Mary Dan Eades, M.D.

And so could I, but the title isn’t meant to be a reflection on my current state of obesity or yours.

An interesting article appeared in the New York Times online that caught my eye centered on the idea that we gain weight because we sit too much and that we can reverse that to some degree at least if we stand more.

Reading the article brought to mind another piece I had read recently, about how former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had gotten excoriated in the press for a note he jotted on a GITMO report about the detainees there being asked to stand for up to four hours a day. His hand-written comment in the margin of the report was “Only 4 hours?”

The note was seen by many in the press and elsewhere as proof of his approval of the use of cruel and unusual punishments for GITMO detainees. Whatever Mr. Rumsfeld’s feelings might have been on the subject of treatment of detainees (about which I am making absolutely no value judgement here pro or con) the ’standing’ comment probably wasn’t proof of callousness or cruelty, because apparently it is Mr. Rumsfeld’s habit to stand all day long as he works. According to the article I read, he long ago had a special standing-height desk fashioned for himself and he works, standing at it, all day long. Thus, for a man who chooses to stand for 8 hours a day, the seemingly heartless ‘Only 4 hours?’ comment maybe wasn’t intended to be. Whatever else one may say about Rummy, for a man who will turn 78 this year, he’s in pretty darned good shape. He stands ramrod straight and is reasonably trim of frame and flat of ab, so maybe there’s something to this standing business.

For quite some time now, this very idea–standing more–has been something that Mike and I have discussed at length in our ongoing search for what changed in our lives (and the lives of our peers) during the quiet slide from 40 to 60. What happened that could account for the difficulty so many of us clearly experience in holding the line against weight gain (let alone losing weight) as we age, even in the face of a eating about the same amount of food and doing about the same amount of exercise as we did in our younger years.

One of the things that has changed, for us at least, is what we do for a living and the lifestyle differences that shift engendered.

Thirty years ago we first went into clinical practice and for the next nearly twenty years after that, our days were spent working 10 to 12 hours a day, 5 to 7 days a week, seeing patients in the clinic. A day in our lives as clinic doctors looked something like this: walk to exam room door, pick up chart, go into exam room, sit on a backless stool for about 5 or 10 minutes coning down on the patient’s chief reason for being there, stand to wash hands and examine the patient, sit again (or often continue to stand) beside the patient to discuss findings and recommend testing to be done, walk out of room, track down nurse to carry out the orders, walk to the x-ray suite to check developed films or to the lab to check results, all done standing, walk to the next exam room, repeat the process 50 or more times a day. We were in and out of rooms, up and down and up and down all day long, with a whole lot of it spent ‘up’ and not much spent sitting. Most of those years, we spent almost zero time ‘working out’ or doing any formal kind of ‘exercise’.

Contrast that with our lives of the last ten or so years, spent mainly as writers and researchers of the medical literature.

When we’re home, in our normal routine, our lives as full-time writers and researchers look something like this: sit down at the computer and work for three or four hours in the morning. Take a break every hour or so to walk to the kitchen to make a cup of coffee, then right back to the computer.

I go to the kitchen about 1 o’clock or so to fix lunch or we might hop in the car to go grab a burger someplace, where we sit to eat it. Mike usually works at the computer until time to eat.

Then it’s back to the computer to sit for two or three more hours, with maybe a break to get another cup of coffee, and right back at it, sitting.

Our level of formal ‘working out’ on average hasn’t really changed much over the years. If anything it’s increased. Some days we’ll do a Slow Burn weight work out, which takes just a few minutes. In summer or when we are in SB, Mike will take a break in the late afternoon to go walk a few holes on the golf course and he plays 18 a couple of times a week. I occasionally will take a walk on the beach or on trails, but not regularly. Sometimes I will do pilates. Or maybe I will just go to the kitchen to fix dinner, which is at least standing.

Most days, we’ll both go back to the computer after dinner to sit, working, for another hour or two. Sometimes we’ll work late into the night, depending on whether there’s a big writing project going or not.

Then we get up the next day and do that again.

While we haven’t really changed the amount of time we spend doing ‘actual exercise’ what’s really changed when you compare the last ten years to the twenty before them is the standing. As a clinical doctor, you do a lot of standing. Or at least we did. And it takes a lot more muscle work to stand than to sit.

