My Sister’s Springtime Baby Shower

One of my favorite things to do relating to food is to cook for other people.  Since we are a family of foodies, my sister Amanda’s baby shower provided an excellent opportunity for cooking fancy foods.  And because the gathering was small, it allowed my mother, my sister’s friend Melissa, and myself, to do the cooking ourselves and use our fancy china and glassware. So if you’ll permit me the indulgence, here is a photo post of the foods we made and served at the baby shower.

We set the table with my mother’s china, and set plenty of daffodils on the table in small bud vases.  We used bronzed and ceramic baby shoes as decoration. 

My mother filled her antique wicker baby carriage with daffodils too.  The quilt on the wall was made by my mother’s friend when Amanda was a baby.  The yellow duck was an Easter toy my mother found at a discount store.

For the party favors, my husband and I made this peach pineapple mango jam at home.  I made the labels in Photoshop.

My sister’s friend Melissa made this lovely and delicious cake.  It was a yellow lemon cake with almond flavored filling.  She even made the little baby shoes on top.

Our main luncheon included 3 varieties of quiche, from left to right: 1) broccoli cheddar, 2) ham and Swiss, and 3) spinach and tomato with mozzarella and goat cheese.  We also served Italian style pasta salad, and spinach salad with apples, pecans and blue cheese, as well as a loaf of french bread.

We made as much of the food ourselves as possible.  My sister was very pleased with the event, and all our guests appeared to have a good time.  And I’d like to think that an event celebrating a new life should also be an event that also celebrates good food shared with friends and family.

Casserole: the eternal crowd pleaser

When the first crisp day of fall arrives, I immediately start day dreaming about hot meals, in a way that would have seemed like madness in the intensely hot days of summer just a few weeks before. Yesterday was just such a day, when I reached for my coat before walking outside, and noticed a few leaves at the tops of the trees that were eager to put on their fall colors. At the end of the day, coming home cold and wind blown, I knew what I was craving was a homemade, hot and crisp from the oven casserole.

It doesn't get any better than this

This craving for casserole made me wonder about the history of this dish, when and where it originated, how it became such an iconic American staple, and why it eventually fell into culinary abandonment. While the casserole has not been forgotten at the average American table, it certainly seems to be passé to the trend setting foodie elite, where recognition of its glory is relegated to Thanksgiving.

In one such holiday issue of Saveur magazine, in a feature about green bean casserole, Todd Coleman  suggests a starting place for our historical investigation. “Like most American casseroles, this one can trace its roots to the Depression era, which gave rise to a number of one-dish meals that made the best of readily available and inexpensive ingredients” (The Queen’s Beans, Coleman 2007). The Great Depression as the origin of the casserole is surely a common and logical conception, but evidence suggests that it is much older.

“Casserole cookery has been around since prehistoric times, when it was discovered that cooking food slowly in a tightly covered clay vessel softened fibrous meats and blended succulent juices” (The Oxford companion to American food and drink, Smith 2007: 97).

The name for the food comes from the container in which it is cooked. The historical time line of the ceramic (or now glass) cooking vessel that we commonly know as the casserole dish is telling one. According to The Oxford Companion to Food, “The word [casserole] has a complicated history, starting with a classical Greek term for a cup (kuathos), progressing to a Latin word (cattia), which could mean both ladle and pan, then becoming an Old French word (casse), which then became casserole. Historically, casserole cookery has been especially popular in rural homes, where a fire is in any case burning all day and every day” (Davidson 1999: 143).

In An A-Z of Food & Drink, John Ayto writes, “Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of its history is the complete and sudden change in the dish it refers to that has taken place within the past hundred years. When English took it over from French at the beginning of the eighteenth century it meant a dish of cooked rice molded into the shape of a casserole cooking pot and then filled with a savory mixture, say of chicken or sweetbreads. It was also applied by extension to a border of rice, or even of mashed potato, round some such dish as fricasee or curry. Then some time around the 1870s this sense of casserole seems to have slipped imperceptibly but swiftly into a dish of meat, vegetable, and stock or other liquid, cooked slowly in the oven in a closed pot”(Ayto 2002: 60-1).

“With the addition or subtractions of leftovers or inexpensive cuts of meat, the casserole is flexible and economical in terms of both ingredients and effort. Fannie Meritt Farmer’s Boston Cooking School Cook Book (1896) had one casserole recipe, for Casserole of Rice and Meat, to be steamed for forty-five minutes and served with tomato sauce. During the depression of the 1890s, the economic casserole provided a welcome way to stretch meat, fish, and poultry. In the twentieth century, casseroles took on a distinctive American identity” (Smith 2007: 97).

“Although the casserole has a long history in America, it did not begin to attract major attention until condensed, canned soups came on the market” (The Casserole Makes A Comeback With New Tricks And New Tastes, American Institute for Cancer Research 2000).

Dr. John T. Dorrance, a chemist with the Campbell Soup Company, invented condensed soup in 1897. The Campbell Soup Company aggressively marketed these products, “through regular offerings of cookery pamphlets and cookbooks emphasizing how soups could be enhanced or used as ingredients to make other dishes. Campbell’s published its first advertising cookbooklet in 1910 and has subsequently put out dozens of such items” (Smith 2007: 97).

Steven Gdula, author of The Warmest Room In The House, notes that the casserole was embraced during World War 1 for its ability to conserve both food and fuel. “The saving of fuel during wartime was just as important as the saving of food, and both noble efforts were combined in casserole cooking. There were few ways to cook that were more economical that tossing vegetables and meats into a pot with some broth and allowing them to stew for hours over low heat. In fact the casserole was really nothing more than an update of that old standby, the one-pot meal, which had been present in the America Kitchen for centuries” (Gdula 2008: 26).

