88% of Americans make New Year's resolutions, and only 20% succeed. Scary! Every year I make TONS of New Year's resolutions for how I'm going to make my life better (told you I was a perfectionist). One year I made so many I couldn't even remember all of them! Clearly that is not the way to join that 20%. In fact, this article on New Year's resolutions fitness tips warns people to limit the number of resolutions you make. Although that article warns people to break your goal into smaller goals, I've never really been good with keeping the "everyday" goals - I think I'm better off setting long-term goals to accomplish at some point in the year. Plus, if I do long-term resolutions, I have all year to get them done instead of having one bad day (or bad week or bad month) and giving up.
I'm declaring 2008 "The Year of Fitness." On my weigh-in this morning, I got back to my lowest weight in 18 months! Unfortunately, this weight is also the weight I couldn't seem to get below on my last attempt to lose weight and get healthy. Will I be able to get below it? Hopefully my new year's resolutions will help.
I've already gotten in the calorie counting habit (and LOVE it), so I don't need to really add that to my list. Instead, as I said, I'm choosing three long-term fitness goals.
Goal #1: Complete a half-marathon. I know a full would be more ambitious and probably a better goal for me, but with my work schedule, it's hard for me to make that kind of time commitment. My current project gives me plenty of time, but who knows what my next project will be like. So - I'm aiming for a half-marathon at the end of January. I've been running 9 miles or so in Central Park, and I think I can work up to another four in a month (that's 1 mile/week, which is exactly what's considered a safe way to increase your mileage). My project finishes at the end of January, so I know I'll be good for time until then. Hopefully I can get this goal knocked out early in the year, and then maybe I'll even go for a marathon later in the year.
Goal #2: Get my CPT (that's a certification to be a personal trainer). I've wanted to do this for a while, not necessarily because I want to work as a personal trainer (I think it would be great, but I don't know if I can fit it in with work, and I'm not ready to make it my whole career). The hard part is, there are a TON of different certifications. To be a doctor or a lawyer, there is only one organization (at least in the US) that certifies you. However, to become a personal trainer, there are about five different options, all of which are considered reputable. If anyone who reads this has gotten a certification, let me know which one and how you picked it - I'm interested to hear real anecdotes instead of the marketing nonsense on each website. Cost isn't a HUGE consideration (of course, I'd rather spend less, but it seems like there isn't a big differential so I'd rather just pick whatever one is the best). I'm particularly interested in some of the ones that offer dual certifications as a personal trainer and nutritionist, because diet and exercise go together so much. My goal is to pick a certification within the next week, so then I have the rest of the year to study up and get it done!
Goal #3: Run 600 miles this year. That sounds like a TON, but that's 50 miles/month, which is doable... IF I keep up with my running. This I think is going to be the hardest goal, because it's going to be the least intolerant of slacking (if I miss a month, 100 miles in the next month is going to be really hard).
This has been my attempt to make myself accountable by publicizing my resolutions, as discussed in this article. Feel free to do the same by posting yours in my comments - I'd love to hear what your plans are for the new year! If you want some ideas for your own resolutions (remember, they can be made ANYTIME, not just on December 31), there are a ton of comments at FitSugar with other people's fitness resolutions.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Healthy Meal: Iceberg Salad with Tangy Cilantro Dressing
Tonight I'm trying to save lots of calories for all the alcohol I'll be drinking, so I wanted something light. When I started thinking about it, for some reason I got a craving for this simple salad with a yummy cilantro-lime-onion dressing. It's very simple and very low-cal, but unfortunately not that nutritious... can't win them all! Usually this gets paired with a meal (I usually make chicken tortilla soup with it, and go for a Mexican theme), so it doesn't matter too much. Just make sure you aren't eating it by itself every day or you won't be getting all the vitamins and minerals and protein and fat you need. I had it with a Trader Joe's beef taquito to get just a bit of protein, without a ton of calories or cooking time.
The recipe actually calls for it to be just lettuce with the dressing, but I like to add tomatoes, cucumber, and carrots to give it some texture/substance as well as a few nutrients. I usually make it with spinach or some other kind of greens, because iceberg lettuce is just kind of filler without anything good for you. However, tonight I decided to go traditional and just use a quarter head of iceberg. As you can see, this is a TON! I had a huge salad that was really filling.
Recipe notes:
These are the notes that pertain to the dressing. I kept the lime juice and the vinegar in the same proportions, but only used 1/2 tbsp of olive oil. When I've add it a little at a time, I've discovered that 1/2 cup just isn't necessary - I think it would be way too oily if you kept it as-is. Mine does come out thicker, but I like it that way, and it still mixes into the salad well.
Nutrition facts:
94 cals for the dressing (recipe here)
86 cals for the veggies (1/4 head iceberg lettuce, 1 tomato, 1/2 cucumber, 1 carrot)
100 cals for the beef taquito
Review: 5/5
Recipes like this always make me wonder why people get store-bought dressing - this is so easy! This is a great salad that's fantastic as a side dish to Mexican food. If you want it on its own and want to add some protein, I think it would taste fantastic with some sliced grilled chicken on top. I love that the only ingredient that I don't keep on hand is the cilantro - makes shopping very quick and easy when you don't have to make a long list just to make dinner! Try this if you're in the mood for something tangy and fresh-tasting, without a ton of calories.
The recipe actually calls for it to be just lettuce with the dressing, but I like to add tomatoes, cucumber, and carrots to give it some texture/substance as well as a few nutrients. I usually make it with spinach or some other kind of greens, because iceberg lettuce is just kind of filler without anything good for you. However, tonight I decided to go traditional and just use a quarter head of iceberg. As you can see, this is a TON! I had a huge salad that was really filling.
Recipe notes:
These are the notes that pertain to the dressing. I kept the lime juice and the vinegar in the same proportions, but only used 1/2 tbsp of olive oil. When I've add it a little at a time, I've discovered that 1/2 cup just isn't necessary - I think it would be way too oily if you kept it as-is. Mine does come out thicker, but I like it that way, and it still mixes into the salad well.
Nutrition facts:
94 cals for the dressing (recipe here)
86 cals for the veggies (1/4 head iceberg lettuce, 1 tomato, 1/2 cucumber, 1 carrot)
100 cals for the beef taquito
Review: 5/5
Recipes like this always make me wonder why people get store-bought dressing - this is so easy! This is a great salad that's fantastic as a side dish to Mexican food. If you want it on its own and want to add some protein, I think it would taste fantastic with some sliced grilled chicken on top. I love that the only ingredient that I don't keep on hand is the cilantro - makes shopping very quick and easy when you don't have to make a long list just to make dinner! Try this if you're in the mood for something tangy and fresh-tasting, without a ton of calories.
Friday, December 28, 2007
Healthy Meal: Vermont Chicken Pie
I needed something quick and easy with ingredients on hand. I also had some chicken and some mushrooms that I wanted to use up. So - I searched Food Network and found this. The only things I didn't have were peas and southern biscuits, but I figured I could chop up some green beans and substitute those for the peas (would even be a little healthier because it's less starchy!), and an English muffin for the biscuits. The result:
It looks really good doesn't it? A few of my substitutions are very evident though.
Recipe notes:
I already mentioned subbing an English muffin for the biscuit - it was still good, though I'm sure one of those buttery southern biscuits would have been better (however, I don't know if I could then include this recipe in the "healthy meal" category!). I also subbed chopped green beans for the peas; however, I screwed this up by adding way too many. I used 3/4 cup green beans when I should have used 1/2 cup peas. Peas have a milder flavor anyway, so I probably should have used about 1/4 cup of green beans. Oops. Finally, I skipped the butter and just used the olive oil to saute the veggies.
Nutrition facts:
336 calories for the chicken and biscuit (recipe here)
Review: 3/5
Wow, this recipe is ridiculously low-cal! It filled me up pretty well (thank you, fiber in the English muffin) and gave me tons of protein, but was still way lower than I was expecting. It's because it's basically just chicken, veggies, and a bit of oil - super healthy! However, the flavor wasn't amazing. It was very green bean-y. Now, as I said, that's probably entirely my fault for subbing green beans and then using way too many... but at the same time, there didn't seem to be any component that would provide a strong flavor for the sauce. I'd maybe try a bit of marsala or other sweet white wine between adding the flour and adding the chicken broth. Still, not bad, and healthy enough that I don't really care. Now, on to the beers and shots that will more than compensate for any calories I saved with this meal! Happy Friday :)
It looks really good doesn't it? A few of my substitutions are very evident though.
Recipe notes:
I already mentioned subbing an English muffin for the biscuit - it was still good, though I'm sure one of those buttery southern biscuits would have been better (however, I don't know if I could then include this recipe in the "healthy meal" category!). I also subbed chopped green beans for the peas; however, I screwed this up by adding way too many. I used 3/4 cup green beans when I should have used 1/2 cup peas. Peas have a milder flavor anyway, so I probably should have used about 1/4 cup of green beans. Oops. Finally, I skipped the butter and just used the olive oil to saute the veggies.
Nutrition facts:
336 calories for the chicken and biscuit (recipe here)
Review: 3/5
Wow, this recipe is ridiculously low-cal! It filled me up pretty well (thank you, fiber in the English muffin) and gave me tons of protein, but was still way lower than I was expecting. It's because it's basically just chicken, veggies, and a bit of oil - super healthy! However, the flavor wasn't amazing. It was very green bean-y. Now, as I said, that's probably entirely my fault for subbing green beans and then using way too many... but at the same time, there didn't seem to be any component that would provide a strong flavor for the sauce. I'd maybe try a bit of marsala or other sweet white wine between adding the flour and adding the chicken broth. Still, not bad, and healthy enough that I don't really care. Now, on to the beers and shots that will more than compensate for any calories I saved with this meal! Happy Friday :)
Healthy Meal: Waterzooi de Poulet
Well, I'm not in the best of moods today. I made this for dinner last night (went out after without posting), but I was going to have it again for lunch today, so I figured I'd post then. I packed it all up in my favorite soup mug, cut a nice chunk of baguette to go with it, and even chopped up some carrots to have as a mid-afternoon snack. Unfortunately, I stopped at the pharmacy on my way into work, and totally left my lunch on the counter. The good news: I called the pharmacist and he's leaving it with the manager of the grocery so I can get it at the end of the day (which is still, unfortunately, a long way away). The bad news: chicken soup does not keep for 12 hours unrefrigerated. At least I get my mug back!
The soup is called Waterzooi de Poulet, and it's Belgian. Very simple and quick to make, and very refreshing and light tasting, while still filling you up. I will admit that I screwed up the recipe a bit (which is why the soup looks all cloudy and mucky instead of brothy and clear). However, it was still delicious.
Recipe notes:
Used olive oil instead of butter, because I keep automatically adding olive oil to a pot before sauteeing things, and then realizing afterward that it was supposed to be butter. I used skim milk instead of heavy cream. And my fatal flaw: I accidentally put the whole egg in instead of just the yolk. It was still good, but it made little bits of egg white float all through the soup instead of being nice and clear and thick.
Nutrition info:
368 calories for the soup (recipe here)
160 calories for the wheat roll I put with it
Review: 5/5
Very light-tasting and delicious, and a fairly low amount of calories. Just having a bowl of it with a large piece of bread was filling enough for a meal, yet didn't overstuff me. I'm really bummed that I missed out on the second serving that I made, but I think this is a new favorite that I'll make soon enough.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
My Diet Plan: A Check In
This morning I stumbled on a diet website that's almost exactly the plan I'm following: The DIY Diet. I have to say, I really hate diets like Atkins and South Beach. They're just too "diet-y." Weight Watchers is doing a promotion right now for how WW isn't really a diet, and that's what I'm striving for: to eat well but not have to eat large quantities of odd things or be deprived of my favorite things.
As you may be able to tell, I log everything I eat on DailyPlate. I mean I log everything, maybe even a bit obsessively :) However, I can see a CLEAR difference in my weight ever since I started doing that. I've posted before about thinking you're doing something healthy and then realizing that your choices were actually not as great as you thought, and I want to reiterate that. My diet plan involves understanding what you ate. Not depriving yourself of sweets and treats, but eating those sweets and treats with full knowledge about what you're doing.
On Christmas Eve, I had a ton of food that I probably shouldn't have had. However, as I was eating, I was mentally tallying it up in my head. I had a whole assortment of things: a few bites of this, a few nibbles of that. And yet - my mental tally turned out to be within 100 calories of the actual amount! I was proud of that because it means I'm starting to understand what goes into a calorie and how to avoid pitfalls when I'm someplace that I can't look up calorie counts.
If you have a chance, check out the DIY Diet. All the tools on the right side of the page are basically what I wanted to say in my blog, but didn't yet write. I think this is a pretty sensible plan, and I'm proud to announce that on my own version of it, I've lost 7 pounds so far!! I look and feel great, and it's been noticed by family, friends, and coworkers. What's more, this is sustainable. This isn't a "next week once I've lost the weight I'll gorge myself on forbidden foods XYZ" kind of plan. (Though sometimes I wish I could have a free week to just binge on everything, like I used to do when I didn't pay attention to my weight). I eat everything I like in small amounts. Last night I had a few meringues for dessert; the night before I had a bunch of caramel corn; the day before that I had ice cream. I eat fun stuff - I just watch what I eat other times so I shouldn't feel guilty about eating the fun stuff.
My only concern about this "diet" is that sometimes I worry that I'm getting a little obsessive about it. I feel gross if I eat way over my calories for the day (which does happen on occasion), or if I skip/miss working out at night. I'm a big perfectionist, so it's frustrating to me when I mess up. I don't scrap the whole diet, but I tend to approach it with a new fanaticism. Yesterday, for example, I went for a nine mile run in Central Park. NINE MILES. That's a ton. And I try not to get in the habit of eating back what I burn exercising, but that's about 1,000 calories burned. And yet - when I had the meringues after dinner (pushing me like 50 calories over my total calories for the day, but still about 900 calories under my net calories), I felt guilty.
Do these guilty feelings happen to anyone else? Am I the only one with perfectionist tendencies?
As you may be able to tell, I log everything I eat on DailyPlate. I mean I log everything, maybe even a bit obsessively :) However, I can see a CLEAR difference in my weight ever since I started doing that. I've posted before about thinking you're doing something healthy and then realizing that your choices were actually not as great as you thought, and I want to reiterate that. My diet plan involves understanding what you ate. Not depriving yourself of sweets and treats, but eating those sweets and treats with full knowledge about what you're doing.
