<http://www.newarkadvocate.com/apps/p...0080819/LIFEST
YLE/808190336>

interesting quote: "The trend is reflected in the sales of the popular
Ball canning jars and supplies, said Chris Scherzinger, vice president
of marketing for Jarden Home Brands, the maker of Ball products. Retail
sales of Ball canning products have increased almost 30 percent this
year, and sales of the company's plastic freezing containers have
doubled in past year, according to market data from Information
Resources Inc."

FWIW.
--
-Barb, Mother Superior, HOSSSPoJ
http://web.mac.com/barbschaller, blahblahblog is back and
most recently updated last night, 8-17-2008. Fair entries are DONE!

On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:48:40 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
> wrote:

><http://www.newarkadvocate.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080819/LIFESTYLE/808190336>
>
>interesting quote: "The trend is reflected in the sales of the popular
>Ball canning jars and supplies, said Chris Scherzinger, vice president
>of marketing for Jarden Home Brands, the maker of Ball products. Retail
>sales of Ball canning products have increased almost 30 percent this
>year, and sales of the company's plastic freezing containers have
>doubled in past year, according to market data from Information
>Resources Inc."
>
>FWIW.

I hope there isn't a comparable increase in botulism and other
illnesses from improperly canned food.

In article >,
The Cook > wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:48:40 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
> > wrote:
>
> ><http://www.newarkadvocate.com/apps/p...819/LIFESTYLE/
> >808190336>
> >
> >interesting quote: "The trend is reflected in the sales of the popular
> >Ball canning jars and supplies, said Chris Scherzinger, vice president
> >of marketing for Jarden Home Brands, the maker of Ball products. Retail
> >sales of Ball canning products have increased almost 30 percent this
> >year, and sales of the company's plastic freezing containers have
> >doubled in past year, according to market data from Information
> >Resources Inc."
>
> I hope there isn't a comparable increase in botulism and other
> illnesses from improperly canned food.

I went to the extension service last week to have my dial gauge checked
and to deliver some soil samples. Instead of going to the one for our
county, I went to the closer one in the neighboring county that I hadn't
been to before. After checking my gauge, they sat me down and gave me
quite a lecture--- a very kind one--- on the importance of using
approved canning methods and tested recipes. Though I am using approved
methods, I listened very carefully. A refresher is always nice and you
never really know as much as you think you do. They gave me a handout
with a sobering horror story about this Boberg woman in Wisconsin
getting botulism from her BWB canned carrots.

What really shook me was when they told me never to use any recipe, for
*any* kind of canning, unless it came from the extension service, the
most recent BBB, or the USDA. She grilled me for 5 minutes on which
version of the BBB I have. All I could tell her is that I use the most
recent--- the one with the cheesecake on the front--- but she seemed not
to think that was the most recent. She said especially not to use any
recipe that comes with a canner because they are often out of date. I
have a nice collection of recent, trusted canning and preserving books
and I have used recipes from most of them. I no longer use older
editions like Putting Food By, Stocking Up, and the like. I don't buy
books where the author sounds like she does not know what she is doing.

I mentioned my Fagor pressure cooker/canner and she really got upset.
She said never to use it for pressure canning because (1) all the
approved recipes are for the larger canners; and (2) the pressure
canning recipes that came with the canner are not USDA approved (Is
there some kind of formal USDA approval process?). She is talking about
the USDA that so recently has allowed tens of thousands of people get
food poisoning from tainted food products. Honestly, right now, I'd
trust the extension service and the BBB over the USDA any day.

While I had actually bought the Fagor to use for pressure cooking and
small batch BWB canning, I was very shocked to hear what she said.
All-American makes pressure canners between 10.5 qts and 41.5 qts. Are
some of those too small? My Fagor is only 1/2 qt smaller. Presto
currently makes a 16 and a 23 AFAIK. Is my 16 qt Presto too small? So
I really don't understand what she means by "larger".

I've read the dated Review of Home Preservation on the NCHFP website but
did not find it particularly helpful as it seemed to ask more questions
than it answered. Despite that home canning activities have steadily
increased since the 1970s, the USDA seems to have spent virtually no
money doing any significant research in the last 20-25 years. That's
certainly a shock. So is the advice we are getting "best guesses" based
on the old, but most recent, research they did? Are they simply trying
to discourage home preserving, especially home canning, due to, perhaps,
food industry pressure?