Gdula cites an article from Good Housekeeping from March of 1917, titled the Law and Lure of Casseroles, quoting “The primitive woman herself was the inventor of casserole cooking, and in her pottery dishes she boiled and stewed meats, vegetables, and fruits, everything which she did not cook in the ashes or on a hardwood stick over the fire.”

Campbell’s efforts to market its soup for recipes increased, and “when the Depression hit in the 1930s, the company’s advertising budget shot up to $3.5 million. Campbell’s Cream of Mushroom soup was an absolute boon for housewives when it was introduced in 1934” (Smith 2007: 97).

The casserole “became an American staple in the Depression, when cheap but filling meals were essential, and rose in popularity during World War II as women began to enter the workplace in large numbers. It reached its heyday in the fifties” (American Institute for Cancer Research 2000).

“The idea of casserole cooking as a one-dish meal became popular in America in the twentieth century, especially in the 1950s when new forms of lightweight metal and glassware appeared on the market. The virtues of easy-to-prepare meals were increasingly promoted in the women’s magazines of the era, thereby supposedly freeing the housewife from the lengthy drudgery of the kitchen” (Mariani 1999: 59).

The casserole was not free of controversy during this time, however, as it was suggested in a 1954 newspaper editorial that “the next war between the sexes will be fought over the delicate issue of casseroles… A woman is never more coy than when she has cooked a coy casserole. All casseroles, I submit are, coy. They reflect the basic tease in women, the urge to attract by the mysterious, the tendency to persuade us that there is more to a dish female or culinary than meets the eye. Casseroles symbolize woman’s reluctance to face the fact that yesterday’s roast beef or chicken is still yesterday’s roast beef or chicken, now defrocked, sliced up and hidden like a poor relative under a melange of whipped potatoes, noodles or rice.” (Casseroles May Cause Next War Between Sexes, Saul Pett, The Tuscaloosa News, Jun 7, 1954)

While the casserole enjoyed tremendous popularity during the 1950s and 1960s, its popularity began to decline. “By the 1970s casserole cookery took on a less-than sophisticated image” (The Encyclopedia of American Food & Drink, Mariani 1999: 59).

“Part of the decline in the casserole’s popularity was due to an over-reliance on leftovers, canned foods and “instant” sauces.” (American Institute for Cancer Research 2000).

Whatever the reason for the decline of the casserole in the past, there has hardly been a more suitable time than now for us to give the casserole a second life.  The life history of the casserole shows peaks of interest when times are tough.  As we are facing tough economic times, with wages stagnant and food costs rising, as well as temperatures dropping, the advantages of the casserole can again make it relevant for foodies and eaters alike. With its hot, filling and creamy character, there has never been a better time to break out that old casserole dish and make something fantastic.

Bacon: a delicious investment

I always hear it first, the distinctive sizzling sound of bacon, cooking in the kitchen on a weekend morning.  A few minutes later, the signature smell wanders in, and I am enticed out of bed and filled with anticipation and desire.  On weekends, my fiancé likes to make breakfast, and while he is vegetarian by choice, he is also a bacon enthusiast.  According to NPR, he’s not the only vegetarian making this sizzling exception.  There is just something so irresistible about bacon, and it got me thinking about how a simple breakfast food has been elevated to a place of reverence for cooks and eaters alike.

The Bacon Wallet from ThinkGeek.com

While it might seem like a straightforward topic, the story of bacon, pork and the pig is complicated, and much too long for a single blog post.  The prehistoric relationship between humans and the humble pig is complex and dynamic, as domestication of the pig occurred independently in at least seven places across the globe. (Larson 2005)

Yet pork was not universally embraced through history, as some groups, including Jews and Muslims, were forbidden from eating it.  I wondered what health or social advantages a pork-free diet offered to ancient peoples, that they sought to eliminate it from their lives, with threats of eternal damnation.

I wondered why pork is favored at breakfast over other meats.  Bacon, ham and pork sausage are breakfast favorites, at least in the US, while beef and chicken (except for eggs) are rarely found in the a.m. and mostly relegated to lunch and dinner menus.  What historic or cultural conditions lead to this special treatment?  Does pork lend itself more easily to preservation methods than other meats, ensuring it would be both ready and safe to eat first thing in the morning?

I may cover all these topics in time, but for this post, my interest is in the present.  Bacon is enjoying a renaissance of sorts, a renewed popularity in recent years, after it was exiled during the 1990s in the low fat diet days.  Bacon got a reluctant invitation back to the breakfast table when the low carb diet was big, only to be pushed aside again when swine flu was the big fear.  Yet when comfort food came on the trendy food scene, bacon became its poster child.  Since then it has been upwardly mobile and fueled by the internet and foodie culture, as the bacon fascination today is at a fever pitch.  Wikipedia calls it a bacon mania and traces its origins back even further.

Bacon has tremendous appeal as a flavor enhancer, recipe improver, and novelty act, which brought it into the spotlight, and hurled it into food superstardom.  There is a new cookbook made up exclusively of bacon recipes, called I Love Bacon!  The best recipe I’ve tried so far from the book is the chocolate bacon cupcakes.

From http://walyou.com/bacon-roses/

For many of us, bacon is widely regarded to be so fantastically delicious that it seems to create a charismatic cult following, and can be a type of enhancement drug.  Check the internet for bacon and you will be amazed at the love and dedication that people express for this magical food.  One can find it manifesting itself proudly in fantastical piles of bacon, atop mighty burgers, daintily reclining over lettuce and tomato, wrapped around scallops, steaks and hot dogs, or even woven into a meaty textile covering a chicken, turkey or ultimately, the turducken.  Bacon bits can be found in salads and chocolate, and bacon flavor in ice cream, soda, gum, vodka, beer, popcorn, and salt, among thousands more. There are also several non-food bacon flavored items including toothpicks, dental floss, scented candles, lip balm, envelopes and lubricant.  Stephen Colbert recently featured two new bacony products, Denny’s maple bacon sundae and a bacon scented cologne.

From http://www.tonychor.com/archive/000871.html

With bacon becoming such a hot commodity, what should a bacon lover do?  If you are the gambling type, now is a great time to invest in your favorite anytime food.  Consider a recent blog post from the Idaho Farm Bureau “Pork belly prices are on pace to set records this summer as demand for bacon skyrockets. The big jump in bacon use is coming mostly from fast-food restaurants and casual dining establishments that are adding bacon to everything from salads to ice cream sundaes. About 44 percent of U.S. consumers will eat bacon within a two-week period, which is a record high, according to consumer research conducted by the NPD Group, a Port Washington, N.Y.-based market research firm. Much of the growth comes from cooks using bacon as an ingredient to enhance the taste of a dish, according to the NPD study.”

The historical and economic origins of this tasty breakfast staple are only slightly less interesting than they are delicious. “Cured pork belly (also known as bacon) evolved as a way to preserve the meat after slaughter. Pork belly is the result of harvesting both bellies from a pig, salting or smoking them, and refrigerating them. The pork industry’s growth was fueled by the demand for pork bellies as the rail system in the U.S. improved. At the same time, the country’s population and economy shifted from rural to urban, bringing a taste for pork belly to the cities. Considered a longer lasting and easier way to transport pork with little to no perishing, pork bellies became a staple in the American diet. With the increased production and distribution of pork bellies, the first pork belly commodities contract was created in 1961 by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Pork bellies are easy to transport, can be preserved nearly indefinitely with proper refrigeration, and are a byproduct of the most popular meat in the world. Needless to say, pork bellies are commodities that will always have a supply and demand chain.” (Noble Drakoln www.investopedia.com)

The widespread love of bacony goodness is also reflected in the increasing global demand.  “China’s continued urbanization presents an opportunity for explosive growth in pork product demand, much like the migration from rural to urban life in the U.S. spurred the domestic popularity of pork bellies. The pork industry has seen tremendous growth worldwide – more exports are heading to China and Japan than ever before. Pork has long been considered the leading consumed meat in the world, and the pork industry saw 105 million pigs go to slaughter in 2006, plus a doubling in export demand in 2007. With much of the pork heading overseas to fulfill growing demand, the industry’s continued growth appears healthy.”  (Noble Drakoln www.investopedia.com)

And this graph from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Daily Livestock Report, shows how demand for bacon increased over the last decade, with prices nearly doubling in that time.  You can see clearly how the 2009 swine flu had a downward effect on prices, and how ferociously demand returned in 2010.

According to the Daily Livestock Report, “This surge in bellies prices has been driven by a confluence of factors. Bacon featuring this spring was quite aggressive by many manufacturers and retailers with many brands being promoted in “2 for $5” ads where the 2 refers to 2 one-pound packages. The resulting draw-down in frozen pork bellies inventories pushed those stocks to their lowest level since October 2007 — in August. That is important since bellies stocks normally continue to decline through October due to lower summertime hog slaughter runs and late-summer BLT sandwich usage. When these lower stocks met lower-than-expected hog supplies since July 1, the bellies supply situation became critical and prices began to rise rapidly.”

The next question now is, are we in the midst of a delicious, bacony bubble? It certainly could be, but judging by current trends it should last a while longer, and even then it might be the most appetizing bubble to burst in economic history.

Poisoned by tableware: Historic parallels of plastic and lead

In recent years, the evidence that some plastic products are leaching harmful chemicals into our food supply has become irrefutable. Legal bans on some plastics have been enacted, and awareness campaigns have been undertaken by concerned citizens, to make the public aware of these problems, and to advocate for safer alternatives. Safer plastics are being developed and marketed to the public, with many consumers eager to pay a little more for a better product. Other people avoid plastics altogether, fearing that there may not be a “safer” plastic. For more details visit my previous post on the subject.

"Vanitas" by Willem Claesz Heda. Dated 1628, a typical vanitas painting, a calvinist form of 'memento mori'.

There is a historical precedent for this social, environmental and health problem, with a link to food related items. Lead, and lead containing metal alloys such as pewter, were used widely in the manufacture, storage and service of food and beverages, going back as far as the Bronze Age, despite the fact that they carried tremendous health risks from their production and use. According to Milton A. Lesser, of the Department of Physiology at Ohio State University, lead and cast copper artifacts made during the “Bronze Age indicated that ancient man had discovered the smelting process and was rendering and purifying metals to make useful and decorative objects” (Lesser, 1988).

Even as these metals came into wider use, their health risks were known. Hippocrates (460-377 BCE), the ancient Greek physician, “described the symptoms of lead poisoning as appetite loss, colic, pallor, weight loss, fatigue, irritability, and nervous spasms. Among the earliest records, there are notes that lead miners and individuals who worked with lead developed ailments that resulted in their early demise. This was first well documented by the Egyptians who used slaves in their mines and later by the Pre-Greeks, Greeks, and Romans” (Lesser, 1988).

Harry Arthur Waldron wrote, “the Romans’ lead technology was impressive. They manufactured sheet lead and had ingenious methods of rolling and jointing pipes, which were the basis of their water-carrying systems. The amount of lead consumed by the Romans was extraordinary. In building the great aqueduct at Lyons it had been estimated that 12,000 tons of lead were used on just one of the siphon units” (Waldron 1973).

