Does Boiling Sausage Actually Remove Salt?

The food technology school at the University of Costa Rica (UCR) is located in the Rodrigo Facio campus in San José, 11501-2060 Costa Rica.

The food technology school at the University of Costa Rica (UCR) is located in the Rodrigo Facio campus in San José, 11501-2060 Costa Rica.

The food technology school at the University of Costa Rica (UCR) is located in the Rodrigo Facio campus in San José, 11501-2060 Costa Rica.

Two groups at the Universidad de Costa Rica (San José, 11501-2060) are the Centro de Investigación en Enfermedades Tropicales (CIET) and the Sección de Microbiología de Alimentos, Departamento de Microbiología e Inmunología, Facultad de Microbiología.

Two groups at the Universidad de Costa Rica (San José, 11501-2060) are the Centro de Investigación en Enfermedades Tropicales (CIET) and the Sección de Microbiología de Alimentos, Departamento de Microbiología e Inmunología, Facultad de Microbiología.

The food technology school at the University of Costa Rica (UCR) is located in the Rodrigo Facio campus in San José, 11501-2060 Costa Rica.

Several efforts have been made to reduce sodium in meat products due to its demonstrated negative health effects. This study looked at what happened to the physical, chemical, sensory, and microbiological properties of cooked sausages when the salt content was lowered at the same time. 2% and 1. 8%), Na-lactate (2. 8% and 1. 5%) and sodium tripolyphosphate (STPP) (0. 4% and 0. 2%). Salt and STPP reduction affected cooking loss, while no significant differences (P > 0. 05) were obtained in instrumental and sensory texture for all factors. Discrimination tests showed significant perceived differences between some pairs, however, d′ values were below 0. 55 in all comparisons, meaning consumer awareness of the reduction might be irrelevant in a real-life scenario. Taking away both Na-lactate and salt at the same time did not change the product’s microbial stability (psychrotrophic and LAB counts). Getting rid of additives that contain sodium could be a cheap and effective way to lower the total sodium content of cooked sausages without changing their physical, chemical, sensory, or microbiological properties.

It has been shown that eating a lot of sodium can raise blood pressure, which in turn raises the risk of heart disease and other health problems (WHO 2014). Many efforts have been taken worldwide to reduce sodium from food sources. An agreement was made by WHO member states in 1966 to set a voluntary global goal for a 30% relative reduction in salt and sodium intake in the average population. 10 (WHO 2014), with the goal of lowering that number to less than 5 g/day (about 2 g of sodium) by 2025.

Salt, specifically sodium chloride, is the main source of sodium in processed meats. Other chemicals, such as monosodium glutamate (which adds flavor) and sodium phosphates (which bind water) (Puolanne et al. 2001), sodium nitrite/nitrate (preservative and colour stabilizer), sodium lactate (preservative and antioxidant) (Brewer et al. 1995), and sodium erythorbate (reduction agent) (Posthuma et al. 2018). Because salt and other sodium-based additives are technical necessities in meat systems, getting rid of them is a big problem for the meat business. Just adding salt to meat can make it taste better, feel better, and last longer (Ruusunen and Puolanne 2005). Because of this, consumers may think that the quality of meat products has gone down since sodium-containing ingredients have been cut down.

It has been found by several authors that reducing salt directly with no other changes still leads to good consumer acceptance in meat products around 2020 (Aaslyng et al. 2014; Yotsuyanagi et al. 2016; Cluff et al. 2017). Based on these reports, the formulation could have even less sodium by cutting back on other sodium-containing ingredients that consumers would not even notice. However, other implications must be considered due to ingredient functionalities in the meat system.

Sodium lactate is the second most common source of sodium in meat products, after salt. This means that controlling this compound could lead to a bigger drop in total sodium. In contrast, companies are adding sodium lactate when they cut back on salt to make products last longer and make them taste saltier (Ruusunen and Puolanne 2005; Verma and Banerjee 2012; Yotsuyanagi et al. 2016). Thus, partial salt substitution strategies have been extensively studied showing negative results on sensory characteristics. Gou et al. As of 1996, researchers found significant flavor problems with substitutions above 20% using potassium chloride and potassium lactate in fermented sausages and dry-cured loins. Researchers have reported similar results when they replaced 20% of the salt in fermented sausages with mixtures of potassium lactate and glycine. Flavor and texture problems were found (Gelabert et al. 2003).

