Livestock Antibiotics

[MoreCowbell]

Thanks for your post. One thing I continually learn is that not all information a person consumes can be taken as gospel. I do not claim to be an expert in the field, but have a done a good deal of research (not just watching food documentaries) beyond the common consumer. I will definitely look further into the feed issue with cattle... but my stance on the use of nontherapeutic use antibiotics, hormones etc just to up production will be a hard one to sway.

I will continue to support my local, grass-fed and certified organic meat producer up here in MN. We've been buying from the family for 4+ years and consistently get quality meat. I'm a big local supporter and a big fan of the grass-fed taste.

I think it's great you have done your own research, made your own decisions based on that research and your personal comfort level, and have found a local supplier to support with whom you're happy.

Education is key. The most difficult thing is finding good, non-biased sources - or at least reading information from both sides of the debate. And even then, if someone wants to "prove you wrong," they will find a way to discredit your sources, if only to make themselves feel better. Again, this works on Both sides of the argument.

 

[asmosis]

I think it's great you have done your own research, made your own decisions based on that research and your personal comfort level, and have found a local supplier to support with whom you're happy.

Education is key. The most difficult thing is finding good, non-biased sources - or at least reading information from both sides of the debate. And even then, if someone wants to "prove you wrong," they will find a way to discredit your sources, if only to make themselves feel better. Again, this works on Both sides of the argument.

Fully agree.

 

[rebecacy]

rebecacy--I didn't say that the result of man messing with nature is always bad, in fact it often can be good for the short term. I said the long term effects are usually bad, and that could take generations to play out. And occasional and extreme change is very much a law of nature, it's happened throughout the history of the planet. One could also argue that man made changes has very much brought on overpopulation of the planet. The overpopulation of the planet wasn't an issue for thousands of years until the fairly recent changes brought on by man due to industrialization, mass production, the age of oil, vaccines, and other medical advances. There's no argument that these have had great short term benefits, but you could also argue that the long term affects may be fatal to the human race due to pollution and overpopulation.

This is a philosophical discussion that will never end. I respect your position even though I do not agree with it. I'll stop by saying 1) I don't want to live in a cave or a sod hut without medicines, safer foods, hot running water and TV. My first 6 years on this earth we only had an outhouse and a pump in the kitchen - never again. 2) In my mind, any negatives we have seen with technological advancement are outweighed by all the positives. Outweighed by many orders of magnitude. 3) Scientific advancement is net net a good thing because of the thorough risk assessments done during the process. The antis do play a role in making this very robust. 4) Man's capacity to learn and to do has hardly been tapped. The best inventions are yet to come.

 

[awendel]

Here is some "food for thought" : )

There is no such thing as "hormone-free" beef or any other meat, as all meat products contain hormones. Hormones are produced by all humans and animals for normal body functioning and maturation.

The hormones used in beef cattle implants include three naturally occurring hormones (estradiol, progesterone and testosterone) and two synthetic hormones (zeranol and trenbolone acetate). Zeranol mimics estradiol and trenbolone acetate mimics testosterone. All of these have been used without any effects on public health for many years. A 3-ounce serving of beef from an implanted steer has 1.9 nanograms of estradiol, and a 3-ounce serving of beef from a non-implanted calf has 1.3 nanograms. There are 28 billion nanograms in 1 ounce; therefore, the difference in estradiol is extremely minuscule.

Here are the nanograms of estrogenic activity in 1 pound of common foods.

Food
Estrogenic activity in nanograms/lb of food
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Soybean oil[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

908,000​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Cabbage[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

10,896​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Eggs[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

15,890​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Milk[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

59​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Beef from pregnant cow[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

636​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Beef from implanted cattle[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

10​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Beef from non-implanted cattle[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

7​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

Here is the daily production of estrogen in humans and the amount in implanted beef. The amount of estrogen consumed from eating beef is minuscule compared to what we produce in our bodies every day.

Item

Estrogen produced, nanograms/day​

​

​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Pregnant woman[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

90,000,000​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Non-pregnant woman[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

5,000,000​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Adult man[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

100,000​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Pre-pubertal children[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

40,000​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]3 ozs. beef from implanted cow[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]

1.9​

[/FONT]​

[/FONT]​

The FDA has concluded that the estradiol content in implanted beef is insignificant and of no safety risk.

 

[CYKOFAN]

rebecacy- Fair enough, and I don't disagree with you that I also wouldn't want to go back to the days of outhouses, or living like the pioneers and Indians out in the woods. I'm used to the modern way of life and like it. But I also believe there were physical and spiritual plusses to that simpler and harder way of life we don't often get with our easy lifestyle of modern conveniences. Most of these unbelievable changes and technological advances have occurred in only the last 150 years, and time will tell if it's for the longterm good of the human race.

 

[rebecacy]

rebecacy- Fair enough, and I don't disagree with you that I also wouldn't want to go back to the days of outhouses, or living like the pioneers and Indians out in the woods. I'm used to the modern way of life and like it. But I also believe there were physical and spiritual plusses to that simpler and harder way of life we don't often get with our easy lifestyle of modern conveniences. Most of these unbelievable changes and technological advances have occurred in only the last 150 years, and time will tell if it's for the longterm good of the human race.

Yes, fair enough --- time will truly tell!!

 

[Bobber]

This is a philosophical discussion that will never end. I respect your position even though I do not agree with it. I'll stop by saying 1) I don't want to live in a cave or a sod hut without medicines, safer foods, hot running water and TV. My first 6 years on this earth we only had an outhouse and a pump in the kitchen - never again. 2) In my mind, any negatives we have seen with technological advancement are outweighed by all the positives. Outweighed by many orders of magnitude. 3) Scientific advancement is net net a good thing because of the thorough risk assessments done during the process. The antis do play a role in making this very robust. 4) Man's capacity to learn and to do has hardly been tapped. The best inventions are yet to come.

Well said.