On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 18:50:05 +0100, "Christophe Bachmann"
> wrote:

>Last nights unrefrigerated pasta will not be dubious this evening, and even
>the meat sauce if well cooked, stored in as small a jar as possible with a
>closed lid (to minimise oxydation and contamination) will hold very well
>for a day or two out of the fridge, if you have a cool spot to put it in.

Two points: A "cool spot" may be hard to come by in many
climates/seasons. Since I was thinking about the era before
refrigeration, it would also be before air-conditioning, which usually
isn't used to cool lower than about 70F anyhow. Second, food storage
guidelines, conservative to be sure, in the US dictate that cooked and
many raw foods can be kept between 40F and 140F (4C to 60C) for no
longer than 4 hours to avoid possibly harmful bacterial growth. These
'rules' are guidelines for home food storage and requirements for
restaurants. While my house is quite cold, it's all well above 4C,
except in the 'fridge.

>Let's not forget that conditions of life were quite different then from
>now, and that people knew far better what could be held, in what
>conditions, and how long.

Hmmm. They knew "far better" about the causes and effects of
food-borne illness (and death)? I don't think so. Scientists and
researchers had a hard time selling the 'germ theory' about the cause
and spread of disease -- how could something you can't see hurt you?
The world before knowledge of 'germs' was far from germ-free.

> And let's also not forget that these people were
>raised in conditions of hygiene that were far less stringent than they are
>today, and so could far better cope with the slight contamination levels
>they faced and modern sanitation practices (and they are far more stringent
>in the USA than in most of Europe) lowered our tolerance level to these
>contaminants. (I don't say it's bad.) I just remember that in the 1970s
>still some things were routinely done to food that would be absolutely out
>today.

I agree that over-sanitation/sterilization has gotten way out of hand,
and also that naturally-acquired immunity from mild exposure to many
diseases may indeed be beneficial. In fact, as far as I've been able
to determine, deaths and even serious illness (in the west) from food
sources is rather rare. However, just because something looks and
smells OK doesn't mean it isn't growing tiny critters.
>
>> We have whole cookbooks of 'leftover' recipes, based on the idea that
>> Tuesday's roast becomes Thursday's hash, and Sunday's chicken,
>> Wednesday's chicken salad.
>>
>> It must have been *very* hard work to shop for and prepare relatively
>> 'new' meals each day.
>
>Absolutely not, a lot of cooked meals can be kept a few days without
>refrigeration if you respect these basic rules :

>- If you at all can, use a preservation method, canning, laying underwater,
>coating with fat, honey or salt, dessicate... etc.

Yes, this is true of preserving foods. Does not apply to Sunday's
roast chicken. My (most recent) contention is that it would have been
a whole lot of *work* to not be able to shove something in the 'fridge
for a few days (or freezer for a couple of months).

>- Store cool and far from drafts

"Far from drafts?" Is this leftover meat sauce or a parekeet? :-)

>- Know well the tolerance of your products, some hold overnight, some hold
>a few days and some hold a few weeks.

I certainly keep more things in the 'fridge than strictly necessary.
Particularly when the ambient temperature is low. However, I don't
think I'd want to eat a mayonnaise-based salad (tuna, chicken, potato)
after a day unfrigerated. Pizza? Yes. Pasta with meat sauce? I don't
think so. In fact, outside of hard sausage, or country salt-cured ham,
I wouldn't be happy with any meat/fish/poultry thing, cooked or raw,
that had lingered untimely at room temperature, not matter how
well-covered.

>And most cookbooks before refrigeration give the tolerance of the finished
>product, stating how long the product keeps.*

I think I'll lean toward the USDA and CDC rather than Mrs. Beeton. :-)