FDA to require prescription for antibiotics in livestock

[tangent4ronpaul]

Farmers and ranchers will for the first time need a prescription from a veterinarian before using antibiotics in farm animals, in hopes that more judicious use of the drugs will reduce the tens of thousands of human deaths that result each year from the drugs' overuse.

The Food and Drug Administration announced the new rules Wednesday after trying for more than 35 years to stop farmers and ranchers from feeding antibiotics to cattle, pigs, chickens and other animals simply to help the animals grow larger. Using small amounts of antibiotics over long periods of time leads to the growth of bacteria that are resistant to the drugs' effects, endangering humans who become infected but cannot be treated with routine antibiotic therapy.

More at link...

The noose tightens...

-t

[angelatc]

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.

[Lishy]

You know, I MIGHT agree with this, if I understand it correctly. A farmer should require a prescription from a Vet before giving medicine to his animals? What's the catch?

[angelatc]

You know, I MIGHT agree with this, if I understand it correctly. A farmer should require a prescription from a Vet before giving medicine to his animals? What's the catch?

Well, for starts, most of us aren't convinced that we should need a prescription for anything.

[tttppp]

I'll bet there are better ways to solve this problem. However, if this law is actually enforced, it could be positive. If it prevents farmers from pumping up its animals with a bunch of drugs, then thats great. I'd much rather have REAL food.

[angelatc]

I'll bet there are better ways to solve this problem. However, if this law is actually enforced, it could be positive. If it prevents farmers from pumping up its animals with a bunch of drugs, then thats great. I'd much rather have REAL food.

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.

[tttppp]

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.

Like I said, there are better ways to do this. I have an idea that would motivate the market to eliminate fake food by themselves, without regulations. That would be the best solution.

However, as a consumer, I would appreciate being able to pick up any piece of meat and know its mostly healthy. Meat with crap in it may be cheaper, but it will cost you more in medical expenses in the long run.

Be creative. I'm sure there are many other ways too where you could eliminate garbage in your food. Another idea would be to have better disclosure. And hold companies accountable for it. There are plenty of companies which advertise their meat as antibiotic free, however I know they are full of shit, and nobody does anything about it.

[Keith and stuff]

This new regulation is going to increase the cost of meat and eggs. For example

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/science/fda-to-require-prescription-for-antibiotics-in-livestock-630927/


Christine Hoang of the American Veterinary Medical Association said her organization supported the new rules, although she said some remote or small farmers might have trouble abiding by the rules, since there are fewer than 10,000 large-animal veterinarians in the United States.


But R.C. Hunt, president of the National Pork Producers Council, said small farmers and ranchers would have a hard time following the new rules, which "could eliminate antibiotics uses that are extremely important to the health of animals."

[luctor-et-emergo]

Well one of the main reasons why antibiotics stop working...
Is people put antibiotics in anything that doesn't look 100% okay.

So from this point of view it's very interesting. Although it would be better if the public could simply choose to buy their meat from a responsible farmer. There was some antibiotic resistant bacteria in chicken meat here in Europe.. Nearly all chickens that were non-organic had this bacteria in them (those are fed antibiotics on default), this was over 90%. In organic raised chickens, it was under 5% that carried this bacteria.

From my perspective, any reduction in the use of antibiotics is good. The more we use them, the more likely they are to stop working. And then we have to find another antibiotic again...

But this is one thing the government certainly does NOT have to do. In the Netherlands/Europe they found a semi-fascist way to resolve this problem. There's a member funded regulator called 'SKAL', although they receive their rules and authority from the European union, the actual organization is funded by the farmers that want to use the 'SKAL' label(organic equivalent). So I'm glad something like this exists, although some of the rules are just making the whole 'organic' thing mega expensive. One example, a chicken that's raised organically can't get antibiotics or hormones, it has to eat 100% organic varied foods and has to have around 10sqft indoor space and 40sqft outdoor space, about 60 times as much as a factory farmed chicken. But it's only 4 times as expensive in the end... (and for some weird reason the farmer also makes more).

Anyways, the only thing that appears to be missing over here, is competition in labels. So the market and the people can choose. I definitely see people interested in where their food comes from again.. Which is a good thing.

[LibertyEagle]

This new regulation is going to increase the cost of meat and eggs.

Yup. This new requirement is not good at all.

[Brett85]

I'll bet there are better ways to solve this problem. However, if this law is actually enforced, it could be positive. If it prevents farmers from pumping up its animals with a bunch of drugs, then thats great. I'd much rather have REAL food.

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.

[Kotin]

It's foolish. Educate people about quality meat and food in general and the free market demands it.. Otherwise avoid it.. STOP USING FORCE!!

