Sous vide New York steak

The company that makes these is based right here in Houston. I almost sold them a phone system. Had their word. Then had an email saying they were getting me a check ready. Then, a week later they say they went and bought one on their own. You know what they say. Its not a deal till the checks in your hand. The devise is awesome though.

I'm actually much interested in this process, in part due to my long regard of cooking as chemistry. I also think that if properly managed sous vide may have some real useful applications for folks like me that do a lot of remote camping. The idea that part of the cooking process could be done before leaving home is quite attractive to me. New reasons for more research into best ways to manage inherent risks as measured against potential benefits.

Thanks to all for the very interesting discussion!

Mine do too. Steaks less than an inch or so do don't really benefit much from SV.
A cheaper thick cut like 2.5 inch thick top sirloin or a thick bison steak is another matter.
You can take a two rib 3" thick pork chop to a perfect 147 degrees for four hours and have a perfect, tender hunk a meat that just needs a crust on a hot grill or a cast iron skillet. And not just meats. Perfect risotto without stirring. Perfect polenta.

My steaks look and taste great in about 6 minutes on the grill....Whatever works for you is fine with me :C

Big Katuna wrote:
Thanks for the post. Look at that huge safe zone.

The graphic is a model, as indicated by its author's qualifying remarks included with the image. It is not intended to be definitive, as he clearly states. Too many unknowns/variables. Sous vide cookery would be one such variable, mostly due to the vacuum packaging that adds a whole new dimension. But hopefully projects like the one I linked to happening in Great Britain will shed more light on the subject.

Meanwhile, my former recommendation stands: closely follow all instructions given by the makers of the appliances!

Thanks for the post. Look at that huge safe zone.

And as a health professional would agree that there are hundreds if not thousands of SV cookers safely in use?

Big Katuna wrote:
Y Could you link to the graph with the time temp chart below the one you showed that shows the huge safe zone for temps under four hours? Please?

Gladly, but with the understanding that it's offered within that article as a potential model upon which future graphs might be based. The author does not maintain that it's authoritative, but developed as a means of providing a more multidimensional look at the problem. He also states, here quoting

Dr.Frank L. Bryan, Ph. D., M.P.H. wrote:
This presentation is complex because of (a) the semi-log scale; (b) inaccuracies caused by generalizing data concerning specific pathogens to values for all foodborne pathogens; and (c) shaded portions give relative but not precise degrees of risk. The danger zone ought to be considered as a concept that has dimensions of time, temperature and degrees of risk. Time and temperature can be obtained from research data, but risks must be estimated.

As I've expressed several times, the added dimension of the airless environment during sous vide must be considered as a separate factor that falls within the "estimated risk" portion of the above quoted statement. And there is in fact very little information available on the effect of that extra dimension, as noted by the following link to the beginning of a study evidently now happening in Great Britain. Link to study

You know, I agree with the 120 statement. I never cook SV less than 130. There are a few pathogens than can grow(although very slowly) at 125 or so.

Although red meat at 120 from a trusted source(not Walmart) doesn't scare me.

And yes, there is fear mongering and a tad bit of bullying going here but not by you.

I am on iOS device and it isn't easy doing links. Could you link to the graph with the time temp chart below the one you showed that shows the huge safe zone for temps under four hours? Please?

Big Katuna wrote:
Francesca;

In plain English, answer me these;

Are saying Sous Vide cooking, following recommended time/temperature schedules, is inherently dangerous?

Is a chicken breast cooked at 140 degrees at three hours unsafe to eat?

The process is not "inherently dangerous" IF standards are adhered to.

It isn't as casual as some make it sound. I'd point out, for example, the O.P.'s instructions to set the temp for this steak at 120 degrees. That may be the conventionally cooked internal temp for rare, but lower than sous vide industry recommendations for a four hour exposure of vacuum packed meat- and a long time in the 'danger zone" on the chart above.

All I said is that protocols must be carefully followed. The process is delicate, and dependent on close attention to the safeguards provided in instructions.

Francesca;

In plain English, answer me these;

Are saying Sous Vide cooking, following recommended time/temperature schedules, is inherently dangerous?

Is a chicken breast cooked at 140 degrees at three hours unsafe to eat?