emannths

My favorite has got to be Bacalhau à Brás, which is basically flaked salt cod, onions, potatoes, and eggs. Very good, and very easy. Quick question, if anyone knows: can you freeze salt cod after soaking? Particularly for any recipe that doesn't call for filets, I could see soaking the cod, flaking it into a freezer bag, and stashing it in the feezer. That way the planning time winds up being more like an hour instead of days. Does this work, or does it lose its particular je ne sais quoi when frozen?

Chris--I was focusing on the ice-for-drinks aspect of this thing. Though I've never done it myself, first-hand reports (and at least one video) indicate that for ice-cube size pieces of ice, boiling works fine. The manual [pdf] says that the ice compartment is 17.4x13.4cm, and that it makes 600mL of ice. This means the ice is only 2.6 cm--or about 1 inch--thick. I think this thickness can be done using boiled water and an appropriately sized pan, but I'm not sure. Camper's pint-size tubs may not be the best comparison. In fact, if you look at the size of the region of clear ice in Camper's experiments, you'll see it's about 1 inch thick. Time to whip up a couple experiments. I'll be back in a bit.

Most (nearly all) cans are lined with an epoxy resin, which uses BPA as a precursor.

For $60, you could boil a LOT of water and get the same effect.

Ok, here's a quick primer: Polyethylene terephthalate (aka PET, PETE; #1) Uses: Water and soft drink bottles, films, fibers (including Polar Fleece) PET is made by reacting terephthalic acid with ethylene glycol. Sometimes other monomers are included in the reaction, such as cyclohexane dimethanol and isophthalic acid. Orthophthalates, the toxic plasticizers used in PVC, are not generally used in the reaction. Plasticizers are not used with PET. Sometimes, a layer of aluminum or polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) is added to help with barrier properties (i.e., to exclude oxygen or keep in carbonation). Neither of these additives have associated health concerns (PVA is used in Elmer's Glue and many eyedrops, for example). Potential health concerns: minimal. There are plausible mechanisms by which the PET may degrade to create toxic phthalates, but this hasn't really been observed. Additionally, antimony is used as a catalyst in PET production, and is therefore present in trace amounts in the PET container. Whether it leeches in to your drink, and whether that would cause problems, is undetermined. [source] High-density polyethylene (aka PE, HDPE; #2) Uses: Milk jugs, margarine tubs, water pipes, grocery bags, hip implants... HDPE is made using ethylene gas and a catalyst. Plasticizers are not used with HDPE. Degradation of HDPE is notoriously slow, though it can be accelerated with exposure to UV light. The degradation products are dependent on the mode of degradation, but can be expected to be an assortment of hydrocarbons, most being benign. Potential health concerns: effectively none. I suppose you could get yourself worked up over the potential presence of catalyst (though this is usually not a heavy-metal catalyst), or the potential degradation products, but HDPE shouldn't have any more potential to harm you than anything else in your general environment. Polyvinyl chloride (aka PVC; #3) Uses: Pipes, tubing, plastic wrap (some formulations) PVC is made from vinyl chloride. While vinyl chloride is highly toxic, once polymerized, the vinyl chloride is gone and therefore of little concern. PVC is often modified with additives and plasticizers to create the desired properties. It is often these additives that are the cause of much of the health concerns surrounding PVC. Potential health concerns: moderate? The presence of unpolymerized vinyl chloride is a concern, as is the creation of toxic compounds by thermal degradation. PVC is generally heat-stable up to at least 200C, so as long as the PVC remains in contact with water, the risk is minimal. This is why microwaving foods, especially fatty foods, with PVC wrap, is not a great idea. The fat can splatter onto the plastic wrap, where it can heat the plastic wrap to over 100C (since it is no longer in contact with water). Additionally, because of the wide range of additives that may be included in a PVC product, it is difficult to determine the exact hazards. The good news is that PVC has long been recognized as a potential health hazard, so we have a