Guest guest Posted February 28, 2005 Report Share Posted February 28, 2005 Kathy wrote: >If you're soaking grains like quinoa or millet, how long might you cook them after this is the pressure cooker? I don't use my pressure cooker for Quinoa because it only takes 10-15 mins to cook in a saucepan on the stove. >I have a real beauty dh got me a few years ago for my birthday - I'm trying to use it more. I don't think people on this list think very highly of pressure cookers, but I LOVE my stainless steel model. I use it regularly to make spaghetti sauce and all sorts of stews, but the best use of my pressure cooker is for fantastic soups. I regularly plonk in a chicken or turkey carcass, along with some garlic, a little vinegar and a few veggies, top it up with water, and it's done in 20 mins :-) Cheers, and the K9's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 6, 2008 Report Share Posted January 6, 2008 > And lastly, we always have used the pressure cooker, >does anyone know if this is an acceptable method >of cooking beans or is there a better, more optimal way? > > Thanks, > Millie Sally Fallon lists the presure cooker as: " realtively new " and " The danger is that pressure cookers cook foods too quickly and at temperatures above the boiling point. " (page 68, NOURISHING TRADITIONS, revised second edition) But she gives no reason why this is a problem. I too have cooked with pressure cookers for decades, so I looked into this method of cooking and found: By increasing the pressure in a pot, the boiling point of the water is raised (just the opposite of cooking at high elevations, where the boiling point is lower and therefore takes longer to cook) and this higher temperature equates out to shorter cooking times. Once the water begins to boil, no more heat can be added, and the excess steam generated is released out the " whistle " . Most steam though is held inside creating the " pressure " . Most pressure cookers cook at 234 degrees. One report did say 252, but most give the lower number, the higher one was at an increase in pressure of 15psi (pounds per square inch), so maybe the other pots are not as tightly sealed and have a slightly lower pressures. This temperature is below the lowest setting of crockpots which is 250 degrees and only 22 degrees above water boiled at sea level. Older crockpots, and perhaps ones placed in the ground on coals (like dutch ovens) may use lower temps. But the new rules require all crockpots to first heat the food to at least 250 degrees. Cooking in pots under pressure has actually been around for hundreds of years. At least as far back as the 1700 people were weighing down the top of their pots with rocks. Sort of like putting coals on dutch ovens, except using rocks to keep the steam in. That is what increases the pressure in the pot to allow it to cook above the boiling point. I believe I also found this to be the case for my Native American ancestors. It seems logical that heavy rocks on a cast iron or earthen pot may not hold as much steam as a modern lock-downed stainless steel pot, but who knows how much different it is? We are only talking about an increase of 22-40 degrees at most. Most food cooked in a regular oven is at 350 degrees, of course we all know that will create a tough, dry, overcooked grassfed roast. I use the lowest setting an oven will go to, usually 190 (regardless of what the oven says it is-check it with a thermometer). Large restaurants use special ovens for prime rib that work at 140-150 and take up to 14 hours. Crockpots always seem to cook too hot for me. If we use a stove-top method of cooking, regardless of the boiling point temperature, nutrients will escape into the water. If the lid is not on the pan, that steam will escape along with the nutrients. If using a pressure cooker, you can reduce this loss by allowing the pan to cool naturally, slowly, without releasing the steam first to speed up the process. This allows any nutrients in the steam to go back into the broth. I never had any luck in cooking beans in crockpots, which is what led me to look into my mother's pressure cooker methods. But she never used it for beans, always roasts. After ruining maybe 75 pounds of beans over the years, I just gave up and stuck with meats. When I finally got my own set (yes, small to large) of pressure pots, I didn't have the desire to go back to trying beans (except lentils which don't need any special pans and practically cook on their own). I don't know if any other changes occur in the food, but I have found this out: 1. I never cook vegetables in a pressure cooker, as they get overdone very quickly, I add them at the last few minutes before serving, after the pot has cooled and the lid is removed. Or, I cook them separately and combine them. 2. If I am short on time, I use the pots mostly for roasts, instead of the crockpot. 3. I always let the pan cool naturally, so all the steam is re- incorporated into the broth and all the broth is always consumed. 4. I do not use this method for making stocks-they should be cooked at a simmer. The constant boiling emulsifies the fat in the stock. The fat will often stay suspended in the stock even after cooled. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but the stock will look cloudy. However, it does make great gravy when it is emulsified like that(which will happen even if you just hard boil the stock for hours instead of simmering it). 