Header graphic for print

Food Safety News

Breaking news for everyone's consumption

Governors Help BPI Wash Ammoniated Beef of ‘Pink Slime’ Image

"Dude, it's beef!"

Three governors, among them recent presidential candidate Rick Perry of Texas, two lieutenant governors, and the Under Secretary for Food Safety at the U.S. Department of Agriculture all went to bat for Beef Products Inc. in a press conference in South Sioux City, Nebraska Thursday to assure consumers that Lean Finely Textured Beef, now widely known as “pink slime,” is safe and nutritious.

The event was part of a broader effort this week to fight negative press coverage and win back consumers after the company was forced to suspend operations at three of its four plants — halting around 70 percent of its production capacity — as major national retailers like Kroger and Safeway dropped the product.

“We need to stand together to clear up the misinformation that has been circulating in the media,” said Iowa Governor Terry Branstad, who helped organize the event. “These accusations are totally unfounded… I am proud to say that for 20 years I and my family have been eating it.”

Kansas Governor Sam Brownback called the national controversy over LFTB “an unmerited and unwarranted food scare” and said it would lead to higher lean ground beef prices and cause more people to buy higher fat ground meat.

Screen Shot 2012-03-29 at 11.10.25 PM.png“Dude, it’s beef!” said Brownback. “It’s good beef.”

The governors largely echoed the message put out by the American Meat Institute just before the event. In a press release, AMI urged the media to stop using the term “pink slime.” 

“Let’s call this product what it is and make ‘pink slime’ a term of the past,” said Gov. Perry, who warned that unchecked “social media rumors” and “hysteria” could take down any industry. “What industry is not vulnerable to this type of fast-spreading misinformation. If the beef industry can succumb to this, who’s next?”

Food safety experts including STOP Foodborne Illness President Nancy Donley and director of the Center for Food Safety at Texas A&M University Gary Acuff spoke in support of BPI’s food safety record and testing policies, which are ahead of the curve for the industry.

“It’s critical to have companies that put food safety first,” said Donley, who lost her only son to E. coli contaminated ground beef in 1993. Donley said she believes BPI’s food safety record is “unchallengeable.”

“I think these folks have saved lives. They don’t know it, they can never prove it, they can never show it, that you or you or you, or your child is alive because of something they’ve done,” said Donley, in an emotional address that received a standing ovation. “I’m really afraid of what campaigns like this can do to impact all of food safety…why would a company want to go that extra step, go that extra walk, only to put a target on their back?”

Financial ties questioned

The 45-minute press conference was tense at times. During two very heated exchanges between ABC News and the panel of speakers, BPI’s financial ties to both Gov. Terry Branstad and STOP Foodborne Illness were called into question.

In their online financial disclosure forms, STOP lists a $250,000 contribution in 2010 from an anonymous donor and a single $500,000 donation in 2009, also from an anonymous donor.

Nancy Donley fiercely defended her nonprofit’s independence and said STOP would gladly take “no strings attached” donations from other other corporations to help further their cause.

“We have been very grateful to BPI for being supportive of us,” said Donley. “BPI has never asked us for a single thing — ever. We will never be compromised in our position of protecting consumers from pathogens in the food supply. That is or mission, period. My goal is to put my organization out of business, so that there are no foodborne illness victims anymore — that is my professed goal. No price can be put on my son’s head! I can’t be bought and neither can my organization!”

Gov. Branstad was also questioned about what impact BPI’s $152,000 contribution to his 2010 campaign had on his decision to speak out in support of the company.

“None whatsoever!” shouted Branstad. “Let me tell you this, I will always fight for my constituents and I will always fight for what’s right, and I will never be intimidated by anybody in the press who tries to make those accusations.”

Both Donley and Branstad’s responses were met with loud applause from the audience.

President and CEO of BPI, Eldon Roth, has long been a donor to a number of candidates and campaigns. According to Federal Election Commission data, Roth and his wife have together given more than $380,000 over the years to presidential and congressional campaigns, political action committees (PACs), and to large party organizations, like the Republican National Committee. The Roths also contributed $21,000 to Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman’s 2010 election campaign.

The Roths have been engaged in the 2012 election, too. In October the couple donated $190,000 to state-level PACs in five states set up by presidential candidate Mitt Romney,  according to the Washington Post.      

