Poultry: Final Tempeature and Processing Times

The United States Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) states that poultry should be cooked 165 degrees throughout for safe eating. FSIS also publishes the Time-Temperature Tables for Ready to Each Poultry Projects. This table is available at ttp://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/rdad/FSISNotices/RTE_Poultry_Tables.pdf . This table appears to be for markets selling rotisserie food and fast-food establishments. It states that for poultry, you need to obtain a 7.0 log reduction of Salmonella before the poultry is safe to eat. To accomplish this the publication shows minimum processing times after minimum temperature is reached. As and example, the following is shown for poultry with a fat content of 12%;

Temp Reached/Minimum Time for Chicken/Min Time for Turkey

140/ 35 Min / 33.7 Min
145/ 13 Min / 13.8 Min
150/ 4.2 Min/ 4.9 Min
155/ 54.4 Secs/ 1.3 Min
160/ 16.9 Secs/ 26.9 Secs
165/ <10 Secs/ <10 Secs


The above chart is interesting, because it appears that this allows poultry to be safely cooked at a lower temperature than 165 degrees depending of length of time that it remains at that temperature.

Can anyone in the food service industry comment on this and provide additional information? I’m curious about this for a couple of reasons:

First, I’ve been trying smo-fried turkeys lately and during the frying process the turkey temps can rise very quickly towards the end and overcook the turkey. The very outer layers of turkey reach 180-190 degrees before the interior portions reach 165 and thus the outer layers are somewhat dry. According to the tables, I should be able to pull the turkey off when the internal temps are 150 degrees and maintained for longer than 4.9 minutes. This would allow a reduced final temperature for the outer layers.

Second, when cooking chickens sometime I end up taking 15-20 minutes extra time to make sure that the minimum temperate is 160 degrees. I may have one location in the breast that seems to take forever to go from 155 to 160 degrees, and every 5 minutes it goes up only one degree. According to the chart I should have no worries as long as the minimum processing times are kept. Another example is cooking whole chickens on a BBQ temp at 225; this could take 4-5 hours for the chicken to reach 160. I no longer cook chicken at this temperature, but when I first started cooking I did and it took quite a while to cook whole chickens. This time could have been reduced as long as the minimum processing times are kept.

If anyone could expand on this publication and/or provide additional comments it would be greatly appreciated. I would like to experiment with slightly lower cooking temperatures of poultry, especially fried turkeys, but I want to make sure it’s done safely.

Thanks, Ken

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ken Keating:
...(FSIS) states that poultry should be cooked 165 degrees throughout for safe eating. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Throughout is the operative word here.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">This table appears to be for markets selling rotisserie food and fast-food establishments. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>This chart is a standard throughout the industry but it is important to note that it assumes an accurate determining of temp. <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The above chart is interesting, because it appears that this allows poultry to be safely cooked at a lower temperature than 165 degrees... </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Not exactly. It allows poultry to be cooked to a lower temp than 165. <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">...depending of length of time that it remains at that temperature. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>This is true for everything. Log reductions are always a matter of time @ temp and never temp alone. Of course when you reach high temps the cumulative effect is virtually instantaneous but time @ temp is still the reality. 165 is often quoted to the public because it is assumed that if the temp is 165 in the spot John Q checks then it is likely that other spots within the bird would have been at other, possibly lower, temps for long enough to have the same affect as the 165 in the checked spot. Neither the USDA nor the FDA make a big deal of thermometers (and they should if the effort is to educate in order to reduce chances of FBIs), such as using the correct kind of therm, checking its accuracy, etc., but that is another topic.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Can anyone in the food service industry comment on this and provide additional information? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Two very important variables: First, unless you are taking multiple temp readings--and I mean many and all over the place, something no one is likely to do--then it is important to have confidence in the locations you choose to take temps. Second, it is important to have confidence in your thermometer and that means ONLY a tip-sensitive digital therm will do. Never use a bi-metal therm for checking temps if you're looking to cut it close, and do not use them for thin meats (which include chickens, many turkeys, burgers, et al.).
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">...and during the frying process the turkey temps can rise very quickly towards the end and overcook the turkey. The very outer layers of turkey reach 180-190 degrees before the interior portions reach 165 and thus the outer layers are somewhat dry. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Two things here: Make sure the turkey is not fresh out of the fridge. Allow it to get closer to room temp (no more than 2 hours) before cooking. Also, plan for residual cooking. This allows you to pull the turkey sooner as the temps will continue to climb during resting.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> According to the tables, I should be able to pull the turkey off when the internal temps are 150 degrees and maintained for longer than 4.9 minutes. This would allow a reduced final temperature for the outer layers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>This is correct. Note that unless you are actually able to hold the temp at 150 it will likely keep rising thus shortening the time variable, a good thing. Again, you have to be confident that the place you are temping is totally representative of the entire bird. Or, you have to build in some room (time) for error.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Second, when cooking chickens... I may have one location in the breast that seems to take forever to go from 155 to 160 degrees, ... According to the chart I should have no worries as long as the minimum processing times are kept. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>As long as the minimum time @ temp is realized, yes. The concerns are the same as I just noted above. There is also less chance of this if the chickens are not cold when they are placed in the oven.<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Another example is cooking whole chickens on a BBQ temp at 225; this could take 4-5 hours for the chicken to reach 160. I no longer cook chicken at this temperature... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>It is fairly pointless, imo. <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">This time could have been reduced as long as the minimum processing times are kept. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Well, yes. It is still a matter of confidence that the spot you temp is representative of the whole chicken. All the more reason not to start with it cold. Again, though, there is no reason to cook a chicken at 225. That is too low to have any confidence in residual cooking. Chicken can be cooked at lower temps if you wish but at least 250 is preferable imo, though I never go even that low.

I am assuming that you mean that you want to experiment slightly lower finish temps, yes? Unlike intact meat cuts, poultry must be assumed to contain pathogens within its structure. B/s chicken breasts are commonly cooked sous vide at low temps (~140). Time is allowed for the breast itself to reach the same temp as the water in which it is cooking, and then more time is allowed for both log reduction of pathogens and actual cooking, i.e., structural changes to the meat that will offer the taste and texture the cook is seeking. This is not hard when cooking a relatively thin, relatively evenly thick chicken breast vac'd in a bag and placed in a water bath. This is trickier in standard dry heat cooking as this type of cooking transfers heat far less efficiently than cooking in water. This is one of the reasons we cook at significantly higher temps than the temps we seek as internal measures of 'done'. Also and quite obviouly, large cuts, irregular cuts, cuts that contain more than one type of meat, each type requiring a different finish target, are all variables that alone or in combination affect even cooking, irrespective of cook temps, and this means that these factors do or may need to be considered when figuring out cooking procedures and finish temps.

Cooking in fat (deep frying) is more efficient heat transfer-wise however, but these variables can still come into play.

If I am not making sense (wouldn't be the first time!) or if I can expand on any of this let me know.

Kevin;

Thank you for your response. It makes sense. I use a Therampen to obtain accurate temperatures and I do take many measurements throughout the bird to ensure it’s done. I don’t rely on bi-metal thermometers; they’re just not reliable or quick enough.

The reason I generated the post is to verify this document is a standard in the industry and if it’s valid. Also, I see a lot of guidelines on final poultry temperatures: 160-165 in the breast and 170-175 in the thigh. I always thought these were the minimum temperatures that had to be reached throughout the bird for safety. So if I smoked and then deep-fried a whole turkey and 99% of it was at 175 and one spot was less that 160(say 155), I would leave the turkey in the oil until that one location reached 160, even though the rest of the bird would be at 180 and overcooked. The problem with large turkeys is it seems one has to overcook portions of it to reach a minimum temperature throughout the entire bird. I was always worried about having sick guests the next day. Based on the FSIS guidelines, my worries were a little unfounded, as long as the minimum time/temperature requirements are met.

