Is it safe...Brisket cooked at 160f

[TheCountofQ]

So a post comes across my Facebook page. Pic of a 13lb whole packer looking like a rare rib roast. A little discussion reveals that he cooked it at 160° for 15 hours. No fat trimming. Cooked in some sort of roaster, no details on exact style or model.

My question, excepting the fact this thing is probably tough as Chuck Norris, and chewier then Chewbacca himself. ... what health hazards are presented by cooking at those temps for that amount of time, if any?

I did a search on the main AR.com, but found no definitive info.

[Mr. Bones]

Although it don' sound much like an appetizin' brisket, (leastways not t' me), th' general guidelines I was always taught, and req' t' adhere t' by th' State Health Inspectors, is temps above 140°F, or below 40°F are the safe zones.

Jerod Broussard is on an' prowlin' aroun' th' Pit, I'm hopin' he'll pipe up with a more informed answer for ya.

[Spinaker]

Bones, i was supposed to fly to KC tonight, but Delta grounded all flights because their system went down. Flight was canceled. Work Trip canceled.

[Mr. Bones]

Spinaker, are they still sendin' ya' t' KC @ a later date?

[Spinaker]

Yeah they are, but not sure when. Maybe later this week. Wednesday maybe. I am meeting a chemical supplier in Elwood, KS and Smithfield Farmland in KC.

[TheCountofQ]

I personally wouldn't think it would be safe. That is the majority of the meat spent too much time in the danger zone. One guy is saying that the bacteria is on the outside of the brisket, and the 160 killed that, so it is safe.

An interesting question... although I still would have to figure a way out of eating that meal if I had been invited.

[Spinaker]

Oooooh this is a good one!! I know Meathead doesn't recommend cold smoking because it can be dangerous for amateurs. I'm guessing thats why we can't find any info on it here, probably. I agree. I bet you could lace that sucker up and wear it!

I bet its okay, from a safety stand point. But I wouldn't be surprised if someone did get sick from this. I wouldn't prepare it like this. No point, seems risky and it can't be tender! !

Thanks for posting. I am looking forward to hearing from the Doc and Jerod Broussard on this one. They should be able to shed some light.

[TheCountofQ]

It's a young guy learning on his own apparently. Took all the criticism well. I was impressed with that much at least. I referred him to AR, of course!!!

[Spinaker]

Sounds like he needs it!!! Perfect spot for him.

[Jerod Broussard]

Meathead recommends 225 as a base cooking temperature so that you can pasteurize the surface.

The problem with cooking too low is Salmonella will become heat resistant if the humidity is not high enough to achieve properly lethality.

The meat surface temperature is also cooler than the air temperature.

So go figure on what kind of mess you could end up with there, other than the toughest brisket in the world.

​​​​​

[TheCountofQ]

I had no idea salmonella could become heat resistant, but understand the surface temp would be cooler. Maybe not much after 15 hours. But as far as the inside of the packer, I just assumed something would have to start growing there, at such temps for such a long time. Still learning. ..

[Jerod Broussard]

TheCountofQ The heat resistance of Salmonella increases as the water activity of the food decreases. They also have the ability to acquire greater heat resistance following sub-lethal exposure. I compare the last sentence to someone getting in shape to run a marathon. The Salmonella "get in shape" with low heat and become more resistant to higher temps.

[tbob4]

Jerod Broussard - Question based upon your response. Forgive me if I am misunderstanding what you wrote. When cooking low and slow (225) the presence of water in the cooking environment effectively kills Salmonella, thus making the use of the water pan essential at low temps? The reason I ask is because I cook a lot at the low and slow temps and use a water pan. I do simply because it became a convenient way to control temps on my COS' and carried the style over to my other units because it became ingrained in my cooking style for low and slow. I read a lot of debate about water in the environment - I'm likely too old to change my style and preferences. However, for those who like cooking in a dry environment, would you suggest cooking with water for a period of time to kill the surface critters and then switching to dry cooking?

[Jerod Broussard]

If you're cooking at a high enough temperature the moisture really isn't a concern. The use of water pans cooking at 225 and higher is more for temperature control and smoke adhesion, amongst other things.

It's just at low temperatures you need all the heat transfer that you can get and a wet heat helps you attain that.

[tbob4]

Great. Thanks for the response. When I'm cooking at 225, I'm dipping a bit below and a bit above so it's good info - much appreciated.

[Willy]

I'd really like to see some serious scientific support for the idea that microbes could become heat resistant over the course of a single cook (or even MUCH longer). I just don't buy it--it sticks in my craw. No offense intended (I'm certainly willing to be wrong here), but I hate to see incorrect information spread around. What about SV for 24-48 hours at temps well below 225°F?

