New York City chef tests Crisco vs. trans-fat alternatives

by Joe DiStefano, Posted Dec 12th 2006 @ 12:06PM

A scant two days after New York City became the first U.S. city to ban trans-fats in restaurant cooking, chefs were scrambling to test alternatives. Well, at least one chef was to my knowledge.

Yesterday's New York Times had an article detailing Chef Michael S. Schwartz's test of using Crisco, coconut oil, canola oil, peanut oil, butter and lard in baking and frying. The experiment took place at the Institute of Culinary Education, where Schwartz is an instructor. The dishes tested were tarte Tatin, the venerable French apple tart; French fries and fried chicken. Crisco was the only ingredient with a trans-fat content that breaks the city's new rules. Just as Chef Schwartz predicted, Crisco produced a tart with the flakiest crust. Meanwhile, the tart baked with butter had a firmer crust that was judged inferior. The tarte Tatin made with coconut oil was deemed tasty, but its crust was lumpy and crumbly.

And what of those two dishes so dear to the heart of every fried food lover you ask? French fries made with coconut oil were tasty, but limp. As for those fried in the dreaded Crisco, they were, you guessed it, crispier. As for the fried chicken, all varieties tasted great, regardless of whether they used trans-fats. This result comes as a great relief to me and the legions of fans of Charles Gabriel the fried chicken genius of Harlem.

Source

Filed Under: Health & Medical, Ingredients, Methods
Tags: baking, Charles Gabriel, CharlesGabriel, Chef Michael S. Schwartz, ChefMichaelS.Schwartz, east coast, French fries, FrenchFries, fried chicken, FriedChicken, fruit, frying, nstitute of Culinary Education, NstituteOfCulinaryEducation, poultry, tarte Tatin, TarteTatin, trans fats

Chew on This

Royal Wedding Cake Details Revealed! - YumSugar

Make Your Own Pop Tarts - CHOW
Denny's Introduces a Maple Bacon Sundae - Eater
Whole Foods Opening Bars in Stores - USA Today
Rules Of Bar Etiquette -- For The Bartender - HuffPost Food

Reader comments (Page 2 of 2)

12-21-2006 @5:19PM Ed said... The ban on trans-fats is not a food ban. It is a chemistry ban. By the way, check out some of our wonderful peanut manufacturers...out with the peanut oil and replace it with partially hydrogenated soybean oil. Choosy mothers etc.....
Reply

Vote upVote downReport

1-18-2007 @4:36PM jason said... If people want to be healthy they will be healthy, if they don't care about being healthy they probably won't be healthy. If you eat fried food enough to be affected by the removal of transfats then you are eating way to much fried food. Only unhealthy food will be affected by this ban, making it only slightly less unhealthy. If you want your kids to be healthy feed them more fruits and veggies and less micky-ds. Don't fool yourself into thinking micky-ds is better now because they don't use transfats. Also, I am sure the replacement will end up being worse, just like crisco was a replacement for the dreaded lard now lard(natural) is widely considered healthier. Don't rely on the government to make us healthier, that is our responsibility.
Reply

Vote upVote downReport

1-22-2007 @8:52PM Crista said... I live in California, and I wish we also had the trans fat ban in our restaurants. New York has got it right. As for the whiners that complain that the government is "controling" what they eat, I am appalled that people would actually want to eat a fat our body cannot process. I routinely have this very conversation with my parents, who also fight me at every turn. My mom bakes, and loves Crisco, store bought cake mixes and would use Jiffy over any other peanut butter. My dad who for the most part consumes her "treats" has high cholesterol, and has had 2 major heart operations. You would think my parents would make a change, but they protect their trans fats like chain smoker protects his cigarettes. It is not only our children we need to protect and educate, it is our parents as well.
Reply