crymad writes:

This whole brown vs. white rice thing has been bothering me. I recall
researching the topic in the past, and that's probably when I stopped
fretting about eating white rice. Look at the nutritional breakdown for
100g of long grain below, courtesy of http://www.nutritionanalyser.com
-- is brown rice really that dominant? Any of you brown rice eaters
have any additional information that this comparison overlooks? Joe?


White Brown
-------------------------
[...other nutrients...]
Folate - Total (mcg)58.00 4.00
Food - Folate (mcg) 3.00 4.00
Folate - DFE (mcg) 97.00 4.00

Looks as if the white stuff in this comparison was doped with folate,
which raises questions about the other nutrients as well.

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

On 21 Oct 2004 10:14:06 -0400, Lewis Perin wrote:

crymad writes:

This whole brown vs. white rice thing has been bothering me. I recall
researching the topic in the past, and that's probably when I stopped
fretting about eating white rice. Look at the nutritional breakdown for
100g of long grain below, courtesy of http://www.nutritionanalyser.com
-- is brown rice really that dominant? Any of you brown rice eaters
have any additional information that this comparison overlooks? Joe?


White Brown
-------------------------
[...other nutrients...]
Folate - Total (mcg)58.00 4.00
Food - Folate (mcg) 3.00 4.00
Folate - DFE (mcg) 97.00 4.00

Looks as if the white stuff in this comparison was doped with folate,
which raises questions about the other nutrients as well.

Perhaps it is the "enriched" variety.

--
Derek

"The larger the island of knowledge, the longer the shorline of wonder." --
Ralph W. Sockman

On 21 Oct 2004 10:14:06 -0400, Lewis Perin wrote:

crymad writes:

This whole brown vs. white rice thing has been bothering me. I recall
researching the topic in the past, and that's probably when I stopped
fretting about eating white rice. Look at the nutritional breakdown for
100g of long grain below, courtesy of http://www.nutritionanalyser.com
-- is brown rice really that dominant? Any of you brown rice eaters
have any additional information that this comparison overlooks? Joe?


White Brown
-------------------------
[...other nutrients...]
Folate - Total (mcg)58.00 4.00
Food - Folate (mcg) 3.00 4.00
Folate - DFE (mcg) 97.00 4.00

Looks as if the white stuff in this comparison was doped with folate,
which raises questions about the other nutrients as well.

Perhaps it is the "enriched" variety.

--
Derek

"The larger the island of knowledge, the longer the shorline of wonder." --
Ralph W. Sockman

I'm drinking Drunken Concubine and listening to Janet Baker sing
Schubert.

Much better than the reverse, I'm sure.

Reminds me of a favorite Dorothy Parker retort. When asked why she hadn't
attended a production of one of her own works: Because I'm too f******
busy - and vice versa.

I'm drinking Drunken Concubine and listening to Janet Baker sing
Schubert.

Much better than the reverse, I'm sure.

Reminds me of a favorite Dorothy Parker retort. When asked why she hadn't
attended a production of one of her own works: Because I'm too f******
busy - and vice versa.

Real brown rice is pretty chewy, as Michael says, especially if
incorrectly
prepared - which is common. (Following package directions for amount of
water and cooking time makes a product I wouldn't eat.)

do tell, dog.....how best does one prepare it?

Obviously a matter of taste, and I wouldn't presume to arbitrate same. I
guess I'm saying that something as versatile as rice can be made to suit
almost any taste, so "correctly" means "as you best like it." For white-rice
eaters, that could mean using at least 50% more water than is usually
recommended, and to "overcook" it slightly - both to soften the rice and
make it slightly more self-adhesive.

Here's what I do: wash the rice, place in a cooker with water, and heat just
to simmer. Then turn off, and wait an hour or more for the water to be
absorbed and distributed. Then add more water and cook. What's happening is
that the rice is then fully hydrated before cooking, which I think makes a
much better product with distinct, soft grains and little surface breakdown.

This is not actually entirely OT, as the detailed solution mechanics of tea
brewing, especially for the first few steeps of gong-fu, have several
processes in common.

-DM

"But how can you trust one who trifurcates bananas?"

Real brown rice is pretty chewy, as Michael says, especially if
incorrectly
prepared - which is common. (Following package directions for amount of
water and cooking time makes a product I wouldn't eat.)

do tell, dog.....how best does one prepare it?

Obviously a matter of taste, and I wouldn't presume to arbitrate same. I
guess I'm saying that something as versatile as rice can be made to suit
almost any taste, so "correctly" means "as you best like it." For white-rice
eaters, that could mean using at least 50% more water than is usually
recommended, and to "overcook" it slightly - both to soften the rice and
make it slightly more self-adhesive.

Here's what I do: wash the rice, place in a cooker with water, and heat just
to simmer. Then turn off, and wait an hour or more for the water to be
absorbed and distributed. Then add more water and cook. What's happening is
that the rice is then fully hydrated before cooking, which I think makes a
much better product with distinct, soft grains and little surface breakdown.

This is not actually entirely OT, as the detailed solution mechanics of tea
brewing, especially for the first few steeps of gong-fu, have several
processes in common.

-DM

"But how can you trust one who trifurcates bananas?"

Just realized this topic was even here. It appears I have initiated some
controversy in that earlier thread.

I'm just in some ways an unreconstructed hippie with food preferences formed in
the 70s, and I absorbed the food propaganda too. The cooking was too heavy and
bland, but it seems like most of the propaganda turned out to be right. I've
since abandoned meat, and dairy is very much an occasional thing.

I like brown rice and whole grains, but I do eat the white stuff when that's
all the restaurant offers.

I do think the chart reflects the properties of enriched rice.

Joe

Just realized this topic was even here. It appears I have initiated some
controversy in that earlier thread.

I'm just in some ways an unreconstructed hippie with food preferences formed in
the 70s, and I absorbed the food propaganda too. The cooking was too heavy and
bland, but it seems like most of the propaganda turned out to be right. I've
since abandoned meat, and dairy is very much an occasional thing.

I like brown rice and whole grains, but I do eat the white stuff when that's
all the restaurant offers.

I do think the chart reflects the properties of enriched rice.

Joe

On 21 Oct 2004 17:07:03 GMT, Joseph Kubera wrote:

Just realized this topic was even here. It appears I have initiated some
controversy in that earlier thread.

Ah, so we can blame you for all of this, right?

I'm just in some ways an unreconstructed hippie with food preferences formed in
the 70s, and I absorbed the food propaganda too. The cooking was too heavy and
bland, but it seems like most of the propaganda turned out to be right. I've
since abandoned meat, and dairy is very much an occasional thing.

Healthful eating has never gone away. Bleached and processed flours aren't
as good as whole grain flour. That's why General Mill's recently announced
that they are going to us whole grains in *ALL* of their breakfast cerials.

I like brown rice and whole grains, but I do eat the white stuff when that's
all the restaurant offers.

I discovered brown rice in college. I never make the white stuff at home
anymore.

I do think the chart reflects the properties of enriched rice.

't would make sense.


--
Derek

Heffalumps to the left of me, woozles to the right.
Here I am, stuck in the middle with Pooh.

On 21 Oct 2004 17:07:03 GMT, Joseph Kubera wrote:

Just realized this topic was even here. It appears I have initiated some
controversy in that earlier thread.

Ah, so we can blame you for all of this, right?

I'm just in some ways an unreconstructed hippie with food preferences formed in
the 70s, and I absorbed the food propaganda too. The cooking was too heavy and
bland, but it seems like most of the propaganda turned out to be right. I've
since abandoned meat, and dairy is very much an occasional thing.

Healthful eating has never gone away. Bleached and processed flours aren't
as good as whole grain flour. That's why General Mill's recently announced
that they are going to us whole grains in *ALL* of their breakfast cerials.

I like brown rice and whole grains, but I do eat the white stuff when that's
all the restaurant offers.

I discovered brown rice in college. I never make the white stuff at home
anymore.

I do think the chart reflects the properties of enriched rice.

't would make sense.


--
Derek

Heffalumps to the left of me, woozles to the right.
Here I am, stuck in the middle with Pooh.

Dog Ma 1 wrote:

Michael Plant, crymad:


... those who would have me eat this chewy muck.

Think of it as the textural equivalent of a single-tree Phoenix oolong as
compared with the insipid shallowness of stale Twinings that white-rice
mastication offers.

Does everything we eat have to be bursting with flavor? The reason
white rice works so well with Asian food is that serves as a foil for
the more strongly flavored main dishes that accompany it. We all know
people who eat fried rice with their Chinese meal, or who pour soy on
white rice because it "has no taste". Show some refinement -- eat plain
white rice.

"Insipid shallowness"? I once saw a Japanese TV show that sent a famous
chef into the wilds of Africa to cook for one of those isolated tribes
whose menfolk wear the legendary long "penis sheaths". He cooked up a
pot of plain white rice and gave a taste to the village chief. This old
guy actually broke down in tears, blubbering that he had never tasted
anything so beautiful and delicious.

Is it OK to discuss mastication here?

Only in the context of penis sheaths.

Most US "brown" rice
is really white rice that's slightly less polsihed: looks brownish, but all
the good stuff's gone - that nutrient chart wouldn't apply. I recommend
Lundberg if it's available there.

I'd be eager to see the nutritional analysis of some fine Lundberg, or
anything comparable. Then we can see if healthfulness of brown rice is
just pure myth. Any numbers, anyone?

--crymad

Dog Ma 1 wrote:

Michael Plant, crymad:


... those who would have me eat this chewy muck.

Think of it as the textural equivalent of a single-tree Phoenix oolong as
compared with the insipid shallowness of stale Twinings that white-rice
mastication offers.

Does everything we eat have to be bursting with flavor? The reason
white rice works so well with Asian food is that serves as a foil for
the more strongly flavored main dishes that accompany it. We all know
people who eat fried rice with their Chinese meal, or who pour soy on
white rice because it "has no taste". Show some refinement -- eat plain
white rice.

"Insipid shallowness"? I once saw a Japanese TV show that sent a famous
chef into the wilds of Africa to cook for one of those isolated tribes
whose menfolk wear the legendary long "penis sheaths". He cooked up a
pot of plain white rice and gave a taste to the village chief. This old
guy actually broke down in tears, blubbering that he had never tasted
anything so beautiful and delicious.

Is it OK to discuss mastication here?

Only in the context of penis sheaths.

Most US "brown" rice
is really white rice that's slightly less polsihed: looks brownish, but all
the good stuff's gone - that nutrient chart wouldn't apply. I recommend
Lundberg if it's available there.

I'd be eager to see the nutritional analysis of some fine Lundberg, or
anything comparable. Then we can see if healthfulness of brown rice is
just pure myth. Any numbers, anyone?

--crymad

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:21:24 -0700, crymad wrote:

I'd be eager to see the nutritional analysis of some fine Lundberg, or
anything comparable. Then we can see if healthfulness of brown rice is
just pure myth. Any numbers, anyone?

From the Lundberg website:

Long Grain Brown Rice, 1/2 cup (98g) serving

Calories: 340
From fat: 28
Total Fat: 3 g (6% daily value)
Saturated: 0 g
Trans fat: 0 g
Cholesterol: 0 mg
Sodium: 0 mg
Total Carbs: 76 g (26% daily value)
Dietary Fiber: 6 g (26% daily value)
Sugars: 0 g
Protein: 8 g
Vitamin A: 0%
Vitamin C: 0%
Calcium: 0%
Iron: 4% daily value.

Here's a website that compares different types of rice. The Lundberg facts
seem to be comparable to the brown rice listed.

http://www.pechsiam.com/allabout_nutrition.htm

White rice isn't bad for you, brown rice simply has more of what's good for
you.

--
Derek

Your role may be thankless, but if you're willing to give it your all, you
just might bring success to those who outlast you.

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:21:24 -0700, crymad wrote:

I'd be eager to see the nutritional analysis of some fine Lundberg, or
anything comparable. Then we can see if healthfulness of brown rice is
just pure myth. Any numbers, anyone?

From the Lundberg website:

Long Grain Brown Rice, 1/2 cup (98g) serving

Calories: 340
From fat: 28
Total Fat: 3 g (6% daily value)
Saturated: 0 g
Trans fat: 0 g
Cholesterol: 0 mg
Sodium: 0 mg
Total Carbs: 76 g (26% daily value)
Dietary Fiber: 6 g (26% daily value)
Sugars: 0 g
Protein: 8 g
Vitamin A: 0%
Vitamin C: 0%
Calcium: 0%
Iron: 4% daily value.

Here's a website that compares different types of rice. The Lundberg facts
seem to be comparable to the brown rice listed.

http://www.pechsiam.com/allabout_nutrition.htm

White rice isn't bad for you, brown rice simply has more of what's good for
you.

--
Derek

Your role may be thankless, but if you're willing to give it your all, you
just might bring success to those who outlast you.