[HN Gopher] Why are border smugglers trafficking bologna?
___________________________________________________________________
Why are border smugglers trafficking bologna?
Author : indigodaddy
Score : 64 points
Date : 2022-08-16 23:06 UTC (23 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.texasmonthly.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.texasmonthly.com)
| chiph wrote:
| > artisanal bologna
|
| Two words I never thought I'd see next to each other.
|
| Growing up we ate the Oscar Meyer product. Not great, but when
| you're 10 years old, it's fine. But they've got a point - bologna
| for adult tastes just doesn't exist, and someone should give it a
| whirl.
| [deleted]
| germinalphrase wrote:
| They call it mortadella, and it features pistachios.
| p1necone wrote:
| There's also the slavic "doctors sausage"[1], which ideally
| has much less fillers in it than American Bologna, but is
| very similar in concept.
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor%27s_sausage
| JetAlone wrote:
| I remember watching a youtube video on Doctor Sausage. Next
| time I meet an older/elderly Eastern European who lived in
| the Soviet Union I should ask them how they remember it.
|
| EDIT: here it is, this is the video I saw, includes one
| interview with a babushka:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AcxQBkdughc
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| I still see doctors sausage on sale in most of the
| Eastern European shops here, I'm told the recipe/process
| hasn't changed at all.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| The recipe was carved into law a few different times.
| buildsjets wrote:
| They also call it Lebanon Bologna, and it's pretty easy to
| make from scratch at home. Common in Amish areas of the USA.
|
| https://www.myfermentation.com/meat-and-fish/Lebanon-
| bologna...
| sph wrote:
| What Americans call bologna, it isn't what Italians call
| bologna or mortadella.
|
| Whatever the hell is this
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bologna_sausage vs the real
| deal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortadella
|
| But to be honest I always thought mortadella was overrated.
| I'm more of a salame kind of guy.
| ska wrote:
| I've read that bologna was invented as a knock off
| mortadella. If true, it makes sense that there isn't really
| "artisanal" bologna.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| > honest I always thought mortadella was overrated
|
| > I'm more of a salame kind of guy.
|
| two times wrong:
|
| - mortadella is delicious, if you don't like it, fine,
| you're the rounding error, but nobody is over selling it,
| people just love it because what's not to love about it?
|
| - salame is not an alternative to mortadella, it's a
| completely different product (mortadella is cooked, salame
| is air-dried), in the same way a steak is not an
| alternative to bresaola (same animal, different process).
| soledades wrote:
| um, they're both food, are they not?
|
| and yeah salame definitely better.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| > um, they're both food, are they not?
|
| ice cream and broccoli are both food too...
|
| > and yeah salame definitely better.
|
| according to your taste maybe, and that's completely fine
|
| but AFAIK people love them both.
| JetAlone wrote:
| The pictured mortadella with olives looks interesting. I'd
| wanna try that.
| casta wrote:
| Those are pistachios, not olives.
| tartoran wrote:
| Some have olives as well, I tried it myself years ago.
| Mortadella is delicious though in the US there are two
| versions for sale. I forgot which, is the one that is a
| bit too dry and not to my taste. In my 40s now I stay
| away from processed meats as much as I can.
| JetAlone wrote:
| The second image on the page depicts mortadela with
| pistachios.
|
| But I am talking about the fourth image: https://upload.w
| ikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/Mortadel...
|
| Mortadela_com_azeitonas.jpg
|
| Auto translate tells me that "azeitonas" [Portuguese
| (Brazil) detected] translates to "olives" in english.
| Natsu wrote:
| Yes, that's the correct translation of azeitonas.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| That's because what is sold in America as bologna is mostly
| an American product and not actually descended from Italy.
| Like many things in the US, it was produced and sold by and
| for immigrants.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZaOK0Cj3ug
| Morgawr wrote:
| >it isn't what Italians call bologna
|
| Nitpicking, but Italians don't call it Bologna anyway. In
| Italy Bologna is just one very specific thing: a city
| (where I'm from :))
| sph wrote:
| I'm from Piedmont, and I've heard it called bologna a
| couple times, though I know mortadella is the common
| name.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| specifically, traditionally mortadella from Bologna is
| without pistaches, I prefer the variant we have in
| central Italy (the one from Rome), that always contains
| them.
|
| Original mortadella was born in Latium, Bologna made it
| popular.
| thefz wrote:
| Yeah, and we have zero products called "Bologna" nor the
| awful "baloney". That food looks more like salame tipo
| Praga.
| Morgawr wrote:
| > and it features pistachios.
|
| Doesn't have to. Although they are common.
| MiddleEndian wrote:
| I just realized I've never had bologna as an adult. Curious to
| try a bologna sandwich now.
| chasd00 wrote:
| Pan fry it and put it between white bread with pickle slices
| and a little mayo + salt/pepper
| tartoran wrote:
| Delicios but really unhealthy in my oppinion
| soledades wrote:
| off topic
| skyyler wrote:
| If health is the only reason you eat food I feel really
| bad for you.
| MiddleEndian wrote:
| Don't worry I'm not expecting this to be healthy or
| become a staple of my diet lol
| mrguyorama wrote:
| About every five years or so I feel like I don't remember
| why I don't eat bologna so I buy a pound and eat baloney
| sandwiches for a week (because when I eat sandwiches I do
| the sameish sandwich all week). After about three days I
| go to the bathroom and remember why I don't eat bologna
| sandwiches regularly.
|
| It's very fatty and greasy.
| davidw wrote:
| > The Department of Agriculture prohibits travelers from bringing
| most pork products into the U.S. because they can carry maladies
| such as foot-and-mouth disease and African swine fever.
|
| I wonder what this actually looks like in practice? Is this a
| real risk or "we've always done it this way"? Do different non-US
| countries have different risk profiles?
|
| The customs people took a chunk of prosciutto my parents brought
| back to the US that my Italian in-laws had given them. What a
| waste. And Italy takes its food very seriously and
| professionally. I'd even go so far as to say that it's mostly
| higher quality than in the US in many ways.
| pkaye wrote:
| I think lot of countries have restrictions like this to prevent
| foreign pests and diseases from coming in. Right now California
| is dealing with cockroaches from Turkestan and Florida with
| African snails. Its easy for pests to spread when there is no
| native predators. California also does further pest inspections
| if you enter by roads.
| davidw wrote:
| A vacuum sealed chunk of prosciutto is different than a crate
| of bananas or live fish or something.
| pkaye wrote:
| I've read after Brexit truck drivers traveling from UK to
| EU can no longer bring sandwiches with them. So even EU has
| those rules.
|
| https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55622331
| ska wrote:
| The risk is low, but the upside is essentially zero (from the
| point of view of customs)
| xboxnolifes wrote:
| From the point of view of customs, there is no upside to
| allowing people to bring _anything_ through. So, that doesn
| 't really explain why this is different from other things
| that are allowed.
| ziddoap wrote:
| > _there is no upside to allowing people to bring anything
| through. So, that doesn 't really explain why this is
| different from other things that are allowed._
|
| The difference is the potential downside of some things as
| compared to other things. It's all about balancing risk.
| willcipriano wrote:
| If you only flagged items that are actually dangerous you
| wouldn't have the opportunity to flex your authority as
| often.
|
| Do you want to be the head of the department that "saves
| American lives by preventing the import of contraband" a
| million times a year, or a thousand times a year? Who do
| you think gets more funding?
| mrguyorama wrote:
| I think it's funny that you think Customs and Border
| Patrol agents have to justify their work at all. There
| were literal TV shows making them out to be the saviors
| of America.
|
| They also don't need any excuse to flex their authority,
| they've been given broad ability to violate rights with
| very few specific requirements. Remember, these are the
| same people who can legally deny you entry to the US if
| you don't show them your facebook profile if you aren't a
| US citizen.
| nicwilson wrote:
| At least for Australia and New Zealand, who are probably the
| most biosec paranoid countries, there are a large number of
| reasons. mostly do to with introduction of pests and other
| potentially ecologically damaging effects, see introduction of
| cane toads. Those pests can be anything from viruses to mites
| (see current bee crises) through to domestic animals. Part of
| this paranoia comes from the evolutional isolation, and part of
| it comes from the fact that they are islands, and so it is
| feasible to implement measures to block the importation of
| foreign materials.
|
| Food, unless it has been thoroughly cooked or cured, is a risk
| and the diversity of stuff people bring back is enormous.
| Obviously Australia and New Zealand import food, but that
| requires licences and is regulated and inspected.
|
| I would have thought that land border inspections would be less
| paranoid about food provided that the neighbouring country has
| similar regulations. But I guess that better describes e.g.
| mainland EU borders or the US-Canada border rather than the US-
| Mexico border.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| The US-Canada border has the same restrictions. You can't
| bring many fresh foods over the border even if you're
| actually reimporting a product produced in the same country.
| 4gotunameagain wrote:
| Humans are funny. After having caused Australia's Pleistocene
| megafaunal extinction, we now have decided to be in charge.
|
| Same with the US and immigration..
|
| And yes, of course it is more complicated than that but I
| cannot forgo of the irony of our existence.
| walrus01 wrote:
| The US is extremely lax compared to NZ's biosafety laws.
| nomel wrote:
| > Is this a real risk or "we've always done it this way"?
|
| I assume the risk assessment assumes some percentage of sick
| pigs are contained within each. In the US, this percentage is
| tracked. From another country, the upper, and probably very
| realistic, bound is 100%. Think small, unvaccinated farm, or
| one that slaughters sick pigs because they need the money. It
| would be interesting to see their math.
|
| Swine fever just recently has a vaccine. I doubt many US pigs
| are vaccinated: https://www.science.org/content/article/news-
| glance-african-...
