Pink Slime

[Skeptic Ginger]

Tell that to the anti-GMO people who want all GMO produce labeled. Of course, they only care about certain GMO products, otherwise every single bit of produce would bear the label.

The issues are different. I agree all agriculture products are genetically modified. That poses issues with labeling. It might be useful to label products as owned by Monsanto, that way I could boycott for political reasons since I'm not worried about the GMF biological issues.

But all hamburger doesn't have the texture altering LFTB in it and I'd like my burger to have the texture I prefer, not the rubbery texture with the additive.

 

[Prometheus]

About a month and a half ago, I asked the butcher in my local supermarket if they had 100% grass-fed ground round. They didn't, but he said he would order some. It showed up in the case within a week, and must be selling well because they've been carrying it ever since. It only costs $1.50 more per pound than their lowest grade "ground chubs" and it is about the tastiest burger I've ever tried. Why not see if your grocer will do the same and quit stressing out abour LFTB?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I already do that Prometheus, now. I've been buying organic burger from some grocers and organic grass fed from Whole Foods.

But for years I kept getting burger with an awful texture and the people behind the meat counters kept telling me nothing had changed with hamburger. I even asked if they were processing it differently and the answer was repeatedly no.

When I found out LFTB could be the answer, I tested it and it confirmed this was the problem I'd been having for years. It pisses me off the producers pulled revolving door strings in DC and got the regulators to let this stuff pass into the burger market without labeling.

Joey's pissed because he thinks companies should be able to deceive customers who have no right to informed via labeling because technically this previous waste product comes from the cow ergo it's beef.

It's not about stress. It's about being able to choose hamburger that has the texture I prefer before I buy it, not after.

 

[Aepervius]

Tell that to the anti-GMO people who want all GMO produce labeled. Of course, they only care about certain GMO products, otherwise every single bit of produce would bear the label.

While hybridisation and GMO use the same fundemental process, it is a bit of a misnommer to confuse the two. The probability of you inserting a fish gene into a tomatoe plant by hybridisation is not the same as doing it by GMO.

That said, once tested and commercialized there is no difference whatsoever with eating the normal stuff nutritionally.

Still I would allow the public to decide whether they want GMO or not. That's up to the public to decide. The same way I think decision of stopping nuclear plant and use coal instead (brown coal even) is stupid from germany, BUT in the end it is up to the people to decide, and not the industry to hide it with any way they can.

How would you feel if after a democratic decision you asked a nuclear plant to be stopped, but instead they dig a hole and hide it, and pretend the electricity is generated by wind or solar ?

The point is not whether people make good decision or not. We already know they don't as a whole. the point is that people/industry are enforcing their own decision over people, when the MARKET should be the one deciding by having all information disclosed.

Same with reworked meat really. It should be up to the market if they want to buy reworked meat for cheaper, or buy the normal stuff for less cheap. Hiding the stuff is a sure sign that somebody KNOWS they would lose sell and would rather pocket the money and hide the difference.

Whether the quality is different or similar is not at stake. What's at stake is that you should be able to have an informed choice as a consummer and decide based on your own criteria which can include bloody stupid belief, whether or not you buy a particular brand.

Hiding information change the deal, and stop the market from deciding what it wants.

If you are a free market capitalist, then hiding any information should be an abbhorence to you.

ETA: I think at least on the reformed meat germany has a good consumer law : it must be indicated on the package that it was not , say, ham but reformed ham. Same nutritional value, and near the same quality. But one is far cheaper to produce than the other.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

....When I found out LFTB could be the answer, I tested it and it confirmed this was the problem I'd been having for years. ...

...................

It's not about stress. It's about being able to choose hamburger that has the texture I prefer before I buy it, not after.

Actually, you had that choice once you determined there was a problem and claim that you continued to eat it for years anyway..

Why is that ?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Actually, you had that choice once you determined there was a problem and claim that you continued to eat it for years anyway..

Why is that ?

I know the thread is 36 pages long and it's been a while since it was fresh, but your post says you missed the key complaint I've been griping about this entire time.

I didn't continue to eat the crap. I've never bought it on purpose. I've gone out of my way to get hamburger that doesn't have it in it. But many times I'd buy burger and not know it was going to have that disgusting rubber texture until it was home and cooked.

And until it came out in the news, I didn't know what burger to avoid because I didn't know what the problem was and neither did the grocers.

Because it wasn't labeled. And why isn't it labeled? Because the producers and retailers knew if it were labeled people would find out crap was being added to their hamburger.

 

[Myriad]

You have failed to realize that this is magical stuff that's so totally beef that it doesn't have to be labeled as anything else, but also so totally unlike beef that it doesn't have to be labeled "previously frozen" like other previously frozen beef does.

Get with the program!

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Maybe I should just post a link here to the OP. We can start this game all over again.

It changes the texture of hamburger. It should be labeled.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

I know the thread is 36 pages long and it's been a while since it was fresh, but your post says you missed the key complaint I've been griping about this entire time.

I didn't continue to eat the crap. I've never bought it on purpose. I've gone out of my way to get hamburger that doesn't have it in it. But many times I'd buy burger and not know it was going to have that disgusting rubber texture until it was home and cooked.

And until it came out in the news, I didn't know what burger to avoid because I didn't know what the problem was and neither did the grocers.

Because it wasn't labeled. And why isn't it labeled? Because the producers and retailers knew if it were labeled people would find out crap was being added to their hamburger.

I just don't understand why you say it went on for years..

It just seems to me, switching to fresh ground chuck or whatever, until you figured out the problem, should have happened sooner than " years "....

 

[jimbob]

I just don't understand why you say it went on for years..

It just seems to me, switching to fresh ground chuck or whatever, until you figured out the problem, should have happened sooner than " years "....

Why put the onus on the customer to guess what has happened? Why should they be forced to guess which product has the higher-quality ingredients?

If the customer doesn't want a burger made with "100%" chuck steak, why should they be forced to gamble on the other burgers?

Just label the ingredients. Which has happened in the EU.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I just don't understand why you say it went on for years..

It just seems to me, switching to fresh ground chuck or whatever, until you figured out the problem, should have happened sooner than " years "....

Because for years I didn't know what was wrong with the burger. Getting the awful stuff was hit or miss. I had been taking some of it back, throwing some of it out, asking what was different and complaining to grocers for a long time. I don't always shop at the same stores or buy the same brands. My job takes me all over the county so I tended to shop where I happened to be.

It was only after several years of being disgusted by some burger some of the time that the news about Pink Slime came out. That's why I know it wasn't just confirmation bias, I knew something was wrong before I ever heard of LFTB. It didn't help that I was buying the lowest fat beef, again, not knowing that rather than just adding less fat, they were adding connective tissue and other parts of the cow to lower the fat ratio.

Now that I know what the problem is, I've been buying organic ground beef and not once since, have I encountered the rubbery texture that was grossing me out.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Why put the onus on the customer to guess what has happened? Why should they be forced to guess which product has the higher-quality ingredients?

If the customer doesn't want a burger made with "100%" chuck steak, why should they be forced to gamble on the other burgers?

Just label the ingredients. Which has happened in the EU.

I totally agree with what you are saying.. That was hardly my point..

My point was about blindly reaching into the same apple barrel ( for years ) where you keep coming up with bad apples, when there is a shelf nearby with all the apples laid out for inspection..

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I totally agree with what you are saying.. That was hardly my point..

My point was about blindly reaching into the same apple barrel ( for years ) where you keep coming up with bad apples, when there is a shelf nearby with all the apples laid out for inspection..

Your problem is you don't get what happened so you've made up your own version and your version is false.

I could have given up hamburger altogether. But that would have meant giving up my favorite spaghetti, tacos, hamburgers.

You buy burger, sometimes it's OK, but more and more often it has a rubbery texture that ruins it for you. You don't know what's going on or how to avoid the rubbery stuff. The grocers just tell you nothing is different, it's not being processed differently, they don't know what is wrong with it.

Then you find out there was something wrong with it.

It's not complicated. Fine, you would have what? Just stopped buying burger? You can't avoid the rubbery stuff because you don't know what to avoid.

They were wrong not to label it.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Really, I do get it...

Sounds like outrage with hindsight to me...

You have said over and over, that for years, you knew something was different, but no one would fess up; so you essentially took their word for it and kept grabbing bad apples...

When you suspected there was a problem with burger prep in the back room, it was time to grab a chuck roast and get the meat guy to grind it for you; not years later when you busted the pink slime conspiracy...

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Not all of us shop at the meat counter asking for cuts of meat to be ground up for us. Maybe you should get out more, see how other people live.

And you do have an imaginary version of events, but whatever.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

So just to review since several folks in the thread have forgotten and/or remain in denial:

2012 - ‘Pink slime:’ Combo of connective tissue, scraps hidden in your kids’ lunch

Pink slime is a mix of ground-up connective tissue and beef scraps that are normally meant for dog food. ... “We looked at the product, and we objected to it because it used connective tissue instead of muscle. It was simply not nutritionally equivalent (to ground beef). My main objection was that it was not meat.”

This is a skeptic's forum and we are supposed to be about the evidence and the science, not about the forum's right wingers' unskeptical support of corporations' policies. Here's what the scientists had to say about it:

“They’ve taken a processed product, without labeling it, and added it to raw ground beef,” Zirnstein said. “Science is the truth, and pink slime at this point in time is a fraudulent lie.”

They started making the stuff in 1990. The amount in ground beef began to increase so that by 2012 in was in 70% of US hamburger.
70 Percent of Ground Beef at Supermarkets Contains ‘Pink Slime’

“Pink slime” is beef trimmings. Once only used in dog food and cooking oil, the trimmings are now sprayed with ammonia so they are safe to eat and added to most ground beef as a cheaper filler. ... “It’s economic fraud,” he told ABC News. “It’s not fresh ground beef. … It’s a cheap substitute being added in.” ... The “pink slime” does not have to appear on the label because, over objections of its own scientists, USDA officials with links to the beef industry labeled it meat.

So the amount in hamburger didn't just start at 70% in 1990, it gradually increased over that time. What started out as rubbery hamburger once in a while became more and more frequent over that time. The idea one gets rubbery burger once and one gives up burger is ludicrous. By the time it was turning up all the time I did start buying mostly organic ground beef from Whole Foods. Go back through the thread. You'll see that's exactly what I said.


Then there was this bit of corruption that some people in the thread dismiss out of hand:

When Smith stepped down from the USDA in 1993, BPI’s principal major supplier appointed her to its board of directors, where she made at least $1.2 million over 17 years.

Sounds like a regular job at 70K/year until you find out she was appointed to the board and was only scheduled to work ~4 days a year.

The USDA said while her appointment was legal at the time, under current ethics rules Smith could not have immediately joined the board.

 

[Joey McGee]

NPR is becoming as diluted as the mainstream news. As usual the 'safety issue' straw man dominates the article and the one mention of Cargill labeling the product doesn't make mention that is only at the wholesaler and not at the retail level.oa

Or maybe youre just on the lunatic fringe conspiracy theory side of this? Why should they label the exact same product as something different just because they use another tool other than a knife to get it. Why do you continue to ignore the experts who say your beliefs about that paper are false. I don't really know. But have fun with your soapbox.

If these people are so sure their product is desirable, they shouldn't be afraid to put the ingredient on the label!

They do. Are you ignorant of the fact the companies are all pro label after I showed that multiple times? Maybe you should be mad at the ones who are still not labeling it for whatever reason... can you find us some evidence of anyone who is not?

Conspiracy Theory Thread....

 

[Joey McGee]

The issues are different. I agree all agriculture products are genetically modified. That poses issues with labeling. It might be useful to label products as owned by Monsanto, that way I could boycott for political reasons since I'm not worried about the GMF biological issues.

But all hamburger doesn't have the texture altering LFTB in it and I'd like my burger to have the texture I prefer, not the rubbery texture with the additive.

Sorry in the whole *************** of a thread I forget why you think you can tell it alters the texture and could do that under controlled conditions, and how you can argue publicly that what you say is true. Uhm, how deep can we trust the results of this inquiry. I don't doubt that it's possible, but I can't see evidence of what anyone should give a ****.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Right, you've seen some stuff in bucket in a slaughter house (or wherever it was) and you know more than the USDA scientists I cited.

"over objections of its own scientists, USDA officials with links to the beef industry labeled it meat."

The official analysis said it was more connective tissue than meat, the scientists called it "connective tissue instead of muscle" but you want us to believe your assertions that you have not supported with any alternative analysis, only with the industry's promotional material.

I'm sorry the evidence pisses you off. It's not me that's fringe here.

I have yet to see a single retail label with lftb on it, you can stamp your feet all you want, it's not being labeled.

 

[Joey McGee]

But for years I kept getting burger with an awful texture and the people behind the meat counters kept telling me nothing had changed with hamburger. I even asked if they were processing it differently and the answer was repeatedly no.

When I found out LFTB could be the answer,

You have zero proof of this that anyone would ever take seriously

Joey's pissed

not the correct adjective, I'm more saddened by the lost of work by the employees, disgusted with idiots, and besieging God for not existing.

because he thinks companies should be able to deceive customers who have no right to informed via labeling because technically this previous waste product comes from the cow ergo it's beef.

Hysterical. I believe it is the same product and therefore would be insane to label differently, ammonia is not required to be named as a processing agent, not is citrus juice, and you have zero proof its practically different than regular ground beef on a molecular level, you're off on a trip.

It's not about stress. It's about being able to choose hamburger that has the texture I prefer before I buy it, not after.

I's probably better that you can actually prove your public arguments irrefutably and correctly.