[angelatc]

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.

I am so happy to see all of us here in a single thread, finally.

[DerailingDaTrain]

I don't agree with the government doing this but I also don't like them pumping antibiotics into cattle so I'm split on this.

[Kotin]

I don't agree with the government doing this but I also don't like them pumping antibiotics into cattle so I'm split on this.

Thats how easy it is to stop your critical thinking process.. Who cares what YOU don't like.. YOU cannot force it on ME

[angelatc]

Like I said, there are better ways to do this. I have an idea that would motivate the market to eliminate fake food by themselves, without regulations. That would be the best solution.

However, as a consumer, I would appreciate being able to pick up any piece of meat and know its mostly healthy. Meat with crap in it may be cheaper, but it will cost you more in medical expenses in the long run. .

I don't believe the propaganda about medical costs. Again, Americans are living longer now than at any point in history, including the era in time when 85% of the population farmed their own food. Anecdotal evidence supports my case, not yours. I think that preservatives and antibiotics make the odds of meat being contaminated smaller, not bigger.

But more importantly, you're saying here is that when it really comes down to it, you don't really mind if the government takes away choices in the market, as long as you think society is better off as a result, using criteria weighed as you believe they should be weighed.

This is definitely the liberal infestation. When it comes down to it, they believe they are smarter than the rest of the population, and therefore it's ok to use government to do things their way. After all, it's for the common good.

[DerailingDaTrain]

Thats how easy it is to stop your critical thinking process.. Who cares what YOU don't like.. YOU cannot force it on ME

I guess you missed the part where I said I don't like the government doing this specifically because they are telling them they need a prescription. I didn't force anything on anyone and even though I don't like them doing this to cattle I don't support the FDA in this scenario at all. Just because I don't like something doesn't mean I want the government to create and enforce a law to stop it. So I actually agree with you.

[azxd]

Many have been trying to FORCE the FDA to make labels that specify "origin" a required thing ... Another cost to be incurred by the consumer.
This is no different, from a cost perspective, yet with the industrialized farming situation we now live with, it is very hard, if not outright impossible, for many to obtain food from a local trustable source.

I have no idea if this is actually a good thing, but when multiple States worth of consumers can fall victim to salmonella and other forms of bacteria, due to the large scale industrialization of our food sources ... Some form of control needs to be implemented.
A true free market, as it stands now, would bring with it hardship and death, long before the market could react, IMO.

[rockerrockstar]

Liberals voting for Ron is a good thing. I know I voted for Obama last election and considered voting for Ron in 2008 by write in. Ron dropped out and Obama had a much better chance to win.

Maybe there is other reasons they want to vote for Ron. I know for me it is the anti war stance, his willingness to try to save the dollar, get spending under control, Ron is the only one proposing real cuts, and defending peoples rights for freedom.

I consider my self more of a independant voter. I did vote for Obama last election but considered writing in Ron in 2008.

[dannno]

This new regulation is going to increase the cost of meat and eggs. For example

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/science/fda-to-require-prescription-for-antibiotics-in-livestock-630927/

This is how they run the little guy out of business..

The factory farms can hire a vet to work on-site and administer the anti-biotics to as many animals as they want.

The small farmer has to pay exorbitant amounts for legitimate use of anti-biotics on their farm animals.

[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.

[brandon]

Antibiotic resistant bacteria would likely be less of a problem if the government would lower the barriers into research for alternative treatments such as phage therapy, and stop directing research through their grants. Anyway, will this be the death blow for the dollar menu?

For those claiming "mind your own business", I think that sometimes public health concerns do require intervention. If the retard next door to me has built an explosive meth lab, I'm going to want to shut it down by force before he kills us all.

[tttppp]

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.

Maybe you missed my post where I said you can motivate farmers to produce real food without the use of any regulations. I don't see how this isn't consistent with Ron Paul.

[tttppp]

I don't believe the propaganda about medical costs. Again, Americans are living longer now than at any point in history, including the era in time when 85% of the population farmed their own food. Anecdotal evidence supports my case, not yours. I think that preservatives and antibiotics make the odds of meat being contaminated smaller, not bigger.

But more importantly, you're saying here is that when it really comes down to it, you don't really mind if the government takes away choices in the market, as long as you think society is better off as a result, using criteria weighed as you believe they should be weighed.

This is definitely the liberal infestation. When it comes down to it, they believe they are smarter than the rest of the population, and therefore it's ok to use government to do things their way. After all, it's for the common good.

People may be living longer now, but medical costs have gone way up. This is because people are eating unhealthier food and the medical industry only covers up the problems, it doesn't cure anything. The facts support my case, not yours.

Eating meat with antibiotics is roughly the same as getting a shot of antibiotics. If you required a shot of antibiotics to eat meat, I'm sure you would prefer to eat something else.

Also, what is wrong with my idea of eliminating all regulations and putting in a system that will motivate farmers to produce real food without any regulations?

[hard@work]

People may be living longer now, but medical costs have gone way up. This is because people are eating unhealthier food and the medical industry only covers up the problems, it doesn't cure anything.

I'm not commenting on any other part of this discussion. This however is the absolute truth. The SAD (standard American diet) diet is creating a lot of health problems with a lot of people very early on. And then it is being masked by pharmas.

Even Dr. Paul comes out and says this.

[brandon]

Eating meat with antibiotics is roughly the same as getting a shot of antibiotics. If you required a shot of antibiotics to eat meat, I'm sure you would prefer to eat something else.


I'll remember this next time I get a bacterial infection. I'll skip the doctors visit and just eat hamburger all day. Thanks!

[Brett85]

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.

Most farmers care about making enough money to support their families. Hardly anyone gets rich from farming, except for a few big corporate farmers. A law like this will only hurt the small farmers, not the big corporate farmers. Even going beyond this particular law, where is the Constitutional authority for the FDA to even exist? I didn't see that when I read through article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution. Where is the Constitutional authority for the EPA? The EPA has no authority to regulate herbicides and pesticides, because the EPA has no authority to even exist. Also, how exactly do you expect farmers to farm without using herbicides and pesticides?

[Anti Federalist]

A true free market, as it stands now, would bring with it hardship and death, long before the market could react, IMO.

If I was the kind of guy that put out of context quotes in my sig line in a lame attempt to try and embarrass people, that one would be a killer.

But I'm not that kind of guy.

:rolleyes:

[tttppp]

I'll remember this next time I get a bacterial infection. I'll skip the doctors visit and just eat hamburger all day. Thanks!

A hamburger is about as effective as most medication you get from the doctors, and has much less side effects. If you want real results, I'd go to an herbologist.

[wrestlingwes_8]

We wouldn't be faced with this problem if we just raised the NATIVE ruminant of North America for meat production - BISON!!

1. They do not get sick nearly as much as cattle do since they are adapted to this environment
2. They utilize the available grass in a pasture more efficiently and effectively (they eat a wider range of grasses and also do not hang around water sources like cattle do)
3. They do not need to be fed in the winter, unless the conditions become very extreme
4. They have significantly fewer problems giving birth

And plus, they are healthier for you! And taste better in my opinion, nothing beats a good ol' Bison Burger here in South Dakota.

[QuickZ06]

If the government is involved, it cannot be for the good. Everything they do has a motive behind it.

[rockerrockstar]

We should be worried about the growth hormones they give these animals because the meat can cause us to get cancer. Even milk that has hormones in it can cause cancer. I have seen articles on it not long ago. I am sure you guys probably read about it too. Scary stuff.

http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/general/milk.htm

http://cincovidas.com/growth-hormones-in-beef-potential-cancer-causers-choose-organic/

[tttppp]

We should be worried about the growth hormones they give these animals because the meat can cause us to get cancer. Even milk that has hormones in it can cause cancer. I have seen articles on it not long ago. I am sure you guys probably read about it too. Scary stuff.

http://www.preventcancer.com/consumers/general/milk.htm

http://cincovidas.com/growth-hormones-in-beef-potential-cancer-causers-choose-organic/

I agree. None of this garbage should be in our food. Instead of feeding them fake crap, why not give them what they eat naturally?

[Feeding the Abscess]

We wouldn't be faced with this problem if we just raised the NATIVE ruminant of North America for meat production - BISON!!

1. They do not get sick nearly as much as cattle do since they are adapted to this environment
2. They utilize the available grass in a pasture more efficiently and effectively (they eat a wider range of grasses and also do not hang around water sources like cattle do)
3. They do not need to be fed in the winter, unless the conditions become very extreme
4. They have significantly fewer problems giving birth

And plus, they are healthier for you! And taste better in my opinion, nothing beats a good ol' Bison Burger here in South Dakota.

Bison meat tends to be much leaner, too. It's so much better than beef.

[Feeding the Abscess]

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.

Except for when it regulates abortion, marriage, a massive military costing hundreds of billions a year, police, a secret prison system where alleged terrorists are tortured and often killed, and the Intelligence State, a court system, intellectual property...

[Brett85]

Except for when it regulates abortion, marriage, a massive military costing hundreds of billions a year, police, a secret prison system where alleged terrorists are tortured and often killed, and the Intelligence State, a court system, intellectual property...

Even Ron Paul supports regulating some of those things, such as abortion and marriage. He believes that we should have a strong military, local police, intelligence agencies, a court system, and intellectual property. He doesn't support secret prisons, and neither do I. But, even though I'm not an anarchist, I'm still more libertarian than most of the people posting in this thread and the minimum wage thread. How exactly can these people arguing in favor of FDA regulations and increasing the minimum wage call themselves "libertarians" in any way?

[Feeding the Abscess]

Even Ron Paul supports regulating some of those things, such as abortion and marriage. He believes that we should have a strong military, local police, intelligence agencies, a court system, and intellectual property. He doesn't support secret prisons, and neither do I. But, even though I'm not an anarchist, I'm still more libertarian than most of the people posting in this thread and the minimum wage thread. How exactly can these people arguing in favor of FDA regulations and increasing the minimum wage call themselves "libertarians" in any way?

Just exhibiting the macho flash. You're right, though, the approval of the FDA regulations in this thread is appalling.

And I'm happy to see that you've changed your position on Gitmo. For liberty!

[Brett85]

Just exhibiting the macho flash. You're right, though, the approval of the FDA regulations in this thread is appalling.

And I'm happy to see that you've changed your position on Gitmo. For liberty!

Gitmo isn't a secret prison. I thought you were talking about the secret prisons we have in Europe. But, my position isn't that Gitmo should stay open forever. My position is that all of the prisoners at Gitmo should be tried in military tribunals as soon as possible. Those who are found innocent should be released to their country of origin, and those who are found guilty should be executed. Once all of the prisoners have been tried, I would support closing down Gitmo.

[tttppp]

Even Ron Paul supports regulating some of those things, such as abortion and marriage. He believes that we should have a strong military, local police, intelligence agencies, a court system, and intellectual property. He doesn't support secret prisons, and neither do I. But, even though I'm not an anarchist, I'm still more libertarian than most of the people posting in this thread and the minimum wage thread. How exactly can these people arguing in favor of FDA regulations and increasing the minimum wage call themselves "libertarians" in any way?

There is a difference between someone who likes a couple of regulations than someone who wants to overregulate everything to death.

[tod evans]

Keep the government off our farms.

Buy locally grown meat, and for you city dwellers........know your butcher!

Wanting to buy "suits your notion of pure" beef from Wal-Mart for $1.99lb just isn't going to happen.

There's an old saying in the trades that applies to food too; Good/Fast/Cheap.....pick two.

[dannno]

We wouldn't be faced with this problem if we just raised the NATIVE ruminant of North America for meat production - BISON!!

1. They do not get sick nearly as much as cattle do since they are adapted to this environment
2. They utilize the available grass in a pasture more efficiently and effectively (they eat a wider range of grasses and also do not hang around water sources like cattle do)
3. They do not need to be fed in the winter, unless the conditions become very extreme
4. They have significantly fewer problems giving birth

And plus, they are healthier for you! And taste better in my opinion, nothing beats a good ol' Bison Burger here in South Dakota.


+Rep I agree 100% with this post. Even though I only eat meat a few times a year, bison is always a favorite of mine to be on the menu.

If I ever started eating more meat, it would be primarily bison and venison.. also fish.. not a big fan of foul tho chickens are easy to raise and I like eggs.

[XNavyNuke]

This is how they run the little guy out of business..

The factory farms can hire a vet to work on-site and administer the anti-biotics to as many animals as they want.

The small farmer has to pay exorbitant amounts for legitimate use of anti-biotics on their farm animals.

+1 rep for you Danno. This is what the ruling is all about. That is why agribusiness and AVMA have lobbied so hard for the regulation. Acute use of antibiotics is not where resistant strains are created, rather it is the continuous use of low levels as a prophylactic in entire herds. This is needed because the animals are raised in an environment where they are continuously exposed to vectors. Can you say CAFO's? Big companies have vets on staff. This affects them not one bit. Just another piece of paperwork in the pile that they are already pushing. It exclusively affects those of us who have to call out a private vet for diagnosis and treatment. The only thing this is designed to do is push medium producers into the hands of the megacorps with veterinary staffs. Small producers risk going out of business or operating outside the law, aka criminalization.

Is antibiotics resistance a health issue? Of course. Will this make a significant difference on a per-animal basis of those receiving treatment? No - and thats the problem! The issue is being used as an economic weapon that all the do-gooders can jump on board with. Bait and switch. The same way we've lost all of the freedoms. Slick talked out of them. Congrats!

