Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Many Works of Fiction and Hysteria...

Hello blog world, haters, and curious eavesdroppers.  It's been a while since I posted, so I thought I would toss together a tolerable hodgepodge of food things...

Cloned meat has reportedly been found in the UK...  cue the music... dun dun duuuuunnnn!  Oh no!  Run everybody, ruuuun!  Cloned cows!  Holy cow!  Panic!  Freak out!

Don't worry... don't panic... and don't freak out.  There is no science that I am aware of that supports any theories about meat coming from cloned animals being anything less than safe.  Seriously, it's cool.  It's just more panic from the Food Hysterics that I think stems from a lack of fundamental science knowledge.  

Remember these simple rules when wading through these stories:
1.  Just because someone puts it in a book, doesn't make it true.
2.  Established science, and a consensus of credible, peer reviewed scientific studies can never be undone by one study.  Never.
3. Always pay close attention to the Expert's area of expertise before you consider what they're talking about.  Don't take medical advice from a food scientist, don't take environmental science info from a doctor, and certainly don't give much credence to what an environmental scientist says about food.
4. Chef's have almost zero food science knowledge.  Same goes for journalism professors.
5. Beware of percentages in the absence of hard numbers. Percentages often sound worse than they really are. i.e.  Grass fed cows have 60% more omega-3 fatty acids than grain fed cows....  but the grain fed has 1.2 and the grass fed has 1.92. When you see actual data, the percentages get less scary.

Hooter's update...
For those unaware of my writings about Hooter's, please read this as well as this.
I met someone that was going to train to be a Hooter's manager several months back.  I caught up with him recently and asked how it was going.  He quit the training and made several complaints about the company and told one interesting anecdote.  He says he went to get some raw wings to bread and fry from the cooler and noticed some had a greenish tint and smelled foul.  As any good kitchen worker does, he immediately alerted the manager in charge.  The manager took a look and advised him to go ahead and cook them.  For those concerned for their health, the training location was North of Columbus in the Polaris area and the store is located on Sancus Blvd.  I advise nobody to eat there.  Hooter's never got in touch with me and their training continues to be ignorant of the most basic food safety logic.  If anyone from Hooter's is reading this... I can help you.  You need to seek help from someone before your food kills someone, especially since more families and children are eating there.


School lunch...
I'm all for nutritious school lunches, but aside from the money needed to increases the free lunche program, it shouldn't cost more per person.  The school lunch bill being considered now is confusing.  It aims to simultaneously reduce childhood hunger while fighting childhood obesity.  The bill includes an increase in the number of kids eligible for free lunches, and also includes stricter controls on fat and sodium.  

Here is what Mrs. Obama has not considered... the other 18 hrs that the kid isn't in school.  They assume that kids blow their diets at school, which I'm not so sure of.  Kids get 1 meal at school in most cases, and while they may go for higher sugar, higher fat foods, are they eating more calories than they do at home?  Also, the law states that they must get a full 1/3 of the minimum daily calories from the school lunch... shouldn't calories be cut to reduce obesity?  I've heard they have provisions aimed at encouraging schools to go local and organic, so they'd be paying a premium for the same food without any health benefits.  

Who does this benefit other than organic farmers?  Here's a plan: offer a tax break to families that brown bag it.  That way, the parents have only themselves to blame for fat kids.  Secondly, simplify the menu with lunch meats, and fruits/veggies.  Less to cook means lowered energy costs and these foods are already lower in fat/calories.  You don't need to increase the spending on this, aside from what you spend to increase free lunches.  This seems to be another bill based on more emotion/opinion than logic, reason, and science.

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Bad Arnold & The School Lunch Examiner.

First blog of July and I have several mini-topics to go over.  I think this might be a better format, as the longer blogs I'm known for might be off-putting to people wanting some quick serve information.  It's ironic, because I was taught to be succinct in my writing and I'm a staunch opponent of length requirements in writing assignments.

First thing... Examiner.

I applied to write posts for the Examiner so I could at least make a little of what Adam Carolla calls WAM(walking around money).  Blogger has ad programs, but I've earned a whopping $6 in a year.  So I applied and submitted a writing sample, which I had to edit extensively because they didn't like anything written in first person.  It's such an old school, pre-blogging, pre-op-ed style.  It's like being asked to use a typewriter.  I submitted, I waited, I got fucking rejected.  Not bitter...nope, not at all.  How could I possibly compete with the award winning writing of the Examiner Food writers discussing the most ironic, bitter micro-brews, or some crazy lady talking about how Mountain Dew is destroying America...

IFT 2010 in Chicago has begun.  Have fun and mingle lots my friends.  For those that don't know, IFT is the Institute of Food Technologists, which is a professional organization for food science and food industry pro's.  IFT is a great resource if you have questions about food science and you can find them on Twitter @IFT

I need a career, folks.  I keep trying and I keep getting denied.  I have talents that are going to waste.  I can write, speak, present, sell, collaborate, investigate, or manage things for your organization.  I am very relocatable and willing to travel 100% for my job.  I'll work trade shows and live out of a suitcase if that is what you need.  If you are in need of a good addition for your team, please contact me on Twitter @samvance 

The House Committee on Education and Labor is holding hearings about the School Lunch Program today.  They want an $8 Billion budget for school lunches.  I'm not sure if this is the proposed budget or an addition to the budget, especially frustrating since I was just searching for the info on the committee website.

They seem to be having 2 hearings today.  One hearing is about how this bill(H.R. 5504) will help tackle childhood obesity and the other is about how we it will help end child hunger... What?  A couple things about this: The bill doesn't directly address obesity.  The bill makes it easier to use local farms and I think it updates the nutrition requirements based on professional recommendations.  By law, the school lunch program must provide no less than 30% of the nutrition and caloric value that a child needs in a day.  This is assuming the kid eats 3 meals a day.  

The way to battle obesity is to reduce calories, not increase the nutritional density of a food.  This bill can do little to that end because the kid eats whatever when he/she gets home from school.  Also, you can't force the kids to eat the food you make.  So what is the increase in spending?  I know some of the spending is a 6 cent increase in the school lunch reimbursement rate, but that doesn't account for all of it.  More of the money comes from increasing the number of kids that qualify for free and reduced lunches, but again, that doesn't account for all the money.  The rest is in buying more expensive food.  

This is directly related to the local farm provisions.  You see, 'local' farms charge a premium for the food and take advantage of your fear and anxiety over processed foods and corporations.  This creates a sort of halo effect for these operations, where consumers falsely conclude that local food is more nutritive and safer.  It isn't.  In fact, Dole and Del Monte have greater resources for ensuring that fruits and vegetables are safe.  Small operations can't afford these resources and don't intend to invest in them.  The whole reason they market themselves as local is so they can charge a premium on that food.  A large operation has to invest to protect itself against recalls and lawsuits.  Also, these operations are usually highly automated, meaning there are less people touching and contaminating the product.

I really think this just comes down to foodies and food hysterics being anti-corporate, anti-science, and pro-presentation.  They really don't like the way school food looks, which isn't the point of it.  I could make these foodies a school lunch that was more fattening and has more calories and they would choose it over the current school lunch.  Actually, Cornell has done research where they take fast food and reconfigure it to look like fine dining and participants had substantially higher opinions about that food and how many calories they thought it had versus the exact same fast food they just sampled.  This bill has a couple good things in it, but for the most part it's style over substance.

Arnold Foods makes a wide assortment of higher end breads.  They usually enjoy shelf placement right alongside Sara Lee and Pepperidge Farm.  I was shopping at the Bigg's Hypermarket in Hyde Park (Cincinnati) and noticed and unusual quality defect in a package of their sesame seed sandwich buns.

Can you tell which package doesn't look right?














The package on the left is barely done and has no color.  I am amazed that nobody working on the line or in QA for Arnold caught this.  The bottom of the package is soggy and a little doughy.  The process for these buns is pretty straight forward.  Dough is batched and loaded into a hopper where it is portioned, shaped, and sent through a proofing room.  Then the dough heads through an oven on a belt.  Most likely, the belt speed, oven temp was adjusted and a few of the buns were in the oven when the belt speed was too fast or the oven temp was too low.  This should have been picked up by QA though.

Bad Buns.


















Good Buns.


















FYI - I did take the bad buns to Bigg's customer service counter and explain what the issue was and told her the grocery manager could probably get a credit for them.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

Food Hysterics Are Taking Over.

