Steviol glycoside safety: Are highly purified steviol glycoside sweeteners food allergens?

Urban, Jonathan D.; Carakostas, Michael C.; Taylor, Steve L.

doi:10.1016/j.fct.2014.11.011

Cited by 45 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hypersensitivity reactions to stevia in any form appear to be rare. Therefore, there is little substantiated scientific evidence to support warning statements to consumers about allergy to highly purified stevia extracts (Urban et al 2015).…”

Section: Safety Of Application In Foodstuffsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni: health promoting properties and therapeutic applications

Marcinek

Krejpcio

2015

J. Verbr. Lebensm.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Safety Of Application In Foodstuffsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni: health promoting properties and therapeutic applications

Marcinek

Krejpcio

2015

J. Verbr. Lebensm.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The representation of the extraction method of steviol glycosides is displayed in Figure 3 along with the relative percentage of all glycosides present in the mix. In 2014 steviol glycosides were researched by a scientific panel of the EFSA and determined that, despite previous allegations, the consumption of these molecules was under the ADI and did not pose a toxicological threat as a food additive EFSA, 2014;Urban et al, 2015). Another high potency sweetener is glycyrrhizin (E 958) (Barclay et al., 2014), a triterpene glycoside extracted from Glycyrrhiza glabra L., the liquorice plant.…”

Section: Natural Sweetenersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural food additives: Quo vadis?

Carocho

Morales

Ferreira

2015

Trends in Food Science & Technology

474

269

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a time where the public is more aware and interested with what they eat, natural additives have been gaining interest both from the food industries and the consumers.Some studies show that consumers prefer food prepared with natural additives rather than chemical ones, due to health reasons. Although quite promising, natural additives still face some drawbacks and limitations as well as conflicting information. In this manuscript, the most important natural additives are overviewed, as well as their use, benefits and risks. The future of these molecules along with new types of additives are also summarized. Keywords: natural food additives, antimicrobials, antioxidants, sweeteners, colorings Food as a basic needThe importance of food for mankind is undeniable; there is still no way of living without eating, therefore, this commodity is of utmost importance for the well-being of every man, woman and child across the world. Although the need to feed has maintained itself immutable across the ages, the way we consume foodstuffs has seen deep changes. From the local gatherers in the Paleolithic to the domestications of animals and vegetables there was a huge leap, only surpassed by the commercial trading of spices and other goods in the fifteenth century. Today, in modern countries food is produced in specific facilities and then transported to markets that can be within the same country or even in distant ones (Atkins and Bowler, 2001). Delivering food in good conditions from the production site to the consumer requires a great load of energy, either by refrigeration, controlled packaging or the use of additives to avoid spoilage and reduce food alteration. In a competitive global market, the least expensive method of food preservation is always favored, and in most cases, food additives are 3 chosen over the others. Furthermore, food additives are essential to enable the food industry to make food meet the increasingly challenging market and legal demands (Saltmarsh et al., 2013). Food additivesThe Codex Alimentarius defines a food additive as "any substance not normally consumed as a food itself and not normally used as a typical ingredient of the food, whether or not it has nutritive value, the intentional addition of which to food for a technological (including organoleptic) purpose in the manufacture, processing, preparation treatment, packing, packaging, transport or holding of such food results, or may be reasonably expected to result, (directly or indirectly) in it or its by-products becoming a component of or otherwise affecting the characteristics of such foods. The term does not include contaminants, or substances added to food for maintaining or improving nutritional qualities, or sodium chloride" (Codex Alimentarius; Motarjemi, Moy and Todd, 2014). The Food and Drug Administration of the United States (FDA) defines a food additive as "any substance the intended use of which results or may reasonably be expected to result --directly or indirectly --in its becoming a component or otherwise aff...

