Thursday, July 9, 2015

making a recipe your own

As a person who has been cooking for almost half-a-century now, it finally occurred to me that the easiest meals to prepare are the ones I do from memory.  For some reason, the need to consult a recipe makes the preparation significantly more tedious.  And when I have to keep waking up my ipad because it drifts away to sleep while i'm chopping or measuring?   grrrr....

Cooking an old familiar dish -- piece o' cake.  It may take me hours, but its familiarity makes it easy.  Cooking a simpler one that I never made before -- much more productive of stress and weariness, not least because of the uncertainty of the result.  Ever get a recipe for a dish that tasted wonderful at a friend's house, but turned out disappointing when you made it? ... you know what i'm talking about!

When making a more complicated concoction, I doubt that there's any quick way to bypass the much-repeated consultations with the written word.  A recipe with a dozen different seasonings, from 1/4-teaspoon of cayenne to 1 1/2-teaspoon ground mustard to 2 tablespoons of sugar-free pancake syrup (as in a batch of barbecue sauce), calls for a lot of back-and-forth which frankly makes me prefer to let J grill steaks....

Reading a "new" recipe VERY carefully before starting it -- or even a recipe i've made a time or two -- complete with visualizing the process, can help me.  In the former case, I can pick up possible errors in transcription.  As hard as proofreading literature can be, proofreading recipes is REALLY tricky, and some people can't describe a procedure well to save their lives.  If I've tried a recipe before and found it worth doing again, reading it through (with visualization) reminds me of what I thought should be done differently the first time.

Reading the new recipe can also remind you of something you've done before -- that makes it easier and less stressful!  If I realize that a new chicken recipe is LIKE an old pork recipe in technique, but just changing herbs and adding cheese, I can pretty well just wing it.

Converting classics and childhood favorites to a lower-carb style requires a few different ingredients AND some changes in technique.  When I first started LC, I was "doing" Atkins according to the book;  their recipes in those days beat hell out of most diet recipes i'd used in preceding decades, and it was worth it to me to buy the old "bake mix" and shake powders, but those things disappeared from the market and I had to find other substances that could do the job.  For a few years I used Expert Foods' thickeners and other special ingredients ... but THEY quit the business TOO!  :-P  Thank heavens their raw materials are known and available to retail consumers....

I've picked up several invaluable tricks from Dana Carpender:
  • To thicken a liquid with glucomannan (konjac) flour, the process goes MUCH more easily if you put the powder in a salt-type shaker and sprinkle with one hand while whisking with the other.  This doesn't keep me from over-thickening from time to time, but at least it prevents the lumps that I USED to get.
  • In preparing shirataki noodles for serving, you can keep dishes from sitting in puddles of water by draining and rinsing the straight-from-the-bag noodles, then microwaving 90 seconds and re-draining them TWICE.  That method seems to drive the water out without the stove-top heating that so often toughens them.
  • Classic recipes with cheesy sauces often require making béchamel and melting cheese into it.  This high-carb product can't be imitated merely by melting cheese into a low-carb dish, but by melting cream-cheese and cheddar (or gruyere, or whatever) together, you can get pretty close.
  • To replicate the caramel flavor of brown sugar, she suggests using a tiny amount of blackstrap molasses to the artificial-sweetener of choice -- somewhere around a half-teaspoon, depending of course on the size of the recipe.  Ever try to measure out a quarter-teaspoon of molasses???  :-)  Dana recommends putting your molasses into an old honey-bear type of squeeze bottle -- I haven't done this yet, but it sounds like GENIUS.
There are lots of other tweaks to traditional cooking that make our low-carb creations turn out better.  Part of it is intuitive and some is ... less so.  It occurred to me that I should make another "special page" here, where i'll congregate some of these ideas.  I hope my internet friends will share theirs, too!  Together, we have centuries'-worth of kitchen experience!

Tuesday, July 7, 2015

new recipe, improved by being left-over!

My husband had to wait a little while before he got to sit in the barber-chair, when he got his last haircut.  The ladies who do the cutting had Rachael Ray on the boob-tube -- i'm not sure if J has ever seen her before, but that day she was making something that sounded really good to him, so when he got home he did some googling....

He pulled up the pork recipe she had been doing on the show, and another one that sounded good to him;  he discussed the recipes with me, and we decided the second one should be on our week's menu.  We were so right!  It was delicious, and I just finished the leftovers for lunch ... and they were even better today than they were last week!

