Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
a sugarless substitute?

--
Rich

On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 at 1:58:10 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
> sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
> a sugarless substitute?
>
> --
> Rich

stevia .....you would have to play with the strength to your tastes

On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 at 4:15:49 PM UTC-5, ImStillMags wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 at 1:58:10 PM UTC-7, RichD wrote:
> > Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
> > sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
> > a sugarless substitute?
> >
> > --
> > Rich
>
> stevia .....you would have to play with the strength to your tastes

Stevia tastes awful, like licorice.

--Bryan

On 6/17/2015 2:58 PM, RichD wrote:
> Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
> sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
> a sugarless substitute?
>
> --
> Rich
>
Possibly sub in sucralose?

But I doubt you'll get the same viscosity at all.

Agave nectar is another possibility.


http://www.discusscooking.com/forums...enda-6271.html

Splenda DEFINATELY can be made into a simple syrup! The stuff can be
substituted measurement for measurement for granulated sugar in just
about any recipe. Unlike its sugar-substitute predecessors, Splenda
(which is a form of sugar) can be subjected to heat making it very
versatile in all forms of cooking. I'd have to check for the exact
threshhold, but I know you can cook Splenda beyond 300 degrees F,
because I've made candy with the stuff!

I'm sure the Atkins...er...uh...folks are all over its use in drink
recipes, so you can probably google a ton of responses.

For a traditional simple syrup, combine 2 parts Splenda to 1 part water
in a saucepan over medium heat. Stir constantly to dissolve the stuff
and cook until it reaches about 220 degrees F. (Probably 2-3 minutes
past a full, rolling boil at sea level.)

On June 17, 2015 La Mirada wrote:
> > Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
> > sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
> > a sugarless substitute?
>
> Possibly sub in sucralose?
> But I doubt you'll get the same viscosity at all.
> Agave nectar is another possibility.
>
> http://www.discusscooking.com/forums...enda-6271.html
>
> Splenda DEFINATELY can be made into a simple syrup!

My concern about Splenda and Stevia, is the glucose blood
reaction. I was diagnosed as pre-diabetic, so I'm trying
to eliminate sugar, and anything with that effect.

--
Rich

On Friday, June 19, 2015 at 2:50:48 PM UTC-10, RichD wrote:
> On June 17, 2015 La Mirada wrote:
> > > Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
> > > sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
> > > a sugarless substitute?
> >
> > Possibly sub in sucralose?
> > But I doubt you'll get the same viscosity at all.
> > Agave nectar is another possibility.
> >
> > http://www.discusscooking.com/forums...enda-6271.html
> >
> > Splenda DEFINATELY can be made into a simple syrup!
>
> My concern about Splenda and Stevia, is the glucose blood
> reaction. I was diagnosed as pre-diabetic, so I'm trying
> to eliminate sugar, and anything with that effect.
>
> --
> Rich

As far as Splenda raising blood sugar, I doubt that occurs. There is some internet hysteria where Splenda raising blood sugar is regarded as fact but I wouldn't believe it. Your mileage may vary!

For a simple sugar, I'd first try 24 of the individual packets of Splenda to a cup of water for starters. You can use equal amounts of water and the pourable stuff in bags of course. I wouldn't cause most of that stuff is bulking agents. If you like that syrup, go hardcore and use this stuff:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CCXMBD2

"RichD" > wrote in message
...
> On June 17, 2015 La Mirada wrote:
>> > Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
>> > sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
>> > a sugarless substitute?
>>
>> Possibly sub in sucralose?
>> But I doubt you'll get the same viscosity at all.
>> Agave nectar is another possibility.
>>
>> http://www.discusscooking.com/forums...enda-6271.html
>>
>> Splenda DEFINATELY can be made into a simple syrup!
>
> My concern about Splenda and Stevia, is the glucose blood
> reaction. I was diagnosed as pre-diabetic, so I'm trying
> to eliminate sugar, and anything with that effect.

Only way to know is try and see. I am diabetic and can't have corn.
Splenda is made of corn. I won't use stevia.