show abstract

“…non-caloric sweetener) weight change, energy intake, lipids, HbA1C, insulin resistance parallel or crossover RCT follow-up at least 1 week in duration; at least 10 participants per group, no trials with placebo control January 2011 MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library CENTRAL, CAB Global Oliver, 2015 [ 85 ] ND aspartame, ace-K, cyclamic acid and its salts, steviol glycosides, neohesperidin DC, neotame, saccharine and its salts, sucralose,aspartame-acesulfame salt, thaumatin benefits and risks related to intense sweeteners meta-analysis, RCTs, quasi experimental, cohort, case-control, cross-sectional studies none ND MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Psychinfo Onakpoya, 2015 [ 21 ] adult volunteers (>18 y) steviol glycoside cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure, blood sugar, cholesterol) double-blind RCTs No age, language or time restrictions. Studies in which steviol glycosides were combined with other dietary supplements were excluded May 2014 MEDLINE, EMBASE, Amed, Cinahl, The Cochrane Library, Google Scholar Poolsup, 2012 [ 282 ] patients with hypertension stevioside systolic and diastolic blood pressure control RCTs published in English language February 2012 MEDLINE, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, Wiley Online Library Ulbricht, 2010 [ 20 ] both adults and children stevia adverse effects, (pharmacology, kynetics, dosing, interactions, toxicology) no restriction (both in vivo and in vitro studies) no language restrictions ND AMED, CANCERLIT, CINAHL, CISCOM, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, HerbMed, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, MEDLINE, NAPRALELT Urban, 2015 [ 283 ] ND steviol glycosides and/or stevia leaf extracts of known concentrations allergic reactions no restriction (also animal and in vitro studies) ND October 2014 MEDLINE, Science Direct, Google Scholar Wang, 2016 [ 284 ] adults, pregnant women and infants (>6 mo) FDA-approved sweeteners energy sensing by the brain; gut hormones ...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health outcomes of non-nutritive sweeteners: analysis of the research landscape

Lohner

Toews

Meerpohl

2017

Nutr J

138

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundFood products containing non-nutritive sweeteners (NNSs) instead of sugar have become increasingly popular in the last decades. Their appeal is obviously related to their calorie-free sweet taste. However, with the dramatic increase in their consumption, it is reasonable and timely to evaluate their potential health benefits and, more importantly, potential adverse effects. The main aim of this scoping review was to map the evidence about health outcomes possibly associated with regular NNS consumption by examining the extent, range, and nature of research activity in this area.MethodsWe systematically searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane CENTRAL databases for studies on NNSs (artificial sweeteners or natural, non-caloric sweeteners, either used individually or in combination) using text terms with appropriate truncation and relevant indexing terms. All human studies investigating any health outcomes of a NNS intervention or exposure were eligible for inclusion. No studies were excluded based on language, study design or methodological quality. Data for each health outcome were summarized in tabular form and were discussed narratively.ResultsFinally, we included 372 studies in our scoping review, comprising 15 systematic reviews, 155 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 23 non-randomized controlled trials, 57 cohort studies, 52 case-control studies, 28 cross sectional studies and 42 case series/case reports.In healthy subjects, appetite and short term food intake, risk of cancer, risk of diabetes, risk of dental caries, weight gain and risk of obesity are the most investigated health outcomes. Overall there is no conclusive evidence for beneficial and harmful effects on those outcomes. Numerous health outcomes including headaches, depression, behavioral and cognitive effects, neurological effects, risk of preterm delivery, cardiovascular effects or risk of chronic kidney disease were investigated in fewer studies and further research is needed. In subjects with diabetes and hypertension, the evidence regarding health outcomes of NNS use is also inconsistent.ConclusionsThis scoping review identifies the needs for future research to address the numerous evidence gaps related to health effects of NNSs use.It also specifies the research questions and areas where a systematic review with meta-analyses is required for the proper evaluation of health outcomes associated to regular NNSs consumption.

show abstract

Steviol glycoside safety: Are highly purified steviol glycoside sweeteners food allergens?

Cited by 45 publications

References 54 publications

Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni: health promoting properties and therapeutic applications

Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni: health promoting properties and therapeutic applications

Natural food additives: Quo vadis?

Health outcomes of non-nutritive sweeteners: analysis of the research landscape

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About