Skip to main content

View Diary: Preserving antibiotics for humans requires cutting back on their use in animal feed on farms (22 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Which is why the mandatory label change was (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FindingMyVoice, Louisiana 1976

    the right way to go. Then farmers would have needed a prescription to buy it.

    Realistically, in farm areas, plenty of Vets would probably hand them out freely, but it would have been a step in the right direction.

    We may require a major outbreak of an antibiotic resistant superbugs killing thousands before we even have serious discussions about limiting use.

    Pharmaceutical companies are big donors to both Parties.

    Probably the only way we will get such limitations is a bill that guarantees to maintain Big Pharm profits with some big subsidy for researching new replacement antibiotics that will not be ready to replace cash-flow for 10 plus years on even an expedited basis.

    My understanding is they current R & D pipeline for new drugs with approval is 17 years.

    Oh, yes, Big Pharm will also probably demand and get, trademark and copyright brand name protections for 100 years or forever.  

    "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

    by HoundDog on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 01:58:59 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  It wouldn't bother me if the already-medically- (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      HoundDog, Louisiana 1976

      useless antibiotics were continued to be allowed to be used in agriculture for growth promotion.

      Ideally, factory farming would be eliminated but absent that, might as well reduce animal suffering to what ever extent possible.

      •  This is a great idea Roadbed Guy. Why hasn't (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Louisiana 1976, Roadbed Guy

        anyone thought of this?

        "Seriously, Folks, WTH?" - ("What the Heck? "h/t Joan McCarter, Seriously, Florida. WTF?)

        by HoundDog on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 02:25:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  By and large, that's how things are now. (0+ / 0-)

          They're clearly not using any of the expensive antibiotics-of-last-resort in mass quantities for agriculture.

          But this seems to be a good opening for a start up biotech company to come up with an alternative completely orthogonal to human health.

      •  Suffer the little chickens , wait that was another (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        prophet. So let's crowd thousands of baby chickens into the least amount of space possible and then use antibiotics to ease their suffering. Wow what humanitarian principles the agribusiness corpoations have. That must come from their corporate religious beliefs from that first prophet?

        Life is just a bowl of Cherries, that stain your hands and clothes and have pits that break your teeth.

        by OHdog on Mon Apr 07, 2014 at 03:25:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It doesn't ease their suffering (0+ / 0-)

          it simply allows them to suffer for two or three fewer days, what with them growing faster.

          Again, I find the whole thing deplorable, but I'm just applying the lessons of ObamaCare (to give but one example) to this situation.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site