Lead was used in the manufacturing of many items, including utensils, cups and plates, in ceramic glazes, as well as in vessels used to manufacture wine and cider. Sapa was made by boiling acidic wine in lead-lined vessels. “This yields a sweet syrup due to the formation of lead acetate. Most early Greek and Roman wines contained sapa, which also was used to sweeten food because these civilizations had no readily available source of sugar. Recent analyses of ancient Greek and Roman wine vessels indicated that wine stored in them had a considerable lead content” (Lesser, 1988).

Waldron wrote that the practice of adding sapa was “so universal that Pliny remarked indignantly that ‘genuine, unadulterated wine is not to be had now, not even by the nobility.’ And he was right to complain for, he comments, ‘From the excessive use of such wines arise dangling . . . paralytic hands, echoing Dioscorides, who wrote that corrected wine was ‘most hurtful to the nerves’” (Waldron 1973). As the Roman Empire expanded, the mining and manufacturing of lead increased across Europe. And while several notable historians have suggested that lead poisoning contributed to the fall of the Roman Empire, this theory is still rather contentious.

Lesser indicates that during the Middle Ages, “the writings of medieval physicians indicated an awareness of both the sources and symptoms of lead poisoning. U. Ellenberg in 1473 published “On the Poisonous and Noxious Vapors and Fumes of Metals” and later G. Agricola (1556) published “De Re Metallica.”” Even with this awareness, “the Middle Ages saw a marked increase in the use of lead and lead-containing products” (Lesser, 1988).

According to Neil Beagrie, “in the Medieval period there were essentially two main grades of pewter used for vessels. A hard high-quality alloy of tin with perhaps 1-3% copper used for plates and dishes and a softer cheaper alloy of tin with 10 to 20% lead used for hollow-ware such as pots or flagons [pitcher]. Analysis has shown that sepulchral chalices [footed cups] and patens [plates] of the late medieval period could contain much higher levels of lead, in some cases as much as 75%” (Beagrie 1989).

Lesser adds that, during the Colonial period, “there was extensive manufacture and use of glazed earthenware, pewter, lead pipe, lead shot, and lead type for printing. Red and white lead was used as pigments for paints and lead acetate and lead oxide were used to sweeten and whiten bread. Lead intoxication was rampant during the Colonial Period in America and may have been involved in accusations of witchcraft because individuals with lead poisoning neuropathy often show weird behavior” (Lesser, 1988).

With the well known effects of lead poisoning, it can be hard to believe that it took thousands of years for the use of lead to be discontinued, at least at the consumer level. However, it was concern for occupational and environmental health that eventually tipped the scale against lead. Lesser wrote, “it was not until the late 19th and early 20th centuries that occupational health was recognized as an important governmental public health issue. The United States and several European countries (Britain, France, Germany) passed legislation designed to protect workers from dangerous toxic environments. Congress passed the Occupational Health Act in 1970, which created the National Institutes of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Limits for the acceptable levels of lead in air, water, and food were set by NIOSH. These levels have been revised downward as new evidence became available on the vulnerability of infants and developing children to relatively low levels of lead in the environment” (Lesser, 1988).

Luckily for us, the story of lead has a happy ending, at least in countries where such legislation has been enacted and enforced. “The reduction of lead in gasoline, controlling the use of lead pigments in paints and printing inks, and banning of lead-based glazes on pottery and ceramic ware have resulted in a reduction of both industrial and population exposure to lead. There is no way that an important metal like lead can be removed from the environment, but with increased vigilance and control we can markedly reduce the exposure of animals and humans to lead” (Lesser, 1988).

Will we be so lucky with plastics? Only time will tell.

Hunger: New efforts to combat an old enemy

The hollow face of hunger was given a euphemistic face-lift in the 20th century with the term “food insecurity”. Even so, hunger has too long been on the periphery in the discussion about food culture, but this is beginning to change. It started creeping into the wider discussion as the global recession put more people at risk for hunger, and food pantries saw their donations decrease and their requests for assistance increase. According to the World Health Organization “food security is defined as including both physical and economic access to food that meets people’s dietary needs as well as their food preferences. In many countries, health problems related to dietary excess are an ever increasing threat.”

In the United States, food insecurity is becoming a major economic issue. According to the annual USDA report, Household Food Security in the United States, “14.6 percent of American households were food insecure at least some time during the year, including 5.7 percent with very low food security—meaning that the food intake of one or more household members was reduced and their eating patterns were disrupted at times during the year because the household lacked money and other resources for food.” They also found that “prevalence rates of food insecurity and very low food security were up from 11.1 percent and 4.1 percent, respectively, in 2007, and were the highest recorded since 1995, when the first national food security survey was conducted. Fifty-five percent of all food-insecure households participated in one or more of the three largest Federal food and nutrition assistance programs during the month prior to the 2008 survey.”

More recently, according to The Wall Street Journal “nearly a year and a half into the economic recovery, some 43.6 million Americans continued to rely on food stamps in November [2010]. More than 14% of the population drew food stamps in November to purchase groceries as high unemployment and muted wage growth crimped budgets. The number of recipients was up 0.9% from October, according to the new report by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Compared to a year ago, the number of people receiving food stamps was up 14.2%.”

As if being hungry wasn’t bad enough, according to the New York Times, “a range of studies has shown that low-income people, especially those who receive food stamps, face special dietary challenges because eating healthy costs more and healthier food is harder to get in their neighborhoods. This is the problem of “food deserts” — a lack of grocery stores selling fresh produce in rural and underserved urban areas.”

Adding further insult to injury, The Chicago Sun-Times reports, “Major manufacturers of consumer goods are again coping with rising commodity costs by cutting back on portion sizes, chipping away a few ounces here and taking out a few slices there rather than ask the customer to pay more. But the net effect is just as costly. Companies often attempt to “ease” a downsizing in — increasing the indent on the bottom of a container of ice cream; decreasing the thickness of plastic wrap. Consumers respond much less negatively to a portion reduction than a price hike, companies contend. Consumer advocates counter that’s because consumers are less likely to notice a stealthy downsizing. And they do complain, online and to the companies.”

