Maltodextrin side effects and alternatives



Producer: BENEO Reseller: Innotaste


It’s probably just a typo in your case, but some other people fail to get this: isomaltulose is pretty much the same as sucrose (table sugar). Both consist of 50% glucose and 50% fructose, only the places at which the glucose and fructose molecule are attached are different. So there’s no sucrose in isomaltulose :wink:

Carbohydrates are broken down by enzymes: for each type of carbohydrate there is a specific type of enzyme to break it down. The breakdown of carbs (or hydrolysation) is slower for isomaltulose for some reason (my educated guess: the enzyme responsible for isomaltulose breakdown is probably much less available, on account of the body producing much less of it since isomaltulose only occurs naturally in small doses). The end products of sucrose and isomaltulose breakdown are the same: 50% glucose and 50% fructose. Only the speed of breakdown is different.

You should not be scared of isomaltulose if you comfortably ingest(ed) equal amounts of table sugar or HFCS instead.

There is: maltose (malt sugar). There’s also trehalose, but it is much less common in nature (wikipedia: disaccharidase). You do need some fructose, though…


Thanks Rick, good catch. I meant glucose. The fact that it’s no worse than table sugar is an excellent point. I don’t think HFCS is really an ideal safety reference, but I see where you’re coming from…

After checking, the GI of maltose is 105, so that’s out… Trehalose though seems interesting and definitely worth pursuing (especially for those that can’t get hold of Isomaltulose.)


I wonder if all of this GI hunting is really necessary when fiber and fats are known to slow glucose absorption. Maybe try mixing malto/dextro with lots of fiber (psyllium, for example?) first, and if that doesn’t work, try things like palatinose? Also there are quite a variety of fiber out there: if psyllium doesn’t work, for example, try something like inulin or FOS (which can actually replace your source of carbs, if you’d like; but that would be akin to going with a keto/low carb diet).

TBH, if you have problems with high GI/insulin resistance, going keto is probably your best bet to recover insulin sensitivity. After a few months (or periodically test for insulin sensitivity, and whenever it’s good enough) you can switch back to a normal diet/soylent with malto/dextr without much of the insulin problem. This is speaking from personal experience though; however there are some (mixed, though slightly positive) evidence for general decreasing insulin resistance after keto if you check the wiki page for keto/LC diets, and of course, follow the sources.


Strictly necessary? No. But ingesting a load of dissolved high-gi carbs all at once just seems like a bad idea, and a slow energy release seems like a good idea.

I suspect that fibre and fats in foods only actually affect carb uptake rate when they are in some sort of solid “foodlike” structure. The very fact that soylent shakes are homogeneous liquids would surely mean that anything in solution is more-or-less instantly available to the intestinal wall - as opposed to, say, having to wait for fibrous/fatty superstructures to be broken down to release the carbs.


perhaps, but for example, one of fiber and fat’s functionality is to delay gastric emptying, which would nevertheless affect the rate at which carbs enter the small intestine. Anyway, I don’t think it hurts to try a couple of times before investing energy, time, and money to find and purchase a more rare carb source (if you have fiber sources on hand).

Of course, do what you may. From my point of view it seems easier to just try mixing with fiber and fat first.


Well I think we probably all have plenty of fat and a degree of fibre present too. What we lack is the ability to measure our blood glucose response beyond subjective effects.

There are probably good alternatives, but the Palatinose is one of the parts of my soylent recipe I am most confident in.


I don’t think just mixing maltodextrine with fiber in form of oat powder can substantially lower its GI. Nor do I think fructose is a good idea, for reasons well described above. So I ended up making boiled oat groats the main source of carbs and fiber in my diet. Not exactly “the Soylent way”, but I can’t find anything better, fitting these constraints.


I want to use Palatinose/Isomaltulose because the Maltodextrin gives me a big burst of energy when i drink Soylent, but this energy fades away after a while and I crash (lightly but noticeable). My hope is that Palatinose will help keep my energy levels for stable with out highs and lows that the maltodextrin gives.My plan is to use some ratio of oat flour, maltodextrin, and palatinose to have a Soylent that gives me immediate energy upon consumption but keeps me steady throughout the day. Still working on sourcing it though, thats the only thing holding me back.


