I am looking to purchase fresh turkey since it is one of the 3 meats I can eat, right now. The farm that I've inquired to said this:
We do sell turkeys both whole and parts. They are pasture raised, fed a non GMO feed and not injected with anything. However the feed does contain soy. I don't know if that will be a problem for you or not. The whole birds are $3.35/ pound.
Would this be a problem if I am soy free??
Thanks!
Does what turkeys are fed matter???
Moderators: Rosie, Stanz, Jean, CAMary, moremuscle, JFR, Dee, xet, Peggy, Matthew, Gabes-Apg, grannyh, Gloria, Mars, starfire, Polly, Joefnh
Does what turkeys are fed matter???
Linda :)
LC Oct. 2012
MTHFR gene mutation and many more....
LC Oct. 2012
MTHFR gene mutation and many more....
According to conventional wisdom, no.
According to those who believe in secondary glutenization (such as DogtorJ), yes.
Personally, I believe the risk lies in processing methods. The megaprocessors of poultry use machinery to rake the guts out, and feces mixed with undigested and partially-digested feed residue goes everywhere. Then the bird is thrown into a "bath" that consists of rinse water mixed with feces, feed residue, blood, and tissue left from previous birds, with a disinfectant added. The undigested and partially-digested feed residue will obviously contain soy (and any other feed ingredients ingested by the bird).
It would appear that the chances of a bird getting through that without being coated with soy residues from the guts of previously washed birds would be pretty slim (if soy is in their ration, which it almost certainly would be). But that's just my opinion. The disinfectant will destroy a high percentage of the bacteria, but it will not deactivate any protein fragments from feed that might be present.
On the other hand, small processors may process the birds by hand, thus greatly reducing the odds that most of the meat will be coated with feed residues from the gut. And I'm just guessing here, but there's a possibility that they might wash the carcass in fresh running water, rather than using the same stale bath that has already been used for thousands of birds. Keep in mind that as I said, much of this is guesswork, because the techniques used will probably depend on the size of the operation, and various management decisions.
Tex
According to those who believe in secondary glutenization (such as DogtorJ), yes.
Personally, I believe the risk lies in processing methods. The megaprocessors of poultry use machinery to rake the guts out, and feces mixed with undigested and partially-digested feed residue goes everywhere. Then the bird is thrown into a "bath" that consists of rinse water mixed with feces, feed residue, blood, and tissue left from previous birds, with a disinfectant added. The undigested and partially-digested feed residue will obviously contain soy (and any other feed ingredients ingested by the bird).
It would appear that the chances of a bird getting through that without being coated with soy residues from the guts of previously washed birds would be pretty slim (if soy is in their ration, which it almost certainly would be). But that's just my opinion. The disinfectant will destroy a high percentage of the bacteria, but it will not deactivate any protein fragments from feed that might be present.
On the other hand, small processors may process the birds by hand, thus greatly reducing the odds that most of the meat will be coated with feed residues from the gut. And I'm just guessing here, but there's a possibility that they might wash the carcass in fresh running water, rather than using the same stale bath that has already been used for thousands of birds. Keep in mind that as I said, much of this is guesswork, because the techniques used will probably depend on the size of the operation, and various management decisions.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
The only real solution is to be more careful with the evisceration process, to prevent getting intestinal contents on the meat in the first place. Washing removes the largest particles and makes it look better, but can't really undo all the damage, because the proteins we're talking about are glutenous, so they tend to stick to the meat.Linda wrote:Oh my, this is complicated. Would washing the meat, well, help?
I'm not aware of any rigorous, controlled, studies that have been done on this, that would meet the standards of accepted medical practices. So far it's all theory and speculation.Linda wrote:I'm not sure about the secondary glutenization issue. Has there been good research done on that topic?
Dr. John Symes is a British veterinarian who is a leading expert on food sensitivities (including human food sensitivities). At the link below, you can read what he says about secondary glutenization. Note that he (and others who believe in secondary glutenization) believes that gluten and other antigenic foods (feed) are actually deposited in muscle tissue during the growth process. This is a completely different mechanism in comparison with what I have described regarding contamination during processing. Personally, I believe that it would be impossible for food proteins (or peptides) to be used in the growth process, because new tissue can only be constructed from amino acids, and peptides are short to medium-length chains of amino acids, thus disqualifying them from use in building new tissue.
However, note that I do believe that it is possible for an animal that has a leaky gut (like us) to leak peptides into the bloodstream, and like us, those peptides would be deposited in joints, organs, and possibly muscle tissue (not as new tissue, but as foreign matter). So there are multiple ways that this contamination could happen.
“Secondary Glutenization”
Note that he talks about lectins in that article. Gluten is a lectin, and that property probably also applies to the antigenic components of other foods as well.
Lectin activity of gluten identified as wheat germ agglutinin.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Tex,
So, we really aren't 100% safe unless we raise our own animals and food, huh? Or, we know a farmer that we trust.
How very sad that all of this has happened to our food supply. It's greed, and a government that is too big and invasive.
Thanks for your input.
So, we really aren't 100% safe unless we raise our own animals and food, huh? Or, we know a farmer that we trust.
How very sad that all of this has happened to our food supply. It's greed, and a government that is too big and invasive.
Thanks for your input.
Linda :)
LC Oct. 2012
MTHFR gene mutation and many more....
LC Oct. 2012
MTHFR gene mutation and many more....
