We are not going to tell you VS7188 is a drop-in replacement for Sucram. Nobody outside ADM can honestly claim that, because the current Sucram formulations are not published in enough detail to support an equivalence claim. What follows is what each side publishes, where the gaps are, and a protocol for getting a real answer in your own mill.
Sucram is ADM's feed sweetener range, originally developed by Pancosma. It is the reference point most buyers in this category compare against, and searches for an alternative usually come from one of three places: a regulatory change, a cost review, or a supply-chain decision to qualify a second source. Each of those needs a different answer.
A lot of coverage says sodium saccharin has been "banned in EU feed". That is not what the instrument says. We read the original rather than the summaries:
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1727 of 20 June 2024, withdrawing from the market certain feed additives. Annex Part 2, Artificial substances: E 954(iii) Sodium saccharin — Piglets. Adopted under Article 10(5) of Regulation (EC) 1831/2003, the procedural route for additives where no re-evaluation application was submitted or the application was withdrawn. Transitional measures (Article 2): existing additive stocks to 11 July 2025, premixtures to 11 October 2025, compound feed and feed materials to 11 July 2026. Read the original →
Three things follow. It applies to piglets, not all species. It is a procedural withdrawal, not a safety ban. And it applies equally to any saccharin-based sweetener — including SILSEP VS7188 and VS3965, both of which are built on sodium saccharin. If your problem is specifically EU piglet feed, we are not your answer either, and you should be looking at ADM's saccharin-free lines or an equivalent. We would rather say that than sell you something that cannot ship.
If your market is Southeast Asia, South Asia, the Middle East or North Africa, this regulation does not apply to you at all. Sodium saccharin remains listed for farmed animals in China's feed additive catalogue and is registered as a feed additive in the Philippines.
This is the comparison that can actually be made from public sources. Note how much of the ADM column is unavailable — that is not a criticism, it is a commercial choice most of this industry makes, but it does determine what a buyer can evaluate before committing.
| Field | Sucram range (ADM / Pancosma) | SILSEP VS7188 | SILSEP VS3965 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Active composition | Not published for current grades. Newer lines are described by technology name (“PIG SWEET NUCLEUS”) rather than composition | Food-grade sodium saccharin with sweetness enhancers and synergists | Neotame + sodium saccharin system |
| Carrier | Not published | Carrier-free — no inert substrate | Silica flow carrier |
| Active percentage | Not published | 100% functional granule | Not published |
| Dosage | Sucram Specifeek 230 g/T; Sucram M’I Sweet 100 g/T (piglets and fattening pigs, as published by ADM) | To formulation | 60–180 g/T complete feed |
| Dispersion metric | Not published | 76,000,000 particles per gram | Not published |
| Dissolution | Not published | 3 seconds | Not published |
| Thermal claim | Heat resistance stated qualitatively; a 180°C figure appears in Pancosma technical articles for the microencapsulated C-150 grade | Tolerates 85°C+ steam conditioning and pelleting | Stable through pelleting |
| Shelf life | Not published | Not published | 18 months |
| Saccharin-free option | Yes — Specifeek and M’I Sweet lines | No | No |
ADM figures are as published by ADM or reported in trade press interviews with ADM product specialists; we link the regulation but do not reproduce third-party datasheets. “Not published” means we could not find the figure in public sources as at September 2026, not that it is unfavourable. If ADM publishes more detail, this table should be corrected — tell us and we will update it.
| Your situation | Honest answer |
|---|---|
| EU piglet feed, need saccharin-free | Not us. Both our sweeteners are saccharin-based. Look at ADM's saccharin-free lines or an equivalent |
| Hot, humid market; pelleting at 85°C+ | Worth testing. This is the condition VS7188 is designed around, and we publish the numbers to check it against |
| Cost pressure at constant sweetness | Worth calculating. Carrier-free means you are not paying freight and duty on inert mass. Run the cost per tonne of finished feed, not per kilogram |
| Qualifying a second source | Straightforward. Trial quantity from one carton, full documentation, parallel trial against your incumbent |
| Water-line or milk-replacer dosing | Worth testing. 3-second dissolution and no insoluble carrier is the specific advantage here |
| You need published efficacy trials against Sucram | We do not have them. We have not run head-to-head trials against a competitor product and will not present modelled numbers as if we had |
We supply trial quantities from a single carton, with TDS, SDS and COA, so that none of this requires a commercial order. If your incumbent wins, that is a legitimate outcome and we would rather you found out on a carton than on a container.
No supplier can honestly promise that, and we will not. Sucram's current formulations are not published in enough detail for anyone outside ADM to claim equivalence, and sweetener performance depends on your raw materials, inclusion rate and process. What we can say is what VS7188 is made of, what it does at defined conditions, and how to run a comparison that gives you a real answer rather than a claim.
Narrower than most coverage suggests. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/1727 withdrew sodium saccharin (E 954(iii)) from the EU market for piglets, under Article 10(5) of Regulation (EC) 1831/2003 — the procedural route used when no re-evaluation application was submitted or the application was withdrawn. It is not a safety ban and it is not all species. Compound feed produced with it could be used until 11 July 2026. Both Sucram's classic saccharin-based grades and SILSEP VS7188 and VS3965 are affected by the same rule in the same way.
ADM publishes 230 g/T for Sucram Specifeek and 100 g/T for Sucram M'I Sweet in piglet and fattening pig feed. SILSEP publishes 60-180 g/T for VS3965 in complete feed; VS7188 is dosed to formulation. Dosage alone does not settle cost, because it depends on the sweetness endpoint each figure is measured against — which is why the comparison below is on cost per tonne of finished feed at an equivalent endpoint, not on price per kilogram.
Three things, in this order: run both products through your own conditioning process and assay retention; hold samples at your warehouse temperature and humidity and re-assess at 30, 60 and 90 days; and run a short intake trial with a control. We supply trial quantities from a single carton so that none of this requires a commercial order. If the incumbent performs better in your mill, that is a useful result too.
Because withholding it pushes the comparison onto price per kilogram, which is the wrong unit for a low-inclusion additive. VS7188 is food-grade sodium saccharin with sweetness enhancers and synergists, carrier-free. Knowing that lets a formulator reason about compatibility, regulatory status and cost in a way that a proprietary technology name does not.
See VS7188 specifications Request a trial quantity
Last updated: 3 September 2026 · Sucram and Pancosma are trademarks of their respective owners. SILSEP is not affiliated with, endorsed by or connected to ADM or Pancosma. Comparative statements are based on publicly available information as at the date above.