How long does it take for buttermilk to go bad? I love making buttermilk pancakes but I can never seem to use up my buttermilk before it passes the expiration date. The thing is, if I take a solid whiff of the "expired" buttermilk it smells great (even up to a month after the expire date).

How can I tell if it's still ok to use?

Buttermilk is already thoroughly packed with live bacteria. During its manufacture, that bacteria already consumed some portion of the available lactose and turned it into lactic acid.

Because of the lack of food, acidity, and the extreme competition it is pretty hard for buttermilk to go bad. The good bacteria will stay active and the buttermilk will get thicker and more sour until it runs out of lactose. In fact- when your buttermilk container has about 1/2 cup left you can make more just by refilling the container with milk and leaving it to ferment on the counter for a day. If you use it up more quickly than the bacteria eat the lactose then you can keep this up indefinitely.

Don't worry if it is thicker- if it still smells good then it probably is. As Noctrine said- mold around the lip is the worst risk. I am not a food chemist and despite my personal experience- if you ever suspect that food is bad just throw it out. $2 of buttermilk isn't worth an unpleasant afternoon.

I also have a plastic container of buttermilk in the back of my frig cause it's coldest there for some reason and my expired in nov and it stills smells like buttermilk . I just shake it up before using , do the sniff test, and ck for mold and chunky texture if it's all good then I'm baking . Today I will be making banana bread
Happy cooking


How to make thick and fluffy pancakes? I recently had thick and fluffy pancakes at a restaurant and I am eager to figure out how to make them.

Anyone know the secret behind getting thick and fluffy pancakes? Is it adding baking soda? Using carbonated water (does this even work?)?

Separating the eggs and whipping the egg whites before folding into the batter could assist in this.  At home it's not a problem, but if it's a very busy that you had them in they're not likely to be doing this due to the fact that this will need to be done in batches.

Adding a bit of baking soda in addition to the baking powder could assist as well, but only if you're using buttermilk.  If you're using regular milk the baking soda is going to create a soapy taste. In the case of buttermilk and baking soda, the primary leavening would be coming from the baking powder and then the acidity of the buttermilk would provide the reaction for the soda to give that extra "oomph".  If you're using baking soda then you'll have to use the batter right away otherwise those bubble will rise to the surface and pop, releasing their CO2 to the air. Same goes with adding seltzer water...add just before cooking the pancakes.

As for replacing milk with seltzer water...this will add bubbles to the batter but having less fat in the batter (presuming you're using whole milk) will increase the gluten development.  If you're using low-fat or nonfat buttermilk or regular milk it may not be as much of a difference.  The benefit of buttermilk (besides flavor) is the acidity that it provides.  Acidic doughs don't allow gluten to develop as easily and therefore create a more tender texture.

Overmixing pancake batter is a MAJOR issue with most people.  Make a well in the center of the dry ingredients, add the liquid ingredients which have already been beaten together and then carefuly fold just until combined so there aren't major pockets of dry ingredients but by no means should the batter be smooth.  Mixing to a smooth consistency will develop gluten and create tough pancakes.  A few lumps are fine as they will hydrate upon sitting.

If you're not using baking soda and seltzer water you can improve tenderness by letting your pancake batter sit after mixing for 30-60 minutes.  This is the idea behind chilling pastry crusts.  It not only allows gluten to relax but mainly it allows the starch granules of the flour to absorb moisture, hydrate, and expand (bloom).  This is could likely be part of what contributed to the pancakes you enjoyed at the restaurant.  If it's a very busy place, most likely they produce their pancake batter in large batches a day ahead for the next day's service.  This extended resting time would allow for maximum hydration of the starch which will make a thicker batter.  The thicker the batter the less spread you'll have on the griddle.  Obviously this provides limitations if you wake up with an appetite for pancakes!

A way I accidentally stumbled onto in the past is to use a large amount of icing sugar. The pancakes coming out very fluffy and nice. I wish I could tell you the amount I used but its been so long since I have made them. I accidentally mistook icing sugar as flour so in the end I probably used 1:1 or 1:2 icing sugar:flour ratio. I'm not sure if that much is needed though, you will have to experiment


What type of tea should I use to make Thai Iced Tea? I love the sweet iced tea you get at Thai restaurants, and want to make my own at home.  I used to buy a concentrated solution online (added water and half and half), but they discontinued it.  I'm not sure what type of tea is used, but it is reddish in color and has hints of coconut taste in it. Cheers!

I currently live in Thailand and there is really only 1 brand that's used (If there is another brand I've never seen anyone use it!) nationwide by all the street vendors to make traditional Thai Ice Tea and that's this one...

I don't know the name of it but I'm pretty sure it's just Number One Brand. I'll confirm the name when I get chance!

As far as I can determine, there is no such thing as "Thai" tea. It's very strongly brewed black tea, and the color (originally) came from Tamarind pulp. In the US, where we don't deal well with tamarind, it's likely to be food coloring. The "secret sauce" is a combination of orange blossom water, star anise, and sometimes other spices like cinnamon or cassia, all sweetened with evaporated milk and sugar. The actual recipe is usually pretty well guarded, so experiment.


Should I pre-season meat with salt even if it's skinless? I read a lot of mentions of pre seasoning meat with salt 24 hours before cooking, with the idea that it draws moisture out, which can make the skin crispy when you cook it. I've also heard that it can make it more absorbent of marinade, but not sure if that's true. Anyways, my question is is this worth doing even if the meat i have is just boneless skinless chicken breasts (for example)?

If the chicken is not left exposed to the air (see below), then seasoning ahead of time will not dry out the chicken; in fact, it will do the opposite. When salt is applied to the surface the osmotic pressure differential (the difference in salinity between the inside and outside of the chicken) will draw out moisture at first, then the salty water will be drawn back into the chicken, helping to break down muscle fibers and season the chicken inside.

You will lose less moisture when cooking, and your chicken will be more tender, moister, and better seasoned.

This is also true for steaks and other fleshy comestibles. The use of salt is a complicated subject and there has been a lot written about it. Unfortunately, there is a lot of false information out there, even from famous, professional chefs. For example: whether to pre-season eggs for scrambled eggs or not.

I have done my own tests with seasoning and also read a lot on the subject. One thing I found, for example, is when sous videing chicken, white meat and dark meat behave differently with regard to pre-seasoning and need different temperatures and different lengths of time. In the case of white meat I find it comes out better with no pre-seasoning, and with dark meat, which I sous vide for longer, the affect of pre-salting becomes less pronounced the longer you cook it for. I do my dark meat for eight hours.

If you are going to pre-salt, do it at least 45 minutes ahead of time. If you salt a steak, for example, 20 minutes before cooking it will be worse than salting right before cooking or an hour before cooking.

Note: Dry aging of meat and poultry can be done at home, and in this case you want to leave the meat unwrapped in the fridge. For example, when I make a whole turkey I spatchcock it then dry brine (with salt only, no liquid) for three days covered and then one more day uncovered. This makes really crispy skin and the salt gets deep into the flesh for better seasoning and moister turkey.

I could write a book on this subject, but fortunately, people much smarter than I already have. I suggest you read Harold McGee and Kenji López-Alt's books as a start.

I wouldn’t season skinless chicken anything With salt for that long as it does draw out moisture and will cause your meat to be dry, along with partially curing it, per your example anyway. With marinades it really depends on what you are using. For example, if I marinate beef bulgogi I slice the meat very thin allowing the marinade to penetrate the beef. For chicken, you can tenderize to keep whole or slice, then marinate to do the same thing.


How to reduce the heat on a gas burner I have a new gas cooktop and the lowest setting on the smallest burner still produces afast rolling boil rather that a very low simmer. How can I reduce the heat?

1. Simmer/Burner Plate

You can use a simmer plate or something to diffuse the heat. For example:

http://www.thekitchn.com/good-tool-burner-plate-for-low-107122
Google: Heat Diffuser

From the first link, a suggestion is to use a cast iron skillet as a heat diffuser. That should work in a pinch.

2. Adjust the Flame

Alternatively, some stoves allow you to adjust the flame level. I'm not a technician, so please do this at your own risk, read the manual, etc....

I figured out another solution:

First adjust the main gas valve on the stove back, its not only on and off. Then check that the lower output setting on the operating panel still outputs the amount of gas which burns steadily, also if you set fire on the other stages as well in the same time.
If this is not sufficient enough then try the solution above, when the knob is almost off settings.

Note: The first method doesn't really work well if you work with gas tank


What weights to use for fermenting sauerkraut? I am new to making sauerkraut. I do know the right ingredients for making sauerkraut, based on searching on Google.

My question is what equipment should I use to weight the sauerkraut below the brine?

I am using a Fidos jar as a container. If I were rich, I would buy a fermenting crock that comes with stone weights, see for example this crock. However, since I am not rich, are there stone weights that I can buy?

My current idea is to use ceramic pie weights, but I have never owned any of these before. Would they be sufficiently heavy to weight the sauerkraut down?

Penn State Extension recommends:

  Cover with a plate weighted down with jars filled with water or cover
  with a large food grade plastic bag filled with salt water (6
  tablespoons salt per gallon of water.)

Although weights are highly recommended, I have successfully made cabbage saurkraut without weights. When not using weights you have to make sure you pack down the cabbage nicely, the juices drawn from the cabbage should almost fill the jar. leaving very little air in the jar. Everyday you will have to pack down the cabbage as some of the cabbage bit would be floating and may cause mold formation. This works for me for cabbage and beets.


Why do patterns appear on tempered chocolate? Sometimes, during a single session, spots and lines may appear on tempered chocolate. This seems to happen with the first third of production.

Chocolates produced later in the batch do not exhibit any pattern:

Why is that? How can this be prevented? Is it caused by poor tempering?

Chocolate is Valrhona 66% Caraïbe (but it happened with other chocolate of the same brand), and tempering was done by controlling temperature with water baths following a 52-55C / 28-29C / 31-32C schema. Chocolate was maintained at working temperature by periodic water bathing each time its temperature dropped below 31-30.5C.

What you're seeing is called chocolate bloom. It doesn't happen because of tempering, it happens in spite of it (or sometimes due to improper tempering).

Sugar bloom is pretty straightforward - it happens due to moisture exposure (e.g. condensation) causing dissolution and re-crystalizing of the sugar on top. You can easily check if you have sugar bloom by wetting your finger (just a bit!) and wiping the grainy/streaky surface. If it becomes smooth after doing so, then you got sugar bloom.

The other type, fat bloom, is more complicated, but ultimately it boils down to having different types of crystals (and specifically crystals that are not the beta crystals you want from tempering). It can happen for a lot of different reasons, but some of the most common ones are:

Not heating enough before tempering. You might have melted most of the original chocolate but not quite all of it.
Too much heat in the 3rd stage - if you melt some of the beta crystals, they can form larger crystals and push cocoa butter to the top when they re-crystallize. This happens to me every so often when I decide to make a way larger batch of chocolate-coated whatevers than I really have time for, start rushing near the end, and heat too much/too quickly in order to keep it melted.
Fat migration, due to incompatible fats on the surface of whatever you're coating (maybe nuts, or something with oil or butter) mixing with the melted chocolate. This is more likely to happen later in the process, after you've dipped and coated a whole bunch of them, so it's probably not what happened to you here. Also, it's more likely to happen when the coated items are at a very different temperature from the chocolate.
Cooling too fast during or after molding. I don't know the scientific explanation for this one, but it's pretty easy to demonstrate by throwing enrobed chocolate into the fridge right away - it almost always blooms. This can also happen in more subtle ways, e.g. if a nearby air conditioner happened to be running while you were working.

Unfortunately it's almost impossible to tell which specific problem occurred simply from looking at the end result. If it's any consolation, though, I don't think yours really turned out so badly compared to what can happen with bad tempering.

(Ideally this would have been a comment because it doesn't seek to replace the earlier comprehensive explanation about blooms) however I just wanted to make some specific observations about the fact that it's spots, lines and nothing in that sequence in your pictures.

It's interesting to note that the lines in image 2 are collectively oriented in the direction of likely dipping into source choc: I'd suggest that implies the blooming effect was triggered by some property at the surface of the chocolate being dipped into (which is then drawn across the surface as the biscuit is lifted). Perhaps it's seed sites of bloom crystallisation which are floating on the choc surface which are then drawn across the biscuit coating leaving seeding sites behind. Perhaps in image 1 the seed sites hadn't yet developed to be big enough on the choc dipping source surface but there were enough small ones in the mix to be distributed across the surface of the biscuit after removal. The fact that it is then absent later on suggests to me that the seeds for the bloom were no longer present, begging the question why..

Now it's impossible to be clear about the cause without more information (a video of the process might let us be scientific about it ;-) but would leave us very hungry) - if we think it's water from moist environment then we need to consider why the line pattern wasn't across from the get-go and what in the circumstances changed to make it disappear by image 3.

Perhaps it's related to the subsequent water-bath warm ups to keep the choc workable.. could it relate to a change of temperature in the choc source or a change in the humidity in vicinity of the temperature controlled water baths used to melt the chocolate? There might also have been some other unconscious change in physical handling of the chocolate - perhaps a stir of the choc part way through dipping which turned over the seed points from the surface, churning them into the body of the remaining choc where they changed state and melted?

My guess is that the repetitions of warming up were better for the overall tempering and early on it the choc wasn't quite ready for dipping for some reason.

Anyway, I hope that's some food for thought when next handling the dipping choc. Let us know if you discover ways of intervening with the choc-lines.. it looks to me like something going on at the surface of the dipping liquid which disappears with water bath reheating..


Why doesn't my Lemon Posset thicken? What am I most likely doing wrong? I've have once succesfully made this Gordon Ramsay's Lemon Posset, but on the last two tries attempts I've not managed to thicken it.

After it has bubbled and kept bubbling for approx. 3 mins, I pour in the lemon juice while stirring, but the substance just doesn't thicken.

What are the most likely things I'm doing wrong? Not stirring strongly enough? Overboiling or underboiling? It did work fine the frist time (sigh)...

It sounds like your problem is most likely lack of acid. The acid is what causes possets to thicken. That could happen because the lemons aren't acidic enough (maybe the ones you had the first time were more sour). Re-reading your recipe, I notice that there's a second, simpler potential cause: your recipe simply asks for the juice of 1-2 lemons, and you might just have smaller lemons, or drier ones without as much juice.

For comparison, I've successfully made this lime and lemon posset, which uses 5 tablespoons of lemon and lime juice for 2.25 cups of cream. That'd scale to 42 mL of lemon/lime juice for your recipe. If you think you simply didn't have as much juice as before, or that the volume was less than that, I'd start by simply using more lemon juice.

If that's not the problem, and your lemons are for some reason less acidic, then the main option is still to use more lemon juice. Ideally you'd concentrate it, though, so that you don't end up with a smaller fraction of cream in the recipe. You can juice more lemons, then reduce the juice on the stove down to the original volume. (An easier option would be to add extra citric acid to your lemon juice, if you happen to have it.)

(Much of this was said in the comments, but I went ahead and made it an answer - please don't accept it unless you verify it though!)

Let the cream cool to about 50,then add your lemons.


What is the formal definition of savory? What is the formal definition of "savory" when used in cooking?  I hear a lot about things coming in either sweet or savory forms — e.g. crepes — but in context it doesn't seem that savory is the term for all things that are not sweet.  Does it have to do with preparation methods?  Ingredients?  Taste of the final product?

I have been assuming that "sweet" means something like "sugary," as it does in common usage; please correct me if that's not the case here.

In cooking, "Savory" does generally refer to a flavor profile that is anything other than sweet.

"Sweet" doesn't have to necessarily be sugary sweet...basil, tarragon, fennel, carrots, beets, etc. have sweet flavors that are not excessively sugary sweet.

The term "neutral" is typically used for things like crepes and choux paste (eclair paste) because when made in their traditional style they are neither savory nor sweet and can work with either flavor profile.

Savory means any food stuff that requires the addition of salt and pepper.


Finishing pre-cooked prime rib, day-of? I’m ordering a 6lb. bone-out prime rib roast from a local butcher. I want to have them season and (mostly) cook it for me in their rotisserie on Christmas Eve (pickup at 4pm) so I can just finish it quickly in my oven Christmas Day (12pm).

I have a couple questions:

what internal temperature should I ask them to cook? Thinking 110°.
what’s the best method to finish it? I’m thinking rest to room temperature then 375° uncovered oven roast until 120° internal to get a crisp herb crusted exterior (as opposed to a foil tent or foil wrap).
am I insane? Should I just roast it all myself?

Thanks!

Two stage cooking is generally not a safe practice unless the food comes to at least 130-140F during the first stage, held there an adequate amount of time to kill off bacteria, then is chilled quickly, and then reheated relatively quickly.  Commercial food service has a lot of fairly complex rules dealing with these sort of "pre-cooked" and reheated situations, because they are one of the places where it's most likely to cause foodborne illness.

Since you likely wouldn't want to go to temperatures that high (and I don't blame you), I'd recommend cooking it all yourself at one time for safety reasons.

Also, aside from safety concerns, I agree with moscafj's comment: I'm not sure what the purpose would be here.  Is it to get some benefit from the "rotisserie"?  It's possible to get somewhat similar effects by roasting slowly (at low temperature) at home, even without a rotisserie.

EDIT: Since the OP has identified the goal as decreasing cooking time, I agree with AMtwo that this process won't help.  I'd only add to AMtwo's answer that it might actively hurt the quality of the final result, as both the butcher's rotisserie and OP's relatively high-heat oven temperature will likely cook the outer layers of the meat further, while leaving the interior very rare.  Doing this twice will actually compound this problem, so if the goal is a rare roast (as I'm guessing from the target temperatures mentioned), this will actually result in a thicker layer of more "done" meat near the edges with more time to dry out.  Better to just cook it once.

Goal is to reduce cooking time day-of.

Your plan is not helpful for that.  Cooking time is all about heating up the food (and/or evaporating water), not putting energy into some chemical reaction.  Cooking is slow because it takes time to get the inside from fridge temp to your target, and food doesn't conduct heat very efficiently.

And for a rare roast like this, not about time-at-temperature either like BBQ where you're converting collagen to gelatin.  And stopping at 110F is too low for anything to happen anyway.

On the day of, before putting it in a real oven, warm it some (not cook) in a microwave on medium power (like power level 6 out of 10 on a 1500W oven for example) for several minutes to heat the meat somewhat uniformly.  (Sorry I don't have a solid estimate for this, and of course it depends on the absolute power of your microwave.)  Maybe 10 to 15 minutes, and maybe on even lower power than that.  You need time for heat to transfer from hot spots so they don't actually cook.  Check for hot spots after 10 mins, and maybe put it in for another few minutes if it's not very warm yet.

To avoid hot spots cooking on the surface of the meat, you'll want a microwave with a turntable.  Maybe even turn the meat during some microwave time.

Then stick a probe thermometer in and roast as normal, starting from a meat temperature of maybe 90F.  You just want to warm it, not even close to cook any of it with the microwave.  And let it rest some to even out hot spots that were close to starting to cook, before you put it in the oven.

Your goal with the microwave step is to get heat energy into the middle of the roast without starting to even brown the outside.  Microwave ovens can do this somewhat better than hot air because microwaves penetrate slightly into the meat, into the wet part, where heat can more efficiently conduct inward without drying out the outside.  You have to be careful not to actually cook parts of the meat, just get it up to around room temp.

A roast for a special occasion is probably not the best time to experiment with this, and be sure to read the comments on this answer.  I think they're being too pessimistic and are basing their opinion on actually cooking meat with a microwave, not just warming it up.  But maybe I'm wrong and there's no way to usefully do this.

I have done this with steaks before pan-searing with good results: less time in the pan is needed, and you still get a browned outside layer and a nice rare or medium-rare inside.  Ideally you can get the inside medium-rare with less of a well-done layer outside it.  (A significant part of the cooking of the inside still comes from traditional cooking; you're just starting with a warm piece of meat instead of fridge temp).

If you're a little aggressive with the microwave you'll get some cooked patches on the outside (especially with a steak; a roast is maybe more resistant to that.)  If you see that, stop the microwave and let it rest for a few minutes to come closer to thermal equilibrium before going into the regular oven.

A roast is done when the centre reaches a high enough temperature.  If it starts uniformly at fridge temp, cooking by roasting in a hot oven heats it up by heat transfer from air to the outside layer of meat.  This is slow, so it takes time even for the outside to heat up and start heating the inside by conduction.

This hot air also dries out that layer, letting it get significantly hotter than inner layers (and letting browning reactions happen forming a crust).  This is why you want to roast at a low temperature so this doesn't go too far before the cold centre of the meat gets up to temperature.

Starting with the meat hotter some/all the way through (closer to thermal equilibrium than you'd get from oven heating) means not as much heat energy has to be conducted all the way from the outside of the roast into the middle with dry heat, so you'll have less of a well-done layer.

When you put in the probe thermometer, you'll get some idea of how much temperature difference you have between the outside and inside.  If it's significant, perhaps let it rest a couple minutes.  Not more; the meat will be right in the danger zone for bacteria so you should get it heating again quickly.

This is not something I've tried with a roast, only steaks.  It's simple physics, though.

Other ways of heating meat without cooking the outside include sous-vide.  In that case heat transfer slows down as the meat temp approaches the water bath temp, so you can use it to get the meat all the way up to desired temp.  This is not the case with microwaves because they apply near constant power to a layer around the outside, and not evenly.  This is why you have to stop before any the meat is even close to fully cooked, and let the temperature even out.

(Do note that microwaves don't really penetrate very deeply, but they can get about a centimeter in so heat has a head start conducting into the centre of the food.)


Browning Avocados - What Helps? Years ago Koobz asked "Oxidized Avocado: What's Going on & How to Prevent It?" That question has been merged with this one because it's dealing with the same issue.

Recently, we had this question: Are limes and lime juice more acidic than lemons and lemon juice?. Now I'm just curious, I want an answer.

After Logophobe's answer to the acidity question, and my own research backing up that answer, I feel like I know less than I did before!

Lemon contains more ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) and citric acid than limes, yet limes are more acidic overall. Distilled vinegar is more acidic than lemons and almost as acidic as limes, Fruit Fresh is an extremely highly concentrated mixture of ascorbic acid and citric acid specifically developed to prevent browning in fruits.

So what works to keep avocados pretty and green?

Perhaps some experimentation is in order. I think I'll start with acids, since the common wisdom is that acid helps keep avocados green.

EDIT As of 1/8/15, I have added a new answer, as the highly upvoted one really only says what doesn't help. The accepted answer HERE shows the results of further experimentation, and what does help.

See the improved answer here: What DOES Help?

Which acid works best to keep avocados from browning?

Answer: None (of the acids tested)

It's not that acid doesn't do much to help.

ALL OF THE ACIDS TESTED CAUSED AVOCADOS TO BECOME MORE BROWN AND TO BECOME BROWN FASTER THAN NO TREATMENT AT ALL

I am not kidding.

Method

For acid, I used freshly squeezed lemon juice, freshly squeezed lime juice, distilled white vinegar (diluted to 5% acidity), and Ball brand Fruit Fresh mixed per package instructions, 2 tsp powder to 3 TBS water. Fruit Fresh contains dextrose, ascorbic acid, citric acid and silicon dioxide. According to the label, 1/4 tsp of the powder contains 230% of the US RDA of Vitamin C (ascorbic acid). That roughly translates to the solution I used having 100X the concentration of Vitamin C of lemon juice. I was not able find anything to give me a basis for comparison of citric acid concentration.

I diced 1 avocado and shuffled up the chunks so that no 1 pile had chunks from only 1 part of the fruit. I dropped the chunks into small bowls of the acids, removed the chunks, and allowed to air dry. They remained at room temperature for 24 hours.

I mashed 2 avocados together and put 50 grams of the mash into each of 5 small bowls. I added 1/4 tsp of each individual acid to each bowl, leaving 1 bowl plain. I mixed thoroughly and scooped the mash onto 2 plates, 1 to be refrigerated, and 1 to be left at room temperature. I washed and dried the scoop between changes in acid.

Results

The diced avocados just gradually became darker over 24 hours, with the vinegar treated fruit the first to show signs of browning, and ultimately the vinegar treated fruit became the darkest. The untreated fruit resisted browning the longest and ultimately browned the least. The lemon juice and lime juice were about tied, they both significantly sped darkening and ultimately became significantly darker than the untreated fruit. The Fruit Fresh barely made any difference, but the slight difference there was, was negative. Fruit Fresh also caused the avocado to become darker and to brown faster, but just barely.

At 24 hours all of the mashed, unrefrigerated avocado had become equally brown and unappetizing, it just happened faster to the treated avocado. The difference was most dramatic at 6 hours:

It's not clearly visible in the photo, but the Fruit Fresh treated avocado was ever-so-slightly more brown than the untreated avocado.

At 6 hours none of the refrigerated, mashed avocado was significantly browning.

At 24 hours all of the mashed avocado was the worse for wear. On the non-refrigerated side, it looks on this photo like the vinegar treated avocado ultimately fared the best. It actually didn't. I didn't think to snap a picture, but the vinegar treated avocado was the only one to discolor all the way through. The others were still green on the inside, the vinegar treated scoop was slightly browned even on the inside.

There came a point about 12 hours in that the refrigerated side just stopped browning. It had dried out, leaving it more green than the non-refrigerated side, but no more pleasant. All of the samples browned and dried out fairly equally.

At 48 hours I had one scoop of mashed avocado left that I cared to eat.

By adding nothing, keeping it refrigerated and covered in plastic wrap clinging to the surface, so that it had no air at all, this avocado is still fresh, green and ready to eat.

I'll add lime now for flavor, and some cilantro and cumin. Pass the chips.

Note:

I am honored that this answer has been so generously received, but the fact is, it really doesn't answer the question very well. This answer shows what doesn't help. As of 1/8/15 I have added and accepted a new answer based on new experiments that show what does help, it's HERE next to the checkmark.

I am missing mention of the conventional wisdom trick to keep avocados from discoloring: keep the kernel in.  That does not really help with readily prepared dishes but it does help with partially used avocados.


How can I tell if a balsamic vinegar is good? I bought a bottle of balsamic vinegar, and it smells so sour when I put my nose over the bottle.

Is it supposed to be like that?

Well, it IS vinegar. However as you probably already know, higher quality balsamic vinegar is less sour and more rich tasting than its cheaper counterpart. It's unlikely that your balsamic is spoiled--in most ways vinegar is as spoiled as it's going to get.

More likely is that you've uncovered one of the issues with balsamic vinegar: Most of what you can get in a supermarket is of low quality, and is not produced in the traditional way (years of curing and evaporation in wooden casks). What you can get is more likely to be much more mundane wine vinegar with flavorings. And that is often more acidic-tasting and pungent than the real thing (which costs an arm and a leg).

I'd say sample it carefully and see if it's as sour as it smells. It might be OK, or you might want to find a new brand or get it at a store that goes through it faster (check the best by date, if there is one).

There's a good chance your vinegar went bad, though vinegar of all qualities can usually be used while cooking. Expensive vinegars can be used straight, such as with cheeses, as a sauce over pasta, or glazed on fruit.

Lower quality vinegars are better for cooking (Put balsamic in towards the end of the cooking/heating cycle, as the flavor will dissolve when heated too much!) and mixing in foods.

How do you know when a balsamic is good quality? Yes, there are stamps of approval from balsamic boards in Italy, and high-quality balsamic vinegar should only come from a few of these regions. When you pay more for a good balsamic (price is a good indicator), you'll often get a wax seal, a sweeter flavor from aging, and a much more viscous vinegar. The older, more expensive, and more aged it is, the more like honey it will look when you pour it out of the bottle. Runnier, looser balsamics are diluted with water and will often taste more tangy (as does yours--though again, there's a good chance it went bad). Try Dodi brand or balsamics from the Emilio region, especially those that come with certificates.

Great balsamics are aged, thick, sweet, and sticky, so although yours is probably fine for cooking, I'd invest in a higher-quality vinegar for special occasions.


Cooked or raw mushrooms on pizza? Should I precook mushrooms before putting on pizza to prevent soggy pizza?  I swear when I've seen pizza shops do it, they put them on raw--albeit from recollection they're more thinly sliced than the supermarket pre-sliced variety.

Is that the key?  Or do most pizzerias saute their mushrooms in advance to remove the moisture?  What if I'm using a lot of mushrooms?

Short answer: It Depends.

Long Answer:

You are correct that the decision on precooking mushrooms before putting them on pizza is about controlling moisture.  For some hefty mushrooms like portabellos, it's also about making sure that they cook fully.  Here's what to factor in:

What's the density of mushrooms per pizza area?  That is, how much space between slices?
Are these hefty mushrooms (white, crimini, portabello) or delicate mushrooms (chantrelle, oyster, enoki)?
How thickly are they sliced?
Are there other "wet" items going on the pizza topping, like a sauce or fresh tomatoes?
How thick is the crust?
How long will the pizza cook, and how hot?

On one end of the scale, if you're making a thin-crust pizza with tomato sauce and covering it completely in thickly sliced portabellos, you pretty much certainly should precook them.  However, if you're making a deep dish pizza with only a few thin-sliced white mushrooms on top, then don't bother.  Stuff in between is up to your judgement.

For pizza restaurants, American Pizza is a medium crust, and they generally don't put that many mushrooms on each slice, so it's fine to put them on raw.  However, I've been to thin-crust Neopolitian-style pizza places where they did, indeed, partly cook the "wild mushrooms" ahead.

Also, if you are precooking the mushrooms, you want to cook them in a way that will remove moisture.  That means broiling them in the pizza oven on a baking sheet with parchment ... not sauteeing them.

Mushrooms should be pre cooked to remove moisture and placed below the cheese to prevent drying out.


How can I get more lime flavor into my key lime cake recipe? I found a great recipe for key lime cake, but it seems to lack the key lime flavor I am looking for. It has lime zest and juice in it, still a great cake, but it seems not enough lime kick to it.

My daughter who loves lemon cake thought of a great idea a couple years ago to knock the lemon flavor out of the park. I'm sure it would work for lime too: make a lime syrup and pour it into the bottom of the cake after poking it all over with a thin skewer. The more lime you like, the more syrup you use. As a bonus, it also adds some moisture to the cake.  Note that you may need to refrigerate the cake after this step (if it lasts more than a few hours).

You can add more lime zest, you can also add more juice, but when you increase the tartness of the cake, you need
To increase the sugar to offset it.

You'll reach a point of diminishing returns however and you may be better off making a key lime pie rather than a cake.


Changing a vegan cookie recipe? I am tyring to cut refined sugar from my diet and I have Celiac disease so no gluten is a must. Both of these things make baking a challenge. I have been using a mixture of coconut palm sugar and pure maple syrup and am liking both the flavor and the results.

So, I find a pumpkin oatmeal cookie recipe and get to making it before I realize it has no eggs.  The resulting cookie is okay, not bad really, but not "cookie texture" to say the least.  I want to add an egg next time to add structure and chewiness but since the batter is already quite wet, what should I add (more flour? more oats?) so that the cookie dough isn't a gummy mess?

1 cup quick cooking (GF) oats,
3/4 cup flour (GF),
1/4 tsp sea salt,
1 tsp cinnamon,
1/4 tsp nutmeg,
1/4 tsp ginger,
1-1/2 tsp baking powder,
3/4 cup pumpkin puree,
1/2 cup maple syrup,
3 Tbs coconut oil (melted and cooled),
1 tsp vanilla

Mix dry ingredients and wet ingredients separately, then stir to combine.
Bake on in a pre-heated, 350 degree oven for 11-15 minutes.  Use parchment paper to avoid cookies sticking to the pan.

NOTE: I do not need exact measurements to try - I have baked all my life.  Just an idea of what to increase, add or subtract.

There are a couple of things in that recipe that appear to be used as an egg replacement:

Pumpkin puree - usual rule (as far as I'm aware) is to use 1/4 cup per egg. This is particularly good for adding moisture, so reducing this would be a good start. Baking powder can also be used in conjunction with this to leaven the mixture.
Coconut oil can also used as an egg substitute in the right context. Honey (or, as this is a vegan recipe, maple syrup) can also be used in conjunction with this, as can baking powder. However, baking powder and to a lesser extent, honey/maple syrup could still appear in a recipe before the egg has been substituted.

All in all, my suggestion would be to first reduce the amount of pumpkin puree (or possibly even remove the pumpkin puree entirely).

An alternative (although possibly a less effective one) to this, or if removing the pumpkin puree doesn't manage the job, would be to cut down on the amount of coconut oil. As you've mentioned that you like maple syrup, cutting down on that would be the last resort.

There is a question of whether the baking powder is also used to help with the lack of eggs, but baking powder often appears in recipes with eggs as well, so qualifying whether or not to get rid of baking powder is more likely to be dependent on the flour (self raising or not) used.

Oats will soak up the moisture, and add a egg next. How much is up to you but start with a fourth of a cup. If you need more you will know it. One egg will gave you the raising and try it to see how it works. You can try it in a frying pan first, and if it is firm put it in the oven to bake, 350°F.


Peeling and dicing potato before boiling it I've mostly seen people peel a potato after it has been boiled and then cutting it to pieces if required. Given it's muddy exterior, I find it cleaner (and probably takes less heat) to remove the skin with a peeler before boiling. Am I losing anything when I use my method? What do you suggest?

A lot of us just eat the peel, but assuming you don't want to...

Certainly it's going to be a lot faster to boil a potato that's already been cut up than to boil a whole one, so between boiling whole and peeling, dicing, then boiling, I'd certainly pick the latter. It doesn't really have much to do with cleanliness, though; a good washing leaves the peel plenty clean and safe (and like I said, I eat it). You're not losing anything with your method, besides the nutritional value of the peel.

I imagine the reason a lot of people boil their potatoes whole is to be able to peel them without a peeler. You could sort of have it both ways. If you partially cut the potato (thick slices, probably), you could boil them in not much longer than it'd take to boil small cubes, then peel the slices by hand, and cut further if necessary. Not sure it'd really save you a ton of time, but if your peeler is dull/broken/missing/stolen, it'd be a decent fallback. (You could probably also partially boil them whole, peel, chop, then finish cooking, but that's starting to sound like it just makes more work.)

Its much better to peel it before boiling............


Can salt make sour fruit seem sweeter? I got a little debate started via the comments on this answer. The poster suggests the use of salt to make a sour kiwifruit-sauce taste sweeter in the same way you would use salt to make something taste less bitter.

I was interested to see if this would really work, so I did a simple experiment. I'll repeat the details from the comment,

  Salt will only make fruit taste sweeter if it is already sweet. Here's
  an experiment I tried with two glasses of dilute lime juice. I added
  enough sugar so that the mixture was just a little too sour. I added a
  very small amount of salt to one glass, stirred until disolved and
  tasted. The glass containing salt was noticeably more sour. [...]

And the poster's reply to this,

  Kiwifruit typically has more sugar content than grapefruit, which is
  typically 'made sweeter' with a touch of salt. It is certainly much
  sweeter than lime juice; kiwifruit averages over 8 grams of sugar
  where the same amount of lime juice (as in your example) averages just
  over 1.5 grams.

My assumption has been that salt acts as a flavour enhancer and so will accentuate whatever taste is predominant (unless the taste is bitter). My little experiment bears me out, but one experiment is hardly conclusive as any number of things can go wrong. In any case, I'm willing to believe that things are more complex than I have assumed.

Does salt help sour fruit taste sweeter?

It seems at the least plausible, on two fronts.

If I'm reading http://ajpgi.physiology.org/content/291/6/G1005.full correctly, saltiness and sourness can cancel each other out to some extent.
Salt can increase perceived sweetness: T1r3 taste cells have sodium-glucose co-transporters which may provide the explanation.

It does help the taste and make it more complex. I don't agree that salt makes fruit taste more sweeter. However, it is known that salt water reduces acidity so the sour fruit juices doesn't leave a weird feeling in your mouth.

My experience with this is learning from my parents how to eat pineapples by dipping them into salt water.


How can I make NON-fluffy pancakes? Every recipe I can find is for "fluffy" pancakes.  I prefer thinner, slightly crispy, (very) slightly chewy, non-fluffy pancakes.  Basically, the less "cake-like" the better.

Apparently I'm the only one, and these are all non-desirable qualities in a pancake, so it is hard to find recipes.

How can I make non-fluffy pancakes?  I will be using a cast-iron pan.

Have you tried making Swedish Pancakes? They are between a "regular" fluffy pancake and a crepe. To make a proper crepe, you need either a crepe pan or a crepe griddle. With Swedish Pancakes, you can use a regular pan. You will find that Swedish Pancakes have a higher amount of eggs and milk. For example:

4 eggs
2 cups milk
1/2 cup flour
1 tbsp sugar
1 pinch salt
2 tbsp melted butter

Snackery pancake mix...chewy, but I am looking for their recipe.


What is each side of a 4-sided grater for? We own a standard 4-sided grater, but only ever use the side with large holes.

What do the other sides do, and what kind of recipes are they for?

We have:

Medium holes with a cutting edge on bottom (look like large raindrops)
Small holes with cutting edge on bottom
Outward protruding holes with spiky edges on all sides
Wide holes that look like a smiley.

To answer in the language of the question asked:

Medium holes with a cutting edge on bottom (look like large raindrops) : used for shredding.
Small holes with cutting edge on bottom : used for shredding when you want it finer than the larger size.
Outward protruding holes with spiky edges on all sides : used for grating.
Wide holes that look like a smiley : used to slice things to an even thickness.

As for recipes ... I generally don't use the slicing portion too often, as I can get fairly consistent slices with a knife, but if you're not so skilled, it could be used to slice potatoes for an au gratin (might need to slice them in half first, is the slots aren't wide enough to fit the whole potato), or to slice firmer cheeses.  It can also be used for slicing cabbage for coleslaw (again, once cut down to fit), cucumbers or carrots for salads, etc.  As the blades aren't razor sharp, there are some softer items (eg, tomatoes) that it just won't work for, that you'd have to do by hand or get a much more expensive mandoline.

The grating side I only generally use for hard cheeses, when I need a more powdery texture than I can get with the shredding sides.  I've also used it for zesting citrus (although it only works in large quantities, as you end up losing about 1/2 a lemon to the groves and it doesn't release without a brush**), and I've used it for pulping carrots (was mixing them into a sauce, and I didn't want identifiable bits)

The shredding sides are the ones I use the most, with the choice of side dependent upon what size I want the resultant shreds.  I use it for firmer vegetables and fruits that I'm baking into breads (zucchini, carrots, apples), potatoes for hash browns, medium cheeses for firmer cheeses (when I want this texture), etc.

Although a food processor can be used for this task, you have to consider a couple things (besides initial cost & space it takes up) : it's really easy to go and shred lots of cheddar cheese in a food processor, but it cramming all in there and fusing back together from the force and heat, defeating the purpose.  Chilling the cheese helps, but you also need to keep dumping the work bowl out.  If you have a strong arm and a small food processor, a hand shredder might actually be faster and give better results.

When using a shredding disk for firmer things, you do more damage than by hand, resulting in lots of liquid being given off.  Sometimes, this is better ... I have a potato kugel recipe that comes out very light as I can get more of the liquid out after having gone through the food processor ... so you may want to try both tools (if you already own them both) to see which one gives you better results.

** ... I've heard you can wrap it in plastic wrap, use the grater, and then pull the wrap off to get it to release; I've never tried it, in part because I now have a microplane grater, but also because I'd be afraid of getting bits of plastic in the food.  I also want to say that I saw the trick the context of pulping ginger or garlic, but it's been long enough ago that I don't know that I can trust my memory

One extremely important application of a grater is for horseradish, the big grates way to coarsely, the side grates makes a mush. The small grates makes your horseradish perfect for mixing with dill, putting it on your potato salad, putting it on your salmon, your tuna, your BLT, your BBQ, your breakfast cereal.


How to adapt brownie recipe to cook well in a mini-muffin tin? I've got a great brownie recipe that works awesome in a 9x11 pan.  The top comes out crunchy, the bottom cake like and the middle nice and fudgy.  I figured I would try to make them in a mini-muffin tin, thinking it would be easier for the kids to eat.  Ended up with a mini disaster.

Things I had not counted on:  they rose seemingly more than in the 9x11 pan.  Too much cake like vs not enough fudge center.

Should there be things I need to be aware of?  I cut a good 7 or 8 minutes off my cooking time of 25 minutes int eh 9x11 pan, and even still, they were over cooked.  But more importantly, I realized that with all edges being cooked (as opposed to square in the 9x11), there is a lot of "cake surface" vs soft and fudgy centre.

Is there something i should consider doing specifically to the recipe?  Is there a way to make good fudgy brownies in a mini-muffin tin, or am I just looking for trouble?

Recipe is butter-free (just uses vegetable oil) and only 1 tsp of baking soda as a leavening agent.

Brownies are bar cookies.  Note that the brownies are at the edge of the pan are more cooked, and raised higher:  they set before they settle back down.

Baking the brownies in a mini-muffin tin will essentially make each mini-brownie all edge.  They will rise and set very rapidly, and then easily over bake.

I would suggest that brownies are not ideal in a mini-muffin tin.  Instead, cutting them smaller would be a better solution.

If you do want to try it again, I would suggest:

Don't overfill the tins.  You don't want the batter more than about 1/2 inch deep; you want about the same depth it would be in the pan for which they are designed.
Let the batter sit for about 5-10 minutes after portioning into the muffin tins.  This will give some additional time for the sugars to dissolve, and the flour to hydrate since they won't have as much time in the oven.  This should help texture and crust development (the shiny crackly top).
Reduce or eliminate the chemical leavening.  I would experiment with cutting the baking powder by 50% to start.

There are ways to incorporate air into brownie batter mechanically, by (for example) beating air into the egg-butter-chocolate mixture, but the exact way to approach it would depend on your particular brownie recipe.  If you go that route, you can probably completely eliminate the baking powder.
Reduce the oven temperature by about 25 F (maybe even 50 F in a second trial, if they still over bake and are too crusty too rapidly) or so, to allow the baking process to slow, and give more time for the mini-brownies to rise and settle.
Check them much sooner.  Mini-brownies are going to go from not-done to overdone very, very quickly.  I would start checking as early as 15 minutes, until you have an expectation.  When you can smell the chocolaty aroma is a good time to start checking.
Bake only one mini-muffin tray at a time, so that they are even.  You don't want shadow effects and changes in oven convection to throw off the baking by having more than one tray in the oven at the same time, although that is more an issue of consistency than it is of the complete character of the outcome.

I just made a brownie box mix according to directions. I baked them at 325 degrees in a dark non stick mini muffin pan with each section given a spritz of PAM. Baked for 15 minutes, no extra fuss. Upon removal from oven I let them sit about 1-2 minutes, turned the pan upside down and they slipped out easily. Brownies were moist - PERFECT!


Is there a way to add shine to a chocolate coating after it has hardened? My recipe calls for melting chocolate chips and pouring the liquid chocolate over the cake for a coating.  That works but, when it hardens, it returns to that dull gray/brown color of chocolate chips, i.e. to the color of the chips before they were melted.

Is there a way to polish or add some shine to the hardened coating?  Would rubbing a thin coating of butter on the surface work?

What you're looking for is 'tempered' chocolate.   Tempered chocolate has that sheen and snap to it.  When properly heated and cooled, the cocoa butter in the chocolate formed the correct crystalline structure for this to occur.  When the process is uncontrolled, you get dull chocolate that doesn't snap quite as well.

There's a few (1,2,3) different ways to do it.  But overall the easiest way - in general terms, is to heat chocolate to the correct temperature (check the links for correct temperatures for your type of chocoloate), stir in *pre-tempered chocolate (from the store or such) as it cools, and then slightly reheat.

Or, buy a tempering machine.

This should give you that gloss your after.

*Store bought chocolate is pretty much always tempered and the dull gray of the chips doesn't mean its not tempered - just scratched up.  You can use this to stir into your cooling chocolate at step 2.

There a product called confectionary shine.
Do a search this could do the job


Why is mustard irritating for me? I thought I bought mustard, but when I put it on a hot dog and ate it, it didn't taste like mustard. It irritated my nose and sent a shockwave through my skull. So I bought a different brand, but there was not much difference. I feel that irritating, tingling sensation rippling through my head whenever I take a bite. I think it's yellow mustard, the label says "table mustard". I don't recall having this reaction when eating mustard from McDonald's.

As a straight answer to "why" it's the quantity of mustard oil in any given mustard type.

There are many types of mustard, but the two you may find the most confusing visually are English & American.

Though both are a fairly bright yellow in colour, that's about as far as the similarity goes.

Mustard seeds themselves come in many different 'heats' - the mildest generally being pale yellow, almost white & the strongest are dark brown.
Additionally, mixing mustard with vinegar tempers the heat & lengthens the shelf-life.
Mixing instead with pure water increases the punch, but the flavours will dissipate over a much shorter period.

American mustard is one of the mildest available. It starts with a mild seed, pale yellow/white in colour, but the colour is then boosted by using turmeric. The mixture is then diluted with vinegar.
This is your 'standard' mild American mustard, found in many places, including McDonald's. You can slather it in huge quantities on a hot dog with no ill-effects.

Almost at the other end of the scale [Chinese mustard can be even hotter] is English. Made with a mixture of yellow & brown mustard seed, then mixed with water not vinegar, this will take the roof of your nose out if used in injudicious quantities. It can quite literally make your eyes water & your nose run - though if you did it by accident, take solace in the fact that the hit is very short-lived, not like eating a blindingly hot chilli pepper.
The full impact & flavour of English mustard is quite short-lived even in the jar, once made up from powdered mustard. Even ready-made, store-bought has quite a short shelf-life for a condiment.  Made at home & mixed with water it will lose its punch in just a few days, so the trick is to buy powder & mix it just 15 minutes before you eat it, for the full experience.

If you're ever uncertain visually which you are about to add - taste it first.

Personally I love English mustard on hot dogs! With ketchup too [one of the only things I will ever put ketchup on]. The balance between the sweet, vinegary ketchup & the hard hit of the mustard is really quite the feast. Bring on the junk food!

There is an in-depth article on the various types at Serious Eats - Mustard Manual: Your Guide to Mustard Varieties

Any type of mustard contains poisonous substances, as every plant, to protect it from being eaten by insects and other animals. Some people tolerate more, some less. It depends on ones state of health, specially if one has a lack of body fluid and other substances to cushion aggressive substances, it feels irritating.


5 Day marinated chicken breast Bought chicken breast on Sunday and put in marinade.  It is now Thursday.  Chicken has turned a bit white . . . is it safe to cook and eat at 5 days in marinade?

2 days is usually the max for chicken in the fridge that is officially recommend, 5 days is definitely on the long side.  Pending the sell by date that the chicken had originally.

Color is just the marinade, it's the bacteria you need to be concerned about.  Hard to tell if chicken has gone bad in a marinade.

Good acidic or high salt marinade, you are probably safe.   Really up to you if you want to take the small risk or just throw away.


How to add a salty/bacon flavor and texture to vegan collard greens? As a vegan of nearly a year bacon has come as a "great loss" and my collard greens have suffered for it greatly.

I have been experimenting with tvp bacon bits, vegan bacon strips (both frozen and refrigerated), tempeh, liquid smoke, soy sauce, butter, etc. to get something of the salty and fatty flavor/texture that I used to get with pork bacon but have yet to be successful.

Additionally I have tried boiling, slow cooking, sauteeing and a few other methods of cooking. The slow cooker seems to be the best, helping everything cook down as far as I want, but it does take a good while and does not get the animal fat infusion that I used to enjoy so much.

Suggestions for helping add some fat and texture to my way too healthy and way too mushy pot of vegan greens?

As a vegetarian, I regularly try to compensate for the lack of meat in a normally meat-containing dish using a number of methods, though I feel none can truly replace the addition of meat perfectly. In my experience, duplicating the effects of the addition of meat to a dish requires considering individually the effects the addition would have.

First I'll address the fat added. Since the lard present in bacon is high in saturated fats, you can attempt to duplicate that using vegetable oils that are high in saturated fats, like hard margarine or palm oil. While I wouldn't normally advocate with using an oil specifically because it has higher saturated fat content (for health reasons), in this case it will likely help the quality of the finished greens. Consider using a smaller proportion of the more saturated fats by adding in a lighter/healthier oil, like canola or grapeseed, as a portion of the added fat. There is no single rule for getting the fat content of a dish like this right, and it's often a matter of taste.

The smokiness added by the bacon is also a consideration. While liquid smoke could work, the volatility of the product can contribute to the flavor getting poorly concentrated in the food. I have had good results with both smoked salt and smoked black pepper in concentrating smokiness in a dish, and I have found that adding either more near the end of cooking encourages the flavor to be retained more prominently.

For the savoriness added by the aminos in the pork, there is a wide variety of vegan options for its substitution. A good place to start, in my opinion, is to use a vegan not-meat bouillon (e.g. from Edward & Sons) as the base of the broth. The addition of nutritive yeast (and to a lesser extent mushrooms) can also help infuse the broth with umami, and is a common ingredient in vegan broth preparations. If desired, the addition of liquid aminos (e.g. Bragg's Liquid Aminos), and/or MSG can help further improve the savoriness of the greens.

For the texture added by the bacon itself your intuition of using TVP or vegan bacon is likely the way to go. While neither adds much flavor itself (vegan bacon being far more mellow in its baconiness), they are probably your best bet for duplicating a meaty texture.

Maybe,
roast 1 pack med sliced fungi in 1/4ctamari, 1T maple, 1T liquid smoke, 2t natural oil in a coverd pan 400 25-30mins, til they've released their juices, then uncovered til they've sucked them almost all the way back up, then toss them in your 3/4 of the way cooked greens?


When I'm separating egg whites, how much does it matter if a little yolk gets in? I was separating egg whites today and one of the yolks broke and contaminated my bowl of whites. I started from scratch, but I'm wondering if I really needed to; would a tiny bit of yolk (say, 1/8 tspn in 4 egg whites) mixed in with the whites make a big difference?

To provide some context, I was about to whip the whites with castor sugar to make almond macaroons.