From what I’ve read, figuring out a meal’s GI is even worse science than nutrition already is:

As far as I can tell from the methodology, the actual GI of the meal was overestimated by 22%-50%, and it doesn’t look like the meals did any more mixing than you might do in a blender or shaker bottle. To me, this hints that just having all these ingredients in the stomach at once is enough to reduce the GI of the whole meal.


It doesn’t matter how much fructose you ingest most of it it is always processed in the liver, making triglycerides, LDL and uric acid which causes hypertension and gout. Personally I’d never put anything with fructose in my Soylent. Maybe I’m brainwashed by Dr. Lustig ( but hey, why take the chance if you can avoid it.

Dr. Lustig describes the digestive processes of different carbohydrates in detail in the video, well worth a watch if you aren’t familiar.

If someone has research not paid by Coca Cola Co. et al. to refute any of it, I’d be interested in reading it.


Never heard of such research, but looks interesting. Thank you!


Well, my edited formula helps a lot more, so I’ll still blame the sugar high.
But if problems worsen over time I’ll take into consideration that it might be related to potassium.
Thanks for your input. :slight_smile:


Hi ingeniousrealm,

I’ve got a Soylent mix of my own which I’ve just started on, and am still tuning some options back and forth. The information in this thread has been pretty helpful so far, and I was wondering how you were faring with your Soylent recipe.

I’m also Dutch by the way, so it’s pretty directly applicable :slight_smile:


Well, due to multiple reasons, I am not living 24/7 on Soylent.
When I do have Soylent, I prefer to live a whole day on it, but I’m experimenting with the usage of replacing part of my meals and making a formula for pre-workout and post-workout Soylent.

My only issues with this formula are actually having 6 of these 0.5L shakes without getting nauseas and keeping it up for multiple days. Using different flavours of Whey could make shakes throughout the day less boring, so I’ll be ordering different flavours soon.
Also adding more water to the Soylent actually helps, because it feels less heavy on the stomach.

Even despite my inconsistencies, I’ve gained around 3 kilo’s this month, and I can assure you, it is not fat mass.

And would you be so kind as to upload your formula and sharing the link with us?


Oh certainly, I actulaly simply forgot to link to my thread:

Note that my blend is for a much more passive lifestyle than yours, and also a lower weight (60kg). This allows me to make a thin shake for a whole day in less than 1.5 Litre, which I’m sure is easier to drink than 3 Litres :slight_smile:

I’m also sourcing my multivitamin, calcium and choline from Germany, having it delivered to a German address.

You’ll be looking at a slightly tweaked recipe. It tasted very sweet, and a lot like coconut. richardtkemp notified me that my fructose intake was too high (320 gram isomaltulose), so I’ve reduced it down to 200 for today. This made the Soylent much more palatable. It’s no problem, since I felt very full yesterday, and didn’t manage to finish everything.

I’m looking to reduce isomaltulose further, and your Brinta sounds good. I wonder, though, why you take Brinta, and not simply whole-wheat flour (Volkorentarwemeel). Brinta is literally whole-wheat flour with salt, there’s nothing else in there:

Anyway, taking whole-wheat flour also reduces the need for coconut flour, which is good since it’s too coconutty for my taste.


Actually, apparently raw flour can carry salmonella:

So maybe it’s better to stick with brinta anyway.


The reason I used Brinta was because I wanted to stick with the Soylent, but I had nothing to replace the Maltodextrin with.
Ever since my Palatinose arrived, I’ve been using 50% Brinta. Then again, I might as well buy “Scottish Oats” on Bulkpowders. For now, I enjoy the rougher taste as a variation.


The oat powder on is on sale this week (cheaper than the 5kg bag on bulkpowders), for those of us who live in the Benelux…

I use this, no complaints about quality.


I’m not too familiar with the taste of brinta nor of oat powder. The price seems similar.

I’ll be buying a box of brinta tomorrow to try it out. Any reason I should consider oats?