Links from around the internet!
Don't forget! The easiest way to support Casual Kitchen is to buy your items at Amazon using the various links here. Just click over to Amazon, and EVERY purchase you make during that visit pays a modest affiliate commission to support my work here. Best of all, this comes at zero extra cost to you.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.
PS: Follow me on Twitter!
*************************
Readers, one quick programming note: On Monday, I'll be announcing a new cooking and writing project for the month of June. Stay tuned!
Mantecadas: super easy Mexican sweet bread. (Mexico In My Kitchen)
Chicken Kabobs: Why not play around with the marinade a bit? (Food and Fire)
Delicious, American takeout style Kung Pao Chicken. (Alosha's Kitchen)
Try cooking your broccoli a little longer. (Stonesoup)
Cleaning your cast iron pan. (Dad Cooks Dinner)
Don't get caught in the "local trap." (Jayson Lusk)
Then... and now. (Lefsetz Letter)
Marie is a French woman living in Brooklyn who has no job, no visa, and lives in a three-story house for free. Her secret? Living off the waste of others (Guardian)
The protein leverage theory of obesity. (Rogue Health and Fitness)
Bonus! What can happen to an old person in a hospital. (Rogue Health and Fitness)
The "future me problem" and other reasons why you don't want to live for today with your money. (The Simple Dollar)
What Google's self-driving car is learning about accidents. (Medium)
Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Who's Watching the Watchdogs? Ethical Problems in the "Ten Riskiest Foods" Report By the CSPI
Readers, a quick reminder: during the month of May I’ll be featuring articles from Casual Kitchen’s archives. Enjoy! As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback.
Here's where I correct an example of raging intellectual dishonesty from a well-meaning food safety watchdog group.
**************************************************
Who's Watching the Watchdogs? Ethical Problems in the "Ten Riskiest Foods" Report By the CSPI
Anyone listening to the news over the past day or two has probably heard a news blurb or two on a highly critical report about the dangers of eating 10 surprisingly risky foods.
This report was written by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer watchdog group that has done an amazing job putting together a report that's both controversial and highly disturbing. And most importantly, the report is easy for reporters to work into an attention-grabbing story.
Too bad it's an utter non-story.
In today's post I'm going to discuss exactly why it's a non-story, and I'm going to raise questions about the ethics of manufacturing an apparent health scare in order to draw attention to a watchdog organization's agenda.
First, the report itself, which lists ten surprising foods already regulated by the FDA that led to more than 48,000 cases of food-borne illness. These foods, in order, are:
1) LEAFY GREENS: 13,568 reported cases of illness
2) EGGS: 11,163 reported cases of illness
3) TUNA: 2341 reported cases of illness
4) OYSTERS: 3409 reported cases of illness
5) POTATOES: 3659 reported cases of illness
6) CHEESE: 2761 reported cases of illness
7) ICE CREAM: 2594 reported cases of illness
8) TOMATOES: 3292 reported cases of illness
9) SPROUTS: 2022 reported cases of illness
10) BERRIES: 3397 reported cases of illness
All told, these ten foods accounted for a total of 48,206 cases of illness (the report gives no fatality information, but I would guess less than 1% of these resulted in deaths). The press release goes on to drop this exceptionally well-chosen money quote from CSPI staff attorney Sarah Klein:
"It is clearly time for FDA's reliance on industry self-regulation to come to an end. The absence of safety plans or frequent inspections unfortunately means that some of our favorite and most healthful foods also top the list of the most risky."
Pretty compelling stuff, huh?
We don't find out until the very end of the report, however, that these are the sum total of food-borne illnesses reported over a 17 year period from 1990 to 2006. That means that on a per year basis, there are approximately 2,835 illnesses per year.
And that, unfortunately, ruins everything.
Let me explain by putting these numbers in perspective. The USA has a population of more than 300 million. 2,835 people are sickened by these ten foods each year. That means that your odds of getting sick on these foods are roughly, 1 in 105,820 per year (or, expressed in percentage form, it works out to less than 1 one thousandth of one percent). The odds of dying? Probably well less than one in a million.
I will take those odds any day. Please pass the spinach and eggs.
Even if you swallow the CSPI's assertion that the list above represents only 40% of reported illnesses (thus the total could be 7089/year), we're talking about an illness rate of 2.4 thousandths of one percent.
Now I very much feel for anyone who's suffered from food poisoning, but anybody with a calculator can tell that this is not only not a health crisis, it is not even a rounding error. Compare the above data to the real health crisis of highway deaths, which run between 38,000 and 41,000 per year. Yes, that's right, per year. (And these are highway deaths, not highway "illnesses.") Now that is a legitimate health crisis, but somehow it doesn't seem to resonate quite the same way as dying from a pint of ice cream.
Here's why reports like this infuriate me, and why they should infuriate you too. People are going to avoid healthy foods because of this report. They are going to worry unnecessarily after hearing about this report. Worst of all, they are going to worry about the wrong things. I'm sure the CSPI means well, but they've written a report that actually hurts the public.
But it certainly doesn't hurt the CSPI. In fact, this report helps the CSPI gain attention and grow in scope and stature. Which brings me to my next point. Why do reports like this get written, and why is it that they are quickly picked up and widely disseminated by the mass media?
Because they are constructed specifically for that purpose. What talk radio show or news program isn't going to run with a story about food borne illness from foods like lettuce that are otherwise thought to be healthy? And along with lots of free media attention, the CSPI gets the warm patina of being an altruistic organization out to fight for healthy food. After all, "fighting for healthy food" is kind of like rooting for puppies, isn't it?
Now, what if I were to ask: what is the purpose of a watchdog/advocacy group like the CSPI? You might logically answer, "oh, well of course, they care about our food supply."
You'd be wrong. That's the CSPI's secondary purpose. Their primary purpose is to get noticed and thereby secure contributions, donations and support. And judging by this latest flurry of news coverage on their latest report, I'd argue that they are very good at that. The question is, at what cost, and with what unintended consequences?
If the CSPI mis-informs the public about a health crisis that isn't, and as a result causes us to expend resources, tax dollars and political energy on areas that do not need that attention, then the CSPI's ends do not justify their means. This, in a nutshell, is exactly what's wrong with our media and many of our watchdog and lobbying groups.
Therefore, in the future, when you see a news story on the food industry that sounds particularly horrifying, do two things. Listen with a jaundiced ear, and note what organization wrote it. If it's the CSPI, keep today's article in mind.
Readers, what do you think? Is it ethical for advocacy groups to bend and massage the truth to gain attention for their cause--even if it's ostensibly a good cause?
Sources:
CSPI's own press release on the report
The full CSPI report itself
Other media outlets that gullibly picked up the story:
Pittsburgh Post Gazette: Calls grow for tougher food safety regulations
New York Times: Ten Common Food Poisoning Risks
ABC News: Where's the Beef? 10 Unexpectedly Risky Foods
A follow up article from the blog of Sarah Klein, a CSPI staff attorney and the report's lead author:
Are we all crash test dummies for the food industry?
Understandably angry responses from food industry sites:
Media Should Treat CSPI Report With Skepticism
An Outbreak of Distortion
Read Next: A Cup of Morning Death? How "Big Coffee" Puts Profits Before People
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Here's where I correct an example of raging intellectual dishonesty from a well-meaning food safety watchdog group.
**************************************************
Who's Watching the Watchdogs? Ethical Problems in the "Ten Riskiest Foods" Report By the CSPI
Anyone listening to the news over the past day or two has probably heard a news blurb or two on a highly critical report about the dangers of eating 10 surprisingly risky foods.
This report was written by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer watchdog group that has done an amazing job putting together a report that's both controversial and highly disturbing. And most importantly, the report is easy for reporters to work into an attention-grabbing story.
Too bad it's an utter non-story.
In today's post I'm going to discuss exactly why it's a non-story, and I'm going to raise questions about the ethics of manufacturing an apparent health scare in order to draw attention to a watchdog organization's agenda.
First, the report itself, which lists ten surprising foods already regulated by the FDA that led to more than 48,000 cases of food-borne illness. These foods, in order, are:
1) LEAFY GREENS: 13,568 reported cases of illness
2) EGGS: 11,163 reported cases of illness
3) TUNA: 2341 reported cases of illness
4) OYSTERS: 3409 reported cases of illness
5) POTATOES: 3659 reported cases of illness
6) CHEESE: 2761 reported cases of illness
7) ICE CREAM: 2594 reported cases of illness
8) TOMATOES: 3292 reported cases of illness
9) SPROUTS: 2022 reported cases of illness
10) BERRIES: 3397 reported cases of illness
All told, these ten foods accounted for a total of 48,206 cases of illness (the report gives no fatality information, but I would guess less than 1% of these resulted in deaths). The press release goes on to drop this exceptionally well-chosen money quote from CSPI staff attorney Sarah Klein:
"It is clearly time for FDA's reliance on industry self-regulation to come to an end. The absence of safety plans or frequent inspections unfortunately means that some of our favorite and most healthful foods also top the list of the most risky."
Pretty compelling stuff, huh?
We don't find out until the very end of the report, however, that these are the sum total of food-borne illnesses reported over a 17 year period from 1990 to 2006. That means that on a per year basis, there are approximately 2,835 illnesses per year.
And that, unfortunately, ruins everything.
Let me explain by putting these numbers in perspective. The USA has a population of more than 300 million. 2,835 people are sickened by these ten foods each year. That means that your odds of getting sick on these foods are roughly, 1 in 105,820 per year (or, expressed in percentage form, it works out to less than 1 one thousandth of one percent). The odds of dying? Probably well less than one in a million.
I will take those odds any day. Please pass the spinach and eggs.
Even if you swallow the CSPI's assertion that the list above represents only 40% of reported illnesses (thus the total could be 7089/year), we're talking about an illness rate of 2.4 thousandths of one percent.
Now I very much feel for anyone who's suffered from food poisoning, but anybody with a calculator can tell that this is not only not a health crisis, it is not even a rounding error. Compare the above data to the real health crisis of highway deaths, which run between 38,000 and 41,000 per year. Yes, that's right, per year. (And these are highway deaths, not highway "illnesses.") Now that is a legitimate health crisis, but somehow it doesn't seem to resonate quite the same way as dying from a pint of ice cream.
Here's why reports like this infuriate me, and why they should infuriate you too. People are going to avoid healthy foods because of this report. They are going to worry unnecessarily after hearing about this report. Worst of all, they are going to worry about the wrong things. I'm sure the CSPI means well, but they've written a report that actually hurts the public.
But it certainly doesn't hurt the CSPI. In fact, this report helps the CSPI gain attention and grow in scope and stature. Which brings me to my next point. Why do reports like this get written, and why is it that they are quickly picked up and widely disseminated by the mass media?
Because they are constructed specifically for that purpose. What talk radio show or news program isn't going to run with a story about food borne illness from foods like lettuce that are otherwise thought to be healthy? And along with lots of free media attention, the CSPI gets the warm patina of being an altruistic organization out to fight for healthy food. After all, "fighting for healthy food" is kind of like rooting for puppies, isn't it?
Now, what if I were to ask: what is the purpose of a watchdog/advocacy group like the CSPI? You might logically answer, "oh, well of course, they care about our food supply."
You'd be wrong. That's the CSPI's secondary purpose. Their primary purpose is to get noticed and thereby secure contributions, donations and support. And judging by this latest flurry of news coverage on their latest report, I'd argue that they are very good at that. The question is, at what cost, and with what unintended consequences?
