For the Love of Food

I recently came across a SeriousEats post about how devoid some people are with respect to basic nutritional knowledge.  Heck, just knowledge about real food in general.  And by "real" I mean any food that has not been processed, canned, frozen, or boxed into a take-out container.  I knew those people were out there, but I did not know the extent to which their ignorance prevailed.  I understand that I am privileged by the fact that my parents use real produce and cook real food - tasty food at that - and have wisely imparted that knowledge to myself.  I know that not everyone has the resources to become acquainted with a kitchen or access to fresh groceries.  But for those who are financially secure enough to eat out every night and live in a house with an internet connection, is it really that difficult to better your health (and probably your wallet) simply by doing a little research?


Walking through the city on this scorching Saturday afternoon with my lovely SO, I came across a produce presentation held by the Melbourne Food and Wine Festival.  A woman was making a miracle drink called "the green smoothie."  We didn't get to witness the exact ingredients of the smoothie but the basic concept was to combine a combination of raw green vegetables with any fruits of your choosing.  Sounds simple enough.  Not a breakthrough discovery, right?  WRONG.


Apparently, a woman by the name of Victoria Boutenko - the mother of the famous "Raw Family" - created this "revolution" dubbed the green smoothie.  From what I understand, she and her family were suffering from life threatening diseases such as juvenile diabetes, heart arrhythmias, hyperthyroidism, arthritis, and asthma.  The doctors she sought counsel from "didn't do anything" and told her that they would all have to suffer from these chronic diseases for the rest of their lives.  She subsequently sought the advice of random people on the street that she thought looked "healthy."  And no, I'm not making this up.  She would literally stalk joggers in parks and ask them what they did to stay fit.  She tried everything anyone ever said by altering her family's diet who knows how many times but finally settled on a raw food diet and went on to develop this smoothie.


Now, I'm no doctor, but my first year of medical school and a heck of a lot of wikipedia articles have actually taught me a thing or two about these ailments.  It is true that these are all chronic illnesses that don't have a complete cure.  But a very large percentage of the population suffers from at least one - if not more - of these diseases.  Doctors know how to administer their treatment but they must also be managed by the patient for their entire lives.  So either Boutenko was getting her info from some really shitty doctors, or she expected a miracle pill that would cure every complaint.


From what I gathered, Boutenko was obese and didn't know the first thing about nutrition.  I mean, she did conclude that taking the advice from a different stranger everyday would be better for her family's health than say, a dietician.  Or even the internet.  Although, I at least commend her for taking some action in changing her and her family's eating habits.


What I find really baffling though is why this smoothie is such a crazy concept.  You're led to believe it's basically the elixir of life based on all the testimonials on her website, when in fact, it's just the lazy person's way of getting their greens.  Of course you're going to experience a health boost after drinking this stuff because the people who drink it, have never had vegetables touch their tongue that wasn't attached to a BigMac.  Oh and the best component of this revolution is that people are encouraged NOT to change the rest of their diet or habits (like drinking and smoking).  Just downing a liter of this stuff will bring you everlasting life.  Well, sure, a liter of liquid consumes quite a bit of volume in your body for quite a while so it should logically cut down your food intake.  But that's not exactly going to stop you from dying of lung cancer, is it?


I suppose that the idea of the drink, if not novel, is a helpful one.  In the context of our sad society, Boutenko's fame is somewhat understandable.  No one can be bothered learning how to cook properly or actually doing the cooking.  They think vegetables taste bad because they've never tasted them prepared right.  So in essence, I shake my head in disapproval at the world that has placed the green smoothie on a pedestal, not at Boutenko herself.  And I implore the rest of you to please educate your children on how good food should taste.  Not processed in a blender or eaten from a package, but appreciated for the contribution of flavor that each fresh ingredient brings to one's palate. 

The Righting Reflex

It's human nature to want to be right.  To believe we have this control over our lives and are living it "correctly."  Every time we are proven to be right, we breathe a sigh of relief.  But on the occasion that our beliefs are challenged, we second guess ourselves -- even just for an instant.  Then vehemently attempt to validate our case.  It seems as though we are trying to prove our opponents wrong but it may actually be that we're trying to prove ourselves right.  Because each time our beliefs are found to be mistaken, a little bit of, not just our ego, but our confidence in ourselves as well, shrinks.

In the case of subjective arguments -- such as those most couples experience -- the situation isn't as easily rectified.  It's not a simple black-and-white case of "who was the 13th president?" or "weren't we supposed to make a right instead of a left?"  It's usually centered around one party's seeming transgression that the other party identifies, then either chooses to react to or forget.

The range of such transgressions are so wide and ever-changing that it would be impossible to even compile a list.  They are subjective and circumstantial which also makes them infinitely flexible.  Forgetting to make a phone call one random day wouldn't bear nearly the same weight as forgetting that phone call on someone's birthday.  But because they are so subjective, it's possible and quite probable, that one party might not even agree to define an act as condemnable as the other party would.

