groucho

If you're looking for Indian at the corner of Clopper & Quince Orchard, I'd recommend trying Bombay Dhaba (around the corner from Madras Palace). While its buffet line doesn't have the variety of Madras Palace, I find the food at Bombay Dhaba more flavorful. If you go in the evening, please don't get the buffet line, which will have become skanky, but the regular menu items are mostly pretty solid. For those not in the area, I wouldn't consider either establishment to merit much of a trip.

There are many factors one might consider when choosing what to eat: a desire to promote "organic" farming is a fine reason to choose one watermelon over another, and a philosophical stance against consuming overly "processed" or "synthetic" foods (for whatever reason) may cause you to abstain from Miracle Whip. But I think you are raising a different, and quite interesting, issue entirely: how your conception of the food's quality directly affects your gustatory sensations. This phenomena was recently studied by neuroscientists who monitored the brain activity of subjects taking blind and non-blind taste tests of Pepsi vs. Coke. In the blind taste test, the subject's low-level "reward region" of the brain lit up (on average) significantly more for Pepsi. In the non-blind test, not only did the majority of the subjects claim to prefer Coke, but their brain activity was different as a consequence of their knowledge. For a more complete description, see "There's a Sucker Born in Every Medial Prefrontal Cortex" at the researcher's web site: http://www.hnl.bcm.tmc.edu/print.html. The point is, in this experiment (with two soft drinks which taste pretty similar to my palate, anyway), conception trumps sensation by a large margin, and at a fundamental brain-chemistry level. So I agree that this is a real and important phenomena in dining, but I come to a different conclusion. Although my conception of food surely factors into my enjoyment, I view this as a failing on my part, not on the part of the dish. As a lover of gustatory pleasure, I aspire to overcome the contaminating effects of my biases, and not let them detract from my enjoyment of anything delicious. I don't want to choose what to eat because of a superior advertising campaign or better brand image. Whether I choose not to eat something for reasons such as environmental concerns, personal health, culinary philosophy, it's not groovy enough, etc. etc., is a separate issue, but I disagree with the concept of "something cunningly manipulated to 'fool the diner' into thinking that it's good". If it tastes good, then, dammit, it tastes good. Don't let your prefrontal cortex fool you otherwise.

I don't know for certain what my bags are made of, but my current best guess is a PTFE/Teflon® coating on top of a Kevlar® weave. I would expect that to be microwave safe. However, this is largely conjecture. Having stuck the suckers in a microwave, I can offer you the following: 1) they absorb a minimal amount of microwave energy and 2) they haven't killed me yet. Your mileage may vary.

I hear you. I have a coworker who often microwaves a sandwich for lunch, and I wince every time I see him do it, knowing how miserable the bread must be. So it is without sarcasm that I say: I understand the pain you feel reading about microwaved bread. Nevertheless, IF you find yourself stranded on a desert island with nothing but a thick meatball sandwich in a toaster bag, a microwave oven, and a toaster; IF you want the meatballs hot and the cheese melted; and IF you prefer your bread to be golden brown rather than blackened, then I would humbly suggest that you try a little microwaving before toasting. I think you will be pleasantly surprised by the outcome. Even more boldly, I would suggest the following experiment: take two slices of bread, microwave one briefly until warm (when you microwave a sandwich, the water and fat-rich filling preferentially absorbs the microwaves), then pop both in a toaster and toast to your preferred level of doneness. Maybe even add some butter. Can you tell the difference between the slices? I did this experiment today under single-blind conditions with two slices of formerly frozen, decent-quality bread. I could discern no significant difference between the two. But perhaps I am simply a boor.

I've had my bags for a couple of weeks, and am still a fan. They've been a boon to my workday lunches. A few random observations and comments: I bought mine from toastabags.com. After the pounds-to-dollars conversion, they were $10.26 for two (including shipping and handling), and arrived by airmail about a week after I ordered them. For heavier sandwiches (sausage, meatball sub, etc.), I microwave the sandwiches, bag and all, for 10 to 20 seconds before popping them in the toaster. This helps to get the inside hot without burning the bread. The toaster action goes a long ways towards forgiving my dual sins of refrigerating and microwaving bread. Contrary to the illustrious Mr. Perlow, I would guess the white, wispy gases often seen rising from the bag are steam, not smoke. I don't get the "Magic wrap" version of the bag. Does it completely enclose the sandwich? If so, I would worry that the sandwich would be steamed rather than grilled/toasted. Also, I don't quite see the virtue, as my maximum sandwich thickness is limited by my wide-mouth toaster, not my bag. But what do I know? I probably woulda thought the bags wouldn't work either. Thanks, eGullet, for introducing me to this miracle of modern technology.