They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
with no tail. There was very little fat anywhere on them. I grilled
one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. It tasted
grass fed, not even corn finished. The strip side was fairly tender,
but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. I liked it better than
the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.

--Bryan

Dido is hot:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUBUExxD41A

Bryan > wrote:
> They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
> with no tail. There was very little fat anywhere on them. I grilled
> one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. It tasted
> grass fed, not even corn finished. The strip side was fairly tender,
> but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. I liked it better than
> the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.
>
> --Bryan
>
> Dido is hot:
> www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUBUExxD41A

I heard Mexican beef uses non of the USDA chemical crap.

Greg

On Jul 5, 6:21*pm, gregz > wrote:
> Bryan > wrote:
> > They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
> > with no tail. *There was very little fat anywhere on them. *I grilled
> > one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. *It tasted
> > grass fed, not even corn finished. *The strip side was fairly tender,
> > but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. *I liked it better than
> > the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.
>
> > --Bryan
>
> > Dido is hot:
> >www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUBUExxD41A
>
> I heard Mexican beef uses non of the USDA chemical crap.

I believe that. When you graze, and only supplement with corn when
absolutely necessary, you don't need all those antibiotics. Land and
labor are cheaper there, and grass grows more year round. Grass.
That's what cattle are evolved to eat.
>
> Greg

--Bryan

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:13:57 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
> wrote:

> They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
> with no tail. There was very little fat anywhere on them. I grilled
> one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. It tasted
> grass fed, not even corn finished. The strip side was fairly tender,
> but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. I liked it better than
> the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-...137688303.html

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Jul 5, 7:57*pm, sf > wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:13:57 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
>
> > wrote:
> > They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
> > with no tail. *There was very little fat anywhere on them. *I grilled
> > one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. *It tasted
> > grass fed, not even corn finished. *The strip side was fairly tender,
> > but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. *I liked it better than
> > the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.
>
> http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-...ing-more-beef-...
>
It looks like from that article that cattle are mostly grain FINISHED,
but grass fed until later in life. The corn feeding thing in the USA
is far worse. They have to give the cattle antibiotics because they
get sick from eating starch instead of cellulose. It's called,
"subacute acidosis," and it's caused by feeding cattle corn instead of
grass/hay/forage. After I post this, I'm going to email SAVE-A-LOT,
and compliment their Mexican beef. I prefer leaner over more tender,
and I prefer the better fatty acid content of beef that has been
merely corn *finished*, rather than corn fed for extended periods.

--Bryan www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUBUExxD41A Romance is alive and well.

On Thursday, July 5, 2012 9:38:03 PM UTC-6, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:13:57 -0700 (PDT), Bryan wrote:
>
> > They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
> > with no tail. There was very little fat anywhere on them. I grilled
> > one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. It tasted
> > grass fed, not even corn finished. The strip side was fairly tender,
> > but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. I liked it better than
> > the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.
>
> The carniceria market steaks always looks a little off to me - usually
> one or more of the characteristics you describe, plus purpleish. But
> what keeps me from buying them most of all is how thin they cut them.
> And they're usually not scraped to remove bone fragments and fat from
> the band saw.
>
> -sw

It's been ages since I ate a Mexican sourced steak. I didn't like the ones
we had...might as well have had cardboard. No taste, no fat, no flavor and
not tender. Canadian or American beef is far superior IMHO.

On 7/5/2012 9:24 PM, Bryan wrote:
> It looks like from that article that cattle are mostly grain FINISHED,
> but grass fed until later in life. The corn feeding thing in the USA
> is far worse. They have to give the cattle antibiotics because they
> get sick from eating starch instead of cellulose. It's called,
> "subacute acidosis," and it's caused by feeding cattle corn instead of
> grass/hay/forage. After I post this, I'm going to email SAVE-A-LOT,
> and compliment their Mexican beef. I prefer leaner over more tender,
> and I prefer the better fatty acid content of beef that has been
> merely corn*finished*, rather than corn fed for extended periods.

