I know this is not a BBQ question but I lurk here and there is so much
food knowledge.

I grilled some Johnsonville sausages the other night. There were 2
that were not eaten. My daughter wanted to save them but just put
them back in the zip-lock bag they came in (which was not washed or
rinsed in any way).

So my possibly stupid question is since they are pork would I need to
re-heat them to a certain temperature for them to be safe?

Thank you!


Jay

www.fantasydragracing.homestead.com
www.deltabluesfestival.net

*****
If you should see me walking
Through your dreams at night
Would you please direct me
Where I ought to be
I've been looking for a crystal ball
To shed the light
To find a future in me...
*****

Jay Smith wrote:
> I know this is not a BBQ question but I lurk here and there is so much
> food knowledge.
>
> I grilled some Johnsonville sausages the other night. There were 2
> that were not eaten. My daughter wanted to save them but just put
> them back in the zip-lock bag they came in (which was not washed or
> rinsed in any way).
>
> So my possibly stupid question is since they are pork would I need to
> re-heat them to a certain temperature for them to be safe?
>
> Thank you!
>
>
> Jay
>
> www.fantasydragracing.homestead.com
> www.deltabluesfestival.net
>
> *****
> If you should see me walking
> Through your dreams at night
> Would you please direct me
> Where I ought to be
> I've been looking for a crystal ball
> To shed the light
> To find a future in me...
> *****

If they were not the pre-cooked type then yes you will have to kill the bacteria
again. I myself would throw them out and consider it a lesson learned and not
take any chances.

Chris

On 15-Jun-2009, Jay Smith > wrote:

> I know this is not a BBQ question but I lurk here and there is so much
> food knowledge.
>
> I grilled some Johnsonville sausages the other night.

Grilling is definitely On Topic.

> There were 2
> that were not eaten.

Uncommon for this group, but it does happen.


> My daughter wanted to save them but just put
> them back in the zip-lock bag they came in (which was not washed or
> rinsed in any way).

That zip-lock is highly suspect since it likely sat out on the counter
whilst
all that grilling and eating was going on.

>
> So my possibly stupid question is since they are pork would I need to
> re-heat them to a certain temperature for them to be safe?
>
> Thank you!
>
>
> Jay

I would eat them withing about two days and definitely heat them good
before eating. I'd guess that 165 deg for a minute or two should render
them reasonably safe. There's some food police in the group that can
likely supply a more accurate number.

--
Brick (Youth is wasted on young people)

Jay Smith wrote:

> I know this is not a BBQ question but I lurk here and there is so much
> food knowledge.
>
> I grilled some Johnsonville sausages the other night. There were 2
> that were not eaten. My daughter wanted to save them but just put
> them back in the zip-lock bag they came in (which was not washed or
> rinsed in any way).
>
> So my possibly stupid question is since they are pork would I need to
> re-heat them to a certain temperature for them to be safe?

Pork is not an issue here. Pork is no more susceptible to bacteria
than any other type of meat once it's been cooked.

Though most official recommendations for cooked meat shelf life is
2-3 days, I think that's too conservative, and one can't help
but think lawyers are involved in coming up with such conservative
figures. I have no problem keeping cooked meat for up to 5 days in
the fridge.

Throwing out meat just because it was cooked a few days ago is
just a waste of food.

I also feel the need to add... if you do have reason to believe food may
be spoiled, reheating doesn't necessarily solve the problem. Even if
you kill the bacteria, you won't necessarily destroy the endotoxins
that some bacteria leave behind unless you cook it the the point
that it's no longer recognizable as food. Recooking is not a
magic bullet.

On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:39:47 GMT, "Brick"
> wrote:

>> There were 2
>> that were not eaten.
>
>Uncommon for this group, but it does happen.

LOL... Well I have lurked enough to know THAT!!! ;-)

Thanks for all of the replies. I am thinking better safe than sorry
but also though getting a little education here would be good too!


Jay

www.fantasydragracing.homestead.com
www.deltabluesfestival.net

*****
If you should see me walking
Through your dreams at night
Would you please direct me
Where I ought to be
I've been looking for a crystal ball
To shed the light
To find a future in me...
*****

On Jun 15, 10:23*am, Jay Smith > wrote:
> I know this is not a BBQ question but I lurk here and there is so much
> food *knowledge.
>
> I grilled some Johnsonville sausages the other night. *There were 2
> that were not eaten. *My daughter wanted to save them but just put
> them back in the zip-lock bag they came in (which was not washed or
> rinsed in any way).
>
> So my possibly stupid question is since they are pork would I need to
> re-heat them to a certain temperature for them to be safe?



We have a simple rule here - When in doubt,, throw it out!

-frohe

On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:23:43 -0700 (PDT), frohe >
wrote:

>On Jun 15, 10:23*am, Jay Smith > wrote:
>> I know this is not a BBQ question but I lurk here and there is so much
>> food *knowledge.
>>
>> I grilled some Johnsonville sausages the other night. *There were 2
>> that were not eaten. *My daughter wanted to save them but just put
>> them back in the zip-lock bag they came in (which was not washed or
>> rinsed in any way).
>>
>> So my possibly stupid question is since they are pork would I need to
>> re-heat them to a certain temperature for them to be safe?
>
>
>
>We have a simple rule here - When in doubt,, throw it out!
>
>-frohe

Yes, I've had food poisoning (several years ago), and I can't
recommend it.


Desideria

On Jun 15, 5:23*pm, frohe > wrote:

> We have a simple rule here - When in doubt,, throw it out!
>
> -frohe

Same here. Food poisoning is painful and unnecessary. For some
folks, quite dangerous.

Those sausages would now be catfish bait, or in the trash. I wouldn't
feed anything like that I had doubts about to the dog, either.

Robert

"Nunya Bidnits" > wrote in message
...
> In ,
> RegForte > typed:
>> Jay Smith wrote:
>>
>>> I know this is not a BBQ question but I lurk here and there is so
>>> much food knowledge.
>>>
>>> I grilled some Johnsonville sausages the other night. There were 2
>>> that were not eaten. My daughter wanted to save them but just put
>>> them back in the zip-lock bag they came in (which was not washed or
>>> rinsed in any way).
>>>
>>> So my possibly stupid question is since they are pork would I need to
>>> re-heat them to a certain temperature for them to be safe?
>>
>> Pork is not an issue here. Pork is no more susceptible to bacteria
>> than any other type of meat once it's been cooked.
>>
>> Though most official recommendations for cooked meat shelf life is
>> 2-3 days, I think that's too conservative, and one can't help
>> but think lawyers are involved in coming up with such conservative
>> figures. I have no problem keeping cooked meat for up to 5 days in
>> the fridge.
>>
>> Throwing out meat just because it was cooked a few days ago is
>> just a waste of food.
>>
>> I also feel the need to add... if you do have reason to believe food
>> may be spoiled, reheating doesn't necessarily solve the problem. Even
>> if you kill the bacteria, you won't necessarily destroy the endotoxins
>> that some bacteria leave behind unless you cook it the the point
>> that it's no longer recognizable as food. Recooking is not a
>> magic bullet.
>
> Thank you for posting that. I have tried many times to convince people
> that
> they cannot unspoil food by cooking it. You might kill harmful bacteria
> but
> you can't unchange the chemical byproducts of bacterial activity. You
> wouldn't put a toxic chemical in a hamburger and expect cooking would make
> it safe to eat. If it's not alive, you can't kill it.
>
> I know one fellow who thinks deep frying is the thing to do with food that
> is on the edge of spoiling. He firmly believes that 375 degree oil will
> fix
> anything. I love fried food but I avoid it at his house.
>
> OTOH I agree with you about the fact that the rules on keeping raw and
> cooked food are pretty conservative. But those rules have to take into
> account variations in habits, refrigerators, and intelligence, so I
> understand why the rules are written the way they are written. I tend to
> go
> by nose, by color, by feel, and by common sense, as well as age of the
> food.

Interesting. The last food service management class I took (2008) the
instructor stated that if it smells bad, it probally won't hurt you.
Apparently, the real nasties don't have an appearance / odor signature.
That's what makes then really dangerous. I still wouldn't eat/serve
anything with a funky smell. (Unlike my Father, who lived through the
depression. He would eat sh!t that he KNEW would make him sick. In the name
of not wasting it.)

> For example, if meat has been in a cooler with ice which has melted and
> had
> more added several times while out in the summer heat, and the meat has a
> slimy feel or off odor, then even if the package date said it was stlll
> good
> I would toss it.
>
> MartyB in KC
>

Shawn Martin wrote:


> Interesting. The last food service management class I took (2008) the
> instructor stated that if it smells bad, it probally won't hurt you.
> Apparently, the real nasties don't have an appearance / odor signature.
> That's what makes then really dangerous. I still wouldn't eat/serve
> anything with a funky smell. (Unlike my Father, who lived through the
> depression. He would eat sh!t that he KNEW would make him sick. In the name
> of not wasting it.)



It's interesting that they would tell you that in an FSM class.
Can I ask where/who it was exactly? Just wondering.

It's true that you can't see/smell the effects of food born pathogens.
However, you can't make the statement that, therefore, if it -does-
look/smell bad then means it's necessarily -safe- to eat.

Think about it. A carcass has been laying in the road for a month.
In the summer. It obviously will smell pretty bad. That means
it's safe to eat ??

RegForte wrote:

> It's true that you can't see/smell the effects of food born pathogens.

Cadaverine moreso than putresine, but both are toxic and are responsible
for the the odor of rotten meats. But I don't know if they're considered
pathogens, technically.

-sw

On Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:25:41 -0500, Nunya Bidnits wrote:

> Bingo. If it's been around long enough to get stinky, it's been around long
> enough to get dangerous. Unless it's cheese, of course.

Yeah, right. Tell that to my girlfriend with the pinkie-toe fetish.

-sw

"RegForte" > wrote in message
...
> Shawn Martin wrote:
>
>
>> Interesting. The last food service management class I took (2008) the
>> instructor stated that if it smells bad, it probally won't hurt you.
>> Apparently, the real nasties don't have an appearance / odor signature.
>> That's what makes then really dangerous. I still wouldn't eat/serve
>> anything with a funky smell. (Unlike my Father, who lived through the
>> depression. He would eat sh!t that he KNEW would make him sick. In the
>> name of not wasting it.)
>
>
>
> It's interesting that they would tell you that in an FSM class.
> Can I ask where/who it was exactly? Just wondering.

They didn't say it was OK to serve it; just that the really dangerous
critters have no outward signs of infection.

>
> It's true that you can't see/smell the effects of food born pathogens.
> However, you can't make the statement that, therefore, if it -does-
> look/smell bad then means it's necessarily -safe- to eat.

Again, I / they didn't say it was safe to eat, just that it probably
wouldn't hurt you. (As in permanent damage)
>
> Think about it. A carcass has been laying in the road for a month.
> In the summer. It obviously will smell pretty bad. That means
> it's safe to eat ??

See above

Shawn Martin wrote:


> Again, I / they didn't say it was safe to eat, just that it probably
> wouldn't hurt you. (As in permanent damage)
>


That's even weirder, but ok.

Probably shouldn't have asked.
Anyway, happy Qing.

"Nunya Bidnits" > wrote in message
...
> In . com,
> Shawn Martin > typed:
>> "RegForte" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Shawn Martin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Interesting. The last food service management class I took (2008)
>>>> the instructor stated that if it smells bad, it probally won't hurt
>>>> you. Apparently, the real nasties don't have an appearance / odor
>>>> signature. That's what makes then really dangerous. I still
>>>> wouldn't eat/serve anything with a funky smell. (Unlike my Father,
>>>> who lived through the depression. He would eat sh!t that he KNEW
>>>> would make him sick. In the name of not wasting it.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's interesting that they would tell you that in an FSM class.
>>> Can I ask where/who it was exactly? Just wondering.
>>
>> They didn't say it was OK to serve it; just that the really dangerous
>> critters have no outward signs of infection.
>>
>>>
>>> It's true that you can't see/smell the effects of food born
>>> pathogens. However, you can't make the statement that, therefore, if
>>> it -does- look/smell bad then means it's necessarily -safe- to eat.
>>
>> Again, I / they didn't say it was safe to eat, just that it probably
>> wouldn't hurt you. (As in permanent damage)
>
> Personally speaking, if I only get sick for say, four days, because some
> fool nitwit took chances serving spoiled food who had reason to know
> better
> (i.e., caterer, restaurant, or other reasonable presumption of someone
> with
> a basic food safety class), there will be war and I will win.
>
> Any food professional who uses "no permanent damage" as the criteria for
> whether food is safe to eat should be redflagged and put out of business.
>
> It doesn't take permanent damage to get sued, inspected, and newsed out of
> existence. It happens all the time. No offense but it sounds like whoever
> was teaching that class is an imbecile. Food service management class is
> NOT
> a food safety class. Food service management teaches you not to waste
> food.
> Food safety class teaches you to know when food is dangerous, and when to
> throw it the hell out. The reason the two are separate should be obvious.
>
> MartyB in KC
>
>

All true Marty. But the point of the whole conversation was that the REALLY
dangerous pathogens have no taste or odor.

And yes, it was a Safety class. Taught by the state of Texas.

this thread puts me off wanting to ever eat in Texas, I took this class in
IL a fe years back, rule was, looks, off, smells off, feels off, its off the
menu, Lee
"Shawn Martin" > wrote in message
. com...
>
> "Nunya Bidnits" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In . com,
>> Shawn Martin > typed:
>>> "RegForte" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Shawn Martin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Interesting. The last food service management class I took (2008)
>>>>> the instructor stated that if it smells bad, it probally won't hurt
>>>>> you. Apparently, the real nasties don't have an appearance / odor
>>>>> signature. That's what makes then really dangerous. I still
>>>>> wouldn't eat/serve anything with a funky smell. (Unlike my Father,
>>>>> who lived through the depression. He would eat sh!t that he KNEW
>>>>> would make him sick. In the name of not wasting it.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's interesting that they would tell you that in an FSM class.
>>>> Can I ask where/who it was exactly? Just wondering.
>>>
>>> They didn't say it was OK to serve it; just that the really dangerous
>>> critters have no outward signs of infection.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's true that you can't see/smell the effects of food born
>>>> pathogens. However, you can't make the statement that, therefore, if
>>>> it -does- look/smell bad then means it's necessarily -safe- to eat.
>>>
>>> Again, I / they didn't say it was safe to eat, just that it probably
>>> wouldn't hurt you. (As in permanent damage)
>>
>> Personally speaking, if I only get sick for say, four days, because some
>> fool nitwit took chances serving spoiled food who had reason to know
>> better
>> (i.e., caterer, restaurant, or other reasonable presumption of someone
>> with
>> a basic food safety class), there will be war and I will win.
>>
>> Any food professional who uses "no permanent damage" as the criteria for
>> whether food is safe to eat should be redflagged and put out of business.
>>
>> It doesn't take permanent damage to get sued, inspected, and newsed out
>> of
>> existence. It happens all the time. No offense but it sounds like whoever
>> was teaching that class is an imbecile. Food service management class is
>> NOT
>> a food safety class. Food service management teaches you not to waste
>> food.
>> Food safety class teaches you to know when food is dangerous, and when to
>> throw it the hell out. The reason the two are separate should be obvious.
>>
>> MartyB in KC
>>
>>
>
> All true Marty. But the point of the whole conversation was that the
> REALLY dangerous pathogens have no taste or odor.
>
> And yes, it was a Safety class. Taught by the state of Texas.
>

btw i just remembered that the guy who taught our class said that the slime
in effect was excremint of and bodys of the bad stuff, Lee
"Nunya Bidnits" > wrote in message
...
> In . com,
> Shawn Martin > typed:
>> "Nunya Bidnits" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In . com,
>>> Shawn Martin > typed:
>>>> "RegForte" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Shawn Martin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Interesting. The last food service management class I took (2008)
>>>>>> the instructor stated that if it smells bad, it probally won't
>>>>>> hurt you. Apparently, the real nasties don't have an appearance /
>>>>>> odor signature. That's what makes then really dangerous. I still
>>>>>> wouldn't eat/serve anything with a funky smell. (Unlike my
>>>>>> Father, who lived through the depression. He would eat sh!t that
>>>>>> he KNEW would make him sick. In the name of not wasting it.)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's interesting that they would tell you that in an FSM class.
>>>>> Can I ask where/who it was exactly? Just wondering.
>>>>
>>>> They didn't say it was OK to serve it; just that the really
>>>> dangerous critters have no outward signs of infection.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's true that you can't see/smell the effects of food born
>>>>> pathogens. However, you can't make the statement that, therefore,
>>>>> if it -does- look/smell bad then means it's necessarily -safe- to
>>>>> eat.
>>>>
>>>> Again, I / they didn't say it was safe to eat, just that it probably
>>>> wouldn't hurt you. (As in permanent damage)
>>>
>>> Personally speaking, if I only get sick for say, four days, because
>>> some fool nitwit took chances serving spoiled food who had reason to
>>> know better
>>> (i.e., caterer, restaurant, or other reasonable presumption of
>>> someone with
>>> a basic food safety class), there will be war and I will win.
>>>
>>> Any food professional who uses "no permanent damage" as the criteria
>>> for whether food is safe to eat should be redflagged and put out of
>>> business.
>>>
>>> It doesn't take permanent damage to get sued, inspected, and newsed
>>> out of existence. It happens all the time. No offense but it sounds
>>> like whoever was teaching that class is an imbecile. Food service
>>> management class is NOT
>>> a food safety class. Food service management teaches you not to waste
>>> food.
>>> Food safety class teaches you to know when food is dangerous, and
>>> when to throw it the hell out. The reason the two are separate
>>> should be obvious.
>>>
>>> MartyB in KC
>>>
>>>
>>
>> All true Marty. But the point of the whole conversation was that the
>> REALLY dangerous pathogens have no taste or odor.
>>
>> And yes, it was a Safety class. Taught by the state of Texas.
>
> The point, IMO, should be that if you smell those odors, the likelihood
> that
> those pathogens are present is pretty high as well, even if they aren't
> making the odor. That doesn't mean you don't also have to go by storage
> age
> and refrigeration history as well, to be as safe as possible. But I bet
> you
> can't find any food science instructor who would disagree with the idea
> that
> stinky food has a high potential for being dangerous food as well.
>
> You had called it a food service management class before, so I took that
> literally. As in how to plan meals and calculate, budget, buy, store, and
> preserve the foods you need to prepare over a given period of time.
>
> MartyB in KC
>

I took the same type class and I have always said, if my snout doesn't like
the smell, if the meat feels slimy or weird, my mouth doesn't need to eat
whatever it is. I see people cook pork that "might be a day older than it
should be" and I shudder. Have seen a few get sick from doing this. The
idea that the heat will kill the bad stuff just isn't true.
"Stormmee" > wrote in message
...
> this thread puts me off wanting to ever eat in Texas, I took this class in
> IL a fe years back, rule was, looks, off, smells off, feels off, its off
> the menu, Lee
> "Shawn Martin" > wrote in message
> . com...
>>
>> "Nunya Bidnits" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> In . com,
>>> Shawn Martin > typed:
>>>> "RegForte" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Shawn Martin wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Interesting. The last food service management class I took (2008)
>>>>>> the instructor stated that if it smells bad, it probally won't hurt
>>>>>> you. Apparently, the real nasties don't have an appearance / odor
>>>>>> signature. That's what makes then really dangerous. I still
>>>>>> wouldn't eat/serve anything with a funky smell. (Unlike my Father,
>>>>>> who lived through the depression. He would eat sh!t that he KNEW
>>>>>> would make him sick. In the name of not wasting it.)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's interesting that they would tell you that in an FSM class.
>>>>> Can I ask where/who it was exactly? Just wondering.
>>>>
>>>> They didn't say it was OK to serve it; just that the really dangerous
>>>> critters have no outward signs of infection.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It's true that you can't see/smell the effects of food born
>>>>> pathogens. However, you can't make the statement that, therefore, if
>>>>> it -does- look/smell bad then means it's necessarily -safe- to eat.
>>>>
>>>> Again, I / they didn't say it was safe to eat, just that it probably
>>>> wouldn't hurt you. (As in permanent damage)
>>>
>>> Personally speaking, if I only get sick for say, four days, because some
>>> fool nitwit took chances serving spoiled food who had reason to know
>>> better
>>> (i.e., caterer, restaurant, or other reasonable presumption of someone
>>> with
>>> a basic food safety class), there will be war and I will win.
>>>
>>> Any food professional who uses "no permanent damage" as the criteria for
>>> whether food is safe to eat should be redflagged and put out of
>>> business.
>>>
>>> It doesn't take permanent damage to get sued, inspected, and newsed out
>>> of
>>> existence. It happens all the time. No offense but it sounds like
>>> whoever
>>> was teaching that class is an imbecile. Food service management class is
>>> NOT
>>> a food safety class. Food service management teaches you not to waste
>>> food.
>>> Food safety class teaches you to know when food is dangerous, and when
>>> to
>>> throw it the hell out. The reason the two are separate should be
>>> obvious.
>>>
>>> MartyB in KC
>>>
>>>
>>
>> All true Marty. But the point of the whole conversation was that the
>> REALLY dangerous pathogens have no taste or odor.
>>
>> And yes, it was a Safety class. Taught by the state of Texas.
>>
>
>