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| > because they can carry maladies such as foot-and-mouth
| disease and African swine fever
|
| sounds more like it's related to tariffs and whatnot, bologna
| is cooked, so there's no risk of spreading germs.
| jamiek88 wrote:
| >so there's no risk of spreading germs.
|
| This is not true. Prion diseases can for sure survive
| cooking.
|
| Foot and mouth can too I believe.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| > Prion diseases can for sure survive cooking.
|
| but it's not found in the cuts used to make Bologna...
|
| And BTW it's been heavily controlled and it was mostly a
| domestic threat spread in living animals through their food
| supply.
|
| Hand foot and mouth disease is usually not lethal and it
| spreads through close personal contact. If they wanted to
| block it at the border, they should block the people, not
| the food.
| samatman wrote:
| I can imagine some very plausible pathways whereby some
| amount of lunch meat ends up eaten by pigs.
|
| I would also wager you are far too confident that central
| nerves aren't ending up in the chubs.
| jessaustin wrote:
| Pork is not implicated in prion disease, according to
| NIAID. [0] It might make sense to suspect any particular
| bologna could contain other meats, but as TFA explains
| Mexican bologna tastes better because it _doesn 't_
| contain beef (or presumably, venison.)
|
| [0] https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/prion-
| research
| sleepybrett wrote:
| My understanding is that Bologna is a bit like hotdogs,
| pretty much made out of whatever left over scraps they
| can find.
| peoplefromibiza wrote:
| still pork meat, not related to prion.
|
| coppa di testa [1] is made with srcaps from pork head, it
| was never involved in the ban regarding the "mad cow"
| disease
|
| [1] https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coppa_di_testa
| krispyfi wrote:
| If the problem is really about "maladies", I've always though
| that irradiating food products at customs would be a good
| compromise to allow people to keep what they brought (for a
| nominal fee).
|
| Maybe it isn't effective against viruses or prions.
|
| Maybe the public perception that irradiated food becomes
| radioactive is to strong.
|
| Maybe the problem is actually about protecting domestic
| industry...
| marcosdumay wrote:
| It is ineffective against prions, and not very effective
| against virus. But also, irradiating food is a complex
| process that depends on expensive machinery. It's not
| something that customs can do in a rush.
| ta988 wrote:
| You can't bring any Citrus either in the US (lemon, grapefruit,
| oranges...)
|
| One of the problems for meat was also that people would bring
| homemade goods inside commercial containers, or bring wild
| animal meat...
| sleepybrett wrote:
| My understanding of this, and this is also something that is
| enforced at certain us state borders as well, is this is
| primarily about insect and other parasites that may be on/in
| the fruit (or their eggs). I remember having to toss a bunch
| of fruit at the california border a few years back.
| [deleted]
| tmm84 wrote:
| I don't believe it has to do with X country takes food more
| seriously. I do believe it has to do with labelling at some
| point, say something that is labelled from X country but is
| coming in from Y country. The person bringing it in from Y
| country will argue the label is true and that it is from X
| country but it just costs less in Y country. But, how can
| border agents guarantee that it is what the label says it is?
| They can't. Same thing with that prosciutto, you say it is
| Italian made but there is no way border agents can honestly
| guarantee that it is and that any possible bugs/bacteria/etc
| aren't in it. Also, I believe that it is the whole transport of
| such meat/agriculture products. Things like temperatures,
| packaging, labelling, etc are important when it comes to food
| safety. Something that is deemed unfit for human consumption
| may get a pass elsewhere. I'm pretty sure it is an 80% of the
| stuff out there is safe but 20% is unsafe so customs just
| tackles all 100% as unsafe to prevent mistakes.
| [deleted]
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| The risks are very real. The US pork industry is substantial in
| scale, and because of a combination of geographic isolation and
| legal measures like this, has managed to keep several nasty
| pathogens out.
|
| Remember when Bill Gates was going around about 2 decades ago,
| warning everyone of the risk of a global pandemic? The specific
| scenario/simulation his foundation used as an example was a
| mutation of swine flu emerging in rural Brazil then making the
| leap to the global food system via the US.
|
| I get its frustrating not to be able to take stuff home. I
| gained a dozen pounds of water bloat I ate so much charcuterie
| in Tuscany. But the bottom line of these laws is that the
| health of the industry as a whole matters more than us
| individuals enjoying what's ultimately a luxury not necessity.
|
| Aside: I'd say Italy is a mixed bag in terms of food handling.
| I toured a cattle ranch and it was pretty grim. Lifelong
| intensive confinement seemed to be the norm. But what I would
| say I loved about Italy is the importance food is given in
| ordinary life. Sure, I'm not overly romanticizing things,
| people of people just order some dominos in Italy too, but I
| think it's fair to say there's a higher priority paid to proper
| food vs the US.
| Ichthypresbyter wrote:
| >Sure, I'm not overly romanticizing things, people of people
| just order some dominos in Italy too
|
| I don't think very many do, given that the Italian Domino's
| franchise recently went bankrupt [0] having managed to open
| 29 of its planned 880 restaurants.
|
| Of course, plenty of Italians eat fast food (McDonald's is
| reasonably successful there), just not imported American
| versions of Italian food.
|
| [0]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/10/dominos-
| retrea...
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| Yeah, you're right now that I think about it.
|
| I have a long standing personal joke about how no matter
| where you go in the world, you'll see Domino's delivery
| scooters there most likely, except in the US. I dunno why I
| find that so amusing but I do.
| walrus01 wrote:
| "The quantities of intercepted bologna are so large that it's
| hard to believe "
| Natsu wrote:
| I bet it's easy to train the dogs to find this...
| soledades wrote:
| hahaha those dogs are definitely living their best life
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| No artisanal bologna? I had some in a breakfast sandwich at my
| local diner just last week. Awesome!
| rmason wrote:
| I think this is potentially a pretty fair startup idea. Here in
| Michigan I knew farmers who had meat packing plants on the farm.
| Most of them closed because they couldn't compete on price with
| the big meatpackers. There are also several large meatpacking
| plants in Detroit though most of them have been closed for up to
| thirty years.
|
| Here's a niche where you could compete as long as you could get
| distribution and create a strong brand name. There's no good
| reason you couldn't create bologna just as good as the Mexicans.
| In fact there's a good chance you could export it to Canada as
| well.
| adolph wrote:
| Additionally they probably couldn't compete with food safety
| regulatory requirements and related baseline costs required for
| revenue positive distribution.
|
| https://www.sqfi.com/partners/compliance-and-integrity-progr...
|
| https://safefoodalliance.com/food-safety-resources/what-is-g...
|
| https://www.fda.gov/food/hazard-analysis-critical-control-po...
|
| https://www.sysco.com/dam/jcr:596b9459-7e35-4ee0-8a4d-16b8bd...
| Breadnought wrote:
| "The hull of a Boeing 727 but made entirely of flesh". This
| article is fun.
| [deleted]
| ramadan_steve wrote:
| joshu wrote:
| ok but does it taste different?
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| It uses different ingredients (purely pork, no filler of
| chicken or beef), so... Yes.
| citrin_ru wrote:
| I have an impression that US is a nation of germophobes and FDA
| regulations are affected by this to great degree. People who
| afraid to eat food which contains (or can potentially contain)
| even harmless bacteria are numerous enough to deprive others of
| free choice of food to eat.
|
| Many cheese varieties enjoyed by people in Europe and around the
| world are illegal in the US. French Brie would be en example (I
| personally like it).
| Wohlf wrote:
| The FDA is a bureaucracy that optimizes for only one thing, so
| this is what happens.
| formerly_proven wrote:
| It's honestly kinda amazing how much stuff is forbidden via FDA
| for "safety". I bet FDA bureaucrats would get a stroke if they
| knew millions of Germans are regularly eating raw, ground pork
| on bread rolls.
| kube-system wrote:
| Most of these customs prohibitions are not to protect people
| eating it -- it's to protect disease from being spread to
| local agriculture.
| VHRanger wrote:
| It's often to protect local producers from global
| competition
| lostlogin wrote:
| New Zealand has battled this with its meat and dairy
| industries in the EU and US.
|
| Don't be the small player.
| callmeal wrote:
| >Most of these customs prohibitions are not to protect
| people eating it -- it's to protect disease from being
| spread to local agriculture.
|
| It's the other way around - these prohibitions are to
| prevent the unsanitary conditions at slaughterhouses from
| causing outbreaks. It's these conditions that cause the US
| to be the only country in the world that dunks slaughtered
| chickens in bleach before selling them.
|
| https://www.telegraph.co.uk/food-and-drink/features/us-
| trade...
| kube-system wrote:
| I'm speaking generally about agricultural customs
| restrictions
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| The FDA won't stop anybody from eating raw pork in America.
| They stop you from _selling_ something like that to other
| people, because experience has showed that corporations
| cannot be trusted with something like that.
| the_gipsy wrote:
| You can buy it in german supermarkets:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mett
| Dracophoenix wrote:
| They'll prevent you from importing foodstuffs and
| prescriptions as well, even if it's just for personal use.
| Such is the case with Kinder Eggs, baby food, and foreign
| insulin. It has nothing to do with corporations.
| jorvi wrote:
| The strange thing is that generally EU regulatory agencies
| will do preventative policy, putting controlling regulations
| on something because there is reasonable suspicion it will
| cause harm, whereas US agencies will do reactive policy,
| where it is basically a free-for-all until significant harm
| has been demonstrated.
| googlryas wrote:
| That actually more appropriately describes the EU safety
| mindset: "Ban it, unless we can show it is safe", whereas the
| US is more "Allow it, unless we can show it is unsafe". All
| sorts of things, like random food colorings, are banned by
| the EU, even though they have no ability to show anyone has
| ever been even remotely harmed by them.
|
| I think what you're pointing out may just come down to a
| differing view as to what are acceptable losses for eating
| raw pork.
|
| And, in fact, Germany has regulations for handling mett(which
| I assume you're talking about), indicating it can only be
| served on the day it is made, and you can't make it out of
| previously frozen pork.
| connicpu wrote:
| There's certain parts of America that regularly eat raw
| ground beef on slices of bread! The FDA/USDA can't really do
| much once the product leaves the well regulated grocery
| stores
| mrguyorama wrote:
| More importantly, the USDA/FDA seem to significantly draw
| back what they consider their duty by the time the product
| leaves a distributor. You can order a nearly raw burger, or
| straight up tartare at plenty of restaurants, with the only
| heads up being a small notice in fine print that it could
| kill you, which I'm not even sure is a regulation but
| possibly instead a liability thing.
|
| The FDA/USDA is just trying to stop giant companies from
| distributing only shit products with no alternatives like
| it was (supposedly) in the 20s. If you buy a cow and drink
| it's milk straight from the udder, the FDA does not care.
| adrianmonk wrote:
| > _afraid to eat_
|
| Maybe, but this article isn't about that. It doesn't say
| anything about whether food is safe to eat, nor does it mention
| the FDA.
|
| It does mention diseases (avian influenza, mad cow disease,
| African swine fever) and pests (wood-boring), and it talks
| about the economic damage they could cause / have caused to
| agriculture.
| frozenlettuce wrote:
| yet, they place a lot of trust in the meat industry when eating
| rare steaks
| toast0 wrote:
| Isn't US rare more cooked than the rest of the world? I think
| I remember needing to ask for medium or more in Paris to get
| what I expected for medium rare?
|
| A fair amount of differences in food safety practices has to
| do with where cleanliness is done. For example, I'm told
| European eggs are usually not industrially washed, so you can
| leave them on the counter, but you can only do that when
| laying is clean. In the US, laying is dirty, so eggs are
| industrially washed and must be refrigerated. Both systems
| work, but you have to be careful about comparing steps in the
| middle.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| Eggs in Mexico are also not washed and can be kept at room
| temperature. Not sure how they manage laying.
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| I adore Mexico but knowledge of food safety is very much
| lacking there, and a depressingly common attitude is that
| getting parasites occasionally is just part of life.
|
| With the friends and families I've stayed with down
| there, pretty much all fresh produce and meat is
| disinfected before cooking, as surface contamination is
| definitely typical.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| The FDA mandates any cooked steak be cooked up to 145deg F,
| which is medium. I imagine many steakhouses don't strictly
| follow this, but I expect that even a rare steak ordered
| most places comes out medium rare at best.
| happyopossum wrote:
| > I imagine many steakhouses don't strictly follow this
| .. > I expect that even a rare steak ordered most places
| comes out medium rare at best
|
| Your speculation does not even remotely match reality in
| the US, nor are you factually correct. The FDA
| _recommends_ 145* for beef, it does not _mandate_ it. And
| I 've never been to a restaurant anywhere in the US that
| refused to serve a steak at 125 if so ordered.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| I know that various government organizations say that
| 145degF is the minimal safe temperature for a steak, and
| I know that health inspectors check that food has a safe
| internal temperature. I assumed this was the FDA, though
| seem to be wrong about that, and that health inspectors
| use the published temperature for ensuring a safe
| internal temperature.
|
| Maybe I'm wrong, but there is a mandated temperature and
| I'm pretty sure it's well over what would be rare.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| It's not mandated. You are wrong. Otherwise every
| restaurant serving a hamburger would have to be shut
| down.
|
| The FDA has charts that simplify and explain how heat and
| time will kill pathogens and result in safe food. This is
| information meant for consumers, not restaurants, which
| have way different requirements that are meant to produce
| safe operating and serving environments, so that you
| don't have to rely on overcooking your meat to ensure
| food safety. Bringing unground beef to 145 is ONE of
| those values, but the temp changes based on type of food
| and the FDA is also open that there are other ways to
| make sure your food is safe and that lower temps for
| longer are plenty sufficient.
|
| Restaurants then have a bit of fine print on their menu
| or somewhere that says "Eating raw or undercooked
| meat/eggs/shellfish can cause illness" and you can then
| order an undercooked food item.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| Health inspections are a state matter, sometimes county,
| so I can't speak for everywhere but here's Texas as an
| example where hot food needs to be 135degF, well above
| the 120degF for rare. https://www.dshs.texas.gov/foodesta
| blishments/pdf/47-Item-In...
|
| And it wouldn't surprise me to see this requirement
| widely ignored. A cook could easily know to cook to the
| required temperature when the health inspector is
| watching and it's very difficult to do a surprise
| inspection even if they wanted to.
|
| I fully admit I was wrong to say the FDA mandated this,
| but my larger point is still broadly true.
| wonnor wrote:
| I have no experience with this subject, but I don't think
| hot food needing to be "held" at 135degF has any
| implications regarding the cooking temperature. The
| document you linked seems to be forbidding holding TCS
| food below 135degF for more than 4 hours.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| You're right, I misread it in my haste. So, NYC
|
| >Cook rare beef to at least 130degF
|
| https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/business/food-
| operators/food-s...
|
| I realize it says temporary, but you can check the full
| guidelines where it says that 130degF is only permitted
| if you cook it for 112 minutes.
| jefftk wrote:
| I think that may not be true?
|
| _One factor that further complicates the medium-rare
| burger issue is the fact that serving undercooked meat
| contaminated with E. coli is technically illegal under
| federal law. Even if a consumer orders their burger
| medium-rare, the restaurant is breaking the law if that
| burger happens to have E. coli in it._ --
| https://www.foodsafetynews.com/2014/06/rare-
| burgers/#:~:text....
| mrguyorama wrote:
| From that very article:
|
| "The federal food code allows restaurants to serve
| undercooked burgers as long as they have a clear written
| warning, such as a statement on the menu, regarding the
| dangers of eating raw or undercooked meat. "
|
| That's as plain as day that there is no mandate to serve
| steak/burger at the 145 (for steak) or 165 (for ground
| beef) recommended internal temps. I wish that article
| cited its sources for the claims it makes. It's possible
| that the actual law prohibits _knowingly_ serving
| contaminated beef, instead of it just happening due to
| supplier contamination.
|
| For reference, consider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/199
| 3_Jack_in_the_Box_E._coli_o...
|
| That was in 1993, so maybe the "illegal to serve beef
| with e. coli" is from newer legislation but notice Jack
| in the Box was not put on trial for any federal crimes.
| jefftk wrote:
| My reading of the article is that it's legal to serve
| undercooked beef as long as (a) you warn the customer and
| (b) it doesn't happen to contain E. coli. But since you
| can't ensure (b) you may be breaking the law without
| realizing it.
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| You're very mistaken. FDA guidelines are just that, not
| mandates, and they're largely aimed at the lowest common
| denominator of what some teenage idiot will do in a chain
| restaurant kitchen.
|
| Culturally older folks in the US are likely to prefer
| meat with little to no pink, so you will find a bias that
| direction in some restaurants. A proper fine dining
| establishment however will have zero problem giving you
| exactly what you ask for with a steak, including
| blue/pittsburg rare. I wouldn't say tartar is popular but
| it's not an uncommon site on an upscale menu.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| I live in a place where a form of steak tartar is a
| common local delicacy but no restaurant I'm aware of
| sells it because it wouldn't pass a health inspection.
|
| Health inspections aren't national, so maybe someplace
| does allow steak tartar, but many have some kind of
| mandated temperature.
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| I'm not aware of any place that has a ban on tartar, just
| it isn't common outside of continental style fining
| dining. I've certainly had it in several states, more
| than I can remember. I generally only order it at places
| that are breaking down their own primals and where it's
| clear they have attention to sanitation.
| messe wrote:
| > Culturally older folks in the US are likely to prefer
| meat with little to no pink
|
| Not just in the US. I'm from Ireland and my grandmother
| was horrified at LIDL advert showing a should of beef
| cooked medium rare, going so far as to call it raw.
| rootw0rm wrote:
| here in the US i have to order my steaks rare and emphasize
| that i want it bloody to have even the remotest prospect of
| getting a steak that's not cooked more than medium rare
| happyopossum wrote:
| That's a thought you're free to have, but it isn't really
| relevant to the article - the Department of Agriculture is the
| agency that prohibits this, for reasons related to potential
| damage to US livestock - African swine fever and foot-and-mouth
| disease are specifically mentioned.
|
| There is no implication in the article that this stuff is
| unsafe to consume by humans.
| stickfigure wrote:
| Given how heavily processed bologna is, I'm going to call
| bullshit on that.
|
| A more likely reason is that domestic pork producers have a
| powerful lobby.
| googlryas wrote:
| L. monocytogenes is found all the time in processed meats
| coming out of highly regulated plants in the US. I hope you
| understand that "processed" does not mean that all viruses
| and bacteria have been removed or killed from the product.
| Especially when the meat is processed in a plant with even
| laxer safety standards than what we have in America.
| atwood22 wrote:
| Processed meats usually have preservatives like nitrates
| or nitrites in them. It doesn't matter what bacteria is
| detectable when they leave the factory. They're not going
| to propagate in the meat.
| stickfigure wrote:
| You're basically making @citrin_ru's point - "nation of
| germophobes", not "potential damage to livestock".
| googlryas wrote:
| I'm not making their point by telling you that you're
| incorrect in saying that "processed food = no potential
| disease transmissibility".
| stickfigure wrote:
| Nobody is arguing that it's impossible to get sick from
| bologna.
|
| However, bologna is not a vector for african swine fever
| or foot-and-mouth disease or (as far as I can tell) any
| other threat to US livestock.
|
| Thus "bullshit". Re-read the thread.
| soledades wrote:
| really into this thread now.
|
| what does bologna being heavily processed have to do with
| "bullshit" though?
| googlryas wrote:
| You said "Given how heavily processed bologna is, I'm
| going to call bullshit on that" in response to someone
| who said "the Department of Agriculture is the agency
| that prohibits this, for reasons related to potential
| damage to US livestock - African swine fever and foot-
| and-mouth disease are specifically mentioned."
|
| Why would you say that instead of "bologna is not a
| vector for african swine fever or foot-and-mouth
| disease"? What does how heavily processed the bologna
| have to do with your point, and why did you bring it up
| if it has nothing to do with it? That's literally the
| only thing I argued against.
| johannes1234321 wrote:
| A big thing in the debate around TTIP had been the European
| "fear" about American cholrinated chicken. Here in Europe
| people were afraid of having chicken meat disinfected by
| dunking them in chloride, as it is done in the US. Which to me
| seems to be the better alternative to pumping them full of
| antibecterials, as we do here in Europe ...
|
| Quite different safety traditions on both sides of the
| Atlantic.
| gambiting wrote:
| I haven't met anyone afraid of eating meat dunked in chlorine
| because of the chlorine - it's because of the reasons _why_
| American chickens need a chlorine wash in the first place.
| And it 's because it's cheaper and more efficient to just let
| chickens stand in their own shit for so long their feet
| dissolve and then just wash the meat in chlorine to avoid any
| bacterial contamination, than provide chickens with decent
| living conditions in the first place.
|
| Never heard of European chickens being "pumped full of
| antibacterials" - would you mind explaining what you mean?
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| The EU approach to salmonella control is a combination of
| antimicrobials and vaccines, in contrast to the US using a
| dip in chlorinated water after slaughter. There are critics
| of both approaches, and some annoying folks that use it as
| a pretext for smugness (without actually engaging the
| reality of the differences).
| lostlogin wrote:
| Dosing herds has been/is standard in some places. A quick
| Google suggests this is changing in the EU.
|
| https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/european-union-bans-
| an...
| MichaelCollins wrote:
| Food irradiation is also restricted in Europe, relative to
| America. Never-mind that it has been shown to be safe and
| effective; countries like Germany try to restrict irradiation
| of food to only a few things like dried spices. (EU trade
| regulations partially nullify these bans, by allowing the
| sale of food legally irradiated in other EU countries.)
| jefftk wrote:
| _> Which to me seems to be the better alternative to pumping
| them full of antibecterials, as we do here in Europe_
|
| We do that here in the US too. Chlorination was on top of
| that.
| orangepurple wrote:
| How is President cheese available in every major US supermarket
| then? Pasteurized?
| gopalv wrote:
| > impression that US is a nation of germophobes and FDA
| regulations
|
| Germophobes I don't think so, but there's definitely something
| to be said about the way the regulations are setup to be
| protectionist of rural voter groups. And food production is a
| major chunk of those rural economies.
|
| And a lot of cheese is made from excess milk, not the best milk
| because the best milk goes into the cold chain fresh. So it is
| politically convenient to make long lasting cheeses to keep the
| milk prices stable through the year and cut competition from
| outside importers (even Canada?).
|
| The germs thing is a win-win on that respect. But if it had
| political negatives, the FDA would "find a way".
|
| PS: "Food that Built America" season 2 is a great collection of
| anecdotes about all this
| JasserInicide wrote:
| Yup. Our dairy industry is a mere few steps away from being
| nationalized it's so heavily subsidized. Don't tell the rural
| voters that though, it sounds like communism!
| zdragnar wrote:
| Food production takes a bit of time to ramp up. Epidemic
| diseases among livestock and plants can destroy months worth
| of production capability in a very short period of time.
|
| Over-producing (and maintaining the capability to over-
| produce) is one means of protecting against such calamity.
| I'm not sure if there are better ways to go about it. True
| rural voters make up a relatively small percentage of the
| country's population- 20% or so, depending on where you draw
| the line. It's not hard to out-vote them, but it is very hard
| to live without them.
| jollyllama wrote:
| It's all about protecting big business. Hence why all kinds
| of dubious ingredients are allowed in fast food, but farmers
| get busted for selling raw milk.
| sterwill wrote:
| I buy French Brie at US grocery stores many times a year. Did
| you mean to say it's one of the types that isn't illegal?
| natpalmer1776 wrote:
| It was probably a reference to Brie de Meaux, which is a type
| of brie that only comes from France and is (I believe)
| illegal to import in the United States.
| timy2shoes wrote:
| Real French brie is unpasteurized, which is illegal in the
| US. See https://theculturetrip.com/north-
| america/usa/articles/fancy-...
| sterwill wrote:
| The Brie I buy is made in France, so I'll leave it up to
| you guys to convince them that it's not "real."
| saiya-jin wrote:
| A food product is much more a sum of ingredients and
| procedure to process them, than just something something
| looking/tasting similar from given country. Especially
| those protected as historically significant to given
| place.
|
| So no, what you buy as brie, if it went through official
| US import channels, is not real Brie. Now how much is the
| real difference in taste is another topic, but we take
| protecting traditional methods of making these things
| very seriously here in Europe. Very anti-race-to-the-
| bottom approach.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| They know it's not "real," they pasteurize it
| specifically to be able to sell it in the US.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| There are "back channels" for european unpasteurized
| cheese to be sold here. I've been friends with a couple
| of cheesemongers who sell that stuff. I asked them how it
| comes over here when the FDA doesn't allow it. "In
| shipping containers, like everything else". I asked them
| what would happen if it was discovered. "They'd probably
| just destroy it all." I've found examples of such cheeses
| in great cheese stores across the USA.
| goatcode wrote:
| >US is a nation of germophobes[sic]
|
| The regulators sure are. The people want to buy raw milk, and
| are told we're not grown up enough to handle the consequences.
| andrewxdiamond wrote:
| The regulations only really have an effect on distribution of
| raw milk, not local sale. Yes, selling raw milk from a
| roadside stall is still illegal, but enforcement is non-
| existent at that scale.
|
| With the laws in place; if you live close enough to a farm to
| get raw milk, it's probably safe for you to consume.
|
| The rest of use have to stick to milk that has been treated
| to survive the lengthy distribution process
| JoeAltmaier wrote:
| The consequences used to be, tuberculosis.
|
| You can tell young people - they have no notion where this
| all came from. Living in a world where almost everybody grows
| up, it's easy to forget that wasn't always the case.
|
| What's-his-face- the guy who wrote about reform and the 'gate
| in the road', had some good things to say about all this.
|
| {edit: Chesterson's Fence}
| isleyaardvark wrote:
| We apparently aren't. "Although only about 1 percent of
| Americans drink it, raw milk accounted for 70 percent of
| milk-related food poisoning outbreaks between 2002 and 2011".
| (https://foodpoisoningbulletin.com/2014/raw-milk-1-percent-
| of...)
| jessaustin wrote:
| That link would be more convincing if it dealt in
| quantities rather than percentages. Does 70% mean 7 out of
| 10 or 700,000 out of 1,000,000? And anyway, why wasn't it
| 100%? People who intentionally consume raw milk know that
| it's raw. Why shouldn't we be more concerned about the 30%
| who drank pasteurized and still got poisoned?
| kenned3 wrote:
| you are overlooking several other "american" issues.
|
| 1) Lawsuits
|
| - The US court system is often used as some sort of "i won the
| lotto" system where people do dumb things, and somehow win
| substantial sums of money. It is often easier to preemptively
| prevent anything that could trigger a lawsuit
|
| 2) Powerful lobby groups.
|
| - Many things that are legal elsewhere are not in the US, and
| often there is a government lobby group behind it.
|
| Think things like this : https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/the-
| anti-consumer-25-chicken-...
| nine_k wrote:
| Things like yogurt and kefir are sold widely in the US, and
| bottles even _boast_ the numbers of live bacteria they contain.
| ethagknight wrote:
| I would assume a lot of this prosecution and confiscation is more
| a function of tariffs and ag industry protectionism. Am I really
| to believe that a tube of bologna is a disease threat to American
| pig farming?
| peyton wrote:
| This is about _travelers_. Volume is extremely limited. Disease
| threat is a reasonable belief.
| ethagknight wrote:
| The article is about travelers bringing processed meats. So
| because its banned, it gets smuggled, which now is a major
| human health concern due to improper storage, also consumes
| resources and time from our CBP from looking for actual
| threats. Coming from Mexico, bugs don't mind national borders
| on their own accord, and a product that is legal 100 ft to
| the south but illegal just a skip away makes little sense.
|
| I understand strong restrictions on overseas seeds and bugs
| (especially in New Zealand's case where they have a defined,
| delicate ecosystem), but it just seems like US is beating up
| on its little neighbor.
|
| I'm just saying this whole article details a little corner of
| American law enforcement that is an overzealous
| interpretation of a reasonable, because SOMEONE out there
| made a big stink about it. "Whoa whoa whoa, you can't bring
| this low cost meat product across the line to sell in US
| markets!! US Markets are only for big US Farming
| Corporations!
| ThePadawan wrote:
| German living in Switzerland here - I would dare say meat is one
| of the most commonly smuggled items into Switzerland.
|
| The price of meat here is discouragingly high (IMO rightly so),
| and incredibly cheap in neighboring Germany.
|
| The duty-free limit is also incredibly low (1kg per person and
| day), similar to the amount of spirits (1L per), and the customs
| you pay after hefty.
| nibbleshifter wrote:
| A lot of the Swiss I know do their grocery shopping for meat
| and some alcohols in Germany.
|
| The statistical likelihood of being stopped is slim enough that
| its not even considered "smuggling".
| saiya-jin wrote:
| The problem is, Germany (or France for Romandie and Italy for
| Ticino) is EU - unless you look at labels closely, that cheap
| meat is probably sourced from the eastern countries like
| Poland which have truly abysmal record on meat quality and
| safety (ie using salt for roads for meat/food and
| distributing it also in surrounding countries). If its from
| Germany and cheap, be assured the lowest allowed standards
| were adhered to (or not).
|
| Swiss have mostly higher safety standards than EU, plus much
| higher wages. Thus the prices.
|
| As for smuggling - I do it too... but it depends which border
| crossing you use. On some, chances for search are maybe
| 20-30%. Way too high risk to save maybe 100-200 chf and risk
| a much higher fine. On some crossings I know nearby to
| France, practically 0 (but even at those, I have sworn border
| cops are never there till I saw them once in 10 years...)
| Scoundreller wrote:
| There was a time when US border patrol at the canada-US border
| was most concerned if you were bringing in any citrus fruits,
| regardless of where you're going.
|
| I'm happy to share that I have never done such a thing to keep
| the New York, Pennsylvania or Ohio citrus industry safe.
|
| (While ignoring that Toronto was exporting hundreds of trucks a
| day of garbage to Michigan dumps)
|
| Then there is the current ban on most Personal fresh egg/chicken
| imports from US into Canada due to avian flu outbreak, just to
| make sure I don't feed them uncooked to a bird in Canada (as
| opposed to... eating them), ignoring the fact that birds fly and
| pose 1000x bigger threat where I live, <100km from the border.
|
| https://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/services/fpa-apa/bringing-apport...
| ziddoap wrote:
| > _ignoring the fact that birds fly and pose 1000x bigger
| threat._
|
| Are you suggesting the border control become bird hunters?
| That'd be pretty fun.
|
| Border control enforcing whatever the current bans on birds are
| does not impact the effort (or lack thereof) on other controls,
| such as flying birds. Different people, different jobs.
| toolz wrote:
| It has more to do with the fact that the current ban has
| negligible impact on solving the core problem.
|
| Useless laws are detrimental if you want a society that
| respects and trusts the law.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| It's what happens when there's a problem and every
| department gets a memo asking how it can contribute.
|
| Instead of sending resources toward what can actually solve
| the problem (e.g. taking money from your department to
| testing agricultural flocks), just create some senseless
| barriers that won't help anyone at all and distract
| yourself from whatever your dept's focus should be.
|
| Win-win?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-17 23:01 UTC)