[rohanjf]

Originally Posted by fine69

I was looking for some tasteful oats recipes minus the oil (we all know there aren't many) I somehow landed on a page which had some very positive feedback about an oats breakfast recipe.

I tried this today:
1 cup oats
1 cup milk
1 tablespoon milkmaid
1/2 cup cashew nuts

- Roast the cashew nuts in a nonstick vessel at medium heat
- When the nuts turn light brown, add oats and roast a little more
- Add milk and milkmaid and stir until oats are cooked

[mallumowgli]

Originally Posted by WindRide

Query to the rice-eaters here:
Recently switched to the 'Ponni Boiled Rice' variety of rice since wifey finds this less chewey and smelly than the yellowish parboiled rice we used to buy earlier. Now, i find the Ponni boiled rice whiter than parboiled rice which tends to be yellowish in colour. Parboiling process, i understand, tends to give the rice that yellowish colour. So, is ponni boiled rice really a parboiled rice variant, or is it like Raw/white rice which is highly polished and hence nutient-deficient?

As far as I've seen, ponni tends to be more whitish than other rounder varieties of parboiled rice. Now that you have raised this issue, am also a bit confused about why it is so!!

[alpha1]

So two weeks back was in Delhi, and visited the Old Delhi Karim's.
Brought back the childhood memories ... :-)

Anyway, this time I went on a mission to decode their gravies, I think I have nailed the qorma quite exactly, but the damn stew is proving to be a difficult one.

What I could fathom was that the stew is fried (in tons of oil/ghee, not boiled in gallons of water), contains ample amount of onions. It contains a flavor/aroma of the typical baingan bharta ... (most probably because of tons of onions fried) ... or did the stew have some roasted baingan (eggplant/brinjal too), or were the onions roasted first and then fried - well these guys never reveal their secrets ...

There are no powdered spices (which you can make out by seeing the microscopic floater in the gravy oil). Whole spices which I could see: coriander seeds (tons), cumin seeds, black pepper, black cardamom ... I was half expecting cloves, but didn't find any.

I could see the chilli seeds, but quite frankly I don't recall whether it was red or green variety. Few garlic pieces here and there (but not browned - hence must've been put after the onions).

Anyone up for the decoding? Unfortunately for me, I don't know when I would be able to visit next ...

[sam003]

guys anyone aware of Kaff Oven. I want to know its functions properly, as using it on Auto mode till now for making Pizza, cheese toast etc. Manual is not at all frandly.

[DrRom]

Originally Posted by alpha1

So two weeks back was in Delhi, and visited the Old Delhi Karim's. .., I don't know when I would be able to visit next ...

Did you notice the extra empty saucer they serve. It is for draining out the fat on top of the gravy. When enquired of them why dish out so much fat, their answer was it is the fat that brings out the aroma/ flavor. Their location, the food and the atmosphere make it look like a film set.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by DrRom

Did you notice the extra empty saucer they serve. It is for draining out the fat on top of the gravy. When enquired of them why dish out so much fat, their answer was it is the fat that brings out the aroma/ flavor. Their location, the food and the atmosphere make it look like a film set.

Haha, but to be frank I love "drinking" that fat.
The fat (more than the assortment of spices) makes all the difference between the normal stuff dished out at homes/run of the mill restaurants and this place.

Besides, we (Indians) have just boarded the American bus of anti-fat propaganda - which has been running there for decades. Propagated for obvious marketing purpose (= health foods). Otherwise people here actually loved extra dollops of butter/ghee/fat in their food ... (without having heart problems)


Also to the thread: do you ever feel acidic/acidity in your oesophagus when you eat spicy/oily/meat stuff? And you rush out for the Eno/bicarbonate/(any other anatacid in the garb of ayurveda?)

It could be the worst thing possible you do to your digestive system.

The feeling of acidity does not mean you have excess acid in your stomach. On the contrary, it means your stomach was not able to produce enough acid, and thus is unable to digest properly, and hence opens the stomach sphincter/valve to relieve the food back (like a very mild vomit). This food contains the small amount of acid that your weak stomach tried to produce.

Your oesophagus is not meant to take come in contact with the stomach acid (in the normal course, everything flows down ...), and thus you get the burning sensation around your breast bone.

What you should ideally do is to HELP the stomach and not obliterate its purpose in the digestive tract. Which means as soon as you get the heartburn, reach out for lemon juice / vinegar and gulp it down. It will help. (Now you realize why in ayurveda lemon/amla etc are used for improving digestion)

Remember the alkalis (antacids) have no business or place in the stomach. Our digestive system neutralizes the acidic slurry after passing the stomach automatically. If you really have excess acid product or low bicarbonate production, you should feel acidity downstream of the stomach.

The extremely sad thing is that most of the doctors also prescribe antacids immediately without checking whether the problem is excess acid production or low acid production. Both are exactly opposite cases!

[mallumowgli]

Originally Posted by alpha1

Haha, but to be frank I love "drinking" that fat.
The fat (more than the assortment of spices) makes all the difference between the normal stuff dished out at homes/run of the mill restaurants and this place.

Besides, we (Indians) have just boarded the American bus of anti-fat propaganda - which has been running there for decades. Propagated for obvious marketing purpose (= health foods). Otherwise people here actually loved extra dollops of butter/ghee/fat in their food ... (without having heart problems)

I too was in this bus for quite some time without any visible benefits. But now I've got down and boarded back the traditional bus - and am loving it.

I've gone traditional with a vengeance (in my case back to ghee/butter and coconut oil) and I've one more person to blame : @Aroy. The mutton preparation in ghee by cooking in the lowest possible heat for about 2 hours!! (check back a few pages) Mutton just melts in your mouth - I can't think of any other way of cooking meat. The downside is that nowadays mutton has ceased being a part of my lunch box- where is the time to slow cook?

[Aroy]

Originally Posted by mallumowgli

I've gone traditional with a vengeance (in my case back to ghee/butter and coconut oil) and I've one more person to blame : @Aroy. The mutton preparation in ghee by cooking in the lowest possible heat for about 2 hours!! (check back a few pages) Mutton just melts in your mouth - I can't think of any other way of cooking meat. The downside is that nowadays mutton has ceased being a part of my lunch box- where is the time to slow cook?

There is plenty of time if you do it systematically.
. Day 1 marinate the mutton and put it in refrigerator
. Day 2 fry the onions in a small thick bottom vessel and put it in refrigerator
. Day 3 take the mutton and onions out of the refrigerator, put in a largish pot on heat and mix all the ingredients while it is heating up - 10 min. Now keep the heat high for 10 min and then to moderately high while the mutton fries and releases a lot of water - 30 min. Reduce the heat to minimum and cover the pot with a tight fitting lid. If it leaks a lot of steam, seal the lid/pot interface with kneaded atta. Let it cook - 90 min. Total time < 3 hours. The longer you cook the softer it gets and the curry thickens due to the cartilage and fat getting assimilated. If you start at six in the evening the mutton will be ready by 9 max. In case you come at 8, the mutton gets ready by 11. If you cook for two or three days then you can enjoy for longer time.

Another variation is to just put the mixture straight out of the refrigerator on a sealed vessel and let it cook for 2 hours or more. This will give more bland mutton.

[msvg]

I happen to visit this place called Indian Coffee bar on Church street Bangalore where u get awesome Scambled EGG.I totally love the snack.
last time when i went there a thought arised why dont i learn to make myself the same,so here i am asking the distinquished fellow bhpians the recipe of scambled eggs.Please guide me here.

[RajeswaranK7]

Originally Posted by alpha1

Haha, but to be frank I love "drinking" that fat.
The fat (more than the assortment of spices) makes all the difference between the normal stuff dished out at homes/run of the mill restaurants and this place.

Also to the thread: do you ever feel acidic/acidity in your oesophagus when you eat spicy/oily/meat stuff? And you rush out for the Eno/bicarbonate/(any other anatacid in the garb of ayurveda?)

It could be the worst thing possible you do to your digestive system.

What you should ideally do is to HELP the stomach and not obliterate its purpose in the digestive tract. Which means as soon as you get the heartburn, reach out for lemon juice / vinegar and gulp it down. It will help. (Now you realize why in ayurveda lemon/amla etc are used for improving digestion)

@alpha1
These are some very good points that you have brought out.

There is one small eatery in Pamban, Rameswaram. It has been there from my granddad's times and he was the one who introduced me to the owner. They server Parotta, Omlette, Chicken curry and dosa if we insist and no other dish. But you won't get the taste of that Parotta and Salna combo any where else. For regulars like me, he dishes out the Salna with the spicy fat that has lined up and it makes all the difference. He does not give the fat to older people.

Same way i like to eat spicy or very spicy food, but hate to be in the vicinity of curd or buttermilk and whenever i have spicy chicken i make it a point to get lime juice or lime piece to neutralize the alkali. I learnt it from my neighbor from Andhra, home of spicy foods :-).

[bblost]

Originally Posted by alpha1

Besides, we (Indians) have just boarded the American bus of anti-fat propaganda - which has been running there for decades. Propagated for obvious marketing purpose (= health foods). Otherwise people here actually loved extra dollops of butter/ghee/fat in their food ... (without having heart problems)

I don't think Americans are selling health food.

I also don't think that Indian were healthier in the past.
Check average life expectancy.
It was in the 20's for most countries in the early 1900's

This is the first time in history that so many people are living for so many years.
None of us really know how our bodies will cope with it.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by bblost

I don't think Americans are selling health food.

I also don't think that Indian were healthier in the past.
Check average life expectancy.
It was in the 20's for most countries in the early 1900's

This is the first time in history that so many people are living for so many years.
None of us really know how our bodies will cope with it.

Life expectancy has increased mainly because of drugs and pharmaceuticals and cleanliness of water (how often do you hear about some disease wiping out the entire village/district).
Also vaccination has improved the infant/child mortality rate, and thus has increased the "Average life expectancy"

Food intake wise, today, we are eating far more than we require.
People in earlier centuries were not rich enough (no govt subsidy on food) to keep feeding themselves every hour or so with junk.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by alpha1

... vaccination has improved the infant/child mortality rate, and thus has increased the "Average life expectancy" ...

Huh? I am sure you didn't mean either of the expressions. Mortality rate has reduced, not increased (improved). And Infantile Mortality Rate has nothing to do with Average Life Expectancy.

Originally Posted by alpha1

... Food intake wise, today, we are eating far more than we require. ...

Not true. Body takes what it can, and passes out the rest. The difference is in a larger part of the population - more today than 50 years back - leading a sedentary life. Those whose constitutions cause excess sugars to be converted to fats (leading to obesity) are always a constant percentage of any population, whether now or 100 years earlier.

Originally Posted by alpha1

... People in earlier centuries were not rich enough (no govt subsidy on food) to keep feeding themselves every hour or so with junk.

Didn't know Govt. gives subsidy on junk food!

It was never a matter of personal economic condition. One ate only what one grew, or bartered whatever one didn't need for things that one needed. There was enough leftover for the occasional feast. Life was about what one needed, not what one wanted.

[alpha1]

Originally Posted by DerAlte

Huh? I am sure you didn't mean either of the expressions. Mortality rate has reduced, not increased (improved). And Infantile Mortality Rate has nothing to do with Average Life Expectancy.

Infant mortality rate has decreased, and hence you see an "improved" life expectancy figure. I think I was not quite clear while posting "improved mortality" If you see how the life expectancy figure is calculated - it is based on deaths vs age figures (pretty simple like the MTTF for mechanica/electrical parts that we calculate). So high infant mortality means you are pulling down the average. Therefore this figure is irrelevant in the context of our posts ...

Also I did make it clear that the life expectancy has improved because of medication and sanitation. That has brought down the mortality of the babies and the aged tremendously. But that doesn't mean that our eating/food habits have become any better, and thus we are "more" healthy, which is what bblost was insinuating.

Not true. Body takes what it can, and passes out the rest.The difference is in a larger part of the population - more today than 50 years back - leading a sedentary life. Those whose constitutions cause excess sugars to be converted to fats (leading to obesity) are always a constant percentage of any population, whether now or 100 years earlier.

So you mean we are not eating more than what we require?
Then why did you bring about the topic of currently sedentary lifestyle vs earlier (supposedly) non sedentary lifestyle?

In a human being what causes the continually increase of fat content of the body?

Didn't know Govt. gives subsidy on junk food!

It was never a matter of personal economic condition. One ate only what one grew, or bartered whatever one didn't need for things that one needed. There was enough leftover for the occasional feast. Life was about what one needed, not what one wanted.

The point I was trying to make is that in the previous centuries, there were no democratically elected governments, hence no subsidies and stuff on food. Most people were living on a hand to mouth existence. Today, most people are moving to the "middle class" economically ... and the food subsidies are just increasing. Which means everyone can and does indulge.

Which brings me to the previous point about eating more than you require.

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by alpha1

... But that doesn't mean that our eating/food habits have become any better, and thus we are "more" healthy, which is what bblost was insinuating. ...

It probably predates you, and may be that is why you are not aware of it. Alongwith strides made in agriculture (productivity, avoidance of crop and grain loss, etc.), the concept of 'balanced diet' associated with healthy living was brought in after independence. This was a major dissemination effort targeting rural, semi urban as well as urban population. People understood how diet affects their daily lives.

That was the time that processed Soya was popularised as cheap protein supplement, for example. Pregnant mothers were advised at grass roots level what to eat. The practice of milk as diet supplement given to children in schools dates back to the 50's, initially with the help of external aid - till the white revolution took roots in India. As opposed to eating what grows around traditionally, people gradually shifted to greens grown because demand increased. Anyone who went to primary & middle school in 60s was given education on health and diet.

Killing germs was not the only thing that made people healthier and increased life expectancy - it was ONE of the factors. What had MOST impact was EDUCATION.

Originally Posted by alpha1

... So you mean we are not eating more than what we require?
Then why did you bring about the topic of currently sedentary lifestyle vs earlier (supposedly) non sedentary lifestyle? ...

At the macro level, the brain switches off the desire to eat when the stomach reaches capacity. Only gluttons overcome this signal and eat more. Brain doesn't know what the body "requires" - that is an abstract concept. Brain only signals when stomach's processing capacity has been reached. This mechanism is as old as life on earth. Whatever an organism (and that includes humans) is not able to absorb is excreted. It is not necessary for body to absorb 100% of nutrients - it is a factor of what you eat and how long it stays in the intestine (intestine keeps solids and liquids moving on constantly).

At the micro level, if the body is unable to consume what came into the blood stream across the intestine walls, the kidney quietly filters it and sends it out. Carbs, sugars, proteins, vitamins ... absorbed through the intestine are sent around to various organs via blood to be consumed as needed.
* What is not consumed is sent back
* Sugars which are not consumed are either converted to fat, or sent out. The conversion to fat is a desirable mechanism - when sugar is not coming in through intestines and there is demand, fat is converted to sugar. It is a storage mechanism
* So when is sugar not consumed (ignore the diabetes problem)? When the muscles don't convert it
* When do the muscles not convert it? When they are not made to do work
* What describes that body's state where muscles do very little work? Sedentary

Some bodies have a better sugar to fat conversion efficiency - those people put on fat more than others IF they have a sedentary lifestyle.

Originally Posted by alpha1

... The point I was trying to make is that in the previous centuries, there were no democratically elected governments, hence no subsidies and stuff on food. Most people were living on a hand to mouth existence. ...

You have a rather strange city-centric understanding of government, governance and economics. Arrey baba, politicians promising subsidized rice at Rupee 1 per Kg is a modern political stunt.

The concept of FPS and rationing was brought in to insulate the lower economic level from market price fluctuation. This is hardly a modern concept. It didn't need "democratically elected governments" to ensure well being of the population. Sure, there have been many uncaring / self-centered rulers, but it is a myth that all rulers were tyrannical.

All rulers, no matter which form of governance, ensured that during periods of economic downturn (wars, famines, floods etc.) the subsistence of people was subsidized from state buffers, even given for free sometimes to ensure continuity. What was never tolerated was subsidy for doing nothing, for not being productive. Today some earnings are ensured by giving work to people at canal building projects etc. Earlier it was building of temples, conversion of arid land etc.