PDA

View Full Version : Injection question


ZILLA
08-13-2010, 11:31 AM
My intent is that this conversation be confined to injection of meat for moisture and flavor enhancement.

Do you think that the use of moisture enhancement by means of chemical injections, such as sodium phosphate, a store bought stock, or homemade stock, such as beef broth in competition meat is ethical?

Tasting judges at BBQ competitions are not specifically told that the meat they are about to eat may or may not be chemically or naturally enhanced by injection by a cook. There is no disclosure by the cook and no notice given by the Judging official of the potential that some of the meat may have been chemically altered or enhanced and with what chemical or product and if it is actually used in a safe amount.

Do you think that the use of moisture enhancement by means of any injection, such as sodium phosphate, a store bought stock, or homemade stock, such as beef broth should be allowed in competition BBQ?

Some people are of the opinion that injections are not representative of true and traditional BBQ and are added to simply get a leg up on another competitor, and that it is hurting the BBQ tradition as a whole that our competitions were originally intended to promote.

For the record, I do use variuos methods of moisture enhancement in my competiton BBQ.

I do not use any form of meat enhancement at home except for an occasional brined Thanksgiving turkey, mainly to being on a low salt diet.

Ryan Chester
08-13-2010, 11:39 AM
Regardless of how I feel about it, there is no way to regulate it. MSG for instance enhances flavors but you can't see or taste it so there is really no way to know who is using it.

Lake Dogs
08-13-2010, 11:48 AM
You know, I hadn't put much thought into this subject, and honestly I agree with you.

I truly believe in BBQ being BBQ, and that's it, to the point where I really think that
greenery has no business being in a turn-in box, and I'm also of the opinion that
chicken ain't BBQ either. So, I'm probably fairly extreme in my views this way.

As long as it's allowed, I'll use it. I do use it at home, mainly because I enjoy the
added flavors that tend to coincide nicely with my rub and any sauce that we may
or may not add. Oh, as Tim said below, we ONLY use stuff in our injection(s) that
your mom would approve of. No *chemicals* perse.

However, I doubt either the slaves when pretty much inventing the BBQ technique
with pork in NC, SC, GA coast or the guys on the trail in Texas (using beef of course)
had injectors... They might've soaked it, in something, but something tells me they
didn't pull out the needle and have-at-it.

Then again, until we're all cooking out of a hole in the ground, one could easily debate
that we're already away from the origins, so where do we/they draw the line?

I like your point, and I think it's valid, but I also think we'll see ice sculptures in hades
before we get there.

tmcmaster
08-13-2010, 11:50 AM
Speaking soley for and as me, I say this...

I view Injecting as borderline cheating. I liken it to steroids in baseball. <dismounts from soapbox> That being said, one must do what one must to compete and be competetive.

When I do inject it is a mix of butter, honey, dark brown sugar and apple juice. Things your mother wouldn't object to you eating (unless it's my mother, who thought butter was evil :-P).

But, injecting is legal, as are pellet poopers, Guru's, etc. so, I find no harm in using what is allowed and available.

ZILLA
08-16-2010, 02:36 PM
That's it? No other opinions? You have to be kidding!

Saiko
08-16-2010, 02:43 PM
That's it? No other opinions? You have to be kidding!

Put this in the competition forum and you'd probably be up to 5 pages by now. :-D

To answer your first question, yes, I believe it is ethical. Personally, I don't compete, so I don't inject, or even wrap any of my meats anymore. I like the challenge of trying to produce moist BBQ without them.

To answer your second question, I'm on the fence on that one. It sure would be hard to enforce a no injection policy in comps, and pretty much everyone is doing it. If I was running a comp in my back yard though, my rule would be no injections or even wrapping! Let's put everybody on an even playing field.

deguerre
08-16-2010, 02:44 PM
Zilla, did you mean this thread for Q-Talk? Seems as if it would be more at home in the Comp forum.

ZILLA
08-16-2010, 02:52 PM
Yes I suppose you're right.

deguerre
08-16-2010, 02:57 PM
I never answered your question though. I don't compete but I've never injected for home cooks.

bluetang
08-16-2010, 03:35 PM
Although I have never competed or even cooked my first brisket (soon though), I think that injecting a "flavor" enhancer is not a bad thing. It just speeds up (turbo charges) marination, which has been done forever. That being said, I do have a problem with using non food items such as TSP in this venue, even though it was in the ham I ate today. My vote is to use real food in food.

JazzyBadger
08-16-2010, 03:58 PM
I inject pork butts, mmm. Injected pork butt.
I've done an injected brisket once, didn't much fancy it.

I don't do competitions though.

FretBender
08-16-2010, 08:01 PM
I don't think anything chemical or artificial should be allowed. Brining/marinading is as old, maybe older, than BBQ, and by injecting it into the meat is just a bit quicker than soaking, but I think OK.

Crazy Harry
08-16-2010, 08:28 PM
I have not competed yet. There is no way to know of a piece of meat has been injected or enhanced. I have read some of the rules and I remember seeing something about no pre-marinated meats but does that include enhanced meats from the packer? Is the meat required to be in store sealed packages at meat inspection? Disassembling chicken to scrape the skin and cooking separately then reassembling for submission does not seem right to me.

MilitantSquatter
08-16-2010, 08:30 PM
Mod Note : Thread re-directed from Q-Talk to Comp

It's ethical as it's not against the rules and the judges are adults who willingly agree to take a chance eating foods of unknown origins, storage, methods etc. I'd be just as concerned eating BBQ meats cooked by some who have little to no experience or care about proper food handling and preparation as I would about what they pump into the meat or rub on top of it. If you're concerned about what you consume, comp BBQ judging is one of the last places you should be.

competition BBQ is already somewhat of a gross misrepresentation traditional BBQ and any form of artificial moisture retention seems fitting alongside much of the other wacky things associated with high level comp BBQ, such has parsley beds, parkay and butter baths, sugar braising in foils, chicken thigh pillows, mufffin pans, etc.

Podge
08-16-2010, 08:49 PM
If it's allowed by the rules, it's ethical, and the means justifies the ends, especially if you win.

Alexa RnQ
08-16-2010, 08:54 PM
I'm also of the opinion that chicken ain't BBQ either.

If there were to be a BBQ uprising, this is the one I'd get behind.

luckyduk
08-16-2010, 08:56 PM
Mod Note : Thread re-directed from Q-Talk to Comp

It's ethical as it's not against the rules and the judges are adults and are taking a chance eating foods of unknown origins, storage, methods etc....I'd be just as concerned eating BBQ meats cooked by a bunch of strangers, some of whom have little to no experience in proper food handling and preparation as I would about what they pump into the meat or rub on top of it. If you're concerned about what you eat, comp BBQ judging is one of the last places you should be.

competition BBQ is already a gross misrepresentation traditional BBQ and any form of moisture retention seems fitting alongside mush of the other wacky things associated with high level comp BBQ, such has parsley beds, parkay and butter baths, sugar braising in foils, chicken thigh pillows, mufffin pans, etc.

Totally agree! FWIW if I am cooking for people or just at home for myself and not for comp practice, I do not use any injections with any "other chemicals" besides a simple brown sugar brine sometimes.

smoken don
08-16-2010, 09:01 PM
I'm sure we all do alot of things to meat at comps. I would really like to see rub,meat and ,heat....OK,maybe sauce,and...well never mind.:confused:

Butcher BBQ
08-16-2010, 09:20 PM
Do you think that the use of moisture enhancement by means of chemical injections, such as sodium phosphate, [/B]a store bought stock, or homemade stock, such as beef broth in competition meat is ethical?

Do you think that the use of moisture enhancement by means of any injection, such as sodium phosphate, a store bought stock, or homemade stock, such as beef broth should be allowed in competition BBQ?




I have been trying to find something like this to compare this to. I can't figure out if you're asking more about the use of advancement of technology entering BBQ or flavor enhancement (other than the flavor given to the animal other then what God gave it).

Butcher BBQ
08-16-2010, 09:32 PM
Maybe I should just answer, I don't see a problem.

One of the best cooks that ever walked the stages at the AR and the Jack told me this year that competition BBQ has changed. I ask how do you mean, he replied that the day of showing up with a good piece of meat, and being able to cook it properly to win is gone. With all the new style techniques in flavors, cooking methods, creative box displays, and the internet. The old ways of just showing up and having the best way to have ribs and brisket cooked to the perfect doneness is gone. He followed that with all the classes out there that many folks don't know how to test their own methods just know what they were taught.