It's been a long time coming, but we are now starting to see the food hysterics taking over.  It isn't just them though, but a larger movement that will never think we are safe enough or healthy enough.  You've heard stories of schools banning dodgeball and tag.  You've heard about the participation ribbons(losing is too negative).

This overreaction to life has fed the Food Hysterics and created a sense(to them) that they are justified in what they are doing.

So what are they doing?

The CSPI (Center for Science in the Public Interest) is launching a lawsuit against McDonalds.  Apparently, CSPI told McDonalds not to put toys in Happy Meals.  McDonalds probably realized that CSPI has no authority over them and ignored the order.  So now they're being sued for what CSPI claims are deceptive practices.  By putting toys in Happy Meals, it entices kids to drive to McDonalds, open their wallets, and fork over their hard earned money for... what a  minute, that doesn't sound right.

Washington D.C. schools will now stop offering flavored milk to students.  There choices are now 1% & skim.

Seriously.

Let's look at the Happy Meals first:

Obviously, kids aren't buying the Happy Meals, the parents/guardians are.  The toy is as much for the parent as it is for the kid, since the kid stays put and is placated by the toy and not running a muck in the restaurant.  Sure, the kids can bug the folks to get them a Happy Meal, but even then, they can still ask them to omit the toy.  But it isn't the toy that the CSPI is really opposed to, is it?  Clearly, they are opposed to the food, but that doesn't make a whole lot of sense either.

Look at the actual ads for Happy Meals:

Happy Meals used to be 4 McNuggets or a Cheeseburger, fries, and a soft drink.  Now they have the option of replacing fries with apple slices and replacing the pop with milk.  So you can get McNuggets, apple slices, and a milk.  That's a pretty good lunch and the kid can be treated to some hot fries every now and then or just have a few of mom or dad's.  I have a niece and a nephew almost 2 and just over 4 years old.  I have never seen them finish what's on their plate, not even close.  They eat like birds and I guarantee that they don't eat more than 200 calories out of their 430 calorie Happy Meal.  By the way, if you adults want to go on a diet without giving up your favorite foods, I have a suggestion for you... Happy Meal!  You could have a happy meal for 3 meals and still be at a caloric deficit.  They even give you a toy(while supplies last).

CSPI is being really short sighted here.  Sure they missed the fact that adults are in charge, and they missed the fact that Happy Meals are advertised with apple slices and milk now, and they missed the fact that many kids probably don't even finish the Happy Meal, and they missed the fact that for every fat kid eating a Happy Meal, there are many other kids who are just fine.  Despite all that, they missed a way these Happy Meals can be used in their favor.  What if the toy was a ball?  What about a jump rope?  How about one of those mind boggling logic puzzles?  Not only that but what about using toys to establish a lifetime of eating apples and drinking milk?  Sure they can still get the cheeseburger and fries if the parent allows it, but they should still have that choice, right?  Right??

CSPI is wrong about this.  The Food Hysterics are wrong about their issues.  On nearly every issue, they get the science wrong, or quote studies that have been discredited, or have too small a sample size, or only make a correlation(which you should know means nothing), or haven't been replicated or peer reviewed.  If you you tell the truth, that it all boils down to managing calories, then their life's work goes away.  They're not activists, they're Hysterics.  They take a trace amount of a food additive that would require you to eat 100's of pounds of that food a day to get ill and turn it into a huge danger to society.  They need these wild accusations to prey on the weak minded and the science illiterate so that The Food Hysteric's way of life can continue.  

They really need to settle down.  Maybe they need a Happy Meal.  You know, they do come with a toy...





Monday, June 21, 2010

Just Say Yes: An Open Letter To The Food Industry.

I remember the first job I tried to get.  A guy in my class was working at a Ponderosa Steakhouse as a dishwasher and was let go.  I overheard him telling someone about his firing so I knew I had a chance to capitalize.

I went down to the Ponderosa and filled out an application.  I was thrilled when they wanted to interview me.  'I've got this one', I thought to myself as I waited for the General Manager to join me in the booth.  I knew they needed a night time dishwasher and I had spent the last 6 years at family farm boot camp where I had to haul in firewood by the wagon full, shovel hog manure, and wrestle hogs down that needed castrated or moved to other pens.  Dish washing would be a cakewalk.