If you’ve followed our writing in books and blogs, you’re probably saying, Hey wait a minute! You’ve said many times before that exercise is not a good way to lose weight. And that is absolutely true.

In our most recent book, The 6-Week Cure for the Middle Aged Middle, we wrote an entire chapter debunking the whole idea of ‘eat less and exercise more’ as an effective strategy for weight loss. And we stand behind that chapter.

What we also discuss in The Cure is the difference in EAT (exercise activity thermogenesis) and NEAT (non-exercise activity thermogenesis.) EAT is the energy cost in calories of exercise taken for exercise’s sake–i.e., running, rowing, the hour spent doing aerobics or pilates or yoga. NEAT is the energy spent doing every other sort of activity in the remainder of the 24 hour day–i.e., the fidgeting, wiggling, walking, standing, stooping, and squatting we do in the activities of daily living and the moving we do in our sleep. It’s easy to see that 30 minutes or an hour spent ‘doing exercise’ even if it’s pretty rigorous, is far outweighed by the amount of time in a day we don’t spend doing it. So as far as energy expenditure in the course of a day or a month or a lifetime, NEAT is the main source of guzzling calories, not EAT.

Let me illustrate. The average 150 pound person expends 720 calories in an eight hour day just lying quietly in bed. If sitting at a desk to work, he or she expends 912 or an additional 192 calories during that same 8 hour period. Standing to work, the caloric expenditure rises to 1176 or an additional 264 calories. So all other things being equal (and I realize that’s a pretty big assumption) just spending most of one’s work day standing instead of sitting costs the body an additional 1874 calories per week or the rough equivalent of a one-half pound of potential weight gain a week.

But the body isn’t merely a ‘black box’ into which calories go and out of which calories flow. A change in one area (expenditure) causes changes in other areas (intake) that can easily correct course and keep the body in balance. It’s not just eat more exercise less. Clearly it isn’t that simple, because if it were, taking a brisk 3 mph walk every day (which would burn 300 calories) would offset the difference occasioned by sitting all day to work. But it doesn’t, at least not completely.

As I wrote about in The Cure, when my weight began an inexorable creep upward as I passed 50, in spite of my knowing what to do and for the most part doing it, I undertook a program of daily walking of about 3.5 miles per day, six days a week for a solid 10 months, and didn’t lose a pound or an inch. There’s more than simply calories in and calories out as we normally think of those things in what drives us to store fat. If it were that elementary, we’d all be thin!

The kind of calories coming in matter. Hormonal balance matters. Stress matters. And maybe, just maybe, standing more matters.

At any rate, I intend to do the Rummy and give it a try. I’ll let you know how it works out.

*Rumsfeld photo - Wikipedia

Send this post to a friend.

I’ve written before about the lovely Meyer lemon tree in our back yard in Santa Barbara. Small, but prolific, it keeps us supplied with more lemons than we can possibly use. This summer, it positively outdid itself, leaving us awash in fragrant fruit and wondering what to do with them all. An article in the local paper about hand-crafted aperitivos and digestivos gave us an idea.

When life gives you lemons, make Limoncello!

The best limoncello in the world comes from the Amalfi Coast of Italy, made traditionally from lemons grown on the volcanic slopes of Vesuvius. In restaurants throughout the region, a complimentary glass of limoncello follows every meal, in the belief that it will act as a digestivo and improve the overall eating experience. Bad limoncello tastes like Janitor-in-a-Drum Liqueur, but the good stuff, served syrupy and cold, is a delight.

I found a recipe online and, straightaway, ordered a large (2 1/2 gallon) glass container with a screw top lid. As soon as it arrived, I plucked about 40 lemons from our tree, procured 4 fifths of vodka, readied my vegetable peeler, and set to work.

The most important step in making good limoncello–what the Italians will freely tell you separates the rot gut from the sublime–is to take great care in peeling the lemons, getting just the zest and taking the time to scrape off any bit of white pith that might be clinging to the zest. Even a small amount of pith can impart a bitterness to the final liqueur (masked usually by adding much more sugar) and the extra time it takes to check each sliver of peel for pith and scrape it away pays great dividends in the final product.

