Artificial sweeteners and sugar substitutes are not as sweet as natural sugar, according to a study.

Commercial sweetening agents are used in place of natural sugar, honey or maple syrup for their low nutritive caloric content and sugar levels. These products are often preferred by diabetics and those who are weight-conscious. But, a new research by the Pennsylvania State University scientists found some of the popular sugar substitutes made from aspartame and acesulfameK or Ace K that are extracted from the stevia plant are not sweet like real sugar. The experts conducted a test involving 401 volunteers who were instructed to taste 12 to 15 samples of sweetened substances having maple syrup, agave nectar, sucrose, AceK and aspartame.

The subjects reportedly felt nutritive sugar substitutes had high levels of sweetness compared to non-nutritive sweetening agents. The findings debunks the myth that all artificial sugar substitutes have unrestrained amounts of sugar. But, the current research also suggests the perception of sweet taste is ruled by taste receptors and this does not accurately help measure the intensity of the response. If a person is able to perceive low level of sweetness then, it is because of the potency of mixture that triggers a response for taste.

"While you can detect non-nutritive sweeteners at lower levels than sugar, that doesn't really tell us anything about the perceived intensity of that sweetness," said John Hayes, study author and assistant professor of food sciences at the Pennsylvania State University's Sensory Evaluation Center, in a new release.

"These ingredients are often marketed or described as 'high-intensity' sweeteners, but that's misleading. Our data confirm other work showing the maximal sweetness of low-cal sweeteners is often much lower than that of table sugar or other natural sweeteners, like maple syrup," he adds.

The research was funded by the National Institutes of Health. More information is available online in the International Journal of Obesity.