Stuff I just don't understand, post here yours.

[Mith]

I understand the scenario that leads to the discovery of immediately edible stuff, like apples or even more complicated things like nuts or meats.

But how in the world did some recipes come to be? Surströmming is a mild case as "add vinegar" to anything to keep it for longer seems just right. But Hákarl aka the fermented shark meat? Roasted coffee beans ground up in water? Or anything involving distilled or fermented spirits and alcohol?

Surely they must have been based on a rather big dare. "I give you 5 sea shells if you eat this rotten shark, another two if you drink this old cherry juice." "Okay...hey, this is kinda nice."

Alcohol is a fundamental force of civilisation, since you need so many elements to make it that are impossible to maintain with a hunter gatherer society.

[Keltest]

From my understanding, the alcohol content of various foods and drinks has gone up fairly sharply in the modern era compared to before. Originally, alcoholic drinks were some of the only ones guaranteed to not make you too sick, which is why people ate/drank them.

[Iruka]

So I can have coconut that doesn't taste like the white innards? Because that's something I'm interested in. Never liked coconut before, but I'd totally be up for trying the "fruit" part of it.

There is not really a "fruit" part to eat, between the green skin and inner shell are only inedible fibres (the stuff that makes them float). Freshly harvested coconuts do however contain much more coconut water than the stuff you find in stores and probably taste different for that reason.

Nearly all edible mushrooms are the same mushroom. Button, portabello, cremini, etc. If you've eaten one mushroom, you've eaten 'em all. They're all the same species, just at a different stage of development.

I'd guess it is rather "nearly all eaten mushrooms are the same". The types you listed are all Agaricus bisporus, which might be the most common commercially cultivated mushroom and gets thrown into most food products that are supposed to contain mushrooms. There are tons of different species of edible mushrooms, with quite the differences in taste and texture.

[Peelee]

There is not really a "fruit" part to eat, between the green skin and inner shell are only inedible fibres (the stuff that makes them float). Freshly harvested coconuts do however contain much more coconut water than the stuff you find in stores and probably taste different for that reason.



I'd guess it is rather "nearly all eaten mushrooms are the same". The types you listed are all Agaricus bisporus, which might be the most common commercially cultivated mushroom and gets thrown into most food products that are supposed to contain mushrooms. There are tons of different species of edible mushrooms, with quite the differences in taste and texture.

Yeah. That was badly phrased. Thanks!

[Mr Blobby]

From my understanding, the alcohol content of various foods and drinks has gone up fairly sharply in the modern era compared to before. Originally, alcoholic drinks were some of the only ones guaranteed to not make you too sick, which is why people ate/drank them.

Generally, while the alcohol % has gone up since c1900, the amount drunk has fallen off a cliff, resulting in a net decrease of units consumed per capita. I've seen statistics that the latter has gone down 2/3 in the UK since Victorian days, for example. I'd put much more stock in us living in a world where sobriety is vital [driving, operating machines etc], non-drinking pastimes [TV, films etc], the fact we can get painkillers and more of us can't drink due to medication etc. Even culture changes; I think here in the UK 'a drink with a weekday lunch' is on the endangered list - but was still common enough say 20 years ago.

But not all booze content has risen; pre-modern wines were around 15-20% [now ~12.5%], and lager/ale went from 5.5-7.5% [1880's] to the ~4% seen now. The former being increased understanding of the process allows quicker production and better taste quality, while the latter was due to repeated watering-down caused by two World Wars and [allegedly] catering to changing taste.

A wider choice in booze may play a part too. Before c1950 [for example] in the UK the only two spirits really consumed were gin and whiskey - I remember a novel written/set in the '30s where a good ~100 words were devoted to the description of, and the character talking about the consumption of vodka. Naturally, they wouldn't have done this if vodka consumption was high enough for most folk to be familiar with it.

