3 ms·
The article actually doesn't refute the idea of resting meat to retain the juices. In fact, it supports it. It just provides a reason for why this works which i
by metabagel 1y ago
The article actually doesn't refute the idea of resting meat to retain the juices. In fact, it supports it. It just provides a reason for why this works which is perhaps different than conventional wisdom.
Retaining the juices in the meat has to do with the temperature at which the meat is cut. Resting allows the temperature to drop, which creates less pressure, so the juices aren't forced out of the meat nearly as strongly.
The title is click-bait. The major rule is correct, not wrong. But, now we know a little bit more about why this rule works.
> As the meat rests (and therefore cools) that vapor pressure decreases, and so does the juice loss. It's not about reabsorption or thickening as the juices cool, which is another common explanation that's been offered over the years. It's simply about pressure. Control for final internal temperature, and—rested or not—the juice loss is the same.
- IsopropylMalbec 1y agoDoes this mean that cooking at lower temperatures will lead to lower pressure and less moisture loss?
- pdq 1y agoYes. Kenji Lopez has done this experiment using sous vide cooking. See the chart halfway down here: https://blog.thermoworks.com/coming-heat-effects-muscle-fibers-meat/ https://blog.thermoworks.com/coming-heat-effects-muscle-fibe...
- woooooo 1y agoWouldn't thickening of juices also be temperature- rather than time-dependent? Fats and collagens melt at specific temperatures. I always thought the whole point of resting is to do with temperature rather than time.
- ars 1y agoIt has nothing to do with vapor pressure, rather the liquid congeals when it cools and doesn't run out.
- chasebank 1y ago"Resting allows the temperature to drop, which creates less pressure, so the juices aren't forced out of the meat nearly as strongly." I was always under the impression that if you pull your meat at let's say 128, resting it will bring the internal temperature up, finishing at like 132-134. Is this wrong?
- bmurphy1976 1y agoIt's not wrong, it's incomplete. It will briefly bring the temperature up as everything stabilizes but then it will start going back down. How quickly is entirely dependent on the environment it's in as well. Keep it in a warming oven? It's gonna a be a much slower process than sitting on a cool countertop.
- ketzo 1y agoThat is indeed exactly what the article says — I’m not certain GP is right on this. Kenji’s original tests seem to confound this as well: every 2.5min of slicing produces steadily less juice, despite the fact that the steak’s internal temp should be rising for some of that time.
- nerdsniper 1y ago“Internal” temperatures are measured near a single point. Some internal, watery, parts will be hotter than other internal, watery, parts. On average, the temperature goes down over time even if it increases in some local parts. So the average pressure will decrease. (Yes, for an ideal cavity, pressure is equal everywhere, but for meat which contains highly tortured paths and a three-phase state mixture for the vapors to escape from - there can be different pressures in different areas especially once there’s any flow at all)
- UncleMeat 1y agoResting increases internal temperature. Immediately after you take the meat off the heat it'll have a cooler internal temperature than after five minutes of resting. The crust of the meat is much hotter than the core and heat moves from the outside to the inside during resting.
- bigbuppo 1y agoIn other words, the real reason to let it rest is to let it finish cooking.
- stevenhuang 1y agoUnless it's already cooked, and this extra time spent resting will overcook it, resulting in the meat becoming drier, however imperceptible.
- p1necone 1y agoIf perfect doneness requires immediate consumption as soon as it leaves the pan I'd argue you've still overcooked it, unless you're fine with only ever being able to reproduce your dish alone, just for you.
- x2tyfi 1y agoThis is true. But OPs point - while a bit hidden - is that even more rest will result in the temperature lowering, eventually. And when you achieve that was-lower-then-higher-but-now-lower-again temperature, it should be more juicy
- x2tyfi 1y agoThis is a good point, and highlights that there’s an additional variable somewhat out of scope from this test. 1. finish temperature (as mentioned in this article) 2. peak temperature In these tests, the finish temperature and peak temperature were the same - he sliced while carryover cooking was still climbing. However, when resting, most people achieve a peak temperature (due to carryover cooking), then roll down the other side of the curve to a lowered temperature. As you imply, a longer rest - in conjunction with protein pulled at just the right time - can likely result with both the perfect (to taste) peak temperature, and a lower (and more juicy) slicing temperature
- flaminHotSpeedo 1y agoThe article categorically refutes the idea that resting is important for juiciness but that's not the same as saying resting will not improve juice retention. Proof that a relationship once though to be causal is not is a pretty big deal, and the conventional wisdom is wrong. As a counterexample: let's say the only things I care about are juiciness of the center of the cut of meat and the time it takes me to make it. By the conventional wisdom I'd have to rest the meat, adding time, but now we know that I could simply keep cooking the meat for longer, since that will raise the center temp faster, and then cut it immediately after cooking. Or another scenario: if I know the precise internal temperature for my preferred level of juiciness, I know exactly what temperature to set a sous vide to.
- Dylan16807 1y agoSomeone that only cares about juiciness at the center, and doesn't care how much is lost from the rest of the meat, sounds pretty unrealistic to me. If you keep pouring in heat until the last moment everything outside the center will be much hotter and lose much more juice.
- flaminHotSpeedo 1y agoThat depends on the heat applied. Which brings up another good counterexample: knowing this, someone could cook longer at a lower temp to get a juicer edge for the same juiciness center.
- Dylan16807 1y agoI'm talking about the method in that example, which was cooking as fast as possible.
- flaminHotSpeedo 1y agoYes, my example is unrealistic when you apply your own unrealistic constraints on top of it. But when you remove your unrealistic constraints, it is absolutely realistic. There is a wide temperature band where a cut of meat will reach a given center temp faster than carryover cooking with a difference to edge temperature that is trivial enough that someone is unlikely to notice.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- ezoe 1y agoThe article conduct rested vs not rested test and testers are inconsistent on which is juicier.
- safety1st 1y agoThat's an inaccurate and unnecessarily critical take on the article. First, at the end of the article he does a taste test. In the taste test no one was able to tell whether the meat had been rested or not, so that's a reason you might not want to bother resting meat. Second, yes he devotes a lot of the article to the discovery that juice retention is happening for different reasons than we thought. To quote him directly, he thinks this is important because "Food and recipe writers like myself have been dispensing inaccurate meat-resting time and temperature guidance for ages." If you choose to continue resting your meat, as many will, these insights provide you with better guidance in terms of how you should do it. As a home cook, the taste test is convincing enough to me that if I'm making food for myself, I should probably skip the resting stage, focus on other taste factors, and see how it goes, as I'm always happy to save 10 minutes and taste is rather subjective anyway. A professional or commercial chef will likely have a very different but no less useful takeaway from this article. All this to say, it was a great article and the headline's not clickbait.
- Funes- 1y ago>The title is click-bait. Click-bait!? On HN's frontpage? Oh, say it ain't so!