Pink Slime...what's in your burger?
Options
Replies
-
If you like ammonia in your food, good for you. I would prefer my meat without it.
That's nice, but ALL meat has amonia in it. The good news is you can effectively remove it with cooking.
I don't have an interest one way or another, but it appears you have a choice between a more expensive beef with more e-coli (i.e., fecal matter) and less ammonia. Or a cheaper product with less e-coli and more ammonia.
Go with whichever one turns your stomach less. Pesonally, I don't find a slightly elevated pH level of ammonia off-putting. In a perfect world I'd be able to weigh the negatives of increased ammonia against the negatives of increased e-coli with a variety of scientific studies, but that's not feesable, so I'm not going to argue anyone else's choice. Efficency also plays a big role in my preferance beyond it's direct effect on my pocketboook. Really, it's an execise in conservation. Use less cows, use less energy, lessen the environmental impact. I find that appealing. But like I said, I won't argue against your choice to avoid it.
Also, the "pink slime" is also over 90% lean beef, so that may be a factor for you as well if you value protien in your diet over fat.0 -
If you like ammonia in your food, good for you. I would prefer my meat without it.
That's nice, but ALL meat has amonia in it. The good news is you can effectively remove it with cooking.
I don't have an interest one way or another, but it appears you have a choice between a more expensive beef with more e-coli (i.e., fecal matter) and less ammonia. Or a cheaper product with less e-coli and more ammonia.
Go with whichever one turns your stomach less. Pesonally, I don't find a slightly elevated pH level of ammonia off-putting. In a perfect world I'd be able to weigh the negatives of increased ammonia against the negatives of increased e-coli with a variety of scientific studies, but that's not feesable, so I'm not going to argue anyone else's choice. Efficency also plays a big role in my preferance beyond it's direct effect on my pocketboook. Really, it's an execise in conservation. Use less cows, use less energy, lessen the environmental impact. I find that appealing. But like I said, I won't argue against your choice to avoid it.
Also, the "pink slime" is also over 90% lean beef, so that may be a factor for you as well if you value protien in your diet over fat.
yes all meat and most foods have ammonia in them but when the levels are so HIGH that the workers complain about the overpowering smell...there is a serious problem.
I will take my chances with the higher priced beef and cook it accordingly.0 -
Don't even bother arguing with this guy. Elementary1, signed up today, 0 lbs to lose, and their only posts are in full defense of this disgusting process that anyone with half a brain would understand is bad for you, is obviously a shill for this "Beef Products" company.
I like how he says ammonia breaks down when you cook it- well what does he think happens to the e.coli when you cook it?0 -
Another reason why I'm glad to be a pescatarian.0
-
Don't even bother arguing with this guy. Elementary1, signed up today, 0 lbs to lose, and their only posts are in full defense of this disgusting process that anyone with half a brain would understand is bad for you, is obviously a shill for this "Beef Products" company.
I like how he says ammonia breaks down when you cook it- well what does he think happens to the e.coli when you cook it?
:laugh: My thoughts exactly! :drinker:
Food Handling 1010 -
Oh dear lord.... :sick:
There is a book out there that is along these lines that will have your skin crawling and stomach churning. You will seriously not want fast food EVER again. Called Toxin and is based on actual events and practices in the fast food world. I will try to find the name of the author and edit my post.
Author: Robin Cook.0 -
Don't even bother arguing with this guy. Elementary1, signed up today, 0 lbs to lose, and their only posts are in full defense of this disgusting process that anyone with half a brain would understand is bad for you, is obviously a shill for this "Beef Products" company.
The thought crossed my mind when I saw this thread was the first topic to be commented on. What do these companies do? Search the internet all day to go argue their toxic sludge?
And Elemntary1...I know you won't answer publicly...but do you really eat this and feed this to your family?? Since you are an insider my guess would be no.0 -
I watched the Jamie Oliver show too ... OMG ... how disgusting!!! I am so glad I went veggie a few years back and vegan this year!!
It's appalling what the meat and dairy industry get away with ... once you start reading and learning about it, you will be scared to eat anything! :noway:
the veggie/vegan isn't safe either. look at what the grain industry does to corn, soy and others to 'engineer' better food. scary and yuck! you should not be able to 'patent' a seed!!!0 -
This is why I only feed my family grass fed beef! No nasty stuff. Also glad to live in Canada cause they don't allow growth horomones in any food, so unlikely this would be permitted for use here.
Back in the day before industrialized meat processing eating beef was a treat because it was expensive, really you don't need to eat it every day.
It is the industrialized process that causes all of these meat diseases, so spend the money and just eat less beef. And for gods sake don't feed your kids fast food it is not food.0 -
Don't even bother arguing with this guy. Elementary1, signed up today, 0 lbs to lose, and their only posts are in full defense of this disgusting process that anyone with half a brain would understand is bad for you, is obviously a shill for this "Beef Products" company.
The thought crossed my mind when I saw this thread was the first topic to be commented on. What do these companies do? Search the internet all day to go argue their toxic sludge?
maybe you're right and he works for that company (doubt it), but don't assume that all people that disagree with you are shills or trolls. i hope you both apologize if he does stick around. everyone has to have a first post somewhere! plus, this is a FITNESS site, not just used for weight loss.0 -
Barf!!!0
-
It doesn't really bother me.
If I'm sitting down to eat some meat, the dead flesh of another living being, I fully expect and want disgusting as it is.
Top it off with some solidified bovine secretions processed with stomach lining and we are good to go!0 -
Don't even bother arguing with this guy. Elementary1, signed up today, 0 lbs to lose, and their only posts are in full defense of this disgusting process that anyone with half a brain would understand is bad for you, is obviously a shill for this "Beef Products" company.
The thought crossed my mind when I saw this thread was the first topic to be commented on. What do these companies do? Search the internet all day to go argue their toxic sludge?
maybe you're right and he works for that company (doubt it), but don't assume that all people that disagree with you are shills or trolls. i hope you both apologize if he does stick around. everyone has to have a first post somewhere! plus, this is a FITNESS site, not just used for weight loss.
I understand people disagree and I always welcome a good debate or a different point of view. It was more the way the argument was presented that raised a red flag for me. It was more of a "sell" than a difference of an opinion.
If I am wrong I will certainly apologize...but I don't see this person returning to dispute it either. :huh:
And it is not uncommon for companies to have their people out on the internet. Take Match.com, they have had lawsuits because they hire attractive people to contact members to keep them interested and renew their memberships. Companies on Amazon employ people to write raving reviews for products (even if 90% of the rest of the reviews are saying the exact opposite). It happens.0 -
Wow. Yes I did create this account today, specifically to reply to this post. My real account is used strictly to remain accountable with my friends (real world, not virtual) on our food and exercise programs. I don't use that account to get involved in forum discussions, but I do occasionally browse the message boards. This topic was interesting enough for me to want to reply.
To you above who has commanded the rest to not to "bother arguing with Elementary1", I agree. I'm not arguing with anyone, so there is no reason to argue with me. I have a differing viewpoint, that's all.
In an overwhelming number of instances, "natural" foods are advantageous. But I won't make the jump to equate "natural" and "good", nor will I make the jump to equate "unnatural" with bad. Some instances will arise where something that is unnatural is better than its natural counterpart. I strive to be a skeptic and avoid an ideology. I will believe that which has the best evidence to support it, and be willing to change my views in an instant when the evidence changes.
So I will agree that natural foods are better, except when they're not. This looks to me like a case where the more natural production process has been bested by a decidedly unnatural process. I could be wrong, but after giving critical thought to the evidence available, that's the conclusion I've arrived at. But like I said, more information could easily tip my conclusion in another direction. So far, none has been presented.
