exmachina posted:

Has anyone heard from cab off-site since chicken burgers? The worst thing about a unlike a country with rule of law we may never know if he is still alive a la Cato or whatever the name of the goon who was in a Syrian dungeon for a decade

Dont Touch ME posted:

Empty calories is meaningless pseudo-science designed to deter americans who cannot stop shoving HFCS down their throats long enough to get some of the other macros/micros. Put some beef in the rice. Add some onions, broccoli and chilis. You'll be fine.

GoutPatrol posted:

About 8 years ago, I was eating lunch with a co-worker, and I was complaining about rice with my biandang. Just gimme more vegetables, I said. Rice is just empty calories and has no flavor.

He said rice is the great mediator of Asian cuisine. It adds balance to overly-seasoned dishes that are designed to be very salty or spicy. To eat these things without rice is to eat these things wrong - like a sandwich without bread. Rice is like water, and no matter what people say, water does have flavor.

It was pretty profound to me for a person I considered pretty dumb at the time so I'll always remember it.

Dont Touch ME posted:

Empty calories is meaningless pseudo-science designed to deter americans who cannot stop shoving HFCS down their throats long enough to get some of the other macros/micros. Put some beef in the rice. Add some onions, broccoli and chilis. You'll be fine.

goblin week posted:

the idea of there being a single proper and correct english spelling of a word in a language not using the latin alphabet is false. all transcriptions are valid

Grand Fromage posted:

Yep. There's a whole class of Chinese dishes that are very salty/strong and designed to be eaten on rice. Also the typical way you eat is hold the rice bowl in your left hand, move food from the shared plate to the bowl, then eat it. So sauces drip down into your rice and add fun extra flavor.

Grand Fromage posted:

Yep. There's a whole class of Chinese dishes that are very salty/strong and designed to be eaten on rice. Also the typical way you eat is hold the rice bowl in your left hand, move food from the shared plate to the bowl, then eat it. So sauces drip down into your rice and add fun extra flavor.

bob dobbs is dead posted:

unbelievably stoned and east asia dont really mix, better off doin it in california

Grand Fromage posted:

Weed is extremely available in Chengdu. It's illegal as all hell, but unlike many other parts of East Asia it's not hard to come by or expensive.

UltraRed posted:

I don't understand the pilaf derail. You made fun of rice and said it can't stand alone. Then you post a recipe with rice that adds a bunch of other stuff to it.

Magna Kaser posted:

since this is now the rice thread heres some uighur lamb polov i made and it was v good and good use of rice and easy to make if a little time intensive.

McGavin posted:

You rinsed it after cooking, right?

Magna Kaser posted:

since this is now the rice thread heres some uighur lamb polov i made and it was v good and good use of rice and easy to make if a little time intensive.

oohhboy posted:

It depends on what you want. Nothing wrong with sticker rice nor loose rice like balsamic. Polov and it's ilk is meant to be sticky, that's the sauce.

Rinsing rice after. DO IT.

Magna Kaser posted:

i learned from urumqi chef landlord.

Grand Fromage posted:

Weed is extremely available in Chengdu. It's illegal as all hell, but unlike many other parts of East Asia it's not hard to come by or expensive.

Dont Touch ME posted:

What can you use a rice cooker for, other than cooking rice

Dont Touch ME posted:

What can you use a rice cooker for, other than cooking rice

Mantis42 posted:

I can never get my lovely rice cooker to make anything other than mush or chewy rice. I know that means the water levels are too high/too low but I measure that poo poo out and it still turns out bad.

Mantis42 posted:

I can never get my lovely rice cooker to make anything other than mush or chewy rice. I know that means the water levels are too high/too low but I measure that poo poo out and it still turns out bad.

McGavin posted:

quote:

Cooking of Rice for Sensory or Instrumental Testing

The sensory and instrumental methods for evaluating rice texture require rice that has been cooked in a reproducible and meaningful way. In fact, any method designed to study cooked rice can only be as good as the cooking method it is based on. Unfortunately there is no agreed-upon standard or official method for preparing cooked rice. Juliano and Perez (1983) showed that the hardness of cooked rice is dependent on its moisture content (shown as water-rice ratio in Figure 10). So any nonuniform adjustment of the water ratio adds a significant effect to a study. Yet one finds investigators using different water-rice ratios dependent on the amylose class of each sample, and varied cooking methods are also reported.

