596 views • Categories: Food Politics See if you can find the connection.
(Reuters) - The world is running out of time to make sure there is enough food, water and energy to meet the needs of a rapidly growing population and to avoid sending up to 3 billion people into poverty, a U.N. report warned on Monday.
As the world's population looks set to grow to nearly 9 billion by 2040 from 7 billion now, and the number of middle-class consumers increases by 3 billion over the next 20 years, the demand for resources will rise exponentially.
Even by 2030, the world will need at least 50 percent more food, 45 percent more energy and 30 percent more water, according to U.N. estimates, at a time when a changing environment is creating new limits to supply
Indian Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar has lashed out at Congress President Sonia Gandhi’s dream project, namely the National Food Security Bill, which the government introduced in the Lok Sabha on December 22.
Pawar went on record as saying that there are insufficient funds to implement the Food Security Bill in its present form. However, he said “This is not a question of [an] individual. This is a question of investment in agriculture.”
The bill, if it became law and was fully implemented, would cost the national exchequer Rs 1.1 lakh crore ($22 billion) annually in agriculture liabilities alone, but would provide subsidized food grain to more than 60 percent of the country’s population.
I'm not a gambler, but I'm more than willing to bet we see more and more issues like this appear upon the world stage. How much they affect us here at home or in Western Europe is the only variable that I believe is truly in play.
1110 views • Categories: People 
There is a conflict within me. My head is all for scientific rationalization. I love the questioning various aspects of things we take for granted, and trying to find a coherent truth. But in my heart? I am a romantic. Beauty can't be quantified or qualified. Things move us, emotionally, for many different reasons, and trying to find out their hows & whys only seem to destroy our reactions to such things.
All of this is my way of introducing my love for the American fish shop, where deep frying is the order of the day, and cole slaw, french fries, and slices of lemon are the only nod to fruits and vegetables.
We now know that deep fried items are, generally speaking, bad for us. Over the course of the past generation or two, this has changed the landscape of this particular type of restaurant. Deep fried clams, beer-battered halibut, or your standard fish and chips are things that "should be avoided". And so people have. And so, over the course of the past generation or two, the fried seafood shop has lost its popularity.
Even here in Seattle, home of Ivar's and a handful of other similar places that take advantage of their place next to the Sound that is part of the Pacific Ocean, these restaurants have faded from their heights. Looking it the local newspapers and phone books from the 60's and 70's, one could get the impression that deep fried seafood could be found on every corner. Yet now? Now these places have taken a back seat to teriyaki places and Thai restaurants.
I'm not going to lament this culinary shift in tastes and preferences. Time marches on, after all, and who am I to stop it?
But I do admit to a feeling of comfort and joy when I walk into these places that I get in no other restaurant. These places feel like home to me, what with the aroma of malt vinegar, spicy cocktail sauces, and oil that is just about to break down.
Here's the thing: I know exactly why these places speak to me. The first restaurant my father took me to, without my brother and sisters, was an Arthur Treacher's. It was there that he treated me to the joys of deep fried clams and the taste of malt vinegar. For an 8 year old who was growing up on baloney sandwiches, Kool-aid, and Quisp and Quake, Arthur Treacher's was equivalent to a fine dining experience. And I know that every time that I have sprinkled malt vinegar on my french fries, or have ordered deep fried clams, it is a nod to that moment in time back in the mid-70's.
I look at this now and reflect upon the wonder of that. That this moment still affects me in restaurants to this day is astounding to me. Over the course of the past eight years, I've eaten in some of the top restaurants of the world, have eaten new dishes that were exotic, exquisite, or both, and have shared drinks with remarkable locations. And yet none of these moments, not one, have made me feel like I do when I walk into fried fish shop. No other place in the world can make me feel so tied to my past or to my father.
I could try to psycho-analyse this to the nth degree, and figure out the hows and whys of the emotive response. But the romantic in me says this is unnecessary. Some people go to the cemetery to connect with those who have passed on. Me? I think I'll keep the fish stand.
1272 views • Categories: Travel My friends and I are planning trips for the upcoming year, and it has given me the opportunity to reflect on what I think makes for a good-to-great trip. These are my own personal preferences, and some of them may not work for you.
Before I leave:
Set the Length of the Trip: The best thing I've learned is that it's difficult for me to do more than two weeks of travel at any given time, unless I move around a LOT.
I've also learned that traveling with other people has a time limit based on the patience of the least patient person in our traveling party. If I am traveling with other people, up to ten days seems to be doable. Anything longer seems to bring people to into the "What am I still doing here?" phase.
Research, Research, Research where you are going to stay: This means looking at more than one site. For every room I book, I tend to look at a minimum of three sites (Kayak.com or Booking.com, tripadvisor, and then the website of the hotel or apartment that I found.)
I look at Kayak for pricing, and Booking for details on rooms I find interesting.
I look at Tripadvisor to see how other travelers have rated the place, and I will consider any mid-range reviewed locations or higher because I'm okay with average hotel rooms. This is particularly important when you head to cities that have hundreds of hotels available, where a hotel ranked 150 out of 300 can still be considered 'adequate for the task'.
Research Things to Do on the trip: I have learned two things about Itineraries. First - They should be written in pencil. What I mean by that is that you need to be adaptable because sometimes people just don't want to go to a museum, or circumstances prevent you from heading to the market you wanted to go to. Have a list of things you wish to do on the trip, but be satisfied if you only get to do half of that plan.
Secondly, something should be available to do every day. It is better to have an event planed and not do it, then it is do want to do something, yet have no idea on what to do. I have found that it is worth it to have two places to go see per day, and one planned thing to eat or drink. We don't have to do any of them, but having the option available is quite comforting.
And yes, I make plans on eating at certain restaurants or looking for particular foods or drinks. I have particularly fond memories about the quest for haggis, trying to find the best Kölsch in Cologne, and looking for a good bratwurst in Milwaukee. Food and drink can be really strong ties to where you are at.
During the Trip
Write off your travel days: We have taken to calling the days we travel "purgatory", regardless of whether its by plane, train, or automobiles. Plane travel is NEVER pleasant, being either adequate to the task, or frustrating beyond belief. I've never had a great day of plane travel. I've had a few where there were no problems, but I have found that standing in line (check-in or baggage drop) after line (security) after line (getting on the plan) to be, at best tedious, and at worst, dreadful.
Trains are somewhat better than airlines, and have been known to sneak up into the 'pleasant' region from time to time. But those times are rare, and are often dependent upon who run the train and the amount of people in your car.
Surprisingly, cars afford the best opportunity for a pleasant trip, as you can come across a scenic route whilst driving, and can actually stop the car to appreciate wherever you are at. I'm reminded of my friend Andrea's and my last minute decision to stop and enjoy coffee at a place in the Rhine river valley, and the stop Tara and I made to enjoy the Tantalus Range in British Columbia. These moments are rare but notable. If you drive on major highways or Interstates, it's mostly dull.
Have a light first day: This is especially true if you travel overseas. Jet lag sucks, and it's worth your time to not push yourself when you've had anywhere from zero to four hours of sleep. Stay close to your hotel if you can.
Here's what I do on the first day: I become acquainted with the closest commercial street, where it is in relation to the hotel, and where I can find it on the map. This allows me to establish where I am in relation to the rest of the city. My friends are amazed at my ability to never get lost in a new city. My success in this is almost entirely due to acquainting myself with where the hotel is located.
I also try to acquaint myself with the local metro system. Nothing sucks more than learning that 50 minute walk you took could have been accomplished in 10 minutes with a ride on the subway. I've learned this the hard way.
Learn its okay to be a tourist, but acknowledge that you ARE a tourist: Many people dislike being called tourists. But the fact remains, you will be a tourist at some point. You can't avoid it, unless you wish to avoid visiting areas where tourists congregate. To put it another way, if you want to go to Pike Place Market, the Golden Gate Bridge, the Tower of London, or the Eiffel Tower, but are not from the areas where these places are located, you will be a tourist. It's unavoidable.
This isn't to say that you should always do touristy things. Good god, NO! It is a good thing to find things off of the beaten path, looking for the people, places, or things that the tour books are unaware of, yet help define your experiences. THESE experiences will differ from person to person and will make your trips different from everyone else's. Besides, being a tourist is exhausting.
Take pictures, but don't go crazy about it: As I said above, pictures can work as souvenirs. By all means, take them and then get them printed out and framed to put in your house, as reviewing them on Flickr is nice, but not as effective as having a picture that you can touch and feel and move about your house.
However, I have found that there's a fine line between having an experience versus recording an experience. If you are continually taking pictures, then your memories may be entirely about you taking pictures.
When possible, live (and engage) in the moment: That itinerary I told you to have above? You need to be able to adapt it, even to the point of throwing it aside if something better comes along. Traveling is not your schedule. Traveling is enjoying being somewhere else. Sometimes life will provide an alternative to what you have planned. Recognize it and engage it.
Andrea and I were in a higher end restaurant in Palermo, one mostly dedicated to the locals. In walks a mime/clown (not in white-face, thank god). This clown would try to engage other customers who really didn't want anything to do with him. Andrea and I took the opposite tact, and we engaged him, and he made us laugh and we made him laugh. Because we did that little bit of engagement, we have a very strong shared memory.
Be Safe, but don't be paranoid: There are two things that, if you lose, make your life difficult when you travel - your identification, and financial resources. (Note that I said difficult, but not impossible). Everything else is easily replaceable, up to and including airline tickets. Have a plan to deal with the loss of these items, certainly. But the odds of you of being pickpocketed or having the staff of your hotel steal stuff out of your room is small. It happens, yes, but only to a minority of travelers. Taking small but notable actions will lessen those odds. Use common sense (don't flash money about, keep your ID in a place where it's difficult to pickpocket, etc. etc).
Also, it's here where not being in a touristy area works in your favor. Criminals can and do work Pike Place Market, North Beach, and the Eiffel Tower. Added consideration should be taken in these areas. If your at a coffee-shop in a residential area of a city, the odds drop dramatically.
Additionally, if you find yourself in an uncomfortable situation, then leave. There's a difference between having a clown come up to you at a reputable restaurant, and having a stranger try to lead you away from the crowds of a commercial street.
My point here is that, yes, be aware of crime and criminals. But don't let the odds prevent you from enjoying yourself. Be smart, don't be paranoid.
hat's all I have now. I may add to this at a later date.
1890 views • Categories: The Spice Trade Trying to write about King Philip II in a single blog post is akin to summarize Crime and Punishment in a paragraph. Yes, it can be done, but so much will be lost along the way that the reader (and possibly the writer) will still be ignorant on the subject
However, his name comes up constantly when talking about both England and the Netherlands in the late 1500's, and with good reason. Three centuries before Queen Victoria and her "The Sun never sets on the English Empire", King Philip II of Spain had colonies the Americas and Asia, sought to expand the Holy Roman Empire to bring places such as England and Holland back into the Catholic fold, and tried to defeat the Ottoman Empire. His empire, by far, was the most powerful on earth at the time.
Note that I did not say 'wealthy'. Don't get me wrong, his empire did have wealth, but Philip's various wars and battles cost him a LOT of money, and in any given year of his reign, his treasury was just as likely to be empty as it was full.
There are two, no, make that three things that I find interesting about Philip.
His idea of statecraft and warfare - He saw himself as the face of Catholicism, and felt as if he had to defend the religion on any and every front. This was in large part due to the papacy naming his father , Charles V, as the protector of the Catholic cause. By Phillip's reign, his empire was essentially the mouthpiece for the Cardinals of Rome.
He also ruled his lands with the basic idea that religion of the ruler dictated the religion of the ruled, leaving no room for Protestantism in his realm. This would lead to the creation of the Dutch state, and would have a huge influence on how England and Holland perceived themselves and how they responded to any action by the Spanish.
He was a Royal Bureaucrat - As recently as a century before, many Kings would paint themselves as warrior-kings, whether true or not. But as Monarchies evolved into ruling through laws rather than might, Phillip's approach to his reign could be see as the logical extension of that philosophy - he ruled from his court.
By many accounts, Philip was an a font of information, and every decision went through him. Consider the logistics of this. He had lands and colonies that were thousands of miles away, were communications would arrive years after they had been written, and a response would take years to return. Yet for many major decisions, this is exactly what had happened. It was this level of bureaucracy that allowed the English to antagonize the Spanish in the Americas, for many of the Spanish lords, governors, and captains were afraid to take an action or make a decision that the King disproved of. The result? A lot of inaction until Philip acted himself*.
