It's interesting how the line of what is "done" for chicken has changed. I grew up with chicken cooked until it was falling off the bones, no hint of any color except grey, and the bones were probably juicier than the meat. Seems like the standard back then was 180 degrees for "done" chicken, loose joint where the leg attached to the body, absolutely clear juices. There's been so much information pushed on the public about how eating underdone poultry is a health risk--it's the sort of things the media loves to cover in great detail--it's no wonder people are gun shy about underdone poultry. What isn't so broadly published is when food safety standards change. I was just looking at the US Department of Agriculture food safety site, where safe temperature for cooked chicken is 165 F. They even say some pink color to the meat & juices is ok as long as it reaches 165 degrees. This is a HUGE difference from what I was taught about cooking chicken--what's safe would have been considered too raw to eat back then.
I have to wonder how many of the guideline changes are triggered by the availability and accuracy of instant read thermometers. Don't know if some of you younger guys even remember the old analog meat thermometers--the resolution was horrible, and the accuracy probably wasn't much better. If the reading you got was within 5 degrees you were probably doing pretty good. Now you can take your instant read, jab the bird, and get an accurate temperature within fractions of a degree in a matter of seconds. Combine that accuracy with better information about what constitutes safe food, and there's been a big change in the last 30-40 years in what's an acceptable temperature for doneness.
And it would be hijacking the thread to go off on what's acceptable vs what I grew up with as safe temperatures for pork...
Anyway, I've done a little research and learned some new things, so maybe I'll try roasting a chicken at home again.
That youre talking about madame are just ure misinformation.
On the behalf of this Agriculture-thing. Chicken is considered dirty and in one book - an old one found info that chicken skin is filthy dirty and you have to destroy it with fire. I mean fry the shite out of it.
First question is, how do the bacterias move inside meat if theres no puncture/damage to the flesh? One way to do that is to contaminate the meat when youre cutting down the bird [skin--->hands--->flesh route]. Other is shooting a bird, as to the projectile moving all the dirty stuff.
In case the bacteria is indeed on the outside, a second on the frying pan heated to 200 degrees should kill them all.
The other question is when do the real pasteurization time-guides came out. You can safely eat chicken over 60 celsius, lets say. Some like it at 62, some 65, some cant stand the juice.
And just to mention, the pink left in the juice is just pigment. Not blood anyway. Chicken breast meat is white cause theres no mioglobin! no hemoglobin either, thats for sure.
But please bear in mind, Im not saying anything about slow cooking here. I actually think that anyway chick breast skin on tastes much better from the an and roasted at 180 than any form of "sous vide". If you can do that properly. You know I bought sous vide set just to check these types of things.
I hate what salt brines are making with chicken flesh. Its disgusting.
I did my iberico at 55 degrees for fourty hours and it was a hit, juiciness was there, but what about succulence? I think its better to roast it in 180 degrees drowned in oil.
As to the OP, I dry the chicken skin a little, stuff a little [not so its full] so the hot air can get in from the inside too. If you want you can stick a fork in each leg, it promotes heat distribution=enhances legs flavour.
Salt the skin heavily some hours before roasting, be generous with pepper too. and herbs. If you like it extra dark rub with oil honey mixture. Good quality bird will catch decent colour anyway
