Re: More on Ghee

[Guest guest]

Is ghee the part with or without the casein? I though I had learned

somewhere that it was the part without.

I ordered the ghee from WFN and it is so good. I have been making my

own butter from grass-fed raw milk but they do feed grain right

before milking and during the winter when the grass is covered with

snow. I cannot get milk that is totally grass-fed (never any grain) I

don't think it is anywhere available to my understanding but WFN

claims to get this from cows in the USA! Is anyone here getting raw

milk that is totally grass-fed in the USA?? There is a difference in

the ghee that is made from regular land-o-lakes butter and raw grass-

fed. I would love to find this totally raw milk/butter. The best

butter/ghee is at the top of my list for nutritional additions to my

diet. Anyway if you have not read or seen the WFN site here is a link

to the section on ghee.

http://www.wildernessfamilynaturals.com/mall/raw_ghee.asp

Thought someone may be interested. Thanks for this discussion. ,

I have saved your directions for making stove ghee and plan to try

it. Thanks,

~Del

> Last night's ghee now has a fire under it again. Overnight it did

not

> harden, does it? should it? I'm cooking it down again. The stuff on

> the bottom did brown some but I've still got some foam on top.

>

> Any advice is appreciated.

>

> Thanks,

>

> Belinda

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Delano Eaton " <mushimushi@s...>

wrote:

I would love to find this totally raw milk/butter. The best

> butter/ghee is at the top of my list for nutritional additions to my

> diet.

-------Del, Radiant Life carries x-factor gold butter oil. It's from cows not

only

100% grassfed, but also eating grass in the growth phase, which produces

the x-factor Weston Price talked about. They only produce it in the spring

and the fall, since that is when the new grass is growing. They don't use heat

to separate the oil (they centrifuge it as I believe WFN does also) so it's

still

raw. It's expensive, and for supplementation, not cooking. If you're

interested, you should act quickly, as winter is coming and they may run out

soon (if they haven't all ready). I stocked up enough to last me through

March since I plan to try get pregnant in a month or two.

Hope this is helpful,

[Guest guest]

> Last night's ghee now has a fire under it again. Overnight it did

> not harden, does it? should it?

If it is cold enough for long enough, it should harden.

If your butter was still liquid this morning, and there

was some browning, it sounds like your fire died out

much slower than expected, and continued to keep it warm,

and even cook a it a little, longer than expected.

> I'm cooking it down again. The stuff on the bottom did brown some

> but I've still got some foam on top.

You want all of the non-fat milk solids, or particulate

matter, to brown at the same rate, or as closely to that

ideal as possible. So cook very slowly and stir often.

Whatever happens, once any appreciable amount of the

sediment reaches the darker end of the ideal color range,

cooking _must_ stop, or you risk burning some of the solids

and imparting a burnt flavor to the ghee.

[Guest guest]

> I would love to find this totally raw milk/butter. The best

> > butter/ghee is at the top of my list for nutritional additions to

my

> > diet.

>

> -------Del, Radiant Life carries x-factor gold butter oil. It's

from cows not only

> 100% grassfed, but also eating grass in the growth phase, which

produces

> the x-factor Weston Price talked about. They only produce it in

the spring

> and the fall, since that is when the new grass is growing. They

don't use heat

> to separate the oil (they centrifuge it as I believe WFN does

also) so it's still

> raw. It's expensive, and for supplementation, not cooking. If

you're

> interested, you should act quickly, as winter is coming and they

may run out

> soon (if they haven't all ready). I stocked up enough to last me

through

> March since I plan to try get pregnant in a month or two.

>

> Hope this is helpful,

>

>

WFN says theirs is also 100% grass-fed and I can buy that by the

bottle which is easier on the pocketbook right now. Radient Life is a

better buy. WFN says 1 teaspoon is a serving and one bottle is 30

servings. Radient Life says 1/2 teaspoon is a serving. If I use 1/2

teaspoon of the WFN then that makes WFN a better buy! So the 64,000

dollar question is how much do I need. Nobody knows. Right now I am

taking a T of CLO. Does that mean I would need to take the same of

the butter oil?? BTW, Radient Life still has the butter oil

available. I have been using the butter oil extravaganly, spreading

it on my cooked fish, steak and veggies! I need to stop doing that

and just take an amount of it 1x a day and use the land-of-lakes

butter or my own butter when ever I need it. I see that you guys are

making the ghee to be able to cook and not burn. Why don't you just

use coconut oil? It doesn't burn nor is it destroyed when heated.

Somewhere I read that butter should never be heated. Anyone else read

that?

~Del

[Guest guest]

>

> Is ghee the part with or without the casein? I though I had learned

> somewhere that it was the part without.

The ghee is definitely the part without. Casein is the main

protein in milk, but ghee is almost 100% pure milk _fat_.

The cooking of what little casein, as well as lactose, and I

know not what all else left in butter after churning, imparts

a certain distinctive flavor to ghee, but is strained out of

it after cooking. This is part of the reason I object to so

called " raw ghee " being called as such. Though of course I

don't deny any possible health benefits to be had from the

product.

> There is a difference in the ghee that is made from regular land-

> o-lakes butter and raw grass-fed.

I don't doubt it. I imagine that, among other things, it is

a much deeper yellow than ghee from regular store-bought butter.

However many of us can't afford to make a staple of raw butter

made from the milk of all-grass-fed cattle, as much as I'm sure

we all wish we could.

As an interesting aside, goat- or sheep's-milk ghee is actually

clear when liquid, and white like Crisco when solid. There's

no beta-carotene left in the milk of goats and sheep to color

it. That's also the reason that feta is no brilliantly white,

with no hint of yellowness like cheeses made from cow's milk.

[Guest guest]

----- Original Message -----

From: " wtsdv " <liberty@...>

> I don't doubt it. I imagine that, among other things, it is

> a much deeper yellow than ghee from regular store-bought butter.

> However many of us can't afford to make a staple of raw butter

> made from the milk of all-grass-fed cattle, as much as I'm sure

> we all wish we could.

I don't see why not. At over 3,000 calories per pound, raw butter is

actually a pretty good deal in terms of cost per calorie.

[Guest guest]

> >

> > Is ghee the part with or without the casein? I though I had

learned

> > somewhere that it was the part without.

>

> The ghee is definitely the part without. Casein is the main

> protein in milk, but ghee is almost 100% pure milk _fat_.

> The cooking of what little casein, as well as lactose, and I

> know not what all else left in butter after churning, imparts

> a certain distinctive flavor to ghee, but is strained out of

> it after cooking.

---I don't understand what you are saying above. Could you rephrase

it? It sounds like you are saying that in order to get ghee we have

to cook it, therefore taking out flavor. Is that right? The ghee I

bought at WFN says on the bottle " no heat process " . It also says that

raw ghee is made with no heat unlike traditional ghee that is heated.

WFN uses centrifuge to separate the milk solids and take out the

water. This raw ghee is also made from cream. It is a very deep

yellow.----

This is part of the reason I object to so

> called " raw ghee " being called as such. Though of course I

> don't deny any possible health benefits to be had from the

> product.

>

> > There is a difference in the ghee that is made from regular land-

> > o-lakes butter and raw grass-fed.

>

> I don't doubt it. I imagine that, among other things, it is

> a much deeper yellow than ghee from regular store-bought butter.

> However many of us can't afford to make a staple of raw butter

> made from the milk of all-grass-fed cattle, as much as I'm sure

> we all wish we could.

----I understand too well! That's why I will limit my consumption to

1/2 teaspoon a day along with my clo and use coconut oil and land-of-

lakes to cook with. Have you ever heard to not heat butter and if you

do, it should never brown? Browning it makes it turn to transfat, I

think.----

>

> As an interesting aside, goat- or sheep's-milk ghee is actually

> clear when liquid, and white like Crisco when solid. There's

> no beta-carotene left in the milk of goats and sheep to color

> it. That's also the reason that feta is no brilliantly white,

> with no hint of yellowness like cheeses made from cow's milk.

>

>

[Guest guest]

>

> I see that you guys are making the ghee to be able to cook and

> not burn. Why don't you just use coconut oil? It doesn't burn

> nor is it destroyed when heated.

Coconut oil is very good tasting, and I personally consider

it a close second to butter or ghee, but it is not the

traditionaly fat to use when cooking, for example, Indian,

Persian or Ossetian food. Alot of what Sally Fallon's

books is supposedly about, is following age-old traditions

that have a proven track record of sustaining our ancestors.

My ancestors were not in the tropics and probably never saw

a coconut, they were nomadic cattle herders whose diet was

very rich in milk fat, and who used ghee to fry their food.

> Somewhere I read that butter should never be heated. Anyone else

> read that?

You may have read that, there are alot of raw-foodist out

there that would forbid heating anything, but if any fat

at all is to be heated, then it should be an animal fat.

They are the least prone to damage by heating. Supposedly

coconut and palm oil are the next best fats for this use,

but animals fats are the best.

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Berg " <bberg@c...>

wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: " wtsdv " <liberty@p...>

>

> > However many of us can't afford to make a staple of raw butter

> > made from the milk of all-grass-fed cattle, as much as I'm sure

> > we all wish we could.

>

> I don't see why not. At over 3,000 calories per pound, raw butter is

> actually a pretty good deal in terms of cost per calorie.

Regular store-bought butter has a comparable number of

calories per pound, but is much cheaper. I don't go to

the store to buy calories, I go to buy butter. I don't

eat the butter with a mind to get calories, I eat it

because I like the taste of butter. The calories are

just along for the ride. :-)

[Guest guest]

>

> ---I don't understand what you are saying above. Could you rephrase

> it? It sounds like you are saying that in order to get ghee we have

> to cook it, therefore taking out flavor. Is that right?

No, we have to cook it to _add_ flavor - the flavor of the

caramelized milk sugars, of the denatured milk proteins, and

of whatever other small amounts of non-fat milk solids are

left in butter after churning. Without this flavor it should

not be considered traditional ghee, merely clarified butter.

> The ghee I bought at WFN says on the bottle " no heat process " . It

> also says that raw ghee is made with no heat unlike traditional

> ghee that is heated.

Yes, but Belinda was making traditional ghee, which is heated.

I also have been objecting, in this thread and in another, to

the raw product being called " ghee " . The heating process is

integral to the production of real ghee. This so called " raw

ghee " is actually just centrifugally clarified butter. See my

other post on the difference between clarified butter and ghee,

and also keep in mind that I'm not claiming any special health-

giving properties from traditional (heated) ghee.

> WFN uses centrifuge to separate the milk solids and take out the

> water. This raw ghee is also made from cream. It is a very deep

> yellow.----

I'm sure that it's a very good product, and very beneficial

for health, but it's not really ghee. It's centrifugally

clarified butter, and if I had the means, I would start legal

procedings to stop those companies that are selling it as such.

> Have you ever heard to not heat butter and if you do, it should

> never brown? Browning it makes it turn to transfat, I think.----

See my other post where I try to answer this question. Regard-

less of whatever heating might do to butter, it will do worse

to any other fat except lard, tallow or suet, which are also

animal fats. So the question is whether _any_ fat at all should

be heated, not whether butter specifically shouldn't be. If

_any_ fat can be heated, butter can.

[Guest guest]

--- In , " Berg " <bberg@c...>

wrote:

>

> Coconut oil has been used traditionally in some parts of India

> (Southern India, I think), hasn't it?

Yes, you're right. I should have said " certain types of

North Indian cooking " , but wasn't thinking. Sorry about

that.

[Guest guest]

>

> >

> > I see that you guys are making the ghee to be able to cook and

> > not burn. Why don't you just use coconut oil? It doesn't burn

> > nor is it destroyed when heated.

1. Don't like the taste of coconut and imagine the oil would be the

same.

2. Don't know how to make it.

3. Too expensive to buy.

Normally we use lard, which we have plenty of, this is just my way of

making some room in the freezer.

Belinda

[Guest guest]

in butter after churning. Without this flavor it should

> I'm sure that it's a very good product, and very beneficial

> for health, but it's not really ghee. It's centrifugally

> clarified butter, and if I had the means, I would start legal

> procedings to stop those companies that are selling it as such.

------forgive me, , if I'm reacting to a statement made in jest as if it

were

serious, but don't people have the freedom to use language incorrectly?

Granted, it can be annoying to the purists, but what would be the legal

justification for suing a company for misusing the term " ghee " ? Would you

want to live in a country where the law interfered with our lives to this

extent?

And why would you want to put these manufacturers of good foods through

the expense of litigation over the fine distinction between clarified butter and

ghee?

Again, if you were exaggerating to make a point, please disregard this rant.

It's just that your statement really pushed my libertarian buttons.

[Guest guest]

>

> ------forgive me, , if I'm reacting to a statement made in

> jest as if it were serious,

I was jesting a little, and a serious a little. :-)

> but don't people have the freedom to use language incorrectly?

Yes, I think so, but we do have marketing and labelling laws, like

those that require milk to contain so much of this or that before

it can be sold as " milk " , and the like.

> Granted, it can be annoying to the purists, but what would be

> the legal justification for suing a company for misusing the

> term " ghee " ?

I don't know, but are you on any of the kefir lists? If so, you'll

know about the same sort of annoyance, though caused by calling

various kinds of fermented milks " kefir " , but which are not made

using Caucasian kefir grains.

> Would you want to live in a country where the law interfered with

> our lives to this extent?

I already do, and since I do, I want them to go ahead and apply

the same sort of laws to the legal definition of ghee, as they

do, for example, to foods like bread, mayonnaise or beer, the

latter of which aren't nearly so important to me personally as

ghee.

> And why would you want to put these manufacturers of good foods

> through the expense of litigation over the fine distinction

> between clarified butter and ghee?

Sure. There's no reason for them to call it ghee, unless

they feel there's a marketing advantage in doing so, in

which case they're taking advantage of the consumer's

notions about, or desire for, a different product than the

one they're actually selling.

> Again, if you were exaggerating to make a point, please disregard

> this rant. It's just that your statement really pushed my

> libertarian buttons.

I don't mind the rant. I'm a libertarian too, and understand

what you're saying, but I think that so long as we don't yet

have a true libertarian system in place, we might as well try

to use the existing laws to our best personal advantage. That's

what those who are selling centrifugally clarified butter as

" ghee " are doing. By the way, I'm not trying to stop people

on this list who themselves are buying, or discussing buying, a

product sold as " raw ghee " from calling it that. That's the

name under which it's being marketed, and if they were to try

to call it anything else, confusion about which product, from

which company, would ensue. It's the company's choice of name

made in the first place, that I object to. If anyone has bought

a product from company X, and that company calls it " raw ghee " ,

regardless of what it might actually be, then by all means don't

be afraid to say " I bought X's raw ghee " .

[Guest guest]

--- In , " wtsdv " <liberty@p...>

wrote:

> I was jesting a little, and a serious a little. :-)

> I don't mind the rant. I'm a libertarian too, and understand

> what you're saying, but I think that so long as we don't yet

> have a true libertarian system in place, we might as well try

> to use the existing laws to our best personal advantage. That's

> what those who are selling centrifugally clarified butter as

> " ghee " are doing.

======Thanks for the well thought out reply, ! I can

completely relate to frustration with misuse of the language. I

myself had conniptions when the History channel kept

mispronouncing Atilla the Hun, as uh-TILL-uh, rather than

ATTLE-uh. It's the HISTORY channel for heaven's sake!

