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

A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

slimemoldtimemold.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 234 posts

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#121

Post by justsomehnguy »

postexitus wrote: post #117
camhart wrote: post #46

I can't stand "normal" milk from the US... the stuff you buy in the plastic cartons. It taste horrid. Milk from Germany? I love it. Milk from Darigold in the paper cartons? I love it. Milk from Darigold in the plastic? Tastes like garbage. Organic milk in a paper carton? Some is good, some taste like garbage. I didn't realize how different milk tastes until I spent some time in Germany. Prior to that I just thought I…

Impact of modern packaging on the taste itself has been proven to be neglible in double blind studies. However, the taste of milk varies wildly based on the animal (food, location, roaming, season etc.) and also of course the process applied to sterilize the milk (pasteurization/UHT, skimming, filtering). Same milk from from same cow will taste very different when raw vs UHT. I am very much a UHT person, but for some…

> modern packaging

But the packaging itself matters, eg soda in a Al can and a glass bottle is perceived quite differently.

If the milk came in a plastic bottle I have no problem drinking directly from the bottle, if it came in TetraPak... If I bothered to cut it with scissors I would probably be fine drinking milk directly, but if I just ripped the corner by the perforation then I would definitely drink from the mug, because I hate the feeling of the paper fibers on my lips.

Also there is a thing with Americans, they just buy milk. I can't buy "just" milk. I can buy 1%, 1.5%, 3.5% and (my preferred) ~3.5-4% fat milk. I don't like 1%, it is just a water with a bit of milk taste for me. Even reading Wikipedia article on skimmed milk makes me wonder how it even can be called a milk. I read many stories of Americans who didn't like milk since their childhood, only to discover in their adult life what what they drunk back then wasn't even a milk per se and sometimes their parents not only gave them skimmed milk but further diluted it with water. Urgh!

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#122

Post by ghaff »

morsch wrote: post #45
nwatson wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prosciutto-wrapped cantaloupe is standard Italian fare (prosciutto e melone), I can't see bacon-wrapped banana unreasonably far from that. Going to try it tomorrow morning.

Also, Bacon-Wrapped Dates. But I suppose the question is not so much if it'd be any good, but whether it's common. And I've never seen bacon wrapped banana, either.

Bacon-wrapped dates are AFAIK a relatively recent thing in the US. Bacon-wrapped scallops--which are actually a bit hard to get right (i.e. both the bacon and the scallops baked reasonably)--were the more traditional cocktail party item.

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#123

Post by technothrasher »

zxcvbn4038 wrote: post #113
jasonkester wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even milk from the same dairy tastes radically different in plastic than paper. I always hated plastic milk as a kid. Nobody else seemed to notice the difference though. I sometimes wonder if there’s only a small subset of the population that can notice it.

It’s entirely possible, most artificial sweeteners have a chemical taste to me and if I consume them it unsettles my stomach for a couple hours. My mother is the only other person I’ve encountered with the same condition. My father and brothers can’t tell the difference. I can ingest real sugar and corn syrup without issue, but they taste very different to me. I discovered sodas made with real sugar about ten years a…

When the "Mexican" coke started making a splash as "better than American", Coke tested it blind with taste testers and came to the conclusion that there was no perceptible difference, and that the glass bottle makes more difference than the cane sugar vs HFCS (The whole point of HFCS is to be formulated to contain the same amount of glucose and fructose as cane sugar). Many other folks then performed tests (of better or worse quality) and they tend to show the same results, either there was no difference or people somewhat randomly preferred the cane sugar or the HFCS. But Coke is still happy to sell people a product made with cane sugar at a big premium, because why not?

(I put "Mexican" in quotes above, because standard Coke sold in Mexico in the past 10 years or so is made with HFCS just like in the US. The bottled cane sugar Coke is only made as a specialty product.)

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#124

Post by bprieto »

namdnay wrote: post #87
morsch wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, Bacon-Wrapped Dates. But I suppose the question is not so much if it'd be any good, but whether it's common. And I've never seen bacon wrapped banana, either.

now you've got me wondering what is the subset of countries that both grow dates and eat bacon :)

European mediterranian countries. Bacon wrapped dates were pretty common at parties in Spain. Then they were considered bad for your health because of the fat, and now they are considered bad for your health because of the sugar.

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#125

Post by skhr0680 »

thematrixturtle wrote: post #54

> This is sort of like how squid ice cream seems normal in Japan. I regret to inform you that squid ice cream is actually pretty darn weird even in Japan. Red bean (azuki), sweet corn or roasted tea ice cream, on the other hand, would be quite normal.

Squid ink ice cream is (was?) a fixture at service area-type places so I think most people have at least heard of it

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#126

Post by da768 »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #114
tomjakubowski wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plastic jugs let in lots of light, while paper cartons are opaque, which could have an effect. FWIW, I do have a preference, I think milk is best drunk straight from a paper carton (in single servings, milk from the plastic "milk chugs" has always tasted worse to me).

True, but stores generally don't get any natural light in their fridge sections. Over here (NL), most milk is only on shelves for a day, they cart in new batches daily. We err, go through a lot of milk.

Some store fluorescent bulbs produce enough UV, 24/7, to make printed boxes fade away, and turn plastics brittle and yellow. It's not as strong as full sunlight, but it's still there nonetheless.

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#127

Post by s5300 »

idontwantthis wrote: post #30
paxys wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If German troops are malnourished within their own borders and Americans are eating freaking Apple Pie from thousands of miles away, it's hard not to draw conclusions.

If the Germans are struggling to supply beans and bullets, and Americans are so flush they can "waste" a tremendous amount of logistical overhead on transporting pie just to make the soldiers feel better, then it says a lot about how things are going.

I think the US making ice cream in their airplanes were the best example of this.

Not sure of which model of craft, but they were essentially able to fly milk to a high enough altitude it turned into ice cream. The ability to have been able to spare aircraft for the sole purpose of doing that said a lot.

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#128

Post by rando14775 »

sandos wrote: post #81
jotm wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most German milk is either "long life" or UHT, both of which taste better to me than "normal" pasteurized milk, which is the most common in England, for example. The three different pasteurization techniques result in different tasting milk. I do notice a difference between foil lined carton, plastic jug and carton milk, the latter usually tastes the worst probably because the carton is more permeable? But I do love…

Yeah the UHT milk tastes sweeter apparently. I dont drink milk any more due to lactose intolerance, but only one time I noticed a real difference in milk taste, and that was when the milk very super-clearly to me tasted of almonds.

UHT to my taste also adds slightly bitter flavor. I grew up drinking fresh milk but my parents at some point switched to UHT and so did most people I know. I'm not sure if the middle ground longer-shelf-life type is actually more popular than UHT in Germany as someone here claims. UHT tasted bad to me (slightly off) back then, but now being used to it I have the opposite reaction and think something's wrong when I drink fresh milk. The difference in taste seems negligible when used as a cooking ingredient.

UHT (and longer-shelf life) milk became pretty popular in Germany during the late 90s I think. I'd speculate it's because it's much more convenient due to smaller fridges, as well as discounters (which are very popular) selling it for very cheap.

I will also agree with the other commenter that the type of heat treatment is the most obvious factor in how milk tastes, and that I've heard people from abroad comment on this. Though I've never had US milk so IDK.

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#129

Post by jhbadger »

ufo wrote: post #120

Is milk being on every relief menu a sign that people had a derranged love for milk? Or just the strength of the milk lobby?

I don't think you can easily separate the two. Things might start as a marketing campaign but then catch on in general culture. In modern culture, this would be true of bacon. Bacon was falling out of favor in the US in the 1980s as people were beginning to become heart and weight conscious. But then there was a massive marketing push and now bacon is everywhere even on things like donuts. People think bacon is the most wondrous food/flavor and probably don't associate their obsession with a marketing campaign.

Re: A Square Meal – Foods of the ‘20s and ‘30s

#130

Post by chrisco255 »

ido wrote: post #73
chrisco255 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their argument is that height has increased as a result of the meaty and fatty diet. It's definitely a factor. If you look at height differences between South Koreans and North Koreans, for example, you will see the effect that nutrition can have on height. South Korea's meat consumption per capita has also increased consistently since the Korean War. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-relationship-between...

The counter argument is that it's simply better nutrition increasing height and you can have better nutrition even without a lot of animal product (especially in 2022). It's not intrinsic to meat and animal fat.

This has been borne out in the data: access to high quality animal fat and amino acids is absolutely critical to achieve maximum height. You can even observe it in fossils from the early Holocene, as agriculture expanded (hunter-gatherer diet was overwhelmingly meat dominant), human stature shrank: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/human-heights-over-the-lo...

Only in late 19th/early 20th did European stature begin to return to natural levels from the Mesolithic.

This effect was seen in American Indians, too. When early Europeans arrived in America, the Great Plains tribes were the tallest people in the world, due to game animal (bison, elk, deer, etc)-centric diet:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2001/05/010529071125.h... https://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/traditional-diets...

Other studies: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30823563/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570677X1...

Post reply on HN