As a result of my recent efforts to end the use of LFTB in USDA-procured beef for the National School Lunch Program, I’ve been chosen as one of eight finalists for Healthy Child Healthy World’s 2012 Mom on a Mission campaign.
I’m truly honored by this nomination, but when you see the other seven finalists and their accomplishments, you’ll understand why I don’t feel I deserve to be in their company. The strides we made this spring toward improved food transparency and consumer choice were only possible because we all voiced our opinion together. It was truly a collective victory and I share this nomination with everyone who signed my Change.org petition.
Here’s a video statement I was asked to submit for the campaign:
Voting begins tomorrow, Saturday, September 1st and will end on Monday, October 15th. When the link goes live tomorrow, you can vote here. (I’ll also share the link on Facebook and Twitter now and then during the voting period.) The winner will be honored at a special fundraising event in New York City this fall.
Thank you to Healthy Child, Healthy World!
Do You Love The Lunch Tray? ♥♥♥ Then “like” The Lunch Tray! Join almost 4,000 TLT fans by liking TLT’s Facebook page (or follow on Twitter) and you’ll get your Lunch delivered fresh daily, along with bonus commentary, interesting kid-and-food links, and stimulating discussion with other readers. You can also check out my virtual bulletin boards on Pinterest and find selected TLT posts on The Huffington Post.
Copyright secured by Digiprove © 2012 Bettina Elias Siegel
Oliver says
Congrats, You have my vote – you are a hustler for all of the good causes – the most important causes.
Oliver
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Thank you!
Steve says
Bettina,
I wouldn’t expect votes from any of the 1500 families that lost their livelihood by the closing of processing facilities that produce or blend LFTB. This is an example where emotion and sensational journalism was allowed to trump sound science against a business that had an excellent safety record. And it was all accomplished by folks with no training in food science or nutrition. Didn’t you find it odd that not one, of hundreds of meat scientists from either private industry or academia, jumped on board with the initial allegations from the guy who left USDA. They are not all in the pocket of the meat industry.
And I hope you don’t find it surprising that those in the meat industry eat the products that they create. They are not knowingly poisoning themselves for the sake of a profit. However a background in biochemistry and organic chemistry is very helpful in understanding how using things like ammonium hydroxide gas to adjust pH, assist in the process.
It’s clear from the comments in your video that you still don’t understand the process, but it hasn’t gone unnoticed that you didn’t launch a campaign against eating bread. After all, they were using ammonium hydroxide long before BPI started using it, as were several other foods.
The livestock industry has long prided themselves in not wasting any of the animal after harvest. BPI came up with a modern way to separate small bits of meat from small pieces of fat without tediously using a knife to do it. Now that they are closed we have 7 million pounds of lean meat each week that is not available for human consumption and meat prices have gone up. So much for being “green.”
I understand wanting food labeled, but if people like Jim Avila and Jamie Oliver had better researched this whole story before going on the attack, it wouldn’t have had to end the way it did. Perhaps it is shame on the beef industry for not being proactive, but I don’t see it that way. The precedent of adjusting pH with ammonium hydroxide and not labeling, was set decades earlier with other food. Beef just became the fall guy because this is the first anybody noticed. I suppose in the end, meat will be better labeled that it contains a few ppb of something that will not harm you, for the sake of the few people that can’t find enough to worry about, but in my opinion it was not worth the grief that it caused for 1500 families in the end.
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Steve: I certainly respect your opinion and commend you for sharing it here in a respectful and civil way, which has not been the case with most pro-LFTB commenters. This past spring I wrote at great length on TLT about numerous issues associated with LFTB: my concerns about the product based on scientific assessment and published reports; my belief in the one’s right to make informed decisions about the food one eats and feeds one’s children; and about the job losses associated with the collapse in demand for LFTB — job losses which no one takes lightly, I can assure you. I won’t reopen those discussions here but here’s one such post covering many of these issues, and here is another.
Oliver says
What effect do you think this ammonia treatment has on the nutrients – those nutrient molecules that are proteins and amino acids? You speak of what science may or may not know. Chemists know one sure way to degrade a protein is with ammonia. You can google that yourself if you like.
Respectfully, you can research, independent of all food industry websites or political ones, how pH balance impacts amino acids. Or just buy a book on proteomics – I recommend “Introduction to Protein structure” by Carl Branden.
Read that and other books purely on proteins – not from a food point of view and you will see that the joke is on so many who don’t realise that meat treated in such a way renders it void of it’s essential nutrients.
If there is something wrong with industry, while it may cost jobs, it is more important to save lives, or at least ensure that we are getting nutritionally sound food stuffs.
We should stop consuming sugar, it’s killing half our country in one way or another – if we all stopped with sugar consumption and subsequent production, the country of Domincan Republic would collapse (unless they use the cane for fuel based endeavors). Should we be more concerned with a nations capitol demise or a bigger nations failing health?
Should we continue production of jack daniels or cigaretes because chemists have to provide for their families? At some point, one has to overide the other. And the health of peoples should always trump everything else.
I don’t mean this as a snide remark – but those families can eat the beef they treated that is now going to waste. It’s something, and if there are enough people who don’t have a problem with the treated beef – they can purchase that stuff instead.
Nancy Huehnergarth says
It’s hard to stand up to a deep-pocketed industry that has thwarted the consumer’s right to know for decades, but you’ve done it with tremendous grace, Bettina. Thank you for helping to get the nation’s schools a choice of ground beef without LFTB. Nobody wants to eat meat scraps that were once relegated to dog food, much less meat scraps that are frequently contaminated with deadly bacteria like E.coli. You have my vote!
Steve says
Bettina,
I respect the fact that you were intending to do something positive and the consequences did not turn out as you expected.
I guess for me the bottom line is, that consumers expect due diligence from food companies in reporting what is in their product. I think the food industry deserves the same consideration if someone is reporting to the public that their product is unsafe. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I didn’t hear of anybody interviewing BPI or another meat scientist about this product. It seems responsible journalism, that if a single person who doesn’t hold their job anymore, marches against everyone else in their industry and says something is bad, you would find at least a couple people on the other side of the fence to find out the rebuttal to the story. I sincerely believe that if one person had done this along the way, the ending would have been different. Perhaps in the end we will agree to disagree, but I truly believe that nobody was ever put in danger and the whole issue still sticks in my craw.
Bettina Elias Siegel says
It is not accurate to say “you were intending to do something positive and the consequences did not turn out as you expected.” I started a petition asking USDA to cease use of LFTB beef in the National School Lunch Program. With the help of over a quarter of a million co-signers, USDA responded within nine days and changed its policy. The monumental effectiveness of the petition was certainly “unexpected,” but the outcome was “something positive” for those of us who care about the quality of the meat served to America’s schoolchildren, potential food safety issues and transparency in food labeling. As for your other concerns, I would again refer you to the numerous posts on this blog as the issue unfolded. I’m not going to “relitigate” the matter in this comment thread.
Oliver says
Steve, you are waiting around for responsible journalism – there are far more irresponsible acts of science and marketing that goes on in the food industry.
Do you really think interviewing some one who works for BPI is going to be forthright always? Whose being naive here? Even interviewing a public politician to get truthful answers is like pulling teeth – and you expect private corps to be fully transparent?
Steve says
Bettina,
I should clarify my comment from my previous post. You did achieve what you set out to do. What I meant by consequences did not turn out as you intended, was that you stated in a previous post that you never meant to put people out of work and that you were deeply troubled by that. I suppose it was, an additional, unintended consequence.
And Oliver, if you believe that the puff of ammonia hydroxide gas renders the meat void of it’s essential nutrients and destroys the amino acid structure, you can believe that if you like but it simply isn’t true.
But more importantly, in our conventional judicial system, anybody who is convicted of a wrong doing has the opportunity to testify on their own behalf. You may or may not choose to believe them, but they deserve the opportunity to present their side of the story. I’m sure I’ll never convince you Oliver, because you have obviously made up your mind, but there is more integrity among food producers and food processors than you will ever know, but some foodie types have painted them as 100% liars, only out to make a profit no matter who is harmed. Again, producers eat the same food that they produce for everyone else to eat.
And Oliver, you still did not acknowledge that there were hundreds of impartial meat scientists in academia that could have been interviewed on this subject.
There were journalists involved in this fiasco that lacked the testicular fortitude and common decency, to go to BPI and interview them before they went on the attack. Integrity is a two way street and journalists that lack it should be out of business just like BPI.
It seems to me, that Trial by Social Media, is in a wild west stage. You can hang someone without testimony in their own defense and without a complete presentation of all the facts from both sides. To me, that is the most disturbing part this whole scenario, and I hope that we evolve past this.
Oliver says
Steve – It simply IS true that ammonia alters the molecular makeup of amino molecules – not chemistry 101 but perhaps advanced chemistry ( which you could still research on your own).
