Tuesday, 7 January 2014

Sugar's Bad Reputation: Addiction, Overconsumption and Slavery

For something so common and inconspicuous, sugar (sucrose) has managed to permeate much of our world. It has “…helped create the system of political institutions, economic forces, and cultural constraints that govern us to this day (Charles 2002: 132)”. From its birth in southern China as Saccharum sinense, the sugar cane was cultivated as S. officinarum (Dalby 2000: 26) and thus, its journey began. But sugar today cannot be used in the context of just sugar cane, instead sugar is found as an “indirect-use product (Mintz 2008: 99)” located in manufactured products, both sweet and unsweet (Mintz 1985: 195), such as Coca-cola and jam. This essay looks at sugar’s bad reputation; addiction and overconsumption through taste and slavery, of a product that has influenced so many of our lives today.


  The taste for sugar is universal to humans, a genetic predisposition to the sweet. Newborns are found to prefer sugar solutions over water or less sugary solutions (Birch 1999: 46), with “Neonates prior to any feeding experience…” exhibiting “…distinct facial responses to sweet and bitter substances: a marked relaxation of the face versus open-mouthed grimacing with a flat, protruded tongue.” (Harris 1987: 80), and, if sweet substances are introduced into the amniotic fluid, the foetus begins to suckle (De Snoo 1937, cited in Armelagos 1987: 580). The preference for sugar may be due to ecological reasons whereby sweet-tasting foods indicate high-energy substances and a predictor of nutritive value, while bitter substances may indicate poisons produced by plants (Harbottle 1997: 182, Harris 1987: 80). This is similar to other frugivorous primates, whereby the motivation for fruit seeking may partly be due to the high palatability for sugars (Simmen 1997: 31), where primates in the Amazon forest have a higher threshold for sugar than those living in open dry forests (Hladik 1997: 23), like that of human populations living outside of the African forest, having higher sensitivity to sucrose than those living in the forest (Ibid: 22). This is due to the African rain forest having fruits rich in sugar compared with outside the forest, where fruits are limited, with low sugar content (Ibid: 23), hence lower levels of taste perception for sugar, results in an increased motivation for it.
Certain academics disagree that the predisposition for sweet substances is genetically encoded, such as Lupton (1996: 7), who says that the “…experience of eating is intertwined with… [baby’s] experience of close human contact with the provider of food…The sweetness of milk means goodness and pleasure not simply because of the taste, but because of the pleasurable associations with it”. She then goes onto say that the reasons for why sugar became a dominant part of the English diet cannot be traced back to “…the notion that ‘humans like the taste of sweetness’…”since there is variation of taste within culture, between cultures and through time (Lupton 1996: 15). Although Lupton is correct in that taste cannot be solely due to genetics, it is a nurture-over-nature debate, a now dated argument as both genes and environment play important roles. However, we cannot discount the crucial part genes play in taste. We are “programmed” to accept foods that are sweet, and to accept the familiar and not novel edibles (Birch 1999: 45). While all newborns were found to prefer sweet over other, by 6 months of age, only infants that had been fed sweetened water by their mothers routinely, had a greater preference for it. “Preschool children repeatedly given tofu, either plain, salted, or sweetened, came to prefer the version they had become familiar with. This finding suggests that, in general, sweet taste is preferred but only in familiar food contexts” (Ibid: 46). So, although the preference for sweet is innate, as we grow older, we become accustomed to the familiar, which is why we can acquire a preference for bitter taste, even though it is instinctive to dislike the taste. This then explains why tolerance of sugar varies cross-culturally e.g. Iranian sweet foods such as Baklava is usually considered sickly sweet to the British, while the same is said for the Christmas pudding (without icing) for the Iranian palate, although Iranians born in England gain partiality to English cakes and pastries (Harbottle 1997: 182).

     The genetic predisposition for sweetness may therefore explain overconsumption and addiction to sugar. McKenna (1992: 175) argues that “Sugar abuse is the world’s least discussed and most widespread addiction…[it being] one of the hardest of all habits to kick…The depth of serious sugar addiction are exemplified by bulimics who may binge on sugar-saturated food…” and then vomit or take laxatives so that they can indulge in more sugar. McKenna correlates high sugar consumption with high alcohol consumption, saying that; “After alcohol and tobacco, sugar is the most damaging addictive substance consumed by human beings”. In the USA, obesity is increasing with approximately half of American adults classified as overweight (Birch 1999: 42), this is said to be caused from American diets too high in total energy, sugar, fat, and too low in complex carbohydrates (Ibid: 43). “The high and increasing prevalence of overweight individuals suggest that the predispositions that were adaptive under conditions where food was scarce are not adaptive in today’s environment…where inexpensive foods high in sugar, fat, total energy, and salt are readily available (Ibid: 45)”. However, overconsumption cannot be purely based on genetics, as Lupton said, since other forces must be at work to induce such extremes in certain countries. As noted by Mintz (1985: 189); “…the average French person consumes less sucrose…” than the average English person. Like how many people were enslaved for the sugar trade, the consumption of sugar may be a form of covert slavery imposed upon the unaware citizen.

  Sugar has has had a dark past. McKenna (1992: 176) maintains that the modern drug trade resembles nothing of the scale in which kidnapping, transporting, and the mass murder of large populations happened in fuelling the sugar trade. In the beginning of the sugar industry; the Portuguese had Portuguese work on the sugar estates; usually convicts, debtors and Jews who refused to convert to Christianity (Hobhouse 2002: 63-64). The Modern Sugar Slave Trade began, however, when Prince Henry of Portugal's ships captured and enslaved a crew of Moslems, they were released after arguing that the best slaves were to be found in the hinterland of Africa. Thus trade began between Africa and southern Europe. The Portuguese saw the Africans as less than human, for they were children of Ham, and were not allowed to read or write, or convert to Christianity. Some were sold to Spain (Ibid: 66). Yet, there were not enough slaves to be imported to the Caribbean, where some of the Spanish were settling. By 1530, slaves were sent directly from Africa to the Caribbean (Ibid: 69). But it was Bartolomé de Las Casas who, upon seeing how the native Caribbean Caribs and Arawaks were forcibly made to do jobs that they couldn’t or wouldn’t do (many choosing to die than except slavery) (Ibid: 70), that he “…suggested the introduction of blacks.” They were thought to be docile beings, who would work willingly in servitude. The transatlantic slave trade began. Abuse was harsh and commonplace upon the slaves, and resigning his bishopric, Las Casas conducted a nationwide campaign in 1548, against the trade he had started. His efforts failed. It would be 200 years later before the slave trade would once again be questioned (Ibid: 71). Instead, many human lives meant only in the service to the sugar trade; in 1645 Barbados, there were 4000 black people (all slaves), and 18,000 white people (only 7000 were free) (Ibid: 74). It is believed that 11.7 million slaves were exported and “…9.8 million slaves imported into the New World between 1450 and 1900” (Ibid: 76), with one ton of sugar representing “…the lifetime sugar production of one slave who had been captured, manacled, marched to the African coast, penned like a pig to await a buyer, sold, chained again on board ship, sold on the island market…” and then seasoned to the Caribbean before they would show profit to an owner. The slave’s whole life was equal to that of one ton of refined sugar (Ibid: 77). As Hobhouse (2002: 79) writes; “It was the first time since the Roman latifundia that mass slavery had been used to grow a crop for trade (not subsistence)…It was also the first time in history that one race had been uniquely selected for a servile role.”


  At the same time, the sugar industry chained the free person. Cultures everywhere that have remained in a habitat for a long time build up knowledge of the environment around them, as well as a sustainable diet. Industrial food can help to supplement diets, yet, transnational advertising, ethnocentrism and uninformed individuals leads to the devaluation of traditional cooking and increased consumption of junk foods [Which contains and is based on, high fats and sugars] (Pilcher 2002: 223). Two examples of this can be seen in Britain and Mexico.
In Britain, sweetened tea and treacle were advertised in 1750, with mass consumption of sucrose happening around 1850 (Mintz 1985: 147-148), making it available to the poor. Britons began to produce less of their own food, spending more time away from the home and eating elsewhere, healthy foods such as broths and porridges were replaced with high-energy jam and white bread. Now women were not spending time on preparing food, they too could join the work force (Mintz 1997: 100). “Industrialisation drew people from the countryside, from their gardens and fields, woods and streams which had provided their food, to the tenements and back-to-back houses where they had to buy what they ate.” Buying cheap, store-bought, factory processed food allowed the abandonment of traditional cooking to spend more time working. Sugar was used as preservative, flavourer (Galloway 1989: 7), and quick energy to the working class. “By positively affecting the worker’s energy output and productivity…[sugar] figured importantly in balancing the accounts of capitalism… (Mintz 1985: 148)”. World sugar production rose from 572,000 tons in 1830 to 6,000,000 tons in 1890 [a 500% increase in 30 years] (Ibid: 73).
In 20th century Mexico, road networks allowed bottled soft drinks to become a staple commodity, with servings accounting for 15% of Coke’s and 20% of Pepsi’s international sales in the 1990s. Pepsi’s label found on many junk foods has led to the company’s success over coke (Leatherman & Goodman 2005: 839) with food manufacturers allowance to run mass advertising campaigns for soft drinks and sweets, with only small print on advice to eat fresh fruit (Pilcher 2002: 233-234), it is therefore not uncommon to see a young infant with a soft drink (Leatherman & Goodman 2005: 839). Like that of sugary white bread replacing homemade loaves in Britain, fewer corn tortillas are eaten in Mexico, replaced instead with white flour tortillas [These are of course higher in sugar than the traditional corn tortillas] (Ibid: 840).

