Diabetic Sweets

I picked up the November issue of “Diabetic Living” magazine yesterday.  The piece below tells diabetic readers how good Fruit Slim sweets are, “sugar-free, fat-free, fibre filled”, which will “halt food cravings in their tracks”.  It then goes on to say that there is more fibre in five of these sweets, than there is in two-cups of spinach or 15 raw almonds!  This makes me slightly want to cry!

So, the ingredients of “Fruit Slims” are: Gum Acacia, Maltitol, Sorbitol, Xylitol, Acidifier (330), Fruit Juice Concentrate, Flavour, Vegetable Oil, Sweetener (955), Natural Colour ( Paprika), Coating Agent (901).

Sweetener (955) is sucralose.  This sweetener has been linked with liver and kidney damage.  There is also a lot of uncertainty with artificial sweeteners and some evidence to suggest that they may cause an insulin response; clearly not desirable in diabetics!  Maltitol, Sorbitol and Xylitol are all sugar alcohols, which might be classed as “sugar-free”, but are carbohydrates and do have an effect on blood sugar levels.  Fruit juice is also sugar, which clearly impacts blood sugar levels.  “Flavour” could mean anything and as for the “vegetable” oil; well, that’s certainly not Paleo!  The ingredients of these “crazy good” sweets look more like a chemistry experiment; there are no real foods in sight.

I think it’s really irresponsible to promote these as a good product to anyone, never mind diabetics.  To imply they are a better choice than almonds or spinach seems reckless.  They might have more fibre, but when eating a Paleo diet rich in vegetables, fibre won’t be an issue.  Besides, for diabetics, blood sugar is a far more pressing issue than fibre?

I've not found anything to back up the claim that these sweets will “halt food cravings in their tracks”.  In fact from what I've read, artificial sweeteners appear to have the opposite effect, increasing cravings for carbohydrates.

Compare the chemical composition of “Fruit Slims” to the “alternatives” of almonds and spinach.

Almonds provide high natural amounts of many nutrients, including manganese, vitamin E, magnesium, tryptophan, copper, vitamin B2 (riboflavin) and phosphorus.

Spinach is a fantastic source of vitamin K, vitamin A, manganese, folate, magnesium, iron, vitamin C, vitamin B2 (riboflavin), calcium, potassium, vitamin B6 (pyridoxine), tryptophan, vitamin E, copper, vitamin B1 (thiamine), phosphorus, zinc, omega 3 fatty acids, vitamin B3 (niacin) and selenium – and many other nutrients.

Am I missing the benefits of this swap?

The Misleading Health Claims of “Guilt-Free” Sweets

Unfortunately, products like “Fruit Slims” are marketed in a way that can make them sound almost medicinal — particularly to those who are actively trying to manage their health. Terms like “sugar-free,” “fat-free,” and “craving control” are especially appealing to diabetics and dieters alike, but they paint a dangerously incomplete picture. Without real context around blood sugar response, nutritional quality and long-term metabolic impact, such claims are not only misleading — they can be harmful.

The comparison to spinach and almonds is particularly troubling. Measuring a food’s value solely on fibre content is an extremely reductionist approach that ignores the synergistic role of real nutrients in whole foods. This kind of messaging reinforces the belief that health is achieved by numbers on a label, not by the integrity and origin of the food itself.

Understanding the Reality of Sugar Alcohols

Sugar alcohols like maltitol, sorbitol and xylitol are frequently used in “sugar-free” sweets because they don’t spike blood sugar to the same degree as glucose or fructose. But they’re far from metabolically neutral. Maltitol, in particular, has a high glycaemic index compared to other sugar alcohols, and it can still cause significant blood glucose rises in sensitive individuals — especially those with diabetes.

Moreover, sugar alcohols are known for causing digestive issues. Many people report bloating, gas, and diarrhoea when consuming even moderate amounts. These compounds ferment in the colon, often causing discomfort that completely negates the supposed benefits. For diabetics already managing complex symptoms, additional gastrointestinal stress is the last thing needed.

