In a sort of sideways attack on claims by Jonathan Safran Foer and others that vegetarianism is the only ethical food choice, Angier writes,

[B]efore we cede the entire moral penthouse to "committed vegetarians" and "strong ethical vegans," we might consider that plants no more aspire to being stir-fried in a wok than a hog aspires to being peppercorn-studded in my Christmas clay pot. This is not meant as a trite argument or a chuckled aside. Plants are lively and seek to keep it that way. The more that scientists learn about the complexity of plants - their keen sensitivity to the environment, the speed with which they react to changes in the environment, and the extraordinary number of tricks that plants will rally to fight off attackers and solicit help from afar - the more impressed researchers become, and the less easily we can dismiss plants as so much fiberfill backdrop, passive sunlight collectors on which deer, antelope and vegans can conveniently graze. It's time for a green revolution, a reseeding of our stubborn animal minds.

She then launches into a series of anecdotes about the ways plants protect themselves from getting eaten, all of which are entertaining, and all of which seem slightly beside the point. Anyone who's ever eschewed meat has encountered more than one person who makes jokes about cruelty to carrots, usually with the goal of making vegetarians feel like idiots. They do this because vegetarianism often feels like a judgment, implicit or explicit, against the way omnivores live their lives. But the fact that brussels sprouts combat hungry caterpillars by releasing compounds that summon caterpillar-eating wasps doesn't invalidate vegetarianism anymore than the sheer number of sick people in the world invalidates medical care. We can never end all suffering, and the assumption that this is the goal of all vegetarians misunderstands what vegetarianism is about — a misunderstanding unfortunately fostered by some vegetarians.

Angier's real point isn't actually that vegetarianism is dumb, or that we should all subsist on fruit and dead bugs. Rather, her argument is that all eating is a compromise. Angier writes that she no longer eats "mammalian meat," but still consumes fish and poultry. She continues,

My dietary decisions are arbitrary and inconsistent, and when friends ask why I'm willing to try the duck but not the lamb, I don't have a good answer. Food choices are often like that: difficult to articulate yet strongly held.

The truth is, the best thing human beings could do for (almost) every other species on Earth would be to cease to exist. Anytime we choose to keep ourselves alive at the expense of other living things — which we do all the time, consciously or not — we sacrifice a certain amount of our moral purity. This is something people on both sides of the debate about food politics have to accept — that vegetarians will never be entirely morally perfect, and that this lack of perfection doesn't invalidate what they're trying to do.

Food politics are ancient, as a look at any religion's dietary laws will attest. And as Angier says, people often believe in their food choices almost as deeply as they believe in their gods, making many a dinner table a kind of culinary Middle East. Arguing about food can be just as thankless as trying to talk someone into or out of belief in God, and at this point we might do well to accept an interfaith model of eating. Yes, food is about morality, and yes, we can judge others' dietary morals if we wish. But food, like religion, can also be about comfort, memory, tradition, transcendence, and joy, and these are things people can share even if they're not eating the same dish. It might be time to focus on them.

Sorry, Vegans: Brussels Sprouts Like To Live, Too [NYT]

You will "save" if you buy right now! There must be someone in your life who needs a "Tower Of Treats." In my case, that person appears to be me.

click "full size" to enlarge

Aw, the Gingerbread Man is adorable. Wait: You have to take his head off to get to the treats? Hmm. I guess that is the fate of all Gingerbread Men and Women. More important: I spy yogurt-covered pretzels. Mmmm.

Look at the size of that chocolate chip cookie. Look at it. Then turn your attention to the true Christmas miracle: Peppermint bark.

Ignore the fruitcake and focus on the Cheesecake Party Wheel. Ask yourself this: Would you like to make a reservation for a party of one?

Fruit paired with cheese and crackers and then a side of popcorn, with cookies and candies for dessert? This is a full meal.

A Tower of Chocolates, however, has my name all over it.

Salty and sweet together really gets those taste buds going, Crunch goes so well with creaminess, and vice-versa. You can nibble, gobble, savor and… um, what were we talking about?

Damn. Forget what I said about fruit not being appealing. That pear looks juicy.

Harry & David [Official Site]

Earlier: Dean & Deluca Thanksgiving: Mouth-Watering, Wallet-Emptying
Mackenzie: Hot, Steamy, Scrumptious Food Porn

Related: Free People: Let's Pretend It's The Summer Of '69
Anthropologie's Hazy Shade Of Winter
Fetchdog, Drs Fosters & Smith: Howliday Humiliation For Dogs & Cats

All previous catalog posts

I could complain about the litany of stereotypes being put forth, but the piece quickly tackles that aspect:

Right away, it was clear that Coolio was not going to follow the traditional celebrity-chef model. As television critic Troy Patterson wrote when the show first aired, Coolio's format was designed to offend, relying heavily on "inner-city minstrelsy." For example, instead of pulling salt or pepper from bowls or mills, Coolio uses "dime bags" full of spices, the tiny Ziplocs used to transport cocaine or marijuana. He throws out fusion terms of his own design, including "Ghettitalian," and "Blasian," and knowing that every television chef must have his catchphrase, constantly uses the term "Shakazulu!" as his Lagasse "Bam!"-a punctuation mark for every action.

Coolio later reveals he wanted to use "motherfucker!" as the catch phrase, but his daughter said that went too far.

But she was fine the Sauce Girls, apparently. The show itself - available for viewing over at My Damn Channel - is ridiculously over the top, as if Coolio watched some Snoop Dogg and Dr. Dre videos and worked cooking into the concept. The first episode starts off with the producer and Coolio's cousin/hype man getting into a verbal altercation because Coolio is late. The former rap star explains why he got the idea for a cooking show in the first place:

"Me and my cousin, we were watching Food Network, commenting on how boring it was," he says. "And I thought I could do a cooking show where I'd be clowning on everyone, with more profanity, and better looking girls, and a better house band, and it grew into a monster from there." Within weeks of hatching the idea, the rapper and his cousin inked a deal with My Damn Channel for a season of 10 shows. The pair also revealed to The Daily Beast that they will be returning to the Web network for Season Two early next year; "We've had some interest from the major networks in taking it to air," says the rapper. "And of course I want to turn myself into a brand name, with chef's jackets, chef's hats, all that. But it's rough out there now and I want a big paycheck if I am going to compromise for some network. Our content is a little racy for the mainstream. My swagger is different."

Racy indeed! Here's the first episode.

Yes, he really did offer an autographed bell pepper at the end of the show.

However, his newfound zeal for the kitchen may not be entirely attributed to a love of the culinary arts. The Daily Beast reveals that Coolio's latest album failed to release in the US, and this is not his first foray into television:

Coolio's first foray back into television was a reality show for the Oxygen Network, Coolio's Rules, in 2008. The show featured his hectic life with six young children (by four different mothers), but went off the air after one season: "My kids didn't want to do that no more," he says. He went on to appear on Celebrity Big Brother in the U.K. in January of this year, trapped in a house with the likes of Verne Troyer and La Toya Jackson, ultimately finishing third in the competition. He says that the cooking is, so far, the only path that seems to be lucrative, but he would consider appearing in another reality program. " I want to do one of those Coolio of Loves, like on VH1," he says. "Though I'm not looking for love, I'm looking for mothaf-king checks. You think any of them cats is really lookin' for love?"

The dose of realism is refreshing. If it's all about the cash, Coolio has created a program tailored to a certain set of the population, is a new twist on a cooking show, and entertaining in the train-wreck reality tv way we know and love. Coolio recently renewed his show for a second season on My Damn Channel - I'll be surprised if BET doesn't come knocking.

Cookin' With Coolio [The Daily Beast]
Cooking With Coolio [My Damn Channel]

This is a pretty interesting spread they've got going here: There's wine, but no veggies or bread. Just meat and dessert. Not that I'm complaining. Interested in doing a little shopping? The pecan pie is $65; the apple pie is $65, and you'll pay a $150 for that ham. Oh, the chocolate turkey centerpiece is $175 — more than the actual 14 lb. turkey, which rings up at $125.

The Turkey Roulade is layered with cornbread stuffing (made from cornbread, yellow onions, celery, cranberries, pecans and jalapeño peppers) but the Harvest Cornucopia cake sounds even better: Buttery almond cake layered with rich vanilla cream, frosted in chocolate buttercream and wrapped in dark chocolate. What if I don't want the weird marzipan fruit — just the frosting? Will that knock a few bucks off the $150 price tag?

This Berkshire boneless ham looks decent, but there's no way it holds a candle to the pecan-covered, bourbon-soaked ham my mom used to make. Before my sister became a vegetarian.

