Sweet alternatives to sugar

Kan søtstoffer bidra til en sunnere fremtid?

Lars Bo Jørgensen

www.npsweet.com

| 2

Introduction to the speaker’s background

Global market leader in stevia and steviasucrose

Europe’s second largest sugar producer

| 2

Joint venture – Stevia product sales, innovation and stevia application technology

| 3

Introducing todays topics

1) Overview of alternative sweeteners

2) Feasibility factors for sweeteners in food and beveragea) Tasteb) Functionality in foodc) Regulatory limitationsd) Health & nutrition image and consumer behaviour e) Availability / cost in use

3) Conclusions

| 4

The sweetener mapNO ENERGY

FULL ENERGY

ARTIFICIAL NATURAL

SUGAR ALCOHOLS /

POLYOLS

HISHIS

SACCHARIDESHONEY

FRUIT EXTRACTS

SUCROSE

GLUCOSE

FRUCTOSE

TAGATOSE

GLUCOSE SYRUP

ISO GLUCOSE (HFS)

LACTOSE

TREHALOSE

INVERT

XYLITOL

MALTITOL / SORBITOL SYRUPS

SORBITOL

MALTITOL

MANNITOL

ISOMALTLACTITOL

ERYTHRITOL

ASPARTAME

ACESULFAME K

SUCRALOSE

SACCHARIN

CYCLAMATE

NEOTAME

STEVIA (STEVIOL GLYCOSIDES)

THAUMATIN

NEO HESPERIDIN

BrazzeinCurculin

HernandulcinMabinlinMiraculin

Mogroside(LoHanGou)

Monellin

Not EU approved

Sugars / Saccharides

| 5

Saccharides Processing Relativesweetness

Energy kJ/gram

Sugar, sucrose Extraction of sugar beet or sugar cane 1,0 17

Glucose, dextrose Hydrolysis of starch with acid and/or enzymes 0,6-0,7 17

Fructose Hydrolysis of starch or sugar with acid and/or enzymes, followed by enzymatic transformation of glucose

1,0-1,3 17

Maltose Hydrolysis of starch with acid and/or enzymes 0,5 17

Lactose Extraction of whey from cheese production 0,4 17

Tagatose Enzymatic transformation of lactose 0,9 6

Trehalose Enzymatic transformation of starch 0,4-0,5 17

Invert sugar Hydrolysis of sugar with acid and/or enzymes, 1,0 17

Glucose syrup Hydrolysis of starch with acid and/or enzymes 0,4-0,6 17*

Isoglucose, HFS Hydrolysis of starch with acid and/or enzymes, followed by enzymatic transformation of glucose

0,8-1,0 17*

*) On dry matter

Sugar alcohols

| 6

Sugar alcohols Processing Relative sweetness

Energy kJ/gram

Mannitol Hydrogenation or enzymatic transformation of fructose

0,6-0,7 10

Xylitol Hydrogenation or enzymatic transformation of xylose

0,9-1,0 10

Lactitol Hydrogenation or enzymatic transformation of lactose

0,4 10

Sorbitol Hydrogenation or enzymatic transformation of glucose

0,6 10

Isomalt Enzymatic transformation of sucrose 0,5-0,6 10

Maltitol Hydrogenation or enzymatic transformation of maltose

0,8 10

Maltitol, sorbitol syrup Hydrogenation or enzymatic transformation of starch based syrup with high content of maltose

0,6-0,8 10*

Erythritol Enzymatic treatment of glucose 0,7 0

*) On dry matter

HIS – High Intensity Sweeteners

| 7

High Intensity Sweeteners (HIS)

Processing Relative sweetness

ADI-valuemg/kg body weight / day

Average max sweetness per day

for a 60 kg person, as gram sugar

Acesulfame K Chemical synthesis 130-200 9 89

Aspartame Chemical synthesis 120-220 40 408

Cyclamate Chemical synthesis 30-40 7 15

Sucralose Chemical synthesis 400-800 15 540

Neotame Chemical synthesis 8000-10000 2 1080

Saccharin Chemical synthesis 300-500 5 120

Steviol glycosides (Stevia) Extraction from plants

200-400 4 72

Neohesperidine DC Extraction from plants

300-2000 5 345

Thaumatin Extraction from plants

2000-3000 Not specified enough

| 8

Global consumption of sweeteners in WSE = white sugar equivalents

Source : LMC

| 9

Global consumption of HIS in WSE = white sugar equivalents

Source : LMC

| 10

Since January 2012, Stevia has been used in 16% of all new products with HIS

Stevia as a blend with sugar-alcohols:17%

Stevia as a blend with Sugar: 70%

Global new product introductions with HIS, 2007-2012Source: Mintel GNPD

Stevia as a blend with other HIS: 25%

Feasibility factors - Taste

| 11

No single alternative sweeteners taste exactly like sugar HIS have metallic, bitter off notes Polyols have cooling effects

Mixing of various sweeteners can create taste profiles close to sugar.

