![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
livingdebThe last time I was at Trader Joe's, I noticed a recipe for "Unbelievable Chocolate Chip Cookies" on the back of their blanched almond flour so I decided to buy it and to try the recipe.
Almond flour versus whole wheat flour
Almond flour sounds like a good idea for people trying to avoid carbs but a really bad idea for people with nut allergies. I do not fit into either category, but I still was interested to know how different the nutrition of this blanched almond flour and my usual white whole wheat flour are. The following numbers are for 1/4 cup.
Almond flour has:
* more calories (170 versus 110)
* more fat, as expected (15 g versus 0.5 g)
* fewer carbs, as expected (5 g versus 23 g)
* a little less fiber (3 g versus 4 g)
* a surprising hint of sugar (1 g versus 0 g)
* more protein, but not as much more as I expected (6 g versus 3 g)
* a hint more sodium (5 mg versus 0 mg)
* a little more calcium (6% versus 2%)
* about the same iron (6% versus 8%)
* serious Vitamin E (35% versus ~0)
* magnesium (20% versus ~0)
My flour does not list Vitamin E or magnesium, so I looked it up on Nutrition Data.) While I was there, I saw that they estimated the glycemic load as 9, which is really good. But the nutrient balance is only 23. So then I wanted to compare those numbers to blanched almond flour. They don't have that, but they do have blanched almonds. They do manage to have an even better estimated glycemic load (0). And a nutrient balance of 39, pretty nice.
Another difference between the flours is that they recommend refrigerating the almond flour after opening, and in my house, that's not so easy. But then you are supposed to return it to room temperature before using, which sounds like a pain. It's also pricier.
New recipe versus old recipe
I already have a chocolate chip recipe I like (which, strangely, I cannot find in my blog). It's basically like the standard Toll House recipe except there are no eggs. Every time I use a recipe with an egg, my cookies become fluffy and boring instead of crispy on the outside, chewy on the inside, and with a rich toffee flavor.
So, this almond flour recipe has egg in it, and not just one egg, but an egg plus a yolk. So, part of me knew I was doomed to failure, but I decided to try it exactly as they had developed it the first time. Except I made them small like mine and I did not use parchment paper.
Besides the egg, the main difference was they use 2 1/2 cups of almond flour as compared to my 1 cup of white whole wheat flour. Wow. And although my original recipe calls for 1 cup of chocolate chips, I accidentally used 3/4 of a cup once, and it was enough, so that's what I do now. But with the new recipe, I needed the full cup and they made a lot more cookies, too.
They were a little stickier than my regular cookies, so it was a little harder getting them out of the scoop. But there were also about 33% more cookies.
New cookies versus old cookies
They smelled good.
They did not melt in the oven at all; they were the exact same shape when I took them out as when I put them in. Yet the instructions say to drop them on the cookie sheet 2 inches apart. I could have put them 1 millimeter apart. I could probably have had them touching.
When they were warm, they were a tiny bit crispy on the bottom and very fluffy and they made me think they would be really good with a lot of coconut added to them.
Now that they have cooled, they are just fluffy, and they remind me a little of peanut butter cookies.
Conclusion
I won't make this recipe again except maybe to try it with a bunch of coconut.
Almond flour versus whole wheat flour
Almond flour sounds like a good idea for people trying to avoid carbs but a really bad idea for people with nut allergies. I do not fit into either category, but I still was interested to know how different the nutrition of this blanched almond flour and my usual white whole wheat flour are. The following numbers are for 1/4 cup.
Almond flour has:
* more calories (170 versus 110)
* more fat, as expected (15 g versus 0.5 g)
* fewer carbs, as expected (5 g versus 23 g)
* a little less fiber (3 g versus 4 g)
* a surprising hint of sugar (1 g versus 0 g)
* more protein, but not as much more as I expected (6 g versus 3 g)
* a hint more sodium (5 mg versus 0 mg)
* a little more calcium (6% versus 2%)
* about the same iron (6% versus 8%)
* serious Vitamin E (35% versus ~0)
* magnesium (20% versus ~0)
My flour does not list Vitamin E or magnesium, so I looked it up on Nutrition Data.) While I was there, I saw that they estimated the glycemic load as 9, which is really good. But the nutrient balance is only 23. So then I wanted to compare those numbers to blanched almond flour. They don't have that, but they do have blanched almonds. They do manage to have an even better estimated glycemic load (0). And a nutrient balance of 39, pretty nice.
Another difference between the flours is that they recommend refrigerating the almond flour after opening, and in my house, that's not so easy. But then you are supposed to return it to room temperature before using, which sounds like a pain. It's also pricier.
New recipe versus old recipe
I already have a chocolate chip recipe I like (which, strangely, I cannot find in my blog). It's basically like the standard Toll House recipe except there are no eggs. Every time I use a recipe with an egg, my cookies become fluffy and boring instead of crispy on the outside, chewy on the inside, and with a rich toffee flavor.
So, this almond flour recipe has egg in it, and not just one egg, but an egg plus a yolk. So, part of me knew I was doomed to failure, but I decided to try it exactly as they had developed it the first time. Except I made them small like mine and I did not use parchment paper.
Besides the egg, the main difference was they use 2 1/2 cups of almond flour as compared to my 1 cup of white whole wheat flour. Wow. And although my original recipe calls for 1 cup of chocolate chips, I accidentally used 3/4 of a cup once, and it was enough, so that's what I do now. But with the new recipe, I needed the full cup and they made a lot more cookies, too.
They were a little stickier than my regular cookies, so it was a little harder getting them out of the scoop. But there were also about 33% more cookies.
New cookies versus old cookies
They smelled good.
They did not melt in the oven at all; they were the exact same shape when I took them out as when I put them in. Yet the instructions say to drop them on the cookie sheet 2 inches apart. I could have put them 1 millimeter apart. I could probably have had them touching.
When they were warm, they were a tiny bit crispy on the bottom and very fluffy and they made me think they would be really good with a lot of coconut added to them.
Now that they have cooled, they are just fluffy, and they remind me a little of peanut butter cookies.
Conclusion
I won't make this recipe again except maybe to try it with a bunch of coconut.