Hand Coding

As food companies try to lower the sugar content of their foods, they’ll try just about anything. In addition to the usual white-flour-to-soy-flour conversion, sugar is often taken out and replaced with a sugar alcohol. The name is a bit misleading as it’s neither a sugar nor an alcohol; rather, its chemical structure is merely similar to sugars and alcohols.

And, food companies generally subtract food alcohols from the “carb count” on the back of the package as they reason that sugar alcohols have a negligible effect on blood sugar levels. But, is that really the case? To find out, I searched for the glycemic values for various sugar alcohols. For those not aware, the Glycemic Index is a measure of a food’s effect on blood sugar levels. The scale is set up so that sugar has a value of 100. But, that’s not to say that foods can’t exceed 100 — potatoes can reach into the 150s, for example.

While a glycemic value of zero would truly represent a food which has “no effect” on blood sugar levels, that’s not to say that any effect is bad. Really, it’s the spikes in blood sugar levels brought on by foods with high glycemic values which cause mischief. Getting back to the sugar alcohols, I discovered that many of them aren’t that low:

• Maltitol syrup, intermediate: 53
• Maltitol syrup, regular: 52
• Maltitol syrup, high: 48
• Polyglycitol / hydrogenated starch hydrolysate: 39
• Maltitol syrup, high-polymer: 36
• Maltitol: 36
• Xylitol: 13
• Isomalt: 9
• Sorbitol: 9
• Lactitol: 6
• Erythritol: 0
• Mannitol: 0

Obviously, maltitol and its variants stick out. But, how bad is it? For comparison, corn syrup (a sugar derived from corn) is around 85-92. Sure, maltitol is lower than that, but it’s not that far off. As a rule of thumb, a glycemic value in the 40s (or below) is considered low. But maltitol syrup (53) is almost at the level of new potatoes (57).

So, which sugar alcohols are used commonly? Speakingly only anecdotally — from my recollections of food labels at my local Target — maltitol seems to be the sugar alcohol of choice for many manufacturers. I think we’d all like to find some double chocolate chip cookies make with erythritol (with its zero glycemic value), but I’ve never actually seen erythritol on any ingredient label :-/.

It may initially seem confusing to have all these sugar alcohols and glycemic values to remember — especially since so many food manufacturers liken all of them to having a minimal effect. But, just keep in mind these two: maltitol (36-53, depending on variant) and polyglycitol (also called “hydrogenated starch hydrolysate”, at 39). If you steer clear of those, the rest shouldn’t be an issue — the next-highest sugar alcohol is xylitol and that only has a glycemic value of 13.

I was working late the other day and, by the time I got back to my apartment, it was a bit late to go about making dinner. So, I surveyed my fridge door for coupons. There were the usual items — pizza, wings and so on — but I wasn’t much in the mood for those. I briefly considered a burrito from Chipotle or Freebirds (both of which are nearby), but that seemed like too much food at the time.

A sandwich seemed like a good idea and I was about to go for Quiznos — if it weren’t for the fact that I had opened by credit card bill only moments earlier and noticed that I had been to Quiznos four times in as many weeks. In lieu of Quiznos, Schlotsky’s seemed like a good alternative. And, because I didn’t want to get there only to end up standing in front of the counter staring at the menu while I made my decision, I decided to check out their menu online ahead of time.

What I noticed on their front page right away was a new item, their “Grilled Chicken Romano Panini”. As it’s described on their home page, the panini has “grilled chicken breast and melted Gruyère cheese with sweet red peppers and fresh baby spinach on freshly toasted slices of Artisan bread”. That sounded pretty good to me, especially since I couldn’t even recall when last I had Gruyère on a sandwich.

The Schlotsky’s near me is only about a quarter mile away and it didn’t take long to get there. There was hardly anyone there, so I walked right up to the counter and ordered the panini. As I handed over my credit card to pay for it, the lady behind the counter verbally dispatched my order to the sandwich maker in the back (which wasn’t really “in the back” as the sandwich-making area was more to the side of the cashiers).

I could see him building the sandwich and I watched as he started with two slices of bread and added the chicken, red peppers and Gruyère. Then, to my horror, he omitted the most important part of the panini-making process: the panini press. In traditional panini-making, the sandwich is assembled and then placed between two hot metal plates which are pressed together. However, that technique was not employed this time; rather, my panini to-be was sent through the toasting-conveyor-belt just like any other Schlotsky’s sandwich.

Sure, the bread became toasted and crunchy, but it wasn’t really a true panini anymore. The distinction may seem subtle, but the benefit of the pressing process is that all of the ingredients meld together. In particular, the cheese oozes into the cracks and crevices within the bread to form a type of delicious hybrid cheese-bread. As it was, my Gruyère did melt, but only onto the surrounding chicken and peppers. I was denied any cheese-to-bread integration.

In fairness to Schlotsky’s, the sandwich was still decent (by normal sandwich standards).There were plenty of morsels of lean chicken and the red pepper was tender and sweet. As a Chicken + Something sandwich, I might have even been inclined to recommend it to friends. But why would they assume the panini persona if they were only panini poseurs at heart? I can’t say that this has soured me on Schlotsky’s, but I could really go for a good panini after having almost attained one.

Peter-Paul Koch is a front-end developer based out of Amesterdam; he runs QuirksMode.org and he’s perhaps most well known for his work with JavaScript. (In particular, I’ve been thinking about giving his JavaScript-based image-replacement script a try.)

He also has a mailing list where he sends out short announcements on new scripts and articles that he’s written. And, in his most recent message, he wrote about his completion of a Ubachs Wisbrun site is all in Dutch and, as far as I can tell, they’re an advertising agency. Interestingly enough, they also have some of their commercials posted in their portfolio.

I stumbled into their section for Rabobank and I actually quite liked many of the commercials there. Sure, I didn't understand a word of what they were saying — for the most part — but that allowed me to enjoy them for their composition, diction and tempo.

And, after viewing a few of them, I realized that it reminded me a bit of “Lorem Ipsum”. Lorem Ipsum is a standard set of placeholder text that web & print designers often use in their mockups. By using what's essentially gibberish, designers can can create a design for client review without concerns that the client will nitpick the text itself (and, in the case of a design mockup, the text is only a component within the deisign and not intended for critique).

Obviously, these commercials for Rabobank are not gibberish, but I don’t speak Dutch so I can’t understand a word of it. And, with the narration out of the way, I can concentrate on the on my impressions of the commercial as a whole. All the same, I’m still curious what the heck they’re saying in that one commercial where everyone keeps banging his/her head as he/she is waking up.

Now that it’s back on the air, I often try to catch Headbanger’s Ball on MTV2 (which airs each Saturday at 10/9c). Though I’ve never seen the original (circa ten years ago), my understanding is that it used to have a good amount of hair-metal & pop-metal (neither of which are really metal at all). But, the show these days — while not perfect — is far from posturing about metal.

The current iteration is hosted by Jamey Jasta, frontman for Hatebreed. And, while I don’t particularly care for Hatebreed, I can’t deny that it’s not metal (I generally prefer more melodic metal). And, to MTV2’s credit, they feature plenty of legitimate metal bands on the show: In Flames, Children of Bodom, Meshuggah, Lacuna Coil and others.

In any case, on next week’s show, they’re airing Headbanger’s Ball and Revolver Magazine’s Best Metal Videos of the New Millennium. Granted, it’s a a bit premature to start declaring a best-anything of the new millennium, but I think it’s partly tongue-in-check (even their website includes the sheepish postfix “so far”).

Looking over the apparent candidates (from a concurrent online poll), I was discouraged at first since I didn’t recognize many of the band names. But, as I read further, I gained faith in the list — sure, some blowhards like Korn are on there, but so are Arch Enemy and In Flames (two of the more talented metal bands out there, in my opinion).

However, until Headbanger’s Ball’s teaser for this Best Metal Videos list, I hadn’t even heard of Revolver magazine. So, I’m curious how the list will end up. Not that I’ll take it personally if some of my favorite bands don’t make the list, but it would renew my faith in the American Music Scene to see some of Scandinavia’s top metal acts make the cut. (And, yes, all the best metal seems to come from Scandinavia, for reasons which elude me.)

I was reading the comments to a Slashdot article about Python programmers and I was amused by a comment by a fellow who goes by “DasMegaByte” on his impressions of programming languages and people who use them:

[…] I wonder how else we can pad programmer’s egos based on completely subjective hypothesis on language choice?

• Perl users have more dense social lives.
• Ruby users have big, full beards chicks love to run their hands through.
• VB users have sensible shoes and drive Toyotas.
• C++ users enjoy a good mystery now and then.
• PHP users probably own one or more Dremel multitools.
• Javascripters are full of little trivia snippets and are great fun at parties.
• Cold Fusion users are kind of quiet but have very deep thoughts.
• SQL programmers have annoying laughs but are otherwise okay guys

[…]

My favorite may be his comments on SQL programmers (though the comments on JavaScripters are jovial as well). Still, I’m left wondering if Bryan has a Dremel multitool ;).

I gave Connie a ride home from Roger’s party last weekend and I drove over a monster pothole as I was nearing her apartment. My rear suspension made an unsettling ka-churnk sound at the time and I was just hoping that is was merely at its limits (and not past them). I was not so lucky — I noticed a slight rattle as I drove back to my apartment after dropping off Connie.

Though it was a rattle, it sounded just like having gravel churning around in my rear wheel wells — and I held out hope that maybe that was the case. But, by Monday it was still there and I knew I needed to do something about it. So, I called up Autoscope and arranged for an appointment the next day. (Autoscope is the only shop that I trust with my car — and it doesn’t hurt the owner goes autocrossing with me from time to time.)

As it turns out, one of the brackets on my rear sway bar had broken in half. For those not aware, a sway bar stiffens a car’s suspension; in particular, a rear sway bar reduces “understeer” (while a front sway bar reduces “oversteer”). Most cars from the factory are designed to understeer which means that, in a panic situation, they’ll continue to drift forward (turning less than desired) rather than spin (turning more than desired). But, in autocross, understeer is unnerving — there’s nothing worse that going around a tight bend, turning the wheel all the way to the lock and plowing through the curve.

As you might have guessed, I had upgraded the rear sway bar on my Alero (well, and the front sway bar, but that one is fine). So, I couldn’t just order another ”rear sway bar bracket” from Oldsmobile as that wouldn’t fit my aftermarket sway bar. Initially, I tried calling the people that made my sway bar (Ram Air Tech) but my voicemails went unanswered. So, I asked the techs at Autoscope for suggestions.

The tech that worked on my car, Paul, suggested that I check out a “speed shop” in Plano (called “Steve’s Racing” or something). Of course, my Alero was still inoperable, so I rented a car from the Enterprise next door to Autoscope. And, from there, I headed off to the speed shop. I got there just as they were about to close, but they hardly wanted anything to do with me — they almost pushed me out the door as they affirmed that they didn’t have of the brackets I needed.

However, they did suggest that I check out O’Reilly’s (a local car parts shop). So, I buzzed over to O’Reilly’s but they didn’t have one. They then recommended that I try Home Depot as one of the O’Reilly’s guys apparently used to work there and thought that I might be able to find an applicable bracket among the selection of fencing brackets.

The guy gave me directions to the Home Depot, but I got lost. As it turns out, I ended up right near a Lowe’s (aha, that’ll work!). I asked the fencing-section guys there about the bracket, but they didn’t have one. So, just to be sure, I then drove off to a Home Depot near my apartment (which I knew how to get to). But, they were just as dumbfounded as the Lowe’s guys.

Without many other options, I also checked out a Pep Boys in the area. But, no. Finally, I just drove home. To ensure that the day wasn’t a total loss, I stopped by Quiznos for dinner and picked up a Spicy Monterey Club sandwich on Low Carb Toasty Flatbread. It was mucho tasty.

Back on the subject of the bracket, I looked online later that evening for performance-oriented Oldsmobile retailers. As you might guess, there aren’t many. But, I e-mailed them asking whether they had such a bracket. The next morning, I checked my e-mail and a couple replied. They confirmed, firstly, that Ram Air Tech was indeed out of business (no surprise there). And, none of them had a bracket like the one I needed.

At this point, I think I’m just going to have Autoscope install my stock rear sway bar while I search for the bracket (since the Enterprise rental is just a money-suck in the meantime). If I get lucky, maybe I’ll find someone with a spare bracket like the one I need.

And I haven’t ruled out that I might have to buy a whole new swaybar — not that its brackets would be compatible, but I need to get a working rear sway bar one way or another :). And sure, the stock sway bar will be fine for now; but, with the upgraded front sway bar, the car will have horrible understeer until I get an equally stiff rear sway bar back in there.

Since working at RD2, I’ve been enlightened to sandwichy-goodness of Roly Poly. I hadn’t even heard of them before working here, but I’ve probably had their sandwiches at least once or twice a week since I started. They make regular sandwiches but rolled in a tortilla. And not only are their sandwich recipes innovative, but their ingredients are far above what you’d normally expect from a quick food restaurant.

They have dozens of sandwiches on their menu and I’ve been working my way through the varieties. So far, the Cobb Salad sandwich may be my favorite (with both avocado and bacon, how can you go wrong?). In any case, I decided to get a Roly Poly sandwich for dinner a couple days ago and I wanted to give their turkey sandwiches a chance.

I settled on the California Turkey sandwich which has, among other things, turkey, cheddar, bacon and avocado. I placed my order over the phone for pick-up and it was ready as soon as I got there. So, I paid and headed back home. I unwrapped the sandwich from its paper and grabbed a plate.

As I ate the sandwich, I couldn’t deny that it was full of turkey — it definitely had plenty of turkey flavor. However, there was another flavor that I couldn’t quite identify — a subtle sweetness that I couldn’t ignore. At first, I thought it might be a honey mustard, but there was no honey mustard listed on the menu for this one. I then considered whether perhaps I was encountering the natural sweetness of a ripe vegetable, but that didn't seem to be be it either.

After a few more bites, I realized that it wasn’t just a general sweetness, it was a soggy sweetness — from the dressing itself. Some of the dressing had already began to seep out the back of the sandwich (onto the plate) and I took a closer look to see if that would provide any clues. As I looked over the dressing, I noticed that it was mostly clear but thick and full of colored specks. Aha — Italian Dressing!

So, that resolved the dressing conundrum, but the sweetness? I soon realized that Roly Poly must be using a mass-market Italian Dressing: I hadn’t realized it until I started cutting my sugar intake (and reading more about hidden sugars in foods) but Italian Dressing is full of sugar. Right after water, oil and vinegar on the ingredients list — and before any of the actual spices — is high fructose corn syrup (bleh). So, that must have been what I was encountering in my sandwich.

The sandwich, perhaps contrary to what its creator intended, ended up as a sugary turkey sandwich. That’s not to say that it was bizarre enough for me not to eat the rest of it, but I pondered giving up on it a few times. And, if you’re particularly astute, you may have already noticed that Roly Poly’s menu specifies ”ranch dressing” (and not Italian) with their California Turkey sandwich (I only just noticed this myself). I'm certain that the dressing in my sandwich was Italian, so I can only figure that they gave me #11 by mistake.