Here’s how to do it:

Limoncello di Villa Eades

15 to 20 fresh lemons, zest only
2 fifths (750 ml) vodka or PGA
4 cups sugar
4 cups water

Step 1: Zest the Lemons
Wash the lemons well. Use a sharp vegetable peeler to remove slivers of just the zest. Check the backs of the slivers for pith and scrape away every minute bit of it with the blade of a small paring knife.

(I juice the naked lemons and mix with water and sucralose or stevia to make low-carb lemonade.)

Step 2: Make an alcohol infusion
Put the slivers of zest into a large, glass container with a tightly-sealing lid.

(I found a large glass screw-top container online that will let me make a double batch at once. Old-fashioned, glass, screw-top, gallon, sun tea jars would work well, too, but the new ones on the market all seem to be made of plastic, which I’d prefer not to use.)

Add the vodka, swirl the contents, cover tightly, and put into a cool, dry place for 2 weeks to 1 month to extract the lemon oils and allow them time to infuse the alcohol.

Step 4: Make a simple syrup
In a saucepan large enough to hold it all, add the sugar to the water and stir to combine. Heat the mixture over a low flame, stirring constantly, until all the sugar has dissolved and the syrup is clear. Set aside.
(Yes, I use real sugar, because it is a part of what ensures inhibition of the growth of unfriendly microbes. And besides, you aren’t supposed to drink a water tumbler of it, just a cordial glass. It works out to about 8 - 10 grams of carb per ounce of liqueur, which is lot, but not so so terrible for an occasional treat.)

Step 5: Sweeten the alcohol
Strain the peels from the infusion, by pouring the infusion through a fine meshed sieve into a separate container. Return the infusion to the large jar and add the simple syrup. Swirl to combine. Cover tightly and return to the cool, dry area to age for about 1 or 2 months.

Step 6: Bottle the limoncello
Use a funnel to transfer the limoncello into ultra clean, dry, small bottles with tight stoppers or screw tops. I found some great ones in 250 ml and 500 ml sizes online. I also dipped the stoppered bottle ends in wine bottle sealing wax to create an even better seal.

Step 7: Label your treasure and put away in a cool place. Great for giving as a hostess gift or birthday gift or any-occasion gift. Be sure to put one bottle into your own freezer to have at the ready for improving digestion after a great low-carb meal!

Send this post to a friend.

This Thanksgiving we had a larger crowd than usual and were the recipients of not one, but two turkeys, courtesy of Mike and our son, Dan, having won a pair of them at the local Thanksgiving week golf tournament aptly named The Turkey Shoot.

I decided to cook them both. One I did the traditional baste, roast, turn, baste, roast, burn your hand, OUCH, turn method I’ve used for years. The other I did in pieces in my SousVide Supreme.

The comparison of the two was a revelation. You can read the whole story here.

Send this post to a friend.

Readers of this blog know that Mike and I have followed a low-carb way of eating and day-to-day living for about a quarter of a century now. We try to follow our own advice most of the time, with (admitted) dietary vacations thrown in for fun and psychosocial health. But even when we’re hewing pretty close to the straight and narrow, it’s nice now and again to treat ourselves to just a little indulgence, which at Casa Eades is often a small square or two of good dark chocolate. I try to keep a bit on hand, just for this purpose.

While waiting for my Americano the other day at a little coffee bar/grocery/deli not far from our house, I was perusing the chocolate bar display and noticed something unusual. There along side the Chocolate with Raspberries, Chocolate with Orange, Chocolate with Almonds, Chocolate with Coffee Beans and other typical chocolate and something combinations was one called (and I am not making this up) Mo’s Bacon Bar from Vosges Haute Chocolat.

Curious, I bought one to try.

Oh, my Heaven above!

I have always relished juxtaposition in flavors and textures in foods and I dearly love the savory, sweet combination. When I was young and foolish and thought myself metabolically invincible, I used to snack on a combination of Duncan Hines Soft Chocolate Chip Cookies and Cheetos (I preferred the ones quick fried to a crackly crunch over the baked to a delicate crunch, except in a pinch, because, again, I liked the soft cookies juxtaposed against the crispy cheese puff.) One bite of a cookie, one bite of a cheeto…another bite of a cookie, another bite of a cheeto. Ah, such were the days of my misspent youth, before I had my brain transplant and realized what damage I was actually doing to myself by regular indulgence in carby junk!

