jsolomon

When you're helping someone learn about wines, what strategies do you propose to people? Do you advise them to keep tasting notebooks? Read magazines? Books? Use Mapquest? Wine for Dummies? Translation dictionaries and airplane tickets? Here's the deal, I like wine. I want to learn more about wine. I have moderately well-developed tastes, especially for someone young. I have a modest wine education--enough to be able to discern a good amount of schlocky labeling to dig out a decent moderately-priced bottle reliably. But, I'm in an intermediate stage where the serious wine news is too heady for me, and the introductory stuff isn't quite enough. Where do I go? Should I browse my local library for Wine for Dummies? Where ought I go if I'm disinterestedly interested? I.e. I don't want to feel like I'm having to get an advanced degree in oenology to increase my knowledge due to price or sheer poorly-related information amounts, but I want to know more.

Studies have reliably shown that caffeine is a more reliable gateway drug than marijuana... and it affects roughly 1/3 of the biochemical pathways in the body. Good stuff, I say... good stuff. Not to argue, just to support... as I drink yet another cup of life.

So, here's the rub. How does a hayseed like me... who grew up on Papa Sagreto's Punky Nebraska Plonk learn about wine when there aren't outlets to find out about wine here? There are a couple of stores that steer me wrong as often as right. In the libraries, there aren't things about wine, and living on a newly graduated person's budget, it's hard to justify a wine appreciation course, a wine magazine (with suspect interests), and I simply don't have the experience to really judge a wine forum. Honestly, I take people's opinion on authority because they assert it, not for any good reason. So, how do I find out?

You ought to be able to hack the control for the hot plate portion using a PID, but it'd be ugly. I doubt there'd be room to hide the PID in the base of that little guy.

*sigh* on my meager salary not nearly as much as I would like... Probably 2 glasses a week, tops. Occasionally--when in a relationship, something approaching a half-bottle to a bottle a week.

When I was working at $tarbuck$, I would make double mochas with half the milk and half a shot of banana flavoring. No whip, no foam. Just thinking about that sends me into a hyperglycemic emergency.

The wine that got me hooked on drinking wine was port. To each his or her own. But, to clarify what I said that I have seen taken out of context once on this thread is that when I look for wine, I generally look for wine that is less than US $15. There simply aren't many merlots in that area that I'll spend my money on. There aren't that many great wines in that area, period. But there are wines that make me happy. I just keep my eyes open and figure out who makes what I like and branch from there. But as for Merlot, I don't follow that branch around US $15. I'll be forever disappointed, IMO. But, I wouldn't ditch a date who ordered it. I'd just help her finish it fast and order a second bottle more to my liking

Having not seen the movie, I have to admit, I am of much the same opinion. The simple fact of my opinion is that most of the merlots in my price point, especially ones that I would purchase at a restaurant, are low-end industro-plonk made a million bottles at a time. They have grapey-winey character analogous a McDonald's hamburger having a beefy-burgery character. It's there, but it has had the magic beaten out of it. Sort of the wine equivalent of a Twinkie... I await for people to show me the Merlot way. It is a wine I love to hate (much like Jason Perlow loves to hate Beaujolais Nouveau)

For cold, sleety weather, there's little better than a braised pork roast... 250 or 275 F for 3 or 4 hours, till the meat just falls apart. Pull with a fork and stir in some of the juices given off... Yum!!!!!

Ditto for me, in Nebraska!

Boy, oh, boy does that bring up a W.C. Fields quote in my mind :) I can't see any reason why one oughtn't use it in that method. It would certainly impart a unique twist. The other thing you can do is collect your seawater, strain it, and place it in wide shallow, stainless containers and dehydrate the seawater to get the salt on your own. You can use either a dehydrator, or store in a dry place and let time do it's work.