We made some small changes in the base-recipe, so that I feel entitled to print this as our own ... so here I present:

"DECARBÉE" STUFFED PORK LOIN

Stuffing:
2 T. dried currants, soaked in hot water and drained
1 T. each olive oil and butter
2 cloves garlic, crushed or minced
1/2 c. chopped onion
1/2# ground pork
1 t. fennel seed
1/4 c. dry white wine
3 T. pine nuts, lightly toasted
1 t. thyme (more if fresh)

1# pork tenderloin
~8 slices prosciutto

Heat the oil and butter, and add the onion;  sauté till a bit softened, and stir in the garlic.  Crumble in the ground pork and cook till pink goes, then add salt and pepper to taste.  Add the rest of the ingredients, stir-fry together a bit, and set aside.

Put your tenderloin on a good-sized cutting board, butterfly it, and pound it to a uniform thickness of about 1/4".  Leaving a one-inch border on both short- and one long-side, spread the stuffing on the sheet of meat.  Roll up like a jelly-roll;  lay out your slices of prosciutto, overlapping generously, and place the meat-roll on it, seam-side down.  Roll up again, and tie with string.

Place your meat-roll on a rack in a roasting pan, and bake for ABOUT 40-45 minutes at 400F. 

J tested at 30 minutes and it seemed to have quite a way to go, so he put it back in the oven for 20 minutes and it was a little too done.  The original recipe calls for an internal temperature of 145F, and his ended up at 165 -- it was a little bit drier than it should have been but still delicious.

And it was even more delicious after resting a couple of days in the fridge!  It occurred to me that this would be an outstanding cocktail-party offering, made up in a roll half the diameter of our dinner-size roast, and sliced into bite-sized pieces.  Drizzle it with a tiny bit of low-carb sweet-sour sauce, or better yet a little pomegranate molasses, and I have no doubt that your guests will leave you with NO leftovers to enjoy for lunch the next day.

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

eating like a lumberjack

During the "quiet time" we've been having recently, while so many bloggers are busy LIVING instead of writing, I started reading Dana Carpender's blog archive.

I have NO IDEA why I didn't do this before:  she is, after all, my favorite living cookbook-author!  Since I started reading blogs so much (which started while my husband worked out-of-town, and I had gobs of time to call my own) and ultimately discovered her work, she hasn't been as prolific a writer as she was six or seven years ago, and I didn't have a chance to get hooked on her "voice." 

I'm making up for it, now.  :-)  Enjoying it, too!  I became acquainted with her in real life, on the low-carb cruises, and I really like her and her husband both.  My daughter observed that Dana reminded her of my eldest sister, and she's right -- D and S have similar personalities which I find entertaining and stimulating.

Some of her blog-posts recount what she eats on a daily basis -- well, she creates and publishes recipes, so she has a lot of "experiments" to "dispose of" and is too frugal a person to want to let any food go to waste.  If her mother was like mine, who grew up during the Great Depression, she comes by it naturally....

Once when she asked for reader input, someone "accused" her of having a small appetite, saying that some days she seemed to eat not much more than a chicken-thigh during the course of half a day;  Dana responded that on the contrary, her reader had been mistaken, and elaborated on the sort of meal and its preparation, which the reader had misinterpreted.  Further, in the comments, another reader agreed with Dana having a decent-sized appetite -- she herself ate similarly and had been accused of "eating like a lumberjack."

This is what spurred me to write today.  It aggrieves me to hear people passing judgement on not only WHAT other people choose to eat but HOW MUCH ... especially right in their faces ... and most especially to women.  And as we see daily, online, much waspishness goes on and much conclusion-jumping too.  So-and-so MUST eat less (or more) than they claim to, because they're losing (or gaining) weight on what a NORMAL PERSON would not!  Or -- and this is the perennial annoyance -- SHE eats like a lumberjack ... with the underlying, unspoken condemnation that such a woman is gross and unfeminine.

For millennia, "Neolithic" culture has been up-in-arms about anybody having a good time, and it's a particular crime for women.  Women should be delicate and pure, abstemious, chaste and sober, and "eat like a bird."  For a woman to enjoy her food (or, god forbid! SEX) has long been considered just appalling.  All a woman SHOULD enjoy is service to others.  :-P

Though this attitude began to relax a bit during the 20th century, it is still going strong now.  Want to cast aspersions on some woman?  Say things like she's strong as an ox (implying "fat cow"), or flaunts herself (dresses for warm weather and exhibits joye de vivre), or EATS LIKE A LUMBERJACK (the shameless hedonist!)....

