Raw sugar question

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

Hopefully not for any imaginary health reasons, though.

Doug Kanter said:

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

Hopefully not for any imaginary health reasons, though.

Right. Because there's no research out there that indicates that sugar
is in any way bad for you. As a matter of fact, I believe the AMA
recommends a minimum of 3 cups per day. Are you eating enough of it,
Doug?

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Doug Kanter said:

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

Hopefully not for any imaginary health reasons, though.

Right. Because there's no research out there that indicates that sugar
is in any way bad for you. As a matter of fact, I believe the AMA
recommends a minimum of 3 cups per day. Are you eating enough of it,
Doug?

I'm referring to any dream that UNrefined sugar is better for you than plain
old white sugar.

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

No it's not. There is not a single shred of evidence that refined sugar
is worse in any way than other forms of sugar. In fact there is a lot of
evidence that there is no difference. Sugar is sugar, and the presence
of a few impurities that make it brown instead of white has no bearing
on how your body reacts to the sugar. Unfortunately there are a lot of
people who know less than nothing about biochemistry, digestion, and
physiology. They think that if something is labelled "unrefined" or
"natural" that automatically makes it better. The fact that you use the
word "obviously" is an indication of how successful these people have
been in spreading their dogma.

--
Peter Aitken
Visit my recipe and kitchen myths pages at www.pgacon.com/cooking.htm

Peter A said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

No it's not. There is not a single shred of evidence that refined sugar
is worse in any way than other forms of sugar. In fact there is a lot of
evidence that there is no difference. Sugar is sugar, and the presence
of a few impurities that make it brown instead of white has no bearing
on how your body reacts to the sugar. Unfortunately there are a lot of
people who know less than nothing about biochemistry, digestion, and
physiology. They think that if something is labelled "unrefined" or
"natural" that automatically makes it better. The fact that you use the
word "obviously" is an indication of how successful these people have
been in spreading their dogma.

Personally, I prefer anything I consume to be less processed rather
than more processed, given the choice. We eat brown rrice most of the
time, for example, and when we do eat white rice, it's never Uncle Bens
or Minute Rice. We try to eat foods that are as close to their natural
form as possible.

Are you telling me it's a BAD thing to use less-processed sugar rather
than white sugar?? I disagree.

It's the same issue that always comes up on Usenet - people have lots
of opinions to offer, but ain't much help in actually answering the
question. Thanks a lot. Anyone who's used raw sugar have anything to
say about how it bakes, which was my actual inquiry??

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Peter A said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

No it's not. There is not a single shred of evidence that refined sugar
is worse in any way than other forms of sugar. In fact there is a lot of
evidence that there is no difference. Sugar is sugar, and the presence
of a few impurities that make it brown instead of white has no bearing
on how your body reacts to the sugar. Unfortunately there are a lot of
people who know less than nothing about biochemistry, digestion, and
physiology. They think that if something is labelled "unrefined" or
"natural" that automatically makes it better. The fact that you use the
word "obviously" is an indication of how successful these people have
been in spreading their dogma.

Personally, I prefer anything I consume to be less processed rather
than more processed, given the choice. We eat brown rrice most of the
time, for example, and when we do eat white rice, it's never Uncle Bens
or Minute Rice. We try to eat foods that are as close to their natural
form as possible.

Are you telling me it's a BAD thing to use less-processed sugar rather
than white sugar?? I disagree.

It's not BAD to eat it. It just isn't any better in terms of nutrition or
health. Tastes a bit different, if accompanying ingredients don't overpower
it, which they almost always do.

And, brown rice really IS nutritionally different in measurable ways. You
can't compare that to sugar, though.

Jude said:

[snip]
Anyone who's used raw sugar have anything to
say about how it bakes, which was my actual inquiry??

You should expect "raw sugar" to bake identically to white sugar.
Chemically, they are both sucrose. The only difference between them is
that "raw sugar" has not gone through the filtering/cleaning process to
remove the impurities (i.e., non-sucrose contents) that are naturally
found in the cane juice. Other than that, "raw" and "white" sugars are
from the same source and share the same chemistry. See the chemistry
handbook page at this site:
http://www.elmhurst.edu/~chm/vchembook/546sucrose.html

Is it bad to use unfiltered/uncleaned sugar? No, the impurities are
not harmful; it just costs more. Is there any benefit from using raw
sugar? Maybe it meets a psychological need.... -aem

Jude said:

Personally, I prefer anything I consume to be less processed rather
than more processed, given the choice. We eat brown rrice most of the
time, for example, and when we do eat white rice, it's never Uncle Bens
or Minute Rice. We try to eat foods that are as close to their natural
form as possible.

