Losing Internal Juices

[tino27]

Since my grandmother is about to turn 88 and has more or less lost the desire to cook on a regular basis, I have been going over to her condo on the weekends to make sure she has at least one homemade meal per week. While she does have a regular stovetop/oven combination, she also has a small toaster oven that I employ quite frequently to "finish" the protein.

Whether it is pork, chicken, or beef (we're talking chops/breasts/steaks), my normal cooking technique involves removing the protein from the fridge about thirty minutes before I am going to cook it. I dry it off with paper towels and salt and pepper it immediately prior to placing it into a hot saute pan which I've preheated with a bit of grapeseed oil and a pat of butter. I sear it on each side for about 2-3 minutes and then transfer it to a pre-heated toaster oven pan, where I will finish it off at somewhere between 350-375 deg Fahrenheit until I get the proper internal temp for which I am looking.

The two issues I have is that when I remove the tray from the toaster oven, there is accumulated juice in the bottom of the tray. I don't waste it, I will simply add it to the gravy or sauce that I've prepared to accompany the protein. I then remove the protein to a cutting board where I will tent it with aluminum foil loosely to let it rest for about five minutes. When I finally remove the foil to slice and serve it, there will inevitably be even more juice on the cutting board, even before cutting into it.

My question is basically ... how do I keep all of this juice in the meat? Fortunately, because I am using an instant read thermometer to pull the protein out of the oven at the right time, the meat is never dried out, but if I can make it even juicier, I'd like to try.

By the way, all proteins are generally from the regular grocery store/supermarket so I'm sure they are brined and whatnot.

Thanks in advance for any tips.

[mkayahara]

It doesn't sound to me like you're doing anything wrong. Every time I've cooked any protein, some juice inevitably leaks out; it's just a function of the fact that when you heat muscle fibres, they contract, squeezing out moisture. The only way to keep more juice in is to cook the meat less, but if you're already cooking to temperature, then that's probably not really an option, either for reasons of food safety or of taste.

[Mjx]

Would you be more specific about the kind of meat you're cooking? You can't cook all meat the same way.

Your best bet is probably to get a reliable cookbook; you don't even need to commit to buying, you can get one from the library. For reliability, it's hard to beat The Best Recipe, by America's Test Kitchen.

[tino27]

Would you be more specific about the kind of meat you're cooking? You can't cook all meat the same way.

Your best bet is probably to get a reliable cookbook; you don't even need to commit to buying, you can get one from the library. For reliability, it's hard to beat The Best Recipe, by America's Test Kitchen.

My grandmother has had issues with swallowing in the past, so the proteins usually involve very tender cuts (which also makes them particularly lean, too), such as chicken breasts, pork loin/chops, or sirloin beef steaks. I was under the impression that lean proteins do best with a sear over direct heat for a short period of time followed by being finished in an indirect heat (such as the oven).

Thank you for the America's Test Kitchen resource. I try and catch their PBS show whenever I can.

[bmdaniel]

Jaccarding would probably help.

[Mjx]

Hm... if the cuts are very lean and tender, you may be better off just cooking them on the stove, over fairly high heat, so you get adequate internal cooking, and good browning, too. Or are we talking thick chunks?

[tino27]

Jaccarding would probably help.

I had no idea that this technique was called jaccarding. I understand why doing this would make the meat more tender (by breaking down the muscle fibers), but I'm at a loss as to why this would make the cooked protein juicier.

[tino27]

Hm... if the cuts are very lean and tender, you may be better off just cooking them on the stove, over fairly high heat, so you get adequate internal cooking, and good browning, too. Or are we talking thick chunks?

We're talking average supermarket thickness. My grandmother had gotten in the habit of buying chicken tenders (supremes) thinking that they were the tenderest part of the chicken. I've tried (and somewhat successfully, I might add) to show her that a thicker cut of meat cooked to the proper internal temperature is actually better because it is harder to overcook it and it will generally be moister. Same goes for pork chops. She isn't buying the extra thick ones, but she stopped buying the really thin ones that are basically cooked entirely in the pan as you suggested.

I'd say the sirloin steak I cooked last night was probably about 1/2 inch thick. I cooked it about 2 1/2 minutes per side in the pan and then finished it in the oven for another five minutes. It was medium rare to medium, just what I was aiming for.

[bmdaniel]

Jaccarding would probably help.

I had no idea that this technique was called jaccarding. I understand why doing this would make the meat more tender (by breaking down the muscle fibers), but I'm at a loss as to why this would make the cooked protein juicier.

Moisture is lost due to muscle fiber contraction; by jaccarding you reduce the contraction (since you have severed the fibers) and this muscle loss. There is a good. There is a good topic on it here:

[mkayahara]

Another thought: If you're looking for juicier meat, have you experimented with brining?

[tino27]

Another thought: If you're looking for juicier meat, have you experimented with brining?

That's a good idea. I'll have to check the packaging next time, but I'm pretty sure that the supermarket chicken breasts and I'm almost positive that the pork chops have already been injected with a saline solution prior to packaging. I'm not sure if additional brining would help. Perhaps next time I'll try it, just to see if that makes a difference or not.

[Darienne]

You are a good grandson.

[HungryC]

Kudos to you for helping her out. Have you considered poaching some of the chicken? Poached chicken is versatile, tender, and succulent. Whether you do the whole bird and pull it off the bone or poach boneless/skinless cuts, you can use the cooked chicken in so many ways. It can be shredded or finely chopped to accomodate her difficulties.

[tino27]

@HungryC: That's a great suggestion and actually the last time I did chicken, I poached it in order to make a "chicken pot pie" without the pie crust (I subbed in spaetzle for the starch). That being said, I think both of us really enjoy the flavor compounds created from searing the meat (plus that gives me some nice fond to build a pan sauce off of).

[Lisa Shock]

I'd like to point out that at my PT catering job (I'm a vegetarian, so none of this stuff gets cooked at home.) we've noticed that frozen then thawed chicken releases a lot of water, whereas when we source fresh chicken that has never been frozen, the liquid release is minimal. This makes sense knowing about the damage ice crystals do to cells. I recommend buying and using never frozen meats.

The one trick we use in cooking is to pull the protein off the heat a bit below the temperature required, because carryover cooking during resting will take the the temperature up to where it needs to be. For example, we bake chicken in a convection oven with a corded probe thermometer/alarm, like this one on Amazon, set for 158°. We pull it out to rest and within two minutes it's up to the 165° needed to ensure safety. Anyway, you didn't list actual temps, and, just guessing here, but, if you're pulling out, say, chicken at 165° then you are probably overcooking it, since it will go 7°-10° higher during resting, and the protein as it contracts is squeezing out liquid.

[tino27]

@lisa: You make an excellent point about frozen vs. fresh meat. Even if the meat was never frozen from processor to the distributor to the supermarket, the minute it makes its way to my grandmother's condo, she immediately freezes it until needed. That being said, when I pick the meat up from the grocery store and use it that day, I still notice the loss of juice, so I surmise that it was probably frozen at some point and then defrosted before being placed for sale out in the refrigerated bins. This alone is probably the biggest culprit in losing juice.

For the purposes of chicken breast, I do exactly as you suggest. I pull it when the internal temp is 160 deg Fahrenheit, knowing it will reach 165 during the covered resting period. Obviously, pork and beef are cooked to lower temperatures (although grandma is from an era where pork was cooked well done, not medium as is the trend today, so I usually cook pork to 145 or so).

[robirdstx]

For pork, you might try tenderloin instead of loin for a more tender cut of meat.

[Mjx]

Hm... if the cuts are very lean and tender, you may be better off just cooking them on the stove, over fairly high heat, so you get adequate internal cooking, and good browning, too. Or are we talking thick chunks?

We're talking average supermarket thickness. My grandmother had gotten in the habit of buying chicken tenders (supremes) thinking that they were the tenderest part of the chicken. I've tried (and somewhat successfully, I might add) to show her that a thicker cut of meat cooked to the proper internal temperature is actually better because it is harder to overcook it and it will generally be moister. Same goes for pork chops. She isn't buying the extra thick ones, but she stopped buying the really thin ones that are basically cooked entirely in the pan as you suggested.

I'd say the sirloin steak I cooked last night was probably about 1/2 inch thick. I cooked it about 2 1/2 minutes per side in the pan and then finished it in the oven for another five minutes. It was medium rare to medium, just what I was aiming for.

I myself would not cook meat of those particular thicknesses in the oven; I really prefer the control and results I get on the stovetop. Unless it has to spend at least 15 minutes in the oven, I don't fire it up. Besides, when the meat is that thin, it gets tricky to accurately measure the temperature at the centre.

However, I don't know whether this is idiosyncratic, or widespread practice.

[Lisa Shock]

@lisa: You make an excellent point about frozen vs. fresh meat. Even if the meat was never frozen from processor to the distributor to the supermarket, the minute it makes its way to my grandmother's condo, she immediately freezes it until needed. That being said, when I pick the meat up from the grocery store and use it that day, I still notice the loss of juice, so I surmise that it was probably frozen at some point and then defrosted before being placed for sale out in the refrigerated bins. This alone is probably the biggest culprit in losing juice.

For the purposes of chicken breast, I do exactly as you suggest. I pull it when the internal temp is 160 deg Fahrenheit, knowing it will reach 165 during the covered resting period. Obviously, pork and beef are cooked to lower temperatures (although grandma is from an era where pork was cooked well done, not medium as is the trend today, so I usually cook pork to 145 or so).

I think a lot of supermarket meats are previously frozen. There are a few brands that state on the label that they have never been frozen. My employer has done well with RedBird chicken, which is available in supermarkets, at least out here in the west, and through our wholesale foods purveyor. They have systems in place to ensure that their product does not go below 32°F. The Federal Safety and Inspection Service allows meats to be labeled as 'fresh' as long as they have not gone below 26°F. So, you may encounter meats labeled 'fresh' which have, IMO, for all intents and purposes been frozen and will have ice damage to their cellular structure.

I had hoped your temp procedure was correct, but, since you didn't explicitly state your temps, just thought I'd confirm that piece of the puzzle was not an issue.

Is speed of cooking important to you? Why not try a braise, like coq au vin, or beef stew, etc?

[tino27]

Speed isn't necessarily important, and I've done simple dishes using ground beef or turkey for things like chili with kidney beans or sloppy joe's. Additionally, 95% of the time, I will be using a protein that she has already purchased ahead of my visit, so my options are limited to what she has purchased at the store (and most likely was whatever was on sale the day she went). Since my grandmother doesn't really understand the world of braising, she considers stew meat to be too tough and a likely choking hazard, whether or not it actually is. And sometimes perception can manifest itself into reality from what I've experienced.

Probably the best bet for non-frozen meats would be our local farmers market, but as she would never be able to navigate such a busy place and even more important, would absolutely cringe at having to pay significantly more for meat that could be had for far less in the grocery store, I guess I will have to get the meat from there during my own visits. Fortunately, they have them every other weekend in the winter.

[HungryC]

Maybe you could buy her a small slow cooker (should cost around $20). Small roasts (pork or beef) in a slow cooker will turn out fall-apart fork-tender, easily chewed and swallowed. You could prepare the dish while you're at her place, turn on the cooker, and she'll have another hot meal later in the day or for the next day's lunch. If she's still interested/able to clean up in the kitchen, you can use the plastic slow-cooker liners which make cleanup a snap. I'm a fan of Joe Simmer's slow cooker recipes--stuff with real flavor & seasonings, rather than short-cut heavy 70s home ec style slow cooking. Think creole red beans & rice, ratatouille, chicken mole, etc.