Synopsis

Another question of importance is in defining, can the level of nutrients be altered through modifications of the production system? Applying this for minerals, the homeostatic regulation and metabolism is complex and differs for each mineral (Rooke et al., 2010; and Windisch, 2002). The regulation of some minerals occurs mainly at the site of absorption (e.g., copper, iron, manganese, and zinc), whereas for others renal excretion is the major site of regulation (e.g., cobalt, iodine, and selenium) view (De Smet and Vossen, 2016). Consequently, the potential to alter the content of these minerals depends on the source, content, and chemical species of the element in the diet and all factors interfering in their regulation and metabolism, most importantly chelating agents as well as interactions between minerals that may inhibit absorption and bioavailability (Purchas and  Busboom.  2005; Van paemel et al., 2010; and Windisch, 2002).

Rooke et al. (2010) and Van paemel et al. (2010) reviewed the literature on concentrations of essential minerals in red meats as to their response to the dietary supply of various concentrations and forms of the mineral. The focus for copper, iron, zinc, and manganese, the response in muscle to increased dietary concentrations is mostly absent (De Smet and Vossen, 2016). In contrast, muscle iodine and selenium respond to dietary concentrations (De Smet and Vossen, 2016). The source of the mineral is also important. By example, iodine, most studies have used an inorganic source. He, Hollwich, and Rambeck (2002) compared potassium iodide and the algae Laminaria digitata at similar doses of iodine and reported that the organic source resulted in more than twice the level of iodine in muscle. Supplementation of selenium from organic forms also has been reported to result in twice the selenium in muscle as supplementation with inorganic sources (EFSA, 2008 ). Ortigues-Marty et al (2005) reported that a wide range in dietary Co in the diets of cattle and sheep had little impact on muscle vitamin B₁₂ except when Co was deficient. They also found that the oxidative type muscle rectus abdominis had twice as much vitamin B₁₂ as the glycolytic type muscle semitendinosus.

Commentary

The fourth release Part (4!) four resumes the biology related to the intrinsic character of red meat, this collection of (5) five E-letters summarize the biology of each extrinsic trait to set the stage for discussions of production system elements that impact each trait. Because of the pervasive impact of total fat content and fatty acid profile on beef quality, especially aspects concerning appearance, tenderness, juiciness, flavor, and healthfulness, the biological considerations and the production system elements impacting these issues are distributed throughout this text. This fourth section will focus on the Fluctuation of healthiness generated by the modification of production system elements.

Analysis

Muscle Profiling

“Muscle profiling” is defined as the precise characterization of muscles by physical and chemical analysis in order to utilize each muscle according to its attributes (Hildrum et al., 2009). A complicating factor is that eating quality varies for a position within some muscles in addition to the large variations between muscles (Polkinghorne, 2005). Understanding these variations creates the possibility of making better decisions in the process of selecting individual muscles especially from the beef chuck and round for the production of added-value products (Hocquette et al., 2014; and Von Seggern et al., 2005).

The nutrient and meat quality profiles of individual muscles and muscle groups (primal or subprimal cuts) of the beef carcass has been researched over a long period of time (Acheson et al., 2015; Hunt et al., 2014; Jeremiah et al., 2003a, b, c ; Jung, Hwang, and Joo, 2015, 2016 a; Roseland et al., 2015; Ramsbottom and Strandine, 1948; Ramsbottom, Strandine, and Koonz, 1945; and Strandine, Koonz, and Ramsbottom, 1949 ). These profiles are dictated by muscle fiber composition and their proximate composition (Jung, Hwang, and Joo, 2015, 2016a, b; Ramsbottom and Strandine, 1948; Ramsbottom, Strandine, and Koonz, 1945; and Strandine, Koonz, and Ramsbottom, 1949 ). The results of this body of work indicate that the composition and physical properties of beef muscles have changed considerably and differ according to breed (Jung, Hwang, and Joo, 2016a, b). The primary decision a consumer must address in eating beef is the selection of individual retail cut followed by quality certification, origin, production system (e.g., natural, organic, or commodity), breed, and price (Scozzafava et al., 2016).

Nutrient Profiles of Beef Cuts

Illustrations as shown in this text, red meat is nutritionally dense, but individual muscles are not equally rich (Pereira and Vicente, 2013). This is true even for the primary nutrient provided by red meat to the human diet, protein that can vary substantially in content and amino acid balance by individual retail cuts (Desimone et al., 2013; Roseland et al., 2015; Jung, Hwang, and Joo, 2015, 2016a, b; Strandine, Koonz, and Ramsbottom, 1949 ; and Swift and Bauman, 1959). Also, fat content and fatty acid profile is muscle dependent and may differ in terms of the effect of cooking on product fat and fatty acid content (Roseland et al., 2015; Gerber, Scheeder, and Wenk, 2009; Hunt and Hedrick, 1977; and McKeith et al. 1985). Similarly, individual muscles vary in mineral concentration as well as mineral bioavailability. Interestingly for example, selenium content ranges from (40 to 50) forty to fifty μg/100 g of fresh meat, and the bioavailability of selenium in meat cuts is quite variable (Fairweather-Tait, Collings, and Hurst, 2010).

The USDA has developed a database providing a Standard Reference (SR) for the (7) seven primal cuts (chuck, rib, loin, round, brisket, flank, and plate), and full nutrient profiles were made available in SR (Roseland et al. 2015: http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata). SR has updated nutrient profiles for (32) thirty two retail cuts of beef with up to (12) twelve profiles per cut, including profiles for raw, cooked, separable lean only, separable lean and fat, Choice, Select, and “all grades” cuts (Jung, Hwang, and Joo, 2016a). Acheson et al. (2015) reported the nutrient composition of ten beef loin and round cuts to update the nutrient data of the SR. Jung et al. (2015) reported the chemical composition and meat quality traits of (10) ten primal cuts, (39) thirty nine  retail cuts, and five quality grades (Korean Beef Marbling standard) according to the Korean methods of fabrication and grading from (25) twenty five Korean Hanwoo (native cattle breed). An inverse relationship exists between the fat content and amount of water present within the muscle (Acheson et al., 2015; Duckett et al., 1993; Patten et al., 2008; Smith et al., 2011). Cabrera and Saadoun (2014) found that cuts within Hereford and Brahford ranged in Fe from (15) fifteen mg/kg wet tissue for tri-tip to (60) sixty mg/kg wet tissue for the rib-plate.  Then for Zn, the range was from (18) eighteen (tenderloin)-(60) sixty (rib plate) mg/kg wet tissue.

Fat and Fatty Acids

Primary culprits of red meat considered detrimental to human health are fat content as contributing to obesity and the fatty acid profile as contributing independently to heart disease and cancer primarily.

Health-conscious consumers are increasingly aware of the amount and type of fats they consume (Garmyn et al., 2011). Beef is often perceived as a fatty protein source encumbering the consumer with certain health risks. This perception originates from the total fat content, saturated fatty acid composition, and cholesterol content of beef and their relationship with obesity, certain types of cancer, and cardiovascular diseases (Fernandez-Gines et al., 2005).

According to Scollan et al. (2006) beef could be viewed more favorably from a human health standpoint if strategies are implemented to reduce the total amount of fat and reduce the saturated fatty acid content while increasing the concentration of beneficial PUFA, especially n-3 PUFA and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA).

a) Fat Content

The first consideration is the amount of fat consumed as to its physiological effects independent of its fatty acid profile. Fat is a very good source of energy having 9cal/g. Therefore, overconsumption contributes to obesity. Dietary fat also is a biologically active component of the diet. Dietary fat affects gene expression by modifying expression (inducing or inhibiting) of genes that encode either specific enzymes (Jump, 2002) or transcription factors and nuclear receptors (Oliveira et al., 2014) involved in lipid metabolism. Among these transcription factors and nuclear receptors, sterol regulatory element-binding protein-1c (SREBP-1c ) and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPAR-α) are important because they are master regulators of lipid metabolism (Oliveira et al., 2014).

Although individual fatty acids play roles in advancing or hindering human health, the other dimension of fat, its caloric content, may over-ride these effects. Technical resulting side effects matter for example, it may be possible that certain fats created by feeding Wagyu cattle DDGS may contain healthful fatty acids, but the obesity resulting from consuming the fatty product over-rides this effect by setting the stage for heart disease. Therefore, it is important to consider the means of altering total fat content in beef products.

Carcass composition can be altered with the plane of nutrition and manipulation of the growth curve (Guenther et al., 1965; Berg and Butterfield, 1968; and Fox et al., 1972). Altered rates of protein and fat accretion, feed intake, and energy utilization during compensatory growth are proposed to improve feed efficiency and alter fat accretion rates (Meyer et al., 1965; Carstens et al., 1991; and Hayden et al., 1993). Ghrelin (Tschop et al., 2000; and Wertz-Lutz et al., 2006, 2008) and leptin (Houseknecht et al., 1998; and Keisler et al., 1999) are hormones produced by adipose tissues that have been reported to influence feed intake, energy metabolism, and adiposity and, therefore, are related to fat accretion rates. Plasma leptin is produced by fat making adipose tissue the largest endocrine organ in the body. Therefore, the concentration of leptin increases with increasing adiposity.

The control leptin has on adipose metabolism is demonstrated by the fact that exogenous administration of leptin results in decreased feed intake and adiposity (Houseknecht et al., 1998; and Keisler et al., 1999). In contrast, plasma ghrelin concentrations increase with feed restriction. This is demonstrated by the fact that exogenous administration of ghrelin results in increased feed intake and adiposity (Wertz-Lutz et al., 2006, 2008). In rodents, ghrelin causes increased adiposity and altered energy metabolism (Tschop et al., 2000). To complicate the situation, expression of the growth hormone secretagogue receptor to which ghrelin binds decreases in hypothalamic and pituitary tissues with increasing adiposity (Kurose et al., 2005; and French et al., 2006). Jennings et al. (2011) found that plasma ghrelin concentrations were increased for cattle continuously fed high energy diets compared to those on a compensatory growth system as they became increasingly fatter; however, abundance of the growth hormone secretagogue receptors in liver, muscle, and subcutaneous adipose tissue was not different between the dietary treatment groups.

b) Fatty Acid Profile

Fatty acids are deposited in distinctive depots as structural phospholipids in cell and organelle membranes as well as neutral lipids in 1) intramuscular fat (IMF) resulting in marbling between fibers within muscles, 2) inter-muscular fat (between different muscles), 3) SCF, 4) peritoneal fat, and 5) KPH (Kamihiro et al., 2015). Partitioning of fat between these depots and the associated fatty acid profiles in carcass primal cuts are influenced by animal genetics, age, sex, feeding regimes, and fabrication techniques (Raes et al., 2004; Scollan et al., 2006; and Wood et al., 2008).

Biohydrogenation of unsaturated fatty acids by rumen bacteria adds a layer of unpredictability to the challenge of formulating ruminant diets to attain predictable fatty acid profiles (e.g., 85–100% of dietary α linolenic acid is bio-hydrogenated) (Doreau and Ferlay, 1994; and Wood et al., 2008). However, some dietary alterations through the inclusion of flaxseed in combination with dried distiller grains with solubles (DDGS) appears to impact beef fatty acid profile by increasing n−3 FA in beef fat (Kronberg et al., 2006; Nassu et al., 2011; He et al., 2012 a, b, c; and He et al., 2014;).

Sunflower seed is 40% lipids, high in linolenic acid (70%), and low in oleic acid (15%), but in high oleic acid sunflower seed, the amount of oleic acid can account for (60%) sixty percent of total fatty acids. Feeding sunflower seed to cattle has been shown to increase levels of conjugated linoleic acids, especially vaccenic acid in beef fat (Mir et al., 2008). These fatty acids arise mainly from rumen bio-hydrogenation, followed by tissue-level desaturation (Mir et al., 2003; and Dugan et al., 2011). Inclusion of high linolenic acid safflower oil in finishing beef cattle diets had a greater impact on adipose conjugated linoleic acid than the inclusion of high oleic acid safflower, but there was no difference in the conjugated linoleic acid content of muscle (Hristov et al., 2005).

Inclusion of dried distiller’s grains with solubles (DDGS) in beef cattle diets can also increase conjugated linoleic acid including vaccenic acid (Dugan et al., 2010) and α linoleic acid, concurrently decreasing levels of undesirable trans-fatty acids (He et al., 2012a, b, c). However, DDGS are not considered a dietary source of n−3 fatty acids because of their low levels of α linoleic acid and oil content. Although both DDGS and flaxseed can alter the fatty acid composition of meat, neither DDGS (Aldai et al., 2010 a, b ; and Walter et al., 2010) nor flaxseed (Maddock et al., 2006; and Hernandez-Calva et al., 2011;) alters carcass or meat quality when included in the diet at moderate levels.

