Grass-fed beef tastes better, and is more nutrients, but the cost may keep some shoppers away, according to an NPR article by Allison Aubrey. She noted a growing trend of U.S. farmers using a more traditional method of raising cattle by feeding them grass, not corn. A decade ago, only about 50 grass-fed-cattle operations were in the United States, she wrote; compared to the thousands today.
The reason for the increase? Consumers are buying it. While she said grass-fed beef is chewier (because their muscles are used more and thus, more tone), taste tasters say the flavor is more varied than corn-fed beef.
And, she found grass-fed beef is more nutritious for the consumer, due to its omega-3 content. Cows on pasture eat clover and grasses that contain omega-3 essential fatty acids (EFAs), which are heart healthy. These EFAs are thus found in greater numbers in grass-fed meat than in cattle raised on corn. She pointed out a recent analysis from the Union of Concerned Scientists that found grass-fed steak has about twice as many omega-3s as a typical grain-fed steak. Another study published in March in Nutrition Journal echoed came to the same conclusion. However, she said the omega-3 content of grass-fed beef is only around 35 mg, which is much lower than salmon’s 1,100 mg.
Additionally on the health front, grass-fed cattle are usually leaner, so they have less total fat content than the corn-fed cows.
The biggest downside is the cost. Pastures add costs for the farmers, which is translated to grocery store prices.