Sour cream apple walnut pie — made with Granny Smith apples, fresh sour cream, topped with brown sugar, cinnamon and walnut streusel — sounds really good right about now. But if you're going to spend $65, the "pie sampler" may be the way to go: You get to taste the walnut pie, the pumpkin pie, the pecan pie and the Mississippi Mud pie. We discussed the pumpkin cake earlier, so let's move on to some other cakes…

The German chocolate cake has four layers of light chocolate cake with buttercream frosting and coconut and toasted pecans between the layers. Callebaut chocolate fudge and chocolate curls top the whole thing off. Sounds like $75 might be a bargain for that one. The coconut key lime cake is "zingy," according to the copy, but I'm really curious about the raspberry rose vanilla cake. Butter cake perfumed with Tahitian vanilla beans, then layered with buttercream flavored puréed raspberries and rose syrup? Never heard of such a thing!

Since the $180 purse cake seems gimmicky and the $40 pistachio cake not sweet enough, gâteau nuage cheesecake it is! "A delightful blend of cream cheese and whipped cream, layered with sour cream, in a graham cracker crust." And at $70? You're really putting your money where your mouth is.

Earlier: Halloween At Dean & Deluca: The Trick Is Being Able To Afford The Treats
Mackenzie: Hot, Steamy, Scrumptious Food Porn
Free People Wishes You Hippie Holidays
Lilly's Kids: What's Christmas Without Reinforcing Gender Stereotypes?

All previous catalog posts

Of course, food is often a touchy subject even in non-vegetarian homes. My desire to eat nothing but plain chicken and bagels throughout my childhood caused plenty of bitter fights, and contributed to my parents' early fear that my vegetarianism was just another form of pickiness. In retrospect, I'm not sure why I hated all foods with flavor so much, but I do know that kids start searching at a relatively young age for ways to exercise their own autonomy, and food choice is one of these ways. So should the children of vegetarians get to choose to eat meat?

Emily Sohn of the LA Times addresses several issues surrounding this question, including health. It's a common misconception that growing kids need meat to survive. I remember a sort of legend that made the rounds in college about a student who tried to raise her toddler vegan; all the kid's teeth fell out, and had to be replaced with metal ones. The metal is, I think, a dead giveaway that this story was bullshit (although I'd kind of like to get a look at little Johnny Steelfangs), but it's true that vegetarian and especially vegan diets for kids require a few tweaks. As Sohn says, small children may need calorie-rich foods like peanut butter because a vegetarian diet can otherwise fill them up without giving them enough energy. And breastfeeding vegan moms may need a B12 supplement. But horror stories aside, a meat-free diet shouldn't do kids physical harm.

Then there's the psychological angle. As Sohn points out, "school-age children in particular can become anxious when anything about them is different from their peers, including what they eat for lunch." This actually seems like an opportunity for educating kids about differences — after all, children are always going to stick out in some way, and if parents can teach them to stand up for what's in their lunchboxes, they may be better at standing up for what's in their heads.

What seems more difficult to negotiate is a kid's desire to separate herself from her parents — including their dietary restrictions. Of course, many parents exercise some control over what their kids eat, and in some religions, dietary rules have been passed down for millennia. But, as Sohn notes, "resentment can build up if foods are forbidden completely." And at some point, kids are going to have the opportunity to try a hamburger. Parents can tell their children why they believe vegetarianism is important, and they can make only vegetarian foods at home. But when it comes to the big, bad, omnivorous world, probably the best they can do is teach them to make informed choices and not to let anyone else think for them — including mom and dad.

Don't Make Food A Conflict For A Vegetarian Child [LA Times]
Nutritional Guidelines For Vegetarian Children [LA Times]

Over at CNN, Ruben Navarrette Jr. says to "Take food racism with a grain of salt" :

This week, I was on a talk radio show when the host — a white male conservative (what are the odds?) — asked me if Americans are so sensitive that we now have to worry about "food racism." [...]

ESPN broadcaster Bob Griese has been suspended for one week for a stereotypical crack he made about NASCAR driver Juan Pablo Montoya. During a recent ESPN broadcast, a graphic appeared listing the top drivers in a NASCAR competition. When fellow analyst Chris Spielman asked where was Montoya, Griese replied he was "out having a taco."

Griese has twice apologized on air for the remark, which — according to ESPN — he now realizes was "inappropriate." Montoya, who is Colombian, has taken the high road. Asked about the comment, the driver said: "Somebody mentioned it to me. I don't really care to tell you the truth. Yeah, I don't. I could say that I spent the last three hours eating tacos, but I was actually driving a car."

We're not going to debate whether or not the remark is racist.

We're not going to talk about the other issues raised in the article, particularly around the presidential primary.

We're not going to talk about the issues inherent in ranking acts of racism.

We'll just say this: it is always fascinating to see what the media deems an interesting conversation about race.

Take Talk Of Food Racism With A Grain Of Salt [CNN]

I can't tell you how many times I've said, like Portman, "I love food, I love eating, I'm pretty adventurous with different flavors and cuisines, and the one thing is, I'm a vegatarian" — and watched people's faces fall. Being "adventurous" and being vegetarian really aren't mutually exclusive — because cutting out meat forced me to vary my diet more, I now eat a much wider variety of foods than I did when I was omnivorous. And I'm a lot less "picky" than some of my meat-eating friends, many of whom turn up their noses at vegetables — I often say I'll eat anything as long as it isn't meat. As I've written here before, I do eat seafood now, so my family and friends are a little less freaked out, but some omnivores still seem to find my diet mysterious. Yesterday's Top Chef may explain why. Below are four common myths about vegetarian cooking, as illustrated on the show (and yeah, also some spoilers).

— Vegetarian food lacks protein.

Only if you do it wrong — like, say, the hapless Mike, who thought some undercooked leeks shaped like scallops could be a main dish. The point of vegetarian cooking isn't to make food look like meat or shellfish — as in all other cuisines, it's to make delicious and satisfying dishes. And while a vegetarian can get by with a breakfast of fruit or a salad lunch sometimes, everybody needs some protein to feel full and be healthy. Luckily there are a bazillion vegetarian sources of protein. Many vegetarians still eat cheese, eggs, and milk, but for those who don't, there are lots of protein-rich beans, nuts, seeds, and grains, and these can be combined into dishes that are a lot more tasty than some scallop-shaped leeks. For instance, I like to cook up a bunch of quinoa (quite proteiny, and pretty cheap if you can get it in bulk— if you can't, couscous or brown rice would work), add sauteed red peppers, spinach, olives, walnuts, and spices, and then wrap the thing in a tortilla and call it a burrito. I usually add a bunch of goat cheese to this, but for vegans, some truffle oil will do the job, or just plain old olive oil. An important note: mushrooms don't actually have all that much protein, though they often appear in lieu of meat on restaurant menus. Which brings me to my next myth.

— Vegetarians need a "meaty" substitute.

This one has a grain of truth — it is nice to eat something with a little savory, umami flavor, and mushrooms do provide that. I also like soy-based fake meats like MorningStar "bacon" and veggie crumbles for this purpose, even though a lot of vegetarians disdain them. Yes, they're a little pricey and not so great for the environment, but I tend to treat them the same way many cultures treat meat — as a seasoning, not a main dish. A little fakon in chili makes it taste like a whole different dish, which can be good if you're cooking for yourself and end up with a lot of leftovers. But all that said, I was kind of troubled to notice that so many of the chefs rushed for either eggplant or mushrooms to serve as the centerpiece for their dishes. I guess it's a texture thing, but these two foods appeared as the "vegetarian option" in my college dining halls more times than I can count, and while they can be tasty, they're not the be-all and end-all. Vegetarians don't need every meal to include a slab of something meat-like (and unfortunately, those college portobello mushroom sandwiches were often just that: a slab). One of my favorite dishes lately is a bunch of dandelion greens wilted with onions and garlic and olives and rosemary. I usually eat this with scrambled eggs and toast, but vegans could add white beans for an equally tasty protein kick — no meat "substitute" needed. And if you don't have dandelion greens, spinach works.

— Vegetarian food is just a "collection of sides."

Natalie Portman complained that vegetarian options at a restaurant often feel like side dishes, and I see where she's coming from. I don't really have a problem making a meal of sides, especially on Thanksgiving at my grandparents' house (I haven't officially told them I don't eat meat; I'm still letting them process the fact that I work for a "blog"). But sometimes I do want something main-dishy, not just a heap of kale and a bowl of beans and some bread (although this is pretty good). And just because you can't center a vegetarian meal around a hunk of meat doesn't mean you can't center it at all. A good solution to the problem, especially in fall and winter, is roasting, since nothing's more main-dishy than a roast. I like to chop up a bunch of red potatoes, sweet potatoes, green and red peppers, garlic, and onions, and stick them in the oven for an hour with rosemary and feta. Vegans could ditch the feta, add something else for extra flavor (like maybe hot chiles), and serve the whole thing with hummus on the side. This dish is real easy and cheap and great for potlucks.

— Vegetarian food can't be filling.

Kevin won the challenge with his dish of morels and turnips, which Portman and the other judges found both delicious and satisfying. Morels are, as you may know, fucking expensive, but the point is, it's possible to make a vegetarian meal just as filling as a meat-based one. It helps to remember the protein (though Kevin didn't actually seem to include much of that), but it's also important — at least in my view — not to be too afraid of fat. For some people, vegetarianism is synonymous with abstemiousness, and these are the same people who think a vegetarian meal always has to leave you hungry. I'm not saying you have to add a cup of sesame oil to everything (as a vegan housemate of mine used to do before we finally set him straight). I'm just saying that some olive oil, butter, cream, goat cheese, Earth Balance, or even avocado adds flavor and body to a vegetarian meal. For instance, brussels sprouts: they're okay if you boil them, but if you cut them in half and saute them in some butter or Earth Balance (plus garlic and rosemary and pepper), they're way more delicious. I like to eat this with Annie's mac and cheese from the box, which probably would not appear on Top Chef — but that doesn't mean it's not awesome.

Tender meat… bulging and exploding with a surprise inside. All you have to do is put it in your mouth.



Juicy, sticky, sweet and warm.

Would you like to nibble a lean little hunk? Or get your hands on something fleshy and chunky? Ooh, naughty: You want both at the same time, don't you.



Opened wide. Ready, willing. Waiting.

Or do you like it raw? Glistening and pink?

What a tease… Encouraging you to finger those folds.

Put your tongue inside, where it's moist and delicious.

Oozing. Just for you. You know you want it.

Biting is allowed… encouraged.

Can't you feel your heart race? It's dripping and luscious, waiting to be penetrated. [Ugh, Dodai, I'm blushing. -Ed.]

Mackenzie Ltd [Official Site]

Earlier: The Naked Chef: Pfaelzer Brothers Peddle Hot Food Porn

Honestly, the way that the drums bang about the obesity epidemic, I thought cookies would be public enemy number one right about now.

But that seems to be a part of the appeal of the diet. According to the experts interviewed for the New York Times article:

"The Cookie Diet is very appealing, because it legalizes a food - the cookie - that is banned from most weight-loss programs," said Jenni Schaefer, author of "Goodbye Ed, Hello Me: Recover From Your Eating Disorder and Fall in Love with Life" (McGraw-Hill, 2009).

"The diet gives people a false sense of control, simplifying balanced nutrition into one food: the cookie," she added.

In addition, the nutritional properties of said cookies are widely subject to interpretation:

[T]here are no clinical studies on any of the diets and that a key ingredient in Dr. Siegal's cookies - special amino acids, which supposedly curb appetite - is known only to Dr. Siegal and his wife.

"It's the particular mixture of proteins that does the job," Dr. Siegal said. "All foods do not handle hunger the same way, and high protein foods curb hunger." The cookies, he said, contain protein derived from meat, eggs, milk and other sources. They also contain microcrystalline cellulose - a plant fiber that acts as a bulking agent, emulsifier and thickener - and are sweetened with sugar.

However, other diet cookie makers are more forthcoming about how the cookies work. One of the competing brands, Soypal, relies on "okara, or soy pulp, which absorbs any liquids you drink with the cookies." Since the Soypal website recommends you drink two glasses of water or another beverage with each cookie, it's pretty clear that the diet cookies are designed to trick your body into thinking you've eaten.

Unfortunately, many of those who tried the cookie diet have found it lacking:

Ms. Pierson, who is in her 60s and lives in Manhattan, tried Smart for Life cookies, which come in chocolate, banana coconut, oatmeal raisin and blueberry last year, and lasted about three days. "I was weak, tired, irritable and hungry," she said. "I hated it."

I guess that just goes to show cookies really are a sometimes food.

A Few Cookies A Day To Keep The Pounds Away? [NYT]

Allysia Finley writes:

While the program's creators say that Smart Choices is intended to help consumers make better nutritional decisions, the Attorney General and many consumer protection advocates are questioning the program's nutritional standards and decrying the program as "deceptive" and "potentially misleading"—-namely because a few nutritionally suspect foods like Teddy Grahams, Kraft Cheese crackers and Cocoa Krispies happen to qualify.

Ironically, the program's nutritional standards that Mr. Blumenthal and consumer advocates are questioning are based directly on the USDA's dietary guidelines. For example, calories from fat can't exceed 35% of total calories and sodium content must be less than 480 mg per serving.

Smart Choices is exactly the kind of program that Mr. Blumenthal and consumer advocates should be in favor of since it makes nutritional information more visible to consumers.

Actually, no.

This is like the nutritional equivalent of green washing. Finely tries to show how gallantly Coke is trying to live up to the government's standards by introducing a new 90 calorie mini can of Coke, and plans to highlight calories on the front of the products.