In that case, maybe their California turkey sandwich is still worth trying after all. Still, don’t get the wrong idea about Roly Poly — their sandwiches are fantastic. I mean, I wouldn’t be eating them every week if they weren’t. But, if you’ve reduced your sugar intake, perhaps avoid the sandwiches with Italian dressing — they may end up tasting a bit like they've had a sugar marinade.

The Dallas Camera Club meets twice a month and members take turns bringing in snacks (chosen by rotating through the membership list). Tuesday’s meeting was my turn to bring in snacks and so I decided to bake some cookies. Sure, some people just stop by Kroger and buy a box of cookies, but I figured that baked cookies would be much nicer.

I stopped by AllRecipes a few days ahead of time to select a recipe. Once in their Cookie section, I headed straight for the subsection on Chocolate Chip Cookies. It's not that I had ruled out other cookie types, but I thought I had a good chance of finding a workable chocolate chip cookie recipe.

Fortunately, all the recipes at AllRecipes are rated (on a scale of one to five). With dozens of chocolate chip cookie recipes, I just ignored all the non-5-star entries. And, I had in mind more of a soft cookie (rather than crunchy) and that further narrowed the playing field. And one that I finally settled on was called (simply) Best Chocolate Chip Cookies. In particular, the tagline sounded enticing: “Crisp edges, chewy middles”.

As the recipe called for chocolate chips (as you would expect) but also chopped walnuts, I thought I'd have to make a special trip to Super Target for sure. But, I glanced through my pantry beforehand and it turned out that I had all the ingredients already.

When it came time to bake the cookies, the recipe was actually a little easier than I expected. There was no melting of any kind (neither butter nor chocolate) and there're only three steps in total (the first of which is “preheat oven”, so that one hardly counts, even). The one nebulous portion of the recipe was the baking time — “Bake for about 10 minutes […] or until edges are nicely browned”. I don’t like guesswork when it comes to recipes and so I just went with an even 10-minutes for the first batch (well, actually 5 minutes + 5 minutes, as I swapped racks halfway through).

After that first batch, the edges were slightly browned, but who was I to say if that meant “nicely”? To be sure, I baked the second (and third) batches for 11 minutes (5 minutes + 6 minutes) and those were slightly more golden-brown around the edges.

Once they were baked, I set them aside on cooling racks and, as soon as they were cool enough not to burn my tongue, I snarfed one. It was still gooey, of course, but rather tasty. In some ways, it still even had that cookie-dough flavor (as opposed to most other recipes where the cooked product is decidedly different from the raw edition). But, I made a mental note that I'd have to allow them to cool fully before forming a final opinion.

So, the next day, I had one with breakfast (ooh, decadence) and it wasn’t quite the cookie that I recalled from the night before. It was soft, to be sure, but the edges never hardened. Really, it was just soft the whole way through — and some people like it that way, but not me. I wanted that delicate ying & yang of crispiness and softness, but to no avail. So, sure, these cookies are good in the general sense that all cookies are yummy, but I get the feeling that there may be a better chocolate chip cookie recipe out there.

In any case, here’s the recipe.

“Best Chocolate Chip Cookies”

Ingredients:

• 1 cup butter, softened
• 1 cup white sugar [or Splenda, natch]
• 1 cup packed brown sugar
• 2 eggs
• 2 teaspoons vanilla extract
• 3 cups all-purpose flour
• 1 teaspoon baking soda
• 2 teaspoons hot water
• 1/2 teaspoon salt
• 2 cups semisweet chocolate chips
• 1 cup chopped walnuts

Directions:

1. Preheat oven to 350° F (175 degrees C).

2. Cream together the butter, white sugar, and brown sugar until smooth. Beat in the eggs one at a time, then stir in the vanilla. Dissolve baking soda in hot water. Add to batter along with salt. Stir in flour, chocolate chips, and nuts. Drop by large spoonfuls onto ungreased pans.

3. Bake for about 10 minutes in the preheated oven, or until edges are nicely browned. [11 minutes was an improvement for me, and 12 minutes may be even better]