"Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
> Default User said...
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I've also noticed that cleaning them without water concerntrates their
>>> flavour and means that when they are cooked they dont release Excess
>>> water as the water content in mushrooms is quite high! (Similiar to
>>> cucumber in a way!)
>>
>> How would that work? As stated elsewhere, mushrooms don't absorb water
>> during washing.
>
>
> Mushroom don't absorb water?? Says who???
>
> Andy
>

Sez me. Not in the 2 seconds it takes to wash each mushroom. If you take
longer, you're doing it wrong.

Youse got a problem wit dat?

"Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
> Default User said...
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I've also noticed that cleaning them without water concerntrates their
>>> flavour and means that when they are cooked they dont release Excess
>>> water as the water content in mushrooms is quite high! (Similiar to
>>> cucumber in a way!)
>>
>> How would that work? As stated elsewhere, mushrooms don't absorb water
>> during washing.
>
>
> Mushroom don't absorb water?? Says who???
>

They do.

cybercat said...

>
> "Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
>> Default User said...
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I've also noticed that cleaning them without water concerntrates
their
>>>> flavour and means that when they are cooked they dont release Excess
>>>> water as the water content in mushrooms is quite high! (Similiar to
>>>> cucumber in a way!)
>>>
>>> How would that work? As stated elsewhere, mushrooms don't absorb
water
>>> during washing.
>>
>>
>> Mushroom don't absorb water?? Says who???
>>
>
> They do.



Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap then dump
it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.

Andy

"Andy" <q> wrote

> cybercat said...

>>> Mushroom don't absorb water?? Says who???

>> They do.

> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap then dump
> it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.

Alton did that already. Even when he got up to soaking the things
there was no appreciable weight gain.

nancy

cybercat wrote:

>
> "Andy" <q> wrote in message
> ...
> > Default User said...
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > I've also noticed that cleaning them without water
> > > > concerntrates their flavour and means that when they are cooked
> > > > they dont release Excess water as the water content in
> > > > mushrooms is quite high! (Similiar to cucumber in a way!)
> > >
> > > How would that work? As stated elsewhere, mushrooms don't absorb
> > > water during washing.
> >
> >
> > Mushroom don't absorb water?? Says who???
> >
>
> They do.

The mushrooms say that?

At any rate, this was answered elsewhere, Alton Brown thoroughly
investigated the situation in his kitchen myths show.



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

Nancy Young said...

>
> "Andy" <q> wrote
>
>> cybercat said...
>
>>>> Mushroom don't absorb water?? Says who???
>
>>> They do.
>
>> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap then
>> dump it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.
>
> Alton did that already. Even when he got up to soaking the things
> there was no appreciable weight gain.
>
> nancy


Alton this... Alton that...

[pout]

"Andy" <q> wrote

> Nancy Young said...

>> "Andy" <q> wrote

>>> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap then
>>> dump it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.
>>
>> Alton did that already. Even when he got up to soaking the things
>> there was no appreciable weight gain.

> Alton this... Alton that...
>
> [pout]

He da man.

nancy

"Andy" <q> wrote :
>>>
>>>
>>> Mushroom don't absorb water?? Says who???
>>>
>>
>> They do.
>
>
>
> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap then dump
> it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.
>

I guess I could ... but I don't need to.

I can tell by the way they behave when cooked.

(I don't know who Alton is, and I don't care.)

"Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
> cybercat said...
>
>>
>> "Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
>>> Default User said...
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I've also noticed that cleaning them without water concerntrates
> their
>>>>> flavour and means that when they are cooked they dont release Excess
>>>>> water as the water content in mushrooms is quite high! (Similiar to
>>>>> cucumber in a way!)
>>>>
>>>> How would that work? As stated elsewhere, mushrooms don't absorb
> water
>>>> during washing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Mushroom don't absorb water?? Says who???
>>>
>>
>> They do.
>
>
>
> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap then dump
> it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.


When will you be getting your GED, Andrew?

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Andy" <q> wrote
>
>> Nancy Young said...
>
>>> "Andy" <q> wrote
>
>>>> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap then
>>>> dump it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.
>>>
>>> Alton did that already. Even when he got up to soaking the things
>>> there was no appreciable weight gain.
>
>> Alton this... Alton that...
>>
>> [pout]
>
> He da man.
>
> nancy

No. Your science teacher was da woman/man. Andrew apparently ate his teacher
before anything happened in class.

JoeSpareBedroom said...

> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message
> . ..
>>
>> "Andy" <q> wrote
>>
>>> Nancy Young said...
>>
>>>> "Andy" <q> wrote
>>
>>>>> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap
>>>>> then dump it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.
>>>>
>>>> Alton did that already. Even when he got up to soaking the things
>>>> there was no appreciable weight gain.
>>
>>> Alton this... Alton that...
>>>
>>> [pout]
>>
>> He da man.
>>
>> nancy
>
> No. Your science teacher was da woman/man. Andrew apparently ate his
> teacher before anything happened in class.


My teachers agreed I should be an astronaut. Something about taking up
space in school...

Andy

How to clean and cook all those mushrooms from China town? lol

Green Mtn. Griller wrote:

"Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
> JoeSpareBedroom said...
>
>> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>>
>>> "Andy" <q> wrote
>>>
>>>> Nancy Young said...
>>>
>>>>> "Andy" <q> wrote
>>>
>>>>>> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap
>>>>>> then dump it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alton did that already. Even when he got up to soaking the things
>>>>> there was no appreciable weight gain.
>>>
>>>> Alton this... Alton that...
>>>>
>>>> [pout]
>>>
>>> He da man.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>
>> No. Your science teacher was da woman/man. Andrew apparently ate his
>> teacher before anything happened in class.
>
>
> My teachers agreed I should be an astronaut. Something about taking up
> space in school...
>
> Andy

{drum crash!}

Is this an audience or an oil painting?
-Henny Youngman

cybercat wrote:

>
> "Andy" <q> wrote :
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Mushroom don't absorb water?? Says who???
> > > >
> > >
> > > They do.
> >
> >
> >
> > Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap
> > then dump it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.
> >
>
> I guess I could ... but I don't need to.
>
> I can tell by the way they behave when cooked.
>
> (I don't know who Alton is, and I don't care.)

Alton Brown, host of the "Good Eats" Food Network show. He did an
episode devoted to kitchen myths. Mushrooms don't absorb water! Searing
meat doesn't seal in juices (no matter what Emeril says)!



Brian

--
If televison's a babysitter, the Internet is a drunk librarian who
won't shut up.
-- Dorothy Gambrell (http://catandgirl.com)

"Andy" <q> wrote in message ...
> JoeSpareBedroom said...
>
>> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>>
>>> "Andy" <q> wrote
>>>
>>>> Nancy Young said...
>>>
>>>>> "Andy" <q> wrote
>>>
>>>>>> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap
>>>>>> then dump it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alton did that already. Even when he got up to soaking the things
>>>>> there was no appreciable weight gain.
>>>
>>>> Alton this... Alton that...
>>>>
>>>> [pout]
>>>
>>> He da man.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>
>> No. Your science teacher was da woman/man. Andrew apparently ate his
>> teacher before anything happened in class.
>
>
> My teachers agreed I should be an astronaut. Something about taking up
> space in school...
>
hahaha!



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

>
> > Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap then dump
> > it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.I guess I could ... but I don't need to.
>
> I can tell by the way they behave when cooked.
>
> (I don't know who Alton is, and I don't care.)
>
>

Why do you guys talk about mushrooms as if they were one? Ink caps
absorb water, but boletus or agaircus do not. How many of you pick
them, and how many varieties? Next you will be saying that they have no
taste of their own.

"Sheldon" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Green Mtn. Griller wrote:
>> "Steve Pope" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > aem > wrote:
>> >
>> >>Green Mtn. Griller wrote:
>> >
>> >>> Years ago I was taught that the only way to clean mushrooms was with
>> >>> a
>> >>> damp
>> >>> towel or with one of those little soft-bristle brushes. That rinsing
>> >>> them
>> >>> under water, either standing or running, was bad as that method
>> >>> washed
>> >>> away
>> >>> taste and the mushrooms would absorb water. Recently, I started
>> >>> rinsing
>> >>> them under running water and patting them dry. Can't say that I've
>> >>> really
>> >>> noticed a difference. Any insights on this? (Yeah, I gotta get a
>> >>> life...)
>> >
>> >>Julia Child had a similar experience, eventually coming around to
>> >>saying there was nothing wrong with rinsing mushrooms or dipping them
>> >>in a bowl of water, as long as it was brief and you dried them
>> >>afterwards. True, they are little sponges, but they aren't so fast at
>> >>absorbing water that a quick rinse will spoil them. -aem
>> >
>> > Plus, damp towels are ideal germ incubators. Do not use a damp
>> > towel for anything in the kitchen, especially cleaning something
>> > that's about to go into a salad raw.
>> >
>> > Steve
>>
>> The damp towels were always paper towels, guess I should have specified
>> that. They didn't last too long before being tossed.
>
> Um, they mean a *clean* damp towel, not one you just used to wipe the
> floor or your stupid ass... what a dumb shit you are... didn't always
> have "always" paper towels you juvenile snot.
>
> Where do they find these moroons...
>
>
> Sheldon
>

Now why do you have to start calling names? And I'm juvenile?! I'll
attribute the first part of your reply to the statement from the person who
brought up germ incubators. But, I do know that we didn't always have
"always" paper towels, or "any other" paper towels; not until 1907, anyway.
What I meant, hopefully you can comprehend this time, was that paper towels,
as opposed to cloth towels, were always used to clean the mushrooms. You
miserable old ******.

"JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
...
> "jay" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 11:56:53 GMT, Joe in the SpareBedroom wrote:
>>
>>>and several thousand messages in this newsgroup.
>>
>> And so far most of 'em are yours. lol
>
> I'm simply astounded sometimes at how fearful some people are when it
> comes to experimenting, or believing the results that are right in front
> of them.
>

Obviously, I wasn't afraid to experiment. Nor did I disbelieve the results.
I was just asking what others thought about the subject.

"JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote in message
...
> "Green Mtn. Griller" > wrote in message
> news:yOTZg.5623$5v5.1814@trndny08...
>> Years ago I was taught that the only way to clean mushrooms was with a
>> damp towel or with one of those little soft-bristle brushes. That
>> rinsing them under water, either standing or running, was bad as that
>> method washed away taste and the mushrooms would absorb water. Recently,
>> I started rinsing them under running water and patting them dry. Can't
>> say that I've really noticed a difference. Any insights on this? (Yeah,
>> I gotta get a life...)
>
> Where's your confidence? You said you didn't notice a difference. That's
> the end of that. You are happy with your technique.
>

I'm confident enough. Curious, also. I didn't ask how I should clean the
mushrooms. I asked if anyone had any insights on the subject. That's all.
Sometimes it's called "starting a conversation."

Dave Smith wrote:
> Default User wrote:
> >
> > Alton Brown, host of the "Good Eats" Food Network show. He did an
> > episode devoted to kitchen myths. Mushrooms don't absorb water! Searing
> > meat doesn't seal in juices (no matter what Emeril says)!
> >
>
> I will buy the deal about mushrooms not absorbing water, but when I cook
> steaks or chops I slap them on a hot pan or grill pan to sear and then turn
> the heat down, and they turn out tender and juicy.

Yes, that's a good way to cook steaks but that doesn't mean that
searing has sealed in juices. You give them high heat at first to
create more flavor (the Maillard reaction, I think). Think about it:
every bite you take you can feel that the outside surface is firmer and
drier than the inside. That doesn't mean you trapped juices inside a
shell, it just means you dried out the surface. The tenderest steak
would be cooked over very low heat, but it wouldn't taste as good
because of no char/fond creation and it wouldn't have that contrast of
textures that you enjoy without even noticing. -aem

Andy wrote:

> Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap then dump
> it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.

Rinsing them off while rubbing them with thumb and finger works for me. I
just had some sautéed mushrooms with my dinner tonight. They were wonderful
and i just can't accept that rinsing them causing them any harm.

"aem" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> Default User wrote:
>> >
>> > Alton Brown, host of the "Good Eats" Food Network show. He did an
>> > episode devoted to kitchen myths. Mushrooms don't absorb water! Searing
>> > meat doesn't seal in juices (no matter what Emeril says)!
>> >
>>
>> I will buy the deal about mushrooms not absorbing water, but when I cook
>> steaks or chops I slap them on a hot pan or grill pan to sear and then
>> turn
>> the heat down, and they turn out tender and juicy.
>
> Yes, that's a good way to cook steaks but that doesn't mean that
> searing has sealed in juices. You give them high heat at first to
> create more flavor (the Maillard reaction, I think). Think about it:
> every bite you take you can feel that the outside surface is firmer and
> drier than the inside. That doesn't mean you trapped juices inside a
> shell, it just means you dried out the surface. The tenderest steak
> would be cooked over very low heat, but it wouldn't taste as good
> because of no char/fond creation and it wouldn't have that contrast of
> textures that you enjoy without even noticing. -aem
>

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. People like what they like, and they will also do whatever
their parents told them to do because there are so few traditions that are
easy to hang onto. I had a neighbor who used to warm up his 1990 Chevy
pickup for 45 minutes every day because "Poppy said it was the best thing to
do", even in summer.

Default User wrote:

>
> > > Weigh a mushroom. take an ounce of water and pour it in the cap
> > > then dump it out. Re-weigh the mushroom.
> > >
> >
> > I guess I could ... but I don't need to.
> >
> > I can tell by the way they behave when cooked.
> >
> > (I don't know who Alton is, and I don't care.)
>
> Alton Brown, host of the "Good Eats" Food Network show. He did an
> episode devoted to kitchen myths. Mushrooms don't absorb water! Searing
> meat doesn't seal in juices (no matter what Emeril says)!
>

I will buy the deal about mushrooms not absorbing water, but when I cook
steaks or chops I slap them on a hot pan or grill pan to sear and then turn
the heat down, and they turn out tender and juicy.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> 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.
>
>

Seriously, it doesn't matter. I know people who fancy themselves to be
serious cooks. And yet, they buy Jif smooth peanut butter.

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.

On Oct 20, 9:24 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
> "Zywicki" > wrote in ooglegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > On Oct 19, 7:38 pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:
> >> Plus, damp towels are ideal germ incubators. Do not use a damp
> >> towel for anything in the kitchen, especially cleaning something
> >> that's about to go into a salad raw.
>
> >> Steve
>
>> have an amazing machine that allows me to have towels that do not
>>harbor germs, and reduces the amount of waste generated by paper towels
>>(not that I care much about that.)

>>This might sound funny, but it also allows me to use clothing made of
>>cloth instead of paper.

>>Greg Zywicki

>Sounds interesting. Is this the machine?http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/ar...rimentsmap.gif

Nope, it's more like this:
http://newkunst.com/images/products/pid42.jpg

But to be certain you need to also use this:
http://mysmsdirect.com/prodimages/small/s0005_63.jpg

But yours is nice too.

Greg Zywicki

"Zywicki" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
>
> On Oct 20, 9:24 am, "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>> "Zywicki" > wrote in
>> ooglegroups.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Oct 19, 7:38 pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:
>> >> Plus, damp towels are ideal germ incubators. Do not use a damp
>> >> towel for anything in the kitchen, especially cleaning something
>> >> that's about to go into a salad raw.
>>
>> >> Steve
>>
>>> have an amazing machine that allows me to have towels that do not
>>>harbor germs, and reduces the amount of waste generated by paper towels
>>>(not that I care much about that.)
>
>>>This might sound funny, but it also allows me to use clothing made of
>>>cloth instead of paper.
>
>>>Greg Zywicki
>
>>Sounds interesting. Is this the
>>machine?http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/ar...rimentsmap.gif
>
> Nope, it's more like this:
> http://newkunst.com/images/products/pid42.jpg
>
> But to be certain you need to also use this:
> http://mysmsdirect.com/prodimages/small/s0005_63.jpg
>
> But yours is nice too.
>
> Greg Zywicki
>

Mine wears out the towels faster.