Cook meat at what temperature?

[Samuel]

I did a search on what temperatures to cook meat, but didn't find enough information that pins this down for me.

My wife (she's vegetarian and won't change) screeches at me about cooking meat (hamburger, chops, bacon, etc,) at high temperatures, so I thought I'd better do some checking on this, as I've always (more or less) assumed that animal fat and meat could withstand high temps without being adversely affected. Anyway.....

I use an electric stainless steel fry pan for most things. Most meat like bacon and hamburger, I cook at 325 F. Hamburger for about 4 minutes per side. Bacon, I cook longer; that is, until it looks done enough or slightly crisp, maybe 6 or 7 minutes per side. Pork chops, I cook at 325 F for about 3 minutes per side.

Now, what I'm wondering is this: do I cook at too high a temp? Do I cook the meat too long or not long enough? Also, should I use a different way of cooking the meat, such as baking in a countertop oven? I use the countertop oven for chicken at 400 F and for about 20 minutes per side (40 minutes total).

How, in what and for how long do you cook various meats? Perhaps there are some posts on this that someone could point me to, also?

 

[SeekinTruth]

There should be no problem with saturated animal fats, but the protein may be effected by high heat. I usually cook most of my meat at a pretty low heat. There's some information, I'm pretty sure, on the forum. Try searching the "Life Without Bread" thread with the search terms.

 

[RedFox]

Here's a list of smoke points for different oils/fats
http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,17952.msg216454.html#msg216454

The fats for cooking on the paleo diet would be lard/tallow/butter/ghee and maybe coconut if you can tolerate it (probably best to use coconut rarely). I tend to cook just below the smoke point.
Having said that, a slow cooker on low setting for the entire day on a joint of lamb is always excellent. I'd think the temperature is pretty low on that.

 

[cassandra]

Meat should be sealed first on a higher heat otherwise it will be dry, then lower the heat until "done".
Maybe a minute or two on each side at a high temperature before turning down the heat.

 

[mcb]

I have been cooking larger cuts of meat in a crock pot on low, often overnight. I have been cooking other items including ground lamb & beef, in a covered frying pan on medium-low to low heat (gas stove, cast iron or stainless steel pan). I have been using comments in the book Deep Nutrition as a guide. See, for example, this post.

 

[Samuel]

I have been cooking larger cuts of meat in a crock pot on low, often overnight. I have been cooking other items including ground lamb & beef, in a covered frying pan on medium-low to low heat (gas stove, cast iron or stainless steel pan). I have been using comments in the book Deep Nutrition as a guide. See, for example, this post.

Thanks, everyone for your helpful posts. I just ordered Deep Nutrition and Primal Body, Primal Mind (which I had but lost last fall when I took a little trip to my sister's in Montana).

Searing the meat first at high temp and then cooking it at a lower temp makes sense.

 

[Gonzo]

Just thought I'd add that in addition to nutrition, texture and flavor, food safety is another consideration. To ensure dangerous bacteria has been adequately killed, certain temperatures for certain durations should be met. There are several sources for this information, including Health Canada's website (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/securit/kitchen-cuisine/cook-temp-cuisson-eng.php). Apologies if I'm bringing up the obvious, but just in case some novice cooks reading this thread didn't know, I thought it worthy of mention.

FWIW,
Gonzo

 

[Samuel]

Just thought I'd add that in addition to nutrition, texture and flavor, food safety is another consideration. To ensure dangerous bacteria has been adequately killed, certain temperatures for certain durations should be met. There are several sources for this information, including Health Canada's website (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/securit/kitchen-cuisine/cook-temp-cuisson-eng.php). Apologies if I'm bringing up the obvious, but just in case some novice cooks reading this thread didn't know, I thought it worthy of mention.

FWIW,
Gonzo

Yes, that's one of my concerns, too, and probably why I cook meat at too high a temp and for too long. I remember 40 years ago, my Mother always cooked pork longer than other meats to kill any Trichinosis. Of course, in those days (of Noah) most meat was clean of toxic bacteria, antibiotics, hormones, etc., that are part and parcel of today's meat. Even the organic and pasture fed (which I always buy) I'm skeptical of.

 

[mcb]

Just thought I'd add that in addition to nutrition, texture and flavor, food safety is another consideration. To ensure dangerous bacteria has been adequately killed, certain temperatures for certain durations should be met...

That's very true. I have found that when cooking ground beef and lamb in a covered frying pan on medium low to low there is more risk of overcooking than undercooking. I especially like the way the moisture and fat remain in the pan (until I pour it over the food, anyway) but I have to be careful not to leave it on the heat too long. I usually use a stainless steel alloy pan with a tight-fitting lid.

I prefer not to brown my meat. That is partly because I sometimes share a little with the cats, and they don't have the tolerance for acrylamide that humans have apparently developed, and partly because I doubt that it is good for humans either. At the same time it is important to cook ground meat thoroughly, because any surface contamination of the original meat becomes mixed throughout the entire mass during grinding. The important thing is that it is cooked, not that it is browned.

 

[mcb]

Yes, that's one of my concerns, too, and probably why I cook meat at too high a temp and for too long. I remember 40 years ago, my Mother always cooked pork longer than other meats to kill any Trichinosis. Of course, in those days (of Noah) most meat was clean of toxic bacteria, antibiotics, hormones, etc., that are part and parcel of today's meat. Even the organic and pasture fed (which I always buy) I'm skeptical of.

Some authors state that some of the highly toxic E. coli strains that are causing so much trouble today resulted from feeding grain to cattle. These strains are not toxic to the cattle themselves, but waste from infected cattle can find its way into the food supply in many ways -- on truck tires, for instance. Vegetables eaten raw can be especially risky, since there is no "kill step" in their preparation. Grass-fed cattle could be exposed to such pathogens as well, or their meat after they are butchered. Anything you eat could be, and some of the pathogens are extremely virulent: you don't need to swallow a whole lot of them to become sick.

You won't hear much about this from commercial media (deriving so much of their income from the factory food system) but a good book (in my opinion) for understanding the magnitude of the problem and how it came about is The End of Food by Paul Roberts.

 

[ytain]

What about freezing the meat for minimum 3 weeks? That's what I know, the rule from where I'm from.

Ytain

 

[mcb]

What about freezing the meat for minimum 3 weeks? That's what I know, the rule from where I'm from.

Ytain

That has been mentioned on the forum before. If it by any chance originates with the USDA then I would like to see a more reliable source.

 

[Gonzo]

Freezing in a household freezer does not kill bacteria, it puts it in a dormant state and slows down its growth. The temperature required to actually kill bacteria, in terms of freezing, is well below anything our freezers are able to attain. Heat will kill bacteria, but, once again, we need the right temperature. Meat thermometers are highly recommended. This doesn't mean the meat has to be over cooked. You can still get a steak or a roast cooked to medium, (pink on the inside) and have attained the temperature sufficient to kill the pathogens.

Animals all have bacteria for which they have their own way of coping. It is believed that many human infectious diseases originated in animals as a result of us adopting agriculture and living next to the livestock. The animal diseases eventually mutated and spread among humans.

When humans got into intensive farming, diseases increased, since the abnormally high animal populations provided perfect breeding grounds for bacteria and the transmission points through feeding and watering systems made it even easier for disease to spread. This is one of the reasons antibiotic use in conventional farming is so prevalent. They use it as a preventative measure, regardless of whether the animals are showing any symptoms, because they know how unsafe it is to have so many animals kept so closely together. Of course, the result of preventative use of antibiotics is the antibiotic-resistant diseases we now see among cattle and pork populations.

In the wild, when animal populations get to large, deer for example, disease often windows the herd down before predators can.

So, although pastured livestock will have lower levels of bacteria (and antibiotics, hormones and other crap), they will still have bacteria.

We can tolerate low levels of bacteria, depending on the strain, which is why we don't often die from eating undercooked meat. But to put things in perspective, in Canada alone, we estimate their are approximately 11 million cases of food poisoning each year from unsafe practices, most of them occurring in the home. Only 3,500 of them become large and severe enough outbreak for the federal government to have to investigate.

I've been working in the government food safety sector for six years now and will never again eat undercooked meat. I also wash my hands and all preparation surfaces like crazy after handling uncooked food. I've seen what grows on and in livestock and poultry, both free range, organic and conventional and how sick we can get from the various pathogens, some of which can be fatal and many of which can cause permanent organ damage.

@megan
What do you mean by browning and that it is not safe? My understanding of browning is the act of searing the outside of meat with high heat for a short duration, to lock in the moisture inside the meat while it cooks at a lower temperature (stewing, for example). Perhaps we're not talking about the same thing.

Regards,
Gonzo

 

[3DStudent]

@megan
What do you mean by browning and that it is not safe? My understanding of browning is the act of searing the outside of meat with high heat for a short duration, to lock in the moisture inside the meat while it cooks at a lower temperature (stewing, for example). Perhaps we're not talking about the same thing.

I think she was just talking about cooking food until it browns, not necessarily the locking in of moisture. Apparently cooking it well makes more of those acrylamides, which humans are more tolerant of than cats. I remember reading this somewhere that cats don't like well done food, probably here.

If I'm wrong please correct me Megan. ;)

 

[mcb]

Freezing in a household freezer does not kill bacteria, it puts it in a dormant state and slows down its growth...

Now that you mention it, that is what I was taught (food safety information) many years ago -- that bacteria continue to grow in frozen food, but very slowly. I have recently seen a claim on the forum that freezing kills bacteria, but I have encountered no supporting evidence and it seems like the source for the claim might have been the USDA (i.e. "industry").

@megan
What do you mean by browning and that it is not safe? My understanding of browning is the act of searing the outside of meat with high heat for a short duration, to lock in the moisture inside the meat while it cooks at a lower temperature (stewing, for example). Perhaps we're not talking about the same thing.

While I have seen some debate about risks of acrylamide (produced in "browning") to humans, the impression I have from what I am reading today is that we seem to have evolved to tolerate it. In some other animals it is a carcinogen, and when it first started being found in human foods in large amounts there was a lot of concern. I read about this some years ago and don't have references readily available. There was so much acrylamide in common foods that it required a re-think, since people weren't developing cancer as might be expected.

Carcinogens, though, are often identified through animal experiments. It would seem that lab animals did not have the tolerance to acrylamide that humans do, and I am therefore reluctant to feed anything to my cats that might be high in it. It is not something I have had time to research thoroughly, but I try to err on the side of caution.