Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
$4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
costing as much as that.
--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.

On May 8, 8:51*am, James Silverton >
wrote:
> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
> costing as much as that.
> --
> Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)
>
> Extraneous "not." in Reply To.

Did you buy any?

On 5/8/2013 11:53 AM, merryb wrote:
> On May 8, 8:51 am, James Silverton >
> wrote:
>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>> costing as much as that.
>> --
>> Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)
>>
>> Extraneous "not." in Reply To.
>
> Did you buy any?
>
I quite like most beans but not at that price!

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.

"James Silverton" > wrote in message
...
> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for $4
> a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so that's
> about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus costing
> as much as that.
> --

Fava beans are the new ___. I can't think of anything off hand. Maybe foie
gras? They seem to grow like weeds in Italy; every otherwise not occupied
nook and cranny has fava growing. But here, they are just so "today".

Pico Rico wrote:

> Fava beans are the new ___. I can't think of anything off hand.

The common term is "food fad".

> They seem to grow like weeds in Italy; every otherwise not occupied
> nook and cranny has fava growing. But here, they are just so "today".

Before you buy them, look into how much work is involved in preparing them.
That alone turned me away from trying them.

"George M. Middius" > wrote in message
...
> Pico Rico wrote:
>
>> Fava beans are the new ___. I can't think of anything off hand.
>
> The common term is "food fad".
>
>> They seem to grow like weeds in Italy; every otherwise not occupied
>> nook and cranny has fava growing. But here, they are just so "today".
>
> Before you buy them, look into how much work is involved in preparing
> them.
> That alone turned me away from trying them.
>
>

I have knocked out a case or two at a time, for a dinner seating of a few
hundred. So, for a normal meal or crowd, it would be child's play. Sure, a
bit more work than cutting open a bag of frozen beans of some sort.

On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:14:08 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
wrote:

>
> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Pico Rico wrote:
> >
> >> Fava beans are the new ___. I can't think of anything off hand.
> >
> > The common term is "food fad".
> >
> >> They seem to grow like weeds in Italy; every otherwise not occupied
> >> nook and cranny has fava growing. But here, they are just so "today".
> >
> > Before you buy them, look into how much work is involved in preparing
> > them.
> > That alone turned me away from trying them.
> >
> >
>
> I have knocked out a case or two at a time, for a dinner seating of a few
> hundred. So, for a normal meal or crowd, it would be child's play. Sure, a
> bit more work than cutting open a bag of frozen beans of some sort.
>
You took off two sets of shells for a couple of hundred people and
called it child's play? I did that exactly once just for the two of
us and decided that I would buy packaged/frozen if I ever wanted to
cook fava beans again.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:14:08 -0700, "Pico Rico" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>> "George M. Middius" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Pico Rico wrote:
>> >
>> >> Fava beans are the new ___. I can't think of anything off hand.
>> >
>> > The common term is "food fad".
>> >
>> >> They seem to grow like weeds in Italy; every otherwise not occupied
>> >> nook and cranny has fava growing. But here, they are just so "today".
>> >
>> > Before you buy them, look into how much work is involved in preparing
>> > them.
>> > That alone turned me away from trying them.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> I have knocked out a case or two at a time, for a dinner seating of a few
>> hundred. So, for a normal meal or crowd, it would be child's play.
>> Sure, a
>> bit more work than cutting open a bag of frozen beans of some sort.
>>
> You took off two sets of shells for a couple of hundred people and
> called it child's play?

no, I did not say that.

On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 11:54:28 AM UTC-4, Pico Rico wrote:
>
> Fava beans are the new ___. I can't think of anything off hand. Maybe foie
>
> gras?

Time was, they were a poor man's meal, like mussels found for free were.

On Wed, 8 May 2013 09:59:26 -0700 (PDT), Kalmia
> wrote:

> On Wednesday, May 8, 2013 11:54:28 AM UTC-4, Pico Rico wrote:
> >
> > Fava beans are the new ___. I can't think of anything off hand. Maybe foie
> >
> > gras?
>
> Time was, they were a poor man's meal, like mussels found for free were.

and lobster too

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On 5/8/2013 11:51 AM, James Silverton wrote:
> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
> costing as much as that.

Maybe they're Magic Beans.

Jill

On 08/05/2013 11:51 AM, James Silverton wrote:
> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
> costing as much as that.


How are their fiddlehead prices? Those things are usually pretty pricey
here. Luckily there is very little waste to them.

