News
« Older Entries Newer Entries »
Tuesday, February 28th, 2012
If you are one of the 16 million people in the UK with high blood pressure, and don’t yet need medication, a natural remedy may help.
Studies have shown that you’re twice as likely to have high blood pressure (ie: it’s consistently at or above 140/90) if your BMI is 30 or higher (visit www.bmicalculator.co.uk).
Regular brisk walks can lower the top number (systolic) of your blood pressure reading by almost eight points and the lower figure (diastolic) by six. ‘Regular exercise strengthens the heart so that it can pump more blood with less effort,’ according to Professor Gareth Beevers of the Blood Pressure Association. ‘Aim to walk vigorously for at least 30 minutes most days, but build up to this if you’re not used to doing any
A US study claims that three cups of hibiscus tea daily lowers systolic pressure by seven points in six weeks – equalling the effects of many medications. Try Hambleden Hibiscus Tea, £2.50 for 30 bags from health stores.
Try to cut down on processed foods – bread, biscuits, breakfast cereals, takeaways and ready meals. These contain 80 per cent of the salt we consume, says the Blood Pressure Association.
This mineral can counter the effects of sodium (from salt) and is great at helping to control blood pressure. Good sources include bananas, melons, pulses, mushrooms and sweet potatoes.
Slow breathing and meditative practices, such as qigong, yoga, and tai chi decrease stress hormones which elevate renin, a kidney enzyme that raises blood pressure. Try five minutes in the morning and at night. Inhale deeply and expand your belly. Exhale and release all of your tension.
Scientists at Queen Mary, University of London say patients who drank 250ml of beetroot juice daily had significantly lower blood pressure for up to 24 hours. Try Beet It, £1.39 for 250ml, available at good supermarkets.
Caffeine can raise blood pressure by tightening blood vessels and by magnifying the effects of stress, which makes the heart pump faster. Duke University Medical Centre found 500mg of caffeine — three mugs of coffee — daily, increased blood pressure by 4 points, lasting until bedtime.
Studies have found that coenzyme Q10 supplements reduced blood pressure by up to 17 points over ten points. CoQ10 is an antioxidant required for energy production and works by dilating blood vessels. Speak to your GP about taking a 60-100mg supplement three times a day. Try Healthspan Coenzyme Q10 60mg (£14.95 for 90 capsules from www.healthspan.co.uk).
The University of Florence asked 28 adults on hypertension pills to listen to soothing classical, Celtic, or Indian music for 30 minutes a day, while also breathing slowly. After a week, the participants had lowered their average systolic reading by 3.2 points. After a month, readings were down 4.4 points.
Posted in Health related news | No Comments »
Tuesday, February 28th, 2012
Shoppers have been warned to expect a new wave of price rises on food, as areas of Britain face the prospect of their worst drought in decades.
Speaking at a crisis meeting between farmers and water companies, environment secretary Caroline Spelman yesterday declared that the south east of England was officially in drought.
The news marks the earliest time of year ever a drought has been declared, and comes after two dry winters in a row.
Farmers warned that food prices would be certain to rise unless the government was ready to assist producers.
“We want to see evidence from government that it is giving food producers a fair crack of the whip,” said Paul Hammett of the NFU. “Government must get the balance right between environmental protection and food production. For food security we need water security.”
Posted in Food Inflation and pricing | No Comments »
Tuesday, February 28th, 2012
The food industry’s biggest con trick is one you’re probably falling for every day of the week. Even worse, the victims are your children.
Visit any supermarket and wander down the aisle of breakfast cereals. The message from the packets couldn’t be more encouraging.
This one is ‘the sunshine breakfast’. That one is made from ‘wholesome corn, oats, rice and wheat’. Pretty much all are ‘fortified with vitamins and minerals’. The contents of the attractive colourful boxes can form ‘part of a balanced diet’.
For decades, we have been sold the story that a bowl of cereal is one of the healthiest things a caring mother could feed her children every morning.
But many cereals hide a horrible secret: the large amounts of sugar the manufacturers have pumped into them.
