Re: [DIYbio] Re: New York Times - Arsenic in Our Chicken?

Lately I've been hearing that transportation costs for small-time
farmers (not necessarily organic), local food, is much more expensive
in general because that leg of the system is just way more efficient
for big corp farms (i.e. a tractor trailer truck is per kg food
transported much more efficient than the local farmer's box truck)

http://www.npr.org/2012/04/16/150705824/new-rules-for-everyday-foodies

http://www.gmu.edu/centers/publicchoice/faculty%20pages/Tyler/

On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Cathal Garvey <cathalgarvey@gmail.com> wrote:
> You forgot to factor oil requirements into your formulas. Industrial farming is only "efficient" in terms of labour and land use, but it consumes far more oil, generally.
>
> Yes, I realise this trend isn't true of method X in circumstance Y.
>
> mad_casual <ademlookes@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Aflatoxin in peanut butter? Check.
>>Mercury in vaccines? Check.
>>Mercury in tuna? Check.
>>Arsenic in Chicken? Check.
>>BSE in Beef? Check.
>>
>>Consuming it all in spite of the risks? Check.
>>
>>Of note; Brand name peanut butters are lowest in aflatoxin as their
>>production processes are more efficient and they dilute out the
>>aflatoxin
>>with things like palm oil and fully hydrogenated fatty acids. Organic
>>vegetables are notorious for requiring extra effort and care in
>>preventing
>>food borne pathogens that have been automated out of modern industrial
>>farming. Neither side has the winning formula; either food production
>>is
>>cheap, centralized, efficient, and meets some core set of minimum
>>standard
>>or it is decentralized, expensive, labor intensive, and meets a wide
>>array
>>of rather whimsical standards.
>>
>>On Monday, April 23, 2012 8:29:08 PM UTC-5, Nathan McCorkle wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/05/opinion/kristof-arsenic-in-our-chicken.html
>>> "
>>> OP-ED COLUMNIST
>>> Arsenic in Our Chicken?
>>> By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
>>> Published: April 4, 2012
>>>
>>> Let's hope you're not reading this column while munching on a chicken
>>
>>> sandwich.
>>>
>>> That's because my topic today is a pair of new scientific studies
>>> suggesting that poultry on factory farms are routinely fed caffeine,
>>> active ingredients of Tylenol and Benadryl, banned antibiotics and
>>> even arsenic.
>>>
>>> "We were kind of floored," said Keeve E. Nachman, a co-author of both
>>> studies and a scientist at the Johns Hopkins University Center for a
>>> Livable Future.  "It's unbelievable what we found."
>>>
>>> He said that the researchers had intended to test only for
>>> antibiotics. But assays for other chemicals and pharmaceuticals
>>didn't
>>> cost extra, so researchers asked for those results as well.
>>>
>>> "We haven't found anything that is an immediate health concern,"
>>> Nachman added. "But it makes me question how comfortable we are
>>> feeding a number of these things to animals that we're eating. It
>>> bewilders me."
>>>
>>> Likewise, I grew up on a farm, and thought I knew what to expect in
>>my
>>> food. But Benadryl? Arsenic? These studies don't mean that you should
>>> dump the contents of your refrigerator, but they do raise serious
>>> questions about the food we eat and how we should shop.
>>>
>>> It turns out that arsenic has routinely been fed to poultry (and
>>> sometimes hogs) because it reduces infections and makes flesh an
>>> appetizing shade of pink. There's no evidence that such low levels of
>>> arsenic harm either chickens or the people eating them, but still...
>>>
>>> Big Ag doesn't advertise the chemicals it stuffs into animals, so the
>>> scientists conducting these studies figured out a clever way to
>>detect
>>> them. Bird feathers, like human fingernails, accumulate chemicals and
>>> drugs that an animal is exposed to. So scientists from Johns Hopkins
>>> University and Arizona State University examined feather meal — a
>>> poultry byproduct made of feathers.
>>>
>>> One study, just published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal,
>>> Environmental Science & Technology, found that feather meal routinely
>>> contained a banned class of antibiotics called fluoroquinolones.
>>These
>>> antibiotics (such as Cipro), are illegal in poultry production
>>because
>>> they can breed antibiotic-resistant "superbugs" that harm humans.
>>> Already, antibiotic-resistant infections kill more Americans annually
>>> than AIDS, according to the Infectious Diseases Society of America.
>>>
>>> The same study also found that one-third of feather-meal samples
>>> contained an antihistamine that is the active ingredient of Benadryl.
>>> The great majority of feather meal contained acetaminophen, the
>>active
>>> ingredient in Tylenol. And feather-meal samples from China contained
>>> an antidepressant that is the active ingredient in Prozac.
>>>
>>> Poultry-growing literature has recommended Benadryl to reduce anxiety
>>> among chickens, apparently because stressed chickens have tougher
>>meat
>>> and grow more slowly. Tylenol and Prozac presumably serve the same
>>> purpose.
>>>
>>> Researchers found that most feather-meal samples contained caffeine.
>>> It turns out that chickens are sometimes fed coffee pulp and green
>>tea
>>> powder to keep them awake so that they can spend more time eating.
>>(Is
>>> that why they need the Benadryl, to calm them down?)
>>>
>>> The other peer-reviewed study, reported in a journal called Science
>>of
>>> the Total Environment, found arsenic in every sample of feather meal
>>> tested. Almost 9 in 10 broiler chickens in the United States had been
>>> fed arsenic, according to a 2011 industry estimate.
>>>
>>> These findings will surprise some poultry farmers because even they
>>> often don't know what chemicals they feed their birds. Huge food
>>> companies require farmers to use a proprietary food mix, and the
>>> farmer typically doesn't know exactly what is in it. I asked the
>>> United States Poultry and Egg Association for comment, but it said
>>> that it had not seen the studies and had nothing more to say.
>>>
>>> What does all this mean for consumers? The study looked only at
>>> feathers, not meat, so we don't know exactly what chemicals reach the
>>> plate, or at what levels. The uncertainties are enormous, but I asked
>>> Nachman about the food he buys for his own family. "I've been
>>studying
>>> food-animal production for some time, and the more I study, the more
>>> I'm drawn to organic," he said. "We buy organic."
>>>
>>> I'm the same. I used to be skeptical of organic, but the more
>>> reporting I do on our food supply, the more I want my own family
>>> eating organic — just to be safe.
>>>
>>> To me, this underscores the pitfalls of industrial farming. When I
>>was
>>> growing up on our hopelessly inefficient family farm, we didn't
>>> routinely drug animals. If our chickens grew anxious, the reason was
>>> perhaps a fox — and we never tried to resolve the problem with
>>> Benadryl.
>>>
>>> My take is that the business model of industrial agriculture has some
>>> stunning accomplishments, such as producing cheap food that saves us
>>> money at the grocery store. But we all may pay more in medical costs
>>> because of antibiotic-resistant infections.
>>>
>>> Frankly, after reading these studies, I'm so depressed about what has
>>> happened to farming that I wonder: Could a Prozac-laced chicken
>>nugget
>>> help?
>>> "
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nathan McCorkle
>>> Rochester Institute of Technology
>>> College of Science, Biotechnology/Bioinformatics
>>>
>>
>>--
>>You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>Groups "DIYbio" group.
>>To view this discussion on the web visit
>>https://groups.google.com/d/msg/diybio/-/hfzk_atDp2UJ.
>>To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com.
>>To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>For more options, visit this group at
>>http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en.
>
> --
> Sent from K-9 Mail on Android
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
> To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en.
>



--
Nathan McCorkle
Rochester Institute of Technology
College of Science, Biotechnology/Bioinformatics

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en.