ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › Minimum Safe Internal Temperatures
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Minimum Safe Internal Temperatures

post #1 of 14
10/6/09 at 1:02am
Thread Starter 
This is in relation to recommended safe internal temperatures as it relates to cooking meat products.

Having not found a central UK authority that provides information similar to that of the USDA, yet having occasionally seen some differences that exist between recommendations of different countries, I became interested in where members sourced their information in relation to safe cooking temperatures.

As a domestic cook in the UK, I'm quite happy to use the USDA figures as I'm not subject to any local council regulations that may differ.

Do you use a source other than the USDA?

As information does occasionally change, do you ever make an effort to return to your source of information to check first hand that your information is still valid?
Reply

Featured Stories on ChefTalk.com

Great product that allows you to manually adjust the sharpening angle for each knife
When Cooks Cook for Themselves
A clinical look at how a restaurant runs
post #2 of 14
10/6/09 at 1:28am
Hey Andy

Have you tried looking at the Governments Food Standard Agency website?

Food Standards Agency - Homepage
Reply
post #3 of 14
10/6/09 at 2:18am
Thread Starter 
Hi Bazza,

Yes thanks, I've seen that site and although I may have missed something, it doesn't appear to operate on quite the same consumer level that the USDA does.

There are a lot of reports that aren't aimed at the domestic consumer. Where there are links to consumer friendly information, it appears to offer little more than blanket advice to make sure any meat product is piping hot at 70C for 2 mins.:-

Food Standards Agency - Eat well, be well - Cooking
Reply
post #4 of 14
10/6/09 at 4:05am
Andy, don't think our USDA or FDA is wonderful, they make plenty of beauratic errors. The problem is they are staffed by to many managers and administrators and not enough FOOD PEOPLE. To many unenforcable laws and to many departments. We here need only 1 or 2 tops Department of food safety administrations, not 10 or 12 each going a different direction and trying to prove how vital they are. It is simply a justification of jobs not needed.

Chopped meat internal 165 F
poultry 165 f
Beef roast(solid) 135 and up (ex primeal rib )
fish varies ( frozen 72 hours first is best)

Keep in mind when you take items from oven they will still cook.
CHEFED
Reply
post #5 of 14
10/6/09 at 4:37am
Thread Starter 
Hi Ed.

Sure, not a lot of perfect out there for anyone I guess. Still, I prefer the way the USDA puts the information out there with product specific figures.

I'd be interested to hear where cooks from other countries go to for their information.
Reply
post #6 of 14
10/6/09 at 4:50am
One thing I have noticed over many years is ethnics .Afro American, Haitian, Jamaican all well done meat , no blood ,not all but most. Italian well done no blood most not all , from the Med reigon the same. The reasoning I believe was caused by lack of refrigeration till a later time in these countries. The French smoked or salted and then covered the tast with a sauce of some kind, therefore becoming famous for their sauces. I find all of this interesting.
CHEFED
Reply
post #7 of 14
10/6/09 at 5:17am
Here's a cool little refrigerator magnet that may help with final cooking temperatures.

Measure Magnet & Cooking Temperature Magnet
Chef Todd Mohr
http://www.WebCookingClasses.com
Reply
post #8 of 14
10/6/09 at 5:37am
Thread Starter 
Hi ChefTodd,

Thanks for the add. Looking at the temps on the magnet - aren't they out of date? It still has whole chicken at 180F, whereas I understood this was revised a while back to 165F in line with the other poultry recommendations.

It does feed into my second question though, about how often members double check their information from trusted sources. I suspect there are a lot of people who learn the temperatures or have magnets like this, and then never check to see if that info remains valid.
Reply
post #9 of 14
10/6/09 at 9:28am
180 Is to high it will fall apart as it still cooks after taking out . 165 is correct
CHEFED
Reply
post #10 of 14
10/6/09 at 10:35am
One problem with things like those magnets, and even the markings on many termometers, is that the makers took the figures from USDA published data. Trouble is, USDA uses the top final temperature, not the cook-to temperature.

Thus, if a final internal temp should be, say, 170, that's what USDA publishes. But, of course, if you actually cook it to that point it will continue to 180 or even 185.

I can understand why they do that. Resting is too nebulous a variable to come up with any sort of chart. So they err on the side of caution. They see their role as providing safe food, not necessarily palatable food.
They have taken the oath of the brother in blood, in leavened bread and salt. Rudyard Kipling
Reply
post #11 of 14
10/6/09 at 10:55am
160 for pork???? A loin chop would be a dry chewy hunk of ick at that temp. I take lean pork no higher than 145.
Reply
post #12 of 14
12/13/09 at 8:35am

temperatures

Here is the thing. I used to be a food safety inspector in two different states and the temperatures were slightly different depending on the Food Code version used in each State.
I don't think it makes much of a difference if you use the latest one because they change it based on science.

Here are the minimum internal temperatures:
Whole intact muscle (like a steak) - 145F
Ground meats (excluding poultry) - 155F
Pork - 145F
Eggs and Fish - 145F
Poultry - 165F

Now these temperatures don't take in consideration that you might like your steak rare (like I do).. The state allows guest requests (variation on temperatures depending on how you like your meat cooked) for whole beef, whole pork, eggs, ground meats (excluding poultry), fish (like salmon). There isn't a variation in temperature for poultry. So no medium rare chicken!!! and that (even if a lot of us disagree) includes duck.

Hope this explanation helps you.
Reply
post #13 of 14
10/1/12 at 6:40pm

What about sausage.  I really like chorizo (Mexican) but I am always unsure of when it is done.  I figure it is pork sausage, or chopped meat and so at 155 -165 it should be at least done to meet safety concerns.  Is there any reason to doubt that?

Reply
post #14 of 14
10/1/12 at 7:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregac1984 View Post

What about sausage.  I really like chorizo (Mexican) but I am always unsure of when it is done.  I figure it is pork sausage, or chopped meat and so at 155 -165 it should be at least done to meet safety concerns.  Is there any reason to doubt that?

Not in my opinion.

 

Remember, safety is a time-temperature solution, not just a fixed temperature, most temperatures listed refer to a 15 second duration.

 

Example: Beef @ 155°F for 15 seconds or 135°F for 75 minutes are both considered pasteurized (bacteria killed)

Chef,
Specialties: MasterCook/RecipeFox; Culinary logistics; Personal Chef; Small restaurant owner; Caterer
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Food & Cooking

Featured Stories on ChefTalk.com

Great product that allows you to manually adjust the sharpening angle for each knife
When Cooks Cook for Themselves
A clinical look at how a restaurant runs
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › Minimum Safe Internal Temperatures