|
Post by lagatta on Oct 30, 2015 12:22:21 GMT
You can freeze or can (jar, tin) artichokes. By the way, Syrians would gladly eat them (looked that up on a hunch, as I knew they were a prize food round the Mediterranean and Levant). www.saveur.com/article/Travels/Hearts-of-Syria-modernfarmer.com/2014/09/food-war-syria/Chexbres, "les gueules cassées" were First World War soldiers who had facial injuries due to getting hit with something. Their plight also led to significant progress in plastic surgery, which does not only mean botox or erasing wrinkles but to restoring a human appearance to people maimed in wars, accidents, fires etc. I feel sorry for those nice parsnips, and for the farmer seeing them binned when surely people would be happy to buy them.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2015 12:30:28 GMT
You can freeze or can (jar, tin) artichokes. Yes, but whether artichokes, carrots or butter, these things are not eternal and must be destroyed sooner or later if they cannot be used. For things like butter, it was proven in the past that if you give them to poor countries (after the butter had already been sitting frozen for five years), it completely disrupts the local producers in those countries and causes them to starve to death. There was also the "wine lake" which finally got turned into ethanol at great expense.
|
|
|
Post by rikita on Oct 30, 2015 23:42:46 GMT
well, yes, i think sending things to poor countries is not the solution, as it causes problems in the local economy (especially when it is sold much cheaper), makes farmers give up their farms if they can't sell their own produce, so then the country ends up depending on imported food. but growing it just to throw it away seems wrong, too. if it all got sold, less farmland or less harsh methods to grow everything as big as possible would be necessary i suppose ... as for supermarkets throwing things away, i used to know some people who lived of things from the supermarket garbage - breaking into the place the thrown away things were kept and taking them. it is illegal and considered stealing, even though these things are just being thrown away ... and wasn't it someone in this forum once mentioning how some supermarkets pour bleach over food, just so no one takes it?
|
|
|
Post by chexbres on Oct 31, 2015 9:45:51 GMT
There is still a home for Les Gueules Cassees in Paris - it's not too far from La Madeleine, in a really lovely building that I pass by frequently.
I think the only solution to food waste would be to stop producing so much food in the first place. But this would cause prices to rise, people would buy less, farmers would go out of business...
The health board requires that any food that might still be consumed by humans be doused with bleach or ammonia, if it's put in the trash. I've only seen this done when a restaurant or grocery had failed their yearly health inspection, or had been convicted of causing food poisoning. In Paris, perfectly good food is just put in the garbage bins. The people who need it are always on time, so they can get to the food before the garbage truck arrives.
Most of the time, it's clear that the people gathering food from the garbage are desperate and have no other choice - but I've seen well-dressed, well-fed hipster types riding up on expensive bicycles and joining in because they thought it would be fun. And a couple of times a year, there is a producer's market where the prices for fruit and vegetables have been cut to the bone in protest against regulations, giant supermarkets, etc. Somebody started publicizing this as a "must-do", so now more tourists show up than anybody who really needs to buy 20 kg of potatoes for their families.
|
|
|
Post by rikita on Oct 31, 2015 23:09:45 GMT
well the people i knew who got the food from garbage weren't homeless or very poor (though not rich either, usually students) - but i wouldn't say that they did it because they thought it was fun. had to do more with political attitudes and lifestyle, basically wanting to avoid consumerism and waste and all that ...
if less food was produced and prices rose (to a normal level, in a lot cases), wouldn't farmers get more money for the produce they still produce, even if people buy less, while (because it is less) having to invest less? so why would they go out of business?
|
|
|
Post by chexbres on Nov 1, 2015 8:27:03 GMT
I'm no expert in either math or economics, but I believe that the current system involves subsidies for producing more food, the excess of which is supposed to be exported - or something like that where everybody still makes money producing more food for less money? I think if farmers produce less, they aren't entitled to government subsidies, which is what keeps most of them going in the US, anyway. Somebody please correct me, if I have this wrong.
People are bitterly complaining about how much food costs now - I can't imagine what chaos would ensue if prices rose even a little bit. I guess more people would just eat a whole lot more fast food, which is always cheaper, even if it is deadly.
|
|
|
Post by rikita on Nov 1, 2015 9:18:15 GMT
well, in that case i suppose the subsidies could be used differently - instead of using them for producing more food, for producing less (but maybe that one higher quality, organic, etc.) ... i know people complain about the cost of food, and sometimes i do too, but the truth is that the cost of a lot of things is unrealistic. we have become unwilling to spend a proper amount of money on what we put into our bodies, while we pay lots for electronic toys and similar things ...
i once saw a cartoon that kind of described it for me: at a barbeque competition, the juror is speaking to one of the participants, the participant brags about all his gear, how much it costs, how high quality it is. and the juror asks: and the meat. he says this-and-this meat, for 80 cents at this-and-this discounter, and the juror says: at the other discounter it is 20 cents cheaper, so we will have to substract some points ...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2015 12:50:32 GMT
With or without subsidies, there is no way for farmers to completely control the quantity or quality of their crops. There are good years and bad years for a variety of reasons. Since I don't think anybody wants to go hungry, farmers have to produce more than they think we need, if only to be sure to have enough even when it is a bad year. And when it is a crop that the whole world needs like wheat or rice, I seem to recall that everybody screams bloody murder when the price of bread goes up, for example.
|
|
|
Post by tod2 on Nov 2, 2015 18:14:16 GMT
My family on my father's side were all farmers including my dad. I saw him work the land from dawn till dusk only to have to plow his crops back into the soil some years because the price he would get on the market had sunk so low he would loose money taking his produce to be sold. Never mind not earning a blue cent from months of labor - the mental strain was also a factor in my parents giving up farming for good.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 2, 2015 18:47:03 GMT
The upscale grocery Whole Paycheck Food Co. here used to have a dumpster that used to be chock full of still edible food stuffs. Perhaps a bit bruised or slightly overripe, perfect for soups and such. Alot of students and artists that I know used to raid it on a regular basis and have a weekly potluck dinner. Over time the store began locking the dumpster. One would think that they might even allow their employees to take it home. It makes no sense. And yet they tout being eco-friendly etc.
The farmer's market on the other hand has a slew of vendors who will practically give away produce at the end of the day and fruit that is slightly overripe dramatically discounted. I get a huge bag of peaches from one vendor which are slightly overripe but perfect for pies, cobblers, or homemade ice cream. There are some chefs who will come and buy out what is left to use for their restaurants. It's still fresh but just not "perfect" with a bruise here or a nick there. Perfectly edible.
Yes, growing up, both sides of my family were potato farmers along with some other seasonal vegetables. We were at the mercy of the capricious forces of nature from year to year. There was one farmer who was notorious for hoarding potatoes in his barn with the hope of the price rising. Almost every other year there would be a fire in his barn from them becoming combustible as they rotted away. My father was a volunteer fireman and in the dead of winter in the middle of the night we would hear the fire whistle going off and I can remember my father saying, "I'll bet that it's that SOB Gurden's potato barn" and he would have to get up along with another dozen or so firemen and go put this man's fire out in his barn.
|
|
|
Post by chexbres on Nov 2, 2015 20:16:56 GMT
Unfortunately, the reason grocery stores and restaurants are leery about giving away left-over food to people who need it, is the fact that they can be sued if someone becomes ill after eating it. In addition to a big lawsuit, nobody wants to risk negative advertisement.
This is one of the big questions being raised in Paris - food establishments must respect "la chaine de froid" (keep things properly cold while in storage and transit). Since this costs money to do, many aren't able or willing to make the effort. Food banks have been recruiting volunteers with refrigerated trucks to make pickups, but since it's still up to the store or restaurant to ensure quality, not many are willing to take the chance of being sued.
|
|
|
Post by questa on Nov 3, 2015 3:30:14 GMT
In Australia we have OzHarvest...a group that runs a fleet of trucks daily to collect food for charities... OzHarvest is the first perishable food rescue organisation in Australia collecting quality excess food from commercial outlets and delivering it, direct and free of charge, to 600 charities providing much needed assistance to vulnerable men, women and children across Sydney, Adelaide, Brisbane, Canberra, Gold Coast, Melbourne, Newcastle and Perth.
OzHarvest is the only food rescue organisation in Australia collecting surplus food from all types of food providers including fruit and vegetable markets, supermarkets, hotels, wholesalers, farmers, stadiums, corporate events, catering companies, shopping centres, delis, cafes, restaurants, film and TV shoots and boardrooms.
OzHarvest was founded in November 2004 by Ronni Kahn, who was named Australia’s Local Hero of the Year in 2010.
In 2005, Kahn together with pro-bono lawyers lobbied the state governments to amend legislation to allow potential food donors to donate surplus food to charitable organisations.
The Civil Liabilities Amendment Act was passed in NSW in 2005 with ACT, SA and QLD following. This ensured surplus food could be donated to charitable causes without fear of liability.It is still mostly volunteers who do the work. www.ozharvest.org/what-we-do/our-story/
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Feb 5, 2016 15:23:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by chexbres on Feb 6, 2016 17:04:39 GMT
Well, France talks a good game, but things like this are too complicated for many food outlets to comply with - even when threatened with higher taxes and heavy fines. There will still be a lot of food left in garbage cans for anyone who wants or needs to find it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2016 17:49:46 GMT
I think that the supermarkets have no moral or capitalistic problem with giving the food to charities and food banks, but in reality only about 30% of the food can be used, either because it is really in questionable condition or simply because it is often the same items of which there is too much, and you just can't cram it down the throats of people who don't want it. There are always tonnes of leftover pork products but most poor Muslims will not eat them, even if they are hungry. In a totally different register, a huge amount of cauliflower gets thrown away. Even when the outside has turned brown, the inside is perfectly fine to eat, but the fact is that most people just do not like cauliflower (I love it.). Already when it is produced, half of it gets thrown away before even reaching the vendors simply because in any "normal" year, the amount produced is at least double the amount consumed.
Unless they start making food pills in advance for the Mars colony in 2050, there is just no way to use a lot of this stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2016 7:29:05 GMT
I threw away half a jar of instant coffee this morning. I opened it for the first time in about 4 years and the acrid smell made it seem that it could be used as paint remover rather than as a breakfast beverage. Ended up making tea, even though my tea bags are not much younger.
|
|
|
Post by chexbres on Feb 7, 2016 19:56:07 GMT
Kerouac - you need to clean out your kitchen more often! Speaking about cauliflower - a really hot trend in restaurants is to burn the stuff, either sliced in "steaks" and fried in butter till it's very dark brown, or just a whole head stuck in a hot oven until it's nearly black. I don't understand the appeal of burned food of any kind, with the exception of pork chops (which is how my mother made them to please my father, who had a lifelong fear of trichinosis). But another dish that's making the rounds is "cauliflower cous-cous" - you just grate raw cauliflower into little crumbs, then blanch it for a nanosecond. Then cook everything else you want to serve it with and pour that over the fake cous-cous. If you're trying to avoid calories, it's not too bad.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Feb 7, 2016 21:27:12 GMT
That first crap sounds like the craze for "blackened" this or that. yuck.
The coffee mutation is impressive. I once opened a jar of it I'd kept too long, but it had no smell and had simply turned gray and more crumbly.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2016 22:05:39 GMT
A previous time when I kept instant coffee for too long, it actually had green flecks in it. Brrrr!
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Feb 7, 2016 23:14:06 GMT
Did you at least save the jar to justify keeping it that long?
|
|
|
Post by rikita on Feb 21, 2016 8:44:47 GMT
i wonder how to teach a child not to waste food (for example by making a complete mess of the food they don't want to eat), without resorting to the "there are children in africa starving" line ... i tell her that i might have liked to eat it if she hadn't taken it completely apart with her fingers, and now we have to throw it away and that is a waste, but she does not seem to care much. of course a certain haptic experience with food is important, but i really don't like how much we end up throwing away (and usually things she asked for, like the extra cheese sandwich she just demanded). and of course it is annoying to clean up the mess ...
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Feb 21, 2016 14:55:47 GMT
Rikita, smaller servings? She'd eat it all if she was hungry & the second (or third) helping could be small as well. Even with sandwiches, you could make a half sandwich & cut that in half to give her as a first portion. I think then she'd start seeing her food as something to eat and not mess with when she was full and bored.
As far as haptic experience with food, she's probably past that stage & might start enjoying being tidier. Maybe if she is accustomed to staying in her chair after she's had her fill, you could give her some Play-Doh to entertain her and divert her from asking for more food out of boredom.
|
|
|
Post by htmb on Feb 21, 2016 15:03:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bjd on Feb 21, 2016 17:54:19 GMT
As far as haptic experience with food, she's probably past that stage & might start enjoying being tidier. Maybe if she is accustomed to staying in her chair after she's had her fill, you could give her some Play-Doh to entertain her and divert her from asking for more food out of boredom. Bixa, have you forgotten? Small children eat Play-Doh.
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Feb 21, 2016 18:44:21 GMT
Mine never did! Anyway, if little Agnes was there at the dinner table with her parents, I doubt they'd sit by and let her gobble it up. The product is non-toxic and I imagine one taste would put a child off it for good.
|
|
|
Post by htmb on Feb 21, 2016 19:03:49 GMT
I always figured that once they started tearing their food apart and dropping it on the floor they were finished eating.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 21, 2016 19:29:57 GMT
I must have been a strange child. I always ate what was put in front of me, even in school cafeterias.
However, it is also true that certain things were not put in front of me at home because I was known to dislike them. Things like spinach or liver -- no problem! I would even have seconds.
I also recall that in my first three years of (Catholic) school, where it was forbidden to return the tray if it was not empty, I was one of the participants in the black market of extra desserts. Even though I hated them, too, I would eat other kids' (mercifully small) portion of collard greens in exchange for their dessert. Probably the fact that I liked spinach helped me to swallow that crap because it looked exactly like spinach although the flavour was "spinach gone terribly wrong."
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Feb 21, 2016 20:59:18 GMT
Boy, you were rebel with a cause, weren't you?!
I have a very early memory of my godmother feeding me butter beans and saying "down the hatch" with each spoon-full. I must have basked in the praise of being a good girl and eating it all up because to this day I eat everything on my plate whether I need to or not.
|
|
|
Post by rikita on Feb 21, 2016 23:23:00 GMT
my experience is that the interest in food varies a lot - my niece is a much tidier eater, even though younger, simply because she loves food and wouldn't waste it. for agnes - she might have not had anything for quite a while, and it might be her favourite, but she still gets distracted and finds tearing it up more interesting at times ...
i have to kind of find a way to do that with smaller servings and giving her the right thing, so far i usually make a plate with a selection of different things, so she finds something she likes (like, for breakfast some bread with cheese and a slice each of an apple, a pear, a banana) - i try asking her beforehand what she wants, but usually get answers like "nutella" or no answer at all ... as i said, food (other than sweets) is not that much a priority for her ...
i don't want to make her finish her plate though - because i tend to always finish the food that is there, which isn't actually that good (i tend to overeat) and i read that it often has to do with being taught as a child not to listen to your body when it is full ... as i said, the problem is not so much not finishing what i give her (guessing what she might want), but when she asks for something, and then ends up not eating it. or when she insists on peeling the whole banana (often she is so fast i can't stop her), even though she always just has a bite or two from it, and later on refuses to eat one that is not looking nice anymore ...
she doesn't always make a mess though - just this morning she did ...
|
|
|
Post by htmb on Feb 22, 2016 1:22:09 GMT
I must have been a strange child. I always ate what was put in front of me, even in school cafeterias. However, it is also true that certain things were not put in front of me at home because I was known to dislike them. Things like spinach or liver -- no problem! I would even have seconds. I also recall that in my first three years of (Catholic) school, where it was forbidden to return the tray if it was not empty, I was one of the participants in the black market of extra desserts. Even though I hated them, too, I would eat other kids' (mercifully small) portion of collard greens in exchange for their dessert. Probably the fact that I liked spinach helped me to swallow that crap because it looked exactly like spinach although the flavour was "spinach gone terribly wrong." Too funny!!!
|
|