Fig. 10:


Juliano et al (1981a, 1982) and Juliano and Perez (1983) gave a lot of attention to this issue, which is discussed in detail by Juliano (1985). This author mentions that they adjusted the water-rice ratio for high-amylose rice to obtain an “acceptable soft texture (less than 10 kg of Instron hardness).” It was suggested that the water-rice ratio used for cooking should be 0.9–1.1 for waxy rice, 1.2–1.4 for low-amylose rice, 1.5–1.6 for intermediate-amylose rice, and 1.7–2.0 for high-amylose rice. The study of the effect of different water-rice ratios on the hardness values of cooked rice (Fig. 10) reported that the above-mentioned ratios gave ranges of hardness values among the samples almost identical to those that would have resulted had an identical ratio of 2.65 (final rice moisture, 75%) been chosen for all rices. Nonetheless, these water-rice ratios are arbitrarily defined, and if the results are similar, adjustment seems unnecessary. The ratios reported have not always been constant either. For example, Juliano and Perez (1983) reported that in their program they used ratios of 1.3, 1.7, 1.9, and 2.1 for the four types of rice mentioned above, respectively. And in a survey, Juliano (1982) found that the water ratios being used by different investigators ranged from 0.8 to 1.3 (waxy), 1.1 to 1.7 (low-amylose), and 1.5 to 2.5 (intermediate- and high-amylose rice). Since texture is dependent on cooked-rice moisture content, the reported results are not comparable. An imaginary example of the hazard of using arbitrary ratios can be shown by examining Figure 10. If one were to choose a water-rice ratio of approximately 1.6 for waxy rice, 2.1 for low-amylose rice, 2.3 for intermediate-amylose rice, and 2.7 for high-amylose rice, all the samples would give an identical Instron hardness reading, leading the investigator to proclaim that cooked-rice hardness is independent of amylose constant, something known to be untrue.

Based on the above discussion, the water-rice ratio used for studying cooked rice should be decided on using the following considerations. First, as has been discussed before, all rices, regardless of type or composition, absorb approximately 2.5 times their weight of water when cooked in excess boiling water until the central opaque core disappears. Based on this consideration, one logical approach would be to cook each sample with precisely 2.5 times its weight of water. Second, Okadome et al (1999a,b) have recently used a constant water-rice ratio of 1.6. While this ratio looks arbitrary, it has the merit of being the same for all samples. So the comparative position remains unchanged. Third, if consumer preference is under evaluation, then cooking with adjusted water-rice ratios may be necessary if it has been demonstrated that such is the actual practice in homes of different populations or ethnic groups. An example that would justify varying the ratio of water to rice is as follows. If one were studying the consumer preference for waxy-rice types in northern Thailand and parts of Cambodia, the samples under study would need to be cooked differently than in boiling water due to regional practices. In this region, rice is soaked in ambient water overnight (the equilibrium water content would be approximately 40%, including the adhering water), and then the soaked rice is steamed on a perforated basket or cloth mesh. Thus, the final water uptake would lie somewhere in the range of 0.5–1, and cooking waxy rice with such a ratio for its testing could be justified.

The actual procedure used for cooking rice is another variable on which there is little agreement. Cooking rice in a beaker, in an automatic cooker, and indirectly by steam have all been reported. If a precise water-rice ratio is used, then the cooking should preferably be indirectly by steam, so that the entire amount of water is actually absorbed by the rice. Even in an automatic cooker, some loss of steam occurs, thus altering the ratio. The uniformity of absorption of water by all the rice grains in a sample can be ensured in one of two ways. One is to cook the rice in a shallow layer (Bhattacharya et al, 1978; Deshpande and Bhattacharya, 1982). The other way is to cook rice in excess water for the cooking time of each sample when using a water-rice ratio of 2.5. The cooking time would need to be predetermined using the method of Desikachar and Subrahmanyan (1961) or Sowbhagya and Ali (1991). Some techniques require that rice be cooked in a deep container such as a beaker or a cooker, but with a given water-rice ratio. In such a case, a clear gradient of moisture content would form from the top (least) to the bottom (most) rice layer. An attempt is made to remove this error by discarding the top and the bottom layers and using only the middle layer for the test or by collecting the rice in a plastic bag and allowing it to equilibrate for some time.