General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

REC: Flourless Chocolate Cake

Started by AutomaticDripCoffee · · Last activity · 33 posts · 287 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
12 June 2007
Last activity
17 June 2007
Original author
AutomaticDripCoffee
Posts
33
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
287
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 33
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Chocolate cake. It's a good thing, except for those evil carbohydrates
    added by flour. But you need flour to make cake, right? WRONG! Martha
    Stewart developed the "sugared" version of this recipe; reportedly to have a
    dessert so dense that a shank could be brougt in without X-ray detection.
    Must have worked. Nevertleless, this is pretty darned good. Just watch
    it...not for induction and then should only be eaten in strict moderation.
    No matter how few carbs, chocolate cake is (as an old friend said) not low
    carb.

    Flourless Chocolate Cake

    Serves 8

    6 tablespoons unsalted butter, plus more for pan

    8 ounces bittersweet or semisweet chocolate, finely chopped

    6 large eggs, separated

    1/2 cup granulated Splenda

    Confectioners' sugar, for dusting (OK, run some Splenda through your food
    processor to get powdered Spelnda)

    Whipped cream, for serving

    1. Preheat the oven to 275° with the rack in the center. Butter the bottom
    and sides of a 9-inch springform pan. Set aside.

    2. Place butter and chocolate in a large heatproof bowl and microwave in
    30-second increments, stirring each time, until completely melted. Let cool
    slightly. Whisk in egg yolks.

    3. In a large bowl, beat egg whites until soft peaks form. Gradually add
    granulated sugar, and continue beating until glossy stiff peaks form. Whisk
    1/4 of the egg whites into the chocolate mixture; then gently fold in
    remaining egg whites.

    4. Pour batter into the prepared pan, and smooth the top with a rubber
    spatula. Bake until the cake pulls away from the sides of the pan and is set
    in the center, 45 to 50 minutes. Cool completely on a wire rack; remove
    sides of pan. Serve at room temperature, dusted with powdered sugar (use
    Splenda). Serve with whipped cream, if desired.

    Approx. 4.5-5 carbs per serving

  2. AutomaticDripCoffee said:

    Chocolate cake. It's a good thing, except for those evil carbohydrates
    added by flour. But you need flour to make cake, right? WRONG! Martha
    Stewart developed the "sugared" version of this recipe; reportedly to have a
    dessert so dense that a shank could be brougt in without X-ray detection.
    Must have worked. Nevertleless, this is pretty darned good. Just watch
    it...not for induction and then should only be eaten in strict moderation.
    No matter how few carbs, chocolate cake is (as an old friend said) not low
    carb.

    Flourless Chocolate Cake

    Serves 8

    6 tablespoons unsalted butter, plus more for pan

    8 ounces bittersweet or semisweet chocolate, finely chopped

    6 large eggs, separated

    1/2 cup granulated Splenda

    Confectioners' sugar, for dusting (OK, run some Splenda through your food
    processor to get powdered Spelnda)

    Whipped cream, for serving

    1. Preheat the oven to 275° with the rack in the center. Butter the bottom
    and sides of a 9-inch springform pan. Set aside.

    2. Place butter and chocolate in a large heatproof bowl and microwave in
    30-second increments, stirring each time, until completely melted. Let cool
    slightly. Whisk in egg yolks.

    3. In a large bowl, beat egg whites until soft peaks form. Gradually add
    granulated sugar, and continue beating until glossy stiff peaks form. Whisk
    1/4 of the egg whites into the chocolate mixture; then gently fold in
    remaining egg whites.

    4. Pour batter into the prepared pan, and smooth the top with a rubber
    spatula. Bake until the cake pulls away from the sides of the pan and is set
    in the center, 45 to 50 minutes. Cool completely on a wire rack; remove
    sides of pan. Serve at room temperature, dusted with powdered sugar (use
    Splenda). Serve with whipped cream, if desired.

    Approx. 4.5-5 carbs per serving

    Well of course the flourless type can be low carb, if you use liquid
    Splenda and bakers chocolate. In the above recipe, most of the carbs
    are in the bittersweet/semisweet chocolate and the filler in the
    Splenda.

    Also, I don't think Martha Stewart invented this, or much of anything
    else. I saw Jean George showing her how to make his flourless cake
    on her TV show. And he claimed to have invented his flourless lava
    cake, which is excellent, by mistake. Not sure I believe that either.

  3. email hidden said:
    AutomaticDripCoffee said:

    Chocolate cake. It's a good thing, except for those evil carbohydrates
    added by flour. But you need flour to make cake, right? WRONG! Martha
    Stewart developed the "sugared" version of this recipe; reportedly to
    have a
    dessert so dense that a shank could be brougt in without X-ray
    detection.
    Must have worked. Nevertleless, this is pretty darned good. Just watch
    it...not for induction and then should only be eaten in strict
    moderation.
    No matter how few carbs, chocolate cake is (as an old friend said) not
    low
    carb.

    Flourless Chocolate Cake

    Serves 8

    6 tablespoons unsalted butter, plus more for pan

    8 ounces bittersweet or semisweet chocolate, finely chopped

    6 large eggs, separated

    1/2 cup granulated Splenda

    Confectioners' sugar, for dusting (OK, run some Splenda through your
    food
    processor to get powdered Spelnda)

    Whipped cream, for serving

    1. Preheat the oven to 275° with the rack in the center. Butter the
    bottom
    and sides of a 9-inch springform pan. Set aside.

    2. Place butter and chocolate in a large heatproof bowl and microwave
    in
    30-second increments, stirring each time, until completely melted. Let
    cool
    slightly. Whisk in egg yolks.

    3. In a large bowl, beat egg whites until soft peaks form. Gradually
    add
    granulated sugar, and continue beating until glossy stiff peaks form.
    Whisk
    1/4 of the egg whites into the chocolate mixture; then gently fold in
    remaining egg whites.

    4. Pour batter into the prepared pan, and smooth the top with a
    rubber
    spatula. Bake until the cake pulls away from the sides of the pan and
    is set
    in the center, 45 to 50 minutes. Cool completely on a wire rack; remove
    sides of pan. Serve at room temperature, dusted with powdered sugar (use
    Splenda). Serve with whipped cream, if desired.

    Approx. 4.5-5 carbs per serving

    Well of course the flourless type can be low carb, if you use liquid
    Splenda and bakers chocolate. In the above recipe, most of the carbs
    are in the bittersweet/semisweet chocolate and the filler in the
    Splenda.

    Also, I don't think Martha Stewart invented this, or much of anything
    else. I saw Jean George showing her how to make his flourless cake
    on her TV show. And he claimed to have invented his flourless lava
    cake, which is excellent, by mistake. Not sure I believe that either.

    I've made flourless chocolate cake, although not the low carb version.
    The problem for me is that it's incredibly dense. You need to cut it into
    very small slices. And, it's incredibly high in calories. Even small
    pieces have a lot of calories.

    --
    Bob in CT

  4. Looks like some of these recipes were posted here in this group many
    years before they were seen anywhere else. :-)

    Cheri

    [email hidden] wrote in message

    Also, I don't think Martha Stewart invented this, or much of anything
    else. I saw Jean George showing her how to make his flourless cake
    on her TV show. And he claimed to have invented his flourless lava
    cake, which is excellent, by mistake. Not sure I believe that
    either.