That said, we'll have to agree to disagree on the morality of suing

the " raw ghee " companies. I really appreciate that these

companies are making healthy foods available to us by mail

order, and if their terminology offends, then use your (quite

considerable:-)) persuasive skills to get them to change the

name. I just don't believe in using the force of law and

government to bend others to my will (of course, this is a general

principle, which because of human depravity, cannot be applied

100%... but that's an issue for another day, and another list:-))

> > Would you want to live in a country where the law interfered

with

> > our lives to this extent?

>

> I already do, and since I do, I want them to go ahead and apply

> the same sort of laws to the legal definition of ghee, as they

> do, for example, to foods like bread, mayonnaise or beer, the

> latter of which aren't nearly so important to me personally as

> ghee.

>

> > And why would you want to put these manufacturers of good

foods

> > through the expense of litigation over the fine distinction

> > between clarified butter and ghee?

>

> Sure. There's no reason for them to call it ghee, unless

> they feel there's a marketing advantage in doing so, in

> which case they're taking advantage of the consumer's

> notions about, or desire for, a different product than the

> one they're actually selling.

[Guest guest]

>

> I myself had conniptions when the History channel kept

> mispronouncing Atilla the Hun, as uh-TILL-uh, rather than

> ATTLE-uh. It's the HISTORY channel for heaven's sake!

Oh, you're interested in Atilla and the history of

the Huns? So am I!

> I just don't believe in using the force of law and government

> to bend others to my will

How I love to read words like these, and agree of

course! If we are indeed disagreeing, it's the

sweetest disagreement I've ever had! ;-)

[Guest guest]

> Oh, you're interested in Atilla and the history of

> the Huns? So am I!

-----I must confess I'm more interested in proper pronunciation and word

usage, but I do find " barbarian tribes " fascinating! Especially how Atilla

terrorized and chiseled away at the mighty Roman Empire. I didn't realize the

Huns were an Asiatic people, rather than a Germanic people like the Goths

and Visigoths. There's just so much I've forgotten from high school history!

>

> > I just don't believe in using the force of law and government

> > to bend others to my will

>

> How I love to read words like these, and agree of

> course! If we are indeed disagreeing, it's the

> sweetest disagreement I've ever had! ;-)

-------Well I'm a sweet girl! Were we disagreeing? I can't remember...:-)

>

>

[Guest guest]

> -----I must confess I'm more interested in proper pronunciation and

word

> usage,

, that makes two of us. I forgot, were you a part of our

grand digression on " thus " and " thusly " and prescriptivism versus

descriptivism? It was a little long-winded and not really apropriate

for this board, but it was a fun thread. Grammar is yummy.

Tom

[Guest guest]

> , that makes two of us. I forgot, were you a part of our

> grand digression on " thus " and " thusly " and prescriptivism versus

> descriptivism? It was a little long-winded and not really apropriate

> for this board, but it was a fun thread. Grammar is yummy.

----Tom, I must confess I avoided that thread because I felt intimidated by

high level of linguistic expertise! I like reading books on grammar and

pronunciation, but I'm a dabbler... plus my interest in food and nutrition is

somewhat all consuming at this moment! I don't remember what side you

were on, but I definitely am opposed to thusly (unless used poetically)... I

think this makes me a prescriptivist!:-)

[Guest guest]

Yep, that was the side I was advocating. And there's nothing wrong

with dabbling!

Tom

>

> > , that makes two of us. I forgot, were you a part of our

> > grand digression on " thus " and " thusly " and prescriptivism versus

> > descriptivism? It was a little long-winded and not really apropriate

> > for this board, but it was a fun thread. Grammar is yummy.

>

> ----Tom, I must confess I avoided that thread because I felt

intimidated by

> high level of linguistic expertise! I like reading books on grammar

and

> pronunciation, but I'm a dabbler... plus my interest in food and

nutrition is

> somewhat all consuming at this moment! I don't remember what side you

> were on, but I definitely am opposed to thusly (unless used

poetically)... I

> think this makes me a prescriptivist!:-)

>

>