Really curious where this started and I wonder if it’s possible to track back and find out. Someone with an agenda no doubt.
I’ve been to BPI’s plants and they are the cleanest facilities I have even seen, I thought it was a dairy operation at first given the sterling clean facility. I’ve eaten their product and wouldn’t hestitate to continue to eat their products. Where they came up with a “slime” lable is beyond me, not a bit of that anywhere. Seeing it for yourself makes me a beliver in their product. And for those that stated it causes “e-coli”, it does just the opposite. Whoever would believe any story the media puts out today show they don’t have the ability to think and reason for themself. Sad to hear this happening to such a great company.
Whereas corn sugar may be a name worth fighting for, “pink slime” is definitely not. It is the infelicitous term for what beef producers prefer to call lean, finely textured beef, a filler comprising trimmings subjected to an ammonia-based gas to kill pathogens. Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver decried the filler process on his television show, and the campaign against pink slime has gone viral through social media and a Change.org petition to stop its use in school lunches.
The term was reportedly coined by Gerald Zimstein, the former USDA scientist who brought the process to the public’s attention. Zimstein is not—surprise—a fan of the product. He also objected to a USDA decision allowing its use to be concealed from the American public and has made a point of calling it out. You’ll find him in the ABC News story reporting that some 70 percent of ground beef products in grocery stores contain pink slime.
...
She [KJ Dell’Antonia, who writes the Motherlode blog for the NYT] also notes that that the ammonia, put in context with our other chemical exposures, doesn’t seem especially worrisome. And I tend to agree there too. What’s more interesting to me—and what hasn’t been covered especially well in the slime stories—is that foods that are ammonia-processed are remarkably widespread. Among them are breads, pastries, cheeses, chocolates, breakfast cereals, sports drinks, fruits, vegetables….in other words, if we’re going to worry about chemical processing, beef products need to stand in line.
Another smart piece from Amy Hubbard at the Los Angeles Times notes that even the consumer-advocacy group Center for Science in the Public Interest isn’t particularly alarmed about pink slime, noting rather depressingly that a lot worse things go into the daily diet. The center does plan to investigate whether the super-processed beef bits are less nutritious than regular beef.
...
But one more point, just to complicate the story. You’ll recall I mentioned that the USDA has agreed to allow schools to choose slime-improved beef or to reject it. But it turns out that the regular, unprocessed ground beef alternative, lacking that super-lean filler, has a higher fat content. Another health story, anyone?