Why “Sugar-Free” Doesn’t Equal Healthy

The term “sugar-free” often leads consumers to believe they’re choosing something harmless — or even beneficial. But sugar-free doesn’t mean carb-free, insulin-neutral, or safe. In the case of “Fruit Slims,” the added fruit juice concentrate is still sugar, even if labelled naturally. And the sucralose (sweetener 955) used has been linked to adverse effects in animal studies, including alterations to liver and kidney health.

Even without definitive conclusions in humans, it’s risky to encourage diabetics to consume substances that may worsen insulin sensitivity or increase cravings — especially when the product in question has no nutritional upside.

Artificial Sweeteners and the Cravings Myth

Despite marketing claims, artificial sweeteners may actually worsen the very issue they promise to solve. Research suggests that these sweeteners can confuse the brain’s response to sweetness, leading to more persistent cravings and even reduced satiety. When the body senses sweet taste without a corresponding caloric reward, it may trigger compensatory mechanisms that drive increased hunger later on.

For someone managing insulin resistance or diabetes, anything that promotes increased food intake — especially refined carbs or processed snacks — is counterproductive. Whole foods, particularly those with a mix of protein, healthy fats and fibre, help regulate appetite and reduce cravings far more effectively than ultra-processed “diet” alternatives.

The Nutrient Power of Whole Foods

Let’s revisit the real alternatives. Almonds provide high-quality fats, plant-based protein, and a wide array of vitamins and minerals. They’re especially rich in vitamin E, magnesium, and manganese — nutrients that support heart health, blood sugar control, and cellular repair.

Spinach, on the other hand, is a micronutrient powerhouse. It offers iron, calcium, folate, potassium, and a full spectrum of B vitamins, along with powerful antioxidants and anti-inflammatory compounds. These nutrients are highly bioavailable and support a wide range of functions, from energy production to immune health.

Comparing these foods to a chemically engineered sweet based on a single metric like fibre is completely disingenuous. Real food offers complexity, synergy and bioactivity — none of which can be recreated in a laboratory-made lolly.

The Paleo Perspective on Sweeteners

From a Paleo standpoint, the ideal approach to sweetness is to retrain the palate away from it, rather than replace one sweet substance with another. Occasional use of natural sweeteners like raw honey or dates might be tolerated in moderation, but the emphasis remains on whole, unprocessed foods that nourish and satiate.

If you’re looking to reduce cravings, focusing on nutrient-dense meals with adequate protein and fat is far more effective than introducing sweeteners — natural or artificial. Once your blood sugar stabilises, your desire for sweetness usually diminishes, and your taste buds begin to appreciate the natural flavours of real food.

More Responsible Support for Diabetics

What diabetics need is honest, evidence-based guidance — not patronising marketing disguised as health advice. Instead of pushing chemical-laden products in glossy magazines, we should be empowering people to build simple, real-food habits that support healing and metabolic health.

This includes education around:

• Choosing foods with a low glycaemic load
• Prioritising protein, fibre and healthy fats at every meal
• Understanding the inflammatory impact of seed oils and artificial additives
• Staying well-hydrated with clean water, not synthetic drinks or diet sodas

With proper knowledge and support, diabetics can thrive on a whole-food approach — without the need for “free-from” gimmicks that undermine their long-term health.

Moving Away from Processed “Solutions”

Let’s be clear: the food industry has a vested interest in keeping people reliant on processed products. Whether it’s low-fat, sugar-free, or high-fibre snacks, these offerings keep consumers stuck in a cycle of poor nutrition, cravings, and metabolic instability. But health isn’t built in the snack aisle — it’s built through conscious, consistent choices around whole food, movement, sleep, and stress management.

We need to keep questioning the health claims of packaged foods, especially those marketed to vulnerable groups. Instead of asking how many grams of fibre are in a lolly, we should be asking whether our food choices are real, nourishing and sustainable.

If the answer is no, it’s time to step away from the packet — and towards the produce aisle.