The Ethics and Chemistry of Food and Cooking
We worked on this project from the eyes of a scientist and a humanitarian. We got to learn about how and where America's food is processed, and we got to see the natural way of farming and the ethical way of harvesting meat. We focused a lot on the pros and cons of the industrial food chain and the local, sustainable food chain. This project gave all of us a new outlook on what food we consume based on how it was grown or raised, processed, and how far the food traveled to reach our grocery store.
The interdisciplinary aspect of this project taught me not only about where my food comes from and about the chemical makeup of my food. It made thinking about what I eat more interesting, I know exactly what its made of, where it came from, and I know that it was healthy. This project also taught me about ethical food processing and all of the benefits of it, and I got to taste it too with my chemistry project. Not only did I learn about the science and ethics behind my food but the effects of industrial farming on our planet. All of the chemicals that go into our atmosphere, water, and wildlife from pesticides and antibiotics. My biggest takeaways from this project are my new food ethic and my realization that we need to steward the Earth as it stewards for us. I support animals being fed nothing but antibiotics and corn meal while living in their own and others feces. No life on Earth deserves to be treated like that, nor does the Earth deserve to be treated like that. God gave us the Earth, and he also wants us to steward the Earth. We were put in nature to protect it not to destroy it. We resource everything from the Earth, and we need to respect it just as we respect one another. |
|
A. How does the ingredient that you experimented with affect the foods overall characteristics?
In hollandaise sauce, the butter affects the richness of the sauce. When I first decided to test the amount of butter, I thought that it would affect not only the flavor but also the thickness. My hypothesis was incorrect as I later discovered that it is the amount of time that you cook the sauce that affects the thickness of the sauce. The temperature that you cook the sauce at is very vital; if the butter gets too hot, the eggs will cook and the proteins will no longer be able to bond the butter molecules and the water molecules. If the melted butter is hot and not warm when you add it to the sauce, the eggs will cook. The more butter that you use, the harder it is to make the sauce. The butter does not affect the thickness of the sauce, but it affects how flavorful the sauce is and makes the sauce very delicate and challenging to make.
D. In what way(s) are cooking and doing science similar and in what way(s) are they different? How are a cook and a food scientist similar and different?
Cooking is science, but it is done every single day by any almost every person alive, so it is not necessarily seen as a science. The flavor difference between raw food and cooked food is all because of chemical reactions. For instance, raw steak is gross, but a cooked steak is to die for. Even adding salt to the process changes the flavor of the steak. The flavor all comes from molecules breaking and bonding to form new substances with similar chemical makeup.
A lot of science experiments and reactions that occur are inedible. With the majority of reactions not being edible, people think of that as science, and the reactions that are edible are called cooking. The only differences, in my opinion, are if the reaction is edible and the recognition of food and inedible objects.
A cook and a food scientist are doing the same thing with a different mentality about cooking. A food scientist thinks about the molecular structure, caloric value, the chemical reactions and how to make food more flavorful. A cook or a chef is more worried about the outcome of the cooking, the flavor of the food, the texture and the appearance. Chefs are thinking about satisfying those that will consume the food and not always the chemistry and science behind cooking. Although it isn't always on their radar, they need to have a good understanding of the science behind what they are cooking so that they can make the food taste as good as possible.
In hollandaise sauce, the butter affects the richness of the sauce. When I first decided to test the amount of butter, I thought that it would affect not only the flavor but also the thickness. My hypothesis was incorrect as I later discovered that it is the amount of time that you cook the sauce that affects the thickness of the sauce. The temperature that you cook the sauce at is very vital; if the butter gets too hot, the eggs will cook and the proteins will no longer be able to bond the butter molecules and the water molecules. If the melted butter is hot and not warm when you add it to the sauce, the eggs will cook. The more butter that you use, the harder it is to make the sauce. The butter does not affect the thickness of the sauce, but it affects how flavorful the sauce is and makes the sauce very delicate and challenging to make.
D. In what way(s) are cooking and doing science similar and in what way(s) are they different? How are a cook and a food scientist similar and different?
Cooking is science, but it is done every single day by any almost every person alive, so it is not necessarily seen as a science. The flavor difference between raw food and cooked food is all because of chemical reactions. For instance, raw steak is gross, but a cooked steak is to die for. Even adding salt to the process changes the flavor of the steak. The flavor all comes from molecules breaking and bonding to form new substances with similar chemical makeup.
A lot of science experiments and reactions that occur are inedible. With the majority of reactions not being edible, people think of that as science, and the reactions that are edible are called cooking. The only differences, in my opinion, are if the reaction is edible and the recognition of food and inedible objects.
A cook and a food scientist are doing the same thing with a different mentality about cooking. A food scientist thinks about the molecular structure, caloric value, the chemical reactions and how to make food more flavorful. A cook or a chef is more worried about the outcome of the cooking, the flavor of the food, the texture and the appearance. Chefs are thinking about satisfying those that will consume the food and not always the chemistry and science behind cooking. Although it isn't always on their radar, they need to have a good understanding of the science behind what they are cooking so that they can make the food taste as good as possible.