Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Food and Nutrition Sciences, 2012, 3, 1509-1513
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/fns.2012.311196 Published Online November 2012 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/fns) 1
Comparison of Sugar Content in Bottled 100% Fruit Juice
versus Extracted Juice of Fresh Fruit
Jasmine Y. Serpen
Southview High School, Sylvania, USA.
Email: gserpen@gmail.com
Received August 22nd, 2012; revised September 21st, 2012; accepted September 29th, 2012
ABSTRACT
This paper presents findings of an experiment for the comparison of sugar concentration in extracted juice of fresh fruit
to that of commercially-bottled 100% fruit juice with a “no sugar added” attribute. The goal of the study was to deter-
mine if the sugar content of bottled 100% fruit juice with a “no sugar added” label is equivalent to that of extracted
juices of fresh fruits. The reported study was performed to address the potential concern that commercially-bottled
100% fruit juices with “no sugar added” may contain higher sugar content than extracted juice of fresh fruit. The fruit
juices that were tested included apple, grapefruit, orange, pineapple, pomegranate, red grape and white grape. All bot-
tled juices and fresh fruits were purchased in Toledo, Ohio, USA during the winter of 2012. The fresh fruits were juiced
and three samples were tested for sugar concentration using a Brix refractometer. The same testing protocol was also
applied to the bottled 100% fruit juice. Application of the Mann-Whitney test on the experimental data demonstrated no
statistically significant difference (p > 0.05). The results suggested that the sugar content in the commercially bottled
100% fruit juice with the “no sugar added” label is an accurate representation of sugar content in the freshly-extracted
juice of the corresponding fruit.
Keywords: Sugar Content Analysis; Bottled Juice; Fresh Fruit Juice; 100% Juice Label; Brix Refractometer
1. Introduction
Fruits contain many beneficial qualities to one’s health;
they provide an abundance of vitamins, minerals, anti-
oxidants and fibers, which are all essential for the human
diet [1]. Many people consume fruit juices on a daily
basis. Fruit juices are a convenient way for people to
receive the benefits of various fruits. However, they may
also have high sugar content. Although the sugar is natu-
ral, it may not be healthy in high quantities. It was sug-
gested that too much sugar could pose harmful health
effects, as people could develop diabetes, obesity, heart
disease, and other complications from excess consump-
tion [2]. Recently, companies have been marketing fruit
juices with the “no sugar added” feature, in part, to ad-
dress the concern of exceeding the daily-recommended
intake for sugar.
The comparison of the sugar content in freshly-ex-
tracted fruit juice with the sugar content in bottled 100%
fruit juice claiming to have “no sugar added” is of inter-
est for a number of reasons. It is important to know if the
juices with the “no sugar added” claim truly represent the
sugar content of juice extracted from the corresponding
fresh fruit. If the sugar content in bottled fruit juice with
the “no additional sugar” label is higher than that of
freshly-extracted fruit juice, people may want to recon-
sider the amount of commercially-bottled fruit juice they
consume.
Fructose is one of the most abundant sugars in fruit
juice. Some people believe fructose is healthier than su-
crose because it is found naturally in fruit, however it can
be equally harmful [3]. Fructose, also known as fruit
sugar, is a simple monosaccharide absorbed directly into
the bloodstream during digestion. Fruits, vegetables, and
honey are all natural sources of fructose. Three common
forms of fructose are crystalline fructose, high-fructose
corn syrup, and sucrose. Crystalline fructose is derived
from corn, and has the highest concentration of fructose.
High-fructose corn syrup is a combination of fructose
and glucose. Sucrose is a compound of one molecule of
glucose and one molecule of fructose [4], and is com-
monly referred to as table sugar [5]. Excessive amounts
of fructose consumption has been tied to negative health
effects [6]. The study reported in [6] reached a number of
conclusions as follows. Fructose is likely a primary cause
of symptoms in certain patients with functional bowel
disturbances. The ever-increasing occurrence of obesity,
diabetes mellitus, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease
could be the result of excessive fructose intake as well.