   Unlike metal or cloth, drug foods such as sugar, encourages immediate consumption through our innate disposition to like sweet substances. Sugar therefore, is less likely to be stored, causing consumer demand to either remain constant or increase (Jankowiak & Bradburd 1996: 718). Through mass media and small print [e.g. Asda’s sticky chilli chicken and Tesco’s crispy beef was found to have more sugar content than vanilla ice cream (BBC 2007)], consumers are removed from their nourishment, and to see packaged foods as more natural than living plants and animals (Pilcher 2002: 236). As the body habitually gets sugar requirements from sucrose in processed foods, other enzymes are inhibited, making it difficult to digest starch and fibre. Naturally, people avoid what they cannot eat, and the manufacturers reduce fibre content and increase sugar content of factory foods. People become addicted, and disorders such as bulimia occur, overconsumption increases, and problems such as obesity, tooth problems and malnutrition are caused (Hobhouse 2002: 58). In Mexico; diabetes is the fourth leading cause of death nationwide, with adults usually both obese and anaemic at the same time (Pilcher 2002: 236). 
   To conclude, sugar has been used for centuries; written about in the Mahābhāshya [400 B.C] (Mintz 1985: 19), the Buddhagosa (Ibid: 23), and ancient Latin and Greek literature (Lupton 1996: 35). It was medicinal and used in many countries (Mintz 1985: 96-99). Sugar’s sweet taste is pleasurable to all humans, a genetic predisposition that tells us of its high energy content. Sugar didn’t always have a bad reputation. It wasn’t until mass quantities could be refined that its dark history was created, being used to push millions of people into slavery, whether overtly [working on the plantations] or covertly [“drug foods often serve as an alternative to military force and are generally selected because they are more efficient, more economical, or easier to sustain (Jankowiak & Bradburd1996:718)”]. Through today’s industry, we are taken away from being able to create food, manipulated into believing packaged is natural, swamped with a sugar overload from manufactured products. We overconsume, addicted to a taste that once was adaptive.  
Bibliography
Armelagos, G. (1987). “Biocultural Aspects of Food choice” in Harris, M. & Ross, E. B. (eds.). Food and Evolution: Toward a theory of Human Food Habits. Temple University Press: Philadelphia
Birch, L. L. (1999). “Development of Food Preferences”. Annual Review of Nutrition 19: 41-62.  

Charles, J. (2002). “Searching for Gold in Guacamole: California Growers Market the Avocado, 1910-1994” in Belasco, W. & Scranton, P. (eds.). Food Nations: Selling taste in Consumer Societies. Routledge: New York

Dalby, A. (2000). Dangerous Tastes: The Story of Spices. The British Museum Press: London

De Snoo, K. (1937). “Sucking Behaviour in the Human Fetus”. Monatsschrift Geburtshilfe 105: 88-97.

Galloway, J. H. (1989). The Sugar Cane Industry: An historical geography from its Origins to 1914. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge

Harbottle, L. (1997). “Taste and Embodiment: The Food preferences of Iranians in Britain” in Macbeth, H. (eds.). Food Preferences and Taste: Continuity and Change. Berghahn Books: Providence

Harris, M. (1987). “Foodways: Historical Overview and Theoretical Prolegomenon” in Harris, M. & Ross, E. B. (eds.). Food and Evolution: Toward a theory of Human Food Habits. Temple University Press: Philadelphia 

Hladik, C. M. (1997). “Primate Models for Taste and Food Preferences” in Macbeth, H. (eds.). Food Preferences and Taste: Continuity and Change. Berghahn Books: Providence

Hobhouse, H. (2002). Seeds of Change: Six plants that transformed mankind (Second Edition). Pan Books: London

Jankowiak, W. & Bradburd, D. (1996). “Using Drug Foods to Capture and Enhance Labour Performance: A Cross-Cultural Perspective”. Current Anthropology 37: 717-720.

Leatherman, T. & Goodman, A. (2005). “Coca-colonisation of Diets in the Yucatan”. Social Science and Medicine 61: 833-846.

Lupton, D. (1996). Food, the Body and the Self. Sage Publications: London

McKenna, T. (1992). Food of the Gods: The Search for the Original Tree of Knowledge -  A Radical History of Plants, Drugs and Human Evolution. Rider: London

Mintz, S. W. (1985). Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History. Penguin Books: New York

Mintz, S. W. (2008). “Time, Sugar, and Sweetness” in Counihan, C. & Van Esterik, P. (eds.). Food and Culture: A Reader (Second Edition). Routledge: New York

Pilcher. J. M. (2002). “Industrial Tortillas and Folkloric Pepsi: The Nutritional Consequences of Hybrid Cuisines in Mexico” in Belasco, W. & Scranton, P. (eds.). Food Nations: Selling taste in Consumer Societies. Routledge: New York

Simmen, B. (1997). “Food Preferences in Neotropical Primates in Relation to Taste Sensitivity” in Macbeth, H. (eds.). Food Preferences and Taste: Continuity and Change. Berghahn Books: Providence

Online Sources
BBC. (2007). Savoury Foods High Sugar Warning


Monday, 6 January 2014

Complementing Food with Wine: A Guide

Although a lot of drugs are frowned upon in the UK, a drug of choice that maintains its legal status is Alcohol. There are hundreds of different alcohols out there, but an interesting subject may be what wine (I should say grape) goes with which dish best? I'll be using a host of sites to comprise a dish list, including some information on the wine. If you read this and want some extra information in certain areas, feel free to post on the blog. Happy Dining!

KEY:
Red text = Red wine
Pink text = Rosé wine
Green text = White wine 

FOOD COVERED:
- Barbecue
- Beef
- Cheese
- Cold Meats
- Fish
- Lamb
- Pheasant or Venison
- Pizza or Pasta
- Poultry 
- Vegetarian

BARBECUE
- Gamay [BBC Good Food tells us that it tastes wonderful with barbecued sardines and spicy sausages, and that remember to chill for an hour before serving]
Example = St Verny Cotes D`Auvergne [£9.49 at The Wine Reserve]

BEEF
ROAST
- Australian Shiraz [Gonzalez (2012) says that Australian shiraz usually carries hints of black pepper, smoke and cloves, and goes well with fatty cuts of beef due to its high acidity]
Example = Terra Barossa Shiraz [£10.90 at The Wine Shop]
- Bordeaux [Gonzalez explains her choice due to Bordeaux's sharp, mineral flavour that should enhance the flavour and texture of your beef]
Example = L'Orangerie [£10.00 at The Wine Shop]
- Cabernet Sauvignon [Her thoughts on this grape is that it goes well with a well-seasoned cut of beef that may be a fattier cut] (Gonzalez 2012)
Example = Maycas del Limari [£13.40 at The Wine Shop]
- Malbec [This is my mum's choice, she tells me that it is a full-bodied wine that complements a hearty roast beef or a steak]
Example = Nieto [£9.50 at The Wine Shop]
- Merlot [Back to Gonzalez (2012) who explains that this wine may be good for wine drinkers not quite accustomed to the strong tannins of other red wines, I know the merlot is a strong favourite of the male drinkers of my family]
Example = La Paz [£7.50 at The Wine Shop]
STEAK:
- Malbec
Example = Paula [£9.80 at The Wine Shop]
- Shiraz [BBC Good Food explains that this grape gives a delicious full body to the wine and matches well with grilled steaks and roasted vegetables]
Example = Mr. Smith [£12.60 at The Wine Shop]
- Pinotage [BBC Good Food says that red pinotage is "...a natural with barbecued steak and sausages..."]
Example = Origin [£10.00 at Tescos]
CHEESE
SOFT:
- Pinot Noir [Goes well with mild, creamy soft cheeses (BBC Good Food)]
Example = The Ned [£13.99 at Majestic]
- Sauvignon Blanc [Matches with goats cheese, giving a fresh taste (Ile de France)]
Example = Sancerre Blanc 2012 Domaine Vacheron [£17.99 at Majestic]
- Merlot [Goes well with goats cheese (Ile de France)]
Example = Los Boldos Merlot 2012 Alto [£9.99 at Majestic]
- Gamay [Drink a gamay rosé with goats cheese (Ile de France)]
Example = Domaine de la Potardiere [£8.49 at Rude Wines]
- Pinot meunier [Partners with brie, Ile de France suggests using a pinot meunier from the Orléanais region, but I have used an example wine from New Zealand because I like LOTR]
Examples = Middle Earth [£12.12 from Middle Earth]
- Gewürztraminer [Pairs well with Muenster cheese (Zraly 2009)]
Example = 'Les Princes Abbés' 2011 Domaines Schlumberger [£15.99 at Majestic]

HARD:- Riesling [Ile de France discuss how Rieslings flowery aromas and high acidity work well with hard cheeses such as Etorki]
Example = Villa Maria [£9.99 at Majestic]
- Cabernet Sauvignon (Berry Bros. & Rudd)
Example = Robertson Winery [£7.49 at Majestic] 
- Shiraz (Berry Bros. & Rudd)
Examples = Mister Shiraz [£9.99 at Majestic], Two Hands 'Angel' Share [£23.00 at Majestic] 
BLUE:
- California Zinfandel [Try this grape with a salty blue cheese (Zraly 2009)]
Example = Barefoot White Zinfandel [£6.99 at Tescos]
COLD MEATS
- Nebbiolo [BBC Good Food explains that this drink will go well with a cold platter of meats or mezze dishes]
Example = L. A. Cetto [£17.90 at The Wine Shop]
FISH
- Chardonnay (Berry Bros. & Rudd)
Example = Oxford Landing Estates [£7.99 at Majestic, £6.90 at The Wine Shop]
- Chenin Blanc [Berry Bros. & Rudd suggest this grape goes well with simple fish with a side of fresh salad or a fish in a rich sauce]
Example = Raats Granite Blocks [£10.99 at Majestic]
- Gewürztraminer [Partners up with smoked salmon (Berry Bros. & Rudd)]
Example = Yali [£8.99 at Majestic]
Grüner Veltliner [Goes nicely with steamed lobster, grilled scallops, prawns or sushi]
Example = Weingärten [£9.99 at Majestic]
- Sauvignon Blanc [Fish and seafood (Berry Bros. & Rudd)]
Example = Oyster Bay [£11.49 at Majestic, £10.90 at The Wine Shop]
- Viognier [Shellfish (Berry Bros. & Rudd)]
Example = Yalumba [£9.99 at Majestic]
- Pinot noir [Smoked salmon, oysters, seafood, tuna (Berry Bros. & Rudd)]
Example = Te Tera [£17.49 at Majestic]
- Semillon [Goes great with fishcakes and a tartare sauce, but also with chicken korma too [BBC Good Food]
Example = Peter Lehmann Margaret Semillon [£16.20 at The Wine Shop]
- Muscat [Have with oysters or seafood]
Example = Trimbach [£15.60 at The Wine Shop]
LAMB
ROAST:
- Cabernet Sauvignon [BBC Good Food says that this complements a hearty roast lamb]
Example = Mountain View [£6.99 at Majestic Wine]
- Pinot Noir (BBC Good Food)
Example = Côte de Beaune-Villages 2010 Louis Jadot [£15.99 at Majestic]
- Tempranillo ["...a perfect match to roast lamb, roasted vegetables and mushrooms, especially vegetarian main courses" (BBC Good Food)]
Example = Rioja Reserva 2008 Viña Eguía [£9.99 at Majestic]

