In the past, I would frequently cook (in the oven) 6+ lbs (3+ kg) of salmon fillets (usually took ~25 min) to an internal temp of 145-150 F (62.5-65 C), take them out, let them set on the counter for an hour or two, and then throw them in vacuum-sealed bags and into the freezer.
Then, when I wanted to eat one, I'd take it out and throw it in the microwave. Understandably not the tastiest thing, but it worked well enough. I've never tried it with meat, only fish. As far asI know this never made me sick.
Now, all of the sous vide literature emphasizes a rapid chill in an ice water bath if you want to freeze something. Is this really necessary? For a very thick steak (say 2 in (5 cm)) it could take 3+ hours to fully chill down to 41 F (5 C) in the middle, so if that's still safe to eat, why must you chill thinner cuts? I'd expect anything 1in or less to chill within 3 hours in the freezer. Obviously, you can extrapolate this out and say that, e.g., a 0.125 inch (0.3 cm) cut wouldn't need to be chilled in an ice bath, so the blanket suggestion is only necessary above a certain thickness.
If anyone has found graphs of time/temperature when freezing meat from a cooked temperature, that would be helpful. If that doesn't exist, what's a best guess for the thickness at which pre-freezer ice baths become important for safety?
Yes, fast chilling is critical because it minimizes the production of new bacteria and potentially deadly toxins from the spores of anaerobic pathogens such as C. botulinum and C. perfringens. The spores are not killed by the low temperatures usual in sous vide, and the oxygen-free environment of the bag brings them back to activity. But they require time and temperature to become active and dangerous, so fast chilling -- either refrigeration or freezing -- and limiting the refrigeration time (to about 5 days at around 5°C/40°F, longer for lower temperatures) are absolutely critical to deter them.
The question starts with a situation that is different: cooking in an oven, which is not an anaerobic environment and thus does not trigger the same activation of the spores' lifecycles as cooking in a vacuum does.
Also, safety aside, cooling in an ice/water bath can be done very rapidly and therefore the freezing in the freezer will create much smaller ice crystals and therefore create a better texture in your reheated product (but that may not be a concern of yours if your reheating salmon in the nuker).
I prepared some chicken wings by: Place chicken wings, raw, in cool oil. Heat corn oil to ~180°F, hold at ~180°F for 3 hours (in the oven). Heat peanut oil in deep fryer to 370°F (as high as the deep fryer goes). Time such that deep fryer is heated by the end of the 3 hours. Drain now-cooked chicken wings Deep fry (while still hot) for 4 minutes, flipping half way through. These came out good. While somewhat dry (but not overly so), they had very tender fall-off-the-bone meat and crunchy skin. However, for a few of them, I inserted a step 4(b), put in plastic bag and chill in ice bath
Two months ago I made a homemade sous vide cooker and I've had great luck so far. Last night I started a batch of 72 hour ribs and I'm really looking forward to eating them in a few days. Until I realized a problem: When I've made sous vide ribs before I've used a kitchen torch or a plumbing blow torch to start the Maillard reaction on the ribs after removing them from the water bath. This works great. However, because of work I've got two apartments 1000 miles apart and the sous vide cooker and the ribs are in the apartment without either of my torches right now. If I had a gas stove I
on the meat and so my stomach isn't irritated. Anyway I was wondering if I were to try sous vide, would the end meat be just like or similar to the meat in a soup or is it more likely it would be have problems as with grilling/roasting. In sous vide the meat will be in a bag i.e. never make contact with water and stay at low temperatures. Even if this is the case, I would think the heat would still cause fat and juices to drip out and then the meat would be fried in its own juices. Please explain what you think about sous vide compared to grilling, roasting in the respects I have mentioned
in to account. I don't understand why not. Surely if the meat gets to temperature faster, it must pasteurize faster as well. From the above tables, a 50mm (thickness) steak takes 3 1/4 hours to pasteurize at 134.5F. If it's a slab, it takes 3 1/2 hours to get to 133.5F through out. If it's a cylinder, it only takes 2 hours. Do I really need that additional 1 1/4 hours for pasteurization? Can I...Looking at Douglas Baldwin's charts for time to heat a piece of meat sous vide (table 2.2), a cylinder with diameter X heats through much faster than a slab with thickness X. This makes sense to me
in stock, I'm going to make it with salmon instead of halibut). I'd rather not grind the fish - ground fish does not sound like something that's too interesting to eat. So, I was thinking I'll just cut the fish into cubes, and fry them up, then throw the cooked cubes into a tortilla, roll up with some sauce, and serve (to myself). If it turns out good it would be a great recipe to share with friends and family. However this is not something I've done before. I know fish breaks apart quite easily when cut into small bits, so is it even possible to preserve "fish-cubes" in a frying pan
I'm new to sous vide cooking. The equipment I'm using is a Ronson slow cooker connected to Sous Vide Magic PID controller, no bubbler. No vacuum sealer. I calibrated the SVM temperature reading... for this? I know thickness in a slab shaped piece of meat is most crucial in determining cooking time, and each of these steaks was about 15mm thick (so not very thick), so potentially even 10hr was too... in the centre. Each steak was individually sealed in a zip-lock bag using the water submerge method Doublas Baldwin recommends. The first day I cooked them for 10 hours (not 12, it was dinner time
. I plan to sear the meat after Sous Vide with a propane burner) UPDATE Just wanted to say how it turned out: 55 C for 48 hours made the meat tender... VERY tender. Almost liquid ;) I'll go...I'm a new owner of a Sous Vide circulator, and I'd really like to make a leg of lamb for Easter. Making leg of lamb the "old" way (in the oven) I always get a better result if the leg is with the bone attached. However, all the recipes I find for Sous Vide calls for meat without the bone (typically 55 C for up to 48 hours). Is there anything I need to do different to make it on the bone? (My
I frequently cook sous vide at home--primarily for the sake of convenience. I have been generally satisfied with the results, and normally get tender and juicy meat. One thing that bothers me, however, is the amount of liquid left in the bag when it's done. Even when adding nothing but, say, a steak, or a pork chop, patted dry, it is disheartening to see all the juiciness I could have had getting left behind. A few weeks ago I saw notes from a class on khymos.org, where, in the context of a cook-chill-reheat scenario, Mr. Lersch relayed Bruno Goussalt's advice to cool in stages in order
and is chilled or frozen The masa and water mix goes soft after I let it stand for 30 to 60 minutes I use a typical tortilla press, but it never gets them really thin, just flat, say match thickness? The main problem is that using a well seasoned cast iron comal they take longer to cook than I would expect (more than one minute), and tend to dry out too much, and don't like being bent. If I stop cooking them after a minute they taste very uncooked They taste so so ... the kids will eat them all day made up as Quesadillas Where am I going wrong?