Well, you have to recognize that agricultural production is a business, and it's a very expensive business, with extremely high costs of production, and a very high risk of failure (basically, farmers have to put everything they own on the line every time they plant a crop, because of the high cost of inputs). Farmers are businessmen, and they have to utilize the most efficient production methods, or the economy will plow them under and put them out of business. They produce for the mass market, and that market controls virtually all of their viable options, which therefore causes it to dictate most of their most important production decisions. The only farmers and ranchers who are exempt from those constraints are small hobby farmers and ranchers, who make a living working in other industries. They are free to do pretty much as they want, because they can afford to take a loss on their production. Full-time farmers and ranchers don't have that luxury.
Trust me, farmers and ranchers are much more responsive to market demands than any other business, and if the market dictated a need for pure crops (or non-GMO crops), or whatever, and the market was willing to pay the bill, most farmers and ranchers would go there in a heartbeat (their families have to eat too, you know), but the incentive simply isn't there, under current conditions. And we have mostly government regulations, and food manufacturer demands, to thank for the sorry state of affairs in production agriculture today.
The government decided over half a century ago to eliminate the small family farm (by strategically designing their farm programs to that end), and they have been extremely successful at accomplishing that goal.
Tex
Trust me, farmers and ranchers are much more responsive to market demands than any other business, and if the market dictated a need for pure crops (or non-GMO crops), or whatever, and the market was willing to pay the bill, most farmers and ranchers would go there in a heartbeat (their families have to eat too, you know), but the incentive simply isn't there, under current conditions. And we have mostly government regulations, and food manufacturer demands, to thank for the sorry state of affairs in production agriculture today.
The government decided over half a century ago to eliminate the small family farm (by strategically designing their farm programs to that end), and they have been extremely successful at accomplishing that goal.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.
Tex,
Don't think, for a minute, that I meant that farmers are greedy. That's not what I meant. I meant that the greed comes from the ones who are forcing the farmers into practices (as they are today) that are contributing to the detriment of the food system, from seeds to processing. The regulations for me, as a small time farmer, and owner of a seasonal produce stand, are staggering enough, I can't even begin the imagine what large agricultural has to deal with in this country.
Here is the response from a local turkey farmer regarding processing....(we had discussed secondary glutenization)...
The turkeys are not fed for at least 18 hours before butchering which allows time for all the feed to run through their digestive systems. They are all processed by hand and rinsed at least three times and then chilled in an ice water bath before they are bagged and put in refrigeration. I really don't think undigested soy would be an issue at all.
Don't think, for a minute, that I meant that farmers are greedy. That's not what I meant. I meant that the greed comes from the ones who are forcing the farmers into practices (as they are today) that are contributing to the detriment of the food system, from seeds to processing. The regulations for me, as a small time farmer, and owner of a seasonal produce stand, are staggering enough, I can't even begin the imagine what large agricultural has to deal with in this country.
Here is the response from a local turkey farmer regarding processing....(we had discussed secondary glutenization)...
The turkeys are not fed for at least 18 hours before butchering which allows time for all the feed to run through their digestive systems. They are all processed by hand and rinsed at least three times and then chilled in an ice water bath before they are bagged and put in refrigeration. I really don't think undigested soy would be an issue at all.
Linda :)
LC Oct. 2012
MTHFR gene mutation and many more....
LC Oct. 2012
MTHFR gene mutation and many more....
Linda,
I hear you. The problem with the marketing system in this country is that rather than receiving their signals direct from consumers, the producers receive their signals from a chain of middlemen, and the food processors are calling the shots, because they are the ultimate wholesale purchasers of agricultural production. Farmers markets bypass the process of course, but those are retail markets, not wholesale, and so far they constitute only a very small percentage of certain markets (mostly produce).
There's no practical way for consumers to influence government policy, because when push comes to shove, politicians respond only to large campaign contributions.
That leaves trying to change the food manufacturing industry as the only practical option (for achieving food policy changes), and it takes a lot of voting with purchasing dollars to get the attention of their stockholders. But the tide is slowly but surely shifting, as more and more consumers become aware of, and decide that they are fed up with, existing food industry trends, and they seek out GF, SF, DF, Non-GMO etc. alternatives. Hopefully we will live to see some significant (beneficial) changes in the ways that food is processed in this country (and in the world).
That sounds reasonable. The only conflicting possibility would be if DogtorJ is correct, and food peptides are actually deposited in the meat during the growing process. Hopefully that theory is wrong, but the jury is still out, since the theory has never been rigorously tested.
Thanks for the update.
Tex
I hear you. The problem with the marketing system in this country is that rather than receiving their signals direct from consumers, the producers receive their signals from a chain of middlemen, and the food processors are calling the shots, because they are the ultimate wholesale purchasers of agricultural production. Farmers markets bypass the process of course, but those are retail markets, not wholesale, and so far they constitute only a very small percentage of certain markets (mostly produce).
There's no practical way for consumers to influence government policy, because when push comes to shove, politicians respond only to large campaign contributions.
That leaves trying to change the food manufacturing industry as the only practical option (for achieving food policy changes), and it takes a lot of voting with purchasing dollars to get the attention of their stockholders. But the tide is slowly but surely shifting, as more and more consumers become aware of, and decide that they are fed up with, existing food industry trends, and they seek out GF, SF, DF, Non-GMO etc. alternatives. Hopefully we will live to see some significant (beneficial) changes in the ways that food is processed in this country (and in the world).I really don't think undigested soy would be an issue at all.
That sounds reasonable. The only conflicting possibility would be if DogtorJ is correct, and food peptides are actually deposited in the meat during the growing process. Hopefully that theory is wrong, but the jury is still out, since the theory has never been rigorously tested.
Thanks for the update.
Tex
It is suspected that some of the hardest material known to science can be found in the skulls of GI specialists who insist that diet has nothing to do with the treatment of microscopic colitis.