know your meat....(health alert)

RolandTD20Kdrummer

Oh how nice...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maFJJ_XO2x0

pjtradeking

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Oh how nice...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maFJJ_XO2x0

You know...I work in the beef industry and these SO called natural programs are nuts, and have caused some serious issues the past year or so. The governments rules and regs are so loosely worded that anyone and everyone could have a "natural' program if they chose too.

There are two types of programs that we deal with on a daily basis.

Most of the programs that are called "natural", only require that the animal be free from all hormones and antibiotics the final 60-90 days before slaughter. This means that a company can treat the animal with pretty much anything they want during most of its life. The last 60-90 days, the animal is taken of all injections and treated feed. This allows its system to be flushed of any traceable amounts of anything that would fall outside the parameters of "natural"..Basically like weening yourself off of pot to pass a drug test. So just because the animal is free at the time of testing, it can be labeled as "natural".

Then, there are programs that we call "never,never"programs, or "birth to box" programs. These are just what they sound like. The animal has never been subjected to any kind of hormone or antibiotic during its entire life. The feed that they are raised on also contains no additives or hormones as well. Any company that uses this proccess is required to keep pretty strict records of these animals and should be able to be traced from feedlot to feedlot, or ranch to ranch. Should the animal become "untraceable" as it were, they must be removed from the program and treated like any other.

In the long run, the whole thing is really what your consumer believes and how much they really care. Is there THAT much difference in an animal that is "TRULY" natural compared to those taken off the lst 60-90? Probably not really, but becasue of the way they are raised and the records kept, these will command higher prices and allow restaurants to be able to tell the customers they are serving "natural beef"

So, the next time you go out to eat somewhere that advertises "natural", ask them if it is a never, never or birth to box and see the dumbfounded look upon their face, or watch them try and make something up on the spot. Rather comical to do...:)

Pork is virtually the same as beef, however, I am not too sure about the requirements of the poultry industry.

Anyhow, there is my two cents..

RolandTD20Kdrummer

pjtradeking wrote:

You know...I work in the beef industry and these SO called natural programs are nuts, and have caused some serious issues the past year or so. The governments rules and regs are so loosely worded that anyone and everyone could have a "natural' program if they chose too.

There are two types of programs that we deal with on a daily basis.

Most of the programs that are called "natural", only require that the animal be free from all hormones and antibiotics the final 60-90 days before slaughter. This means that a company can treat the animal with pretty much anything they want during most of its life. The last 60-90 days, the animal is taken of all injections and treated feed. This allows its system to be flushed of any traceable amounts of anything that would fall outside the parameters of "natural"..Basically like weening yourself off of pot to pass a drug test. So just because the animal is free at the time of testing, it can be labeled as "natural".

Then, there are programs that we call "never,never"programs, or "birth to box" programs. These are just what they sound like. The animal has never been subjected to any kind of hormone or antibiotic during its entire life. The feed that they are raised on also contains no additives or hormones as well. Any company that uses this proccess is required to keep pretty strict records of these animals and should be able to be traced from feedlot to feedlot, or ranch to ranch. Should the animal become "untraceable" as it were, they must be removed from the program and treated like any other.

In the long run, the whole thing is really what your consumer believes and how much they really care. Is there THAT much difference in an animal that is "TRULY" natural compared to those taken off the lst 60-90? Probably not really, but becasue of the way they are raised and the records kept, these will command higher prices and allow restaurants to be able to tell the customers they are serving "natural beef"

So, the next time you go out to eat somewhere that advertises "natural", ask them if it is a never, never or birth to box and see the dumbfounded look upon their face, or watch them try and make something up on the spot. Rather comical to do...:)

Pork is virtually the same as beef, however, I am not too sure about the requirements of the poultry industry.

Anyhow, there is my two cents..

That was rather insightful indeed.

Thanks!

pjtradeking

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

That was rather insightful indeed.

Thanks!

You are most welcome..:)

g under p

pjtradeking wrote:

You know...I work in the beef industry and these SO called natural programs are nuts, and have caused some serious issues the past year or so. The governments rules and regs are so loosely worded that anyone and everyone could have a "natural' program if they chose too.

There are two types of programs that we deal with on a daily basis.

Most of the programs that are called "natural", only require that the animal be free from all hormones and antibiotics the final 60-90 days before slaughter. This means that a company can treat the animal with pretty much anything they want during most of its life. The last 60-90 days, the animal is taken of all injections and treated feed. This allows its system to be flushed of any traceable amounts of anything that would fall outside the parameters of "natural"..Basically like weening yourself off of pot to pass a drug test. So just because the animal is free at the time of testing, it can be labeled as "natural".

Then, there are programs that we call "never,never"programs, or "birth to box" programs. These are just what they sound like. The animal has never been subjected to any kind of hormone or antibiotic during its entire life. The feed that they are raised on also contains no additives or hormones as well. Any company that uses this proccess is required to keep pretty strict records of these animals and should be able to be traced from feedlot to feedlot, or ranch to ranch. Should the animal become "untraceable" as it were, they must be removed from the program and treated like any other.

In the long run, the whole thing is really what your consumer believes and how much they really care. Is there THAT much difference in an animal that is "TRULY" natural compared to those taken off the lst 60-90? Probably not really, but becasue of the way they are raised and the records kept, these will command higher prices and allow restaurants to be able to tell the customers they are serving "natural beef"

So, the next time you go out to eat somewhere that advertises "natural", ask them if it is a never, never or birth to box and see the dumbfounded look upon their face, or watch them try and make something up on the spot. Rather comical to do...:)

Pork is virtually the same as beef, however, I am not too sure about the requirements of the poultry industry.

Anyhow, there is my two cents..

Thanks for the great advise and the words of wisdom. You appear to know your meats.

Peace

pjtradeking

g under p wrote:

Thanks for the great advise and the words of wisdom. You appear to know your meats.

Peace

Everyone has to know SOMETHING right....hahaha

MattCameronKicksButt

This family is switching over to Organic but mainly just for the health of the animals themselves.

MattCameronKicksButt

pjtradeking wrote:

Most of the programs that are called "natural", only require that the animal be free from all hormones and antibiotics the final 60-90 days before slaughter. This means that a company can treat the animal with pretty much anything they want during most of its life. The last 60-90 days, the animal is taken of all injections and treated feed. This allows its system to be flushed of any traceable amounts of anything that would fall outside the parameters of "natural"..Basically like weening yourself off of pot to pass a drug test. So just because the animal is free at the time of testing, it can be labeled as "natural".

Sorry, isn't this illegal? I don't understand. It must be a high risk to take?

pjtradeking

MattCameronKicksButt wrote:

Sorry, isn't this illegal? I don't understand. It must be a high risk to take?

Evidentally not illegal. Like I said, it is a government thing and it is how THEY interpret "Natural". We dont have anything to do with it here at our plant. We buy everything already boxed and are not part of the ranch/feedlots. I was just passing on what I know. These are the people WE BUY from as well. Like the IBP's and Excells. It is the BIG beef companies that SLAUGHTER and RAISE the animals. We are just a supplier for the restaurants/hotels and such. We are taking no risk at all as we educate our customers on what is and isnt "natural".

MattCameronKicksButt

pjtradeking wrote:

Evidentally not. Like I said, it is a government thing and it is how THEY interpret "Natural". We dont have anything to do with it here at our plant. We buy everything already boxed and are not part of the ranch/feedlots. I was just passing on what I know. These are the people WE BUY from as well. Like the IBP's and Excells. It is the BIG beef companies that SLAUGHTER and RAISE the animals. We are just a supplier for the restaurants/hotels and such.

I understand what you mean. It's supply and demand. If more people stood up and said no, farmers would ultimately have to stop producing meat like this.

It's common news that the cheaper the meat, the more chemicals it's had pumped into it but I didn't know some companies/farmers could let it slip through the net like that. Maybe it's different in foreign countries.

acoustic guy

Great post thanks!

Its amazing what the food companies sell the americans. They think we are a bunch of fucking robots. It really bothers me. Ever since my daughter was born 1 1/2 years ago, I have changed my whole way of eating. I try to go organic as much as possible for me and my family. I love to find new companies that sell true, pure, healthy food. I see entire families that are large and in poor health and it baffles me. I guess they either do not care or they are not educated on the topic. Either way I think its wrong for the goverment to let it happen.

acoustic guy

MattCameronKicksButt wrote:

I understand what you mean. It's supply and demand. If more people stood up and said no, farmers would ultimately have to stop producing meat like this.

It's common news that the cheaper the meat, the more chemicals it's had pumped into it but I didn't know some companies/farmers could let it slip through the net like that. Maybe it's different in foreign countries.

Very different in foreign countries.
I have exchange students who come from europe to work for me. Many of them say how different the food is here. Not diffenent b/c of the type of food, but different b/c of the color, taste etc... Tehy say the fruit there is more colorful and tastier, the meat looks real, not like a picture.
They eat a lot healthier food with out all the preserves. But, they balance it out by smoking and drinking too much! LOL

pjtradeking

acoustic guy wrote:

Very different in foreign countries.
I have exchange students who come from europe to work for me. Many of them say how different the food is here. Not diffenent b/c of the type of food, but different b/c of the color, taste etc... Tehy say the fruit there is more colorful and tastier, the meat looks real, not like a picture.
They eat a lot healthier food with out all the preserves. But, they balance it out by smoking and drinking too much! LOL

I know that the European cattle industry is not nearly as regulated as the US. As for here....Just like "Big Tobacco", in my opinion. The government will do what ever they need to do to keep them happy as they are a HUGE part of the economy. No reason to think it isnt just as corupt as any other damn thing these days. The are really only 3-4 MAJOR meat packers that set the market and standards for everyone else, but then when something goes wrong, it is usally the smaller plants that have the issues even though they are selling to the BIG company.

I wonder what they mean by "looks real", not like a picture? I also wonder if there fruit is enhanced in some way, or if it is in its natural state? There are SO many ways to alter things these days to make it appear better than it really is.

Australia prob has the cleanest well run plants in the beef industry. I dont know how regulated they are, or if they simply have higher standards that everyone else, or if is by law.

Get_Right

PJ trade king is wise

the food industry has been lobbying for years to expand the definition of "organic" and "all-natural" and they have been successful.

Its all about the label with food products.

What you can now label as organic or all natural, you could not have done 10 years ago. Those labels mean a lot less nowadays.

For beef, what you want to see is grass fed, preferably with the name of the ranch from which it came.

MattCameronKicksButt

Get_Right wrote:

For beef, what you want to see is grass fed, preferably with the name of the ranch from which it came.

Which is what organic means!

pjtradeking

Get_Right wrote:

For beef, what you want to see is grass fed, preferably with the name of the ranch from which it came.

This is not all together true either.

While being able to know where the animal came from is def a good thing so you know who you are buying from, "grass fed" can be quite decieving too.

There is grass fed organic, and there is also grain fed organic. A rancher can use organically grown grains and corn to feed their animal and achieve the same(and most of the time better) results as grass fed to a point, while still producing and organic animal.

Grass fed animals tend to be much leaner and contain little to no marbling. For those who dont know, marbling is the white fatty flakes that you see when you look at a raw steak or pc of meat. This is what gives the meat its flavor for the most part. Without it, meat tends to be kind of bland and will require more seasoning or something to go on top for flavor. Filet mignon(tenderloin) is one of the LEAST flavorful pcs you can get and the most expensive, go figure. As a rule, there is little to no marbling in a filet unless you are getting into the higher grades such as prime and certified angus beef(which I can get into more if anyone has any interest, I know this is boring listening to me, huh?) While the ribeye, or the striploin cuts(New yorks or delmonicos) will have more marbling and will give you more of that juicier flavor ad "bite" that some look for.

Grains and corns and such contain more of what the animal needs to get the marbling and will also tend to result in larger finish weights with the animals at the time of slaughter. This wil also will allow the animal to put on weight faster. So some ranchers will feed the animal nothing but grass until the last 60-90 days and will finish them off with grains and corns to try and get more value out of the animal. Not only does a bigger animal result in more profit, but only having to use grains and corns the last 60-90 days also cuts down the cost as grass is MUCH cheaper. So to raise an animal entirely on corn and grains can be quite expensive.

Cattle have 4 stomachs and are the ONLY animal that can take grains and corns and grass and turn them into lean muscle and not straight fat. Has something to do with the way they proccess everything in each chamber or stomach as it were, but waaay to hard for me to go into here.

Austalian raised cattle can be completely different as well, and again, I will only elaborate if someone wants to know.

failedpersephone

easier just to not eat meat.

really it is!

pjtradeking

failedpersephone wrote:

easier just to not eat meat.

really it is!

Take it easy!! I need my job!!

failedpersephone

pjtradeking wrote:

Take it easy!! I need my job!!

can you switch to a soy-based employment??

maybe meat in moderation ?? will that work for you?

(I still will be a veggie)

pjtradeking

failedpersephone wrote:

can you switch to a soy-based employment??

maybe meat in moderation ?? will that work for you?

(I still will be a veggie)

Soy based employment...prob not..:(

...the moderation I can handle. Believe it or not, I dont eat as much as you would expect considering where I work..:)

justjoshingu

seriously.. the title of this thread is know your meat....

and yet not one masturbation joke?

did i step into bizarro AET?