Not a thing wrong with that.

Quoted message said:

Are you telling me it's a BAD thing to use less-processed sugar rather
than white sugar?? I disagree.

Not bad, just nutritionally the same. The difference between them
is negligible. Turbinado has a few extra minerals, but only in
tiny amounts.

Quoted message said:

It's the same issue that always comes up on Usenet - people have lots
of opinions to offer, but ain't much help in actually answering the
question. Thanks a lot. Anyone who's used raw sugar have anything to
say about how it bakes, which was my actual inquiry??

I've substituted turbinado for brown sugar in different
recipes and couldn't tell the difference. Several cakes
and some cookies.

Don't forget there's rec.food.baking, too.

--
Reg

Jude said:

It's the same issue that always comes up on Usenet - people have lots
of opinions to offer, but ain't much help in actually answering the
question. Thanks a lot. Anyone who's used raw sugar have anything to
say about how it bakes, which was my actual inquiry??

It bakes just fine but it holds its shape and doesn't dissolve as well
as the finer-grained sugar does... I used to use raw sugar in my
caramel slice base and it came out with a definite 'crunch' from it.
Delicious! You could use it in cookies with impunity but I don't know
about cake unless you want it to be crunchy...

In article <[email hidden]>,

Jude said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea, and I know we go through a lot of sugar
around here, esp in baked goods.

I've been buying Turbinado (raw) sugar recently. I love using it to
sprinkle over baked stuff, because it keeps its large crystal shape and
looks like those nice professional bakery sugar crystals. Very nice
look on shortcakes, shortbread cookies, etc.

My question is, does it work the same way as white sugar in baking? Or
does the larger crystal affect they way it cooks? Could I swap it out
in recipes with little worry? Should I try crushing it down some in the
food processor or blender, like my mom used to do with granulated suger
when she was out of powdered sugar, to make a resaosnable substitute?
Or does it not matter?

Thanks for ideas/tips!!

It depends on what you are cooking... Mom used it for most items, but
you have to take it's flavor into consideration.

If you are worried about the crystals not dissolving, throw it into the
blender and powder it.

It works. :-)

I don't eat sugar anymore in any form, except for the occasional
pre-made treat and I'm conservative with those. <sigh>

Borderline type II.
I don't wish to go over the edge.......
--
Peace, Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

In article <[email hidden]>,

Doug Kanter said:

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

Hopefully not for any imaginary health reasons, though.

Tsk!

Supposedly the chemicals used to bleach it white are toxic.....

I've no idea if that is true tho'.

Raw sugar also has some trace minerals to make it "worth" the calories
theoretically.

I've not studied it enough to have an opinion one way or another. :-)

On the rare occasion I eat pancakes or waffles, I like raw sugar on them
for the flavor and texture. It does not taste the same as bleached. It
has more "personality".

But that is very much a personal opinion!
--
Peace, Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

"OmManiPadmeOmelet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Doug Kanter said:

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

Hopefully not for any imaginary health reasons, though.

Quoted message said:

Raw sugar also has some trace minerals to make it "worth" the calories
theoretically.

I suspect that if you're eating enough sugar to make those trace minerals
significant, you're going to need a hip replacement real soon. And very
large pants.

OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

Supposedly the chemicals used to bleach it white are toxic.....

I've no idea if that is true tho'.

It's very likely untrue, for the simple reason that sugar is not
bleached. No chemicals are added to it during the cleaning/filtering
process. At least according to the manufacturers. -aem

Jude said:

Doug Kanter said:

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

Hopefully not for any imaginary health reasons, though.

Right. Because there's no research out there that indicates that sugar
is in any way bad for you. As a matter of fact, I believe the AMA
recommends a minimum of 3 cups per day. Are you eating enough of it,
Doug?

Raw sugar is less chemically processed than white refined sugar. Some
of us prefer to not ingest unnecessary chemicals [comment directed at
the ill informed DK]. To answer your question Jude, I substitute the
raw for refined. If the recipe calls for extra fine, I just grind the
raw a bit in the food processor. It can be ground into powdered sugar
if you want. HTH and don't worry about the ney sayers 😉

Here's a link describing the different types of sugars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_refined_sugar

"~patches~" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Jude said:

Doug Kanter said:

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

>I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
>Obvoiusly that's a good idea

Hopefully not for any imaginary health reasons, though.

