Warning! Crockpot "warm" setting!

On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 21:16:10 -0500, "Nancy Young"
wrote:


Actually I've never done that, but I've recently baked a frozen pizza
on it's cardboard disk... at least I removed the plastic overwrap, it
was still edible but needed more baking. Frozen pizza has greatly
improved, and it's easy to add more toppings. I no longer bother with
pizzaria pizza, they cheat on the ingredients, and ~$20 is outagious,
and by the time I haul it home it's barely tepid. None of the chain
pizzarias are as good as frozen... last I tried The Hut it was
inedible. I'd much rather frozen piping hot from my oven. I like
Freschetta, DiGiorno, and Walmart brand (rising crust is good)...
typically only six bucks... they have the crust down so it hardly pays
to make my own. Typically I add a sprinkle of Penzeys Italian herb
blend, some freshly grated parm, and a drizzle of EVOO... the brands I
mentioned really have enough mozz and sauce... I don't care for over
loaded pizza, I don't even consider that deep dish hog slop caserole
from Chi Town pizza. I live too far from Brooklyn now so frozen is
the next best thing... and last I was in Brooklyn was like ten years
ago, pizza there ain't how it usta be either. I have three Walmart
(Great Value) pizzas in my freezer right now, anytime I feel like a
pie, even at two AM during a blizzard I'm eating in like 30 minutes.
Now I'm thinking pizza for dinner tonight.
 
In article ,
[email protected] says...


become

Often, the wrong one, because many people just don't know enough
biology or physiology to correctly diagnose their problem, let alone the
"likely cause". It's self-perpetuating. They dose themselves up with the
wrong thing which has absolutely zero benefit ; the problem resolves
itself and they imagine they cured themselves.

Janet.
 
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 22:32:52 -0500, "Nancy Young"
wrote:


The doc wrote me a scrip for a supply of hydrocodene for back pain
until the steroid shots took effect... I doubled up on my Crystal
Palace vodka instead... the side effects from those hydrocodene pills
wasn't worth it. The doc agreed, if the few extra slugs of vodka did
the trick then by all means that's better than codene, much better.
 
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 22:52:32 -0800, "Julie Bove"
wrote:


Wasn't too very long ago folks attributed illness to spirits and gods,
they believed an amulet from the witch doctor would cure them... many
still leap to similar conclusions.
 
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 22:12:51 -0800 in rec.food.cooking, "Bob
Terwilliger" wrote,

No, we don't know that.

There are many ways to go wrong, some of them involving the crock
pot. Perhaps Omelet's model doesn't get hot enough. Perhaps hers
has failed and doesn't work on "warm" anymore. Perhaps the switch
is starting to fail intermittently, and this was the first time it
affected anything. Perhaps Omelet turned the switch just a bit past
"warm" and it spent some time at "off." Perhaps her dad did. Or
maybe it was in a dead spot between "low" and "warm." Maybe the
cord plug was loose in the wall socket.

When you get as sick as Om did it is natural to react strongly and
blame something. I'm OK with blaming the crockpot. I think blaming
all crockpots everywhere is going too far, though.

My #1 conclusion is that everybody ought to have a modern digital
thermometer, and use it frequently. Plus, we all know now that if
the food is cool enough to stick your finger in and hold it there,
it isn't hot enough.

We'll know more when Omelet gets back with some temperature
measurements. Maybe they will point the finger at her crock pot,
and maybe we will never know exactly what happened. A good reading
this time doesn't mean it couldn't have failed last time.

Another good tool is something like the Kill-a-Watt meter someone
else mentioned. That would let you see exactly when the heater is
running and when it is not (while you jiggle the switch.)
 
Warning! Crockpot "warm" setting!

On Feb 19, 8:56?am, Omelet wrote:


That sounds like you started it on warm, which is the equivalent of
trying to cook on the warm setting.

To do an accurate test, you need to heat it on high first, confirm 160
degrees and then switch it to warm and temp it a few hours later.
 
Warning! Crockpot "warm" setting!

On Feb 19, 8:56?am, Omelet wrote:


That sounds like you started it on warm, which is the equivalent of
trying to cook on the warm setting.

To do an accurate test, you need to heat it on high first, confirm 160
degrees and then switch it to warm and temp it a few hours later.
 
Warning! Crockpot "warm" setting!

On Feb 20, 4:56?am, Omelet wrote:

How does that compare to how you cooked the soup? You tested it by
cooking with warm, specifically what the manual says not to do.
 
Warning! Crockpot "warm" setting!

