Very good!

virginawallace%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 08:15:25 AM PST

Very good. Satisfied my craving for chocolate. Be carefull and don\'t bake too long. This recipe is a keeper!

16 of 19 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Helpful Tip for Chocolate Lovers

juliafretwell%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 10:57:33 AM PST

I read this recipe and it does look good. I do agree with one of the other reviwers though- when I want chocolate, I want the real thing! I recieved a tip years ago that I still use, and no one has ever guessed the change I made. In place of oils or fats in chocolate recipes, use baby food prunes. They have very little taste, add chewiness, and-without sacrificing on taste- reduce your overall calorie count. I have used them for years and everyone always raves about how good my recipes are. They have no idea!

15 of 19 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Serving size isn't 45!

mrsmeyerson%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 08:27:04 AM PST

There was a misprint in this recipe. It says "serving size 45". It SERVES 45 but the serving size must be ONE cookie or two at the most.

12 of 17 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Healthy? Chocolatety?

sherpajmr - January 20, 2007 01:44:55 PM PST

Whoa, I have been a chef and caterere for 20 years and a cookie baker for about 30. I haven\'t tried this recipe, and I probably won\'t, because I can tell immediately upon reading a recipe what might not be right about it. Like the amount of sugar compared to the amount of flour in this recipe is outrageous! I\'m not diabetic, but my insulin soared just reading it. This is neither healthy NOR healthful. And the chocolate flavor would be masked by sweetness. Just my opinion.

8 of 9 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Tastes like cardboard

jgrinblat%40verizon.net - January 20, 2007 12:46:28 PM PST

Well, I just tried the recipe out, and the cookies taste like sweet cardboard. 1 tbsp of vanilla extract really throws the taste off (probably should be 1 tsp). In addition, I really don\'t see how this recipe can be considered healthy. Two thumbs down from me.

7 of 9 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Good Substite to Traditional Chocolate Cookies

michelleellyn - October 19, 2007 10:47:31 AM PST

Thought this recipe looked good, then read the reviews. They all seemed pretty prejuged and that made me want to try it for myself.
My middle-school aged step-son (but even more, me) loves cookies, and I love to bake. I used CocoVia chocolate instead of the 3 ounces of unsweetened chocolate. I also added about 1/2 Tbsp. of Hershey\'s Chocolate Syrup to the batter.
The cookies came out GREAT! Chewy enough, and the edges are slightly crisp. I think they are a wonderful alternative to traditional chocolate cookies. I\'d rather feed these to myself and my family when we crave sweets!

1 of 1 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

These are good,

jamescrum%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 10:26:00 PM PST

I thought they were good, no butter, yet still chewy. I added a few dropps of almond extract and a few drops of black walnut extract, for added flavor. They are wonderful with tea. The recipe has no oil!! I reccomend this to those that love cookies, but still care about their bodies. Like I said, hot tea with a bit of cream, its a nice snack. and by the way about the Serving size, I cant imagine the serving size is more than 1, and I got 36 medium to large cookies, I can see getting 45 small cookies; they spread out a lot. Enjoy

1 of 1 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

substitute splenda...

tlgamk2005%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 02:39:02 PM PST

If you substitute Splenda in place of sugar, it makes the calorie amt even lower, not sure what though. I don\'t have a calculator for that kind of stuff. It still tastes just as good!! :-)

1 of 1 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Healthy?

red rocket - January 20, 2007 08:30:18 AM PST

These are okay, but when I want chocolate chip cookies, I want the real thing. In all fairness, I have never been a fan of "kind of healthy foods", aka "hey, at least they are not as unhealthy as the real thing and they still taste kinda decent".

If you want chocolate chip cookies, eat chocolate chip cookies...just do not eat fifteen of them, and do not eat them everyday. It\'s really not that hard. These cookies are okay, but I\'d rather eat delicious, real, old-school chocolate chip cookies once every 7 to 10 days and be careful with the rest of my diet than to pat myself on the back by eating not-as-unhealthy cookies more frequently.

Just my take, I gotta get off my soap box now...

9 of 18 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

First of All............

jenzosweet%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 01:13:33 PM PST

The cookies looked very unappetizing and my first impression was they resembled the likes of animal\'s waste. The recipe looked like too much preparation would have to be involved for something that I am sure is NOT a great treat. Sorry guys on this one.

1 of 2 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Nothing Healthy here!

terry.mattson%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 10:45:58 AM PST

Forget this recipe if you\'re looking for healthy ... also if you\'re looking for a real chocolate chip type cookie.

1 of 2 found this review helpful.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Not as nutritious as claims

cristy l - April 2, 2008 10:07:05 AM PST

There are much healthier goodies out there. The ratio is of the nutrient content is very high in carbs, low in fiber and low in protein. Sure it has only 1 gram of fat, but again you have empty calories. Show me a recipe that has a good balanced ratio of healthy fats, carbs and protein that taste delicious and I will rate a 5 star review. This recipe is definitely in need of help!

Maybe we could add some flax seed, wheat germ, substitute apple sauce for the eggs and use 1/2 the sugar in the recipe?

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

TOtalLY cHOcolaTE!!

ninajane_kittygirlz92 - March 10, 2008 09:45:02 PM PST

oh...this is great!I like chocolate 4ever!I eat it for years you know!AWESOME!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Healthy? I don

callhurd - February 27, 2008 10:06:21 AM PST

These are LOADED with sugar. What in the world makes them healthy? Just because Yahoo says they\'re healthy doesn\'t make it so. If you think eating these cookies is OK, then you need a nutritional consultant. If you have a chocolate craving, try dark chocolate straight up. Good grief, no wonder America is so fat!!!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

it doesnt look very appetizing...

