Why E-numbers aren't evil

A more mature debate about E-numbers would only come through a better understanding of where additives came from and why they were added to foods, a leading supplier has claimed.

Paul Prendergast, UK md of leading ingredients solutions systems supplier GC Hahn, said: "I'm certainly not an apologist for E-numbers as we have no vested interest in their production; and we have actually had a great deal of success in helping customers clean up their labels. "However, I wonder how many consumers actually realise that many additives are the complex sugars that form the stored energy of plant seeds."

A seemingly widespread belief that E-numbers were developed from synthetic chemicals by men in white coats had forced product developers to avoid a whole raft of essentially natural, thickening and gelling agents, which, despite coming from natural sources, were now on retailers' banned lists, said Prendergast.

"There is a lot of emotion whipped up in this debate but this should be balanced with more objective science about what function an ingredient or additive is performing in a given product."

The functional qualities of fat were particularly difficult to replicate in some products without using additives, as fat affected viscosity, texture, creaminess, freeze/thaw stability and shelf-life, he added. "Cleaning up labels in low fat products presents some serious technical challenges."

Caroline Sanders, who has been developing Tate & Lyle's new Enrich range of solution sets, said calls to remove pectin (a thickening agent made from the cell walls of plants), and modified starch from ingredients labels raised some "very interesting challenges"

She added: "It is very difficult to create nice textures in low fat yoghurts without using modified starch."