Tastes much, much better? I don't buy it. Being better for you is a potential argument (as the article you linked to emphasizes), but taste? Grass fed beef lacks the tenderness and marbling of corn-fed beef.

As a beef coinesseur of sorts, I strongly suggest a side-by-side comparison of the two. Unless, of course, your side by side comparison is at an A&W and a McDonalds ... which might explain your current opinion.

Tastes much, much better? I don't buy it. Being better for you is a potential argument (as the article you linked to emphasizes), but taste? Grass fed beef lacks the tenderness and marbling of corn-fed beef.

As a beef coinesseur of sorts, I strongly suggest a side-by-side comparison of the two. Unless, of course, your side by side comparison is at an A&W and a McDonalds ... which might explain your current opinion.

While I oppose such a stupid campaign, you're still wrong.

A&W beef is far, far superior to McDonalds.

Corn-fed beef has a far better taste and texture than grass-fed. There's no way around that.

Grass fed beef causes cancer. Even Oprah knows that.

US Corn-fed beef smells rancid. Alberta beef is best.

Jake, Robert

Some years ago a New Zealand beef marketing organisation (possibly the one Dan links to) conducted a side-by-side taste test at a major New Zealand agricultural field day (think county fair crossed with trade display). They hired two chillers, two bbqs and a bunch of graduate students, who quickly became the most popular guys around.

Visitors were invited into the booth, given two small slices of steak, and asked a few simple questions.

As I recall, pretty much everyone could tell there was a difference between the two samples. Most could accurately identify grass-fed from grain-fed.

The key finding was that people liked what they were used to. Kiwis (who made up the majority of samplers) overwhelmingly preferred the grass-fed. Ditto for the substantial number of Australians, and handful of Argentinians. North American and Asian visitors almost invariably preferred grain-fed.

I guess this shows that while we believe we know what we like, we mostly like what we know.

These findings (replicated elsewhere under more controlled conditions) led to some enterprising local exporters teaming up with Japanese importers to build feedlots where perfectly good grass-fed steers are fed grain for a few months before slaughter until their meat supposedly loses its 'grassy' texture and the fat content (a.k.a marbling) builds up. Local farmers are bemused by this "spoiling" of good meat, but are more than happy to take the money.

And my preference? As a farm-raised kiwi, just give me a leg of lamb and you fellows can have your steak any way you like it.

With due respect to 42 South, I'm a corn-fed beef fed American, and I prefer grass-fed beef too.

As an American city boy, I'll also take the leg of lamb.

I hate to burst anyone's bubble, but when I was growing up on my father's farm, all of our grass fed beef went to make hamburger meat sold at fast food places. He would buy all sorts of beef and milk cattle, pasture them over the summer and sell them to the buyers for those companies.

Also, no one "corn feeds" beef, there are a lot of feed lots out there in Kansas, Texas and other western states in which cattle are crowded together in small areas (mostly manure covered areas) and fed cattle feed which contains all sorts of stuff including protein from animal sources and grains of various types. If you are ever in the panhandle of Texas, Oklahoma or western Kansas you can't miss them because of the almost toxic levels of ammonia produced. I know that I have had tears come to my eyes in West Texas when passing a feed lot, and it wasn't because I am a PETA member (I love a good steak) but because of the pollution.

There is a distinct difference in grass fed vs. "grain" fed meat, it can be seen as well as tasted. I like both, but don't think that there is a moral difference too.