|
Post by chrisg on Oct 30, 2016 8:49:19 GMT -5
With reference to the information on this thread and a lot of trawling of the internet:
chocolatetalk.proboards.com/thread/391?page=1 A typical diabetic chocolate is sweetened with one or more of the sugar alcohols. Xylitol and Maltitol being common. Both of these have a “cooling” effect (like peppermint) and also cause tummy upsets in higher concentrations. There are also some concerns over how low the glycemic index (effect on blood sugar) actually is. However they are cost effective, stable and easy to work with. Isomalt is another sugar alcohol. It has less cooling effect on taste, a lower tummy upset effect for a given amount and a low glycemic index. It becomes unstable over 110F which makes it tricky for commercial processing but is just within for my Premier Two Litre Grinder which runs at 105F. It is significantly less sweet than sucrose though. The conclusion of the thread for small batch production is to use two isomalt based sweeteners, one with added acesulfame potassium, the other with added sucralose. The aim is that the two additives bring the sweetness of isomalt up to that of sucrose and cancel out each others negative flavours, i.e. the sweetness arriving too slowly or too quickly or odd metallic aftertastes. It seems that acesulfame potassium has become very controversial for health reasons. Also sucralose (splenda) isn’t suitable on its own as it sweetens more slowly and then lingers. This makes the initial taste too bitter followed by a lingering sweetness after the chocolate taste has gone. So what I need is isomalt with sucralose and something like acesulfame potassium in taste profile.
The solution to replacing acesulfame potassium might be saccharin which also has a quick sweet taste followed by a quick tailing off.
So I've ended up with Isomalt with the sweetness boosted by saccharin and sucralose.
These are available in the UK as Sweetex tablets and Splenda tablets, commonly used as sugar substitutes in tea and coffee. Each little tablet is equivalent to 5g of sugar. Isomalt turns out to be used in cake decorating and is available in big tubs.
So now for a stab/guesstimate/first experiment at a chocolate making sugar substitute!
This my chocolate making sugar substitute formula per Kg: Saccharin (Sweetex) tablets 40 (equivalent to 200g of sugar) – quick onset of sweetness, has a bitter or metallic aftertaste (hence 40%), especially at high concentrations Sucrose (Splenda) tablets 60 (equivalent to 300g of sugar) - slow onset of sweetness, is sometimes a little metallic (a little, hence 60%), and tends to absorb into the mouth and linger Isomalt grams 1000 (equivalent to 500g of sugar) total bulk 1000g
As stated in the thread title, comments are welcome. It would be really handy if one of our resident sugar chemists would comment or if anyone has tried something similar.
|
|
|
Post by Sebastian on Nov 1, 2016 20:07:44 GMT -5
Any high potency sweetener you choose, you'll find some negative health connotations associated with them on the internet. Almost none are true. Pick the one you like.
With Isomalt (it's actually a blend of two polyhydric alcohols) - be 100% certain to watch your temperatures, as there's a very low point at which those crystals release their bound water and your chocolate will turn into mud irreversibly.
As far as formulation goes, you're gonna need to convert it to %'s of the ingredient (not the branded, diluted product) to get any feedback on it. W/o having a full formula in standard format (%) you're not likely to get much useful feedback i'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by chrisg on Nov 5, 2016 18:00:45 GMT -5
Thanks for the reply Sebastian.
The previous thread that I referenced suggested Isomalt due to its taste, less tendency to cause upsets and its low glycemic index. I lack the knowledge to argue with that or to suggest anything better. My idea to enhance its sweetness with a 60/40 mixture of sucrose and saccharin has more to do with availability than any health scares over acesulfame potassium. I can actually buy the branded sweeteners Sweetex and Splenda in the local shops. Isomalt is also available as a cake decorating ingredient though I'll need to get that online.
I'm simply trying to replace sugar as effectively as possible given what I can get hold of (from UK suppliers).
Do you think there is a better starting point than Isomalt-sucrose-saccharin given that I'm stuck with combining ingredients that I can actually source?
|
|
|
Post by Sebastian on Nov 6, 2016 19:56:49 GMT -5
Better is a terribly subjective term, and i'm not sure what you can and can't source. Maltitol's going to be the easiest for you to work with - if you can source that, i'd go with that. Remember that any high intensity sweetener you buy off the grocery store shelves is going to have 'other stuff' (TM) in it (usually maltodextrin or corn starch).
|
|
|
Post by chrisg on Nov 7, 2016 18:12:18 GMT -5
By "Better" I mean:
Low Glycemic index (my father is diabetic and the chocolate is for him) Does not taste noticeably "cool" (He doesn't like the taste of some diabetic chocolate he has tried, this might be why?) Is less likely to give tummy upsets (I can't see anyone wanting this...) Is easy to work with (enough to make a chocolate bar without laboratory support)
Going by the original thread that would make: 1) Isomalt better for GI 2) Isomalt better for taste 3) Isomalt better for side effects 4) Isomalt trickier due to temperature control (needs to be <110F)
I'm prepared to take on chance on 4 to gain on 1, 2 and 3. I have checked my last chocolate batch and it ran at 105F. That's close but if I run the machine in a colder part of the house, at this time of year one room is pretty chilly, I might get away with it comfortably. Tempering is going to be the trickiest step as I normally use a thermometer and cool to 80F then raise to 88F. That won't leave much headroom for error when warming over a bowl of hot water... I might need two thermometers, one in the water...
|
|
|
Post by chrisg on Dec 8, 2016 14:34:38 GMT -5
I have now made chocolate using my sugar substitute:
Saccharin (Sweetex) tablets 40 (equivalent to 200g of sugar) Sucrose (Splenda) tablets 60 (equivalent to 300g of sugar) Isomalt grams 1000 (equivalent to 500g of sugar) total equivalent to 1000g of sugar
I watched the thermometer very closely while tempering, keeping in mind that 110F limit from the previous thread.
The results are promising but the taste is slightly different to using normal sugar. First bite, it tasted like chocolate. It didn't quite have the "same" sweetness as my sugar based chocolate. It was more of a dry sweetness.
My son said there was a synthetic after taste. I noticed a slight lingering synthetic sweet taste for a few hours after eating two bars. Not unpleasant, just different.
I am now wondering if a slight tweak to the recipe is required, perhaps cutting back on the HITs, adding a bit more Isomalt and/or adding back just a bit of table sugar.
Has anyone else tried a sugar substitute? What were the results?
|
|