Yes, it matters a lot. When you are separating egg whites, it is for whipping them into a foam. This foam is a protein-based foam, relying on protein ends hooking into each other. Even small traces of fat will prevent the foam from forming. Egg yolks contain high amounts of fat. Once an egg yolk breaks in your whites, you have to start the separation anew, because it can prevent your foam from forming. Also, don't use plastic bowls for whipping egg whites (their surface retains some fat molecules even after washing, giving you a less stable foam) and only whip with a cleanly washed whisk or mixer attachment (not one you have just used for something else, not even if you wiped it clean).

To prevent big mishaps, just separate each new egg in a teacup and only add the new white to the old whites after it has separated cleanly. Else you are in big trouble if you are separating a lot and the last egg contaminates the whole whites with yolk. And a single contaminated egg is easily reused for a quick egg-and-feta sandwich or something else.

Contamination the other way round isn't so worrisome. You still want to work as precisely as possible, as yolk-only recipes will often have somewhat worse texture if eggwhite is included, but small contaminating amounts are usually not noticeable in the finished product, even in foams (zabaglione, mayonnaise). This is because yolk foams are fat-based, and small amounts of protein don't prevent a fat foam from forming.

Honestly it doesn't really matter. If you want to separate the yolk, then you should break the egg and then slowly tip the yolk between the two shell halves. The other way is a bit more messy; first rule wash your hands. Then break the egg. Tip it into your hand and then roll it between your hands the white will filter out between your fingers. I have found that the best thing is to have 2 bowls, one for whites and one for yolks. This way if things get messed up then you won't ruin a whole meal.


Do I put the pot roast above or below the vegetables in my crock pot? When cooking a pot roast in a crock pot, do I put the meat above or below the vegetables? And does cooking it on hi or low have effect on this?

Either way should work, though the results might depend on your crockpot's cooking temperatures.  ("High" and "low" can create different temperatures on different models.)

It comes down to your personal preferences about:

How well-done or "mushy" you want the vegetables to be
Whether you want the vegetables to cook in the meat juices and get the full "meaty" flavor
Whether you want the meat to be "basted" by the flavor of some vegetables

In general, if you place vegetables on the bottom, hard vegetables like carrots and potatoes will get softer faster, both due to the heat and ultimately being submerged in any juices from the roast.  If you cook them very long, they may get quite mushy, which some people like and others don't.

If you place the vegetables on top, some of them may stay firmer, but they often won't absorb as much of the juices from the meat (and any flavors that go with it).  On the other hand, aromatic vegetables on top will contribute their own juice to the roast's flavor, so (for example) putting onion slices or quarters on top will allow some of the flavor to seep down gradually onto the meat as it cooks.

Some people find that even with the vegetables on top or on the sides, they still get too mushy for their tastes.  In that case, you may want to add the vegetables for the last few hours of cooking only.  On the other hand, some people really prefer the mushy texture, and in some crockpots that cook at a lower temperature the steam will not be enough to soften some of the hard vegetables (like carrots) even over many hours on top.

I layered the bottom with carrots and potaotes. Sauteed celery and onion on top after adding dabs of butter to the top of the seared roast. Am cooking it low and slow (290) for 1.5 hrs for a 2.5 roast. I want roast, not stew so I'm not adding any liquid. Dutch oven should seal it.


Bagels: Flat, no rise, gummy inside. Over kneading? Edit: thanks for all the advice! I worked these half as much, and made sure to let them cool. Great, round results!!

To start, I'm using this recipe: https://www.epicurious.com/recipes/food/views/bagels-366757

My first try I used AP flour and honey (both in the dough and the poaching liquid). Resulted in bready bagels that didn't have any of that chew on the inside, or the outside.

Second, I switched to diastatic malt powder on the dough, and bread flour instead of AP. I also increased the cooking time to 12 minutes per rotation (because after 8 and 8 they weren't golden brown).

The second resulted in almost crispy outsides (probably a little long in the oven, and the use of a dark pan, causing this), but gummy insides, and flat bagels. There was almost no rise at all, and cutting them resulted in most of the insides ending up on the knife.

Is this a proofing issue? Are the bagels not being allowed to come up to temp long enough outside of the fridge (they are passing the float test after 60 minutes)? Am I over-working the bagels (I'm doing 3 minutes per round, with a 5 minute break in the middle, on a pro series kitchenaid stand mixer with the dough hook).

Which step results in an underbaked-tasting gummy inside? What do I need to do to get a more tender (albeit chewy) interior and a good rise?

Attaching three photos. You can see the lack of rise in two of them (flat bagels, and holes that don't seem like they closed up very much). You can also see the knife in the background, with the gummy insides all over it. Last one is the dark bottom (again, I think this is pan related).

It is essential to allow the bagels to cool completely before slicing. The recipe says at least 30 minutes, but my experience suggests longer might be needed: if you slice too early you'll get a gummy inside, since it's still saturated with water vapour, rather than the chewy texture you want.

I would suggest you knead them less if you are using a higher gluten flour.


When making fried rice, how does the amount of heat affect the taste of the food? This answer talks about the amount of heat required for cooking fried rice which tastes similar to restaurants.

I want to understand the science behind it. Please explain.

It's an issue of thermodynamics.

When you're cooking food, the food cools itself off through evaporative cooling and the energy being used to cause chemical changes in the food (eg, caramelizing sugars).

If you have too much food in the pan, the balance is overwhelmed by evaporative cooling, and thus you can only get to the boiling point of water.

To change the equation, you need to do one of the following:

Use a more powerful heat source.
Cook less food at a time
Reduce the amount of moisture in the food before cooking it.

You'll often see advice for #3 -- such as patting dry steak or chicken before grilling it, as without it, you won't get good browning.

You can't do that when you're dealing with sauces.  You can try cooking less, but with sauces you cause more problems -- if the pan size is the same, the area for evaporation is the same, so you don't really improve the balance.

With a sufficiently sized burner, you can actually heat sauces above the boiling point, as you're putting in energy faster than evaporation can cool it.  This which will change the chemical reactions that occur, thus the resulting chemical compounds and the resulting flavor of the food.

It's not just the amount of heat. The heat component IS really important, but that funny taste that you only get from chinese takeout fried rice, really has to do with the fire.

The smoke from the fire, even completely combusted fire envelopes the wok and the food within it, the food in that wok is absorbing the smoke and that's what imparts that Chinese takeout wok flavor. It's most noticeable in fried rice because fried rice is delicately flavored which allows you to taste it almost directly as a prominent feature/flavor of the dish. This is what is called Wok Hei and it only happens when you use fire.


How can I make my Ice Cream "creamier"? My ice cream doesn't feel creamy enough. I got the recipe from Good Eats, and I can't tell if it's just the recipe or that I'm just not getting my "batter" cold enough before I try to make it. I let it chill overnight in the refrigerator, but it doesn't always come out of the machine looking like "soft serve" as he said on the show - it's usually a little thinner.

Recipe: http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/alton-brown/serious-vanilla-ice-cream-recipe/index.html

More fat!

Your recipe has two dairy components (half and half and whipping cream). The half and half is half cream, half milk. To increase the fat, experiment with using more cream and less half and half.

simply use 2 cups of cream & only 1 cup of WHOLE milk. this should help. make sure freezer bowl is SOLID, no loose liquid inside.


Can I add uncooked noodles directly to soup? Most noodle soup recipes that I see call for boiling and draining the noodles separately, then adding them to the broth already cooked. Is there any reason that I can't just add the dry noodles 10 minutes before the soup is done, and add a little extra water or broth to compensate for that the noodles take? Doing it this way would allow the noodles to take up some of the broth's flavor, and also save dirtying an extra pot and a colander.

similar to what julio said, the main reason is that typical wheat-based noodles release a lot of starch into the water, which changes the consistency of the soup. the starches can add a dirty colour to the water, but more than that, they can also thicken the soup undesirably (think of making a roux). Finally, if there are leftovers, the noodles can sometimes become completely water logged, making eating it the next day a bit of a soggy experience.

That said, with all these considerations there are times when you might add the noodles directly in-- non-starchy noodles (eg. like rice noodles) seem to do ok. also parboiling regular pasta before hand seems to help a lot with the starch and can still help you achieve the flavour integration you mentioned.

I would say NEVER cook noodles at the same time for all the reasons the smart friends above suggested but my adamant reason is that it makes the soup look and taste like dishwater!


How do I avoid gummy, unworkable pasta dough? I've tried several times to make egg pasta from scratch. No matter how much flour I add or how much I knead, the result is the same: the dough is too sticky to pass through a pasta roller or even to roll out by hand. Last night I tried a friend's extruder machine, and the extruded noodles just gummed together before I could even cut them off. What should I be doing differently?

Michael Rhulman writes: "The pasta dough ratio is 3 parts flour, 2 parts egg.  So I crack 1 egg per serving into a bowl, then multiply that weight by 1.5 and add that much flour."

Try that.

Also, the recipe for extruded pasta is different, most often made with semolina and water...almost always a crumbly texture when entering the extruder.

Add a little oil and a little salt to your pasta and stop overcooking it.


How to make nut butter without a food processor? I want to make peanut butter and almond butter. My food processor heated after a couple of minutes last time, so this time I first used a mortar and pestle to grind it a little and then use the processor. After 3-4 minutes, the motor just stopped and I had to press the reset button. I'm a kid and have to use my mum's food processor, so I'm really scared that I'll break it. Any other way to make the butter? I don't add any oils or anything and would prefer not to.

There usually is no good way to do this, since most home appliances in an average kitchen are simply not suited for making nut butters.

If you really want to do it, the preferable tool would be a masticating juicer. It is an expensive thing which also uses up quite a lot of counter space, and the process is messy.

All other electric tools you can misuse - food processors, blenders, mills, etc. - run into the problems you already noticed, because they are not designed to make nut butter. For all, it is easy to burn them out. If you take the risk and grind away, and the motor survives, you are as likely to end up with a collection of nut pieces and nut dust as you are with a butter. And not adding oils reduces your chances of success.

The mortar and pestle approach would work, but you will probably have to spend several hours for a jar of nut butter. It is usually not worth your time when compared to buying the nut butter.

See also earlier questions like What features should a food processor have in order to make nut butters?, What features should I look for in a hand grinder (for peanut butter)? and How to make ground almonds creamy?.

Making nut butter is easy:

you have to soak your nuts for so many hours
drain
add some avocado in one of those new blending machines.

The above is a bit of a trial and error, maybe add a touch more avocado or just a touch more water if you do not like avocado,

In my 1000 W blender it works like a charm.


Does freezing butter or margarine change the properties? I have a lot of butter & margarine and looking for ways to keep it for longer time.

Will freezing them change melting point, flavor, or anything that could be undesirable when cooking?

Update:
We are now freezing our butter and margarine. It is a perfect solution!

Butter and margarine freeze perfectly.  I generally stock up during sales and thaw it as needed. You just have to make sure it's wrapped tightly in the foil, to prevent oxidation.  It'll keep at least 6 months, probably more if you don't have a self-defrosting freezer.

Thawing butter does take quite a while, however.  I usually give a package a few days to thaw fully. If you need butter in a hurry, you can always put it in a Ziploc bag and fast thaw it a bowl under running running water.  Or, just soften it in the microwave.

If you ask any of the margarine manufacturers, they'll tell you NOT to freeze margarine because of the high water content. Upon thawing, the oil and water will likely separate. It'll look bad and not taste as it should.

Butter, on the other hand, can be frozen, because of the high fat content.


What can I substitute for lady cream peas without noticeable flavor change? I was emailed a recipe by a friend -- she'd like me to cook a Strawberry and Lemon White Bean Bundt Cake. One of the ingredients is going to be a problem, though:

  1/2 pound Camellia Brand Lady Cream Peas, cooked and drained

The cooked peas are pureed and then mixed with other, more conventional cake ingredients; presumably the strawberry and lemon flavors predominate, rather than the peas.

But for my question: I'd never heard of lady cream peas! According to the manufacturer's website (from whence the recipe comes), it's a type of cowpea.

  They have a sweet flavor and creamy texture and are featured in Southern dishes

I've looked in a couple of stores and can't find lady cream peas -- would I be able to substitute black-eyed peas (another strain of cowpea) with little risk of changing the flavor, or are they stronger (beanier?) than lady cream peas? What other bean/pea options are available? My lack of cowpea experience is showing :)

Camellia brand has a store locator for it's products and the OP was able to find the lady cream peas at a location close to her.

For anyone who isn't able to find them, butter peas are a good option. I've seen them fresh, frozen, and canned. Other acceptable substitutes could be cannellini (white kidney) beans or great northern beans, although great northerns are not quite as sweet. Both of these should be available dried or canned. However, if you are to prepare them without salt, I would stay away from canned.

I am sure you could use any type of white beans.


How do you remove the stickiness from reusable plastic container or lid? I have a blue plastic lid for my glass Anchor container.  I noticed that the lid is very sticky to the touch from both sides.  I've cleaned it thoroughly with soap but the stickiness is still there.  This lid is supposed to be microwave safe but I never used it while heating up food.

I also noticed a similar texture with with my semi-transparent Tupperware plastic container.  For this one, the lid is fine but the container itself is sticky on the inside.

Has anyone experienced that before with plastic lids or containers?  The stickiness is the same all year long.  Is there a way to clean it or has the product reached its end of life?

When I get this, it's almost always old grease that didn't get washed off properly in the first place. We have some newer storage containers that are, for some reason, really strongly attractive to grease and have to be washed very carefully with lots of detergent or they're sticky next time we go to use them.

My usual solution is to rub the whole thing with undiluted dishwashing liquid and let it sit a minute or two. Then I rub/rinse with the hottest water I can stand until it's all squeaky clean. This usually works.

If your grease is several layers deep or really old, you might have to resort to a grease cutter like Formula 409 or one of the citrus-based degreasers, followed up with plenty of detergent. I would not use solvent any stronger than a commercial cleaning spray because of the risk of damaging the plastic. I also would not scour the plastic. The scratching will make it exponentially harder to get all the way clean, and the deepest scratches can harbor bacteria (ask any home brewer who scoured his brew bucket how much it increases the risk of infection).

I know that soaking in mixture of dish detergent and ammonia is the most effective method, but I cannot stand the noxious (carcinogenic?) fumes. Especially in the office kitchenette, when you have but two plastic lunch boxes (and a couple of plastic cutlery you conscientiously reuse) to wash.

I use a mixture of baking soda and dish detergent.

My other alternative is laundry detergent with baking soda.

I realise that baking soda is not readily available in many countries (e.g. Israel or southeast Asia), where they sell a tiny sachet for like US$1, while we could get a whole quart for $0.50 in the US. In such times, I had used the cheapest white toothpaste in place of baking soda, unadulterated with gels or substances used to smoothen the texture of the connoisseur brands toothpaste.

Then rinse on a slow trickle of hot water from the faucet. A rushing gush of water would simply wash away the mixture. (I am adamantly annoyed at people who turn the hot water full blast not knowing that such an environmentally harmful method is less effective than a slow trickle).


Am I slow cooking chicken correctly? I tried to slow cook chicken today using the hob on my gas cooker.  I started on a very very low heat and just left it for an hour and noticed it was doing a good job of absorbing flavours in the liquid which is what I wanted. I then slowly brought it to a simmer, simmered for 10 minutes and then lowered to low poach and left it for 45 minutes. Unfortunately upon taking it out I noticed leg pieces seemed overcooked and where falling apart and juices had come out.

From my understanding slow cooking is cooking at lowest temperatures of poaching up to simmering and doing it for between 4 to 8 hours.  Having tried and thought about it if you cook chicken for 4 hours at low poaching of course it is going to overcook and tear up.  4 hours is too much for chicken let alone 8.  Anyway have I missed something here or how do you slow cook chicken without overcooking it?

Yes, you are slow-cooking correctly.
If you were cooking some chicken adobo then having the meat fall off the bone is intended.

Otherwise if you want to serve if while everything is still attached, you can do so anytime after you have simmered or poached the chicken (making it safe to eat), not sure it qualifies as slow cooking however. As pointed out by @Aaronut, extended cooking will break down connective tissues - it breaks down collagen.

If your chicken is fat, then it may take longer to break down.
You can develop a caramel crust on your chicken so that it holds longer and lock in the juices.
tip: put the fattier part on top, so that it runs down the chicken.

Here is some information about searing; it can cause a maillard reaction which does a few interesting things:

it will add more complex and varied flavors, by reacting the sugars, amino acid, and heat.
caramelize stuff, e.g. onions :D

In some cases, pressure-cooking can achieve the same results as slow-cooking in less time, while making it easier for the maillard reaction to happen.

You have to pack the chicken breast in ice before cooking. If the chicken breast is really cold or frozen when you start, it will be tender at the same time of the legs. If you don't the breast will be either overcooked or the legs undercooked. This happens because of the different composition of the meats on the chicken.


Is there a problem with defrosting meat on the counter? I generally defrost meat on the kitchen counter. A friend of mine suggested that this was dangerous and suggested that I defrost meat in the refrigerator. I am no biologist but it seems to me that as long as the meat doesn't get warm defrosting it on the counter should be safe.

Generally, I remove the frozen items from the freezer and place them on a plate on the counter in the packaging they were frozen in. When they are mostly / completely thawed I place the meat in the refrigerator.

Am I wrong and should I be defrosting in the refrigerator?

A lot of bacteria grows in the range of 40-100°F (4-38°C) (i.e. room temperature). It's definitely not recommended to defrost meat at room temperature. In fact, you are not supposed to leave meat at room temperature for more than an hour.

However, defrosting in the refrigerator can take a long time and require you to plan at least one day ahead of time. I'm not so good at this, which leads to a safe and fast solution: Defrost meat in a waterproof ziploc bag in cold water. Change the water every 30 minutes until defrosted. The water is a better  conductor of heat than air, so the defrosting is quite fast and the water is cold so there's minimal safety risk.

From the USDA:

  Uh, oh! You're home and forgot to
  defrost something for dinner. You grab
  a package of meat or chicken and use
  hot water to thaw it fast. But is this
  safe? What if you remembered to take
  food out of the freezer, but forgot
  and left the package on the counter
  all day while you were at work?

  Neither of these situations are safe,
  and these methods of thawing lead to
  foodborne illness. Food must be kept
  at a safe temperature during "the big
  thaw." Foods are safe indefinitely
  while frozen. However, as soon as food
  begins to defrost and become warmer
  than 40 °F (4 °C), any bacteria that may have
  been present before freezing can begin
  to multiply.

  Foods should never be thawed or even
  stored on the counter, or defrosted in
  hot water. Food left above 40 °F
  (unrefrigerated) is not at a safe
  temperature.

  Even though the center of the package
  may still be frozen as it thaws on the
  counter, the outer layer of the food
  is in the "Danger Zone," between 40
  and 140 °F (4 °C and 60 °C) – at temperatures where
  bacteria multiply rapidly.

  When defrosting frozen foods, it's
  best to plan ahead and thaw food in
  the refrigerator where food will
  remain at a safe, constant temperature
  – 40 °F (4 °C) or below.

  There are three safe ways to defrost
  food: in the refrigerator, in cold
  water, and in the microwave.

  Refrigerator Thawing Planning ahead is
  the key to this method because of the
  lengthy time involved. A large frozen
  item like a turkey requires at least a
  day (24 hours) for every 5 pounds of
  weight. Even small amounts of frozen
  food -- such as a pound of ground meat
  or boneless chicken breasts -- require
  a full day to thaw. When thawing foods
  in the refrigerator, there are several
  variables to take into account. Some
  areas of an appliance may keep the
  food colder than other areas. Food
  placed in the coldest part will
  require longer defrosting time. Food
  takes longer to thaw in a refrigerator
  set at 35 °F (2 °C) than one set at 40 °F (4 °C).

  After thawing in the refrigerator,
  ground meat and poultry should remain
  useable for an additional day or two
  before cooking; red meat, 3 to 5 days.
  Foods defrosted in the refrigerator
  can be refrozen without cooking,
  although there may be some loss of
  quality.

  Cold Water Thawing

  This method is faster than
  refrigerator thawing but requires more
  attention. The food must be in a
  leak-proof package or plastic bag. If
  the bag leaks, bacteria from the air
  or surrounding environment could be
  introduced into the food. Also, meat
  tissue can also absorb water like a
  sponge, resulting in a watery product.

  The bag should be submerged in cold
  tap water, changing the water every 30
  minutes so it continues to thaw. Small
  packages of meat or poultry – about a
  pound – may defrost in an hour or
  less. A 3- to 4-pound package may take
  2 to 3 hours. For whole turkeys,
  estimate about 30 minutes per pound.
  If thawed completely, the food must be
  cooked immediately.

  Foods thawed by the cold water method
  should be cooked before refreezing.

I remember my mother defrosting most meat from the freezer on the counter.  She would take it out when she came home from work for lunch, and it would be ready to cook when she got home.  We never got sick.  But that was almost 50 years ago when bacteria wasn't as prevalent or resistant as it is today.  Greed and selfishness in the forms of people not being responsible enough to consider others... By not washing their hands, not cleaning up after themselves, littering, etc.  It's kind of sad.

I now buy very little meat and when I do, it's strictly organic, grass fed humanely raised local meat.  I defrost it in the refrigerator only.


Hot sauce; Remove seeds? I use a recipe that calls for removing the top third or more of Cayenne peppers in order to remove most of the seeds. Seems like a waste to me. Aside from having to strain out the seeds after cooking, what would it hurt to just cut the stem and cook the peppers with the seeds in there? Would it have an ill affect on the taste? I wouldn't think so since the seeds are also used for crushed red pepper.

I just made a batch of hot sauce that was very cayenne-heavy myself. Keep the seeds.

You want to get every last bit of heat out of those babies, especially if you are diluting with a significant amount of vinegar.

The only use case I can think of for chopping the tops off as described in your recipe is if you aren't already planning to strain out the pulp as well.

Even if I was eager to keep pulp but avoid seeds in my final batch I would rather scrape seeds from the individual peppers than waste that much product.

I personally don't think you'll notice any off flavors from the seeds.

Exactly, ribs contain the hottest part. That's the point for hotness.
In regards to seeds, I do not recomend to add seeds to any hot cooked or raw sauce,  becasuse seeds are not good for our digestion, in any pepper.
Just think, do you add seeds when cooking a red sweet bell pepper? I love hotness but I always take the seeds out of my salsas.
I do not understand why chefs add seeds... Are they just lazy or ignorants about our health issues?


In place of cream of tartar to stabilize egg whites? https://sallysbakingaddiction.com/sky-high-chocolate-mousse-pie/#tasty-recipes-69503

Using this recipe, calls for cream of tartar. I don't have that, I've only got tartaric acid. Would that work? Or anything else in substitute?

Thanks

Your acid will work in place of potassium bitartrate, AKA cream of tartar.
Lemon juice, vinegar, or even baking powder will also work.
Six good substitutes: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/cream-of-tartar-substitutes
Most common baking powders are a mix of sodium bicarbonate and cream of tartar. As per link, add 1.5 tsp baking powder in place of 1 tsp cream of tartar.

Take some raw fish and toss it in a blender with half-and-half. Voilà! Cream of tartare.


Butter Alternatives for Baking Pastry I'm dairy intolerant but I really love to bake.  I've found success by substituting butter with either lard or coconut oil.  The other night, I made a short pastry dough that called for 13 tablespoons of butter to 1.5 cups of flour and instead of using butter I used coconut oil.  The dough was super delicate to work with since the oil heated up much more quickly and teared more easily than butter dough I've worked with before.

Would I achieve better results with a different fat?  Say, margarine or shortening?

Any input would be greatly appreciated!

There are good quality vegan margarines (Earth balance, Alsan) on the market nowadays, often they are of the interesterified instead of the hydrogenated variety. They are designed to behave and taste similar to butter instead of (as many cheap margarines seem to do) staying spreadable at temperatures where butter would be very firm. Unlike pure coconut or palm oil, they do not act very brittle when cold, and also they soften gradually instead of suddenly melting like eutectic solder. These should be on the top of the list of things to try...

Also, some recipes recommend using more than one type of fat in pastry, for more interesting texture (eg such margarine, and smaller flakes of a hardened coconut fat).

I have read applesauce could be a great substitute for butter in baking. Its 68 calories per 100g, which is less than a tenth of the calories you would get from margarine and without the trans fat. The ratio from what I have read is 1:1 to butter.


What can I do to make my Cheese & Onion Pie freeze well? Here is my Mum's recipe for what she called Cheese & Onion Pie, which was a favourite of mine as a child, and I continue to make occasionally to this day.

Boil some chopped potatoes until soft.
Drain, add milk and butter, and mash them.
Add grated cheese and finely chopped red onion and mix. About two thirds potato, one third cheese & onion.
Transfer it into a dish.
Cover with pastry (I cheat and use ready made pastry, sorry)
Bake in the oven for about 35 minutes.

This works very well. Over the years I've experimented with different types of cheese, and also things like black pepper and garlic.

However, if I freeze it, it does not defrost very well. It comes out watery and with a lot less taste.

I have tried leaving it to defrost at room temperature, defrosting it quickly in the microwave, and putting it straight in the oven frozen. The end result is the same.

I have also tried leaving the pastry out and just freezing the mixture.

There are two issues with freezing it:-  The watery texture, and the taste. Are they connected?

Is there anything I can do to make it suitable for freezing?

To clarify: I make a large pie, serve half and freeze the other half. I'm not making it specifically just to put in the freezer.

The way to freeze this well would be to use instant potatoes simply mixed cold and not cooked.  Then when you bring it out to reheat, you'll cook the potatoes.  The taste will be of instant potatoes, though.

The problem is that the starches in the potato will undergo retrogradation, recrystallize and expel moisture when reheated.

You could counteract this by stirring in some potato starch after the potatoes have cooked and cooled and before you assemble the pie, but the instant potato method will work better and will require less experimenting.

Cheese and onion pie does not freeze as well if potato is added to it, try just cheese and onion. Cook onion first in a little butter, slowly, and then cool on kitchen paper to remove excess water. Mix cheese and onion, beat one egg and add then put in pastry case in an 8 inch tin. I have frozen half pies many times and not had any issues with texture or taste


Should I rinse canned beans before using them? Certainly, if I were making a salad with canned beans, I would thoroughly rinse them first. But if I'm making soup or chili with canned black beans or kidney beans, should I drain and rinse them first? Goya brand beans have recipes on the side of the can that call for undrained beans.

On the one hand, I've heard claims that using the liquid in the can will increase gassiness, and that in some brands it can contain a lot of sodium. But I've also heard that it contains lots of soluble fiber that is lost if drained. Is there merit to either of these claims? Are there other nutrients that get lost if I drain and rinse? I always feel bad throwing out anything edible.

I finally found what I'm looking for, from the University of Michigan - some actual data on the subject!

They say that rinsing canned beans can reduce the amount of sodium by half, and also reduces the amount of complex sugars which humans can't digest (but the bacteria in our intestines can, with uncomfortable results!)

It appears that draining the fluid is likely to improve the flavor and texture of the resulting food by concentrating the flavor of the beans -- unless you're following a soup recipe that specifically suggests retaining the liquid to thicken the soup.

I still haven't found any information about what healthy nutrients might be lost by rinsing the beans, but the general consensus seems to be that it rinsing will do more good than harm in almost all cases.

Dark Red Kidney Beans . . . I rinse them well (with warm water), then eat them right out of the can.  Nature's perfect fiber for mankind. I have beans everyday, no problems with gas because after a while your body gets used to digesting them. "Affordable, healthy, and damn tasty. Absolutely rinse that yuch off of them. It's just extra salt and sugar that you don't need in your body if you want to stay healthy.

I love black beans, but the Dark Red Goya Kidney beans won first place on my palette.

Other than out-of-the-can, I put them directly into a corn tortilla with some cilantro and Guacamole.  Oh my. . . so good.

Salads are intensely satisfying and nutritional with these beauties.

Yum.


Why should I "rest" meat after cooking? I often read in recipes that I should "rest" meat after it has been cooked but what does resting the meat actually do?

There are a couple of reasons why 'resting' meat is a good idea. First, as the meat cooks the muscle fibres contract, which forces the juices out. Letting the meat rest helps the muscle fibres relax so the juices are re-incorporated into the meat and not lost on the chopping board, which would happen if carved immediately.

The second reason to let meat rest is to provide an evenness. Basically as the meat rests it continues to cook slightly and it allows the meat to gain an overall 'doneness'

Pulse is so correct that it is so important to let a piece of meat rest. It is so evident when a steak is cooked placed straight on a plate and cut into , all blood that hasn't been able to settle back through the meat will be pooling on the plate in seconds and you are left with a dry overbooked piece of meat.
In large joints of meat I have found that a short resting time creates the meat to be tougher to cut through and again a loss of crucial juices then a rested piece.
Creates the question with many cooks is a slightly cooled piece of meat rested and relaxed better than a nice hot piece of meat off the grill or out of the oven - I Believe Yes.


Cookware, copper or cast iron or just buy the right tool for the job? I'm thinking of replacing my motley collection of cheap non-stick and bargain basement steel pots and pans.

I'm considering either replacing with cast iron (Le Creuset is probably the best known of these) or perhaps pushing the boat out and investing in copper cookware.

For someone who enjoys getting adventurous every now and again in the kitchen at home, is it worth spending extra on copper?

Copper can be useful for certain tasks due to the its metallic properties (heats quickly, distributes heat evenly, etc.), however I would not call copper pans good "all-purpose" pans.

As for cast iron, you mentioned Le Creuset, and again I would tell you that they are more of a specialty manufacturer. They make some very nice coated cast iron-ware and fantastic large pots, but they're not really the go-to for a simple cast iron pan.

For basic cast iron, go buy a Lodge skillet. They're around $20 depending on size, and will literally last a lifetime. The company has been making these pans for 115 years; they know what they're doing. I use mine 3-4 times per week, and cook almost all my meat in it. It tastes better after every use.

Copper cookware is much better for conductivity and food presentation. Please remember that if you want to really do some gourmet preparation you will need the right tools. Me experience says to buy copper which, also, last for generations. Try Mauviel or Amoretti Brothers www.amorettibrothers.com, the first maybe more clean and for professional chefs, the second more decorative and gourmet.