wrote on 5/27/2017 :
> kinda looks like a flacid penis on top. hehe
>
He's the Greatest!

http://imgur.com/a/fo2vu LOL!

On 5/27/2017 6:03 PM, lucretia wrote:
>> This works for me
>> https://postimage.io/
>>
>> Tinypic sucks.
>
> Quite - I have used postimage since (I think) Jeßus pointed it out.

Yes it was Jebus. He also recommended
hostpic.org and that also works well for posting quick pictures.

The other pic sites, post a big page with lots of extra nonsense but the
two above quickly show just the picture....just make sure you choose to
post the direct link to the picture. They offer you several links. The
direct link (the second choice on mine) end in .jpg

Pork bellies seem to be very popular on Food Network shows. But as described and
from the appearance, it will be a cold day in hell before I ever try (even "perfectly cooked")
a chunk of pork fat.

Bacon, for me, has to have the fat portion fried to a crisp brown color. Anything less makes
me gag. Sorry. Y'all can have my share of pork belly.

N.

Am Dienstag, 30. Mai 2017 00:14:01 UTC+2 schrieb Nancy2:
> Pork bellies seem to be very popular on Food Network shows. But as
> described and from the appearance, it will be a cold day in hell before
> I ever try (even "perfectly cooked") a chunk of pork fat.

In that case, it's too fat. There are uses for that (e.g. for the outside
of a terrine), but not when cooked, bbqed or baked.

> Bacon, for me, has to have the fat portion fried to a crisp brown color.
> Anything less makes me gag. Sorry. Y'all can have my share of pork belly.

Try samgyeopsal (Korean) then. Thin layers of fat fried to a crisp between
meat. There are special pans to get rid of the fat so that it doesn't burn.

Bye, Sanne.

On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 12:14:01 PM UTC-10, Nancy2 wrote:
> Pork bellies seem to be very popular on Food Network shows. But as described and
> from the appearance, it will be a cold day in hell before I ever try (even "perfectly cooked")
> a chunk of pork fat.
>
> Bacon, for me, has to have the fat portion fried to a crisp brown color. Anything less makes
> me gag. Sorry. Y'all can have my share of pork belly.
>
> N.

The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff - at least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a different attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat. It's quite a liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of weeks ago. The pork raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian pork. I made this with American pork.

https://www.amazon.com/photos/share/...lg09Kp6rXi4qnM

On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 9:02:20 PM UTC-10, sanne wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 30. Mai 2017 00:14:01 UTC+2 schrieb Nancy2:
> > Pork bellies seem to be very popular on Food Network shows. But as
> > described and from the appearance, it will be a cold day in hell before
> > I ever try (even "perfectly cooked") a chunk of pork fat.
>
> In that case, it's too fat. There are uses for that (e.g. for the outside
> of a terrine), but not when cooked, bbqed or baked.
>
> > Bacon, for me, has to have the fat portion fried to a crisp brown color.
> > Anything less makes me gag. Sorry. Y'all can have my share of pork belly.
>
> Try samgyeopsal (Korean) then. Thin layers of fat fried to a crisp between
> meat. There are special pans to get rid of the fat so that it doesn't burn.
>
> Bye, Sanne.

For my dad's birthday last week, we went to a Korean barbecue restaurant. I did have the pork and it was fine. They were using thinly sliced pork shoulder instead of belly so there was less fat. This might be more acceptable for Americans.

My son had some heart. Don't ask me what animal it was from - they never said. That was pretty hard to swallow. OTOH, I'm lucky because my son will order funny meats and I get to try it at least once. God, I sure hope he doesn't order pig uterus.

