Monday, June 26, 2006

Chocolate Cake Update

OK, I've been lax in posting, and I know my one reader is dying for a new post... So I just have to comment quickly on a cake I made at the end of May. Betty Crocker Triple Chocolate Fudge, made with Guinness instead of water. I feel like a bum for using a packaged mix, but I ran out of time to go shopping, and the cake mix was calling to me from the cupboard. It was quite tasty, even though I didn't get to make the ganache I had planned.

Someone needs to start packaging a two-to-four serving-size cake mix. The standard size mix, which makes a 13x19 inch pan or two 9-inch rounds, is something like 16 servings of cake. At 250 calories a serving, that's a lot for two people to go through. And then there's the frosting. I'm not even going to talk about that.

Suffice to say that this cake sat, ensconced in a non-Tupperware-brand plastic food preservation container, for at least a week and a half. At least. And when I finally threw it out, this mutant cake was showing no signs of decay. None. Not a bit of mold, not an off-odor, nothing. It seemed perfectly edible. And yet I know that it contained eggs, albeit cooked eggs; and that those eggs had been sitting out at room temperature, blended into the cake batter, for the entire duration. Of course I would never eat an egg that had been sitting out for a week and a half. There isn't even a chance I would want to -- it would clearly be rotten and smelling of sulfur. But these eggs, though some sort of Betty Crocker alchemistry, seemed safe.

What on god's green earth did they add to that mix??

1 Comments:

Blogger jess said...

dude! there are so many chemicals in that stuff.

i think of betty crocker more as cake-flavored preservatives.

11:05 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home