The research group Which? recently investigated the sugar content of 50 breakfast cereals. The results should shock you.
Products we are led to believe are healthy are, in fact, laden with so much sugar they ought to be sold alongside chocolate biscuits, said Which?, not marketed as a recipe for a healthy life.
The worst offenders in the Which? report were Kellogg’s Frosties, with 37 per cent sugar; Tesco Choco Snaps, with 36 per cent; and Sugar Puffs, with 35 per cent. According to the Food Standards Agency, a sugar content above 15 per cent is considered to be high — these cereals have double this.
Perhaps it’s not such a surprise that Frosties are sugary — after all, the sugar is visible on every flake. However, even Rice Krispies contain 10 per cent sugar, while Kellogg’s Corn Flakes have 8 per cent.
Does it matter? The answer is ‘Yes’. It is now accepted scientific fact that eating too much sugar increases your chances of suffering from obesity, diabetes, heart disease, cancer and liver problems.
A recent article in the highly respected journal Nature claimed that an excess of sugar contributes to 35 million deaths a year worldwide.
It not only makes people fat, but also changes the body’s metabolism, raises blood pressure, throws hormones off balance and harms the liver, said the authors of the report, The Toxic Truth About Sugar.
‘A little is not a problem, but a lot kills — slowly,’ they said. They have called for sugar to be regulated like cigarettes.
The biggest risk of a high-sugar diet is obesity. This is not only because sugar is high in calories, but also because it acts like a drug on your system. Eating too much sugar leaves you craving more sugar. It becomes a vicious circle.
You’ve probably heard about the glycaemic index. This is a measure of how quickly foods release their sugars into your bloodstream.
Breakfast cereals have a high GI, which means they break down quickly during digestion and your blood sugar level surges. Then it quickly recedes — leaving you hungrier, sooner.
That’s why people who have had cereal for breakfast can feel tired and hungry by 11am and unable to hold out for lunch.
Eating a bowl of Frosties is like throwing a newspaper into a fire. Whoosh, and then you need more fuel. The problem is that once the fuel has been used up, you need something sweet. Something right now. If you’re not careful, you’re soon into a spiral of obesity.
A breakfast consisting of an unsweetened yoghurt and a handful of fruit and nuts is like putting slow-burning coal on a fire: it will sustain you for longer and you won’t crave the hit of a sugar fix.
So, if sugar is so bad for us, why do the cereal manufacturers pack their products with it?
To understand that, you need to know the economics of the industry. Breakfast cereals are a miracle of modern capitalism.
You take ultra-cheap ingredients — corn or rice, for example — put them through a simple manufacturing process and then sell them to the public at a huge mark-up. A 750g box of Kellogg’s Frosties will cost you around £2.70. The corn will have cost Kellogg’s just a few pennies.
However, there are two problems with this manufacturing process. It removes much of the nutritional benefits from the raw ingredients; and stripping grains of rice or pieces of corn, crushing them or puffing air into them leaves you with a product that is about as appealing in taste terms as eating newspaper.
This is where sugar comes in (and salt, but that’s another story). Adding it in large amounts is the only way people can be encouraged to eat the end product.
But this poses another problem for the manufacturers. How can you get away with marketing a product at children — the core customers for many breakfast cereals — if it’s packed with all this sugar? The answer is as simple as it is dishonest: bestow the cereals with the illusory gift of health.
Enter the word ‘fortified’. Emblazoned on pretty much every cereal packet, it’s a subliminal and sneaky message to the consumer. This food may taste sweet, and sweet foods may seem unhealthy — but not this one!
By adding synthetic vitamins to your flakes, krispies or loops, the manufacturer can shout about the fact that a bowl of Kellogg’s Coco Pops contains thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B6, folic acid, vitamin B12, iron and calcium, without drawing attention to the fact 35 per cent of what you are eating is sugar.
That’s around 3½ teaspoons of sugar in one 40g serving (assuming you measure out a serving, unlike most people, who pour until the bowl is full).
