13 replies to this topic

[shayaree]

Hi...

Could any one site a reference (rational) for CL of chicken cooking core temperature of 74+/-2 deg C.


Thanks,

Shayaree

[shayaree]

Hi guys.....

Any answers ....??????

Still waiting....

[GMO]

There's a really good table in the Chilled Food association High Risk best practice for the 6 log reduction in Listeria monocytogenes and what they are equivalent to. Remember if you have a target of 74+/-2oC, you should ensure they measure the temperature for the time required to ensure the temperature of 72 is held for long enough.

[GMO]

Not cheap though.

http://www.tsoshop.c...60000&DI=561965

Might be worth searching online for Listeria and Salmonella in chicken.

[RMAV]

http://www.fsis.usda...fr/95033f-a.htm

This works for us in the US but I do not immediately recall where the supporting studies are.

[Charles.C]

Dear Shayaree,

I predict that yr location already possesses its own legislatory requirements for this item.

FWIW, the US-FDA appears more conservative than FSIS. Some extensive comments here -

http://www.fda.gov/F...9/ucm186451.htm

http://www.fda.gov/F...327.htm#chart4a

In another (2012) document, the FDA guidelines were stated to be “recommended” as –

FDA Guidelines: Minimum Internal Cooking Temperatures

The FDA recommends the following minimum internal cooking temperatures to destroy potentially harmful bacteria:

Fresh ground beef, veal, lamb, pork: 160°F

Beef, veal, lamb-roasts, steaks, chops Medium: 160°F Well done : 170°F

Fresh pork-roasts, steaks, chops Medium: 160°F Well done: 170°F

Ham Cook before eating: 160°F Fully cooked, to reheat: 140°F

Poultry Ground Chicken, Turkey: 165°F Whole Chicken, Turkey: 180°F Breasts, roasts: 170°F Thighs and wings: Cook until juices run clear

Egg dishes, casseroles: 160°F

Leftovers: 165°F

(Note that no times included)

EC comparable data will be based on L.monocytogenes. From memory, will need temperatures of 74-75 degC before the associated times are “negligible”.

Assuming that a Salmonella based evaluation is acceptable to you, The FSIS data in previous post is probably nearest to yr own temp. target (so far).

The detailed data tables and Salmonella supporting evidence are also on this site (somewhere).

Rgds / Charles.C

[KTD]

The US FDA recommendations are for instantaneous temperatures and are directed at consumers, so have a degree of cushion.

RMAV's link is good and valid, but USDA has generated a wealth of other info that is directed at processing facilities. Go to www.fsis.usda.gov and enter 'chicken lethality' in the search box on the left. You will find links to T & t tables to reach lethaility, risk assessments conducted for USDA, as well as peer-reviewed references used by USDA.

[Charles.C]

Dear KTD,

Another possible reason is that USDA apparently changed their minds (2006) but the FDA maybe (?) didn’t, eg see the links below -

http://www.foodsafet...king-temp-145f/

http://www.fsis.usda...06_01/index.asp

http://www.smoker-co...emperature.html

I’m only deducing, didn’t see any validation for the reason for the stated fsis changes (haven’t investigated yr last links which would presumably include such support).

Rgds / Charles.C

[KTD]

Hi Charles C:

Since the original question concerned poultry, I did not address red meat temperatures - although there is a time/temp table for certain whole muscle meats in the link below. Notice that in the 2006 article regarding a single 165F temp, the references are again to consumers, not processors.

The link below includes the entire time/temp table that USDA FSIS allows. Notice that 162F and above are 'instanteous' temperatures (no hold time required). So the 165F recommendation in your 2nd link actually gives the consumer a temperature cushion, but one that is significantly less than that referenced in your 3rd link.

http://www.fsis.usda...ltry_Tables.pdf

I think the basis for adjusting the temperatures through time has been due to more and improved research on lethality (predominantly salmonella), and changes to the log lethality expectation. USDA FSIS is the lead regulatory agency for meat and poultry, while FDA is supposed to cover everything else, so I am somewhat surprised that FDA suggested temperatures at all, as there is a large degree of territoriality between the two...

Keith

[Charles.C]

Dear KTD,

Thks for the link. I do remember it agonizingly well.

I take yr point, I think, that the official cooking advice was (pre 2006?) different for consumers / manufacturers. As an example of what was perhaps the “unified” official presentation to consumers, I enclose this 2004 snippet from Nebraska University. Interesting scientific logic !

 cooking poultry, FDA-USDA, 2004.png   65.19KB   6 downloads

I am curious why no xref. to the NACMCF report which recommended the “change” from 180 to 165degF for poultry (my previous second link). Embarassment ? Or perhaps I missed it.
(added - probably here (2007) if one had a library - NACMCF (National Advisory Committee on Microbiological Criteria for Foods). 2007. Response to the questions posed by the Food Safety and Inspection Service regarding guidelines for the safe cooking of poultry products. J. Food Prot. 70: 251-260. )

The question remains whether FDA, in a manufacturing context, initially agreed with fsis’s result ?. I seem to remember comparing the 2 approaches several years back on this forum (somewhere). Any validation for FDA’s 180degF now appears to be elusive.

added - the 2009 FDA Food Code now cross-references the FSIS 1999 document as source for its own data. I guess any earlir studies (if existed) will remain elusive.
http://www.fda.gov/F...9/ucm189211.htm
(Ch3)

It is fortunate that the OP did not include hamburgers.

Just to further illustrate the subjective aspect of (American?) cooking, I found this revealing comment from a webinar given November 2011 –

Haim’s Question:
Mr. McGee made a comment regarding to the optimal internal temperature of a cooked bird being at around 150F. It is often taught that poultry should be cooked to an internal temperature of about 165F according to HACCP/ServSafe guidelines. Is this not correct? Would it be hazardous to cook it to 150F rather than 165F or is this just designed for restaurant and manufacturer safety parameters?

Harold’s Response:
This question is an excellent one because it highlights the difference between cooking for deliciousness and cooking for safety. I specified 150 degrees in the turkey breast, and 160 or above in the leg, because these are temperatures at which the two kinds of meat are done but still juicy. The USDA specifies 165 degrees because this is a temperature at which most microbes that cause foodborne illness are killed instantly. The common food microbes are also killed at 150 degrees. It just takes longer for their numbers to be sufficiently reduced–on the order of 5 minutes, a period that will be maintained in a roast as large as a turkey. And a turkey that has been handled properly won’t have microbes deep in its tissues anyway–they’ll be on the surfaces, where the temperature will be higher and for much longer than 5 minutes. The USDA guideline puts safety first, and produces a dry turkey breast. My recommendation balances safety and quality, and produces a moist turkey breast. For more about balancing safety and quality in home cooking, visit the website of Dr. O. Peter Snyder at http://www.hi-tm.com...titl-tabl.html.

http://acswebinars.org/mcgee

added - in agreement Food Code, this FDA consumer link (last updated 2011) now gives 165degF for poultry in harmony with FSIS. My previously posted (consumer) 180degF link was clearly out of date.

http://www.fda.gov/F...s/ucm255180.htm

(Unfortunately all this analysis gives a result of 74degC which doesn't help the OP very much).

Rgds / Charles.C

[Charles.C]

Dear shayaree/All,

The attachment below (2008) is the most recent review I could find of the US situation. Any later ones, particularly regarding poultry, are welcome.

 Some guidelines for validation of consumer cooking of NRTE meat, poultry products, US oriented .pdf   1.1MB   32 downloads

It summarises and discusses most of the official links given in previous posts. For fine details you will need to look at the actual references.

Regarding yr original post querying use of (minimum) 72degC (ca. 162degF) for poultry, I doubt this would be validatable in EC without a specific time attached. (a typical requirement is 70degC/2min).

72degC does appear to be partially supported, although not recommended, in the US-FSIS tables (ca. 2001) attached by KTD, assuming that your situation / product matches their limiting conditions, eg with respect to - chicken/turkey, %fat content, interpretation of “instant”.

Shayaree, Any comments ?

Rgds / Charles.C

[onsolution]

Could any one site a reference (rational) for CL of chicken cooking core temperature of 74+/-2 deg C.

A quick anecdote about chicken cooking and core temperatures. We had a client who had failed an inspection because the inspector did not believe the core was not reaching the desired temperature.

They were initially indignant and bought some temperature loggers to place inside their products. The results, however, revealed that they did have some issues. Some simple changes to oven temperatures and times and the problem was resolved, but until then they thought everything was fine.

For this company, they supply a number of big name clients so food poisoning issues could have easily hit the media. The inspector did them a huge favour by highlighting the potential issue.

There are now loggers out there that are small enough to go into almost anything (down to the size of a coin). There are also models that size that will go up to 145°. These are not units with external probes but self contained loggers.

So if you want to be sure what the internal temperature is, you can now monitor it properly.

[Gourav]

Hi...

Could any one site a reference (rational) for CL of chicken cooking core temperature of 74+/-2 deg C.


Thanks,

Shayaree

Please visit

http://www.ifsanet.c....aspx?tabid=236

You will get teh required.

Gourav

[Charles.C]

Dear Gourav,

Thanks for the link but IMHO this "world" applicable publication is a rather flawed document.

To take 3 examples -

Page8. The (apparently) haccp based table of cooking critical limits has no mention of time. This unfortunately makes the temperature data meaningless. No specific sources / explanation of chosen values are given with the table.

Pg62. Look at the tabled review of literature cooking temperatures/times and note how many cross-references to L.monocytogenes. The haccp analysis (pg53) does contain an extra sentence in the critical limits column to "cover the back".

Page46. haccp step No6. This implies that washing vegetables "effectively" can eliminate all pathogens. This is widely known and documented to be impossible using standard procedures. Curiously, the text in their cross-referenced SOP (Pg 28) is different and more realistic.

Nonetheless, the link is appreciated.

Rgds / Charles.C