« Assorted links | Main | Markets in everything: terrifying yet stupid pieces of furniture »
Can people distinguish pâté from dog food?
The forward march of science continues:
Considering the similarity of its ingredients, canned dog food could be a suitable and inexpensive substitute for pâté or processed blended meat products such as Spam or liverwurst. However, the social stigma associated with the human consumption of pet food makes an unbiased comparison challenging. To prevent bias, Newman's Own dog food was prepared with a food processor to have the texture and appearance of a liver mousse. In a double-blind test, subjects were presented with five unlabeled blended meat products, one of which was the prepared dog food. After ranking the samples on the basis of taste, subjects were challenged to identify which of the five was dog food. Although 72% of subjects ranked the dog food as the worst of the five samples in terms of taste (Newell and MacFarlane multiple comparison, P<0.05), subjects were not better than random at correctly identifying the dog food.
The title of the paper is, appropriately: Can People Distinguish Pâté from Dog Food?
Posted by Tyler Cowen on May 1, 2009 at 11:02 AM in Food and Drink | Permalink
Comments
I seems strange how many people did not think that the worst tasting sample had to be dog food.
Posted by: db at May 1, 2009 11:10:46 AM
I wonder how dogs would have rank things?
Slugs appear to be unable to tell beers apart
http://www.irishcraftbrewer.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=110&Itemid=32
Posted by: davidc at May 1, 2009 11:24:05 AM
When I was in college, the most distant (and thus cheapest) parking lot was next to the facilities of a company called Frozen Pet Ingredients. I assume based on the name and the smell that they sold meat to pet food firms. The reason I tell this story though is that the meat they processed was delivered in large tubs labeled USDA UNFIT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION. Not that I think much of the USDA, but there might be a little more than just "stigma" that argues against eating dog food.
On a totally unrelated note, there is a Fancy Feast commercial that plays on the "can't tell pet food from pate" theme.
Posted by: Noah Yetter at May 1, 2009 11:33:45 AM
@Tyler_Cowen: But your refined palette can discern all the subtleties in wine ... right?
@Noah_Yetter: Please don't pimp second-hand urban legends as your first-hand experience. That myth has been debunked. As bad as the USDA is, they use no such label and never did.
Posted by: Silas Barta at May 1, 2009 11:45:24 AM
This is Ig Nobel-worthy research!
Posted by: Kat at May 1, 2009 11:47:39 AM
Many years ago, a now-deceased uncle of mine was an executive with a major food processing company. Among his duties were dealing with complaints and other comments by people living near company facilities. He got some calls and/or letters from neighbors of one factory saying that they really liked the aroma of roasting meat coming from the facility. They wanted to know what products were being produced, so they could buy them - anything that smelled so good must be delicious.
Upon being told that the factory actually was producing dog food, the compliments disappeared and were replaced by a barrage of complaints ("That disgusting smell!")
Posted by: Peter at May 1, 2009 11:53:17 AM
Dog food is intended to be nutritionally balanced and complete. This is sure to adversely impact flavor. The ingredients may be "not fit for human consumption" and that may adversely impact the flavor, but the constraint that the glop be nutritionally complete must also impact it.
Posted by: Constant at May 1, 2009 11:54:14 AM
Glad I'm a vegetarian.
Posted by: David at May 1, 2009 12:01:09 PM
Has anyone tried feeding dogs pate?
Posted by: Ed at May 1, 2009 12:05:42 PM
Does this mean that people should be eating less pate, or more dog food?
Posted by: Scott Wentland at May 1, 2009 12:24:42 PM
In Superman 3 Clark Kent mistakes dog food for pâté, and when Lois points out that he's eating dog food, Clark continues unfazed. I watched that as a kid, and to this day I'm tempted by dog food!
Posted by: samson at May 1, 2009 12:42:30 PM
50 years ago the comparison was with corned beef hash. As i recollect, the results were in the same ball park.
Posted by: Diversity at May 1, 2009 12:56:48 PM
This seems pretty silly. These people presumably have no previous experience about what dog food tastes like, so why would one expect them to be able to recognize it? It's a bit surprising that they didn't assume that the worst-tasting one was the dog food, but that obviously has nothing to do with their tasting abilities. That 72% of them thought the dog food tastes worst is just what one would expect, and any spin beyond that seems designed to try to make the experiment sound more interesting.
Posted by: Radford Neal at May 1, 2009 1:08:05 PM
I am fascinated by my own aversion to canned pet food. I don't mind the dry stuff, but for some reason I find wet pet food repulsive. I'm looking after some pets that eat expensive, all-natural canned food, and even having the empty cans in the sink bothers me.