And if you add 125ml of semi-skimmed milk, which packs its own carbohydrate punch, that’s a total of 5¼ teaspoons of sugar in your breakfast bowl. Marketing breakfast cereals as ‘fortified with vitamins’ is not against the law.
No outright lies are being told — those vitamins are there (though all the vitamins and minerals in fortified cereals are found in greater quantities in other foods, such as eggs and meat). But they’re a smokescreen to distract attention from the real story.
Another ruse, which is used for cereals aimed at adults, is to label them as low-fat (the Special K packet declares: ‘Less than 2 per cent fat’).
Yes, cereal grains are by their very nature low in fat. But it’s another red herring to distract you from the salt and sugar content. (And anyway, contrary to what we have been led to believe, there is scant evidence to support the nutritional mantra that fat is automatically bad for you.)
So there is nothing illegal in this marketing, but in my opinion it’s dishonest. What’s worse is when manufacturers plaster packets with cartoon characters and use cuddly creatures — the Honey Monster, Tony the Tiger, the Coco Pops monkey — to appeal directly to children.
The problem is that most of us don’t understand the nutritional information on food packets. I have been a food investigative journalist for more than 20 years and it took me a while to get the hang of it.
When it comes to sugar, the key is to ignore the ‘per serving’ figure — the food company’s bowl size probably will not equate to your children’s portion — and look instead at the table marked ‘typical values per 100g’.
Then look down to the figure next to ‘sugars’. More than 15 per cent is deemed to be a high-sugar product — even Special K, which claims on its website ‘you can be sure you are helping yourself look good and feel special’ consists of 17 per cent sugar.
What should be done to end the scandal of sugary cereals? I think the Government should impose a sugar tax to discourage firms from lacing their products with the stuff.
But it would take a very brave government to pick a fight with the corporations that have built such lucrative businesses on the back of our addiction to sugar.
So, if you care about your children’s health, you need to serve them something else for breakfast. I never gave my children sugary breakfast cereals: they had Weetabix served with a spoonful of fruit.
Other healthy starts to the day include a poached, boiled or sometimes fried egg, which provides every major vitamin you need apart from vitamin C; porridge, which is delicious and healthy; or a slice or two of wholemeal toast plus unsweetened yogurt mixed with fresh fruit and a handful of nuts.
Now grown up, my daughters won’t touch foods that are packed with sugar — they find snacks and treats such as cupcakes to be too sickeningly sweet for their liking.
Thanks to a healthier breakfast, you can put your new-found energy to good use.
Posted in Health related news, Newspaper stories | No Comments »
Tuesday, February 21st, 2012
It’s a tale straight from the pages of the weirder realms of science fiction. A mysterious millionaire and a brilliant professor join forces, with a single aim. To create Frankenburger: the world’s first test-tube beefburger.
Peculiar as it may sound, it’s the future for our food, according to the academic in question, Professor Mark Post of Maastricht University in the Netherlands. He plans to serve up the first burger this October after growing beef muscle in his lab, which will eventually become a juicy quarterpounder. Post has grown small strips of beef muscle tissue using a cow’s stem calls and serum taken from a horse foetus (are you hungry yet?). Just like all growing muscles, they are currently flexing away in order to become bigger and healthier – only, in true sci-fi style, they are doing so in a Dutch lab, held in place by Velcro and stimulated by electricity. When fully grown, 3,000 of these muscles will be needed for one burger – and will cost an estimated £200,000.
Professor Post has big plans for his stem-cell-cum-foetus version of fast food. “Eventually my vision is that you have a limited herd of donor animals in the world that you keep in stock and that you get your cells from,” he says.
So who’s the chef who will cook up this scientific experiment and launch a culinary revolution? You guessed it – Heston Blumenthal. And the lucky diner? To be confirmed, says Professor Post. “My financier will decide who will eat it… [he is] famous, everyone knows this guy.” But we will not learn his identity, not at least until his Frankenburger has proved a success. Ketchup anyone?
Let’s be serious. We shouldn’t undermine credible efforts to solve the crisis in the world’s food supply. But rarely do the inventors of these technologies seem to understand why consumers are sceptical of their ideas and motives.
