Truth on Tuesday-

Are All Natural Sweetener Better than Artificial?

A few weeks ago I posted about the safety and use of artificial sweeteners.  This week I want to discuss the all natural varieties that are available.  Likely you've read the press about the wonders of agave nectar and various all natural zero calorie sweeteners like Truvia and  Purevia.  So what's the deal with these? Are they healthier options than the standard artificial sweeteners?  Here are a few facts about the most common "all natural" sweeteners on the market.

First off, let me remind you that there is no legal definition for the word "natural" in terms of food labels.  So just because something is all natural does not necessarily mean it's better for you.  Take Agave Nectar for example:

Agave Nectar
Made from the agave plant grown wild in Mexico, this sweetener has gained alot of popularity due to it's intense sweet flavor. The idea is that because it is sweeter than sugar, you can use less to achieve the desired sweetness.  However, agave derives its super sweet flavor from the sugar fructose Depending on the variety it can be as high as 92% fructose (1).  This is more than the amount found in  the high fructose corn syrup of sodas -- Regular soft drinks are 55% fructose and 45% glucose (2).  Because fructose is metabolized differently than glucose, it can lead to elevated triglycerides and free fatty acids in the liver (3).  Furthermore, many studies have linked increased fructose consumption with the development of diabetes, liver disease, and metabolic syndrome (2).  So while agave nectar may be an all natural alternative to artificial sweeteners, you should use it only in moderation and possibly avoid it if you have known elevated fasting blood sugar or high triglycerides. 

Honey
Honey is about 38% fructose, 31% glucose, and the rest a mixture of maltose, sucrose & carbohydrates (4).  Honey is in fact a natural source of sweetness, but again remember the fructose content- while it has a lower percentage of fructose than agave, remember to use it sparingly! 1 tablespoon of honey is about 60 calories, which should provide plenty of sweetness.  Furthermore, honey has some antimicrobial and antioxidant properties (5).

Sugar in the Raw
Is derived strictly from sugar cane syrup then crystallized into a hard particle form.  White sugar is obtained by refining the sugar cane crystals to remove all the sugar cane juice flavor.  Sugar In The Raw contains very small amounts of nutrients, mainly due to traces of molasses from the sugar cane that are not found in white sugar.  However, these mineral are found in such small amounts, it's likely to impact your overall nutritional intake.   In terms of calories, both regular sugar and Sugar in Raw contain about 15 calories per teaspoon. 

Stevia
Stevia is derived from a plant grown in South America and Asia. The plant’s intense sweetening qualities are complex molecules called steviosides that are glycosides made of glucose, sophorose and steviol. These are what make stevia up to 300 times sweeter than sugar and non-caloric. These glycosides do not get absorbed into the body but rather simply pass through leaving no calories (6). 

Many products such as Purevia and Truvia boast about using this all natural compound to provide sweetness, however both products have added compounds to balance out the taste.  Truvia has erythritol, a sugar alcohol, in addition to "natural flavors". Unlike some sugar alcohols, erythritol is not associated with laxative effects.  Purevia has added dextrose (a natural sugar), cellulose powder (a fiber substance from plants; added for textural properties) and natural flavors. 

Stevia In the Raw does not contain added erthyritol or extra sugars, and claims to be 100% Rebeiana (Reb-A). However, under the ingredients list, it does contain dextrose and maltodextin which are two naturally occurring sugars.  The use of Stevia as a sweetener is really too new for any long term research studies to have been conducted on potential harmful side effects. My hunch is that too much of anything is going to trigger some sort of adverse health effect. 


The Takeaway...
Pick your poison, but use it in moderation.  As a Registered Dietitian, I support both the use of artificial sweeteners and natural sweeteners.  Science relating to artificial sweeteners and their contribution to certain cancers are inconclusive at this point, while the science is clear that over consumption of natural fruit sugar (fructose) is associated with a myriad of metabolic diseases including diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.  On a personal note, I would recommend looking to cut back on the use of artificial foods in your diet, including artificial sweeteners, and to focus on eating more whole foods. 




1. Deis, R. (2001). Sweetners for Health. Food Products Design. http://www.foodproductdesign.com/articles/2001/02/food-product-design-february-2001--sweetners-for.aspx 

2.  Nseir, W., Nassar, F., Assy, N. (2010). Soft drinks consumption and nonalcholic fatty liver disease.  Word Journal Gastroenterol. 16(7), 2579-2588.

3. Rutledge A, & Adeli, K. (2007). Fructose and the metabolic syndrome: pathophysiology and molecular mechanisms. Nutr Rev, 65, 3- 23.

4. National Honey Board. (2010) < "Carbohydrates and the Sweetness of Honey">

5. Gross H, Polagruto J, Zhu Q, Kim S, Schramm D, Keen C. Effect of honey consumption on plasma antioxidant status in human subjects. Paper presented at the 227th American Chemical Society Meeting, Anahein CA, March 28, 2004. 2004.

6. Goyal, S. Samsher, & Goyal, R. (2010). Stevia (Stevia rebaudiana) a bio-sweetner:a review. Internation Journal of Food Science and Nutrition, 61, 1-10.