Register

Yet another foodscare :-(

Chill out and chat with the foodie community or swap top tips.
NOTE: THE CURRENT CHATTERBOX IS IN THIS FORUM
User avatar
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Badger's Mate » Mon Jul 31, 2017 9:40 am

I've never really understood the attitude towards cooking poultry. I doubt there is any reason why chickens should be more likely to contain pathogens than duck, guinea fowl, quail, or feathered game, and surely all should be regarded with a similar degree of caution. Yet if a duck breast is cooked to the same degree of doneness as is normal for chicken, it is deemed overcooked; conversely a piece of chicken cooked like a duck breast will be rejected with theatrical horror.

It's perfectly possible to make a safe, rare burger but it requires brief exposure of the original piece of meat to high temperatures, such as dipping it in very hot water for a few seconds, to sterilise the surface without cooking the insides, then mincing it in a sterile mincer and cooking it promptly. What would be the chances of this happening in a commercial kitchen? More importantly, how would you know?

User avatar
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Badger's Mate » Mon Jul 31, 2017 10:03 am

On the subject of GM, the whole debate seems to be polarising into 'Frankenstein food' vs 'wittering ninnies who know nothing about science'. Clearly the possibilities are potentially great, both good and bad. I'm sure that GM crops grown for all sorts of purposes will become more common and doubtless unexpectedly bad things will happen as a consequence.

I remember seeing a photograph in New Scientist a decade or so ago. It was in a piece about GM crop research and described how careful the scientists were with their biosecurity. They'd grown some GM tomatoes. To demonstrate how safe they were, the picture purported to show the scientists biting into these tomatoes. Someone pointed out in a subsequent issue that either the scientists ate the tomatoes, in which case the seed would have confounded security by being left in whichever toilet they subsequently used and thus was at large, or alternatively the picture was staged and therefore no evidence of safety.

Either they didn't know what they were doing or thought we (the readers of a popular science journal) were idiots. I cannot read anything about the GM debate without thinking of that.

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Mon Jul 31, 2017 10:37 am

Renée wrote:Thank you for the information, Sue. I'm as careful as I can be when handling raw chickens, even sterilising the taps after washing my hands. I do use an anti-bacterial hand wash in the kitchen and make sure that it goes under my fingernails too.

Regarding salmonella, I was thinking more of the freerange chickens feeding habits, ingesting all kinds of bacteria from the soil which might have found their way to the insides of the chickens. I can remember years ago, reading warnings about duck eggs too, because the outside reared ducks have similar feeding habits and the eggs could be contaminated by salmonella as a result.


Badger's Mate wrote:I've never really understood the attitude towards cooking poultry. I doubt there is any reason why chickens should be more likely to contain pathogens than duck, guinea fowl, quail, or feathered game, and surely all should be regarded with a similar degree of caution. Yet if a duck breast is cooked to the same degree of doneness as is normal for chicken, it is deemed overcooked; conversely a piece of chicken cooked like a duck breast will be rejected with theatrical horror.

It's perfectly possible to make a safe, rare burger but it requires brief exposure of the original piece of meat to high temperatures, such as dipping it in very hot water for a few seconds, to sterilise the surface without cooking the insides, then mincing it in a sterile mincer and cooking it promptly. What would be the chances of this happening in a commercial kitchen? More importantly, how would you know?


Right, let's get down and dirty
The point about salmonella (and e coli) is that they are only a risk if there is any trace of faecal contamination
These bacteria live inside the gut of humans and animals
Historically chickens are a major problem for two reasons

1. Cage birds (not free range) live in each other's muck if one is infected then they all soon will be, hence Edwina Curry and the infected egg scandal. We have now banned cages in UK and EU but not in USA. Four legged animals are lower risk though not no risk, especially very intensively reared pigs (not in UK). We also I believe vaccinate some flocks. Bacteria can spread of course through flocks kept clise together without cages

2. I'm quite good at eviscerating chickens, and removing the gut fairly intact,, but if I did it all day and every day in the same room there would be contamination from one bird to another, and with cage birds the feathers can be contaminated with faeces too. Same commercially.

So chickens are much higher risk than other meat animals, and while we don't use cages and I believe the removal of cages has reduced infection rates ...

As few people like rare chicken cooking them thoroughly is fine, as Renee says the risk is more from splashing the raw juices around and cross contaminating. Clean hands boards and knives are important

Ducks are potentially an issue as the like water, and water can transmit the bacteria, less of a problem with good husbandry

The chlorine bath thing comes in because although both cages and chlorine are illegal in UK and EU, in USA they have the cages and a number of other bad practices so need the chlorine to make the meat safe to take into kitchens, IF we start importing chicken from the USA then it will be chlorinated. But Red Tractor and small volume high quality chicken won't be even then so the scare is as ever exaggerated. They also chlorine wash eggs in the USA

Yes, I expect you could sterilise the beef for a burger by searing the outside of the joint before mincing, but personally I'm not pregnant or immuno compromised, and I eat rare burgers and even steak tartare, I've no wish to eat a well done burger or any other form of cardboard. But that's a personal stance based on my own health and taste

User avatar
Posts: 3832
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby jeral » Mon Jul 31, 2017 12:04 pm

Badger's mate: To add to your tomato seed anecdote, it's well known that the seeds are remarkably resilient, with plants growing up along camel trains from their dung and on railways tracks when our dung was empties out on them. Maybe they'll develop a seedless version as they have with corn, although with corn I seem to recall a wind drift case in the US brought by a farmer who claimed his non-GM corn was being contaminated.

Re ducks, there was (maybe still is) that scandal about farmed ducks which cruelly unnaturally never ever saw swimming water which caused huge stress. However, if reared wholly indoors the same as many chickens are, presumably the same salmonella risk applies.
---

Stokey Sue: Re chlorine washing and UK chicken, the overriding fear is that cheap US imported chicken (and agricultural produce) will wipe out our own farming industry who'll be priced out without huge subsidies given the aim is tariff-free trade.

If, and maybe it's a big if, the UK government did allow US chlorinated and hormone'd meat in, then the EU could ban all UK exports. (I gather it was a sticking point with the now scrapped EU/US TTIP.)

Then again, if Philip Hammond gets his "transition" way, a US deal won't be possible for another five years and a lot can happen in five years...

User avatar
Posts: 4357
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:58 pm
Location: Clayton-le-Woods

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Renée » Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:47 pm

Many thanks for all that information, Sue and thanks for your contribution, too, jeral.

User avatar
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Badger's Mate » Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:59 pm

So chickens are much higher risk than other meat animals,


Surely chickens will be a similar risk to other poultry/game bird species raised under similar conditions.

I remember getting some grief on the BBC boards years ago when I said that I sometimes didn't wash chickens because of the risk of splashing dirty water around the kitchen. The 'chicken washers' were somewhat offended and took exception to the notion.

As few people like rare chicken cooking them thoroughly is fine


It's perfectly fine to thoroughly cook any meat if that's how you like it, but I believe that the 'pink duck - thoroughly cooked chicken' convention is just that, rather than a logical response to the respective risk.

It is of course possible to cook a burger, sausage, kebab or other minced meat product to a safe internal temperature without it becoming cardboard, but it wouldn't be rare.

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:36 pm

I think there are a few things in that Badger's Mate

The first being that chicken is the item that has been repeatedly found to be a problem, salmonella being cultured from the carcasses. That is why the recommendation is to treat chicken with extra care, it's a factual, not a theoretical thing; chicken is known to be particularly high risk

But as I said the biggest problem is with birds intensively cage reared, no longer permitted in the UK and as far as I know only chickens and quail were ever routinely reared that way here, guinea fowl etc just won't thrive. Which is not to say birds of all kinds aren't often more intensively reared than we might like, just not as severely, not caged, and with less risk of the bacteria.

