Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

mentalfloss.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 112 posts

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#51

Post by notauser »

arrrg wrote: post #11
camillomiller wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an Italian, my experience is that I can’t have any satisfaction with less than 180g of pasta. Therefore I only eat it like once a week and make it a little event. Growing up I had similar portions almost on a daily basis and I was never overweight. Trick: do sports. A lot.

180g cooked or uncooked? Portions with 125g of uncooked pasta feel fine to me. That‘s 450 calories. Plus sauce (200 on the low end, 350 calories on the high end, depending on what exactly you want to eat – 200 calories would be something like a 400g can of tomatoes, garlic, onions, some olive oil) and cheese (100 calories for 25g Parmesan) you end up with a meal that‘s between 750 and 900 calories. That between a nor…

I work on the basis of 80g of uncooked pasta per person for our family.

We aren't exactly skinny, either, despite being pretty active (an average of 70 miles of cycling a week).

The difference is probably made up with vegetables, fruit etc.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#52

Post by krebs_liebhaber »

scottlocklin wrote: post #21

Futurists were the most punk rock artistic movement before punk rock happened in the 70s. They even invented Industrial noise before Throbbing Gristle with Russolo's "Art of Noises" and orchestra of noise makers. The interesting thing about them is while they enjoyed shocking people and beating up their artistic rivals, they weren't nihilists like punks were: they were punk rock for technological progress rather than…

The post-Fascist futurists had a lot going for them as well - especially the Soviets, who basically created the foundation for modern electronic music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTj1TtXHKG0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTiSkiUw7dA&list=OLAK5uy_lx_...

(side note: I lament being born too late to ever experience real subculture...)

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#53

Post by sleepysysadmin »

Everything dates back to post-ww2. One of the key people was Ancel Keys. He falsified data and excluded significant data from his studies in order to push a narrative that saturated fats were bad for you. That eating plants was the only healthy way forward. Then the governments around the world pushed out their food pyramids that reinforced this idea.

We then had obvious paradoxes where in neighbours like France and Italy were the complete opposite reality. France with high fat had very low coronary heart disease and Italy which was low fat had high coronary heart disease.

There was no paradox, the science was fraudulent. Over the last several decades they have debunked and disproven this several times.

The fix for bad science is better science. this is over. We know all the health risks are from carbohydrates. This has been a fact for decades. Yet we sit here and grocery stores are 90% carbs. If we eliminate carbs from society, the food industry collapses >90%. Millions upon millions of jobs are headed to unemployment. worse yet, the majority of these people have no other skills.

We as a society basically cannot afford to stop eating carbs. Nobody will be cutting carbs out of their diet.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#54

Post by harimau777 »

arrrg wrote: post #11
camillomiller wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an Italian, my experience is that I can’t have any satisfaction with less than 180g of pasta. Therefore I only eat it like once a week and make it a little event. Growing up I had similar portions almost on a daily basis and I was never overweight. Trick: do sports. A lot.

180g cooked or uncooked? Portions with 125g of uncooked pasta feel fine to me. That‘s 450 calories. Plus sauce (200 on the low end, 350 calories on the high end, depending on what exactly you want to eat – 200 calories would be something like a 400g can of tomatoes, garlic, onions, some olive oil) and cheese (100 calories for 25g Parmesan) you end up with a meal that‘s between 750 and 900 calories. That between a nor…

I'm trying to get an understanding of the portions that you guys are talking about. Am I correct that:

125g would be roughly .3 liters or 1.25 cups of a pasta like spaghetti (i.e. one that isn't hollow so it fills up most of the available space)

25g of cheese would be just enough to melt and form a thin layer over the top of the pasta

I think that I would want some meatballs or cubed chicken (or a vegetarian equivalent) to feel satisfied. However, I also probably wouldn't add the cheese so maybe it equals out somewhat.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#55

Post by simonebrunozzi »

arrrg wrote: post #11
camillomiller wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an Italian, my experience is that I can’t have any satisfaction with less than 180g of pasta. Therefore I only eat it like once a week and make it a little event. Growing up I had similar portions almost on a daily basis and I was never overweight. Trick: do sports. A lot.

180g cooked or uncooked? Portions with 125g of uncooked pasta feel fine to me. That‘s 450 calories. Plus sauce (200 on the low end, 350 calories on the high end, depending on what exactly you want to eat – 200 calories would be something like a 400g can of tomatoes, garlic, onions, some olive oil) and cheese (100 calories for 25g Parmesan) you end up with a meal that‘s between 750 and 900 calories. That between a nor…

In Italy we always measure pasta weight when uncooked. I'm pretty sure he meant 180g uncooked.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#56

Post by simonebrunozzi »

eznzt wrote: post #13
enriquto wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you put a lot of fat in your pasta (e.g., guanciale) then you get filled with a much smaller serving, like 100g.

Your mention of guanciale reminded me of this delicious video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AAdKl1UYZs The serving seems gigantic though.

Big mistake: no olive oil should go in the pan where you cook the guanciale. Otherwise, everything else is legit.

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#57

Post by simonebrunozzi »

sai_c wrote: post #31
prower wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, we usually eat around 250g of pasta divided by 3 people. 180g only for you? Congratulations! Full disclosure: we're also all very sedentary

I eat 250g (uncooked) alone. Add to that sauce and vegetables, sometimes meat. I'm nearly forty, and 1,74m and weigh between 76 and 78 kg (depending on the time of the year). I'm a software developer and only do loaded carries three times a week. My wife always asks where all the calories go ;-).

That typing all day long can be quite stressful, you know!

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#58

Post by simonebrunozzi »

arnejenssen wrote: post #24

I recently used the Libre Sense continuous glucose sensor as an experiment (I don't have diabetes). I noticed that after eating pasta, my blood sugar stayed elevated for 4-5 hours. It looks like calling pasta and bread "slow carbs" is appropriate. One of my conclusions from the experiment is that I will probably never buy wheat again (but I'll eat it if I get it served).

Add fibers and you'll mitigate most of the issues. E.g. a good vegetable-based sauce with the pasta, "e via".

Re: Anti-Pasta: When Italian Futurists Tried to Ban Pasta in Italy

#59

Post by 1_player »

user-the-name wrote: post #44
scottlocklin wrote: post #21

Futurists were the most punk rock artistic movement before punk rock happened in the 70s. They even invented Industrial noise before Throbbing Gristle with Russolo's "Art of Noises" and orchestra of noise makers. The interesting thing about them is while they enjoyed shocking people and beating up their artistic rivals, they weren't nihilists like punks were: they were punk rock for technological progress rather than…

Futurists, though, were by and large fascists. Punk is strong anti-fascist.

A punk-like movement is a product of its time and opposed to the status quo. Modern punk and Futurism are a similar idea borne out of a very different substrate.

Of course it's easy in retrospect to note that (Italian) fascists and Futurist groups did cross paths during their ascent, but that does not mean that Futurism was fascist in its philosophy.

Post reply on HN