Sorry about all the rambling just wanted to say Nothing will ever be what the Good Ole Days were or we would all be still turning a crank on the side of the phone instead of reading this with in seconds of me posting. Just my thoughts.

Alexa RnQ
08-16-2010, 09:43 PM
with all the classes out there that many folks don't know how to test their own methods just know what they were taught.

This is a very astute observation. And if a cook hasn't learned how to problem-solve and comparison-test methods, what will they do when the curve has moved beyond them -- take another class?

ZILLA
08-16-2010, 10:16 PM
Do you think that the use of moisture enhancement by means of chemical injections, such as sodium phosphate, [/B]a store bought stock, or homemade stock, such as beef broth in competition meat is ethical?

Do you think that the use of moisture enhancement by means of any injection, such as sodium phosphate, a store bought stock, or homemade stock, such as beef broth should be allowed in competition BBQ?




I have been trying to find something like this to compare this to. I can't figure out if you're asking more about the use of advancement of technology entering BBQ or flavor enhancement (other than the flavor given to the animal other then what God gave it).

I'm really not trying to steer this in any one direction and i guess it's both , David. Two questions intertwined so to speak. Actually it was my wife that asked this question to me. She is an NP and faculty at the UT Health Science Center here in San Antonio in the Nephrology dept (Kidney Disease). She is always very concerned about sodium as it relates to kidney damage. She is also involved in research which is where the ethical part comes in. Informing folks is key the ethical conduct during a study.

Now all that being said I do like all the benefits of injecting and even as one of your customers I do sometimes wonder if I should tell others what they about to eat. You have to admit that these are not normal ingredients in any traditional BBQ and that may be what some think they are getting. Just a question and nothing more.

Alexa RnQ
08-16-2010, 10:25 PM
Is there really anything (sodium, MSG, phosphates) in BBQ that isn't in about a zillion other processed foods?

Smokedelic
08-16-2010, 10:35 PM
This is a very astute observation. And if a cook hasn't learned how to problem-solve and comparison-test methods, what will they do when the curve has moved beyond them -- take another class?
Probably...it's the quick fix, but it won't keep you progressing along the curve. IMO, success in this hobby of ours has become a moving target, and classes do a great job of getting you honed into what it takes "right now" to win. But what happens when you're cooking next year or even 6 months from now and the "target" has moved?

ZILLA
08-16-2010, 10:43 PM
Is there really anything (sodium, MSG, phosphates) in BBQ that isn't in about a zillion other processed foods?

Our food is not processed and is supposed to represent an artisinal product.... You agree with that I know. I for one am trying to minimize processed foods.

ZILLA
08-16-2010, 10:49 PM
I agree Mike! That target done moved on me just this past weekend down in Victoria.

Smokedelic
08-16-2010, 10:49 PM
Zilla, if your concerns are health-related, I think there are bigger health issues with the food we cook than a little sodium phosphate, or MSG, or any other chemical that might be used to enhance meat. There are tons of foods that we eat every day that have greater amounts of chemicals than what is used in competition bbq, IMO.

If your concern is potential allergies of those that judge to the chemicals being used, then I'd suggest that those judges find another hobby besides judging food. It's no different than someone who has a nut allergy signing up to judge a cake contest. If the potential risk to a judge is present, it would be prudent for them to not put themselves in that situation.

If your concern is straying from the traditional ideas of BBQ by the use of chemicals to produce award winning meat, then I offer it is no better, nor worse than the practice of cooking prime briskets, wagyu or akaushi beef, or duroc, berkshire, or kurobuta pork in order to win.

...but that's just me

ZILLA
08-16-2010, 10:51 PM
Zilla, if your concerns are health-related, I think there are bigger health issues with the food we cook than a little sodium phosphate, or MSG, or any other chemical that might be used to enhance meat. There are tons of foods that we eat every day that have greater amounts of chemicals than what is used in competition bbq, IMO.

If your concern is potential allergies of those that judge to the chemicals being used, then I'd suggest that those judges find another hobby besides judging food. It's no different than someone who has a nut allergy signing up to judge a cake contest. If the potential risk to a judge is present, it would be prudent for them to not put themselves in that situation.

If your concern is straying from the traditional ideas of BBQ by the use of chemicals to produce award winning meat, then I offer it is no better, nor worse than the practice of cooking prime briskets, wagyu or akaushi beef, or duroc, berkshire, or kurobuta pork in order to win.

...but that's just me

I agree.

Alexa RnQ
08-16-2010, 10:58 PM
Well, there are several points there that would need agreed-upon definitions.

How processed is processed? I know people who consider pasteurization or cooking in any form to be "processing", but we're not serving raw meat. I know other people who think that storebought rotisserie chicken isn't processed, even though it's shot full of everything possible.

Is competition BBQ supposed to represent an artisanal product? What makes a product artisanal? What would be considered an artisanal pit? Are we back to holes dug in the ground?

If someone is limiting processed foods for specific health concerns, they know to inquire as to their proposed food's origins and ingredients -- that's personal responsibility. Then again, we have people whose idea of limiting processed food is to lay off beer and Velveeta for a couple days a week.

So I suppose that even if definitions were agreed upon, various BBQ products would fall at all points along a hypothetical line, and we'd have an awful lot of room for discussion -- enough to last all winter! http://www.divaherself.com/funny/shiner.gif

Butcher BBQ
08-17-2010, 06:31 AM
I'm really not trying to steer this in any one direction and i guess it's both , David. Two questions intertwined so to speak. Actually it was my wife that asked this question to me. She is an NP and faculty at the UT Health Science Center here in San Antonio in the Nephrology dept (Kidney Disease). She is always very concerned about sodium as it relates to kidney damage. She is also involved in research which is where the ethical part comes in. Informing folks is key the ethical conduct during a study.

Now all that being said I do like all the benefits of injecting and even as one of your customers I do sometimes wonder if I should tell others what they about to eat. You have to admit that these are not normal ingredients in any traditional BBQ and that may be what some think they are getting. Just a question and nothing more.
Thats what I was sure your thought was when I was reading your 1st post. My point is a lot like what Mike posted, the target is moving and you need to move with it and the need to inject is only one step in the cooking process. It won't give you a win, but it helps. Now with that said I'm sure there is die hard golf players that don't like the new and improved clubs and shoes. I didn't mean for it to sound like I was attacking you just pointing out that everything changes and at some point it will change from what we currently know as comp bbq and we won't like it.

This is a good thread and will be good to hear what other think. So for now :tape::tape:

mobow
08-17-2010, 07:33 AM
Velvetta is processed food!!. OMG. keith

tmcmaster
08-17-2010, 08:38 AM
This is a very astute observation. And if a cook hasn't learned how to problem-solve and comparison-test methods, what will they do when the curve has moved beyond them -- take another class?
Could not agree more, actually. Thomas Edison (who screwed Tesla!!!:tape:) once said that he did not fail 200 times at inventing a lightbulb, but succeeded in finding 200 ways not to do it.

ZILLA
08-17-2010, 08:55 AM
To the point of ethics. Several folks have suggested that it's allowed by the rules. Or is it? Is it simply not mentioned therefore gets under the wire by omission? The point my wife was trying to make to me (please remember this was a lively debate in my kitchen first) was that even though it's allowed by not being disallowed still leaves the judges in the dark as to what they are eating. Store bought foods have to have ingredients listed on the packaging, restaurants are "supposed" to follow certain guidelines set up by federal, state, and local agencies as well to keep the public safe. Do our organizations owe it to the people that taste our food to know what they are getting?

KC_Bobby
08-17-2010, 09:40 AM
Maybe I'm not exactly comparing apples to apples here, but most of the meats we are buying now days are already injected with some type of solution as a flavor enhancer since so much of today's poultry, hogs, cattle, etc are "factory" raised. 20-30-40 years ago, this was not so much the case (at least with hogs and cattle).

Is the question injecting period or injecting with a purchased product such as Butchers, FAB or Kosmos? If it's the later, where's the line for those making their own injections at home? Or is it OK for home made products? If so, then one could open the can of worms to rubs, sauces, mops, our own chopped wood, pits, hand dug pits, slaughtered animals ... would this be done after meat inspection?

Ok, I've purposely went overboard to demonstrate many of us have different views on what traditional BBQ is and difficulty of drawing lines within rules with all the different aspects to the bbq process.

ZILLA
08-17-2010, 10:05 AM
The question was.....Is it ethical to serve enhanced meat to judges without telling them?

KC_Bobby
08-17-2010, 10:07 AM
The question was.....Is it ethical to serve enhanced meat to judges without telling them?

Absolutely, it's already enhanced when it leaves the packing plant.