Funny you mention that because I never gave it much thought about the
taste of beef if it was grass fed or grain fed. I recently cooked a rump
roast and it had a very acidic taste to it. I haven't cooked a rump
roast in many years so I couldn't really place why it tasted differently
from other cuts, but do you think that means it was grass fed? I'm
going to have to experiment. I have to admit I didn't really like the
acidic taste. Maybe it was none of the above and just the cut.

On Jul 5, 11:51*pm, Roy > wrote:
> On Thursday, July 5, 2012 9:38:03 PM UTC-6, Sqwertz wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:13:57 -0700 (PDT), Bryan wrote:
>
> > > They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
> > > with no tail. *There was very little fat anywhere on them. *I grilled
> > > one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. *It tasted
> > > grass fed, not even corn finished. *The strip side was fairly tender,
> > > but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. *I liked it better than
> > > the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.
>
> > The carniceria market steaks always looks a little off to me - usually
> > one or more of the characteristics you describe, plus purpleish. *But
> > what keeps me from buying them most of all is how thin they cut them.
> > And they're usually not scraped to remove bone fragments and fat from
> > the band saw.
>
> > -sw
>
> It's been ages since I ate a Mexican sourced steak. I didn't like the ones
> we had...might as well have had cardboard. No taste, no fat, no flavor and
> not tender. Canadian or American beef is far superior IMHO.

You'd probably feel the same way about pricey, organic, grass-fed beef
or buffalo. Many folks find very lean beef flavorless. I don't.

--Bryan

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 18:24:25 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
> wrote:

> On Jul 5, 7:57*pm, sf > wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:13:57 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
> >
> > > wrote:
> > > They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
> > > with no tail. *There was very little fat anywhere on them. *I grilled
> > > one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. *It tasted
> > > grass fed, not even corn finished. *The strip side was fairly tender,
> > > but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. *I liked it better than
> > > the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.
> >
> > http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-...ing-more-beef-...
> >
> It looks like from that article that cattle are mostly grain FINISHED,
> but grass fed until later in life. The corn feeding thing in the USA
> is far worse. They have to give the cattle antibiotics because they
> get sick from eating starch instead of cellulose. It's called,
> "subacute acidosis," and it's caused by feeding cattle corn instead of
> grass/hay/forage. After I post this, I'm going to email SAVE-A-LOT,
> and compliment their Mexican beef. I prefer leaner over more tender,
> and I prefer the better fatty acid content of beef that has been
> merely corn *finished*, rather than corn fed for extended periods.
>
The article clearly said that the beef you *think* was grass fed
probably isn't.



--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 21:51:14 -0700 (PDT), Roy >
wrote:

>
> It's been ages since I ate a Mexican sourced steak. I didn't like the ones
> we had...might as well have had cardboard. No taste, no fat, no flavor and
> not tender. Canadian or American beef is far superior IMHO.

Is your Mexican meat clearly labeled? I've never head of Mexican
steak. If I go to a Mexican market, I won't buy the beef because it
looks like it wasn't processed (bled) properly.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Jul 6, 4:50*am, sf > wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 18:24:25 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > On Jul 5, 7:57*pm, sf > wrote:
> > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:13:57 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
> > > > with no tail. *There was very little fat anywhere on them. *I grilled
> > > > one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. *It tasted
> > > > grass fed, not even corn finished. *The strip side was fairly tender,
> > > > but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. *I liked it better than
> > > > the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.
>
> > >http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-...ing-more-beef-....
>
> > It looks like from that article that cattle are mostly grain FINISHED,
> > but grass fed until later in life. *The corn feeding thing in the USA
> > is far worse. *They have to give the cattle antibiotics because they
> > get sick from eating starch instead of cellulose. *It's called,
> > "subacute acidosis," and it's caused by feeding cattle corn instead of
> > grass/hay/forage. *After I post this, I'm going to email SAVE-A-LOT,
> > and compliment their Mexican beef. *I prefer leaner over more tender,
> > and I prefer the better fatty acid content of beef that has been
> > merely corn *finished*, rather than corn fed for extended periods.
>
> The article clearly said that the beef you *think* was grass fed
> probably isn't.
>
But a quorum of characteristics suggest that it was, at least mostly.
Roy called Mexican steaks, "No taste, no fat, no flavor." That's the
exact criticism of grass fed beef. Americans generally prefer corn
fed.

--Bryan

On Friday, July 6, 2012 3:52:59 AM UTC-6, sf wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 21:51:14 -0700 (PDT), Roy >
> wrote:
>
> >
> > It's been ages since I ate a Mexican sourced steak. I didn't like the ones
> > we had...might as well have had cardboard. No taste, no fat, no flavor and
> > not tender. Canadian or American beef is far superior IMHO.
>
> Is your Mexican meat clearly labeled? I've never head of Mexican
> steak. If I go to a Mexican market, I won't buy the beef because it
> looks like it wasn't processed (bled) properly.
>
> --
> Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

Acapulco is where we had it...presumed it was of Mexican origin but who knows it could have been imported. We weren't impressed.

Most grass fed beef are feed graas. But, most are also fed corn and other things. Now that corn has gone through the roof, blends with oats have become popular. You don't always get what think in a grocery store. Nice to know the people who raise the animals you eat.

Same thing for BGH free milk. The great majority of milk Americans buy comes from cows jacked up on this. My neighbor is organic and his cows will live for 10-15 years. The average Growth Hormone Boosted cow will last 2-2.5 years. Not even enough time to replace that cow with a young hieffer (that may reach 3 years before she yields milk).

Greater production; but it does seem a little nasty that those big critters only live a short life. Price of progress.

On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 08:01:11 -0700 (PDT), Roy >
wrote:

> On Friday, July 6, 2012 3:52:59 AM UTC-6, sf wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 21:51:14 -0700 (PDT), Roy >
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > It's been ages since I ate a Mexican sourced steak. I didn't like the ones
> > > we had...might as well have had cardboard. No taste, no fat, no flavor and
> > > not tender. Canadian or American beef is far superior IMHO.
> >
> > Is your Mexican meat clearly labeled? I've never head of Mexican
> > steak. If I go to a Mexican market, I won't buy the beef because it
> > looks like it wasn't processed (bled) properly.
> >
> > --
> > Food is an important part of a balanced diet.
>
> Acapulco is where we had it...presumed it was of Mexican origin but who knows it could have been imported. We weren't impressed.

Yeah, you don't know under those circumstances. It was steak you ate
in Mexico, but you don't know if it was steak from a steer raised in
Mexico. It could have come from Texas or Argentina.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Jul 6, 11:52*am, Gorio > wrote:
> 'Bryan[_6_ Wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > ;1755181']On Jul 6, 4:50*am, sf wrote:-
> > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 18:24:25 -0700 (PDT), Bryan
>
> > wrote:-
> > On Jul 5, 7:57*pm, sf wrote:-
> > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 12:13:57 -0700 (PDT), Bryan--
> > --
> > wrote:
> > They were $3.99/#, had no marbling whatsoever, and were a deep red,
> > with no tail. *There was very little fat anywhere on them. *I
> > grilled
> > one over pure cherry wood, well seared but rare inside. *It tasted
> > grass fed, not even corn finished. *The strip side was fairly
> > tender,
> > but the filet was melt-in-you-mouth tender. *I liked it better than
> > the USDA Choice ones I usually buy.--
> > --
>
> >http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-...ing-more-beef-...
> > -
> > It looks like from that article that cattle are mostly grain
> > FINISHED,
> > but grass fed until later in life. *The corn feeding thing in the USA
> > is far worse. *They have to give the cattle antibiotics because they
> > get sick from eating starch instead of cellulose. *It's called,
> > "subacute acidosis," and it's caused by feeding cattle corn instead
> > of
> > grass/hay/forage. *After I post this, I'm going to email SAVE-A-LOT,
> > and compliment their Mexican beef. *I prefer leaner over more tender,
> > and I prefer the better fatty acid content of beef that has been
> > merely corn *finished*, rather than corn fed for extended periods.-
>
> > The article clearly said that the beef you *think* was grass fed
> > probably isn't.
> > -
> > But a quorum of characteristics suggest that it was, at least mostly.
> > Roy called Mexican steaks, "No taste, no fat, no flavor." *That's the
> > exact criticism of grass fed beef. *Americans generally prefer corn
> > fed.
>
> > --Bryan
>
> Most grass fed beef are feed graas. But, most are also fed corn and
> other things. Now that corn has gone through the roof, blends with oats
> have become popular. You don't always get what think in a grocery store.
> Nice to know the people who raise the animals you eat.
>
> Same thing for BGH free milk. The great majority of milk Americans buy
> comes from cows jacked up on this. My neighbor is organic and his cows
> will live for 10-15 years. The average Growth Hormone Boosted cow will
> last 2-2.5 years. Not even enough time to replace that cow with a young
> hieffer (that may reach 3 years before she yields milk).
>
> Greater production; but it does seem a little nasty that those big
> critters only live a short life. Price of progress.

Yeah, I have no problem with the healthfulness of BGH milk, nor the
short life, but just the issue of the discomfort to the cows.
>
> --
> Gorio

--Bryan

On Jul 6, 12:04*pm, sf > wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2012 08:01:11 -0700 (PDT), Roy >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Friday, July 6, 2012 3:52:59 AM UTC-6, sf wrote:
> > > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 21:51:14 -0700 (PDT), Roy >
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > It's been ages since I ate a Mexican sourced steak. I didn't like the ones
> > > > we had...might as well have had cardboard. No taste, no fat, no flavor and
> > > > not tender. Canadian or American beef is far superior IMHO.
>
> > > Is your Mexican meat clearly labeled? *I've never head of Mexican
> > > steak. *If I go to a Mexican market, I won't buy the beef because it
> > > looks like it wasn't processed (bled) properly.
>
> > > --
> > > Food is an important part of a balanced diet.
>
> > Acapulco is where we had it...presumed it was of Mexican origin but who knows it could have been imported. We weren't impressed.
>
> Yeah, you don't know under those circumstances. *It was steak you ate
> in Mexico, but you don't know if it was steak from a steer raised in
> Mexico. *It could have come from Texas or Argentina.
>
Argentinians are beef fanatics. If I were filthy rich, I think I
might spend winters there. Even as hot as it's been (over 100F for 5
days, and forecast to be 108-110 tomorrow), I still hate winter.
Actually, it's gotten to over 100F every day starting Friday, June
22nd, but we were in Chicago for a few of those days.

--Bryan

Sqwertz wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 22:40:35 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 5 Jul 2012 23:21:05 +0000 (UTC), gregz wrote:
> >
> > > I heard Mexican beef uses non of the USDA chemical crap.
> >
> > Mexican beef closely follows the same methods of U.S. beef. They
> > are usually the first to adopt and endorse any new practices that
> > the U.S. invents.
>
> Brian Fart. I'm thinking of Canada. One's north, one's south. I
> even subscribe to two meat/poultry industry magazines just so I'll be
> smarter about the subject. Doesn't work 100% of the time.

Maybe you can answer a question that's been on my mind a long time. Why has
the price of beef gone up about 4 times the rate of pork or chicken in the
past 20 years, at least in the northeast?


--

Reply in group, but if emailing add one more
zero, and remove the last word.

Tom Del Rosso wrote:

> Maybe you can answer a question that's been on my mind a long time. Why has
> the price of beef gone up about 4 times the rate of pork or chicken in the
> past 20 years, at least in the northeast?

That happened because the cows threatened a hunger strike if prices
didn't increase.