Welcome to the blog for Colgate University's interdisciplinary course on food. This is the place to keep up with what students in the course are experiencing in their work at Common Thread Community Farm and through their everyday encounters with food.

Monday, November 22, 2010

Different Consumer Roles in Processed Food Intake

The prevalence of toxins in processed food manifests itself differently among wealthier and marginalized citizens, calling into question informed choices and the limitations of choice. The unchecked spread of toxic pollutions is a product of larger social structures and institutions, mainly a consumerist and free-market mentality.

In pursuit of higher crop yields and increased industrial profits, one billion pounds of pesticides are used each year despite known increases in asthma and cancer rates since the onset of pesticide use following World War II. The profit driven industry sits comfortably by delegating public health concerns to the government, evidenced by Monsanto’s director of corporate communications Phil Angell. "Our interest is in selling as much of it [biotech food] as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA's job"

Through marketing techniques, industry is able to create a demand in order to facilitate the sale of toxins manifested in the form of processed and convenience foods. Convenience foods, or commercially prepared foods, come in many forms such as hot, ready-to-eat dishes; shelf-stable products; frozen products, or dry mixes that require minimal preparation. More than 10,000 chemical solvents, emulsifiers and preservatives are used in processed and convenience foods, and over 3,000 chemicals are added directly to the food supply. Complex chemicals known as “natural” and “artificial” flavor are responsible for the tastes associated with processed food, but have created vast amounts of toxic pollution and health complications. Despite this, industries have the recourses to engage in aggressive and capital-intensive market campaigns, using careful representation to achieve increased sales at an increased rate.

Growing distrust does not necessarily translate into action because values come into play, and risks are weighed against development and the convenience toxins have provided. Food industries capitalize on society’s sentiments associated with the family dinner by creating advertisement that depicts processed food as a way to participate in and strengthen the traditional nuclear family, as well as create a means to achieve the craft and “timeless human activity” despite emerging time constraints. American families are willing to invest in convenience foods as the only means to achieve this the benefits associated with the family dinner ideal, which outweighs the risks associated with processed food. The irony, however, is that processed foods that are potentially harmful to children are considered a necessary means for achieving the family dinner which is viewed as important for the family. The consumers, educated Americans with disposable incomes and reported concern for the environment, acknowledge the risks associated with processed food but do not change their behavior because of the values that come into play when evaluating risk.

The sustained use of processed food in the low-income population of American society is a result of different factors, calling into question aspects of environmental justice. Among low-income American families, mobilizing resources and educating individuals on the dangers presented by toxic processed foods does not translate into behavior changes because this population is acting within the “parameters of choice” set by larger social, larger social, political and ecological actors. Processed food serves as the cheapest source of calories and therefore the continued consumption provides some necessary benefits despite known costs. For this reason, low-income reliance on processed foods is intertwined with aspects of environmental justice including exclusionary decision-making and biased processes of risk assessment. 


The risk of processed foods is also attenuated because of the belief that the consumption of processed foods is voluntary and controllable. Among low-income families dependent on cheap calories, this is not the case. An accurate assessment of risk, identifying and rectifying attenuation in the instance of toxins in processed foods, will facilitate a more a more effective response, promote lasting resiliency, and ensure outcome equity.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

My Lifesaving Chocolate Covered Pretzels

I must apologize for my posting negligence; it has been one of those weeks.

But my week ended on a fun note as I got the opportunity to visit my best friend down in NYC. I could post about the heaven-on-earth New England clam chowder I got for lunch at the Chelsea Market today, but instead I want to talk about my bus snacks. Last time I took the bus down, I was in a mad rush to make it to the bus on time and neglected to pack travel snacks. This was, of course, a terrible mistake, so this time I made it a point to stop at the C-store on Friday before I left.

I feel like I have a pretty good idea of what traits a travel snack should possess: non-perishable, not messy, easy to eat with your hands, and not likely to induce car sickness in myself or those around me. With all these characteristics in mind, I settled on dark chocolate covered pretzels. The name not withstanding (Flipz! I love it when the name on my food is intentionally misspelled...) chocolate covered pretzels met all the requirements for suitable road food. But little did I know, not only would these pretzels stave off the four o clock tummy rumblies, but they also FIGHT CANCER.

That's right, in addition to sugar, salt and fat (the trifecta of deliciousness) Flipz proudly claims to contain antioxidants; there is a special little label on the front, complete with a comforting picture of cacao beans nestled on a green leaf that seems to imply "I'm not junk food, I'm tasty health food!"

