Natural?

phatch

Moderator
Staff member
9,213
884
Joined Mar 29, 2002
From memory, natural has no legal definition in labeling for poultry
 

phatch

Moderator
Staff member
9,213
884
Joined Mar 29, 2002
But i'm not entirely correct

In the USDA's view, any natural meat, poultry, or egg product is simply one that is minimally processed and doesn't have any artificial flavorings, colorings, or preservatives added after slaughter. Most meat products qualify as natural under this definition, so it's a pretty meaningless adjective.
 
28
6
Joined Nov 9, 2020
They slipped you a chicken-flavored turkey leg, maybe a baby ostrich... :emoji_laughing:

That thing is huge. I know they're breeding birds bigger (some of my ciurrent flock of RI Reds are easily 15% larger than any before them), but that's... WAY bigger. Somewhere between Jersey Giant and Bramahan.
 
1,821
532
Joined Aug 15, 2003
As was already pointed out, "natural" doesn't seem to have much meaning. Honestly probably has more to do with breeding and whatnot than growth hormones.

The notion of growth hormones (at least artificial or "added" ones) is a myth. There aren't chickens being gown that have additional hormones.

If you really think about it, we must process billions of chickens a year and it would be nearly impossible to inject each of those chickens with growth hormones. Plus that would be a lot of hormone to produce, package and distribute.
 
28
6
Joined Nov 9, 2020
This is easy - I didn't come here to have my tail kicked or show how "brilliant" I am to anyone. So my apparently "offensive" post has been removed. If you're curious you can read it in the next post. Me, I'm a movin' on. Life is too short to argue.

Arreviderci.
 
Last edited:
1,821
532
Joined Aug 15, 2003
ALso RE "hormones - it's not injected, it's in the feed. If they do that (and some do), that's how, just like they do "medicated" chick feed to help prevent pneumonia and other chick-hood diseases... they eat the feed, they get the meds. So yes they do do hormones to get better growth as well... been doing that for decades.

This is complete bunk. All you are doing is spreading false information to people.

There is no "growth hormone" in chicken feed. If there was, the digestive tract (and enzymes and acids) would render the hormone ineffective. You can't put hormones in animal feed for this reason.

A quick google search would tell you that the poultry industry doesn't use them, and in fact they were banned for poultry in the US in the 1950's.
 

phatch

Moderator
Staff member
9,213
884
Joined Mar 29, 2002
Well, now we all know so there is value in publicly correcting false information.
 
731
276
Joined Sep 17, 2018
That chicken never skipped leg day.

As for the growth hormone, I can see why that would be brought up as the dairy here is marketed using no rbst hormones so I can see the thought process of adding the theory to different food chains.

If I had to guess it is more a product of breeding to increase specific desirable traits in the livestock than actual chemical additives. But honestly no matter what we are told there is no way for the average consumer to gauge levels of anything in these foods other than taking the manufactures word at it.
 
28
6
Joined Nov 9, 2020
I like that, but you also need to know the source if your meat, and if you don't, and a customer wants to know, you're doomed. Seriously, you do NOT want to be the gal (or guy) walking out there with the chef's coat and toque, have a customer grill you, and fail.

Part of OWNING your job is knowing the source of EVERYTHING you purchase and approved for use and being able (like a meat purchaser, FFA Beef candidate, or auctioneer) to talk about that chateubriand as if it was a member of your family.

Chicken is what chicken is. I look at it as a source of eggs and protein. I run my own (isolated and stormtroopin' hens) chickens for my bakery. If they fail, they go to the bobcats or the frying pan. While they throw eggs, we're good. If they're mpt egge producers and scrawny meat - well, I have 100 nighbors who want pet chickens, an chicken stock ALWAYS works for the holidays)

Back to the redirected focus - you NEED to know the source of what you're buying to sell to your customers (and to your owners / bosses)... because in the 2020's, unlike the 1980's, knowing this (and BUYING this) is important. To you, to your customers, nd (honestly) to your crew.
 
1,821
532
Joined Aug 15, 2003
Might a PM have been more effective - and civilized - than a public downdressing? Just curious.
I don't think what I wrote was anywhere near a public downdressing. I find value in correcting false and misleading information and stopping that cycle.
you do NOT want to be the gal (or guy) walking out there with the chef's coat and toque, have a customer grill you, and fail.

Part of OWNING your job is knowing the source of EVERYTHING you purchase... to talk about that chateubriand as if it was a member of your family.

you NEED to know the source of what you're buying to sell to your customers (and to your owners / bosses)... because in the 2020's, unlike the 1980's, knowing this (and BUYING this) is important.
You seem to place a lot of emphasis on competency and accurate information, so it makes me wonder why you're upset at receiving an accurate and competent correction to your post?

But yes, I agree with what you said, you wouldn't want to be caught out in public not knowing what you're talking about--it could be slightly embarrassing.
 
1,156
709
Joined Mar 1, 2017
It is not a myth or a secret that commercially raised chickens have literally doubled in size on average over the last 60 years. Most of you are not old enough to remember the days of corner butcher stores and butchers who operated out of locally owned markets. The chickens they sold 50 years ago were not nearly this big. On average, chickens back then were about 3lbs. Today, the average size of a chicken is more than 6lbs, according to the FDA.

So, if growth hormones are not permitted in poultry production in the US, how did chickens literally double in size over the last 50 years?

Several reasons.

1. Selective breeding of chickens have produced chickens that grow twice as fast and twice as big on the same amount of feed;
2. Improvements in feed, especially the amount of soluble/digestible nutrients that help promote faster, larger growth;
3. Improved efficiency in raising chickens, especially in terms of overall health and disease prevention;
4. Antibiotics used in the production of chickens have taken the place of growth hormones. They are called Growth Promoting Antibiotics (GPA) which are authorized for use by the FDA for commercial poultry production in the US.

So, while the use of "growth hormones" is expressly prohibited under US law, it appears the poultry industry has devised a very clever way around this prohibition by developing and using an antibiotic that increases and accelerates growth as a "side effect." (see the study linked below that examines 7 million chickens produced by Purdue, the 4th largest chicken producer in the US).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1804117/

So, based upon the available information, it would appear that the growth enhancing drugs are, in fact, used in commercial chicken production in the US.

On that basis, it would appear that Someday is partially correct in his statement that the use of growth hormones in the US poultry production are prohibited. But, it also appears that L'ouvo vullcanico is also generally correct insofar that growth enhancing drugs are used in US poultry production.

Cheers! :)
 
28
6
Joined Nov 9, 2020
Reminds me of the old joke -

"J just got a brand new Henway."
"What's a Henway?"
"Oh, about 3-4 pounds..."

Have a fun and profitable weekend, folks!
 
Top Bottom