Most fatty acids have little or variable effect on beef palatability, but oleic acid (C18:1) is consistently associated with both health promotion and with beef flavor in a positive manner (Dryden and Marchello, 1970; Westerling and Hedrick, 1979; and Melton et al., 1982 a, b). Garmyn et al. (2011) found that total PUFA and specifically C18:2 and C20:4, although thought to promote health, were negatively related to juiciness and tenderness, whereas monounsaturated fatty acids were positively related to juiciness and tenderness. The fatty acid profile of intramuscular fat affects its overall acceptability in terms of the dimensions: hardness, oxidative stability, color, and flavor (Wood et al., 2004, 2008).

The fatty acid causing softer fat (Smith et al., 2009) and more flavor (Bureš et al., 2006) in Japanese and Korean cattle is oleic acid (C18:1cis-9). Higher levels of intramuscular fat deposition are associated with higher oleic acid content (Bureš et al., 2006; Hoehne et al., 2012; and Nogi et al., 2011). Ingestion of beef with higher levels of MUFA may result in reduced risk for cardiovascular diseases (Adams et al.,2010; and Lopez-Huertas, 2010). Stearic acid (C18:0) has a high melting point causing it to be a primary contributor to the hardness of fat (Wood et al., 2004, 2008). Shirouchi et al. (2014) found that fatty acid profiles of muscle, intermuscular fat, circulating plasma fat, visceral fat, and perirenal fat were similar for Japanese Black and Holstein steers. Japanese Black steers, however, had a relatively higher proportion of monounsaturated fatty acids than Holsteinsteers. Emerging research is pointing to the pervasive importance of total fat content as well as fatty acid profile to beef quality impacting appearance (fat color and firmness), tenderness, flavor, and healthfulness. Pullanagari, Yule, and Agnew (2015 ) reported regression models employing visible near-infrared spectroscopy to predict individual fatty acids and fatty acid groups such as saturated fatty acids, monounsaturated fatty acids, and polyunsaturated fatty acids with coefficients of variation ranging from 0.60 to 0.74.

Unlike the amino acid profile of muscle tissue that is under considerable homeostatic control and, therefore, relatively conserved, the fatty acid composition of animal muscle is more elastic to dietary alterations (De Smet and Vossen, 2016). Animal fats exhibit much variation in fatty acid profile, but ruminant fats are generally considered too high in saturated and too low in polyunsaturated fatty acids from a human diet perspective (De Smet and Vossen, 2016). But, meat and eggs are the major sources of long-chain n-3 PUFA and docosapentaenoic acid (DPA, C22:5 n-3) for the majority of the population in many first world countries that do not frequently consume fatty fish. (Gibbs, Rymer, and Givens, 2010;  Howe et al., 2006; and Raes, De Smet, and Demeyer, 2004). DPA has been suggested to be inversely related to the risk of several chronic diseases (McAfee et al., 2010). The animal’s dietary fatty acid supply (source, content, and duration of feeding) is the main factor governing the fatty acid composition of intramuscular fat and adipose tissue (De Smet and Vossen, 2016; Raes et al., 2004; Wood et al.,  2008; Nieto and Ros, 2012; Scollan et al., 2001 a, b, 2006; and Lourenço et al., 2008) The bottom-line of this research was summarized by De Smet and Vossen (2016) as:

1. The fatty acid composition of fat depots in farm animals depends on the amount of fat in the carcass and muscle. The effects of animal diet and genotype must be viewed in the context of the degree of fatness of the animal.
2. Differences among animal species can only be partly explained by differences in the digestive processes. Because unsaturated fatty acids are toxic to rumen microbes, these microbes are very effective in hydrogenating them; therefore, most of the fatty acids absorbed are saturated and their meat is generally much higher in saturated fatty acids and lower in PUFA compared to fats from monogastric animals. Specie differences also exist in the deposition of long-chain PUFA in subcutaneous and internal fat depots versus intramuscular fat. Because of ruminant unsaturated fat results from tissue level desaturation, they deposit PUFA primarily in muscle, whereas pigs are more similar in concentrations of PUFA in adipose tissue and muscle. Long-chain (C20–22) PUFA are found in both adipose tissue and muscle neutral lipids in pigs and sheep but mostly in intramuscular fat in cattle.
3. The fatty acid profile of monogastric animals mirrors their diets, whereas the fat of ruminants results from digestive and metabolic processes that produce a series of minor fatty acids such as trans-fatty acids, conjugated linoleic and α-linolenic fatty acids, and odd and branched-chain fatty acids that have unknown health consequences to the consumer.
4. The dietary supply of α-linolenic acid (ALA, C18:3 n-3) increases the content of ALA and total n-3 PUFA in muscle and adipose tissue.
5. Increasing the tissue content of long-chain n-3 PUFA requires the direct dietary supply of this long-chain n-3 PUFA by means of feeding relatively large amounts of fish oil/meal or micro-algal oil/biomass (Brunner et al., 2009; and Givens and Gibbs, 2006). A method to increase the long-chain n-3 PUFA content in animal tissues is the feeding of oils from plants high in stearidonic acid (C18:4n-3) such as primrose, echium, and hempseed (Lenihan-Geels, Bishop, and Ferguson, 2013) or from transgenic soybeans (Rymer, Hartnell, and Givens, 2011). Stearidonic acid (C18:4n-3) allows bypass of the rate-limiting enzyme, Δ6-desaturase, in that it is the first desaturation product in the conversion of ALA to its long-chain derivatives. However, no advantage of echium oil over linseed oil in this respect was found in lambs (Kitessa et al., 2012). Inclusion of high levels of long-chain PUFA in the diet of ruminants can result in reduced fat stability and the occurrence of off-flavors (Campo et al., 2006; Melton, 1990; Wood et al., 2008). Feeding high levels of antioxidants partially ameliorates these issues.