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. FNS
Comparison of Sugar Content in Bottled 100% Fruit Juice versus Extracted Juice of Fresh Fruit
1510
Finally, fructose may promote the formation of toxic
advanced glycation-end products, which may contribute
to diabetes, the aging process, and the thickening of ar-
tery walls [6].
Sugar content varies depending on the type of fruit.
All fruit juices contain fructose, but vary in their amount
of sucrose, glucose, and sorbitol [7]. Fruits that are rela-
tively low in sugar include lemon, lime, rhubarb, rasp-
berry, blackberry, and cranberry. Fruits that have low to
medium sugar content include strawberry, casaba melon,
papaya, watermelon, peach, nectarine, blueberry, canta-
loupe, honeydew melon, and apple. Fruits that are fairly
high in sugar content include plum, orange, kiwi, pear,
and pineapple. Fruits that are considered very high in
sugar content include tangerine, cherry, grape, pome-
granate, mango, fig and banana. The fruits with very high
sugar content will have correspondingly high sugar con-
tent when their juice is extracted. In general, the level of
sugar in the juice of a fruit is correlated to the level of
sugar in the fruit itself. This indicates that grape and
pomegranate juice are very high in sugar content. It is
also relevant to note that not all fruits are made into
juices. Some of the fruits made into commercial bottled
juices include lemon, lime, cranberry, watermelon, apple,
grape, pomegranate, cherry, and orange [8].
A number of studies evaluated the health-related im-
pact of fruit juice in different forms such as bottled, pas-
teurized, freshly-extracted etc. [9-14]. In one such study,
it was suggested that daily fruit requirements could be
met by consuming 100% fruit juice [9], although other
studies in the past have evaluated 100% fruit juice as a
sweetened beverage with unhealthy consequences with
regard to weight. The study reported in [9] also evaluated
the contribution of 100% fruit juice to diet quality. Par-
ticipants in the study ranged in age from two to nineteen
plus years old. A survey was conducted to analyze their
usual intake of 100% fruit juice. The participants were
split into four age groups as follows: two to five, six to
twelve, thirteen to eighteen, and nineteen plus years old.
The percentages of the participants that consumed 100%
fruit juice ranged from 45 to 71. The consumption of
fruit juice was associated with higher energy intake in all
groups except for the two-to-five-year-old group. The
usual fruit juice intake exceeded guidelines for the
two-to-five-year-old age group, but was associated with
better overall diet quality in all groups. The conclusion
was that 100% fruit juice should be a healthy part of
one’s diet, but only in moderation [9].
Another study reported the concentration of fructose,
glucose, sucrose, pH and acid levels in fruit juices, fruit
drinks, carbonated beverages and sport drinks to facili-
tate an assessment of impact on dental health [10]. The
fruit juices, fruit drinks and carbonated beverages con-
tained an average combined sugar amount of 9.3% -
9.8%, and sports drinks contained 4.4%. Fruit juices had
the highest amount of acid, approximately 2 to 3 times
higher than the others. The study concluded that fruit
juices, fruit drinks, and carbonated beverages have the
same carcinogenicity, which refers to the contribution to
tooth decay development [10], when testing the total
amount of sugar and acidity.
Insulin is a hormone produced by the pancreas to
regulate glucose. Insulin must be regulated, but not sup-
pressed. Insulin causes sugars to enter cells, which then
provides the brain with a satisfactory feeling [11]. One
study reports that with oranges there was a smaller insu-
lin response to the fruit than the juice [12]. In grapes, the
insulin response to the fruit was greater than the juice.
The study concluded that grapes appeared to be more
insulinogenic than oranges, meaning they stimulate the
production of insulin to a larger degree. This indicates
that orange juice leads to greater insulin production than
an actual orange fruit, while grapes appear to induce
more insulin production than grape juice [12].