Buster Dog BBQ
08-17-2010, 10:17 AM
I agree with Bobby. Go to a local grocer and see if there is anything that is not enhanced, especially on the pork side. If you disclose enhanced meat to judges does that also include other enhancements and or warnings of potential food allergies?

I think a judge needs to accept what they are going to eat with those precautions in mind. If they don't want to don't judge.

ZILLA
08-17-2010, 10:42 AM
There are indeed products sold that are enhanced but, they are labeled so, to ethically inform the consumer. That's what this thread is about, ethics and informing.... You have a choice there fellas. You do not have to buy enhanced meat. I never do.

tmcmaster
08-17-2010, 10:47 AM
There are indeed products sold that are enhanced but, they are labeled so, to ethically inform the consumer. That's what this thread is about, ethics and informing.... You have a choice there fellas. You do not have to buy enhanced meat. I never do.
I hear ya, Zilla!!! The only enhancement my butcher does is cutting trimming fat!
:thumb:

monty3777
08-17-2010, 11:00 AM
off-topic, so I deleted my reply

KC_Bobby
08-17-2010, 11:24 AM
There are indeed products sold that are enhanced but, they are labeled so, to ethically inform the consumer. That's what this thread is about, ethics and informing.... You have a choice there fellas. You do not have to buy enhanced meat. I never do.

True and while I don't know what the percentage is of enhanced vs non-enhanced meats are, (I'll see if I have some time do to a google search during lunch) I'm going to guess that packing plant enhanced meats account for a very high percentage of all consumed meats. Thus, I think it's implied that judges will be consuming injected meats during judging.

deguerre
08-17-2010, 11:43 AM
The question was.....Is it ethical to serve enhanced meat to judges without telling them?
Modify the question a bit. Would you serve it to friends and family?

Dustaway
08-17-2010, 11:53 AM
The question was.....Is it ethical to serve enhanced meat to judges without telling them?



We can modify the rules to allow YOU to place a label in your turn in box to indicated your meat has been enhanced :thumb:

ZBQ
08-17-2010, 12:11 PM
There are indeed products sold that are enhanced but, they are labeled so, to ethically inform the consumer. That's what this thread is about, ethics and informing.... You have a choice there fellas. You do not have to buy enhanced meat. I never do.

And so do the judges.......to judge... or not to judge.....

As far as I'm concerned, the fact that judges DO INDEED have a CHOICE should end this thread.

Alexa RnQ
08-17-2010, 12:48 PM
There is a difference in basic expectation.

Consumers have a reasonable expectation that manufacturers and restaurants are required by law to disclose ingredients upon request. And in spite of this, we all know that offending ingredients are hidden by legal loopholes under such monikers as "spice", "hydrolyzed yeast extract", "flavorings" ad infinitum to protect proprietary monkeyings with said food products. Consumers also have a reasonable expectation that if they are to take personal responsibility to avoid offending ingredients, they do not order or consume them unless they absolutely know what's in them.

Judges have a reasonable expectation that they are judging food products from teams that have invested a considerable amount of effort in developing flavor profiles that they are NOT going to disclose. Personal responsibility then dictates that if a judge wishes to avoid possible sensitizers from unknown food products, they should avoid exposure.

So in its essence, the issue is not really about injecting. Offending sensitizers can be dusted or misted on, or applied in any number of ways. The issue is that these products are used in BBQ, and one can choose to avoid exposure or not. It's not like the little kid that has to have all peanut products banned from his classroom because he can't assess risk -- judges are adults who are well aware of the milieu in which they judge, and it would be utterly disingenuous for one to claim that they were shocked and unaware that MSG or phosphates might be in the food products they judge.

AZScott
08-17-2010, 12:56 PM
Rule 7 of the 2010 KCBS Rules and Regulation:

No pre‐seasoned meat is allowed other than manufacturer enhanced or injected
products, as shown on label EXCLUDING but not limited to:teriyaki, lemon pepper or butter injected.

This sums it up right there and all judges should immediately be aware of what enhanced and injected products will be in the competition. If they can't read and understand the rules the competitors are following they have chosen to be ignorant. If one is allergic to certain ingredients they have also chosen to play Russian roulette. These topics always raise a can of worms since you can get into the minutest details. Should I serve organic meat? Grass fed and finished since it's better for the animal and will provide the judge more omega 3's? Should I serve a chicken that has been rinsed with chlorinated water? Should I ensure my bbq doesn't get charred so that I don't create an excess of oxidized fats?

roksmith
08-17-2010, 01:15 PM
I guess my take.. is that as long as everything you are injecting, rubbing, or slathering on your entry is USDA/FDA approved, then there is simply no issue.
If a judge has any known food allergies/issues, then (as stated before) best to get another hobby.

If I'm injecting with Butchers, rubbing with Smoking Guns, saucing with Blues Hog, and buying USDA approved meat, then it's all golden in my book.

Now.. if you're injecting with a little rubbing alcohol becasue you like the little kick it gives... well then we've got an issue.

Bill Ames
08-17-2010, 01:26 PM
There is so much mis-information out there, that this subject is very difficult to discuss.

My father was a food technologist, and member of the IFT for the better part of four decades, and the "chemicals" that are being discussed here are simply part of my standard spice rack.

Most people talking about chemicals are concerned about side effects, I think, and even here, the placebo effect outweighs anything the FDA has to say about these things. Some people will swear on a stack of bibles that they are allergic to something. Are they? Is it real, like peanut allergies, or is it placebo? Are they really allergic to gluten, but they blame cilantro? Hard to say, definitely. Folks believe what they believe, and no evidence to the contrary will convince them. They may be right, after all. I'm not going to try and dismiss anybody's concerns.

However, I see a lot of common ingredients being bashed for no good reason, simply because people are afraid of what they don't understand. Mono-sodium glutamate looks scary, and so does mono-sodium chloride, yet people wouldn't think of cooking without the one, and they have conspiracy theories about the other.

For those that didn't get it, mono-sodium chloride is salt. It contains both sodium and chlorine. Chlorine is a deadly gas, and sodium explodes in water, but you can't live without them when they're bonded, and it tastes great. Who here cooks without salt? Consume too much, though, and it will kill you, and I'm not just talking about the risk of heart attack and stroke. Drink six ounces of salt in a glass of water and tell me how you feel. Heck, some judges are probably on low-sodium diets, but is anybody suggesting that comps ban the use of salt? It's the same with any chemical.

Phosphates are found naturally in all living tissue. So are glutamates. I could go on and on.

If it's the "spirit of BBQ" that you're interested in preserving, then why not ban pellet cookers, or green eggs? Both of them could be considered "cheating", because they're not what was used 100 years ago. Let's not even talk about "pit computers" and fans that regulate temperature! Should all of those be banned?

Like anything, too much of any ingredient is probably harmful. Too much fat will kill you from a heart attack. Sugar can kill diabetics. BBQ isn't health food.

Regarding MSG, it can actually LOWER the amount of sodium that you're taking in, because ounce for ounce, it has half the sodium of salt, and it's a stronger flavor enhancer to boot. Sodium inosinate and sodium guanylate are 100 times more powerful than salt. Sodium phosphates simply replace what was in the meat and has degraded. The fresher the meat, the more natural phosphates it contains. When you add it after the fact, you're pretty much replacing what was already there. Glutamates are in almost all proteins.

I'm not a chemist, but I do know a little about these things, so if you have any concerns, I might be able to point you in the right direction and sway you away from the conspiracy theorists. I think that education is the key in the whole "chemical" discussion, and I'd be happy to lend what I know to the groups.

As for my opinion, I'd like to see a separate category for "traditional barbecue". In that competition, you can't use computers or charcoal. No lighter fluid, only matches to start your fire and no pellets. You can't use a metal cooker, and the same meat is provided to every entrant to ensure consistency. Rubs have to be made on site and inspected with only selected ingredients from an on-site pantry. Now THAT would be interesting!

ZILLA
08-17-2010, 01:39 PM
There is a difference in basic expectation.

Consumers have a reasonable expectation that manufacturers and restaurants are required by law to disclose ingredients upon request. And in spite of this, we all know that offending ingredients are hidden by legal loopholes under such monikers as "spice", "hydrolyzed yeast extract", "flavorings" ad infinitum to protect proprietary monkeyings with said food products. Consumers also have a reasonable expectation that if they are to take personal responsibility to avoid offending ingredients, they do not order or consume them unless they absolutely know what's in them.

Judges have a reasonable expectation that they are judging food products from teams that have invested a considerable amount of effort in developing flavor profiles that they are NOT going to disclose. Personal responsibility then dictates that if a judge wishes to avoid possible sensitizers from unknown food products, they should avoid exposure.

