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

Pink Slime

Joey McGee said:
Oh no! SG do you think that BPI paid off this judge just like they paid off all of those laboratories who said that the texture was preferred by more people?
Yeah it couldn't have anything to do with trying to get justice for their lost profits and hundreds of jobs lost, it's about "free speech" being chilled? What the **** lol
Click to expand...
I see you continue to distort the issues and my posts.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
While I hope the news media that reported on the slime prevails, I was not concerned about the safety of the product. My issue was complaining multiple times to the folks behind the meat counters that something was different about the hamburger and I didn't like it. The answer was time and time again, nothing is different. That was a lie. Perhaps because the folks answering didn't know, but nonetheless the answer was a lie. IMO I had a right to a truthful answer.

At this time I've not found the bad texture in beef ground in-store. I continue to avoid anything packaged that I cannot be assured doesn't have the LFTB in it. And I have not encountered the disgusting texture in burger that had been an issue for me.
Click to expand...

Seriously? I can honestly say this complaint probably just made the counter person roll their eyes. Do you think the schmuck making minimum wage is getting paid well enough to know every detail of the meat? If you don't like it at one place go to another, hassling the guy behind the counter is neither going to be productive nor fun for anyone involved

We are not taking cyanide here, nor anything unsafe if quality is an issue, spend more to get better meat and avoid being " that guy" that hold up business with silly questions that could be easily remedied by taking his business elsewhere. If enough people hate the texture that much they will stop using it.
 
Aepervius said:
Strawman alert. It was not said it was NOT beef, it was said it was low quality beef passed off as higher quality one.
Click to expand...
It's not actually low quality beef either. Look I have found a cute picture to explain.

http://www.beefisbeef.com/assets/content/MakingOfGroundBeef.jpg

The molecules are the same. The nutrition is the same. It actually improves the taste, texture, and nutritional balance of ground beef. So honestly, they weren't passing anything off at all.

Since we've been over the available evidence here over, and over, and over, I think it will help to wait until the court case gets under way when these claims will be tested in court rather than continue to bicker, unless anyone has some new evidence that it is a poorer product.
And reconstituted ham is also ham but there are good reason why here it MUST be indicated it was prepared so, and when used in other products as ham (like pizza) it must be indicated as such.

And reconsituted chicken is also chicken ETA and here again it must be indicated when as such, as opposed to chicken breast.

But I find that interresting that you used such a strawman. Too bad I only saw that today.
Click to expand...
We're not talking about reconstituted beef. And you are lecturing me on strawmen :covereyes
AGAIN it is not about what it is or not, but the right as consumer to chose what it wants and BE informed on what he is served.
Click to expand...
OK GREAT, no one was trying to hide anything, there are thousands of facts about food production that people have a right to know that producers aren't forced to tell them... should we require food producers to provide free books on every detail of their procedures? Should a booklet come with every meat product? :rolleyes: The USDA decided it didn't need to be labelled differently for a reason, it decides lots of things do. And it didn't change that after this, it merely allowed it to as an option! Maybe lobby the USDA ;)
 
Prometheus said:
That said I sometimes get an awful "grisly" texture when grinding my own, even with top quality cuts. I find this never happens if I pass the meat through the grinder twice, nor if I sharpen the cutting blades first and push the meat through very slowly. I think it likely occurs in commercial beef when producers try to cut costs by saving time.
Click to expand...
Skeptic Ginger said:
...complaining multiple times to the folks behind the meat counters that something was different about the hamburger and I didn't like it. The answer was time and time again, nothing is different. That was a lie. Perhaps because the folks answering didn't know, but nonetheless the answer was a lie. IMO I had a right to a truthful answer.
Click to expand...
And you know for sure that "pink slime" was the offender here? :boggled:

Hmmm I enjoy sticking to the facts of the case. At times, I think it's helpful to remember how this all got started. Just think of Jamie Oliver throwing household ammonia all over some beef and then throwing it into a washing machine.



Jamie Oliver: What do you think of that?
Some Guy: I don't like it.

Hilarious!

Remember what network that show was on? ABC of course! Epic stupid, soon to be an epic fail.
 
sadhatter said:
Seriously? I can honestly say this complaint probably just made the counter person roll their eyes. Do you think the schmuck making minimum wage is getting paid well enough to know every detail of the meat? If you don't like it at one place go to another, hassling the guy behind the counter is neither going to be productive nor fun for anyone involved

We are not taking cyanide here, nor anything unsafe if quality is an issue, spend more to get better meat and avoid being " that guy" that hold up business with silly questions that could be easily remedied by taking his business elsewhere. If enough people hate the texture that much they will stop using it.
Click to expand...
I know it's a long thread to read through, but that cherry picking misses a lot of the details.

The industry making pink slime, through lobbying and the industry government revolving door (which in this case paid one of the regulators with more than a million for a 4 day/year job), got the stuff declared "beef" even though it was 70% connective tissue and not muscle meat. The result was it didn't have to be labeled.

When not labeling the product honestly came back to bite the industry in the butt, they whined that it was the news media and the public's fault they lost the bulk of their customers.

As for the safety issue, while it wasn't my issue, there was evidence some of the products had excessive ammonia and not all the claimed bactericidal claims made by the processors stood the test. It wasn't taste or smell that I had a problem with, it was texture. And I cook burger thoroughly so that wasn't an issue for me.

But the additive was in large amounts of burger that went to school kitchens. I don't trust every school kitchen to properly cook every ounce of burger so residual e-coli is most certainly an issue for large scale cooking operations that make food for kid's lunches.

The USDA and/or FDA testing was revealed to be flawed when it came to this product.


What do you have against simple honest labeling and proper food safety testing?
 
Last edited:
As for your dishonest industry, it's no surprise they are sneaking back in:
Pink Slime Returns to School Lunches
As of Sept. 3, seven states put in orders to the USDA for about 2 million pounds of beef that may contain the controversial product for the meals they serve in the 2013-14 school year. At this time last year there were only three states — Iowa, Nebraska and South Dakota — that had put in orders for beef that may contain lean finely textured beef.

But as schools across the country grapple with tight budgets, some are changing their minds and accepting the lower-price alternative product that brings down the price of the food they serve. Schools in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Texas have now done an about face and also put in orders with the USDA for ground beef that may contain the product, government data obtained by POLITICO reveal.
Click to expand...

At least some processors have opted for honest labeling: Cargill to label meat after 'pink slime' uproar.

Too bad they are leaving it up to the retailer to pass the information on to the consumer.
Cargill's new packaging will state that a product "contains Finely Textured Beef" on boxes of ground beef that retailers repackage for sale to the public, company officials said.

By next year's grilling season, Cargill plans to have the same language printed on its branded packages of ground beef that are sold directly to consumers.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Tendons and hyde? Preposterous nonsense.

Connective tissues, not only have we beat that issue to death here already, it's part of the *********** court case! So is all of the other nonsense you are spewing about the company and the history of the product. You can search for connective tissue. e coli., jo ann smith and other made-up nonsense in the final complaint.

http://beefisbeef.com/assets/content/FINALComplaint1.pdf

LOL no wonder you hope ABC wins, you're making all of the same made-up and slanderous claims!
 
Hide, yes it was documented that the trim included in LFTB was close to the hide, meaning scraped from the inside of the hide. And tendons make up a big part of the trim used.

Are you still denying the 70% connective tissue that was found in the university analysis? That's right, you've claimed repeatedly the trim was mostly muscle meat when all the sources say otherwise.
 
As we have been over a hundred *********** times, even the author of that study doesn't agree with you, you are doing your own reading into it, and you are failing incredibly hard.

From the lawsuit...

Once they arrive at a BPI facility, the beef trimmings enter a de-sinewer in which cartilage, connective tissue, and other pieces that may incidentally accompany the trimmings are removed, leaving only the muscle tissue and fat. This process, combined with the process used by beef processing plants before the beef trimmings are sent to BPI, helps ensure that the final product produced by BPI does not contain cartilage and connective tissues.
Click to expand...

This is central to the court case. I assume you haven't read it, perhaps you are worried that it will contain elements that are unpalatable to you.

These claims will all be tested in court, so I'd rather not waste any more of my life discussing them. Perhaps we can reopen the fun later on!
 
Joey McGee said:
It's not actually low quality beef either. Look I have found a cute picture to explain.

http://www.beefisbeef.com/assets/content/MakingOfGroundBeef.jpg

The molecules are the same. The nutrition is the same. It actually improves the taste, texture, and nutritional balance of ground beef. So honestly, they weren't passing anything off at all.
Click to expand...

You know this is why we have law about truth in labelling in Europe. Because people abuse the "it is the same molecule, nutrition the same" argument to pass off lower quality stuff. Thus passing "reconsituted ham" as ham, or "reconsituted chicken" as chicken - funny how you did not evena ddress that and tried to ignore it. Which is exactly what the whole debacle is about.

I also note that you give a cute picture which has nothing to do with the argument.
 
Aepervius said:
You know this is why we have law about truth in labelling in Europe. Because people abuse the "it is the same molecule, nutrition the same" argument to pass off lower quality stuff. Thus passing "reconsituted ham" as ham, or "reconsituted chicken" as chicken - funny how you did not evena ddress that and tried to ignore it. Which is exactly what the whole debacle is about.

I also note that you give a cute picture which has nothing to do with the argument.
Click to expand...
No you just don't know what you're talking about. I'll try again. If you had a lot of time and a variety of knives you could sit there with these trimmings and cut most of the meat out by hand. But it would take forever to separate from the fat and it wouldn't be worth the time. Knowing this, some genius invented a way to do it by centrifuge. Brilliant!

Chemophobes, conspiracy theorists, anti-corporate activists, long list of kooks that love this subject. The outcome of the case will be big news and hopefully will cause insane amounts of indignation and rage.
 
Feel free to bump the thread then, Joey, when the case is decided. In the meantime you are just repeating yourself.
 
Joey McGee said:
No you just don't know what you're talking about. I'll try again. If you had a lot of time and a variety of knives you could sit there with these trimmings and cut most of the meat out by hand. But it would take forever to separate from the fat and it wouldn't be worth the time. Knowing this, some genius invented a way to do it by centrifuge. Brilliant!
Click to expand...

The trouble with that statement is central to this whole debate. It assumes that anything other than fat is "lean beef", but connective tissue is not something most people would class as beef.

"Fractionation of proteins showed the LFTB to be relatively high in insoluble proteins and collagen compared to beef chuck." link

The trick the LFTB producers have pulled off is to get a definition that paints the product in a favourable light and allows them infinite wriggle-room to parrot "But it's lean beef!".
 
Joey McGee said:
No you just don't know what you're talking about. I'll try again. If you had a lot of time and a variety of knives you could sit there with these trimmings and cut most of the meat out by hand. But it would take forever to separate from the fat and it wouldn't be worth the time. Knowing this, some genius invented a way to do it by centrifuge. Brilliant!

Chemophobes, conspiracy theorists, anti-corporate activists, long list of kooks that love this subject. The outcome of the case will be big news and hopefully will cause insane amounts of indignation and rage.
Click to expand...

You are the one which keep ignoring what I keep writing.

AGAIN.

This is a similar process that ham producer and chicken producer use to get more "scraps" and *form* it into ham and chicken. And it has long been recognized as an inferior products compared to "noble" meat slice and must be labelled as such when sold. Protest as much as you want. I am glad that kind of shenanigan (labelling reformed meat as normal) is frowned upon here.
 
Last edited:
GlennB said:
Yeah, me too. I had a big handful of cashew nuts, and I'm pretty sure they weren't reconstituted cashew shells ;)

<backs off slowly>
Click to expand...

So it wasn't cashew butter. Cashew butter sounds great though.

Aepervius said:
Funny you are saying that, I am eating the rest of a hacked steak , 100% cut from beef and wolfed, nothing reconsituted. In fact they make it before your own very eyes.
Click to expand...

I don't think you're understanding me, I want to put 'pink slime' on a cracker or piece of bread and eat it. They should can the stuff. Potted meat is already a (rare) treat for me.
 
Aepervius said:
You are the one which keep ignoring what I keep writing.

AGAIN.

This is a similar process that ham producer and chicken producer use to get more "scraps" and *form* it into ham and chicken. And it has long been recognized as an inferior products compared to "noble" meat slice and must be labelled as such when sold. Protest as much as you want. I am glad that kind of shenanigan (labelling reformed meat as normal) is frowned upon here.
Click to expand...

Except in the case of lftb, it's not reconstituted, and no one is pretending it's something it isn't. It's just ground beef.
 
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