Header graphic for print

Food Safety News

Breaking news for everyone's consumption

What’s Wrong With Pink Slime?

Opinion

It’s high in protein.

It’s low in fat.

It’s been treated to kill Salmonella and E. coli.

It’s lab-tested before it is shipped.

So what’s all the fuss about?

Gerald Zirnstein, a former microbiologist with USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service, calls the product “pink slime” and doesn’t “consider the stuff to be ground beef,” according to a report carried last Wednesday evening on ABC National News.

The meat industry, including producers such as Beef Products Inc. and HRR Enterprises, Inc. call it Lean Finely Textured Beef, or LFTB – a far less catchy, but more accurate name.

Where does Lean Finely Textured Beef come from?

Producers of LFTB start with beef trim. This is the “waste” meat and fat that results from trimming higher quality beef cuts (such as steaks) to customer specifications, and is usually used to make ground beef.

The LFTB process begins by separating most of the fat from the beef. This is done by warming the trim and “spinning out” the fat in centrifuges. The result is a very lean beef: approximately 94-97% lean, according to Beef Products Inc. This lean beef can be mixed with higher-fat beef in order to produce low-fat ground beef and processed meat products.

But beef trim is notorious for carrying pathogenic bacteria – especially, E. coli O157:H7 and its close cousins, the non-O157 STEC bacteria. So Beef Products Inc. developed an ammonia gas treatment step to kill the microbes.

What’s the deal with ammonia? Is it legal? Is it safe?

Ammonia is formed naturally in the body as a result of protein digestion by bacteria that live in the intestines. The ammonia is carried in the blood (as ammonium hydroxide) to the liver; there it is converted to urea, which exits the body in the urine. It is normal and usual to find a certain amount of ammonium hydroxide in meat.

Ammonium hydroxide has been used as an antimicrobial agent in meat for more than 40 years. Its safety was reviewed in 1974 by the US Food and Drug Administration’s Select Committee on GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) Substances, who had this to say:

“Ammonia and the ammonium ion are integral components of normal metabolic processes and play an essential role in the physiology of man. Although there have been no significant feeding studies specifically designed to ascertain the safety threshold of ammonium compounds as food ingredients, numerous metabolic studies have been reported in the scientific literature. Extrapolation of these findings to the concentrations of ammonium compounds normally present in foods does not suggest that there would be untoward effects at such levels. In the light of the foregoing, the Select Committee concludes that: There is no evidence in the available information on ammonium bicarbonate, ammonium carbonate, ammonium chloride, ammonium hydroxide, mono and dibasic ammonium phosphate, and ammonium sulfate that demonstrates, or suggests reasonable grounds to suspect, a hazard to the public when they are used at levels that are now current or that might reasonably be expected in future.”

Ammonium hydroxide also is included in the USDA’s list of Safe and Suitable Ingredients Used in the Production of Meat, Poultry, and Egg Products (FSIS Directive 7120.1, Revision 2; last revised 4/12/10). It is used as a pH control agent in brine solutions for meat products, and as an antimicrobial agent for beef carcasses (in hot boxes and holding coolers) and boneless beef trimmings. Ammonia gas (anhydrous ammonia) is also used as an antimicrobial agent for lean finely textured beef.

Ammonia and ammonium hydroxide are among several antimicrobial agents that may be used on beef and poultry without labeling disclosure. Organic acid blends, calcium hypochlorite, chlorine gas, citric acid, lactic acid, and trisodium phosphate are other examples. All of these agents are considered by FDA and USDA to be processing aids rather than ingredients, when they meet one of the following criteria:

(a) substances that are added during the processing of a food but are removed in some manner from the food before it is packaged in its finished form;

(b) substances that are added to a food during processing, are converted into constituents normally present in the food, and do not significantly increase the amount of the constituents naturally found in the food; or

(c) substances that are added to a food for their technical or functional effect in the processing but are present in the finished food at insignificant levels and do not have any technical or functional effect in that food.

Do we need to worry about E. coli and Salmonella in LFTB from Beef Products Inc.?

Beef Products Inc. has adopted ammonium hydroxide treatment of its LFTB products in order to kill the pathogenic bacteria that may otherwise be present in the meat. And they’ve gone beyond USDA’s current pathogen testing requirements for these harmful bacteria. In July 2011, the company announced that it had initiated a “test and hold” policy in addition to its various preventative sanitation and food safety programs.

