4 ms·

No, the article concluded that resting meat does not influence juiciness. In the blind test the author ran, the tasters could not identify a difference in juici

No, the article concluded that resting meat does not influence juiciness. In the blind test the author ran, the tasters could not identify a difference in juiciness between rested and unrested meat.

adastra22 1y ago
Do you cook steak? I do, multiple times a week (my kids love it). If you cut it right away, you end up with a pool of meat juice. If you wait a few minutes, you don't. I call bullshit. Resting the meat keeps the juice inside. This is objectively the case, whether or not some blind taste test agrees. (I'm not even sure why a blind test is relevant here...)
- jdlshore 1y ago
  I’m talking about the article, not my (or your) experience cooking. The points you raise are addressed in the article, which is very thoughtful and thorough.
- kelnos 1y ago
  No, cutting into the meat when it's at a particular temperature determines how much juice spills out, not how long you've rested it. Yes, resting it changes the cutting temperature (acknowledged by the article), but that's not really the point being made or the effect being investigated.
  - huhtenberg 1y ago
    Based on my experience this is incorrect. Cooking to, say, a medium-rare and cutting in right away will spill a lot of juice, whereby cooking to below medium-rare and letting it get to the medium-rare temp will leak hardly anything. It's dead simple to reproduce and obvious in practice. I am aware of what SeriousEats is, but this particular article is sensationalist and was written for clicks.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
- ksenzee 1y ago
  Did you read the article? This is absolutely addressed. “Resting the meat keeps the juice inside” is obviously correct and he is not arguing against that point. The question is whether there is another way to keep the juice inside.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- Hikikomori 1y ago
  On one side we have Kenji and Chris young (modernist cuisine books) and the other side we have guy making well done steak for his kids, several times a week.

No, the article concluded that resting meat does not influence juiciness. In the blind test the author ran, the tasters could not identify a difference in juiciness between rested and unrested meat.

adastra22 1y ago

Do you cook steak? I do, multiple times a week (my kids love it). If you cut it right away, you end up with a pool of meat juice. If you wait a few minutes, you don't. I call bullshit. Resting the meat keeps the juice inside. This is objectively the case, whether or not some blind taste test agrees. (I'm not even sure why a blind test is relevant here...)

jdlshore 1y ago
I’m talking about the article, not my (or your) experience cooking. The points you raise are addressed in the article, which is very thoughtful and thorough.
kelnos 1y ago
No, cutting into the meat when it's at a particular temperature determines how much juice spills out, not how long you've rested it. Yes, resting it changes the cutting temperature (acknowledged by the article), but that's not really the point being made or the effect being investigated.
- huhtenberg 1y ago
  Based on my experience this is incorrect. Cooking to, say, a medium-rare and cutting in right away will spill a lot of juice, whereby cooking to below medium-rare and letting it get to the medium-rare temp will leak hardly anything. It's dead simple to reproduce and obvious in practice. I am aware of what SeriousEats is, but this particular article is sensationalist and was written for clicks.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
ksenzee 1y ago
Did you read the article? This is absolutely addressed. “Resting the meat keeps the juice inside” is obviously correct and he is not arguing against that point. The question is whether there is another way to keep the juice inside.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
Hikikomori 1y ago
On one side we have Kenji and Chris young (modernist cuisine books) and the other side we have guy making well done steak for his kids, several times a week.