Well beyond the obvious observation of how this is an example of companies trying to capitalize on the increasing "health awareness" of the average consumer, I got to thinking about antioxidants: what they are, what they do, why they should matter at all to my chocolate covered pretzels.

An antioxidant is, bear with me, a molecule that prevents other molecules from being oxidized. Without going into the nitty gritty details of oxidation, suffice it to say that oxidation reactions can lead to molecules (you've probably heard of free radicals) whose chemistry is ultimately damaging to cells. And of course cell damage leads to cancer, and nobody likes cancer. So the idea is that by consuming antioxidants, you can prevent the chain of chemical events that leads to cancer. So where do chocolate covered pretzels come into play?

It all hinges on my preference for dark chocolate. Cacao beans typically contain polyphenols, specifically flavanoids, a variety of free radicals found in many kinds of plants. However, here is the interesting part. Flavanoids are bitter-tasting, so even in dark chocolate, they may be removed and the chocolate may be darkened artificially so the manufacturers don't have to deal with the bitterness of the flavanols. Obviously DeMet's Candy Company, the proud makers of Flipz, did not remove the flavnoids, but there it is hard to tell who has and who hasn't. There is a potential economic benefit to keeping the flavanoids in if you get to label your chocolate as containing antioxidants and advertise it as a health food, but candy makers are under no obligation to indicate the flavanol content of their chocolate.

This is according to The Devil in the Dark Chocolate, an article published in The Lancet in 2007. This article makes another pretty excellent point about all the health claims surrounding dark chocolate; if you're going to rely on dark chocolate to avoid health problems like cancer or atherosclerosis, you're going to be dealing with some other pretty serious health problems pretty quickly anyway.

So if I were feeling concerned about the presence of free radicals in my cells, I probably wouldn't be turning to Flipz for the cure. However, if I were look for a delightful combination of salty and sweet, chocolate-covered pretzels would be 100% the correct answer.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Reflections on Common Thread

Sadly, our time working at Common Thread has come to an end. And for me, it really is sad! I learned so much about agriculture from hands on experience, thoroughly enjoyed the time away from traditional campus, and worked hard to see a real product from my labor! Additionally, the Wednesday group (sorry, Thursday) was never plagued by inclement weather.

I’ll relay some of the tasks I found MOST enjoyable-

Leeks. Cutting the leeks from the shoots made me feel like a samurai. I loved it when I successfully shed the excess with just two swift swoops of the small knife.

Cabbage. For similar reasons, using the knife to free the cabbage from the ground was so satisfying.

Washing Carrots. Holly and I got to clean the carrots using the large washer contraption in the barn. We had heard that Ryan was a master at the machine, and worked hard to prove ourselves just as able. The tasks were threefold- dumping the carrots on one end, spraying with the hose from the opposite end, and periodically taking the broom to unclog the drain directly below the contraption. Holly and I added in pushing the carrots with the broom (opposite end than we used to clean the drain..) and additional spraying at the start point to improve our efficiency.

Separating garlic cloves. This is strictly because it facilitated great conversation as we all sat in a circle, mindless snapping garlic and separating into the six buds.

You may be tired from hearing this from so many others, but another aspect of the farm I loved was the respite from campus living. I honestly loved getting off the hill, engaging in physical labor, and letting my mind wander from the usual stresses of work and extracurricular commitments. Speaking with Amy and Chris, who have so many interesting and diverse insights, added to my enjoyment. Their openness to informal questions and knowledge in an array of fields- both in terms of the farm (pun definitely intended) and social structures- was extremely eye opening.

Sonya spoke earlier about the state she returns home after a morning on the farm. One of my favorite post-farm moments happened this past Friday, after a morning laying hay over the recently planted garlic. In an impromptu moment, I decided to get my haircut and walked in to JJ’s salon after only changing out of my farm clothes. As the stylist readied herself to begin the cut, she asked me if I had been to a wild party the night before.

“What, haha no?” I responded.

She then pulled a piece of hay from my hair and gave me an inquisitive look.

“Oh! Believe it or not, I was working on Common Thread farm this morning.”

She told me she’s seen it before…

I don’t know if she believed my excuse. But it forced me to pause and realize how lucky we are, to have this experience at Common Thread that so many at Colgate do not. We have crazy stories and hands on experience that will stay with us for a long time coming!

Saying bye to "Happy Meal" toys

Who can recall their favorite “Happy Meal” toy from McDonalds?
I admit I had a whole collection when I was young. I still remember some of my favorites- Simba (in plush) and the Tarzan wind-up toy.

I loved going to McDonald’s. What kid wouldn’t? There’s all the delicious food, a play gym with all those bouncy balls, and to top it off, cool happy meal toys! There is something special about getting something that was just for kids. These toys were almost as exciting as my ketchup smothered French fries.

Did you know the first McDonalds “Happy Meals” was sold in 1979 in Kansas City, and it came with a set of toys: a puzzle book, ID bracelet, McDoodleer stencil, McDonaldland eraser or a McWrist wallet? I wish I got those. Since then, McDonald’s has released hundreds of Happy Meal toys, everything from Disney movie figurines to animals from the Build-A-Bear Workshop.

Well, sadly, we may have to say so long to the coveted toys in “Happy Meal.” In a recent government call to action as Grace sent us in an email, toys included in McDonald's “Happy Meals” have been banned in the San Francisco Bay area. The underlying reasons for this ban include the hope to lure kids away from eating unhealthy food. Could this ban catch on to other cities across the nation?
On one side of the debate you have proponents arguing that the big food corporations are the ones to blame for the childhood obesity epidemic. Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), who is threatening the suit writes, “This advertising is unfair to kids and to parents who are put in the position of constantly telling their kids no.” In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the occasional “Happy Meal” and we have to give them credit for giving kids a better variety like apple slices and milk, right?

Childhood obesity and proper nutrition are certainly important issues and fast food and sugary beverage consumption certainly contribute to the rise of the childhood obesity epidemic, but are these big corporations the only people we should blame?

There are people who argue that it’s all the parents’ fault. As one angry commenter on the article wrote, “Why are we blaming McDonald's for parents lack of common sense…Don't blame fast food chains because of a lack of parenting skills.” A major part of the issue that we cannot overlook stems from the home, indicating how important it is for parents to be a model for healthy eating and living. Young children learn from and imitate what their parents do so if the parents aren't eating fries, Big Macs, and a Coke from McDonald's several times a week, then the child won't either.

While this ban might only affect the food choices of a small percentage of the population, doing something is always better than nothing, right? Giving parents another incentive to feed their children wisely might make us that much closer to giving up our spot as one of the world’s unhealthiest nation; a title that I would be more than happy to say goodbye to. But do you think removing toys from higher calorie kids meals actually influence what they choose to eat?

Monday, November 8, 2010

My passion to cook (or at least attempt to...)

Cooking is a passion of mine and gives me time to step out of my daily routine. It allows me to experiment, to learn, to please, and equally as often, mess up. Cooking means more than putting a pre-packaged meal into the microwave or throwing a frozen pizza in the oven; it actually means following or making a recipe(s) and preparing a meal.

I haven’t always cooked but granted, growing up, I’d give my parents a helping hand with dinner once in a while. Family meals were always important and we always made time to eat dinner together. There were times when that meant eating dinner late because my sister and I had sports practices or one of my parents was working late.

I think back to my friends and I who even just a few years ago did not have sufficient cooking skills. Yet at some point (not sure of the exact moment) I developed a genuine interest not just in eating good food, but in cooking it too and that was when my cooking skills began to evolve. Perhaps this new culinary vision happened during experience in Barcelona, where by living in an apartment and not wanted to spend all my money eating out (considering 1 euro=$1.5), I had to put my cooking skills to the test.

In Barcelona, I loved the challenge of sourcing unusual ingredients in a country where supermarkets are small, cater for regional tastes, and focus on seasonal food. I was shocked to see a whole octopus, a pig’s head, rabbit feet, and even a brain of an undistinguishable animal right in front of the market for everyone to see. I liked the idea of strolling through La Boqueria, buying fresh ingredients, taking them home, and seeing what I could come up with each night. I quickly realized that with a handful of essential ingredients: olive oil, garlic and tomato, you can make a lot of tapas and meals. The Catalan staple and breakfast favorite, Pa amb tomàquet, involves a thick slice of toasted bread, rubbing some garlic and fresh tomato on top, drizzling a generous amount of olive oil and adding a pinch of salt. So simple and satisfying.

Eating out was a great experience as well—seeing the culture surrounding the food made me appreciate it much more. The long siestas in the afternoon were mainly spent eating lunch outside with family and friends, where there seemed to not be a stress in the world. You would never find anyone walking and eating on the go, or even drinking a large Venti Starbucks cup, which has become the norm in most part of the US.

For me, food encompasses a whole range of things that are important to me. Food brings together families and friends through warmth, smells, taste, and satisfaction.

At Colgate, between balancing school work, a job, involvement in students groups, and a social life, preparing meals certainly takes up a lot of time and we don’t always find the time to do it. Yet, I think food is such a part of who we are and therefore we should all take a break from our busy work days and cook together with friends.

Supermarket Craftiness

Nudging Grocery Shoppers Toward Healthy Food

Just as I was contemplating the topic of my next blog post, this article was posted to my facebook wall by one of my NPR-loving friends who shares my deep and abiding hometown love of Wegmans. It is perfectly pertinent to our discussion last week and reaffirms my affection for the big W.

For those who don't have time to read, allow me to summarize. This article talks about taking some of the same techniques used to market unhealthy food and applying them to healthy food, like produce. Wegmans is used as an example because of the way their produce department is the focal point of the store when you walk in the door. At least in my Wegmans in Canandaigua, you don't even really have to "veer right"; the first thing you see when you walk in the door is a big old produce display. This past summer, Wegmans set up a "farmer's market" booth in the produce department, complete with bushels of local summer squash and tomatoes. It was a pretty clear marketing strategy, and it made it very difficult to ignore the fresh produce.

Also, sample day at Wegmans (always a joyous occasion) is especially fun in the produce department. They have apples with cheese, smoothies and other fresh fruits and veggies for tasting. As much as I would like to believe sample day exists for my pleasure alone, it is a great marketing technique to get people in the produce frame of mind (or mouth).

The article also talks about the way Wegmans is using lighting in their newer stores to literally highlight fruits and vegetables, especially with natural light from high windows. Although I haven't been in any of the newer stores to experience this myself, it seems like it would be a good subtle technique. And, as the article points out, subtlety is the key. If people feel like they are being seriously pressured into buying produce, they will probably buy less of it; consumers don't like to feel like they're being "taken" even if it is in kind of a good way.

Obviously the motives of supermarkets like Wegmans are not entirely aimed at healthying up the consumer. It makes good business sense to sell as much produce as possible and reduce waste. Because produce is so perishable, it needs to sell as quickly as possible. My darling boyfriend worked the produce department at Wegmans for the past few years. He recently swithced over to grocery (pretty much the rest of the edible goods in the store) and he tells me that the turn over for grocery is much, much slower than it was for produce. This makes perfect sense; cans of soup are infinitely more shelf stable than bananas. I asked him what they do with the produce that has gone bad and all I could ever get out of him was that it gets "shrunk". I have no idea what this means. I'm pretty sure it is not a literal shrinking process a la "Honey I Shrunk the Kids", but he didn't seem to know where it ended up after he tossed it in the pile for shrinking. What's the point of having a man on the inside if you can't get any information out of him? My hope is that it is composted. This seems likely to me, simply because Wegmans Organic Test Farm is located in Canandaigua, on a lovely sloping hill on the west side of Canandaigua Lake. However, I would be interested to know what happens in supermarkets in general when the food goes bad. I've seen "expired" bread that is still perfectly good get donated to community kitchens, but what about fruit that is actually bad? Does it get composted or simply tossed?

Overall, I think the idea of marketing fruits and vegetables in the same way highly processed foods are marketed is a great idea. However, if the consumer wants chips, she is certainly not going to head for the carrots instead just because they are cleverly marketed. The problem of the American diet is not a problem of marketing or supermarket design alone. But all together, this is a step in the right direction.


Finally, on a separate, only mildly related note, Wegmans is being sued! Walgreens is suing Wegmans because their most recent logo change contains a W that is apparently too close for comfort to the Walgreens W. They are suing for all the profits Wegmans has made since changing their logo. Which I think is pretty funny, since I have never wandered into a Wegmans thinking it was an enormous Walgreens.

Sunday, November 7, 2010

Locally Grown Bananas?