5. I only use the pressure pot when my choices are A. have dinner ready from my grassfed meat in an hour or B. eat out or some other *quick* food. (my goal is to have pre-made dinners ready, but I'm not perfect yet.) So I personally will take the trade-off of using a pressure cooker over fast food, but I don't use it all the time. 6. They are extremely energy efficient using only a low flame for about an hour or less verses 8-12 hours of electric heat in the crockpot. Most people prefer using a crockpot, I just don't like the higher heat it uses, if anyone else has info on why cooking at the slightly higher pressure and temperature, but below crockpot and oven temperatures creates problems in the food or nutrition, PLEASE post us your findings! ~Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 6, 2008 Report Share Posted January 6, 2008 > > > And lastly, we always have used the pressure cooker, > >does anyone know if this is an acceptable method > >of cooking beans or is there a better, more optimal way? > > > > Thanks, > > Millie > > Sally Fallon lists the presure cooker as: " realtively new " and " The > danger is that pressure cookers cook foods too quickly and at > temperatures above the boiling point. " (page 68, NOURISHING > TRADITIONS, revised second edition) But she gives no reason why this > is a problem. > are you cooking for a meal or are you canning .new in indiana> I too have cooked with pressure cookers for decades, so I looked into > this method of cooking and found: > > By increasing the pressure in a pot, the boiling point of the water > is raised (just the opposite of cooking at high elevations, where the > boiling point is lower and therefore takes longer to cook) and this > higher temperature equates out to shorter cooking times. Once the > water begins to boil, no more heat can be added, and the excess steam > generated is released out the " whistle " . Most steam though is held > inside creating the " pressure " . > > Most pressure cookers cook at 234 degrees. One report did say 252, > but most give the lower number, the higher one was at an increase in > pressure of 15psi (pounds per square inch), so maybe the other pots > are not as tightly sealed and have a slightly lower pressures. > > This temperature is below the lowest setting of crockpots which is > 250 degrees and only 22 degrees above water boiled at sea level. > Older crockpots, and perhaps ones placed in the ground on coals (like > dutch ovens) may use lower temps. But the new rules require all > crockpots to first heat the food to at least 250 degrees. > > Cooking in pots under pressure has actually been around for hundreds > of years. At least as far back as the 1700 people were weighing down > the top of their pots with rocks. Sort of like putting coals on > dutch ovens, except using rocks to keep the steam in. That is what > increases the pressure in the pot to allow it to cook above the > boiling point. I believe I also found this to be the case for my > Native American ancestors. > > It seems logical that heavy rocks on a cast iron or earthen pot may > not hold as much steam as a modern lock-downed stainless steel pot, > but who knows how much different it is? We are only talking about an > increase of 22-40 degrees at most. > > Most food cooked in a regular oven is at 350 degrees, of course we > all know that will create a tough, dry, overcooked grassfed roast. I > use the lowest setting an oven will go to, usually 190 (regardless of > what the oven says it is-check it with a thermometer). Large > restaurants use special ovens for prime rib that work at 140-150 and > take up to 14 hours. Crockpots always seem to cook too hot for me. > > If we use a stove-top method of cooking, regardless of the boiling > point temperature, nutrients will escape into the water. If the lid > is not on the pan, that steam will escape along with the nutrients. > If using a pressure cooker, you can reduce this loss by allowing the > pan to cool naturally, slowly, without releasing the steam first to > speed up the process. This allows any nutrients in the steam to go > back into the broth. > > I never had any luck in cooking beans in crockpots, which is what led > me to look into my mother's pressure cooker methods. But she never > used it for beans, always roasts. After ruining maybe 75 pounds of > beans over the years, I just gave up and stuck with meats. When I > finally got my own set (yes, small to large) of pressure pots, I > didn't have the desire to go back to trying beans (except lentils > which don't need any special pans and practically cook on their own). > > I don't know if any other changes occur in the food, but I have found > this out: > > 1. I never cook vegetables in a pressure cooker, as they get > overdone very quickly, I add them at the last few minutes before > serving, after the pot has cooled and the lid is removed. Or, I cook > them separately and combine them. > 2. If I am short on time, I use the pots mostly for roasts, > instead of the crockpot. > 3. I always let the pan cool naturally, so all the steam is re- > incorporated into the broth and all the broth is always consumed. > 4. I do not use this method for making stocks-they should be > cooked at a simmer. The constant boiling emulsifies the fat in the > stock. The fat will often stay suspended in the stock even after > cooled. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but the stock will look > cloudy. However, it does make great gravy when it is emulsified like > that(which will happen even if you just hard boil the stock for hours > instead of simmering it). > 5. I only use the pressure pot when my choices are A. have > dinner ready from my grassfed meat in an hour or B. eat out or some > other *quick* food. (my goal is to have pre-made dinners ready, but > I'm not perfect yet.) So I personally will take the trade-off of > using a pressure cooker over fast food, but I don't use it all the > time. > 6. They are extremely energy efficient using only a low flame > for about an hour or less verses 8-12 hours of electric heat in the > crockpot. > > Most people prefer using a crockpot, I just don't like the higher > heat it uses, if anyone else has info on why cooking at the slightly > higher pressure and temperature, but below crockpot and oven > temperatures creates problems in the food or nutrition, PLEASE post > us your findings! > > ~Jan > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2008 Report Share Posted January 7, 2008 The very high temperature and quick cooking time achieved by a pressure cooker creates acrylamides (carcinogens -- someone else here mentioned them recently) in grains and probably legumes, too. That's why Sally always says to cook rice, for example, on the lowest possible heat for almost two hours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2008 Report Share Posted January 7, 2008 Hi Jan, Thanks so much for taking the time to provide your excerpt and your thoughts. I do appreciate it. I agree that lower is optimal but like you say, for the less than perfect in the kitchen me days, and I really only use it for beans... so for now it stays. I have the very large size Kuhn Rikon cadillac one and without pressure, it also comes in handy for big soups also. Millie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 On 1/6/08, bellasol.organics <bellasol.organics@...> wrote: > Most food cooked in a regular oven is at 350 degrees, of course we > all know that will create a tough, dry, overcooked grassfed roast. I > use the lowest setting an oven will go to, usually 190 (regardless of > what the oven says it is-check it with a thermometer). Large > restaurants use special ovens for prime rib that work at 140-150 and > take up to 14 hours. Crockpots always seem to cook too hot for me. The pressure cooker might (I'm not sure) produce more denaturation even though the temp is a little lower, because it is wet heat. You get much more denaturation with wet heat usually. > If we use a stove-top method of cooking, regardless of the boiling > point temperature, nutrients will escape into the water. True, but not if you are using the water. That's the advantage of stews and soups. >If the lid > is not on the pan, that steam will escape along with the nutrients. Are you sure? I'm sure that might be true for some nutrients, but I imagine not for very many. Iodine, for sure. But vitamins and perhaps some other minerals are probably a lot less volatile. Apparently the canned seafood is pressure cooked, and this is what makes the bones edible, at least according to one of the cans. That's an advantage I suppose. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 > > The pressure cooker might (I'm not sure) produce more > denaturation even though the temp is a little lower, > because it is wet heat. You get much more > denaturation with wet heat usually. Wouldn't that be the same in crockpots where you cover the meat with water and the temp is higher? > > Apparently the canned seafood is pressure cooked, and this is what > makes the bones edible, at least according to one of the cans. That's > an advantage I suppose. Actually you can create very soft bones from chickens, pork even beef, depending on the size, if you use the pressure cooker to make stock. I did this once; it was pretty amazing, the bones practically dissolved. I don't know if that would be and advantage or dis-advantage. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Every time I make my chicken broth I can crush the bones. And all I do is simmer them with a little ACV to draw out the minerals. My beef bones don't crumble quite as much. No need for the pressure cooker! Kathy ---- " bellasol.organics " <bellasol.organics@...> wrote: > Wouldn't that be the same in crockpots where you cover the meat with > water and the temp is higher? > Actually you can create very soft bones from chickens, pork even beef, > depending on the size, if you use the pressure cooker to make stock. I > did this once; it was pretty amazing, the bones practically dissolved. > I don't know if that would be and advantage or dis-advantage. > > Jan > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 Hi Jan, > Wouldn't that be the same in crockpots where you cover the meat with > water and the temp is higher? I'm not familiar with the use of either of them, but the temp of the water can only go up above 212F/100C if pressure is involved. In general, steaming and simmering are less dangerous because they use a lower temperature, I think, at least in terms of formation of nasty things like acrylamides. I'm just saying it's possible -- and I don't know for sure becaue I don't know what the critical thresholds are -- but it's possible that the combination of wet heat and the higher temperature might do more damage than a slightly higher temperature with dry heat. Just raising the possibility. > > Apparently the canned seafood is pressure cooked, and this is what > > makes the bones edible, at least according to one of the cans. That's > > an advantage I suppose. > Actually you can create very soft bones from chickens, pork even beef, > depending on the size, if you use the pressure cooker to make stock. I > did this once; it was pretty amazing, the bones practically dissolved. > I don't know if that would be and advantage or dis-advantage. We'll only know once someone actually produces a nutritional analysis of stock! Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 > > Wouldn't that be the same in crockpots > > where you cover the meat with > > water and the temp is higher? > > I'm not familiar with the use of either of them, > but the temp of the > water can only go up above 212F/100C > if pressure is involved. Oh yes, of course, so then what exactly is going on in those crockpots?? The guides say the pot has to heat to 250 first-even on low, you can also use a high setting. Does that mean if their is water in it, the excess heat is just heating the outside of the pot and dissipating this heat into the atmosphere? if so, what a waste of energy! It sounds like a typical gov't catch 22. " you must make the vessel heat to 250 " " But water won't heat that high-it just uses up excess electricity " " the safety rules are still that the vessel must heat to 250 " -UGGHH! And, does this hold the same for cooking a stew (or anything surrounded in water) inside an oven at temps over 212? Most cooking instructions call for 300-350. We could all be saving a lot of energy here. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2008 Report Share Posted January 8, 2008 On 1/8/08, bellasol.organics <bellasol.organics@...> wrote: > Oh yes, of course, so then what exactly is going on in those > crockpots?? The guides say the pot has to heat to 250 first-even on > low, you can also use a high setting. Does that mean if their is > water in it, the excess heat is just heating the outside of the pot > and dissipating this heat into the atmosphere? I'm not sure what the temp corresponds to, I would think the pot, but I don't know. But the heat can also go into the food. The max temperature of the water without pressure is 100C, but the max temp of the food is higher, so the internal temperature of the food might get higher, I think. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2008 Report Share Posted January 9, 2008 > > Oh yes, of course, so then what exactly is going on in those > > crockpots?? The guides say the pot has to heat to 250 first-even on > > low, you can also use a high setting. Does that mean if their is > > water in it, the excess heat is just heating the outside of the pot > > and dissipating this heat into the atmosphere? > > I'm not sure what the temp corresponds to, I would think the pot, but > I don't know. But the heat can also go into the food. The max > temperature of the water without pressure is 100C, but the max temp of > the food is higher, so the internal temperature of the food might get > higher, I think. > Wait, how can the surrounding temp of the water be lower than the internal temp of the item in the water, when the item temp starts out at equal or lower than the starting water temp? Isn't that only possible in a microwave where the vibrations heat different densities at different rates? Any thermodynamics buffs out there? ~Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2008 Report Share Posted January 9, 2008 On 1/9/08, bellasol.organics <bellasol.organics@...> wrote: > > I'm not sure what the temp corresponds to, I would think the pot, but > > I don't know. But the heat can also go into the food. The max > > temperature of the water without pressure is 100C, but the max temp of > > the food is higher, so the internal temperature of the food might get > > higher, I think. > Wait, how can the surrounding temp of the water be lower than the > internal temp of the item in the water, when the item temp starts out > at equal or lower than the starting water temp? Isn't that only > possible in a microwave where the vibrations heat different densities > at different rates? > Any thermodynamics buffs out there? Excess heat in the water can go any of three places: back into the pot, into the air by evaporation, or into the food. There's no reason that heat can't transfer from the water into the food if the food is lower than its maximum internal temp and the water is not. That said, I think in a situation where there is room for evaporation, evaporation is going to tend to be easier. But still, boiling cruciferous vegetables brings the internal temperature up to 110C, evn though the water reaches a maximum at 100C. Chris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2008 Report Share Posted January 9, 2008 I recall it being said that it causes formation of MSG. On Jan 6, 2008, at 6:53 PM, bellasol.organics wrote: > Sally Fallon lists the presure cooker as: " realtively new " and " The > danger is that pressure cookers cook foods too quickly and at > temperatures above the boiling point. " (page 68, NOURISHING > TRADITIONS, revised second edition) But she gives no reason why this > is a problem. > Parashis artpages@... portfolio pages: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11468108@N08/ http://www.artpagesonline.com/EPportfolio/000portfolio.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2008 Report Share Posted January 11, 2008 Does anyone have any info on this anywhere? > > I recall it being said that it causes formation of MSG. > > > On Jan 6, 2008, at 6:53 PM, bellasol.organics wrote: > > > Sally Fallon lists the presure cooker as: " realtively new " and " The > > danger is that pressure cookers cook foods too quickly and at > > temperatures above the boiling point. " (page 68, NOURISHING > > TRADITIONS, revised second edition) But she gives no reason why this > > is a problem. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.