Message war

Whether BPI and its supporters can win the message war remains to be seen.

“BPI has a major PR problem,” said Marion Nestle, a Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health professor at New York University. “The name “pink slime” is a framing device that is virtually impossible to counter.”

“Evidently, BPI has the political clout to pull in governors, USDA officials, and even food safety advocates on its behalf. I can’t help wondering whether their support for pink slime derives from a genuine belief that the public has treated BPI unfairly, or whether they are responding to the generous campaign contributions and charitable donations by BPI’s owner,” added Nestle, who has written several books on food politics and food safety. “I’m willing to grant that pink slime is safe, but that doesn’t make it acceptable.”

The term “pink slime” — which Gov. Brownback called an unfortunately catchy name — was first used by former USDA microbiologist Gerald Zirnstein in a private email to department colleagues. The New York Times later obtained the email via a Freedom of Information Act request and used the quote in an article that questioned the safety of BPI’s process.

Under Secretary Elisabeth Hagen said the term “pink slime” was not “certainly not any kind of official terminology” and is not widely used jargon in the meat industry. 

At least two online petitions have been launched on behalf of BPI. One on change.org called “Sustainable Food Petition: Beef Is Beef” had well over 3,000 signatures as of Thursday and the other, “Address libel, slander and social media influencing government agency decisions” is posted at whitehouse.gov has a little over 1,500 — the latter takes issue with the USDA’s recent policy change, which gives school districts a choice on whether they will purchase ground beef that contains LFTB. The White House has pledged to respond to petitions that garner at least 25,000 signatures.

For recent Food Safety News coverage on the LFTB controversy, see: “BPI Suspends 70 Percent of Ammoniated Beef Production.”

© Food Safety News
  • Michael Bulger

    I can’t help but take issue with the food safety card being played on BPI’s behalf.
    To my understanding, these trimmings were previously kept out of the human food supply. The trimmings are also known to be more vulnerable to contamination.
    BPI found a way to make more money off of these trimmings. They could treat them with ammonia and sell them for ground beef patties. The treatment brought the trimmings closer to normal ground beef safety levels, but as BPI said in the NYTimes, they “are not perfect.”
    If the ammonia treatment is improving the safety of LFTB, it is still not going to effect the food safety of ground beef patties. To repeat an assertion I made previously, dropping a tablespoon pasteurized milk into a glass of raw milk doesn’t improve the safety of the glass. The same holds true for the ground beef supply, as I think we can all be assured the AMI intends for us to “drink the whole glass”, if you will.
    Ammoniated LFTB in ground beef patties is about BPI making more money off of hazardous trimmings. It is not about reducing illness.
    As I will be saying, “Dude, it’s raw ground beef.” Cook thoroughly.

  • JC

    Comparing LFT beef with raw milk is absurd. Just what we might expect from someone who routinely struggles to comprehend causation logic. The cult of foodie ideologues is some intense piece of work.