Contribution of 100% fruit juices to the epidemic of
obesity was analyzed in a study reported in [13]. When
fruits are juiced, the nutritional portion, the fiber, is dis-
carded. Researchers claim that calories and sugar ob-
tained from liquid extracted from fresh fruit do not pro-
vide feelings of fullness, which in turn may cause people
to consume excessive amounts. The study reported in the
same article suggests that while some studies show an
improved diet quality with the consumption of 100%
fruit juice, other studies demonstrate correlations be-
tween increased juice consumption and increased risk of
obesity and diabetes [13]. Along similar lines, a different
study analyzed the correlation between excess 100% fruit
juice consumption in children and short stature or obesity.
A cross-sectional study was used on a population-based
sample of healthy children. 116 two-year-old children
and 107 seven-year-old children were recruited for two
years along with their primary caregivers and parents.
Mean dietary intake, height and weight were calculated
and analyzed for 168 of these children. Results were in-
terpreted to suggest that consumption of greater than
twelve ounces of fruit juice per day in younger children
may be associated with short stature and obesity [14].
Excessive sugar consumption is an ongoing concern. It
is therefore important to validate the claim of “no sugar
added” appearing on 100% fruit juice bottles. Accord-
ingly, an experiment was proposed to determine and to
compare the level of sugar content in freshly-extracted
fruit juices to purchased 100% fruit juices with a “no
sugar added” label as available to consumers in the USA.
2. Materials and Methods
The experimental methodology entailed direct measure-
ment of sugar concentration in units of Brix using a re-
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. FNS
Comparison of Sugar Content in Bottled 100% Fruit Juice versus Extracted Juice of Fresh Fruit
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. FNS
1511
fractometer [15,16]. The refractometer is made of a rug-
ged exterior of plastic and metal to protect the optical
lenses, prisms and mirrors inside. Towards one end, there
is a slide with a lid to place the liquid and on the opposite
end is the viewing hole, which resembles a monocular
eyepiece as seen in Figure 1. The theory of operation for
refractometry is presented in [17]. The refractometer
used for the experiments reported in this study measures
the percent Brix, or relative sugar concentration, of a
liquid sample. Depending on the amount of sugar in the
sample, the refractometer, which works similarly to a
prism, will give a reading on the index. The sugar level is
determined by reading the value where two colors on the
index, blue and white, meet [16].
grape, and white grape. The juicer was cleansed in be-
tween each juicing using soap and water. The sugar con-
tent for each fruit juice was tested using the refractometer
using three samples from the same bottle of purchased
juice or extracted juice of fresh fruit, and was recorded.
The sugar contents of the extracted juices were compared
to those of the bottled juices claiming to have “no sugar
added”. Experimentally measured data were analyzed
using the Mann-Whitney test for statistically significant
differences.
3. Discussion
Typical sugar content concentrations in Brix are shown
for a number of common fruits in Table 1 to serve as a
point of reference for the subsequent discussion in this
section [15]. Measurement values of the experiment are
presented in Figure 2. In the apple, red grape, and pine-
apple juices, the sugar concentration was higher for the
fresh fruit juice. For the orange, grapefruit, white grape,
and pomegranate juices, the sugar concentrations were
higher in the commercially-bottled 100% fruit juices.
The findings indicate that the values for the sugar con-
centration of natural and bottled fruit juices with a “no
sugar added” attribute were within close proximity of
each other, ranging in difference only a few degrees Brix.
Bottled juices and fresh fruits were purchased at vari-
ous local grocery stores in Toledo, Ohio, USA at differ-
ent times during the winter of 2012. The fresh fruits in-
cuded apple, grapefruit, orange, pineapple, pomegranate,
red grape, and white grape. A fruit juicer was used to
extract the juice of the fresh fruits. The following 100%
fruit juices designated as “no sugar added” were purchased:
apple, grapefruit, orange, pineapple, pomegranate, red
Table 1. Typical Brix concentrations for common fruits.
Type of fruit Brix concentration in %
Oranges, pears 8 - 13
Apples, melons 11 - 16
Strawberries, peaches 7 - 12
Grapes 15 - 26
Watermelons, plums 9 - 15
Figure 1. Hand-held optical refractometer.
