And the total opposite of the Bacon thread...

[aliantha]

Other than the nitrates/nitrites in it, which can cause cancer and/or migraines, yeah, it's fabulously healthy stuff...

Hmm, maybe the opposite of *eating* bacon would be this.

Or you could procure it ready-made, if you prefer.

[Harbinger]

Quinoa was of great nutritional importance in pre-Columbian Andean civilizations, being secondary only to the potato, and was followed in importance by maize. In contemporary times, this crop has become highly appreciated for its nutritional value, as its protein content is very high (12%–18%), making it a healthy choice for vegetarians and vegans. Unlike wheat or rice (which are low in lysine), quinoa contains a balanced set of essential amino acids for humans, making it an unusually complete protein source.[4] It is a good source of dietary fiber and phosphorus and is high in magnesium and iron. Quinoa is gluten-free and considered easy to digest. Because of all these characteristics, quinoa is being considered a possible crop in NASA's Controlled Ecological Life Support System for long-duration manned spaceflights.

When grown in heavily fertilized fields, it can accumulate dangerously high concentrations of nitrates

A saponaround content in quinoa may be mildly toxic, when may be a oxalic acid content found in the leaves of tons of the chenopodium personal. Nevertheless the risks associated by using quinoa come minimum provided that these are properly prepared & leaves are non eaten to excess.

I first read about quinoa in Men's Health- they left out the bit about the nitrates and the oxalic acid. Looks like the nitrates can be circumvented by buying organic and the oxalic acid by proper preparation. I was excited by the fact that it is so rare to find a plant that is a complete protein. I still haven't tried it, though.

[Menolly]

My understanding is that quinoa is considered a grass, not a grain, and as such is considered kosher for passover. But I am not 100% sure of that. I do plan on learning recipes for it and incorporating them in to my Passover menus if it is though.

[aliantha]

It's good. Kind of nutty tasting. Harbinger, you don't eat the leaves -- just the seeds/grains -- so I don't think oxalic acid would be an issue. Could be wrong, tho.

The biggest hassle with preparing quinoa, as far as I'm concerned, is having to rinse the grains before you cook them. Otherwise it tastes bitter. My plastic strainer has holes just about the size of a quinoa grain, so some of them tend to get stuck in the holes. A friend told me, tho, that she found a variety of quinoa that doesn't need to be rinsed. It might have been red quinoa. Anyway, I keep forgetting to look for it....

[wayfriend]

This is the opposite of the bacon thread. Nothing here sounds like it tastes good.

[Vader]

I have always been a great admirer of Jewish culture. In fact a jewish friend from NYC calls me (tongue in cheek) the only living German non-Jewish zionist. I have a couple of cooking books for kosher food. I am acquainted to most of the rules of kosher cooking but some things are simply beyond me.

I understand that scavengers and predatory beasts are forbidden (as can be seen in the link Menoly posted at the start of this thread). I can see the logic behind it, I'm just confused about the definition of "predatory beast". Salmon for example - and other kinds of fish as well - is a predator and still it's kosher - is that a traditional "mistake" that people just kept for the sake of it ? Or does the definition of "predatory beast" just apply to land animals?

[Savor Dam]

I am not an authority, but I can take a shot at Vader's question.

Salmon, to my knowldge, are not predators in the same sense as lions and tigers and bears...or sharks, to take us into the realm of aquatic life.

However the Torah has particular rules for judging whether sea life is kosher, just as the cloven hoof and the chewing of cud is required of land life. For water creatures, they must have both fins and scales. A salmon has both. A shark has fins, but not scales. Shellfish (etc.) have neither.

Now for Menolly, Ms. Mary, or another more knowledgable person to flesh out (pun intended?) this minimal explanation...

[Vader]

I understand this. But still salmon eats other animals and even also explicitly unkosher animals like shellfish.

So if salmon feeds on unkosher food wouldn't it make it unkosher as well? And if it did, what would happen to smoked salmon bagels?

[Savor Dam]

...what would happen to smoked salmon bagels?

I believe there is a tract in the Talmud where Mordecai the Pitmaster established that smoke makes everything better.

OK, not really...I am outside my realm of knowledge and have only humor to fall back upon.

[Vader]

Humour or humus?

[Savor Dam]

Don't know. Hum a few bars and I'll fake it.

(falling back on humus prompts visions of some odd varient on Jell-O wrestling or something. While playing with one's food has its place, I think it is best not to pursue this line of thought. )

[Menolly]

Keep in mind that while I hosted a Kosher Cooking chat on AOL back in the day, I myself do not keep kashrut and would much prefer to defer this to someone who does, such as Ms. Mary. But I believe Ms. Mary does not frequent The Galley...

That said, I think we're getting in to the realm of "fences around fences." In some things, this is important. Yet in others, they are not. I think salmon is allowed because, as SD explained, it meets the criteria of fins and scales. I have a feeling non-ritual reasons are not taken in to consideration. When allowed foodstuffs were determined, and salmon was judged whether or not to be allowed, was it known within society that salmon were scavengers at the time? Or only that they have fins and scales, which is the only determining factor regarding fish, as far as I know.

Other non-kosher "fish" besides the shark are swordfish and catfish. Mostly for the same reason; they do not have both fins and scales. Some rabbis will allow swordfish only at a specific point in their lifecycle, because they do have both fins and scales at that time, but this is not a generally accepted practice.

I think the "scavenger" aspect applies only to creatures of land and air. I'm pretty sure that "chewing their cud" only applies to mammals. I assume something similar applies to the the scavenger aspect of fish.

Kashrut truly is a subject of depth. I think this is why the observant applaud the tiniest baby steps one who has not kept it before attempts to make. They understand full understanding will take years.

[wayfriend]

Latest shot in hummus war: Israel doubles record

Yes, this is a picture of four tons of hummus.

[stonemaybe]

I'm not sure about that one, Wayfriend!

On the one hand, 'Make hummus not war' is a great slogan, but I'm not sure it's all been done in that spirit!

I know hummus (I'm sure that's not how I usually spell it!) is mainly chickpea, but i see the chickpeas only as a vehicle to carry the all-important garlic. I object to garlic being used as a weapon of war!

And anyway, why is this in the 'opposite to bacon' thread? Hummus and bacon are both on the right side of the palate!

[Vader]

I'm not sure about that one, Wayfriend!

On the one hand, 'Make hummus not war' is a great slogan, but I'm not sure it's all been done in that spirit!

I know hummus (I'm sure that's not how I usually spell it!) is mainly chickpea, but i see the chickpeas only as a vehicle to carry the all-important garlic. I object to garlic being used as a weapon of war!

And anyway, why is this in the 'opposite to bacon' thread? Hummus and bacon are both on the right side of the palate!

Not for a kosher palate apparently.