Rec: Steel Cut oat muffins

[anthonie]

I make these in a regular muffin tin- but I fill the cups 2/3 full or
so, and they don't rise much. They look small, but are a
satisfying snack -- especially with a bit of yogurt. I've never
done them with anything other than steel cut oats and nuts.

I move very ripe bananas to the freezer in a ziplock bag. The
morning I'm going to make these I put a banana, the milk and oats in a
bowl. In an hour or so, they stir together nicely.

These freeze well. They keep in an air tight container at room temp
for 3-4 days.

I was just thinking that subbing some agave syrup or brown rice syrup
for the brown sugar might be worthwhile.

Oatmeal Muffins
[good for desert or breakfast- makes 18 smalll muffins]
1 cup steel cut or old fashion rolled oats (not instant)
1 cup non-fat milk
1 cup whole wheat flour
2 tbls flax meal [I use 2 tbls flax- ground in coffee grinder]
1/4 cup brown sugar
1/2 cup unsweetened applesauce
1 banana [a frozen one breaks down easily]
1 cup chopped walnuts
2 egg whites
1 tsp. baking powder
1/2 tsp. baking soda
1/2 tsp. salt
1 tsp. cinnamon

Topping
2 tbls Brown Sugar
2 tsp cinnamon

Directions
Soak the oats in milk for about one hour.
Preheat the oven to 400 degrees.
Spray muffin pan with cooking spray.
Combine the oat mixture with the applesauce and egg whites, and mix
until combined.
In a separate bowl measure and whisk the dry ingredients together.
Add wet ingredients to dry and mix until just combined. Add nuts or
raisins if desired.
Do not over mix the batter or the muffins will be tough. Spoon muffin
mixture into muffin pan.
Combine the cinnamon and sugar and top each muffin with some of the
mixture.
Bake for 20 minutes

[freeze well]

Nutrition Facts for 18; Calories 192.2 ; Total Fat 6.8 g ; Saturated
Fat 0.9 g ; Polyunsaturated Fat 3.9 g ; Monounsaturated Fat 0.9 g ;
Cholesterol 1.0 mg ; Sodium 328.2 mg ;Potassium 175.8 mg ; Total
Carbohydrate 32.7 g ; Dietary Fiber 4.1 g ; Sugars 12.1 g ; Protein
6.3 g
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Jim

[agracc]

Jim Elbrecht wrote:


Looks like just the type of muffin I am wanting these days. Thanks.

[Bezonce]

On Fri, 29 Apr 2011 07:19:57 -0400, Jim Elbrecht
wrote:


I don't think I've ever seen rice syrup. Is it next to the agave
where you shop or are they in different stores?

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[BossLady]

On Sun, 01 May 2011 05:01:50 -0700, sf wrote:


In the health food store and the groceries near me, they are in the
same area. The brown rice syrup has a similar glycemic index
number, but does add some flavor. To me the agave just sweetens.
The rice syrup still has some brown rice flavor. [which I like & might
be a good addition in these muffins]

I just doubted myself and checked-- The GI on brown rice syrup is 25,
agave is 15. [to compare- Honey is 30 and brown sugar is 64]
http://www.fitsugar.com/Glycemic-Ind...s-Fall-3031565

Jim

[saalik]

On Sun, 01 May 2011 09:11:45 -0400, Jim Elbrecht
wrote:

Pardon my ignorance, but I'm not diabetic... is that the only reason
why they are used?

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[LoveKill]

sf wrote:

-snip-

No--- I'm not diabetic & I don't think these would be much less bad
than sugar for diabetics. [though I'd appreciate someone who knows
confirming that]

Keeping the glycemic index low makes sugars less bad for you. It
relates to how quickly your body absorbs the sugar. The low glycemic
index sugars are absorbed over a longer period of time so you don't
get a high, then crash.

The brown rice syrup is used in most of the 'power bars' whose labels
I've looked at.

My son has studied it in earnest-- I just try to absorb what I can
from him.

Jim

[a?? lalaa??]

In article ,
Jim Elbrecht wrote:


It's interesting what the food manufacturers have learned how to do.
The big one right now is HFCS, which is made out of corn. But they've
learned to do something similar with agave, producing a product which is
90% fructose (as percentage of sugar) for some brands. Now it appears
that they are doing the same with brown rice! The highest possible GI
would logically seem to be glucose, with an index set at 100 (the
reference standard). After all, glucose *is* blood sugar! It would
seem like glucose would effect your blood sugar most strongly, since all
the body has to do is put it in your blood. But maltose has a GI of
105. I have no clue how that could be. Brown rice syrup is 45%
maltose (as percentage of sugar). However, the other sugar component in
brown rice syrup takes 2-3 hours to be absorbed, so it brings the total
GI way down:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_rice_syrup

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]

[chris_6212]

On Mon, 02 May 2011 17:24:18 -0400, Jim Elbrecht
wrote:


Oh, okay. I don't get a sugar high either, but I understand what you
mean because my husband drinks hot chocolate to "wake up".

Thanks. I don't eat those things, so I've never looked at the label.

Thanks, I was just curious.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

[lily-jane]

Dan Abel wrote:

As the folks who experienced Prohibution die of old age distilled
alcohol beverages gradually decline in popularity. There's little
pressure for higher concentration to be easier to smuggle or transport
on wagons to remote colonies and little pressure to get drunk in secret.
So tequila isn't a lasting fad rather a part of the gradual decline from
popular to a level that will never hit zero. That does mean plenty of
agave fields need to be used for other products. I like that it's now
being sold as a competitor to maple syrup.


Vastly more rice is grown than sorghum. Rice is one of the top 3 crops
on the planet, while sorghum is far down the list.


It's the hormone reaction that matters. The details of the sugar
content only matter in terms of how the body reacts. The hormone
reactions are evolved without being an exact match to the details of the
sugar content. This is an example of how details of diet can be used to
exploit metabolic loopholes. Both low carb and low fat diet methods
exploit similar metabolic loopholes.


I am not sure exactly how good an idea it is to have a sweetener that is
slower to absorb. Relative sweetness combined with price effects how
much is used and more sugar is not a good thing. How this combines with
insulin reactions is not as simple as "slower carb is better carb" when
we're dealing with various types of sugar.