slkinsey

Okay, that's one example. And, one could argue that there are things about the production of Kobe beef that are less humane as those used in the production of foie gras. For example, the reason these cows are massaged is because they are permitted so little exercise that their muscles get sore. They are fed beer as an appetite stimulant because muscle soreness decreases appetite. And, of course, one could argue that the level of fattiness and corpulence produced in this cattle is every bit as "pathological" as the fatty livers of ducks and geese raised for foie gras. Funny, though, that no one seems to campaign against Kobe beef.

To the extent that it adds anything to this debate, I'd like to clarify a little on the anthropomorphization front. First of all, as do most people, you make a mistake in assuming that pain is a physiological or neurological phenomenon, which it is not. It is a psychological phenomenon. Advanced animals, like human beings and ducks, have specialized nerves called nociceptors that respond to high levels of mechanical, thermal or chemical stimuli. The activation of these nerves combines with other sensory stimuli and is processed inside our complex brains into the perception we know as pain. The perception and processing part is the important part, not the stimulus part. There is an entire theory of how pain works called "gate control" which asserts that pain happens only in the brain. So, to the extent that we make the assumption that ducks experience pain in the same way as humans, we anthropomorphize, which means "to attribute human form or personality to things not human." And, of course, if we go the direction of supposing that even nonpainful gavage would cause inhumane levels of "stress" in ducks and geese, we're going straight into the realm of animal psychology. We make a similar mistake when we use our own physiology and psychology to form assumptions about things like gavage. There are plenty of things that might not particularly bother a duck or a cow that we, as humans, would find very distressing or painful. For example, I'm guessing that humans would be very stressed out at being formed into a line and marched into the slaughterhouse like cattle are. Does this mean that it is unacceptably inhumane to do the same with cows? Well, maybe it does and maybe it doesn't. One thing we try to do is figure out how we can tell if the cows are unacceptably distressed. In the case of cows, a seriously freaked out cow actually results in characteristically lower quality meat. In the case of ducks and geese, there are other indicators (largely physiological and hormonal, but also behavioral) that can be examined to determine if the animals are unduly stressed by gavage. If my recollection is correct, some of this research has been done and it was determined that the animals were not unduly stressed. And I believe it is also the case that a stressed animal also results in lower quality foie gras, so it is actually in the producer's best interest to avoid undue stress to his ducks or geese. So. . . once we come around to the idea that there are things one can do to/with various domestic animals without causing undue stress that one could not do with humans or other animals without causing undue stress (and vice-versa), you have to try to look at it from the duck's perspective to the greatest extent possible. For example, I don't think anyone would consider it cruel if humans weren't given enough gravel in their feed, while this might very well be the case for animals like ducks and chickens who use a gizzard to grind their food. Similarly, we shouldn't make the assumption that just because having food decanted into our own stomachs with a tube sounds extremely unpleasant and painful, that the same would be true when feed is decanted into the gizzard of a duck with a tube. Indeed, there is plenty of evidence that this is not the case. Now, one can make the argument that the domestication and slaughter of animals for human consumption for food is inherrently cruel (indeed I believe this is the underlying philosophy of most of those driving the various anti-foie gras movements). If you accept the idea that it can be okay to domesticate and slaughter animals for human consumption, then you have to decide what you think is an acceptable way to do that. Now, I suppose we'd all like to believe that the animals we eat are raised in idyllic "Farmer Brown" free-roaming situations until they are lovingly slaughtered by a teary-eyed Farmer Brown while Mrs. Brown sings a soothing song in the background. But the reality is that it has never and will never be that way. That said, the raising of ducks and geese for foie gras comes as close to that scenario as any method of animal husbandry with real scale of which I am aware. From what I have been able to gather by trying to understand duck physiology/psychology and the best methods of producing foie gras, I just can't believe that a limited period of gavage at the end of which, yes, the ducks may become very heavy, is any more inherrently cruel than any other way we raise domestic animals for slaughter. Indeed, I think the whole practice of domesticating and raising animals for slaughter and human consumption would be substantially more humane (or perhaps I should say "chickenmane" and "cowmane" and "pigmane" as appropriate) if only it were as good as it is for ducks and geese raised for foie gras. Can anyone think of a single animal husbandry practice of comparable scale that is even remotely in the same category?

Interesting. Distilled by Blackwood Distillers in Shetland, Scotland. Some interesting local botanicals include angelica root, wild water mint and sea pink flowers. There are apparently two bottlings of gin by Blackwood: Blackwood's Vintage Dry Gin, their regular bottling, and Blackwood's Vintage 60, a limited edition gin made with hand-gathered Summer botanicals from the Shetland Islands. Audrey, have you tasted their gin? What's it like.

You should be able to use the regular iSi chargers. But, I have to tell you that the antique glass bottles with the cool wire netting, of which I have several, are almost never in working order (usually the rubber seals in the headpiece have failed). So don't buy a vintage glass soda siphon on eBay unless the seller can confirm that it they have charged it and it works without leaking.

To a certain extent, I would think that icy shots of straight vodka are out of the question in this situation. Unless they bring the bottle already ice cold, it will take too long for a full bottle of room temperature vodka to get down to freezer temperature.

Keep it in the freezer and it will stay fine more or less forever, in my experience.

If you really want to "taste the vodka" then I think straight chilled is the only way to go. For cocktails with vodka, there are very few I like, but I have enjoyed Audrey's "Dreamy Dorini Smoking Martini." It goes a little something like this: 2.0 oz : vodka 0.5 oz : Laphroaig 10* 2-3 drops : Pernod Stir with ice, strain into a cocktail glass. Garnish with lemon twist. * I have used other intensely smokey single malts, such as Lagavullin, with success

I also have a ton of broken down chicken carcasses (raw, not from roasted chickens) and around a dozen cocktail glasses in the door. But that doesn't strike me as all that weird for an eG crowd.

