A REDUCED CALORIE FROZEN DESSERT

Abstract: An improved frozen dessert made without sucrose or corn syrup solids is provided that employs lactitol and hydrogenated starch hydrolysates as the bulk sweeteners. Aspartame, acesulfame K or other artificial sweeteners may be used as an intense sweetener. The formulation provides a taste and texture qualities that are at least as preferable as conventional products sweetened with sucrose and corn syrup solids and further provides hardness, melting and overrun properties that compare favorably with conventional products sweetened with sucrose and corn syrup solids.

Description: A reduced calorie frozen dessert Field of the Invention This invention relates generally to sugar-free or "no sugar added" food products and more specific¬ ally to frozen desserts sweetened without any added sucrose or corn syrup solids. Still more specifically, this invention relates to frozen dessert products that utilize a combination of lactitol and hydrogenated starch hydrolysate as a bulk sweetener. Background of the invention "Frozen dessert" is a generic term that has been applied to a wide variety of products including ice cream, frozen yogurt, frozen custard, ice milk, sherbet, frozen dairy confections and non-dairy des¬ sert. There are two primary sources of calories in frozen desserts: fat and sugar. While fat contributes most of the calories in typical premium ice creams, sugar also contributes a substantial portion of the calories. Hence, reduction of sugar in frozen desserts is an effective way to reduce the calorie content of such desserts. Further, sugar has been linked to a variety of health problems including hypertension, coronary heart disease, arterial sclerosis and dental caries. Sugar or sucrose also increases blood glucose and insulin levels and therefore can be hazardous to people suffering from diabetes. Therefore, the reduc¬ tion of sugar in one's diet may have health benefits beyond the reduction of calories and weight control. Typical ice creams and frozen desserts are sweetened with sucrose or a combination of sucrose and corn syrup solids. The combination of sucrose and corn syrup solids (CSS) is generally considered to be the optimum sweetener with regard to taste profile and important properties such as texture, hardness, melt¬ ing rate and overrun. The present invention is directed toward reducing the caloric content of frozen desserts by eliminating the addition of sucrose and corn syrup solids to these products. However the elimination of sucrose and corn syrup solids has proven to be prob- lematic and the food industry's quest for adequate non-sucrose/CSS substitutes for use in frozen desserts has not, to date, been very successful. Generally speaking, any low calorie substitute for sucrose/CSS normally includes two components—an "intense" non-caloric sweetener and an alternative "bulk sweetener". The intense sweeteners such as aspartame, saccharin or acesulfame K provide a relat¬ ively high "sweetness equivalent" to sucrose/CSS with little or no added calories. Intense sweeteners have at least two drawbacks. First, intense sweeteners can impart an unpleasant aftertaste even though they are far sweeter per unit weight than sucrose, corn syrup solids and alternative bulk sweeteners. Second, intense sweeteners fail to contribute the body and bulk to the frozen dessert contributed by the sucrose and corn syrup solids. The "bulk sweetener" or "bulking agent" is used to replace the volume and texture supplied by the sucrose/CSS with substantially less calories than sucrose/CSS. Preferably, the bulk sweetener or bulking agent will also contribute some sweetness equivalent as well and the combination of the intense and bulk sweetener will provide the sweetness equivalent of sucrose/CSS. Currently available "bulk" sweeteners include monomeric sugar alcohols such as mannitol, sorbitol or xylitol or dimeric sugar alcohols such as isomalt, lactitol or altitol. Other alternative bulk sweet¬ eners include polydextrose and maltodextrin. However, all of these alternative bulk sweeteners, either alone or in combination, also fail to provide the texture, taste and other qualities demanded by today's con¬ sumers. Specifically, known combinations of sugar alcohols and combinations of sugar alcohols with polydextrose and/or maltodextrin all provide a product that is inferior in certain essential properties, namely, taste, texture, hardness, melting rate and "overrun" . Overrun is a measure of the ability of a whipped dessert product to increase in volume during the whip- ping or mixing process. For example, a product that doubles in volume (i.e. one gallon to two