If you're a low carber, chances are you've at least tried flaxmeal in some context or other. Flaxmeal is simply ground-up flaxseed -- and yes, flax is the same fibrous plant from which fabric used to be made.
In the health food world, flaxseed is considered a superfood, with claims of benefits ranging from reducing your risk of cancer, stroke, heart disease and diabetes. These various benefits come from three components of flaxseed: Omega-3 fatty acids, fiber (both soluble and insoluble) and lignans, which are powerful antioxidants and rich in plant estrogens. There are conflicting studies over whether flaxseed also helps with menopausal symptoms (my personal, anecdotal, completely unscientific experience of this is a resounding YES).
If you're a low carber, however, flaxseed has an entirely different benefit package -- it's a "grain" that's not a grain. The carbs in flaxmeal are almost entirely fiber: Out of 2.02 carbs in one tablespoon of flaxseed, 1.9 of those carbs are fiber.
The flaxmeal "muffin in a minute" recipe is ubiquitous on low carb sites and lists. Structurally speaking, here's the basics: a teaspoon or so of butter or coconut oil, melted, beaten together with an egg, mix in a quarter cup of flaxmeal and whatever flavorings you like (cinnamon, Splenda, what have you) and half a teaspoon of baking powder, stir together in a microwave-safe mug or bowl and microwave for one minute. You can make sweet MIMs, savory MIMs, add nuts or dried blueberries or cheese or whatever. You can make MIMs in a selected bowl or container, split and toast for sandwich buns or bread. I just posted a Zucchini bread that started out as an MIM recipe.
I use the above MIM recipe, with a little salt, vanilla extract, and Splenda added, for pancakes. One "batch" makes two palm-sized, lovely pancakes that are very reminiscent of buckwheat pancakes.
I also make a flaxmeal cereal, particularly now in cold weather. It's very simple: Mix whatever quantity of flaxmeal with just less than twice the amount of water, some cinnamon, a little salt and Splenda. Drop a couple hunks of butter in, stir thoroughly (so there aren't any flaxmeal lumps) and microwave for one minute, then stir thoroughly again. It's very Cream of Wheat. Important note: Don't omit the butter, and I personally will never try coconut oil again instead.
All this said, there are two kinds of flaxmeal you can buy: Regular "brown" flax, and golden (often organic) flax. You can also choose between whole seeds and pre-ground flaxmeal.
Proponents of flax's health benefits say you should buy whole flaxseed and grind your own as you use it, and that's probably optimal. However, after trying two different coffee grinders and one Vitamix blender, I still can't get a nice fine consistent grind, and I refuse to spend the megabucks on a dedicated grain mill, so I buy already-ground flaxmeal. So sue me. Because of flaxseed's high oil content, you should store your flaxseeds or flaxmeal in the refrigerator or freezer in an airtight container.
I use both brown and golden flaxmeal, but not interchangeably. I prefer the brown flaxmeal for my hot flax cereal above; to me the golden flax makes the cereal too -- well, mucus-y -- and the consistency of the brown flax is much better. On the other hand, for MIMs and pancakes and so forth, I much prefer the golden flax.
Speaking of failed experiments, I've never liked flaxmeal used in any way as a breading, which is too bad because it does stick nicely, but it makes a shell rather than a crust, and not a pleasantly textured one, either. It can work as a binder in things like meatloaf, but I like other products more.
Sunday, March 10, 2013
Friday, March 8, 2013
OMG, zucchini bread!!!
I have fond memories of zucchini bread. Throughout my childhood, it was the only way I'd eat zucchini. My grandmother, who lived with us, made it anytime we had too much zucchini around the house, and what Hoosier doesn't have too much zucchini around the house part of the year? I ate it spread thickly with cream cheese. I remember an impassioned argument with my mother about why zucchini bread should count as a vegetable -- if you ate enough of it, which I was always willing to do!
Last night, using Muffin-in-a-Minute principles, I ate zucchini bread for the first time since starting Atkins almost ten years ago (March 13, 2003!!!).
Here's what I made:
MINUTE ZUCCHINI BREAD
1T butter, melted
2 large eggs, beaten
1t vanilla extract
2t pumpkin pie seasoning
1/2t salt
Artificial sweetener equivalent to 1/4c sugar (or to taste)
1/4c flaxseed meal
1 heaping tablespoon coconut flour
About 2/3c shredded zucchini
1t baking powder
Mix thoroughly in a microwave-safe bowl -- I used an oversized teacup-shaped soup bowl. Microwave until cooked through -- 2 1/2 minutes in my microwave, but microwaves vary. Remove from bowl and let sit upside down for a few minutes, or the "bottom" will be damp. At this point you can microwave it again for a few seconds to heat it up, eat it cold, or slice it and pop it into the oven or toaster oven if you like it crusty. Smear with cream cheese or your spread of choice, and enjoy the flashbacks!
This makes a big muffin/loaf. The flaxmeal gives it a wonderful nutty flavor, but you could add nuts too if you wished. You could even sub some nut meal for some of the flaxmeal. Haven't tried that yet, but I will.
Last night, using Muffin-in-a-Minute principles, I ate zucchini bread for the first time since starting Atkins almost ten years ago (March 13, 2003!!!).
Here's what I made:
MINUTE ZUCCHINI BREAD
1T butter, melted
2 large eggs, beaten
1t vanilla extract
2t pumpkin pie seasoning
1/2t salt
Artificial sweetener equivalent to 1/4c sugar (or to taste)
1/4c flaxseed meal
1 heaping tablespoon coconut flour
About 2/3c shredded zucchini
1t baking powder
Mix thoroughly in a microwave-safe bowl -- I used an oversized teacup-shaped soup bowl. Microwave until cooked through -- 2 1/2 minutes in my microwave, but microwaves vary. Remove from bowl and let sit upside down for a few minutes, or the "bottom" will be damp. At this point you can microwave it again for a few seconds to heat it up, eat it cold, or slice it and pop it into the oven or toaster oven if you like it crusty. Smear with cream cheese or your spread of choice, and enjoy the flashbacks!
This makes a big muffin/loaf. The flaxmeal gives it a wonderful nutty flavor, but you could add nuts too if you wished. You could even sub some nut meal for some of the flaxmeal. Haven't tried that yet, but I will.
Friday, January 25, 2013
Back to Basics -- Simple Pleasures
Not everything is about elaborate, clever recipes. It's easy, particularly since I've been low carbing so long -- ten years on March 13, 2013 -- to get more intricate, more imaginative, more experimental. And that's not a bad thing, because to me the worst thing ever is falling into a food rut and "settling" for something simply because it's low carb and a familiar, known quantity. I make a conscious effort to do and try new things.
But sometimes it's good to go back to the well and discover, to my surprise, just how good simple things are. An avocado half with salt. Tuna salad scooped up with pork rinds. Jicama sticks and homemade bleu cheese dip. A plate of cheese to be nibbled with hot tea. Deviled eggs. These things aren't something I settle for because they're low carb, or even because they're low carb and easy. They're things that taste good.
Last night the hubby and I ate at Cracker Barrel. I love this place because it's one of the few restaurants that still has specifically low-carb sections on both their breakfast and lunch/dinner menus. Paul had their "grilled roast beef" (a/k/a pot roast), a tossed salad with ranch dressing, and some of their wonderful hammy turnip greens. I had spicy grilled catfish fillets (delicious, juicy and sweet, 0 carbs) and three, yes, three, servings of turnip greens (2g carbs each) because my catfish came with three sides. I can't speak for Paul, but my dinner was absolutely perfect, satisfying, delicious and filling and I envied nobody in the world their dinner.
Stop and savor what you're eating. It doesn't have to be fancy and elaborate. Choose quality ingredients -- good, fresh, raw ingredients -- prepare your food properly, and it'll be tasty. But do yourself a favor and appreciate it. Are you so busy missing bread that you're not paying attention to how tender and juicy the chicken you're eating is? Are you trying so hard to pretend that your spaghetti squash is pasta that you're missing that delicious nutty/sweet squash flavor? Are you wishing so hard for french fries that you don't notice the delicious crunch of just-barely-sauteed zucchini?
If you've been away from sugar for a while, you may notice to your surprise how much sweeter ordinary foods (like, say, broccoli) taste. You'll notice layers of flavors you never noticed before. Maybe, like me, you'll find yourself liking foods you used to hate. Or maybe you'll just rediscover a new enjoyment of foods you already like.
Slow down. Taste. Savor. Immerse yourself.
And every now and then, touch base with simple pleasures.
But sometimes it's good to go back to the well and discover, to my surprise, just how good simple things are. An avocado half with salt. Tuna salad scooped up with pork rinds. Jicama sticks and homemade bleu cheese dip. A plate of cheese to be nibbled with hot tea. Deviled eggs. These things aren't something I settle for because they're low carb, or even because they're low carb and easy. They're things that taste good.
Last night the hubby and I ate at Cracker Barrel. I love this place because it's one of the few restaurants that still has specifically low-carb sections on both their breakfast and lunch/dinner menus. Paul had their "grilled roast beef" (a/k/a pot roast), a tossed salad with ranch dressing, and some of their wonderful hammy turnip greens. I had spicy grilled catfish fillets (delicious, juicy and sweet, 0 carbs) and three, yes, three, servings of turnip greens (2g carbs each) because my catfish came with three sides. I can't speak for Paul, but my dinner was absolutely perfect, satisfying, delicious and filling and I envied nobody in the world their dinner.
Stop and savor what you're eating. It doesn't have to be fancy and elaborate. Choose quality ingredients -- good, fresh, raw ingredients -- prepare your food properly, and it'll be tasty. But do yourself a favor and appreciate it. Are you so busy missing bread that you're not paying attention to how tender and juicy the chicken you're eating is? Are you trying so hard to pretend that your spaghetti squash is pasta that you're missing that delicious nutty/sweet squash flavor? Are you wishing so hard for french fries that you don't notice the delicious crunch of just-barely-sauteed zucchini?
If you've been away from sugar for a while, you may notice to your surprise how much sweeter ordinary foods (like, say, broccoli) taste. You'll notice layers of flavors you never noticed before. Maybe, like me, you'll find yourself liking foods you used to hate. Or maybe you'll just rediscover a new enjoyment of foods you already like.
Slow down. Taste. Savor. Immerse yourself.
And every now and then, touch base with simple pleasures.
Thursday, January 3, 2013
Just how fat are we?
Read an interesting article in the New York times today about the startling correlation (or lack thereof) between "excess weight" and mortality:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/opinion/our-imaginary-weight-problem.html?_r=0
when you read it, though, you have to be careful how you take this because, as the article says, it's only a statistical analysis. "Mortality" includes things like automobile accidents, lightning strikes, shark attacks, tsunamis, and other killer situations that can't be sanely linked with the victim's weight.
That said, it does bring into question what we've been spoon fed as "the truth" about what constitutes "normal" weight and "healthy" weight . . . and they're not necessarily the same thing. What's a realistic and healthy weight? Is it really what the AMA has been telling you? It's certainly not what the media is. The media is telling women they should all be Size 0. If you want a real eye opener, settle in in front of the TV and watch some old movies. Go back to the '40s, '50s, '60s, and look at the women. Not a one would've fit into a Size 0. One leg, maybe.
In the late 1990s, the federal government redefined overweight and obesity. Suddenly, overnight, over 29 million Americans became instantly obese or overweight -- all without gaining an ounce. Now, isn't that depressing?
Check this out:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/guideposts/fitness/optimal.htm
The new standard became a BMI (Body Mass Index) of 25 or below as a "healthy" weight. But the BMI itself is problematic. It's calculated on a simple weight-versus-height formula. It doesn't take into account skeletal frame or the amount of muscle on the body. Nearly all athletes would "score" as overweight or obese by the BMI calculation.
Even if this magic, arbitrary BMI of 25 is, however, 100% correct for every single person on the planet:
"The rationale behind these definitions is based on . . . data that shows increases in mortality with a BMI of 25 and above," said Judy Stern, an obesity researcher at the University of California at San Diego, and the only member of an NIH advisory panel to vote against endorsement of the guidelines. "They have misquoted the data . . . if they are going to do it scientifically, they should do it scientifically. I would not change public health policy on that."
We're back to "mortality." Which makes me very much want to see the raw data for these statistics, because it's starting to sound like the totally debunked Keys data that supposedly correlated fat consumption with heart disease: Faulty, biased, made-up pseudo-science.
You also have to look at the group who's performing these studies, as well as the group that's quoting the statistics. There is a huge pharmaceutical and diet industry lobby out there who have a multi-billion-dollar incentive to (a) keep us fat (or at least believing we are), and (b) keep us desperate to get thinner. The media is on their side -- doesn't it infuriate you when you hear this gorgeous girl at the next table whining about the five pounds she has to lose so she can fit into that Size 0 just like Supermodel X? The insurance industry is on their side because if they can quote statistics to say that you're overweight or obese, your illnesses are your fault and your problem and they can legitimately reduce or deny benefits. Even your doctor may be on their side because if he can prescribe you diet pills, he may get all kinds of incentives from the pharmaceutical company that makes them. Or he can send you down the street to a buddy who does bariatric surgery, who has even more incentive to tell you how fat you are.
Let me also remind you that this became the height of the low-fat craze, when doctors and, yes, the federal government were telling us we needed to cut way back on eating animal products and cut fat intake down to less than 30 percent of calories and eat a lot more grains (an interesting side note here is that most low-fat nutritionists said that the percentage of calories from fat actually needed to be less than 10 percent of intake, but the federal government didn't publish that because they felt people couldn't stick with such restrictions!). When America just got fatter under this approach . . . well, obviously it's because we weren't sticking to our low-fat diets, right? Not because the diet itself was hogwash. Meanwhile the agricultural industry is having a blast selling lots of grain products (so we can get those 6-12 servings per day!) and high fructose corn syrup, never mind that we're fattening up just like the cows and pigs who got fed the same grains and corn!
Once again . . . the "facts" are only as reliable as the people selling them.
So . . . how fat are we? What's a "normal" weight? What's a "healthy" weight? I strongly suspect there is simply no answer for human beings as a whole, or even sub-groups of human beings. I strongly suspect it's a very, very individual and subjective thing, and there's nothing the federal government hates more than not being able to pigeonhole us all in groups. Honestly, I don't believe there's any "magic number" that exists, period, even if you factor in height, age, gender, etc., etc. For instance, if you have arthritis, particularly in your back, hips or legs, you need to weigh less than if you don't. If you're just coming off of chemotherapy, even if you qualify as an "ideal" BMI, my bet is your body is unhealthy. If you have a supermodel figure but can't walk up a flight of stairs without wheezing, is that "success"?
So it's all about the individual. Your self-image. Your state of health. How good or bad you feel on a day-to-day basis, physically and mentally. Your goals and needs and plans. The activities that make you happy. And, just as importantly, a realistic and healthy way of life you can actually live with. The important thing is that you think about and refine and reexamine all of the above. Question it. Talk about it. Maybe getting down to Number X or Size Y shouldn't be the goal. Maybe "getting better" should be the goal -- feeling healthier, sleeping better, moving better, liking life better. Maybe the goal should be a process rather than an endpoint.
Because the numbers game is rigged, folks, and not in your favor.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/03/opinion/our-imaginary-weight-problem.html?_r=0
when you read it, though, you have to be careful how you take this because, as the article says, it's only a statistical analysis. "Mortality" includes things like automobile accidents, lightning strikes, shark attacks, tsunamis, and other killer situations that can't be sanely linked with the victim's weight.
That said, it does bring into question what we've been spoon fed as "the truth" about what constitutes "normal" weight and "healthy" weight . . . and they're not necessarily the same thing. What's a realistic and healthy weight? Is it really what the AMA has been telling you? It's certainly not what the media is. The media is telling women they should all be Size 0. If you want a real eye opener, settle in in front of the TV and watch some old movies. Go back to the '40s, '50s, '60s, and look at the women. Not a one would've fit into a Size 0. One leg, maybe.
In the late 1990s, the federal government redefined overweight and obesity. Suddenly, overnight, over 29 million Americans became instantly obese or overweight -- all without gaining an ounce. Now, isn't that depressing?
Check this out:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/guideposts/fitness/optimal.htm
The new standard became a BMI (Body Mass Index) of 25 or below as a "healthy" weight. But the BMI itself is problematic. It's calculated on a simple weight-versus-height formula. It doesn't take into account skeletal frame or the amount of muscle on the body. Nearly all athletes would "score" as overweight or obese by the BMI calculation.
Even if this magic, arbitrary BMI of 25 is, however, 100% correct for every single person on the planet:
"The rationale behind these definitions is based on . . . data that shows increases in mortality with a BMI of 25 and above," said Judy Stern, an obesity researcher at the University of California at San Diego, and the only member of an NIH advisory panel to vote against endorsement of the guidelines. "They have misquoted the data . . . if they are going to do it scientifically, they should do it scientifically. I would not change public health policy on that."
We're back to "mortality." Which makes me very much want to see the raw data for these statistics, because it's starting to sound like the totally debunked Keys data that supposedly correlated fat consumption with heart disease: Faulty, biased, made-up pseudo-science.
You also have to look at the group who's performing these studies, as well as the group that's quoting the statistics. There is a huge pharmaceutical and diet industry lobby out there who have a multi-billion-dollar incentive to (a) keep us fat (or at least believing we are), and (b) keep us desperate to get thinner. The media is on their side -- doesn't it infuriate you when you hear this gorgeous girl at the next table whining about the five pounds she has to lose so she can fit into that Size 0 just like Supermodel X? The insurance industry is on their side because if they can quote statistics to say that you're overweight or obese, your illnesses are your fault and your problem and they can legitimately reduce or deny benefits. Even your doctor may be on their side because if he can prescribe you diet pills, he may get all kinds of incentives from the pharmaceutical company that makes them. Or he can send you down the street to a buddy who does bariatric surgery, who has even more incentive to tell you how fat you are.
Let me also remind you that this became the height of the low-fat craze, when doctors and, yes, the federal government were telling us we needed to cut way back on eating animal products and cut fat intake down to less than 30 percent of calories and eat a lot more grains (an interesting side note here is that most low-fat nutritionists said that the percentage of calories from fat actually needed to be less than 10 percent of intake, but the federal government didn't publish that because they felt people couldn't stick with such restrictions!). When America just got fatter under this approach . . . well, obviously it's because we weren't sticking to our low-fat diets, right? Not because the diet itself was hogwash. Meanwhile the agricultural industry is having a blast selling lots of grain products (so we can get those 6-12 servings per day!) and high fructose corn syrup, never mind that we're fattening up just like the cows and pigs who got fed the same grains and corn!
Once again . . . the "facts" are only as reliable as the people selling them.
So . . . how fat are we? What's a "normal" weight? What's a "healthy" weight? I strongly suspect there is simply no answer for human beings as a whole, or even sub-groups of human beings. I strongly suspect it's a very, very individual and subjective thing, and there's nothing the federal government hates more than not being able to pigeonhole us all in groups. Honestly, I don't believe there's any "magic number" that exists, period, even if you factor in height, age, gender, etc., etc. For instance, if you have arthritis, particularly in your back, hips or legs, you need to weigh less than if you don't. If you're just coming off of chemotherapy, even if you qualify as an "ideal" BMI, my bet is your body is unhealthy. If you have a supermodel figure but can't walk up a flight of stairs without wheezing, is that "success"?
So it's all about the individual. Your self-image. Your state of health. How good or bad you feel on a day-to-day basis, physically and mentally. Your goals and needs and plans. The activities that make you happy. And, just as importantly, a realistic and healthy way of life you can actually live with. The important thing is that you think about and refine and reexamine all of the above. Question it. Talk about it. Maybe getting down to Number X or Size Y shouldn't be the goal. Maybe "getting better" should be the goal -- feeling healthier, sleeping better, moving better, liking life better. Maybe the goal should be a process rather than an endpoint.
Because the numbers game is rigged, folks, and not in your favor.
Monday, December 17, 2012
Uzi vs. Oozy . . . Automatic Weapons and French Cheese
There's an interesting article in Huffington Post this morning: "Automatic Weapons vs. French Cheese: Which Is Easier To Buy In The U.S.?"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/23/automatic-weapon-french-cheese-gun-control_n_1696200.html
This is a particularly sore topic in the wake of a horrifying school shooting in Connecticut. Guns and gun control is the topic du jour.
I'm not going to air my feelings on gun control. But I am going to air my feelings on cheese control and the prohibition of the sale of raw milk. Basically, my opinion can be summed up in two words: It sucks.
Yes, you can conceivably get various diseases from raw milk. You can also get salmonella from raw eggs or raw chicken (commercial or otherwise), but there's no prohibition against any backyard poultry producer selling you raw eggs or chicken. There's certainly nothing stopping large-scale commercial poultry and egg companies from selling you the least hygienically-raised eggs and chicken money can buy, and we blithely take those home every day. Groceries sell us spinach and green onions and strawberries that may or may not be infected with e. coli. Convenience stores sell us cigarettes that are extensively proven very, very definitely harmful. But I can't buy a gallon of raw milk or a flavorful raw-milk cheese aged less than 60 days because there's a remote possibility that if the producer isn't observing good standards of cleanliness at his facility, it might contain harmful bacteria.
The typical response to this is: Well, hey, pasteurized milk cheeses are delicious. So are cheeses aged over 60 days. What's the big deal?
As somebody who has actually eaten artisanal, unpasteurized Brie de Meaux, I can tell you that, yes, it is a big deal. It's the difference between a Monet and a Xerox copy of a print of a Monet. It's the difference between a really great bottle of wine and Mogen David. It's the difference between a juicy, seared, well-seasoned burger fresh off the grill and a mystery meat patty from McDonald's that's sat under heat lamps for an hour.
The artisanal foods movement is a big and growing concern. Small wineries, microbreweries, artisanal breads, and green markets selling organically grown produce, free-range chicken, pastured meats, all face their own challenges in competing against the big commercial concerns. Their goods cost more than commercial, mass-produced equivalents. There's no way around that. Therefore, they have to offer something the commercial producers can't -- better flavor, better nutrition, a clean conscience about the living conditions of your meat or the environmental impact, whatever.
The artisanal cheese industry, however, is also disadvantaged by the War On Raw Milk. This seriously limits the cheeses that can be produced and "dumbs down" the flavor of these artisanal cheeses. Imagine artisanal vintners being told, "You can make all the wine you want, but you can only use white grapes. Hey, why are you complaining? What's wrong with white wine?"
If the government is really that worried about the dangers of raw milk and raw milk cheeses, why not just require a warning label sticker? "Warning: This product contains unpasteurized milk. Unpasteurized milk can contain dangerous bacteria and can cause diseases such as listeria." (Never mind that eggs and raw chicken and other foods aren't required to carry such labels.) Heck, I'd be more than willing to sign a liability waiver for my cheesemonger.
Just one last point. I've never heard of anyone killing anyone else using gooey, rich, unpasteurized cheese as a murder weapon. It may well have happened in the history of the world, but frankly, I find those odds more than acceptable.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/23/automatic-weapon-french-cheese-gun-control_n_1696200.html
This is a particularly sore topic in the wake of a horrifying school shooting in Connecticut. Guns and gun control is the topic du jour.
I'm not going to air my feelings on gun control. But I am going to air my feelings on cheese control and the prohibition of the sale of raw milk. Basically, my opinion can be summed up in two words: It sucks.
Yes, you can conceivably get various diseases from raw milk. You can also get salmonella from raw eggs or raw chicken (commercial or otherwise), but there's no prohibition against any backyard poultry producer selling you raw eggs or chicken. There's certainly nothing stopping large-scale commercial poultry and egg companies from selling you the least hygienically-raised eggs and chicken money can buy, and we blithely take those home every day. Groceries sell us spinach and green onions and strawberries that may or may not be infected with e. coli. Convenience stores sell us cigarettes that are extensively proven very, very definitely harmful. But I can't buy a gallon of raw milk or a flavorful raw-milk cheese aged less than 60 days because there's a remote possibility that if the producer isn't observing good standards of cleanliness at his facility, it might contain harmful bacteria.
The typical response to this is: Well, hey, pasteurized milk cheeses are delicious. So are cheeses aged over 60 days. What's the big deal?
As somebody who has actually eaten artisanal, unpasteurized Brie de Meaux, I can tell you that, yes, it is a big deal. It's the difference between a Monet and a Xerox copy of a print of a Monet. It's the difference between a really great bottle of wine and Mogen David. It's the difference between a juicy, seared, well-seasoned burger fresh off the grill and a mystery meat patty from McDonald's that's sat under heat lamps for an hour.
The artisanal foods movement is a big and growing concern. Small wineries, microbreweries, artisanal breads, and green markets selling organically grown produce, free-range chicken, pastured meats, all face their own challenges in competing against the big commercial concerns. Their goods cost more than commercial, mass-produced equivalents. There's no way around that. Therefore, they have to offer something the commercial producers can't -- better flavor, better nutrition, a clean conscience about the living conditions of your meat or the environmental impact, whatever.
The artisanal cheese industry, however, is also disadvantaged by the War On Raw Milk. This seriously limits the cheeses that can be produced and "dumbs down" the flavor of these artisanal cheeses. Imagine artisanal vintners being told, "You can make all the wine you want, but you can only use white grapes. Hey, why are you complaining? What's wrong with white wine?"
If the government is really that worried about the dangers of raw milk and raw milk cheeses, why not just require a warning label sticker? "Warning: This product contains unpasteurized milk. Unpasteurized milk can contain dangerous bacteria and can cause diseases such as listeria." (Never mind that eggs and raw chicken and other foods aren't required to carry such labels.) Heck, I'd be more than willing to sign a liability waiver for my cheesemonger.
Just one last point. I've never heard of anyone killing anyone else using gooey, rich, unpasteurized cheese as a murder weapon. It may well have happened in the history of the world, but frankly, I find those odds more than acceptable.
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Vegetarians beware! All others, prepare to drool!
Grilled steaks in mid-December?
Hell, yes!
We have a remarkable and unusual concatenation of events here. First, it's unseasonably warm for December -- today's high, 56 degrees. Second, by a remarkable coincidence, the little oddball IGA nearby had whole ribeyes on sale for $3.99 a pound (the whole ribeyes on sale happens about every couple months there, although last time they were $4.99).
We bought a whole ribeye and cut it up -- part into a beautiful big roast, the rest into monster steaks almost 2" thick. These were actually really great ribeyes, well marbled with a lot of fat. And because it's so warm out, we decided to have Paul's infamous grilled steaks in the middle of December.
Now, let me put in a word here about Paul's steaks. My husband is justly famous for his steaks. I've literally never had a steak better than his. We ate at the famous St. Elmo's here in Indianapolis and the steaks were no better than his (just a whole lot more expensive). Everyone who knows Paul starts to salivate at the mention of his steaks.
We start with really thick steaks because Paul and I like our steaks on the rare end of medium rare -- heck, when asked how I like my steak, I usually say, "Just walk it through a warm room." BUT we also like our steak nicely charred on the outside. Hence, thick steaks.
Paul seasoned the steaks with his seasoning mix du jour -- it varies with his mood -- and drizzled them with a little olive oil while the grill heated up HOT. When he put those babies on, the flames shot up high! I cooked the veg while Paul put our steaks through the hellfire. He later showed me his arm -- he'd managed to singe all the hair on his forearm!
Paul then called me out to gauge doneness, because even after years and years of cooking steaks, he can't tell when they're done.
For those of you who don't want to have to call the spouse to come over and check the steaks, here's an excellent tutorial on how to judge the doneness of your steak without poking disastrous, juice-leaking holes in it:
http://www.simplyrecipes.com/recipes/the_finger_test_to_check_the_doneness_of_meat/
You want to take your steak off the grill a little bit before it's completely done to your liking, because it will continue to cook after you take it off. The thicker the steak, the longer it will continue cooking. Also, if you're like us and really like the outside a bit charred, that makes gauging the doneness a little more tricky, so there is something of an art to it, I'll admit. At any rate, Paul has the knack of cooking steaks. I have the knack of divining doneness. We make a good team.
Put your steaks on a warmed platter and let them rest at least five minutes, ten if they're really thick. This is crucial. Let them rest undisturbed. Otherwise, they won't finish cooking, and when you cut into them, the juices will leak out everywhere instead of remaining in the meat.
Paul's steaks today were perfect. Absolutely perfect. The pinnacle of steak perfection to which all steaks should aspire. The outside was nicely charred, the inside was medium rare to rare, every juicy morsel tender and seasoned to eye-rolling deliciousness. It's a common misconception that people on Atkins live on steaks, and today of all days I'd be pretty much okay with that.
As Paul would say, "Not bad for $3.99 a pound."
In a few days I'll try, TRY, to make a prime rib roast that measures up to those steaks (I'd really have preferred bone-in, but there you are), but I'm telling you, the memory of those steaks will have me drooling until the next warm spell.
Hell, yes!
We have a remarkable and unusual concatenation of events here. First, it's unseasonably warm for December -- today's high, 56 degrees. Second, by a remarkable coincidence, the little oddball IGA nearby had whole ribeyes on sale for $3.99 a pound (the whole ribeyes on sale happens about every couple months there, although last time they were $4.99).
