Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
MCDONALD’S IS TRYING shed light on its often-criticised food sourcing and processing practices.
In the face of growing consumer demand for transparency, the Big Mac chain has launched social media campaigns in Canada and Australia to answer consumer-submitted questions such as, “Are McDonald’s eggs organic or free-range?” and “Does McDonald’s import beef from other countries?”
McDonald’s has also added a “Your Questions Answered” section to its US website addressing various customer concerns, including the rumored existence of “pink slime” in its meat and information about which egg dishes are cooked in the restaurant and which ones are pre-made and frozen.
Business Insider has selected some of the most commonly asked questions and provided summaries of the company’s responses.
“Our eggs are not organic, nor are they free-range; they are from caged hens,” McDonald’s Australia writes on its website.
Caged hens produce the cheapest eggs, which helps keeps McDonald’s prices low, the company says.
“Our goal is to provide customers with great quality food at great value,” the company’s answer reads.
The cost of organic or free range eggs would raise the price of our food to a point that our customers may not feel they are receiving the value they’ve come to expect from us.
In the US, however, McDonald’s buys a “small amount” of cage-free eggs “as part of a scientific research project McDonald’s is part of to better understand different hen housing systems”.
“In the US, there is no consensus or firm scientific research on whether one type of housing system is better than the other, which leads to a lot of confusion,” McDonald’s USA adds.
“McDonald’s frying oil contains a small amount of an additive called dimethlypolysiloxane, which helps prevent oil from foaming and spattering in our restaurants,” McDonald’s USA explains.
Dimethylpolysiloxane is also used in some non-food products, such as putty, caulks, and cosmetics.
For that reason, “there have been individuals who have erroneously claimed that these items are also in our food,” the company explains.
The company added that scientific names for ingredients can “sound scary” even if they are safe and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.
“For example, the salt you use to de-ice a driveway is a variation of the salt you use in the kitchen, however they are both sodium chloride,” the company writes.
McDonald’s french fries are made from whole potatoes that are peeled, cut into french fries and then partially fried before they are packaged and shipped to the chain’s restaurants.
A video from McDonald’s Canada explains the process in more detail.
The video shows McDonald’s potatoes being harvested from farms and then sent to a processing plant, where they are washed, peeled and cut.
“Once the potatoes are cut, we push the strips to a blancher to remove the natural sugars from the strips,” Mario Dupuis, the production manager for McCain, a fries supplier for McDonald’s Canada, says in the video.
This will prevent some variation in our color once we re-cook the product.
“Following the blanching process we add a a dextrose solution to have that nice even coat that we see in the restaurants. We also add an ingredient to our strips to make sure that we prevent the graying of our product throughout the process.”
Next, moisture is removed from the strips before they are fried, frozen, and packaged for shipping.
Here are the ingredients in the fries, as listed on McDonald’s website: Potatoes, vegetable oil (canola oil, soybean oil, hydrogenated soybean oil, natural beef flavor, citric acid), dextrose, sodium acid pyrophosphate (maintains color), salt. Once the fries arrive at the restaurants, they are prepared in vegetable oil (canola oil, corn oil, soybean oil, hydrogenated soybean oil and dimethylpolysiloxane.
Is McDonald’s cheese 1% away from being plastic?
“The major ingredient in our signature slices is natural cheese, so the plastic rumour is just a myth,” says Nicole Thornton, a McDonald’s crew member in Sydney, Australia, in a video.
(TJ Warning: graphic images of blended cheeses. Bleurgh)
Other main ingredients include milk solids, butter and emulsifiers, which are additives used to improve the color and texture of processed foods.
“If you are referring to the smoothness and flexibility of our cheese,” Thornton explains, “that is obtained by blending heated cheeses and other ingredients with emulsifiers and then dispensing it onto a smooth chilled surface, just like some of the processed cheeses you’ll find in the supermarket.”