I was just making room for some extra ice in my freezer when I realized I have some pretty weird stuff in there. I mean, most people would think it odd that half my freezer space is taken up with various animal fats, currently duck, goose, bacon, lard and chicken fats plus some butter made from the cream skimmed from parmigiano reggiano. And indeed the weirdest thing in there is yet another kind of fat. I have a big chunk of blubber a friend from Alaska brought the last time she was in New York. I think it's whale blubber, but it might be seal blubber. Haven't decided what to do with it yet, but rest assured that I will be making Steven Shaw eat some of it and we will be writing about it here. Recipes for blubber are, of course, appreciated. So, what's the weirdest thing in your freezer?

Many strong sourdough cultures are decades old, having co-evolved through literally billions of generations.

Whoa. That's a lot of questions, dude. I think it might be interesting if those who fill out the forms for Esquire also post their choices here. I won't fill it out myself, because any bar I might choose would be one of which Dave is already aware. But for top places in NYC, one could do worse than Flatiron Lounge, Milk & Honey and Pegu Club.

Just get a decent quality PTFE-coated frypan. Whatever is being sold at a deep discount. No nonstick surface will last forever, and I am not aware of any nonstick coating that emits "harmful chemicals."

Shalmanese: For various reasons having to do with growth-limiting conditions for sourdough microorganisms, it would be much better if you reduce the amount of "old" starter you hold behind. You are holding back 33% of the old starter. The starter culture would have much better growth characteristics if you held back only around 10% of the old starter. I often refresh by dumping out all the old starter and only holding back whatever sticks to the inside of the jar. Reducing the percentage of held back old starter is the single most important thing you can do to increase the activity and health of your sourdough culture. I would also recommend feeding your starter at 1:1 flour and water by weight rather than by volume. This also helps to reduce growth limiting conditions and makes it easy to know how much flour and water you have in a given weight of starter. Finally, you should try to feed your starter when it is at peak activity. If you wait until the starter is starving before you feed it, you are starting off on the wrong foot already. Rickster: It sounds like your starter culture is awfully young to be put in the refrigerator for three weeks. This is the kind of treatment that is often only handled well by cultures that are very robust and well-established (which is one reason I think it's better to acquire an established culture rather than making your own).

FWIW, I prefer Absente over Pernod for an absinthe-substitute.

I don't think it's entirely accurate to say that there existed only a "minuscule minority ... who were never taken seriously" in the scientific/medical community who were were skeptical of the premise that dietary fat was the end-all, be-all with respect to heart disease, cancer, etc. -- although this may be true of the popular media.

Cafe Edgar on the Upper West Side in NYC has something very similar they call a "Viennese."

For those who may not be familiar with bicerin, it is essentially a drink with a shot of espresso, a couple of ounces of Italian-style hot chocolate (considerably thicker than the American version) and a couple of ounces of unsweetened softly whipped cream on top.

Doc, I don't think viruses can be cultured in a nutrient media. Think about it: viruses don't have a metabolism and replicate by using the machinery of a living host cell. If there is no living host cell, the viruses cannot replicate. Since a nutrient medium is not a living host, no replication. Right?

I don't see why you couldn't use regular sugar. You'd just have to make sure you stirred everything together long enough to dissolve the sugar before adding ice. Simple syrup is often preferred simply because it's easier. It's easy to measure and you don't have to worry aboud dissolving.

Wow mbanu the swirling of the pastis and letting it dry sounds so cool and makes a whole lot of sense. Thanks. That's a neat trick probably best sampled at home since I can't imagine that many bartenders would want to coat the glass and then keep checking it to see if it's dry before they finish making the drink. FWIW, letting the absinthe or absinthe-substitute dry to the inside of the glass is not the standard technique. Actually, I'm not aware of any cocktail where the glass is rinsed and allowed to dry (although of course there may be some of which I am unaware).

Have a look at the thread All About Rye Whiskey and ask around. There are plenty of excellent, reasonably priced rye whiskeys on the market. Indeed, rye whiskey is probably the best bargain for the money in liquor today.

For a few reasons. First, there is the tradition and showmanship element. Second, swirling absinthe around to coat the inside of the glass and discarding the excess is a useful way to get just the right amount of absinthe. Third, when you coat the inside of a glass with a liqueur and pour the drink in over that coating, the rinse infuses into the drink somewhat differently than it would if you simply added a few dashes to the mixing glass. As far as I know, Peychaud's only is traditional. And for sure you need Peychaud's bitters to make a Sazerac. Can't make one without Peychaud's bitters. But there's no harm in adding a dash of another bitters in addition, and a lot of people prefer it that way, myself included.

I feel your pain, Craig. Friends in the know tell me that there are a few places on the West coast that blow away the best places in Italy, but there's nowhere near the ubiquitous baseline quality one can expect on every street corner in Italy (this is discussed a bit in this thread). That's one reason among many I take almost all my coffee at home with my own roasted beans and from my own Rancilio.

A (gin, whiskey or perhaps scotch?) sour with basil?

Absolutely. I think it's clearly a topic on which there is more than one defensible viewpoint. I've only tried to explain mine. I actually kind of like canned corned beef hash and greasy eggs. But I do get your point. Unfortunately for me, there are a lot of fun bars I can't visit any more because of my profession. I can't be damaging my hearing with loud music, straining my voice shouting over same. Them's the breaks when your hearing and voice are the tools of your trade. That's one reason I have been so happy about the NYS and NYC smoking bans -- I can finally go back into bars without screwing up my voice from the cigarete smoke.