Nutritional management of lactose intolerance: the importance of diet and food labelling

Worldwide, 70% of the adult population has limited expression of lactase enzyme with a wide variation among different regions and countries. Lactase deficiency may lead to lactose intolerance (LI). Depending both on the amount of lactose ingested and on the lactase activity, people who suffer from lactose malabsorption might experience numerous gastrointestinal and extra-intestinal symptoms and manifestations. Treatment of LI mainly consists of reducing or eliminating lactose from the diet until the symptoms disappear as well as supplementing lactase, and inducing colon microbiome adaptation by probiotics. Cow’s milk is one of the major source of calcium and several other vitamins and minerals. Thus, a complete exclusion of dairy products may favor the development of bone diseases such as osteopenia and osteoporosis. Therefore, the dietetic approach has a crucial role in the management of LI patients. Additionally, the use of lactose and milk-derived products in non-dairy products (e.g., baked goods, breakfast cereals, drinks, and processed meat) has become widespread in the modern industry (the so-called “hidden lactose”). In this regard, a strict adherence to the lactose-free diet becomes challenging for LI patients, forced to continuous check of all products and food labels. In fact, lactose-free product labeling is still controversial. Considering that nowadays a specific cut-off value establishing “lactose-free” labeling policy is lacking and that there is no universal law regulating the production and commercialization of “delactosed” products, identification of specific safe and suitable products with a well-recognized lactose-free logo might help consumers. This narrative review aims to identify the dietary management for lactose intolerant people, avoiding symptoms and nutrients deficiencies, helped by the use of specific labelling to guide them to choose the safer product on the market.

Role of sweeteners on temporality and bar hardening of protein bars

Protein bars are one product that meet consumer demands for a low-carbohydrate, high-protein food. With such a large market for protein bars, producers need to find the correct texture and sweetness levels to satisfy consumers while still delivering a high-protein, low-carbohydrate bar. In the bar industry, bar hardening is a major concern, and currently the effects of non-nutritive sweeteners on bar hardening is unknown. Due to the negative implications of bar hardening, it is important to investigate the sweetener-protein relationship with bar hardening. The objective of this study was to characterize the effects of sweetener and protein source on flavor, texture, and shelf life of high-protein, low-carbohydrate bars. The iso-sweet concentration of sweeteners (sucralose, sucrose, monk fruit, stevia, and fructose) in pea protein (PP), milk protein (MP) and whey protein isolate (WPI) bars were established using magnitude estimation scaling and 2-alternative forced-choice testing. Descriptive analysis and temporal check-all-that-apply methods were then applied to determine flavor and temporal differences between the protein bars. Finally, an accelerated shelf life study was completed to understand how sweetener and protein types affect the shelf life of protein bars. The 15 protein bars formulated at iso-sweet concentration were all stored at 35°C and 55% humidity for 35 d, and measurements were taken every 7 d, beginning at d 1 (d 1, 7, 14, 21, 28, and 35). Bars made with MP required significantly less sweetener, compared with PP and WPI, to reach equal sweetness. Bars sweetened with stevia or monk fruit had distinct bitter and metallic tastes, and sucralose had a low metallic taste. Bars made with WPI were the most cohesive, and PP and WPI bars were more bitter and metallic compared with MP bars. Bars made with WPI and fructose were initially the hardest, but after d 14 they scored at parity with PP sucrose. There were no significant differences among bars in terms of hardness by d 21. Bars made with WPI were consistently denser at all time points than bars made with PP or MP. Bars made with PP were the driest and least cohesive and had the fastest rate of breakdown in the study. Non-nutritive sweeteners did not have a negative effect on bar hardness in low-carbohydrate, high-protein bars. Findings from this study can be applied to commercially produced protein bars for naturally sweetened bars with different protein types without negative effects on protein bar texture.

Consumer rejection threshold, acceptability rates, physicochemical properties, and shelf-life of strawberry-flavored yogurts with reductions of sugar

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing demand for reduced-sugar products due to the worldwide prevalence of obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of sugar (sucrose) reductions on the acceptability, preference, and quality of strawberry-flavored yogurts. A consumer rejection threshold test and an acceptability test (N = 53) were conducted using six yogurt samples with decreasing concentrations of sugar (12-5/100 g). Additional physicochemical tests (pH, °Brix, water-holding-capacity, viscosity, and color) were conducted to examine the quality and shelf-life of strawberry-flavored yogurts with reductions of sucrose during 28 days of storage at 4 °C.

RESULTS

Reduction of sucrose affected the acceptability and physicochemical characteristics of yogurts. The consumer rejection threshold showed that sucrose in strawberry-flavored yogurts could be reduced to 5.25/100 g from an initial concentration of 12/100 g without affecting the preferences of consumers. The 71%-sucrose (8.50/100 g of yogurt) was perceived as the most liked (6.27 using a nine-point hedonic scale) and the most preferred (rank sum = 127.50) yogurt sample. For the physicochemical properties of yogurts, the viscosity (3263-5473 cP) decreased, and the color lightness (80.98-85.44) increased during 28 days of storage at 4 °C.

CONCLUSION

Physicochemical properties and preferences were affected by the reduction of sugar. The consumer rejection threshold analysis showed that sucrose can be reduced to less than half of the initial concentration. These findings are useful to understand consumers' acceptability and shelf-life of yogurts with reduced-sugar formulations in the developing of new products. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry.

Invited review: Milk lactose-Current status and future challenges in dairy cattle

Lactose is the main carbohydrate in mammals' milk, and it is responsible for the osmotic equilibrium between blood and alveolar lumen in the mammary gland. It is the major bovine milk solid, and its synthesis and concentration in milk are affected mainly by udder health and the cow's energy balance and metabolism. Because this milk compound is related to several biological and physiological factors, information on milk lactose in the literature varies from chemical properties to heritability and genetic associations with health traits that may be exploited for breeding purposes. Moreover, lactose contributes to the energy value of milk and is an important ingredient for the food and pharmaceutical industries. Despite this, lactose has seldom been included in milk payment systems, and it has never been used as an indicator trait in selection indices. The interest in lactose has increased in recent years, and a summary of existing information about lactose in the dairy sector would be beneficial for the scientific community and the dairy industry. The present review collects and summarizes knowledge about lactose by covering and linking several aspects of this trait in bovine milk. Finally, perspectives on the use of milk lactose in dairy cattle, especially for selection purposes, are outlined.

Lactose-Free Dairy Products: Market Developments, Production, Nutrition and Health Benefits

Lactose-free dairy is able to provide the essential nutrients present in regular dairy products, like calcium and vitamins, to those that are not able to digest lactose. This product category currently has a wide and growing health appeal to consumers. In recent years, the quality and product variety in the lactose-free dairy segment has been increasing significantly, giving consumers more tempting products to decide from. As a result, lactose-free dairy is now the fastest growing market in the dairy industry. This review discusses the market developments and production possibilities and issues related to the wide variation of lactose-free dairy products that are currently available. Additionally, the health benefits that lactose-free dairy may offer compared to dairy avoidance are illustrated.