This is one reason why Old Stylers cook meals from scratch and avoid ready meals!

voiceofreason

misskool wrote: »

This comes up a lot and I feel in 2 minds about this. First of all, they use every single piece of meat on the animal and no waste. Of course, on OS, we would use it all and make chicken stock and strip everything down to the bone etc. But this is a good way of reducing waste (it's not nice looking) but chemically it's chicken.

It costs a lot to raise animals, there should be as little waste as possible.

Of course, every person reading this will think I'm nuts and that it's completely wrong but ah well.

Nope - absolutely 100% with you there; it's using cooking and processing to get the most out of the carcass.

Just like your stock-pot does.

By all means be aware of what it is, and if you don't like the idea then look out for it and don't eat it - hell, there're plenty who don't like the idea of eating offal, and that's sure as damn not "prime cut" or whatever; it's their call - but I'm not convinced it's entirely joined-up thought, that, to criticise the MSM process while extolling good, thrifty kitchen practices and the virtues of nutritious, home-made stock......

Lotus-eater

misskool wrote: »

The thing about additives is that it could be something innocuous like salt, wheat rusk or things we would add to "normal" food without thinking. Of course, things like sulphites and preservatives are not nice.

Personally, I eat the whole animal but I don't really see why people are so bothered against mechanically recovered meat.

I have severe doubts of any MRM that is made into a decent food that is sold. Maybe you know of a good example of MRM usage?
Unfortunately all the various fats/skins/gristle that is made into MRM makes it far different from something we would cook in a stockpot. We skim all the fat off to start with, the gristle doesn't end up in the stock and personally I take the skin off and don't include it.

zippychick

Lotus-eater wrote: »

I have severe doubts of any MRM that is made into a decent food that is sold. Maybe you know of a good example of MRM usage?
Unfortunately all the various fats/skins/gristle that is made into MRM makes it far different from something we would cook in a stockpot. We skim all the fat off to start with, the gristle doesn't end up in the stock and personally I take the skin off and don't include it.

I totally agree - it is OS in a sense and I agree with Misskool to a certain degree, but home made stock and meat pickings for soup are something entirely different than the above! Something i prefer not to eat !

Is it always labelled as reformed meat or can it be named in different ways? I don't buy a lot of prepack meat products, but i would like to understand if this is clearly labelled. As far as I know it has to be? I did spot it lately on a product.

I have explained it to my b rother - and I said i thought his Subway meatball treat would contain MRM - he was disgusted. I just hope it sinks in and he really cares!

amazon_spice

ughghghhghgh

seraphina

Another one that thinks it's not too far away from rubber chicken - or getting the most out of every piece of meat. And I think it's only right to try and get the most out of every animal if you're going to kill it for food.

For example - look at all the people who followed Nigella's recipe for brining a turkey this Christmas. Brining basically plumps up the meat by adding water to it - but haven't we all been complaining about supermarkets adding water to our meat? Why is it different if we do it ourselves?

I don't eat meat so I guess I can take the moral high ground on this one relatively easily - but would people rather it was thrown away than eaten??

floss2

seraphina wrote: »

...For example - look at all the people who followed Nigella's recipe for brining a turkey this Christmas. Brining basically plumps up the meat by adding water to it - but haven't we all been complaining about supermarkets adding water to our meat? Why is it different if we do it ourselves...

It's different in that you know exactly what has gone into it, and you have paid for the original bird, not the water-plumped heavier one that the supermarkets sell at a higher price.

Caterina

AW GAG!!!!!!

I see what misskool and seraphina are saying, re. the use of the whole animal, but this sort of overprocessing not only needs the use of many additives to make it at least barely palatable but it has many negatives:

- It does not give the consumer any choice
- it does not encourage food waste control in the home, it is just a great blob of amalgamated animal mush which will be turned into anonymous bits of processed animal matter (which bits we are only left to guess)
- it does not teach anyone how to cook fresh food
- it actively encourages blind, unquestioning consumption of processed food

seraphina wrote: »

For example - look at all the people who followed Nigella's recipe for brining a turkey this Christmas. Brining basically plumps up the meat by adding water to it - but haven't we all been complaining about supermarkets adding water to our meat? Why is it different if we do it ourselves?

The difference is that the customer will have paid for turkey and not for water and will have deliberately chosen to brine their own purchase using free tap water!

I also do not eat meat and hate the idea of animals being slaughtered for bit parts and the rest chucked away, but I think that a campaign against food waste is much better than allowing the meat industry to get away with feeding crap to people and keep them uninformed at the same time!

I have read so much about the processing of food and the absurd power and abuses in the food industry recently that I get really militant about this issue!

oystercatcher

I don't see the difference between this and making soup out of broccoli stalks and carrot tops ! It's resourceful to use every bit of food instead of chucking it out.
Additives are a seperate issue and I don't see this meat as any worse than say a vegetable cup-a-soup or this pre prepared vegtable fingers or potato smiley faces. They are all cheap foods, we all know what is in them and choose whether or not to buy them! They have their place in busy lives as long as we don't become reliant on them.

Waste no want not in my mind!

Bongedone

zippychick wrote: »

Is it always labelled as reformed meat or can it be named in different ways? I don't buy a lot of prepack meat products, but i would like to understand if this is clearly labelled. As far as I know it has to be? I did spot it lately on a product.

I have explained it to my b rother - and I said i thought his Subway meatball treat would contain MRM - he was disgusted. I just hope it sinks in and he really cares!

Reformed meat is completely different. MRM must be lable as such. Not sure about what Subway contains and would like to know. I am positive you would be safe with meatball though.

From http://www.visionfoodhall.com/glossary.html


Reformed Meat
Reformed meat has the appearance of a cut, slice or joint of meat, formed by tumbling chopped meat; also finely comminuted meat and other ingredients may be added to bind the pieces together in a pre-ordained shape. The process must be indicated in the name of the food, unless the fact is obvious (eg burgers).

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Mechanically Recovered Meat (MRM)
MRM comes from the carcass of an animal once the good meat has been removed. MRM is therefore essentially meat residue (flesh, cartilage and sinew) which has been pressure-blasted off the bones by machinery to form a reddish slurry which resembles mince. Some companies then use it to bulk up their meat products. If MRM is used in a product the label must say so.

I have checked Subway and they use reformed meat.
[/FONT]

jexygirl

I watched that "britains most disgusting meat" and this is apparently what tinned hotdogs are made from....