id
stringlengths 1
7
| text
stringlengths 59
10.4M
| source
stringclasses 1
value | added
stringdate 2025-03-12 15:57:16
2025-03-21 13:25:00
| created
timestamp[s]date 2008-09-06 22:17:14
2024-12-31 23:58:17
| metadata
dict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
94086 | Preserving taste when freezing fish
As some sort of continuation to this question: Is IKEA frozen salmon sushi safe?
Will the freezing process to make fish sushi safe alter the taste of it, compared to raw, just caught and cleaned fish (assuming the latter would be safe to eat, which is not)?
I always wondered if making fish safe altered the taste, and if there was a way to make this effect minimal
So, if you've has sushi in the USA, you've had sushi that's been previously frozen. US regulations do not allow serving raw-from-the-ocean fish. For that matter, even in Japan, salmon is frozen before serving as sushi, because as a fresh-and-salt-water fish, salmon has multiple parasites that are directly transmissable to humans. Don't eat it raw.
Speaking from personal experience, I have had actual raw sushi while in Japan (some fish and shrimp were even killed in front of me). It does make a difference in taste and texture, especially for toro (fatty tuna) and ebi (sweet shrimp). Beyond that, it's a bit hard to tell the difference between the effects of freezing and the effects of quality differences in fish (I had raw fish in the Tsujiki fish market), and unless you can get "caught yesterday" fish you don't want it raw anyway; fish degrades quickly.
So, so sum up: if you have access to caught-this-morning, ocean-only fish (not salmon), you should try it raw for sushi, but previously frozen is still pretty good, and safer.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.481722 | 2018-11-20T15:01:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/94086",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
91253 | Could Someone Please Help me to Identify What Type of Squash This One Is?
So I can try and plan out some recipes using it..
Thanks in advance!
:D
Hi Jenna! Can you give us some sense of scale for your squash? How long is it? What's the diameter? It might help to know where you are, too. Some types of squash are more typical in some parts of the world than others.
Thank you for replying so quickly! And yes, I’m in Portland Oregon and I grew these in my garden and just picked a few within the last week or two(the ones pictured here) but I can’t remember for the life of me what they are exactly. And one of the squash is approximately 9 1/2 inches long and approx. 12” around the fattest part of the squash. Also I’m completely guesstimating (cuz my kitchen scale is reading “overload”) but I think they are close to 34 oz. Around there. Thank you, again, in advance!
Also keep in mind that Squash, Pumpkin, Melon and zucchini are really prone to crossbreed and there are about a million variations. Just make sure when you don´t take seeds from anything not pollinated under controlled conditions - decorative gourds can mix in and make the offspring poisonous.
It appears to be a Cocozelle Green Striped Summer Squash, a type of zucchini.
Yes, so ultimately test the texture of it and use in basically any zucchini application...
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.481851 | 2018-07-25T02:21:43 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/91253",
"authors": [
"Catija",
"Daniel",
"Jenna Kay",
"MarsJarsGuitars-n-Chars",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/33128",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/3853",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/66630",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/68163"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
91043 | Ruined balsamic salad dressing, how to recover?
My favorite balsamic salad dressing seems to have been discontinued, so I decided to make my own. In doing so I added far, far too much xanthan gum and am now left with 350ml of oily herbed balsamic gel. I tried adding oil to thin it out, but of course had no luck. I have not yet tried an immersion blender (it's too late at night here to run it).
How can I recover from this, either moving ahead with the salad dressing or finding an alternate use for the gel, or should I just cut my losses and start over?
Potential alternate use, little slivers used as a garnish. It just seems like it'd be neat.
This is stupid, but if you know any small children, you could add some more gum and let them play with it. :P
@kitikwfyer well, all these "molecular gastronomy" folks are doing stuff like that so it can't be that stupid, no?
You certainly can't render it ineffective chemically while still keeping the dressing edible: https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-get-wet-xanthan-gum-out-of-my-sink-disposal? :) ... (add the dang question mark to the url....)
Well, adding more of everything but xanthan gum would of course have the effect of diluting the xanthan gum. The problem is, it's possible that you used way, way too much xanthan gum (easy to do, the amount you need to slightly thicken a dressing is minuscule), so unless you've got a few 50-gallon drums of balsamic vinegar lying around, I wouldn't advise that you go that route. Instead, I'd suggest that you make a new dressing with no xanthan gum, then add the old dressing a bit at a time until you like the result.
As for finding an alternate use for (the rest of) your balsamic xanthan slime: I wouldn't. Xanthan gum is texturally quite unpleasant except at very low concentrations.
Not knowing how much xanthan gum you added it's impossible to guess if you should start over or not. The recipe for Easy Garlic Balsamic Salad Dressing uses 4 oz olive olive oil, 2 oz of balsamic vinegar and 1/8 teaspoon of xanthan gum. So those would seem like reasonable starting proportions. If you can't use at least half of your original batch (so say you end up with 1.5 batches) it would seem better to just start over.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.482003 | 2018-07-15T07:37:45 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/91043",
"authors": [
"Megha",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35312",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/47365",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/56913",
"kitukwfyer",
"rackandboneman"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
124585 | How to remove latex(?) from a bread-baking tin?
I've just got an old baking tin, and it's coated on the inside with something that looks a lot like a surgical latex glove; definitely not non-stick, and it is flaking off. I have started rubbing it off in places with my finger, but it isn't easy. I haven't got a picture with me, but I can add one when I come home.
What would be the best way to remove it - preferably without scratching the metal? I've seen mention of ammonia and acetone, but that sounds rather heavy duty to me - perhaps there is a better way?
If you can take it off with your fingers, it might just be slightly "glued" to your tin' surface.
Please pay attention to the following products because the mix can be really aggressive for your eyes and skin. Equip yourself with protection gloves and glasses before any other step and for the whole operation.
I would suggest to use white vinegar and sodium bicarbonate (AKA baking soda), which are both pretty easy to find (i.e. in your local supermarket). As a dosing ratio, I recommend 15-20g (1 tbsp) of sodium bicarbonate per liter (33 oz) of vinegar.
Get a bigger container in which your baking tin can fit, leaving space around and over it. Put your baking tin in it. and
Add the white vinegar until the surface which you want to clean is fully covered.
According to the given ratio, add your sodium bicarbonate. The mixture might react because of the carbon dioxyde being produced. Thus, make sure not to put the soluton in a bottle of closed container. If a foam appears, no worries : it is normal and non-toxic, but irritating.
Let the mix do its job for 1 to 2 hours and you should then be able to scrub your surface with a sponge withouth scratching the metal.
Make sure to rince very well with clear water and normal soap before any cooking.
Optional : if you need the mix to be more efficient, add a bit of lemon juice into it.
Note that this operation works really well with greasy and stained surfaces and clogged pipes. It is 100% natural.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.482286 | 2023-06-27T10:37:09 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/124585",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
91214 | Bone broth question
Is it ok to partially cool chicken broth (prior to refrigerating ) with bones left in? I left my chicken broth on a low simmer overnight, the next morning my husband turned the stock off to cool… He did not remove bones. Now I’m wondering if it is still safe to use (I removed bones and refrigerated stock within 2 hours)
Whether or not the bones are removed is irrelevant. You might want to look at the related question on the right "I left stock out to cool overnight...", as it has information about cooling a stock.
Yes, in fact I would advise cooling the broth/stock a bit before putting it in the refrigerator. Adding hot foods to a refrigerator will drastically affect the foods inside. It takes too long to get from hot to cold and everything inside will be warmed up (to varying degrees) from the temperature fluctuation. Leaving the bones in, also not a problem. And it will make it easier to both skim the fat from the broth and remove the bones as the cooler temperatures will be easier to handle. Based on my experiences, everything sounds like you've handled it correctly.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.482464 | 2018-07-22T21:20:51 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/91214",
"authors": [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"moscafj"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
91546 | Slow Cooked Pork Tenderloin
I am using a recipe for pork tenderloin that calls for 2 pounds of meat cooked for 1-2 hours in a slow cooker to 145 degrees. I want to increase the amount of meat in the slow cooker to 6 pounds of pork tenderloin. How do I estimate how long to cook for? I can keep checking the internal temperature, but I'd like to have some sort of reasonable estimate.
I've always thought that slow cooking is better suited for cuts of meat that are well-marbled and have connective tissue that breaks down for a richer-tasting final dish - like a shoulder or butt roast. A tenderloin would seem to be the opposite of that and more suited for some other technique. Have you tried this one before? Not meant as criticism or telling you to do otherwise, just wondering how the results turn out.
@PoloHoleSet slow cooking approaches can work well for lean cuts if you make sure you never exceed the critical temperature when they become hard and dry. This is the mechanism that makes sous vide so successful. Whether a slow cooker is suited to the task remains to be seen. The long stewing method slow cookers are so famous for is quite different.
@Stephie - The issue I'm raising is not so much whether you can get an acceptable or favorable result, but whether that method is best suited for the characteristics of the cut. If I get an acceptable result for a pork tenderloin, which is 5 to 10 times more expensive than a cheaper cut that will give me an also acceptable result, then why am I using that particular cut?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.482581 | 2018-08-08T14:52:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/91546",
"authors": [
"PoloHoleSet",
"Stephie",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/28879",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/49684"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
91566 | Raw garlic in Sunflower oil
So I wanted to infuse garlic flavour to my sunflower oil. I sliced one full garlic and added it to cold sunflower oil and let it be for a week. When I opened it, the flavour seemed to have infused well but I saw a few bubbles of air in the oil. I got a bit worried and put the glass jar in the refrigerator.
Can you please tell me if:-
I can use the oil safely if I continue to refrigerate it. Or should I just throw it all away?
Can I do something to the oil to make it safe to consume?
Next time whenever you want to add flavor of Garlic in any oil follow this link
Possible duplicate of dry garlic in oil --> botulism risk?
Possible duplicate of Garlic Infused Oil—Safety
Possible duplicate of Garlic Overflow — Why won't my olive oil stay in its jug?
Possible duplicate of Botulism, Garlic, Cold pressed Olive oil and mason jars
Make fresh or refrigerate for up to 1 week is what is generally recommended for garlic-in-oil mixtures.
Marketed garlic oils are extremely controlled as garlic generally represents a risk of Clostridium botulinum presence in the food.
According to this link,
The FDA recommends that if you want to make your own infused garlic oil, you should prepare it fresh and use it right away. If you are saving any leftovers, you must refrigerate it right away and use within a week.
A link to the FDA document PDF download containing the following:
"Oil products that can create anaerobic sites of sufficient aw favorable for C. botulinum growth and toxin production are problematic; for example, the addition of fresh garlic to oil. The moisture surrounding the garlic fragments coupled with no acidulant creates the conditions necessary for C. botulinum growth and toxin production. To maintain a pH that precludes growth and toxin production, an acidulant is required in these products"
This spore-forming anaerobic bacteria is known to be extremely dangerous and lethal in small doses.
I am not saying to not play with garlic-in-oils at all, or trying to scare you out of it, but it is definitely a topic in culinary pleasure that requires research and preparation.
Thank you. This helps. I will discard what I have made and start over!
Short answers -
1 No.
2 Yes
My source was http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/botulism
However, upon going back to find the URL in response to the request and comment, it is obvious that I mis-read their statement. I apologize and withdraw my answer to the question
Could you add a link /citation for the second claim? It's at odds with what I've seen elsewhere on the survival of spores (as opposed to growing bacteria)
We need to be very careful here. I believe what you found is information that will deactivate the bacteria, but not spores. To kill the spores of Cl.botulinum at least 121°C (250F) for 3 min is required. While you can deactivate the toxins very quickly at temps above 80C (176f), You can't eliminate the spores on your stove top, without pressure sterilization. I would suggest editing your answer so that it is clear, and provides safe advice.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.482724 | 2018-08-09T09:38:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/91566",
"authors": [
"Allison C",
"Apoorva Nagendra",
"Ching Chong",
"Chris H",
"Cindy",
"Debbie M.",
"The Hungry Dictator",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20413",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/22295",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/23376",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/26180",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35357",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/62114",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/68592",
"moscafj"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
125353 | How to keep rice in sushi-like dishes from drying out overnight?
So my kids like to take 'sushi' (that is, variations without raw fish) and sushi-like dishes (onigiri/onigiraza, musubi etc) to school for lunch. However in the mornings I don't have time to fully make them. So I have to make them the evening before. Over the, say, 15 hours between preparation and consumption, the rice tends to dry out quite noticeably. Are there any tricks to keep the rice fresh longer? Is there any difference between using plain vs seasoned (rice vinegar, mirin) rice? I've tried wrapping the dish tightly in cling film, which helps a little, but not as much as I would have expected. I've also tried doing prep (including cooking rice) the night before, and assembly in the morning. In that case the rice is less dry (I presume because the surface area is smaller) but by the time it's lunchtime, most gains seem to have been lost - plus it's quite time consuming/stressful doing even only the assembly in the morning.
I've thought about making the rice more moist but I'm not quite sure how to go about that in a way that it doesn't turn it into a mush, and most of the excess water would be absorbed by the nori anyway - which brings its own set of problems. (the nori going soft is already a problem when storing for more than say an hour)
Are there any other tricks?
This isn’t necessarily a duplicate of the other question as you have other issues (whatever is with the rice in the sushi), and may have other options as you have the su (salt, sugar, vinegar mixture) to work with
And the top of answer in the ‘duplicate’ question of rinsing the rice will not work for sushi, as you need it sticky
Part of the issue isn’t actually drying out— it’s starch retrogradation (the starch changes into a different form, which is firmer). There must be a way to deal with this, as Japanese convenience stores sell pre-made onigiri (rice balls), although there may also just be the expectation that pre-made stuff will be slightly sub-par compared to fresh.
Thank you, 'starch retrogradation' is the magic term that lead me to many more resources. This seems to be a widely studied problem without obvious working solution even for the commercial food industry, let alone accessible to the home cook. I especially found https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jnsv/65/Supplement/65_S134/_article an interesting overview, although I have yet to dive into its references. Practically speaking it seems that my best bet for the short term is to not cool the rice at all (I can program my rice cooker so that it's done in the morning) and to assemble last minute.
I suspect that it will be okay if you work in a clean environment, but make sure to use salt and vinegar as a preservative as you don’t want to run into ‘fried rice syndrome’. Maybe also check some of the bento (Japanese packed lunch) websites for suggestions/advice? NHK has an English language show ‘Bento Expo’: https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/tv/bento/
You can significantly improve the texture of slightly stale rice by sprinkling water on it and then sticking it in the microwave for thirty-ish seconds (the exact time probably depends on your microwave). I do this all the time to day-old refrigerated white rice.
Like you mentioned, cling-wrap helps too, as does putting the rice in an airtight container. Maybe you could try making the rice the night before, microwaving it in the morning before you pack it, and then packing it in a good airtight container? Usually I find a thermos retains moisture better than a regular plastic tupperware box.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.482991 | 2023-09-26T07:57:56 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/125353",
"authors": [
"Joe",
"Roel",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/68749"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
91821 | Custard vs raw eggs in ice cream
I've recently started making homemade ice-cream and have found most recipes require you to make a custard using egg yolks, however the Ben and Jerry's recipe book asks for whole raw eggs to be used instead.
I understand cooking the egg yolks removes the risk of salmonella however in the UK most UK sourced eggs are safe to eat raw.
This leaves the question that I am struggling to find the answer to:
Aside from removing the health risks of eating raw eggs is there any benefit to texture and/or taste by making a custard instead of using raw eggs or egg yolks in ice cream?
Before I say this and it sounds like a slam, I use the Ben & Jerry's method and like it. That said, it is a cheat on creme anglaise. If you beat the eggs the recommended amount you get it to behave similar to creme anglaise but without the effort and risk of actually making one. Consistency wise, I find it a bit more air than a if I were to actually make one, but much easier and more consistent. A proper creme anglaise, to my taste, is better though slightly denser, but not only does it take more effort, it is easy to mess up as well. Whipping the eggs for 4 minutes on the other hand comes out just about the same each time. I tend to opt for product that I would consistently score about 90 on a 100 point scale over one that might be a 99, and next time might be a 70 plus takes more effort. But that is me. They airy vs dense is more of a personal preference and to me is fairly slight difference but others may have different results.
On the safety side, if you use pasteurized eggs, the risk of raw should about the same as cooked, and unless you are careful with temps, it is easy to have creme anglaise and some other custards not really be at temperature long enough to match pasteurized. I personally do not worry about it as I am using my own eggs so am confident my birds are clean, but if I were using commercial eggs I likely would use pasteurized. Maybe not in UK where the birds are vaccinated though.
Heating the dairy and sugar mixture causes changes in flavor and texture, independent of whether there are eggs. Heating causes a number of changes:
Evaporates water from mixture
Denatures milk proteins to bind to water
Dissolves sugar more completely
These factors give you a smoother, less icy texture.
I recommend reading Jeni's Splendid Ice Creams at Home by Jeni Britton Bauer, which has a good explanation and methods for making home ice creams. I have no affiliation.
I'm a fan of Jeni's as well. With respect to the original question, it's worth pointing out that her recipes are true "ice cream" rather than an "iced custard", i.e. they don't have any eggs in them.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.483282 | 2018-08-21T14:59:43 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/91821",
"authors": [
"G. Allen",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/39563"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
91850 | Presentation - How to make a Tiramisu to be photogenic?
Sorry if this is the wrong forum. I can make a nice Tiramisu but the photo does not look good. I make Tiramisu, get a slice of it and photograph it. Challenge is that we have zero control over how the sides are going to look. It looks messy
Hi manu, and welcome. In addition to people here, you should see if the photography stackexchange might offer other or better help. They have "food photography" tag.
Froze it and cut with a sharp knife.
can you add a picture of what you are getting
@roetnig that is a great idea I will try it next time
@CosCallis here is a photo [imgur link] (https://imgur.com/a/Yxyo3oo) I can fix the background, but the dish is where my worry is. [this photo on shutter stock] (https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/tiramisu-traditional-italian-dessert-on-white-477311839) looks clean.
Mind what you cut the tiramisu with - your knife might not be sharp enough, or even too sharp, or of the wrong kind, or using the wrong kind of technique (pull vs push vs rock cut give different results here).
Exactly the same, of course, applies to the camera equipment used.
But what matters most is how to light the texture of the cut - light it head on and in a nearly collinear to the camera fashion and you will suppress a lot of the texture since highs and lows will be equally lit. Light it from the side and you will emphasize the texture. A combination of both will probably work best. Mind what shadows (of the whole piece of tiramisu) you will cast, and also consider these shadows in the plating and background you use. Mind that white plates can act as a reflector lighting textural features from below (which might be desired or undesired) - but be aware that unwanted hard shadows (moreso if they pick up a color cast) on white backgrounds can be easily overlooked when framing the picture but can look atrocious in the final result. Consider polarizing filters or even using cross polarized lighting if reflections from shiny crockery or shiny, glazed parts of the dessert give you problems.
One thing you could try is heating the knife. Use a sharp, smooth-edged knife and heat it in hot or boiling water just before cutting the tiramisu. Freezing the tiramisu beforehand may also help. But you won't know what effect it will have on your particular creation until you try. Perhaps the one in the other photo has thinner pastry layers, which would give more resistance to cutting.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.483508 | 2018-08-23T06:23:01 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/91850",
"authors": [
"Cos Callis",
"Willem van Rumpt",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/26450",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/52874",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/6279",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/68856",
"manu muraleedharan",
"roetnig"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92408 | How to freeze mango puree?
This last season, I tried freezing mango puree. My google research told I me I can just freeze them as is. But when I thawed them, puree had lost its taste. What did I do wrong?
You have not told us what you did so it would be hard so say what you did wrong.
@paparazzo - I said I froze them as is meaning I got the mango puree, put it in ziplock bag and put it into freezer.
I usually freeze mango slices in a ziplock (note that it's best to place it in a single layer in the freezer)
then I let them thaw for a few minutes (3-4 minutes) before I blend them and that's my go-to mango smoothie/puree recipe.
The issue with your method might be that you let it thaw completely for a long time which is not really needed. Another issue could be the freezer bag you used which probably is not airtight, that also could affect the taste.
I would try this method the next season. I sure am thawing for a long time (hours in fridge)
This is how I freeze fruits:
Wash, thoroughly dry and peel your fruit.
Remove any bruised or undesirable spots.
Cut or slice in small sized pieces. For mangoes, I prefer bite sized pieces as they are easy to blend.
Place in a zip-lock or food bag and flatten it out.
Wrap aluminium foil on it to prevent freezer burn. Freezer burn is the most common cause of flavour and texture loss.
Place it in a freezer bag that is specially designed for freezing. It will prevent any moisture or air from getting in.
It works for me and I never had any problem with loss of flavour. The key thing is to prevent freezer burn.
Butcher paper is more effective and less costly.
@paparazzo: I've never seen butcher paper in UK supermarkets. It's probably what we call parchment paper.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.483731 | 2018-09-22T09:47:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92408",
"authors": [
"Ess Kay",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45636",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/68856",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69382",
"manu muraleedharan",
"paparazzo"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
94631 | How to place nuts on top of the cake so that they stay symmetrically?
I am making a Christmas plum cake and I like to decorate the top of the cake with cashew nuts. I place them in a circle, touching each other and touching the wall of the pan. But after baking is done, nuts have moved about, destroying the nice circle. I also tried by arranging them in circle touching the wall but not touching each other. Still not maintaining circle. And I can see factory made cakes of same type having cashew nut decorations. How can I get the decorations proper?
Steps for this cake:Steps are like: Dryfruits are soaked in alcohol for some days and drained on the day of baking. Make a caramel syrup from sugar. melt butter. mix egg yolks and butter, then add vanilla extract, orange zest, and spices. add flour+leaveners in parts, alternating with caramel syrup. add egg whites that are whipped to firm peaks. add the dry fruits with a little flour to avoid sinking. pour in cake pan and arrange nuts on top. bake.
Many cakes have the nuts applied after cooking, held down with some sort of glaze. That will keep them where you put them so long as the top is reasonably flat. It will also prevent them burning, as nuts are often used to top cakes that cook for quite a long time.
If nuts are going to be baked on top of a cake, I'd expect to need a dense recipe that doesn't rise much, as the rising will be what causes them to move. The classic Dundee cake (which uses almonds) is such a cake.
This Dundee cake recipe takes an interesting approach: the nuts are added when the cake is part way through cooking. You couldn't do this with a sponge cake, or it would sink, but a more robust cake, cooked slowly, apparently works.
This is a dense cake that does not rise much. Nuts are mixed with flour to prevent sinking. They don't sink but moves about. Recipe seems similar to the Dundee cake. Steps are like: Dryfruits are soaked in alcohol for some days and drained on the day of baking. Make a caramel syrup from sugar. melt butter. mix egg yolks and butter, then add vanilla extract, orange zest, and spices. add flour+leaveners in parts, alternating with caramel syrup. add egg whites that are whipped to firm peaks. add the dry fruits with a little flour to avoid sinking. pour in cake pan and arrange nuts on top. bake.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.483884 | 2018-12-10T07:39:15 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/94631",
"authors": [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/68856",
"manu muraleedharan"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
95159 | Will apricot Jam glaze affect the shelf life of Christmas fruitcake?
I am using a apricot jam glaze to decorate the top of a Christmas fruitcake (made using rum soaked dryfruits and fed with rum after baking). This kind of fruitcake really lasts long due to alcohol in it. Now I am using a apricot jam glaze to put some nuts on top to decorate it. (could not get the nuts to stay in place during baking) Since glaze is made by heating jam with some water, does this glaze affect how long the cake will last?
No, the glaze will make very little difference. Jam is 60% sugar and sugar is an excellent preservative. To put it another way: if you find jam keeps well in the pot, the same should hold once it's on the cake.
Two points... the jam glaze is apparently thinned with water, which will make it less stable, and the storage conditions of jam may be different from the storage of the cake (sealed in a jar vs open air is one thing, refrigerated vs countertop depends on the cake). It may hold up quite well, especially if the glaze dries off some, but one should be aware of the possibilities.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.484061 | 2018-12-27T06:15:34 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/95159",
"authors": [
"Megha",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/47365"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
99628 | How to handle mango puree going stale in mousse
I made a mango mousse cake using the recipe here: https://www.womanscribbles.net/mango-mousse-cake/
Turned out nice, but after two days the mango puree was tasting stale. How can i counter this?
By mango puree you mean the gel that goes on top? Or the puree that you used to make the mousse and the gel?
@JulianaKarasawaSouza i mean the puree content that goes into the mousse and gel
Oh. You shouldn't keep it for that long, homemade fruit purees don't have any preservatives and weren't made in optimal conditions for having a longer shelf life. You make it, and use it for your desert and if you have leftovers you need to turn your puree into something else that can be consumed quickly or has longer shelf life (like a chutney or a preserve). For the next time you might be able to prolong shelf life to 1 or 2 days by adding lemon juice (with vitamin C, which is a natural antioxidant), but for this one there is nothing you can do.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.484159 | 2019-06-20T10:14:58 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/99628",
"authors": [
"Juliana Karasawa Souza",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/51551",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/68856",
"manu muraleedharan"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
101122 | Baking with Whey Protein
I wanted to experiment with baking with Whey Protein and I found recipes for baking online. I was wondering if any whey protein off the shelf can be used? Or do I need to find a specific type of whey protein online? Using Whey is something I'm not familiar with and didn't see any options online geared for cooking, so I wasn't sure if any product was acceptable...
I bake extensively with whey protein concentrates and isolates. Well, to be clear, a combination of whey protein concentrates/isolates and other non-wheat type flours (flaxseed meal, almond flour, coconut flour, psyllium husk powder, etc.).
One thing to mention right off the bat is that whey protein and gluten do not mix. Well, let me explain. In some of my low-carb baking for yeast-raised breads/pizzas, I use vital wheat gluten (VWG) at around 40 - 50% of the total flour weight (see my answer here). Like one would expect, mixing plain VWG with water normally produces a rubbery, elastic dough that can immediately pass the windowpane test. However, if I mixed, say, 20 g of VWG with 10 g of unflavored whey protein isolate and added 30 g water, I would end up with a thick, liquid-like soup — almost a batter: absolutely no ability to hold shape or structure. (I think) the whey protein basically shreds the VWG to pieces. I am still researching why this behavior occurs, but I think it may have to do with whey protein being a super-concentrated source of glutathione (which is why you usually scald milk before adding to wheat flour recipes) and/or L-cysteine. (L-cysteine is the active ingredient in PZ-44, a commercial dough-conditioner). Now, whether this same behavior will carry over to baked goods made with wheat flour + whey protein, I don't know, but it's certainly something to watch out for. Granted, it will likely have a greater effect on baked goods that rely more heavily on gluten for their structure. Interestingly, casein (the other major milk protein), or more specifically, micellar casein, does not exhibit this same destructive behavior, cooperating well with gluten and working alongside the gluten network to provide structure.
Second, at least in my experience (which doesn't include wheat flour), whey protein concentrates/isolates seem to have an extreme drying effect on baked goods, similar to egg whites. For example, if I were to take ¼ cup (28 g) of flaxseed meal and add an egg, it would bake up to have a moist, muffin-like texture. In contrast, if I were to take an equal amount of whey protein isolate and an egg, it would bake up to an inedible brick: chalky and desert-like in its dryness. While previously I was at a loss for why this was occurring, in the process of writing this answer, I realized it's likely because as the proteins set, you're squeezing out the moisture, and without any other hygroscopic ingredients, that moisture just evaporates. This same drying behavior would likely also occur with wheat flour. So, depending on the amount of whey protein used, it may be necessary to counteract that by including hygroscopic ingredients (sugar, flaxseed meal, psyllium husk powder, etc.).
In my experience, (again, which doesn't include wheat flour), whey protein concentrates (75%) are not equivalent to whey protein isolates (90%). I just learned this the hard way. I developed numerous recipes using whey protein isolates, then trying to save a few bucks, I ordered whey protein concentrate instead of isolate. None of the recipes I developed with isolate worked using concentrate (they'll require re-formulation of other ingredients). Since the amount of protein in isolates is higher than in concentrates, isolates have a higher "drying power" and can support the addition of a greater amount of non-egg moisture. Granted, these whey proteins were making up about 50% of my total "flour" by weight. (For an example of such a recipe, see the Buttermilk Pancake (Coconut Flour + Whey Protein Isolate) in my answer here). Consequently, assuming you're using wheat flour, I don't think this difference will be as big of an issue since you'll be using a much smaller amount.
