"Bob (this one)" wrote:
>
> Kate Connally wrote:
> > "Bob (this one)" wrote:
> >
> >>Kate Connally wrote:
> >>
> >>>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.
>
> This would be more than 180° and would be much more dry than the
> currently suggested 165° in the thigh.

Well, I don't take the internal temperature of the meat I cook.
All I know is that it is well done, no red or pink near the bone,
and it is *not* dry!

> >>>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.
> >>
> >>Right and wrong are meaningless terms in the kitchen. Here's why you
> >>will increasingly see blood in poultry:
> >><http://www.hi-tm.com/Documents/Bloody-chik.html>
> >
> > I don't buy it.
>
> You don't buy what? The biology? The poultry-raising techniques? The
> fact that immature bones are porous? That deep-chilling forces heme
> through the bone? Those are facts.

I don't buy the fact that properly, thoroughly, cooked chicken
will have red near the bone due to all the crap about the porous
bones, etc. Maybe it's because people are not cooking the chicken
as long as they used to that they are seeing this red stuff.

> > I've been cooking chicken for over 40 years
> > and when I cook it at home there is never any "blood" or whatever
> > near the bone.
>
> Kate, chickens used to be killed at 12 weeks and they were mature at
> that age. Now they're killed at 6 weeks because they grow faster - and
> they're not mature; bones are not fully calcified. The science behind it
> was spelled out on the page I cited.

IF that's so then why have I never encountered it in the chickens
I buy and cook? Could it somehow be that I am getting the only old
chickens around? That would be a freakish coincidence.

> Go argue with them.

Well, I'm arguing with you because you're the one who
referenced that article, so obviously it's your belief as
well as theirs.

> But understand that in the foodservice community, it's considered a
> serious problem. It's also why store-bought rotisserie chicken is so
> often dry. They cook it to the point where the darkness at the bone is
> minimized. The way they do that is to cook it to more than 180°F in the
> breast, sometimes all the way to 195°. That means dry chicken.
>
> > Maybe it's safe to eat when you can see the
> > "blood" as described in the article you quoted above but that's
> > not the issue, as far as I am concerned. It may be "done" but it's
> > not done enough for me.
>
> And that's exactly what they said on that page.
>
> >>>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.)
> >>
> >>"Rare" is a technical term. You misuse it.
> >
> > How so? Rare is when the meat is pink or red and bloody, is
> > it not?
>
> No. Pink and red define different degrees of doneness just by themselves.

Well, excuse if I misused the term pink. I should have said
red. To me they are pretty much the same in this instance.
I'm not standing there with color swatches saying this one is
pointsettia red and this one is cherry pink, etc.

Anyway, I looked up numerous definitions of rare and none
of them disagree with me in any way whatsoever.

> It's been defined at least twice in technical terms with temperatures
> and physical characteristics given in this thread alone. It's more exact
> than that. Go upthread and see.

Uh, I don't see anything about which temperature is pink
and which is red. All I see is something about 180 degrees
and 165 degrees in regard to the relative "doneness" of
chicken.

> These descriptions are technical terms
> with very specific meanings.

Well, excuse me for not being technical in my description.
But no matter what color term I use it's still *rare* and I do
know what rare is!

Kate