dsi1 wrote:
>
> I was referring to the spontaneous release of gas in a liquid. I guess
> "outgassing" is as good a term as any.

Precipitation.

Cheryl wrote:
>
> "dsi1" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> I was referring to the spontaneous release of gas in a liquid. I guess
>> "outgassing" is as good a term as any.
>
> You can take that to the cellular level and it is cellular respiration
> caused by metabolism. For example (yes, biology course material) yeast
> and water with sugar added produces CO2. Hydrogen peroxide + yeast
> produces oxygen and water. The enzymes present allow a chemical
> reaction to take place, and sometimes the result is a gas.

This reminds me to make some bread today. :-)

Mark Thorson wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>> I was referring to the spontaneous release of gas in a liquid. I guess
>> "outgassing" is as good a term as any.
>
> Precipitation.

Interesting - I've never heard of precipitation used in this manner.

Damaeus wrote:
>
> Reading from news:rec.food.cooking,
> Mark Thorson > posted:
>
> > I've only used it one, and it worked great. It fizzed a lot, but did
> > not splash. I think any recommendation against not using may be
> > assuming a worst case, like a very full pot of hot oil. I always
> > deep-fry in rather shallow oil, an inch or less.
>
> I decided that it's better to have a lot of oil in the pot, even if you're
> only frying a small handful of something, or individual frozen items. The
> more hot oil you have the less the temperature will be able to drop when
> you put cold items into the pan.

It depends what you're frying. When I deep fry,
it's usually squid rings or wontons. If the oil
is deeper than an inch, the fried items will orient
themselves with the heavy side down. If the oil
is shallow, I can decide which side is down, and
I'll flip them halfway through to get even browning.

Damaeus wrote:
>
> I've never had a fire in the kitchen, despite my probably
> higher-than-average frequency of deep frying. I've had bacon grease that
> smoked so much that it looked like it might catch on fire, but it never
> has. Interestingly, I've also never cut myself with a knife in the
> kitchen, and I keep them quite sharp.

It's wiser to plan for an accident and not have one
than to not plan and have one. Accidents are the
unplanned but predictable result of unsafe practices.

dsi1 wrote:

> Mark Thorson wrote:
>
>> dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>> I was referring to the spontaneous release of gas in a liquid. I guess
>>> "outgassing" is as good a term as any.
>>
>>
>> Precipitation.
>
>
> Interesting - I've never heard of precipitation used in this manner.

"If you're not part of the solution you're part of the precipitate"

Usually only chemists laugh at that one.

--
Reg

RegForte wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>
>> Mark Thorson wrote:
>>
>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>
>>>> I was referring to the spontaneous release of gas in a liquid. I guess
>>>> "outgassing" is as good a term as any.
>>>
>>>
>>> Precipitation.
>>
>>
>> Interesting - I've never heard of precipitation used in this manner.
>
> "If you're not part of the solution you're part of the precipitate"
>
> Usually only chemists laugh at that one.
>

I can see why. I vaguely remember chemistry class - we prepared a
precipitate of salicylic acid. Luckily, I haven't been called to do
anything like that since. Otherwise, I'd probably be in jail. :-)

Reading from news:rec.food.cooking,
Dan Abel > posted:

> In article >,
> Damaeus > wrote:
>
>
> > I know that shortening doesn't literally flow through our veins. It's
> > converted somehow in the intestines, but I couldn't help but visualize
> > butter at body temperature flowing and not clogging arteries, while Crisco
> > shortening being solid at body temperature and being the culprit in
> > clogged arteries.
>
> I believe that fatty stuff travels through our blood system as
> cholesterol. I'm not too sure about how that works, though.
>
> > I've heard that combining shortening and high-fructose
> > corn syrup is what both clogs and hardens arteries.
>
> I've never heard that. You wouldn't happen to have more details, would
> you? I've always heard that throwing salt over your shoulder does
> something, but I don't remember what. I don't do it anyway. I think
> people would just laugh at me.

I don't throw salt over my shoulder, either. I walk barefoot through the
house and don't like anything gritty underfoot. As for more information
about HFCS and hydrogenated fats, it was just something I heard on a set
of CDs I borrowed from a friend. It was called "Natural Cures" by Kevin
Trudeau. It was about nutrition and the pharmaceutical industry. It also
mentioned that many food additives are also made by the same companies
that manufacture drugs. Some people have smeared Trudeau as a lunatic,
but then, those are probably the people who don't want to see the economy
fall apart.

I dunno. I just eat whatever. I believe in Lamarckian genetics as well
as Darwinian genetics. So what I perceive and believe about the things
I'm eating and my environment will be translated into proteins that alter
my genetics to deal with whatever happens to me.

High-Fructose Corn Syrup Produces Toxic Chemical "HMF" When Heated
Tuesday, October 20, 2009

http://www.naturalnews.com/027286_HFCS_food_honey.html

Damaeus

Reading from news:rec.food.cooking,
Dave Smith > posted:

> Perhaps you should be saying that you *thought* you knew what the
> boiling point. You continue to expose you misunderstanding by admitting
> that you cannot get the water to get hotter than 212. You can, but you
> have to pressurize it.

Never mind.

Damaeus

In article >,
dsi1 > wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
> > So the rest of the world uses sugar for sweetening,
> > and the US uses HFCS.
> >
>
> Maybe not -

Well, I guess I can't deny saying that, since it is right there in black
and white. Still, it's obviously not true. The rest of the world is
*still* using regular sugar (sucrose) for many things, because it costs
them half what it costs in the US. In the US, many things, including
sweetened drinks and manufactured baked goods, now are using more HFCS
as a sweetener, since it is cheaper than regular sugar (sucrose).
There's still one heck of a lot of regular sugar being sold and used in
the US. Certain things can't use HFCS (I'm think chocolate and certain
candies, but I'm not sure).

HFCS is not unique to the US.

> I have a bottle of high fructose rice syrup that's made in
> China. It's pretty mild stuff that has the consistency of honey and a
> third of the calories of corn syrup. It comes in a cute bear shaped
> bottle with a little green fabric bow tie and is artificially peach
> flavored. My guess is that you could probably make a pecan pie with one
> third less calories with this stuff. It would be less sweet which is OK
> with me.

I've never made pecan pie, but in the US it was traditionally made with
No Fructose Corn Syrup, marketed as Karo Syrup.

There are a lot of types of sugar that naturally appear. Three of them
are glucose, sucrose and fructose. Glucose is the sugar found in your
blood. There is some in many types of fruit (an apple is an example).
Glucose is less sweet than the other two. Sucrose is what you get when
you buy a sack of sugar at the store. It commonly comes from sugar
beets and sugar cane. There is some in many types of fruit (an apple is
an example). Fructose is fruit sugar. It is often the main sugar in a
fruit (an apple is an example). Fructose is sweeter than the other two
sugars.

HFCS (high fructose corn syrup) is made out of CS (corn syrup). Corn
syrup is pure glucose. HFCS has had some of that glucose changed to
fructose.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Damaeus wrote:
>
> I don't throw salt over my shoulder, either. I walk barefoot through the
> house and don't like anything gritty underfoot. As for more information
> about HFCS and hydrogenated fats, it was just something I heard on a set
> of CDs I borrowed from a friend. It was called "Natural Cures" by Kevin
> Trudeau. It was about nutrition and the pharmaceutical industry. It also
> mentioned that many food additives are also made by the same companies
> that manufacture drugs. Some people have smeared Trudeau as a lunatic,
> but then, those are probably the people who don't want to see the economy
> fall apart.

You are a fool. Get smart. Learn about the hucksters
who have fooled you.

http://www.infomercialwatch.org/tran/trudeau.shtml

http://www.infomercialwatch.org/reports/nycpb.shtml

http://www.ncahf.org/digest05/05-32.html

> I dunno. I just eat whatever. I believe in Lamarckian genetics as well
> as Darwinian genetics. So what I perceive and believe about the things
> I'm eating and my environment will be translated into proteins that alter
> my genetics to deal with whatever happens to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism

The Cook wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 14:00:23 -0500, George Shirley
> > wrote:
>
>> Dave Smith wrote:
>>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>>
>>>>> That's one of the
>>>>> reasons I wish Coke in the USA was made with sugar instead of corn
>>>>> syrup.
>>>>> Coke in Mexico is made with sugar, after all. What are they trying
>>>>> to do
>>>>> in America?
>>>> It's pretty simple. It's spelled $$$$$$. The people who make sugar
>>>> in the US want to make lots of money. There are price supports and
>>>> tariff restrictions so that the price of sugar in the US is *twice*
>>>> the world price. On the other hand, the US government wants to
>>>> support corn production. Just ask Earl Butts. So HFCS, which is made
>>>> from corn, is cheap in the US. So the rest of the world uses sugar
>>>> for sweetening, and the US uses HFCS.
>>>
>>> It may not be much of a difference in the cost per can or bottle, but
>>> with the soft drink industry selling millions of units, it adds up to a
>>> major savings. Soft drinks are water, a bit of flavouring and a hell of
>>> a lot of sugar or HFCS.
>> And the ones I drink are the same thing but with artificial sweetener
>> versus sugar and often cost more than the ones with sugar in them. AFAIK
>> the only cold drinks still made with real cane sugar are the Dr.
>> Pepper's bottled in Waco, TX. Haven't had one in years.
>
> The Coke bottled in Mexico uses real sugar. Costco has been carrying
> them since last Christmas.

Closest Costco is in Houston, about a 2.5 hour drive for me. Maybe next
time we go see our kids in that area.

In article >,
George Shirley > wrote:

> Dave Smith wrote:
> > Dan Abel wrote:

> >> It's pretty simple. It's spelled $$$$$$. The people who make sugar
> >> in the US want to make lots of money. There are price supports and
> >> tariff restrictions so that the price of sugar in the US is *twice*
> >> the world price. On the other hand, the US government wants to
> >> support corn production. Just ask Earl Butts. So HFCS, which is made
> >> from corn, is cheap in the US. So the rest of the world uses sugar
> >> for sweetening, and the US uses HFCS.

> > It may not be much of a difference in the cost per can or bottle, but
> > with the soft drink industry selling millions of units, it adds up to a
> > major savings. Soft drinks are water, a bit of flavouring and a hell of
> > a lot of sugar or HFCS.

> And the ones I drink are the same thing but with artificial sweetener
> versus sugar and often cost more than the ones with sugar in them. AFAIK
> the only cold drinks still made with real cane sugar are the Dr.
> Pepper's bottled in Waco, TX. Haven't had one in years.

I haven't kept up with this, since about the only thing I drink is
water, but there is a demand for drinks sweetened with sucrose. Mexican
coke has already been mentioned (my daughter buys it by the case at
Costco). I believe that there are a number of other soft drinks out
there. I think they command a premium price.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 14:00:23 -0500, George Shirley
> wrote:

>Dave Smith wrote:
>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>>> That's one of the
>>>> reasons I wish Coke in the USA was made with sugar instead of corn
>>>> syrup.
>>>> Coke in Mexico is made with sugar, after all. What are they trying
>>>> to do
>>>> in America?
>>>
>>> It's pretty simple. It's spelled $$$$$$. The people who make sugar
>>> in the US want to make lots of money. There are price supports and
>>> tariff restrictions so that the price of sugar in the US is *twice*
>>> the world price. On the other hand, the US government wants to
>>> support corn production. Just ask Earl Butts. So HFCS, which is made
>>> from corn, is cheap in the US. So the rest of the world uses sugar
>>> for sweetening, and the US uses HFCS.
>>
>>
>> It may not be much of a difference in the cost per can or bottle, but
>> with the soft drink industry selling millions of units, it adds up to a
>> major savings. Soft drinks are water, a bit of flavouring and a hell of
>> a lot of sugar or HFCS.
>
>And the ones I drink are the same thing but with artificial sweetener
>versus sugar and often cost more than the ones with sugar in them. AFAIK
>the only cold drinks still made with real cane sugar are the Dr.
>Pepper's bottled in Waco, TX. Haven't had one in years.

The Coke bottled in Mexico uses real sugar. Costco has been carrying
them since last Christmas.
--
Susan N.

"Moral indignation is in most cases two percent moral,
48 percent indignation, and 50 percent envy."
Vittorio De Sica, Italian movie director (1901-1974)

Dan Abel wrote:
> In article >,
> dsi1 > wrote:
>
>> I have a bottle of high fructose rice syrup that's made in
>> China. It's pretty mild stuff that has the consistency of honey and a
>> third of the calories of corn syrup. It comes in a cute bear shaped
>> bottle with a little green fabric bow tie and is artificially peach
>> flavored. My guess is that you could probably make a pecan pie with one
>> third less calories with this stuff. It would be less sweet which is OK
>> with me.
>
> I've never made pecan pie, but in the US it was traditionally made with
> No Fructose Corn Syrup, marketed as Karo Syrup.
>


Pecan pie also takes a lot of eggs and sugar, for both texture
and volume. If you left out the sugar, you'd have something
like custard or toffee pie with pecans, wouldn't you?

gloria p

gloria.p wrote:
> Dan Abel wrote:
>> In article >,
>> dsi1 > wrote:
>>
>>> I have a bottle of high fructose rice syrup that's made in China.
>>> It's pretty mild stuff that has the consistency of honey and a third
>>> of the calories of corn syrup. It comes in a cute bear shaped bottle
>>> with a little green fabric bow tie and is artificially peach
>>> flavored. My guess is that you could probably make a pecan pie with
>>> one third less calories with this stuff. It would be less sweet which
>>> is OK with me.
>>
>> I've never made pecan pie, but in the US it was traditionally made
>> with No Fructose Corn Syrup, marketed as Karo Syrup.
>
>
> Pecan pie also takes a lot of eggs and sugar, for both texture and
> volume. If you left out the sugar, you'd have something like custard
> or toffee pie with pecans, wouldn't you?
>
> gloria p

I used to make these a lot but not anymore. I've always considered pecan
pie to be a no-milk custard pie. The ones you buy from the store very
likely contain a thickening agent other than eggs. Mostly, it was a
marketing ploy to get folks to use more Karo Syrup. I can't believe I
used to eat that nasty stuff. :-)

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> On Sun 25 Oct 2009 06:32:45p, dsi1 told us...
>
>> gloria.p wrote:
>>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>>> In article >, dsi1
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have a bottle of high fructose rice syrup that's made in China.
>>>>> It's pretty mild stuff that has the consistency of honey and a third
>>>>> of the calories of corn syrup. It comes in a cute bear shaped bottle
>>>>> with a little green fabric bow tie and is artificially peach
>>>>> flavored. My guess is that you could probably make a pecan pie with
>>>>> one third less calories with this stuff. It would be less sweet which
>>>>> is OK with me.
>>>> I've never made pecan pie, but in the US it was traditionally made
>>>> with No Fructose Corn Syrup, marketed as Karo Syrup.
>>>
>>> Pecan pie also takes a lot of eggs and sugar, for both texture and
>>> volume. If you left out the sugar, you'd have something like custard
>>> or toffee pie with pecans, wouldn't you?
>>>
>>> gloria p
>> I used to make these a lot but not anymore. I've always considered pecan
>> pie to be a no-milk custard pie. The ones you buy from the store very
>> likely contain a thickening agent other than eggs. Mostly, it was a
>> marketing ploy to get folks to use more Karo Syrup. I can't believe I
>> used to eat that nasty stuff. :-)
>
> I love pecan pie, but not those with a starch thickener involved. Starches
> became involved for either economic reasons or to help insure a success in
> the filling reaching the correct thickness. I can taste and feel the
> difference when starch is involved and would stop eating it after the first
> bite.

