Do You Eat Grass Fed Beef?

Nutrition
81

[quote]rainjack wrote:
BF Bullpup wrote:
swordthrower wrote:
But, you can’t write off the grass-fed beef industry as tree hugging vegan bullshit.

I can’t, because the statement above is an oxymoron. Vegans don’t touch meat, even grass-fed. Just saying.

Without reading the whole thread, I’ll just say that, yes, I go out of my way to buy grass-fed beef. It makes me sick how farming the way we used to before the Vietnam War, like feeding our livestock grass, is now too cost-prohibitive compared to spending millions of dollars on research on cheap feeds and growth hormones to produce more meat cheaper.

Farming in the 50-60’s was far more reliant on much harsher chemicals than we use today. Google Diethyl Stilbestrol in beef cattle. [/quote]

That’s nothing! The Viets had to deal with Agent Orange, napalm and other goodies dropped from the sky.

82

[quote]lixy wrote:
rainjack wrote:
BF Bullpup wrote:
swordthrower wrote:
But, you can’t write off the grass-fed beef industry as tree hugging vegan bullshit.

I can’t, because the statement above is an oxymoron. Vegans don’t touch meat, even grass-fed. Just saying.

Without reading the whole thread, I’ll just say that, yes, I go out of my way to buy grass-fed beef. It makes me sick how farming the way we used to before the Vietnam War, like feeding our livestock grass, is now too cost-prohibitive compared to spending millions of dollars on research on cheap feeds and growth hormones to produce more meat cheaper.

Farming in the 50-60’s was far more reliant on much harsher chemicals than we use today. Google Diethyl Stilbestrol in beef cattle.

That’s nothing! The Viets had to deal with Agent Orange, napalm and other goodies dropped from the sky.[/quote]

That would be all well and good if the discussion were about the atrocities of the Viet Nam War. Oddly enough it’s not. It’s about raising beef.

Go back to the political forum if you want to rant on that, lixy.

83

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Digity wrote:
Well, where do you think mad cow disease came from? Cows got it when they were fed meat from other cattle…last time I checked cows were herbivores. I’ve heard they’ve even mixed garbage into the feed. It’s pretty disgusting.

You have “heard” this, huh? And you wonder why I called that book you were touting propaganda? I challenge you to go to a feed lot and find “garbage” being fed. You won’t find any.

Name the last documented case of Mad Cow disease in the U.S. - just a date will suffice.

It is tree hugging vegan bullshit like this that turns me against grass fed beef. If you have a product worth buying, it will sell. Using baseless accusations and fear mongering will not make the meat any more tasty.

That’s why I’m a fan of buying your beef locally. Particularly, if there’s some transparency there and you can see how the animals are being treated. Basically, find farmers that aren’t taking part in all the bad practices that are out there.

You are the type of customer that they love to see coming. trust me - I could feed my cattle pure dog shit, tell you it was organic, and you would never know the difference.

I don’t care if you believe all the tree hugging bullshit you have been fed, but please offer some proof with your charges beyond, “I even heard that they…”.
[/quote]
Okay, first of all the comments about the bad cow feed did not come from the book. The book contains an entire chapter on corn-fed cows and that’s all it talks about…corn being fed to cows. There’s nothing scandalous, in that respect, in the book. Please don’t be so presumptuous in the future.

Secondly, I only mentioned mad cow disease to illustrate that in the past cows have been fed some ridiculous things and therefore, it’s not a huge stretch to believe other crap hasn’t been added to their feed. If no mad cow cases ever occurred there’s a good chance cows would still be fed raw meat even though they’re herbivores. I don’t have first hand accounts of any of this, so in that respect I have no proof. But again, if they’re willing to feed meat to cows it’s not a big stretch to believe that other unsavory things have been fed to cattle.

BTW tree hugging vegans don’t eat meat…

The more I learn about the “organic market” the more I realize you need to be a savvy customer and not believe everything you hear, as you’ve stated. Ironically, the book is in agreement with you here. It’s talks a lot about how there’s a ton of bullshit in the organic industry and how big companies have bought up a lot of small organic businesses and turned the “organic” symbol into a marketing tool. Before you continue to belittle a book and call it propaganda…you might actually want to read the damn thing!

I acknowledge that there’s a lot of problems with establishing an honest and transparent cattle industry where the claims made on the package are not frivolous. However, that doesn’t mean everyone out there lacks integrity and will feed dog crap and call it organic. There are people that take the practice seriously. I think it’ll mostly be a niche market, but I think the option should be available for those who choose it. That being said, it’s ultimately in the customer’s hands to determine that they’re getting what they paid for. Again, customers need to be savvy and do their research. But like I said before, just because there are those that will take advantage of this movement that doesn’t mean we should give up on it.

84

LOL about the Vietnam War. I just thought of that off the top of my head and wasn’t trying to start anything political. Oh well.

Rainjack I think you made a typo because I couldn’t turn up anything using Google and I’m too ignorant with farm chemicals. I would like to counter with DDT being used during that time period before the hippies made the poor farmers stop using them to kill pests.

85

[quote]BF Bullpup wrote:
LOL about the Vietnam War. I just thought of that off the top of my head and wasn’t trying to start anything political. Oh well.

Rainjack I think you made a typo because I couldn’t turn up anything using Google and I’m too ignorant with farm chemicals. I would like to counter with DDT being used during that time period before the hippies made the poor farmers stop using them to kill pests.[/quote]

I realized that after I tried to google it myself. Try googling Diethylstilbestrol. One word, not two.

86

[quote]Digity wrote:
Secondly, I only mentioned mad cow disease to illustrate that in the past cows have been fed some ridiculous things and therefore, it’s not a huge stretch to believe other crap hasn’t been added to their feed. If no mad cow cases ever occurred there’s a good chance cows would still be fed raw meat even though they’re herbivores. I don’t have first hand accounts of any of this, so in that respect I have no proof. But again, if they’re willing to feed meat to cows it’s not a big stretch to believe that other unsavory things have been fed to cattle.[/quote]

Let me ask you a question. When you read of stories about feeding meat to cattle, what do you see in your mind? I’m not trying to be a smart ass. I want to know what your visual interpretation of this is.

But many of them are militantly anti-meat propagandists.

I have never said that we should.

87

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I realized that after I tried to google it myself. Try googling Diethylstilbestrol. One word, not two. [/quote]

It works, thanks. Okay, I chose the wrong time period. Try pre-WWII. You know, back when cattle ate nothing but grass or grains and had nothing else inside. The irony of more additives resulting in a more affordable meat today pisses me off.

88

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Digity wrote:
Secondly, I only mentioned mad cow disease to illustrate that in the past cows have been fed some ridiculous things and therefore, it’s not a huge stretch to believe other crap hasn’t been added to their feed. If no mad cow cases ever occurred there’s a good chance cows would still be fed raw meat even though they’re herbivores. I don’t have first hand accounts of any of this, so in that respect I have no proof. But again, if they’re willing to feed meat to cows it’s not a big stretch to believe that other unsavory things have been fed to cattle.

Let me ask you a question. When you read of stories about feeding meat to cattle, what do you see in your mind? I’m not trying to be a smart ass. I want to know what your visual interpretation of this is.

BTW tree hugging vegans don’t eat meat…

But many of them are militantly anti-meat propagandists.

But like I said before, just because there are those that will take advantage of this movement that doesn’t mean we should give up on it.

I have never said that we should.

[/quote]

I imagine they’d mix the meat in with the rest of the feed (corn, hay, etc). Maybe to increase the total nutritional profile of the feed.

About tree hugging vegans…the guy who wrote the book likes going to McDonald’s. Even after seeing some of the practices in the meat industry that he says he doesn’t agree with he admits that he can still see himself going to McDonald’s for a burger. I never got the impression that I was reading tree hugging vegan propaganda…if anything, the fact that he was honest and didn’t have a holier-than-thou attitude was pretty refreshing.

89

[quote]Digity wrote:
I imagine they’d mix the meat in with the rest of the feed (corn, hay, etc). Maybe to increase the total nutritional profile of the feed.
[/quote]

Do you think they just flop out some ground beef into the feed bunk?

90

[quote]rainjack wrote:
Digity wrote:
…

That’s why I’m a fan of buying your beef locally. Particularly, if there’s some transparency there and you can see how the animals are being treated. Basically, find farmers that aren’t taking part in all the bad practices that are out there.

You are the type of customer that they love to see coming. trust me - I could feed my cattle pure dog shit, tell you it was organic, and you would never know the difference.

I don’t care if you believe all the tree hugging bullshit you have been fed, but please offer some proof with your charges beyond, “I even heard that they…”.

