A Picture's Worth...

Well, it's not exactly a food blog, but they do add new content on occasionally: Aharn Thai does, however, have something that makes it very valuable: videos. I'm the type of cook who would rather see something done once in person by an expert than read a supremely detailed recipe guide.

Granted, videos of people cooking all manner of things are pretty easy to find these days on Youtube and the like, videos of cooking in its unmanicured, unmeasured, natural human habitat are less so.

My only advice would be to make sure that the quality of your meat, especially pork, as it's used extensively in Thai cooking, is up to par: that means either organic or, at the least, something not treated with hormones/antibiotics, known as "naturally raised." Why? Ming Tsai says so (at least his recipes do). Just read this horrifying account of the American hog industry if you're still iffy.

Ingredient Minimalism

Hot cocoa is usually easy to make: just tear open the packet and add to milk. If you're real fancy, you'll actually have a canister of Hershey's chocolate powder and spoon it into some milk along with a little heap of sugar.

It shouldn't be surprising that with all the hype about the antioxidant merits of dark chocolate, particularly those with high percentage concentrations of cacao (what exists before it becomes dried and fermented cocoa), hot cocoa isn't what it used to be. As such, I have a nice recipe I indulge in, and it doesn't even require added sugar.

Something like Hershey's Special Dark cocoa is probably pretty good, although I very much like my "Dutch processed" Hershey's dark chocolate powder (which is apprently increasingly hard to find, according to this discussion, and the fact that they don't display the clearly marked canister I have on their product webpage any longer).

Unlike a chocolate candy bar, a table spoon of this stuff has nearly no fat; the dark variety also has more iron and fiber than regular coca powder, and much more so than processed milk chocolate. And you still get that rich chocolate essence.


In any case, it should look something like what you see here: dark. It doesn't contain any milk powder, so you get the boldest flavor. All it needs is a bit of sweetening.

My Minimal Ingredient Cocoa

• Rice milk
• "dutch processed" dark cocoa
• powdered milk

You could just as easily use actual milk, but the rice milk has a bit of sugar on its own so nothing else in necessary. The milk powder just serves to soften the flavor a bit further, but I don't always use it.


When it's properly heated, it will get a bit of froth on the top, like this. Don't over heat it much past this point, especially if you've added milk. Just stir, cool, and serve.

Enter the Twinkie

There's a recent article in the Heath / Food Science section of Newsweek magazine's website about "decoding the 39 ingredients in a twinkie." What a good idea -- I should have thought of that.

Here's a quote from the article, which is a preview for an upcoming book on the subject of what goes into every twinkie:

"At the heart of the book is the fundamental question: why is it you can bake a cake at home with as few as six ingredients, but Twinkies require 39? And why do many of them seem to bear so little resemblance to actual food? The answer: To stay fresh on a grocery-store shelf, Twinkies can't contain anything that might spoil."

I can't speak to the virtue of the book, but the prolific reader commentary at the end of the article will give you a good ideas to the nature of the debate and skepticism surrounding it. At the very least, it seems to attempt a reasonable explanation of why foods are so heavily processed (essentially it's commercialism, they say).

Whether it presents a serious case regarding the twinkie's impact on health due to the ingredients is another question.

The photo is courtesy of Wikipedia Commons.

Stand and be Counted

In the inaugural post to Good Ingredients, I mentioned the multitude of ingredients found in a typical canister of store-brand bread crumbs. Here's a little evidence.

Readers may recall the claim that such an unassuming product could actually have 30 or 35 ingredients listed. Pictured below is the inspiration for that claim, something I found lying around in my shared pantry:


You can click on the image for a larger view and read for yourself. But as you can see, there are about 40 ingredients without counting the sub-ingredients (those in parentheses), and a full count yields around 55 ingedients alltogether.

Obviously not all of these ingredients are bad--most of them are not, in fact. But do you want them all? Well, I envy all of you whose lives are not already complicated enough; mine certainly can use some simplicity, however.

Here are a few of the highlights:

• 6 types of sugar, including 2 delicious varieties of corn syrup
• 5 types of dairy product
• 2 types of preservative

This type of ingredient list epitomizes the word "processed" as it refers to food: each stage of production requires a flurry of ingredients to aid the working of the aoutomated machinery, and ultimately to prolong its shelf life. In other words, it's good for business.

Although it does list "whole wheat flour" as a <2% ingredient, the main ingredient (the first one) is "enriched flour." This means it's not a whole grain, i.e. it has had the fiber and other nutrients removed, as well as probably having been bleached (again, a business-savvy move to prolong its shelf-life).

The sugar and the dairy listed aren't necessarily bad ingredients, but their variety might raise some eyebrows. It's easier to make a case against most preservatives, however.

Calcium Propionate was actually linked to beahvioral problems in children, something not too often measurably shown. Also, in this CDC report, there was an outbreak of stomach illness among school students associated with flour tortillas; the only unusual thing about the tortillas was an elevated level of potassium bromate and calcium propionate, two common and similar bread preservatives (results were not absolutely conclusive, but no other possibilities arose). They also noted that the elevated chemical levels in the tortillas were in fact common for other commercially sold buns and rolls.

Potassium Sorbate, on the other hand, is gennerally not indicated as a threat in scientific studies. Some less scientific and unsupported (but thorough) websites claim it is risky, and should at least be avoided. It's actually used in some cases to treat some patients with gastronomical infections. In any case, the FDA lists no recommended daily intake for it.

A Simple Start

To start with the recipes, here is a simple staple: oatmeal. I realize that oatmeal is not for everyone--the texture, I am told, is something one either likes or dislikes, with little opinion variation in between.

Despite the difficulty of convincing nonbelievers that oatmeal is fun, it's rather easy to point out its virtues. In fact, it's pretty much presumed to be a "health food" no matter what packaging it comes in. But I prefer the plain old fashioned rolled oats that are prepared on a stove top; this way, the sweeteners, seasoning, and other accoutrements are all up to me.

First of all, I have to give credit to Mahanandi, one of the food blogs I regularly visit, for linking to this very thorough exploration of the myriad health benefits of oatmeal's star ingredient: oats. I think most people would agree that it's a good one.

Perhaps the most important quality of oats to an American audience is its soluble fiber content, about 2 grams per 1/2 cup oats. That may not sound like a lot, but soluble fiber (not insoluble fiber; both are sometimes combined under the heading "fiber") sucks up cholesterol like a vacuum cleaner (and promptly removes it). It's not something you find in great quantities in many ingredients, if at all, but it's very effective at lowering blood pressure and, obviously, cholesterol levels.

The most basic recipe is as follows:

• 1/2 cup oats
• 1.25 cups water

And that's it. Directions: boil until desired consistency. Everything else is extra, and up to you and your imagination. The great thing about oatmeal is its versatility.

Of course, unless you're living the ascetic monastic life, you'll want to add the following:

• 1/4 teaspoon salt
• something sweet (a teaspoon of brown sugar usually does it)

Then add something interesting, like fruit or spice. cinnamon and raisins, brown sugar and apples, peaches and cream, etc. Here's my standard variation, most of which is optional:

• 3/4 cup oats
• 1/2 cup vanilla rice milk
  
• 1 cup water
• ~1/4 teaspoon cinnamon
• ~1 tablespoon powdered milk
  
• 1/4 cup raisins
• 1/2 tablespoon brown sugar
• light drizzle maple syrup

Directions: bring liquids to a boil, then add everything but the syrup; cook to desired consistency, serve, and top with syrup.

Add raisins at the start when liquids are cool to soften them; add oats when liquids are cool for a creamier (some say gooier) final consistency. Milk will also produce a creamier oatmeal, but with quality oats you hardly notice the difference.

You might be thinking that this is too sugary, but considering the size of the portion (oats expand like rice), it's not bad. It can also easily become so if you keep the sweetener next to your bowl as you eat. Just resist the urge to sweeten as you go.

Speaking of sugar, the cinnamon plays an important role here: even a little bit has been shown to control glucose levels in the blood and dampen any spiking that causes people to go hyper and then crash (...and then get type II diabetes) . Oatmeal probably isn't the worst thing for your blood sugar (but mini prepackaged oatmeals will be more sugary and have a greater impact), but the cinnamon helps offset any refined sweeteners you might want to add.

And if you're either diabetic or at risk for it, go nuts with the cinnamon. But whatever you do, just don't attempt to disprove the saying that a human cannot swallow a spoonful of cinnamon...trust me.

A Little Indian

Another addition to my notable food blogs: Mahanandi. It's primarily a blog about Indian cuisine, with a little bit of culinary variety.

The thing that makes Mahanandi special is its context of cooking within a family and a tradition, and the warm history that comes with each dish or simple recipe. It is also the work of native experts on the food of that country, so you can be sure you're getting an authentic experience. Their genuine knowledge of Indian cooking brings with it an emphasis on using the freshest, most natural ingredients.

As far as I can tell, all of their dishes are vegetarian, save for occasional dairy products (cream, yogurt, cheese) and eggs. As a natural result, almost all of their dishes could be considered heart-healthy. Spiced chickpeas, typically over rice, is a favorite dish (one of my own) that's very filling, and a good replacement for meat that's packed full of protein; when combined with rice, such legume dishes provide all the amino acids needed for complete protein (like meat).

The site also features some excellent photography, which always helps in locating those unfamiliar ingredients.

Indian cooking is not something I grew up with. But because my brother married into an Indian-American family, I have developed a great love for it. Those who presume it it to be too spicy or too vegetarian (or too meaty, for that matter--I have heard both) have not yet had a proper, complete exposure. It can be all of those things at times, and much more, while still remaining true to its origin.

If you are a meat lover, like much of my company at gatherings with my brother's in-laws, also try some of their links to other Indian food blogs. There's a large community of sites covering all aspects of Indian cuisine.

On a related note, Mahanandi recently won an online competition for Best Food Indiblog of the year 2006. Congratulations Mahanandi!

______________________________


There has been a lot of buzz recently about the health benefits of spices and herbs in general. Indian food does make good use of plenty of these at times, and it is perhaps best associated with curry by westerners.

The above link describes a study, along with many others on the topic of healthful spices, linking curry to a reduced risk of Alzheimer's:

"A recent study suggests curcumin — a component of curry and turmeric — may help the immune system get rid of the protein that builds up to form damaging plaques in the brains of Alzheimer's patients. The findings complement previous research linking curry consumption to reduced Alzheimer's risk. One study found that in India — where curry is commonly used to spice food — only one per cent of the elderly developed the disease. That's one-quarter of the rate in North America."

That article comes from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, a very reliable source akin in quality to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).

Wikipedia also has a rather thorough entry on the various kinds of curry and their uses; as you can see it's not just an Indian spice, and a good ingredient regardless.

Blogs of interest

I'll be adding links on a sidebar to a few of my favorite food blogs, but I'd like use some space here to point them out as they are added.

One of my absolute favorite such resources is Evil Jungle Prince. Don't be fooled by the name: there's nothing evil or frightening about this friendly blog from a Californian amateur cook who specializes in Asian (particularly Korean) and global cuisine. His logo*:


The skilled author is ever conscious of opportunities to improve the ingredient constitution of his creations, reducing superfluous fat, cholesterol, sugar, and salt without sacrificing taste and vitality. His work also celebrates good cooking with a minimum of meat and animal products.

His passion for cooking is evident in his personal profile, which I quote:

"The act of cooking is also a form of therapy. In a world which is largely out of our control, cooking allows one to cultivate beauty and perfection. Food prepared by strangers is always a risk, whereas to prepare food with one's own hands is to exert control over an otherwise chaotic world."

Please give his blog a visit; the archives are full of wonderful recipes and education on using good ingredients wisely. I would be thankful to achieve but a fraction of his accomplishment there.

*This image is courtesy of Evil Jungle Prince, and remains the property of that site's owner.

______________________________


On a side note, it has come to my attention that there is another website/organization by the name of "Good Ingredients." They are a pistachio orchard in Santa Barbara California and although their nuts look very appetizing, this website has no affiliation with them.

Incidentally, pistachio nuts make a pretty good ingredient: high in monounsaturated fat, omega-6 fatty acids, and relatively low in saturated fat (like most nuts). Just watch the salt.

There is a common misconception that high fat foods like nuts are simply bad for you. On the contrary--most nuts contain far more of the good monounsaturated and polyunsaturated (relatively good) fat than the bad saturated fat, so adding them to one's diet can actually improve blood and heart health.

Help you lose weight they will not, however. And the salt that usually accompanies them is another potential disadvantage; it can quickly add up, and is of course bad for blood pressure.

