5 ms·
145F is beyond well-done for fish Edit: I must refrain myself from changing this comment into a pun about it seeming fishy.
by manwe150 5y ago
145F is beyond well-done for fish
Edit: I must refrain myself from changing this comment into a pun about it seeming fishy.
- m463 5y agorelated, I read recently that the temperatures were lowered for some meats for internal temperature from 165. EDIT: ok, here's the chart: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/safe-food-handling-and-preparation/food-safety-basics/safe-temperature-chart https://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/safe-food-handling-and... some things are still 165, but some are now 145. ham in some cases is 140.
- tornadron 5y agoCame across this last year, which intuitively made sense to me--definitely have had chicken cooked at lower than 165F and didn't get sick. I've not seen charts for other types of meat though. https://www.seriouseats.com/the-food-lab-complete-guide-to-sous-vide-chicken-breast https://www.seriouseats.com/the-food-lab-complete-guide-to-s... "The upshot is: Food safety is a function of both temperature and time. What the USDA is looking for is a 7.0 log10 relative reduction in salmonella bacteria in chicken. That is, a reduction that ensures that out of every 10,000,000 bacteria living on that piece of chicken to start, only one will survive."