"Pink Slime" in 70% of U.S. Ground Beef (Read 1364 times)

    Why is it wrong and derogatory to call a pink slime "pink slime," but it's okay to call pink slime "ground beef"? 

     

    Explain that for me, spaniel.


    Needs more cowbell!

      The most nefarious product I can remember feeding cattle is Lucky Charms.  Our cousins used to get the seconds of the marshmallows by the semi trailer full and they'd feed them to the cattle.

       
      Wha...?!  Why wouldn't they sell that...to ME?!  They could call them "Unlucky Charms."  I would gladly eat them. Blush 

      Kirsten - aka "Auntie Kirsten"

      '14 Goals:

      • 2 olympic distance duathlons -- 6 days apart -- PR at least 1

      • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)

         

        Farming, in general, is subjected to a lot of misinformation and downright urban legends created by people who don't have any experience with it. 

         

        This is true, but it is also subject to a lot of misinformation and downright rural legends as well, created by people who have a direct financial interest in it.


        Fat butt on couch

          Why is it wrong and derogatory to call a pink slime "pink slime," but it's okay to call pink slime "ground beef"? 

           

          Explain that for me, spaniel.

           

          "Ground beef" is a widely accepted and standard terminology for a product.

           

          "Pink slime" is not; it was created by someone trying to make an issue out of it. 

          "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

           

            "Ground beef" is a widely accepted and standard terminology for a product.

             

            "Pink slime" is not; it was created by someone trying to make an issue out of it. 

             

            The reason "ground beef" is widely accepted and standard terminology is because ground beef has been around for, well, a really long time. Pink slime has been injected into ground beef for a couple of years, and it's created by a highly technical process. They are two very different things. One is beef that has been ground. The other is slimy pink stuff. But we should have the same word? Hmmm. 

             

            So, basically, we either just go with a word that disguises what's happening--beef industry marketing that has no relation to reality--or we go with a description of reality. You choose the marketing. This does not seem like you, to muddle reality with words. I thought that was what liberal intellectuals were supposed to do, not down home farmer types.


            Fat butt on couch

              This is true, but it is also subject to a lot of misinformation and downright rural legends as well, created by people who have a direct financial interest in it.

               

               

              That may be true.  Providing an actual example, as I did, would be helpful in reinforcing that claim.

               

              People of all walks of life may create information/misinformation if they have a financial (or other) interest in something.  Human nature.  However, having spent time in agriculture (in which I no longer have any personal financial interest, BTW), I am astounded by some very common perceptions of what goes on that have no basis in reality.  That, or rare/unrepresentative cases are put forth as standard practices.

               

              I just shared what I know based off first-hand experience.  I don't think one should be surprised if I am unconvinced and/or irritated by people who argue positions based of third- or fourth-hand information that I know, from personal experience, is not accurate.

              "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

               

                That may be true.  Providing an actual example, as I did, would be helpful in reinforcing that claim.

                 

                There's an actual example on the table. You can read about it in the OP. (?)

                 

                MTA: I will spell out the example for you: calling a pink ammonia treated slime of meat products "ground beef." That's straight up marketing, and there is a financial interest in evoking the rural bucolic life in selling beef products (and also downplaying the industrial agriculture.)


                Fat butt on couch

                  The reason "ground beef" is widely accepted and standard terminology is because ground beef has been around for, well, a really long time. Pink slime has been injected into ground beef for a couple of years, and it's created by a highly technical process. They are two very different things. One is beef that has been ground. The other is slimy pink stuff. But we should have the same word? Hmmm. 

                   

                  So, basically, we either just go with a word that disguises what's happening--beef industry marketing that has no relation to reality--or we go with a description of reality. You choose the marketing. This does not seem like you, to muddle reality with words. I thought that was what liberal intellectuals were supposed to do, not down home farmer types.

                   

                  As I posted previously, it is my perception (though I have not followed this closely enough for long enough to know it to be 100% factual) that the FDA concern over "pink slime" was not safety-related, but related to truth-in-packaging.  So it is my opinion that the FDA felt that "pink slime" and standard ground beef were two different things, and perhaps the consumer had the right to know if they were combined....if one was putting this additive into standard ground beef they should have to disclose it.

                   

                  I have no problems with that...seems straightforward and sensible.

                   

                  However, if you read around, the correct name for "pink slime" appears to be "beef trimmings".  "Pink slime" was deliberately created by this Zirnstein person to negatively brand beef trimmings and give them a yuckier-sounding name.  Zirnstein is the person doing marketing, not the beef industry.

                  "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                   


                  Fat butt on couch

                    There's an actual example on the table. You can read about it in the OP. (?)

                     

                    MTA: I will spell out the example for you: calling a pink ammonia treated slime of meat products "ground beef." That's straight up marketing, and there is a financial interest in evoking the rural bucolic life in selling beef products (and also downplaying the industrial agriculture.)

                     

                    Well, here is another example of misconceptions in agriculture.  The meatpacking industry has nothing to do with rural interests and farmers.  Farmers hate meatpackers, for the most part.  Most of the markup in the meat value chain goes to meatpackers....farmers get paid commodity prices and much smaller margins.

                     

                    Farmers don't really give much care to whether meatpackers get to sell their beef trimmings or not.

                    "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                     

                      As I posted previously, it is my perception (though I have not followed this closely enough for long enough to know it to be 100% factual) that the FDA concern over "pink slime" was not safety-related, but related to truth-in-packaging.  So it is my opinion that the FDA felt that "pink slime" and standard ground beef were two different things, and perhaps the consumer had the right to know if they were combined....if one was putting this additive into standard ground beef they should have to disclose it.

                       

                      I have no problems with that...seems straightforward and sensible.

                       

                      However, if you read around, the correct name for "pink slime" appears to be "beef trimmings".  "Pink slime" was deliberately created by this Zirnstein person to negatively brand beef trimmings and give them a yuckier-sounding name.  Zirnstein is the person doing marketing, not the beef industry.

                       

                      Why is it okay for the beef industry to market and not Zirnstein.

                       

                      Looks more like pink slime than ground beef to me:

                       

                        Well, here is another example of misconceptions in agriculture.  The meatpacking industry has nothing to do with rural interests and farmers.  Farmers hate meatpackers, for the most part.  Most of the markup in the meat value chain goes to meatpackers....farmers get paid commodity prices and much smaller margins.

                         

                        Farmers don't really give much care to whether meatpackers get to sell their beef trimmings or not.

                         

                        How was I implying that this was an issue with farmers? I agree with this completely.

                         

                        My point was that the meat industry relies on bucolic images of farm life and practices to sell its products. 

                           will spell out the example for you: calling a pink ammonia treated slime of meat products "ground beef."

                          Maybe I'm not following, but who is calling it that?  The final product of [ground beef muscle plus processed beef trimmings] is being called "ground beef".  From the article:

                           

                          Zirnstein and his fellow USDA scientist, Carl Custer, both warned against using what the industry calls “lean finely textured beef,”...

                          “Everything you need is already inside.” -- Bill Bowerman


                          Fat butt on couch

                            Why is it okay for the beef industry to market and not Zirnstein.

                             

                            Looks more like pink slime than ground beef to me:

                             

                             

                            Calling a product by its standard, non-branded, generic name (beef trimmings) is not marketing.  Giving an already-named product a disgusting-sounding moniker as you are trying to convince people that it's not something you want to eat, is.

                             

                            A similar example, but when where I'd agree with you that marketing is being done from the supply side, is corn syrup's rebranding as "corn sugar".  They were trying to get away from the negative brand attributes attached to the syrup.  They even ran commercials geared to this campaign.  Beef trimmings is a descriptive, generic, and non-branded terminology.

                            "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                             


                            Fat butt on couch

                              My point was that the meat industry relies on bucolic images of farm life and practices to sell its products. 

                               

                              That's because meat processing, beef trimmings aside, is a disgusting industry and nobody would eat the stuff if they saw the process with their own eyes.  Much easier to show Grandpa rocking on the porch eating beef-trimmings-and-tongues-encased-in-cleaned-out-intestines.

                               

                              Wink

                               

                              MTA:  And what Clive said.  Jeff I think we're just talking past each other here.  I'd agree with you that if the stuff (whatever you want to call it) is mixed in with ground beef the buyer should have the right to know. 

                              "If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does.  There's your pep talk for today.  Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

                               

                                But "beef trimmings" seems awfully gentle compared to what the substance really is and how very highly processed it is, wouldn't you agree?  I acknowledge that beef is also processed, but not to that level.  "Beef trimmings" conveys to me stuff like skin, bones and fat -- the kind of detritus you'd have on your cutting board after processing your deer/elk.

                                 

                                MTA: edited to "elk", as I doubt even spaniel can obtain a license to hunt elves.

                                “Everything you need is already inside.” -- Bill Bowerman