The USDA labeling division has the tough task of making sure labels on packaged meat and poultry are "accurate and not misleading." As you will read at this link, Dr. Richard Raymond, a former USDA undersecretary for food safety, has questions and concerns about the process.
Shakespeare knew that the “pen is mightier than
the sword” (Bulwer-Lytton), and he understood that words could cause
conflict and confusion. Many of his plays hinge on predictions, inflammatory statements, mistaken meanings, and other word misadventures. In agricultural
circles, word wars surface in many ways, and the labeling issue is a prime
example.
The pink slime episode also confirmed that in several ways,
as this rewrite of an earlier blog examines.
Would Finely Textured Beef by Any Other Name Taste the Same?
"What's in a name? That
which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." Shakespeare
When several
large supermarket chains banned any beef containing lean finely textured meat
trimmings, the pink slime issue became even more “textured.”
One side, led by Jamie
Oliver and ABC Nightly News investigations, indicated that the meat by-product
is possibly dangerous, probably treated by a suspect ammonia process, and
definitely in need of being labeled whenever it is sold. They say a subtle
meat industry practice has forced pseudo beef onto the consumer.
The other side, backed by numerous companies and scientists, claimed the product is safe and approved. They say a slur campaign results in wasted products, higher costs, and the abandonment of a perfectly useful food. Some companies are beginning to process finely textured beef again.
Maybe one thing all
sides would agree on is that the “pink slime” term was a master stroke in
connotative maneuvering. The pejorative phrase had been around for months, but
it caught fire in the media bonfire and led to many consumers
calling for slime-free (non-textured) meat.
The meat industry was
caught off guard. If they could have come up with a Madison Avenue term for the
product early on, the outcry may have been muted. A tough task though,
considering the long name they had to work with: Lean Finely Textured
Beef. The acronym sounds more like a school club: LFTB. Adding the word
“trimmings” allows for an alliteration like “textured trimmings,” or using
truncated words could make something like Fine Tex Beef, but that sounds like a
Lone Star State production.
Maybe the industry
should have changed the term completely like other food products have done. Not
many would order Slimehead from the fish menu, but its replacement name, Orange
Roughy, has worked out fine. Fatty Goose Liver is not in demand, but some French food
lovers go for the controversial foie gras. And no need
to elaborate about the term Rocky Mountain Oysters.
So, a new name. How
about something like “pink protein” or “the other pink meat”? If the color is
the problem, then they could try “lean trim protein.” That has a healthy sound
to it, although it might be too wordy for the Twitter world.
Names aside, the
important factors for agricultural products are health, nutrition, and
economics. In the New Digital World, communication about these factors is key.
Food producers and consumers need to communicate, and the media can be the
means or it can be the message--clear or distorted. When it comes to our
food supply, honest, thoughtful messages on all sides would be the best items on
the menu. As Shakespeare wrote, “This
above all; to thine own self be true.”
by dan gogerty (photos from ars/usda and mit.edu)
No comments:
Post a Comment