Given how manufacturers cram this into every food imaginable nowadays it seems like it’d be just the thing to incorporate into my home-cooking. And yet, I’ve never seen a bottle of it available at any store, nor have I had any luck finding it online. Is it possible for the average consumer to get their hands on this stuff?
Isn’t that the stuff the sell as “corn syrup”?
Yep. Been on the shelves for at least 50 years.
Actually, no, it’s not the same.
Beaten by Vicullum.
nm
As mentioned, no. Karo syrup, for example, is not high-fructose corn syrup. The “high fructose” modifier is there to distinguish it from regular corn syrup. Here’s Karo’s FAQ:
I’ll have to look, but I’m not even sure if I’ve seen HFCS at the restaurant supply stores I’ve been to. If it’s available to the consumer, you might be able to find it at a candy making supply store.
I’ve heard honey is similar, so you might be able to substitute agave syrup which will have less flavor then honey.
It sounds like it’s partially pre-digested. :eek:
What’s wrong with partially digested foodstuffs? I, for one, find honey delicious and not at all off-putting.
Here’s one place you can buy it.
I just hope you need a metric ton of it…
I’ve got another issue with this - it makes it sound as if corn syrup started as sucrose. I thought that corn didn’t produce much sucrose, compared to sugar cane or sugar beet; that corn syrup was mostly glucose already. Wikipedia appears to agree.
So - it sounds like somebody writing the Karo syrup FAQ doesn’t know the relevant chemistry?
Digestion by definition means broken down into components: simple sugars, fatty acids, and amino acids. (Or sometimes intermediary products between the complex and simple.) There’s nothing odd or disgusting or non-edible about the components. Do you find fruit disgusting because the primary sugar in them is fructose?
From that same Wiki link:
Which is exactly what Karo claims. What’s the problem?
It’s the unbelievably massive and near-total ignorance about the basics of food composition, the digestive process, and nutrition that gives me :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: every day.
No. Karo claimed that regular corn syrup is broken into ‘two different forms of sweetness, fructose and glucose’, implying that they were both there in the starting syrup and only needed to be separated.
As I read the wiki link, it’s first talking about breaking starch apart into glucose, which is part of the process of making ordinary corn syrup. Then there’s another process, which can be used to convert some of the separated glucose molecules into fructose. It’s not even terribly close to the same thing.
I disagree. They’re using lay language but using it entirely correctly. Fructose *is *there in the starting syrup. It’s an isomer of glucose. Both are C[sub]6[/sub]H[sub]12[/sub]O[sub]6[/sub]. One is convertible to the other using enzymes. Separated is not a word they use; it’s a word you are wrongly imposing because you misunderstand their use of “break it into.”
Well, we’re getting deeply enough into chemistry nerd territory that we should probably agree to disagree very soon. Which I do, though I see your point. To me, just because the C[sub]6[/sub]H[sub]12[/sub]O[sub]6[/sub] is there does not mean that fructose is there or that what they started with can be ‘broken into’ fructose.
If they’d mentioned ‘converting to fructose’ or ‘transforming to fructose’ then they’d have been perfectly correct, and using language that a layperson could understand.
What could possibly seem disgusting about munching on a gigantic ovary? 