With just a bite of Mo’s Bacon Bar, I was transported to sweet/savory nirvana! The Vosges website says it better than I could

Two equally obsessive foods come together in one perfectly balanced bite of savory, smoky, and sweet. Applewood smoked bacon, Alder wood smoked salt, blend with a array of chocolates

The whole bar, were you to eat it, contains nearly 30 grams of pure sugar and about 400 calories–the maker claims there are 2.5 servings–3 squares each–in each 3 ounce bar. That’s enough to break the bank when you’re really holding the line against carbs. But if what you’re after is just a little indulgence after a good low-carb meal, one square at a bit over 3 grams is just enough with a cup of decaf Americano to finish a meal nicely.

Send this post to a friend.

In most of the country, it’s hotter than blazes, which means it’s a good time to make something light and cool for dinner. Our local newspaper, the other day, gave me a perfect idea: Viccyssoise.

It was mentioned in an AP article about Julia Child, which seem to be everywhere coincident with the hype surrounding the book and newly released movie, Julie & Julia, starring Meryl Streep as the indomitable Mrs. Childs. The article focused on three kitchen utensils Julia felt were mandatory in the kitchen: the crepe pan, the whisk, and the food mill, each with a recipe for using the item. The latter, of course, she used for making Vichyssoise, which on a hot summer day sounded pretty darned tempting.

OK, clearly not real vichyssoise, since it’s potato-based and thus too filled with easily digested potato starch (read glucose) to be of much use to those of us who keep a lid on the carbs. But a nice chilled low-carb version and some slices of cold grilled chicken over butter lettuce and tomatoes drizzled with a tangy lime and fresh rosemary vinaigrette. Now you’re talking!

So I set about to pimp Julia’s recipe. In it were cooked peeled potatoes, leeks, chicken stock, salt, heavy cream, white pepper and minced fresh chives. Really not much but the potatoes that had to go, which can most easily be replaced by cauliflower or celery root.

I chose cauliflower, since unless you get a very fresh celery root, you’re going to run into the possibility of some woody bits, which would really spoil the delicate and velvety puree.

Begin by making a double batch of Creamy Cauliflower Puree , about which I’ve posted before. (Scroll down a bit in that blog post for the recipe.) If you have more than you need, great; it keeps in the fridge well for use as the side dish that it is, just heated in the microwave.

Low Carb Vichyssoise
Serves 6 to 8

3 cups Creamy Cauliflower Puree
3 cups sliced leeks, white parts only
1 1/2 quarts chicken stock or broth
1/2 to 1 cup heavy cream (organic if possible)
Salt to taste
White pepper to taste
2 to 3 tablespoons minced fresh chives
Sour cream garnish, if desired

1. In a 3 to 4 quart saucepan, over medium high heat, simmer the leeks in the stock with a ittle salt for about 40 to 50 minutes, until the leeks are tender.
2. Place the leeks and some of the stock into a blender and puree.
3. Return the pureed leeks to the remaining stock in the pan, add the Creamy Cauliflower Puree, add the cream until you get the consistency you desire, and stir well to combine.
4. Taste and adjust seasonings, adding more salt and the white pepper.
5. If you’re a real stickler for a perfectly smooth soup, pass the puree through a fine mesh strainer. (I am not usually so picky, but it’s a nice touch if you’ve got the time.)
6. Chill thoroughly, up to overnight.
7. When ready to serve, ladle into chilled bowls, garnish with a sprinkling of chives and a dollop of fresh sour cream, if you like.

Cool as the ‘Tom Brady’ side of the pillow!

(My fellow NFL fans will understand the inversion of the overworked allusion (cliche) that one particular ESPN talking sports head uses (over and over and over) to describe the degree of coolth, calmth, and collection under pressure of the storied New England Patriots’ QB, who returns this season from the disabled list.)

Send this post to a friend.

Several of you have written in reference to a comment on one of Mike’s posts mentioning my mayonnaise recipe. I thought I’d post it here, instead of in the comments, since more people will be able to find it if it’s a blog. I don’t think you can search my comments…yet.

For those of you who may own one or more of our cookbooks, there is a good version of mayonnaise in the Low Carb Comfort Food Cookbook and another, slightly easier version that shows up in both our 30-Day Low Carb Diet Solution book and in our Low Carb CookwoRx Cookbook.