I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.

Isabella
--
"I will show you fear in a handful of dust"
-T.S. Eliot

On Aug 20, 4:23 pm, Isabella Woodhouse > wrote:

> I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.
>
> Isabella

fear mongering
abuse of power
arrogance
misrepresentation
paternalism

Once upon a time it was my job to question expert opinion and I
haven't lost the habit.

The claim that only USDA approved and/or extension tested equipment
and recipes are safe is patently absurd. People were canning long
before these institutions existed and I am sure safe recipes and
equipment are developed and tested world wide. Further, what you
should have been told is that they know what they recommend is safe,
but they haven't tested and don't have an opinion on other methods and
equipment. As an international observer, I would note that it is US
centric.

A problem with a lot of food and drug research is that media,
marketers, and policy makers are prone to accepting research results
as gospel without considering the statistical significance of the
results or the presence of confirming studies. For example, I think
coffee is ok these days because it prevents cancer, just like
chocolate. Then there are eggs, good and bad cholesterol and many
others.

As for canning research, how much safer are the new methods and who
paid for the research.

Where would creative preservers be if they could only use existing
tested recipes?

ljp wrote:
> On Aug 20, 4:23 pm, Isabella Woodhouse > wrote:
>
>> I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.
>>
>> Isabella
>
> fear mongering
> abuse of power
> arrogance
> misrepresentation
> paternalism
>
> Once upon a time it was my job to question expert opinion and I
> haven't lost the habit.
>
> The claim that only USDA approved and/or extension tested equipment
> and recipes are safe is patently absurd. People were canning long
> before these institutions existed and I am sure safe recipes and
> equipment are developed and tested world wide. Further, what you
> should have been told is that they know what they recommend is safe,
> but they haven't tested and don't have an opinion on other methods and
> equipment. As an international observer, I would note that it is US
> centric.
Of course it is, it is the United States Department of Agriculture.
They're not trying to dictate to you as to how to can things if you live
outside the US.
>
> A problem with a lot of food and drug research is that media,
> marketers, and policy makers are prone to accepting research results
> as gospel without considering the statistical significance of the
> results or the presence of confirming studies. For example, I think
> coffee is ok these days because it prevents cancer, just like
> chocolate. Then there are eggs, good and bad cholesterol and many
> others.
>
> As for canning research, how much safer are the new methods and who
> paid for the research.
The citizens of the United States paid for the research through their
taxes and the research is conducted by reputable food scientists and
staff of universities that have agriculture departments. For example:
University of Georgia, Texas A&M, and other ag departments.
>
> Where would creative preservers be if they could only use existing
> tested recipes?
No one is trying to tell you you can only use tested recipes, they're
telling you that the recipes they tout are the ones they have researched
and have found safe. Most of us that have to do with this newsgroup
recommend them because we don't know if your "creative" recipes are safe
or not. If I'm playing around with certain recipes that are untested I
don't offer the food to friends or family until I'm sure it won't make
me sick. But mostly I change tried and true, approved recipes around
just enough that I don't upset the pH greatly nor do I change
ingredients to the extent it might upset the total balance of the recipe.

You're free to do whatever you like but most of us don't post recipes
that are untested and proven by scientific research group on this
newsgroup. We try like hell to avoid poisoning people.

Before you started posting recently I had not heard of you and I've been
posting here since 1992. Who are you, what are your bonafides, where do
you live, and how long have you been preserving food? Or, are you just
another troll?

On Aug 20, 6:28 pm, George Shirley > wrote:
> ljp wrote:
> > On Aug 20, 4:23 pm, Isabella Woodhouse > wrote:
>
> >> I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.
>
> >> Isabella
>
who
> > paid for the research.
>
> The citizens of the United States paid for the research through their
> taxes and the research is conducted by reputable food scientists and
> staff of universities that have agriculture departments. For example:
> University of Georgia, Texas A&M, and other ag departments.

I'm glad you still have publicly funded research. In Canada over the
last decade or so, the focus has been market driven research (if you
can find a company to fund it you can do it) a trend we picked up from
the US. Even publicly funded research is usually joint venture with
control of the results resting with the corporate partners.
Consequently, the research that gets done tends to support product
development and marketing.

....
> No one is trying to tell you you can only use tested recipes, . ..