[Florian]

Small corrections:

The beer brewing process didn't significantly change in the last centuries. You still basically get two kinds of wort out of one batch, the first being rather strong and concentrated, the second being considerably weaker in strength and concentration, but also needing less fermentation time. Earlier, it used to be common practice to keep both separated to get a strong (5,5% ABV) and a weak (2,5% ABV) ale, while nowadays, we mix them together again for a regular (4% ABV) ale.

Broadly speaking, reducing ABV to the 4 - 4,5 range is mostly a thing for the mass market and is caused how alcohol taxation is handled in most countries, with most of them basing the taxation on the original degrees Plato of the wort, which is generally 3xABV (i.e. a standard Lager with 4% ABV has an original 12°P, while a, say, Russian Imperial Stout with 8% ABV has an original 24°P.)

[Mr Blobby]

Correcting the correction:

Didn't say beer-brewing process had significantly changed. That is, outside of increases of technology. However, many recipes have changed over the last century, some due to ingredients change and others plain 'improving flavour for the market we're aiming at'.

Though it does depend where in the world you are; as a rule, I've found Anglo nations much less 'respectful' towards beer than say Europeans...

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I understand the scenario that leads to the discovery of immediately edible stuff, like apples or even more complicated things like nuts or meats.

On that same line, I do have to wonder how the Japanese/Korean figured out which bits of the fugu were safe to eat. You'd think that after the first few dead they'd simply steer away from the death fish, but they kept at it, for some reason. Maybe it was the only fish they caught?

But how in the world did some recipes come to be? Surströmming is a mild case as "add vinegar" to anything to keep it for longer seems just right. But Hákarl aka the fermented shark meat? Roasted coffee beans ground up in water? Or anything involving distilled or fermented spirits and alcohol?

Alcohol & other "spoiled" foods (e.g. cheese) are usually "this stock of food has gone bad, but we're hungry. I'd rather try to eat it and hope it won't kill me to starving to death". Similarly, a lot of "strong taste" additives (such as vinegar) also likely come from trying to cover up the taste of food gone bad. As to other recipes? As an (amateur) cook myself, all I can say is that after a while you get a feeling for what tastes will go well together. The film Ratatuille does a very good job explaining it.

Originally, alcoholic drinks were some of the only ones guaranteed to not make you too sick, which is why people ate/drank them.

I've heard the same thing - in fact, as one of my professors (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) put it, civilizations come in three big groups in that regard: those whose national drink is alcoholic, those whose national drink involves boiling water, and those that were ravaged by cholera a lot more than the previous two.

Grey Wolf

[2D8HP]

....I've heard the same thing - in fact, as one of my professors (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) put it, civilizations come in three big groups in that regard: those whose national drink is alcoholic, those whose national drink involves boiling water, and those that were ravaged by cholera a lot more than the previous two.

Grey Wolf

Sounds like an awesome class!

[Lord Joeltion]

On that same line, I do have to wonder how the Japanese/Korean figured out which bits of the fugu were safe to eat. You'd think that after the first few dead they'd simply steer away from the death fish, but they kept at it, for some reason. Maybe it was the only fish they caught?

Given their propensity to find a reason to kill themselves one way or another; I'm not really surprised it was the Asians who discovered the secret, and not any other.

I've heard the same thing - in fact, as one of my professors (somewhat tongue-in-cheek) put it, civilizations come in three big groups in that regard: those whose national drink is alcoholic, those whose national drink involves boiling water, and those that were ravaged by cholera a lot more than the previous two.

That's a good one, lol. It also explains a lot about Oregon Trail*. I remember having read somewhere that the importance of alcohol was merely a myth, and that even ancient societies would restrict its use for religious/recreational purposes, not actual hydration. Makes sense, given the poor hydration stats of any alcoholic beverage. Unless you are a sailor, that is.

*Do Americans have a national drink anyway? Other than soda?

There is not really a "fruit" part to eat, between the green skin and inner shell are only inedible fibres (the stuff that makes them float). Freshly harvested coconuts do however contain much more coconut water than the stuff you find in stores and probably taste different for that reason.