New efforts have been made recently to combat food insecurity, to widen the availability of healthy food and promote good eating habits among the most impoverished Americans. These social and economic efforts often attempt to focus on the connection between food and health related issues of childhood obesity and diabetes. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “In the last 2 decades, type 2 diabetes (formerly known as adult-onset diabetes) has been reported among U.S. children and adolescents with increasing frequency. The epidemics of obesity and the low level of physical activity among young people, as well as exposure to diabetes in utero, may be major contributors to the increase in type 2 diabetes during childhood and adolescence.”

First Lady Michelle Obama has made healthy eating and reducing childhood obesity the centerpiece of her agenda. And Walmart the nation’s largest grocer, is planning to “reformulate thousands of products to make them healthier and push its suppliers to do the same, joining first lady Michelle Obama’s effort to combat childhood obesity.”

And here’s where it gets political. Rich liberal social safety net Democrats face off against rich conservative small government, assistance cutting Republicans, and feeding the hungry becomes a campaign issue and nothing is accomplished. For an example of the recent political mudslinging, Courier Post Online columnist writes, Michelle Obama “has transformed the East Wing of the White House into Big Nanny’s new Central Command headquarters. The biggest threats to Mrs. Obama’s 70-point plan for national fitness: parental authority and sound science. Mrs. O’s real interest isn’t in nurturing nursing moms or slimming down kids’ waistlines. It’s in boosting government and public union payrolls, along with beefing up FCC and FTC regulators’ duties.” When did charity, compassion and feeding the hungry become a conspiracy?

“Protecting the poor is not a partisan issue,” Vicki Escarra, president and CEO of Feeding America. Proposed federal budget cuts “include cuts to programs that serve low-income families. As a result, many of the people served by Feeding America, the country’s largest domestic hunger relief organization, are likely to experience increased hardship.”

Let’s take a moment to step outside of the political debate on this “issue” and look at the realistic, ground floor experience of being broke and hungry. In case you are fortunate enough to have never faced the sort of economic hardship faced by millions of Americans, another blogger, Elisha, (at elfstaranymore.tumblr.com) can break it down for you. “First, you plan your protein. This is generally the most expensive part of your diet, and also the part which makes you feel like you have actually eaten a meal. Your first priority as a poor person is to get enough food to not be hungry, and proteins and yes, fats, are highly desirable for that. This tends to be fatty food like chicken thighs, hot dogs, fatty ground beef, peanut butter, eggs, and highly processed ‘cheese food.’ The second part of the food budget “goes toward breads and starches because those are digested more quickly than proteins and thus sate your hunger quickly in the short-term, while proteins keep you feeling full longer. So once you’ve got your proteins, you then go for potatoes, rice, breads, cereals, and pastas. It is worth noting that in all instances white is cheaper than whole-grain. Next, you get things that will allow you to put your base ingredients together as meals. This is where vegetables first start to enter the picture, particularly cheap flavor-adding vegetables such as onions and celery. But this is also where you buy butter, milk, cooking oils, salt, jelly, Hamburger Helper and Shake n Bake. Don’t underestimate the value of those! An extra dollar to turn a flavorless wad of beef into a satisfying meal is an extremely good choice.”

At this point in her post, Elisha takes a turn for what might be called ‘radical realism’. She voices a truth about how food is greater than a combination of nutritious elements. Even though food is tied to health, it is also tied to happiness and self esteem. “…Sometimes when you’re poor, eating for entertainment is the only entertainment you can afford. If a dollar box of Twinkies makes you feel happy when the rest of your life is no fun, that is a dollar well spent. Sometimes you need to have some small luxuries to feel human, and personally, my need to feel human is more important than my need for broccoli.”

These would be the eating habits that Mrs. Obama, and many other policy makers, are attempting to change. And for those who are distressed at the lack of fruits and vegetables in this realistic diet, Elisha has a logical point for them too. “Produce spoils quickly and is often an enormous waste of money, and you can’t afford to be spending money on food you will only throw in the trash. So when you are poor, you have to be very, very careful what vegetables you buy.”

Elishamakes several more excellent points from a perspective seldom heard in this debate, someone with a personal experience dealing with hunger. The most valuable point she makes is that the upper classes often use an offensively condescending tone to those who are hungry and in need. “I grew up on food stamps and quite frankly by about age 7 I was already sick of every purchase my family made being scrutinized. Oh you bought ice cream? But those two dollars could’ve been spent on VEGETABLES! See, because you don’t deserve ice cream, not even $2 generic ice cream, because you’re poor. You deserve to be told what to buy by richer people, because richer = smarter and we know what’s best for you.” Think of that the next time you’re tempted to judge another person at the checkout counter.

For any program, initiative or assistance to actually help people, it must take into account their needs, as well as their wishes. Remember the World Health Organization includes in its definition of food security “both physical and economic access to food that meets people’s dietary needs as well as their food preferences.” A prescriptive approach will likely fail in this situation. We need to include the beneficiaries of these efforts in the planning stages in order to make any progress on improving their situations. It may seem like an odd notion to people at the top levels of policy making, to ask the poor for input. But I think asking the people most dependent on these assistance programs what sort of help they most need might improve the effectiveness of the programs, and could even reduce dependence over time. Maybe they need a farmer’s market more than a Whole Foods or a Walmart in their neighborhood. Shouldn’t we ask them?