Am Dienstag, 30. Mai 2017 10:40:43 UTC+2 schrieb dsi1:
> On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 9:02:20 PM UTC-10, sanne wrote:

> > Try samgyeopsal (Korean) then. Thin layers of fat fried to a crisp between
> > meat. There are special pans to get rid of the fat so that it doesn't burn.
> >
> > Bye, Sanne.
>
> For my dad's birthday last week, we went to a Korean barbecue restaurant.
> I did have the pork and it was fine. They were using thinly sliced pork
> shoulder instead of belly so there was less fat. This might be more
> acceptable for Americans.

There are several methods: Slicing the meat (belly, butt, shoulder or neck)
thinly - or as chops. In the latter case, you brown it, cut it up with
scissors (as wide as it is thick) and fry it a little longer.
Less work that way.

> My son had some heart. Don't ask me what animal it was from - they
> never said. That was pretty hard to swallow.

Tough or mystery? Or strong taste?
Anyways, heart should be treated like octopus - cut it up thinly and fry it
until it just loses color, or cook it very long.

> OTOH, I'm lucky because my son will order funny meats and I get to try it
> at least once. God, I sure hope he doesn't order pig uterus.

Makjang is bad enough - small intestine, beef in that case.
Edible with lots of soju only. ;-)

Skirt steak is considered a delicacy in Korea. In Germany, it's not asked
for very often - here in Bavaria and Austria, it's mostly cooked.
But I do know how great it is bbqed, did that several times.
A kimchi-based marinade is great for that, the meat barely has to touch the
grill then. :-)

Bye, Sanne.

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 4:30:54 AM UTC-4, dsi1 wrote:
> On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 12:14:01 PM UTC-10, Nancy2 wrote:
> > Pork bellies seem to be very popular on Food Network shows. But as described and
> > from the appearance, it will be a cold day in hell before I ever try (even "perfectly cooked")
> > a chunk of pork fat.
> >
> > Bacon, for me, has to have the fat portion fried to a crisp brown color.. Anything less makes
> > me gag. Sorry. Y'all can have my share of pork belly.
> >
> > N.
>
> The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff - at least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a different attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat. It's quite a liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of weeks ago. The pork raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian pork. I made this with American pork.
>
> https://www.amazon.com/photos/share/...lg09Kp6rXi4qnM

For me, it's about the texture. I just can't handle that slippery,
not-quite-chewy, not-quite-jello texture. There's a ton of Asian
foods I won't eat because of that.

I won't eat chicken thighs because of the slippery mouthfeel, either.

Cindy Hamilton

On Tue, 30 May 2017 03:37:34 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton
> wrote:

>On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 4:30:54 AM UTC-4, dsi1 wrote:
>> On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 12:14:01 PM UTC-10, Nancy2 wrote:
>> > Pork bellies seem to be very popular on Food Network shows. But as described and
>> > from the appearance, it will be a cold day in hell before I ever try (even "perfectly cooked")
>> > a chunk of pork fat.
>> >
>> > Bacon, for me, has to have the fat portion fried to a crisp brown color. Anything less makes
>> > me gag. Sorry. Y'all can have my share of pork belly.
>> >
>> > N.
>>
>> The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff - at least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a different attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat. It's quite a liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of weeks ago. The pork raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian pork. I made this with American pork.
>>
>> https://www.amazon.com/photos/share/...lg09Kp6rXi4qnM
>
>For me, it's about the texture. I just can't handle that slippery,
>not-quite-chewy, not-quite-jello texture. There's a ton of Asian
>foods I won't eat because of that.
>
>I won't eat chicken thighs because of the slippery mouthfeel, either.

People and their little likes and dislikes... I once listened to a man
explain when he likes prawns and when he doesn't. It went on for 10
minutes and it involved fishing locations, sizes, seasons and
preparations. Some people deserve to go through a little famine.

"dsi1" wrote in message
...

On Monday, May 29, 2017 at 9:02:20 PM UTC-10, sanne wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 30. Mai 2017 00:14:01 UTC+2 schrieb Nancy2:
> > Pork bellies seem to be very popular on Food Network shows. But as
> > described and from the appearance, it will be a cold day in hell before
> > I ever try (even "perfectly cooked") a chunk of pork fat.
>
> In that case, it's too fat. There are uses for that (e.g. for the outside
> of a terrine), but not when cooked, bbqed or baked.
>
> > Bacon, for me, has to have the fat portion fried to a crisp brown color.
> > Anything less makes me gag. Sorry. Y'all can have my share of pork
> > belly.
>
> Try samgyeopsal (Korean) then. Thin layers of fat fried to a crisp between
> meat. There are special pans to get rid of the fat so that it doesn't
> burn.
>
> Bye, Sanne.

For my dad's birthday last week, we went to a Korean barbecue restaurant. I
did have the pork and it was fine. They were using thinly sliced pork
shoulder instead of belly so there was less fat. This might be more
acceptable for Americans.

My son had some heart. Don't ask me what animal it was from - they never
said. That was pretty hard to swallow. OTOH, I'm lucky because my son will
order funny meats and I get to try it at least once. God, I sure hope he
doesn't order pig uterus.

==

lol I guess you taught him to be so adventurous)


--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

"dsi1" > wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-

The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff - at
least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a different
attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat. It's quite a
liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of weeks ago. The pork
raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian pork. I made this with
American pork.


++++++++++
I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat was
bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream, milk
etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain kinds of
fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention to any of it.

Cheri

On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
> "dsi1" > wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-
>
> The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff -
> at least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a
> different attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat.
> It's quite a liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of
> weeks ago. The pork raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian
> pork. I made this with American pork.
>
>
> ++++++++++
> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
> to any of it.
>
> Cheri

I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.

On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>
>> ++++++++++
>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>> to any of it.
>>
>> Cheri
>
>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.

We don't use neither. Do we win?

On Wed, 31 May 2017 05:47:01 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:

>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>
>>> ++++++++++
>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>> to any of it.
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>
>We don't use neither. Do we win?

Don't you mean 'either'?
What's not healthful is cholesterol... I use butter but I mostly use
EVOO... using 50-50 for frying eggs cuts way down on cholesterol and
yet the butter flavor is still there. For browning meat I trim off
all visible fat and brown in EVOO.
Fat is fat as far as calories, but health wise it depends which kind.
For dinner tonight we're having kielbasa with beans... I simmer the
kielbasa for thirty minutes and drain which removes a lot of the fat
and salts, then I brown the kielbasa in minimal EVOO. We don't notice
any loss in sausage flavor, it's a little extra work, but we prefer
more healthful eating.
Flavorless EVOO is readily available and costs a lot less than butter.

"Cheri" wrote in message news
"dsi1" > wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-

The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff - at
least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a different
attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat. It's quite a
liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of weeks ago. The pork
raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian pork. I made this with
American pork.


++++++++++
I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat was
bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream, milk
etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain kinds of
fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention to any of it.

Cheri

===

I'm not sure what a 'boomer' is, but I am the same as you. Fat was never a
problem.



--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk

On Tue, 30 May 2017 16:09:10 -0400, wrote:

>On Wed, 31 May 2017 05:47:01 +1000, Bruce >
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>>
>>We don't use neither. Do we win?
>
>Don't you mean 'either'?

Yes.

>What's not healthful is cholesterol... I use butter but I mostly use
>EVOO... using 50-50 for frying eggs cuts way down on cholesterol and
>yet the butter flavor is still there. For browning meat I trim off
>all visible fat and brown in EVOO.

The way I understand it is that cholesterol that's in food isn't the
problem. The problem is food that makes our bodies produce
cholesterol. That's food that contains saturated fats. That's why
butter's bad and eggs are not.

And then there are the kooks who say you can eat any amount of
anything, as long as you do it while you're standing on your head and
strike a Neanderthal pose.

>Fat is fat as far as calories, but health wise it depends which kind.
>For dinner tonight we're having kielbasa with beans... I simmer the
>kielbasa for thirty minutes and drain which removes a lot of the fat
>and salts, then I brown the kielbasa in minimal EVOO. We don't notice
>any loss in sausage flavor, it's a little extra work, but we prefer
>more healthful eating.
>Flavorless EVOO is readily available and costs a lot less than butter.

We do almost everything with olive oil, except Asian stuff.

On Tue, 30 May 2017 21:34:24 +0100, "Ophelia" >
wrote:

>"Cheri" wrote in message news >
>"dsi1" > wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-
>
>The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff - at
>least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a different
>attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat. It's quite a
>liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of weeks ago. The pork
>raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian pork. I made this with
>American pork.
>
>
>++++++++++
>I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat was
>bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream, milk
>etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain kinds of
>fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention to any of it.
>
>Cheri
>
>===
>
>I'm not sure what a 'boomer' is, but I am the same as you. Fat was never a
>problem.

"Typically, they range from the early-to-mid 1940s and end from 1960
to 1964." (wiki)

(That's refering to birth year.)

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 9:16:21 AM UTC-10, Cheri wrote:
> "dsi1" <dsi1yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-
>
> The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff - at
> least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a different
> attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat. It's quite a
> liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of weeks ago. The pork
> raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian pork. I made this with
> American pork.
>
>
> ++++++++++
> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat was
> bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream, milk
> etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain kinds of
> fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention to any of it.
>
> Cheri

I wasn't talking about you. I was talking about these other mugs - including me.

On Tue, 30 May 2017 12:15:45 -0700, "Cheri" >
wrote:

>"dsi1" > wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-
>
>The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff - at
>least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a different
>attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat. It's quite a
>liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of weeks ago. The pork
>raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian pork. I made this with
>American pork.
>
>
>++++++++++
>I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat was
>bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream, milk
>etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain kinds of
>fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention to any of it.
>
>Cheri

It was in the mid to late 70s. They suddenly pronounced eggs (more
than two per week) butter etc was bad for you. Never mind margarine
was far more unhealthy. Next came fat on meat - it's all been
disproved since but the damage was done. Rather like the greedy
doctor who averred that having the mumps/measles vaccine gave kids
autism. Even now, after he has been exposed as greedy for money, too
many parents still believe it

On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>> "dsi1" > wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-
>>
>> The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff -
>> at least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a
>> different attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat.
>> It's quite a liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of
>> weeks ago. The pork raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian
>> pork. I made this with American pork.
>>
>>
>> ++++++++++
>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>> to any of it.
>>
>> Cheri
>
>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.

We were like you, just decided to disregard it - we didn't really eat
excessive amounts and I could not see why an egg, made to nourish a
chick, could possibly be harmful.

On Wed, 31 May 2017 05:47:01 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:

>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>
>>> ++++++++++
>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>> to any of it.
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>
>We don't use neither. Do we win?

Probably not because your diet is not balanced.

On Tue, 30 May 2017 16:09:10 -0400, wrote:

>On Wed, 31 May 2017 05:47:01 +1000, Bruce >
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ++++++++++
>>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>>> to any of it.
>>>>
>>>> Cheri
>>>
>>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>>
>>We don't use neither. Do we win?
>
>Don't you mean 'either'?
>What's not healthful is cholesterol... I use butter but I mostly use
>EVOO... using 50-50 for frying eggs cuts way down on cholesterol and
>yet the butter flavor is still there. For browning meat I trim off
>all visible fat and brown in EVOO.
>Fat is fat as far as calories, but health wise it depends which kind.
>For dinner tonight we're having kielbasa with beans... I simmer the
>kielbasa for thirty minutes and drain which removes a lot of the fat
>and salts, then I brown the kielbasa in minimal EVOO. We don't notice
>any loss in sausage flavor, it's a little extra work, but we prefer
>more healthful eating.
>Flavorless EVOO is readily available and costs a lot less than butter.

