The grass-fed vs. grain-fed beef debate
CNN
Health, featured a very interesting experiment/article from Cooking Light
magazine in March of last year.
Kim Cross wanted to test the difference between grass-fed and grain-fed
beef. Her test included health,
price, and taste.
They
were quite clever to purchase half a cow of the grass-fed, which met the price
of the cheapo super market meat (averaging all types of beef together) and blew
away premium prices like Whole Foods and other grass-fed or organically raised
beef. This also causes a major
issue for the average consumer because not everyone has the freezer space for
that much meat. 243 pounds of
beef, assuming you eat meat for every meal every day it will still last two
people almost a year. But they
also suggest a “cowpool” which is interesting on many levels.
And
while the number of U.S. grass-fed beef producers is rising -- from 50 in 2002
to more than 2,000 today -- they face big challenges, including higher
operating costs, a shortage of processors, loose standards for the definition
of "grass-fed," a lack of consistent quality, and consumer wariness
about taste and texture.
The tasting tests goes on
for a very long time. While
studies show that the more lean cows like Brangus are much healthier and even
have more vitamins and omega-3 in the fat, there is much less fat. Cooking some of the tougher cuts can be
challenging, and need to have a very slow and careful approach or you may be
dealing with a very tough chew and little taste.
When all is summed up from
my read, I’ve decided for myself that if I want to eat healthy and in a more
sustainable way, grass-fed is not the way to go. I would rather choose a different source of protein entirely
than suffer the cost, effort, and taste.
Good day! In your blog article did you base on some researches or here are totally your private conclusions? Can't wait to hear from you.
ReplyDelete