Even the way you try to minmise it by using the word “puff”, like it’s some harmless, minute amount that has zero impact on anything- or anyone. It enough of a “puff” to do the trick. The point of using the ammonia in the first place is to kill harmful bacteria. Now, chemistry 101 tells you that bacteia is protein laden, and that e coli and the like can be hardier and more resistant than your average meat proteins, and so whatever you do to kill them off will kill of other molecules including good protein molecules. And you should do your due diligence and talk to a real chemist about what things can degrade a protein and discuss with them the derivitive nature of amino acid synthesis – I will not be stumbled by you saying “this is simply not true”. You will be forced to have a chemistry discussion, or we can move on to talk about other thing which are more opinion based.
And to that…
As far as “impartial” meat scientists – I don’t know who the heck is genuinly impartial – how does that work?
You’re on the wrong side of the argument and of history – when the truth finally comes out. Yes there are plenty of honest decent hardworking folk in the farming and agriculture buisness. So too there are many who are complicit – in the name of profit. If those in the business who wish to cast a blind eye and a deaf ear on what they know is going on in the business, then they can’t cry foul, or shouldn’t cry foul, when the ship sinks with everyone in it.
It is always easy to blame media. Which came first, the chicken or the egg. Media didn’t create these problems. And those in media who are in the investigative field – they don’t go planting evidence, so to speak, around the country at big businesses.
Nancy Huehnergarth says
We can debate for eternity whether the ammonia puff is dangerous or not. I believe the real point is that the CONSUMER deserves the right to know what’s in their food and to decide if they want to consume ground beef that contains LFTB. When industry took away that choice from the consumer by ensuring that LFTB was unlabeled, they made a ‘fatal’ error.
A similar debate is going on in California right now over genetically modified foods. Advocates are demanding labeling so consumers can make their own decisions about whether or not to consume GM foods. The food industry is fighting labeling tooth and nail and trying to thwart the consumer’s right to know. It strikes me as a pretty bad business model to continue to hide food ingredient information from the consumer — particularly after the LFTB debacle.
doug says
I am by no means a chemist so I will accept your assesment of the effects of amonium hydroxide on proteins and amino acids. The part of the equation that you are leaving out is that ammonium hydroxide occurs naturally in beef and the vast majority of other foods, animal and vegetable. So, the degredation you speak of is presumably occuring in all ground beef. The real question is how much more degradation do you see after BPI’s process. Unless you subscribe to Jaimie Oliver’s washing machine analogy I think that you will find that it is negligible. To put it in perspective, BPI says their end product contains about 200 ppm amonium hydroxide. A study by The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition shows that raw onions contain 269 ppm.
Travis says
As a meat scientist, I’m going to go ahead and take objection to the impartiality statements. It is the role of scientists (in any industry) to be objective…that was actually hammered into my head as a Ph.D. student over and over again by my meat scientist professors. It is the role of the scientist to be a third party, objective, unbiased opinion, and all of the meat scientists I have been associated with throughout my education take a large amount of pride in doing so. We’ve performed studies funded by third party companies that have their own interests in mind, and we’ve published results for them that are not in the best interest of their bottom dollar…but that is our role as scientists.
Now, as someone familiar with biochemistry processes, ammonium has been scientifically shown to NOT alter the nutrient composition of ground beef. It does affect the micro-protein structures, which is why LFTB is not used in hot dogs or emulsified products because the protein binding properties are altered. However, beef can intrinsically have a pH that is akin to the pH under ammoniated circumstances, and the only thing altered is the water holding capacity.
Understanding that this conversation has gotten off track from Bettina’s intent, I agree that folks should have the right to know what is in their food. However, when labeling claims are forced due to a meat industry witch-hunt, that take away from the necessity to label. Consumers were not given an accurate depiction of what LFTB is or what it is used for. They were misled by folks such as yourself on the reason for the BPI processes and the value that LFTB adds to being “sustainable” and those things that I assume people such as yourself place a high amount of value on. You basically said “its different, so its bad,” and led the charge…which ultimately is wasting millions of pounds of very much edible beef, put thousands of people out of work, and is leading to the demise of a business that is an asset to the beef industry as a whole. People do deserve the right to know whats in their food, but they also deserve the right to form those opinions understanding both sides of the discussion. You have NOT done that, and I think that many people may feel differently when presented the issue as a whole.
Oliver says
As a meat scientist – you can’t on the one hand say ammonia does not alter the nutrient composition, and then say that it does affect micro-protein stuctures… That’s the nutrient composition. The structure of the protein. Once that protein is altered it is no longer that same protein with that same name and with that same specific function. Even the folding of a protein can change its function. Hence, if we are seeking a certain specific protein from a pure meat food source – we need not to alter it.
The other thing, and this is for doug as well, and Steve, and everyone – meat is an organic entity. Once it is dead, it immediately begins to breakdown, to decompose, to biodegrade – into nothingness – like a “puff” of wind – leaving only skin, bones, and teeth – which will eventually breakdown as well – environmental conditions permitting (see wooly mammoth frozen in ice 🙂
As a bio chemist you might know, that one of the first stages of decay is the breaking down of good protein and other nutrients, by specific enzymes – enzymes built to do just that, breakdown the other nutrient molecules. So Doug, protein degradation is in fact occurring all the time once you, me, or the cow or pig or chicken etc is dead.
We can retard these decay dynamics to some extent- cryogenics, freezing your meat etc.. Green giant vegetable company says they retard the decay process by using a quick heat treatment. This kills the enzyme that I spoke of which aids in the breaking down of good nutrient molecules.
The problem with the flash heat is that it renders all biologic activity disabled. The enzyme which they seek to target is also just a protein at the end of the day – the heat doesn’t discriminate from one enzyme/protein to the next.
Someone mentioned nitrites – these too have an effect on amino acids – The acetic acid found in vinegar can impact your amino acids as well. All cured meat has some added chemical that disables protein dynamics. Even the juice from a squeezed lemon can impact the proteins in your fish or meat – ceviche, steak tartar are two examples.
Sodium hydroxide and Dimethyl sulfoxide to name only a mere fraction of the many things that can cause reactions to amino acids like deprotonation or death by oxidation etc.
And yes many of these things are found in mostly all plants and animals naturally. It is there use of them in other instances or taking them out of their original form and combining the chemical compounds with other abnormal compounds and molecules in a different environment that is the problem, and brings about a host of new chemical reactions.
And Nancy, for me, the real point is still not weather beef contains LFTB – rather why doesn’t science tell us about the real issues regarding nutrient damage. Wouldn’t you be more concerned knowing your expensive beef didn’t have any nutrient value by the time it got to your plate?
This is what we should be huffing and puffing about. This is what we should be demanding from our scientists – the truth about nutrient damage, and what things can damage our nutrients. The problem may be that cash is king. The meat industry may not want you know that at the end of the day if you want real meat protein you had better get it like every other species gets it – fast and fresh.
The lion is guaranteed unadulterated proteins. So too is the hawk who swoops up a baby rabbit, or the shark, or the polar bear who eats a seal… and so on and so forth. And then there are plenty of humans who realize this multi million year old dynamic and still have their meat raw (steak tartar and a host of other ways around the world) and sashimi (Fish) Sushi can have cooked fish at times – sashimi is the real deal – there is a restaurant in NY that serves Beef Sashimi.
Nancy Huehnergarth says
Oliver, yes as a consumer I want access to all of the information about ingredients in my food, how it has been processed, etc. I want to know if the nutrient value has been degraded or not, I want to know what beef parts have been ground into ground beef so I can assess contamination risk and I want to know what, if any, chemicals have been added to my food. I want to make my own decisions about what I feed my family and I don’t appreciate any industry hiding information from me. And, I want everyone to vote for Bettina so she gets the recognition she deserves!
Oliver says
Bettina, is doing what she can and we support her. I have my separate efforts and everyone has to contribute to the effort for full disclosure, and demand complete industry transparancy from top to bottom – from the farm to our tables as the saying goes.
Pilar says
Done, congrats! and good luck.
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Thank you, Pilar!
EdT. says
My vote has been cast. Good luck, Bettina!
~EdT.
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Thank you, Ed!
Mike says
When BPI announces who they are filing suit against tomorrow I will be curious as to the response here. I absolutely believe she has a right to her opinion, but when it is repeated as fact, backed up by science ( which it is not) then there may be a price to pay for that opinion .
Truth Seeker says
Why would anyone vote for you??? All you did was jump on the band wagon to defame a product and company. Spreading lies, half truths, and NOT even trying to provide any information that might go against your remarks is just plain old WRONG!!!!! I hope you can sleep at night knowing your unfounded lies cost families jobs and your comments STOLE food off tables for the CHILDREN you say you are trying to feed. I feel sorry for you. May someday you learn that spreading lies is a wrong thing. Wish your mom and dad would have taught you better.
Truth Seeker says
Vote for Martha Sanchez. She is fighting to protect our children without lying about the problem.
Bettina Elias Siegel says
Truth Seeker: I always try to be as liberal as possible in allowing comments through on this blog, although by repeatedly calling me a “liar,” you have violated my policy against ad hominem attacks. That said, I’m a big girl and certainly understand that there are those who share your view, no matter how vehemently I (and literally hundreds of thousands of other people out there) might disagree. However, this is just a heads up to you that future comments along these lines of personal attack will not be permitted.