  5. Bob in CT said:

    On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 23:09:11 -0400, [email hidden]

    Quoted message said:
    AutomaticDripCoffee said:

    Chocolate cake. It's a good thing, except for those evil carbohydrates
    added by flour. But you need flour to make cake, right? WRONG! Martha
    Stewart developed the "sugared" version of this recipe; reportedly to
    have a
    dessert so dense that a shank could be brougt in without X-ray
    detection.
    Must have worked. Nevertleless, this is pretty darned good. Just watch
    it...not for induction and then should only be eaten in strict
    moderation.
    No matter how few carbs, chocolate cake is (as an old friend said) not
    low
    carb.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Flourless Chocolate Cake

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Serves 8

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    6 tablespoons unsalted butter, plus more for pan

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    8 ounces bittersweet or semisweet chocolate, finely chopped

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    6 large eggs, separated

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    1/2 cup granulated Splenda

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Confectioners' sugar, for dusting (OK, run some Splenda through your
    food
    processor to get powdered Spelnda)

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Whipped cream, for serving

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    1. Preheat the oven to 275° with the rack in the center. Butter the
    bottom
    and sides of a 9-inch springform pan. Set aside.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    2. Place butter and chocolate in a large heatproof bowl and microwave
    in
    30-second increments, stirring each time, until completely melted. Let
    cool
    slightly. Whisk in egg yolks.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    3. In a large bowl, beat egg whites until soft peaks form. Gradually
    add
    granulated sugar, and continue beating until glossy stiff peaks form.
    Whisk
    1/4 of the egg whites into the chocolate mixture; then gently fold in
    remaining egg whites.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    4. Pour batter into the prepared pan, and smooth the top with a
    rubber
    spatula. Bake until the cake pulls away from the sides of the pan and
    is set
    in the center, 45 to 50 minutes. Cool completely on a wire rack; remove
    sides of pan. Serve at room temperature, dusted with powdered sugar (use
    Splenda). Serve with whipped cream, if desired.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Approx. 4.5-5 carbs per serving

    Quoted message said:

    Well of course the flourless type can be low carb, if you use liquid
    Splenda and bakers chocolate. In the above recipe, most of the carbs
    are in the bittersweet/semisweet chocolate and the filler in the
    Splenda.

    Quoted message said:

    Also, I don't think Martha Stewart invented this, or much of anything
    else. I saw Jean George showing her how to make his flourless cake
    on her TV show. And he claimed to have invented his flourless lava
    cake, which is excellent, by mistake. Not sure I believe that either.

    I've made flourless chocolate cake, although not the low carb version.
    The problem for me is that it's incredibly dense. You need to cut it into
    very small slices. And, it's incredibly high in calories. Even small
    pieces have a lot of calories.

    --
    Bob in CT- Hide quoted text -

    - Show quoted text -

    Yes, that's true. But it's so rich and dense that you're not as
    likely to eat anywhere near as much as you would with a regular
    cake. Similar in many ways to substituting other LC foods, which are
    higher in fat and calories, for less calorie dense but high carb
    ones.

    The molten volcano cake, even when served in a restaurant as the
    regular carb version is small, maybe 1/2 a cup in size. And it's
    usually served with a small scoop of vanilla ice cream. So, while
    it's dense in calories, the size is relatively small. And IMO, it
    tastes a whole lot better than a tradional chocolate cake.

  6. Quoted message said:

    Snipped<

    Quoted message said:

    I've made flourless chocolate cake, although not the low carb version.
    The problem for me is that it's incredibly dense. You need to cut it into
    very small slices. And, it's incredibly high in calories. Even small
    pieces have a lot of calories.

    --
    Bob in CT- Hide quoted text -

    - Show quoted text -

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Yes, that's true. But it's so rich and dense that you're not as
    likely to eat anywhere near as much as you would with a regular
    cake.

    i would 🙁

    there is a difference between ordering a small portion in a restaurant and
    making the whole whopping recipe at home. I'd eat the whole thing then make
    another 🙁

    as a matter of fact, if i had a small one in a restaurant - or a bite LOL -
    it would be enough to inspire me to create a whole thing at home to eat when
    no one was looking!!

    sounds soooo good btw 🙁

  7. nanner said:
    Quoted message said:

    Snipped<

    Quoted message said:

    I've made flourless chocolate cake, although not the low carb version.
    The problem for me is that it's incredibly dense. You need to cut it
    into
    very small slices. And, it's incredibly high in calories. Even small
    pieces have a lot of calories.