First L - November 23, 2007 12:05:03 PM PST

like i said it doesnt look good... so therefore... when i tried it out it tasted awful... they had way too much vanilla and i think putting real chocolate chips would be better...

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Not bad for a healthier style cookie

vmacaroni56 - October 18, 2007 08:34:38 AM PST

First of all the recipe does not state 45 per serving as it never states how many be serving. It tells you it serves 45 and makes 45 so that means 1 point per serving and in weight watcher points that is 1 per cookie. The cookies are easy to make but mine did not flatten. They came out like a chocolate drop cookie. They are on the tasty side for a healthy cookie but you can taste the wheat flour if you are not accustomed to eating or baking with it. My son tasted one and said they were fine and didn\'t seem to mind the flour difference. This cookie would be good for those trying to eat healthier but not ready or wanting to go for the full health diet.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Just for the heck of it!

mguevara59 - October 17, 2007 06:42:07 AM PST

From all I have read so far....this poor recipe has really taken a beating and I am not at all inspired to try it!! Poor chocolate cookies!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

CHEWY CHOCOLATE COOKIE

dstinton - October 13, 2007 10:08:31 AM PST

This sounds like a great recipe using whole wheat flour but I just can\'t understand if you are using whole wheat flour(which I assume is 100%) why the fiber content is 0??

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Serving Size and Calories Are Correct

First L - January 28, 2007 07:26:24 PM PST

The recipe makes 45 cookies, and underneath it says 66 Kcal. That means kilocalories not regular calories. Kilocalories amount to a much higher number than 66, so therefore these cookies are not all that healthy, but next time you\'re in chemistry class, you might want to learn this unit (especially all of you who thought 45 cookies equaled 66 calories).

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

not so great...

fvr4u%40sbcglobal.net - January 21, 2007 03:33:29 PM PST

The texture is not very good and the intial taste is not so pleasant. It is more of a "cake like" cookie

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Very tasty!

keepitlight77 - January 21, 2007 09:47:05 AM PST

These cookies have a delicate outer "shell" and a chewy, light interior. Very satisfying. Be sure and incorporate the brown sugar gradually like the recipes suggests to create a smooth batter. Also, if you want to ramp up the chocolate flavor, use semi-sweet instead of unsweetened chocolate. Enjoy!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

45 cookies?

labarbera8550%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 07:33:23 PM PST

I think they meant 4 to 5 cookies, that would make more sense.
There are better recipes out there than this one.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

chewy CHOCOLATE COOKIES......NO CHIPS

klemklan%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 07:06:00 PM PST

OK ALL THESE REVIEWS AND YOU ALL TALK ABOUT CHOCOLATE CHIP COOKIES..... IT DOESN\'T SAY IT\'S A CHOCOLATE CHIP COOKIE....SO WHY DISS IT FOR NOT HAVING CHIPS IF IT DOESN\'T CALL FOR THEM!!!!!


JUST MY OPINION!

LOOKS LIKE A GOOD RECIPE TO ME!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Uuummmm...not even going to make these!!!

amy24faith - January 20, 2007 07:01:39 PM PST

I thought that this recipe might be interesting...and maybe even tasty. BUT - after reading someone\'s review that compared them to an animals\' fecal matter....uh...ya...I took a second look. I won\'t be making these. ha ha. Not to mention that any cookie that only has 66 calories per cookie can\'t possibly be good. Nice thought, though. Anyone need new coasters? These might be in the running.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Healthy?

campfish%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 03:45:45 PM PST

I m not sure about that...Looks nasty and who knows the taste...Sorry but i will go for the real things Chocolate Chips Cookies yummy!!!!

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Eating Unhealthy Doesn't Hurt Everyone

imhhhot%40verizon.net - January 20, 2007 03:26:00 PM PST

I agree these are lacking any real "cookie" taste. The picture looks better than they taste that\'s for sure. But I have found that when it comes to dessert, just eat what you like. I do and all my cholesteral and glucose tests always come back fine. I\'ve known too many people that eat "healthy" food like these cookies all the time and are sick more often and die younger. Why not enjoy yourself while you\'re alive?

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Too much sugar

vicandsandijjr%40sbcglobal.net - January 20, 2007 10:05:44 AM PST

Way too much sugar for us diabetics.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

45 cookies in a serving?

rt - January 20, 2007 09:46:01 AM PST

I don\'t think the nutrition information reflects a serving size of 45 cookies.

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

serving size?? help

a a - January 20, 2007 09:34:31 AM PST

UNDER NUTRITION: It says serving size is 45!!! And the recipe makes 45 ! Too good to be true,,,,,,,,has to be. Who would eat 45 cookies at one time?
What does "calores: 66 keal" mean? I live in the USA and I do not reconize that measurement.
Please clearify this for me..........thanks

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse

Nutrition Info

zekeboy%40prodigy.net - January 20, 2007 09:22:18 AM PST

I agree with Tom.
The Nutrition Info can not be mathematically supported.
Please make a correction.
I also am a type 2 diabetic but I prefer crispy chocolate chip cookies.
Thanks,
bob

Was this review helpful to you? Yes - No Report Abuse