When I am upset about an action for some reason, I react how one would normally act if one were upset.  I have to let the other person know why I feel this way and what spurred it.  But upon reflection not too long afterward, I second guess myself.  I wonder if my reaction was even justified in the first place or maybe  exaggerated.  I enter a mode of self-debate.  Fabricating reasons as to why I shouldn't have responded that way.  Then countering those reasons with vindicating arguments for my feelings and actions.  I become so absorbed in the "correctness" of my conduct, that the actual act in question loses its value.

The focus is then shifted to all the other actions that have sparked my attention.  I begin deliberating about prior incidents and my responses to them -- attempting to average out the actions and the reactions and weighing their justifications against each other.  And although I've spent a little too much time to openly admit dwelling on this internal conflict, I've finally realized that the conclusion I've been trying to find is actually a trivial one.  One that can't actually be found.

But all this ruminating hasn't entirely been in vain.  The more significant realization is that the person I'm usually accusing of being in the wrong, doesn't have to argue about whether he thinks he is or isn't.  He acknowledges the way I feel instead, and tries to rectify the situation as best and as quick as he can.  And that is what truly makes him great.  Not the fact that he never makes mistakes, but the fact that he can set aside that relentless compulsion to be right all the time and see the situation from my perspective as well.

Losing Touch

Social networking.  Pretty much the hot topic of the year.  I guess it's alright.  Revolutionary in the scheme of things.  Wouldn't be writing this here without it.

But it probably has the most confusing role in my life.  It can go from being my sole communicator, to being the bane of my existence.  Granted, it's never completely absent from my life.  I just take different approaches depending on my mood.

When I moved here away from my friends, it became the primary access to my old life.  But once I established a friendship circle here, it became a way of learning a bit about people I've just met.  It only transformed to an annoyance when I became tired of the hackneyed status updates and photo montages.  I viewed facebook as a place for people to brag, whine, or establish a façade.  Instead of browsing through the endless news feed of trash, I yearned for something concrete and genuine.  But being the clearly reasonable person that I am, I retreated from the only thing that could achieve my wish: chatting.

I didn't stop checking facebook.  No, no.  That would be too logical.  Plus, my compulsive habit was too overwhelming.  But instead, I just permanently set my status to offline and left it at that.  It remained this way for a few months.  I didn't think much of changing it.  I interacted with people in real life, at uni and on the weekends.  And when I came home, just browsed through food blogs and took sanctuary in reddit with complete strangers.  I didn't recognize how empty my life was without my friends until going a while without them.

But now that my primary confidante and conversationalist is in another hemisphere (not too hard when you live in Australia), I feel alone again and have opened up the lines of communication once more.  I feel a bit silly for losing contact for so long.  Especially since the friends back home I never want to lose.  But I'll be coming back soon and really cannot wait until virtual becomes face-to-face.  Unfortunately, before that happens, I'll have to study til I experience CSF leakage and what a merry time to rediscover facebook it is!

Tasty Thinking

Seeing as how food has such a significant role in my life, I'm surprised I haven't mentioned it sooner.  But I guess its prevalence disguised its urgency as a topic.  And as I regularly read a plethora of the food blogs out there, I figured there couldn't be much more I could contribute on the subject.

Being holed up in my room studying all day, however, with nothing to do but eat to break the monotony, has led to an observation of my independent living eating habits.  Living in a share house with easy access to a kitchen is definitely a step up from the microwave meals I was limited to in my dorm.  But living and cooking by myself has its limitations as well.  I go shopping every week and have worked out my produce essentials to a very estimated--yet quite commendable--science.  I'm restricted by perishable time constraints as well as price restrictions and quantity control.  I also have no working oven, very few kitchen tools, a limited array of spices to work with, and might I add, quite a sensitive palate to satisfy.  

And nothing short of a raw pepper will do.

I don't think my creativity has been exercised this much.  I'm continuously expanding my repertoire of dishes even though they've consistently been mediocre for the most part.  Hopefully this is only due to my lack of resources and not my lack of talent...

I've also noticed a few staple food items that I cannot do without, even though I never used to think much of them.  Peanut butter for one is probably one of the most versatile ingredients but always took a back seat to any other food pairing.  Bananas were a highly underrated fruit when I lived at home.  Oatmeal was a food that I usually opted out of eating on normal occasions.  And crackers were the last resort before a big grocery shopping trip was in order.  Now, I seem to eat these foods on a regular basis.  Almost to an unhealthy excess I think.  But I believe them only to be a temporary placation of comfort foods before I go home and engorge myself on all the salty, sweet, and fatty goods America has to offer.

Piece of Mind

At this point in our lives--these almost post-teenage years--I'd like to think we have it all figured out.  Maybe not our exact careers or dream house or future partner but we hopefully have some idea of where we'd like to see ourselves 5, 10, maybe even 20 years down the road.  Right now, we at least have direction in our lives.

But besides planning our futures, we've also been established by our past.  By now, we've developed a sense of ideals, values, and beliefs.  We've been shaped by our parents, friends, life experiences, and most importantly, had a chance to explore for ourselves.

Ironically, this sense of self-achievement is quite a naïve perspective.  We're not quite as malleable as we were in our middle school/pre-teenish years...remember how awkward that was?

Ooh let's not revisit that, shall we?

But for those of us that did managed to survive that segment of our lives without too many scars, we have emerged with a stronger sense of self.  And with every passing year that we've confirmed our identity, we become more and more confident in it.  Accompanied with this confidence, is a stubbornness that also increases with each subsequent year.  We become more resilient to change and opposing ideas since we've believed in our own for so long.  Sometimes only a significant event or an epiphany is sufficient to alter our perspectives once they've been ingrained into our subconscious.

At the moment, however, we're still young enough to remain open-minded.  We are just entering a critical stage in our lives that has the capability to close us off to the suggestion of change a few more years into our future. 

Why change though?  If we've been comfortable enough with our own beliefs until now, what would make us think otherwise?

As an example... until recently, I've more or less accepted the fact that what is illegal is bad.  Just labeling something as illegal is enough to create a stigma regardless of whether or not we consider it morally inappropriate.  There are reasons it has been made illegal and we've been conditioned to avoid it so I've never really stopped and reconsidered.  But when challenged about my so called "beliefs" in a specific aspect, I stumbled and seemed to lose footing in a reliance I've maintained for years.  It's discomforting and disheartening and can be likened to losing faith in a religion.  But like religion, many matters are not clear cut or set in stone.  We may encounter multiple philosophies throughout our lifetime and zero confirmations.  We may never alter one dogma no matter the circumstance and modify another on the slightest whim.  We ultimately shape our own thinking but it's a continuous work in progress.

All In a Night's Work

3:50 AM.  Pretty appropriate time to write, wouldn't you say?  Well it's either that or get wasted so I can make a ridiculous ruckus out in public.  And I was tempted to choose the latter but I figured plenty of people have perfected that role already so why bother?

In fact, besides the injuries, embarrassments, awkwardness, and just plain annoyances that these people induce directly, they're indirectly affecting us night owls detrimentally as well.  They cause security to be on edge as soon as the sun sets just because society simultaneously breaks out the booze.  They also make everything save for a McDonald's wrapper rolling by on the street seem suspicious.

Just a couple nights ago, I ventured on an innocent trip with a few friends to the supermarket at 2 something AM, only to partake in a series of uncomfortable encounters.  First off, there was the random drunk guy who approached acting like he knew us, then requested a photo with us, and finally got pissed off when we told him we were international students.  He then staggered off to rant about us to our poor other friend who we left all alone while we just pointed and laughed.  Once he escaped the drunk guy's clutches, we witnessed some hostile exchange as security confronted the guy and we bolted out of the produce area.  Soon minding our own business in the dairy section, a huge, half-bald-half-mowhawked brute comes out of nowhere demanding to know "who was making all the noise."

 Oh, and did I mention how hot he was?

I'm sorry but I never got the memo about laughing not being permitted in Woolworths after 11 PM.  But for fear of a crushed skull, it wasn't difficult to learn.

Even though I probably have the least to worry about when going out, I still feel as if I have to act as unsuspiciously as possible around any sort of security.  A little voice in my head just reminds me to "act natural" even though I have no idea what "natural" is supposed to mean at 2 AM.  Uh drunk and nauseous?

Ooh now I get it...

But no matter how much I complain, this is sadly the established and accepted norm of society.  It employs steroidal hunks of meat and provides them with a physical outlet for all that pent up childhood anger and neglect, so in a twisted kind of way, it works.

(and no, security is not on edge because darkness is also the opportune time for nonalcoholic criminal acts... don't be silly)

Ice, Ice, Baby

Classes are over and the "study" period has commenced... meaning I finally have time to write.  But before delving into the plethora of topics I've been intending to address these past few weeks, I must revisit a peculiar incident that occurred during lectures one day.

The unpredictable climate in the R1 lecture theater can be likened to Melbourne itself.  No ventilation over the weekend can lead to stuffy Monday mornings even before the rows fill up with 300 some students all breathing heavily over their whirring laptops.  But leave the doors open over night and we might as well be having the lecture out on the lawns.  Only rarely is the temperature actually "room."

So on one of these days, a friend turned and asked, "Is it cold in here, or is it just me?"  Quite a common question really and one that you never give much thought in asking or answering.  Normally the askee would nod in concurrence and agree that the air does seem quite chilly.  Then both parties would be rest assured that neither is shivering alone.

But in this particular case, I believed the temperature to be quite moderate and responded instead with, "Um no, I think it's just you."  Not exactly the response the asker had in mind, I'm sure, but it did add a nice touch of awkwardness in the air.  I did answer the question truthfully though.  And if no one really wants to hear the alternate response then why bother offering such options anyways?

People who ask about some observable feature in their environment and then end it with "or is it just me?" seem to be seeking to normalize their senses or own observations, which is completely understandable.  But just the way in which it is done seems silly.  What happens when the other person doesn't feel the same way or observe the same phenomenon?  Then the asker is left feeling unfulfilled and possibly crazy depending on the severity of the situation.

Another quirk in an established phrase used so often that it loses its absurdity.  Next time I'm shivering, I'll avoid the embarrassment with a simple, "hey are you cold?" ... "yeah, me neither."