We bought a whole ribeye and cut it up -- part into a beautiful big roast, the rest into monster steaks almost 2" thick. These were actually really great ribeyes, well marbled with a lot of fat. And because it's so warm out, we decided to have Paul's infamous grilled steaks in the middle of December.
Now, let me put in a word here about Paul's steaks. My husband is justly famous for his steaks. I've literally never had a steak better than his. We ate at the famous St. Elmo's here in Indianapolis and the steaks were no better than his (just a whole lot more expensive). Everyone who knows Paul starts to salivate at the mention of his steaks.
We start with really thick steaks because Paul and I like our steaks on the rare end of medium rare -- heck, when asked how I like my steak, I usually say, "Just walk it through a warm room." BUT we also like our steak nicely charred on the outside. Hence, thick steaks.
Paul seasoned the steaks with his seasoning mix du jour -- it varies with his mood -- and drizzled them with a little olive oil while the grill heated up HOT. When he put those babies on, the flames shot up high! I cooked the veg while Paul put our steaks through the hellfire. He later showed me his arm -- he'd managed to singe all the hair on his forearm!
Paul then called me out to gauge doneness, because even after years and years of cooking steaks, he can't tell when they're done.
For those of you who don't want to have to call the spouse to come over and check the steaks, here's an excellent tutorial on how to judge the doneness of your steak without poking disastrous, juice-leaking holes in it:
http://www.simplyrecipes.com/recipes/the_finger_test_to_check_the_doneness_of_meat/
You want to take your steak off the grill a little bit before it's completely done to your liking, because it will continue to cook after you take it off. The thicker the steak, the longer it will continue cooking. Also, if you're like us and really like the outside a bit charred, that makes gauging the doneness a little more tricky, so there is something of an art to it, I'll admit. At any rate, Paul has the knack of cooking steaks. I have the knack of divining doneness. We make a good team.
Put your steaks on a warmed platter and let them rest at least five minutes, ten if they're really thick. This is crucial. Let them rest undisturbed. Otherwise, they won't finish cooking, and when you cut into them, the juices will leak out everywhere instead of remaining in the meat.
Paul's steaks today were perfect. Absolutely perfect. The pinnacle of steak perfection to which all steaks should aspire. The outside was nicely charred, the inside was medium rare to rare, every juicy morsel tender and seasoned to eye-rolling deliciousness. It's a common misconception that people on Atkins live on steaks, and today of all days I'd be pretty much okay with that.
As Paul would say, "Not bad for $3.99 a pound."
In a few days I'll try, TRY, to make a prime rib roast that measures up to those steaks (I'd really have preferred bone-in, but there you are), but I'm telling you, the memory of those steaks will have me drooling until the next warm spell.
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Anne's Going Renegade!!!
Hey, folks.
You may notice me becoming less visible (or invisible) on the low-carb lists. I'm not going to give any specifics because saying negative things about others is absolutely not me, but some things have upset me and I'm kind of undecided as to where I go from here. Arguing and complaining and bringing negativity to a list is something I just refuse to do, so I'm going to just lurk for a while and see how I feel later.
At any rate, I feel like there's room out there for another low-carb list with a different slant, so in the spirit of all those people who have ever been told, "If you don't like [insert mood/policy/rule here], why don't you go start your own list?" Well, I'm doing it! Please feel welcome to join me at LCNoStress:
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/LCNoStress/
I hope to see all my low carb friends and hopefully plenty of new faces, too!
Thanks,
Anne Logston
You may notice me becoming less visible (or invisible) on the low-carb lists. I'm not going to give any specifics because saying negative things about others is absolutely not me, but some things have upset me and I'm kind of undecided as to where I go from here. Arguing and complaining and bringing negativity to a list is something I just refuse to do, so I'm going to just lurk for a while and see how I feel later.
At any rate, I feel like there's room out there for another low-carb list with a different slant, so in the spirit of all those people who have ever been told, "If you don't like [insert mood/policy/rule here], why don't you go start your own list?" Well, I'm doing it! Please feel welcome to join me at LCNoStress:
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/LCNoStress/
I hope to see all my low carb friends and hopefully plenty of new faces, too!
Thanks,
Anne Logston
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)