Healthy Rubs??? Is it possible?

Ron,

There was a correction to that recipe. The salt total equals the sugar total, 1/2 cup of each of the four salts.

There is a diabetic Q email list run by a friend of mine. Write to Bruce Cook, bdcbbq@home.com. Tell him I sent you. He'll fill you in.

There isn't a ton of posts there. Here's why: If you are a diabetic, it's almost impossible to eat Q "correctly". I know this because I'm a type II without medication.

Don't know whether you're diabetic or not, but for those who are, exercise, proper diet (never seen Q in that category), and many other things control it...if not on meds.

Sorry for the long post, but I read the other day something about a person cutting off the fat on his Q because of need to lose weight.

That ~might~ work, but who's going to diet and eat 3 oz of "lean" barbecue for a meal? Sort of an oxymoron, eh?

Regards, Mike

quote:

Mike Rochman wrote:
There was a correction to that recipe. The salt total equals the sugar total, 1/2 cup of each of the four salts.

No problem, Mike. I'll just order a blood pressure cuff that has the ability to measure the systolic pressure above 999. The only fear naturally is that the blood flow under that pressure from a simple cut might be akin to a fire hose.

Thanks for the diabetic address. I'm type II controlled with medication (and a lot of yelling by my wife and doctor.)

As to the fat content, I've decided that I can cook the butt and ribs and other stuff for family and friends and live on the chicken and turkey and seafood quite well. And, naturally, every cook is obligated to sample his cooking. Thus I'm not feeling totally deprived. (Well, I am but I'm trying to convince myself.)

Thanks for the help, Mike.

-Ron

Ron,

Happy to lend a thought when I can. There's little new about Q, or for that matter, or diabetes. It's just new to you and me.

As we both know, diabetes is about choices. There are many thoughts that differ, and many forks in the road.

For me, the most important thing is not to have an over-active fork.

However, those of us with type II are making a choice when we eat Q in the first place. My choice is obvious..I'll pay the price and compensate elsewhere in my life, as obviously most all diabetics who love Q will do.

Getting off the soapbox....

Regards, Mike

Hey,Ron...The low fat shouldn't be an issue in the rubs....Cooks in Texas usually don't believe you should use sugar in rubs anyway....Many are just salt and pepper believers....Most of our pork and poultry products are being tumbled or pumped with 7% to 15 % salt water now anyway....Although the rubs and mops help with the building of the bark,the cooking and smoking contribute greatly to that outer layer....For those that need to,try not eating the bark....I've never tried any of the salt substitutes in a rub so can't help there....I'd give Stogie a shout,as he is involved in a number of data bases where he might already have some tried and workable recipes. Just a few thoughts,sorry not to have more specific answers.

Tom, missed the part about sugar subs.

Splenda (and other prods that contain sucralose) are the most natural tasting we've found. They withstand the heat, so they are good for baking and for Q.

Taste? We can still tell it from sugar, but don't tend to experience the strong aftertaste that we get from other prods.

Problem using it in rubs: It's very fine grained stuff. Used it once in a rub. Had to grind the rub in a Cuisinart to get it all to the same powdery consistancy. Then, I didn't like the way the rub spread via our pizza cheese shaker jar.

Certainly worth a try if the finer grained rub isn't a problem for you.

Regards, Mike

quote:

Mike Rochman wrote:
As we both know, diabetes is about choices. There are many thoughts that differ, and many forks in the road.

Many forks in the road ??!! Hey, you should see how many forks (both figurative and literal) there are on my table!

quote:

Tom wrote:
The low fat shouldn't be an issue in the rubs

I agree totally, Tom. The issues of fat are easily controlled by the products cooked. Obviously there are very fatty all the way to lean products and everything in between. As I mentioned, I'll taste the fatty stuff but stick to the non-fatty stuff for myself.

quote:

Tom further wrote:
... the cooking and smoking contribute greatly to that outer layer ...

That's one of the main reasons I opted for the CS, Tom. I guess it all comes down to seeing the CS as a smoker rather that a "Q'er" per se. I'll tell 'ya, I'm not a big fan at all of chicken. I usually refuse to eat it - which, naturally, is a problem. What I've done in the CS has been very good. And coming from me, that's one major league compliment!

Thanks for the help.

-Ron

Mike:

We were obviously on at the same time so I didn't see your followup posting.

quote:

Mike Rochman wrote:
Problem using it in rubs: It's very fine grained stuff. Used it once in a rub. Had to grind the rub in a Cuisinart to get it all to the same powdery consistancy. Then, I didn't like the way the rub spread via our pizza cheese shaker jar.

Mike, I was under the impression that the sugar substitutes turned foul when used on a grill. Then again, the CS isn't a grill.

Other than the problems with the pizza cheese shaker jar, did the powdery consistancy have a negative effect on the final product? Was the issue just the large amounts pouring from the shaker?

Actually, I had a chocolate bar made with Splenda (and no chocolate the other day - better living through chemicals!) and it was very good. I'll try it tomorrow! I assume it can be bought in a supermarket.(?)

Thanks.

-Ron

Ron,

" Mike, I was under the impression that the sugar substitutes turned foul when used on a grill. Then again, the CS isn't a grill. "

Only tried it in a rub one time. Was no problem. Splenda is used in baking, so low and slow shouldn't have an effect on it.


" ..did the powdery consistancy have a negative effect on the final product? Was the issue just the large amounts pouring from the shaker? "

I had trouble getting the rub spread evenly on the ribs. It was a pain in the "ribs".

" ..I assume it can be bought in a supermarket.(?) "

Yup..or online. Market was cheaper.

Regards, Mike

Hey red neckn training, how long have you been type 2? Two months for me. Went to a few classes and was told they really didn't have a problem with sauce or rubs...it's whats under them they fought me on. YEAH....I hear yeah on the wife and doctor. Wife likes Q and hasn't really said much....the doc is another story. The day I found out I was type 2 , at 8 am I had one wife and one mother. By 3 pm I had 30 wifes, and 30 mothers. Everyone telling me NO! you can't have that. I too am on pills. I thought about a sugar free sauce. Nothing will hold up to the heat, but if you really think about it you really don't eat alot of sauce, it really is what's under it! Don't really think it's that bad for ya. Not cooked in grease and what fat it has is almost cooked away. Give me an e-mail sometime and we will talk. twhs615@yahoo.com

well, well, well... it seems that a whole bunch of us are Type II diabetics. I am actually not controlling my sugar well, and am on the max with the oral meds. Doc wants to go to the needle. Am struggling with diet, though getting OK exercise...

I guess diabetics just LOVE q...

Woodurner...my doc is going to kill me in Sept. when I see him. The first month I gained 2 lbs. Don't sound like much but if you do it every month your in trouble. I on the other hand have gained 7 lbs back now. Yeah it's the q and my eating habits.Summer is my pit fall and then winter sets in and I don't work the lbs off. They say 15 new people have type two every month. Tha's goes to show ya how we have changed out habits over 100 years!

Hi, Mike, Barbqr, Woodburner,

Well, it seems like Stuart is going to hire a dietician before our families flood the market with used CS equipment.

Actually, I agree that most of the fat cooks out (yes, dear, most of it - maybe even all of it!).

She's not buyin' it.

We have agreed, however, to devote some serious effort to coming up with rub and a sauce that do the job. Three of my board members are physicians (you can imaging the hassle I take) and have agreed to evaluate what I put together by way of rubs and sauces. Somehow, I suspect they're going to want me to marinate in water, rub with great effort, and run the ribs around the block three times before I cook them and then give 'em to someone else to eat!

Ain't gonna happen!

BTW, Barbqr, welcome to the club. Ten years plus for me.

Hey! From a 'reduce the fat' perspective, (and this is probably heresy) what about par-boiling to render a good portion of the fat out of the ribs, laying on a real hard chill, then smoking them for flavor? Anybody tried that?

Ron

Ron,

" Actually, I agree that most of the fat cooks out (yes, dear, most of it - maybe even all of it!). She's not buyin' it. "

She's 100% correct. There just isn't any such thing as eating healthy Q. Sure, go for 3 oz of chicken, or 4 oz of fish..if you can.

Many researchers feel there is a gene that is activated in those of us who get type II diabetes. They feel that when the conditions are right, the gene activates. The typical type II activates this gene by over-eating and weighing too much, by being far too sedentary.

The only "good thing" about it is it can be controlled....but not with the ingestion of large amounts of Q, no matter if you render the fat out until you are left with dust...no matter what you use for rubs, sauces, and/or marinades.

If we eat FAR smaller quantities of Q, we type II diabetics will be much better off.

Great advice.
I'll probably never take it.

Regards, Mike

Well...well...well.....looks like the cs forum needs to start a new area. SUGARS 101 LOL. Yeah the real key is WHAT YOU EAT and HOW MUCH. I gave up smoking (cigs not Q) and had to give up my reg. Dr. Pepper...I won't give up my last vice. They say life is short anyway...just didn't know how soon that really was.

Barbqr, Your post echoes my sentiments. Gave up several foods I like. Kept a couple I love...Q being the foremost. Walk most everyday. So far, extremely lucky...no meds.

Regards, Mike

Hey guys -

I have some real ribs (2 slabs) (that have been par-boiled to render a bit of the fat out) sitting waiting for some rub. I'm putting a good hard chill on them and will put them in te CS at around 38 degrees.

Don't know what to call what I'm using - it's not a dry rub, per se, 'cause it's got a little liquid in it but it sure isn't a mop or a marinade either I don't think. So I'll call it a "damp" rub.

I'm trying some fake sugar (Splenda), some fake salt (called NoSalt), some fake maple syrup (called fake maple syrup ), a little cumin, a lot of paprika (the cheap stuff), some garlic powder, onion powder, and a touch of cayenne. Will cook them off tomorrow at 200 for an hour or two with hickory and let you know.

Happy 4th!

-Ron

Red Neck in Training...Let us know how the splenda works. I thought about using it but after looking at the price I opted for the REAL bad stuff. From the way it sounds, our life is a fake world....LOL.

RNIT,

Please...
...tell me you really didn't parboil those ribs. Why?

The only ones who do that usually cook them on a grill and call that smoking...or they don't have a cookshack.

You don't need to render the fat out, it will naturally during the cooking process and boiling anything makes it tougher.

...and next you'll tell me you used foil!

There are a lot of recipes and a lot of cookbooks out there that suggest this, and that's how Chili's and Tony Roma's do theirs. But all the flavor is in the sauce and the meat takes on a weird texture from the boil and doesn't take smoke really well.

And it's not like I feel strongly against this. Nope not me

Really, this is on my personal don't do list. Boiling, yuck,

But that's just my opinion.

Smokin Okie

quote:

In his own unique fashion, Smokin' wrote:
Please...
...tell me you really didn't parboil those ribs. Why?

Then, as if that wasn't bad enough, he said:

quote:

...and next you'll tell me you used foil!

And, rather than express a negative opinion he hinted:

quote:

And it's not like I feel strongly against this. Nope not me

Really, this is on my personal don't do list. Boiling, yuck,

So I, in prompt reply, say...

Nah nah nah Yeah, well, oh yeah!

Actually, Smokin, the latter part of the test just got destroyed. I had sent ribs 1, 2, & 3 to a business associate for testing to determine fat content. The remainder of the slab were par boiled for 6 minutes. (Why 6? 'Cause that's what he told me.) ribs 4, 5, 6 were removed, frozen and sealed and the remainder of the slab went back in for 4 more minutes.

That's as far as we got. The slab then went into the CS for 3 hours and we raced out to see the fireworks. 9 hours later we got home - dazed and needing to pee like a race horse. Got stuck in traffic - didn't move (literally) for three hours then made it to the causeway and over the draw bridge. You guessed it - the bridge got stuck - UP!

But, believe it or not, the ribs (albeit well done) were still tasty. Amazing! The CS came through in extreme style!

However, from a testing perspective, it's back to another shot next weekend. - Hey! That's only two days away. (He tells me the samples absolutley, positively, drop dead, stick a nail in your eye, gotta be from the same slab.)

So that's my sad tale!

Happy 5th!

-Ron

Ron,

Have never had "boiled ribs" that retained any flavor. In fact, boiling tends to suck the flavor right out of them. What's your secret???

Regards, Mike

quote:

Mike Rothman wrote:
Have never had "boiled ribs" that retained any flavor. In fact, boiling tends to suck the flavor right out of them. What's your secret???

Like anything else, Mike, I think it's a question of degree. We were testing a thesis that says given that there is x% fat by meat volume of a raw rib, that same rib, par boiled, will have x-y% of fat where y is the fat rendered during the initial par boil, (x-y)-z% is the fat after a secondary par boil and n% is the fat remaining after all of the boiling and CS cooking. The base is, obviously, a slab that goes directly to and from the CS.

What I'm trying to find out is if there is a way to reduce the fat (and to prove it, to some degree of scientific certainty) without destroying the taste and texture.

Smokin' apparently doesn't think so. I'm not sure I think so either, but my scientific mind says that I've got to prove it.

In the instant case, leaving the ribs in so long resulted in a skewed test for a variety of reasons. So it's back to square one.

As to the ribs that were in the CS so long, and, as with everything of this nature, the results were subjective given the preparation and the waaaaay overcooking. They were still "good."

Make any sense at all?

-Ron

" Make any sense at all? "

Ron, nope. None whatsoever.

Regards, Mike

Hey it's just my opinion.

I've been cooking in general for many years and boiling most things sucks the flavor out.

I haven't scientifically tested your theory about percentage of fat, but keep in mind, it's the fat that helps tenderize the meat.

I've experimented before with par-boiling and it's not for me as I stated.

If you can make it work for you, please let everyone know of your success.

How about starting a new thread about par-boiling? Up to you. Foil is another subject too. It's not a bad thing, it just tends to steam the meat and ruin the "bark" for me. But I know many people who use it and love it and that's great.

Appreciate the info, I'm always learning more.

Smokin'

Gosh,guys....If I'd known that making Q in a CS was this complicated, I'd probably just stuck with frying up some Texas toast or cornbread...Dip it in a good sauce and chase it with a good beverage. Ya'll got me worried so now,I might just have the cold beverage.

" How about starting a new thread about par-boiling? "

Shirley, you jest?

Regards, Mik

we'll it's one of those topics, like foil, that comes up every once in a while. By suggesting a new post about it doesn't mean I support it.

...just wanting a little truth in Q (remember the soapbox Smokin' was on)

Smokin'

Smokin',

We don't use foil in the cooking process for all the reasons mentioned before by you, Stuart, etc. We have nothing against the practice, and know some guys who produce some darn good Q finising with foil...often in the oven.

However, I don't know one single person who takes Q seriously who would par-boil the meat before smoking. Never seen anything positive written about it. Never heard anything by word of mouth.

With that said, I'll be happy to read and learn about anything, including the possible advantages of par-boiling meat before smoking.

Let the thread begin...

Regards, Mike

PAR BOILING RIBS IS LIKE TAKING A HOTDOG TO A STEAK FRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow! I must jump in here and agree with Smokin... years ago (YEARS ago) I tried that par boiling... I HATE IT! Whenever I hear about someone doin that to my beloved ribs... well... you know that old bit about Niagra Falls? NIAGRA FALLS! Slowly I turn... step by step...

Anyway, on another note, I think I used foil in a way that Smokin will definitely approve of:

Cooked up three slabs of ribs and three fat chickens (the proper way), then double foiled for the trip to Tanglewood on the 4th (a western Mass outdoor concert venue), where James Taylor was playing. My plan was to eat the chicken cold, but heat up the ribs on the engine of the Villager! Well... it was so crowded, and the van was so far away, that I could not execute the automotive reheat. However, being the good Q-hound that I am, I noticed -- out behind the stage -- that James' caterer had some nice grills and ovens cranked up. So I duked the guy a $20 and he put the foiled ribs in the oven for about 15 minutes. Truly a good man, he was. I came back to my group with piping hot, aromatic ribs -- and drew quite a few confused looks ("How did he barbecue those ribs...") LOL! My finest hour yet!

Welp, I gotta tell y'all - the par boiled ribs were not as good as plain old ribs.

Howevvvvah they were not as bad as you all had me thinking. Because of all the comments I tried something different (for me at least) = I dug out the bride's Joy of Cooking (or something like that) book and finished 1/2 a slab per their directions which included par boiling and then into the oven. So half to the oven and half to the CS.

The CS ribs (par boiled) were much better than the oven cooked variety. Almost like the CS added moisture back in. (Not possible, I'm sure, but it tasted like it.)

There seemed to be no difference in taste between the ribs par boiled for six minutes and the ones that went back in for the additional 4 minutes.

The non-boiled ribs, cooked at the same time as the others were better. Much better.

However, the issue for me was (is) to see what the trade-offs are. I'll let you know when the tests come back. I've also sent out a cooked CS (non-boiled) rib for comparison as well.

Should be interesting.

-Ron