Mayonnaise is nothing more than an emulsion of oil and water, and as such, is a delicious and healthy low-carb food, if made with good oil. Therein lies the problem for most commercial mayonnaise: they’re usually made with nasty soybean oil or canola oil, basically a trans fat slurry. Now and again, I can find a good olive oil mayonnaise in Whole Foods or Lazy Acres or some similar natural food grocery, but for the most part the stuff that’s sold on the standard grocery shelf is made with simply wretched oils. And if you’ve read our books, you know that one of the most important aspects of good nutrition is the quality (not the quantity) of the fat you put into your mouth.

Making mayonnaise may seem daunting, but it’s really simplicity itself. I’ll share my blender version, but a word of caution. Don’t use your good quality extra virgin olive oil for making mayonnaise. It will become bitter in the blender. I haven’t a clue why, but it happens quite regularly, so don’t waste your money or the good oil. Most of the time, I use a ‘Light’ Olive oil–I think it’s Bertoli, maybe–that I can pick up at the regular grocery store for making mayonnaise. Occasionally, I will make it with avocado oil or if I want a particular flavor, with a nut oil, such as walnut oil, but not for everyday mayo.

Here’s all you do:

Basic Blender Mayo
(Makes 16 Tablespoons)

1 raw egg yolk (pasteurized in the shell egg if available)
2 teaspoons champagne vinegar or white wine vinegar
1/4 teaspoon salt
1/2 lemon, juice only (about 1 tablespoon)
1/4 teaspoon dry mustard
dash cayenne pepper
1 packet Splenda (optional, but gives it a slight sweetness like Miracle Whip)
3/4 to 1 cup light olive oil

1. Crack egg and put yolk only into the blender
2. Add the vinegar and salt and blend on low speed.
3. With the motor running, add all the remaining ingredients, except the oil.
4. With the motor still running, add the oil in a slow, steady stream until it makes mayonnaise of the consistency you desire. Be careful not to add the oil too fast or add too much oil or you may break the emulsion and the mayonnaise will separate and clump.*
5. Store in the refrigerator in a clean jar (good use for store-bought mayonnaise) or a container with a tight-fitting lid for up to a week.

*Don’t despair if your mayonnaise breaks and don’t throw out the result. While, once broken, it will not likely ever thicken into a spreadable form, you can save it in a jar in the refrigerator and whisk herbs and garlic and a bit more salt into it to make a nice mayonnaise-based dressing, which demands a looser emulsion anyway.

Send this post to a friend.

The family gathered for a little Father’s Day/Mike’s birthday get together this past weekend. I’d planned a casual light meal for the evening that incorporated several of Mike’s favorites: steak and tomatoes.

The menu included Garden Style Gazpacho (like my usual Gazpacho Andaluz, but without going to the trouble of pressing the base through a strainer and served with the diced fresh vegetables already stirred back into the soup) and Grilled Flank Steak and Warm Mushroom Salad, Fresh Sliced Heirloom Tomatoes, a bit of baguette and brie and a nice local local wine.

I didn’t want to have to do too much work after the family got here, because when our granddaughter hits the door, it typically puts a serious crimp in her Nanny’s otherwise careful attention to slicing and dicing!

So, I marinated the flank steaks in vac-seal bags the night before using a steak rub I keep around, typically salt, black pepper, garlic powder, onion powder, paprika, and sometimes cumin. To make it easier on myself at party time, I tossed them into a 135F sous vide water bath about 11 am on party day and left them there until practically time to eat, about 8 hours, then popped them out of the bags, patted them dry, and flopped them onto a hot, oiled grill just to give them a nice sear on the outside.

The sous vide method is the only way to get a cheaper, tougher cut of meat, such as a flank steak, to come out tender as filet mignon and still perfectly medium rare. And so it was. When I cut the meat and fanned it out onto the greens, I was rewarded with perfectly cooked steak: deep pink, flavorful, and tender.

Everybody enjoyed the Gazpacho and loved the flank steak and we had a lovely evening.

It wasn’t until the next morning that I realized that I had not ever sauteed the mushrooms and fennel to add to the salad. There the bag of chopped mushrooms, sliced fennel bulb, olive oil and herbs was, still marinating in my refrigerator. So I decided to turn them into soup, which turned into an accidental hit.

If necessity, as they say, was the mother, then absent-mindedness, apparently, was the father. But whatever the genesis, it’s good eats!

Mushroom, Fennel, and Sausage Soup*
Serves 4

1 pound Cremini mushrooms (baby bellas), cleaned and quartered
1/2 bulb fresh fennel, sliced
2 tablespoons olive oil (divided use)
1/2 teaspoon Herbes de Provence
1/2 teaspoon black pepper (divided use)
1/2 pound Italian Sausage, sweet or hot, sliced
1/4 white onion, peeled and sliced
1 clove garlic, peeled and minced
1 can (14-ounces) fire roasted diced tomatoes, drained
1 tablespoon sundried tomato paste
1/4 cup sherry
1 quart chicken broth
1/4 teaspoon onion powder
1/4 teaspoon garlic powder
1/2 teaspoon coarse salt (or to taste)

1. In a zip bag, marinate the mushrooms and fennel with 1 tablespoon of the olive oil, Herbes, and 1/4 teaspoon of the black pepper. Refrigerate for 1 hour or up to overnight.
2. In a soup pot, heat the remaining olive oil over medium heat. Add the Italian sausage and cook for 3 or 4 minutes to give it some color.
3. Add the onions and garlic and continue to cook until they are translucent, about 2 or 3 minutes.
4. Deglaze the pan with the sherry.
5. Add the mushrooms and fennel and cook until soft, another 5 minutes or so.
6. Add the tomatoes, garlic and onion powders, remaining salt and pepper, tomato paste, and chicken broth and bring to a boil.
7. Reduce heat and simmer for another 20 minutes or so.
8. Serve hot.

*For a vegetarian option to this delicious soup, simply substitute one (14-ounce) can of soy beans, rinsed and drained, for the sausage and substitute mushroom or vegetable broth for the chicken broth.

Enjoy!

Send this post to a friend.

Forgive my lengthy absence from the blog desk. As those of you who also read Mike’s blog know, I’ve been up to my eyeballs for the last month finishing a couple of major business projects and wearing my SB Choral Society President and soprano-in-the-chorus hats getting our Verdi Requiem behind us (which, as he’s already blogged about, was a smashing critical success, thank you very much) and as such all work on my blog got pushed to the back burner. Mea culpa!

Then before you could turn around and catch a breath, we were off on this trip to China.

We’ve never traveled in the East before and it has been something we were looking forward to doing, particularly as it involves food and nutrition. One big surprise has been the food. I came expecting rice and noodles and vegetables and not much in the way of protein and boy was I wrong.

I would have to say that rice or noodles have been a side dish, not a main dish, at most of our meals here. And there has been plenty of fish, poultry, beef, and pork…often all four at one meal.

For instance, the day we were in Jiang Men, we were treated to lunch at a Dim Sum restaurant. I was concerned that it would be all rice and dumplings with little tidbits of meat here and there.

The meal began with steamed stuff clams and fish cakes. Followed by a couple of dumplings

Pork Dumplings

Shrimp Dumplings

And the food just kept on coming.

Most of the food appeared in plates to be shared, placed on the giant lazy Susan always found in the center of a Chinese dining table. But everybody got his or her own ‘main dish’ which at this lunch was steak.

Steak with a brown sauce and fries

You’ll notice that there are a few fries artfully arranged (practically into a Chinese character) on the plate. That’s how many came with the steak. There were eight or nine (both lucky numbers in China–eight for wealth and nine for long life) fries about an inch and a half long on the plate. That’s it. Contrast that with the mountain of fries you’d get with a ’steak frite’ in the West.

Then a shared chicken dish that was just yummy…

Chicken with mushrooms and fresh cukes and tomatoes

and one of scallops and broccoli…

Scallops and Broccoli

…and a shared plate of corn and a purple sweet potato that is a locally grown specialty. I don’t eat much corn (though I love it) so I passed on the corn on the cob, but I tried a little of the purple sweet potato. Its consistency and taste is pretty much just like an orange one, but purple through and through, like a beet.

Corn and Purple Sweet Potatoes

And finally some little sweets, which I admit to having a taste of, just to try. They were actually quite hard to get into. The outer sticky rice ‘bread’ is soft and cold and really stretchy, a lot like the Ethiopian bread, called Injera, if you’ve ever had that. It was a struggle to get the thing open, but we weren’t alone; the locals struggled a bit, too. Inside was lightly sweet cream and bits of different kinds of fresh fruit, including watermelon.

Snowballs - Steamed Sticky Rice Sweets

Quite a feast…and for lunch, no less! Wait until Mike blogs about dinner that night. Sakes alive, what a meal!

Off to London this afternoon. Will be dining at The Fat Duck, so be prepared for a blow-by-blow on that experience.

Send this post to a friend.

In the dining section of the NY Times last Wednesday, there was a somewhat alarming article by Kim Severson, titled: Showdown at the Coffee Shop (free but requires registration) detailing the entry of the new sweetener Truvia to the world of packet sweeteners.

Photo from NY Times Wednesday April 15, 2009

We’d already heard about its arrival at the Natural Foods Expo West show last March in Anaheim and had even sampled some of it. While I’m glad to see a natural alternative in the low-and-no calorie sweetener department, I’m personally not crazy about this one. Truvia is a blend of rebiana, an extract of stevia, and erythritol, a sugar alcohol. Thought there may be many good things about erythritol, to my taste buds it has a cold, metallic edge that I don’t enjoy. Others who don’t catch that taste twinge would perhaps feel differently about it and will love Truvia’s green packets in the sweetener caddy beside the blue, pink, and yellow ones.

Of course, by convention, for many many years, consumers have associated artificial sweeteners with a particular packet color: blue for aspartame products, pink for saccharine products, yellow for sucralose products, and green for stevia products. And it is related to this topic that I found the real eye-popper in this piece…the big news in my humble opinion…buried in the continuation of the article on page D5:

Consumers are loyal to their favorite sweetener, and to the color of its packet. Now manufacturers like Mr. Petray [CEO of Nutrasweet, which makes aspartame] are mixing up the color code, putting new sweetener combinations in the familiar pink, blue, and yellow.

This is news! And, in my mind, underhanded and sneaky and ethically fuzzy. The article goes on…

His challenge to Splenda combines aspartame and a touch of sugar in a yellow packet called NutraSweet Cane…Mr. Petray’s entry in the stevia wars is called Natural NutraSweet, which comes in a green packet, of course. And the company created a new saccharin-free pink packet, too. [The article didn't say what was in that pink packet, however, but since it's coming from NutraSweet we can be sure that one of the ingredients will be aspartame.]

The yellow packet, especially, is worrisome to me, since most low-carbers avoid aspartame because of some reports that suggest it might be particularly detrimental to the brains of people on a low carb eating plan. And this yellow imposter will have not only aspartame but sugar…real honest to Pete sugar! In the very yellow, pink, and green packets that many of us have come to trust do NOT contain aspartame, there will now be aspartame.

(For a longer discussion on the various sweeteners, see a previous blog post of mine here.)

Once these imposter packets make their way into the commercial market, consumers or diners will no longer be able to rely on colors alone to select their sweetener. We’ll all have to be careful label-readers to keep from being duped.

Send this post to a friend.

Our local newspaper carried an article a few days ago by the McClatchy News Service’s Steve Schmaedeke that caught my eye: A whiff of luxury: Take Le Whif of inhalable chocolate.

Say what?! Inhalable chocolate?

Truth is indeed stranger than fiction.

According to Mr. Schmadeke, David Edwards, the gentleman who invented inhalable insulin for diabetics, has now given us…well…a snort of chocolate. And he goes on to quote Mr. Edwards,

We believe really strongly that there’s a whole new way of eating–by aerosol.

Hmmmm. Like I need a ‘whole new way of eating’ chocolate. I’ve been known to ‘inhale’ chocolate in my time–I have admittedly downed a fair number more pieces of Mike’s mother’s fabulous fudge at Christmas in a short span of time than would be considered prudent–but never anything quite like this!

The chocolate particles (80 to 300 microns in size and about 1 calorie’s worth per puff) coat the inside of the mouth, so says the article. I wonder if you can actually taste it? I wonder if there’s any pleasure whatsoever to be derived from it? Any nutritive value from the catechins present in so minuscule an amount?

And if not, what’s the point?

We can all find out at the end of this month, according to the article, when Le Whif goes live on line, vending chocolate whiffs at about 50-cents a pop.

Ah, I can see it now… I’ll just have a doppio espresso and two of those chocolate whiffs, please.

Can inhalable buttered popcorn at the movies be far behind?

Send this post to a friend.