PHEASANT or VENISON
- Grenache [BBC Good Food says this is the perfect wine for rustic and hearty dishes]
Examples = Gallo White [£5.70 at The Wine Shop], Grenat Grenache Gris [£10.40 at The Wine Shop]
- Zinfandel [BBC Good Food mentions that this wine goes best with venison, maybe with a side of sautéed wild mushrooms]
Examples = Dancing Bull [£10.90 at The Wine Shop], Paul Dolan [£15.80 at The Wine Shop], Wildwood [£7.50 at The Wine Shop]
PIZZA or PASTA
- Sangiovese [BBC Good Food tells us that it goes well with rich meat sauces on pasta or a pepperoni pizza]
Example = Monteguelfo Toscana [£8.50 at The Wine Shop]
- Barbera [BBC Good Food says that this wine goes nicely with tomato based dishes]
Examples = Barbera d'Asti La Court Michel Chiarlo [£38.90 at The Wine Shop], Barbera d'Alba Ansisa [£10.90 at The Wine Shop]
- Negroamaro [Means Bitter Black and is great for Pasta Bakes (BBC Good Food)]
Example =  Lamadoro [£9.99 at Morrison's Cellar]
- Pinot Gris [Pairs up with creamy pasta dishes and pork (Berry Bros. & Rudd)]
Example = Peregrine [£22.00 at Majestic]
POULTRY
Chardonnay (Berry Bros. & Rudd)
Example = Grand Ardèche [£10.99 at Majestic]
- Merlot [BBC Good Food says this grape is perfect with your Christmas dinner turkey, your roast chicken dinner, a roast duck or a winter bird casserole]
Example = Concha y Toro Sunrise [£7.99 at Ocado]
- Pinot Noir [Matches well with roast turkey (BBC Good Food)]
Example = Bourgogne Pinot Noir 2012 Nicolas Potel [£12.99 from Majestic]
- Riesling [Have with duck or goose (Berry Bros. & Rudd)]
Example = Peter Lehmann [£10.99 at Majestic]
VEGETARIAN - As you may know, many wines are not vegetarian friendly [and if you didn't know this, read the note at the bottom for the explanation], thus I shall only give vegetarian friendly wine examples in this section, however I haven't checked if they are vegan friendly.
- Chardonnay [Taste Wine & Enjoy suggests that this grape pairs well with creamy sauces, almonds or walnuts, while Vegetarian Food & Wine (2013) adds that this grape can go with a green salad, a chilled soup or contrasted with the starch in a risotto]
Example = Maison Fort du Roi Chablis [£13.99 at Tescos]
- Sauvignon Blanc [Drink it with artichokes or asparagus, the high acidity of the wine allowing it to refresh your palate with a dose of these veggies (Taste Wine & Enjoy). It also partners up with Tomato Tarte Tatin and caramelised onions (Vegetarian Food & Wine 2013)]
Example = Isla Negra [£4.99 at Tescos]
- Pinot Noir [If you're using warm spices or roasting vegetables, this is a wine to go for (Taste Wine & Enjoy)]
Example = Jacktone Ranch [£12.00 at Tescos]
- Gamay [Taste Wine & Enjoy says that Beaujolais are overall food friendly wines, thus enjoy it with all your vegetarian dishes. I have placed it under the gamay grape as this type of wine is usually made from the gamay grape, also I can include my example from the Louis Jadot range which are vegan friendly too. But be careful, not all Louis Jadot wines are vegan friendly as some use egg whites (Barnivore)]
Example = Louis Jadot Beaujolais-Villages Combe aux Jacques [£10.99 at Ocado, £10.50 at The Wine Shop]
- Riesling [Try this grape with roasted beetroot and haloumi salad, says Vegetarian Food & Wine (2013)]
Example = Tim Adams [£10.79 at Tescos]


[NOTE: If you're interested in pairing your cheese and wine, I found this website: Winemonger.com]

[NOTE: Obviously 'vegetarian' is a wide range of food that I couldn't cover completely in this blog post, thus I have included some extra links here to look up yourself: 'The Ultimate Vegetarian Wine Guide' and 'The Best Wines to Serve with Vegetable Dishes']

[NOTE: The reason that not all wines are vegan or vegetarian is due to the process of fining whereby particles left over from fermentation are filtered out to improve the clarity of the wine (Schuster 1992: 79). A variety of fining agents can be used, such as casein [milk protein], gelatin [animal protein], albumin [egg whites], isinglass [fish bladder protein], bentonite or activated charcoal. Since the fining agent may be absorbed into the wine (The Kitchn), you won't be wanting some of these products in your system if you're philosophy is to avoid them. Although I do wonder about the poor yeast that go to all that trouble of fermenting the wine, only to be killed en masse, suffocating in their own waste products for the production of alcohol. If you're against killing single-celled micro-organisms, wine may not be for you]

About the grape!

I have given a list above of different wines to complement different foods, but I give no information on the actual grape. thus, if you're interested in the grape itself, I will include a little companion guide on the grapes themselves that are listed. All my information will be taken from Understanding Wine: A Guide to Winetasting and Wine Appreciation by Schuster (1992) if you want to learn more. 