XNN

[tttppp]

+1 rep for you Danno. This is what the ruling is all about. That is why agribusiness and AVMA have lobbied so hard for the regulation. Acute use of antibiotics is not where resistant strains are created, rather it is the continuous use of low levels as a prophylactic in entire herds. This is needed because the animals are raised in an environment where they are continuously exposed to vectors. Can you say CAFO's? Big companies have vets on staff. This affects them not one bit. Just another piece of paperwork in the pile that they are already pushing. It exclusively affects those of us who have to call out a private vet for diagnosis and treatment. The only thing this is designed to do is push medium producers into the hands of the megacorps with veterinary staffs. Small producers risk going out of business or operating outside the law, aka criminalization.

Is antibiotics resistance a health issue? Of course. Will this make a significant difference on a per-animal basis of those receiving treatment? No - and thats the problem! The issue is being used as an economic weapon that all the do-gooders can jump on board with. Bait and switch. The same way we've lost all of the freedoms. Slick talked out of them. Congrats!

XNN

If thats the case, farmers shouldn't be allowed to get the prescription from a vet on their payroll. But thats hard to regulate. As I said before, there are much better ways to get antibiotics, growth hormones, and all the other fake crap out of our food.

[tod evans]

These people writing "laws" need to be stopped!

Listen to Ron Paul............Start by repealing several thousand laws...

[r3volution]

If I was the kind of guy that put out of context quotes in my sig line in a lame attempt to try and embarrass people, that one would be a killer.

But I'm not that kind of guy.

:rolleyes: burn

[Brett85]

There is a difference between someone who likes a couple of regulations than someone who wants to overregulate everything to death.

What part of the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to pass regulations? I guess there's a few specific types of regulations that are authorized by the Constitution, such as bankruptcy laws. But, I certainly don't see how a law like this could be considered Constitutional for anyone who believes in a literal interpretation of the 10th amendment.

[tttppp]

What part of the Constitution gives the federal government the authority to pass regulations? I guess there's a few specific types of regulations that are authorized by the Constitution, such as bankruptcy laws. But, I certainly don't see how a law like this could be considered Constitutional for anyone who believes in a literal interpretation of the 10th amendment.

I'm not the constitutional expert, so you tell me. If its not constitutional, you can always change the constitution and make it legal. What makes it right for food manufacturers to sucker people into unknowingly buy tainted food? There are many ways the government could insure the safety of our food without placing any burdensome regulations on people. The government could actually eliminate thousands of regulations and still be able to insure the safety of our food.

I believe in only having a few regulations that create a tremendous amount of benefit, and placing a system that motivates companies to do the right thing. I don't see anything wrong with that.

[tangent4ronpaul]

WOW! I didn't think this thread would take off, so should have checked back earlier. You peeps have hit some good points, but missed one of my main points completely: "THE NOOSE TIGHTENS!". Denial of access to medical care and medicine has historically been used by repressive regimes to control the population. Right now, the only access to antibiotics without a prescription is via vet meds. For the 4 most common ones, they come off the same production lines as the Rx/prescription ones for "human" drugs.



This is how they run the little guy out of business..

The factory farms can hire a vet to work on-site and administer the anti-biotics to as many animals as they want.

The small farmer has to pay exorbitant amounts for legitimate use of anti-biotics on their farm animals.

BINGO!


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.

...

If I don't need a prescription for medicine, why should animals?

Micky D's and similar get their meat from overseas where these regulations have no effect.

You almost got my main point...


will this be the death blow for the dollar menu?

No, again they get their meat from other countries where the lack of regulatory burden makes the meat affordable.


how exactly do you expect farmers to farm without using herbicides and pesticides?

There was not much in the way of herbicides and pesticides 100 years ago, beyond companion planting. Outside of sulfa drugs, (and a number of native american poultices that have never been properly creditied that are much older) antibiotics didn't really exist prior to WWII.

Something else to take into consideration is that antibiotics are a medicine that will pass out of your/the animals system in a fairly short period of time. It's not like you were feeding the chickens lead pain and having it build up in their muscle mass.

-t

[Acala]

If you don't want anti-biotics in your beef, buy organic, grass fed beef. I do.

But here is an angle you may not have considered - prudent folks preparing for the inevitable collapse of the American economy "might" want to have a stock of broad-spectrum antibiotics on hand for emergencies. Guess what the best source is for cheap, pure anti-biotics without a prescription? Vet meds. Guess what cuts off that source?

THIS FREAKING LAW!!!!

edit: I see that tangent did post on this. I got impatient with the thread and skipped to the end. I would have posted sooner but I was busy buying some cipro