Advertisement

May 23, 2013

Pink Slime: The Demise of Beef Products, Inc.

I encourage all food businesses to take a moment and give real thought to whether your business is susceptible, either directly or indirectly, to consequences similar to that which has befallen Beef Products, Inc.  BFI is the meat processor originally responsible for what is publicly known as Pink Slime.   Pink Slime was not responsible for any public health crisis – no one got sick and there was no threat of foodborne illness.  It was sold through familiar distribution channels – Kroger, Wal-Mart, Burger King, Taco Bell, huge school systems, etc., and each of us non-vegetarians have likely consumed it over the years. 

The product, which might be perceived as gross, caught the attention of some news media and popular bloggers and, ultimately, the American public.   People screamed "no one is serving something that looks like pink slime to my kids at school."   Despite being safe and a staple of the American diet for years (albeit, unknowingly perhaps), the public was fed up.  Now, a successful American company, which had employed 1,500 prior to this situation, faces failure.  Could a blogger tag your product with an unsavory name and put you out of business?  Or one of your key suppliers?  Are you prepared for that and in a position to defend against it? 

© 2013 Varnum LLP

About the Author

Partner

Steve helps regulated businesses - in particular, food and medical device companies - successfully bring their products to market. He also advises management on the day-to-day legal issues facing their companies. Steve helps his clients stay competitive while keeping a close watch on the regulatory issues that can derail products before and after they get to market.

616/336-6569

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.