May 25, 2011
Pork can be pink! The USDA says it’s now safe to eat pork closer to rare.
Until this week, the government has said that pork should be cooked to an internal temperature of 160. But now they’ve reduced it to 145.
Pamela Johnson, director of consumer communications for the National Pork Board:
Our consumer research has consistently shown that Americans have a tendency to overcook common cuts of pork, resulting in a less-than-optimal eating experience. The new guidelines will help consumers enjoy pork at its most flavorful, juicy – and safe – temperature.
Food industry professionals are generally pleased, it seems.
Patrick Quakenbush, chef of Zed451:
I think it is good that they finally realized that trichinosis has not been around since the 50′s and that you don’t need to cook pork till it is done… I love my medium rare pork chops!”
Paul Kahan, chef at Blackbird:
I’m ecstatic. I do a lot of work with The American Pork Council, and I know this is something they’ve been working on for a long time. Frankly, I never cook pork to 160 degrees, that’s just hammering it. If you cook it to 138 and let it coast to 145, that’s pretty close to where you need to be.
* * * * *
Awesome. I’m looking forward to some medium chops.
I have been doing this for quite some time. The butcher at our store cuts the chops about 1.5″ inches thick so they are more like steaks. Season, let them come to room temp for about an hour, grill, pull at about 135 and let them rest. They continue to cook and the juices settle down.
Perfection.
I’m concerned that the legalization of pink pork will lead to people eating undercooked chicken. What’s next? Raw milk?
Just a little input from the local hog-farmer’s wife. :)
The difference is that pink pork – thanks to the modern standard of NOT letting them free-range – is no longer exposed to the trichinosis worm. The previous cooking temperature was proven to kill the larvae potentially hidden in the meat before you consumed it.
(keep in mind that if you eat free-range pork you had still better cook it as high as before)
Chicken – on the other hand – can easily carry salmonella and campylobacter on the skin’s surface. When they’re slaughtered it can’t be guaranteed to be eliminated – thus necessitating the need to cook properly to kill the bacteria.
Same with raw milk: there are high risks associated with it. Salmonella, and listeria to name a couple – and those are dangerous for everyone. Pasteurization kills those bacteria rendering it safe to drink.
I doubt the USDA will lower those standards anytime soon – but I think you can trust they did due-diligence in reaching the decision for pork. :)
Wow. I didn’t realize people felt so passionately about this.
The folks at Cooks Illustrated have been saying that for years, and I’ve been taking their word for it. 160 makes shoe leather out of pork. (Unless it’s tenderloin, which was fortunate for me a couple of days ago when I was juggling kitchen and grill duties.)
I’ll stick to the safest standard of not eating any pork other than bacon…and I think chewy bacon is the devil. So yeah. I’m safe.