or Connect
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › USDA changes names of pork and beef cuts
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

USDA changes names of pork and beef cuts

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 

Get ready to help your friends sort out the confusion.

 

http://www.brandchannel.com/home/post/2013/04/05/USDA-Names-Beef-Pork-040513.aspx

 

Theoretically, this is to help consumers understand what part of the animal the meat is from and how to prepare it.

 

From what I've seen, it mostly transfers the nomenclature from beef to pork. Still, it's supposed to have 350 naming changes so it's pretty far reaching.  

 

It looks confusing in the interim, but maybe better once it all settles in?

Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
Palace of the Brine -- "I hear the droning in the shrine of the sea monkeys." Saltair
Reply
post #2 of 15

This really sounds like an April Fool's joke.

post #3 of 15

I am fine and dandy with the pix on the label as I sometimes get stumped by a regional name for a certain cut.

We in this industry can look at a piece of pork and know exactly where the corresponding cut is located (and can name it and prepare it properly) on a side of beef.

Sounds like pork pricing is about to jump.

My daughter raised and showed hogs (4H) for quite a few years.

Pound per pound pork costs, on average, are the same as a steer (to raise from young to proper size for the knife).

I am talking about the big barn industry, not the mom and pop out in the pasture or pen home use animal.

It was only a matter of time......

 

mimi

post #4 of 15

If you really want it confusing, ask the government to do it.

CHEFED
Reply
CHEFED
Reply
post #5 of 15

I was just at a fine dining restaurant that appears to be using the new pork names already.  My wife was totally confused about the term "pork porterhouse".  So was I because I had no idea that the names were changing (and see no real purpose in it either), but immediately knew what was goingto be served... and exactly what I expected was served.

 

I, on the other hand, had the duck... and was quite happy that it is still called "duck breast" and not "duck brisket" or somethings stupid like that.

post #6 of 15

It's bad enough people misappropriate and twist the meaning of standard names for their own purpose, now we have to get used to a whole new nomenclature. 

post #7 of 15

Since already butchered meat is shipped nationally, I think it's a good to standardize the names.  Standardization is also a good way to prevent people from using oddball names to confuse buyers -- whether intentionally or unintentionally. 

 

The only thing that has me worried is "Pork London Broil."  That was a joke.  Not a good one, but a joke.  It reflects the regionally dependent meaning of the term London Broil.  For the benefit of Chef Talkers everywhere, please don't try to explain Pork London Broil to me.  You know who you are... or maybe not.  Please, no angry PMs either. 

 

BDL

post #8 of 15

Funny; very funny.  I almost swollowed my tongue (if that is what the hunk of wiggly prehensile meat inside the mouth is still being called).

 

Although I don't see th point I will be a beneficiary of the changes.  No longer will I have to repeatedly educate my wife that "a pork chop is not a pork chop is not a pork chop". 

post #9 of 15

Will i have to re learn beef cuts? It was confusing enough for non English spoken people though the Argentinean terms border the ridiculous, like, for instance: Bife de Chorizo (sausage steak literally ) for a ribeye steak and so on. 

Gebe Gott uns allen, uns Trinkern, einen so leichten und so schönen Tod! Joseph Roth.
Reply
Gebe Gott uns allen, uns Trinkern, einen so leichten und so schönen Tod! Joseph Roth.
Reply
post #10 of 15

What exactly is the meat industry trying to communicate?  You look at a package of pork chops.  You either like it or not.  If you do you put it in your grocery cart.  If not you look at another package.

 

Where is the problem?

post #11 of 15

Also, this is just pure laziness from the grocery industry.  They don't want to have to put a live person at a butcher counter to explain stuff to customers.  They want all the stuff brought in prepackaged, nitrogen flushed, cherry red, and they want the package to sell itself.

post #12 of 15

I feel that if we be patient for the next three years or so, nomenclature will get back to being standardized due to the rise of charcuterie awakening that's slowly sweeping America.  Please visit the Salt Cured Pig at FB and you'll see that many members in our homeland are making spek, homemade bacon and fermented sausages like never before.  EDIT:  The production of that stuff demands vocabulary more precise than what's been indicated at the beginning of this thread.

 

EDIT:  I feel that there's a real epiphany in store for this country.


Edited by kokopuffs - 4/8/13 at 11:24am

Best and I'm a foodie.   I know very little but the little that I know I want to know very well.

 

-T

Brot und Wein
(1 photos)
 
Reply

Best and I'm a foodie.   I know very little but the little that I know I want to know very well.

 

-T

Brot und Wein
(1 photos)
 
Reply
post #13 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianShaw View Post
... and was quite happy that it is still called "duck breast" and not "duck brisket" or somethings stupid like that.

Hilarious.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by boar_d_laze View Post

Since already butchered meat is shipped nationally, I think it's a good to standardize the names.  Standardization is also a good way to prevent people from using oddball names to confuse buyers -- whether intentionally or unintentionally. 

 

The only thing that has me worried is "Pork London Broil."  That was a joke.  Not a good one, but a joke.  It reflects the regionally dependent meaning of the term London Broil.  For the benefit of Chef Talkers everywhere, please don't try to explain Pork London Broil to me.  You know who you are... or maybe not.  Please, no angry PMs either. 

 

BDL


Funny. But - Pork butt (otherwise known as Pork Shoulder) shall be known as “Boston roast." (??) And beef-under-blade-boneless-steak is now Denver steak(??)

 

From : http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-04-05/starting-with-pork-butt-the-meat-industry-rebrands

 

"This should boost consumer appeal (i.e. sales) and, they claim, make it easier for people to know what they’re eating." Yeah. They claim. A re-brand is always done to increase sales.

post #14 of 15

I wonder how long it will take for cookbook and recipe writers to adapt to the new nomenclature. Anyone who uses current or older cookbooks/recipes is going to have to still know the old terms--as well as whatever they are now going to be called.

 

Standardization isn't a bad idea but as someone who is just beginning to get familiar with various cuts of meat--and relying a lot on cookbooks and recipes in learning how to cook them-- I foresee being very confused.

post #15 of 15

For real standardization maybe they should consider the use of real medical terminology and muscle names.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Food & Cooking
ChefTalk.com › ChefTalk Cooking Forums › Cooking Discussions › Food & Cooking › USDA changes names of pork and beef cuts