There are dozens of examples of food technology “big talk” that has come to nought. Scientists and biotech companies grumble that their efforts fail because of bad press – yet it is often entirely their own fault that the public are so suspicious.
To begin with, they tend to make our stomachs churn. In-vitro meat production uses stem-cell technology and fetal material. How will we feel, eating the product of an animal that, never mind being kept in a factory farm, was never allowed life at all? Technologies such as this unnerve us because they interfere with the magnificently sedate process of evolution. We like to think what we eat is unaltered and as natural as possible.
I’ve always thought it was astonishing that we subject our food to far fewer safety checks than we do our medicines. After all, we can eat the same foods every day for a lifetime, making them more risky. Medicines are (hopefully) only consumed for short periods of time. Genetically modified foods, for example, are not as thoroughly investigated as GM drugs. Cancer therapies using genetically modified organisms are rigorously tested over many years, yet pesticide-resistant wheat or soya needs only to be tested for three months – and tested on rats, not humans. The use of stem cells to cure human diseases is being debated all over the world by philosophers and politicians. Why is it being cleared for use on our plates with such ease?
The technology is expensive, but Post hopes that expanding his operation will make it affordable. The reality is, though, that efforts of scientists to feed the world sustainably rarely see the light of day. Twenty years ago, biotechnologists created super-nutritious GM “Golden Rice,” transforming rice with genes from a daffodil to add nutritious beta carotene. It was hoped it would reduce Vitamin A deficiency in developing countries. But the project has encountered many technological difficulties, while attracting fierce opposition from pressure groups.
Supporters of in-vitro meat say that it will solve many problems – not just hunger. Like what I wonder? In-vitro meat won’t prevent greenhouse-gas emissions from livestock farms because dairy farms are a major source of methane, and milk cannot be made in a laboratory (yet). And while less land will be used for livestock, I can’t see that there is a great need for it for other uses. We won’t need, presumably, as much grain for animal food (a test tube does not need feeding). And we certainly don’t need more potatoes or onions, cauliflowers or carrots – Spain, Holland and Africa can grow all the other vegetables we want so cheaply. What to do with the prairies of England? I predict the tumbleweed will be blowing across uninhabited plains in no time.
Heston Blumenthal will surely employ all his powers to get the Frankenburger to taste decent. He is no shirker when it comes to using gadgets to enhance his cooking. It will probably need colour added to the flesh – Professor Post admits that the muscle strips are currently “pinkish towards yellowish” – and the flavour of well hung beef needs replicating. But hey, a little hydrolysed vegetable protein, an unpleasant soya-based additive most often used in stock cubes to make them taste meaty, should do the trick.
It’s not that I’m against growing protein, per se. Let’s not forget Quorn, a vegetarian mycoprotein developed in Buckinghamshire using a soil fungus. Grown in tanks in oxygenated water, it develops from a single spore to a mass that can then be processed, given texture and sold as a meat alternative. It is not a mushroom, and it certainly does not taste like fungi, or anything else much. But it has made a lot of vegetarians happy and is a thousand times less controversial than using genetically modified organisms and stem cell science in food technology.
Think back to the origins of the “food without fields” fantasy. NASA, contemplating putting astronauts in space for long periods, initiated the in-vitro meat project nearly 20 years ago. They hoped that one day, those sent to space could feed themselves from on-board “farms”, which grew beef, pork, lamb and salmon. That, too, sounds like another great sci-fi story.
But could it provide a clue to the provenance and funding for Frankenburgers? Consider the three elements of this story: space travel, mystery wealthy investor and great publicity stunt. It feels very Richard Branson (who’s set to send tourists to space some time in 2013) to me. If so, Sir Richard, let me whisper a little something in your ear. Please don’t call it Virgin Beef.
Posted in GM and Food Labelling stories | No Comments »
Tuesday, February 21st, 2012
If you’ve been struggling with your weight loss – despite adhering to NHS guidelines that advise cutting 500 calories a day from your diet to shed roughly half a kilo per week – you’re not alone.
