3 ms·
"cook longer" at the same temperature is my original example (though admittedly I was thinking that cook temp would be another variable, but I didn't write that
by flaminHotSpeedo 1y ago
"cook longer" at the same temperature is my original example (though admittedly I was thinking that cook temp would be another variable, but I didn't write that):
> now we know that I could simply keep cooking the meat for longer
Cooking longer at the same temperature is also pretty much exactly what the experiment in the article was, which found no statistically significant correlation between testing and juiciness.
The experimental group pork chops took less time from when they were put on the skillet to when they were cut (and when they would have been consumed if they were cooked by someone making a meal for themselves).
You're welcome to disagree, but the facts disagree with your stance.
- Dylan16807 1y agoI worded that badly. I meant cooking significantly longer is outside the scope, since that implies different temperature (or a rubber brick). Yes, cooking different times at the same temperature is exactly what I was responding to. The outside will be a lot hotter if you do that. If the juice loss is the same, there's a missing factor here, why does only the middle temperature matter and not the edge temperature?