Post: #1

In a desperate attempt to avoid implementing an actual ban on the non-therapeutic use of antibiotic drugs in factory animal feed, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has once again made it abundantly clear that it favors corporate interests over public health. In a recent announcement, the FDA publicly petitioned the factory food industry to voluntarily stop using antibiotics, claiming that this hands-off, non-regulatory approach will somehow be more effective at curbing antibiotic overuse than a mandatory ban would be.

The announcement comes just weeks after a federal judge took the FDA to task for its blatant disregard for public health, and ordered the agency to begin withdrawing approval for the non-therapeutic use of certain antibiotics in animal feed (http://www.ucsusa.org). But instead of stepping up to the plate to fulfill these federally-mandated legal duties, the FDA has instead chosen to stage a meaningless publicity stunt that will do absolutely nothing to fix the problem.

Meanwhile, the drug companies that produce penicillin and tetracycline, the two antibiotics ordered by the federal judge to be banned, have the opportunity to challenge the ruling. But if they fail at an evidentiary hearing to prove the drugs' safe and effective use in animal feed, which they likely will be unable to do, then the FDA will not get away with simply requesting that the food industry withdraw the drugs' use -- on the contrary, the FDA will be required to ban their use in accordance with the law.

"For the past 35 years, while advocates and citizens alike have been urging FDA to take action, the problem has steadily worsened and FDA has sat on its hands, which begs the question of whose interests the agency is protecting," said Margaret Mellon, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists' (UCS) Food & Environment Program, in a statement. "The FDA has known since the 1970s that the routine use of powerful antibiotics in livestock leads to the evolution of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which cause infections that are more difficult to treat in both people and animals."

FDA plays word games to conceal itsselling out tothe factory food industry
The FDA really has no valid excuse as to why it has deliberately failed for more than 35 years to address the problem of non-therapeutic antibiotic use in factory animal feed. And now that the public is finally catching on to the FDA's cozy coalescence with the factory food industry, the agency is being forced to at least acknowledge the issue.

But rather than acknowledge it in a sound and reasonable way, the FDA has resorted to playing word games that completely dodge the issue. Despite the fact that a federal judge has already ordered the two most common antibiotic culprits to be banned, for instance, the FDA is now claiming that this voluntary approach will perform the same function without the need for litigation.

"The new strategy will ensure farmers and veterinarians can care for animals while ensuring the medicines people need remain safe and effective," FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg is quoted as saying in a recent Reuters report.

Huh? Farmers and veterinarians will still have the ability to "care for animals" following a ban on non-therapeutic antibiotic use, hence the "non-therapeutic" designation. And yet Hamburg would have us all believe that simply asking the industry to regulate itself will somehow better address the problem than actually regulating it. Do not be fooled by such nonsense.

Learn more: What the f*ck
http://www.naturalnews.com/035723_antibi...z1taEzH0c0

Post: #2

Are there no honest men in Washington willing to take on this blatantly corrupt organization?

Post: #3

widespread antibiotic use in livestock started under clinton when both the fda and usda had their rules "revamped" to favor such practices as well as gmo stuff, big ag...

those rules were revamped in the 90's when Michael Taylor was appointed to the FDA as well as the USDA, one right after the other. he was from monsanto. once all the rules for both agencies were rewritten to monsanto's satisfaction he went back to work for monsanto.

until now. obama appointed him our "food safety czar" at the fda. he's not the only monsanto guy in our food agencies, though. obama appointed quite a few.

so i doubt we'll see a phase out unless people just stop buying the crap.

Post: #4

I thought a judge ruled that they HAD to stop it!

contempt of court!

Post: #5

Just to inject a little reality into this, the main non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in animals is at the feedlots where cattle are fattened on grain. Cattle are not naturally grain eating animals, they are grazers, and their normal digestive system can't handle grain, because the normal microbes react with gas and bloating. So they feed them antibiotics to kill off the digestive protozoans etc. They are also fed lots of bicarbonate of soda to counter the same digestive problems. Banning antibiotics would pretty much shut down the cattle feedlot biz.

It didn't start with Clinton.

Post: #6

mstra  Wrote:

Just to inject a little reality into this, the main non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in animals is at the feedlots where cattle are fattened on grain. Cattle are not naturally grain eating animals, they are grazers, and their normal digestive system can't handle grain, because the normal microbes react with gas and bloating. So they feed them antibiotics to kill off the digestive protozoans etc. They are also fed lots of bicarbonate of soda to counter the same digestive problems. Banning antibiotics would pretty much shut down the cattle feedlot biz.

It didn't start with Clinton.

the major rule changes that created what we have today re: big ag did start w/clinton. yes, there were some rules before but under clinton there was a major overhaul. not a few here or there, they completely altered the ag industry. i researched the rules myself and they can be found quite easily. not that it matters, really. bush sr was an advocate for the gmo industry and big into subsidizing them. but the rules which turned our food into utter crap, changing everything, happened under clinton. there was a massive change in regulations when taylor worked at the fda and the usda.

and worrying about shutting down the feedlot biz, so what? unethical businesses should be shut down. feed the cattle what they naturally eat. if you can't, get into another business. animals aren't here to be abused. we eat them, the least we can do in return for what they give us is to treat them well while they live and kill them humanely when they're slaughtered. having dominion over the animals doesn't mean they have to be treated poorly. that says a lot about our level of civilization, how we treat "lesser" creatures. might doesn't make right.

Post: #7

Black H@t  Wrote:

In a desperate attempt to avoid implementing an actual ban on the non-therapeutic use of antibiotic drugs in factory animal feed, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has once again made it abundantly clear that it favors corporate interests over public health. In a recent announcement, the FDA publicly petitioned the factory food industry to voluntarily stop using antibiotics, claiming that this hands-off, non-regulatory approach will somehow be more effective at curbing antibiotic overuse than a mandatory ban would be.

The announcement comes just weeks after a federal judge took the FDA to task for its blatant disregard for public health, and ordered the agency to begin withdrawing approval for the non-therapeutic use of certain antibiotics in animal feed (http://www.ucsusa.org). But instead of stepping up to the plate to fulfill these federally-mandated legal duties, the FDA has instead chosen to stage a meaningless publicity stunt that will do absolutely nothing to fix the problem.

Meanwhile, the drug companies that produce penicillin and tetracycline, the two antibiotics ordered by the federal judge to be banned, have the opportunity to challenge the ruling. But if they fail at an evidentiary hearing to prove the drugs' safe and effective use in animal feed, which they likely will be unable to do, then the FDA will not get away with simply requesting that the food industry withdraw the drugs' use -- on the contrary, the FDA will be required to ban their use in accordance with the law.

"For the past 35 years, while advocates and citizens alike have been urging FDA to take action, the problem has steadily worsened and FDA has sat on its hands, which begs the question of whose interests the agency is protecting," said Margaret Mellon, senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists' (UCS) Food & Environment Program, in a statement. "The FDA has known since the 1970s that the routine use of powerful antibiotics in livestock leads to the evolution of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which cause infections that are more difficult to treat in both people and animals."

FDA plays word games to conceal itsselling out tothe factory food industry
The FDA really has no valid excuse as to why it has deliberately failed for more than 35 years to address the problem of non-therapeutic antibiotic use in factory animal feed. And now that the public is finally catching on to the FDA's cozy coalescence with the factory food industry, the agency is being forced to at least acknowledge the issue.

But rather than acknowledge it in a sound and reasonable way, the FDA has resorted to playing word games that completely dodge the issue. Despite the fact that a federal judge has already ordered the two most common antibiotic culprits to be banned, for instance, the FDA is now claiming that this voluntary approach will perform the same function without the need for litigation.

"The new strategy will ensure farmers and veterinarians can care for animals while ensuring the medicines people need remain safe and effective," FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg is quoted as saying in a recent Reuters report.

Huh? Farmers and veterinarians will still have the ability to "care for animals" following a ban on non-therapeutic antibiotic use, hence the "non-therapeutic" designation. And yet Hamburg would have us all believe that simply asking the industry to regulate itself will somehow better address the problem than actually regulating it. Do not be fooled by such nonsense.

Learn more: What the f*ck
http://www.naturalnews.com/035723_antibi...z1taEzH0c0

I know a cow that happens to like being vaccinated. You are evil for proposing the idea of denying the right, Tuna faced b*tch!

