Pink Slime: Exception or Rule?

"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 5^th, 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.