Figure 2. Average Brix concentrations for each fruit juice
Comparison of Sugar Content in Bottled 100% Fruit Juice versus Extracted Juice of Fresh Fruit
1512
A Mann-Whitney statistical test [18] based on a com-
parison of medians indicated there was not a significant
difference in the sugar contents of freshly-extracted and
purchased 100% bottled fruit juice in all tested flavors as
presented in Table 2. This suggests that the sugar con-
centration of purchased 100% fruit juices with “no sugar
added” appears to represent the true sugar content of the
corresponding fresh fruit, in its liquid form.
Although the sugar content comparison failed to yield
any differences between bottled and freshly-extracted
fruit juices, it is relevant to note other beneficial ingredi-
ents or nutrients that are found in freshly-extracted fruit
juice. The comparison between freshly-extracted and
commercial fruit juices has been reported in prior studies
[19,20]. One such study analyzed juices hand-extracted
from pineapple, Hamlin and Valencia oranges in com-
parison to various brands of processed orange juice [19].
Several volatile components were evaluated including
alcohols, aldehydes, esters, and hydrocarbons. Results
demonstrated that fresh squeezed unpasteurized juice had
the highest level of volatile components. Pasteurization
of single strength juice not made from concentrate
caused no significant changes in volatile flavor composi-
tion in comparison to fresh orange juices. Significant
changes in volatile compounds occurred in juices recon-
stituted from concentrates. Canned juices and 10% or-
ange juice were also compared to the 100% orange juice
products and were found to have a significantly lower
flavor quality in comparison to fresh orange juice [19].
Another study compared the nutrient content of fresh and
commercial fruit juices, specifically looking at types and
amounts of carbohydrates and electrolytes along with pH
and osmolarity [20]. Forty types of fresh fruits were ana-
lyzed and compared to data obtained earlier regarding
commercial fruit juices. Results demonstrated differences
in nutrient content among fresh and commercial fruit
juices obtained from the same fruit. Sucrose was more
frequent in commercial fruit juices, and rare in fresh
juices. Fresh fruit juices had a more neutral pH level than
commercial fruit juices, demonstrating a higher acidic
Table 2. Results of the Mann-Whitney Test.
Mann-Whitney Test Parameter Values
Type of Fruit W p
Apple –4.5 0.08
Red Grape 4.5 0.08
White Grape –3.0 0.26
Orange –4.5 0.08
Grapefruit –4.5 0.08
Pomegrante –4.5 0.08
Pineapple 4.5 0.07
content in commercial fruit juices. Commercial juices
derived from apple, guava, orange, pear, and pineapple
had a higher solute concentration than corresponding
fresh juices. All tested fresh juices demonstrated lower
sodium levels than commercial versions. A majority of
the fresh fruit juices contained higher levels of nutrients
such as: potassium, phosphorus and magnesium than the
commercial juices [20]. Therefore, when there is choice
available, it is reasonable to suggest that a consumer is
likely better off with respect to a balanced diet if (s)he
consumes fresh squeezed fruit juice.
4. Conclusions
This paper presents an experimental study on the com-
parison of sugar content between 100% fruit juices that
are sold in bottles in the marketplace in the USA and
those that are freshly extracted from fruit. Statistical
analysis of the experiment results indicated that there
was no significant difference in the sugar concentrations
between the two in all tested varieties.
This is a finding that favors consumers who are par-
ticularly concerned with sugar consumption. However, it
is important to recognize the limitations of this study.
The validity of the results could have been affected by
the country of origin, surrounding climate, or brand of
fresh fruits, among other possible factors.
5. Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges the scientific and technical
guidance provided by Dr. Gursel Serpen, PhD, and Mrs.
Blythe Tipping.
