What is the difference between cooking in water and roasting
If you order a semi-raw steak, or medium-rare, in a luxury restaurant these days, you may find that its color is a perfect reddish pink not only in the center, but throughout its thickness, except for a thin outer layer of browned meat. The secret to obtaining this stunning result with all courage and courage, is the incredibly simple but amazingly effective technique: sous vide. First the chef puts the food in a special plastic bag, often in a vacuum (sou-vide means "in a vacuum" in French), but sometimes also in a bag filled with air or other gases. Then he cooks the wrapped food very slowly, for hours and even days, in hot water or in a steam oven. Cooking is usually done at a relatively low temperature of 50 to 65 degrees Celsius.
Chefs of meat restaurants, who are used to grilling the dishes in ovens that reach a temperature of almost 1,000 degrees Celsius, may raise an eyebrow at this unconventional approach. But sous vide cooking is gaining fans at an impressive rate, even in home kitchens, and this is, in part, thanks to several famous chefs who advocate the method, such as Joel Robuchon, Juan Rocca and Thomas Keller.
The simple act of vacuum packing the food and immersing it in hot water surprisingly changes the physical processes of cooking. For the most part, the purpose of cooking is to bring the food to a certain temperature where it will be "done" optimally. In many types of food, such as fish and certain vegetables, this range is quite narrow. But in normal cooking, the high temperature of the pan, or of the grill, heats the outside of the food at such a speed that significant temperature differences are created between the surface and the core. When grilling an emo on a charcoal grill, for example, the thin outer layer of meat heats up quickly and the water in it vaporizes and evaporates. This boiling zone can be 30 degrees Celsius hotter than the semi-raw center of the Amtza. And due to the conduction of heat, the center continues to heat up even after you remove the pan from the grill.
In sous vide cooking, on the other hand, the cook adjusts the temperature of the water in the bath to a temperature only one or two degrees higher than the desired temperature. A heating element with computer control can keep this temperature stable by a quarter of a degree here or there, and in the meantime the temperature in the entire volume of the cooking food becomes uniform. Since the temperature is low, there is no danger of overcooking, and the timing is much less crucial. The vacuum packaging prevents trapped air from disrupting the heat conduction, prevents contamination and greatly slows down oxidation processes that may lead to color changes and unwanted aftertastes. The low temperature does not brown the food, but a light caress of a burner or a brisk burn on the griddle gives the food the final color and crust. This way you can prepare the dish exactly according to the chef's instructions every time.
Gibbs is the editor of the book "The Modern Kitchen: The Art and Science of Cooking" and Myhrvold is one of its authors. The six volumes of the book were published in March 2011.
18 תגובות
I must point out that there is no comparison between normal cooking or roasting on the grill and meat or chicken cooked in a vacuum, for all the skeptics among you, you should taste it and then give your opinion, it simply changes the texture and makes the meat perfect
Vegetarianism is stupidity, we are cannibals by nature, (see Remedia's vegetarian children who became a plant), without animal protein the development of human intelligence would freeze in its tracks.
Where can I buy such a machine??
In all kosher animals, 0 blood pressure is created in the area of sensation in the brain, unlike the non-kosher ones, the artery in the neck does not connect to the ork in the throat. The difference became clear during a trial in an attempt to disqualify the slaughter of the Jews. Look at Orita and Bara Alma from a Jewish point of view.
And more about the slaughter. They talk a lot about the days and the like.
I don't know, who decided that stunning an animal and then killing it is better than knowing it's going to die. Maybe she wants to do something at the last second before she dies. What is it that everyone here goes into the head and soul of the cow to determine for her how she will die.
In nature, animals perish and this is how the world has always existed. Whoever wants to change this should invent a robot that consumes electricity and transfer his brain there.
Ami Bachar, what made you decide that the Jewish slaughter is cruel?
Since when does the time it takes for the blood to drip determine if the animal is suffering? I understood that precisely in the Jewish slaughter the blood in the brain is expelled quickly and new blood does not reach the brain and therefore the animal does not suffer. In contrast to the secular methods we saw in Chalbotek.
Thanks Dan. And now, wait for the article about vegetarianism if there is one to continue the series, even so it is not really relevant to the article. I have been helped by the site's tolerance so far, but still we make sure there is a connection between the article and the comments.
with gratitude
my father
Ami,
Do you think it is a good idea to further dilute the remains of nature and exterminate the animals that barely survive, in the living space we have allowed them? Today, for example, an article was published in Israel about the extinct fish and the depleting fish, in the Mediterranean Sea, due to wild fishing.
