Datasets:

andrewsiah

/

se_cooking_preference_sft

like 0

So, I've finally accomplished making mayo. But it has a yellowish hue to it, obviously this is the case because of the egg yolks. My question is this: Why is store mayo white? What makes it white? I'm fine with mine being the color it is, but now it's driving me crazy as why it's white in the stores. Is it a preservative thing? Is it an appearance thing?

Short answer: store mayonnaise has less yolks per volume oil, and yolks give most of the yellow color. Mainly the reason is that store mayonnaise adds water, rather than relying on the moisture in the egg yolks and vinegar. To quote On Food and Cooking, page 634: Though cookbooks often say that the ratio of oil to egg yolk is critical, that one can only emulsify a half-cup or cup of oil, this isn't true. A single yolk can emulsify a dozen cups of oil or more. What is critical is the ratio of oil to water: there must be enough of the continuous phase for the growing population of oil droplets to fit into. This means you can use less yolks and just add water to get your volume. Since yolks impart most of the yellow color (from plant pigments called xanthophylls), this reduces color considerably. Store mayonnaise also uses some whole eggs, not just yolks, which do not emulsify as well, but are cheaper. This further reduces the amount of yolk in the result. Note that while home mayonnaises use yolks, store mayonnaises can get away with including egg whites by using very powerful machines to emulsify the mayonnaise, and in some cases add emulsifiers such as lecithin to help stabilize it. The Experiment! One whole, very jumbo egg, with a little white wine vinegar (around 15 mL). For oil, I used vegetable oil with a small splash of olive oil. The total amount of oil used was 1.5 cups, or 350 mL. First, I tried to create mayonnaise by hand whipping with a mini-whisk. It turned out a pale yellow, and thickened some, but refused to thicken fully. This confirms that making a homemade mayonnaise by hand requires yolks or some sort of mechanical beating/blending; whole eggs just don't emulsify well enough. It's fair to say that the result is quite yellow when it isn't fully blended. Next, I gave it a shot with my immersion blender: See how much lighter and paler the mayonnaise is! I can only speculate that the blender created a much finer emulsion, and incorporated more air, reducing the impact of the oil and yolk color on light scattered off the micro-droplets. Finally, I went ahead and added flavorings (a little dijon mustard, a ton of paprika, salt, pepper, and more vinegar). In this comparison against commercial mayonnaise, you can see that the result is now darker and more orange, courtesy of the paprika. It is also clear how close the color was before adding paprika. Clearly, the use of whole eggs is the biggest part of the equation. It is clear that by adding more water to thin the emulsion and then adding oil to achieve the proper consistency, I could make this even paler, very close to store mayonnaise. The use of mechanical blenders may assist in the process, producing a finer and paler emulsion. Recipes that include paprika also yield a more yellow-orange result; I think it is for this reason that my commercial mayonnaise uses "paprika oleoresin" in place of ground paprika. Finally, the use of more heavily colored olive oil appears to darken the resulting mayonnaise. Given how bland my mayonnaise was with only a touch of olive oil, I would encourage you to blend in water and additional oil, rather than avoiding the olive oil. Ideally, the water would be added about a tsp at a time, when the mayonnaise is still somewhat liquid.

I recently made a large batch of mixed vegetable pickles (cucumber, onion, carrot, peppers, cauliflower, garlic) with a brine of 1 cup white vinegar to 3 cups water and 1/4 cup salt. I used a clean, not sterile method, and didn't process the jars. Ten days later some of the jars are cloudy, and some of the lids are fizzing. I've pickled a lot in the past, sometimes using a water bath to process and sometimes not. This time I skipped the step thinking the acidity would be enough to prevent nasty things like botulism. I'm belatedly researching and learning the difference between fermented pickles and vinegar pickles. I had simply assumed the process was similar and adding vinegar would keep it safer by increasing the acidity. My question now is, will the high acidity and high salt (works out to 1 tablespoon per cup of brine) prevent botulism from growing and keep them safe to eat (as long as they don't smell bad)? Reading about fermented pickles, I see that cloudiness is a good sign. Can the cloudiness be lacto-fermentation, or would the vinegar disrupt that process? Another thing that might explain the cloudiness is the iodized salt (I didn't have access to pickling salt). I want to experiment with fermentation and would definitely do things differently next time, but for now, I'm just wondering if I can salvage anything, and what would be a clear indication that they're unsafe and I should throw out the lot.

The best advice anyone can give you is to please stop experimenting and use tested recipes. Particularly for acidified pickles, there are huge numbers of resources out there with tested recipes verified by scientific protocols. (That is, they tried them many times under many conditions and tested stored versions for microorganism growth to verify they are safe.) The National Center for Home Food Preservation is one place to start for both general information and many specific tested recipes. Many states (particularly agricultural ones) have similar resources online. The Ball Blue Book Guide to Preserving and the Bernardin guidebooks are also classic resources for such information. From your description, it sounds like you have left unprocessed, unsealed containers out at room temperature. No, this is not a safe storage method. Yes, the acid and salt will likely inhibit botulism growth, but without using a verified recipe and procedure (as mentioned above), you can't guarantee this. Large chunks of food, for example, may not acidify fast enough to prevent botulism growth, or depending on your recipe, some of the vegetables may release a lot of water when placed in brine, which could dilute the salt and acid to the point that nasty bacteria could grow. That's why there's no magic formula that will guarantee safety by telling you X amount of salt or Y amount of vinegar for all foods. Individual recipes need to be developed and tested. Botulism is certainly not the only dangerous bacteria, though -- Listeria, for example, is a common bacteria that can grow even in mildly acidic conditions and can cause illness in improperly processed foods. Surface mold can also easily grow in situations like you describe, sometimes with serious toxic effects if eaten. With less acidity or sufficiently diluted conditions, all sorts of things could grow. That's why processing with heat is absolutely necessary for safe room temperature storage, to pasteurize and seal the foods from spoilage agents. (Food stored in the refrigerator is a bit different: without processing, acidified pickles may still be safe for several days or weeks, depending on the recipe.) Use of a verified recipe is also essential for preservation that will include room temperature storage, as you can't guarantee sufficient acidity, salt, etc. without microbiological tests. Food scientists have worked hard to develop such recipes over the past century, since before that canned food made many people sick. If you really want to store food at room temperature, please don't trust any recipe on the internet or even from some book that doesn't come from an organization which actually does testing. As to what happened with your current batch and what you should do with it -- first, it is possible that some lacto-fermentation went on during room temperature storage, even despite starting with an acidified recipe. Obviously with all the fizzing, some sort of fermentation has happened. Unfortunately, without microbiological testing, you have no idea what sort of stuff you may have grown or whether it is safe. Lactofermentation usually depends on a higher salt content in the initial phase to select for the right sort of bacteria, which then grow and acidify the mixture to the point that nothing bad will likely grow. However, without knowing exactly how acidic your initial mixture was (again, taking into account possible liquid released from the vegetables you added to your brine) as well as actual salt concentration, it's impossible to know whether you had a good "healthy" fermentation or whether you grew something that could make you sick. Many types of dangerous spoilage bacteria don't necessarily produce a smell or taste sufficient to warn you that they could cause illness. The only 100% safe recommendation at this point is to throw this batch out and start again with a reputable recipe. And if you plan to store at room temperature, please process with hot water accordingly and seal properly. It's possible (given sufficient acidity and salt) that your current batch may still be edible, but no one here can guarantee that.

Why is it that every time I try to heat raw milk in a microwave it curdles and becomes like ricotta after a few seconds?

The problem you are facing is that your microwave temperature is too high and boils your milk too rapidly. The microwave does not heat food evenly and boils the milk too fast. Milk shouldn't be boiled too rapidly and doing this causes the casein in it to clump together and that curdles the milk. It should instead be brought 'to a boil' by heating on a slow heat for longer until it starts to boil. So, you can try a couple of different options: You can bring the milk to a boil in a pan on a stove on slow heat, which will take long depending on the amount of milk. And I can vouch for this method. I've seen my dad do this for years and as long as your pan is clean and the heat is low, you'll have a successful result. I haven't tried this myself, but you can Pour milk into a microwave-safe container and microwave on medium-high (70%) power, stirring every 15 seconds, just until steam begins to rise from the milk. To scald milk for custards or yogurt, heat 250 mL (1 cup) on HIGH for 2 to 2 1/2 minutes. - Reference

Apfelschorle is a German (or Austrian?) drink which is made with approximately a 1:1 ratio of apple juice and sparkling (carbonated) mineral water. My technique is simply to pour the appropriate amount of apple juice and water (both chilled) into a cup, give it a stir, and then drink. When I had bottled Apfelschorle in Germany (primarly two brands: Gerolsteiner and Lift), the bubbles were delicate and small, like in a bottle of champagne. I preferred the Gerolsteiner brand, which had a bit more delicate bubbles and better apple flavor. I've tried making it at home in the US with an approximately 1:1 ratio of seltzer water (La Croix brand) and apple juice (Mott's brand). The flavor is close to Lift (I suspect higher quality apple juice would give a better depth of flavor and the mineral content is different as well which might also affect the flavor) which is acceptable, but the mouthfeel is all wrong -- the bubbles are typically big and don't last as long as either Lift or Gerolsteiner; only a few sips have the right mouthfeel. Is there a way to get the right mouthfeel without resorting to buying (expensive in the US) European mineral waters? I drink a decent amount of seltzer water, so even if it requires equipment to carbonate water at home, I might be willing to invest in it.

You are comparing two rather different things. A mixture of apple juice and water that is then carbonated (as your bottled product would be) is quite different from a mixture of still apple juice and carbonated water. I know that both alcoholic and non-alcoholic carbonated cider/apple juice typically have small bubbles. And you can purchase carbonated apple juice in the US, (often seen/marketed as a non-alcoholic alternative to champagne) as well as an increasingly wide variety of alcoholic ciders. I don't know how mixing carbonated juice and carbonated water would work out, but it would have much better odds of being somewhat like what you want. For even better odds, start with an empty, chilled bottle (suitable for carbonated drinks) and pour both ingredients into it, then seal the top and let them meld in the fridge under pressure for a while (perhaps a day), rather than stirring in an open cup. That MIGHT even work for the still juice, although it would be limited in carbonation. If you got a carbonation system of some sort, you could start with apple juice and water mixed, and then force carbonate that.

Most dumpling recipes—including those discussed on this site—claim that the dumplings will be ready when they float to the surface. I have two interrelated questions: Does this rule ever fail? For example, might there be certain recipes or conditions (e.g., altitude) where one should allow the dumplings to cook further after they have floated? Conversely, are there certain recipes/conditions where one should remove the dumplings before they float? If this is a relatively universal rule, what is the science behind it?

I will quote here the bible of cooking science, Harold McGees "On Food and Cooking": "Dumpling doughs are minimally kneaded to maximize tenderness, and benefit from the inclusion of tiny air pockets, which provide lightness. [...] This tendency to rise with cooking is due to the expansion of the dough's air pockets, which fill with vaporized water as the dumpling interior approaches the boiling point and make the dough less dense than the surrounding water." Following this, your dumpling must be a proper dumpling - dough that was only minimally kneaded, while altitude does not matter. Why does this coincidence with being ready? [...] the starch granules absorb water molecules, and swell and soften as the water molecules intrude and separate the starch molecules from each other. This granule softening [...] takes place in a temperature range that depends on the seed and the starch, but is in the region of 140-160°F/60-70°C. The tightly ordered clusters of amylose molecules require higher temperatures, more water, and more cooking time to be pulled and kept apart than do the looser clusters of amylopectin molecules. So, altogether, the starch molecules do not absorb much more water as they are done, so the remaining water can vaporize and fill the air pockets, which makes the dumpling float then. Or, in other words, a floating dumpling is actually overcooked and so guaranteed to be ready (if the preconditions are met). Does this rule ever fail? Yes. Your dough needs to have sufficient air pockets for floating. Your dough needs to be made out of starch that is willing to absorb water. A dough made out of waxy potatoes has a fair chance to not float in time. This does match with German recipes for potato dumplings using waxy potatoes, that warn about the dumplings falling apart due to overcooking, if there is too much water in the pot (as it takes too much time for the dumpling to rise).

While frying chicken, with a basic marinate of eggs, salt, pepper and ginger-garlic paste overnight, I get a sort of raw taste of chicken, but when I eat the same fried chicken at the restaurant - they somehow are able to remove that taste. Can anyone tell how is this gone? Has anyone experienced this before? I think I'm not able to describe that taste, the most rough idea is chicken taste in general tso's chicken or something like chicken kebabs vs just boiling plain chicken(which has that taste)

I think it's based on which brand of chicken you've bought. In where I'm currently located, there are a number of brands of chicken (mostly the frozen ones) that the purchasers of restaurant strictly avoid. Maybe try buying another brand? One more thing, you haven't defrosted your chicken THEN refreezing it again right? Based from my experience, that's how you end up with "off taste" like that.

Is there a website that I can search for all products certified by USDA with one of the 4 organic labels: 100% Organic Organic Made with Organic Some Organic ingredients For example, how can I found a list of brands sell sugar that is labelled "100% organic" by USDA?

The USDA Organic Integrity Database people search for Organic certifications and the foods lists the foods they were certified for. https://apps.ams.usda.gov/Integrity/

I have heard some people say that to make the best bread, you should use little yeast, and let the dough rise for a long time (about 24h). However, I am wondering if you can achieve the same results by just putting more yeast in the beginning, and rising it for only several hours. Chemically I don't see what the difference would be.

Yes, there is a lot of difference. In principle, having food prepared under different conditions while keeping some total variable the same, tend to have different outcomes - having the same outcome would be the exception, not the rule. Yeast colonies live and metabolise differently under different circumstances - imagine how people live in the Icelandic countryside and in Hong Kong, something similar happens to your yeast. What is most pertinent to the taste are some compounds which get built in hot, overcrowded conditions (a quick rise), but not in the slow ones. These are most notably ammonia and thiols, and some people experience them as too harsh in taste. Also, if you do a low and slow rise, you get a tiny bit of lactic and acetic acid formation, as in sourdough. During a slow rise, the texture also changes, with extra gluten formation through autolyse. The current trend is for artisan breads to do slow rises and to have the flavor profile from retarded doughs. Quickly risen breads have a homemade quality to them, and are not perceived as very refined. It is up to you which one you prefer.

Does placing a metal spoon in an open bottles of bubbles, sparkling wine & Champagne help keep its fizz ? If so why is this ?

As a beer brewer, I'm pretty concerned with fizz ;) Since the below may be a little tl;dr, the short answer to your question is, "I don't think so." This is actually the first time I've heard of the metal spoon "trick", so I can't directly comment on that, but I'll share a little of what I know about carbonation. Carbonation is carbon dioxide (CO2) that is dissolved in the liquid (beer, champagne, soda). The fizz is that CO2 coming out of solution and escaping into the air. Keeping it cold helps keep the fizz, as CO2 dissolves more readily into a cold liquid. And conversely, comes out of a warm liquid more readily. Ever pour a glass of warm soda or champagne straight after opening? It'll foam over everywhere. The only way to not lose all that CO2 is to seal the container. Even then, the CO2 will come out of solution and pressurize the headspace (space in the top of the container). That's why you get a hiss when you first open a bottle. Again, temperature comes into play. In a warm bottle, more of the CO2 comes out of solution and pressurizes the headspace. Chill that same bottle down, and the CO2 can dissolve back into the liquid, giving you a sparkling beverage again. Now, back to the spoon. I would think that putting a spoon in the carbonation liquid would produce nucleation points, causing the CO2 to come out of solution faster. This is why many beer glass manufacturers are coming out with laser-etched designs on the bottom of their glasses - the effervescence caused by the nucleation points helps bring out the hop aromas.

I am a waiter at a coffee shop and quite often I have guests that order cappuccino. As you knew, the milk foam of cappuccino looks very unstable and tends to overflow. Not to mention I have to bring the cappuccino from the barista on the first floor to guest on the second floor. Sometimes it does overflow. I want to ask how I can solve that problem with tools available in any coffee shops ?

Two suggestions, one practical, the other probably less so. 1) Hold the cup directly, instead of the plate the cup is on. I don't know if that's allowed by health code or restaurant policy, but if it is, you get much more stability from cupping the cup in your hand than balancing it on a small plate. If you're already doing that: practice will get you there. 2) A good cappuccino should be fairly stable. I know there's disagreement about the proper way of layering cappuccinos, but the best ones integrate very finely textured foam into the milk, instead of just layering coffee - milk - foam on top of each other. Milk foamed this way is more stable than regular milk; I've carried cups filled to the brim up the stairs without any spilling. But: this is a barista-side issue, and to be honest, I wouldn't touch it ... the barista is going to make the cappuccino how s/he feels it's best, and being told to do something differently won't go over well.

When I make a soup (planning on making a chicken soup tonight) I use chicken broth, creamer, and various seasonings. I love when I eat soup that has a filling broth because I always serve more broth than meat & veggies that are also in the soup. The broth doesn't need to be thicker but are there spices or veggies I could add that will make the broth itself more filling?

I have no clue what a "bacon roll" is... and if I had to imagine what it is, it would not be what you got. My mental image was a "sausage roll" but with bacon. A sausage roll is like a pinwheel or "cinnamon roll" but with savory biscuit dough (American biscuit) and ground sausage meat: (Image from here) So, a "bacon roll" in my head is the same thing but with chopped bacon instead of sausage. I can find no reference to what you've described... which sounds like a bacon omelet. It's completely possible that you confused the waitress with your fancy British accent and she thought that a "roll" was British for "omelet"... though how she turned "sandwich" into "roll" and then into "omelet", I'm not sure. If you want a "bacon sandwich" in future (meaning a roll with bacon on it), you might try asking for a "BLT - with no lettuce or tomato".... though, you should be sure to remember that our "bacon" is what you Brits call "streaky bacon", I believe. The closest thing we have to British bacon is "Canadian Bacon" or simply "ham". As to the potatoes, they were likely what are often called "home fries". Roughly chopped/diced potatoes, sometimes mixed with peppers and/or onions. Here's an image of "Cajun home fries", which look a lot like what you've described:

Each day, you're supposed to get a certain number of servings of grains, vegetables, fats, etc. You know, the food pyramid. However, instead of going to all the trouble to prepare three meals with several courses each and every day, I'd like to just have the same thing to eat, all the time. I'm hoping this isn't considered sacrilege for this site! What I'm describing is an Überfood, as it has a near-perfect balance of all of the daily intake requirements. They make it for cats, dogs, and other mammals, so I'm sure it's possible for us primates. Like cats and dogs, I'd of course have the occasional treat, but it would always be above-and-beyond and not part of my daily nutrients. What considerations should I put into making an Überfood? Ideally, it would be shelf-stable and not need refridgeration. Texture and taste are less important. Clearly, I don't know much about cooking or food preparation... But I think there's a better way than just buying an industrial blender, throwing a bunch of vitamins, vegetables, protien, etc., and seeing what turns up.

Sounds like you want Nutraloaf. If you search google you will undoubtedly find recipes for this abomination. It is designed to meet nutritional needs while minimizing the need for utensils. You did say taste and texture weren't important.

I know that I need to cook beef for 15 minutes per pound (500 g) in the pressure cooker for well done. So one 4 pound (2 Kg) roast would cook for one hour. But what if I cook two 2 pound (1 Kg) pieces in the pressure cooker at the same time? Would it still be one hour because it's a total of 4 pounds or would it be 30 minutes because each piece is only 2 pounds each?

There is a complicated formula for calculating cooking time based on energy input, surface area, thermal conductivity of food etc. Smaller pieces with a larger surface area will cook slightly quicker than large single pieces In general for roasts (large slabs) just add the weight of the pieces and cook for the minimum time recommend by your pressure cooker for that (or from your experience). Then test using an accurate thermometer and cook some more as required. In my experience most people overcook meat anyway, so try it a little more undercooked for a change. Remember to let it stand at least 5 minutes per 500 g too There are too many variables to give a blanket answer (stove energy, pressure in pressure cooker, meat type, fat content etc.)

I was using Coconut oil to fry up tostada shells and I was wondering if its safe to reuse the oil I used the night before to cook up more shells the next day?

For most oils, you can re-use them several times, if you're OK with (or want) the flavors the oil takes on from the food cooked in it. The thing to watch is the smoke point. That's when the oil starts sending off whisps of smoke. For coconut oil, that's 350F. As oil is re-used, that smoke point starts to drop until it's no longer able to stay hot enough to properly fry food. We're dealing with an oil that has a relatively low smoke point in the first place at 350F, as opposed to 450F for peanut oil, and proper frying needs to be pretty close to 350F in order to have the moisture in the food hold out the oil from rushing into the food like a sponge. That, unfortunately means that coconut oil isn't a great candidate for re-use.

I was thinking of making this tofu-/seafood-stew, but I am having some trouble getting a couple of ingredients for use in the initial stock - namely the dried anchovies and the kelp. A friend suggested that I should just make a stock of the heads and shells of the shrimp used later in the recipe, maybe with some soy sauce or anchovies in oil added in, to get that umami flavor mentioned on the Maangchi-website. If so how much should I use of the various ingredients, and should I clean out the shrimp heads in some way before attempting to make a stock from them?

Some ingredients more effectively transfer flavor to stock in dried form than in fresh or pickled form. Mushrooms, kelp, fish and shellfish are examples of those types of ingredients. You won't find an exact substitute for them, but they do keep for a long time, so it doesn't hurt to keep them on hand. However, Japanese and Korean cuisine have many variations of stock starting from various combinations of dried ingredients. Although obviously Japanese and Korean taste preferences are quite different, it may be instructive to look at similar ingredients used in similar ways to see if you can adapt to what's available in your region. Dried shiitake are used in some Japanese soup stocks, but years ago I noticed the similarity of aroma between smoked, dried katsuo (skipjack tuna) and dried porcini mushrooms, which may be more available to you in Norway. I was rather surprised to find that it was a rather compelling substitute for katsuo. There is some overlap between that and dried anchovies, though it won't be as close of a match. Dried anchovies and dried sardines are as iconic as a source of flavor in Korean dishes as dried katsuo or dried sardines are in Japanese ones, so you won't get an exact result by substituting, but you may find a compelling enough alternative. You may find locally dried fish that would help produce an effective stock. Stockfish, or dried cod, may be a reasonable local substitute in Norway. I would expect its flavor not to be as distinctive as dried anchovies, though. However, you should do your best to find dried kelp, because the only reasonable substitute for that is MSG, which is purified to the point that the natural aromas of kelp are lost, so the flavor won't be as nice. It was quite reasonably priced, though, even when I was a starving student in Germany, even though it took a bit of effort to track down. An inadequate but passable substitute for kelp may be a touch of MSG and simmered green cabbage. Cabbage is one of the few vegetables that old rural Japanese preparations didn't necessarily expect to be prepared in a soup stock, because it does a nice job of creating its own when simmered gently.

A week ago, we bought some salmon, that was oddly cheap. Today, after cooking it, we realized why: there were hundreds of bones in the fish, all waiting to make their way into our throats. We stopped eating it and threw it away. I realized at the same time that even though they were potential hazards, it was such a waste of money. Question is, how do we best efficiently filter out fish bones from fish that have tons of them? In other words, is there an easier way besides manually pulling out the bones one by one?

If you are speaking of a salmon filet, you must remove the pin bones one by one. The easiest way to do it is with tweezers or needle nosed pliers. This brief video demonstrates the technique: Run the back of your knife across the line where the bones are, from tail to head, to make them pop out more. Pull each bone, on an angle towards the head of the fish

Is it possible to make alfredo pasta in mixed (both red and white) sauce? Is alfredo pasta the same as pasta made in white sauce?

While I am not completely sure what texture difference you are seeing, and I would not necessarily describe store-bought butter as 'oily', I can think of a reason why the texture of homemade butter is different: air. Depending on your method, when churning butter at home, you usually incorporate some air into the butter, giving it a 'fluffier' texture. This is similar to (but less extreme than) whipped butter. A simple test to see if this is indeed the case would be to take some store-bought butter, follow the recipe I linked to above, and see whether the result is closer to your preferred texture.

I recently ordered a grocery delivery from Whole Foods, and as I was ordering I noticed they had rutabagas, which I've never had before, so I decided to try them. What I got was this: They don't look anything like any picture I can find online of rutabagas, which are supposed to look like a large turnip. Instead, these appear to be some sort of yam. (That is, an actual yam, not a sweet potato, which for some reason is commonly called a yam in the US!) Adding to the confusion, they appear to be coated with a thick layer of wax. I googled vegetables covered with wax, and all that shows up is lots of pages about rutabagas! Rutabagas, it turns out, are commonly waxed to keep them from drying out. I can't find any information about waxed yams, though. So, what are these things?

It looks like it could be yuca/cassava, based on the appearance alone. (Note: this is not the same as or related to yucca.) The picture on Wikipedia even shows a waxed version. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassava

I started making my own ice cream this year. While the French type works quite well, I've been having trouble with American and Gelato types. I don't have an ice cream machine. I freeze small portions of icecream on a prefrozen wide porcelain plate. While a pinch of xanthan keeps the result reasonably smooth, the texture isn't great. It melts almost instantly, and when melted, it is as liquid as it was before - it turns to sweetened milk in my mouth even before I have swallowed it. So while I prefer denser ice cream, I think that some recipes were created with a lot of overrun in mind. I thought of trying the Serious eats idea and creating the overrun after the freezing. But first, I don't have a food processor, and don't think an immersion blender will be good enough. Second, it will melt while I am blending. I don't want to pay the money and simply don't have the space for a gelateria style ice cream machine with a compressor. I was wondering if the prefrozen churner type machines will help with my problem. How much overrun do they produce with a typical ice cream recipe (say 2/3 3.6%, 1/3 30% cream)? Does the texture suffer from the same problems (instant melting)? Edit Overrun is measured in percent. If 500 ml of mixture go into the machine and out come 750 ml of ice cream, this is 50% overrun (the air volume in the ice cream is 50% of the ice cream base volume).

Cooks Illustrated reviewed and measured overrun in a bunch of ice cream makers: http://www.cooksillustrated.com/equipment/results.asp?docid=25989 Most were 20–30%, with the exception of one that attached to a stand mixer, which had an astonishing 80%, and one which completely failed (3%). Most are compressorless models costing under $100. So, if you're going for around for 20-30%, a pre-frozen churner can do that. (Note: you have to pull up the details of each model to see the overrun percentage, it's not in the recommendation summary table).

I am going to be trying my hand at bockwurst tomorrow evening, and will be going to the butcher shortly to have meat cut for the process. For the pork, I'm going with shoulder/butt. I can't seem to find any recommendation on what veal cuts are best for sausage making. Are there standard cuts of veal which are traditionally reserved for making sausage?

Remember that veal is merely very young beef; the chuck (which is the beef equivalent to the pork shoulder) is probably your best choices. The chuck naturally has that best proportion of muscle to fat for sausage making. That said I would actually discourage you from choosing veal as a meat for sausage making, ground veal is [IMHO] really 'nothing special' in terms of flavor. Veal's 'specialness' is in its tenderness, which is irrelevant in a sausage. You would be better served to use an mature beef chuck from an angus or longhorn. Lamb would also be a nice ancient flavor.

I'm a fan of green tea and I find myself reusing the tea leaves 2-3 times a day. Sometimes I'll just store the leaves and reuse them the next day but it got me thinking if what I'm doing is actually "safe", I know that the taste isn't the same. So my questions are: What's the best way of storing tea for reuse? Currently I drain the leaves and put them in a small sealed glass jar. Is it safe to store tea to reuse the next day? Bonus point for an actual reference/research proving that it has bad or no side effects whatsoever.

Here in China, it is normal to reuse tea again and again. Typically the first cup from the tea is bitter. Chinese people commonly pour one cup and then throw it away and drink the second cup from the same leaves. Workers here can be seen with a large mug or jar of tea. When drunk, they top up the water again with hot (but not boiling) water. This will go on all day. The next day, however, they will not reuse the tea. My Chinese wife always tells me off if I reuse the previous days tea leaves. She says they are bad for you, though I have never had any problem myself.

I remember that in my biology class in high school the teacher told showed us a puffed up can of pineapples which he claimed had botulism in it. Is that remotely true? and if so, can I tell if my canned ketchup has botulism in it through the same "method"? and if so how long might that take?

One reason botulism is so scary is that you can's see, smell, or taste the bacteria growing in there. The only way to know for sure if botulism is growing in food is to have it tested by a laboratory. Fortunately, though, you can see its evidence. Yes, a puffed-up can or a jar w/ the lid popped up means something's growing in there. Discard the material; do not consume it. Discard a metal can if there's any visible opening, no matter how small, if the ends are bulging, if the seam doesn't look intact, or if there's a leak. Discard a jar if the jar appears cracked at all, if the pop-top doesn't pop when opened (meaning there's no longer a vacuum inside), or if the seal appears damaged. As for how long it takes for a problem to arise, I'm not sure; I've had the same question.

I'm making a lemon bars/squares recipe that I've made a few times before, and I keep having trouble deciding when to take it out of the oven. I don't want to overbake it, but I don't want to underbake it either as I won't be able to cut it properly into squares. The recipe says "until set, about 25-30 minutes". My lemon bars have been in the oven over half an hour; the top has gone light brown, but it still jiggles around like liquid when I move it. How do I know when it's "set"?

Custard without any flour or starch should be baked to about 83 Celsius internal temperature. Below 80 is underbaked, above 90 it curdles, so you have a very small window of good texture. It may be even narrower, it depends a bit on the other stuff you have in there, sugar gives you wiggle room but acids (including lemon juice!) will make it harder to get right. If you have starch or flour, you need to reach almost boiling temperatures. 95 Celsius should be OK. If you want high confidence, you really need to measure the internal temperature. External signs are not reliable, and time even less so.

I have a recipe that asks for "a ladleful" of something. The recipe book usually uses imperial weights and volumes, that I can convert to my metric units that I hold so dear. As I understand it, a ladleful is the volume necessary to fill a ladle - but how much is it? A ladle can take on various sizes, so I guess it wouldn't make much sense to not normalize it in any way (like, a cup is eight ounces). EDIT: As suggested in the comments, I want to mention it is "a ladleful of sourdough starter" that I should add to 2 pounds 7 ounces / 1.1 kg of rye flour and 2.5 cups of water. I'd normally go with about 500g of starter, but that seems like a big ladle to me.

Every sourdough starter has different characteristics, a ladleful of one will give a different result from the same amount of another. The recipe is right in that there's no way to say what result you are going to get, so why be exact. The point I would make is that you want repeatibility, and the capability to adjust your amounts over time to suit your taste. So whatever you use to get it out (ladle, spoon, measuring cup, hand) I would weigh and record how much starter you use, you can add more or less and see how you get. As long as you keep using the same starter you can adjust to your taste.

I have a recipe that calls for garlic powder, but I only have fresh garlic on hand. What ratio should I use to substitute?

I'd say about 1 clove for every half-teaspoon of garlic powder. There isn't going to be anything particularly scientific about this, since garlic cloves vary in size, strength and flavor but that will be in the ballpark.

I've seen several recipes for various doughs that have several (usually 2) stages of proofing. Start by just letting the dough to rise in a bowl. Separating the dough into the desired number of pieces, set the requested form/shape, and let the dough rise again. Bake. I've even seen a recipe for pizza dough where you are supposed to just hit the dough after the first stage of rising and leave it in the same bowl. Then, after a second stage of rising, form the dough into pizza form. What is the purpose of separating the proofing into several steps, and what would be the difference between this and just one longer rise period, where the portions are separated and shaped before or after the longer rise time?

There are three steps in bread making commonly referred to as "Proofing" The first step is also called fermenting (or proofing the yeast, which, I believe, is not what you are asking about). The first rise (also called proofing or bulk fermentation) is about increasing the volume. This is the primary breeding period for the yeasts once they are incorporated into the dry goods. It's during our bulk fermentation that the yeast does the majority of its work, helping our dough gain flavor as ethanol and other byproducts are produced, and gain structure as CO2 inflates our gluten network. The second rise, or final proof, of the dough is maturing the flavor and texture. Having risen in volume and then being shaped much of the gas created in the first raise is released, but the gluten 'matrix' is preserved. How much (or how vigorously) we 'punch down' the dough will create a bread of more fine air pockets while a dough that is barely worked will preserve some of those original air pockets and will create a bread with a more course interior. Additionally the final proof can be used to allow the loaf to take it's final form. Sometimes this is because it is in some container (loaf pan, dutch oven, etc.). It is simply easier to allow the dough to fill the pan by expanding into it. If time permits it is often beneficial to 'retard' the final rise, slowing the rate of expansion, by placing the dough in a refrigerator. This will, obviously, take more time, but the reward in flavor is (IMHO) worth it. Proofing our loaves in the fridge (also called retarding) will slow down their final rise, giving our loaves more flavor. Also, retarding loaves during their final proof makes them easier to handle and score before baking, which will improve the crumb, crust, and appearance of our baked loaves. There are a variety of more detailed explanations available online. This article from 'Serious Eats' is a good starting place.

I have a problem when heating bread in the microwave oven. I place it on the glassy rotated bed of the oven, it get heated very well, but there is a lot of moisture are formed at the bottom of the bread (the contact between the glass and it). How could I eliminate this wetting effect?

There are two main strategies I employ to combat sweating in the microwave. Microwave the item in short intervals, rotating in between each round. This will help steam dissipate rather than collect on the glass. Using a lower power might also help the item heat more evenly and lose less water. Place a paper towel or tea towel under the item. This will collect the moisture so it doesn't pool and make things soggy.

There are lots of products on the market to ease lemon squeezing. I've never used any of them. Are there any benefits to using one? What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of the different types?

I'm a recent convert to the type where you load the fruit between two halves of a metal mold and squeeze. I find that it extracts a very high percentage of the juice with minimal effort and does a good job of separating away the seeds. I find it a lot less messy than the reamer or other type I've owned in the past.

I'm pretty handy with my slow cooker. I use it a lot - pot roasts, stews [curries, chilli, paysane etc] However, I've always been a little paranoid about having everything completely up to temperature before I drop it into the slow cooker element itself. I start by frying off, browning, sweating; add my liquids & then bring to a full boil before allowing it to simmer 10 minutes... the same as I would were it to just be in a saucepan for a couple of hours. Only at that point will I transfer the pot into the slow cooker & let it take over for the next 4, 6, 10 hours. Do I really need to do this? Can I [or should I] just transfer it to the slow cooker as I drop my liquids - so at the point I have seared/fried/browned 'solids' but cold or only warmish stock &/or a couple of cans of tomatoes or beans etc I just dumped in & gave a quick stir. Am I being over-safe by bringing it all to the boil first? Should I trust that the slow cooker, given sufficient time, will do the job eventually? I am never in any rush doing this, so either way is fine. I just wondered if I'm being over-cautious.

There are several terms which you can use, depending on the context of writing (or speaking). A very simple one is "the starch". It is mostly used in the context of meal planning, such as "What starch are we going to serve tonight" or "When planning a vegetarian meal, it is best to first decide on the starch and then select sides that complement it". "Grains" or, mostly interchangeably, "cereals" is what academic specialists for nutrition and diets use in their jargon. If you read a textbook on nutrition, that's where you will find breads, etc. There, the context makes it clear that the word doesn't mean simply uncooked kernels. The nonacademic literature on dieting is more likely to use "carbs" - see Chris H's answer for more detail on that usage. In legal language, for example rules and regulations about food product labelling, or import and export regulations, you will frequently find phrases like "grain products". Since none of these terms is unambiguous, outside of these genres of writing you will probably have to go for something more descriptive, for example "foods made from grains" in a colloquial conversation.

I accidentaly switched my freezer off for a week. This lead to spoilage of food, pool of blood inside freezer etc. Trays are unremovable and difficult to clean. I have thrown everything away and tried cleaning with baking soda, bleach etc but smell hasn't fully gone. I'm assuming its just the smell of blood and I don't want to buy a new freezer straight away. If I freeze food in the meantime 1. will it absorb odours? 2. If it does will the food be safe to eat? 3. Can you suggest how else I can clean the freezer or should i go and buy a new one? Thanks

Not worth the risk, just throw it out. There's no way to tell whether the smell was absorbed, or comes from bacteria in the food itself.

It's generally known that boiling vegetables removes a large fraction of vitamin C, but in what way? Does the high temperature destroy it? Is it merely absorbed by the boiling water?

Actually, vitamin C degrades with heat. The following, by dietician Jill Irvin, says it all: Vitamin C is one of the least stable of all vitamins in solution and is oxidized readily in light, air and when heated. It is also water soluble. This means that heating in water, (like cooking broccoli in boiling water) causes the vitamin to leach out of the food into the water and also to be oxidized, first to dehydroascorbic acid and then to diketogulonic acid. This last compound has no Vit[amin] C activity at all and is irreversible. She goes on to say that normal cooking doesn't affect levels of the vitamin too much, but the main issue being queried here is how boiling removes vitamin C from food, and this quotation tells how that happens.

I've bought two different sets of frozen salmon with the same result. On thawing the salmon is bland and off color (more gray than pink). After cooking, the taste is OK, but the presentation and texture is totally off. I've tried to defrost this fish in the fridge and submerged in milk with the same result. My guess is these two brands are no good. So, my question is: does quality salmon exist frozen, with the 'same' texture and color as fresh salmon?

Some species of salmon are better or worse at freezing. Pacific Sockeye freezes very well and is your best bet if you're buying frozen. It's also the most expensive. Pink salmon doesn't freeze well at all (but is delicious if you can get it fresh!). Others like Chum are somewhere in the middle. Most "cheap" salmon that you get in North American supermarkets is farmed Atlantic salmon. It holds up well to freezing, but is generally pretty gray and bland to begin with. Avoid it.

In the summer, I often make a refrigerated blueberry pie. The recipe calls for a graham cracker crust, and you make the filling by cooking one pint of blueberries with one cup of sugar and 3 tablespoons on cornstarch on the stove until the mixture becomes thick. It's then poured into the crust, and topped with another pint of fresh blueberries, and chilled until it's firm. The flavor of the blueberries is delicious, but I always find that there's a pronounced corn starch flavor that detracts from the simplicity of the pie. How could I change the recipe or the technique to decrease that flavor while maintaining the firmness of the filling?

you could try some other thickeners, like xanthan gum, tapioca starch, arrowroot, or the like. not certain of the proportions, though, but i'm betting google knows.

I have a problem with uncooked, sliced onion making me and other people feel uncomfortable in the stomach, sometimes whole night. However, when I eat tacos out in restaurants that never happens. Is it due to the variety of onion or do they prepare them in a certain way?

Adding salt and lemon should do it, or at least help a lot. What you want to do is to chop them up and rub in a little salt and a splash of lemon juice (vinegar should work too). Obviously you don't want to add so much of either that you won't want to eat the onion. Leave to sit in the fridge overnight and enjoy.

I have added a good slosh of white wine vinegar to a dish by accident (it was meant to be white wine, not vinegar) and now all I can taste is a nasty vinegary taste. I don't have any actual white wine so I want it to taste as if it's just without. Is there anything I can do to save the dish? It's a savory dish with mainly bacon, onions, garlic, carrots and Spring Greens and stock

You may be able to save the dish by adding some bitterness and sweetness to counteract the acidity. Spinach, Kale and other bitter vegetables would work, as would bitter herbs like fenugreek. Sweetness could be sugar, honey, any sweetener to be honest. There's limits to this approach, you may end up with something that is overwhelmingly sour, bitter and sweet at the same time and you have to get rid of it anyway. Sometimes you get something that tastes good with a neutral accompaniment like rice or pasta, you won't know unless you try.

I never cooked "real" sausages before. Now I have several kinds of sausages: chorizo, merguez, and chicken. I have only a couple of each and a big electric pan. How do I cook them? Should I add water? How long?

Sausages are pretty forgiving. As long as you don't burn them or leave the center raw, they should come out OK. Since they're pretty fatty (at least the good ones are) there's little chance of drying them out, so when in doubt, cook them a little longer. They'll feel firm, not squishy, when they're done. The easiest way to cook raw sausages is in the oven (at 350-375°F, 180-190°C or so). If you're doing it on the stove, I'd brown them first in a little (very little) oil, then add some water, or beer, or wine, or whatever you happen to have (not much - just enough to cover the bottom), cover, reduce the heat, and simmer until done. Feel free to cook some vegetables in the pan along with the sausage.

I am not an avid coffee drinker. Yesterday, I tried Bru Gold coffee brand. I mixed one teaspoon milk with 1 teaspoon coffee and added the remaining 200ml hot milk premixed with 2 teaspoons of sugar. The result wasn't great. The coffee was NOT strong nor did it contain any froth. I want strong, not bitter coffee. How do I know how much coffee to add to how much milk? Secondly, do I have to mix coffee in whole milk and then boil the whole thing like it is done for tea? Does the amount of time I spend in mixing coffee with milk also have an effect on the outcome?

What is too bitter is likely to be primarily opinion-based. That said, when I make instant coffee, I usually use one teaspoon per 200-250 ml of water - not milk. The result is a nice, even cup of coffee, which is not what I would characterize as strong. If I want strong coffee, I will use as much as four teaspoons to the same amount of water. The milk will have a mellowing effect on the end result. In combination with the sugar, it has been my experience that the milk masks the bitter taste of coffee that many people do not enjoy. I would recommend playing around with how much coffee you use. Once you get the strength you want, you can add or remove sugar to reduce the bitterness.

What are these crispy bits on top of rice that look something like this, but are perhaps a bit smaller: (Picture taken from this blog post.)

Those are fried onions. They're pretty recognizable, but for confirmation I did a search by image and found this blog post in Finnish containing that exact image. The caption underneath the picture is: Kun riisi on kuohkeutettu, sipulit lisätään mukaan - n. kolmasosa jätetään koristeeksi. Google Translate translates that to "When the rice is loosened, the onions are added, the -. The third of the leaves for decoration." I think the proper translation is probably something like: After fluffing the rice, the onions are added, one third as garnish. The recipe itself says: Sekoita mukaan 2/3 paahdetusta sipulista. Tarjoa suurelta vadilta lopuilla sipuleilla koristettuna. Which translates to (again with a bit of fixing): Stir 2/3 of the fried onion. Serve on large dishes garnished with the remaining onions. (Google Translate thinks "paahdetusta" means roasted, but earlier in the recipe it's pretty clear that the instructions are to fry them.) You ask about things that look like those but might be smaller. I'd assume they're still onions, just sliced smaller (or possibly shallots) since that's a fairly common garnish. Of course, it's certainly possible you've seen something else; hard to say without a picture of the exact dish you wanted to ask about.

I have used aluminum foil when I grill salmon because it keeps the oil from running onto the heating element and smoking the fish. Can anyone suggest a substitute for aluminum foil?

Dried palm fronds are traditional Thai. Not sure you have access however.

Does a convection microwave make decent toast, as a toaster oven would or a bone fide oven set to broil? I have read far and wide on the internet and in operating manuals for Sharp, Bosch, etc. convection microwaves and have come up empty handed. I know you can't make toast in a microwave, but these are convection microwaves we're talking about here. Would prefer to hear from someone who actually owns one of these things instead of someone just reading things like "CompuBroil®, CompuRoast®, CompuBake® - automatically compute broiling, roasting, and baking times/temperature settings." from the www.sharpusa.com website like me :-) Additional specific requirements for our situation are an "Over The Range" (OTR) solution, for which there are often microwave and convection microwave solutions that include 300CFM ventilation and lighting for our cooktop. We're not looking for a countertop unit. Hence the desire to see if these convection microwave units can do the deed! Thanks in advance!

Toasting bread involves the Maillard Reaction and requires a dry heat. Toasters and toaster ovens (and conventional ovens) use radiant heat. Convection ovens use convection, as the name implies, and this is most certainly a dry and very even heat; the question is whether or not a convection microwave actually provides a true convective environment, like a high-end convection oven. And that's where the problem generally lies. Convection microwaves (AKA microwave convection ovens) are not usually true convection ovens. They use a combination of microwaves and convection currents, which will quickly cause steaming and inhibit the Maillard reaction. This isn't really a problem with, say, chicken, but it's a big problem with bread. You'll have many of the same problems you'd have with a regular microwave - the bread will burn before it toasts. What you really want is a microwave toaster oven. They exist, and are often very cheap. If it doesn't actually bill itself as being a combination microwave/toaster oven, then it's not going to be very good at toasting.

I found a great recipe for Chilles Rellenos - the first time I made them - they came out perfect. I used pasilla Peppers and the spice/heat was just right. Since then, I have not been able to duplicate the heat level no matter what type of pepper I use. I'm removing the membranes and seeds - and the skin as I can - it's really hard to do. Other than that, the only difference I can think of is that when I made them the first time it was fall and now it's winter. I tried pasilla, poblano, anaheim - in all cases - they're not just a little hotter - they're excruciating. (to the point where just working with the peppers has my HAND burning a day later - and of course the Rellenos were too hot for anyone to eat, even after roasting and frying them.) All these peppers are listed as being "mild"... What gives?

Many references indicate that stress on the plant effects the heat rating of the fruits produced. "Good" stress (usually people want to increase heat) is generally a reduction in water supply, carefully and aptly timed, and/or increased outdoor temperatures. While appearing dated and non-authoritative, this site, also looks very accurate from my experience around growing chiles, and states that (as is common, referring to spice/heat as pungency): ...total pungency amount of the medium and mild chiles increase dramatically when put under stress. Normally, chile plants like summer weather (sunlight and warmth), and are not nearly productive in winter. What you're obtaining in winter months may be imported from a very different location, probably from a place on Earth where it was summer when harvested. As indicated in the above-cited article, the truly hot peppers don't get much hotter from stress. Anecdotal addendum: fwiw & ime, chile plants grown in winter (the ones observed are nagas, tabasco, japone, jalapeños) aren't as productive and the peppers are not anywhere near as hot. So, when not grown in the proper conditions that a species expects - mostly enough daily sunlight or a long enough warm season, the heat in produced fruits can drop dramatically.

My kids like their bagels like they just came from the oven or the bagel bakery with a crisp crust and soft chewy center. However, it is not practical to make bagels or buy bagels in the morning on school days. What can I do with a frozen bagel to mimic fresh out of the oven?

Buy or make fresh bagels and store them uncut in a plastic bag with the air squeezed out of it in the freezer for up to one month. When you want to prepare a "like fresh" bagel, run it briefly under water (I used filtered water) so that the outside crust is damp but not soggy. Wrap it tightly in foil with a small vent, 1/2" long by 1/8" wide, on one side and heat in a 400°F oven (I use our toaster oven) for about 15-20 minutes, depending upon how cold your freezer is. The bagel will be as soft as it was when it originally came out of the oven and the hot oven will cause the crust to crisp through the foil. Don't let it over bake or it will be rock hard though.

Since few time I observed that whenever I make french fries, after 15-20 mins of its making it is getting loose. Is there anything doing that we can maintain the crisp of the fries for longer span i.e. for at least 20 mins or so?

The tip I hear the most with fries is, to double-fry them. First fry them till they are cooked, but still pale on the outside. Then let them cool off. Then fry them again, till they are crispy. This should improve overall crispiness, but also potentially keep sem good for longer, as you´ll reduce water content. That said, fries are greatest when they are hot. So try to make smaller portions and then make some more if you need them. With the above tip it´s easy, as you can have them prepared and the second fry does not take long.

I love red bell peppers. Is there a taste difference if I roast them before chopping and adding them to soup or beans that slow cook for 4-6 hours? Am I just cooking them before cooking them again or does roasting (under my broiler, then peeling) produce a unique taste that I wouldn't get from just simmering them for hours?

The roasting process doesn't just heat the peppers, but the high, dry heat also causes a bit of both scorching and carmelization of the sugars, so I would expect there to be a bit of different flavor, even if both get cooked to the same consistency in a subsequent process.

I was bought a paella pan for my birthday. It had a small label on it with only the brand name on, which I've since washed off. It is steel (I think), with rubberised handles and dozens of concentric dimples on the surface. I was wondering what these impressions were for and by extension, what makes a really good pan for making paella in?

I believe the dimples are for two reasons. One, they possibly help to make the pan, which should be fairly thin, more rigid. Secondly, they are a reminder of the time when these pans were hammered by hand - so, in a way, they make a factory-made pan seem more authentic. The pan should be fairly thin, yet rigid, and conduct heat well. You don't want localised hot spots, but a strong, even heat. The pan should probably not be too non-stick - you want to encourage the formation of socarrat - the slightly crusty layer at the base of a good paella. The "how to cook" series in the Guardian are excellent for researching various recipes and deciding on an evidence-based amalgam - have a look at http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/aug/18/how-to-cook-perfect-paella.

A container of black pepper seems to have both black and greyish bits. Why is this the case? Shouldn’t it all just be black?

Here is a photo of a peppercorn. You can see why a ground one might contain both black and grey bits.

I'm interested in making a variation of this baked Jamaican Chocolate Cheesecake from the Cheesecake Shop. The description from the website is not terribly useful in identifying what the possible ingredients are: A smooth, baked chocolate cheesecake crowned with mouthwatering chocolate shavings, and lightly dusted with icing sugar. I've searched the internet fruitlessly for a "Jamaican Chocolate Cheesecake" recipe. There are a few other Jamaican Cheesecake recipes but they mostly seem to involve ingredients that are Jamaican (e.g. "Jamaican mangos") so I'm under the impression that the chocolate is Jamaican and it isn't a style of cheesecake. (Is "Jamaican chocolate" a thing? I couldn't find that either...) The closest I can find is recipes for "Jamaican Hot Chocolate" and "Jamaican Chocolate Tea" which involve some cinnamon and maybe nutmeg and other flavours. Short of getting the people at the shop to give me the ingredients, which I doubt they would do, I'm at a loss as to what goes in this cake. This website has a non-promo photo of the cake, including the inside after it is cut: http://blog.stillaslife.com/food/jamaican-chocolate-cheesecake-from-the-cheesecake-shop/ Has anyone heard of this type of cake before and know what goes in it? Unfortunately I haven't tasted the cheesecake. A choc-orange variety was requested so I'm just left guessing what else could be in it. I was mostly hoping it was a more common recipe than it is... I ended up contacting them and it is just a normal chocolate cheesecake with a chocolate biscuit base. I inquired if it had rum or cinnamon or anything and they said no they just add cocoa to the normal vanilla cheesecake mix. I'm going to award the answer to LoganGoesPlaces for the useful info and because their idea is very creative and sounds tasty.

While I've never experienced this cheesecake personally and the photo doesn't show anything at all "Jamaican" about it, I'd hazard a guess that the recipe involves rum. The traditional go-to cake in Jamaica is a black fruit cake. It involves soaking dried fruit in rum for an extended period of time and making liberal use of molasses for color. If I were making it myself, I'd soak some dried fruit such as dates in rum for a few days. Then I'd add rum to the cheesecake recipe and I'd chop the dates fine to put on top along with the shaved chocolate.

Home-cooked Phở is my white whale. Anyway, before I can cook Phở, I need to be able to make beef broth, and so far I've failed completely. My broth is greenish-gray in color, mostly flavorless, and smells like a swamp. Here is what I did. Keep in mind, this happened TWICE: I purchased a few pounds of beef knuckles from the store. I placed them in a stock pot, and covered them with water. I boiled them for a half hour or so. I emptied the pot, along with all of the scum. I did my best to scrub all of the scum away from the knuckles (very difficult). I re-filled the pot with water. I brought it to a boil. I added some chunks of beef. I skimmed the top frequently. 3 hours later: disgusting pond water. Since this process is so time-consuming, I am not keen on experimenting with it again until I have a pretty good idea of what went wrong. I've asked around for some advice. Some told me I should roast the knuckles first. Some told me I should start with cold water. Ok, this sounds like good advice, but these seem like small potatoes. They certainly don't seem like the sort of thing that could turn a pot of beautiful, delicious beef brother into pond water. I must be doing something horribly, horribly, horribly wrong. I'm hoping to find someone who has had a similar experience, and has a pretty good idea of why this is happening to me. =(

Some of your 'shortcuts' are not good ideas. Definitely start with cold water. Definitely bring up the temp slowly. Definitely do not boil. Do add aromatics upfront to the broth, but remove them as they get mushy so they don't cloud it. Standard ratio for beef broth would be: 8 pounds of bones to 6 quarts of water to 1 pound of veggies (onion, leek, carrot) to one 'boquet garni', essentially garlic, rosemary, anise flavoring for pho, and bay leaf, plus whatever else I forgot. If you have 'pond water', which I interpret as thin-tasting, you probably put too much water in the second time -- this is fixable by slowly evaporating out the water until it gets to a good texture. If you skimmed properly, it will be clear as you do this. I will typically strain through a kitchen towel or cheesecloth as the liquid evaporates down. I'm guessing you put in like a gallon of water, so you had like three or four times too much water. As a warning which you probably already know, you are not going to be able to duplicate your local pho joint's broth -- the broth recipe is the thing for pho makers, and they probably have a bunch of tricks they use, including using a neverending supply of yesterdays pho, that you won't be able to do at home. That said, you should be able to get a good beef broth if you follow some basic rules for making stock.

On what factors does the temperature setting depend? Of course if I have to bake a stone, I would need to set the temperature at 900C perhaps :rolleyes: ;), but in normal cakes where you have a banana or an orange as an extra ingredient, how do you decide the temperature? Example: How much temperature difference can there be in a plain cake and a banana cake? If you bake a banana cake on 200C instead of 180C, is that going to make a difference somewhere? In which way?

Cooking temperature and time are determined by a number of factors. The idea is to get the inside of the product properly cooked before the outside dries out, becomes tough, or becomes unpleasantly dark or even burned. At the same time, you usually want the product to get nicely browned (adds flavor and looks nice) before the inside is overcooked. So it's a balance. Factors which influence appropriate temperature and time include: ingredients: High protein ingredients (like meat or eggs) easily become tough when overcooked. High sugar or starch recipes will tend to brown or burn more easily. moisture level: For some products, such as popovers or many kinds of pastry, steam is an important leavening agent, and a high temperature is called for. In other products, like cookies, one of the goals of baking is to drive off excess moisture. And in still others, moisture is absorbed into the other ingredients. shape: A fat, round loaf will usually need a longer cooking time and lower temperature than a thin, flat pizza or a long, skinny baguette because it takes longer for the center of the loaf to heat up. pH: Changing the pH of the product will change how it browns. leavening: Some chemical leavening, like double-acting baking powder, activates at a certain temperature. personal preference: At the end of the day, the most important factor is whether you like the way the product turned out. If you like a crispier crust, change the temperature and/or cooking time to suit your taste. Any baking recipe should specify the temperature and cooking time, unless perhaps it's from a book that specifies those things for a number of recipes at once. If not, find a similar recipe and use the temperature specified there, but keep a close eye on the product during the baking process. Learn how to tell when the product is done. For cakes, you usually go by color for the outside, and by temperature or using a toothpick or wooden skewer for the inside. (Briefly: poke a wooden toothpick into the center of a cake; if it comes out with wet batter, keep cooking; if it comes out clean and dry, it's probably overcooked; if it comes out with a few crumbs stuck to it, it's probably perfect.)

As I understand it, rendering fat is a culinary term for melting and clarifying hard animal fat in dry heat or wet heat for cooking purposes. One application of rendering I have seen is heating animal fat (such as lard or tallow) over low heat for an extended period of time, until the solid fat separates from impurities like proteins, sinew, and connective tissue. The clear liquid that results is called rendered fat, which can be used for other things like sauteing vegetables. However, I also read that rendering can make meat juicier because it allows the melted fat to penetrate the meat fibers, creating pockets of liquid that add moisture and tenderness to the meat as it cooks. Fat is an important component of meat and helps to keep it moist and juicy, so by allowing the fat to permeate the meat fibers, rendering can improve the overall juiciness and flavor of the meat. Can someone confirm if this is indeed how rendering works? If not, if you could explain how rendering improves the flavor of meat? Thanks and any help would be great!

Speaking as someone who has made this broth, it will not work. Fresh anchovies will add too much oil and will break up in the broth, making it cloudy and too fishy. You really want to look at other dried ingredients. The answers to this question cover a fair range of what those dried ingredients could be.

Many manufacturers currently offer kitchen knives with Damascus steel blades at a premium. Besides looking cool do such knifes have any better characteristics compared to simply good forged stainless steel kitchen knives?

At the time of my engineering degree (mid-1990s), the knowledge for true Damascus steel was lost, much like the knowledge of the recipes for the concrete used in the Roman Colosseum. It's possible that more materials analysis has been performed since that point, as there have been a number of groups who would like to reproduce the process to determine how it compares to modern steel. (museums aren't willing to subject the known pieces to destructive testing). With modern steel, they intentionally introduce small proportions of other metals to interrupt the crystals that form as the metal is cooled; this helps to improve the strength of the steel as there isn't a single sheer plane that could allow fractures through the whole item. They're also better able to control the cooling process, so that they can control what crystal structure forms in the steel as it's annealed and quenched. My understanding of true Damascus steel is that it's likely two different crystaline structures, one more ductile (so it can compress to absorb more energy without failing) and the other more brittle (which can hold a sharper edge). The two work together similar to today's composite materials. Most of the stuff sold on the market today is laminated from two or more metals. In many ways, it's more similar to the folding process of high-quality Japanese blades, but with dissimilar metals. As the sheets are mostly parallel to each other, I would suspect that the strength improvement isn't as high as the more erratic patterns in true Damascus, but this is likely countered by using metals that are independently stronger. So, to answer the specific questions: Do they have some better characteristics? Probably. Are they worth the additional cost? Not likely for the type of forces they'd be subjected to in a kitchen. Most people are better off getting some decent but cheap knives and replacing them more often. Victorinox Fibrox regularly wins America's Test Kitchen's ratings of knives.

Yesterday I went to check if I had brown sugar for a recipe and found that my bag, which comes with a zip lock, was totally unzipped I am guessing for months. Any danger here or should it be ok? I am guessing it's just for convience and to prevent spilling but curious if anyone has any knowledge. It's "dark" if that matters. NOTE: I am aware it probably dries it out faster and causes it to become hard but I consider that just a general thing with brown sugar and not a danger=)

After periodically coming back to the question over a few months, I think I've found some answers. Remco's answer gives part of the justification (crosslinking pectin chains), but there are other complications. The short answer is there may be minor chemical benefits to unlined copper for preserve-making, but one can likely achieve similar benefits by just using slightly more acidic recipes for jam. And the aversion to lined copper may be partly based in problems with old corroded tin linings in copper, which would discolor some jams. (Stainless linings shouldn't have these problems.) The only culinary resource I've found on point (which also has a good scientific repuation) is Hervé This's Molecular Gastronomy, which addresses this question on pp. 65-67. He begins by noting there is conflicting advice about preserving pans in traditional culinary sources. Many traditional sources going back to the 1800s advocate unlined copper pans. But Henri Babinski in Gastronomie pratique (1907) recommends against them for "preserves made with red fruits," claiming unplated copper pans transmit a "sharp taste." Hervé This also notes professors at the Ecole du Cordon Bleu in the early 1900s recommended against tin for preserves: "avoid using any iron or tin-plated vessel." Lots of sources recommend using pans that have good heat response for preserves (as copper obviously does). So, there are really two questions here: (1) are there positive advantages to unlined copper, and (2) are there disadvantages to (some?) copper linings? To answer the first question, there seem to be at least a few possible advantages: Hervé This focuses on the crosslinking pectin explanation. As he notes, pectin naturally contains chemical groups (carboxylic acid) that repel each other. Acidic conditions neutralize this effect somewhat and allow pectin to bond (hence one reason why some jam recipes add acid). Copper can provide positive ions that counteract the negative carboxylic ions in solution and thereby allow pectin to link a bit easier, hence "hardening preserves," as This claims. What surprises me about that answer is that it's so little studied. If it were a significant effect, there are plenty of food science journals. Industrial jam-making is a huge enterprise, and if this effect were worthwhile, it would likely have been quantified. (In addition to the article linked in comments, there are several articles dating back a couple decades on copper sequestration effects with pectin, so this is a somewhat well-known phenomenon chemically.) But Hervé This seems to be the only source out there that even mentions this effect. How significant is it? Other sources that claim positive benefits for unlined copper don't speak in those terms. In fact, the only other one I saw consistently mentioned is that unlined copper makes "sparkling" preserves. Oddly, yes, it's that specific adjective that I saw in several resources, both online and off. My English-language copy of Larousse Gastronomique under "Jams, Jellies, and Marmalades" claims: Copper and aluminum [pans] should not be used as these metals react with the fruit and contaminate the preserve. (At one time, copper was favoured because the reaction between the metal and fruit produced a sparkling preserve, but this was before the risks of metal contamination were fully appreciated.) But what creates the "sparkling" effect? Why that specific word? This is my own theory, but I believe it is partly due to the likely effect copper ions also have on catalyzing the inversion of sugar in preserve-making. One of the goals in cooking preserves is to break down sucrose into its components glucose and fructose (i.e., "inverting sugar"). The catalysis of sugar inversion in unlined aluminum and copper is well-known to confectioners, which can sometimes be an advantage (to break down sugar into a stable syrup) or a disadvantage (when producing harder candies, it can soften the product too much). I've also seen vague references to copper jam pans perhaps helping against jam crystallization (where not enough sugar is inverted, so the sugar recrystallizes after setting). Increased fructose and glucose would also result in more "syrupy" preserves that would tend to be glossier, perhaps aiding this supposed "sparkle." These advantages seem to be minor enough that no serious food science studies have tackled them. But what are the objections to lined copper? The likely culprit is again mentioned by Hervé This. Tin or silver linings themselves are not an issue. But tin and silver salts (i.e., formed through corrosion and left on pans that are not perfectly clean) will react with acidic preserve components: "Silver salts cause raspberries to whiten a bit, whereas copper ions give them a fine red-orange color. Tin ions trigger the purple tinge that has given rise to the prejudice against tin-plated pans." However, This goes on to note: "Modern cleaning methods are superior to those in times past... and so the dictum must be amended: Red fruits should never be placed or cooked in unclean tin-plated copper pans." A final point that is not addressed by This or any other source I could find is -- what about stainless steel linings, which are incredibly popular for copper pans these days? Since they are non-reactive, they would lack the minor advantages of copper's reactivity, but they would also avoid the disadvantages of bare pots (or tin or silver lined) which could introduce potentially poisonous salts if not cleaned properly, as well as creating discolored jam. Why stainless-lined jam pans are basically unavailable is thus still a bit of a mystery to me. And what about the supposed benefits of unlined copper reacting to help the jam gel quickly (both through pectin crosslinking and perhaps through sugar inversion)? Well, both of these reactions can also be helped along naturally -- without copper -- in jam-making with sufficient acidity. Thus, ironically, jam makers who buy expensive unlined copper pans and then avoid using very acidic recipes (to avoid excessive copper uptake) are actually working against the very chemical processes unlined copper might facilitate to produce better jam.

I have a large block of cheddar cheese that I would like to use for burgers. But grating is such a pain. I do have a meat grinder. Can I use that for "grating" cheese? Has anybody done that before? Will it mess up the grinder? I know someone who says it's perfectly fine, but he never did it before. I know another person who's friend says it's not because cheese is sticky and may jam the grinder. I cannot find anything on google either. Has anyone had any experience with "grating" cheese with a meat grinder?

During my younger days working in restaurants I have grated many pounds of cheese using a 'meat grinder' (or rather the meat grinder attachment for a hobart stand mixer)...I have also used my home Kitchen Aid meat grinder for cheeses (cheddar, jack and mozzarella mostly). So, it depends on the grinder and the attachments you have but yes it can be done. You want a fine grinder plate and cold cheese (so it stays together better). You probably also want to be doing a "serious quantity" as the set up/tear down/clean up will be an endeavor. If your having friends and family over for a Mexican Fiesta, perfect. If you are making a quick plate of nachos...OVERKILL.. For a few burgers, do it once and decide for yourself if you want to do it again. It won't be bad for the grinder It won't be bad for the cheese Expect Leftovers... (note: IMHO near frozen mozzarella for lasagna is a perfect place to use a grinder for cheese...)

I'm trying to recreate a very specific brand of white bread from my parents' hometown, which isn't available outside about a 60-mile radius since the bakery doesn't use preservatives. But it's DANG good, and I'd like to be able to make something similar for myself in between trips to visit my parents. The things I know about the bread are: VERY pale, despite apparently using wheat flour - pure white inside and a very light tan on the crust Extremely light and airy inside, with a fairly open crumb Delicate, almost sweet flavor, with none of the usual "yeasty" or "bready" flavors in typical white breads Makes a very lightweight but sturdy and crispy toast Supposedly made from a German recipe from 1852, unchanged except for "the removal of lard" (I don't know what, if anything, replaced the lard) The ingredients listed on the packaging are Enriched wheat flour, water, sugar, yeast, buttermilk, shortening (soybean and palm oils), malt, salt I've made a few attempts at recreating the recipe, but so far haven't had any luck. The main problem is that no matter what I do, I can't eliminate the "yeasty" or "bready" taste. The closest I've gotten is by replacing half the water in a standard white bread recipe with buttermilk, substituting lard for shortening, and substituting all the sugar except what starts the yeast, with half the amount of malted milk powder (I've ordered proper diastatic malt powder but it'll be a while before it arrives). However, among other issues, that recipe still results in the distinct "yeasty" or "bready" taste that I'm trying to avoid. I found this question which asks about how to increase the yeast flavor in bread, but I'm not yet good enough at bread science to reverse the answers. How can I remove the "yeasty" flavor from my bread, ideally while also maintaining the characteristics listed above?

One way to reduce the taste of yeast is paradoxically to use more yeast. With more yeast (and higher temperature, and more sugar) you can make the dough rise faster, which yields less of the yeasty flavour. (Normally the process is the reverse - in order to get more yeasty flavour, use less yeast and let it rise for longer (and at lower temperature)). An other alternative is to use the Chorleywood process, but that's not really suitable for home use. I also think you're a bit confused regarding the use of 'wheat' as an adjective. Most white bread is made with wheat flour (i.e. ground endosperm from triticum), but when some (American?) bakers say 'wheat', what they really mean is 'whole-wheat', which does not mean '100% wheat', but rather that the flour they're using is (at least partly) made from whole wheat grains.

I'm interested in cooking some meat Brazilian style, like they do at those BBQ restraunts where the meat is served on trays in small slivers. Is there an effective way to do this without a huge turning slow cooker thingy (sorry don't know correct name/terminology).

Not sure if there is a correct way. It's basically skewered hunks of meat on a wood fired BBQ You can do your own Churrasqueira by using a Weber "kettle" style BBQ or a B.D.S. (Big Drum Smoker). Use long steel skewers (or swords!) for your meat and BBQ away Thick steaks of beef and lamb work well. Also try chicken drumsticks and some small Chorizo (spicy sausage) Don't marinate the meat, but toss some coarse salt onto the meat surface before and during cooking. Don't go crazy with it, but it seems to absorb the roasting flavours and really boost the taste Use a smoky fire, if your wood won't smoke add some fresh wood or herbs that do. Try lavender bush (wood and flower), grape vine or kiwifruit vine cuttings, or any other fresh cut aromatic wood Watch the amount of fat dripping onto the hot coals; too much will make the meat taste bad. Shield the coals as required or trim off large chunks of fat There is no need for motorised skewers that takes the fun out of it. Occasionally turn the meat by hand while enjoying your favourite beverage, and "chewing the fat" with a friend Serve by taking a skewer to the diners plate, and hold skewer nearly vertically above plate. Use an extra sharp carving knife and slice onto the plate with a downwards cut so juices and other slicing splatter goes onto the plate and not onto the diners If you are having a Churrasco party, give each diner a flippable symbol (e.g. red/green) to indicate to the server (probably you) "GIVE ME MORE!", or "I am stuffed". Serve a round of each meat as their outer layer becomes done Coolest Churrasco cooker I could find The rails on the top are what the skewers rest on Following the car theme, some more cool Churrasco cookers here http://autozine.com.br/inusitados/churrasqueiras-automotivas

I usually make steel cut oats in a rice cooker (1:3 ratio of oats and water) and generally have a couple of servings left over. When I try to reheat in the microwave it comes out all congealed together in small little chunks. Even if I put a little milk before microwaving still doesn't seem to work - The milk stays settled on the bottom of the heated bowl and the oats are still clumped together. Any Tips?

You have to really beat the milk into it. Start with all of the oatmeal in a bowl, and add just a little milk and mush it in with a fork. Keep adding milk a little at a time until you reach the texture you like, then reheat it.

Why exactly is it recommended to store cooking oil away from sunlight? How does sunlight accelerate spoilage?

The main enemy of oil is oxidation, which is the reaction of the constituent molecules with oxygen. How fast oxidation occurs will depend on the type of oil you consider. For example, unsaturated fat oxidizes faster than saturated. Therefore oils with higher content of unsaturated fat tend to oxide faster. Since oxidation is a reaction, it changes the chemical content of the oil. Oxidation is measured in the industry by looking at the molecules that were not there originally. More specifically, they differentiate primary, secondary and tertiary oxidation, each associated with the presence of certain subproducts of oxidation, in increasing order of complexity. The fact is that if you go to the lab and take two samples of the same oil, leave it in the same room for the same time, one protected from sunlight and the other exposed, and after you measure oxidation according to the criteria aforementioned, you will observe that the exposed oil will have a higher concentration of secondary oxidation chemicals than the protected one. Oxided oil might not be completely spoiled, but it definitively changes some of its 'nice' properties. The crude underlying reason is the photoelectric effect: light can excite electrons and make molecules more reactive. If you are interested in more chemistry details I would recommend reading this paper or this simpler one, that explain also the role of other factors such as humidity, temperature, etc.

If my charcoal bbq is too hot and the chicken is turning stiff on the surface, can I close the top vents to cool down the barbecue? What is the best way of cooling I down? Once cooled, what is the best way of making I hot again?

The temperature of a charcoal cooker is controlled by how much oxygen you allow to get to the fuel. I don't know what kind of grill you have, but typically there are one or more vents at the bottom, and one or more at the top. The bottom vents regulate oxygen supply to the fuel, while the top vents regulate air flow. If you close down all the vents, the coals will eventually extinguish. If they are still holding enough heat, opening them back up will cause them to reignite. To regulate your temperature, open/close your supply vents (bottom ones) to varying degrees. Also, consider setting up a zone on your grill surface where there is no charcoal underneath, to where you can move any food in danger of being overcooked.

We recently cooked a beef stew in our unglazed earthenware tagine. The food at the bottom of the dish burned a bit, and we're now left with a rather crusty mess that we don't know how to remove. Is there any trick to softening up the remains so that they're easier to scrape away? Soaking in hot water hasn't really helped. We know that you can't use dish soap in a tagine, but is there something else that we can try—baking soda, maybe? And in terms of abrading tools, is detergent-free steel wool OK or should we stick to the usual brushes, plastic scrubbers, and coarse-grained salt?

You might try cooking it loose. Heat it up with plain water inside, even to boiling, and the combination of heat and soaking should loosen everything and make it easier to scrub out - especially if you scrape the bottom and stir occasionally as it boils. Baking soda might help, sure - you might try hot vinegar and baking soda, boil vinegar and water, add baking soda, and let soak for a few hours. Or you might try a baking soda paste, leave on stubborn stains a while and try cleaning afterwards. Both possibilities are used for cleaning burnt food on pots, but it should also work for a tagine - I found one example of simmering hot water and baking soda in the tagine, which is another option. Steel wool should be fine, though if you are worried about wear on the bottom of your tagine you can plan to use it infrequently, only for serious messes. Clay is pretty hard stuff, so it shouldn't actually be a problem (I use steel wool on my tagine, and the unglazed portions don't show any wear), but if you are worried just remember to scrub gently and let the abrasion slowly wear the residue away, instead of scrubbing hard. Other brushes and scrubbers should also be fine, though you might want long handles or heat resistance if you're going to pair scrubbing with simmering the residue soft. Also, from what I've read, unglazed tagines are supposed to be seasoned with oil - not quite like cast iron, it involves soaking thoroughly, coating with oil, and heating at a low heat so the evaporation of the water pulls the oil into the pores of the clay. If your tagine was seasoned, it should be able to stand surface washing with soapy water - the danger is if the soap soaks into the pores of the clay, which an oil seasoning should prevent, especially if it's a brief wash not a prolonged soak and you rinse well. Up to you if you want to risk it or not, but it might help. As a side note, there's nothing wrong with soaking a tagine...seasoning one requires prolonged soaking, in fact, and many sites suggest it for stubborn cleaning. I'm not sure what was said to GdD, but I've never heard anything against soaking.

I just finished making cookies. The dough was enough to make multiple batches. I only have one baking sheet. Every time a batch was ready, I used new parchment paper on the baking sheet. Is this necessary or could I just re-use the same piece of paper till all my cookies are baked?

You can reuse parchment paper several times for your cookies (it also works for other dry dishes), depending on cooking time and temperature, with no problem. Change the paper when it gets dirty, dark and/or brittle as it may crumble beyond this point. I always do so with no difference in the results, saving both on money and waste.

I was reading a post earlier regarding maple syrup being left out overnight. They were asking if their beloved Maple syrup was still safe to consume. In the comments I believe someone brought up this question I am asking, I'm sure I could do the research and find out but hey whats the fun in that. So here's my question does the sugar in Maple syrup or any product for that matter inhibit the growth of mold. Also if its true, how much sugar is needed percentage wise? Does it matter what type of sugar?

TLDR; Yes. Sugar does inhibit growth of mold. How does this work? Several reasons: Sugar prohibits growth through osmosis / dehydration. "The most notable is simple osmosis, or dehydration. Salt or sugar, whether in solid or aqueous form, attempts to reach equilibrium with the salt or sugar content of the food product with which it is in contact." Source: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-do-salt-and-sugar-pre/ Sugar weakens the molecular structure of pathogens' DNA Salt and sugar's other antimicrobial mechanisms include interference with a microbe's enzyme activity and weakening the molecular structure of its DNA. Sugar may also provide an indirect form of preservation by serving to accelerate accumulation of antimicrobial compounds from the growth of certain other organisms. Source: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-do-salt-and-sugar-pre/

I am making pancetta for the first time and I've just taken it out of the cure to dry. I have rolled it and am ready to hang it. Before I hang it, what are the pros and cons of wrapping it in cheesecloth while it dries? The recipe I am using says to cover it in cheesecloth when laying flat to dry, but nothing about wrapping it in cheesecloth to hang it.

I've made pancetta many times. When rolling, I just tie with a string. Traditionally, it is just tied off. Personally, I prefer the results when I just hang it without rolling...poke a hole, loop a string, hang...but that is just personal preference. The only downside I can see to the cheese cloth, is that it might slightly slow the drying process. Other than that, as long as you are working clean, I can't see a problem with it, but I am not sure it really helps you in any significant way. Perhaps you could get a tighter roll with a sheet of cheesecloth?

I get raw milk and to somehow pasteurize it, I boil it. The milk strongly curdled showing that it is spoiled and rotten (definitely, not suitable for drinking). Is it totally bad milk and I should throw it away? or it still can be used for making yogurt and cheese?

Even if it is possible, it is a very, very bad idea as you don't know what cultures or pathogens are in the already spoiled milk. Fermented dairy products should only be made from fresh milk in good condition—and in most cases, that milk should be pasteurized while fresh absolutely as soon as possible from the source cows.

I recently purchased this vegetable at a farmers' market without getting its name. It was marketed as organic/fresh/local in the Northeastern United States in late September. The leaves are thin and non-waxy, but a little moist (when I try to slide my fingers across the leaves they stick a little). When I tasted a small portion of a leaf raw, I immediately felt moderate burning in the mouth which I (mistakenly) believed to be oxalic acid at first. In reality, it was a mustardy spicy/sharp taste (which I didn't expect from greens). Because I don't know the name of this plant, I'm not sure if this is the case. In light of that concern, does it require any special preparation to be safe for healthy individuals?

From the photo & description of the leave look & feel, these sound like green wave mustard--a variety of mustard greens with curly leaves. Mustard greens have a "spicy" or peppery taste, which also seems to align with your experience. Mustard greens can be safely eaten raw or cooked. It can be a raw salad ingredient, or be sauteed, braised, grilled, etc. Because of the assertive flavor, some people find it best when mixed with other leafy greens to balance out that spiciness you describe.

Patting dry with paper towels is really wasteful. I would like to pat dry meat with something reusable like a kitchen towel, yet I fear some of the bacteria will remain on it and make it contaminated. Is there a substitute for paper towels? Also, do not confuse this question with: Do you use paper or clothe towel This is about the safety of using a reusable drying material, not it's culinary efficacy.

There are only four ways that I know of other than towels (paper or otherwise) to dry meat: Air circulation Time (in a relatively dry environment). Heat Momentum Most people avoid the heat approach, as you'll start to cook it once it's hot enough to be safe for long-term storage of meat. Some recipes may start in a low oven to dry the surface, then remove it, let the oven pre-heat to a higher temperature, then finish cooking. (as it's difficult to give recipes that know how quickly your oven heats up). For momentum, you basically have to flick the meat such that the water gets flung off. Which is prone to lots of problems (letting go of the meat, plus the spraying of contaminated liquid everywhere). You could use a salad spinner, but if you did, I'd recommend keeping a separate one for meats, as you don't want to risk contaminating other ingredients that would be eaten raw. For the airflow, you can set it under a low speed fan ... avoiding high speeds so you don't end up aerosolizing the moisture and flinging it through the kitchen. Or you can place the food in a ventilated container and leave it in your fridge overnight ... possibly with a battery powered fan in the fridge to improve airflow. As all of these ideas have drawbacks (food safety, time, etc.), most people just accept the waste of using paper towels. There are a few times when one of the others might be used (food dehydrating, trying to get a glaze to set up (eg, peking duck), dry brining, etc.), but they're relatively rare.

When you are measuring out your flour, sugar, etc with the measuring cups, is it better to scoop and then shake the cup to get a leveled cup, or scoop and then use a knife to scrape off the excess. I have been using the first method but will it make a difference?

The real answer is that it depends on the measurement methodology used by the person who wrote the recipe. I have one book that actually calls for measuring by scooping with the measuring cup and scraping it with the side of the bag, which is how the average person tends to measure flour, and results in about 30% more flour by weight per cup. King Arthur flour (and most other recipe sources) use the "sprinkle the flour into the measuring cup with a spoon and then level with a knife" which most closely simulates measuring sifted flour. This method will generally be appropriate when using professional recipes, unless the cookbook calls for another method. These recipes generally do not want compacted flour. If you are compacting your flour you are almost certain to be using too much. Many instructional style cookbooks will lay out their measuring methodology at the beginning of the baking section (or the beginning of the book if it is a baking book). But since every methodology and every individual's use of that methodology comes out with a different weight per cup, working by weight really is your best bet.

Some fresh herbs seem to retain their flavor better than others when dried; for example, dried parsley has very little flavor, but dried tarragon tastes reasonably close to fresh tarragon. Which other herbs can be dried successfully without losing too much flavor?

Tarragon, basil, oregano, thyme, savory, and sage are the ones that I'm most inclined to use in their dried form. Generally the more resinous and strongly scented they are fresh, the better they'll be in dry form. Rosemary will hold its flavor dry but unless you're going to grind the dry product it's like eating pine needles. I prefer fresh rosemary instead.

Can coconut cream be transformed into coconut milk, or the other way around? For example, will adding water or cow milk to coconut cream make a usable coconut milk? Or by reducing coconut milk, can I get coconut cream?

Short answer: you can let coconut milk separate and skim it to get a little coconut cream, but can't convert coconut cream back to coconut milk. Diluting the cream just produces something runny and disgusting. Long answer: Coconut milk is made by grating coconut and running very hot water through it to extract oils and flavor, then straining out the coconut pieces. It is a mix of water soluble parts and fats, and can emulsify just like normal milk or thicken sauces similarly to milk cream. If you allow coconut milk to sit, the fatty part will rise to the top. This part is skimmed off to make coconut cream, which is much richer in fats. It cooks very differently because of the higher fat content, and does not emulsify or thicken well; however it is quite delicious! If you're looking to substitute for coconut milk, but only have coconut cream, the best substitution will probably be a little coconut cream + a lot of heavy (milk) cream. Note: Some people refer to the liquid contained in fresh coconuts as coconut milk, but it is more accurately called coconut water. This confusion has ruined many a recipe!

I know that kangaroo meat is usually cooked rare because it's so low in fat. I also know that certain meats are not safe unless well cooked, such as chicken and pork. But what about kangaroo? For me it's the most delicious red meat so if I like steak tartare I know I should like kangaroo tartare, but how could I make sure that I'm doing it the safest way possible, if there is a safe way?

It seems the meat is not farmed at all but entirely "harvested" in the wild http://www.daff.gov.au/agriculture-food/meat-wool-dairy/ilg/industries/kangaroos. So it should be treated as a game meat rather than a farmed one - i.e. best to cook it. Here's advice from the Department of Primary Industries saying you should never feed raw kangaroo to your dog, so I'd err on the side of caution http://new.dpi.vic.gov.au/pets/pests-and-diseases/health-care

I marinated a skewer with chicken next to mushrooms and peppers all uncooked then put them in the freezer will I get sick when i cook them?

Restaurants do this sort of thing all the time. The FDA food code would simply require the vegetables, and anything else that touched that chicken, be cooked to an internal temperature of at least 165 for them to be safe. That's pretty conservative, but I tend to agree.

I've been making cheesecakes for a while and they always end up cracking on the top. I was told to try putting a pan of water in the oven with it to keep the humidity up, which might help a little, but then it tends to crack when it's cooling. Am I overcooking? Or baking at the wrong temperature? Whipped cream can only cover up so much.

To make a good baked cheesecake, I was taught the following, and it has ALWAYS worked: Start with room temperature ingredients. DO NOT over-mix. This is a significant cause of cracking, as the incorporated air tends to souffle. When baking, always bake in a bain-marie (put your cake into a water bath for insulation). Bake half an hour at 300° F / 150° C. Then, turn off the oven, open the oven door, and rest for 30 minutes. Then, close the oven and bake 30 to 40 minutes more at 300° F / 150° C. My first pastry chef taught me this, and it always works. Also, over-baking will definitely lead to cracking (due to the loss of moisture), and, as stated, over-mixing will as well.

I'm looking at a recipe for a fajita stir-fry that includes an optional 2 tbsp of dark rum. The introduction for the recipe mentions, Latin spices combined with the optional kick of dark Jamaican rum make an interesting marriage of flavors. What does the rum offer to the recipe? I ask because I'm not sure I want to buy a whole bottle of dark rum just for one recipe.

In the Caribbean and other Rum producing areas, you find Rum in all sorts of recipes It is sometimes an unusual flavour pairing, but not necessarily bad. In savoury cooking it adds a semi-burnt sweetness, more like toffee or butterscotch than straight Rum Caribbean and Mexican cooking is well blended and harmonious with many common ingredients (chilli, coriander, avocado etc.) Considering the popularity of spicy jerk meat and Rum, the Rum Fajitas would be an interesting experiment

Help! I added three times the amount of salt needed for my sourdough bread recipe (1/4 c. versus 1 T.) Can I save it?

Cake flour is milled more finely than all purpose flour. It also has a lower protein content, so less gluten is produced in the final product. It is ideal for achieving the soft crumb of a cake. That said, plenty of cakes are made with all purpose flour. You would be able to perceive a difference in a side-by-side comparison. In your own kitchen, with one cake, it is not going to matter too much. I would suggest you sift your dry ingredients and move ahead with AP flour. It will not be a problem.

I want to make broccoli cheddar soup tonight and it says to blend the stuff after you add the broccoli. I have a blender but it sucks and would rather use my ninja. Can I put hot liquids in this? How do I deal with venting the steam?

Caramelising is a chemical process in which sugars decompose under the influence of heat (pyrolisis). It happens to any heated sugars, no matter if they are free (as in heating refined sugar for making candy) or bound in something else (such as the sugars naturally occurring in an onion). The outcome of the process are compounds which have a dark color and pleasant aroma. Sauteeing is a cooking technique. It consists of frying small pieces of solid food on very high temperature with very little fat while shaking the pan all the time, so they won't overheat and/or stick. Many people don't know the technical meaning of sauteeing and use the word for plain shallow frying at medium temperature and without shaking the pan. This seems to be the definition your employer was using. In fact, you were shallow frying both kinds of vegetables, which resulted in caramelisation plus other changes for the onions and in these other changes only for the vegetables which don't contain significant amounts of sugar. Cooking recipes frequently avoid saying just "fry the onions", because onions have to be brought to a different state for different recipes. So they usually use a word which implies a desired final state, such as "caramelize". For many other vegetables, which only have a single usable state of doneness, they specify the technique instead. This is why different words can be used for the same process - one describes the technique you are using, the other describes the changes which are happening, it is like saying 'I am going sunbathing' or 'I am going to catch some tan', which are indeed the same process. Incidentally, true sauteeing is a bad idea if you want to caramelise onions. Low and slow is the way to go if you want caramelised onions, while during the high temperatures used in sauteeing they go from translucent to burnt without passing a nice caramelized stage. But just leaving them in the pan for some time is a good technique. You also say grilling. This is a completely different technique, and it is done on a grill instead of in a pan. I can't imagine how you would caramelize cut onions on a grill, unless you put a griddle on the grill, which is equivalent to frying.

A friend of mine years back related a story about an appetizer that he ordered at an Asian restaurant that was apparently quite unusual. It was a bowl of something (possibly peppers or another vegetable) where each piece looked completely identical, but one out of every 15-20 of them was extremely spicy. The rest tasted rather mild, so he and his friends would go around the table basically playing a kind of Russian roulette with spicy food. Does anybody have any idea of what this could be?

It sounds like it could be Shishito peppers, which about 10% are spicy, and "even experts may not be able to distinguish relative hotness on the same plant.".

I put too much Rosemary spice in a pureed vegetable soup. Ingredients were onions, peppers, celery, ,cauliflower, vegetable broth, tamari and Rosemary and coconut milk. The Rosemary is too strong. How can I save it?

Make a second soup with out rosemary and combine the two final products. Or call it Rosemary Soup.

US recommendations always go for +4°C at most, and this would correlate with how the danger zone is defined in the pertinent literature. In Germany, most literature (and also the specification next to use-by dates on packaging) suggests +7°C or +8°C. http://www.br.de/radio/bayern1/inhalt/experten-tipps/umweltkommissar/kuehlschrank-temperatur-energie-verbrauch-umweltkommissar-100.html Surprisingly, the first dutch google result http://www.consumentenbond.nl/koelkast/extra/temperatuur-koelkast/ suggests +3-4°C. France, http://www.linternaute.com/bricolage/pratique/electromenager/17004/temperature-frigo-tout-ce-qu-il-faut-savoir.html +4°C UK, http://www.exeter.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=11517 +8°C and redefines the danger zone. What is up with that, given +4°C vs +8°C is not as trivial a difference as it looks like... Not truly answered in possible duplicate What is the ideal fridge temperature. If even on this site such things aren't accepted as a "matter of opinion" (generally good!), why would they be between devoloped nations? One would assume biology and state of science being the same in all these countries, either things are likely or very unlikely to spoil in a non-visible way at that or that temperature...

As a starting point, I found this article, which says: The suggested temperature specification for refrigeration of foods has been revisited from time to time as knowledge and technology have advanced. Initially 7°C (45°F) was considered the optimal temperature; however, technological improvements have made it economical to have domestic refrigeration units working at a temperature of 4-5°C (40-41°F). For perishable products ≤4.4°C (40°F) is considered a desirable refrigeration temperature. ... Even these measures cannot control all pathogenic bacterial growth. For example L. monocytogenes, Yersinia enterocolitica, Aeromonas hydrophila, B. cereus and C. botulinum will multiply at recommended “good” refrigeration temperatures (5°C [41°F]). There are other bacteria (Salmonella spp., E. coli and S. aureus), that, although unable to grow at temperatures below 5°C (41°F), will take advantage of temperature abuse and grow. ... If you're interested in additional detail about all that, the article does have a bibliography, but most of it is not accessible online. I did find this table of temperature ranges for growth for several common bacteria, though. Note that for example C. botulinum grows down to 3.3C/38°F, and L. monocytogenes (listeria) grows down to 29.3°F (-1.5°C)! So even 4°C isn't stopping everything. In any case, there definitely is concrete benefit from the 4°C guideline: many foodborne bacteria will definitely multiply above 5°C, which would lead to shorter safe refrigeration times (or more foodborne illness if you times aren't adjusted) at the 7°C or 8°C temperatures used in Germany. I don't know anything concrete about why Germany has chosen to tolerate this risk, however. The historical progression to lower temperatures cited there does suggest that Germany simply hasn't adjusted their standards lower as technology has improved (as mentioned in the article) but it's not clear why. A side note: outside of food safety, the primary way fridges can have an undesired effect on food is by accidentally freezing it. (Temperatures vary by position in the fridge, and by time.) There's a balance here between reducing temperature as much as possible for safety, and keeping far enough above 0°C that variance doesn't routinely freeze your food. Given that some things grow even below 4°C, I'm guessing that if it were possible to hold temperature more constant, we'd actually see even lower temperature recommendations, in the same vein as previous decreases in temperature recommendations.

For the holidays, I plan to do a turkey, but I need to order in advance since the place I'm buying from is popular and usually sells out in pre-orders. Estimates of how much turkey to plan per person vary widely across the internet; does anyone have authoritative data on how much turkey to buy? There's clearly a difference between a small child and a hefty eater, for example, and I'd imagine the meat-to-bone ratio changes as the turkey gets larger or smaller. I also want to plan to have leftovers, since my family enjoys leftover turkey sandwiches. Does it matter how many sides I plan to make? Note that this is for Americans at Thanksgiving, so portion sizes are intended to be larger than normal.

Unless you're feeding 20, chances are you want the smallest bird they have. It doesn't really matter if you should have 1 lb per person or 1.5 if you have 8 people and their smallest bird is 12 pounds - and I'm willing to bet that's the case. That said, I generally allow 1 lb per person and don't count the smallest children (say, haven't started school yet.) I also tend to send a lot of leftovers home with other people. Our feasts are very veggie heavy, but as I mentioned above you may have less control over this than you think.

I have here, Terrine de Campagne and Mousse de Canard with Expiry of Mar 16, this year. Mousse de Foie expired Mar 22. So all are expired and their packages have ballooned up. I'm wondering if they are still safe to eat?

I'm sorry to say that your three packages are no longer safe for consumption. Expiry dates are usually pretty conservative and food may still be good several days past them, but the concerning factor in your case is the ballooning of your packaging. As various bacteria live their lives, they produce gas. A small amount of bacteria over a short amount a time will not be enough to produce enough gas to make any noticeable change to a packaging and is completely safe. However, the fact that your unopened factory-sealed packages have ballooned up points to a serious multiplication of said bacteria. I recommend you throw away all three packages.

When I am cooking small pieces of meat (so a meat thermometer is not an appropriate tool - I'm thinking of things like shredded chicken being stir-fried, frying or grilling slices of bacon, or minced beef being browned in a pan) I tell whether it is cooked yet by the change in colour in the meat. Chicken goes pink -> creamy white, bacon goes pink -> a different shade of pink, beef goes reddish pink -> brown, etc. How does a blind, or colour-blind, chef manage? If going purely by time of cooking you will surely either end up with some pieces undercooked or the whole lot overcooked to compensate for that. Also it depends so much on the exact size of the pieces of meat, in the case of a grill how close the meat is to the heat, etc. This is not a purely theoretical question - my husband is colour blind and really struggles with this. He cannot see the relevant colour differences at all, and although there are some texture changes on the outside of the meat, that doesn't tell you that the pieces are cooked all the way through.

Texture. Although I can see perfectly, I use texture to tell me if pasta is done, for example. It's obvious for spaghetti but I do it for macaroni too, or any shapes. Just stirring a pot full of boiling water with raw macaroni, then stirring a pot full of boiling water and cooked macaroni, is a very different experience. Stir frying raw meat, partly cooked meat, and cooked meat will also feel different. Grilling meat is definitely a time for everyone to use texture, probably some variant of the press-the-ball-of-your-thumb rule. To a lesser extent, smell. This is what I rely on to evaluate baked and roasted things, long before I open the oven to look at them or touch them. It won't help you grill a steak though. FYI, I asked Christine Ha on Twitter, and she replied By feeling the texture of the meat… And also not being afraid to taste Which is as close to "from the horse's mouth" as it seems we will get in this thread.

Most recipes I see for tzatziki often call for dill and/or mint. However none of them ever state which kind of mint is needed, it's always just listed as mint. So which mint is best for tzatziki? Spearmint or peppermint? Obviously there are many other less common types of mints which may also work but spearmint and peppermint are the only two common mints (at least from where I am from, maybe it's different elsewhere. Maybe there's only one common type in USA, where most of the recipes seem to come from so perhaps that's why there's no distinction?).

It refers to spearmint in this case. You can find both spearmint (Mentha spicata, known in Greek as δυόσμος) and peppermint (Mentha × piperita, generally known as μέντα, though that may be used for almost any type of mint) pretty readily throughout most of Greece, but spearmint is much more common in traditional Greek cuisine (peppermint is generally too strong for how they typically use mint), and all the original Greek recipes I’ve seen for tzatziki that call for mint call for spearmint. You can, however, substitute most other mildly flavored mints and get a similar flavor. I’ve used both Mentha arvensis (commonly known as field mint or wild mint) and Menth suaveolens (commonly known as apple mint) before in my own home made tzatziki and the difference was not readily noticeable.

Many salmon recipes use Dill (Anethum graveolens) as the usual ingredient as condimentary herb. In my place, I have fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) available outdoors, so I opt to use it instead. And I like it. Why is it never mentioned as a substitute? what is your opinion?

I assume you're speaking of using fennel fronds, specifically. The fronds look a bit like dill, and are often used as a garnish, but certainly taste different than dill. I think the main reason is that most people usually only get fennel fronds when they also buy a fennel bulb, so it's usually inconvenient to only use the fronds for a garnish when you're not using the bulb. Also, some people (my wife) just don't like the taste of anise/fennel at all. If you have it growing in your backyard, and you like the taste, there's no reason you can't use it.

I love Bacon, but I prefer fattier pieces of meat. However, I cannot seem to find a way to cook the bacon without melting most of the fat off. What I've tried so far: Searing at high temperature - Maybe the best results? Baking the bacon at 200*F(takes way too long, still melts) Also baking at 300 & 400*F. In the end, it may just not be possible to retain more fat. I just hate having so much bacon fat left over, and I cook enough that It would make no sense to save it all.

I'm not sure this is really a sensible answer… but it's one way… Deep-fry it. Should take about 15 - 30s. That way it will come out even fattier than it went in. Any fat that comes off will be added to the next batch, though probably at an overall loss to the fryer, so you'll have to periodically top back with oil. Late edit: I forget the US likes their bacon crispy. My timings were for UK bacon to keep the fat soft but get the meat technically cooked, as the OP asked for 'more fat'. Crispy I guess will take longer. I've never made crispy bacon in my life & have to assume it's cured differently to be able to make it cook like that.

So far we have tried using a hard ball syrup as a glue, but it is challenging to evenly coat the popcorn and get consistent results. We have tried drizzling the hot syrup over warmed popcorn and then mixing by hand in a large bowl but the syrup just does not spread out enough. We'd love to be able to replicate the process they use to make Popcorn cakes where they seem to be breaking down the starch and then solidifying it. Any and all suggestions welcome!

We ended up using straight corn syrup heated to soft ball stage. Two critical factors were (1) use the right proportions and (2) do the mixing/coating inside a big wok to keep it from cooling before adding to the mold. Getting the right proportions takes trial and error. Too little corn syrup will not hold the popcorn together well and too much will make the mixture too sticky to press into the mold. We ended up using about 1/4 cup per batch of air-popped corn. The biggest wok we could find was 18" but even bigger would have probably have been even better.

I'm working on my chicken flauta recipe skills today, I like to make everything from scratch but all I can find are recipes with store bought tortillas. Knowing how much better homemade corn tortillas are I'm thinking of trying this with scratch made flour tortillas, stuffing and then frying. My question is should I first cook the flour tortillas in a pan, then fill and fry? Or fill and fry with the raw dough after pressing it?

According to this page... neither your first option. You should toast them in a pan without oil. After rest period, heat a large pan over medium-high heat. Roll each dough piece into a rough circle, about 6-7 inches in diameter, keep work surface and rolling pin lightly floured. Don’t stack uncooked tortillas on top of each other or they will get soggy. When pan is very hot, place one dough circle into pan and allow to cook about 1 minute or until bottom surface has a few pale brown spots. The uncooked surface will begin to show a few little bubbles. If tortilla is browning too fast, reduced heat a bit. If it’s taking longer than a minute to see a few pale golden brown spots on underside of tortillas, increase heat a bit. Flip to other side and cook for about 30 seconds. You want the tortilla to be soft but have a few small pale golden brown spots on surface. Remove from pan with tongs and stack in a covered container or zippered bag till all tortillas are cooked. This will keep them soft and pliable. You can view the complete recipe following the above link.

How are the results in pizza baking different between one baking steel using a broiler, versus baking the pizza on a lower steel with a second steel on a higher rack? Is one easier to control (less likely to burn the cheese or crust)? Does a second steel above the pizza do a good job at cooking the top? Does anyone have experience with that?

I would say that in most cases neither is that helpful. I have great success with one steel, placed at the highest possible elevation in the oven. Preheat for at least an hour, and allow the steel to recover for a few minutes after removing the completed pizza, and before adding the next one. I have found minimal to no improvement with a steel or stone above the pizza. Also, in my oven, turning the broiler on, means the heating from the bottom goes off. I also need to keep the oven door slightly ajar when the broiler is on, so I lose a lot of heat this way. I find I don't need the broiler with my set-up. It is less convenient for marginal gains.

When I make chicken stock from scratch, I like to include whole spices like mustard seed, coriander, star anise and black pepper. I put these in right at the start when the water is still cool, so they can slowly add flavor as the stock simmers for hours. I only run into a problem when skimming foam. Many of the whole spices float to the top and I find it very tedious to skim the foam without taking out spices as well. I use a metal spoon or ladle for skimming. How can I skim the foam without catching the floating spices as well? Is there a technique or tool specially suited to this task?

I tend to just stick the spices in a tea egg I do this whenever I think the spices will get in the way during my process or when I want to remove them before serving, such as in case of a bouquet garni, cloves or juniper berries. Should you be reluctant to use metal in your recipe you can of course use loose leaf tea bags. Either way you can just lift the spices out whenever you want to skim the top of your broth.

I've heard that splitting spaghetti in half before cooking them change the taste. Is it true?

No, it's not true. It will not change the way they cook. Noodle cooking times vary by what they're made out of and by thickness, not by the length of the noodles. The kids and I seem to prefer eating shorter noodles and dodging the hassle of spinning the noodles, but when there's company over we tend to do it the classic "right" way. No difference in taste.

I have sous vide for a while with mixed success. Mostly good, but still mixed. One thing I question which I hoping to get opinion on is time to sous vide beef (steak specifically, e.g. ribeye or strip). I have read and heard where people have left beef in the bath for 24+ hours and rave about it. All the Anovo guidelines say 4 hours or less. I have not tried more than four hours. What gives, and what is overdoing it with sous vide cooking?

When cooking low temperature, over time the texture of the protein that you are cooking changes. For a tough cut, like a shank, or short rib, this is desirable, and where you would see cooking times of 12, 24, 48 hours...or longer. Most people want to enjoy a steak that chews like the traditionally cooked product. After 3 to 4 hours, the texture of your steak will change. It will become more mushy. That is why it is recommended that you only cook until done (1 to 2 hours). So, overdoing it, as you describe it, would be cooking it too long so that the texture becomes undesirable. For a steak, I think 4 hours would be pushing it.

I normally purchase sesame oil from an Asian market, but this time I bought it from the grocery store. I primarily use sesame oil for making stir-fried cashew chicken in a wok on the stovetop. Kadoya Brand 100% Pure Sesame Oil Ingredients: Sesame Seed Oil La Tourangelle Toasted Sesame Oil Ingredients: 100% Pure Sesame Oil The new bottle (toasted sesame oil) says on the back that it is best for low to medium heat, including stir-frying, baking, dipping, dressings, or drizzled on finished dishes. So, what is the difference between sesame oil and toasted sesame oil? I do not taste a difference.

I think the Kadoya brand you bought was toasted as well, it just didn't bother to mention it. Everything I've bought from Kadoya has been toasted. They are easy to tell apart. Non-toasted is about the same color as say safflower oil, toasted is rather dark brown. Toasted is used primarily for finishing dishes, as a final flavor. A little goes a long way. Non-toasted is a pretty marginalized product; you see it at health food stores some times. I can't think of any culinary reason to prefer it over the many other choices and it is quite expensive. Maybe some folks have particular health reasons for choosing it.

I just came across this recipe that calls for 1 1/4 cups of fresh cranberries. I was wondering if it was possible to substitute frozen cranberries instead. I am assuming that I have to thaw the cranberries pour off any excess water measure out the required amount (1 1/4 cups) Is this correct? Will there be any major differences?

As long as your frozen cranberries aren't in a syrup, this should be just fine. The most noticeable difference would be the texture. The flavor will also be slightly concentrated due to the water loss that Michael points out.

I have a garden every year and would prefer to use my own tomatoes for all my cooking. I can them and make sauces, but haven't found a good recipe that describes the technique for tomato paste. I need it to be thick like you buy at the store - I use this for sauce dishes, etc that I don't like to be too runny. How would a home cook go about making tomato paste?

Tomato paste is just tomatoes with the water removed, essentially. I'd slice the tomatoes in half and roast them (cut side up) at 350 degrees F for an hour (this will concentrate the flavour nicely and you can add s&p/olive oil/herbs/garlic if you want). Then mash them through a sieve or food mill to get a smooth consistency. Then put that tomato puree in a pot and just boil them down until it's as thick as you want. As it gets thicker, you'll need to stir it regularly to prevent it sticking to the bottom of the pot and burning.

So, for our wedding someone gave my wife and a cast iron lodge pan. Its a very nice pan and cooks well, but it's started to develop a rust spot after only a few months use. This is gross. I scrub the spot off before use, which is a pain, but Better than eating rust flakes with our hamburger helper. My inner mechanic is screaming "if its rusting, oil it!". Obviously I'd prefer a veggy based oil to my traditional motor oil, but is oiling a cast iron pan before storage sop?

As rumtsho has said oiling will help, but I think you have a more fundamental problem with is learning the care for your cast iron. There are lots of resources on the web to learn how to prepare, and maintain your cast iron. Some of it works even though it's wrong, some of it is very good and some of it is scientific in nature. However here are the basics. You want to scrub your pan down once. Oil it all over...every nook and cranny even in the handles .... with a very thin layer of oil. Then wipe this off with a clean towel and bake the sucker at 385 for an hour or more until it looks bone dry. I recommend you do some good reading however and learn all the different ways to keep it in shape along with all the different fat and oil choices. I use peanut oil, it has a high smoke point, which means the polymer you create will burn at a higher temperature than those oils with a lower smoke point, and peanut oil makes a hard seasoning.

I did not know pressurized cream whippers existed until just seeing a reference to one, which led me to do a Google search. I own a manual cream whipper, which I rarely use, because it is exceedingly difficult to remove the cream from the canister. So I just use the whip attachment on my mixer. I'm very interested in hearing people's opinions on pressurized whippers, and whether they can be used for more than cream.

The best storage depends on the particular confection: Refrigerate (in a sealed container to not pick up orders or absorb water): Ganache Soft caramel Cool dry storage, again in an air-tight container to minimize changes in moisture level: Candied citrus peal Nuts - Dry storage Marzipan Raisins and other dry fruits Fondant Hard caramel or toffee Ovens without pilot lights probably qualify as cool dry storage, and will keep the pets out if you have any, but accidents happen. I would use a cabinet or pantry if you have room.

I was watching S13E16 of Good Eats and to cook his chicken for "chicken and dumplings", he places an old hen (instead of a rooster) in the pressure cooker at the maximum temperature & pressure. I've done a bit of searching and it seems pressure cookers are recommended for stocks since it can denature collagen in the connective tissues in tough meats and other pieces to gelatin faster. This makes sense, except I thought the whole point of slow roasting (and indeed sous-vide) is to use low temperatures over a long period of time for collagen to gelatin conversion. Why is the low temperature needed in this, and the high temperature needed for the pressure cooker? It seems a bit contradictory. If the higher temp and pressure is better, we should be able to sous-vide in a pressure cooker too.

What you need for the conversion of collagen is a certain amount of energy. It is a complicated process - the melting point is around 70°C for the type of collagen contained in beef, but the melting does not happen instantly once the meat reaches 70°C. In a pressure cooking, you can apply the same amount of energy in a shorter amount of time. This is not bad, as opposed to slow roasting of collagen-poor meat. In collagen-poor meat, you have two types of protein, which are soft and wet. Under heat, they curdle, becoming tough and dry. The perfect meat is when the first type has curdled (so the meat is not raw) but the second hasn't, so it still holds juices inside. If you curdle both, your meat gets tough and you can't take it apart with your teeth. In collagen-rich meat, you curdle both proteins - the collagen itself is tough and you want to melt it, but this happens long after the meat has curdled. But because the muscle fibers are not clinging to each other, but separated by collagen, you still get tasty meat. For that, you melt the collagen into gelatin, and serve the meat warm, so that the dry fibers are separated by the smooth, juicy melted gelatin. Unlike slow-roasted meat, you don't have to tear the juiceless fibers apart, and the gelatin makes up for the missing meat juices which were expelled from the cells during curdling. So, in slow-roasted meat you don't want to cross the temperature limit for curdling a certain protein, this is why you have to apply heat slowly until the center of the meat has cooked, without the outside getting overcooked. In collagen-rich meat, there is no upper limit at which the meat gets non-tasty, so you can push the energy needed for the collagen-to-gelatin conversion quickly into your meat. The pressure cooker can do this better than the normal boiling process.

How on earth is not washing a cast iron with soap not harmful? Since even if you wash it good with hot water and Salt, wouldn't there still be a possibility of harmful bacteria and such left in the crevices in the metal? I mean the metal is porous, correct? Also same goes for the seasoning we use (bacon grease, oil, etc) How does this not get a bunch of bacteria on it?

Toxic? Neither the seasoning (which is essentially polymerized fat) nor the rust (which is... rust) is harmful in small quantities. Of course, I would not eat either by the spoonful. Spray oil as seasoning fat? See the many questions on seasoning, but cooking spray is far from ideal as a seasoning fat, as it contains emulsifiers and such, and tends to be a poly-unsaturated fat (that is, liquid at room temperature). Saturated fats are better. One of the most common household options is, dare I say it, Crisco. Or bacon fat. Why is scrubbing with salt sanitary? Tradition is that cast iron is not washed with soap and water. The purists will rail at me for saying this, but an occasional light wash with mild dish soap is not going to irreparably harm your seasoning. As you cook, it is continually being rebuilt, at least in frying which is what cast iron pans are best for. Nonetheless, the common method of just cleaning out with salt and then drying leaves a dry surface, which is not hospitable to bacteria or other pathogens. They cannot grow in a desert. Even if there are micro-crevices in the pan (there are), they would either be filled with the seasoning layer and irrelevant, or leaving the bacteria in direct contact with that active iron surface, which is also not good for them. But the main issue is that the pan is dry. Finally, since the pan is hot when being used (often even preheated in many applications) any tiny amount of bacteria which find a foothold will normally be killed quite early in the cooking process. The seasoning—even from delicious bacon fat—that forms the protective layer on the pan is also polymerized, which makes it less available as a food source for bacteria, even if they could otherwise grow in the very dry environment of a properly cleaned and dried cast iron pan.

I love spring onions (I believe they're called green onions in the US); I use them in salads and to add flavor. The problem is, whenever I get them from the supermarket, they're filled with dirt. No matter how much I wash them, and spray water inside the little stalks, there is always a considerable amount of dirt inside. I'm a little bit confused as to what I'm supposed to do with this. Is there a way to clean the dirt from the green section, apart from doing something nutty such as cutting open each stalk? Or are you supposed to just eat the dirt?

This occurs pretty often with leeks as well. The procedure there is to cut open the stalks lengthwise - i.e. one cut from top to bottom along the long axis. This allows you to fan apart the layers to ease out any trapped dirt. You could do the same thing with your green onions, assuming you don't mind cutting them lengthwise. If you don't want to cut, you could try soaking them in a sink or pot full of clean water for a half hour or so, agitating them every now and again. The water should get down the stalk and at least loosen up any trapped dirt.

I'm going to be making a soup dish that calls for 50 cloves of roasted garlic. I have always roasted garlic by cutting off the top of a head, drizzling it with oil, and wrapping with foil. Then when they're done I just squeeze out the paste from each clove. But some comments on the recipe say it's easier to roast them already peeled in a covered dish so you don't have to squeeze 50 cloves and deal with all the stickiness and peels. Since I already know how to easily peel whole cloves very quickly, it doesn't make much difference in the amount of work for me to do it either way. In fact, it's probably quicker to peel them. My question is, does it affect taste or any other quality to roast them as an entire unpeeled head rather than as peeled individual cloves? And if not, should roasting time be adjusted?

Garlic roasted as a head, as unpeeled cloves, or as peeled cloves is all much the same. It is just easier to handle unpeeled, and even easier when kept as a head For easy results just trim the excess paper skin and roots of a whole garlic head, carefully trim just the tops of most of the cloves Don't drizzle with oil and wrap in foil, this will just make a mess, and steam them more than roast them. Garlic is already very oily, it shouldn't need any more. Roasting items should be exposed to dry heat, not steam Roast until soft and medium-dark brown. When cooled slightly, pull cloves apart and lay them out on a board. Squeeze out each clove using a firm spatula or other blunt tool. This should not be too messy. Wear disposable gloves if you don't like garlic on your hands

When I grill store bought sheek kebabs I notice the oil drips out and it is coloured while being free of any curry powder though I imagine curry powder is added to the mince before they make it. I wanted to create the same thing directly so got some saturated fat, added curry powder and fried it. Now while the colour does change the powder just remains in the fat. I could filter the powder however I'm wondering where does the powder go when grilling sheek kebab\why doesn't it come out? Is it become Ive added to much or maybe because I haven't cooked for long enough e.g.few minutes frying whereas grilled sheek kebab tends to be for longer. Thanks.

Is everything sealed or is it like when cooking normally? Slow cookers are definitely not sealed. It'll release odor while cooking (which, depending on what you're making, might be pleasant!) and there's no way to get around the potential mess of transferring food to/from the cooker. You'll want at minimum to have a relatively clean, clear area where you can fill and use the cooker. That said, the enclosed and relatively weak heating elements of slow cookers generate less excess heat and can be used outside of a kitchen without too much risk. Make sure the surrounding area is relatively clean and free of flammable material for safety; make sure your electrical outlets are likewise in good working order. do I need to add water or can I use 6.8 Liters purely for food? Check out this related answer - you need some sufficient level of liquid for just about any slow-cooked recipe. I would advise you to carefully follow a recipe at first rather than going off-script and trying to develop your own. You'll be better assured of success this way. (That said: yes, 2 kilograms of chicken should fit in a cooker this large.) I want to save time Keep in mind that they don't call it a "slow" cooker for nothing. These devices are only capable of low, slow heating, and can only be used for recipes that take extended low-temperature cooking, usually at least a few hours. They can't sear, or saute, or boil; they are by design incapable of any fast cooking method. Those methods can be key to developing flavors (browning meat is often quite important) and although you can usually cook safely without them, you don't want to just skip those steps if they're called for in a recipe. Slow cookers can be convenient in that they can safely run for several hours without being actively tended (unlike, say, a pot on the stove) but how and where this will actually save you time depends on how well you can plan your cooking ahead. If you have an unpredictable schedule, limited refrigerator space to store prepared food, or simply don't want to eat the same thing a few days in a row, a slow cooker probably won't save you time, money, or aggravation. As noted by @Catija, you could consider a "multi-cooker" as an alternative; that would broaden the variety of cooking you can do, allowing the options of searing or sauteeing whether called for in a slow-cooked recipe or just if you're in a hurry to make dinner. Many of these devices will allow for pressure cooking that cuts down on overall cooking time, and they have enclosed heating elements and other safety mechanisms. Keep in mind though that this would not minimize the mess, odor, etc. of those cooking methods. Oil can splatter whether you're doing it in a pan or a fancy multi-cooker in your bedroom; the same applies to the odor, smoke, and noise involved. These devices are also generally more expensive than a traditional slow cooker, so if you have budgetary constraints you might want to try a cheap slow cooker first, figure out if it works well for you, then upgrade later on.

If cooking meat kills bacteria, and bacteria are responsible for problems with eating meat which has been left out, then why is it dangerous to eat meat which has been left out at room temperature and then thoroughly cooked? A related question mentions that "Even if the bacteria is dead, toxins can remain if the food was out too long, causing problems". However, there's no further detail given. Are these toxins as dangerous as the bacteria themselves? How long does meat have to be left out to accumulate a dangerous level of toxins and thus be dangerous even if thoroughly cooked? Are these toxins the reason for the usual guideline of keeping meat unrefrigerated for a maximum of 2 hours? update The revelation, courtesy of Aaronut, that e. coli is actually dangerous because of its toxins — which cannot be denatured at temperatures which will leave meat in an edible state — has pretty much answered this question. And also given me further incentive to stop eating meat altogether :) Our discussion (see the comments on hobodave's answer) has progressed into the realm of microbiology. Some highlights from my ongoing research: Detail on heat-shock proteins. These seem to be the reason for the importance of keeping meat at a high temperature for a period of time. Some background on heat resistance in bacteria. This also provides fascinating insight into how bacteria evolved immunity to antibiotics. Fungi.

hobodave's answer is most of the way there but I think it understates the importance of protein toxins. With the vast majority of foodborne illnesses, the bacteria aren't particularly harmful at all; what you need to worry about is the protein toxins they produce. E.Coli - probably the most well-known form of food poisoning along with Salmonella - is actually a harmless bacteria that already lives in your lower intestine. But there is a particular strain of E.Coli, notably O157:H7, that is primarily associated with food poisoning. The reason? It produces what's called a Shiga-like Toxin. E.Coli contamination is actually dangerous on two fronts. Because the bacteria are so well-adapted to surviving in the human digestive system (as I pointed out earlier, that's their primary habitat), ingesting even a relatively small number of the bacteria will result in them multiplying and producing those toxins in your gut (and the rest of the way down). This is why it normally takes several days for you to feel the effects of this type of food poisoning; that's how long it takes for them to produce the toxins in sufficient quantity for your body to notice. But they don't need to be in your gut to produce those toxins; a piece of meat at room temperature provides good enough conditions and more than enough raw material for them reproduce and emit those same toxins. So if you leave it sitting out too long, then it really doesn't matter how many bacteria you kill, you are going to end up with E.Coli poisoning fast, because you don't even need to wait for them to produce the toxins; they're already there. The problem is that you can't "kill" a protein toxin with a brief burst of heat because a protein isn't alive. It's just a protein. The temperatures and times needed to destroy that toxin would be similar to the temperatures and times needed to destroy all of the protein in the food, draining all the nutrition value and quite possibly turning it into a lump of charcoal. Salmonella seems to be a fountain of misinformation with all sorts of people saying that it doesn't produce toxins. This simply isn't true. Inside the host it produces what's called an AvrA toxin (which isn't "toxic" per se, but allows the bacteria to grow to larger numbers), and some strains can also produce a CdtB toxin, which is highly toxic. (Apparently there's also a similar toxin produced by other strains.) I'll be honest, a lot of the medical mumbo-jumbo is way beyond my ability to comprehend, but it seems that a lot of the public confusion comes from the fact that salmonella can do some nasty things even without the toxins - but that doesn't mean that the toxins themselves can't do plenty of damage even if you manage to kill the bacteria. The same applies to many other types of dangerous bacteria; C.diptheriae produce the diphtheria toxin, C.botulinum produce the botulinum toxin (botulism); even the infamous mad cow disease was, as far as we know, caused by a protein, not a bacteria, which is why it was able to be transmitted to humans even through cooked beef. Are protein toxins the only reason why the USDA insists on a maximum 4-hour cumulative danger zone? Probably not. As hobodave says, the more the bacteria multiply, the harder is to kill all of them, even at high temperatures. The figure of 74° C / 165° F that the food agencies give us for poultry is not going to kill exactly 100% of all the bacteria, and if it only kills - I'm just throwing out a number here - 99.999% of them, that may be good enough for relatively fresh poultry but won't be enough if you've got a whole bacterial colony to worry about. We can only speculate as to exactly what's entailed by the "danger zone" but my guess is that it's actually a combination of statistics, probabilities, and safety margins, which include, but are not limited to, the effects of protein toxins.