This post is part of our Battle of the Brands feature. Let us know which brand you prefer, and check out other Battle of the Brands posts.

Among the phrases that mystify me is "Too sweet" -- I was born with 28 sweet teeth. The sweetener holder in most restaurants today holds at least two different ersatz sugars; Sweet'N Low and Splenda. Which is better?

Sweet'N Low has the history. It first came on the market back in 1957 when the key ingredient, saccharin was packaged in the same single-serving sleeves used for sugar. It is still owned by the originators, privately held Cumberland Packing Group. Although the intensely sweet saccharin had been around since the start of the century, it took Sweet'N Low marketing and an increasing focus on the nation's waistline to popularize it.

The product's primary advantage is cost; a packet sells for slightly over a penny a serving. Downsides include bitterness that some users distinguish, and the inability to use it in baking and cooking, as it breaks down under heat.

Continue reading Battle of the Brands: Sweet'N Low vs. Splenda

Battle of the Brands: Sweet'N Low vs. Splenda originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 30 Apr 2008 17:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.