Stan Horwitz wrote:
>
> In article >,
> Dan Abel > wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > (Denise in NH) wrote:
> >
> > > I like my beef well done. Anything less done tastes like the remnant
> > > flavor of having had a nosebleed. I hate the flavor of blood. I went
> > > to a wedding last week where all of the beef was solid blood red, as if
> > > it hadn't been cooked at all, not even a tiny bit brown on the edges. I
> > > assumed that my meal was going to be just potatoes and steamed veggies,
> > > but then, the waitresses brought some chicken parmesan to the tables
> > > too.
> >
> >
> > And how did you request that the chicken be cooked? Rare, medium or
> > well done?
> >
> > All meats get tough when over-cooked, and all are more tender when
> > less-cooked, and all taste raw when they are raw. In my experience in
> > the US, it's only beef where you commonly get to choose the degree of
> > cooking.
>
> That's a good point. I think the reason people do not get to order fowl
> cooked rare or medium rare is because of health concerns, but I may be
> wrong about that.
Well, for me it's not health concerns. Rare poultry is just
disgusting. Of course I don't want it over-cooked either but
I like it well-done and about to fall off the bone. Breast
meat can be a little less well-done but has to be cooked through
with no pink and the texture has to have changed from the raw
or semi-raw texture to a cooked texture. That's why I hate
chicken that's undercooked, it's the texture. Plus it's just
not right to see blood in poultry. The only meat where I don't
mind blood it beef, maybe lamb in certain circumstances. Pork
and poultry should never be eve the slightest bit bloody.
(Of course the pork thing comes from when I was growing up and
people always cooked pork well due to the possibility of trichinosis.
I understand that's not a concern nowadays and, in any case,
is not the reason I like it well-done. It's due to having grown
up not ever having rare pork.)
Kate