Some cosmetic changes in preparation for larger site changes in the works.


Do you think fresh pumpkin puree is worth the effort?

Veteran Member
16894 posts
Joined: Dec 12, 2005


Posted to Thread #12304 at 2:50 pm on Oct 18, 2008

Reading my new yogajournal, they suggest that fresh pumpkin puree will allow you to omit a larger portion of sugar from a recipe because "tinned" pumpkin is bitter--thereby requiring more sugar.

Here's what CookingLight says;
Canned versus fresh: Preparing canned pumpkin is quicker, but fresh tastes sweeter. When it comes to nutritional value, fresh packs more fiber, but the heat used during the canning process causes more "bioavailable" beta-carotene to form. That means the body can process the nutrient more effectively, Kitchin says.

I remember doing a test YEARS ago (okay, was actually DECADES ago.) I bought a "baking" pumpkin (for some reason "French pumpkin" is coming to mind...or maybe "sugar pumpkin"?) Anyway, took forever to find it, then I went through all the work of cleaning that sucker out and prepping it for pumpkin pie. Then I made two pies (same recipe), the one using the fresh puree and another using pure canned pumpkin. My father [Prime Test Case #1] said he couldn't taste any difference. Then he told me they both tasted good. [that's my dad for you.]

At that point, I figured WHY? Why go to all that work if there is no difference?

Since then I've always used tinned pumpkin. Now I'm wondering if I should give "fresh" another chance.

Stopped by at Walmarts today and they have huge bins of pumpkins...half wear a label marked "pie pumpkin"--but they look exactly like the ones for jack-o-lanterns. Is this just a marketing ploy?

What should I look for to use a "fresh pumpkin" for baking a pie?
What is the best way to prepare said pumpkin?
Or...was my dad right? Why should I even bother?

Jesus saves. Buddha recycles.

Other messages in this thread: