Talk:Hummus

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search



Nutritional information[edit]

I removed the nutritional information from this article because hummus is a prepared food and thus varies considerably in its composition. As a general rule, Wikipedia, for good reason, does not give nutritional information for prepared foods, for exactly this reason. Another editor put that section back claiming that "hummus is mainly chickpeas". Of course, the Arabic word hummus just means "chickpea", but this article is about the prepared food, which includes variable quantities of tahini, lemon, salt, olive oil, water, etc.

Let's look at two well-regarded cookbooks I happen to have on my bookshelf. One recipe uses 1/4 cup tahini for 1 cup dried chickpeas,[1] while another uses 1/2 cup tahini for 3/4-1 cup dried chickpeas.[2] Since chickpeas are only 2.5% fat, and tahini is 54% fat and only 3% carbohydrates, more than doubling the amount of tahini more than doubles the ratio of fat to carbohydrates in the result. Roden also suggests adjusting the proportions of water, lemon juice, garlic, and salt to adjust the consistency and taste, making the proportions even more ill-defined. Other recipes vary even more, with only tiny amounts of tahini, or large amounts of olive oil, and so on.

This is why the nutrition infobox is silly. It reports that 100g of hummus consists of 64.9g water, 20.1g carbohydrates, 8.6g fat, and has 741 kJ of energy, where even the first digit of all these ostensibly precise numbers is dubious. The detailed listing of vitamins and minerals is equally silly. Just because the USDA reports these meaningless numbers (where did they get their recipe?) doesn't mean that we should follow suit. We should follow the general Wikipedia practice of not giving nutritional info for prepared foods. --Macrakis (talk) 23:11, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Paula Wolfert, The Cooking of the Eastern Mediterranean, 1994, p. 24
  2. ^ Claudia Roden, A Book of Middle Eastern Food, 1968, p 45
While I agree with you about the (lack of) value of the nutritional information, some readers and editors evidently find it valuable. Falafel became a good article with a Nutrition section and infobox very similar to the ones in this article. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 23:23, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Agree with Malik Shabazz. It's "splitting hairs" to argue that the nutritional information isn't useful information. An encyclopedia should serve the general interest, hopefully being as applicable as possible to the topic, and this is the case for the USDA nutrient data shown for hummus. The ancillary ingredients are in minor amounts, while the chickpea nutrient data are certainly the primary component and relevant to giving perspective to encyclopedia users about the main nutrients contained in hummus. The two entries in the USDA nutrient database are remarkably similar between "home prepared" and "commercial" hummus, well within the preparation differences and measurement error. I find the article nutrient table a useful index of what I'm getting for nutrition by consuming hummus. The table serves a valuable guide for encyclopedia users seeking facts about nutrient content. --Zefr (talk) 00:03, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
I disagree on several grounds.
If it were true that the chickpea component determined the "main nutrients", then why do we see (using the tables in the hummus and chickpea articles) that the fat content of hummus is over 3x that of chickpeas, the salt content is over 34x (going from 0% of Recommended to 16%), and the dietary fiber is about half? (There is also clearly some sort of gross error in the sugar amount, which is shown as 4.8g for chickpeas but 0.3g for hummus.)
There is a huge amount of taste and discretion that goes into making hummus. Some people like it soupy, with large amounts of water; others like it very dry. Some like it very salty, others very little. Some add significant amounts of olive oil; others don't use oil at all.
I am not impressed by the consistency in the USDA figures between "home prepared" and "commercial" hummus. Did the USDA go around to multiple households and sample their home-made hummus? If so, the honest summary would include a range of values, not just one.
This is true of most prepared foods, which is why we should not include nutritional information on them in Wikipedia. --Macrakis (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I understand your objection and feel it's ok to give such a perspective in the article on nutrient values for different hummus preparations if 1) you can find reliable sources for food nutrient assays (there are few of them) - among nearly 9000 foods analyzed, the USDA has only the two reports for hummus as the link above shows; and 2) you can write a paragraph for review first here at Talk on the nutrient variations of concern if the content has WP:WEIGHT; see the guidance section under WP:NOTEVERYTHING. --Zefr (talk) 15:15, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Draft[edit]

Explanation (not suggested for the article): The nutrient data below are from Condé Nast, Nutritiondata.com, a reliable republication from the USDA National Nutrient Database version SR-21 (2008); the 2015 version is SR-28 where some individual nutrient values have changed (not appreciably) due to additional measurements since 2008 and/or newer methods. For editor revision and comment:

