4 ms·
> You can always do better. But I'd like to see a well-grounded argument that KFC-grade chicken is somehow "shitty". I'd say if you buy your meat from a local
by windexh8er 7y ago
> You can always do better. But I'd like to see a well-grounded argument that KFC-grade chicken is somehow "shitty".
I'd say if you buy your meat from a local butcher and you know the actual source of the meat, then you'd likely say that raising chickens in high capacity growth sheds doesn't put out what many would define as quality birds. [0] The chicken is likely fine for consumption, agreed. But if you were born, pumped full of feed to make you as fat as fast as possible, and barely had room to move during that time - would you qualify yourself as healthy? Just as an athlete vs a couch potato have significantly different body composition one could assert this is also true for chickens. In the grand scheme you get what you pay for. In a race to the bottom of cheap meat you need scale and it's much easier to throw lots of chickens in a small place than it is to free-range them.
Finally, while subjective, it's a common pattern to leverage MSG in products that are of generally low quality. I don't know anyone who puts MSG in recipes using pricier butcher cuts, I know I never have. KFC has Monosodium Glutamate in most things they sell.
I guess if you want to stand on a soap box and call out that KFC meat quality isn't "shitty" just because nobody has proven it to you, then more power to you. But, it's hard to argue that there isn't a difference of quality by a mass producer of chicken vs non-mass producing vendors. I mean, it's why people pay more for a friendlier and healthier growth environment for said meats. "Shitty" in the sense of this argument seems rather subjective anyway. But I will say it's hard to argue mass produced chicken isn't "shitty" for the environment. [1][2]
[0] https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2999689/The-35-day-life-KFC-chicken-shed-34-000-birds-Documentary-reveals-conditions-23-million-birds-fast-food-chain-uses-year-kept-in.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2999689/The-35-day-...
[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214317316300336 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221431731...
[2] https://academic.oup.com/nutritionreviews/article/77/4/197/5307079 https://academic.oup.com/nutritionreviews/article/77/4/197/5...
- tptacek 7y agoI'm a little lost here. I agree: heritage birds that are free to roam uncrowded pastures will taste better than CAFO chicken. What's your point? A dry-aged ribeye also tastes better than a bottom round steak. If you're eating dry-aged ribeyes (or heritage chicken) every day, you're wealthy. Congrats, but most people don't have that option.
- windexh8er 7y agoLet's not jump to conclusions - I never said anything about tasting better. What I said was that the quality of the bird with regard to health is likely very different. I also never said I'm eating any of those things. In fact I don't eat red or white meat at all anymore. And that's my point. Why eat sub-par quality meats when there are better alternatives that are cheaper or similarly priced? If I did still eat meat I surely wouldn't be wasting money on eating low quality meat on a daily basis and instead eat it less often but buy better. Your request doesn't have an objective answer, so I'm not sure what you were looking for other than to present something indefensible. But, you also gloss over the main points of how "shitty" this practice is for the environment and instead you try to deflect with a backhanded "you're wealthy" comment. At least I presented some points to the conversation.
- tptacek 7y agoWait, I'm saying it tastes better. It feels like we can't even agree about what we disagree about.