Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2015 February 6

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 6

Funny story on Wikipedia's birth

http://cache.epapr.in/432922/557071ac-f718-4dff-bfe6-e3c23d21212f/1400x2234-700x744/1x3.png In this local newspaper appearing in Malayalam, in the state of Kerala in India, there is a feature by one K.M. Shakkeel narrating the story of the origin of the idea that gave birth to Wikipedia. The feature says that Kira the new-born baby of Jimmy Wales had some serious congenital disorder which made breathing difficult. The docs said there was no treatment for condition. They informed him that one doc in Santiago treated such cases with success although there was no scientific basis known for that. Wales searched out and found this doc and brought him to the hospital where his daughter was born. The timely treatment saved the life of the child. The value of timely and speedily available information gave Wales the idea of Nupedia which later became Wikipedia. Real incidents or some hoax? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.253.195.32 (talk) 01:41, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, it tells a true story but in a very mixed up and error filled way. When Kira was born, she had meconium aspiration syndrome. The traditional treatment at that time was basically to give the baby support and hope they pull through it. However, we were fortunate to be in San Diego where a doctor associated with a nearby university was in the midst of a controlled scientific trial of a new technique, which involved as I recall, paralyzing the baby, stopping the breathing, rerouting the blood through a machine to oxygenate it, and then use a newly invented protein-based fluid to fill the baby's lungs and "rinse out" the lungs 4 times. This was not "no scientific basis known" - it was cutting edge science. The treatment worked immediately and Kira was completely fine, and remains so to this day.

This did not give me the idea for Nupedia or Wikipedia, but it was a life-changing emotional experience as you can imagine, and it did provoke me to be decisive when I got back to work to rip up the Nupedia plan and install the wiki software, thereby launching Wikipedia.

It doesn't seem like the original poster was trolling, just asking a question based on a quite likely confused news report.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 16:47, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Addendum. This appears to be the final publication of the study in question. I say that because it matches my memory of the treatment (although it seems like I had the number of lavage's wrong (3 not 4) and the doctor's name is there (Bernstein) and the year seems right. It's interesting to note that although this study concluded that the approach was promising, Wikipedia cites more recent research suggesting otherwise. All I know is that Kira is fine. :)--Jimbo Wales (talk) 16:56, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

[1] --Francis Schonken (talk) 10:05, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Current Monarch with power over life and death?

Are there any current Monarchs who have the legal power of life and death over civilians? (I don't like the fact that you spilled your ale, Guards shoot him!), if not, who would be the most recent monarch to have that level of power? Pre-WWII Japanese Emperor?Naraht (talk) 14:34, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

In the Commonwealth of Nations, the Monarch (or more formally their representative, usually the Governor General) has the power to commute a death sentence, but not issue one. See Royal prerogative of mercy. So, they have a limited power over life and death, in the sense that they can issue orders to halt the planned execution of someone. --Jayron32 14:51, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Although that power is activated at the request of the responsible cabinet minister. As usual with our constitution, the monarch acts on the advice of her (or his) ministers and not otherwise. Alansplodge (talk) 20:23, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Is that just tradition, or is their power to grant pardons/clemency/commute sentences strictly limited by law ? StuRat (talk) 13:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

See Absolute monarchy . The countries here give absolute power to their rulers, which means in theory they can do whatever they want (unless they make people angry enough that they get overthrown I guess) 81.138.15.171 (talk) 16:52, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

All monarchs inherit with their position the means to make a murder look like an accident or suicide. Those aren't illegal. I'm not saying any reigning monarchs are into that, but it'd be easier for them than for you. Or even a minister. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:33, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

In a way Jordan fits the bill. According to this the Jordanian king is required to sign off on the death penalty but they haven't since 2006. But it doesn't look as if they could just send for the royal executioner. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 05:43, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

You mean it says they didn't between 2006 and 2014? Nil Einne (talk) 12:58, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

MSG in cooking

Are there any good reasources on how to use MSG? When I search for it on the internet all I get is a bunch of alt med nonsense about how its bad for you or whatever. I know you can use it as part of a stir fry, and you can use it as a salt substitute. Does this mean it might be good to spread on food like you would salt on fish and chips (fries for Americans) or whatever, or does it need to be cooked? --81.138.15.171 (talk) 16:46, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

You don't need to cook it. It does seem to work as an appetite stimulant, which, of course, isn't good if you are trying to lose weight. (If you are looking for a salt substitute which is an appetite suppressant, I suggest some form of capsaicin, such as red pepper flakes.) StuRat (talk) 16:53, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Here's a list of 61 recipes that use MSG [2]. What's not mentioned in the recipe search is that MSG naturally occurs in many foods, e.g. nori. So even if you're not adding MSG powder, you get some of that umami flavor in sushi (e.g. maki) and other Japanese, Chinese, and Korean dishes that use seaweed, like seaweed salad. MSG also occurs in mushrooms and tomatoes (more listed at our article), so any dish with those would probably not be hurt by adding a little supplemental MSG. (I would totally try a little on fish & chips, spaghetti with marinara and mushrooms, or almost any homemade soup) SemanticMantis (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

(ec)You just use it like salt, and sprinkle it on and stir it in after cooking--like sugar and salt, it doesn't need to be cooked. I suppose if you had a recipe that said to cook it in you would follow the recipe. But basically it behaves like sugar or salt sprinkled on something.

A good test would be to make some plain white rice, and have a spoonful while plain. Then sprinkle some MSG on, maybe half as much as you would if you were using salt, then fluff it in and taste the rice. (If you don't mix, it will just sit there, like a salty layer on top and a bland layer on the bottom if you don't mix the salt in.) The rice with MSG should now taste "tasier" (umami).

I find it has a synergistic effect with salt, so don't put both, or put the salt on only after tasting, and use a very little bit. Otherwise, what is a normal amount of salt may taste much saltier. Here's a commercial website that offers info and recipes. Google "recipes with msg" (in quotes) to get other results. I'd also mention that most processed foods like battered fish will already have salt or flavor enhancers. So don't add MSG unless they are bland to the taste or you may find they are too salty. I use MSG on homemade stir-fry vegetables, home-made fried rice, and on Chinese takeout when it is bland, rather than salt. μηδείς (talk) 17:10, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Eating My Greens

OK, I think I've paid my dues, so it's time for me to ask a question of the great minds of the Reference Desk...

Like many other people, I'm aware of the need to eat a wide range of vegetables (as opposed to fruit) each day. There appear to be health benefits from doing so, and I'm quite content to take the advice of medical experts on this. My problem is that I really don't care for many vegetables. In particular, I find leafy green vegetables, particularly members of the Brassica family, either very bitter or otherwise foul tasting. I also find members of the Allium genus generally too strong-tasting and somewhat unpleasant. Finally, I dislike, and am extraordinarily sensitive to, cucumber, to the extent that I can taste cucumber on food that has simply sat next to a cut cucumber in a fridge. (I appear to have inherited this from my father, who has the same sensitivity; the sensitivity is also present in some paternal cousins.) In general I am very sensitive to and discriminating of tastes and smells; I suspect I am hyperosmic compared to the general population (though I may simply pay more attention to my environment than average, as I also seem to be more discriminating of colours than average).

I readily eat and enjoy the following vegetables: peas, beans and pulses of all kinds; the roots of most of the Apiaceae, and where appropriate their stems or leaves, though I don't care much for the texture of celery; artichokes, asparagus, beets, potatoes, sweet potatoes and sweetcorn. Further, I generally find vegetables more palatable when cooked, as this seems to make some taste less bad.

The particular problem is this: medical guidelines seem to suggest that the greatest health benefits come from eating leafy green vegetables. Annoyingly, these are the ones I most dislike. My question to the Reference Desk is thus this: can you think of ways of getting me to eat my greens? One option is to incorporate them into other foods so that the tastes and textures are diluted or concealed (for example in soups or strong-tasting dishes); if so, are there ways to do this that don't incur substantial extra calorie costs? Are there any other options?

And (just out of curiosity) what is it that makes dieticians favour leafy green vegetables over others?

I await your answers with interest. RomanSpa (talk) 21:28, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

In answer to one of your questions, my mum has just recently bought a soup maker machine. Everything is thrown in together, mashed up, and boiled (you can set 'mashing settings' to 'chunky' (if you are adding meat) and 'totally just soup' (I forget the wording)). You can add whatever spices or salts, peppers, or whatever to it, to mask the taste of any ingredient you dislike the taste of. The spices or other condiments will not add much to the calorie levels. Alternatively, you could just start smoking, because then you can hardly taste anything :) KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 21:45, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Ever try saag paneer? spinach soufflé? What about liquid form - Wheat grass shots or Naked Juice's "green machine?" Wilted dandelion greens can be good, toss with some vinegar and bacon. Kale chips are suddenly on the shelves in many markets, but you can also make them easily at home. Mustard greens are often served with traditional Chinese food, not often seen in western restaurants though (Ok that's a brassica, probably too bitter for you). "Hunger makes the best pickle" as Ben Franklin said. I never liked asparagus until I was confronted with very limited options and an empty stomach. Ever since I've loved it ;) SemanticMantis (talk) 22:29, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh, for your last question: roots and tubers tend to be Storage_organs - they are mostly relatively simple carbohydrates, and not much else. Leaves will have more dietary fiber, as well as a host of secondary metabolites, each of which usually has some study showing some health benefit. Note also that any green plant matter has chlorophyll, ensuring a decent amount of iron. There's a reason why some people recommend thinking of color for dietary concerns. Lots of white/pale things won't in general have the same vitamins, minerals, and other goodies that a colorful mix of leaves and stems will. Also note that botanical fruits are not the same as culinary fruits. Peppers, tomatoes, squashes, etc are all fruits that we don't often think of as such for eating purposes. But for nutritional purposes, you can base a meal around squash, whereas you probably wouldn't use oranges as the base for a meal. Usually when dieticians say vegetables are better than fruit, they are classing zucchini and pumpkin and peppers as "vegetables." SemanticMantis (talk) 22:41, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

But chlorophyll doesn't contain any iron! RomanSpa (talk) 18:17, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Try baby spinach, it doesn't seem to be as offensive as teenage spinach. If you cannot tolerate broccoli because you are a supertaster, that tends to lessen with age. You should ask your doctor, she may simply provide supplements, and a licensed nutritionist will be happy to tell you how to get your vitamin K. I also cannot tolerate cucumber rind, but that is not normally a major source of leafy greenness. Broccoli Piza is great, we are having it tonight. μηδείς (talk) 23:14, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

For those foods which are healthy, and you like the flavor, but not the texture, you might consider a juice extractor. That removes the fiber, which is normally good for you, but if you can't stand it, at least you can get the vitamins from those foods. Finely blending them is another option, and healthier, since it leaves the fiber in, as long as you find the result palatable. StuRat (talk) 01:37, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Drinking the juice withought the fibre is also a good way to aggravate a diabetic condition. The OP should ask his doctor and get a referral to a licensed nutritionist. μηδείς (talk) 02:58, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

A diabetic ought not to drink fruit juice "withought" fiber, but most vegetable juices are far lower in sugars. Carrot juice is about the highest. I agree that a diabetic should consult a doctor before any dietary change, but the OP didn't say they have diabetes. StuRat (talk) 13:31, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I said "withought the fibre". Please don't mesquite me. μηδείς (talk) 21:06, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

I find the taste of raw broccoli to be horrible and boiled broccoli yucky, yet I eat broccoli most days of the week because when stored and prepared properly broccoli is tasty. By not freezing vegetables you will retain their crispness and certain vitamins. If you throw the broccoli into a pan at around 300F with just a little canola oil then add a little sauce when nearly done you will mask all the bitterness and keep all the healthiness with only adding 50cal per head/15 branches. There's little need to worry about adding even 100cal onto a plate of broccoli as an alternative meal will still be much higher in calories if it is low in low-calorie vegetables. 70.30.20.185 (talk) 04:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

@ 70.30.20.185 “mask all the bitterness” You are avoiding over-cooking it. That is what makes it taste dreadful. Also, next time your really, really hungry, have nibble at a bit of fresh raw broccoli (not frozen, as that has been blanched prior to freezing).--Aspro (talk) 23:38, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

I always steam my broccoli. I said steam, not over-steam. Five minutes max. Add a sprinkle of salt and pepper, and a bit of butter if you wish, and you'll be begging for more. This also works great for carrots, beans and other fibrous vegetables.-- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]}

Make bubble and squeak or cabbage rolls. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 05:32, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you all for your kind responses. RomanSpa (talk) 11:22, 11 February 2015 (UTC)