rcj@burl.UUCP (Curtis Jackson) (10/01/85)
[Since this is net.cooks, I feel that a lot of you are concerned about
this issue; but a lot of you just read for recipes. Therefore, could
anyone following up to this (try mail, please, if more appropriate)
use the subject line of this letter "nasty food ingredients" or some
"re:" of it so those who want recipes only can use their 'n' key?
Thanks!!!! Curtis]
I'm so tired of this stuff. Let me bring up a few of [common sense,
therefore 'natural'] tidbits for you to chew on:
a) The VAST (VAST meaning outnumbering natural food enthusiasts my
orders of magnitude) majority of people won't buy an orange that isn't
bright orange, won't buy the 'natural' cookies/crackers because they
have been conditioned to \like/ the taste of animal fat, and not only
eat hot dogs but \want/ them colored red with whatever dye is available.
This rot about "we as consumers better tell these chemists what we want"
is just that -- rot. Millions of consumers everyday are telling them
what they want with $$$ at the cash register; and they aren't playing
your tune.
b) Sometimes the manufacturers do hear special interest groups like
yourself and do respond. Look how much yogurt is on the grocer's shelves.
Look at the labels and you'll see that the majority of what the layman
is eating has no active culture, either -- it ain't \real/ yogurt.
How about granola? Seen the new commercials for the new chocolate-covered
granola? All the 'health-food' granola cereals with all sorts of garbage
in them? It all comes back to the same thing -- give the people what
they want, not what they need to be eating.
c) It all boils down to the same thing every time -- the only way to put
pressure on manufacturers in from the bottom (i.e., consumer) via the
$$$. Educate the public on natural foods, and you'll very soon have an
educated group of manufacurers as well. And I mean \educate/, not tell
them that granola is good for them and then sit back and let them accept
anything the manufacturers decide to call granola. I VERY much support
public education of all kinds.
d) To bring up a question, since the author to whose article I am following-up
signed his/her article "Yours for natural foods" [paraphrase]: I would like
to hear from some of you natural food types just how you expect to feed
8 million people in New York City (as an example) tons upon tons of food
everyday without using chemical preservatives. As a start, don't even
bother trying to tell me about natural preservatives that will keep foods
fresh for 2 weeks -- you need to be able to preserve a lot of foods for
a minimum of 6 months. I'd be interested to see if there has been any
research done on replacing existing chemical preservatives (BHA, BHT,
whatever) with more natural substitutes.
Please try to mail to me -- I'll be more than happy to summarize when
it slows -- if you feel that your comments need to be aired, however,
try to use the same subject line ("nasty food ingredients") to act as
a flag to recipe-lovers-only. Thanks,
--
The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291)
alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj
...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!rcjems@amdahl.UUCP (ems) (10/03/85)
> > d) To bring up a question, since the author to whose article I am following-up > signed his/her article "Yours for natural foods" [paraphrase]: I would like > to hear from some of you natural food types just how you expect to feed > 8 million people in New York City (as an example) tons upon tons of food > everyday without using chemical preservatives. As a start, don't even > bother trying to tell me about natural preservatives that will keep foods > fresh for 2 weeks -- you need to be able to preserve a lot of foods for > a minimum of 6 months. It is very easy to preserve food for long periods of time without chemical aids. The means used do, however, change the taste, color, and apearance of the product. Among the ways are: Freezing, drying, pickling, salting, canning, vacuum packing, freeze drying, fermenting, and spiceing. These procedures have led to many of the favorite ethnic foods of the world. Noodles, Jerky, pickles, salt pork, canned peaches, (and if you include survivalists and campers as an odd ethnic group: vacuum packed hard wheat and freeze dried chicken glop...), cheese, yogurt, cold slaw, salami, 100 yr eggs ... the list goes on and on. Anyone who lived on a farm before modern transportation and refrigeration can tell you how to 'put up' enough food to get you through 2 *years* or more without resorting to 'artificial' preservatives or even high technology. You have to like the kind of product you get though... Pemmican, yech! (The reason for two years? Why, what do you do when there is a drought/flood/other problem and you have a crop failure?) Then of course there is the fact that most any grain or bean left intact and dry will keep for decades and some will even sprout after much longer storage. Imagine, fresh bean sprouts after years of storage. And tofu ... yum! -- E. Michael Smith ...!{hplabs,ihnp4,amd,nsc}!amdahl!ems This is the obligatory disclaimer of everything. (Including but not limited to: typos, spelling, diction, logic, and nuclear war)
mls@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP (Michael Schneider) (10/10/85)
Yes, it is possible to do away with all those chemicals, but... First many chemicals have been used to provide colour when the food was preserved for many years (read over 1000). For example saltpeter has been used in meat for many years in corning it. Second, many of the chemicals that are seen in foods occur naturally, all that is different is that they are noted as being added to the food. For example MSG is found in mushrooms. Third, even if the chemical is made from "non-organic" (rememmber from a chemical viewpoint all these chemicals are organic) sources, the body doesn't know the difference. m. schneider
mbr@aoa.UUCP (Mark Rosenthal) (10/12/85)
In article <490@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP> mls@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP (Michael Schneider) writes: >Yes, it is possible to do away with all those chemicals, but... First many >chemicals have been used to provide colour when the food was preserved for many >years (read over 1000). I don't think I'd be too interested in food which was preserved for over 1000 years, no matter how good its color. :-) Mark of the Valley of Roses ...!{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!aoa!mbr P.S. - Explanation seen on an insurance form: "I'd been driving my car for 32 years without an accident when I fell asleep behind the wheel and drove into a tree." Talk about all-nighters! -- Mark of the Valley of Roses ...!{decvax,linus,ima,ihnp4}!bbncca!aoa!mbr
billw@Navajo.ARPA (10/15/85)
> to hear from some of you natural food types just how you expect to feed > 8 million people in New York City (as an example) tons upon tons of food > everyday without using chemical preservatives. As a start, don't even > bother trying to tell me about natural preservatives that will keep foods > fresh for 2 weeks -- you need to be able to preserve a lot of foods for > a minimum of 6 months. I'd be interested to see if there has been any > research done on replacing existing chemical preservatives (BHA, BHT, > whatever) with more natural substitutes. > Well, I don't beleive nearly any of the natural food hype, but by irradiating food with a nice gamma ray source, you can preserve it for months without adding ANYTHING at all to it chemically. Try to get the public to swallow THAT though. BillW "Radiation is natural"
rcj@burl.UUCP (Curtis Jackson) (10/18/85)
In article <198@Navajo.ARPA> billw@Navajo.ARPA writes: >> a minimum of 6 months. I'd be interested to see if there has been any >> research done on replacing existing chemical preservatives (BHA, BHT, >> whatever) with more natural substitutes. >> >Well, I don't beleive nearly any of the natural food hype, but by >irradiating food with a nice gamma ray source, you can preserve >it for months without adding ANYTHING at all to it chemically. > >Try to get the public to swallow THAT though. > Well, some of us "public" won't swallow that because, although the food has been demonstrated fresh alright, there have been no studies that I have seen that try to determine what irradiation does to food tissue and how that relates to what it does to me when I eat it. Other than that, I am 110% for irradiation. This brings up another interesting point: Ever notice how there are never any [reasonable] studies at all on how EVERYTHING that the average Joe eats/breaths/absorbs affects him/her re: cancer, etc.? "Small amounts of sacharrin don't cause cancer. Yellow dye #N doesn't cause cancer. Nutrasweet doesn't cause cancer. Therefore, all of these are marked safe; the assumption being that if no one of them causes cancer then surely the combination of all of them won't, either." I mean, how many cooks do you know who say: "Peanut butter tastes good. Smoked oysters taste good. Guacamole tastes good. Therefore, I'll mix them together and have a great dish!" [disclaimer: The above is not a recipe and should be instantly forgotten by anyone who has a tendency to get the stoned munchies.] Sorry for the poor analogies/examples above -- it has been a long day. Comments/info disproving my hypothesis and/or showing that there have been such studies are welcomed (hopefully via mail -- I'll summarize). Flames at my stupidity will be gleefully agreed with by my co-workers and then tossed.... -- The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291) alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj ...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!rcj
dave@circadia.UUCP (David Messer) (10/28/85)
> I mean, how many cooks do you know who say: > > "Peanut butter tastes good. Smoked oysters taste good. Guacamole tastes > good. Therefore, I'll mix them together and have a great dish!" > -- > The MAD Programmer -- 919-228-3313 (Cornet 291) > alias: Curtis Jackson ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj > ...![ ihnp4 cbosgd akgua masscomp ]!clyde!rcj Well, there is Olson's Law of Combinetorial Dining which states: Any two foods, when mixed together, will taste as good as the least palitable one. Have you tried the above combination? It might taste good. I happen to not like oysters very much, but I bet I would like peanut butter & guacamole. Could be an interesting dip. -- David Messer UUCP: ...ihnp4!circadia!dave FIDO: 14/415 (SYSOP)
dennisg@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Dennis Griesser) (11/22/85)
Sorry about the delay in responding... Curtis Jackson ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!rcj said: > I mean, how many cooks do you know who say: > > "Peanut butter tastes good. Smoked oysters taste good. Guacamole tastes > good. Therefore, I'll mix them together and have a great dish!" To which David Messer <190@circadia.UUCP> dave@circadia.UUCP replied: >Well, there is Olson's Law of Combinetorial Dining which states: > Any two foods, when mixed together, will taste as good > as the least palitable one. > >Have you tried the above combination? It might taste good. I >happen to not like oysters very much, but I bet I would like >peanut butter & guacamole. Could be an interesting dip. Olson's Law has some obvious exceptions, such as: o lemon juice tastes great straight o milk tastes great too o so I'll mix them together... On the plus side, I have used similar reasoning to create interesting, novel, and occasionally edible dishes. It goes: o honey goes well with peanut butter (on sandwiches) o I put honey in my sweet-and-sour dip o so let's try a sweet-and-sour dip with peanut butter! My latest attempt in this area was a dressing for seafood salad. My wife liked the stuff, but was a bit put off by the chunks of peanut (I used chunky stule) on her crab legs. -- [Standard disclaimers apply.]
bbanerje@sjuvax.UUCP (B. Banerjee) (11/22/85)
>> Olson's Law has some obvious exceptions, such as: >> o lemon juice tastes great straight >> o milk tastes great too >> o so I'll mix them together... >> This isn't a valid counterexample of Olson's Law. Try the above combination sometime. Use boiling milk. Strain the result. I'm not certain what it's called in English... curds or whey or something like that. Anyhow, strain it through cheesecloth and eat the solid part with a bit of jam on the side -- delicious. The liquid part can be recycled in cooking. Because milk in the U.S. is homogenized, you need quite a bit of lemon juice for the above to work. Citric acid crystals work quite well. -- Binayak Banerjee {allegra | astrovax | bpa | burdvax}!sjuvax!bbanerje P.S. Send Flames, I love mail.