ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Pastries & Baking › Soft Chewy Choc Chip Cookies without so much better?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Soft Chewy Choc Chip Cookies without so much better?

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 

Is it too much to ask for?  If I have to use a lot, then I have to, but 2 c flour to 1½ c butter seems excessive to me.  OTOH, I don't like crispy cumbly cookies.  I guess I'm in denial.

DD

post #2 of 11

Hmm... I'm not a professional baker by any means, but I am very serious about choc chip cookies. I just scanned ca. 5 recipes for the chewy kind, and while they varied from 1/2 to 3/4 to 1 cup of butter per 2 cups of flour, not one used more than that.

post #3 of 11

There is an on line recipe that adds a package of inastant vanilla pudding and cuts down on sugars. These come out soft but better yet stay soft. I have held them in an airtight container for 2 weeks , still soft and chewy.

Chef EdB
Over 50 years in food service business 35 as Ex Chef. Specializing in Volume upscale Catering both on and off premise .(former Exec. Chef in the largest on premise caterer in US  with 17 Million Dollars per year annual volume). 
      Well versed in all facets of Continental Cuisine...

Reply

Chef EdB
Over 50 years in food service business 35 as Ex Chef. Specializing in Volume upscale Catering both on and off premise .(former Exec. Chef in the largest on premise caterer in US  with 17 Million Dollars per year annual volume). 
      Well versed in all facets of Continental Cuisine...

Reply
post #4 of 11
Thread Starter 


Wow, I must have looked at a dozen or more online recipes, and the least any called for was 12 T to 2 cups of flour.  I'm going to look up that one with the pudding in it that chefedb mentioned.  Sounds very promising (as long as it doesn't have HFCS in the pudding).

DD

 

Is this the pudding one, chefedb?

 

Chocolate chip cookies by Jell-o-pudding.

2-1/4 cup un-sifted all purpose flour
1 teaspoon baking soda
1 cup butter or margarine softened
1/4 cup granulated sugar
3/4 cup firmly packed light brown sugar
1 teaspoon vanilla
1 package (4 serving size) Jell-o instant vanilla pudding
2 eggs
1 teaspoon vanilla
1 package (12 oz) chocolate-chips
1 cup chopped nuts (opitional)

Mix flour with baking soda. Combine butter, the sugars, vanilla and pudding mix in a large mixer bowl; beat until smooth and creamy. Beat in eggs. Gradually add flour mixture; then stir in chips and nuts. (batter will be stiff.) Drop by rounded measuring teaspoonfuls, about 2 inches apart, onto ungreased baking sheets. Bake at 375 degrees for 8 to 10 minutes. Makes about 7 dozen. For Chocolate Chocolate Chip Cookies, substitite Chocolate flavor instant pudding.

If you use butter the cookies are good but with margarine they do not spread so much.

Report Spam o

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by

GourmetM View Post
 

Hmm... I'm not a professional baker by any means, but I am very serious about choc chip cookies. I just scanned ca. 5 recipes for the chewy kind, and while they varied from 1/2 to 3/4 to 1 cup of butter per 2 cups of flour, not one used more than that.

 

 



 

post #5 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyGal View Post ...(as long as it doesn't have HFCS in the pudding)....

 



 

Just curious, why the prohibition concerning HFCS?
 

 

Chef,
Specialties: MasterCook/RecipeFox; Culinary logistics; Personal Chef; Small restaurant owner; Caterer
Reply
Chef,
Specialties: MasterCook/RecipeFox; Culinary logistics; Personal Chef; Small restaurant owner; Caterer
Reply
post #6 of 11
Thread Starter 

Because it is one of the most insidiously unhealthy things you could ever put in your body.  It is linked to so many long term chronic diseases.  I avoid it whenever I can.  Plain cane sugar is bad enough, but high fructose corn syrup is much worse.

DD

post #7 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyGal View Post

Because it is one of the most insidiously unhealthy things you could ever put in your body.  It is linked to so many long term chronic diseases.  I avoid it whenever I can.  Plain cane sugar is bad enough, but high fructose corn syrup is much worse.

DD



High fructose corn syrup is nothing more than sugar made from corn. I do not know why they have to use the name they do for it but all of the health concerns over it is just hype.

post #8 of 11
Thread Starter 

High-fructose corn syrup is a complex compund that is basically the combination of sucrose and fructose after they are broken down and extracted from corn. The conversion is what causes the engineered sugar.

