6 ms·

I can't speak to the nutritional aspect of it, but having attempted various high protein or protein/fat heavy keto diets in the past with varying levels of succ

I can't speak to the nutritional aspect of it, but having attempted various high protein or protein/fat heavy keto diets in the past with varying levels of success I do have to say it doesn't take long before you just get sick of eating meat. What kind of meat were you eating and how was it cooked? I did a month of carnivore diet and never got sick of eating rare ribeye steak, lamb ribs, or lamb legs. I think I would get sick of chicken or pot roast or well-done ground beef. That said, I never stopped missing carby meals like mac 'n cheese or cookie dough ice cream.

war1025 6y ago
> never got sick of eating rare ribeye steak > I think I would get sick of chicken or pot roast or well-done ground beef Honest question, why do people seem to love rare meat so much? I agree that tough meat doesn't taste good, but I would argue a properly cooked pot roast is about the most tender cut of meat you can find. Having had what most "foodie" people would call a "properly cooked" just barely above rare steak, I always find it to be unsatisfying. What am I missing?
- sillycon-valley 6y ago
  It's juicy. Some people's preference of "dry" varies. Some people can't fathom others liking well done, some can't fathom rare. Pink in the middle is preferred but at red it's too watery for me, to each their own.
  - war1025 6y ago
    > It's juicy. Most of the juice in my experience comes from cooking the meat long enough to render the fat. I've had medium-rare steak before where the fat was all still solid. Didn't seem all that great to me even though all the others raved about it.
    - hnick 6y ago
      Yes, I think most juiciness is actually fat/oil, not water. Pretty sure one of those more serious food blogs measured it once. This is why basting in fat is important sometimes. I was gifted some leftover thin wagyu cuts recently. I cooked them through because they have so much fat they're still tender, and the brown adds flavour. It just had to render enough. I guess they were technically "well done" but perfect for me, as someone who prefers medium on typical steak.
- curiousllama 6y ago
  In terms of statistical preference, I'm not sure there's a actually huge difference. Some people like blue steaks, others like well done, most people are in between. I think people who like rare steaks just talk about it more because it's the "right" way to prepare the "best" cuts. A $200 steak is just going to be most flavorful when it's on the rarer side. But its just a signaling thing if you're talking about skirt or flank. Same question could be asked "why does everyone all the sudden love whiskey neat so much?" - they don't, its just that the whiskey folk talk about it conspicuously.
  - war1025 6y ago
    > its just a signaling thing That makes a lot of sense. Also what on earth makes a steak worth $200? I bought a 1/4 beef this fall for something like $700, and that includes all the nice steaks and roasts along with like 50 lbs of ground beef.
    - curiousllama 6y ago
      Well, a nonlinear demand curve for luxury goods comes into play. Also, $200 steaks are typically prepared (at which point you're paying for restaurant ambiance and the chef's time). Raw steaks don't get up that high unless aged or pre-prepared in some way. But more generally, steaks just scale well to the high end. They keep getting better and better as cut, livestock, and preparation improves. That's not necessarily true for other foods. E.g., most pastas (while obviously delicious) will only get so good barring a virtuoso chef. I recommend a test. Find a friend who's really good at preparing steaks. Have them cook a good cut & a regular cut from your 1/4 beef, and you cook one of each too. You'll taste the difference from cut and preparation quality.
      - war1025 6y ago
        Where would you suggest getting a "good" steak? In my experience direct from farmer beef is so superior to store bought beef that I avoid eating beef bought from a store.
- chlodwig 6y ago
  Honest question, why do people seem to love rare meat so much? I agree that tough meat doesn't taste good, but I would argue a properly cooked pot roast is about the most tender cut of meat you can find. Ribeye, lamb ribs, and lamb leg are all relatively tender. Beyond a certain point, I don't need my meat to be that tender. Frankly, ribeye is probably too tender to be optimal for health and physique -- it would be better to develop that Chad-like jaw to eat something a more tough cut ... Rare meat is not only juicier, but too me it tastes a lot better. Rare meat tastes good, the denatured proteins of pot roast do not taste good. And while there is a tremendous amount of social conditioning and idiosyncrasies that determine people's tastes, I don't think is just me -- most people eat their steaks plain, but almost everyone I know adds sauces and fixins to their pot roast and brisket and other meats that have been cooked forever. IMO, they ruin the meat with over cooking and then add in sugars and other flavorings to make it palatable.
  - war1025 6y ago
    A well cooked pot roast is not that much different from the sous vide trend that's becoming so popular. You put the roast in a dutch oven coated in salt and pepper the same as you would with a steak and a bit of water, then you let it cook at ~200F for 4 - 8 hours. Usually you also slow roast some onions, carrots, potatoes, etc. along with it the last little while. Then make a gravy from the drippings. The gravy is good on the meat, but it's more for the vegetables. The meat is delicious in its own right.
    - chlodwig 6y ago
      With sous vide the collagen breaks down, but the internal temperature never gets high enough for the proteins to denature. Internal temp should not be higher than 135. The meat is still pink if you are doing it right. With pot roast, internal temp is going to 190 degrees or higher and the proteins denature (in addition to the collagen breaking down). I find that sous vide chuck roast taste better on its own than chuck roast, but it is worse than chuck roast seared and served rare. But the sous vide version is more tender than rare chuck roast, while being less tender than pot roast.
- Shorel 6y ago
  It depends. Cow meat is better when rare, pork is better well roasted.
  - sonotmyname 6y ago
    > Cow meat is better when rare A few pitmasters in Texas would like to have a word with you about over-generalizing.... Seriously though - a cow is a huge animal with many cuts. Some are better rare, some are sublime when cooked to a high enough heat to break down the collagen in it.
  - com2kid 6y ago
    Visit Japan sometime, health and sanitary standards are so high that you can have chicken ordered rare. It is a bit shocking and I know a few people who just couldn't do it, we are so conditioned in the west to "rare chicken will kill you". But, if you can manage it, very delicious. :)
    - selimthegrim 6y ago
      There are farmers here in south Louisiana I trust that much but I agree I didn't believe it before I found it.
  - hnick 6y ago
    Slightly pink pork is generally considered safe in most countries now, and preferred for some leaner styles (like pork chops/medallions). I've tried it and it benefits just like a beef steak.

war1025 6y ago

> never got sick of eating rare ribeye steak > I think I would get sick of chicken or pot roast or well-done ground beef Honest question, why do people seem to love rare meat so much? I agree that tough meat doesn't taste good, but I would argue a properly cooked pot roast is about the most tender cut of meat you can find. Having had what most "foodie" people would call a "properly cooked" just barely above rare steak, I always find it to be unsatisfying. What am I missing?

sillycon-valley 6y ago
It's juicy. Some people's preference of "dry" varies. Some people can't fathom others liking well done, some can't fathom rare. Pink in the middle is preferred but at red it's too watery for me, to each their own.
- war1025 6y ago
  > It's juicy. Most of the juice in my experience comes from cooking the meat long enough to render the fat. I've had medium-rare steak before where the fat was all still solid. Didn't seem all that great to me even though all the others raved about it.
  - hnick 6y ago
    Yes, I think most juiciness is actually fat/oil, not water. Pretty sure one of those more serious food blogs measured it once. This is why basting in fat is important sometimes. I was gifted some leftover thin wagyu cuts recently. I cooked them through because they have so much fat they're still tender, and the brown adds flavour. It just had to render enough. I guess they were technically "well done" but perfect for me, as someone who prefers medium on typical steak.
curiousllama 6y ago
In terms of statistical preference, I'm not sure there's a actually huge difference. Some people like blue steaks, others like well done, most people are in between. I think people who like rare steaks just talk about it more because it's the "right" way to prepare the "best" cuts. A $200 steak is just going to be most flavorful when it's on the rarer side. But its just a signaling thing if you're talking about skirt or flank. Same question could be asked "why does everyone all the sudden love whiskey neat so much?" - they don't, its just that the whiskey folk talk about it conspicuously.
- war1025 6y ago
  > its just a signaling thing That makes a lot of sense. Also what on earth makes a steak worth $200? I bought a 1/4 beef this fall for something like $700, and that includes all the nice steaks and roasts along with like 50 lbs of ground beef.
  - curiousllama 6y ago
    Well, a nonlinear demand curve for luxury goods comes into play. Also, $200 steaks are typically prepared (at which point you're paying for restaurant ambiance and the chef's time). Raw steaks don't get up that high unless aged or pre-prepared in some way. But more generally, steaks just scale well to the high end. They keep getting better and better as cut, livestock, and preparation improves. That's not necessarily true for other foods. E.g., most pastas (while obviously delicious) will only get so good barring a virtuoso chef. I recommend a test. Find a friend who's really good at preparing steaks. Have them cook a good cut & a regular cut from your 1/4 beef, and you cook one of each too. You'll taste the difference from cut and preparation quality.
    - war1025 6y ago
      Where would you suggest getting a "good" steak? In my experience direct from farmer beef is so superior to store bought beef that I avoid eating beef bought from a store.
chlodwig 6y ago
Honest question, why do people seem to love rare meat so much? I agree that tough meat doesn't taste good, but I would argue a properly cooked pot roast is about the most tender cut of meat you can find. Ribeye, lamb ribs, and lamb leg are all relatively tender. Beyond a certain point, I don't need my meat to be that tender. Frankly, ribeye is probably too tender to be optimal for health and physique -- it would be better to develop that Chad-like jaw to eat something a more tough cut ... Rare meat is not only juicier, but too me it tastes a lot better. Rare meat tastes good, the denatured proteins of pot roast do not taste good. And while there is a tremendous amount of social conditioning and idiosyncrasies that determine people's tastes, I don't think is just me -- most people eat their steaks plain, but almost everyone I know adds sauces and fixins to their pot roast and brisket and other meats that have been cooked forever. IMO, they ruin the meat with over cooking and then add in sugars and other flavorings to make it palatable.
- war1025 6y ago
  A well cooked pot roast is not that much different from the sous vide trend that's becoming so popular. You put the roast in a dutch oven coated in salt and pepper the same as you would with a steak and a bit of water, then you let it cook at ~200F for 4 - 8 hours. Usually you also slow roast some onions, carrots, potatoes, etc. along with it the last little while. Then make a gravy from the drippings. The gravy is good on the meat, but it's more for the vegetables. The meat is delicious in its own right.
  - chlodwig 6y ago
    With sous vide the collagen breaks down, but the internal temperature never gets high enough for the proteins to denature. Internal temp should not be higher than 135. The meat is still pink if you are doing it right. With pot roast, internal temp is going to 190 degrees or higher and the proteins denature (in addition to the collagen breaking down). I find that sous vide chuck roast taste better on its own than chuck roast, but it is worse than chuck roast seared and served rare. But the sous vide version is more tender than rare chuck roast, while being less tender than pot roast.
Shorel 6y ago
It depends. Cow meat is better when rare, pork is better well roasted.
- sonotmyname 6y ago
  > Cow meat is better when rare A few pitmasters in Texas would like to have a word with you about over-generalizing.... Seriously though - a cow is a huge animal with many cuts. Some are better rare, some are sublime when cooked to a high enough heat to break down the collagen in it.
- com2kid 6y ago
  Visit Japan sometime, health and sanitary standards are so high that you can have chicken ordered rare. It is a bit shocking and I know a few people who just couldn't do it, we are so conditioned in the west to "rare chicken will kill you". But, if you can manage it, very delicious. :)
  - selimthegrim 6y ago
    There are farmers here in south Louisiana I trust that much but I agree I didn't believe it before I found it.
- hnick 6y ago
  Slightly pink pork is generally considered safe in most countries now, and preferred for some leaner styles (like pork chops/medallions). I've tried it and it benefits just like a beef steak.