3 ms·

Yep. The FDA recommended temperatures are very conservative and reflect something like the temperature at which almost all dangerous pathogens would be killed

Yep. The FDA recommended temperatures are very conservative and reflect something like the temperature at which almost all dangerous pathogens would be killed nearly instantaneously. Holding for a minute at 155F, or even 140F for a long while (easy to do with sous vide), has the same pasteurizing effect and is perfectly safe, while not totally ruining the texture† as cooking to 170F would do. Serious Eats has a great explanation. "Food safety is a function of both temperature and time." https://www.seriouseats.com/the-food-lab-complete-guide-to-sous-vide-chicken-breast#mntl-sc-block_1-0-17 https://www.seriouseats.com/the-food-lab-complete-guide-to-s... † (personally, I find 140F chicken breast a bit weird, though)

el_benhameen 5y ago
Developing an understanding of the time/temp relationship in cooking and food safety really revolutionized the way that I think about cooking and safety. Instead of a fear-based binary cooked/raw framework, I can reason about how long I need to hold an ingredient and a particular temperature to obtain both the texture I want and the level of food safety I need. It's made me a lot more relaxed about cooking.
Scramblejams 5y ago
Agreed, 140F chicken is weird. I did a bunch of test runs with my sous vide and my personal magic temp for chicken is 147F for an hour. Works great for dark and light meat.
jimmaswell 5y ago
For me the chicken comes out chewy and spongy if I don't cook it to 170 or so. I started having a chicken breast for almost every meal recently and I had to keep increasing the cook time to find the right doneness, and at that doneness it will read 170 or even a lot more in spots. 425 for 32 minutes for one ~10oz breast for reference.