What Finney neglects to mention is that this is something Coca-Cola already does - they unveiled the 100 calorie can with a big bubble on the front announcing the calorie count about two years ago, around the time when the hundred calorie snacks were ruling the world. This isn't being more responsible - it's just a brand refreshing.

It's the same bullshit they pull with cereal commercials:

Part of a "complete breakfast?" ? Whatever. I love Reese's Puffs Chocolate Frosted Sugar Bombs like anyone else, but it is not a nutritious choice. Even though they fortify it with vitamins, it's still crap. Kind of like this op-ed. The government has every right to investigate the labeling of products under "smart choices," especially if the "choices" highlighted are just repackaged junk food.

Fat Police Target Government's Own Nutrition Standards [WSJ]

When I refer to the challenge, I don't mean getting the residents of Huntington to adopt better habits. I mean penetrating the "reshapping & remaking" genre of reality television, which is already full of contenders like The Biggest Loser, Dance Your Ass Off, DietTribe, and Celebrity Fit Club: Boot Camp.

Still, it appears the producers are pressing on:

Oliver came to Huntington last month and the show is taping in West Virginia's second-largest city throughout the fall. Months before it airs, though, the show has opened still-fresh wounds from an Associated Press story last year that used federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data to proclaim the five-county Huntington metropolitan area the country's fattest and unhealthiest.

The town, for its part has fretted a bit about it's image in the world, noting that "the world's fattest town" isn't quite a label that anyone wants to adopt.

"All the years of statistics don't strike home as much as the threat of a national TV audience getting this perception about Huntington," said [Don] Perdue, who is chairman of the House of Delegates Health and Human Resources committee.

Even so, Perdue is worried about the show.

"If it's accurate and not positive, that's our fault," the Wayne County Democrat said. "If it's inaccurate and negative, that's their fault."

However, this fluffy article isn't sharing with us the full story. In the New York Times Magazine, a six-page feature on Oliver shows what he's really trying to accomplish. Oliver didn't come to the states to find the fattest people to put on display - he is coming to help expand his people first food revolution.

The article opens:

On his first day in Huntington, W. Va., Jamie Oliver spent the afternoon at Hillbilly Hot Dogs, pitching in to cook its signature 15-pound burger. That's 10 pounds of meat, 5 pounds of custom-made bun, American cheese, tomatoes, onions, pickles, ketchup, mustard and mayo. Then he learned how to perfect the Home Wrecker, the eatery's famous 15-inch, one-pound hot dog (boil first, then grill in butter). For the Home Wrecker Challenge, the dog gets 11 toppings, including chili sauce, jalapeños, liquid nacho cheese and coleslaw. Finish it in 12 minutes or less and you get a T-shirt.

So much for local color. Earlier that day, Oliver met with a pediatrician, James Bailes, and a pastor, Steve Willis. Bailes told him about an 8-year-old patient who was 80 pounds overweight and had developed Type 2 diabetes. If the child's diet didn't change, the doctor said, he wouldn't live to see 30. Willis told Oliver that he visits patients in local hospitals several days a week and sees the effects of long-term obesity firsthand. Since he can't write a prescription for their resulting illnesses, he said, all he can do is pray with them.

Last year, an Associated Press article designated the Huntington-Ashland metropolitan area as the unhealthiest in America, based on its analysis of data collected in 2006 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Nearly half the adults in these five counties (two in West Virginia, two in Kentucky and one in Ohio) were obese, and the area led the nation in the incidence of heart disease and diabetes. The poverty rate was 19 percent, much higher than the national average. It also had the highest percentage of people 65 and older who had lost their teeth - nearly 50 percent.

In the midst of a town battling various ailments, Oliver arrives dispensing more than just solid food advice - he deeply appreciates the transformative power that the ideas of simple food and home have made in his life:

Oliver got personal with his series "Jamie's Kitchen," based on the Fifteen Foundation, which he created in 2002. Each year it sponsors 15 (give or take a few) young adults from disadvantaged backgrounds, including those with criminal records or a history of drug abuse, and trains them in the restaurant business. To kick-start the program and to finance Fifteen, the upscale London restaurant that would employ them, he put up his own house as collateral - without telling his wife. [...]

If he were just a professional do-gooder, Oliver, who is 34, would be a bore. But food has given his life focus and meaning since childhood, and he has honored it ever since. [...]