And regarding humanity, is there a humane way to kill?
Father, no one has the right to cause another a life of suffering, even if the other is an animal. On the side of slavery, two hundred years ago they also voiced arguments about their right to enslave.
And a matter concerning our survival, the damage caused by animal farms to the ecology is enormous (I think articles on the subject have been published here).
The facts in the movie about the connection between meat and poor health are true, see the prevalence of obesity and diabetes among US citizens. Caloric value? What caloric value? Did you perhaps mean protein value? Legumes in combination with grains provide complete protein without clogging the arteries.
It is difficult for most people to separate from the meat, so at least they should open their eyes and see what they are causing, presenting the facts is not propaganda and has nothing to do with religion, only morality.
And for those who want to see a movie about meat from the side of the growers and consumers:
Food Inc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HptNCNc2DW4&playnext=1&list=PL5CDEA7C9C75BF389
I eat meat too. I still haven't decided if it makes me sad or not. I would prefer that the meat I eat be grown on petri dishes from stem cells and that no animal suffer from this. But what my father says actually raises a question: game meat. Unlike animals that are raised in substandard conditions and slaughtered in a cruel manner (the most cruel, by the way, is the Jewish method in which the blood is simply allowed to drip out of the body while the animal slowly dies), hunter's meat is actually the meat of free animals. Animals that do not suffer throughout their lives. Maybe in the last seconds or minutes they also feel pain, like in slaughter. But at least they live their lives freely and without fear or conditions. No injections of hormones or high density conditions, no dirt and bars. Hunting meat sounds to me the most humane way of all.
An almost religious propaganda film. It is true that we need to take care of the welfare of animals on farms, but we cannot deny 7 billion people (with the exception of a few hundred thousand vegetarians) the right to eat animals raised for that purpose (I am against hunting for example and certainly against furs). Still, in terms of digestion and caloric value, meat is the best food.
This is really an interesting cooking method, which should preserve the juiciness of the meat and the flavor in a good way.
To her, you are wrong here, because contrary to what is written in the article, according to what I know, when you prepare a spoonful of meat, you don't just put water or (or a vacuum) in a bag, but put the meat in beforehand with some kind of marinade, and so when the meat is cooked, it just absorbs in a better way all the flavors with it in the bag.
For the meat eaters, I'm sure the attached lecture will illuminate some points you didn't know or avoided thinking about.
In the name of the freedom of thought that characterizes the site, please watch it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omweihtaYwI
In the future they will invent such a device that is attached to the tongue and nose and it transmits electric currents suitable for any taste we want...but until then we will hear about cooking in a vacuum, cooking with antimatter and neutron bombardment
Why bother so much? You can also eat "washed chicken". After all, the food that comes out of the bag is tasteless, and anyone who likes a bit of flavor in their food will not like this method. If I remember correctly, this cooking method was shown on some television show. It seems to me that the developers of the method are trying to market it in every way, but are not succeeding.
Definitely interesting. Conservatively, we will say that everything that is exposed to the air at any stage, needs to be at least pasteurized to be considered free of bacteria. Pasteur is around 70 degrees. Of course, pasteurization does not make food sterile either. There are many, many microorganisms that will survive even above a hundred degrees for many minutes. But for the most part total sterilization is not necessary. Pasteurization is usually sufficient.
What about fifty or sixty degrees? If so, as already stated, certain bacteria survive it (and there are even some for whom such temperatures are considered low). But there are many, many bacteria that will not survive such heat. For example, in our bodies when we are sick, the temperature rises by a degree or two and this helps in the destruction of bacteria. So there is and there is. Some bacteria will not survive 38 degrees of heat and some will survive 120 degrees of heat. Usually those who will survive and thrive in our bodies will like the temperature of our bodies and therefore it is likely that they will die at fifty degrees.
In conclusion, it is better to pasteurize at least.
post Scriptum.
In a framed article, I will say that even complete disinfection will not always prevent food poisoning, since certain bacteria secrete toxins during their lifetime into the environment, therefore even complete disinfection at very high temperatures will still not remove the toxins, even if it completely kills the bacteria.
Greetings friends,
Ami Bachar
I wonder if this kind of cooking is safe, i.e. will it destroy bacteria / parasites that are in the meat...