Apparently they grow a lot of pistachios in California. Due in part perhaps to their sway, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) even consented to give them the right to claim that nuts such as pistachios can reduce the risk of heart disease, a fact they proudly proclaim.

About the only thing I could think to put pistachios in is ice cream or baklava, though, so I don't often cook with them. They're usually more expensive per pound than other nuts as well, and so are relegated to being an occasional treat.

A Welcome and Introduction

Welcome to Good Ingredients, an incomprehensive but hopefully well examined and insightful exploration of what food components I think qualify as "good" and why.

Why focus on ingredients? For one, we've all heard the saying that good food starts with good ingredients, or something to that effect (perhaps in part thanks to Papa John's take on it in their motto, "Better Ingredients, Better Pizza"). So as an amateur cook it is my interest because of the enjoyment, the art of the process, and also the health concerns.

By "ingredient," I also don't just mean the items that you find listed in a recipe book (i.e., eggs, milk, sugar, etc.). There are, after all, literally hundreds of different "ingredients" that can be found to constitute the items on a single shelf at the grocery store--far more ingredients, generally, than the names of the products would suggest.

These days, even many ingredients themselves have ingredients.

One of my favorite examples of this phenomenon is the humble bread crumb. How many ingredients would you expect to find in your run of the mill canister of store brand bread crumbs?

If you said one, or even five, congratulations--you are a raging optimist.

In fact, you could be off the mark by around 30 ingredients with some typical brands. Commercially manufactured bread crumbs have one of the most deceptively complicated ingredient lists, including growth inhibitors, anti-caking agents, flavor enhancers, and more. Beginning to wonder why someone would put that much effort into your bread crumbs?

Well, good, then. A healthy sense of curiosity is definitely a requisite of this topic. Hopefully, over time, you'll get a sense of my sense of what are good ingredients, and then make some informed decisions for yourself.

_________________________________


The basic premise of "better ingredients make better food" makes sense and is hard to argue with. A much more interesting discussion is what makes ingredients good or bad. It's ultimately an opinion, of course, so a more useful way to pose that question would be, what advantages and disadvantages, if any, do the ingredients in our food have?

I should be clear that this is not a scientific study or research project; I'm not a scientist, and I'm not trying to prove my statements beyond all doubt. However, I do try to avoid making any totally unfounded claims.

That being said, even the question of an ingredient's pros vs. cons is often not too challenging when you look at a single item in a typical list of ingredients: there is little point in debating, after all, the usefulness of oats, for example. Nor, among those scientists who have studied them, is there much point debating the ill effects on humans of chemicals that kill mold (in case you were wondering, no--Tilex does not do your body good).

No, the most challenging question to answer, perhaps--one that has certainly led to some of the most heated debate--is at which point, at which quantity or concentration, do such disputed items move from the "good" column over to the "bad" column? In other words, what are you willing to tolerate?

As I mentioned, some ingredients don't require so much debate: eggs, milk, and sugar can be good ingredients in good food. Moderation is the key in the case of such self-explanatory items.

But the question of "how much is too much?" is not easy to answer regarding food additives like preservatives because most of the science does not result in clear cut, black and white conclusions. But neither is there nothing insightful that can be drawn from them collectively.

With a little of this supporting evidence, it is my hope that readers of this blog will come to agree that less of certain "ingredients" is always good, right down to none at all in some cases. At the very least, I think we should be skeptical and careful in consuming that which we know little about.

To be clear on the scope of discussion, I'm not particularly concerned with breaking down the naturally occurring chemical makeup of an item, such as its vitamin and mineral content (but if you are, Nutrition Data is one of the best resources). In the case of animal products however, the chemical makeup is quite relevant because of animals' particular tendency to absorb substances in their environment; although this can and does occur on its own, or even unbeknownst to their farmers altogether, I generally wouldn't consider it "naturally occurring" because the contamination wouldn't exist in the animals' natural habitat and diet--i.e., a clean one. Mercury in fish is just one good example.

There's not much point in ranting without having anything to show in defense of said rants. As such, I think it will be convenient to take single examples of foods or recipies in each post and to over time build a body of knowledge. There are, after all, hundreds if not thousands of "ingredients" to consider ingesting on a typical stroll down a supermarket isle.

In summation, I hope the readers of this blog can develop a critical eye for good ingredients, while not simply having to take someone's word on it.