relatively good idea about how to create, process, and use PVC products safely. Low-density polyethylene (aka PE, LDPE, LLDPE; #4) Uses: film, bags, trays, containers, waterproof coatings on cardboard liquid contains (e.g., juice and milk) LDPE is chemically identical to HDPE, with the only difference being how much each chain branches (LDPE branches more), so please see the HDPE section for details. Polypropylene (aka PP; #5) Uses: Plastic hinges (e.g., Tic-Tac container), heat-resistant containers The manufacture and chemical properties of PP are similar to those of PE, substituting propylene gas for ethylene gas in the manufacture. Health concerns: minimal. The health risks are essentially identical to those for PE. However, because PP is generally used for higher-value uses, it is more likely to be modified with additives. In 2008, there was a report that some of these additives may potentially be a source of some potentially hazardous compounds. However, the concentration of these compounds was very low, and the compounds themselves are not intensely hazardous, so this shouldn't be a major concern given the current evidence. Polystyrene (aka PS, #6) Uses: Plastic utensils, some yogurt containers, foam cups A synthetic chemist would tell you that PS is by dozens of different methods, but they all involve simply linking up a bunch of styrene molecules. It is sometimes copolymerized with other monomers to make tougher plastics (such as high-impact polystyrene and ABS, which is probably what the housings of most of your plastic items are made from), but these rarely see food contact. Health concerns: minimal. PS has been evaluated as a food packaging material for over 50 years, and all governments (US, Europe, Hong Kong...) label it as safe. There may be underlying concerns about exposure to unpolymerized styrene, but you'll likely be exposed to more styrene from your food than from its container. It is also relatively heat stable. A quick note on #7 plastics: #7 is a catch-all for anything listed above. So while all polycarbonate is #7, not all #7 is polycarbonate. Polycarbonate (aka PC, #7) Uses: Reusable water bottles, highly transparent food storage containers (e.g. some Cambro containers) First we said that "#7" isn't specific enough. Well, PC sometimes isn't either. For these purposes, we're concerned about PC that is made from bisphenol-a (BPA), which encompasses most PC. However, it is certainly possible to make a plastic that would be called PC without using BPA. This is rare, though, and it should be safe to assume that unless a PC product says "NOT MADE WITH BPA," it's made with bpa. Health concerns: moderate-significant. The concern with PC is both the presence of unreacted BPA and also the presence of BPA created as the PC degrades over time. While the leeching of minute amounts of precursor probably happens with all plastics, it's a much bigger concern for PC/BPA. This is because there are some studies that show that BPA can have health effects at extremely low concentrations by mimicking natural hormones. Strong bases (e.g., bleach) may accelerate the breakdown of PC into BPA. As I noted above, however, PC containers are hardly the only source of exposure to BPA, and so minimizing your use of a water bottle may have little net effect. And of course the science is inconclusive at this point as to both a) whether PC containers leech BPA and b) whether minute amounts of BPA have measurable heath effects. Hopefully that gets you started. Most of the info is distilled from Wikipedia, with a few other sources thrown in, and then all run by my chemical-engineering-degree filter. While most of the info is pretty easy to find, it's often riddled with what seem like small errors (e.g., confusing teraphthalates with orthophthalates) that make a big difference in the final analysis. ETA one last comment: The above summary deals mainly with the plastics themselves, and not the potential additives. Where common, I've tried to note them, but the presence of additives of course changes the analysis. If someone starts adding carcinogenic dyes to your milk container, it doesn't really matter how safe HDPE is, does it?

I think the simplest way is to use the Resin ID Codes as a sort-of portal to look for more details about the various plastics used for food. No. 1, 3, and 7 tend to have the most concerns associated with them, while 2, 4, 5, and 6 invite much less controversy.

