Pink Slime

[Silly Green Monkey]

Which one of the alternative hypotheses fit ALL the observations? And why do you keep missing that little flaw in your thinking here?

First, I made the texture change observation before I ever heard of LBT. Rules out confirmation bias.

Right here. No it does not. We don't necessarily dispute your experience, just your seizing upon LBT as THE CAUSE, THE ONE AND ONLY CAUSE.

Second, the timing of LBT introduction into the market coincides with the texture change observation. Rules out all your arguments that the LBT isn't any different than different cuts of ground beef. If that was the case why did this problem start only a decade ago?

Third, in all my decades of eating hamburger, until LBT was added to burger, I never tasted the disagreeable texture. Rules out all your arguments that the LBT isn't any different than different cuts of ground beef. If that was the case why did this problem start only a decade ago?

Fourth, there is still burger that I found OK, again, before I ever heard of LBT. It turns out not to have LBT in it. Rules out the argument that the change I noticed was due to aging taste buds.

This is all where the confirmation bias is, you are assuming LBT is the cause. Nothing else at all went on with ground beef, in all those years, all those different suppliers and methods and regulation changes?

I'm not saying that it can't be the CAUSE, THE ONE AND ONLY CAUSE, just that it's unwarranted to simply claim so (and accuse all those who point out your logical gap of making assumptions of their own).

 

[Dipayan]

Yes I do. It was noted in the store brands I had bought in the news reports we read. The problem now is some of those stores, like Safeway, plan to take LBT out of their burger but they said they need time to find alternative suppliers of burger.

LBT was in most of the prepackaged hamburger in most chain grocery stores in this area. It wasn't in Costco's burger but I don't shop there.

A lot of words that in no way answer how you can accurately claim that LFTB was added to ground meat at the same time that you started finding a different texture to your beef.

There's no reason to think so.

So you haven't looked. Which makes this claim of your irrelevant.

Paper is easy to cut but chewing it is another story. I don't see that this fact which was measured by cutting a burger with a knife rules out my hypothesis that the LBT changed the chewing texture of burger.

An objective standard for tenderness of meat (that is closely matched by actual tasting tests - google it) is being ignored by you, simply because of personal incredulity - 'It can't possibly test tenderness as well as I can when I chew!' Good skepticism.

 

[Belz...]

Being fed what is meant to be dog food is being nutritionally poisoned in my opinion.

Uh-huh. Sure.

 

[Furcifer]

Which one of the alternative hypotheses fit ALL the observations? And why do you keep missing that little flaw in your thinking here?

First, I made the texture change observation before I ever heard of LBT. Rules out confirmation bias.

Ground beef changes all the time, this is meaningless.

Second, the timing of LBT introduction into the market coincides with the texture change observation. Rules out all your arguments that the LBT isn't any different than different cuts of ground beef. If that was the case why did this problem start only a decade ago?

Your memory is not an "observation", not from a skeptical standpoint. It's a theory.
You have no way of knowing how the ground beef you buy may have changed at the time you noticed it. It may have been due to the addition of LBT or it may have been due to the addition of desinewing in the processing.

Therefore this is meaningless.

Third, in all my decades of eating hamburger, until LBT was added to burger, I never tasted the disagreeable texture. Rules out all your arguments that the LBT isn't any different than different cuts of ground beef. If that was the case why did this problem start only a decade ago?

Perhaps your producer added desinewing, or changed the cuts of beef, or the grade of beef or the type of fat or one of the many other factors known to affect the texture.

Until you rule this out the change you noticed 10 years ago is meaningless.

Fourth, there is still burger that I found OK, again, before I ever heard of LBT. It turns out not to have LBT in it. Rules out the argument that the change I noticed was due to aging taste buds.

This is contrary to the studies cited, therefore it's meaningless.

Fifth, the university analysis provides a mechanism explaining the changed texture observation. Doesn't support your claim all burger differs and LBT doesn't significantly differ from simply grinding different cuts of meat.

Nonsense. That study was done under EXTREMELY controlled conditions, the ground beef you've bought over the last 10 years varied conisderably. The test was merely establishing a metric, but cannot be extended to include beef you bought over the years.

 

[Belz...]

First, I made the texture change observation before I ever heard of LBT. Rules out confirmation bias.

Of course it doesn't.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

You guys want to come over to my place?

I have a brand new brick wall you can bang your heads against, and when you're done, I'll grill up a bunch of burgers.

Who's in?

 

[Ryokan]

Paper is easy to cut but chewing it is another story. I don't see that this fact which was measured by cutting a burger with a knife rules out my hypothesis that the LBT changed the chewing texture of burger.

Are you serious? Take some paper as thick as a burger, and try cutting through it. It'll be way easier to cut the burger.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You guys want to come over to my place?

I have a brand new brick wall you can bang your heads against, and when you're done, I'll grill up a bunch of burgers.

Who's in?

I'm playing last woman standing.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Are you serious? Take some paper as thick as a burger, and try cutting through it. It'll be way easier to cut the burger.

Grind it up first and it'll take hardly any pressure to cut. Think chewing it will be tender? I'm just illustrating chewing and cutting are two different measures.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Of course it doesn't.

So I was biased the burger changed before I ever knew it actually had?

 

[Furcifer]

You guys want to come over to my place?

I have a brand new brick wall you can bang your heads against, and when you're done, I'll grill up a bunch of burgers.

Who's in?

I'm getting this Pink Floyd -slime how can you eat you meat if you don't eat your pudding vibe from this but I can't put it together. But if I do it will be hilarious.

 

[Drs_Res]

Just curious.

1. How are you going to control for the quality of the cuts in the LBT burger vs. the non-LBT burger?

2. How are you going to control for differences in the grind process itself?

3. Will some people get 2 samples of "A" or "B" vs. getting a sample of both "A" and "B" to see if they are noticing a real difference or if their mind is playing a trick on them? Seen that happen before.

Thanks.

 

[Ryokan]

Grind it up first and it'll take hardly any pressure to cut. Think chewing it will be tender? I'm just illustrating chewing and cutting are two different measures.

Admitting that I haven't tested it, I still think cutting through ground up paper will be harder than cutting through the same thickness of ground up meat.

And that's ignoring the fact that the test is designed to test the tenderness of meat, not paper.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Ground beef changes all the time, this is meaningless.

You keep stamping your feet here but you have not addressed the problem with your hypothesis. I've been eating burger my whole life. I've lived in 4 states, I've been poor and middle class and have bought all types of burger. Why did it change a number of years ago and why didn't I ever notice said change before that?

Your whole argument fails because you can't cite something other than LBT that changed within the last 10 years.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Admitting that I haven't tested it, I still think cutting through ground up paper will be harder than cutting through the same thickness of ground up meat.

And that's ignoring the fact that the test is designed to test the tenderness of meat, not paper.

I'm not ignoring anything. I know that I began encountering a distasteful texture in burger. LBT fits the bill and you are arguing that somehow it doesn't because you think the words I used to describe the changed texture are somehow at odds with a completely different measure, cutting a burger in half.

I'm a nurse practitioner. I know from taking patient histories on thousands of patients that people describe the same symptom in dozens of different ways. We pick adjectives that are the best match for our experiences but the adjective I choose might differ from the one you choose despite our symptoms being exactly the same clinically.

If you want to believe the cutting test means the adjective I used to describe the texture when chewed couldn't be true, you'll just have to wait for the hypothesis test in the skeptic's group when you can confirm or refute the claim you are making that chewing texture and cutting force are equal measures.

 

[Furcifer]

Grind it up first and it'll take hardly any pressure to cut. Think chewing it will be tender? I'm just illustrating chewing and cutting are two different measures.

Actually they're the same (or as similar as possible), you're talking about mouth feel which is different and highly subjective. Chewing is just the repition of biting and biting or bite force is modelled using the cutting experiment.

I'm not trying to be pedantic, I just think it's important to be particular in this case.

 

[Furcifer]

You keep stamping your feet here but you have not addressed the problem with your hypothesis. I've been eating burger my whole life. I've lived in 4 states, I've been poor and middle class and have bought all types of burger. Why did it change a number of years ago and why didn't I ever notice said change before that?

Because until you heard about LBT you like most people had very low expectations in regards to ground beef and consistency. Most people don't notice because 99% of the time you're adding a butt load of spices and preparing it differently. Almost everyone bases their ground beef quality on 1 thing- color.

Your whole argument fails because you can't cite something other than LBT that changed within the last 10 years.

It changes all the time and ther have been numerous "somethings" cited in this thread.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Just curious.

1. How are you going to control for the quality of the cuts in the LBT burger vs. the non-LBT burger?

2. How are you going to control for differences in the grind process itself?

The LBT significantly affects the quality so that's what is being tested. Otherwise the burger will both be prepackaged with the same fat content from a grocery store meat section.

This isn't exactly a perfect test, most studies aren't. But honestly if the people doubling down in this thread don't accept the results they can do their own tests.

3. Will some people get 2 samples of "A" or "B" vs. getting a sample of both "A" and "B" to see if they are noticing a real difference or if their mind is playing a trick on them? ....

That's a thought. Yes, people brought that up in the thread that Penn and Teller had showed people believing organic was better or something and they had been given the same food.

I think completely randomizing the samples is a good idea. The other option is to give people 3 samples, 2 the same, one different. If a consistent number of people do or don't get it wrong which 2 are the same that will give us good control data.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

...

It changes all the time and ther have been numerous "somethings" cited in this thread.

What changed 10 years ago that didn't change before that? Why is this so hard for you?

If your hypothesis was right I would have found bad texture burger randomly my whole life. I didn't.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Actually they're the same (or as similar as possible), you're talking about mouth feel which is different and highly subjective. Chewing is just the repition of biting and biting or bite force is modelled using the cutting experiment.

I'm not trying to be pedantic, I just think it's important to be particular in this case.

The pressure to cut and the texture of something you chew are two different things.

Is this really all you guys have?