/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>18304724
If that's what you consider a lot of effort I have to assume you weigh 800 lb and spend most of your time sleeping in a hammock while your servants feed you cheeseburgers and help change out your hammock-bedpan.

>>14277717
>Pic not related at all, "worth your salt" comes from when salt was currency. When people were paid their salaries in salt.
The 'salary was named "salary" because people used to be paid in salt' myth comes from a 100% baseless folk etymology Pliny the Elder made up about an ancient past he had no actual evidence for. No soldiers of his time had anything remotely comparable to salt payment or even to the other version of this myth where it's an allowance for purchasing salt, and nobody has evidence this was done in the ancient past before his time either. Roman authors made up with folk explanations for how things were long ago like this all the time.
Please stop repeating bullshit like that. It gives me a headache.
t. /his/
While I'm at it "you need 8 glasses of water each day" and "you only use 10% of your brain" are also myths. And while there's a lot of world history to rule out before you can literally say you know for sure, it's at least extremely unlikely anyone at any time throughout history actually valued salt pound for pound at a higher rate than gold despite that other popular salt myth.
Salt was and is very important, but cost nowhere near that much and had no role as a form of payment to soldiers or other workers

>>13519233
I know how you feel Try this.
1) Buy months' worth of microwave rice pouches, easy mac, and instant noodles from Amazon. Almost every civilization ever got their base calories from grains like that. They're easy to digest, non-perishable (can be kept lying around in boxes for years before going bad) and you won't get tired of eating them as quickly as you would a lot of other kinds of food, but having 2 or 3 different kinds like that to rotate between will help for when you eventually do get tired of one of them.
2) Cans of Vienna sausages and SPAM singles packs for your meat (already cooked; just microwave a bit to warm them up).
3) V8 for drinks and to help cover your potassium (go with the low sodium kind; has more potassium and you're already getting plenty of salt).
4) Get some condiments to keep everything tasting good. Worcestershire sauce is a nice one that's surprisingly low sodium while still giving you a nice savory flavor (good with the meat). Ketchup's a good thing to have on standby if you can't think of anything else you want. Salad dressings of all sorts work well on rice or noodles too e.g. Italian vinaigrette, ranch, thousand island.

>>13326066
These sorts of clickbait articles come out every so often and depend on not understanding how these plant "behaviors" are actually fired off.
Long story short, if you applied this kind of thinking to humans you would be saying the way your skin responds to sunlight by tanning is an intelligent behavior for dealing with stress.
And I say this as someone who eats meat every day. I don't care about vegans, but falling for this kind of clickbait bullshit is bad.

>>13312975
Earliest known chili recipe is 1850. Texas wasn't part of Mexico in 1850.
>stormer
?
I'm not insulting Mexico. Contemporary Mexicans on the record themselves have repeatedly insisted they have nothing to do with it:
>The only thing certain about the origins of chili is that it did not originate in Mexico.
>Charles Ramsdell, a writer from San Antonio in an article called San Antonio: An Historical and Pictorial Guide, wrote:
>"Chili, as we know it in the U.S., cannot be found in Mexico today except in a few spots which cater to tourists. If chili had come from Mexico, it would still be there. For Mexicans, especially those of Indian ancestry, do not change their culinary customs from one generation, or even from one century, to another."
>If there is any doubt about what the Mexicans think about chili, the Diccionario de Mejicanismos, published in 1959, defines chili con carne as (roughly translated):
>"detestable food passing itself off as Mexican, sold in the U.S. from Texas to New York."

>>13277185
>not because the quality of the food has dropped, but because it is no longer open to the general public.
OP's a dishonest faggot as usual. Disregard.

>>13204911
For fat people who drink it for fun instead of for what it was originally intended. That's the whole point of this discussion, that it defeats the point of what it was made for.
>>13204908
Listen here you ketotard piece of shit. You're wrong. It was ALWAYS intended to help with blood sugar replenishing on top of having electrolytes.
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16686535
>Cade created Gatorade at the University of Florida in 1965 as a way to both quench players' thirst and replace carbohydrates and electrolytes lost through sweating in the intense Florida heat.
Also note the famous original formula that tasted really awful before they switched gears and focused on improving flavor HAD SUGAR ALREADY.
>Robert Cade was just 37 years old and had only recently heard about new research showing the importance of glucose and salt in helping the body absorb water. He and his assistants got to work mixing up concoctions using sodium, potassium and glucose. The University of Florida football players asked to try it, said it tasted, well, like urine.

>>13176239
Imagine being so poor when you finally get spending money you think attending a restaurant more expensive than Burger King is something to feel pride over.

>>13141404
Rabbit is the original term for it you retard. Rarebit was a later bastardized false etymology that kills the humor of the original name.
>Welsh Rabbit is amusing and right. Welsh Rarebit is stupid and wrong.
Fowler, H. W., A Dictionary of Modern English Usage, Oxford University Press, 1926

>>13142155
>emergency 3600 calorie snack bars
Do Americans... REALLY?

>>13131138
>In all honesty keto actually does work
Nope.
Reminder that you don't lose more weight if you keep calories the same and only change the macronutrient ratio.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19246357
>Comparison of weight-loss diets with different compositions of fat, protein, and carbohydrates.
>CONCLUSIONS: Reduced-calorie diets result in clinically meaningful weight loss regardless of which macronutrients they emphasize.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/7096307_Ketogenic_low-carbohydrate_diets_have_no_metabolic_advantage_over_nonketogenic_low-carbohydrate_diets
>Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets
>KLC and NLC diets were equally effective in reducing body weight and insulin resistance, but the KLC diet was associated with several adverse metabolic and emotional effects. The use of ketogenic diets for weight loss is not warranted.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27385608
>Energy expenditure and body composition changes after an isocaloric ketogenic diet in overweight and obese men.
>The carbohydrate-insulin model of obesity posits that habitual consumption of a high-carbohydrate diet sequesters fat within adipose tissue because of hyperinsulinemia and results in adaptive suppression of energy expenditure (EE). Therefore, isocaloric exchange of dietary carbohydrate for fat is predicted to result in increased EE, increased fat oxidation, and loss of body fat. In contrast, a more conventional view that "a calorie is a calorie" predicts that isocaloric variations in dietary carbohydrate and fat will have no physiologically important effects on EE or body fat.
>CONCLUSION: The isocaloric KD was not accompanied by increased body fat loss but was associated with relatively small increases in EE that were near the limits of detection with the use of state-of-the-art technology.

>>13111872
>2019
>falling for the keto meme.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00325481.1958.11692236?journalCode=ipgm20
>We have for the past 15 years treated numerous diabetic patients with the rice diet. Since more than 90 percent of the calories in this diet are derived from carbohydrates, it was anticipated that increased amounts of insulin would be necessary to keep the blood sugar at its previous level. However, the opposite proved to be true. As previously reported, not only is the rice diet well tolerated but in many instances the blood sugar and the insulin requirements decrease.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673655902117
>There is no indication that healthy people taking a diet rich in carbohydrates are especially liable to diabetes ; in fact numerous observations show improvement of carbohydrate tolerance following its greater intake. The Staub-Traugott effect is a classical example of this in acute experiments. As a long-term effect diabetes mellitus is not especially common among the huge and mainly carbohydrate-eating populations of the world-e.g., the Chinese-except the rich and the sedentary among them who partake of large quantities of fat as well and encourage obesity by overeating.