Saturday, December 02, 2006


At first glance it seems that specialty tonic waters are just one more example of excess. But then maybe that's not the excess; maybe that's about actually making things good. Maybe the whole HFCS version is more excessive than the specialty version. Isn't it a bit riduculous to have politics define that we use a sweetner that doesn't taste as good as the cheaper (without interference) and better tasting one. I'm willing to pay for quality, but wouldn't it be better if we made things good in the first place.

We had lunch at Per Se a month or so ago. And we tried their Gin and Tonic - with their special tonic. And it was good. It was even great. And then on Wednesday, the New York Times raised the broader issue:
Specialty Tonic Waters, Subtly Sweet


Blogger Tabasco06 said...

Could you really tell a difference between the tonic with HFCS and actual sugar? I cant tell when i try things with or without HFCS.

4:38 PM  
Blogger Bee said...

I've done a side by side comparison with Coke - and yes, with that you can easily tell that the sugar tastes ... (for lack of a better word) better - it's a different sweet.

With the G&T, while on the afternoon of our lunch at Per Se, I could have gotten one with Canada Dry without leaving the climate controlled environment (the upside to restaurants in malls), it wasn't worth breaking up the lunch flow. However, with that it was easier, as Per Se's tonic actually changes the look (it's not crystal clear) and taste.

9:47 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home