Sugar reduction by addition of HIS can be acheived with taste profiles very close to sugar.

Feasibility factors – Functionality in food and beverage

| 12

Alternative sweeteners need to compete with the functional properties of sugar

Product and production re-engineering

When reducing or substituting sugar with HIS

needs arise for alternative :

• Bulking with low/no calories• Texturising / improved mouthfeel• Sweetness with low/no calories• Flavours / extracts• Colours• Stabilisers / emulsifiers• Preservatives and preservation techniques• Production /handling techniques• Packaging• Storage conditions

Feasibility factors – Functionality in food and beverage

| 13

| 14

Feasibility factors – Regulatory limitations

EU has defined rules for the use of alternative sweeteners EU Nr. 1129/2011, Annex II Nr. 1333/2008

Most food and beverage categories may use alternative sweeteners Sugar alcohols not allowed in beverages HIS not allowed in bread and meat Stevia not allowed in cereals, bakery products and confectionery with sugar

Limitations in dosage levels / ADI values

Requirement of 30% energy reduction when using HIS

Labelling demands Sugar alcohols laxative effect Containing sweeteners, for aspartame : source of phenylalanine

| 15

Feasibility factors – Health & nutrition image of HIS / polyols

No / low calories

Not carriogenic

No / low effect on GI

EFSA approved

16

Copyright © 2011 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.

The importance of how food and beverages are sweetenedSignificant less is trying to avoid artificial sweeteners. Norway does in significant higher degree than the Nordics try to avoid sugar and in less degree to avoid artificial sweeteners

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Yes, I attempt to avoid productscontaining sugar

Yes, I attempt to avoid products withartificial sweetener

No, it doesn't matter in what way it hasbeen sweetened

Norway 2010 (2.632) Norway 2012 (2.534) Nordics 2012 (10.081)

= sig. lower

= sig. higher

Q21/ Does it matter to you, if sweetener has been added to what you eat or drink?

17

Copyright © 2011 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.

Attitudes and associations towards artificial sweeteners.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Artificial sweeteners provides energy

Artificial sweeteners is addictive for me

Artificial sweeteners is not as bad as some people think

Artificial sweetener creates hole in the teeth

Artificial sweeteners is fattening

I eat artificial sweeteners with a bad conscience

Artificial sweeteners is generally harmful for my health

Children should not eat artificial sweeteners

Norway 2010 (2.632)

Norway 2012 (2.534)

Nordics 2012 (10.081)

= sig. lower

= sig. higher

Q8/Attitudes towards artificial sweeteners (Has answered partly –completely agree)

18

Copyright © 2011 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.

0123456789

10

Norway 2010 (2.632)

Norway 2012 (2.534)

Nordics 2012 (10.081)

Q1/ How often do you drink the product

Avg. 1 = Never drinks – 10 = Drinks Three times a day= sig. lower

= sig. higher

Drinking frequency - Drinks Increased drinking frequency of all light drinks and Cola regular from 2010 - 2012. And higher drinking frequency than the Nordics on all light drinks and Cola regular

19

Copyright © 2011 The Nielsen Company. Confidential and proprietary.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Do not know

As it is more trendy

Cheaper than syrup or carbonated soft drinks sweetened withsugar

Because it is difficult to find syrup or carbonated soft drinkssweetened with sugar

Because it is better for my child/children/grandchildren

Because I have diabetes

As I have read/heard in the medias that sugar is bad for me

As i get bad conscience drinking lemonade/Carbonated Soft Drinks

To avoid holes in the teeth

Tastes better than syrup or carbonated soft drinks sweetened withsugar

Other reasons

Because it is healthier than syrup or carbonated soft drinkssweetened with sugar

Not to gain weight

Contains less calories than syrup or carbonated soft drinkssweetened with sugar

Norway 2010 (2.102)

Norway 2012 (2.058)

Nordics 2012 (7.238)

Reasons to drink light drinks/artificial sweeteners“Contains less calories than syrup or CSD with sugar” and ”not to gain weight” are still the individual TOP2 reasons to drink light drinks. “Not to gain weight” and “Healthier than syrup and CSD with sugar “ is significantly more important than in the Nordics. Finally “taste better” has increased significantly from 2010 - 2012 and is now more important than in the Nordics

Q7/Why are you drinking light drinks?

= sig. lower

= sig. higher

Base – Q1 = Drink CSD light, Cola light or Light ordinary dilutables

Feasibility factors – Cost in use

| 20

Relative cost in use of alternative sweeteners, per sweetness contribution

Conclusions

| 21

Alternative sweeteners do offer the opportunity to create food and beverage with Reduced energy / energy density Reduced impact on GI Reduced impact on oral health

Industry investment in formulation / re-formulation neededHouseholds need proper application knowledge

However, only the individual behaviour can determine the overall impact on health Taste preferences Nutritional education / awareness Life priorities

| 22

Examples of sugar reduced EU launches with stevia

| 23

Thank You for Your Attention!