On Christmas Eve, I had a ton of food that I probably shouldn't have had. However, as I was eating, I was mentally tallying it up in my head. I had a whole assortment of things: a few bites of this, a few nibbles of that. And yet - my mental tally turned out to be within 100 calories of the actual amount! I was proud of that because it means I'm starting to understand what goes into a calorie and how to avoid pitfalls when I'm someplace that I can't look up calorie counts.
If you have a chance, check out the DIY Diet. All the tools on the right side of the page are basically what I wanted to say in my blog, but didn't yet write. I think this is a pretty sensible plan, and I'm proud to announce that on my own version of it, I've lost 7 pounds so far!! I look and feel great, and it's been noticed by family, friends, and coworkers. What's more, this is sustainable. This isn't a "next week once I've lost the weight I'll gorge myself on forbidden foods XYZ" kind of plan. (Though sometimes I wish I could have a free week to just binge on everything, like I used to do when I didn't pay attention to my weight). I eat everything I like in small amounts. Last night I had a few meringues for dessert; the night before I had a bunch of caramel corn; the day before that I had ice cream. I eat fun stuff - I just watch what I eat other times so I shouldn't feel guilty about eating the fun stuff.
My only concern about this "diet" is that sometimes I worry that I'm getting a little obsessive about it. I feel gross if I eat way over my calories for the day (which does happen on occasion), or if I skip/miss working out at night. I'm a big perfectionist, so it's frustrating to me when I mess up. I don't scrap the whole diet, but I tend to approach it with a new fanaticism. Yesterday, for example, I went for a nine mile run in Central Park. NINE MILES. That's a ton. And I try not to get in the habit of eating back what I burn exercising, but that's about 1,000 calories burned. And yet - when I had the meringues after dinner (pushing me like 50 calories over my total calories for the day, but still about 900 calories under my net calories), I felt guilty.
Do these guilty feelings happen to anyone else? Am I the only one with perfectionist tendencies?
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Healthy Meal: Emeril's Shrimp Scampi
I was trying to post something light because I know so many of us overindulged on Christmas. However, this recipe actually ended up being a bit heavy because it involved a) pasta b) shrimp and c) oil. Not necessarily a diet recipe, though it's also not terrible for you.
Fortunately, I went running today (NINE miles. Yes, NINE. I'm so proud of myself), so I've really earned some more calories to eat (even though I don't generally make a practice of that). But really, if I don't eat anything else with the pasta (maybe just some steamed veggies), I'm where I should be for today. Pretty impressive considering I had a much larger breakfast than usual!
Recipe notes:
I used just olive oil, no butter (and I didn't add more olive oil once I put the pasta in - I found it was fine without). Bread and butter pickles instead of capers. And no extra salt.
Nutrition facts:
535 calories for the pasta (recipe here)
Review: 4/5
This was delicious, and seriously, SO quick to prepare. Took a grand total of 11 minutes, and that includes cooking the pasta. I didn't even have Emeril's Essence (I keep basic spices - very few blends), and throwing the spices together was easy. It came out spicier than I anticipated, and the pickles were very apparent (my fault for using pickles instead of capers), but I liked it a lot, and would definitely make it again if I'm in a carb mood. Only reason for the loss of a star is that it's a bit high cal if you wanted to put anything else with it. I ate it by itself (though I may have some steamed veggies later), but be warned: this is not light enough to also have garlic bread or something with. Maybe a salad, if you go light on the dressing.
Fortunately, I went running today (NINE miles. Yes, NINE. I'm so proud of myself), so I've really earned some more calories to eat (even though I don't generally make a practice of that). But really, if I don't eat anything else with the pasta (maybe just some steamed veggies), I'm where I should be for today. Pretty impressive considering I had a much larger breakfast than usual!
Recipe notes:
I used just olive oil, no butter (and I didn't add more olive oil once I put the pasta in - I found it was fine without). Bread and butter pickles instead of capers. And no extra salt.
Nutrition facts:
535 calories for the pasta (recipe here)
Review: 4/5
This was delicious, and seriously, SO quick to prepare. Took a grand total of 11 minutes, and that includes cooking the pasta. I didn't even have Emeril's Essence (I keep basic spices - very few blends), and throwing the spices together was easy. It came out spicier than I anticipated, and the pickles were very apparent (my fault for using pickles instead of capers), but I liked it a lot, and would definitely make it again if I'm in a carb mood. Only reason for the loss of a star is that it's a bit high cal if you wanted to put anything else with it. I ate it by itself (though I may have some steamed veggies later), but be warned: this is not light enough to also have garlic bread or something with. Maybe a salad, if you go light on the dressing.
Healthy Meal: Holiday Strata and Fresh Winter Fruit with Creamy Poppyseed Dressing
Hope everyone had a merry Christmas! :) I forgot to take pics of my Christmas Eve dinner, but I have some yummy brunch recipes coming up - holiday strata and fresh winter fruit with creamy poppyseed dressing. Both were absolutely delicious, and pretty filling, but still on the lighter side for brunch. Good thing, since I ate quite a few treats the night before!
Fruit recipe notes:
Nutrition info:
Review: 5/5
Strata recipe notes:
First, I cut the recipe in half - it still made 6 decent-sized servings. I used olive oil to saute the mushrooms, just because I didn't look at the recipe when I started and mixed up the two :) That was fine though. I only used one link of sausage (Trader Joe's Sweet Bell Pepper & Onion Chicken Sausage, which is awesome), sliced it, and cut each slice in half. I used Trader Joe's three cheese blend (mozzarella, monterey jack, and cheddar), 1/4 cup for each step just to make a nice thin layer of cheese (1/2 cup total). I used skim milk, and contrary to the instructions, it was just fine - still came out thick and rich. Finally, I used dijon mustard instead of dry mustard, just because I don't have dry mustard. It took about 15 minutes to put it all together, then in the morning I got up early to pull it out of the fridge, nap for 30 minutes, pop it in the oven, nap for another 30 minutes, and then prep the fruits for the last 15 minutes of cooking. 45 minutes at 300 was absolutely perfect, and it came out golden and beautiful. Surprisingly easy to serve too: it cut nicely.
Fruit recipe notes:
I used one Fuji apple, one pear, one banana, 3/4 cup pineapple, and no grapes. I didn't put any sugar with the lemon juice just because I never put sugar on fruit - I find it naturally sweet enough. As for the poppyseed dressing, I used more yogurt than mayonnaise, and I used French vanilla yogurt. The whole thing was absolutely DELICIOUS, and pretty healthy.
Nutrition info:
165 calories for the strata (recipe here)
296 calories for the fruit and dressing (recipe here)
Review: 5/5
The fruit was much higher in calories than I was expecting (probably because it was a HUGE serving), and the strata much lower. It all balanced out to be a delicious and good-sized meal though, and I think the calories were definitely worth it (especially when you see how much protein this has!). Very easy, but definitely not something I'd want to make on a weekday because the strata requires a lot of inactive prep/cook time, and I don't like getting up and going back to bed! I'd say this is the perfect dish if you have company on a weekend and want to impress them for brunch.
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Healthy Meal: Super Tuscan Burgers and Potato Salad
Tonight I'm back in the swing of things with some burgers and potato salad. I know, not your typical dinner OR your typical winter food (more of a summertime picnic lunch), but it was good and a delicious way to use up the ground turkey that I had.
Sorry for the picture sucking. Tomorrow I'm going to buy brighter lightbulbs for our living room so I can take pictures without the flash and they hopefully won't be too dark.
Recipe notes:
I made this recipe without many changes for nutrition, which is why it's a bit higher-cal than usual (I still subbed a bunch, but more to use up what was in my fridge rather than make it healthier). I used one potato for two people (instead of 2.5 pounds for four - that is a LOT of potatoes!). I used dried sage instead of fresh, though next time I think I'd pick up some fresh sage and use that because it was hard to get the ground sage to go evenly through the meat. Used whole wheat kaiser rolls, grated parmesan instead of sliced, mesclun instead of arugula, and pickles instead of capers. In terms of actual preparation, I did it just the way the recipe said. If you'd like to make it healthier, grill your burgers instead of pan-frying them, and then use just 1/2 tbsp of oil to saute the mushrooms.
Nutrition:
505 calories for the burger (recipe here) - sounds like a lot, but not too bad for a big cheeseburger!
142 calories for the potato salad (recipe also here)
Review: 5/5
This was great! The sage didn't spread through the burger as evenly as I wanted, but whenever I got a bite that had sage it was incredible. The red wine also adds a nice flavor to the burger. As I said, I'd buy fresh sage next time to make sure all of it got the sage. Definitely really yummy and fairly easy/quick (I think it took about 25 mins total). I'd make this again if I had the ingredients on hand and the calories to spare.
Sorry for the picture sucking. Tomorrow I'm going to buy brighter lightbulbs for our living room so I can take pictures without the flash and they hopefully won't be too dark.
Recipe notes:
I made this recipe without many changes for nutrition, which is why it's a bit higher-cal than usual (I still subbed a bunch, but more to use up what was in my fridge rather than make it healthier). I used one potato for two people (instead of 2.5 pounds for four - that is a LOT of potatoes!). I used dried sage instead of fresh, though next time I think I'd pick up some fresh sage and use that because it was hard to get the ground sage to go evenly through the meat. Used whole wheat kaiser rolls, grated parmesan instead of sliced, mesclun instead of arugula, and pickles instead of capers. In terms of actual preparation, I did it just the way the recipe said. If you'd like to make it healthier, grill your burgers instead of pan-frying them, and then use just 1/2 tbsp of oil to saute the mushrooms.
Nutrition:
505 calories for the burger (recipe here) - sounds like a lot, but not too bad for a big cheeseburger!
142 calories for the potato salad (recipe also here)
Review: 5/5
This was great! The sage didn't spread through the burger as evenly as I wanted, but whenever I got a bite that had sage it was incredible. The red wine also adds a nice flavor to the burger. As I said, I'd buy fresh sage next time to make sure all of it got the sage. Definitely really yummy and fairly easy/quick (I think it took about 25 mins total). I'd make this again if I had the ingredients on hand and the calories to spare.
New Year's Eve Decisions
Oh, New Year's Eve. It has the potential to be one of the greatest drinking nights of the year, but has so much pressure to fulfill that potential that it usually falls short. If you're living in NYC, there is even more pressure due to what has become the typical way to celebrate: overpriced open bars.
(If you're wondering what this has to do with fitness, the supposed topic of my blog, I promise the relevance will eventually become apparent)
The open bar is quite a conundrum because you have to order you tickets weeks in advance. You check out your favorite bars, check out websites and spam e-mails promising you "the biggest NYE blowout ever!", talk to your friends, and yet no one is willing to make a decision. Because dropping $150 on a night of drinking, some would say, is irresponsible. Oh sure, we may have done that in a normal night (though we probably don't remember the night), but it's spread out over the course the night, and we certainly didn't realize we were going to be spending that much before we started. And then there's the pressure. If you are going to buy a $150 ticket to a bar, you better make damn sure that it's a good bar where you will want to stay the rest of the night. NYE is not the time for bar-hopping as usual. In fact, you pretty much can't do it because every place has the open bar with a huge cover (cash bars on NYE are very very rare). So - you pay without knowing what you're getting yourself into. And chances are you will never get your money's worth because the "open bar" actually means "open bar if you can push your way past all the other people we packed in here and violated the fire code but hey we're making tons of money because no one can get to the bartender and actually order a drink."
So this year, that's obviously option #1. A bunch of my friends found a place that's only $100 (only... ha) and invited me to come with them. Option #2, presented by my friend Kelly, is the "fit" option. The New York Road Runner's club puts on the Emerald Nuts Midnight Run, a four mile race in Central Park that starts on the stroke of midnight. There is a costume parade, music, dancing and general revelry from 10-12, and then at midnight, fireworks go off to mark the beginning of the race. At mile 2, there is even a champagne stop instead of a water stop! (However, some past participants have remarked that they think it may be non-alcoholic champagne). So my idea was as follows: wear some kind of crazy costume. Avoid drinking before midnight (?! I know. Not a typical NYE, when the goal is usually to get as drunk as possible and not remember what happens at midnight). At midnight, take a shot (albeit of something not TOO alcoholic... maybe triple sec or something) and commence running. At each mile, take another shot (substituting champagne for a shot at mile 2). When the race finishes, stop at my apartment for a quick shower and change of clothes, and then head out to the bars. After midnight, the open bar is drastically reduced in price. Unfortunately, the number of cute guys who haven't yet found a girl is also drastically reduced.
My biggest concern with this plan is the dangers of running while drunk. Although drinking and running are two of my favorite activities, I've never done them together. Paul over at Recovering Runner posted on Thursday about a new world record for the Beer Mile, which gave me hope. However, one mile is very different than four, and it also occurred to me that if someone is running a five minute mile:
A) They are in much better shape than I.
B) The alcohol has probably not had a chance to get into the bloodstream before they are done running.
Running four miles while drunk sounds like a good idea in theory, and I certainly wouldn't be running it for time, but I also could see it spelling disaster. A cautionary tale to other runners: "this dumb girl tried to run four miles drunk and she ended up in the hospital." This thread over at CoolRunning seems to indicate that other people have done it successfully, but I'm still a bit concerned.
At the same time, what a perfect start to my New Year! I will be posting later this week about 2008 goals and New Year's resolutions, but for now I'll just say that my goals have a lot to do with fitness. Starting the year running (literally) would be a great way to kick off 2008, and it could definitely make for a cool story.
Decisions, decisions...
(If you're wondering what this has to do with fitness, the supposed topic of my blog, I promise the relevance will eventually become apparent)
The open bar is quite a conundrum because you have to order you tickets weeks in advance. You check out your favorite bars, check out websites and spam e-mails promising you "the biggest NYE blowout ever!", talk to your friends, and yet no one is willing to make a decision. Because dropping $150 on a night of drinking, some would say, is irresponsible. Oh sure, we may have done that in a normal night (though we probably don't remember the night), but it's spread out over the course the night, and we certainly didn't realize we were going to be spending that much before we started. And then there's the pressure. If you are going to buy a $150 ticket to a bar, you better make damn sure that it's a good bar where you will want to stay the rest of the night. NYE is not the time for bar-hopping as usual. In fact, you pretty much can't do it because every place has the open bar with a huge cover (cash bars on NYE are very very rare). So - you pay without knowing what you're getting yourself into. And chances are you will never get your money's worth because the "open bar" actually means "open bar if you can push your way past all the other people we packed in here and violated the fire code but hey we're making tons of money because no one can get to the bartender and actually order a drink."
So this year, that's obviously option #1. A bunch of my friends found a place that's only $100 (only... ha) and invited me to come with them. Option #2, presented by my friend Kelly, is the "fit" option. The New York Road Runner's club puts on the Emerald Nuts Midnight Run, a four mile race in Central Park that starts on the stroke of midnight. There is a costume parade, music, dancing and general revelry from 10-12, and then at midnight, fireworks go off to mark the beginning of the race. At mile 2, there is even a champagne stop instead of a water stop! (However, some past participants have remarked that they think it may be non-alcoholic champagne). So my idea was as follows: wear some kind of crazy costume. Avoid drinking before midnight (?! I know. Not a typical NYE, when the goal is usually to get as drunk as possible and not remember what happens at midnight). At midnight, take a shot (albeit of something not TOO alcoholic... maybe triple sec or something) and commence running. At each mile, take another shot (substituting champagne for a shot at mile 2). When the race finishes, stop at my apartment for a quick shower and change of clothes, and then head out to the bars. After midnight, the open bar is drastically reduced in price. Unfortunately, the number of cute guys who haven't yet found a girl is also drastically reduced.
My biggest concern with this plan is the dangers of running while drunk. Although drinking and running are two of my favorite activities, I've never done them together. Paul over at Recovering Runner posted on Thursday about a new world record for the Beer Mile, which gave me hope. However, one mile is very different than four, and it also occurred to me that if someone is running a five minute mile:
A) They are in much better shape than I.
B) The alcohol has probably not had a chance to get into the bloodstream before they are done running.
Running four miles while drunk sounds like a good idea in theory, and I certainly wouldn't be running it for time, but I also could see it spelling disaster. A cautionary tale to other runners: "this dumb girl tried to run four miles drunk and she ended up in the hospital." This thread over at CoolRunning seems to indicate that other people have done it successfully, but I'm still a bit concerned.
At the same time, what a perfect start to my New Year! I will be posting later this week about 2008 goals and New Year's resolutions, but for now I'll just say that my goals have a lot to do with fitness. Starting the year running (literally) would be a great way to kick off 2008, and it could definitely make for a cool story.
Decisions, decisions...
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Are You Unintentionally Sabotaging Your Diet?
One of the hardest things when you're first starting to try to lose weight is actually realizing your diet and exercise mistakes. Last year was when I started learning how to cook, and I thought the pounds would just melt away if I cooked for myself instead of eating out all the time. I went for about three months without touching fast food! I was never really a fast food junkie, but I drove by a zillion McDonalds and Long John Silvers etc all the time, and sometimes I would just get a really intense craving. I learned to make what I was craving, which was definitely better than just eating fast food. But how much better? Ah, that depends on the recipe.
You've seen me post recipes that are 600-700 calories, which for my diet is a little high. But what you have to remember is: that's not even the real recipe. That's the modified version. A lot of the recipes that I make actually use tons of sugar, olive oil, salty broths, etc. I substitute for these a lot, and also use alternate cooking methods to cut fat and calories. For example, the pork chop recipe that I posted the other day called for the pork chops to be sauteed in olive oil. I opted to grill them on my George Foreman, which not only saved me calories and fat from oil (375 cals and 42 g of fat saved compared to using the 3 tbsp the recipe calls for), but also, if you believe the claims of the "Lean Mean Fat Burning Machine," helped more of the meat's fat to be dripped away so I get fewer calories and less fat from that. (I don't count that when I calculate nutrition, but hey, my body counts it, so it's worth something).
Anyway, the point is, if you think you're doing something healthy by just cooking for yourself, you are - certainly don't stop. But try to think realistically about what you're cooking.
The pork chop recipe is 1475 calories if you make it as-is. Fourteen hundred and seventy five calories per serving. That means one serving of the recipe as-is would be more than my entire daily allowance. For comparison, a Big Mac with large fries and a large coke is only 1386 calories (I can't believe I said only with that figure). This does not by any means indicate that you should stop cooking and start eating at McDonalds; I definitely would not encourage that, especially since the McDonalds food is full of chemicals and other highly-processed ingredients. But it means you need to really think critically about the supposedly healthy choices you're making and whether they really are healthy and make a difference. Is your recipe healthy, or does it use a bunch of cream? Try substituting low-fat yogurt for the cream, or chicken broth for the oil to sautee things, or applesauce for the oil in baking. See how healthy you can make your recipes - you'll be surprised.
It's very easy to unintentionally delude yourself into think you're doing well with your diet, but then you wonder why it's not working. It really is just SO easy to do that. The little calorie counter on the machine says you've burned 600 calories doing 30 mins of cardio, so you think you've got a free pass to eat an extra 600 calories. Stop! Don't do it. Those calorie counters are wrong, and if you eat back what they say you burned, you're going to be gaining weight and wondering why.
I was talking to a friend about this the other day. He talked about how he plays Wii baseball and counts it as exercise on DailyPlate, using baseball as the activity. When I inquired how many calories he supposedly burned an hour, he said DailyPlate told him about 600. Now, what I like to do when I think about exercise is compare it to running (a recent article in the Times did the same thing, which made me feel super-smart). Running is a fairly standard thing that running a mile burns about 100 calories (of course, up or down depending on your weight and how fast you were going, but it's still a good standard). So what DailyPlate basically said was that playing baseball for an hour is the equivalent of running 6 miles. Excuse me?! I know baseball is demanding, but you do not run 6 miles in a game. A lot of the time you're just standing there waiting for your turn at bat or for the ball to come your way in the outfield. As with any sport, I realize there is variation due to what position you play and how the game is going, etc, but I don't think any player would burn 6 miles worth of calories in an hour. When I told this to my friend, I also pointed out that in Wii baseball, you're not even running! You're waving your arm around with a fairly light little controller in hand. Yes, you might get a little sweaty, but I wouldn't classify two hours of that as a 1200 calorie workout. It's an innocent mistake, but one that would cost you pretty dearly if you were counting on that 1200 calories as a workout.
Which brings me to the real point of today's post: knowledge. The reason all those dumb fad diets are so successful? People haven't learned that weight loss is calories in, calories out. Eat less, move more. It's not miracle pills or five minutes a day on some revolutionary machine. It's just plain hard work. It's avoiding the sweets and then dragging yourself down to the treadmill (though hopefully you can find healthy treats that you like, and an exercise activity that you don't mind). I like to read everything I can on health/fitness, and that's part of why I wanted to have this blog: to share what I know. I'm not an expert; I'm not certified; I get my information from various sources, some of which may not even be entirely reliable. But if I read enough of it, I'll learn what's good advice and what's not. What really is something cool to help you lose weight and what's just some scam to promise you results and take your money.
According to Diet Detective, the drug company Alli is going to be providing free access to nutritionists from January 4 to January 8. You can call in between the hours of between the hours of 10 AM and 6 PM, and either speak live with a dietitian, or hear prerecorded diet, nutrition, behavioral and exercise tips. I can't vouch for how great these dieticians are going to be (if it turns into just one big sales pitch for Alli, I'm bailing), but it seems like a good idea. So think of some burning questions! Really think about why you are the weight you are, and what's standing in your way of dropping to the weight you want to be. Try to figure out the silly things ("I cook every night with a cup of olive oil... I don't get why I'm not losing weight!") on your own and then use this to take care of the really tough questions that you just can't get answered anywhere else. I may be putting too much faith in the Alli-sponsored dietitians, but getting to talk to an expert for free sounds awesome, so I'm going to give it everything I have!
Off-topic, I just want to announce that last night I went out drinking and had a good time, but only ended up 24 calories over for the day thanks to smart choices earlier. And me not drinking like a fish. I'm proud of myself :)
You've seen me post recipes that are 600-700 calories, which for my diet is a little high. But what you have to remember is: that's not even the real recipe. That's the modified version. A lot of the recipes that I make actually use tons of sugar, olive oil, salty broths, etc. I substitute for these a lot, and also use alternate cooking methods to cut fat and calories. For example, the pork chop recipe that I posted the other day called for the pork chops to be sauteed in olive oil. I opted to grill them on my George Foreman, which not only saved me calories and fat from oil (375 cals and 42 g of fat saved compared to using the 3 tbsp the recipe calls for), but also, if you believe the claims of the "Lean Mean Fat Burning Machine," helped more of the meat's fat to be dripped away so I get fewer calories and less fat from that. (I don't count that when I calculate nutrition, but hey, my body counts it, so it's worth something).
Anyway, the point is, if you think you're doing something healthy by just cooking for yourself, you are - certainly don't stop. But try to think realistically about what you're cooking.
The pork chop recipe is 1475 calories if you make it as-is. Fourteen hundred and seventy five calories per serving. That means one serving of the recipe as-is would be more than my entire daily allowance. For comparison, a Big Mac with large fries and a large coke is only 1386 calories (I can't believe I said only with that figure). This does not by any means indicate that you should stop cooking and start eating at McDonalds; I definitely would not encourage that, especially since the McDonalds food is full of chemicals and other highly-processed ingredients. But it means you need to really think critically about the supposedly healthy choices you're making and whether they really are healthy and make a difference. Is your recipe healthy, or does it use a bunch of cream? Try substituting low-fat yogurt for the cream, or chicken broth for the oil to sautee things, or applesauce for the oil in baking. See how healthy you can make your recipes - you'll be surprised.
It's very easy to unintentionally delude yourself into think you're doing well with your diet, but then you wonder why it's not working. It really is just SO easy to do that. The little calorie counter on the machine says you've burned 600 calories doing 30 mins of cardio, so you think you've got a free pass to eat an extra 600 calories. Stop! Don't do it. Those calorie counters are wrong, and if you eat back what they say you burned, you're going to be gaining weight and wondering why.
I was talking to a friend about this the other day. He talked about how he plays Wii baseball and counts it as exercise on DailyPlate, using baseball as the activity. When I inquired how many calories he supposedly burned an hour, he said DailyPlate told him about 600. Now, what I like to do when I think about exercise is compare it to running (a recent article in the Times did the same thing, which made me feel super-smart). Running is a fairly standard thing that running a mile burns about 100 calories (of course, up or down depending on your weight and how fast you were going, but it's still a good standard). So what DailyPlate basically said was that playing baseball for an hour is the equivalent of running 6 miles. Excuse me?! I know baseball is demanding, but you do not run 6 miles in a game. A lot of the time you're just standing there waiting for your turn at bat or for the ball to come your way in the outfield. As with any sport, I realize there is variation due to what position you play and how the game is going, etc, but I don't think any player would burn 6 miles worth of calories in an hour. When I told this to my friend, I also pointed out that in Wii baseball, you're not even running! You're waving your arm around with a fairly light little controller in hand. Yes, you might get a little sweaty, but I wouldn't classify two hours of that as a 1200 calorie workout. It's an innocent mistake, but one that would cost you pretty dearly if you were counting on that 1200 calories as a workout.
Which brings me to the real point of today's post: knowledge. The reason all those dumb fad diets are so successful? People haven't learned that weight loss is calories in, calories out. Eat less, move more. It's not miracle pills or five minutes a day on some revolutionary machine. It's just plain hard work. It's avoiding the sweets and then dragging yourself down to the treadmill (though hopefully you can find healthy treats that you like, and an exercise activity that you don't mind). I like to read everything I can on health/fitness, and that's part of why I wanted to have this blog: to share what I know. I'm not an expert; I'm not certified; I get my information from various sources, some of which may not even be entirely reliable. But if I read enough of it, I'll learn what's good advice and what's not. What really is something cool to help you lose weight and what's just some scam to promise you results and take your money.
According to Diet Detective, the drug company Alli is going to be providing free access to nutritionists from January 4 to January 8. You can call in between the hours of between the hours of 10 AM and 6 PM, and either speak live with a dietitian, or hear prerecorded diet, nutrition, behavioral and exercise tips. I can't vouch for how great these dieticians are going to be (if it turns into just one big sales pitch for Alli, I'm bailing), but it seems like a good idea. So think of some burning questions! Really think about why you are the weight you are, and what's standing in your way of dropping to the weight you want to be. Try to figure out the silly things ("I cook every night with a cup of olive oil... I don't get why I'm not losing weight!") on your own and then use this to take care of the really tough questions that you just can't get answered anywhere else. I may be putting too much faith in the Alli-sponsored dietitians, but getting to talk to an expert for free sounds awesome, so I'm going to give it everything I have!
Off-topic, I just want to announce that last night I went out drinking and had a good time, but only ended up 24 calories over for the day thanks to smart choices earlier. And me not drinking like a fish. I'm proud of myself :)
Friday, December 21, 2007
Healthy Meal: Spanakopita Chicken Meatballs with Spicy Cucumber and Yogurt Sauce
Work has been a bit busy the past few days, but it's finally the weekend and I am on vacation until Wednesday!!! Hurray. I'm heading out to celebrate with a few friends, so I wanted to make a fairly light dinner but something that was still filling so I wouldn't want as much cider :) This is one of my old favorites that I pulled out. Apologies for the dark pictures; I really need to get some better lighting in my living room.
As you can see, I paired the meatballs/sauce with a nice Greek salad. The ingredients for that can be whatever you want, but I'll give you a great dressing recipe that's simple and VERY diet-friendly.
Recipe notes for the meatballs:
I used ground turkey because it was on sale; I find it pretty interchangeable with the chicken. (I actually tend to use ground turkey instead of ground beef a lot too, just because it's healthier). I used kale instead of spinach (boiled it first to soften it) because I still had some in the fridge to use up. In case you haven't already noticed, I'm a big fan of finding recipes that can be adapted to use up whatever I have on hand :) I skipped the olive oil (it's unnecessary, in my opinion, and I have added it before and found that it doesn't really add anything). Just be sure to spray the bottom of your pan with a bit of Pam so the meatballs don't stick.
Recipe notes for the sauce:
I used dried dill and low-fat greek yogurt. Otherwise, for once, I left the recipe alone.
Recipe notes for the salad:
In the salad, I put mesclun greens, chopped red onions, sliced cucumber, a tomato, and a little bit of feta (I took it from the 1/4 cup I put in the meatballs). As for the dressing, just blend: 1/2 tsp garlic, 1/2 tsp oregano, 1/2 tsp basil, 3/8 tsp pepper, 3/8 tsp onion powder
3/8 tsp mustard, 4 tbsp red wine vinegar. That makes about 1/4 cup of dressing, so when I make it I just throw in a few shakes of everything and ignore the proportions, because I don't really feel like measuring 3/16 of a tsp of anything. I toss it all in a little mini tupperware cup and just shake it up for a minute. And - this is the amazing diet part - no olive oil is needed because the mustard thickens it up! It does come out a bit tangy, so if you're a sugar-lover, you can sub balsamic vinegar for the red wine vinegar, and even throw in a little bit of brown sugar.