You may want to refer to the original post

>
> Before you started posting recently I had not heard of you and I've been
> posting here since 1992. Who are you, what are your bonafides, where do
> you live, and how long have you been preserving food? Or, are you just
> another troll?

Because you asked FutureCraft: Shaping Society's Future
http://clubweb.interbaun.com/~l-pphillips/

Top 20 in a Googlecom search for Larry Phillips, number 1 for pages
from Canada. However, my fame is for my work in education and
consumerism, not preserving.

In article
>,
ljp > wrote:

> On Aug 20, 4:23 pm, Isabella Woodhouse > wrote:
>
> > I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.
>
> fear mongering
> abuse of power
> arrogance
> misrepresentation
> paternalism

I'm not sure I'd go quite that far but I value your opinion nonetheless.
I am confident the University Extension Service people mean well. They
work, however, in a poorly funded program under the grant supervision of
an agency (USDA) which, especially in recent years, is far more
accountable to industry than to American consumers.

> Once upon a time it was my job to question expert opinion and I
> haven't lost the habit.
>
> The claim that only USDA approved and/or extension tested equipment
> and recipes are safe is patently absurd. People were canning long
> before these institutions existed and I am sure safe recipes and
> equipment are developed and tested world wide. Further, what you
> should have been told is that they know what they recommend is safe,
> but they haven't tested and don't have an opinion on other methods and
> equipment. As an international observer, I would note that it is US
> centric.

I agree that they should have told me they can only recommend certain
recipes or equipment but cannot give an opinion on ones they have not
tested, except to be careful maybe. One fact that gives your US-centric
theory credibility is that they had no problem with the All-American
brand of pressure canners even though the smallest size is 10.5 quarts.
They didn't warn me off that one but instead warned me off the 10 qt
Fagor which is made in Spain. I suspect they would have looked askance
at Kuhn-Rikon or other non-US brands as well. I never mentioned that I
was going to pressure-can in it though. I talked about making
small-batch jams and they simply jumped to conclusions.

> A problem with a lot of food and drug research is that media,
> marketers, and policy makers are prone to accepting research results
> as gospel without considering the statistical significance of the
> results or the presence of confirming studies. For example, I think
> coffee is ok these days because it prevents cancer, just like
> chocolate. Then there are eggs, good and bad cholesterol and many
> others.

While I'm not sure about the rest of the planet, I am pretty certain
that the traditional American media spends little money on investigation
and fact-checking these days.

[...]

Isabella
--
"I will show you fear in a handful of dust"
-T.S. Eliot

"Isabella Woodhouse" > wrote in message
...

Clipped )> than it answered. Despite that home canning activities have
steadily
> increased since the 1970s, the USDA seems to have spent virtually no
> money doing any significant research in the last 20-25 years. That's
> certainly a shock. So is the advice we are getting "best guesses" based
> on the old, but most recent, research they did? Are they simply trying
> to discourage home preserving, especially home canning, due to, perhaps,
> food industry pressure?
>
> I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.
> Isabella

"Don't you worry your head about it, pretty little lady."

Ye gods I hate it when officious twits decide they know the gospel and thou
are not allowed to interpret it. What's worse is any of them will tell you
what they *think* you need to know. What if they forgot something? What if
they don't like b**ts? What if they never saw a hot pepper in their life
(don't laugh - I was 19)?
Get thee hence, handmaiden, having understood the precepts of food
preservation and preserve away. Having good equipment helps. Knowing how and
why it works helps too.
Using tested recipes is the buffer for people who don't want to learn any
more. S'okay, too. I felt that way myself for a few years. Then I got
confidence & other geeky electronical stuff and shiny pots n' things.

Edrena, faithful disciple of St. Vinaigrette, Holy Order of the Sacred
Sisters & Brothers of St. Pectina of Jella (HOSS&BSPJ)

In article >,
"The Joneses" > wrote:

> "Isabella Woodhouse" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> Clipped )> than it answered. Despite that home canning activities have
> steadily
> > increased since the 1970s, the USDA seems to have spent virtually no
> > money doing any significant research in the last 20-25 years. That's
> > certainly a shock. So is the advice we are getting "best guesses" based
> > on the old, but most recent, research they did? Are they simply trying
> > to discourage home preserving, especially home canning, due to, perhaps,
> > food industry pressure?
> >
> > I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.
> > Isabella
>
> "Don't you worry your head about it, pretty little lady."

LOL. We're just way too busy watching soap operas and eating bon bons
to trouble ourselves with knowledge, eh?.

> Ye gods I hate it when officious twits decide they know the gospel and thou
> are not allowed to interpret it. What's worse is any of them will tell you
> what they *think* you need to know. What if they forgot something? What if
> they don't like b**ts? What if they never saw a hot pepper in their life
> (don't laugh - I was 19)?
> Get thee hence, handmaiden, having understood the precepts of food
> preservation and preserve away. Having good equipment helps. Knowing how and
> why it works helps too.
> Using tested recipes is the buffer for people who don't want to learn any
> more. S'okay, too. I felt that way myself for a few years. Then I got
> confidence & other geeky electronical stuff and shiny pots n' things.

I'm with you, sister.

Isabella
--
"I will show you fear in a handful of dust"
-T.S. Eliot

"Isabella Woodhouse" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> The Cook > wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:48:40 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
> > > wrote:
> >
> >
><http://www.newarkadvocate.com/apps/p...80819/LIFESTYL
E/
> > >808190336>
> > >
> > >interesting quote: "The trend is reflected in the sales of the popular
> > >Ball canning jars and supplies, said Chris Scherzinger, vice president
> > >of marketing for Jarden Home Brands, the maker of Ball products. Retail
> > >sales of Ball canning products have increased almost 30 percent this
> > >year, and sales of the company's plastic freezing containers have
> > >doubled in past year, according to market data from Information
> > >Resources Inc."
> >
> > I hope there isn't a comparable increase in botulism and other
> > illnesses from improperly canned food.
>
> I went to the extension service last week to have my dial gauge checked
> and to deliver some soil samples. Instead of going to the one for our
> county, I went to the closer one in the neighboring county that I hadn't
> been to before. After checking my gauge, they sat me down and gave me
> quite a lecture--- a very kind one--- on the importance of using
> approved canning methods and tested recipes. Though I am using approved
> methods, I listened very carefully. A refresher is always nice and you
> never really know as much as you think you do. They gave me a handout
> with a sobering horror story about this Boberg woman in Wisconsin
> getting botulism from her BWB canned carrots.
>
> What really shook me was when they told me never to use any recipe, for
> *any* kind of canning, unless it came from the extension service, the
> most recent BBB, or the USDA. She grilled me for 5 minutes on which
> version of the BBB I have. All I could tell her is that I use the most
> recent--- the one with the cheesecake on the front--- but she seemed not
> to think that was the most recent. She said especially not to use any
> recipe that comes with a canner because they are often out of date. I
> have a nice collection of recent, trusted canning and preserving books
> and I have used recipes from most of them. I no longer use older
> editions like Putting Food By, Stocking Up, and the like. I don't buy
> books where the author sounds like she does not know what she is doing.
>
> I mentioned my Fagor pressure cooker/canner and she really got upset.
> She said never to use it for pressure canning because (1) all the
> approved recipes are for the larger canners; and (2) the pressure
> canning recipes that came with the canner are not USDA approved (Is
> there some kind of formal USDA approval process?). She is talking about
> the USDA that so recently has allowed tens of thousands of people get
> food poisoning from tainted food products. Honestly, right now, I'd
> trust the extension service and the BBB over the USDA any day.
>
> While I had actually bought the Fagor to use for pressure cooking and
> small batch BWB canning, I was very shocked to hear what she said.
> All-American makes pressure canners between 10.5 qts and 41.5 qts. Are
> some of those too small? My Fagor is only 1/2 qt smaller. Presto
> currently makes a 16 and a 23 AFAIK. Is my 16 qt Presto too small? So
> I really don't understand what she means by "larger".
>
> I've read the dated Review of Home Preservation on the NCHFP website but
> did not find it particularly helpful as it seemed to ask more questions
> than it answered. Despite that home canning activities have steadily
> increased since the 1970s, the USDA seems to have spent virtually no
> money doing any significant research in the last 20-25 years. That's
> certainly a shock. So is the advice we are getting "best guesses" based
> on the old, but most recent, research they did? Are they simply trying
> to discourage home preserving, especially home canning, due to, perhaps,
> food industry pressure?
>
> I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.
>

In theory any generic pressure cooker can be converted into a canner
by addition of a dial guage. (A lot of people swear by weights,
but the problem with weights is that they have a much more coarse
granularity than a guage. Although, a guage can go out of calibration by
being treated badly, or simply by age)

However, most pressure cookers aren't deep enough to pressure
can anything other than one of those "squashed pint jars"

You also run into trouble with smaller pressure cookers not having
enough water capacity. If the canner runs out of water the jars
are likely going to crack, explode, food be burnt, canner be melted,
all kinds of nasty stuff.

With used pressure canners available from time to time at the
thrift shops, you would have to be daft to bother attempting to
pressure can in a converted pressure cooker.

The most popular pressure canner sizes are the 16 qt and the 21 qt with
good reason. 16qt pressure canners can do a nice batch of standard
sized pints. 21 qt canners can do a nice batch of standard sized
quarts.

Use of anything other than a standard size quart or pint or 1/2 pint
in a pressure canner (or the Classico equivalent) is highly risky.

1/2 gallon Mason jars can often still be found in thrift stores, these
should never be used for any kind of canning these days. Use them
for pickling.

Any recipie that includes hard parts of food is risky for pressure
canning. The biggest risk is canning meats that have bone still
in them (it sounds disgusting to me, but I suppose that someone
somewhere might attempt to do that) Small seeds are fine but
anything larger (corn cobs?) and you run the risk of the interior of
the hard part not reaching a high enough temp for long enough.

Fowl (chicken, turky, etc) is the worst of all things to pressure can,
meaning that it is guarenteed to be full of botulism. It always
carries the longest canning times - I think it's 45 minutes in a
pressure canner for pint jars of turkey or chicken, and 1.5 hours
for quart jars.

Any recipie that you find, even the hoariest old pressure canning
recipie, if you follow the times for pressure canning fowl in your
canner - you are guarenteed to kill all the pathogens. Of course,
the contents may have turned to mush after an hour in the
pressure canner.

And this is where the sticky point is. Obviously, foods are
heat sensitive, some more than others. Meats aren't that
bad, you can cook a stew in a crock pot for 8 hours and it
tastes wonderful. But you try that with tomatos and you
can forget it, you will have tasteless mush since all the
flavorants will have been cooked away. In short, it's easy
to can meats in a pressure canner - you just cook the hell
out of them and they taste great. But, since that won't work
with veggies, this is where the concern is on old pressure
canning recipies. Veggie recipies in the olden days sometimes
leaned towards the least amount of time in the pressure canner,
which was too short.

The rule of thumb used to be for recipies that you pressure
can that aren't tested for pressure canning, use the longest time
recommended for the individual ingredients in the recipie.
For example, your chicken soup that has carrots and onions
in it, use the time for canned chicken, not the shorter time
for canned onions.

I personally think this is a good rule, but obviously the
USDA is afraid of being sued so they are going to be as
conservative as possible.

Ted

"Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Fowl (chicken, turky, etc) is the worst of all things to pressure can,
> meaning that it is guarenteed to be full of botulism. It always
> carries the longest canning times - I think it's 45 minutes in a
> pressure canner for pint jars of turkey or chicken, and 1.5 hours
> for quart jars.

Just to be nitpicky here in case someone is reading and is naive enough to
can something based on an "I think" in usenet rather than checking in a
definitive source, the BCBoHP says pints of bone-in poultry need to be
processed for 65 minutes, 75 minutes for boneless poultry. It's 75 minutes
for bone-in quarts, and 90 for boneless.

Surprisingly, fish has a longer processing time -- it's 100 minutes for both
half-pints and pints.

Anny

"Anny Middon" > wrote in message
...
> "Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> Fowl (chicken, turky, etc) is the worst of all things to pressure can,
>> meaning that it is guarenteed to be full of botulism. It always
>> carries the longest canning times - I think it's 45 minutes in a
>> pressure canner for pint jars of turkey or chicken, and 1.5 hours
>> for quart jars.
>
> Just to be nitpicky here in case someone is reading and is naive enough to
> can something based on an "I think" in usenet rather than checking in a
> definitive source,

"I think" was intended to indicate "It's something around this but
you go look it up, I'm not going to do your work for you"

If I was going to be definitive, I would have said "it is" not "I think it
is"

> the BCBoHP says pints of bone-in poultry need to be processed for 65
> minutes, 75 minutes for boneless poultry. It's 75 minutes for bone-in
> quarts, and 90 for boneless.
>

I never use process times or recipie amounts from memory.

