Quote: Here's the list:
Meat
Don't fall for the media hysteria.
It's 95% lean beef and the other 5% is beef fat
Meat
Don't fall for the media hysteria.
It's 95% lean beef and the other 5% is beef fat
What are your opinions on "pink slime"?
- Thread starter AquaEyes
- Start date
Lol you can't believe the media hype. Yea it might not be the best. But heck i remember a few years ago they were posting so many maggot parts were allowed in tomato paste/sauce according to the fda. Really the only option is if you want to really know whats in your food you'd have to raise it yourself. Just my 2 cents.
Legally they can put 15% pink slime in the beef and still call it 100% beef. Blech. Pink slime is made out of the parts of the cow most likely to be contaminated by fecal material - including the hide and remnants from the slaughterhouse floor. These fatty sweepings from the slaughterhouse floor, which are notoriously rife with pathogens like E. coli 0157 and antibiotic-resistant salmonella. Hence why they need to be treated with ammonia. I don't want my family eating anything treated with ammonia.
We've been eating from local farmers who don't produce pink slime! And a hell of a lot more poultry, especially ground turkey.
Some markets have refused to carry products carrying pink slime: Safeway, Costco, Publix, Whole Foods, Gerrity's, H-E-B, Fresh and Easy, and the entire Kroger chain, etc. You can see an updated list as it grows on the Pink Slime Wikipedia page, Some fast food restaurants have pledged not to use it, either. Those are also listed on the Wikipedia page.
We've been eating from local farmers who don't produce pink slime! And a hell of a lot more poultry, especially ground turkey.
Some markets have refused to carry products carrying pink slime: Safeway, Costco, Publix, Whole Foods, Gerrity's, H-E-B, Fresh and Easy, and the entire Kroger chain, etc. You can see an updated list as it grows on the Pink Slime Wikipedia page, Some fast food restaurants have pledged not to use it, either. Those are also listed on the Wikipedia page.
From an article in the Washington Post: "The lower-cost ingredient is made from fatty bits of meat left over from other cuts. The bits are heated and spun to remove most of the fat. The lean mix then is compressed into blocks for use in ground meat. The product is exposed to ammonium hydroxide gas to kill bacteria, such as E. coli and salmonella.
Here's info on hot dogs - having been to a slaughter/meat packing plant as a kid for a school field trip, I know that most hot dogs are made with "scraps" of whatever is left after processing for other things: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Factsheets/Hot_Dogs/index.asp
Are you eating wood in your food? Here's an interesting tidbit about cellulose in people's favorite food products (including "organic"): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703834804576300991196803916.html
Andy Rooney had some quips about what's in food: http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18561_162-3325499.html
And then we have artificial sweetener with chlorine molecules http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2005/tc2005022_7832_tc024.htm , http://www.splenda.com/faq/no-calorie-sweetener
The fact is, people want great taste, convenience, easy preparation, and low price. They want to have their cake and eat it to. Would it be safer to eat more fruits/veggies that you grow yourself or buy only from sources you can trust? Yes. Would it be safer to grow/kill your own meat or buy it only from local sources you trust? Yes.
Are people going to give up convenience foods, prepared foods, etc? No. Why? BEcause growing your own food, processing your own food, and preparing your own food is time consuming as well as being somewhat expensive.
Are these people willing to pay more money for "safer food"? No. Why? BEcause people are cheap - it's why you see people buying junk food more often than fresh fruits and veggies - because junk food is cheaper.
There is always some media hype about one thing or another, but you don't see people boycotting fast food restaurants because they use fillers in their meat products. You don't see the majority of people eating only food that they grow and prepare themselves. Heck, many schools don't even have Home Ec classes anymore and many people don't even know how to cook from scratch!
People follow the media hype, especially when stuff sounds disgusting, but if they are going to have to pay more for a food, if they are going to have to spend more time preparing that food - after the media hype winds down, most of the public is going to forget all about it and continue to eat all the crap that they have always eaten.
Here's info on hot dogs - having been to a slaughter/meat packing plant as a kid for a school field trip, I know that most hot dogs are made with "scraps" of whatever is left after processing for other things: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Factsheets/Hot_Dogs/index.asp
Are you eating wood in your food? Here's an interesting tidbit about cellulose in people's favorite food products (including "organic"): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703834804576300991196803916.html
Andy Rooney had some quips about what's in food: http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18561_162-3325499.html
And then we have artificial sweetener with chlorine molecules http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/feb2005/tc2005022_7832_tc024.htm , http://www.splenda.com/faq/no-calorie-sweetener
The fact is, people want great taste, convenience, easy preparation, and low price. They want to have their cake and eat it to. Would it be safer to eat more fruits/veggies that you grow yourself or buy only from sources you can trust? Yes. Would it be safer to grow/kill your own meat or buy it only from local sources you trust? Yes.
Are people going to give up convenience foods, prepared foods, etc? No. Why? BEcause growing your own food, processing your own food, and preparing your own food is time consuming as well as being somewhat expensive.
Are these people willing to pay more money for "safer food"? No. Why? BEcause people are cheap - it's why you see people buying junk food more often than fresh fruits and veggies - because junk food is cheaper.
There is always some media hype about one thing or another, but you don't see people boycotting fast food restaurants because they use fillers in their meat products. You don't see the majority of people eating only food that they grow and prepare themselves. Heck, many schools don't even have Home Ec classes anymore and many people don't even know how to cook from scratch!
People follow the media hype, especially when stuff sounds disgusting, but if they are going to have to pay more for a food, if they are going to have to spend more time preparing that food - after the media hype winds down, most of the public is going to forget all about it and continue to eat all the crap that they have always eaten.
Last edited:
My issue, as with most of the gmo argument, is that all of this stuff is snuck in foods. They don't require labeling because they know the "food product" would be rejected by consumers. American consumers are lazy. They want wholesome foods, but they don't want to put the effort in to find out exactly what this means. The result is that we have these frenzies about food additives and how food is produced. If all of this stuff was up front and out in the open, the market would be different. Americans wouldn't freak out about stuff like this, because they would know it happens, and would make their choices based on that knowledge.
Being an informed consumer of food in this country is difficult. Farmed fish? Where is farmed? How is it grown? What are the environmental regulations? Is it grown in sea pens or inland? What is it fed? One product, so many questions.
In terms of food, a free market doesn't really work here because we don't allow a freedom of information in the marketplace. If consumers knew what meat was irradiated, and with what isotope, what products were gmo, what meat was processed with ammonia, what eggs came from confined chickens; different choices would and could be made. As things stand today, we get media frenzies, and gut reactions.
On the specific case of "pink slime", I think it is telling that until recently, it was only allowed in pet food. It was not considered wholesome enough for humans to eat. So what changed, and who changed it? As for the governers, like mine, who said it would hurt the meat industry and cost jobs if they were not allowed to put it in human food...nonsense. It would cut into meat producers profits because they would be forced back to selling to pet food.
I also suspect that "pink slime" used to go into cattle feed...but I have no proof. With the regulations to prevent Mad Cow, beef is no longer allowed to be streamed into cattle food. Wouldn't it be swell if the whole reason this showed up in human food is because it was too dangerous to feed it to the cows?
Being an informed consumer of food in this country is difficult. Farmed fish? Where is farmed? How is it grown? What are the environmental regulations? Is it grown in sea pens or inland? What is it fed? One product, so many questions.
In terms of food, a free market doesn't really work here because we don't allow a freedom of information in the marketplace. If consumers knew what meat was irradiated, and with what isotope, what products were gmo, what meat was processed with ammonia, what eggs came from confined chickens; different choices would and could be made. As things stand today, we get media frenzies, and gut reactions.
On the specific case of "pink slime", I think it is telling that until recently, it was only allowed in pet food. It was not considered wholesome enough for humans to eat. So what changed, and who changed it? As for the governers, like mine, who said it would hurt the meat industry and cost jobs if they were not allowed to put it in human food...nonsense. It would cut into meat producers profits because they would be forced back to selling to pet food.