Every box of LFTB is sampled, and the samples sent to independent third-party labs for analysis. Every box of LFTB is held at the plant until the labs confirm that all specifications – including the absence of Salmonella, E. coli O157:H7 and other STEC bacteria – have been met. Only once the satisfactory results have been confirmed does the company allow its product to leave the premises.

What do the experts say about LFTB?

I asked Dr. James Marsden (Regent’s Distinguished Professor of Food Safety and Security at Kansas State University) for his opinion.

“There are,” he said in an emailed reply, “all kinds of ingredients in food products that can be falsely characterized as unappetizing when viewed out of context. When lay persons see the processes of cheese manufacturing, wine making and the production of the most high quality gourmet processed meats, some of the stages in the process are less than appetizing.”

“I think the criticism of BPI’s products are based on quality perceptions, not food safety,” Dr. Marsden added. “It should, however, be recognized that BPI made great strides in improving the safety of ground beef through their unique food safety processes. On the one hand, consumers demand safe foods and are right to do so; they also need to recognize that the production of safe foods requires processing interventions.”

In other words, it might have an image problem, but Lean Finely Textured Beef – aka ‘pink slime’ – is safe to eat.

——————————-

“What’s Wrong With Pink Slime?” was originally posted March 8, 2012 on eFoodAlert. Reposted with permission.

© Food Safety News
  • Mae Thompson

    BPI initiated its “test and told” system AFTER the New York Times report in 2009:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/us/31meat.html?_r=2
    which found that E. coli and Salmonella was found in BPI’s products 51 times in four years. Luckily, government testing found the bacteria before it reached schoolchildren in the school lunch program.
    Hardly a ringing endorsement.

  • Janet Riley

    Thanks for this very rational and fact filled commentary.

  • Helliem

    It has not been placed on label, so you don’t get what you pay for.this is deceptive practice.

  • http://www.thewatchers.us Jim Bynum

    I am confused?
    Disinfection 101
    Ammonium hydroxide is an effective disinfectant against coccidial oocysts however strong solutions emit intense and pungent fumes.5 This substance is not considered effective against most bacteria. General disinfection should follow the use of this compound.
    http://www.cfsph.iastate.edu/BRM/resources/Disinfectants/Disinfection101.pdf

  • Donna

    Seriously, our children deserve better cuts of meat. Should one of those cows carry something worse such as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) our kids will be the first to get it. Have we been testing for that? Oh right I think when humans in the US get that now they call it Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. Needless to say there IS a cover up and ultimately it is BAD to feed anyone bad cuts, expecially scrapings. The ammonia will never help that. Perhpas if we cleaned up the feedlots the necessity for all of the “sanitizing” would cease, but that won’t happen. We are all part of the “Acceptable Loss Policy!” Your children deserve better.

  • Holiday

    Yeah…just because something can be processed and chemically treated to the point where it may be “safe to eat”, doesn’t mean we (or our kids) should be eating it.
    These are some things I can think of off the top of my head that could also go on this apparently “safe to eat” list: dirt, sand, grass, cigarette butts, cork, wood pulp, toenail clippings, hair, ashes, dandruff, crayons…what else could we add here???

  • Bill Rees

    why should our kids,or,anyone else eat processed waste just so some company can maximize profits?
    i’ll eat my beef in the form of a pot roast or steak.

  • Eucritta

    While there may not be anything specifically unhealthful about pink slime it’s added to ground beef without the label specifying that inclusion. Thus, it’s deceptive.
    It’s also not necessary. There was, at least, some excuse for filled milk, in that it could be shipped to remote areas with dodgy refrigeration. But pink slime filled ground beef? It’s not inherently more resistant or healthful post-production, it just allows processors a chance to make a greater profit on an unappetizing product that previously went into pet foods, while making already cheap ground beef a bit cheaper all ’round.
    So – label it. Let us choose. Some won’t care; some will care and buy it anyway; and those of us who want to avoid it, can spot it and do so easily.

  • Jen

    Oh come on now, the trimmings would not transmit BSE to humans because BSE is found in brain & spinal tissue. The trimmings they speak of are mostly connective tissue trimmed from steaks & other higher priced cuts of meat. If you want the government to pay for your kids to eat prime cuts of meat, fine. But I’d rather that be something parents did at home for their children. The meat they serve in school lunches is not less healthy, it is just less APPEALING to most people. Kids eat hot dogs and bologna all the time, and those are certainly no less gross than ammoniated beef trimmings.

