Jump to content
This site uses cookies. Continued use is acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. More Info... ×
  • Welcome to Celiac.com!

    You have found your celiac tribe! Join us and ask questions in our forum, share your story, and connect with others.




  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A1):



    Celiac.com Sponsor (A1-M):


  • Get Celiac.com Updates:
    Support Our Content
    eNewsletter
    Donate

Tapioca Starch


judym

Recommended Posts

judym Newbie

I'm new to gluten-free baking. I'm finding that my cakes (I've only made yellow cake, to be used as a layer cake, so far) have a distinctive flavor (I've made one specifically gluten-free recipe and one regular cake recipe using gluten free flours). I've used the same combination of flours in both cakes (Bette Hagman's gluten-free blend). When I tasted the flours straight out of their packages, I noticed that the tapioca flour was the culprit. Has anyone else noticed this and been put off by the flavor? Does anyone know of any decent substitutions for the tapioca that would add the same (non-flavor) benefits that tapioca starch adds to baked goods? Thank you so much in advance!


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



Guhlia Rising Star

What flours are in the Bette Hagman blend? I haven't found tapioca starch to taste funny, but I do really hate the taste of sorghum, soy, garfava and other bean flours. Brown rice flour also sometimes tastes funny to me, but not as much as the others. I imagine if its the tapioca starch that tastes funny to you, you could probably just use potato starch instead.

JennyC Enthusiast

I have never thought tapioca starch tastes funny, but cornstarch would be a good replacement. I think soy and garbanzo bean flours taste horrible.

hayley3 Contributor

I didn't think the tapioca had any flavor at all. Tapioca is what gives Chebe bread such great flavor.

I ground up my own toasted garbanzo beans and made gravy with it, and it tasted great. I did read that it goes bad quickly and must be refrigerated, so maybe that's why it would not taste good. Just a thought.

JNBunnie1 Community Regular
I have never thought tapioca starch tastes funny, but cornstarch would be a good replacement. I think soy and garbanzo bean flours taste horrible.

I agree, soy and bean flours make certain things gross, I only use bean flour in savory baking and never soy. Arrowroot starch would be a good, tasteless baking sub. I personally enjoy the mild flavor tapioca starch gives food.

bakingbarb Enthusiast

I too am dealing with this, I thought it was the xanthan gum. It seems it depends on what I am making. Cornbread tastes normal but when I made Irish Soda Bread UCKY, so which thing tasted weird? It feels like when something tastes good then I got lucky, if it tastes weird then I don't make it again. So far I have NO IDEA what it is!!!

larry mac Enthusiast
..... When I tasted the flours straight out of their packages, I noticed that the tapioca flour was the culprit......

I would acquire another package, perhaps another brand of tapioka starch flour and taste it. If the taste doesn't agree with you, I would try using a combination of potato starch, corn starch, and arrowroot starch.

I use a combination of white rice flour, brown rice flour, sorghum flour, bean flour, tapioka starch, potato starch, and corn starch for all my baked goods. Approximately half flour and half starch.

best regards, lm


Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):
Celiac.com Sponsor (A8):



Celiac.com Sponsor (A8-M):



Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A19):



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      128,131
    • Most Online (within 30 mins)
      7,748

    Itsabit
    Newest Member
    Itsabit
    Joined

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A20):


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      121.1k
    • Total Posts
      70.6k

  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A22):





  • Celiac.com Sponsor (A21):



  • Upcoming Events

  • Posts

    • trents
      Keep us posted and let us know the results of the biopsy. Your case is atypical in a way in that you have this high DGP-IGA but normal TTG-IGA so knowing how it turns out will give us more data for similar situations that may be posted in the future. 
    • Skg414228
      Fair enough! I very easily could have misread somewhere. Celiac is very confusing lol but I should know in a little over a month what the final verdict is. Just thought chatting with people smarter than myself would get me in the right mindset. I just thought that DGP IGA was pretty high compared to some stuff I had seen and figured someone on here would be more willing to say it is more than likely celiac instead of my doctor who is trying to be less direct. She did finally say she believes it is celiac but wanted to confirm with the biopsy. I did figure it wouldn't hurt seeing what other people said too just because not all doctors are the best. I think mine is actually pretty good from what I have seen but I don't know what I don't know lol. Sorry lot of rambling here just trying to get every thought out. Thanks again!
    • Scott Adams
      Yes, these articles may be helpful:    
    • trents
      No, you don't necessarily need multiple testing methods to confirm celiac disease. There is an increasing trend for celiac diagnoses to be made on a single very high tTG-IGA test score. This started in the UK during the COVID pandemic when there was extreme stress on the healthcare system there and it is spreading to the US. A tTG-IGA score of somewhere between 5x and 10x normal is good enough by itself for some physicians to declare celiac disease. And mind you, that is the tTG-IGA, not the DGP-IGA. The tTG-IGA is the centerpiece of celiac antibody testing, the one test most commonly ordered and the one that physicians have the most confidence in. But in the US, many physicians still insist on a biopsy, even in the event of high tTG-IGA scores. Correct, the biopsy is considered "confirmation" of the blood antibody testing. But what is the need for confirmation of a testing methodology if the testing methodology is fool proof? As for the contribution of genetic testing for celiac disease, it cannot be used to diagnose celiac disease since 40% of the general population has the genetic potential to develop celiac disease while only 1% of the general population actually develops celiac disease. But it can be used to rule out celiac disease. That is, if you don't have the genes, you don't have celiac disease but you might have NCGS (Non Celiac Gluten Sensitivity).
    • Skg414228
      Okay yeah that helps! To answer your last bit my understanding was that you need to have multiple tests to confirm celiac. Blood, biopsy, dna, and then I think symptoms is another one. Either way I think everything has to be confirmed with the biopsy because that is the gold standard for testing (Doctors words). You also answered another question I forgot to ask about which is does a high value push to a higher % on those scales. I truly appreciate your answers though and just like hearing what other people think. Digging into forums and google for similar stuff has been tough. So thank you again!
×
×
  • Create New...