[Jerod Broussard]

Not sure on the time frame. Just know they warn about it as part of food micro by those who spend their lives researching this stuff.
Here is a tidbit for you to look up- find why it was determined that canned foods w/ low acidity & high water activity must undergo a 12-log reduction process.

[Willy]

Jerod Broussard My understanding of canning low acid foods at higher heat (under pressure) is in regard to botulinum (the spores survive even tho the bugs are killed), not salmonella?

I have NO CLUE as to what is a 12-log reduction process! :«)

[Jerod Broussard]

Willy the reason I mentioned it is because they really don't know the specific reason as to why scientists established the 12-log reduction. 1. 12-log which is a million * million or one trillion is so big it's incomprehensible or 2. It takes that many microbes to fill up one cubic centimeter.

[TheCountofQ]

Willy It seems I read somewhere (I thought in a post here on AR) about no SV on large cuts, due to microbial/bacterial issues from spending to much time in the danger zone. I just browsed over it though, as I have never done a SV cook.

I have also seen post with all different charts, that I didn't really understand, with different temps/times/log values concerning food safety.

Other than the liability issues, I think this would be a very good subject for another Video Seminar with Doc.

I know there "was" a link here somewhere, discussing how the recommended cooking temps are a bit extreme (playing it extra safe). It broke down somewhat how additional time at the lower temp could be just as effective. Am not sure where that link is now. May still be there, and I just have not "re-found" it.

I also like "facts", but will play it on the safe side without them. NEVER would I cook a brisket for 15 hours at 160F, even without the safety concerns.

[Willy]

There may or may not be good reasons to not cook a brisket at 160°F for 15 hours (taste and quality aside), but I am all but certain that having the microbes adapt to, and survive at, higher temperatures is not a good reason. I hope this thread stays active and gets someone with knowledge to respond.

[Huskee]

Remember we're talking a big difference in energy transference between water and air. SV cooking at 160 is MUCH different than cooking at 160 in a smoker. The same as sticking your hand in a 212 oven or smoker might actually feel nice for a few seconds vs 212 degree water! I don't know much about lethality of heat on microbes myself, but I would trust what Jerod tells us, since that's his day job....and I wouldn't consider it incorrect information being spread around.

[AdamJG]

Same reason 35 degree air is tolerable but a swim 35 degree water would be agonizing and breath taking (in a bad way)

[Steve Vojtek]

Yes Huskee is absolutely correct. Without spending time to look it up again I believe water transfers heat 20 to 25 times faster than air. ( please correct me if I'm wrong ). Therefore cooking SV at 160 is perfectly safe as it is close to the "instant kill zone" for pathogens. There is also moisture in the bag so salmonella is unlikely to become resistant to heat. I would go as far as saying that dropping a vacsealed bag of meat into a 160 f hot tub will heat and pasteurize the meat quicker than a 225 f oven or smoker. And we all know that is safe. A 160 f oven on the other hand is probably dangerous as the meat would take a lot longer to come up to temp. I would not recommend it unless you want to suffer potential consequences. Many people including myself cook SV at much lower temps than 160 as pasteurization is a function of not only temperature but also time. I regularly SV short ribs at 135 f for 72 hours and never had problems.

[Willy]

Jerod Broussard Huskee To be clear, I am only questioning the idea that the microbes become heat resistant and, as I stated in my first post, I am happy to be wrong regarding my suspicions. I do recognize that this is relevant to Jerod’s "day job" and I certainly meant no disrespect toward him or his expertise. Neither do I intend to cook at 160°F ever, although I do often put my meat into a relatively cool smoker while things heat up, so this might have some relevance.

The image I have is of a frog being heated very slowly in a pot of water until it is happily swimming in boiling water. It jest don’t feel right. Over the course of my life, I’ve "known" more than a few "facts" that weren’t so, thus I’ve learned to ask for clarification when my skeptical sense is aroused. I’d rather appear to be stupid now than to pass on info as fact.

[DeusDingo]

bacteria would be so much cuter if they were all frog shaped. alas, the 2 cannot be compared. a frog is an organism made up of a LOT of complicated cells which will kill it if just a small number of them fail. microbes are much simpler and don't follow the same rules as complex life.

[Jerod Broussard]

No offense taken and as Deus pointed out, things vary so much it is a matter of being cautious for the sake of safety knowing the capabilities of certain organisms. Bacteria actually communicate with each other which allows them to form complex structures such as Biofilms.

[tbob4]

Willie - for you. It may cause more questions than answers in relation to your temp inquiry but it's informative: http://aggie-horticulture.tamu.edu/f...ood-poisoning/ - I like the line of questioning and answers here.

[Willy]

Thanks, tbob4!

[tbob4]

The only thing I've been missing from you lately, Willy, are the polls. How about BBQ shoes? New, old, sneakers, boots - dedicated to BBQ only etc.