Is grass-fed beef healthier than grain-fed beef? It’s a question that’s frequently asked and debated in the cattle industry.
The specific health traits of grass-fed beef vs grain-feed beef was the topic of a recent Texas AgriLife Research study.
“There really were no negative effects of feeding ground beef from the pasture-fed cattle,” Dr Stephen Smith, AgriLife Research meat scientist said. “We did see many positive effects in men that consumed ground beef from corn-fed cattle. The ground beef from the USDA Prime cattle increased HDL cholesterol and LDL particle diameter. Both effects are protective against cardiovascular disease. The Prime ground beef also decreased insulin, so it may have some protective effect against type II diabetes.”
Read the complete article:
Study shows ground beef from grain-fed cattle healthier than grass-fed
What do you think? Click the Comments link, or let us know at the CattleMax page on Facebook.
Subscribe by Email
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
I am seeing many posts on the article from Texas AgriLife. I am a Texan and a Texas A&M fan. To accurately judge this article I wrote the author, Blair Fannin and asked for a copy of the study so I could read it for myself instead of others interpretations. Neither Fannin or Dr. Smith could produce the study as I requested. This “study” is flawed in its onset. Presumably he only used 27 subjects for the test and only gave them 5 ozs of beef per day. If any of us still remembers 9th grade science class, a viable study starts a samples over 1000, not 27 subjects with cows of who knows what genetics. Without the actual study to read, I guess we will never really know. Visit http://www.grassfednetwork.com and http://www.grassfedexchange.com for more information on grass feeding and finishing.
Hi Joey
Thanks for your comment and you do bring up an interesting point. I know Blair personally and have sent him an email with a link to your comments on this post, so hope he can provide the information you are looking for.
Thanks again for the comment and let us know what you find out.
Terrell
I have studied a prior report with similar results that they managed to get published. It has so many holes in it a bull could walk through it and not touch a thing. For one thing, not only could the subjects eat anything else they wanted along with their tiny meat portions, but the nutritional data on the pasture-fed beef and the maize-fed beef was nearly identical. If that is true, then they did not have any grass-fed beef in their study.
I also showed the report to “real” nutritional scientists who are specialists in EFAs (ok, Omega-3 and Omega-6 fatty acids) and they say the report is so flawed they were surprised the earlier version ever got published. Not only that, but in published interviews with Dr. Smith he is quoted as saying the only peer-reviewed studies backing health claims for grass-fed meats involve rats. That too is flawed because there are literally thousands upon thousands of studies on Omega-3 fatty aids and low glycemic foods that have proven beyond a reasonable doubt the Big Time health benefits of balanced EFAs and low glycemic foods FOR HUMANS.
The report in question here is a prime example of bad science paid for and promoted by the NCBA. Ironically, it promotes 3-ounce servings of beef. I market grass-fed meats and I eat 2.0 to 2.5 pounds of meat a day and my customers also eat large quantities of meat. Even three ounces of beef for breakfast would be a joke for most women who eat grass-fed meats.
Thank you for your comments, Ted.
It sounds like there is a variety of reports about the subject – some showing that grass-fed beef is healthier, while others (like this Texas Agrilife study) say there is not much difference or that grain-fed beef is healthier.
Hopefully consumers’ interest in knowing the difference in health benefits between grain fed and grass fed beef will drive additional (and more in depth) studies of the subject.
Penny
{ 2 trackbacks }