Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
Research Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsResearch Chemical SciencesUGFREAKeudomestic

Information on Malitol - It effects your blood sugar.

the-short-one

New member
EF VIP
Information on Maltitol - It effects your blood sugar.

I copied this from the site "Hand Coding". The link is http://www.handcoding.com/archives/000797.shtml

We were discussing sweeteners the other day and whether or not they might effect fat loss. Hope this helps.

Beware of the Sugar Alcohol Maltitol
As food companies try to lower the sugar content of their foods, they’ll try just about anything. In addition to the usual white-flour-to-soy-flour conversion, sugar is often taken out and replaced with a sugar alcohol. The name is a bit misleading as it’s neither a sugar nor an alcohol; rather, its chemical structure is merely similar to sugars and alcohols.

And, food companies generally subtract food alcohols from the “carb count” on the back of the package as they reason that sugar alcohols have a negligible effect on blood sugar levels. But, is that really the case? To find out, I searched for the glycemic values for various sugar alcohols. For those not aware, the Glycemic Index is a measure of a food’s effect on blood sugar levels. The scale is set up so that sugar has a value of 100. But, that’s not to say that foods can’t exceed 100 — potatoes can reach into the 150s, for example.

While a glycemic value of zero would truly represent a food which has “no effect” on blood sugar levels, that’s not to say that any effect is bad. Really, it’s the spikes in blood sugar levels brought on by foods with high glycemic values which cause mischief. Getting back to the sugar alcohols, I discovered that many of them aren’t that low:

Maltitol syrup, intermediate: 53
Maltitol syrup, regular: 52
Maltitol syrup, high: 48
Polyglycitol / hydrogenated starch hydrolysate: 39
Maltitol syrup, high-polymer: 36
Maltitol: 36
Xylitol: 13
Isomalt: 9
Sorbitol: 9
Lactitol: 6
Erythritol: 0
Mannitol: 0
Obviously, maltitol and its variants stick out. But, how bad is it? For comparison, corn syrup (a sugar derived from corn) is around 85-92. Sure, maltitol is lower than that, but it’s not that far off. As a rule of thumb, a glycemic value in the 40s (or below) is considered low. But maltitol syrup (53) is almost at the level of new potatoes (57).

So, which sugar alcohols are used commonly? Speakingly only anecdotally — from my recollections of food labels at my local Target — maltitol seems to be the sugar alcohol of choice for many manufacturers. I think we’d all like to find some double chocolate chip cookies make with erythritol (with its zero glycemic value), but I’ve never actually seen erythritol on any ingredient label :-/.

It may initially seem confusing to have all these sugar alcohols and glycemic values to remember — especially since so many food manufacturers liken all of them to having a minimal effect. But, just keep in mind these two: maltitol (36-53, depending on variant) and polyglycitol (also called “hydrogenated starch hydrolysate”, at 39).
 
Last edited:
A GI of 53 is not particularly high, and for a carbohydrate, it is quite low.

Sugar alcohols require specific enzymes to break them down. There is a small percentage of the population who are lacking in these enzymes - with the resulting metabolism of the foodstuff leading to excessive peaks in blood glucose/insulin secretion.
 
SPORT SCIENTIST said:
A GI of 53 is not particularly high, and for a carbohydrate, it is quite low.

Sugar alcohols require specific enzymes to break them down. There is a small percentage of the population who are lacking in these enzymes - with the resulting metabolism of the foodstuff leading to excessive peaks in blood glucose/insulin secretion.

the issue with polyols (sugar alcohols) is more in the respect that they very likely impair insulin sensitivity. They elicit insulin response via a different mechanism that carbohydrates.

IMO there is far too little research into their effects on this particular aspect of human metabolism.

IMHO they should be used sparingly, and unfortunately they are the essential base of the "low/zero carb" diet (at least the newer bars, cookies, etc.. anything thats supposed to be sweet tasting)
 
macrophage69alpha said:
the issue with polyols (sugar alcohols) is more in the respect that they very likely impair insulin sensitivity. They elicit insulin response via a different mechanism that carbohydrates.

IMO there is far too little research into their effects on this particular aspect of human metabolism.

IMHO they should be used sparingly, and unfortunately they are the essential base of the "low/zero carb" diet (at least the newer bars, cookies, etc.. anything thats supposed to be sweet tasting)


Sugar alcohols are termed as polyols polyhydric alcohols or polyalcohols, providing an average of 2 calories (2.1 for malitol) , as opposed to the 4 cals per gram seen in standard carbs. They are Hydrated forms of aldoses or ketoses. Glucitol (sorbitol), for example, has the same linear structure as glucose, but the aldehyde group replaced by –CH2OH. They are not entirely digested in the stomach and as such can cause considerable intestinal discomfort and gas/ diarrhea if ingested in large doses (likely to be in the order of 30+ grams per day),as they stay in the stomach for long periods, allowing bacteria to chronically feed.
I am not entirely convinced that there is an ‘extraneous” mechanism responsible for decreasing insulin sensitivity (unless you can show me evidence). . Hyperglycemia does indeed activate the polyol pathway , but there is no evidence linking actual polyol ingestion with decreased sensitivity to insulin.
To my mind the GI index and glycemic load perfectly predict insulin response (which is entirely blood glucose related- unless you can prove otherwise). Polyols are naturally occurring in fruits and vegetables, with roasted malt and chicory being particularly high in Malitol. (Although sugar alcohols undergo processing and refinement, when they find their way into other foodstuffs). In fact, because they are both slowly and not entirely digested, they result in a reduced blood sugar response (in comparison to refined sugars.) The absorbed portion is either mediated by a blood glucose insulin response (like any other carb) or excreted via the urinary tract. Some of the polyols that are not absorbed into the blood are broken down into fatty acids in the large intestine. Unabsorbed polyols are partially fermented in the colon and excreted. The FDA state that they do not cause sudden rises in blood glucose/ insulin. In addition they do not cause tooth decay (xylitol being used in chewing gum).

I believe that problems arise from excess intake of sugar alcohols. If used as a substitute for sucrose in low doses, they are an excellent choice, providing that they are not excessively consumed. Taking xylitol as an example, when using large amounts, the liver converts the excess into glucose thus altering insulin and glucagons levels. The hyperglycemic effect only occurs when there is an accumulation of the osmotically active sugar alcohols. This is much like lactose, many people are lactose intolerant, not possessing enough of the lactase which is required to break down galactose and glucose. Such a condition arises in a very small proportion of people in the context of sugar alcohols. Taking malitol as an example, a disaccharide polyol produced by the hydrogenation of maltose, maltase is required to break down the maltose into isomaltose.

When eaten in large quantities, polyols are certainly not a healthy foodstuff. They are hydrogenated, and as such contain trans fats. As long as the amount of polyols in the diet is relatively low, I do not see any problem with them.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom