salgud wrote:

> That could be. It might just be a particular "cooking tradition" I'm
> not familar with. So please tell me, which "cooking tradition"
> considers cooking pancakes and French Toast in a little butter or oil
> "frying"?


Well, I'm not sure if it qualifies as an entire cooking tradition, but
that's what I'd call it when pressed for a term. (Honestly, I'd never
thought about it much before I got to this thread.) When I asked Jim
what he called the cooking method for the way we make french toast and
pancakes, he answered "frying" before knowing the context or why I was
asking. I'm from South Florida. He's from Western Canada.


--Lia

salgud wrote:

> Some of
> us care about that kind of thing, called "semantic precision", and
> others don't. But us semantically precise types are going to remind
> them from time to time!

I like your approach, but I don't know an authoritative source of
cooking definitions.

salgud wrote:
> Matt wrote:
>> Julia Altshuler wrote:
>>> salgud wrote:
>>> If it were, then sauteing
>>>> veggies in a tablespoon of oil would be frying veggies. I've never
>>>> heard of sauteed veggies being called "fried" veggies.
>>>
>>> But surely you've heard of "stir-fried" vegetables. I think this is one
>>> of those things where different words are used in different cooking
>>> traditions. One isn't necessarily wrong and the other right.
>> Also: fried eggs, home fries, french fries, frying pan, fried fish. At
>> home, those terms don't imply deep frying.

> As far as I can tell, "fried eggs" are a sort of anomaly. "Home Fries"
> and "French Fries" are deep fried, and therefore definitely would be
> called "fried". Technically, they probably should be called "French
> Deep Fries".

Unless I am wrong, very few people deep fry at home, if by deep-frying
you mean immersing the food in hot oil.

Do people really deep-fry 'home fries'? Show me a recipe. Here is a
bunch of recipes wherein the home fries are cooked in a pan or skillet
with a little oil.
http://www.google.com/search?as_q=re...ghts=&safe=off

For me, the essence of frying is cooking with fat between a hot surface
and the food, heat going through the fat and into the food.

Oh pshaw, on Wed 20 Sep 2006 02:06:38p, Matt meant to say...

> salgud wrote:
>> Matt wrote:
>>> Julia Altshuler wrote:
>>>> salgud wrote:
>>>> If it were, then sauteing
>>>>> veggies in a tablespoon of oil would be frying veggies. I've never
>>>>> heard of sauteed veggies being called "fried" veggies.
>>>>
>>>> But surely you've heard of "stir-fried" vegetables. I think this is
>>>> one of those things where different words are used in different
>>>> cooking traditions. One isn't necessarily wrong and the other right.
>>> Also: fried eggs, home fries, french fries, frying pan, fried fish.
>>> At home, those terms don't imply deep frying.
>
>> As far as I can tell, "fried eggs" are a sort of anomaly. "Home Fries"
>> and "French Fries" are deep fried, and therefore definitely would be
>> called "fried". Technically, they probably should be called "French
>> Deep Fries".
>
> Unless I am wrong, very few people deep fry at home, if by deep-frying
> you mean immersing the food in hot oil.
>
> Do people really deep-fry 'home fries'? Show me a recipe. Here is a
> bunch of recipes wherein the home fries are cooked in a pan or skillet
> with a little oil.
> http://www.google.com/search?as_q=re...oogle+Searc h
> &as_epq=home+fries&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_fi letype=&as_qdr=all&as_n
> lo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_ rights=&safe=off
>
> For me, the essence of frying is cooking with fat between a hot surface
> and the food, heat going through the fat and into the food.
>

I think you've got the essence right.

--
Wayne Boatwright @¿@¬
_____________________

Oh pshaw, on Wed 20 Sep 2006 02:06:38p, Matt meant to say...

> salgud wrote:
>> Matt wrote:
>>> Julia Altshuler wrote:
>>>> salgud wrote:
>>>> If it were, then sauteing
>>>>> veggies in a tablespoon of oil would be frying veggies. I've never
>>>>> heard of sauteed veggies being called "fried" veggies.
>>>>
>>>> But surely you've heard of "stir-fried" vegetables. I think this is
>>>> one of those things where different words are used in different
>>>> cooking traditions. One isn't necessarily wrong and the other right.
>>> Also: fried eggs, home fries, french fries, frying pan, fried fish.
>>> At home, those terms don't imply deep frying.
>
>> As far as I can tell, "fried eggs" are a sort of anomaly. "Home Fries"
>> and "French Fries" are deep fried, and therefore definitely would be
>> called "fried". Technically, they probably should be called "French
>> Deep Fries".
>
> Unless I am wrong, very few people deep fry at home, if by deep-frying
> you mean immersing the food in hot oil.
>
> Do people really deep-fry 'home fries'? Show me a recipe. Here is a
> bunch of recipes wherein the home fries are cooked in a pan or skillet
> with a little oil.
> http://www.google.com/search?as_q=re...oogle+Searc h
> &as_epq=home+fries&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_fi letype=&as_qdr=all&as_n
> lo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_ rights=&safe=off
>
> For me, the essence of frying is cooking with fat between a hot surface
> and the food, heat going through the fat and into the food.
>

I find this an interesting reference that differentiates between "pan
frying", "shallow frying", and "deep frying".

http://www.baking911.com/howto/fry.htm

--
Wayne Boatwright @¿@¬
_____________________

Matt > wrote:
>Blair P. Houghton wrote:
>> Blair P. Houghton > wrote:
>>> The Cook > wrote:
>>>> Check out the Crisco in the green can. It is no hydrogenated and has
>>>> no trans fats.
>>> How do they make it?
>>
>> Okay. I found their website.
>>
>> Apparently, they make it just like they make their regular
>> shortening,
>
>no
>
>but they hide the trans fats behind the law.
>
>That seems to be false unless:
>
>1) "fully-hydrogenated" is a legal rather than chemical term, or
>
>2) the mono- or di-glycerides are partially hydrogenated.

Hydrogenation produces trans-fats, because it's bonding
molecules randomly rather than building them in a form-fit
factory like animal cells do it.

Once a fat is a trans-fat, does fully hydrogenating it
keep it from being a trans-fat any more?

--Blair

writes:
>Matt > wrote:
>>Blair P. Houghton wrote:
>>> Blair P. Houghton > wrote:
>>>> The Cook > wrote:
>>>>> Check out the Crisco in the green can. It is no hydrogenated and has
>>>>> no trans fats.
>>>> How do they make it?
>>>
>>> Okay. I found their website.
>>>
>>> Apparently, they make it just like they make their regular
>>> shortening,
>>
>>no
>>
>>but they hide the trans fats behind the law.
>>
>>That seems to be false unless:
>>
>>1) "fully-hydrogenated" is a legal rather than chemical term, or
>>
>>2) the mono- or di-glycerides are partially hydrogenated.
>
>Hydrogenation produces trans-fats, because it's bonding
>molecules randomly rather than building them in a form-fit
>factory like animal cells do it.
>
>Once a fat is a trans-fat, does fully hydrogenating it
>keep it from being a trans-fat any more?

the cis/trans distinction only occurs in double bonds since the molecule
can rotate freely about a single bond

tert in seattle > wrote:
writes:
>>Matt > wrote:
>>>Blair P. Houghton wrote:
>>>> Blair P. Houghton > wrote:
>>>>> The Cook > wrote:
>>>>>> Check out the Crisco in the green can. It is no hydrogenated and has
>>>>>> no trans fats.
>>>>> How do they make it?
>>>>
>>>> Okay. I found their website.
>>>>
>>>> Apparently, they make it just like they make their regular
>>>> shortening,
>>>
>>>no
>>>
>>>but they hide the trans fats behind the law.
>>>
>>>That seems to be false unless:
>>>
>>>1) "fully-hydrogenated" is a legal rather than chemical term, or
>>>
>>>2) the mono- or di-glycerides are partially hydrogenated.
>>
>>Hydrogenation produces trans-fats, because it's bonding
>>molecules randomly rather than building them in a form-fit
>>factory like animal cells do it.
>>
>>Once a fat is a trans-fat, does fully hydrogenating it
>>keep it from being a trans-fat any more?
>
>the cis/trans distinction only occurs in double bonds since the molecule
>can rotate freely about a single bond

Okay, maybe they tried, but the labeling is still a giveaway.

They can't guarantee that the palm oil is "fully hydrogenated,"
so they can't say "no trans fat".

And, iirc, palm oil is supposed to be evil stuff in the first
place, moreso when hydrogenated. Maybe less so when fully
hydrogenated.

But I don't doubt they're trying to get the FDA to codify
"no trans fat" to mean "contains less than 0.50 grams trans
fat per serving".

--Blair

Blair P. Houghton wrote:
> Matt > wrote:
>> Blair P. Houghton wrote:
>>> Blair P. Houghton > wrote:
>>>> The Cook > wrote:
>>>>> Check out the Crisco in the green can. It is no hydrogenated and has
>>>>> no trans fats.
>>>> How do they make it?
>>> Okay. I found their website.
>>>
>>> Apparently, they make it just like they make their regular
>>> shortening,
>> no
>>
>> but they hide the trans fats behind the law.
>>
>> That seems to be false unless:
>>
>> 1) "fully-hydrogenated" is a legal rather than chemical term, or
>>
>> 2) the mono- or di-glycerides are partially hydrogenated.
>
> Hydrogenation produces trans-fats, because it's bonding
> molecules randomly rather than building them in a form-fit
> factory like animal cells do it.

Vegetable oils have _unsaturations_ (a.k.a. double bonds).
Unsaturations in general are either cis or trans, but the unsaturations
in unhydrogenated vegetable oil are all cis. The goal of hydrogenation
is saturate some or all of the unsaturations in the oil so as to improve
the stability and raise the melting point. As a side effect some
unsaturations that don't get saturated change from cis to trans.

>
> Once a fat is a trans-fat, does fully hydrogenating it
> keep it from being a trans-fat any more?
>
> --Blair

Yes. Full hydrogenation removes all the unsaturations. No saturations
implies no cis or trans.

Matt wrote:
> salgud wrote:
>
> > Some of
> > us care about that kind of thing, called "semantic precision", and
> > others don't. But us semantically precise types are going to remind
> > them from time to time!
>
> I like your approach, but I don't know an authoritative source of
> cooking definitions.

It's as plain as the nose on your face! Me, of course!

Matt wrote:
> salgud wrote:
> > Matt wrote:
> >> Julia Altshuler wrote:
> >>> salgud wrote:
> >>> If it were, then sauteing
> >>>> veggies in a tablespoon of oil would be frying veggies. I've never
> >>>> heard of sauteed veggies being called "fried" veggies.
> >>>
> >>> But surely you've heard of "stir-fried" vegetables. I think this is one
> >>> of those things where different words are used in different cooking
> >>> traditions. One isn't necessarily wrong and the other right.
> >> Also: fried eggs, home fries, french fries, frying pan, fried fish. At
> >> home, those terms don't imply deep frying.
>
> > As far as I can tell, "fried eggs" are a sort of anomaly. "Home Fries"
> > and "French Fries" are deep fried, and therefore definitely would be
> > called "fried". Technically, they probably should be called "French
> > Deep Fries".
>
> Unless I am wrong, very few people deep fry at home, if by deep-frying
> you mean immersing the food in hot oil.
>

My guess is you don't live in the South, and maybe haven't travelled
there much. At least not to the rural areas. But I've been there and
heard them rave about last night's dinner (at home) of Chicken Fried
Steak, Fried Okra and French Fries. There are a lot of people who deep
fry at home, you and I just don't hang with them.

> Do people really deep-fry 'home fries'? Show me a recipe. Here is a
> bunch of recipes wherein the home fries are cooked in a pan or skillet
> with a little oil.

I could be mistaken on the "Home Fries". Thought it just mean French
Fries cooked at home.
> http://www.google.com/search?as_q=re...ghts=&safe=off
>
> For me, the essence of frying is cooking with fat between a hot surface
> and the food, heat going through the fat and into the food.

In article >,
" BOB" > wrote:

> In news > Matt > typed:
> > I am looking for an oil to use for frying.
> >
> > I don't want to use hydrogenated oils (notably Crisco and other
> > shortenings) because of health concerns.
> >
> > The problem is that the liquid oils I have tried start to smoke or
> > smell
> > rancid when frying.
> >
> > Specifically I want something for frying french toast or pancakes.
> >
> > Something that won't smoke or smell bad at frying temperatures.
> >
> > Thanks.
>
> Use lard.
>
Not necessarily. Lard straight off the hog is relatively unsaturated.
Most lard you find in the grocery stores, especially the buckets on the
shelves, has been hydrogenated to improve its shelf life.

As RFC's own Ranee says, "Nothing says loving like pork products."

Cindy

--
C.J. Fuller

Delete the obvious to email me