4.4 Article

Potential intakes of total polyols based on UK usage survey data

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/19440049.2014.886132

Keywords

sweeteners; intake; exposure; polyols; xylitol (E 967); isomalt (E 953); sorbitol (E 420); lactitol (E 966); maltitol (E 965); mannitol (E 421)

Funding

  1. European Association of Polyol Producers (EPA)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Polyols are approved for use as sweeteners in specific foods but they may be used for other technological purposes in a wider range of foods, all on a quantum satis basis. The European Polyols Association (EPA) has identified 24 categories of food where polyols are used and it has been able to establish the levels at which the polyols are used in each type of food and whether for sweetening or non-sweetening purposes. The UK National Dietary and Nutrition survey database was used to estimate potential exposures to total polyols based on reported use levels. It was possible to express potential polyol intake on the basis of exposure relating to a single eating occasion, a meal period, 1day and the average over 4days of the survey. Potential intakes of polyols were approximately twice that found on a per-item or a meal-period basis when estimated on a daily basis. Apparent intakes were lower when averaged over the 4days of the survey. It was felt that intake expressed on a per-meal occasion basis was most relevant to the development of digestive discomfort. On the basis of maximum use levels of polyols in all food categories, adults had the highest intake of total polyols up to 5.6g per meal period at the 95th percentile. However, when expressed on a bodyweight basis, children had higher intakes, up to 0.15gkg(-1) bw per meal period. Distributions of potential polyol exposures were highly skewed towards lower values with higher levels of exposure relating to sweetener uses occurring relatively infrequently.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available