"So it's okay with the commenters below to eat beef that has been treated
with ammonia?? That industrywide practice is not in dispute. You are so
busy covering for your industry that common sense has been abandoned.
"I can't believe it. This article places beef right there along with
high-fructose corn syrup. This poor reporting on the beef and processing
industry only sheds poor light on the beef industry and aims to scare
consumers from eating it. Your site is losing credibility when it posts
articles like this one.
"U.S. meat is among the safest, most abundant and most affordable anywhere in
the world. Despite this, the makers of 'Food, Inc.' and the subjects they
interview seek to paint the meat industry as big, bad and mechanized. They
seek to prove their point though a selective use of the facts. While the
makers of 'Food, Inc.' have the right to state their opinions, consumers and
the media have the right to the facts. And thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s why consumers are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.safefoodinc.org/ and http://www.bestfoodfacts.org/prod/
These are sources designed to provide balanced, objective information to
help consumers make informed choices. Information is from leading
universities on common questions or issues about the contemporary US food
"We no longer buy fruitsnacks because of what they have done to my
toddler's teeth. He loves them. We would buy the all natural ones
thinking they would be a healthy alternative to candy and sweets. Our
dentist said the snacks stick to teeth and that is most likely the primary
cause of his tooth decay. At age 2 he had deep, slightly discolored
crevices in his molars that needed to be drilled and sealed. His older
brother has no worrisome dental issues and rarely ate alot of fruit
"Wow. This is an absolute shame that you feel the need to quote blog posts
and op eds as science fact. This article is fear mongering at its finest.
Just the tuna/mercury thing alone is repulsive by itsef.
Dr Hightower's 'study' was not scientific or double-blinded. She
handpicked her group of patients.
She conceded in the study's text that 'because only mercury was tested in
these individuals, other contaminants responsible for symptoms cannot be
ruled out.' In other words (her words): 'Cause and effect regarding
symptoms was not fully addressed in this study.' Not to mention the press
that she received YEARS ago for this was most likely to help her sell more
Quoting some journalist's irresponsible experiment as fact is just wrong.
Please take more care in the information you dispense to parents. "
"In reference to your article about hamburger: If I were this site, I would
be very careful in selecting the information you send out so widely. The
video 'Food, Inc' is filled with false information about the beef industry
and agriculture in general. I am incensed that an educational site would
publish this false information without studying the facts thoroughly.
There are many industry groups who you could qualify the information with
instead of a liberally biased group.
I am involved in beef production and education and would like to see some
research behind your articles. "
"I question this reasoning. I watch my local butcher make hamburger. He
uses the thick roast and stuff that the sell as steaks ans such. He just
takes some roasts, as the hamburger in the display case is low, and grinds
it up and adds it to the hamburger display."
"If you are going to attempt to disparge the 'sources' of this information,
then perhaps you yourself should provide a reliable 'source' to refute the
information in this article. "
"There may also be a link between ADM, their intense lobbying pressure and
dollars stuffed into Congressional pockets, and the legislation that helps
subsidize corn growers and corn syrup makers."
"This article only tells half the story. What about suitable substitutes?
Grind your own beef for hamburgers? Fresh fruit rather than fruit snacks?"
"Interesting article. I would instinctively agree with most of the
findings. What concerns me and what makes me question the validity of
your publication is that your 'expert' source in every instance is either
a newspaper or a self proclaimed expert who has written a book. I think
current experience has shown these are not the best source of facts.
There is some proven validity in each of your cases, chemistry speaks for
itself, but I think your conclusions about hamburger, in particular, are
careless and too general. There is no question that the eating habits and
food quality of our nation needs an overhaul, but credibility is based on
solid facts not opinions.
John E. Bragg
PS I have no connection, nor have I ever had any connection with the food
production industry. "