The danger of botulism
Mary Fisher
It said that there are 110 cases of botulism in USA every year.
What percentage of the population is that?
What percentage of the population is killed in road accidents?
Do you drive?
Mary
Puester
Yes, I drive, but I don't open kettle can. Some risks
can be minimized, some aren't worth the taking.
One case of botulism is too much if it's someone you love
or someone who ate your home canning. (Which of your
relatives or guests are you willing to sacrifice so that
you can use currently-regarded-as-unsafe canning techniques?)
Similarly regarding your egg/salmonella post--if you've ever
had it (I have) you wouldn't want to chance it again.
gloria p
Peter Watson
pue...@worldnet.att.net wrote on 10/6/02 9:01 AM:
So does that mean you will never again eat the glory of a stunning real
mayonaise? So sad.
Peter
zxcvbob
I actually do a little open kettle canning -- I posted one of the recipes
recently. But only for extremely acid foods. If I had a jelly recipe that
I liked that absolutely would not work using modern methods, I would seal
the jars with wax like my mother used to do back in the 60's. The risk
that I am taking is that the tomatoes will ferment and spoil, or the jelly
will mold -- neither of which is life threatening, just wasteful.
Spoiled mayonnaise might make you wish you were dead, but it won't actually
kill you. So it's a bad analogy here.
Every once in a while, someone dies or is left paralyzed because they ate
some bad canned carrots, or peppers, or smoked fish, or green beans, or
garlic-stored-in-oil. But they are not going to die from anything that I
canned.
BTW, here's an interesting case of botulism poisoning involving sauteed
onions that were stored improperly in a restaurant *for a couple of hours*:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000265.htm
Best regards,
Bob
Joelle
>
>What percentage of the population is that?
>
>What percentage of the population is killed in road accidents?
My guess is that more people drive than do home canning.
Joelle
If you want to make God laugh, tell him what you are doing tomorrow
Father Mike
Brian Mailman
> Spoiled mayonnaise might make you wish you were dead, but it won't actually
> kill you.
Sure can. Lose enough fluids due to "vomitorrhea" (as spewing from both
ends is called here) and it throws your electrolytes off, inviting all
kinds interesting cardiac problems.
BTDT, have the t-shirt
B/
zxcvbob
You can die from endocarditis as a complication of having a hangnail; that
doesn't mean hangnails are considered life threatening. You can contrive a
case for just about anything to be fatal. That doesn't give you a license
to expose other folks to unnecessary risks (like green beans canned in a
boiling water bath, or garlic-stored-in-oil.)
I'm not sure why people are coming out of the woodwork to pick a fight with
me...
--bob
Mark Preston
http://www.bact.wisc.edu:81/ScienceEd/stories/storyReader$87
Botulism Toxin: Friend of Foe?
Posted by Tracey Ogrin, 7/31/02 at 12:35:36 AM.
In 2001, an outbreak of a foodborne illness affected the lives of 14
people living in Alaska. Within 24 hours after eating fermented beaver
tail, the people of the village experienced dry mouth, blurred vision,
nausea and fatigue. Respiratory failure almost took the lives of 2 of
these people, who were luckily saved by intubation and mechanical
ventilation. The cause of this foodborne illness was due to botulism
toxin (Botulism Outbreak, 2001). This same toxin that almost killed
two people was actually a "lifesaver" to a 52-year-old woman. For over
half of her life, she has experienced chronic migraines. Due to the
botulism toxin, the migraines have miraculously disappeared (Gupta,
2002).
How can this be possible? The same exact toxin that almost killed two
people significantly enhanced another person's life. Botulism toxin is
derived from the bacteria, Clostridium botulinum. Even though botulism
toxin produces many negative side effects in humans, including death,
it has the potential to produce positive side effects when the toxin
is in dilute concentration and administered medically. By
understanding the functions, strains, and types of this toxin, humans
can protect themselves against the harmful effects, and at the same
time, take advantage of the positive effects.
Botulism toxin inhibits acetlycholine release at the synapses of motor
nerves. The inhibition of this neurotransmitter prevents muscles from
contracting, thus causing a flaccid paralysis. The toxin first affects
the cranial nerves and then it moves on to affect the skeletal muscles
(American Heart Association, 2000). Respiratory failure and death can
result because the toxin inhibits the diaphragm and chest muscles. On
the contrary, in dilute concentrations, this same toxin that inhibits
contraction of skeletal muscles, can actually be advantageous to
people who suffer from migraines, muscle spasms, and an overactive
bladder.
There are actually seven different versions of the toxin that have
been identified, A,B, C, D, E, F, and G, but only types A, B, E, and F
cause human botulism. The other strains cause botulism in animals
(FDA, 1992). Three types of human botulism have been recognized:
foodborne, infant, and wound. Foodborne and infant botulism are both
related to foods. Wound botulism is caused when Clostridium botulinum
infects a wound on the skin and produces toxins that enter the blood
stream. The symptoms, which include double vision, drooping eyelids,
slurred speech, dry mouth, muscle fatigue, respiratory failure, and
death, are generally the same for all three types of human botulism
(Botulism Outbreak, 2001).
Several conditions must be met in order for foodborne botulism to
occur. First, the spores from the bacteria have to be present in a
food that has a high pH, like canned corn, peppers, green beans,
soups, beets, spinach, tuna fish, chicken, and fermented fish. In
order for the spores to grow and subsequently the toxin to form, it
requires an anaerobic environment that has a high pH, a temperature
greater than 39 degrees Celsius, and a significant amount of moisture
(Botulism, 1989). To prevent food poisoning caused by botulism, proper
canning methods should be used. For low acid foods, like beets,
carrots, corn, and peas, a pressure cooker must be used to kill the
Clostridium botulinum spores. For high acid foods, like tomatoes,
pickles, and fruits, a boiling water bath can be used to kill all the
spores. Also, discard all canned foods that show signs of spoilage
(Botulism, 1989).
Like foodborne botulism, infant botulism, is also related to food.
Infant botulism, now the most common form of botulism, with
approximately 80 cases reported each year, is only seen in infants up
to one year of age (Infant Botulism, 1984). The toxin is produced in
the gastrointestinal tract when the spores are ingested. Although
there seems to be many potential causes of infant botulism, honey is
the only dietary source that has been proven to cause botulism in
infants. For this reason, honey should not be fed to infants under 12
months old. The symptoms of infant botulism includes constipation,
lethargy, generalized muscle weakness, and respiratory arrest (Infant
Botulism., 1984). The muscles can be so weakened that some infants
lose their ability to control their heads, which makes them appear
"floppy" (Lily, 2001).
Unlike foodborne and infant botulism, wound botulism is not caused or
related to foods. Instead, it is due to spores that germinate and
release a toxin in a cut or wound of an individual. This type of
botulism is most commonly seen in chronic drug users, like heroin
addicts, who use subcutaneous injections. The spores, which are found
in the drug or liquid mixture, cannot be killed by heat treatment due
to the heat resistant spores. Even when drug users heat heroin, it
still does not kill the deadly spores of Clostridium botulinum. Wound
botulism is the rarest form of botulism, with only about 3 cases
reported each year in the United States (Wound Botulism, 1995).
Even though botulism can cause numerous medical problems and even
death, this toxin, in dilute form, can actually be helpful. The
botulism toxin, botox, is known as "Hollywood's new favorite drug" due
to its amazing ability to help people get rid of wrinkles and drooping
eyebrows (Gupta, 2002). According to Corey Mass, the chief of the
division of facial plastic surgery, botox injections seem to be a
better alternative to surgery because the procedure can be '"completed
in five minutes, requires no anesthesia, and has no recovery time"'
(Non-Surgical Treatment Lifts Aging Eyebrows, 1998). Since 1992,
plastic surgeons have used botox strictly for cosmetic purposes.
However, in the past couple of years, botox has been used to treat
people who suffer from migraines, muscle spasms, and an overactive
bladder (Botox Treatment for Wrinkles, 2000).
Although there are many drugs to treat migraines, including
anti-depressants and anti-inflammatory drugs, 9 million Americans
still suffer from migraines (Gupta, 2002). However, the results with
botox treatments, have been a milestone for the medical community. In
2000, at Wake Forest University, 134 patients who experienced
recurring migraines and showed no signs of recovery by standard
medications, were injected with botox treatments. For people who
received four full treatments, the rate of improvement was close to
92% (Gupta, 2002). The mechanism for how this works seems to be
unclear, but it appears to relax the muscles in the head and neck and
inhibit the pain sensation (Gupta, 2002).
In addition to relieving pain in people who suffer from migraines,
botox also relieves muscle stiffness and pain in people who have
experienced a stroke. After a person has a stroke, muscle stiffness in
a person's arms or legs is common. According to Dr. Bakheit, who is
the professor of neurological rehabilitation in Plymouth, England,
muscle stiffness can be so severe that it will '" throw a stroke
survivor off a chair'" (American Heart Association, 2000). Common
treatment for muscle stiffness consists of oral medication, which is
proven to be ineffective because it paralyzes all the muscles in the
body. Also, it causes many negative side effects like mental
confusion. However, due to the fact that botox only targets a
localized area, it does not affect all the muscles in the body. Also,
one injection can last for months. In a double blind study,
researchers in Western Europe found that botox was incredibly
successful in relieving muscle pain (American Heart Association,
2000). However, there were some drawbacks. For example, it was not
significantly successful in the ability of the patients to accomplish
daily tasks, like bathing and dressing. Also, it produced a red rash
and a slight fever in some of the patients.
Botox has also been used to treat overactive bladder, which affects
over 17 million people in America (University of Pittsburgh, 2002). An
overactive bladder is caused by involuntary contractions of the
bladder muscle. This disease makes it very hard for people to suppress
their urine. This can be very embarrassing and many people leave this
problem untreated. Injections of botox can actually relax the bladder
muscle and inhibit the involuntary contractions. In a recent study at
the University of Pittsburgh, 82% of the 50 patients reported an
increase in their ability to control their bodily functions, only a
week after receiving botox injections (University of Pittsburgh,
2002). These findings offer much hope to the millions of Americans who
suffer from an overactive bladder.
Clostridium botulinum, has caused pain and suffering in many
individuals, but has also provided hope to people who suffer from
migraines, wrinkles, muscle stiffness, and an overactive bladder. As
botulism toxin gains more popularity, the general public needs to
understand both the positive and negative effects of this toxin. Only
by acknowledging the complexity of this toxin, can people begin to
understand bacteria and all that it has to offer.
Works Cited:
2000. American Heart Association. Poison Relieves Muscle Spasms and
Pain in Stroke Patients. Science Daily: 1-3.
Center for Disease Control. 2001. Botulism. Division of Bacterial and
Mycotic Diseases: 1-4.