Along with that, sodium phosphates are often used to make meat products better, even though they increase the total amount of sodium in the food. Phosphate reduction is becoming more of a problem for meat producers because more and more people want functional ingredients that come from natural sources instead of chemical additives (Glorieux et al. 2017). Many attempts have been made to replace phosphates in meat products with other substances, like starches, mushroom powders, and dehydrated beef protein. However, the quality of the taste and tenderness is often lost (Resconi et al. 2016).

Also, ingredients used to replace sodium raise the cost of production, which has a direct effect on the prices of products sold in stores. So, even though products with less sodium are good for you, they will only appeal to a certain group of people. For example, people who care a lot about price might not be able to afford these items.

If the products with less salt taste different to people, they might not like them or accept them as much. This could hurt sales and the product’s reputation. A sensory approach to lowering sodium could help make meat products that people will buy while keeping costs low and quality high. So, the study’s goal is to get a big drop in the amount of sodium in cooked sausages by lowering salt, Na-lactate, and sodium tripolyphosphate (STPP) all at the same time. The goal is to make sure that consumers don’t notice the change in saltiness and that the quality of the final product stays high.

Formulations for cooked sausages are presented in Table . Modifications in concentration of salt, sodium lactate (Na-lactate) and sodium tripolyphosphate (STPP) were studied.

We bought lean meat and back fat from a nearby butcher and cut it into side cubes about 2 cm thick. We then used an Alfa-Laval mincer with a 10 mm plate to make mince. Ingredients were weighed according to the formulation. Lean meat, commercial salt (Sal Sol®, Costa Rica), nitrite salt (6. The 25% nitrite (Chemelco, Holland), the sodium tripolyphosphate (Bundenheim Corp, Germany), and half of the water were mixed together in a bowl chopper (Alpa-Laval, Kramer Grebe, Germany) until the temperature reached 8%20°C. The next parts were added in this order: the rest of the water, the sodium erythorbate from Zhengzhou TuoyangvBio-Engineering Co., China, the sausage seasoning from Baltimore Spice in Costa Rica, the back fat, and the potato starch from Emsland in Germany. Chopping continued until reaching 12 °C. Mixture was then stuffed into 1. 6 cm diameter polyamide casings (Viscofan, Spain) with a hand stuffer. The sausages were then cooked in water in steps, with temperatures of 60 °C for 30 minutes, 70 °C for 30 minutes, and 80 °C until the cold spot of the sausage reached 72 °C. This was done to make sure the quality and safety of the product. As soon as possible, the sausages were put in ice water to cool them down until they reached a minimum temperature of 30 °C. They were then labeled and kept at 3–5 °C until they were analyzed. Three replications of each treatment were made in different production batches.

We did eight different treatments using a 3 × 2 randomized complete block design (batch as a block). Each treatment had three replications (batches) and two levels of each factor (high and low). The factors were salt concentration, Na-lactate concentration, and STPP concentration.

Salt concentration was defined using a regular salt percentage of 2. 2% and a 20% reduced salt content, leading to a final 1. 8% of salt in the formula. The percentages of Na-lactate and STPP in the formula were based on concentrations that are commonly used in the meat industry. This meant that a high concentration (2 8%) and a low concentration (1. 5%) for Na-lactate and for STPP a high concentration of 0. 4% and a low one of 0. 2%.

A pH-meter electrode (Metrohm, 827pH lab, Switzerland) was used directly on the sausage batter at 25 °C to measure the pH.

There was a 25-gram sample of sausage batter that was centrifuged (3220 g, 5 min at 4 °C) to get rid of any air bubbles. The samples were then heated at 20 °C for 20 minutes to make sure the temperature stayed stable. They were then cooked in steps of 30 minutes at 60 °C, 30 minutes at 70 °C, and 30 minutes at 80 °C until they reached 72 °C in the cold spot. After cooking, liquid phase was measured using a 5 ml graduated cylinder. Cooking loss was expressed as percentage of initial sample weight.

Shear force was measured on at least five 1. 5 cm thick slices, made from each treatment and batch of cooked sausages, at room temperature. A Texture Analyser TA. XT plus (Stable Micro Systems Ltd. The Warner–Bratzler shear force test was done with a Warner–Bratzler that had a rectangular slot blade and a crosshead speed of 2 mm/s. Samples were penetrated to 30 mm from their height and force–time curves were recorded.

Ten selected and trained assessors (Civille and Szczesniak 1973) undertook the sensory texture analysis on 1. 5 mm slices of each sample. Using hardness as the descriptor, shear force was determined by cutting the sample in half with a knife. All assessors performed the cutting using the same method, defined during the training step. Samples were given to the judges in a balanced and random order after being coded with three random digit numbers (Lawless and Heymann 2010). Each panelist assessed the eight treatments by duplicate, during two different sessions. A structured 10-point scale was used, with 0 meaning no hardness or very low hardness intensity and 10 meaning very high hardness intensity. Evaluation was undertaken in individual cubicles provided by red light.

Experts did a preliminary bench test on all treatments to find out how different the samples were and what kind of difference it was. A subtle observed difference indicated that discrimination testing was appropriate (Lawless and Heymann 2010). Furthermore, saltiness intensity was chosen as the relevant attribute due to unperceived changes in other attributes.

A 2-Alternative Forced Choice (2-AFC) test was done with 60 sausage eaters between the ages of 18 and 60 (d′ = 1, ± = 0). 05 and 95% power using (Ennis et al. 2014, tables) to see if people could tell the difference in saltiness when Na-lactate and STPP levels were lowered while salt levels stayed the same. One session used regular salt treatments and the second session used treatments with less salt. These sessions were one week apart.

A set of six pairs was presented in both sessions. Each set had all the possible mixes of the four treatments that corresponded to different levels of Na-lactate and STPP for a single salt concentration (Table). Consumers were asked to choose the saltiest sample.

Meat samples that were 1 cm thick were fried in an electric griddle at 60 °C for 2 hours with no oil added. 5 minutes for each side, and were served to customers at room temperature in separate cubicles in a random and even order. Participants were asked to rinse their mouth between pairs. There was a 20-second break between each pair of samples to avoid adaptation and carry-over effects (Cubero-Castillo and Noble 2001).

The people who took part signed an informed consent form that was okayed by the University of Costa Rica’s Scientific Ethics Committee, which is in charge of looking over the sensory protocols (nº VI-4141-2014). As a thank you, they got a small gift.

A randomized complete block design (batch as a block) was used to make four treatments with three replications (different batches). There were two levels of salt in each treatment. 2% and 1. 8%) and two levels of Na-lactate (2. 8% and 1. 5%) using a fixed STPP concentration (0. To find out how many microbes are on solid culture media, we used seven different storage time levels (0,205,207,2012,2014,2022%20, and2028%20days). Phosphates are not considered as direct preservatives (Wang et al. 2013), reason why only the effect of salt and Na-lactate was evaluated on microbiological counts.

A 10 g portion of each sample was aseptically transferred to a sterile stomacher bag. Ninety ml of 0. A laboratory blender from NEUTEC in Albuquerque, New Mexico, was used to add 1% sterile peptone water (PW) and stir for one minute. Ten-fold serial dilutions were made in PW, and 100 µL of each was plated on Tryptic Soy Agar (TSA; Oxoid, Ltd.) twice. , Basingstoke, UK) and Man, Rogosa and Sharpe Agar (MRS; Oxoid, Ltd. , Basingstoke, UK). TSA plates were incubated at 5 °C for 7 days to count total psychrotrophic bacteria. To find out how many lactic acid bacteria (LAB) were present, MRS plates were kept at 25 °C for two days in a microaerophilic environment. Typical colonies were counted and expressed as log CFU/g of sausage.

A three-way ANOVA was used to look at the physical and chemical properties (pH, cooking loss, and instrumental texture) as well as the sensory properties (Na-lactate, STPP, and salt). A two-way ANOVA with interactions was used to find out how the treatments (SL, Sl, sL, and sl) and storage times (0, 5, 7, 12, 14, 21, and 28 days) affected the stability of microbes. A mean comparison Tukey’s test was applied when the main effects were significant. Statistical analysis was performed using the software XLSTAT®.

A one tail binomial analysis was applied to the sensory discrimination tests, Ennis et al. (2014) with α = 0. 05 and 95% power, to show if population could be able to find the difference. Besides, d′ values were calculated to show the magnitude of the difference between sample pairs.

Physicochemical analysis and sensory texture

Values of pH were around 6. 6 ± 0. 1. Na-lactate, STPP and salt presented no significant effect on pH. High pH values were observed on treatments probably due to meat quality factors. DFD (dry, firm, and dark) pork meat is often used in low-cost meat products like the ones this study looked at, which raises the pH levels of the final product. While DFD meat might make the sausage better at holding water, it could also change the microbiology (van der Wal et al. 1988), this issue is discussed below. This kind of cooked sausage is the most popular meat item in Costa Rica because it is cheap and easy to get (Araya-Quesada et al. 2014).

Results of physicochemical analysis are shown in Table . No statistical interactions between simple factors were found allowing mean values to be reported by each factor. Significant changes in cooking losses were observed when using different concentrations of STPP (P = 0. 05) and salt (P = 0. 03) in meat products, as expected (Table ). The batter’s ability to hold together water and fat is linked to salts with high ionic strength, such as salt and phosphates, which make proteins more soluble (Offer and Knight 1988). Besides, when comparing phosphate addition, similar results have been reported by Glorieux et al. (2017), where a significant decrease in cooking loss percentage was obtained by the addition of STPP. No significant differences in cooking losses (P > 0. 05) were obtained at different Na-lactate concentrations, as expected.

Regarding texture, Warner–Bratzler shear force was used to simulate tenderness sensory testing. No significant effect (P > 0. 05) was found on the three factors (Na-lactate, STPP and salt). Average results are shown in Table . Accordingly, O’Flynn et al. (2014) observed no differences on breakfast sausage TPA profiles formulated with different STPP amounts (0%, 0. 25% and 0. 50%). In this study, lowering STPP caused more cooking loss, but it didn’t change the texture of the meat. This effect was likely caused by the STPP’s ability to separate the actomyosin complex even at low levels (Glorieux et al. 2017). Additionally, it has been seen that salt and STPP work together to improve the extraction of myofibrillar proteins (Xiong et al. 2000), which may have led to better fat emulsification and a stronger gel network formation as a result.

Similarly, Cluff et al. (2017) found that using intermediate salt levels had no effect on hardness, as measured by shear force, after 90 days of storage (1, 33 and 1. 84%) on a type of bologna sausage. This results agree with the present study, where intermediate salt levels did not affect shear force.

Since Na-lactate is used to keep food fresh (Hugo and Hugo 2015), it wasn’t expected that there would be any changes to the sausage’s texture.

As expected, the results from the sensory texture test done by a trained panel did not show any differences in cutting hardness between the treatments (P 05). Therefore, these data showed a sodium reduction on emulsion sausages of up to 30% (SLP vs. slp) that might be achievable without affecting texture, in spite of cooking losses.

Results of the two different sensory discrimination tests (regular and reduced salt treatments) are shown in Table .

Table shows a variety of possible starting point scenarios. At first, the sausage had either a normal or a low salt concentration. Next, different mixes of high and low STPP and Na-lactate were added.

It felt less salty when high levels of STPP and Na-lactate were compared to lower levels of both during regular salt treatments [SLP vs. Slp (P = 0. 03)]. The same effect was observed when just STPP was reduced [SLP vs. SLp (P = 0. 05)]. A reduction of Na-lactate without changing STPP did not affect saltiness sensation (SLP vs. SlP and SLp vs. Slp). Saltiness perception was not affected by the reduction of STPP when Na-lactate level was already low (SlP vs. Slp), as well as interchanging the levels of both ingredients (SLp vs. SlP). Reducing Na-lactate achieved a sodium reduction of 13. 5–17. 2% without reducing salt or affecting saltiness. Contradictory, Na-lactate has been found to enhance saltiness perception in some meat products (Verma and Banerjee 2012). O’Connor et al. (1993) discovered that adding Na-lactate made the meat taste saltier until it reached a maximum Na-lactate concentration (1 5%), after which no further saltiness gain was observed. This explains the results of the present study since the minimum level of Na-lactate used was 1. 5%.

We didn’t expect to see results about how salty people thought STPP was because this ingredient is used for its effect on texture rather than taste. It is thought that STPP’s ability to control pH and dissolve myofibrillar proteins could change how salty something tastes. Proteins have been found to have an umami taste (Macleod 1994). Taste is related to hydrosoluble compounds, since they need to be solubilized in saliva (Lawless and Heymann 2010). Myofibrillar proteins that have been dissolved may be able to reach more taste receptors in the mouth, giving a stronger Umami sensation and making saltiness stronger as a result.

