JoeSpareBedroom wrote:

> Our local paper carried a story about this a couple of years ago. Some food
> scientist from Cornell did a simple experiment: He cooked a bunch of steaks
> various ways, and weighed them carefully afterward. The "seal in the juices"
> method was, in fact, bullshit. More weight was lost with that method due to
> lost liquid, and the opposite came from cooking over very low heat. But, it
> doesn't matter.

I would disagree that a test as you described it would accurately measure the
juices that are supposed to be locked in. There is a variety of consistency in
the meat of a seared steak. the outside is a little harder and drier while the
inside is nice anc moist. At least, they are when I do them the way I like them,
raw or almost raw in the middle. Then there is the fat, which tends to melt off
in hot pan.

A proper test would have to break down the various components of the meat to
measure the amount of fat, the amount of water and to test the inner part. The
idea of searing meat to lock in juices, as I understand it. leads to the
browning of the outside of the meat, making it a little drier and tougher
texture, but the inside is nice and juicy.