This summary provides a succinct backdrop for identifying production system elements that are elastic to fatty acid profiles of ruminant animals that will now be discussed in detail. Research on manipulation of fatty acid profile has focused on the effects of breed (Siebert et al., 1996; Pitchford et al., 2002; and Smith et al., 2009a ) and diet (Leheska et al., 2008; Alfaia et al., 2009; and Duckett et al., 2009 ).

c)Genetics

The beef fatty acid profile is influenced by both genetic and non-genetic factors and their interactions (Malau-Aduli et al., 2000; DeSmet, Raes, and Demeyer, 2004; Wood et al., 2008; and Aldai et al., 2010 a, b, c). Methods for improving the fatty acid profile of beef cattle, as discussed above has focused on the manipulation of non-genetic factors mainly through supplements in designed diets (Gillis, Duckett, and Sackmann, 2004; Mir et al., 2004; and Dugan et al., 2010). However, Malau-Aduli et al. (2000) and Pitchford et al. (2002) reported a range of heritability estimates from 0.02 to 0.30 for C14:0, C16:0, C18:0, 9c C16:1, 9c C18:1, total saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated fatty acids in the subcutaneous fat of British crossbred beef cattle. Tait et al. (2007) estimated the heritability for 24 fatty acids in the longissimus dorsi of Angus influenced cattle to range from 0.00 to 0.49. Inoue et al. (2011), Nogi et al. (2011), and Yokota et al. (2012) reported a range in heritability for an array of fatty acids in the trapezius and longissimus dorsi muscles of Japanese black cattle from 0.00 to 0.86.

A wide range of genetic correlations among fatty acids, from near 0 to1, has been reported by Inoue et al. (2011) and Ekine-Dzivenu et al. (2014). Higher genetic correlations among fatty acids observed by Ekine-Dzivenu et al. (2014) suggest common synthetic pathways. Ekine-Dzivenu et al. (2014) reported no evidence of antagonism between groups of beneficial fatty acids, indicating that they might be simultaneously improved through selection. The low melting point monounsaturated fatty acids, especially oleic acid (C18:1c9), are the most plentiful and, thus, the most important since they contribute to mouthfeel, juiciness, and flavor (Melton et al., 1982a, b;  and Smith et al., 2006).

Breeds or genetic types with a low concentration of total lipids in the muscle (i.e., the phospholipid is a high proportion of the total lipid) have higher proportions of PUFA in total lipids. Fisher et al. (2000) demonstrated this in sheep reporting that Soay sheep of the same age and nutritional background as Welsh Mountain had leaner carcasses, less lipid in muscle, lower proportions of C18:1cis_ 9, and higher proportions of all PUFA in the semimembranosus than Welsh Mountain sheep. Raes, De Smet, and Demeyer (2001) reported that double-muscled (mh/mh) Belgian Blue cattle have less intramuscular fat, lower proportions of C18:1 cis_ 9, and higher proportions of C18:2n _ 6 in intramuscular fat compared with the normal genotype. They indicated that the increases in unsaturated fatty acids in double-muscled cattle resulted from higher ratios of phospholipid to total lipid.