    --
    Bob in CT- Hide quoted text -

    - Show quoted text -

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    Yes, that's true. But it's so rich and dense that you're not as
    likely to eat anywhere near as much as you would with a regular
    cake.

    i would 🙁

    there is a difference between ordering a small portion in a restaurant
    and
    making the whole whopping recipe at home. I'd eat the whole thing then
    make
    another 🙁

    as a matter of fact, if i had a small one in a restaurant - or a bite
    LOL -
    it would be enough to inspire me to create a whole thing at home to eat
    when
    no one was looking!!

    sounds soooo good btw 🙁

    I don't know -- the one I made (for Christmas) was so dense and rich that
    I ended up throwing the remains away. It's a cake that's great to make
    for large groups, as you can feed lots of people with the cake. I'm a
    chocolate lover, and even I couldn't eat more than one slice.

    --
    Bob in CT

  8. "Bob in CT" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    nanner said:
    Quoted message said:

    Snipped<

    Quoted message said:

    I've made flourless chocolate cake, although not the low carb version.
    The problem for me is that it's incredibly dense. You need to cut it
    into
    very small slices. And, it's incredibly high in calories. Even small
    pieces have a lot of calories.

    --
    Bob in CT- Hide quoted text -

    - Show quoted text -

    Quoted message said:

    > Yes, that's true. But it's so rich and dense that you're not as
    > likely to eat anywhere near as much as you would with a regular
    > cake.

    i would 🙁

    there is a difference between ordering a small portion in a restaurant
    and
    making the whole whopping recipe at home. I'd eat the whole thing then
    make
    another 🙁

    as a matter of fact, if i had a small one in a restaurant - or a bite
    LOL -
    it would be enough to inspire me to create a whole thing at home to eat
    when
    no one was looking!!

    sounds soooo good btw 🙁

    I don't know -- the one I made (for Christmas) was so dense and rich that
    I ended up throwing the remains away. It's a cake that's great to make
    for large groups, as you can feed lots of people with the cake. I'm a
    chocolate lover, and even I couldn't eat more than one slice.

    --
    Bob in CT

    wow. that's great. i think i must have a serious problem because if i threw
    that cake in the trash i'd probably jump in after it within the hour. (not a
    joke) Usually if i need to get rid of something like that i stuff it in my
    belly so it will be gone. waahhh. well - that's why i am back here. but i
    worry that i yo-yo'd because there is something bigger going on, binging and
    out-of-control sugar addiction has ruled me for 2 years 🙁 I really went
    days eating nothing but *foods i won't mention here so as not to trigger
    cravings* - but no real food.

    I think figuring all that out will be as important for me as eating
    less/excercising more and making healthy choices.

  9. AutomaticDripCoffee said:

    Chocolate cake. It's a good thing, except for those evil carbohydrates
    added by flour. But you need flour to make cake, right? WRONG! Martha
    Stewart developed the "sugared" version of this recipe; reportedly to have a
    dessert so dense that a shank could be brougt in without X-ray detection.
    Must have worked. Nevertleless, this is pretty darned good. Just watch
    it...not for induction and then should only be eaten in strict moderation.
    No matter how few carbs, chocolate cake is (as an old friend said) not low
    carb.

    Flourless Chocolate Cake

    Serves 8

    6 tablespoons unsalted butter, plus more for pan

    8 ounces bittersweet or semisweet chocolate, finely chopped

    6 large eggs, separated

    1/2 cup granulated Splenda

    Confectioners' sugar, for dusting (OK, run some Splenda through your food
    processor to get powdered Spelnda)

    Whipped cream, for serving

    1. Preheat the oven to 275° with the rack in the center. Butter the bottom
    and sides of a 9-inch springform pan. Set aside.

    2. Place butter and chocolate in a large heatproof bowl and microwave in
    30-second increments, stirring each time, until completely melted. Let cool
    slightly. Whisk in egg yolks.

    3. In a large bowl, beat egg whites until soft peaks form. Gradually add
    granulated sugar, and continue beating until glossy stiff peaks form. Whisk
    1/4 of the egg whites into the chocolate mixture; then gently fold in
    remaining egg whites.

    4. Pour batter into the prepared pan, and smooth the top with a rubber
    spatula. Bake until the cake pulls away from the sides of the pan and is set
    in the center, 45 to 50 minutes. Cool completely on a wire rack; remove
    sides of pan. Serve at room temperature, dusted with powdered sugar (use
    Splenda). Serve with whipped cream, if desired.

    Approx. 4.5-5 carbs per serving

    I'm not positive at this point, but this looks a lot like the recipe I
    made a few weeks ago. It was horrible! But I had to substitute
    baking chocolate for the semi-sweet, so maybe that did it?

    It wasn't even the taste -- though it could have been sweeter and I
    think I didn't add enough Splenda for the substitution -- but I ended
    up with a pan full of crumbs! There was no "slicing" it -- you
    basically had to scoop it out with a spoon. It looked like a pan full
    of potting soil -- LOL!

    Has anyone else made this recipe and done this substitution? My son
    loved it, so I'd like to try it again and I'm positive I didn't do it
    right the first time! :-)

    --
    BlueBrooke
    254/236/135

  10. BlueBrooke .@. said:
    AutomaticDripCoffee said:

    Chocolate cake. It's a good thing, except for those evil carbohydrates
    added by flour. But you need flour to make cake, right? WRONG! Martha
    Stewart developed the "sugared" version of this recipe; reportedly to
    have a
    dessert so dense that a shank could be brougt in without X-ray
    detection.
    Must have worked. Nevertleless, this is pretty darned good. Just watch
    it...not for induction and then should only be eaten in strict
    moderation.
    No matter how few carbs, chocolate cake is (as an old friend said) not
    low
    carb.

    Flourless Chocolate Cake

    Serves 8

    6 tablespoons unsalted butter, plus more for pan

    8 ounces bittersweet or semisweet chocolate, finely chopped

    6 large eggs, separated

    1/2 cup granulated Splenda

    Confectioners' sugar, for dusting (OK, run some Splenda through your
    food
    processor to get powdered Spelnda)

    Whipped cream, for serving

    1. Preheat the oven to 275° with the rack in the center. Butter the
    bottom
    and sides of a 9-inch springform pan. Set aside.

    2. Place butter and chocolate in a large heatproof bowl and microwave
    in
    30-second increments, stirring each time, until completely melted. Let
    cool
    slightly. Whisk in egg yolks.

    3. In a large bowl, beat egg whites until soft peaks form. Gradually
    add
    granulated sugar, and continue beating until glossy stiff peaks form.
    Whisk
    1/4 of the egg whites into the chocolate mixture; then gently fold in
    remaining egg whites.

    4. Pour batter into the prepared pan, and smooth the top with a
    rubber
    spatula. Bake until the cake pulls away from the sides of the pan and
    is set
    in the center, 45 to 50 minutes. Cool completely on a wire rack; remove
    sides of pan. Serve at room temperature, dusted with powdered sugar (use
    Splenda). Serve with whipped cream, if desired.

    Approx. 4.5-5 carbs per serving

    I'm not positive at this point, but this looks a lot like the recipe I
    made a few weeks ago. It was horrible! But I had to substitute
    baking chocolate for the semi-sweet, so maybe that did it?

    It wasn't even the taste -- though it could have been sweeter and I
    think I didn't add enough Splenda for the substitution -- but I ended
    up with a pan full of crumbs! There was no "slicing" it -- you
    basically had to scoop it out with a spoon. It looked like a pan full
    of potting soil -- LOL!

    Has anyone else made this recipe and done this substitution? My son
    loved it, so I'd like to try it again and I'm positive I didn't do it
    right the first time! :-)

    You have to watch substituting chocolate -- the fat content varies with
    chocolate content. So, you generally cannot substitute baking chocolate
    for semi-sweet or bittersweet chocolat.

    Here's a recipe with no added sugar (there is sugar in the chocolate):

    http://www.scharffenberger.com/re0212.asp

    The cake I made was similar, and I thought from Scharffen Berger, but I
    don't see a recipe for it on their website.

    --
    Bob in CT

  11. BlueBrooke .@. said:
    AutomaticDripCoffee said:

    Chocolate cake. It's a good thing, except for those evil carbohydrates
    added by flour. But you need flour to make cake, right? WRONG! Martha
    Stewart developed the "sugared" version of this recipe; reportedly to
    have a
    dessert so dense that a shank could be brougt in without X-ray
    detection.
    Must have worked. Nevertleless, this is pretty darned good. Just watch
    it...not for induction and then should only be eaten in strict
    moderation.
    No matter how few carbs, chocolate cake is (as an old friend said) not
    low
    carb.

    Flourless Chocolate Cake

    Serves 8

    6 tablespoons unsalted butter, plus more for pan

    8 ounces bittersweet or semisweet chocolate, finely chopped

    6 large eggs, separated

    1/2 cup granulated Splenda

    Confectioners' sugar, for dusting (OK, run some Splenda through your
    food
    processor to get powdered Spelnda)

    Whipped cream, for serving

    1. Preheat the oven to 275° with the rack in the center. Butter the
    bottom
    and sides of a 9-inch springform pan. Set aside.

    2. Place butter and chocolate in a large heatproof bowl and microwave
    in
    30-second increments, stirring each time, until completely melted. Let
    cool
    slightly. Whisk in egg yolks.

    3. In a large bowl, beat egg whites until soft peaks form. Gradually
    add
    granulated sugar, and continue beating until glossy stiff peaks form.
    Whisk
    1/4 of the egg whites into the chocolate mixture; then gently fold in
    remaining egg whites.

    4. Pour batter into the prepared pan, and smooth the top with a
    rubber
    spatula. Bake until the cake pulls away from the sides of the pan and
    is set
    in the center, 45 to 50 minutes. Cool completely on a wire rack; remove
    sides of pan. Serve at room temperature, dusted with powdered sugar (use
    Splenda). Serve with whipped cream, if desired.

    Approx. 4.5-5 carbs per serving

    I'm not positive at this point, but this looks a lot like the recipe I
    made a few weeks ago. It was horrible! But I had to substitute
    baking chocolate for the semi-sweet, so maybe that did it?

    It wasn't even the taste -- though it could have been sweeter and I
    think I didn't add enough Splenda for the substitution -- but I ended
    up with a pan full of crumbs! There was no "slicing" it -- you
    basically had to scoop it out with a spoon. It looked like a pan full
    of potting soil -- LOL!

    Has anyone else made this recipe and done this substitution? My son
    loved it, so I'd like to try it again and I'm positive I didn't do it
    right the first time! :-)

    Woops! That recipe does have sugar:

    http://www.scharffenberger.com/re0212.asp

    Sorry about that.

    --
    Bob in CT

  12. Bob in CT said:

    On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:24:59 -0400, BlueBrooke <.@.> wrote:

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I'm not positive at this point, but this looks a lot like the recipe I
    made a few weeks ago. It was horrible! But I had to substitute
    baking chocolate for the semi-sweet, so maybe that did it?

    It wasn't even the taste -- though it could have been sweeter and I
    think I didn't add enough Splenda for the substitution -- but I ended
    up with a pan full of crumbs! There was no "slicing" it -- you
    basically had to scoop it out with a spoon. It looked like a pan full
    of potting soil -- LOL!

    Has anyone else made this recipe and done this substitution? My son
    loved it, so I'd like to try it again and I'm positive I didn't do it
    right the first time! :-)

    You have to watch substituting chocolate -- the fat content varies with
    chocolate content. So, you generally cannot substitute baking chocolate
    for semi-sweet or bittersweet chocolat.

    Hi, Bob --

    I can't remember all the details right now. I know there was an
    adjustment for the sugar and I believe the fat content as well -- but
    I can't find the source for the substitution and can't remember what I
    did.

    At any rate, I made the cake tonight and it's completely different and
    wonderful -- actually like a real cake. I went ahead and bought
    semi-sweet chocolate tonight and used that instead of trying to
    substitute baking chocolate (which I was out of anyway <g>😉.

    I can see, though, that I'm not going to be able to make this too
    often -- it's super rich and super yummy, too. :-)

    --
    BlueBrooke
    254/236/135

  13. nanner said:

    wow. that's great. i think i must have a serious problem because if
    i threw that cake in the trash i'd probably jump in after it within
    the hour. (not a joke) Usually if i need to get rid of something
    like that i stuff it in my belly so it will be gone. waahhh. well -
    that's why i am back here. but i worry that i yo-yo'd because there
    is something bigger going on, binging and out-of-control sugar
    addiction has ruled me for 2 years 🙁 I really went days eating
    nothing but *foods i won't mention here so as not to trigger
    cravings* - but no real food.

    If you haven't already, get a blood glucose tester. Your symptoms
    sound just like what I was going through: I could have my entire
    kitchen stocked full of LC foods -- foods I *like* -- and a craving
    would send me walking three blocks to the grocery store for a bag of
    chips. That all changed when I got a BG tester and could see exactly
    what I was doing to myself.

    I don't care much for the victimology tactics of addiction groups like
    AA, but I do think that if your body doesn't naturally have your blood
    sugar under good natural control, you need to look at carbs as a
    low-grade poison, because ultimately that's what they are for you.
    (After all, out-of-control blood sugar is deadlier than a lot of other
    things we try to avoid in our food, like nitrates or preservatives.)
    Think of carbs the way most people have been trained to think of salt:
    you can't really avoid it completely, because it's too useful for
    flavoring and preserving foods, but you can keep your consumption very
    low.

    When you first go get a BG tester, it's a little confusing, because
    there are all these different things you need, and some brands box
    certain things together and some don't. So here's what you need:

    1) The tester itself. These range hugely in price, depending on
    whether they remember your scores or have racing stripes and things
    like that.

    2) The test strips. You use a strip for each test, and these things
    cost anywhere from 10 cents to $1 each, so here's where your
    long-term cost is. Find the cheapest strips you can, and then buy
    the tester that works with them.

    3) Tester calibration fluid. They might call this something else, but
    basically it's a controlled glucose solution that you can use to
    determine whether your tester is accurate.

    4) Lancets. These are the little needles you poke yourself with.

    5) Lancet poker thingy. I can never remember what they call this, but
    it's the thing you put the lancets in, and it does a quick stabbing
    motion so it's really not painful at all.

    One note: the tester doesn't care how you poke your finger, so don't
    think you have to buy the cheapest lancet/poker combo just because you
    bought the cheap tester. Feel free to spend a little more money on
    #4/#5 and get one that'll be quick about it. A nice feature of mine
    is that you can vary the depth, depending on how thick your skin is.
    I don't know if the cheaper ones would have that.

    If you're worried that it'll hurt, it really doesn't. There's a
    little sting, but it's over before you know it. My girlfriend finally
    worked up the courage to try mine (her BG was high, but not as bad as
    mine would have been after the same meal), and she looked up in
    surprise: "Wow, you weren't kidding; it really doesn't hurt!" Let me
    put it this way: I'd rather [censored] myself with this thing 1000 times
    than get a single Novocain shot from a dentist.