[/quote]

I work with a bunch of people with family farms. They laugh at all the people that pay extra for grass fed and all the other BS. They think it is all a marketing scam.

91

[quote]rainjack wrote:
BF Bullpup wrote:
LOL about the Vietnam War. I just thought of that off the top of my head and wasn’t trying to start anything political. Oh well.

Rainjack I think you made a typo because I couldn’t turn up anything using Google and I’m too ignorant with farm chemicals. I would like to counter with DDT being used during that time period before the hippies made the poor farmers stop using them to kill pests.

I realized that after I tried to google it myself. Try googling Diethylstilbestrol. One word, not two. [/quote]

DES has been very successful in treating female canine incontinence stemming from poor sphincter control.

92

Okay, we all agree that unscrupulous people can use the grass-fed label to fool people. However, it’s no different than the supplement industry. Sure some supplement companies sell god-knows what based on sketchy research, but we still take supplements after we are convinced that the source is trustworthy, and the research is sound. So let’s stick to discussing the actual agricultural processes themselves.

And I agree with rainjack, that feeding cattle grains is a good way to get them to slaughtering weight, and shouldn’t be shunned outright. In fact, many small-scale farmers supplement with grain grown on the farm, or let the cattle graze it directly, and do it in a sustainable way.

As for the comment about the the farmers laughing about the grass-fed movement, I would be cautious. Farmers are not known to be embracer’s of change, and it’s pretty obvious when you look at the state of farming today, that most farmers would rather keep going deeper into debt buying chemicals and machinery than to change what they were doing (especially if it doesn’t require loans or diesel engines…). So, sure most of them are going to be suspicious, but a some of them are realizing that low-input sustainable farming is the way to go, and are making the transition. And remember, sustainable doesn’t just refer to warm fuzzy environmental ideas, but to profitability and quality of life as well. Because what the hell is a point of a farm if it isn’t profitable, and relies on loans and other financial/material inputs?

93

[quote]swordthrower wrote:
Okay, we all agree that unscrupulous people can use the grass-fed label to fool people. However, it’s no different than the supplement industry. Sure some supplement companies sell god-knows what based on sketchy research, but we still take supplements after we are convinced that the source is trustworthy, and the research is sound. So let’s stick to discussing the actual agricultural processes themselves.

And I agree with rainjack, that feeding cattle grains is a good way to get them to slaughtering weight, and shouldn’t be shunned outright. In fact, many small-scale farmers supplement with grain grown on the farm, or let the cattle graze it directly, and do it in a sustainable way.

As for the comment about the the farmers laughing about the grass-fed movement, I would be cautious. Farmers are not known to be embracer’s of change, and it’s pretty obvious when you look at the state of farming today, that most farmers would rather keep going deeper into debt buying chemicals and machinery than to change what they were doing (especially if it doesn’t require loans or diesel engines…). So, sure most of them are going to be suspicious, but a some of them are realizing that low-input sustainable farming is the way to go, and are making the transition. And remember, sustainable doesn’t just refer to warm fuzzy environmental ideas, but to profitability and quality of life as well. Because what the hell is a point of a farm if it isn’t profitable, and relies on loans and other financial/material inputs?[/quote]

At the prices cattle are at now, it will be sustainable for years to come.

You make the mistake of thinking all farmers raise cattle. Very few do. They sell everything they grow to someone who then sells it to the rancher.

Your arguments about inputs and such would be better placed in a rant against modern farming practices - which are, by far, the most efficient in the history of mankind.

Everyone benefits from government farm payments, so don’t use that as an argument.

94

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Digity wrote:
…

That’s why I’m a fan of buying your beef locally. Particularly, if there’s some transparency there and you can see how the animals are being treated. Basically, find farmers that aren’t taking part in all the bad practices that are out there.

You are the type of customer that they love to see coming. trust me - I could feed my cattle pure dog shit, tell you it was organic, and you would never know the difference.

I don’t care if you believe all the tree hugging bullshit you have been fed, but please offer some proof with your charges beyond, “I even heard that they…”.

I work with a bunch of people with family farms. They laugh at all the people that pay extra for grass fed and all the other BS. They think it is all a marketing scam. [/quote]

I’m not surprised by that attitude. I don’t understand the whole scam idea. For instance, if the cattle’s primary diet is grass then its nutritional profile varies from that of grain fed cattle. Therefore, you are getting a different product, which research shows is healthier than conventional cattle. Where’s the scam in that? Mind you, I mean properly raised grass-fed cattle.