At the same time, I am cooking up a mash of cabbage, onions and canned fish - if anything, my dinner smells worse than the animal's food, and it doesn't even taste particularly delicious! Rationally I don't believe there is anything in pet food which is "unsafe" for me to eat (there might be some animal body parts that we don't normally see in the grocery store - but I am fearless at Chinese restaurants, that stuff doesn't bother me). I even used to nibble on dog biscuits when I was a kid. Even with such indiscriminate taste, the idea of putting canned pet food in my mouth, or even letting it come near anything I might later eat, is horrible.
I really don't get it!
Posted by: margaret at May 1, 2009 1:30:20 PM
I spent several years working for a pet food company, and confirm Noah Yetter's comment above.
Pet food is typically includes ingredients that do not qualify for human consumption. This is why it is cheaper.
Posted by: Zbicyclist at May 1, 2009 1:32:33 PM
Bodes well for in vitro meat!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_vitro_meat
While it may not be true that dog foods today use meat "unfit for human consumption," they certainly do use parts that they would not use in meat for humans, such as "chicken meal", etc. That is part of why I get vegetarian dog food for my two chihauhuas (who love it, by the way).
Posted by: Libertarian Girl at May 1, 2009 1:33:05 PM
In Monsieur Ibrahim, Omar Sharif, a convenient store owner, taught a boy how to feed his abusive father on the cheap:
- use cat food as substitute for pate
- add chicory to his coffee
- reuse dried tea bags
- refill the beaujolais bottle with some cheaper wine each day
The boy's father was very happy with his diet, but committed suicide in the end because of some other dissatisfactions in life.
Posted by: Yan at May 1, 2009 1:45:46 PM
Silas, before you make grand pronouncements, check with your local ag people. "Unfit for Human Food" is a real categorical designation and is on many types of grade labels and stamps. Those rules can be found with a quick check of the USDA, your local extension agent, or even good butchers. Maybe the word "consumption" isn't used, but that's too long for the labels anyway.
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Guidanc/guidance67.htm
I know, and used to work with, some very good people in agribusinesses and the things they told me about food always made me suspicious of pate, sausage, and creamed corn-- but that's for another blog post.
Posted by: The Other Eric at May 1, 2009 1:48:22 PM
Although the dog food list sea salt in in its ingredients list, I doubt it is of sufficient quantity to satisfy a normal person's palate.
Also, without tasting the products if you were to ask me to rank which of the following charcuterie products would taste better based upon description. I would rank them:
1. Fresh Duck Liver pate
2. Fresh Pork Liver mouse
3. Canned Ham Aspic
4. Liverwurst
5. Canned Chicken and Turkey terrine
Taking the above mentioned into consideration its no surprise that the dog food placed last that often.
Posted by: Matt at May 1, 2009 1:51:49 PM
Everyone knows dogs will eat anything, including things best described by words that can't be broadcast on TV and radio, but that can be discussed in ads, and they never "taste" anything, preferring to chomp and swallow stuff that is soft and squishy. And I've noticed that small hard treats fired at a dog will be dispatched with a chomp, swallow, and that look of anticipation for the next one.
On the other hand, house cats are picky eaters. While your taste and your cat's probably differ, if a house cat eats it it is certainly high quality. On the other hand, people will chow down on just about anything, no matter how bad.
The stigma is admitting you eat like a dog, preferring to create the impression you are picky about your food, and savor its taste, like a cat.
Posted by: mulp at May 1, 2009 1:53:53 PM
I was drunk enough not to tell (by the looks) that what was on top of the cracker was not paté. But drunk as I was I could still taste that it was not paté (not a cheap one anyway). Still the dog food was not as bad you might think and if we had been fed dog food when young we would probably appreciate it a lot more now. I'm pretty sure that over 50% of the world population is eating what we would consider less tasting food than dog food and certainly less nutritious.
Posted by: Joen at May 1, 2009 4:39:09 PM
"house cats are picky eaters .. if a house cat eats it it is certainly high quality".
I doubt there has ever been an instance of a house cat starving while store brand kibble sits uneaten in their bowl.
Posted by: Zbicyclist at May 1, 2009 4:41:26 PM
Doesn't anyone remember the Honeymooners episode, where Ralph thinks he's found a new food product and wants to sell it, and it turns out to be dog food? If I remember correctly he ends up serving it to his boss. Apparently in that episode no one could tell the difference either.
Posted by: Justin at May 1, 2009 5:44:14 PM
I am not sure I would pick the best or worst tasting for dog food. Probably the smelliest though and depending on how appealing to owners, perhaps the better smelling.
Posted by: Lord at May 1, 2009 8:18:20 PM
I am not sure I would pick the best or worst tasting for dog food. Probably the smelliest though and depending on how appealing to owners, perhaps the better smelling.
Posted by: Lord at May 1, 2009 8:18:21 PM