On the other hand, lowering sodium-containing ingredients had a different effect on meat products that were already low in salt than on products that were not low in salt. This effect can be explained by Weber’s law, which says that a lower initial concentration is needed for a lower change to be perceived (Johnson et al. 2002). Again, depending on a starting point a reduction was tested. When comparing high levels of STPP and Na-lactate to lower levels of Na-lactate or both ingredients together, people felt less saltiness [sLP vs. slP (P = 0. 03) and sLP vs. slp (P = 0. 05)]. Also, when both levels were interchanged there was no effect on saltiness (sLp vs. slP). Reduced STPP can decrease saltiness sensation only if Na-lactate was at lower level [sLP vs. sLp (P > 0. 05) compared to slP vs. slp (P = 0. [01)], which seems to show that lactate was increasing salt levels, supporting what Verma and Banerjee (2012) said.

It is interesting to observe that only reducing Na-lactate in a reduced salt product (1. 8%), manufacturers could achieve between 16. 1 and 20. 3% sodium reductions without consumers’ awareness. Because lactate can be used as a preservative, it is important to make sure the product is stable for microbes when lowering it (Ruusunen and Puolanne 2005). The meat industry often adds Na-lactate to low-salt meat products because it makes them last longer and make people think they are saltier (Papadopoulos et al. 1991; Vote et al. (2000); however, this ingredient must be limited in meat products because it adds a lot of sodium to the formula and In this study, a change from 2. 8 to 1. 5.5% of Na-lactate caused a small change in the feeling of saltiness, which depended on the salt and STPP levels at the start.

The reduction of 25% STPP did not cause significant changes in the texture of the sausages, but it did have an effect on how salty they felt, depending on the concentration of Na-lactate, as mentioned above. While sodium phosphates are mostly used to improve the texture of meat and not to add saltiness (Puolanne and Terrell 1993), some authors have found that using different amounts of STPP in emulsified sausages can change how salty people think they are (O’Flynn et al. 2014). These results agree with the effect found in our study.

Although there were noticeable differences, all of the 2-AFC tests had a small d′. This means that the difference is not big enough for the consumer to notice when they are not seeing both stimuli at the same time. O’Mahony and Rousseau (2003) say that a d′ value of 1 is the threshold value. This means that customers have just begun to notice the difference. In this study, all d′ values were below 0. 55, which meant that differences in saltiness were still small and that most people wouldn’t notice the changes, so they didn’t matter. Since saltiness is the important thing to tell the difference between, it would be even harder to find the difference between other things that aren’t important.

Since d values were low in all comparisons, the most significant decrease in sodium was observed around 2020 for both regular and low-sodium cooked sausages. This value is closer to the 20% reduction goal set by WHO (WHO 2014), and it has the added benefit of not needing replacements, which lowers the cost of production. Being conservative and taking into account important differences in sensory perception, a 2017 sodium reduction could be reached by only lowering Na-lactate while keeping STPP high (0. 4%). Previous studies report 20% salt reduction in meat products with good acceptability by the consumers (Aaslyng et al. 2014; Cluff et al. 2017), that represents 8–10% sodium reduction, depending on the formula. So, it is suggested that the concentrations of Na-lactate and STPP in the meat product be checked to see if sodium-containing additives can be cut down before any salt reduction is made. This could be an appropriate strategy to achieve greater total sodium reductions in meat products. This method could also be used for other food items that have complex flavors (sour, sweet, aromatic, and umami) and ingredients that contain sodium.

In addition, it would be interesting to compare high and low salt levels using 2-AFC tests in future research to see how the three factors (salt, STPP, and Na-lactate) affect how salty something tastes.

Microbiological stability results for cooked sausages formulated with different levels of salt and Na-lactate are shown in Table . Since Na-lactate has been used to stop the growth of microbes in processed meat products for a long time, it was chosen over phosphates for the microbe studies.

Overall, no differences (P > 0. 05) were found between the four types of cooked sausage (SL, Sl, sL, and sl), no matter what kind of microbes were tested (psychrotrophic bacteria and LAB). A significant inhibition (P < 0. 05) of LAB was found in treatment sl (1. 8% NaCl-1. 5% Na-lactate) during the first 7 days of storage at 3–5 °C. Interestingly, a lower inhibition was observed when using high concentrations of Na-lactate (2. 8%). Therefore, Teusink and Molenaar (2017) found that LAB that use “mixed acid fermentation” pathways tend to grow faster when there is more lactate. This may be typical for microorganisms that cause spoilage. Some lactic acid bacteria can also use lactate as a building block to make pyruvate and energy (Liu 2003). This could explain why lower concentrations of lactate do not necessarily favor replication of LAB. But after 12 days of storage, the lactic acid bacteria in treatment SL started to grow again, and they continued to do this until the end of storage (Table).

No significant differences were obtained among the four treatments after day 7 for the two types of microorganisms. Counts reached the maximum level around 5. 5 log CFU/g for psychrotrophic bacteria and 5. 2 log CFU/g for LAB.

Our results show that lowering the amounts of salt and Na-lactate did not have a big effect on the microbe stability of cooked sausages, which is similar to what other studies have found. Yotsuyanagi et al. (2016) found that the numbers of mesophilic microorganisms and LAB did not differ significantly between frankfurters made with different amounts of NaCl (1 0, 1. 3 and 1. 75%) and 1. 0% of Na-lactate; in fact, in this study, the final counts for LAB (5. 1 Log CFU/g) were similar to the final counts reported in our study. Similarly, Aaslyng et al. (2014) found that total aerobic counts and LAB were not significantly different in hotdog sausages made with different amounts of NaCl (2, 3). 0, 2. 8 and 3. 6%); final populations of lactic acid bacteria in this study were between 3. 9 and 5. 4 log CFU/g. Also, Devlieghere et al. (2009) demonstrated that with the incorporation of 2. It is possible to lower salt levels from 2% of a mixture of K-lactate and sodium diacetate. 5 to 1. 5%, without stopping the growth of lactic acid bacteria; because K-lactate has a similar structure and bactericidal activity as Na-lactate, these results confirm that lactates can be used to lower the salt content of meat products.

Even though salt can be reduced without affecting the stability of microbes, it is still thought that salt and Na-lactate must be used together to stop Listeria monocytogenes from growing (Dussault et al. 2016). In fact, in the absence of lactate, 4. 5% NaCl is required to effectively depress replication of L. monocytogenes to safe levels, but an addition of 1% or 2% of lactate requires NaCl concentrations of 3. 5% and 0. 5%, respectively (Doyle and Glass 2010).

Cutting down on salt, Na-lactate, and STPP all at the same time could be a good way to lower the total amount of sodium in cooked sausages. Depending on the initial formulation, up to 30% sodium reduction could be achieved while keeping texture characteristics. Because the differences in how the products felt were small in all of the tests, the fact that customers noticed the decrease may have been rare and not important. Generally, a sodium reduction as high as 2020% may be possible for both regular and low-sodium cooked sausages by only removing sodium-containing ingredients and not affecting their microbiological stability (psychrotrophic and LAB). As a result, lowering the amount of sodium-containing additives at the same time, as was done in this study, could be a useful and inexpensive way to lower the amount of sodium in meat products.

This research was financed by University of Costa Rica. The authors would like to thank the consumers that participated in the sensory panels.

How to Remove Salt and Nitrates from SPAM

FAQ

Can you boil the salt out of meat?

Does boiling hot dogs remove sodium?

What to do with too salty sausage?

Does boiling water remove salt content?

How can I reduce the saltiness of sausage?

One of the easiest ways to reduce the saltiness of sausage is to soak it in water for a few hours. This will help draw out some of the salt. To do this, place the sausage in a bowl or container and cover it with water. Let it soak for at least 2-3 hours, or overnight if possible.

Is sausage casing healthier option to eat?

Cellulose casings and some natural casings are perfectly fine to eat. Sausage casings are used to hold and shape filling inside so that it can be cooked. There are natural sausage casings and synthetic varieties, and most of them are edible. The healthiest way to cook them is by boiling or baking. Sausages provide high levels of vitamin B12 and iron, both of which are essential for healthy red blood cells and hemoglobin production.

How can I make sausage less salty?

To make sausage less salty, place it in a pot or skillet and add enough unsalted broth or water to cover it halfway. Bring the liquid to a boil, then reduce the heat and let the sausage simmer until cooked through. The broth or water will help to draw out some of the salt.

How do you keep sausage from bursting while boiling?

Pricking: Piercing the sausage with a fork or making small slits along its length can prevent it from bursting while boiling. This step allows steam to escape and helps the sausage cook evenly. Bringing to Room Temperature: Allowing the sausage to come to room temperature for about 20-30 minutes before boiling can help it cook more evenly.