Maybe we can knock out some of the questions/concerns one-by-one. So while the answer to whether plastic containers are "safe" on the whole may be difficult to determine, I think some fears can be allayed. For example... There is usually concern about reusing plastic containers. For example, some say not to reuse a water bottle. I can't see any scientific rationale to this. The first fill will contain the highest concentration of "contaminants," and each subsequent fill should have lower and lower concentration (a good analogy: think about the color of your tea when you reuse a tea bag--each time you reuse it, the color gets lighter). Perhaps there's some concern that over time the plastic degrades, but this would happen regardless of whether or not the container if filled with its original contents or something else. My conclusion: don't worry about reusing plastic containers. If there's any difference at all, it's probably better than using a new container. There's also a concern about freezing food in plastic containers. Here's what Johns Hopkins has to say about this: "Freezing water does not cause the release of chemicals from plastic bottles." Good enough for me. Also, concerns about one type of plastic should not apply to other types. For example, concerns about bisphenol-a (a polycarbonate precursor), should not extend to polyethylene (recycling code 2) or polypropylene (#5). Additionally, the concerns about phthalate exposure from PET products (#1) should not be confused with these other products. Finally, if you're concerned enough about bisphenol-a that you're going to stop using polycarbonate products, you'll have to stop using most canned products as well, as the cans are lined with an epoxy that uses bisphenol-a as a precursor. It can also be found in thermal paper (credit card receipts, etc), with some indicating this may be the leading source of exposure for most people. My personal take: there's no use trying to stay ahead of the curve on things like this. Plastic products are so pervasive that trying to reduce you exposure will only net a reduction on the order of 1 (e.g., maybe you cut your exposure in half). Most of the concern about health effects stems from concerns that even very low exposure levels result in major health problems, so addressing this would necessitate an exposure reduction of many orders of magnitude. Doing so would take waaaaaaaaay too much time and effort. If you're willing to put in the time and effort, it would be better spent simply exercising and eating healthier food instead of worrying about your containers.

Anyone try Finish Glass Magic? It gets excellent reviews over at Amazon.

Phosphates were removed (or at least severely limited) from laundry detergents in 1994. Phosphorus was banned from dishwasher detergent in 16 states this summer. Source.

What does this "excess detergent" consist of? I was under the impression that dishwasher detergent consisted of a minerals to adjust the pH and ionic strength, surfactants (soap), and then a little bit of some fancy things like enzymes and corrosion inhibitors. Both the pH adjusters and the surfactants could potentially be "used up" by food, but any excess should be easily water soluble and therefore rinsed away. So what's being left on the dishes? I don't mean to be pedantic or obstinate. It just doesn't make sense that cleaner dishes will wind up dirtier. The only way I can think of is if dirty dishes soften hard water enough to eliminate hard water problems. But this would require the perfect combination of amount and type of food, amount and hardness of water, and phosphate-free dish detergent. EDIT: Did some poking around. The only rationale given is that if the contents is too clean the detergent foams excessively. I guess it's time to run a couple test loads...

While the general thesis of that article is probably correct, this has to be the most bogus statement I've ever seen written: Sorry. Cleaning dishes twice does not make them dirtier than cleaning them once.

I once had a tempered glass shower door explode on me once. THAT was cool. The cracks instantly propagated though the pane, then it fell into the tub, where the little pieces continued to pop apart. It looked something like , but more dramatic because it was in the freakin' shower. If you haven't experienced this, you're missing out on one of life's great thrills!Anyway, my understanding is that when tempered glass breaks, it will shatter into these small little nuggets. Which makes it a pain to clean up, it also means that there are no sharp, jagged shards. So don't avoid it because you're worried that you're going to be sliced open by a baking dish.

Of these, only staph poisoning is a reasonably plausible possibility. C. perfringens doesn't produce a heat-stable toxin, so if the bones are roasted and boiled, it won't cause any damage. C. botulinum only produces toxin in an anaerobic environment, so we don't have to worry about that. The poisoning by B. cereus toxin is associated only with rice products and other starchy foods (infection is associated with meat, but since it's going to be cooked again, that's avoided) [source]. But staph poisoning seems plausible. But that would require 1) that your turkey was infected with staph, 2) that strain of staph was one that produces toxin, and 3) that there was enough time in those 8 hours for the spores to germinate and multiply into enough cells to produce enough toxin to make you sick. I am personally willing to take that risk. Others are not so willing. It's up to you.

I vote to eat it. It was cooked once, so you killed any resident beasties that might have been present due to slaughtering/processing. You're going to be cooking it again (twice!) at high temperature, which will kill any new beasties. Sounds fine to me.

Garlic, olive oil, chopped canned tomatoes, anchovies, red pepper flakes, capers, parsley, olives. And a heavy hand with the garlic, anchovies, capers, and parsley. Something like this NYTimes recipe, taking the "or more" route when possible.

Another vote for the rice cooker. We've got a 3-japanese-cup capacity one, and it seems that 1-8oz cup of oats plus 3-8oz cups of water (or slightly less) on the porridge/congee setting works well.

Below I've listed some weeknight staples from our house (I think they can all be done in 30 min or less--my wife might disagree based on empirical results). I've realized a lot of them rely on a simple-to-cook protein with either pasta or rice as the starch (both of which require minimum attention while cooking). But we love pasta and white rice. I think a lot of it depends on what you guys like to cook and eat. It's probably easier to adapt what you like to cook and eat than it is to create a whole new repertoire. If you can coral a sous-chef to help you with a task (making a salad, chopping some herbs, stirring the pasta), it'll help a lot, at least mentally. Anyway, on with the suggestions: Many Chinese-style dishes can be prepared in 30 minutes start-to-finish, especially if you prep and freeze your meat ahead of time. We make a lot of "kung pao chicken" and "ma po tofu." The quotes are there because the recipes we use we copied from my father's index cards and bear little resemblance to those dishes in a real Chinese restaurant (e.g., the ma po tofu is garlic, ginger, scallions, fermented black bean, chile paste with garlic, and soy sauce). Hamburgers, a can of baked beans, and some vegetable (could be cole slaw, could be a salad, could be steamed green beans, etc) should clock in a no more than 30 minutes. Sausage, sauerkraut, and rye bread. Or sausage, polenta, and a little tomato sauce. Curries--whether Japanese, Thai, or Indian, you can usually find decent pre-made sauce bases that only require you to throw stuff in and cook it till it's done. We make Japanese curry pretty frequently, and have recently started making prik king using the little cans of Thai red curry paste (and sometimes adding a little coconut milk, or even better, creamed coconut. Lots of pasta dishes could be done in under 30 minutes--you just have to put the sauce together while the water is boiling. Some weekday favorites include carbonara, butternut squash and italian sausage (can be sped up by buying the pre-peeled halves of squash if necessary), and "tuna fish pasta" (olive oil, garlic, hot pepper, canned tuna, capers, parsley--almost no cooking necessary). Homemade tomato-based sauces are made in bulk on weekends and frozen--just finish them with the appropriate fresh herbs and no one will know the difference. You could maybe put together a simple tomato sauce or puttanesca in 30 minutes, but you'd probably need a helper to do so. Rick Bayless' Cowboy Beans are a good weeknight accompaniment. It's just canned beans livened up with a little garlic, canned tomato, and pickled jalapeno (and bacon/chorizo, if you want to take the time to brown it). Fish is good. If you don't get to go shopping much during the week and are concerned about leaving fish aging in the fridge, you can turn lemons into lemonade by making sweet miso marinated fish. Great on black cod, also good on salmon. Just make a batch of the miso on the weekend, throw a little into a ziplock with the fish, freeze the extra marinade for the next week, and broil the fish on Wednesday. Winter squash can be cooked really fast in the microwave. Buy boneless, skinless chicken thighs (or breasts, if you prefer them), sprinkle generously with your favorite rub-like-condiment, and throw them in the freezer. If you freeze them flat, they defrost quickly. You can grill them or cook them on the stove. Jerk and Greek seasons are good and require no additional sauce.