On a related note, I know some variety/es of "coconuts" with similar characteristics (hard shell, fibre, and a "nut" inside). Like the coconut, if you want anything edible, you need to crack the inner shell; but since they are so small (smaller than the length of a thumb) you don't get too much of it anyway, and they don't contain any noticeable amount of liquid. Those that are safe to eat are pretty sweet, though, so some people would use them as sweetener for infusions (think of adding vanilla+honey to your tea) or in some pastries. I'm unsure whether the species is related (they do grow on palms though) but people here would call them names like "lil coconut" or something like that.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

I remember having read somewhere that the importance of alcohol was merely a myth, and that even ancient societies would restrict its use for religious/recreational purposes, not actual hydration. Makes sense, given the poor hydration stats of any alcoholic beverage. Unless you are a sailor, that is.

Even weak alcohol content is enough to put a dent on cholera and other harmful bacteria in the drinking water. Didn't completely cleanse it, of course, but enough it is thought it made a difference. As to whether it was a myth? No, not at all. "Panem et Circenses" leaves out the most crucial of the three things that the poor citizens of Rome got for free: with their daily ration of bread and entertainment, they got also a free daily ration of wine. And when the free stuff was under threat, they rioted over the missing wine more than they did over the bread.

What could be thought of as a myth is that they were all drunk all the time, because this was quite weak wine (or beer or whatever the local equivalent was). You had to be very committed to get drunk, it wasn't something that just happened.

*Do Americans have a national drink anyway? Other than soda?

I hear that the "South" has a propensity towards iced tea (Peelee might need to confirm). Also, they did have enough German immigrants (many, I have recently learnt, fleeing after losing the revolutions of 1848) that they have a strong beer culture (insert here joke about making love in a canoe).

GW

[Peelee]

I hear that the "South" has a propensity towards iced tea (Peelee might need to confirm).

Bang on the money. Restaurants are absolutely judged poorly if they have bad iced tea. Though it's also all relative, too. Like, nobody goes to Taco Bell expecting quality Mexican food, and nobody buys Luzianne expecting the good stuff. It's cheap, fast, and good enough.

Props to Arizona Bevegage Co., btw. Who says northerners can't make good tea?

[Keltest]

According to google, America has a thing for bourbon, with the east coast at least also having a very strong milk industry. Commence milk-drinker jokes.

[Fiery Diamond]

There are jokes about milk drinkers? I thought everyone drank milk.

[Peelee]

There are jokes about milk drinkers? I thought everyone drank milk.

Why else do you think everyone is mocked at some point in their lives?

[factotum]

On that same line, I do have to wonder how the Japanese/Korean figured out which bits of the fugu were safe to eat. You'd think that after the first few dead they'd simply steer away from the death fish, but they kept at it, for some reason. Maybe it was the only fish they caught?

I think it's likely that (a) the fish was just that delicious that the occasional death was worth it and (b) the parts of the fish that are most highly toxic are mostly the bits you wouldn't eat anyway, like the eyes, ovaries and skin. The liver is the one part that's highly toxic and which people might also eat.

[sktarq]

*Do Americans have a national drink anyway? Other than soda?

At one time I would have said cider but by the mid 1800's the nation had developed various localized markets....bourbon, rum was very popular for a long time, but prohibition kinda left the whole system very messed up and "drinking culture" was basically atomized.

On that same line, I do have to wonder how the Japanese/Korean figured out which bits of the fugu were safe to eat. You'd think that after the first few dead they'd simply steer away from the death fish, but they kept at it, for some reason. Maybe it was the only fish they caught?

I figure it was young men daring each other is peacocking risk taking behavior....it was the hood surfing of its time.

[Celestia]

If we're talking about weird food that make no sense to eat, I'd have to bring up almonds. Before being domesticated, wild almonds had high concentrations of cyanide and were remarkably poisonous. Like, why would someone look at that and think it would be nice to eat? It's literally poison!