On Feb 20, 4:56?am, Omelet wrote:

How does that compare to how you cooked the soup? You tested it by
cooking with warm, specifically what the manual says not to do.
 
Warning! Crockpot "warm" setting!

On Feb 20, 4:58?am, Omelet wrote:


But that is what you are testing with your temp check. How high it
can get if set to warm from the beginning. You are not testing how
long it takes to cook frozen ingredients on high, or how well it can
hold a higher temp once it is already there.
 
Warning! Crockpot "warm" setting!

On Feb 20, 4:58?am, Omelet wrote:


But that is what you are testing with your temp check. How high it
can get if set to warm from the beginning. You are not testing how
long it takes to cook frozen ingredients on high, or how well it can
hold a higher temp once it is already there.
 
Warning! Crockpot "warm" setting!

On Feb 22, 2:12?pm, Omelet wrote:


But you didn't test the same way you cooked. So, they do NOT
compare.

It is not useful to test the warm setting from cold, since that is not
what you did with your food. Cooking and holding are two different
things. The hot cases you see in grocery stores do not cook the food.
If we put the food in there cold, it would never get hot enough. But
if we put in food that is already hot, it holds just fine.

If you tested the hot case by putting in cold food and testing it 4
hours later, you would assume the hot case is defective. But if you
put in hot food and testing it anytime, 4 hours later, 10 hours later,
it would test just fine.

So, why do you insist on testing the warm setting by starting it from
cold, and then waiting to see how warm it gets? Why won't you set it
on high, confirm a temp above 160, and then set it warm and test it a
few hours later? That is the only valid way to test it.
 
Warning! Crockpot "warm" setting!

On Feb 23, 12:06?am, "[email protected]"
wrote:

She's not trying to duplicate the cooking conditions -- for that she
would have to duplicate the food, freeze it, partially thaw it, etc.

She's trying to determine if her particular crock pot works properly.
For that, what she's doing is sufficient. What you want to do will
plot out like this capacitor charge/discharge plot, although the
discharge asymptote will be somewhere between 0% and 100%. And what
will it tell you?

http://www.electronics-lab.com/projects/rf/014/capacitor_time_constant.gif
 
On Wed, 23 Feb 2011 00:46:41 -0800 (PST), spamtrap1888
wrote:


Actually not... that method will only give a rough approximation.
Crock pots are not used to heat plain water. Also many slow cookers
cycle on and off, similar to the defrost mode on microwave ovens, this
to help make up for lack of stirring. A far better test is to cook
something with mass, like a thick stew. Plain water will lose heat
ahead of the appliance's ability to recover from heat loss. I tested
my slow cooker temperature while cooking steel cut oats... the
temperature actually increases as the liquid is absorbed and the mass
becomes thicker. This is exactly the reason why slow cookers have
costlier thick earthenware liners rather than cheapo thin metal. And
regardless, NEVER use a slow cooker to reheat ANY left overs or to
defrost frozen food... and NEVER EVER transport food in ANY slow
cooker and then use it as a chaffing dish, even those that say they
are made for that purpose, DO NOT!

Slow cookers do work properly, but are constantly being refined to
lessen the likelihood of the kitchen pinheads from poisoning
themselves and others. I can see exactly how slow cookers like many
small kitchen appliances (especially those that tout shortcuts) give
those untrained in safe food handling a false sense of security. I'm
surprised that many more don't become ill from using slow cookers,
probably because so few ever report the incidents to the
authorities... but pretty accurate figures are obtained, and for all
unreported illnesses, by extrapolationg the incidence of purchasing
particular OTC drugs. Hardly anyone calls into work for a sick day
and actually says they have food poisioning, it's always a stomach flu
which of course it is not, or some kind of fabrication.
 
In article
,
"[email protected]" wrote:



An alternative suggestion was made last week. Put in the cold water,
and test the temperature every hour and plot it on a graph. When the
line flattens out, you are approaching the final temperature. I like
pretty graphs, so this appeals to me. It's not a very good idea, for
many reasons. Unless you have an automatic chart recorder, you have to
remember to check the temperature periodically. Om was doing this while
sleeping. That doesn't work. As you have mentioned, it doesn't
represent actual use of the crockpot. We've all agreed that the "warm"
setting should only be used to hold, not cook. It might be a graphic
demonstration of why you shouldn't cook on "warm". If the crockpot
takes four hours to go from 40F to 140F, that's twice the safe time for
that temperature range.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
[email protected]
 
Back
Top