Divergent Sweetener Attitudes Highlight Emerging Opportunities

The U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates the average American eats about 100 pounds of added sugar a year, up 30 percent since the 1980s. While sugar has long been a staple of the American diet, the proliferation of sugary sodas, snacks and packaged foods, coupled with an increasingly sedentary lifestyle, has created a dangerous duo that is packing pounds around the American waistline and adding to the increased incidence of diabetes, heart disease, cancer and many other afflictions.

Introductions of low or no sugar products have doubled in the United States and nearly tripled worldwide based on consumers’ increasing quest for health and wellness (Figure 1). But an internal struggle persists. At the same time that consumers are trying to eat healthier, there exists a continual desire for indulgence and sweets that may, in part, be rooted in humans’ evolutionary instinct to consume fuel in the form of sugar when food was scarce. In essence, this relates to a common observation surrounding carbohydrate cravings.

Research conducted by The Natural Marketing Institute (NMI) in 2005 reveals this struggle between the American consumer and their sweeteners and highlights some emerging dichotomies and opportunities.

Sweetener Usage

New research from NMI’s annual Health & Wellness Trends Database™ indicates that over half of consumers (56 percent) report using table sugar (processed sucrose from sugar cane) on a regular basis, as an added ingredient or as part of food or beverages. Other consumers are taking a more “natural” route, with 36 percent using honey and 14 percent using raw, unprocessed sugar. And 44 percent of consumers prefer foods with no sugars added. Interestingly, only 13 percent state they use high fructose corn syrup or consume foods or beverages with it as an ingredient, although high fructose corn syrup is an extremely common component of many conventional consumer packaged foods and beverages. Hence, there exists a significant lack of knowledge and awareness of this particular sweetener and its widespread applications.

Perhaps some consumers are unaware (or indifferent) of the types of “sugars” present in their foods. Part of consumers’ high sweetener consumption may, in fact, be due to lack of monitoring behavior (or the fact that other ingredients are more important). How closely are consumers really looking at ingredient labels?

Sugar Monitoring

While half of all U.S. adult consumers (53 percent) indicate they “typically watch the sugar content in their diet”, a 16-percent increase since 2002, behavior is still falling short if half (the other 47 percent) are not watching the amount of sugar they consume.

According to NMI data, consumers are just not doing a good enough job of monitoring the sugar content of the food they consume. Only half of consumers (50 percent) indicate they check for sugar “most often” on the label of a packaged food or beverage product, eclipsed by “total fat” and “calories” (Figure 2). As would be expected, consumers who are managing their weight are significantly more likely to be scanning the product label for sugar content—57 percent versus only 41 percent of those not managing their weight.

A positive relationship does exist between sugar monitoring and age. As age increases, so does monitoring. Figure 3 shows that 41 percent of consumers in the 18 to 25 year range indicate they watch the sugar in their diet, steadily increasing to 62 percent of consumers in the 56- to 65-year-old range, and dropping off slightly among older consumers. Those younger than 18 are also under the watchful eyes of their parents, with almost two-thirds of parents (61 percent) trying to limit the amount of sugar their children consume. Two out of five households (46 percent) specifically seek out children’s products that do not have any sugar added. Both attitudinal statements lead to specific opportunities for children’s products that address these concerns.

While limiting behavior may be one avenue for those trying to cut back on sugar, the desire for sweets in foods and beverages is powerful and, at times, hard for many to overcome. Science has shown that even newborn babies have an innate love of sugar flavored water. The challenge is therefore set for science and the food industry to develop alternatives to appease consumers’ sweet tooth.

Are Artificial Sweeteners the Answer?

From saccharin to aspartame to sucralose, the sweetener industry has been trying to imitate the sweetness, consistency and qualities of sugar—without the calories—for over a century. And consumers are more than eager to support alternative sugar substitutes, evidenced by the fact that over half of U.S. adults (58 percent) indicate using artificial sweeteners over the past year, a steady 25 percent increase in usage since 2002.

