benhall.1 wrote:
Nanohedron wrote:
I don't know about other Yanks, but for scrambled eggs I would be equally as likely to say "fry" as "cook". Interestingly (or not), I only "cook" omelets; I haven't "fried" them yet.
I agree that you can only "cook" an omelette, not fry it. I take it that's why David referred to "an omelette gone wrong". Similarly, you can only "cook" scrambled eggs. It's very different from frying. I think part of it is that frying implies that there's something solid to begin with. You can't fry a liquid.
I would probably say "cook scrambled eggs." Most of the folks I know might be confused at "fry scrambled eggs". But most people I know would recognize "frying" to mean either pan frying (cooking in a pan with a little fat) or deep frying (totally submerging the food).
Nanohedron wrote:
Michael w6 wrote:
I've been quite interested in all the comments about pressure cookers. What advantage do they offer over a standard pot? I eat rice and beans or split peas nearly every day. Would pressure cooker behoove me?
Pressure cookers significantly reduce cooking time, water use, and energy expenditure. They also are excellent for braising tough cuts of meat into tenderness, faster than the low-and-slow oven method.
That's what i use them for. Can cook chicken in less than 10 minutes. What would take me 8 hours in a crock pot can be done in 1 in a pressure cooker. That kind of thing.
An often under-discussed benefit is that it frees up time and effort: If I make butter chicken on the stove-top, I have to return to the pot every so often to stir and check on it. In the pressure cooker, once you've turned it on, you can ignore it and focus on the side dishes. Basically, the same convenience of a slow cooker but in a much smaller fraction of the time.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
