Food Safety
search
cart
facebook twitter linkedin
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Food Safety
  • NEWS
    • Latest News
    • White Papers
  • PRODUCTS
  • TOPICS
    • Contamination Control
    • Food Types
    • Management
    • Process Control
    • Regulatory
    • Sanitation
    • Supply Chain
    • Testing and Analysis
  • PODCAST
  • EXCLUSIVES
    • Food Safety Five Newsreel
    • eBooks
    • FSM Distinguished Service Award
    • Interactive Product Spotlights
    • Videos
  • BUYER'S GUIDE
  • MORE
    • ENEWSLETTER >
      • Archive Issues
      • Subscribe to eNews
    • Store
    • Sponsor Insights
  • WEBINARS
  • FOOD SAFETY SUMMIT
  • EMAG
    • eMagazine
    • Archive Issues
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Contact
    • Advertise
  • SIGN UP!
Food TypeDairy/EggsRefrigerated/Frozen

Food Safety Perception Challenges: Low-Sugar Ice Cream Development

August 1, 2013

“Just a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down,” sang Julie Andrews in the 1964 movie Mary Poppins, and while this was an acceptable mantra in its day, it is unlikely that it would hold much favor in today’s society. Along with many other changes that have taken place in the 50 years since this movie was released, there has been a big emphasis on reducing sugar consumption in people’s diets. There is a global focus on obesity, amplified by the recently updated U.S. dietary guidelines, and strong recommendations to reduce sugars in the diet, all of which means that today’s consumers are looking for lower-sugar and lower-calorie products that are formulated to provide all the texture, flavor and indulgence of their full-sugar counterparts. Recent advances in specific ingredient technologies now make it easier for the product developer to formulate good-tasting products at lower sugar and calorie levels; however, consumer perception of the safety of some of these ingredients can in turn bring its own challenges.

Nowhere is this focus more active than in the $10 billion ice cream and frozen novelties category.

Ice cream consumers continue to demand new products that deliver all the creamy indulgence they expect from ice cream without all the sugar, calories and fat. While this represents a significant challenge for the product developer, in fact the bigger hurdle is overcoming the deeply held consumer perception that “better for you” products compromise on taste, a belief most likely driven by decades of experience and disappointment for naturally skeptical consumers. As with all foods, with ice cream, taste is king. Generally, consumers are not willing to compromise on the creamy, rich, indulgent taste experience they expect from ice cream for a few calories or grams of sugar.

Nonetheless, a significant market exists for these types of products, with most ice cream manufacturers offering lower-fat or “no sugar added” variants in their product lineups.

A particular challenge for the ice cream formulator is what to do when one removes fat and sugar from the recipe. To achieve the creamy texture characteristic of ice cream, one must replace the solids lost with other components. Failure to do so results in very icy products that do not deliver a satisfying taste experience. The numbers of suitable ingredients that have become available over the last 20 years or so have increased both the size and performance of the ingredient toolbox substantially. Recent advances in two ingredient technologies, namely high-intensity sweeteners and bulking agents, now make it possible to produce ice cream products with lower sugar and fat that deliver an indulgent, creamy taste with little or no compromise.

“No sugar added” or “NSA” ice creams started to appear on the U.S. market in the 1980s. Generally, they utilized fillers, such as polydextrose or glycerin, in place of the sugar normally found in ice cream. It is fair to say these early NSA products definitely compromised on taste delivery, but as product developers became more familiar with formulating lower-sugar recipes, and ingredient vendors began to see the potential of these kinds of products in the marketplace, the quality of these products began to improve. Indeed, by the mid-1990s, most ice cream brands carried NSA flavors as a part of their lineup.   

By the mid-2000s, the ice cream category became awash with products designed to take advantage of the low-carb craze inspired by the AtkinsTM and South Beach® diets. This was subsequently followed by a next generation of better-for-you products, which promised to deliver a rich, creamy, indulgent ice cream experience at half the fat of regular ice cream. These products combined both ingredient and process technologies to create ice cream with less fat and calories but a creamy texture similar to regular ice cream.

In recent years, the increasing prevalence of weight-related health problems such as diabetes, heart disease and hypertension is leading consumers to believe they should be eating a little less overall and reducing sugar in their diet. This is expanding the market for sugar-free and reduced-sugar products. In addition, consumers continue to search out products that are devoid of ingredients with negative reputations, which all has led to a steady progression of “new and improved” high-intensity sweeteners, especially over the past 20 years or so.
    
High-Intensity Sweeteners
When it comes to product success in the marketplace, consumer perception is everything. In today’s social-media-dominated world, blogs and platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have become sounding boards, encouraging speedy and direct opinions from consumers. Even individual, and frequently not fact-based, concerns can quickly become viral in effect, leading to widespread perception issues around the safety of such ingredients.

For all of sugar’s negative connotations, there are few other ingredients that are more accepted on an ingredient declaration, so replacing it can be tricky when appealing to those consumers seeking “clean labels.”

Alternative sugar sources, such as agave nectar, tapioca syrup, molasses, maple syrup or honey, are all possibilities for consumers seeking shorter, simpler ingredient lists with familiar ingredient names. However, from a calorific standpoint, these are all roughly equivalent to regular sugar. The demand for lower-calorie products that deliver equivalent sweetness to regular products has led to a plethora of inventions during the last century, and a number of advances in the area of high-intensity sweeteners, including those detailed below. Artificial sweeteners are also controversial, and there have been concerns about the safety of using many of these products.

Saccharin: Saccharin was invented in 1879 at John Hopkins University and is 300–500 times sweeter than sugar. Although it has a somewhat characteristic bitter aftertaste, it became very popular during World War I due to global sugar shortages. Saccharin has a long history of safe use by humans; however, a series of experiments in the 1970s showed that consumption of large amounts caused bladder cancer in male rats. As a result, saccharin was banned in some countries (e.g., Canada) and required a warning label in the United States. In 2000, these safety decisions were reversed when scientists determined that the mechanism for bladder tumor formation in the male rats did not occur in humans. Consequently, products that contain saccharin are no longer required to carry warning labels in the United States. However, it is fair to say there is still much negative perception around this ingredient, and it does not tend to be used very widely in many food products today. It has been sold commercially under the brand name Sweet’N Low® since the 1950s.

Aspartame: Aspartame was discovered in 1965 and is marketed as Equal® and NutraSweet®. It is about 200 times sweeter than sugar, and also lacks the bitter aftertaste commonly associated with saccharin, though it does have a characteristic “metallic” taste that some people seem to be more sensitive to than others. It is actually a protein in nature, manufactured from two amino acids, phenylalanine and aspartic acid. Its use was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1981 and has been shown to be safe in more than 200 studies since then. However, it has also been associated with potential health risks—some people who suffer from migraine headaches claim that aspartame triggers their headaches. In addition, people who have a disease called phenylketonuria should not consume aspartame because their bodies are unable to metabolize phenylalanine. Although it is used widely in many food and beverage products to this day, aspartame is also not very temperature stable, making it a challenge to use in products that are subject to heat treatment during their production, such as baked goods.

Sucralose: Sucralose was discovered in 1976 at King’s College, London. It was first marketed in Canada in 1991 and was granted FDA approval in 1998. It is around 600 times sweeter than sugar. In addition to its sweetness, it is very heat stable, making it an attractive choice for baked and/or heated products. Sucralose is made by chemically bonding three chlorine atoms to each molecule of sucrose. This process makes the molecule indigestible as the body does not recognize it as a carbohydrate; hence, it has no calorific value. Multiple studies have shown sucralose is safe for human consumption, though there are a few anecdotal reports of adverse reactions to it. There are some reports that claim it causes thymus damage, which could affect the immune system. This claim is based on one laboratory study in which young rats fed sucralose and low-calorie diets suffered from shrinking thymus glands. However, this is a common response for rats when they are under stress due to weight loss and is not related to sucralose consumption. Follow-up studies did not discover any evidence of immune system dysfunction; nonetheless, there is still some negative perception around it.

