[Sca-cooks] Sugar Waffles and fertilized chicken eggs
lady.ysabeau at gmail.com
Mon Mar 26 07:33:28 PDT 2007
Hmmm... I would think that straining it out would prevent a "clump" or
something . I've never really worried about it when I've found one but it
isn't a big deal. The embryo isn't really recognizable - at least in the
cases I've come across. It is more like the white of an egg after it has
been cooked and has typically been very small. I seem to remember finding it
more when I was little and using the eggs from my grandmother's chicken coop
than now...now that I think about it. I remember my mom telling me it was
okay to leave it in or I could pick it out.
On 3/26/07, Saint Phlip <phlip at 99main.com> wrote:
> On 3/24/07, Stefan li Rous <StefanliRous at austin.rr.com> wrote:
> > I'm also not sure how to take this description of straining out the
> > chicken embryos. Basically yuck, I think. And wasteful. Does using
> > fertilized chicken eggs affect the consistency or the taste of the
> > white/yolk that remains?
> > I was also, at first, wondering why they were using fertilized
> > chicken eggs at all. Today you avoid that by simply not having
> > roosters around. Perhaps this is evidence that the hens were not
> > penned but were allowed to run around free, with the roosters, and
> > finding what they could to eat.
> > Stefan
> > --------
> Until modern times, chickens were essentially free range. Roosters and
> elderly hens were generally eaten as chicken- the eggs were used as
> eggs. However, since often eggs got laid wherever the hen was when she
> had the urge, it wasn't always possible to determine how old they
> were, and whether or not they'd been set on.
> My eggs are fertile too, but it's very unlikely you'll ever have to
> strain the embryos out of them, simply because the eggs get collected
> every day, unless I'm letting them be set (and I mark any eggs for
> that purpose). And, while I let my girls free range, weather
> permitting, they have nesting boxes where they lay most of their eggs.
> Got 9 yesterday ;-)
> If you look at an egg, the yolk is essentially food for the developing
> chicks, and the white is essentially shock absorption. The reason that
> babies can be shipped all over the US right after birth, is that as
> long as you keep them reasonably warm (and requiring certain numbers
> of chicks/ducklings/goslings/poults to be shipped at one time helps
> this) they don't need to eat for a couple of days, because they're
> still reabsorbing the yolks into their bodies- in essence, feeding
> One thing the hens will do is lay the eggs in a safe place, and leave
> them alone until they have a full clutch. Then they come back and set
> them, and all of them start developing at once, soi they all hatch
> about the same time. My hens will continue to set until about 48 hours
> after the first egg hatches- after that, they give it up as a bad job.
> This has implications today, for my chickens. One thing you do is try
> to save the largest eggs because they're likely to be the most healthy
> (understanding breed differences- last summer I let the girls set the
> banty eggs). If you save those eggs, and keep them above freezing, and
> below setting temp, you can pick and choose which eggs you want to
> save. Johann told me that you can actually keep them in the fridge for
> a few days. Had a dozen I was going to put out- 6 to the Tag Team
> banties, 3 to Princess Layer, and 3 to the black hen, but then worked
> out a deal with a neighbor, where we'll swap eggs, to increase both
> our flocks, and give each of us a wider gene pool.
> But, all my girls lay fertile eggs, and no, I don't strain embryos out of
> Saint Phlip
> Heat it up
> Hit it hard
> Repent as necessary.
> It's the smith who makes the tools, not the tools which make the smith.
> HIPAA Penalties
> 42USC1320d-6 Wrongful disclosure of individually identifiable health
> (a) Offense
> A person who knowingly and in violation of this part-
> (1) uses or causes to be used a unique health identifier;
> (2) obtains individually identifiable health information relating to
> an individual; or
> (3) discloses individually identifiable health information to another
> shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
> (b) Penalties
> A person described in subsection (a) shall-
> (1) be fined not more than $50,000, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or
> Sca-cooks mailing list
> Sca-cooks at lists.ansteorra.org
More information about the Sca-cooks