Food Smack

Foodspace

2008-06-18T14:12:00.001-07:00

For the moment, at least, I'm writing about food here. Please come check it out -- there's more nutrition info and I've been trying to post more often...

This spud's for you, Jack.

2008-05-26T10:11:00.000-07:00

J.R. Simplot passed away yesterday evening at 99. He has a fascinating life story that I first read about in a Rolling Stone article by Eric Schlosser 10 years ago, before Schlosser finished Fast Food Nation. He started out at 14 and made money from the minute he left home. He eventually learned how to freeze dry onions and potatoes for WWII and then when a food scientist figured out how to freeze potatoes without turning them into mountains of mush, Simplot figured out what to do with them: sell them to McDonald's. His company has been supplying them ever since, and as I've probably written, today's french fry is a complicated little thing, covered with a spray of maltodextrin and this and that for flavor and texture, etc. Simplot and Lamb Weston pretty much have the fry market sealed. But Simplot is a HUGE company and he owned something like a million acres of land and had investments everywhere. Anyway, you might want to read up on him since he's been a big part of your food landscape whether you knew it or not, and his is an interesting story. The poor guy fell on his head a year or so ago and I thought he was a goner, but he recovered and was calling friends over for a game of cards when he suddenly passed from a bout of pneumonia. What a life.

Slap that bitch up on a bun, bartendah!

2008-03-29T20:19:00.001-07:00

Okay, so the Whopper is over the hill at 51, and some executives are trying to find a way to make it hipper and more appealing to the younger generation (the golden 18-24 demo, and believe me, most of them haven't cooked a thing in their lives, so how much of a stretch is it to get their business?). Enter the Whopper Bar. When I read it in print without a picture I though they were somehow going to try to make the damned thing into a bar shape, but that's just because I don't get "contemporary syntax" on account of my being out of the demo, hopelessly uncool, and obviously more mentally hitched to the idea of chocolate than bellying up for meat on a bun. The concept: a custom burger joint that fits into a small space with high output, and you can order your burger however you like, or choose from burgers like The Angry Whopper (spicy onions...), the Texas Double Whopper (bacon, jalapenos), etc.

Can we name our own? I'd like a Fat Cheesy Bastard Whopper (3 patties 5 pieces of cheese). Or an I Just Told A Whopper (1 onion ring, hiding). I'm feeling younger and more refreshed by the Whopper Bar already.

It's a good concept for selling burgers, as much for the possibilities afforded by dropping a tiny burger factory into a food court than merely for the novelty, but the quotes at the end of the New York Times story had me falling over laughing. The lack of awareness displayed by executives trying to explain the coolness of their concept is nearly always a laugh, but this one is just fab:

So, is this for real?
“Absolutely,” said Russ Klein, the company’s president for global marketing, strategy and innovation. “We have a tremendous amount of resources and passion and, most importantly, franchise fever over the prospects of this concept.”
Mr. Klein came up with the idea five years ago, while on a trip to a Burger King outlet in Germany. The franchise owners had set up a bar in the back of the restaurant, serving Whoppers and beer. (Alcohol won’t be appearing in the American incarnation.)
“Even just the syntax, the idea of a concept called the Whopper Bar, it’s very contemporary,” Mr. Klein said. “Like sushi bars, juice bars, oyster bars.”
The Whopper Bar will also feature a build-your-own option for customers hoping to customize their burger.
“The concept is like ‘Pimp My Ride,’ ” Mr. Klein said, referring to the MTV program about customized cars. “To take up your Whopper, make it your own, put you in charge.”
So much so that the company initially considered labeling the concept Pimp Your Whopper. But Mr. Klein quickly insisted that was an early idea that would most likely be abandoned.
“My guess is, we’re not going to use that language on our menu board,” he said.

What, no Bitch on a Bun Whopper?

Vodka and vanilla: two tastes that go great together!

2008-01-03T21:18:00.000-08:00

Oh those long vacations in the Netherlands…which allow people like this guy Ian to whittle away at his spare time with the joys of making…his own vanilla extract!?

There are so many things that benefit from vanilla, it’s just an amazing, weird little substance. As much as I like the stuff, I don’t know that making a quart of it would help matters much (vanilla vodka, anyone?). Ian from the Netherlands who is getting his PhD (in something not food science, but obviously something else that requires a technical mind), gathered a good bit of helpful info on vanilla, and there is much to be learned about the mighty bean (he even includes a link to the FDA standard for heaven’s sake).

For the rest of us, Trader Joe’s makes an excellent vanilla using bourbon and no other additives, which is why I’ll fork over the $4 it costs me to buy it instead of trying to buy vanilla beans and make it. Be sure to see Ian's sources for vanilla in case you should ever need some, however: at Whole Foods a single bean can cost $4-6!

Get properly blasted!

2008-01-01T21:39:00.000-08:00

No, seriously. We're only 1 day into the new year, and lookie: One of the most wonderful-weird convenience foods ever to hit the refrigerator case: Batter Blaster. Steven clued me into this as he's a fervent reader of boing-boing.
Batter you shake and squirt, Reddi-Whip style, into the pan. Hilarious. Clever. Organic. Bizarre. I'm slightly horrified that our culinary prowess has come to this, yet I'm drawn to it like a moth to flame.

Whether it actually makes a good pancake is almost immaterial because if you're the sort of person looking to squirt pancake batter into a pan your expectations could really only be one very small stumble above stopping at McDonald's, or microwaving a pre-frozen breakfast. You're just willing to wash a pan (gasp!) and possibly a plate. And/or you're me, followed by a prancing child who in the morning expresses interest in ONE pancake, preferably from McDonald's because that's where the kids at school get their pancakes and it's so unfair because she's never gotten to go that magical place and anyway, she just needs something, just about anything in the house we can find, that can be dipped into that liquid gold, that passageway to childhood wakefulness that is real maple syrup. Must. Try. Cannot. Resist.

Rich, creamy...or, maybe not

2007-04-14T21:55:00.000-07:00

Most people don't know that the government has something called a "Standard of Identity" for lots of the food we eat. And it might seem odd, but back around the turn of the century, one could add say, plaster of Paris into flour to increase bread weight -- or, okay, maybe poison -- and still call it "white bread." (And, maybe not just during the turn of the century but in modern day China using melamine to boost the protein content of wheat or rice gluten?!)

So. The Pure Foods and Drug Act of 1906, and eventually the birth of the FDA right around 1938. It's supposed to be an independent entity, not subject to politics, but the business over Plan B (the morning after pill) has once again proven that it just isn't so. The FDA is also supposed to inspect loads of food, but only looks at 1% of the billions of pounds of ingredient products entering our ports each year so it's all working out just swell. Or, was that Customs who was supposed to do that? USDA? Who can tell? Of course we could just grow our own damned ingredients, but we're all busy sending manufacturing and farming jobs overseas where they're cheaper. Just what is it we're doing around here anyway? (I'm starting to rant. Reh).

Anyway, to transition to something not quite as compelling, the chocolate titans are clashing over potential changes to the standard of identity for chocolate (take the link, type in "chocolate" and read the second listing if you dare). Recently this issue came up when Kraft was found to be making guacamole with no avocados. The standards for chocolate include how much cocoa content, milk fat, etc. one must use to call the product "milk chocolate" (10% chocolate liquor; 3.39% milkfat) or "bittersweet chocolate" (35% chocolate liquor; generally no milk).

At stake: if the standard of identity changes and the government allows less milk fat in favor of canola oil and milk protein concentrate -- as the Grocery Manufacturers of America would like -- manufacturers can make cheap, and perhaps even lower fat chocolates (dark and milk varieties). This might undercut the growth of premium chocolate sales, so See's (YUM!) and Guittard (acc. to the L.A. Times) are peeved in the extreme. Funny though, Hershey's is all for it, which isn't surprising except that they recently purchased the giant yumminess that is Scharffenberger. I guess diversification means not having to worry.

From a food science perspective, they really have little to worry about, because chocolate made with cheaper ingredients and lower fat generally means lower quality and taste. It might work for a chocolate coating I guess. But if I'm eating 12 pounds of chocolate per year, as the article suggests we all do in America (and I'm guessing that I'm busting the average upward, especially during baking season), I'm eating the real thing.

"I could eat that every night!" -- The Cloning Issue

2006-12-28T16:35:00.000-08:00

The FDA finally released their risk assessment about cloned animals today, and if you eat animals or any of their byproducts (like milk) you might want to hear this: They've been deemed safe for eating. This really isn't news -- it's been expected that the FDA would come to this conclusion for some time now, since the components of food from clones are largely the same as those from conventionally bred animals.

But.

No labeling. And some people just don't like the idea. Should they have a choice in the matter? Well, the FDA wants to know what you think about that and the matter in general and will be taking public comment for the next few months on the matter. You can do that here (though as of today it wasn't set up -- wait a few days perhaps). The docket number is 2003N-0573 if you want to paste that into the search on the link.

My take on it: Clones do have problems. The fetuses die more often, and genetic expression can be off, causing a higher chance for the animal to die in the first 18 months. But surviving animals are direct genetic copies (the FDA likens it to twins delivered at different times). The animal may have problems, may be more susceptible to illness -- not a lot is known. These are expensive animals to breed and they are mostly used to promote desirable characteristics for breeding programs that produce conventional animals -- but when they outlive their usefulness, they might be on your dinner table.

When you eat food, your body denatures the proteins, and for good reason. Those proteins are foreign and were only of use to the food source. Your body needs to break food proteins down and rebuild them in ways that are usable to you. Dietary proteins are uncoiled by stomach acid and your digestive enzymes go to town, breaking them apart into individual amino acids. Your DNA then directs the rebuilding of amino acids into proteins for muscle, hair, nails, other DNA, hormones, organs, etc. Proteins you ingest include DNA from the food source itself, and you will probably be unaffected by that DNA, (though some proteins do pass through the digestive system without fully breaking down, hence the probably part). This is the reasoning behind the FDA's decision that the products of that animal, the meat, milk, etc. should be safe. Of course, you will still be susceptible to any diseases the animal might carry, etc.

But because scientists haven't fully explored the effects of cloning, I am for labeling such items. If they decide against it, marketers will be savvy enough to figure out what to do anyway: lots of GMO (genetically modified organisms) products are not labeled as such, but plenty of foods are labeled GMO-free for those looking to avoid them. I'm sure a Clone-Free beef sticker will find it's way onto the cellophane and a Clone-Free carton will bear your milk if it's perceived to be a problem.

Mr. Burbank, I'll take a Ranger Russet with that shake

2006-12-21T13:27:00.000-08:00

In August I did some yapping about acrylamide, wherein I predicted that those crazy kids over at Simplot would be working hard to reduce acrylamide in its fries. Well, in the November edition of the Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry (54 (26), 9882 -9887), those wacky scientists reported that by tweaking the DNA of the Ranger Russet potato they were able to avoid the unsightly black spots and outrageous sweetening problems that plagued the little tuber during storage. As an additional benefit, the french fries produced by these modified Rangers yielded fries containing less acrylamide (which the researchers euphemistically call an "antinutritional compound" while I like to call it a "carcinogen.") As a bonus, they are supposed to taste good.

The russet currently used for most french fries is the Burbank Russet, a 130-or-so-year-old specimen brought to you by Luther Burbank. He lived out in Santa Rosa, CA, however, and I recently found out that Burbank, CA ("the entertainment capital of the world") wasn't named after him but instead a dentist-turned-sheep rancher named David Burbank who would probably be unhappy to find that there's a Luther Burbank Middle School in his city, adding to the confusion. But I digress.

The genetic engineering used to create this rugged Ranger was not the type that makes activists twitch uncontrollably, but one that has been used for centuries, if a little more precisely of late: all native. Which means they didn't insert any fish or tomato or whatever, just messed around with DNA using other potatoes to yield a crop with more desirable traits. No foreign stuff. They aren't stupid over at Simplot. They knew some of us might get wind and start screaming.

Now all they have to do is nip this trans-fat problem in the bud (it's intended) and McDonald's will be doing a jig.

...and check this out: Lord of the Fries.

Celiac? Wheat allergies? This Bud's for you.

2006-12-21T10:20:00.000-08:00

Anheuser-Busch, makers of Budweiser, have come out with a beer for people with Celiac Sprue and wheat sensitivity. It's made with sorghum, a gluten-free alternative to wheat. And there's no barley in the hops either (grains like barley and oats also contain gluten). You can pick some up at places like Whole Foods.

Now even people with gluten issues can get a buzz on.

If you're looking for some bakery without gluten, I'll drop these on you just in case you need a snack with your beer:

Black Sheep Bakery
Flying Apron Bakery
Sun Flour Baking (also sold on Amazon)

If you're a baking do-it-yourself-er, try millet flour in place of the wheat, but you will also need a bit of xanthan gum, guar, or arrowroot. Check out www.celiac.com for more info there...

Dietary Supplements

2006-12-18T15:52:00.000-08:00

I get asked this question an awful lot, from people who are suspicious about whether an herb or vitamin will exert its intended effects, usually, but occasionally from people who are ready to give camera-worthy testimonials:

Are supplements safe?

Well. I don't know.

While one could argue that the FDA doesn't necessarily keep us all safe regarding food and drugs, products passing through the agency do so on a 3-foot pedestal of paperwork citing scientific research detailing safety and efficacy (e.g. that the product does what it's supposed to do). BUT, the FDA doesn't regulate supplements. They only oversee them after they've hit the market, and pull them if they can prove that they're unsafe. The manufacturer must prove safety and efficacy, but that rule is really little more than a legal disclaimer by the FDA because no one oversees the manufacturer's claims. Here's the FDA link on supplements. Be sure to go to the bottom where they answer all the important questions about them.

My opinion: herbs are strong stuff, with real chemical effects (many beneficial), but not a lot has been proven scientifically. The importance here would be with the amount you should take and the amount in the bottle (is it the same as what the manufacturer claims?) . And since they have potent effects, how about their interactions with foods/each other?

Vitamins are strong stuff. They can be overdone, with deleterious results. When it doubt, look at the nutrition label. If there's 3,567% of the RDA, you're overdoing it, know what I mean?

Antioxidants are strong stuff. They can be pro-oxidants in large quantities. What is a large quantity? Dunno. There's no Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for them. I would not take an antioxidant supplement, and that includes high doses of vitamin C. Eat your vegetables and a busload of fruits too -- you couldn't eat enough of them to do yourself any harm (as far as pro-oxidation), and you'll get plenty of good antioxidants. Don't drink a gallon of juices -- too much sugar, too much everything. Think of how many fruits or vegetables it takes to make them and ask yourself if you could really eat all that whole.

Use the head your mother tried to fill up with common sense, now, y'hear?

Space food for urbanites

2006-12-15T11:20:00.000-08:00

Wanna eat like the astronauts do? Got my hands on some Easy 4 Busy fruit purees, initially because of the odd packaging. It really was developed for NASA according to the web site. And it feels like it too: Gushy aseptic-type packaging with a weird screw top reminiscent of an IV bag.

I've only tasted the Blueberry/Raspberry/Banana one so far*, and it's like a smoothie that needs a bit of ice (and this was straight out of the fridge). It's very thick, a tastes a bit like cooked fruit, but sweet. If you're looking to get 3 servings of fruit this would be a very convenient way to get it. I would have been happier with 2 servings in a package, since it's supposed to be easy and if I'm busy I'm not going to refrigerate the rest. It's a lot to inhale.

These are supposed to be available in New York, but for the rest of us...
The web site offers free shipping, and for December only you can buy one case ($29.99 for 10) and get another case free. Given the price of fruit, that's quite a good deal.

So if you're fruit deprived/extremely busy, here ya go. The fruit is pasteurized, which is a good idea I think. Keep those suckers on ice in the car though, and leave warm fruit puree to the real spacemen.

*Tasted the pear/caramel which was oddly good (the caramel flavor really works), and the kiwi/passionfruit was good -- tropical. They both have a bit too much of the applesauce/banana thing happening but still, for fruit on the go they're all right.

New York's trans-fat tsunami...

2006-12-14T14:51:00.000-08:00

Nation's Restaurant News is reporting that Denny's, Loew's hotel chains, and Darden restaurants, owners of Red Lobster and Olive Garden are all switching away from trans fats in response to the New York ruling. Loew's will eliminate trans fat from room service to mini-bar selections.

Never one to miss a beat (or a sale), Lamb Weston has new fries processed in 100% canola oil, with less fat absorption. Less fat for you, and the frying oil will last longer. I wonder what the kids at Simplot are up to? (At last glance, they were still the supplier for McDonald's and about many, many others).

New Yorkers ban the trans-fat

2006-12-07T17:18:00.000-08:00

Wow. This is a big deal. On December 5th, New York's Board of Health decided that by two deadlines in 2007 and 2008 added trans fats will be phased out of restaurant foods. The second deadline will be the most difficult and may line some wise food technologist's pockets: finding a (profitable, tasty) way to make those fries without using partially hydrogenated oil (the source of trans fat). Without it, oil becomes rancid more quickly and must be tossed (hopefully the way of someone using biodiesel). So far that's probably what will happen -- oil will have to be turned over more frequently. If someone can work out a way to extend the oil's useful lifespan without hydrogenation, well, there could be some bucks in it. Rancidity is caused by oxidation, and vitamin E is already added to oils like Canola to extend their life.

Taco Bell's been working on this issue for some time and will be switching to canola oil (from hydrogenated soybean oil) by April 2007. Wendy's and KFC have already switched, the latter to non-hydrogenated soybean oil). McDonald's has been pacing that fence, worried about the signature taste of their fries perhaps. I'll bet they figure it out now.

In terms of baked goods, odds are they'll be reformulated to contain butter, which is only a slight improvement (saturated fats, like those in butter, cause increases in LDL, or "bad" cholesterol, whereas trans fats do that and decrease the levels of HDL, or "good cholesterol"). That's if they didn't contain butter already, and they probably did. Hydrogenation in baked goods is common when soybean oil, etc. are used to extend shelf life. But restaurants generally use butter because they aren't holding onto your cake that long...

For those of you worried about not being allowed the freedom to get your trans fat, they will still be naturally occurring in meat and dairy foods, and on grocery shelves, since this only applies to restaurants. Trans fats are indicated on nutrition labels -- starting just this year.

Way to go New York. The L.A. Daily News is reporting that rumblings around L.A.'s city council suggest we'll be following suit. The National Restaurant Association is not pleased. But you should be.

