Above all else, Craig is a showman who likes attention, controversy produces attention. He's not wrong, not saying that...just saying his scientific approach is, at times, suspect. He cites ancedotal references without providing more specific reference points (maybe I didn't see them) and I'm not really impressed with his "body" of work. As I said - I truly appreciate his POV and his passion and his recipes and techniques, advice on methods, etc. good stuff.
an example - I don't like that he redefines the food temperature standards to suit his tastes, rather than indicate his adjustments to the established standards as his desired or recommended...he causes confusion for those new to cooking. (He's the authority who produced temp guidelines for Grill Grates) As to his testing criteria, fortunately I have been exposed to some of the comprehensive efforts undertaken by Cornell and MIT trained scientists responsible for white papers on dehydration of food vis-a-vis a certain outdoor grill mfg I had some association with ... and have a sense of understanding of just how difficult it is to set up scientific standards for a food test. He doesn't appear to have done the exhaustive work to truly establish credibility for his findings.
And with all due respect to his 'science for hire' - it is, exactly that. Science for hire.
Is it interesting? do I concur that all moisture is not retained and there is some loss? and do I pose a reasonable explanation for how muscle fibers actually expell and abosorb moisture in an uncooked and cooked state? Yes - I think so. And I haven't discounted his position, just suggest it's - per usual - headline grabbing and designed to invigorate his web site traffic. Thass all...he's an excellent businessman.
