snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > The Bad Gastronomer

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 28 October 2015, 02:34 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 19,035
Glasses

Quote:
Originally Posted by thorny locust View Post
Alternatively: zucchini bread and the like? that is, vegetables and fruits added into things, in such a fashion that they don't taste like the vegetables/fruits are even there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril View Post
There are whole cookbooks devoted to this--to adding pureed veggies to everything from chicken tenders to macaroni and cheese. And if that is too much trouble, you can, say, buy the spinach or carrot pasta instead of the regular. There are ways to get veggies that don't involve eating a big salad.
Both of these are along the lines I was looking for. As for what I do like--baby peas, carrots (raw and lightly cooked), raw spinach (as part of an undressed salad), cabbage (raw and lightly cooked, but not pickled), corn. Parsnips in stew. Tomatoes in the form of tomato puree (I really, really hate the texture of tomatoes). And, if peas and beans count, then yellow peas in the form of soup. Lentils. White, black, brown beans in a variety of dishes.

Most green vegetables (see baby peas, above, for an example) taste like chlorophyll to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril View Post
I had to train myself to eat bell peppers, in particular, over time, beginning with them chopped very fine and cooked until very soft, and now I can eat them raw in strips, and a lot of other ways.
Now this, I don't understand (maybe because green peppers--all types--make me feel sick). My father did something similar with green beans as a teen (he had a job picking them and decided that if he were going to pick them, he was damn well going to eat them).

I've always thought that there are a lot of things I don't like because they don't like me, either. My experience has borne this out. I've never liked peaches or pears, and as an adult my mother revealed to me that I'd been mildly allergic to peaches as an infant (my mother's way of dealing with my food allergies was to not try and make me eat whatever food it was; none of the allergies were life-threatening, so as a strategy, it did work, even if it wasn't the best thing she could've done).

I spent 25 years with severely restricted fruit options (I could eat citrus, grapes, melon & bananas, basically). I've expanded back out a little (apples, carrots, celery & cherries have been reintroduced) since allergy shots came to my rescue, but I'm still very cautious.

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 28 October 2015, 02:47 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,695
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaboe Muffinchucker View Post
Both of these are along the lines I was looking for.
I got your point the first time, no need to rub it in. Sheesh!

Quote:
As for what I do like--baby peas, carrots (raw and lightly cooked), raw spinach (as part of an undressed salad), cabbage (raw and lightly cooked, but not pickled), corn. Parsnips in stew. Tomatoes in the form of tomato puree (I really, really hate the texture of tomatoes). And, if peas and beans count, then yellow peas in the form of soup. Lentils. White, black, brown beans in a variety of dishes.
That's a pretty well rounded group of vegetables really. IANAN, but I don't think you're in to much trouble with a group like that.

Quote:
I spent 25 years with severely restricted fruit options (I could eat citrus, grapes, melon & bananas, basically). I've expanded back out a little (apples, carrots, celery & cherries have been reintroduced) since allergy shots came to my rescue, but I'm still very cautious.
Have you tried cooking some of the fruits that you are cautious about? I don't know about you, but my issues with raw pineapple go away when the pineapple has been cooked (no, I'm not made of Jello).
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 28 October 2015, 06:00 PM
Esprise Me's Avatar
Esprise Me Esprise Me is offline
 
Join Date: 02 October 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,948
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
Have you tried cooking some of the fruits that you are cautious about? I don't know about you, but my issues with raw pineapple go away when the pineapple has been cooked (no, I'm not made of Jello).
Yes, fruit allergies are sometimes triggered by enzymes that get destroyed in the cooking process--and canning counts as cooking. I have a friend who's allergic to all stone fruits (along with soy, tree nuts, and probably a few other things I'm forgetting--poor guy!) but he can eat, say, canned peaches just fine.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 28 October 2015, 06:36 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 19,035
Glasses

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
Have you tried cooking some of the fruits that you are cautious about? I don't know about you, but my issues with raw pineapple go away when the pineapple has been cooked (no, I'm not made of Jello).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Esprise Me View Post
Yes, fruit allergies are sometimes triggered by enzymes that get destroyed in the cooking process--and canning counts as cooking.
What I have is called oral allergy syndrome. I am so allergic to alder pollen that before allergy shots I reacted to almost all the fruits of the rose family. This includes apples, peaches, cherries, pears, apricots, strawberries--basically, any fruit that starts out with a 5 petaled flower (I also reacted to roses themselves; if I got pricked by a thorn, it would turn white and swell up, the same way a lot of people react to a cat scratch).

I am not actually allergic to any of these fruits. According to my allergist, if I were, cooking would not make a difference (and it did, since I could eat applesauce even though I could not eat apples).

Plus, with the exception of apples, I don't really like cooked fruit (there's that texture thing again).

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 28 October 2015, 10:55 PM
Avril's Avatar
Avril Avril is offline
 
Join Date: 07 August 2002
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 10,547
Default

Some books about hiding veggies in things:

Deceptively Delicious, by Jessica Seinfeld (wife of Jerry Seinfeld)

As I understand it, there was some annoyance that it appeared this celebrity wife was just stealing other people's ideas. Including this woman's:

The Sneaky Chef, by Missy Chase Lapine

Both books are for fooling "kids," but I think the techniques may well work for adults.

For me, the reason I didn't like a lot of vegetables--including bell peppers, onions, and beans--has a whole lot to do with the way my mother cooked. She cut the vegetables in huge chunks and never cooked them all the way. So her pasta sauces and things had huge pieces of hot, raw onions, etc. It's not very pleasant. And the only way she ever cooked beans was to make a big, bland pot of pinto beans boiled in watered down beef broth. She loved it. Nobody else in the entire house could stand it. And then because she'd made so much, we were all confronted with it for a week. She did this at least 6 times/year! So it's no wonder I was averse to beans.

I did a lot of experimentation, and still do. I'm working on beans, still. I have a rough time with most beans. But I do like refried beans, and hummus, and baked beans.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 29 October 2015, 02:24 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 19,035
Glasses

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril View Post
I'm working on beans, still.
Why? Sounds like you have a lot of alternatives, so why work on beans anymore? Because you think you should like them?

My mother was a good cook (although she didn't think so because she--in her mind--cheated by using canned beans and soups, etc.), so my food aversions can't be laid at her door. My father couldn't eat tomatoes or garlic and didn't like a lot of vegetables, so it was a challenge for her sometimes. She hated seafood for texture reasons.

I combine the negative food traits of both my parents. There are a lot of things I won't eat due to texture (mushrooms and tomatoes, for example) and I just don't like a lot of vegetables (broccoli and cauliflower are nauseating, to my mind).

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 29 October 2015, 10:29 PM
Avril's Avatar
Avril Avril is offline
 
Join Date: 07 August 2002
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 10,547
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaboe Muffinchucker View Post
Why? Sounds like you have a lot of alternatives, so why work on beans anymore? Because you think you should like them?
Because I want to is good enough. I don't think people should like any particular food, though I do find it annoying to try to eat meals with super picky people.

But if you would like further rationales, here are some.

1. Beans are a very good protein source that is high in iron, unlike red meat, which is much more expensive. I can afford a can of beans much more easily than a steak.

2. Beans are high in fiber, without being bread, and sometimes one gets tired of bread.

3. I genuinely do like some things with beans and have found I like a lot of the new things I try, and I like having a varied diet. So I work on trying new things.

4. I prefer to have as few dietary "WILL NOT EAT THAT!"s as possible, because it tends to be easier on the people around me who might have me over for dinner, etc.

5. I really find food fascinating and exploring is fun even if things don't always taste good.

6. When I work on it, I've found I grow to like most things, and then that increases the enjoyment I get out of food in many ways.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 30 October 2015, 03:56 AM
ganzfeld's Avatar
ganzfeld ganzfeld is offline
 
Join Date: 05 September 2005
Location: Kyoto, Japan
Posts: 23,789
Default

I'm lucky dw and I love vegetables and beans and all kinds of other foods. The only downside is "all kinds of other foods" includes all kinds of meats and meat products. But we try.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 30 October 2015, 08:07 AM
Avril's Avatar
Avril Avril is offline
 
Join Date: 07 August 2002
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 10,547
Default

I meant to say that beans are high in iron, and red meat is high in iron, but that the red meat costs a lot, not that red meat isn't high in iron like beans.

I definitely refuse to make any radical changes in my diet in accordance with whatever the newest thing in nutrition is.

We were supposed to avoid fat, then maybe not, then no, that's bad for you, because you actually need fat. We were supposed to avoid butter in favor of transfat margarine, then no, that will kill you and butter is better. We were supposed to eat eggs, then they were going to kill us all, then they weren't actually bad. We were supposed to think chocolate was bad for us, but then it actually made us live longer.

I took a course in nutrition in college. My professor was very sensible, and maybe my opinions are still heavily influenced by this. But he gave us a good overview of how sea changes in the American diet took place--how what is now the "all natural" movement that was not even fully underway against partially hydrogenated vegetable oil was a reversal of a different sea change historically, when people worried about saturated fats like coconut oil that had previously been used. He did cover the cancer risks of processed meats, so the fact that studies have indicated a slight increase in risk with heavy consumption of them was not news to me. But, as with all things, he said it was important to balance a lot of things in one's diet, including the pleasure of eating.

The pleasure of eating is not a frivolous one. It is necessary for survival, or at the very least, good overall health. For most people, a push to "GIVE UP ALL OF X!!!!" is counterproductive.

I know it is for me, too! So while, like him, I know there are benefits and risks to consuming anything, a focus on overall health is far more important that demonizing a particular kind of food. In my focus on that, without even thinking about it, I don't end up overconsuming anything. Do I eat red meat? Yes, about twice a month. Do I eat processed meat? Yes, but it probably averages out to a couple times a week. These are not levels that indicate substantial health risk.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 30 October 2015, 12:08 PM
Dasla's Avatar
Dasla Dasla is offline
 
Join Date: 15 April 2010
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avril View Post
I definitely refuse to make any radical changes in my diet in accordance with whatever the newest thing in nutrition is.

We were supposed to avoid fat, then maybe not, then no, that's bad for you, because you actually need fat. We were supposed to avoid butter in favor of transfat margarine, then no, that will kill you and butter is better. We were supposed to eat eggs, then they were going to kill us all, then they weren't actually bad. We were supposed to think chocolate was bad for us, but then it actually made us live longer.

I took a course in nutrition in college. My professor was very sensible, and maybe my opinions are still heavily influenced by this. But he gave us a good overview of how sea changes in the American diet took place--how what is now the "all natural" movement that was not even fully underway against partially hydrogenated vegetable oil was a reversal of a different sea change historically, when people worried about saturated fats like coconut oil that had previously been used. He did cover the cancer risks of processed meats, so the fact that studies have indicated a slight increase in risk with heavy consumption of them was not news to me. But, as with all things, he said it was important to balance a lot of things in one's diet, including the pleasure of eating.

The pleasure of eating is not a frivolous one. It is necessary for survival, or at the very least, good overall health. For most people, a push to "GIVE UP ALL OF X!!!!" is counterproductive.
It sounds like you had a good lecturer. And I think not only has our understanding of nutrition changed over time but there are all these fads diets that really have no scientific backing. And while most of us here know the difference (I would hope) I think a lot of people don't. So it is even more confusing.

One of the reason I got into cooking at a young age is because as a fussy eater I can make what I like and adapt recipes to my own taste.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 30 October 2015, 02:28 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 19,035
Glasses

Thanks, Avril. That makes sense.

I never expect people to cook to my tastes. If someone can't cook without using garlic, for example, I don't accept dinner invitations (although in my circle of friends dinner invitations that are not potlucks are very few and far between). If there's something at a potluck I don't like, or I'm not sure of, I don't eat it. I've done these things all my life (although, as a child, being served by an adult, I mastered the art of cutting vegetables very, very small and swallowing them without chewing or tasting).

It's not (g)your job to cater to my tastes.

That said, I eat at ethnic (i.e., Greek, Lebanese, Indian, Italian, Chinese) restaurants frequently, which would have amazed me as a child. Sometimes, I grant you, there are only a few things on the menu I can eat, but I never go hungry. So even though I am super picky, I get quite annoyed by those who make a production out of being picky. If I don't starve going to, say, an Italian restaurant (filled with tomatoes, garlic and onions), they generally won't either.

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 30 October 2015, 03:55 PM
fitz1980 fitz1980 is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 4,625
Default

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/pr...-risks-of-meat

Quote:
How the media butchered the story about the cancer risks of meat

Why have so many media outlets reported that processed meat is as likely to cause cancer as smoking or asbestos? No scientist has said any such thing. Where were the experts to tell us what was true and false, asks Mediawatch.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 30 October 2015, 05:37 PM
Elkhound Elkhound is offline
 
Join Date: 09 October 2002
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,676
Default

http://theunaustralian.net/2015/10/2...-to-arrogance/
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 30 October 2015, 05:39 PM
Elkhound Elkhound is offline
 
Join Date: 09 October 2002
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 10,676
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by E. Q. Taft View Post

(I really ought to eat more vegetables, but...they're just inconvenient when you don't cook much.)
Most vegetables, you know, one can eat raw.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 31 October 2015, 02:43 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust thorny locust is offline
 
Join Date: 27 April 2007
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 9,906
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaboe Muffinchucker View Post
T If someone can't cook without using garlic, for example, I don't accept dinner invitations [ . . . ]
It's not (g)your job to cater to my tastes.
While it's true that it's not the host's job to provide twenty seven different meals, or to cook entirely differently than they know how or than their household is set up for: if that's your only reason for turning down a dinner invitation, under most circumstances I'd mention it to the host (though being careful of your phrasing.) If nobody's said anything otherwise, any meal I make is indeed likely to contain garlic somewhere; but I can certainly produce a meal without it, or for a large party at least some dishes without any, and I'd rather do than than not have a friend come over.

If I invite my vegan friend for dinner, there'll be something she can eat. If I'm inviting only vegans for dinner, it'll all be things they can eat; if I'm inviting a mixed group, they'll have to put up with there being meat dishes on the same table, but there will be enough that they can eat to fill them up (though sometimes I will take the potluck route partly for this reason.)
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 02 November 2015, 02:50 PM
Seaboe Muffinchucker's Avatar
Seaboe Muffinchucker Seaboe Muffinchucker is offline
 
Join Date: 30 June 2005
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 19,035
Glasses

Oh, all the people I'd be likely to eat dinner with know about the garlic issue. And the onion issue.

We meet monthly (at least) for dinner. We have two people who can't have pork (can't even eat in a restaurant that uses the same cutting board for pork as for other meat), one that can't have cheese, one that can't have gluten and me. I'm far and away the easiest, since for the others, these things make them terribly ill whereas I'm merely discomfited in comparison.

Seaboe
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 03 November 2015, 11:27 AM
Dasla's Avatar
Dasla Dasla is offline
 
Join Date: 15 April 2010
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 3,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fitz1980 View Post
From this article
Quote:
Instead, reporter Julian Lee, dressed in a lab coat, cast doubt on the data reviewed by the IARC.
Yeah one sure thing that is sure to send of my BS meter is a journalist in a lab coat. Of all my jobs in science only occasionally did I wear a lab coat. And when I did it was only in a lab, not just as general wear. Cause the thing about lab coats, is they are only to worn in a lab. The health and safety officer would get annoyed if you wore them in the meeting room, or in the lunch room or home on the bus etc. Lab coats have a purpose and the purpose is not to declare "I am a scientist"
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 03 November 2015, 04:31 PM
Horse Chestnut's Avatar
Horse Chestnut Horse Chestnut is offline
 
Join Date: 11 August 2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 5,307
Icon05 Is bacon actually bad for you? It may depend on your DNA.

After the World Health Organization concluded last week that processed meats cause cancer, millions presumably reconsidered their appetite for bacon and hot dogs.

But for many, the warning may be completely irrelevant.

In a study published last year with little fanfare, researchers found that genetics - a simple difference in your DNA - may determine how dangerous processed meats are for you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...s-on-your-dna/
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 03 November 2015, 07:02 PM
Esprise Me's Avatar
Esprise Me Esprise Me is offline
 
Join Date: 02 October 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,948
Default

Fascinating. I wonder how many other general health recommendations will eventually acquire an asterisk, signaling they're mostly significant for certain individuals and not others.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 03 November 2015, 08:44 PM
A Turtle Named Mack's Avatar
A Turtle Named Mack A Turtle Named Mack is offline
 
Join Date: 21 June 2007
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 21,451
Default

There are plenty that should, like gluten, Aspartame, peanuts, etc.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bacon Vodka -- Pure. Refreshing. Bacon. A Turtle Named Mack The Bad Gastronomer 4 05 September 2014 08:51 PM
Michael Douglas had tongue cancer, not throat cancer snopes Amusement Bark 21 25 June 2014 09:40 PM
Bacon Bacon aroma set to end A Turtle Named Mack The Bad Gastronomer 0 18 May 2013 05:18 AM
Taking Vitamin A & Smoking Increases Lung Cancer Risk? tphunter Medical 2 16 February 2007 01:47 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.