i have been trying to learn more on brining
problem i was working on is how long to leave various meats in the solution


i suspect this information is available in the research community but i
have not so far found anything--email to Purdue chicken gave no response
( asked months ago)

question asked was how long to leave in brine?

the only thing that I have not controlled for was temperature--i just
place item in lower refrigerator


i took a chicken leg with skin attached

place 1 drop of green food dye on the skin and one drop on the flesh
covered it ( to prevent drying out) and placed on lower shelf of my
home refrigerator

5 hours later i sliced the drop area on the flesh

color only permeated 1/16 of a inch

on the skin it passed thru the skin and only colored the flesh underneath.


my next step is to use the dye to color my liquid with no salt added

since i use seltzer as the liquid
i want to know does using seltzer really make a difference?--i assume
the release of gases from the seltzer breaks apart the fibers of the
tissue leading to increase tenderness

since i tightly close the bags i place the tissue in there is some
increase in pressure which should lead to increase penetration to the
solution


last step will to color my brine solution and see the depth of penetration

hth

ilaboo wrote:

> i took a chicken leg with skin attached
>
> place 1 drop of green food dye on the skin and one drop on the flesh
> covered it ( to prevent drying out) and placed on lower shelf of my
> home refrigerator


Green chicken - is it St. Paddy's Day or what...???

--
Best
Greg

On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 09:42:49 GMT, ilaboo > wrote:

>i have been trying to learn more on brining
>problem i was working on is how long to leave various meats in the solution
>
>i suspect this information is available in the research community but i
>have not so far found anything--email to Purdue chicken gave no response
>( asked months ago)

Purdue injects their chicken with a saline solution, don't they? In a
sense, it's pre-brined at the factory. It might be useful to get a
bird that's not adulterated for your experiments because the saline
osmosis in brining might be affected by the presence of salt in the
meat at the start of the process.
>
>question asked was how long to leave in brine?
>
I usually brine a turkey over night -- eight to 12 hours. Works for
me. I usually use Stephan Pyles' brine recipe from his _New Tastes of
Texas_ cookbook. He may be God.

>the only thing that I have not controlled for was temperature--i just
>place item in lower refrigerator
>
>i took a chicken leg with skin attached
>
>place 1 drop of green food dye on the skin and one drop on the flesh
>covered it ( to prevent drying out) and placed on lower shelf of my
>home refrigerator
>
>5 hours later i sliced the drop area on the flesh
>
>color only permeated 1/16 of a inch
>
>on the skin it passed thru the skin and only colored the flesh underneath.
>
Interesting idea.
>
>my next step is to use the dye to color my liquid with no salt added
>
>since i use seltzer as the liquid
>i want to know does using seltzer really make a difference?--i assume
>the release of gases from the seltzer breaks apart the fibers of the
>tissue leading to increase tenderness
>
>since i tightly close the bags i place the tissue in there is some
>increase in pressure which should lead to increase penetration to the
>solution
>
Most seltzers contain salt, don't they? I don't see why carbon
dioxide gas would have any effect on the osmosis that a brine depends
on. In solution CO2 does produce a mild acid, which will break down
meat fibers, I believe.

>last step will to color my brine solution and see the depth of penetration

This is where I really get interested. Please report your results.
But even if the penetration into the meat is only a half inch or even
less, It would be interesting to see if the liquid migrates from the
outside rim to the interior of the meat as it cooks. This strikes me
as possible, especially in a low and slow smoker environment.


modom

"Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eyes."
-- Jimmie Dale Gilmore

"Michael Odom" > wrote in message
>
> Purdue injects their chicken with a saline solution, don't they? In a
> sense, it's pre-brined at the factory.

Not from what I can see.

they do have marinated chicks, but that is obvious when you see it is
flavored. I just looked at an oven stffer and it says all natural. Less
that 3% retained water. Minimally processed.

I've seen other brands that brag that is is made more tender and the fine
prins gives a weight of added saline solution.
Ed

"Michael Odom" > wrote in message
>
> Purdue injects their chicken with a saline solution, don't they? In a
> sense, it's pre-brined at the factory.

Not from what I can see.

they do have marinated chicks, but that is obvious when you see it is
flavored. I just looked at an oven stffer and it says all natural. Less
that 3% retained water. Minimally processed.

I've seen other brands that brag that is is made more tender and the fine
prins gives a weight of added saline solution.
Ed

On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 19:56:52 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski" >
wrote:

>
>"Michael Odom" > wrote in message
>>
>> Purdue injects their chicken with a saline solution, don't they? In a
>> sense, it's pre-brined at the factory.
>
>Not from what I can see.
>
>they do have marinated chicks, but that is obvious when you see it is
>flavored. I just looked at an oven stffer and it says all natural. Less
>that 3% retained water. Minimally processed.
>
>I've seen other brands that brag that is is made more tender and the fine
>prins gives a weight of added saline solution.
>Ed
>
I was writing from what is evidently a faulty memory. Thanks for the
correction. Was it Tyson I was thinking about?


modom

"Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eyes."
-- Jimmie Dale Gilmore

Michael Odom wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Nov 2004 09:42:49 GMT, ilaboo > wrote:
>
>
>>i have been trying to learn more on brining
>>problem i was working on is how long to leave various meats in the solution
>>
>>i suspect this information is available in the research community but i
>>have not so far found anything--email to Purdue chicken gave no response
>>( asked months ago)
>
>
> Purdue injects their chicken with a saline solution, don't they? In a
> sense, it's pre-brined at the factory. It might be useful to get a
> bird that's not adulterated for your experiments because the saline
> osmosis in brining might be affected by the presence of salt in the
> meat at the start of the process.
>
>>question asked was how long to leave in brine?
>>
>
> I usually brine a turkey over night -- eight to 12 hours. Works for
> me. I usually use Stephan Pyles' brine recipe from his _New Tastes of
> Texas_ cookbook. He may be God.
>
>
>>the only thing that I have not controlled for was temperature--i just
>>place item in lower refrigerator
>>
>>i took a chicken leg with skin attached
>>
>>place 1 drop of green food dye on the skin and one drop on the flesh
>>covered it ( to prevent drying out) and placed on lower shelf of my
>>home refrigerator
>>
>>5 hours later i sliced the drop area on the flesh
>>
>>color only permeated 1/16 of a inch
>>
>>on the skin it passed thru the skin and only colored the flesh underneath.
>>
>
> Interesting idea.
>
>>my next step is to use the dye to color my liquid with no salt added
>>
>>since i use seltzer as the liquid
>>i want to know does using seltzer really make a difference?--i assume
>>the release of gases from the seltzer breaks apart the fibers of the
>>tissue leading to increase tenderness
>>
>>since i tightly close the bags i place the tissue in there is some
>>increase in pressure which should lead to increase penetration to the
>>solution
>>
>
> Most seltzers contain salt, don't they? I don't see why carbon
> dioxide gas would have any effect on the osmosis that a brine depends
> on. In solution CO2 does produce a mild acid, which will break down
> meat fibers, I believe.
>
>
>>last step will to color my brine solution and see the depth of penetration
>
>
> This is where I really get interested. Please report your results.
> But even if the penetration into the meat is only a half inch or even
> less, It would be interesting to see if the liquid migrates from the
> outside rim to the interior of the meat as it cooks. This strikes me
> as possible, especially in a low and slow smoker environment.
>
>
> modom
>
> "Dallas is a rich man with a death wish in his eyes."
> -- Jimmie Dale Gilmore
reason for using seltzer ( sodium free is not for it's slight acidity
but for the physical expansion of the gas in tissue---it should split
the fibres as bublles are formed.

gave no thaught to migration as it is cooked--might look into it
will keep you posted

pter

ilaboo wrote:

> reason for using seltzer ( sodium free is not for it's slight acidity
> but for the physical expansion of the gas in tissue---it should split
> the fibres as bublles are formed.

Your assumption about splitting fibers is flawed. The "fibers" are
protein strings that won't accept the gases, and if they did, it would
mean that cells are being ruptured and that results in mushy, dry
meats since the cellular contents would leak out. In any event, why
would you want to "split the fibers" anyway?

If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry no
flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.

Pastorio

"Bob (this one)" > wrote in
:

> If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
> about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
> mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
> means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry no
> flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>
> Pastorio

What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak where
pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end product? In fact,
meat put through a tenderizer is also a common practice for chicken fried
steak. I don't notice a problem with the meat in those cases.

--
Wayne in Phoenix

*If there's a nit to pick, some nitwit will pick it.
*A mind is a terrible thing to lose.

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> "Bob (this one)" > wrote in
> :
>
>>If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
>>about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
>>mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
>>means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry no
>>flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>>
>>Pastorio
>
> What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak where
> pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end product? In fact,
> meat put through a tenderizer is also a common practice for chicken fried
> steak. I don't notice a problem with the meat in those cases.

It's not a problem, just a fact of nature. The meat will lose a lot of
juice with rough mechanical tenderizing. Check out what Harold McGee
says about it in "On Food and Cooking."

Neither Swiss steak nor CFS are judged on their juiciness. Swiss steak
is usually braised in highly seasoned, thickened liquids which serve
as a presentation gravy. CFS is also routinely slathered with peppered
gravy. and usually deep fried so that step adds a luscious sense of
fat moisture.

If you were to take a thick rib eye, run it through a tenderizer and
broil it, it would be dry to the bite. Ask me how I know...

BTW, McGee has just released a newly edited version of OFAC and I've
heard (not seen) that it's even better than the original. Hard to
imagine it.

Pastorio

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> "Bob (this one)" > wrote in
> :
>
>>If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
>>about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
>>mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
>>means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry no
>>flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>>
>>Pastorio
>
> What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak where
> pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end product? In fact,
> meat put through a tenderizer is also a common practice for chicken fried
> steak. I don't notice a problem with the meat in those cases.

It's not a problem, just a fact of nature. The meat will lose a lot of
juice with rough mechanical tenderizing. Check out what Harold McGee
says about it in "On Food and Cooking."

Neither Swiss steak nor CFS are judged on their juiciness. Swiss steak
is usually braised in highly seasoned, thickened liquids which serve
as a presentation gravy. CFS is also routinely slathered with peppered
gravy. and usually deep fried so that step adds a luscious sense of
fat moisture.

If you were to take a thick rib eye, run it through a tenderizer and
broil it, it would be dry to the bite. Ask me how I know...

BTW, McGee has just released a newly edited version of OFAC and I've
heard (not seen) that it's even better than the original. Hard to
imagine it.

Pastorio

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> "Bob (this one)" > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
>>about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
>>mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
>>means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry no
>>flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>>
>>Pastorio

this may or not be true--if the appropriate salt solution is used the
cells will just swell but not burst.

i am under the impression that the flavor of meats are due to proteins
mainly ---
>
>
> What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak where
> pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end product? In fact,
> meat put through a tenderizer is also a common practice for chicken fried
> steak. I don't notice a problem with the meat in those cases.
>
i am not looking for a specific way to tenderize steak by using
seltzer--the theoretical reason is that as the gas expands it will
separate tissue allowing brine solution etc permeate the meat faster.
i have e injected it once and what it did was to really separate the
muscle fibers--rather drastically!


so far the best tenderizer i have found is to inject plain yogurt into
the flesh--left no yogurt flavor but was a fantastic tenderizer.
i incidently tried flavored yogurt but the flavor did not come
thru--tried mango/orange

after 8 hours in dye colored plain water--chicken had less that 1/8 inch
permeation of dye into tissue--there was no difference in permeation
from either muscle fibers on edge along bone or from skin.


i am coming to the conclusion that brining only affects a very little
about of tissue if the meat is just soaked in the brine--brine to be
effective has to be injected into the meat-- or multiple punctures (
this probably has very little effect on flow thru tissue) or large
slashes have to be make

next experiment is to soak for a given time and then cook and see if dye
permeates further--suspect it will because of the increase in temperature.

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
> "Bob (this one)" > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
>>about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
>>mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
>>means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry no
>>flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>>
>>Pastorio

this may or not be true--if the appropriate salt solution is used the
cells will just swell but not burst.

i am under the impression that the flavor of meats are due to proteins
mainly ---
>
>
> What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak where
> pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end product? In fact,
> meat put through a tenderizer is also a common practice for chicken fried
> steak. I don't notice a problem with the meat in those cases.
>
i am not looking for a specific way to tenderize steak by using
seltzer--the theoretical reason is that as the gas expands it will
separate tissue allowing brine solution etc permeate the meat faster.
i have e injected it once and what it did was to really separate the
muscle fibers--rather drastically!


so far the best tenderizer i have found is to inject plain yogurt into
the flesh--left no yogurt flavor but was a fantastic tenderizer.
i incidently tried flavored yogurt but the flavor did not come
thru--tried mango/orange

after 8 hours in dye colored plain water--chicken had less that 1/8 inch
permeation of dye into tissue--there was no difference in permeation
from either muscle fibers on edge along bone or from skin.


i am coming to the conclusion that brining only affects a very little
about of tissue if the meat is just soaked in the brine--brine to be
effective has to be injected into the meat-- or multiple punctures (
this probably has very little effect on flow thru tissue) or large
slashes have to be make

next experiment is to soak for a given time and then cook and see if dye
permeates further--suspect it will because of the increase in temperature.

ilaboo wrote:

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>> "Bob (this one)" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
>>> about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
>>> mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
>>> means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry no
>>> flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>>>
>>> Pastorio
>
> this may or not be true--if the appropriate salt solution is used the
> cells will just swell but not burst.

What I said is true, documented by others. The notion I referred to
above is about tenderizing. Mechanical tenderizing like pounding or
running through a "cuber" machine breaks/cuts cells and permits the
cellular fluids to leak out. Likewise, chemical tenderizing, using
papain or some other commercial compounds, will also cause cellular
rupture. Both mean that there will be "purge" or loss of liquids
before cooking.

Brining won't cause cellular rupture. It doesn't release fluids from
the meats, it causes meats to take them up and hold until the protein
denatures from either chemical "cooking" like adding strong acids or
cooking through heat in the traditional methods.

> i am under the impression that the flavor of meats are due to proteins
> mainly ---

Nope. The *structure* of meat is primarily due to protein. Flavors
come from cellular fluids and fats.

>> What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak
>> where pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end product?
>> In fact, meat put through a tenderizer is also a common practice for
>> chicken fried steak. I don't notice a problem with the meat in those
>> cases.
>>
> i am not looking for a specific way to tenderize steak by using
> seltzer--the theoretical reason is that as the gas expands it will
> separate tissue allowing brine solution etc permeate the meat faster.
> i have e injected it once and what it did was to really separate the
> muscle fibers--rather drastically!

You're confused about the structure of meat. Fibers contain the cells.
The spaces between fibers is empty. The fibers you're talking about -
what you see when you shred meat or what you see when cutting it -
*are* meat. Getting between them is a rather meaningless concept for
treating meat. Your assumption is that the gases will somehow get into
the meat but only between the cells. It's not going to happen unless
you put it under pressure.

> so far the best tenderizer i have found is to inject plain yogurt into
> the flesh--left no yogurt flavor but was a fantastic tenderizer.

Yogurt is acid. The lactose has been converted to lactic acid and that
tenderizes the meat by denaturing the protein. There are many better
ones. Papain (extracted from papayas) or the juice of figs or
pineapple will do a creditable job, but for different physical reasons.

> i incidently tried flavored yogurt but the flavor did not come
> thru--tried mango/orange
>
> after 8 hours in dye colored plain water--chicken had less that 1/8 inch
> permeation of dye into tissue--there was no difference in permeation
> from either muscle fibers on edge along bone or from skin.

If you're only using dye, you won't get much penetration; flesh is
designed to be waterproof unless some drastic changes are made to it.
Add some food coloring to a standard brine mixture and watch it
penetrate. The solutes in the brines create at least two different
mechanisms to have the brine taken up by the meat. They're osmosis and
diffusion. Go read about them.

> i am coming to the conclusion that brining only affects a very little
> about of tissue if the meat is just soaked in the brine--brine to be
> effective has to be injected into the meat-- or multiple punctures (
> this probably has very little effect on flow thru tissue) or large
> slashes have to be make

This is pure guesswork on your part and is wrong. Do yourself and
everyone else a favor and go read about brining from some reliable
sources who understand the physiology of meat and the physics of the
processes at hand. As it stands, your guesses are leading you in the
wrong directions.

Brining is a technique that likely goes back to prehistoric times.
You're trying to reinvent an already well-defined wheel without doing
any homework.

> next experiment is to soak for a given time and then cook and see if dye
> permeates further--suspect it will because of the increase in temperature.

This is what I mean. Temperature isn't the reason it will permeate
better. Denaturing the protein is why. But the process will reverse
when it reaches an appropriate temperature (which varies from meat to
meat) and most of the liquids will be purged.

Pastorio

Bob (this one) wrote:
>
> The solutes in the brines create at least two different
> mechanisms to have the brine taken up by the meat. They're osmosis and
> diffusion.

> Go read about them.

Good advise. I'm wondering if the dye/food coloring will actually pass through
the "semi-permiable membrane" or will be left behind by the osmotic process.
I'm *guessing* that it won't as easily as the OP wants, and will only color that
same area as in his other trial.

BOB

"Bob (this one)" > wrote in
:

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>> "Bob (this one)" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
>>>about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
>>>mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
>>>means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry no
>>>flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>>>
>>>Pastorio
>>
>> What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak
>> where pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end product?
>> In fact, meat put through a tenderizer is also a common practice for
>> chicken fried steak. I don't notice a problem with the meat in those
>> cases.
>
> It's not a problem, just a fact of nature. The meat will lose a lot of
> juice with rough mechanical tenderizing. Check out what Harold McGee
> says about it in "On Food and Cooking."
>
> Neither Swiss steak nor CFS are judged on their juiciness. Swiss steak
> is usually braised in highly seasoned, thickened liquids which serve
> as a presentation gravy. CFS is also routinely slathered with peppered
> gravy. and usually deep fried so that step adds a luscious sense of
> fat moisture.
>
> If you were to take a thick rib eye, run it through a tenderizer and
> broil it, it would be dry to the bite. Ask me how I know...
>
> BTW, McGee has just released a newly edited version of OFAC and I've
> heard (not seen) that it's even better than the original. Hard to
> imagine it.
>
> Pastorio
>

Thanks, Bob

--
Wayne in Phoenix

*If there's a nit to pick, some nitwit will pick it.
*A mind is a terrible thing to lose.

"Bob (this one)" > wrote in
:

> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>> "Bob (this one)" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>>If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
>>>about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
>>>mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
>>>means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry no
>>>flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>>>
>>>Pastorio
>>
>> What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak
>> where pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end product?
>> In fact, meat put through a tenderizer is also a common practice for
>> chicken fried steak. I don't notice a problem with the meat in those
>> cases.
>
> It's not a problem, just a fact of nature. The meat will lose a lot of
> juice with rough mechanical tenderizing. Check out what Harold McGee
> says about it in "On Food and Cooking."
>
> Neither Swiss steak nor CFS are judged on their juiciness. Swiss steak
> is usually braised in highly seasoned, thickened liquids which serve
> as a presentation gravy. CFS is also routinely slathered with peppered
> gravy. and usually deep fried so that step adds a luscious sense of
> fat moisture.
>
> If you were to take a thick rib eye, run it through a tenderizer and
> broil it, it would be dry to the bite. Ask me how I know...
>
> BTW, McGee has just released a newly edited version of OFAC and I've
> heard (not seen) that it's even better than the original. Hard to
> imagine it.
>
> Pastorio
>

Thanks, Bob

--
Wayne in Phoenix

*If there's a nit to pick, some nitwit will pick it.
*A mind is a terrible thing to lose.

"ilaboo" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> i have been trying to learn more on brining
> problem i was working on is how long to leave various meats in the
solution
>
>
> i suspect this information is available in the research community but i
> have not so far found anything--email to Purdue chicken gave no response
> ( asked months ago)
>
> question asked was how long to leave in brine?
>
> the only thing that I have not controlled for was temperature--i just
> place item in lower refrigerator
>
>
> i took a chicken leg with skin attached
>
> place 1 drop of green food dye on the skin and one drop on the flesh
> covered it ( to prevent drying out) and placed on lower shelf of my
> home refrigerator
>
> 5 hours later i sliced the drop area on the flesh
>
> color only permeated 1/16 of a inch
>
> on the skin it passed thru the skin and only colored the flesh underneath.
>
>
> my next step is to use the dye to color my liquid with no salt added
>
> since i use seltzer as the liquid
> i want to know does using seltzer really make a difference?--i assume
> the release of gases from the seltzer breaks apart the fibers of the
> tissue leading to increase tenderness
>
> since i tightly close the bags i place the tissue in there is some
> increase in pressure which should lead to increase penetration to the
> solution
>
>
> last step will to color my brine solution and see the depth of penetration
>
> hth

I'm afraid there is a fatal flaw in your experiment. You cannot assume that
the dye penetrates the same as the salt. Perhaps it does, but without
knowing this for sure the results are worthless.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

"ilaboo" > wrote in message
nk.net...
> i have been trying to learn more on brining
> problem i was working on is how long to leave various meats in the
solution
>
>
> i suspect this information is available in the research community but i
> have not so far found anything--email to Purdue chicken gave no response
> ( asked months ago)
>
> question asked was how long to leave in brine?
>
> the only thing that I have not controlled for was temperature--i just
> place item in lower refrigerator
>
>
> i took a chicken leg with skin attached
>
> place 1 drop of green food dye on the skin and one drop on the flesh
> covered it ( to prevent drying out) and placed on lower shelf of my
> home refrigerator
>
> 5 hours later i sliced the drop area on the flesh
>
> color only permeated 1/16 of a inch
>
> on the skin it passed thru the skin and only colored the flesh underneath.
>
>
> my next step is to use the dye to color my liquid with no salt added
>
> since i use seltzer as the liquid
> i want to know does using seltzer really make a difference?--i assume
> the release of gases from the seltzer breaks apart the fibers of the
> tissue leading to increase tenderness
>
> since i tightly close the bags i place the tissue in there is some
> increase in pressure which should lead to increase penetration to the
> solution
>
>
> last step will to color my brine solution and see the depth of penetration
>
> hth

I'm afraid there is a fatal flaw in your experiment. You cannot assume that
the dye penetrates the same as the salt. Perhaps it does, but without
knowing this for sure the results are worthless.


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

ilaboo > wrote:
>i am not looking for a specific way to tenderize steak by using
>seltzer--the theoretical reason is that as the gas expands it will
>separate tissue allowing brine solution etc permeate the meat faster.
>i have e injected it once and what it did was to really separate the
>muscle fibers--rather drastically!

Howard McGee debunks that pretty thoroughly.

>so far the best tenderizer i have found is to inject plain yogurt into
>the flesh--left no yogurt flavor but was a fantastic tenderizer.
>i incidently tried flavored yogurt but the flavor did not come
>thru--tried mango/orange

Unsurprising, yogurt is high in acid, and acid is the base of almost
all tenderizers.

>after 8 hours in dye colored plain water--chicken had less that 1/8 inch
>permeation of dye into tissue--there was no difference in permeation
>from either muscle fibers on edge along bone or from skin.
>
>
>i am coming to the conclusion that brining only affects a very little
>about of tissue if the meat is just soaked in the brine--brine to be
>effective has to be injected into the meat-- or multiple punctures (
>this probably has very little effect on flow thru tissue) or large
>slashes have to be make

Your conclusion is demonstrably false in that I've tasted the brine
deep within a turkey breast. Your thesis rests on the shakey
assumption that salt penetration is the same as visible dye
penetration. I find this unlikely, as they dye won't have the same
chemical and osmotic properties as a salt solution.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

ilaboo > wrote:
>i am not looking for a specific way to tenderize steak by using
>seltzer--the theoretical reason is that as the gas expands it will
>separate tissue allowing brine solution etc permeate the meat faster.
>i have e injected it once and what it did was to really separate the
>muscle fibers--rather drastically!

Howard McGee debunks that pretty thoroughly.

>so far the best tenderizer i have found is to inject plain yogurt into
>the flesh--left no yogurt flavor but was a fantastic tenderizer.
>i incidently tried flavored yogurt but the flavor did not come
>thru--tried mango/orange

Unsurprising, yogurt is high in acid, and acid is the base of almost
all tenderizers.

>after 8 hours in dye colored plain water--chicken had less that 1/8 inch
>permeation of dye into tissue--there was no difference in permeation
>from either muscle fibers on edge along bone or from skin.
>
>
>i am coming to the conclusion that brining only affects a very little
>about of tissue if the meat is just soaked in the brine--brine to be
>effective has to be injected into the meat-- or multiple punctures (
>this probably has very little effect on flow thru tissue) or large
>slashes have to be make

Your conclusion is demonstrably false in that I've tasted the brine
deep within a turkey breast. Your thesis rests on the shakey
assumption that salt penetration is the same as visible dye
penetration. I find this unlikely, as they dye won't have the same
chemical and osmotic properties as a salt solution.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

Bob (this one) wrote:
> ilaboo wrote:
>
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>>> "Bob (this one)" > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
>>>> about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
>>>> mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
>>>> means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry
>>>> no flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>>>>
>>>> Pastorio
>>
>>
>> this may or not be true--if the appropriate salt solution is used the
>> cells will just swell but not burst.
>
>
> What I said is true, documented by others. The notion I referred to
> above is about tenderizing. Mechanical tenderizing like pounding or
> running through a "cuber" machine breaks/cuts cells and permits the
> cellular fluids to leak out. Likewise, chemical tenderizing, using
> papain or some other commercial compounds, will also cause cellular
> rupture. Both mean that there will be "purge" or loss of liquids before
> cooking.
>
> Brining won't cause cellular rupture. It doesn't release fluids from the
> meats, it causes meats to take them up and hold until the protein
> denatures from either chemical "cooking" like adding strong acids or
> cooking through heat in the traditional methods.
>
>> i am under the impression that the flavor of meats are due to proteins
>> mainly ---
>
>
> Nope. The *structure* of meat is primarily due to protein. Flavors come
> from cellular fluids and fats.
>
>>> What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak
>>> where pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end
>>> product? In fact, meat put through a tenderizer is also a common
>>> practice for chicken fried steak. I don't notice a problem with the
>>> meat in those cases.
>>>
>> i am not looking for a specific way to tenderize steak by using
>> seltzer--the theoretical reason is that as the gas expands it will
>> separate tissue allowing brine solution etc permeate the meat faster.
>> i have e injected it once and what it did was to really separate the
>> muscle fibers--rather drastically!
>
>
> You're confused about the structure of meat. Fibers contain the cells.
> The spaces between fibers is empty. The fibers you're talking about -
> what you see when you shred meat or what you see when cutting it - *are*
> meat. Getting between them is a rather meaningless concept for treating
> meat. Your assumption is that the gases will somehow get into the meat
> but only between the cells. It's not going to happen unless you put it
> under pressure.
>
>> so far the best tenderizer i have found is to inject plain yogurt into
>> the flesh--left no yogurt flavor but was a fantastic tenderizer.
>
>
> Yogurt is acid. The lactose has been converted to lactic acid and that
> tenderizes the meat by denaturing the protein. There are many better
> ones. Papain (extracted from papayas) or the juice of figs or pineapple
> will do a creditable job, but for different physical reasons.
>
>> i incidently tried flavored yogurt but the flavor did not come
>> thru--tried mango/orange
>>
>> after 8 hours in dye colored plain water--chicken had less that 1/8
>> inch permeation of dye into tissue--there was no difference in
>> permeation from either muscle fibers on edge along bone or from skin.
>
>
> If you're only using dye, you won't get much penetration; flesh is
> designed to be waterproof unless some drastic changes are made to it.
> Add some food coloring to a standard brine mixture and watch it
> penetrate. The solutes in the brines create at least two different
> mechanisms to have the brine taken up by the meat. They're osmosis and
> diffusion. Go read about them.
>
>> i am coming to the conclusion that brining only affects a very little
>> about of tissue if the meat is just soaked in the brine--brine to be
>> effective has to be injected into the meat-- or multiple punctures (
>> this probably has very little effect on flow thru tissue) or large
>> slashes have to be make
>
>
> This is pure guesswork on your part and is wrong. Do yourself and
> everyone else a favor and go read about brining from some reliable
> sources who understand the physiology of meat and the physics of the
> processes at hand. As it stands, your guesses are leading you in the
> wrong directions.
>
> Brining is a technique that likely goes back to prehistoric times.
> You're trying to reinvent an already well-defined wheel without doing
> any homework.
>
>> next experiment is to soak for a given time and then cook and see if
>> dye permeates further--suspect it will because of the increase in
>> temperature.
>
>
> This is what I mean. Temperature isn't the reason it will permeate
> better. Denaturing the protein is why. But the process will reverse when
> it reaches an appropriate temperature (which varies from meat to meat)
> and most of the liquids will be purged.
>
> Pastorio
>
ma da fa vortata

Bob (this one) wrote:
> ilaboo wrote:
>
>> Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>>
>>> "Bob (this one)" > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> If tenderizing is your intent, this is rather a strange way to go
>>>> about it. Do keep in mind that any sort of tenderizing, whether
>>>> mechanical or chemical, causes cellular leakage. Cellular leakage
>>>> means that the meat will consist largely of cell walls. They carry
>>>> no flavor or moisture. It means dead-flavored and textured meats.
>>>>
>>>> Pastorio
>>
>>
>> this may or not be true--if the appropriate salt solution is used the
>> cells will just swell but not burst.
>
>
> What I said is true, documented by others. The notion I referred to
> above is about tenderizing. Mechanical tenderizing like pounding or
> running through a "cuber" machine breaks/cuts cells and permits the
> cellular fluids to leak out. Likewise, chemical tenderizing, using
> papain or some other commercial compounds, will also cause cellular
> rupture. Both mean that there will be "purge" or loss of liquids before
> cooking.
>
> Brining won't cause cellular rupture. It doesn't release fluids from the
> meats, it causes meats to take them up and hold until the protein
> denatures from either chemical "cooking" like adding strong acids or
> cooking through heat in the traditional methods.
>
>> i am under the impression that the flavor of meats are due to proteins
>> mainly ---
>
>
> Nope. The *structure* of meat is primarily due to protein. Flavors come
> from cellular fluids and fats.
>
>>> What about meat preparation for Swiss steak and chicken fried steak
>>> where pounding the meat considerably is requisite to the end
>>> product? In fact, meat put through a tenderizer is also a common
>>> practice for chicken fried steak. I don't notice a problem with the
>>> meat in those cases.
>>>
>> i am not looking for a specific way to tenderize steak by using
>> seltzer--the theoretical reason is that as the gas expands it will
>> separate tissue allowing brine solution etc permeate the meat faster.
>> i have e injected it once and what it did was to really separate the
>> muscle fibers--rather drastically!
>
>
> You're confused about the structure of meat. Fibers contain the cells.
> The spaces between fibers is empty. The fibers you're talking about -
> what you see when you shred meat or what you see when cutting it - *are*
> meat. Getting between them is a rather meaningless concept for treating
> meat. Your assumption is that the gases will somehow get into the meat
> but only between the cells. It's not going to happen unless you put it
> under pressure.
>
>> so far the best tenderizer i have found is to inject plain yogurt into
>> the flesh--left no yogurt flavor but was a fantastic tenderizer.
>
>
> Yogurt is acid. The lactose has been converted to lactic acid and that
> tenderizes the meat by denaturing the protein. There are many better
> ones. Papain (extracted from papayas) or the juice of figs or pineapple
> will do a creditable job, but for different physical reasons.
>
>> i incidently tried flavored yogurt but the flavor did not come
>> thru--tried mango/orange
>>
>> after 8 hours in dye colored plain water--chicken had less that 1/8
>> inch permeation of dye into tissue--there was no difference in
>> permeation from either muscle fibers on edge along bone or from skin.
>
>
> If you're only using dye, you won't get much penetration; flesh is
> designed to be waterproof unless some drastic changes are made to it.
> Add some food coloring to a standard brine mixture and watch it
> penetrate. The solutes in the brines create at least two different
> mechanisms to have the brine taken up by the meat. They're osmosis and
> diffusion. Go read about them.
>
>> i am coming to the conclusion that brining only affects a very little
>> about of tissue if the meat is just soaked in the brine--brine to be
>> effective has to be injected into the meat-- or multiple punctures (
>> this probably has very little effect on flow thru tissue) or large
>> slashes have to be make
>
>
> This is pure guesswork on your part and is wrong. Do yourself and
> everyone else a favor and go read about brining from some reliable
> sources who understand the physiology of meat and the physics of the
> processes at hand. As it stands, your guesses are leading you in the
> wrong directions.
>
> Brining is a technique that likely goes back to prehistoric times.
> You're trying to reinvent an already well-defined wheel without doing
> any homework.
>
>> next experiment is to soak for a given time and then cook and see if
>> dye permeates further--suspect it will because of the increase in
>> temperature.
>
>
> This is what I mean. Temperature isn't the reason it will permeate
> better. Denaturing the protein is why. But the process will reverse when
> it reaches an appropriate temperature (which varies from meat to meat)
> and most of the liquids will be purged.
>
> Pastorio
>
ma da fa vortata

ilaboo wrote:

> so far the best tenderizer i have found is to inject plain yogurt into
> the flesh--left no yogurt flavor but was a fantastic tenderizer.
> i incidently tried flavored yogurt but the flavor did not come
> thru--tried mango/orange

Yogurt is a great tenderizer and is commonly used in middle eastern and eastern
cooking. The first time I made tandoori chicken I was suspicious of the
chemical nature of the masala, thinking that anything that softened flesh that
much could not be good for you, but it turned our to be the yogurt that worked
the magic.

On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:

> Your conclusion is demonstrably false in that I've tasted the brine
> deep within a turkey breast. Your thesis rests on the shakey
> assumption that salt penetration is the same as visible dye
> penetration. I find this unlikely, as they dye won't have the same
> chemical and osmotic properties as a salt solution.

I love these.

Since osmosis is migration from a less concentration solution to a higher
concentration solution, just how does the higher concentration brine
penetrate the lower concentration meat?

nb

On 2004-11-29, ilaboo > wrote:

One line of text! ...while copying 100+ lines of previous text.

Trim your posts, please. Thank you.

nb

notbob > wrote:

>On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:
>
>> Your conclusion is demonstrably false in that I've tasted the brine
>> deep within a turkey breast. Your thesis rests on the shakey
>> assumption that salt penetration is the same as visible dye
>> penetration. I find this unlikely, as they dye won't have the same
>> chemical and osmotic properties as a salt solution.
>
>I love these.
>
>Since osmosis is migration from a less concentration solution to a higher
>concentration solution, just how does the higher concentration brine
>penetrate the lower concentration meat?

That's one definition of osmosis, one depending on the movement of the
dilutent. It's not the only definition, as the exact process depends
on the properties of the membrane the reaction occurs across, not
grade school simplifications.

D.

--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:

> That's one definition of osmosis, one depending on the movement of the
> dilutent. It's not the only definition, as the exact process depends
> on the properties of the membrane the reaction occurs across, not
> grade school simplifications.

Since you offer no references to the "exact process", I'll go with my "grade
school" and every other explanation I can find on the web, including edu
sites. But, feel free to offer evidence for you arguement. I'm more than
willing to be enlightened.

nb

On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:

> That's one definition of osmosis, one depending on the movement of the
> dilutent. It's not the only definition, as the exact process depends
> on the properties of the membrane the reaction occurs across, not
> grade school simplifications.

Since you offer no references to the "exact process", I'll go with my "grade
school" and every other explanation I can find on the web, including edu
sites. But, feel free to offer evidence for you arguement. I'm more than
willing to be enlightened.

nb

notbob wrote:

> On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:
>
>>Your conclusion is demonstrably false in that I've tasted the brine
>>deep within a turkey breast. Your thesis rests on the shakey
>>assumption that salt penetration is the same as visible dye
>>penetration. I find this unlikely, as they dye won't have the same
>>chemical and osmotic properties as a salt solution.
>
> I love these.
>
> Since osmosis is migration from a less concentration solution to a higher
> concentration solution, just how does the higher concentration brine
> penetrate the lower concentration meat?

The cellular liquids aren't constantly lower concentration. The
theoretical mechanism seems to be this: Upon initial immersion in the
brine, the meat *loses* fluids until an equilibrium is established
between cellular fluids and brine. Then the meat begins to take up
fluid with all solutes. So the water, salt, etc. is carried into the
meat.

But diffusion is also at work in the process, so a pure osmosis model
isn't applicable. Surprising how complex it can get.

Pastorio

notbob wrote:

> On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:
>
>>Your conclusion is demonstrably false in that I've tasted the brine
>>deep within a turkey breast. Your thesis rests on the shakey
>>assumption that salt penetration is the same as visible dye
>>penetration. I find this unlikely, as they dye won't have the same
>>chemical and osmotic properties as a salt solution.
>
> I love these.
>
> Since osmosis is migration from a less concentration solution to a higher
> concentration solution, just how does the higher concentration brine
> penetrate the lower concentration meat?

The cellular liquids aren't constantly lower concentration. The
theoretical mechanism seems to be this: Upon initial immersion in the
brine, the meat *loses* fluids until an equilibrium is established
between cellular fluids and brine. Then the meat begins to take up
fluid with all solutes. So the water, salt, etc. is carried into the
meat.

But diffusion is also at work in the process, so a pure osmosis model
isn't applicable. Surprising how complex it can get.

Pastorio

notbob > wrote:

>On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:
>
>> That's one definition of osmosis, one depending on the movement of the
>> dilutent. It's not the only definition, as the exact process depends
>> on the properties of the membrane the reaction occurs across, not
>> grade school simplifications.
>
>Since you offer no references to the "exact process", I'll go with my "grade
>school" and every other explanation I can find on the web, including edu
>sites. But, feel free to offer evidence for you arguement.

The effects (of brining) are widely known, and well documented.

>I'm more than willing to be enlightened.

Anyone that can actually explain how osmosis works has a Nobel in
their future. In the human body alone we have several places where
something other than dilutent moves (I.E. lungs, kidneys, liver, small
and large intestines, the blood-brain barrier), yet nobody is certain
just how they work. Osmosis is a well known but poorly understood
process.

Which is why all you find on the web is grade school simplifications.
Only a fool believes all knowledge is available there.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.

-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL

notbob wrote:
> On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:
>
>
>>Your conclusion is demonstrably false in that I've tasted the brine
>>deep within a turkey breast. Your thesis rests on the shakey
>>assumption that salt penetration is the same as visible dye
>>penetration. I find this unlikely, as they dye won't have the same
>>chemical and osmotic properties as a salt solution.
>
>
> I love these.
>
> Since osmosis is migration from a less concentration solution to a higher
> concentration solution, just how does the higher concentration brine
> penetrate the lower concentration meat?
>
> nb
agreed but the only tracer i had was water soluble dye--i do not ahve an
osmometer to control for it or radioactive salt to track the sodium
my conclusion is that brien has to be injected into the tissue
thanks
peter

notbob wrote:
> On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:
>
>
>>Your conclusion is demonstrably false in that I've tasted the brine
>>deep within a turkey breast. Your thesis rests on the shakey
>>assumption that salt penetration is the same as visible dye
>>penetration. I find this unlikely, as they dye won't have the same
>>chemical and osmotic properties as a salt solution.
>
>
> I love these.
>
> Since osmosis is migration from a less concentration solution to a higher
> concentration solution, just how does the higher concentration brine
> penetrate the lower concentration meat?
>
> nb
agreed but the only tracer i had was water soluble dye--i do not ahve an
osmometer to control for it or radioactive salt to track the sodium
my conclusion is that brien has to be injected into the tissue
thanks
peter

notbob wrote:
> On 2004-11-29, Derek Lyons > wrote:
>
>
>>Your conclusion is demonstrably false in that I've tasted the brine
>>deep within a turkey breast. Your thesis rests on the shakey
>>assumption that salt penetration is the same as visible dye
>>penetration. I find this unlikely, as they dye won't have the same
>>chemical and osmotic properties as a salt solution.
>
>
> I love these.
>
> Since osmosis is migration from a less concentration solution to a higher
> concentration solution, just how does the higher concentration brine
> penetrate the lower concentration meat?
>
> nb
agreed but the only tracer i had was water soluble dye--i do not ahve an
osmometer to control for it or radioactive salt to track the sodium
my conclusion is that brien has to be injected into the tissue
thanks
peter

notbob wrote:
> On 2004-11-29, ilaboo > wrote:
>
> One line of text! ...while copying 100+ lines of previous text.
>
> Trim your posts, please. Thank you.
>
> nb
got it
thanks
peter

notbob wrote:
> On 2004-11-29, ilaboo > wrote:
>
> One line of text! ...while copying 100+ lines of previous text.
>
> Trim your posts, please. Thank you.
>
> nb
got it
thanks
peter

final results

using brine solution 6 tablespoonfuls coarse salt per quart of water
with green dye as tracer
placed chicken leg in it in bottom of fridge

after 6 hours color only penetrated about 1/16 of an inch

conclusion
brine has to be injected into tissue

i place to only inject brine into meat from now on

no soaking it in brine

makes no sense to me now

hth
peter

final results

using brine solution 6 tablespoonfuls coarse salt per quart of water
with green dye as tracer
placed chicken leg in it in bottom of fridge

after 6 hours color only penetrated about 1/16 of an inch

conclusion
brine has to be injected into tissue

i place to only inject brine into meat from now on

no soaking it in brine

makes no sense to me now

hth
peter

final results

using brine solution 6 tablespoonfuls coarse salt per quart of water
with green dye as tracer
placed chicken leg in it in bottom of fridge

after 6 hours color only penetrated about 1/16 of an inch

conclusion
brine has to be injected into tissue

i place to only inject brine into meat from now on

no soaking it in brine

makes no sense to me now

hth
peter