CHARDONNAY (Page 54)
+ Origin: France
+ Most popular white grape variety 
+ Pure chardonnay = Nose is low key 
+ Taste = Ripe fruit such as apples, more age can give it a buttery or nuttier taste
+ Palate = Full and round
+ Moderate acidity

RIESLING (Page 60)
+ Origin: Germany
+ Crisp acidity
+ Oily bouquet

SEMILLON (Page 64)
+ Origin: France
+ Has little aroma until it has aged 10-20 years whereby it develops a honeyed and nutty character, with a rich, silky texture

CHENIN BLANC (Page 66-67)
+ Origin: France
+ "Few Chenin wines that are produced outside France can match the quality of the finest French offerings, and none of them have the steely acidity which is the key feature of the French Chenin."
+ The dry wines are uncomplicated and clean, waxy and smoky, while the sweeter wines have a touch of honey and damp straw
+ Not full-bodied

SAUVIGNON BLANC (Page 68)
+ Origin: France
+ Sauvignon comes from the French 'Sauvage', meaning wild, or what I would call close similarity to 'savage'. Interestingly this comes from the Latin 'silva' which means wood
+ A young S.B. has a "...spikily penetrating aroma, variously described as gooseberry or blackcurrant leaf; sometimes also chalky, smoky or flinty in character. With a bit of age this can become more vegetal, musk like or 'catty', as in cat's pee..." (Erm...ok. Not sure if cat's piss is a good taste, definitely a strange description)
+ This wine echoes freshness and greenery, and is crisp and uncomplicated

GEWURZTRAMINER (Page 70)
+ Origin: Germany
+ 'Gewürz' means 'spice' in German, and this is one of the wine's characteristics
+ Fairly high in alcohol, low in acidity 
+ Bouquet of lycees, rosewater, violet cachous, guava or Turkish Delight
+ Broad and mouthfiling 
+ Can be overwhelming if not partnered with food

MUSCAT (Page 72)
+ Origin: Possibly Greece 
+ "The smell of Muscat grapes is so distinctive and instantly recognisable, that it is the only wine grape which doesn't have wine buffs or wine writers desperately searching for analogous smells to assist in identifying it. Muscat smells of Muscat...This remarkable perfume is also the reason why most Muscat wines are made sweet. The Muscat smell is chemically linked to the grape's sugars and if these are all transformed into alcohol the fragrance is lost at the same time. Stop the fermentation before all the sugar is turned to alcohol and you keep the perfume with the sweetness."

VIOGNIER (Page 73)
+ Origin: France
+ Deep yellow in colour (like cat's piss? I joke)
+ "(H)as a heady bouquet that is fragrant, peachy, occasionally musky as well."
+ High alcohol
+ Moderate acidity
+ Silky texture
+ Slow to develop on the palate, warm and spicy on the finish, may have a hint of almond kernal bitterness

GRUNER VELTLINER (Page 75)
+ Origin: Austria
+ Greeny yellow in colour
+ "(D)ry and grapey with a delicate spritz and a very distinct peppery spice on the palate and often on the nose too."

CABERNET SAUVIGNON (Page 80-81)
+ Origin: France
+ Most famous grape variety 
+ Distinctive blackcurrant aroma
+ Plenty of acid and tannin

PINOT NOIR (Page 86)
+ Origin: France
+ "Pinot Noir is the sole grape from which red Burgundy is made."

SYRAH (Page 90)
+ Origin: France
+ Also known as Shiraz
+ Has plenty of alcohol, tannin and acidity
+ Usually has earthy, peppery flavours 

MERLOT (Page 93)
+ Origin: France
+ Soft texture
+ Plentiful in alcohol but low in tannin 
+ Rich but supple
+ Smells sweet and smoothly fruity

NEBBIOLO (Page 96)
+ Origin: Italy
+ "Nebbioso" means "Foggy", which "...describes the state of Piedmont's slopes in late October. It is the time when the Nebbiolo grape is ready to be picked, hence its name."
+ Bitter, burnt flavour which is "...starkly framed by a fierce, dry, mouthcoating tannin."
+ When young, they smell of ripe cherries, plums and violets, but after 3-4 years, they smell burnt, tarry, and smokey

SANGIOVESE (Page 98)
+ Origin: Italy
+ "Sangiovese is Tuscany's leading red wine grape..."

TEMPRANILLO (Page 99)
+ Origin: Spain
+ "Tempranillo is generally thought of as 'the' grape of Rioja, although the wine is never made solely from this variety."
GRENACHE (Page 99)
+ Origin: Spain
+ High alcohol 
+ Has a sweet, jammy smell, with a hint of aniseed or liquorice 
+ Moderately coloured and quick to brown 

GAMAY (Page 100)
+ Origin: France
+ Has a distinctively blue tinge
+ The nose is "...a smooth blend of strawberry and bubble gum..." with a hint of chalkiness or pepper
+ Best drunk cool

ZINFANDEL (Page 100)
+ Origin: America 
+ Burnt-blackcurrant nose
+ Brambly, spicy flavour 
+ Moderate tannin 

BARBERA (Page 101)
+ Origin: Italy 
+ Little tannin 
+ Pronounced acidity
+ Tastes like cherries

[NOTE: Found this website: winefolly.com which seems helpful if you're a budding wine connoisseur]

Bibliography

References
Schuster, M. (1992). Understanding Wine: A guide to winetasting and wine appreciation. Mitchell Beazley International: London

Online Sources
Barnivore. (Unknown). Louis Jadot Beaujolais is Vegan Friendly.