Stevia: Stevia is made from rebaudioside A, one of the components of the Stevia rebaudiana plant native to the tropical parts of North and South America. It is sold under various brand names, including Truvia® and PureVia® in the U.S. It can be up to 300 times sweeter than sugar, but also can have a somewhat bitter, almost licorice-type aftertaste. Stevia has the advantage of being generally perceived as natural (though that in itself is a very gray area) and is very heat stable. It has been used safely as a sweetener in Japan for several decades and is increasing in popularity recently as a sweetener of choice in many food products in the U.S., though taste issues remain a challenge to the product developer.

Monk fruit: Monk fruit is a green melon-like fruit native to Thailand and southern China. Extract from the fruit is approximately 300 times sweeter than regular sucrose. The process for extracting high-intensity sweetness components from monk fruit was patented by Procter & Gamble in 1995, and recent advances have concentrated on removing some of the bad-tasting components also associated with the fruit. It has recently been commercialized in the U.S. under the brand name Nectresse™.

Both stevia and monk fruit have the advantage of being natural sources of high-intensity sweeteners, which has potential consumer advantages. In some circumstances, such as the recently launched Nectresse product, a combination of sweeteners can minimize negative flavor impact, improve sweetener stability and enhance overall taste.

As high-intensity sweeteners provide no significant added solids to the recipe, the selection of the appropriate bulking agents to maintain acceptable ice cream texture is also key.

Bulking Agents
Another area of ingredient technology that continues to expand the toolbox of the product developer is “bulking agents.” This includes various complex carbohydrates (some of which can also have the benefit of being classified as dietary fiber) and sugar alcohols.

Sugar alcohols are modified carbohydrates that are not well absorbed in the gut, therefore contain fewer calories than regular carbohydrates. Common examples include glycerol, sorbitol, lactitol, xylitol and erythritol. However, due to the fact that they are not well absorbed, overconsumption of sugar alcohols can lead to gastrointestinal symptoms including bloating, gas and diarrhea. In addition, many of the sugar alcohols have an off taste, particularly when used at high levels. The challenge for the product developer is thus to use a combination of such ingredients, which give the functional benefits without the negative taste and/or biochemical effects. A particular nuance for the ice cream product developer is that ice cream tends to be eaten as an after-dinner treat—many people who are following sugar-restricted diets will have consumed large quantities of ingredients such as sugar alcohols throughout the day, which undoubtedly contribute to gastrointestinal issues. However, as it is ice cream that is the last food consumed, it tends to also shoulder the blame for the discomforts that subsequently follow!

Another issue in replacing common ingredients such as sugar in an ice cream recipe is related to the recent consumer trend toward, and desire for, “clean labels.” Many of the “sugar replacers” do not have familiar-sounding names and hence can create suspicion and potential rejection when they appear on an ingredient declaration. While it is true that health (in its broadest calorific sense) is on most consumers’ minds, even the most healthful ingredients and products can have image problems simply by virtue of the long list of strange-sounding names that appear within the ingredient list. This then has become another challenge for the product developer.

It is clear that there are indeed many challenges, some technical and some more related to consumer perception, in developing lower-sugar ice cream alternatives. Indeed, it is very unlikely that Mary Poppins’ optimistic view that “every task you undertake becomes a piece of cake” would be shared by many ice cream product developers today! 

Jon Oldroyd, M.Sc., is currently a director of supply chain for Wells Enterprises Inc., the largest privately owned ice cream manufacturer in the U.S.


Author(s): Jon Oldroyd, M.Sc.

Share This Story

Looking for a reprint of this article?
From high-res PDFs to custom plaques, order your copy today!

Recommended Content

JOIN TODAY
to unlock your recommendations.