gallons) is said to achieve 100% overrun. Conventional ice cream products, i.e. products sweetened with sucrose/CSS, may achieve a batch freezer overrun in excess of 100%. Non-sucrose desserts made with polydextrose, malto¬ dextrin and sorbitol may achieve batch freezer over¬ runs of less than 100% (92% is a typical value) . The lower overruns of the non-sucrose desserts lowers the effective yield because whipped frozen desserts are sold by volume and not by weight. For example, polydextrose, maltodextrin and sor¬ bitol are combined as the bulk sweetener in several commercially available products. For example, a prod¬ uct containing 5.4% fat, 12% milk solids (non-fat), 9% polydextrose, 2.5% maltodextrin, 3% sorbitol, 0.5% stabilizer, 0.04% aspartame and 0.6% vanilla exhibits a batch freezer overrun of 92% and therefore is more costly to manufacture per unit volume and is higher in caloric density than a competitive product with a 100% overrun. Further, the polydextrose/maltodextrin/sor- bitol product was found to be approximately 40% harder than conventional ice creams and therefore less "spoonable". Difficulty in obtaining the product from the container causes frustration to the consumer and makes the consumer less likely to purchase the product a second time. In addition, the formulation was more difficult to mix and did not exhibit good mixing prop¬ erties. Further, the above product was more difficult to mix and melted at a rate 40% faster than conven¬ tional ice creams. By way of another example, a combination of polydextrose and lactitol was used as a sucrose/CSS replacement in a reduced-fat frozen dessert formula¬ tion. The polydextrose/lactitol formulation included 5.4% fat, 12% milk solids (non-fat), 9% polydextrose, 9% lactitol, 0.5% stabilizer, 0.04% aspartame and 0.6% vanilla. The polydextrose/lactitol formulation was found to be much softer than the polydextrose/ maltodextrin/sorbitol product discussed above but still 10% harder than conventional ice cream and therefore slightly less "spoonable" than conventional ice creams. Further, the melting rate of the polydex¬ trose/lactitol formulation was 40% faster than conven¬ tional ice creams. Thus, both the polydextrose/maltodextrin/sor- bitol combination has proven to be less than satisfac¬ tory bulk sweetener alternatives and the polydextrose/ lactitol combination proved superior in many respects to the polydextrose/maltodextrin/sorbitol combination. Hydrogenated starch hydrolysate (HSH) has been used as a sweetener in chewing gum and various candy products. Hydrogenated starch hydrolysates are primar¬ ily prepared by the controlled catalytic hydrogenation of corn syrup. The resulting hydrogenated starch hydrolysates are mixtures of monomeric, dimeric and polymeric sugar alcohols. The ratios of these differ¬ ent sugar alcohols provide different hydrogenated starch hydrolysates with different properties. A hydrogenated starch hydrolysate made from a 32-36 dextrose equivalent corn syrup will have an average molecular weight similar to that of regular corn syrup solids. A hydrogenated starch hydrolysate made from 70 dextrose equivalent corn syrup will result in a prod¬ uct that is approximately 50% maltitol and is often referred to as a "maltitol syrup". Accordingly, there is a need for a bulk sweet- ener, in either the form of one compound or a combina¬ tion of compounds, that can be combined with an intense sweetener as an alternative to sucrose/CSS. The alternative bulk sweetener should provide the taste and texture qualities demanded by today's con- sumer and further should result in a spoonable product that is easy to mix, provides acceptable overrun and further that melts at a rate similar to that of con¬ ventional ice creams, if not slower. Suπurαary of the Invention The present invention solves the aforenoted needs by providing a reduced calorie frozen dessert that is sweetened with by a combination of lactitol and hydrogenated starch hydrolysate and at least one intense sweetener. The frozen dessert of the present invention is a no sucrose added reduced-fat frozen dessert having between 0 and 8% fat content. The des¬ sert contains approximately 12% milk solids (non-fat) . However, it will be apparent that the milk solids con¬ tent will vary with the fat content and the bulk sweetener content. The lactitol content will range from 5% to 15% and the hydrogenated starch hydrolysate (HSH) content will range from 5% to 15% on a solids basis. In addition, in the preferred embodiment, a stabilizer in the range of 0.1% to 1% should be employed. To complement the bulk sweetener (lactitol and HSH) , aspartame in an amount ranging from 0.015% to 0.045% should be employed as the intense sweetener. Other intense sweeteners such as acesulfame K, sac- charin, sucralose, alitame and cyclamates may be employed as an alternative to aspartame. Vanilla in the amount of 0.6% was used to formulate the example shown below; however, other flavors are available and will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art. The quantity of flavor used will depend on the type used, i.e. material or synthetic. A preferred reduced-fat non-sucrose frozen des¬ sert includes 5.55% fat, 12% milk solids (non-fat), 10% lactitol, 10.67% (wet basis) hydrogenated starch hydrolysate (or 8.0% dry basis), 0.5% stabilizer, 0.03% aspartame and 0.6% vanilla (or other alternative flavoring) , the balance of the formulation being water. It is therefore an object of the present inven- tion to provide an improved bulk sweetener for use in combination with an intense sweetener as an altern¬ ative to sucrose and/or corn syrup solids. Yet another object of the present invention is to provide an alternative bulk sweetener comprising hydrogenated starch hydrolysate and lactitol. Still another object of the present invention is to provide I an improved sucrose-free or suc¬ rose-reduced frozen dessert. Yet another object of the present invention is to provide an improved frozen dessert with no or a reduced amount of corn syrup solids. Another object of the present invention is to provide a non-sucrose/CSS frozen dessert that exhibits melting rate, hardness, overrun and taste properties that are similar to that of conventional ice creams. Brief Description of the Figures The benefits of the present invention are illus¬ trated graphically in the accompanying figures where- in: Figure 1 is a graphical comparison of the vis¬ cosity of four different frozen dessert formulations, one of which is formulated in accordance with the present invention; Figure 2 is a bar graph illustrating hardness properties of four frozen dessert formulations, one of which is formulated in accordance with the present invention wherein hardness is determined by penetra¬ tion (mm) of the test ice cream at 18°C; and Figure 3 is a graphical comparison of the melt¬ ing rate of four frozen dessert formulations, one of which is formulated in accordance with the present invention. Detailed Description The benefits and advantages of the present invention are best understood after comparison of one formulation made in accordance with the present inven- tion with a conventional sucrose/CSS product, a for¬ mulation including a combination of polydextrose, maltodextrin and sorbitol and yet another formulation containing a combination of lactitol and polydextrose. An example of one formulation made in accordance with the present invention is presented as Example 1 below. EXAMPLE 1 Ingredients Weight Percentages Fat J • JJfJ Milk solids (non-fat) 12% Lactitol (Lact) 10% Hydrogenated Starch 10.67% (wet basis) Hydrolysate 8.0% (dry basis) (HSH) Stabilizer 0.5% Aspartame 0.03% Vanilla 0.6% The product formulation of Example 1, i.e. the "HSH/Lact formulation", was prepared in a 300 pound batch and frozen in a continuous ice cream freezer to a 90% overrun. Thirty-four pounds of the mix were also frozen in a batch freezer for characterization of the overrun development. The viscosity of the HSH/Lact formulation (Example 1) was similar to a conventional product made with sucrose/CSS as shown in Figure 1. The hardness of the HSH/Lact formulation (Example 1) was also similar to a product conventionally made with sucrose/CSS as shown in Figure 2. Specifically, an instrument penet- rated the sucrose product 145 millimeters at 18°C; an instrument penetrated the HSH/lactitol formulation of the present invention (Example 1) 148 millimeters at 18°C. Finally, referring to Figure 3, the HSH/Lact for¬ mulation took seventy-three minutes to drip 10 milli- liters at ambient temperature which is longer than the sixty-four minutes it took the conventional sucrose/ CSS product to drip 10 milliliters at ambient temper¬ atures. Hence, the melting characteristics of the HSS/ Lact formulation are superior to the conventional suc¬ rose/CSS product. It should also be noted that the HSH/Lact formulation produced a maximum overrun of 103%, which compares favorably to the 107% maximum overrun provided by the conventional sucrose/CSS prod¬ uct. The superiority of the present invention is best understood after comparing the properties of the HSH/ Lact formulation shown in Example 1 with the formula¬ tions shown in Examples 2 and 3 which are made with different bulk sweeteners and, hence, not in accord¬ ance with the present invention. A formulation made with polydextrose, maltodex¬ trin and sorbitol (PD/MD/Sorb) is illustrated in Ex¬ ample 2. EXAMPLE 2 Ingredients Weight Percentages Fat 5.4% Milk solids (non-fat) 12% Polydextrose (PD) 9% Maltodextrin (MD) . D ~6 Sorbitol (Sorb) 3% Stabilizer 0.5% Aspartame 0.04% Vanilla 0.6% The relevant properties of this formulation are also illustrated in Figures 1, 2 and 3. Specifically, the PD/MD/Sorb formulation of Example 2 exhibits a substantially higher viscosity than the conventionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat product. Hence, it is harder to mix than the conventionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat product. Further, the PD/MD/ Sorb formulation of Example 2 was substantially harder (see Figure 2) and melted faster (see Figure 3) than the conventionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat product and the HSH/Lact of Example 1. In addition, the PD/MD/Sorb formulation of Example 2, which is ex¬ tremely similar to commercial reduced-fat products that are currently on the market, exhibited a maximum overrun of only 92%. Thus, the PD/MD/Sorb formulation of Example 2 provides a volume yield of 11% less than the HSH/Lact formulation of Example 1 and further pro¬ vides a volume yield of 15% less than the conventional sucrose/CSS product. A product made with a combination of poly¬ dextrose and lactitol (PD/Lact) is provided in Example 3. EXAMPLE 3 Ingredients Weight Percentages Fat 5.4% Milk solids (non-fat) 12% Polydextrose (PD) 9% Lactitol (Lact) 9% Stabilizer 0.5% Aspartame 0.04% Vanilla 0.6% As shown in Figures 1, 2 and 3, the PD/Lact for¬ mulation of Example 3 is also substantially inferior to the HSH/Lact formulation of Example 1 (i.e. the present invention) and the conventional sucrose/CSS product. Specifically, referring to Figure 2, the PD/ Lact formulation of Example 3 is 10% harder than the conventionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat prod¬ uct and 11% harder than the HSH/Lact product of the present invention. Further, referring to Figure 3, the PD/Lact formulation of Example 3 melted 18% faster than the conventionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat product and 28% faster than the HSH/Lact product of the present invention. Specifically, it took the formulation of Example 3 only 52.5 minutes to drip 10 milliliters at ambient temperatures; it took the conventionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat product 64 minutes to drip 10 milliliters; in con¬ trast, the HSH/Lact formulation made in accordance with the present invention took a full 73 minutes to drip 10 milliliters at ambient room temperature. Referring back to Figure 2 and the property of hardness, a formulation made in accordance with the present invention (HSH/Lact) and the conventionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat products exhibited similar hardness. The polydextrose/lactitol (PD/Lact) formulation (Example 3) was 10% harder than the con¬ ventionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat product and the polydextrose/maltodextrin/sorbitol (PD/MD/ Lact) product (Example 2) was a full 40% harder than the sucrose/CSS product. The HSH/Lact formulation of the present invention, the sucrose/CSS conventionally sweetened product and the PD/Lact formulation (Example 3) all exhibited similar overruns (i.e. greater than 100%) . However, the commercially available formula- tion, i.e. the PD/MD/Sorb formulation of Example 2, exhibited an overrun of only 92%, resulting in a sub¬ stantially lower yield. The melting rate of the HSH/ Lact formulation of the present invention had a super¬ ior melting rate which was 12% slower than the conven- tionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat product. The PD/Lact formulation (Example 3) and the PD/MD/Sorb formulation (Example 2) had melting rates which were much faster than the melting rate of the formulation of the present invention and the sucrose/CSS formula- tion. Thus, the HSH/Lact formulation of Example 1 and, in general, a frozen dessert sweetened with a combina¬ tion of hydrogenated starch hydrolysate and lactitol along with an intense sweetener provides a product with essential properties that are similar to that of sucrose/CSS products, which, of course, is the bench¬ mark upon which low fat and low calorie frozen dessert products are measured. In addition, in a taste test survey taken to estimate the consumer acceptability of each product, the HSH/Lact formulation was at least as preferred as the conventionally sweetened sucrose/CSS reduced-fat product. Further, the HSH/Lact formulation of the present invention was very significantly pre¬ ferred over the