You'll note that I said "Royal". For a man who literally ran an empire, there was little to no appearance of stress, even when his armies lost battles, or armadas were lost. By all major accounts, Phillip was stately, religious, and gracious. Depending upon who you read, there are little to no accounts of him losing his temper. In short, the man acted like a King. He was never ruthless (although many beneath him were). But he always thought he was right because God was on his side.
This is not meant to whitewash history. As the decision maker of the Empire, ultimately the atrocities committed in his name do fall at his feet. My point here is that wars are rarely black and white, and kings and queens are rarely solely good or evil. From my point of view, Philip II is enigmatic, with his persona running in stark contrast to the results of his decrees and rulings. While ultimately I side with both the Dutch and English in their conflicts with the Spanish, it's difficult for me to see Philip as the sneering villain that some paint him as.
*NOTE: There are a few Spanish figures in this time-frame who are the exception, many of whom can be found in the Spanish-Dutch conflict. Sometimes they acted of their own accord, other times they interpreted Philip's instructions in the broadest possible way, resulting in accomplishing what Philip wanted, but with unfortunate results. Not surprisingly, many of these men were relatives and other members of the monarchy. I will call out these folks when necessary.
Remember the kind things I used to say about Paula Deen? Yeah, I'm taking them back.
If you're not aware, Paula Deen, the Food Network celebre-cook of the high cholesterol, calorie laden recipes, has found out she has Type II diabetes.
Let me be clear - this isn't the part that makes me upset, or wants to call her out. All of us, every single person who lives a life upon this planet, make choices in each of our individual lives, and make decisions that affect our long term health. We get older. Our bodies break down. We live with the results of choices made years ago. This includes the people who are fans of Ms. Deen. They watched her show, they made their choices to eat Deep Fried Lasagna, Deep Fried Stuffing on a Stick, and the classic Lady's Brunch Burger, the sandwich consisting of eggs, bacon, and hamburger placed between two slices of Krispy Kreme Doughnuts. That Paula Deen likely came to have diabetes through her diet is ironic, tragic, and no different than the health problems we all deal with as we get older. When I first heard she had diabetes, I was willing to leave it alone.
However, the news came out recently that her diagnosis occurred three years ago, and that she waited(!) to tell the rest of the world until she was able to leverage her disease into a sponsorship from Novo Nordisk that includes a promotional campaign that has its own website, and recipes that heavily promote Deen's own product line.
That, my friends, is unconscionable.
Wanting to help those with diabetes is a laudable action.
Profiting from your own diabetes, as well as the diabetes of others is sickening.
To profit by offering advice where the primary solution is to "take medicine", but "lose weight" and "get more exercise" appears secondary, is appalling*.
Profiting off of the diabetes of others that she may have had a hand in help creating? I don't believe that an adjective yet exists that can adequately describe such a whorish money grab.
There is a line somewhere out there. We who work in Food Media know we are, at heart, entertainers and lifestyle coaches. Informing people of the risks surrounding food? Well, there's even less money in that than there is in food writing. But in our roles in food media, there's a line. I don't know where it is exactly. But I do know that Paula Deen not only crossed it, she purchased a house over there, probably selling her soul for the down payment.
* Note: The Mayo Clinic's recommendation for Type II Diabetes Management is as follows:
In other words, medication is not the primary response to Type II diabetes. Yet here's Paula Deen, partnering up with a pharmaceutical that comes with its own FDA safety warning. That woman makes me sick, sick, sick.
1817 views • Categories: Food Politics 
The best humor always has a grain of truth to it. The humor in the above picture has several loaves of bread made from the amount of grain. From 2010, came this report:
Most of the one million farm workers in America are immigrants, up to a half are thought to be in the United States illegally.
As summer fruits and vegetables ripen across U.S. farmland, the work of harvesting them depends on illegal immigrants.
The reliance is so heavy that farmers, who tend to vote more conservatively, have rejected Congressional Republican sponsored bills that put more stringent requirements on documenting the legal status of its work force.