I've always been aware that a lot of the produce sold at our local farmer's market may not actually be locally grown. I'm okay with this because usually it still has some semblance of being in season, and I'd like to imagine even if products are being resold, they are still somewhat local in origin, perhaps grown in a greenhouse. I had to stop and think the other weekend however, when one stand was offering bananas.
First of all, where could these bananas have come from? I don't believe that the operations at the local farmer's market operate on a large enough scale that they are buying bananas from a distributor. It seems more likely that they purchased the bananas at a grocery store and sell them with a mark up at the farmers market.
I suppose this system could be convenient for some. Maybe it makes it easier to buy all your groceries in one place. Perhaps it provides a little bit of variety for those who aren't as willing to try experimenting with whatever root vegetables are currently in season; a comfort food for those who were dragged along by an overzealous locavore. There are many roles a banana could play in a farmer's market, but for me it was only unsettling.
I started to doubt the origin of every product around. Is this maple syrup really local? How do I know that these carrots were grown in the area and not just picked up at a grocery store. While I realize that the bananas may have only been there as a way to make a few extra dollars, it seems like such an in your face contradiction to some of the values that are supposed to define the farmers market that it changed my whole perception. Was I really at a farmer's market, or was this just a communal area for local citizens to try to make a few dollars pedaling the tropical fruits of Price Chopper to unwitting Colgate parents?
When one shops at a farmer's market you are not only purchasing food, but you are consuming a certain ideal about the food you eat. Having the person who grew your potato hand it to you, is about as close to food production as its reasonable for many to get. Asking the farmers for cooking tips and making small talk about the weather this year are as much a part of the experience as the food that comes with it. When Farmer Brown brings bananas to the farmer's market, it lifts this veil. Suddenly all of the other appeals of shopping at a farmer's market are gone and its just an outdoor version of Price Chopper. Part of the appeal of buying local is the transparency of the entire process. While some operations still manage to maintain this, several do not. All I can do is wonder who is buying these bananas.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

"Is Candy Evil or Just Misunderstood?"

I came across an interesting article in the Dining section of the New York Times recently, titled “Is Candy Evil or Just Misunderstood?” I thought the topic of candy was quite fitting for Halloween. The author discusses the history of sweets in America and why it has such a bad reputation.

In the article, Samira Kawash, the blogger behind Candy Professor, defines candy as “a processed food, eaten for pleasure, with no particular nutritional benefit.” And yet, she and others in the article point out that we eat all sorts of other, sugar-packed foods — like granola bars, certain cereals and yogurt, and fruit juice under the belief that they are much more nutritious: As the article states, “Nutritionally there is little difference between a gummy bear and a bite of fruit leather.” And yet, “candy carries so much moral and ethical baggage that people view it as fundamentally different — in a bad way — from other kinds of food.” I think this view stems from the health claims and marketing attached to many of these food products.

Many of today’s popular health claims including low fat, no high fructose corn syrup, trans fat free, organic and all natural can lead people to select foods, especially snack items, without paying much attention to whether these foods are truly nutritious choices. This gives certain foods a “health halo” attached to them, making them appear much healthier than they truly are. I am certainly subject to buying some food according to this notion.

At a recent visit to the supermarket, I came across dozens of outrageous nutrition/health claims of various food products ranging from ground beef to soda to crackers. I found a bag of chips which were described on the label in huge letters as “vegetable chips.” A quick look at the ingredients indicated that they are actually made from a variety of potatoes cooked in oil…I saw another claim of pretzels marketed as “Cholesterol Free!” Well, obviously they are…What other outlandish nutrition claims can you think of? Have these claims impacted your purchasing behavior?

What I’ve learned is that we can’t let these “health halos” dominate our decisions about food products. Going back to the candy debate, I think the issue centers on the idea that as our culture becomes more and more health conscious, people have been quick to give candy the evil glare. But maybe instead of arguing that candy is an evil invention, we need to look at our society at large, particularly America’s fixation with sugar and how it was evolved over time.

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

What is the Caganer??


We spend so much time devoted to talking food. But what happens to food after it enters our bodies?! We have failed to look at the full course of the food lifetime (apart from, of course, the show many of us reveled in at the dairy farm --was it just me or did every cow choose to have a bowel movement at the exact moment our attention was directed towards them!?).

I hope this post is not TMI for any readers. It’ll be tame, but I understand it’s a topic that often elicits embarrassment. That was not ever the case in my house. As unconventional as it may seem, its been a dinner conversation on more than one occasion- checking in with everyone making sure “all systems were go” and regular. It’s a private affair, so I suppose my parents wanted to check in with that aspect of our health somehow!

Different cultures have different attitudes towards poop. Americans and the British have forged a sentiment of amusement, creating jokes commonly incorporated in pop culture, while the French and particularly the Germans find it distasteful. After studying abroad, the difference in bathroom structure is very apparent. All Spanish homes are equipped with bidets, but this is not the case in the US. European bathrooms are far more private, with full length doors and more commonly private stalls, in stark contrast to the communal bathroom. In developing countries, feces-contaminated water is the leading cause of infant death, hardly a comedic matter (The Big Necessity: The Unmentionable World of Human Waste and why it Matters; George).