  • http://www.johnmunsell.com jmunsell

    I’d like to respectfully respond to Michael Bulger’s comments. I do agree that blending safe LFTB trimmings into a larger batch of trimmings will not purify the remainder of the total batch. While ammonia hydroxide treatment will kill bacteria in the ammoniated meat, it has zero impact on the remainder of trimmings into which the LFTB is blended. It could dilute the level of bacteria in the blended mixture, but will not kill the bacteria.
    I also agree that the LFTB had previously been excluded from the human food supply. Frankly, consumers want to eat lean meat, not a high fat percent sausage “grease burger”. Having boned out beef for decades, I readily acknowledge that a certain % of trimmings from beef carcasses is so blasted fat that we simply don’t have a human market which will accept and consume all that yucky grease. For this marketing problem, not because of innate pathogen presence, these fat trimmings have been diverted to other markets, such as pet food.
    An unconscionable critic (unwittingly) to the industry is USDA/FSIS, which unfortunately has made public statements that boneless trimmings are “High Risk”. Please note that FSIS has not differentiated between high-lean trimmings versus high-fat trimmings! We must admit that bacteria aren’t drawn to trimmings simply because the trim has a high fat content. All trimmings emanating from the exterior of carcasses (which is where fecal material are deposited on the kill floor) have equal access to abattoir pathogens.
    The only slimy situation I observe in all this is that USDA allows meat to be shipped into commerce which the USDA itself has identified as “High Risk”. The fact that the agency allows “High Risk” (by its own admission) meat to be labeled with the official USDA Mark of Inspection which states “USDA Inspected and Passed” reveals the sinister mindset at the agency.
    Capitalism rewards enterprising individuals who identify a need, and fill it, benefitting everyone. BPI saw the enormous tonnages of high-fat content trimmings, which are perfectly healthy but just too blasted fat for us to eat, being shipped to low-value marketing options such as pet food, and developed a way to extract the lean meat from it. Granted, the final product is worth more, allowing BPI to benefit, while consumers also benefitted from leaner products at lower costs. Now, I can imagine how Communism might pillory such a win-win situation, but here in America? When we suffer from too high an unemployment number, I simply cannot process the argument that BPI’s activities are all about making money off of hazardous trimmings. If the trimmings were indeed hazardous, and BPI made them safe, how can we criticize BPI? I don’t criticize GM for making money off the Impala I drive, as GM met my need, a benefit of Capitalism.
    I agree with Mr. Bulger’s concluding remark “Dude, it’s raw ground beef. Cook thoroughly”. Although USDA has overtly mislead Americans into thinking that all raw meat & poultry should be safe because of HACCP, common sense tells us that raw meat & poultry which has not been exposed to a kill step indeed carries a risk, and we must handle and cook it with care. Frankly, ammoniated meat is much safer than untreated trimmings, to the benefit of consumers.
    John Munsell

  • Wynann Brownell

    I don’t give a damn if the eat the crap raw. Nobody has a right to doctor our food with anything and especially not telling us!

  • SD girl

    these trimmings were “previously” kept out of the food supply… 35 years ago. BPI has been in business for about that long, and has been producing a safe wholesome product ever since.

  • Jen

    Well said, John.

  • Terry S. Singeltary Sr.

    ammonia treated beef DOES NOT KILL MAD COW DISEASE !!!
    these stupid photo ops eating hamburgers to try and prove beef is safe, is so stupid.
    i remember john gummer in the UK force feeding his daughter a hamburger, trying to prove the UKs beef was safe. years later, after that stupid photo op, a close friend of their family, she died at 23 of mad cow disease. turned out that UK beef was not so safe after all. see photos of Governor rick perry looking as stupid as john gummer did back then. see photos of both here ;
    pink slime and a ship of fools, with Governor Rick Perry at the helm.
    john gummer of England, force fed his daughter mad cow beef. a few years later, a young friend of theirs (23) died from mad cow disease. NOW, Governor Rick Perry, shows he is as big a fool as John Gummer.
    http://media.kansascity.com/smedia/2012/03/29/21/01/MiPpi.SlMa.81.jpg
    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2009/12/30/article-0-01F258B0000004B0-450_468x286.jpg
    see more on this sad sad saga here ;
    Wednesday, March 14, 2012
    PINK SLIME, MRM’s, BSE AKA MAD COW DISEASE, AND THE USDA NSLP
    http://madcowusda.blogspot.com/2012/03/pink-slime-mrms-bse-aka-mad-cow-disease.html
    Sunday, August 28, 2011
    Rick Perry, Texas, BSE aka mad cow disease, CJD, and 12 years of lies there from
    http://sciencebushwhacked.blogspot.com/2011/08/rick-perry-texas-bse-aka-mad-cow.html
    kind regards,
    terry

  • Michael Newburn

    This is another attempt by the news media to destroy something simply because it can. Its also seems strange to me that Mrs. Obama has not come out in support of BPI solely based on its higher percentage of lean beef that is being provided to our children in American Schools. This is based as much on politics as it is sensationalism. In an economy that boosts almost 10% unemployment its hard to believe that the news media is giving its best effort to destroy 10,000 jobs and destroy countless lives. Yes I did say 10,000 jobs. Its not only BPI employees that will be effected by these closings. There are countless other businesses out there that will close also. This is going to cause a domino effect in the job industry. Was this false story worth the jobs of these hard working Americans. SHAME ON THE MEDIA. Same on those that use the media to push their political agendas.

  • David W

    I dont want any chemical added to my food. I used to hunt ..kill..clean…eat. Safely eating it. Never added ammonia. Have a clean slaughterhouse and if you cant produce meat at $5 a pound do it at X and see if you can make a living.Sell the beef at $10 if you have to… but sell 100% beef.
    Its not like we have to eat it anyways. Me? I will never buy ground beef from a store shelf again.If its ground while I watch, sure.
    The FDA has become a joke. We are becoming a second class coutry.

