Pink Slime

[PetersCreek]

Sorry...I thought I read complaints upthread about gristle and other connective tissue in the LFTB-modified GB.


ETA: I wasn't addressing my comment to the question of LFTB being harmful or indigestible. I don't think it is. I agree it's largely a texture issue. If glands are involved in sufficient quantity, it's also an issue of flavor.

 

[Dipayan]

My personal taste preference is burger the way it used to be made and the more I've read the more convinced I am this additive is the reason for the texture change. If they label it so I have a choice instead of trial and error buying with no guarantee the next time I buy the same brand it won't have changed, that's all I ask for.

Is this falsifiable?

 

[Brian-M]

Hey, just how much gunk do they put in to those plastic tubes anyhow? It must be a pretty high percentage to get that texture, like 40-50%, not just a token amount. And the other half is probably pretty poor quality too.

You know, if you care so strongly about what goes into your burger, you can always buy your own grinder. Little hand cranked ones that clamp onto your kitchen bench are pretty cheap, I think my local Aldi store is selling them for about $15. You can put whatever meat you want into it, and it'll probably come out slightly more tender than the exact same meat run through industrial grinders used in factories. My dad's been doing this for himself for years, and I'm willing to bet he's never even heard of pink slime.

 

[casebro]

You know, if you care so strongly about what goes into your burger, you can always buy your own grinder. Little hand cranked ones that clamp onto your kitchen bench are pretty cheap, I think my local Aldi store is selling them for about $15. You can put whatever meat you want into it, and it'll probably come out slightly more tender than the exact same meat run through industrial grinders used in factories. My dad's been doing this for himself for years, and I'm willing to bet he's never even heard of pink slime.

I guess you didn't read the whole thread. I mentioned that I do exactly that, back about page one.

But nobody has answered the query that you responded to: How much pink slime do they typically put into that cheap stuff?

According to the university study mentioned up thread, PS has about 3x the non-meat stuff then usual ground beef. And sine it is enough to change the texture, those cheap tubes of ground 'beef' must be about half PS?

 

[shadron]

The politics in this is immense.

3 Republican governors are touring BPI today.

The politicians who plan to tour the plant — including Texas Gov. Rick Perry, Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback, Nebraska Lt. Gov. Rick Sheehy and South Dakota Lt. Gov. Matt Michels — all agree with the industry view that pink slime has been unfairly maligned and mislabeled.

Interesting. the first non-election issue coming down the pike this year to split the GOP.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

I guess you didn't read the whole thread. I mentioned that I do exactly that, back about page one.

But nobody has answered the query that you responded to: How much pink slime do they typically put into that cheap stuff?

According to the university study mentioned up thread, PS has about 3x the non-meat stuff then usual ground beef. And sine it is enough to change the texture, those cheap tubes of ground 'beef' must be about half PS?

but is that whats changing the texture? most of what i read indicate the LFTB has the same texture as ground beef, and neither i nor anyone else ive personally spoken to have noticed much difference between the 2 products. mcdonalds burgers taste/feel the same as they did a year ago

 

[uruk]

Don't know what the big stink is. Beef is beef no matter what the texture is.
But then I love spam and I think that barely qualifies as a food product.

Now where gelatin comes from will really gross you out.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Now where gelatin comes from will really gross you out.

and now i have a craving for marshmallows and gummi worms

 

[Draca]

Don't know what the big stink is. Beef is beef no matter what the texture is.
But then I love spam and I think that barely qualifies as a food product.

Now where gelatin comes from will really gross you out.

The big deal is it was unlabeled, undisclosed, snuck into the American diet. The USDA allowed it not to be labeled separately because it is made out of cattle, this is despite the expectation by the consumer that ground beef contains ground meat. LFTB is not the same thing as ground beef. Ground Beef use to be called ground round or ground chuck, for the pieces of meat the burger was made out of. It has always in the past been known as ground meat. The Iowa State paper shows that LFTB is largely connective tissue. It's 36.77 collagen, 77.25 insoluble protein. It is not the same nutrition profile as meat. It was deceptively included unlabeled in ground beef and the deception was approved by the USDA, with connections to the beef industry. Even if LFTB was 100% beef meat I still think it should be labeled because it is processed so differently.

This is something that IMO we should all be greatly concerned about and protest against. If no one protests this dirty move by the USDA what will they approve of next? I really think arguments that it is still part of cattle really misses the mark. It is not what the consumer expected when purchasing ground beef and it wasn't labeled.

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. 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.

Gelatin is labeled. If a package of ground beef was labeled - products contains ground beef meat and processed LFTB - then people would be aware of what they are buying. If they didn't know what LFTB was they would know what to ask and or look up. Since it is not a separate item on the label then people will understandably believe the label ground beef means ground beef meat processed normally, which has been the past meaning.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Ground Beef use to be called ground round or ground chuck, for the pieces of meat the burger was made out of.

you can still get ground round, ground chuck (and ground sirloin) and for as long as i can remember, ground beef has coexisted with them all, with ground beef being the low end cost-wise since it didnt come from any specific cut (so i assumed it was made of scraps too small to used in the premium products)

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Sorry...I thought I read complaints upthread about gristle and other connective tissue in the LFTB-modified GB.

