divalasvegas

Yet another beautiful dish from you hzrt8w. You mention that in China this dish is usually prepared using a whole chicken. How is this done? Would one just cut up a whole chicken as usual and proceed or is the chicken cut in half and then each half is fried? Also, since I love spicy dishes, would adding a Chinese-style chili sauce or chilis detract from this dish? I was thinking of a result that would be sweet, lemony-tart, and spicy. As everyone else has said, thanks so much for sharing your cooking and techniques.

How about a few more Jackal10? At least these are my no no's. 6. Swiss Miss Hot Chocolate Mix (or any cheap hot chocolate mix for that matter). This is the hot chocolate mix the office orders and it's pretty vile stuff, not even remotely chocolatey and it contains a ton of sugar plus artificial colors to make it look "brown." 7. Boneless Skinless Chicken Breasts. 8. Low Fat Cheese. 9. Fat Free Salad Dressings like Pritikin (hello, the olive oil in a vinagrette is actually good for you) 10. Seasoning packets for marinades, gravies, sauces, meat seasoning, etc. -- tons of sodium, artificial colors and artificial flavors. Ugh. Unnecessary and so easy to put together your own seasonings at home. Probably more to come.

Oh GG I just read the article from the first link you posted featuring advice from Dr. Charles Booras. BOORAS. Yeah, I'd say his name fits him like a glove. I especially liked this quote from him, although it was hard to choose since his list contained a veritable goldmine of unintentionally hilarious lines: You just can't trust anyone who disparages bacon.

Once again we have a self appointed expert who has compiled a list of the ten worst foods you can eat. The online article is even subtitled "Vile Vittles." In addition to the above "offensive" foods she also lists alcohol and raw oysters. To her credit she did include olestra (duh) as a food, er, substance to be avoided. Here's the link to the article: The Ten Worst Foods So how many of these "forbidden" foods do you partake of? How much of her list do you agree/disagree with?

Oh you KNOW Dad_of_snacky_cat is gonna try this one out I promise to report back when it happens, complete with photos. ← Hmmmm, snacky_cat not sure why, but this sounds like more of a threat than a promise!

Oh yes, canned fish/seafood products. Basic formula: crackers (Ritz or Townhouse), cream cheese, canned fish product (smoked oysters or clams, salmon, mackeral, but especially sardines), chopped onions (optional but a nice touch), topped off with the hot sauce of your choice (I prefer Tabasco, Goya, or Sriracha). Rock Creek soda too if you can find it; KoolAid or lawnmower beer if you can't.

Typical U.S. breakfast type foods: eggs (any style except boiled), bacon, home fries, toast (especially toast), grits, pancakes, waffles. None of it travels well especially in a sweaty styrofoam container. Trying to reheat it in the microwave only makes it worse.

Oh. My. GAWD. Anna N I admire your resourcefulness for digging this one up, although I find it more than a little disturbing that you knew of it's existence in the first place. I've always wondered when perusing the Cooks.com website what their criteria is for accepting a recipe and what "recipes" if any do they reject. Also, does someone actually have to test these recipes? Blech! Now, I double dare anyone out there to actually make this and report back.

*** Lowering my Ghetto Shield *** Rachel I don't think the recipe you guided us to sounds so terribly bad (yes, damning with faint praise). The marinade recipe on the other hand which among other ingredients includes enough sodium (salt, garlic salt, onion salt, soy sauce, and meat tenderizer) to keep me retaining water for entire year, sounds pretty gagtastic. I am surprised though that the old 50's/60's standby of Lipton Onion Soup Mix isn't involved somewhere.

Nope. Please elaborate. I suppose you're suggesting that kosher meat is less likely to have spinal cord tissue in it and won't include "downer" cattle, but that does not guarantee that there is no risk of transmission of mad cow disease. I wouldn't be sure that e coli contamination is impossible, either. Kashrut in slaughtering has more to do with the way the animal is killed (cut to the throat) and whether a rabbi is supervising than what the animal is fed or how clean the meat is. I'd like to think that cleanliness is a requirement of kashrut, but I've read too much about dirty kosher shops in England and so forth to believe that. ← Thanks Pan. Sorry to hear about the dirty Kosher shops in England. As I had stated in an earlier post, the case I referred to in Minnesota was documented in excrutiating detail and it was the conclusion that, at least for that particular meat processing plant, when the animals were butchered by hand there was never any e-coli contamination. It was only when it became mechanized that this happened. Of course, I'm sure the care taken when hand butchering a cow would vary from establishment to establishment.

How might this be so? ← From what little I know--and I admit docsconz it's not a whole lot--it's the handbutchering of the animal, in this case a cow and the fact that certain pieces of the cow is considered to be unfit/not Kosher. Years ago in Minnesota (can't remember the city or town) for instance people began getting ill and the local health experts finally figured out it was the ground beef. Well, the processing plant had until recently been owned by Jewish people who butchered all of their meat by hand (for decades with no problems), avoiding cutting the colon/other intestinal tracts. The new owners, however, decided to "modernize" and did everything mechanically with the result being that contents of the colon were mixed in with the processed/ground beef and people contracted e-coli. Also I believe meat from the spinal cord area and the cord itself is considered to not be Kosher. Edited for additional comments/clarification (and the fact that my fingers aren't working very well today).

Pardon my ignorance, but would purchasing Kosher or Halal meat and poultry be considered organic? Should one assume that because the meat or poultry is certified Kosher or Halal that those products would easily qualify as organic? I had been considering purchasing these forms of meat and poultry, at least as much as I can afford. Especially in avoidance of mad cow disease, I believe the Kosher way of butchering an animal makes anyone eating Kosher meat at nearly a zero risk of contracting that disease; same goes for ecoli. I don't know about Halal meat/poultry products in that regard.

Many Southern US households would often eat canned seafood such as salmon, mackeral and even sardines for breakfast. I know fish for breakfast may sound odd to some but this is how it was done: fry up some bacon until crisp, remove from frying pan, add diced onions and sautee until slightly soft. At this point add canned sardines, oil and all--how many cans is up to you of course. Do not use sardines packed in water since they are beyond vile. Then add black pepper, maybe a little seasoning salt/creole seasoning and water. Cover and simmer for a couple of minutes and serve over hot buttered grits and that crispy bacon on the side. Pass the hot sauce. Yum.

Had I written the script, this scene would have continued thusly: You've never had anyone give you the Aunt Jemima ot ? The name's Bond Girl, pal--not Bondage Girl! ← ← Okay, I'll bite: What the Hell is the Aunt Jemima Treatment? Does it involve hot grease and a spatula? Now I'm not sure I want to know!

Thanks Adam. I appreciate your explanations and depth of knowledge on all things fish/seafood. Thanks for the link re: steelhead. It really is delicious, especially grilled or broiled. I hope you get a chance to taste it. From the information provided in the link, it sounds like fishing for this ferocious beastie is an adventure within itself. About the Dover Sole, unfortunate indeed since I have heard those who've actually eaten the real thing rave about it. While not illegal or wrong to refer to USA Dover Sole as such on menus, since many restaurant dishes are often listed on the menu in excrutiating detail as to each component, method of cooking, source of ingredients, etc. (I'm not saying that this is a bad thing) perhaps just the addition of "U.S." on the menu would at least let diners know exactly what they're getting. However, I can understand why this probably would not happen since "Dover Sole" would command a greater price than "U.S. Dover Sole." Returning to the original intent of this thread, I think that I have already started on my "Fishing for New Experiences" in the sense that I'm learning more and more about new species of fish as well as different methods of preparation provided in threads on eG such as yours on various fish and shellfish as well as others. One fish I've always been intrigued by is Opah. Just from the description I've read about this fish I'd love to try it. It is native to Australia. Here's a link with some information about this fish: Opah Facts I had read that this fish had four or five different tastes/textures of flesh depending on which part of the body was eaten. Ever since then, I've wanted to try it. Has anyone out there eaten this fish? Also, I'd like to learn how to properly cook crayfish/crawfish at home. I tried this once many years ago and they weren't very good. I purchased them live at the DC Wharf and steamed them as I would steam blue crabs, but the end result was awful.

OK, dear, DUCK! While I agree with your appreciation of people who truly care about the product as opposed to those to simply go through the motions, I am appalled to find that there is someone who prefers rudeness to the alternative, which is good manners. It's ridiculous to say that someone who makes good food should be allowed to be rude, just because they make better food than is served in some other places, and I think it's sad that you feel that you need to suffer the ignominy of rude behavior in order to eat well. That's just absurd to me. Especially at the level of dining we're discussing here, and the locale. I mean, DC is not exactly a wasteland of good food! I try not to ever be served mediocre food, I only spend my money where I am at least hopeful to 90% of having a decent meal. That said, I will NEVER eat anywhere that has a component of "Screw you" attitude. And, dear, you shouldn't have to, either. We live in a great big world with so many choices, it's incomprehensible to me that you would want those negative experiences, or even a chance of them. Someone with a chip on their shoulder can NEVER give you a completely wonderful meal experience. It just won't happen. You need to stay under their radar, you need to hope that if they are in contact with you the moment won't have a tense result, that's unacceptable to me. Life is wonderful and horrible, and I refuse to go out of my way to chance horrible. If you're thinking that the 'artist' has a right to be rude and get away with it, I don't see things the same way. No one is so much better than someone else just because they have a talent, or have worked hard to do something (or for ANY reason, for that matter) that they have a right to be rude. That's just small minded, negative, unpleasant behavior, I won't tolerate it, and I'm dismayed if you feel that it is the price you need to pay, in order to feel that you are getting good food. Or good anything. ← Extremely well said Rebecca263.

After reading everyone's comments, I think I've come up a hassle free approach to taking photos in restaurants. I intend to proceed as follows: 1) Go with at least 8-10 other dining companions since there's definitely strength in numbers (make sure that several of them are built like NFL linebackers). 2) Bring my lawyer. 3) Bring/borrow adorable baby boy/baby girl (like DC Foodie, I think Noah kept the chef from goin' "medieval" on his family.) Of course, if I can borrow someone's twin babies, all the better. 4) Check for a written policy re: photo-taking. 5) Ask to speak with the manager to get persmission to take said photos. 6) After explaining who I am, provide the appropriate documentation--birth certificate, driver's license, note from my dead mother, DNA sample so he/she can verify that I am who I say I am. This will probably only be a short phone call, email and fax to the Department of Homeland Security. Hopefully their background check won't extend to my wild college days in Massachusetts. Uh, after all, some substances have medicinal value and really should be de-criminalized. Wait anxiously for the results. 7) Once seated and the food begins to arrive, make clearly audible "oohs and aahs" over how glorious the food looks, even if it looks like steaming piles of sh**. This is to assuage the artistic, tempermental head chef who will be standing across the room eyeing our table with suspicion. 8) Upon completion of the meal, stand up in unison, and put fingers down our throats and throw up. 9) Take more photos of that, then leave, promising the chef on our way out that we will only post photos of the highest quality; no blurred, out-of-focus depictions of his/her "art." Sounds like the end to a perfect evening to me.

"Sea Bream" is a generic name and doesn't really identify a species, just a type of fish. It works in the UK as nearly all of them sold are Gilthead bream Sparus aurata, which are related to but not the same as porgys Steelheads are the natural ocean going form of the Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss. The European Brown trout Salmo trutta can do a similar thing and are called "Sea Trout", "Salmon trout" or "Selwin". In Australia rainbow trout that are raised in sea water pens and undergo some of the body changes similar to a natural Steelhead are called "Ocean trout". I wonder if your "salmon trout" also come from a similar aquacultual practice, rather then being "Steelheads"? ← Thanks Adam for the clarification. The name steelhead was on various restaurant menus at the time. Sometimes I know that restaurants play fast and loose with exact terms, i.e., calling a fish "Dover Sole" when it's really something very different. It seemed to be everywhere--this was during the mid-90s in our area--then gone. Also, when I mentioned porgies for a second time I actually meant to say croakers were another fish very popular in our area. Oops. Showing my ignorance, but when you say "body changes" what do you mean? I have no insights as to the origin of the fish. BTW, I truly enjoy your posts on all things fish and shellfish. The pictures are stunning and your commentary always brings the various locales to life for me.

Not surprisingly, I always learn something new on eG. I had no idea that porgy's were also known as sea bream. I grew up eating this fish and it has always been very popular in this area. Same goes for croakers. However, there's a fish I had years ago that I haven't seen but would like to eat again. It was called steelhead, but was renamed salmon trout, and it's delicious. I suspect that it was renamed to increase the sale price. Anyone see this on menus or at your local fish monger? Edited to change porgies to croakers.

Does anyone out there know if this whole, uh, oh Hell I don't what to call it, came up in today's live online chat with the Washington Post's Sietsema?

Wow. Now I don't feel so bad about my pickled pig feet post upthread!

Well, I'll be even briefer: YOU GO GIRL!

raisab, you are entirely missing my point -- and indeed the point of all such legislation. Workplace nonsmoking legislation is not intended to protect you, the customer. As you correctly point out, you have the choice to go elsewhere. Workplace nonsmoking legislation is intended to protect workers in the workplace -- in this case, workers in the restaurant and bar indistry who work in bars and restaurants. As you correctly point out, "work is something you need to do," and it is something that various government bodies have determined that workers who "need to work" in office buildings, airplanes, restaurants and bars (etc.) should be able to do without exposing themselves to the unnecessary risk of exposure to secondhand smoke. According to your own logic, this is not "government interference in something one has a choice in," but rather government regulation of workplace safety. There is ample scientific evidence (I have cited some very compelling studies in these forums) that the hazards of secondhand smoke in restaurants and bars is significant. And it really doesn't matter whether the percentage of restaurant and bar workers who smoke is 25% or 75%. The nonsmokers still deserve protection (not to mention that even the smokers are exposing themselves to increased risk) working in a smoke-filled room. FWIW, my anecdotal experience suggests to me that the percentage of bar and restaurant FOH workers who smoke is not meaningfully greater than perhaps 35%. ← Yes, in general I would agree with you that government regulations are designed to provide an employee with a safe working environment; however, respectfully, if the establishment allowed smoking when that person applied for a job and they took the job anyway, knowing that they hate to be around smoke and/or consider it a health hazard, isn't that their responsibility? Did they have absolutely no responsibility whatsoever to not take a position in such an establishment? I know some out there would say that they didn't have a choice. Again, I would disagree. Yes, they did have a choice and they made it. They chose to take a job in an environment that they deemed offensive/deleterious to their health in a city that for some time has had many restaurants that were smoke free. Oh well, the point is moot anyway, Samuel. Though I wonder why having 80-90% smokefree and a measly 10-20% of restaurants that would allow smoking would have imposed such a "hardship?" Now, if someone would be kind enough to answer the question I posed in my previous post on this here. Edited for typos.

As for egotisical chefs or obnoxious restaurant staff in general, I absolutely agree. I for one have no desire to put up with any kind of "Soup Nazi" type experience when dining. And regarding the last part of your post re: Times Square/the Ginza, I can only say, damn, too bad. Oh well, a girl can always hope!

I've never tried taking photos in a restaurant before. There have been many positive, a few negative, and the downright bizarre (see the link to Holly Moore's experience upthread) reports on eG about taking pictures which left me feeling somewhat iffy about ever attempting to try it, so I really appreciate your comments docsconz which seem common-sense, practical and respectful of the owner's/manager's wishes. But like monvano who made these remarks earlier in this thread, I'm still hard-pressed to understand what exactly people like her are afraid of and why can't they see the upside of such (pun intended) exposure for their food. Oh, if only people could be more like Shola.