[HN Gopher] Lost in the Stock
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Lost in the Stock
        
       Author : objections
       Score  : 166 points
       Date   : 2023-02-19 07:56 UTC (15 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.eater.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.eater.com)
        
       | vgel wrote:
       | Interesting--I didn't know why the first ingredient is listed as
       | broth--but the doom and gloom attitude was a bit much. E.g.:
       | 
       | ```quote
       | 
       | As Moss pointed out, even the FDA-mandated nutrition facts box
       | that has appeared on most packaged food since the '90s "was
       | conceived by none other than the food industry itself as a way of
       | placating us." Back in the '70s, he explained, consumer advocate
       | Ralph Nader was talking "really loudly and publicly about the
       | evil-sounding" chemicals that the food industry was feeding to
       | unknowing consumers. "As a way of countering that attack, [they
       | figured] why don't we disclose lots of stuff on the labels of
       | packages and if we do so, people will feel comforted by the idea
       | that the government is keeping track and it must be okay," Moss
       | said. "What I thought was our friend was in fact a conceit of the
       | industry to lull us into complacency."
       | 
       | ```
       | 
       | Alternative read: activist makes a stink about a bad industry
       | practice and industry self-regulates an effective response that
       | helps the situation significantly. Is it perfect? Of course not,
       | but my understanding is that the US has some of the strongest
       | food labeling regulations in the world (similar to the EU's, much
       | better than e.g. China) and they're being continuously tweaked to
       | be better. As a consumer I can look at a food label and see
       | basically everything that's in it that I care about, e.g. HFCS,
       | and that means customer preferences drive company behavior. What
       | this article sees as crass language about "good labeling" from
       | the chicken concentrate manufacturers, I see as evidence that
       | food labels _work_ to change corporate behavior. If there were no
       | food labeling laws who 's to say that store-bought chicken stock
       | would have any chicken in it at all?
       | 
       | Maybe I just have more of a stomach for industrial food
       | production? I mean I make homemade stock and it's delicious and
       | in a different league than anything from the store, but sometimes
       | a meal needs some chicken water and you have nothing in the
       | freezer, you know? It's not so bad. If we want to talk about
       | store-bought crimes against the culinary arts let's talk about
       | store-bought _bread_.
        
         | floren wrote:
         | Yeah, the quotes from Moss had me rolling my eyes... shades of
         | the guy at the coffee shop telling you how so-and-so invented a
         | carburetor that ran on water, man, but GM had him killed.
        
       | andreareina wrote:
       | With ready access to bones/carcasses (either direct from the
       | store or from saving them when cooking) I've found making stock
       | just-in-time via electric pressure cooker to be very convenient
       | as the pressure cuts down the time so I don't need to make
       | anything ahead and freeze, and it's legitimately I-can-leave-home
       | levels of set-it-and-forget-it. The only part I haven't yet
       | figured out is a more convenient way of straining out the bones.
       | Currently I pour the contents into another stock pot with a pasta
       | insert. This works, but is _two_ additional large pieces to
       | clean.
        
         | chadash wrote:
         | Buy a pasta straining spoon. It's basically a large spoon with
         | holes in it that replaces a full size pasta strainer. Is it
         | better than a pasta strainer? No. Is it easier to clean,
         | absolutely. I use mine all the time.
        
       | Hizonner wrote:
       | Reason number 47,000,000,036 that governments worldwide should
       | require total public disclosure of everything material to how
       | anything sold to the public is made... including not just what
       | ALL of the ingredients are, but their relative quantities, where
       | they're sourced from, every detail of how they're processed,
       | results of any quality or characterization tests, and any and all
       | existing internal documentation of WHY any particular choices
       | were made. If you're talking about machinery rather than food,
       | then that includes all detailed design documents, source code,
       | tooling designs and setups, and whatever else.
       | 
       | And of course they should refuse to enforce any NDA that bears on
       | any of that.
       | 
       | Trade secrets are purely destructive, even from a "free market"
       | perspective. Asymmetric information always makes markets less
       | efficient. They should not be tolerated, let alone given any
       | legal protection. You want to protect something, get a patent
       | (which should still be harder to do than it is today).
       | 
       | Unfortunately it would require global coordination, because
       | markets (and businesspeople) would punish the first mover, just
       | as markets punish any individual player who doesn't play the
       | secrecy game. So I'm not exactly holding my breath, especially
       | because people in business are so used to playing in the secrecy
       | system that they can't imagine competing any other way.
        