  • Auntie Grace

    My, my, my. We do have a lot of picky eaters here. We don’t have highchairs and booster seats enough to go around. I fear we have spoiled an entire generation of Americans. Too bad. I am not moved by the grimaces or the crocodile tears.

  • FoodSci

    Everyone needs to attend a class on meat processing for emulsified sausage products. Guess what finely textured (in the chopper, not out of the grinder) meat emulsions look like? It’s pink and you can pump it, just like LFTB. Or just put ground beef in a Cusinart if you think it’s only something that happens in large production batches.
    Sausage Manufacturing and Technology
    http://www.wishh.org/workshops/intl/nigeria/oct08/emulsifiedmeat_08.pdf
    It’s toward the end.

  • Rich

    Mae:
    Your comment regarding BPI initiating our test and hold program only after the NY Times article is not accurate. BPI led and continues to lead the industry in this practice. We initiated test and hold in the mid 1990s.
    In fact, before test and hold become the standard for industry practice, BPI encouraged customers to implement their own programs. We offered customers a buyback program in 2001 to encourage further use of test and hold programs.

  • http://facebook.com/veganforlife Janet Weeks

    They could save even more money by harvesting earthworms and adding it to the mix. Hell, earthworms are cheap, already slimy, and already pink, so there’d be no need for red-dye additives! Who would know?

  • Ruby

    Wonderful idea Janet. The ground earthworm concoction could be labeled as “Certified Organic pink slime”. Now that would be fine. A delicacy! Command a premium price from the same emotional wrecks who are hemorrhaging over BPI’s innovative product.

  • D.

    Even if everything in this article is true, why didn’t we need pink slime to make our meat supply safe BEFORE 1974? Believe me, it wasn’t in the hamburgers we used to get at our local drive-in when I was in high school in the early 1970′s. Real burger is no more unsafe than this junk if it’s handled and shipped properly. It’s just that McD’s and places who want to make a fast buck on a burger not worth 2 cents won’t be able to do that by having to use refrigerated shipping methods. Too costly and it cuts into their profits, not to mention what it does to the budgets of most school cafeterias. So we go with plastic food unsuitable to feed to a dog you don’t like and feed it to our kids, via school lunchrooms and joints like McD’s. I guess it’s progress to some people, but it’s asinine if you ask me (but then, no one did). Just use real beef and keep it real. But that also won’t keep the hospitals full and that’s an important point, too. See how circular the whole mess has become?

  • BB

    Hey parents…you don’t want your kids eating “pink slime,” but you don’t have a problem giving them a hot dog or any other emulsified product. I agree with FoodSci.
    The corporate food industry’s marketing programs are designed to decieve the consumer. Do your homework and find out where your food comes from…..maybe you’ll decide to grow your own or buy “real food.” At least you would know it’s origin.

  • Sirloin

    I cant believe the lack of food science terminology used for this discussion. Why doesnt anyone discuss the nutritional attributes in terms of Protein Efficiency Ratio (PER) or Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Assay (PDCAAS) on this product, to be sure that the added product to ground beef is equivalent in value……

  • Hot Dog

    I guess no one here would has ever eaten a hot dog.
    (not counting organic veggie dogs)

  • TC

    It is easy to judge what you don’t understand for many people. The fact is our food supply is filled with many such ingredients and as long as safe practices and policies are followed it should not be an issue. The majority of the dangers that occur in our food supply are due to lapses, ignorance or outright defiance of good manufacturing practices.
    All one needs to do is read the FDA Warning letters to see these constant occurrences. If you think not eating meat is the answer see the tofu company in San Francisco that had pigeons in their factory.
    http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2012/ucm295239.htm
    How about a factory that ignores their own food safety program?
    http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2011/ucm284409.htm
    What about the condiments you put on that hamburger you fear so much?
    http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2011/ucm291487.htm
    Ultimately everyone must make a decision as to what they want to eat. If the choices your children have to eat at school are not acceptable than make them lunches. I was only allowed to purchase drinks at school and this was several decades ago.

