Let’s Not Give In to Beef Industry “Slimewashing”

The beef industry is pushing back hard in the last few days against opposition to Lean Beef Trimmings, better known as “pink slime.”  Yesterday the American Meat Institute released this video:

There is also a new message in beef industry communications, expressly raised in the Food Safety News piece by Nancy Donley (mother of a child who tragically died of E. coli), that those who oppose LBT are somehow standing in the way of food safety that protects all of us.  In the words of  MeatPoultry.com, a meat industry trade publication, opponents to LBT could cause

“the use of an effective food safety tool being reduced” and “other companies researching new food safety technologies or programs [to] curtail their efforts after observing the challenges Beef Products has faced in the wake of the negative publicity.

But to oppose LBT is not to oppose reasonable food safety measures.

No doubt some consumers do fear the use of ammonium-hydroxide to process their food, but nothing in the wording of my Change.org petition or my writing or speaking about this issue has ever once sought to confuse the public by associating this chemical with the cleaning agent you keep under your sink.  Rather, those who have read about how LBT is made are likely to feel gratitude that an agent like ammonium hydroxide is used, given how naturally pathogenic the raw material used to make the product — i.e.,  slaughterhouse scraps that are likely to be contaminated by cow excrement.

It is my belief that the majority consumers who oppose LBT in their beef are not irrational victims of fear-mongering.  Rather, they’re simply mad that a cheap filler — up to 15% — has been surreptitiously mixed into what they thought was 100% ground chuck or ground round.   And this tampering is not without consequence.  Yesterday I told you how JM Hirsch, Associated Press’s food editor, found that the taste and texture of beef with LBT was substantially different than true “100% ground beef.”  And a former USDA microbiologist has argued that the proteins in LBT are inferior nutritionally.  The consumer is being harmed in a very real way by USDA’s decision not to label this stuff on packaging.

So let’s not give in to beef industry “slimewashing.”  Please contact your Congressional representatives and ask them to sign on to the letter being circulated  by Rep. Chellie Pingree of Maine, which demands that this stuff be taken out of USDA beef destined for schools and that it be labeled in supermarkets.

These are reasonable requests which have nothing to do with opposing food safety measures, and it is simply wrong for the beef industry to portray our efforts otherwise.

[Hat tip and thanks to my online colleague Nancy Huehnergarth of NYSHEPA for coining the excellent term, “slimewashing.” ]


 Do You Love The Lunch Tray? ♥♥♥ Then “like” The Lunch Tray! Join 2,500 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.

Digiprove sealCopyright secured by Digiprove © 2012 Bettina Elias Siegel


  1. Chris says

    Well, they actually posted my comment!! I tried to stay fairly non confrontational. Not satisfied at all with their response though.

  2. Dealzstealz says

    Our food safety system is broken!! How can you trust AMI when Eldon Roth sits on the Board of Directors and probably had a hand in the scripts the stores are giving their customers stating pink slime is in their products. When will BRANDS tell consumers PINK SLIME is in their non-ground beef products?? Mr. Roth is also a majority shareholder in National Beef and isn’t his company the producer of Mc Donald’s hamburgers – Jo Ann Smith the USDA official that approved pink slime sits on Tyson’s Board of Directors…connect the dots. If the meat industry continues this lack of transparency only the consumer will win by shopping for organic beef only. Politicians need to step up and do their jobs – the people’s safety and labeling of these products should be the priority not PROFITS. Oh and add estrogen and steroids to the list! The Burger That Shattered Her Life – Stephanie Smith (The New York Times) watch the video 38% was from Greater Omaha meat packing plant 37% from Lone Star, a slaughterhouse in Texas 15% from a processor in Uruguay 10% from Beef Products International (PINK SLIME) A study done by R.P. Clayton and K.E. Belk in 1998 concluded that a single 4-ounce ground beef patty was made from, on average, at least 55 different animals to, at most, an average of 1082 animals.

  3. says

    Personally I really wonder if the e. coli outbreaks are caused by this as if i recall from seeing how the two types of burgers were cooked the LBT one took longer thereby possibly not being at the correct temperatures.

    Maybe that should be closely looked into.

  4. Tom says

    How about we all visit beefisbeef.com and make an educated decision based on science and facts rather than media scare tactics.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *