Regionalism in Meat Doneness Terminology and Usage

I recently ate a steak in Kansas City that came, to my thinking, overdone by at least one stage -- i.e., I ordered medium-rare and received a steak that was somewhere between medium and medium-well, at least as I am used to using those terms. I was in a group of 8, of whom 4 ordered the same steak, at varying degrees of doneness -- all the others reported the same phenomenon, except the local guy, who thought his was just like he had ordered. OK, this is admittedly a small sample. But it certainly had us wondering whether there was actually a language barrier? Do Kansas Citians* simply assign different meanings to the doneness adjectives for their steaks? If so, how do they order one rare (in the sense in which that term is used hereabouts)? Or was it simply because we were at a lousy restaurant ("Skies," rotating high above the KC skyline)?


* But for numerous historic markers, articles, etc. I saw while there, I would've said "Kansas Citizens." So you see, we Midwesterners may well be one people divided by a common language!

Try ordering "blue" next time, although I don't know if that works in KC. You could always go with the classic "still mooing".

In France everything is one step cooler than here. Their medium is our medium rare, etc. It's wonderful.

Every steak I have ever had in Kansas City has been overcooked. Now BBQ, that's a different story.

I would tend to say that's probably true, based on growing up in Wichita. I have no idea why-- it's not like they don't get fresh beef in that part of the world, since the Chicago Stockyards closed in the 70s they're much closer to it-- but my father always ordered rare and got, basically, pink, which is what he wanted. First few times I ordered it here I got bluish-purple, and realized that I had to switch to medium rare to get what I wanted.

Actually what I want is in between the two, but I really don't know how to ask for that. Pantone 221, maybe.

I'm with you, Mike, I want the doneness exactly between rare and medium rare. I actually ask for exactly that at steakhouses, and it turns out well most of the time.

At Bern's in tampa they even have this doneness on their menu, which really, really makes me want to go there.

Jim,

It cetainly wouldn't be surprising that such variation in regional usage exists. I also have the impression that the scale of doneness relative to the terms has changed over time. Back in the remoter parts of the 20th century, when I was a young whipper-snapper, I think the scale I knew back east resembled what you describe in KC now. At some point, roughly around the time when people in the States started eating crispy vegetables it seems to me, greater acceptance of lesser degrees of doneness in meat arose and -- again, this is just my impression -- the scale got recalibrated a little. In other words, medium back east in 1960 was more done (and similar to 'medium' in KC today perhaps) than 'medium' back east in, say, 1985 or today. It would be possible to look into this but I'd rather watch the tomatoes ripen...

Antonius

Mike, that's awesome, I'd love to bring a Pantone 221 chip with me next time I go for steak. I'd be severly impressed if a grill chef could hit it consistently though.

The Capital Grilles that are opening all across the country have a consistent definition - they define rare as cool center, rare plus is just warm.

gleam wrote:I'm with you, Mike, I want the doneness exactly between rare and medium rare. I actually ask for exactly that at steakhouses, and it turns out well most of the time.

At Bern's in Tampa they even have this doneness on their menu, which really, really makes me want to go there.

I've ordered mine that way at Bern's and it was a great steak. I consider it one of the top steaks I've ever had.

I think the scale I knew back east resembled what you describe in KC now.

Antonius,

My experience exactly. When I was growing up on the East Coast, I never encountered a "rare" steak as "blu." When I began to travel, though, it became more and more difficult to determine the amount of doneness equated with "rare" (which I considered to be "saignant"=bleeding) so much so that outside the region of Phila/Balt a felt compelled to always order steak "medium-rare," sometimes getting what I wanted, sometimes winding up with something, horrors, closer to "well-done." Nowadays, I don't order much steak, but when I do, I usually find a conversation with the waiter worth the effort.

If you're anywhere other than a metropolitan area in the Deep South, medium-rare will get you medium-well, rare will get you medium-rare, and I shudder to think what well done would get you (shoe leather, would be my suspicion). Even very high-end establishments seem clinically incapable of doing anything other than cooking the crap out of the meat. Puzzling.

I have found that Chicago is one of the few places in this country where rare means rare. The only other place I have had a properly done steak was in Bloomington, Indiana. When I am out of town, I usually order my steak "bloody" or "raw". To be fair, many states now have laws which mandate all meat must be cooked to a certain temperature. When my mother moved to Washington state, she just gave up on eating steaks in restaurants. Ever since the Jack-in-the-Box Salmonella outbreak there, all meat (even steaks) must be cooked to an internal temperature of 165 degrees, which is well done in my book. I have even offered to sign a waiver of liability, but still no luck. In fact, the waiter suggested that I could be an undercover agent from the State Health department (apparently there is such a thing).

d4v3 wrote:Ever since the Jack-in-the-Box Salmonella outbreak there, all meat (even steaks) must be cooked to an internal temperature of 165 degrees, which is well done in my book.

Seriously? So beef carpaccio and steak tartare are illegal in Washington state?

Dmnkly wrote:

d4v3 wrote:Ever since the Jack-in-the-Box Salmonella outbreak there, all meat (even steaks) must be cooked to an internal temperature of 165 degrees, which is well done in my book.

Seriously? So beef carpaccio and steak tartare are illegal in Washington state?

Yes, as far as I know, that is true. Medium rare steaks and medium burgers are also illegal. However, I did get the temps wrong. I misread a statute which concerned wild game and stuffed meat or fish, which has to be heated to 165.

Wash. Agricultural Code wrote:(a) Beef 145°F for three minutes or, comminuted (ground) beef products 155°F for fifteen seconds.

(b) Pork 145°F for three minutes or 150°F for one minute.

(c) Any products containing poultry or meat food birds must be cooked to an internal temperature of at least 165°F for fifteen seconds.

Nevertheless, as far as I am concerned, 145 degrees for 3 minutes renders a steak almost inedible (I think the temperature for steak was originally 155, but they lowered it).

Mike G wrote:
Actually what I want is in between the two, but I really don't know how to ask for that. Pantone 221, maybe.

Now that is a terminology that I can understand!

For me, I often order red meat "medium" and get a very red center, which I would prefer slightly less red-- but ordering medium well usually gets you a grey mass.

This all puts me in mind of Mark Twain's remark: "When I was a boy of fourteen, my father was so ignorant I could hardly stand to have the old man around. But when I got to be twenty-one, I was astonished at how much he had learned."

When I was a youngster of that age or thereabouts--and far more impatient than I am now (one would hardly have thought such a thing possible)--I used to bridle when my dad ordered his steak by color. He would never use "standard" terms and virtually every time we went out, his method resulted in a discussion--if not a debate--with the waiter. They tried to cram his preference into their categories and he just refused to be pigeonholed. They could call it whatever they wanted, but it had darn well better show up the right shade of pink when it hit the table!

I got older. Dad learned so damn much it's a pleasure to have him around now. (But I still order my meat the "old-fashioned way." All things considered, he probably gets what he wants more often than I do.)

d4v3 wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:

d4v3 wrote:Ever since the Jack-in-the-Box Salmonella outbreak there, all meat (even steaks) must be cooked to an internal temperature of 165 degrees, which is well done in my book.

Seriously? So beef carpaccio and steak tartare are illegal in Washington state?

Yes, as far as I know, that is true. Medium rare steaks and medium burgers are also illegal. [...]

Now that's what should be a laughingstock. Foie gras? Feh. I want burger juices dripping down my jowls.

Dmnkly wrote:

d4v3 wrote:Ever since the Jack-in-the-Box Salmonella outbreak there, all meat (even steaks) must be cooked to an internal temperature of 165 degrees, which is well done in my book.

Seriously? So beef carpaccio and steak tartare are illegal in Washington state?

I've had beef carpaccio and/or steak tartare at Rover's in Seattle, Whitehouse Crawford in Walla Walla, and Herbfarm in Woodinville -- all in the past two years. So there must be exceptions...hmm...all three were Wagyu beef. I wonder if that makes a difference?

Dunno, my Mom moved from Washington about 2 years ago, so I am not aware of what changes may have been made in the law since then. All I know is that starting sometime in the mid 1990s, I was unable to order a rare steak in Anacortes, Washington. I do know that the restaurant associations were pretty upset about the law when it went into effect, and were fighting to change it. I wonder if the beef was irradiated? I will ask my sister who still lives in Seattle.
=======
UPDATED:
On further investigation, I found that the State of Washington amended the law several times (most recently Sept 2004, May 2005). Apparently, they allow individual restaurants to apply for a variance for dishes that are normally served raw (like tartare), if they implement a voluntary inspection program, submit scientific data that proves the food is not harmful, submit a safety plan to the State Health Department and if they do not serve a "susceptible" population. They also need to post a written warning to customers about the dangers of raw meat.

I found they also eased the regulations on steak by changing the 3 minutes at 145 degrees requirement from internal to external temperature (top and bottom). The 155 degrees internal temperature for burgers still stands .

Here is an odd section I discovered about sushi and ceviche. It requires that all fish which is served raw to be frozen solid first. Certain species of Tuna are exempt. That can't make sushi chefs happy.

[i]3-402.11 Parasite Destruction.
(A) Except as specified in ¶ (B) of this section, before service or sale in READY-TO-EAT form, raw, rawmarinated,
partially cooked, or marinated-partially cooked FISH other than MOLLUSCAN SHELLFISH shall be:
(1) Frozen and stored at a temperature of -20°C (-4°F) or below for 168 hours (7 days) in a freezer; or
(2) Frozen at -35°C (-31°F) or below until solid and stored at -35°C (-31°F) for 15 hours.
(B) If the FISH are tuna of the species Thunnus alalunga, Thunnus albacares (Yellowfin tuna), Thunnus
atlanticus, Thunnus maccoyii (Bluefin tuna, Southern), Thunnus obesus (Bigeye tuna), or Thunnus
thynnus (Bluefin tuna, Northern), the FISH may be served or sold in a raw, raw-marinated, or partially
cooked READY-TO-EAT form without freezing as specified under ¶ (A) of this section.[/i]

http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/sf/Pubs/FoodRule/chapter3.pdf

Thanks for the additional info!

The part about certain species of tuna being exempt from regulations makes me wonder if that's the reason all three places served raw Wagyu beef. Since the Wagyu cattle are raised in the state of Washington, perhaps they feel they can insure safer meat because all processing occurs within its borders.

Either that, or the local ranchers pitched a fit (rightfully so) and got an exemption

You may have something there. As usual, I got my original facts confused. It was a 1993 [b]E. Coli[/b] outbreak which sickened 400 people and killed 3 children, not Salmonella. Since E. Coli contamination is caused by unsafe butchering practices, maybe Waygu beef is considered safer. Apparently, the burger rule was already in place at the time of the outbreak, but it was just not widely enforced. The rare steak ban was a knee jerk reaction to the outbreak. Of course, the chances of getting E. Coli from a steak are almost nil, since the contamination would only be on the outside of the meat. I remember making that argument to a waiter, but to no avail. The state later relaxed the steak restrictions, changing the required cooking temperature from internal to external, which makes more sense.

When I was doing my restaurant research in Minneapolis, it was common knowledge that a rare steak ordered in Minnesota tasted like a medium rare steak back east. Medium meant well done, and well done was leather. Servers understood this (or some did) and made sure that diners who seemed that they might be from the coast would know how to order. You can always cook a steak more, never less.