The manager interviewed me and towards the end posed some odd question where he asked me to interpret a quote.  It was a psychological test where the quote could be read in a number of different ways.  He told me there was no wrong answer.  I didn't get the job... as a dishwasher that they needed.  Maybe there was a wrong answer after all.

It's been many years since then, and I have gone from wanting to be the Chef-owner of my own restaurant to being interested in the food industry, to wanting a career in the industry.  I put myself in debt and went to college.  At one point, I had to take a couple years off because I had no money.  Once I was able to get financial aid I decided I would make sure I didn't leave without my degree.  It wasn't easy.

For many quarters I would start off on a full-time schedule, then drop a class just so I could have money to live off of.  It was also very routine for me to return books I had bought as I had run out of money.  Most of my college education was gleaned off of what was said in lecture and recitation, because I didn't have books.  I had some academic set-backs as well.  I struggled in a few classes where I had to take them over, which destroyed my GPA, although none of those classes(except accounting) dealt with my degree.

With one quarter left and the end in sight, I was informed that I had maxed out my financial aid and I would only get a small amount of grant money for my last quarter of school.  I was several thousand dollars short and had to get my sister to co-sign a private loan just so I could finish.

That last year I tried to get hired by several food companies ahead of time so I could start work right after graduating.  These companies would skim off the people with the highest GPA and most extra-curricular activities, which left me out.  Everything is computerized now, so instead of pleading with someone in HR to consider the grades I got in food science and ops management classes, a computer just automatically rejected me.

My sister pleaded with me to manage my expectations and take any job, anywhere just to start making money.  My argument was that it'd do more damage to work heavy hours in a job that is going to take my energy away from finding work that I really wanted to do.

So I've had a couple decent things here and there, but no real start to a food industry career.  The food industry was sold to me as a vacuum for graduates, that there are more jobs than food science & technology grads to fill them.  I was filled with thoughts of bidding wars over my valuable services.  I'm still trying to get my career going.  My aspirations don't seem very far-fetched to me.  I want to get hired into the food industry, preferably into a training program where I am able to learn about the company and move up.  I don't expect to be a regional sales manager or a plant manager straight away, but I also know that my skills aren't going to be put to good use as an hourly machine operator, either.

The food industry seems to be taking advantage of the recession.  In my 2 and a half years of looking, I've seen the job requirements change.  I recently saw a posting for a 3rd shift production supervisor in Eastern Ohio.  The ad stated that they wanted someone with at least 5-7 years of experience in a very specific manufacturing process.  Starting pay, $30,000 - $35,000.  Greedy.  First off, how many qualified candidates do you expect to find on the eastern border of Ohio... with 5-7 years of experience in a specific manufacturing process?  Second, what self respecting production supervisor with 5-7 years of experience is going to take a 3rd shift job for that little money.

Of course, this is anecdotal, but it underscores a troubling trend for the food industry.  This is an industry built on progress and innovation.  Food companies should have a minimum number of people that they train for management, R&D, and QA every year.  Sure, the smaller companies can't afford these training programs, but they get people a few years after those programs and other people that were in those companies.  This is how the talent cross-pollinates within the industry.  The trainee moves up after the seasoned manager moves on to the smaller company for a promotion in title and a raise in pay.  This is the circle of life in the food industry, or at least it was.  There is now something jamming up the gears of progress.  I have the solution though, if you want to hear it.

Just say yes.

Don't let the computer or the HR generalist making $25,000/yr hand out all those free 'no's.  The no's have a cost associated with them which lies in wasted talent.  In their place are people that are very good at being students.  Not to sound completely cynical, there are many very good candidates with 3.0 and above GPA's, but there are also many very good candidates with lower GPA's.  The inherent flaw is in selecting pristine candidates for an industry that isn't very pristine.  What happens when people that locked themselves in their rooms to memorize facts and figures to maintain there GPA encounter adversity and failure in the workplace?  How will they handle change and uncertainty?  

I'm a fighter, a cellar climber.  Nothing I got came easy and I don't have any successes without several failures to go along with it.  I learn from my mistakes and I've learned a lot, but I get passed up a lot, too.  How many more are out there just like me, who are smart, capable, creative, and know they can do a great job if given the opportunity.  My confidence is strengthened through the failures in my life.  Every time I couldn't, I learned why, so next time I could.

What is a company to do?  Talk to us.  Meet us.  Shake our hand and have a conversation.  If after that, you don't feel we're right for a position, then tell us why and we'll learn from it and be smarter for the next interview.  You don't like cookie cutter resumes?  Well we hate cookie cutter rejections.  Man up, and say why we aren't good enough.  It could be a simple misunderstanding that makes us a stronger candidate in your eyes.  It could be something we were unaware of and you would have just helped us tremendously.

About me:  I have a Bachelor's of Science from The Ohio State University in Food Business Management.  That's Operations Management with a heavy emphasis on Food Science.  I have several years of management experience in the restaurant industry, just under a year of experience in sales, and less than 6 months experience in Quality Assurance.  I retain technical information well and have no trouble with both written and spoken communication.  You need an idea, I've got plenty.  You need someone to travel, I'm there.  You need a problem solved, I'm your man.  My main interests are Sales & Marketing, R & D, and Operations Management.  My goal is to one day be in a position of leadership over a large food company.

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

The Media Is like High School For Science...

Ever have a rumor stat about you when you were in high school?

Infuriating, isn't it?

Sometimes it's a half truth, and sometimes it's just something taken out of context.  Either way, the efficiency of the rumor spreading is way higher than the efficiency of you explaining the whole story or putting what was actually said into context.  You converted one or two people, but everyone else you confronted just laughed in your face, called you a liar, and repeated the rumor to more people.

Many things in life are counter-intuitive.  We anticipate one thing but the other thing is true.  Less is sometimes more.  You really do, on average, hit the golf ball farther and straighter when you don't try to swing so hard, and so on.  These same types of things exist in food science.  Although, it's not that they're counter-intuitive, it's that the public has a bad intuition.

Let's look at BPA, for example.  Does everyone remember the statement put out by the FDA in regards to BPA in January?  What did it say?  Some remember it as an admission that the government was wrong about BPA and that we need to take a careful look at how it's regulated.  This is one of those rumors that start by something being taken out of context.  What the FDA said was that BPA was safe, but there haven't been studies on very subtle effects and that effects on the very young warranted further study.  But in several stories that came out since then, it was reported as if the government changed their mind on all the established science.

This is also a great example of how efficient rumors are vs. explaining the whole story.  For those who've really looked into BPA, you'll know that BPA(like most chemicals including some vitamins) have a level at which they cause harm.  So it has the potential to do harm, and the article(rumor) reports that it's in everyone's bodies, so it must be harming our bodies, right?  Hold on.  This is the type of rumor where you need to explain, and most people don't sit still for it, but let me have a crack at it.  BPA is established as a GRAS food additive.  It's not mixed directly in food, but rather it makes up part of the packaging that the food touches, so it must be labeled as an additive.  Anything GRAS has a limit on how it can be used and at what quantities.  That's per the Code of Federal Regulations.  That limit is based on the Lowest Observable Effect Level determined in lab tests.  Just to be sure it's safe enough to use, they take the quantity that is determined to cause the LOEL and divide it by as much as 1,000.  Now, the studies on BPA all say that it can't be proven that BPA is a definitive danger.  Furthermore, some studies show us how much BPA was found in a particular canned product.  I've mentioned this before but one of the highest BPA concentrations was found in canned fruit.  Here's the part you never get to read.  At those levels, a person would have to eat several hundred pounds of the fruit every day to reach the LOEL.  But the published rumor is titled, 'BPA in Cans Poses Health Threat, Report Claims'.

This has been going on for a while with different things.  I remember a similar story about Tab years ago and they figured you'd need to drink hundreds of cans a day to get ill from whatever the chemical was.

Salt is one of the relatively new bad guys.  The way you hear it told, the food industry is poisoning us with dangerous levels of sodium and they say it causes 100,000 deaths a year.  Wow, that's a lot of people.  The trouble is that BPA supposedly causes a lot of death's too, as does HFCS, as does trans-fat, but where do the numbers come from?

Correlation.  

