EJRothman

FoodTV doesn't come on the air until like 8:30 or 9:00 here on the East Coast.

I generally eat out 1-3 times a week. I always go to "bang-for-the-buck" local places because I am a poor college student. When the parents are buying it tends to get a little more upscale, but still moderate. I have not been to any of the listed restaurants. Last year I went to Bread Bar at Tabla, I have been to Mesa Grill, Gotham Bar and Grill way back when I was young (early teens), and maybe one notable restuarants. I usually dine near home, but also find restauarants around the city if I happen to be in the area. I have a few places I go regularly to, but am always looking for a new good bargain place.

Nitro-Tech Protein bars and beef jerky for all me protein-ated needs.

There seems to be a lot of positive feedback on the Maverick E-73. From what I can find out about it, it is a remote version of the E-8. Is there really that big a draw to having the remote sensor? The E-73 costs 2-3X more than the E-8 and just doesn't seem worth it. Is it really that hard to remember to return to the kitchen at the approximate time you think the meat is done?

Gage & Tollner on Futon Street in Brooklyn has been continuously operating since 1879. I know it's the oldest restaurant in Brooklyn, not sure where it ranks on the list of oldest in the city. Pete's tavern on E. 18th Street has been continuously serving food and drink since 1864. Does this count as a restaurant? -Eric

Monkfish cubes, wrapped in bacon, interspersed with cherry tomatoes and drizzled with basil oil.

I would be thrilled if EGullet could get Willet to do a Q&A. c'mon people speak up, join me here!

I have always kept my fork in my left hand and knife in my right. I am left handed. No one in my family does the switch over thing. In fact, I rarely see people doing that, and every time I do it seems very odd. I also keep my forearms/elbows on the table at all times. For demographic purposes in this little exercise, I am from NYC, born and raised. -Eric

Nerissa, you are only calculating "Active" calorie burn. The human body burns calories by moving, thinking, pumping blood, etc. A 5'1", 118 pound female (my gf, in this case) burns appx. 1600 calories just through normal bodily activity, i.e. if she sat in bed all day staring at the wall. Add normal daily activities plus moderate exercise and getting up to 2500 is not hard for her - she routinely burns many more due to her job. I personally estimate that I burn around 3500 calories a day based on my body composition and activity level. -Eric

Excelent recent post, Stone. The only thing I'd really like to address is the term, "healthful." According to the dictionary it means the same thing as healthy. My twisted mind has created two seperate definitions, however, and I feel compelled (bored, really) to share them. I think of 'healthy' as meaning dietetic. Foods that are basically low in calories. 'Healthful,' on the other hand, gives me the impression that the food has many nutritious characteristics regardless of calorie content. This may be stupid, but whatever.

The problem with this of course, is that the definition of obesity is a terrible measure of a person's overall body composition. "Weight" by itself says nothing about a person's health. Many muscular individuals far exceed the standards for obesity. Mark Maguire is the most prominent example. Most football players also fall into the category. The government needs to wise up and define obesity by body fat composition, not weight. To address your other points: Smokers are physically addicted. There was a whole long discussion of food attictions elsewhere, and I don't want to get into that again, but I think the two are different. I agree that a calorie is a calorie and that overconsumption of anything leads to obesity. However, I think that it is a step in the right direction to get people to eat more nutritious foods. From there maybe weight loss can follow. As I originally noted, more nutritious foods tend to lend a greater sense of satiety, which may cause people to eat less. Finally to address: This is very true, but that doesn't mean that there is no importance to proper nutrition for blood-chemistry reasons. There was a NYTimes Science section article (too long ago for a link) that suggested that overweight elderly individuals are better served by focusing on proper nutrition as opposed to weight loss, because at their advanced age it may be healthier to remain at a stable weight than put their body through the physical stress of the weight loss process. Just some food for thought (and calorie free at that!)

First off, I butchered Lyle's quote, so if I am misrepresenting your POVs then I apologize and it is not intended. To address a couple of the issues raised, the problems with "dieting" is that it is often a misguided attempt to lose weight fast and then return to previous eating habits. What is really needed is a complete and nutritious diet (as in "a bird's diet is composed of worms, and seeds") that balances nutrition and flavor. Personally I abide by a diet that focuses on proteins, vegetables, and whole grains - thereby avoiding refined and processed foods. I eat any enjoy foie gras, in fact I can't imagine an alternative diet plan that I would enjoy the taste of more. No, I do not eat McGriddles, but there is a large spectrum between those and iceberg lettuce with a spritz of lemon.

I think we have a whole site full of such exceptions: pretty much everybody on eGullet is top-percentile food-and-nutrition knowledgeable and eats junk food in smallish amounts, yet judging from the events I've attended they are physically similar to the population at large, if not fatter. Yes, a site full of exceptions, but still exceptions at that. I'm still not buying it. All you have to be is the average moron who watches Oprah or any other afternoon- or morning-TV programming to acquire the dim knowledge that junk food is unhealthy. I would hazard a guess that not just some, but the overwhelming majority of people who eat junk food are fully aware that it's bad for them, just as (and here's an actual useful analogy to smoking) pretty much everybody who smokes knows it is hazardous to one's health. Yes, I agree that most people know junk food is bad for them. That's not enough to change anything. Ask them why junk food is bad for them. Ask them what they should eat instead. Ask them what makes those certain foods more nutritious than fast food. You'll get a blank stare as a response. People generally no nothing about nutrition, knowing something is unhealthy merely skims the surface. Food is different than smkoing in this regard. Ask anyone why smoking is bad, they'll tell you it gives you cancer, makes skin sag, makes you look older, makes teeth yellow, clothes smell stale, hair and nails brittle, etc. People know what smoking does. They also know how to avoid this: don't smoke. Ask people what unhealthy food does and all you get is "it makes people fat." They don't know why. Plus, you can't just stop eating. You need to know what not to eat. There's another issue that hasn't really been addressed as well. Yes, fat guy, as you said, you are overweight, like the majority of this country. The difference is (and this is all assumption) you got that way because you overindulged in high-quality foods and didn't get as much exercise as you should. Now I have know way to prove this, and I may be wrong, but I bet that although you are fat, you are also a lot healthier than most fat people because the foods you eat are highly nutritious sources of vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and healthy fatty acids. So my guess (and I am going out on a limb) is that fat gourmands are healthier than fat fast foodites.

I think we have a whole site full of such exceptions: pretty much everybody on eGullet is top-percentile food-and-nutrition knowledgeable and eats junk food in smallish amounts, yet judging from the events I've attended they are physically similar to the population at large, if not fatter. Yes, a site full of exceptions, but still exceptions at that. With regard to a later issue you address: A combination of factors is at work here. The manual laborers are working hard yes, but consuming low quality junk food due to cost, thus still overconsume. The executive probably watches what he eats and has a session with his personal trainer after work and on the weekends.As you also mention (not quoted here) We cannot change the availability of food. You're right, we're not hunting animals anymore. My hope is that knowledge of nutrition will catch on and maybe (though doubtfully) fast, cheap food will begin to embrace more healthful foods. They have attempted, and currently failed to do this (a salad with 2000 calories of dressing on it is not health food). I wish they would stop trying to fool the ignorant public, but that, of course, would be bad business.

In order to substantiate that statement you'd have to show that, among similarly situated people, the ones with more knowledge of nutrition weigh less. The only information I've seen on this point indicates that many people are obese despite the fact that they understand they're eating unhealthy food and too much of it. As an obese person who eats virtually no junk food and probably knows more about nutrition than 99% of the population and more about how food is produced and prepared than 99.99%, I find the notion that ignorance and disconnectedness from production are the root causes of obesity to be absurd. There is only one universal cause of obesity, and I stated it above. Beyond that, any attempt at a one-size-fits-all (so to speak) explanation is bound to be misguided and, if it forms the basis of policy, harmful to those who don't conform to averages (and in my life, I've met very few average people). Granted I do not have the resources to prove that those who know more about nutrition tend to be more fit (I do not like to use terms like "weigh less" because weight and fitness are not directly related. Muscle is denser than fat, and thus a person will more muscle tone can weigh more than aa fat person). It is not enough for a person to understand that they are eating unhealthy foods, they need to know why that food is unhealthy, as well as what to eat that is better. I agree with you, FG, that you fit the mold of a person who knows a great deal more about nutrition than the average person, eat no fast food, yet, as you admit, are obese. The difference, however, is that food is a way of life for you. You eat out multiple times a week, cook lavishly at home, etc. The majority of the public does not go to the extremes that you do for good food. Yes, taste is important, but that have been weined onto the taste of cheap, fast food. Although it is often derided for lack of flavor, wholesome food can be flavorful if done properly. Bottom line is that using yourself as an example of a person who knows nutrition, avoids fast food, yet remains unfit is misplaced as you are a profound exception to the rule. -Eric

I agree that most people feel compelled to eat less in the summer, my parents and sister seem to eat less. I however eat my normal tonnage of food regardless of the weather. -Eric

Although I think fast food is disgusting and a major cause of obesity in this country and around the world, I agree with FG and others that banning or taxing it will do little ot alleviate the problem. One major cause of obesity in this country is a profound ignorance towards the field of nutrition. Being tht nutrition interests me and that I learn whatever I can about it, it astonishes me how little the vast majority of the population knows about the subject. This past Sunday I found myself in a debate over the problems associated with trans fatty acids. This friend of mine had never even heard of trans fatty acids, and was claiming that I was simply proliferating some crack-pot new age nutrition advice. My point being that any solution to the obesity problem must begin with educating the public on better nutrition. Granted, this will be a difficult task, made even more difficult by the fact that the government has its head stuck up its ass when it comes to nutrition. There are, however, some basic guidelines that hold true, such as comsumption of unprocessed whole grians, vegetables, and meat. What this country really needs is to appoint Harvard professor Walter Willet - one of the most pragmatic and learned nutrition experts currently around - to head the FDA. In lieu of quality whole foods, this country is obsessed with unheathy refined foods which do little to aid the body in nutrition absorption while contributing little to satiety, resulting in overconsumption of calories. This works hand in hand with the fact that hardly anyone does any manual labor anymore which would help burn off these calories. The fact that the majority of America lives a rural/suburban life with little to no walking only exacerbates the problem. As the New York Times reported, major cities which induce people to walk as a primary means of transportation may show less incidence of obesity. Interestingly, the latest issue of Eating Well (content not available online) has a feature article on efforts to study indiginous (sp?) tribes in an attempt to reconstruct early human eating habits. A life of constant activity and the need to work for food leads to virtually nonexistant occurances of heart disease and obesity. Now, leaving modern society and living in the hinterlands hunting, gathering, and farming is completely impractical. But recognizing the benefits of unprocessed foods and the importance of exercise is something of grave importance in today's fast-paced, fast-food society. Sorry for the long post, nutrition is a point of great interest for me and always hits a nerve. -Eric

Just curious, but do you use both a chef's knife and a santoku? I have both a santoku and a chef's. I use the santoku for small vegetables, chopping, etc. The chef's knife gets used for larger veggies (anything bigger than an eggplant such as a squash), chopping herbs, and for hard stuff that needs the added weight of the chef's knife. These knives are the family knives, I plan on getting my own personal knives when I make some money this summer (poor college student). No one takes care of this knives and since the santoku is new (and hence sharp) and the chef's knife is old (and hence dull), the santoku is generally reached for first. When another family member is using it, I grab the chef's instead. -Eric

I've heard it's a bad idea to put toddlers in the freezer. *Sorry, couldn't resist.

Thanks for the clean-up, FG. Louisa, congratulation on getting your stage. Your writing is top notch and I always greatly anticipate your next entry. Do keep writing between now and mid-August. Whether or not you're working in a kitchen your depiction of Parisian life is thorougly enjoyable. -Eric

Hi - General consensus is that buying individual knives is better than buying a whole set of knives. This way you get what you need/want and avoid the knives you won't use, but are nevertheless included in the set. As for sharpening, the method of choice is a honing steel to keep the edge (ideally used every time you use your knives) and a whetstone to grind a new blade (usage ranges from once or twice a month to once of twice a year depending on usage). The Spyderco Sharpmaker seems to be a good choice for added convenience with functionality of a whetstone. Finally, yes the grand prix line is expensive. It is a fully forged knife with a full tang. The set you saw which looks similar, but is much cheaper, is the Wusthof Silverpoint line. These knives have stamped blades, not forged blades. This is the big EGullet knife thread that will give you more info on knives than you ever wanted to know. Here's another large thread about knives. Here's a thread on knife sharpening. And finally, another sharpening thread.

Hey, EJRothman, when do they have to close shop? First of all, a correction - the store is owned by a Mr. Martinez, not Mr. Truinfel. I will edit my previous post accordingly. Second of all, I just checked the rest of the NYTimes article (Lexis-Nexis for full text), and it said that as of May 18th, 2003, the store had 9 days left to vacate. I have walked by recently, however, and the store appears to still be open and operating. Maybe the petition worked. -Eric

Triunfel Market at 227Court Street in Cobble Hill, Brooklyn carries quiet good Chorizo. (718 624 2170) The owner, Mr. Martinez, has lost his lease as the building owner is raising the rent. This modest local market carries many ethnic goods of Spanish and Hispanic origin and is an asset to the neighborhood and the city. Mr. Martinez has started a petition to save his store, and livelyhood, but I do not know if this has done any good. In any event, if possible, try this stores chorizo. It is quite good, very likely undercuts Fairway's prices, and supports a good cause. -Eric

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't all the epicurious recipes just a compilation of backissues of Gourmet and Food & Wine magazine? I don't have any backissues of these two mags, but assuming that some people here do, I would think - for them at least - FoodTV would be a better source for original recipes. -Eric

Pan--ha. I thought of this, but it's more of a nice gesture than anything else. My other thought was to make a surprise meal of all his faves--he tells me his favorite ingredients, and I tailor a menu around them...we'll see. You didn't think of that, I told you that, but you never listen to me. Do his favorite foods thing, it makes a lot more sense. -Eric