<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Buckingham &#187; LFTB</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.buckinghampost.com/tag/lftb/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.buckinghampost.com</link>
	<description>Post</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2013 01:19:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
		<item>
		<title>Shedding Light on the &#8220;Pink Slime&#8221; Debate</title>
		<link>http://www.buckinghampost.com/2012/04/06/shedding-light-on-the-pink-slime-debate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.buckinghampost.com/2012/04/06/shedding-light-on-the-pink-slime-debate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2012 10:36:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Olga Hajishengallis</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BPI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LFTB]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pink slime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USDA]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buckinghampost.com/?p=8678</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The recent months have given rise to great controversy relating to pink slime, a term given to “lean finely textured beef”, also known as LFTB. While the term carries a vastly negative connotation, some claim there are a number of advantages to this meat product. Others are adamant in their stance that it should be]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div id="attachment_8762" class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://www.buckinghampost.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Pink-Slime.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-8762" src="http://www.buckinghampost.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Pink-Slime-300x168.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="168" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">http://abcnews.go.com</p></div>
<p>The recent months have given rise to great controversy relating to <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/04/is-it-wrong-to-feed-pink-slime-to-our-children-in-school-lunches/255320/">pink slime</a>, a term given to “lean finely textured beef”, also known as LFTB. While the term carries a vastly negative connotation, some claim there are a number of advantages to this meat product. Others are adamant in their stance that it should be eliminated not only from fast food restaurants, but also from school cafeterias.</p>
<p>Pink slime is produced by warming salvaged portions from carcass trimmings. The fat is removed, and then ammonium hydroxide gas is applied to eliminate pathogens. Finally, it is stored in freezers to be used at a later time. Its practical benefits seem reasonable considering 34 million cattle are killed every year. Only about half their body weight is utilized. However, with pink slime, 10 to 12 pounds from each animal is also used, which ultimately helps 1.5 million animals avoid the slaughterhouse each year.</p>
<p>Pink slime can be more resourceful because the application of ammonia eliminates pathogens, a common problem with “cheap hamburgers.” Specifically, reports from safety officials indicate that ever since LFTB has been used, toxic <em>E. coli</em> is hardly ever found in school hamburgers.</p>
<p>Marion Nestle, a professor of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University, argues that pink slime is a derogatory term for LFTB. The association with the term has contributed to poor public perception. According to Nestle, cultural norms have predominantly shaped the public’s opinion of LFBT.</p>
<p>On the other hand, Bettina Siegel, school food advocate, amassed 230,000 signatures to legally abolish LFBT from school cafeterias, as she likened the use of pink slime to feeding “our children connective tissues and beef scraps that were, in the past…not considered fit for human consumption.” In response to this, Nestle offers possible solutions such as schools buying higher-quality and therefore more expensive meat or simply labeling LFBT as an ingredient to provide greater transparency for the public.</p>
<p>Recent <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/are-lftb-or-pink-slime-safety-claims-meaningful-to-consumers/">updates</a> on this debate include the USDA (U.S. Department of Agriculture) endorsing the idea of labeling LFBT as an ingredient in ground beef. Also, BPI (Beef Products Inc.) has issued statements that support this plan in hopes of improving public opinion towards this product.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.buckinghampost.com/2012/04/06/shedding-light-on-the-pink-slime-debate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
