<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for A brazen move from an agency shot through with industry players.]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Heidi http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/ Wed, 06 Sep 2006 05:40:15 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/1 Passing the buck

I don't eat cows myself, but I still find this damned upsetting.  Granted, it is generally a better idea to know who is raising your food, and I am all in favor of tracking down local farmers who use grass pasture.

But I refuse to just accept that food labels are meant to be meaningless. With so much information being pelted at us, it is very important that consumers be able to use easy-to-identify labels to help them make decisions.  How can the government get away with this?  If the USDA isn't setting standards that are meaningful, then who is?

Is there a letter-writing or lobbying campaign on the horizon?  Do I need to start one?

http://groxie.com DIY Environmentalism

]]> Passing the buck

I don't eat cows myself, but I still find this damned upsetting.  Granted, it is generally a better idea to know who is raising your food, and I am all in favor of tracking down local farmers who use grass pasture.

But I refuse to just accept that food labels are meant to be meaningless. With so much information being pelted at us, it is very important that consumers be able to use easy-to-identify labels to help them make decisions.  How can the government get away with this?  If the USDA isn't setting standards that are meaningful, then who is?

Is there a letter-writing or lobbying campaign on the horizon?  Do I need to start one?

http://groxie.com DIY Environmentalism

]]> Comment #2 by meander http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/ Wed, 06 Sep 2006 06:42:15 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/2 Grass fed beef and health

A few months ago, the Union of Concerned Scientists did a literature review about how nutrional characteristics of beef and milk are affected by how the animal is raised.  I haven't seen much coverage of their study.  

The report is "Greener Pastures:  How grass-fed beef and milk contribute to healthy eating", and can be found here.

The key findings, summarized in the Executive Summary:

"We reviewed all the studies published in English we could find that compare levels of [beneficial] fatty acids in pasture-raised milk and meat with levels in conventionally produced milk and meat, and converted these levels into amounts per serving of milk, steak, and ground beef. The resulting analysis found statistically significant differences in fat content between pasture-raised and conventional products. Specifically:
Steak and ground beef from grass-fed cattle are almost always lower in total fat than steak and ground beef from conventionally raised cattle.
Steak from grass-fed cattle tends to have higher levels of the omega-3 fatty acid ALA.
Steak from grass-fed cattle sometimes has higher levels of the omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA.
Ground beef from grass-fed cattle usually has higher levels of CLA.
Milk from pasture-raised cattle tends to have higher levels of ALA.
Milk from pasture-raised cattle has consistently higher levels of CLA."

ALA, EPA, DHA, CLA are defined in the Exec Summary.







]]> Grass fed beef and health

A few months ago, the Union of Concerned Scientists did a literature review about how nutrional characteristics of beef and milk are affected by how the animal is raised.  I haven't seen much coverage of their study.  

The report is "Greener Pastures:  How grass-fed beef and milk contribute to healthy eating", and can be found here.

The key findings, summarized in the Executive Summary:

"We reviewed all the studies published in English we could find that compare levels of [beneficial] fatty acids in pasture-raised milk and meat with levels in conventionally produced milk and meat, and converted these levels into amounts per serving of milk, steak, and ground beef. The resulting analysis found statistically significant differences in fat content between pasture-raised and conventional products. Specifically:
Steak and ground beef from grass-fed cattle are almost always lower in total fat than steak and ground beef from conventionally raised cattle.
Steak from grass-fed cattle tends to have higher levels of the omega-3 fatty acid ALA.
Steak from grass-fed cattle sometimes has higher levels of the omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA.
Ground beef from grass-fed cattle usually has higher levels of CLA.
Milk from pasture-raised cattle tends to have higher levels of ALA.
Milk from pasture-raised cattle has consistently higher levels of CLA."

ALA, EPA, DHA, CLA are defined in the Exec Summary.







]]> Comment #3 by kmp http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/ Wed, 06 Sep 2006 06:53:07 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/3 Sustainable Table

has a good overview of the terms, common misconceptions, etc. in pasture-raised meats.  Eat Wild I have also found to be an excellent resource.

I'm hoping that even if the USDA gets away with watering down the "grass fed" definition, websites like this one will be diligent in letting the consumer know exactly what they are buying, even if you cannot visit the farm in person.

I haven't eaten beef in many years, but I recently threw an End of Summer BBQ party at my place and decided I should serve hamburgers.  The Eat Well guide has a handy-dandy search engine to locate local stores, farms, and on-line purveyors of all sorts of organic, pasture-raised, heritage, etc., foods.  I ordered ground beef from Sweet Grass Farm in Vernon, NY.  Ground beef was $3 a pound (!!), shipped overnight, and, according to my boyfriend, made burgers that were "amazingly good."

]]> Sustainable Table

has a good overview of the terms, common misconceptions, etc. in pasture-raised meats.  Eat Wild I have also found to be an excellent resource.

I'm hoping that even if the USDA gets away with watering down the "grass fed" definition, websites like this one will be diligent in letting the consumer know exactly what they are buying, even if you cannot visit the farm in person.

I haven't eaten beef in many years, but I recently threw an End of Summer BBQ party at my place and decided I should serve hamburgers.  The Eat Well guide has a handy-dandy search engine to locate local stores, farms, and on-line purveyors of all sorts of organic, pasture-raised, heritage, etc., foods.  I ordered ground beef from Sweet Grass Farm in Vernon, NY.  Ground beef was $3 a pound (!!), shipped overnight, and, according to my boyfriend, made burgers that were "amazingly good."

]]> Comment #4 by Tom Philpott http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/ Wed, 06 Sep 2006 07:08:27 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/4 Heidi,

You're right that i shouldn't be so cynical about these things, but it's tough when a bunch of industry minions are running the show. Organic Consumers Association is doing great work to protect the organic label, complete with pretty successful write-in campaigns, etc. Check 'em out. Cornucopia Institute has been stellar on the pasture-access question; check them out, too.

Also, there is a lot of talk in small-farm circles about new, non-USDA labels. Here is an example from the celebrated Maine grower Elliot Coleman.

I should have added in the post that the whole impetus behind the move is to give large-scale industrial producers access to the premium awarded by the market for grass-fed beef, without having fundamentally to change their practices -- as is happening with "organic" milk. Agreed that it's unacceptable.

]]> Heidi,

You're right that i shouldn't be so cynical about these things, but it's tough when a bunch of industry minions are running the show. Organic Consumers Association is doing great work to protect the organic label, complete with pretty successful write-in campaigns, etc. Check 'em out. Cornucopia Institute has been stellar on the pasture-access question; check them out, too.

Also, there is a lot of talk in small-farm circles about new, non-USDA labels. Here is an example from the celebrated Maine grower Elliot Coleman.

I should have added in the post that the whole impetus behind the move is to give large-scale industrial producers access to the premium awarded by the market for grass-fed beef, without having fundamentally to change their practices -- as is happening with "organic" milk. Agreed that it's unacceptable.

]]> Comment #5 by Mike Frew http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/ Wed, 06 Sep 2006 08:37:07 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/usda-on-grass-fed-cows-confine-em-and-let-em-eat-corn-stalks/5 calling a paddock a paddock

Here in New Zealand (where cows are seldomly fed in the shed) we have a similar argument bubbling over a "Buy Kiwi Made" campaign promoted by the Green party (in conjunction with the Labour Gov.).

Industry players have excerted pressure in order to have goods made abroad, but designed in NZ and with NZ sourced material included under a "Kiwi Made" labelling system. An iconic NZ company that manufactures in China has been particularly vocal.

Aims of the Kiwi Made program include supporting local manufacturing and reducing our external dependance (as a remote country) in an energy constraned world. So Kiwi Made means just that. Similarly, I'm sure the intentions of a "Grass Fed" label is to inform consumers just that. Like many similar issues, this is one of local sustainability.

It seems that for both NZ and the US the issue has become one where a group of interested industry players (bound to be excluded) rally to have the rules changed in order to protect their positions. Most often their position is one based on "un-sustainable" practices, and a labeling regime that excludes them would tag them as "un-sustainable".

If the punters want "Corn Fed" meat, or indeed "Made abroad" clothing they have a right to buy them. But if its corn fed or made abroad and labelled otherwise its plain misleading.

So, Heidi, stay strong. These are important issues. The average consumer is (and maybe will allways be) unaware of what sits behind the label. Getting rules right from the get-go is crucial.

]]> calling a paddock a paddock

Here in New Zealand (where cows are seldomly fed in the shed) we have a similar argument bubbling over a "Buy Kiwi Made" campaign promoted by the Green party (in conjunction with the Labour Gov.).

Industry players have excerted pressure in order to have goods made abroad, but designed in NZ and with NZ sourced material included under a "Kiwi Made" labelling system. An iconic NZ company that manufactures in China has been particularly vocal.

Aims of the Kiwi Made program include supporting local manufacturing and reducing our external dependance (as a remote country) in an energy constraned world. So Kiwi Made means just that. Similarly, I'm sure the intentions of a "Grass Fed" label is to inform consumers just that. Like many similar issues, this is one of local sustainability.

It seems that for both NZ and the US the issue has become one where a group of interested industry players (bound to be excluded) rally to have the rules changed in order to protect their positions. Most often their position is one based on "un-sustainable" practices, and a labeling regime that excludes them would tag them as "un-sustainable".

If the punters want "Corn Fed" meat, or indeed "Made abroad" clothing they have a right to buy them. But if its corn fed or made abroad and labelled otherwise its plain misleading.

So, Heidi, stay strong. These are important issues. The average consumer is (and maybe will allways be) unaware of what sits behind the label. Getting rules right from the get-go is crucial.

]]>