That's Krafty.

2006-12-06T21:48:00.000-08:00

It has very little avocado, but that didn't stop Kraft from making guacamole (ahuaca-mulli to the Aztecs) dip using starch and oils and food coloring to simulate the deliciousness of the avocado, officially known around this house as 'nature's mayonnaise'. Now mayonnaise is a whole other story, having been assigned a standard of identity by the FDA (if you click the link, type in mayonnaise, or even peanut butter to find out what manufacturers are required to include to call the food by it's proper name). But not so with guacamole. So was Kraft breaking the rules? Errrr...not technically. It doesn't SAY there's avocado in there. It does say what's really in there. On the back. If you read it.

So there's a lawsuit. And Kraft is reformulating their packaging to make it more obvious.

It does seem deceptive, but it means that the FDA might want to add the Aztecan melange to the list. Worthy of a lawsuit? Nah. Take the crap back and get a refund. And next time, when you're buying something for the first time, read the label!!!

(Has anyone but me noticed that among my something like 13 non-prolific posts, I've ended up yakking about Kraft's adherence to the definition of a food item twice? They make American cheese, for heaven's sake: let that be a clue.)

The human cost of cheap food

2006-09-04T20:43:00.000-07:00

I tend not to do dead-serious stuff, because -- well, probably because I'm not all that sophisticated, and also, because I like food to be mostly what it is: fun. However, as someone interested in everything about food, it's very important to understand the entire process. Part of that process involves the people who grow, harvest, and manufacture foods. In California particularly, and the United States in general, we face particular difficulty drawing the line between commerce and humanity (not just with food, with drugs, health care -- anything where human needs might interfere with turning a buck). There's the rub of capitalism.

Writer Mark Arax and photographer Matt Black have put together an outstanding article for the L.A. Times' West Magazine called "The Summer of the Death of Hilario Guzman," which followed a family's plight for one year as they faced death, poverty and uncertainty traveling between the grape fields of central California and Oaxaca, Mexico. It was truly heartbreaking and sought to explain all sides of the dilemma faced by farmers, immigrant workers and taxpayers -- and did it very well, I thought. There is no easy solution to the problem we face in California, but surely there must be a way to treat fellow humans as well as we treat our pets. The squalor is astonishing -- and it is our problem. And those kids? Ages 11 and 7, working to lay down trays and pull grapes.

The article and the accompanying photographs will be online for 7 days, free of charge. I urge you to look at it.

Pepsi and Coke go head to head over fizz-free drinks

2006-08-23T21:53:00.000-07:00

Yesterday's L.A. Times business section had a nice article ("Coca-Cola Seeks More Fizz with Non Soda Lines") on the fight between Coke and Pepsi for the non-cola market share. It's really astonishing to me that the two companies own so much of the beverage market. Coke makes Dasani water, Powerade, Minute Maid drinks, Godiva drinks, Tab, and I believe they also do the Starbucks bottled drinks. Pepsi provides pictures so I don't have to list their products, and Aquafina water. Did you know that Pepsi only gets 20% of their sales from soda? Wow. They should have an easier time filling up those vending machines at schools...oops, except, they do their biggest secondary business from Gatorade. Gatorade is fine if you're running a marathon, but not if you're an overweight second grader. Meanwhile, they have Tropicana. Coke depends on soft drinks quite a bit more at the moment. Are you aware of who bottles what you buy?

For example, when you go into a restaurant, they are usually a Coke or Pepsi establishment, but I've yet to see one that's both. Taco Bell: Pepsi. McDonald's: Coke. Baja Fresh: Pepsi. So if you want Lipton Iced Tea at a restaurant, and you can get it, that's a Pepsi place. Minute Maid lemonade? A Coke establishment. I was astonished when I realized that the cola wars run this deep.

At Target, it's either a Coke week or a Pepsi week. They end-cap (big display at the end of the aisles) pallets of one or the other, and one week it's a 12 pack of Pepsi for $3.00 (and the other end of the aisle has an endcap with a pallet of Aquafina) or it's Coke with Dasani on the other end. Also, as is pointed out in the L.A. Times, Pepsi has brilliantly branded Gatorade with so many flavors and variations that it dominates the sport drink spot, leaving Powerade a tiny strip. I thought Powerade was a version of Gatorade (but it's owned by Coke).

If I were richer (Lord knows I'm geeky enough), I'd be headed to InterBev 2006, ("Everything Beverage, Better Than Ever!") in Vegas, where they'll be having the Beverage World Soft Drink Hall of Fame Awards Reception and discussions will include "The Buzz on Benzene: Where We've Been and Where We're Going." If you haven't heard the buzz on benzene, it's that the sodium benzoate and ascorbic acid (vitamin C) in most soft drinks apparently react to form benzene -- a known carcinogen -- in amounts higher than the government allows in water (and therefore, a bit more than should be in a drink. Like we need any). In case you are rich, they also feature panels on what America drinks and sweeteners in drinks. Or, you could spend your money on sending me. Whatever.

Both companies are currently after the middle aged lady market and I would know because I are one. They are both developing drinks perceived as "healthier" using tea extracts, fizz, juice -- whatever they can come up with. We'll see how they do.

The flap on labeling and acrylamide

2006-08-21T14:00:00.000-07:00

There's a little article in today's Daily News (and AP) about how California laws about food labeling are driving food manufacturer's nutty. As a part of Prop. 65, food companies have to alert the public with a food label if their products contains lead, arsenic, acrylamide, etc. -- even if it's in amounts generally regarded as safe. It's to inform the public, and discourage food makers from including those substances where they can be avoided. But sometimes it can't be avoided, as in the case of acrylamide. Acrylamide, (a carcinogen) is formed when heat causes asparagine, an amino acid (the building blocks of proteins), to react with some sugars during something called the Maillard reaction. The Maillard reaction browns food, making it delicious because it brings out the sweet flavor and improves texture. This reaction is what makes the browned crust on meats, but acrylamide doesn't form there because there isn't much sugar. In the presence of starch, however, acrylamide forms -- so toast, potato chips, browned cake tops -- all of that forms acrylamide -- not a ton, and researchers don't yet know what the impact is, but some. Over a lifetime, it could, might lead to some kinds of cancer.