  • http://bluetwothree.blogspot.com Gabi

    “Trimmings”? It’s animals you’re killing for food! And if you absolutely can’t do without meat, then I’m all for using up as much of the animal as possible, so that fewer of the poor creatures will be raised in factory farms, artificially fattened up, pumped full with hormones and antibiotics, live miserable little lives devoid of space, natural light, and real food, and are brutally killed.
    If that means you have to eat pink slime, I’m all for it. The whole business of meat is gross anyway.
    Go vegan. It’s healthier for you, more ethical in terms of animal treatment, much more sustainable for the planet, and it can eradicate world hunger if crops aren’t fed to the legions of livestock, but to people.

  • http://www.johnmunsell.com John Munsell

    I’d like to respectfully respond to Michael Bulger’s comments. I do agree that blending safe LFTB trimmings into a larger batch of trimmings will not purify the remainder of the total batch. While ammonia hydroxide treatment will kill bacteria in the ammoniated meat, it has zero impact on the remainder of trimmings into which the LFTB is blended. It could dilute the level of bacteria in the blended mixture, but will not kill the bacteria.
    I also agree that the LFTB had previously been excluded from the human food supply. Frankly, consumers want to eat lean meat, not a high fat percent sausage “grease burger”. Having boned out beef for decades, I readily acknowledge that a certain % of trimmings from beef carcasses is so blasted fat that we simply don’t have a human market which will accept and consume all that yucky grease. For this marketing problem, not because of innate pathogen presence, these fat trimmings have been diverted to other markets, such as pet food.
    An unconscionable critic (unwittingly) to the industry is USDA/FSIS, which unfortunately has made public statements that boneless trimmings are “High Risk”. Please note that FSIS has not differentiated between high-lean trimmings versus high-fat trimmings! We must admit that bacteria aren’t drawn to trimmings simply because the trim has a high fat content. All trimmings emanating from the exterior of carcasses (which is where fecal material are deposited on the kill floor) have equal access to abattoir pathogens.
    The only slimy situation I observe in all this is that USDA allows meat to be shipped into commerce which the USDA itself has identified as “High Risk”. The fact that the agency allows “High Risk” (by its own admission) meat to be labeled with the official USDA Mark of Inspection which states “USDA Inspected and Passed” reveals the sinister mindset at the agency.
    Capitalism rewards enterprising individuals who identify a need, and fill it, benefitting everyone. BPI saw the enormous tonnages of high-fat content trimmings, which are perfectly healthy but just too blasted fat for us to eat, being shipped to low-value marketing options such as pet food, and developed a way to extract the lean meat from it. Granted, the final product is worth more, allowing BPI to benefit, while consumers also benefitted from leaner products at lower costs. Now, I can imagine how Communism might pillory such a win-win situation, but here in America? When we suffer from too high an unemployment number, I simply cannot process the argument that BPI’s activities are all about making money off of hazardous trimmings. If the trimmings were indeed hazardous, and BPI made them safe, how can we criticize BPI? I don’t criticize GM for making money off the Impala I drive, as GM met my need, a benefit of Capitalism.
    I agree with Mr. Bulger’s concluding remark “Dude, it’s raw ground beef. Cook thoroughly”. Although USDA has overtly mislead Americans into thinking that all raw meat & poultry should be safe because of HACCP, common sense tells us that raw meat & poultry which has not been exposed to a kill step indeed carries a risk, and we must handle and cook it with care. Frankly, ammoniated meat is much safer than untreated trimmings, to the benefit of consumers.
    John Munsell

  • Michael Newburn

    This is another attempt by the news media to destroy something simply because it can. Its also seems strange to me that Mrs. Obama has not come out in support of BPI solely based on its higher percentage of lean beef that is being provided to our children in American Schools. This is based as much on politics as it is sensationalism. In an economy that boosts almost 10% unemployment its hard to believe that the news media is giving its best effort to destroy 10,000 jobs and destroy countless lives. Yes I did say 10,000 jobs. Its not only BPI employees that will be effected by these closings. There are countless other businesses out there that will close also. This is going to cause a domino effect in the job industry. Was this false story worth the jobs of these hard working Americans. SHAME ON THE MEDIA. Same on those that use the media to push their political agendas.

