US elections 2021-2022

[PRlady]

You can lead the junk food addict to veggies but can’t make her eat them.

I lived in veggie-happy Israel and found a lot of the food boring and repetitive. And guess what, every single time I’m there, I lose weight and have fewer stomach issues. I could eat that diet here but, y’know, there’s 4x the types of food at the market and I like what I like.

 

[MsZem]

I lived in veggie-happy Israel and found a lot of the food boring and repetitive.

How dare you

 

[PRlady]

How dare you

Yeah well DH doesn’t like it either but there’s only so much cheese, tomatoes and cucumbers plus hummus I can take.

 

[MacMadame]

MY ex dil and her current SO have a huge plant pot - not filled with plants, but overflowing with cigarette butter. Despite the extremely high taxes. Adding a soda tax or sugar tax will NOT change obesity levels.

The overall rate of smoking has gone down though. None of these policies and societal changes are going to bring these behaviors down to zero.

One big issue I have with a policy to tax "unhealthy" foods is that most people, including experts, can't agree on what is healthy and what is healthy depends on context. A cookie may not be healthy in on context but lots of people who aren't obese eat them once in a while.

Then there is the unhealthy food disguised as healthy. @clairecloutier mentioned salads that aren't actually healthy. Another example is the Clif bar. They have a "health halo" around them due to things like saying they are "all-natural" and that many of the ingredients are organic. But look at the nutritional label. It reads like a candy bar. They have way more sugar than similar bars. They are not healthy IMO; they are candy bars.

 

[Louis]

One big issue I have with a policy to tax "unhealthy" foods is that most people, including experts, can't agree on what is healthy and what is healthy depends on context.

There are some easy ones to pick off, though. Is anyone going to defend full calorie soda pop? When faced with sugar taxes in Europe, many of the manufacturers changed their formulas to lower sugar. The reduction in sugar was something like 15%. (Now Liz Truss is going to repeal these in the UK, but no one is perfect! Hopefully the lower sugar formula stays anyway.)

The same could be applied easily to confectionary items like Skittles, Starburst, etc/ The EU already bans certain products, with have additives or food coloring associated with hyperactivity and altered moods in children, and it's in process of banning Skittles due to titanium dioxide, which causes cancer. I'd argue that many things sold in the U.S. and marketed to children are probably unsafe for human consumption. So while I agree with your overall point, I think it's fairly easy to pick off a subset of things that virtually all experts (more than would agree on human impact on climate change) would agree are bad and have limited to no nutritional value. These could either be taxed or banned, with the option to change the formula and reintroduce.

I do agree with you that thinks get murky with things like chocolate with nuts in it, or sweets that contain fruit juices. Maybe a sugar threshold would be a fair way to implement it. The sugar threshold could apply to Clif bars, too.

The Philadelphia sugary drink tax was controversial, but also applies to things like Vitamin Water and Gatorade (fully supportive), and even to diet drinks (less supportive because I think these can be good way for people to wean off of the full calorie stuff, but not entirely opposed either).

 

[MacMadame]

There are some easy ones to pick off, though.

This is true. But this is one area where I am wary of the "slippery slope" mostly because so many people are so militant about their own nutritional choices. (Even ones based on ignorance or poor data.)

 

[DORISPULASKI]

My little city is a food desert. There are a couple quickstops and that's it. Nothing much sold at a quickstop is good for you. It is possible to eat a little better, though, without leaving town for the shopping centers.

We do have one thing that helps. Every Tuesday in season, one of the city's ballfields is turned into a farmer's market. A band is provided. It's fun.

The booth prices are negligible, so it's easy to attract farmers. Produce is Connecticut raised and so very fresh. And everything is sold by how much you want. You can buy one pickling cucumber and a dozen green beans, if you want. No huge packages required.

Booths must take SNAP cards, so local low income people can and do use this market.

We also have a fresh seafood truck, an organic meat truck, and a lady selling hummus, baba ganush and such.

Downside from a health perspective, there is home-made cannoli, granny's pies, and a coffee roaster.