The pie gets a kind of gummy mouth feel. I don't like that either but a
piece of pecan pie is mostly for younger folks, anyway.

>
> Some restaurants and bakeries add a starch thickener to a regular custard
> pie, too, and that totally ruins it for me.
>

You got that right! I dislike it in pumpkin pies too. I guess you just
gotta make them yourself. :-)

Reading from news:rec.food.cooking,
Mark Thorson > posted:

> Damaeus wrote:
> >
> > I don't throw salt over my shoulder, either. I walk barefoot through the
> > house and don't like anything gritty underfoot. As for more information
> > about HFCS and hydrogenated fats, it was just something I heard on a set
> > of CDs I borrowed from a friend. It was called "Natural Cures" by Kevin
> > Trudeau. It was about nutrition and the pharmaceutical industry. It also
> > mentioned that many food additives are also made by the same companies
> > that manufacture drugs. Some people have smeared Trudeau as a lunatic,
> > but then, those are probably the people who don't want to see the economy
> > fall apart.
>
> You are a fool. Get smart. Learn about the hucksters
> who have fooled you.

**** you. You've been huckstered by those who call others hucksters. I
don't believe everything I hear or read. But some of the stuff he said
made a lot of sense. I went with that, as oppose to what the government
and pharmaceutical industries say, which seem to have a lot of other
motives behind them than making the lives of its people better.

Damaeus

Wayne Boatwright wrote:


> You're absolutely right, Gloria. The most typical combinations for
> pecan pie are white granulated sugar + dark corn syrup, light or dark
> brown sugar + white corn syrup, and white granulated sugar + white
> corn syrup.

The original recipe used cane syrup. I bought a bunch of Steen's cane
syrup. It has a definite molasses flavor. Using it straight is a bit
much for my tastes, so I mix it half with light corn syrup.



Brian

--
Day 265 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project

In article >,
Damaeus > wrote:

> **** you. You've been huckstered by those who call others hucksters. I
> don't believe everything I hear or read. But some of the stuff he said
> made a lot of sense. I went with that, as oppose to what the government
> and pharmaceutical industries say, which seem to have a lot of other
> motives behind them than making the lives of its people better.

Well, F*** me too. Do you believe that one guy who writes a book that
makes you "see the light" has anything over Erich von Daniken? My advice
is to not believe *anything* you hear or read until you follow the money.
Here's an example. If governments' funds research prove that *man made*
global warming exists, what scientist interested in government funding
would dare to prove them wrong at the expense of future grants? What
industrial scientist who does contrary research to prove them wrong will
be given a voice? Yeah, I'm one of those guys. Ninety five percent of
what you read or hear makes you fear something (political) or buy
something (commercial). Fear and buy are the best controls for both
those worlds.
I go about my daily business blissfully knowing that I can't do a damned
thing about my point of view. Neither can you. Relax.

[ObFood] I roasted a rolled roast for the first time in thirty years
last night. I wouldn't have bought it, but the supermarket sold it for
$2.97 per pound with a free 5 pound bag of russets, bag of Dole Salad
Mix and Deli French bread. I cooked it to 145 degrees F and served it
with a salad (D'oh), mashed potatoes and gravy. I sliced the beef thin,
and it was OK on old teeth. Not great. OK.

leo

In article >,
Wayne Boatwright > wrote:

> Never much cared for rolled roasts, as I always thought they were a bit
> tough on young or old teeth. :-) How old are your teeth, Leo? :-) I
> got rid of my oold teeth in July, My new teeth work much better. LOL!

They're a year younger or older than yours, Wayne. I lose track.
Medicare is short of two years. I wouldn't have bought the damned thing
if the other stuff wasn't free. Free! Yup. I'll stand by that. Now I
have a hunk of less than tender beef and some excellent gravy. I think
I'll make beef and noodles. That's a hit with the DW if I don't break
her teeth. I'll probably simmer the clunker for a while. A simmered
roast? Might work. We'll see.

leo

Reading from news:rec.food.cooking,
Leonard Blaisdell > posted:

> I go about my daily business blissfully knowing that I can't do a damned
> thing about my point of view. Neither can you. Relax.

I didn't say I was scared of them. **** them, too. I was just talking
about what I read.

Damaeus

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> On Sun 25 Oct 2009 08:54:28p, dsi1 told us...
>
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>> On Sun 25 Oct 2009 06:32:45p, dsi1 told us...
>>>
>>>> gloria.p wrote:
>>>>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>>>>> In article >, dsi1
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have a bottle of high fructose rice syrup that's made in China.
>>>>>>> It's pretty mild stuff that has the consistency of honey and a
>>>>>>> third of the calories of corn syrup. It comes in a cute bear shaped
>>>>>>> bottle with a little green fabric bow tie and is artificially peach
>>>>>>> flavored. My guess is that you could probably make a pecan pie with
>>>>>>> one third less calories with this stuff. It would be less sweet
>>>>>>> which is OK with me.
>>>>>> I've never made pecan pie, but in the US it was traditionally made
>>>>>> with No Fructose Corn Syrup, marketed as Karo Syrup.
>>>>> Pecan pie also takes a lot of eggs and sugar, for both texture and
>>>>> volume. If you left out the sugar, you'd have something like
>>>>> custard or toffee pie with pecans, wouldn't you?
>>>>>
>>>>> gloria p
>>>> I used to make these a lot but not anymore. I've always considered
>>>> pecan pie to be a no-milk custard pie. The ones you buy from the store
>>>> very likely contain a thickening agent other than eggs. Mostly, it was
>>>> a marketing ploy to get folks to use more Karo Syrup. I can't believe
>>>> I used to eat that nasty stuff. :-)
>>> I love pecan pie, but not those with a starch thickener involved.
>>> Starches became involved for either economic reasons or to help insure
>>> a success in the filling reaching the correct thickness. I can taste
>>> and feel the difference when starch is involved and would stop eating
>>> it after the first bite.
>> The pie gets a kind of gummy mouth feel. I don't like that either but a
>> piece of pecan pie is mostly for younger folks, anyway.
>
> I guess we all experience things differently. My perception of a properly
> baked pecan pie is a filling that is more congealed/gelatinous in texture.
> I don't know about age, as I'm 64 and i still love it. :-)
>
>>> Some restaurants and bakeries add a starch thickener to a regular
>>> custard pie, too, and that totally ruins it for me.
>>>
>> You got that right! I dislike it in pumpkin pies too. I guess you just
>> gotta make them yourself. :-)
>>
>
> I totally agree. I just bought two pie pumpkins yesterday that I will cook
> this week and prepare for use in pies, then into the freezer until
> Thanksgiving. We like our pumpkin pies heavily spiced, but it's still just
> a custard of eggs, cream, sugar, pumpkin, and spices.
>
Nodding. I usually make the chiffon pie that I have posted about
numerous times. On rare occasions, I make a normal pumpkin pie,
and it is more spicy than the norm.

Back to pecan pie... I keep thinking I'll make one--sans the corn
syrup. Maybe with maple syrup and sugar (maple or brown), maybe
with brown sugar. Maybe cane syrup and brown sugar. Some recipes
use a lot of molasses, but I think that would be overpowering.

And yes, none of these have any starch thickener in the filling.
My main problem with store-bought pies (and other sweets for that
matter) is that they tend to be sickeningly sweet with little
flavor beyond the sweetness.

--
Jean B.

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:21:43 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:

>Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>> On Sun 25 Oct 2009 08:54:28p, dsi1 told us...
>>
>>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>>> On Sun 25 Oct 2009 06:32:45p, dsi1 told us...
>>>>
>>>>> gloria.p wrote:
>>>>>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>>>>>> In article >, dsi1
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have a bottle of high fructose rice syrup that's made in China.
>>>>>>>> It's pretty mild stuff that has the consistency of honey and a
>>>>>>>> third of the calories of corn syrup. It comes in a cute bear shaped
>>>>>>>> bottle with a little green fabric bow tie and is artificially peach
>>>>>>>> flavored. My guess is that you could probably make a pecan pie with
>>>>>>>> one third less calories with this stuff. It would be less sweet
>>>>>>>> which is OK with me.
>>>>>>> I've never made pecan pie, but in the US it was traditionally made
>>>>>>> with No Fructose Corn Syrup, marketed as Karo Syrup.
>>>>>> Pecan pie also takes a lot of eggs and sugar, for both texture and
>>>>>> volume. If you left out the sugar, you'd have something like
>>>>>> custard or toffee pie with pecans, wouldn't you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> gloria p
>>>>> I used to make these a lot but not anymore. I've always considered
>>>>> pecan pie to be a no-milk custard pie. The ones you buy from the store
>>>>> very likely contain a thickening agent other than eggs. Mostly, it was
>>>>> a marketing ploy to get folks to use more Karo Syrup. I can't believe
>>>>> I used to eat that nasty stuff. :-)
>>>> I love pecan pie, but not those with a starch thickener involved.
>>>> Starches became involved for either economic reasons or to help insure
>>>> a success in the filling reaching the correct thickness. I can taste
>>>> and feel the difference when starch is involved and would stop eating
>>>> it after the first bite.
>>> The pie gets a kind of gummy mouth feel. I don't like that either but a
>>> piece of pecan pie is mostly for younger folks, anyway.
>>
>> I guess we all experience things differently. My perception of a properly
>> baked pecan pie is a filling that is more congealed/gelatinous in texture.
>> I don't know about age, as I'm 64 and i still love it. :-)
>>
>>>> Some restaurants and bakeries add a starch thickener to a regular
>>>> custard pie, too, and that totally ruins it for me.
>>>>
>>> You got that right! I dislike it in pumpkin pies too. I guess you just
>>> gotta make them yourself. :-)
>>>
>>
>> I totally agree. I just bought two pie pumpkins yesterday that I will cook
>> this week and prepare for use in pies, then into the freezer until
>> Thanksgiving. We like our pumpkin pies heavily spiced, but it's still just
>> a custard of eggs, cream, sugar, pumpkin, and spices.
>>
>Nodding. I usually make the chiffon pie that I have posted about
>numerous times. On rare occasions, I make a normal pumpkin pie,
>and it is more spicy than the norm.
>
>Back to pecan pie... I keep thinking I'll make one--sans the corn
>syrup. Maybe with maple syrup and sugar (maple or brown), maybe
>with brown sugar. Maybe cane syrup and brown sugar. Some recipes
>use a lot of molasses, but I think that would be overpowering.
>
>And yes, none of these have any starch thickener in the filling.
>My main problem with store-bought pies (and other sweets for that
>matter) is that they tend to be sickeningly sweet with little
>flavor beyond the sweetness.


