Hi,

I just have a few questions about food safety whilst cooking steak and
beef in general. As i like my steak a little on rare side, but have to
been to scared to eat it that way

1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!

2). Does this point alter if the meat has been frozen and then fully
defrosted?

3). Do these same rules apply to similar cuts of lamb? ie. lamb cutlets
and steaks.

Thanks,
Paul

Paul wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I just have a few questions about food safety whilst cooking steak and
> beef in general. As i like my steak a little on rare side, but have to
> been to scared to eat it that way
>
> 1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
> the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!

Heck, you even pay a lot of money in a restaurant for raw steak!
Carpacchio, I believe. Anyway, I don't know what you're scared of,
but maybe you're confusing it with the warnings about rare burgers?
I've never heard of any warnings about eating rare steak.

nancy

"Paul" > wrote in message
...
> Hi,
>
> I just have a few questions about food safety whilst cooking steak and
> beef in general. As i like my steak a little on rare side, but have to
> been to scared to eat it that way
>
> 1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
> the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!
>
As long as the exterior is exposed to the heat.
The interior is sterile just like your interior.
Even when beef is aged, the microbes that are present
are harmless to the normal digestive system.

> 2). Does this point alter if the meat has been frozen and then fully
> defrosted?
>
No

> 3). Do these same rules apply to similar cuts of lamb? ie. lamb cutlets
> and steaks.
>
Lamb and beef can both be cooked rare.
The only domestic meats it doesn't apply to are chicken and pork.

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 21:55:40 +1100, Paul > wrote:

>I just have a few questions about food safety whilst cooking steak and
>beef in general. As i like my steak a little on rare side, but have to
>been to scared to eat it that way
>
>1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
>the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!
>
>2). Does this point alter if the meat has been frozen and then fully
>defrosted?
>
>3). Do these same rules apply to similar cuts of lamb? ie. lamb cutlets
>and steaks.

The e. coli contamination problem in beef is mostly to do with giant
batches of ground meat where one source can transfer to large
quantities. As the bacteria does not grow in the interior of meat, a
rare steak with a seared outside is pretty safe. Note also that this
is *not* a problem naturally occurring in all beef (or raspberries or
apple juice), but a rather rare contamination issue.

Approx. 50 to 100 deaths annually in the US are estimated to be due to
E. coli 0157:H7. 42,000 die in traffic accidents.

Freezing doesn't de-activate e. coli.

You might be interested in this site:

http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/HGIC3700.htm

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 21:55:40 +1100, Paul > wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I just have a few questions about food safety whilst cooking steak and
>beef in general. As i like my steak a little on rare side, but have to
>been to scared to eat it that way
>
>1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
>the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!

The steak is under cooked when it moo s

>2). Does this point alter if the meat has been frozen and then fully
>defrosted?

Cows don't like the cold.

>3). Do these same rules apply to similar cuts of lamb? ie. lamb cutlets
>and steaks.

Yes. Baa s and oink s are a definite indication that the meat is
under cooked.

>Thanks,
>Paul

Pan Ohco

Paul wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I just have a few questions about food safety whilst cooking steak and
> beef in general. As i like my steak a little on rare side, but have to
> been to scared to eat it that way
>



If you are concerned with Mad Cow (BSE), be advised that
cooking doesn't destroy the prions.

gp

at Mon, 09 Feb 2004 10:55:40 GMT in >,
(Paul) wrote :

>Hi,
>
>I just have a few questions about food safety whilst cooking steak and
>beef in general. As i like my steak a little on rare side, but have to
>been to scared to eat it that way
>
>1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
>the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!

It's not a question of cooking time, its a question of how the meat was
handled from slaughter to table. If the meat was processed in a highly
sanitary facility, with full precautions, shipped quickly (in an ideal
world, in a day or less) and under continuous refigeration, to where you
bought it, brought home promptly if you were making it at home, cut, if
necessary, into portion size also in sanitary facilities (clean knives,
boards, work surfaces, work garments, no obvious sources of contamination,
kept cool at all times) and not mixed with other meats or other possible
contamination sources, it's probably fine to eat, even raw. If the
processing, shipping, or cutting was performed under indifferent sanitation
or refrigeration, or if you were similarly lax at home, it would probably
be necessary at least to cook it until the surface browned. Even these
guides aren't infalliable.

Also, BSE, AKA Mad Cow, doesn't appear to be affected by cooking, at least
not according to current theory. So that (and some other bugs that leave
toxins undestroyed by heat) could still make you sick.

>2). Does this point alter if the meat has been frozen and then fully
>defrosted?

AFAIK there may be slightly more risk with frozen and then defrosted meat.
I do know you can minimize the risk by defrosting in the refrigerator. But
I don't think the differences between frozen or fresh meat are really that
large in terms of getting sick. Again, it's the processing and handling
that counts.

>3). Do these same rules apply to similar cuts of lamb? ie. lamb cutlets
>and steaks.

In general, yes. You should allow for the fact that the smaller lamb cuts
spoil somewhat faster because there's more surface area to volume. Surface
area is an important factor in food safety. The more exposed surface to
volume, the greater the risk.

>
>Thanks,
>Paul


--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

In rec.food.cooking, Paul > wrote:

> 1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
> the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!

There is no safe way to eat red meat. It Will Kill You.

--
....I'm an air-conditioned gypsy...

- The Who

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 17:08:29 GMT, Puester >
wrote:

>Paul wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just have a few questions about food safety whilst cooking steak and
>> beef in general. As i like my steak a little on rare side, but have to
>> been to scared to eat it that way
>>
>
>
>
>If you are concerned with Mad Cow (BSE), be advised that
>cooking doesn't destroy the prions.
>
Be aware that prions do not exist in a rare steak.

wrote:
> In rec.food.cooking, Paul > wrote:
>
>
>>1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
>>the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!
>
>
> There is no safe way to eat red meat. It Will Kill You.
>

And so will breathing. Each breath wounds and the last one kills.

Another take: Avoiding red meat, caffeine, and alcohol will not
actually make you live longer, it will only make it seem longer.

Still another take: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you may be
in Utah.

- Adam

--
Adam Fineman

(Reverse domain name to reply.)

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:15:01 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

>In rec.food.cooking, Paul > wrote:
>
>> 1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
>> the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!
>
>There is no safe way to eat red meat. It Will Kill You.

bring on the sons of cows!

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:16:23 -0500, Adam Fineman
> wrote:

>Still another take: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you may be
>in Utah.
>
>- Adam

but i've heard (i hope it wasn't here) that there are in fact topless
bars in salt lake city. not everything is lost.

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:16:23 -0500, Adam Fineman
> > wrote:
>
> >Still another take: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you may be
> >in Utah.
> >
> >- Adam
>
> but i've heard (i hope it wasn't here) that there are in fact topless
> bars in salt lake city. not everything is lost.
>
> your pal,
> blake


'Topless' in SLC means that they don't wear hats.

Jack Wasatchmo

> wrote in message
...
> In rec.food.cooking, Paul > wrote:
>
> > 1). At what point would a steak be under cooked, so that it would make
> > the eater sick? I have seen some people eat some very rare steaks!
>
> There is no safe way to eat red meat. It Will Kill You.
>
> --
> ...I'm an air-conditioned gypsy...
>
> - The Who

I disagree. There are those that can eat a steak raw and have no ill side
effects.

It kind of depends on personal preference. Red meat will NOT kill you. You
need to test a few pieces to calculate your preference. Cook a piece of meat
well done. Is it too dry? Too hard? Try it rare. Does it feel rubbery or
nasty in your mouth? Try it somewhere in between, medium, medium rare,
medium well.

There are those people who have been brought up to believe that steak has to
be thin, tough, burnt and dry to be edible and do get ill if a steak is
anything but that way.

blake murphy wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:16:23 -0500, Adam Fineman
> > wrote:
>
>
>>Still another take: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you may be
>>in Utah.
>>
>>- Adam
>
>
> but i've heard (i hope it wasn't here) that there are in fact topless
> bars in salt lake city. not everything is lost.
>
> your pal,
> blake

I've drunk in bars without floors, but never one without a roof.
..
..
..
Actually, Portland, Maine boasts a topless doughnut shop. To get back
on topic, the doughnuts and coffee were terrible!

--
Adam Fineman

(Reverse domain name to reply.)

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:51:15 GMT, "Jack Schidt®"
> wrote:

>
>"blake murphy" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:16:23 -0500, Adam Fineman
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Still another take: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you may be
>> >in Utah.
>> >
>> >- Adam
>>
>> but i've heard (i hope it wasn't here) that there are in fact topless
>> bars in salt lake city. not everything is lost.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
>
>'Topless' in SLC means that they don't wear hats.
>
>Jack Wasatchmo
>
naw, man there's a website out there that identifies 'gentlemen's
clubs' across the country, which specify 'bikini', 'pasties', and i
suppose buck naked.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:51:15 GMT, "Jack Schidt®"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "blake murphy" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:16:23 -0500, Adam Fineman
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Still another take: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you may be
>>>> in Utah.
>>>>
>>>> - Adam
>>>
>>> but i've heard (i hope it wasn't here) that there are in fact topless
>>> bars in salt lake city. not everything is lost.
>>>
>>> your pal,
>>> blake
>>
>>
>> 'Topless' in SLC means that they don't wear hats.
>>
>> Jack Wasatchmo
>>
> naw, man there's a website out there that identifies 'gentlemen's
> clubs' across the country, which specify 'bikini', 'pasties', and i
> suppose buck naked.
>
> your pal,
> blake

You forgot the link...
'-)

BOB

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 21:07:49 -0500, " BOB" >
wrote:

>blake murphy wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:51:15 GMT, "Jack Schidt®"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "blake murphy" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 13:16:23 -0500, Adam Fineman
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Still another take: Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow you may be
>>>>> in Utah.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Adam
>>>>
>>>> but i've heard (i hope it wasn't here) that there are in fact topless
>>>> bars in salt lake city. not everything is lost.
>>>>
>>>> your pal,
>>>> blake
>>>
>>>
>>> 'Topless' in SLC means that they don't wear hats.
>>>
>>> Jack Wasatchmo
>>>
>> naw, man there's a website out there that identifies 'gentlemen's
>> clubs' across the country, which specify 'bikini', 'pasties', and i
>> suppose buck naked.
>>
>> your pal,
>> blake
>
>You forgot the link...
>'-)
>
>BOB
>
yes, i did. i did a half-hearted search on 'gentleman's clubs,' but
it didn't return the site i was thinking of. maybe a search for
'topless joints' or the like would turn it up.

it was, of course, research for my church.

your pal,
jim