On 5/8/2013 1:20 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 08/05/2013 11:51 AM, James Silverton wrote:
>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>> costing as much as that.
>
>
> How are their fiddlehead prices? Those things are usually pretty pricey
> here. Luckily there is very little waste to them.

Love fiddleheads! I've heard of, but have never encountered, *frozen*
fiddleheads. I'd love to find some. (I'm not about to order frozen
food online.)

Jill

On May 8, 1:20*pm, Dave Smith > wrote:
> On 08/05/2013 11:51 AM, James Silverton wrote:
>
> > Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
> > $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
> > that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
> > costing as much as that.
>
> How are their fiddlehead prices? Those things are usually pretty pricey
> here. *Luckily there is very little waste to them.

I just saw them this morning for $10 a pound (!) at Lull Farm in
Hollis, New Hampshire.

I like 'em. I just don't like 'em *that* much!

They used to grow wild in a shady wet part of my back yard, but I
discovered the "cut off only 3 of the 7 fronds so they'll have enough
left to propagate" directive too late, so now none grow there :-(

--
Silvar Beitel

--
Silvar Beitel

On 5/8/2013 1:20 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 08/05/2013 11:51 AM, James Silverton wrote:
>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>> costing as much as that.
>
>
> How are their fiddlehead prices? Those things are usually pretty pricey
> here. Luckily there is very little waste to them.

I've never noticed them but I will look!

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.

In article >,
James Silverton > wrote:

> On 5/8/2013 1:20 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> > On 08/05/2013 11:51 AM, James Silverton wrote:
> >> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
> >> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
> >> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
> >> costing as much as that.
> >
> >
> > How are their fiddlehead prices? Those things are usually pretty pricey
> > here. Luckily there is very little waste to them.
>
> I've never noticed them but I will look!

Fiddleheads were $12.99 at the produce market near me. Can't imagine
they'd be so delicious as to be worth that price. I didn't pay any
attention to the price of fava beans - they are a lot of work to shell
and shell again.

marcella

On May 8, 9:54*pm, Marcella Peek > wrote:

>
> Fiddleheads were $12.99 at the produce market near me. Can't imagine
> they'd be so delicious as to be worth that price. *I didn't pay any
> attention to the price of fava beans - they are a lot of work to shell
> and shell again.
>
> marcella

Favas are nice. But like you, I don't think they are worth the
trouble. I have found that I like the big fat frozen Fordhook lima
beans best of all.
The only place I can find them is at Safeway. They are labeled
Fordhook Lima Beans. They are tender and juicy and not dry or mealy
at all if you don't overcook them. I just lightly cook them in a
little water and then add butter and some seasoning to have them alone
as a side dish and I love them in soups and other dishes.

On 5/9/2013 10:18 AM, ImStillMags wrote:
> On May 8, 9:54 pm, Marcella Peek > wrote:
>
>>
>> Fiddleheads were $12.99 at the produce market near me. Can't imagine
>> they'd be so delicious as to be worth that price. I didn't pay any
>> attention to the price of fava beans - they are a lot of work to shell
>> and shell again.
>>
>> marcella
>
> Favas are nice. But like you, I don't think they are worth the
> trouble. I have found that I like the big fat frozen Fordhook lima
> beans best of all.

I *love* those frozen Fordhook limas!

> The only place I can find them is at Safeway. They are labeled
> Fordhook Lima Beans. They are tender and juicy and not dry or mealy
> at all if you don't overcook them. I just lightly cook them in a
> little water and then add butter and some seasoning to have them alone
> as a side dish and I love them in soups and other dishes.
>
I buy the Publix brand Fordhook lima beans. I buy a couple of bags at a
time so I'll always have some on hand.

Jill

James Silverton wrote:
> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
> costing as much as that.

this being Usenet I'm obligated to note that beans are not vegetables

"tert in seattle" > wrote in message
...
> James Silverton wrote:
>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>> costing as much as that.
>
> this being Usenet I'm obligated to note that beans are not vegetables
>

thank you for meeting our obligation, as you correctly noted. I was
beginning to wonder what was going on here!

On 5/8/2013 2:44 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
> James Silverton wrote:
>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>> costing as much as that.
>
> this being Usenet I'm obligated to note that beans are not vegetables
>
ROFL!

Jill

On 5/8/2013 2:44 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
> James Silverton wrote:
>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>> costing as much as that.
>
> this being Usenet I'm obligated to note that beans are not vegetables
>

I'm not going to ask your definition but in mine they certainly are! My
definition depends on their use: fruits, vegetables, meats, fishes and
grains. To avoid misunderstanding, a tomato is a vegetable to me and I
might have a subset of vegetables to include salad greens.

--
Jim Silverton (Potomac, MD)

Extraneous "not." in Reply To.

On 5/8/2013 3:28 PM, James Silverton wrote:
> On 5/8/2013 2:44 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>> James Silverton wrote:
>>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>>> costing as much as that.
>>
>> this being Usenet I'm obligated to note that beans are not vegetables
>>
>
> I'm not going to ask your definition but in mine they certainly are! My
> definition depends on their use: fruits, vegetables, meats, fishes and
> grains. To avoid misunderstanding, a tomato is a vegetable to me and I
> might have a subset of vegetables to include salad greens.
>
I hear what you're saying. I don't think of tomatoes as fruit, either,
even if they are. Technically beans are legumes. I don't know anyone
who says, "We're having legumes with dinner tonight!"

Jill

"jmcquown" > wrote in message
...
> On 5/8/2013 3:28 PM, James Silverton wrote:
>> On 5/8/2013 2:44 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>>> James Silverton wrote:
>>>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>>>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>>>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>>>> costing as much as that.
>>>
>>> this being Usenet I'm obligated to note that beans are not vegetables
>>>
>>
>> I'm not going to ask your definition but in mine they certainly are! My
>> definition depends on their use: fruits, vegetables, meats, fishes and
>> grains. To avoid misunderstanding, a tomato is a vegetable to me and I
>> might have a subset of vegetables to include salad greens.
>>
> I hear what you're saying. I don't think of tomatoes as fruit, either,
> even if they are. Technically beans are legumes. I don't know anyone who
> says, "We're having legumes with dinner tonight!"
>
> Jill

being a legume is not what makes it not a vegetable.

Pico Rico wrote:
>
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 5/8/2013 3:28 PM, James Silverton wrote:
>>> On 5/8/2013 2:44 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>>>> James Silverton wrote:
>>>>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>>>>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>>>>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>>>>> costing as much as that.
>>>>
>>>> this being Usenet I'm obligated to note that beans are not vegetables
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not going to ask your definition but in mine they certainly are! My
>>> definition depends on their use: fruits, vegetables, meats, fishes and
>>> grains. To avoid misunderstanding, a tomato is a vegetable to me and I
>>> might have a subset of vegetables to include salad greens.
>>>
>> I hear what you're saying. I don't think of tomatoes as fruit, either,
>> even if they are. Technically beans are legumes. I don't know anyone who
>> says, "We're having legumes with dinner tonight!"
>>
>> Jill
>
> being a legume is not what makes it not a vegetable.

Ronald Reagan made ketchup a vegetable

jmcquown wrote:
> I hear what you're saying. I don't think of tomatoes as fruit,
> either, even if they are. Technically beans are legumes. I don't
> know anyone who says, "We're having legumes with dinner tonight!"

I had a small salad and some refried legume tacos. They were quite tasty.

On Wed, 08 May 2013 15:28:33 -0400, James Silverton
> wrote:

>On 5/8/2013 2:44 PM, tert in seattle wrote:
>> James Silverton wrote:
>>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>>> costing as much as that.
>>
>> this being Usenet I'm obligated to note that beans are not vegetables
>>
>
>I'm not going to ask your definition but in mine they certainly are! My
>definition depends on their use: fruits, vegetables, meats, fishes and
>grains. To avoid misunderstanding, a tomato is a vegetable to me and I
>might have a subset of vegetables to include salad greens.

I'm a gardener, so beans are vegetables. I'm ok with the part of the
tomato that I eat being a fruit-- but I call the entire plant a
vegetable. I can't decide on rhubarb, though. Seems like it
should be a fruit because I make sweet pies with it--- but now I'm
doing a lot more savory things, so maybe it *is* a vegetable.

Jim

"tert in seattle" > wrote in message
...
> James Silverton wrote:
>> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling for
>> $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain so
>> that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even asparagus
>> costing as much as that.
>
> this being Usenet I'm obligated to note that beans are not vegetables
>
and being Usenet you could have used the shorter "obliged" instead of
"obligated" {;-)

James Silverton wrote:
> Admittedly it was in a "gourmet" store but I saw Fava beans selling
> for $4 a pound. The pods must weigh as much as the beans they contain
> so that's about $8 a pound for a vegetable! I've never seen even
> asparagus costing as much as that.

That does seem high! Luckily for me those are one bean I can live without.
I didn't try them until recently. Got a taste of a salad with them in it at
Whole Foods. They were kind of meh.