Do my favorite hot dogs contain pink slime? Apparently not.

Vienna Beef's website lists "beef trimmings" as one of the ingredients in its hot dogs. This may or may not be the same thing as the much harried PINK SLIME we've been hearing about lately. Though I understand why the industry uses PINK SLIME (green paper), and agree that it is probably safe, just thinking about the process makes me physically ill, and I'm not one prone to squeamishness. Lets just say it involves centrifuges, gasses, high pressure baths, etc. Fucking gross. The scientists who thought this crap up should have their graves pissed on.

I'm not too worried about injesting the stuff because I don't eat a ton of ground beef, and when I do, I try to buy it from a source that grinds it from fresh, whole cuts of beef. But there is one problem - I love hot dogs. Vienna Beef hot dogs. Does this mean I'm getting PINK SLIME shoved down my throat by a bunch of evil crypto-facist capitalists?

Probably.

I've emailed Vienna Beef to clarify. Their website does not portend good news, but one never knows.

[title edited to reflect that VB hot dogs apparently do not contain the infamous sludge]

Habibi wrote:Vienna Beef's website lists "beef trimmings" as one of the ingredients in its hot dogs. This may or may not be the same thing as the much harried PINK SLIME we've been hearing about lately. Though I understand why the industry uses PINK SLIME (green paper), and agree that it is probably safe, just thinking about the process makes me physically ill, and I'm not one prone to squeamishness. Lets just say it involves centrifuges, gasses, high pressure baths, etc. Fucking gross. The scientists who thought this crap up should have their graves pissed on.

I'm not too worried about injesting the stuff because I don't eat a ton of ground beef, and when I do, I try to buy it from a source that grinds it from fresh, whole cuts of beef. But there is one problem - I love hot dogs. Vienna Beef hot dogs. Does this mean I'm getting PINK SLIME shoved down my throught by a bunch of evil crypto-facist capitalists?

Probably.

I've emailed Vienna Beef to clarify. Their website does not portend good news, but one never knows.

This just in...a very prompt and nice response from a QC VP at VB informed me that Vienna Beef raw and finished products "do not contain any pink slime materials." Now I can rest, and consume hot dogs, easier.

Bien fait, Habibi! Tnx for taking the point on this.

Geo

Habibi wrote:Vienna Beef's website lists "beef trimmings" as one of the ingredients in its hot dogs. This may or may not be the same thing as the much harried PINK SLIME we've been hearing about lately. Though I understand why the industry uses PINK SLIME (green paper), and agree that it is probably safe, just thinking about the process makes me physically ill, and I'm not one prone to squeamishness. Lets just say it involves centrifuges, gasses, high pressure baths, etc. Fucking gross. The scientists who thought this crap up should have their graves pissed on.

I'm not too worried about injesting the stuff because I don't eat a ton of ground beef, and when I do, I try to buy it from a source that grinds it from fresh, whole cuts of beef. But there is one problem - I love hot dogs. Vienna Beef hot dogs. Does this mean I'm getting PINK SLIME shoved down my throught by a bunch of evil crypto-facist capitalists?

Probably.

I've emailed Vienna Beef to clarify. Their website does not portend good news, but one never knows.

[title edited to reflect that VB hot dogs apparently do not contain the infamous sludge]

The beef trimmings are cut off the corned beef rounds.

This chart may be of interest to those who buy ground beef at the supermarket:

AISLE BE ON THE SAFE SIDE
More supermarkets refusing to sell ‘pink slime’ in their meat



No word yet on everyone's favorite independents.

I get the uproar about the failure to disclose the presence of "pink slime" but I hardly find the process to be any "grosser" than slaughtering animals for food. There's nothing inherently wrong about maximizing the amount of protein you take from a carcass (really, what makes a t-bone steak wholesome but defatted trimmings repulsive?). And we've been using far "grosser" meat products in foods (ever read a label on a can of vienna sausages?) for many decades, so this is really a tempest in a teapot.

If I eat a potted meat product, I can reasonably expect that industrially "recovered" "meat" will make up some portion of what I am injesting.

I don't expect the same thing when I purchase "ground beef." I expect ground meat, not recovered protiens that need to be separated from bone, fat, etc. through mechanically and chemically intensive processes. The process makes it repulsive. The pecuniary urge to capture every last bit of protien from a carcass makes it repulsive. The fact that I really can't tell you how its different than dog food makes it repulsive.