This market moves to the city hall gym in winter. Most vegetables are gone (except winter squash & such), but at least the seafood & fresh bread is still available.

Food giveaways are done once a month between United Way and the city in the HUD housing area of the city. Boxes contain stuff that is healthy, among other things.

We have city sea coast. Fishing is allowed. Also, a clamming license is cheap. There is also crabbing in a local estuary (no license needed) that is part of city open space.

Another thing that can be done is Parks & Rec runs community vegetable gardens. People share what they grow, if they have too much.

But we should do better. I am interested in ideas other food deserts are using to help people eat better.

 

[olympic]

You must not be following this discussion very thoroughly because I've talked about the Oregon gubernatorial race (and a couple of the Congressional races as well) several times. "Leftie" Oregon is in play for a couple of reasons. 1) It's a three-woman race - one Dem (Tina Kotek), one former Dem turned independent (Betsy Johnson), and one GOP (Christine Drazan). 2) Even in "leftie OR", the GOP consistently grabs about 42-44% of the vote in statewide elections, depending on the candidate in individual races.

On point #1 - Kotek is your typical Portland liberal; Johnson is a more centrist, blue collar, old-school Democrat from a rural county that borders on Portland and has areas that are slowly becoming more suburban - she also has the big, corporate money support (Phil Knight of Nike is a major campaign contributor); Drazan is a fairly typical conservative - grew up in southern central Oregon, now lives in the Portland suburbs, but still holds to conservative values (she's no Trumper as far as I can tell - and I'm pretty sure if she was, there'd have already been smear ads to that effect).

Which leads to point #2 - Johnson has the capability of shearing off from Kotek enough of the more moderate Dem vote as well as a fair amount of the independent votes that would be inclined to vote for her over Drazan because the only thing the left can really attack Drazan about is the fact that she's supported by Oregon Right to Life (which is a red herring in and of itself because 1) Drazan has stated, repeatedly, she accepts Oregon's voters have decided this issue already (go states rights!) and 2) the governor can't sign a bill into law unless the state legislature passes it and there's no way that both of the Oregon legislative houses flip red this year or any time in the near future). So, the question is, how much of the Dem vote is going to be split by Kotek & Johnson, and will Drazan hold on to enough of the usual GOP vote to get elected with less than 50% of the vote?

There isn't a lot of polling data in Oregon most years, and I'm a bit skeptical of the most recent one conducted last month that fivethirtyeight has included. Why am I skeptical? Well, it was a survey of three races (governor and 2 Congressional races) and the polling company's press release for the poll results identifies the candidate for one of the Congressional races as "he" when, no, the candidate is a "she" - so, if they don't even know that basic information about the candidates, then how reliable is their polling sample?

Also, of note, it is very possible that Oregon could have a 3-3 split in our Congressional delegation if the 5th & 6th districts go GOP. I am quite positive that D5 will go to the GOP candidate (moderate Dem incumbent Kurt Schrader was primaried by a Bend-based progressive, and it's always been the district most in play in the last 15 years). I'm surprised to see, in that latest poll, that my own district, the new 6th district, is trending toward the GOP candidate. I figured there were enough Salem and Portland suburb Dems to keep it blue, even though the rest of the district is rural Willamette Valley which has been trending red in the last 6 years.

Sorry. I kind of jump in and out, and my statement was more of a random brain fart. Thanks for clarifying

 

[Spikefan]

Our area has a bus that’s been converted to a healthy traveling grocery store. It is in a different set location every day in the food desert area. The prices are very cheap. There are also community gardens but that doesn’t help in winter. People on the free streetcar line can also get to the farmers market that does accept SNAP. Of course most of the area around the streetcar has been gentrified and there is now a pricey grocery store.

 

[BittyBug]

Our area has a bus that’s been converted to a healthy traveling grocery store. It is in a different set location every day in the food desert area. The prices are very cheap.

Brilliant. We have mobile health care services that have proven to be very effective at reaching underserved communities, why not mobile fresh food stores?

 

[SkateSand]

I can't help it - every time I see the term food desert posted here, I think of food desserts and wanna go out and get a donut or something.

 

[Allskate]

I don't think it's a time issue; people are busy in other countries too, and often have smaller kitchens that are less convenient to cook in.

One big issue I have with a policy to tax "unhealthy" foods is that most people, including experts, can't agree on what is healthy and what is healthy depends on context. A cookie may not be healthy in on context but lots of people who aren't obese eat them once in a while.

I'm not an alcoholic but I drink alcohol once in a while. I have no problem having my alcohol taxed. I feel the same way about Oreos, Doritos, Coke, cupcakes, donuts, etc. Food is generally exempt from sales tax because it is a necessity. But, when a food clearly has little nutritional value and contributes to poor health, I am fine with taxing it. There always are going to be line-drawing problems, but I don't think that's a reason for not even trying. And I'm definitely opposed to having my taxes indirectly subsidize junk food and junk food retailers. IMO, if we're going to subsidize the cost of food, it should be healthy vegetables and fruit.

Food deserts are an issue, but I read a book recently about diet in America (How the Other Half Eats by Priya Fielding-Singh) that suggested the bigger problems are really 1) the cost of food, 2) the lack of time to prepare healthy meals, and 3) food marketing.

Well, some good points here, but it's known that Americans' working hours (average/annually) tend to be on the higher end, and that does not take into account commutes or other lifestyle/time issues. Also, income inequality is relatively high here as well, which affects not the price of food but the ability to afford it for lower-income families.

Most Americans with unhealthy diets don't live in food deserts, but there certainly are some food deserts, and more needs to be done to address that. I would like to see if there could be programs that use some of the food waste in this country to provide healthy food to some of these areas.

There is no question that poverty affects the ability to buy food generally, but I'm not convinced it is a big part of the reason why such a large percentage of Americans eat unhealthy diets. If people can afford soda and potato chips, they can afford to drink water and buy some of the more affordable fresh or frozen or canned produce. More dollar stores are stocking food, including fresh, canned, and frozen fruits and vegetables, beans, etc. (But also stocking lots of junk food.) A lot of Americans eat more meat than necessary, which raises their costs. There are lots of cultures (many with bigger poverty issues than the U.S.) that get their protein and calories from healthier and more affordable sources. American food costs are not higher than many other countries. Plenty of people who can afford to eat healthier don't. My sister has plenty of money, but she does not have a healthy diet.

People are making choices about whether to spend time preparing meals. There are a lot of Americans who spend significantly more time watching tv than preparing meals. Some meal prep doesn't really take much time. Instead of a donut or sugary cereal for breakfast, someone could have a healthy cereal/oatmeal or yogurt and fruit with little effort. Lunch can be healthy leftovers instead of a big fast food meal. Even healthy dinners sometimes can be fairly quick. My sister has time to make brownies and cupcakes, so she could find the time to cook healthy meals that include, say, vegetables. But, I do think that, when a person first shifts to a healthier diet, it takes time to learn how to shop and prepare different foods.

Even when people buy fast food or takeout, there often are healthier options that are cheaper and don't take much more time.

Food marketing is an issue, but I think food culture in general, including family culture, is important. That includes both the kind of food people eat and portion size. Portion sizes are much bigger today. My niece recently complained that the smaller chip bags that are sold for a single person don't contain enough for a full single serving. In fact, they contain much more than one serving and much more than they used to contain when I was a kid. When my nephew was in first grade, my sister complained that his lunch box wasn't big enough for all of his food. (Anyone who looked at him could see that he was not being deprived of enough calories.) She does not have a good sense of what a real portion should be and she is passing that on to her kids. She is also passing on her love of sugar and simple carbs and her aversion to vegetables. It's really a shame because a lot of people form their eating habits when they are young.

I think part of our culture does include a political anti-woke attitude that rationalizes eating poorly. When Michelle Obama was trying to make school lunches healthier, politicians and media on the right called her elite and accused her of trying to limit their freedom.

It's difficult sometimes even for doctors to address the issue. I overheard a woman complaining to her friend that her doctor had advised her to lose weight. (The woman clearly was significantly overweight.) The woman was offended and was looking for a new doctor.

Yeah well DH doesn’t like it either but there’s only so much cheese, tomatoes and cucumbers plus hummus I can take.

In a lot of cases, it really is just what people prefer. When I eat food that is unhealthy, it's not because I don't know better or can't afford better or don't have enough time. I just like it. Or, if I've had a rough day, I tend to want ice cream or some form of fried potatoes or other comfort food.

I do think you have a point about food being addictive for some people. My sister seems to be like that to some extent. She had a hard time having kids, but even when her doctor told her that part of her problem was her weight and blood sugar, she had a hard time doing well with her diet.

 

[clairecloutier]

I guess this is obvious, but in terms of outcomes, what matters is not others’ judgment or advice but people’s own perceptions or evaluations. If they perceive they don’t have the time or mental or physical energy to shop for or prepare or cook a meal with fresh ingredients, then they won’t do it. Other people can judge that they can or should have the time, but what matters, in terms of the outcome, is what they think. Same with spending decisions. What I liked about the book I mentioned is that the author makes a concerted effort to understand the reasons and motivations behind the subjects’ decisions around food.

 

[MsZem]

I guess this is obvious, but in terms of outcomes, what matters is not others’ judgment or advice but people’s own perceptions or evaluations. If they perceive they don’t have the time or mental or physical energy to shop for or prepare or cook a meal with fresh ingredients, then they won’t do it. Other people can judge that they can or should have the time, but what matters, in terms of the outcome, is what they think. Same with spending decisions.

Well, obviously. But if you want to design appropriate interventions and policies to deal with this, you need to identify both objective and subjective barriers.

What I liked about the book I mentioned is that the author makes a concerted effort to understand the reasons and motivations behind the subjects’ decisions around food.

The problem with doing purely qualitative research with informants is that they may not be able to tell you what is actually driving their perceptions and behaviors, which is why such work needs to be complemented with other methodologies. I remember reading an interview with someone who did research on gambling, and she basically said something to the effect that after putting in a lot of traditional qualitative work, she realized that it was anthropologically interesting, but people would not be able to tell her why they were there - what process created the option for a particular person to do what they did, and she needed an institutional lens to really make sense of it.

 

[DORISPULASKI]

Top 5 Meal Delivery Services - Top 5 Meal Delivery Services

top5mealdeliveryservices.com

The growth of home cooking box companies like Blue Apron, Hello Fresh, and other meal delivery services makes it clear that many people at the very least lack time to shop and perhaps also have limited cooking skills and time. Some are apt to have healthy choices, and at the very least have portion control.

Possibly we should support subscriptions to them instead of/in addition to SNAP?

 

[VGThuy]

I also think most people start getting used to eating certain kinds of food and certain amounts of it. Many people, surprisingly, aren’t adventurous eaters and will stick with what they know and grew up with. If you grew up thinking a Big Mac, large fries, and a large coke is one meal when calorically, it’s like three meals…and then you eat something like that at least three times a day and then mindlessly snack (and not protein-heavy or nutritionally healthy snacks either), which what those snack companies want you to do…well…

And I’ve been convinced for a long time that there is something going on with the way American farming is producing our food that is adding to it. It’s become such a pervasive issue that creative a whole health/weight loss industry with at-times conflicting that confuses people with some having had success with it while many others not…there’s something going on.

I also think the way freeway, suburban, and car culture evolved here created more sedentary lifestyles and lifestyles of abundance of availability of food that makes us feel good. Add in more stressful working lives and other obligations that make us think we deserve a “treat” every now and then but we don’t keep track of “every now and then”….

I think everyone who has participated in this convo has a valid point and nobody should be dismissed. I do think we should be honest but kinder to people. Obesity is something that is debilitating and people who are conscious about needing to adopt a healthier life style already go through enough self-shame and have self-image issues and usually don’t have a shortage of people giving unsolicited advice and making micro to macro judgments about them and how lazy they are or how they are a certain kind of person.

And I do think the book @clairecloutier mentioned probably has some truth bombs that we can use when trying to “change” people’s behaviors and consumption of food. It’s one of those things that isn’t an either/or situation and turning it into that creates an unnecessary conflict when there doesn’t need to be one.

 

[BittyBug]

As far as not having time to cook is concerned, I think that is lack of awareness. There is no shortage of cooking shows about quick meals - 30 minute meals, even 15 minute meals. And with a few simple appliances like a rice cooker, that prep time can be even further reduced. (Obviously you don't need a rice cooker to make rice but it reduces the effort to practically nothing.)

I eat a lot of rice bowls, which take a maximum of 10 minutes to assemble, and can often be compiled in as little as 5 minutes. And they're easily customizable to suit individual taste preferences. But the average American isn't educated to view something like a rice bowl as real food. So it goes back to education.

 

[DORISPULASKI]

Serious question. Why a rice cooker?

What could be easier than just cooking rice?

Rice & water, bit salt, bit olive oil in a regular pot. Bring to a boil, turn off heat, cover, and wait 20 minutes or more.

( And machines of all sorts are a pest to store and clean imo. )

 

[allezfred]

Serious question. Why a rice cooker?

What could be easier than just cooking rice?

Rice & water, bit salt, bit olive oil in a regular pot. Bring to a boil, turn off heat, cover, and wait 20 minutes or more.

( And machines of all sorts are a pest to store and clean imo. )

Asian rice cookers allow you to cook large quantities of rice and keep it warm and ready to go when needed. Handy when you are from a culture where rice is eaten with every meal.

Am not going to comment on using olive oil to cook rice.

 

[Dai's Blues for Klook]

Serious question. Why a rice cooker?

What could be easier than just cooking rice?

Rice & water, bit salt, bit olive oil in a regular pot. Bring to a boil, turn off heat, cover, and wait 20 minutes or more.

( And machines of all sorts are a pest to store and clean imo. )

Because it's even easier to throw rice and water into a machine, and go to work. Cooked rice by the time you get home!

ETA: ALSO you can make bread and cake in rice cookers!

 

[Vagabond]

Not commenting on using olive oil to cook rice is like not commenting on using lungs to breathe.

 

[once_upon]

I think there is also the "fix what you are familiar with" and lack of willingness to try something new.

When we were first married, my husband ate 3 vegetables, all canned which has a high salt preservative and to add flavor to blanched overcooked limp tasteless food. Corn, green beans, faux baked beans - which in addition to salt has high sugar content. He ate a lot of peanut butter jelly sandwiches Only bananas for fruit. Part of that was poverty level, part of his mother not having cooking skills. His dad (they were divorced) made a lot of fried foods, grilled steaks or hamburgers, occasionally spaghetti and chili.

Over 50 years I've gotten him to try more vegetables and fruits but it's a stretch to get him to eat healthier.

While I was recovering he made a lot of tuna or chicken helper meals. I appreciate everything but as he said he's happy eating the same thing every night. Even the meal kits don't help to give him something else to fix.

I got eggplant at the farmer's market, he can't imagine what I would do with it.

 

[MsZem]

Yay, another food thread

Am not going to comment on using olive oil to cook rice.

I don't cook plain rice with olive oil, but anyone who's ever eaten Middle Eastern food knows that the two go well together.

 

[MacMadame]

It's difficult sometimes even for doctors to address the issue. I overheard a woman complaining to her friend that her doctor had advised her to lose weight. (The woman clearly was significantly overweight.) The woman was offended and was looking for a new doctor.

If her doctor was one of those who blames every problem on being overweight, that was pretty smart of her. (Patient: My arm hurts and there is this bone sticking out of it; Doctor: Have you considered losing weight?)

There is no question that poverty affects the ability to buy food generally, but I'm not convinced it is a big part of the reason why such a large percentage of Americans eat unhealthy diets.

