USDA Beef Grades / Grading

[RunBe4UFly]

I was standing in front of the beef counter earlier staring at packages of USDA choice beef piling next to some local 'everything chemical free' beef. Is USDA choice beef supposed to be 'chemical free'? I can't imaging the meat from a sick cow can be stamped with 'choice', can it?

[tim]

I was standing in front of the beef counter earlier staring at packages of USDA choice beef piling next to some local 'everything chemical free' beef. Is USDA choice beef supposed to be 'chemical free'? I can't imaging the meat from a sick cow can be stamped with 'choice', can it?

←

Hi,

USDA Food Labeling Regulations state, "CHEMICAL FREE: The term is not allowed to be used on a label."

USDA Regulations also specify the following:

NO HORMONES (beef):

The term "no hormones administered" may be approved for use on the label of beef products if sufficient documentation is provided to the Agency by the producer showing no hormones have been used in raising the animals.

NO ANTIBIOTICS (red meat and poultry):

The terms "no antibiotics added" may be used on labels for meat or poultry products if sufficient documentation is provided by the producer to the Agency demonstrating that the animals were raised without antibiotics.

Tim

Edited February 6, 2009 by tim (log)

[Florida]

USDA grading is based on two variables

1) degree of marbling of fat

2) age of the animal ("maturity" in USDA speak)

There is no reference to chemicals, hormones, antibiotics, type of feed, or pasturing, though there is some referrence to the sex of the animal (beef produced from cows is not eligible for Prime grading)

[RunBe4UFly]

so you are saying USDA Choice doesn't garantee the beef chemical free?

[Florida]

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by "chemical," but in general, no, the USDA grading does not mean the beef is chemical free.

[slkinsey]

Beef is made of chemicals!

But it's okay. So is everything else. Including us.

[paulraphael]

That's right, the USDA grade reflects basically one characteristic out of many. It gives you some clues about the qualities of the meat, but leaves many questions unanswered.

By chemicals I assume you mean growth hormones and antibiotics, because, as slkinsey says, the word chemical is basically meaningless. Every bite of food you've ever had was 100% chemicals. But no, the USDA grade tells you nothng about this.

The term "all natural" tries to tell you something about this, but it's not a phrase with an official definition. If you see someone claiming "all natural," read more and find out exactly what they mean. "Organic" covers many bases, including freedom from hormones and antibiotics. Unfortunately, it's very restrictive, and as a result much of the best beef in the country isn't rated organic, and much of the organic beef isn't among the best.

I've spent the last two months talking to ranches, farms, and meat distributors, trying to source the best beef in the country. What I've learned is that beef is complicated! There is no buzzword that can guarantee you great beef. The differences in breeds, husbandry, and (most importantly), feed and finishing, are enormous.

You end up not only with a huge range of quality, but a huge variety of styles at any quality level. I've been looking at cattle from three different breeds, raised several different ways, with many different approaches to feeding. And I'm in the process of narrowing it down to four or five finalists for my butcher and me to try side by side. We expect them to all be excellent but very different. Our personal tastes will be the final arbiter.

[pax]

Organic is labeled that way. If it's not labeled 100% Organic, then no, there are promises.

I recently had this discussion with a mom because she was all bent out of shape over her 70% organic Luna bars being recalled (the pb issue). 70% organic means the other 30% could have fallen out of a rat's butt.

Now...you want to have an interesting read...read up on why organic labeling is such a freaking mess. I would buy local farm grown (where I trusted the farmer) even if it wasn't officially organic before I'd buy shipped 100% organic, given my druthers.

[paulraphael]

I recently had this discussion with a mom because she was all bent out of shape over her 70% organic Luna bars being recalled (the pb issue).   70% organic means the other 30% could have fallen out of a rat's butt.

Depending on the rat's diet, what falls out of his butt could absolutely be labelled organic. Don't be fooled into thinking organic = good.

Looking at the issue from another perspective, a label like "70% organic" isn't 100% useless. it means that a chunk of your dollar goes to organic farms, which might be a cause you like to support.

Edited February 6, 2009 by paulraphael (log)

[tim]

Beef is made of chemicals!

But it's okay.  So is everything else.  Including us.

←

Hi,

Pick your chemical HERE!

Tim

[rlibkind]

The actual quality of "choice" beef falls within a range, and it's really geared to the individual animal. I've had some choice that tastes more like prime, and some prime that comes close to choice. The standards for grading are objective, but the net result (flavor) is subjective.

As for antibiotics in beef, what you want to avoid is cattle which have been treated with sub-therapeutic levels, i.e. given to the animals on a constant bnasis when they don't need it to treat disease. If an animal has been given antibiotics to treat a particular malady and it's cured, I don't have a problem with that, because that antibiotic isn't going to become systemic and, should I eat the meat, affect me.

On general principals (and I'm only marginally conversant with health issues) I'd rather avoid meats that receive hormones for muscle-gain or sub-therapeutic antibiotics. But I've had supermarket beef that undoubtedly was raised on sub-therapeutic antibiotics and hormones, and it's tasted delicious. Flavor is my top priority!

[JAZ]

Just to further complicate matters, keep in mind that some small producers -- especially those who raise grass-fed beef -- prefer not to have their beef graded at all (it's optional) because they don't have the kind of marbling that will get them a prime or choice grade. It doesn't mean the beef isn't good; it's just different.

[paulraphael]

Just to further complicate matters, keep in mind that some small producers -- especially those who raise grass-fed beef -- prefer not to have their beef graded at all (it's optional) because they don't have the kind of marbling that will get them a prime or choice grade. It doesn't mean the beef isn't good; it's just different.

←

It gets even more complcated than that. I talked to a high end rancher in the northwest who said he only produces choice beef, because of the feed type and schedule. I thought this was curious, because I've seen his beef on the menus of some upper end restaurants. What happens if a carcass gets graded prime?

He said it gets dumped in with the "commodity" meat, along with the carcasses that only meet the Select grade. In other words, they don't get sold under his brand, they get piled in with the cheap meat that goes to discount grocery stores.

I asked him WTF???

He said only a small percentage of his carcasses grade prime, and it just costs too much to stop the line and officially change the grade. Also, for some bureaucratic reason, he can't label things "choice or higher," which is an option in some cases.

So the moral of that story is, you might get lucky with ungraded meat at the supermarket. And I'm buying from someone who isn't as hamstrung by bizarre constraints.

[RunBe4UFly]

Yes, by chemical I mean growth hormones and antibiotics, I just want to figure out if 'Choice' is safe from hormones and antibiotics. From what I have been hearing in this post, it's not the case...

[slkinsey]

There is no way you can tell whether beef comes from an animal that has not been treated with hormones or subtherapeutic antibiotics unless it is expressly labeled as such (and you trust the labeling). This is irrespective of USDA grading of the meat. All of which is to say that USDA Choice beef may come from an animal that has not been treated with hormones or subtherapeutic antibiotics, but doesn't necessarily have to.

[pax]

Yes, by chemical I mean growth hormones and antibiotics, I just want to figure out if 'Choice' is safe from hormones and antibiotics. From what I have been hearing in this post, it's not the case...

←

Then you are reading correctly.

[Chris Hennes]

Are cattle in the US graded on a whole-animal basis? Or are the individual sides/primals/whatever graded individually? This afternoon I had a USDA Prime-graded ribeye from a local butcher just getting into the business: they were selling them for $9.99/lb, which is a great price for ribeye of any grade around here; the guy at the counter said their supplier cut them a deal to "help them get started out." Now, don't get me wrong, this was a good steak. But Prime? The outer edges had the level of marbling and flavor I associate with prime, but that interior portion of the ribeye (does it have a name?) was definitely in "choice" territory. Like I said, not a bad steak at all for a region of the country where the vast majority of beef is graded Select (yes, even the CAB stuff). But I'm thinking that their supplier really just decided to unload a bunch of prime-graded-but-no-restaurant-is-going-to-pay-prime-prices beef. Is that possible/reasonable? Or am I misunderstanding the grading process?

[tim]

Are cattle in the US graded on a whole-animal basis? Or are the individual sides/primals/whatever graded individually? This afternoon I had a USDA Prime-graded ribeye from a local butcher just getting into the business: they were selling them for $9.99/lb, which is a great price for ribeye of any grade around here; the guy at the counter said their supplier cut them a deal to "help them get started out." Now, don't get me wrong, this was a good steak. But Prime? The outer edges had the level of marbling and flavor I associate with prime, but that interior portion of the ribeye (does it have a name?) was definitely in "choice" territory. Like I said, not a bad steak at all for a region of the country where the vast majority of beef is graded Select (yes, even the CAB stuff). But I'm thinking that their supplier really just decided to unload a bunch of prime-graded-but-no-restaurant-is-going-to-pay-prime-prices beef. Is that possible/reasonable? Or am I misunderstanding the grading process?

←

Chris,

Individual animals are graded on degree of marbling between the 12th and 13th rib (the ribeye) and degree of maturity. There are varying degrees of Prime.

The following sites may help.

In simple english: Beef Quality and Yield Grades

In USDAspeak: United States Standards for Grades of Carcass Beef

Tim

[budrichard]

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

Or in other words you must determine yourself what you find as a cut of meat that you want to purchase. Within the USADA Choice and Prime are sub grades and all the top restaurants that serve Prime are competing for the top primal cut in the Prime grade. It is perfectly possible to have a USDA piece of Prime beef that is inferior in marbeling and tenderness to a piece of USDA Choice graded beef. Grading is not an exact science but more of an art althouhg i did read of an optical device that 'reads' the fat content in the rib portion but I don't know if that is in wide use. That's why Peter Lugers decendents pick out the primal cuts for aging themselves.

Me, I go to a good source of USDA Choice and pick out my own primal cuts and cut and package. Sometimes it deosn't work out as well as I thought and sometimes it works out very well. I picked up a USDA Choice whole boneless rib eye a couple of weeks ago for $5.99/# that yielded superb Cowboy steaks and excellent sandwich steaks. It more of an art than science and you don't always get what you want.

In terms of grass fed and organic beef, I have a feeling that use of these phrases is somewhat marketing driven. I don't particulary like any grass fed beef I have had(Cheaper for the producer though) and Organic has become just another buzz word. It's in the farmer's best interest to limit the use of antibiotics and other pesticides and herbicides to reduce cost. In any event, there is a definite delay time that antibiotics must be stopped to allow them to clear the animals system.

I think your are more at risk breathing fumes from automobiles than US raised beef.-Dick

[Busboy]

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."

In terms of grass fed and organic beef, I have a feeling that use of these phrases is somewhat marketing driven. I don't particulary like any grass fed beef I have had(Cheaper for the producer though) and Organic has become just another buzz word. It's in the farmer's best interest to limit the use of antibiotics and other pesticides and herbicides to reduce cost. In any event, there is a definite delay time that antibiotics must be stopped to allow them to clear the animals system.

I think your are more at risk breathing fumes from automobiles than US raised beef.-Dick

←

You may be correct if you're buying beef from small producers, but the reason so many animals are pumped full of antibiotics, hormones and so on is because, for most producers, it's in their interest to finish their animals in a low-cost feedlot environment where the conditions demand heavy use of hormones to speed growth and antibiotics to prevent diseases from sweeping through crowded, manure-filled lots.

In addition to potential health effects in humans and their contribution to evolution of resistant virus strains, they are a symptom of a system that is unfortunate at almost every level -- environmental, small businesses. labor relations, farm subsidies, monoculture, humane treatment of animals. Not that I didn't eat some hormone-labed ground chuck tonight. Michael Pollan has a few interesting observations on the subject.

I'm not sure if grass-fed is cheaper, but there's generally not the demand for it because it is leaner and tastes different from corn-finished beef, so the price is lower. Far from being a buzzword, the farmers (and chefs) I know who've embraced the grass-fed lable are passionate in their commitment to that type of husbandry. "Organic" is a cliche, but also one with (some would say onerous) government regulations behind it and which offers a reasonable guaranty of something closer to "purity" than most meat offers.

[paulraphael]

The trouble with the grass fed vs. corn fed debate is that it falls into a false dichotomy, where the only available choices are pristine, pasture-raised beef vs. abused, industrial feedlot-raised beef.

This presumes that all cattle finished on grain are the products of filthy and inhumane factory farms, which just isn't the case. There are plenty of small to mid-sized artisinal farms all over the country that choose to raise their cattle humanely and without hormones and antibiotics--and to finish them on grain.

If you want to compare the results of grass finishing to those of grain finishing, then compare beef from similar quality farms. Otherwise you're engaging in a meaningless debate.

On another topic, there's a good reason producers of grass-finished beef choose not to have their meat graded: it's usually too lean to even make the Choice grade. Very little of it would even make Select. This doesn't mean that the meat is poor quality, but it does mean that it will be utterly lacking in one of the qualities (succulence) that people raised on grain finished beef often value.

Edited July 8, 2009 by paulraphael (log)

[David A. Goldfarb]

I've been buying beef cooperatively with some friends from a small producer in the Hudson Valley, and after a few rounds, we've been asking for grass-fed corn-finished beef, which has the flavor of grass-fed beef with a bit more marbling. It usually grades somewhere between choice and prime.

[paulraphael]

I've been buying beef cooperatively with some friends from a small producer in the Hudson Valley, and after a few rounds, we've been asking for grass-fed corn-finished beef, which has the flavor of grass-fed beef with a bit more marbling.  It usually grades somewhere between choice and prime.

←

Who's your farm? I might try to include them in an upcoming beef tasting event.

For my tastes, that's the best way to do it. Keep the cows in the pasture longer, and finish on grains (not necessarily corn, and ideally with grass still in the mix) to fatten them up.

Some of the best farms, like Prather Ranch in California, keep the cattle in the pasture their whole lives, but supplement their diet with grain at the end.

It's worth mentioning that ALL cattle are grass-fed for the first year or so of their lives. What's at issue how they're fed for the last few months. "Corn finished" or "grain finished" are more accurate terms than corn-fed.

Also worth mentioning that grass-fed doesn't always mean pasture-raised. Farmers have lobbied to have all kinds of things considered grass, including hay. Think about the climate in any farm's region ... you can be pretty sure that in New York State and Montana, the cattle aren't roaming the pastures and eating grean grass in February. They're probably in an enclosed barn for much of that time, eating hay.

You'll get greener tasting beef from Southern California.

[Busboy]

The trouble with the grass fed vs. corn fed debate is that it falls into a false dichotomy, where the only available choices are pristine, pasture-raised beef vs. abused, industrial feedlot-raised beef.

This presumes that all cattle finished on grain are the products of filthy and inhumane factory farms, which just isn't the case. There are plenty of small to mid-sized artisinal farms all over the country that choose to raise their cattle humanely and without hormones and antibiotics--and to finish them on grain.

If you want to compare the results of grass finishing to those of grain finishing, then compare beef from similar quality farms. Otherwise you're engaging in a meaningless debate.

On another topic, there's a good reason producers of grass-finished beef choose not to have their meat graded: it's usually too lean to even make the Choice grade. Very little of it would even make Select. This doesn't mean that the meat is poor quality, but it does mean that it will be utterly lacking in one of the qualities (succulence) that people raised on grain finished beef often value.

←

I think in terms of the filthy factory farms v. pristine pastures debate, the more revealing clue is the presence of hormones and/or antibiotics.

The beef guy at our closest farmer's market caused a minor kerfuffle among the purists when he went to grain for the last bit of his cows' pre-dinner existence, but his customers are well-satisfied with the results -- philosophically and culinarily.

[David A. Goldfarb]

Paul--Our supplier is a guy named Herb Litts. We have one person who lives up in New Paltz who usually coordinates the order, collects names of people interested and works out the distribution. We buy shares of 1/8 of a side (some purchasing multiple eighths), and our coordinator takes orders and makes it work out so that we have an even number of full sides. The meat is butchered and frozen, and we all have a big gathering to split it up. The regular muscle cuts are included in the share. Organ meats and bones are giveaways at the end of the process.

The one issue I and others have had with this arrangement is the butchering--steaks cut too thin, some strange cuts like a rolled trimmed brisket instead of a whole brisket, and lots of burger that I'd rather get as a whole cut and grind myself as needed. We could have the meat cut differently, but when it's being split between several people, it's hard to meet all demands. The beef has generally been good though.

If you want me to put you in touch, send me a PM.

Edited July 8, 2009 by David A. Goldfarb (log)