Zero sugar is not a synonym for zero sweetener
Five products fall into the diet/zero sugar type (two from Dengo, one from Divine, two from Torras), but the "total sugars" declared on the label varies among them: three mark 0 g (Dengo 65% Zero, Divine Amargo 80% Zero, Divine Branco Zero) and two carry a small residue declared on the label itself, 0.5 g in the Torras Negro and 1 g in the Torras Orgânico. All five declare a sweetener on the label, maltitol or erythritol, and the amount of polyols (where the manufacturer publishes it) is also recorded in the dataset.
Sodium and fiber: where labels diverge most
Per 100 g, sodium ranges from 0 mg (two Garoto/Talento products declare "sodium: 0 mg" per serving) to 120 mg (Garoto Talento Recheado Torta de Limão). Fiber also varies widely: dark chocolates with a higher cocoa percentage pack more fiber per 100 g, peaking at 16 g (Divine Amargo 80% Zero), against 0 g in milk and white tablets that declare no fiber per serving.
The five diet/zero sugar products in this comparison declare on the label two sweeteners from the polyol family (sugar alcohols): maltitol (Dengo 44% Zero, Dengo 65% Zero, Divine Amargo 80% Zero, Divine Branco Zero, Torras Negro 85% Zero) and erythritol (Torras Orgânico 79% Zero, combined with maltitol also in the Dengo 44% Zero). These are compounds that replace sugar while keeping the sweetness, with effects on the body different from those of sucrose, documented by regulatory agencies.
Laxative effect in high amounts. Polyols are not fully absorbed in the small intestine; the excess ferments in the large intestine and can cause gastrointestinal discomfort and a laxative effect. That is why European Union legislation (Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011) requires the warning "excessive consumption may have laxative effects" on labels with more than 10 g of polyols such as maltitol per 100 g (or more than 25 g in the case of erythritol). Source: European Association of Polyol Producers, polyols-eu.com/faq.
"Zero sugar" is not "zero calorie". Polyols have calories, just fewer than sugar: European Union legislation uses 2.4 kcal per gram for most polyols, maltitol included, against 4 kcal per gram for common sugar (same source). This comparison's own dataset shows it: the Dengo Barra 65% Cacau, with sugar, has 529 kcal per 100 g, and the 65% Cacau Zero version, sugar-free, with maltitol, has 468 kcal per 100 g. Fewer calories, far from zero.
Xylitol, same family, separate caution. No product in this comparison declares xylitol on the label (the sugar-free ones here use maltitol or erythritol), but the note is worth making because it is a common sweetener in other "sugar-free" sweets: xylitol is toxic to dogs. According to the American FDA, in dogs the compound triggers rapid insulin release, causing a severe drop in blood sugar between 10 and 60 minutes after ingestion, with symptoms such as weakness, lack of coordination and seizures. Source: FDA, "Paws Off Xylitol; It's Dangerous for Dogs" (fda.gov).
What Brazilian law requires to call it "zero sugar". In Brazil, claims such as "contains no sugars" and "zero sugar" are regulated by Anvisa under RDC No 429/2020 and Normative Instruction No 75/2020, on the nutrition labeling of packaged foods (source: gov.br/anvisa, nutrition labeling page). That is why every product in this comparison carrying that claim also declares on the label the sweetener that replaces the sugar in the formula.
Why does sugar-free chocolate avoid the insulin spike?
Because in the five diet/zero sugar products of this comparison the sucrose in the formula was replaced by polyols (maltitol, erythritol), and the only peer-reviewed study located for this combination measured a lower blood glucose and insulin response with the sweetener than with sugar. The study tested six mixtures of dextrose, maltitol and short-chain fructo-oligosaccharides (scFOS, also used to replace sugar) in a chocolate dairy dessert, at a dose of 35 g, with 32 adults completing the test and a subgroup of 18 providing a blood sample to measure the postprandial response.
In the original text of the article: "Blood glycaemic and insulinaemic responses were lower for all the sugar-free recipes containing maltitol and scFOS in comparison to the control one (P<0.0001)" [blood glycaemic and insulinaemic responses were lower for all the sugar-free recipes containing maltitol and scFOS compared with the control, P<0.0001]. Because the study design did not isolate maltitol from scFOS, the result holds for that combination, not for maltitol alone. Source: Respondek et al., "Digestive tolerance and postprandial glycaemic and insulinaemic responses after consumption of dairy desserts containing maltitol and fructo-oligosaccharides in adults", European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2014, doi.org/10.1038/ejcn.2014.30.
Why does one sweetener and not another make a difference here?
Because maltitol and erythritol, the two sweeteners declared on the labels of the diet/zero sugar items in this comparison (maltitol in Dengo 44% Zero, Dengo 65% Zero, Divine Amargo 80% Zero, Divine Branco Zero and Torras Negro 85% Zero; erythritol in Torras Orgânico 79% Zero, combined with maltitol on the Dengo 44% Zero label), do not have the same documented path in the body. For erythritol, EFSA's 2023 re-evaluation of this additive describes a path that does not involve turning into blood sugar: "Erythritol is readily and dose-dependently absorbed in humans and can be metabolised to erythronate to a small extent. Erythritol is then excreted unchanged in the urine" [erythritol is readily and dose-dependently absorbed in humans and can be metabolised to erythronate only to a small extent; it is then excreted unchanged in the urine]. For maltitol, the source used in this comparison (the study cited above) does not isolate the mechanism: what it measures is the outcome of the combination with scFOS, lower than that of sugar, without breaking down what happens with maltitol alone.
The same EFSA re-evaluation of erythritol also weighs against the sweetener, not only in its favor. The panel set an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 0.5 g per kg of body weight per day, with diarrhea as the reference effect: "An ADI of 0.5 g/kg bw per day was considered by the Panel to be protective for the immediate laxative effect as well as potential chronic effects, secondary to diarrhoea" [the panel considered an ADI of 0.5 g/kg of body weight per day protective against the immediate laxative effect and against potential chronic effects secondary to diarrhea]. The same re-evaluation concluded that the estimates of acute and chronic exposure to erythritol were above that ADI: "the exposure estimates for both acute and chronic dietary exposure to erythritol (E 968) were above the ADI, indicating that individuals with high intake may be at risk of experiencing adverse effects" [the estimates of acute and chronic dietary exposure to erythritol were above the ADI, indicating that individuals with high intake may be at risk of experiencing adverse effects]. And it also concluded that the data do not support removing the laxative warning from the label: "the available data do not support the applicant's proposal for the exemption of erythritol from the current laxative warning" [the available data do not support the applicant's proposal to exempt erythritol from the current laxative warning]. Source: EFSA, "Re-evaluation of erythritol (E 968) as a food additive", EFSA Journal, 2023, doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8430.
Each person's response to these sweeteners varies, and the decision about consumption, especially in the case of diabetes, belongs to a doctor, not to this comparison.
Gluten and lactose: a trait of the product line, not of the category
Among the 27 products, four declare "gluten-free" on the label, and all four are from the Divine Chocolates line (dark, milk, semi-sweet and white). The other 18 declare that they contain gluten and 5 do not carry that information in the source consulted, so they are left as "no data". For lactose, two products, both from Divine's zero/white line with that information published, declare "lactose-free"; 18 declare that they contain lactose and 7 are left without that information in the source.
Educational content. It does not replace a consultation with a dietitian or a physician. An individualized meal plan is an act reserved to licensed dietitians under Brazilian law (Lei 8.234/91). Sources are cited with a link for verification. Images under the Unsplash License (free use, including commercial).
