Beef
 

I don't want to hijack the thread below about grass fed beef but I have a question. If grain fed beef is so bad for you why did our ancestors live into their 80's and sometimes 90's? Also, why were the animals themselves healthy and not dying from heart disease?

There are some assumptions and faulty logic going on in your questions... Which ancestors? There are a lot more things that contribute to poor health than how your beef is raised.

Cows raised in feedlots don't die of heart disease, most of them are brought to the absolute brink of death by non-functioning livers via fatty liver disease by the time they go to slaughter though. No animal can live for an extended period of time being fed so unnaturally.

also our ancestor fed their cows grass and hay (dried grass) so they ate grass fed beef. Grain was for dairy animals for milk.

It isn't that grain fed beef is so bad for you, but grass fed is better for you.

In time past I have read that here in NC the cattle were left to their own resources to get through the Winter and it was expected some of them to die as a result. Those animals that died were the food source for the farm workers. Time went by and corn was a surplus item and a source was sought for for the surplus corn. Again here in NC liquor was made and other places it was determined cattle could be made to eat a disproportionate amount of corn and that the beef would have more fat that added taste. People became accustomed to eating the fat/flavor and so evolved feedlots. Feedlots have high feed bills but deal in volume and make some money. Most cattle finished on farms have fewer animals but feed grass/hay and low feed cost and make their money from reduced feed expenses. Feed can be 80% or more of the cost of production if not utilizing grass/hay.

It wasn't until the invention of tractors, planters and combines to produce grain by the tons, and trucks and trains to haul huge quantities of grain, that grain become a cost effective livestock feed.

Prior to a few hundred years ago, grain was not fed to livestock with a few exceptions. Draft animals who are supposed to graze a majority of the day but instead had to work were given grain to keep up their energy. I read in some horse mag that work horses were not expected to live into their teens because they led such a difficult life. City horses were given grain because it was easier to transport food energy as grain than large quantities of hay.

Grass fed beef is just another part of the religon.

It will never make sense if you don't beleive. :cool:

My cattle are on pasture but eat corn too. Are they grass fed or corn fed? :rolleyes:

Grass fed beef will never make sense unless you believe the science.

No single food item will make or break your diet, when eaten in moderation. Our ancestors worked hard physically and that made up for some other things in their lives which were less than optimal.

Aaahh the grass feds bible.

Mine are feed ground open pollinated cob corn, oats and hay that I grow. They too are on grass. I don't give antibiotics and the vet has not been out in years. I guess I am not part of the religion either.

Nasty ad hominem attack there my friend, and totally unnecessary. I notice you show up whenever there's a discussion like this just to get your digs in.

I share what we do and our reasons for doing so, I don't especially care what you do. I share information and then to each their own.

Attacks? :rolleyes:

Grass fed beef is pure sales gimmick to get the beleivers to pay more for lower quality beef.

Yes, attack. And a nasty one at that.

Did everyone notice what a nice polite thread we had going here - especially considering the topic - till Soupmaker showed up to stir the pot?

I like to learn. Why don't you share some actual science proving that there's no difference between grass fed and grain fed?

Everybody is welcome to their own opinion and I'd never force anyone to eat something they didn't like. But resorting to ridicule is infantile.

Because it is nothing but BS that grain fed beef is bad for you.

Grain fed beef is perfectly healthy food. As in everything you eat, use some moderation.

It's possible to raise some excellent grass fed beef, if it is properly done, but some grass fed beef is an inferior product because not all 100% grass fed beef is well raised.

In addition, I will point out that whole grain is a very healthy food for humans, so why would it suddenly be poison for cows and turn their meat into an unhealthy food.

some doctors disagree with you. I have a friend who isn't allowed to eat corn fed beef because of his heart problems. since I don't know the science behind it, I won't defend that practice further.

I'm sure you'll agree that all corn fed beef, pork or anything else is not well raised as well. So that isn't much of a knock on grass fed.

you must be way to sensitive

Nope just tired of these threads turning nasty when they don't need to. We're all adults and should be able to discuss things without juvenile attacks and people getting nasty.

as you said previously, all things in moderation. Corn is good for people but too much corn in the diet causes pellagra. For cattle, it is also an unnatural food. Cattle have a digestive system adapted for grass.

there is also an argument to be made for grass fed based on lower costs of inputs of labor, petroleum, and feed. grass fed also avoids the pollution created by CAFOs

but there was no juvenile attack, or anyone getting nasty, just you accusing someone else of running the thread into the mud when no such thing occured. Try not to be so sensitive when another adult voices an opinion that differs from yours, your post was the first in this thread that cought my attention as snippy.

Do you know Soupmaker and their posting history? They show up on controversial subjects like this and start or escalate arguments.

Comparing grass fed to a religion was an attack and it would've gone downhill from there if anyone had argued with the person. Do I really have to spell out logical fallacies for you?

When I get my slaughtered I always save the liver. Always looked fine to me. Nothing fatty or diseased that I can see. It is amaizing how so many animals at the "brink of death" can make it to the consumer without dying before they get to market.

That was a reference to feedlot cattle, not your cows :)

The point was that cows overfed on grain don't die from heart disease like your op seemed to assume.

Some false assumptions and faulty logic in response???

Yes, there will be some animals that can't adjust well to "hot" feed, but this is a very exaggerated claim. Rations for feedlot cattle contain fiber/roughage, not just grain, and are especially formulated for optimum gain AS WELL AS the health of the animals. An animal "on the brink of death" from liver disease when slaughtered isn't going to be passed by the meat inspectors, and the feedlot would lose money. They aren't in business to lose money, and they don't operate in the manner you have described. Sick and dead animals don't make any money and therefore are avoided as much as possible.

I think that previous generations could eat "corn fed beef" and all kinds of other animal fats and still live long lives because they were not so sedentary as we are today. They WORKED, very few sat a desk for a living. They walked a lot more, wouldn't dream of driving a car just to go a few blocks. Also, they ate smaller portions. The "happy meal" size hamburger used to be the adult size. Then consider the level of processing and artificial additives that food products contain today. And pollutants in our environment. I can tell when I get close to the city coming to work each day when I start smelling exhaust fume type of smell. I think it is a cumulative effect of all of these things why my grand-dad smoked, loved meat and fatty foods, and still lived to be 98.

I fail to see how you have any room to talk here.

Apparently I struck a cord with you though. :cool:

Well ok, maybe a little dramatic I agree :) The point was that cows don't die of heart disease from eating grain. They do have metabolic issues including acidosis, fatty liver and liver abscesses. Of course the feedlots don't feed them to actual death. They calculate to get the most gain by slaughter time while at the same time keeping the cows alive.

I agree about the other things you said, like I said originally (or maybe on the other thread?) there're a lot more things that contribute to poor health than just grain fed beef.

Amen to that!

We live in a complicated world but people still seem to want simple answers. It just isn't so simple as, well if you never eat meat you'll be healthy. Or you never eat grain fed meat. Or you never eat farmed fish. Or you only eat this or that. It just isn't that simple! Our lifestyles and especially our genetics play a big role.

And there is so much misinformation and myth out there, making it even more complicated and confusing! That's why I felt I had to offer explanation in response to your post. It is hard enough to make good choices without mis-information clouding it up.

I had got a hold of a list of things feed lots have been caught feeding to cows.
Shredded News paper,cardboard,phone books.
Chicken litter (chicken ---- and straw)
Ground and dried Poultry byproducts (ground chicken turkey bits they can't sell).
Ground and dried Beef byproducts (mad cow ring a bell)
I am not saying all feedlots are bad, But do you now where and trust the feedlot that supplied yours.
That is the reason I grow my own Plain and simply.

Do cattle and humans digestive tracts work in the same manner?

A visit to a feed lot is enough for me. Thats why I am raising my own grass fed beef.

Define quality.

I am right there with you, AK, but I am not sure we can go without feedlots as long as the American diet and lifestyle is like it is. I don't have a really tall ladder and good binoculars, but I don't think there is enough pasture out there to finish beef on grass for all. This is a real tangent, but consider this thought: Chipotle has gained a following by marketing "responsibly" grown animals. (my words, not theirs). I don't doubt that they do. But those chains are opening around here so fast that it is getting ridiculous. How long will it be before we hear that they get they caved and got some hogs from ConAgra? My point in that is that the food infrastructure of the beef industry is designed the way it is for good reason. There are a whole bucketload of people to feed, that have no real interest in "quality", just quantity.

There isn't enough HIGH QUALITY pasture out there. It takes some pretty high quality pasture to finish a steer on grass alone, which is why a lot of the grass-fed beef is sold as being better simply because it's lean.

It's pretty easy to produce a lean steer on almost any type of pasture, but it takes a lot of good grass, good weather, and good management for a steer to put on fat and finish the way he should.

Here's an exercise for those who know the numbers: how much grain does it normally take to raise an animal in a feedlot? How much land does it take to raise that grain, and what are the associated costs (such as fuel)? If that land was used to properly raise (read: MIG/mob stocked) ruminants, how much meat would it produce compared to the conventional system?

There is a compny called Tall Grass Cattle Company that is trying to make a ready market for grass fed beef, like Swift has done for commodity beef. Their biggest target customer is Arby's.

Arby's sells all grass fed beef in it's restaurants, but is forced to buy most of it from New Zealand and Australia. They are trying to help develop a grass fed beef industry here at home.

My friend is running a grass fed operation, selling to his client list. Arby's came to him and did ultrasound inspection of his cattle to help him make grass fed beef that met their expectations. They also inspected his pastures. They had several recommendations. A couple had to do with his grass. A couple had to do with his choice of bull.

He has changed bulls twice since then to get calves that Arby's will approve. Once they approve him, the Tall Grass Cattle Company will accept him as a supplier.

Lots of scientific stuff goes into getting an approval. There are no laws defining what makes "grass fed beef", but Arby's knows.

He hasn't reached approval yet, but he expects his latest batch of calves to make it. He has done the soil enhancements necessary. You should see his grass! His latest bull is very efficent at converting grass and puts it in the right locations.

His last bull made way too much fat on his calves. Cover fat, not marbling. Too much waste. Plus he threw calves too large. He lost a couple of calves to birthing problems.

I haven't been over to see his latest bull. I hear it's a Dexter/Shorthorn cross. Tiny calves, low cover fat and big, well marbled rib eyes.

70 brood cows on 90 acres. Lots of lime and chicken manure. Select grass varieties. Once baled a lot of hay, but with good management the cattle now eat the grass out of the field. He only bales enough for emergencies, like heavy snow or extreme drought.

He's a smart man who applies himself to doing things right. His customers rave about his beef.

there is an editorial in July's (I think) Stockmans Grass Farmer that tries to answer your Q. It basically says that if you converted acreage currently in production to grass fed sheep (because sheep produce more meat per acre-year) with the corn and beans acreage going to veggies, every person in America would have 20 lbs of veggies per week and 2.5 sheep / year, which would be more food than the average American should be eating. It is beyond my ability to verify those numbers.

In doing so, we would also use less petroleum as fuel and fert, would return acres of prairie back to a more natural grass requiring less irrigation, use less pesticides and herbicides, etc.

There's nothing wrong or unhealthy with grain fed beef. That's my main complaint about grass fed beef producers: they can't just advertise their own, they have to tear down everyone else.

I'm coming in kinda late on this disucssion, but I do not believe a beef producer can stay in business raising beef for a fast food chain (Arby's). They're competiting with every other fast food operation for the lowest price to draw in more customers. I'd suggest that you'd be a lot better off to be aiming your cattle genetics toward the Outback market than the fast food market.

There isn't enough grass in the USA to produce all the beef being consumed. IMO, a producer needs to sell his beef for a heck of a lot more if he's grazing it for two years than the guy selling weaned 600 lb calves at 8 months. And I just don't see any fast food restaurant paying you that much more.

Tall Grass Beef has been around for a while, but they're not available in my area....neither is Nolan Ryan, nor Laura's Lean. They're a niche market and if you can make it work, good for you. But simple arithmetic tells me that most of us can't.

This is the argument that the anti meat people make all the time. And I see another poster on this board has jumped right in to support them.

Cattle don't eat much grain. Very little land is actually set aside to raise grain for the feedlot. Some, yes, but not a lot. With the increase in ethenol and the increase in corn prices, most feedlots are feeding ethenol byproducts....not corn. What else would you do with those byproducts? Put them in a landfill? Cattle eat almost no wheat....but they do eat wheat mids...a byproduct of producing flour. They eat almost no soy....but they do eat soy meal after the oil has been extracted. Cattle have garbage guts. They do a lot to clean up the waste produced in human food production.

If the Stockman Grass Farmer article says what's claimed, it's even more dishonest than I thought. It ignores the fact that cattle can graze on land that can't be farmed. In fact, that's where most of the beef in this country comes from: land that is too wet, too dry, too fragile, too high, etc, to be plowed up for planting.

One would think the Stockman Grass Farmer had never heard of the Dust Bowl years!

I wasn't arguing the point, I was questioning it. I genuinely do want to see some hard numbers.

Eh? If I read the post talking about the SGF article correctly, the SGF is advocating less tillage, not more.

I agree that grain fed beef is not as unhealthy as some people make out, but that doesn't mean they're identical. The eatwild link has lots of studies showing a difference between grass fed and grain fed and although I've asked, nobody has yet showed me any studies showing otherwise.

All producers should diversify their clientele, as well as their product. It's never wise to depend on any one thing.