@rumtscho It's not the question of whether or not salt (or more accurately brine) is absorbed, but rather the insistence that there is some kind of transformation taking place. Even though there's no evidence, no logic, or even a plausible explanation of the mechanism or result.
It's not being approached from the perspective of trying to test a theory. Instead the assumption is simply stated, and no alternatives are tolerated.
Really does seem like a waste of time at this point; I hate to say it, but it's like arguing with a religious zealot, it's a lost cause.
Yes, I only forget how hopeless it is in between talks with him :(
Actually, I still think that some kind of transformation can take place through salt. I only doubt that this is the reason why it makes meat tolerable, because I think his conclusions (juicy -> salt penetration) are inaccurate.
This is the difference salt makes in ground meat, as found by the good old Food lab.
I have some hope that if it doesn't help him get better, he will recognize that it wasn't the salt. Although, this hope diminishes every time I speak with him.
@rumtscho Considering how long this has already been going on for, I doubt it. He just automatically dismisses any evidence that doesn't fit his theory.
Not to mention, anxiety can do some pretty awful things to the gut, stomach ulcers and all - the psychological factors alone are probably contributing to the problem. Every time something doesn't seem "right" to him, he freaks out, and that makes the problem worse.
@rumtscho As for the burger thing, I don't see how that adds up to a chemical change, it's just a change in texture and appearance, and we already know about that. When salt is ground into meat, it toughens the meat. It does the exact opposite of what James thinks it does.
It would be ironic if it turns out that he can't tolerate undercooked meat or overcooked meat, but the correct thing is well-cooked meat, with the extremes being a problem (I don't know why, maybe causing too much gastric acid production or something).
@Aaronut The change in texture is caused by a chemical change in the raw meat proteins. Both Kenji and McGee confirm it.
But whether this is the right change? I have no idea at all.
@rumtscho That would be pretty unlikely on the "overcooked" front unless it was being cooked completely improperly, e.g. by rapid boiling.
All proteins will denature if they're cooked long enough, and eventually you're getting nothing but amino acids and byproducts; if that's not digestible, "perfectly-cooked" protein won't be either.
@rumtscho Not sure what it is that you're referring to here; at what point do either of them suggest that the effect of salt on raw meat is anything other than desiccation?
On a totally unrelated subject, have you noticed an uptick in inappropriate anonymous edits? I just rejected two that were adding totally new content, both somewhat ranty and clearly meant as comments. Where are they picking up this behaviour from?
"High salt concentrations cause the normally tightly bunched protein filaments in the muscle cells to separate into individual filaments, which are too small to scatter light: so the normally opaque muscle tissue becomes translucent." - A quote of McGee via Kenji.
@rumtscho I think we need to define "high" here - that's what happens when you cook in a brine, yes.
But if you pack raw meat into a brick of salt, it's not going to get all nice and tender, it's going to dry out and get very tough, like jerky or any other cured meat.
So I rejected the edit, but kept the text as comment, noting in brackets that it wasn't my own comment but that of an anonymous user.
I think that it could be the same person, who for some reason doesn't want an account - or maybe thinks it takes too much time and/or effort to gain enough rep for commenting - and trying to get us to convert other edits to comments.
The one I noticed today but didn't do anything about was added as [Comment: blah blah]
I wasn't too happy about it. I mean, we can close an eye once, but I don't want it to become endemic.
I approved it the first time, thinking that it adds some value, and that the person will never again visit us - they didn't bother to create an account after all.
If we consequently reject further tries, it will hopefully be discouragement enough.
I don't know what the appropriate behaviour would be for this anonymous user. Maybe to add an answer saying "What X said is true, but he pointed out he doesn't know the difference between veal and beef. In fact, veal is made from baby cows, and beef from adult cows" or something like that.
But I don't think we have a way to communicate this.
Frankly, I am surprised that somebody new to the SE network would use the anonymous edit feature instead the "Add answer" feature.
People who don't know us tend to not even know that anonymous edits are possible.
Could it be somebody who doesn't want to reveal his identity?
It would be funny, imagine Jon Skeet deciding to participate in Cooking, but being afraid that his so-so comments would damage his know-it-all image. And he knows that sockpuppets can be caught. So, he just posts anon.
(Not that don't I believe that this is what is happening; I just find the mental image amusing).
@Aaronut Let's face it, 99% of first-time visitors to the site think we function like any old forum, and overlook it. The chance of two people noticing it within a few days and misusing it for comment leaving is very, very low.
We know that almost every new visitor with a comment-worthy information leaves it as a new answer; we have seen it happen thousands of times.
As for who it is, I won't speculate; I have no information which could point me to any user (beside the fact that it might be a user from another SE site, but unknown on Cooking)
This is what an anonymous editor sees.
Maybe we should request a feature, that the text in the red box says also "If you have additional information, consider posting your own answer instead of making a big change in somebody else's answer"
my wife Birthday is coming. she's the "pastry chef" of the family and friends, but lucky for her, I learned some things from her.
Anyway, she really loves chocolate and amarena cherry so here's what i thought:
layer of sponge cake, amarena cherry sauce (cherries, wine and sugar) chocolate mousse,...
The internal card seems to be good enough. In fact, when I connect the external one, it sounds worse, because the bad recording is reproduced in more detail.
Actually, I have to complain about the BBC this morning. They announce their fearless leader is stepping down, and already the journalistic standards are declining! bbc.co.uk/nature/17404059
"During its winter hibernation, a black bear's core body temperature is reduced by as much as 7C (45F)…"
Well, then, economically speaking, you'd need to multiply the fine by the probability of being caught, fudge it a little for additional risk, and then if that's lower, you should never buy a ticket.
He was asked to pay 10 Eur. He couldn't imagine it being so cheap - after all, you have to pay more in Sofia, and the normal ticket in Sofia is much cheaper.
So he thought that the conductor is asking him for a bribe.
Hmmm, is that charged cash-only? Otherwise, I'd think, just suggest paying by credit card. Much harder for the conductor to siphon off some of that revenue
It is not so rare. If you are caught without a ticket, the conductor takes you off the bus, and tells you: The fine would be 20 Eur, and you know it. But if you pay me 5 Eur, I won't report you and there will be no record of you being caught.
Pretty much every business takes credit cards here. Even the fast food places gave in, eventually. Haven't spent cash at a business for several years, really.
But yes, here in Germany, you don't pay cash. I had once forgotten my semester-long bus card (had used it as a bookmark and not taken it back out of the book) and they caught me. I had to go to their central office to show them a name-bound ticket valid for the date I was caught, and pay a 5 Eur fine (instead of the 40 if I hadn't had a ticket at all). I couldn#t pay the fee at the central office, had to make a bank transfer.
Your answer is helpful, but you can make it better by including a summary or relevant portions of the pages you're linking to. This will also help your answer remain great even if the links you included break in the future.
that's how it normally goes, but seems like I should remove the first clause in this case :-(
@Mien hypothetically, I think OP could have asked "will it be good enough" by asking it in a more answerable manner, e.g., asking if a pastry chef would consider it an appropriate 30 yr anniversary cake
Sort of like, you could ask a chef if a some dish would be considered an appropriate main course for a formal dinner.
This isn't listed as either on-topic or off-topic in our FAQ, but this sort of "culinary tradition" question would seem to fit, to me at least
I guess it might work. Check this site to see the effect of vinegar on bread (dough). Then, tell me how it tasted.