Cholesterol too has been pooh poohed now. It was a random level
picked by a researcher and someone picked up the banner and ran with
it. Looks more likely that cholesterol levels vary greatly with the
individuals.

On Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 11:01:41 AM UTC-10, Bruce wrote:
> On Tue, 30 May 2017 21:34:24 +0100, "Ophelia" >
> wrote:
>
> >"Cheri" wrote in message news > >
> >"dsi1" <dsi1> wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-
> >
> >The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff - at
> >least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a different
> >attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat. It's quite a
> >liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of weeks ago. The pork
> >raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian pork. I made this with
> >American pork.
> >
> >
> >++++++++++
> >I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat was
> >bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream, milk
> >etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain kinds of
> >fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention to any of it.
> >
> >Cheri
> >
> >===
> >
> >I'm not sure what a 'boomer' is, but I am the same as you. Fat was never a
> >problem.
>
> "Typically, they range from the early-to-mid 1940s and end from 1960
> to 1964." (wiki)
>
> (That's refering to birth year.)

The start of the boomer generation was predicated by a single event. The end of World War II.

On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:30:30 -0300, lucretia
> wrote:

>>Don't you mean 'either'?
>>What's not healthful is cholesterol... I use butter but I mostly use
>>EVOO... using 50-50 for frying eggs cuts way down on cholesterol and
>>yet the butter flavor is still there. For browning meat I trim off
>>all visible fat and brown in EVOO.
>>Fat is fat as far as calories, but health wise it depends which kind.
>>For dinner tonight we're having kielbasa with beans... I simmer the
>>kielbasa for thirty minutes and drain which removes a lot of the fat
>>and salts, then I brown the kielbasa in minimal EVOO. We don't notice
>>any loss in sausage flavor, it's a little extra work, but we prefer
>>more healthful eating.
>>Flavorless EVOO is readily available and costs a lot less than butter.
>
>Cholesterol too has been pooh poohed now. It was a random level
>picked by a researcher and someone picked up the banner and ran with
>it. Looks more likely that cholesterol levels vary greatly with the
>individuals.

And with lifestyle and diet.

On 5/30/2017 2:30 PM, lucretia wrote:
> On Tue, 30 May 2017 16:09:10 -0400, wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 31 May 2017 05:47:01 +1000, Bruce >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ++++++++++
>>>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>>>> to any of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheri
>>>>
>>>> I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>>> little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>>> store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>>>
>>> We don't use neither. Do we win?
>>
>> Don't you mean 'either'?
>> What's not healthful is cholesterol... I use butter but I mostly use
>> EVOO... using 50-50 for frying eggs cuts way down on cholesterol and
>> yet the butter flavor is still there. For browning meat I trim off
>> all visible fat and brown in EVOO.
>> Fat is fat as far as calories, but health wise it depends which kind.
>> For dinner tonight we're having kielbasa with beans... I simmer the
>> kielbasa for thirty minutes and drain which removes a lot of the fat
>> and salts, then I brown the kielbasa in minimal EVOO. We don't notice
>> any loss in sausage flavor, it's a little extra work, but we prefer
>> more healthful eating.
>> Flavorless EVOO is readily available and costs a lot less than butter.
>
> Cholesterol too has been pooh poohed now. It was a random level
> picked by a researcher and someone picked up the banner and ran with
> it. Looks more likely that cholesterol levels vary greatly with the
> individuals.
>

I preferred it when salt was bad, fat was bad, cholesterol was bad. It
made my ignoring "the rules" all the more pleasurable.

On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:28:31 -0300, lucretia
> wrote:

>On Wed, 31 May 2017 05:47:01 +1000, Bruce >
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ++++++++++
>>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>>> to any of it.
>>>>
>>>> Cheri
>>>
>>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>>
>>We don't use neither. Do we win?
>
>Probably not because your diet is not balanced.

As if we _need_ to consume butter or margarine.

On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:27:48 -0300, lucretia
> wrote:

>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>> "dsi1" > wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-
>>>
>>> The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff -
>>> at least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a
>>> different attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat.
>>> It's quite a liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of
>>> weeks ago. The pork raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian
>>> pork. I made this with American pork.
>>>
>>>
>>> ++++++++++
>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>> to any of it.
>>>
>>> Cheri
>>
>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>
>We were like you, just decided to disregard it - we didn't really eat
>excessive amounts and I could not see why an egg, made to nourish a
>chick, could possibly be harmful.

At the moment, nobody says eggs are harmful, do they?

On Tue, 30 May 2017 14:35:20 -0700, Taxed and Spent
> wrote:

>On 5/30/2017 2:30 PM, lucretia wrote:
>> On Tue, 30 May 2017 16:09:10 -0400, wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 31 May 2017 05:47:01 +1000, Bruce >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ++++++++++
>>>>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>>>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>>>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>>>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>>>>> to any of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheri
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>>>> little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>>>> store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>>>>
>>>> We don't use neither. Do we win?
>>>
>>> Don't you mean 'either'?
>>> What's not healthful is cholesterol... I use butter but I mostly use
>>> EVOO... using 50-50 for frying eggs cuts way down on cholesterol and
>>> yet the butter flavor is still there. For browning meat I trim off
>>> all visible fat and brown in EVOO.
>>> Fat is fat as far as calories, but health wise it depends which kind.
>>> For dinner tonight we're having kielbasa with beans... I simmer the
>>> kielbasa for thirty minutes and drain which removes a lot of the fat
>>> and salts, then I brown the kielbasa in minimal EVOO. We don't notice
>>> any loss in sausage flavor, it's a little extra work, but we prefer
>>> more healthful eating.
>>> Flavorless EVOO is readily available and costs a lot less than butter.
>>
>> Cholesterol too has been pooh poohed now. It was a random level
>> picked by a researcher and someone picked up the banner and ran with
>> it. Looks more likely that cholesterol levels vary greatly with the
>> individuals.
>>
>
>I preferred it when salt was bad, fat was bad, cholesterol was bad. It
>made my ignoring "the rules" all the more pleasurable.

There is that I try hard to eat lots of salt because I have such
low blood pressure due to all the unhealthy consumption of all the
banned items.

On Wed, 31 May 2017 07:35:39 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:

>On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:28:31 -0300, lucretia
> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 31 May 2017 05:47:01 +1000, Bruce >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ++++++++++
>>>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>>>> to any of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheri
>>>>
>>>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>>>
>>>We don't use neither. Do we win?
>>
>>Probably not because your diet is not balanced.
>
>As if we _need_ to consume butter or margarine.

One needs to eat a little of everything, and not too much of anything.

On Wed, 31 May 2017 07:36:46 +1000, Bruce >
wrote:

>On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:27:48 -0300, lucretia
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>> "dsi1" > wrote in message news:ab9398da-9a9b-442e-89fa-
>>>>
>>>> The boomers were mostly raised with the notion that fat was bad stuff -
>>>> at least, I was. My guess is that the younger generation will have a
>>>> different attitude. These days, I don't really care how much fat I eat.
>>>> It's quite a liberating feeling. I made some shoyu pork a couple of
>>>> weeks ago. The pork raised in the US tends to have less fat than Asian
>>>> pork. I made this with American pork.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ++++++++++
>>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>>> to any of it.
>>>>
>>>> Cheri
>>>
>>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>>
>>We were like you, just decided to disregard it - we didn't really eat
>>excessive amounts and I could not see why an egg, made to nourish a
>>chick, could possibly be harmful.
>
>At the moment, nobody says eggs are harmful, do they?

No, they received absolution about two, three years ago.