According to experts from the U.S. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Disease, cutting calories slows down your metabolism. Losing weight then becomes harder and eventually plateaus, according to the Telegraph.
Scientists from the Institute have programmed an online calculator that helps design a weight loss programme tailored to body shape, diet, age, height, weight, sex and physical activity levels, which can be used by people to calculate how much weight they would lose by making certain lifestyle changes.
According to the experts, eating around 100 fewer calories a day can help you lose 10lbs over the next three years, and up to five pounds in the first year (in contrast to cutting out 500 calories a day, which sees you dropping five pounds in six months).
“The contrast is that the old rule of thumb predicts twice as much weight loss after a year and it gets worse after that,” said one of the online calculator’s designers, Dr. Kevin Hall, speaking at a conference in Vancouver.
“People have used this rule of thumb to predict how much weight they should lose for decades now, and it turns out to be completely wrong.
“If you cut the calories in somebody’s diet their metabolism starts to slow down, and it slows down more the more weight is lost, so eventually you’ll reach a plateau.”
According to Dr. Hall, the online calculator can help people get a realistic sense of what changes they need to make to their diets and physical activity levels to achieve their weight loss goals.
“If you’ve expected to lose twice as much weight after a year as you actually lose, I think that’s horribly demotivating to people,” he said.
Posted in Health related news | No Comments »
Monday, February 20th, 2012
Use this batter recipe as a base for creating the most delicious sweet or savoury pancakes- flipping brilliant
Ingredients:
100g plain flour
2 eggs
300ml semi-skimmed milk
1 tbsp sunflower oil or vegetable, plus extra for frying
pinch salt
Method
Blending in the flour: Put the flour and a pinch of salt into a large mixing bowl and make a well in the centre. Crack the eggs into the middle, then pour in about 50ml milk and 1 tbsp oil. Start whisking from the centre, gradually drawing the flour into the eggs, milk and oil. Once all the flour is incorporated, beat until you have a smooth, thick paste. Add a little more milk if it is too stiff to beat.
Finishing the batter: Add a good splash of milk and whisk to loosen the thick batter. While still whisking, pour in a steady stream of the remaining milk. Continue pouring and whisking until you have a batter that is the consistency of slightly thick single cream. Traditionally, people would say to now leave the batter for 30 mins, to allow the starch in the flour to swell, but there’s no need.
Getting the right thickness: Heat the pan over a moderate heat, then wipe it with oiled kitchen paper. Ladle some batter into the pan, tilting the pan to move the mixture around for a thin and even layer. Quickly pour any excess batter into a jug, return the pan to the heat, then leave to cook, undisturbed, for about 30 secs. Pour the excess batter from the jug back into the mixing bowl. If the pan is the right temperature, the pancake should turn golden underneath after about 30 secs and will be ready to turn.
Flipping pancakes: Hold the pan handle, ease a fish slice under the pancake, then quickly lift and flip it over. Make sure the pancake is lying flat against base of the pan with no folds, then cook for another 30 secs before turning out onto a warm plate. Continue with the rest of the batter, serving them as you cook or stack onto a plate. You can freeze the pancakes for 1 month, wrapped in cling film or make them up to a day ahead.
Tips:
Sweet & savoury Onion, cheese & bacon Fry a chopped onion, then add chopped streaky bacon and cook until golden. Tip onto pancakes, grate over cheddar, fold up and eat hot.
Tropical fruit & ginger: Fresh tropical fruits, stem ginger syrup and Greek yogurt.
Reheating pancakes To oven reheat, stack the pancakes on a heatproof plate; cover with foil. Warm at 180C/fan 160C/gas 4 for 10-15 mins from cold or 5-10 mins from room temperature. To microwave, stack, cover with cling film, pierce the film. Reheat on High for 1 min.
Posted in News, Pancakes, Snacks | No Comments »
Friday, October 28th, 2011
Frugal cooking: How to save money in the kitchen
We advise readers how to save money in the kitchen through frugal cooking tips and tricks.
One of Fiona Nevile’s most astute purchases has been a five-litre Twenties Thermos flask that she bought for one pound at a church fete. “I imagine it was used to take soup to shooting parties”, says Fiona, a passionate gardener and cook. Fiona, however, doesn’t attend shooting parties – she cooks in her Thermos, radically reducing th e energy required in conventional cooking.
Based on the traditional “hay box” idea, that food heated to simmering point will lose heat much more slowly in an insulated container, the Thermos works even more efficiently due to the vacuum surrounding the inner container. “I’ve cooked bread, cakes and even a cockerel that we had to kill because it was annoying the neighbours,” says Fiona. “I had to quit my job due to illness two years ago, and although my partner still works, our income was severely diminished and we needed to reduce our bills quickly. The Thermos really helps.”
Her other great purchase, she says, is a food dehydrator. “When we have a glut of vegetables or supermarkets do a three-for-one offer, we can dehydrate them and store them in a plastic bag for several months. Vegetables come out looking like they should be doll’s house food.”
Financial experts concluded earlier this month that British families are experiencing “an unprecedented collapse in living standards” due to a combination of pay freezes, inflation and fuel bill increases. Reducing energy use is now not just about carbon emissions – it’s about helping make your money stretch further.
I have written much about reducing heating costs in the home. But what about the next biggest energy guzzler – the kitchen? Our family has already turned to stews and casseroles, slow-cooked on a low heat for six hours. The children, brought up, I am ashamed to admit, on the modern child’s predilection for everything to be dry and sauce-less, at first looked askance at the rich deeply-flavoured gravy that everything now comes with. The slow cooker not only reduces my oven fuel bill but enables me to buy cheaper cuts of meat. Even a scrawny piece of mutton melts off the bone after several hours.
Slow cooking doesn’t mean a diet of stews, though. Aly Hodge, a mother of three who lives in Wiltshire, cooks lasagne, chutney, rice pudding, corn bread – pretty much everything – in her two slow cookers. “I blog about family life and a lot of mums report switching to slow cooking – for the convenience, but also to save on fuel bills,” she says.
Chef Arthur Potts Dawson, the brains behind the People’s Supermarket movement, says that as well as using a slow cooker, he now tries to have two or three days in the week when his family eat raw food. “It’s healthy and saves money.” When he do es cook, he makes sure he leaves not a scrap of waste. “Our record is using a chicken for six different meals: roast first; then, with the leftover roast potatoes, squashed in a patty with peas and fried; chicken salad, chicken stir fry with rice; with bacon and eggs for breakfast and using the stock for soup.”
While slow cookers can save around one third of the electricity a conventional oven uses, a thermal cooker – the commercial version of Fiona’s Thermos – can save 80–90 per cent. Dave Knowles is a thermal cooker fanatic and commissioned a factory in China to make him one. “We use ours most days,” says Dave, who runs a chandlery near Southampton and originally devised his thermal cooker for people living on boats and in caravans. “For stew, you have to get food up to simmering point, cook for 10 minutes, then seal and leave it, meaning 10 minutes of cooking fuel for something that would take three hours in a conventional oven.”
He says that last Christmas, he even made a Christmas cake in it, with the cake tin in an outer “bath” simmering for 35 minutes before being sealed. “It came out beautifully moist and at a fraction of the cooking costs of a normal seven-hour-Christmas-cake-baking time.”
Posted in Newspaper stories | No Comments »
Thursday, October 27th, 2011
Raising a glass to the joys of the sloe life
The first frosts of the year have arrived, but there is compensation. It’s a sign, not just that the car windscreen will need scraping and central heating bills are about to go through the roof, but that sloes, the last fruit of the British autumn, are ready for picking.
The tiny fruits look like miniature black plums with a soft, white bloom, some no bigger than a pea. They are inedible raw, but once cooked or macerated in alcohol, have an intense flavour, most famously in sweet, fragrant, carmine-tinged sloe gin. And making it at home is a piece of cake – once you have your sloes.
Your best bet is to recruit a country-loving friend, ideally a dog walker, as these always seem to know when and where the best forage is to be had. On a chilly morning last week, I press-ganged my friend Luke and his dogs, wrapped up warm and headed for the Somerset countryside.
Fifteen minutes’ tramp through silvery fields brought us to the booty. Although related to plums, sloes are the fruit of the blackthorn bush, Prunus spinosa. The bushes or small trees (which grow to 13ft) are often found in hedgerows, where their inch-long thorns make them an effective barrier. Picking takes time and gloves – not just because of the thorns but because the fruit is fiddly for cold-numbed hands.
The chief concern for most gatherers is whether they have genuine sloes or bullaces, a relative of the damson. The two look very similar, although bullaces are larger. A good bet is to look at the leaves: sloe leaves are at least twice as long as they are wide, while bullace leaves are rounded. In addition, bullace trees have few, if any, prickles.
This sounds straightforward. But, in fact, as Miles Irving, author of The Forager Handbook (Ebury House, £30) and supplier of wild foods to many of London’s top restaurants, points out, natural hybridisation between the two plants has blurred the distinction. According to Brian Doonan of the sloe website www.sloe.biz, the best way to be sure is to taste one. A raw bullace will be sour, but a sloe will be lip-curlingly, mouth-dryingly tannic.
Everyone agrees that they are best picked after the first frosts. To some, the fruit will not be truly ripe until now. But to sloe experts like Julia Medforth, who makes sloe gin, sloe port and sloe sherry at her Yorkshire Wolds estate, Raisthorpe Manor, the frost breaks down the skin so they macerate in alcohol more readily. She’s been picking from her 20 miles of hedgerows since September and replicates the frost by freezing them before popping them into the gin bottles.
“It’s been a good year, with a hard winter followed by an early, warm spring,” Medforth says. “We’ve had a good wind, too, which blows the leaves from the bushes and makes the fruit easier to see and pick. The older bushes, 50 or 60 years old, are the best.”
If you make your sloe gin now, you can drink it for Christmas, but as Irving says, it is better to leave until next year. “Most of the flavour comes from the kernel, a gently almondy note, which takes months to develop.”
Sloes are worth using in other recipes. I’ve added a handful to an apple crumble, which turns the fruit the prettiest pink and enrichens the flavour. Irving prefers to use them as a sauce for game, cooking a handful with red wine and sugar. Rub it through a sieve and add any juices from the roast meat, plus salt and pepper to taste. While you are waiting for the gin, this will give you the sloe fix, quick.
Sloe recipes
Sloe gin/sherry
Empty a bottle of gin into a jug. Prick a mugful of sloes with a fork, then drop them into the bottle, stopping when the bottle is half full. Add 5oz/140g sugar. Fill the bottle with gin and close it tightly. Shake the bottle every day for a week, then once a week or so for a couple of months. You could drink the gin at Christmas but it will be better left until next year or even longer. Or fill the bottle with sherry, adding a little sugar. Shake and store as for gin.
Sloe “butter”
Decant the sloes from the sherry and put in a pan with barely enough water to cover. Simmer until the fruit is really soft and the liquid has reduced to three or four tablespoonfuls. Rub the sloes through a sieve or use a mouli-legumes, aka a vegetable mill. Either way, the little stones make this a tiresome job but persevere. Weigh the pulp and add half its weight in sugar. Heat gently until the sugar dissolves, then boil for three to four minutes until thick. Scrape into a jar and leave to set. Store in the fridge. Eat on bread or with cheese.
Sloe truffles
Mix the sloe “butter” with an equal weight of melted chocolate. Spread into an oblong about little-finger deep. Allow to set in a cool place, then cut into squares and dust with cocoa powder.
Posted in Newspaper stories | No Comments »
Wednesday, October 26th, 2011
Top 10: pumpkin carving tips
However you choose to celebrate 31st October, there is one tradition that will generally precede all festivities. The self-carved Jack o’lantern is something of a Halloween pin-up, but how will you make yours stand out from the crowd? Our simple four-step guide will get you started, but here are our top 10 tips for giving your pumpkin a touch of magic…
1. Choose your pumpkin wisely. The lines on the skin could be a witch’s wrinkles while a misshapen squash could provide a devilishly different canvas.