I second the question. I've heard it said they're more energy efficient - how much? "According to the U.S. Department of Energy the efficiency of energy transfer for an induction cooktop is 90%, versus 71% for a smooth-top non-induction electrical unit, for an approximate 20% saving in energy for the same amount of heat transfer." The quote is from Wikipedia; this is their source (Dept of Energy pdf).

If I'm making mango smoothies (or anything else where the size and shape of the pieces don't matter), I just cut the sides off and scoop the flesh out with a spoon. A few extra slices at the seed liberate the remaining flesh. If I want cubes of mango, I peel it with a vegetable peeler, then cut the sides of and dice it up. This page describes it in pictures (second technique). With the exception of people that avoid knifework (either because of medical conditions or because they're young), what's the appeal? For people that like this thing, what part of the process does it speed up?

I was going to try to describe how I freeze bacon, but I found a site with drawings. Just try to make sure that there are no air bubbles between the slices and the plastic wrap.

You can use the nibble method to check the sweetness of corn too. While you're checking the kernels at the tip, just snap one off and taste it. If it's sweet, you're good to go!

Zucchini (and mushroom) tacos, from Rick Bayless' Mexican Everyday. Pretty simple recipe, and pretty delicious. It's also a welcome break from all the Mediterranean-style recipes.

Regarding asparagus' bent tips, here's what Harold McGee says: This seems to imply that the bent tips only indicate the orientation of the asparagus during storage. I believe Alton Brown agrees with this. See "The Age Of Asparagus," S14E03. Of course, it's possible that asparagus stored on its side has been deprived of water, but it's not water deprivation that causes the curved tips.

Around Cambridge, I've noticed that Market Basket (in Somerville) stocks a number of Massachusetts-grown vegetables. I don't remember everything, but many of the winter squash, zucchini, collards, kale, and similar items are labeled as from Massachusetts. They've also got potatoes from Maine, but that's like getting excited about Idaho potatoes in Washington. Even Shaw's (in Porter Square at least) stocks things like zucchini from MA sometimes. Neither are great with local fruit though. I'll echo the tomato complaint. I've switched to plum tomatoes, which are at least still slice-able without being as offensive as the grocery store beefsteaks. Peaches bother me the most though, because sometimes (almost all the time?) they even start to smell like peaches, but then manage to rot before turning sweet. At least I have no expectations from tomatoes. But a peach will sit on the counter, smelling like a peach, only to start growing mold before softening up. I don't have many complaints about strawberries or damson plums (other plums seems to be less successful), though I rarely buy them out of "season."

I've improvised on too many recipes that include the phrase "choose a pan large enough to accommodate all of the pieces in a single layer," and I'm ready to spend some money to get a good, large saute pan to fix this. Depending on what I'm making, currently I alternate between a Le Creuset dutch oven of about 8.5" and a shallow, nonstick frying pan of about 11.5", only 8" of which is flat. This makes it tough to brown more than say, two chicken legs or pork chops simultaneously. After reading the eGCI class on stovetop cookware and the associated Q&A, it seems like the best way to go would be an 11" Sitram Catering (or maybe Profiserie) saute pan, available from Amazon for $55. However, Lloyd's (the course instructor) love of what Sitram calls a saucier, also available in an 11" size, got me thinking that perhaps I could get essentially the same saute pan-type utility out of a saucier, as well as getting a pan better shaped to tossing vegetables, substituting for a wok for Chinese cooking, etc. However, I'm concerned that by trying to solve many problems at once I may be solving none of them. Is the Sitram saucier curved enough that I'd miss the extra area on the bottom of the pan? Would you suggest something else entirely? Also, some other manufacturers make saute pans larger than 11". Is it worth even thinking about these, or is my stove not up to the task? -------------------------------------- Some background: I'm living in a relatively small apartment with an average gas stove. As a result, I'd like to get the most use out of the minimum of equipment. I cook Chinese relatively frequently, but I have been reluctant to buy a wok after reading that most stoves are too weak and that woks tend to hurt rather than help in that case. I am also not opposed to spending some money to buy a nice piece of equipment, under the assumption that it will last me a decade or more.