         | wpm wrote:
         | There should at least be a way for me to punch in a UPC or some
         | other product code and see exactly where all of the ingredients
         | came from. The author had to go through a lot of effort and
         | hoops just to kinda sorta confirm that these brands are using
         | concentrate and from one of three major players. I don't need
         | to know ratios or recipes, just tell me who touched the shit in
         | this carton.
        
         | vrdvn wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_secret
        
           | adwi wrote:
           | > In 2004, the National Environmental Trust tested 40 common
           | consumer products; in more than half of them they found toxic
           | substances not listed on the product label
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | ac29 wrote:
       | Here's a fairly simple stock recipe I've been making for a few
       | years.
       | 
       | Usually I use saved chicken frames (the leftover bits from a
       | whole chicken after cutting off the breasts and legs), but you
       | can also get a whole chicken and cut it up into parts if you dont
       | have anything saved. If you do use a mix with more meat, you can
       | save the meat after making the stock for soups or salads.
       | 
       | For each 1 lb of chicken meat and bones you'll need:
       | 
       | 1 quart water
       | 
       | 1 carrot, cut into large pieces
       | 
       | 1 celery stalk, cut into large pieces
       | 
       | 1 garlic clove, crushed
       | 
       | 1/2 onion, quartered
       | 
       | Herbs such as bay leaf, thyme, peppercorn
       | 
       | (parsley stems are a nice addition if you have some, dont add the
       | leaves though)
       | 
       | Bring meat and bones to boil then reduce to a simmer, skimming
       | froth. When clean enough, add everything else and continue simmer
       | 2-8 hours (4 is good).
       | 
       | Strain, let cool a bit, portion into 1qt/1L containers, fridge
       | overnight, skim fat once solidified. Can freeze up to 6 months.
        
         | kibibyte wrote:
         | Pressure cooking (including the time to bring up to pressure,
         | pressure cooking, and pressure release) can save you about 2-6
         | of those hours. Depending on who you talk to, it's either
         | almost as good or perhaps better than simmering for several
         | hours.
        
           | heisenzombie wrote:
           | Highly agree with this. I was gifted an electric pressure
           | cooker recently, and it has been a revelation for home stock
           | making. It makes truly excellent stock in around 60-90
           | minutes all up.
           | 
           | If you're willing to wait the extra half hour for a slow
           | pressure release, then you get a beautiful super-clear
           | consomme-style stock because the pressurized environment
           | means the liquid never boils. I've never achieved that in a
           | stock pot, even if i'm being finicky about temperature
           | control.
        
         | downut wrote:
         | I have, rarely to be true, had too much carrot flavor direction
         | in the stock, so I go light on carrots. I've never had that
         | happen with the onion or celery. My whole family are garlic
         | fiends so there's likely going to be garlic in the terminal
         | recipes so I never add it to the stock.
         | 
         | I always start it at night after 8pm and do the coarse
         | filtering with a basket and then 3 or 4x reduction[1] first
         | thing the next morning. I put the hot coarsely filtered,
         | reduced stock, including the fat, in a 1 gal plastic pitcher,
         | filtering it again with a very fine mesh sieve, and stick it in
         | the back of the fridge, uncovered. The _next_ morning first
         | thing I scoop off the hardened fat that caps the top of the
         | stock[2], and then I plop[3] the stock into a 1 gal freezer
         | bag, slowly ease out all the air, seal it and lay it flat on a
         | cookie sheet. Usually it 's around 1/2" to 3/4" thick. This
         | means that once hard frozen, I can pull it out of the freezer
         | on demand, let it sit flat on the counter for maybe 15 minutes,
         | and then bend off as much or as little of mighty fine stock as
         | I want. Consequently I use it all the time, and stock making is
         | a required part of our family routine. I don't care how much
         | time and effort it costs.
         | 
         | [1] I've got a 25 yo Viking gas range (with a big through roof
         | fan hood); both the overnight barely bubbling simmer (using a
         | generic stock pot) and the vigorous boil of the reduction,
         | using a 6 quart All-Clad copper chef saute pan, seem hard to
         | manage, as I do almost entirely hands off, on _any_ consumer
         | grade electric range I 've ever used.
         | 
         | [2] After stupidly wasting too much of my lifespan I discovered
         | what schmaltz is and now I use the stock fat for basically
         | sauteeing any vegetables required in a recipe. I had always
         | tossed the chicken skin in with all the other ingredients
         | anyway!
         | 
         | [3] It had better plop! All this effort and it needs to be a
         | solid gelatin object at the end.
        
         | wiredfool wrote:
         | I keep the bones, carcasses, and other bits and pieces left
         | over from meals and freeze them in ziplocs. I'll also toss in
         | the gelatinous goo and other drippings from roasting whole
         | birds, wings, or thighs. (Sometimes this is ~1/2 the volume of
         | the resulting stock).
         | 
         | When there's enough, or I'm running out of space in the
         | freezer, I plop all of that into a 8 or 12 qt stockpot, with a
         | couple carrots, an onion and a couple stalks of celery. Enough
         | water to be mostly full. (If it's hard to fit the frozen bits,
         | pour near-boiling water from a kettle over it to fill the pot).
         | 
         | Bring to a boil, back off to a light simmer, let it go for a
         | few hours.
         | 
         | Skim off the bulk of the fat, (reserve or not, I had 1/2 L for
         | 3.5L of stock yesterday) Pour it out through a colander into a
         | large bowl to strain the chunks, skim most of the fat out and
         | put it in quart jars for freezing. If stored in the fridge,
         | it's basically solid.
         | 
         | If you need more meaty bits, roast some wings. They've got the
         | best mix of meat and collagen for stock.
         | 
         | I just toss all the solids, the meat is mostly tasteless at
         | that point, though the dog likes the carrots. (and occasional
         | bits of the meat)
        
         | sgtnoodle wrote:
         | Any time we do a grocery store / Costco chicken, I'll just
         | throw all the bones into a pot with water, salt, and some
         | carrot, celery and onions (or powder). I'll let it simmer for a
         | few hours, and turn it off an hour before I plan to go to bed
         | so it cools off before I put it in the fridge. It's really
         | easy, and can be turned into delicious soup later in the week.
        
       | unglaublich wrote:
       | These stocks are just yeast extract water for taste with chicken
       | residues for marketing. Yeast extract (or MSG, or e621) is the
       | cornerstone of modern processed food. It replaces expensive
       | processes and products aimed at improving taste with a cheap
       | additive that attempts to approximate the traditional taste.
       | Soups, meat products, stocks, potato chips, snacks, sauces,
       | anything that's supposed to have an extravagant taste is
       | generally just a bland tasting cheap scalable filler product with
       | yeast extract for flavor.
       | 
       | And consumers love it. They like the 'punch' of yeast extract
       | flavor in everything. They love the low effort, low price
       | products.
        
         | _a_a_a_ wrote:
         | Of your last line, this sounds like an absolute win-win, right?
        
           | pdpi wrote:
           | You can achieve that effect with salt, msg and/or marmite
           | (depending on what sort of flavour you're going for).
           | Inversely, there's things you can achieve with _actual_ stock
           | that you can 't with any of those, mostly related to the
           | texture.
           | 
           | If you don't know what's going on, it can be quite
           | dispiriting to read about restaurant-style sauces, learn that
           | one of the key ingredients is stock, and then fail to
           | replicate the effect because the stock you're getting isn't
           | the real deal. These days I just make my own stock (it's dead
           | easy) and freeze it in ice cube trays for easy portioning.
        
             | wpm wrote:
             | Marmite _is_ yeast extract.
        
           | unglaublich wrote:
           | Yes, it is for most people. A minority of people don't like
           | it though for a variety of reasons, mostly taste. But for
           | them (more expensive), alternatives are available.
        
           | AstixAndBelix wrote:
           | Yes, if you throw away all the nutritional concerns...
        
             | _a_a_a_ wrote:
             | Does well-made stock actually _have_ significant nutrition
             | in it? Serious question.
        
               | zug_zug wrote:
               | Yes, per the article -- the reason store-bought stock
               | (minimum water-to-protein ratio 1:135) never reduces to a
               | gelatin (like homemade) is that the homemade has Much
               | higher protein content.
               | 
               | It's hard to know what other dimensions of healthiness
               | apply to homemade over store bought.
        
               | vkou wrote:
               | > Yes, per the article -- the reason store-bought stock
               | (minimum water-to-protein ratio 1:135) never reduces to a
               | gelatin (like homemade) is that the homemade has Much
               | higher protein content.
               | 
               | How much of an effect on my _nutrition_ will replacing
               | the stock part of my typical recipe with water have?
               | 
               | I'd be highly surprised if it were at all meaningful. I
               | don't add stock for nutrition, I add it for the taste.
        
               | UncleMeat wrote:
               | You can add powdered gelatin if you want the body of
               | homemade.
        
               | pdpi wrote:
               | The reason you care about the protein is completely
               | unrelated to nutrition, though. Rather, it's because of
               | the flavour and mouth feel.
        
               | jamiek88 wrote:
               | Can we just say texture?
               | 
               | This weird phrase 'mouth feel' that 'foodies' have
               | started to use is weird and subjectively to me, gross.
               | 
               | No professional chef or restauranteur uses the phrase
               | 'mouth feel' it's a weird internet phrase that has caught
               | on a bit.
               | 
               | Texture. Taste. Temperature.
               | 
               | Mouth feel, tongue feel, heat feel.
        
               | _a_a_a_ wrote:
               | I get you but I believe mouth-feel is more than texture,
               | for example it's the crunchiness of crisps in your mouth,
               | and temperature alone doesn't cover the coolness of
               | menthol.
               | 
               | I certainly agree with you that a lot of pretentious long
               | words are taking over from short words that do a
               | perfectly good job, and it sucks.
        
               | jamiek88 wrote:
               | You used the perfect existing word for crunchiness.
               | Crunchiness.
               | 
               | But this is my personal hill and I've already built the
               | mausoleum!
        
               | ahefner wrote:
               | I'm willing to die on this hill with you provided we also
               | take up arms against the phrase "flavor profile".
        
               | wiredfool wrote:
               | Foodies may have 'just' started using it, but it's a term
               | of art in the Food service/Food science world.
               | 
               | It's not like computing doesn't have a lot of terms that
               | seem redundant or over complicated if you aren't
               | experienced with it.
        
               | AlecSchueler wrote:
               | Though your mouth is reporting good feedback on things
               | that seem to have good nutritional value right? Of course
               | you can easily confuse it (eg with lots of sugar), I just
               | mean the distinction you're making might not be needed.
        
         | ginko wrote:
         | I despise yeast extract. It leaves a noticeable aftertaste in
         | my mouth that won't go away for hours. I'd much prefer if
         | brands just stuck with MSG but for some reason every single
         | type of chips other than plain salt is adding yeast extract
         | around here.
        
           | joshspankit wrote:
           | I suspect that the aftertaste is one of the selling features
           | for brands: if you take a bite, enjoy it, and then an
           | aftertaste tries to settle in, you might be likely to go for
           | another bite to cover it up and repeat that until the product
           | is gone and you want more.
        
             | sgtnoodle wrote:
             | Seems like that strategy would back-fire. No one would buy
             | that brand again because of the bad aftertaste.
        
               | joshspankit wrote:
               | And yet here we are.
               | 
               | It turns out that out of quality, consistency, and price
               | all they really need is consistency.
        
           | unglaublich wrote:
           | Yeah, I'm not too fond of it, either. I recently found chips
           | with paprika flavor that only had potato, salt, paprika
           | powder! They tasted wonderful. A friend of mine thought them
           | 'boring' and liked the common ones with yeast extract more.
        
       | MathMonkeyMan wrote:
       | "Stock." Finance? Well, "eater.com". Ben Eater? Maybe about
       | electronics. Ah, chicken stock.
        
       | Havoc wrote:
       | I've found a strategy that works well for home use: Freeze meat
       | offcuts etc over time. Nuke accumulated stuff in pressure cooker
       | every couple weeks, pour into a ice cube tray & freeze.
       | 
       | Especially useful for a flexitarian diet. The days where the main
       | protein is say beans adding one of the above beef based cube
       | helps give it a bit more complexity
        
         | disgruntledphd2 wrote:
         | I've normally found that you want to strain and cool it first,
         | as otherwise you end up with a layer of fat in your stock,
         | which tends to not be as nice.
        
           | Havoc wrote:
           | It just settles on top of the cube & goes into whatever I'm
           | cooking.
           | 
           | While pouring I ensure it's evenly spread so that none of the
           | cubes end up fat heavy
        
           | guessbest wrote:
           | I pull the layer of fat off the top after I cool down the
           | chicken stock and it looks as rich and creamy as butter but
           | with a slight chicken flavor. Some people call it schmaltz.
           | It makes a great coating for a copper pan when cooking
           | scrambled eggs or really anything pan fried.
        
           | Graziano_M wrote:
           | What I do is cool down in the fridge over night, skim the
           | solidified fat, and then freeze. I'll often get a portion of
           | the skimmed stock and reduce it to a demi glace before
           | freezing, often just to save space in the freezer, since I
           | try to make at least a gallon at a time.
        
             | disgruntledphd2 wrote:
             | Yeah, that's generally my approach. Definitely don't freeze
             | it in freezer bags though, as they stick together making it
             | difficult to use it in the intended amounts.
        
         | ac29 wrote:
         | I do this too - buying whole chickens is generally half the
         | price/lb of individual cuts, and you get the leftover bones/etc
         | to make proper stock.
        
       | MikeDelta wrote:
       | > If manufacturers were truly making chicken stock "just like
       | your grandma did," it would be highly perishable, incredibly
       | expensive, and shelf-unstable.
       | 
       | I wonder why grandma's chicken stock would not be shelf-stable
       | using old or modern food-preservation techniques.
        
         | madaxe_again wrote:
         | It is. We can it in mason jars at home. The fat floats to the
         | top and solidifies, so even if the seal on the (sterilised!)
         | jar is imperfect, the fat preserves the broth by preventing
         | microbe incursion. Also helps to make it good and salty, and
         | concentrate it down until it just begins (while boiling hot) to
         | be viscous. When cool, it's thick and gloopy.
         | 
         | So long as everything is good and hot when you seal, you're
         | good.
         | 
         | Quite often we'll can it with a few legs in there - they taste
         | fabulous after a year of marinading.
         | 
         | You can buy it in stores in France, no problem - or duck broth,
         | or goose, or whatever you fancy.
         | 
         | https://www.beyondthechickencoop.com/canning-chicken-stock/
        
           | nerdponx wrote:
           | Several brands sell it in the USA now as well.
        
           | ac29 wrote:
           | FYI, that fat layer is doing nothing to prevent microbial
           | incursion and will turn rancid if left at room temperature
           | not properly sealed. Proper home canning procedures should
           | leave a good, sterile seal though (or just freeze it, which
           | is what I do).
        
