FDA to require prescription for antibiotics in livestock

[leonster]

You know, I'm not sure how I feel about this. I hate the government, but I hate the farmers that are putting that antibiotics in the cattle. I'm not convinced that they're causing tens of thousands of deaths though.

One of those situations with no good guys....

 

[dannno]

One of those situations with no good guys....

Not really.. If a free range cattle got bit by a snake or cut itself some how there could be a legitimate use for anti-biotics.

The problem is that in the factory farms they feed the animals massive amounts of hormones to make them grow bigger and faster or to allow milking cows to milk all year long. This along with being in close quarters with relatively filthy conditions leads to udder infections in the milking cows, broken bones, cancers and other injuries in the other animals that requires a lot of anti-biotics.

 

[craezie]

I completely agree with this law. While I believe in free markets and lower regulation in general, I believe that this is an appropriate use of government authority because it protects the environment and health of everyone in a very real way. I wish that the government would have stepped in years ago, but because of croneyism with factory farming they have allowed them to continue appalling practices. Many of the most deadly antibiotic resistant bacteria, such as E Coli 157:H7 and the new strain of MRSA in the UK are directly linked to inappropriate antibiotic use in livestock. Once this stuff is mutated there is no going back, and something has to be done to slow the antibiotic resistance.

Yes, it will likely increase the price of factory farmed meat. You have to realize that the price of "factory" meat is artificially low due to government subsidization of the corn based food the animals eat and croney regulation (or lack of regulation in this case). Funny how people only like free markets when they aren't getting the government sponsored meal ticket.

 

[tfurrh]

It's official...this forum has been over run with liberals who only support Ron because of his position on foreign policy and the war on drugs. I grew up on a family farm, and I can tell you that the government doesn't have the right to tell us how to farm, period! Government sucks.

+REP. I was thinking the same thing. How can the 1st 10 comments on this page give more gov't regulation the benefit of a doubt? BLEW MY MIND.

edit: After reading more comments. I am taken aback completely.....COME ON PEOPLE. WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE FOR LIBERTY. Thread fail

 

[dannno]

I completely agree with this law. While I believe in free markets and lower regulation in general, I believe that this is an appropriate use of government authority because it protects the environment and health of everyone in a very real way. I wish that the government would have stepped in years ago, but because of croneyism with factory farming they have allowed them to continue appalling practices. Many of the most deadly antibiotic resistant bacteria, such as E Coli 157:H7 and the new strain of MRSA in the UK are directly linked to inappropriate antibiotic use in livestock. Once this stuff is mutated there is no going back, and something has to be done to slow the antibiotic resistance.

Yes, it will likely increase the price of factory farmed meat. You have to realize that the price of "factory" meat is artificially low due to government subsidization of the corn based food the animals eat and croney regulation (or lack of regulation in this case). Funny how people only like free markets when they aren't getting the government sponsored meal ticket.

Sigh.....

The reason why factory farmed meat is grown on such a large scale is because it is subsidized by government. It is being directly subsidized, and there is heavy subsidy on corn which brings down the price of factory farming.

If everything was on a level playing field, then consumers would have the option of paying something like:

$3.79/lb factory farm ground beef with hormones and anti-biotics

$3.99/lb grass-fed ground beef with no hormones and anti-biotics

OR

Local grass-fed cattle might be cheaper than shipping in factory farm ground beef, so it might end up being the same or cheaper for the good stuff!!


Most consumers wouldn't mind paying the extra $.20/lb for the good meat, anyway. McDonalds wouldn't have as big an edge on local burger places because they wouldn't have access to extra-low priced meat that is heavily subsidized, and the local burger places would more likely get the quality meat because the decision will not affect the bottom line as much. Also it might help them keep customers.

However currently, the price structure looks more like:

$2.99/lb factory farm ground beef
$3.99/lb grass-fed

That is a significant cost savings, even though most of it is made up for with higher taxes that everybody has to pay. Businesses have a much tougher decision to make.

The real answer is to get government out completely.. If I don't need a prescription for medicine, why should animals?

 

[Keith and stuff]

I wonder if this will increase some of the companies that currently buy meat in the US to buy meat in other countries?

 

[LibertyEagle]

I completely agree with this law. While I believe in free markets and lower regulation in general, I believe that this is an appropriate use of government authority because it protects the environment and health of everyone in a very real way. I wish that the government would have stepped in years ago, but because of croneyism with factory farming they have allowed them to continue appalling practices. Many of the most deadly antibiotic resistant bacteria, such as E Coli 157:H7 and the new strain of MRSA in the UK are directly linked to inappropriate antibiotic use in livestock. Once this stuff is mutated there is no going back, and something has to be done to slow the antibiotic resistance.

Yes, it will likely increase the price of factory farmed meat. You have to realize that the price of "factory" meat is artificially low due to government subsidization of the corn based food the animals eat and croney regulation (or lack of regulation in this case). Funny how people only like free markets when they aren't getting the government sponsored meal ticket.

What you don't seem to understand is that it will drive the small-to-medium sized farmers out of business. Then, all we will have is corporate farming.

 

[craezie]

It's official...this forum has been over run with liberals who only support Ron because of his position on foreign policy and the war on drugs. I grew up on a family farm, and I can tell you that the government doesn't have the right to tell us how to farm, period! Government sucks.

Most farmers these days only care about making a buck, and are destroying the biodiversity of nature by planting genetically modified plants which spread into the natural gene pool, destroying the environment through over-use of toxic pesticides and herbicides, and creating deadly super-bacteria through irresponsible livestock management.

I am in no way a "liberal", and I don't even 100% agree with RP on foreign policy or drugs. People should be free to manage their time, bodies and property in any way they see fit so long as it does not harm others rights. There are those, however, who would exploit the environment, health and lives of others to make a buck. I'm sorry, but factory farmers fit in that category, and are doing it on taxpayers' dimes to boot. Food supply is the very cornerstone of our individual lives and corporate society. When it is allowed to be destroyed in ways that are irreversible, the only people that win are Monsanto and government power brokers.

 

[dannno]

Most farmers these days only care about making a buck, and are destroying the biodiversity of nature by planting genetically modified plants which spread into the natural gene pool, destroying the environment through over-use of toxic pesticides and herbicides, and creating deadly super-bacteria through irresponsible livestock management.

I am in no way a "liberal", and I don't even 100% agree with RP on foreign policy or drugs. People should be free to manage their time, bodies and property in any way they see fit so long as it does not harm others rights. There are those, however, who would exploit the environment, health and lives of others to make a buck. I'm sorry, but factory farmers fit in that category, and are doing it on taxpayers' dimes to boot. Food supply is the very cornerstone of our individual lives and corporate society. When it is allowed to be destroyed in ways that are irreversible, the only people that win are Monsanto and government power brokers.

What would you say if you found out that this law was actually written by Monsanto for the benefit of large corporate factory farms to the detriment of small and medium sized farms? You are ignoring the fact that a large factory farm has no issue hiring a full-time vet to go from site to site and write prescriptions, but that it is very expensive for smaller and medium sized farms.

So logically, the only solution is to take the government power away from the brokers.

 

[tfurrh]

Most farmers these days only care about making a buck

As opposed to the olden days where farmers farmed for naught? I miss those good ole days when farmers became hopelessly impoverished.

the first priority of any business is to profit. And besides, you've got everything backwards.

 

[puppetmaster]

But why can't the market decide? I'd rather have cheaper beef - I don't really care about the antibiotics in my beef as long as it's cheaper.

I agree let the market decide, like they decided in the pink slime debate. I raise my own so it is a non issue with me but many would be taken aback if they were informed of how their food is grown and processed.

 

[angelatc]

People should be free to manage their time, bodies and property in any way they see fit so long as it does not harm others rights. There are those, however, who would exploit the environment, health and lives of others to make a buck. I'm sorry, but factory farmers fit in that category, and are doing it on taxpayers' dimes to boot. Food supply is the very cornerstone of our individual lives and corporate society. When it is allowed to be destroyed in ways that are irreversible, the only people that win are Monsanto and government power brokers.

Do you see what you did there?

 

[craezie]

What you don't seem to understand is that it will drive the small-to-medium sized farmers out of business. Then, all we will have is corporate farming.

50% of U.S. food production already comes from the 2% of farms. The medium sized farmers who are trying to compete with the factory farmers were out of business decades ago. The primary culprit was not requirements to produce food ethically, but favoritism and agribusiness subsidies which made it impossible to compete. What you don't seem to understand is how the market for foods have changed, and how small farmers are more able to adapt to those demands. Many small family farmers have gone into organics or direct-market models, which is far more profitable and what a lot of people want anyway. CSAs and farmers markets are bigger than ever.

Besides, some things are just plain wrong. Creating biohazards while taking taxpayer money is wrong. Your argument reminds me of the garment industry a few years back justifying their child labor because they couldn't make a profit without it.

 

[angelatc]

I agree let the market decide, like they decided in the pink slime debate. I raise my own so it is a non issue with me but many would be taken aback if they were informed of how their food is grown and processed.

They didn't decide anything in the pink slime fiasco. That was nothing but a baseless liberal slam job by the media who know how exactly to manipulate people with emotion over fact.

And yes, most people don't want to see their beef slaughtered. They'd rather not clean out their own septic tanks, too. They pay other people to handle the nastier bits of life for them. That's how capitalism is supposed to work.

 

[angelatc]

50% of U.S. food production already comes from the 2% of farms. The medium sized farmers who are trying to compete with the factory farmers were out of business decades ago. The primary culprit was not requirements to produce food ethically, but favoritism and agribusiness subsidies which made it impossible to compete. What you don't seem to understand is how the market for foods have changed, and how small farmers are more able to adapt to those demands. Many small family farmers have gone into organics or direct-market models, which is far more profitable and what a lot of people want anyway. CSAs and farmers markets are bigger than ever.

Besides, some things are just plain wrong. Creating biohazards while taking taxpayer money is wrong. Your argument reminds me of the garment industry a few years back justifying their child labor because they couldn't make a profit without it.

LOL - definitely liberal infestation. Child labor laws - really? ROTFL!

 

[craezie]

What would you say if you found out that this law was actually written by Monsanto for the benefit of large corporate factory farms to the detriment of small and medium sized farms? You are ignoring the fact that a large factory farm has no issue hiring a full-time vet to go from site to site and write prescriptions, but that it is very expensive for smaller and medium sized farms.

So logically, the only solution is to take the government power away from the brokers.

You are right, there is no solution to any of this so long as 1. Monsanto and other corporate interests are allowed to manipulate government regulators and laws to their own whims and 2. the travesty that is government farm subsidies (mostly received by large factory farms) exists

However, I still maintain that regulating antibiotic use (and GMOs for that matter) is an appropriate use of government authority because of the greater danger to public health and the environment. In my belief, it is 100% necessary to protecting my rights to life and property.

The fact that our government cannot do any of its appropriate roles correctly, due to extreme corruption, is another issue.

 

[shelskov]

Buy natural beef (and other farm products). Patronize farmers who do it right. Vote with your dollars. Support third party verification organizations that certify farms as natural or organic (no "government certification" necessary, the market can do it better).

If there is enough demand, the market will make it work. It is only through uniformed consumers who don't care about how their food was produced as long as it is cheap that the producers have been able to get away with these unwise practices.

Find a local farmer who does it right and buy from them. And don't say you can't afford it. If you drink coffee or soda everyday, have cable and high speed internet, a data plan on your phone, and a pantry full of processed high fructose corn sugar junk then you can afford it, you just need to prioritize what's important to you, wholesome food or all those other luxuries.

Transparency in farming is the answer, and finding a local farmer who grows food the right way is the best way to do it. It is harder for your farmer to get away with doing things the wrong way when he has his customers coming to his farm to buy his products.

Support CSA in your community.

Spend time growing your own food.

All of these actions will help to move our food system to a more natural and wholesome production system without needing government intervention or programs or mandates or certifications.

 

[dannno]

But why can't the market decide? I'd rather have cheaper beef - I don't really care about the antibiotics in my beef as long as it's cheaper.

That's rather short-sighted.

What if you or one of your kids got an infection that the hospital couldn't treat properly because of the anti-biotics in the cheap meat you buy and it ended up costing hundreds of thousands in medical bills, or worse, if it caused death?

I mean, I think you should be free to put whatever you want in your body and damage you and your kids however you want, but does that mean it is the best decision?

 

[dannno]

However, I still maintain that regulating antibiotic use (and GMOs for that matter) is an appropriate use of government authority because of the greater danger to public health and the environment. In my belief, it is 100% necessary to protecting my rights to life and property.

The fact that our government cannot do any of its appropriate roles correctly, due to extreme corruption, is another issue.

So giving government more power to regulate and subsidize, you admit, leads to greater use of anti-biotics and other damaging substances in meat..

So why do you want to give government more power to regulate when you know it is going to lead to greater use of the substances you are trying to minimize?

Ron Paul uses the argument with illegals - If we stopped subsidizing them and instead just let them come here to work, then there wouldn't be an immigrant problem because the only ones who would come would be ones who are willing to work and support themselves or their family. They would provide cheaper labor and thus cheaper and more plentiful goods. But there would still be immigrants.

If we stopped subsidizing and regulating the farming industry there would still be anti-biotics, but they wouldn't be abused nearly as much and the problems that come with abusing the anti-biotics wouldn't exist for the most part.

 

[Kluge]

I don't think that any laws pass anymore that aren't written and approved by lobbyists first. So for those who support this, you might want to consider that and think about how this raises the cost for smaller farmers. It also opens the door for more federal meddling where it doesn't belong.