Reasons for usage of artificial sweeteners are varied, but dieting and weight management appear to be the main drivers. Consumers are also using artificial sweeteners for the following reasons:

However, even with such high usage, half of consumers (55 percent) are concerned about the negative side effects of artificial sweeteners. About half of consumers (49 percent) even want their local store to stock foods that are free from artificial sweeteners, and a quarter (23 percent) prefer not to serve their family anything with artificial sweeteners. Such dichotomies create challenges for companies throughout the supply chain.

Certain segments of consumers show even stronger conflicting attitudes, creating even greater challenges for the food and sweetener industries. For instance, over three-quarters (78 percent) of consumers who use organic foods/beverages on a daily basis are concerned about the negative side effects of artificial sweeteners, while just under three-quarters (73 percent) also desire foods with no sugar added. While 73 percent of diabetics use artificial sweeteners for a diabetic diet, half (49 percent) are indeed concerned about the negative side effects. So what’s a consumer to do?

As is commonly known, longstanding clinical studies have linked some artificial sweeteners with an increased risk of certain cancers. In addition, a more recent study has shown artificial sweeteners actually turn off the body’s ability to detect satiation, which compels consumers to consume more food.

The upside of artificial sweeteners is that most do not contain calories and the respective carbohydrates that do not cause elevation of blood sugar levels—positive news for both weight managers and diabetics.

While the safety and value of artificial sweeteners continues to be debated, conflicting media reports and lack of awareness about long term health implications continue to fuel consumer confusion about artificial sweeteners, which, coupled with their desire for less sugar, is sending consumers looking for a better solution.

Low/No Sugar and Glycemic Index

For consumers who are trying to reduce sugar consumption but have distaste and disillusionment for artificial sweeteners, low-sugar, sugar-free or low-glycemic foods and beverages may be a healthy compromise. Approximately two-thirds of consumers (69 percent) are using “low sugar” foods and beverages, with a third (32 percent) indicating they have increased usage of these products during the past year. Two-thirds (66 percent) also indicate they have used “sugar-free” foods and beverages.

While low sugar content is desired, products will have to overcome the negative connotation of “low sugar” or “sugar free” labeling as being less tasty or full of artificial sweeteners in order to attract and hold consumer loyalty.

While the glycemic index is a relatively new term among the general population, 45 percent of consumers indicate they have used low glycemic foods in the past year, with one out of five (22 percent) having increased usage. However, “low glycemic” is the least checked item when reviewing a food or beverage label, with only 4 percent of the population checking for it “most often”.

Usage of low glycemic foods among age groups shows an interesting trend. The youngest consumers, 18 to 25 year olds, are just as likely to be using low glycemic foods and beverages as older age groups (Figure 4). Low glycemic foods and beverages, therefore, may provide a lifetime value opportunity due to their age immunity and ubiquitous usage patterns.

As the popularity of the low carb movement gets redefined, usage of low glycemic foods is prime for growth across a range of product categories. Low glycemic foods may even have more staying power in the marketplace because of their inherent value to stabilize blood sugar levels, satiate, help with weight control and assist with the management of various health conditions. Low glycemic products that effectively communicate these benefits without getting caught up in trying to define the scientific definition of “low glycemic” labeling and terminology may prove most successful.

Whether or not we can (or will) blame our evolutionary instincts for our love of sugar, the negative consequences of high consumption are clearly evident. This dichotomy creates numerous opportunities for the food industry and especially for companies that are serious about providing healthy alternatives with a taste of sweet indulgence.

Steve French is managing partner at The Natural Marketing Institute (NMI), a leading consultancy and research firm specializing in health and wellness. With 25 years of experience across many disciplines, French has pioneered a range of consumer databases, is a frequent speaker at many industry events, and is a published author and contributor to many U.S. and international media sources.

The data sources in this article are from NMI’s Health & Wellness Trends Database™ (HWTD), an annual research study of 2,000+ U.S. general population consumers with seven years of trends, and NMI’s Dietary Supplement Consumer Insight Database (DSCID). Both studies are nationally projectable and have a margin of error of +/-2 percent.