    Quoted message said:

    I think figuring all that out will be as important for me as eating
    less/excercising more and making healthy choices.

    Absolutely. This really isn't something you can take an incremental
    approach to, so you have to ignore all the people telling you if you
    eat a little less and exercise a little more everything will be
    hunky-dory. You can't do this halfway. High blood sugar simply has
    too much power over your mind and body for that. (I don't have any
    experience with hard drugs, but high BG affected my behavior at least
    as much as being drunk ever did. Drunkenness lowers your inhibitions,
    but it never completely changed my mind about something the way a
    sugar rush can convince me I really *should* go get a box of ice
    cream.) You simply *have* to get your BG under control first, and
    keep it there for a while, before you can make consistent progress.

    Fortunately, this isn't complicated: Cut your carbs to under 10g/meal,
    stay away from the "iffy" products like LC bread, and test your BG
    regularly. If it still goes high after certain foods, cut those back.
    If you eat a lot of protein, you might find that enough is being
    converted to glucose to raise your BG unacceptably. If that happens,
    find ways to exchange some of that protein for fat. After a while,
    you won't need to test as often, but get to a point where you're
    confident that your BG is staying in the healthy range. I've been
    there for over two weeks now, and I'm amazed at how much better I
    feel.

    --
    Aaron -- 285/235/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz

  14. "Yes, that's true. But it's so rich and dense that you're not as
    likely to eat anywhere near as much as you would with a regular
    cake."

    ROTFLMAO!

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

    Quoted message said:

    nanner!
    you and i could be sisters!

  16. readandpostrosie said:


    "Yes, that's true. But it's so rich and dense that you're not as
    likely to eat anywhere near as much as you would with a regular
    cake."

    ROTFLMAO!

    Depends on how your body reacts. Dense and rich in meat -
    fattier vs leaner for the same total calories - will work that way
    for me after the first meal of it. By the second meal of it I
    am that much less hungry that it gets easy to eat less. But
    something sweet? Richer does mean more filling and longer
    before hunger comes back, but sometimes eating isn't about
    hunger.

  17. Boy, that's the truth. :-)

    Cheri

    Doug Freyburger wrote in message >

    Quoted message said:

    but sometimes eating isn't about
    hunger.

  18. <snipped me whining and Aaron's great BG testing advice>

    Thanks Aaron, i will look into it. When I was prego the tests kept saying I
    was kind of borderline on the sugar so i eventually had the 8 hour glucose
    test which came out fine. So I dunno. I can look into the testing equipment
    but if it's costly I will probably have to skip it.

    Do you know a good, cheap set-up?

  19. x-no-archive: yes

    nanner said:

    <snipped me whining and Aaron's great BG testing advice>

    Thanks Aaron, i will look into it. When I was prego the tests kept saying I
    was kind of borderline on the sugar so i eventually had the 8 hour glucose
    test which came out fine. So I dunno. I can look into the testing equipment
    but if it's costly I will probably have to skip it.

    Do you know a good, cheap set-up?

    The Walmart Relion meter is cheap, but they all are, with rebates,
    because the real expense is test strips. Relion strips are the cheapest.

    Susan

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

    Quoted message said:

    x-no-archive: yes

    nanner said:

    <snipped me whining and Aaron's great BG testing advice>

    Thanks Aaron, i will look into it. When I was prego the tests kept saying
    I was kind of borderline on the sugar so i eventually had the 8 hour
    glucose test which came out fine. So I dunno. I can look into the testing
    equipment but if it's costly I will probably have to skip it.

    Do you know a good, cheap set-up?

    The Walmart Relion meter is cheap, but they all are, with rebates, because
    the real expense is test strips. Relion strips are the cheapest.

    Susan

    thanks - i'll check it out

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.