That does not change the fact that a good portion of the advice come up with for proper food handling and sanitation come around because of knee-jerk legislation. Now, I'm not saying that in a commercial kitchen things should be the same as my recommendations for a home kitchen because things spend more time wet, and therefore have a better chance to actually grow a culture. But practices of holding food and then rewarming are much more common in the restaurant business than at homes. There are vast differences in the environments. I'm also not saying that people oughtn't do anything when they're going from prepping ground meat to vegetables on the same cutting board. Even in my prep, I don't. However, all I do is wash with hot soapy water, rinse with clean hot tap water, and dry if necessary (like when I'm doing a fine mince so things don't stick). One thing to keep in mind about disinfectants is that anything that will kill bacteria, spores, and fungi that quickly generally does not have a good effect on the human system, and institutes that recommend these sanitation guidelines bank on humans simply getting too low of a dose to affect their system. But, I for one would rather live with the effects of a child at my house attempting to drink the dish-soap I leave under the sink, or come crying to me because they stuck their hand in hot soapy water, then to have to call poison control because they drank bleach or some other thing. And I don't even have kids or let them into my domicile. And, no I don't really want to get further into discussions of loading doses and toxicities and such, but the fact is that stuff that kills them, kills us, and it is simply much easier to keep things clean (note I did not put sterile or disinfected) and dry at the home/consumer level. Restaurant kitchens given the length of time things are in use are a whole different ball game. However, I do recommend what FG does, and running your sponges through the dishwasher. Those things are cess-pools.

Would it be bad? No. Would it be effective? Not really. Given that the doubling time of many common bacteria is less than an hour, and that the common ones are also borne on dust, dander, and other things normally in the atmosphere, you're most likely not going to make a significant difference in the normal flora of your domicile. But, my question is, if you keep the dirt and filth down to a minimum by sweeping, vacuuming, and doing dishes, and you also keep things dry, you're not going to have any significant growth because there simply isn't an energy source, or a water source, both of which are limiting reagents to life. So, why do people insist on a scorched earth policy in their kitchens. And, FWIW, I think that the foo-foo scented bleaches should work just fine.

The simple fact is, we will rarely be able to live in a sterile environment... and I can tell you that after having worked for much too long in sterile environments, they suck. But, I've learned several strategies that I was already using, and FistFullaRoux already touched on them with his Grandma's house analogy. First: we're never going to live in a sterile environment. Bacteria and fungi, even the pathological ones, have well-defined, necessary niches in the ecosystem. Second: our bodies have evolved to coexist with these critters Third: these critters exist where there is water and food and a nice environment, just like we do. So, the best thing you can do to make sure that your house is inhospitable to them is to make sure that you don't have damp areas around, and that you don't leave bioburden (think trash) around for them to grow on. So, that means, wash and promptly allow your dishes to dry. Sweep your floors regularly. Wipe up spills. If you have an suppressed or weakened immune system, please take precautions given to you by your current medical professional expert. Also, to respond to what Rebel Rose commented on, vinegar will not leave a sticky residue. Pure vinegar is nearly as liquid as water. You also used to be able to find a cleaning strength vinegar that was 10% instead of the 5% cooking variety. I think Office Depot still might have it available in their cleaning section.

There are quite a number of reasons to use a quaternary ammonia compound or a phenolic (or, to rotate between the two) for your disinfection needs. However, for the household, nearly every basic disinfection/sanitization/cleaning need can be fulfilled with common ammonia, dishsoap (e.g. Dawn, Ivory, Palmolive), and ethyl/isopropyl alcohol, and good hot water. The simple fact is, we need a certain low level of innervation of our immune system to keep it from overreacting when it shouldn't and from underreacting when it should react. When I homebrew, I generally sterilize with metabisulfite or common household bleach. But, that and canning are the ONLY times I currently sterilize (except at work, where I work with parenteral drug production and research). Given my active lifestyle, I know I have plenty of dirt in my diet. I run. I cycle through the winter. I eat MRE's in the field in the Army, and you know that when we drop our burrito out there, we just brush off the worst of the dirt and chow back down. The only sick days I have missed from work in the past year have been mental health days. Also, according to here common household bleach is quite alkaline. So, if left to its own devices and exposed to air, the carbon dioxide which is acidic will react with the basic bleach and tend to degrade it. However, to have a pH 1 full unit higher than ammonia means that it will take a rather long time. Over the course of 7-14 days you may see some degrading in a 1:10 solution of bleach left in an open container, but in a closed spray bottle, there should be little enough transport of carbon dioxide that one can neglect any degradation it might cause.

On the lone prairie of Nebraska, it's hard to come by a whole lotta hardwood to use in a wood-fired oven. Does anyone have experience using charcoal in such a beast? My SO and I are in discussions of building a Pompeii style, but I'm curious about fuel flexibility.

And according to Bart Simpson, chicks dig scars. So... what do roosters like? However, I've caught many a beer bottle, wine bottle, and liquor bottle that way. The absinthe bottle hurt the worst.

