Talk:Sugar alcohol

Internal Body Odor??

What is internal body odor? How can you tell? Djdickmutt 02:09, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

ANYONE????!!!? Djdickmutt 03:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Polyol

Should this item be relocated to "polyol"? It's technically a more accurate and definitive chemical group.

Also, I've got some info about the FDA-approved relative caloric content and percent sweetness (compared to sucrose). Should this be expanded on in this entry or should I dump it in expanding the individual sugar alcohols?

My inclination is to have polyol and sugar alcohol as separate articles, because while all sugar alcohols are polyols, not all polyols are sugar alcohols (e.g., pentaerythritol). Generally, I have only heard "sugar alcohol" used for the subset of polyols that can be prepared via the hydrogenation of carbohydrates. Branched-chain polyols do not fit this mold. Shimmin 13:11, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)

Just a Slight Funny

"Despite the variance in caloric content of sugar alcohols, EU labeling requirements assign a blanket value of 2.4 kcal/g to all sugar alcohols."

And people make fun of Alabama for allegedly ruling that the value of pi is 3. McGehee 14:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I thought this was interesting about Alabama and pi until I looked a little farther. I found some information on it as an URBAN LEGEND at http://www.snopes.com/religion/pi.asp. It looks like a small attempt at reinforcing a prejudice about the South. Just remember, just because you read it on the internet doesn't make it right. WFJ (heruns) from New York —Preceding unsigned comment added by Herunswfj (talk • contribs) 13:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad someone checked it out. It was why I said "allegedly," after all. ;-) McGehee (talk) 18:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Difference between Alcohol and Sugar Alcohol

I want to learn whether this "sugar alcohols" are accepted as the alcohol -which Islam refuses to be used- or not ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.223.40.240 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 26 February 2007

I suspect not, as they do not have an intoxicating effect and contain no ethanol, but you'd probably have to check for a fatwa from your particular Islamic organization to be sure. Vectro 06:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Is this chemical denotation correct? It's an OH group, not HO, and I can't tell at all what the chemical difference is by the description, and I'm kind of a chemist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.252.25.175 (talk) 02:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

The sugar alcohol formula is confusing, but not quite "wrong". HOCH2(HCOH)_n-2CH2OH would be clearer. The sugar formula is wrong, because it implies all sugars are aldoses, but I don't see any easy way to fix it.72.197.227.204 (talk) 23:16, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 18:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Methanol

Methanol is brought up a few times in this article as being a sugar alcohol. Is it? I'm no chemist, but this seems incorrect. I know for a fact that methanol is not a "white, water-soluble solid", which is the description given in the third sentence of the article. Nor is it "sweet" as the article states. 104.51.149.199 (talk) 08:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Methanol does not meet any normal definition of a sugar alcohol, so I have removed mention of it from the article. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:51, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Sugar alcohol/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This page is decent as far as it goes but could possibly use a bit more detail regarding Diabetes, commenting on the fact sugar alcohols are not 'free foods'. http://www.ynhh.org/online/nutrition/advisor/sugar_alcohol.html <- has a nicely laid out article on sugar alcohols with a bit more depth. Zazen68 (talk) 13:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 13:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 07:15, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Most popular?

The last sentence the introduction suggests without citation and in uncertain language that xylitol is the most "popular" sugar alcohol. James BeMiller's Carbohydrate Chemistry, which is published by the AACC, states that "sorbitol is ... produced and used in greatest quantities." Can we get this fixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A601:6B0:A301:612B:B840:6293:4795 (talk) 05:28, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

tooth decay

The following 2 claims "Sugar alcohols do not contribute to tooth decay" and "Sugar alcohols are not metabolized by oral bacteria, and so they do not contribute to tooth decay" lack proper sourcing. No page number is given and the quoted study does not encompass the entire group of sugar alcohols but only specific effects of xylitol and sorbitol: "This study examines the effect of xylitol and sorbitol." as can be seen in the abstract: http://web.archive.org/web/20110615024410/http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=ShowAbstract&ArtikelNr=261977&Ausgabe=248146&ProduktNr=224219 While many sugar alcohols are generally considered to be non-cariogenic, studies point to some of them as being at least slightly cariogenic. For example, the German Wikipedia page for Sorbitol states that Sorbitol is slightly cariogenic. Therefore, while there seems to be a general agreement, that most sugar alcohols are non-cariogenic, the claim that ALL sugar alcohols are non-cariogenic appears to be in dispute. As a consequence, proper sourcing for this claim (that ALL sugar alcohols are non-cariogenic) would be important. --boarders paradise (talk) 16:58, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Does this page sound just a bit like an advertisement?

A lot of this article feels carefully worded to frame sugar alcohols in a positive light. This is the entirety of the "health effects" section:

Health effects

Sugar alcohols do not contribute to tooth decay; in fact, xylitol deters tooth decay.

Sugar alcohols are absorbed at 50% of the rate of sugars, resulting in less of an effect on blood sugar levels as measured by comparing their effect to sucrose using the glycemic index.

When sugar alcohols cause digestive issues, it's generally a result of fermentation by gut bacteria. Yet the article does not mention any mechanism for digestive issues beyond mentioning they can occur, and then not in the prominent if short "health effects" section, but as the last sentence of the final section. Further, consider the line:

Sugar alcohols are not metabolized by oral bacteria, and so they do not contribute to tooth decay.

How are sugar alcohols not metabolized by oral bacteria if the one notable side effect is caused by extensive fermentation by gut bacteria? Tglibs (talk) 20:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)