Why don't people use stevia instead of sugar?: The complex truth behind this sweet swap

October 10, 2025 •

4 min read

While it's a zero-calorie, natural sweetener, a 2025 consumer study found that some beverage products with stevia received significantly higher “bitterness ratings” compared to their sugar-sweetened versions. So, why don't people use stevia instead of sugar?

Quick Summary

Despite its health benefits, stevia's adoption is hindered by its bitter aftertaste, inability to mimic sugar's functionality in baking, higher cost per volume, and consumer skepticism surrounding inconsistent product quality.

Key Points

Distinct Aftertaste: Many consumers report a bitter, licorice-like aftertaste, especially with low-purity stevia extracts containing more Reb A.
Poor Baking Performance: Unlike sugar, stevia doesn't provide bulk, moisture, or aid in browning, requiring complex recipe modifications.
Higher Perceived Cost: Though very little is needed, stevia can appear more expensive per unit compared to bulk sugar, influencing consumer choice.
Consumer Skepticism: Historical misinformation and modern research into potential gut flora impacts contribute to lingering consumer doubt about stevia's long-term effects.
Inconsistent Product Quality: The taste and user experience can vary widely between brands due to differences in extraction, purification, and the use of fillers.
Not a Universal Substitute: Stevia is not a perfect replica of sugar; its functional differences make it unsuitable for certain culinary applications, driving people back to sugar.
Industry and Habit: A long history of sugar and artificial sweetener dominance, coupled with consumer habits, makes widespread replacement difficult.

The Taste: The Lingering Aftertaste Challenge

For many, the biggest obstacle to embracing stevia is its taste. While intensely sweet, stevia often comes with a distinctive, licorice-like or metallic aftertaste that some find unpleasant. This flavor profile can vary dramatically depending on the specific steviol glycosides present in the product. The most common commercial extract, rebaudioside A (Reb A), activates bitter taste receptors on the tongue alongside the sweet ones, creating this undesirable flavor. Even small differences in the purity of the extract or the ratio of different glycosides can significantly impact the final taste. This has led to inconsistent experiences and a negative overall perception for many consumers who tried an early or low-quality product.

The Role of Steviol Glycosides

Rebaudioside A (Reb A): The most common commercial glycoside, known for its intense sweetness but also the source of the bitter aftertaste.
Rebaudioside D (Reb D) & M (Reb M): Newer, more sugar-like glycosides that lack the bitter aftertaste but are more expensive and difficult to extract.

The Baking Dilemma: Functionality Beyond Sweetness

Sugar does more than just add sweetness; it provides crucial bulk, moisture retention, texture, and browning (caramelization) in baked goods. Stevia, which is hundreds of times sweeter than sugar, cannot replicate these functional properties. Using a concentrated stevia extract instead of sugar results in a different final product, often lacking the right volume and texture. To compensate, bakers must experiment with recipes and add other ingredients to provide bulk, moisture, or leavening, which can be a difficult process. Commercial stevia-based baking blends often include fillers like erythritol or maltodextrin to mimic sugar's volume, but this adds other variables and potential digestive side effects.

The Cost Conundrum and Market Competition

At first glance, a small packet of stevia sweetener might seem more expensive than a large bag of sugar. While stevia is significantly more potent and less is needed for the same sweetness level, the higher per-pound price can deter casual shoppers. Moreover, the market for alternative sweeteners is fiercely competitive, with a long history of lobbying by the sugar and artificial sweetener industries impacting perceptions and early regulatory hurdles for stevia. Early commercial versions that were cheaper and less refined also failed to deliver a quality taste, further hindering initial adoption.

Consumer Concerns: From Gut Health to Long-Term Effects

Although purified stevia extracts are generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by regulatory bodies like the FDA, ongoing public perception and some research raise questions. Some studies suggest potential effects on beneficial gut bacteria, while some stevia products contain sugar alcohols or fillers like maltodextrin that can cause digestive issues like bloating and diarrhea. The World Health Organization (WHO) also recommends against using non-sugar sweeteners for weight control, further complicating public understanding. Long-term studies on the effects of intense, non-caloric sweeteners are still limited, contributing to consumer skepticism.

Sugar vs. Stevia: A Comparison


Feature	Sugar (Sucrose)	Stevia (Purified Extract)
Taste Profile	Classic sweetness with no aftertaste. Provides a pleasing, well-known flavor.	Intense sweetness with a potential bitter, licorice-like aftertaste, especially in lower-purity forms.
Baking Performance	Adds bulk, moisture, and aids in browning and caramelization. Reliable for structural integrity.	Doesn't provide bulk or aid in baking chemistry. Requires significant recipe adjustments and additional ingredients.
Caloric Content	16 calories per teaspoon.	Zero calories.
Impact on Blood Sugar	Increases blood sugar levels rapidly.	Minimal to no effect on blood sugar levels.
Cost (per serving)	Lower cost per gram, but more is needed.	Higher cost per gram, but much less is needed due to high potency.
Availability	Ubiquitous and widely available in its pure form and as an ingredient in countless products.	Available in various forms (liquid, powder, tablets), but some versions contain added fillers and other sweeteners.

The Evolution of Stevia and Its Future

To address the aftertaste issue, manufacturers are moving towards higher-purity extracts rich in the better-tasting glycosides, Reb D and Reb M, or creating blends with other sweeteners like erythritol and monk fruit. These innovations aim to provide a more sugar-like flavor profile, improving consumer acceptance in beverages and other products. As technology advances, these improvements could help overcome the taste barrier and position stevia more competitively against sugar and other sweeteners. However, the functional challenges in baking will likely remain, making it a better substitute for beverages and tabletop use rather than a perfect all-purpose alternative.

Conclusion

While stevia offers a zero-calorie, natural alternative to sugar with clear benefits for blood sugar management, its path to widespread adoption has been anything but simple. The primary reasons why people don't use stevia instead of sugar stem from its distinct bitter aftertaste, its lack of functional properties in baking, and a higher perceived cost at the consumer level. Lingering health questions, inconsistency in product quality, and the sheer habit of sugar consumption further contribute to its slower acceptance. Though ongoing product innovations and improved extraction methods are addressing the taste problem, for many, the familiar flavor and functionality of sugar remain a powerful preference.

Frequently Asked Questions

The bitter aftertaste is often linked to the specific steviol glycoside compounds extracted from the plant. Rebaudioside A (Reb A), a common component in many stevia products, activates bitter taste receptors on the tongue in addition to sweet ones, especially in lower purity versions.

Yes, but with caveats. Stevia lacks the bulk, moisture, and caramelization properties that sugar provides for baking chemistry. Substituting it requires significant recipe adjustments, and you may need to add other ingredients to achieve the desired texture and volume.

Per unit of volume or weight, stevia is typically more expensive than sugar. However, because it is significantly sweeter, far less is needed, which can make the cost comparable per serving in certain applications, especially for bulk commercial use.

While high-purity stevia is generally considered safe, some products blended with sugar alcohols can cause digestive issues like bloating and gas in some individuals. Preliminary research has also explored potential links to altered gut bacteria, though long-term effects are still under investigation.

Product quality varies due to differences in the extraction and purification processes used by manufacturers. Lower-quality processes can leave behind bitter impurities. Some brands also use low-cost fillers like maltodextrin, which can alter the taste and impact blood sugar.

The food industry has historically favored cheaper, more stable, and widely-accepted sweeteners like sugar and artificial alternatives. While stevia's use is growing, its unique taste profile, cost considerations, and functional limitations make it challenging for universal application in many products.

Stevia is a zero-calorie, natural sweetener that does not affect blood glucose levels, unlike sugar. However, the World Health Organization recommends against using non-sugar sweeteners for weight control and notes that the long-term effects of frequent consumption are still being studied.