NPR featured one activist and urban resident of a L.A. food desert, Olga Perez, who suggests that something as simple as available transportation can help make a difference. When the nearest supermarket is three miles away, Perez “can buy only what she can carry back home in her arms. Instead of a head of lettuce, she buys a small bag. She can’t buy more than a few cans, and she can manage only half a gallon of milk. Now, with help from a community group called LA Voice PICO, Perez and some of her neighbors are speaking out and lobbying politicians to help them get more healthful food options.

“They recently won a small victory when Superior grocery store district manager Marco Sosa brought back free shuttle van rides for customers, something he dropped last year because of cost. Perez is glad for the shuttle but says that’s just a partial solution. Her goal is to get a real supermarket in Ramona Gardens. She says her mother’s early death from diabetes still haunts her, and she wants something better for herself, her family and her neighbors: fresh, organic foods, like the rest of L.A. “It doesn’t matter if we live in a low-income area,” says Perez. “We all deserve to eat the fresh fruits that nature provided for us. We shouldn’t be divided.”

New efforts and new ideas to address the hunger problem are emerging. NPR covered an effort that has the dual benefit of feeding the hungry while reducing food waste. “On U.S. farms, gleaning is making a comeback, as a national anti-hunger organization has turned to the ancient practice to help feed the poor. And it also gives farmers a way to use produce that would otherwise be wasted.” Similarly, the North Berkeley Harvest, featured in the New York Times is “part of a small but expanding movement of backyard urban gleaners — they might be called fruit philanthropists — who voluntarily harvest surplus fruit and then donate it to food banks, centers for the elderly and other nonprofit organizations.”

The New York Times also detailed an partnership in California where the “California Association of Food Banks has struck deals with farms and packers across the state, where, on behalf of its members, it collects truckloads of fruits and vegetables that are too small, ripe or misshapen for supermarkets to sell.”

More innovative ideas are still needed, however, because as demand for assistance continues to rise, and government funds are reduced, a bigger problem is looming. According to NPR “The United Nations says food prices hit a record high last month. The UN’s food agency says prices of sugar, wheat and other staples have risen for seven straight months, and are likely to continue going up. Frustration over food prices has helped fuel the protests in Tunisia and Egypt.” If there was ever a good time to use the cliché, a “perfect storm,” I think it has arrived.

Gluten: food friend or foe?

It seems like gluten has become the next food item to be the victim of avoidance frenzy, falling from grace with the likes of trans-fats, carbohydrates and high fructose corn syrup. Gwyneth Paltrow endorsed avoiding it, and its absence from Chelsea Clinton’s wedding cake was noted by the Associated Press. But is gluten being unfairly ostracized for the sake of another food fad? After all, gluten, a protein found in wheat, rye and barley, has been an indispensable dietary staple that has contributed to the rise of western civilization.

"Grains on Mykonos" by Seth Sawyers from http://www.flickr.com/photos/sidewalk_flying/2546359596/

The gluten-free diet has been named a Top Food Trend of 2011 by Good Housekeeping. “While following a gluten-free diet is a lifesaving strategy for people with celiac disease, suddenly everyone is jumping on the bandwagon. For most, it’s not necessary, but one thing is for sure—gluten-free is everywhere. And with companies like General Mills introducing gluten-free products, this fad is not fading.”

Other big names are getting on the bandwagon too, including Betty Crocker, which introduced a gluten free recipe collection. And Subway is “testing a bun made of egg whites, corn starch and tapioca starches for customers with gluten sensitivities.”

The gluten-free diet is not a new idea. I was able to find a great description of it in a 1989 book, “The Healing Foods: The Ultimate Authority on the Curative Power of Nutrition” by Hausman and Hurley. “A gluten-free diet is a two-step mission. First, you’ll need to ferret out gluten-containing foods in your diet. That accomplished, you’ll be free to concentrate on the foods that you can eat without worry” (1989: 112). That description accompanies a section about celiac disease called, “one man’s wheat is another man’s poison.” Those are ominous words, and sure to make people think that gluten is a dangerous substance.

However, historically speaking, the introduction of grains into the human diet was significant because it marks the beginning of a transition towards agriculture in some areas, as a reliable food supply increased the human population and reduced mobility. This was a contributing factor in the rise of western civilization, according to Jared Diamond (1999) in Guns, Germs and Steel. The high protein content of wheat, mixed with its fast yield time, contributed to the transition from nomadic hunter to agrarian society for Paleolithic and later Neolithic humans in the Middle East. Referring to an archaeological site in Tell Abu Hureyra, at the edge of the Euphrates Valley in Syria, Diamond writes, those hunter gatherers “were not wasting time and endangering themselves by collecting wild plants indiscriminately. Instead, they knew the local wild plants…and used that knowledge to select and bring home only the most useful available seed plants. But those gathered seeds would have constituted the material for the unconscious first steps of plant domestication” (1999: 145). In the Jordan Valley, 9,000 years ago, Diamond writes, “the valley’s first domesticated cereals were barley and emmer wheat, which are still among the world’s most productive crops today” (1999: 145).

Archaeologists in Israel have discovered the earliest evidence of grain processing – a grinding stone used for grains and an “oven-like hearth” which suggest “dough made from grain flour was baked.” This site dates back about 23,000 years ago – or about 12,000 years before grain was domesticated in southwest Asia. “The beginning of baking was probably an important step forward in human nutrition.”

For social historian and author Michael Pollan, wheat holds a special place in the diet of Europeans, as a cornerstone of their diet for thousands of years. When compared to the new-comer potato, the cultural significance of wheat becomes easy to see. “Like the potato, wheat begins in nature, but it is then transformed by culture. While the potato is simply thrown into a pot or fire, wheat must be harvested, threshed, milled, mixed, kneaded, shaped, baked, and then, in a final miracle of transubstantiation, the doughy lump of formless matter rises to become bread. This elaborate process, with its division of labor and suggestion of transcendence, symbolized civilization’s mastery over nature. A mere food thus became the substance of human and even spiritual communion, for there is also the old identification of bread with the body of Christ. If the lumpish potato was base matter, bread in the Christian mind was its very opposite: antimatter, even spirit” (2002: 204).

