I don’t tend to eat much fish, but in the supermarket earlier I saw some smoked salmon which didn’t need cooking, and some salmon fillets which did. They looked the same really - both ‘raw’. I decided to buy some of the fillet. It was nice, but a very different flavour from when I’ve tried smoked salmon in the past. The cooked fillet was quite chicken-y with a slight earthy/fishy taste, whereas smoked salmon has a very strong fish flavour.

Why do they taste so different? And why is smoked salmon safe to eat without cooking when other smoked fish do need cooking?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    91 year ago

    Smoked salmon looks “raw” largely because it is raw. It has never been heated.

    Smoking the fish does indeed give a very different flavour to non-smoked fillet. That shouldn’t be any great surprise.

    Why is it safe? Well good quality raw salmon is also safe (see sushi). But the smoking does have an effect of preserving the fish and making it less of an environment where bacteria would thrive.

    • @PaulDevonUK
      link
      English
      81 year ago

      Smoked salmon looks “raw” largely because it is raw. It has never been heated.

      I am curious about the process of smoking without heat.

      • @Countess425
        link
        English
        71 year ago

        I they’re referring to cold smoking. It’s just smoking at a temp of like 80 degrees for like 18 hours or something. It’s how you make lox.

        • SleepyBear
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          Traditional lox is just brined in salt, no smoking.

          Gravadlax is brined in salt and sugar with spices.

          Smoked salmon is just smoked salmon, like nova, in the US.

          Due to customer preference and lack of knowledge, most want smoked salmon when they ask for lox, so are sold lox.

          See: https://forward.com/news/7669/the-raw-truth-about-lox/