My real interest stems from an aspect of Catalonian culture that I found so interesting and unique- the caganer. The caganer is a small statue, most commonly a peasant man in a red cap, who is squatting and pooping and placed in the Nativity scene. Yes, the Nativity scene alongside the baby Jesus and the three wise men. The caganer represents the equality of all people: as everyone defecates regardless of status, race, or gender. Additionally, the caganer reinforces that the infant Jesus is God in human form, with all that being human implies. Most relevant, the caganer represents the importance in Catalan culture of eating well, and all that goes along with eating well. Their ''fertilizer'' enriches the earth around them, thus promising a buena cosecha (a good harvest) during the forthcoming year. This translates into a general good omen for the future.

The caganer is a lasting and important part of the culture, made evident by the 2005 government decision to remove the caganer from the public nativity in Barcelona. The local government countered many critics, who claimed an attack on Catalan culture, stating that the Caganer was not included because public defecation and urination had recently been made illegal. The Salvem el caganer campaign (Save the caganer) and media criticism led to the reinstatement of the caganer in the 2006 nativity.

Monday, November 1, 2010

5 Things

Hi all,
I was just browsing around cnn.com and found this posted on their eatocracy blog. It is a list of five things chefs don't want you to know according to chef Josh Grinker. I got a kick out of it so I thought I'd repost it here for you all to see! And the first item is very relevant to my most recent post.


1. There’s butter in everything

"No, that’s not true - there’s also cream and oil.

In every culinary school in America, they hammer home the same three-word mantra to students day after day, year after year, until it’s like a little voice in your brain that guides virtually every culinary decision you will make for the rest of your career: 'Fat is Flavor.' And you know what? It’s true.

You know how you cook a great steak? You slather it in butter, throw it on the grill, paint it with more butter just about constantly, take it off the grill to let it rest - and paint it again. Then you slice it, put a nice big dollop of butter on it and let it gently melt under the broiler. Voila."

2. They aren’t in the kitchen
"The mark these days of a successful chef is that they don’t spend much time in the kitchen. In fact, it’s almost an inverse principle that the better the restaurant, the less chance there is that the chef is back there cooking away. And, it’s almost certainly true that the chef hasn’t picked up a knife since his last appearance on 'Iron Chef America.'

People don’t really seem to understand this. I have a friend who is a waiter at Po in Brooklyn, a small Italian restaurant that opened about four years ago. The original Po, in Manhattan, was once upon a time co-owned by Mario Batali before he sold it and went on to found a restaurant empire.

My waiter friend has people ask all the time if Mario is in the kitchen tonight. Actually, he’s just off the red-eye from Vegas, in a cab this very minute, racing back here to make sure your eggplant Parmesan is up to his specifications."

3. There’s salt in everything
"This simple fact is what separates good cooks from bad ones, or at least flavorful food from bland food. Good restaurant cooks know how to season food and that’s why their food tastes good.

It’s not some genius alchemy of exotic ingredients, or zig zag farm-to-table freshness that makes you coming back wanting more - it’s salt.

I don’t know why lay cooks are so resistant to this ideal, but they are. I taught a class on grilling a steak once and when I showered the beef with a crust of salt there were gasps from the audience as if I had just stabbed a small child. The result was a perfect steak.

When I give people a recipe that invariably ends with ‘salt to taste’ and they tell me it wasn’t as good as mine, I know the reason: not enough salt."

4. Your food was cooked by minions
"Well, not quite - but migrant workers, would-be criminals and mindless idiots? Yes, most definitely. The restaurant business, despite its celebrity pretensions, is a tough business. Profit margins are razor-thin and competition is brutal. Restaurants, to be successful, must get the most skilled laborers possible and pay them as little as possible. That means lots of immigrants. And if you think they’re all legal and paid handsomely for their six-day weeks, well, just enjoy your soup.

The other major demographic working the skilled restaurant job are dumb blue-collar kids who have been lured by the chance of stardom, sort of like playing the lottery.

Oh yeah, there’s one group I forgot: alcoholics."

5. Chefs are jerks
"This is a fact that is nearly universal and one that chefs most certainly want to conceal. The culture of the kitchen is one where abuse is assumed and condoned. Combine that with the pressure of feeding hundreds of diners, lots of details and a militaristic hierarchy and you get some out of control egos.

Many, although not all, chefs are savvy enough to realize that their baby tantrums would be laughed at in the real world, so they step into the dining room in full regalia, all smiles and charm. Rest assured, the more gregarious and charming they are to you, dear diner, the more draconian and out of control they are to that poor fry cook."