If the CSPI mis-informs the public about a health crisis that isn't, and as a result causes us to expend resources, tax dollars and political energy on areas that do not need that attention, then the CSPI's ends do not justify their means. This, in a nutshell, is exactly what's wrong with our media and many of our watchdog and lobbying groups.
Therefore, in the future, when you see a news story on the food industry that sounds particularly horrifying, do two things. Listen with a jaundiced ear, and note what organization wrote it. If it's the CSPI, keep today's article in mind.
Readers, what do you think? Is it ethical for advocacy groups to bend and massage the truth to gain attention for their cause--even if it's ostensibly a good cause?
Sources:
CSPI's own press release on the report
The full CSPI report itself
Other media outlets that gullibly picked up the story:
Pittsburgh Post Gazette: Calls grow for tougher food safety regulations
New York Times: Ten Common Food Poisoning Risks
ABC News: Where's the Beef? 10 Unexpectedly Risky Foods
A follow up article from the blog of Sarah Klein, a CSPI staff attorney and the report's lead author:
Are we all crash test dummies for the food industry?
Understandably angry responses from food industry sites:
Media Should Treat CSPI Report With Skepticism
An Outbreak of Distortion
Read Next: A Cup of Morning Death? How "Big Coffee" Puts Profits Before People
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
The Top Lame-Ass Excuses Between You and Better Health
Readers, a quick reminder: during the month of May I’ll be featuring articles from Casual Kitchen’s archives. Enjoy! As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback.
Warning: This post is NOT intended for whiners or excuse-makers.
***********************************
The Top Lame-Ass Excuses Between You and Better Health
In the more than 500 posts that I've written here at Casual Kitchen, I've shared all kinds of secrets for preparing easy and healthy food at home. I've shared all kinds of counterintuitive ideas for managing our appetites and embracing a healthy diet.
I've also heard every possible kind of excuse.
Here's the thing. Humans are really good at excuse-making. We love to avoid taking action, and we love to offer rationalizations and justifications for why. Half the time we make excuses autonomically, without even realizing it.
Here are six of the most common excuses I hear from people--in conversation, in emails, on Twitter, and in comments on this blog.
Have you ever caught yourself saying any of the following?
1) "That tip won't work for me."
You actually have to think creatively to take a tip that works for someone else and figure out why that same tip won't work for you. Ironically, it takes the same amount of creativity to take that tip and tweak it so that it can work for you.
Which do you think is a more productive use of your energy?
Astute readers will also note the circular argument buried in this excuse: if you assume that a solution won't work for you, it won't. And you'll be "right" in your prediction that it won't work. This is why I always want my readers to choose a solution-based mindset--and avoid all negative self-fulfilling prophecies--whenever they address challenges in their lives.
2) "But you haven't considered X, or Y, or Z."
Translation: If your tip isn't perfect in every way, then I'm going to point out a minor flaw in it and use that as an excuse not to take action.
This is a textbook example of letting the perfect being the enemy of the good, or as I've taken to saying lately: letting the perfect be the enema of the good.
Once again, it takes the same amount of creativity to shoot down an idea as it takes to think of ways to tweak it so it works for you.
3) "That's obvious."
You have to unpack this phrase a bit before you can truly understand what's going on in the mind of the person saying it. In one sense, this statement is a perfect excuse because it's short, simple and supremely condescending. In just two words, it quickly slaps away any idea. However, underneath this seemingly simple statement is both a circular argument and a lot of psychological baggage.
I'll start with the circular argument. Think about it: if some tip or suggestion is so obvious, then why isn't the person already putting it to use--and getting positive results? In reality, saying "that's obvious" is just another generalized excuse for not taking action.
Further, phrases like that's obvious or I know that already actually signal a lack of comprehension and knowledge. It suggests that this person's mind is closed to an idea, regardless of its merit.
All of this brings us to the psychological aspect of this excuse, which lies in its narcissism. The thing is, most of our problems actually have relatively simple (note that I didn't say easy) solutions. Spend less, save more; eat less, exercise more. However, there seems to be an odd habit--at least among the most narcissistic of blog commenters--of demanding 100% super-duper secret customized tips, designed specifically for them.
To those readers I say this: consider the notion that the things you read aren't written solely with you in mind.* And just because something is obvious to you doesn't mean it's obvious to others.
* Readers, I don't literally mean "you"--I'm speaking metaphorically to a narcissistic reader, who will never see themselves in this example anyway.
4) "Sure, that's easy for you, but..."
Whether a tip or suggestion is easy for me is completely beside the point. Some tips will be easy for you, some will be easy for me. Seriously, though, does that even matter? Isn't the effectiveness of a tip more important than its ease of use?
Once again, don't let the perfect be the enema of the good.
A side note for other bloggers who often hear this excuse: A productive response in many situations is to say "how do you know that it's easy for me?" This simple, disruptive question often breaks a person out of his or her presumptions and redirects the conversation towards solutions rather than excuses.
5) "This is all well and good for you, but there are other people out there who are suffering from [insert any disadvantage here] who can't do this like you can."
The brilliant thing about this excuse is that it's actually true. There are always going to be people with various disadvantages who cannot use the ideas or solutions you offer. But as readers of my series of posts on the "Yes, But" argument know, this response is nothing more than excuse-making by proxy.
Look, there will always be:
* People without education.
* People without money.
* People who live in food deserts in the inner city (uh, unless food deserts are a myth).
* People with five jobs, five kids and a five-hour commute.
* People who live out in the middle of nowhere, where there's only one store around for miles and who therefore cannot comparison shop.
* People who don't have the time to read through labels to avoid government subsidized ingredients in processed foods (these last two were actual excuses from one angry reader--I'm totally serious).
And so on.
Forget all that. The real question is: what are you going to do, in the context of your specific situation? You were not put here on this earth to whine on behalf of hypothetical people with hypothetical disadvantages and use that as an excuse to wring your hands.
Not to mention that many people who have actually faced those disadvantages could easily see your whining as insulting. For example, I've had readers who have faced poverty, as well as other significant disadvantages, who consider it totally condescending that other readers would presume their disadvantages are (or were) insurmountable.
The bottom line: this is just another excuse. The excuse-maker is merely manufacturing a series of disadvantages, experienced by some imaginary third person, as a reason not to take action.
6) "I don't have time."
Let me share a quick story: A friend of mine once asked me for my waffle recipe, and just as I was explaining the important step of separating the egg whites, he cut me off, saying, "Forget it. I don't have time to separate egg whites."
This pretty much murdered our conversation, and I hung my head and went to the other side of the room. In retrospect however, the statement I don't have time to separate egg whites was so preposterous that my wife Laura and I now use it as a general metaphor for pathetic time management excuses.
Of course, the truth is, "I don't have time" is excuse-making code for "I've made a passive choice not to allocate time for this, but I want to slip something into this conversation that validates my ego, and shows how busy and/or hardworking I am."
If you want to be healthy, you simply have to allocate time to choosing the right foods, eating well and exercising. There's no way around it. You have no choice but to make time for these things, or you'll suffer increasingly dire consequences. You'll weigh more each year. Your energy levels and your fitness will decline each year. Your joints and muscles will get weaker and less functional. Your cardiovascular system will get less and less efficient. And at some point, your body might stop working altogether.
Imagine yourself in ten or twenty years if you continue on your current path. If you don't like what that possible future holds for you, change it. We are all running out of time. Don't waste still more precious time whining about not having time.
Closing thoughts
Readers, you've just read a blog post where the author complained about complainers. Thus it's only fitting to close this post with a non-complaining call to action. And if there's one conclusion you should draw from the collective whine of the excuse-makers out there, it's this: the barriers separating us from the lives we want usually aren't physical. They are almost always psychological.
This is at once depressing and encouraging.
Depressing, because it simply proves that most people are their own worst enemies when it comes to solving problems. We think we have air-tight reasons to explain why we can't or aren't permitted to do certain things or achieve certain goals. But those reasons are really made of air. There's no there there.
Which brings us to the encouraging part. You have the power to choose your approach to the challenges and problems in your life. You can complain and make excuses, or you can use a solution-based mindset and take action.
More importantly, you can (gently) help others recognize when they're engaging in defeatist thinking. Most people use these excuses without really realizing it. You can help, by focusing on solutions and by redirecting conversations--both online and in the real world--back to productive ideas.
Just make sure you stay out of the "yes, but" vortex. :)
Readers, what have I missed in this post?
This post is dedicated to Ramit Sethi at I Will Teach You To Be Rich for defying the complainers and encouraging his readers to take action.
Read Next: Consumerism and Modern Pseudovalues: Some Thoughts
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Warning: This post is NOT intended for whiners or excuse-makers.
***********************************
The Top Lame-Ass Excuses Between You and Better Health
In the more than 500 posts that I've written here at Casual Kitchen, I've shared all kinds of secrets for preparing easy and healthy food at home. I've shared all kinds of counterintuitive ideas for managing our appetites and embracing a healthy diet.
I've also heard every possible kind of excuse.
Here's the thing. Humans are really good at excuse-making. We love to avoid taking action, and we love to offer rationalizations and justifications for why. Half the time we make excuses autonomically, without even realizing it.
Here are six of the most common excuses I hear from people--in conversation, in emails, on Twitter, and in comments on this blog.
Have you ever caught yourself saying any of the following?
1) "That tip won't work for me."
You actually have to think creatively to take a tip that works for someone else and figure out why that same tip won't work for you. Ironically, it takes the same amount of creativity to take that tip and tweak it so that it can work for you.
Which do you think is a more productive use of your energy?
Astute readers will also note the circular argument buried in this excuse: if you assume that a solution won't work for you, it won't. And you'll be "right" in your prediction that it won't work. This is why I always want my readers to choose a solution-based mindset--and avoid all negative self-fulfilling prophecies--whenever they address challenges in their lives.
2) "But you haven't considered X, or Y, or Z."
Translation: If your tip isn't perfect in every way, then I'm going to point out a minor flaw in it and use that as an excuse not to take action.
This is a textbook example of letting the perfect being the enemy of the good, or as I've taken to saying lately: letting the perfect be the enema of the good.
Once again, it takes the same amount of creativity to shoot down an idea as it takes to think of ways to tweak it so it works for you.
3) "That's obvious."
You have to unpack this phrase a bit before you can truly understand what's going on in the mind of the person saying it. In one sense, this statement is a perfect excuse because it's short, simple and supremely condescending. In just two words, it quickly slaps away any idea. However, underneath this seemingly simple statement is both a circular argument and a lot of psychological baggage.
I'll start with the circular argument. Think about it: if some tip or suggestion is so obvious, then why isn't the person already putting it to use--and getting positive results? In reality, saying "that's obvious" is just another generalized excuse for not taking action.
Further, phrases like that's obvious or I know that already actually signal a lack of comprehension and knowledge. It suggests that this person's mind is closed to an idea, regardless of its merit.
All of this brings us to the psychological aspect of this excuse, which lies in its narcissism. The thing is, most of our problems actually have relatively simple (note that I didn't say easy) solutions. Spend less, save more; eat less, exercise more. However, there seems to be an odd habit--at least among the most narcissistic of blog commenters--of demanding 100% super-duper secret customized tips, designed specifically for them.