Nutrition

Chickpeas, the main ingredient of conventional hummus, have appreciable contents of dietary fiber, protein, B vitamins, manganese and other nutrients. As choice of ingredients in hummus preparations may vary across cultures and consumers, differences in nutritional content are possible, depending on the proportions of chickpeas, tahini, salt, olive oil, lemon juice or other components. For example, one commercial preparation (ingredients undefined) providing 166 calories in a 100 gram amount had 24% of the Daily Value (DV) for dietary fiber, 16% DV for protein, 21% DV for folate, 16% DV for sodium, 39% DV for manganese and 14-26% DV for several dietary minerals. A homemade hummus (ingredients undefined) providing 177 calories had corresponding values of 16% DV for dietary fiber, 10% DV for protein, 15% DV for folate, 10% DV for sodium, 28% DV for manganese and few other minerals with significant content. Fat content for both preparations, typically from use of tahini and olive oil, was 13-15% of total amount, whereas other major components include 65% water, 14-20% total carbohydrates, including 0-0.3% sugars and 5-8% protein. --Zefr (talk) 20:27, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Added to article in Nutrition section. --Zefr (talk) 15:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
It suffices to say that recipes vary.
The two recipes used as a sample here are pretty arbitrary, and both are American.
The fundamental problem remains: prepared foods almost never have meaningful nutritional analyses. --Macrakis (talk) 14:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Better to have some general information rather than nothing per WP:CCPOL. Let's edit rather than blanking out some reliable content on nutrient composition. --Zefr (talk) 15:12, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Your edit of the Nutrition section was good, Macrakis. As a bookmark on the sodium issue (which is valid and notable to retain in the discussion, but I'll go along with it out), let's keep in mind that salt is normally an ingredient for many hummus recipes and sodium is an essential nutrient (i.e., required for physiological functions and health) with Europe recommending 1500 mg/day intake and FDA recommending not more than 2300 mg/day (one teaspoon daily). --Zefr (talk) 14:42, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Sodium is of course an essential nutrient. But deficiencies are rare in the developed countries, and it is common to consume more than is recommended. The article you point to says, "pick the food with a lower %DV of sodium", so it is peculiar to call hummus an "excellent source" of sodium, as though a little is good and a lot is "excellent". --Macrakis (talk) 15:50, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Yes, on a topic like sodium intake, where the developed world consumes too much of this nutrient, the adjectives "excellent", "rich", "high" or "good" to describe content in a food lead one to assume a recommendation, whereas these are defined food labeling terms for Daily Value guidance (see Nutrient Content Claims) in the US and Canada. --Zefr (talk) 16:03, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

"High in" is the other phrasing allowed in that document, and does not have the same implications as "excellent source of". In any case, the sodium content of hummus is presumably highly variable, though I'd guess (not a WP:RS!) that most of the salt in most preparations comes from the salt added to canned chickpeas. --Macrakis (talk) 01:36, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

"Or Other Beans" edit[edit]

Hummus contains chickpeas, by definition. An edit was made on the 8th of December, changing the definition of hummus to include other beans. Due to the rise in popularity of hummus in the U.S., a company called "Eat Well Embrace Life," formerly "Eat Well Enjoy Life," has begun making a hummus free food they market as "the other bean hummus". This is legal, because there is no legal definition of hummus in the U.S.A., and the word can be applied to other products. A legal definition of hummus has been sought in the U.S. due to this.[1]

This is merely one new American company, who's site states "Eat Well Embrace Life has Americanized the hummus category by creating hummus from Other Beans." The bold text is highlighted, and capitalized on their site, I have not added the emphasis. [2] The edit in question seems to have been made around the time that this product began being marketed. Regardless as to whether this was a paid edit, or simply an assumption by an American customer due to the U.S.'s lax labeling laws on a new product, it is not accurate, or appropriate for this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skeletontea (talkcontribs) 07:26, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Though I find it annoying to see things called "hummus" which aren't based on chickpeas, and things called "aioli" without garlic, there is nothing new about food names being extended like this. The Nouvelle Cuisine crowd was especially fond of names like "cod loin" and recently we have gotten "cauliflower steak". If it's a real non-fringe trend (and not just one product) we should report it. --Macrakis (talk) 14:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2016[edit]

Hummus was invented by Lebanese people, and so the origin is Lebanon. Greyc (talk) 21:32, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Disagree. It is sufficient to say the origin is in the Levant, as several sources used in the article state. --Zefr (talk) 22:13, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
No sourcing provided for the proposed change. Hertz1888 (talk) 22:39, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2016[edit]

You guys are saying this article is subprotected to avoid vandalism that I think is amazing, but this article is saying Hummus is egyptian when actually the information is unknown and some sources will say it's israeli. Also says PALESTINIANS enjoy it, what about Israelis. And Palestineans ARE Israelis, as there is no such country called Palestine, wether you like it or not, agree or not, the country is Called Israel and the citizens are Israelis (Jewish or Arabs).

Please make the article impartial. It is partial at the moment. 203.31.116.2 (talk) 03:11, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. It's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. -- Dane2007 talk 03:32, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Hummus[edit]

The opening paragraph refers to hummus as a "food dip" (and where the dip page says dips are "condiments"). This is innaccurate. In a vast swath of the Levant and even into Africa, Hummus is most often eaten as the main course of a meal. Yes, it is traditionally eaten by dipping pita into it rather than with a spoon, but it forms the bulk of the meal. I ain't citin' any sources, cuz I don't need to, cuz it's just true. And this is non-controversial even in the Middle East: Arabs, Jews, and others, please come together long enough to have my back on this. 68.175.11.48 (talk) 19:53, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Actually, our article on the Sky cites four sources to say that it's blue. WP:CITE and WP:Verifiability are taken very seriously around here. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:30, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
don't get distracted, my suggestion is an improvement to the article, you now know something true about hummus you never knew before. As to citations, the purported blueness of the sky NEEDS citation as the sky is not actually blue, it only appears to be blue from the surface of the planet during the day; its blueness disappears as you increase elevation or set the sun. Now you also know something about the sky. 68.175.11.48 (talk) 15:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hummus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:25, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Ok. One url/source needs to be replaced. --Zefr (talk) 17:27, 6 April 2017 (UTC)