Appetite is driven by powerful biochemical processes.  Anybody with experience of the world sees that repressing appetite for food (ie, on a calorie-deficient diet) can only last so long before one's hormones take charge and Nature's protective directives MAKE them give up and EAT.  If we are burning a good deal of energy, a symphony of biochemicals is turned loose within us, demanding that we replenish our resources.  If, thanks to insulin, we can't access our stored resources and we have to take in nourishment though we're still over-weight, the howling chorus screams "lumberjack."

It is STILL Nature's Way that we enjoy food ... despite the puritanical forces which condemn hedonism for purely unhealthy (psychopathic) reasons.  It is Nature's Way that we have a drive to remain alive, even if our hormonal balance as been thrown off by our unnatural modern foods and lifestyles.  We're wired to obey Nature in a way that puritanical entities (religions and cultural mores) find infuriatingly enviable.  They WANT us to obey them as we must obey Nature, and Nature says NO because those puritanical forces are antithetical to Life Success.

Nature seems to have made women's biology to evolve during our lifetimes, so we can more effectively shape society for the better.  When we're young we're more prey to our female hormones and neurotransmitters like serotonin -- we're softer and more placating.  When we reach midlife, we're less estrogenic on the one hand, and more dopamine-motivated on the other -- we care less about how others like us, and are more driven to do something about conditions we find intolerable.  As I say -- female humans are different from other mammals which do not lose their reproductive capabilities two-thirds of the way through life as we do.

WE need to be a driving force for improving the world ... and one of the easiest ways we can do this is to stop supporting the kind of culture that thinks it's okay to backhandedly insult those who are only obeying Nature.  She's eating like a lumberjack, is she?  ... Gee, I wonder why -- must be something about her biology.  Flaunting herself?  Maybe something about the summer weather, her energy level, her youth and vibrancy....  Cattiness and eating like a bird SHOULD have gone out of fashion a LOOOONG time ago!

Sunday, June 28, 2015

Sunday confessional

It's been pressuring me for some time, so I need to get something off my chest.

I really don't much like erythritol.

Having tried several of the recipes I've found at All Day I Dream About Food, I DO really like this woman's creative skills.  She creates some of her recipes specifically to showcase what you can do with Swerve, and the basic recipes are very good, but i'm left with that bitter, over-sweetened feeling when I use it ... and I ALWAYS use less than her recipes call for.  That latter trick I learned decades ago when substituting artificial sweeteners for sugar in conventional recipes.

Yes, there are times when the powdered Swerve will definitely come in handy, because the other things on the market don't have a very good texture for certain applications.  I can even see using the granulated version as PART of the sweetening in recipes.

BUT....

Veronica Atkins is absolutely right.  She's a proper CHEF, and no doubt it was on her advice that the dear doctor (NOT "the good doctor" whose advice I wouldn't take on ANYTHING) advocated using a mixture of different artificial sweeteners, for their synergistic and aesthetic advantage.  When you take one packet of sucralose and one packet of saccharine-blend, it comes off tasting sweeter and more sugar-like than two packets of either one alone.

So this is not a "forgive me, readers, for I have sinned" sort of confession, just one of those "I wanted to like it but I just DON'T" situations.  I'm going back to considering bulk sucralose my go-to choice, to be augmented by erythritol (plus others) for the synergy.

The only sweetener on my never-never list remains XYLITOL -- I can't repeat often enough, how toxic it is for dogs!

Thursday, June 25, 2015

"moderation in everything"

Occasionally, I like to take time out from our more specialized approach to health and weight control, to write something a little more basic to share with friends who would LOVE to improve both, but who don't have my opportunities to really immerse themselves.  Such people tend to be targeted by all those businesses who KNOW they're interested in health but have very little technical knowledge of it.

Advertising is an insidious process.  When print media bolster television commercial messages, it gives consumers the impression that all of them are telling you the same truths ... which couldn't be FURTHER from what actually IS true. 

The same people who are trying to sell you their processed foods are financing the diet-advice industry (dieticians and nutritionists) AND all those "health charities" which I rant against.  It is in their best interests (NOT YOURS) to convince you that moderation is the cornerstone of good nutrition, and that if you fail using their faulty paradigm, it's YOUR fault, not theirs.

It's what mainstream America believes in, but every woman over the age of 35 (and men over about 50) should have realized by now that it's just plain LIES.  Who benefits when you eat moderate quantities of three kinds of junk food?  Certainly not you.

The trick is, you KNOW that Doritos and ice cream and pizza are junk foods, but what they're trying to hide from you is that these foodstuffs are, too:
  • breakfast cereals;
  • most yogurt;
  • breads and crackers (yes, even the whole-grain kind);
  • low-fat dairy products;
  • pasta;
  • juices, both fruit and vegetables such as carrot;
  • mashed potatoes and other flavored potato preparations;
  • modern fruits, especially "tropical" ones;
  • coffee and tea drinks which are essentially milkshakes;
  • "vegetable oils" and everything cooked or served with them;
  • ...and many more items which won't occur to me till after I hit the "publish" button.
How can this be?  I'm sure, having read my list, you'll be inclined to write me off as an extremist, but I entreat you to read to the end. 