Nutrition facts:
326 calories for the meatballs (recipe here)
28 calories for the sauce (recipe also here)
83 calories for all the ingredients in the salad
16 calories for the dressing! (recipe above)
Review: 5/5
This is such an awesome recipe, and it's so easy. Seriously you can't go wrong. Plus, I'm really full and satisfied right now - yet I ate just over 400 calories. Awesome!!! This one has been a favorite of mine since I started cooking, and I'll continue keeping it in my repertoire.
As you can see, I paired the meatballs/sauce with a nice Greek salad. The ingredients for that can be whatever you want, but I'll give you a great dressing recipe that's simple and VERY diet-friendly.
Recipe notes for the meatballs:
I used ground turkey because it was on sale; I find it pretty interchangeable with the chicken. (I actually tend to use ground turkey instead of ground beef a lot too, just because it's healthier). I used kale instead of spinach (boiled it first to soften it) because I still had some in the fridge to use up. In case you haven't already noticed, I'm a big fan of finding recipes that can be adapted to use up whatever I have on hand :) I skipped the olive oil (it's unnecessary, in my opinion, and I have added it before and found that it doesn't really add anything). Just be sure to spray the bottom of your pan with a bit of Pam so the meatballs don't stick.
Recipe notes for the sauce:
I used dried dill and low-fat greek yogurt. Otherwise, for once, I left the recipe alone.
Recipe notes for the salad:
In the salad, I put mesclun greens, chopped red onions, sliced cucumber, a tomato, and a little bit of feta (I took it from the 1/4 cup I put in the meatballs). As for the dressing, just blend: 1/2 tsp garlic, 1/2 tsp oregano, 1/2 tsp basil, 3/8 tsp pepper, 3/8 tsp onion powder
3/8 tsp mustard, 4 tbsp red wine vinegar. That makes about 1/4 cup of dressing, so when I make it I just throw in a few shakes of everything and ignore the proportions, because I don't really feel like measuring 3/16 of a tsp of anything. I toss it all in a little mini tupperware cup and just shake it up for a minute. And - this is the amazing diet part - no olive oil is needed because the mustard thickens it up! It does come out a bit tangy, so if you're a sugar-lover, you can sub balsamic vinegar for the red wine vinegar, and even throw in a little bit of brown sugar.
Nutrition facts:
326 calories for the meatballs (recipe here)
28 calories for the sauce (recipe also here)
83 calories for all the ingredients in the salad
16 calories for the dressing! (recipe above)
Review: 5/5
This is such an awesome recipe, and it's so easy. Seriously you can't go wrong. Plus, I'm really full and satisfied right now - yet I ate just over 400 calories. Awesome!!! This one has been a favorite of mine since I started cooking, and I'll continue keeping it in my repertoire.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Healthy Meal: Minestrone alla Genovese and Panini con Rucola e Prosciutto
Tonight's dinner I was kind of concerned about. It's a two-part dinner, and I checked out the calories before I made it. The soup alone was 690, and I was sure that the grilled ham and cheese would add a ton! However, I was really hungry, and decided to make both anyway.
Recipe notes for the soup:
A side note: I recently discovered Herb Ox Very Low Sodium Bouillon. I found it on DailyPlate when I went looking for low sodium broths, and the Hormel website (link above) actually has a store finder so you can see what stores near you carry it. It's almost sodium free: only 5 mg per serving, compared to 570 mg per serving for Swanson Natural Goodness Chicken Broth, which is actually 33% less than their standard. The downside is Herb Ox has no protein, whereas Swanson has 2g per serving. However, I get way too much protein anyway, so that's okay with me. I bought the Herb Ox but was still trying to use up my leftover Swanson, so in few days I'll try it and then post a full review of taste and whatnot. If it's good, I plan to not cut broth in my recipes anymore b/c there's no need.
Recipe notes for the panini:
Recipe notes for the pesto:
Review: 3/5
I tried to take the pictures with no flash, but I think they came out worse than with the flash. Our living room just isn't bright enough for photography, unfortunately. But see how I got all artistic and put dots of pesto on the sandwich plate? :)
Recipe notes for the soup:
I used one tablespoon of olive oil, and once that burned off, added a bit of water for the rest of the "sauteeing". My thinking is, if it's soup, it's all going to get kind of mushy anyway, so there's no need to add tons of extra calories via oil. As usual, I used about half chicken broth and half water, in order to cut down on the sodium. I subbed french cut frozen green beans instead of the shorter ones just because those are the kind I had in my freezer, which made the soup a little trickier to eat (long beans everywhere!), but also made it look prettier. Finally, I used vermicelli because I only had the extra wide egg noodles.
A side note: I recently discovered Herb Ox Very Low Sodium Bouillon. I found it on DailyPlate when I went looking for low sodium broths, and the Hormel website (link above) actually has a store finder so you can see what stores near you carry it. It's almost sodium free: only 5 mg per serving, compared to 570 mg per serving for Swanson Natural Goodness Chicken Broth, which is actually 33% less than their standard. The downside is Herb Ox has no protein, whereas Swanson has 2g per serving. However, I get way too much protein anyway, so that's okay with me. I bought the Herb Ox but was still trying to use up my leftover Swanson, so in few days I'll try it and then post a full review of taste and whatnot. If it's good, I plan to not cut broth in my recipes anymore b/c there's no need.
Recipe notes for the panini:
My version is really not following the recipe at all. I used Mestemacher three grain bread because I wanted to use up the last of it. Unfortunately I only had one piece, so I kept it as an open faced sandwich and popped it in the toaster (and subsequently burned the ham a bit) instead of grilling it. I used Boursin Gournay cheese instead of ricotta, because I like it and because it was already in my fridge. And I used baby spinach instead of arugula.
Recipe notes for the pesto:
I used Wegman's Fat Free Grated Topping (it's basically like Kraft Parmesan, but not that bad for you), and a little bit more of the chicken broth instead of olive oil. That makes the nuts really the only source of fat, so it's not too bad. And it was delicious!
Nutritional info:
390 calories for the soup and pesto (recipe here)
270 calories for the sandwich (recipe also here)
Review: 3/5
The soup somehow was very... French-tasting (odd, because it's supposed to be an Italian recipe). But French-tasting like in a bland way? I don't know if that makes any sense, because French food is awesome, but it just didn't quite do it for me. However, I made four servings, so I'll keep trying it and I think it will get better. Also, I should add that when I first calculated the calories, it was supposed to be like 690 for just the soup. However, after the meal when I put in all the ingredients with the substitutions and everything (I usually try to figure that out when I first calculate it, but I often make switches in the process of cooking), it came out to be a lot less. That makes me like it more :) The sandwich was just decent, but it didn't really follow the recipe, so maybe the recipe version is awesome. The pesto was INCREDIBLE, and added a lot to the soup - I'd make more next time to give the soup more flavor. Yes, I did say next time - I could see myself making this again if I were in the mood for something kind of simple.
Update: I put way more pesto in my lunchtime edition, and it was much better. 4/5
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Healthy Meal: Spanish Pork Chops with Cornbread Stuffing and Cherry-Rioja Gravy
I've been anticipating this recipe for a LONG time. I've mentioned how I taught myself to cook by watching Food Network? I used to tape shows and watch them at night when I was bored. I couldn't cook all the stuff I taped, especially because I was living alone and was bad at cooking for one, so I generally cooked once and then ate leftovers for 4 days. So I would add recipes that looked good to my Food Network recipe box, and eventually get to them. What I mean by eventually is that, more than a year and a half later, I still have recipes in there from that first month I started teaching myself to cook. This is one of them.
I've been avoiding it a bit because it requires corn muffins/cornbread, which is generally pretty unhealthy. Plus, I didn't want to make or buy a ton of it and then have it sitting around so it would be unhealthy for a week. However, today I tapped into the true magic of Daily Plate and discovered that, by searching for corn muffin, I could look for results with the fewest number of calories. I chose Thomas' Toast-R-Cakes Corn Muffins, which have 110 calories in each. (Not that bad when you consider that a corn muffin from Dunkin Donuts has 510 calories... sorry Topher. I looked online and found that Gristede's carried them, and even went to the trouble of calling up my Gristede's to see if they had them in stock. They did, so this is what I made.
I tried to take it without the flash at first but it just came out too dark to see... our apartment needs better lighting. Anyway, this shows the colors and whatnot. However, here is what to note from the picture: do those two sides of the plate look like they go together? I think not. One side is bright and colorful and party-ish, like Mexican food. I want to pair the stuffing with tacos or something. The other side looks all somber and stately. I want to pair it with mashed potatoes instead. Unfortunately, while both parts of the recipe were good, they just didn't come together to make a meal.
Substitutions:
Grilled the pork chop on the Foreman instead of pan-frying then baking; I used one tablespoon of margarine to start the sauce. I subbed Trader Joe's no sugar added organic strawberry preserves instead of the black cherry preserves, but I threw some black cherries on top (which tasted good and made it look pretty!). Doubled the peppers, onions, and celery because I like veggies, and sauteed them in one tablespoon of olive oil. Finally, throughout the recipe I cut the beef stock in half and used water for the other half. Less salt!
Nutrition:
654 calories for the pork chops and stuffing (recipe here)
No calories for my glass of cherry seltzer :)
Review: 3/5
Both halves were decent, but they just didn't go together at all. Plus, with my high expectations for the meal, I was really let down. On the plus side, it was very quick and easy (25 minutes from pulling things out of the fridge to sitting down and taking the picture), and the flavors were good enough that I'd make them again - but only if I paired them with different items.
I've been avoiding it a bit because it requires corn muffins/cornbread, which is generally pretty unhealthy. Plus, I didn't want to make or buy a ton of it and then have it sitting around so it would be unhealthy for a week. However, today I tapped into the true magic of Daily Plate and discovered that, by searching for corn muffin, I could look for results with the fewest number of calories. I chose Thomas' Toast-R-Cakes Corn Muffins, which have 110 calories in each. (Not that bad when you consider that a corn muffin from Dunkin Donuts has 510 calories... sorry Topher. I looked online and found that Gristede's carried them, and even went to the trouble of calling up my Gristede's to see if they had them in stock. They did, so this is what I made.
I tried to take it without the flash at first but it just came out too dark to see... our apartment needs better lighting. Anyway, this shows the colors and whatnot. However, here is what to note from the picture: do those two sides of the plate look like they go together? I think not. One side is bright and colorful and party-ish, like Mexican food. I want to pair the stuffing with tacos or something. The other side looks all somber and stately. I want to pair it with mashed potatoes instead. Unfortunately, while both parts of the recipe were good, they just didn't come together to make a meal.
Substitutions:
Grilled the pork chop on the Foreman instead of pan-frying then baking; I used one tablespoon of margarine to start the sauce. I subbed Trader Joe's no sugar added organic strawberry preserves instead of the black cherry preserves, but I threw some black cherries on top (which tasted good and made it look pretty!). Doubled the peppers, onions, and celery because I like veggies, and sauteed them in one tablespoon of olive oil. Finally, throughout the recipe I cut the beef stock in half and used water for the other half. Less salt!
Nutrition:
654 calories for the pork chops and stuffing (recipe here)
No calories for my glass of cherry seltzer :)
Review: 3/5
Both halves were decent, but they just didn't go together at all. Plus, with my high expectations for the meal, I was really let down. On the plus side, it was very quick and easy (25 minutes from pulling things out of the fridge to sitting down and taking the picture), and the flavors were good enough that I'd make them again - but only if I paired them with different items.
A is for Apple
Lately I've been snacking on apples a lot. There is a farmer's market down in the square below my building (though Friday is their last day of the season! No fair), so I stop every few days and pick up a bunch of yummy orchard apples to keep at my desk. I usually eat one every morning around 10 or so as a mid-morning snack to get me through to lunch. I also happened to use an apple last night in my soup and salad, so I've been getting quite a few apples into my diet lately!
I haven't really been getting sick much lately, which begs the question... does an apple a day keep the doctor away? First, let's take a look at where this expression came from. In Greek mythology, apples were associated with the god Apollo, who was known for healing. In medieval times, doctors thought that cooked apples could help with common ailments of the bowels, lungs and nervous system. Before doctors knew about fiber, they knew that apples could help with digestion, which was a common problem requiring doctor's visits. So - an apple a day really COULD help keep the doctor away.
If we're considering more modern medicine, when we know fiber is important and therefore a lack of it isn't as prevalent a reason for doctor's visits, Massachusetts General Hospital has a great article answering this question. Basically, the answer is that apples ARE super healthy for you... but it's more that eating a diet high in fresh fruits and vegetables will help you, not apples specifically. Apples have a lot of nutrients and could definitely be considered a "super food," but in general lots of fruits and veggies are great for you, and the same claim could be made about any. Massachusetts General recommends not peeling your apples, because a lot of the nutrients are in the skin.
Raw plain apples on their own aren't the only things good for you: some apple products can work as great substitutes in your cooking. You may know about using applesauce in your baked goods instead of shortening, but new reports show that apple butter can also be used to cut fat and sugar. But not all apple products are good for you - watch out for apple juice! I love a good Appletini as much as the next girl, but most juices are so sugary that it cancels out most of the health benefits. And we all know how hard cider can mess up a diet...
Going back to the skin for a second, I want to give a quick shout-out to my alma mater, Cornell University, where researchers found that the amount of fresh apple extract from a medium apple with skin provides the antioxidant activity equal to 1,500 milligrams of vitamin C. So apples can even help prevent cancer! A Finnish study confirmed this in 1997, when it surveyed people and found that those who ate the most flavonoid-rich foods had a 20% lower incidence of cancer than those who didn't. Quercetin accounted for 95% of the flavonoids consumed, and quercetin is found mainly in apple skins.
So, we've discovered that apples are pretty healthy, pretty filling, and can also help you prevent cancer, which is great. But did you know that different apples have different health benefits? This article from iFit and Healthy tells you more. Personally, I'm a Fuji or Gala kind of girl... I like the smaller size and the taste. When I was little I loved Jonagolds and Golden Delicious best though (hey, maybe that's why I got dumber as I aged: I stopped eating the brain food apples!). I think I just liked having the word "gold" in there, because yellow was my favorite color.
Anyway, all those benefits sound pretty good to me, so pick a variety of types and mix it up every day! If you get really into it, you might even check out the Apple Diet...
PS - Did you know the modern apple originated in Kazakhstan? "Great success!"
I haven't really been getting sick much lately, which begs the question... does an apple a day keep the doctor away? First, let's take a look at where this expression came from. In Greek mythology, apples were associated with the god Apollo, who was known for healing. In medieval times, doctors thought that cooked apples could help with common ailments of the bowels, lungs and nervous system. Before doctors knew about fiber, they knew that apples could help with digestion, which was a common problem requiring doctor's visits. So - an apple a day really COULD help keep the doctor away.
If we're considering more modern medicine, when we know fiber is important and therefore a lack of it isn't as prevalent a reason for doctor's visits, Massachusetts General Hospital has a great article answering this question. Basically, the answer is that apples ARE super healthy for you... but it's more that eating a diet high in fresh fruits and vegetables will help you, not apples specifically. Apples have a lot of nutrients and could definitely be considered a "super food," but in general lots of fruits and veggies are great for you, and the same claim could be made about any. Massachusetts General recommends not peeling your apples, because a lot of the nutrients are in the skin.
Raw plain apples on their own aren't the only things good for you: some apple products can work as great substitutes in your cooking. You may know about using applesauce in your baked goods instead of shortening, but new reports show that apple butter can also be used to cut fat and sugar. But not all apple products are good for you - watch out for apple juice! I love a good Appletini as much as the next girl, but most juices are so sugary that it cancels out most of the health benefits. And we all know how hard cider can mess up a diet...
Going back to the skin for a second, I want to give a quick shout-out to my alma mater, Cornell University, where researchers found that the amount of fresh apple extract from a medium apple with skin provides the antioxidant activity equal to 1,500 milligrams of vitamin C. So apples can even help prevent cancer! A Finnish study confirmed this in 1997, when it surveyed people and found that those who ate the most flavonoid-rich foods had a 20% lower incidence of cancer than those who didn't. Quercetin accounted for 95% of the flavonoids consumed, and quercetin is found mainly in apple skins.
So, we've discovered that apples are pretty healthy, pretty filling, and can also help you prevent cancer, which is great. But did you know that different apples have different health benefits? This article from iFit and Healthy tells you more. Personally, I'm a Fuji or Gala kind of girl... I like the smaller size and the taste. When I was little I loved Jonagolds and Golden Delicious best though (hey, maybe that's why I got dumber as I aged: I stopped eating the brain food apples!). I think I just liked having the word "gold" in there, because yellow was my favorite color.
Anyway, all those benefits sound pretty good to me, so pick a variety of types and mix it up every day! If you get really into it, you might even check out the Apple Diet...
PS - Did you know the modern apple originated in Kazakhstan? "Great success!"
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Healthy Meal: Butternut Squash Soup and Waldorf Salad
Slow to post tonight because I was busy watching The Biggest Loser season finale. It was great to see how much weight everyone had lost! However, I have to say, at the beginning of the season I always found it super-inspiring. Tuesdays were my hard workout days because I would just jump on the elliptical and go for the whole show, sometimes even hitting the treadmill after! Lately, though, not so much. Tonight I did 35 mins -- which is still great, but nowhere near the 60 I was aiming for. I'm excited about the new season January 1st though. Hopefully that will provide fresh inspiration.
Anyway, get ready for some amazing food! Tonight I made butternut squash soup, which is like RIDICULOUSLY healthy. I had a huge portion (it was really two portions), and it was still only 200 cals! Pretty awesome.
My mom sent me the recipe a few days ago and I was eager to try it - I love butternut squash soup. However, I've never bought/used an actual butternut squash before. Peeling it without dropping it into the garbage can was a bit tricky, but didn't really take that long, and chopping it is fairly easy because it's all going to get mushed up anyway so you don't really have to worry about how uniform you're making the pieces.
I paired it with a version of a Waldorf salad, which was actually more cals/fat than the squash because I threw walnuts on top. Now, I tried to plate it all pretty, but I think I just don't have the knack for this, because it looks the same as the pictures I've already been posting:
I cut up a slice of that Mestemacher whole grain bread to have with the soup, and that was pretty tasty. Also, that stuff you see on top of the soup are a few extra walnuts and some nutmeg. See, I told you toppings can really make a recipe look great!
And now for the substitutions of the day. For the soup: one tbsp of I Can't Believe It's Not Butter instead of 2 tbsp butter, 2 cups of Swanson Natural Goodness Chicken Broth (it's lower sodium and fat-free) plus 2 cups of water instead of 4 cups of chicken stock, and I skipped the optional heavy cream. I meant to put in skim milk at the end but forgot until I was already eating, and it was delicious without it. I also tossed half an apple (diced) in with the squash to give it an extra complexity and sweetness.
I used one of those handheld masher things to try to squish the squash into soup, and it almost worked. However, it was still just too irregular for me (especially since tonight was going to be pretty picture night!), so I finally dug out the big blender and put it in. It seriously took like 2 seconds in the blender to puree it. I mean, I pressed the button, then realized I had filled it too full and went to take the top off to dump some out before trying again, and when I did that, I saw that it was already done. Cool!
Substitutions for the salad: no oil or cream in the dressing (it was still great), and I subbed fresh cherries for the grapes. Neither is really in season, but the grapes at my grocery looked gross whereas the cherries looked good, so I figured either was fine. Also I messed with a lot of proportions on the salad. When I get a salad recipe, I tend to just use the amounts as guidelines. Because if I like a little less onion and a little more apple in my salad, who cares? If you do want to know the exact proportions of everything I used, you can always check out the DailyPlate link below (where it says the number of calories).
The whole thing was SO filling. Seriously I am completely stuffed right now and I kind of can't believe I ate that much. However - there's no real guilt, because it was a pretty healthy meal!
Nutrition info:
200 cals for the soup (recipe here)
120 cals for the bread
316 cals for the salad (recipe here)
55 cals for 1/2 glass of skim milk (I was running low)
Now, 691 cals might sound like a lot. However, I really can't tell you just how filling this is. I could have eaten half of everything and still been full! That's a real calorie bargain.
Review: 5/5
This is absolutely incredible. Please please please, if you try nothing else on my blog, try these recipes. They go together really well, and are the perfect winter meal without necessarily being all meaty and heavy. Peeling and chopping the squash was a teeny bit of a pain, but that was all the prep for the whole recipe, so really not a big deal - you just have to stick around for 20 minutes for it to simmer and soften. Just enough time to do a quick fitness DVD in my room! I see this recipe appearing on the menu quite often in the upcoming weeks of winter :)
Anyway, get ready for some amazing food! Tonight I made butternut squash soup, which is like RIDICULOUSLY healthy. I had a huge portion (it was really two portions), and it was still only 200 cals! Pretty awesome.
My mom sent me the recipe a few days ago and I was eager to try it - I love butternut squash soup. However, I've never bought/used an actual butternut squash before. Peeling it without dropping it into the garbage can was a bit tricky, but didn't really take that long, and chopping it is fairly easy because it's all going to get mushed up anyway so you don't really have to worry about how uniform you're making the pieces.
I paired it with a version of a Waldorf salad, which was actually more cals/fat than the squash because I threw walnuts on top. Now, I tried to plate it all pretty, but I think I just don't have the knack for this, because it looks the same as the pictures I've already been posting:
I cut up a slice of that Mestemacher whole grain bread to have with the soup, and that was pretty tasty. Also, that stuff you see on top of the soup are a few extra walnuts and some nutmeg. See, I told you toppings can really make a recipe look great!
And now for the substitutions of the day. For the soup: one tbsp of I Can't Believe It's Not Butter instead of 2 tbsp butter, 2 cups of Swanson Natural Goodness Chicken Broth (it's lower sodium and fat-free) plus 2 cups of water instead of 4 cups of chicken stock, and I skipped the optional heavy cream. I meant to put in skim milk at the end but forgot until I was already eating, and it was delicious without it. I also tossed half an apple (diced) in with the squash to give it an extra complexity and sweetness.
I used one of those handheld masher things to try to squish the squash into soup, and it almost worked. However, it was still just too irregular for me (especially since tonight was going to be pretty picture night!), so I finally dug out the big blender and put it in. It seriously took like 2 seconds in the blender to puree it. I mean, I pressed the button, then realized I had filled it too full and went to take the top off to dump some out before trying again, and when I did that, I saw that it was already done. Cool!
Substitutions for the salad: no oil or cream in the dressing (it was still great), and I subbed fresh cherries for the grapes. Neither is really in season, but the grapes at my grocery looked gross whereas the cherries looked good, so I figured either was fine. Also I messed with a lot of proportions on the salad. When I get a salad recipe, I tend to just use the amounts as guidelines. Because if I like a little less onion and a little more apple in my salad, who cares? If you do want to know the exact proportions of everything I used, you can always check out the DailyPlate link below (where it says the number of calories).
The whole thing was SO filling. Seriously I am completely stuffed right now and I kind of can't believe I ate that much. However - there's no real guilt, because it was a pretty healthy meal!
Nutrition info:
200 cals for the soup (recipe here)
120 cals for the bread
316 cals for the salad (recipe here)
55 cals for 1/2 glass of skim milk (I was running low)
Now, 691 cals might sound like a lot. However, I really can't tell you just how filling this is. I could have eaten half of everything and still been full! That's a real calorie bargain.
Review: 5/5
This is absolutely incredible. Please please please, if you try nothing else on my blog, try these recipes. They go together really well, and are the perfect winter meal without necessarily being all meaty and heavy. Peeling and chopping the squash was a teeny bit of a pain, but that was all the prep for the whole recipe, so really not a big deal - you just have to stick around for 20 minutes for it to simmer and soften. Just enough time to do a quick fitness DVD in my room! I see this recipe appearing on the menu quite often in the upcoming weeks of winter :)
You Eat With Your Eyes
Last night's dinner wasn't looking too hot. I mean, it was delicious... but the picture just kind of looked like a pile of brown goo (yum!). I did toss some asparagus on there so there was a bit of green and brown, but come on, this isn't Rydell (I can't find a lyrics page to support this reference, so if you get it, post in comments and I'll have a chuckle). Dark brown and green just do not go together in a very appealing way. I mean, what do you think of when you think of brown and green? I think of grass growing in dirt. Ew. Not quite what I wanted to eat.
Fortunately for me, Katie at Sister Skinny provided a gem of a post from Life in Digital Pixels, providing 8 Tips for Taking Mouth-Watering Food Pictures. I promise my food tastes great; hopefully these tips will enable me to take pictures that will make you want to try the recipes too!
This got me thinking... we all know that food taste is directly correlated to how it looks. For example, in Mindless Eating (I really really promise I will post a review of it soon - I know I talk about it a lot), they recount an experiment where people are told they're going to try strawberry yogurt. They are put in a dark room so they can't see, and are given chocolate yogurt. Most of the people came out saying it was great strawberry yogurt, the best strawberry yogurt they've ever had, and wanting the brand name of the fantastic strawberry yogurt. Without seeing it, they tricked their tastebuds. Other studies from the same book show that we eat more if it's on a larger plate, more in the presence of certain colors, etc. Basically, we take our cues from what's around us.
I know when I go to a fancy restaurant -- you know, one of those snobby places that serves a bite-sized taste as an entree -- I find myself getting full on less food. Whereas when I went to Crocodile Lounge last Saturday and they kept giving me a whole personal pizza every time I bought a beer (truly the best special ever from a munchies perspective, truly the worst special ever from a dieter's perspective - AVOID), I ate about one regular-sized pizza. But if Domino's came to my door with a pizza and said "this is for you... enjoy!", there is no way I would have eaten that much.
Anyway, I'm not going to delve into all the ways you can trick yourself to eat less by making it look like it's more; Brian Wansink already did an awesome job of that in Mindless Eating. Instead, I'm going to talk about a few ways you can make your food look tastier and more gourmet, so you feel like you're eating decadently even if you're just having some whole-wheat pasta with a little margarine and parsley.
Here's a great article I found that teaches you about plating, arranging, garnishing, etc. Some of these tips I can't really try - we already have a full set of dishes, and I'm not going to go buy more just to complement all the foods I make. However, I was pleased to see that they recommend criss-crossing your asparagus tic tac toe style... I've got that one down! (Kind of). Believe it or not, I found another great article about plating and presentation at Kraft. I expected it to be full of product placements and whatnot ("Always put your Kraft® Macaroni & Cheese on a blue bowl so it looks like it's the cheesiest!"), but it's surprisingly sophisticated. If you're feeling really ambitious and have extra time, check out this list from RecipeTips.com on how to make various garnishes that you'd see at fancy restaurants.
A few tips I can share from personal experiences:
-When choosing ingredients and substitutions, think about ingredient color combinations, especially if you're making a one-dish meal (e.g. chili, soup, stir-fry, etc). Different colors mean different nutrients, but they also make your food more exciting to eat than a monochrome dish. Let's say I'm making chicken tortilla soup (recipe is here and it's one of my favorites, though I haven't posted it on the blog in full form yet). That's tomato-based, so you have your red. And there's a lot of corn in it, which gives you yellow. So if I'm trying to pick a bell pepper or a zucchini/squash, I might stick with the plain green variety for some contrast.
-Try to put things cleanly and neatly on the plate. If you're serving something with gravy, put the main things on and drizzle the gravy on neatly rather than scooping a lot of meat and veggies with the gravy right from the pot. I messed this up with the top round yesterday, and it made the whole plate look muddy and dirty.
-If your plating isn't perfect, cover it up with more food (healthy food, that is)! You can't tell from the picture, but last night I put the asparagus where I did because it covered up the gravy smudges on that side of the plate :) Remember, smaller plates make you feel full faster, so feel free to grab a tiny one and pile the food on. (Alternately, bigger plates with lots of space between the food look really fancy if you're trying to impress and/or make your food seem better than it is. I really ought to start photographing my recipes on humongous dishes).
-Have fun with the spices. Sprinkle a little something on top when you're done, and it gives the dish a nice finish that looks way more elegant.
For many people, cooking is a big ordeal, and it's frustrating to slave away in the kitchen only to have your food come out looking like a Lean Cuisine. You may even wonder why bother! But your food tastes better and is much healthier than frozen convenience food, so give it the boost it deserves and take the last 30 seconds of your cooking time to make it look pretty.
Hopefully you guys will see the results of all this research when I post my dinner tonight!
