• gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 days ago

    It’s not soup if they discard the water after cooking, leaving only the vegetables.

    The alternative, btw, would be to fry everything in butter or some plant oil, i believe. That’s what they’re opposing.

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      88
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Making soup and then dumping out the soup seems like a very stupid way to make soup.

      Maybe they feel better from not eating all of those simple, delicious calories.

        • volvoxvsmarla @lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          4 days ago

          Pasta doesn’t lose the majority of its vitamins to its cooking water though. (Mostly because pasta doesn’t have many vitamins to begin with)

        • GoodLuckToFriends@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          If you’re throwing out the pasta water, you’re wasting some very good stock to make the sauce you’ll put on said pasta.

          • MacN'Cheezus@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            I wouldn’t call it stock, but Italians do indeed use pasta water in many of their sauces. Makes sense because it’s basically just starchy water, which helps to bind the sauce.

            That said, you generally don’t need more than one or two cups of it, the rest is still thrown out.

      • slaacaa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s like when somebody throws out the white rubbery thing after drinking their mozzarella

          • irmoz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Yeah ofc, but boiling isn’t always making soup, sometimes it’s just boiling, and what you’re “dumping out” isn’t soup

    • TheDoozer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      It’s not soup if they discard the water after cooking, leaving only the vegetables.

      So… boiled vegetables. That’s still already a thing. Not a particularly good thing (to my tastes), but been a thing for a long time.

      • Microw@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        4 days ago

        We are not talking about a specific food here, but about a way to prepare food. It does not matter what you cook - meat, vegetables, whatever. It’s about cooking it in water instead of sharp oil-based cooking.

        And no, it is not new at all.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      4 days ago

      It’s not soup if they discard the water after cooking, leaving only the vegetables.

      Then it’s a waste of vitamines.

      • ebolapie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        4 days ago

        I read in popular science that it might be possible to use a variety of different kinds of gases to carry heat, or perhaps some kind of radiant heat or even radio waves to cook food. But sadly this fantastic technology is still just fiction. I hope I get to see a form of cooking that doesn’t involve immersing food in hot liquid. I wonder what it would taste like.

        • MNByChoice@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          radiant heat

          So some kind of nonconductive heat? How would that even work? I will stick with putting the pot in the fire.