Jump to content
  • Welcome to the eG Forums, a service of the eGullet Society for Culinary Arts & Letters. The Society is a 501(c)3 not-for-profit organization dedicated to the advancement of the culinary arts. These advertising-free forums are provided free of charge through donations from Society members. Anyone may read the forums, but to post you must create a free account.

Cooking pork to 130F OK? (according to Modernist Cuisine)


torolover
 Share

Recommended Posts

The FDA saids an internal temperature of pork of 145F is safe.

Modernista Cuisine saids "convincing chefs that pork has no special cooking requirements compared with those for beef or other meat can be a difficult feat."

So does this mean I can cook pork medium rare like a steak? I want to cook a pork chop to 130F and want to make sure it is OK.

Any thoughts or experiences?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FDA saids an internal temperature of pork of 145F is safe.

Modernista Cuisine saids "convincing chefs that pork has no special cooking requirements compared with those for beef or other meat can be a difficult feat."

So does this mean I can cook pork medium rare like a steak? I want to cook a pork chop to 130F and want to make sure it is OK.

Any thoughts or experiences?

The section covering the cookery of pork and possibility of food born illness explains why they say it is safe. Essentially, they hold that trichinella is no longer an issue in modern pork production. From my understanding this is mostly true, pastured pork from smaller farmers that don't use antibiotics as liberally as larger operations are more likely to have trichinella.

Personally, I've cooked medium rare pork for years without issue. On Thursday at the restaurant I intern at we did a small staff tasting of whey fed pork and cooked the cut rare. It was delicious and surprisingly different.

If you can cook at low temperature, such as in an immersion circulator, you can kill the trichinella by holding it at 54.4C/130F for about 30 minutes (according to US government guidelines). Alternatively, you can freeze the cut to kill the parasite.

Andrew Vaserfirer aka avaserfi

Host, eG Forums

avaserfirer@egstaff.org

eG Ethics Signatory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Modernista Cuisine saids "convincing chefs that pork has no special cooking requirements compared with those for beef or other meat can be a difficult feat."

Convincing the people we cook it for that it's okay to eat it that way is much more difficult than convincing cooks it's okay to cook it that way.

It's kinda like wrestling a gorilla... you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is tired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but I think part of the point MC is trying to make with that sentence is that there are no food safety concerns specific to pork that would dictate a higher cooking temperature. Since the risk of eating "undercooked" (i.e., unpasteurized) pork and, say, beef are similar, it's not rational to cook pork to a higher temperature than beef due to safety concerns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input guys! That's the point I felt Modernista Cuisine was making, but I just wanted to make sure what I read was correct.

Good to see replies from some fellow Bostonians!

Time to hit Savenors and cook some pork chops medium rare!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...