There is a well-established correlation between income and healthy eating.

Top 5 Meal Delivery Services - Top 5 Meal Delivery Services

top5mealdeliveryservices.com

The growth of home cooking box companies like Blue Apron, Hello Fresh, and other meal delivery services makes it clear that many people at the very least lack time to shop and perhaps also have limited cooking skills and time. Some are apt to have healthy choices, and at the very least have portion control.

Possibly we should support subscriptions to them instead of/in addition to SNAP?

We use those services and they are great. They are more expensive than buying the ingredients without the service though. Not sure how allowing SNAP dollars to pay for them would fly as I think they are perceived as something "too good" for poor people.

As far as not having time to cook is concerned, I think that is lack of awareness.

I agree with this. I always make brownies from scratch. It doesn't actually take any more time than using a box. Most box brownie mixes require you to add water, some kind of fat (usually oil), and an egg or two, but some require more. And there are tons of articles out there about how to make boxed brownies better that call for adding more eggs, some butter, maybe milk instead of water, more chocolate, some salt, some vanilla, etc.

How are these less work than mixing powdered chocolate, flour, sugar & a bit of baking powder in a bowl, then adding water, butter, and eggs? (okay and maybe some vanilla and salt)

Really, the only thing a box mix saves you is having to mix the dry ingredients together. You still have to add moisture (water or milk) and something to give it body and lift (i.e., eggs)

Rice & water, bit salt, bit olive oil in a regular pot. Bring to a boil, turn off heat, cover, and wait 20 minutes or more.

What?

 

[El Rey]

After being eligible for almost three decades, I finally decided to apply for my US citizenship in March and will become a citizen on Wednesday! I live in Texas and can’t wait to vote against candidates, which this year is every single Republican. And I cannot wait to vote against Ted Cruz in 2024!!!! I consider myself a moderate who leans right on a lot of issues (including immigration and don’t get me started on Latinx…) but no way am I voting for anyone in the current Republican Party with their overt racist messaging.

Quoting myself to say thanks to everyone! I am now a US citizen! Does that allow me to complain now? The ceremony was not pleasant at all. Imagine airport TSA X100. From the security shouting and yelling at you upon arrival to shouting from all the workers/agents reviewing and taking your paperwork. We were treated as if we had committed some sort of crime. And based on one's English speaking level, it even seemed somewhat racist/discrimination? My appointment was at 9:15 and I was out of there by 10:03 (they made sure to remind us how many they had that day and they had been there since 6 am). And apparently you're supposed to keep every single immigration entry document you've ever received and turn back in, which i guesstimate 80% of the ~100 didn't have, including myself. That led to unnecessary questioning and yelling for every single person who didn't have it, only to be told to mail them back in. I have been able to only find one expired green card and will be mailing it back in with a very strongly written letter about the experience. Cause I'm an American dammit!!!

I've registered to vote and made an appointment for my passport, which the earliest one is 30 days out!! No wonder more Americans don't have one. And then I'll have to wait at least 4 weeks for an expedited one! Geez, I never thought Mexico would be so much better at something. I can go to the Mexican consulate and get a passport the same day....

 

[MacMadame]

Congrats, @El Rey

Though why do you need an appointment to get a passport? I got mine by filling out forms and mailing them in.

 

[BittyBug]

Serious question. Why a rice cooker?

What could be easier than just cooking rice?

I used to think the same thing until I got one, but the beauty of a rice cooker is that (1) it comes out perfect every single time, (2) you can make a variety of grains in it (any type of rice, quinoa, farro, wild rice, etc., plus oatmeal, and beans (with or without rice)). And you can set everything up and program it to cook later so that whatever you're cooking is done exactly when you want it. And you don't need to watch the pot. (Basicaly, it's the Ronco Roaster of grains - set it and forget it.). It also has build in portion lines, so it's very easy to know exactly how much you need to make.)

 

[Allskate]

There is a well-established correlation between income and healthy eating.

Yes, a correlation. But that doesn't mean that the cost of food is the cause of why lower income people have less healthy diets. Most of the Blue Zones, where people live longer lives, are not in less wealthy areas of the world. My point was that the cost of food is not necessarily the cause of unhealthy eating for most people. Half of American adults are pre-diabetic or diabetic. So, clearly, the issue goes beyond poverty. And, among poorer people, I think the issue often is more complex than simply the cost of healthier food.

I recently read about programs and studies to "prescribe" and pay for healthy fruits and vegetables to poorer people who have diet-related health conditions. It will be interesting to see what the study shows not just in terms of whether it is successful but why. Is it the cost? Is it that they are being given food for free? Is it that the person already has a health condition that they want to address? Is it because the prescription essentially educates them on what to eat and why and maybe educates them on how to prepare it?

I guess this is obvious, but in terms of outcomes, what matters is not others’ judgment or advice but people’s own perceptions or evaluations. If they perceive they don’t have the time or mental or physical energy to shop for or prepare or cook a meal with fresh ingredients, then they won’t do it. Other people can judge that they can or should have the time, but what matters, in terms of the outcome, is what they think. Same with spending decisions. What I liked about the book I mentioned is that the author makes a concerted effort to understand the reasons and motivations behind the subjects’ decisions around food.

Well, obviously. But if you want to design appropriate interventions and policies to deal with this, you need to identify both objective and subjective barriers.

ITA. Again, though, I think the issues are complex. For example, my sister says she doesn't buy avocados because they are too expensive. But, why does she think that when she can afford European vacations and spends money eating out, buying expensive meat and beer, and buying soda, Doritos, candy, Oreos, etc. ?

As far as not having time to cook is concerned, I think that is lack of awareness.

I think there is also the "fix what you are familiar with" and lack of willingness to try something new.

I agree. People develop tastes and habits. I think it's genuinely very hard for many people to break those tastes and habits, and I wasn't exaggerating when I said that, for some people it is like an addiction.

And, as I mentioned, it can take time and effort to learn what food to buy and how to prepare it. For some people it can be overwhelming if they have no information about what to prepare and how. I've had to deal with this because I have food intolerances and autoimmune issues. When my doctor tells me to eliminate a certain food, it takes a little while to figure out what to buy instead and how to prepare meals that are still healthy. My doctors recently put me on a diet that eliminates a lot of foods, and it's a challenge figuring out what to eat and prepare. I think changing diets is even more difficult when you have family members in your household who are not on board with it.

My arguments for saying that our diet problems aren't merely about cost and time isn't meant to suggest that it is simple to address unhealthy diets. It is to say that I think that the problems are much more complex than cost and time.

 

[Dai's Blues for Klook]

I used to think the same thing until I got one, but the beauty of a rice cooker is that (1) it comes out perfect every single time, (2) you can make a variety of grains in it (any type of rice, quinoa, farro, wild rice, etc., plus oatmeal, and beans (with or without rice)). And you can set everything up and program it to cook later so that whatever you're cooking is done exactly when you want it. And you don't need to watch the pot. (Basicaly, it's the Ronco Roaster of grains - set it and forget it.). It also has build in portion lines, so it's very easy to know exactly how much you need to make.)

You can put vegetables in to steam them too. It's very a multi-functional thing in my mother's house haha.

 

[DORISPULASKI]

Good to know. My husband bought one and never used it. After he died, I gave it away. I wondered whether I did the right thing. Now I know I did since I only make rice very occasionally, and I am cooking for one.

As to oil in rice, my mom used to use a little bit of butter. That is also probably a no no. OTOH you all probably put milk or cream or tomatoes in clam chowder, don't make johnnycakes or serve scrunchions and cream sauce with salt cod, and likely even use mayo in a lobster roll.

Those are my native foods.

Likewise, rice is not my native food, and I seldom make it. I do not claim to any correctness of my methods. However, it always comes out tender, tastes good, and never sticks to the pot

I do like arborio rice cooked with a little oil or butter as a tasty base for top of the stove rice pudding.

And I do like it with maghmour.