REFERENCES
[1] H. J. Klee, “Improving the Flavor of Fresh Fruits: Ge-
nomics, Biochemistry, and Biotechnology,” New Phy-
tologist, Vol. 187, No. 1, 2010, pp. 44-56.
doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2010.03281.x
[2] K. I. France, “Public Attitudes towards the Healthiness of
Fruit Juices,” Journal of Human Nutrition & Dietetics,
Vol. 13, No. 5, 2000, p. 369.
doi:10.1046/j.1365-277x.2000.00001-16.x
[3] J. Briffa, “Juicy Details-Why Fruit Juices Pose a Hazard
to Our Health,” 2006.
http://www.drbriffa.com/2006/11/10/juicy-details-why-fr
uit-juices-pose-a-hazard-to-our-health/
[4] Wikipedia, “Fructose,” 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fructose
[5] Wikipedia, “Sucrose,” 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sucrose
[6] A. Gaby, “Adverse Effects of Dietary Fructose,” Alterna-
tive Medicine Review, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2005, pp. 294-306.
[7] M. M. Smith and M. Davis, “Carbohydrate Absorption
from Fruit Juices in Young Children,” Pediatrics, Vol. 95,
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. FNS
Comparison of Sugar Content in Bottled 100% Fruit Juice versus Extracted Juice of Fresh Fruit 1513
No. 3, 1995, p. 340.
[8] L. Dolson, “Low-Carb Fruits: Lists of the Best and
Worst,” 2011. http://lowcarbdiets.about.com/od/what
[9] C. E. O’Neil, T. A. Nicklas, M. Zanovec and I. L. Fulgoni,
“Diet Quality Is Positively Associated with 100% Fruit
Juice Consumption in Children and Adults in the United
States,” Nutrition Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, 2011, pp. 17-
26. doi:10.1186/1475-2891-10-17
[10] D. Birkhed, “Sugar Content, Acidity and Effect on Plaque
pH of Fruit Juices, Fruit Drinks, Carbonated Beverages
and Sport Drinks,” Caries Research, Vol. 18, No. 2, 1984,
pp. 120-127.
[11] G. Neilson, “Insulin: The Good and the Bad,” 2012.
http://basskilleronline.com/insulin-good-bad.html
[12] R. Bolton, K. Heaton and L. Burroughs, “The Role of
Dietary Fiber in Satiety, Glucose, and Insulin: Studies
with Fruit and Fruit Juices,” The American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 34, No. 2, 1981, pp. 211-217.
[13] M. Eng, “100% Fruit Juice Comes Under Fire in War on
Obesity,” 2012.
http://www.bendbulletin.com/article/20120531/NEWS01
07/205310318/
[14] B. Dennison, H. Rockwell and S. Baker, “Excess Fruit
Juice Consumption by Preschool-aged Children Is Asso-
ciated with Short Stature and Obesity,” Official Journal
of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Vol. 99, No. 1,
1997, pp. 15-22.
[15] Atago, “Hand-held Refractometers,”
www.atago.net/english/images/catalog/hand-held.pdf
[16] Grapestompers, “How to Use a Refractometer,” 2012.
http://www.grapestompers.com/refractometer_use.aspx
[17] John Hanson, “Theory of Operation for Refractometry,”
2006.
http://www2.ups.edu/faculty/hanson/labtechniques/refract
ometry/theory.htm
[18] Wikipedia, “Mann-Whitney U,” 2012.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mann%E2%
[19] M. Nisperos-Carriedo and P. Shaw, “Comparison of
Volatile Flavor Components in Fresh and Processed Or-
ange Juices,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemis-
try, Vol. 38, No. 4, 1990, pp. 1048-1052.
doi:10.1021/jf00094a029
[20] N. Densupsoontorn, P. Jirapinyo, N. Thamonsiri, R.
Wongarn, P. Phosuya, A. Tritiprat, S. Patraarat, P. Pi-
datcha and L. Suwannthol, “Comparison of the Nutrient
Content of Fresh Fruit Juices versus Commercial Fruit
Juices,” Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand,
Vol. 85 No. 2, 2002, pp. S732-S738.
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. FNS