• 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:
. In the case of the LBT, there so far has been nothing else added to the differential that meets all the observations.
Click to expand...
How do you know this?
One does not just toss out the only thing on the dif list because something you aren't aware of might be the actual diagnosis. You test the hypothesis and if it fails you continue looking.
Click to expand...

You don't seem to allow for even the remotest possibility that anything else might be on the dif list. Some have been suggested, grind types, times ground, different cuts from the cow, cooking types, length of time under the warmer--that's only a small sample of the innumerable factors that can affect ground beef from source to ingestion. LBT might even be the cause of the problem you noticed----but at this time you don't have the evidence to conclude that.
 
Ryokan said:
Especially when speaking about oneself...
Click to expand...
I find nothing unskeptical in knowing one's observational skills. What is silly is assuming we can never observe anything objectively or we can never trust our observations. When you understand how the brain filters observations you can actually make accurate evaluations of the evidence. If you stereotype every single observation as unreliable, how do you get through the day?
 
Silly Green Monkey said:
How do you know this?


You don't seem to allow for even the remotest possibility that anything else might be on the dif list.
Click to expand...
You are misinterpreting what I said. I said no alternative hypotheses that fit ALL the evidence have been presented, not that no such alternative explanations could possibly exist.


Silly Green Monkey said:
Some have been suggested, grind types, times ground, different cuts from the cow, cooking types, length of time under the warmer--that's only a small sample of the innumerable factors that can affect ground beef from source to ingestion. LBT might even be the cause of the problem you noticed----but at this time you don't have the evidence to conclude that.
Click to expand...
And I have addressed these alternative hypotheses. That people ignore the reasons these hypotheses don't fit all the evidence does not make the hypotheses fit the evidence.
 
I ask again, have any of you people arguing so vociferously that I couldn't possibly have noticed a difference in the texture in hamburger with LBT added tried yourselves to taste test two samples, one with, one without?

No, or at least no one has said they tried it themselves, just that they haven't noticed a change. Yet you call me unskeptical while arguing something you also only hypothesize yourselves: that there's no effect on burger texture when LBT is added.

I challenge you to test it. Go to Walmart, buy some of each and try it. Test your own hypotheses that there is no difference.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Walmart claims to be selling burger with and without and if so that should solve the sample problem.

As for the rest, the study will be randomized and blinded, I know how to do that. I can understand you don't know that I know that, but it'll be done right and I'll describe the methodology when the details are worked out.


However, don't expect this to be a master's thesis here. It'll be enough to show LBT changes the texture. If people want to nitpick the test they are going to reject the results regardless of how well the test is done.
Click to expand...
Okay, I'll wait for the details then.

I don't think you should ignore preference though. If you yourself were able to detect a texture difference, but liked one just as well as another, not of this would have come up. You would be happily buying whatever was available and not caring which was which.

ETA: labeling food based on texture really seems like a non-starter to me. There wouldn't be room on package labels to describe all the production processes.
 
Last edited:
Marcus said:
Okay, I'll wait for the details then.

I don't think you should ignore preference though. If you yourself were able to detect a texture difference, but liked one just as well as another, not of this would have come up. You would be happily buying whatever was available and not caring which was which.
Click to expand...
I'm not quite sure what you are getting at. I don't doubt some people could like the LBT burger. The texture in question disgusts me and I don't trust an industry ad that says some people preferred it. But I have no reason to think it's impossible that anyone could prefer it.

But if someone prefers one or the other, what will that tell us about whether the LBT is indeed the cause of the disgusting texture I've been complaining about?

Marcus said:
ETA: labeling food based on texture really seems like a non-starter to me. There wouldn't be room on package labels to describe all the production processes.
Click to expand...
While the industry might claim LBT is merely a differently processed meat, a number of things suggest that isn't true. In particular, as I've noted over and over, if the stuff is within the parameters of other cuts of meat made into hamburger, why don't you see 100% LBT hamburger? Why did they find that beyond 15% the stuff was unacceptable in their marketing studies?

Given the above is evidence LBT is not the same as hamburger, shouldn't consumers have a right to know it's been added to their hamburger?
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I'm not quite sure what you are getting at. I don't doubt some people could like the LBT burger. The texture in question disgusts me and I don't trust an industry ad that says some people preferred it. But I have no reason to think it's impossible that anyone could prefer it.