Karo is now marketing the version without HFCS. It is made with corn
syrup, salt and vanilla and labeled "Original."
--
Susan N.

"Moral indignation is in most cases two percent moral,
48 percent indignation, and 50 percent envy."
Vittorio De Sica, Italian movie director (1901-1974)

The Cook wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:21:43 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>> On Sun 25 Oct 2009 08:54:28p, dsi1 told us...
>>>
>>>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>>>> On Sun 25 Oct 2009 06:32:45p, dsi1 told us...
>>>>>
>>>>>> gloria.p wrote:
>>>>>>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article >, dsi1
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have a bottle of high fructose rice syrup that's made in China.
>>>>>>>>> It's pretty mild stuff that has the consistency of honey and a
>>>>>>>>> third of the calories of corn syrup. It comes in a cute bear shaped
>>>>>>>>> bottle with a little green fabric bow tie and is artificially peach
>>>>>>>>> flavored. My guess is that you could probably make a pecan pie with
>>>>>>>>> one third less calories with this stuff. It would be less sweet
>>>>>>>>> which is OK with me.
>>>>>>>> I've never made pecan pie, but in the US it was traditionally made
>>>>>>>> with No Fructose Corn Syrup, marketed as Karo Syrup.
>>>>>>> Pecan pie also takes a lot of eggs and sugar, for both texture and
>>>>>>> volume. If you left out the sugar, you'd have something like
>>>>>>> custard or toffee pie with pecans, wouldn't you?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> gloria p
>>>>>> I used to make these a lot but not anymore. I've always considered
>>>>>> pecan pie to be a no-milk custard pie. The ones you buy from the store
>>>>>> very likely contain a thickening agent other than eggs. Mostly, it was
>>>>>> a marketing ploy to get folks to use more Karo Syrup. I can't believe
>>>>>> I used to eat that nasty stuff. :-)
>>>>> I love pecan pie, but not those with a starch thickener involved.
>>>>> Starches became involved for either economic reasons or to help insure
>>>>> a success in the filling reaching the correct thickness. I can taste
>>>>> and feel the difference when starch is involved and would stop eating
>>>>> it after the first bite.
>>>> The pie gets a kind of gummy mouth feel. I don't like that either but a
>>>> piece of pecan pie is mostly for younger folks, anyway.
>>> I guess we all experience things differently. My perception of a properly
>>> baked pecan pie is a filling that is more congealed/gelatinous in texture.
>>> I don't know about age, as I'm 64 and i still love it. :-)
>>>
>>>>> Some restaurants and bakeries add a starch thickener to a regular
>>>>> custard pie, too, and that totally ruins it for me.
>>>>>
>>>> You got that right! I dislike it in pumpkin pies too. I guess you just
>>>> gotta make them yourself. :-)
>>>>
>>> I totally agree. I just bought two pie pumpkins yesterday that I will cook
>>> this week and prepare for use in pies, then into the freezer until
>>> Thanksgiving. We like our pumpkin pies heavily spiced, but it's still just
>>> a custard of eggs, cream, sugar, pumpkin, and spices.
>>>
>> Nodding. I usually make the chiffon pie that I have posted about
>> numerous times. On rare occasions, I make a normal pumpkin pie,
>> and it is more spicy than the norm.
>>
>> Back to pecan pie... I keep thinking I'll make one--sans the corn
>> syrup. Maybe with maple syrup and sugar (maple or brown), maybe
>> with brown sugar. Maybe cane syrup and brown sugar. Some recipes
>> use a lot of molasses, but I think that would be overpowering.
>>
>> And yes, none of these have any starch thickener in the filling.
>> My main problem with store-bought pies (and other sweets for that
>> matter) is that they tend to be sickeningly sweet with little
>> flavor beyond the sweetness.
>
>
> Karo is now marketing the version without HFCS. It is made with corn
> syrup, salt and vanilla and labeled "Original."

Thanks. I am still thinking I want to try something other than
corn syrup. In fact, after making my comment, I thought I'd take
advantage of google's improved group search function to see the
numerous recipes that have been posted for pecan pie over the
years. I think I will do that (or something related) for the
virtual cook-in.

--
Jean B.

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 13:28:06 -0400, Dave Smith wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
>
>>> That's one of the
>>> reasons I wish Coke in the USA was made with sugar instead of corn syrup.
>>> Coke in Mexico is made with sugar, after all. What are they trying to do
>>> in America?
>>
>> It's pretty simple. It's spelled $$$$$$. The people who make sugar in
>> the US want to make lots of money. There are price supports and tariff
>> restrictions so that the price of sugar in the US is *twice* the world
>> price. On the other hand, the US government wants to support corn
>> production. Just ask Earl Butts. So HFCS, which is made from corn, is
>> cheap in the US. So the rest of the world uses sugar for sweetening,
>> and the US uses HFCS.
>
> It may not be much of a difference in the cost per can or bottle, but
> with the soft drink industry selling millions of units, it adds up to a
> major savings. Soft drinks are water, a bit of flavouring and a hell of
> a lot of sugar or HFCS.

this is the advantage of committing micro-fraud on a mega scale. a few
cents (or even fractions of a cent) add up when you have millions of them,
and the defrauded individuals are unlikely to complain.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:25:26 -0500, Damaeus wrote:

> Reading from news:rec.food.cooking,
> Mark Thorson > posted:
>
>> Damaeus wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't throw salt over my shoulder, either. I walk barefoot through the
>>> house and don't like anything gritty underfoot. As for more information
>>> about HFCS and hydrogenated fats, it was just something I heard on a set
>>> of CDs I borrowed from a friend. It was called "Natural Cures" by Kevin
>>> Trudeau. It was about nutrition and the pharmaceutical industry. It also
>>> mentioned that many food additives are also made by the same companies
>>> that manufacture drugs. Some people have smeared Trudeau as a lunatic,
>>> but then, those are probably the people who don't want to see the economy
>>> fall apart.
>>
>> You are a fool. Get smart. Learn about the hucksters
>> who have fooled you.
>
> **** you. You've been huckstered by those who call others hucksters. I
> don't believe everything I hear or read. But some of the stuff he said
> made a lot of sense. I went with that, as oppose to what the government
> and pharmaceutical industries say, which seem to have a lot of other
> motives behind them than making the lives of its people better.
>
> Damaeus

mark is a crackpot in his own way, but giving any credence at all to
'lamarckian genetics' makes you a fool:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism>

blake

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:54:12 -1000, dsi1 wrote:

> Cheryl wrote:
>>
>> "dsi1" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> I was referring to the spontaneous release of gas in a liquid. I guess
>>> "outgassing" is as good a term as any.
>>
>> You can take that to the cellular level and it is cellular respiration
>> caused by metabolism. For example (yes, biology course material) yeast
>> and water with sugar added produces CO2. Hydrogen peroxide + yeast
>> produces oxygen and water. The enzymes present allow a chemical
>> reaction to take place, and sometimes the result is a gas.
>
> This reminds me to make some bread today. :-)

i think maybe i will fart.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 14:05:59 -0700, RegForte wrote:

> dsi1 wrote:
>
>> Mark Thorson wrote:
>>
>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>
>>>> I was referring to the spontaneous release of gas in a liquid. I guess
>>>> "outgassing" is as good a term as any.
>>>
>>>
>>> Precipitation.
>>
>> Interesting - I've never heard of precipitation used in this manner.
>
> "If you're not part of the solution you're part of the precipitate"
>
> Usually only chemists laugh at that one.

not a chemist, but i thought it was pretty funny the first time i saw it.

your pal,
blake

Jean B. wrote:


> Back to pecan pie... I keep thinking I'll make one--sans the corn
> syrup. Maybe with maple syrup and sugar (maple or brown), maybe with
> brown sugar. Maybe cane syrup and brown sugar. Some recipes use a
> lot of molasses, but I think that would be overpowering.

I found that 100% cane syrup (Steen's) was a bit too strong of a
molasses flavor, so I mix with corn syrup. You might find the straight
cane syrup to your liking.




Brian

--
Day 266 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project

George Shirley wrote:
>
> ... AFAIK
> the only cold drinks still made with real cane sugar are the Dr.
> Pepper's bottled in Waco, TX.

There are specialty brands that use "real sugar" as a selling point.
I've never been clear on why HFCS is worse than cane sugar. Is it
because it's cheaper in the US so more gets used (sugar is toxic, sorta,
because it causes diabetes, sorta) or because its somehow worse gram for
gram than cane sugar.

I would be astonished if Dr Pepper still used cane sugar.

Default User wrote:
> Jean B. wrote:
>
>
>> Back to pecan pie... I keep thinking I'll make one--sans the corn
>> syrup. Maybe with maple syrup and sugar (maple or brown), maybe with
>> brown sugar. Maybe cane syrup and brown sugar. Some recipes use a
>> lot of molasses, but I think that would be overpowering.
>
> I found that 100% cane syrup (Steen's) was a bit too strong of a
> molasses flavor, so I mix with corn syrup. You might find the straight
> cane syrup to your liking.
>
> Brian
>


Hmmm. It sounds like one might not want to combine that cane
syrup with brown sugar then--or was that with brown sugar?

I have a query out to try to locate some of the syrup from the
southern US near here. Otherwise, I might try Lyle's Golden Syrup.

--
Jean B.

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> I've never made a pumpkin chiffon pie. Other chiffon pies, yes, but never
> tried the pumpkin.

I think by now you have the recipe. If not, give a holler.
>
> <smile> I would not like anything maple in my pecan pie. It's so "anti-
> southern". :-)

Ah, but I'm from the north!

Most often I use white Karo syrup and light brown or dark
> brown sugar. When I've been able to get real cane syrup, I use that along
> with granulated sugar. Real molassses on its own would be overpowering, I
> agree. Although, I have used a combination of sorghum and granulated
> sugar.

How does sorghum compare with the almost-ubiquitous corn syrup?
>
> Agreed, most are sickeningly sweeet and without flavor.
>
Yeah. I made the mistake of getting a piece of pecan pie with
some barbecue--maybe 6 months ago. I decided it was so lacking in
merit that it wasn't worth the calories. :-(

--
Jean B.

