News

NCBA takes issue with CR ground beef study

The beef industry is taking issue with a study by Consumer Reports (C-R) which concludes that ground beef from so-called sustainable beef operations is safer for consumers than conventionally produced ground beef. Dr. Mandy Carr, with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, tells Brownfield Ag News that Consumer Reports found less than 1% of salmonella in the beef it sampled and did not find ANY E. coli that cause serious foodborne illness. Carr says, “They did not find levels of those organisms in the products they purchased. So, I think it’s another testament to the efforts of the industry (that) are very effective in reducing the bacteria that causes the majority of the foodborne illness in this country.”

Consumer Reports found conventionally raised beef was more likely to have bacteria overall. But, Carr says the majority of bacteria found in all of C-R’s samples is normally found in the environment. She tells Brownfield, “So, I think it is a bit confusing to the consumer to report high levels of bacteria when in fact some of the ones they’re reporting on aren’t typically the ones that cause people to become ill.”

And, Carr says, the report assumed organic and grass-fed production is sustainable – she calls them marketing terms. An industry study, she adds, has looked at the whole system of beef production, “It actually has found that we have improved the sustainability of all beef production in recent years, so, I think that is something that is technically inaccurate about the study.”

The only take home message in the study, Carr says, is that consumers are responsible for cooking ground beef to a proper temperature that will kill any and all pathogens. Carr says the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports a decrease in foodborne illness in the United States over the last several years.

AUDIO: Interview with Dr. Mandy Carr