I don’t mean cattle that was fed grass for one day in its life and then labeled “grass-fed”. In that case, it’s a scam. Do they think even the legitimately raised grass-fed cattle is some sort of scam? What about cattle that hasn’t been given growth hormones, antibiotics and so on…do they consider that a scam too? If so, that’s more a matter of opinion rather than a fact.

For instance, if a lottery game is set up and no one can possibly win then that’s a scam and it’s a fact. In the case of the cattle, the jury is still out about what’s best and therefore, you can’t state factually that the growing alternative methods are a scam.

95

[quote]Digity wrote:
…
I work with a bunch of people with family farms. They laugh at all the people that pay extra for grass fed and all the other BS. They think it is all a marketing scam.

I’m not surprised by that attitude. I don’t understand the whole scam idea. For instance, if the cattle’s primary diet is grass then its nutritional profile varies from that of grain fed cattle. Therefore, you are getting a different product, which research shows is healthier than conventional cattle. Where’s the scam in that? Mind you, I mean properly raised grass-fed cattle.

I don’t mean cattle that was fed grass for one day in its life and then labeled “grass-fed”. In that case, it’s a scam. Do they think even the legitimately raised grass-fed cattle is some sort of scam?

[/quote]
Big part of the problem is there is no one that can say what is legitimate.

The dairy farmers I know don’t do hormones and they don’t think ANYONE doesn’t do antibiotics. No one wants sick cows, even the granola type farmers. The no antibiotic claim is usually a farce.

[quote]

For instance, if a lottery game is set up and no one can possibly win then that’s a scam and it’s a fact. In the case of the cattle, the jury is still out about what’s best and therefore, you can’t state factually that the growing alternative methods are a scam.[/quote]

Without any way to prove they are legitimate and knowing how people work and gossip I tend to think they are mostly scammers.

The no antibiotic claim is a good example. My old secretary laughed at it because one of the farmers near her claimed his goat milk was antibiotic free. Her vet believed otherwise. I don’t remember if he treated the goats or if he knew the vet that treated the goats but they were not antibiotic free.

I have heard a ton of stories about people spraying “organic” fruits too.

I am highly skeptical of many claims.

96

Well, then I totally agree with your farmer friends. If people are making claims and doing the opposite then it’s a flat out scam.

That’s my biggest issue with buying grass-fed beef at the moment. I haven’t a clue what I’m really getting. It’s annoying to not have that transparency about something I’m putting into my body.

The beef I bought is considered reputable from the research I did on the net, but who’s to say what’s really going on on those individual farms. I’m definitely not saying “Hey everybody, lets all jump on the grass-fed bandwagon!” However, I still think there’s people out there that take it seriously. I’d hate to think ever farmer out there is trying to scam everyone.

97

[quote]Digity wrote:
That’s my biggest issue with buying grass-fed beef at the moment. I haven’t a clue what I’m really getting. It’s annoying to not have that transparency about something I’m putting into my body. [/quote]

Move to Europe.

98

[quote]rainjack wrote:
At the prices cattle are at now, it will be sustainable for years to come.
[/quote]

Okay, but that’s not really sustainable, since it relies so heavily on outside energy sources. Sustainable means that every year the land gets better, the organic matter in the soil increases and therefore the stocking density can increase, the water that flows into the farm leaves cleaner that it was, etc. The system we have now is the opposite.

Every year the midwest is turning into more of a dustbowl, more fertilizer runoff is making its way down the Mississippi, more resistant strains of bacteria are being created, more E. Coli is making its way into the food system, more lagoons of manure seeping into the ground…

You say that grass-fed beef is an inferior product, but there is more to it than the steak on your plate. That’s the unfortunate reality of living on God’s green earth. It’s all connected, and something as simple and essential as food has a huge impact on the world.

Which is ridiculous… Sorry, when I say “small-scale farmer” I mean one who is raising cattle, most likely on grass. Anyway, there are no small-scale corn or soy farmers anymore, or at least the idea of small-scale has changed.

Well, I don’t see how beef production is not an integral part of modern agriculture. I don’t think you can talk about one without talking about the other. The reason we are growing huge monocultures of grain is has a lot to do with the livestock industry, and vice versa. One hand shakes the other kind of thing.