I also suspect that "pink slime" used to go into cattle feed...but I have no proof. With the regulations to prevent Mad Cow, beef is no longer allowed to be streamed into cattle food. Wouldn't it be swell if the whole reason this showed up in human food is because it was too dangerous to feed it to the cows?
Last edited:
People eat foods for 3 reasons:
1. It tastes good.
2. They think it is good for them.
3. it is cheap
How many times do people that eat tofu based foods say "it tastes really good" the food they are imitating tastes good also but they always defend it and for someone who eats the real deal and occasionally eats the tofu dishes it does NOT taste the same although it may taste good... sometimes.
As for PS people have been eating it for years and unless you are there watching you never really know where or what you are eating.
Most small butcher plant who do custom slaughter mix your burger with other peoples and package it and give you the predetermined weight of burger back... they do this with sausage also. There are a few who do not.
Like someone said if it is a concern raise and slaughter the animals youself... then you may see why some choose to eat prepared foods.
1. It tastes good.
2. They think it is good for them.
3. it is cheap
How many times do people that eat tofu based foods say "it tastes really good" the food they are imitating tastes good also but they always defend it and for someone who eats the real deal and occasionally eats the tofu dishes it does NOT taste the same although it may taste good... sometimes.
As for PS people have been eating it for years and unless you are there watching you never really know where or what you are eating.
Most small butcher plant who do custom slaughter mix your burger with other peoples and package it and give you the predetermined weight of burger back... they do this with sausage also. There are a few who do not.
Like someone said if it is a concern raise and slaughter the animals youself... then you may see why some choose to eat prepared foods.
It would be a bummer if the label cost was more than the cost of the product. The other factor would be how many trial lawyers would be employed suing over mislabeling.
You are right the market would definitely be different.
You are right the market would definitely be different.
- Thread starter
- #18
From the Wikipedia page I linked in my first post, regarding the history of "pink slime" being allowed to be sold for humans:
In 1994, in the wake of public health concerns over pathogenic E. coli in beef, Eldon Roth, founder of Beef Products Inc. (BPI), began work on the "pH Enhancement System," which disinfects meat using ammonia.[16][17] The additive was approved for human consumption by the USDA in 2001. Some USDA scientists had argued against approval, saying that it was not "meat" and was in fact "salvage," but were overruled;[4] approval was ultimately granted by then-Under Secretary of Agriculture JoAnne Smith, who according to former USDA microbiologist Carl Custer stated "It's pink, therefore it's meat."[10] Smith left the USDA in 1993 and joined the board of directors of BPI's principal supplier, where according to ABC News she made at least $1.2 million over 17 years.[10] In 2007, the USDA determined the disinfection process was so effective that it would be exempt from "routine testing of meat used in hamburger sold to the general public."[17]
The term "pink slime" was coined by Dr. Gerald Zirnstein to refer to the resulting products in an internal email which Zirnstein wrote after the product was approved by the USDA over his objections.[4] Zirnstein has stated "I do not consider the stuff to be ground beef, and I consider allowing it in ground beef to be a form of fraudulent labeling."[17] The email was subsequently released to the New York Times following a Freedom of Information Act request for information used in a December 2009 New York Times investigative piece, which questioned the safety of the meat treated by this process—pointing to occasions in which process adjustments were not effective—and referenced "pink slime" in passing.[7][17] The next week, the newspaper published an editorial reiterating the concerns posed in the news article. A retraction, stated it had "said incorrectly that two 27,000-pound (12,247 kg) batches of processed beef had been recalled. The contamination of the meat was discovered by the company in its plant before the beef was shipped. No meat produced by Beef Products, Inc. has been linked to any illnesses or outbreaks."[18]
What I find interesting is that it was granted permission to enter the human food supply, despite protests from scientists, by a person who soon left the USDA to work for one of the large beef producers (BPI) which first proposed allowing it -- sounds like a bit of corruption. "Hey, if you push this through, we'll have a nice cushy job waiting for you with our company....."
In 1994, in the wake of public health concerns over pathogenic E. coli in beef, Eldon Roth, founder of Beef Products Inc. (BPI), began work on the "pH Enhancement System," which disinfects meat using ammonia.[16][17] The additive was approved for human consumption by the USDA in 2001. Some USDA scientists had argued against approval, saying that it was not "meat" and was in fact "salvage," but were overruled;[4] approval was ultimately granted by then-Under Secretary of Agriculture JoAnne Smith, who according to former USDA microbiologist Carl Custer stated "It's pink, therefore it's meat."[10] Smith left the USDA in 1993 and joined the board of directors of BPI's principal supplier, where according to ABC News she made at least $1.2 million over 17 years.[10] In 2007, the USDA determined the disinfection process was so effective that it would be exempt from "routine testing of meat used in hamburger sold to the general public."[17]
The term "pink slime" was coined by Dr. Gerald Zirnstein to refer to the resulting products in an internal email which Zirnstein wrote after the product was approved by the USDA over his objections.[4] Zirnstein has stated "I do not consider the stuff to be ground beef, and I consider allowing it in ground beef to be a form of fraudulent labeling."[17] The email was subsequently released to the New York Times following a Freedom of Information Act request for information used in a December 2009 New York Times investigative piece, which questioned the safety of the meat treated by this process—pointing to occasions in which process adjustments were not effective—and referenced "pink slime" in passing.[7][17] The next week, the newspaper published an editorial reiterating the concerns posed in the news article. A retraction, stated it had "said incorrectly that two 27,000-pound (12,247 kg) batches of processed beef had been recalled. The contamination of the meat was discovered by the company in its plant before the beef was shipped. No meat produced by Beef Products, Inc. has been linked to any illnesses or outbreaks."[18]
What I find interesting is that it was granted permission to enter the human food supply, despite protests from scientists, by a person who soon left the USDA to work for one of the large beef producers (BPI) which first proposed allowing it -- sounds like a bit of corruption. "Hey, if you push this through, we'll have a nice cushy job waiting for you with our company....."
Last edited:
I think there is a rather large, and perhaps deliberate, disconnect between our food and its source. Americans don't WANT to know where their food comes from, or what's in it. They just want it to show up on grocery store shelves, at a reasonable price. Every once in a while, one of us makes the connection that our meat was once alive, and out or sheer revulsion, a vegan is born. Pink Slime is just a product of our intensely industrial agricultural system. People have been eating it for decades without any problems, so why are they suddenly upset now? Because they have no idea what they are really eating. And they don't WANT to know. Ignorance is bliss.
I also think that there are a lot of people starting to move away from that system, eating locally, organically, and out of their back yard. And I think most of us here are part of that group. Why else would we be keeping chickens? Well, other than the interesting personalities and hijinks.
And finally, I think that every single objection to eating meat raised by vegetarians/vegans can be overcome by simply eating responsibly. By eating free range, properly processed meat. Yes, it's more expensive, but it's worth it not get crap like this Pink Slime. We've made the change, we don't eat processed meat at all, we eat a lot less of it, but the quality and taste is not even comparable.
I also think that there are a lot of people starting to move away from that system, eating locally, organically, and out of their back yard. And I think most of us here are part of that group. Why else would we be keeping chickens? Well, other than the interesting personalities and hijinks.
And finally, I think that every single objection to eating meat raised by vegetarians/vegans can be overcome by simply eating responsibly. By eating free range, properly processed meat. Yes, it's more expensive, but it's worth it not get crap like this Pink Slime. We've made the change, we don't eat processed meat at all, we eat a lot less of it, but the quality and taste is not even comparable.
- Aug 12, 2009
- 5,314
- 103
- 291
The company that makes it should quit whining about the smear campaign, and start selling it to animal food makers.I am sure they will still make a profit,but feeding it to people should be phased out.We eat so much junk already.
Fresh was a good movie to watch on food.
Fresh was a good movie to watch on food.
Last edited:
New posts New threads Active threads
-
Latest threads
-
CHicken Run in Winter- Started by AmbersChicks2024
- Replies: 0
-
-
Not Cocci or Worms?
- Started by fighillcottage
- Replies: 2
-
-
-
-
Threads with more replies in the last 15 days
-
-
-
-
-
How do you manage treating 5 chickens with bumblefoot?- Started by citychicks99
- Replies: 47
-