  • Michael Newburn

    This is another attempt by the news media to destroy something simply because it can. Its also seems strange to me that Mrs. Obama has not come out in support of BPI solely based on its higher percentage of lean beef that is being provided to our children in American Schools. This is based as much on politics as it is sensationalism. In an economy that boosts almost 10% unemployment its hard to believe that the news media is giving its best effort to destroy 10,000 jobs and destroy countless lives. Yes I did say 10,000 jobs. Its not only BPI employees that will be effected by these closings. There are countless other businesses out there that will close also. This is going to cause a domino effect in the job industry. Was this false story worth the jobs of these hard working Americans. SHAME ON THE MEDIA. Same on those that use the media to push their political agendas.

  • Steve

    The ONLY safe beef is organic 100% grass-fed beef.
    But hey if you want to eat beef that’s been jacked up with hormones, fed GMO corn and given massive amounts of antibiotics to combat the diseases that arise from CAFO conditions…it’s ALL YOURS!

  • http://www.stevesmarketanddeli.com Steve

    Those defending and promoting “Pink Slime” should be wearing “Tough Enough To Eat Pink Slime” shirts!

  • Ted

    We wisely prefer to wear our “Smart Enough to Not Eat Organic Manure” tee shirts…while munching contentedly on a cheeseburger! I can’t fathom all the fuss over LFTbeef. I’ve eaten fast food burgers for years and years, no doubt containing plenty of LFTbeef. I didn’t “need to know”, but now that I do I don’t feel deceived or cheated or grossed-out or outraged…actually it makes me hungry for a good MickeyD’s or BurgerKing double hamburger! Don’t change anything in those burgers, guys. You shouldn’t let silly activist dummies convince you to mess with perfection.

  • mrothschild

    Grass-fed, organic beef is certainly an option, especially for those who can afford it, but promising — or guaranteeing — that it is safe is dangerously deceptive.
    All cattle, pastured on grass or grain-fed in confinement, can harbor pathogens in their intestines and shed them in their feces. Any beef contaminated with pathogenic fecal matter can make humans sick, so it’s important to handle and cook all beef safely.

  • Ruby

    But, Mary, we’re wearing our special “Organic is Safer ‘Cause We Say So” tee shirts. You know, the ones with the magic protective force field to keep away bad boogiemen of all sorts. These grass stains on our tee shirts let you know we mean business. Oh, wait, those aren’t exactly grass stains…organic fertilizer, actually. My bad.

  • http://burningbird.net Shelley

    First, kudos to Michael Bulger. I’ve been using his “tablespoon of pasteurized milk” analogy in comments to stories where ignorant journalists seem to think using this product makes all the meat safer.
    On to the article:
    This is just getting extreme. People are beginning to verge on beatification of BPI, which is absurd. Last time I looked, BPI ain’t walking on water.
    Nancy Donley claims we should support BPI because it puts safety first, but BPI puts profits, first. Of course it does, it’s a for-profit company.
    The company’s effort for food safety are as much for marketing and cost effectiveness as corporate responsibility. More than any other meat product, BPI’s adulterated beef has the potential to trigger a massive food recall. It gets mixed into so many products sold by so many companies that any failure to ensure the safety of the product could have catastrophic results.
    A tablespoon of pasteurized milk can’t make raw milk safer, but a tablespoon of raw milk could seriously impact on the safety of the pasteurized milk.
    And look at all the defense this company is getting now from food safety people just because of its practices. I mean, you can’t buy that type of support.
    Speaking of which…
    I find it disturbing that three governors are promoting a for-profit enterprise. Especially in light of the fact that these same elected officials have been the recipient of donations. And it’s unconscionable for a USDA official to drag the government into providing free corporate marketing.
    (I’ll leave it to the STOP board to determine at what point Donley’s efforts on behalf of BPI may compromise the integrity of the charity’s efforts.)
    The change.org petition just demonstrates how absolutely clueless BPI is about social media. Unless you can garner the same numbers (it can’t) as the petitions against “pink slime”, it should never even go this route.
    Mary, you’re right in correcting the misunderstanding that organic beef is safer than non-organic where it comes to pathogens. As you say, all beef must be handled safely, and cooked to the proper degree.
    But Steve did reference three factors that are true for organic beef and not true for in-organic beef: the cows are not fed GMO corn, they are not given antibiotics, and they’re not given hormones.
    Food safety is related to more than _just_ the presence of pathogens, don’t you think?
    (Suggestion for future article, perhaps.)
    Michael Newburn, exaggerating the number of jobs impacted did not work for the Keystone Pipeline; it won’t work for BPI, either.

