No Thanks
Let

Keep In Touch With MarthaStewart.com

Sign up and we'll send inspiration straight to you.

Martha Stewart takes your privacy seriously. To learn more, please read our Privacy Policy.

Lighter Chocolate Cinnamon Pudding

  • servings: 6

advertisement

advertisement

Ingredients

  • 3 tablespoons cornstarch
  • 6 tablespoons light-brown sugar
  • 3 tablespoons unsweetened Dutch-process cocoa powder
  • 1/2 teaspoon ground cinnamon
  • 1/4 teaspoon salt
  • 2 1/2 cups skim milk
  • 1/2 cup evaporated skim milk
  • 4 ounces bittersweet chocolate
  • White- and milk-chocolate shavings, for garnish
  • Cinnamon sticks, for garnish

Directions

  1. Step 1

    Whisk cornstarch, sugar, cocoa powder, cinnamon, and salt in a medium saucepan. Add milks, whisking. Bring to a boil over medium-high heat, whisking constantly. Cook until thickened, about 1 minute. Whisk in chocolate; cook until chocolate has melted, about 1 minute.

  2. Step 2

    Divide evenly among six 4-ounce cups. To prevent a skin from forming, press plastic wrap onto surface of pudding. Refrigerate until set, at least 1 hour and up to overnight. Serve garnished with chocolate shavings and cinnamon sticks.

Source
Martha Stewart Living, January 2006

advertisement

advertisement

Reviews (21)

  • Happy_Birthday_Dr_Seuss 5 Feb, 2013

    Lighter Chocolate Cinnamon Pudding
    Russell's Tuesday Lunch
    Nutritious and Delicious!

  • Tryingsomethingnew 24 Mar, 2009

    This was an interesting mix. No using eggs was a twist. The end result was so-so. The cinnamon gave it quite the Christmasy touch. I'll probably make this recipe again in December.

  • Tryingsomethingnew 24 Mar, 2009

    This was an interesting mix. No using eggs was a twist. The end result was so-so. The cinnamon gave it quite the Christmasy touch. I'll probably make this recipe again in December.

  • Uvita 26 Feb, 2008

    I agree with Anahata. We are talking about Chocalate pudding ladies, not tofu for the love of God!! If you are so particular about dieting and nutritional info, then you should not be clicking on this recipe from the beggining.

  • Princess2 23 Feb, 2008

    To be honest I went looking for nutrion guide, also but only because I am conditioned to. the fact it's skim milk, (reduced fat) and cinnamon- good for those with diabetic issues, is nutritionally speaking enough consideration for me. It's a snack, not a meal. good enough

  • Princess2 23 Feb, 2008

    To be honest I went looking for nutrion guide, also but only because I am conditioned to. the fact it's skim milk, (reduced fat) and cinnamon- good for those with diabetic issues, is nutritionally speaking enough consideration for me. It's a snack, not a meal. good enough

  • rgw 22 Feb, 2008

    i checked out this recipe because i combined chocolate and cinnamon...yum! i read on because people are arguing in the comment section. it's chocolate pudding...supposed to be humbling!

  • foodiebing 22 Feb, 2008

    I've had a recipe for chocolate mousse that's phenomenal using skim milk as well. Don't knock it until you try it. Why don't you cook it (follow the directions in detail and) then eat it. See if you'll like it! Not anything fatty is delicious. You'll be surprised!

  • Dulcist 22 Feb, 2008

    You're rude. Get over yourself!

  • Anahata56 22 Feb, 2008

    Anyone who would make chocolate pudding and not consider that it was NOT going to be health food is a little dense. I for one do not expect chocolate pudding to contain tofu, carob, or any other equally repulsive and "good for you" ingredient to be included. Nor do I care about the nutritional information because, hey--it's PUDDING! I appreciate the fact that the formula calls for skim milks, which DOES make it "lighter", but in the end, it's dessert. Get over yourselves.

  • kmallaber 22 Feb, 2008

    I have added chocolate pudding but I will not keep any recipe that does not have nutritional value. It is the most important item in a light recipe.

  • thebonbon 22 Feb, 2008

    I agree that I would like to see the nutritional information provided. It was a major disappointment when I followed the links from the newsletter highlighting "comfort foods with a lighter touch", and did not find any nutritional info for these items. If you are looking at 'lighter' you are probably more likely to be interested in the nutritional info. I could look up the info, but frankly there are other websites that have recipes with the nutritional info that I would use instead.

  • sonica 22 Feb, 2008

    I too would like to see nutrional information for each recipe. I have high cholesterol and I need to make healthy choices for myself and my family. To go to another website and key in the recipe to calculate the fat content would be too time consuming. Please provide this information for us, and if a reader is not interested in it, simply ignore it. Thank you.

  • kimwylie0523 22 Feb, 2008

    Oh, stop whining. If you're THAT interested in nutritional information, do the research. There are websites that provide nutritional values for each ingredient. That, or check out the packaging of the ingredients when you go shopping! The things that makes this recipe "lighter" are the skim milk and skim evaporated milk. If you're also concerned enough about nutrition facts, substitute the milk and white chocolate shavings with dark chocolate -- it has a LOT less sugar and milk fat.

  • punkybunny300 22 Feb, 2008

    While I agree that nutritional information would be useful, I am not sure that asking for it in the Comments section is the best way to accomplish this task. Though the more recipes with the complaint more likely someone who works at the site to happen upon. Still time would be better spent (especially if you feel strongly enough to STOP using recipes all together) sending messages here: webmaster@marthastewart.com where someone is guaranteed to read your message. That's my opinion, anyway.

  • PALACIOS 21 Feb, 2008

    CHICAS , LA RECETA ES REDUCIDA EN GRASAS Y A ZUCARES, NO SEAN INFANTILES, LIGTH NO SIGNIFICA QUE NO APORTE CALORIAS, DEPENDE DE LAS PORCIONES, EL VALOR NUTRICIONAL ES RELATIVO, NO ESCUDEN SU OBESIDAD O FALTA DE CONSTACIA EN UNA DIETA CON ESOS ARGUMENTOS BARATOS.

  • isail2 21 Feb, 2008

    Please don't say something is "lighter" without giving the nutritional info. I've stopped using these recipes because of this issue.

  • cynsteinberg 21 Feb, 2008

    Martha, you have been touting a healthier lifestyle through your affiliation with Andrew Weill. I'd like to see evidence of a healthier lifestyle in your recipes. For instance, this recipe has a great deal of cornstarch and sugar and Dutch-processed cocoa. The last has been processed with alkali. I don't believe that recipes should have added cornstarch, toxic ingredients like alkali and so much sugar. There are dark chocolate powders and bars that can be used to make a healthier pudding!

  • RJ1 24 Jan, 2008

    I like everyone else would love to have the nutritional information

  • kclauhs 17 Jan, 2008

    (chocolate garnish that is)

  • kclauhs 17 Jan, 2008

    4 points without the garnish!