There’s an article up on Slate, Beware the Myth of Grass-Fed Beef that says “Cows raised at pasture are not immune to deadly E. coli bacteria.” The author is taking Nina Planck to task for a piece she wrote for the New York Times several years ago that claimed that the toxic strain of E.coli is “not found in the intestinal tracts of cattle raised on their natural diet of grass, hay and other fibrous forage.”
In fact, a recent study proves that grass-fed cattle are NOT immune to E. coli O157:H7. The author’s beef is that people might not cook their meat properly if the label says grass-fed, which would create a public health hazard. The author has a point.
Frankly, I didn’t “know” that grass-fed cows were supposed to be immune to the toxic strain of E.coli. I thought that E.coli O157:H7 was a function of factory farming: animal overpopulation, cows standing knee-deep in feces, excessive use of antibiotics, and feces and intestinal matter contaminating the carcass at the slaughterhouse.
For awhile there, grass-fed beef was coming from small operations. Obviously, the data analysts failed to correlate conditions with results properly. E.coli O157:H7 wasn’t about diet, but the environment those cows with a grass diet also enjoyed. When the corporate world caught on to a market opportunity, they simply changed the animal’s diet and nothing else. Except one thing; they inject beef with ammonia to kill the bacteria. Yum.
While grass-fed beef is clearly more nutritious than corn-fed, the best advice continues to be to know your farmer and his or her farming practices. And nowadays, learn about your farmer’s slaughterhouse as well.
Please watch Food, Inc.
on Jan 25th, 2010 at 11:02 am
Interesting; I’ve always thought that the grain-fed pH reasoning was sound, but of course, did not really dig into the research.
However; in looking at the research cited in the Slate article; one study simply says that once you *inject* cows with O157:H7, diet and associated acidity has no effect on this strain of E coli (which is a different thing from saying that it would have no effect on the growth of a colony). Another study, from cow-calf farms in Kansas, did not distinguish (in the Abstract; I could not pull the entire article) between grass-fed or grain-fed, but, most meat cows are steers, are they not? The link to one study reference is broken, and since there are no citations or references accompanying the article (with journal, author, date, etc) there is no way to find it, and the Australian study mentioned is not linked. It all made me suspicious. So I Googled the author, James E McWilliams.
Turns out he is the author of an anti-locavore book, “de-bunking the mythology of local eating.”
http://www.amazon.com/Just-Food-Where-Locavores-Responsibly/dp/031603374X
According to the Amazon review:
“He presents thought-provoking ideas about food reform, sulfur fertilizers, and eating meat. At times, McWilliams shortchanges his own arguments by failing to disclose the financial or institutional backing of his sources (including various talking heads, esoteric-sounding think tanks, and scientific journals), leaving readers to comb extensive footnotes and web links to determine how the evidence stacks up.”
While McWilliams is a vegetarian who has written that meat-eating in general is bad for the planet, he is also clearly someone who thinks that eating locally is a trendy fad and, with that bias, he will present any argument he can to ‘debunk the myth.’
Kaela
on Jan 27th, 2010 at 12:12 am
Kaela: I wouldn’t put much stock in his book myself. Too many contradictions, not enough back-up on the claims.
One thing that seems to be a tired argument with me is about food transportation miles. I don’t consider that as the only reason to eat local food and in my case, it’s not even one of the top 5.
I also tend to dismiss any argument that threatens us with global hunger if we don’t heed their advice. For example, if we don’t do it the industrial way, we won’t be able to make enough food for everyone or that GM is the way to make enough food to address world hunger. These arguments are based on a faulty premise. There is no shortage of food. There is a shortage of political will and no shortage of greed, which together create poverty. Poverty is the leading cause of hunger.
The thing I did agree with him about is that there could be a public health issue if people automatically assumed that the “grass-fed” label meant a guarantee that there was no E.coli O157:H7 inside.
I don’t think we have enough data on this issue and I don’t know if we’ll ever have unequivocal data we can believe. There are too many commercial and political interests involved at this point for the truth to stand a chance.
I am fairly certain, however, that if I know my farmers and I am eating the same thing they feed their families, I am as safe as I can expect to be.