2001. Botulism Outbreak Associated with Eating Fermented Food- Alaska
2001. MMWR: 50(32); 680-2.
1984. Infant Botulism-Massachusetts. MMWR: 33(12); 165-6
1995. Wound Botulism- California, 1995. MMWR: 44(48); 889-892.
FDA- Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. 1992. Clostridium
botulinum. Foodborne
Pathogenic Microorganisms and Natural Toxins Handbook: 1-5. Gupta,
Sanjay. 2002.
How to Prevent a Migraine. Time: Vol.160 No. 1. Lilly, T., and H.
Solomon. 2001. FDA Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.
Clostridium Botulism. Bacteriological Analytical Manual Online. 1-11.
University of California. 2000.
Botox Treatment for Wrinkles May Also Relieve Migraines" Science
Daily: 1-3. 1998.
Non-Surgical Treatment Lifts Aging Eyebrows. Science Daily: 1-3.
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. 2002. University of
Pittsburgh Researchers Use Botox to Treat Overactive Bladder. Science
Daily: 1-2.
University of Wisconsin. 1989. Botulism. NDSU: 1-2.
Mark Preston
http://www.tarakharper.com/b_botuln.htm
her site is conclusive.
zxcvbob
>
> I found this at:
>
> http://www.bact.wisc.edu:81/ScienceEd/stories/storyReader$87
>
> Botulism Toxin: Friend of Foe?
> Posted by Tracey Ogrin, 7/31/02 at 12:35:36 AM.
>
> In 2001, an outbreak of a foodborne illness affected the lives of 14
> people living in Alaska. Within 24 hours after eating fermented beaver
> tail, the people of the village experienced dry mouth, blurred vision,
> nausea and fatigue. Respiratory failure almost took the lives of 2 of
> these people, who were luckily saved by intubation and mechanical
> ventilation. The cause of this foodborne illness was due to botulism
> toxin (Botulism Outbreak, 2001). This same toxin that almost killed
> two people was actually a "lifesaver" to a 52-year-old woman. For over
> half of her life, she has experienced chronic migraines. Due to the
> botulism toxin, the migraines have miraculously disappeared (Gupta,
[snip]
Is there a reason you are posting these large articles quoted in their
entirety? Perhaps just to fill up the server space alloted to this
newsgroup so other people's messages will be expired sooner? I thought
only Eric pulled stunts like that.
By the way, there was a significant factual error in the article you
quoted. It said 39 degrees celcius was the lower range for clostridium
botulinum growth, and it probably should have said fahrenheit -- at least
according to multiple FDA web sites. Big difference.
You should go back to posting at rec.food.sourdough. They really
*appreciate* assholish behavior. (I apologize to the rest of the group if
Mark followed me here from r.f.s, because I've posted there a few times
recently)
Regards,
Bob
--
"Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talking"
--Hank Hill
Peter Watson
b...@area51online.net wrote on 6/10/02 2:33 PM:
It is important that we have robust discussions to reach a decent
conclusion. Mark as part of that contribution is valuable. What must also be
continually presented is balance...
Bob Pastorio
>
> Brian Mailman wrote:
> >
> > zxcvbob wrote:
> >
> > > Spoiled mayonnaise might make you wish you were dead, but it won't actually
> > > kill you.
> >
> > Sure can. Lose enough fluids due to "vomitorrhea" (as spewing from both
> > ends is called here) and it throws your electrolytes off, inviting all
> > kinds interesting cardiac problems.
> >
> > BTDT, have the t-shirt
>
> doesn't mean hangnails are considered life threatening. You can contrive a
> case for just about anything to be fatal. That doesn't give you a license
> to expose other folks to unnecessary risks (like green beans canned in a
> boiling water bath, or garlic-stored-in-oil.)
>
> I'm not sure why people are coming out of the woodwork to pick a fight with
> me...
Dammit, Bob...
Oh, wait.
Pastorio
Bob Pastorio
>
> in article 3D9F70DC...@worldnet.att.net, Puester at
> pue...@worldnet.att.net wrote on 10/6/02 9:01 AM:
> > Similarly regarding your egg/salmonella post--if you've ever
> > had it (I have) you wouldn't want to chance it again.
> >
> So does that mean you will never again eat the glory of a stunning real
> mayonaise? So sad.
Indeed. And needlessly so. The finished mayonnaise has a nice, low pH
that pretty much makes it safe by definition when first made. Later, of
course, it can spoil, but that's a different thing.
Pastorio
Bob Pastorio
>
> I found this at:
>
> http://www.bact.wisc.edu:81/ScienceEd/stories/storyReader$87
Funny. I didn't see anywhere that botulism came from food contaminated
with feces. Are you sure it was in your "readings?"
Pastorio
Bob Pastorio
Um, she's not a food scientist or microbiologist, either. She's a
violinist. Or something.
From her website:
In 1984, Harper graduated from U of O with a Bachelor of Science. She
returned to northwest Oregon and immediately took a job with a company
in R&D high-tech, test and measurement. This allowed her to make enough
money to support her personal research (aka vacations) in engineering,
genetics, virology, and other disciplines. Her fiction writing was, at
that time, a hobby--something for weekends and evenings.
Conclusive. Right. Here's some of her "science" from the website:
Certain environmental conditions are conducive to germination of spores
and production of the botulinum toxin. These conditions include:
absence of oxygen (such as a covered storage pot ), a low pH--less than
4.6, warm temperatures (less than 39 F or 4 C), high moisture content,
and a lack of competing bacterial flora. Covering food with oil or
grease (such as for grilled vegetables) can create the anaerobic
environment conducive to spore germination. Home-canned jams and
jellies do not usually provide an environment in which the spores
germinate because of the high sugar content.
A *low* pH - less than 4.6, she says. *Warm* temperatures less than 39F,
she says. Low pH is acid which stops botulinum from germinating. 39F
isn't a warm temperature - it's refrigerator temperature. Home canned
jams and jellies don't provide the environment because they're not
anaerobic and are acid.
I invite everyone concerned about trolling to see:
Mark Preston (Did he even read what she said?).
Pastorio
Mary Fisher
"zxcvbob" <b...@area51online.net> wrote in message
news:3D9FA0BC...@area51online.net...
> Brian Mailman wrote:
>
>
> You can die from endocarditis as a complication of having a hangnail; that
> doesn't mean hangnails are considered life threatening. You can contrive
a
> case for just about anything to be fatal.
Exactly.
> I'm not sure why people are coming out of the woodwork to pick a fight
with
> me...
>
I hope you don't think I am ...
Mary
> --bob
Mary Fisher
"Puester" <pue...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3D9F70DC...@worldnet.att.net...
>
> Yes, I drive, but I don't open kettle can.
I'm sorry, I don't understand that expression: 'open kettle can'.
> Some risks
> can be minimized, some aren't worth the taking.
But far, far more people (many of whom took no risks at all) are killed on
the roads than from botulism.
It just seems to me that life is full of risks and to deny ourselves the
pleasure of enjoying ourselves because there's an infinitessimal possibility
of danger is unrealistic.
I prefer to eat unpasteurised cheese. Some folk are trying to ban it. We
can't get unpasteurised milk, such a pity. I refuse to eat processed food (I
like to know what my meals contain) and if my flour gets mites in it I sift
them out. I don't get digestive problems. I don't get colds either and wear
open sandals all year round and no coat.
This morning I went to the farmers' market and spoke to a nursery man about
his olives and herbs in oil. He said They were on the brink of banning such
things, because of the transatlantic influence.
Good God! What are we doing to ourselves? I'm passionate about good food but
unless you make it yourself it's getting harder and harder to find, because
of the health and safety police.
And yet they allow McD to stuff young people with - well, with what?
Rant over. I'll not say any more in this thread. I'm sorry if I've upset
anyone but my opinion is as valid as anyone else's.
Mary
Bob Pastorio
>
> "Puester" <pue...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:3D9F70DC...@worldnet.att.net...
> >
> > can be minimized, some aren't worth the taking.
>
> But far, far more people (many of whom took no risks at all) are killed on
> the roads than from botulism.
These are very different risks with the possibility of very different
results. In any event, comparing risks like this is uninformative. It
doesn't matter that more or fewer people die as a result of some
entirely different activity. Neither means anything to the other. More
people get blurred vision from botulism than from cars. No information.
> It just seems to me that life is full of risks and to deny ourselves the
> pleasure of enjoying ourselves because there's an infinitessimal possibility
> of danger is unrealistic.
Mary, you're a strong contributor here, but saying it this way isn't
really a representation of the facts. It isn't the infinitesimal
possibility of danger. That sounds like the state of danger is the end
result. The real end result can be death or lifelong disability. From
dealing with food unwisely. Dealing with it wisely is no more difficult,
so I can't see that anything much is gained by flouting basic safety
measures.
> I prefer to eat unpasteurised cheese. Some folk are trying to ban it.
It's difficult to find in the US largely because cheeses are mostly made
in factory settings. It means more expensive procedures to make raw-milk
cheese - milk sources have to be certified healthy, equipment has to be
essentially sterile throughout the processes, documentation has to be
carefully attended. But it is being made in small, artisanal
cheesemaking operations. Jonathan White is about to release his first
production soon and there are others like him all over the country. I'm
helping a local woman get the necessary information and details to make
cheese. She wants to do raw-milk cheeses from cows and goats.
> We
> can't get unpasteurised milk, such a pity. I refuse to eat processed food (I
> like to know what my meals contain) and if my flour gets mites in it I sift
> them out. I don't get digestive problems. I don't get colds either and wear
> open sandals all year round and no coat.
I'm pleased that you're healthy, but I'm not sure you can correlate
those facts. I sift out mites as well. My daughter said "eewwwww" when
she saw me doing it once. We did some research online and I showed her
insects being used as food. After a half-hour of that, she was less
distressed, but said she'd rather not. This is the same child who eats
raw fish, homemade cheeses, offal and other things that her peers think
are disgusting.
> This morning I went to the farmers' market and spoke to a nursery man about
> his olives and herbs in oil. He said They were on the brink of banning such
> things, because of the transatlantic influence.
None of the producers I know have heard of anything like this. Herbs in
oil are approved in every state in the US if done safely. Olives in oil
are safe if handled in the traditional ways. The American government has
standards for these products and no one is challenging either the
standards or the actual products that I know about.
> Good God! What are we doing to ourselves? I'm passionate about good food but
> unless you make it yourself it's getting harder and harder to find, because
> of the health and safety police.
>
> And yet they allow McD to stuff young people with - well, with what?
It's more a combination of factors but certainly including a silly fear
of the table. The expansion of mass-marketed food proceeds because the
consumers want it. If they didn't, there would be empty burger shops,
empty taco shops, empty pizza shops. This era of people wanting
guaranteed safety or else someone else has to fork over big scads of
money has spread around the globe.
> Rant over. I'll not say any more in this thread. I'm sorry if I've upset
> anyone but my opinion is as valid as anyone else's.
Agreed. Your viewpoint is just fine for you and it certainly seems like
a sincere articulation of your position. Mine is slightly different and
I hope I haven't upset you, as well.
Pastorio
Mark Preston
If you are feeling defensive, I can't help it. I'm not the only person
concerned about answering food safety questions at r.c.p. that is
looking askance at your postings. I'm just the only one willing to
come out and say it.
Mark Preston
be conclusory. These postings are results of research.
If I posted in part, I could be seen as "de-contextualizing" or using
statistics, or what have you to "prove" something. I am not a lawyer
or such and am not trying to prove a thing.
As for Harper, at least she didn't fiddle while Rome burned. Bob, if
she's a violinist what are you?
Her site and the CDC's are presented only to further the discussion. I
would have much preferred to post quoted sections, but, again,
somebody would say I was using the stats in my "own way".
Mary Fisher
"Bob Pastorio" <past...@rica.net> wrote in message
news:3DA055A8...@rica.net...
<snip>
>
> Agreed. Your viewpoint is just fine for you and it certainly seems like
> a sincere articulation of your position. Mine is slightly different and
> I hope I haven't upset you, as well.
No you haven't, I don't upset easily.
Take a look at this exellent page ...
http://www.btinternet.com/~e_methven/disgust.html
... and watch out for the insects.
Mary
>
> Pastorio
>
zxcvbob
>
> > Yes, I drive, but I don't open kettle can.
>
> I'm sorry, I don't understand that expression: 'open kettle can'.
Pack hot food into hot jars and immediately seal them up with a canning lid
or a layer of paraffin wax. No further heat treatment.
> [snip]
> and if my flour gets mites in it I sift them out.
I just add poppyseeds.
Best regards, :-)
Bob
zxcvbob
Which Bob are you talking to? You replied to a message from Joelle, and
you didn't quote anything at all that might have given some context.
Regards,
Bob
Mary Fisher
> Mary Fisher wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, I drive, but I don't open kettle can.
> >
> > I'm sorry, I don't understand that expression: 'open kettle can'.
>
> Pack hot food into hot jars and immediately seal them up with a canning
lid
> or a layer of paraffin wax. No further heat treatment.
Oh, thanks. I don't do that. Where does the kettle come in?
I don't like the idea of paraffin 'wax' next to my food - but I'm a
beekeeper so won't have anything to do with paraffin anyway.
>
Mary
Mary Fisher
> Mark Preston wrote:
>
> Which Bob are you talking to? Is there more than one Bob on this ng?
I always assumed they were one and the same, some people (no idea why) do
have different names on Usenet.
Mary
zxcvbob
There are at least two of us (Bob Pastorio and yours truly,) and probably
many more lurking. I've been posting using the name "zxcvbob" since it was
my AOL screen name many years ago.
Best regards,
z'bob (not Pastorio)
Bob Pastorio
Mark, it's a genuine public service you do when you pretend to speak for
the silent multitudes. I'm not feeling at all defensive. I rarely do.
Particularly when I poke holes in a hot air bag.
You might want to correct that "r.c.p" so it makes you look like you
actually hang out here now and again. Oh, look. Another mistake.
Hilarious. I especially like the big floppy shoes and the red, plastic
nose.
Pastorio
Bob Pastorio
>
> Never the less, I've not been conclusory, because, I'm not trying to
> be conclusory. These postings are results of research.
No. These postings are the result of sloppy reading.
> If I posted in part, I could be seen as "de-contextualizing" or using
> statistics, or what have you to "prove" something. I am not a lawyer
> or such and am not trying to prove a thing.
I love words that don't really mean anything. It takes a truly creative
person to make up sentences like these that say nothing but do so at
great length. So you aren't a lawyer nor are you a scientist. We're
eliminating things. One day we'll get to what you are. Or have we
already?
> As for Harper, at least she didn't fiddle while Rome burned.
What a perfectly wonderful non sequitur. An editor, you say? I would
hope your stories made more sense and stayed closer to topic.
> Bob, if
> she's a violinist what are you?
I've told you a couple times already. Try to retain what hits your
screen. Makes for better discussion.
> Her site and the CDC's are presented only to further the discussion. I
> would have much preferred to post quoted sections, but, again,
> somebody would say I was using the stats in my "own way".
Wonderful effort to make yourself some sort of aggrieved party - a
hapless victim of evil forces. Look at me, I'm being picked on by the
nasty people named Bob. It would be good if you actually read enough to
distinguish between the Bobs. Try to keep up.
Pastorio (the other Bob - no Zs in my name)
Dianna Visek
Regards, Dianna
On Sat, 05 Oct 2002 23:33:31 -0500, zxcvbob <b...@area51online.net>
wrote:
_______________________________________________
To reply, please remove "fluff" from my address.
Peter Watson
mary....@zetnet.co.uk wrote on 6/10/02 9:33 PM:
Go mary.... I 100% agree.
And it is important to note that too much influence by any country in a
debate is quite unhealthy.
Peter
Peter Watson
emarkp...@yahoo.com wrote on 7/10/02 1:19 AM:
Crap... what crap... how long have you been posying on this group?
Scott
"Mary Fisher" <mary....@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> It said that there are 110 cases of botulism in USA every year.
>
> What percentage of the population is that?
>
> What percentage of the population is killed in road accidents?
How many people drive versus how many people preserve food?
--
to respond, change "spamless.invalid" to "optonline.net"
Please post replies, unless they are off-topic.
Bob Pastorio
>
> And it is important to note that too much influence by any country in a
> debate is quite unhealthy.
?
Pastorio
Lightnin Dave
"Mary Fisher" <mary....@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3d9f6707$0$253$4c56...@master.news.zetnet.net...
> It said that there are 110 cases of botulism in USA every year.
Since only a very small percentage of the population actually cans low acid
foods, and since the vast majority of those use (in my experience, that is)
USDA approved methods, I wonder what would happen to that number if as many
people canned as drive, and if they all used high risk canning methods.
I think I'll stick to pressure canning and suffer the terrible loss of
quality that some people aparently think results.
Lightnin Dave
zxcvbob
I started pressure canning my tomatoes instead of BWB about 5 or 6 years
ago because the quality is *better*.
Best regards,
Bob
Lightnin Dave
> ago because the quality is *better*.
>
> Best regards,
> Bob
Up until this year, I was using both methods, because I always had to many
tomatoes for my one pressure canner. This year, however, I didn't do
either. Drought and grasshoppers wiped me out completely. Guess I'll just
have to survive on the left overs from last year. At least I have the
pepper sauce that George made and Barb was kind enough to send me a sample
of. Maybe next year...
Lightnin Dave
MarilynŠ
> zxcvbob wrote:
>
>> Spoiled mayonnaise might make you wish you were dead, but it won't
>> actually kill you.
>
> Sure can. Lose enough fluids due to "vomitorrhea" (as spewing from
> both ends is called here) and it throws your electrolytes off,
> inviting all kinds interesting cardiac problems.
>
> BTDT, have the t-shirt
>
Yeah...let me tell you about the case of it I had. I was eight months pregnant at the
time and lost 7 pounds overnight, became severely dehydrated, went into labor and spent 4
hours in the hospital getting intravenous fluids to rehydrate me and stop the labor so
that I could go to term with the pregnancy. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
Mary Fisher
"Lightnin Dave" <ddob...@bektel.com> wrote in message
news:uq1tbud...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> This year, however, Drought and grasshoppers wiped me out completely
Didn't you think about drying or canning the grasshoppers?
Mary
>
> Lightnin Dave
>
>
Ross Reid
>I invite everyone concerned about botulism to see:
>
>http://www.tarakharper.com/b_botuln.htm
>
>her site is conclusive.
Her site is a joke.
I invite everyone concerned about botulism to see:
http://www.uga.edu/nchfp/publications/uga/botulism.html
Ross
Eliminate obvious to email.
Peter Watson
8/10/02 2:22 AM:
But what casued it? Botulism?
Marilyn©
No, that was salmonella poisoning and I mentioned it because of the raw eggs in
mayonnaise. You know, I would probably still make my own mayonnaise if I raised the
chickens myself and knew where the eggs originated but since I have to buy mine at the
supermarket, I have foregone making it. The poisoning I got wasn't from mayonnaise,
though, but from another source. I just prefer not to take chances with food safety.
Some bacteria will make you only mildly sick, with a little stomach upset and maybe slight
diarrhea and others will kill you.
--
Marilyn
remove "no spam" to reply
Peter Watson
wrote on 8/10/02 9:15 AM:
> Peter Watson wrote:
>> in article 1034007743.685766@yasure, Marilyn© at jff...@yahoo.com
Marylin.. I have travelled extensively in Asia, been places, seen things and
eaten fabulous foods. I have lived with locals, eaten in shanties by rivers
and all the while, occasionally got food poisoning... and yes I was going at
both ends. But if I had tried to cocoon myself and not been prepared to take
a chance, then I would not have done any of the stuff I have.
Life is a chance, you could walk out your front door and be knocked over by
a bus. And done nothing.
I refuse to live like that. I buy eggs from farmers markets, produce markets
and supermarkets. I make great mayoniase and even better aioli. One day I
will for certain get bad stomach again. But I will live life to the full.
I hope your life and the lives of people who try and be (in my opinion) very
protectionist are as fulfilled and richly rewarding as mine has been so far,
shits and all.
Peter
zxcvbob
>
> No, that was salmonella poisoning and I mentioned it because of the raw eggs in
> mayonnaise. You know, I would probably still make my own mayonnaise if I raised the
> chickens myself and knew where the eggs originated but since I have to buy mine at the
> supermarket, I have foregone making it. The poisoning I got wasn't from mayonnaise,
> though, but from another source. I just prefer not to take chances with food safety.
> Some bacteria will make you only mildly sick, with a little stomach upset and maybe > slight diarrhea and others will kill you.
>
> --
> Marilyn
Have you thought about using pastuerized eggs? It significantly reduces
the risk of salmonella, but doesn't eliminate it completely:
http://www.colostate.edu/Orgs/safefood/NEWSLTR/v2n4s06.html
I would chance it in something like mayonnaise.
I wonder if you can make a decent mayo with soft boiled eggs?
Best regards,
Bob
Peter Watson
b...@area51online.net wrote on 8/10/02 12:27 PM:
This is English Salad Cream... quite good.
English Salad Sauce
*Don't sneer until you have tasted it, it does have some merit.
*Its great with a potato salad with a splash more oil.
*Goes well with cold fish.
*Someone invented it in 1845.