Fortunately for me, Katie at Sister Skinny provided a gem of a post from Life in Digital Pixels, providing 8 Tips for Taking Mouth-Watering Food Pictures. I promise my food tastes great; hopefully these tips will enable me to take pictures that will make you want to try the recipes too!
This got me thinking... we all know that food taste is directly correlated to how it looks. For example, in Mindless Eating (I really really promise I will post a review of it soon - I know I talk about it a lot), they recount an experiment where people are told they're going to try strawberry yogurt. They are put in a dark room so they can't see, and are given chocolate yogurt. Most of the people came out saying it was great strawberry yogurt, the best strawberry yogurt they've ever had, and wanting the brand name of the fantastic strawberry yogurt. Without seeing it, they tricked their tastebuds. Other studies from the same book show that we eat more if it's on a larger plate, more in the presence of certain colors, etc. Basically, we take our cues from what's around us.
I know when I go to a fancy restaurant -- you know, one of those snobby places that serves a bite-sized taste as an entree -- I find myself getting full on less food. Whereas when I went to Crocodile Lounge last Saturday and they kept giving me a whole personal pizza every time I bought a beer (truly the best special ever from a munchies perspective, truly the worst special ever from a dieter's perspective - AVOID), I ate about one regular-sized pizza. But if Domino's came to my door with a pizza and said "this is for you... enjoy!", there is no way I would have eaten that much.
Anyway, I'm not going to delve into all the ways you can trick yourself to eat less by making it look like it's more; Brian Wansink already did an awesome job of that in Mindless Eating. Instead, I'm going to talk about a few ways you can make your food look tastier and more gourmet, so you feel like you're eating decadently even if you're just having some whole-wheat pasta with a little margarine and parsley.
Here's a great article I found that teaches you about plating, arranging, garnishing, etc. Some of these tips I can't really try - we already have a full set of dishes, and I'm not going to go buy more just to complement all the foods I make. However, I was pleased to see that they recommend criss-crossing your asparagus tic tac toe style... I've got that one down! (Kind of). Believe it or not, I found another great article about plating and presentation at Kraft. I expected it to be full of product placements and whatnot ("Always put your Kraft® Macaroni & Cheese on a blue bowl so it looks like it's the cheesiest!"), but it's surprisingly sophisticated. If you're feeling really ambitious and have extra time, check out this list from RecipeTips.com on how to make various garnishes that you'd see at fancy restaurants.
A few tips I can share from personal experiences:
-When choosing ingredients and substitutions, think about ingredient color combinations, especially if you're making a one-dish meal (e.g. chili, soup, stir-fry, etc). Different colors mean different nutrients, but they also make your food more exciting to eat than a monochrome dish. Let's say I'm making chicken tortilla soup (recipe is here and it's one of my favorites, though I haven't posted it on the blog in full form yet). That's tomato-based, so you have your red. And there's a lot of corn in it, which gives you yellow. So if I'm trying to pick a bell pepper or a zucchini/squash, I might stick with the plain green variety for some contrast.
-Try to put things cleanly and neatly on the plate. If you're serving something with gravy, put the main things on and drizzle the gravy on neatly rather than scooping a lot of meat and veggies with the gravy right from the pot. I messed this up with the top round yesterday, and it made the whole plate look muddy and dirty.
-If your plating isn't perfect, cover it up with more food (healthy food, that is)! You can't tell from the picture, but last night I put the asparagus where I did because it covered up the gravy smudges on that side of the plate :) Remember, smaller plates make you feel full faster, so feel free to grab a tiny one and pile the food on. (Alternately, bigger plates with lots of space between the food look really fancy if you're trying to impress and/or make your food seem better than it is. I really ought to start photographing my recipes on humongous dishes).
-Have fun with the spices. Sprinkle a little something on top when you're done, and it gives the dish a nice finish that looks way more elegant.
For many people, cooking is a big ordeal, and it's frustrating to slave away in the kitchen only to have your food come out looking like a Lean Cuisine. You may even wonder why bother! But your food tastes better and is much healthier than frozen convenience food, so give it the boost it deserves and take the last 30 seconds of your cooking time to make it look pretty.
Hopefully you guys will see the results of all this research when I post my dinner tonight!
Monday, December 17, 2007
Healthy Meal: Sirloin Beef Burgundy (Boeuf Bourgignon)
All right, here comes another one that's more than 400 calories. Told you I don't starve myself! This recipe clocks in at 588 calories, which is totally doable if you're not pigging out the rest of the day. Not at all bad for a beef-based meal!
And oh, substitutions... you are my friends. (That means there are lots of them tonight.) Let's start with no bacon (you're eating beef - do you REALLY need to top it with bacon?). Sauteed the mushrooms/onions in olive oil instead of butter. I doubled the amount of mushrooms and onions, because I like mushrooms and onions, and it makes the meal a lot more filling without adding many calories. Used Pinot instead of burgundy wine (does that makes this a Boeuf Pinot Noir?) because it was still left over from last night. Finally, dried herbs instead of fresh, because fresh herbs/spices are expensive and I can't really grow a garden in my 20th floor apartment with no balcony (yes, yes, I know, the Aerogarden is amazing... but it's expensive and I don't really trust that it's not just some infomercial crap). I also quickly boiled up some asparagus to round out the plate and make it look more green and less brown.
And oh, substitutions... you are my friends. (That means there are lots of them tonight.) Let's start with no bacon (you're eating beef - do you REALLY need to top it with bacon?). Sauteed the mushrooms/onions in olive oil instead of butter. I doubled the amount of mushrooms and onions, because I like mushrooms and onions, and it makes the meal a lot more filling without adding many calories. Used Pinot instead of burgundy wine (does that makes this a Boeuf Pinot Noir?) because it was still left over from last night. Finally, dried herbs instead of fresh, because fresh herbs/spices are expensive and I can't really grow a garden in my 20th floor apartment with no balcony (yes, yes, I know, the Aerogarden is amazing... but it's expensive and I don't really trust that it's not just some infomercial crap). I also quickly boiled up some asparagus to round out the plate and make it look more green and less brown.
Nutritional results:
588 calories for the beef/mushrooms/onions/gravy (recipe here)
16 calories for the asparagus
110 calories for the ice cold glass of skim milk
Review: 4.5/5
Really yummy, but fairly salty (due to the beef broth). If you can find low-sodium beef broth, props to you. Otherwise, I think next time I'd use half-broth and half-water to cut down the salt some. Pretty easy though, and a nice treat to have beef without necessarily killing your diet for the day. Plus it's nice to sound all fancy and say you cooked "boeuf bourgignon" :) If you want to be decadent, use yesterday's tip and pour yourself a glass of whatever wine you used to cook this - it will definitely bring out the flavors.
Nutrition Info on Receipts?
A few days ago, I posted about nutrition information on your beer. But what about nutrition information on your receipt? FitSugar had an interesting link today to Nutricate, company that makes software to print nutrition information right on your receipt at fast food restaurants. On their website, they say, "At Nutricate, we believe in the familiar saying, Knowledge is Power. We believe that education helps people make decisions, which are best for their lifestyles."
In their FAQ for foodservice professionals, they add, "Eighty-nine percent of our research study respondents said they wanted more nutrition information available at all restaurants. They want to know the nutritive value of what they are consuming and many track their nutrition intake." I believe that statistic completely. What I don't believe is that it will help profits to give that information to customers.
We all know that fast food restaurants are reluctant to put nutritional information on menus, where customers can see it before they make a decision. Nutricate seems to provide the solution: put the nutrition facts on the receipt where customers will see it after they've already bought their food. Actually, most customers probably won't see it at all - when was the last time you analyzed your McDonalds receipt? When I worked at Panera, half our customers crumpled it up in a ball and stuffed it in their pocket, or walked away without even taking it.
There are two case studies on the Nutricate website, both for restaurants that serve pretty healthy fare. Do we really think McDonalds is going to adopt this, and show customers that their double Big Mac with large fries and a large cokes is 1526 calories? For that matter, even a company like Subway that puts all of their nutrition info right on the menu is unlikely to adopt this. Subway makes money from the "halo effect": people think all their food is healthy even though only some of it is. Plus, if you add any condiments that aren't included in nutritional calculation of the sandwich, you're bumping the calories up. The point of the Nutricate system is to account for those additional condiments and modifications, but do you really think restaurants want their customers to know exactly what they are eating? A study by the National Restaurant Association found that 70% of customers modified their order when nutritional information on their order was available. It's just a hunch, but I'm guessing those 70% weren't supersizing!
Finally, I am all for education, but I don't know that it necessarily helps to have it on your receipt, which comes AFTER you've ordered and made your decision. This is especially true since most people will probably forget all that information by the next time they visit the restaurant.
All in all, it's a pretty sneaky way for restaurants to pretend like they're helping people stay healthy, while actually not doing anything at all!
In their FAQ for foodservice professionals, they add, "Eighty-nine percent of our research study respondents said they wanted more nutrition information available at all restaurants. They want to know the nutritive value of what they are consuming and many track their nutrition intake." I believe that statistic completely. What I don't believe is that it will help profits to give that information to customers.
We all know that fast food restaurants are reluctant to put nutritional information on menus, where customers can see it before they make a decision. Nutricate seems to provide the solution: put the nutrition facts on the receipt where customers will see it after they've already bought their food. Actually, most customers probably won't see it at all - when was the last time you analyzed your McDonalds receipt? When I worked at Panera, half our customers crumpled it up in a ball and stuffed it in their pocket, or walked away without even taking it.
There are two case studies on the Nutricate website, both for restaurants that serve pretty healthy fare. Do we really think McDonalds is going to adopt this, and show customers that their double Big Mac with large fries and a large cokes is 1526 calories? For that matter, even a company like Subway that puts all of their nutrition info right on the menu is unlikely to adopt this. Subway makes money from the "halo effect": people think all their food is healthy even though only some of it is. Plus, if you add any condiments that aren't included in nutritional calculation of the sandwich, you're bumping the calories up. The point of the Nutricate system is to account for those additional condiments and modifications, but do you really think restaurants want their customers to know exactly what they are eating? A study by the National Restaurant Association found that 70% of customers modified their order when nutritional information on their order was available. It's just a hunch, but I'm guessing those 70% weren't supersizing!
Finally, I am all for education, but I don't know that it necessarily helps to have it on your receipt, which comes AFTER you've ordered and made your decision. This is especially true since most people will probably forget all that information by the next time they visit the restaurant.
All in all, it's a pretty sneaky way for restaurants to pretend like they're helping people stay healthy, while actually not doing anything at all!
Healthy Meal: Quinoa with Cranberries, Walnuts, and Kale
Bonus lunch meal day!
Because I cooked for a friend last night, and therefore didn't have leftovers, I had to whip something up this morning to bring for lunch today. I opted for quinoa with a few ingredients stirred in. I found this ingredient combination online a while ago (no idea where though - maybe YumSugar?) and have had it saved for a while to try. It was super easy, super delicious, super nutritious, and a great way to use up more of the leftover uncooked kale from last night.
Because there's no official recipe, here are my directions:
1. Rinse 1/3 cup quinoa. This step is honestly the biggest pain of anything, because I don't have a colender with small enough holes so the quinoa doesn't slip through, so I improvise using my hands/paper towels/whatever I can find.
2. Put the quinoa in a pot with 2/3 cup water. Simmer for about 12 minutes.
3. At the 12 minute mark, add 2 cups of chopped (uncooked) kale. Let that keep cooking and wilt down for another 2-3 minutes.
4. Turn the stove off. Add 1/4 cup dried cranberries, 1/8 cup walnuts, and 1 tbsp balsamic vinegar. Stir. Done!
Because I cooked for a friend last night, and therefore didn't have leftovers, I had to whip something up this morning to bring for lunch today. I opted for quinoa with a few ingredients stirred in. I found this ingredient combination online a while ago (no idea where though - maybe YumSugar?) and have had it saved for a while to try. It was super easy, super delicious, super nutritious, and a great way to use up more of the leftover uncooked kale from last night.
Because there's no official recipe, here are my directions:
1. Rinse 1/3 cup quinoa. This step is honestly the biggest pain of anything, because I don't have a colender with small enough holes so the quinoa doesn't slip through, so I improvise using my hands/paper towels/whatever I can find.
2. Put the quinoa in a pot with 2/3 cup water. Simmer for about 12 minutes.
3. At the 12 minute mark, add 2 cups of chopped (uncooked) kale. Let that keep cooking and wilt down for another 2-3 minutes.
4. Turn the stove off. Add 1/4 cup dried cranberries, 1/8 cup walnuts, and 1 tbsp balsamic vinegar. Stir. Done!
Nutritional results:
444 calories for the bowl (no recipe available)
Review: 4.5/5
Really yummy. Somewhat sweet tasting, and very wintery. Calories are fairly low for a meal, but don't think you can have a lot of side dishes with it: this is a meal in itself. Tons and tons of protein, so it's great if you're vegetarian and/or have problems getting your protein for the day.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Healthy Meal: Oregon Style Pork Chops with Pinot Noir and Cranberries
The last few recipes I've posted have been super low-calorie. Although I try to cook healthy, my definition of healthy is really just cooking for myself, using natural ingredients (not processed foods), limiting fats/sugars, and making healthy substitutions for some of the worst ingredients. This recipe definitely has a lot more calories than other things I've posted so far, but it's still very good, and has a lot of great nutrients.
Tonight's recipe was Oregon Style Pork Chops with Pinot Noir and Cranberries, Oregon Hash with Wild Mushrooms, Greens, Beets, Hazelnuts and Blue Cheese, Charred Whole Grain Bread with Butter and Chives. Quite possibly the longest name ever (thanks, Food Network), but it's really three different recipes that they just put all the instructions on one page. They all work very well together, and as a meal for company, I think it's decently impressive. I invited my friend Barry over to try my cooking for the first time. He's been hearing about my meals quite a bit, so the expectations were pretty high. I opted to make a new recipe instead of something already in my repertoire, just because I really like trying new recipes. There are so many out there - why bore your palate with flavors you've already tried? I'm all for being adventurous. Unfortunately, I did have a little mishap (burned the leeks/cranberries, but I was able to salvage most of it, so you couldn't really tell in the final product). However, I think it got a thumbs up overall.
First, I grilled the pork instead of pan-frying it in oil. Then I sauteed the leeks in some olive oil, added the cranberries and Pinot, and subbed 1/4 cup chicken broth mixed with 1.75 cups water (saved some salt that way) for the 2 cups of chicken broth. Tossed the pork chops in and cooked that for ten minutes. If I had been keeping an eye on it, I would have been done with that part of the meal. Unfortunately, I wasn't - so I burned it and ended up having to transfer the pork chops and top layer of leeks/cranberries to a new pan and cook it with a bit more Pinot to get some sauce going.
As for the hash, I skipped the butter, and used just 1/2 tablespoon of oil. I put in the shallots and mushrooms, cooked five minutes, and tossed in the kale. I skipped the beets because Barry doesn't like them, but I bet they would be good for next time.
Finally, for the bread, I used some rather delicious Mestemacher three grain bread and toasted it. I went to toss the goat cheese (I hate blue cheese) onto the hash, and realized I had accidentally bought spreadable - so I put that onto the bread instead of butter/chives (that's what that big white blobby looking thing is in the picture). Tossed the hazelnuts on top of the hash, poured two glasses of the Pinot, and everything was ready to go. Not too difficult, and I think it took maybe 25 minutes or so total.
A tip for those of you unfamiliar with wine but wanting to impress: use a recipe like this that calls for a specific type of wine, then make sure you buy a good bottle. Use however much you need for cooking, then serve the rest of the bottle with the meal. The flavors of the food will be enhanced by the wine, and vice versa. If no one realizes you used the wine in both the food and as a drink, they'll think you're an amazing oenophile who can really choose the perfect match! (I couldn't get away with this because Barry brought the wine and was watching me cook).
Nutritional results:
726 calories for the food (recipe here)
122 calories for the glass of Pinot Noir I had with the meal
Review: 4.5/5
Really delicious with good flavors. All the components of the meal really work well together, and although I didn't really do a great job with the presentation, you could make it really pretty and impress someone by cooking this for them. The only reason for the 1/2 point deduction is that it's a bit high in calories for my eating plan. Not really unhealthy, but it's a meal I would have to plan and eat a bit less for breakfast and lunch in order to make sure it fits in. Depending on your diet and caloric needs, this may not be an issue.
Tonight's recipe was Oregon Style Pork Chops with Pinot Noir and Cranberries, Oregon Hash with Wild Mushrooms, Greens, Beets, Hazelnuts and Blue Cheese, Charred Whole Grain Bread with Butter and Chives. Quite possibly the longest name ever (thanks, Food Network), but it's really three different recipes that they just put all the instructions on one page. They all work very well together, and as a meal for company, I think it's decently impressive. I invited my friend Barry over to try my cooking for the first time. He's been hearing about my meals quite a bit, so the expectations were pretty high. I opted to make a new recipe instead of something already in my repertoire, just because I really like trying new recipes. There are so many out there - why bore your palate with flavors you've already tried? I'm all for being adventurous. Unfortunately, I did have a little mishap (burned the leeks/cranberries, but I was able to salvage most of it, so you couldn't really tell in the final product). However, I think it got a thumbs up overall.
First, I grilled the pork instead of pan-frying it in oil. Then I sauteed the leeks in some olive oil, added the cranberries and Pinot, and subbed 1/4 cup chicken broth mixed with 1.75 cups water (saved some salt that way) for the 2 cups of chicken broth. Tossed the pork chops in and cooked that for ten minutes. If I had been keeping an eye on it, I would have been done with that part of the meal. Unfortunately, I wasn't - so I burned it and ended up having to transfer the pork chops and top layer of leeks/cranberries to a new pan and cook it with a bit more Pinot to get some sauce going.As for the hash, I skipped the butter, and used just 1/2 tablespoon of oil. I put in the shallots and mushrooms, cooked five minutes, and tossed in the kale. I skipped the beets because Barry doesn't like them, but I bet they would be good for next time.
Finally, for the bread, I used some rather delicious Mestemacher three grain bread and toasted it. I went to toss the goat cheese (I hate blue cheese) onto the hash, and realized I had accidentally bought spreadable - so I put that onto the bread instead of butter/chives (that's what that big white blobby looking thing is in the picture). Tossed the hazelnuts on top of the hash, poured two glasses of the Pinot, and everything was ready to go. Not too difficult, and I think it took maybe 25 minutes or so total.
A tip for those of you unfamiliar with wine but wanting to impress: use a recipe like this that calls for a specific type of wine, then make sure you buy a good bottle. Use however much you need for cooking, then serve the rest of the bottle with the meal. The flavors of the food will be enhanced by the wine, and vice versa. If no one realizes you used the wine in both the food and as a drink, they'll think you're an amazing oenophile who can really choose the perfect match! (I couldn't get away with this because Barry brought the wine and was watching me cook).
Nutritional results:
726 calories for the food (recipe here)
122 calories for the glass of Pinot Noir I had with the meal
Review: 4.5/5
Really delicious with good flavors. All the components of the meal really work well together, and although I didn't really do a great job with the presentation, you could make it really pretty and impress someone by cooking this for them. The only reason for the 1/2 point deduction is that it's a bit high in calories for my eating plan. Not really unhealthy, but it's a meal I would have to plan and eat a bit less for breakfast and lunch in order to make sure it fits in. Depending on your diet and caloric needs, this may not be an issue.
Exploring the Dangers of Running
Today's post is going to be a bit more serious than usual. Diet Blog had an article today called Why Do Healthy Athletes Die of Heart Attacks? This is a topic that's a bit hard-hitting for me. I'm sure a lot of you in the running community heard about the guy who died at the Chicago Marathon (due to heat stroke, I believe). If you were really watching the news, you would have heard that another runner died the same day during the Army Ten Miler in Washington, DC. That runner was my friend and former co-worker, Mike Banner.
I hadn't talked to Mike in a few years, but he was always in great shape when I knew him. He wasn't overweight or anything, and while I don't know his running habits, a 10 mile race shouldn't have been that difficult for him. At the time, reports surmised that like the Chicago marathon, it must have been a lack of water on the course.
This was a bit scary to me, because I can be really bad about drinking water while I run. In races where there are water stations, I usually take a cup at each one - but it makes me feel a bit nauseous when I drink it. According to an article about hydration while running an endurance race, that's definitely not a good thing. It specifically says, "drink less if you begin to get a queasy, sloshy feeling in your stomach." When I'm running on my own for training, however, I rarely carry a water bottle. Now the furthest I've ever run in a non-race scenario is 8.3 miles (last week! Yay!), but that's still longer than I should really be going without a drink. I feel good running without water, but I always guzzle it down when I get home, which still could cause hyponatremia (basically, the opposite of being dehydrated: it means you're overhydrated).
So how much should you drink? Old reports used to give you a set number of ounces per hour or per mile, but those were found to be inaccurate because each person is different (I hate when they say that and don't just give an easy answer!). The new guidelines from USATF tell you to weigh yourself before and after a workout - any weight difference is your unique "sweat rate." You want to drink sixteen ounces of fluid for every pound you lose, so once you've figured out your sweat rate, you can calculate it to a per hour or per mile or whatever rate you want. This sounds like a great idea, and one I'll definitely try next time I go for a good workout.
So after all that about water and dehydration... newer reports showed that Mike actually had a very rare heart condition that was the cause of death. His arteries were severely clogged due to a heart disease that's very rare in people our age, and much more common among the elderly. We don't know if Mike knew he had this disease or if he was unaware. My (completely uneducated) guess is the latter. I mean, if you're a twenty-something, you're probably not even thinking about heart disease or tests for it or anything like that. At least, I know I'm not. Ryan Shay, the 28 year old elite distance runner who died running the U.S. men's marathon Olympic Trials, had an enlarged heart that helped him to excel at running, but ultimately killed him. He knew about it - presumably because he was such a great athlete and did so much running that he had been thoroughly checked. But how many young, generally healthy amateur runners do that?
I know they say so many places (or at least on my fitness DVDs) that you should see a doctor before beginning any kind of exercise program. I always just assumed that was really aimed at older people or extremely overweight people who were starting from a completely sedentary lifestyle, and also that it was meant to just be a CYA (Cover Your A**) move for the producers of the DVDs. But the more I hear, the more nervous I get. Is what I'm doing safe? I don't have a nutritionist or a personal trainer. (Actually, I don't even have an official doctor right now, since I still haven't bothered to find one yet since moving to NYC - I should really get on that). Everything I've done to change my diet and change my exercise plan is just based on things I've read and what I think feels "right." I don't go over the top. Until I started calorie counting about a month ago, I didn't even really track what I ate or limit certain things: I just ate what I considered reasonably healthy (limited fatty foods, cooked a lot and didn't eat processed, etc). But maybe it's time I got things checked out to be sure I'm good to go.
Have you gotten a full physical screening from a doctor before exercising? Do you check your diet and exercise plans with them? Or do you just do what feels healthy to you? I'm interested to hear.
I hadn't talked to Mike in a few years, but he was always in great shape when I knew him. He wasn't overweight or anything, and while I don't know his running habits, a 10 mile race shouldn't have been that difficult for him. At the time, reports surmised that like the Chicago marathon, it must have been a lack of water on the course.
This was a bit scary to me, because I can be really bad about drinking water while I run. In races where there are water stations, I usually take a cup at each one - but it makes me feel a bit nauseous when I drink it. According to an article about hydration while running an endurance race, that's definitely not a good thing. It specifically says, "drink less if you begin to get a queasy, sloshy feeling in your stomach." When I'm running on my own for training, however, I rarely carry a water bottle. Now the furthest I've ever run in a non-race scenario is 8.3 miles (last week! Yay!), but that's still longer than I should really be going without a drink. I feel good running without water, but I always guzzle it down when I get home, which still could cause hyponatremia (basically, the opposite of being dehydrated: it means you're overhydrated).
So how much should you drink? Old reports used to give you a set number of ounces per hour or per mile, but those were found to be inaccurate because each person is different (I hate when they say that and don't just give an easy answer!). The new guidelines from USATF tell you to weigh yourself before and after a workout - any weight difference is your unique "sweat rate." You want to drink sixteen ounces of fluid for every pound you lose, so once you've figured out your sweat rate, you can calculate it to a per hour or per mile or whatever rate you want. This sounds like a great idea, and one I'll definitely try next time I go for a good workout.
So after all that about water and dehydration... newer reports showed that Mike actually had a very rare heart condition that was the cause of death. His arteries were severely clogged due to a heart disease that's very rare in people our age, and much more common among the elderly. We don't know if Mike knew he had this disease or if he was unaware. My (completely uneducated) guess is the latter. I mean, if you're a twenty-something, you're probably not even thinking about heart disease or tests for it or anything like that. At least, I know I'm not. Ryan Shay, the 28 year old elite distance runner who died running the U.S. men's marathon Olympic Trials, had an enlarged heart that helped him to excel at running, but ultimately killed him. He knew about it - presumably because he was such a great athlete and did so much running that he had been thoroughly checked. But how many young, generally healthy amateur runners do that?
I know they say so many places (or at least on my fitness DVDs) that you should see a doctor before beginning any kind of exercise program. I always just assumed that was really aimed at older people or extremely overweight people who were starting from a completely sedentary lifestyle, and also that it was meant to just be a CYA (Cover Your A**) move for the producers of the DVDs. But the more I hear, the more nervous I get. Is what I'm doing safe? I don't have a nutritionist or a personal trainer. (Actually, I don't even have an official doctor right now, since I still haven't bothered to find one yet since moving to NYC - I should really get on that). Everything I've done to change my diet and change my exercise plan is just based on things I've read and what I think feels "right." I don't go over the top. Until I started calorie counting about a month ago, I didn't even really track what I ate or limit certain things: I just ate what I considered reasonably healthy (limited fatty foods, cooked a lot and didn't eat processed, etc). But maybe it's time I got things checked out to be sure I'm good to go.
Have you gotten a full physical screening from a doctor before exercising? Do you check your diet and exercise plans with them? Or do you just do what feels healthy to you? I'm interested to hear.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Healthy Meal: Grilled Mahi Mahi Fillet and Asparagus with Orange and Sesame
My apartment-guest for the weekend met up with another friend for dinner, which gave me the chance to cook something healthy instead of going out to eat! Hurray. I wanted something as low-cal and healthy as possible after my pizza binge last night (and with another night of drinking planned for tonight). I was thinking of just grilling some fish and pairing it with some broccoli, but instead found this great recipe that's very similar to that and very simple. Here is my attempt at an elegant presentation, though it's nowhere near as cool as the official picture on the recipe. In case you were wondering, I tried to layer the asparagus and weave it to make a sort of tic-tac-toe grid. Unfortunately, it just looks like a big pile of asparagus, and the food got a bit cold in the time it took me to be "artistic."
The recipe is SO easy, especially because I didn't chop the ginger and just opted for ground ginger instead. As for active prep time: it took me about 30 seconds to make the marinade and put the fish in, 5 minutes to zest the orange, take the pith off and slice it, and 1 minute to trim the asparagus. Add 10 minutes to let the fish sit, and 8 minutes to cook the fish and the asparagus, and you've got dinner in less than 20 minutes (and you even have time to do other stuff while you're making it). Awesome!
Nutritional results:
283 calories for the fish, asparagus, and orange (recipe here)
1 calorie for the ice water with a splash of lime juice that I had with it :)
Review: 4.5/5
Really really delicious, but fish and asparagus gets cold quickly. Make sure you are ready to eat the SECOND it is done - it definitely doesn't keep warm like a one-dish meal does. Great when you want something lean and fresh tasting.
The recipe is SO easy, especially because I didn't chop the ginger and just opted for ground ginger instead. As for active prep time: it took me about 30 seconds to make the marinade and put the fish in, 5 minutes to zest the orange, take the pith off and slice it, and 1 minute to trim the asparagus. Add 10 minutes to let the fish sit, and 8 minutes to cook the fish and the asparagus, and you've got dinner in less than 20 minutes (and you even have time to do other stuff while you're making it). Awesome!
Nutritional results:
283 calories for the fish, asparagus, and orange (recipe here)
1 calorie for the ice water with a splash of lime juice that I had with it :)
Review: 4.5/5
Really really delicious, but fish and asparagus gets cold quickly. Make sure you are ready to eat the SECOND it is done - it definitely doesn't keep warm like a one-dish meal does. Great when you want something lean and fresh tasting.
Nutrition and Alcohol (Yes, I put those two words in the same title)
So, I broke my own advice and opened another tab last night. Bad, bad, bad. This bar had Woodchuck Cider, which is one of my favorites, but was on tap - so I got pint glasses (16 oz) instead of bottles (12 oz). As we all know thanks to Mindless Eating (if you haven't read it, you MUST - I will post a review in the upcoming days that explains more), bigger serving sizes meant I drank more. A lot more. And to top it all off, this bar gave out free pizza with every drink. These were personal pizzas, but if you added it up, I ate approximately one whole cheese pizza. A WHOLE PIZZA. I think I am officially going to be gaining weight this week instead of losing or maintaining.
Anyway, on the subject of alcohol, a new controversy has arisen of which you might not be aware. Other blogs may be unoriginally discussing whether or not fast food restaurants should be put their labels on the menu. Clearly that discussion is so last week. This blog, being on the cutting edge of trendiness (and the edge of weekend alcoholism), will instead discuss nutrition labeling on alcoholic beverages.
If you are not a big drinker and an obsessive compulsive food logger/calorie counter like me, you may not realize how hard it is to find nutrition information on alcohol (nutrition/alcohol? Yes, I realize it's a bit of an oxymoron). So I'm here to set the record straight: it is HARD. Forget finding the crazy names for whatever mixes you drank (Wild Squirrel Sex? I just looked it up as an example of something weird, but it actually sounds delicious). Unfortunately, it's hard enough to even find the kinds of alcohol IN those drinks. Most food logging websites, including my beloved DailyPlate, have a very limited selection. Sometimes I get lazy from all the trouble this causes, and just put every fruity mixed drink down as a cranberry vodka (which is actually one of the least caloric drinks that still has flavor and isn't on the rocks, so it's definitely cheating when I use that as a stand-in). As for ciders or microbrews, forget it - you'll never find the right calorie information. The best method I've found is to use Webtender to get ingredient information for mixed drinks, and then search each of those brands on Google to get calorie information. But that's pretty time consuming. And it doesn't even always work.
In Australia, a group of researchers is looking to change that. They want to make it a requirement to have nutritional information on bottles/cans/casks of alcohol (casks? I have never drank out of a cask. That sounds awesomely medieval. Cask stand anyone?). After surveying more than 7,000 students at an Australian university, 75% agreed that nutritional information on alcohol (including casks!) should be required by law.
In the US, talks about this are just starting to surface, and personally, I am all for it. I check nutrition labels like crazy, so even if I was in a drunken haze at a bar and a bottle were pressed into my hand, I'd probably notice and try to read the familiar black-and-white square. Now, this isn't to say that I'd read it accurately or interpret it correctly ("This has lots of calories, but that's okay because it will give me energy to go dance on that table!"). But I think just having it there would be a big help. Something to remind me, "You will NOT be 'on plan' for your diet if you have six of these."
I really could have used that reminder last night.
Anyway, on the subject of alcohol, a new controversy has arisen of which you might not be aware. Other blogs may be unoriginally discussing whether or not fast food restaurants should be put their labels on the menu. Clearly that discussion is so last week. This blog, being on the cutting edge of trendiness (and the edge of weekend alcoholism), will instead discuss nutrition labeling on alcoholic beverages.
If you are not a big drinker and an obsessive compulsive food logger/calorie counter like me, you may not realize how hard it is to find nutrition information on alcohol (nutrition/alcohol? Yes, I realize it's a bit of an oxymoron). So I'm here to set the record straight: it is HARD. Forget finding the crazy names for whatever mixes you drank (Wild Squirrel Sex? I just looked it up as an example of something weird, but it actually sounds delicious). Unfortunately, it's hard enough to even find the kinds of alcohol IN those drinks. Most food logging websites, including my beloved DailyPlate, have a very limited selection. Sometimes I get lazy from all the trouble this causes, and just put every fruity mixed drink down as a cranberry vodka (which is actually one of the least caloric drinks that still has flavor and isn't on the rocks, so it's definitely cheating when I use that as a stand-in). As for ciders or microbrews, forget it - you'll never find the right calorie information. The best method I've found is to use Webtender to get ingredient information for mixed drinks, and then search each of those brands on Google to get calorie information. But that's pretty time consuming. And it doesn't even always work.
In Australia, a group of researchers is looking to change that. They want to make it a requirement to have nutritional information on bottles/cans/casks of alcohol (casks? I have never drank out of a cask. That sounds awesomely medieval. Cask stand anyone?). After surveying more than 7,000 students at an Australian university, 75% agreed that nutritional information on alcohol (including casks!) should be required by law.
In the US, talks about this are just starting to surface, and personally, I am all for it. I check nutrition labels like crazy, so even if I was in a drunken haze at a bar and a bottle were pressed into my hand, I'd probably notice and try to read the familiar black-and-white square. Now, this isn't to say that I'd read it accurately or interpret it correctly ("This has lots of calories, but that's okay because it will give me energy to go dance on that table!"). But I think just having it there would be a big help. Something to remind me, "You will NOT be 'on plan' for your diet if you have six of these."
I really could have used that reminder last night.
Friday, December 14, 2007
An Original Diet Tip for Drinking
You would think that having just started this blog a few days ago, I'd have plenty to post about and wouldn't yet start missing updates. Unfortunately, you would be wrong. Yesterday was a busy day and I just didn't get around to posting during the day. I planned to make up for it at night by posting an awesome dinner. We're talking gourmet here, people. I invited my friend Barry over with promises of deliciousness, and I even stopped at Whole Foods on the way home and bought all kinds of special ingredients. We made plans to meet up at 8 PM, which I figured would give me a chance to get a good run in before cooking. I walked in my door, took the groceries out of the bag... and my phone rang. Three of my friends put forth a pretty tempting offer to come out for dinner, and to bring Barry along. So... bye-bye gym, bye-bye special home-cooked dinner. Hello, overindulging and derailing my diet!
Now, that really wasn't my plan when I agreed to go out. I knew I had about 700 cals left for the day, so I figured I'd eat dinner, have ONE glass of wine with dinner, and skip the drinking after. Knowing just the title of the blog, you can probably guess how this is going to go.
So first at dinner... they put out this basket of yummy-looking rolls and a dish of olive oil. I used all the diet tricks: I put them on the other side of the table, I even put the little drink special card in between so I couldn't see the basket. Unfortunately, I was hungry, and what I COULD see was everyone else munching away contentedly. And then I made a critical error. I thought, "well, I have 700 cals... eating bread won't really put me over as long as I'm good the rest of the night." It was those last ten words that were the key part of that sentence. Basically, one roll became two. Oops. Still not the end of the world, but the snowball had started rolling down the hill from healthy to fatville.
There was a short bout of healthy decisions before the snowball really got going. I got this awesome seafood linguine with marinara - totally awesome. And really not THAT unhealthy, at least as far as eating out goes. I also had a small glass of white wine, which was perfect, because it gave me a little buzz but not too many cals. Then we stopped at a bar that had beer pong, and I rocked it! I made the first four cups on my first four shots in a row, and then adding one more to make probably my best game ever. Really fun, and totally calorie-free since I had Barry drink for me. I wonder how many calories you burn playing beer pong? It's not listed in Daily Plate... :)
And now, direct from me to you, a completely original and all-new diet tip. When going to a bar, ALWAYS have cash. Better still, always have a specific amount of cash: enough for two drinks, plus a cab home. Of course the cash you have for the cab will turn into one more drink and then walking/subway/bus, but three drinks is still not that bad. The key is really just not trying to use a credit card.
Having only $3 in my wallet, I threw mine down, and there was a $20 minimum, so I opened a tab. Bad, bad, bad idea. I had a pint of cider, bought a drink for Barry, and then people started leaving so I couldn't buy any of my other friends drinks. Drinks were about $6 for a pint, which was a great price, but it meant that the $20 minimum was just over three drinks. So I got another pint, and still hadn't hit the minimum. And then I met a cute guy... who happened to be the bartender's roommate. Hello, free drinks!
Now we all know the cardinal rule of alcohol: it is not to be wasted. Under any circumstances. So when there is a free drink sitting there, meant for you, you really have no choice but to drink it. So I had a couple, and it started getting late. Guess who still had a tab open??? Barry was gone, the guys I had met at the bar weren't really fun enough for me to buy them a drink, so I bought one more pint for myself. All in all, that's 1120 cals from alcohol, when I intended to have about 200 (80 for wine, 120 for one cider). Mission: failed.
Plan for today is to eat as few calories as possible, because I think I'm going for dinner and drinking again tonight. This time hopefully I'll be a bit more prepared!
PS - Last night's awesome meal will be cooked and posted on Sunday night, which is when Barry and I rescheduled.
Now, that really wasn't my plan when I agreed to go out. I knew I had about 700 cals left for the day, so I figured I'd eat dinner, have ONE glass of wine with dinner, and skip the drinking after. Knowing just the title of the blog, you can probably guess how this is going to go.
So first at dinner... they put out this basket of yummy-looking rolls and a dish of olive oil. I used all the diet tricks: I put them on the other side of the table, I even put the little drink special card in between so I couldn't see the basket. Unfortunately, I was hungry, and what I COULD see was everyone else munching away contentedly. And then I made a critical error. I thought, "well, I have 700 cals... eating bread won't really put me over as long as I'm good the rest of the night." It was those last ten words that were the key part of that sentence. Basically, one roll became two. Oops. Still not the end of the world, but the snowball had started rolling down the hill from healthy to fatville.
There was a short bout of healthy decisions before the snowball really got going. I got this awesome seafood linguine with marinara - totally awesome. And really not THAT unhealthy, at least as far as eating out goes. I also had a small glass of white wine, which was perfect, because it gave me a little buzz but not too many cals. Then we stopped at a bar that had beer pong, and I rocked it! I made the first four cups on my first four shots in a row, and then adding one more to make probably my best game ever. Really fun, and totally calorie-free since I had Barry drink for me. I wonder how many calories you burn playing beer pong? It's not listed in Daily Plate... :)
And now, direct from me to you, a completely original and all-new diet tip. When going to a bar, ALWAYS have cash. Better still, always have a specific amount of cash: enough for two drinks, plus a cab home. Of course the cash you have for the cab will turn into one more drink and then walking/subway/bus, but three drinks is still not that bad. The key is really just not trying to use a credit card.
Having only $3 in my wallet, I threw mine down, and there was a $20 minimum, so I opened a tab. Bad, bad, bad idea. I had a pint of cider, bought a drink for Barry, and then people started leaving so I couldn't buy any of my other friends drinks. Drinks were about $6 for a pint, which was a great price, but it meant that the $20 minimum was just over three drinks. So I got another pint, and still hadn't hit the minimum. And then I met a cute guy... who happened to be the bartender's roommate. Hello, free drinks!
Now we all know the cardinal rule of alcohol: it is not to be wasted. Under any circumstances. So when there is a free drink sitting there, meant for you, you really have no choice but to drink it. So I had a couple, and it started getting late. Guess who still had a tab open??? Barry was gone, the guys I had met at the bar weren't really fun enough for me to buy them a drink, so I bought one more pint for myself. All in all, that's 1120 cals from alcohol, when I intended to have about 200 (80 for wine, 120 for one cider). Mission: failed.
Plan for today is to eat as few calories as possible, because I think I'm going for dinner and drinking again tonight. This time hopefully I'll be a bit more prepared!
PS - Last night's awesome meal will be cooked and posted on Sunday night, which is when Barry and I rescheduled.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Healthy Meal: Black Bean Soup
This is one of my favorite recipes, and today I made it in record time! Fourteen minutes to chop the veggies and put everything in the pot, then I did the 20 minute arms segment of "Tank Top Arms, Bikini Belly, Boy Shorts Bottom" while it cooked. Easy, easy, easy! I was a little concerned when I came back, because it was much redder than usual, but I realized I usually do two cans of black beans instead of one (the recipe calls for three, but I cut it in half, and I usually don't like to save half a can of black beans in the fridge, so I can go either up or down). However, it still tasted all creamy and full of black bean goodness.
I opted not to top the soup because it's great on its own, but you can add sour cream, shredded cheese, or scallions if you want a little something extra. After I took the picture, I splashed a little of the milk from my glass in to cool it down and also make it creamier. However, I had tasted it before I did that, and it was surprisingly creamy even before. Made me wonder if I had already tossed some dairy in and forgotten (I hadn't). Not sure what causes that creaminess, but mmm... it's good.
The picture shows the soup served with two Trader Joe's beef taquitos. When my roommate saw me popping them in the toaster, she was shocked - she had seen them in the freezer, and thought they were our other roommate's, because he always eats pre-packaged convenience food and I never do. However, these are all natural, and only have 100 cals each, so I buy them and have them as an occasional treat.
As far as how I changed the recipe, first of all, I cut it in half to make exactly two servings. However, I tossed in a whole red bell pepper as well as half of a green pepper (had to use them up, and it made it more filling while adding minimal calories). As I said, I also used 1 can of black beans instead of 1.5 cans. I didn't make the Southwestern Monte Cristo sandwiches that are in that recipe, but I have made them before, and they're delicious (though not too healthy).
Nutritional results:
352 calories for the soup (recipe here)
200 calories for the taquitos
90 calories for the milk
Review: 5/5
As I said, this is one of my absolute favorite recipes! After last night's unsatisfactory meal, I figured I should make something I know I love. Hopefully you'll try it and love it as well!
I opted not to top the soup because it's great on its own, but you can add sour cream, shredded cheese, or scallions if you want a little something extra. After I took the picture, I splashed a little of the milk from my glass in to cool it down and also make it creamier. However, I had tasted it before I did that, and it was surprisingly creamy even before. Made me wonder if I had already tossed some dairy in and forgotten (I hadn't). Not sure what causes that creaminess, but mmm... it's good.
The picture shows the soup served with two Trader Joe's beef taquitos. When my roommate saw me popping them in the toaster, she was shocked - she had seen them in the freezer, and thought they were our other roommate's, because he always eats pre-packaged convenience food and I never do. However, these are all natural, and only have 100 cals each, so I buy them and have them as an occasional treat.
As far as how I changed the recipe, first of all, I cut it in half to make exactly two servings. However, I tossed in a whole red bell pepper as well as half of a green pepper (had to use them up, and it made it more filling while adding minimal calories). As I said, I also used 1 can of black beans instead of 1.5 cans. I didn't make the Southwestern Monte Cristo sandwiches that are in that recipe, but I have made them before, and they're delicious (though not too healthy).
Nutritional results:
352 calories for the soup (recipe here)
200 calories for the taquitos
90 calories for the milk
Review: 5/5
As I said, this is one of my absolute favorite recipes! After last night's unsatisfactory meal, I figured I should make something I know I love. Hopefully you'll try it and love it as well!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
