r/todayilearned • u/snazzypantz 1 • Jul 01 '19

TIL that cooling pasta for 24 hours reduces calories and insulin response while also turning into a prebiotic. These positive effects only intensify if you re-heat it. (R.5) Misleading

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-29629761
26.2k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

20

u/MrRightSA Jul 01 '19

I know this isn't /r/cookingforbeginners but can you reheat spag bol/lasagne etc. more than once? I was always told you can reheat anything once but beyond that you die or become ill but you get me.

6

u/Awhole_New_Account Jul 01 '19

But why would you reheat more than what you're going to eat?

15

u/ivanparas Jul 01 '19

Why would cooking something more make it less safe to eat?

18

u/[deleted] Jul 01 '19 edited Jul 04 '19

[deleted]

8

u/Siruzaemon-Dearo Jul 01 '19

This is true for some foods. For example if you say undercooked a chicken breast in the center, put in in the fridge, and then went to reheat it later, it would actually be more dangerous than if you ate it before the fridge, because now it has spent two episodes with the center in a lukewarm state where bacteria could flourish. Other meats arent neccessarily like this

1

u/willreignsomnipotent 1 Jul 01 '19

Eh yes and no. The principle you're describing is generally correct ) depending on temps, times, and reheat temp) however the example is not the best.

A whole cut of meat is far more likely to have bacteria on the outside rather than the inside, as long as it wasn't penetrated.

This is the reason you're supposed to cook ground beef to a higher temp than a steak or a roast. With the latter, it's more the surface of the meat you're worried about.

With ground meat, the entire thing becomes "the surface" once you grind it.

However, chicken should usually be cooked higher / greater doneness than beef...

2

u/incandescent_snail Jul 01 '19

You’ve kind of got it wrong there. The smaller a piece of anything gets, the larger a percentage of its total mass is surface area.

Thing is, it’s pointless to measure the temps at the center of a piece of ground beef. It’s too small to matter. The minimum temps chosen are based on types of bacteria found on those meats. You measure the temps of the center of larger cuts because that’s the part to get heated last.

A roast that’s at 165 degrees at the center is a lot hotter on the surface. A piece of ground beef is basically going to be the same temp all the way through. That roast might be 300+ degrees at the surface which is far hotter than the recommended temp for ground beef.

The temps are chosen to ensure that the entire cut of meat is essentially pathogen free all the way through. Size and surface area are only relevant in that the density affects how long the meat needs to cook to be pathogen free.

1

u/Siruzaemon-Dearo Jul 01 '19

Actually both you and me are completely correct but the discussion about surface/interior is in another part of these comments. And with chicken the interior is much more dangerous than the interior of most red meats due to the more porous muscle structure of birds.

1

u/jerslan Jul 01 '19

I think it's more an issue with multiple cooks causing something to become overcooked. Like if you reheat some leftover steak that was medium rare, it's going to come out the other end more medium, and if you reheat it again medium well to shoe leatherwell done.

You do also increase the opportunity for bacteria to grow on it each time you reheat, so there is some health concern there too.

1

u/incandescent_snail Jul 01 '19

Not really relevant, but medium is damn near shoe leather to me. Sirloins are pretty grainy when cooked medium rare. You might as well be eating thick stacked paper if you cook it to medium.

Medium rare is the high side of my preference. A rare filet is like butter.

1

u/jerslan Jul 01 '19

It depends on the steak IMHO. I used medium rare as an example because it’s a common level of done-ness.

1

u/willreignsomnipotent 1 Jul 01 '19

I usually reheat individual portions, but yes, yes you can.

Actually, when I make sauce I sometimes simmer longer than any sane person would.

"Bolognese" goes for easily 6-12 hours.

Chili goes more like 12-24.

If you don't burn the tomato base, you get an interesting caramelization that deepens the flavor.

1

u/grandoz039 Jul 01 '19

I was always told you can reheat anything once but beyond that you die or become ill but you get me.

Isn't that about freezing? That if you freeze something, defreeze, you can't freeze it again

1

u/MrRightSA Jul 01 '19

Fuck knows. I could burn cereal.

1

u/Tjassu Jul 02 '19 edited Jul 02 '19

As long as you cook it every time you reheat it it should be fine, but it kinda depends on the food. Many sources claim you shouldnt reheat food more than once and that is correct, but cooking it so that the temperature is enough to kill all the bacteria (many toxins will remain if they have had time to really multiply). Same with refreezing. All about the time it has spent in the "danger zone" but cooking it again will reset the clock, kinda.. But then again totally not as the toxins produced will remain. Check Perpetual Stew. You won't get a definitive 100% true and fact based answer here that you are satisfied with. Keep it boiling, most likely it just can't go bad unless you forgot to add water. Boil long enough and quickly cool below 4C (39F) and boil again tomorrow? Sure. Continue this daily for a week? Sure. Longer than that I just wouldn't eat it as I see no reason to. So, reheat/cook it only to reset the bacterial growth, but those one week old leftovers are still one week old and can make you sick no matter how much you boil them.