Correlation got you into fights in high school.  Correlation caused your parents to punish you when you did nothing wrong.  Correlation is basically this:  A is true and B contains A and B contains C, so C is true.  Put another way...  From statistics-help-online.com:
"Let's take some other ludicrous examples to explain the problem of correlation vs. causation. Define $T$ as the temperature of a day in Manhattan, and $I$ as the number of ice cream vendors out on that day. The correlation coefficient between these two is almost certainly quite positive. (How many vendors are out there in January?). Does this prove that ice cream vendors cause it to be hot? Obviously causation goes the other way. Common sense tells you that. Unless of course you believe in conspiracy theories."
 So all the salt people's numbers are based on correlation studies.  Is salt killing us? A clue can be found by observing other countries.  This is helpful in the HFCS argument since sugar is cheaper than HFCS outside of the US and we can compare with obesity and diabetic rates to see how much healthier they are(in the case of HFCS, non HFCS countries don't fare better).  

"When all the surveys in Britain are considered, there has been no consistent downward trend in salt consumption in recent years, said Dr. McCarron, who has been a longtime critic of the salt reformers. (For more on him and his foes, go to nytimes.com/tierneylab.) He said that the most notable feature of the data is how little variation there has been in salt consumption in Britain — and just about everywhere else, too.

Dr. McCarron and his colleagues analyzed surveys from 33 countries around the world and reported that, despite wide differences in diet and culture, people generally consumed about the same amount of salt. There were a few exceptions, like tribes isolated in the Amazon and Africa, but the vast majority of people ate more salt than recommended in the current American dietary guidelines."
 So if we all eat about the same amount of salt but we have varying amounts of high blood pressure and heart trouble, then what does that say about salt causing problems.

A couple rules of thumb for reading news releases about studies:
Scientists don't generally brag, so take note of the ones that do and what their intentions may be.
Regardless of your opinion of the matter, judge a study on it's science and methodology, not it's source of funding.
Look for numbers and look for them in context.  Beware of studies were they are vague aboiut the numbers or use them out of context, as in percentages.
Read the whole study if possible.  Sometimes a researcher or writer of the article will say the opposite of what the study actually proves.
Beware of Meta-analysis.  These are studies of studies and they're never as good as well designed original studies.
Learn statistics. This will make you smarter and less likely to be taken advantage of by con men or people with an agenda.
One study proves nothing!  Reproducibility is king.  A good study can be duplicated and if it's true, the results will be reproduced.
Correlations are a starting point in a scientific quandary, not the end.  You need causation, not correlation studies and a lot of percentages to be validated.

Monday, May 17, 2010

Getting Fresh with Foodies...

Kroger Fresh Fare Closing.


The Kroger Fresh Fare concept that existed at the fancy Kenwood Towne Center will be closing at the end of the month according to an article in the Cincinnati Business Courier which I have linked to in the title of this blog.

It's either closing due to lower sales or trouble with the newly built property, depending on who you ask.  If you ask me, it's a bad strategic move either way.


First let's assume they aren't meeting sales numbers.  OK, but did they adjust their expectations when the economy nose dived?  Are they using unrealistic goals as an excuse to up and leave?  The more likely reason could be that they don't want to be in the middle of any entanglements that arise from Bank of America foreclosing on the property... and sales are probably down as well.


This is bad for several reasons.  First, this is Kroger's front door step.  Closing a unique concept in the home of your headquarters is like Louisville KFC's closing down or Wendy's closing their Dublin, OH locations.  Even though they have a few other Fresh Fare concepts in the country, it's still a proof of concept for the company.  What message do you send to shoppers about that concept and about the strength of your brand if you yank one of 2 or 3 in the country from your own front doorstep?


Even if it loses them some money, it's worth keeping the concept alive and can serve as a great test market for all things upscale.  The development on the site of the Kenwood Towne Center isn't going to crumble into dust.  The businesses will rebound and whoever is still there will reap the rewards.  Also, Kroger now has a ton of Marketplace locations and they could easily close one of those instead or one of their regular Kroger stores.  The closing of that store will be ironic because it will cause the other Kroger stores in the area to be much busier.  This will be great for those store's numbers but will annoy the shoppers that get sick of waiting in long checkout lines.  Some of these shoppers will instead seek out unique experiences like those found at Whole Foods, Fresh, and Kroger Fresh Fare... if it were still open.