  • aokeefe

    Agreeing with TC. To ad to that and get some perspective the food industry is mostly about profit and streamlining the process. Nutrition and peoples wellbeing is secondary to most companies. Face it. The US is heading for a disaster (if not there already) that will inflict generations. Looking at obesity in the world these are the stats for USA:
    - of 22 industrialized countries, the U.S. has the highest obesity statistics
    - 2/3 of Americans over age 20 are overweight
    - nearly 1/3 of Americans over age 20 are obese
    Much is done to lower those stats but I bet the power of money and other traditions
    will make this downward spiral hard to brake.

  • MD

    Agreeing with TC. To ad to that and get some perspective the food industry is mostly about profit and streamlining the process. Nutrition and peoples wellbeing is secondary to most companies. Face it. The US is heading for a disaster (if not there already) that will inflict generations. Looking at obesity in the world these are the stats for USA:
    - of 22 industrialized countries, the U.S. has the highest obesity statistics
    - 2/3 of Americans over age 20 are overweight
    - nearly 1/3 of Americans over age 20 are obese
    Much is done to lower those stats but I bet the power of money and other traditions
    will make this downward spiral hard to brake.

  • http://burningbird.net Shelley

    It irritates me when I see people using an argument such as “I guess you people have never eaten a hot dog”–as if all hot dogs are made the same, or made in an identical manner as the stuff being discussed in this article.
    Depending on where you buy your hot dogs, or sausages, or whatever, you’ll get a product made in a variety of ways, and from a variety of cuts of meat. One thing you most likely won’t get, though, is waste meat that has been shipped in from various producers all over that has been cooked at low temperatures or in a pressure cooker, spun in a centrifuge, puffed with ammonia, and then hidden within fresher ground meat, and all packaged as “fresh ground meat”.
    In other words, we know what we’re getting–or not–when we buy sausages or hot dogs. We are aware of the processes, we are aware of the materials, we are aware of the fact that we may or may not be getting ‘mystery meat’, depending on the manufacturer.
    But we’re not aware of the fact that supermarkets have been shoving “boneless lean beef trimmings” into what is supposed to be “fresh ground beef”.
    If you want to use this product, then label it’s use. Let the market decide whether it wants the product or not. Don’t hide it.
    Food safety is more than processes and procedures, rules and regulations. Food safety is also about knowledge, and keeping consumers informed so we can make decisions appropriate for ourselves and our families.
    We want to know if genetically modified crops are used in our food. We want to know if humane livestock practices are used with our food. We want to know where the food originates, and if the people growing the food are mistreated. We want to know if chemicals or contaminants are in the food. We want to know the processes used to deliver the food. We want to know if something other than fresh ground beef is used in the thing we buy in the store called “fresh ground beef”.
    If this publication can’t understand this, then it isn’t the publication I once thought it was.

  • REBECCA

    I think it is sad that all my life I have trusted our government to provide safe and wholesome food for all of the people.
    It is totally misleading to the public not to put a name to any additive on any label on any product that is produced or imported into this country.
    I have a son who is so very allergic to MSG yet, anything can have the useless additive in it and it says natural ingredients. Well, rat poop is natural too but I would like to know that it is in the food I am eating.
    Raising 2 children who have probably eaten their fair share of Pink Slime, it sickens me to think that even ground beef at the local grocery store can have PS in it. Disgusting! And what about other meats? Who is to say that they don’t sweep up chicken parts and fat and use them for Chicken pink slime? We would probably never know for years!
    IT IS TIME THIS COUNTRY STARTS TAKING CARE OF US!
    WHO CARES ABOUT FUNDING FOR OTHER COUNTRIES!
    I am tired of people MOSTLY caring about only the ALMIGHTY BUCK!
    If you can’t trust your own government, it is a sad thing!

  • Borlock

    It’s very easy to avoid MSG…
    Look for any of the following ingredients in your food: organic brocoli, tomatoes, mushrooms, eggs, peas, cheese, seafood and meat, and stop eating them.
    Glutamates occur in far larger quantities in natural foods than in the “useless additive” that you’re referring to.
    Must suck for your son not to be able to eat pizza, or anything else for that matter.
    On the other hand… there has never been any documented case of a person sufferring from “MSG allergies” that have passed a double-blind study. (Most likely because natural foods would have killed people having such allergies of a long time ago! This is not like peanuts – you can’t avoid it). But maybe your son is the ONE person on earth who really DOES have an MSG allergy.
    Also calling it a useless additive is like calling salt & sugar are useless additives. (You avoid those, right?).
    Salt & sugar is far more harmful to us than most of the new modern ingredients. If salt and sugar were introduced by any food company today it’s HIGHLY unlikely that it would get FDA approval and it would have massive public outcry. Those are actually proven to causes heart disease, tooth decay, obesity, high blood pressure etc. – unlike ANY prove that you have for Ammonia Hydroxide. We accept Salt & Sugar as “Generally Accepted as Safe” because it got grandfathered into the system. But you just eat it because your great-great-great-great-grandfather ate it, and after all, he did live to the ripe old age of 35!
    Also Ammonia Hydroxide is not an additive – it doesn’t stay in the food. It’s a simple anti-microbial agent that is used to sanitize probably half the stuff you have in the kitchen today. See:
    http://www.codexalimentarius.net/gsfaonline/additives/details.html?id=380
    Do you want all those to be labeled as well?
    In the case of “pink slime” after it’s been sanitized it’s still 100% beef. Ok, so let’s add the following warning: “Warning! This 100% beef contains some more 100% beef.”

  • http://burningbird.net Shelley

    ‘In the case of “pink slime” after it’s been sanitized it’s still 100% beef. Ok, so let’s add the following warning: “Warning! This 100% beef contains some more 100% beef.”‘
    There’s beef, and then there’s beef. Saying that we consumers only need to know that the material we’re buying is “100%” beef denies us the information we need to make effective buying decisions.
    I only buy grassfed beef from humane certified farms. This decision not only impacts on how the cows are raised, and treated, but also the quality of the meat. Grassfed beef is less likely to have problems with E.Coli than corn fed beef. Grassfed beef is generally healthier beef.
    But it’s all “100% beef”.
    What I’m hearing here is that the USDA and this company, and even this publication, all say this material is perfectly fine to eat. Fine and dandy: then label products that contain it.
    It is just that simple.

  • mrothschild

    Shelley: I like to support local farmers, too, but, unfortunately, all cattle — grass-pastured and corn-fed feedlot cattle — are natural reservoirs for pathogenic E. coli.
    The scientific evidence indicates there are no clear safety advantages to grass-fed beef over feed-lot beef. Several studies have shown that overall coliform contamination does not differ. Grass-fed cattle have been implicated in several foodborne disease outbreaks (the outbreak strain in the big 2006 spinach outbreak was isolated from grass-fed cattle), as well as contamination of a water supply that sickened 2,300 people and killed 7.
    The exception to this may be cattle fed distiller’s grains — the stuff left over when corn is processed to make ethanol — in the last few months before slaughter. Research indicates a higher prevalence of E. coli O157:H7 in the manure of cattle whose corn-based feed included the distiller’s grains than those whose corn-based feed did not.
    Nevertheless, promoting or marketing grass fed beef as less likely to have problems with harmful E. coli is not only inaccurate, but dangerously deceptive, and could cause consumers to disregard important advice on how to safely handle and cook beef.

  • Mary Rothschild

    Shelley: I like to support local farmers, too, but, unfortunately, all cattle — grass-pastured and corn-fed feedlot cattle — are natural reservoirs for pathogenic E. coli.
    The scientific evidence indicates there are no clear safety advantages to grass-fed beef over feed-lot beef. Several studies have shown that overall coliform contamination does not differ. Grass-fed cattle have been implicated in several foodborne disease outbreaks (the outbreak strain in the big 2006 spinach outbreak was isolated from grass-fed cattle), as well as contamination of a water supply that sickened 2,300 people and killed 7.
    The exception to this may be cattle fed distiller’s grains — the stuff left over when corn is processed to make ethanol — in the last few months before slaughter. Research indicates a higher prevalence of E. coli O157:H7 in the manure of cattle whose corn-based feed included the distiller’s grains than those whose corn-based feed did not.
    Nevertheless, promoting or marketing grass fed beef as less likely to have problems with harmful E. coli is not only inaccurate, but dangerously deceptive, and could cause consumers to disregard important advice on how to safely handle and cook beef.

  • http://burningbird.net Shelley

    I appreciate the update on E.coli in grass fed beef, Mary.
    My bad for not investigating further, or believing what I read without further investigation.
    The companies I’ve bought from do not promote the meat as safer–just healthier. I buy grassfed beef because I do not like CAFOs, and prefer more humane practices. I also believe that CAFOs are extremely damaging to the environment.
    One company I’ve purchased from is Hearst, and as you can see, they don’t tout the meat as safer, just better.
    http://www.hearstranch.com/grass-fed-benefits
    The other I purchased from is American Grassfed Beef, in my own state of Missouri. Again, no claims about anything other than using a healthier approach to raising the cattle.
    http://www.americangrassfedbeef.com/grassfed-beef-standards.asp
    I should have done more due diligence about the grassfed beef E.Coli claim. I certainly shouldn’t have repeated the claim without checking further.
    Even this heavily pro-grassfed site was careful to note about safe handling being necessary for all beef.
    http://www.eatwild.com/foodsafety.html
    So again, I shouldn’t have repeated something that’s not proven. My bad.
    And it doesn’t make a bit of difference how I feel about this stuff.

  • JC

    I’m sorry, but do people really know what is in hotdogs? The packages do not specify what is a part of the meat trimmings and by-products: mean pork stomachs or snouts; beef, veal, lamb, or goat tripe; beef, veal, lamb, goat, or pork hearts, tongues, fat, lips, weasands, and spleens; and partially defatted pork fatty tissue, or partially defatted beef fatty tissue.
    If people read that, or even saw the actual process of making hotdogs, bologna, sausage, etc., they probabaly would elect not to buy it.
    This ranting and raving has been unfairly directed toward one product, and leaving out all the rest.

  • Scott

    The problem I see with it is Anhydrous Ammonia used to kill bacteria becomes a Preservative.(Nitrates) The FDA has a law that states.
    CFR – Code of Federal Regulations Title 21
    21 CFR 101.22(j) A food to which a chemical preservative(s) is added shall, except when exempt pursuant to 101.100 bear a label declaration stating both the common or usual name of the ingredient(s) and a separate description of its function, e.g., “preservative”, “to retard spoilage”, “a mold inhibitor”, “to help protect flavor” or “to promote color retention”.
    So the question is, did they get an exemption and if so why? The consumer deserves this information to make educated decisions in their food choices. Is the USDA willigly letting them break the law? I guess I can’t blame them; who’d buy hamburger with Anhydrous Ammonia listed as an ingredient?

  • R. C. H. Schmidt

    Will “Pink Slime” become the “Soylent Green” of the next century. Wait and see.

  • R. C. H. Schmidt

    Will “Pink Slime” become the “Soylent Green” of the next century. Wait and see.

  • Anonymous

    Wow, what a money-promoting exec-marketing name “Lean Finely Textured Beef” I mean “textured” and “fine” almost sounds gourmet. Dear BPI and USDA, call it what it is: Ammonia Treated By Product and see how far you get. Slap an ATBP label on your product and watch the profits go down. This entire issue is a VIOLATION of any sort of truth-in-labeling act or law whatsoever.

    • adam

      Have you even seen how they make soda and what chemicals are in it, this is nothing compared to what is in soda.

  • Hayden

    “there have been no significant feeding studies specifically designed to ascertain the safety threshold of ammonium compounds as food ingredients”
    WHAT?? So millions of people in the USA are consuming these artificial chemical ingredients despite the fact that there have been NO RESEARCH done specifically dedicated to determining the safety of consuming such chemicals?
    THAT IS NOT FOOD SAFETY. How can foodsafetynews.com presume that this is ‘good enough’? I’m no expert on food and I still know it’s not good enough!!
    Food safety involves doing multiple studies to determine that a chemical is safe to digest, BEFORE allowing it to be put in food!!
    DEMAND MORE OF YOUR GOVERNMENT AS THEY ARE DOING A TERRIBLE JOB AT KEEPING YOUR FOOD SAFE.

    • James Williams

      Artificial chemicals? Did you read the article? Ammonia is produced naturally in our body and is processed by it extremely well.

  • Ed

    My problem is that the government and the beef industry seemingly conspired to sell us a product we might not have chosen to buy. The question is not is it edible or is it nutritious? The question is do we want it? Since the product was reportedly to lower the cost of ground beef I suggest that LFTB (alone) be made into patties packaged as a stand alone product. Those that can’t afford ground beef ( and those who support the idea) could buy it at presumably a much lower price than normal ground beef, and the rest of us could buy ground beef with confidence that it is truly ground beef.

    • adam

      At least this was from the cow, I am wondering how this is a bigger issue than what soda companies put in their products, cancer causing chemicals for dyes, strong acids that can melt away the inside of a penny, and more.

  • bruce wayne

    the ground beef an pink slime is pretty much the same thing