Read the description of how this crap is made, and tell me with a straight face that this is the kind of thing we should be eating. If all we care about is cost, then we should stop eating meat rather than eat this filth. A vegetarian diet is probably more cost effective and doesn't carry the spiritual degradation of eating food fit for house pets that some weirdo scientist dreamt up in the 50s.

spinynorman99 wrote:I get the uproar about the failure to disclose the presence of "pink slime" but I hardly find the process to be any "grosser" than slaughtering animals for food. There's nothing inherently wrong about maximizing the amount of protein you take from a carcass (really, what makes a t-bone steak wholesome but defatted trimmings repulsive?). And we've been using far "grosser" meat products in foods (ever read a label on a can of vienna sausages?) for many decades, so this is really a tempest in a teapot.

At least for me, the point is that I don't want to eat what is essentially an industrial product, something that is at the wrong end of the spectrum of processed foods. Like Habibi, I am happy to pay more to avoid this stuff.

I'd edit your second sentence to say that there's nothing inherently wrong about maximizing the amount of protein used for human consumption. The "pink slime" process doesn't increase the amount of protein. It is a way to convert what used to be turned into pet food into food that will be bought by people. (Those poor dogs; what will they eat?)

It seems a little misguided to attack the scientist who invented this process.

Beef, schmeef, it's not the trim that bothers me (or would bother me if I ate industrial grunk), it's the ammonia needed.

TLC, on its "howstuffworks.com" site explains pretty well what happens:

But that's not all! See, the problem when you turn garbage bits of animal carcasses into "pink slime" to sell as a food product is that there's an issue with pathogens, such as E. coli. And when samples of the pink slime were tested, the tests came back showing that the slime was rampant with harmful bacteria. Now, one might think that the best idea would be to decide not to sell pink slime to feed to humans, but there's no money in that, is there? So BPI cleverly started disinfecting the slime with ammonia. And convinced the FDA to allow them to list it as a "processing ingredient" so that we wouldn't know we were eating ammonia.
We're eating garbage, people. Literally -- garbage that's been "cleaned up" with ammonia and sold to us mixed with ground beef, shrink wrapped for convenience at our local megamart.

Change your mind?

"This just in...a very prompt and nice response from a QC VP at VB informed me that Vienna Beef raw and finished products "do not contain any pink slime materials." Now I can rest, and consume hot dogs, easier."

Thanks Habibi!
I like Vienna products.
Well I guess its back to grinding beef for our dog as Sam's Club uses pink slime!-Dick

Vital Information wrote:Beef, schmeef, it's not the trim that bothers me (or would bother me if I ate industrial grunk), it's the ammonia needed.

TLC, on its "howstuffworks.com" site explains pretty well what happens:

But that's not all! See, the problem when you turn garbage bits of animal carcasses into "pink slime" to sell as a food product is that there's an issue with pathogens, such as E. coli. And when samples of the pink slime were tested, the tests came back showing that the slime was rampant with harmful bacteria. Now, one might think that the best idea would be to decide not to sell pink slime to feed to humans, but there's no money in that, is there? So BPI cleverly started disinfecting the slime with ammonia. And convinced the FDA to allow them to list it as a "processing ingredient" so that we wouldn't know we were eating ammonia.
We're eating garbage, people. Literally -- garbage that's been "cleaned up" with ammonia and sold to us mixed with ground beef, shrink wrapped for convenience at our local megamart.

Change your mind?

We're not eating "garbage," it's usable protein that could not be efficiently extracted so it ended up as waste.

It ends up as pet food, not garbage.

Count me as strenuously "meh".

We revel in eyeball tacos, hogs maw, beef tendon, and if the travel channel is to be believed even assholes, as long as it’s prepared with some “authenticity” or “artistry”; but when pieces of an animal that would otherwise discarded are “mechanically separated” all of a sudden it’s offensive. And "chemical processing" describes accurately a good deal of what we discuss and partake in here.

As long as it’s properly labeled and people know what they’re buying I have no problem with it. The unfortunate truth is that a great number of people will never be able to afford organic, grass fed, pick-your-favorite-description, meat. Another truth is that meat tastes good and people are gonna want to eat it. I’m not about to tell them they can’t. The only issue I see is proper labeling.

Another point is that ammonia, like just about everything else in the world, is safe in limited quantities. I’m not going to run to the store to seek this pink stuff out but level the indignation seems a little misplaced.

zoid wrote:Count me as strenuously "meh".

We revel in eyeball tacos, hogs maw, beef tendon, and if the travel channel is to be believed even assholes, as long as it’s prepared with some “authenticity” or “artistry”; but when pieces of an animal that would otherwise discarded are “mechanically separated” all of a sudden it’s offensive. And "chemical processing" describes accurately a good deal of what we discuss and partake in here.

As long as it’s properly labeled and people know what they’re buying I have no problem with it. The unfortunate truth is that a great number of people will never be able to afford organic, grass fed, pick-your-favorite-description, meat. Another truth is that meat tastes good and people are gonna want to eat it. I’m not about to tell them they can’t. The only issue I see is proper labeling.

Another point is that ammonia, like just about everything else in the world, is safe in limited quantities. I’m not going to run to the store to seek this pink stuff out but level the indignation seems a little misplaced.

This brouhaha has also spawned the inevitable "pink slime" taste tests. One I read recently found that the pink slime burger wasn't as juicy and had a more gristly texture. However, he paid about $3 a pound for the pink slime version and nearly double that amount for the one he decided tasted better so it was decidedly unscientific (no idea of the % of "slime" as a percentage of product, and most importantly, no idea of the quality of the lower-priced beef in the first instance). It's poor "reporting" like this that leads to knee-jerk reactions in consumers. (Link below)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/1 ... 53058.html

VI touches on the problem with pink slime but doesn't explain why it needs to be treated. It's bits of meat that have been essentially rotting on the carcass. If the meat needs to be treated to kill it of harmful bacteria, then it's probably not suited for human consumption. Not to mention the cows themselves are not the healthiest to begin with. There's my line.

aschie30 wrote:VI touches on the problem with pink slime but doesn't explain why it needs to be treated. It's bits of meat that have been essentially rotting on the carcass. If the meat needs to be treated to kill it of harmful bacteria, then it's probably not suited for human consumption. Not to mention the cows themselves are not the healthiest to begin with. There's my line.

This is getting out of hand. Where on Earth did that "information" come from? There's simply no incentive for large-scale processors t leave anything around to "rot." They want to keep the process moving which is why it's not cost-effective to use every bit of meat from an animal. Their "slime" process makes it more efficient.

spinynorman99 wrote:

aschie30 wrote:VI touches on the problem with pink slime but doesn't explain why it needs to be treated. It's bits of meat that have been essentially rotting on the carcass. If the meat needs to be treated to kill it of harmful bacteria, then it's probably not suited for human consumption. Not to mention the cows themselves are not the healthiest to begin with. There's my line.

This is getting out of hand. Where on Earth did that "information" come from? There's simply no incentive for large-scale processors t leave anything around to "rot." They want to keep the process moving which is why it's not cost-effective to use every bit of meat from an animal. Their "slime" process makes it more efficient.

That's right!

The problem, I mean media storm, in recent week's is not so much whether some people want or don't want to eat pink slime. The problem was we had no information. As noted above, we did not know ammonia was being used to treat meat served to school kids. Whether a little Mr. Clean will clean you or not, some of us think that it's good "information" to have, knowing it's in our meat. More importantly as I just noted, the information causing so much furor was the existence of said slime in school lunches. In other words, we are free to choose or not choose to eat what we want, but who get's to choose for the kids?

It helps to have information!

aschie30 wrote:It's bits of meat that have been essentially rotting on the carcass.

I find this very difficult to believe. I'm gonna have to ask for a reliable citation for that claim, the ammonia could very well be used to retard bacterial growth as a preventive measure.

zoid wrote:

aschie30 wrote:It's bits of meat that have been essentially rotting on the carcass.

I find this very difficult to believe. I'm gonna have to ask for a reliable citation for that claim, the ammonia could very well be used to retard bacterial growth as a preventive measure.

ETA: I agree VI, the real issue I see here is clear, acurate, and obvious labeling.

If the media hadn't coined the term "pink slime" for this stuff, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

nr706 wrote:If the media hadn't coined the term "pink slime" for this stuff, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

I would say it's probably a good thing that they did then. Seems like a worthwhile discussion to be having.

nr706 wrote:If the media hadn't coined the term "pink slime" for this stuff, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

I don't need the media to coin a term to have a visceral reaction to this.

zoid wrote:

aschie30 wrote:It's bits of meat that have been essentially rotting on the carcass.

I find this very difficult to believe. I'm gonna have to ask for a reliable citation for that claim, the ammonia could very well be used to retard bacterial growth as a preventive measure.

The information on pink slime is readily available from multiple sources. I urge you to do some reading and draw your own conclusions (as have I).

Looking at the photo posted by aschie makes me feel as if Achatz and co. missed a grand opportunity for a "brush your teeth and go to bed" final course on the Next Childhood menu,

nr706 wrote:If the media hadn't coined the term "pink slime" for this stuff, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

Actually, we can thank the NSLP as much as the media. This NY Times article does a good job of explaining the issues. It's worth reading the whole thing:

Safety of Beef Processing Method Is Questioned

I just love marketing robo-speak, especially from a trade group under the microscope for selling SLUDGY PINK SLIME MEAT SLURRY to little schoolkids in their burgers!

Reading this makes me feel SOOO much better:

"In the past, these trimmings were wasted because a surgeon’s skill was required to separate the lean from fat and create a product that consumers would enjoy. But 20 years ago, a new technology became available that has helped us prevent the waste of wholesome, lean beef. We’re proud that today we can derive more beef from a beef animal with less waste."

I love beef animals. Which ones are those?

One really can't help but think of this through this entire discussion:

aschie30 wrote:

nr706 wrote:If the media hadn't coined the term "pink slime" for this stuff, we probably wouldn't be having this discussion.

I don't need the media to coin a term to have a visceral reaction to this.

zoid wrote:

aschie30 wrote:It's bits of meat that have been essentially rotting on the carcass.

I find this very difficult to believe. I'm gonna have to ask for a reliable citation for that claim, the ammonia could very well be used to retard bacterial growth as a preventive measure.

The information on pink slime is readily available from multiple sources. I urge you to do some reading and draw your own conclusions (as have I).

So just so we're clear, you're making a claim and then refusing to back it up.
If the proof that

aschie30 wrote:It's bits of meat that have been essentially rotting on the carcass.

is readily available please tell me where you read it and I'll happily go look at the source. I've seen nothing that reliably verifies this claim.

Habibi wrote:
This just in...a very prompt and nice response from a QC VP at VB informed me that Vienna Beef raw and finished products "do not contain any pink slime materials." Now I can rest, and consume hot dogs, easier.

Hooray! Now we only have to worry about "butt cancer."

aschie30 wrote:
I don't need the media to coin a term to have a visceral reaction to this.

It looks like bologna toothpaste.

JimTheBeerGuy wrote:

Habibi wrote:
This just in...a very prompt and nice response from a QC VP at VB informed me that Vienna Beef raw and finished products "do not contain any pink slime materials." Now I can rest, and consume hot dogs, easier.

Hooray! Now we only have to worry about "butt cancer."

aschie30 wrote:
I don't need the media to coin a term to have a visceral reaction to this.

It looks like bologna toothpaste.

The "bologna toothpaste" linked photo is for something entirely different.

spinynorman99 wrote:The "bologna toothpaste" linked photo is for something entirely different.

It is? Here is the accompanying article:

McDonald’s Pink Slime is Off the Menu

No, not the pink goo in the viral Chicken McNuggets pic, but the controversial McDonald’s “pink slime” that goes into making their ubiquitous hamburger patties.

It’s not officially called pink slime, because, ew, then who would eat it? But as we know, words often win over hearts and minds, and after Jamie Oliver dubbed the extra bits of cow laying around (treated with chemicals to kill bacteria and added to burgers to beef them up) pink slime, McDonald’s announced that it would no longer be using the filler to stretch meat bits out- kind of like meatloaf, but with chemicals instead of breadcrumbs. Super ew.

So, you may not like the idea of ingesting the dirtiest parts of a cow, soaked in ammonia to keep it from making you sick because it’s so potentially dirty. But the government has repeatedly denied McDonald’s pink slime is a danger to people who eat food.