I find advancements in food production technology fascinating. The human race cannot have thrived as it has without advancements. Norman Borlaug genetically engineered high yield crops and is credited with saving billions of lives from starvation. Anhydrous ammonia (the stuff used in the Oklahoma City bombing) is of course used as a fertilizer for these crops. Though there may be downsides, it would be impossible to argue against these advances.
In the future (though we may not live to see the day), our food will less natural than at any point in human history, and it will be healthier and tastier than anything you've ever had. Imagine, if you will, a machine that works very much like a 3D printer does today, only it is used to instantly "print" and cook food. It will be loaded with cartridges that have the very components of foods broken down to dehydrated powders. You can order a meatloaf. Just like a 3D printer, it will construct the meatloaf, bit by tiny bit. I little bit of powder from this cartridge, a little from that cartridge, mix it with a tiny bit of water, layer it on, and apply a little heat to cook it. In a manner of minutes the fully cooked meatloaf will be dispensed. The nutritional content will be precise, and controlled to your exact specifications. Easily monitored (by you or your doctor), and easily changed. Grocery stores won't exist. When you start to run low on a cartridge a new one will be delivered. The inefficiencies in food distribution (the area where the most inefficiency exist) will be gone. Food will be cheap, plentiful, healthy, and unnatural.
To get back on point, the article in question was presented with the goal of eliciting a negative reaction from the reader, and not much else. It was not a true critique of the process that weighs its costs and benefits. I attempted my own critique, and I arrived at a different conclusion than the author.0 -
Oh, and does anyone know where I can find one of those jobs where I puruse internet postings and defend corporate interests?
I might actually enjoy that job!0 -
Oh, and does anyone know where I can find one of those jobs where I puruse internet postings and defend corporate interests?
I might actually enjoy that job!
Match.com :laugh:
And I apologize for thinking you were a corporate internet PR person.
IDK, I hope I don't live to see the day of powdered food but that is just me. :huh:0 -
In an overwhelming number of instances, "natural" foods are advantageous. But I won't make the jump to equate "natural" and "good", nor will I make the jump to equate "unnatural" with bad. Some instances will arise where something that is unnatural is better than its natural counterpart. I strive to be a skeptic and avoid an ideology. I will believe that which has the best evidence to support it, and be willing to change my views in an instant when the evidence changes.
So I will agree that natural foods are better, except when they're not. This looks to me like a case where the more natural production process has been bested by a decidedly unnatural process. I could be wrong, but after giving critical thought to the evidence available, that's the conclusion I've arrived at. But like I said, more information could easily tip my conclusion in another direction. So far, none has been presented.
So very well stated. Bravo!0 -
gross... I have the urge to throw up the burger i just ate from wendys...0
-
Now that all the disinformation has been spread by the sheeple and the media here are some facts.
http://beefisbeef.com/2012/03/15/top-7-myths-of-pink-slime/
The media has been spreading a lot of myths about what “pink slime” is. The image spreading on the internet is not beef. Read more about the top 8 myths of pink slime below.
Myth 1:
Boneless lean beef trimmings look like pink slime.
Fact:
The photo many media have used to represent pink slime is not boneless lean beef trimmings.
Boneless lean beef trimmings actually looks like this.
Myth 2:
“Boneless lean beef trimmings” or “lean finely textured beef” which have recently been called “pink slime,” are just “fillers” and not beef at all.
Fact:
As their real names suggest, boneless lean beef trimmings are 100% USDA inspected beef. Imagine trimming fat from a roast or steak. There’s always some meat that is trimmed with the fat. It is this meat, trimmed from the fat, which becomes boneless lean beef trimmings. When you compare the nutrition analysis of this lean beef with 90% lean/10% fat ground beef, they are virtually identical. That’s because boneless lean beef trim is beef – period.
Myth 3:
Ground beef produced with boneless lean beef trimmings is less nutritious than other ground beef.
Fact:
A side-by-side comparison of nutrition labels for 90% lean/10% fat ground beef demonstrates this lean beef has substantially identical nutritional value as 90% lean ground beef. Lean ground beef is low in fat and is a good or excellent source of 10 essential nutrients, including protein, iron, zinc and B vitamins.
Myth 4:
Boneless lean beef trimmings are produced from inedible meat.
Fact:
Boneless lean beef trimmings are 100% edible meat. These trimmings are simply the lean beef removed from the meat and fat that is trimmed away when beef is cut into steaks and roasts. The meat in these trimming is nearly impossible to separate with a knife so, historically, this product only could be used in cooked beef products when the fat was cooked and separated for tallow. But now there is a process that separates the fat from the fresh lean beef, and it is this fresh lean beef that can be used in ground meat foods like hamburger and sausages. No process exists that could somehow make an inedible meat edible.
Myth 5:
Dangerous chemicals are added to boneless lean beef trimmings.
Fact:
This is a reference to ammonium hydroxide, essentially ammonia and water, both naturally occurring compounds that have been used to make foods safe since 1974, when the Food and Drug Administration declared it GRAS or Generally Recognized as Safe, the highest safety attribution the agency assigns to compounds. Boneless lean beef trimmings receive a puff of ammonia to eliminate bacteria safely and effectively. When combined with moisture naturally in beef, ammonium hydroxide is formed, which is a naturally occurring compound found in many foods, in our own bodies and the environment. Food safety experts and scientists agree it is an effective way to ensure safer ground beef.
Myth 6:
Food safety advocates are concerned about the safety of boneless lean beef trimmings.
Fact:
Scientists, advocates and plaintiff’s lawyers, who in many cases are critical of the beef industry, have all stepped forward to praise Beef Products Inc. and its efforts at food safety.
Myth 7:
Because ammonium hydroxide is an ingredient, ground beef containing boneless lean beef trimmings should be labeled.
Fact:
Ammonium hydroxide is not an ingredient added to the product – rather, the product receives a puff of ammonia to eliminate bacteria safely and effectively. When combined with moisture naturally in beef, ammonium hydroxide is formed, which is a naturally occurring compound found in many foods including baked goods, cheese, chocolate, and puddings, in our own bodies and the environment. It is used in the production of each of these foods as a processing aid and not an ingredient, so not “on the label” of those foods either. It is safe and has been approved by FDA since 1974 and specifically approved for its food safety benefits in beef processing since 2001
Myth 8:
Lean finely textured beef (LFTB) is “filler” for ground beef.
Fact:
Many in the media have begun to describe Lean Finely Textured Beef (LFTB) as “filler” for ground beef. This is factually inaccurate. Meat fillers include cereals, legumes, vegetable, roots and tubers, and may not be used in anything carrying the term “ground beef” due to its standard of identity. On the other hand, LFTB is an end product made from boneless lean beef trimming, the very same beef that is processed into roasts and steaks for retailers and restaurants. These trimmings are simply small pieces of beef with fat attached.
The boneless lean beef trimmings become “finely textured” using high-technology food processing equipment that resembles a large, high-speed mixing bowl, in which they are warmed to help separate away the fat so that only the beef remains. The result is a high-quality beef product and is at least 90 percent lean.
LFTB is blended into ground beef, which is required by law to be made exclusively from beef. It has not been labeled as a separate ingredient because it is 100 percent beef. It is not an additive or filler. In fact, to label it as anything but beef would raise truth-in-labeling questions.0 -
Would you rather have ecoli? I mean wtf. Unless you have your own cow or buy directly from the farm Wth do you expect? There is such a demand for meat and the food industry has grown so big something has to be done to keep it clean. This is the best current option. Until.everyone buys beef from local grassfed small time farmers and there is a complete overhaul of the food industry, I would rather know my meat doesn't have ecoli.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 999 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions