Good beef?

ISU152

ISU152

Active member
Seeing as I always get my beef from a family friend that farms cattle I don't really have a nutrition panel to compare to. I was shopping today and found these "bacon wrapped beef filet's" and was just wondering if they would be very healthy. Goal right now is recomp

142g serving

Calories-230
Total fat-15g
Cholesterol-90mg
Sodium-570mg
Protein-22g
 
Get your macros set for each meal and then see if this fits. I'm betting it will.
 
Send them to me and I will test them for you with a side of sweet potatoes and grilled asparagus. Oh, and a cold beer.
 
ISU152 said:
Seeing as I always get my beef from a family friend that farms cattle I don't really have a nutrition panel to compare to. I was shopping today and found these "bacon wrapped beef filet's" and was just wondering if they would be very healthy. Goal right now is recomp

142g serving

Calories-230
Total fat-15g
Cholesterol-90mg
Sodium-570mg
Protein-22g
Click to expand...

If they are pasture raised (grass fed all the way to slaughter) then that beef is better than anything you will buy in the supermarket.

Br
 
ZiR RED said:
If they are pasture raised (grass fed all the way to slaughter) then that beef is better than anything you will buy in the supermarket.

Br
Click to expand...

I highly doubt it is haha. I already ate it so I will have to go get some more and check
 
grngoloco said:
Argentenian beef is the safest, cleanest beef you can buy
Click to expand...

My family owns a ranch in Nebraska and having around 1000 head, I fully disagree with this statement. Not sure where you came up with it.
 
It doesn't taste that good either...

Invalid Link Removed

Implication
"When differences in tenderness and marbling level
were minimized between domestic, grain-fed (aged 9 d)
and branded, grass-fed, Argentine (aged 30+ d) beef,
consumers found domestic beef to be more palatable.
Although a niche market may exist for branded, Argentine beef, most consumers found domestic beef more
acceptable and were willing to pay more for domestic
steaks."
 
AForney said:
My family owns a ranch in Nebraska and having around 1000 head, I fully disagree with this statement. Not sure where you came up with it.
Click to expand...

You're biased against the competition,,, lmao!!!
Invalid Link Removed
 
I can't comment on the safety...

AForney said:
It doesn't taste that good either...

Invalid Link Removed

Implication
"When differences in tenderness and marbling level
were minimized between domestic, grain-fed (aged 9 d)
and branded, grass-fed, Argentine (aged 30+ d) beef,
consumers found domestic beef to be more palatable.
Although a niche market may exist for branded, Argentine beef, most consumers found domestic beef more
acceptable and were willing to pay more for domestic
steaks."
Click to expand...

But I can on the taste and nutritional quality.

Mass produced grain fed beef is what american's have been brought up on over the past 40-50 years. Thus, we are use to the taste of corn fed cows.
The meat from these animals does have more marbling and is more tender because the cows are (the feed lot cows) less active.

On the other hand, free range cattle are more active. Their meat is not as tender nor as well marbled (in fact, it is much leaner) because the cows are doing what cows naturally do - grazing and foraging for food. They are not held in small pens. But, with that increase in activity comes an increase in muscle fascia, tendons, etc. As a result, the meat is tougher.

Now, when it comes to nutrition, free range trumps grain fed any day. The fat profiles are much different:
grain fed is higher in saturated fat, trans fat, and omega-6 fatty acids.
Free range is lower in saturated fat and high in omega-3 fatty acids.

This shows the differences in fat content between beef kept in similar conditions but one fed grass silage (grass fed, not free range) and the other fed grain (what you typically get in the grocery store)

Invalid Link Removed 2002 Jun;80(6):1556-63.
[h=1]Grass silage versus maize silage effects on retail packaged beef quality.[/h]Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed.
[h=3]Source[/h]Department of Food Science, Food Technology and Nutrition, National University of Ireland, Cork.

[h=3]Abstract[/h]The effects of three preslaughter diets on heifer beef quality were investigated. Heifers (n = 45) were divided into three groups and fed for ad libitum consumption either maize silage, grass silage, or a 50:50 mixture of maize silage and grass silage. Meat quality was determined by measuring color, lipid oxidation, alpha-tocopherol levels, and fatty acid composition. Beef from the maize silage group had poorest color stability (P < 0.05), whereas beef from the grass silage diet had best (P < 0.05) color stability. The visual panel least preferred the maize silage group after 2 or more days of display, and lipid oxidation was significantly (P < 0.001) higher in this group compared to the 50:50 maize:grass silage and grass silage groups. There was a significant (P < 0.001) difference in the alpha-tocopherol levels detected in the meat from the three dietary groups. Alpha-tocopherol levels increased in the order: maize silage < 50:50 maize:grass silage < grass silage, at levels of 2.08, 2.95, and 3.84 microg/g meat, respectively. Fatty acid analysis indicated 18:3 was significantly (P < 0.001) lower in the maize silage-fed group than in the maize:grass silage and grass silage groups. However, 18:3 was significantly (P < 0.001) higher in the grass silage group than in the other two groups. There were no significant differences in all other fatty acids among the three dietary groups. It was concluded that beef from grass silage-fed animals had better overall quality in terms of color, lipid oxidation, and alpha-tocopherol levels than beef from maize silage fed animals.


PMID:12078737 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text
Click to expand...

Invalid Link Removed 2010 Mar 10;9:10.
[h=1]A review of fatty acid profiles and antioxidant content in grass-fed and grain-fed beef.[/h]Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed.
[h=3]Source[/h]College of Agriculture, California State University, Chico, CA, USA. [email protected]

[h=3]Abstract[/h]Growing consumer interest in grass-fed beef products has raised a number of questions with regard to the perceived differences in nutritional quality between grass-fed and grain-fed cattle. Research spanning three decades suggests that grass-based diets can significantly improve the fatty acid (FA) composition and antioxidant content of beef, albeit with variable impacts on overall palatability. Grass-based diets have been shown to enhance total conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) (C18:2) isomers, trans vaccenic acid (TVA) (C18:1 t11), a precursor to CLA, and omega-3 (n-3) FAs on a g/g fat basis. While the overall concentration of total SFAs is not different between feeding regimens, grass-finished beef tends toward a higher proportion of cholesterol neutral stearic FA (C18:0), and less cholesterol-elevating SFAs such as myristic (C14:0) and palmitic (C16:0) FAs. Several studies suggest that grass-based diets elevate precursors for Vitamin A and E, as well as cancer fighting antioxidants such as glutathione (GT) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity as compared to grain-fed contemporaries. Fat conscious consumers will also prefer the overall lower fat content of a grass-fed beef product. However, consumers should be aware that the differences in FA content will also give grass-fed beef a distinct grass flavor and unique cooking qualities that should be considered when making the transition from grain-fed beef. In addition, the fat from grass-finished beef may have a yellowish appearance from the elevated carotenoid content (precursor to Vitamin A). It is also noted that grain-fed beef consumers may achieve similar intakes of both n-3 and CLA through the consumption of higher fat grain-fed portions.
Click to expand...

Invalid Link Removed 2006;15(1):21-9.
[h=1]Effect of feeding systems on omega-3 fatty acids, conjugated linoleic acid and trans fatty acids in Australian beef cuts: potential impact on human health.[/h]Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed, Invalid Link Removed.
[h=3]Source[/h]Department of Food Science, RMIT University, Melbourne, Victoria 3001, Australia.

[h=3]Abstract[/h]The influence of feeding systems on the levels of functional lipids and other fatty acid concentrations in Australian beef was examined. Rump, strip loin and blade cuts obtained from grass feeding, short-term grain feeding (80 days; STGF) and long-term grain feedlot rations (150-200 days; LTFL) were used in the present study. The typical Australian feedlot ration contains more than 50% barley and/or sorghum and balanced with whole cottonseed and protein meals were used as feed for STGF and LTFL regimens. Meat cuts from 18 cattle for each feeding regimen were trimmed of visible fat and connective tissue and then minced (300 g lean beef); replicate samples of 7 g were used for fatty acid (FA) analysis. There was a significantly higher level of total omega-3 (n-3) and long chain n-3 FA in grass-fed beef (P< 0.0001) than the grain-fed groups regardless of cut types. Cuts from STGF beef had significantly reduced levels of n-3 FA and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) and similar levels of saturated, monounsaturated and n-6 FA compared with grass feeding (P < 0.001). Cuts from LTFL beef had higher levels of saturated, monounsaturated,n-6 FA and trans 18:1 than similar cuts from the other two groups (P<0.01), indicating that increased length of grain feeding was associated with more fat deposited in the carcass. There was a step-wise increase in trans 18:1 content from grass to STGF to LTGF, suggesting grain feeding elevates trans FA in beef, probably because of increased intake of 18:2n-6. Only grass-fed beef reached the target of more than 30mg of long chain n-3 FA/100 g muscle as recommended by Food Standard Australia and New Zealand for a food to be considered a source of omega-3 fatty acids. The proportions of trans 18:1 and n-6 FA were higher (P<0.001) for both grain-fed beef groups than grass-fed beef. Data from the present study show that grain feeding decreases functional lipid components (long chain n-3 FA and CLA) in Australian beef regardless of meat cuts, while increasing total trans 18:1 and saturated FA levels.
Click to expand...

Br
 
There's a richer, more earthy flavor to natural beef,,, I don't need to look at reports,, we all know anyone can find all the reports and literature they want to back up any claim they have. I have nothing to gain or lose,,, not buying or selling anything. I have eaten tons of argentenian beef. It has a special, unique flavor. I've also eaten well marbled prime beef with no flavor from feed lot cattle. Environment, nutrition, and general happiness of animals all effect flavor. I'm a deer hunter; head shot deer taste better than lung shot. The stress hormones from pain actually change the flavor of the meat.
 
grngoloco said:
You're biased against the competition,,, lmao!!!
Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...
Now I'm lmao. This article doesn't say anything about it being "cleaner beef and safer". That was the point you made and it's not true. :laugh:
 
grngoloco said:
They are raised more naturally, free of pesticides, antibiotics and hormones
Click to expand...

This is a broad sweeping generalization. Go to any local farmers market by YOUR town and pick up some organic, grass fed and finished beef. It doesnt have to come from Argentina.

Organic foods are foods that are produced using methods that do not involve modern synthetic inputs such as synthetic pesticides and chemical fertilizers, do not contain genetically modified organisms, and are not processed using irradiation, industrial solvents, or chemical food additives.

So if you buy American grown, Organic beef. How is Argentinian beef cleaner and safer?
 
ZiR RED said:
I can't comment on the safety...
Click to expand...
I wont say Argentinian beef is unsafe, that would be an idiotic generalization. To say it's safer than American beef isnt true either. A tiny sample of either countries cattle does not determine the safety as a whole.

ZiR RED said:
Mass produced grain fed beef is what american's have been brought up on over the past 40-50 years. Thus, we are use to the taste of corn fed cows.
Click to expand...
I'm not a big fan of sweeping generalizations. We are talking Millions of pound of cattle summed up into "corn fed beef".
Our cattle are grass raised and grain finished. After many years of eating both, I like grain finished better than our grass finished. Yes, we have both.

ZiR RED said:
Now, when it comes to nutrition, free range trumps grain fed any day. The fat profiles are much different:
grain fed is higher in saturated fat, trans fat, and omega-6 fatty acids.
Free range is lower in saturated fat and high in omega-3 fatty acids.
Click to expand...
This is a statement that can be applied to millions of pounds of beef the world around. Argentina hasn't cornered the "free range beef" market.

ZiR RED said:
On the other hand, free range cattle are more active. Their meat is not as tender nor as well marbled (in fact, it is much leaner) because the cows are doing what cows naturally do - grazing and foraging for food. They are not held in small pens. But, with that increase in activity comes an increase in muscle fascia, tendons, etc. As a result, the meat is tougher.
Click to expand...
Our ranch doesn't have "small pens". I know many in America do though. We have around 36,000 acres of mostly Invalid Link Removed where fences divide land into 50 to 180 acre pastures. ATV's and horses are used to round-up and move cattle from pasture to pasture. The amount of grass available is the determining factor of where we graze. 13-17 acres per cow, calf pair about sums up grazing needs. Our cattle are just as "free range" as any in the world.
Invalid Link Removed

I thank you for the time you put into posting. I just want people to think about American beef in a different way. Any uninformed person will probably find beef like you describe at the local store. That same person can look for a local butcher or go online to find any type of beef they want. If you like/want grass fed, organic beef why go to Argentina to get it? Hope people don't get angry with me for pimping an American product every bit as good and available as an import.
USA.gif


P.S. Funny thing about the whole "this beef is better" thing. I eat as much wild game as I do beef/chicken/pork.
 
grngoloco said:
There's a richer, more earthy flavor to natural beef,,, I don't need to look at reports,, we all know anyone can find all the reports and literature they want to back up any claim they have. I have nothing to gain or lose,,, not buying or selling anything. I have eaten tons of argentenian beef. It has a special, unique flavor. I've also eaten well marbled prime beef with no flavor from feed lot cattle. Environment, nutrition, and general happiness of animals all effect flavor. I'm a deer hunter; head shot deer taste better than lung shot. The stress hormones from pain actually change the flavor of the meat.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to get you to change your taste. That was never my point. You said Argentinian beef is the cleanest and safest you can buy. Have you tried grass raised and finished organic beef grown here. Why buy a product from Argentina that you can get in America?

As a fellow hunter myself, I agree with you there. I also like the taste of a whitetail over mule deer and a doe over a buck. This year we shot 7 deer for our freezer. Some people don't like the flavor of wild game, but I think its great.
 
AForney said:
I thank you for the time you put into posting. I just want people to think about American beef in a different way. Any uninformed person will probably find beef like you describe at the local store. That same person can look for a local butcher or go online to find any type of beef they want. If you like/want grass fed, organic beef why go to Argentina to get it? Hope people don't get angry with me for pimping an American product every bit as good and available as an import. View attachment 54370

P.S. Funny thing about the whole "this beef is better" thing. I eat as much wild game as I do beef/chicken/pork.
Click to expand...

Here's a great site to find farmers who raise free range/grass fed beef locally. You can even order it online.

Invalid Link Removed

best bang for your buck is to buy a freezer and invest in a half cow.

Br
 
ZiR RED said:
Here's a great site to find farmers who raise free range/grass fed beef locally. You can even order it online.

Invalid Link Removed

best bang for your buck is to buy a freezer and invest in a half cow.

Br
Click to expand...

thanks for the link. !!!!
 
As a whole Argentina does not use antibiotics or hormones in their beef,,, the mass majority of american beef can't say that ... is there good american beef? Of course ... but my preference is still Argentina,,, this opinion comes from my taste buds not from websites :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top