2. Use a template to perfect your spooky design. Create your own or find inspiration from the many websites dedicated to pumpkin prettying. Secure your chosen style to the front of your pumpkin and carefully trace the image by poking holes along the lines. Once finished remove the template and gently carve. Voilà!
3. Create some eerie shadows by carving another pattern into the back of your pumpkin. Place next to a wall, light from the inside and watch your design come to life.
4. Put some flame-retardant coloured tissue paper just behind the front face of your pumpkin to create a coloured filter. Make sure you’re lighting your pumpkin with a torch rather than a naked flame though!
5. Try shaving parts of your pumpkin rather than cutting all the way through. This will give your design a two-tone effect and add depth.
6. Use everyday items from around the house to bring your pumpkin to life. Create a face from nuts and bolts, use white reflective tape as bandages or simply chop off the top and add flowers for your own spooky vase!
7. Painting your pumpkin can work wonderfully, especially if you want to keep little hands away from sharp objects. They’ll also look great in the daytime. Either paint on a design or use to add accents to an already carved squash.
8. Shun the traditional orange pumpkin for a ghoulish green variety… or why not try your hand at transforming a watermelon? The process is the same but it will certainly make your neighbours look twice!
9. Make your pumpkin shine from the inside out. Use multicoloured Christmas lights to add a new dimension to simple styles or try a red bicycle light, set to flash, for a really sinister touch.
10. Funny faces and ghoulish grins not your thing? Try making simple shapes like stars or spooky creatures with cookie cutters or use an apple corer or drill bits to add polka dots for a more grown-up pumpkin.
Posted in News | No Comments »
Monday, October 24th, 2011
Are those supermarket ‘bargains’ just a big con? Shops routinely exaggerate discounts, says Which? report
Supermarkets routinely exaggerate ‘bargain’ offers to dupe shoppers into thinking they are getting a better deal, experts have claimed.
Some stores were found to inflate prices for just a few days, before promoting their products as being half-price or better for weeks afterwards.
Consumer group Which? said a number of chains were exploiting loopholes in fair-trading legislation to offer ‘dubious’ offers on items such as fruit and wine ‘that might mislead you into thinking you are getting an extra-special bargain when you are not’.
Many families, facing the biggest cost of living squeeze for 60 years, have taken to buying only items that are on offer – but Which? said stores appear to be taking advantage of cash-strapped consumers.
Products should be sold at an original price for 28 days before shops can then use this as a benchmark for any advertised reductions.
In addition, the items should not be on offer for any longer than they were on sale at their original price.
However, Which? said these rules do not apply if stores display a sign explaining the offer, or a product is going out of date.
The organisation looked at deals at Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury’s, Morrisons, Waitrose and Marks & Spencer over three months.
It found that fruit prices ‘had the greatest potential’ to ‘baffle consumers’, with one example involving cherries sold at Sainsbury’s at one price for 15 days, before being advertised as half-price for eight weeks.
Elsewhere, M&S had blueberries on offer for 13 weeks out of 14.
Deals on wine were similarly confusing. Tesco sold Hardys Crest Cabernet Shiraz Merlot for £10.99 for just two weeks; it was then ‘half-price’ at £5.49 for ten weeks, and £7.99 for the next two.
Rival chain Asda promoted another bottle as reduced from £5.28 to £3, but Which? said the highest price it ever saw for the wine was £4.98.
Which? executive director Richard Lloyd said: ‘Just because something is on offer doesn’t necessarily mean it’s cheap or good value. Unfortunately, some “special offers” aren’t so special.
‘Supermarkets must take a more responsible approach. We want to see clear and transparent offers that don’t cause confusion.’
The six chains in the report insisted that they had no intention to mislead customers.
Tesco said it has strict price rules and mistakes are rare, while Waitrose said it is conducting research to ensure its offers meet legal requirements.
Asda and Sainsbury’s blamed human error for pricing mistakes, but both Morrisons and M&S insisted that their deals complied with industry rules.
Posted in Food Inflation and pricing, Newspaper stories | No Comments »
« Older Entries Newer Entries »