  • Mary Rothschild

    Grass-fed, organic beef is certainly an option, especially for those who can afford it, but promising — or guaranteeing — that it is safe is dangerously deceptive.
    All cattle, pastured on grass or grain-fed in confinement, can harbor pathogens in their intestines and shed them in their feces. Any beef contaminated with pathogenic fecal matter can make humans sick, so it’s important to handle and cook all beef safely.

  • http://burningbird.net Shelley

    Correction to comment:
    Make that non-organic, not inorganic. Adulterated beef isn’t a rock.

  • Sandy

    I’dlike to comment here. its about the grass fed vs confined cattle issue. Grass fed beef has room to roam and does not need the antibiotics that are used on confined cattle. Nor are they fed growth hormones that confined cattle are. The feelots are crowded and filthy, neccessatating antibiotics to keep the anmal healthy under those conditions. I buy grass fed beef and organically produced milk (I am not a fan of raw milk because I feel its unsafe). I am not going to buy ammoniated ground beef either because I would rather have beef that does not have trimmings in it. I buy Kosher hot dogs fro this reason (no I am not Jewish) when will the industry listen to consumers?

  • Michael Newburn

    Shelly I don’t work for BPI but let me explain the facts to you. The workers at the BPI plants are not the only workers affected. There so many companies that have BPI as their only vendor. Any intelligent person would recognize that many companies will be affected by BPI’s closing. Box Companies, Trucking Companies, Support Companies that provide and make the equipment that BPI uses. The list could on on and on. Only a closed minded person would not see the domino effect. Maybe the Governors are worried about how these closings will hurt the people who will lose their jobs as a result of lies. Maybe you have a job that is safe or maybe if you lose your job it will not cause a major financial problem for you but that it not the case for thousands of hard working Americans. What are you basing your information on “Media Bias” I assume. Wake up you are destroying lives with your biased slant on a product you know nothing about. Don’t believe something because some reporter was looking to sensationalize a story for his benefit. I guess if the media reported its bad it must be bad. Can one persons lies and distortions ruin a company and the jobs they supply. REALLY

  • Michael Newburn

    Shelly I don’t work for BPI but let me explain the facts to you. The workers at the BPI plants are not the only workers affected. There so many companies that have BPI as their only vendor. Any intelligent person would recognize that many companies will be affected by BPI’s closing. Box Companies, Trucking Companies, Support Companies that provide and make the equipment that BPI uses. The list could on on and on. Only a closed minded person would not see the domino effect. Maybe the Governors are worried about how these closings will hurt the people who will lose their jobs as a result of lies. Maybe you have a job that is safe or maybe if you lose your job it will not cause a major financial problem for you but that it not the case for thousands of hard working Americans. What are you basing your information on “Media Bias” I assume. Wake up you are destroying lives with your biased slant on a product you know nothing about. Don’t believe something because some reporter was looking to sensationalize a story for his benefit. I guess if the media reported its bad it must be bad. Can one persons lies and distortions ruin a company and the jobs they supply. REALLY

  • Michael Newburn

    Shelly I don’t work for BPI but let me explain the facts to you. The workers at the BPI plants are not the only workers affected. There so many companies that have BPI as their only vendor. Any intelligent person would recognize that many companies will be affected by BPI’s closing. Box Companies, Trucking Companies, Support Companies that provide and make the equipment that BPI uses. The list could on on and on. Only a closed minded person would not see the domino effect. Maybe the Governors are worried about how these closings will hurt the people who will lose their jobs as a result of lies. Maybe you have a job that is safe or maybe if you lose your job it will not cause a major financial problem for you but that it not the case for thousands of hard working Americans. What are you basing your information on “Media Bias” I assume. Wake up you are destroying lives with your biased slant on a product you know nothing about. Don’t believe something because some reporter was looking to sensationalize a story for his benefit. I guess if the media reported its bad it must be bad. Can one persons lies and distortions ruin a company and the jobs they supply. REALLY