• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Pink Slime

Skeptic Ginger said:
All they had to do was be honest. It would have blown over and those who wanted to save 3 cents a pound on their burger would have gone right back to being oblivious about it.

But they wanted to have the stuff declared the same as the rest of the burger despite the fact it wasn't. And if you read the NYTs link I posted above, it sounds like Beef Products, Inc went out of it's way to juggle safety and profits, often favoring profits over safety. But that probably was business as usual for many food producers.
Click to expand...

And, it has been so for a good bit of time: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle



Just more subtle - and politicians still fight believing it for some reason.
 
That's hilarious. Even the food "experts" couldn't tell the difference
Click to expand...
Well, all they did was go by how the sausages tasted. Everything that tasted or looked badly contained "pink slime" in their eyes.

Scientific:rolleyes:. Like the organic fad all over again.
 
Joey McGee said:
Oh please...



Except for this time independent food scientists worldwide are declaring it safe and nutritious! What a tragic dystopian nightmare novel waiting to be written :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Cute, they had pets then too. And, all being asked is they be required to label it . Their choice, but if I can't know, I have no reason to trust them and buy ground beef.
 
Pets? Are you telling us this food is not fit for human consumption? You realize the "dog food" line is hysterical and stupid, right? No actual reason for mentioning the history of meat production when we're talking about one specific product that is meant for one specific thing. That's just vapid sensationalism.

[eta]
Is it true that these trimmings previously were only used for pet food and oil and were unfit for human consumption, as one media outlet claimed?

That statement is patently false. Beef trimmings are edible. No process can make an inedible product edible. What the process does is separate the lean meat from the fat, which was previously near impossible to accomplish through knife trimming by hand.

Source, the company, http://beefisbeef.com/faq-3/
Click to expand...
Hmmmm, well we'll need some evidence to back up the dog claim eh? Thing is dude, after "The Jungle" was published a real government task force was sent and actually found some of the things were real. This time, all of the feds are on BPI's side, and there is no evidence to back up this stupid "it's dog food" claim.[/eta]

What should they label it? How should the description of the term appear in the food glossary? I'm riveted.

They are going to voluntarily label it now. They've realized they can't trust YOU, the paranoid, persecutory consumer, terrified of being away from the herd...
 
Last edited:
Joey, you have not answered one simple question that would prove or refute your premise. Why don't they make hamburger with 100% LBT? Why not even make it with 50%?
 
Joey McGee said:
They are going to voluntarily label it now. They've realized they can't trust YOU, the paranoid, persecutory consumer, terrified of being away from the herd...
Click to expand...


Funny, everyone else thought it's the consumers that realized they cannot trust the crap-food-industry.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Joey, you have not answered one simple question that would prove or refute your premise. Why don't they make hamburger with 100% LBT? Why not even make it with 50%?
Click to expand...

I don't know. Maybe they're afraid of people poisoning the well even further with a loud, public decrying of "the ickies".


Maybe it would be the best burger you ever ate. Although, if it is as lean as it is claimed, you'd probably wanna add beef fat back to it first.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Joey, you have not answered one simple question that would prove or refute your premise. Why don't they make hamburger with 100% LBT? Why not even make it with 50%?
Click to expand...

I hope you mean aside from the fact the resulting product would in all likelihood have the texture of the beef chunks in a Dinty Moore stew? :p
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Joey, you have not answered one simple question that would prove or refute your premise. Why don't they make hamburger with 100% LBT? Why not even make it with 50%?
Click to expand...
I didn't neglect to answer anyone's question on this, did I? What post was that in?

I couldn't find an official explanation from the USDA on this matter in 7 minutes of googling, all I found was other people wondering the same thing. Perhaps if you want to know the USDA would reply to an email inquiry :) I'm pretty sure that a) the matter of it's texture effects and b) the fat content and the resulting effect on the function of the product (as Furcifer and Beerina noted) are the reason for that, but I'm open to a credible source (the USDA basically being the only one we should accept, not some cat in the media) saying it's because lftb is ground up evil. There's nothing making the product unhealthy or lacking nutrition in the evidence pool now, this isn't going to do it either.

You're the one making the claim that the limit implies something nefarious about the product, the onus is on you to prove that, but, unfortunately, that would take some willpower for investigation. If no one has exploited this fact yet, it's probably because there is an innocent reason for it.
 
Last edited:
I on occasion have treated myself to a product known as 'potted meat'.

That is pink meat slime.

It's great on crackers.
 
Oliver said:
Funny, everyone else thought it's the consumers that realized they cannot trust the crap-food-industry.
Click to expand...
Everyone else? Gee what fallacy is that again? Weasel words...

Hey let's forget the fact that the public has come out in support of this product in a very significant way. Let's ignore how this thread is split with a variety of viewpoints.

There are problems with the food industry and no one should "trust" the USDA and they companies to follow the law, or for that matter the people on the hill to make intelligent laws. But neither should companies trust that the media, the consumer and the internet will have their best interests at heart when the next disinformation campaign is started by idiots like Jamie Oliver. These entities are prone to rabid, insane acts of stupidity.
 
slingblade said:
No wonder I don't care/haven't noticed it in ground beef. I love potted meat.
Click to expand...

Is that the stuff in the classic "key" opener can, got a picture of a cow on the side and comes from Brazil? I can't go camping without that stuff.
 
Furcifer said:
Is that the stuff in the classic "key" opener can, got a picture of a cow on the side and comes from Brazil? I can't go camping without that stuff.
Click to expand...

There may be some like that, but what I buy is made by Armour meats, comes in a very small, round can, and has a pop-top.
 
slingblade said:
There may be some like that, but what I buy is made by Armour meats, comes in a very small, round can, and has a pop-top.
Click to expand...

Must be a different product altogether then. I reckon it's "corned beef", but it sure ain't brisket.
 
Myriad said:
I don't for a moment think that concentrating and then reconstituting juice from concentrate is inherently unhealthy, is a significant health hazard, makes any difference nutritionally, or is "not really juice." I don't even claim to be able to taste the difference.
Click to expand...

Apparently they do really horrible things to oranges, in order to keep them "fresh" until they squeeze them. Lately I've been sticking to concentrate, rather than "fresh squeezed".
 
Furcifer said:
Must be a different product altogether then. I reckon it's "corned beef", but it sure ain't brisket.
Click to expand...

Potted meat is more like a paste, in consistency. Ever bought deviled ham in a can? Kind of like that, but much smoother.

It's made with tripe, tongue, hearts, and so forth. There's also some chicken in it, but Armour and Hormel seem (by taste alone, mind you) to put in less chicken than the Libby's brand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom