Pink slime? Nothing wrong with it in school meals, USDA says.

Pink slime, a controversial ammonium-treated beef, got dumped by McDonald's. But USDA defends purchases of pink slime for use in national school lunch program. 

Alfredo Sosa/The Christian Science Monitor/File
Third grader Lourdes Montero eats lunch at the International Charter School in Pawtucket, R.I., in this 2010 file photo. Reports say some 7 million pounds of so-called 'pink slime' -- beef trimmings treated partly with ammonium hydroxide to fight contamination -- will appear in school lunches this spring.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is defending the use of ammonium-treated beef, dubbed "pink slime" by detractors, in meals destined for U.S. schoolchildren as part of the national school lunch program.

The Internet news source The Daily reported this week that 7 million pounds (3.2 million kg) of the product -- beef trimmings treated partly with ammonium hydroxide to fight contamination -- would appear in school lunches this spring.

"All USDA ground beef purchases must meet the highest standards for food safety," the agency said in a statement.

"USDA has strengthened ground beef food safety standards in recent years and only allows products into commerce that we have confidence are safe."

Fast-food chain McDonald's stopped putting the USDA-approved ammonium-treated meat into its hamburgers in August after a number of food activists, including celebrity chef Jamie Oliver, drew attention to the additive.

The USDA, schools and school districts plan to buy the treated meat, categorized as "lean fine textured beef," from South Dakota's Beef Products Inc for the national school lunch program.

The BPI product makes up about 6.5 percent of the 112 million pounds (51 million kg) of ground beef that has been contracted for the National School Lunch Program, the USDA said.

The department oversees the program, which buys about 20 percent of products served in U.S. schools. The rest is bought directly by schools or school districts.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.