So in its essence, the issue is not really about injecting. Offending sensitizers can be dusted or misted on, or applied in any number of ways. The issue is that these products are used in BBQ, and one can choose to avoid exposure or not. It's not like the little kid that has to have all peanut products banned from his classroom because he can't assess risk -- judges are adults who are well aware of the milieu in which they judge, and it would be utterly disingenuous for one to claim that they were shocked and unaware that MSG or phosphates might be in the food products they judge.

Agreed, but it still begs the question, do all judges in all sanctioned contests know or have available to them information about what cookers are likely to use in the preparation of their meat. I'm thinking that perhaps a Certified KCBS judge might be aware or a judge that's an experienced cook but how about the rest of them. Or the folks that participate in peoples choice events. Do we owe anyone a heads up?

roksmith
08-17-2010, 02:21 PM
Nope.. none required.

Most folks don't even know what the additives really are. You tell them your injecting with Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein or Textured Soy Protein and they'll think you are poisoning them.. when in fact, the red meat you're injecting will kill them long before the soy will.

Same folks that are afraid of MSG will think nothing of downing a Diet Coke.

ZBQ
08-17-2010, 03:39 PM
Agreed, but it still begs the question, do all judges in all sanctioned contests know or have available to them information about what cookers are likely to use in the preparation of their meat. I'm thinking that perhaps a Certified KCBS judge might be aware or a judge that's an experienced cook but how about the rest of them. Or the folks that participate in peoples choice events. Do we owe anyone a heads up?

Simple answer, No.

What ever happened to personal responsibility?

Who is responsible for what a person puts in their mouth?
That person and ONLY that person.
No one is forcing them to eat it.

If a person is concerned about a particular ingredient in their food or the manner in which it is prepared, they have a responsibility to themselves to inquire about it.

If the information that they seek is not available, they have 2 choices.

Eat it.

or

Don't eat it.

If they choose to eat it, they have ventured forth with the knowledge that the information they were seeking was not available and have assumed sole responsiblity for their actions.

It's really just that simple.

Alexa RnQ
08-17-2010, 03:44 PM
If I were to come in here and tell you all that a California people's choice event had been required to post notice that the following list of FDA-approved food chemicals may or may not have been added to some food products, you'd wet your pants laughing.

Better yet: the last time you went to the county fair and bought a corn dog or funnel cake, was a full list of ingredients or allergen advisories posted?

Stoke&Smoke
08-17-2010, 04:42 PM
Rule 7 of the 2010 KCBS Rules and Regulation:

No pre‐seasoned meat is allowed other than manufacturer enhanced or injected
products, as shown on label EXCLUDING but not limited to:teriyaki, lemon pepper or butter injected.

This sums it up right there and all judges should immediately be aware of what enhanced and injected products will be in the competition. If they can't read and understand the rules the competitors are following they have chosen to be ignorant. If one is allergic to certain ingredients they have also chosen to play Russian roulette. These topics always raise a can of worms since you can get into the minutest details. Should I serve organic meat? Grass fed and finished since it's better for the animal and will provide the judge more omega 3's? Should I serve a chicken that has been rinsed with chlorinated water? Should I ensure my bbq doesn't get charred so that I don't create an excess of oxidized fats?


P01Shooter, With all due respect, you're taking the rule out of context. Don't get me wrong, not trying to start an argument, just trying to clarify somewhat.

The full rule reads...

7) All competition meats shall be inspected by the Official
Meat Inspector during the times established by the contest
organizer but not prior to the day before judging. Once the
competition meat has been inspected, it shall not leave the
contest site. Cooking shall not begin until the competition
meat has been inspected by the Official Meat Inspector. All

competition meat shall start out raw. No pre
‐seasoned meat
is allowed other than manufacturer enhanced or injected
products, as shown on label EXCLUDING but not limited to:
teriyaki, lemon pepper or butter injected.

When the contest
organizer supplies the meat, the contestant is not required to
enter only that meat. Competition meat not meeting these
qualifications shall be disqualified; given a one (1) in all criteria
by all six judges.

The rule applies to the meat a team brings to a competition. Nothing can be pre-seasoned, with the exception of "enhanced" meats from the store.

Once the meat has been inspected, and the inspector verifies it hasn't been pre-marinated, seasoned, etc., then it is the cooks perogative to season it however he chooses, as long as he uses approved cooking methods.

As to whether it's ethical or not, any bbq judge that thinks he isn't getting some quantity of injected or otherwise enhanced meat is likely not a very experienced judge. Besides, as many have already pointed out, there is an abundance of "enhanced" meat in supermarkets nowadays, and it isn't always clearly marked. Usually, in fact, you need to look for some VERY fine print saying something like. "up to 15 percent added solution"

As many have said here, if you expect to get calls as a competition team, it's likely you are going to take measures such as injecting, brining, etc.
You only have 1 or 2 bites to make an impression, and, against the competition these days, you have to make those bites "pop"!

I don't cook at home like I do for comps, and clearly most folks here don't either. But the fact that people do is likely not going away.

big brother smoke
08-17-2010, 04:47 PM
Looks like winter pre-season stuff, lol!

tmcmaster
08-18-2010, 06:30 AM
There is so much mis-information out there, that this subject is very difficult to discuss.

My father was a food technologist, and member of the IFT for the better part of four decades, and the "chemicals" that are being discussed here are simply part of my standard spice rack.

Most people talking about chemicals are concerned about side effects, I think, and even here, the placebo effect outweighs anything the FDA has to say about these things. Some people will swear on a stack of bibles that they are allergic to something. Are they? Is it real, like peanut allergies, or is it placebo? Are they really allergic to gluten, but they blame cilantro? Hard to say, definitely. Folks believe what they believe, and no evidence to the contrary will convince them. They may be right, after all. I'm not going to try and dismiss anybody's concerns.

However, I see a lot of common ingredients being bashed for no good reason, simply because people are afraid of what they don't understand. Mono-sodium glutamate looks scary, and so does mono-sodium chloride, yet people wouldn't think of cooking without the one, and they have conspiracy theories about the other.

For those that didn't get it, mono-sodium chloride is salt. It contains both sodium and chlorine. Chlorine is a deadly gas, and sodium explodes in water, but you can't live without them when they're bonded, and it tastes great. Who here cooks without salt? Consume too much, though, and it will kill you, and I'm not just talking about the risk of heart attack and stroke. Drink six ounces of salt in a glass of water and tell me how you feel. Heck, some judges are probably on low-sodium diets, but is anybody suggesting that comps ban the use of salt? It's the same with any chemical.

Phosphates are found naturally in all living tissue. So are glutamates. I could go on and on.

If it's the "spirit of BBQ" that you're interested in preserving, then why not ban pellet cookers, or green eggs? Both of them could be considered "cheating", because they're not what was used 100 years ago. Let's not even talk about "pit computers" and fans that regulate temperature! Should all of those be banned?

Like anything, too much of any ingredient is probably harmful. Too much fat will kill you from a heart attack. Sugar can kill diabetics. BBQ isn't health food.

Regarding MSG, it can actually LOWER the amount of sodium that you're taking in, because ounce for ounce, it has half the sodium of salt, and it's a stronger flavor enhancer to boot. Sodium inosinate and sodium guanylate are 100 times more powerful than salt. Sodium phosphates simply replace what was in the meat and has degraded. The fresher the meat, the more natural phosphates it contains. When you add it after the fact, you're pretty much replacing what was already there. Glutamates are in almost all proteins.

I'm not a chemist, but I do know a little about these things, so if you have any concerns, I might be able to point you in the right direction and sway you away from the conspiracy theorists. I think that education is the key in the whole "chemical" discussion, and I'd be happy to lend what I know to the groups.

As for my opinion, I'd like to see a separate category for "traditional barbecue". In that competition, you can't use computers or charcoal. No lighter fluid, only matches to start your fire and no pellets. You can't use a metal cooker, and the same meat is provided to every entrant to ensure consistency. Rubs have to be made on site and inspected with only selected ingredients from an on-site pantry. Now THAT would be interesting!
Great post!!!:clap2:

But, for the record, I want to say that BBQ IS Health Food!!!:-D

CivilWarBBQ
08-18-2010, 09:25 AM
:thumb:

Nuff said.

Smokesman
08-18-2010, 10:30 AM
Now.. if you're injecting with a little rubbing alcohol becasue you like the little kick it gives... well then we've got an issue.

I've said it before, we really need a "That's farkin' funny!" button in addition to the "Thanks!" button.