Description
ABSTRACT
This research investigated how the sweetness of sugar substitute compares to the sweetness of sugar. In this research different percentage solution of sugar, artificial sweetener and natural sweetener (10%, 1%, 0.1% and 0.01%) were prepared. Ten volunteers were gathered for the sensory evaluation in this case tasting of the solution, the volunteer‟s taste threshold of data was gotten. The artificial sweetener was found out to be the sweetest among the substances experimented and at the percentage of 0.1% and 0.01% saccharin an artificial sweetener was able to mimic the taste of sugar. Research prove that artificial sweetener are non-nutritive they have virtually no calories in contrast to sugar which contains 4 calories at each gram, a teaspoon of sugar is about 4 grams, for weight lose artificial sweetener may be an attractive option to sugar. Artificial sweetener may also be a good alternative for diabetic patient, unlike sugar; artificial sweeteners generally don‟t raise blood sugar levels because they are not carbohydrates.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Title page
Certification
Acknowledgement
Abstract
Table of contents
CHAPTER ONE
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Research aim and objectives
1.2 Significance of study
CHAPTER TWO
Review of literature
2.0 Table sugar (sucrose)
2.1 Classification of sugar
2.1.1 Mechanism of action in the body
2.1.2 Sugar alcohols and novel sweeteners
2.1.3 Advantages and disadvantages of sugar
2.2 Artificial sweetener
2.2.1 Advantages and disadvantages of artificial sweetener
2.2.2 Reasons for use
2.2.3 Differences btw sugar and artificial sweetener
2.2.4 Biochemical reaction of artificial sweetener
2.3 Aspartame
2.4 Sucralose
2.5 Saccharin
2.6 Stevia
2.7 Erythritol
2.8 Honey
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Materials and methods
3.1 Equipment/apparatus used
3.2 Methodology
3.3 Testing the solutions
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 Result
4.1 Volunteer‟s taste threshold data for sugar
4.2 Volunteer‟s taste threshold data for saccharin
4.3 Volunteer‟s taste threshold data for honey
4.4Total number of people who detected a change in taste
4.5 Degree of sweetness
CHAPTER FIVE
Discussion and conclusion
References
Appendi