Even with all that history, gluten has been conclusively linked to health problems in some groups of people. Seven to eight percent of the population has some sensitivity to gluten, and Celiac disease occurs in about 1 percent of the population. “Yet about a quarter of U.S. adults are either trying to reduce or completely avoid gluten in their diets, according to the marketing firm NPD Group’s Dieting Monitor. That means most of the people eating gluten-free foods probably don’t have to, but want to” according to the Associated Press.

Unlike trans-fats, gluten is not inherently bad and poses no health risk to the general population. Gluten-free is just another food fad marketed to Americans, based on the duality of nutritionism, described by Pollan (2008) as how “at all times there must be an evil nutrient for adherents to excoriate and a savior nutrient for them to sanctify.” This “view of nutrition is bound to promote food fads and phobias and large abrupt swings of the nutritional pendulum” (2008: 31).

The health risks associated with avoiding gluten definitely outweigh the health benefits. Avoiding gluten is not a foolproof method for weight loss, as some profiteers and cheerleaders might suggest. The Associated Press points out that “just because a product is labeled gluten-free doesn’t mean it’s low in calories. And some gluten-free prepared meals can run high in both calories and salt.” “Weight gain, headaches and fatigue can be the consequences of eating gluten-free when there’s no medical reason to do so” according to the New York Daily News.

“There are major health dangers in going gluten-free: By skipping fortified breads and cereals, you’re missing out on folate, which can lead to an increase in the amino acid homocysteine, raising your risk of a heart attack by as much as 200 percent. Pregnant women who don’t get enough folate double their risk of preterm delivery — and their babies have a 50 to 70 percent greater likelihood of developing certain birth defects. Replacing wheat products with gluten-free versions doesn’t help much: A study in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association found that only 5 percent of the 58 gluten-free breads, cereals, and pastas studied were fortified with folic acid, the synthetic form of folate” according to Fitness Magazine.

Researchers published in the British Journal of Nutrition, also found that when healthy people avoid gluten, it could cause problems in the digestive system. “The gluten free diet led to reductions in beneficial gut bacteria populations and the ability of fecal samples to stimulate the host’s immunity.”

In the case of Gluten vs. Food Fads, Gluten is the winner. These grains have been the staff of life for the last several thousand years, and the advancement of human civilization in the West is due in part to the consumption and domestication of grains with gluten. Avoiding this vital protein is silly, and a waste of effort and money. Avoiding gluten is not only bad for the health of healthy people, doing so provides no health benefit. The best thing to avoid is this food fad.

Plastic: can’t eat with it, can’t eat without it.

As one year ends and a new one begins, people attempt positive changes in their lives. One aspect of our lives that is receiving a lot of scrutiny has been the ubiquity of plastic products, and recently attention has been drawn to plastic and its relationship to food. There are two main reasons why people try to avoid plastic; the idea of avoiding plastics because they might transfer toxins into ones food, and the idea of cutting down on ones use of disposable products that persist in the environment and do not biodegrade.

Image from http://www.rachelleb.com/2006/02/20/fake-plastic-food/

Ed Begley Jr. is a leader in the green movement, and recently he wrote “Make kitchen greener — and save money, too” (Begley 2010).  His fourth and final tip was “avoid single-use plastic whenever possible. Store your leftovers in reusable containers that last for many years and save some dough. Plastic bags cost a lot over time.” This includes costs on the consumer and on the environment.

“Plastic is ubiquitous in our lives because it is convenient and relatively inexpensive. Its inexpensiveness is the result of a large portion of the costs associated with its life — production, use and disposal — being put onto society as a whole. This unsolicited financial burden on society manifests itself as increased taxes to finance municipal curbside recycling programs, landfill space, and incineration. It also increases health care and insurance costs as a result of its incineration polluting the air, water, and food.” (Get Plastic Out Of Your Diet, Goettlich 2004)

This line of reasoning has caused a surge in the consideration and passage of laws banning plastic, most frequently bags used for carrying home ones groceries and BPA plastic in beverage and baby bottles. In Brownsville Texas, “the ordinance prohibits retailers from using thin plastic bags at checkout counters — bags that are said to contribute significantly to the local litter problem.” More than local litter, the locals want to show off their greener lifestyle as part of a larger reimagining for the city. “Officials called the ban a huge step for the city — a move that will help put Brownsville in front of larger cities like Austin and San Antonio in efforts to protect the environment.” (Plastic bag ban begins in Brownsville, TX, Ulloa, 2011)

Yet these laws have not always garnered widespread support. Not everyone is so excited to wear the greener crown. Take “Italy’s Plastic Bag Ban Fails in Consumer Minds” (Clark,  2011) “This ban, though consumers continue to oppose, will eventually change Italians’ overall environmental outlook. Undoubtedly, there will be a learning curve in this process, but if Italy wants to step up to its economic competitors like green cities Portland, Oregon; Curitiba, Brazil; and Vancouver; Canada the plastic bag has got to go. “This marks a key step forward in the fight against pollution and it makes us all more responsible in terms of recycling,” said Environment Minister Stefania Prestigiacomo.”

However, the plastics companies have not been lying down on this debate. “Parts of Los Angeles County, Long Beach, and San Jose have all recently enacted bag bans. But the most recent ban attempt in Marin County, C.A., was stalled this week due to plastic industry pressure and threats of a lawsuit against the county.” (Marin County Bag Ban Threatened by Lawsuit from Plastic Industry, Belsky 2011)

Interestingly, the Plastics News blog is blogging about how some other bloggers are blogging about going plastic free (Another blogger avoiding plastic, Loepp, 2010). They had a blog post about Mark and Melanie Rummel, who say they’re trying to live a plastics-free lifestyle. “The newlywed couple from Texas has a goal of buying nothing made of plastic for the next year, and they’ve set up a blog, nonewplastic.com, to share their story.” The blog then quoted the other blog, where Melanie narrates the adventure of buying cheese that was not wrapped in plastic.

More insightful than the blog post was this comment: “I would like to tour their home and see what they use for refrigeration, how do they wash their clothing, etc. Right now, it’s popular in the mainstream press to say, “I’m living a plastic-free life!” and it’s obviously a great way to draw media attention, especially from local stations. It’s the latest, greatest “feel-good” topic. Makes Joe and Jane Q. Public all warm and fuzzy, until they realize that even their heat and air conditioning are conveyed in machines and systems that rely on plastic.” (Posted by Angie DeRosa on July 19, 2010). The point is clear that plastic are everywhere in our modern world, and one cannot avoid plastic completely without sacrificing many amenities.

What about the health effects of eating food that has lived a large portion of its shelf life wrapped in plastic bags, cellophane, or plastic storage containers? How harmful is plastic when it surrounds our food and enters our mouths? Think about all the plastic drinking straws, silverware, cups, plates, sandwich baggies, and soda bottles that have ever touched you or your food. “These plastics are called “Food Contact Substances” by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but until April 2002, they were called “Indirect Food Additives.”[2] The new name is cleansed of the implication that plastic gets into your food. In spite of this semantic deception, migration is a key assumption of the FDA. (Get Plastic Out Of Your Diet, Goettlich 2004)

“Plastic is used in contact with nearly all packaged foods. Most cardboard milk containers are now coated with plastic rather than wax. It is sprayed on both commercial and organic produce to preserve its freshness. Plastic is even used to irrigate, mulch, wrap, and transport organic food.” “Evidence of the negative health effects of plastics already exists in sufficient quantity to halt the use of it in contact with food.” (Get Plastic Out Of Your Diet, Goettlich 2004)

Exposure to BPA can cause numerous problems including “aneuploidy, a chromosome abnormality found in more than 5% of pregnancies. Most aneuploid fetuses die in utero. About one-third of all miscarriages are aneuploid, making it the leading known cause of pregnancy loss. Among conceptions that survive to term, aneuploidy is the leading genetic cause of developmental disabilities and mental retardation. About 1 in 300 liveborn infants and 1 in 3 miscarriages are aneuploid. It is associated with Down syndrome, Patau syndrome, Edwards syndrome, Klinefelter syndrome, Turner syndrome, Cri du chat syndrome, and Alzheimer’s disease. (Get Plastic Out Of Your Diet, Goettlich 2004)

And that’s not all. “BPA is about 10,000-fold less potent than 17ß-estradiol, a potent estrogen that is synthesized primarily in the ovary, but also in the placenta, testis and possibly adrenal cortex. Because of the disparity, industry representatives claim it causes no harm at the levels that the majority of people are exposed to. However, a study in 2001 showed that even at such low potency, when combined with other xenoestrogens (estrogens from outside the body), they act together additively, effectively raising the body load of estrogen to dangerous levels.” (Get Plastic Out Of Your Diet, Goettlich 2004)

So how far should one go to remove plastic from our lives? Are halfway measures enough or is a complete lifestyle change necessary to protect us from harm? Should we shun this miraculous freshness-saving technology? Perhaps there is a better way than total plastic paranoia.

“With Health Canada set to ban polycarbonate baby bottles, which contain the estrogen-mimicking chemical bisphenol A, many Canadians are seeing all the plastics around them in a newly unflattering light and scrambling for alternatives.” (The anti-plastic backlash, Pearce, 2008) “For consumers concerned about the makeup of their plastic containers, websites such as http://www.toxicnation.ca/, run by the advocacy group Environmental Defense, outline the meanings of various plastic recycling logos. Bottles labeled number 7 or 3 may leach BPA, while those marked with number 5, 4 and 2 seem safer.”

“Experts agree that rethinking plastic in the kitchen should be a priority, especially among families with pregnant women and small children. “Children are uniquely vulnerable to these chemicals,” says Aaron Freeman, policy director at Environmental Defense.” (The anti-plastic backlash, Pearce, 2008)

However, even activism needs some moderation. “With BPA also lurking in the linings of most canned goods, many Canadians are saying goodbye to their favorite convenience foods, too. “It’s a drag,” Ms. Gough says. “Lately, I’ve been soaking beans.” Yet, even the most staunch anti-plastic folks say eliminating all risks is impossible. “There’s so much in the environment, you can’t be radical about it or you’d go nuts,” Mr. Sinha says.” (The anti-plastic backlash, Pearce, 2008)

In the case of plastic, perhaps realism is the both a blessing and a curse. Luckily, the greenest solution is also the closest. “Experience tells us that the most sustainable way to manage solid waste is at the local level—as close to home as we can get. Reduce, reuse and recycle.” (Why Pinoys need green lifestyle, Guerrero, 2011)

People need to look at their food choices, and at their “garbage bin in a new perspective. I hope that it will make them ask these questions the next time they shop: “Where does this product come from? Is it made or grown locally? How far has it traveled? Who made it? Will it last? Can I recycle it? Is it toxic? Is there a better alternative? Where will it eventually end up? Is it at the dump?” (Why Pinoys need green lifestyle, Guerrero, 2011).

As consumers, the best we can do is be informed, ask these questions, make smart choices, and share our awareness with others. We need to know and care about our food and everything that touches it before it gets to our tables, because our food choices affect our health and the health of our environment.