On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 at 4:22:19 PM UTC-5, La Mirada wrote:
> On 6/17/2015 2:58 PM, RichD wrote:
> > Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
> > sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
> > a sugarless substitute?
> >
> > --
> > Rich
> >
> Possibly sub in sucralose?
>
> But I doubt you'll get the same viscosity at all.
>
Sucralose is the way to go, but is is certain, not merely doubtful, that
"you'll get the same viscosity at all."
>
> Agave nectar is another possibility.
>
Agave nectar IS sugar.
>
> http://www.discusscooking.com/forums...enda-6271.html
>
> Splenda DEFINATELY can be made into a simple syrup! The stuff can be
> substituted measurement for measurement for granulated sugar in just
> about any recipe. Unlike its sugar-substitute predecessors, Splenda
> (which is a form of sugar) can be subjected to heat making it very
> versatile in all forms of cooking. I'd have to check for the exact
> threshhold, but I know you can cook Splenda beyond 300 degrees F,
> because I've made candy with the stuff!
>
> I'm sure the Atkins...er...uh...folks are all over its use in drink
> recipes, so you can probably google a ton of responses.
>
> For a traditional simple syrup, combine 2 parts Splenda to 1 part water
> in a saucepan over medium heat. Stir constantly to dissolve the stuff
> and cook until it reaches about 220 degrees F. (Probably 2-3 minutes
> past a full, rolling boil at sea level.)

Splenda has carbs. Use pure sucralose.

--Bryan

They now say saccharin stops the spread of cancer.

On 6/18/2015 4:20 AM, wrote:
> They now say saccharin stops the spread of cancer.
>
The rats?

I read they may start giving it to human cancer patients.I use 3 or 4 pkgs of it daily.

On Wednesday, June 17, 2015 at 4:58:10 PM UTC-4, RichD wrote:
> Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
> sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
> a sugarless substitute?

Liquid saccharin (e.g., Sweet n Low).

Tastes like hell. I'd probably switch cocktails.

Cindy Hamilton

Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>RichD wrote:
>> Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
>> sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
>> a sugarless substitute?
>
>Liquid saccharin (e.g., Sweet n Low).
>
>Tastes like hell. I'd probably switch cocktails.
>
>Cindy Hamilton

I prefer using honey as a sweetener.

On 6/20/2015 3:47 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:
> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>> RichD wrote:
>>> Cocktails often call for simple syrup;
>>> sugar + water, 50-50. Any suggestions for
>>> a sugarless substitute?
>>
>> Liquid saccharin (e.g., Sweet n Low).
>>
>> Tastes like hell. I'd probably switch cocktails.
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>
> I prefer using honey as a sweetener.
>
In a cocktail?

Jill

Stevia isn't as sweet as saccharin.

I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.

On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>

All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.

On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:16:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
>> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>>
>
>All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.

It's a natural product.

On 6/20/2015 10:08 PM, wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:16:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>> On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
>>> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>>>
>>
>> All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.
>
> It's a natural product.
>

So is crude oil, uranium, arsenic. Stevia has been processed from a plant.

On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 23:14:38 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 6/20/2015 10:08 PM, wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:16:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
>>>> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>>>>
>>>
>>> All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.
>>
>> It's a natural product.
>>
>
>So is crude oil, uranium, arsenic.

<rolls eyes> I wasn't making any magical claims, just stating a fact.

>Stevia has been processed from a plant.

It can be and is the most common form you come across. You can also
buy the plants and seeds. It doesnt *have* to be 'processed'.

On 2015-06-21, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> So is crude oil, uranium, arsenic. Stevia has been processed from a plant.

Likewise, water hemlock, deadly nightshade, etc. Don't even need
processing to kill you.

nb

Jeßus wrote:
>Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>coltwvu wrote:
>>> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>>
>>All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.
>
>It's a natural product.

Not really, stevia is highly processed, so is granulated sugar for
that matter... only honey is absolutely natural, directly from live
buzzing bees, only processing is sieving off any schmutz/debris.
Honey is an excellent sweetener for all cocktails calling for sugar;
sours, margaretas, etc., to frost the glass use crystalized honey.
http://www.wired.com/2014/03/crystalized-honey/
http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&key...sl_1cy2546kt_b

On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 10:07:00 -0400, Brooklyn1
> wrote:

>Jeßus wrote:
>>Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>coltwvu wrote:
>>>> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>>>
>>>All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.
>>
>>It's a natural product.
>
>Not really, stevia is highly processed,

We quibble over the term 'processed' (I'm sure I've seen threads go
that way before on this one).

>so is granulated sugar for
>that matter... only honey is absolutely natural, directly from live
>buzzing bees, only processing is sieving off any schmutz/debris.
>Honey is an excellent sweetener for all cocktails calling for sugar;
>sours, margaretas, etc., to frost the glass use crystalized honey.
>http://www.wired.com/2014/03/crystalized-honey/
>http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&key...sl_1cy2546kt_b

Fair enough that it can be described as processed in that way, I'd use
the term 'refined'. You could make a case for honey also being
processed, as it is only a matter of degree. Not that I would
though... Is maple syrup considered processed, it's only tapped out
of the trees?

On Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 7:31:39 PM UTC-5, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:16:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
> >On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
> >> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
> >>
> >
> >All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.
>
> I thought it was a plant.
>
A nasty tasting plant.
>
> --
> Bruce

--Bryan

On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 17:53:56 -0700 (PDT), Bryan-TGWWW
> wrote:

>On Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 7:31:39 PM UTC-5, Bruce wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:16:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>> >On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
>> >> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>> >>
>> >
>> >All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.
>>
>> I thought it was a plant.
>>
>A nasty tasting plant.

The plant itself doesnt taste nasty, the refined stevia does, OTOH.

On 6/20/2015 7:09 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 17:53:56 -0700 (PDT), Bryan-TGWWW
> > wrote:
>
>> On Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 7:31:39 PM UTC-5, Bruce wrote:
>>> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:16:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
>>>>> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.
>>>
>>> I thought it was a plant.
>>>
>> A nasty tasting plant.
>
> To me, it sounds like a product for mothers-in-law and older aunts.
> With all due respect.
>


To whom?

On 6/20/2015 8:31 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:16:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>> On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
>>> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>>>
>>
>> All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or honey.
>
> I thought it was a plant.
>

Derived from a plant. The FDA does not allow the actual leaves to be
used.
http://www.livescience.com/39601-ste...ts-safety.html
Is stevia safe?
The question of whether stevia is safe to consume largely depends on
what someone means by "stevia." The U.S. Food and Drug Administration
has not approved stevia leaves or "crude stevia extracts" for use as
food additives. Studies on stevia in those forms raise concerns about
the control of blood sugar and effects on the reproductive,
cardiovascular, and renal systems, the FDA warns.

"Caution is advised when using medications that may also lower blood
sugar. People taking insulin or drugs for diabetes by mouth should be
monitored closely by a qualified health care professional, including a
pharmacist," Ulbricht said.

Stevia may also interact with anti-fungals, anti-inflammatories,
anti-microbials, anti-cancer drugs, anti-virals, appetite suppressants,
calcium channel blockers, cholesterol-lowering drugs, drugs that
increase urination, fertility agents and other medications, Ulbricht
said. People should talk with their doctor before deciding to take
stevia in large amounts, she said.

"Ed Pawlowski" > wrote in message
...
> On 6/20/2015 8:31 PM, Bruce wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:16:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>> On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
>>>> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>>>>
>>>
>>> All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or
>>> honey.
>>
>> I thought it was a plant.
>>
>
> Derived from a plant. The FDA does not allow the actual leaves to be
> used.
> http://www.livescience.com/39601-ste...ts-safety.html
> Is stevia safe?
> The question of whether stevia is safe to consume largely depends on what
> someone means by "stevia." The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not
> approved stevia leaves or "crude stevia extracts" for use as food
> additives. Studies on stevia in those forms raise concerns about the
> control of blood sugar and effects on the reproductive, cardiovascular,
> and renal systems, the FDA warns.
>
> "Caution is advised when using medications that may also lower blood
> sugar. People taking insulin or drugs for diabetes by mouth should be
> monitored closely by a qualified health care professional, including a
> pharmacist," Ulbricht said.
>
> Stevia may also interact with anti-fungals, anti-inflammatories,
> anti-microbials, anti-cancer drugs, anti-virals, appetite suppressants,
> calcium channel blockers, cholesterol-lowering drugs, drugs that increase
> urination, fertility agents and other medications, Ulbricht said. People
> should talk with their doctor before deciding to take stevia in large
> amounts, she said.

I'll pass. There are a lot of plants on the face of the earth. Some are
not meant to be consumed.

"Bruce" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2015 20:16:54 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>>On 6/20/2015 8:03 PM, wrote:
>>> I think stevia upsets my stomach a little.
>>>
>>
>>All the artificial stuff does that to me. I'm sticking with sugar or
>>honey.
>
> I thought it was a plant.

It is. But I assume it is processed in some way to get it into drinks.

Some don't sweeten tea, I don't sweeten coffee.

On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:35:42 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>Some don't sweeten tea, I don't sweeten coffee.

Good tea or coffee doesnt need sweetening.

On 6/21/2015 3:28 PM, wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2015 12:35:42 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
>> Some don't sweeten tea, I don't sweeten coffee.
>
> Good tea or coffee doesnt need sweetening.
>
That depends on your personal tastes.

> wrote in message
...
> Some don't sweeten tea, I don't sweeten coffee.

I don't sweeten any drinks.