BBC Good Food. (Unknown). Match Red Wine with Food.

BBC Good Food. (Unknown). Semillon.

Berry Bros. & Rudd. (Unknown). Matching Wine Grapes to Food. 

Gonzalez, K. (2012). Best 5 Wines to Serve with Roast Beef.

Ile de France. (Unknown). Reach for the Rosé. 

Ile de France. (Unknown). Red, Robust and Delicious. 

Ile de France. (Unknown). Matching Cheeses with White Wines.

Taste Wine & Enjoy. (Unknown). Vegetarian Wine Pairing.

The Kitchn. (Unknown). Discovering Vegan Wine: What! Isn't all Wine Vegan?

Vegetarian Food & Wine. (2013). What's lurking in the Wine Cellar?

Zraly, K. (2009). How to Pair Wine with Cheese.

Wednesday, 1 January 2014

Some of the most Common Misconceptions about Biological Evolution


Biological evolution is the “...change in the characteristics of descendent populations of organisms”, organisms today being the modified (not meaning ‘better’) descendants of previous species, resulting in all living species having once had a common ancestor right here on Earth (Hurry 1993: 1-2). With there being 8 million possible chromosome combinations in Homo sapiens meiosis, and therefore a zygote upon random mating having a possibility of 64 trillion combinations of chromosomes (Campbell et al. 2009: 141), sexual reproduction of organisms generates variable offspring, allowing the descent of generation to generation with modification giving rise to great diversity in and between species (Hurry 1993: 2). You are not evolving, you have evolved, and if you have children, they will be the next organisms at the height of the evolutionary tree with that of the next generation of cats, pigeons, grasshoppers etc. The aim of this essay is therefore to shed light on a few of the misguided misconceptions.

  Jakobi (2010) is a college lecturer who wrote an article on some of his student answers on evolution before the course began. Answers included; “I don’t believe that dolphins became dogs or that we were once Apes” (Ibid: 418) and “If the evolution theory is true for humans then why aren’t little monkeys sitting outside on the grass evolving into humans?” (Ibid: 419). This idea is also found in other papers such as Meikle and Scott’s (2010): “If humans evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?” (Ibid: 573), and in Dawkins (2009); “I’ll believe in evolution when a monkey gives birth to a human baby” (Ibid: 155). The misconception clearly being: Evolution states that Humans evolved from Chimpanzees/ Monkeys (Chimpanzees and monkeys coming under the same title in this case).
Misconception One: A Chimpanzee is a monkey. In fact, both are primates, sharing common features such as; a generalised body plan, grasping hands with opposable thumbs and/or big toes, flattened nails, forward facing eyes, generalised teeth, have large brains for body size etc. But there are also differences within the primate family. Apes (including us and chimpanzees) and monkeys come under the suborder Haplorhini, but New World Monkeys (NWM) live in sub/tropical areas, have small body sizes, have three premolar teeth and are all arboreal, some having prehensile tails. The Old World Monkeys (OWM) live in parts of Africa, Asia and the Middle East, have ischial callosities, bilophodont molars and display a greater size range and sexual dimorphism than NWM, while the apes (the Hominoids) possess rotating, suspensory shoulders and lack tails (Stanford et al. 2009).
Misconception Two: Humans evolved from Chimpanzees. However, we are merely similar apes, chimpanzees being our closest living relatives. “The genetic similarity between a chimpanzee and us is greater than the chimpanzee’s evolutionary affinity to a gorilla” (Ibid: 189). Meikle and Scott (2010) explain the link between chimpanzees and us as a cousin relationship, mentioning that nobody would refer to having come from their cousin, yet cousins share a common relative. Using this information and that of the modern primate family tree, one can clearly see that humans share a closer ancestry to other apes, than apes do to monkeys, but we in turn still share an ancestry with monkeys. Even fruit flies share nearly 60% of their DNA with humans (BBC 2000), although our common ancestor with fruit flies is much further away than that of us and monkeys.

 The divergence time of OWM and Hominoidea is approximately 30 million years ago, while it is about 5.9 million years ago when humans and chimpanzees diverged (Lewin & Foley 2005: 201). But this divergence has been greatly argued about, many people expressing the idea that somewhere there should lie a missing link; a fossil that provides the link between humans and apes (Ibid: 228). Misconception three: We still haven’t found the missing link. In fact, there is a wide range of evidence supporting that chimpanzees and humans are close relatives. For one, the similarities in anatomical structure is very close, such as the rotating, suspensory shoulders and the lack of tail. Secondly, the comparison of DNA has shown little difference; “The more distant the evolutionary relationship between two organisms, the more differences there will be in the amino acid sequences of these proteins”. Even chromosome shapes are similar, as well as almost identical banding patterns, African apes and humans being susceptible to many of the same diseases and parasites (Tanner 1981: 34). Therefore genetic comparisons has shown that between individual humans, there is about 0.1% difference, between Chimpanzees and humans: 1.2%, the Bonobo differing to the same degree, 1.6% between gorillas and all apes mentioned above, and a 3.1% difference between all apes mentioned above and the Orangutan (Human Origins.si.edu). So far, even if there wasn’t a fossil record of pre Homo sapiens, there is brilliant evidence for the link between Chimpanzees and us. As Dawkins (2009: 150-151) states; “...we now have a rich supply of intermediate fossils linking modern humans to the common ancestor that we share with chimpanzees. On the human side of the divide, that is”, he goes onto say that no fossils are available linking an ancestor to modern Chimpanzees, and that this may be due to forests where Chimpanzees reside, not providing good fossilising conditions. But the fossil record is rich in abundance, from Sahelanthropus tchadensis to Australopithecus afarensis, all the way to Homo sapiens