And as far as the efficiency of modern farming practices goes, I think we need to really examine what efficiency means. I’m sure you know people have done calculations (the accuracy of which is probably questionable, but it gives a good qualitative description of the issue at hand) of energy input for each calorie of food produced, and the result tends to always be that it takes several times as much energy, mostly from fossil fuels, to create one calorie of meat from conventional livestock.

By that definition, the efficiency is actually much worse than a small-scale intensive grazing operation where the biggest input is free solar energy. I mean if you think about it from a real rudimentary point of view, we’ve gone from making the cows go get their own food and in the process fertilize the soil, to using synthetic fertilizer (money and fuel) to grow grain and then hauling it to the cows (money and fuel) and then finding ingenious ways to dispose of the waste (money and fuel).

Only from a strict economic perspective is it efficient, and I would argue that growing food is not strictly economic. It is biological, and ecological, and thus has severe impacts when done unsustainably.

99

[quote]Digity wrote:
Well, then I totally agree with your farmer friends. If people are making claims and doing the opposite then it’s a flat out scam.

That’s my biggest issue with buying grass-fed beef at the moment. I haven’t a clue what I’m really getting. It’s annoying to not have that transparency about something I’m putting into my body.

The beef I bought is considered reputable from the research I did on the net, but who’s to say what’s really going on on those individual farms. I’m definitely not saying “Hey everybody, lets all jump on the grass-fed bandwagon!” However, I still think there’s people out there that take it seriously. I’d hate to think ever farmer out there is trying to scam everyone.[/quote]

I am sure they are not all scammers but someone here tried grass fed beef that tasted like “regular” beef to them. Something very wrong with that.

Also the use of antibiotics on sick animals is not a bad thing. The fear mongering about antibiotics is (and so is the over use of antibiotics.)

100

[quote]swordthrower wrote:
rainjack wrote:
At the prices cattle are at now, it will be sustainable for years to come.

Okay, but that’s not really sustainable, since it relies so heavily on outside energy sources. Sustainable means that every year the land gets better, the organic matter in the soil increases and therefore the stocking density can increase, the water that flows into the farm leaves cleaner that it was, etc. The system we have now is the opposite.

Every year the midwest is turning into more of a dustbowl, more fertilizer runoff is making its way down the Mississippi, more resistant strains of bacteria are being created, more E. Coli is making its way into the food system, more lagoons of manure seeping into the ground…

You say that grass-fed beef is an inferior product, but there is more to it than the steak on your plate. That’s the unfortunate reality of living on God’s green earth. It’s all connected, and something as simple and essential as food has a huge impact on the world.

You make the mistake of thinking all farmers raise cattle. Very few do. They sell everything they grow to someone who then sells it to the rancher.

Which is ridiculous… Sorry, when I say “small-scale farmer” I mean one who is raising cattle, most likely on grass. Anyway, there are no small-scale corn or soy farmers anymore, or at least the idea of small-scale has changed.

Your arguments about inputs and such would be better placed in a rant against modern farming practices - which are, by far, the most efficient in the history of mankind.

Everyone benefits from government farm payments, so don’t use that as an argument.

Well, I don’t see how beef production is not an integral part of modern agriculture. I don’t think you can talk about one without talking about the other. The reason we are growing huge monocultures of grain is has a lot to do with the livestock industry, and vice versa. One hand shakes the other kind of thing.

And as far as the efficiency of modern farming practices goes, I think we need to really examine what efficiency means. I’m sure you know people have done calculations (the accuracy of which is probably questionable, but it gives a good qualitative description of the issue at hand) of energy input for each calorie of food produced, and the result tends to always be that it takes several times as much energy, mostly from fossil fuels, to create one calorie of meat from conventional livestock.

By that definition, the efficiency is actually much worse than a small-scale intensive grazing operation where the biggest input is free solar energy. I mean if you think about it from a real rudimentary point of view, we’ve gone from making the cows go get their own food and in the process fertilize the soil, to using synthetic fertilizer (money and fuel) to grow grain and then hauling it to the cows (money and fuel) and then finding ingenious ways to dispose of the waste (money and fuel).

Only from a strict economic perspective is it efficient, and I would argue that growing food is not strictly economic. It is biological, and ecological, and thus has severe impacts when done unsustainably. [/quote]

What do you consider sustainable? If everything was free range grass fed there would be much less available beef. It would be very expensive and rare for most of us.

I prefer our current system, flaws and all, although I would like to see some of the subsidies for corn disappear.