[Mr Blobby]

The exact opposite could be said about Ricin. Who would have thought castor seeds could contain something so deadly? What were those scientists thinking exactly - were they looking into everything on the off-chance it could be poison?

[Grey_Wolf_c]

The exact opposite could be said about Ricin. Who would have thought castor seeds could contain something so deadly? What were those scientists thinking exactly - were they looking into everything on the off-chance it could be poison?

Often, yes. Usually because the military asked them to. That's certainly how german scientists discovered (invented?) FOOF and Chlorine trifluoride.

GW

[sktarq]

If we're talking about weird food that make no sense to eat, I'd have to bring up almonds. Before being domesticated, wild almonds had high concentrations of cyanide and were remarkably poisonous. Like, why would someone look at that and think it would be nice to eat? It's literally poison!

Quite simple....every once in a while a particular tree is basically non poisonous. the domesticated almond is just a stabilzed pure version of this mutation. And it takes one nibble to notice the difference and some animals may treat treat that individual tree differently (and thus spark human investigation)....
And oak trees are similar - there are rare examples of oaks with sweet acorns - but the genetics are wonkier and harder to breed true. though people have tried.

[Rynjin]

Props to Arizona Bevegage Co., btw. Who says northerners can't make good tea?

I do. That stuff is nasty. Barely above Brisk, and that "tea" is like to make me vomit.

"Stuff I don't understand" includes why people like Arizona (or any pre-packaged tea) teas. It tastes just like what it is: old tea that's been left to sit for weeks or months at a time.

[Wraith]

I remember having read somewhere that the importance of alcohol was merely a myth, and that even ancient societies would restrict its use for religious/recreational purposes, not actual hydration. Makes sense, given the poor hydration stats of any alcoholic beverage. Unless you are a sailor, that is.

I remember, when I was studying at University, being shown a 19th century street map of London, England which had been overlaid with a key showing the concentration of cholera victims in a given area.

It was specifically and deliberately pointed out to us by my lecturer that the streets surrounding the local brewery were almost entirely free of cholera victims, even though there were 'hot zones' right next door. It was apparently proven that the brewery workers made up a tiny percentage of cholera victims expressly because a lot of what they drank was their free beer (a perk of the job) and/or an isolated water supply treated for and by the brewing process, rather than the local disease-ridden standpipes.

Obviously trends and availability change over time, but it was one of the few times that industrialisation and mass production proved to be a benefit rather than the problem.

*Do Americans have a national drink anyway? Other than soda?

The general consensus from abroad is that it would be either coffee (specifically the myriad of varieties served in the Starbucks-esque style takeaway cups) or bourbon; while not unique to the USA, it's certainly more popularised there.

[Vinyadan]

Bang on the money. Restaurants are absolutely judged poorly if they have bad iced tea. Though it's also all relative, too. Like, nobody goes to Taco Bell expecting quality Mexican food, and nobody buys Luzianne expecting the good stuff. It's cheap, fast, and good enough.

Or to PizzaHut, and expect pizza. *shudders*

[Peelee]

I do. That stuff is nasty. Barely above Brisk, and that "tea" is like to make me vomit.

"Stuff I don't understand" includes why people like Arizona (or any pre-packaged tea) teas. It tastes just like what it is: old tea that's been left to sit for weeks or months at a time.

Eh, different strokes for different folks. Love me some Arizona Arnold Palmer's, or raspberry tea, though that's harder to find.

[Keltest]

Eh, different strokes for different folks. Love me some Arizona Arnold Palmer's, or raspberry tea, though that's harder to find.

I find myself with a quietly simmering hatred for Arizona tea ever since somebody dropped a big plastic gallon of it all over the floor of the store I work at. A gallon is a lot of tea to clean up.

[Rynjin]

I remember, when I was studying at University, being shown a 19th century street map of London, England which had been overlaid with a key showing the concentration of cholera victims in a given area.

It was specifically and deliberately pointed out to us by my lecturer that the streets surrounding the local brewery were almost entirely free of cholera victims, even though there were 'hot zones' right next door. It was apparently proven that the brewery workers made up a tiny percentage of cholera victims expressly because a lot of what they drank was their free beer (a perk of the job) and/or an isolated water supply treated for and by the brewing process, rather than the local disease-ridden standpipes.

There's a really good Extra History series about this specific outbreak that's worth a watch, if you have the time.

[Mr Blobby]

And if you haven't, you can dig out the ~5 min clip about it from the series 'What the Victorians Did For Us'.

[Lord Joeltion]

As to whether it was a myth? No, not at all. "Panem et Circenses" leaves out the most crucial of the three things that the poor citizens of Rome got for free: with their daily ration of bread and entertainment, they got also a free daily ration of wine. And when the free stuff was under threat, they rioted over the missing wine more than they did over the bread.

What could be thought of as a myth is that they were all drunk all the time, because this was quite weak wine (or beer or whatever the local equivalent was). You had to be very committed to get drunk, it wasn't something that just happened.

Phrased it poorly. I was referring to the origin of alcohol. There's a common* misconception that alcohol originated because tribes ancient civilizations needed a way to safely store water sources for when there weren't "fresh" sources available. Like the sailors did in the old days (I think).

*[citation needed]

I hear that the "South" has a propensity towards iced tea (Peelee might need to confirm). Also, they did have enough German immigrants (many, I have recently learnt, fleeing after losing the revolutions of 1848) that they have a strong beer culture (insert here joke about making love in a canoe).

Yeah, well, "beer" and "American" aren't words you usually put together in the same sentence, amarite? Come to think of it, I guess lemonade juice iced tea is perfectly valid. Iced tea is common in Asia too, after all. But what about the north, specifically?

There are jokes about milk drinkers? I thought everyone drank milk.

Me and my mild intolerance are glancing at you Hail Bast for thy lactose-free milk

At one time I would have said cider but by the mid 1800's the nation had developed various localized markets....bourbon, rum was very popular for a long time, but prohibition kinda left the whole system very messed up and "drinking culture" was basically atomized.

I suppose that explains a lot.

---

Computer stuff recently caught my attention. I'm basically illiterate in things more complicated than "insert CD, run install" and "press the reset button till it works fine again". I was considering try and look for some basic literature on programming but a) Uni is devouring my life, and b) I really have a hard time getting around all that wizardry and stuff.

Having a practically dead PC also doesn't help (one of these days I'll turn that thing into an oversized typewriter). It's also not that I need to know; but I tend to hold grudges against all knowledge that escapes my mind. It's an annoying thought that I can't seem to easily get rid off. It would probably help me know some basic things by next semester too, but it's very low on my current "To Study" list.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

Phrased it poorly. I was referring to the origin of alcohol. There's a common* misconception that alcohol originated because tribes ancient civilizations needed a way to safely store water sources for when there weren't "fresh" sources available. Like the sailors did in the old days (I think).

*[citation needed]

Yeah, that's completely new to me, even as an urban legend. The hypothesis I've always been told is that people like getting buzzed, and thus alcohol was constantly being discovered and retained everywhere. But as a liquid storage? No, that wouldn't really make much sense to me. People settled next to rivers so they didn't need to worry about that. I'd have to dig into population centers established away from fresh water sources to see what they did, but for much of human civilization, those were quite rare, I'd imagine. If you didn't have a river handy, and wells were not in the cards, you found somewhere else to settle.

Thinking about it, maybe mining communities? I can't think of any examples off the top of my head, but at least now I see what you're suggesting. I suppose I can't completely discard the possibility that if they had to import hydration, they might import beer over water in part because it might have traveled better, and already had distribution networks. That said, carrying water with donkeys was (and in fact, is!) a thing, so water was definitely moved around too.

Grey Wolf