It's a personal blog, not approved or tested recipes. So it is a use at your own risk site. For example, with beef stew, the approved instructions call for browning the meat first and heating it and the vegetables to boiling in the broth before filling the jars. Filling the jars with hot foods is what allows for the 90 mins. processing time for quarts. Your site above calls for filling the jars with raw meat and raw cold vegetables and still only processing for 90 mins. So it is under-processed since a fair portion of the 90 mins processing time is used simply bring the food up to temp., not processing it. You can find the approved recipe for beef stew in both of the Ball canning books. Dave

I've linked below to one source that gives a brief overview of the various bacteria associated with food poisoning. Of course that applies not just to home-canned foods but fresh meats, dairy products, etc. Maybe people got sick or died in the past and no one thought of food poisoning as the cause. Maybe they were stronger than we are today; those who survived (didn't die prior to the age of five) may have developed forms of resistance by exposure to many bacteria we no longer encounter. (Some scientists have speculated our children have lost certain immunities because we are "too clean," which may account for higher rates of allergies, etc.) Maybe bacteria have just developed; it's easy to forget that bacteria are not static. Think how new stronger antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria are making it more and more challenging for doctors to treat some of the infections people get. Whatever few bacteria survive antibiotics will live to breed a new stronger generation of poisons. The law of nature is survival. The question now is whether we can develop new treatments faster than the bacteria can mutate. Maybe it's all of those things. All I know is it's better not to take any unnecessary risks (what Deanna called Russian Roulette). Doctors and hospitals aren't infallible and I'd rather not depend on them to cure me. It's easier to avoid the problem in the first place. Actually, I think our best chance to eat well and stay healthy is to process our own food, following the best and most current information available to us. We've certainly seen in the media lately lots of examples of problems with the commercial food chain. Food is strongly connected to our emotions and sense of ourselves. We all cherish family recipes and the rituals of food-preparation we remember. But it's no sin to update the approach, recognizing that conditions change. It needn't alter our affection for the parent or grandparent who first taught us and it isn't rejection. Carol Here is a link that might be useful: Historical Overview of Key Issues in Food Safety

Frequent question Mike and a good one. Basically it boils down to the great difference in commercial canning equipment like irradiation and high pressure autoclaves while we only have low-pressure pressure canners. Plus they use additives and preservatives that we don't add at home. If I use a pressure cooker can I can jerk sauce? For assured safety, that all depends on the recipe you use. As I mentioned, there are approved canning recipes available that are close to what many call jerk sauce and they can be safely modified after opening. And of course you always have the choice of just making up your own recipe, testing it for proper pH and pH stability, and pressure canning it for an unknown period of time and pressure. But that isn't recommended given the potential safety issues not to mention the potential quality issues. Honestly, jerk sauce is intended to be a fresh mixed, fresh use item so canning it isn't a high demand issue (thus no testing has been done) and it isn't recommended for that reason either. However freezing it in small useable proportions is always possible and effective. So again, given the wide differences in ingredients in jerk sauce, if you can tell us what specific ingredients you are looking for in your sauce one of us might be able to direct you to an approved recipe that is close to it. Dave

So....the LAWYER in the house has given over 73.3% of the budget yet only 10% of the project has occurred. No materials have been ordered but demolition has occurred (unsolicited, unsafe and improper removal of asbestos without proper license/abatement to do so). And you have a "worker" (employee/subcontractor) who appears to be unsafe and unable to work without direct supervision and has continued to do things against code. Do I have that so far? I would say contact a lawyer...but it seems the one you have has mucked things up - ROYALLY. OK. So. What to do? Not much. So long as the Project Manager (who is the REAL boss - not DH lawyer who doesn't know to withhold HUGE amounts of money from a project such as this) has your money, you have to deal with the company and their employees/subcontractors. The Project Manager is FULLY responsible for this stuff. All of it. Stop talking to DH and start calling project manager. And start talking about REBATES....yes. They are going against your contract (which your lawyer has mucked up) for scope of work (removing what should not be removed, failure to mitigate, etc). If you REALLY want to get some action: make some statements about contacting state licensing agencies and the health department (unsafe removal and disposal of asbestos). That should REALLY get everyone's attention. That's not a fun thing to do but it will make EVERYONE snap to attention - even deadbeat DH/lawyer. Remember: the work done by the subcontractors/employee is 100% the responsibility of the General Contractor/Project Manager. Every. Stick. Of. It. Anything that is out of place with this employee is to be reported to the Head Dude In Charge! Figure out who that is and speak with him/her. Point out to whomsoever is in charge that the employee/sub that concerns you is NO LONGER welcome on your property. Put it in writing. Get copies. Everyone signs a master copy (which you keep) and they in turn receive a copy for their records. I would suggest leaving it with your lawyer....but this seems to be an issue. Again...I would suggest a lawyer but it seems yours is on temporary leave of absence. I would put these guys on notice. They get one more kick at the can and then you kick them to the curb! Oh. Wait. That have OODLES of your money. Hmmmm. They should have only received 30% of what was needed....not 73.3%. This is not a healthy place to be....but it is *possible to get out of this. A lawyer could get it done...but alas...