<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Eating Real Food &#187; grass</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.eatingrealfood.com/tag/grass/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.eatingrealfood.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 19:10:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>News: Grass-fed beef not automatically safer</title>
		<link>http://www.eatingrealfood.com/news/news-grass-fed-beef-not-necessarily-safer/</link>
		<comments>http://www.eatingrealfood.com/news/news-grass-fed-beef-not-necessarily-safer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jan 2010 17:40:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dave Mulder</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beef]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ecoli]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grass]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.eatingrealfood.com/?p=316</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A few years ago, proponents of grass-fed beef brushed off the E. coli threat, saying that grass-fed cows with natural digestive pH levels are not carriers of hardy O157:H7. This no longer appears to be the case.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A friend of mine passed along this Slate article about grass-fed beef: <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2242290/">&#8220;Beware the Myth of Grass-Fed Beef&#8221;</a>.</p>
<p>Though the title sounds ominous about the health benefits of grass-fed beef, the content actually reflects a myth about <em>E. coli</em>.</p>
<p>Industrial cattle production typically uses grain (corn) as feed. Since cows did not evolve to eat corn, their stomachs reach a lower pH (more acidic) than cows fed grass. Corn-fed cows have a greater tendency to become sick; this is one of the reasons that the industrial plants supplement their feed with antibiotics. An externality of this process is that bacteria naturally found in a cow&#8217;s intestinal track is killed off. By itself, this is not necessarily a bad thing, but bacteria like <em>E. coli </em>are remarkably adept at evolving into new, hardier strains.</p>
<p>This is exactly how <em>E. coli O157:H7</em> is believed to have come into relative dominance.</p>
<p>A few years ago, proponents of grass-fed beef brushed off the <em>E. coli</em> threat, saying that grass-fed cows with natural digestive pH levels are not carriers of hardy <em>O157:H7</em>. This no longer appears to be the case. A recent study examined the acid-resistance of <em>O157:H7</em> in grass-fed cows versus that in corn-fed cows and found no difference.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this means that grass-fed beef is not inherently safer than industrial, corn-fed beef. When preparing ground beef, regardless of the source, the meat should be well-cooked to protect its eaters (the FDA recommends an internal temperature of 160 degrees).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.eatingrealfood.com/news/news-grass-fed-beef-not-necessarily-safer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