In last year's U.K. series, "Jamie's Ministry of Food," Oliver expanded his reach past the school system into people's homes. He chose Rotherham, an industrial town in northern England with a high rate of obesity and related illnesses, where 20 percent of the working-age population was on public assistance. He built a community center where residents could learn to cook inexpensively for their families while instilling the idea that healthful eating is not a luxury. "They thought that cooking a meal and feeding it to your family was for posh people," he said. Some participants in the show had never even had a kitchen table. They ate takeout food on their floors.

That project has proved a success and the perfect model for Oliver's mission in Huntington. The community center here will be called Jamie's Kitchen and will teach both adults and children the basic skills for cooking healthful, economical meals at home. Oliver will also work with local schools on eliminating junk food in vending machines and in cafeterias, replacing reheated processed foods with meals cooked from scratch with fresh ingredients. But there is no guarantee of success.

The reporter Alex Witchel, points out that Jamie's enthusiasm for food does not always translate to success. Witchel finds out from Oliver that only half of the schools from the flagship program are functioning properly - there are issues with getting school staff properly trained and willing to stick with the program. In addition, the children, once exposed to the wonders of eating fresh, unprocessed food, still revert back to many of their old ways once the pressure is off. Near the end of the piece, Witchel skeptically points out the residents of Huntington don't seem to be interested in being healthier as much as they want to be on television.

However, I think that Oliver has it exactly right. When he speaks to the people of Huntington, he's polite and hopeful, explaining that the problem they face has a solution. Changing food culture from one of convenience to one of health will not happen overnight. People need time to acclimate to cooking, to the taste of food that isn't injected with salt/fat/sugar/hormones, that change in lifestyle. One of my larger critiques with the current food movement is that is is concerned with ideals and absolutes, and doesn't take into consideration the role food plays in people's lives and cultures. However, Oliver, with his less than stellar beginnings, and commitment to people, does get it. And it shows he speaks:

Oliver picked up the mike. "Hi, guys," he began. "Some say this is the most unhealthy town in America. We're going to spend the next few days getting under the skin of the problem, and we're asking families, individuals, schools and churches to spread the word. Here, the odds are against you, you live an unhealthy life and die young. That's what the report said. So, this is not a sparkly, pretty show. It's about finding local ambassadors for change."

He asked people to raise their hands if friends or family were affected by obesity and bad health. Almost every hand went up. Oliver nodded. "What do you think the problems are?" Among the answers were: too much processed food in school cafeterias; a need for better prenatal nutrition; a call to stop putting Kool-Aid in toddlers' sippy cups (earlier, Oliver heard about infants' bottles filled with Coca-Cola); suggestions that restaurants offer smaller portions and that children's menus offer alternatives to burgers and fries.

Oliver took it in. "This isn't a freak show here," he said. "You're only a few percent away from the national average. Every child should be taught to cook in school, not just talk about nutrition all day. Good food can be made in 15 minutes. This could be the first generation where the kids teach the parents." That earned a round of applause.

"I got a billion dollars out of the British government and put it into the school system," he went on. "But it's still in transition, it's not all glossy yet. When parents get angry anything can happen. So I'll need your help. Hopefully over the next few months, we'll do some really good things together."

‘Fattest city' in U.S. braces for reality TV show [AP/MSNBC]
The Biggest Loser [NBC
Dance Your Ass Off [Oxygen]
DietTribe [Lifetime]
Celebrity Fit Club: Boot Camp [VH1]
Putting America's Diet on a Diet [NY Times]

Maybe, sorta. Times Magazine writer Jon Gertner profiles a group of human guinea pigs whose feed seems a lot less spartan than the Quorn-and-asparagus regime Julian Dibbell described in his 2006 New York article. Participants in the Calerie (Comprehensive Assessment of Long-Term Effects of Reducing Intake of Energy) study are supposed to reduce their caloric intake by 25% for two years, so researchers can measure the effects on the aging process. But they still get to eat potatoes, pasta, even Häagen-Dazs. And most of the subjects say their biggest problem isn't hunger, but the fact that counting and reporting calories is a pain in the ass.

Then again, Gertner talks to Jeffrey Peipert, who occasionally woke up in the middle of the night because he was so hungry, and couldn't go back to sleep without a bowl of cereal. These incidents, researchers determined, were caused by his active lifestyle, and their advice was just to move around less. While calorie restriction is apparently better at increasing lifespan than exercise, it seems a lot less entertaining. And, of course, a few people had to drop out of the study because of anemia or bone loss. Everybody needed sweaters. People deemed prone to eating disorders were excluded at the outset.