Wood et al. (2008) suggested that Holstein–Friesians formed more docosahexaenoic acid (DHA, 22:6n _ 3) than Angus from its precursor C18:3n _ 3 in phospholipid. Although the breed differences in this study was confounded by differences in levels of fatness of the two breeds, Wood et al. (2008) concluded that Holstein–Friesians have a greater activity or a greater expression of D5 and D6 desaturase enzymes than Angus agreeing with their assessment of the work of Raes, De Smet, and Demeyer (2001) who presented evidence that the double-muscled (mh/mh) Belgian Blue genotype converts a higher proportion of C18:3n _ 3 to 20:5n _ 3 and 22:5n _ 3 but not 22:6n _ 3.

May et al. (1993) reported that crossbred Wagyusteers had higher percentages of C16:1 and C18:1 and lower percentages of C16:0 and C18:0 in intramuscular and subcutaneous fat than purebred Angus steers. Wagyu influenced steers to have a high MUFA: SFA ratio as compared to other breeds of British and European descent (Sturdivant et al., 1992; and Xie et al. 1996 ). Xie et al. (1996) also showed that among-sire variation in MUFA: SFA is large enough to afford the possibility of developing breeding programs designed to decrease palmitic acid (C16:0) while increasing oleic acid (C18:1) resulting in a high MUFA: SFA ratio to provide consumers a healthier beef product (Elias Calles et al., 2000).

d)Metagenomics

The study of human-associated microbial communities (microbiotas), especially those associated with a disease, give reason to believe that an understanding of the microbial ecology of livestock can contribute to achieving the goals of more healthful, flavorful red meats and a cleaner environment through reducing the animal’s stress load (Frank, 2011). Culture-independent microbiological technologies now permit a comprehensive study of complex microbial communities in their natural environments (e.g., 16S rDNA and 16S rRNA methods for metagenomics; Frank, 2011).

Microbiotas associated with animals provide many beneficial services to their hosts that, if lost or diminished, could compromise host health. These microbiotas appear host specific and stable over time for adult animals adapted to their environments to the extent that these profiles have been called Temperature Gradient Gel Electrophoresis fingerprints (Zoetendal, Koike and Mackie, 2003). Dysfunctional microbial communities have been noted in several human conditions, including inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn’s disease, obesity, and antibiotic-associated diarrhea (Seksik et al., 2003; and Frank, 2011).

Examination of the mechanisms by which the human microbiota influences health and disease susceptibility can inform similar studies of host-microbe function in the animal sciences. Insights gained from human studies indicate strategies to promote not only healthier livestock through selective manipulation of microbial communities but also healthier humans (Frank, 2011).

Dysbiosis, characterized by imbalances in the distribution of microbes in a community, is a signal condition reported in both chronic and acute disease states. These conditions may have resulted from interventions intended to improve health, such as antibiotic treatment or dietary manipulation, but sometimes have unintended side effects, including dysbiosis. Accordingly, remediation of dysbiosis and promotion of homeostasis and resilience of commensal communities in the face of external influences (e.g., pathogens) may provide novel routes for improving livestock health through reduced dependence on prophylactic antibiotics and exogenous growth hormones as well as reduced adverse environmental impacts (Frank, 2011).

Both ruminal and cecal microbiota signatures have been established that are characteristic of individual animals and are associated with feed efficiency and other characteristics associated with animal viability (Sherman et al., 2010; Abo-Ismail et al., 2014; Saatchi et al., 2014; and Myer et al., 2015).

Conclusion

Please join us on the (1) first and (15) fifteenth of each month for our fortnightly delivery of insightful, informative must-reads from some of the world’s scientific thinkers. Selected by our editors.

If we had to summarize in one sentence, when talking about eating beef, the most crucial decision for a customer is to choose his individual retail cut followed by quality certification, origin, production system (e.g., natural, organic, or commodity), breed, and price. Therefore, it is important to address the healthfulness of red meat from an objective point of view. Overriding consideration and one of the elements responsible for its healthiness is the proportions and properties of fatty acids present in the piece of meat the consumer would choose. We want to proceed further, more in-depth on this controversial subject. Therefore, please join us on the (1) first of next month for Part (5!) five the final release, in order to learn more about Increasing the Animal Diets & Their Effects on Healthfulness of Red Meat. Thank you for reading our publication entirely; please share it with others who also care. We look forward to your comments and having you with us again next month; we will be thrilled in having you with us; thus, we will take your trust in us with great honor and appreciation.