Y'know, you bring up something interesting. If wheat prices are so gawl-durn low, why can't I find a pound of bread that's less than $2.00 and worth eating? Wheat is ~$3/bushel, and there are 52 pounds per bushel of wheat. Crazy.

Home grown beef, home grown tomatoes, home grown onions, home grown/canned dill slices. Season the beef with a little salt and fresh ground pepper on both sides. Grill the beef over charcoal with mullberry chips for smoke Top with a dollop of brown mustard, dollop of horseradish put up the previous winter. Bread? Pretty much any kind will do, but the best is a potato-dough roll.

One of the ways I look at that is that those big food companies are always on the look-out for a little guy who's hungry to sell. I have no doubt--especially after working with a small microbrewer--that those people who make a good product that catches on bust their tails. There are certainly numbers of them that get burnt out and when approached by someone like ConAgra or RJR Nabisco are ready to sell out, cash in their chips, and retire on a very handy sum. Those giants have the banking systems and cashflow to be able to transact several million dollars to get the recipe, name rights, etc, for a product that they can then take nation-wide, if not global, where the small manufacturer simply couldn't come up with the scratch. It seems very similar in my mind to why the big farmers get bigger and the small farmers leave farming--but I'm sure there's an oversimplification in many areas there. Just remember, everyone needs to eat to live. There's always going to be lots of money in it. The people who have the supply chain and the manufacturing chain managed in a low-cost, efficient manner (read Big Food Companies) are going to be able to make a killing. And, they do, time and time again. My father invests a large amount of his retirement in food companies for that reason. Sound business sense, but I've problems with the ethics.

For ink stains (I have a collection of fountain pens in varying stages of overuse), I use Amodex. As for food or other stains on my clothes? Unless they're my interview clothes, the stains are worn with pride. I have bike chain marks on almost all of my pants (grease, and sprocket teeth cuts), biological stains on all of my lab coats, coffee stains on most of my shirts, and lipstick, wine, and beer stains on many others. But, check this link from the Food Network on cleaning.

Here's my perspective. I am working on a project dealing directly with a very powerful, natural neurotoxin. I can do this much more safely through the magic of recombinant technologies. Is this unnatural? It's safer than the natural product, and it is the natural genetic code for it... just in a different place. Natural doesn't really mean anything because things like asbestos, arsenic, and tetrodotoxin are perfectly natural, and dangerous. Not to mention there are organisms like E. coli that actually trade genetic information with other bacteria through the use of plasmids, little rings of DNA outside of the "nuclear" DNA. But, here's the question. If it came down to saving a significant portion of the population would you rather use completely natural fugu, or GMO beef? Where do we draw the line? This is a very polarizing issue where people are not going to act in their utilitarian best interests because there is simply too little related to it that we can actually know. So, would I rather eat most likely safe beef daily, or extremely dangerous fugu daily? I'd take the beef 364 out of 365 days of the year.

Hmm... sounds like I need to borrow my mom's big roaster and make soup for a year with a whole ham, 6 or 7 pounds of peas, and just freeze it afterward. Might work. I'll keep that idea on the back burner for a summer cooking weekend project.

The crucial point with GMOs spread in the environment is not risk taking. It's risk imposing. ← There is painfully little stopping people from producing their own food if they are dedicated. It's like choosing not to own a car in America. You can do it, it's just a little more work. FWIW, it's really interesting that GMO's are more discussed than the trade subsidies that I've mentioned 3 or 4 times in my posts. Apparently no one really thinks that food for democracy is a strange way of conducting internation politics.

What about the mid-range example of GMO yeasts for bread-making, ethanol production, xanthan gum production. GMO lactobacilli for cheese, yogurt, etc. making? Where do those fit in examples? Agriculture? Manufacture? Somewhere in between? I am not bothered by GMO food because cooked food is more of a frankenfood for the way my digestive system evolved IMO than GMO food. Also, I tend to recuse myself because I can't figure out how I want to place things like the binders and such related things that come from GMO's currently. But, when I get my letter of acceptance (in the next two months, hopefully) after celebrating with heroic amounts of champagne, I'm going to leap out of a perfectly good airplane and trust that someone I don't know has packed my parachute properly. I'm willing to take GMO's safety on the same authority as I take the parachute's safety. I admit it. I'm a risk-taker.