/ck/ - Food & Cooking

[Anonymous No.12156817]

>mfw trying to bake drumsticks
>they're still not ready after 1 and half hours of baking in 425 degree heat
What the fuck? Why is chicken so damn hard to prepare?

[Anonymous No.12156819]

>>12156817
cursed chicken

[Anonymous No.12156826]

>>12156817
What the fuck am i looking at, looks like a mess

[Anonymous No.12156832]

>>12156817
>not ready after 90 minutes
>posts charcoal
???

[Anonymous No.12156843]

>>12156832
The first hour of baking had deep red blood oozing out of it.
>>12156826
No fucking shit.

[Anonymous No.12156845]

>>12156817
dude. that's done as done gets.
why didn't you braise? or at least cover and properly lubricate the pan?
i swear to fuck, slid-posters are the worst.

[Anonymous No.12156862]

>>12156845
>why didn't you braise
I was after a half hour but it was still leaking it's juice.
>lubricate the pan
I coated the pan with butter prior to putting the chicken in.

[Anonymous No.12156902]

>>12156862
That piece looks fine to eat.

[Anonymous No.12156913]

>>12156817
Did you check the temperature? They are probably done.

[Anonymous No.12156939]

>>12156862
Jesus what the fuck did you even do to those things?

[Anonymous No.12156943]

>>12156817

At 425F the chicken reached temp a long time ago. Unless your oven is broken.

The reason it didn't cook the way you expected is because of that pan. Those pans are called steam pans for a reason. Next time use a sheet pan covered with aluminum foil.

[Anonymous No.12156947]

Also one of the legs had a slight tint of green on the skin. Which got me a bit worried to even prepare.

[Anonymous No.12156949]

>>12156826
He's using a disposable baking tray. That should tell you everything you need to know.

[Anonymous No.12156965]

>>12156949
>>12156943
Huh, now this I didn't know.

[Anonymous No.12156975]

>>12156862
if you're asking for legit advice and this isn't bullshit;
i used 8 bone-in, skin-on thighs for dinner today.
i marinated them for about 5 hours in a cheap bottle of italian dressing in the fridge.
when i was ready to bake, i set my oven to 380, sprayed a glass casserole dish with canola spray and i didn't rinse or dry the thighs. i just dripped them into their zip-loc bag and placed them next to each other.
i cooked them approximately 35 minutes at 380F and then cranked up the oven to 450.
at this point they'd provided a lot of their own juice in addition to the small amount of marinade that came with them and were braising themselves.
i waited until the unsubmerged tops got brown and pulled them, covered and let them sit for around 20 minutes because i intended to make chicken salad from them.
when i decided i'd make german style potato salad, i sauteed onion in a dutch oven, pour the then gelatinous liquid from the roasting pan and almost completely submerged them with canned chicken stock and i let them braise until i was done with a few beers and everyone was home and settled down and ready to eat, during which time i also boiled potatoes and heated a can of beans with crushed garlic, chili flakes and salt and pepper.
read this several times. it's just what happened when i decided to change plans half way through and everyone complimented the food over and over.
you gotta get a feel for stuff in the kitchen. you can make a snap decision that changes the entire meal and never miss a beat.
i'm sure you're capable, if only because you're interested.
don't get discouraged, just read more recipes and do more experimenting when you can afford the ingredients and time.

[Anonymous No.12156993]

>>12156965
Good cookware holds and distributes heat evenly. Shitty dollar store aluminum cookware that's best used for your company's pot luck luncheon does not.

[Anonymous No.12156996]

>>12156975
Thanks. Chicken just makes me apprehensive since it can easily fuck your shit up if you slightly undercook it or you can ruin it if slight overcooked.

[Anonymous No.12157004]

>>12156975
if you can braise a quarter chicken in stock and seasonings and herbs, you'll probably come out better anyway.
don't just try what seems most basic, because a lot of time it turns out that that actually requires understanding your oven and adjusting according to vessel and so on.
consider trying something with a few more steps than season and heat. it might help you have a higher understanding of what you did wrong.

[Anonymous No.12157009]

>>12156996
not him but i bake chicken thighs in the oven now and just started a few weeks ago. i do 400F for 40 mins but if you are apprehensive just take a fork and knife and cut into the chicken before taking it all out and learn the timing of your oven

[Anonymous No.12157012]

>>12156996
Drums are the hardest part of the chicken to cook. Stick to breasts for a while.

