Wednesday, April 17, 2013

#5. Pink-Slimey-Euphemisms...

If one were to do a Google search for "best comedians of all time," it would be difficult to find a list without George Carlin residing in the top 10, including Comedy Central's top 100 list where Carlin was ranked 2nd. I particularly enjoy the way he views society, and each time I read about "lean, finely textured beef" I continually envision Carlin's routine regarding euphemisms (warning: VERY offensive language).  He begins the skit by explaining how post-traumatic stress disorder was originally called shell shock during World War I, then called battle fatigue in World War II, further diluted to operational exhaustion for The Korean War, and finally being termed post-traumatic stress disorder during "The Vietnam Conflict" (a euphemism of it's own).  Post-traumatic stress disorder, since his stand-up routine, has been further desensitized to PTSD.


It seems to be the same for the food industry.  They are describing what is, essentially, the unusable beef scraps that have been chemically treated so that it is "safe" for human consumption. Lean, finely textured beef has 1/3 of the protein that we want from meat, while there's nearly 2x the amount of the undesirable collagen, making the LFTB 6 TIMES less nutritious than beef chuck.  Even though lean, finely textured beef is barely beef at all, the beef companies don't even have to tell you that it's in your food if it comprises 15% or less of the total weight.  That's not a very high proportion, but think of it like this: Imagine that you pay to go see a movie and it ends 20 minutes early... Ashton Kutcher and Cameron Diaz never fall in love and Gerard Butler doesn't save the president from the North-Korean terrorists.

Every other industry has requirements for "truth in advertising", yet it seems that the food industry does not.  Meat that has ANY amount of LFTB ought to be labeled "MOSTLY beef" and/or indicate the percentage of which the contents are comprised of this filler.  The food industry shouldn't be able to lead the consumer to believe that the product being purchased is of a certain quality, when in reality a bait-and-switch is occurring by providing a lower quality, less healthy, and chemically treated product.  If these products were properly labeled, I'm sure many people would still purchase the LFTB infused meats, favoring the lower cost, however I would be willing to bet that a large percentage of the population would sacrifice the few dollars to get a superior product.

"...I bet ya, if we had still been calling it shell shock, some of those Vietnam Veterans would have gotten the attention they needed at the time." - George Carlin

3 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. How does the food industry continually get away with not specifically telling us the truth? When they do finally come out with the truth, how am I supposed to trust them then. Can I believe what they are saying, and if I do believe them then can I trust them to change their ways. Good way to give another example and tie them together, it really helps to grasp the concept.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Effective introduction here encouraging your reader to think critically about the language used in the food industry. Pulling it back in at the end gives this post a completeness that is quite effective.

    ReplyDelete