Yes it's simply a convention to cook chicken thoroughly and duck less so, but a lot of people don't like pink duck; I do but I don't like pink chicken as the texture is totally different to duck, and while probably not universal I suspect if you were running a restaurant and serving well done poultry customers might ask for pinker duck but probably not chicken. I think we can accept it as fact that most people in this country don't particularly want rare chicken

When I was growing up the scare was pork, because of worms rather than bacteria I think, and like many people I've always tended to give it an extra 15 minutes for safety. Until I got a really good thermometer, when safe to eat and definitely cooked, at 72 C pork is still juicy and ever so slightly pink (this is more obvious once cold). Much nicer! Yes of course when I said the burger would be like cardboard, I was being a bit flippant (how very dare I) and using a thermometer enables you to get a slightly pink burger above 65 C but most people don't use a thermometer, and the sorts of restaurants that put notices on their menus saying they only serve well done burgers seem a bit prone to dishing them up over done to the point of dryness

A thermometer is definitely the best thing, but BBC Truth or Scare programme did a major feature on how much to cook meat for safety last week, during which nobody ever mentioned or used a thermometer, it was all done by eye (though they had scientists showing how the bacteria count diminished) so presumably they thought people wouldn't use one (either that or it was scripted by the usual idiot). I did email them to say it would have been helpful.

User avatar
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Petronius » Tue Aug 01, 2017 4:18 pm

Lots of interesting stuff being posted, my thanks to you all. I use a thermometer because …

Many years ago OH prepared chicken breasts stuffed with goats' cheese. She loves goats' cheese so licked the fingers covered with the stuff. She was really ill with a notifiable form of food poisoning. Ever since we've been extra careful; crispy duck, chicken and beef to 70C, pork no longer agrees with me so not relevant, not worth buying pieces of lamb, just chops that are certainly over cooked.

User avatar
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Badger's Mate » Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:11 pm

First things first. I apologise if my last post seemed a little heavy-handed. I'm sorry if it caused offence. :(


I was served quail in a restaurant last week. It was decidedly 'juicy' (as they say in India). Other servings were similarly cooked. It was fine, but I thought at the time that had it been chicken, several portions would have been sent back. The flavour and texture were, in my opinion, much like similarly cooked chicken, guinea fowl, or recently killed pheasant for that matter.

I use a thermometer these days. I might have misunderstood the instructions on where to stick it :shock: but I thought the minimum recommended temperature has to be reached throughout the meat. This didn't entirely make sense if the concern was surface contamination. It seems clear that the meat near to the cavity might get contaminated, but not the middle of the thigh muscle, for instance. My thermometer recommends 77°C for duck and goose, which is pretty safe. Presumably the instructions are kept as simple as possible.

It was tapeworms with pork, wasn't it? I remember seeing a photo in a parasitology textbook showing a section through the brain of a patient who had been heavily infected. The worms encyst in soft tissue and this poor woman's brain was riddled with them. So much so that (at the risk of indelicacy) the picture resembled a clafoutis.

User avatar
Posts: 916
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:33 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Pampy » Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:47 pm

Badger's Mate wrote:


I use a thermometer these days. I might have misunderstood the instructions on where to stick it :shock: but I thought the minimum recommended temperature has to be reached throughout the meat. This didn't entirely make sense if the concern was surface contamination. It seems clear that the meat near to the cavity might get contaminated, but not the middle of the thigh muscle, for instance. My thermometer recommends 77°C for duck and goose, which is pretty safe. Presumably the instructions are kept as simple as possible.


The centre of the thickest part of the meat/poultry will be at the lowest temperature if cooked in a conventional oven - so if that reaches the temp. required to ensure that bacteria are killed, then the outer surface will be a bit higher temp. so any bacteria there will have been killed too.

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:06 pm

Sorry, can't be bothered to fiddle with the quotes today

Yes, tapeworm in pork, I think studying parasites as my special subject for A level zoology is one of the things that started me over-cooking pork

A friend bought some organic pork when organic first became "a thing">30 years ago, and it was "measly", i.e. obviously riddled with tapeworm

The need to get the cavity hot is the reason stuffing birds is no longer recommended, though there is no reason why it shouldn't be safe IF you use a thermometer correctly IMO

One positive thing on the Truth or Scare programme was that the scientist deliberately contaminated the outside of steaks and chickken joints with high doses of salmonella, levels you really wouldn't find in practice, and searing the outside got rid of it rather well :thumbsup

User avatar
Posts: 4986
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:30 pm
Location: Provence

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Joanbunting » Fri Aug 04, 2017 2:58 pm

I imagine you've seen this:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-40824819

Thank goodness we have our own hens !!!!!!

User avatar
Posts: 3832
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:28 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby jeral » Fri Aug 04, 2017 5:45 pm

Joanbunting. Ouch re eggs. Made me wonder what where ours come from, hoping they were British. Shockingly, I found this:
http://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/a ... ns/1404007

I thought cages were banned here. They were, in 2012 but "enriched" cages are allowed. On trying to find out what "enriched" cages were, shockingly, I found this, dated Oct 16:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 74281.html

I'm disgusted.
This is a revelation to me. I thought they were all indoor sheds now, which don't look bad when they show us pictures of young chicks with lots of space, although even they look terrible when fully grown and no space at all to move :( (How the heck do they clean the floor?)

As someone who's bought only free range eggs since they came out, I thought it was bad enough that the legal definition of those was considerably broader than probably most would think free range meant.

Rant over.

User avatar
Posts: 393
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Badger's Mate » Fri Aug 04, 2017 7:41 pm

Amongst other reasons, I used to buy duck eggs on the grounds that 'there's no such thing as a battery duck'. However, that's only true because of the particular definition of 'battery' and there are intensively reared ducks both here and abroad whose products we can buy.

User avatar
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Petronius » Thu Aug 10, 2017 5:57 pm

Apparently some supermarkets are having to take some free range egg products off the shelves because they contained the Dutch eggs, which at best can be described as 'Cage free' - living in large sheds. Is that now the definition of free range?

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:46 pm

Wiki wrote:Free-range eggs are eggs produced from birds that are permitted outdoors for at least part of the day. The term "free-range" may be used differently depending on the country and the relevant laws.


There doesn't seem to be a clear cut standard in the UK, which is shocking
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2017/feb/28/what-does-free-range-actually-mean-its-complicated

Organic is higher standard for free range, which I did know though oddly they have to label eggs free range as well as organic, as the Great British Public evidently can't believe Organic eggs are high welfare unless they see the words

Man from FSA (on BBC radio just know) says there's not enough Fipronil in the eggs to have done anyone here any damage as we won't be eating them again and the danger is a slow build up

The use of Fipronil on poultry farms is illegal on poultry farms anywhere in Europe, apparently they are intending to make arrests

Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 4191
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:56 pm
Location: Bushey

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Sakkarin » Thu Aug 10, 2017 7:49 pm

There's a Waitrose ad at the moment which makes it look as if their eggs come from pampered pet hens roaming free in idyllic countryside. Poppycock.

User avatar
Posts: 4139
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: Stoke Newington, London

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Stokey Sue » Thu Aug 10, 2017 10:19 pm

Remember the Tesco ads (chicken meat, not eggs) with Dudley Moore chasing a hen round an idyllically dilapidated French farmyard? :D

User avatar
Posts: 4986
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 8:30 pm
Location: Provence

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Joanbunting » Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:29 am

I vividly recall the time when chicken was an utter luxury only to be had on high days and holidays. Our Christmas dinner was always a chicken and a pork joint. The latter because my uncle was a butcher and the chicken always came from thee country because auntie lived next to a farm.

Now chicken can be cheaper than chips and far too many people simply don't care where it came from or how it was raised. Same with eggs. I know some families have to watch every penny but even then there should be limits if in trying to ecconomise health is put at risk.

User avatar
Posts: 635
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: Yet another foodscare :-(

Postby Petronius » Fri Aug 11, 2017 12:24 pm

Yes, joanbunting. The Christmas luxury chicken, much appreciated then.

As for those having to economise - the cheapest free range eggs in our town (that's not Dutch free range) can be bought at one of our small shops. Happens to be a pet food shop simply because the owner lives next door to a free range egg farm. The butcher's, the greengrocer's are cheaper than any of the supermarkets - the most expensive are sold at the farmers' market! Odd.

PreviousNext

Return to Food Chat & Chatterbox

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests