OT: Never complain about the cost of meat

[GuyOfDoom]

MasterChiToes said:

Livestock feed also commonly includes reclaimed protein... which comes from meat designated unsuitable for human consumption, and by law is treated with creosote at some point, as well as from fido and fluffy when they get euthanized. Say hello to the primary source of mad cow disease.

The reclaimed protein process has been stopped in cattle because of mad cow disease, but that doesn't stop other animals from getting delicious animal bits.

[furloph]

so we just weed the weak from our population so we dont have to worry about them suing hard working people because they ate somthing that was off.

[Will]

Imperator Fyron said:
*snip* A few growth hormones here and there that have no credible scientific studies indicating any potential side-effects to humans eating the meat?
*snip*
There is no particular lack of arable land in the country (or the world as a whole), so any argument related to wasted land usage is completely non-sensible. Pretty much all of the high-quality land that can be used to grow crops for humans either is used to do so, or is left fallow due to not enough demand for more.

I would be more concerned about the large quantities of antibiotics that are fed to livestock, and the increasing number of resistant-strain bacteria that are emerging as a result. What guyofdoom already mentioned of the hormones fed to livestock is serious, but not the main problem. Even if the hormones are not the same as human hormones, and even if they are broken down by our metabolism, it still can (and probably does) cause some fluctuations in body chemistry. Which is minor compared to slowly losing the use of antibiotic drugs.

Also, it is not the case that the world is awash with more arable land than people know what to do with. The US has more than we need, but that is partially due to extensive use of irrigation; a topic you should be very familiar with, being in Riverside. If water from the Colorado River stops, agriculture in southern California stops. In South America, rather than using sustainable farming practices to make use of what arable land is there, people are using up the land and then razing more forests to make up for it.

As for land laying fallow, the only reason that happens in the US is because the Federal Government pays farmers to not grow food. Otherwise, everyone would be trying to grow something to cash in on all the money being thrown around for ethanol development.

[Fyron]

"If you�d like a few references for chemicals that have been PROVEN to show effects I can supply those for you."

References from credible sources would be appreciated.

"Again the short version is by the time it�s definitively �proven� in humans it�s 25+ years later and everyone has already been past dramaticaly affected."

Do you have credible evidence from studies showing that all sorts of "harmful chemicals" are present in efficacious quantities in meat brought to market (especially animal hormones that somehow turn into human hormones)?

"The FDA is about as good at regulating as the EPA {read WORTHLESS}."

Why? Because you said so? Because some pundit-blogger says so?

"If you think no potential crop land has been altered to make way for livestock you�d be gravely mistaken."

I didn't say that; certainly there are instances of land being misused, but most of the land used for livestock is not of the high-quality soil variety.

"If you�re referring to manure being good fertilizer, cow manure is actually pretty low on the scale."

But still on the scale, and still used... Even if it is mostly used on low-quality crops used to feed livestock, it is still useful in the overall cycle, no?

"If you think the world is at 100% efficiency in terms of farmland as well you�re dreaming."

I'm not sure what post you read that from; I specifically said we were way below "100% efficiency."

"There are plenty of plants that can be eaten by humans that can grow in all types of climates. You forget people have been eating plants everywhere before the invention of refrigeration."

No, I don't. I was talking specifically about livestock feed grains versus human feed grains.

[Wade]

This nonsense always starts on forums when someone lightly mentions meat or animals as food(and other controversial subjects that can be argued over until we get bored).

I love animals. They're delicious.

I love animals in their natural habitats too.

I don't like them in small enclosures for most of their lives; aside from my aquarium where I did my best to create a natural habitat(Though I still have doubts about the practice of aquarium keeping sometimes). My cat regularly goes inside and outside; though cats are amongst the species that have been domesticated by humans over thousands of years.

Many of the pets and farm/domesticated animals and plants did not exist in their current forms until humans domesticated them and selectively breed(evolution) them over thousands of years. Many of them now would die off if left to the wild without civilization.

Plants are a life form too. I believe we should use plants and animals as food, materials, labor, and comfort as long as they're not tortured or endangered as a species.

As for chemicals, hormones, cloning, genetic alteration, etcetera; if this technology improves the quality of life for humans then use it. If this technology has irrefutable evidence harming quality of life for humans then improve it.

Quality of life is a balance between all advantages and disadvantages considered.

-Wade

[AgentZero]

Sausages are the best. But I always burn the outside before the inside is cooked.

Also, GuyofDoom, MasterChiToes and Will, consider yourselves all mightily smote.

[MasterChiToes]

Wade said:
As for chemicals, hormones, cloning, genetic alteration, etcetera; if this technology improves the quality of life for humans then use it. If this technology has irrefutable evidence harming quality of life for humans then improve it.

Do you live in a worker's paradise where "irrefutable evidence" is funded by mega-corporations that go out of their way to throw away easy profits?
I personally find myself living in a world where more often than not any research that might threaten profits will not only not be funded but will cost scientists their careers.

Note that recent news article about a scientist being offered a job if he guaranteed he'd come out against the existence of global warming.

Anyway, I consider myself largely indifferent to the extremes of the food debate, and don't really care about being mightily smote. But the whole call for proof thing is a tired refrain, because skepticism without a level playing field of inquiry is little different from the Inquisition dismissing Galileo. Skepticism is not blindly believing in something until someone else proves you wrong.

Eat what you want... we are all going to die anyway.

[GuyOfDoom]

MasterChiToes said:


Do you live in a worker's paradise where "irrefutable evidence" is funded by mega-corporations that go out of their way to throw away easy profits?

Yeah guess who funds most of the research Fyron has apperantly read that tells you "not to worry."

[GuyOfDoom]

Why? Because you said so? Because some pundit-blogger says so?

I could easily just turn your ridiculous arguing tactic on you and say "provide evidence that the EPA has ever done anything." However, I have a family member that works directly with the EPA on a consistent basis and they are less than forceful about doing ANYTHING to chasten corporations in clear violation of environmental laws.

[Will]

AgentZero said:
Also, GuyofDoom, MasterChiToes and Will, consider yourselves all mightily smote.

Well thanks, except it seems you did not really read what I posted. I'm fine with eating meat. I eat at least some daily. What I'm not fine with is the so-called "industrial farming" practices, which I believe will someday come to bite us all in the arse harder than it already has. And I do mean all, not just those of us who do eat meat... like I said, the heavy usage of antibiotics in livestock is just asking for the development of resistant strains faster than would otherwise have happened.