"Jean B." > wrote in message
...
> brooklyn1 wrote:
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Thu, 21 May 2009 09:02:02 -0400, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gee... I will google later, but when my mom did London broil, it
>>>> wasn't flank steak. It was some very thick cut of beef. It may
>>>> have been called London broil. I dunno.
>>> Yes, that's what I remember too and it was labeled London Broil. No
>>> hint of what it really was on the package.
>>>
>>>
>> All fresh meat sold in the US MUST be clearly labeled indicating from
>> what animal and which cut... you are obviously incapable of reading the
>> label. That the label also indicated London broil was merely a suggestion
>> of usage, just like large cuts of chuck are often also labeled Pot Roast,
>> that is not meant to indicate that one can't grind it for burgers/meat
>> loaf. London broil is a recipe, not a cut of meat... if it's top round
>> it will say top round, if it's flank steak it will say flank steak, and
>> if it's sirloin it will say sirloin... there is nothing preventing one
>> from using such cuts for dishes other than London broil, all can be
>> braised, and often are.
>>
> Now. I wonder whether the rules, if any, were looser back in the 60s.
> Probably.
>
>
What rules? The USDA mandates are laws. Those labeling laws existed in the
6os. If anything those labeling laws were more strictly enforced then. In
any case there is no such cut of meat as London broil, it's a recipe, like
pot roast.