This exclusion, along with a number of others, may point to the biggest problem with the Calerie study. Not only do participants have to be of "normal" weight and free of any tendency towards anorexia or bulimia, they also have to be the kind of people who are willing to restrict their diet for two years for only a few thousand dollars. In fact, those who were motivated by even this small amount of money were excluded from the study, so basically everyone participating had to kind of want to eat way less for a long time, which sets them apart from most people.

One investigator in the study, John Holloszy, says 99% of people aren't capable of calorie restriction. He also thinks the participants will quit doing it when their two years are up. And neuropsychologist Robert Krikorian says, "I don't think humans are designed to pay attention to how much they eat." Participants in the Calerie study have enviable blood pressure and cholesterol readings, and other research indicates that if they stick with it, they may enjoy longer live. But they're also the kind of people who say things like, "I've never gotten so much pleasure in my life. I'm wearing a medium shirt now. I haven't worn a medium since high school." Some people may get more pleasure out of not having to weight their potatoes.

Back in 2006, the media cliché about calorie restriction was that it was so unpleasant it wasn't worth the added lifespan. The Calerie study may be less extreme than what hard-core, arugula-counting restricters do, but its participants' diets are still pretty rigid and circumscribed. And if anything, this now seems unfashionable. Three years ago, eating next to nothing might have seemed like a cool rebellion against excess. But now excess is harder to come by, and eating like a pauper seems a lot less hip if you are one. Not only that, but the obesity crisis has been so variously trumpeted and debunked that the Times Magazine's whole Food Issue (tagline: "putting America's diet on a diet") seems a little dated. Diet is such a dirty word now that even Weight Watchers won't admit it is one, and something as, well, restrictive as calorie restriction just seems pretty passé.

This doesn't mean America isn't still obsessed with weight and weight loss, just that the buzzwords now tend to be things like "sustainable" and "lifestyle changes." And while one calorie restricter claims the practice just "teaches you how to eat normal foods but make better choices," it's pretty clear that it's not sustainable for most people. Which might be fine. American food culture is still pretty fucked up, but in the last couple of years there has been a little more emphasis on eating food you enjoy with people you like. This may not increase anyone's lifespan, but compared to a lot of recent diet fads, it seems pretty healthy, not to mention fun. Holloszy says hard-core calorie restricters are motivated by "fear of death," but someone once told me that people fear death more if they're not enjoying their lives. And except for a select few, logging every calorie just isn't enjoyable.

The Calorie-Restriction Experiment [New York Times Magazine]

I love love love the Mexican sugar skulls on the cover, but they are $30 for 3. And they're inedible.

The "Devil Chocolates" sound interesting: They are "sinful" dark chocolate filled with spicy apricot. When it comes to fruit and chocolate, for me, it's hit and miss: Strawberries, yes; raspberries, no. But apricot I haven't tried.

The chocolate skulls — some with edible silver — are my favorite thing on this page, though the marzipan figurines on the bottom are adorable. Not that I like marzipan.

Vampire cookies for the Twihard in your life! As for the jack o' lantern cake, it's milk chocolate cake layered with "lush chocolate cream filling, frosed with rich vanilla buttercream and wrapped in orange-tinted white chocolate." Oh, the picket fence and cat are chocolate, too. Lots of detail, maybe that's why it's $140.

Pumpkin cheesecake with graham cracker crust? Yes please. Throw in some chocolate covered caramel apples, as well.

I've never heard of Cream-nuts before, but since they are peanut butter blended with white chocolate, mixed with chopped pecans and then "enrobed" in milk or dark chocolate, they might be my new favorite candy.

The cupcake giftbox sounds ridiculously awesome, since it has spicy pumpkin cupcakes with cinnamon cream frosting; chocolate cupcakes with chocolate frosting and Madagascar bourbon vanilla cupcakes with vanilla buttercream frosting. But nine for $55? Truly frightening. I think I'd rather have the Trick or Treat bag with 40 bucks worth of candy.

Wait a minute: when deciding between cupcakes and candy, there's no need to choose! Long live cupcake candy.

Lastly a pumpkin cake "almost too pretty to cut." Vanilla spice cake layered with praline buttercream and chocolate fudge — under a white chocolate shell. Guaranteed to force you to reset your New Year's resolutions.

Dean & Decluca [Official Site]

Earlier: Halloween In 2-D Looks Frighteningly Delicious
Harry, David, Dean & Deluca: Chocolate Pagan Easter Symbols And $6,000 Caviar
Williams-Sonoma: A Pre-Thanksgiving Feast For The Eyes
The Naked Chef: Pfaelzer Brothers Peddle Hot Food Porn