[Anonymous No.12157022]

>>12156996
i dig that, but you'll have a feel for it once you get use to your oven. using a thermometer is a great idea until then, but if you use another method than dry heat it helps maintain a moist and palatable product while giving you the freedom to let it ride for long enough to remove your fear of under cooked poultry. it's what i do when i'm throwing together a middle of the weak chicken dinner.
try a coq au vin recipe. you'll get to work on knife skills with that one and it's hard to mess up if you don't stray too far from the recommended cooking temps and ingredient quantities.

[Anonymous No.12157026]

>>12157022
week*

[Anonymous No.12157046]

>>12156947
Were you trying to "oven" fry?
Like some kind of healthy fried chicken or something?

[Anonymous No.12157053]

>>12156996

I'm not saying you should start cooking your chicken medium-rare, but you really shouldn't be afraid of food borne illness. As long as the chicken is fresh and not sourced from a shady supplier, you have a very small chance of getting sick from it. At least in the US (and likely most other countries).

The USDA requires permanent on-site inspectors to be present at large-scale processing plants, and they are required to test daily for pathogens. If they find pathogens, they recall everything. This is required by law.

I get updates from the USDA as part of my job. Currently, there are no alerts for chicken. That essentially means that no legally produced chicken on the supermarket shelves right now contains pathogens that can make you sick. You could eat it raw and you'd be totally fine. You have about as much chance of getting salmonella from raw chicken as you do of winning the lottery.

If you really get freaked out by food pathogens, you should actually stay away from vegetables that are grown low to the ground. Lettuce, celery, etc.

[Anonymous No.12157061]

>>12157053
>You could eat it raw and you'd be totally fine.
assuming you've handled it appropriately.
but, i still wouldn't risk it.

[Anonymous No.12157104]

>>12157061
I'm not sure what you mean by "handled it properly". Sure, if you wipe your ass with your bare hands, you might get sick from eating anything. What I'm saying is that USDA recalls on meat products containing pathgens are virtually non-existent. If you look through all the recalls in the last several years, you're pretty much only going to find products that are "manufactured without the benefit of inspection" I.E. illegally manufactured bootleg meat, which doesn't necessarily mean it contains pathogens, and a bunch of recalls on dogfood for some reason, likely due to it being manufactured without the same strict regulations as human food.

[Anonymous No.12157122]

>>12157046
Yeah. Though I'm omitting the skin and breading for this next batch and covering with just the seasoning and covering the tray.

I can reuse the tray I just previously used for the first batch correct?

[Anonymous No.12157126]

>>12157061

I feel like I need to reiterate, salmonella, e-coli, botulinum, lysteria, these are not things that are normal and present in everyday environments. If they were, people would be getting sick and dying all the time. In fact, another part of the strict legal requirements of being a producer of any product that falls under the purview of the USDA are frequent environmental tests of the processing facility, and if they find even a trace of any of that bad stuff, they shut everything down and recall everything until it's fixed.

[Anonymous No.12157131]

>>12157122
>>bake chicken in a covered tray
why not steam it at that point? it would acheive the same thing much faster.

don't cover the chicken otherwise it will never brown.

[Anonymous No.12157134]

>>12157104
the pathogens that occur naturally from keeping it at too high a temperature are the ones to which i was referring.
chicken isn't always safe just because it left the factory that way.

[Anonymous No.12157157]

>>12157126
So you're saying I could literally eat raw chicken and be fine?

That goes against everything I've ever been told. Where does the salmonella meme come from then?

[Anonymous No.12157160]

>>12157131
>why not steam it at that point
Don't have the tools for that.

[Anonymous No.12157177]

>>12157160
you don't need anything fancy to steam with. a pot, lid, and something to keep the chicken up off the bottom of the pot is all you need. that "something" could be as simple as some wadded up balls of foil. You don't need a fancy device to steam.

The reason I mention that is because baking something totally closed in foil acheives the exact same thing as steaming it, only it takes a lot longer and wastes more energy in the process.

Normally when you use an oven you want the food uncovered, that way it browns. Browning = maillard reaction = tastes good. This is is a cooking fundamental.

[Anonymous No.12157193]

>>12156996
Got sick from eating chicken that I thought was cooked properly through, can understand that fear

[Anonymous No.12157208]

>>12157157
>So you're saying I could literally eat raw chicken and be fine?
I'm not the USDA anon, but yes. The risk is exactly the same as eating raw beef, like tartare.

The risk of pathogens in all meat is pretty much the same. The reasons for why we think beef is OK to eat rare and chicken is not is because of our cultural preferances. We think rare beef tastes great but we don't feel the same about chicken, so we "bend the rules" for one but not the other.

I first learned this when I read Modernist Cusine. I highly recommend the section in the first volume entitled "microbiology for cooks". Fact is that a lot of the things we consider safe are actually quite risky, and other things we think are risky are actually rather safe.

[Anonymous No.12157215]

find you a youtube video of something you like the sound of so much that you don't mind watching it over and over.
something that makes you hungry even though you already ate.
apply what you learned.
rinse, repeat.

[Anonymous No.12157222]

>>12157193
Facts:
-any food has the potential to make you sick; chicken isn't somehow "worse" than other things
-most people blame the most recent thing they ate for their foodborne illness, but the fact is that's a guess. it could have been days beforehand. statistically the most likely cause, by far, is poor hygiene on the part of the eater

[Anonymous No.12157233]

>>12157222
>-most people blame the most recent thing they ate for their foodborne illness
this is something that's always bothered me about people.
>i just ate a burrito, i have to shit and it feels like it's gonna be bad.
wtf? people aren't this stupid are they?

[Anonymous No.12157240]

>>12156975
Thanks anon

[Anonymous No.12157245]

>>12157177
I see. Thanks for that, honestly.

[Anonymous No.12157433]

Perhaps I could shed some light on this matter. I think OP is probably new to cooking and is confusing "cooked" with "seared." He wants the skin to look all nice and golden brown and is confused why that isn't happening, so he keeps leaving it in the oven longer and longer, meanwhile the inside is of course being cooked to shit.

[bruce No.12157654]

>>12157222
>-any food has the potential to make you sick; chicken isn't somehow "worse" than other things
>chicken isn't somehow "worse" than other things
>What the fuck is salmonella even?
What a literal fucking retard

[Anonymous No.12159075]

>>12157654
But the USDA DOES. NOT. LET. CONTAMINATED. MEAT. BE. SOLD.

There are NO PATHOGENS in raw meat.

[Anonymous No.12159087]

>>12157233
When your digestive system starts having particular trouble with a recently consumed food, it hits an emergency button and vacates as much as it can prematurely so it can focus on the problem item. This is different from foodborne illness.

[Anonymous No.12159090]

>buy cooking thermometer
>google safe temperature of what you're cooking
>never worry about this again

[Anonymous No.12159121]

>>12156817
>all these boomers afraid that food is going to hurt their tum tum
Feels good being young and indestructuble

[Anonymous No.12160414]

>>12159075
Then why does raw meat end up being recalled sometimes?

[Anonymous No.12160436]

>>12157654
>>What the fuck is salmonella even?
The risk of salmonella is no higher in chicken than it is in any other meat.

Go read the "Microbiology for cooks" section in Modernist Cuisine.

[Anonymous No.12160450]

>>12156817
Where' s the liquid, you dumb fuck?

[Anonymous No.12160553]

>>12156947
why the fuck did you coat it with flour?
do you use flour as a spice?

[Anonymous No.12160578]

>>12160436
Ever heard of fecal soup? Factory farmed chickens are dipped in a vat at slaughter that ends up being fecal soup That doesn't happen with beef or pork. I'm sure it doesn't happen in real 1st world countries either but US standards are terrible.

[Anonymous No.12160934]

>>12156817
>they're still not ready
they're overcooked to fuck. would bin them unless you were going for charcoal-like consistency

[Anonymous No.12160942]

I was thinking of buying an electric thermometer but relying on tech isn't good. What are some simple methods of testing if meat is cooked right through?

[Anonymous No.12160991]

>>12156947
i think this is where you fucked up, the flour has absorbed all of the moisture from the skin so the chicken has dried out while it's cooking. don't cover it in flour to oven bake it, just salt and the skin will crisp up on it's own.

[Anonymous No.12161023]

>>12160942
Cut it and look inside is foolproof for noobs.

Once you get experience you will be able to do it by feel (texture). A thermometer is not a bad tool to learn on. Start with that, after a while you'll find you don't need it anymore.

For things you roast in the oven you'd be a moron not to use a thermometer with a remote probe.

[Anonymous No.12161048]

>>12156843
it's not blood unless you butchered the chicken yourself

[Anonymous No.12161051]

>>12160578
Yeah, I've heard of it. Sounds awful for sure.

There's a reason I referred you to MC though. They have several papers cited which find that even factory-farmed chicken tests positive for bacteria at similar rates to other meats. The point is to bypass the sensationalist bullshit like "fecal soup" and focus on facts. And the facts say that no, chicken is not more risky to eat rare than beef.

[Anonymous No.12161091]

>>12161051
no, you fucking retard, people have said in the past that eating STEAKS rare is far less risky than eating chicken rare, because the meat of a chicken is significantly different and it's easy for bacteria on the outside to permeate the entire thing, this is also why things like tartare and undercooked GROUND beef are specifically discouraged, since grinding beef will mix any pathogens present throughout the meat and require you to fully cook it for it to be "foodsafe", which is NOT the case with a steak cut

[Anonymous No.12161104]

>>12161091
I'm not talking about anecdotes, or cooked food anon. I'm talking about published research involving 3rd parties testing raw meats sold at supermarkets.

>because the meat of a chicken is significantly different
fiction
> it's easy for bacteria on the outside to permeate the entire thing
no different than beef, pork, lamb, etc.

>this is also why things like tartare and undercooked GROUND beef are specifically discouraged, since grinding beef will mix any pathogens present throughout the meat and require you to fully cook it for it to be "foodsafe"
Sure, that's true. But it's the same for chicken as it is for beef.

>which is NOT the case with a steak cut
I'm not talking about steak cuts. Why are you?

[Anonymous No.12161105]

>>12156996
i eat my chicken slightly under all the time. just make sure it's up to temp. 165 is usually what they call for but i do 145 all the time

even if theres blood it's fine, theres veins in those drumsticks and the meat tends to stay more 'rare' looking. trust the temp because thats what kills bacteria and thats all you care about

[Anonymous No.12161117]

>>12161023
I'm talking about in the oven. I am experienced but with some things like chicken thighs you can tell because sometimes the meat is really pink next to the bone and sometimes isn't so I will overcook to make sure, which I hate doing.

[Anonymous No.12161121]

>>12156817
I guarantee you that chicken is done. Buy a thermometer and you'll never have to wonder again. Seriously you can get a decent one for $20. Pretty cheap for peace of mind and not over cooking your chicken all the time.

[Anonymous No.12161142]

>>12161117
If you're doing it inside the oven then using a remote-read thermometer is the only logical choice.

Any other method of checking will require you to open the door, check, guess, then come back again and again. That will fuck up your cooking since you're opening the door every few minutes. It will take much longer to cook and it will give you worse results.

Use a remote-read thermometer. They're cheap, and you get perfectly cooked food every single time with no guesswork and no overcooking.

[Anonymous No.12161180]

>>12161142
Unless you're a complete novice you won't be checking every few minutes, I usually know roughly when to check and might have to check one more time if I'm wrong.

I refuse to buy a thermometer for something like cooking. Expert in ancient Greece didn't use them and they don't now. What happens when your essential aid goes faulty or gets broken?

[Anonymous No.12161214]

>>12161180
>complete novice
That is the context we are using here, yes.

>What happens when your essential aid goes faulty or gets broken?
Then you check manually and don't get as good results.

Your willful obstinance doesn't make any logical sense. What's wrong with having perfectly cooked food every time, down to the degree? It's not as if the device is expensive--far from it.

..meanwhile here you are using modern tech to talk to people all over the world. Why is OK to use the internet to make communication better but it's not OK to use a thermometer to make your cooking better?

[Anonymous No.12161250]

>>12161104
no, salmonella will not fucking permeate a cut of steak you subhuman retard

your book is also either bullshit or not talking about the US, and a simple search would have shown you that so you doubly have zero idea what you're talking about, fuck OFF
https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/press_release/consumer-reports-finds-71-percent-of-store-bought-chicken-contains-harmful-bacteria/

[Anonymous No.12161272]

>>12161180
Get off the computer you fucking luddite. Imagine being this retarded. Is a thermometer necessary? No, but like all things the more data you have the better your decision making can be and for novices in cooking it can make them more comfortable and lead to better results.

[Anonymous No.12161284]

>>12161250
>no, salmonella will not fucking permeate a cut of steak you subhuman retard
I agree. It won't permeate the chicken either.

My book...well, set of 5 books spanning 2500 pages...is published by pHds and contains citations to hundreds of academic papers, including several dozen on this particular subject. That's why I'm recommending it to you. Do you even know what MC is or do you think I'm referring you to some random cookbook?

Your silly article says nothing about comparing chicken to beef. It simply says that 71% of chicken contains bacteria. That's OK by me. I don't disagree. I'm not claiming chicken is sterile, I'm saying that beef is no different.

Your reading comprehension is remarkably bad.

[Anonymous No.12161315]

>>12161214

>..meanwhile here you are using modern tech to talk to people all over the world. Why is OK to use the internet to make communication better but it's not OK to use a thermometer to make y

That's why I said I wouldn't use something like this for cooking. Please don't misunderstand me.


And yes it is good to make sure you have perfectly cooked food all the time, I just want to gain the ability to do it myself, it's just good to get to know stuff with experience instead of needing something external. That's what life is about. Also irrelevant but I'm sure they are expensive.

[Anonymous No.12161334]

>>12161284
my reading comprehension is leagues above yours since you don't understand what you're saying at all and I'm trying to make you realize that but you seem completely incapable

as much as you want to front like you're into the science the concept of parsimony seems completely alien to you, tell me you big tremendous thunderfaggot do you think ANY restaurant would serve ground beef under well done if it had an infection rate similar to chicken? why will restaurants not serve undercooked chicken but will serve undercooked beef, ESPECIALLY steaks when compared to chicken breast?

don't answer any of these to me, you haven't actually thought about any of these things and your comprehension of basic information is so terrible that I am actually interested in reading MC since I would bet money now that you COMPLETELY misunderstood what it was saying and are wildly misrepresenting their findings

[Anonymous No.12161335]

>>12161250
>>12161091
What a fucking tool. You're stupid, self-centered, and rude all at the same time.

[Anonymous No.12161347]

>>12161315
You can get a good digital meat thermometer for 13 dollars on Amazon right now. I've definitely made my value back on it a hundred fold in not under/over cooking meat. There's nothing wrong with using the right tools for the job anon. Yea I mean if you're cooking the recipes stuff over and over you don't always need it but it's not expensive and doesn't leave room for doubt.

[Anonymous No.12161371]

>>12161347
How long have you had it? I thought the ones for around £90 were the ones you need. And the ones around the price you said would be cheap crap that would last a few month and be poor build quality

[Anonymous No.12161386]

>>12161371
It's normally $30 and is the next best thing compared to the really expensive ones. I researched it and it does the job (I've calibrated it vs a more expensive one) and it holds up. I didn't see the need for a more expensive model.

[Anonymous No.12161389]

>>12160578
Never heard of this. Why the hell are they using this disgusting process?

[Anonymous No.12161395]

>>12161386
Hmm I might get one, still going to make sure I'm competent enough to know when meet is done without it though.

[Anonymous No.12161411]

>>12161389
"fecal soup" is a bit of an overly dramatic name pushed by people with an agenda.

The idea is that the meat spoils rapidly so the goal is to cool it down quickly. This is sometimes done with a brine bath--basically a big fat of ice-cold salt water. Invariably the water gets dirty so that's why the dramatards hype up the name. That said, it's fucking ice-cold and it's loaded with salt, so it's not as if any bacteria are going to be growing in there. Quite the opposite, really.

The alternative is to use a blast chiller (air). This is a slower process. You may have seen premium brands of chicken labeled "air chilled" in the supermarket.

[Anonymous No.12161441]

>>12161411
Seems logical then, it's probably the cheapest way.

Pretty sure bacteria is the issue with this though, being the whole reason which makes chicken unsuitable to be eaten raw.

[Anonymous No.12161485]

>>12161411
I've heard that term tossed around before, so I looked it up and could never find any credible source confirming the practice of what people were describing. It seemed crazy that something like that would be allowed to happen, so I'm not surprised by your explanation. I figured it would be something along those lines, and not nearly as bad as what the conspiracy and vegan tards were claiming.

[Anonymous No.12161489]

>>12160578
I looked it up and it's exactly what I thought it would be; a bullshit term made up by someone with an agenda.
It's not "fecal soup". It's a quick rinse in scalding hot water which is continually replaced as the chickens pass through it. This loosens the feathers and helps remove some of the dirt you obviously will always have on a dead animal.
After the feathers are removed the chickens pass through a second "bath" of very hot water for further cleansing. This water is also continually replaceds, so nobody is making "soup" out of the dead birds all day long as your name for it might imply.

Can you buy a raw chicken at the store, do tests on it, and find bacteria? Yes, of course.
Is that a problem for people who are not absolute fucking retards in a kitchen? No.

It's dishonest sensationalist bullshit, and you are either a lying sack of shit who deliberately spreads it, or a fucking idiot who believes it.

I bought a sack of potatoes yesterday. There's dirt on them. Actual ground soil like what the planet Earth is made out of. Do you think that makes the potato industry evil and unsanitary?

[Anonymous No.12161499]

>>12161441
>Pretty sure bacteria is the issue with this though
Salt kills bacteria.
Ice cold water stops bacteria from growing.
It sounds gross, but its really not.

>>n which makes chicken unsuitable to be eaten raw.
Chicken is no more or no less dangerous then eating any other meat raw or rare. It's all the same from a bacterial point of view. Refer to the section "microbiology for cooks" in Modernist Cuisine.

[Anonymous No.12161568]

>>12161499
You must be the anon I read a comment from earlier about all chicken being the same as any other raw meat. You can't really think undercooked stake and undercooked chicken are equal.

[Anonymous No.12161584]

>>12161411
>>12161485
>>12161489
Then explain why there are continual recalls for chicken contaminated with salmonella while it only ever occurs with beef or pork when it's ground meat?
>reporting the nefarious corporate practices that put consumers in jeopardy is sensationalist
I'll bet you think corporations shouldn't be required to disclose contents of food products either and should be self regulated 'cause you read ayn rand. Why do you advocate for corporations threatening your well being? Masochism?

https://www.pcrm.org/news/blog/video-fecal-matter-grocery-store-chicken-too

[Anonymous No.12161612]

>>12161499
salt kills SOME bacteria, it takes literal days of brining to kill a significant amount and potentially make something contaminated foodsafe, spraying/dipping something during processing would do nothing but spread a pathogen, this is also specifically why you aren't supposed to wash meat, because the only thing you're accomplishing is microspray of potential pathogen everywhere in your kitchen

>Chicken is no more or less dangerous then eating any other meat raw or rare
https://www.cdc.gov/features/salmonellachicken/index.html
explain why chicken and other meats that aren't ground have significantly different minimum "safe" temps then, and why the CDC only specifically recommends chicken ALWAYS be cooked to a minimum of 165F throughout before resting?

for the 5th time you have ZERO idea what you're saying, fuck off retard

[Anonymous No.12161774]

>>12161584
>Then explain why there are continual recalls for chicken contaminated with salmonella while it only ever occurs with beef or pork when it's ground meat?
If you correct recall rates for the amount of food produced they are all the same. You see far more recalls for chicken than you do for pork because we produce more chicken than we do pork, but if you do the math per ton of meat it works out about the same. Ground meats have higher recall rates than whole cuts for the reasons we both already understand.

>I'll bet you think corporations shouldn't be required to disclose contents of food products either
Nope, I think they should. I also think they should state the age, breed, and locations where the animal was a) raised and b) slaughtered.

I've never read Ayn Rand, and I'm not advocating for coporations either. Frankly I think factory farming is a blight and ought to be eradicated.

[Anonymous No.12161782]

>>12161612
>explain why chicken and other meats that aren't ground have significantly different minimum "safe" temps then

I see you still haven't looked up the relevant chapter of MC I keep referring you to. It turns out that a lot of the FDA's rules on cooking are based on bad science.

Look up the PDF and educate yourself.

[Anonymous No.12161794]

>>12161612
>>safe temps

lol, i see you never worked in a kitchen
those rules are all a big pile of patchwork bullshit
legally i cant serve fish whose temp checks below 160 on a thermapen becaus thats 'undercooked'
BUT i can legally serve sushi which is totally raw
usda rules are totally fucking inconsistent

[Anonymous No.12161813]

>>12156843
>deep red
that's not blood. i'd be willing to be that it was fine to eat at that point.

>>12156862
that looks overcooked now, but pink inside chicken isn't always an indication of doneness. especially on darker cuts, the meat will look pinkish even after what you've done.

[Anonymous No.12161832]

>>12156817
did you cover it? those things hold heat in and out senpai
fell for that once, the chicken was cold after an hour in the oven

[Anonymous No.12161922]

>>12161794
Yea I'll take the advice out of a drug fueled life hating scum bag line cook than the scientific evidence of the USDA said no one ever.

[Anonymous No.12161982]

>>12161922
did you miss the point where its contradictory?

