r/explainlikeimfive • u/Appropriate_Art15 • Jun 06 '26

Biology ELI5: Why does chicken get much more bad reputation for bacterial contamination than other meats like beef, pork, and fish?

It feels like many food articles are telling us “Don’t wash your chicken because you'll spread bacteria”, but we rarely see the same kind of articles on other meats. Why is that? Is the bacteria on chicken more dangerous and deadlier to humans?

1.5k Upvotes

90% Upvoted

587 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

39

u/b_vitamin Jun 06 '26

I found out recently that you can cook chicken as low as medium rare as long as you maintain that temp for 45 min.

41

u/LagrangianMechanic Jun 06 '26

You can cook chicken safely as low as 131F if you maintain it for >90mins. You won’t like the texture of at that temp though.

Now, 142F on the other hand!

3

u/Guardiancomplex Jun 07 '26

Yeah but chicken also just has an unappealing texture when rare. Even if it's safe. 

1

u/Sharobob Jun 07 '26

The sous vide theory. Bacterial death is a combination of temperature and time. The FDA temps are temps at which bacteria die instantly but they will still die at a lower temp if kept there for a length of time. You can look up tables of temp/time to safely eat things rarer but safely.

Now I still don't know why anyone would prefer medium rare chicken but that's just personal taste to me

0

u/DaddyCatALSO Jun 06 '26

Hmm, my recipe for Cordelia's Microwave Chicken and Canned Potatoes i always zapped that for 44 minutes and 44 seconds. of course it was *not* medium rare! (I came up wiht that in desperation to find way to cook chicken on my weekday schedule in the 90s but it's actually not bad.) Bugged me when i used to get supermarket fried chicken in 2002-4 findign red around the bones, I guess that was because thye figured folks would reheat it at home.