The study of nutrition has used a lot of very unscientific methods, to begin with.  Do you know why "everybody" says that fiber is good for you?  Because fiber makes big poops, and a medical-missionary in Africa HAD A NOTION that big poops protect against the "diseases of civilization."  THAT'S ALL.  Further studies that looked at "people who eat a lot of fiber" and decided that they were healthier than people who don't, were considered proof of this.  The problem is that people who eat a lot of vegetables are careful about their health in other ways as well.  When scientists finally tested that hypothesis properly, by taking two "identical" groups of people and telling one to go on eating the way they usually do, and telling the other group to eat X-number of vegetables per day, that "healthy-user bias" disappeared. 

More fiber did NOT protect against breast cancer in a series of prospective studies (the kind I described above), but you'll STILL find "responsible" medical authorities claiming it does.  It's a LIE.

More fiber did NOT protect against cancer of the "eliminative organs" ... in fact, it INCREASED IT by a small amount.  You'll still find people who claim that fiber is protective.  That's ANOTHER LIE.

Why do doctors tell patients lies like these?  Why do the American Heart Association, and the American Diabetes Association and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics LIE about this stuff???

Unless a physician has special interest in the science of nutrition, s/he knows nothing more than you do, from reading magazines and watching television.  They get virtually no education on nutrition in medical school -- as a matter of fact they are explicitly TAUGHT that WHAT you eat doesn't affect your health, merely how much.  In the real world, we ALL know that THAT is just another lie.

Who promulgates ideas like these?  As with everything else in modern society, all you have to do to find out is "follow the money."

When you've been convinced that moderation is all that's necessary, the people who benefit are those who are selling you moderate quantities of junk foods.  When moderate quantities of junk foods make you moderately overweight, WeightWatchers, Nutrasystems, JennyCraig and the fitness industry start getting their cut.  Moderate quantities of gym memberships encourage IMmoderate quantities of exercise because "everyone knows" that exercise will burn those calories right off ... except that it doesn't.* 

When the moderation of unhealthy foodstuffs AND exercise has left you with damaged knees and plantar fasciitis and moderate obesity and diabetes, the medical and pharmaceutical industries step in for their piece of the pie. 

See, when people are convinced they can be moderate when they SHOULD be abstemious with their treats, everybody wins ... except YOU.  Our society has been telling us for a very long time that we can have it all, but we can't.  We've been brainwashed to think that medicine can cure almost everything, but IT can't.  Experience shows that when we over-do anything there is a price to be paid.  And we need to remember, that nobody cares about our quality of life, except our own selves. 

WE have to take care of ourselves -- no one else can or will.  WE need to do the prudent thing.  It's like when our childhood rivals used to dare us to do stupid things, and call us cowards if we used our brains and refused.  "C'mon, it's only a cookie!" is our adult version of this phenomenon.  Of course, the cookie was on top of the sugary cocktail to start, and the huge plate-full which made up the main course, etc.

The only thing to moderate is moderation itself, if I may paraphrase FDR. 

Industrial farming has changed everything we eat, so that the nutrients which used to be in foods aren't there anymore, but our fruits and vegetables DO have significantly more sugar bred into them than they used to.  Take onions as a prime example -- remember when we used to have to carefully choose them so as to get milder rather than "hotter" specimens?  Nowadays it's not easy to find one that isn't sweet, like the Vidalias and 1015s.  When was the last time your eyes stung when you diced one?

You have to remember that when you eat any carbohydrate food, even those "healthy fruits and vegetables," any starch in them is broken down to sugar by the digestive processes.  What we were told decades ago about "complex carbohydrates" was very inaccurate -- sure, the cellulose in them slows down the conversion of starch-to-sugar, but with little exception every single molecule of sugar WILL be processed by your body in the end.  And the more ground-up they are, the more easily the last little morsel of yumminess adds to our waistlines....

If you care about your health, you HAVE to draw a line in the sand.  You CAN'T have it all, unless "all" includes heart disease, diabetes and cancer, in your definition.  You may have to be very hard-line if your well-being has fallen a long way already, to get back up to a place where you can indulge a little bit.  Because most of what you've learned about what's healthy, through newspaper, magazine, television, and even modern book-publishing, isn't presented as a public service, to help you feel better.  It's designed to make somebody money.

By telling everyone they can have everything in moderation, they're giving people permission to indulge themselves.  They're telling people what they want to hear.  Do YOU want to hear that you'll have to control your diet for the rest of your life, in order to maintain a safe weight and stave off cancer and dementia? 

No, I didn't think you did.  But it's IMPORTANT.  I sure as hell don't want to end my life in a diaper, doped to the eyebrows with psych drugs, and weighing 300 pounds.  Nor do I want to die a pathetic skeleton on a hospice bed.  If i'm lucky, i'll go like that 90-something-year-old, who took a spill while surfing, got cracked on the head by his board, and drowned -- in an accident while enjoying an adventure!
_______
*  Exercise has benefits, but is inadequate for regaining your figure.  More on that later.

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

gelatin-use update

It's been over eight months now, that I've been adding a tablespoon of gelatin (mostly) or hydrolyzed collagen (occasionally) to my first cup of coffee every morning.  There have only been two or three out-of-town times that I've missed it, and I planned ahead for the LCCruise by getting some beef-cartilage in capsule form, which I have appended to the gelatin dose often since we've been back.

It's working.  This extra step in the morning ritual is DEFINITELY worth continuing.  Considering how often I've gotten accidental or intentional cheat-doses of gluten over the last month, my bad knee has given me pain SIGNIFICANTLY less than usual, and the other one has twinged not at all. 

SUCCESS.

The only trouble is how long one has to wait for indisputable results -- a lot of people would probably give up the practice before it has a chance to really work for them.  As reported before, unless I had some extraordinary stress, I AM convinced that I have fewer grey hairs than I "should" (at one point last month, stress really got to me, and I believed I saw a big new crop of silver up there).  But I was only reminded of the knee situation a few days ago....

You see, as I reported right before the Cruise, I had doubled my daily dose of glutathione on the prompting of Dr. Kharrazian in "Why Isn't My Brain Working?"  According to him, it's supposed to be intrinsic to strengthening the gut wall AND the blood-brain barrier.  I had been observing my reactions to the various occasions since then, when I've allowed myself some wheat products.  I noticed that although the knee is significantly better, the trace of psoriasis that appears on my elbows when i'm not careful is definitely THERE.  Huh?

Gelatin.  (And maybe a little collagen and cartilage, but I've definitely used a LOT more of the gelatin.)  It's possible that i'm seeing a little less wrinkling in my face, too, but that could be influenced by lighting;  if it helps, i'll see more improvement with more time.  No matter, though -- these substances are definitely worth continuing.

Tuesday, June 23, 2015

move over, fat-bombs!

...Cuz I made a batch of something yesterday that outclasses you like a big dog.  ;-)

Not that I actually INVENTED it;  Wooo has spoken for a long time about her inositol candy.  I merely interpreted it my way.

Decades and decades ago, back when Scouts sold their own home-confected goodies to raise money for their troops, I was making cream-cheese-based mints by the hundreds.  Our leader had bought sheets of proto-silicone molds (rubber? plastic?) shaped like roses and leaves, cut them into individual bits and gave us one of each.  We were given the recipe and some basic instructions, and turned loose.

I might have made some after my Girl Scout years -- I don't remember clearly -- but I certainly didn't make any during the low-fat era, nor when fat became exonerated and sugar vilified.  Once I experimented with sucralose in place of the original powdered sugar, but it was a spectacular failure.

Fast forward to the past winter when I decided to experiment with inositol.  And what does powdered inositol closely resemble in both texture and taste?  You guessed it!

I tried it:  softened some cream cheese, measured some powder and flavoring, beat them together, and tasted.  Eh, not quite.  Added a little powdered erythritol and tasted again.  STILL not quite.  Added a little melted butter and it seemed pretty close.  Made a ball of it and put it in the fridge to firm up.  Tasted again today.  Not bad at all.

Now I just need to find those molds -- I know they're here someplace!

INOSITOL BOMBS

2 oz. softened cream cheese
1 c. inositol powder
1/4 t. extract-type flavoring
2 T. powdered erythritol
1 T. salted butter, melted

Beat together, add a drop of coloring if you so desire.  Form with molds or create little patties or balls -- the mixture has a texture reminiscent of PlayDoh.  :-)  I used lemon extract because that's what I have that sounded best;  I used to be very partial to wintergreen flavoring when I first used to make these things, so when I next visit the grocer I think i'll get some of that and also some peppermint. 

One of the tedious things about taking supplements is usually swallowing all the damn pills, so this makes a pleasant change.  A piece of it after dinner will probably make for a nice light dessert.