Datasets:

andrewsiah

/

se_cooking_preference_sft

like 0

I recently received some homemade unfinished wood salad serving utensils as a gift, and like a dummy, I figured it would be safe to rub them down with some olive oil. Now, I've learned that since olive oil turns rancid, this was probably not a good idea. What should I do now? Is there any way to remove the olive oil from the wood (so that it can be replaced with food-grade mineral oil, I suppose) that won't damage the wood and will be safe for food utensils long-term? Ideas I've seen: Scrub with hot water and soap - food-safe, but makes me nervous about damaging the wood, and maybe not actually that good at getting oil out of wood pores? Mineral spirits - doesn't require scrubbing, but makes me nervous about toxicity Random home remedies involving vinegar, salt, lemon juice, baking soda, etc. - makes me very nervous about damaging the wood [edit: of course foods can safely touch food utensils; it's just that I assume that such things would be low potency and thus require a lot of scrubbing, and more abrasive elements like baking soda might not be great for wood fibers] If any of the above are actually good ideas, I'm still interested in hearing that, as long as you can tell me that the thing I'm nervous about isn't a problem.

Do nothing, or maybe give them a soap wash. You seem to be very worried about what are very small effects. Sure, the oil can oxidize over time. It won't turn your utensils into a big ball of funk. You probably won't notice that much difference in reality. Maybe, if you hold them under your nose, the whiff will be different than if you hadn't used olive oil. You can wash if you want to reduce the effect, or keep it so you can at least enjoy the esthetic difference of having oiled wood. Also, wood is not all that easily damaged, especially the kinds of wood a small artisan maker would use. People used to eat out of unfinished wooden bowls every day. Sure, you shouldn't leave the wood soaking in water, but you can wash it with detergent and soap now and then without getting much change in quality. I have a cheap, large-pore bamboo pan spatula which I regularly wash, sometimes with soaking, which is a worst-case scenario, considering the large pores of bamboo. It doesn't look 100% "like new", but it is still a normal, serviceable, nice enough spatula in appearance. The corners of the turning edge are slightly rounded, and the turning edge itself is a tiny bit frazzled, which could be repaired with a bit of sandpaper - but remember, this is something that gets washed regularly. If you are still very serious about getting that oil off, sandpaper is probably the way to go. But depending on the kind of surface the maker intended, you may ruin that surface. If you have small-detail carving, that would look much worse, since you'd have to remove a small layer of material, not just surface-polish it, and you may not be able to get into each carved hole/chip anyway. And if the set was not intended to look too rustic, you will need to go through a progression of sandpapers applied with some skill to get a nice, even sheen. Also, remember that those are salad utensils. If you intend to use them, as opposed to hanging them on the wall, they will come into contact with edible oils frequently, as well as ingredients like vinegar and lemon juice. Especially if you wash them rarely, and/or use little soap, they will get a "seasoning" of salad dressing on their surface just from use. Yes, it will get slightly rancid, and all that. You will likely get a visual difference between the heads of the utensils, and the dry-staying handles. That is normal and expected with wood utensils in use. If you want to keep them pristine, the only chance is to get some heavy acrylic or nitro finishing on them and keep them away from food, in a room different from the kitchen.

Is there any reason an IPA beer would be bad or not work for a beer bread dough? Does it take longer, the same or short than a typical beer bread to rise?

Different sugars have different relative sweetness (in %) (Elmhurst College): Sucrose: 100 Fructose: 140 High fructose corn syrup (HFCS): 120-160 Glucose: 70-80 Lactose: 20 Relative sweetness of some non-sugar sweeteners (NutrientsReview): Aspartame: 180 Acesulfam potassium: 200 (in some diet colas) Stevia: 300 Saccharin: 400 Sucralose: 600 Plain yogurt (100 g) contains 4.7 g sugars, but mostly lactose, which is not sweet. (NutritionData, milk composition) Kirkland Protein Bars contains stevia (300% sweetness) (link - read at the bottom of the Nutrition Facts), which explains its sweetness. Stevia is a natural non-sugar sweetener. Perceived sweetness can increase with the food temperature (ScienceDirect) and salt content (a study in mice). Liquid and solid foods with the same sugar content can have different perceived sweetness (ScienceDirect). And there are sweet taste enhancers...(ChemistryWorld)

My grandfather-in-law was born in England in the 1920s and fought in World War II. Somewhere along the line he acquired the habit of salting his beer before drinking it, which persisted for the rest of his life. I'm as curious about the cultural genesis of the practice as the food science of it – was there perhaps something about wartime beer that made it unpalatable without salt? I know there were other wartime food customs like bread and scrape so it doesn't seem implausible, but the "why" of this one isn't so obvious.

I can think of several reasons why you might salt beer: Salt is a natural flavor enhancer, so you'd be able to taste the hops and malt more Salt reduces perceived bitterness, so overly hopped beer would taste less bitter The salt crystals may nucleate bubble formation, giving the beer more head (briefly) I've heard of it being done before, but never with good beer, only low quality swill. But then, since there were more quality problems with cheap brews at the time, this was probably a lot more common.

I discovered that I can buy cream cheese at 1/4 the price per pound, but only if I buy it as a solid 10 cm x 10 cm x 40 cm brick. Assuming I only eat 1/10th of this brick per week, is there any way I can store it so it does not go moldy in the meantime?

Most farro enthusiasts would say that there is NO substitute for farro. More realistically, you certainly have options. It would help if you clarified what type of recipe you were interested in making - in the absence of that information, I would suggest you consider barley if you're making a soup and quinoa if you're making a salad. The cooking times for both of these would differ from the cooking time for farro.

I have done some calculation. And I think that if I buy a jar of spice from the supermarket, it is about 25 times more expensive (it costs more and you get a fraction of the amount) that getting a bag from my local Asian store. I am perfectly happy with the cheaper alternatives. But I find it hard to believe that there could be this much markup without some benefits. What are they?

I am going to slightly disagree with the other two answers. First, here is an excerpt summarizing Alton Brown's opinion: The first step in learning how to cook with spices is learning where to find spices. Now here in America, we do have some indigenous spices: allspice, vanilla, chili peppers, all from here. But by and large, most of your culinary spices come from the other side of the planet. And in their journey from there to here, a lot of things can happen. Not all of them good. They pass through a lot of hands, and all those palms, you know, want to be greased a little bit, quality can go down. So, if you're going to be a world-class spice cooker, you really should try to find yourself a world-class spice merchant. … I sure hope we've inspired you to set up a little spice trade of your own. Just remember: purchase whole spices, whenever you can, from a reliable purveyor—Internet or mail order are fine—and store those spices in a cool, dry, dark, airtight place. And don't keep them around too long. Two years tops for whole spices, and no more than six months for ground. So, to summarize, the most important thing about buying spices is making sure they are fresh and have been stored properly during their transport. That means buying from a purveyor whom you trust has properly sourced and handled the spices. If you go to a specialty spice merchant, chances are they care enough to ensure the quality of their product, and they charge you more for the convenience of that guarantee. If you shop at an ethnic market that buys imports its spices in bulk, that is okay, as long as the store has enough turnover to ensure that the spices are always fresh, however, you don't necessarily have the guarantee of freshness unless you trust the store owner. Supermarket spices can be okay, as long as they are stored and dated properly. These generally cost more not so much due to the willingness of buyers to pay more, but more due to the fact that there is a longer chain of wholesalers and middle men who all also want to make a profit.

What started out as a variation on a Sacher Torte has turned into a roulade (mostly to justify my recent purchase of a jelly roll pan). I think I've got it figured out exactly how I want to do it, except for one thing. I want to coat the whole thing in ganache, kind of like a giant Ho-ho. I'm going to be using pretty expensive chocolate, so I want to waste as little as possible. How can I evenly coat a cylinder with ganache? I'm going to roll the whole thing in chopped hazelnuts, so minor imperfections won't matter.

You'll definitely want to freeze the cake. Once it's frozen, use a spatula to apply a layer of ganache to the side that will be the bottom of the cake, then return it to the freezer. Once that has set, put the cake, ganache/bottom down on a cooling rack on top of a sheet of parchment paper or acetate. Slowly pour your melted ganache over the cake, guiding it with a spatula if necessary to make sure you get it all covered. You'll want the ganache to be just beginning to cool for a thicker coat. Once it's coated, you can roll it in nuts or whatever you like. You'll have a grid pattern on the bottom (depending on how solid the first ganache froze), and possibly some "feet", but the feet are going to be almost unavoidable. Any extra ganache will be on the parchment or acetate and can easily be stored until you need it again.

What word can I use to accurately describe brisket of beef in French? I usually go to the butcher with a chart of US beef cuts and point to it but it neer seems to correspond to the same piece. Does anyone know the definitive translation?

It's not that simple. Every culture cuts their beef differently (or not at all!) and therefore has different names for it Around the Belgium, Dutch, French low lands they call what the US call brisket and flank, just flank. And what other parts of France might call brisket is not always cut separately, it is just part of the chuck Confused, we are... Many butchers in cities receive partially processed carcass parts, so parts like the chest (brisket) may have been removed for processed meat etc So you need to take a cutting diagram to a butcher whom displays whole carcasses and you should be able to get what you want As I understand it the brisket extends from in front on the fore legs, between the forelegs and a short way past them? When we have a beast killed most of that goes into the salamis, yum! Edit: Some common words used are: Flanchet Plat de côte Poitrine Tendron A popular brisket cut is a long thin (10mm) strip of the full width of the brisket (left to right). A serving is a single slice slowly grilled and topped with a chunky sauce

I am infusing olive oil with truffles. How can I do it safely? Heating the oil destroys the truffle smell and pickling it is a sure way to do the same. Are there any other methods? Perhaps some type of filter that will eliminate the particulates?

In this recipe, the nibs are being used as an accent ingredient, adding some crunchiness and a burst of chocolate flavor, as well as some bitterness. They are not essential to chemistry or overall outcome of the recipe. You may: Simply omit them Chopped or coarsely ground roasted coffee would have a similar profile, although not as fatty, and of course, coffee flavored Try another crunchy, possibly somewhat bitter ingredient like chopped nuts; almonds, hazelnuts, and (in some people's opinions, although I dislike them) walnuts have a particular affinity for chocolate.

I purchased this nice whole-leaf oolong tea this afternoon. I steeped it in 200 F water for 3 minutes (as directed) in my tea steeping basket: And when I pulled out the basket, there were some uninvited guests remaining: Did I do something wrong? I thought this was the kind of results to expect from tea "dust" that might be expected in a bag, but this is whole-leaf tea. Do I need to pre-sift my tea, or something? I'm afraid that as these remnant sit in the tea, they will make it bitter.

In Chinese tea "rituals" they "rinse" the leaves with hot water before steeping. Fill the pot with water and dump it out right away. Then fill your pot and continue as normal. This gets rid of the majority of the "dust". Like the others said, yes it's normal.

What are some good guidelines for judging the consistency and texture of a good pizza dough? I would like to know so I could make some corrections before it's too late! Maybe some people have some good rules of thumb or neat tricks to share? I would be more interested in the thin base italian style. The thinner the better and the bigger the bubbles on the edge the better!

My targets for the final dough: when I stretch it over my fist, once it has got to the size where it covers my whole fist, it starts to stretch under its own weight if the inside of the dough is exposed it will stick to hands/surface need to use semolina/cornmeal to transfer the pizza around contains lots of visible bubbles before stretching, with the dough having enough integrity to stretch the bubbles without losing them. can stretch it to be translucent without tearing too much (preferably without tearing at all) What I look for at different by stages: I have been making a lot of pizza dough over the last year, experimenting with different amounts of water and kneading techniques. In order to make a very thin base, (on you can stretch so it is translucent) but can still transfer into the oven I make a very wet (60% hydration) dough and either: No-Knead approach: use small amounts of yeast and salt. Just leave the dough for approx 18 hours. Then put in the fridge, I find it is best after 2 days in the fridge. Because the dough is cold you can easily handle it, although you might need to let it warm up a bit before you can do anything with it. What I am aiming for is that when I stretch it over my fist, once it has got to the size where it covers my whole fist, it starts to stretch under its own weight. I expect to see a lot of bubbles, up to 0.5cm in diameter but most smaller, in the dough, but not to be able to pour it out. I will have to scrape it out of the bowl using a wet spatula. and will have to use a light dusting of flour (not too much) to stop it sticking to the surface or my hands. I sometimes let it rise again after shaping (need to at least let it relax for a few minutes) and usually have to add more flour to my hands to do the stretch. Try to use as little extra flour as you can. I usually have to only dust the dough once and lightly before stretching it. If you have to use any more it might be too wet or not have enough gluten development. Hand Knead approach: using more yeast and salt. When I first turn the dough out to knead I do not expect to be able to handle it, it is to sticky and runny. I use tools to fold it a few times. You will probably need some flour to do this, but try not to use too much. After several folds the dough comes together enough for me to lightly cover it in flour I "roll knead" - which is rolling and stretching it, but not bringing the wet inside to the surface. If you start to fold or tear the dough it will stick to your hands and the surface, if that happens you have to put more flour on which will reduce the hydration of your dough so avoid it. You will have to work it for quite a while. Try to get your body weight applied to the dough as your roll it. What I am aiming for is a dough which you can pick up without your fingers just going into it and that springs back when you deform it; but if you tear it or open it up the inside will immediately stick to your hands and the surface. When I get this I stop kneading. I usually rise it for 80 mins but it depends on the temperature. After this rise, I will divide it and shape it into balls. I expect to not be able to easily rip the dough apart due to its wetness. It should contain quite a bit of air, and some largeish bubbles which I try not to knock back too much. I have to use a wet spatula to divide it, and then use a small amount of flour on the outside to form a smooth surfaced ball. Then I cover it and rise it again for 20mins. The outside will be smooth with some bubbles visible and due to the flour dry enough to handle. The inside will be too wet to handle without adding more flour. After this second rise I put a bit of flour on my hands and stretch it over my fist, it should behave pretty much the same as the no-knead version at this stage.

Recently I saw a video that shows powdered milk can be whipped with cold water to make topping for cakes. I did a research on Google and yes, some articles/blogs said that it can be whipped. I actually tried myself using half and half powdered milk and whipped it with a hand mixer but it didn’t work, running like normal milk. So I suppose not any type of milk works. Anyone has idea about that? I’d appreciate very much. P.S.: Sorry for my English.

There are methods that whip very cold (up to semi-frozen) low-to-no-fat UHT milk to a whipped cream consistency using an immersion blender with the whipping disk. The key factors are temperature and fat content, for both, the lower the better. I would not recommend using this product for a cake, because the stability is quite limited1. Topping a dessert and serving it immediately is fine, any kind storage is not. I would expect that a non-fat milk powder in cold water works just as well and I vaguely remember my mom doing something along that line a few decades ago. 1 Some sources suggest adding instant gelatine powder for stabilization, but as I have never tried it, I can’t confirm how well it works.

I have a very simple recipe for homemade pasta dough (one egg to 100g flour, some oil), and found this worked great on my first small batch. I mixed it in a stand mixer and immediately rolled it out, using lots of flour to keep things from sticking. It was a bit thick, but I chalk that up to inexperience. On my second batch I made slightly more dough and split it into four balls before rolling each one out. The first two I rolled out almost right away, cut and shaped the pasta, and threw on a plate with some flour until I got around to cooking it. I left the last two balls of dough sitting for 30 minutes or more before I got to them, and these were much, much harder to roll out. I've since discovered (from Google and word of mouth) is that this is the opposite of what should happen, I'm supposed to let my dough rest to make it easier to work with. So was this an anomaly? Should I repeat this (tough) task with the understanding that my previous experience was a one-off? Or is there a special technique to rolling pasta dough made with egg (as opposed to water)? Any thoughts as to what went wrong? (Or, perhaps, confirmation that my word-of-Google-mouth rumors are incorrect?) (Also, I'm not monetarily endowed right now, so I won't have access to any other rolling equipment besides my trusty rolling pin)

Pasta dough has to be sufficiently moist to be rolled properly. Rolling the pasta (in a pasta machine) aligns the gluten strands so they stretch out and become parallel to each other. If the dough is too dry, it is more difficult to align them. This is why it's a good idea to coat unused dough in a thin coating of oil and cling wrap if you're not immediately working with it (a damp tea towel over the bowl will work as well).

I'm having trouble getting my pizza crust light , airy and crispy. I'm not sure if it's the mixing of the dough because I'm using a smaller mixer 20qt as opposed to my old 60qt. The bowl is not smooth and shiny and the dough hook doesn't appear to get close enough to the bottom of the bowl. It looks like the bowl was used to for everything except for making dough. Do these sound like conditions that would cause my crust to be tough? The dough is stiff and is difficult to work with when I remove it from the refrigerated proofing box. It's elastic like. This is frustrating because I owned a pizza shop a year ago; I had a recipe from New Haven and my crust was perfect: light, airy and crispy. I now reopened in a new location with a different oven and I'm still using my old recipe and the pizza crust is awful and I can't figure out why. The recipe is as follows: 4-gal water 4oz yeast cake 12oz salt 50 lbs flour-gold medal bromated bleached flour full strength The recipe is fine since I had a perfect new haven style thin crust using it for a year at my old location.

Your 60 qt mixer is going to mix dough at a much different rate than your 20 qt, even if their rotation speeds are the same. Your hook to bowl clearance shouldn't be an issue unless you're getting an excessive amount of crusty dough on the bottom of the bowl. The condition of the bowl is negligible too. Most likely your issue will be over/under development of your dough. Does the dough from your other location pass a windowpane test? How about your new dough? Assuming your relative humidity, proofing box temperature, and oven temperatures are the same, its going to be dough development. Experiment with different mixing times until you find the sweet spot. Also, if you are scaling a recipe down, occasionally you'll need to adjust hydration levels just a touch.

Chicory is a common additive in Indian Coffee. A quick search in wikipedia reveals that it is usually 20-30% in coffee powder. Can coffee be made solely out of chicory? Does the chicory root contain caffeine or just the flavor profile of coffee?

Roasted chicory root (which is what you are adding to coffee) contains no caffeine. What chicory does is add a nice, roasted flavor to coffee, which is desireable either for cultural reasons, or to offset the bitter flavor of over-roasted low-grade coffee beans. Originally, it was also added because it was much, much cheaper than coffee. That's not true anymore, even in India as far as I know. Proper New Orleans or Vietnamese coffee also contains a lot of chicory.

When making a cold deli meat sandwich or a burger, does layering the solid ingredients and condiments in a different order change the taste or mouth-feel? If so, how and why? Are there reasons to prefer one order to another?

Yes, it can change the taste quite significantly. Here's an easy experiment that you can do: Make a sandwich, but spread mustard on only one of the pieces of bread. Take a bite of the sandwich, mustard-side up. Take a bite of the sandwich, mustard-side down. Mouth feel is affected as well, but not quite as dramatically.

Bear with me... I'm working on a pretty amazing ice cream. It's Dulce de Leche, made the kind of scary traditional way of boiling cans of sweetened condensed milk, then mixing that with a custard and freezing it in my ice cream maker. As a recipe, it's getting there. I use the scraped seeds of a vanilla bean in the mix and swirl in unadulterated Dulce de Leche at the end. It's nearly perfect. Now it needs a crunch. I don't need to mix it in, a topping is fine. I want it salty; I'm thinking of how much I love a good salted caramel. I don't want it to melt salty in the ice cream or on the tongue. I want crunchy salt (Maldon) so encapsulated in hard caramel that you don't experience salt until after the crunch. My plan at this point is to make dry caramel as per the instructions of David Lebovitz (thanks Allison), mixing Maldon salt in at just the last possible second, much like making a praline, but with salt instead of nuts. Since we're just speaking of salt and sugar, normally I would just jump into experimentation on something like this, but I'm down to my last few ounces of mail-order Maldon. I want some assurance that I'm on the right track before I risk the last of an ingredient particularly precious to me. It may be months before I see it again. Can this possibly work? Any other great ideas?

Thank you, all of you, who contributed by answers or comments to the thinking that leads now to this answer. I listened to all of you, and it worked. I can't describe how tickled I am. Your suggestions opened my mind to thinking that this could still "work" even if it didn't quite go as I had hoped. As it turned out, the end product exceeded my hopes. This is my soon-to-be-world-famous Dulce de Leche ice cream. Two nights ago I froze a batch with my new caramelized salt. It wasn't my intention to create a swirl-in, but once I had the candy, I had to try it that way. Just before snapping the picture, I sprinkled some of the candy on top. Then I took a bite. HOLY COW! The candy hits the tongue as just sweet. Then it morphs. In less than a second you start to get the bitter notes of dark caramel, then BAM it hits with salt. It ends salty and sweet, with the bitterness just a memory. By then, you've already got your next bite ready, as in, "What the hell just happened?" Paired with the very one-note sweetness of the Dulce de Leche, the multitudinous flavor bursts of this little crunch are phenomenal. Are you reading into this that I'm a little excited right about now? The candy that was swirled into the ice cream did NOT make the surrounding ice cream salty. It just swirled in, but kept its own character, albeit stickier and less (but still) crunchy. It's a great contrast to the creamy Dulce de Leche. I discussed this small triumph in chat before posting this answer. Logophobe immediately jumped to using the "dust" (I'll show you that in a bit) to rim margarita glasses. The "margaritas" would be made with this. Oh hell yeah. How about as a pork rub? Hell, HELL yeah! The possibilities for this stuff are endless. I hope by now you're intrigued enough that you want your own caramelized salt to play with. Caramelized Salt I basically stuck with my original plan, but I didn't use Maldon; I used inexpensive large crystal (rock) sea salt, like you might put into a grinder. First, I just made a dry caramel as per David Lebovitz using 1/2 cup (100g) of plain granulated sugar. I took his advice and brought the caramel to a darker point (closer to burnt) than I might have otherwise. (Mr. Lebovitz' photos, not mine) At just the very last possible second, I stirred in 100g of rock salt and poured that onto a greased sheet pan. After it cooled, it looked like this: I broke off a tiny bit and tasted it. Too salty. I could barely discern any caramel at all. Hmmph. Well, I didn't expect this to go that easily. What to do, what to do? What if I break this up into chunks and do it all over again? That might work... So I broke it up and put it into a heavy Ziploc. Then I alarmed my neighbor (he called in panic) by beating the crap out of it with the smooth side of a meat mallet. Then I made the caramel again, this time I used 3/4 cup (150g) of sugar. At the last possible second I stirred in my salty sugar chunks and poured the mix onto the same greased sheet pan. I was hoping that this time would maintain the clumpy appearance of the last. It didn't; it immediately homogenized into a fairly smooth mass. At this point I didn't have great hopes, but I figured I'd see if I could make anything useful out of this. I called my neighbor to warn him, then I proceeded again to beat the crap out of it. At this point I tasted it and kind of liked it, but the sizes of the pieces were all over the map. I didn't like that. I also didn't like the way it looked; the dust marred the glassy appearance of the larger shards. So I grabbed three sieves of varying fineness and proceeded to work the candy through the holes. Anything that went through the fine sieve I called "fairy dust". By spending some time working out the "dust" I was left with larger, cleaner shards. I worked those through a pasta colander, then a big pasta colander. The first time around, anything too big to make it through the the big holes of the big colander got put back in a Ziploc and beat up again. That gave me more "fairy dust" and more medium shards. The second time around, the shards that wouldn't go through were small enough that they might make a nice garnish - 2 or 3 pieces on top of the ice cream. So I kept them. It was a good call, they're fun. Swirled into the ice cream, I used the dust and medium shards. The dust dissolves, but it stays to itself. It doesn't make the ice cream next to it salty. The medium shards maintain their integrity, they don't completely dissolve, they provide some crunch. The big chunks look awesome as a garnish and since they stay in the mouth long enough to savor, you can really pick up their complexity. Pretty amazing stuff from 2 inexpensive ingredients. I didn't get the encapsulation effect I was looking for, but in the end, I couldn't be happier with how this turned out. Next time I'm going to try just doing it in one step using regular kosher salt. It might work, but I'm guessing that it won't be the same. We'll see.

I have a cake recipe which calls for 1 1/3 cup of vegetable oil. What are the essential properties of vegetable oil in baking? What changes would be expected if I were to substitute peanut or canola oil for the vegetable oil?

Peanut and canola are vegetable oils. Vegetable oil is a catch-all term, it's not asking for a product labelled "vegetable oil" although you can buy it in the store. Oils labelled vegetable oil are blends and can be any proportion of things like canola (rapeseed), peanut, corn, sunflower, etc. Just don't use Olive oil, it is a vegetable oil but it won't be good for cakes! Different vegetable oils will give different properties although most will give you about the same result. Canola is flavorless and relatively light while peanut is a bit richer and, well, peanut-y. The differences in your cake will be subtle, however.

As discussed in What are the requirements for a dish to be kosher?, kosher food must follow various rules and procedures. I noticed a pattern in these rules which suggests some consistency with modern food scientists' understanding of food safety and handling. For example: Shellfish often contains harmful bacteria which can make one sick. Avoiding this is probably good advice. Many fish or "creatures of the sea", that do not have scales, contain dangerous poisons and are probably best avoided. Are there any scientific explanations for why it might be good to avoid the other food? E.g.: Meat in which the blood has not been drained. Eating milk together with meat or cooking beef in milk. Pigs are often fed garbage and other meat, including meat from other pigs. Could this lead to diseases similar to mad cow disease?

While some of the kosher rules are food-safety rules developed by the Israelite priests (or given by God), the prohibition against mixing meat and milk is because of an ancient ritual that involved cooking the meat of a slaughtered animal in its mother's milk, a religious practice forbidden in Exodus 34:26 "... You shall not boil a kid in its mother's milk", part of a passage sometimes known as the ritual decalogue that prescribes the destruction of artifacts of other religions, forbids the creation of idols, and lays out other religious responsibilities. The laws regarding separation of meat and milk come from the concern that a person might accidentally break this law and boil a kid in its mother's milk if they purchase both meat and milk and prepare them together, or if a residue of milk is left on cooking utensils from a previous dish, which then gets into a dish involving the meat of a slaughtered kid.

Not having used sherry before, what is the type used when a recipe just calls for "sherry"? I see cream sherry, dry sherry, and very dry sherry at my local grocery store. Does brand matter much?

Cream sherry is very sweet - likely too sweet for most recipes that don't explicitly mention it. If a recipe simply calls for "sherry", it usually means dry sherry, as that's the most common kind of available. In fact, I don't think I've ever even seen "very dry" around here. So I would definitely stick with the dry. As for brand, if you see several different bottles all labeled sherry, I don't think it matters too much which one you pick - at least if you're using it for cooking and not drinking. P.S. If you're using this as a substitute for rice wine, the commonly-accepted substitute is indeed dry sherry.

I accidentally cooked a metal lid from an olive can in my spaghetti, but didn't find it until everyone had already eaten. Could my family get sick from it?

Very unlikely. Cans are made from either steel (uncritical) or aluminum (dito), covered with a thin layer of tin (dito) or epoxy coating. These materials are explicitly choosen because they are food-safe1, even at higher temperatures than you use with home cooking: Tin cans are sterilized after filling to make the food inside shelf-stable. So the only way where non-foodsafe components might be introduced would be any printing/laquer/paint, which is typically on the side of the can, not on the lid. 1 The epoxy in the cans may contain Bisphenol-A, which acts as endocrine disruptor (influences the hormone system) and is banned for baby bottles in some countries, e.g. all the EU. The FDA considers its use for food packaging safe.

http://www.sanjeevkapoor.com/vegetable-hot-and-sour-soup.aspx Are we here talking about Bamboo trees? Can we have a picture of Bamboo shoot? In what forms is it available?

Bamboo isn't a tree, it's a grass ;) A bamboo shoot is just the budding new bamboo that's harvested before it grows and becomes hard and stringy. Bamboo shoots are generally available in 2 forms, fresh and canned. Fresh ones are sold whole and generally used in stir fries. Canned bamboo shoots are precooked and packed in water. You can find canned bamboo shoots sold whole, shredded, or sliced. For hot and sour soup (which I assume you're making) you'll probably want the shredded ones. There are also jarred bamboo shoots. You probably don't want these as they are often fermented and add different seasonings to the shoots. I'm not sure where you are so I don't know how available they would be, but you can generally find canned ones in the asian section of major supermarkets. Fresh ones are a little harder to come by and I believe only seasonal

This morning I began crockpotting my first (ever) pork butt in an attempt to make pulled pork. In preparation of this, two days ago I smeared the meat with a spice rub and put it in a large sealed bag in the fridge. I did this because the recipe I was following stated that giving the rub a few days to "sink in" to the meat was crucial. This got me wondering: Does rub/marinade actually penetrate into meat, if so, how? The animal is dead, so I would imagine anything along the lines of "osmosis" or "capillary action", etc. would no longer be functioning. To me, it doesn't seem feasible that rub/marinade would actually penetrate into a (dead) piece of meat. If it does, I'd like to know how, and how deep the rub/marinade actually travels.

Marinades and Rubs are "surface treatments" only, they do not penetrate deeply into the meat. A brine is a deep treatment, which does penetrate by way of osmosis. For a quick explanation of this see Alton Brown's Good Eats

Occasionally it happens that I add to much creme fraiche to a pasta sauce. Recently this happened with a pasta that contained aubergine, courgette, white mushroom, onion, chicken and some pepper and salt. I added the creme fraiche in the last stage. This made the dish creamy, but also neutralised the flavour of the ingredients. Is there a way to to partially reverse this neutralisation?

French fried potatoes (or as the British say, chips) are a deep fried food. In fact, the US term "to french fry" orignally simply meant to deep fry, although simply "french fry" has now come to mean the dish of french fried potatoes. As such, they inherently are not a low fat or small-oil-volume food. If you are asking how you can create these with less volume of oil than required for deep frying, the answer is simply: you cannot. There are appliances that claim to "air fry" but I am skeptical of their outcomes. You can make alternate dishes, which may be very similar, but they will be different. Oven fries are one close alternative--here is a recipe from Tyler Florence of the food network. You can minimize the amount of oil that penetrates the actual fries by cooking them properly: Use a large volume of oil (counter-intuitively) so that when the potatoes are added, the temperature drop is minimized. Use a deep-fry or candy thermometer, to ensure the oil is at the proper temperature. This will reduce the amount of oil that penetrates the fry. When proper deep frying is happening, the rapidly vaporizing water expressing from the potato prevents the oil from entering. This is by far the most important factor. Make sure the potatoes are dry before putting them into the oil. Immediately upon removing the fries from the oil, put them on a wire rack to drain. Paper towels are good, but they leave the fries in contact with the oil, and as they cool, some will enter the fries. With proper technique, only a small amount of oil from the deep frying will actually remain in the final product.

What could I use in place of milk in pancake batter? Would rice milk or soya milk work? What about in scotch pancakes?

Soy milk works great in pancakes. My basic recipe for pancakes is about a cup of flour, about a cup of soy milk, a tablespoon or two of sugar and veg oil, and a few teaspoons of baking powder. Works great, makes nice, fluffy pancakes. (I know, not a "recipe" so much as list of ingredients with approximate proportions, but that's how I tend to cook, experimenting and learning from experience as I go...) Edit: I don't know about scotch pancakes; I've never made them, but upon looking up a couple recipes, I don't see why it wouldn't... Soy milk behaves much like milk in these kinds of recipes, the only difference being that soya adds a bit of binding that dairy milk doesn't (and perhaps a smidge of a taste difference?) Edit2: Haha, ok, so my "pancakes" are much more like your "scotch pancakes" -- there is such a wide spectrum of "pancakes", from crepe-y types to big, fluffy types... So then, yes, I'd say soya'd certainly work fine for scotch pancakes; for your "pancakes", I still suspect it'd be alright. With crepes mainly you just need liquid (hence the mixing with water in your posted recipe) -- the milk is mainly for some added flavour; I'd conjure that soya would work just fine.

Is it possible to prepare a (large) batch of roux and then freeze it, or will the texture and flavour be destroyed in the process?

You can freeze roux and store it up to 6 months without any problems. I put them in plastic ice-tray forms until they are frozen, then move them to a refrigerator bag. Just keep following things in mind: Leave a bit of room in the container before putting it in the freezer - roux expands when freezing. Bring it to room temperature before using it.

Yesterday, I made a sourdough loaf with a high hydration (80%) and as usual, when I turned it out of its banneton, it simply couldn't hold its shape and became very flat; only about 1 1/2 inches at the highest point. The recipe follows: Sponge: 50g water 50g spelt flour 100g starter (100% hydration) Sponge 344g water 230g whole meal spelt flour 230g strong white flour Mix together ingredients for sponge; ferment overnight in fridge. Mix water, flours and sponge together and knead until elastic. Rise until it becomes 1 1/2 its original size. Shape into a boule (for surface tension) and place in floured banneton. Rise until doubled; turn out and bake. Although I made the recipe up there is nothing unusual about it and this happens with other high hydration loaves. I know it is a high hydration but others have formed lovely boules. How can I also achieve these high boules?

Hydration numbers aren't that meaningful by themselves -- whether an 80% hydration level can produce a high-rising free-form loaf will depend on a lot on the types of flours or grains that are used. (Usually, 80% hydration is most appropriate for flatter or roughly shaped breads: ciabatta, focaccia, pizza dough, rustic baguettes, etc.) With the specific mixture of spelt and "strong white flour" (high protein) you mention, it should be possible to get a loaf with a little more lift. But it's hard to say for certain -- the flour itself will affect whether it's actually possible to do what you want. Frankly, there are a lot of variables that could be creating problems beyond the ingredients. A sourdough culture that produces a lot of acid quickly can make it quite difficult to get a tall loaf. Or, if your sourdough yeast is weak and takes more than a couple hours for each rise, you might be producing too much acid. The acidic environment will tend to weaken the gluten, and you'll inevitably get a loaf that spreads. If this is the problem, you'll need to refresh the starter with a few closely spaced builds that really dilute the starter (e.g., dilute your starter 1:4 or even more with new flour/water in each build). That will strengthen the yeast but cut down on the early development of acidity. Unless you're a sourdough expert, I might actually suggest trying to get good results with regular baker's yeast in your recipe before doing the sourdough conversion, since the sourdough may be contributing more than anything else to the spreading. If the starter isn't the problem and the ingredients can hold up the loaf, the next options are alterations to technique. The best suggestion I can give is to introduce "stretch-and-fold" maneuvers into the first rise. After you mix the final dough (which doesn't necessarily need to be heavily kneaded), come back every 30-45 minutes or so and stretch the dough from each side at a time. Pull out, lift up, and fold on top of the rest of the dough. Do this from each of the four sides of the dough. Let rest for 30-45 minutes again and repeat as often as you need until you feel the dough strengthen significantly. If you adopt stretch-and-folds, you may not see the same amount of rise you saw without them, so you need to just keep your eye on the clock and use the same amount of time you did before for the first rise. By the time you reach the shaping phase, the dough should be much more taught and elastic. The other significant issue is shaping. Do you do a pre-shape and bench rest before the final shaping? That can also help. Preshape by pulling the dough taught, folding in upon itself a number of times, then let rest for 15 minutes or so before doing final shaping. Basically, the more times you stretch the gluten and let it rest, the stronger the dough will get -- whether you do that in folding during the first rise or in a preshaping before bench rest, it will help. The shaping technique itself can also significantly affect the stability of the final loaf (but that's hard to explain in a text response). Also, you may be waiting too long in the final proof if you wait to fully double in size. Unless the sourdough culture is very strong, you might have better results by waiting for only a 1.5 or 1.75 rise. If you do that, you may want to be somewhat gentle during the final shaping to preserve some of the gas from the first proof. In fact -- if all of this sounds way too fussy for you, another option may be to skip all the stretching, folding, shaping, etc. and avoid the final rise almost altogether. Let the dough roughly double in size during the first rise, then shape very gently into a rough ball, rest just a short time until it starts to expand again (no more than an hour or so), and then throw it in to bake. Lastly, the baking method could change things. If you're baking on a flat stone, the dough can just spread significantly during baking itself. I've sometimes seen this with high hydration sourdough -- I load it on a peel, and it looks okay before it goes in the oven, but during the oven spring phase, it just becomes wider instead of taller. Baking in a pot or round pan could help to restrain that spreading a bit without making it look too much like bread from a pan. And, if you cover a pre-heated pot for the first 15 minutes or so of the bake, it will help the oven spring and crust development. It's hard to know which of these options will work best for you, since there are a large number of issues that could be at fault in this case. In my experience, however, the two most likely causes for spreading are a weak sourdough starter or inadequate strengthening of the gluten during shaping.

So i've taken it on me to make fresh mozzarella. I've read up on the task in some articles and with multiple recipes but for some reason I never succeed. The seperated curds always stay little crumbs and never take up the shape of solid blocks/curds/strands. This is the recipe i'm following: I use 1L pasteurized organic non-skimmed milk. It's non-homogenized milk but I don't know the pasteurisation temperature. I've used different brands. I dissolve a teaspoon of citric acid into 5 tablespoons of water. Adding this to the milk brings the pH to around 5.8. I've measured the amount of citric acid necessary to lower the pH of the milk to this acidity. I then heat the milk to 30C. (i've also tried adding the citric acid to the milk at 30C instead of from the start). Once it has reached 30 degrees I take the pan off the stove, add 10 drops of microbiological rennet. The rennet is around 200 IMCU. Stir for 30 seconds. Put the lid on, wait for 5 minutes. Drain with strainer. Result: poor crumbly curds, some even so fine they slip through the strainer. Cutting the curds is something i can't even think about. Any mozzarella specialists here who could help out with this one? I don't want to give up on this endeavour but not sure if I want to keep wasting all this milk.

The problem is the organic milk. Or rather, the fact that organic milk available in grocery stores is high-temperature pasteurized, rather than conventionally pasteurized. That helps it keep a lot longer, but it disrupts the proteins so that they don't coagulate well enough for cheese. I'm told that there are brands of conventionally-pasteurized organic milk, but I've never seen one. You might try it with plain old grocery store milk, and it should work. Or you could try to find a local producer, who won't use HTST pasteurization. (You might even be able to find unpasteurized milk, though the USDA definitely frowns on that: even though you're cooking it you won't have aged the cheese long enough.)

The "wonder pot" is a type of stovetop bakeware that seems to have been popular in Israel during a period of austerity. I'm looking for a (preferably USA based) supplier for a new one. Here's a link to a page with a photo of the item in question.

My mother had a similarly shaped pan with a lid that she'd use for baking coffee cake and such when camping. It was all aluminum and much less complicated (and likely not as useful) as what your talking about. The closest thing I found is the Omnia Oven. It looks they may be had for about $50.

I'm baking tonight and I'm out of All purpose flour. I'm lazy to run out to the grocery store. Can I replace All purpose flour with Maida (Maida is better known to Asian Indians - we use it for making Naans and such)

Maida is wheat flour similar to what is sold in the US as cake flour. Like cake flour, maida is finely milled, and it has less protein than all purpose flour. You can use it for bread and cakes, as well as chapatis, parathas and puris. To achieve a flour more like all purpose or other flour types, you can add gluten to maita. According to The Fresh Loaf, maida typically contains 7.5% gluten (if anyone can find a more authoritative source, please edit accordingly). Cooking for Geeks has a good article about the gluten content of other flours: High gluten flour and bread flour is produced from hard wheat. High gluten flour has a gluten percentage of about 12-14% while bread flour contains about 10-13% gluten. Both flours are almost completely made of hard wheat, but some high gluten flours are treated to reduce starch content, raising the gluten content to around 14%. These flours are generally used for making breads. High gluten flour is reserved for breads that are extra elastic such as bagels and pizza. Cake flour is produced from soft wheat and is low in gluten content (8-10%). This flour is used for making delicate cakes. Baked goods made with cake flour has a tendency to crumble because of the low gluten content. All purpose flour is made from a mixture of hard and soft wheats. The gluten content ranges from 9-12%. This is the most versatile flour because it can be used to make both cakes and breads. However, breads won't be as chewy and cakes won't be as tender as if you used bread or cake flour. Pastry flour is also a mix of hard and soft wheat flours with an emphasis on soft. Generally, the gluten content is 9-10% and is often recommended for pie crusts. So, again according to The Fresh Loaf: Then if you're interested in the details of the math, start out with a formula like (100parts/100parts * 7.5%) + (Nparts/100parts * 75%) = 10.5% [or 9.5% or 12.5% or whatever your desired result is], then solve for N. Skipping intermediate steps, simplification gives N = ((end-percentage-goal * 100) - 750) / 75 (Even this math is actually an oversimplification that's not quite right. It takes the not-quite-correct shortcut of directly adding percentages without accounting for the total being more than 100 grams. Hopefully though it's "good enough" ...) The bottom line is: for every 100 grams Maida, add somewhere between 2.6 and 6.6 grams GlutenPowder. Adding 2.6 grams GlutenPowder will give a result with about 9.5% gluten, adding 4 grams GlutenPowder will give a result with about 10.5% gluten, and adding 6.6 grams GlutenPowder will give a result with about 12.5% gluten. According to the original author of this answer, "You might find that bread and cakes made with maida don't keep as well as the same things made with all-purpose flour, but home baking never stays around for more than a day in my experience."

I have a new tool. At Walmart they didn't seem to have the kind of potato masher I'm used to, so I bought this thing. (The can of soup is there for size reference.§) From a young age I'm used to the tool with a long stiff steel wire extending out of the handle about 3", zig-zagging on itself several times in a flat plane, then returning back to the handle. Since that thing mashed, and this thing smashes, I call it a potato smasher. I had not yet cleaned up, so you can see some mashed potato in a few of the holes. Therein lies my problem. As I smashed the boiled potatos, potato would extrude through all the holes. It was easy to remove potato from top and bottom for multiple mashes -- just wipe it off with a fork. But with 24 little holes, I did not know how to efficiently remove the contents of the holes and return it to the smashing bowl when done. Is there an easy way to remove potato from all the holes without waste? In the end, after I was done smashing, I cheated. Using my mouth, I just sucked out as much potato as I could. It was good! Even with my big mouth, I could not get it all, though. § I lied, sort of. The can is also there because that was our gravy. We lacked normal gravy ingredients, so I got some help from Necessity's kid. Using heated split pea soup as gravy ended up tasting great. More vegetables, plus the ham in the soup provided a bit of meat. (I'm not pushing the Progresso brand; it is just what we happened to have.)

There is no need to remove potato from the holes on each stroke, which appears to be what you are describing doing. Just pick it up and smash it down on some un-smashed potatoes until there are no more of those. The potato already smashed through the holes will eventually fall back into the pot during this process. Then, when done smashing, turn the tool sideways, knock it on the rim of the pot to dislodge most of the potato on it, and use a rubber spatula to scrape off what's left. Or expand your shopping beyond wal-mart - I'd bet $20 I can find a wire-type masher at a thrift store nearby, probably for $1 or $2 at most, and certainly by using the same technology you use to post your question you can have one shipped to your house for a bit more money, if this type offends you. You can also mash them with a hand or stand mixer. Or, indeed, a fork.

I use my oven a lot to bake things and roast vegetables, usually at 350 or 400 F. It stays hot for a while afterwards, and it seems like such a waste to not somehow use that heat. Are there any dishes or kitchen maintenance things I can do with an off-but-still-hot oven?

Drying herbs is what I'll use residual oven heat for.

What's the difference between the following chocolates? Milk Dark Semi-sweet Bitter-sweet If a chocolate only lists the % cocoa solids used, can I figure out which of the above types it is?

Milk chocolate is unique in that it contains a significant quantity milk, either in the powdered, liquid, or condensed form. Dark chocolate is a category of chocolate that includes semisweet and bittersweet chocolate. The US FDA actually does classify dark chocolate as anything containing 35% or more cacao (liquor or butter). In practice, semisweet chocolate is typically much sweeter, and contains about 50% sugar. Bittersweet chocolate, on the other hand, typically contains about 33% sugar. Some dark chocolates may contain small amounts of milk, but not enough to be called milk chocolate. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Types_of_chocolate

It's fairly known at most supermarkets and stores you can get regular, cheap wine. However, at some stores who dedicate themselves solely to liquor and spirits, they sell incredibly expensive wine, even up to $2k from where I've been. As someone who has tried a bit of wine and not quite fond of the taste, I'm mainly curious if there really is any difference to expensive wine as opposed to store bought, "cheap" wine. Is there a vast, noticable difference between the two? Is the only reason I would pay more for the age of the wine or how rare it is? One of my relatives who drinks lots of wine told me that there's relatively no difference between expensive and regular; it's noticable after your first glass, but after subsequent glasses it starts to taste the same. Is this true?

There are several factors that increase price. Some are related to the objective quality of the wine, some indirectly linked, other are rather disconnected from quality (but not necessarily irrelevant, as we'll see). It's also worth noting that being of high quality doesn't necessarily mean being appealing to the average consumer. Apart from the stuff listed below, mass-market wines tend to be made in a non-challenging, easily accessible style. Lower tannin levels, less acidity and a generous amount of residual sugar (say 10-30g/l) makes for easy quaffing but little complexity or elegance. They can be very well-made, but the agriculture may not be very sustainable, and the fruit probably isn't of the highest quality. (If you visit a winery at harvest when they bring in the bulk wine fruit, the meaning of "quality" becomes rather apparent.) Wines targeted at connoisseurs, wine snobs and wine geeks (such as yours truly) tend have more structure (tannins, acidity) and are more often completely dry (although there are of course high-quality off-dry, semi-sweet, and sweet wines). There's a limit to how much a producer can spend to increase quality, a limit which varies with location (because of salaries for workers etc) but around $100 per bottle is probably in the right order of magnitude. This does not mean that all wines above this magical limit are equally good, though. A dirt-cheap wine will also have a cost associated to it which will be payed for by someone else, like under-payed harvest workers, the environment around the vineyard, etc. Below are some factors that have a more or less direct link to wine quality and/or character: Yield per acre: Limiting the vineyard's yield per acre (which can be achieved by sparser planting, thinning/green harvest, old vines, etc) increases the quality of the fruit, but you will produce less wine with more or less the same amount of work, which means you'll have to adjust the price. Number of harvesting tries: At harvest, you can pick all the fruit of one vineyard at the same time and be done with it. Unfortunately, not all bunches ripen at exactly the same time, so to avoid over- or under-ripe grapes, you can make multiple tries (French, pronounced "trees") over several days and pick each bunch at optimal ripeness. More tries inevitably means more work, and so, price increases. Selection: When the harvest is brought in, you can throw all the fruit into the press, or you can select the best grapes to make your wine (and make brandy or a second wine of the discarded grapes, or sell them on to a bulk wine producer). Being picky reduces the amount of wine produced, and so, prices increase. Drying: Some wines, like Amarone and straw wine, are made from partially dried grapes, and drying decreases the amount of wine you produce (apart from being extra work) which means - more expensive wine. Sparkling: Sparkling wines made with the traditional method - like Champagne and Cava - need to be disgorged after bottle fermentation, which leads to a certain amount of waste (a Cava producer I talked to said that around 10% of the original wine is lost in disgorgement). Oak aging: Many wines are fermented and/or aged in oak barrels, which greatly affects the character of the wine compared to other types of containers, like concrete or stainless steel vats. (More oak doesn't mean better wine, of course.) Oak barrels are horribly more expensive than the alternatives (and European oak is more expensive than American, and they impart different character), and so, the more oak you use, the more expensive the wine gets. Aging in general: Most high-quality wine receive a bit of aging before consumption to let all components integrate; some designations of origin even require aging prior to selling. Rioja Gran Reserva, for example, must be aged at least three years, with at least one of those years being on oak, while vintage Champagne is mandated to rest three years on the lees, etc. Apart from time being money, you also need a suitable storage location (cool and humid but not too cool and humid, secure but accessible to yourself, etc) which is far from free. The price increases. Other factors aren't causally linked to higher quality, but tend to be connected: Reputation: If you're an unproven winemaker you will be able to charge more if you're operating in a district of high repute than if you're working in an area where no-one has made quality wine before. Conversely, a well-known, high-quality producer expanding their operations to a somewhat less proven district will likely be able to charge more than their new neighbours. Brand: Marketing can take many forms, such as it advertising, tailoring wines to suit influential reviewers, and tends to push prices up. Wineries can even try increasing prices just to seem more exclusive. You can also be lucky and find some great, undiscovered producer (don't tell anyone! except me, that is) selling their wines at more-or-less cost price (which probably still won't be dirt cheap, though). Land prices: Some spots are better for growing grapes. If you're in unexploited territory, you might find a great spot and pay next to nothing, but if you're in a region with an established wine industry, odds are all the good spots are taken... and it'll cost you to buy an existing vineyard. Know-how: Making wine is hard. Unless you are good at it yourself (or a friend, or perhaps your nephew, or your sister-in-law, is), you can hire some hotshot consultant œnologist like Michel Rolland to help you make the most of the fruit you produce... but the consultants will cost you lots of $$$, and your customers will need to pay. Vintage: Vintages vary in quality and quantity. If a vintage is high quality but low in quantity, we will see less supply and likely higher demand. Having said that, a good year isn't always a guarantee for a good wine (if the winemaker screws up the quality of the fruit doesn't matter), and in a hard year, auspicious microclimates and competent vintners can produce great wines anyway. Furthermore, some years can be very good but have an even better "sibling" year, and don't receive their due hype. For example, 1995 was a very, very good year in Champagne, but 1996 is perhaps one of the greatest vintages evur, so the 1995s can be something of a bargain compared to 1996s. Some things might not increase quality at all but still have an effect on price (and some of these may still be worth the price!): Use of pesticides: Using pesticides to counter disease, parasites, pests, etc can increase yield without affecting quality negatively, which lowers the price, but on the other hand you spew out poisons into nature and expose your vineyard workers to them. (The residues left in the finished wine tend to be negligible, though.) Labour: Paying decent wages to your harvest workers means a costlier wine. Find some illegal immigrants you can pay less than minimum wage and the wine gets cheaper. Taxes: Some countries have different alcohol taxes for for different ABVs. For example, in Sweden (where I live) the tax is relatively lower for a 15% ABV wine than it is at 16% ABV (which isn't very common, but for example Zinfandels and Amarones can reach that amount). Furthermore, in some countries the alcohol tax depends on the alcohol content solely (which favours expensive wine, as alcohol tax will end up being rather negligible), in others it may be a percentage of the retail price (which favours cheap wine). Price regulations: At least historically, some districts have regulated the minimum price (and sometimes also the maximum) price a farmer can charge for their fruit when selling it to a winemaker, which inevitably affects the end price. Export/import: If you buy wine from far away countries, not only are you paying for the transport, but you may also be paying import/export tariffs. Organic certification: Organic farming doesn't necessarily mean organic certification. The organizations issuing certifications charge a fee, which can be quite hefty for a small producer, so some organic producers aren't labelled as such since they can't afford the certification fees. Adding gold: Yup, there are wines with actual gold added to them. I can't see that affecting quality in any way, but it'll surely affect the price! So, to conclude - quality costs, but not all costs impart quality, and quality doesn't equate appeal.

So, usually christmas cake recipes call for wrapping paper/cardboard around the cake to insulate it a bit. (See this question: Why should I wrap a cake tin in newspaper?) I find myself lacking in newspaper but with a plethora of shipping boxes due to all the online purchases I've found myself doing recently. I happen to have a box that would be the perfect size (small enough to fit in the oven, but big enough for the cake). And also this seems like a great lazy person solution that appeals to me. To be clear, I mean to put the Christmas cake mix in the baking tin, and then put that in the box. Given the box is devoid of plastic (paper tape and cardboard only), and isn't touching the element (obviously), would this be a viable method? Anything I need to keep in mind? My plan is to close the box entirely top and bottom and interleave the flaps so that nothing comes open. Particular concerns: The box catching fire The printing on the box releasing chemicals into my food The oven convection being impeded Any reasons why this is a bad idea? (My cake is currently in the oven, I jumped ahead a bit and then thought maybe I should check anyway. It hasn't caught fire yet). (Also, I did also see the reduce-by-15C-forgo-the-box-entirely method, but my oven only goes down to 140C, the next step down is 100.)

Your dough should be fairly flexible by the time you are ready to stretch it. I regularly make Neapolitan style pizza, and use a long ferment. It sounds like you are on the right track, and your photo looks like a good start. Each time you manipulate the dough the gluten structure tightens and the dough becomes more difficult to shape. I would recommend that your next step be portioning. That looks like enough for one or two pizzas. So, step two is creating balls of dough. Then let those rest at least 30 minutes, but up to a couple of hours. Next, when shaping, work as gently, but as quickly as possible. Do not use a rolling pin, as this will keep you from having a crust that is puffier than the center, if you are making Neapolitan style. Begin on a well floured board and use your hands. There is some technique here, and you probably will want to find some videos to help. By the time I get to this point, with proper resting, my dough springs back a little, but not that much. It readily holds its shape. I begin on the board, then lift and use my fists to stretch the dough into shape. That took some practice. If you are making pan style, a rolling pin will not be helpful here either. Instead, begin to stretch the dough a little, then place the dough in a well-oiled pan, well ahead of when you want to top it. Gently use your fingers to spread the dough. When it begins to spring back, set it aside. Allow it to relax, then repeat after 10 to 15 minutes. Some styles allow for another rise in the pan before topping and baking. In general, pizza dough always wants to spring back some, but allowing the gluten to relax and learning to work quickly will help. You should certainly be able to get to a point where it is not an issue.

I'm cooking a 2kg octopus at home. Can I eat the head, or just the legs? Update: Thank you to both answerers for the useful info. The head was amazing, as delicious as the legs!

The parts that are inedible in an octopus of any size are the "insides" and beak. If you got it frozen, no need to worry about the insides but if you caught it yourself, you need to turn its bag inside out (it will fight but once it's inside out it will calm down!) and remove the white soft stuff in there with your finger. The beak is the only hard bit and amazingly determines the widest hole an octopus can fit through. It needs to be removed before cooking (I have been told but not sure there's basis for it). It's fairly easy to cut around the beak and discard the mouth. A REALLY important point however you choose to cook your octopus is to NOT USE ANY SALT! It has a lot absorbed in it already and it will lose about half its volume while cooked. I would simmer it in a pan without any water (the rest of its lost volume is water) until you can easily pierce it with a fork and then chop the head and tentacles and finish them in a grill or oiled pan. ---edit--- Actually, the brain and eyes are not particularly appetising, so you might as well remove those as well... And while we are at it, I assume you mean a common, mediterranean octopus with two sets of suckers on each tentacle; if you are referring to any other weird exotic things disregard my answer completely

Help! I bought a Philips Pasta Maker. I love pasta and Asian noodles. The first time I used this machine the pasta was wonderful. Ever since, there have been problems. Mostly, the pasta is dry and in some cases, half of it has to be thrown out. I was using the recipes that came with the machine. Searching online, I found a number of complaints from owners that the recipes that come with the machine are poor. I always made pasta by hand and never had a problem. And I want to love this machine, but so far I am disappointed. I am sure that this can be fixed with proper recipes for the pasta mixture. I am using a combination of semolina flour and all purpose flour (4 to 1). Any suggestions for URLs for sites that promote recipes for this machine, will be greatly appreciated.

Even with restaurant and high end home pasta extruders with more power and brass dies, extruded pasta is extremely finicky and at the mercy of local ingredients and environmental conditions. I would begin with 25% water to flour (try all semolina first or your mixture), then adjust until you find something you are happy with. I've seen anywhere from 20% to upper 40% water noted online. This is something you are going to have to play with. I doubt you will find a formula online that works, simply given the nature of this type of pasta and the tools available to produce it. You note that your product changes during the process, this could very well be a result of the machine itself, simply because of the power output and the parts used for extrusion, rather than your dough formula. On top of that, once you get a noodle you are happy with, drying correctly is another issue you will have to deal with.

I have a really good chocolate chip cookie recipe. I'd like to convert this recipe to have a chocolate dough (ie make chocolate chocolate chip cookies). How can I convert it without losing the texture of chocolate chip cookies? Here is the recipe, if that helps 2 1/2 cups flour ¾ cup sugar ¾ cup brown sugar Tbs vanilla tsp baking soda pinch salt 2 eggs 1stick of margarine (more can be added for better taste) ½ cup chips (chocolate/vanilla) Mix all ingredients except chocolate chips. Add chips to dough Make balls of EQUAL SIZE Bake at 350 for about 12 minutes (or until they begin browning) Let cool before eating

Replace 1-2 tbsp of the flour with cocoa powder, depending on how chocolatey you like your cookies.

I live in Toronto, Canada. I buy my mussels from Diana's Seafood or Loblaws. I wonder if the quote beneath from Mussel Myths & FAQs - The Cornish Mussel Shack holds true for Canada too? Do I need to soak my mussels in water and oatmeal? No. This used to be done to help purge the mussel of any grit. All commercially sold mussels legally have to be purged and purified in UV filtered water for 42 hours. During this time most of the grit and sediment is released from the mussel. Do I need to soak the mussels and throw away the ones that float? Salt water mussels should never be soaked in fresh water as this will kill them, and as explained in the above answer there is no longer any need to soak mussels. This was done in the past to identify dead mussels. People thought that a floating mussel was a dead mussel, which is also is not true. A live mussel can often trap an air bubble when it snaps shut, and this is why some mussels float. To identify dead mussels see our page on preparing mussels safely. How to Clean and Debeard Mussels | Serious Eats says something similar, but nothing about the law. As an added bonus, most farm-raised mussels are grown on vertical rope farms, which means that they come to market quite clean—wild mussels can house a good amount of debris from the seabed or rock walls they grew on. On top of that, farm-raised mussels are held in tanks prior to packaging and shipping, which means that the purging step—soaking the mussels in clean water until they spit out impurities—has already been done for you.

In regards to the first of the two questions you asked, " [does] the quote beneath from Mussel Myths & FAQs - The Cornish Mussel Shack holds true for Canada too?" Do I need to soak my mussels in water and oatmeal? No. This used to be done to help purge the mussel of any grit. All commercially sold mussels legally have to be purged and purified in UV filtered water for 42 hours. During this time most of the grit and sediment is released from the mussel. Do I need to soak the mussels and throw away the ones that float? Salt water mussels should never be soaked in fresh water as this will kill them, and as explained in the above answer there is no longer any need to soak mussels. This was done in the past to identify dead mussels. People thought that a floating mussel was a dead mussel, which is also is not true. A live mussel can often trap an air bubble when it snaps shut, and this is why some mussels float. To identify dead mussels see our page on preparing mussels safely. Yes, it does to a point; but not in regards to food safety - just taste. In my experience (I live in Alberta), you should still follow those guidelines simply from a taste perspective because while generally cleaned and soaked prior to commercial sale no process is perfect at any level (think "pre-washed lettuce" found at Loblaws as well). I have found rinsing them as you listed helps with the taste. I do this with both the store bought mussels I cook, as well as the freshwater clams I catch (not quite the same process but very similar). Now, onto question two - I know in Toronto there will be a local fish market or seafood market that specializes in shellfish, call them. They will be happy to assist you in understanding the regulations as it pertains to the consumption of all kinds of seafood as some regulations also vary from province to province.

A long time ago, I read somewhere, that there is a very specific reason, why we put salt in the water for cooking pasta: The point is to hinder the water from absorbing flavor and nutrients from the pasta. With soup its the other way around: We want to absorb the flavors into the water, which is why we salt it only at the end. The explanation was, that salt "ionizes" water, which somehow makes it less likely to absorb things. Is there any truth to this theory? Source: https://www.finecooking.com/article/the-science-of-salt Quote: Because pure water draws salts and other soluble nutrients from the interior of vegetables, salting vegetable cooking water also minimizes nutrient loss.

As a chemist, I'd say that you have it all wrong. You add salt to pasta water to have the salt infuse into the pasta. So as the dry pasta absorbs water, salt comes into the pasta too. Salted pasta tastes better than unsalted pasta. Salted soup tastes better than unsalted soup. Salt enhances our perception of the flavors in the soup, but it does not extract the flavors.

I have been buying fresh berries from the store on the weekends, and am looking for the best way to make them last throughout the week for use as either a snack or as a component for salads. The blueberries last the longest, and I can usually salvage enough by Thursday or even Friday, but the blackberries and raspberries seem to either get moldy, or turn to mush, before Wednesday is over. I've been storing them in the refrigerator in the plastic vented clamshells they come in. Is there a better way of storing them that will extend their shelf-life another 1-2 days or more?

Store them unwashed. Take out any "bad" ones. I've had decent luck adding some paper towels to wick away extra moisture that seems to speed up the spoilage. Martha Stewart suggest going even further and spreading them out on paper towels on a sheet pan. I have no idea who keeps a fridge empty enough that they can store full sheet pans in there, though. I've never tried this, but someone suggests washing it lightly in vinegar/water. *shrug* Then of course, wash and freeze them spread out on a sheet pan (to make it easier to separate later). I assume this isn't what you want to do, but it is very effective, depending on how you plan to use them.

My recipe calls for an oven temp of 425 degrees but my pan can only withstand 350 degrees per manufacturers instructions. If the original recipe called for 15 minutes at 425 degrees. How long would it be at 350 degrees?

The best solution is - use a different pan if you want the recipe's advertised results. If something is baking at 425 F for only 15 minutes, it's very likely that you need that high heat to get the result you want - which is generally going to give you a toasty, well-browned exterior and a cool, just done interior. If getting an oven-safe pan isn't possible, you can certainly change your oven temperature to 350 F but be aware that, depending on your oven, it may not be properly calibrated1 and it may actually be hotter than 350 F, which means you may be damaging your pan or exposing your food to fumes that the plastics in it are giving off when being overheated. So, even then, I'd be hesitant to recommend cooking it at 350 unless you have an oven thermometer and know your oven heats to the correct temperature. So, my recommendation would be to go even lower, 325 F or so and then start at your original cooking time (15 minutes). If this is some sort of meat (including fish) use a probe thermometer to check the internal temperature every few minutes after that. Depending on the readings you get, you can go for more or less time... if you're half-way to your target internal temperature after 15 minutes, you can probably go about 5-7 minutes more before checking but as you approach the temperature, you're going to want to wait only a minute or two. If this is some sort of baked good (cake, cookie, etc), I'm more concerned that you won't like the outcome at this lower temperature but you might get lucky. Check it after 15 minutes and then every couple of minutes until it reaches the done test described in the recipe, whether that's poking it with a toothpick or golden color etc. I can't give you one number to aim for because time is an incredibly poor way to cook anything, so you shouldn't be using time to cook anyway. Always cook based on the doneness cues mentioned in the recipe. If your recipe doesn't include these non-temporal cues, you're probably better off finding a new recipe. For a scientific discussion of this, I recommend you read the excellent answer to this related question. Note, even a properly-calibrated oven will still heat to a temperature around your target because it cycles on and off. So, it will likely overheat slightly, turn off the heating element until the temperature drops below the target and then heat back up again.

One of my coworkers had a curious question the other day: what kind of mixture or colloid is a roux? For example, whipped cream is a foam, mayonnaise is an emulsion, and gelatin is a gel. I know part of creating a roux is the gelatinization of the starch in the flour, but does that make a roux a gel? Or is it something else?

I would suggest that a roux is a hydrocolloid.

Do pineapples ripen after they are picked? I had alway thought you could leave them on the counter to ripen, however, I recently heard they don't ripen after they are picked.

Pineapple softens, but not sweeten on shelf ripening. Fruit ripening is usually due to exposure of unsaturated hydrocarbons e.g. ethylene. This phenomenon occurs in fruit known as "climacteric fruits". Well known examples are banana, avocado, tomato, apple, pear, kiwi, to name a few. Pineapple is not a kind of climacteric fruit. However, ethylene exposure will activate chitinase (which is a type of enzyme that breaks down chitin, a structural material inside plants), and cause softening of the pineapple. To achieve this a simple method is to place a ripe banana with the pineapple which release ethylene.

If my espresso shot appears to be extracting too quickly, what factors could be causing this? What should I change to try to get a better result?

Actually they recently came up with a reliable test for civet coffee. Apparently a great deal of supposedly authentic stuff never actually traveled through the bowels of a cat. According to the abstract, the levels of citric acid, malic acid, and the inositol/pyroglutamic acid are so much higher in kopi luwak that their ratios can be used to validate mixes with other beans where the proportion of kopi luwak is 50% or greater.

This weekend I attempted to make this recipe for brioche. I did the first step and combined the the milk, yeast, 1 egg and 1 cup of flour which caused very big clumps and then I added the sugar. I then did the 2nd through the 5th steps but the clumps stayed and the dough was really wet (like pancake batter) so I tried adding more flour until I got something like the right consistency. I then covered the dough and put it in a draft free area that was warm for 2.5 hours but my yeast did not rise and the dough still had clumps in it. I waited longer but nothing so I had to throw it away. I really wanted to try this recipe again so I would appreciate any insight into what I did wrong.

Well 1.5 cups is volumetric so the weight will depend on how tightly packed that cup is, if they are chopped, etc. On average though, 1.5 cups of chopped hazelnuts is about 6.08 oz (172 g) according to the USDA's averages. You can check the USDA's National Nutrient Database page for hazelnuts if you want to see estimated weights for 1.5 cups of whole, chopped, or ground hazelnuts.

So, I've got a 2-3dl batch of lacto-fermented hot sauce in the works. Approximately half the vegetables in the ferment are large brown habaneros and the other half is sweet pepper, ginger and some slices of carrot to get the ferment going. So, I expect the sauce to last me quite some time. Therefore, I'm planning on pasteurizing the sauce to extend its shelf-life. My main goal in the pasteurization is to stop the fermentation already going on. For equipment, I have a thermometer from the brewing supplies aisle, various different sizes of pots and pans, some of which can be nested for a double boiler, and an electric stove. Is there a reasonable process to pasteurize a batch of fermented hot sauce with these?

According to the US FDA, normal pastuerization for fruit juice would be 160F for 6 seconds. This should be easily accomplished in a hot water bath; just heat up the water to 160f, and dip the bottles. However, a fermented sauce made with chopped peppers has poor circulation compared to fruit juice, and you are heating bottles rather than passing the liquid through a narrow, heated pipe. So more time would be required for the heat to penetrate, possibly as much as 5 minutes. I can't find specific guidance for something like a chopped pepper sauce. This would pastuerize the hot sauce, but not make it shelf-stable. The criteria to bottle it, as mentioned in the comments, is how acidic the sauce is after fermentation, so you should add some form of Ph tester to your list of equipment. If the acidity is 4.6 or below, then a slightly hotter hot water bath (say, 180F) for a few minutes you could not only pastuerize it, but make it shelf-stable.

The idea is, to put a regular pot in a larger pot full of water and heat the larger pot with a sous-vide stick. Would this accurately simulate a crockpot? The only downside I can see, is that typical sous-vide sticks can not reach the temperature of the highest setting on a crockpot. Are there any other important differences?

Would this accurately simulate a crockpot? No. Most crockpots operate on the principle of having a relatively low-powered heating element that very slowly raises the temperature of food over several hours. In many slow-cooking dishes, that additional time spent at lower temperatures is useful in breaking things down, allowing enzymes to work (before they are destroyed at higher temperatures), allowing flavors to marry, etc. Partly for this reason, most crockpots also have a heavy-duty ceramic insert that does not transmit heat quickly. Some dishes for crockpots even depend on this -- placing ingredients closer to the bottom which need more time at higher temp to cook properly, while having ingredients that need less high-temp cooking time on top. A typical pot placed inside a vat of water with a circulator will absorb the heat from the water much more quickly. The duration of the "transient" (i.e., the time it takes the water to warm up, and then the food inside the pot to warm with it, until they reach a constant temperature) will vary a lot depending on temperature, comparative sizes of the pot and water, etc. But in general, I'd say it's likely the sous vide circulator will get the water up to a high temperature much quicker than a crockpot typically would. And depending on the material of the pot, the pot could then transfer heat to the food much more quickly than a typical crockpot would. Whether this difference is relevant to a particular application or not depends on the situation. In general, the common replacement for a slow cooker is usually a low oven, as that can transfer heat relatively slowly and gradually heat up a dish like a typical crockpot. Sous vide is designed to usually raise the temperature of the food to a target as quickly as possible (hence the water bath -- the water transfers heat much more efficiently and quickly than air in an oven or a coil or whatever element under a ceramic crockpot) and then maintain it there. In sum: crockpot goal = long transient duration; sous vide goal = transient duration usually as short as possible.

I've bought and tried various types of glassware for cocktails. Glasses for typical shaken drinks include a cheap martini glass (165 ml), a nick and nora style glass and a coupe (125 ml), among others. This matches with sizes found in shops around the web, where they might even go higher in volume. However, the basic recipes for cocktails tend to end up a lot smaller, to the point where it looks silly in a glass. For example the "IBA Official" Aviation Cocktail calls for 75 ml of spirits and juices, and shaking over ice (using 30mm square solid cubes, about 5 to 6) will not dilute it to 125 let alone 165 ml of fluids. Obviously I can just scale up ingredients proportionally. But given that "typical" cocktail glasses don't match up with "typical" cocktail recipes, I feel like I'm making a mistake. So my question is: how do you go from a typical cocktail recipe (with around 75 ml of ingredients) to a typical 125-165 ml final product? In my examples above the sizes are for the liquids, assuming around 10% of leeway. So for example the martini glass is 165 ml, but around 180 ml when filled up completely.

Despite what many bars, convenience stores, and fast food restaurants would have you believe, drink glasses are not intended to be "filled to the brim" (or even close). This is particularly true of cocktails and other spirits. The 'head space' allows the drinker to swirl (or, if they have had a few, 'slosh') the drink around to remix the cocktail ingredients as they seek the bottom of the glass. Any water that has melted into the drink will be diluted into the mix, and the drink may be more directly exposed to any remaining ice in order to chill the liquid just as it is consumed. Thus, the 'standard glass' has been designed to exceed the standard drink. Of course, always wanting 'as much as we can get' people tend to expect their neat scotch to be filled to the brim...just like the self-serve uber-drink from the local gas station. In the absence of an official rule book for pouring drinks into glasses I can offer some references you might look to, including the fact that a Google Image search of "Full Cocktail Glass" almost universally shows images of drinks with significant air on top. Commentaries from self-appointed experts at the bar as well as amateurs chiming in with their thoughts tend to corroborate this view. For my part, if more than two members of the family say the word "reunion", Jack Daniels stock jumps five points...so I can at least pretend expertise... Even a beer glass (a pilsner) is designed to make room for a head on the 'proper' serving.

I put ground beef in the fridge 3 days ago and it's still frozen! Why isn't it thawing like normal?

Either you've insulated it or your fridge is really cold. I suggest using a thermometer to check your fridge temperature. Parts of your fridge may be at slightly different temperatures than other parts; it may help to move it to a warmer part of the fridge (if that can be done safely, you don't want it dripping on your produce, for example). You could use the cold water method to defrost your ground beef if you're going to cook it all once its defrosted. The USDA has thawing instructions. Generally, I'd avoid microwave-thawing ground beef, unless its going into chili or similar, because those cooked bits on the outside prevent forming it into patties, etc.

I have my corned beef cooking in my crock pot for about 6 hours on low. Should the meat be falling apart by now? It is still one big hunk of meat. I thought it would be ready in about 1.5 hours. Should I bump it up to high? Thanks!

This year, I slow cooked corned beef for about 8 hours in my crock pot. The slow cooker was set to high for the first 4 hours and set to low for the last 4. The meat didn't "fall apart" when I took it out, rather it kept its form and allowed me to slice it (against the grain). I should mention that I had the corned beef submerged in a water/beer mixture during the entire cooking process. I used 1 bottle of beer (optional) and filled the rest of the slow cooker with water until the beef was submerged.

I'm making a savory pie - basically stew in a pie crust. Do I want to parbake the bottom crust of my pie for this? Will doing so make it more or less likely that the bottom crust ends up as a soggy mess? I'm not sure if or how the contents being stew instead of fruit will change how the whole thing cooks. My plan for cook time is "until the top crust looks good." The filling (stew) is essentially done when it goes in, and the ingredients are ones that are pretty resilient against overcooking, so I'm not worried about harming it regardless of how my cook time comes out.

No, simply because there's no way to attach the top crust to the bottom crust, once the bottom crust is parbaked. In general, pot pies are not pre-baked.

I'm using the "Saturday White Bread" recipe from Ken Forkish's Flour Water Salt Yeast. I'm very happy with the results so far, except for the irregularity of the bubbles. Here's my loaf: For contrast, here's a photo of the same recipe from Forkish's book: His bubbles are not perfectly uniform, but they are a lot more uniform than mine. The dense areas are not as dense, and the largest bubbles are not nearly as large. The recipe I followed: 1000 grams all-purpose unbleached flour 720 grams water, 95°f 21 grams salt 4 grams “active dry” yeast Complete procedure here. Some areas are very dense with small bubbles, while others are large and cavernous. An average 1/2" thick slice has two or three large holes going clean through. Is there any way to even out the bubble size without reducing the overall airiness?

Given that the second picture is what you desire, your bread is over proofed. The large irregular bubbles and flat or sunken overall shape is indicative of such. There are a couple of things you can try: Make sure to form the loaf such that it has a nice taught skin on the outside prior to final proofing. You will notice in the second picture, the bubble structure is obviously interrupted from where the loaf was folded inward onto itself to stretch the outer skin tight. (Note the concentration of large bubbles towards the lower mid-left of the loaf) Don't let your bread proof for so long. Typically the longer the proofing period, the bigger the bubbles. Punch the bread down more vigorously between proofings. This helps to pop the bubbles that have gotten too large. That said, I would much rather eat the first loaf of bread, as that open structure and sturdy crust is what a lot of us home bakers enjoy most. Extra Credit: If you want your loaf to be tall instead of flat there are a few other things to try. Develop a stronger gluten structure by kneading or stretching. Make sure to form a taught skin around the outside of the dough when shaping the final loaf. This will help to constrict the outward spread of the dough. Use a structured vessel to support the dough during the final rise. If you try to make a loaf like the one pictured on a flat surface, it will inevitably spread out and droop. Cheers!

I forgot to fry the onions before grinding it. Now I have added the ground raw onions with masala to make semi liquid sambar(gojju), how do I get rid of raw smell? Should I keep heating the Bindi gojju?

In my experience, a combination of acid (lemon juice/tomatoes/tamarind paste) and heat(temperature) is used to cut the taste of raw onions. You will need to continue frying the raw onion and masala mixture until it separates from the oil, which is a good indicator of the doneness of the onions as well as the spices. If you follow this route of cooking the onions after pureeing them, you would also not want to roast the spices before grinding them, and instead fry them all together at this stage.

I use flour to coat, including the ends, and I use toothpicks to hold the wider part shut. Even when I try to fold the cutlet envelope style, most of my cheese melts out. I cook them on the stove top with butter. Is there another technique that would prevent that? P.S. I use Swiss cheese.

The most common reason for leakage with Cordon Bleu Chicken is that the packets are too thick, which makes it impossible to get a perfect fold; you need to pound the breasts very thin - less than 1/2", maybe a little more than 1/4". The other "trick" is to make a small cut along the folded edge of the breast after you fold and seal the packets, which essentially makes it almost like a sandwich; the top and bottom parts can move independently and you don't have tension trying to pull the top piece away. Just don't cut so deep that you cause an immediate leak; if you've pounded the breast to 1/3" thickness, then your cut should be no more than about 1/8". If you do it this way, you shouldn't even need to use toothpicks; I never do, and I haven't sprung a single leak in my last 20 or so preparations.

I recently purchased a Dexter-Russell carbon steel Chinese cleaver, because they're supposed to be amazingly useful. I'm used to caring for good stainless steel knives, but don't know what special things I should do for carbon steel. So far, I always wash and dry it immediately after use, and do normal honing/sharpening. The problem is that after a week or two of use, it is developing spots of rust, deepening to slight pitting. The rust appears as an orange sheen, and does not disappear readily with scrubbing. Is this slight rusting normal with use, and will it turn into the patina I've seen on other people's carbon steel cutlery? What else does one need to do to care for a carbon steel? I've heard something about oiling and am not sure how that works... Picture of of edge below, to demonstrate:

For my carbon steel knives (including my cleaver), I make very sure to wash & completely dry them after use. When I've used it on something acidic, this is especially true. I've never had a problem unless I've forgotten, or haven't completely dried it. When rust does happen in those cases, it's the only time my knife sees the scruby side of the sponge, I use to wash dishes. It comes off easily with that.

I have a few recipes that call for flaked salt, I can only seem to buy it in bulk 1kg bags here. I want to know that if you use "salt" in a recipe does it really matter to the final taste what kind of salt you use. I do understand that for example when I use it on top of a foccaacia bread or something similar it does create a nicer texture, enhancing the taste, but this is in the final stages of cooking. When its used through the initial stages of the cooking process, like in a stew, bread dough etc does it make any difference ?

Salt (Sodium chloride) is salt. As a topping, flakes are commonly used purely for presentation purposes only. The taste is the same, but gets more intense as the salt particles get finer, so use less if the salt is in powder form As an ingredient, use any form you are happy with, and is economical to use. Once salt is dissolved into water it will be identical to any other form of salt For health reasons, finely powdered salt is preferable as much less is required to impart a salty taste

As I understand it, it is due to the relative atmospheric pressure that water boils at lower temperature further above sea level: 70C at the top of Mt Everest, for example. Surely, then, the water could not get hot enough (and remain liquid) to brew a cup of tea? Or is that the water be boiling the important property, rather than temperature?

Tea brewed under different conditions will taste slightly differently. So no, on a high mountain, you cannot get absolutely the same taste as when brewing at sea level. So no, it is not the boiling state of the water which determines the exact taste of the tea, it is the combination of all parameters, including temperature. And by the way, this is not simply a matter of altitude - if you use a different teapot or make a different amount of tea at the same altitude, you´ll also get temperature differences. Of course, not that many people will notice the difference in taste when changing the brewing temperature slightly. And among the ones who notice, there is no telling whether they will like the 100 Celsius brewed tea more or less than the tea brewed at lower temperatures. So, it is entirely possible to make good tea on a mountain, unless your personal definition is "there is exactly one type of good tea in the world, and it is the one brewed by my favorite process, and that process requires 100 degrees".

I've been making margaritas and I've found that, unlike fancy bar/restaraunt bought margaritas, my margaritas come out more like a liquid drink with shaved ice sitting in it than a mixture. I have a Margarittaville mixer for proper shaved ice, but the final drink lacks the same thickness I'm used to in a margarita; the exception being strawberry margaritas. With (lots of) real strawberries the drink comes out much thicker and smoother to drink. Is there some ingredient that can thicken the mix for a smoother drink? Generally I use tequila, triple sec, agave nectar and then either a mix, strawberries, limeade or whatever for flavor.

If the restaurant or bar is using a margarita mix, they frequently contain additional syrups and stabilizing gums or starches which add body to the drinks. It could also be that the high powered blenders frequently used in bars will be better at creating a smoother and thicker texture, or a more 'emulsified' slush. If you want to try making it thicker at home, the agave nectar is a good start. You could also try adding very small amounts of food gums, like guar gum or gum arabic. It may also help to chill all of your ingredients thoroughly before blending to keep it as frozen as possible.

I am not a very good cook. I have tried making stews or casseroles. I put meat, vegetables and potatoes in a casserole dish in the oven, a slow cooker, or on the hob in a low heat. Sometimes the potatoes dissolve, and give me a delicious thick sauce. Very nice. Quite often, though, I'm left with tasteless white lumps in water. Not nice at all. I can't work out what I did differently. Maybe the variety of potato, or the other ingredients. Any suggestions?

The effect you are looking for is not congruent with typical preferences. Most cooks and eaters, on finding that the potatoes have disintegrated in their stew, would call them "overcooked". So you cannot rely on recipes to produce this result - most are geared towards having potatoes remain in distinct cubes. There are a few factors you can tweak to get closer to your preferred kind of stew. Acid. Make sure that your stew doesn't contain any acid, or the potatoes will stay firm. For this purpose, you should count not only acid seasoning such as vinegar, but also any form of tomato, and any milk, cream, cultured dairy and fresh cheese. Semi-hard and hard cheeses (cheddar, gouda or firmer) are OK. For taste, you can add sourness after the cooking time is over. Potato variety. Potatoes come in three broad categories - "firm", "mealy" and "mixed" or "all-purpose". Use the mealy ones. Cooking time You have to cook for a really long time until the potatoes fall apart. If your recipe suggests a cooking time, start checking at that time and after that every half hour until you see the result, for maybe up to 5-6 hours - if it hasn't happened by then, I don't think it will happen later. The temperature shouldn't have any direct effect on the disintegration part, but for purely practical purposes, such long cooking is done with low temperatures, as low as you can get while still having your food gently simmering. Size As Greybeard said, if you cut them up smaller, they will fall apart quicker. Heat source Once heated, the oven is great for low and slow food - but it does take a long time until the food is heated enough to start cooking. I have stopped using raw potatoes in potato-based casseroles, since it frequently takes 3+ hours to get them to cook through (in the "distinct pieces" sense). The hob is a better place, but more difficult to manage over the long time. As you mentioned a slow cooker, it will be easiest to learn how to do it consistently there. If there are oven recipes you really like, give them even more extra time, or parboil the potatoes before assembling the casserole. I would peel, then boil - skin-on potatoes have always seemed to soak up less water to me, and you can make use of the "cut smaller" effect too. On a side note, if you like this kind of sauce, you might consider ranging out into recipes that use more conventional thickeners for stew. It will be a different taste, but will allow you more flexibility, both with shorter cooking times, and with the ability to add sour ingredients.

Do they refer to the same kind? Or is there a subtle difference? And what essentially encapsulates the concept of a sausage being sweet? Is it typical sucrose driven sweetness inherent to the product...or the resultant chemical aftertaste on consuming it? Cooking geeks unite! We have a problem.

Both sweet and mild refers to the sausages without hot red pepper flakes. The fact they are called sweet Italian sausages doesn't mean they contain sugar.

My question is a kind of follow-up to this. When apples have turned soft or have started to shrivel, is it possible / advisable to but them through a juicer? From the linked question is would appear that they have started to dehydrate, so I wouldn't expect to get much juice from them.

It's not going to hurt anything. The apples they use for cider are usually pretty rough, so a little wrinkling isn't going cause a health issue. You very well may not get as much juice, but the juice you will get will be more concentrated. The same principle applies to grapes used for wine...Ideally they will get very little water in the weeks leading up to harvest, so you'll get all the good sugars and flavours, and less of the undesirable water.

I don't normally make a lot of confections but decided recently to try a few new things. Yesterday I used this recipe for Turkish delight which I originally found on the Hydrocolloid Recipe Collection. It uses agar as the gelling agent and appears relatively easy to prepare (that's why I tried it). Basically you just dissolve some agar in warm water, orange juice, and lemon juice, add sugar, simmer it, then cool and refrigerate to set. Unfortunately, what I ended up with after refrigerating overnight was closer to the consistency of jam or marmalade than a Turkish delight. It was far, far from delightful. When I prepared this I didn't actually follow the source URL and noticed a few differences that may account for the problem (but I'm not sure, that's why I'm asking): The original recipe calls for 1/2 teaspoon of agar; the one in the collection specifies exactly 1.2 g. The original recipe specifically says to cover with a cloth; the collection recipe is not so specific, it just says to cover (I used plastic wrap). The original recipe says to refrigerate in an ice-water bath; the collection recipe does not (I just put the dish in the fridge). Other issues that may have been causes: It turned out that my scale wasn't precise enough to get exactly 1.2 g. The amount I used could have been anywhere between 1 g and 2 g. In retrospect, I wish I had checked the original recipe and simply used the 1/2 teaspoon that it called for. I got the agar from an Asian grocery store, and the packaging clearly said "agar agar", but I did notice that it had two ingredients, the second one (after agar) being vanilla. I'm not sure whether this is normal or whether it might have been diluting the agar mix. I did notice that it did not seem to be gelling at all while it was coming down to room temperature. It was basically a soup until it had been refrigerated. Can anyone identify the most likely reason why this didn't work out? Did I use too little agar? Too much? Could some of the differences between the two recipe versions be important? Could it be something I haven't thought of yet? And equally importantly for the purposes of this question, can I fix it or am I going to have to throw it out?

I've worked with agar a lot, and made a few things from the HRC. Of all of the things you've identified as possible problems, I think the biggest likely ones are the quantity of agar, and the agar powder itself. Everything else about the cooling issue is normal. Agar powders do vary. You want to find one that is pure, unadulterated agar, not one that is setup to be a pre-prepared dessert as those are weaker. If just for a laugh you want to try to save this batch, heat it back up until the agar fully melts, shear in a second amount equal to what you did last night, making sure it fully dissolves, then let it set again. I'm pretty sure that will work. You can also pick up a sub-gram scale on Amazon for around $20. Thanks, drug dealers! They are very helpful when making small batches of "molecular" recipes.

I'm at the point where I will completely avoid certain recipes simply because they require sifting and I find it incredibly tedious. Is there a better method? A better tool? A magic sifter?

Use a food processor to aerate the flour and mix other dry ingredients in. As a bonus for me, the food processor bowl can go in the dishwasher. I have to hand-wash my sifter.

Macarons, financiers, ricciarellis are all made from egg whites and almond flour. Is there a reason why egg whites get along so well with almond flour, and why yolks do not have a place in these recipes? It is easy to see why in macarons since macarons are meringue based cookie, but financier does not use meringue and still calls for egg whites only. Maybe the fat in the almond suffices to make the products rich, or maybe the coarse texture of almond needs to be countered with the moistness of egg whites, but they are just wild guesses I am making up. I would like to know if there is an 'official' reason why egg whites and almonds go together.

There is nothing special about the combination, you seem to have stumbled over a case of confirmation bias :) Here I made a table with examples. The table is by no means complete, it contains the first things that came up in my head. As you see, all other combinations of whole eggs or egg yolks work with almonds, other nuts, or no nuts at all. If the combination you noted were somehow special, I wouldn't have been able to find examples for other, not-working categories. So, combining almonds and meringue is the perfect combination for a macaron, and combining almonds, egg whites and flour is the perfect combination for a financier, but only because that's what makes a macaron a macaron and a financier a financier. You can use any combination out of {egg whites, eggs, egg yolks} and {almonds, other nuts} and each of them tastes good and has been used for something in the kitchen.

I was improvising with some scrambled eggs, and decided to put a spoonful of white sugar in while cooking them. The recipe was good, but the subsequent coating of egg on the teflon pan was very difficult to scrub off. I suspect that the sugar made it "stickier," perhaps, or maybe was more inclined to burn onto the pan. The food was good, is there a way I can avoid making the pan so difficult to clean?

Melted and re-hardened sugar (including caramel) is very difficult to remove through mechanical action, but trivial to remove by soaking. Just pour in enough hot water to cover the sugar and wait an hour or so. (If oil was used, add some dish soap.) For a quicker turnaround, you can simmer the pot with the water on the stove; 10 minutes should be enough to remove even a thick coating.

One instruction in a new barbecue sauce recipe I'm trying out is to take the pot of simmering sauce and run it through a blender or food processor. I have now learned the hard way that blending hot liquid will cause the lid of the blender to explode off... there is barbecue sauce coating my kitchen, and I have some new burns to treat. So, what is the proper way to do this? Is there a safe way to use a regular blender like mine, or would I need a different kind of blender?

It can be a bit tricky, here are a couple of tips: Use a lot less liquid in the blender than normal. Do batches if needed. Vent the lid so the steam can escape. A lot of lids have a center piece that can come out. Using less liquid will stop stuff coming out the top. As Ocaasi suggests, you can cover the open lid with a kitchen towel as you start to ensure there's no spray. Start the blender slow and then speed it up. This may not work depending on how fast your slowest setting is. But once the vortex gets going, the liquid won't splash. It's only when the blades start that you have that issue. Slower start speed means less splash (a vita-mix can start very slowly and have no splash at all, great for hot liquids but the price tag is a bit high).

I made bread the other day and kneaded the dough by hand. The recipes everywhere ask for warm water, which is understandabe for the yeast to rise. When my mother kneads dough using the same recipe, it turns out much softer and her bread in turn is softer. I wonder if it is because her hands are generally warm and mine cold? Or is it just a different kneading technique.

The temperature influences the speed of rising, but to significantly change the dough hardness, you need a very cold temperature. Even if your hands are "cold", they are certainly above air temperature, and firming up dough through coldness is only possible if you use very cold ingredients, below fridge temperature (4 Celsius). It could be kneading technique, if by "technique" you mean the amount or type of lubricant added. Some people knead in a bowl of flour until the dough stops sticking. This will give you a very hard dough. Some use minimal amounts of flour during kneading, and yet others may knead without a lubricant, or using oil or water. Again, this is a very likely culprit in achieving different grades of softness. A somewhat more "hidden" influence would be the direction of kneading (do you align your gluten into sheets or ropes, or do you just knead directionless) and the relaxation time given to the dough during kneading. The length will also play a role, longer kneaded dough develops more gluten and becomes tougher. But while these differences will contribute to a harder (actually "tighter") dough during kneading, they should be reduced after proofing. And the baked bread won't be harder, but slightly more translucent and chewy. This is because they result in more gluten, and what you describe (bread harder after baking) points to more flour. So, if there is no difference in lubricant addition, one of you is probably measuring differently from the other and ending with a different ratio. Maybe one or both of you measures by volume, or is using a badly calibrated scale.

I have seen many videos online and by chefs on tv, showing how to truss a chicken. What is your way of trussing a chicken? They all seem to have a different technique, and I am interested in a possible easier method.

I always store mine in the pantry. I use it frequently enough that sprouting is rarely an issue. If you need it to last longer you can freeze garlic, though I have never needed to. Shelf Life An unbroken bulb of garlic can last 3-5 months in a cool (55-60 F) dark place. Once broken, the remaining cloves last only about 7-10 days. Frozen, you can store garlic 10-12 months. Source: http://stilltasty.com/fooditems/index/17237

I've made a bechamel sauce and added sherry to it, herbs, etc; the sherry is too overpowering. How can I correct that?

Bechamel sauce is only flour milk and butter. Even with the sherry, it's not a big expense. If you make a mess of one batch it's probably best just to bin it and start a new. Diluting it down with more sauce may work by your probably just going to end up with loads and loads of sauce that you'll never eat.

I've been looking for a soda bread recipe to try and I notice that most of them contain buttermilk. Buttermilk is not a standard part of my pantry. Part of the appeal of soda bread is that it's quick to throw together, so having to go shopping for a specific ingredient interferes with the spontaneous aspect. I know there are lots of substitutions for buttermilk (using a bit of lemon juice in regular milk is the one I usually use), but I'm wondering what it is about buttermilk specifically that seems to be a standard part of soda bread. Is it just traditional? Or will it add a particularly noticeable flavour/texture? Edited to add: I know that its functional purpose is to provide an acid to react with the soda for rising; so is it just that it used to be the most convenient acid?

Buttermilk has a delicious flavor that is not at all approximated by lemon juice. It's true that lemon or vinegar with milk will clabber it a little and provide the acid that the recipe needs but the flavor will be distinctly lacking. Get some buttermilk. It's inexpensive and has a longer shelf life than normal milk. It is also exceptionally easy to make. If you make it a standard part of your pantry you will find yourself enjoying life more (or at least pancakes.)

I tried to improvise a tomato soup following these steps: Slice tomatoes, briefly stir-fry for aroma, together with some onions, garlic pepper, salt, and a bit of sugar. While still hot, purée all together into the blender. The result was quite bad: the soup thickened (a bit like jelly) and turned red-brown, rather than fresh red. Questions: Do tomatoes have to be skinned for a reason? Does the skin contain all the starch/jelly-ish stuff? What went wrong with the color? Do you have any advice to keep it truly fresh red? The above combination with garlic, onions, spices can't be all wrong, can it?

One of the first things I learned in Indian cooking is that the combination of tomatoes, onions and ginger is self-thickening. As time went by, I realised that the thickening effect is far more noticable with old varieties of tomatoes - "beef" tomatoes and a lot of the modern varieties are difficult to thicken unless partially fried first. Despite the absence of ginger, I suspect that the thickening is purely a natural action between the tomatoes and the onion, and that the tomatoes used were some particularly nice old variety.

What is the difference between Gammon and Bacon? Would it be generally reasonable to substitute the two as required?

According to my local friendly butcher, Gammon is a type of bacon that is specifically from the hind quarters. Bacon is defined as any pork that has been cured through a process of salting, either as a dry-cure or a wet-cure where the meat is either packed in salts or brine respectively. With wet curing, other ingredients can be added to impart other flavours, such as beer or sugars. Typically, rashers are made from the body of the pig with streaky bacon coming from the belly, and back bacon coming from, well, the back (so the same cut as a pork loin chop). Bacon joints are typically made by combining cuts of bacon from the shoulder and collar, whilst the hind quarters are sold as gammon with a premium on price. Traditionally ham referred to cooked gammon, although in modern uses, it is often extended to include other cooked bacon joints, which include moulded meats made from combining cuts together with other additives to help bind them.

Can you mix all dry ingredients for a cake and place ingredients in container and make cake the next day?

There are a few questions on this site about French fries, I'd suggest you take a look. But I think the best answer is: baked sticks of potato do not French fries make. French fries are deep fried. You can never get the same results in air, although air fryers do come close. A normal oven bakes, not fries. Here are some sites that experiment with fries and crispiness [1] [2].

I have attempted to make thai beef meat balls for about 10 times now and failed almost everytime. Thai beef meat balls need to be stretchy and have a chewy texture when finished. I have tried mince with no fat, mince with 10% fat, high quality mince with no fat, still cannot get the right finished texture like the one in this video: Thai Beef Meatball Recipe So I was wondering, what does cornflour and baking power do to the mince? Why is it so necessary to have the mixed mince very cold before shaping it into a hot water? I have followed exactly what the above video says and still cannot get it right.

I read the key is to keep the meat cold and to put in the freezer to keep it that way then take it out before it freezes solid and you do this several times during the process right up to cooking.

I made salsa last week, and processed the jars (quarts) for 20 minutes (may have been 25, I forgot to note exactly when the water started to boil). I got my times mixed up for the salsa and some applesauce that I was preparing to can also, so I didn't process the salsa long enough. Can I reprocess the salsa? Do I need to open the jars, reheat salsa and re-can it all, or can I just reprocess without redoing anything? Or is it too late because it's been 5-6 days until I realized what I did?

In general, if jars are improperly processed or don't seal, you reprocess them exactly the same way you did the first time. This doesn't depend on the original recipe; you just have to do the exact same thing over again. In your case, since it sounds like your original process was hot pack, you would have to open the jars, dump out the salsa and reheat it, resterilize the jars, and reprocess. But in your case, unfortunately, it's too late. If you didn't process it long enough the first time, you have to assume that it wasn't sterile, and treat it as equivalent to not canning it at all. Yes, probability-wise, your situation is safer than that, but you have to plan for the worst case, because you have no way to tell. Something may have grown in there. Canning just isn't a good place to mess around with safety. And before someone chimes in and says it, yes, if you're the kind of person who eats things that have been left out way longer than is reliably safe, you could save it. It'll work out some fraction of the time, so there are plenty of people out there who can truthfully say "I've done this and never had a problem." But it could also get you sick, so I can't recommend it.

My first ever stab at french fries, and 20 minutes with olive oil and seasonings in the oven preheated at 450*F was not enough to make them crisp. They were cut thick. Could I simply cook them longer to dry them up? They have the texture and consistency of a baked potato.... except the skins are crisp

There are a few questions on this site about French fries, I'd suggest you take a look. But I think the best answer is: baked sticks of potato do not French fries make. French fries are deep fried. You can never get the same results in air, although air fryers do come close. A normal oven bakes, not fries. Here are some sites that experiment with fries and crispiness [1] [2].

I made some fresh pasta for myself, but the recipe made double the amount I need. I didn't have time to make the rest of the pasta and dry it, so I just wrapped the dough ball in plastic wrap and stuck it in the fridge. How long will the dough last in the fridge? I can probably use it tomorrow or in the next 2 days. The recipe is basically 2 cups flour, 1/2 cup water, no eggs. I used half white whole wheat, half AP, tbsp of olive oil. (Yes it's very good, even w/just some olive oil, parmesan, salt and pepper)

Paul, I make my own pasta dough frequently. Since my standard recipe makes around 40oz (1 kg) of dough, I always have leftover, so I've had plenty of experience with saving it. Even with eggs, pasta dough will be fine in the fridge for a week; the texture will be unaffected (if anything, it will be better). If you want to keep it longer than a week, it can be frozen for several weeks wrapped tightly in plastic wrap, and more-or-less indefinitely if you vacuum-seal it. Glad to hear about your WWW recipe, I'll have to try that.

I used potato starch instead of cornstarch, as a thickener and forgot to make a slurry first. Unfortunately, the bisque isn't a pureed bisque, it's mushroom, celery and onion. After I realized my mistake, I then added more as a slurry and was able to properly thicken it. But it still has the slimy clumps, very unappetizing. How do I get the slimy clumps out without pureeing the whole thing?

One possible option might be to pick out as many of the vegetable chunks as you feel reasonable, then puree the rest. You'll end up with a thicker soup body, and fewer vegetable chunks, but it might not be a bad tradeoff to get rid of the lumps. Or (depending on amount and proportion of liquid to vegetable) strain the liquid out, manually add the vegetable chunks from your strainer to the soup, and either discard lumps left in the strainer or puree them with leftover vegetable chunks (depending on how much patience you have for sorting) with reserved liquid. Last option - if the lumps are pretty visible, you can pick them out when you see them - for example, when serving from a pot into a dish, or each time you pull it out of the fridge. If the soup is liquidy you could try scooping up spoonfuls of broth with as many lumps as you can, and ladling them into a strainer held right over the pot, so the liquid will flow right back in and only the lumps get held back. These last are really annoying, and a lot of work, but if it's really bothering you it does help... I did something similar with a dish once, though it was for woody herb bits, since I didn't want to waste a pot-full of food.

A recipe calls for coating (slightly cooked) fennel bulbs in flour before roasting them, presumably to obtain a bit of a crust. Is there anything I could coat them with that is gluten-free?

Rice flour should work well for this; it produces very crispy crusts.

I have a "small" household dehydrator, it is similar to this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_dehydrator#/media/File:Tomato_in_food_dehydrator.jpg Now, I've tried to dry fruits (mainly bananas, cut into thin slices) with it several times. Usually I let it run for 6 to 8 hours at 70 °C (the machine has a power of ~ 250 W). This is the drying time indicated in its manual. But the end result is always still somehow soft and not comparable to the dried banana I buy (which I assume is dried in an industrial-sized dehydrator). One difference for example is that my dried slices stick together when put into a container. Is it possible to try fruits with a household-sized machine much more? Should I just let it run for 12 hours or even a day? What else could I do to favour evaporation? What do industrial dehydrators do differently?

It is possible to dry fruit with a household machine. How long it takes will depend on the relative humidity. When I lived in Texas, drying would take 24 hours- sometimes more. Now that I'm in a high altitude desert drying is sometimes done in less than 6 hours. At very high humidity fruit may get moldy or just too oxidized before it is able to dry. A unit with a heater will help a lot with this. After the fruit is dried, keep it in an air tight container to keep it from absorbing water from the air and molding. If you find your unit just isn't able to move enough air you can try Alton Brown's method and bungee cord an AC filter to a box fan and put it in your window. That will move a lot of air and dry things relatively quickly. Keep in mind that home dried fruit can be dissimilar to purchased dried fruit. For example, apricots are treated with sulphur to preserve their orange color but it affects the flavor. Home dried apricots are darker and not as soft but have better flavor. It's also possible that your bananas are too ripe. Bananas are dried when they are only barely ripe- or slightly under ripe. Ripe bananas have so much sugar that they stay chewy and sticky for a long time. On the plus side they have a lot more flavor than commercial banana chips. Recipes for banana chips will sometimes call for just ripe bananas and toss them in acid to keep them from browning. If your bananas are still sticky they are definitely not done and will mold if you store them very long. Try giving it a good 24 hours. If that still isn't enough then either your machine isn't moving enough air or the air is too humid.

This is definitely one of the weirder questions I've asked, but is there any easy way to massage an octopus? I recently watched the movie "Jiro Dreams of Sushi" and in that movie they show the massaging of the octopus which Jiro insists must be done for 50 minutes. There is no way I am going to spend an hour massaging an octopus. In the video here we can see a different master sushi chef demonstrating massaging octopus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89wwP--bHMg According to this guy his father massaged the octopus by putting it in a washing machine. I am not sure I want to try that and am wondering if there is a kitchen oriented way to massage an octopus rather than using the laundry room?

In the olden days fishermen used to "beat" or hit the octopus against a rock on the shore repeatedly. The main purpose of this endeavour was to soften its hard texture, so that it would take less time to cook it. The other (and more modern) option is to put a fresh octopus in a freezer and let it deep freeze for at least several hours. That breaks down "the fibers or texture" of the meat.

I received a wooden butter knife in the mail fairly recently: now my only question is this, will it need sanding to maintain its food worthiness or does it require something else to keep it food safe? I got it from Amazon.com if it helps.

It's hard to say exactly without knowing what wood it's made out of and how it was constructed - there are many factors to the durability of wooden tools and utensils. If all you are using this for is spreading butter, margarine and the like then you shouldn't need to do too much care, just wash it and especially dry it thoroughly after use. It's rotting that is usually the issue with wooden utensils. I wouldn't sand it unless bits of wood start sticking out of it, which could happen depending on the direction of the grain. Sanding without having a good reason could actually cause you more problems then it would solve as you'll be rubbing off any finish it came with.

I really enjoy snacking on steamed vegetables lightly sprinkled with some salt and pepper, especially broccoli. However I find that steamed fresh broccoli has a slightly sulfuric smell that smells a little bit like fart. I was wondering if there is anything I can do to lessen that smell.

Cook it less, if you can. The more you cook it, the more you get that smell. Perhaps you are just more sensitive to it than most; I don't generally notice it until it's overcooked by my standards. Along with this, cook it as fast as you can. The flavor you don't like is produced by enzymes converting precursor molecules into those with the flavor. From On Food and Cooking: Heating cabbages and their friends has two different effects. Initially the temperature rise...speeds the enzyme activity and flavor generation, with maximum activity around 140F/60C. The enzymes stop working altogether somewhere short of the boiling point. If the enzymes are quickly inactivated by plunging the vegetables into abundant boiling water, then many of the flavor precursor molecules will be left intact. ... If the cooking period is prolonged, then the constant heat gradually transforms the flavor molecules. Eventually the sulfur compounds end up forming trisulfides, which accumulate and are mainly responsible for the strong and lingering smell of overcooked cabbage. So as suggested by others, boiling instead of steaming to reduce cooking time helps. So does cooling quickly, with cold or ice water. Boiling in excess water will also leach some out, but you might also lose flavor you like. A couple other thoughts, also from On Food and Cooking. Cabbage family vegetables grown in the summer, and under drought stress, produce more of the flavor precursors, and those grown in the autumn and winter with less light and more water have less. They're also more concentrated in the core of the vegetables. And for cabbage, you can remove a lot of them by chopping and soaking in cold water; conceivably the same could work for broccoli, but again perhaps at the cost of desirable flavor.

The last time I made pancakes, while they were nicely cooked on the outside, they were still a bit "battery" in the middle. Does anyone has a simple solution to try?

You might try reducing the cooking heat a little, say on medium heat. That way, the middle will finish cooking without the outside being overcooked. And usually when you flip a pancake it should be almost entirely cooked through anyway. You want to flip when the bubbles are pretty set on the top.

I have read somewhere (don't remember where, long time ago) that tea enthusiasts clean their tea pots only with water and without soap. Additionally they only rinse it and don't use a scrub to remove the residues. Is this actually a good practice or simply a quirk? Consider that I don't always drink the same tea, does this matter? I sometimes add fresh lemon or ginger to the water, I suppose this might be a reason to thoroughly clean the pot, to prevent spoiling? If it matters: my pot is made of glass.

How, and if, you clean your tea pot depends both on what your tea pot is made out of, and your personal preference. The only time I've ever seen it recommended that you avoid cleaning agents entirely when cleaning a tea pot is if it is made out of clay. The reason for using only water is because unfinished clay pots, like Yixing / zisha pots, have very porous walls and will absorb both chemicals and the taste/smell of your soap or other cleaning agent. (For these types of pots, it's also generally recommended to brew only one type of tea per pot, for the same reasons.) For tea pots made out of other materials, it really comes down to a matter of preference. In many cases (like with glass and ceramic), simply rinsing the pot in hot water immediately after use will suffice most of the time. If you let your brewed tea sit for a very long time in the teapot, or if you are using hard water, you might start to see mineral buildup or brown stains (from the tannins in the tea). These aren't harmful, but many people don't like the way it looks. If you're looking to clean the stains / buildup off your tea pot, do not use bleach - I'd avoid using bleach on any kitchenware, but especially something glass or ceramic that has pores that could absorb the bleach. A simple baking soda solution will work (you probably won't even have to scrub at all for the stains to come out - just soak for a few hours). You could follow the baking soda soak with a run through the dishwasher (if your pot is dishwasher safe) or a quick wash with soap and water if you'd like. Personally, the only time I wash my (glazed ceramic) teapot is if I brew an Indian chai, which has sugar in it. Then I'll wash it with soap and water because I don't want any remnants of sugar sitting in the bottom of my pot, happily feeding bacteria. But for brewing any black, green, or oolong tea and tisanes without any additions, I just rinse before and after brewing with hot water. As long as you don't see any mold growing in your tea pot and you regularly rinse it with hot/boiling water, you'll probably be fine. I'm not sure where the anti-soap attitude comes from among modern-day tea drinkers. It could be left over from the days before dish soap existed, it would be an overly obsessive concern with any cleaning agent "ruining" the tea's flavor, or it could just be that they're a little lazy, like me. :) (Tea pots are kind of a pain to clean!) So, to sum up the answer to your question: with a glass pot, it's totally up to you. I'd wash it with soap and water if you've put anything other than tea leaves and water in the pot, but otherwise, a quick rinse with hot or boiling water should be fine.

I am an amateur hobbyist cook. So a lot of the time I will toss in a dash of something, taste the dish, and add a bit more. Experimenting sometimes with disastrous results... but I learn :) One spice that I am having a hard time figuring out is the bay leaf. I use it when called for, and have sometimes experimented with it, but I can't seem to place the "effect" it has on the dish. So my questions: What is the general flavor of a bay leaf, is there a dish that exemplifies this? How long do I need to cook with a bay leaf before it has an effect? I think part of my quandary is that I can't simply add some to a sauce, stir it in, and taste it to see the difference. Am I wrong to believe that it takes awhile to permeate the dish?

I don't know how you would describe the flavor of bay--I would call it a subtle savoriness, with a complex aroma. Bay is very tough--almost sharp. It is generally not eaten directly. Instead, the whole leaf (or several whole leaves) are put into a dish or sauce to cook with it, then removed prior to service. The shortest recipe I have for using bay is in a rice pilaf while it cooks, which is 15-30 minutes depending. I am not aware of an upper time limit. Here is a Miami Herald article offering some other perspectives on using bay leaves: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/30/2823923/cooking-with-bay-leaves.html As they Herald points out, many folks prefer Turkish bay rather than California bay, because it has a more complex, subtle flavor. . . . I believe custard in Britain had bay as a traditional ingredient--you might make a custard with a single bay leaf to get some sense of what it tastes like without lots of competing strong flavors. . . . Update: Serious Eats Food Lab has just published an article, What is the point of bay leaves? with lots of good information that may be of interest.

For scones can I mix cold butter with self raising flour and then add the wet ingredients the next day. This is to save time in the morning?

If it's only been soaked briefly, these options might be for immediate eating even if they'd otherwise keep. They're necessarily fairly general solutions as I don't know what sort of fruit you've got. Drain well and cover in dark chocolate. This works best for pieces that are 1-2 bites; smaller would be nice to eat but fiddly to make. Very good with cherries, damsons or sloes, but if the stones are still in, bite carefully. Serve on top of ice cream, or as part of a sundae. If you're feeling fancy, use some of the vodka, thickened, add a sauce. I've done this with the blackcurrants from making creme de cassis, as well as with commercial cherries in spirits. Drain well and bake into a fruit cake. You probably want to start with a recipe using fresh fruit (as opposed to dried). Mix with apples in a pie/crumble (or even without the apples if you've got a lot). Garnish hot chocolate, or even try blending and stirring in (an idea for an experiment, but a shot of fruit spirits is great in hot chocolate).

When heating up cold food in microwave it oftens comes out pretty dry, and I like juicy food. So I add 1 or 2 teaspoons of olive oil on the food before heating it. I'd be easier though if I had some kind of small device

I did a cheap kitchen hack by reusing an empty Sriracha bottle after cleaning and drying it up for my oil drops. Here is how the bottle looks: And it is perfect for dropping oil. The nozzle also lets me increase or decrease the diameter of the oil drop. If you don't happen to like this sauce, try it with some Asian food. You'll love it mostly!!!

I've made omelettes in this pan before without any problems, but fried eggs are impossible to make without sticking.I heat the pan, throw few drops of water and check if they move around (some would say like mercury), lower the heat, pour oil and then put eggs in.I've tried to monitor the temperature carefully to make sure that the pan isn't too hot, still no success.Is my pan the problem?

I solved this problem by using a spray on (canola oil), instead of liquid (canola oil).

I made chili and it's too hot! If I cook it longer will the heat calm down?

Acids tend to reduce the heat of chilli, so you could try adding some vinegar or lime juice. If that makes the dish too acidic, add some sugar to balance it out. Dairy also reduces the heat so you could serve with sour cream and/or cheese, or even stir some butter into the chilli, which would also give it a slightly richer taste.

I love fresh bread, and when I buy it I store it at home in a plastic bag. After 2-3 days it has probably lost about 60% of its overall quality. I've been using some vacuum storage bags and found that the bread can be great up to a week later! This made me think about how I'd love to have a box or chamber on the counter that I can just dump my bread in and vacuum most of the air out. It would be stationary and much more practical than bags, which require cutting and subsequent disposal. What are some of the primary barriers to this being a practical tool? I'd imagine many households would want this!

Bread gets dried out and stale through retrogradation which requires moisture. Your vacuum bags are not keeping the bread fresh because of the vacuum, they are keeping it fresh by providing a very tight seal that prevents the bread from absorbing moisture from the atmosphere. A larger vacuum box would provide the same protection from moisture but it might dry the bread out since the moisture in the bread would easily evaporate at the lower pressure. Also keep in mind that neither a vacuum bag nor a vacuum box will prevent mold from eventually growing on the bread. The biggest competition to a vacuum bread box is the freezer that most people already have in their kitchen. Frozen bread can go for many weeks or even months without going stale and without any mold growing on it. The only real risk to the bread is freezer burn if it is not sealed tightly. Use vacuum bags to seal your bread tight and it can last a very long time in your freezer.

I use an old convection oven. I usually preheat at 180°C for 10 mins. Recently I bought an oven thermometer and found that the oven temperature after the said duration was higher than 180°C, around 210°C-220°C. Is this normal?

Sadly, yes. Your oven most likely has been running too hot for a while and now that you are actually measuring it, you noticed it. We have a lot of Q/As on the site that recommend using a separate oven thermometer whenever an oven behaves strangely. Thermostats can fail or be generally incorrect, like too hot or too cool. Plus many ovens fluctuate quite a bit. If you noticed that your recipes didn’t turn out the way you expected or were used to, getting that oven thermometer was a smart move. Either adjust the temperature to the desired value, if possible (and note down what setting that corresponds to), or consider having the oven serviced or repaired. In some models, the temperature knob can be adjusted, which would be a super trivial thing and may even explain why the oven is set to a wrong temperature. If your question was wondering more about the still rising temperature - ten minutes preheat is on the shorter end of preheat time, especially for old ovens. You can be dealing with quite a bit of thermal mass.

I have a recipe for grilling a pear crisp that calls for grilling for 15 to 20 minutes over indirect medium heat. Can I instead bake this in an oven? At what temperature should I bake it?

The basic technique that I've found effective is to "dry fry" them in a pan to allow water to cook off before adding any other wet or fat ingredients, including oil or butter. If you skip this step, you'll often end up with a bit of a rubbery texture. I recommend cooking them in a small cast-iron pan, but a nonstick pan will do. I usually season with little more than shallots and/or garlic, plus butter, salt and pepper. But I always add the butter after a fair amount of water has been extracted from the mushrooms and cooked off. Chanterelles seem to have a lot more water than most other mushrooms. I haven't verified that scientifically, but I tried following the same technique with button or small crimini mushrooms, and little to no water comes out in dry frying. (Large crimini mushrooms, also called portabella mushrooms, will give off a fair amount of water when roasted, but nothing quite like fresh chanterelles). Shiitake and even oyster mushrooms don't give off much, either.

I have a bread pudding recipe I like, but would like to make it firmer. How would I go about this ?

Honey is acidic with a pH of 3.9- that's more acidic than some oranges. There is also quite a lot of honey in this recipe that will give the acid the baking soda needs to react. In this recipe, both the egg whites and the baking soda are going to provide some leavening. Without the soda the cake will undoubtedly be a little more dense. Additionally, even when not contributing to leavening, raising the pH will promote browning of baked goods. I think the ground almonds will give nice color but the recipe may be a little paler without the soda. There is no soda in angel food cake and I expect this cake will also be just fine without it.

I noticed that my grocery store sells jalapeño that is "nacho sliced". How is this different (if at all) than just normal "sliced"? I do understand that the product on the right is labeled "no heat", and that is a significant difference between these products. I am not asking what the difference between these products is in general: I am asking specifically about nacho-sliced-ness. How is a "nacho sliced jalapeño" different from an ordinary "sliced jalapeño"? Bonus question: why are nachos pictured on the jalapeño that is not "nacho sliced"?

As near as I can determine, "nacho sliced" is simply a marketing term for such pre-sliced, pickled jalapeno peppers. A quick Google for the term brings up several brands which appear identical to one another. There are also similar combinations of the words such as "nacho jalapenos, sliced". The bottle on the right is the only one labelled as such, but they're basically the exact same thing. So, the only difference? The "no heat" on the right-hand bottle, and some other subtle changes to the packaging. It's marketing fluff, not a real distinction. Bonus answer: they probably decided that the picture on the right bottle looked healthier, or lighter, or more colorful, or some dang thing.

I have high-ish blood pressure and the doctor said keep the salt under control. It is easy to ration controlled amounts of salt when cooking large amounts of stews and similar foods and you add salt by teaspoon. But I don't really make stews that much, most of my cooking are single or double servings that I just salt with a sprinkler. I do have a nice salt sprinkler, about 8 oz, however, it is very difficult to gauge a proper amount of salt approximately so I often either over- or under-salt. Is there a device that will accurately measure portions of a teaspoon and at the same time allow me to sprinkle them evenly? Because, if I measure maybe a quarter of a teaspoon, sprinkling it between fingers doesn't distribute salt as evenly as using my sprinkler, which is, like I said above, prone to inaccuracy. Is there any way (a device of some sort) to reap the best of both approaches?

You may need to practice sprinkling salt -- Get a large piece of paper or plastic, that's preferably not white. Sprinkle some salt on it. Try from different heights. You might also try different types of salt (I find coarser salts easier to control) Roll up the paper (or plastic), so you can pour the salt back into a small dish to try again. Once you're comfortable with sprinkling salt : Measure out the salt. Pour the salt into your off hand. Use your good hand to take pinches of the salt & sprinkle it on the food. If you're really wedded to a shaker -- you might consider a grinder and coarser salt. If you know how many grinds it takes to get a teaspoon, you could roughly estimate how much salt is going in by counting grinds.

I made a ginger carrot soup with coconut milk but accidentally made it too salty, how do i fix it? From some google searches - one said to put raw potatoes to absorb the salt. I am not sure if that will work for the soup as it is a thick carrot soup. Adding water would make it watery. Does anyone have any other methods that would work for me? I would like to keep the soup thick. Thank You Edit - the butternut squash worked for me!

Steam a head of cauliflower, puree it. Add it to the soup. You might also consider some squash or sweet potato puree.

This question addresses how to keep pasta from sticking after it has been cooked. This question is what I want, but was wrongly closed. All the answers from the first address the sticking post-boiling, and my problem is the sticking during boiling. How can I prevent this from happening?

Simply put, you have to stir them the first three/four minutes of cooking. Be sure to boil them in enough water (at least 1 liter per 100 grams). In addition to that be sure to buy some good quality pasta. From my knowledge pasta tends to stick when the wheat used is of poor quality. A good pasta should not be transparent when seen in direct sunlight, but it should be of a nice pale yellow color and opaque. Good Italian pasta brands that you can find outside of Italy are De Cecco (which I fear might be quite expensive, and probably not so easy to find), or Barilla (easier to find). Both of them has cooking instructions printed on the package. You might want to cook them for 2-3 minutes less than what's printed, then eventually cook them the remaining couple of minutes together with your sauce.

I've never canned or pickled anything; however, I'm keen to give it a shot. However, I'm the only one in my family who likes cucumber pickles, so it might take me a while to go through a batch. There are a lot of recipes out there for "refrigerator pickles" which only keep for a few weeks; what steps are taken in a real pickle recipe that mark it as one for long-term storage? Can a refrigerator pickle recipe be converted to long-term storage?

Pickle recipes meant for longer-term storage will include instructions for sealing the jars. While some recipes may have you use hot jars and hot brine that will result in a fairly reliable seal ratio (meaning most of the jars will properly seal), other recipes will have you put the filled and closed jars in a boiling water bath to be processed for a specific amount of time. I've found this method to yield an even higher ratio of properly sealed jars. In either scenario, the sign of a sealed jar (assuming you are using canning jars with a lid and ring system) is an indented dome on the lid. Jars that do not seal properly will still have a protruding dome. Most recipes will have all the specific information you need to make pickles including the shelf life of sealed jars. The Ball canning jar company has a good website: http://www.freshpreserving.com/recipes.aspx Best of luck - I hope your pickles are a tasty success!

I am a relatively experienced amateur when it comes to making pizza, especially pizza doughs. I recently went to Italy and enjoyed some calzones with super-thin crusts. My standard recipe for a pizza crust is essentially the following: 1.5 cups bread flour 1 cup whole wheat flour (or all-purpose) 0.5 cups semolina flour 1 tsp. granulated sugar 1 tsp. quick-rise yeast 1 tsp. salt 2 Tbsp. olive (or cooking) oil 1 cup warm water More water or flour to achieve a mostly-elastic (but slightly sticky) dough I typically add some of the following seasonings for fun and flavor: - 1-2 tsp. minced garlic - 1-2 tsp. onion powder - 1-3 tsp. oregano - 1 tsp red pepper flakes The above recipe works great for crusts thicker than a few millimeters. When I roll it out thinner, however, it isn't strong enough and tears when forming a calzone. How can I modify that recipe to get a crust that's strong enough for making a calzone? I expect substituting bread flour for the whole wheat flour would help, as well as not adding extra ingredients. Perhaps I could add a few teaspoons of gluten? Thoughts? Thanks in advance!

Don't use whole wheat flour if you want a strong or thin crust. The shards of bran in the whole wheat flour will cut the strands of gluten, weakening the crust, which prevents it from being stretched very thin. You can verify for yourself by performing the windowpane test.