Pork Embroiled in Marketing Controversy : Advertising: ‘Other white meat’ campaign has increased demand, but consumer groups say industry’s low-fat claims are misleading.

Pork, the Rodney Dangerfield of the food world, continues to have trouble getting respect despite a make-over that the industry claims has made it leaner and safer.

Many shoppers are still avoiding pork because of the fear of trichinosis, a parasitic infection rarely seen today. They are still cooking it to the consistency of shoe leather because they believe pink pork will make them sick, particularly in summer.

And, despite changes in breeding and feeding that have produced leaner pigs, many food shoppers continue to think of pork as a nutritional bad guy--heavy in fat and cholesterol, the antithesis of a healthful diet. The debate continues while consumer groups and the pork industry await the results of a University of Wisconsin study that may show just how lean pork really is.

For the past few years, the National Pork Producers Council has been trying to transform pork’s tarnished image. In 1986, the council went to the public relations firm of Bozell Inc. for an image make-over and pumped a reported $12 million into a national advertising campaign. The resulting slogan, “Pork. The Other White Meat,” has shown the consumer a new pork for new times. The ads promote elegantly prepared foods with names such as pork au vin , pork Kiev and pork cacciatore , an obvious substitute for you-know-what. The pitch is health.

Chew on this ad: “If you are looking for a light alternative to chicken, look to pork--the other white meat. Because pork can be substituted for chicken in virtually any recipe. It’s nutritious. Surprisingly low in calories and cholesterol. And delicious. So to get something extra out of chicken recipes, try putting pork in.”

The payback for the national advertising campaign has been a slight increase in pork demand, but it also has given the pork industry a migraine:

A recently released study done by National Family Opinion for Bozell Inc. and the National Pork Producers Council showed that despite a 58% awareness of the ad campaign, less than half of the consumers (42%) believe that today’s pork is different from the pork of 20 years ago. Those surveyed in this April 1990 poll said that they use other meats more often than pork and are more likely to select chicken and turkey when looking for something low in fat and cholesterol.

The ad campaign also brought the wrath of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a non-profit Washington consumer group that filed a petition with the Federal Trade Commission in March, asking that the claims be stopped and the advertising be corrected. The petition calls the “Other White Meat” campaign unfair and deceptive because the “ads misinform consumers about the amount of various nutrients in pork and how these amounts compare to those in chicken, turkey and fish.”

Robin Kline, director of consumer affairs for the National Pork Producers Council, insists that the pork industry is not trying to mislead the public. She says that the goal is to correct the misconception that fresh pork is high in fat.

“I like to compare apples to apples,” she says. “Poultry cuts are all over the board in fat and calories. We like to compare the leanest chicken--skinless chicken breasts--and pork tenderloin. They are very comparable in fat, calories and cholesterol.”

Typically, the comparison goes like this: A 3-ounce serving of pork tenderloin has 141 calories, 4.1 grams fat and 79 milligrams cholesterol. Three ounces of skinless chicken breast is 140 calories, 3.9 grams of fat and 71 milligrams cholesterol.

But Bonnie Liebman, director of nutrition at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, says that the comparison is unfair.

“The ‘Other White Meat’ claim is misleading,” she says. “The slogan implies that pork is as low in fat as chicken, turkey or even fish. The average cut of trimmed pork is twice as fatty as the average skinned chicken breast. The only cut of pork that is truly lean is pork tenderloin, and pork tenderloin is only 2% to 3% of the fresh pork market.

“It’s highly deceptive to imply that all pork is as lean as pork tenderloin, and that’s what they do in their ads. The next leanest cut (pork center loin) has more than twice as much fat. If they want to run ads calling pork tenderloin the ‘Other White Meat’ I would have no objection,” she says.

When we calculated the percentage of calories from fat, using the pork industry’s own nutritional analysis from the booklet “Pork On the Light Side,” we found that recipes using pork loin chops, a more widely purchased pork cut, took nearly twice as many calories from fat.

For example, a recipe for new South stir-fry using pork tenderloin took 26% of its calories from fat compared to recipes for roast pork loin southwest style, which took 49% of its calories from fat, and lemon-pecan pork chops, which took 46% of its calories from fat. The medically accepted goal for a healthful diet is an average of no more than 30% of calories from fat.

During this “Other White Meat” campaign, the pork industry has also been pitching news about the so-called “new pork” to the food press. Many of the press releases and, therefore, many of the resulting food stories repeat the message: “Pork is 50% leaner than it was 20 years ago.” The statement has been repeated like a mantra, but is it really “pork” or the “pig” that is 50% leaner?

Everyone--from consumer critics to industry promoters--agrees that the pigs have become leaner. Pork producers have selected genetically leaner pigs and are feeding them higher protein soybean diets, according to David Meeker, vice president of research and education for the National Pork Producers Council. In fact, today’s average pig has 1 inch of fat on its back compared to 2 inches 20 years ago.

But we aren’t eating the back fat. And the industry is harder pressed to come up with specifics for the internal fat in the lean meat.

“The whole pig has gotten much leaner than it used to be, even at the same weight,” Kline says. “Pound for pound it’s a leaner hog. It’s a little bit of both--a leaner pig and leaner pork. Some center loin cuts are about twice as lean as they used to be.”

But, more importantly, she says these comparisons are moot because we are no longer eating yesterday’s pork.

The results of a study conducted at the University of Wisconsin, which should be available in the fall, will tell just how lean the new pork really is. The study, funded by the pork industry and monitored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, will eventually be translated into a new Department of Agriculture nutritional analysis.

From April through October of 1989, researchers collected samples of up to 14 pork cuts from 15 cities. Not all stores had all the cuts, but samples of those cuts available were randomly selected from the two or three top-volume supermarket chains in each city.

Raw and cooked samples were analyzed by Hazleton Laboratories America Inc., a Madison, Wisc. private testing facility.

Although Dennis Buege, extension meat specialist at Wisconsin and head of the project, says that he cannot release the study results, he has been quoted as saying the average amount of marbled fat is down 13% from the 1983 data.

“Our information is going to substantiate that pork is leaner for two reasons,” he says. “One is due to the changes in the pigs, and the other is due to changes in processing and trimming methods.”

The amount of fat on the meat cuts, which was 1/4-inch in the old nutritional figures, is now 1-10th to 1-12th of an inch, Buege says.

Dr. Gary Beecher, research leader for the Department of Agriculture’s Nutrient Composition Laboratory, has been monitoring the laboratory’s analysis and methodology.

“We are in the process of looking at the data,” he says. “I feel confident that the study is valid scientifically because the samples were picked up from a large number of cities and are representative of the cuts that are consumed by the population of this country.”