Foodies or Food Snobs: Time for a stern talking to...
Like many of you, I get excited about food.  I can get lost for hours in a grocery store and not buy anything.  In fact, I often get so excited that I can't decide, then walk away empty handed.  I love to look for quality ingredients, try new brands, and be a cheer leader for the things I do like.


What I don't like is what I hear and read from some foodies and food blogs.  I won't start beef(get it?) with any blogs by being negative, but I will praise a couple blogs I think are good examples.


Fries With That Shake - Run by Jess Ward, the Burger Baroness herself celebrates food and tells you what's good without being too good for certain foods.  Maybe it's the fact that she's a fan of burgers, but you never get the feeling you're being lectured, shamed, or talked down to for the food you enjoy.  Bravo Jess, and next time you're in Cincinnati, lets go out for burgers. Follow her on Twitter @BurgerBaroness



Get in mah belly! - Run by Liz and I don't know nearly as much about this blog except that it's honest and not what I would call a Shiite Foodie.  Maybe that's not fair... how about Fundamentalist Foodie.  She likes the food of the masses, seems humble about her food experiences, and like Jess, is really excited to write about food.

What many people do that I don't like is very similar to reviews written in auto magazines.  In those magazines, the guy is always disappointed and makes some shitty comment about the test car that makes the reader feel that the whole process was beneath him.  They'll write things like, 'Of course, we would have preferred to test the 6-speed manual, but we'll have to make do with this automatic.'

So food snobs love to brag about how unique their dishes or ingredients are and love to dog on anyone else they feel doesn't have exotic enough ingredients.  Maybe they only drink IPA's or brag about how much the superdark microbrew costs, or scoff's at the idea of a domestic draft.  These people have indoctrinated themselves to the point that they can't eat a simple cheeseburger or make a fried egg sandwich unless it's flax seed bread, brushed with seasoned extra virgin olive oil, toasted on the grill and made with rare eggs that you can only find in a certain farmer's market that's only open during the summer solstice of every leap year for 2 hours.


Stop it.  You're missing the point of food(aside from providing nutrition).  The point is to have an enjoyable experience and to make something that tastes good that you can share.  What it's become is a canvas for food hipsters to put on an air of superiority.  Foodies react to food as if that is how they think they should react and not what they really think/feel.  It's not about brands or being ironic.  Stop being dicks.  


p.s.
Re: the Kroger story...

I know Kenwood is not in Cincinnati Proper but it is Cincinnati to everyone else that doesn't dwell in the Cincy Metro Area.

Monday, May 10, 2010

Bottle Caps 2: Electric Booga-Dew.

Last week, I blogged about a new bottle cap design being used by a Pepsi bottler for Mountain Dew.  Yesterday, I was surprised to see yet another design in use.  The third design was for an August 2, expiration date while the second design was from a bottle marked July 26.

















Notice the difference between the July 26 cap(left) and the August 2 cap(right).  The newer cap places the threading closer to the bottom of the cap.  Also notice that the plastic ridge from the 2nd design is now more pronounced in the 3rd.


Here is a much clearer pic that starts to give away the most significant difference between the 2nd and 3rd caps.


As I mentioned last week, the 2nd cap(center) was ever so much shorter than the original(left) and probably saved the company money as for as cost of the product and transportation cost.  Now look at the difference between the 2nd cap and the 3rd(right).  It seems this cap is even shorter and more dramatic in design, especially if you compare it with the original.  Is this a supply issue or market testing?  The 3rd design looks a lot like the short bottle caps that Coca Cola switched to for their 20 oz bottles.  My only complaint is that the caps slip away from the fingers pretty easy when attempting to unscrew and take a drink with one hand while steering my car with the other.

In other pop news...


Coca Cola brought back Mello Yello and gave it a retro themed can.  I love the can's design.  It's very pleasing without looking too extreme.  They kept the formulation the same, as far as I know, and I was surprised to see they didn't switch to cane sugar as Pepsi did for it's Throwback products.  Of course, Mello Yello was replaced by Vault, which has the exact(or nearly exact) formulation.  I'm glad to see an established brand back on the shelves.