Already have an account? Sign In

  • people holding baby chicks

    Serovar Differences Matter: Utility of Deep Serotyping in Broiler Production and Processing

    This article discusses the significance of Salmonella in...
    Meat/Poultry
    By: Nikki Shariat Ph.D.
  • woman washing hands

    Building a Culture of Hygiene in the Food Processing Plant

    Everyone entering a food processing facility needs to...
    Personal Hygiene/Handwashing
    By: Richard F. Stier, M.S.
  • graphical representation of earth over dirt

    Climate Change and Emerging Risks to Food Safety: Building Climate Resilience

    This article examines the multifaceted threats to food...
    Best Practices
    By: Maria Cristina Tirado Ph.D., D.V.M. and Shamini Albert Raj M.A.
Subscribe For Free!
  • eMagazine Subscription
  • Subscribe to eNewsletter
  • Manage My Preferences
  • Website Registration
  • Subscription Customer Service

More Videos

Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content is a special paid section where industry companies provide high quality, objective, non-commercial content around topics of interest to the Food Safety Magazine audience. All Sponsored Content is supplied by the advertising company and any opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily reflect the views of Food Safety Magazine or its parent company, BNP Media. Interested in participating in our Sponsored Content section? Contact your local rep!

close
  • Deli Salads
    Sponsored byCorbion

    How Food Safety is Becoming the Ultimate Differentiator in Refrigerated and Prepared Foods

Popular Stories

recalled sysco and lyons imperial nutritional shakes

Listeria Outbreak Linked to Nutritional Shakes Served at Healthcare Facilities Causes 14 Deaths

Image of fish on ice

Common Fish Food Poisoning Types and Prevention Methods

Scientist inspecting food substance with microscope

FDA Announces ‘Proactive’ Post-Market Chemical Review Program to Keep Food Supply Safe

Events

June 12, 2025

Additive Bans Ahead: Your Guide to Avoiding Risk and Maintaining Agility

Live: June 12, 2025 at 12:00 pm EDT: From this webinar, attendees will learn how ingredient bans will impact product development, labeling, and sourcing.

View All

Products

Global Food Safety Microbial Interventions and Molecular Advancements

Global Food Safety Microbial Interventions and Molecular Advancements

See More Products
Environmental Monitoring Excellence eBook

Related Articles

  • flour in a sifter on wood surface

    Industry Survey Reveals Key Challenges to Ensuring Low-Moisture Food Safety

    See More
  • Perception of Food Safety by Food Manufacturers and Food Safety Professionals

    See More
  • Jeni’s Splendid Ice Creams Issues Voluntary Recall of Cold Brew with Coconut Cream

    Jeni's Splendid Ice Creams issues voluntary recall of Cold Brew with Coconut Cream

    See More

Related Products

See More Products
  • 1119053595.jpg

    Food Safety for the 21st Century: Managing HACCP and Food Safety throughout the Global Supply Chain, 2E

  • 1119160553.jpg

    Food Safety: Innovative Analytical Tools for Safety Assessment

  • 9781498721776.jpg

    Handbook of Food Processing: Food Safety, Quality, and Manufacturing Processes

See More Products

Events

View AllSubmit An Event
  • July 25, 2024

    How Rapid Development of Technology Has Revolutionized Food Safety

    On Demand: In this webinar, you will hear from leading technology and policy experts from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), food safety laboratories, and food processors, who will discuss these technological advances and how you can use them to benefit your food safety program.
View AllSubmit An Event

Related Directories

  • Electronic Development Labs Inc. (EDL)

    Since 1943, EDL has been known as the leader in temperature measurement and calibration equipment. USA made and still family owned and operated, our total focus is on quality. Our temperature sensors are recognized as the most dependable, accurate and repeatable sensors available. Trust EDL when quality matters.
×

Never miss the latest news and trends driving the food safety industry

eNewsletter | Website | eMagazine

JOIN TODAY!
  • RESOURCES
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • Directories
    • Store
    • Want More
  • SIGN UP TODAY
    • Create Account
    • eMagazine
    • eNewsletter
    • Customer Service
    • Manage Preferences
  • SERVICES
    • Marketing Services
    • Reprints
    • Market Research
    • List Rental
    • Survey/Respondent Access
  • STAY CONNECTED
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X (Twitter)
  • PRIVACY
    • PRIVACY POLICY
    • TERMS & CONDITIONS
    • DO NOT SELL MY PERSONAL INFORMATION
    • PRIVACY REQUEST
    • ACCESSIBILITY

Copyright ©2025. All Rights Reserved BNP Media.

Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing