Pink Slime

[Joey McGee]

It's fine that you like Spam, hotdogs, etc. I don't care if the product exists. Just put a ****** LABEL on it so the consumer has a choice on if they want to consume it or not.

What hope does the product have when people who supposedly just want the labeling changed are doing it for faulty reasons? Chemophobes, neo-luddites, and life-meaning-starved slacktivists don't have a good record for making intelligent, fact-based food choices.

My choice would be NOT, but if it was in a product like a beef sausage I would probably still eat it if served at a BBQ. I think what is in hotdogs is gross but still have one occasionally. The choice should be the consumers though.

What kind of choice do they have when people are making choices based on misinformation and fearmongering such as

"Being fed what is meant to be dog food is being nutritionally poisoned"

Which is your quote by the way... You'll eat nutritionally poisoned dog food as long as it's in a sausage? Hell even I wouldn't do that.

 

[Joey McGee]

Hey you know that 1996 study that has been waved around here like the smoking gun? I think it's what most people are using to support their "it's inedible" "it's undigestible" "it's not beef" arguments, right?

In a statement dated March 23, Iowa State University agriculture professor Joseph Sebranek, Ph.D., wrote that his 1996 study on LFTB in the Journal of Food Sciences had been misconstrued by some media reports.

While Sebranek's study did not compare nutritional differences between ground beef with and without LTFB, some media reports have claimed that LFTB degrades the meat to which it's added.

"Our research is potentially being misinterpreted by some in the media as suggesting that LFTB has a deleterious effect on the nutritional quality of ground beef," Sebranek wrote. "Nothing in our study or what we know about collagen more broadly should lead one to that conclusion."

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2012/03/how-will-bpis-plant-closures-affect-americas-beef/

What I would do for a burger containing pink slime right now.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Good on ya, SG. Now if everyone who is complaining about "pink slime" would be willing to step up and pay more for beef, as well as paying increased taxes to support the "pure" beef in their public schools, that would be just hunky-dory by me.

This also goes for all the idiots who signed the Internet petition without thinking it through first. How much you want to bet the majority of them would turn around and complain about increased costs/taxes for "pure" beef?

Of course this assumes the pink slime used lowered the price of burger and/or kept the price from rising.

If instead, the pink slime was added to the product and the profit margin was increased instead, your argument fails.

I do not know the answer to this, but suggest it is an equally valid hypothesis.

 

[Joey McGee]

The increase on the price of beef has already happened, it's been in the news for days. The demand for beef staying the same there will be about 1.5 million cows worth of meat missing from the market.

We are at the lowest cattle inventory numbers in the United States since 1952,” Moore says. “Our population has basically doubled since 1952, so sure, we‘re going to see a lot of pressure beef prices at the retail and the food service end.”

Moore says there will be more price pressure now because LFTB made up 15-percent of the nation‘s ground beef production.

“There is no replacement for 15 percent of that product in our country right now,” he says. “We‘ve seen ground beef prices increase 20- to 25-percent over the last 12 months. We‘re going to see more increases especially as we go into summer grilling season.”

source

Yeah we won! Stickin' it to the man! That'll teach 'em from messing with our children's lunch meat!

 

[Checkmite]

What hope does the product have when people who supposedly just want the labeling changed are doing it for faulty reasons? Chemophobes, neo-luddites, and life-meaning-starved slacktivists don't have a good record for making intelligent, fact-based food choices.

Doesn't impact their right to know.

People have the right to make choices about their diet; the fact that they may choose based on "bad data" really doesn't matter.

Honestly, I don't understand how someone can argue against informing consumers just because there's a chance they may misinterpret the information. The solution is to educate, not "hide" things from them.

Beef already is labeled with a fat content ratio. Have sales of heavier-fat beef suffered due to the general public impression that "fat is bad"?

 

[Dipayan]

First, I don't know other than it has been years I've been getting hamburger that had this unpleasant texture. I estimated a decade, give or take.

Thanks for the link.

I believe the company's history page is consistent with when I started having complaints.

I do not dispute your experience, or rather I cannot dispute your experience. But given that there might be x number of reasons why the quality of cheaper beef is not that good, how can one state that it is most probably because of LFBT?

Do keep in mind that I actually don't have a position on this yet.

 

[Dipayan]

Came across an interesting bit of commentary.

BPI's product is a raw material. It is not the finished product. It was meant to be mixed into ground beef to enhance/control it's lean percentages. BPI came up with a process to safely and efficiently do this and to what end? It's not their responsibility to inform the consumer, that would fall on the end seller's shoulders. BPI makes a product that is an ingredient to a finshed product. So if you want a place to place blame for not "disclosing" what's was in their product, you should look towards the people actually distributing the product to the public. Ever see a Wendy's or McDonald's advertisement for 100% beef patties? Now let's think for a minute. Do you think these conglomerates knew exactly what they were buying and mixing into their ground beef? Don't you think they would tour the plants and understand the process before spending millions on the product? How about the supermarkets or packing houses that used lftb in there ground beef. Does their label state it? Yet all these former BPI customers are now on the other side of the fence when it was infact their negligence that kept consumers from being "fully" informed. Here's an anology for you: Would you place blame on the corn farmer because he grew genetically engineered corn (try to find some that isn't a genetically altered hybrid..you won't find many.) and it wasn't "disclosed" on your can of Cambells soup? Cambells didn't grow the corn after all right? So it's the farmer's responsibility to ensure that his corn's proper name goes on the soup can right? Give me a break.

 

[MattusMaximus]

The increase on the price of beef has already happened, it's been in the news for days. The demand for beef staying the same there will be about 1.5 million cows worth of meat missing from the market.

Yeah we won! Stickin' it to the man! That'll teach 'em from messing with our children's lunch meat!

Yup... what idiots.

ETA: What amazes me is how stupid this whole thing is from an environmental standpoint. We are going to be wasting a huge amount of beef, simply throwing it away. What happened to using all of our resources for maximum efficiency?

 

[MattusMaximus]

Of course this assumes the pink slime used lowered the price of burger and/or kept the price from rising.

If instead, the pink slime was added to the product and the profit margin was increased instead, your argument fails.

I do not know the answer to this, but suggest it is an equally valid hypothesis.

Do you have any reason to support this hypothesis, beyond baseless speculation?

And, I believe, the question of higher beef prices has just been addressed with the links provided a couple of posts ago.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Do you have any reason to support this hypothesis, beyond baseless speculation?

And, I believe, the question of higher beef prices has just been addressed with the links provided a couple of posts ago.

Without looking up the specific industry, yes, it does appear to be a widespread corporate trend to keep increasing profit margins.

You cite Joey's link, no doubt. But that just says the beef industry is going to charge the public for this. It doesn't say whether the initial benefit of the product was collected as a greater profit margin or as lower cost of burger. I know a lot of people believe the price of beef is strictly controlled by supply and demand however our economic system is not so pure. It will take a bit of looking to answer your question.

But consider that someone is selling a product that wasn't previously sold. That doesn't mean the consumer saved any money. It could mean they just spent more.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

OK, looking at one scenario: say burger prices were high because less cattle existed. Lean beef trimmings provide more supply. But if the supply was already so low that prices were maxed out, adding more product could simply bring more buyers rather than significantly lowering the cost. So some people who skipped the burger return to the demand side. I now pay almost the same but get a crappier product. More people get burger but I don't pay enough less to actually be getting the full benefit of the lowered price. The beef industry, OTOH, increased supply without only a small increase in production costs.


Anyway, the bottom line is still, give me the choice, don't slip it in with a misleading name, all the while lobbying the legislature to change regulations so you don't have to tell the consumer.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Me, and I've been doing it now for at least a year. The organic burger at Whole Foods is $9-10/pound.

At that price I would grind my own.

 

[ponderingturtle]

It ain't a healthy component if it is 70% undigestible.

So many vegetables are not healthy?

 

[Draca]

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CFR-2010-title9-vol2/xml/CFR-2010-title9-vol2-sec319-15.xml

Title 9 - Animals and Animal Products Volume: 2

Date: 2010-01-01
Original Date: 2010-01-01
Title: Section 319.15 - Miscellaneous beef products.
Context: Title 9 - Animals and Animal Products. CHAPTER III - FOOD SAFETY AND INSPECTION SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. SUBCHAPTER A - AGENCY ORGANIZATION AND TERMINOLOGY; MANDATORY MEAT AND POULTRY PRODUCTS INSPECTION AND VOLUNTARY INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION. PART 319 - DEFINITIONS AND STANDARDS OF IDENTITY OR COMPOSITION. Subpart B - Raw Meat Products.