Fossil evidence of early hominins has shown that our ancestors were bipedal before our brains expanded. As primates, we all have large brains for our size, which is mainly down to the consequence of having unusually large neocortices. Humans have the largest neocortex accounting for 80% of our brain volume (about 10-40% in non-primate mammals, about 50% in prosimians) (Dunbar et al. 2007: 113). We are therefore extremely social and are dependent upon our material culture. But vanity has indeed created misconceptions. Misconceptions four and five: The ladder of perfection (LOP) and Intelligent Design (ID). Both these misconceptions are closely intertwined since; ID states that to have such complexities in nature, there must be a purposeful designer (Scott 2005:63), the earth and its habitats being created for humans because of our ‘specialness’ (ICR.org), whereas LOP is a belief where evolution is climbing a metaphorical ladder and human beings are the end goal (McPherson Smith & Sullivan 2007). Many examples could be used to discount these misconceptions; this essay will use the example of bipedialism. “Of some 4,000 living mammals, only humans are habitual striding bipeds today” (Stanford et. al 2009: 290), and if ID and LOP were true, only perfection could arise from this, but, like all adaptations, problems arise as well. Such problems are; lower back problems due to weight increasing further down the spine you go, babies having to rotate and causing pain to mother during childbirth due to narrow pelvis and large brain size (Ibid: 292-293), fractures/breaks occurring at the femoral neck due to weight bearing etc. It is doubtful that bipedialism would have any adverse effects if we were the perfect specimen designed by a higher deity.

  To conclude, there is an abundance of evidence supporting evolutionary theory. However, with anything, something must be first explained in proper detail and understood before it can be accepted or debated. Misinterpretations are readily taught and passed onto others and this is where much of the problem appears. Misconceptions can easily be remedied if those in the wrong take the time to listen. Apprehension is created with the belief that learning evolution may convert the religious, but Rice et al. (2010) shows, those of a theistic position can too learn evolutionary perspectives, although one misconception in this essay touched lightly on the topic of religion. However, the nature of this blog post only asks for others to understand the knowledge before reproducing it.




[NOTE: I know that one particular objection to evolution, surrounding Intelligent Design is the eye. How could the eye come about?! But this is a terrible argument for ID as the eye has design flaws in itself such as the blind spot. However, if you're curious about how the eye could have evolved, watch this youtube clip where Richard Dawkins demonstrates how the eye could have evolved in an old Christmas lecture]

[NOTE: I read a book titled 'A Universe from Nothing' by Dr. Lawrence Krauss a while ago. Krauss argues how a universe could come about from nothing, with no externalities or magic involved. If you're interested, watch his youtube clip]
 

[NOTE: Here's a youtube clip of Derren Brown speaking about Intelligent Design]



References: [Online sources are already referenced in the text but titles will be included under the heading - Online Sources - in case links don't work]

1.  Campbell, N.A., Reece, J.B., Taylor, M.R., Simon, E.J., Dickey, J.L. (2009). Biology: Concepts and Connections. Pearson Benjamin Cummings: San Francisco

2. Dawkins, R. (2009). The Greatest Show on Earth. Transworld Publishers: London
3. Dunbar, R., Barrett, L. and Lycett, J. (2007). Evolutionary Psychology. Oneworld Publications: Oxford
4. Hurry, S. (1993). Introduction to Evolution. In Skelton, P. (1993). Evolution: A Biological and Palaeontological Approach, The Open University: Milton Keynes, pp. 1-23
5. Jakobi, S.R. (2010). “Little Monkeys on the grass...” How people for and Against Evolution Fail to Understand the Theory of Evolution. Evo Edu Outreach 3: 416-419

6.  Lewin, R. and Foley, R.A. (2005). Principles of Human Evolution. Blackwell Publishing: Malden
7. McPherson Smith, C. and Sullivan, C. (2007). The Top Ten Myths about Evolution: Myth Three: The Ladder of Progress. Prometheus Books: USA
8. Meikle, W.E. and Scott, E.C. (2010). Why Are There Still Monkeys? Evo Edu Outreach 3: 573-575

9. Scott, E.C. (2005). Evolution vs. Creationism: An Introduction. University of California Press: Berkeley

10.  Stanford, C., Allen, J.S. and Antón, S.C. (2009). Biological Anthropology. Pearson Education: New Jersey   
11. Tanner, N.M. (1981). On Becoming Human. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge

Online Sources
1. BBC. (2000). Fruit Fly Gene Success 
2. Human Origins. (Unknown). What does it mean to be human? Genetics
3.  ICR – The Institute for Creationism. (Unknown). Design and Purpose