But if someone prefers one or the other, what will that tell us about whether the LBT is indeed the cause of the disgusting texture I've been complaining about?
Click to expand...
I suppose it's because I'm not solely interested in finding out if you were right about the LFTB being the cause of your perceived texture difference.
While the industry might claim LBT is merely a differently processed meat, a number of things suggest that isn't true. In particular, as I've noted over and over, if the stuff is within the parameters of other cuts of meat made into hamburger, why don't you see 100% LBT hamburger? Why did they find that beyond 15% the stuff was unacceptable in their marketing studies?
Click to expand...
That seems pretty obvious. The stuff has no fat, it would make terrible hamburger. It also has a fine texture, it's right there in the name, the industry calls it lean finely textured beef. The question, at least the one you are interested in, is whether it is easily detectable in 15% concentration.
Given the above is evidence LBT is not the same as hamburger, shouldn't consumers have a right to know it's been added to their hamburger?
Click to expand...
I don't think we need new rules for this. It opens the door for an avalanche of new labeling requirements. If companies want to take advantage of the "pink slime" meme, they can advertise "our meat has no pink slime!", Otherwise people like you can find a brand they like.
 
Marcus said:
I suppose it's because I'm not solely interested in finding out if you were right about the LFTB being the cause of your perceived texture difference.
Click to expand...
I'll include a preference question out of curiosity.

Marcus said:
That seems pretty obvious. The stuff has no fat, it would make terrible hamburger. It also has a fine texture, it's right there in the name, the industry calls it lean finely textured beef.
Click to expand...
"Finely textured" is market speak. The scientists who saw it called it slime.

Are you a Dilbert fan? Do you recall the "The Name" episode?
Dilmom: Why don't you call your product the Gruntmaster 6000?
Dilbert: What kind of product do you see when you imagine a Gruntmaster 6000?
Dilmom: Well it's a stripped-down version of the Gruntmaster 9000 of course. But it's software-upgradeable.
Click to expand...
Why do you think product naming is such a huge business? Framing, branding, naming, if you haven't noticed the 'trending' I suggest you take a look. Ever wonder why they named a bill in the US Congress, "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001"?
So they could call it the USA Patriot Act.
I could fill pages with examples of market-speak intended to deceive. I can't believe I have to in a forum of otherwise well informed individuals.

Are you as well ignoring the actual analysis of LBT compared to ground chuck on the basis of Furcifer's pure speculation? Do you see anything other than Furcifer's assertion in this thread that the range of usual hamburger can have anything like the LBT analysis revealed? Because all I see is an unsupported assertion.


Marcus said:
The question, at least the one you are interested in, is whether it is easily detectable in 15% concentration.I don't think we need new rules for this. It opens the door for an avalanche of new labeling requirements. If companies want to take advantage of the "pink slime" meme, they can advertise "our meat has no pink slime!", Otherwise people like you can find a brand they like.
Click to expand...
I'd like the option of finding that brand based on labeling thank you. Who are you to decide it shouldn't matter to me if I indeed confirm LBT ruins burger for me? Do I have to keep eliminating brands only after wasting my time and money trying them?
 
Ryokan said:
Why is it disgusting? I would have no problems eating any of that. In fact, I know I have and that I will again. I think it's great that we have found methods to use more of the animal. Less waste. It's ethical and it's environmental.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't care either if I didn't find the texture of burger it's been added to disgusting. If it turns out LBT is not the cause then I'll keep buying Whole Foods fresh ground, but if I do confirm what the evidence supports, I have a legitimate reason to expect the stuff to be on the label.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I think I'll see if support of the bill is on change.org and add a petition if it is not:

Introducing REAL Beef Act to require pink slime labeling
Click to expand...


I think a petition supporting the REAL BEEF act or demanding the USDA make labeling required would be a great idea. :)

It's not likely it would get the same attention as Bettina Siegel's petition. From what I understand Change.org selects certain petitions to feature and email their members to sign. With out that selection it wouldn't get nearly as many signatures. I wonder if Bettina Siegel would be interested in starting a second petition.......
 
Ryokan said:
Why is it disgusting? I would have no problems eating any of that. In fact, I know I have and that I will again. I think it's great that we have found methods to use more of the animal. Less waste. It's ethical and it's environmental.
Click to expand...


Disgusting was actually from the title of the article:
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/forkintheroad/2012/05/a_handy_disgust.php

I really just want it labeled. It was very hurtful to me that this was snuck into my food without my knowledge. I'm still :( about that. I think the Beef industry is missing the point by hammering on about it being 100% beef. It is processed completely differently and should be labeled.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I'll include a preference question out of curiosity.

"Finely textured" is market speak. The scientists who saw it called it slime.

Are you a Dilbert fan? Do you recall the "The Name" episode? Why do you think
Click to expand...

Calling it "slime" is the exact same process in reverse.


Also, soap is slime. You are bathing by rubbing slime all over yourself every morning. My chemistry professor, a scientist, called it slime.


Evil people at Dial and Irish Spring! Evil liars! :mad:



:)
 
Last edited:
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