Conference turris::cooks

    I was under the impression that you couldn't use an artificial sweetner
    in things that are cooked because the sweet doesn't stay, it cooks out
    when things get a certain temp.  I even notice it in my hot coffee, if
    it's too hot then it's not as sweet.  
    
    
    

  This is a very difficult thing to do. 

  First of all, the substitution ratios given on the packages of many
  sugar substitutes mainly handle matching sweetness. They generally
  fail in matching sugar's other properties, especially in baking. And
  if you're not baking, the ratio isn't critical, anyway, and it's
  usually not hard to find some rate of substitution which will render
  your final results the desired sweetness, and avoid possible
  off-flavors (such as saccherine has).

  The real problem is the other properties of sugar. When added to
  recipes in the presence of liquid, it usually increases the liquid's
  effect of making the recipe more runny. The strength of this effect
  depends on the ratio of liquid to other ingredients, such as starch,
  fat, and leavening. Baking recipes are sensitive to proportions of
  these ingredients. Sugar substitutes have very little "liquid
  enhancing" effect, so recipes which depend on this property of sugar
  will often fail, no matter how much or how little substitute you use.

  I'm not aware, offhand, of any other ingredient you could add, in
  addition to the sugar substitute, which works well in baking. If
  you're willing to lose a couple of batches of ingredients to
  education, you could try adding water, milk, small amounts of fat,
  etc, in addition to your sugar substitute, to see what happens, but
  you should expect frequent disappointment.

I have a friend who's diabetic who has to use sweeteners when she
bakes. The results can be a bit mixed, but at least the recipies are
designed for sweeteners in the first place. Why not get a diabatic cookery book
and start from there?


Aly

thanks for the replies.  I was hoping to modify recipes that I have to make them
less calories but it doesn't look easy.

-- Nisha

    A lot of diabetic cookbooks seem to use apple juice and other juices
    rather than sugar.  The recipes we have tried are just ok.  Check out
    your local library - they usually have a very large selection of
    cookbooks, including "no sugar" books and "special dietary needs".

    Keep in mind that most recipes can be made with 1/3 less sugar without
    a noticeable difference.  While this doesn't eliminate sugar, it does
    help reduce calories a bit...

    In some cases you can replace sugar with fructose.  Fructose is much
    sweeter than sugar so you can use less.  The difference in sweetness is
    reduced upon cooking, however.  Fructose comes in both liquid and
    granulated forms.  The product labels have recommended amounts for
    replacing sugar in various recipes.  You can find it in grocery and
    health food stores.
    
    Isn't NutraSweet coming out with a version that can be cooked?  I read
    an article quite a few years ago that said there is work going on for
    FDA approval of left-handed sugar.  The molecular form of this material
    is a mirror image of regular sugar.  The tastebuds can't tell the
    difference, but the body can't metabolize it.

RE: .6

>    I read
>    an article quite a few years ago that said there is work going on for
>    FDA approval of left-handed sugar.  The molecular form of this material
>    is a mirror image of regular sugar.  The tastebuds can't tell the
>    difference, but the body can't metabolize it.

This is a phony rumor on two accounts.  First, L-glucose (as opposed to the
usual D-glucose isomer) would taste different--the tastebuds and indeed most
biological processes are highly sensitive to isomeric configuration.
Secondly, the body *can* metabolize L-glucose.  Just not on the preferred
metabolic paths.  The caloric value of L-glucose and D-glucose are the same.

--PSW

    There is a sugar substitute that has been on the market for a few
    years, it's brand name is Sunnett, and you can bake with it. I first
    ran into it at a Sugar-Free bakery in Salem NH on Rt 28. I thought I
    was dreaming, Sugar-Free bakery! I stopped in and tried lots of their
    sweets. Mt favorite was their chocolate chip cookies, they used
    unsweetened chocolate bits and this Sunnett brand sweetner. I forget
    the name of the chemical but I can get it, I have a package of it at
    home. Anyways, in these cookies it tasted fantastic, it had no after
    taste. I am not used to eating sugar so I'm not the best judge. Other
    people I know have tried it and liked it very much. It really does not
    have an after taste.
    
    Linda
    

    Where did you find this Sunnett.  I live in the Nashua area but
    frequent the Salem area also.  Please let me know.  My wife is a
    diabetic with a sweet tooth and this would be a Godsend.
    
    

Interesting.  I just got the latest issue of American Health, and noticed an 
article on sweeteners, incuding sunnett.  I'm going to have to read more about
it.

    Here's the information printed on the packaging of Sweet One.
    
    Low Calorie Sugar Substitute, Sweet One tm
    
    4 Calories per packet
    Each packet as sweet at 2 teaspoons of sugar
    Sodium Free
    with Sunnette tm Brand Sweetner
    
    Sweet One can be used just like sugar, only you use less. Each
    premeasured packet has the sweeting equivalence of 2 teaspoons 
    of sugar and contains approxiametely one gram of carbohydrate 
    equivalent to about 4 calories. This should be taken into account 
    by diabetics.
    
    INGREDIENTS: Dextrose, Acesulfame-K (Sunnette tm brand sweetner), cream
    of tartar, calcium silicate (anticaking agent) and natural flavors.
    
    What is Sunnette tm ?
    Sunnette tm is a new sweetner with a clean, sweet taste which, unlike
    some sweetners, stays sweet even in baked goods.
    
    For information and comments:
    1-800-544-8610
    Sweet One tm is a trademark of Stadt Corp
    Sunnette tm is a trademark of Hoechst AG
    US Patent 3,689,486

Sounds pretty much like many other sweeteners. Nothing in the list of
ingredients leads me to believe that you won't get unpredictable
results (with respect to consistency) in baking or other recipes where
the other properties of sugar are important.

    Here's the spanner in the works:
    
    Are there any health risks to the new sweeteners, for pregnant women
    and young children as well as everybody else?
    
    No problem with any sweetener ending with "ose" -  sucrose,
    fructose, lactose, etc.  Those are all nature's own sweeteners.  
    Sucrose - sugar cane.  Fructose - fruit.  Lactose - milk.
    
    I am concerned with the others.  There have been quite a few on the
    market, and each has come under a cloud of suspicion, usually with
    inconclusive results.
    
    Does anyone have any scientific information?  Possible sources are the
    Center for Science in the Public Interest (Washington, DC) or Consumer
    Reports.
    
    I'd appreciate any information.
    
    Thanks,
    Laura