PD/MD/Sorb formulation of Example 2 (polydextrose/maltodextrin/sorbitol) and was very sig¬ nificantly preferred over the PD/Lact formulation of Example 3 (polydextrose/lactitol) . In summary, an improved reduced-fat non-sucrose added frozen dessert has been provided that has important properties remarkably similar to conven¬ tional reduced-fat products sweetened with sucrose and corn syrup solids. Further, the product of the present invention is at least as preferred as the conven¬ tionally sweetened sucrose/corn syrup solids reduced-fat product. The combination of hydrogenated starch hydrol¬ ysate and lactitol as a sweetener will also work in frozen desserts having either a lower or a higher fat content. Specifically, the HSH/ lactitol combination will work in frozen desserts having fat contents ranging from 0 to 12%. Further, the lactitol content may vary from 5% to 15% and the HSH content may range from 5% to 15%. Further, the milk solids content may also range from 7% to 17%, depending on the lactitol, HSH and fat contents. Aspartame is the preferred intense sweetener; however, it is anticipated that saccharin and other intense sweeteners will work as well. One preferred hydrogenated starch hydrolysate is sold under the trademark HYSTAR 3375, by Lonza, Corp. HYSTAR 3375 includes sorbitol, maltitol and higher polyols and is particularly suited for frozen dessert applications because its molecular weight is similar to that of typical corn syrup. HYSTAR 3375 is fabric- ated from 32-36 dextrose equivalent corn syrup solids. It is also anticipated that different grades of hydrogenated starch hydrolysates will also work in combination with lactitol. Specifically, it is antici¬ pated hydrogenated starch hydrolysates fabricated from 60-80 dextrose equivalent corn syrup will also be appropriate. These hydrogenated starch hydrolysates comprise approximately 50% maltitol and are often characterized as maltitol syrups. Although only one specific formulation of the present invention has been illustrated and described, it will at once be apparent to those skilled in the art that variations may be made within the spirit and scope of the invention. Accordingly, it is intended that the scope of the invention be limited solely by the scope of the hereafter appended claims and not by any specific wording in the foregoing description.

Claims: Claims: 1. A reduced calorie frozen dessert comprising: from 0% to about 12% fat; from about 5% to about 15% lactitol; from about 5% to about 15% of a second bulk sweetener; from about 7% to about 17% milk solids; from about 0.01% to about 0.5% intense sweet¬ ener; and water. 2. The dessert of claim 1, wherein the second bulk sweetener is selected from the group consisting of mannitol, sorbitol, xylitol, isomalt, maltitol, polydextrose, maltodextrin, corn syrup solids having a low dextrose equivalent, and hydrogenated starch hydrolysate. 3. The dessert of claim 1 or 2, wherein the second bulk sweetener is hydrogenated starch hydrolysate. 4. The dessert of claim 3, wherein the hydrogenated starch hydrolysate is prepared from a catalytic hydrogenation of a corn or wheat syrup having a dextrose equivalent of between about 20 and about 80. 5. The dessert of any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the intense sweetener is selected from the group consisting of aspartame, acesulfame K, sac¬ charin, sucralose, alitame, cyclamate, either alone or in combination. 6. The dessert of any one of claims 1 to 5, further comprising from about 0.1% to about 1% stabilizer. 7. The dessert of any one of claims 1 to 6, wherein the total solids content ranges from about 30% to about 40%. 8. The dessert of any one of claims 3 to 7, wherein the hydrogenated starch hydrolysate is prepared from a catalytic hydrogenation of a corn syrup having a dextrose equivalent of between about 20 and about 80. 9. The dessert of any one of claims 3 to 7, wherein the hydrogenated starch hydrolysate is prepared from a catalytic hydrogenation of a wheat syrup having a dextrose equivalent of between about 20 and about 80. 10. A reduced calorie frozen dessert of any one of claims 1 to 9 comprising: from about 4% to about 8.0% milk fat; from about 9% to about 11% lactitol; from about 9% to about 12% hydrogenated starch hydrolysate (wet basis) ; from about 11% to about 13% milk solids; from about 0.3% to about 0.7% stabilizer; from about 0.02% to about 0.04% aspartame; and water.

Inventors: OLINGER PHILIP M, PEPPER TAMMY, OLINGER, PHILIP, M., PEPPER, TAMMY
Applicants: OLINGER PHILIP M, PEPPER TAMMY, XYROFIN OY, OLINGER, PHILIP, M., PEPPER, TAMMY
Application year: 1996
Main classification: A23G9
IPC codes: A23G9