Sugar replacers healthier and cheaper, says nutritionist

By Rod Addy

- Last updated on GMT

Sugar
Sugar

Related tags Nutrition

Food and drink processors should pursue sugar replacers not only because they are healthier, but because they can be proved to be cheaper, leading nutritionist Jack Winkler has claimed.

For years Winkler, a director of nutrition consultancy Food & Health Research and former Professor of nutrition policy at London Metropolitan University, has pressed firms to cut fat, salt and sugar from products. Now he is launching a manifesto that argues manufacturers could be persuaded to make low sugar products on the basis that it would save them money.

He told FoodManufacture.co.uk that there were three classes of products. “Those where nutritional reformulation actually costs more than the standard version …”

He used the example of Heinz tomato ketchup, which was reformulated to contain more tomatoes. More raw material had been used, so the product cost more, he said.

“Then there are the products where cost differences are not very much either way.”​ Those reformulated to contain less salt were an example of this, because salt did not cost much, said Winkler.

‘Nutritionally improved version’

“Then there are other products where you can produce a nutritionally improved version for less.”

Winkler claimed to have secured data conclusively showing standard sweeteners used for some products were cheaper than sugar.

“There’s an opportunity for some manufacturers to not only offer a price incentive for consumers, but make more money. It’s an opportunity for private profitability and public health to go together.”

He said processors had done a lot to replace sugar with low calorie sweeteners in cold products, but not in other areas.

“One of my personal disappointments in the food industry is that you have several sweeteners that are heat treatable. I’m surprised there hasn’t been more engagement in cooked products.”

Disheartening

That was all the more disheartening because the industry was making progress with salt reduction, said Winkler.

Salt reduction was in most cases not flagged up on packs, because consumers’ avoided low salt products as they perceived them to be less tasty, he said.

“97% of products in the government’s salt reduction programme make no claims whatsoever … they recognise that putting ‘low salt’ on products kills sales.”

Instead manufacturers were incrementally cutting salt content so shoppers would not notice, he said.

There were fewer excuses for lack of progress with sugar reduction, Winkler said. “With salt you have no acceptable substitute that has become acceptable in the UK, but with sugar you do: you have sweeteners.”

Related news

1 comment

Sugar replacers healthier and cheaper

Posted by Jose Felix Silva Junior,

The substitution of sugar by sweeteners has to be looked at with caution, so the daily average intake already defined is not exceeded. This could happen mainly for kids, because there are no scientific studies concerned with the increase dosage of sweeteners consumption. On the other hand, the other properties of sugar in food, such as viscosity, appearance, texture, fermentation, and so on, well known by the food technologists, cannot be forgotten. Reformulation of food has to consider those properties before any change could be done.

Price is a relative point, since in most producer countries sugar is the cheapest energy provided for the population, much lower than sweeteners. The position here is much too simplistic in my view.

Report abuse

Follow us

Featured Jobs

View more

Webinars

Food Manufacture Podcast

Listen to the Food Manufacture podcast