Reading from news:rec.food.cooking,
David Harmon > posted:

> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 04:05:45 -0500 in rec.food.cooking, Damaeus
> > wrote,
> >Okay, I know that. The only thing I did not know was that you could not
> >get water to exceed its boiling point no matter how hot the fire is under
> >it.
>
> It is a fairly fundamental point about the behavior of boiling liquids,
> though.

Okay, I'm a flaming ****tard who happens to have decent grammar and
spelling skills, then. Let's just leave it at that. I'm good at
expressing my utter ignorance with fairly perfect grammatical structure.

Damaeus

Reading from news:rec.food.cooking,
blake murphy > posted:

> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 01:25:26 -0500, Damaeus wrote:
>
> > **** you. You've been huckstered by those who call others hucksters.
> > I don't believe everything I hear or read. But some of the stuff he
> > said made a lot of sense. I went with that, as oppose to what the
> > government and pharmaceutical industries say, which seem to have a lot
> > of other motives behind them than making the lives of its people
> > better.
>
> mark is a crackpot in his own way, but giving any credence at all to
> 'lamarckian genetics' makes you a fool:
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism>
>
> blake

No. I don't think Larmarckism has been disproved. I believe that science
believes it has been disproved. Again, I don't believe everything I read,
even if science believes they have proven it.

If there was no Lamarckian genetic selection going on, it means that DNA
to RNA to protein synthesis does not exist, and we would look the same now
as we did hundreds of thousands of years ago. It would mean that we would
all look like fetuses running around. As a person ages, and as their
appearance changes, is a result of Lamarckian genetics at work. Darwin's
natural selection takes place at copulation, giving an organism a starting
point. How that organism adapts to its changing environment is a result
of that organism's existence within that environment. And an organism
perceives its environment with its senses: Perception. And perception
forms beliefs. Those beliefs about the environment result in the mental
states that adjust protein synthesis, which thereby adjusts gene
expression. Reverse transcription writes those changes back to the DNA,
thereby changing the organism's appearance, behavior, and other
characteristics as time goes by.

Damaeus

Reading from news:rec.food.cooking,
Wayne Boatwright > posted:

> Slow simmering may do it. I remember one roast I bought years ago, roasted
> much as you described. It was so tough we couldn't eat it. I sliced the
> whole thing and simmered it in a thinned gravy. It was still tough. I
> finally put the remains in the pressure cooker for half an hour. It never
> did actually get tender. It must have just been a bad cut.

I cooked one in a foil bubble in a pan, with onions, garlic, salt, pepper,
and a cocoa powder rubdown. It put it in the oven at 275 degrees for
about ten hours. The poor roast fell apart and was so marvelously tender,
a great pleasure to consume.

Damaeus

Jean B. wrote:
>
> How does sorghum compare with the almost-ubiquitous corn syrup?

Lighter than dark karo. Darker than light karo. Roughly the same
darkness as Lyle's Golden but the darkness is not as consistant.

I've used sorghum as a pancake syrup. Okay but I gre up with maple
syrup so that's what I prefer.

I've used sorghum in place of honey to make my own homebrew mead like
stuff. Subtly different from honey but same general results.

Damaeus wrote:
>
> No. I don't think Larmarckism has been disproved. I believe that science
> believes it has been disproved.

See epigenetics and traits only inheretted for a few generations.

Jean B. wrote:

> Default User wrote:

> > I found that 100% cane syrup (Steen's) was a bit too strong of a
> > molasses flavor, so I mix with corn syrup. You might find the
> > straight cane syrup to your liking.

> Hmmm. It sounds like one might not want to combine that cane syrup
> with brown sugar then--or was that with brown sugar?

I generally use a combination of brown and white sugar. All white might
make sense if using cane syrup.

> I have a query out to try to locate some of the syrup from the
> southern US near here. Otherwise, I might try Lyle's Golden Syrup.

I've wondered about Lyle's. I've never tried it, so I don't know
exactly what it tastes like.



Brian

--
Day 266 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project

blake murphy wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 13:28:06 -0400, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>>> That's one of the
>>>> reasons I wish Coke in the USA was made with sugar instead of corn
>>>> syrup. Coke in Mexico is made with sugar, after all. What are
>>>> they trying to do in America?
>>>
>>> It's pretty simple. It's spelled $$$$$$. The people who make
>>> sugar in the US want to make lots of money. There are price
>>> supports and tariff restrictions so that the price of sugar in the
>>> US is *twice* the world price. On the other hand, the US
>>> government wants to support corn production. Just ask Earl Butts.
>>> So HFCS, which is made from corn, is cheap in the US. So the rest
>>> of the world uses sugar for sweetening, and the US uses HFCS.
>>
>> It may not be much of a difference in the cost per can or bottle, but
>> with the soft drink industry selling millions of units, it adds up
>> to a major savings. Soft drinks are water, a bit of flavouring and a
>> hell of a lot of sugar or HFCS.
>
> this is the advantage of committing micro-fraud on a mega scale. a
> few cents (or even fractions of a cent) add up when you have millions
> of them, and the defrauded individuals are unlikely to complain.
>


Uh, no, that's called "capitalism", blake...also "smart business
practice"...


--
Best
Greg