Boil the three eggs for 9 minutes from when the water comes to the boil,
cool the eggs under running water and peel, keep the egg whites for
something else, you are only using the yolks.
Place the yolks in a bowl and add one tablespoon of cold water and crush
them to a paste, add a pinch of cayenne pepper plus 1/4 tspn of salt and
work it in.
To this mixture add 150mil (5floz) of thick cream bit by bit, working it in
well, when you have got all the cream in, add 4 tspns of white wine vinegar
and work that well.
It should have the consistency of thick cream rather than mayonnaise and you
can change the seasoning a little if you want to.
My mother used to make a mayonaise with crushed hard boiled egg yolks, olive
oil and white wine vinegar with a goodly drop of salt and pepper... that too
was good, but none has the unctuous and deliciousnes of a real egg
mayonaise, home made.,
Peter
Jerry De Angelis
Perhaps a different perspective might be worth adding, if for no
reason other than stimulating a bit of conversation - not that this
group needs my input ;-)
On another food group calculated that that about 1 x 10 -20 people in
the USA die from salmonella each year. Ditto for botulism, and perhaps
all of the other rare cases of disease associated with bad food
preparations. I try to consider that most people eat about 2 meals
each day. At 280,000,000 men women and children that's about
560,000,000 million meals each day (give or take a few). So for
better or worse most of us survive the foods we eat, and many are not
nearly as sophisticated as members of this group, or have the
information necessary to even make better ingestion decisions.
There is actually no statistical argument that these are significant
numbers. More people die from other self chosen activities each year
than those who eat a raw egg or some such food. I am well aware that
if you are the one who suffered a bout of salmonella poisoning, it was
terrible, and at times probably worst than you could have imagined.
Is that really the point?
I believe we are discussing risk vs reward. A good home made
mayonnaise is far better than store bought in many peoples minds, and
is worth the risk of salmonella - however small that may be. Others
choose not to take that risk. Of course, there is the question of
just how hygienic a product comes in that mayonnaise bottle from the
store, but that is another issue.
I am not suggesting that we need to court disaster, but that we as a
people often become anxious and hysterical about foods and food
stuffs. As others have pointed out, we do not do the same thing with
other activities, like driving, flying, making love, or simply
eating. The risk of choking from eating, dying from a heart attack
while making love (especially after a certain age), and flying and
driving, as well as boating, skating, eating fast foods, etc., are not
activities that, in my opinion, result in too many considerations of
a rapid demise as a result of partaking in that activity. If the sam
econsiderations were given to those activities, we would find that
many relatively common activities would disappeear - like riding
roller coasters or participating in in-line skating.
After spending 65 years on this earth, and eating just about anything
that is possible to eat where I have lived, I have been fortunate to
actually have survived intact. I was reared on home canned foods -
including string beans - that repository of botulism; fatty foods like
pork, when pork was not "the other white meat", raw eggs actually
sucked from the shell, steak tartar, etc. I actually survived being a
teenager who played chicken in my car, being a teenager who ate
anything including ants, grasshoppers and all those fad foods, and
especially enjoyed fresh poached, and/or soft boiled eggs.
I have never had any type of food poisoning. Now there are those who
would say - If you did your would not be so cavalier. I am not being
cavalier about this. I am wondering if a bit more discussion of risk
vs reward is warranted, rather than statements like "you should
not..." I am afraid that those admonitions are a bit like those that
told young people that smoking pot caused hair to grow on your palms
as well as in other unwanted places.
Regards
Jerry @ The Artisan
http://www.theartisan.net
Mary Fisher wrote:
>
> I just looked up botulism on Google.
>
> It said that there are 110 cases of botulism in USA every year.
>
> What percentage of the population is that?
>
> What percentage of the population is killed in road accidents?
>
> Do you drive?
>
> Mary
Marilyn©
Peter, I take all kinds of risks, but I just hate food poisoning.
My life is quite full, thank you, and fine as it is.
Marilyn©
It's not a great loss to me as I eat very little mayonnaise anyway.
zxcvbob
I personally place botulism in a catagory all by it self. I am not afraid
of it, but I have a healthy respect for it. It is completely preventable
with proper food handling and storage, and on the rare occasion that it
strikes it is always a catastrophe. The risk/reward ratio is *so* skewed
to one side, starvation is the only reason I can think of where one should
disregard botulism.
But if you want to seal your jams and jellies with paraffin or beeswax,
make sauerkraut in quart jars and seal them up without processing at all [I
do that], or only process your pickles for 3 minutes instead of 10, go for
it. Only you can decide if the risk of spoilage [it won't be botulism in
any of these cases] is worth the extra crispness or laziness or whatever.
These are more issues of economics rather than safety. I usually have
enough time and effort invested in my jars to make sure none of them spoil,
so with *very* few exceptions, I follow the latest USDA guidelines. But I
never vary from the current USDA processing times for low-acid foods.
To change the subject just a little, a pet peave of mine is self-diagnosed
food allergies. <rant> Especially the mass hysteria about peanut
allergies. Yes I know how dangerous anaphylaxis can be, but that is all
the more reason not to diagnose oneself. A boy in my daughter's class last
year was one of those types that was "allergic" to everything. If he even
saw someone else eating a peanut butter sandwich, he might go into shock
and die -- or so said his mother. The interesting thing about it is, he
would snitch Nutter Butter cookies from the other kids and eat them.
"Brian! [not his real name], you can't eat those, you're allergic to
peanuts!!!" "But I like peanut butter cookies." He wasn't allergic to
peanuts, his mom was terrified of peanuts. </rant>
Best regards,
Bob
Judith Umbria
"Peter Watson" <peter...@netspace.net.au> wrote in message
news:B9C863D3.F3D%peter...@netspace.net.au...
> in article 1034032535.930046@yasure, Marilyn© at mba...@nospamdrizzle.com
> wrote on 8/10/02 9:15 AM:
>
> > Peter Watson wrote:
> >> in article 1034007743.685766@yasure, Marilyn© at jff...@yahoo.com
> Marylin.. I have travelled extensively in Asia, been places, seen things
and
> eaten fabulous foods. I have lived with locals, eaten in shanties by
rivers
> and all the while, occasionally got food poisoning... and yes I was going
at
> both ends. But if I had tried to cocoon myself and not been prepared to
take
> a chance, then I would not have done any of the stuff I have.
>
> Life is a chance, you could walk out your front door and be knocked over
by
> a bus. And done nothing.
>
> I refuse to live like that. I buy eggs from farmers markets, produce
markets
> and supermarkets. I make great mayoniase and even better aioli. One day I
> will for certain get bad stomach again. But I will live life to the full.
>
> I hope your life and the lives of people who try and be (in my opinion)
very
> protectionist are as fulfilled and richly rewarding as mine has been so
far,
> shits and all.
>
> Peter
>
But you will very likely never be pregnant, as she was, and which condition
makes two people especially vulnerable. I've eaten things I don't even want
to think about while traveling, but avoid any number of possible traps, for
instance anything crawling with flies and obviously-canned greenbeans.
Bob Pastorio
>
> Mary et al
>
> Perhaps a different perspective might be worth adding, if for no
> reason other than stimulating a bit of conversation - not that this
> group needs my input ;-)
>
> On another food group calculated that that about 1 x 10 -20 people in
> the USA die from salmonella each year. Ditto for botulism, and perhaps
> all of the other rare cases of disease associated with bad food
> preparations. I try to consider that most people eat about 2 meals
> each day. At 280,000,000 men women and children that's about
> 560,000,000 million meals each day (give or take a few). So for
> better or worse most of us survive the foods we eat, and many are not
> nearly as sophisticated as members of this group, or have the
> information necessary to even make better ingestion decisions.
Now go see how many people get food borne illnesses and watch the
numbers inflate most wonderfully. It's not just death that's at issue.
And this is in the US. Look globally where sanitation principles are
considerably different. The actual numbers of FBI (food borne illness)
will astound you.
> There is actually no statistical argument that these are significant
> numbers. More people die from other self chosen activities each year
> than those who eat a raw egg or some such food. I am well aware that
> if you are the one who suffered a bout of salmonella poisoning, it was
> terrible, and at times probably worst than you could have imagined.
> Is that really the point?
Yes. It is. But not just death. There are other rather serious
consequences of FBI.
> I believe we are discussing risk vs reward. A good home made
> mayonnaise is far better than store bought in many peoples minds, and
> is worth the risk of salmonella - however small that may be.
A properly made mayonnaise is relatively safe and not likely to cause
salmonella poisoning, even when made with contaminated eggs. The acid
ingredients see to that. Check out the HITM web site to see about it.
The bacteria are killed.
> I am not suggesting that we need to court disaster, but that we as a
> people often become anxious and hysterical about foods and food
> stuffs. As others have pointed out, we do not do the same thing with
> other activities, like driving, flying, making love, or simply
> eating.
We take precautions in the activities that likely can result in injury
of death. We drive with an eye not to hit or get hit. We take lots of
lessons before flying a plane ourselves. And we probably don't try to
see how many fish bones we can store in our throats. C'mon, Jerry, let's
keep it more moderate. Walk around your house and workplace and see how
many things there are with the specific intent to avoid death or injury.
Fire extinguishers. Fire exits. Railings. Nailed-down carpets. Rough
floor surfaces. Look around the rest of the world we all inhabit and see
how much is designed to preserve health and life. Just because we don't
consciously think about all of them every day doesn't mean that there
aren't many precautionary conditions surrounding us at every turn. It is
the result of the cumulative experience of all the folks who came before
us. I will agree that if we try not too hard, we could all name a bunch
of such things that we'd consider excessive.
> The risk of choking from eating, dying from a heart attack
> while making love (especially after a certain age), and flying and
> driving, as well as boating, skating, eating fast foods, etc., are not
> activities that, in my opinion, result in too many considerations of
> a rapid demise as a result of partaking in that activity.
Do you want to think about that for another minute? Boating? No life
vests? No floatation devices? No flares on board? Driving? Staying on
your side of the white line? Mirrors on the car? Locks on the doors? WE
each didn't put them there, but they're there for out protection.
> If the sam
> econsiderations were given to those activities, we would find that
> many relatively common activities would disappeear - like riding
> roller coasters or participating in in-line skating.
Roller coasters make you strap in. They trap you in place. The designs
of the roller coasters are safe. Otherwise we'd hear about lots of
injuries and we don't. Because somebody has planned it all out to be
safe. Inline skating is a fine example. Helmets, knee pads, elbow
pads...
> After spending 65 years on this earth, and eating just about anything
> that is possible to eat where I have lived, I have been fortunate to
> actually have survived intact. I was reared on home canned foods -
> including string beans - that repository of botulism; fatty foods like
> pork, when pork was not "the other white meat", raw eggs actually
> sucked from the shell, steak tartar, etc. I actually survived being a
> teenager who played chicken in my car, being a teenager who ate
> anything including ants, grasshoppers and all those fad foods, and
> especially enjoyed fresh poached, and/or soft boiled eggs.
That was then. This is now. I'm not much younger than you and I did all
of those things as well. And, yes, we were fortunate that our respective
stupidities didn't get us killed ot maimed. But it did do those things
to lots of people I knew.
> I have never had any type of food poisoning.
You don't know that. Check the CDC lists of symptoms. You'll be
surprised what sorts of things can come from food borne illnesses. Ever
had flu? Check it out.
> Now there are those who
> would say - If you did your would not be so cavalier. I am not being
> cavalier about this. I am wondering if a bit more discussion of risk
> vs reward is warranted, rather than statements like "you should
> not..." I am afraid that those admonitions are a bit like those that
> told young people that smoking pot caused hair to grow on your palms
> as well as in other unwanted places.
Risk versus reward is what the underlying theme has been. The positions
that have been promoted thus far are basically two: 1) if the avoidance
of hazard can be done with little or no inconvenience, it makes sense to
do it. Better not to die if it takes an extra 5 minutes to do it safely.
2) the likelihood of death or serious illness is small, so we shouldn't
fret about it. Millions of others have done this and survived just fine.
The polarities that these positions reflect are personal and unlikely to
change. I'm more careful now than I was 40 years ago. Football knees,
the odd bullet hole, motorcycle accident with many broken bones, heart
attack and a decade later - bypass. Running restaurants and studying the
numbers and the results. Feeding literally hundreds of thousands of
people and seeing how easy it is to get sloppy.
The foods we get nowadays to process and serve each other is different
than what my grandmother ate. My position is that we need to treat it
differently. That's view 1 above. I can absolutely understand why others
would hold to position 2. Different strokes...
Jerry, nice web site - http://www.theartisan.net. I've done some of your
breads. They were wonderful, especially when I was running a country
club a while back and had ovens with steam jets. Mmmmmmmm.
Pastorio
> Jerry @ The Artisan
> http://www.theartisan.net
>
> Mary Fisher wrote:
> > I just looked up botulism on Google.
> > It said that there are 110 cases of botulism in USA every year.
> > What percentage of the population is that.
Peter Watson
Jud...@nospam.indiatimes.com wrote on 8/10/02 3:53 PM:
Thats true I remain non pregnant and not silly.
MatCoward
to eat his homegrown veg because "Theyve got muck on them". The muck is a
remarkable substance known to science as "soil". Obviously, the prepacked
prewashed supermarket salads she prefers arent grown in this dangerous muck ...
- Mat C
MatCoward
(you should forgive the pun) than scientific. Americans have a view of food
safety that's diffrerent to that held by most other peoples - and I sincerely
doubt that anyone's going to change anyone else's mind! Perhaps food poisoning
is more common in the US than elsewhere, and that's why they are more careful
(or paranoid, depending on your POV)? Who knows.
- Mat C
Blanche Nonken
The paranoia is culturally instilled, probably has its source in Upton
Sinclair's novel "The Jungle."
FWIW, I trust my butcher enough to snack on the raw bits as I'm packing
it away for the freezer. The brisket he gets (kosher, btw) is so good
that it needs no cooking at all, IMO. For those who want to know, it's
Glendale Kosher Meats on Bustleton in Northeast Philly.
Marilyn©
And if you want to take risks with your OWN health, that's fine. As long as you're the
only one eating your home-canned green beans or mayonnaise or garlic preserved in oil or
infused oils, then that's all well and good. But to risk other people's health is
unconscionable. To give someone a gift that carries with it that risk of botulism, that's
another story.
Marilyn©
Oh, and where does the "silly" part come in? Are you resulting to insults now? It's not
always obvious what tone a person is using in online communications and I wouldn't want a
misunderstanding here.
Ophelia
"Jerry De Angelis" <gg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3DA24CE2...@earthlink.net...
> Mary et al
> I have never had any type of food poisoning. Now there are those who
> would say - If you did your would not be so cavalier. I am not being
> cavalier about this. I am wondering if a bit more discussion of risk
> vs reward is warranted, rather than statements like "you should
> not..." I am afraid that those admonitions are a bit like those that
> told young people that smoking pot caused hair to grow on your palms
> as well as in other unwanted places.
>
> Regards
>
> Jerry @ The Artisan
> http://www.theartisan.net
>
Excellent post:)
I have had campylobactor a few times, along with god knows what germs that
did the 'both ends' thing many times in India. Even so I do agree with you.
Having said that I do take care in what I produce as I am very sure Mary
does.
I would never deliberately put anyone elses life in danger. However the way
we preserve some things in UK are very different to the rules in US
I am of course speaking for myself and for the recipes in our cookery books
when I say that jam is usually not treated with HWB and bottled fruit is
usually
sterilized in the oven. It is usual here to cover our jam with a small
waxed paper circle on the jam itself and a circle of clear paper secured
with an elastic band:) I can hear the cries of horror from here. But these
covers come in small packs sold for the very purpose.
I am wanting to bottle meat which is the reason Ross is kindly sending me a
pressure canner. Having never done it before I will be following recipes
exactly. But our preserving recipes are often far less strict and we seem
to
survive.
Ophelia
zxcvbob
No, but if someone doesn't know what they are doing they may put someone
elses life in danger out of ignorance.
> However the way
> we preserve some things in UK are very different to the rules in US
>
> I am of course speaking for myself and for the recipes in our cookery books
> when I say that jam is usually not treated with HWB and bottled fruit is
> usually
> sterilized in the oven. It is usual here to cover our jam with a small
> waxed paper circle on the jam itself and a circle of clear paper secured
> with an elastic band:) I can hear the cries of horror from here. But these
> covers come in small packs sold for the very purpose.
From where do you hear the cries of horror? I think you're imagining it.
Jams and bottled fruit are inherently safe. If you process it badly, you
will have a high spoilage rate and waste a lot of good fruit (and sugar).
If you handle and process it carefully using outdated methods, you will
have a low spoilage rate. If you are careful and use the latest "approved"
methods, your spoilage rate will be even lower.
My time is valuable, I have limited access to good fruits and vegetables,
and sugar is expensive. You can decide for yourself.
OTOH if someone comes here and says he is going to process low-acid or
questionable foods using dubious methods, and especially if he says it is
intended as gifts, I wlll tell him not to do it. Maybe post a URL to a
USDA or CDC website that discusses the issue. Then if he or anyone else
argues with me about it I will yell at them. :-)
Best regards,
Bob
Ophelia
identified!
O
"zxcvbob" <b...@area51online.net> wrote in message
news:3DA30B9C...@area51online.net...
Brian Mailman
Try four days here. A technicolor essay on How I Spent Memorial Day
Weekend. I wasn't pregnant.
> I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
That's one of my points here--those who haven't had it know empirically
food-borne illnesses are not good but having the actual experience may
change their minds.
Many people don't understand that statistical chance cannot predict any
one particular individual's chances of anything. It's a group
aggregate.
For example, (plucking numbers out of thin air) if it's a 1:5,000 chance
something will happen, then each time has an equal chance of whatever
occurring (assuming all risks are equal-weighted and no one is elderly,
having chemo, or otherwise an impaired immune system). It doesn't mean
that *you* can do it 4,999 times and not worry, it just means that in a
group of 5,000 if everyone does it once *someone* is going to whatever.
One person can do it forever and ever and never whatever. That's where
the stories of "I've/my grampa/greataunt have done it this way for 40
years and nothing happened" come from.
If you happen to be that one, your chances are now 100% that it
occurred.
For egg-safe mayo,
http://www.jewishfood-list.com/recipes/condiments/mayonnaisecooked01.html
and
http://www.jewishfood-list.com/recipes/condiments/mayonnaisecooked02.html
B/
Mary Fisher
"Ophelia" <Junk...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:anv0j0$hrn1m$1...@ID-88328.news.dfncis.de...> Excellent post:)
Yes, and website.
>
> Having said that I do take care in what I produce as I am very sure Mary
> does.
We're having mayonnaise at the weekend ... no excuses accepted!
>
> stIt is usual here to cover our jam with a small
> waxed paper circle on the jam itself and a circle of clear paper secured
> with an elastic band:)
I can't see the point in that. As soon as the jar is opened the surface is
exposed to bacteria, yeasts etc. I use flo-seal screw down lids on my jars.
You will be treated to - nay, given the privilege of tasting - my
blackcurrant jam. The jars weren't hot when it was packed, the caps weren't
put on until the jam was cold, to prevent accumulation of water from
evaporation. I bet you don't get ill.
>
> I am wanting to bottle meat which is the reason Ross is kindly sending me
a
> pressure canner. Having never done it before I will be following recipes
> exactly. But our preserving recipes are often far less strict and we seem
> to
> survive.
Perhaps we don't. Perhaps we just seem to, perhaps I only exist in your
imagination and you in mine ...
... don't dare vomit in my imagination!
M
>
> Ophelia
>
>
>
>
Mary Fisher
> If you wish to quote some of us at least leave enough in it for us to be
> identified!
> O
Yes. Someone said my mayonnaise as described was safe because of the acid
content. It had very little acid content, I only use fresh lemon or lime
juice, which have a low acid content. I prefer the flavour to that of
vinegar. You've had it, it's good. That someone also said that mayonnaise
didn't provide an anaerobic environment. WHAT?
>
I think I'm not going to waste my time on this any more. I'm going to have
my pizza (hand made from home grown ingredients of course, except the olive
oil. Shudder - I wonder what contamination that could have acquired ...
M
Lightnin Dave
"Mary Fisher" <mary....@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3da1c64e$0$256$4c56...@master.news.zetnet.net...
>
> "Lightnin Dave" <ddob...@bektel.com> wrote in message
> news:uq1tbud...@corp.supernews.com...
> >
> > This year, however, Drought and grasshoppers wiped me out completely
>
> Didn't you think about drying or canning the grasshoppers?
No, but now that you mention it...
Pity there all gone now ;-)
Ophelia
>
> "Ophelia" <Junk...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:anv0j0$hrn1m$1...@ID-88328.news.dfncis.de...
> >
> > "Jerry De Angelis" <gg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:3DA24CE2...@earthlink.net...
> > >
> >
> > Excellent post:)
>
> Yes, and website.
> >
> > Having said that I do take care in what I produce as I am very sure Mary
> > does.
>
> We're having mayonnaise at the weekend ... no excuses accepted!
None proffered:))
> I can't see the point in that. As soon as the jar is opened the surface is
> exposed to bacteria, yeasts etc. I use flo-seal screw down lids on my
jars.
