-1
$\begingroup$

In my country (Brazil), sucralose comes in this two forms, liquid and powder.

Looking on the nutritional table, liquid sucralose have no significant amount of carbohydrates or kcal; On the powder sucralose says that have about 4kcal/g and about ~1g of carbohydrates(Basically equal to sugar) per g of serving.

There is any chemical difference in the powdered form that makes it been broken down to be used as energy? Or powdered sucralose is basically sugar with a little amount of actual sucralose? Or the chemical substance is the same but described differently

Side note: I've seen the same pattern in other types of recommended (to high blood sugar patients) powdered sweetener with 4kcal/g and ~1g of carbohydrates per g of serving. With the argument that's better than actual sugar.

$\endgroup$

closed as unclear what you're asking by Buck Thorn, Mathew Mahindaratne, Mithoron, Todd Minehardt, Jon Custer Oct 21 at 13:36

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It's a question of formulation, the liquid contains the sweetener dissolved in water, eg here is an example of ingredients for a version I found online: Purified Water, Sucralose, Potassium Sorbate, Citric Acid; the sweetener represents 25% of the weight. $\endgroup$ – Buck Thorn Oct 18 at 14:29
  • $\begingroup$ I didn't understand what you meant. It means that powdered form should have kcal? $\endgroup$ – Kaique Gomes Oct 18 at 19:40
  • $\begingroup$ I cannot speak for the manufacturer, you should check the label of contents. It should say if it has anything other than sucralose as a sweetener. IF it only has sucralose and is a liquid, then it is simply a solution (water+sucralose) and the same weight of solution will have less calories (kcal) than the powder (assuming they didnt add stuff to the powder). The liquid also has "kcal", but if it is a 25% solution for example then you have to drink 100 mL to get the same kcal as 25 g of powder. $\endgroup$ – Buck Thorn Oct 18 at 19:45
  • $\begingroup$ The side note sweeteners have maltodextrin (basically sugar), so it's the same as sugar. The main sucralose powder have: lactose, silicon dioxide, sucralose and acesulfame-k. As I see, the powdered version always have some type of carbohydrate (maltodextrin, lactose). So it's reasonable to say, (given the almost 1:1 carbohydrate to serving) that those powdered sweeteners are equal to sugar? $\endgroup$ – Kaique Gomes Oct 18 at 20:04
  • $\begingroup$ Without having the exact % composition to inspect I can't tell you exactly, but it sounds like they have sugar. I don't know how it is in Brazil but in other countries they list ingredients in order of abundance. However the sweetness of the artificial sweeteners is so high that you are only supposed to use a very small amount. The wikipedia says: "Sucralose is about 320 to 1,000 times sweeter than sucrose" $\endgroup$ – Buck Thorn Oct 18 at 20:10
1
$\begingroup$

In the United States, sucralose is sold under the brand Splenda. There is a liquid product with the food label shown below:

enter image description here

The low calorie sweeteners in solid (powder) form containing sucralose come in different form, and they often contain sugars with calories. Here is one example:

enter image description here

It contains glucose as the main ingredient. Nevertheless, they are allowed to say it is suitable for diabetics. Also, they are allowed to say zero calories. From the FDA rules:

(b) Calorie content claims. (1) The terms "calorie free," "free of calories," "no calories," "zero calories," "without calories," "trivial source of calories," "negligible source of calories," or "dietarily insignificant source of calories" may be used on the label or in the labeling of foods, provided that:

(i) The food contains less than 5 calories per reference amount customarily consumed and per labeled serving.

(ii) As required in 101.13(e)(2), if the food meets this condition without the benefit of special processing, alteration, formulation, or reformulation to lower the caloric content, it is labeled to disclose that calories are not usually present in the food (e.g., "cider vinegar, a calorie free food").

Source: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?fr=101.60

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Is the second label a sweetener in a powdered form? As in Brazil,it's fair to say that there is no apparently difference between sucralose in liquid or powdered form? The problem is the "hidden" sugar in the tabel of contents(dextrose, maltodextrin) that give the non zero carbs and non zero kcal to the product. $\endgroup$ – Kaique Gomes Oct 21 at 13:08
  • $\begingroup$ @KaiqueGomes Yes, the second label is from a solid sweetener; I added it to my answer. The molecule sucralose is the same, no matter whether in a solid form or dissolved in water (notice the first ingredient in the liquid is water), also in terms of carbohydrate content and calories. From my remarks about how food labels are written in the US, you can see that to understand them fully you also need to know the regulations about rounding down and "negligible amounts". $\endgroup$ – Karsten Theis Oct 21 at 19:07
  • $\begingroup$ @KaiqueGomes The solid sweetener label says "'Free food' = up to 4 packets". This refers the "exchange list" which has foods with less than 20 calories per serving (or no calories at all) labeled as 'free'. For the sweetener, this means that 4 packets have less than 20 calories, and 5 packets already have more. So this is a backdoor way to figure how many calories per packet (all we knew was less than 5 calories because it says zero). $\endgroup$ – Karsten Theis Oct 21 at 19:48

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.