On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:39:25 -0300, lucretia
> wrote:

>On Wed, 31 May 2017 07:35:39 +1000, Bruce >
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:28:31 -0300, lucretia
> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 31 May 2017 05:47:01 +1000, Bruce >
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ++++++++++
>>>>>> I'm a boomer and I was never, I mean never, given the notion that fat
>>>>>> was bad stuff. We ate lots of pork, beef, lamb etc. real butter, cream,
>>>>>> milk etc. It was in the later years, well into adulthood that certain
>>>>>> kinds of fats started getting bad raps. I never paid too much attention
>>>>>> to any of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheri
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>>>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>>>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>>>>
>>>>We don't use neither. Do we win?
>>>
>>>Probably not because your diet is not balanced.
>>
>>As if we _need_ to consume butter or margarine.
>
>One needs to eat a little of everything, and not too much of anything.

Nobody needs margarine. Nobody needs meat. Nobody needs animal fats.
Nobody needs alcohol. Nobody needs sweets. Nobody needs liquorice.

On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:40:01 -0300, lucretia
> wrote:

>On Wed, 31 May 2017 07:36:46 +1000, Bruce >
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:27:48 -0300, lucretia
> wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 30 May 2017 15:34:51 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 5/30/2017 3:15 PM, Cheri wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheri
>>>>
>>>>I don't intentionally eat a lot of fat, but never gave up butter, we use
>>>>little milk but it is whole milk and we eat sausage, both home made and
>>>>store bought. Turns out, butter is better for you than margarine.
>>>
>>>We were like you, just decided to disregard it - we didn't really eat
>>>excessive amounts and I could not see why an egg, made to nourish a
>>>chick, could possibly be harmful.
>>
>>At the moment, nobody says eggs are harmful, do they?
>
>No, they received absolution about two, three years ago.

Good, since I eat one a day.

In article >,
says...
> It was in the mid to late 70s. They suddenly pronounced eggs (more
> than two per week) butter etc was bad for you. Never mind margarine
> was far more unhealthy. Next came fat on meat - it's all been
> disproved since but the damage was done. Rather like the greedy
> doctor who averred that having the mumps/measles vaccine gave kids
> autism. Even now, after he has been exposed as greedy for money, too
> many parents still believe it
>

Worse than "greedy for money", he was STRUCK OFF as a doctor in UK,
in other words he lost his license to practice medicine anywhere in
Britain. It beggars belief that America permits him to practice medicine
there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield

"Andrew Jeremy Wakefield (born 1957)[1][2] is a British former
gastroenterologist and medical researcher who was struck off the UK
medical register for his fraudulent 1998 research paper, and other
proven charges of misconduct, in support of the now-discredited claim
that there was a link between the administration of the measles, mumps
and rubella (MMR) vaccine, and the appearance of autism and bowel
disease

After the publication of the paper, other researchers were unable to
reproduce Wakefield's findings or confirm his hypothesis of an
association between the MMR vaccine and autism,[8] or autism and
gastrointestinal disease.[9] A 2004 investigation by Sunday Times
reporter Brian Deer identified undisclosed financial conflicts of
interest on Wakefield's part,[10] and most of his co-authors then
withdrew their support for the study's interpretations <...>

On 28 January 2010, a five-member statutory tribunal of the GMC (General
Medical Council) found three dozen charges proved, including four counts
of dishonesty and 12 counts involving the abuse of developmentally
challenged children. The panel ruled that Wakefield had "failed in his
duties as a responsible consultant", acted both against the interests of
his patients, and "dishonestly and irresponsibly" in his published
research. The Lancet fully retracted the 1998 publication on the basis
of the GMC's findings, noting that elements of the manuscript had been
falsified. The Lancet's editor-in-chief Richard Horton said the paper
was "utterly false" and that the journal had been "deceived". Three
months following The Lancet's retraction, Wakefield was struck off the
UK medical register, with a statement identifying deliberate
falsification in the research published in The Lancet, and was thereby
barred from practising medicine in the UK."

Janet.

"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...

> I'm not sure what a 'boomer' is, but I am the same as you. Fat was never
> a problem.

Kids that were born at the end of WW2 after all the dads came home.

Cheri

"lucretia" > wrote in message
...

> Cholesterol too has been pooh poohed now. It was a random level
> picked by a researcher and someone picked up the banner and ran with
> it. Looks more likely that cholesterol levels vary greatly with the
> individuals.


I'm reading "Selling Sickness" right now it's a book about Big Pharma and
how they manipulate things to suit their drugs with illness, it's
disgusting.

Cheri

On Tue, 30 May 2017 16:12:29 -0700, "Cheri" >
wrote:

>"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>
>> I'm not sure what a 'boomer' is, but I am the same as you. Fat was never
>> a problem.
>
>Kids that were born at the end of WW2 after all the dads came home.

And kids that were conceived by those dads while they were away from
home

"Bruce" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 30 May 2017 16:12:29 -0700, "Cheri" >
> wrote:
>
>>"Ophelia" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>> I'm not sure what a 'boomer' is, but I am the same as you. Fat was
>>> never
>>> a problem.
>>
>>Kids that were born at the end of WW2 after all the dads came home.
>
> And kids that were conceived by those dads while they were away from
> home


It covers them all.

Cheri

On 2017-05-30, lucretia > wrote:

> It was in the mid to late 70s. They suddenly pronounced eggs (more
> than two per week) butter etc was bad for you. Never mind margarine
> was far more unhealthy. Next came fat on meat - it's all been
> disproved since but the damage was done. Rather like the greedy
> doctor who averred that having the mumps/measles vaccine gave kids
> autism. Even now, after he has been exposed as greedy for money, too
> many parents still believe it

The entire food landscape is mostly bogus. Eggs are good/bad, fat is
good/bad, gluten is good/bad, sugar, yeda..... It's OK to drink
wine. It's OK to eat pasta. BAH! ....humbug.

Follow the chemicals! I'm currently trying to eliminate wheat from my
diet. NOT cuz of "gluten", but cuz most wheat farmers are using
glyphosate as a "desiccant". IOW, spray all wheat with gallons of
glyphosate 7-10 days prior to harvest. Allegedly increases crop
yield. (gobble it)

nb

On 31 May 2017 00:39:24 GMT, notbob > wrote:

>On 2017-05-30, lucretia > wrote:
>
>> It was in the mid to late 70s. They suddenly pronounced eggs (more
>> than two per week) butter etc was bad for you. Never mind margarine
>> was far more unhealthy. Next came fat on meat - it's all been
>> disproved since but the damage was done. Rather like the greedy
>> doctor who averred that having the mumps/measles vaccine gave kids
>> autism. Even now, after he has been exposed as greedy for money, too
>> many parents still believe it
>
>The entire food landscape is mostly bogus. Eggs are good/bad, fat is
>good/bad, gluten is good/bad, sugar, yeda..... It's OK to drink
>wine. It's OK to eat pasta. BAH! ....humbug.
>
>Follow the chemicals! I'm currently trying to eliminate wheat from my
>diet. NOT cuz of "gluten", but cuz most wheat farmers are using
>glyphosate as a "desiccant". IOW, spray all wheat with gallons of
>glyphosate 7-10 days prior to harvest. Allegedly increases crop
>yield. (gobble it)

You can't eat corn either for the same reason.

On 5/30/2017 5:46 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Tue, 30 May 2017 18:40:01 -0300, lucretia
> > wrote:

>>>> We were like you, just decided to disregard it - we didn't really eat
>>>> excessive amounts and I could not see why an egg, made to nourish a
>>>> chick, could possibly be harmful.
>>>
>>> At the moment, nobody says eggs are harmful, do they?
>>
>> No, they received absolution about two, three years ago.
>
> Good, since I eat one a day.
>

We have 7 to 10 a week. they have been proven to be beneficial rather
than harmful.