Re: Grassfed meat

ms_pea*** wrote:

"Mark Thorson" <nospam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:44D67BF5.7075861D@xxxxxxxxxxxx

The antibiotics are to increase the yield of meat
from a given amount of feed. It's nothing to do
with any problem with corn. Here's a link to
an article on the subject on a United Nations
web site:

http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/ARTICLE/AGRIPPA/555_EN.HTM

You should have read farther.

"High energy rations increase muscle growth and fat deposition in beef
cattle, and help to improve milk productivity in dairy cattle.
Unfortunately, the use of such rations is associated with side-effects,
such as bloat and lactic acidosis, which can be debilitating or even
fatal. These conditions are not a problem in Europe, where cattle
diets contain more forage. To counteract this, monensin is used
and, in addition to preventing the aforementioned conditions,
it also significantly reduces ammonia and methane emissions "

High energy rations would be corn. Cows don't normally eat corn
and it gives them digestion problems.

Ooooookay. It's true that the antibiotics have other
effects, in addition to their growth-promoting effects.
But the primary purpose of adding the antibiotics to
feed is growth promotion.

I didn't read the whole UN FAO report before posting
the link. It's pretty scary. It's crazy that a
terrible antibiotic like chloramphenicol would be
used on food animals at all (though banned in the US
and Europe). Meat is so incredibly cheap these days
that we should be willing to pay a little bit more
for meat grown without antibiotics. The threat of
multidrug resistant bacteria is so great that people
should not be allowed the option of eating cheaper
meat made with antibiotic growth promoters. That
cheaper meat threatens the health of all of us,
whether we eat it or not. My godson almost died
from a multidrug resistant strain of bacteria.
.

Loading