The ingredients in McDonald’s cheddar cheese slices, as listed on the company’s website, are as follows: Milk, cream, water, cheese culture, sodium citrate, and 2% or less of salt, citric acid, sodium phosphate, sorbic acid (preservative), lactic acid, acetic acid, enzymes, sodium pyrophosphate, natural flavor, color added, and soy lecithin.
This is one of the most commonly asked questions about McDonald's food in Australia, according to Jonathon Pitt, a McDonald's franchise owner in Queensland.
"Absolutely, there is no pig fat in our soft serve — or in our shakes, for that matter," Pitt says in a video on how the frozen yogurt is made.
The only animal products in our soft serve are the dairy ingredients themselves.
That includes milk, cream and milk solids. Sugar is added for sweetness and emulsifiers are used to keep the mixture from separating.
"Vegetable gums are also used to give it a thick, smooth texture," Pitt says. "And finally, a little vanilla flavor is added."
McDonald's does not use whole chickens in its poultry products.
The company uses chicken thighs, breasts, tenders and skin for flavoring, according to McDonald's Canada.
Some of the eggs are cooked fresh, while others are pre-made.
The eggs used for the Egg McMuffin are all freshly cracked right onto the grill in McDonald's restaurants, according to the company.
The scrambled eggs and egg whites are also cooked in the restaurants, but they contain liquid eggs instead of freshly cracked eggs.
The folded eggs and the egg that comes in McDonald's sausage burrito are pre-made in factories, then flash frozen and sent to restaurants, where the dishes are warmed before being served.
"Flash freezing helps ensure the quality and flavor of our burgers when they are cooked in our restaurants," the company says.
Widespread claims that McDonald's uses "pink slime" in its meat are now untrue. The company says it removed the substance from its meat three years ago.
"Lean finely textured beef treated with ammonia, what some individuals call 'pink slime' or select lean beef trimmings, is not used in our burgers. Any recent reports that it is are false," McDonald's USA writes.
The so-called slime refers to lean beef trimmings — what’s left of the meat after all the choice cuts of beef are taken — that is treated with ammonium hydroxide, creating the pink hue. Ammonium hydroxide is used to kill off bacteria, such as E. coli.
The trimmings are banned from human consumption in the UK, but the US Department of Agriculture deems them safe for people to eat.
Stories about McDonald's hamburgers that last years before rotting are frequently cited as evidence that fast food is loaded with preservatives.
McDonald's USA offers another explanation.
"In the right environment, our burgers, fries and other menu items could decompose. The reason our food may appear not to decompose comes down to a matter of simple science. In order for decomposition to occur, you need certain conditions – specifically moisture.Without sufficient moisture – either in the food itself or the environment – bacteria and mold may not grow and therefore, decomposition is unlikely. So if food is or becomes dry enough, it is unlikely to grow mold or bacteria or decompose. Food prepared at home that is left to dehydrate could see similar results.Look closely, the burgers you are seeing are likely dried out and dehydrated, and by no means 'the same as the day they were purchased.'"
Dr. Keith Warriner, the program director at the University of Guelph's Department of Food Science and Quality Assurance gives a lengthier explanation that you can read here.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
If they didn’t hide the outcomes to save their own mistakes than it should not have been a problem. Dishonesty from the HSE is the problem.
@Hans Vos: no the problem, as with cervical screening is that NO test is 100% accurate and you will always have false negatives. It’s nobody’s ‘fault’.
@Ciaran Bolger: I agree that no test is 100% accurate. But hiding the results so woman didn’t know their test was suspicious and ultimately ended up in full blown cancers was.
@Ciaran Bolger: false negatives might be nobody’s fault but covering up certainly was somebody’s fault.
@Hans Vos: In a blame culture like ours, informing a patient of a false negative will likely result in a legal action and collapse of the service- thats what they were afraid of , and that is what is going to happen.
The breast screening program was hit with 15 solicitors letters- best course of action would be to stop “look back” audits -to protect the programs.
@paul kelly: So you saying that women who are in the past willingly misleaded can’t have their rights executed?
@Hans Vos:
Of course you can , it just will cost millions.
