Slow cooking question.
 

Hi people,
I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very successfully.
However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people cooking a large pot of
food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
want, and even adding new ingredients.

This sounds very appealing to me, but quite frankly I'm scared of
poisoning myself. Does anyone know any top tips for doing this, or a
good resource on the web? Using google just seems to find recipes :-)

Thanks in advance
James.

Slow cooking question.
 

Jimbo wrote:
> Hi people,
> I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very successfully.
> However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people cooking a large pot
> of food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when
> they want, and even adding new ingredients.
>
Never heard of that. A slow-cooker is intended to cook a meal without your
being in attendance (e.g. while at work). I don't think it's meant to be
left on and the food eaten over a period of days. You are right to be
concerned; it's a bad idea.

Jill

Slow cooking question.
 

Jimbo wrote:
>
> Hi people,
> I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very successfully.
> However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people cooking a large pot of
> food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
> want, and even adding new ingredients.

Sounds like Back Burner Soup...

I've heard it was done many years ago on coal or wood burning
stoves that were hot pretty much all the time during the winter
months. I don't know whether keeping food in a crock pot at safe
food temp for several days would be unsafe, probably not. But,
I don't think it would be very economical...and, the food would
surely overcook and fall apart into an unappetizing sorta mush.

Slow cooking question.
 

Jimbo > writes:

>I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very successfully.
>However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people cooking a large pot of
>food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
>want, and even adding new ingredients.
>This sounds very appealing to me, but quite frankly I'm scared of
>poisoning myself.

Actually, there's nothing wrong with it at all. I keep a soup pot going almost
all winter, using leftovers.
Disease organisms are killed at the pasteurization temperature range
of 140° to 155°F.
The "low" setting on a slow-cooker is 200°F. (High is 300.) This is well above
recommended internal temperatures of meats, and well above pasteurization
temperature, which makes it totally safe.



Connie
************************************************** ***
My mind is like a steel...um, whatchamacallit.

Slow cooking question.
 

Rich McCormack wrote:
> Jimbo wrote:
>>
>> Hi people,
>> I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very
>> successfully. However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people
>> cooking a large pot of food and keeping it going for several days,
>> eating from it when they
>> want, and even adding new ingredients.
>
> Sounds like Back Burner Soup...
>
> I don't think it would be very economical...and, the food would
> surely overcook and fall apart into an unappetizing sorta mush.

Hear hear! Unless, of course, you want mushy food.

Jill

Slow cooking question.
 

Rich McCormack writes:

>Jimbo wrote:
>>
>>I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very successfully.
>>However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people cooking a large pot of
>>food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
>>want, and even adding new ingredients.
>
>Sounds like Back Burner Soup...
>
>I've heard it was done many years ago on coal or wood burning
>stoves that were hot pretty much all the time during the winter
>months. I don't know whether keeping food in a crock pot at safe
>food temp for several days would be unsafe, probably not. But,
>I don't think it would be very economical...and, the food would
>surely overcook and fall apart into an unappetizing sorta mush.

After you've particiapted here a while you'll come to realize that's what most
folks who post here consider gourmet eating.


---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
Sheldon
````````````
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."

Slow cooking question.
 

ConnieG999 wrote:
> Jimbo > writes:
>
>> I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very successfully.
>> However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people cooking a large pot
>> of
>> food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
>> want, and even adding new ingredients.
>> This sounds very appealing to me, but quite frankly I'm scared of
>> poisoning myself.
>
> Actually, there's nothing wrong with it at all. I keep a soup pot
> going almost all winter, using leftovers.
> Disease organisms are killed at the pasteurization temperature range
> of 140° to 155°F.
> The "low" setting on a slow-cooker is 200°F. (High is 300.) This is
> well above recommended internal temperatures of meats, and well above
> pasteurization temperature, which makes it totally safe.
>
> Connie
> ************************************************** ***
> My mind is like a steel...um, whatchamacallit.

Okay, I take it back. The idea simply never occurred to me and didn't sound
like a good one.

Jill

Slow cooking question.
 

"Rich McCormack" > wrote in message
...
>
> Jimbo wrote:
> >
> > Hi people,
> > I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very
successfully.
> > However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people cooking a large pot of
> > food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
> > want, and even adding new ingredients.
>
> Sounds like Back Burner Soup...
>
> I've heard it was done many years ago on coal or wood burning
> stoves that were hot pretty much all the time during the winter
> months. I don't know whether keeping food in a crock pot at safe
> food temp for several days would be unsafe, probably not. But,
> I don't think it would be very economical...and, the food would
> surely overcook and fall apart into an unappetizing sorta mush.

I have seen the "back burner soup" used in modern times, typically in large
families that have lots of leftovers and scraps. It is used to make stock.
Bones, table scraps, etc are thrown into a large pot of water. It is not
kept boiling continually, but is brought to the boil once a day for an hour
or two, after that day's additions are put in. Then some of the liquid is
removed and used for soup or whatever, replacing it with more water. The
regular boiling prevents any bacterial growth. I have done a similar thing,
but I freeze all my scraps until I have enough and then make stock from
them.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

Slow cooking question.
 

jmcquown wrote:
>>Actually, there's nothing wrong with it at all. I keep a soup pot
>>going almost all winter, using leftovers.
>>Disease organisms are killed at the pasteurization temperature range
>>of 140° to 155°F.
>>The "low" setting on a slow-cooker is 200°F. (High is 300.) This is
>>well above recommended internal temperatures of meats, and well above
>>pasteurization temperature, which makes it totally safe.
>>
>>Connie
>>************************************************ *****
>>My mind is like a steel...um, whatchamacallit.
>
>
> Okay, I take it back. The idea simply never occurred to me and didn't sound
> like a good one.
>
> Jill

Well, I'll give it a go. Tomorrow I'll make some bolognese and post back
in a couple of days how it all went. If I don't make a post assume I
went under a bus rather than got ill :-)

Cheers
James.

Slow cooking question.
 

In article >, "jmcquown"
> writes:

>I don't think it would be very economical...and, the food would
>> surely overcook and fall apart into an unappetizing sorta mush.

But you've never tried it!

Some vegetables may indeed turn to mush, but then you have a thicker broth,
almost like a stew. Some vegetables and meats maintain their integrity, and of
course the "soup" morphs from one thing to another depending on the
ingredients.

Connie
************************************************** ***
My mind is like a steel...um, whatchamacallit.

Slow cooking question.
 

The only recipe I know of that takes several days is my crockpot stock
recipe. It's not *designed* to be eaten during that period but I know
of people who keep dipping bread into it and have to add water to make
up for what they took.

When I make Mexican bean soup in the crockpot, it needs to cook about 24
hours, and I've been known to leave the leftovers in the crockpot and
then reheat it in the cp another day.

--
Sylvia Steiger RN, homeschooling mom since Nov 1995
http://www.SteigerFamily.com
Cheyenne WY, USDA zone 5a, Sunset zone 1a
Home of the Wyoming Wind Festival, January 1-December 31
Remove "removethis" from address to reply

Slow cooking question.
 

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 12:15:28 +0000 (UTC), Jimbo
> wrote:
> Hi people,
> I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very successfully.
> However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people cooking a large pot of
> food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
> want, and even adding new ingredients.
>
> This sounds very appealing to me, but quite frankly I'm scared of
> poisoning myself. Does anyone know any top tips for doing this, or a
> good resource on the web? Using google just seems to find recipes :-)

You might want to inquire on misc.consumers.frugal-living. At
least one user there does this, although I don't know if she uses her
slow cooker for it. She might just keep a soup pot on the back stove
burner, and she does leave it there 24-7 and adds to it. No doubt she
could tell you more details. I know she gets a lot of use out of her
slow cookers as well.

IIRC, she said it was something her mother had always done,
which isn't surprising. It's very economical (she's a frugal living
genius!) and especially handy because anyone can have a hot bowl of
soup anytime, regardless of their schedules. I've read that the
pioneers did the same thing, kept a pot of soup or stew simmering on
the hearth all day long so people could have a decent meal whenever
they came in from the fields.

Ariane

Slow cooking question.
 

Jimbo > wrote in message >...
> Hi people,
> I've been using a slow cooker for a while now all very successfully.
> However, I've heard anecdotal evidence of people cooking a large pot of
> food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
> want, and even adding new ingredients.
>
> This sounds very appealing to me, but quite frankly I'm scared of
> poisoning myself. Does anyone know any top tips for doing this, or a
> good resource on the web? Using google just seems to find recipes :-)
>
> Thanks in advance
> James.
My Italian neighbors in SF kept a sauce pot at least half full of not
quite bubbling tomato based sauce on the stove at all times-cleaned
it out a couple of times a year. Ate sauce out of it many times-no
problemo-most of us Ami's are way too bug wary.

Slow cooking question.
 

>people cooking a large pot of
>food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
>want, and even adding new ingredients.

Crock pots, which do NOT keep their contents above boiling uniformly, should
not be used for indefinite storage at a simmer; and any crock pot process
should start by bringing the entire contents to a boil before reducing the
temperature to the simmer. Simmer for eight hours, if you wish; then consume
or refrigerate.

Throwing raw ingredients into a simmering crock pot is to create a great
bacterial breeding ground.

Neil

Slow cooking question.
 

In article >,
(WardNA) writes:

>>people cooking a large pot of
>>food and keeping it going for several days, eating from it when they
>>want, and even adding new ingredients.
>
>Crock pots, which do NOT keep their contents above boiling uniformly, should
>not be used for indefinite storage at a simmer; and any crock pot process
>should start by bringing the entire contents to a boil before reducing the
>temperature to the simmer. Simmer for eight hours, if you wish; then consume
>or refrigerate.
>
>Throwing raw ingredients into a simmering crock pot is to create a great
>bacterial breeding ground.

Um, crock pots don't simmer... they merely maintain safe cooking
temperatures...160-180 degrees F. If one wanted simmering then there is no
purpose to using a crockpot... instead set an ordinary pot asimmer on the
stovetop. There is no reason whatsoever one couldn't maintain a soup pot going
forever, whether on the stove top or a crockpot, with absolutely no risk of
food pathogen disease. How well the resulting swill tastes is all a matter of
the cook's creativity with ingredients and how hungry the customers.


---= BOYCOTT FRENCH--GERMAN (belgium) =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
Sheldon
````````````
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."