> You will be treated to - nay, given the privilege of tasting - my
> blackcurrant jam. The jars weren't hot when it was packed, the caps
weren't
> put on until the jam was cold, to prevent accumulation of water from
> evaporation. I bet you don't get ill.
>
Never thought I would:)
>
> ... don't dare vomit in my imagination!
might.. might not.....................
O
Ophelia
Pah.. what waste of good protein:)
O
Marilyn©
did like homemade mayonnaise.
Mary Fisher
I apologise unreservedly to anyone except Ophelia who read this post and
took offence. It was intended to be a private mail.
Mary
>
>
Ophelia
Just thought I would mention I adore aioli... just
saying................................
O
Mary Fisher
>
>
>
> Just thought I would mention I adore aioli... just
> saying................................
I'll ask Matthew, he seems to be the aioli expert. I've never knowingly had
it. Is it safe?
Mary
>
> O
>
>
>
>
Ophelia
Well I am still here and you can still use your chickens' eggs innit
O
Mary Fisher
They're different chickens ... but I've never given you aoili. I can't even
pronounce it.
M
>
> O
>
>
>
>
Ophelia
never mind.. all will be revealed this weekend:) but it is only garlic
mayonaisse.
O
Mary Fisher
>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Just thought I would mention I adore aioli... just
> > > > > saying................................
> > > >
> > > > I'll ask Matthew, he seems to be the aioli expert. I've never
> knowingly
> > > had
> > > > it. Is it safe?
> > > >
> > > > Mary
> > > > >
> > > > > O
> > >
> > > Well I am still here and you can still use your chickens' eggs innit
> >
> > They're different chickens ... but I've never given you aoili. I can't
> even
> > pronounce it.
> >
> > M
>
> never mind.. all will be revealed this weekend:)
OH! So you're going to take over my kitchen?
> but it is only garlic
> mayonaisse.
Sounds good to me. We've just used up the batch I made (with fresh herbs for
the first time) a month ago.
Are you allowed to put real garlic in mayonnaise? Perhaps the botulism
cancels out the salmonella ...
M
>
> O
>
>
>
Peter Watson
wrote on 9/10/02 1:48 AM:
UR are way off the point... I never resort to personal insults. This is a
discussion, not a bun fight.
Marilyn©
offense was meant.
Peter Watson
wrote on 9/10/02 8:21 AM:
It wasn't
Marilyn©
Then all is well :-)
Jerry De Angelis
Thank you for the well thought out response. It is just what I wanted
to stimulate. Responding to all of your comments would take quite a
bit of space here, and perhaps not be of general interest to the
group, so I will not do so in great detail. We can certainly do that
privately if that would be of interest.
Relative to FBI (Food Borne Illnesses) in other countries, I am well
aware of them. However I live here, and was addressing the situation
in the USA. Sanitation, if it can be improved worldwide may in fact
be causal in removing many illnesses now ascribed to foods. If we
cannot sanitize what we eat, then we are indeed asking for trouble.
There is an interesting aspect to this however, and that is a new
category of disease called "Hygiene Syndrome". This studies the
effects of being too clean, and too concerned about pathogens in our
foods and drinking water. The summary to date suggests that American
children (read clean) become ill more often that children living in
the slums of certain South American countries. Additionally, children
in day care centers, where germs and virii are passed around daily
suffer fewer colds and other similar diseases than children who do not
attend these allegedly germ breeding locations.
I realize that acids do in fact kill many bacteria. Still there seems
to be quite a bit of concern about making fresh mayo. Perhaps we need
to let more people know that acidic media are antithetical to many
bacteria. This group certainly knows that, but do others?
This paragraph (yours) is interesting:
> We take precautions in the activities that likely can result in injury
> of death. We drive with an eye not to hit or get hit. We take lots of
> lessons before flying a plane ourselves. And we probably don't try to
> see how many fish bones we can store in our throats. C'mon, Jerry, let's
> keep it more moderate. Walk around your house and workplace and see how
> many things there are with the specific intent to avoid death or injury.
> Fire extinguishers. Fire exits. Railings. Nailed-down carpets. Rough
> floor surfaces. Look around the rest of the world we all inhabit and see
> how much is designed to preserve health and life. Just because we don't
> consciously think about all of them every day doesn't mean that there
> aren't many precautionary conditions surrounding us at every turn. It is
> the result of the cumulative experience of all the folks who came before
> us. I will agree that if we try not too hard, we could all name a bunch
> of such things that we'd consider excessive.
We do have all of these things, but are they really necessary? For
example, I have so many required fire sprinklers in my home that my
fear is that if I were trying to escape a fire, I would trip, land
face up, and drown. (That's a lousy sentence :-) ) I think that
regulators, planners, code developers, etc. have added far to many
"safety devices" to buildings without the necessary empirical data. A
number of injuries or deaths due to situation X usually results in
adding a prohibition against X. It is a reflex, or muscle
contractions, and often a basic CYA move catalyzed by litigation
concerns.
> Do you want to think about that for another minute? Boating? No life
> vests? No floatation devices? No flares on board?
No! I boated, water skied, etc, and never had a float, or a flare or
anything other than common sense. Neither did anyone else. Yes that
was then, but humans have not changed that much in 50 years. If we do
too much, we stymie creativity and upset Darwin's evolutionary
context. (Where would the Darwin Awards come from?)
> Roller coasters make you strap in. They trap you in place. The designs
> of the roller coasters are safe. Otherwise we'd hear about lots of
> injuries and we don't.
Here in CA we have a death by rollercoaster every year or so. The
last one occurred because the woman was so fat that she caused the bar
to move out of the safety position. The solution was not more &
stronger bars, but a statement that grossly overweight people would
not be allowed on the rollercoaster. Not politically correct, I know,
but it would be effective.
> > I have never had any type of food poisoning.
>
> You don't know that. Check the CDC lists of symptoms. You'll be
> surprised what sorts of things can come from food borne illnesses. Ever
> had flu? Check it out.
I have not had the flu in perhaps 20 years. As a cook and teacher of
cooking I think that I would know if I had food poisoning. Maybe not,
but I would hope so.
> Risk versus reward is what the underlying theme has been. The positions
> that have been promoted thus far are basically two: 1) if the avoidance
> of hazard can be done with little or no inconvenience, it makes sense to
> do it. Better not to die if it takes an extra 5 minutes to do it safely.
> 2) the likelihood of death or serious illness is small, so we shouldn't
> fret about it. Millions of others have done this and survived just fine.
>
> The polarities that these positions reflect are personal and unlikely to
> change. I'm more careful now than I was 40 years ago. Football knees,
> the odd bullet hole, motorcycle accident with many broken bones, heart
> attack and a decade later - bypass. Running restaurants and studying the
> numbers and the results. Feeding literally hundreds of thousands of
> people and seeing how easy it is to get sloppy.
I can relate to this. I certainly am not suggesting that we get
sloppy about this. We provided care to 6500 children in residential
settings, and fed them three meals + snacks each day. To my
recollection, we never had a food related problem in 27 years of doing
so. Rather than keep adding new caveats to our foods, and other risk
related activities, I am suggesting that we think about those things a
bit differently, and concentrate on those that are likely to kill us
as opposed to those things that are likely to kill our exploration of
foods and cooking. Perhaps we need to emphasize the joy rather than
the risk of eating the foods we prepare.
> Jerry, nice web site - http://www.theartisan.net. I've done some of your
> breads. They were wonderful, especially when I was running a country
> club a while back and had ovens with steam jets. Mmmmmmmm.
Thank you for the compliment. We really appreciate it.
I guess this has turned out to be a longer response than I imagined it
would be. I enjoy these types of discussions, and am a natural
"arguer". (Probably the result of being reared in an Italian family
where heated discussions were the norm, along with laughter) I find
that it stimulates my thinking and helps me clarify positions. I hope
that this response has not sounded too strident, as it is not meant to
be.
Jerry De Angelis
Pat Meadows wrote:
Pat
While many of the statements about pot were incorrect, they were not
all necessarily lies. They were misguided efforts to frighten people,
especially youth, relative to their use of drugs, pot especially.
Harry Anslinger - the main character in that effort - was misguided,
but not a liar.
Even today we read that a precursor to opiate addiction is the use of
marihuana, as most opiate abusers "started" with pot. I point out
that many started out with milk also, and that may well be the cause
of drug addiction.
Having spent 30 years treating both young and older drug addicts in
all settings (inpatient, outpatient and day care) I feel that I am
qualified to make that statement. Many myths exist when we discuss
the human condition, especially that part of it dealing with what were
put in our bodies. It was "common knowledge" that female heroin
addicts would not give birth to healthy babies. Our pregnant addict
clinic delivered 203 healthy babies out of 206 births, thus shattering
that myth. Did we recommend that moms to be partake in heroin in
order to give birth to a healthy baby? Of course not. We did learn
however that both mother and child were incredibly resilient, and many
of the assumptions all of us had made were WRONG.
Generalizations are dangerous. Yes we know that botulism can kill,
and we need to be very careful. However, we do not know how to protect
everyone, without over protecting to the extent that it becomes
intrusive. Risk is inherent in everything we do. We try to minimize
risk, but often cannot eliminate it. It is possible to list all known
sources of botulism poisoning, and then never eat or drink any of
them. Some choose to do that. I make no judgment about that as that
is a personal choice. I do question the need that has arisen in our
society to 'protect" everyone from everything.
Regards
Jerry @ The Artisan
http://www.theartisan.net
> >I have never had any type of food poisoning. Now there are those who
> >would say - If you did your would not be so cavalier. I am not being
> >cavalier about this. I am wondering if a bit more discussion of risk
> >vs reward is warranted, rather than statements like "you should
> >not..." I am afraid that those admonitions are a bit like those that
> >told young people that smoking pot caused hair to grow on your palms
> >as well as in other unwanted places.
> >
>
> No, it is NOT like those statements at all. Those
> statements were a lie. The people making them KNEW they
> were a lie.
>
> That you might get botulism from improperly canned foods is
> not a lie: it is the truth.
>
> The difference is the difference between any lie and the
> truth.
>
> Pat
> --
> Pat Meadows
> Books, books! Low prices.
> Music CDs too!
> http://www.wellsborocomputing.com/sales.html
zxcvbob
>
> Generalizations are dangerous.
The only generalizations I see are the folks hollering "food police", and
deliberately confusing the issue by talking about botulism hiding in the
mayonnaise [wink wink]. As if botulism was an imaginary bogeyman conjured
up to frightening weak-minded people.
> Yes we know that botulism can kill, and we need to be very careful.
> However, we do not know how to protect everyone, without over
> protecting to the extent that it becomes intrusive.
