Get email alerts Get Celiac.com E-mail Alerts  




Celiac.com Sponsor:
Celiac.com Sponsor:




Ads by Google:






   Get email alerts  Subscribe to FREE Celiac.com email alerts

Question About Slow Cooker Sizes
0

12 posts in this topic

I have a 4.5 quart slow cooker and have noticed that most everything I cook in there comes out dry or burnt around the edges. Well, most of the recipes I have used call for a 2.5 quart slow cooker, so I'm wondering if it is possible to make adjustments to the recipe, cooking time, or level of heat in order to avoid these mistakes again. Thanks!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Ads by Google:

My 4 qt is my small cooker.  I have a 6 that I use regularly.  I think they work best at about 3/4 full.  Maybe make another half a recipe.  I also find that mine cook faster than the recipes say they will.  What are you trying to cook?  maybe I can help.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The size of slow cooker you use makes a HUGE difference but nearly all recipes can be easily adjusted (unless you have a specific cut of meat or whatever).  Recipes using a 2.5 quart slow cooker?  Interesting because that is very small.  Most recipes seem to call for at least a 4 quart or larger.  Anyway, as Karen recommended, please let us know specifically what you are making and we'll help.  :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yesterday I made turkey meatballs with an apricot dressing on top. The meatballs were fine, but the sugar in the apricot dressing burned and stuck to the sides of the pot. I've had similar experiences with sugar burning to the sides of the pot as well as with meat drying out

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today's slow cookers cook hotter than older ones. Anything with sugar will burn in a new one. It needs to be at least half full, closer to 3/4 to function optimally. I use my 5-qt most often, but I also have a 4-qt and a 1.5-qt, which I sadly need to replace because I made spaghetti and meatballs in it too many times and it has a gluteny film that won't come out. The 1.5 is perfect for two people, you can cut most recipes in half for it.

 

I haven't seen many recipes call for a 3-qt or smaller though.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




Thank you all for your help:)

 

Karichelle, you said not to use a slowcooker to cook anything with sugar, right? Well I have a slowcooker cookbook for people who need to be gluten-free and a lot of the recipes call for sugar in them, but the recipes were also made especially to be cooked in slowcookers, so is that still okay?

 

Also, would adjusting the heat and cook time prevent me from having add enough to make the pot 3/4 full?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes the slow cookers themselves are at fault.  I returned the first one  I bought because it burned things  even on low.  My new one doesn't burn things even on  high, though I suppose with enough sugar and not a lot of liquid it could :rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With sugary things, it can really be dependent on a lot of things. For instance, I do a pulled pork and cover the pork in non-diet root beer made with cane sugar. Never had a problem. But, once I shred it and cover it in BBQ sauce, there is a limit to how long I can let it cook before it will crisp the sugar around the edges. The time also depends on which one of my pots I use (size) and which heat setting. There are just so many variables and I think sometimes that recipes just need tweaking. For me, skip thick sugary sauces for long cooks in the pots and only use them long enough to add flavor and make them warm.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With sugary things, it can really be dependent on a lot of things. For instance, I do a pulled pork and cover the pork in non-diet root beer made with cane sugar. Never had a problem. But, once I shred it and cover it in BBQ sauce, there is a limit to how long I can let it cook before it will crisp the sugar around the edges. The time also depends on which one of my pots I use (size) and which heat setting. There are just so many variables and I think sometimes that recipes just need tweaking. For me, skip thick sugary sauces for long cooks in the pots and only use them long enough to add flavor and make them warm.

 

So when do you think I should add the sauce?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I add sugary sauces when the meat is either fully or mostly cooked. I just kind of feel it out with each recipe. I cook the meats with a liquid sauce first and add the thick sauces later. It is more complicated, but I don't burn them either. Maybe other people have other solutions.

 

Totally unrelated, but I used to have a problem with everyone in the house picking up the lid on my crockpot all day. Nothing will cook right and everything burns, in my experience, when people do this. If people are doing that, whack them with your spoon and tell them to back off. The lid should only come off when you add sauces, spices, or serve.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your help:)

 

Karichelle, you said not to use a slowcooker to cook anything with sugar, right? Well I have a slowcooker cookbook for people who need to be gluten-free and a lot of the recipes call for sugar in them, but the recipes were also made especially to be cooked in slowcookers, so is that still okay?

 

Also, would adjusting the heat and cook time prevent me from having add enough to make the pot 3/4 full?

I didn't really say not to use it to cook anything with sugar, just advised that it would burn...I guess I should have said, "If overcooked." Just watch it for the last couple of hours, and if you're trying out a new recipe do it on the weekend when you can watch it and see if you need to shave an hour or two off the time. I bought a digital timer programmable one for this reason.

 

You can shorten the time if it's not quite half or 3/4 full, but you still run the risk of it overcooking.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had slow cookers since they first came out many years ago and they do cook things at such a higher temp than they used to. I have become  disgusted with trying to use them for many things. To me they seem to need much less time than the recipe recommends and they often boil over spilling out. Usually I will put them on high for about an hour than decrease the temp to low. I will not even attempt to cook any beef except for recipes calling for browned ground beef in them. I have had most brands available these days and even one with a vent on the lid but still am not happy about using them anymore like I used to. As for chicken I will only cook thighs or legs in it and never white meat anymore as it will dry out too much.

 

The original slow cookers were intended for people who will go out to work all day and come home to dinner ready in the slow cooker. I thought they were great but I certainly don't feel that way anymore about todays slow cookers. And it is true that sugary things will easily burn. If I make applesauce with sugar in it in the slow cooker it will always stick to the sides and burn and I will have to soak the slow cooker for a while to clean it.

 

I now have a 4 quart Cuisanart slow cooker which also has a simmer function on it in addition to low, high, and warm. It is programable but you have to be there watching it to change the settings. So I am happy with it but I do have to be home and there to watch it and to change the settings of the temp as needed.

 

They say the slow cookers should never be more or less than 2/3 full but I have done that and still have had problems with things boiling over or burning or drying out. I tried using slow cooker bags also but was not that impressed with them.

 

I think slow cookers these days have limited uses. Good for things like soups, sloppy joes, chili, and recipes using only chicken thighs or legs. I would also suggest you use a food thermometer to check for the doneness of things rather than going by the recommeded time in the recipes. I really do like using slow cookers though especially in the summers here when you don't want to have to turn the oven on. I have two cookbooks I especially like for slow cookers as they have several variations of the same food in them and the recipes are from people in different parts of the country but still the recommended times for recipes are too long. Anyway the two books are both by compiled by Phyllis Pellman Good and Dawn J. Ranck and one is called Fix-It and Forget It (Feasting with your Slow cooker) and the other is Fix-It and Forget-It (For Entertaining) and no recipes are duplicated in the books so they are especially useful to me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
0

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      104,665
    • Total Posts
      921,655
  • Topics

  • Posts

    • You're welcome! Yes, I too, hate waiting for lab results. Ugh!
    • I understand this is not a doctor's office and that I need proper testing done to rule out Celiac disease, however, I am stuck waiting until November to even see a GI doctor. So I need some suggestions soon on which test to go for first and what to do as I wait. Also do note, I am 28 years old.

      Right now, the most suspecting culprits to my symptoms have been Gallbadder, Celiac disease, and IBS. I have also been recently diagnosed with pre-diabetes and I am obese.  My Ultrasound and CT scan have all come up as normal and no signs of gallstones. However, I was in extreme pain as my upper abdomen was examined during the ultra sound. My white blood cell count also seems to be high at 12,000 but all blood work came back normal for liver and everything else.

      Symptoms included are: diarrhea
      yellow-stools (Sometimes foul smelling but always sink)
      light gnawing pain in area a few inches above belly button
      burning in chest
      sometimes pain below upper right rib cage.
      Tenderness all around the upper abdomen, but more so on the right and center.
      burping frequently after meals
      Gassy
      bloating in abdomen The pains used to come and go for the past few years as something very mild, but then the yellow stools happen at least four months ago and at a constant rate. Everyday it is either yellow or orange.  Sometimes the stools are lose and other times they are not. Two months in, I was finally diagnosed with pre-diabetes and have been having a strict low calorie and non fatty diet.

      So far the upper right pain has subsided but the pain above my belly button would continue. The gassy and bloated feeling would come and go as well. I get severe heart burn after almost every meal. But I felt it especially after eating whole wheat sandwiches or whole wheat pasta. I however don't feel it when I eat a Nature Valley granola bar, or pack of peanut butter crackers. I also had a chicken and vegetable stir fry with soy sauce cooked in that also had little effect on me. A bowl of cereal also made the heart burn act up pretty bad. I sometimes feel numb or light headed after various meals. Especially larger ones. In fact, it seems the more I eat, the worse I feel. But the less in the stomach, the more the pain above my belly button starts to act up.

      It is usually in the morning and afternoon I feel the most with gas and bloating. Especially after any large meals from the previous day. Despite the diet and work outs I have had, nothing has changed the stools. However, taking fish oil pills has greatly reduced the pain in my upper abdomen as well as the pain  in the the area above my belly button. My question now is, is there a very likely chance of this being celiac disease? Should I go on a gluten free diet to test since I Have to wait so long? Also, which test should I ask the doctor for first, as it will take a GREAT deal of time to pay off each one. Colonoscopy, HIDA scan, or endoscopy. 

      Again, I understand this isn't a site to get compete medical advice or to know exactly what my illness is, but I am trying to narrow down the possibility or what is most likely. If this has a chance of being celiac disease, I would rather know sooner than later.
    • Thank you very much for all the info Squirmingitch. The doctor told me as we were talking he was going to order some tests with urine so I don't know why he didn't mark that. Maybe he forgot as we were talking? Duly noted about the bladder Cancer to watch out for too. Doctor said it will take about a week to get the lab results back usually from this lab. The wait will seem like forever I'm sure. Yes I will press to have the other tests done too if this one comes back negative.
    • http://www.cureceliacdisease.org/screening/ Was your hubs tested for total IgA to see if he's IgA deficient? Read this thread: http://www.mayomedicallaboratories.com/test-catalog/Clinical+and+Interpretive/83660
    • Yes, bone density problems are all part of the celiac "umbrella" so to speak and yes, osteoporosis tends to happen more rapidly and at earlier ages than normal when malabsorption is happening. At age 43, it's not normal to have osteoporosis as you describe so that's another part of the jigsaw puzzle. Time to receive blood test results back from the doc are entirely dependent on the particular lab they were sent to. Yep, it's time for you to start keeping a very close check on the PSA in light of your father having had prostrate cancer. I would think you should get a PSA every year. I really would have liked to see him do a urinalysis. With the prostrate cancer your father had, it would seem a close watch should be kept on you for bladder cancer as well. The first symptom of that is blood in the urine but it's generally microscopic before you're ever able to actually see it. That happens to be the 8th most common cancer in men & it's moving up in the rankings. I know this because my hubs had it. The good news is that it's also one of the easiest and most successfully treated provided it's caught early. Certainly starting @ age 50, men should see a urologist every year. BTW, in the last year before I found out I was celiac, I turned up with microscopic blood in my urine. I got it checked out thoroughly since I know about bladder cancer & all tests, ultrasounds, cystoscopy, CT scan etc... turned out fine. The docs were stumped & finally said, "apparently that's just what your body does". Guess what? That's not "just" what MY body does. Once I went gluten-free, I have had no more microscopic blood in my urine. Interesting eh? Before now I didn't realize you are in Canada. The doc didn't do the full celiac panel but I understand the initial screening protocols in Canada only order the TTG but if that comes back negative be sure & press for the full panel as cyclinglady said. We have several here who tested like cyclinglady so it's not a rare thing, it's just not the norm. I'm glad he's doing the B-12 & Ferritin -- those can be big clues.
  • Upcoming Events

  • Blog Entries

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      61,663
    • Most Online
      3,093

    Newest Member
    Steph0903
    Joined