Pork tenderloin, a good alternative to chicken?

DeguelloTex wrote: »

kommodevaran wrote: »

Do not undercook pork and poultry! Bacteria loves pork and poultry, but will be killed when the meat is no longer pink.

Pink pork isn't undercooked, though.

If the juice doesn't run clear... It's undercooked. If the juice is clear... Off you go lol

If you want you can buy a meat thermometer for five dollars at any grocery store.
========

It is bc red meat tis harder to digest and sits longer in the bowel. White meat is easier to digest and has a quicker exit time. And something to do with protein ash. Especially if you have digestive issues or gastric diseases you are advised to avoid red meat.

kommodevaran wrote: »

In the US, pork is considered white meat since 1977:

https://youtu.be/W7z6-xnqazk?t=1008

This was supposed to start playing at around 17 minutes in, but - it's worth watching in its entirety.

Not really. It was promoted as "new white meat" (by the pork industry) but isn't classified as that by the FDA - the whole white/red debate is ridiculous. Does it suddenly become more or less evil depending on the meat color? How silly. It's just maketing. Pork is relatively lean and tasty. No reason not to eat it.

Thanks for posting the video, he's an enjoyable speaker. Unfortunately - while I agree with a lot of his starting point analysis I find it's unfortunate that his "rules" just reinforce the nutritionism he rails against. The "anti-processed" bandwagon that he speaks and writes for tends to come across as reactionary.

Minor arguments - perhaps he is a necessary voice to his American audience and making food manufacturing and processing the debil is *an* answer to eating 'better' as it influences attidudes to eating.

It's also interesting that he doesn't have a monolithic response to the QA session - I prefer that to his "rules" proposed in his books which frankly often have me shaking my head. His journalism is clearly colored by his personal agenda, if you agree with him - great - but I'm a bit more critical.

I bought 4 whole boneless pork loins on sale at Jewel Osco this week for $1.29/pound. My receipt said I saved $170. We will be having lots of pork at our house!!

pennydreadful270 wrote: »

EvgeniZyntx wrote: »

Not really. It was promoted as "new white meat" (by the pork industry) but isn't classified as that by the FDA - the whole white/red debate is ridiculous. Does it suddenly become more or less evil depending on the meat color? How silly. It's just maketing. Pork is relatively lean and tasty. No reason not to eat it.

Good study http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/11/63

Supposedly it's the Iron content that makes it red- and also- causes bowel cancer. I think you can do something to mitigate the risks by eating a diet that otherwise is plant-rich, including cruciferous vegetables and has a fast transit through your system.

The study shows that those who eat a small amount of red meat have a better outcome than those who eat none. Probably because of the iron and vitamins in red meat.

Processed in unequivocally bad though. Statistically you lose an hour of your life over every bacon sandwich.

You think so?

After correction for measurement error, higher all-cause mortality remained significant only for processed meat (HR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.25, per 50 g/d).

Unequivocally?

It's an 18% relative risk ratio increase -that's small- I'm pretty certain that is significantly three orders of magnitude lower than being obese. These questionnaire-based studies need to be taken with a large grain of salt - I'd even guess that meat consumption rates a large marker for over-consuming calories.

The studies on processed meat do suggest issues but the upper quintiles are significantly higher than average consumption.

ETA Also :

The EPIC results do not show the lowest relative risks (RRs) for subjects in the lowest meat intake category, but a slight J-shaped association with the lowest risk among subjects with low-to-moderate meat consumption. This was observed for red meat and poultry. Also, taking into account the results from the studies that evaluated vegetarian and low-meat diets, it appears that a low - but not a zero - consumption of meat might be beneficial for health. This is understandable as meat is an important source of nutrients, such as protein, iron, zinc, several B-vitamins as well as vitamin A and essential fatty acids (linoleic acid and to a minor extent eicosapentaenoic and docosahexaenoic acids also...

I dint read anything in that study suggesting it was iron. They, and the U.S. Studies focus more on saturated fats and nitrates.

pennydreadful270 wrote: »

I agree, I think there are people who could easily have bacon for breakfast, ham for lunch, and hot dogs for tea. Latest advice says they are the ones who need to cut down to the average.

Most likely. I've yet to see a diary like that here, though.

NobodyPutsAmyInTheCorner wrote: »

Pork is white meat to me. Pork like chicken has a massive risk of food poisoning if not cooked properly. Unlike beef and lamb which you can pretty much eat still mooing if you so chose.

Absolutely not true.

Poultry is a high-risk for salmonella, all other meats carry a risk, but lower than poultry.

The biggest boogie man for pork was trichinosis, which dies in 6 minutes when exposed to 131 degrees Fahrenheit, so hitting 145 will eliminate all issues, but still leave it delicious, juicy and probably a touch pink. And, it isn't nearly as big a deal as it used to be 50+ years ago. Chances of running into trichinosis are about 1 in 154 million in a commercial store in the US.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/vs/trichinae/docs/fact_sheet.htm <-- good source of info.
http://www.porkcares.org/our-practices/food-safety/the-truth-about-trichinosis-in-pork

Now, if you're cooking wild game, all this goes out the window. Wild game has a higher chance of infection, so I'd definitely make sure I hit the 145, or higher, mark with it just to make sure.

Oh, and you can eat beef "still mooing", but you will have a risk of e. coli, depending on how the meat was handled. Meat packed in a plant, even a larger cut, has a chance of it, so cook the surface well. Meat slaughtered and processed in a smaller setting should have a decreased chance (less poo flying around than in a large scale, modern slaughtering facility), but you still eat rare beef at your own risk.*

When it comes to meat risk and sickness, I, personally, consider pork no riskier than beef, then chicken, then many seafoods. (this is my personal scale of "I'm about to fly/go to an interview/be on a long car ride, so how much risk do I want to take on this suspect hotel food?").

*for the record, I freaking love rare and medium rare steak and eat it that way whenever I can. As much as I like a nice, medium or medium well burger, I don't take the chance unless I'm in an establishment where I know they grind their own meat on premises.

As a native Iowan (highest pork producing state in the US) it is my duty to say "EAT MOR PORK"

bbontheb wrote: »

Kruggeri wrote: »

Pork tenderloin is one of the leanest cuts of meat, absorbs marinades really well, tastes delicious, and (IMO) is a little more upscale than chicken.

The rule used to be that it needed to be cooked well done but a few years ago the recommendations were revised and I believe anything above an internal temp of 135 is safe to eat.

We grill it often and it is very important to let the tenderloin rest before slicing it so that it stays juicy.

Sesame ginger pork tenderloin with Thai noodles and edamame is on my menu plan for this week!

May I have your recipe? Sounds so good.

Actually this time the pork will just be a packaged marinade that I have in the pantry (Lawry's Sesame Ginger) and the noodles will probably be some version of this recipe:

http://thecreeksidecook.com/spicy-peanut-noodles/#axzz3d9HEutDD


I also use this recipe quite a bit for the pork tenderloin when I want Asian flavors, it is just that this week I'm trying to use up things already in my pantry and I have that marinade all ready to go.

http://allrecipes.com/recipe/thai-quivering-tenderloins/detail.aspx

Canada Food Guide. I had to go check just in case. It recommends meat alternatives "often", and at least two servings of fish a week. No word about white meat, red meat, or chicken other than, ".....provide protein, fat and many other important nutrients including iron, zinc, magnesium and B vitamins..."

DeguelloTex wrote: »

I grill pork loin a lot. That and chicken breast are my go-tos during the day with more beefy stuff in the evening. I've never found any that is leaner than chicken breast, though.

It makes me sad that people overcook pork. It doesn't have to be cooked until it's gray; pink is fine.

As between having red meat two times or less per week or colon cancer, I'd choose cancer.

I just love my digital meat thermometer and not eating overcooked meat anymore!

yarwell wrote: »

The healthfulness or otherwise of pork may depend what the pig was fed on. There are those who bang on about the high Omega-6 PUFA content of pork fat as a problem, where the pigs are corn fed. Pigs have simple digestion and the fat they eat is the fat they store on their bodies.

To piggyback on this, of concern to me is how the animals were treated. I love pork, but eat it far less after learning that pigs are as smart and sociable as dogs and the conditions and practices of factory farms. When I do buy it, I buy from producers that raised the pigs humanely, like Niman Ranch. Meat from a factory farm is not a good alternative for me.

I buy pork loin a lot too because it's cheap and very versatile. I even grind it up in my ninja blender and use it in place of ground beef or make homemade breakfast sausage. It's high in protein, low in fat and very flavorful.