Since I use it so often for baking, I go with unflavored whey protein isolates/concentrates, as they're the most versatile. They're unsweetened and unflavored, so I can have more control over the end product. In my case, this is usually something I have to get online, as most stores I've been to will only carry flavored proteins. If you do go with a flavored protein powder, vanilla is probably the next most versatile, as vanilla is usually at home in a lot of potential recipes. Since the protein powder is usually sweetened, you may need to adjust the recipe's other sweeteners (but do keep in mind the need for hygroscopic ingredients).
I would like to second the observation that whey protein isolate behaves like egg white. I successfully used it as an egg white substitute in a few applications. Veering slightly off-topic, whey protein isolate sets significantly firmer and "tighter" than soy protein isolate in my experience; I would not be surprised if it is one of the "firmer-setting" protein powders generally available.
The major types of whey protein are:
Whey protein concentrate. This has a protein content hovering around 75%. It has a fairly milky taste and smooth mouth feel.
Whey protein isolate. This has closer to 90% protein. The taste is more neutral than WPC.
Hydrolyzed whey protein, which has been processed to break apart proteins and make it more readily digestible. This stuff tastes not very good.
I wouldn't use hydrolyzed whey for baking. Either isolate or concentrate will work fine, but concentrate is cheaper and more widely available. Since you'll be mixing in other ingredients, there's not much reason to use isolate.
Most whey you buy from a store will be flavored and artificially sweetened, so you'll need to find a flavor which works with your chosen recipe.
I haven't baked with it myself, though I've used it in other recipes, and you don't provide links to specific recipes, but whey protein products are mostly very similar: the actual protein concentrate* and flavouring/sweeteners.
You'll need to stick to a similar flavour for the recipe to be similar. This is especially true if it expects unflavoured: you might get away with vanilla but that's often quite sweet and the final product might end up too sweet. On the other hand blueberry vs. raspberry flavour (or chocolate vs. chocolate orange etc.) will give a different but still OK result.
* All the recipes I found used concentrate; using isolate instead would have a small effect on the flavour and texture
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.484265 | 2019-09-03T12:11:22 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/101122",
"authors": [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/72906",
"user95442"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92358 | Replacement for Almond Milk
I have a muffin recipe for Almond milk but I'd like to replace it since Almond Milk is only good for 7-10 days, I can't find small enough containers, and no one in my household will drink it. Outside of replacing it with other forms of milk, what are some substitutes for Almond Milk?
7-10 days? The almond milk I get lasts weeks.
Yeah I used the Almond Breeze and it says "Please use within 7 - 10 days." What brand are you using?
I use Alpro, a UK brand @BrianMains.
@GdD I would be very surprised if it really lasts that long. Note that the date printed on the package is only valid for a sealed package, and that it won't necessary have visible signs of spoilage at the time it has dangerous levels of bacteria.
I've been using the same brand for years @rumtscho, it lasts significantly longer than 7-10 days, and I am careful.
Why specifically are you asking for a non-milk replacement? Are you afraid your muffins will only be good for the 7-10 days that the package says the milk is good for? I'm confused by "Outside of replacing it with other forms of milk"?
You may be able to find smaller containers of almond (or other non-dairy) milk in a different section of the grocery store. The refrigerated half-gallon containers are too large for my family as well, but we can get through the shelf stable size -- 1 quart -- in a week.
To make your life easier, I'd look for another muffin recipe that does not use almond milk.
You should be able to substitute with rice milk, soy milk.. or even regular milk (cow, sheep ...) or other non animal milk.
For example, this site tested muffins with different kind of milks.
https://teaspoonofspice.com/almond-milk-muffins/
My wife is lactose intolerant and doesn't particularly care for almond milk. I have successfully used Cashew Milk in everything from cereal to most baking recipes (where almond milk will work)
Just use water instead, or regular cow milk.
Will water affect the flavor profile?
Almond milk is pretty bland.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.484811 | 2018-09-20T11:35:48 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92358",
"authors": [
"Brian Mains",
"Erica",
"GdD",
"Jennifer S",
"StevenXavier",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17272",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/19707",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/61074",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69006",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7060",
"rumtscho"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92087 | Cooking with Hemp Protein Powder
I was considering making baking goods with protein powder and was considering Hemp Protein Powder. I see most of the recipes often use Hemp Hearts but didn't find much with the protein powder form. Is that Hemp Protein Powder a form that can normally be baked with, and is there a recommended cooking temperature limit?
Will any protein powder work for cooking or should I be selective?
Much of plant protein is in the form of a single enzyme, RuBisCO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RuBisCO#Depletion_in_proteomic_studies , trouble is, what determines taste will likely be trace non-protein components of the flour; Chlorophylls and such. Only way to find out if a particular plant protein mix will work for you is to taste some and see.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.484988 | 2018-09-04T12:37:18 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92087",
"authors": [
"Wayfaring Stranger",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/5455"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92036 | Which method to use when making fruit powders?
Searching online I found a lot of videos/ articles about making fruit powders, some of them dried the fruit itself then ground it. While other juiced the fruit, then ground it.
I am wondering which method will give me a better result regarding:
1) The taste;
2) The color.
The fruits that I am looking forward to try out: Mango, Orange, Lime, apple, grape, tomato, pepper and other fruits and veggies.
I will be using a cheap dehydrator if that is going to make a difference.
I tried drying lemon in a cheap dehydrator, and the flesh doesn't really dry well even when the skin /pith is hard and dry. The membranes of the flesh some too keep the moisture in.
For citrus at least, drying the juice/pulp would be worth a try, and is what I'll do next time I have some to try it on. I suggest drying the zest as well. The pulp or juice would have to be dried on something non-porous, like baking parchment.
Thanks for the answer, but if you are going to dry the juice, would a normal tray work?
The best method, and yet the most expensive one, is freeze drying the fruit, then pulverizing. Freeze drying is, as the name suggest, works by freezing the fruit and then reducing the pressure in the chamber the food is in... Eventually, the water in the food will sublimate leaving the rest of the fruit intact but completely dry.
And you'll even be preserving most of the aroma of the fruit.
So considering you might have access to a household-dryer; I would use that to dry the fruit; then pulverize.
The OP doesn't have access to freeze drying equipment, he specified that he is going to use a cheap dehydrator, and only asked about the difference between drying the whole fruit and the juice (or the pomace? he doesn't specify).
Oh I thought, I had added a section reagarding that, thanks for the comment. I'll update
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.485076 | 2018-09-01T17:57:56 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92036",
"authors": [
"Maliohammad Jaafar",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/68275",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69024",
"rumtscho",
"zetaprime"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
94550 | Why slow ferment after shaping?
Many people say you have to slow ferment your bread after shaping to give it better flavor, but I can never understand that. Why not just slow ferment the whole batch then shape it when it is done fermenting?
This way is way safer as you can't ruin the proofing if you forget it a bit longer than intended and it has been giving me the desirable results I am after.
Are there any advantages in slow fermenting individual breads instead of the whole batch?
I am talking about crusted white bread. After the slow fermentation for the whole batch, I will just shape the bread, put it in a dutch oven and let it proof for 10-20 minutes, slash it then pop it in the oven to bake. For the other method (which I don't use) they just get it out of the fridge, slash it and pop it into the oven.
After the slow fermentation for the whole batch, I will just shape the bread, put it in a dutch oven and let it proof for 10-20 minutes, slash it then pop it in the oven to bake.
For the other method (which I don't use) they just get it out of the fridge, slash it and pop it into the oven.
For the other method (which I don't use) they just get it out of the fridge, slash it and pop it into the oven.
I suspect this is a large part of the answer; maybe it's the entire answer. It's very convenient to be able to take your proofed loaf out of the refrigerator and put it right into the oven.
I don't typically do this, but I appreciate the value. I usually don't ferment in the refrigerator, but just at room temperature, using a small amount of yeast or starter. If you wanted to retard the bulk fermentation (putting it in the refrigerator), you might need to let the dough come up to room temperature before proofing. That would definitely take longer and be harder to time.
Your first batch is used for building gluten strength in the dough for shaping and giving the yeast time to wake up and do their job. After shaping, you are letting the dough rise to its final form while still adding flavor from the yeast.
Still didn't answer my question, as you say we use the first batch to develop the gluten. As for the rise it doesn't matter if it rises in 10 minutes or 10 hours, the only variable here is the flavor.
So why wouldn't cold fermenting the whole batch "after" developing the gluten give the desired flavor?
If you mean putting the dough into a refrigerator and let it sit there for a while, will develop more flavor because the yeast is still actively growing but more slowly. Many bakers do exactly that same thing for timing reasons. For instance, I had a loaf I had just finished shaping but had to leave the house for an undetermined amount of time so I put it in the fridge. This slowed down the fermentation--but did not stop it--and I pulled it out later, let it warm up, and let it rise to where I wanted it before baking. @MaliohammadJaafar
So basically the same result but with different time management methods?
@MaliohammadJaafar You go it! It's even more flexible when you are using a sourdough starter. It is way more forgiving than dry yeast because it's slow growth let's you play with time and temperature. My kitchen can get too cool when the temperature outside gets below 30F and proofing and rising will stretch out for hours more so I'll turn on the light in my oven and put my dough in there while it's rising. Unless I want it to take its time. Then I might put it in the refrigerator which will make it take longer. Some people add colder water to the mix but longer wait gives you sourdough taste
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.485251 | 2018-12-07T10:31:39 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/94550",
"authors": [
"Maliohammad Jaafar",
"Rob",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/12734",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69024"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92069 | Replace icing sugar
Can I replace icing sugar with corn syrup when I make the sponge cake? I don't have icing sugar and blender t blend sugar. So can I use what to replace icing sugar?
It would probably be best if you posted the recipe you're trying to follow. This isn't a common substitution in baking.
You can't make icing with syrup alone because it has too much water in it.
If you were planning to use the syrup in the cake itself you'd have to use more than the amount of sugar called for, and reduce the other liquid. All working by weight. Volume measurements here wouldn't work. But rather than trying to use syrup in the cake mix, it's better to use the finest white sugar you have. Many sponge cake recipes use caster sugar anyway, which is fine but not that fine.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.485517 | 2018-09-03T04:09:43 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92069",
"authors": [
"Chris H",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20413"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
95197 | Should pizza be firm enough to be held by the crust?
I've been to 4 restaurants already (with good reviews) and they all serve similar pizzas - they have to be eaten with fork and knife or else they will bend (because one simply can't hold them with a hand) and their contents will most likely fall off.Even cutting them with a knife completely disintegrates the pizza so in the end it turns into a weird salad of dough, tomato sauce, cheese etc.Is this what pizzas are really supposed to be like?
Where are you located? This will probably vary by country (or even state, if in the US).
Europe (south eastern).
Yeah, so you get Northern Italian pizza mostly, I'll bet. Those are super-thin-crust, and are meant to be eaten with fork & knife.
I did up voted giorgiosironi's A but I would add that the good of pizza is to come in a virtually infinite number of variations (within a finite space). Even in Italy. But the tip of a slice holds only very very seldom.
Speaking as an Italian, both Neapolitan-style pizza (thicker crust on the border) and rest-of-ITaly-style pizza will have a thin center that will normally bend when cut or held; the more so if there are lots of toppings. It shouldn't really disintegrate, that may be an indication of a bad knife, too.
Normally bending dough isn't a problem because you can fold the slice:
This, it's the top of the pizza that bends (the point).I've found that rolling it is the most efficient way to eat it (though I haven't tried to fold it).How many styles are there and which types are firm enough not to bend?
@JoeDough Folding creates an arch, which will provide support for the entire slice, all the way down to the tip.
It's not uncommon for a slice of pizza to "droop" in the front if you try to pick it up with one hand. The amount of droop will vary, depending on the toppings, and type of dough.
Thin, crispy crust pizza will tend to hold itself when picked up. However, longer, thinner, softer dough tends to droop under the weight of itself and the toppings.
There's three main ways to deal with this:
1) Use two hands to hold the slice:
Image Source: 123rf.com
2) Use your thumb to support the pizza while your index and middle finger hold the crust:
Image Source: alamy.com
3) Fold the slice into a "U" shape, which creates an arch, and will provide rigidity for your pizza! It doesn't need to be folded completely in half, just a slight "U" shape will do.
Image Source: seriouseats.com wired.com
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.485857 | 2018-12-28T16:00:27 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/95197",
"authors": [
"Alchimista",
"FuzzyChef",
"JoeDough",
"SnakeDoc",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/36370",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45428",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/59209",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69099",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7180",
"senschen"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92109 | Why are fermented dairy products pasteurised?
Could it be for longer shelf life?How much longer does pasteurised dairy products last compared to non pasteurised one?It doesn't make much sense to me to destroy useful bacterias.I understand that pasteurisation destroys harmful bacterias, but probiotic (unpasteurised) products do exist (how do bottles of probiotic beverages not explode?).
Probiotic products are generally pasteurised, then the desirable cultures are introduced, in a similar way to yoghurt. There may be exceptions but those you can find in the supermarket are all made this way.
There are several reasons. Shelf life is a fairly minor one, but a batch contaminated with a disease-causing species would be a problem not just for health but for the manufacturers profits. Another is consistency. Even a benign bacterial/yeast culture can produce off flavours, or even just different flavours from different strains of the same species.
Now that you mention it, I think I've read somewhere that bacterias are added additionally.So the reason not all fermented products are probiotic is because adding bacterias after fermentation costs too much money?These products should be analysed even after performing pasteurisation and bacteria enriching, so it's basically the same in the end as safety has to be ensured either way.Are other fermented products fermented then enriched with bacteria too (like pickled vegetables)?
@JoeDough I think you've got it backwards. What Chris is saying is that the product is pasteurized to kill unwanted bacteria, then new desirable bacteria are introduced, and then the product is allowed to ferment. There is no product I know of that is fermented and then cultured with additional bacteria. It's also worth bearing in mind that the term "probiotic" is largely a marketing term, not a regulated one; there is no legal requirement that some specified level of bacterial activity must be present.
If desirable bacteria are added in a controlled environment (after pasteurisation of milk), why are fermented products pasteurised after fermentation?Chris mentioned safety and consistency, is it because ensuring hygiene through the entire process after first pasteurisation and consistency is too costly?
The stages in the preparation of yogurt are:
Pasteurize the milk and then cool it to 42-45 ºC.
Add starter and mix well.
Put in plastic, cardboard or crystal jars.
Incubate until reaching 42 to 45 º C for 3 to 6 hours.
Cover the containers.
Refrigerate.
As you can see, pasteurization is done to the raw milk before culturing in order to reduce the pathogens that may contain: bacteria, protozoa, molds and yeasts, etc.
Are you sure pasteurisation isn't done even after fermentation?Isn't that why some products claim that they have live cultures while others don't?Maybe it's different on your market.I've noticed that every recipe for home made yogurt calls for just "yogurt", nobody mentions if it has to be "probiotic" or not so I assume that some markets don't perform pasteurisation after fermentation.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.486108 | 2018-09-06T08:59:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92109",
"authors": [
"JoeDough",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/25059",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69099",
"logophobe"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
96144 | Can't stop eggs from sticking to stainless steel pan
I've made omelettes in this pan before without any problems, but fried eggs are impossible to make without sticking.I heat the pan, throw few drops of water and check if they move around (some would say like mercury), lower the heat, pour oil and then put eggs in.I've tried to monitor the temperature carefully to make sure that the pan isn't too hot, still no success.Is my pan the problem?
get a cast iron pan. they are cheap and excellent. the "seasoning" on the pan is a polymer that acts as non-stick but without many of the downsides of plastic non-stick coatings.
Do you not want to use a nonstick / teflon type pan? Eggs are easy in my nonstick pan.
Using the pan I already have is easier and cheaper than finding another one.Besides, it seems as if we have no idea if non stick coatings are safe or not.
I solved this problem by using a spray on (canola oil), instead of liquid (canola oil).
If food sticks to a stainless steel pan it is usually due to either a) too high heat, b) not enough grease/butter/oil, or c) some amount of both a and b.
I don't think the heat is too high as I repeat the water test often.
If you have indeed heated up your pan, then you're most likely not using enough oil.
I've used far more oil than usual this time.Results - eggs, like before, start browning around edges too soon (temperature can't be too high as I repeat the water test every ~30 seconds), while they didn't stick completely, taking them out wasn't easy and I barely removed the crusty brown part from the bottom.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.486359 | 2019-02-04T17:17:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/96144",
"authors": [
"JoeDough",
"Willk",
"flies",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/53826",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/65979",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69099"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92329 | Energy bar is too soft
I'm trying to make a recipe for an energy bar that can keep it's form, doesn't melt in above-average temperature, and doesn't stick to the teeth.
I want to use a minimum amount of ingredients. For nutritional profile I have settled with roasted peanuts and sesame seeds. I use dates to bind them, and coco powder or freeze-dried fruit powder for flavor, for example banana.
I have tried all kinds of date pastes, some are definitely hold form better than others, but the bar still bends in middle under its own weight when holding up it in the air.
What other natural ingredient (no chemical preservatives or sugar powders) I can introduce into the recipe to make the bar dense but soft, and not too gooey?
Welcome! Can you [edit] your question to include the rough proportion of your ingredients? Have you tried varying the ratio of date paste to cocoa/fruit powder to see what effect that has on consistency?
It sounds like what you need is a powder, you could try a protein powder, or you could use peanut butter powder, which is a good thickener. Chia powder is also a great binder.
Another option would be a gum like xanthan or guar gum.
Heat is another option if you aren't baking these already, heat will drive out moisture and help the mix crystallize.
Many thanks for the answer!
I also read that chia is a good preservative and thickens quite well. Maybe I should try to use it in the recipe.
I'm not keen on using protein powders or gums, but I tried baking the bars for 6 minutes and they definitely hardens. I heard many makers of bars dehydrate them before packing. Maybe this is the way to go.
You can dehydrate them in your oven if the temperature goes low enough @user69335
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.486523 | 2018-09-19T00:02:00 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92329",
"authors": [
"Erica",
"GdD",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17272",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/19707",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69335",
"user69335"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92357 | How could I split the proving and baking of bread over 8 hours plus?
I'd like to bake my own bread now and again, but timing things like proving and baking around a regular work day make it practically impossible. I'm not going to get up at 4am to make dough so it proves in time to be baked before work, and the kitchen is rather monopolised by dinner in the evenings. In an ideal scenario I would like to either:
Make dough before bedtime (before 10pm)
Knock back, second prove and bake around 7am
or
Make dough at breakfast time
Knock back, second prove and bake at dinner time
The second approach is probably better as the oven will likely be hot from dinner anyway so less energy wastage.
The problem is, I can't leave dough to prove for 8 to 10 hours by normal methodology. I'm wondering if there's some way I could reliably slow the first prove. Thinking slightly differently, I wondered about feeding the yeast in a controlled environment, specific amount of sugar and water temperature overnight, and then making dough with that and skipping the first proving.
Any recipes of convenience exist?
Yes, you need cold- or refrigerator-methods, sometimes also known as overnight method. But I am quite sure that we already have a duplicate Q/A. Which means while this post may be closed, you don’t have to wait for an answer! Don’t forget to take the [tour] and browse through our [help] to learn more about how the site works. And welcome to Seasoned Advice!
Stephanie : I don’t know if it was a complete duplicate, as I asked for specific timings, while this one is more open ended. https://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/14184/67
@Joe there are more Q/As about the topic, e.g. https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/13948/how-to-break-up-a-bread-recipe
And somewhat related: https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/84775/which-types-of-bread-are-well-suited-for-overnight-proofing-and-what-adjustments
Thanks for all your useful comments. I will certainly check out the links but good to know I can slow or halt the proving for a while without killing off the second prove. I'll give it a go.
https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/78840/how-to-modify-a-bread-recipe-to-accomodate-longer-proofing-times
I have had luck with refrigerating dough after the first proof and deflation.
I allowed it to rest in the refigerator for about seven hours then removed it to the countertop for the second rise followed by baking. (The second rise will require more time than had it not been refrigerated, as the dough is cold)
This was a basic Italian Bread recipe with just white bread (strong-UK) flour, active dry yeast, water, salt and canola
You would need to experiment with other recipes; I cannnot predict with more and/or different ingredients
For sourdough boules I would usually do the rising in the evening, then shape the loaf and place it on a baking sheet with baking paper. I used to cover that with the biggest cooking pot I had, upturned, which comfortably fit around the loaf. The whole thing went into the fridge and would slow-proof overnight.
In the morning, I took it out, removed the pot and left it until the oven would preheat, then dust, score and bake.
With the 40 minute baking time (for a 500g flour, 340g water, yeast, salt and sourdough starter recipe, so one loaf), this whole process takes about one hour, including a bit of cooling time on a rack. Of course that depends on how quickly your oven can preheat.
In my experience, it did not make a significant difference between doing this at 7pm or 10pm, and I'd usually start the baking between 8 and 10 in the morning.
Here are two examples of two different breads I have done that way (both have part whole-grain spelt flour, hence the colour). The first one didn't have enough scoring, but the product is still OK for an amateur.
I'm not going to get up at 4am to make dough
Get a machine to wake up early for you. Around me, bread machines can be easily found for $10 or $20 at the thrift store. All the ones I know of have a timer and a "dough only" setting, so the machine can be set up in the evening to start working in the early morning. On the dough-only setting it will do the initial mixing and kneading and the first rise, but not actually bake the bread.
Then you get up just a bit before your usual time. Form the loaf in the shape you want, let it rise once more, then put it in the oven.
One limitation, you might not want to use recipes that contain milk or other ingredients that could spoil overnight if you use this method.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.486691 | 2018-09-20T11:15:58 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92357",
"authors": [
"Ecnerwal",
"Joe",
"Stephie",
"ThisLeeNoble",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/28879",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/34242",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69367"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92527 | Is it safe to use raw mushrooms to flavor a broth?
I'm following a recipe for making ramen broth. It says to use chicken stock and boil it with several fresh ingredients for 30 minutes to flavor it, one of which is mushrooms.
Being a very inexperienced cook I searched online for how to handle mushrooms for cooking. One of the pages I found is by the Norwegian food safety authority and says that mushrooms should be put in cold water and brought to a boil, letting them boil for 10 minutes to remove toxins in them, and that this should be done even if you plan on frying the mushrooms afterwards. It also specifically says that the water used to boil the mushrooms should always be thrown away, I'm guessing because the toxins gets mixed into the water when you boil the mushrooms.
My question is, would these toxins not get into the my broth if I am putting the raw mushrooms directly into it? The recipe says nothing about boiling the mushrooms before hand, or is this just something I should know to do?
I also see a lot of recipes for mushroom sauces/soups which says to put raw mushrooms directly into the dish as it is being made, would this not have the same problem?`
I am using common white button mushrooms (Champignon).
Normal mushrooms from the supermarket can be eaten raw, so anything saying they must be cooked is suspect.
@ChrisH : it's possible that different areas may have different food safety expectations. In some areas, you can't just wash an apple, due to the pesticides they use; you must peel them. If Henrik is in Norway, and the website is from a legit group (government agency, etc) in that country, I'd recommend following their advice.
Could be that they are giving advice concerning local mushrooms with particular characteristics. There are many plants that require cooking before being safe, such as Taro or Fiddleheads in BC. A general "mushrooms need to be cooked" is over the top, but stating mushrooms never need to be could put people at risk if they use particular species. With the OP's button mushrooms, it's probably safe though. Conversely, I would also not take the Norvegian advice to mean all mushrooms are fine if cooked because that somehow removes their toxins.
@Joe it still won't remove toxins from non-mushrooms, but I suppose if real mushrooms are commonly grown in manure it might be worth recommending cooking. Norway's not EU but it is EEA and so shares a lot of food regs. As there's no link to the source (and I for one wouldn't be able to read it in Norwegian) so no context to assess relevance, however I've found a document in English from the Nordic Council of Ministers which may provide some context on P51, but specifically frying is good, like boiling
In Norway lots of people still pick their own mushrooms and the Norwegian safety rules for mushrooms picked in the wild do not apply to Champignons you buy in a supermarket in 99.99999% of all cases. ¹
Note ¹: Unless something went horribly wrong in the food supply chain.
I've found a source of some interesting background:
Mushrooms traded as food. Vol II sec. 1 Nordic Risk assessments and background on edible mushrooms, suitable for commercial marketing and background lists. For industry, trade and food inspection. Background information and guidance lists on mushrooms published by the Nordic Council of Ministers says on p.51:
As it is concluded from animal and in vitro
studies that the phenylhydrazine derivatives
occuring in Button Mushroom (A. bisporus)
as well as the mushroom itself may be
genotoxic and carcinogenic, a carcinogenic
risk for humans cannot be excluded.
It is therefore recommended not to eat
Button Mushroom in larger amounts. A
significantly higher intake than 2 kg/year
(average consumption in Denmark, Iceland,
Norway and Sweden) is regarded as “larger
amounts”.
Proper processing of the fresh mushroom
reduces the amounts of potentially carcinogenic
constituents. The fried, microwaveheated,
boiled (especially if boiling water is
discarded), and canned mushrooms contain
significantly less of the potentially carcinogenic
phenylhydrazines. Also ordinary
freezing and subsequent thawing (but not
freeze-drying) will reduce the content of
phenylhydrazine in the mushroom.
It is therefore recommended to process/
cook Button Mushroom before consumption
but note that this specifically states that frying reduces these compounds significantly. The precautionary advice is also based on consumption of >2kg/year. Similar advice is not given in many countries sharing common food regulations and cultures. So if you're only eating them occasionally, my interpretation of the quote above is that you've got nothing to worry about, especially is you're doing any kind of cooking.
Frying the mushrooms first is a real help if you want to maximise the savoury flavour from them, but pre-boiling is likely to extract some flavour which you then discard.
This might be the cause of those worries, on general mushrooms.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/raw-mushrooms-hazardous-or-harmless/
If you follow the link (I didn't post direct because I think Scientific American listing it makes it a bit more credible than some blog's opinion), the dietician states that, while there is agaratine, which is a toxin, in many mushrooms, including those people normally eat raw, the practical dose makes it a non-issue in many cases.
See also http://www.anh-usa.org/supermarket-mushrooms-dangerous-to-eat-raw/
If you want to be sure Google up "raw <your mushroom variety> recipe". But I'm not losing any sleep over this myself over the mushrooms I find in my supermarket.
Also, if you're flavoring a broth, it really doesn't hurt to heat the mushrooms if in doubt and heating might actually be better for the flavor aspect. If you this was about mushroom in salads or the like then my own opinion is that that level of concern is unwarranted.
Edit: to be clear - look up what's relevant to the specific type of mushroom you are interested in, not the recipe or mushrooms in general. Be safe.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.487158 | 2018-09-29T07:42:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92527",
"authors": [
"Chris H",
"Italian Philosopher",
"Joe",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20413",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/64096",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
93521 | How do I need to alter a recipe if I am using a convection oven?
How do I need to alter a recipe if I am using a convection oven as if a recipe calls to use a regular oven? Do I need to alter the recipe or there would only be the differences of baking time/temperature.
Can't you just turn convection off? Also, what recipe is it?
See https://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/3916/67
@Mołot certainly not every fan oven has the option to turn it off. My cooker has two ovens, a small conventional and the main fan oven. If I’m baking something of any great depth, a loaf of a cake it has to go in the fan oven and the fan cannot be turned off independently.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.487612 | 2018-11-02T17:24:44 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/93521",
"authors": [
"Joe",
"Mołot",
"Spagirl",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/36704",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/64479",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
93462 | How Should I Store Brown Sugar?
How can I store brown sugar as it always gets hard before I can use it all. How do you store brown sugar? Does it need to be refrigerated? Also, How can you make hard brown sugar soft again?
See https://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/3935/67 and https://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/8902/67
I always store brown sugar in an airtight, ziplock bag. That works pretty well for preventing it from getting hard. It does not need to be refrigerated.
However, if your brown sugar is already hard, there are a few techniques that people often recommend for resoftening it. These include: storing it in a closed container for a short period of time with apple slices (which will impart moisture); doing the same with a slice of bread (which will also impart some moisture); or, briefly microwaving it.
Here is a cooking blog which discusses some of these approaches:
https://www.thekitchn.com/4-ways-to-soften-brown-sugar-and-keep-it-that-way-195922
Dani, good info but beware of just giving links for information -- they often suffer from 'link rot' when a website shuts down or decides to reorganize their content without setting up redirection. I suggest giving them credit by linking to them, but also copying out the relevant parts. (if you put a '> ' (greater-than and a space) at the beginning of each paragraph, it'll get formatted as a block quote)
Just put it in the microwave. One minute at a time to make sure it doesn't melt. Softens it right up.
If you store it in an airtight container at room temperature that's good enough.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.487695 | 2018-10-31T18:19:39 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/93462",
"authors": [
"Joe",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
93963 | How to peel tomatoes easily?
I went through several websites and found that the easiest way to peel tomato is to boil them . So, How long do we need to boil tomatoes so that you can easily peel them?
You don't want to boil them, you want to blanch them. This means you bring the water to a boil, cut a shallow cross into each tomato (scoring the peel), add the tomatoes (few enough compared to the amount of water that the water doesn't stop boiling) and let them boil for ~1 minute. Remove the tomatoes and dump them straight into ice water. Once cooled the peel should come right off.
The peel tends to hang on to the stem, and often, when peeling tomatoes, you're heading for tomatoes concasse. In this case, I use an apple-corer or pointed knife to isolate the hull ( not all the way through) before blanching, leaving the plug in place. It can save a lot of time.
Another method if you use a gas stove is to roast it over the cooking flame gently. To do this you can stick a knife into the tomato (preferrably in the stem part) and hold it over the flame while rotating it. Some of the peel will burn away and the rest will shrivel up which can be removed using bare hands quite easily.
This isn't a mass peeling method like boiling/blanching but I find it preserves the flavour better.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.487819 | 2018-11-16T06:43:58 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/93963",
"authors": [
"Robin Betts",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/59328"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92603 | Forgot to add Sugar in cookie dough . Is there any way to add sugar?
While adding ingredients to mixture(for cookies), I forgot to put brown sugar..
Now that when i've baked cookies, what alternate can I add to retain their taste?
Was the brown sugar the only sweetener in the recipe ?
Frosting? Filling/cooking sandwiches? Ice cream sandwiches? Are you intent on using them as a cookie, or are you open to other applications?
'Crumble it up on top of ice cream' is always an option. Or fruit. Maybe even a crumb topping for a cobbler, or a crumb crust for a pie.
@Joe I would say that one qualifies as an answer...
@moscafj Your comment is getting upvoted, so I would say it qualifies as an answer...
@Both: ping me here after you've posted an answer and I'll come back and upvote. 0:-)
related: https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/81303/i-forgot-to-add-brown-sugar-to-my-chocolate-chip-cookies-and-didnt-realize
You will never be able to get sweetness into them in the same way as if you had added sugar to begin with, but you do have other options.
As Fabby said, you can add sweet things to them now which will result in a sweet topping (or sandwitch!).
Depending on the type of cookie (it would work better with soft cookies) you could try crumbling them up and mixing with icing to make a "cake pop" (cake pops are made by crumbling cake and mixing with icing).
Other non-cookie options:
You could crumble them and mix with some butter (to hold it together) and sugar/sweetener and use to line a pie/crumble/bars.
You could embrace the savoury and eat them as savoury biscuits - warm or toast them and top with butter or cheese or something. (Garlic butter?)
There are tons of things you can add to them after the fact:
Icing
Jam
Crème au beurre with lots of sugar
Whipped cream with 2 packs of vanilla sugar instead of one
Grated chocolate
Honey
...
With some of the above (like jam, chocolate and honey), you can put them into the oven again at a low temperature (50°C / 120°F) and get a unique cookie!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.487957 | 2018-10-02T15:00:54 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92603",
"authors": [
"Ess Kay",
"Fabby",
"Joe",
"Max",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20118",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/34942",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69382",
"moscafj"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
93479 | Ground coriander vs coriander seeds
What is the difference between ground coriander and coriander seed? Can you use coriander seeds instead of ground coriander? If yes, Can you use whole coriander seeds?
Subjective opionion: If you like the citrus/orange note of coriander seed and want that in a dish, do bother to toast and grind fresh!
Ground coriander is made from the seeds, so you definitely can substitute seeds. But you do need to grind them first. It's hard to get them ground very fine by hand, at least for quick cooking dishes, but if you toast then before grinding they're more brittle (so break up better). In a longer cooking dish the bits soften a little, so you can get away with slightly bigger bits.
Whole coriander seeds (or big pieces of them) are unpleasant to find in food, and don't deliver their flavour well to the dish. They're too big and hard to ignore, but to small to go round (unlike the cardamom pods sometimes found whole in rice dishes).
Seeds store well, keeping their flavour, so toasting/grinding them when you're ready to use them makes for a better-tasting end result. If you're used to using ground coriander that's been hanging around a while, this will be particularly noticeable, and you want want to use a bit less.
Even better: dry-toast the whole seeds in a pan, then grind them.
@Lee, I meant to say that but wasn't as clear as I intended - thanks
Worth also saying that freshly toasting & grinding your own coriander seeds is much more aromatic than adding coriander powder, similar to freshly ground coffee vs coffee grinds
Coriander seeds are easy to grind in a pepper grinder
Coriander seeds are one of the only spices that changes its taste quite a lot when ground. Try to chew a whole coriander seed, then try a roughly crushed one, and then again a (freshly) powdered one. You will find a substantial difference. In many Indian dishes both coriander seeds and coriander powder are used, in different stages of the cooking process
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.488156 | 2018-11-01T15:24:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/93479",
"authors": [
"0xFEE1DEAD",
"Andrea Shaitan",
"Chris H",
"Lee Daniel Crocker",
"anotherdave",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/18599",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20413",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35070",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35312",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/62260",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67883",
"rackandboneman"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
107612 | Grams to cup measurements
Keeping question quite simple, I don't know much about measurings, so how many cups make 218 grams, and also when u say for example a cup what should be the size of that cup?
218 grams of what, exactly? Flour? Sugar? Rice? Venezuelan Beaver Cheese?
218 grams of flour
1 cup of salt weighs 288 grams.
Please follow this table as a reference when converting grams to cups or vice-versa
https://www.allrecipes.com/article/cup-to-gram-conversions/
See this link for more information about cups and its standards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cup_(unit)
While this link may answer the question, it is better to include the essential parts of the answer here and provide the link for reference. Link-only answers can become invalid if the linked page changes.
Grams of what?
Grams is a measure of weight (actually mass, but we'll assume you are cooking on earth).
Cup is a measure of volume.
Different substances have different density, and powdered items like flour can be more or less packed or settled.
To confuse things a bit, in the USA we have ounces (weight) and fluid ounces (volume). When we talk about volume in fluid ounces, a shorthand is to just say ounces.
One cup = 8 (fluid) ounces.
But that 8 fluid ounces can be:
approximately 4.5 ounces of flour, really 120-130 grams, depends on the grind and the sift
approximately 8 ounces of water (that is where fluid ounces came from)
a bit more than 8 ounces butter
etc.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.488335 | 2020-04-15T18:37:47 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/107612",
"authors": [
"GdD",
"Laila",
"Tetsujin",
"Wayfaring Stranger",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/19707",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/42066",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/5455",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69542"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
93903 | Difference between cooking apples and eating apples
What is the difference between cooking apples and eating apples? With so many varieties of apples to choose from, how to choose the apples that are suitable for baking and cooking.
There are many different varieties of apples, some are good for baking because they hold their shapes, some others do not, but can be good for apple sauce or jelly.
Most of the apples are good for eating raw.
There are many lists and charts available on the internets that show all that.
For example :
https://bestapples.com/varieties-information/varieties/
or :
https://www.theyummylife.com/Apple_Fact_Sheet
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.488471 | 2018-11-14T17:49:09 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/93903",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
96288 | Substitution for curry powder
Can garam masala be used as a substitute for curry powder or vice versa? Garam Masala also known as all spice powder
related: https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/37563/what-can-i-use-as-a-replacement-for-curry-powder
Garam Masala and Allspice are two completely different things, per the links in this sentence.
Garam Masala is often used in curries, usually as a finishing spice. However, it is not a substitute for the stronger spices needed earlier in most curry dishes, such as the ones in common "curry powder". Particularly, garam masala usually contains neither turmeric nor hot peppers, two seasonings which are generally considered essential for most "Indian curry" dishes.
...um, I definitely got the impression that OP meant something like "all spices powder" - that is, the term was used as the local synonym to multi-spice powder, or general or multipurpose seasoning blends rather than "that one spice with the oddly generic name"
@Megha I've never heard of "all spices powder" as a term for garam masala. It may indeed be a local term. However, in the rest of the Anglosphere, this could easily be confused with allspice, which is a specific spice made from allspice berries. Go into a shop in the UK for example, and ask for "all spice powder", and you are very likely to be given allspice powder.
Megha: what Billy said. The term "all spices powder" isn't used outside India. Heck, I lived in Nepal, and it's not even used there.
You can use garam masala to make curry, but it doesn't contain everything needed for a typical curry. Other ingredients are required.
Garam masala typically contains cumin, coriander, black pepper, cloves, cinnamon, bay leaf, and mace (the outer casing of nutmeg). It's a basic spice mix often used in Indian cuisine.
To turn it into a curry, you really also need to fry some garlic, ginger, and chilli at the very least. Also, the yellow colour in western style curry powders is turmeric. Don't forget to add some salt too!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.488547 | 2019-02-11T18:47:29 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/96288",
"authors": [
"Billy Kerr",
"Ess Kay",
"FuzzyChef",
"Megha",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/47365",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69138",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69382",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7180"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
107135 | Mayonnaise versus chicken spread
Just confused is there any difference between mayo and chicken spread, what are the ingredients that make them different
Why not look at the ingredients list on the back of each? I've never heard of chicken spread… so unless it contains actual chicken...
These are not much alike.
Mayonnaise is made from oil (generally a neutral-tasting oil), an emulsifier (traditionally an egg yolk and some mustard), some acid (vinegar and lemon juice, e.g.), and some salt.
Chicken spread is made from chicken and fat and other ingredients, depending on the recipe. I've seen chicken spread recipes made with mayo as one of the fats (or all the fat).
According to the Taste Of Home website where there are many recipes for Chicken Spread, mayonnaise is an ingredient used in chicken spread - which seems very similar to chicken salad as we refer to it on the left side of the map.
As near as I can tell, one is not a substitute for the other. :)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.488715 | 2020-03-29T16:14:06 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/107135",
"authors": [
"Tetsujin",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/42066"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
95070 | Samovar Tea: Let it brew the whole day?
I recently got a samovar tea kettle and am not sure about how to use it. For those of you confused about what I am talking about, this is my samovar (electric):
The metal part is a kettle for boiling water and keeping it warm. On top, there is an opening, on which you put your pot. You make very strong tea in the pot and keep it warm throughout the day by placing it on top of the samovar. When you want to drink a cup of tea you first pour in 1/10 to 1/3 tea from the pot and mix it with water from the samovar.
The point of the whole system is to have tea on demand all day for many people. By having only water in the metal part and strong concentrated tea in the pot every person can mix their own tea and make it as strong as they want to. In addition, you only need to clean the pot, the samovar is only used for water.
With this kind of kettle, you are supposed to brew the tea for a long time, and you need to choose a tea with low bitterness.
What I don't understand:
Isn't it a bad idea to have tea brew for so long? Am I even doing this right? Does the long-brewing provide any kind of benefit? Isn't it also a bad idea to continuously keep your tea warm throughout the day? I ended up removing the tea from the pot after several hours. It ended up so strong, that even when mixed 1:10 it was pretty much undrinkable for most people. But I guess I probably used too much tea, so this could have been avoided.
Also, would it be OK to put the tea in the samovar, or is the "svarka" (the tea concentrate) an integral part of the whole thing?
For reference, here is a samovar, without a pot on top:
Presumably, in this case, the tea is in the samovar and there is no concentrate?
The problem with black tea is that after a few minutes of brewing, the leaves release very bitter substances. There are 2 general ways to deal with this:
Short brewing time: remove the tea leaves or bag after about 3 - 4 minutes.
Saturation: if the tea water is saturated with non-bitter substances at 3 minutes of brewing time, it cannot take up much of the bitter stuff. Traditional turkish tea is brewed like that as well, so I suppose it should also work in a samovar.
The concentrated tea is an integral part of the system. You should not add any water to the svarka pot after initially brewing the tea or you give the bitter substances a chance to solve into the tea.
The tea brand is important, too. I'd propose to try an Earl Grey or another tea with a light taste. Ask a tea shop for advice, if you have one nearby.
The ratio of 1:10 sound about right. Most people have to get used to the idea that barely covering the bottom of the cup is enough.
Putting the diluted tea into the big kettle is a very bad idea and probably won't solve your problem. Every green and black tea will get more bitter over time, no matter how it was brewed. I think keeping the concentrate for a whole day is simply too long. 3 - 4 hours is the longest I would keep brewed black tea. You could make smaller portions to use up the concentrate in time.
Experiment with different brands and different amounts of tea, always keeping in mind that you're making a concentrate to keep the bitterness out of the tea. A splash of milk can neutralize a little of the bitterness, but the milk has to be very cold for it to work. If all else fails, brew peppermint tea instead ;)
Thanks, I had no idea about saturation. So this would also work with green tea? I mostly find the advice to not use green tea, as it releases more bitterness quicker, but maybe not when saturated?
I'm not aware of green tea being used this way anywhere, so I assume it's not suited very much. You always can try it out and decide for yourself, but I wouldn't keep my hopes too high.
There's a couple things I think are important, about this style of tea brewing - and which might help clear up some confusion.
First is, you mention the bitterness...the tea made this way generally is bitter, it is then treated to make it drinkable. This is often done with milk and sugar, chai (of India) also has spices added, and in Russia I've read it was often drunk with sugar or jam in the mouth to doctor the flavor at the source. The strong bitterness is part of the flavor, and part of the expectation, of tea brewed this way, and weaker (ie, non-bitter) tea flavor ends up feeling bland and overpowered by the equally strong flavors of the accompaniments when one expects strong tea. The fact that one can also use very small amounts to get a weaker (ish) overall experience is also helpful for those who do not prefer quite so strong a tea.
Or to think on it another way, coffee is also generally quite bitter... it is just expected and compensated for in coffee in a way that cultures which brew tea precisely don't expect to need to for tea.
As for the problems of long brewing, they are actually accounted for in this method. Keeping tea warm is, generally, not safe, but keeping it hot is much safer... basically it needs to be kept out of the danger zone. The other problem is that tea brewed or kept hot for long periods tends to be bitter, this is not usually a problem with this method because the decoction is already fully bitter. Oversteeping is usually not a problem after, for example, boiling the tea leaves for an extended period to extract every last bit of flavor :)
Also, you definitely can put tea in the samovar (this is done in india, for fully-prepared chai). The difficulty is, it will be much more difficult to doctor the tea or alter strength or flavors, so you need to be pretty sure the strength, and preparation, etc, are generally acceptable before you rely on this. It works very well with one person or a family (etc) holding tea made exactly to taste, or with tea conforming to broadly acceptable cultural standards - like a strong, sweetened milk tea, where one would not be expecting anything else and would take it or leave it.
On the other hand, since you are clearly not looking for the strong'n'bitter tea that would be expected out of this kind of style, may I recommend puer-eh teas? They are fermented, often sold in blocks or rounds, can be cheap and/or brew an awful lot of tea from a relatively small amount, and (more importantly) really do not get bitter easily. It's common to have a potful of leaves, and brew multiple pots (by adding and pouring off hot water) over the course of a day - hours of brewing time to extract all the flavor, and from a culture that prefers light, smooth, and undoctored teas. This means valuing a tea with tolerance for both long brewing times and lots of flavor, and good storage qualities as well.
Puer'eh is often said to brew sweet, which does not mean sugary but rather non-bitter, and so that would be a good descriptor to look for when looking into which ones to buy, along with (often) a described reddish brew color. You will also likely prefer the ripe, also called aged or fermented over the raw or fresh, which can be quite harsh in flavor. It also stores quite well since when sold as compressed bricks or rounds it is compact and sturdy (especially compared to dried leaves) - it just needs to be pried at before brewing for measuring and surface area.
Thank you for this answer it has given me much to think about.
The rumor that samovar tea has to be bitter because of its strength is actually a fairytale.
Traditionally the tea leaves are placed in a sealable glass container, covered right to the top with cold water and placed in the fridge for 4-120 hours. I usually use a 5l jug with glass clip lid or bamboo screwon top.
We use 7.5-10g of tea per 500ml of ready to drink tea. This means for a 1:10 concentrate in my 5l container I add 1kg of tea, add the water, screw it shut and shake very well.
It is important is that your container must have a bamboo top. Do not let steel or plastic come in contact with your tea. Store your tea leaves in an untreated sealable bamboo container or dark brown glass container.
My samovar is a ceramic one.
Fill your tea concentrate into the pot and place it next to the hot samovar on a cork trivet.
Never warm up the concentrate. You can also place the pot with some of the concentrate (without leaves) on top of the samovar, but don’t let it get warmer than 50°C to prevent evaporation from the concentrate.
I usually use a 1/10 dilution. However, the tea brewed this way is about 7-10 times stronger than hot water brewed tea.
Try your ideal dilution and ensure kids cannot pour tea by themselves!!!
I've had guests who told me about the strong tea they drink. I gave them 1/15 and they still complaned about heart racing and a sleepless night.
The tea brewed this way has no bitterness at all. Only flowery, earthy, or spicey aromas depending on what tea variety you choose. As it has no bitterness people do not realize how strong it is and tend to drink much more as the unique flavour is very addictive.
So, I just put the tea in cold water, shake and keep it 4 to 120 hours in the fridge? After that I put it on the top of the samovar or that's not necessary? What do you mean by 1000g?
I do not know much about samovars, but I remember that often Lapsang Souchong is used as this tea doesn’t get bitter even after long brewing times. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lapsang_souchong?wprov=sfti1
It is common for even rather strongly brewed Lapsang Souchong tea to lack the bitterness common with other tea varieties.
Another traditional candidate is Russian Caravan, see for example https://tea-culture.net/zavarka-russian-tea/
Often times you will want to use a blend that will not go bitter after longer periods of brewing. Darker and more oxidized teas are better suited than green or white teas. Herbal and fruit teas are also a good option because they don’t contain any catechin compounds that make tea bitter. [...] The traditional tea of choice in Russia is Russian Caravan tea. [...] This heavily oxidized tea it is perfectly suited to make the strong Zavarka concentrate. It will result in a brew that is sweet and smoky with minimal bitterness
Thanks, I'll try that out. I bought Ceylon tea, which was recommended to me in the Russian store.
@user1721135 - you might want to be careful with lapsang souchong (I've less experience with Russian Caravan) as the flavor is quite strong, and somewhat unusual, not so much like black tea. It has a smoky quality, and for me at least this reads strongly as savory to the point that sugar was disconcerting... though it does take salt beautifully, even if salt teas are less usual than sugared teas. You can work with the flavors, balance them out, for example I've seen a mint-and-lapsong combo that was excellent even plain, but one should be aware it is unusual before relying on it.
Well this doesn't fully apply to this situation. One factor for some teas not to get bitter is because the water temperature will slowly drop until it reaches a certain temperature so that the tea won't release flavor anymore. In this case, the temperature is continuously kept high.
@LisaatTeasenz.com - ah, I don't think that's the assumption they're making, there are too many ways to make tea that don't limit extraction by heat - from multiple infusions (Chinese tea ceremony) where steeping time adds up, to boiled-for-hours decoctions (milk tea or chai) to a samovar that keeps the decoction hot like this... to (successfully) claim a tea doesn't get bitter easily it kinda does have to hold up under extended brewing, or else people a) won't believe them and then b) won't buy it. Its safer for them to say "not bitter if brewed properly" if that's what they really mean
When you say the tea was undrinakable for most people, I wonder how you are drinking it. Are you following this advice?
Tea was drunk in clear glass cups, sucked through a sugar cube held in
the mouth.
Samovar
I meant, that it was very strong, but I should have used less I guess. The thing with the sugar cube is not universal btw.
Ideally.. through a chunk of rock sugar, hacked off a cone, which doesn't dissolve so quickly
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.488829 | 2018-12-22T21:31:44 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/95070",
"authors": [
"Elmy",
"Lisa at Teasenz.com",
"Megha",
"Robin Betts",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/47365",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/51293",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/59328",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/71396",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
97170 | How to achieve a good steak crust with a blowtorch?
I tried to torch sous vide steaks twice with a culinary blow torch, but it seems to take forever to get any kind of crust. So far I was not able to achive a really good crust. Should I simply do it longer? The following result took me several minutes per side:
Granted, I don't notice much of a gradient, so I suppose, that even if it takes a long time, it probably doesn't affect the interior temperature too much. Still I am not sure, how it is even possible to achieve a decent crust with this method. And I am also confused, why would this take longer, considering that the temperature of the torch is a lot hotter, than a cast iron.
Yes, I padded it a lot with paper towels. But I did add butter on top, let it melt at room temp, then seared with the torch. Maybe this was the problem?
Is there a reason a blow torch is necessary, as opposed to a hot pan or a grill?
@moscafj, a pan or grill will begin to cook the inside of the steak and cost you one of the best bits of sous vide- the consistent internal color and lack of gradient in doneness. A culinary torch will cook the outside quickly enough without affecting the inside due to the incredibly high temperature of the flame.
@Halaster I could not disagree more. As user of sous vide for many years, I can attest to the fact that a culinary torch is not the best tool for this job.
@moscafj can you provide your reasoning?
@Halaster Too long for comment section, and dealt with elsewhere on this site...but also, search the internet for the best techniques for sous vide steak. I doubt you will find a torch identified as best practice for finishing steak.
It does take a couple of minutes to get a good crust with a torch, but judging by that photo something went wrong as there’s little crust on that picture.
As aris mentioned, you need to ensure that there is no moisture on the steak.
You mentioned adding butter on top and letting it melt at room temperature. This could act as a barrier for the heat but no kitchen test I know of tackled this specifically. Next time try without as I’ve always gotten and seen good results without butter on it.
Lastly, keep the torch at a moderate distance and linger slightly on a spot until you see some sizzling. Make small circles, but don’t move the torch all over rapidly. You don’t need to distribute the heat evenly while trying to get a crust.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.489838 | 2019-03-29T21:17:13 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/97170",
"authors": [
"Halaster",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/73263",
"moscafj",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
96509 | No Butter Sous Vide: What did they mean by this?
I just watched an experiment on youtube, where they compare 2 steaks, side by side, the first one with added butter during sous vide (as many people do), the second one without butter.
It seems the second steak, without butter, was far better, and I have since read other sources suggesting to sous-vide without butter or oil for best results.
However, what should you do when searing? Should you also avoid butter there, or is butter OK, when searing? What about oil?
What about the advice, often mentioned, that if you put in herbs during sous-vide, you should add some oil in order to get the essential oils out of the herbs?
Source:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNtqr8x_u7I
One thing I keep in mind while watching Sous Vide Everything videos is that they are very subjective and keep a very consistent rotation of people tasting their food. They also tend to only test things once, which (IMO) makes it hard to see their videos and know that their conclusions can be taken as a consistent result.
As for butter when searing, go for it! Brown butter works well too as do other oils like canola oil, ghee, or clarified butter--really any oil with a decently high smoke point.
The (alleged) problem with extra fat during SV is that, flavor molecules will dissolve in fat and subsequently be discarded.
The claim is that, this causes the loss of flavor.
For searing it’s fine to use butter or other fat.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.490063 | 2019-02-22T17:06:01 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/96509",
"authors": [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/62623",
"moberemk"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
98717 | Can a sous-vide circulator fully replace a crockpot?
The idea is, to put a regular pot in a larger pot full of water and heat the larger pot with a sous-vide stick.
Would this accurately simulate a crockpot?
The only downside I can see, is that typical sous-vide sticks can not reach the temperature of the highest setting on a crockpot.
Are there any other important differences?
Beyond simulating a crock pot, what is your goal? What are you cooking or keeping warm? I ask because there are probably better ways to achieve your goal.
Mostly bone broth
Given your other questions on the topic, I would suggest overnight in the oven is your safest method, and will yield the best results.
What about other slow cooking recipes, requiring a crockpot. Could I do those just as well in the oven? Or is the oven incapable of reaching the lower temperatures.
Would this accurately simulate a crockpot?
No. Most crockpots operate on the principle of having a relatively low-powered heating element that very slowly raises the temperature of food over several hours. In many slow-cooking dishes, that additional time spent at lower temperatures is useful in breaking things down, allowing enzymes to work (before they are destroyed at higher temperatures), allowing flavors to marry, etc. Partly for this reason, most crockpots also have a heavy-duty ceramic insert that does not transmit heat quickly. Some dishes for crockpots even depend on this -- placing ingredients closer to the bottom which need more time at higher temp to cook properly, while having ingredients that need less high-temp cooking time on top.
A typical pot placed inside a vat of water with a circulator will absorb the heat from the water much more quickly. The duration of the "transient" (i.e., the time it takes the water to warm up, and then the food inside the pot to warm with it, until they reach a constant temperature) will vary a lot depending on temperature, comparative sizes of the pot and water, etc.
But in general, I'd say it's likely the sous vide circulator will get the water up to a high temperature much quicker than a crockpot typically would. And depending on the material of the pot, the pot could then transfer heat to the food much more quickly than a typical crockpot would.
Whether this difference is relevant to a particular application or not depends on the situation. In general, the common replacement for a slow cooker is usually a low oven, as that can transfer heat relatively slowly and gradually heat up a dish like a typical crockpot. Sous vide is designed to usually raise the temperature of the food to a target as quickly as possible (hence the water bath -- the water transfers heat much more efficiently and quickly than air in an oven or a coil or whatever element under a ceramic crockpot) and then maintain it there.
In sum: crockpot goal = long transient duration; sous vide goal = transient duration usually as short as possible.
Also, crock pots get all the way to boiling and sous vide tops out at 170f or so depending on your bags. A pot roast and potatoes sous vide will be underdone.
@Sobachatina - While what you say about bags may be true, most modern sous vide circulators have the ability to heat up to near boiling temperatures. (The Anova goes to 210F and the Joule to 208F, apparently. I've personally never used them like this, but those are the technical specs.) And OP here explicitly mentioned putting a pot inside of a vat of water -- no plastic bags are involved. This isn't actually "sous vide" anything -- it's just using the a heater/water circulator for cooking.
One more factor is that Sous Vide Circulators are limited to temperatures BELOW 212℉, which is the boiling point of water. They are designed for slow heating to a particular internal temperature of the product you are cooking, not speeding the process. This provides for fully pasteurization, while maintaining tenderness and juiciness...especially for meats.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.490208 | 2019-04-27T22:31:34 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/98717",
"authors": [
"Athanasius",
"Sobachatina",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/15018",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/2001",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"moscafj",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
98696 | Does marinating hinder brining?
I learned, that "marinating" for days before cooking, doesn't actually work, since nothing can actually penetrate the meat very deep.
However, with salt, it seems to be a different story.
Does that mean, that marinating works, but only the salt is actually penetrating the meat?
And does that also mean, that when dry brining, you should rather only use salt in order to maximize its absorption and not have other stuff stand in the way?
Are there other ingredients, which penetrate the meat in a matter of days, like salt?
First: the information that "marinades only penetrate 1/8 inch" appears to be entirely from the show America's Test Kitchen (ATK); I reviewed multiple articles on it on the internet, and all of them cited ATK or didn't cite any source. I mention this because ATK has been wrong before due to flawed test conditions, so maybe some judicious testing of your own is in order. Assuming that ATK is correct, though, here's answers to your questions:
With marination, only the salt will affect the meat more than 1/8 inch deep. However, the other flavors will affect that top 1/8 inch, so if you're eating that portion you still care. Also, some marinating techniques like lechon asado involve piercing the meat many times, which lets the marinade penetrate more of the meat by increasing the surface area.
For a dry brine, having ingredients other than salt would only interfere with the brining process if the other ingredients were on thickly enough to keep the salt from contacting the surface. Since dry brining rarely involves a 100% salt coverage (although there are a few that do), this seems unlikely to be a real problem.
Sugar will actually have a similar effect on meat as salt does; both denature proteins and increase moisture retention. Of course, sugar is rarely used to brine meat, but it is used for fish. Serious tenderizers, like bromelain from pineapple, may also penetrate the meat -- certainly we believed it did for South Texas fajita recipes -- but I haven't ever seen an actual scientific test of this.
To be fair though, the 1/8 inch penetaration is only achieved after (if I remember correctly) 8 days of marinating. 1-2 days marinating will probably penetrate a lot less. But I appreciate your comment about the "mechanical" marinating technique and the fact, that this all seems to stem from a single source. I looked at different articles and thought, that this is a widely believed fact, but didn't know they all based their articles on the same source!
According to the ATK source, the 1/8in penetration is achieved after 1-2 hours of marinating.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.490522 | 2019-04-26T19:24:20 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/98696",
"authors": [
"FuzzyChef",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7180",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92633 | Thumbnail sized worm found in different places around the kitchen. What is it?
I have been finding these small worms around the kitchen, sometimes around packaging of salt, for example, sometimes on the ceiling.
This is what they look like:
Are they dangerous?
Are they early state fruit flies or anything to do with fruit flies?
What food are they most likely coming from or how do they get in our kitchen?
How do I get rid of them?
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because we don’t identify bugs here. Possibly a question for Biology SE.
There are other similar questions on this site, which are not closed. This is more about the kitchen, then about the biology of the bug.
This is a larva of a pantry moth and as they infest food sometimes cooks have to deal with them. We do have more Q/As about insects in kitchens.
Related: https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/13304/how-to-get-rid-of-weevils
The photo together with the description of their behavior shows that you have an infestation of pantry moths. What you found are the larvae at their last stage before pupating, they tend to wander around a bit before doing so. Before, the larvae were munching on food somewhere in your home, leaving their feces and often webbing behind.
An infestation of pantry moths means you need to check all your food that may be a food source for them - and they enjoy a surprisingly diverse diet. Main food sources are grain-based products, legumes, dried fruit, nuts and other seeds, but the will also munch on pet food, chocolate, spices... The general rule is that everything in cartons or plastic bags needs to be either discarded or be treated (frozen for a few days or microwaved). This may sound excessive, but if only a few eggs remain, the cycle starts anew. Don’t forget potential moth hideouts outside the kitchen, the larvae wander rather long distances and the adults fly. Clean out the cupboards, vacuum them (especially all cracks and corners), wipe them out. If possible, store your susceptible staples in sealed jars, this will prevent wandering female moths from laying eggs and keep hitchhikers from stores confined in one jar, preventing a larger infestation in the future.
Could it also be rice?
@user1721135 It could definitely be rice. When we've had them (a couple times now) they started out in a bag of flour, but lasted because we didn't notice they had migrated into a bag of rice.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.490765 | 2018-10-03T18:57:02 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92633",
"authors": [
"Debbie M.",
"Erica",
"Stephie",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17272",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/28879",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35357",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
86818 | Steaming and seasoning veggies in a pressure pot?
I am an extreme novice when it comes to food prep. My daughter bought me a pressure pot. I have the Aozita brochure for steaming veggies. When do I season , before? during? or after steaming? What is meant by drizzle?
It depends... (taking carrots with rosemary as an example)
If using dried herbs, add them beforehand so they get steamed together with the veggies
if using fresh: crush and add afterwards
(or a combination of both)
I'd season after steaming the vegetables.
See this question
How to add flavouring ingredients to steamed or boiled veggies?
Drizzling a liquid (mostly) is slowly pouring liquid in small amount.
See this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5F9Oxi_bxmY
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.491034 | 2017-12-31T16:12:29 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/86818",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
86875 | Refreezing bottled juice
I have a bottle of grape juice. I want to freeze the juice to extend the life of the juice. After thawing, can the juice be refrozen without ruining the juice?
Is the juice freshly pressed/squeezed/processed, or from concentrate?
Why was my question how long does it need to keep deleted? To me that is a valid question.
Me think the juice will lose some of its taste.
Instead of freezing the whole bottle, try freezing smaller portions so you only thaw portions as you need them.
You could use "Ziplock" type freezer bags, or small plastic or glass containers to portion the juice in smaller quantity.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.491125 | 2018-01-03T17:31:05 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/86875",
"authors": [
"PoloHoleSet",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45636",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/49684",
"paparazzo"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
77663 | Irish Coffee harder to get right than Baileys Coffee?
On a cold winter's day I was in a Irish-themed pub/restaurant and ordered an Irish Coffee. Some time later (could have been half an hour or longer), the waitress comes with all the stuff other people at the table ordered but she was terribly sorry to tell me that me that the person possessing the abilities to create this particular mix drink was currently not here and she asked whether I wouldn't want a different hot drink instead. Now, from my recollection the only other hot (alcoholic) drink on the menu would have been Baileys Coffee and I thought that surely the same would apply here and I opted for something cold instead, she asked me then explicitly whether I wouldn't want another hot drink but I reiterated my new choice.
Now in hindsight I can't stop thinking about whether I was right in my assumption that if Irish Coffee was not possible Baileys Coffee wouldn't be either. That's assuming it's the same only with Baileys instead of good whiskey (which would explain why latter was also cheaper). The thoughts even made me read up a bit on creating either drink and indeed in Irish Coffee recipes in particular it was often mentioned that getting the cream to float can be a tad tricky but I didn't get any clear answer.
So therefore I'm asking here:
Is Irish Coffee significantly harder to get right compared to Baileys Coffee?
Adding a bounty doesn't change the point that Stephie made... without knowing how this specific pub prepares the drinks, there's no way to know how different they are. Four different bars can offer the same four drinks and they could all have different twists... be slightly dissimilar... Heck, in the 90s I went to NYC and asked for a Dr. Pepper and the waiter thought it was some sort of suicide drink... and it's a major brand of soda!
Some preparations for Irish coffee demand that the whiskey and sugar be caramelized together by heating them in a heat-proof glass over a burner and then topped with hot coffee and thick liquid cream. It takes some experience to get this heating step right. (Youtube video here)
Baileys coffee is simply coffee with added Baileys liquour (cream optional), like many other [coffee and alcohol] combinations.
Of course there are lots of other sources where "Irish coffee" is simply whiskey + sugar + coffee + (even whipped) cream, probably the "original" preparation served to warm up travellers, so without knowing what standards your pub/restaurant follows, it's nearly impossible to say whether you could have ordered Baileys coffee.
Being an Irish-themed pub in a better area I would hope that they would be serving the real stuff.
The waitress coming to your table telling you The Master is not in sounds very hopeful to me. As far as I can tell (I don't order the stuff, I just taste from people that order (and that I know ;))), the order usually is fulfilled within 5 minutes. If they're lucky, the whipped cream is actually freshly made. If they're really lucky, it contains a decent amount of whiskey. And if they're really, REALLY lucky, it contains decent whiskey.
A "Bailey's Coffee" was likely simply a cup of coffee with Bailey's added, and maybea dollop of cream on top. Anyone with legal ability to make and serve a drink would be able to get you that.
An Irish coffee in it's truest form would be perhaps more work but is not really a different drink. Instead of using a pre-mixed whiskey liquor, you basically make it yourself by adding sugar and Irish whiskey to the coffee and adding a dollop of cream on top to drink the coffee through. Again with Irish coffee, anyone with legal ability to make and serve a drink would be able to get you that.
Perhaps they didn't have anyone working that morning who would be able to mix alcoholic beverages legally (often you need a license to do so). If this were the case, Bailey's coffee would also be off limits. However, Bailey's coffee is a bit less work so perhaps they did have someone who could make it for you that day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_coffee
http://www.thekitchn.com/how-to-make-irish-coffee-167678
http://thepioneerwoman.com/cooking/irish-coffee/
It was in the afternoon and from what I can see there are no time restrictions on mixing alcoholic drinks in that country. It's also not it's own regulated trade, it simply falls under the category catering.
wow, what a question. Firstly, perhaps step away from the Bailey's idea, there are many type of coffee out there with 'add-ons', think of Cointreau for example. However, many of these other liqueurs are not cream based. Does that mean that the cream in Bailey's makes a difference... I do not think so. As stated above and copied from the usual website references on this site - there are a plethora of recipes out there. So, to your question: 'Is Irish Coffee significantly harder to get right compared to Baileys Coffee?'. No, whether you infuse your coffee with per-caremalized sugar, white, brown or any other type of sugar, use the back of spoon method, squirty cream or properly whipped cream you should be able to get the result that you are looking for. It really isn't rocket science, however, and here is the caveat, when trying all the methods and recipes mentioned - I should be present - for health and safety reasons of course!
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.491216 | 2017-01-21T18:30:27 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/77663",
"authors": [
"Catija",
"Willem van Rumpt",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/26450",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/33128",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/53909",
"phk"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
77675 | Where did I go wrong with this pie?
I baked this pie at 400F (200C) for 25 minutes on the bottom rack, then reduced temperature to 375F (190C) and moved pie to middle rack for 35 more minutes.
The crust doesn't look like CRUST, so to speak. It looks wet or doughy. Like it'll be chewy.
Any thoughts?
This is the recipe I followed: 2 1/2 cups All-purpose flour, 1 tsp kosher salt, 1 TBSP granulated sugar, 2 sticks cold unsalted butter, and cold water mixed with a little cider vinegar and ice in it. Mixed dry ingredients together then added the butter pieces. I used a pastry blender to cut the biter in. I then adds 1-2 TBSP at a time of the cold water mixture until the dough came together. Split the dough in half, shaped into discs, wrapped in plastic and put in the fridge overnight.
Looks good to me. Have you actually tried it? What was the method/recipe you used for making your crust? We can't really tell you what you did wrong if we don't know how you made the crust.
Yes, we tried it and it was like leather on top and soggy yet still leathery on the bottom. 2 1/2 cups All-purpose flour, 1 tsp kosher salt, 1 TBSP granulated sugar, 2 sticks cold unsalted butter, and cold water mixed with a little cider vinegar and ice in it. Mixed dry ingredients together then added the butter pieces. I used a pastry blender to cut the biter in. I then adds 1-2 TBSP at a time of the cold water mixture until the dough came together. Split the dough in half, shaped into discs, wrapped in plastic and put in the fridge overnight.
The next day, I took it out of the fridge for 10 minutes and then rolled it out using a French rolling pin, rotating 1/8 turn with each roll.
Looks like maybe the problem isn't the pastry but much too much liquid in the filling.
I sweat the apples for 1/2 hour. Not enough?
Leathery or tough dough generally indicates that it was worked too much while blending the ingredients and rolling it out.
When rolling, should i attempt to minimize the amount of rolling I do by pressing harder as I roll?
I think what @JohnFeltz meant was more along the lines of kneading and folding-- like too much squishing and folding the dough trying to bring it together, and then when rolling it out folding it back onto itself because the shape is wrong or there was a tear... Generally speaking, if I no longer see individual pieces of un-incorporated butter in my dough, I get suspicious that I've overworked it.
Overworked pastry?
Simple: it's undercooked.
So what was the specific variable that caused this outcome? Who knows. Maybe 400 on your oven isn't the same as 400 on the oven of the person who wrote the recipe, or your pie started out with colder ingredients, or you opened the oven door too many times, or any number of other factors which could affect how long something takes to cook in an oven.
More important than where you went wrong, is how you can avoid doing this again in the future. As I sit here typing, I can hear my pastry instructor in school yelling "Put that back in the oven! Golden brown means brown, not gold!"
You should always cook a pie to the correct color/doneness, not to a specified time. In most cases in cooking, time is the least reliable indicator for doneness. To someone with experience, even smell by itself is more accurate than time.
Good luck with your future pie baking!
I would have left the temp at 400 degrees on the middle rack for the duration of the bake time and tent the edge with foil to prevent over browning half way through.
I've always hated making homemade pie crusts..for the same reasons as you state and show. However, the one, ok, two things that sticks in my mind from excellent pie-maker's advice to my crust whining is:
1. Don't handle or over-knead it.
2. Use as little water as you can get away with but make sure what little you use is COLD.
I have no scientific or common sense reasons why these things are so important, but I have had these lady's pies, and the crust is delectable.
"Don't handle or over-knead it. 2. Use as little water as you can get away with but make sure what little you use is COLD."
Gluten is what makes bread elastic, and pie dough tough. It's formed when two proteins in flour — glutenin and gliadin— are combined with water and kneaded. Using less water and limiting handling/kneading makes for tender crust. Cold butter makes for flaky crust, because the pieces of butter will stay intact, and create pockets of steam as it bakes— butter is about 16% water.
your butter probably has a higher water content. try shortening, there's zero water in shortening. you've steamed your crust with the high amount of moisture.
Swapping butter for shortening will greatly affect the flavor. Making substantial substitution recommendations are fine but you should make sure to mention both the positive and negative results of the substitution. Also, bakers have been making pie crust with butter successfully for eons... I don't know that this is the only option.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.491792 | 2017-01-22T01:33:17 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/77675",
"authors": [
"Catija",
"ChefAndy",
"John Feltz",
"Mark",
"Niall",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/21409",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/33128",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45428",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/51358",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/52874",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/53916",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/60392",
"roetnig",
"senschen"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
77777 | Left crockpot unplugged for about an hour
I'm making chicken chili. Or trying to... This morning I turned on my crockpot to high for about 40 minutes. I then drove to work and replugged it, about an hour after unplugging it. After cooking it for 5 more hours, should it be safe?
Please see our food safety info under http://cooking.stackexchange.com/tags/food-safety/info, it describes when food left unheated is safe to eat and when it is not, and ends with links to our most important questions and answers on the topic.
It likely depends on if the food came up to 140°F (60°F) while you were still at home, and how much it cooled off during the trip.
Basically, your time in the 'danger zone' is cumulative, so it's the sum of:
Time to heat up to above 140°F (60°C)
Time from when it cooled down to below 140°F 'til it go back up to 140°F
So, if it never got up to 140°F, then it likely spent 2 hours in the 'danger zone'. (40min + 1 hour + time to get up to 140°F), which some people consider to be right at the edge of acceptable.
... but if it got up to 140°F in the first 20 minutes, and it was well-insulated so didn't drop below 140°F until 30 min into the trip, and it came back up to temp 10 min after plugging it back in, you'd have had (20min + (1hr - 30min) + (10min) = 1hr ... which is well within recommended times.
These also assume that you didn't take a long time to get the chicken home from the store and/or leave it on the counter for 30 min while you were putting away other groceries.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.492197 | 2017-01-25T14:17:30 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/77777",
"authors": [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"rumtscho"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
77900 | Why does coconut milk separate when it is placed in the fridge?
I have noticed that for many coconut whipped cream recipes, you are supposed to put the can in the fridge overnight to separate the fat and the liquid. Can anyone explain the food science behind why this separation happens?
Because it's not homogenized? Fat and water don't generally stay mixed.
Related: http://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/25068/how-to-make-canned-coconut-milk-separate?rq=1 Also, refrigeration is not what makes it separate. It should already be separated in the can. Refrigerating it will make the fat solidify somewhat, making it easier for you to separate it from the coconut water. Additionally, cold cream should whip better than room temperature cream.
Coconut milk is made of different components, like water, fat, minerals and protein. All those components have a different mass and when let sit in the fridge for some time, the components with higher mass (protein) tend to sink to the bottom as they are pulled by gravity and the components with lower mass float to the top (water, fat).
The same happens with regular cow milk, which is the reason cow milk is being homogenized to prevent the fat from floating to the top. The reason is that apparently people don't like it when fat floats on top of their milk.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homogenization_(chemistry) for reference:
One of the oldest applications of homogenization is in milk
processing. It is normally preceded by "standardization" (the mixing
of several different milking herds and/or dairies to produce a more
consistent raw milk prior to processing and to prevent, reduce and
delay natural separation of cream from the rest of the emulsion). The
fat in milk normally separates from the water and collects at the top.
Homogenization breaks the fat into smaller sizes so it no longer
separates, allowing the sale of non-separating milk at any fat
specification.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.492338 | 2017-01-30T02:49:52 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/77900",
"authors": [
"Catija",
"Cindy",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/26180",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/33128"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
77954 | Can I freeze bread dough after the first rising?
The bread dough that I am making calls for it to rise for 1 hour, knead for 5 minutes, then rise for another hour, shape into loaves, rise for 45 minutes, then bake. So can I freeze the dough after the first rise?
yes you can; most industrial bakery do that.
related: http://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/63071/67 ; http://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/14184/67 ; http://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/69450/67 ; http://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/52017/67 ; http://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/73194/67
I find it easiest in these situations to freeze it as rolls -- a whole loaf takes too long to defrost.
Yes, you absolutely can - this is the common way to freeze dough, actually. It's better to freeze after the first rise. Often the second rise will be done in the refrigerator along with thawing; and most of the recipes I've seen skip a third rise (so you freeze the dough shaped, and you're rising in shaped form alongside thawing plus a warming stage while you preheat the oven).
See for example this guide to freezing different doughs; or King Arthur Flour's article on the subject.
I here make the dough. Let it rise. Kneed it down. Put it in a bread pan 1/2 full. Let it rise to full. Cover & freeze. Remove when needed. Remove cover. Let thaw. It will start to rise again. Bake it rises a little more. Do the same with pizza crust.
Hello and welcome. I don't get how this answers the question? If your answer is yes, then please make it more visible. Also, what's the added value? What's new, not yet posted in already existing answer by @JoeM?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.492770 | 2017-01-31T17:36:46 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/77954",
"authors": [
"Joe",
"Max",
"Mołot",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20118",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/36704",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
99426 | Black paint chipping of electric grill: is it still safe?
My electric grill, without the heating element looks like this:
There is black paint chipping away and also, what appears to be rust.
I was planing to convert it and use it as a charcoal grill, but am wondering if the rust and especially the paint or whatever that is could be unsafe?
The rust is going to be harmless, except to the extent that the grill will eventually corrode all the way through and the coals fall on the surface underneath.
It's not possible for anyone on SA to tell if the paint will be harmful; you would have to get it tested. Once you fill that tray full of hot coals, some of the remaining paint will almost certainly burn away, and whether or not that results in harmful smoke really depends on what it's made from, and how much actually burns.
FWIW, that looks too shallow to make a good charcoal grill, regardless, and it's likely that the steel is thinner than you'd want as well -- likely to warp or even crack. You'd probably be better off finding a secondhand charcoal grill.
Agree that it is probably not the best base for a grill and may not stand up to those heats. If the OP really wishes to try for however long it will hold up, I would suggest checking out local BBQ places or online. There are black paints made specifically for grills and a good scraping with a wire brush and then sealing with one of those may do the trick. It will not hold up more than one season or so, but the pan is not likely to get more than that either.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.492909 | 2019-06-07T20:16:15 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/99426",
"authors": [
"dlb",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/48330"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
99997 | Does it make sense to vacuume brined meat? Why not sous vide in water directly?
If you wet brine a piece of meat and don't apply anything else to it, why exactly do you need a bag?
Why not cook the meat directly in the brine? While it cooks, it can brine some more. Handy, if you are short a couple hours on the brine.
I always thought, that the point of the bag is to keep the meat dry. But when you take it out its swimming in a lot of liquid.
So why not simply cook it in water, still controlling the temperature precisely?
Theoretically, there is no problem with your logic. In fact, during the early days of restaurant sous vide adoption, when chefs were using the same immersion circulators that scientists were using, it was not uncommon to poach fish directly in oil using an immersion circulator. Those original tools could handle that job. However, most home sous vide devices of today are designed only to circulate water. The biggest issue I see is the mess (at best) or the destruction of your circulator. Also, it is possible to over-brine a product. So, you may not want to cook in a brine for that reason as well.
Mostly I use either dry brine or equilibrium brining, because I am not comfortable with the other methods. But yes, destroying your circulator with pig water was a concern, which is why I didn't do it at the end. I thought there might be another reason.
@user1721135 If you sous-vide a vacuum bag in clear water, the water stays clean, no matter what is in the bag. You can do a different brine bag next without any cleaning of the equipment.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.493066 | 2019-07-05T16:42:24 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/99997",
"authors": [
"Johannes_B",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/27482",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
99463 | Do other ingredients in brines penetrate the meat?
I always thought, that only salt is able to penetrate deep into the meat.
However, there are many brine recipes, calling for additional falvors to be added.
How can they penetrate the meat, if only salt can penetrate the meat?
I also recently found the following question: How deeply will the flavors in a brine penetrate chicken?
The answer argues, that some flavours can indeed penetrate the meat, however food color can not.
So which one is it, is marinade a surface treatment only, or do other ingredients apart from salt also penetrate the meat, and if yes which ones?
Good Eats describes what happens in a brine very well
Essentially, the thing that penetrates the meat is water. Because water is a solvent it can carry things with it into the meat. Salt and sugar are the two most common ingredients in a brine. Salt is required and sugar dissolves really easily in water and adds complexity to the flavor profile. But you can add anything that will be carried by the water into the meat. If your brine isn't penetrating your meat past the surface you aren't doing it right.
So anything that is water soluble? I thought it is about particle size?
@user1721135 I don't believe particle size has anything to do with it. It is about osmosis.
Right because it is osmosis, water does not carry anything. What is important is the concentration of x at the two sides of a membrane plus the fact that x should be able to pass through the membrane diving the two sides. Brine extracts water from the inner of the cells, typical example might be that of cucumbers releasing a lot of vegetation water. Though meat are not living cells, and so I am not sure if marinating is truly a bulk process. From a chemical physical pov, the pressure exerted by osmosis could even disrupt the membrane. This answer contains some imprecisions. Interesting issue.
Different is for what can reach the inner through interstices. But won't be osmosis, just diffusion of ions and eventually molecules. The article cited in A by @Mike TC, though it contains funny statements too, goes in my opinion to the point.
I have tried many different marinates, and found that they do not penetrate the meat, it's only surface treatment. The only thing that really penetrates the meat is salt. So after that, I only dry brine meat in salt and pepper (typically 1 teaspoon per 500g of meat.), let sit overnight to let the brine do it's work.
When I cook the meat, if it's a roast, I apply marinade to the meat towards the end of the cooking, to add to it's flavour. I find that, meats taste much better, flavour and texture wise, if it is dry brined a day ahead.
Here is a link to an article that explains this in great detail.
Why the pepper? Wouldn't it make more sense to put it in the end with the rest of the seasonings?
Salt N Pepper, it's a pair, it's hard to leave the salt alone without pepper. hahaha. It's just a preference, no explanation for it. believe me, not marinating the meat with other herbs and spices is already a big step for me. Try just the salt once. and then try salt and pepper the next time, let us know what you think works best for you. I typically put 1 part salt, and 1 part pepper for my dry brines.
I would like to add that marinating might also have historical reason. Imagine to make chicken without fridge. Either you cook all, or you protect the left one by letting it in marinade. The one night marinating prescription arises from nothing. It is common in many procedures, not only about food.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.493222 | 2019-06-09T08:31:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/99463",
"authors": [
"Alchimista",
"Mike TC",
"Summer",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/59209",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/65929",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/75887",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
98684 | Toning down lamb with mustard powder: universal tool?
Recently I tried the technique of rubbing lamb with mustard powder over night, in order to tone down the "gaminess". The end result was great and tasted nothing like mustard.
Is it a good idea, to use mustard for this reason, as a sort of universal tool, like salt?
Are there parts of the lamb, where this would be unnecessary or even counterproductive? Are there ingredients or recipes, where it would be a bad idea to use the mustard rub?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.493511 | 2019-04-25T21:44:57 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/98684",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
98949 | Most optimal pizza type or style for home oven?
I have an electric oven with a "broiler" function. Its not bad, but temperature-wise it doesn't get close to the 450°C required for "real" neapolitan style pizza. I think it is below 250°C on the highest setting.
So I was wondering, since I can never achieve real pizza with what I have on hand, are there styles of pizza, I could actually nail with my oven?
I was thinking, that Sicily style and other deep dish pizzas should be a good fit for an oven with low maximum temperature?
What about Roman style pizza?
Put some tag because all your pizza styles are obscure. At least for me as Italian, ignore this if I am wrong. I know an answer but it might be trivial. Forget getting a wood oven type of results, or something like the pizza of most pizzerias. Italians in their kitchen do something similar to what seems generally called American pizza, more or less ticker and more or less crispy depending on taste, and well, oven performance.
Would you say what you do at home is comparable to Sicilian "pizza"? Do you fry the dough slightly? I would like to read your answer on this. Just describe what you do at home!
See @moscafi answer. I personally do a dough for pizza, recipes vary slightly in ratios and sometimes are more specific when it comes to flour. The results depends on timing and oven as well the amount of dough laid on the pan. Cooking: gas oven, a small electric one usually used for breakfast, and few days ago I even tried iron pan on stove. That day it was the most satisfactory though I had to finish the top in the small electric oven by grill.
Some pizza dough formulas to try. https://1drv.ms/b/s!AnPAN_4gx2Z-gzl4nYayN_NgyCUC
"Optimal" is a matter of taste and opinion with regard to this question. I am not sure we can answer that. I would start with a calibrated oven thermometer and crank your oven, so you know what temperature you can achieve. In my home oven, I can achieve a decent Neapolitan style pizza using a pizza steel and oven temps slightly below 260C (500F). This is well-below the ideal temperature, but with a long pre-heat, and longer than typical cooking time, it works out well. Alternately, there are thick crust sheet pan pizzas, deep dish pizzas (Chicago style), and pizzas that can be made in a cast iron pan...all of which should be easy to do in any home oven.
Am I correct to assume that professionally made Chicago style pizza is made with lower temperatures, comparable to home ovens?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.493589 | 2019-05-12T12:35:46 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/98949",
"authors": [
"Alchimista",
"Optionparty",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/12608",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/59209",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
99062 | How can a dutch oven reach 400°C on an electrical stove?
I have a pretty average stove and oven. The oven can't even make 300°C.
Yet today I measured the temperature of my dutch oven, heated on the stove and it read almost 400°C. How is this possible? Can the durch oven somehow accumulate energy and reach higher energy, than the heat source? If I remember school physics, this shouldn't be the case.
I checked my IR thermometer on the wall and it seemed to read the correct temperature, so I assume, that its working.
What is most likely the issue here?
Where exactly did you measure the temperature? Was it with the thermocouple in direct contact with the Dutch oven? If so, your observation is not so surprising: the temperature of the heating element in your oven is far more than the air temperature inside your oven. The same will happen (but less extremely) comparing the temperature of the surface of the Dutch oven to the air inside it. You are of course right that heat flows from hot regions to cold regions!
I used an IR thermometer and you can see where I measured on the image (the red dot). The dutch oven at this point was on the stove, not in the oven.
The heating elements inside of your oven and the cooktops (hobs) on the top of your stove are two different heat sources
@RossRidge yes, I know, but I would think, that my stove top can not achieve above 300°C either. Its pretty bad performance wise.
Heating elements on stove tops are typically not controlled by thermostats, while the heating elements inside ovens are. The reason why your oven can't go above 300C is because the thermostat won't let it.
So if I need +300 temperatures I just use my stove with a Dutch oven?
The 300 Celsius you refer to are the air temperature inside the oven. The energy in your oven is quite sufficient to heat a piece of metal to much over 300 (in fact, judging from the color I have seen on my heating elements, they are probably in the 600-700 C range). But the air around them has quite bad thermal qualities, and doesn't heat up well. It also constantly loses heat to the oven walls and to the outside air. So, you cannot really get above 300, which is actually quite high for a domestic oven, most stop at 250.
Your Dutch oven has excellent thermal capacity and is in direct contact with a heat source. Even though it is not a great heat conductor (in comparison with other metals - it is still much better than air) it is not a problem to heat it to 400 Celsius with a 2 kW heating element. You can actually get higher - watch out for reaching the self-ignition point of cooking oils. This doesn't mean that the air above the pan, or the food in the pan, gets to these temperatures (neither does the food in your oven get to 300 inside).
If it were a better thermal conductor it might not get so hot, since heat would be more able to flow up the sides of the pot and be transferred to the surrounding air.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.493796 | 2019-05-19T14:44:49 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/99062",
"authors": [
"Mark Wildon",
"Ross Ridge",
"The Photon",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/26540",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/50909",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/69341",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
105676 | Milk pasteurization in the bottle via water bath: fridge live?
I am frequently buying raw milk in bottle, which needs to be boiled for pasteurization. So far I always poured it in a pot, boiled it, and transferred it to a clean bottle after.
Since my old supplier dried up I need to travel a bit to get it, so I am thinking about ways to preserve it a bit longer, preferably 2-4 weeks in the fridge.
Would it be a good idea to put the glass bottles as they are in a water bath and wait until the milk starts bubbling? This way I won't need to do all the transfers and there won't be any air contact, it would be basically water bath canned. Would it hold for 2-4 weeks this way in my 4C° fridge? Any downsides?
I was also considering pressure canning, but I think this would be over kill for what I am trying to achieve here, which is slightly longer fridge life.
You're in luck!
High-temperature short-time (HTST) pasteurisation for milk can be done at 71.5 °C (160.7 °F) for 15 seconds and extends milk's shelf life to about 2 weeks. So if you can get a thermometer you don't need to wait for milk to bubble.
It's also possible to use a sous vide method; according to this guide 65°C for 30 minutes. Again, it's very important all the milk reaches this temperature and stays constant during the process. In this case the lower temperature is possible because the exposure time is longer. After 30 minutes, cool it as quickly as possible to 4°C.
To extend the shelf life to ~3 months you need ultra-high-temperature (UHT) pasteurisation (135 °C (275 °F) for 1–2 seconds) but that might be more difficult to control; you need to make sure that all the milk reached the temperature and stay there for that amount of time. I'm not sure this process is possible with home equipment.
Make sure to sterilise your containers prior to adding the milk, to avoid other contaminants.
What if I pasteurize in the bottle and don't open it? This will probably increase the shelf life in the fridge? Also what about sous vide pasteurizetion at 64C° for 30min? Is this just as good as the other versions?
You shouldn't play around with the temperature if you plan to keep the milk for that long; some pathogens only die at 65ºC, which is the temperature recommended by this guide https://www.sous-vide.cooking/how-to-pasteurise-milk/
Maybe Ill sous vide half of it, which I will use during week 1 and HTST the other half, which will be used during the second week. And I will be able to compare, if there is a difference at all. Wouldn't the lack of oxygen (closed bottle) and the low temp. significantly increase the shelf life? Can't find information on that.
@user1721135 well 2 weeks is already significant... Fridge temperature is also not very constant, and milk quality will degrade by being exposed to light, so it's not just about contaminants and pathogens. Have you considered freezing some of the milk?
I have, although I don't have much space in the freezer. Maybe I should cut my target shelf life to 2 weeks max and freeze half. I have in the past, always kept boiled milk for 2 weeks without any special measures, like boiling in the unopened bottle and I have never had a problem, but right now, I want to be sure, since my wife is pregnant and we can't afford any experiments. Maybe I should just target 1 week and freeze the rest to be on the safe side.
No, you can't. There is no approved safe process for home canning any kind of dairy.
Sure, there are industrial ways to preserve milk and other dairy-containing food for that long, but they have different security regulations, and are able to follow different processes which you cannot ensure in a home kitchen.
As always with food safety, no matter what you do at home, you cannot prove that it is safe.
I am not actually planning on canning it and keeping it at room temperature, rather I want to increase its fridge life a bit. Cooking it in the closed bottle should be helpful for this? Like it is helpful for everything? I don't want to keep it for months, just for weeks.
The problem is that it is impossible to predict how long it will keep. Food safety is a promise made to you by an official agency who has extensively tested a given process and found out that, when followed with reasonable precision, it always gives a result where the bacterial load is low enough. Anything for which this promise doesn't exist, is by definition unsafe. For your plan, sure, it is clear that boiling will extend the fridge life compared to nonboiling - but you can't know if it will extend it by an hour, a week or a month.
Yeah, I don't want any experiments right now. Maybe I should just stick to 1 week shelf life to be on the safe side.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.494082 | 2020-03-04T21:50:28 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/105676",
"authors": [
"Luciano",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/53013",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"rumtscho",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
103484 | How much pressure fluctuation is too much in pressure canning?
I am pressure canning for the first time and I have a horrible liquid loss / syphoning situation going on. Basically 50% of my slightly larger jars (250ml) end up with less than 50% liquid and I need to put them in the fridge. The situation is somewhat better with smaller jars.
I try to follow some basic best practices in order to avoid these problems:
I try to remove bubbles as best as I can
I don't raw pack, however by the time the paprika are skinned and ready for packing, they are already cold.
I top up with hot water to mitigate the coldness.
After finishing the canning, I stop the heat and don't open the vent, I let it cool down, before I open the canner.
My pressure canner unfortunately is designed for medical applications and it has an automatic vent, which releases when 125C is reached. However in practice the pressure fluctuates between 125C and 130C.
Is this level of pressure fluctuation bad?
Should I try to optimize for more stable pressure, or should I rather work on other factors like preheating before packing, experimenting with produce to liquid ratio when packing, getting better jars and lids or perhaps try to heat up and cool down even more gradually?
I tried manually operating the on / off button and keeping the temp between 122C and 124C (with some exceptions, every now and then I would need to leave for a minute and the pressure would rise to 130C and than fall down back to 125C with the help of the automatic release), but the result was the same: lots of liquid loss.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.494528 | 2019-11-14T23:15:52 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/103484",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
104844 | Why does my cake lack air bubbles and looks like a molten mass?
I have tried to do cakes many times and I frequently have the problem of my cake not having the bubbly structure I expect, but rather looking like a smooth mass on the inside.
So far I have attributed this to user error, but after my mom also had the same problem I am starting to think if it may be the oven?
What I have noticed is, that I have to frequently bake longer than the recipe suggests until the fork comes out dry. However, when using a thermometer the temperature seems to be generally OK in the oven, although it does seem to fluctuate a bit (+-5°C).
This is what my last iteration looks like:
What I expect is something like this, a structure with many bubbles:
That first photo is too close to really tell what is going on.
I tried different angles and distances, but it always comes out blurry. I will try tomorrow with better lighting. It sort of looks like this: https://www.kingarthurflour.com/sites/default/files/blog-images/2014/06/IMG_7225.jpg smooth instead of fluffy.
It sounds like your cake isn't rising. The ±5°C variability is normal in a gas oven. If you're at a high altitude (1km above sea level), you may need to adjust the recipe. I would also question whether your leavener is possibly old. Baking powder & baking soda lose potency over time.
Batter too wet? Or too long before pouring?
What's your recipe?
Is there some food restriction you have and code your record accordingly? Are you making gluten free, or egg free, etc., or is this happening with standard egg + butter + sugar + flour + baking powder cakes?
@rumtscho Its sugar free and I am using erythritol as a replacement. This particular cake is milk free, but I have the same problem when using milk. I did use baking powder, always do. I used corn oil in this recipe, mostly I use some kind of oil.
@Tinuviel my standard recipe:
3 eggs, 230g fake sugar, 250ml milk, 200ml oil, 350g, flour, 3 tbsp coco, 1 package baking powder. But I have been trying different recipes lately, but all basically very similar to this one.
@AMtwo so maybe I need to add more baking powder? Most of the time it does rise though. Its not flat or anything like that. I also don't use a mixer, in order to not overmix.
@user1821135 -- I didn't say you should add more. It's also possible you're adding too much and it's collapsing. How much are you using? Post the recipe. Are you at high altitude? Adjust the recipe & baking. We'd need to see the recipe. Old (12+ months) baking powder? Toss it & buy new.
@AMtwo I add a pack of baking powder, I am not at high altitude, about 200m. See my previous comment for the recipe. The cake however is not flat, it gets pretty big. Doesn't look collapsed on the outside at least.
I'd suggest editing your question to add the full recipe, including preparation & baking method, and source. Comments are easily missed.
What do you mean by a "pack" of baking powder? Baking powder doesn't usually come in single-use packs. What size are they, and what brand?
Mine is in packs one is 15g.
This is a very vexing case, I douobt that anybody can tell from looking at your cake. So you will have to troubleshoot it yourself by first trying to bake a successful cake by following a traditional recipe and using best practices, and then, if that cake works well, start changing it back towards your preferred recipe one-by-one and seeing what makes the difference. For the test cake, you should bake a very standard recipe that has the best chances of rising well - I'd say that's a pound cake.
So, use following factors:
200 g eggs (4 whole eggs), 200 g white all purpose flour, 200 g sugar, 200 g cow-milk butter, 10 g baking powder (not baking soda!). Do not make any replacements here, and don't add other ingredients (flavors, etc.)
make sure the ingredients are all room temperature, and have gotten there slowly. Just leave them overnight, no "Oh I forgot the butter in the fridge, I'll give it 15 seconds in the microwave".
use the creaming method. Cream the butter and the sugar together until you see an obvious change in color and volume (can take 10+ minutes), then add the eggs and beat well, only then add the flour and baking powder.
Use freshly bought baking powder
sift the flour
bake in a 175 C oven for as long as it takes to pass the skewer test.
If that works, as I said above, you will have to slowly change the ingredients back to your preferred recipe and see when the change happens.
If it isn't work even for that, there is some hidden factor that is very difficult to guess at. You will probably have to ask a good baker to bake together with you and either show you how they bake, or have them watch how you bake, and see if that person can spot the problem. You can also have them bake in your kitchen and with your oven, to see if they get the same trouble - but if you measured your oven's temperature, there isn't much that can be going wrong there.
Thanks, I will try this process. No milk at all correct? Also is top and bottom heat best or heat + fan? Another symptom I noticed is shiny material, probably oil, on the inside. What might that indicate? Not baked enough?
I like the freshly bought baking powder idea. But I wonder how exactly it goes bad.
You certainly need both top and bottom. If you can have top, bottom and fan all at once, do it. If you have to choose between one-direction heat plus fan, or two-direction heat, take the two-direction heat. And baking powder can react with itself over time, or with the moisture in the air. Shouldn't happen over a few weeks, or even months, but if you are seeing bad performance or using old baking powder, or have stored it somewhere more humid than usual, it can go off quicker. So best to exclude it. There is no milk in pound cake.
Thank you for this basic recipe, I followed it pretty much exactly, except that I forgot to bring the eggs to room temperature, but overall I didn't have this problem. I will use this as working base to expand.
Are you at a high altitude?
https://www.exploratorium.edu/cooking/icooks/article-3-03.html
Low air pressure has two main effects on baked goods: They will rise
more easily, and lose moisture faster; liquids evaporate more quickly
since water boils at lower temperatures at high altitude. As
leavening occurs faster, gas bubbles tend to coalesce into large,
irregular pockets in a batter or dough. The result? A coarse-textured
cake. Alternatively, the pressure inside a rising batter can become so
great, that cell walls stretch beyond their maximum and burst.
Collapsing cell walls means the cake falls too.
It can be a challenge to get a cake to rise at altitude.
Interesting. I am not that high though, its about 100-200m where I am.
I used to work at 1600m and it look me 50 mins to bake a normal lemon drizzle
Have you tried measuring the temperature in the oven? It looks to me as though your oven is too cool. Get an oven thermometer and give it a try. I had a fan oven that didn't fan properly, and my baking didn't rise properly. If I made the same recipe without fan (with 10% more heat) it worked fine.
Have you tried the same recipe in another oven?
Yeah I did measure the temp, it fluctuates up and down with 5°C. The fan is working, but I have no idea if anything else might be broken, like the bottom heat.
One of the reason could be that you do not whip egg whites or wait too long. You can try to add a spoon of lemon to the egg whites to avoid that.
Another reason is that you need to use yeast.
The cases depend a lot on the type of cake and the recipe followed (yeast is not always necessary).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.494692 | 2020-01-19T22:41:00 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/104844",
"authors": [
"AMtwo",
"Gamora",
"Sneftel",
"Tinuviel",
"Wayfaring Stranger",
"Willk",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45339",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/53826",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/5455",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/58067",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/75772",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/79240",
"moscafj",
"rumtscho",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
103359 | How to pressure can grilled paprika
I would like to pressure can grilled paprika, which is a traditional Bulgarian preserve and looks like this:
Normally this is done by grilling the paprika on very high heat for a short amount of time, after which the skin is removed and the paprika are put in a jar and topped with the juice and maybe water. The closed jar is then water bath cooked for 30-45min. The result is great and not mushy.
Until now, I have always canned them without a pressure canner, but now I want to switch to a pressure canner in order to alleviate the danger of botulism, even though the produce is skinned, to be on the safe side.
Since there are no official recommendations for canning already cooked / grilled paprika, which recipe should I choose? Will the end result be mushy, because of the higher temp? Or will it be similar to what I have done in the past with a water bath? How long should I put the jars in the pressure canner? I have different sizes of jars, but most are about 125-250ml in volume.
The book Putting Food By recommends canning pints or half pints (about the range you have) of hot-pack pimentos at 10lbs pressure (240F/116C) for 20 minutes (sorry for the American measurements, it's an American book). They also recommend putting a small amount of acid in the canning liquid, like 1tsp white vinegar per pint.
By "hot-pack" they mean grilled, skinned, and put in the jar while still warm, with warm liquid.
Added in response to comments:
Per the asker's comment, healthy canning recommends 35 minutes at 10-11lbs pressure.
So I decided to look in the USDA guide, and see what the tie breaker is, and their recommendation is 35 minutes as well.
So I'm not entirely certain whether the Putting Food By recommendation is dated (this is the 1982 edition), or whether the 20min time reflects the addition of a small amount of acid to the canning liquid.
Thx, I also found this: https://www.healthycanning.com/canning-roasted-peppers/ only difference is the time. I guess anything between 20-35min should be fine? Does the pressure depend on the type of canner? For some reason they recommend 11lbs when using a gauge canner.
See updated answer above.
Thanks for the edit, someone here mentioned once, that there is no safe procedure for canning cooked paprika, guess they were wrong. Since I don't want to add any acid, I will go with the 35min.
That's clearly not accurate, since roasted peppers are canned and distributed by dozens of companies.
BTW, I suspect that adding acid to the canning liquid does decrease required time/pressure, because in US stores all the cheaper canned peppers have citric acid, and the ones that don't have it are premium brands.
I am not sure I have ever seen commercial grilled paprika without either acid or oil.
Several of the better brands here (USA) are canned in just salt & water. The problem with adding acid is that it affects the flavor.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.495289 | 2019-11-09T09:46:02 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/103359",
"authors": [
"FuzzyChef",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7180",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
100559 | Does oil oxidation create trans fats?
I am considering switching to beef tallow for my high heat cooking, as it has a high smoke point and is a saturated fat (which means, that it does not oxidize easily). Also recent randomized control trials suggest, that saturated fat on its own is not causally linked to heart disease problems.
From what I have learned, is that unsaturated fats, even those with high smoke points, oxidize easily, because of their chemical property of being unsaturated, which means, that they have "space" for other electrons and react easily. From the unsaturated fats, the polyunsaturated fats have twice as much potential for reaction and oxidization as the monounsaturated fats, because they have two "arms".
With beef tallow for example, it seems to be the other way around: It has a high smoke point, but even more important: It's a saturated fat and it doesn't make new bonds easily, because it has all its electrons.
Now, my question is, how are trans fats being created? Are they the product of oxidized polyunsaturated oils? Where do trans fats come from? Or are companies intentionally putting them in food for economic reasons?
I am aware, that trans fats are banned in the US, but they are not banned in EU yet.
" Eating foods containing saturated and trans fats causes your body to produce even more LDL, raising the level of “bad” cholesterol in your blood." - AHA
First, a little chemistry primer on what unsaturated fatty acids look like (this is petroselinic acid):
By Yikrazuul (talk) - Own work, Public domain, Link
You can see the double bond near the "middle" of the molecule. The "rest" of the molecule is attached to the same side of the double bond axis on both ends, making this a "cis" fatty acid. Rotation around double bonds requires a relatively high amount of activation energy, so this "cis" configuration is stable, at least at low-ish temperatures.
An example of a "trans" fatty acid would be elaidic acid:
By Benjah-bmm27 - Own work, Public domain, Link
Here you can see that the molecule continues on opposite sides of the double bond axis ("trans"). At higher (e.g. frying pan) temperatures, unsaturated fatty acids more readily isomerize between cis and trans, and since trans is energetically favorable, more unsaturated fatty acids will be in their trans configuration after being heated to a high temperature.
So to answer the question(s):
No, trans fatty acids are not generated by oxidation, but the same conditions that favor oxidation (high temperature) also favor the generation of trans fats from cis fats.
Also, the bacteria in the digestive tracts of ruminants (cattle, sheep, but also deer etc.) produce a significant proportion of trans fatty acids.
In addition, the simplest (and cheapest) industrial processes to saturate ("harden") unsaturated fats produce a relatively high amount of trans fats. So yes, not adopting other processes can be economical, if this can be considered "intentional"...your call.
A more extensive explanation can also be found in the accepted answer to this question:
Does preparation of food change the nutritional content with respect to fat type?
So smoke point has nothing to do with it? Olive oil and avocado oil have both the same potential for forming trans fats?
The more unsaturated the oil "is", the more potential it has for forming trans fats (just by sheer numbers, and there seems to be a preference for polyunsaturated fatty acids to isomerize to trans). According to my research, the smoke point also does not directly relate to the propensity to oxidize, but more to the content of free fatty acids and other more volatile components.
So which oil is best for high heat cooking? Not avocado oil despite its high smoke point?
Personally I would choose the one whose taste I think fits best with the dish, but then again I think one has to die of something in the end...but your reasoning with beef tallow containing few unsaturated fatty acids seems sound to me.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.495530 | 2019-08-03T20:25:17 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/100559",
"authors": [
"Matthias Brandl",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/68223",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/76013",
"paulj",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
96651 | Why is bolognese cooked for so long?
Most bolognese recipes advise to simmer the sauce for 4 hours, some even advise to simmer longer than that.
Until I heard about that, I had a recipe, which was a total of maybe 45min of cooking, which worked well for me.
Since then, I have tried to do it the right way, but somehow I always end up with a sandy texture, firm ground meat and overall there is something wrong with the whole thing.
What am I most likely doing wrong here? Simmering at too high of a temperature? What does the long-simmering aim to achieve anyway? Break down the vegetables?
Also I very rarely notice the caramelization on the pot at the level of the sauce. Somehow I am probably not achieving the caramelization as well.
My current procedure goes like this:
Sweat the vegetables, until they are lightly colored, but not quite golden.
Put in the ground meat, increase the heat some and cook until the meat starts sticking to the bottom.
Deglaze using any wine available, usually red.
Add chicken stock, milk and tomatoes or tomato sauce or other sorce of tomatoes.
Season a bit, let it cook until it reduces a bit, then let it simmer with open lid for a couple of hours.
My previous procedure:
Brown the meat with high heat
Add vegetables
Deglaze
Add tomato sauce
Reduce for 20-30min
Season and done
Most Italian youtube cooks add a significant amount of minced pancetta (their unsmoked bacon) and cook that out first, then vegetables, and only after that the meat. Perhaps the added fat would make a difference.
There are several phases meat goes through when simmering - a better-educated chef than myself could probably give them all names, but with no formal education, this is what I've noticed over the years.
If you're going to cook mince for a long time in a sauce, you'll not be interested in the first one - that's more for a burger.
When first fried until a good brown, you could eat it just like that - tender & 'just done' - fine for a burger, not for a long-cook in sauce.
Once you mix it into the sauce & bring it to simmer, it's then going to spend the next hour not smelling all that good & if you taste it, it's decidedly rubbery.
This next bit can depend on temperature - much longer in a slow cooker than on the hob.
Somewhere between there & about the 4-hour mark the rubbery gives way to 'just right' then goes too far & becomes 'grainy' - the 'sandy' texture you alluded too.
This 4-hour delineation seems to be the same whether it's mince or chunks of casserole steak.
So, my best guess is you're cooking it too high.
If your ring won't drop to 'barely, barely visible bubbling' at minimum with the lid on then I'd invest in a simmer ring to put underneath [$£€ 2.50 on eBay] You may need to actually lift the ring temperature with one of those on, or consider it a poor-man's slow-cooker, as you can get it cool enough to be bubble-free with one under the pan.
Once you can get the heat down, your 4 hours should then be fine. Cooking with the lid on means you don't have to watch over it so much in case of evaporation; but you do need to reduce your liquid levels slightly to accommodate that difference.
I tend to consider my bolognese [or chilli, shepherd's/cottage pie, or any long-cook on tomato &/or onion] to be done when the onion pretty much disappears when you stir it in.
One additional note.
If you get your mince from a supermarket, these days they all tend to add the 'legal maximum' extra 10% water, which means it won't fry properly at all if you add it to your sautéd veg.
My workaround for that is I blast it on full-flame in my largest frying-pan, separately to the veg, which can be ticking over nicely in the saucepan at the same time.
Once you can evaporate your 'free water' from it [I never pour it off, I evaporate it all away], then you can get a brown on it. [This would be 'overdone' compared the the 'burger-ready' first phase from above & already into the 2nd phase].
I tend to find if I drop my onions etc first, I can get the meat fried in about the same time it takes for the onion to be ready for it. I deglaze the frying-pan, of course, after that & add it to the saucepan.
Thanks, but I am confused about the browning and deglazing part. You say, that if you brown it at first, its already done and you can basically eat it right there and then. But if you don't do it like that, when does the browning occur? And when are you supposed to deglaze? There is no point in deglazing unless there is stuff stuck to the bottom of the pot right? I tried a recipe today, with milk first, you let it evaporate fully, then deglaze with wine. But it takes for ever and there was no browning, so I added some wine, then stock & tomato and put it on simmer. Did I miss the browning?
With your meat, basically, if there's liquid [water] in the pan, there's no frying. No frying == no browning, just ... 'greying'. It still cooks, but it doesn't have that lovely sear on the outside. Modern supermarket meat is often so wet that it will not fry until you've boiled off the added water. It's a sin, but one they're legally allowed to commit. Hence my separate pan method to get rid of the water. I'm really not sure what purpose would be served by drying milk completely then washing it off with wine. Not something I've ever come across.
I sometimes have them grind the meat in front of me, I assume there can't be any added water then. But when you fry it, there is still some water.
The water is injected into 'whole' meat & you won't know until you try to fry it... if it leaks water as it fries, then it had added water.
Guess the only solution is to buy directly from the farmer.
I'm not certain what is a sandy texture? too dry ?
Make certain to have enough liquid so that it does not dry up (add more during the cooking if it evaporates too much)
There is no right or wrong way to do a bolognese sauce.
In it's most simple recipe, it is just a meat ragu (meat, veggies, water) cooked until the meat (and veggies) is very tender.
Most recipes use ground meat (veal, beef) which will take little time to cook; , but some use meat cubes/chunks that will take longer too cook until tender (to be shredded with forks).
I find the article very informative:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2010/nov/25/how-to-make-perfect-bolognese
It's not too dry, it just has tiny particles it seems, feels like you have some sand in there. I didn't realise, there are so many "legitimate" ways of making bolognese.
First of all, if your old recipe works for you, why not keep using it?
In those long cook recipes they often use whole tomatos which cook down to a sauce. If you start out with a tomato sauce or otherwise prepared tomatos that long time is not realy needed.
It will give a slightly different dish, I think that is acceptable.
It may seem simple, but you must brown the mince for like 10 mins (in a separate pan). Otherwise there will be no flavour. The mince needs to go like crispy bacon. Most people just turn it over a few times and let it go "grey". The crispyness of the mince is the whole flavor.
Reducing it longer is only really fine tuning.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.495853 | 2019-03-02T11:42:12 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/96651",
"authors": [
"Pointy",
"Tetsujin",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/42066",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/557",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
95738 | What type of devices, could increase dim sum output, short of a complete expensive, automatic machine?
I am getting irregular requests for dim sum catering and would like to increase my dim sum output, but am not yet ready to invest in something like this:
Dim Sum Maker Video
What other ways are there, to increase my fire rate?
I could probably save some time by investing in a dough mixer, but the dough mixing is actually not the big problem. The steps, that are most time consuming are:
Cutting the dough into uniform pieces
Making 2D circles out of the pieces
Filling the circles with the filling
closing the whole thing (the most tricky part)
What kind of machines could I use to greatly reduce my work, without buying a 15k machine?
Three sets of tools would help you speed up your operation, with some caveats:
Circle cutters, particularly ones that allow you to cut a lot of circles together like this kind.
Dumpling molds in a variety of sizes. There are even some that mold-and-cut, but that's not actually a big help since you have to "pre-cut" the dough anyway.
Cookie scoops for portioning fillings.
The biggest speed-up here comes from having sets that match: cutters that match the size of specific dumpling molds and a cookie scoop that portions exactly the amount of filling for those molds. You'll also want at least a half-dozen molds of each size so that you can assembly-line it.
Now, the caveats: first, molded dumplings will never look as good as hand-folded. Second, certain shapes aren't possible using a plastic mold, such as Siu Mai or the classic Har Gow shapes.
I would love to find a way to speed up Siu Mai type shapes, which are a lot more popular, than the standard ones, because with those, you can't be sure, that you are not getting the frozen mass produced stuff. Thanks for the tips, solid advice.
It would be possible to create a siu mai mold apparatus, I've just never seen one for sale anywhere.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.496414 | 2019-01-17T11:01:33 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/95738",
"authors": [
"FuzzyChef",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7180",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
115669 | Kitchen aid artisan: won't turn on lower speeds
I have a fairly new kitchen aid artisan. Recently we probably did a larger batch of dough, than reasonable and there was some burnt smell. After that the kitchen aid won't turn on on the lower two speeds. It will only work on speed 3, which seems to me to be the new speed one, basically very slow.
I know that kitchen aid has plastic gears which are designed as breaking points, so the motor doesn't break. But what could cause this effect? Is it most likely the famous plastic gear or could it be something else?
Define "won't turn on". Can you her the motor, but there's no movement, or…?
@Tetsujin can't hear anything for the fist two speeds.
I would suggest contacting Kitchen Aid. They have been helpful to me in the past.
I realize this is an old question and the issue has probably been resolved since, but still, there is one other thing to debug.
This was probably not a broken worm gear. The symptoms of a broken worm gear are that the machine does not turn at all, or that it turns without load but stops as soon as any torque is applied.
The KitchenAid is basically fix geared. Speed is controlled not via gears, but via the motor. On the motor shaft is a "governor", a tiny contraption that moves outwards when the motor spins due the centrifugal forces (please no discussion if this is actually a force).
The speed control lever is connected via a shaft to a movable part, the speed control plate, that sits behind the governor. If the governor hits the speed control plate it pushes against a contact that interrupts the flow of electrical power to the motor. The motor powers down, the governor slides inwards until it releases the contact, power is restored, the governor moves outwards again and so on.
Via the speed control lever you can regulate the distance between the speed control plate and the governor. If the KitchenAid works in high gears but not in low gears, then the cause usually is that the spring loaded screws that hold the speed control plate in place do not provide the correct tension; this changes the distance between governor and speed control plate, and the breaker contacts might be triggered in the rest position stop the motor from running (that is why higher gears work - the third position of the speed lever now creates the same distance between governor and speed control plate as the first gear in a properly aligned machine).
This is quite easy to check. On the rear end of the machine, at the top, there is a single screw; if you remove that, you can remove the dome shaped cover at the end. This will give you access to the speed control plate. You will see that is affixed with two spring loaded screws; at the bottom of the speed control plate, you should see the shaft from the speed control lever latching into a notch in the speed control plate (used to be made from metal, these days it plastics and breaks sometimes). With a Philips head screwdriver you can adjust the screws to see if this makes any difference (you can also check for bent contacts on the speed control plate - these are essentially just bent copper strips that are pressed against each other to close a circuit).
You should probably unplug the machine first, since the contacts are unprotected.
Thank you for this late reply, I have to admit the issue has not been solved, I simply use the machine on higher speeds since I wasn't sure what the issue is and what to change. I will try this.
When I had this issue, it turned out to be the plastic lever arm that controls the governor had melted. The part is directly over the motor and must have overheated. I just had to replace the speed control assembly with a $13 part from Amazon.
Should I be able to see its melted?
all non-pro Kitchenaid mixers have plastic gears, if used properly it should not be an issue.
According to this, the plastic gear is a "safeguard" :
"This gear is designed to shear or break apart should the machine bind up and protects the motor from burning up or otherwise become damaged. They are available for all models through Amazon or other vendors and easily replaced by anyone with a little mechanical aptitude."
You said that you made a larger batch, maybe it pushed the motor too hard and something had to break.
You should try to get it fixed.
The motor has likely overheated (not uncommon when overloaded and operating at low speed), melting some of the insulation in its coils and causing it to operate at lower torque. There's no fix for this other than replacing the motor. The good news is, replacement motors are reasonably priced and straightforward to install. (Only use genuine KitchenAid replacement parts.)
But why would low torque cause just the first two speeds not to work? And wouldn't overloading break the plastic gear, as designed before the motor breaks?
Kitchenaid mixers don't have variable gearing. When set at low speeds, they're working at lower voltage, in an inefficient region of their torque curve. The thing can't run at low speeds because it's no longer efficient enough to work at all at that power setting. The breakable gear is designed to prevent damage to the rest of the geartrain at high torque; it is not designed to protect the motor.
This makes perfect sense unfortunately. right now it runs on 3rd speed as it would on 1st speed. Is that consistent with what you are saying? Can I use this opportunity to put in a better / stronger motor?
I’m not aware of any aftermarket improvements like that, and I suspect that the stock motor is pretty much as good as it gets given the constraints. If you want more mixing power, you’ll need a more powerful mixer overall. A Kitchenaid stand mixer is a good all-round device for its price range, capable of tackling everything from dough to meringues, but that comes with some compromises.
I was thinking more along the lines of another kitchen aid motor, assuming it would fit.
It definitely won’t fit.
Could it also be the phase control?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.496699 | 2021-05-15T18:00:34 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/115669",
"authors": [
"Burt",
"Sneftel",
"Tetsujin",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/42066",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/58067",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/89183",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
111098 | How much shelf life do oxygen absorbers add to food?
I am in the process of storing all my dry foods in airtight jars and bottles. I mainly want to prevent pests, but also want to increase shelf life. There are some foods I need very infrequently and I have to keep throwing those away.
My question is, how much difference would it make, if I add an oxygen absorber to my already airtight jars? For example, for flour and other grain-based products. I don't plan on keeping my food for 30 years. Would it really make a huge difference, if I am filling the jar to the brink? How much air could be there, if a flour jar is full?
Basically are oxygen absorbers just a prepper meme, or are they useful for general food storage as well?
I can’t answer the question about oxygen absorbers, but don’t underestimate the air in flour. It’s the same principle like one can pour quite a bit of water in a jar of dry sand, only on a much smaller scale.
thanks for your question! It got me asking "hey, why haven't I heard of these for food preservation before?" turns out there's a good reason, but it was fun research.
It's not clear that oxygen absorbers would help you preserve food at all.
First, the science on the effectiveness of oxygen absorbers is still young, and few national food regulatory agencies have offered any opinion as to whether they work or not (just that they're non-toxic). Most published "studies" are written by people with a direct interest in selling them. Second, the oxygen absorbers you get from internet retail are unlikely to be the same kind that food manufacturers would use; based on a quick perusal of prepper websites, what many of them are selling aren't actually oxygen absorbers at all.
Most importantly, though, is that just putting an oxysorb in your jar of granola isn't sufficient. There are multiple kinds of oxygen absorbers, including low temperature ones, high temp ones, ones that absorb moisture, ones that emit moisture, and even ones that emit alcohol. The most serious independent studies I can find come from military forces, and they make it clear that it's necessary to match the correct oxygen absorber, packaging material, packaging method, and foodstuff.
Making effective use of oxygen absorbers, then, would require you to have an inventory of different kinds, and also invest in industrial-grade packaging equipment. This does not seem cost-effective compared to buying replacement buckwheat flour every 9 months, or just buying a heavy duty countertop vacuum packing machine.
hmm so its not so simple after all. If they work, they would probably create a vacuume, so it would be noticeable?
They don't make oxygen disappear, so I doubt they're lowering the air pressure.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.497223 | 2020-10-11T13:33:24 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/111098",
"authors": [
"FuzzyChef",
"Stephie",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/28879",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7180",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
113131 | Can a 300W kitchen aid do meat grinding?
I have a kitchen aid artisan with 300W and have read conflicting opinions on what it can and can't do. Many seem to have a hard time using meat grinder and food processor attachments, because of the low power.
Is this the case, or does it simply take longer or require more prep (precutting the meat into smaller pieces for example)? What kind of meat would it have problems with? Why would it have issues with a food processor, which only cuts relatively soft vegatables?
I generally agree with @GdD. I use my kitchenaid as my only meat grinder, and regularly grind up to 5 - 10 pounds of meat for sausage and salumi making. I do have some tips to improve the experience. First, do not purchase the plastic Kitchenaid grinder attachment. Instead, purchase an all metal one. I believe Chefs Choice makes one. There might be others. This makes a big difference. First, there is less movement in the parts. Second, you can get it very cold by placing the parts in the freezer before use. This leads to my second tip, (and this is true regardless of grinder) which is to par-freeze your meat after you cut it into strips that will easily fall into the feed tube of the grinder.
In other news: I don't have, or use, the food processor attachment. I have used the pasta extruder (it sucks), but the pasta roller is a fantastic improvement over my hand roller.
How much watt does yours have? Does the par freezing help hygiene or does it help the grinder? Same with cooling the grinder, it is done for hygienic purposes correct?
Par-freezing is to keep the fat from melting/smearing, not so much hygiene or mechanical cooling. It is ultimately for product quality. This is particularly important in grinding processes that take longer. Work as cold as possible. I have KitchenAid Artisan, says "max watts 325" on the side.
Kitchenaid mixers can grind meat, I know because I have one with the meat grinder attachment and I've used it do just that, as well as make sausages. The problem is one of expectation: it is not the biggest or the fastest meat grinder, if you are going to grind meat often and in large quantities a purpose built one is a better choice for you as it will be faster. However, if you don't need to grind often the kitchenaid one is a compact, effective and relatively cheap solution. It helps to cut the meat into manageable chunks that will fit down the throat.
How much watt does yours have? Will it work with 300W?
Yes, it will work with a 300W one @user1721135.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.497453 | 2020-12-13T00:33:16 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/113131",
"authors": [
"GdD",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/19707",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"moscafj",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
122787 | How to quickly thaw frozen goose?
I have a 5kg goose, frozen at -18C. I guess that even at room temperature, it won't be ready in about 15h to cook. What are my options? How quickly would it thaw in cold water sousvide? Its packaged airtight. Or should I simply put it in the oven early and run it on very low temp for some extra hours?
Set it into the largest pot you own (that it will fit in) and fill the pot with cold tap water. Set it in your sink or set the pot on top of towels on the counter (to collect the condensation from the sides of the pan). Leave the goose/poultry in the water, turning it occasionally so that it thaws more evenly. It should thaw in plenty of time to go into the oven on schedule.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.497661 | 2022-12-24T23:12:00 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/122787",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
95649 | The more I season, the worse it gets with my cast iron
Recently, I bought a cast iron skillet, which was preseasoned. Still, I did season it a couple of times and since then I season it after every cook. I didn't cook anything crazy, just a dutch baby and a pizza.
Still, even after multiple seasonings, there is a clear hole in my seasoning in the middle of the pan:
How I season it:
I put some oil in it, spread the oil with a paper towel, then heat it on the stove until it starts smoking, then let it cool.
I tried olive oil, which apparently is no good, so I switched to sunflower oil and now I am trying it with canola oil. I also switched from paper towel to regular towel, but still, the hole just seems to be getting bigger and bigger. When I touch it with my finger, I can see black residue on it.
What am I doing wrong here? Yesterday I even did a couple of seasonings one after another (let it cool, oil it, heat it, repeat), but this seems to have been counterproductive.
When you season it, are you seasoning the whole pan (building up the area around it, too), or just trying to fill in the hole?
The whole area, although I do not season the outer area, just the inner.
Yesterday I washed it with some water and a plastic brush, maybe that wasn't a good idea? Although since then I have seasoned it multiple times.
As you mention it's getting bigger and bigger, it's possible that there was something wrong with it under the pre-seasoning. You might want to contact the company to see if they'd be willing to replace it or had recommendations
Try seasoning it in the oven at the highest possible temperature.
For how long? 1h should do it?
Sure I could contact the company, but since this is simply a piece of iron, and people dig up 100yo pans from their gardens and still manage to use them, I would think that it should be fixable somehow? What could they have even done wrong in the manufacturing process?
Hard to tell with b/w photo; whole thing looks coated in something. "touch it with my finger, I can see black residue on it." .... uh. Maker's mark? I don't do cast iron... do 'they' sometimes put Teflon on there or something?
The lightly colored circle in the pan you see, which looks like a light reflection, is a light grey, which is the original iron color or something like that. When I touch it, I get a black residue on my finger, which I think is the seasoning falling apart or maybe iron? I am not sure. It doesn't have any teflon.
I closed it as a duplicate of a seasoning gone wrong which seemed to have similar symptoms to yours, but in general, we have tons of old questions about that. You just have to accept that not every attempt at seasoning is successful. You can search around to see other old questions with sometimes different symptoms, like the seasoning remaining sticky.
A couple of things - the first is that I often hear people say that you should strip off/remove the pre-seasoning that comes with skillets, as it is inferior or will interfere with a proper seasoning done by you. Since you are having issues with your current seasoning, and it's not getting better, it might be best to strip it away and start from scratch.
While one might think that soap and a scouring pad is an okay to remove seasoning, soap is going to leave a residue. Cook's Illustrated/America's Test Kitchen (the closest thing to an encyclopedia or the Burning Bush for all cooking-related matters) says that a great way to remove existing seasoning is to run your oven through it's self-cleaning cycle with the skillet in it.
If you do not have a self-cleaning oven, here is another article from Cook's Illustrated on how to do it with oven cleaner, soapy water, steel wool and vinegar -
Follow this method to completely remove any residual seasoning on a cast-iron pan before reseasoning it. Easy-Off Oven Cleaner is a caustic alkali, so be sure to work outdoors, wear rubber gloves, and avoid spraying near your face or skin. The skillet will rust instantly once you’ve discarded the vinegar-water solution and rinsed and dried the skillet in step 5, so be sure to immediately apply oil to the surface.
Working outdoors, place concrete block on ground and cover with heavy-duty kitchen trash bag, draping bag over block so that sides of bag will be easy to grasp and pull up over skillet.
2A. Place skillet upside down on top of block. Wearing rubber gloves, spray skillet all over with Easy-Off Oven Cleaner, being careful to keep spray away from your face and exposed skin.
2B. Flip skillet over and spray inside.
2C. Pull plastic bag up and around skillet and tie to close. Leave wrapped, sprayed skillet outside (or in garage) for 24 hours.
3A. Wearing rubber gloves, remove plastic bag. Scrub skillet all over with steel wool and hot soapy water to remove all residue.
3B. Rinse, repeat scrubbing with steel wool, and rinse again.
Combine 2 cups distilled white vinegar with 2 cups water. Fill skillet with vinegar solution and let stand for 30 minutes to 1 hour.
Discard solution in skillet. Rinse skillet well, then dry well with paper towels.
(start remaining seasoning process, below, here)
Cook's Illustrated: How to strip a cast iron skillet
Once you have, basically, the unseasoned metal skillet, if you want state of the art seasoning, go and find food-grade flaxseed oil. Flaxseed oil is the base for linseed oil, which is used as a tough, durable furniture finish. Keep in mind, you MUST get food-grade oil, as furniture linseed oil has a lot of toxic chemicals added to it.
Google shopping search for food-grade flaxseed oil
The flaxseed oil so effectively bonded to the skillets, forming a sheer, stick-resistant veneer, that even a run through our commercial dishwasher with a squirt of degreaser left them totally unscathed. But the vegetable oil-treated skillets showed rusty spots and patchiness when they emerged from the dishwasher, requiring reseasoning before use.
Why did the new treatment work so well? Flaxseed oil is the food-grade equivalent of linseed oil, used by artists to give their paintings a hard, polished finish, and it boasts six times the amount of omega-3 fatty acids as vegetable oil. Over prolonged exposure to high heat, these fatty acids combine to form a strong, solid matrix that polymerizes to the pan’s surface.
Once you have your food grade flaxseed oil, here are the steps:
How to Season Cast Iron with This Method
Although lengthy, seasoning with flaxseed oil is a mainly hands-off undertaking. We highly recommend the treatment:
Warm an unseasoned pan (either new or stripped of seasoning) for 15 minutes in a 200-degree oven to open its pores. The best way to strip a cast-iron pan of seasoning is to run the pan through your oven's self-cleaning cycle.
Remove the pan from the oven. Place 1 tablespoon flaxseed oil in the pan and, using tongs, rub the oil into the surface with paper towels. With fresh paper towels, thoroughly wipe out the pan to remove excess oil.
Place the oiled pan upside down in a cold oven, then set the oven to its maximum baking temperature. Once the oven reaches its maximum temperature, heat the pan for one hour. Turn off the oven; cool the pan in the oven for at least two hours.
Repeat the process five more times, or until the pan develops a dark, semi-matte surface.
I'm going to assume that warming the skillet in the oven only set to 200 degrees, and then turning the oven off, and leaving it open while applying oil will have the oven cool enough to move to the next step. Also, saying to "repeat the process" does not include stripping off the existing seasoning each time. Just repeat the actual seasoning part.
This method was originally put out there by a blogger named Sheryl Canter. I don't think ATK added any twists of their own.
Sheryl Canter's blog entry about seasoning/polymerizing your skillet
Cook's Illustrated how-to article, NOT behind their paywall
All of my quoted passages are from the Cook's Illustrated articles.
Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
Cook some bacon with it.
What are you cooking with it could have some reason for the area to be expanding, so just try cooking some bacon. Some recipes for seasoning include putting it in an oven with bacon on it.
I did cook steak in it yesterday with pleanty of butter.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.497765 | 2019-01-14T16:44:31 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/95649",
"authors": [
"Cascabel",
"Joe",
"Mazura",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/1672",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/27294",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/52874",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67",
"roetnig",
"rumtscho",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
97351 | How long to sous vide a tough cut of steak?
With most steaks the recommended cooking time in sous vide is about an hour (of course depending on the thickness of the cut).
I have done some sous vide cooks recently, and they always ended up perfect until last time, where I had a ribeye, which turned out tough and chewy.
I have since learned, that ribeye in particular has some connective tissue, which can make it tough. I have also learned, that most tenderizing methods, like vinegar or baking soda don't actually really work, because they are only in contact with the meat on the outside.
So I was wondering if I could improve the result, if I simply increase the cooking time to say 2h? Or should it be way longer than that in order to tenderize the connective tissue?
What would be the downside of increasing the cooking time?
60 hours: https://cooking.stackexchange.com/a/53376/67 . You just have to cook it at a low enough temperature that you're not overcooking it
Sounds like you had a really bad ribeye. Ribeye is one of the most tender cuts from the whole cow.
@Behacad that may have been the case, it was heavily discounted, even though it was "organic".
I've had very cheap ribeye from some asian supermarkets, and couldn't believe it was ribeye and not part of the leg.
Collagen (type-1, for the scientific folks), one of the major connective tissues in beef, begins to dissolve into gelatin starting at 55°C (131°F) but very slowly, long enough for the meat itself to become mush. The pace increases with rising temperature to about 71°C (160°F), at which point further rises in temperature don't accelerate the process much -- but that would be medium-well, a crime for ribeye. Unfortunately, collagen begins to denature at 68°C (154°F), which is also when the meat begins to constrict/toughen substantially and release lots of its juices. Cooks Illustrated suggests 54°C/130°F for 2-3 hours, but in my steak that didn't melt the collagen at all. I find the best trade-off is medium, 63-64°C (145-147°F) for 3 hours. Yes, it isn't the deep rosy and extra-tender medium rare, but most of the connective tissue vanishes and is replaced with luscious gelatin.
In general, the longer you cook a protein at low temperature the more the texture will change. However, it doesn't just get more tender. It can get stringy, or mushy, and unpleasant over time, depending on the type of protein. Thickness and type of muscle matters when calculating time.
In general, I cook 1 - 2 inch thick rib eye like any other traditional steak, for between 1 and 2 hours to achieve a typical mouthfeel/texture. On the other hand, I have cooked oxtail for up to 100 hours using sous vide. You can safely cook as long as you want, but there will be a point when you might not like the results.
Rib eye is not generally considered a "tough cut". Two hours won't change things that much, but if you want to experiment, I would suggest cooking three identical steaks of your choice for three different times, then sear and see what you think.
This is a helpful guide that might also shed light on your questions.
When you say "stringy", does it mean it starts resembling "pulled"?
@user1721135 sort of, but the texture can go unpleasant after a while.
There is one, albeit slightly risky way to tenderize a tough cut of sous vide steak without it starting to resemble pulled pork.
For a 1 inch thick steak, cook it at 121 deg F for 2-4 hours before you cook it to the final temperature. You can tenderize it longer and get it more tender but the chance of spoilage goes up rapidly at this temperature.
Over 130 deg F, the meat will slowly turn into a pulled pork texture.
Another option is to vacuum brine/marinade the steak for a few days to tenderize it, though it will start looking like cured meat after a while.
My local grocery store sells some of the toughest ribeye at under $5 a pound... but after throwing all these tenderization methods at it, it comes out pretty good.
Is that the technique they call "warm aging"?
I suppose so, I didn't know there was a term for the process. I always just called it controlled rotting, I guess warm aging sounds better too.
Interesting, I gotta try that. I watched an episode of sousvideeverything, where they tried that, but it didn't work. However, they did use meat, that was already very tender to begin with. Do you have personal experience with this? Did it work for you?
It worked for me, I use it on some rather tough cuts of ribeye (USDA ungraded/standard). Pre-seared, 1% salt by weight Equilibrium Vacuum Brined for 5 days, 4 hours of warm aging, 6 hours of cooking at 132 deg F. Results in a very tender steak. If it gets too mushy, reduce the amount of time at the 132 deg F final step.
I guess with pre-searing, it should be pretty safe, after all only the surface of the meat contains bacteria right?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.498411 | 2019-04-07T20:19:22 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/97351",
"authors": [
"Behacad",
"Joe",
"Netduke",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/43744",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/61080",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67",
"moscafj",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
97438 | What is the padding with red substance inside of steak packaging?
When I buy steaks, sometimes they include a padding in the packaging, on which the steak sits, which contains a red substance:
What is it? What is its purpose, and can I assume, that it is not poisonous? I unintentionally cut into this one and it had some contact with the steak.
That "padding" is an absorbent pad made of paper and plastic; the "red substance" inside is the juices (often mistakenly believed to be "blood") that have seeped out of the meat; the purpose of the absorbent pad is to absorb this liquid and keep the interior of the tray dry. Without it, the liquid would pool up and potentially spill out when the tray was opened or handled. Because the "red substance" came from the meat itself, no, it is not poisonous; the packaging is regulated to prevent toxic components from being used, so it too is not poisonous.
But it won't taste good, even if you cook it....
@simonatrcl My dog would beg to differ with you.
@Kenster your dog would also probably beg to differ if you'd said bird poop won't taste good even if you cook it...
Also known as a meat nappy - https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Meat%20nappy
Oh, I see! At first I thought it was an extra piece of meat, as an extra or something. Then I thought, that it might be some synthetic material.
Some seem to be more than just paper and plastic. Some look to be the consistency of super absorbent diapers. Just keep an eye out for them in your meat packaging and check them out some time once you've removed the meat ;)
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.498811 | 2019-04-12T14:45:39 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/97438",
"authors": [
"CTS_AE",
"Doktor J",
"Kenster",
"ggdx",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/26320",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/55116",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/613",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/70073",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/72459",
"simon at rcl",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
104190 | Marinade and Smoke Chips
I am planning on doing a pork crown for Christmas and have zeroed in on this recipe, which calls for a marinade: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhgZN1zoLTE
I also would like to have a smokey flavor, for which I plan to use wood chips on my gas grill.
Will the smokey flavor play well with a marinade? Should I marinade the meat first and put it in the smoking grill (not an actual smoker) or should I rather smoke it first a bit and baste it in the middle of cooking?
For me it makes sense to marinade at the beginning to preserve the juices, but I am wondering if the marinade will prevent the smoke from penetrating the meat or if the smoke marinade combination will be weird?
I am also considering putting a dish with water in the grill to create some steam for moisture and only apply the marinade at the end, but am wondering if a steam and smoke combination would work?
Marinating means that your product will be in the marinade before cooking. It is a surface flavor application. It does not seal in juices, nor does it penetrate the protein. Marinate as you would for grilling. Grill/roast (with smoke chips if you wish). You are not technically "smoking," but that is beside the point. You can certainly baste, throughout, with your marinade. If this is the case, you may want to reserve some that raw meat has not come into contact with for this purpose. You will pick up the smoke flavor, even with the marinade and the basting.
What about adding a little water for steam and moisture? Will that interfere with the smoke? Or is it pointless because I am already basting / marinating?
For your application extra moisture is not necessary, but if you want to understand drip and water pans in smoking, see: https://amazingribs.com/more-technique-and-science/more-cooking-science/how-use-drip-pans-and-water-pans-what-put-them-and
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.499078 | 2019-12-18T21:47:44 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/104190",
"authors": [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"moscafj",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
128626 | How much minced meat can I get from a 100kg pig?
I want to make bulk minced meat and have it cheaper than retail.
I have had success in buying whole animals and using for meat, price is about half of normal retail price (even after all the losses like organs).
But how does that work for minced meat, which obviously won't have any bones in it at all?
How much minced meat can I get from say 100kg pig? I don't mind to have some fat in there.
A friend of mine told me you can even use skin, but I am doubtful.
I expect you will find what you want here https://livestock.extension.wisc.edu/articles/how-much-meat-should-a-hog-yield/
Thanks that is helpful. So if I take the cited "Boneless closely trimmed retail cuts" number it would be 65%? Other sources say 55% but I guess that just depends on the animal, how closely the fat trim is etc? There isn't any particular loss from the mincing process in itself I guess?
Using all meat from an entire pig for a single batch of minced meat would be very wasteful. Different cuts of pork have very different value and grinding the fancy cuts gives you a lot less value than using these pieces separately from the less attractive cuts.
@quarague thats a good point. Which parts are considered best for minced meat? Maybe I need to buy them in bulk somehow? Or I have to find a way to sell the good parts?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.499261 | 2024-06-21T21:08:53 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/128626",
"authors": [
"User65535",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/81322",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/97169",
"quarague",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
95452 | Thermo bottle for impromptu sous vide?
I would like to try out sous vide, but I don't want to invest in the gadgets, until I have tried it and decided I want to keep using it. So I have thought about the best way to try it with no budget. Online, one of the method suggested is to use a beer cooler and zip bags. Would it also work to use a thermo bottle (a bottle, which keeps your tea / coffee warm) for this? I recently used my thermo bottle for 12 hours+, in the winter, and even after 12 hours it provided fairly hot tea. Would this work or would it be too small as container? I am pretty sure, that it could hold the temperature well. Or would it be better to simply use a pot on the stove and stir occasionally? I am not trying to achieve amazing results here, just to get a taste of the technique and see if it really is beneficial for me.
What do you want to cook? Do you have a reliable way to measure the temperature of your cooking water?
I have several thermometers, one water thermometer for baby bath water and one water proof cooking thermometer. Other than that no. I don't know what I want to cook, I will cook whatever I can, using my no budget method.
The thermo bottle will continue to cool off (especially if you put something cold into it, unless you're adding heat to it ... and have a way to control that heat so it doesn't heat up too much)
Yeah, this is probably going to be tricky, but once I achieve equilibrium, I just need to shut the lid and it will be good for hours probably? At the beginnging I can stir it and check / correct the temp.
Run a test. fill thermos with water at 90°C. Wait 10 min. Check temp. You'll lose heat fast at the start because you have to heat the interior glass. Then once every half hour or so for 4 hours. That should give you an idea of the cooling rate. Remember that that strip of steak, or whatever you eventually slip in there will also take up heat to reach equilibrium temp. -You can mitigate these troubles by changing the water 10 minutes after adding your cooking bag.
I don't think a thermos bottle will give you enough room to cook much of anything. However in principle, it could work. It would be better to use a cooler. This old Serious Eats article explains everything. Of course, that was written 8 or 9 years ago, when immersion circulators were very pricey. You can get them now for as low as $99 US.
You won't need 12 hours (and I wouldn't recommend any long duration cooks without an actual circulator). You can easily cook a steak (even in a pot in the kitchen sink with running hot water if your water heater puts out high enough heat) in an hour. You could also do this on the stove top, controlling the burner and monitoring the water temperature, but a cooler will retain the heat and you will be pretty good for a cook of an hour or so.
I've been using sous vide for at least 10 years. I don't use it for everything. It's one of a set of kitchen tools. However, I do find it useful. Given the current price point, I would say it is worth the purchase. Plus, then you have the most control, with less monitoring...plus the ability to experiment with much longer cooking times (which impacts texture of proteins).
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.499706 | 2019-01-07T22:42:16 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/95452",
"authors": [
"Joe",
"Wayfaring Stranger",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/5455",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67",
"moscafj",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
103376 | Why let a pressure canner vent, before putting the weight on?
Most instructions for pressure canners mention, that you should let the steam vent for a while, before placing your weight on it.
What is the purpose of this? Why not start with the weight on? And how can I determine how long exactly I need to let it vent?
Example:
Source: https://www.thechoppingblock.com/blog/under-pressure-pressure-canning-for-advanced-preserving
In canning, you have to be very sure that you have produced the exact conditions needed for the process to work properly. If you deviate a bit, it can happen that bacterial spores survive. These "exact conditions" mean not only "keeping temperature X for time Y". You have to make sure that proper heat exchange happens where it needs to happen.
In the case of the venting step, it is needed to ensure that your canner is voided of air entirely. When the water starts to boil, it turns to a gas and this gas mixes with air. If you do it in a sealed container with a small exit (like a canner), the steam can push out the air, but it needs some time to do so. This is why recipes are designed with a vent time at the beginning. Air pockets would interfere with the heating process. Only after you have achieved the canner-full-of-steam-without-air condition, can you start building the pressure.
You can see a quote for it here:
Then allow the steam to escape for an additional 10 minutes to vent the canner. This step removes air from inside the canner so the temperature is the same throughout the canner
Which brings us to your other question, how to know when to stop. The simple answer is: do exactly as your recipe says, and don't deviate. If it says "10 minutes", put a timer and let it go for 10 minutes. OK, you do have some wiggle room in the "longer" duration, if it takes you 3 minutes to manage to put the weight on, your food is still safe despite it having been vented for 13 minutes. But don't go below what the recipe tells you. And also note how sensitive the recipes are to change - canning the same recipe in a different size of jar already changes the safe times. So, really, don't try to second guess your recipe, do as you are told.
I only have a very short manual for my pressure canner and it is in chinese. So I already need to approximate. I guess the venting time also depends on how much water you put in, what you can, what size your canner is and as you say what size of jars you use. Is there any way to approximate or calculate? 1/3 water + 15min venting should be OK? I am only worried, that if I overdo the venting I will lose too much water.
"If steam does not come through the open vent in a steady stream at the end of 20 minutes, keep heating the canner until it does" so a steady stream of steam would indicate the absence of air and I am ready to go? I am canning grilled paprika btw, not seafood.
The exact amount of water you use is not critical, the limits come from 1) it should not be so much that your jars reach it, and 2) it should not be so little that it all evaporates into steam for the duration of the canning operation. Canners are typically designed such that you simply fill it to some point closely below the level on which you place the jars, but do look at generic descriptions of the pressure canning process, there is one on the site I cited. As for the time, you should not be approximating or calculating it, it has to come from your recipe.
What do you mean by "your jars reach it". If you double stack the jars the bottom ones will be covered? I read somewhere that the water level including jars, should not be more than 2/3 of the canner. Is this a safe rule to follow?
You certainly don't want to cover your jars. My pressure canner's user manual specifies "3 quarts" of water, and that's below the rack. Now that I searched on the Interent, it seems that the water reaching the jars is not forbidden per se, but 2/3 still sounds awfully full to me, I would be afraid that something is going wrong if the bottom jars are covered or even substantially submerged. This deserves its own question ("how high can the water level in the pressure canner be?"), would you like to ask it yourself?
So you put the water outside the jar container? I thought it should be inside.
Now I am a bit confused, what is "the jar container"? The pressure cooker is like a big pot, with a tightly fitting lid. The water goes into that "pot", then the rack goes in, and the jars go onto the rack, in one or two rows. In my pressure cooker, the jars are not immersed, I don't know if there are other models which let the water reach the jars. Since the whole cooker is "the jar container", I don't see how there could be water outside of it :)
Oh ok, my canner has an inner pot where you put the jars. You put the inner pot in the bigger pot on top of the heat element. The heat element is between the two pots.
Have a look at this:
Air and Steam Mixture
Mere pressure at up to 30 PSI ('15 PSI' on the gauge is really ~30 PSI absolute at sea level) will do nothing to pasteurize your food. It's high heat that does so.
Following the venting procedures on a Presto left approximately a 20% air mixture in with the steam, according to my own measurements and calculations. At that amount of air, the '10 PSI' on the gauge in reality equates to about 109 degrees Celsius (228.2 Fahrenheit) and not the theoretical 113C / 235F that is often claimed for '10 PSI'; at '15 PSI' it's 115C / 239F; not the theoretical 121C / 250F.
And that's after letting it vent for 10 minutes.
If you don't vent it, you're increasing the air portion in the canner even further and thereby lowering the temperature from what has been shown to successfully pasteurize the food.
The recipes have been tested using actual canners, so I am not too concerned that my temperatures are lower than the theoretical ones.
But you may barely get above water canning temperatures if you don't vent: air mixture drastically lowers the temperature at a given pressure.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.499994 | 2019-11-10T16:38:25 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/103376",
"authors": [
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"rumtscho",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
104305 | Smoking with chips after sous vide
I am planning on cooking a pork rack (pork crown). I like the precision of sous-vide, but I also like having a smokey flavor by using smoking chips.
So I am faced with a dilemma: Either grill the rack the traditional way, adding smoking chips throughout the process or cooking sous-vide, cooling down in an ice bath and making the crust on a grill for say 30min while also smoking some chips.
Would 30 min on the grill be enough for the smokey flavor? Or should I dispense sous-vide in this situation favoring thoroughly smoking the meat? Or should I try to compromise, by having very low heat in the gas grill, turning on only one burner and using indirect heat to have a sort of slow cook?
I only have a gas grill and smoke chips, I don't actually have a smoker.
You can either smoke meats before or after sous vide. Of course, smoking before means you have to pay closer attention to the danger zone. As you point out, you are not really smoking, rather you are grill-roasting to finish the exterior of your crown roast. In this case, I would just do it after the cook step. Just add some wood chips to your grill. You will pick up some smokey flavor in even a shorter time than you suggest. Be careful, though. Your challenge will be to achieve the right balance between exterior crust and interior temperature without ruining the work you put in to sous vide in the first place.
A small shot of liquid smoke added to the bag before cooking the rack sous vide will give it a mild smokiness that captures most of the flavors of real outdoor cooking.
With a grill and wood chips you can still impart some flavor. Try to keep the temperature low (say 300°F) to avoid negating the effect of low and slow sous vide. To avoid drying it out, don't post-sous vide smoke it for more than 3 hours.
If you want the deepest smoke flavor you would want to smoke the meat from raw and could use the sous vide to finish it off (the flavorful compounds in smoke will adhere to and penetrate raw meat much better than they will cooked meat).
I don't have liquid smoke. I take it from your answer, that I can't have perfect smoke and sous-vide simultaneously and should just do a regular grill, if I want sufficient smokey flavor is that correct?
Flavor is often a personal preference. Just as you can experiment with different types of wood chips to smoking with, I would encourage you to try sous vide + smoking and see if you find a combination that satisfies your palate.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.500509 | 2019-12-23T23:36:11 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/104305",
"authors": [
"Matthew K",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/80164",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
98716 | Overnight cooking: Is sous-vide safer than electrical oven?
I am a fan of bone broths, but always have a problem with the overnight cooking part.
For the overnight cooking part I have the following options:
Interrupt cook, let the pot hot on the stove, continue in the morning (this is what I am doing now)
Cook overnight on the stove (this seems to be a bad idea)
Cook in an oven overnight. Some people say, that this is a lot safer, than the stove, but I am not willing to do it.
Stand-alone stove on the balcony. I actually believe, that this should be pretty safe.
My latest idea: Put the bone broth pot in a big container full of water and heat the water with a sous-vide circulator.
Since sous-vide circulators can not reach as high temperatures as an oven and since they are, after all, in a container full of water, is it safe to assume, that overnight sous-vide is safer than overnight oven cooking? I could make it even safer, by putting the whole thing on the balcony, however this would probably increase energy consumption dramatically.
What are you worried about safety from?
I would consider putting electrical appliances outdoors to be the least safe of all possible conditions.
@Tetsujin living in the UK I'm inclined to agree but in countries where the climate is more suited to outdoor living there are often covered areas outside that are very suitable.
I am worried about fires / smoke. I don't want to kill myself and my family over slightly deeper flavour in soup.
On top of the stove the issue is boiling dry. At that point the temperature can rise almost unchecked. This will result in unpleasant fumes at best, flames at worst. Even in the latter case, because you should be using a fairly tight fitting lid, everything should be contained, but I wouldn't rely on that.
The oven is different. Once the pot is up to boiling point you can set an oven temperature of just over 100°C. In the unlikely event of boiling dry, the contents still won't exceed that temperature - no burning. Like you I assume an electric oven.
Using a sous vide circulator you'll actually struggle to get the inner pot hot enough - you generally want a gentle simmer for broth/stock. The outer pot will loose a lot to evaporation even if it never boils.
I'd have more confidence in the oven, but if you're shopping there's one more option - a slow cooker. Making stock is trivial: put in bones (and any veg etc.); pour over boiling water; leave on high for a few hours or low for up to a couple of days; strain. I normally use low overnight for chicken stock with onion, celery, & herbs. These are specifically designed to run for long periods unattended without boiling dry (as the power input is low and the lid fits tightly).
Joule can achieve about 94°C, which I think should be enough for a gentile simmer? The evaporation can be managed quite effectively by putting a lid on the whole thing.
The sous vide setups (stick in bath type) I've seen aren't designed to be covered that well, so evaporation from the outer pot would be an issue. You'd also want to start with the inner pot boiling otherwise it would take a very long time to get up to temperature. But it could be done if you deal with both of these
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.500733 | 2019-04-27T22:00:23 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/98716",
"authors": [
"Chris H",
"FuzzyChef",
"Tetsujin",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20413",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/42066",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7180",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
102365 | Is pressure canning, weeks after regular canning safe?
Recently I have learned, that I need to use a pressure canner when canning paprika. So far I have only used my oven.
I have ordered a pressure canner, but it may arrive end of october. At this time, the season for paprika may already be over.
So my plan is to do my regular canning procedure now, that I can get good paprika at a good price, boil the jars in water (or water bath in oven), then let them sit on the shelf until my pressure canner arrives and cook them in the pressure canner again.
Would this work and is it safe? Would I lose a lot of quality this way? The paprikas are cooked in the oven or grilled on very high heat, after which they are canned. So there is plenty of heat involved already. But would an additional canning procedure do much damage?
Do you have the ability to freeze the peppers after roasting? Then you could just wait until your pressure canner arrives.
I do, this was my second idea. But I thought that the freezing and thawing would be bad for the texture?
It will, but that is better than possible spoilage if you need to store them temporarily.
BTW, note that using your oven for canning was never, ever safe.
This is why I got a canner.
I can't come up with a way to do this that is not problematic.
First, no canning authority I can find provides instructions on how to re-can under pressure food that is already canned. The closest instructions I can find are from the national center for food preservation, which basically say "don't do it".
Second, you're talking about a month between initial canning and then re-canning under pressure. A month is plenty of time for botulism spores and other toxic microorganisms to germinate, which really only need a couple of days, so you'd need to keep the jars in the fridge. Given this, it would be tempting to roast the peppers and not process them at all and just keep them in the fridge, but again in that amount of time they would get moldy (and certainly lose flavor). Freezing them would destroy their texture.
Third, this means you would be running the full jarring process twice, which would almost certainly result in soft, mushy peppers. You can't cut the time on either proccessing cycle, because without the full cycle neither would be safe. I suspect that you'd also have a high ratio of jar/lid failure.
Let me suggest an alternative: package your peppers in a hot water bath, now, with added citric acid. Raising their acidity makes them safe to be jarred at air pressure, and they will still be pretty good. Save the pressure canner for next year.
According to the link I shouldn't even be canning roasted peppers, only fresh. Is that right?
No, it's not. The particular point about re-canning cooked green beans has to do with packing -- they may be too dense to ever pasteurize properly. That shouldn't be a problem with whole roasted peppers. If you're packing sliced roasted peppers, you want to pack them loose for this reason; that's why commercial ones come floating fairly loose in a syrup.
I've added an alternative course of action to my answer.
I got my canner delivered just in time, so this issue is resolved now.
Lucky! Enjoy your canning.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.501006 | 2019-09-17T21:36:24 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/102365",
"authors": [
"FuzzyChef",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7180",
"moscafj",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
92585 | When conserving food in jar, why is the jar turned on its head when cooling?
I am talking about the process, where you cook food, for example, a vegetable and conserve it in a jar. The jar can then be stored in a non-refrigerated area.
Many recipes include adding salt, vinegar or some other preservative to the jar.
The process I am talking about only uses water and heat.
I am trying to do this for a third year, each time I have multiple jars going bad.
Most tutorials include the filled jar being heated up (in a water bath) and then (or even while heating) being turned on its head and being let to cool in this position until it is ready to be stored away.
Most tutorials mention, that there is a vacuum being formed, and the jar being on its head somehow helps the process.
It looks something like this:
The way I understand it is that during the heating process the air in the jar expands and escapes the jar, which reduces the air.
What I don't understand is why this is necessary, obviously there is no perfect vacuum and why the jar needs to be turned on its head?
Also, since the jar is cooked and all bacteria killed, why is air a problem?
Generally turning a jar upside down after filling is a alternative to a proper hot-water bath, not an addition to it. This is known as the inversion method, and is used by many cooks of jams, jellies, mustards, and other very-low-risk canned foods.
The idea of inversion canning is that, by forcing the air in the jar through the hot liquid, you can kill and bacteria in the air (and on the inside of the lid). It is not considered safe by experts, because there are numerous ways that bacteria can survive the process.
If you are doing "proper" canning, that is heating up the lidded jar to 85C or above, the sealing, inverting the jars is in fact a bad idea as it could result in liquid preventing the jar lid from sealing properly. The Ball jar corporation says “Do not invert. move or store jars while cooling, as this may cause seal failure.” At the least, it's unnecessary.
Incidentally, the photo you picked for this is an example of completely-totally-unsafe canning.
@ FuzzyChef, to clarify your comment: the reason you say the photo represents unsafe canning is ... the re-use of lids that originally came on commercially canned foods instead of using fresh sealing-caps and rings to tighten them down ?
It should be made clear that inversion canning (instead of) proper waterbath processing of canned food is NOT a safe method of canning. It is an old outdated method that will not reliably result in a safe and shelf stable product.
Inversion AFTER waterbathing is unnecessary and is more likely to cause seal failure as the jar contents can seep under the lid.
@LorelC. the contents appear to be largely tomatoes, which are a low-acid food and therefore high-risk for botulism when canned. They can't even be safely prepared in a conventional water bath; you need a pressure canner which can raise the exterior temperature past the normal boiling point. On top of that, these are re-using lids as you mentioned and they appear to be barely cooked at all. It somehow combines almost every single potentially-lethal mistake you can make.
Logophobe is exactly right.
First thought it was bell peppers, even worse :)
Its peppers, but there might be some tomatoes as well.
I agree with the above response, in that it is safer to sterilise by immersing the entire jar in boiling water. However, in answer to your question, the idea is to sterilise the lid and inner rim of the jar after sealing by getting them to >85°C for 10 mins. This only works if you make sure you bottle your preserve when far hotter than 85°C so that it takes longer than 10 mins to drop below that temp. Assuming you have steam or oven sterilised your jars before bottling, you are only killing the stray bug that floats into the jar in the brief moment when you open it and pour in the preserve before replacing the lid.
I did immerse the entire jar, but heads down. Guess that's unnecessary?
@user1721135 Waterbathing upside down is a new one to me. That would heat okay but would result in no vaccum being able to form and contents likely seeping out. Waterbath them upright and ensure the water is at least 1" above the jars.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.501287 | 2018-10-01T21:10:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/92585",
"authors": [
"BunnyKnitter",
"FuzzyChef",
"Lorel C.",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/25059",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35312",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/36737",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/47201",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/7180",
"logophobe",
"rackandboneman",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
104500 | Canned Peppers: Very subtle acidic taste
I opened a jar of roasted peppers I canned about a month ago. Because it was a big jar and it ended up lacking water I put it in my 4C° fridge. It was canned at about 120C°-125C° without any additives like salt or vinegar.
After opening it, unlike other jars I've opened, I noticed a very subtle acidic taste, kind of like it was carbonated. It wasn't unpleasant and there is no bad taste or odor.
Is the jar spoiled or is this probably part of the normal range of flavors? Since paprika are very alkaline, why would it suddenly taste a bit acidic?
I can't tell you about the taste, but paprika are not very alkaline. They are very slightly acidic, like practically all fruit and vegetables.
"carbonated" usually isn't a good thing in canning. If something is actually creating gas, it might indicate fermentation or botulism. Assuming you used a Ball/Mason style jar with a dome lid, was the lid still vacuum sealed, or had it "popped up" or even been pressurised?
Hm now I reopened the jar and there was clear pressure and I now see bubble formation, kind of like a carbonated drink. So its most likely fermenting? Is it eatable or should I rather toss it? I had it in the fridge at 4C° so I guess it can't be botulism right?
@user1721135 your "it can't be botulism" statement is based on the assumption that the whole process went as planned. The fact that it is fermenting means that there were deviations between what you thought the conditions were, and what they really were - and you can't know what these deviations were, exactly. So at that point, anything is possible, you can't continue using your assumptions.
I just assume that the dangerous kind of botulism can not grow at 4C. Is this wrong? Anyway I tossed it, whatever it was it was not planned.
It sounds like (benign, tasty) lactic acid bacteria fermentation, possibly along with leuconostoc or something. But without the appropriate levels of salt, it's also possible that less friendly microorganisms are also growing.
As a rule, canned food with unexpected microbial activity -- regardless of process -- should always be discarded. Even if it's not botulinum (it's almost certainly not), a jar of peppers isn't worth a week on the toilet.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.501795 | 2020-01-02T21:16:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/104500",
"authors": [
"AMtwo",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45339",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/63901",
"rumtscho",
"user1721135"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87736 | Achieve butter-like aroma in a vegan recipe
I am planning to cook a French bœuf bourguignon, but a vegan version. Apart from the wine and the herbs, I recall that the butter had quite an impact on the vegetarian version that I previously made.
When reading about vegan butters online the goal is usually to aim for a certain consistency, for baking etc. Is there a way to add butter flavor to this vegan recipe?
Yeah, the latter idea had crossed my mind - diacetyl?
Diacetyl is indeed key to most artificial butter flavor - it is also actually in butter. BTW; in case you happen to get your hands on the pure substance: Careful with that stuff, it is said to be toxic when undiluted.
Diacetyl of what?
@Alchimista (CH_3CO)_2
Ah butanedione. Certainly what you need. It should be ok. I do not think you will breath lot of it for normal food kitchen preparation. :) http://www.toxipedia.org/display/toxipedia/Diacetyl
It can just me, but I find a lot buttery and pine nut taste in green salad valeriana. You might be able to get something out of it. Perhaps infusing oil. Actually while writing I think pine nuts taste is most descriptive of what I feel. It should be a salad reach of oily components, as compared to lettuces etc.
@Alchimista Valeriana locusta not to be confused with Valeriana officinalis..
Right. Not to be confused with officinalis. :)
I actually substitute high quality olive oil for everything in my cooking now. There is a 'butter oil' which is olive oil pressed/infused with celery seed and lettuce extract which actually has a remarkably similar flavor profile. So if you live near any specialty olive oil shops that is definitely something to ask for! It's great on popcorn too. And better than all these funny hydrogenated oils.
https://unrefinedolive.com/collections/infused-olive-oils/products/butter-infused-olive-oil?variant=39727564114
This is the product I was talking about.
Hard to imagine how fennel contributes to a buttery flavour. Do you have the ingredients for that oil? Can't find them online.
https://unrefinedolive.com/collections/infused-olive-oils/products/butter-infused-olive-oil?variant=39727564114 this is exactly the oil I bought, in the description it says it is infused with celery seed and lettuce extract! I will correct my comment above
Many of the modern "vegan butter-like spreads for cooking" have a passable butter flavor, not like the margarines of yore. You do want to get one that mentions it can be used in cooking/baking, rather than the "light" versions that are nearly half water. That's a fairly simple substitution. I'm knee-jerking away from suggesting a specific brand, both to be not spamming and because there are several options.
I find the ones made of mostly or partly of palm oil to be the most delicious and reminiscent of butter. So not a particular brand, per se, but something to keep an eye out for.
Macadamia Nut oil fools people as clarified or drawn butter
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.502002 | 2018-02-13T19:14:16 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87736",
"authors": [
"Alchimista",
"Richard",
"Todd Wilcox",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35312",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/40561",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/53927",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/59209",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/64764",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/65112",
"noumenal",
"rackandboneman",
"soup4life"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87807 | Is it safe to use flax thread for cooking?
I was not able to get hold of hemp thread and so I bought flax (100%) thread instead. It smells a bit funny, but is it safe to use for cooking? I plan to use it for a bouquet.
Not sure what country you're in. If it smells I wouldn't use it for cooking, but you might be able to soak in hot water to remove the smell/taste. I'd go for cotton thread. Hemp comes from the same plant as marijuana so growing is highly regulated in the US.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.502248 | 2018-02-17T11:22:26 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87807",
"authors": [
"MaxW",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/40279"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87780 | Why is a Gruyère sweet when it contains 0 carbohydrates?
I have read on packaging that a Gruyère appears to be around 0 g, maybe 0.4 g carbohydrates per 100g. How come it tastes sweet?
Cheese is a complex variety of chemical compounds some of which can taste sweet. I don't know the exact make up of Gruyère but according to this article there are a couple of compounds that are known to lend a sweet flavor. Including: butyric acid, Alanine, glycine, serine, threonine, ethanol, etc.
Wikipedia says that Gruyère is a "sweet" cheese so I would assume these compounds mentioned above are in higher amounts than other cheeses.
Makes sense. It could be the furaneol or the butyric acid.
Butyric acid could certainly bring the sour/pungent element that we associate with something being CLOYINGLY sweet. Ethanol? Ironically, it isn't sweet but chemically not that far from a sugar.
I'm only quoting the article. As a person in the wine industry for decades ethanol does have a sweet component and this peer reviewed article backs me up https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10940547
Ethanol is certainly sweet and fruity.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.502323 | 2018-02-16T19:22:12 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87780",
"authors": [
"Alchimista",
"farmersteve",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35312",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/55005",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/59209",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/65112",
"noumenal",
"rackandboneman"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87824 | Ways to displace liquids while cooking
I want to cook some beef in the slow cooker and I want it to be completely submerged in the sauce. To do this I will need considerably more sauce than I require. Since the ingredients are expensive, I don't want to waste it. I was thinking I could put something into the slow cooker to displace liquid and allow me to submerge the meat without needing more sauce. I don't know what to use though. I'll need something that won't hurt the flavor of the food, can handle the heat and more importantly won't cause a lot of sauce to stick to it. Anyone have any suggestions on what I can do here?
I assume "reduce the sauce later", "cut the meat differently" and "add root vegetables" are not what you are looking for?
Glass bottles filled with preheated water or so
What is the cut of beef? Can you not cut the meat into portions so it can be packed? Could you get a slow cooker better sized to the beef?
It's a solid lump that I don't want to cut up. It's shape means I need more liquid than required to submerge it
There are many kitchen utensils which will work. My favorite will be canning jars, filled with some water so they don't float, and sealed. Food safe, can withstand the temperature, easily cleaned. One may be enough, if you find the perfect size.
If you don't have them and want to try it with something else first, look in your kitchen for metal or ceramic vessels which can stand upright and are several centimeters taller than the sauce level after displacement. This can be a thermos flask without the cap, or even a tall mug. Just put it there, again fill with some water, and fill the sauce around it. The biggest risk is that it topples over, and you end up with a somewhat watery sauce.
You are going to think this is a little crazy but ceramic or glass marbles. Put in the meat, fill in the gaps with marbles, and then fill with sauce.
I have not used marbles with wine bottles but I have seen ads for wine marbles.
Marbles have a lot of surface area so it may not be optimal for not a lot of sauce to stick. Pour the marbles in a strainer. Maybe you could rinse the marbles then reduce the sauce?
To me the best solution is to cut the meat so it will pack but I get the impression you don't want to do that.
Take a tip from the sous vide crowd and vacuum-pack the meat and sauce, then fill the cooker with all the water you like.
Because there's no evaporation when you vacuum pack, you end up with a much more watery result. You also don't get that little bit of browning that can happen right where the surface touches the pot (that bit of a ring that you can get as things evaporate, but also develops flavor).
Potatoes. You also get a side dish from them. But they will of course affect the sauce, which might put you off them - but the flavor effect is pretty minimal. Washed, unpeeled boiling potatoes would be my choice...
It's going to be in the slow cooker overnight. The potatoes will turn to mush and ruin the dish
@Ecnerwal this sounds like one of the rare occasions where it is best to have two separate answers posted by the same person - a very creative idea, and totally separate from your first one
@DanHastings That was question in a comment 2 days ago. And you have not answer by questions from 2 days ago.
@DanHastings : Not if it's an acidic sauce (eg, tomato). Especially with the skin still on. (note -- "boiling potato" is "waxy potato" not "starchy potato". See https://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/784/67 ). I would not use a starchy / baking / floury potato for this. Maybe use "baby" potatoes or fingerlings, if you want to splurge.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.502460 | 2018-02-18T10:50:20 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87824",
"authors": [
"Alchimista",
"Dan Hastings",
"Joe",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35312",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45636",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/59209",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/65223",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67",
"paparazzo",
"rackandboneman",
"rumtscho"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87947 | How to keep edible cookie dough soft after refrigerated?
I have experimented with about 5-6 edible cookie dough recipes. All are similar to regular cookie recipes minus the eggs and I also use heat treated flour to kill any bacteria. They all taste amazing but as soon as we place the bowl in the refrigerator it becomes rock hard. I need to find a way to keep it soft and scoopable after refrigeration. Any ideas what I could add?
Have you let it warm back up again? What are you doing with the dough? Is your fat butter?
How do you store it in the bowl? Uncovered, a lid? Try to keep air from the dough, e.g. by tightly wrapping in saran wrap.
Since most recipes use butter, I'm going to guess that's what you're using.
Think about butter in the fridge... what's it like? It's hard. Stiff.
Well, that's why your dough is getting hard. So, you have a couple of solutions.
Replace the butter with a fat that's softer when cold instead of using butter. Perhaps coconut oil?
Portion the dough before you put it into the fridge and let your portion warm back up to room temperature before eating it.
For me, I'd go with option two because I'd be worried about the texture when the cookies were warm, which would be much softer than they are currently, and I'd be worried about changing the flavor. If you're using the dough in something really cold - like ice cream - then option 1 would probably be fine for your needs.
One possible option is to add water (or milk, or other liquid) to your cookie dough recipe. This will make the dough extra soft when room temperature, so when it sets up as it cools, even the stiffer dough will be relatively soft and scoopable.
If you are intending to warm it to room temp before enjoying, you'd want to use only a little liquid (like, try adding tbs by tbs), so as not to dilute the flavor overmuch....and you may not need very much to soften it, either. If you want to enjoy it straight from the fridge, you would want to add more water for a softer overall result.
Adding a bland ingredient like water will likely make the cookie dough a little less flavorful, but the difference might not be great - depending on how much you add and how flavorful it starts out. On the other hand, a softer dough will likely seem more flavorful than a drier one, as the flavors are more available to spread on the tongue - so there's usually quite a bit of wiggle room as to how much water you can add before it starts to taste watery.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.502791 | 2018-02-23T18:14:01 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87947",
"authors": [
"Catija",
"Ian",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/33128",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/55819"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87978 | Can soap be put it in the water used for Sous Vide?
This is a bit of a strange question, but may a small amount of soap or detergent be placed in the water when cooking with sous vide? Is the vacuum effective enough to prevent any taste of soap from entering the food contents? Thank you
If the bags seal well enough for vacuum they will deal well enough to keep the soap out. I'd be more concerned about contaminating the food when you open it (though you could rinse). Why would you want to do this though? It sounds almost like you're trying to combine cooking and washing up in one process.
Thank you for the response. There may be a secanrio where this could serve as a solution for those who observe kosher dietary laws. That is why I am trying to figure out if it is a viable option. Clearly the bag would need to be rinsed prior to opening to avoid contaminating the food.
That's interesting - it didn't cross my mind. I assume in that case the alternative is two sous vide units, but my understanding is limited at best. The bags are meant to be impermeable, but I reckon most people would hesitate to say yes. In your position I'd test it on myself with some very plain food that would reveal a contaminated taste, combined with a much stronger soap solution.
The water temperature of the rinse may also be important to the end result, depending on the next step in the cooking.
Thank you. Another suggestion I received would be to make to put the vacuum sealed bag inside another bag and vacuum seal it as well, so as to ensure it is impermeable. Do you think that is possible? Would it affect the sous vide process in any way?
I wondered about that myself. I'm not an expert so didn't suggest it, but can't see a logical reason not to
Curious, in what way kosher laws have to do with a cooking technique ?
@OferLivnat Your second question - is that intended to address the possibility of soap contamination, or to address the possibility of meat/milk/etc. cross-contamination? Either way I would suggest a separate question for that - it's a very different question than your first; or ask a question that is actually what you're getting at (with details as to why you are concerned from a Kosher point of view).
I do agree with the others here: you could get better answers if you explain what the rule is you're trying to follow, so that folks know what alternatives might or might not be helpful for you.
They make antifoam. It might serve better than soap to lower surface tension. Food grade? I think so. Do a search. It may well be the stuff for you. If you go with soap be sure to find food grade. Sooner or later you WILL have a leak.
I'd be concerned with two things here.
First of all, I'd be concerned that some soap might contaminate the food product without you knowing about it. If it's a low enough concentration of soap that it would not cause significant harm to ingest, this isn't a big concern; on the other hand, I might be inclined to use something other than actual soap that is able to accomplish the purpose here if that is possible - for example, a mild bleach solution (I've also seen "pool shock" suggested) might be safer. Do some research on whatever you add to make sure it's actually okay for this purpose. If your purpose is to remove bacteria, this is probably your best bet.
Second, I'd be concerned with odors from the soap affecting the food being cooked. Even if the soap never contacts the food, the odors that make the soap smell good are much more likely to affect things in my experience. If you do use soap, use an odorless soap (something like original (blue) Dawn, no endoresement suggested).
If you can edit the question to provide more of an explanation as to why you're asking it (you mention Kosher laws, but not the specific issue you're trying to address) you may get a better answer.
Potentially ingesting bleach is better than soap?
@mattm Yes (at low concentrations). Bleach water is used as a disinfectant commonly in food service in cases where the bleach is not later rinsed off (three compartment sink, right?); pool water is more-or-less bleach water, and chlorine is in the water you drink from the city if you're in a major city or most smaller ones. Mostly, bleach needs waaaaay lower concentrations to do anything useful, evaporates at room temperature reasonably quickly, and dissolves well in water; soap would need a much higher concentration to do anything useful such that it would make you sick.
This depends on the bag used. Most zip style bags are not impermeable. Whether or not a soap flavor or aroma molecule is large enough to permeate is something I do not know. However, as suggested in the conversation above, you can use a vacuum sealer, and the appropriate bags (more impermeable) to seal a bag within a bag. I think you would be good to go in this scenario.
If you really want to be sure, then use a retort bag to vacuum seal the food. The retort bag is not gas permeable so you don't have to worry about any soap aromas affecting the food.
Retort bags are usually made from multi layer laminated plastic sheeting designed specifically to be gas impermeable and heat resistant.
I would say that even vacuum-sealed bags are not 100% non-permeable. I say this because I have noticed that during very long sous vide baths,like a 48-hour cook on full briskets in vacuum sealed bags, I can smell the meat cooking after about 24 hours. No leaks in the bags but still smelling the brisket. Curious but real.
Therefore, I would hesitate to add soap or any other product to the water bath...especially if the bag were to lose the seal completely. Recoverable if caught quickly but not if there is foreign matter in the water.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.503013 | 2018-02-25T07:50:22 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87978",
"authors": [
"Cascabel",
"Chris H",
"Joe M",
"Max",
"Ofer Livnat",
"Wayfaring Stranger",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/1672",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20118",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20413",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/23682",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/37621",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/5455",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/65373",
"mattm"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
88102 | How can you safely remove 9x13 pans/dishes from a hot water bath?
I like to bake my corn pudding in a bain marie but I have difficulty removing it from the pan. Any suggestions?
What does your setup look like now? What types of containers are you using?
A picture would be helpful, what are you trying to remove? The 9x13 from the bain marie or the corn pudding from the 9x13?
This can be tricky, as you are trying to remove the pan with the hot pudding before it cools completely, without sloshing water into the inner pan.
There are wire rack arrangements with handles that extend on the narrow ends of the pan, but these are an extra expense and require extra height in the oven rack.
A home solution for this is to string some butchers twine criss-crossed under the pan you are using, and extend this over the sides of the bain marie pan. The problem here is that this will wick some water out and it will drip, but does not cause a big problem for me when making bread pudding using a similar method.
When you remove the bain and pudding at end of cook time, you can lift the pan out using the string, but make sure it is very steady. Make sure you use enough string to support the pan.
String:
NOTE: I have big hands, and can do this. THIS CAN BE DANGEROUS if it slips and plunges into the hot water !!
Finally, just lift it out an inch or so, then rotate 90 degrees and rest it on the outer pan. You can now dry the side handles and move it with dry potholders from there.
Sounds like something it would be good to practice on using room temperature water, and maybe a loaf of bread in the pan.
If the pan isn't a very tight fit, you can simply lift it out with silicone oven mitts (random example on amazon).
These are waterproof and allow you to dip your hands in boiling water for some time.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.503458 | 2018-03-02T19:03:06 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/88102",
"authors": [
"Catija",
"Cos Callis",
"Wayfaring Stranger",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/33128",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/5455",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/6279"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
88126 | why does my meatloaf fall apart when I slice it?
My recipe:
1.5 lbs of 90/10 lean ground beef
.75 c oatmeal
.75 c chopped onion
1 extra large beaten egg
1 tbsp worchestershire sauce
3-4 chopped garlic cloves
.5 tsp salt
.5 tsp black pepper
I bake at 350 F until thermometer reads 170 F and let it rest in pan for 10 minutes before plating and slicing but even with a super sharp knife it falls apart.
The problem is your recipe. Try adding 1.5 cups of unsalted cracker crumbs.
Instant or regular oatmeal? It needs to suck up liquids which is why I used dried bread crumbs. 20-30 minutes might be a better wait time as the loaf tends to bond more strongly with cooling.
Do you want it to be gluten-free? Gluten-free cooking has an additional challenge to it, and it takes some experimentation and getting some basic recipes you like successfully converted before getting the hang of it I think. There may be other options than oatmeal, for sure. Oatmeal, in its many forms, can be difficult to use. Wayfaring Stranger asks a good question about which type of oatmeal. There's also sorghum, arrowroot, buckwheat (careful with this one), pamela's paleo flour is pretty awesome, and a lot more flours and meals to try, each with their own properties...
It's the oatmeal. I suspect it is absorbing the egg and preventing it from binding the meat together. I suggest switching to a small amount of breadcrumbs, or day old bread torn into very small pieces if you like a little more texture.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.503637 | 2018-03-03T23:50:27 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/88126",
"authors": [
"MaxW",
"NOTjust -- user4304",
"Wayfaring Stranger",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/11471",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/40279",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/5455"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
88230 | Flames into cooking area
Is this normal to happen it doesn’t happen all the time. Just off and on when using oven
That's pretty scary
That does not seem normal. Maybe contact manufacturer?
Is it happening when you are set to certain temps? Like it doesn't happen at 325°F but does at 450°F?
I’ll have to check that out I’m not really sure . It was seo at 425 most times.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.503779 | 2018-03-09T16:29:15 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/88230",
"authors": [
"Brenda",
"Cos Callis",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17143",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/61534",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/6279",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/65648",
"moscafj",
"mroll"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
88259 | If I double a bread recipe do I double the salt?
I think it was my mom who gave me the rule of thumb that when you double a recipe you double everything except the salt.
I'm willing to defer to her wisdom for the sorts of soups and stews she liked to make, but she didn't do much baking, and I never saw her make bread leavened with yeast.
I know salt and yeast aren't friends and I'm trying to double a rustic ciabatta recipe.
related : https://cooking.stackexchange.com/q/9458/67
I cannot think of a basis not to double the salt.
If you’re measuring your ingredients by weight, I don’t see any reason not to double the salt. I usually do. If you’re measuring ingredients by volume, it might be best to err on the less salty side, as different types of salt have different densities. Hope this helps
How is density different with scale?
@Paparazzi “lf you’re measuring ingredients by volume” - the poster clearly refers to those cases where cooks don’t weigh.
@Stephie How does weigh have anything to do with double a recipe? How will volume be off any different if I double a recipe? If volume is off by 10% will volume not be off be 10% when a recipe is doubled?
A cup of AP flour abnd a cup of whole wheat flour. And if you’re measuring out 3 cups, each cup may differently depending on tightly yo pack the cup. A tsp of kosher salt weighs less than a tsp of table salt, but 4 grams of salt is 4 grams, regardless of type. I’m still learning about percentages, so far, it’s worked very well for me.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.503856 | 2018-03-10T16:12:14 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/88259",
"authors": [
"Joe",
"Just Joel",
"Stephie",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/28879",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45636",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/65650",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67",
"paparazzo"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
88398 | I left pickled ginger left out of fridge
I accidentally left some opened pickled ginger out of the fridge for 8 hours. is it still good?
Does the jar say "must be refrigerated after opening"?
I went in and looked at the jar when I noticed it had been out and someone in my household had taken the label off. I don't know why? I looked on Amazon where they also sell it and it doesn't say anything about refrigeration.
Possible duplicate of How do I know if food left at room temperature is still safe to eat?
@Fabby Well, not really a duplicate, given that this is a pickled product. I don’t refrigerate pickled veg not least because you can’t taste stuff when it’s cold and it’s already undergone a preserving process.
@Spagirl that doesn't really mean it's necessarily safe to do. Heck, some of the pickle brands here are sold chilled in sealed jars.
Food safety guidelines would say a definite no. The temperature "danger zone" is between 40 degrees F (slightly warmer than your fridge temp) and 140 degrees F. Assuming you keep your house around a normal temp your ginger was most definitely in that range for at least 2 hours (the max allowed time a food is considered "safe"). There's no way to guarantee that the pickling liquid was acidic enough to keep it safe, especially since you don't know if the original label said that refrigeration was required. Commercial products that are pickled and canned are not the same as an opened product, because the canning process creates a vacuum (the lid "pops" when you open it).
All that being said, you may keep it and eat it and never get sick. That's up to you to decide, but for peace of mind, I'd throw away what you have and spend the extra few dollars to buy a new jar.
Your ginger is certainly still good.
There is an answer on Cooking SE that will be referred to about food safety guidelines, and many people follow it as must-do.
Pickled eggs and sausages are out on the counters of some convenience stores and delis for many days. They are heavily salted and in vinegar.
Your pickled ginger is not as aggressively preserved, and is marked 'refrigerate after opening' to preserve quality over a several month period, so put it back in the fridge and it will be fine. Do that a bunch of times, though, and it will degrade and lose quality.
Pickled ginger will probably never 'spoil' in the sense of contamination, but lose quality through oxidation.
We are talking about GINGER here. It is used as an anti-microbial agent. Here is an excerpt from the abstract of this scientific paper:
Ginger (Zingiber officinale) has long been used as naturopathy due to their
potential antimicrobial activity against different microbial pathogens. Moreover, in many
countries like Bangladesh, ginger is used in different boiled food preparations. This study
was conducted to determine the antimicrobial activity of soybean oil extract of dried ginger
powder, using agar diffusion assay, against 24 isolates (4 of 6 different types) of food borne
pathogens including Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus,
Vibrio cholerae, Klebsiella spp. and Salmonella spp
Your ginger is fine. Put it back in the fridge if you haven't already.
Down votes with no comments? Not really our style, I thought.
"not as aggressively preserved" could mean "ineffectively preserved" here.
Downvoted for "certainly still good".
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.504096 | 2018-03-16T16:12:48 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/88398",
"authors": [
"Catija",
"Denise ",
"Erica",
"Fabby",
"MarsJarsGuitars-n-Chars",
"Spagirl",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/17272",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/33128",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/34942",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/35312",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/3853",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/64479",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/65834",
"rackandboneman"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
88562 | Pork loin in slow cooker
What temperature should a pork loin be when cooked in a slow cooker or how long should it cook?
Loin or tenderloin is a very lean cut of meat and should not be cooked in a slow cooker.
Slow cookers are better suited to cuts of meat with high amounts of connective tissue, like pork shoulder or chuck roast, that turns into gelatin as it cooks for a long time.
IMHO, tenderloin should be grilled or broiled just until the center is 145° or so. Then rested and sliced.
Good luck!
Totally agree with above answer. However I have done both pork loin and tenderloin in a slow cook/braise method and the meat will be dry but this can be made delicious by making sure to thicken your braising liquid at the end then applying it back to the meat. Just be sure to not add much salt to braising liquid until after reduction.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.504365 | 2018-03-23T15:34:38 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/88562",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
86975 | Savoury version of caramel or sugar cage
I am a hobbyist cook, who has recently taken to attempting elegant plating and presentation.
I particularly like to make "gourmet" versions of classic dishes (nothing novel about that I know).
My question is as follows:
I made a take on Peking Duck with plum sauce the other day and instead of a prawn crackers I made a potato tuile. It inspired me to make more decorative elements to my meals and was wondering if anyone had a tip on how to make a savoury version of a sugar or caramel cage as in the picture below. I've searched in vain on Google and have come up short.
Many thanks!
Why not making it sweet but seasoned with the sauce ingredients? Sugar is great for the cage because of the way it sets at room temperature.
You can make some pretty delicate cages using pastry, which is (or can be) pretty neutral in flavor.
An example is posted on a foodie blog post about a dinner they had at the restaurant L'Heritage in Kuala Lampur.
Slow-braised Black Angus ribs with sweetbread & morels in a choux pastry cage.
Images for "choux pastry cage" are pretty easy to find and they seem to be made in a couple of ways:
A "lattice" style cage that uses flat (premade) puff pastry dough into which slits are cut and then stretched to create openings and then baked. This can be done by hand or with a specialty rotary cutter called a "lattice cutter". Described in detail in this Joepastry article.
Using choux pastry, pipe the pastry around a form in the pattern you like using a small tip and then bake. This is described in a YouTube video here.
Joe Pastry's beautiful caged pears using the lattice cutter look like this:
The choux pastry from the video comes out looking like this... he uses them as bowls but you should be able to use them as cages instead.
Very nice, those look lovely!
I wonder if you could modify a recipe for cheese crisps.
The recipes I'm familiar with involve heating cheese through the melted stage and to a crispy crusty stage. It's usually done in disks or puddles, though the appearance is often airy or holed - from the bubbling of the cheese as it dries and sets, much like the lacy, caramelized cookies (Florentine, I believe).
And it seems from the recipes that it takes a bit for the cheese to crisp up after being taken off the heat, so you may be able to drape or fold the cheese directly from the heat so that as it cools it sets, crisps up, in rounded or arching configurations... and if you can't, you might be able to crisp them in such configurations using curved metal surfaces, like a metal or oven-safe glass bowl.
To move from the bubbly lacy disks to something more airy and cage-like, you would want long shreds - the cheese should be cut to matchsticks, rather than grated. Pre-shredded cheese is often dusted with starch which might help the shreds dry out by providing binding to the escaping oils... though it's probably not difficult to dust your own matchsticks if it does, in fact, help.
You'd have to scatter the shreds quite loosely to prevent them melting together - that is, with enough gaps to leave an impression of a net or cage. Because the space between means each strand or tangle is cooking more or less on their own on the baking sheet, you would need very short cooking times and a lot of vigilance to catch them while crisp and before burnt.
I think your question is more about the savoriness, as opposed to the technique of making the tuile. If so, look into less sweet sugars as a base, perhaps isomalt or an isomalt glucose mix.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.504459 | 2018-01-09T12:11:10 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/86975",
"authors": [
"Luciano",
"Megha",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/47365",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/53013"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87289 | Any danger to leaving brown sugar exposed to air?
Yesterday I went to check if I had brown sugar for a recipe and found that my bag, which comes with a zip lock, was totally unzipped I am guessing for months. Any danger here or should it be ok? I am guessing it's just for convience and to prevent spilling but curious if anyone has any knowledge.
It's "dark" if that matters.
NOTE: I am aware it probably dries it out faster and causes it to become hard but I consider that just a general thing with brown sugar and not a danger=)
It will more likely collect moisture than dry out.
Quality down a lot, and yes, tends to turn into a big hard block. I have used such before in things like sugar cures with reasonable results, a bit less molasses flavor IMO, but not for baking as the characteristics are changed, especially the higher moisture content expected from brown sugar. On danger, it would seem low and I personally would go by Jan's thoughts. Unlikely an issue unless it has been contaminated with liquids, debris, insects, etc. or ended up molding.
While avoiding exposing it to air is to prevent it from hardening, this doesn't occur because of "drying out," actually! The moisture in the air causes the sugar to stick together and form clumps that harden significantly and make it more difficult to work with.
Because it's actually becoming more moist, mold can be a concern there. Letting it sit slightly moist for a few months in the dark cabinet can make it a great place for mold to reproduce and grow. The good news is, most mold is easily detectable just by looking at it. Check the sugar thoroughly and you should be good to go!
In the future, I also suggest getting an airtight storage container like these: http://www.rubbermaid.com/en-US/brilliance-food-storage-containers
I use them for things that I keep a lot on hand of, like flour, sugar, and coffee grounds. They keep moisture out and also look nice sitting on a countertop.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.504747 | 2018-01-25T23:35:29 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87289",
"authors": [
"dlb",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45636",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/48330",
"paparazzo"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87302 | Is there any danger slicing pickles hours before frying them?
I am frying pickles later tonight, and I would like to pre-cut all my slices to fry. Is there any reason I shouldn't cut them then put them back in the jar for later?
May I ask why you want to cut them in advance.
I just wanted to cut them in advance in order to prepare for a big meal. I realize now that it might have been a dumb question. I ended up cutting them then putting them back in the jar and everything worked out fine!
No, there is no danger.
Just slice the pickles then put them back in the jar or alternatively wrap them in foil and place them back in the refrigerator until you need them.
I'd personally avoid foil .... it's not all that long of a time, but in general, acid and metals should be avoided.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.504927 | 2018-01-26T10:30:47 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87302",
"authors": [
"Joe",
"SSDesigns",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/45636",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/64680",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/67",
"paparazzo"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87337 | Can you refreeze spring roll wrappers.
Made spring rolls but still got loads of wrappers left, they came frozen so can I refreeze them?
Err... why not?
Yes, you can do.
Absolutely, as Robert said. Just be forwarned of condensation forming at the bottom when you thaw which will ruin the wrappers. So support with three or four layers of paper towels.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.505028 | 2018-01-27T17:57:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87337",
"authors": [
"Robert",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/20624",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/64706",
"sangheestyle"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87351 | Steamed chicken soup
I just made some steamed chicken breasts in a multicooker. Naturally, I still have water used for steaming in the bowl. It smells like and even looks like chicken soup. I'm not sure if it's good to eat, but wouldn't want to just throw it away.
What is usually done in this case?
What is "usually" done isn't really relevant as everyone has a different solution (and many probably do dump it). What do you want to do? What do you mean by "good to eat"? Safe? Tastes good? "Can I use this liquid to make soup?"
Actual chicken soup is based on chicken stock which is made by simmering a chicken carcass for several hours, usually with stick veg and a few herbs.
This long cooking breaks down the collagen in the bones, skin and cartilage, turning it into gelatin and extracting a lot of flavour.
The steaming water should be perfectly safe to eat but definitely isn't the same thing as chicken stock.
Maybe use it to cook rice or noodles to go with the chicken or if the breasts cam e off whole chicken then add it to the carcass to make stock if you want. But in reality it probably doesn't have that much flavour and probably isn't worth keeping unless you have an immediate use for it.
A an aside one of the great thing about poultry in general is that you can use the whole of the bird to make several dishes.
The breast meat provides good texture, the legs and thigh meat is moist and flavoursome and good for pies and stews, the carcass can be used for soup and the wings and timings can be turned into a tasty sauce or gravy.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.505094 | 2018-01-28T18:31:36 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87351",
"authors": [
"Catija",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/33128"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
87359 | Will putting a salted steak into a preheated stainless steel pan cause pitting?
Typically when I cook steak, I salt/pepper it and then leave it out for a while to warm up. Next, I preheat my non-stick pan, put in olive oil, and add the steak.
However, I recently bought a set of All Clad stainless steel pans. I’ve never cooked with stainless steel before and am worried about pitting.
Will adding a pre-salted steak to a preheated stainless steel pan (coated in olive oil) result in pitting? If so, how/when should I salt to avoid pitting?
Pepper can turn bitter when exposed to high temperatures, I suggest peppering just after you take the steak off the heat and rest it.
I don't think so. The contact time is so short. These pans are meant to take a beating. They are very high quality SS. If it bothers you, get a cheap cast iron pan for this type of thing, it's what I do. You can read more here
Pitting corrosion - The passive layer on stainless steel can be
attacked by certain chemical species. The chloride ion Cl- is the most
common of these and is found in everyday materials such as salt and
bleach. Pitting corrosion is avoided by making sure that stainless
steel does not come into prolonged contact with harmful chemicals or
by choosing a grade of steel which is more resistant to attack. The
pitting corrosion resistance can be assessed using the Pitting
Resistance Equivalent Number calculated from the alloy content.
It depends on the exact SS alloy. If you could find out what, EXACTLY, it is it would make a huge difference in answering the question more clearly. Most likely, for cooking, this has been considered, but no guarantees. Really high quality items are likely more expensive. Some less good, but still highly serviceable items can be found in some areas.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.505238 | 2018-01-29T07:55:42 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/87359",
"authors": [
"GdD",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/19707"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
93115 | Crisping Butternut Squash Chips
My goal is to make a crispy butternut squash chip without deep frying, but from all my various trials, the chips keep coming out chewy, with a texture similar to fruit leather.
My main method has been to slice butternut squash on a mandoline to approx 3-4 millimeters, toss in oil and salt, bake in oven at 400F for approx 35 min on a wire rack on top of a sheet pan, then place the chips in my dehydrator at 125F for 5 hours.
I've also tried boiling them instead of baking for 5 min before the dehydrator and baking at 400F for 20 min then 500F for 10 min before the dehydrator. Both methods still produced the same leathery / chewy texture. I've also tried putting the cut butternut squash straight in the dehydrator, but I don't like the raw taste that the squash retains. Finally, I've tried putting the squash slices in the oven at 300F for 30 min as well to no avail.
It seems to me that there might not be enough starch content in a butternut squash to get a true crispy chip like you'd find in a potato. Does this make sense?
I'd love any advice anyone can offer on how to get these things crispy and crunchy. Thanks!
You can try slicing it thinner (about 1mm or less, like a normal potato crisp), to further increase surface ratio in your crisps and make them dehydrate quicker and fully in the oven, so there is no moisture to migrate.
The difference between frying and baking is how your food is exposed to heat - frying is sudden exposure to high heat that leads to dehydration of the surface of your food and makes it crispy. This doesn't last long because then the moisture at the core of the food migrates to the surface and makes it soggy (like french fries and chicken nuggets). Unless your food lost completely all the remaining moisture and it doesn't migrate to the surface (like happens with potato crisps).
Cutting your squash as thinly as possible might be the solution to have crisps, so your oven can fully dehydrate them and you don't have the leathery texture.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.505391 | 2018-10-21T22:27:55 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/93115",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
99125 | Black stains on aluminium+teflon griddle
I have an old aluminium griddle with teflon siding. The griddle is covered with black stains that look like grease stains but won't go away by washing. I can scrape them away but I am afraid that this would damage the griddle. Is it safe to use it? Is there a way to remove the stains?
Its not ideal, but it's fine. It's burned on oil or grease. If you haven't used it for a while, it can impart a slightly musty flavour to your food.
A suggestion for cleaning - heat the pan whilst dry, then lightly spray with a cleaner & use a bristled brush to clean it whilst very hot.
What kind of cleaner do you suggest?
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.505560 | 2019-05-23T09:21:41 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/99125",
"authors": [
"firion",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/70096"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
93293 | When to cook week old moose meat?
I have obtained a large chunk of approximately week old moose meat that has been never stored in a freezer. I'm planning to eat it during the next week or two.
I cut it to 8 smaller steak-sized chunks, and cut 4 of those into small bits of which I'm going to make moose stew with carrots and onions. I'm just fried the small bits in my frying pan, and am currently making the stew in my pot.
The trouble is, I don't have a large frying pan or a large pot. I only have one small pot which I have free to use for the moose stew. The small bits of half of the moose meat fit in there with carrots and onions.
What should I do for the 4 other steak-sized chunks?
Should I just store them unfried in the refrigerator and cook when I need to, which will be approximately week from now? (Currently they are in the refrigerator, but I can always fry them in my frying pan that is free now.)
Should I fry them in my frying pan and store them in the refrigerator after frying them?
I want to maximize the amount of time the meat stays edible. If it stays edible for only one week from now, I have to eat moose meat every day. If it stays edible for two weeks, I can eat moose meat only every other day.
I of course theoretically have the option of just storing the rest in my freezer, but my freezer (or actually two freezers) are half full with frozen moose meat!
Do you know what part of the animal is included in your cuts?
If you intend to cook it all as stew meat, then I would advise to cut it now and freeze (wherever you can find space).
If you coat the steaks in salt, they will probably last a bit longer in the fridge without getting too smelly.
The only way I would recommend pre-cooking to extend life, is a roast, which should enable meat to last an extra week in the refrigerator. But, if your cuts of meat are not suitable to roasting, then that might be terrible to eat.
The final option - which is again, a waste of good moose meat - would be jerky. I can't advise on jerky techniques. Never made it.
I don't know which part of the animal is included in the cuts, but the meat looks high-quality to me. Doesn't smell at all bad now, smells quite good, actually. I searched a bit about the amount of time meat stays edible and it seems I probably have to freeze it anyway as most meat doesn't last two weeks.
Downvoted for "If you coat the steaks in salt, they will probably last a bit longer in the fridge without getting too smelly." On this site, we interpret questions on food safety as pertaining to actual food safety rules, and not personal intuition of "when it is too smelly to eat". If the OP follows a standard preservation practice which includes curing the meat in salt, OK, but that would produce something on the lines of pastrami. If they just add some salt, that does not make any difference from the point of view of safety.
I never said any of her moose is safe. Covering the meat with a little salt will keep it a little less smelly, a little while longer in the fridge.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.505635 | 2018-10-27T10:52:56 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/93293",
"authors": [
"Douglas Held",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/39172",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/4638",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/70160",
"juhist",
"rumtscho"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
93530 | What percent of the inside lining of the Instant Pot actually stainless steel?
I’ve tried 2 intant pots and both pitted with first use. The 2nd pot I never added salt to the recipe, made the squash soup recipe from the booklet and used vegan liquid buillion and washed pot immediately after cooking, and ALREADY pits have formed! I find this unacceptable. My stainless steel pots I’ve used for 20 yrs have never pitted or corroded even with salt added to recipes. How much stainless steel is used in the lining of the pot? If no salt is used there should NOT be corroded spots. This is absolutely unacceptable for a promoted “stainless steel” product. I know it’s made in China but is the steel lining like 1% steel? Is there any quality control in the manufacturing? The lining cooks off into the food, I don’t want metal in my food even if some deem it safe.
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because this is a chemistry / physics question, not a cooking question.
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because this is a chemistry / physics question, not a cooking question.
There is no such thing as a mixed material containing "x percent steel", unless you are talking an inhomogenous composite material (which would be most certainly more expensive than using all steel, and wouldn't look metallic). A metal alloy is either a steel (stainless or not stainless), or it isn't a steel.
There are thousands of stainless steel types (which you could group by 3 major types and a few specialty ones) which have varying corrosion resistance. Also, a major factor here is how the steel was polished/finished.
Have you compared cooking the same dish in another (non instant, non pressure) stainless steel pot?
Were there any other metal items (spoons, standoffs, immersion blenders...), especially made from something else than stainless steel, more than momentarily present in the liquid while cooking or while the contents were still hot? Stainless steel doesn't like being part of a boiling battery...
A salty, sour liquid at pressure cooker temperatures is actually a rather aggressive chemical mixture - even stainless steel has to work hard here.
By the way, the stainless steel typically used for pots has mostly iron (good for you), carbon (not bad for you), nickel and chromium (technically not good for you)...
I meant “how much steel” is the liner pot made of. If it’s mostly aluminum and just a thin layer of steel covering another metal? Thank u for your response. But I made squash soup, no acid or salt. And I make this also in my stainless steel Saladmaster pot WITH salt and have never had corrosion, including using stick blenders and all types of spoons to stir. The instant pot corrodes upon first use. It’s terrible to see such a reaction and doesn’t look nice either and I don’t want nickel and chromium in my food - metal poisoning.
And thank you for your detailed response . Also I only used a silicone spatula in it to stir. Was extremely careful after the first one pitted after one use. Having had to do a metal detox recently from metal poisoning showing in my bloodwork from using tinfoil and from amalgam filllings, I don’t want nickel and chromium in my blood system. It’s so frustrating the poor quality of a cooking pot
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.505855 | 2018-11-03T03:27:12 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/93530",
"authors": [
"Fabby",
"Luciano",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/34942",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/53013",
"https://cooking.stackexchange.com/users/70328",
"user70328"
],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
103472 | Is it ok for a cast iron skillet to have small visible pores on their surface?
I just got my first cast iron skillet, it's brand new pre-seasoned. While I know cast iron is generally porous, I was surprised to see actual visible pores in there. Is it normal for cast iron cookware to have these sort of pores?
If the pan was cast in sand, and it looks like that one was, it's not unusual at all. As long as you have a good seasoning on it, I think it should be fine.
| Stack Exchange | 2025-03-21T13:24:59.506113 | 2019-11-14T15:37:03 | {
"license": "Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/",
"site": "cooking.stackexchange.com",
"url": "https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/103472",
"authors": [],
"all_licenses": [
"Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"
],
"sort": "votes",
"include_comments": true
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.