The discovery occurred only a few years ago, after a tunnel accident in Sweden exposed workers to industrial acrylamide (that was in 1997). Researchers aimed to quantify the workers' exposure by measuring how much acrylamide was in their bloodstreams compared to normal, unexposed people. They were surprised to find that the control subjects -- those with out exposure -- had acrylamide in their bloodstreams. After eliminating other lifestyle factors, they determined it was coming from food (2002), and it took a while before other researchers narrowed their focus to starchy foods, and finally the amino acid asparagine and reducing sugars (2003, 2004). So there's more research to be done. Meanwhile, places like Mcdonald's, Burger King and potato chip companies are being sued over labeling for acrylamide in their products. Their response has been to try like hell to develop ways of reducing the acrylamide formed (namely by decreasing the amount of asparagine if I'm remembering correctly). I'm guessing you'll see a genetically engineered, low-acrylamide potato at some point. The people at Simplot probably didn't stand around scritching their heads for long when the acrylamide news broke.

Meanwhile, the food industry wants to deal with this by going to Congress to have the state labeling laws overturned in favor of their only following federal regulations regarding labeling. I can understand why. It's not like the federally allowable amounts of lead are really high. But I would like to know, and I am happy I live in a state where people voted in favor of knowing what's in their food.

Stride Right

2006-06-22T23:25:00.000-07:00

Okay, so I popped forth my $.99 for 14 sticks of dynamite, I mean Stride chewing gum, on the way out of Target, along with my usual Trident peppermint, which runs $.84 for 18 sticks and is brought to you by the same folks who make Stride. (Who, by the way, came up with this new peppermint-vanilla Trident? Sounds vile.)

After lunch, I cracked open the package, and I have to say, it’s really beautiful for just chewing gum. It opens like an old-fashioned cigarette case, with the gum standing like little soldiers, and the pieces are an interesting, slightly elongated size from Trident (and I thought their new packaging was pretty good – by now you are certainly rolling your eyes. I know.) Anyway, the flavor: smells EXACTLY like Lifesaver’s Pep-O-Mint, but doesn’t taste quite like it because the intensity of flavor is dialed down quite a bit. It’s very pleasant and minty but doesn’t have the face-smacking bite that most gum has when you first chew it. I chewed it for 45 minutes and enough was enough. They proved their point. It was quite tasty but was starting to make me hungry and I’d just eaten lunch so off it went.

So why does it work?

I read about the gum in an article from the Chicago Sun-Times (they sent their reporter to the All Candy Expo – I have dreams about being sent to a all candy convention) that the key is encapsulation – in this case, sweetener and flavor encapsulation. I then turned to the handy Food Technology magazine from November 2003 and learned, while the toddler alternately threw herself face down in dirt and pet the cat, that they might have used the method Adi and Sam Shefer worked out. Basically the sweetener and flavors are held in a (hydrophobic) nanosphere -- a little sphere enclosed in a bigger sphere called a microsphere. When you pop the gum into your (presumably wet) mouth, the microspheres release the nanospheres, which degrade over time from the lipase (the enzyme) in your saliva. The released sweeteners and flavors also tend to hang around longer because of how they’re encapsulated. Clever, ain’t it? I’m pretty sure I’ve got the big picture correct, but clearly this is the realm of people more brilliant than I.

Finally: the everlasting gobstopper has arrived!

2006-06-21T18:27:00.000-07:00

Well, technically, no. A gobstopper is actually a jawbreaker, but really, this might do the trick anyway. Cadbury Schweppes, in their infinite glory, has developed Stride, the "Ridiculously long lasting gum." I read somewhere about developing flavors that release over time somehow, and if I can dig up anything, I'll let y'all know. Meanwhile, I'll have to play Violet Beauregard (pictured) and chew some for a spell. The web site promises a free shot at it but then tells you that you're too late, you blew it, no free gum for you. What they're really saying, however, is, "We stink, and our web czar is too lazy to withdraw this part of the site so that you won't get frustrated that you could have gotten a free taste, think we're dicks and never buy our gum." Hello, marketing dept.?!

Pour Some Sugar on Meeeeeeeeeeee.

2006-03-01T17:39:00.000-08:00

(sorry for the Def Leppard reference).
The USDA has come up with a nice database detailing the added sugar content for about 2,000 foods. You can download it on PDF or as an Excel file.

We all inhale about 74 pounds of added sugar a year and most of our behinds look like it, too. Find out what they're putting in those drink powders like they serve at um...coffee places on a corner near you. It's on page 16 on the PDF -- 42 grams of added sugar for the mocha powder -- of course it's for 100 grams, or roughly 3 oz. But I'll bet that's in the range of what the commercial coffee places add for their iced mochas, and that's about 168 calories just in added sugar. You don't get any nutrients from it, but it will give you energy I suppose. Food for thought.

Just in case you aren't into metrics, there are roughly 28 grams in an ounce. The listings are in grams per 100 grams -- roughly grams for every 3 ounces. Every gram of carbohydrate (read: sugar) has 4 calories. (Protein has 4 also, fat has 9 calories per gram -- yeah, double).

Everything you say bounces off me and sticks on you!

2006-02-22T22:37:00.000-08:00

Nyah! Teflon is really taking the heat for the use of Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). And I think they should. Although Teflon doesn't contain much if any PFOA, DuPont didn't disclose what it knew about the toxicity of its manufacture until a former employee sent the cat skidding out of the microwave popcorn bag. It cost them millions.

If you're checking here to see if Teflon is safe: it's reasonably safe. Once that stuff starts to peel or crack, dump it. Don't cook in it without something in it, be it liquid or food because if it scorches, it's dangerous. Don't lose sleep over the PFOA content in the actual pan, though.

We use a teflon coated pan for cooking eggs. Eggs become cooked at fairly low temperatures -- around 150 degrees. And they stick like hell without teflon or a load of butter. So we use one for that, and our wok, because it's in good shape. We stopped buying teflon-coated pans because the teflon peels off or starts to degrade in a way that forces me to run out and buy a new one too often. Even if it's an expensive pan. (If you have an expensive one, bear in mind that they are great heat conductors and aren't meant to be used over high heat).

Also, if you want deglaze (release the browned bits from meat or some veggies using wine to make a sauce reduction) you won't be able to do it with teflon.

That said, there are lots of other things that are just as bad as the chemicals they're using. New car smell? Plastics gassing off. New construction? Ditto. New carpet. Uh huh. New paint -- that horrible smell is the volatile organic compounds. So. Let's hope the EPA steps on them so that they stop using PFOA in the manufacture (they also use it for Goretex and Scotchguard...). Until then you can stop buying new Teflon til they stop using the stuff, and don't worry about the Teflon you already have as long as it's in good shape.

This guy was cool!

2006-02-17T17:50:00.000-08:00

Robert E. Rich Sr., 92; Invented Nondairy Whipped Topping
From L.A. Times Staff and Wire Reports

Robert E. Rich Sr., 92, a food industry pioneer who in 1945 created nondairy whipped topping, died Wednesday at his home in Palm Beach, Fla. The cause of death was not disclosed.

During World War II, Rich was running Wilber Farms, a Buffalo, N.Y., dairy, and working with the War Food Administration. The war agency's diversion of milk products such as butterfat to U.S. soldiers caused Rich to begin thinking about developing nondairy alternatives for the home market.
When he heard scientists at a Ford Motor Co. laboratory were working on a nondairy whipping cream made from soybeans, he secured permission to experiment with the same process. After considerable trial and error, he came up with a soybean-based whipped topping that was superior to cream because it could be frozen.

Marketed under the name Rich's Whip Topping, it became a staple of school cafeterias, restaurants and bakeries. Soon Rich spun off nondairy icings, fillings, dessert toppings and a coffee creamer. His company, Rich Products, grew into an international operation with 7,000 employees and annual sales exceeding $2.5 billion.

Rich's contributions to the food industry were recognized in 1990 when he became one of the first four inductees in the National Frozen Food Industry Hall of Fame.
**********
For the record, Ford was interested in cultivating soybeans for use in plastics, but of course were very open to other moneymaking methods. Eventually using plastics from soybeans proved too expensive to manufacture. But as with all wars, new food innovations took place. They always do because soldiers need to eat on the run, and wars create shortages that in turn cause food scientists to come up with cool stuff, like non-dairy whip.

Napoleon sent the troops off to Waterloo with canned foods -- an invention created for the war. K-rations were developed by Ancel Keys, who was way, way ahead of his time.

But because I'm a serious geek, can you believe this Frozen Food Industry Hall of Fame? Seriously, even I'm not that geeky. Yes, of course I am. It's really called the Distinguished Order of Zerocrats Frozen Food Hall of Fame. And they only started in 1990. I'm sure Clarence Birdseye was right there on top of the list. But I can't find the list.

Holy McCow

2006-02-15T15:01:00.000-08:00

McDonald's, fresh off the "Oops, they have more trans fats than we thought, maybe 8 instead of 6 grams" nightmare, now they have to announce that their fries also might contain allergens. Great news for celiac patients...I'm no advocate for McDonald's as I haven't eaten there more than twice in 27 years, but here's the deal:

Many commercially sold fries are batter coated to keep them crunchy, presentable and flavorful after a good trip through the fryer. That batter may contain wheat and/or dairy derivatives, which is what McDonald's meant when they explained that their potato suppliers removed all wheat and dairy proteins. The proteins in wheat and dairy (gluten for wheat and casein for milk and cheese) are allergens -- people are only allergic to proteins. So they figure if the proteins are removed, people won't have reactions to them (and they might be right about that). They have flavors in the oil, too, and those come from wheat or dairy derivatives as well. I never knew that before...

All this is in response to the FDA's request that packaged food suppliers inform people about possible allergens in the food. Meanwhile, McDonald's is attempting to create a fry with lower trans fat without increasing the saturated fat. That will take some doing. I wonder if they'll eventually offer a "baked" fry that takes a trip through the convection oven as an alternative. With their luck, they'll be just in time for research quantifying acrylamide levels on baked and fried carbohydrate/protein foods! (Don't panic, so far it's been in very small amounts...but it's not well researched just yet...)

Last time I went to McDonald's, in 1986 after the Thanksgiving parade when I was starving, all I had was the fries (haven't had a burger there since I was 13, and I wasn't a vegetarian for another 20 years -- call it intuition). They do taste good. And every 20 years or so I indulge (so this might be my year, huh?). Perhaps that's about right considering what's in them.

Faster, Bessie, FASTER!

2006-02-09T18:14:00.000-08:00

Big ruffling in the cheese industry over Kraft's decision to make and market a Parmesan that is cured for 6 months - half the time of the real, serious stuff from Italy. The question is: can you still call it Parmesan?

Seriously, I can't decide which is funnier: the fact that Kraft Parmesan is considered important enough to ruffle Italians making actual, serious cheese, or the abundance of cheese puns.

If eating parmesan out of one of those cylindrical tubes is your thing (nothing wrong with it, just saying), you probably don't care that much about the nutty undertones or serious development of taste the way the truly cheesy do. You probably do want it to taste just like the last time you had it, though, and you probably are a bit attached to the packaging whether you know it or not.

This is food science at it's best/worst. Love it or hate it, this is what the industry does: tries to get the best product it can make acceptable to people at the lowest price. It still comes down to this: buy the stuff in the tube, or go in search of one cured longer with more sophisticated flavor perhaps. Just remember, if you're vegetarian, the Kraft stuff isn't on a technicality to be determined by you: rennet comes from calves' bellies. You do have to credit Kraft: they introduced this stuff in 1945, when it must have been considered quite exotic if you weren't Italian...

Kraft’s Parmesan plan grates on some purists

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Libby Quaid

ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON — In Italy, it takes at least a year to cure Parmigiano Reggiano, the original Parmesan cheese.
The U.S. standard is 10 months, but Kraft Foods Inc., seller of the green shaker can that brought Parmesan to the masses, says it can speed the process and wants a six-month standard.
"We have found excellent consumer acceptance of the new product," Kraft counsel Sheryl Marcouiller wrote in a letter to the Food and Drug Administration.
The idea grates on the Italians and on smaller U.S. companies.
Cheese cured in six months "is not Parmesan," said Paul Bauer of Wisconsin’s Antigo Cheese Co. "Parmesan is cheese that develops its flavor over time."
Months, even years, of aging go into the nutty flavor, the crumbly texture and the pungent aroma of a fine Parmesan cheese.
Parmesan’s history dates to the Middle Ages, when monks in northern Italy developed the recipe.
The ingredients for Parmigiano Reggiano are simple: unpasteurized raw milk, salt and rennet, an enzyme that curdles the milk. But the process is painstaking. The cheese is created in carefully heated copper cauldrons. It rests in molds and then soaks in brine for several days. Finally, it spends at least a year, often two, sitting on a shelf, where it’s turned and brushed.
The taste "is drastically different depending on how long it is aged, and how it is handled while aging," said Andrea Bonati, president of the Consorzio del Formaggio Parmigiano-Reggiano, which represents makers of the Italian original.
"Cheese produced under a 6-month aging process may be produced faster, in greater quantities and for a cheaper price," Bonati said in a letter to the FDA. "But it will not be Parmesan cheese."
Only cheese from Parma and nearby provinces, made by about 600 strictly regulated dairies, can be called Parmigiano Reggiano. Made elsewhere in the world, the same type of cheese is called Parmesan.
Kraft introduced grated Parmesan to Americans in 1945. It also sells shredded Parmesan under the DiGiorno brand. Kraft is the biggest American producer of Parmesan.
In 1997, Kraft figured out a way to speed the curing process by altering how the cheese is cultured. Kraft officials gained permission from the FDA to test-market the cheese two years later, and since then, Kraft has sold about 300 million pounds of faster-cured Parmesan.
"As you would expect, extensive consumer testing was done before we changed the production process to assure that consumers were very satisfied with the product and that it performed to our high quality standards," said Kraft spokeswoman Alyssa Burns.
It’s a business decision for Kraft, which says the faster process could free up plant space and cut costs.
Kraft is not alone. At least five other companies want to test-market Parmesan with an abbreviated curing time.
Opponents worry that changing the standard might jeopardize the Parmesan name. Italy already has exclusive rights to the name Parmigiano-Reggiano, and some U.S. companies worry European officials will persuade the World Trade Organization to restrict use of Parmesan, too.
International trade is treacherous, said Rusty Bishop, director of the University of Wisconsin’s Center for Dairy Research. "It’s a slippery cheese wedge, and if you lose one, then everything else crumbles," Bishop said.

When good antioxidants go bad

2005-12-30T23:20:00.000-08:00

During a rare naptime retreat, I tried to figure out why exactly antioxidants in large amounts tend to become pro-oxidants. It involves the antioxidant reducing iron (or other transitional metals) from Fe3+ to Fe2+ and the metal being freed up to react with the antioxidant (normally metals are bound to proteins so they are soluble enough to be carried through the bod). As far as I can figure.

For example, Vitamin C helps with the absorption of iron because it can reduce it to the heme state, Fe2+. Iron needs to be heme iron to be absorbed. Too much Vitamin C would mean you might absorb too much iron -- it might then not have enough transporters and float around free. If that were the case, the iron could react with Vitamin C or other antioxidants, and er, be oxidized. You could rust, I suppose.

Well. It would be easy to be more intelligent than I and have something to offer here (please do). This is just what I'm sort of gleaning from the literature. It caused me to take a nap....and now you'll probably go face down from the excitement too. When you awaken refreshed, you can think of me with gratitude.

Primary antioxidants in black, green and rooibos teas.

2005-12-10T21:15:00.000-08:00

I've been peeking to see where the few people who dropped in have found this blog. One was a person looking for "mechanisms of camellia sinensis other than tannin." So it occurred to me that for some of you (okay, one of you) it might be helpful to list the most active antioxidants in green and black teas from Camellia sinensis and Aspalathus linearis (rooibos) teas. Because I'm a lazy sod I won't name all of them -- besides, if you're looking for every last one you should be consulting academic papers. But in black and green teas from Camellia sinensis, catechin is your man -- the breadwinner of that polyphenolic family. In Rooibos, Aspalathus linearis, the big man on campus is aspalathin, which is unique to rooibos and one other plant on Earth, which is why it's being studied. Quercetin is another biggie, and both teas have it. There. Now the next time you look me up on Google, "geekity geek" ought to land you right ...here.

Getting cheesy.

2005-12-01T22:48:00.000-08:00

The other day, during our speed-dating version of marital chat (roughly 10 minutes a day -- how could we ever tire of each other at this rate?), the subject somehow turned to cheese. Cheddar cheese. Then Swiss. Then tofu. They don't call it Asian cheese for nothing.

So. Of course you know that cheese was originally developed as a way of preserving milk. It likely happened by accident, since folks used to carry around milk in animal hides, and er, animal stomachs. The enzymes in animal's bellies can curdle milk -- leaving the liquid part, whey, and cheese. Miss Muffet sat on her tuffet eating...cottage cheese. Manufacturer's still use rennin -- an enzyme from calves' stomachs -- to make some cheese. Luckily, they have also started using other enzymes with less awful origins. Additionally, of course, there are some cheeses (bleu being the most obvious) with bacteria added to give flavor and texture. The protein in cow's milk is called casein.

Cheddar cheese is characterized by...cheddaring. First whole milk is inoculated with bacteria (Streptococcus lacti, if you must know), fermented for up to an hour and annato added if it's going to be orange (it's normally off white). Then it's heated to around 100 degrees and enzymes are added. If you've seen an egg cook til it forms an egg white, you've watched a protein denature and coagulate. The proteins unwind (denature), then reform in a different shape (coagulate). The enzymes for cheese work at a certain temperature, and the combination curdles (denatures, then coagulates) the protein into cheese. When the protein coagulates, it squeezes out water like a sponge -- the whey.
Cheddaring keeps the cheese from forming little holes which could get moist and lead to rot. The curds are cut and stacked to eliminate this problem. Then the cheese is "ripened" or aged for between 2 months to a year or so to develop flavor.
Cheddar is from England, but it's the most consumed cheese in the U.S.

The people of Emmental Valley, Switzerland feared not the holey cheese. (In Europe, Swiss is called Emmentaler cheese). Basically the same rules as above apply; the curds are heated, inoculated and stirred to get rid of the whey, but no cheddaring and 4 kinds of bacteria, including one Propionibacterium shermanii for flavor and those really cool holes. The cheese isn't ripened as long -- just 4-9 months. During the first month, at room temperature, the holes are formed from bacteria farting carbon dioxide. That's a pleasant thought, no? Don't care. It still tastes good.

Now -- tofu. It's heated soy milk, to which a calcium or magnesium salt is added to coagulate it, it's pressed to get rid of the whey and hacked into blocks. It's called bean curd sometimes because that's what it is.

And this is why cheese and tofu are so damned high in protein -- because they are made of coagulated proteins (and a fair amount of fat too). That must be why it came up. Who can remember.

As an aside, whey has found quite a market in all those power bars and meal replacement bars. In concentrated form it is high in protein. And if you're lactose intolerant, it will make you into a giant gasbag, because most of the lactose in cheesemaking is left in the whey.

More on tea, those crazy free radicals.

2005-11-28T22:10:00.000-08:00

Most people I know, hardened tea drinkers among them, do not realize that green tea and black tea both come from the same plant -- Camellia sinensis. The difference is how they're processed. Black tea is fermented, and green tea is not. Teas like Oolong are partially fermented. Fermentation means that the leaves are smacked around a bit to bruise the cell walls, laid out to oxidize -- then dried later. The oxidation of the plant compounds changes the color and flavor of the tea considerably. This is why green tea, which is not oxidized, contains more antioxidants.

Whether green or black, to prepare the tea so that it tastes best, boil water, then let the water rest for a few minutes before adding the bag. The water should not be at boiling temperature (212 degrees F), but a bit lower (180 degrees F). A couple of minutes should do it.

Not so rooibos. You can put the bag right in when it's hot as heck, even boil the tea for a while and because it's different chemically it won't taste bad (just stronger).

Rooibos tea is processed in a similar manner as traditional tea - the fermented rooibos is very red, has a fruity flavor, and has less antioxidants than green, or unfermented Rooibos. (I prefer the green over the red for taste alone -- it is remarkably mild and very similar to green tea without the astringency. Astringency is that part of tea that makes you pucker slightly (or more than slightly if you overbrewed) and makes your mouth feel dry.

I've been testing the green rooibos, steeped or boiled for 10 minutes. The boiled has the highest antioxidant activity.

A bit on tea and cancer.

* * * * *

Oxidation

Most people have heard of free radicals. Free radicals are formed when oxygen reacts with a normally stable molecule, making it unstable. To stabilize itself, it steals electrons from other formerly stable molecules and so on, until something puts a stop to it. So what the fuck does that mean?

Okay. Picture 10 fine fellows holding up a heavy glass ball. Along comes some bastard with only one shoe, and seeing that fellow #1 has a match to his own, he runs over, unties the damn thing and tears it off. Fellow #1 struggles to keep his footing, but the glass ball remains intact. But now he has only 1 shoe. And the floor is cold. So he lets go of the ball and steals the next fellow's shoe. All this activity upsets the ball, and it bangs against a wall and sustains a small crack. Now stuff can get in the ball, but it's still a ball. Fellow #1 goes back to holding the ball, but now fellow #2 is now stealing from the third guy, and so on. It upsets the balance. If two guys both simultaneously have shoes stolen, the ball topples and breaks.

And this is like a cell. Cell cracking = cell damage. Now a carcinogen has easier access to your genetic material -- your DNA.. Cell breaking = cell death, and you know, that can't be good.

An antioxidant is a fine fellow wearing two shoes and carrying a third. He runs up to Fellow #1, puts the extra shoe on his foot, laces it up and no one knows the better for it.

We make some antioxidants in our bodies, like superoxide dismutase, and we eat some, like Vitamin C, E and beta carotene, the precursor to Vitamin A. But like I said, as we age, we can use a bit of help. Like most things, it should be noted that oxidation is a balance. We need oxygen, and we even need some reactive oxygen species, because ironically, our immune system uses them to destroy bacteria. But not too much, or the good stuff goes too. If a cell is compromised enough, the free radicals mess with your DNA, the mutation survives, and cancer or other awful crap begins.

So...drink your tea. Eat your greens. And be nice. It couldn't hurt, especially around this time of year. Back with more gripping food smack in a bit.

Rooibos Tea

2005-11-26T22:56:00.000-08:00

I'm working on exiting school before my toddler begins. For my master's thesis, I'm researching rooibos tea. Specifically, I'm measuring the antioxidant activity of rooibos tea.

Rooibos tea is a little shrub that grows in one particular spot on Earth: Cedarberg, South Africa. It's a needly little guy with a very long taproot so that it can bake in the South African sun while gathering up the rare water. South Africans have been drinking the stuff for well over a century, but here in the U.S. I'd only heard of it about 4 years ago. (Now you can find it in Krogers/Ralph's, Whole Foods, Wild Oats, Trader Joe's, etc.)
Rooibos has a sweet taste, is caffeine free and low in tannins. It's an herbal tea (from Aspalathus linearis), whereas black, green and oolong teas are from a different plant (Camellia sinensis). More on teas and the fermentation that makes them next time, if I remember...

Now, all fruits and vegetables, as well as teas contain phytochemicals. The term refers to plant substances that affect humans (beyond being a carbohydrate, protein or fat). Many of these phytochemicals protect the plant. Among them are a group of compounds called polyphenols, and among those are some called flavonoids. Those are what I'm studying. They have antioxidant activity that, during the lifetime of the plant protects the leaves from sun damage and oxidation that could kill the plant. Our bodies have similar mechanisms designed to ward off the oxidative products of our own metabolism, and the oxidative effects of our environment (like pollution). As we age, our natural mechanisms work less efficiently and eventually we succumb to disease. The protection conferred by flavonoids to the plant often translates to antioxidant activity that might well protect us, and that's why it's being studied.

This is getting long so I'll explain oxidation in more detail later (it's a real page-turner!). What's important: oxidation is believed to cause aging and contribute to cancer, heart disease and possible Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and a host of other diseases that do us in. Also important: before you start megadosing on antioxidants, know that many antioxidants, when inhaled like candy on Halloween night (as pills or potions), perform as PRO OXIDANTS.

Next time: what the hell makes green tea green and black tea black and what the hell difference it makes, and if you're oh so lucky, some blathering on how oxidation works.