Post: #8

LoP Guest  Wrote:

mstra  Wrote:

Just to inject a little reality into this, the main non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in animals is at the feedlots where cattle are fattened on grain. Cattle are not naturally grain eating animals, they are grazers, and their normal digestive system can't handle grain, because the normal microbes react with gas and bloating. So they feed them antibiotics to kill off the digestive protozoans etc. They are also fed lots of bicarbonate of soda to counter the same digestive problems. Banning antibiotics would pretty much shut down the cattle feedlot biz.

It didn't start with Clinton.

the major rule changes that created what we have today re: big ag did start w/clinton. yes, there were some rules before but under clinton there was a major overhaul. not a few here or there, they completely altered the ag industry. i researched the rules myself and they can be found quite easily. not that it matters, really. bush sr was an advocate for the gmo industry and big into subsidizing them. but the rules which turned our food into utter crap, changing everything, happened under clinton. there was a massive change in regulations when taylor worked at the fda and the usda.

and worrying about shutting down the feedlot biz, so what? unethical businesses should be shut down. feed the cattle what they naturally eat. if you can't, get into another business. animals aren't here to be abused. we eat them, the least we can do in return for what they give us is to treat them well while they live and kill them humanely when they're slaughtered. having dominion over the animals doesn't mean they have to be treated poorly. that says a lot about our level of civilization, how we treat "lesser" creatures. might doesn't make right.

We should change the way this is done. I avoid most meat, especially beef. But banning the antibiotics could turn out to be a nightmare-pandemics in feed lots.

If we want to shut down feed lots and go to free range grass fed cattle that are regionally slaughtered, which I do, we need to transition to that in a measured way.

This ban may not be the "step in the right direction." They usually aren't.

Like Obamacare. It's not a step in the right direction.

If you want to fix something, you need to decide what you want as a final outcome and change the policies to create that outcome. Half measures make things worse much of the time.

Just my opinion. I'm not an expert on animal husbandry.

Post: #9

LoP Guest  Wrote:

Are there no honest men in Washington willing to take on this blatantly corrupt organization?

Their last names are "Paul", but they're kinda busy.

Post: #10

iceni6  Wrote:

I thought a judge ruled that they HAD to stop it!

contempt of court!

This regime doesn't recognize any authority other than its own.

And it's in love with Monsanto:

Obama Appoints Monsanto's VP as Senior Advisor to the Commissioner FDA
http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/52314...sioner-fda

Post: #11

I see the Monsanto/Obama 1 star shill brigade is up early.

5 stars OP.

And here's your meritorious conduct medal for bravery in the face of 1 star shilling:

Post: #12

The Comedian  Wrote:

iceni6  Wrote:

I thought a judge ruled that they HAD to stop it!

contempt of court!

ALL REGIMES OF THE LAST SEVERAL DECADES doesn't recognize any authority other than THE ONES WHO HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO BUY THEM OUT.

And it's in love with Monsanto:

Obama Appoints Monsanto's VP as Senior Advisor to the Commissioner FDA
http://www.davidicke.com/headlines/52314...sioner-fda

I fixed your above quote.

Post: #13

The Comedian  Wrote:

I see the Monsanto/Obama 1 star shill brigade is up early.

5 stars OP.

And here's your meritorious conduct medal for bravery in the face of 1 star shilling:

link to image: http://imgupld.lunaticoutpost.com/graphi...92F4C8.jpg

We are all sure, like you, that if a republican president had won, instead of Obama, they would shut down Monsanto.



If only Jeb Bush or Mcain had won.

Post: #14

LoP Guest  Wrote:

The Comedian  Wrote:

I see the Monsanto/Obama 1 star shill brigade is up early.

5 stars OP.

And here's your meritorious conduct medal for bravery in the face of 1 star shilling:

link to image: http://imgupld.lunaticoutpost.com/graphi...92F4C8.jpg

We are all sure, like you, that if a republican president had won, instead of Obama, they would shut down Monsanto.



If only Jeb Bush or Mcain had won.

a special , for my good friend " Jadr the Comedian"

Post: #15

Cash
Rules
Everything
Around
Me

CREAM get the money, dollar dollar bill y'all