> Surprisingly, fish has a longer processing time -- it's 100 minutes for
> both half-pints and pints.
>

Interesting, I didn't know that. Probably because my pressure canner
instructions don't even list fish, and I've never had any interest in
canning it.

I would assume since the process times are the same for both sizes that
they arrived at that time by asking some engineer "OK we want to
make absolutely sure everything is dead in there"

Ted

In article >,
"Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote:

> "Isabella Woodhouse" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > The Cook > wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:48:40 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> ><http://www.newarkadvocate.com/apps/p...80819/LIFESTYL
> E/
> > > >808190336>
> > > >
> > > >interesting quote: "The trend is reflected in the sales of the popular
> > > >Ball canning jars and supplies, said Chris Scherzinger, vice president
> > > >of marketing for Jarden Home Brands, the maker of Ball products. Retail
> > > >sales of Ball canning products have increased almost 30 percent this
> > > >year, and sales of the company's plastic freezing containers have
> > > >doubled in past year, according to market data from Information
> > > >Resources Inc."
> > >
> > > I hope there isn't a comparable increase in botulism and other
> > > illnesses from improperly canned food.
> >
> > I went to the extension service last week to have my dial gauge checked
> > and to deliver some soil samples. Instead of going to the one for our
> > county, I went to the closer one in the neighboring county that I hadn't
> > been to before. After checking my gauge, they sat me down and gave me
> > quite a lecture--- a very kind one--- on the importance of using
> > approved canning methods and tested recipes. Though I am using approved
> > methods, I listened very carefully. A refresher is always nice and you
> > never really know as much as you think you do. They gave me a handout
> > with a sobering horror story about this Boberg woman in Wisconsin
> > getting botulism from her BWB canned carrots.
> >
> > What really shook me was when they told me never to use any recipe, for
> > *any* kind of canning, unless it came from the extension service, the
> > most recent BBB, or the USDA. She grilled me for 5 minutes on which
> > version of the BBB I have. All I could tell her is that I use the most
> > recent--- the one with the cheesecake on the front--- but she seemed not
> > to think that was the most recent. She said especially not to use any
> > recipe that comes with a canner because they are often out of date. I
> > have a nice collection of recent, trusted canning and preserving books
> > and I have used recipes from most of them. I no longer use older
> > editions like Putting Food By, Stocking Up, and the like. I don't buy
> > books where the author sounds like she does not know what she is doing.
> >
> > I mentioned my Fagor pressure cooker/canner and she really got upset.
> > She said never to use it for pressure canning because (1) all the
> > approved recipes are for the larger canners; and (2) the pressure
> > canning recipes that came with the canner are not USDA approved (Is
> > there some kind of formal USDA approval process?). She is talking about
> > the USDA that so recently has allowed tens of thousands of people get
> > food poisoning from tainted food products. Honestly, right now, I'd
> > trust the extension service and the BBB over the USDA any day.
> >
> > While I had actually bought the Fagor to use for pressure cooking and
> > small batch BWB canning, I was very shocked to hear what she said.
> > All-American makes pressure canners between 10.5 qts and 41.5 qts. Are
> > some of those too small? My Fagor is only 1/2 qt smaller. Presto
> > currently makes a 16 and a 23 AFAIK. Is my 16 qt Presto too small? So
> > I really don't understand what she means by "larger".
> >
> > I've read the dated Review of Home Preservation on the NCHFP website but
> > did not find it particularly helpful as it seemed to ask more questions
> > than it answered. Despite that home canning activities have steadily
> > increased since the 1970s, the USDA seems to have spent virtually no
> > money doing any significant research in the last 20-25 years. That's
> > certainly a shock. So is the advice we are getting "best guesses" based
> > on the old, but most recent, research they did? Are they simply trying
> > to discourage home preserving, especially home canning, due to, perhaps,
> > food industry pressure?
> >
> > I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.
>
> In theory any generic pressure cooker can be converted into a canner
> by addition of a dial guage. (A lot of people swear by weights,
> but the problem with weights is that they have a much more coarse
> granularity than a guage. Although, a guage can go out of calibration by
> being treated badly, or simply by age)
>
> However, most pressure cookers aren't deep enough to pressure
> can anything other than one of those "squashed pint jars"
>
> You also run into trouble with smaller pressure cookers not having
> enough water capacity. If the canner runs out of water the jars
> are likely going to crack, explode, food be burnt, canner be melted,
> all kinds of nasty stuff.

All-American makes a 10.5 qt pressure canner. Are you saying it does
not work?

> With used pressure canners available from time to time at the
> thrift shops, you would have to be daft to bother attempting to
> pressure can in a converted pressure cooker.

Not sure where you picked up the notion of a "converted pressure
cooker". That is not what I was talking about to be sure. I did not
know that people were converting pressure cookers.
[...]

Thanks for responding.

Isabella
--
"I will show you fear in a handful of dust"
-T.S. Eliot

"Isabella Woodhouse" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Ted Mittelstaedt" > wrote:
>
> > "Isabella Woodhouse" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > In article >,
> > > The Cook > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:48:40 -0500, Melba's Jammin'
> > > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> >
><http://www.newarkadvocate.com/apps/p...80819/LIFESTYL
> > E/
> > > > >808190336>
> > > > >
> > > > >interesting quote: "The trend is reflected in the sales of the
popular
> > > > >Ball canning jars and supplies, said Chris Scherzinger, vice
president
> > > > >of marketing for Jarden Home Brands, the maker of Ball products.
Retail
> > > > >sales of Ball canning products have increased almost 30 percent
this
> > > > >year, and sales of the company's plastic freezing containers have
> > > > >doubled in past year, according to market data from Information
> > > > >Resources Inc."
> > > >
> > > > I hope there isn't a comparable increase in botulism and other
> > > > illnesses from improperly canned food.
> > >
> > > I went to the extension service last week to have my dial gauge
checked
> > > and to deliver some soil samples. Instead of going to the one for our
> > > county, I went to the closer one in the neighboring county that I
hadn't
> > > been to before. After checking my gauge, they sat me down and gave me
> > > quite a lecture--- a very kind one--- on the importance of using
> > > approved canning methods and tested recipes. Though I am using
approved
> > > methods, I listened very carefully. A refresher is always nice and
you
> > > never really know as much as you think you do. They gave me a handout
> > > with a sobering horror story about this Boberg woman in Wisconsin
> > > getting botulism from her BWB canned carrots.
> > >
> > > What really shook me was when they told me never to use any recipe,
for
> > > *any* kind of canning, unless it came from the extension service, the
> > > most recent BBB, or the USDA. She grilled me for 5 minutes on which
> > > version of the BBB I have. All I could tell her is that I use the
most
> > > recent--- the one with the cheesecake on the front--- but she seemed
not
> > > to think that was the most recent. She said especially not to use any
> > > recipe that comes with a canner because they are often out of date. I
> > > have a nice collection of recent, trusted canning and preserving books
> > > and I have used recipes from most of them. I no longer use older
> > > editions like Putting Food By, Stocking Up, and the like. I don't buy
> > > books where the author sounds like she does not know what she is
doing.
> > >
> > > I mentioned my Fagor pressure cooker/canner and she really got upset.
> > > She said never to use it for pressure canning because (1) all the
> > > approved recipes are for the larger canners; and (2) the pressure
> > > canning recipes that came with the canner are not USDA approved (Is
> > > there some kind of formal USDA approval process?). She is talking
about
> > > the USDA that so recently has allowed tens of thousands of people get
> > > food poisoning from tainted food products. Honestly, right now, I'd
> > > trust the extension service and the BBB over the USDA any day.
> > >
> > > While I had actually bought the Fagor to use for pressure cooking and
> > > small batch BWB canning, I was very shocked to hear what she said.
> > > All-American makes pressure canners between 10.5 qts and 41.5 qts.
Are
> > > some of those too small? My Fagor is only 1/2 qt smaller. Presto
> > > currently makes a 16 and a 23 AFAIK. Is my 16 qt Presto too small?
So
> > > I really don't understand what she means by "larger".
> > >
> > > I've read the dated Review of Home Preservation on the NCHFP website
but
> > > did not find it particularly helpful as it seemed to ask more
questions
> > > than it answered. Despite that home canning activities have steadily
> > > increased since the 1970s, the USDA seems to have spent virtually no
> > > money doing any significant research in the last 20-25 years. That's
> > > certainly a shock. So is the advice we are getting "best guesses"
based
> > > on the old, but most recent, research they did? Are they simply
trying
> > > to discourage home preserving, especially home canning, due to,
perhaps,
> > > food industry pressure?
> > >
> > > I'd appreciate any thoughts you all have on these topics.
> >
> > In theory any generic pressure cooker can be converted into a canner
> > by addition of a dial guage. (A lot of people swear by weights,
> > but the problem with weights is that they have a much more coarse
> > granularity than a guage. Although, a guage can go out of calibration
by
> > being treated badly, or simply by age)
> >
> > However, most pressure cookers aren't deep enough to pressure
> > can anything other than one of those "squashed pint jars"
> >
> > You also run into trouble with smaller pressure cookers not having
> > enough water capacity. If the canner runs out of water the jars
> > are likely going to crack, explode, food be burnt, canner be melted,
> > all kinds of nasty stuff.
>
> All-American makes a 10.5 qt pressure canner. Are you saying it does
> not work?
>

I'm sure it works - but you could only fit very small jars in there, and
not many of them. There is a point in canning at which it is so much effort
to setup for a canning run that it is pointless to do small batches.

It takes a half to full hour to get up steam in a pressure canner to
even begin to start timing it for processing, then there is the processing
time itself, and then there is the cooldown with is at least another
hour. For something like turkey soup you easily have 3-4 hours
into final preparation then canning. And the process time would
be the same whether it was a 10 quart canner or a 21 quart canner.

Putting all that time into canning something like 4 half pints when
for the same time you could can 6 pints, is simply crazy. For a
tenth of the effort you could throw the 2 pints into the freezer.

I find a 16 quart BWB canner to be fine for 6 - 7 1/2 pint jars, and
just barely usable for 3 quart jars - and this on a gas stove where
I can get the canner boiling just below where it would be spitting
water all over the stove.

The reason that people are selling and buying the 10 quart canners
is that there's a lot of people out there stuck with really crappy
electric stoves. I canned for a year on one and it was insane.
Heat regulation was a bitch, but the worst of it is that even the 16
quart canner was large enough to overhang the elements by 2-3
inches - which of course trapped the heat in the burner area
which caused the burner to make the bakelight sockets the
burner plugged into, turn brittle, and the metal blades in the
sockets to soften. As a result after about 2 -3 canning batches
the element would burn out the socket and I would have to
go to the appliance store and buy a new one then open up
the stove and cut the old socket out and wire in the new one.
And the sockets were 17 bucks a crack. The trapped heat also
tended to bake any spilled food into the surface of the stove
so cleaning off the cooktop was at least a 2 hour project of
scrubbing at it. And the temp knobs were in the back so
to adjust the temp with a big fat canner on it, you almost
always burned your arm trying to poke at the dial.

After a year of that I said hell with this and
sold the stove for $80 on craigslist and bought a 4 year old
really nice, digital readout, used gas stove for something like $200,
it was the best appliance purchase I ever made. Now my canner sits
level, and the flame can be adjusted to cover the bottom,
and I can put a pot of cut up apples on the stove, set the
flame to just barely visible, then come back 2 hours later
and the apples are fully cooked down without being burned
all over the bottom of the pot. The burner controls are in
the front where God intended stove burner controls to be,
and both are kids are scared of the snap-snap-snap of the
electric ignition spark and so give the stove a wide berth.
And with the recent electric bill rate increase, the stove will
probably have paid for itself in energy bill savings in another
3 years.

The 10 quart canners I've seen are 10 quarts because they
are narrow - basically they are the width of a large electric
element on a stove, they set perfectly on the element without
overhanging it. That's great if you want the canning process to
not melt your stove wiring. But they are really for people who
might pressure can once a year, one time, a very small batch.

Ted

"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message
...
> <http://www.newarkadvocate.com/apps/p...0080819/LIFEST
> YLE/808190336>
>
> interesting quote: "The trend is reflected in the sales of the popular
> Ball canning jars and supplies, said Chris Scherzinger, vice president
> of marketing for Jarden Home Brands, the maker of Ball products. Retail
> sales of Ball canning products have increased almost 30 percent this
> year, and sales of the company's plastic freezing containers have
> doubled in past year, according to market data from Information
> Resources Inc."
>

I told you so!!!

Ted