Again, thanks for your response. It gives me a little better comfort level for future cooks.

Ken

Allow me to expand on this a bit and perhaps shed a little light on why there is seemingly much confusion.

Not only are there multiple federal agencies with their fingers in the food service/safety pie, there are 50 state health departments and thousands of county and local HDs as well. The major agencies (the USDA and the FDA) have responsibilities to the producer/manufacturer end as well as the consumer end. Often the recommendations they make are codified and legally binding on a national level, sometimes the codes are adopted and thus binding on a state level, some states add additonal codes or modifications important to them which might differ from other states, and some localities do the same (as we've recently seen with the ban on foie gras in Chicago and transfats in NYC).

Because state legislatures can take quite a while to adopt the Food Code generated by the Feds, there are states that are operating under codes from the 90s(!) and many that are operating on the Codes written in 2001 that have not yet started discussions on adoption of the 2005 Code.
It does not help that there are elements or entire recommendations that are not scientifically validated but that are included in the Code (and adopted by the states and by county HDs).


Perhaps most important from the consumer's point of view (and an issue I alluded to earlier today here), is that many recommendations from the USDA, FSIS and the FDA are 'distilled' (I call it dumbed down) for consumers and we end up with categorical statements such as 'cook poultry to 165' and 'cook hamburgers to 155' and the '4-hour rule' that are based as much on how these agencies think people will behave (perhaps moreso) as their scientific foundations, and so any elaboration is truncated--no mention of time @ temp, no mention of how various temps can have significance affecting the 4-hour rule (thus making it necessary to make it shorter or allowing it to be longer). The upshot is that it is assumed that consumers cannot understand or make use of all the information so it is abbreviated.

I'm not going to argue with this perception of consumer behavior though I easily could. But one wonders why, if the overarching issue is safe food for the population, food safety is not taught in schools (it could be started at a basic level in the very early grades and fleshed out as youngsters progressed through their schooling); why no PSAs on the need to use tip-sensitive instant-read thermometers--especially for thin meats?; why no PSAs that stress that internal color of a burger does nothing to tell the cook if the burger is safe?. The list could go on and on.

What we have, then, is a population that includes thousands and thousands of current and former food service workers all with their own understandings of food safety depending on what they learned (accurately or not), the type of establishment(s) in which they worked, they emphasis placed (or not) on specific or varying safety criteria, the inspectors that they may have come into contact with and their understanding and enforcement of the codes they operate with, and the codes (which may vary depending on location) they worked under. Add to this thousands of consumers (many of whom might be included in the previous group) who may or may not have picked up accurate or inaccurate food safety information from other people, the media, the Net, etc., and we have a mish-mash of information and misinformation.

Accurate information is out there but it can be hard to find. The Feds agencies' websites tend to be consumer oriented and are loaded with front-and-center abbreviated categorical statements (like those mentioned above) and one has to dig to find data--if it can be found at all. They all stress use of a thermometer but do not mention the type of thermometer to use nor, in most cases, how to check it for accuracy or use it correctly. They all make recommendations which are specious, scientifically speaking, such as the 'danger zone' being 40-140 (it isn't; it's 41-130) and the need to reheat cooked foods to 165. In both cases it seems that these inaccuracies are, once again, due to the perception that consumers cannot be trusted with the real info. In the former (found everywhere but, tellingly, on the website of the FSIS, which established back in 1977 the top end of 130 and pushed for a change, then caved under pressure by several states so a compromise of 135 was agreed upon--though why one doesn't see the DZ on their site as 41-135--hmm), because they feel that a margin for error needs to be included--fine, but no one says so; with the latter, well, who knows? There are no studies I can find that validate 165 as a minumum reheat temp--yet this is law in many places.

You get the idea.


Btw, 170-175 thigh was never a recommendation as a safety point. It was, and is, a recommendation for palatability.