@paul kelly: Don’t you think that being honest from the beginning could have avoided all the hassle. That’s the problem with the HSE . There are people, and don’t get me wrong not everybody, who think that they are more important than the truth. When it’s going wrong than they blame : 1 Somebody else.
2 Politics
.3 The system.
4 The cost.
And I can get on and on but they never blame them self.
@Hans Vos: No, being honest with a look back audit showing the screen to be a false negative will lead to a substantial payout.
Solicitors are looking at a definite new income stream.
@paul kelly: contrary to you I like to be honest.
@Hans Vos: Oh I believe honesty is the ideal , but it will cost hundreds of millions, the collapse of screning and the deaths of far more women.
@paul kelly:
Make that 16 from Monday next. There will be no collapse of the service that’s scaremongering. I never knew there was a look back service nobody ever mentioned it OR A REVIEW
I really hope that this is not:
A) Another case of our healthcare system failing women
B) People jumping on the bandwagon hoping to make a few euro!
@Jenny Kelleher: I have to disagree with your statement about looking for a few quid… in most cases including the cervical cancer cases the hse deny everything and in fact try to cover up what has happened…. nobody goes to jail, nobody is held responsible… the only retribution these people receive is a pay out… and let me tell you that it’s not an easy decision to make about bringing a case because it is a long and very difficult process.. and is even more so difficult when all you can think is,what if people think I’m doing this just for money !!
@Tommy Byrne: There was no cover up. There were false negative results discovered retrospectively (an inevitable feature of any screening programme), some women were told of this others weren’t due to failure of HSE procedures. There is no suggestion that the women’s outcomes were adversely affected as the prior false negatives were only discovered on review after a diagnosis of cancer had been made. The lawsuits pertain to the false negatives themselves. If a situation emerges where there are payouts for every false negative result then the screening programmes will be driven to bankruptcy as false negatives are an inherent statistical feature of large scale screening programmes.
@Damon16: in the cervical cancer cases it most definitely was a cover up … and who is to say there isn’t something similar happening here ? We don’t know the facts of any of the future cases that may come of this. All we are hearing is one side of the story so far… so to judge people as only in it for a few quid is very wrong
@Tommy Byrne:
Indeed ..very wrong
The medical profession and the Gov need to do a better job explaining to the public the difference between a screening test and a diagnostic test. A screening test such as breast check will invariably have some false negatives results. The Gov need to introduce legislation capping or limiting claims in the context of screening programmes. If they don’t the HSE is the HSE are going to stop running screening tests and or not bring in new screening tests due to legal exposure. This will cost many lives.
Alternatively, push for a national Irish healthcare system that looks after patients to internationally recognised, excellent standards. Adopt a class action suit with one aim; justice and improved medical standards. Don’t force individuals to take individual cases and slog through alone. Too many people end up going abroad – men who need hip replacements badly, and have been waiting in pain on long lists, for example. Don’t inflict symphysiotomy on women while the rest of the world is not crippling their own citizens with decades-old clumsy practices. Don’t sweep the outcomes under the carpet until a few suffering families have to spend all their resources to highlight real and ongoing issues and appeal to higher courts separately until they die and the files are closed.
There are lots of pros and cons to screening. Some medics (and not crackpots) would argue against most kinds of screening and a lot of unnecessary screening takes places privately (ie a money spinner). Total transparency and full disclosures are needed in public and private health care.
Do they not have ambulances to chase?
It’s no good in trying to shift the blame for problem onto women who had smear checks carried out on systemic failure on the HSE full stop.
The circus continues with the legal profession rubbing their hands with glee ,the government have to take responsibility ,this has been kept back from the media to prevent the effects it may have on the referendum .again no accountability ,put your trust in LEO and simon everything will just be fine
My god,these people think the public are fools.
@@mdmak33: Clearly some are.
Where were the tests carried out?
Were they the cheapest option?
@The Irish Bull: tested in Ireland and results read in Ireland. Totally different process to cervical screening.
have your say