How is it intrusive to tell someone how to protect themselves? People are
responsible to protect themselves. But they need to know what they are
doing. As the apostle Paul said in his letter to the Romans, "And how
shall they hear without a preacher?" [I'm not comparing myself to Paul,
it's just an apt quote]
> Risk is inherent in everything we do. We try to minimize
> risk, but often cannot eliminate it. It is possible to list all known
> sources of botulism poisoning, and then never eat or drink any of
> them. Some choose to do that. I make no judgment about that as that
> is a personal choice. I do question the need that has arisen in our
> society to 'protect" everyone from everything.
>
> Regards
> Jerry @ The Artisan
> http://www.theartisan.net
This is the one topic that I will not let go in this newsgroup, because it
is the pivotal issue of home food preservation. I will argue for days if
necessary. It's that important.
The risk of botulism poisoning can be eliminated, easily; food that
is stored in an oxygen-starved enviroment can become toxic unless one of
several precautions are taken:
1) assure the pH is low enough to prevent clostridium growth (pH < 4.6)
2) store the food at a low enough temperature (t < 40 degrees F)
3) remove sufficient moisture to inhibit clostridium (I don't know the
boundary for this one)
4) add appropriate chemical preservatives (the sodium nitrite in cured
meats)
5) heat the food to an internal temperature of 240 degrees F for a short
period of time that you look up in a table published by the govt.
6) heat the food to boiling for many hours
Number 6 is not very practical; its effectiveness is questionable, and it
severely overcooks the food you're trying to preserve. But I have some old
BWB timetables if you want me to look something up. For example, asparagus
spears were processed in a BWB for 180 minutes. Whole kernal corn was
processed for 210 minutes. Would you want to eat asparagus that had been
boiled for 3 hours?
*ALL* food preservation methods are based on at least one of the above
methods of preventing botulism. That's why a distinction is made between
high-acid and low-acid foods, and why tomatoes (which are right on the
boundary) are so controversial. Jams and jellies and fruits and pickles
satisfy #1, so you can safely process them however you want. They may mold
or otherwise spoil, but that is not really a safety problem but an economic
problem. Green beans are either pickled (#1) or steam pressure canned (#5).
Goverment restrictions on raw milk cheeses, listeria outbreaks from
contaminated hotdogs, "mad cow disease", etc. are a whole nuther topic and
I'm not goin' there.
I wish Dr. Nummer would weigh in on this botulism thing put it to rest.
Best regards,
Bob
"Hey, don't drink that poison! That's four dollars an ounce!"
--Groucho Marx
Bob Pastorio
>
> "Ophelia" <Junk...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:anv4lu$hcrff$1...@ID-88328.news.dfncis.de...
> > If you wish to quote some of us at least leave enough in it for us to be
> > identified!
> > O
>
> Yes. Someone said my mayonnaise as described was safe because of the acid
> content. It had very little acid content, I only use fresh lemon or lime
> juice, which have a low acid content.
I'm that someone. Fresh lime or lemon juice are very strongly acid. They
have a low pH. Which means they're strongly acid.
> I prefer the flavour to that of
> vinegar. You've had it, it's good. That someone also said that mayonnaise
> didn't provide an anaerobic environment. WHAT?
Mary, read a book and find out what those technical terms mean.
> I think I'm not going to waste my time on this any more. I'm going to have
> my pizza (hand made from home grown ingredients of course, except the olive
> oil. Shudder - I wonder what contamination that could have acquired ...
A certain bitter edge, I would guess.
Pastorio
MatCoward
<p...@meadows.pair.com> writes:
>Nevertheless, there was a post this morning on another
>newsgroup from a gal in the UK who was afraid to eat
>broccoli because she'd found a caterpillar in it.....
>
Doesnt surprise me at all. In fact, I've given up growing closed head broccoli
because no matter how i prepare it, it invariably contains half a dozen huge
fat pillars when served. I wouldnt mind, but i've been a vegetarian for 25
years ... Now I stick to sprouting brocc, which has a longer season, is easier
to grow, more versatile in the kitchen, and tastes better. It also freezes very
well (figleaf).
- Mat
zxcvbob
crawl out. --Bob
Mary Fisher
"Pat Meadows" <p...@meadows.pair.com> wrote in message
news:dhh8qu8v8a9m935co...@4ax.com...
>
> I gave up on growing cabbage family plants, but I'm going to
> try them again. I will be growing them under Reemay
> (floating row cover). Theoretically at least, this keeps
> the butterflies from laying their eggs on the plants,
> therefore no caterpillars.
Doesn't stop the slugs ...
:-)
Mary
David
beautiful Sonoma County, CA
David
"Mary Fisher" <mary....@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3da4690c$0$255$4c56...@master.news.zetnet.net...
Lightnin Dave
> try them again. I will be growing them under Reemay
> (floating row cover). Theoretically at least, this keeps
> the butterflies from laying their eggs on the plants,
> therefore no caterpillars.
>
You should try BT catepillar killer. It's organic, and harmless to anything
but catepillars. I've used it successfully for years. There's one made by
Safer products and one by Bonide. Probably others that I'm not familiar
with.
Lightnin Dave
Ross Reid
>On 09 Oct 2002 09:56:05 GMT, matc...@aol.com (MatCoward)
>wrote:
>What's 'sprouting broccoli'? Is it the same as 'broccoli
>raab' ? Where does the 'figleaf' come in to the picture?
>
>I gave up on growing cabbage family plants, but I'm going to
>try them again. I will be growing them under Reemay
>(floating row cover). Theoretically at least, this keeps
>the butterflies from laying their eggs on the plants,
>therefore no caterpillars.
>
In an effort to eliminate cabbage loopers, etc., we used spun-bonded
row cover on our cole crops this year for the first time. Worked great
for the caterpillars, not one to be found. But, we decided that was
because there was no room for them along side the bazillions of
earwigs and myriad slugs ;-(.
Ross
Eliminate obvious to email.
Jerry De Angelis
I agree with almost all of what you said, and in fact in some regards
agree with all of it. That said, let me quote part of your message:
>How is it intrusive to tell someone how to protect themselves? People are
> responsible to protect themselves. But they need to know what they are
> doing. As the apostle Paul said in his letter to the Romans, "And how
> shall they hear without a preacher?" [I'm not comparing myself to Paul,
> it's just an apt quote]
It is important to tell people what is dangerous, might be dangerous,
or is not dangerous. I am not quarreling with the fact that botulism
is dangerous. Only a fool would argue that, and I do not qualify. My
concern is somewhat different. Once we have told people about the
dangers of substance X, it is up to them to decide whether or not to
use it or not. Botulism can kill. Alcohol, certain drugs, i.e.
cocaine, heroin, oxycontin, penicillin and aspirin (anaphylaxis) etc.,
can also be fatal. What I object to is the "should" aspect of
apostles who preach safety. "You should do this, or you should do
that" are antithetical to allowing each human to decide for themselves
what to do in a situation whereby their life may be at stake. If they
choose to eat food prepared in such a way that botulism toxin may be
present, after being told the facts, that is their choice. Ditto for
drugs, alcohol, and any number of activities.
The only person responsible for a life is the owner of that life. (I
am not talking about infants, crippled folks etc.)
I hear quite a bit of "you should, or you should not" in news groups.
I am as willing as anyone to direct a person to a safe and hopefully
delicious food. However, if they choose to eat a less safe, or
frankly dangerous food, after I have provided ample warning, that is
their problem.
I do not feel that we disagree very much relative to telling people
what is dangerous or not. I am not sure how you feel about personal
responsibility as we have not discussed that.
Regards
Jerry
Sandra
wrote:
>
>I gave up on growing cabbage family plants, but I'm going to
>try them again. I will be growing them under Reemay
>(floating row cover). Theoretically at least, this keeps
>the butterflies from laying their eggs on the plants,
>therefore no caterpillars.
Everytime I start a garden in a new place: the first year I have tons
of caterpillers on the brassicas; the second year I have a lot of
butterflies around and lots of caterpillers on the cabbages and a few
on other brassicas; the third and subsequent years, I still see lots
of butterflies around and have almost no problems with caterpiller
damage to the brassicas.
This has happened for me 3 times now. I am ending my third summer at
this fourth garden. I grew only a very small, late planted garden the
first summer, so I am not officially counting that as year one. This
summer the outer leaves of the cabbages were heavily damaged and
infested with caterpillers. Easily gotten rid of. We found one
caterpiller in a broccolli floret all summer. Some leaf damage on the
broccolli, but even that was not significant.
With one limited exception this year, I don't use any pesticides
either organic or not. I theorize that if you can accept the damage in
the first few years, something comes along to take care of the cabbage
worms for you. I don't know what. While, I have seen many interesting
insect interactions in my gardens, (I've been threatened by an ant
defending it's aphids) I haven't seen what happens to the cabbage
worms. They just magically go away.
The pesticide I used this year was an iron based slugbait, and I used
it only around new plantings of very vulnerable plants. I don't expect
to have to use it again. I've found in my climate that slugs also
balance out after a few years. I used the slugbait parsimoniously
enough that I should not have significantly delayed that process. I
really wanted some home grown lettuce _this_ year.
ob preserving. The saurkraut is in the basement waiting for us to have
time to can it. (The insides of the cabbages were completely wormless
although the outer leaves were heavily damaged and wormy) We're almost
out of jars. We brought in the rest of the tomatoes last week, and
only had time to put them in the basement where it is cool. I did a
quick sort through today to catch any obviously ripe or bad ones. We
have a lot of green and ripening tomatoes downstairs right now. I
think it is the most green tomatoes we have ever brought in.
My preference for storing the tomatoes that look like they have a
chance of ripening, is to get squares of paper or, if I am being
extravagant, muffin or cupcake papers. Each tomato goes in one muffin
paper, and then into boxes in one layer. This way I can easily see
what is ripening and what is going bad. I try to sort them by stage of
ripeness so each box will be ripening at about the same time, and the
boxes with the ripest tomatoes can be stored in the easiest to get to
places. My favourite box for storing tomatoes in, is the small crates
that clementines and tangerines are sold in around christmas time.
These stack nicely, leaving a large enough gap between boxes for me to
be able to see the condition of the tomatoes. Obviously, then the
ripest tomatoes are stacked at the top of the stacks of boxes and the
greenest at the bottom.
We already have a lot of tomatoes canned, we are running out of jars
(did I mention that already), we've dehydrated all we are likely to
use in two years and, besides, I don't think enough will be ripe
enough all at the same time to make canning worthwhile.
The sungold cherry tomatoes have survived the first light frost and
are still ripening tomatoes slowly but surely, as are the stupice.
This weekend we are hoping to make some green tomato pickle of a
sweetish chutney type, and to finally get around to canning the
sauerkraut, which I am, in fact, afraid to try, and may never make
again because the faint but omnipresent smell of sour cabbage has been
irritating me for weeks.