You did. But it was quantity not the mere fact it existed in the burger.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Is this falsifiable?

Sure. I'm more than willing to take a blinded test. It would be interesting if anyone in the Seattle/Bellevue area was game.

 

[Draca]

but is that whats changing the texture? most of what i read indicate the LFTB has the same texture as ground beef, and neither i nor anyone else ive personally spoken to have noticed much difference between the 2 products. mcdonalds burgers taste/feel the same as they did a year ago

Mcdonald's burgers are not a very good example:

McDonald's 4 Year Old Cheeseburger Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IGtDPG4UfI

Even BPI doesn't claim it is the same texture as regular beef though. That is why they call in Finely Textured.

you can still get ground round, ground chuck (and ground sirloin) and for as long as i can remember, ground beef has coexisted with them all, with ground beef being the low end cost-wise since it didnt come from any specific cut (so i assumed it was made of scraps too small to used in the premium products)

I think it has been degrading for some time, going from ground whole cuts to meat scraps. This LFTB is a whole different thing though. The processing alone is so different it should call for labeling.

 

[Draca]

I guess you didn't read the whole thread. I mentioned that I do exactly that, back about page one.

But nobody has answered the query that you responded to: How much pink slime do they typically put into that cheap stuff?

According to the university study mentioned up thread, PS has about 3x the non-meat stuff then usual ground beef. And sine it is enough to change the texture, those cheap tubes of ground 'beef' must be about half PS?

I don't know where to find that info since the USDA does not require it to be listed. I would agree that the percentage is probably high.

I remember a few years ago bringing home a bag of left-over frozen beef patties from a work BBQ. When I cooked the pre-formed patties the color and texture were incredibly different than most beef. I ended up throwing the package away because it tasted and looked strange. It was probably a higher percentage of LFTB that made it that way.

 

[Checkmite]

Mcdonald's burgers are not a very good example:

McDonald's 4 Year Old Cheeseburger Video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IGtDPG4UfI

McDonald's does not use LFTB in its beef.

And the fate of any hamburger of similar size and weight would be the same as the "four year old McDonald's cheeseburger" - namely, desiccation before bacteria has a chance to decompose much of the food.

 

[Draca]

This thread brings to mind the old joke, there are two things most people don't want to see made: sausage and legislation.

I make sausage...but I wouldn't become a legislator on a bet.

As for connective tissue, regular ground beef has it, too. It's practically impossible to remove all fascia ('silverskin') from the muscle. The same goes for cartilage, glands, veins, and the like. In large commercial operations, some of it is likely wind up in the mix. Even though LFTB appears to contain a higher proportion of connective tisse, leaving it out won't eliminate it altogether.

It's NOT sausage though. The joke refers to a product that it is well known uses undesirable parts. Ground beef is expected to be ground meat. LFTB is described by Foshee “The finished product is just 6 percent fat, but it’s filled with glands and connective tissue."

Sorry...I thought I read complaints upthread about gristle and other connective tissue in the LFTB-modified GB.

ETA: I wasn't addressing my comment to the question of LFTB being harmful or indigestible. I don't think it is. I agree it's largely a texture issue. If glands are involved in sufficient quantity, it's also an issue of flavor.

For me it is mostly a disclosure issue. I don't think it is honest or ethical for the USDA to allow this to be called ground beef. The processing alone makes it a different product, without even getting into the different makeup of the final product. Texture is one issue for me, but it's even more a distrust in the process, product and nutrition.

Interesting. the first non-election issue coming down the pike this year to split the GOP.

I'm finding the politics in this VERY interesting. Especially the role of USDA Joann Smith who approved the mix and allowed it to be called ground beef in the first place.

 

[Draca]

McDonald's does not use LFTB in its beef.

And the fate of any hamburger of similar size and weight would be the same as the "four year old McDonald's cheeseburger" - namely, desiccation before bacteria has a chance to decompose much of the food.

Mcdonald's removed LFTB in August 2011 according to an article I read. So it hasn't been that long, but I'm happy they have removed it.

I don't know about the 4yr old burger, sounds weird to me. I don't plan on keeping a burger around that long to test it though.

 

[shadron]

The big deal is it was unlabeled, undisclosed, snuck into the American diet. The USDA allowed it not to be labeled separately because it is made out of cattle, this is despite the expectation by the consumer that ground beef contains ground meat.

And all this time I thought you were saying

Being fed what is meant to be dog food is being nutritionally poisoned in my opinion. Not to mention the ammonia added to kill off all of the ecoli. Beyond gross.

That it isn't labeled "nutritionally poisonous"? or " beyond gross"?

 

[Draca]

Rancher Comments

Here are some comments by ranchers. Beef magazine, Mar 12, 2012

Doesn't sound like it's a myth at all -- it's pink, it's slimy, it's treated with ammonia. Frankly, it sounds pretty bad to almost everyone who doesn't make money off of it. Instead of trying to convince the public that this product is good, and not "pink, slimy, and treated with ammonia", when it is just that, wouldn't it be better to just go back to putting the pink slime in dog food?

Whether it's healthy or nutritious is irrelevant. If it's offensive and unappealing, maybe we should just stop?

We kill a steer every year for our family freezer-- we never put pink slime in it before we wrap it. Do any of you?

Finally, do farmers and anchors make money ff of the slime product? I doubt it. Why can't we recognize that this is just another example of a situation in which meat processors and cattle producers interests are in conflict, and stop carrying water for those folks?

I don't doubt that the USDA has approved this process as safe just as the government regulators approve many unsafe practices, not only in the food industry but mining, oil drilling, timber, fishing, etc. because as we all know the regulators end up working for the big industry intrests and not the "people" due to the revolving door that allows regulators to cash in by eventually going to work for the industry they regulated. I raise and sell locker beef that is healthy and unadulterated and yet I am constrained by an abundance of laws designed to make it difficult and insinuate that there is a real danger to the public if they go outside the mainstream industry for their beef. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is all designed to limit peoples' choices so they have no choice but to eat the adulterated food that comes from big industry. Another thing that should concern everyone is that big business funds most of the research done in universities. But the big point is that no one wants this stuff added to the food we eat but it is there anyway and we eat it anyway. How does that happen except that the system has been manipulated in favor of the industry?

Why are we defending this product?

Safety issues aside it is anything but a quality product that is suitable for anything but dog food.

This is a packer issue; my family stopped buying prepackaged ground beef years ago because of the questionable quality and poor flavor.

Beef producers should not be defending this product. We should be leading the charge to provide the best quality product and practices if we want the public to look to us as for guidance and expertise.

Correct, I am a cattle veterinarian and beef rancher, I have yet to have a need to add BLBT to any of the beef I sell to my customers. The packers don't care about anything but short sighted profit.

The consumer got it right on this one for a change.

End the hysteria. Just put it on the label and let consumers make their own choices.

I am tired of being told that certain ill -begotten food production practices and processes are safe, healthy, or necessary. When In fact, many such practices are a crummy idea. Otherwise healthy foods are being tainted. I am a lifetime rancher that says, "Ick! Stop it already."
China insists on poisoning their people's food supply for whatever economic or ignorant reasons that can be conjured up. Still, that doesn't make it right that nearly 2/3 of the products on their grocery shelves are not fit for human consumption
As far as this pink product being in dog food, dogs have a much short life expectation than we humans. They are less likely to suffer from the crappy consequences of this ammoniated process but there is no guarantee.

This is the Beef industries version of the TRUTH. IE what they want us to know and what they don't want us to know.
I wouldn't trust the beef industry as far as I could throw em.

I have no doubt that this "pink slime" is safe to eat and it may even be healthy. But it clearly is not necessary and consumers dispise this kind of thing. I don't want to eat it and I can't imagine that anyone would knowingly choose to eat it. Why are farmers & ranchers defending this practice? It does nothing to help us.

I support the use of everthing we can of an animal that we have slaughtered. Its saying that we respected you and not just going to eat your good parts and throw the rest away.

However, the errors have been in not telling the consumers what they are buying! It also sounds like some collusion between the USDA and and BPI. Not of this is good for the food industry.

And I thought that the law was that any product that was adulterated and processed and then reintroduced into the final product needed to be labeled as a separate ingredient if not actually produced during processing.such as meat grinding.

Based upon my suspicions many years ago, I have always ground my own beef. My suspicions have been true.

What I don't understand and what the majority of public doesn't understand why this is not labled. People deserve the opportunity to make choices and to be allowed to spend more for making those choices.

The beef industy just shot themselves in the foot. They need to decide where they are going in the future. Or are they going to stand around and shoot themselves in the other foot and loose all credibilty in the public eye to stand up for your products.

The USDA almost effectly banned (regulated) potatoes out of the school lunch program last month. (Congress had to override them)

A couple of more blunders like this and meat will be next on the chopping block. Please!!! move this product back to dog food use only.

It is a cheap shot to discount the opinions being expressed here by referring to the heartfelt “ammoniating” objections as a folding to the media hype. On our ranch we produce a pure and healthy product. It takes forethought and dedication to do so. Yet other entities have taken control before our beef reaches the consumer. I believe that our ranching future is dependent on listening to the consumer and responding in all ways that are reasonable. There may have been a time in history when every part of an animal, except the hide and hair, had to go into the stew pot. Is that still necessary or desirable when the dinner plate is so far from the field?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

McDonald's does not use LFTB in its beef....

Yes but since when? They used to and only after the controversy went public did they announce they would quit using it. You make it sound like they never used it.

I see Draca addressed this. The when is Aug 2011, not so long ago.