Supporters of E-Verify, an electronic system that is currently mandatory for most federal contractors but voluntary for other employers, argue that it would eliminate any doubt about workers’ legal status. But farmers say it could cripple a $390 billion industry that relies on hundreds of thousands of willing, low-wage immigrant workers to pick, sort and package everything from avocados to zucchini.
“This would be an emergency, a dire, dire situation,” said Nancy Foster, president of the U.S. Apple Association, adding that the prospect of an E-Verify check would most likely mean that many immigrant workers would simply not show up. “We will end up closing down.”
That sentiment is echoed by growers like George Bonacich, an 81-year-old apricot farmer who has been working the same patch of land in Patterson, 80 miles east of San Francisco, since 1969.
My point is, when you think of food production reform, including farming of both produce AND meat, conversations will inevitably have to include discussion about migrant workers, immigration, and how do we come to terms with the fact that a fair amount of our food has to, either through necessity or greed, hire undocumented workers.
(h/t to Cuéntame for the graphic - note: facebook link. Also: Changed Title )
From the movie Food, Inc.
Just something for you to mull over today.
1993 views • Categories: Tips, Tricks & How To's Over the course of the years, if there has been one question that has been asked of me more than any others, it has been this - "How do I find the best _______?" Sometimes whiskey fills in the blank, other times restaurants, and still other times it has been foods that I haven't even delved into all that deeply.
When asked, I smile, and give some variation of the same answer I always give. What I like may be different from what you like. You will have to go out and determine what the best __________ is yourself.
And then I proceed to explain to them how to do exactly that.
Setting aside the restaurants (for they are really a different medium of food service), if you wish to find the best tea, whiskey, vodka, chocolate, or whatever, comparison is the key. And not just comparison over the course of several days or weeks, but one really needs to have items sitting side by side, and sampling them one after another.
Seth Roberts has a name for this process, calling it the Willat Effect, after his friend Carl Willat, who presented Seth with five versions of limoncello side by side in shot glasses, and then told him to drink up.
It sounds very obvious that one can determine the good from the bad in a scenario such as this, but it does more than that. Immediate comparison provides information that allows a person to conclude why one is better than another. And once a "why" is understood, it begins showing up everywhere.
For example, there are some whiskeys that very short finishes, meaning that the drinking experience ends very abruptly. If you were to drink these types of whiskeys by themselves, you may never know this. It is only when you have a drink with a short finish, and then soon afterward have one with an extended finish, can you determine the benefits of a dram with an extended finish.
Once you determine what is a flaw in a drink, that flaw becomes more apparent in many future tastings.
I suppose that the reason why this works is that our minds deal with satisfaction in very peculiar ways. Any experience we have when it comes to eating or drinking is primarily memorable if it was extraordinarily good or extraordinarily bad. Everything else falls in the realm of some degree of "satisfactory". Our minds play tricks on us when we try to recall satisfactory experiences, in that we will recall we came to that conclusion, and we may even recall some aspect of that experience, but we will be unable to recall the specific characteristics of the sensory experience that allowed us to that conclusion.
But, when you have an experience which highlights both flawed and exceptional characteristics, our memory changes. We will recall that metallic taste in the wine, that underdone chicken, or that pure aroma of chocolate. I find this with my drinking of whiskey and beer all of the time.
If you're curious, and if your resources allow, buy several brands of chocolate and test this out for yourself. You'll be amazed at the conclusions you draw, as well as how the results will affect your choices later on down the line.
2332 views • Categories: Whiskey/Whisky Remember this from October of 2009?
CAPE ROYDS, Antarctica — This spit of black volcanic rock that juts out along the coast of Antarctica is an inhospitable place. Temperatures drop below -50 Fahrenheit and high winds cause blinding snowstorms. The only neighbors are a colony of penguins that squawk incessantly and leave a pungent scent in their wake.
But if you happen upon the small wooden hut that sits at Cape Royds and wriggle yourself underneath, you'll find a surprise stashed in the foot and a half of space beneath the floorboards. Tucked in the shadows and frozen to the ground are two cases of Scotch whisky left behind 100 years ago by Sir Ernest Shackleton after a failed attempt at the South Pole.
It seems as if the fine folks at Whyte and Mackay have recreated the spirit and are now offering it to the general public. They took a syringe sample from the bottles found in Antartica, and then subjected the sample to analysis. Using that analysis, they went to work.
Whyte and Mackay's master distiller, Richard Paterson, was able to delve into the wealth of warehoused casks and, with the help of his prodigious nose, blend a number of whiskies in exact proportions to replicate the Shackleton spirit. The re-creation, which is given a stint in sherry casks before bottling, includes some of the remaining whisky from the Glen Mhor distillery, which was demolished in 1986, supplemented with comparable liquor from nearby Dalmore. Benriach, Glenfarclas, and other Speyside whiskies lend their character, along with Balblair, Pulteney, and Jura.
The resulting blend was subjected to the same battery of chemical analysis as the original, and found to stack up quite comparably, their phenolics and esters finely matched.
I'm of two minds of this. First - similar does not mean the same. While I have no doubt that the folks at Whyte and Mackay have done their homework, the result is no more Shackleton's whiskey than a recreated baseball is the same as the one that Henry Aaron hit over the fence for the 755th time. Invariably someone will sell this as Shackleton's whisky, and some poor sap will buy it, believing it to be true.
However, all that being said, there's something amazing about the amount of work that went into this whisky. I have no doubt in my mind that the resulting blend is eerily close to what was found in the bottle in Antartica. This speaks well of, not only the science of the chemical analysis surrounding the sample, but just how much skill is involved in being a master blender. That a blender can analyze any given whisky (single malt or otherwise), and then recreate it from their "library of barrels" , is nothing short of remarkable. Thanks to its novelty, I have little doubt that the resulting "Shackleton's" whisky will be overpriced a tad, but I'll be damned if I wouldn't shell out some measure of money to have a taste.
All that being said, the best bit of the story was found at the end:
Finally, minus the milliliters of whisky that had been carefully syringed out through their corks, the original bottles were returned from Scotland to the Shackleton expedition's hut, where they have been re-situated as part of the preserved environ by the Antarctic Heritage Trust.
I can't put my finger on it, but there's something just right about this.
2412 views • Categories: Announcements 
For those who didn't already know, I have a new book coming out here in 2012, entitled Sweet Tooth: The Bittersweet History of Candy. This means that this year is one where I will be forced to promote myself and my book, and do it in such a way where the results lead to more sales than my first book, 99 Drams of Whiskey.
I've never been one to foist myself upon others. This is a character flaw if one is intent on making a living in a publishing world where promotion and *shudder* marketing are almost a requirement. So I find myself at a crossroads, one where I have to find a happy compromise with myself. It has to be a compromise where I don't sacrifice my core principles, one of which includes not insinuating myself where I'm not wanted through promotional campaigns and e-mail spam.
One of the ways to do that is to promote in my own neck of the Internet woods only, meaning on my own web pages and social media feeds. The goal is to generate enough interest to help with sales of the book, something that's quite difficult to do in the current market environment.
So, here's the thing - if you want to review the book, and wish for an advanced copy, send me an e-mail here at KATE AT ACCIDENTALHEDONIST DOT COM. If you do this, I will promise you full access to myself, meaning that while you're reading the book, and there's something that I've written that intrigues you, confuses you, or excites you, I offer myself (via e-mail, twitter, and Facebook) to follow through with you on that. I would rather work hand in hand with book reviewers, than have one go off believing I was writing the next Julie and Julia (which happened several times with 99 Drams).
Sweet Tooth itself is a bit of a different book than 99 Drams, as it starts innocently enough, but enters territories that show the darker side of history of sugar and chocolate. The basic question that results from the book is "How do we, as adults, come to terms with a luxury commodity that is being sold to us and our children as an innocent treat, when the reality is that there are makers of candy who put greed over the greater good?" My research into candy led me to areas that were unexpected, and conclusions that were quite distant from where I thought I would end up. My only hope is that I did the subject, as well as the conclusion I came to, enough justice.
At any rate, this is what I am proposing, and if it sounds interesting to you, let me know, and I will forward the publishers your information. Over the course of the next several months, you'll see more information surrounding this, as I try to do something different in regards to promotion, writing, and trying to find my way in a very unstable publishing world.
Many thanks!
:: Next Page >>