319.15 Miscellaneous beef products.

(a) Chopped beef, ground beef. “Chopped Beef” or “Ground Beef” shall consist of chopped fresh and/or frozen beef with or without seasoning and without the addition of beef fat as such, shall not contain more than 30 percent fat, and shall not contain added water, phosphates, binders, or extenders. When beef cheek meat (trimmed beef cheeks) is used in the preparation of chopped or ground beef, the amount of such cheek meat shall be limited to 25 percent; and if in excess of natural proportions, its presence shall be declared on the label, in the ingredient statement required by § 317.2 of this subchapter, if any, and otherwise contiguous to the name of the product.

(b) Hamburger. “Hamburger” shall consist of chopped fresh and/or frozen beef with or without the addition of beef fat as such and/or seasoning, shall not contain more than 30 percent fat, and shall not contain added water, phosphates, binders, or extenders. Beef cheek meat (trimmed beef cheeks) may be used in the preparation of hamburger only in accordance with the conditions prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section.

(c) Beef patties. “Beef Patties” shall consist of chopped fresh and/or frozen beef with or without the addition of beef fat as such and/or seasonings. Binders or extenders, Mechanically Separated (Species) used in accordance with § 319.6, and/or partially defatted beef fatty tissue may be used without added water or with added water only in amounts such that the product characteristics are essentially that of a meat pattie.

(d) Fabricated steak. Fabricated beef steaks, veal steaks, beef and veal steaks, or veal and beef steaks, and similar products, such as those labeled “Beef Steak, Chopped, Shaped, Frozen,” “Minute Steak, Formed, Wafer Sliced, Frozen,” “Veal Steaks, Beef Added, Chopped—Molded—Cubed—Frozen, Hydrolyzed Plant Protein, and Flavoring” shall be prepared by comminuting and forming the product from fresh and/or frozen meat, with or without added fat, of the species indicated on the label. Such products shall not contain more than 30 percent fat and shall not contain added water or extenders. Transglutaminase enzyme at levels of up to 65 ppm may be used as a binder. Beef cheek meat (trimmed beef cheeks) may be used in the preparation of fabricated beef steaks only in accordance with the conditions prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section.

(e) Partially defatted beef fatty tissue. “Partially Defatted Beef Fatty Tissue” is a beef byproduct derived from the low temperature rendering (not exceeding 120 °F.) of fresh beef fatty tissue. Such product shall have a pinkish color and a fresh odor and appearance.

[35 FR 15597, Oct. 3, 1970, as amended at 38 FR 29215, Oct. 23, 1973; 43 FR 26424, June 20, 1978; 47 FR 10784, Mar. 12, 1982; 47 FR 28257, June 29, 1982; 66 FR 54916, Oct. 31, 2001]

LFTB is not listed as things that can be found in 'Ground Beef' or 'Hamburger' in the Federal Regulation. (e) Partially defatted beef fatty tissue - seems to be LTFB?

 

[Joey McGee]

It's clearly evidence of a grand conspiracy. I think that the USDA official who took a board job at somewhereorother should answer for her treason of humanity.

 

[Joey McGee]

The grand conspiracy to sneak beef into beef! One of the few proven conspiracy theories.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It's clearly evidence of a grand conspiracy. I think that the USDA official who took a board job at somewhereorother should answer for her treason of humanity.

So you dismiss the reality of the influence of lobbyists as CT woo?

 

[Joey McGee]

Not at all, I'm mocking the idea that her acceptance of that job is evidence of conspiracy, especially when it was legal at the time.

 

[Joey McGee]

Yup... what idiots.

ETA: What amazes me is how stupid this whole thing is from an environmental standpoint. We are going to be wasting a huge amount of beef, simply throwing it away. What happened to using all of our resources for maximum efficiency?

The irony is that it is the waste of humanity's resources, IE woo and pseudoscience, that is driving this. It is literally a combination of politicians being apathetic to their voters and scientists being apathetic to the ignorant masses! Leaving the skeptics to wallow in the swamp of feces leftover.

 

[Checkmite]

Yup... what idiots.

ETA: What amazes me is how stupid this whole thing is from an environmental standpoint. We are going to be wasting a huge amount of beef, simply throwing it away. What happened to using all of our resources for maximum efficiency?

Were we "throwing it away" before we started adding LFTB to ground beef, or were we doing something else with it?