[Anonymous No.12162070]

>>12161982
everyone is aware gov't agencies are picking for worst case scenario, are slow to change, and many of their decisions are partly politically motivated

that doesn't mean a decision to clamp down more on chicken than beef or pork is entirely arbitrary, directly to the contrary the CDC recs are BECAUSE chicken STILL is the leading source of foodborne illness and pork isn't far behind

[Anonymous No.12162077]

>>12161794
That's not really inconsistent. Fish meant to be served raw is going to be frozen at a certain temperature for a certain amount of time to kill parasites, fish meant to be cooked won't have that done so it needs to be fully cooked to be safe.

[Anonymous No.12162128]

>>12157208
No. GROUND beef is at greater risk because it's literally ground up. It isn't one surface area anymore like a steak it. Which is why you can sear the outside of the steak and come out mostly okay.

E.coli is literally everywhere. They would shut it down if it was E. coli O157:H7.

Don't eat raw chicken. You aren't a cat. Your stomach is not acidic enough to deal with that raw chicken.

Many French and Europeans have or still eat some ground beef raw. It doesn't mean you aren't at greater risk of bacteria as well as worms and other shit.

[Anonymous No.12162180]

>>12156862
How are you determining doneness?

[Anonymous No.12162189]

>>12157012
Thighs. Cheap as fuck, more meat, and cook easily.

[Anonymous No.12162198]

>>12157053
Yeah the veggie thing. Nothing like Paco and his cousins using you future Romain as toilet paper because they hate the nation that lets them work illegally.

[Anonymous No.12162216]

>>12157126
They are also amazing at tracking down the source quickly to then shut down the particular farm and investigate further. I work with a few companies in this field (veggie) and it never ceases to amaze me how quick they find this shit. And yes. It is always some Mexican worker wiping his ass with your future food.

[Anonymous No.12162219]

>>12162128
>GROUND beef is at greater risk because it's literally ground up.
I agree with that completely. I'm not sure why you quoted me on that.

>E.coli is literally everywhere
Also agreed.

>Your stomach is not acidic enough to deal with that raw chicken.
It's not any different than eating raw beef.
That said, I don't plan on eating any raw chicken--I've tried it, and I thought the taste and texture was disgusting.

>Many French and Europeans have or still eat some ground beef raw.
So does this American.

>It doesn't mean you aren't at greater risk of bacteria as well as worms and other shit.
Than cooked beef? I agree with you.
Compared to raw chicken? No difference in risk.

[Anonymous No.12162228]

>>12162077
its all frozen the same way from the same supplier

[Anonymous No.12162263]

>>12161315
>I just want to gain the ability to do it myself
Sure, I respect wanting to better yourself.
But why would using the thermometer preclude that? That's what I don't understand. If anything, it's a benefit because you now have a tool to measure your own skill development against.

>>Also irrelevant but I'm sure they are expensive.
They're not.
I can see cost being an objection if they are expensive, but you can get one for about $10-15. (remote type, like >>12161142)

[Anonymous No.12162313]

>>12161334
>do you think ANY restaurant would serve ground beef under well done if it had an infection rate similar to chicken?
Of course I would. I can walk into any steakhouse and they offer me options ranging from "blue rare" to well done.

I already explained why most people think there is a difference. You apparently missed it, despite your "leauges better" reading comp:
>>12157208
>> We think rare beef tastes great but we don't feel the same about chicken, so we "bend the rules" for one but not the other.

>> I am actually interested in reading MC
Please do. Read the whole "microbilogy for cooks" section, but the most relevant stuff for this discussion starts on page 174 of the first volume.

[Anonymous No.12163273]

>>12159075
Bold of you to assume mistakes dont constantly happen in the industry. Thats like saying crime doesn't happen because police exist to stop it. They can't stop it all.

[Anonymous No.12163281]

>>12156817
same shit here but with a full chicken. no matter how long i bake it the fuck is still raw on the inside. jamie oliver is a hack

[Anonymous No.12163967]

>>12162263
It's like being a teenager and starting with a gps. Why would you want to be clueless without one and not know orientation or map reading. I want to have life skills.

[Anonymous No.12164484]

>>12156975
Be my mommy anon :'(

[Anonymous No.12165058]

>>12163967
You're really putting a big deal into being able to wing it. In fact I'd argue having a meat thermometer would make you better at being able to eyeball it since you'll know what signs to look for. If you don't want one or need one that's fine, but this weird pride you have around this makes you look like a luddite.