Why YSK: consuming too much sodium can lead to high blood pressure, increasing the risk of heart disease and stroke. In my country (USA), the average daily sodium intake is over 3,300mg, exceeding the recommended maximum of 2,300mg. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends an even lower maximum of 2,000mg.
Also: with the rising cost of food, being mindful of additives that increase sell weight is important.
Here is a short that tells of what’s going here. This short is also a reaction, from an independent farmer who farms chickens. I think the creator here, FarmingWhileBeige, offers a lot of good insight into what is bad and not bad in our current farming practices as a level headed not batshit crazy maga person.
Chris also explains the chlorinated chicken myth and daily unpacks MAHA bullshit about food.
I got 4 words into your post and immediately went “its FarmingWhileBeige, isnt it” and yeah, you name drop him a short while later.
He’s awesome.
“What is it now…”
and the visceral horror of a woman hammering nails into a chicken and frying it in what, by all appearances, looks to be used motor oil.
Here in Denmark how much water is in the chicken is written on the label of the packaging. It is also required to list what ingredients are used to treat the chicken if anything besides water is used.
Must be nice living in a functioning society.
End it. End it all now, Japan, get revenge. Fucking A.
I think it’s like that in the whole of Europe.
It is the same here in the states. And it is in fact the case because I’d be the labels on the chickens that I purchase.
This makes the chicken taste better too.
True, but you can salt or brine the chicken yourself instead of paying more for it.
Eh, in my experience this chicken has a weird texture so not really
Are you talking about the “woody” chicken problem? Because that’s not from this. This is effectively shipping chicken pre-brined.
The texture thing is either from being frozen/thawed too many times or a genetic issue with chickens bred to grow too fast, leading to striated meat.
Possibly. The really water-injected stuff is often frozen so that probably doesn’t help for sure.
Covers up the taste of chlorine
Chicken is not chlorinated, that’s more MAHA bullshit.
Yeah i forgot the /s that’s on me. It was supposed to be an NaCl joke but i forgot about the whole chlorinated chicken bullshit.
LOL, sarcasm … right ? right … ?
I’m sorry you had to learn it so late in life but, salt makes food tasty. You should try some next time.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that person never actually ate UNbrind chicken plain in their life, and would be shocked at how bland some chicken can taste
Okay so, since we are being serious : my taste preferences are :
1- adding salt, but also,
2- reducing the amount of water.
Look for “air-chilled chicken” to find chicken that doesn’t have this.
Also some organic brands don’t do this because of the laws around chemical use making chlorine not possible. Brands vary, though.
Farmers markets are another route.
This is a good example of using technically true facts to imply something that isn’t actually representative.
Yes, some chicken is sold with an added salt-water solution. That’s not a secret it’s disclosed right on the label. But presenting the maximum legal numbers as if they apply to all supermarket chicken is misleading.
“Up to 30%” is the ceiling, not the average. Likewise, “up to 500 mg of sodium” describes heavily enhanced products, not ordinary chicken. Plenty of chicken is sold with no added solution at all, and consumers can choose whichever they prefer simply by reading the packaging.
This post also frames the added solution as though it’s some kind of deceptive adulteration. In reality, it’s added to improve moisture retention and consistency during cooking, and it’s regulated and clearly labeled.
So the takeaway isn’t “supermarkets are secretly selling watered-down chicken.” The takeaway is much less dramatic: read the label. If you want unenhanced chicken, buy unenhanced chicken. If you don’t mind the added solution, buy the enhanced product. Manufacturing practices are not evidence of a conspiracy just because someone cherry-picked the largest numbers they could find.
The title already says “up to” for both the 30% and the sodium content. If the reader understands anything else, that’s a reading comprehension issue.
deleted by creator
Don’t be a contrarian for the sake of argument. If your reading comprehension is so good you’d know the title is intentionally sensationalized intentionally using large numbers to make it look and sound like they’re always at the upper limits.
God. I bet you’re insufferable irl aren’t you?
The literal wording of the title is “up to”. You’re criticizing it for cherry picking when it’s… not.
If there’s a contrarian here, it’s certainly not me.
Nice personal attack though!
Ya. Having “up to” in the title isn’t some magical phrase that excuses the sensational title. And simply claiming that it does isn’t sufficient.
YSK: Not all raw chicken is the same some is enhanced with a saltwater solution
This is an example of a neutral title that doesn’t sensationalize and enhance clicks.
And you started the personal attacks with reading comprehension shtick. So don’t get offended all of the sudden.
You clearly understood the title, so no, the “reading comprehension” thing wasn’t a dig at you. It was a way to say that you shouldn’t assume the reader is unable to understand the litteral meaning of the title, because that is honestly condescending.
The title does not misrepresent anything, is not dramatizing the situation either. It doesn’t even say “most” or “a sizeable share” or anything that would imply it’s a massively widespread problem. It uses one of the least dramatic quantifier: “often”. Then it says “up to” because… That is the only way to say it? Are you expecting a title to say “up to, but not necessarily as high as”? It’s a title.
Your title alternative is, however, actually dramatizing, making it a bigger problem than it is. “Not all is the same, watch out what you’re buying!” Is the emotion it creates in the first part. Then de-dramatizing with “some”.
The title of this post is as neutral as it can be. It is, literally, stating a fact. The word “up to” is indeed not magical, it is the proper way of indicating an upper bound without dramatizing.
I am shocked this is even a debate. And english isn’t even my first language.
Edit: admittedly it could use “sometimes” instead of “often”, or back up with numbers. But that is hardly dramatizing.
Okay. I apologize for the personal dig. That was uncalled for, especially since I misread what you were saying. I made assumptions and responded in a way that was unnecessarily hostile.
The title of the article is clearly engineered to provoke fear. Nobody wants to pay for added salt or for chicken to be “plumped” to increase its saleable weight.
That’s exactly what the title is implying. It throws around numbers like “up to 30%,” “500 mg,” and “7–10 times” in a way that makes them sound alarming without providing meaningful context.
In reality, some manufacturers inject a brine solution into chicken to improve juiciness and tenderness while also increasing its weight. That practice is disclosed on the label. Consumers also have plenty of alternatives, especially in the United States, where supermarkets typically carry both enhanced and non-enhanced chicken.
So yes, I think the title is obviously sensationalized. While the individual facts may contain elements of truth, they’re presented in a way that encourages readers to feel as though they’re being deceived or victimized rather than helping them understand what’s actually happening.
I dislike headlines like this because they present technically accurate information in a misleading way. They encourage an emotional reaction instead of informing the reader.
Using qualifiers like “up to” doesn’t make the presentation any less manipulative. It may make the statement legally defensible, but it doesn’t make it an honest or balanced way to communicate the issue.
I don’t think there’s any significant disagreement between us about the underlying facts. My disagreement is that you’re willing to give this headline a pass, and I don’t think you should. Its purpose isn’t to inform; it’s to provoke.
Lol it’s called a brine
Jesus christ.
I’d also add that if you cook those plumped up chicken breasts, they will immediately release all that extra brine into your dish and ruin it. Buy normal-size chicken breasts and resist the urge to go for the “best” weight to price ratio.
As someone with POTS, I for one am okay with sodiummaxxing 😎
This guy gets it
Buy halal meats. Or from an actual butcher.
Butchers are so rare around me and far more expensive. I would love to be able to afford it as it’s a much more delightful experience and the meat is always so much better.
I justify it as “not paying for extra water” after cooking. Lol
Depends on how much more you pay
There’s a butcher shop near my work that also has a fantastic café attached. The meat is all absolutely exquisite looking, but you’re god damned right that its insanely expensive like at least double or triple the price of meat at your typical store. We pretty much only ever buy their in-house pepperoni sticks and even those are around $16 a pound.
So just the same as adding water to milk
Why is this even legal?
Because the people who write the laws own milk companies, and chicken slaughterhouses?
This is done to avoid botulin toxin from being formed. It’s a much, much bigger issue than the sodium intake
Thats nitrate salts used in sausages, salami and such. The NaCl used in fresh meats is mostly to add weight and supposedly make it more “juicy”.
NaCl does inhibit botulin bacteria too. Nitrate salts have the neat property of changing the color more into deep red territory, which some people tend to prefer.
I bought a cheaper brand of meat than usual earlier this year. It was so wobbly it could have been a pillow in a water bed. Needless to say the cooked meat was salty but otherwise tasteless with a consistency of pre chewed porridge.
Americentrism! You strike again!
That shit is illegal in EU
chicken breast
ingredients: 86,7 % chicken
Chicken sold in supermarkets in America
I fixed the headline for you