Right. Because there's no research out there that indicates that sugar
is in any way bad for you. As a matter of fact, I believe the AMA
recommends a minimum of 3 cups per day. Are you eating enough of it,
Doug?

Raw sugar is less chemically processed than white refined sugar. Some of
us prefer to not ingest unnecessary chemicals [comment directed at the ill
informed DK].

I was referring to the health aspect of the food itself, not any chemicals
involved.

Peter A said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

No it's not. There is not a single shred of evidence that refined sugar
is worse in any way than other forms of sugar. In fact there is a lot of
evidence that there is no difference. Sugar is sugar, and the presence
of a few impurities that make it brown instead of white has no bearing
on how your body reacts to the sugar. Unfortunately there are a lot of
people who know less than nothing about biochemistry, digestion, and
physiology. They think that if something is labelled "unrefined" or
"natural" that automatically makes it better. The fact that you use the
word "obviously" is an indication of how successful these people have
been in spreading their dogma.

Wrong, raw sugar has minimal chemical processing as opposed to the heavy
use of chemicals to process white refined sugar. Some of us prefer to
avoid unnecessary chemicals. All you have done whenever this topic
comes up is try to debunk it. What you don't get is all these chemicals
and preservatives and bleaching agents in relation to any food in
general are totally unnecessary! Why do you think people want organic
foods? It is to avoid all this [censored] along with the growth hormones,
pesticides, etc. Good food does not need any of this [censored] and if you
want to try saying something heavily refined is just as good as
something minimally refined then you have a serious comprehension
problem. My last post to you because you are deliberately obtuse!

Jude said:

Peter A said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

No it's not. There is not a single shred of evidence that refined sugar
is worse in any way than other forms of sugar. In fact there is a lot of
evidence that there is no difference. Sugar is sugar, and the presence
of a few impurities that make it brown instead of white has no bearing
on how your body reacts to the sugar. Unfortunately there are a lot of
people who know less than nothing about biochemistry, digestion, and
physiology. They think that if something is labelled "unrefined" or
"natural" that automatically makes it better. The fact that you use the
word "obviously" is an indication of how successful these people have
been in spreading their dogma.

Personally, I prefer anything I consume to be less processed rather
than more processed, given the choice. We eat brown rrice most of the
time, for example, and when we do eat white rice, it's never Uncle Bens
or Minute Rice. We try to eat foods that are as close to their natural
form as possible.

I agree with you wholeheartedly! The less chemicals as in
preservatives, artificial anything, bleaching agents, etc the better if
you ask me!

Quoted message said:

Are you telling me it's a BAD thing to use less-processed sugar rather
than white sugar?? I disagree.

Essentially that has been his stance on the issue each and everytime it
comes up. He considers the *sugar* aspect only and nothing to do with
the refining process or chemicals used.

Quoted message said:

It's the same issue that always comes up on Usenet - people have lots
of opinions to offer, but ain't much help in actually answering the
question. Thanks a lot. Anyone who's used raw sugar have anything to
say about how it bakes, which was my actual inquiry??

Jude, I replied just a few minutes ago as to how I use it. I like the
flavour myself. It has an actual flavour instead of just adding sweet.
IMO this is as important as the lack of chemicals. If you don't see
my other reply, I'll repost.

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Jude said:

Doug Kanter said:

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
Obvoiusly that's a good idea

Hopefully not for any imaginary health reasons, though.

Right. Because there's no research out there that indicates that sugar
is in any way bad for you. As a matter of fact, I believe the AMA
recommends a minimum of 3 cups per day. Are you eating enough of it,
Doug?

ROFL!!!!
--
Peace, Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

In article <[email hidden]>,

Doug Kanter said:

"OmManiPadmeOmelet" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Doug Kanter said:

"Jude" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>I know there are a few people on here who try to avoid refined sugar.
> Obvoiusly that's a good idea

Hopefully not for any imaginary health reasons, though.

Quoted message said:

Raw sugar also has some trace minerals to make it "worth" the calories
theoretically.

I suspect that if you're eating enough sugar to make those trace minerals
significant, you're going to need a hip replacement real soon. And very
large pants.

<snork> Too damned true...

I take a trace mineral supplement, "Nature's plus trace mins".
Reads like the periodic table.

Oddly enough, it seems to have all but cured my Sciatica.
--
Peace, Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson