Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Myths about cooking steak that need to go away (2013)

seriouseats.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 301 posts

Re: Myths about cooking steak that need to go away (2013)

#201

Post by valgor »

1_player wrote: post #98
jmknoll wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if this is what OP had in mind, but beef has a considerably larger carbon footprint than any other common protein source.

And considerably smaller carbon footprint than industrial emission and cars. The vegetables and grains grown 5000 miles away are being brought via land and sea thanks to petrol right to the vegan store one goes to shop at with their SUV. But yes, let's demonise the food we've evolved to thrive on. It's mental that this has become a controversial idea worth censoring.

We still need cars, but we don't need meat. And there are people working on reducing transportation and energy emissions because that is a hard problem. Buying beans instead of meat at the grocery store is not a hard problem, and one any of us can immediately do.

And if you are worried about plant matter and all the land used for it and transportation emissions around it, what do you think the major of animals eat? They are confined to sheds, not green pastures. They eat plants shipped to the farms, and they eat a hell of a lot more than humans do. Eating the animal means we take a fraction of the total calories the animal consumes. It is completely inefficient. More here: https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local

No one denies we evolved eating meat. But that is the pasted. We can do better in the future. "Tradition" is a word worth censoring.

Re: Myths about cooking steak that need to go away (2013)

#202

Post by astrange »

cthalupa wrote: post #174
astrange wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't steak boring? They're huge and the huger they are the more masculine you are for eating them, but every bite tastes the same and there's no need to experience it past the first few.

>Isn't steak boring? No. > They're huge and the huger they are the more masculine you are for eating them I dry age steaks at home, so between trimming off the pellicle (which I then use for mixing in when grinding burger meat or turn into stock/demi-glace) and the water loss from evaporation, my steaks aren't particularly large, and I certainly don't do it because of any sort of masculinity. >but every bite tastes t…

I've seen this opinion from an actual professional chef recently; don't remember where, but I think it was the author of this article.

> and I certainly don't do it because of any sort of masculinity.

Good for you. Giant porterhouses at steakhouses is definitely associated with power businessmen and boomers in the finance industry though; it goes with the whisky and cigars. (But Alexander's in Silicon Valley seems to be leaning into very expensive wagyu.)

> If you find something delicious, why would you decide you should stop after a couple of bites?

Having a short attention span is my foolproof diet tip and has never failed me. Plus, desire is the root of suffering and all that.

Re: Myths about cooking steak that need to go away (2013)

#203

Post by LesZedCB »

cheese_goddess wrote: post #140
errcorrectcode wrote: post #25

Or: the myth the whole of humanity needs to eat expensive, inefficiently-produced, rainforest clearing, climate change-inducing, antibiotics-immune superbug-breeding, unhealthy animal protein grown on CAFOs. Roughly 12% of GHGs are attributed to meat agriculture. Since few people decide anything rationally since they want their steaks and Big Macs, I challenge anyone to visit Greeley CO, Tar Heel NC or North Platte N…

> Roughly 12% of GHGs are attributed to meat agriculture. The cause of anthropogenic climate change is the burning of fossil fuels, not the raising of animals for food. Burning fossil fuels releases carbon at a rate and in amounts that are too high for the natural mechanisms in the environment, that normally bind carbon, to cope with. The carbon gasses released by cows and other ruminants are part of the planetary ca…

holy fucking shit, no.

https://drawdown.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/Drawdown_Graph...

i know there has been a lot of pushback because of the individualist nature of exxon et al's carbon footprint red herring.

but reduction of emissions is a project every single individual, corporation, and government must be part of.

we are are deeply intertwined, all terrestrials, all earth bound. and the anti-individualist shove-off of responsibility onto corporations is going to get us equally nowhere.

_Both And_, people.

https://www.drawdown.org/drawdown-framework

Re: Myths about cooking steak that need to go away (2013)

#205

Post by burntsushi »

gruez wrote: post #100
fisherjeff wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard disagree on convenience: Timing hot steaks with hot sides is virtually effortless with a circulator

I fail to see how a circulator is more convenient or effortless. For starters you need to prep a bag and a pot of water if you're using a circulator. On the other hand with reverse sear all you need to do is stick a thermometer in, throw it on a pan/rack and put it in an oven. After you're done with the circulator you have to wrangle with a wet bag full of beef liquid and dry off the steak (otherwise your sear will b…

I don't really understand how you can "fail" to see the convenience. The convenience comes from the ease of getting it right. I consistently over-cooked steaks with the reverse sear method. Maybe half the time. With sous vide, I never---literally never---overcook a steak.

That's the convenience. I don't have to worry about the temperature. I drop it in the bath and I take it out at my convenience.

Re: Myths about cooking steak that need to go away (2013)

#206

Post by valgor »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #142
errcorrectcode wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but at least I didn't give consent to it through my silence or was on the wrong side of history, nearly as important as slavery, since it's an existential threat to all of us. Qui tacet consentire videtur.

Have you ever considered that it may be counterproductive to your self stated goals and a more moderate approach may work better?

What would be an appropriate moderate approach? Because for anyone completely shut off to the idea, any approach is too extreme. And for anyone remotely interested with be intrigued enough to learn more on their own.

Re: Myths about cooking steak that need to go away (2013)

#207

Post by gjs278 »

weeksie wrote: post #36
AdmiralAsshat wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having compared the methods in my own kitchen, I'm also coming around to the idea that the reverse sear is a better method than sous vide, because I seem to get a better crust on the steak (likely because the steak is dryer than what I can remove from the s-v'd steak with paper towels). But , I find this only holds true for really nice cuts like filet mignon. If I want to cook a cheaper steak like a NY strip, I think…

A strip is not a "cheaper" steak than a filet. Filet mignon is a fine cut, it's low in flavor but very tender which means that it tastes better when it's extra rare. Well marbled cuts of steak are usually better at mid-rare b/c the fat melts a little. I do like sous vide for very thick steaks with some marbling—so a strip is a pretty decent one for the dip. However, I've found ribeyes come out spongey when you sous v…

No post body was provided.

Re: Myths about cooking steak that need to go away (2013)

#208

Post by jjulius »

halpert wrote: post #197
technofiend wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hah. Try ordering a steak any temperature above medium or up at some NYC steak houses and they'll give you a charred hockey puck because they're assuming you're going to drown it in ketchup and can't taste the difference anyway. It's not always about meat quality or whatever stick the chef has up his butt about serving it barely warmed over. For some of us uncooked / undercooked bloody and gelatinous steak is downrig…

Have you tried just ordering your steaks medium rare? That's what I do, and I've never had the type of trouble you speak of ordering at steak houses in NYC.

OP said:

>Try ordering a steak any temperature above medium or up...

Medium rare is below medium. ;)

Re: Myths about cooking steak that need to go away (2013)

#210

Post by jmknoll »

1_player wrote: post #98
jmknoll wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if this is what OP had in mind, but beef has a considerably larger carbon footprint than any other common protein source.

And considerably smaller carbon footprint than industrial emission and cars. The vegetables and grains grown 5000 miles away are being brought via land and sea thanks to petrol right to the vegan store one goes to shop at with their SUV. But yes, let's demonise the food we've evolved to thrive on. It's mental that this has become a controversial idea worth censoring.

I understand the point you're trying to make, but transportation cost is not really a relevant point here.

Food of any variety can be locally produced, or it can be sourced through industrial supply chains. Animal and plant products can both have an embedded cost in terms of carbon emissions, water, and usage of arable land. That is to say, a cow, a chicken, and a bunch of potatoes can all be locally sourced, and the costs of production for the cow are going to be much higher.

Moreover, the food we "evolved to thrive on," was likely primarily nuts, seeds, fruits, insects, rodents, and occasionally larger animals like antelope (which would have been eaten nose-to-tail), not fatty steaks from domesticated animals.

Post reply on HN