 |
| "Lean Finely Textured Beef" (LFTB) or "Pink Slime" Photo Credit: Beef Products Inc. |
In 2001, Beef Products Inc. (BPI) sent a sample of a new
beef product to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for approval. The
product was derived from pathogen-risky beef trimmings and had been treated
with a combination of ammonia hydroxide gas, flash freezing, and compression in
order to make them safe for public consumption. Although the industry calls
this product “lean finely textured beef” (LFTB), a USDA staffer in a 2002
internal memo labeled it “pink slime,” and the nickname has stuck. [1]
On March 5th, 2012, an
online publication called The Daily reported that the USDA had purchased 7
million pounds of pink slime to be used in school lunches and Bettina Siegal
started an online petition in protest.[2]
The petition garnered over 200,000 signatures in nine days and social media
buzzed with debate. Although the USDA upheld the product’s safety, restaurants
and supermarkets alike gave in to public pressure and terminated use.
Pink slime originated in the 1990s when
BPI began looking for a competitive advantage in the market. If they could turn
the fatty beef trimmings left from slaughterhouse processing into a product fit
for human consumption, they could secure just such an advantage. To remove the
fat, the trimmings were heated and spun in a centrifuge. But the more difficult challenge was the
removal of bacteria. These trimmings were prone to carry E. Coli, Salmonella,
and other pathogens. Their solution was ammonia hydroxide.[3]
 |
BPI's ammonia treated beef.
Photo Credit: New
York Times |
The product has been used in foods
such as hamburgers, hot dogs, lunch meats, pepperoni, and, meatballs.[4]
Industry estimates suggest over 70 percent of American ground beef products use
it. Although government scientists affirm that the product meets acceptable
safety standards, consumers have not been persuaded. After the 2012 March
petition, McDonald’s, Burger King, and Taco Bell all discontinued use.[5] Supermarkets
Food Lion, Safeway, and Stop and Shop also stopped carrying it, as did Kroger,
the largest chain with 2,435 stores.[6]
Walmart, the largest retailer, discontinued use and alluded to the power of
public concern in its public explanation:
As a result of customer and member
feedback, Walmart and Sam’s Club will begin offering fresh ground beef that
does not contain lean finely textured beef (LFTB)...While the USDA and experts
agree that beef containing LFTB is safe and nutritious, we are committed to
listening to our customers and providing the quality products they want at
prices they can afford.[7]
The USDA
will keep using the product within its guidelines of 15 percent in any
particular food item (hamburgers or tacos, for example), but bowing to public
pressure, it will give schools the option on whether or not to use foods that
incorporate the product.[8]
The
decision by so many retailers to pull pink slime—along with the USDA’s decision
to make it optional—is a strong testament to the growing power of social media
and of consumer activism. However, this
victory does not come without costs. The product was a cheap way of boosting
product volume. Industry estimates suggest that hamburger prices will rise
anywhere from 3 to 25 cents per pound and that the loss of this filler is equivalent
to losing 1.5 million head of cattle. Additionally, as BPI closes plants that
produce the product, they are laying off workers.[9]
Although pink
slime has attracted the most acute public scrutiny, it is merely the tip of a
processed meat iceberg. Critics quickly point to other American staples such as
hot dogs or chicken nuggets which also use chemicals—other than ammonia—to kill
bacteria and preserve food.[10]
The USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service updates a report of chemicals that
are acceptable for use in the production of meat, chicken and egg products. The
current iteration of this document is 53 pages long and includes dozens of
substances such as chlorine dioxide and sodium hypochlorite.[11]
The widely-discussed pink slime
controversy has been about one product, but the larger underlying problem has
received far less attention. The very nature of industrial livestock
production—feeding cows grain in confined, concentrated lots where they wade in
their own manure and receive regular antibiotics to stave off infection—produces
meat where E. coli, salmonella, and other pathogens are more prevalent and
dangerous. [12]
Raising risky beef requires safety precautions. BPI chose ammonia
hydroxide, but this was not the first, nor will it be the last use of chemicals
to create food. As a society we must wrestle with how much and what kind of
beef we consume. The choice has consequences. We must decide whether we want
the pink slimes of the meat industry to become the exception...or the rule.
[1] Michael
Moss, “Safety of Beef Processing Method Is Questioned,” New York Times, 30 December 2009, at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/us/31meat.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all.
[2] Bettina
Siegel, “Tell USDA to STOP Using Pink Slime in School Food!” at http://www.change.org/petitions/tell-usda-to-stop-using-pink-slime-in-school-food?utm_medium=email&utm_source=action_alert.
[3] [3]
Michael Moss, “Safety of Beef Processing Method Is Questioned,” New York Times, 30 December 2009, at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/us/31meat.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all.
[4] Dan
Piller, “Loss of ‘pink slime’ filler likely to drive up hamburger prices,” Des Moines Register, 2 March 2012, at http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2012/03/27/beef-industry-braces-for-loss-of-pink-slime-filler/.
[5] Allison
Aubrey and Eliza BarClay, “USDA To Give Schools More Ground Beef Choices After
Outcry Over 'Pink Slime',” National
Public Radio, 15 March 2012, at http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/15/148685884/usda-to-give-schools-more-ground-beef-choices-after-outcry-over-pink-slime.
[6] Mae
Anderson, “No. 1 grocer Kroger relents, ends 'pink slime' use,” 22 March 2012,
MSNB.com, at http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46824961/ns/business-retail/t/no-grocer-kroger-relents-ends-pink-slime-use/#.T3cPk44yZLp.
[7] Walmart,
“Walmart Statement Regarding Lean Finely Textured Beef,” at http://www.walmartstores.com/pressroom/news/10851.aspx.
[8] Allison
Aubrey and Eliza BarClay, “USDA To Give Schools More Ground Beef Choices After
Outcry Over 'Pink Slime',” National
Public Radio, 15 March 2012, at http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/03/15/148685884/usda-to-give-schools-more-ground-beef-choices-after-outcry-over-pink-slime.
[9] Dan
Piller, “Loss of ‘pink slime’ filler likely to drive up hamburger prices,” Des Moines Register, 2 March 2012, at http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2012/03/27/beef-industry-braces-for-loss-of-pink-slime-filler/.
[10] Ari
LeVaux, “Why Hot Dogs, Chicken Nuggets and Some Other "Meats" Are Way
Grosser Than 'Pink Slime',” AlterNet,
16 March 2012, at http://www.alternet.org/food/154580/why_hot_dogs%2C_chicken_nuggets_and_some_other_%22meats%22_are_way_grosser_than_%27pink_slime%27.
[11]USDA
Food Safety and Inspection Service, “Safe and suitable ingredients used in the
production of meat, poultry, and egg prdocuts - 7120.1 Revision 1,” 6 April
2012, at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/rdad/FSISDirectives/7120.1.pdf.
[12] Mark
Bittman, “The Pink Menace,” New York
Times, 3 April 2012 at http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/the-pink-menace/#ftn2
and Any Bellatti, “Beyond Pink Slime,” Huffington
Post, 13 March 2012, at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-bellatti/pink-slime_b_1342559.html.