To those readers I say this: consider the notion that the things you read aren't written solely with you in mind.* And just because something is obvious to you doesn't mean it's obvious to others.
* Readers, I don't literally mean "you"--I'm speaking metaphorically to a narcissistic reader, who will never see themselves in this example anyway.
4) "Sure, that's easy for you, but..."
Whether a tip or suggestion is easy for me is completely beside the point. Some tips will be easy for you, some will be easy for me. Seriously, though, does that even matter? Isn't the effectiveness of a tip more important than its ease of use?
Once again, don't let the perfect be the enema of the good.
A side note for other bloggers who often hear this excuse: A productive response in many situations is to say "how do you know that it's easy for me?" This simple, disruptive question often breaks a person out of his or her presumptions and redirects the conversation towards solutions rather than excuses.
5) "This is all well and good for you, but there are other people out there who are suffering from [insert any disadvantage here] who can't do this like you can."
The brilliant thing about this excuse is that it's actually true. There are always going to be people with various disadvantages who cannot use the ideas or solutions you offer. But as readers of my series of posts on the "Yes, But" argument know, this response is nothing more than excuse-making by proxy.
Look, there will always be:
* People without education.
* People without money.
* People who live in food deserts in the inner city (uh, unless food deserts are a myth).
* People with five jobs, five kids and a five-hour commute.
* People who live out in the middle of nowhere, where there's only one store around for miles and who therefore cannot comparison shop.
* People who don't have the time to read through labels to avoid government subsidized ingredients in processed foods (these last two were actual excuses from one angry reader--I'm totally serious).
And so on.
Forget all that. The real question is: what are you going to do, in the context of your specific situation? You were not put here on this earth to whine on behalf of hypothetical people with hypothetical disadvantages and use that as an excuse to wring your hands.
Not to mention that many people who have actually faced those disadvantages could easily see your whining as insulting. For example, I've had readers who have faced poverty, as well as other significant disadvantages, who consider it totally condescending that other readers would presume their disadvantages are (or were) insurmountable.
The bottom line: this is just another excuse. The excuse-maker is merely manufacturing a series of disadvantages, experienced by some imaginary third person, as a reason not to take action.
6) "I don't have time."
Let me share a quick story: A friend of mine once asked me for my waffle recipe, and just as I was explaining the important step of separating the egg whites, he cut me off, saying, "Forget it. I don't have time to separate egg whites."
This pretty much murdered our conversation, and I hung my head and went to the other side of the room. In retrospect however, the statement I don't have time to separate egg whites was so preposterous that my wife Laura and I now use it as a general metaphor for pathetic time management excuses.
Of course, the truth is, "I don't have time" is excuse-making code for "I've made a passive choice not to allocate time for this, but I want to slip something into this conversation that validates my ego, and shows how busy and/or hardworking I am."
If you want to be healthy, you simply have to allocate time to choosing the right foods, eating well and exercising. There's no way around it. You have no choice but to make time for these things, or you'll suffer increasingly dire consequences. You'll weigh more each year. Your energy levels and your fitness will decline each year. Your joints and muscles will get weaker and less functional. Your cardiovascular system will get less and less efficient. And at some point, your body might stop working altogether.
Imagine yourself in ten or twenty years if you continue on your current path. If you don't like what that possible future holds for you, change it. We are all running out of time. Don't waste still more precious time whining about not having time.
Closing thoughts
Readers, you've just read a blog post where the author complained about complainers. Thus it's only fitting to close this post with a non-complaining call to action. And if there's one conclusion you should draw from the collective whine of the excuse-makers out there, it's this: the barriers separating us from the lives we want usually aren't physical. They are almost always psychological.
This is at once depressing and encouraging.
Depressing, because it simply proves that most people are their own worst enemies when it comes to solving problems. We think we have air-tight reasons to explain why we can't or aren't permitted to do certain things or achieve certain goals. But those reasons are really made of air. There's no there there.
Which brings us to the encouraging part. You have the power to choose your approach to the challenges and problems in your life. You can complain and make excuses, or you can use a solution-based mindset and take action.
More importantly, you can (gently) help others recognize when they're engaging in defeatist thinking. Most people use these excuses without really realizing it. You can help, by focusing on solutions and by redirecting conversations--both online and in the real world--back to productive ideas.
Just make sure you stay out of the "yes, but" vortex. :)
Readers, what have I missed in this post?
This post is dedicated to Ramit Sethi at I Will Teach You To Be Rich for defying the complainers and encouraging his readers to take action.
Read Next: Consumerism and Modern Pseudovalues: Some Thoughts
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
CK Links--Friday May 22, 2015
Links from around the internet!
Don't forget! The easiest way to support Casual Kitchen is to buy your items at Amazon using the various links here. Just click over to Amazon, and EVERY purchase you make during that visit pays a modest affiliate commission to support my work here. Best of all, this comes at zero extra cost to you.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.
PS: Follow me on Twitter!
*************************
There are good reasons to be optimistic about our ability to meet the food requirements of the projected 9-10 billion people on our planet by the middle of this century. (GMO School)
Even if your calorie counts are off, it's still incredibly helpful to count calories and track your food intake. Here's why. (My Fitness Pal)
We've reached a point of diminishing returns with food safety. (New York Times)
Does "science" belong on our dinner plates? Nope, wrong question. (Science 2.0, via Jayson Lusk)
How do "notoriously low-margin" restaurants scramble to deal with a much higher minimum wage? Note the extraordinary fallacy in this article's final paragraph. (NPR)
Bone broth is a joke. (First We Feast)
Consumers increasingly believe organic labeling is just an excuse to charge more. (Time)
Related: "Organic" is just another aspirational product.
Most products are made from the same basic staples, just like food. Put them together yourself instead of relying on companies to sell them to you at higher cost. (Early Retirement Extreme)
Financial advice that needs to die. (The Simple Dollar)
Book recommendation: The Road Less Traveled by M. Scott Peck. One reviewer describes this book as "not just a book but a spontaneous act of generosity." I agree, wholeheartedly. A deeply insightful book about personal growth, psychology and mental health, and the most useful book I've read so far this year.
Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Don't forget! The easiest way to support Casual Kitchen is to buy your items at Amazon using the various links here. Just click over to Amazon, and EVERY purchase you make during that visit pays a modest affiliate commission to support my work here. Best of all, this comes at zero extra cost to you.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.
PS: Follow me on Twitter!
*************************
There are good reasons to be optimistic about our ability to meet the food requirements of the projected 9-10 billion people on our planet by the middle of this century. (GMO School)
Even if your calorie counts are off, it's still incredibly helpful to count calories and track your food intake. Here's why. (My Fitness Pal)
We've reached a point of diminishing returns with food safety. (New York Times)
Does "science" belong on our dinner plates? Nope, wrong question. (Science 2.0, via Jayson Lusk)
How do "notoriously low-margin" restaurants scramble to deal with a much higher minimum wage? Note the extraordinary fallacy in this article's final paragraph. (NPR)
Bone broth is a joke. (First We Feast)
Consumers increasingly believe organic labeling is just an excuse to charge more. (Time)
Related: "Organic" is just another aspirational product.
Most products are made from the same basic staples, just like food. Put them together yourself instead of relying on companies to sell them to you at higher cost. (Early Retirement Extreme)
Financial advice that needs to die. (The Simple Dollar)
Book recommendation: The Road Less Traveled by M. Scott Peck. One reviewer describes this book as "not just a book but a spontaneous act of generosity." I agree, wholeheartedly. A deeply insightful book about personal growth, psychology and mental health, and the most useful book I've read so far this year.
Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Labels:
links
On the True Value of a Forgotten Restaurant Meal
Readers, a quick reminder: during the month of May I’ll be featuring articles from Casual Kitchen’s archives. Enjoy! As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback.
*******************************
On the True Value of a Forgotten Restaurant Meal
I had an interesting moment of clarity about the true value of restaurant meals when I recently went through a pile of credit card receipts from a year ago. In that pile were receipts from fifteen or so restaurants we had been to in mid-2008.
These dinners were from barely a year ago, and yet I hardly remembered any of them. Heck, I couldn't even remember the names of some of the restaurants, much less what kind of food they served. And yet the aggregate cost of these culinary experiences was hundreds and hundreds of dollars.
You'd think after spending all that money I'd remember more of these experiences, but sadly, I don't. The ones that really stuck in my mind boiled down to a couple of really fancy restaurant meals we had, Laura's 40th birthday dinner, and the spectacular all-you-can-eat ribs we had last fall during our visit to Belgium. That's three or four restaurant meals--out of fifteen.
In complete contrast, I remember nearly every dinner party I've hosted at our home, going back many years. Those dinners were all truly salient and meaningful experiences, full of fun conversations, good eating (well, I did make the food after all!) and good times with friends. And yet the entire cost of all the food--for everyone--for a dinner in our home was usually far less than what Laura and I would end up spending on just ourselves for the average forgettable restaurant meal in this forgotten pile of receipts.
Readers, get ready, because here's the punchline of this article: you will completely forget most of your restaurant meals, making them an utter waste of money. Only a select few of your dinners out--the ones with particularly special circumstances--will stick in your mind.
Moreoever, you'll get more value from your experiences by going out to eat only for really, really important occasions. Otherwise eat at home. And host lots of dinner parties. You'll spend a lot less money, and you'll probably keep more meaningful and salient memories.
What is the point of spending extra money on an experience if the odds are you'll end up forgetting all about it?
Readers, what do you think about the value of forgotten experiences?
Read Next: Two People, Fifteen Days, Thirty Meals. Thirty-Five Bucks!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
*******************************
On the True Value of a Forgotten Restaurant Meal
I had an interesting moment of clarity about the true value of restaurant meals when I recently went through a pile of credit card receipts from a year ago. In that pile were receipts from fifteen or so restaurants we had been to in mid-2008.
These dinners were from barely a year ago, and yet I hardly remembered any of them. Heck, I couldn't even remember the names of some of the restaurants, much less what kind of food they served. And yet the aggregate cost of these culinary experiences was hundreds and hundreds of dollars.
You'd think after spending all that money I'd remember more of these experiences, but sadly, I don't. The ones that really stuck in my mind boiled down to a couple of really fancy restaurant meals we had, Laura's 40th birthday dinner, and the spectacular all-you-can-eat ribs we had last fall during our visit to Belgium. That's three or four restaurant meals--out of fifteen.
In complete contrast, I remember nearly every dinner party I've hosted at our home, going back many years. Those dinners were all truly salient and meaningful experiences, full of fun conversations, good eating (well, I did make the food after all!) and good times with friends. And yet the entire cost of all the food--for everyone--for a dinner in our home was usually far less than what Laura and I would end up spending on just ourselves for the average forgettable restaurant meal in this forgotten pile of receipts.
Readers, get ready, because here's the punchline of this article: you will completely forget most of your restaurant meals, making them an utter waste of money. Only a select few of your dinners out--the ones with particularly special circumstances--will stick in your mind.
Moreoever, you'll get more value from your experiences by going out to eat only for really, really important occasions. Otherwise eat at home. And host lots of dinner parties. You'll spend a lot less money, and you'll probably keep more meaningful and salient memories.
What is the point of spending extra money on an experience if the odds are you'll end up forgetting all about it?
Readers, what do you think about the value of forgotten experiences?
Read Next: Two People, Fifteen Days, Thirty Meals. Thirty-Five Bucks!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
How to Own the Consumer Products Industry--And I Mean Literally Own It
Readers, a quick reminder: during the month of May I’ll be featuring articles from Casual Kitchen’s archives. Enjoy! As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback.
*******************************
How to Own the Consumer Products Industry--And I Mean Literally Own It
Everyone who reads Casual Kitchen should own at least a couple of consumer products stocks.
Yep, you read that right. This blog--which relentlessly criticizes the consumer products industry, urges consumer to fight back against it, and tells readers to drop their loyalty to brands at the slightest provocation--is actually telling you to invest in the very industry we subvert.
Why? Because owning these stocks gives you an inside view of the perspective of these companies' owners and managers. It is by far the most effective route to becoming an informed and empowered consumer.
Getting started
Obviously, this isn't an investment blog (thank heaven). But my 13-year career as a stockpicker on Wall Street gives me a perspective on the food industry that doesn't really exist elsewhere in the food blog world. And in today's post I'll share thoughts on how to get started finding a few good consumer products stocks that can help you not only make money, but get more value for your consumer spending. How? Well, just keep reading.
Uh, and let me also surreptitiously toss in a huge caveat that you should not rely on this post or this site as a source of personalized investment advice.
Now, your first task is to find out which companies actually sell the products you buy. In some cases it'll be obvious: Pepsi makes Pepsi, Coke makes Coke, Whole Foods is a publicly traded company, and so on. In those cases, just type the company name into Google Finance, and whammo: there's your ticker symbol, stock price, chart and other assorted trivia about the company.
In other cases, however, it can take a bit of digging to find the company behind the product. For example, companies like Palmolive and P&G own hundreds of separate brands. And seemingly large companies (like Ben&Jerry's for example) can actually be tiny divisions of huge food conglomerates (like Unilever Corp.). And so on. Ironically, this is one of the reasons so many consumers feel deeply powerless against "Big Food." It's easy to presume that consumers have no power over companies so huge that you can't even tell which products they make.
But that's a deeply flawed perspective. The thing is, the information you need is either right there in the fine print on the product's label, or easily obtainable via a quick internet search. And just knowing which companies make what products puts you in a far-above-average position of cognition about the consumer products industry. Hey, most consumers just wilt in the face of Big Food. You, however, are looking for opportunity, and in just a few short minutes you can determine if a product you buy is owned by company you can invest in. In most cases it will be.
Okay. This is where the real work starts. Next, go to the company's website and download the PDFs of the company's past few annual reports. Look for a link to the investor relations page--everything you need should be there.
And when I say read, I mean really read. Go through the whole report from beginning to end, including the footnotes, all the legal-sounding stuff, the disclaimers and risk factors, everything. Read it all. (A side note: you'd be shocked how many investors, both amateur and professional, ignore this advice to their detriment.) I may have lost half of you already with these instructions, but believe me, after just an hour or two of careful reading, you'll have drastically increased your knowledge and context about the company and its prospects. Better still, this one session of reading will make savvier and more informed than 99% of consumers. Don't worry if there are words or terminology you don't understand. With time and osmosis you'll get your mind around the language and the jargon.
Next, go listen to the last couple of management conference calls. This is where you can pick up some of the best forward-looking insights about the company and the broader industry in which it operates. These calls are sometimes unintendedly amusing (for example, I throw up in my mouth whenever some analyst says "congratulations on a great quarter guys!"), but they give enormous insight on management's values, priorities and strategy. Again, you can usually find webcasts of the most recent calls on that company's investor relations page. Also, if you prefer reading transcripts (this is my preferred method because it's faster), there are free (free!) conference call transcripts available for most major stocks at seekingalpha.com.
When it comes to selecting a stock to research, I usually tell people that it's a good idea to start by considering companies that make products you like. But keep in mind, that's just a starting point. It's not always true that great companies always have great stocks--or vice versa for that matter. And once you begin buying, start small and keep learning about the company, and look for opportunities to buy more if the price goes lower.
Finally, be sure to enjoy the regular dividend checks you receive as a stockholder! Almost all consumer products companies, as well as many retail stocks, pay their shareholders generous dividends. Hey, nothing lessens the sting of paying for groceries, clothes or other consumer items than to know that in a small way you are technically paying yourself.
This total initial research process might take you anywhere from 2-4 hours, a small price to pay to learn much more about the companies you do business with nearly every day. And even if you don't end up actually buying a stock, the simple act of engaging in this process will make you more informed than almost all consumers.
To know your enemy, you must become your enemy
Which brings us to the second money-making aspect of this process. Face the facts: the consumer products industry claims a substantial percentage of our discretionary spending. And once you learn how profitable some of these companies are, you will have no choice but to rethink the value you receive from many of the products you buy.
An example: having a better understanding of the consistently high profit margins of companies like Pepsi or Coca-Cola has helped me think much more objectively about the value of buying soda. It doesn't mean that buying soda (or for that matter, being a shareholder in a company that sells soda) is greedy or wrong, but it has helped me decide to what extent I receive value as a soda consumer. This is exactly what I mean when I say owning consumer products stocks helps you become savvier and more informed.
Thus this is not only an effective wealth-building exercise. It's also a money-saving exercise because the process of learning about a company teaches you much more about the inside of the industry than you'll ever learn from the standpoint of a pure consumer. You will save money by knowing more about what drives these businesses, and you will earn money by collecting dividends (and possible capital gains) from those companies you feel are worthy of your investment dollars.
Double your power
Every long-term Casual Kitchen reader knows that my primary goal here is to empower consumers. After all, we are the ones who agree to pay our hard-earned money to buy the products on our store shelves--and unless and until we do this, no consumer products company can make a single penny of profit. We complete the circle of consumption. And as a result, I believe we have far more power than we think.
In essence, being a stockholder enables you to double your power, because you can have an impact in two ways: 1) as a part-owner, and 2) as a savvier and better-informed consumer.
To all the hand-wringers
A final few words: I know that have a few straggler readers who still subscribe to the ludicrously disempowering view that companies are evil, so the next few sentences are dedicated to them. Companies are not monolithic. There exists a spectrum of good and evil, and various companies exist in various places on that spectrum. Believe it or not, however, the more you learn about these companies, the more you'll learn that many companies are closer to the "good" side of the good and evil spectrum than they are to the "evil" side.
Further, there is an alternative to giving away your power. Instead of pointlessly wringing your hands about Big Food and generalizing about how all companies are evil, you actually have the opportunity--with just a few hours of open-minded reading and listening--to understand which companies are evil and which are good. More importantly, you'll know better what to do about it.
Only then will you be a truly empowered consumer.
Readers, please share your thoughts!
A few final notes and disclaimers:
1) Please keep in mind that stocks--even boring consumer products stocks--can go down.
2) Also keep in mind that expecting a stock to go up the minute you buy it is an act of supreme narcissism.
3) Finally, please don't take this post as direct investment advice--after all, there's a reason why I left Wall Street. My point is simply to encourage you to research and invest in some of these stocks to become a savvier, more powerful and more effective consumer.
Read Next: When It Comes To Banning Soda, Marion Nestle Fights Dirty
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
*******************************
How to Own the Consumer Products Industry--And I Mean Literally Own It
Everyone who reads Casual Kitchen should own at least a couple of consumer products stocks.
Yep, you read that right. This blog--which relentlessly criticizes the consumer products industry, urges consumer to fight back against it, and tells readers to drop their loyalty to brands at the slightest provocation--is actually telling you to invest in the very industry we subvert.
Why? Because owning these stocks gives you an inside view of the perspective of these companies' owners and managers. It is by far the most effective route to becoming an informed and empowered consumer.
Getting started
Obviously, this isn't an investment blog (thank heaven). But my 13-year career as a stockpicker on Wall Street gives me a perspective on the food industry that doesn't really exist elsewhere in the food blog world. And in today's post I'll share thoughts on how to get started finding a few good consumer products stocks that can help you not only make money, but get more value for your consumer spending. How? Well, just keep reading.
Uh, and let me also surreptitiously toss in a huge caveat that you should not rely on this post or this site as a source of personalized investment advice.
Now, your first task is to find out which companies actually sell the products you buy. In some cases it'll be obvious: Pepsi makes Pepsi, Coke makes Coke, Whole Foods is a publicly traded company, and so on. In those cases, just type the company name into Google Finance, and whammo: there's your ticker symbol, stock price, chart and other assorted trivia about the company.
In other cases, however, it can take a bit of digging to find the company behind the product. For example, companies like Palmolive and P&G own hundreds of separate brands. And seemingly large companies (like Ben&Jerry's for example) can actually be tiny divisions of huge food conglomerates (like Unilever Corp.). And so on. Ironically, this is one of the reasons so many consumers feel deeply powerless against "Big Food." It's easy to presume that consumers have no power over companies so huge that you can't even tell which products they make.
But that's a deeply flawed perspective. The thing is, the information you need is either right there in the fine print on the product's label, or easily obtainable via a quick internet search. And just knowing which companies make what products puts you in a far-above-average position of cognition about the consumer products industry. Hey, most consumers just wilt in the face of Big Food. You, however, are looking for opportunity, and in just a few short minutes you can determine if a product you buy is owned by company you can invest in. In most cases it will be.
Okay. This is where the real work starts. Next, go to the company's website and download the PDFs of the company's past few annual reports. Look for a link to the investor relations page--everything you need should be there.
And when I say read, I mean really read. Go through the whole report from beginning to end, including the footnotes, all the legal-sounding stuff, the disclaimers and risk factors, everything. Read it all. (A side note: you'd be shocked how many investors, both amateur and professional, ignore this advice to their detriment.) I may have lost half of you already with these instructions, but believe me, after just an hour or two of careful reading, you'll have drastically increased your knowledge and context about the company and its prospects. Better still, this one session of reading will make savvier and more informed than 99% of consumers. Don't worry if there are words or terminology you don't understand. With time and osmosis you'll get your mind around the language and the jargon.
Next, go listen to the last couple of management conference calls. This is where you can pick up some of the best forward-looking insights about the company and the broader industry in which it operates. These calls are sometimes unintendedly amusing (for example, I throw up in my mouth whenever some analyst says "congratulations on a great quarter guys!"), but they give enormous insight on management's values, priorities and strategy. Again, you can usually find webcasts of the most recent calls on that company's investor relations page. Also, if you prefer reading transcripts (this is my preferred method because it's faster), there are free (free!) conference call transcripts available for most major stocks at seekingalpha.com.
When it comes to selecting a stock to research, I usually tell people that it's a good idea to start by considering companies that make products you like. But keep in mind, that's just a starting point. It's not always true that great companies always have great stocks--or vice versa for that matter. And once you begin buying, start small and keep learning about the company, and look for opportunities to buy more if the price goes lower.
Finally, be sure to enjoy the regular dividend checks you receive as a stockholder! Almost all consumer products companies, as well as many retail stocks, pay their shareholders generous dividends. Hey, nothing lessens the sting of paying for groceries, clothes or other consumer items than to know that in a small way you are technically paying yourself.
This total initial research process might take you anywhere from 2-4 hours, a small price to pay to learn much more about the companies you do business with nearly every day. And even if you don't end up actually buying a stock, the simple act of engaging in this process will make you more informed than almost all consumers.
To know your enemy, you must become your enemy
Which brings us to the second money-making aspect of this process. Face the facts: the consumer products industry claims a substantial percentage of our discretionary spending. And once you learn how profitable some of these companies are, you will have no choice but to rethink the value you receive from many of the products you buy.
An example: having a better understanding of the consistently high profit margins of companies like Pepsi or Coca-Cola has helped me think much more objectively about the value of buying soda. It doesn't mean that buying soda (or for that matter, being a shareholder in a company that sells soda) is greedy or wrong, but it has helped me decide to what extent I receive value as a soda consumer. This is exactly what I mean when I say owning consumer products stocks helps you become savvier and more informed.
Thus this is not only an effective wealth-building exercise. It's also a money-saving exercise because the process of learning about a company teaches you much more about the inside of the industry than you'll ever learn from the standpoint of a pure consumer. You will save money by knowing more about what drives these businesses, and you will earn money by collecting dividends (and possible capital gains) from those companies you feel are worthy of your investment dollars.
Double your power
Every long-term Casual Kitchen reader knows that my primary goal here is to empower consumers. After all, we are the ones who agree to pay our hard-earned money to buy the products on our store shelves--and unless and until we do this, no consumer products company can make a single penny of profit. We complete the circle of consumption. And as a result, I believe we have far more power than we think.
In essence, being a stockholder enables you to double your power, because you can have an impact in two ways: 1) as a part-owner, and 2) as a savvier and better-informed consumer.
To all the hand-wringers
A final few words: I know that have a few straggler readers who still subscribe to the ludicrously disempowering view that companies are evil, so the next few sentences are dedicated to them. Companies are not monolithic. There exists a spectrum of good and evil, and various companies exist in various places on that spectrum. Believe it or not, however, the more you learn about these companies, the more you'll learn that many companies are closer to the "good" side of the good and evil spectrum than they are to the "evil" side.
Further, there is an alternative to giving away your power. Instead of pointlessly wringing your hands about Big Food and generalizing about how all companies are evil, you actually have the opportunity--with just a few hours of open-minded reading and listening--to understand which companies are evil and which are good. More importantly, you'll know better what to do about it.
Only then will you be a truly empowered consumer.
Readers, please share your thoughts!
A few final notes and disclaimers:
1) Please keep in mind that stocks--even boring consumer products stocks--can go down.
2) Also keep in mind that expecting a stock to go up the minute you buy it is an act of supreme narcissism.
3) Finally, please don't take this post as direct investment advice--after all, there's a reason why I left Wall Street. My point is simply to encourage you to research and invest in some of these stocks to become a savvier, more powerful and more effective consumer.
Read Next: When It Comes To Banning Soda, Marion Nestle Fights Dirty
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
CK Links--Friday May 15, 2015
Links from around the internet!
Don't forget! The easiest way to support Casual Kitchen is to buy your items at Amazon using the various links here. Just click over to Amazon, and EVERY purchase you make during that visit pays a modest affiliate commission to support my work here. Best of all, this comes at zero extra cost to you.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.
PS: Follow me on Twitter!
*************************
Eleven things to do to make your baked goods better. For what it's worth, I totally disagree with #2 and #5. (Bon Appetit)
Diets don't work. But these two strategies do. (Washington Post)
With so many changes and reversals in dietary thought over the past decades, it makes you wonder if we really know anything about nutrition at all. (First We Feast)
Why do people eat processed foods? (Frugal Healthy Simple)
Striking thoughts on the possible reversibility of Type II Diabetes: "A lot of people have perhaps too simplistically thought that once the pancreas starts to fail, and stop producing insulin, it is an inevitable decline." (Daily Mail)
What really happens to the plastic bottle you throw away? While I very much agree with this short video's sentiments, it's a useful critical thinking exercise to take note of the various manipulation techniques it uses to persuade. (Youtube)
A hipster mustache signals... what? (Noahpinion)
"Rationally, no one should be happier about a score of 96 out of 137 (70 percent) than 72 out of 100, but my students were." Fascinating article about how irrelevancies alter our thinking. (New York Times)
An avalanche of unnecessary medical care is harming patients physically and financially. Long-ish but worth it. (New Yorker)
A good discussion of the various problems, side-effects and unintended consequences of raising the minimum wage. (Carpe Diem)
We run the risk of failing to meet our goals because "one-time events" keep happening. (Behavior Gap)
The Millennial generation is about to get systematically screwed over. (Forbes)
Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Don't forget! The easiest way to support Casual Kitchen is to buy your items at Amazon using the various links here. Just click over to Amazon, and EVERY purchase you make during that visit pays a modest affiliate commission to support my work here. Best of all, this comes at zero extra cost to you.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.
PS: Follow me on Twitter!
*************************
Eleven things to do to make your baked goods better. For what it's worth, I totally disagree with #2 and #5. (Bon Appetit)
Diets don't work. But these two strategies do. (Washington Post)
With so many changes and reversals in dietary thought over the past decades, it makes you wonder if we really know anything about nutrition at all. (First We Feast)
Why do people eat processed foods? (Frugal Healthy Simple)
Striking thoughts on the possible reversibility of Type II Diabetes: "A lot of people have perhaps too simplistically thought that once the pancreas starts to fail, and stop producing insulin, it is an inevitable decline." (Daily Mail)
What really happens to the plastic bottle you throw away? While I very much agree with this short video's sentiments, it's a useful critical thinking exercise to take note of the various manipulation techniques it uses to persuade. (Youtube)
A hipster mustache signals... what? (Noahpinion)
"Rationally, no one should be happier about a score of 96 out of 137 (70 percent) than 72 out of 100, but my students were." Fascinating article about how irrelevancies alter our thinking. (New York Times)
An avalanche of unnecessary medical care is harming patients physically and financially. Long-ish but worth it. (New Yorker)
A good discussion of the various problems, side-effects and unintended consequences of raising the minimum wage. (Carpe Diem)
We run the risk of failing to meet our goals because "one-time events" keep happening. (Behavior Gap)
The Millennial generation is about to get systematically screwed over. (Forbes)
Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Labels:
links
On Spice Fade, And the Utter Insanity of Throwing Spices Out After Six Months
Readers, a quick reminder: during the month of May I’ll be featuring articles from Casual Kitchen’s archives. Enjoy! As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback.
***************************
On Spice Fade, And the Utter Insanity of Throwing Spices Out After Six Months
The spice industry--as well as many misguided cooks, chefs and food bloggers--will tell you that if you have any spices in your cupboard that are more than six months old, you should throw them out.
Pure hogwash. This is just another example of how the food industry tries to get you to spend unnecessarily. Worse, it makes cooking at home more expensive than it needs to be.
However, by now every savvy Casual Kitchen reader should have a sixth sense that starts to tingle whenever companies "recommend" doing something that is both in their interest and costs us more money. Most likely it's not in our interest to obey.
That's why you should verify--with a high standard of proof--claims like "throw out your spices after six months." For example, have you ever done a side-by-side recipe taste test of a spice you bought a year ago compared to a brand new jar of that spice? If you did so, would there be a perceptible change in the context of your typical use? Can you actually perceive this alleged "spice fade" in a recipe?
I'd bet against it. Very, very few of us have palates that are that finely tuned, and those of us who think we do still probably don't.
But even if you actually can tell the difference, I have good news: You still shouldn't throw out your spices. Instead, keep reading. I've got a solution for you.
Half Lives
Here's another way to think about spices--think of them as radioactive isotopes, with a half life. (Seriously--stay with me here).
Spices will fade slightly with time. Remember, I'm not arguing that spices don't fade, I'm saying the degree of fade is tiny and barely perceptible. So let's take a hypothetical example of say, cinnamon, and let's pretend cinnamon has a half life of three years (hmmm, kind of like Rhodium 101).
What does "a half life of three years" mean? It means that in three years or so, your cinnamon should lose about half of its flavor and smell. After six years, it should lose another half, which means your cinnamon would be roughly one-fourth as strong.
Using this framework, then, what's going to happen in six months--when that all-important spice industry drop-dead date passes? Well, in six months, your cinnamon is going to be, oh, about 8% less flavorful.
Whoa. Better throw that puppy right out, right?
Again, these numbers are totally hypothetical and made up--although if you think about it, it's probably not unreasonable to think that three-year-old cinnamon might be half as flavorful as newish cinnamon. But just keep in mind that this is just an example to illustrate a point.
So, getting back to those unlucky souls who think they can detect an 8% decline in spice efficacy, here's your solution: use 8% more of that spice.
If your spice has a smell/taste factor that is 92% of what it was, then to bring it back to 100%, all you have to do is add another 8% more. (It's actually 8.7%, but nobody likes a math geek).
The point: if you detect a modest fade in the spices you use, you can always just use slightly more to compensate. Either way, even if you actually can tell whether a spice has a experienced any meaningful decline in flavor, you still should not automatically throw out your old spices.
Don't throw them out after six months. Don't throw them out after a year. Verify for yourself when your spices are truly past their prime. And even then, you can still embrace the solutions in this post to save yourself quite a bit of extra money.
Don't mindlessly take some expert's word for something--especially when those "experts" may have an agenda to get you to needlessly buy more of what they're selling.
Read Next: Should I Be Paranoid About Grocery Store Loyalty Cards?
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
***************************
On Spice Fade, And the Utter Insanity of Throwing Spices Out After Six Months
The spice industry--as well as many misguided cooks, chefs and food bloggers--will tell you that if you have any spices in your cupboard that are more than six months old, you should throw them out.
Pure hogwash. This is just another example of how the food industry tries to get you to spend unnecessarily. Worse, it makes cooking at home more expensive than it needs to be.
However, by now every savvy Casual Kitchen reader should have a sixth sense that starts to tingle whenever companies "recommend" doing something that is both in their interest and costs us more money. Most likely it's not in our interest to obey.
That's why you should verify--with a high standard of proof--claims like "throw out your spices after six months." For example, have you ever done a side-by-side recipe taste test of a spice you bought a year ago compared to a brand new jar of that spice? If you did so, would there be a perceptible change in the context of your typical use? Can you actually perceive this alleged "spice fade" in a recipe?
I'd bet against it. Very, very few of us have palates that are that finely tuned, and those of us who think we do still probably don't.
But even if you actually can tell the difference, I have good news: You still shouldn't throw out your spices. Instead, keep reading. I've got a solution for you.
Half Lives
Here's another way to think about spices--think of them as radioactive isotopes, with a half life. (Seriously--stay with me here).
Spices will fade slightly with time. Remember, I'm not arguing that spices don't fade, I'm saying the degree of fade is tiny and barely perceptible. So let's take a hypothetical example of say, cinnamon, and let's pretend cinnamon has a half life of three years (hmmm, kind of like Rhodium 101).
What does "a half life of three years" mean? It means that in three years or so, your cinnamon should lose about half of its flavor and smell. After six years, it should lose another half, which means your cinnamon would be roughly one-fourth as strong.
Using this framework, then, what's going to happen in six months--when that all-important spice industry drop-dead date passes? Well, in six months, your cinnamon is going to be, oh, about 8% less flavorful.
Whoa. Better throw that puppy right out, right?
Again, these numbers are totally hypothetical and made up--although if you think about it, it's probably not unreasonable to think that three-year-old cinnamon might be half as flavorful as newish cinnamon. But just keep in mind that this is just an example to illustrate a point.
So, getting back to those unlucky souls who think they can detect an 8% decline in spice efficacy, here's your solution: use 8% more of that spice.
If your spice has a smell/taste factor that is 92% of what it was, then to bring it back to 100%, all you have to do is add another 8% more. (It's actually 8.7%, but nobody likes a math geek).
The point: if you detect a modest fade in the spices you use, you can always just use slightly more to compensate. Either way, even if you actually can tell whether a spice has a experienced any meaningful decline in flavor, you still should not automatically throw out your old spices.
Don't throw them out after six months. Don't throw them out after a year. Verify for yourself when your spices are truly past their prime. And even then, you can still embrace the solutions in this post to save yourself quite a bit of extra money.
Don't mindlessly take some expert's word for something--especially when those "experts" may have an agenda to get you to needlessly buy more of what they're selling.
Read Next: Should I Be Paranoid About Grocery Store Loyalty Cards?
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
How to Tell if a Recipe is Worth Cooking With Five Easy Questions
Readers, a quick reminder: during the month of May I’ll be featuring articles from Casual Kitchen’s archives. Enjoy! As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback.
***************************
How to Tell if a Recipe is Worth Cooking With Five Easy Questions
Nobody wants to take a whole bunch of time out of their busy day to cook something that ends up tasting crappy. And it's pretty frustrating even to make a dish that comes out great--if it takes twice as long to make it as you expected and you're sitting down to dinner with your family at 10:00PM.
So how can you tell, in advance, if a recipe will be any good? Will it be interesting and original? Will it ever make it into your heavy rotation?
Or, will it take too long or be too much of a pain in the ass to make? Or worse, will it end up tasting weird?
You can get surprisingly accurate answers to these questions just by learning to read a recipe with a critically trained eye. So today, as a teaching tool, I want to show you a new recipe that we tried for the first time the other night. I'm going to share with you why I chose the recipe, how I decided that it was likely to taste good, and other assumptions I made about the dish, including the prep work involved and how scalable the dish might be.
Basically, I’m going to walk you through how I went about thinking through the recipe in advance and why I decided it was worth making. Hopefully when you finish this post, you’ll also be able to judge a recipe BEFORE you make it. But first, here is the new recipe itself, borrowed without permission from The New Moosewood Cookbook. I submit it to you here with some modifications. Please read it through and keep it handy as you read the rest of this post:
*********************
White Bean and Black Olive Soup
2 Tablespoons olive oil
2-3 onions, chopped
2 stalks celery, diced
2 carrots, diced
1 teaspoon dried oregano
1 1/2 teaspoon dried basil
1 zucchini, diced
1 green bell pepper, chopped
3-4 garlic cloves, crushed
black pepper to taste
4 cups water
3 oz tomato paste
1/4 cup dry red wine (don't forget: never use "cooking wine")
2 8 ounce cans white beans
1 cup black olives (canned okay)
1 Tablespoon lemon juice
Chopped parsley for toppings.
Heat olive oil in a large stock pot. Add onion, celery, carrot and seasonings. Saute 8-10 minutes over medium heat. Add zucchini, green pepper and garlic, saute 5 minutes more.
Add rest of ingredients to pot, bring to a boil and simmer over medium heat for 15-20 minutes. Serve topped with parsley.
******************
Essentially I want to know if the grief involved in making this dish will outweigh the pleasures involved in eating it. So, what I’m going to do is consider this recipe with the following five key questions in mind. By walking through this exercise with me, you’ll see a practical example of how I think about a recipe before I make it:
1) Does it sound good?
Not if you hate olives. And I mean that in a serious way. You need to scan down the list of ingredients and first make sure there aren’t any ingredients that you hate in there. I know this sounds like a “duh”-type comment, because most dishes, quite expectedly, taste like the ingredients in them.
But my point here is that you can use this rule to instantly eliminate a dish from consideration and move on to another recipe. Hate olives? Okay, nix this one and turn the page. Next!
Yes, you will find some recipes that combine ingredients in such an original way that they don’t taste like their component parts. Believe me, however, a vegetable soup just won’t fall into that category. (Forgive a quick tangent: at some point I’ll share a great Pasta Puttanesca recipe with you that even anchovy-haters will love. My wife can’t sit in the same room with an anchovy but she still loves it.)
Now, here’s the next step in deciding if a dish sounds good: see if there are ingredients in the recipe that are combined in an original way. What grabbed me about this recipe was that it was a soup that contained olives. I love olives, but I have NEVER added them into a soup before. It seemed pretty neat and original. And thus, the recipe “sounded good” to me. Why pick a new recipe if there’s nothing interesting about it?
2) Does it contain any bizarre or impossible-to-find ingredients?
This is usually the second question I ask myself as I run down the list of ingredients. Again, it’s a quick litmus test to help you make an even quicker decision. If the recipe calls for saffron or something (I barely even know what saffron is, much less do I know where the heck I’d find it in my grocery store), it’s a quick deal-killer. Next!
With this recipe, this is an easy question to answer: No. All of the ingredients will be easy to find at any grocery store.
3) How much prep work am I gonna have to do? Will this be a pain in the ass and take forever?
Ah-hah. I thought we were sailing along with flying colors, but we’ve stumbled a bit here. There is a fair amount of chopping and slicing of veggies required here, a common and predictable liability of vegetarian recipes. What I’ll do next, then, is try and estimate the time it will take to make the recipe. My thought was that the prep work in this dish above would take me about 20-25 minutes, which isn’t too bad for a vegetarian soup dish. Adding in the other steps, this dish could be made in under an hour from top to bottom, and you can do something else while it’s simmering for the last 15-20 minutes (but please, stay near the kitchen!).
Many recipes do this thinking for you by listing (hopefully accurate) prep times and/or cook times along with the recipe itself. For me, if I think the prep time alone will be much more than half an hour, I know I’ll get antsy. (Next!) Figure out what your prep time tolerance is and use that as a decision factor.
Aside from a bit of extra slicing and dicing, this recipe is fairly low on the pain in the ass scale. There aren’t a lot of discrete steps in the recipe and frankly it’s not all that complicated. Yes, you’ll be washing and cutting up veggies, but then you just spend a few minutes sauteing them, and after that it’s all about chucking everything into a pot and forgetting about it until the timer goes off. So once the prep work is done, 90% of the total work is done too.
4) Can the dish be doubled easily?
At first glance you could make a case that this recipe partially fails this test because of the amount of prep work. But I disagree. There are ways to process vegetables to save time here. Does it really take twice as long to cut four stalks of celery vs. two? You have to buy a huge multi-stalk celery thing at the grocery store anyway, what’s so hard about stacking up four stalks into a pile and cutting them all at once? Line up the two zucchinis next to each other and cut ‘em up simultaneously. These are simple workflow suggestions so that you’ll be more likely to capture the great benefit of doubling a recipe: 2x the food for only 1.2x the work.
5) Will this dish be cheap to make?
How important this answer is depends obviously on how important frugality is for you. But I typically draw the line if a recipe contains any rip-off expensive ingredients (once again, saffron might be one obvious example. Next!). I have a feeling I’ll always think a little bit about this issue--even if I were a lottery winner or something--because at some crossover price it becomes cheaper to order take-out instead of cooking. Luckily, this dish is cheap enough to qualify for laughably cheap, so there’s no issue whatsoever here.
*********************
So there you have it, five easy questions to ask to help you decide if a recipe is worth cooking. The White Bean and Black Olive Soup recipe was a pretty clear winner here, as it passed three of the five questions with flying colors (#1, #2 and #5), and it got qualified but passing answers on the other two (#3 and #4). That’s good enough for me. There’s no hard and fast rule to apply here as far as how many no answers you’ll tolerate before saying “Next!” or which specific answers are recipe deal-breakers. You will decide for yourself which are most important and which, if any, are triggers for YOU to say “Next!”
If you read each recipe from now on with a critical eye and do your best to answer these five questions, I guarantee you’ll save yourself from a lot of bad recipes, and you’ll have a much better idea of what you’re in for when you choose a new recipe to cook.
Read Next: Re-Seasoning: How To Never Be Bored With Leftovers
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
***************************
How to Tell if a Recipe is Worth Cooking With Five Easy Questions
Nobody wants to take a whole bunch of time out of their busy day to cook something that ends up tasting crappy. And it's pretty frustrating even to make a dish that comes out great--if it takes twice as long to make it as you expected and you're sitting down to dinner with your family at 10:00PM.
So how can you tell, in advance, if a recipe will be any good? Will it be interesting and original? Will it ever make it into your heavy rotation?
Or, will it take too long or be too much of a pain in the ass to make? Or worse, will it end up tasting weird?
You can get surprisingly accurate answers to these questions just by learning to read a recipe with a critically trained eye. So today, as a teaching tool, I want to show you a new recipe that we tried for the first time the other night. I'm going to share with you why I chose the recipe, how I decided that it was likely to taste good, and other assumptions I made about the dish, including the prep work involved and how scalable the dish might be.
Basically, I’m going to walk you through how I went about thinking through the recipe in advance and why I decided it was worth making. Hopefully when you finish this post, you’ll also be able to judge a recipe BEFORE you make it. But first, here is the new recipe itself, borrowed without permission from The New Moosewood Cookbook. I submit it to you here with some modifications. Please read it through and keep it handy as you read the rest of this post:
*********************
White Bean and Black Olive Soup
2 Tablespoons olive oil
2-3 onions, chopped
2 stalks celery, diced
2 carrots, diced
1 teaspoon dried oregano
1 1/2 teaspoon dried basil
1 zucchini, diced
1 green bell pepper, chopped
3-4 garlic cloves, crushed
black pepper to taste
4 cups water
3 oz tomato paste
1/4 cup dry red wine (don't forget: never use "cooking wine")
2 8 ounce cans white beans
1 cup black olives (canned okay)
1 Tablespoon lemon juice
Chopped parsley for toppings.
Heat olive oil in a large stock pot. Add onion, celery, carrot and seasonings. Saute 8-10 minutes over medium heat. Add zucchini, green pepper and garlic, saute 5 minutes more.
Add rest of ingredients to pot, bring to a boil and simmer over medium heat for 15-20 minutes. Serve topped with parsley.
******************
Essentially I want to know if the grief involved in making this dish will outweigh the pleasures involved in eating it. So, what I’m going to do is consider this recipe with the following five key questions in mind. By walking through this exercise with me, you’ll see a practical example of how I think about a recipe before I make it:
1) Does it sound good?
Not if you hate olives. And I mean that in a serious way. You need to scan down the list of ingredients and first make sure there aren’t any ingredients that you hate in there. I know this sounds like a “duh”-type comment, because most dishes, quite expectedly, taste like the ingredients in them.
But my point here is that you can use this rule to instantly eliminate a dish from consideration and move on to another recipe. Hate olives? Okay, nix this one and turn the page. Next!
Yes, you will find some recipes that combine ingredients in such an original way that they don’t taste like their component parts. Believe me, however, a vegetable soup just won’t fall into that category. (Forgive a quick tangent: at some point I’ll share a great Pasta Puttanesca recipe with you that even anchovy-haters will love. My wife can’t sit in the same room with an anchovy but she still loves it.)
Now, here’s the next step in deciding if a dish sounds good: see if there are ingredients in the recipe that are combined in an original way. What grabbed me about this recipe was that it was a soup that contained olives. I love olives, but I have NEVER added them into a soup before. It seemed pretty neat and original. And thus, the recipe “sounded good” to me. Why pick a new recipe if there’s nothing interesting about it?
2) Does it contain any bizarre or impossible-to-find ingredients?
This is usually the second question I ask myself as I run down the list of ingredients. Again, it’s a quick litmus test to help you make an even quicker decision. If the recipe calls for saffron or something (I barely even know what saffron is, much less do I know where the heck I’d find it in my grocery store), it’s a quick deal-killer. Next!
With this recipe, this is an easy question to answer: No. All of the ingredients will be easy to find at any grocery store.
3) How much prep work am I gonna have to do? Will this be a pain in the ass and take forever?
Ah-hah. I thought we were sailing along with flying colors, but we’ve stumbled a bit here. There is a fair amount of chopping and slicing of veggies required here, a common and predictable liability of vegetarian recipes. What I’ll do next, then, is try and estimate the time it will take to make the recipe. My thought was that the prep work in this dish above would take me about 20-25 minutes, which isn’t too bad for a vegetarian soup dish. Adding in the other steps, this dish could be made in under an hour from top to bottom, and you can do something else while it’s simmering for the last 15-20 minutes (but please, stay near the kitchen!).
Many recipes do this thinking for you by listing (hopefully accurate) prep times and/or cook times along with the recipe itself. For me, if I think the prep time alone will be much more than half an hour, I know I’ll get antsy. (Next!) Figure out what your prep time tolerance is and use that as a decision factor.
Aside from a bit of extra slicing and dicing, this recipe is fairly low on the pain in the ass scale. There aren’t a lot of discrete steps in the recipe and frankly it’s not all that complicated. Yes, you’ll be washing and cutting up veggies, but then you just spend a few minutes sauteing them, and after that it’s all about chucking everything into a pot and forgetting about it until the timer goes off. So once the prep work is done, 90% of the total work is done too.
4) Can the dish be doubled easily?
At first glance you could make a case that this recipe partially fails this test because of the amount of prep work. But I disagree. There are ways to process vegetables to save time here. Does it really take twice as long to cut four stalks of celery vs. two? You have to buy a huge multi-stalk celery thing at the grocery store anyway, what’s so hard about stacking up four stalks into a pile and cutting them all at once? Line up the two zucchinis next to each other and cut ‘em up simultaneously. These are simple workflow suggestions so that you’ll be more likely to capture the great benefit of doubling a recipe: 2x the food for only 1.2x the work.
5) Will this dish be cheap to make?
How important this answer is depends obviously on how important frugality is for you. But I typically draw the line if a recipe contains any rip-off expensive ingredients (once again, saffron might be one obvious example. Next!). I have a feeling I’ll always think a little bit about this issue--even if I were a lottery winner or something--because at some crossover price it becomes cheaper to order take-out instead of cooking. Luckily, this dish is cheap enough to qualify for laughably cheap, so there’s no issue whatsoever here.
*********************
So there you have it, five easy questions to ask to help you decide if a recipe is worth cooking. The White Bean and Black Olive Soup recipe was a pretty clear winner here, as it passed three of the five questions with flying colors (#1, #2 and #5), and it got qualified but passing answers on the other two (#3 and #4). That’s good enough for me. There’s no hard and fast rule to apply here as far as how many no answers you’ll tolerate before saying “Next!” or which specific answers are recipe deal-breakers. You will decide for yourself which are most important and which, if any, are triggers for YOU to say “Next!”
If you read each recipe from now on with a critical eye and do your best to answer these five questions, I guarantee you’ll save yourself from a lot of bad recipes, and you’ll have a much better idea of what you’re in for when you choose a new recipe to cook.
Read Next: Re-Seasoning: How To Never Be Bored With Leftovers
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
CK Links--Friday May 8, 2015
Links from around the internet!
Don't forget! The easiest way to support Casual Kitchen is to buy your items at Amazon using the various links here. Just click over to Amazon, and EVERY purchase you make during that visit pays a modest affiliate commission to support my work here. Best of all, this comes at zero extra cost to you.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.
PS: Follow me on Twitter!
*************************
Book recommendation: My friend and fellow food blogger Monica Bhide has a new book out, A Life of Spice, filled with beautifully written essays about food, family, culture and faith. You can check it out via the link here: A Life of Spice
A "voluminous backlash" after Chipotle announces they'll stop serving GMO foods. (Jayson Lusk)
Panera Bread pulls their own Chipotle move, removing many multisyllabic ingredients from their menu too. Get ready for brown cheese. (New York Times)
Researchers have discovered a "switch" in the brain controlling hunger and satiety, which could lead to novel anti-obesity drugs. (MedPage Today)
The primal/paleo community is far more diverse than you might think. (Mark's Daily Apple)
The Environmental Working Group put out a fear-ridden guide on poly-flourochemicals. Count the logic errors, or forever fear your dental floss. PS: Call the Food Babe! (EWG)
How to easily spot a BS clickbait political story. (Cracked)
There's one thing that's misunderstood about retirement investing. It's not out-and-out wrong. It's just not totally right. (Aleph Blog)
Throwing away the "retail therapy" crutch. (The Simple Dollar)
Intriguing short post about how an innumerate New York Times reporter played fast and loose with the facts to make our eighth graders look much less smart than they actually are. (Brad DeLong)
Related: How to develop a healthy cynicism of the media. (Quick Writing Tips)
Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Don't forget! The easiest way to support Casual Kitchen is to buy your items at Amazon using the various links here. Just click over to Amazon, and EVERY purchase you make during that visit pays a modest affiliate commission to support my work here. Best of all, this comes at zero extra cost to you.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.
PS: Follow me on Twitter!
*************************
Book recommendation: My friend and fellow food blogger Monica Bhide has a new book out, A Life of Spice, filled with beautifully written essays about food, family, culture and faith. You can check it out via the link here: A Life of Spice
A "voluminous backlash" after Chipotle announces they'll stop serving GMO foods. (Jayson Lusk)
Panera Bread pulls their own Chipotle move, removing many multisyllabic ingredients from their menu too. Get ready for brown cheese. (New York Times)
Researchers have discovered a "switch" in the brain controlling hunger and satiety, which could lead to novel anti-obesity drugs. (MedPage Today)
The primal/paleo community is far more diverse than you might think. (Mark's Daily Apple)
The Environmental Working Group put out a fear-ridden guide on poly-flourochemicals. Count the logic errors, or forever fear your dental floss. PS: Call the Food Babe! (EWG)
How to easily spot a BS clickbait political story. (Cracked)
There's one thing that's misunderstood about retirement investing. It's not out-and-out wrong. It's just not totally right. (Aleph Blog)
Throwing away the "retail therapy" crutch. (The Simple Dollar)
Intriguing short post about how an innumerate New York Times reporter played fast and loose with the facts to make our eighth graders look much less smart than they actually are. (Brad DeLong)
Related: How to develop a healthy cynicism of the media. (Quick Writing Tips)
Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Labels:
links
On the Benefits of Part-Time Vegetarianism
Readers, a quick reminder: during the month of May I’ll be featuring articles from Casual Kitchen’s archives. Enjoy! As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback.
***************************
On the Benefits of Part-Time Vegetarianism
Back in the 1970s when I was growing up, the vegetarian movement in America was just getting off the ground in places like Berkeley, CA and Ithaca, NY.
Everywhere else, however, vegetarians were seen as sandal-wearing kooks and mocked for their food choices.
Fortunately, attitudes have changed quite a bit since then. Now, most people fully understand the negative health impact of a meat-heavy diet, and more and more people are becoming aware of the negative environmental impact of a meat-heavy diet.
Finally, people are asking themselves how much meat they really need.
And let's face it: the Western diet contains meat and saturated fats in amounts far beyond a human being's daily requirements. By comparison, vegetarian meals are typically far healthier, much lower in fat, and loaded with healthy vitamins, fiber and antioxidants.
But best of all, most vegetarian dishes can be made for a mere fraction of the cost of the typical meat-centric meal.
Look: I'm not a vegetarian, and I'll probably never be a vegetarian. I fully respect why others might make that choice, but I simply don't choose to eat a 100% plant-based diet.
But what if there was a solution that let us capture the best of both worlds?
That's where the concept of Part-Time Vegetarianism comes in.
Forget about being a sandal-wearing kook. Instead, try replacing two or three of your weekly meat-centered meals with vegetarian meals. You don't have to be a militant vegetarian to take advantage of the dietary, environmental and cost benefits of vegetarian food.
A number of years ago our household made this transition, and we saw an immediate 25-30% reduction in our weekly food bill. Our diets became much healthier and, not surprisingly, we felt healthier.
But the most amazing surprise of our part-time vegetarian experiment was this: we never missed the extra meat. It was a surprisingly easy transition to make, and the results (not to mention the financial savings) were so clear and compelling that we never went back. We've been embracing part-time vegetarianism ever since.
If you'd like some cookbook ideas to help you get started with vegetarian and low-meat cuisine, here's a brief list of some of the best cookbooks on our shelves:
1) Sundays at Moosewood Restaurant -- A wonderful cookbook, jam-packed with all kinds of ethnic recipes.
2) The New Moosewood Cookbook-- One of the original veggie cookbooks and a highly regarded classic.
3) The New Vegetarian Epicure -- An early and influential vegetarian cookbook, in a newly updated edition.
4) Almost Meatless -- An exceptional cookbook centered around low-meat eating.
Finally, take a moment to scan the wide range of veggie recipes here at Casual Kitchen. You can search under the vegetarianism tag or visit my Index of Recipes page and look under "Vegetarian." You'll find more than 40 free recipes there!
Don't forget: you can help your pocketbook, your health and the environment by eating less meat. Try part-time vegetarianism in your home and get the best of both worlds!
Read Next: The Top 20 Worst Self-Indulgent Quotes From Michael Pollan's "Cooked"
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
***************************
On the Benefits of Part-Time Vegetarianism
Back in the 1970s when I was growing up, the vegetarian movement in America was just getting off the ground in places like Berkeley, CA and Ithaca, NY.
Everywhere else, however, vegetarians were seen as sandal-wearing kooks and mocked for their food choices.
Fortunately, attitudes have changed quite a bit since then. Now, most people fully understand the negative health impact of a meat-heavy diet, and more and more people are becoming aware of the negative environmental impact of a meat-heavy diet.
Finally, people are asking themselves how much meat they really need.
And let's face it: the Western diet contains meat and saturated fats in amounts far beyond a human being's daily requirements. By comparison, vegetarian meals are typically far healthier, much lower in fat, and loaded with healthy vitamins, fiber and antioxidants.
But best of all, most vegetarian dishes can be made for a mere fraction of the cost of the typical meat-centric meal.
Look: I'm not a vegetarian, and I'll probably never be a vegetarian. I fully respect why others might make that choice, but I simply don't choose to eat a 100% plant-based diet.
But what if there was a solution that let us capture the best of both worlds?
That's where the concept of Part-Time Vegetarianism comes in.
Forget about being a sandal-wearing kook. Instead, try replacing two or three of your weekly meat-centered meals with vegetarian meals. You don't have to be a militant vegetarian to take advantage of the dietary, environmental and cost benefits of vegetarian food.
A number of years ago our household made this transition, and we saw an immediate 25-30% reduction in our weekly food bill. Our diets became much healthier and, not surprisingly, we felt healthier.
But the most amazing surprise of our part-time vegetarian experiment was this: we never missed the extra meat. It was a surprisingly easy transition to make, and the results (not to mention the financial savings) were so clear and compelling that we never went back. We've been embracing part-time vegetarianism ever since.
If you'd like some cookbook ideas to help you get started with vegetarian and low-meat cuisine, here's a brief list of some of the best cookbooks on our shelves:
1) Sundays at Moosewood Restaurant -- A wonderful cookbook, jam-packed with all kinds of ethnic recipes.
2) The New Moosewood Cookbook-- One of the original veggie cookbooks and a highly regarded classic.
3) The New Vegetarian Epicure -- An early and influential vegetarian cookbook, in a newly updated edition.
4) Almost Meatless -- An exceptional cookbook centered around low-meat eating.
Finally, take a moment to scan the wide range of veggie recipes here at Casual Kitchen. You can search under the vegetarianism tag or visit my Index of Recipes page and look under "Vegetarian." You'll find more than 40 free recipes there!
Don't forget: you can help your pocketbook, your health and the environment by eating less meat. Try part-time vegetarianism in your home and get the best of both worlds!
Read Next: The Top 20 Worst Self-Indulgent Quotes From Michael Pollan's "Cooked"
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Labels:
saving money,
vegetarianism
Survivor Bias: Why "Big Food" Isn't Quite As Evil As You Think It Is
A quick note to readers: I'm going to run a mini-experiment in May while I take a month off from blogging. Each Tuesday, in place of my regular column, I'll run a classic post from Casual Kitchen's archives. I'll also run an *extra* bonus post from the archives each Thursday.
I'll post brand new Friday Links each week all month as always.
My hope is to help familiarize newer readers with some of the best work in CK's increasingly gigantic back catalog of posts. And of course, I'll be back with more new material in June (I'm planning something surprising... we'll see how it comes out!). As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback!
******************************
Survivor Bias: Why "Big Food" Isn't Quite As Evil As You Think It Is
Lots of food writers and bloggers, myself included, love to criticize Big Food. It's such an easy target. After all, shouldn't everyone be against an industry that earns billions by force-feeding us unhealthy foods?
Of course, you can only make a statement like that (and keep a straight face) if you view the world with a conspiracy-theory mentality. If that's your primary mindset, stop reading this post right now. Because I am about to suggest an alternate explanation for the realities of the food industry--one that doesn't involve the a priori assumption that our destiny is under the control of an evil cabal of greedy food lords.
A warning though: this explanation involves a quick detour to statistics class, and a quicker detour through my former career on Wall Street. But in just a short few minutes, you'll see that someone else is behind the curtain selecting the foods on our grocery store shelves.
My quick detour starts with a financial question: what happens to a mutual fund that really sucks? (Don't worry, this will be brief. I promise.)
Well, a mutual fund can get away with suckola performance for a few years, but if it significantly underperforms its peer group for much longer, it will be closed down and killed off. It gets pulled from the newspapers, its performance record vanishes, and it gets washed down the memory hole as if it never existed.
Here's the point: this regular mercy-killing of bad mutual funds creates a deeply misleading picture of past performance. Since the worst-performing funds are regularly removed from the data set, the past performance of mutual funds in general looks better than it actually was. What you see isn't really a true picture of past performance--it's just the past performance of the survivors.
Statisticians call this phenomenon survivor bias, and it gives a whole new meaning to the expression "past performance does not guarantee future returns." (Even though I left Wall Street more than a year ago, I still throw up in my mouth a little bit whenever I hear that awful, awful phrase.)
Okay. The point of this article isn't to tell you to be suspicious of the mutual fund industry, that's just a freebie side benefit you get from reading a food blog written by a retired Wall Street analyst. The point is to apply this concept of survivor bias to the food industry, and specifically to the foods sitting on our grocery store shelves.
Many of us like to think that all the deliciously unhealthy foods in our grocery stores are there because evil food companies engineer them that way on purpose. What we don't see, and what few of us think about, are all the foods that weren't quite popular enough with consumers, and were therefore killed off. The food industry is littered with the corpses of thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of foods that have come and gone. Just like underperforming mutual funds, these unpopular or ill-conceived food products die off because they didn't perform well.
If you were to look over the thousands of foods that came and went over the past 50-75 years, you'd find foods of all types. Some would be healthy, some extremely unhealthy. Some would be terrible and tasteless, some would be delicious but for whatever reason unpopular. Some of these foods never made it past regional test markets or focus group testing. Some had huge ad budgets behind them, while some quietly came and went with no ad spending at all.
In every case, however, what really mattered was this: consumer demand was insufficient to support the products that didn't survive. And so they died. The remaining foods on our grocery stores shelves, however unhealthy they may be, are the product of survivor bias. It's quite simple: the foods most heavily demanded by consumers always survive.
So, who's really behind the curtain choosing the foods on our grocery store shelves?
It's us. We are behind the curtain. That's right: fattening and unhealthy foods are on our store shelves because we put them there.
This is why consumers have such a critical role in deciding what is available to us in our stores and markets. Exercise your power by spending your money accordingly.
Readers, share your thoughts!
Note: I owe a debt of gratitude to two exceptional books by Nicholas Taleb: Fooled by Randomness and The Black Swan. Both were instrumental in helping me think through issues raised in this post. Things are not always as they seem.
Read Next: A Paradox for Locavores
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
I'll post brand new Friday Links each week all month as always.
My hope is to help familiarize newer readers with some of the best work in CK's increasingly gigantic back catalog of posts. And of course, I'll be back with more new material in June (I'm planning something surprising... we'll see how it comes out!). As always, I welcome your thoughts and feedback!
******************************
Survivor Bias: Why "Big Food" Isn't Quite As Evil As You Think It Is
Lots of food writers and bloggers, myself included, love to criticize Big Food. It's such an easy target. After all, shouldn't everyone be against an industry that earns billions by force-feeding us unhealthy foods?
Of course, you can only make a statement like that (and keep a straight face) if you view the world with a conspiracy-theory mentality. If that's your primary mindset, stop reading this post right now. Because I am about to suggest an alternate explanation for the realities of the food industry--one that doesn't involve the a priori assumption that our destiny is under the control of an evil cabal of greedy food lords.
A warning though: this explanation involves a quick detour to statistics class, and a quicker detour through my former career on Wall Street. But in just a short few minutes, you'll see that someone else is behind the curtain selecting the foods on our grocery store shelves.
My quick detour starts with a financial question: what happens to a mutual fund that really sucks? (Don't worry, this will be brief. I promise.)
Well, a mutual fund can get away with suckola performance for a few years, but if it significantly underperforms its peer group for much longer, it will be closed down and killed off. It gets pulled from the newspapers, its performance record vanishes, and it gets washed down the memory hole as if it never existed.
Here's the point: this regular mercy-killing of bad mutual funds creates a deeply misleading picture of past performance. Since the worst-performing funds are regularly removed from the data set, the past performance of mutual funds in general looks better than it actually was. What you see isn't really a true picture of past performance--it's just the past performance of the survivors.
Statisticians call this phenomenon survivor bias, and it gives a whole new meaning to the expression "past performance does not guarantee future returns." (Even though I left Wall Street more than a year ago, I still throw up in my mouth a little bit whenever I hear that awful, awful phrase.)
Okay. The point of this article isn't to tell you to be suspicious of the mutual fund industry, that's just a freebie side benefit you get from reading a food blog written by a retired Wall Street analyst. The point is to apply this concept of survivor bias to the food industry, and specifically to the foods sitting on our grocery store shelves.
Many of us like to think that all the deliciously unhealthy foods in our grocery stores are there because evil food companies engineer them that way on purpose. What we don't see, and what few of us think about, are all the foods that weren't quite popular enough with consumers, and were therefore killed off. The food industry is littered with the corpses of thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of foods that have come and gone. Just like underperforming mutual funds, these unpopular or ill-conceived food products die off because they didn't perform well.
If you were to look over the thousands of foods that came and went over the past 50-75 years, you'd find foods of all types. Some would be healthy, some extremely unhealthy. Some would be terrible and tasteless, some would be delicious but for whatever reason unpopular. Some of these foods never made it past regional test markets or focus group testing. Some had huge ad budgets behind them, while some quietly came and went with no ad spending at all.
In every case, however, what really mattered was this: consumer demand was insufficient to support the products that didn't survive. And so they died. The remaining foods on our grocery stores shelves, however unhealthy they may be, are the product of survivor bias. It's quite simple: the foods most heavily demanded by consumers always survive.
So, who's really behind the curtain choosing the foods on our grocery store shelves?
It's us. We are behind the curtain. That's right: fattening and unhealthy foods are on our store shelves because we put them there.
This is why consumers have such a critical role in deciding what is available to us in our stores and markets. Exercise your power by spending your money accordingly.
Readers, share your thoughts!
Note: I owe a debt of gratitude to two exceptional books by Nicholas Taleb: Fooled by Randomness and The Black Swan. Both were instrumental in helping me think through issues raised in this post. Things are not always as they seem.
Read Next: A Paradox for Locavores
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
CK Links--Friday May 1, 2015
Links from around the internet!
Don't forget! The easiest way to support Casual Kitchen is to buy your items at Amazon using the various links here. Just click over to Amazon, and EVERY purchase you make during that visit pays a modest affiliate commission to support my work here. Best of all, this comes at zero extra cost to you.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.
PS: Follow me on Twitter!
*************************
The real reason you don't cook. (Summer Tomato)
Is the food movement winning? Looks like it may be. (Food Politics)
The Daily Show recently ran a segment on GMOs... and reached conclusions the exact opposite of what you'd expect. (Daily Show)
Shield yourself from guile and deliberate manipulation with Carl Sagan's BS detector. (The Big Picture)
Bonus! Six ways to separate lies from statistics.
The work required to have an opinion. (Farnam Street)
If you want to be cured, forever, of any and all desire for aspirationally marketed products, read this post. Long and somewhat difficult, but well worth it. (The Last Psychiatrist)
Why can't we read anymore? Is there anything we can do about our habits of distracting and "pleasing" ourselves to death? (Medium)
Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Don't forget! The easiest way to support Casual Kitchen is to buy your items at Amazon using the various links here. Just click over to Amazon, and EVERY purchase you make during that visit pays a modest affiliate commission to support my work here. Best of all, this comes at zero extra cost to you.
As always, I welcome your thoughts.
PS: Follow me on Twitter!
*************************
The real reason you don't cook. (Summer Tomato)
Is the food movement winning? Looks like it may be. (Food Politics)
The Daily Show recently ran a segment on GMOs... and reached conclusions the exact opposite of what you'd expect. (Daily Show)
Shield yourself from guile and deliberate manipulation with Carl Sagan's BS detector. (The Big Picture)
Bonus! Six ways to separate lies from statistics.
The work required to have an opinion. (Farnam Street)
If you want to be cured, forever, of any and all desire for aspirationally marketed products, read this post. Long and somewhat difficult, but well worth it. (The Last Psychiatrist)
Why can't we read anymore? Is there anything we can do about our habits of distracting and "pleasing" ourselves to death? (Medium)
Got an interesting article or recipe to share? Want some extra traffic at your blog? Send me an email!
How can I support Casual Kitchen?
Easy. Do all your shopping at Amazon.com via the links on this site! You can also link to me or subscribe to my RSS feed. Finally, consider sharing this article, or any other article you particularly enjoyed here, to Facebook, Twitter (follow me @danielckoontz!) or to bookmarking sites like reddit, digg or stumbleupon. I'm deeply grateful to my readers for their ongoing support.
Labels:
links
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)