4 ms·
The Hot Dog Report
- yggydrasily 11y agoThe report doesn't really say how this happens or what it means exactly. Does this result from say, people's fingers getting cut by the processing machines and little bits of flesh going in, or is it human waste ending up in the mix somehow?
- nanny 11y agoI think those type of questions are bit beyond the scope of this report.
- gdulli 11y agoOccam's razor would suggest that hair or skin cells would account for most of it.
- Zikes 11y agoThat's a pretty fair assumption. It would also mean that 2% of pretty much every food should contain a bit of human DNA, making hot dogs a moot target.
- gdulli 11y agoI agree. This sounds sensationalized.
- stevesearer 11y agoThough the submitter was the one that added the sensational headline. [edit: headline was changed] They do say, "While some of these substitutions, hygienic issues, other variances, or off-label ingredients may be permitted by the FDA, our scientific disclosure allows you, as the consumer, to decide whether the variance or problems meet your personal standard in your buying decision." Some of these problems like pork in pork-free products or having 10g protein as opposed to 25g seem to be big problems that need some sort of investigative follow-up like contacting the companies for a statement about the findings.
- jenscow 11y agoNo, the article says "found human DNA in 2% of the samples", meaning 7 out of 345 samples had the DNA. This implies it's not as common as you suggest.
- cpfohl 11y agoThe report also doesn't state how it's detecting human DNA. I was under the impression that tests like these are reasonably unreliable, especially when dealing with big mixes of genetic materials...I can't say this with any authority though
- Amorymeltzer 11y agoOf interest: >2/3 of the human DNA samples were [in] vegetarian products. >10% of Vegetarian products contained meat. Sounds to me like the meat hotdogs are the better ones.
- mfoy_ 11y agoSoylent Green?
- jksmith 11y agoSqueeze hot dog juice into 23andMe test tube.
- mbrubeck 11y agoThey tested “345 hot dogs and sausages,” and found 2% of them tested positive for human DNA. That's only 6–8 contaminated hot dogs. If 2/3 of those were vegetarian, that’s just 4 hot dogs. I wouldn't jump to any conclusions from such a tiny sample. Also, if the human DNA was caused by sample contamination in the lab, it could just be that the contamination is more likely to be detected in a vegetarian sausage than in a meat one.
- joezydeco 11y agoThis comment from mitrovarr@Metafilter sums it up: "It's really easy to contaminate PCR reactions with human DNA, on account of the technicians being human and thoughtlessly shedding DNA at all times. You can prevent it, of course, but most labs that usually deal with non-human taxa only don't bother to, because it doesn't matter and it's a tremendous hassle and significant expense to do so. Unless this was done in a forensics lab, that would be my guess as to the source of the human DNA in the reactions." http://www.metafilter.com/154105/Quality-meat-No-fillers-Or-maybe-just-some-fillers#6260088 http://www.metafilter.com/154105/Quality-meat-No-fillers-Or-...
- ChuckMcM 11y agoWow, hotdogs just can't catch a break. I wonder if they tested Hebrew National hot dogs. There is a reason "Inside the Sausage Factory" is a thing.
- dmitrygr 11y agoThey did, and those were some of the least contaminated, as per article
- stevesearer 11y agoIt does say in the Recommendations area with regard to not accidentally getting pork to "Stick with Kosher brands you know and trust, like Hebrew National" and they assigned them a score of 96.
- nommm-nommm 11y agoDid you RTFA? Hebrew National was rated 4th least contaminated with a score of 96 (out of 100).
- ChuckMcM 11y agoTo be honest I found it challenging to actually derive information out of the series of infographics interspersed with various bits of text. Once I ascertained they really weren't going to reveal any insights into the origin of things I simply classified it as a companion hit piece on hotdogs to the "processed foods cause cancer" piece.
- dang 11y ago> Did you RTFA? Please don't do this here. The sibling commenters have all provided nice examples of how to reply respectfully. From the site guidelines: Please don't insinuate that someone hasn't read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- bluefin 11y agoYes, it's right there among with three other brands having received the highest score of 96.
- buckbova 11y agoI'm glad they didn't test Nathan's. I prefer to be blissfully ignorant.
- Laaw 11y agoSo? Is this human DNA that can be found in hot dogs harmful to me in the quantities it's found in?
- tdicola 11y agoPeople have been eating hot dogs for years and years without major issue, I think you'll be fine. The saturated fat, cholesterol, and sodium is a bigger concern to be worried about.
- awqrre 11y agoI think I'll stick with my slim jims
- imjk 11y agoIs it OK to you that there's human DNA in the hotdogs as long as they're not harmful to you?
- sp332 11y agoWhy else would it bother me? I mean if people were being killed to make the hotdogs... but otherwise?
- ars 11y agoThere are body parts that can be harvested from people, but regrow. (Liver and Blood for example.) You'd be OK eating those? I wouldn't, I'd be grossed out. Or is it just when it tiny minimal quantities? Which honestly everyone eats sometimes.
- noselasd 11y agoI'd say this depends on how that dna got there, and how much. Is this just minute dna from fingerprints or the presence of humans, or is it something more severe. I don't expect all food to be prepared in sterile clean rooms.
- 11y ago
- readams 11y agoAlternately: 2% of tests done by an advocacy organization are tainted by human DNA.
- chejazi 11y agoIn addition to intake during consumption, I wonder how much "human" we intake during respiration, with all the dust in the air.
- tragomaskhalos 11y agoI like those odds.
- bcook 11y agoIf the contamination levels are above the legal limits, please report them. Otherwise, this article seems more politically motivated rather than a focus on public health. We are all cannibals and coprophages, so what?
- dwd 11y agoThe point is: what is on the label doesn't match the detected ingredients and there are some "hygiene" issues. The hope would be that at the end of this manufacturers will hold themselves and suppliers to a higher standard. Looking forward to when bread products are analysed in all their varieties.
- 5ilv3r 11y agoYou expect me to believe that Butterball sold at walmart is the highest quality? Who paid for this site? I did some googling on the CEO's name and the whois owner but couldn't find much.
- scott_karana 11y ago"Quality" in that case meant, "their ingredient claims matched reality, and they had no adulterations".
- 5ilv3r 11y agoTop 10 Major Hot Dog Brands [[Butterball logo]] 1. Butterball Are we looking at the same thing?
- scott_karana 11y agoThis is what I'm looking at: > Our scientific disclosure allows you, as the consumer, to decide whether the variance or problems meet your personal standard in your buying decision. > The Clear List is a comprehensive list of high-quality, safe, and accurate products. This list only includes products with a Clear Score of 95 or above. A score of 95 or above means that there were no hygienic issues, and no substitutions found in our molecular tests. There could be slight discrepancies in the observed nutritional information vs. the nutritional content on the label, but nothing that could be harmful or intentionally mislabeled. I see nothing on the page that quantifies taste or other aesthetic qualities, which is how you seem to have interpreted the test?
- matheweis 11y ago> You expect me to believe that Butterball sold at walmart is the highest quality? On average? Sure! Mass produced food standards are actually pretty strict. Violations happen in bespoke/small batch/local farms too, but are not very newsworthy because they only affect small numbers of people. > Who paid for this site? https://www.clearlabs.com/about https://www.clearlabs.com/about Don't see too much sketchyness; they claim to have funding from Felicis Ventures, Khosla Ventures, and HBM Genomics... All SV area companies. Seems to me more like a well architected viral campaign designed to fund their kickstarter project: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/906785694/clear-food-your-molecular-guide-to-food/creator_bio https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/906785694/clear-food-yo...
- refurb 11y agoIt would have been awesome if they had quantified the results somehow. It makes a big difference if the human DNA suggested 5% of the food was of a human origin or 0.000001%. This reminds me of the article about heavy metals in our drinking water. Analytical chemistry has made massive strides in our ability to detect different chemicals. Common laboratory machines can detect heavy metals down to the ppt (part per trillion). That's approximately 1 microgram in a liter of water. At those levels, who cares?
- marricks 11y agoIf I wanted to smear veg options this is how I'd do it. Kickstart a small independent lab for transparency and health of food, run all sorts of food and pin select veg ones as being especially low quality and even having meat. Don't be clear on tests or results, don't be clear on process. This is the sort of thing news loves to pick up, and before your pressured for full details it's already gone twice around the world. Do a full clarification later on how there was human containment and the only veg brands that failed were cause they weren't processed in vegan facilities, so it's expected. You come out looking honest, and it's just the media failing to wait for the full info! Test other brands and items, do the same process.
- nommm-nommm 11y agoThank you. I can assume some food processing plants that do tofu dogs also are big enough to do regular dogs or other products. Which means you can expect a few molecules of "cross contamination" even with proper washing procedure like with peanuts. As a vegetarian this doesn't bother me in the least, its to be expected. Nobody can avoid microscopic consumption of non-vegetarian items. It's the same with those microscopic shrimp in the water in NYC. Probably the same for the food I cook at home because I cook meat for my spouse in the same bowls/pans. Now if they were to say, 5% chicken, that's an issue. Wanted to chime in as a vegetarian. [That being said there WAS issues years ago of non-vegetarian gelatin being labeled as vegetarian. There was no possible way that was a mistake, it was straight up gelatin.]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]