It's been a great summer, and an amazing fall.
sph
Blanche Nonken
> I theorize that if you can accept the damage in
> the first few years, something comes along to take care of the cabbage
> worms for you.
Yellow Jackets and German Wasps. They eat 'em like candy - grab 'em and
haul 'em off to the nest. Kinda neat to watch. Vespidae are awesome
when they're leaving you alone.
zxcvbob
OK, we are down to a misunderstanding about symantics. This is progress (I
think). "You should" or "you shouldn't" indicates a strong opinion. At
least that's what I meant when I wrote it. "You must" or "you mustn't" (or
"thou shalt not" :-) is a command. I think a strong opinion is appropriate
here. It's not like I'm going to issue a Food Police Warrant and
confiscate the offending bottle of [whatever]. One thing you might have
forgotten (I almost said "should remember" but thought that might be to
forceful) is the original poster in all this was talking about bottling
fresh herbs in oil and giving the bottles away as gifts. How much personal
responsibilty is expected of the unsuspecting recipient of the gift?
Wouldn't they be in the same catagory as "infants, crippled folks, etc."?
In reflecting on all of this I realized that overlooked one other botulism
precaution that would have been appropriate here. Botulism toxin is not
heat stable. Food that is suspect can be boiled vigourously for 10 minutes
to denature the toxin that may or may not be present. So rather than
throwing away the oil, SPOONS could have emptied the bottles into a kettle,
fished the herbs out of the bottle and added them to the kettle, then
heated the oil to about 240 or 250 degrees. This would have quickly
detoxified any botulism toxin that might have been in there, and it would
extract the essential oils from the herbs. And if there was some other
kind of anaerobic spoilage going on, it would stink to high heaven and
obviously need to be discarded.
I know that I have a sarcastic writing style, especially when I am debating
something. None of the above was meant to be disrespectful.
Best regards,
Bob
George Shirley
bacteria infest the cabbage worms and they die.
George
Mary Fisher
> >
> >Doesn't stop the slugs ...
> >
> >:-)
> >
>
> now, on the deck. No slug problem. I will probably grow
> broccoli that way too. (We have a HUGE deck, about as big
> as the house.)
And slugs don't get there?
They got onto all the decks of my friends in Washington State ... and their
slugs were bigger than ours :-(
Mary
Mary Fisher
"Jerry De Angelis" <gg...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3DA4DA7F...@earthlink.net...
> Bob
>
>
> I am not sure how you feel about personal
> responsibility as we have not discussed that.
I tried ...
Mary
>
> Regards
>
> Jerry
Marilyn©
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2002 18:31:51 +0100, "Mary Fisher"
> <mary....@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Pat Meadows" <p...@meadows.pair.com> wrote in message
>> news:nm79qu8dpglb6u9j0...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>> Doesn't stop the slugs ...
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I know. But I'm growing a LOT of my garden in containers
>>> now, on the deck. No slug problem. I will probably grow
>>> broccoli that way too. (We have a HUGE deck, about as big
>>> as the house.)
>>
>> And slugs don't get there?
>>
>> They got onto all the decks of my friends in Washington State ...
>> and their slugs were bigger than ours :-(
>>
>
> problem here, as they evidently do in Washington State. I
> think we have only a minor slug problem here, comparatively
> ('here' is Pennsylvania).
>
We got slugs, we got snails...ugh. Nasty, nasty. I was fortunate that somehow they
didn't devour much in my garden this year, but I've had problems in the past. They will
climb up the side of the house, especially the snails. I have to sometimes knock them off
the outside doors.
And yes, I'm in the Washington state, home of the slug festival in Elma :-)
Mary Fisher
> >
> >And slugs don't get there?
> >
> >They got onto all the decks of my friends in Washington State ... and
their
> >slugs were bigger than ours :-(
> >
>
> problem here, as they evidently do in Washington State. I
> think we have only a minor slug problem here, comparatively
> ('here' is Pennsylvania).
I was told that the slug was the state animal in Wa ... I can believe it!
Mary Fisher
"Marilyn©" <mba...@nospamdrizzle.com> wrote in message
news:1034284953.823674@yasure...
> Pat Meadows wrote:
> >
> > No, they haven't. But I don't think we have a major slug
> > problem here, as they evidently do in Washington State. I
> > think we have only a minor slug problem here, comparatively
> > ('here' is Pennsylvania).
> >
> We got slugs, we got snails...ugh. Nasty, nasty. I was fortunate that
somehow they
> didn't devour much in my garden this year, but I've had problems in the
past. They will
> climb up the side of the house, especially the snails. I have to
sometimes knock them off
> the outside doors.
Spouse recently had to replace timbers in the window frames on the south
side of our house. They were rotting and he found woodlice, fungi, worms and
slugs in the rot, even at first floor level (in England that's the storey
about the ground floor level).
>
> And yes, I'm in the Washington state, home of the slug festival in Elma
:-)
Don't know Elma, I was in Puget Sound.
Our hens love snails but only small slugs. They're fussy about what kind of
worms they eat too, they won't touch the red ones in the compost heap. And
windows ... :-(
Mary
Marilyn©
> "MarilynŠ" <mba...@nospamdrizzle.com> wrote in message
> news:1034284953.823674@yasure...
>> Pat Meadows wrote:
>>>
>>> No, they haven't. But I don't think we have a major slug
>>> problem here, as they evidently do in Washington State. I
>>> think we have only a minor slug problem here, comparatively
>>> ('here' is Pennsylvania).
>>>
>> We got slugs, we got snails...ugh. Nasty, nasty. I was fortunate
>> that somehow they didn't devour much in my garden this year, but
>> I've had problems in the past. They will climb up the side of the
>> house, especially the snails. I have to
> sometimes knock them off
>> the outside doors.
>
> Spouse recently had to replace timbers in the window frames on the
> south side of our house. They were rotting and he found woodlice,
> fungi, worms and slugs in the rot, even at first floor level (in
> England that's the storey about the ground floor level).
>>
>> And yes, I'm in the Washington state, home of the slug festival in
>> Elma
> :-)
>
> Don't know Elma, I was in Puget Sound.
Elma is a small town located on Highway 12 between Olympia (the state capital) and the
coast.
MatCoward
writes:
>Soak the heads in salt water before you cook them and the caterpillars will
>crawl out. --Bob
>
Tried that. Even tried it with vinegar. Trouble is, I think, the caterpillars
get in there young, and the big, very tight heads form around them, and the
only way they'll ever get out is to eat their way out - so soaking them doesnt
help. Doesnt help them or me! Eating with your eyes closed can be helpful,
though hard to explain to guests ...
- Mat
Kris Dow
>
> But if you want to seal your jams and jellies with paraffin or beeswax,
> make sauerkraut in quart jars and seal them up without processing at all [I
> do that], or only process your pickles for 3 minutes instead of 10, go for
> it. Only you can decide if the risk of spoilage [it won't be botulism in
> any of these cases] is worth the extra crispness or laziness or whatever.
> These are more issues of economics rather than safety. I usually have
> enough time and effort invested in my jars to make sure none of them spoil,
> so with *very* few exceptions, I follow the latest USDA guidelines. But I
> never vary from the current USDA processing times for low-acid foods.
One of the things I've noticed on this group (and in the
various bits of literature availible) is that people don't always
explain *why* X, Y, or Z is the Only Safe Way to can a specific
product. As a beginner, particularly coming from the UK, where the
attitude *is* so different, I find this a bit frustrating, because it's
then very hard to do risk-assessment. (I am slowly learning what
the risk-factors are for things, but it is a very slow process,
and incomplete.) Obviously, I don't want to poision anyone. :) But
at the same time, I'm restricted in what supplies and equipment are
availible- for example I've only found one source for jars using the
two-piece lid recommended by all and sundry in North America, made
by a company I've never heard of, and only availible in rather large
sizes. So I can either not can, because I can't do it using the
right containers, or I can assess the options availible to me (screw
top jars with plastic lid linings, waxed circles, etc.) and try to
decide why they're not deemed suitable in the US, and thus what
risks I'll be taking if I use them.
It is sounding like the greatest risk with using other
methods of sealing when you're talking about jams, pickles, etc.
is spoilage in ways which would be easy to spot, though, which
does make me feel better. I can cope with having to throw some
out. It's the hidden nasties I'm more concerned about.
I do quite appreciate all of the recipes and information
people here share. :) I'd just like the "why we do it this way"
explained a little more of the time. (But then, my favorite
cookbooks are the ones that explain the science of the cooking
process. :)
> To change the subject just a little, a pet peave of mine is self-diagnosed
> food allergies. <rant> Especially the mass hysteria about peanut
I don't have much faith in doctors diagnosing food allergies
either, personally. :) This is a direct result of my own experiences,
though- I ate two foods I don't normally, mushrooms and lobster. Within
minutes, I'd started swelling and turning red and having difficulty
breathing. Pretty obvious minor anaphlactic reaction. (I hadn't had
much of either- the swelling passed after some time, and never got
so bad that I had to go to hospital. Luckily my mother, who is a nurse,
was present and able to monitor the situation.) At any rate, after
this, I went to an allergist and had tests done. The result? No
allergies, supposedly. I'm kind of skeptical of that, because I
don't generally randomly swell up and turn red! So I ignore the doctor
and avoid mushrooms and shellfish. :) It's an area where the doctor
isn't always right, either. *shrug*
My personal fave on the subject of food allergies/intolerances
are the people who charge you hundreds of dollars to do tests on
your blood which have no scientific basis, then come back and tell
you you're allergic to half the planet, and if you cut all these
things out, you'll be happy and healthy as a horse. Of course, it's
nearly impossible to be so restrictive, so if it doesn't work for
you, it must be because you're not cutting everything out, not
because there was something wrong with their method in the first place...
ahem. :)
Back on topic for the group:
Out of curiousity, has anyone done studies on food preservation
and the relative levels of bacteria and yeasts and so on as part of
the preservation process? I know in other areas there's been research
to suggest that left to it's own devices, in a bacterial culture the
non-antibiotic resistent bacteria generally far out number and out-compete
the antibiotic resistent strains- something to do with the mutations
that allow for antibiotic resistence making the bacterium less viable
than their non-mutated counterparts was the idea, if I remember correctly.
What I'm curious about (and I'm not suggesting this *is* the
case, just wondering) is if a similar idea applies to canned goods,
whereby a product that hasn't been processed at *all* (just put
into clean jars and what have you) is less likely to be harboring
nasties but otherwise seem edible than one which has been partially
processed, but improperly- too short a time, BWB instead of
pressure canning, something like that.
Anyone know of any studies on the subject? (Note: I'm
not suggesting that this means that people shouldn't process
anything because they might get it wrong and it's better not
to chance it.)
-Kris