Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

blackspade

(10,056 posts)
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 01:31 PM Sep 2013

Yuck. ‘Pink slime’ returns to school lunches in 4 more states

Pro-meat packing propaganda.....

Thousands of schools across the U.S. rushed last year to stop feeding their students meat that contained the ammonia-treated beef, known by industry as lean finely textured beef. Their action followed a massive media uproar, which included a prime time show featuring British celebrity chef Jamie Oliver and a series of critical reports by ABC World News.


Actually Oliver was referring to chicken nuggets, but this "journalist" obviously can't be bothered with details....

Considered by the beef industry to be an impressive innovation, lean finely textured beef is made from the remnant scraps of cattle carcasses that were once deemed too fatty to go into human food. The scraps are heated and centrifuged to reclaim bits of muscle and then the product is treated with ammonium hydroxide to kill bacteria like Salmonella and E. coli before being mixed into ground beef. Currently, USDA allows these beef products to contain up to 15 percent lean finely textured beef without labeling requirements, but last year the department said it would allow voluntary labeling.


Oh yes, quite impressive.

“USDA has repeatedly affirmed that lean finely textured beef is safe, wholesome, and nutritious 100% lean beef,” adds Craig Letch, director of food safety and quality assurance for Beef Products Inc., the largest manufacturer of the product. “With the successful use of LFTB by [USDA’s National School Lunch Program] over the last 15 years, we are confident that these states and school districts will enjoy both quality and cost improvements. This will ultimately enable them to provide more nutritious lean beef to their children.”

CSPI’s Wootan also doesn’t have an issue with LFTB in terms of nutrition or safety. “Mostly it’s just that parents thought it was gross,” she says.


Not only is it gross, dumbass, but if this shit was so "safe, wholesome, and nutritious 100% lean beef" why have you been hiding it for the last 15 years? And why are our kids the industries guinea pigs? Maybe it's because adults wouldn't stand for it if they knew?

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/pink-slime-school-lunches-96502.html
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Yuck. ‘Pink slime’ returns to school lunches in 4 more states (Original Post) blackspade Sep 2013 OP
“USDA has repeatedly affirmed that lean finely textured beef is safe, wholesome, and nutritious 100% leftyohiolib Sep 2013 #1
Cattle hoofs are "beef" as well DJ13 Sep 2013 #2
In the distant past, people would eat all parts of the animal Orrex Sep 2013 #3
More like 60 but, that's not the point blackspade Sep 2013 #4
Citric acid is also used, for instance Orrex Sep 2013 #5
That is not the same at all. blackspade Sep 2013 #6
You aren't actually advancing your position Orrex Sep 2013 #8
At least I have a position. blackspade Sep 2013 #10
Ugh. woo me with science Sep 2013 #7
Gag with Industrial Ag foodlike product substance Berlum Sep 2013 #9
 

leftyohiolib

(5,917 posts)
1. “USDA has repeatedly affirmed that lean finely textured beef is safe, wholesome, and nutritious 100%
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 01:59 PM
Sep 2013

lean beef,” translation someone in the usda has been bought off

Orrex

(63,208 posts)
3. In the distant past, people would eat all parts of the animal
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 02:24 PM
Sep 2013

Of course, I'm talking about the really ancient past, like 40 years ago.

Thank god we've moved beyond that savage time, so that we eat only the aesthetically pleasing parts of our animals and throw the rest in a ditch.


blackspade

(10,056 posts)
4. More like 60 but, that's not the point
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 02:30 PM
Sep 2013

The point is that the crap they are calling food was never considered edible even by butchers.
It was usually used to make glue or pet food (not that that was awesome).
The fact that they have to disinfect it with Ammonia should tell you that it was not fit for consumption.

Orrex

(63,208 posts)
5. Citric acid is also used, for instance
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 02:47 PM
Sep 2013
The fact that they have to disinfect it with Ammonia should tell you that it was not fit for consumption.
That's the same as saying "The fact that they have to cook chicken should tell you that it was not fit for consumption."

Would you prefer that they not try to kill e coli bacteria?



blackspade

(10,056 posts)
6. That is not the same at all.
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 04:43 PM
Sep 2013

That is ridiculous.
I would prefer that they ban feedlots and slaughter animals in a fashion that minimizes contamination.
Rather than the current methods which maximize profit at the expense of public health.

But hey, I'll eat the non-manufactured meat, and you can have your ammonia soaked lean meat product.
Enjoy.

Orrex

(63,208 posts)
8. You aren't actually advancing your position
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 05:42 PM
Sep 2013

You declare my point ridiculous but fail to support your claim.

You declare that treating meat to kill bacteria is not the same as treating meat to kill bacteria, but you don't explain why this might be so.

You attempt to ridicule me by implying that your selection of food is somehow more enlightened than mine, but you don't back this up.

Why should I accept anything that you have to say on the subject? Because you say so?

blackspade

(10,056 posts)
10. At least I have a position.
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 06:19 PM
Sep 2013

You are equating cooking food with treating meat remnants with ammonia.
They are obviously not the same.
This shit they are trying to foist off as food, is a manufactured product utilizing chemicals. It is not a cut of edible meat.
And how am I ridiculing you? My choice is to eat actual cuts of meat that is humanely slaughtered.
I don't have 'back this up.'
I'm not sure of the reason for your original attack wherein you made unsubstantiated claims as well.
If you have a counter argument as to why this crap should be in our food supply, I'm all ears.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
7. Ugh.
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 04:48 PM
Sep 2013
As of Sept. 3, seven states put in orders to the USDA for about 2 million pounds of beef that may contain the controversial product for the meals they serve in the 2013-14 school year. At this time last year there were only three states — Iowa, Nebraska and South Dakota — that had put in orders for beef that may contain lean finely textured beef.

But as schools across the country grapple with tight budgets, some are changing their minds and accepting the lower-price alternative product that brings down the price of the food they serve. Schools in Illinois, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Texas have now done an about face and also put in orders with the USDA for ground beef that may contain the product, government data obtained by POLITICO reveal.

It’s no wonder. Lean finely textured beef brings down the cost of ground beef by about 3 percent, which can add up quickly in a program that feeds more than 31 million school children each day.



Berlum

(7,044 posts)
9. Gag with Industrial Ag foodlike product substance
Tue Sep 10, 2013, 06:02 PM
Sep 2013

Livestock fed on the waste product of GMO mutant corn after it is converted to biofuel. The, after slaughter, delicately mixed with pink slime before it gets to your plate.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Yuck. ‘Pink slime’ return...