The Ethics of Food and Cooking in America
Project Description
The Ethics and Chemistry of Food in America was an interdisciplinary project between humanities and chemistry. For the semester we dove into the idea of food and how we get food from two different perspectives: the chemical make up, and the food industry.
In humanities, we studied the food system in America by watching films and reading books. One of the main texts we used for this project was The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Micheal Pollan. We also dove deeper into our personal ethics on food and what we thought about the industrial food system.
In chemistry, we focused on the chemical structure of the food. We studied topics like types of reactions and balancing equations. For the final product, we created a food recipe and chose one of the ingredients to study. We studied the chemical make-up of that ingredient and manipulated it to create the perfect version of our food.
In humanities, we studied the food system in America by watching films and reading books. One of the main texts we used for this project was The Omnivore’s Dilemma by Micheal Pollan. We also dove deeper into our personal ethics on food and what we thought about the industrial food system.
In chemistry, we focused on the chemical structure of the food. We studied topics like types of reactions and balancing equations. For the final product, we created a food recipe and chose one of the ingredients to study. We studied the chemical make-up of that ingredient and manipulated it to create the perfect version of our food.
Project Reflection
My favorite part about Animas is Interdisciplinary projects. One of the things I love most about learning is taking a topic and looking at it from all different perspectives. This impacted my learning about this project because I was able to really take a deeper look into it because I was studying it 3 hours a day. From the Omnivore’s Dilemma, we understood how the food got from out plate to the ground, and in chemistry we understood what the food was really made of from the smallest unit of matter. Interdisciplinary projects are what make well-rounded students and I am so glad I go to a school that uses interdisciplinary with their students.
One of the major differences that come to mind before and after this project is that now, I am educated. Before this project, I was with the rest of America in the sense that I was almost ignorant when it came to how I got my food. Food was a commodity for me. Now, food is valuable, privilege and most importantly, food. I now think about exactly how my food got to me, and if I do buy into the industrial food industry, I feel an obligation to change my actions. I know now that I can vote with what I buy and eat, and that empowerment is a huge difference between before and after this project.
One of the major differences that come to mind before and after this project is that now, I am educated. Before this project, I was with the rest of America in the sense that I was almost ignorant when it came to how I got my food. Food was a commodity for me. Now, food is valuable, privilege and most importantly, food. I now think about exactly how my food got to me, and if I do buy into the industrial food industry, I feel an obligation to change my actions. I know now that I can vote with what I buy and eat, and that empowerment is a huge difference between before and after this project.
My Food Ethic Essay:
The Chemistry of Food and Cooking:
How does the ingredient you experimented with affect the food’s overall characteristics?
For my project, I manipulated the amount of gelatin used in Panna Cotta. Gelatin is a product of collagen, which is a protein found in the bones and skin of animals. Like all proteins, gelatin is made of tightly wound strands of amino acids. These strands, which form a triple helix, are so tight that they normally don’t allow water between them. When gelatin is heated though (for example, in hot cream and sugar), the strands of the amino acids separate, or denature. Once the strands have denatured, water can freely move between the strands and do because the water molecules have a strong attraction to the amino acids. Once the water has cooled down (in the refrigerator) the strands of amino acids combine again, except now with water molecules between them. Now with the water molecules in between them, the Panna Cotta mixture is much more flexible and can move or “jiggle “. |
For my experiment, I wanted to see which precise amount of gelatin would yield a Panna Cotta with 1) the greatest shape retention, and 2) the most favorable texture. Going into my experiment, I knew full well that the Panna Cotta with the greatest shape retention might not be the most favorable texture of my samples, but I had to think like a food scientist and really take into consideration the values of the consumer or the people actually eating my food. My prediction that the Panna Cotta with 150% of the normal amount of gelatin would retain its shape the best was correct, but it turns out that it was not the most favorable texture. My peers said that the sample with 150% was chewy and stiff, and did not melt in your mouth like they were looking for. The Panna Cotta with the most favorable texture was the sample with 75% of the normal amount of gelatin. They said that this Panna Cotta melted in their mouth and was a perfect consistency despite not retaining its shape as well as the other sample. This project not only taught me a lot about the scientific process but also about the importance of the consumer’s or real-world’s values when creating a product for others.
In what way(s) are cooking and doing science similar and in what way(s) are they different? How are a cook and a food scientist similar or different?
From the deep understanding of science and chemistry that we have gained this year, it has become clear that science and cooking are extremely similar. For example, both cooking and completing a chemistry experiment require a “recipe”. What I mean by this, is that there is a list of ingredients at a specific amount that has to be put together in the exact right conditions to create the expected final product. In chemistry, each of the reactants has to be added in the exact amount of moles and the exact ratio between them. If they are off by any amount, you are not completing the same reaction. This is similar to cooking in which each ingredient has to be the right amount and at the right ratio to create the food that you are hoping to create. This also means that in both cooking and chemical reactions, a ratio can be used to create a larger or smaller product. Another similarity with food and chemistry is that alone, the ingredients (or reactants) are not very effective, but together they can create an effective and exciting product. For example, gelatin and hot cream separate aren’t a food, but once they are combined, they form panna cotta. This is similar to any chemical reaction in which a single chemical won’t create a reaction on its own, but once it is combined it will create a full reaction and a whole new product with its own properties.
While chemistry and cooking are extremely similar, there is a small but important difference between the two. The main difference is that cooking does not have to be as precise as chemical reactions. This was shown to me in the river watch lab I participated in this year in chemistry class. In the lab, my partner and I had to add the exact right amount of Sodium thiosulfate or the reaction would not even happen. We found this out when we added too much, and had to completely restart the experiment. In cooking, adding too much sugar or flour will not cause the cook to restart, but the product may not be exactly how they expected it to turn out. The preciseness that is needed in chemistry is almost never needed in cooking, and this is a large difference when comparing the two.
In what way(s) are cooking and doing science similar and in what way(s) are they different? How are a cook and a food scientist similar or different?
From the deep understanding of science and chemistry that we have gained this year, it has become clear that science and cooking are extremely similar. For example, both cooking and completing a chemistry experiment require a “recipe”. What I mean by this, is that there is a list of ingredients at a specific amount that has to be put together in the exact right conditions to create the expected final product. In chemistry, each of the reactants has to be added in the exact amount of moles and the exact ratio between them. If they are off by any amount, you are not completing the same reaction. This is similar to cooking in which each ingredient has to be the right amount and at the right ratio to create the food that you are hoping to create. This also means that in both cooking and chemical reactions, a ratio can be used to create a larger or smaller product. Another similarity with food and chemistry is that alone, the ingredients (or reactants) are not very effective, but together they can create an effective and exciting product. For example, gelatin and hot cream separate aren’t a food, but once they are combined, they form panna cotta. This is similar to any chemical reaction in which a single chemical won’t create a reaction on its own, but once it is combined it will create a full reaction and a whole new product with its own properties.
While chemistry and cooking are extremely similar, there is a small but important difference between the two. The main difference is that cooking does not have to be as precise as chemical reactions. This was shown to me in the river watch lab I participated in this year in chemistry class. In the lab, my partner and I had to add the exact right amount of Sodium thiosulfate or the reaction would not even happen. We found this out when we added too much, and had to completely restart the experiment. In cooking, adding too much sugar or flour will not cause the cook to restart, but the product may not be exactly how they expected it to turn out. The preciseness that is needed in chemistry is almost never needed in cooking, and this is a large difference when comparing the two.