           | chrisoverzero wrote:
           | > So long as everything is good and hot when you seal, you're
           | good.
           | 
           | Good, maybe. Safe, no. Chicken stock is not acidic enough
           | even for water-bath canning - it must be pressure-canned.
           | Anything else is a risk of botulism.
        
             | 13of40 wrote:
             | What you said got me wondering about whether you could fix
             | that by adding some vinegar, which led me to this
             | interesting article:
             | https://www.clemson.edu/extension/food/canning/canning-
             | tips/...
             | 
             | Tl;dr your canned food can get a fungus that eats the
             | vinegar, reducing the acidity, and allowing botulinum to
             | grow.
        
             | madaxe_again wrote:
             | And this is why my wife is in charge of canning - yes,
             | these go through the pressure cooker, and I should probably
             | have mentioned that!
        
         | antihipocrat wrote:
         | Or just sell it as a frozen good. Even the author mentioned
         | freezing homemade stock for later use.
        
           | nerdponx wrote:
           | They do both now. It's just not as popular because Americans
           | have no idea what they're missing.
        
       | adingus wrote:
       | If I had to summarize what I thought of this article in one
       | sentence I'd grab this quote:
       | 
       | ""Raw material (chicken frames) are cooked in water to specific
       | solids content," the representative wrote."
       | 
       | The the product, the rep and the company are so disconnected from
       | reality that they can't even call a chicken bone a "chicken
       | bone". They call it a "chicken frame", like some strange chicken
       | nugget defecating robot.
        
         | nerdponx wrote:
         | The cruelty and horror of industrialized farming wouldn't be
         | possible without this level of detachment.
        
         | andreareina wrote:
         | Because it isn't just bone, there's a lot of skin and other
         | connective tissue that goes along for the ride. I've parted out
         | whole chickens so I wouldn't call me disconnected from the
         | reality of it and calling it the frame makes perfect sense to
         | me. "Carcass" is another word that's in common use.
        
           | adingus wrote:
           | I guess this is just a case of me being annoyed because of my
           | own ignorance. I wasn't aware that 'frame' was a common term,
           | like carcass.
        
         | glitchc wrote:
         | Frame sounds like carcass, mainly the ribcage devoid of major
         | sections of meat (breast, legs, etc.).
        
         | farco12 wrote:
         | This is going to be the case with any sufficiently scaled
         | business. I feel the same way about how marketing and sales
         | people talk about human beings as an opportunity to qualify for
         | their sales funnel.
         | 
         | I'm sure others might feel similarly disgusted how software
         | developers and business people talk about users. I personally
         | find it gross that high spenders are commonly referred to as
         | whales.
        
       | sakerbos wrote:
       | All of a sudden I have a newfound love for homemade stock. I
       | guess I'm making some tomorrow. Recipe looks really good too!
        
       | manmal wrote:
       | Tangentially related, chicken bones are unusually high in lead
       | and chicken bone broth is often quite contaminated:
       | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23375414/
        
       | jareklupinski wrote:
       | > In a way, maybe I was hoping for a horrifying crime --
       | something nefarious and real, like the Australian horse and
       | kangaroo meat scandal of 1981.
       | 
       | Why is there no wiki article about this?
       | 
       | https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/meat-sub...
       | 
       | "The 1981 discovery that horsemeat and kangaroo meat were being
       | substituted for beef in meat exported by Australia to the United
       | States..."
        
         | MarcScott wrote:
         | We had a far more recent one in the UK, that does have a
         | Wikipedia article -
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_horse_meat_scandal
        
         | hummus_bae wrote:
         | [dead]
        
         | pimlottc wrote:
         | Not that it excuses the chicanery, but it is worth noting that
         | kangaroo meat is perfectly fine and commonly available in
         | Australian supermarkets.
        
           | jareklupinski wrote:
           | how is it? I've seen it a few times at those 'exotic food
           | conventions' but never worked up the courage...
        
             | pimlottc wrote:
             | If you like venison, you'd probably enjoy it; it's
             | somewhere between that and beef. It's commonly sold as
             | mince, but like venison, it's quite lean, so you may have
             | to adjust recipes a bit if you want to sub it in for ground
             | beef. You can also get it in fillets and cook it like a
             | steak.
        
             | sgtnoodle wrote:
             | It's perhaps a bit gamey, but I appreciated having it as an
             | option while I was down-under. I'm allergic to beef, so
             | it's more variety. Well prepared, it's just as good as any
             | other red meat such as lamb.
        
       | skilled wrote:
       | Eater is making an interesting choice with its cookie policy. It
       | doesn't matter if you click Accept (the only option!) or not, it
       | will still load the TikTok video, a platform that's well-known
       | for its notorious tracking.
       | 
       | "By choosing I Accept, you consent to our use of cookies and
       | other tracking technologies."
       | 
       | Is Eater able to make an exception for TikTok in this context? At
       | least for the news sites that I consume, they will typically
       | overlay TikTok/Facebook/Instagram content with a form that asks
       | you to reveal the said content in exchange for that platform
       | getting data on you.
       | 
       | Here it looks like Eater just doesn't care at all.
       | 
       | Sorry for being so off-topic, but I just couldn't help to notice
       | it.
        
         | nerdponx wrote:
         | Of course they don't care. What makes you think they would
         | care?
        
         | wpm wrote:
         | I'll never understand the utility of autoplaying videos,
         | especially ones that are barely related or more often
         | completely unrelated (looking at you local and national news
         | websites). Like, is this supposed to just annoy me? Is that
         | annoyance going to make it more likely I'm going to stay on the
         | site, which I'm blocking all the ads on anyways?
         | 
         | It's just absolute cancer.
        
           | solarkraft wrote:
           | Gaming engagement metrics, probably
        
         | throwaway47291 wrote:
         | Maybe this is controversial and not what the GDPR says but IMO,
         | it's up to tiktok to ask.
        
         | throwaway2jz34 wrote:
         | I don't know. Between the pihole & content blocking plugins I
         | didn't even notice it had any third party content. Combine that
         | with the use of reader mode and all I got was a wall of text
         | that made the site as pleasant as browsing the web in the 1990s
         | from the CLI :)
         | 
         | And to be more on topic...I quite enjoyed this article, and
         | wish more people would have this level of concern for & desire
         | to know _the truth_.
        
       | MisterBastahrd wrote:
       | Look, if you want to make a quick stock from store brought
       | products, just add some bouillon and gelatin to it. If you want a
       | bit more flavor and you have time, you can boil the crap out of
       | some mirepoix and whatever bundled herbs you want to flavor it.
       | 
       | It's never going to be as good as the real thing, but then again,
       | you're never going to eat the real thing by itself.
        
       | ergonaught wrote:
       | This was so well written I wish everyone producing similar
       | content would study it and learn from it.
        
         | dclowd9901 wrote:
         | I'm really not a fan of even long form reporting bringing the
         | author into the story so much. It feels very much an artifact
         | of this generation of reporters who seek celebrity as much as
         | (more than?) telling an informative and neutral story.
        
           | mrmekon wrote:
           | I'm sure it has increased over time as people imitate their
           | heroes, but first-person journalism is certainly not at all
           | unique to "this generation"; it was already a big element of
           | New Journalism in the 1960s:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Journalism
           | 
           | Is it surprising that journalists who grow up reading Hunter
           | Thompson go on to write like Hunter Thompson? I think that's
           | a pretty natural progression, without needing to blame
           | generational narcissism. If anything, it seems like World War
           | II was the major turning point for involving the author into
           | the story.
        
           | wcedmisten wrote:
           | Personally I felt more engaged with the story due to its
           | narrative style.
           | 
           | A lot of the corporate responses wouldn't have as much impact
           | if they were stated more neutrally like "These 3 stock
           | manufacturers declined to comment", or just providing their
           | nonanswers sequentially.
           | 
           | The author's bio also describes him as "chef, author and host
           | of the YouTube cooking show Don't Panic Pantry", so I think
           | the style is more appropriate here than it would be written
           | by a professional journalist on a more strictly "news" site.
        
       | fwlr wrote:
       | Restaurants are in the sweet spot of the economy of scale when it
       | comes to things like sauces and stocks. Households can be a bit
       | too small; making chicken stock is practical, but not effortless.
       | Commercial processed food corporations on the other hand are too
       | big; they can afford to formulate a witch's brew of Flavoring
       | 31A, Refined Extract Concentrate, and Butylated Hydroxysorbate
       | that 9 out of 10 focus group participants agree reminds them of
       | chicken stock. But restaurants have the manpower, facilities, and
       | quantity of ingredients to make a lot of stocks and sauces from
       | scratch and iterate on the recipe and process until it's really
       | good. (Once you get to about five chefs in the kitchen brigade
       | you start to see the position of saucier, a chef whose job is
       | just preparing sauces.) If the menu mentions soup, broth, stock,
       | jus, or demi-glace I make a beeline for it and I'm usually in for
       | a treat.
        
         | jghn wrote:
         | One thing that changed the dynamic for me was adding gelatin to
         | store bought stock. I think I originally got that tip from
         | Kenji (who was quoted in the article). If not it was definitely
         | from Serious Eats.
         | 
         | It's nowhere near as good as the real deal, but it provides a
         | great effort to value ratio.
        
           | wpm wrote:
           | Yeah the gelatin trick is huge. Store-bought stock/broth does
           | a decent job of _tasting_ like real chicken stock, and then
           | the added gelatin does a decent job of _feeling_ like real
           | chicken stock.
           | 
           | It's as close to the real deal as it is probably worth to the
           | home cook. I recently made a huge batch of beef stock _and_
           | turkey stock over the same two days. After skimming the fat,
           | all the filtering, heating and cooling, and portioning, then
           | freezing, I hit me that while this stock is damn good, I had
           | spent an absolute shitton of money, burned a bunch of fossil
           | fuels, spent a bunch of electricity, and a lot of time, for a
           | couple quarts of stock. A quart of kitchen basics low sodium
           | and two packets of Knox gelatin get me 80% of the way there
           | for fractions of the cost and time.
        
             | twoodfin wrote:
             | The trick is to freeze the stock in ice cube trays (the
             | latex ones that make 2" cubes), and divide the spoils of
             | your effort among a future dozen or so recipes. The
             | marginal value of half a cup of homemade stock in a dish is
             | typically massive.
        
               | pellucidar wrote:
               | The trick is to make stock in an Instant Pot (or other
               | electronic pressure cooker). It's low effort and can be
               | done with accumulated frozen scraps.
        
         | don-code wrote:
         | I'd argue that restaurants _don't_ have the manpower to do
         | this. Restaurant margins are small as it is, and while I don't
         | have concrete numbers to back this statement up, it feels like
         | designating (or even hiring) someone to upcycle products like
         | chicken bones into stock would be prohibitively expensive, in
         | comparison to just buying prepackaged stock in bulk.
        
           | blovescoffee wrote:
           | Except prepackaged stock is either cheap or good but never
           | both.
        
           | aintgonnatakeit wrote:
           | Except that industrial stock is expensive compared to
           | trimmings (free) and tastes terrible, and the cook assigned
           | to make stock is also doing other tasks.
        
       | Rastonbury wrote:
       | They sell demiglace in boxes and bags too about 10g per 100ml. If
       | it's a matter of reduction of water, that'll make it 3x to 10x
       | more expensive for the same amount of bones/carcass, if we use
       | the 1-3g per 100 numbers in the article.
       | 
       | I was curious and went to check and this actually tracks based on
       | Waitroses (UK) house brand stock and demiglace. Their stock is
       | 2.5g and 48p per 100ml and demiglace is 10g and PS1.9 per 100ml,
       | 4x the protein content and around 5x the price
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-02-19 23:01 UTC)