 Natural fructose is not broken down by the liver but high-fructose corn syrup is. Because this compound is what is called a free sugar and not recognized by the body as a natural sugar, it is not easily broken down in the body.   A study on the chemical composition of carbonated beverages by a Rutgers University researcher in 2007 revealed that the converted sugar compound that is high-fructose corn syrup--found in all sodas--deposits potentially high levels of harmful carbonyl compounds (carbon dioxide and carbonyl sulfide) into the system.

 

High-fructose corn syrup as a regular food additive and preservative is actually a fairly new phenomenon. Because of this, we are just starting to see the adverse affects (or at least the debate is getting louder over the direct correlation of health indications and HFCS). It has been added to foods and beverages since the late 1970s. Some opponents in the medical community have linked HFCS to obesity, insulin spikes and increased acidity. Although the debate has not been resolved conclusively, high-fructose corn syrup is now slowly being removed from food and beverages in the United States. It is banned in Europe.

 

(from http://www.ehow.com/about_5494851_problems-fructose-corn-syrup.html

But I've seen many other reports, with associated studies, the most notable one from UC Davis that this man made sugar has far longer reach than these few factors.  It affects almost every function in the body.   It is thought (but not proven) that it actually blocks glucose takeup - so the body thinks it is starved and produces more and more glucose.   Bad stuff.

post #9 of 11

My oh my, I guess my education is as antiquated as I'm beginning to be.

 

I was always under the impression that carbon dioxide was the natural result of breathing and that carbonyl sulfide was a naturally occurring gas.

 

The old adage "you learn something everyday" must be true!

 

Then again, maybe the American Dietetic Association can be trusted?

Chef,
Specialties: MasterCook/RecipeFox; Culinary logistics; Personal Chef; Small restaurant owner; Caterer
Reply
Chef,
Specialties: MasterCook/RecipeFox; Culinary logistics; Personal Chef; Small restaurant owner; Caterer
Reply
post #10 of 11

Indy girl  Yes thats the recipe. Note it doesn't have to be jello brand  any will do.. These cookies stayed soft 3 weeks in a sealed canister.. When you bake them Double pan them and bake on parchment if possible.

Chef EdB
Over 50 years in food service business 35 as Ex Chef. Specializing in Volume upscale Catering both on and off premise .(former Exec. Chef in the largest on premise caterer in US  with 17 Million Dollars per year annual volume). 
      Well versed in all facets of Continental Cuisine...

Reply

Chef EdB
Over 50 years in food service business 35 as Ex Chef. Specializing in Volume upscale Catering both on and off premise .(former Exec. Chef in the largest on premise caterer in US  with 17 Million Dollars per year annual volume). 
      Well versed in all facets of Continental Cuisine...

Reply
post #11 of 11
Thread Starter 

You can eat it if you want to,   I prefer not to.   I already have enough problems with carbohydrates, I don't need the "non natural ones mucking things up even worse.   My body does not metabolize carbs right.  There are about 12 steps, and it only gets halfway there.  The end by products are various citrates (found in the urine) and my body does not produce them unless I take B6 and K (potassium) supplements.   Evidence you say? Oxalate type kidney stones. (not the ones from too much protein, those are another type than I have.)   I do not have diabetes, but insulin resistance, (some think it is a precurser) which has my pancreas spewing out way too high levels of insulin, and when that happens, B6 and K are known to leech out of the system. Low levels of those two are associated with high levels of insulin.   I have not had any kidney stones since giving up non-natural sugars in 1991, and also by taking those supplements.   Might I be OK taking more chances?  Maybe, but I'm not prepared to have more stones when other ingredients are available.

 

Yes, I do eat cookies, fruit and other stuff with sucrose/fructose in it, but I'm sure to take my supplements when I do.  My sugar levels are normal, even after having had glucose in an IV all night.  My body does deal with it.  But the cost is very high levels of insulin, with the associated vitamin/mineral deficiencies.

 

So far so good. No more stones since researching all this for myself, no doctor ever helped me find this out.   (But my gyno took notes and started recommending these supplements for her oxalate kidney stone patients - many pregnant women get them during gestation).  

 

I prefer not to skate out onto the ice, not knowing how thick it is, and if there are any sharks under there, thank you.  If I cannot handle the sweets God intended for us, then I'm sure not taking chances with man made ones.  Most days I can stick with a pretty controlled level of carbs, especially simple carbs.   But without the occasional splurge, well, life can be pretty dull.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Pastries & Baking
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Pastries & Baking › Soft Chewy Choc Chip Cookies without so much better?