So yes if antibiotics is indeed the problem, and farmers are required, by contract and livestock insurance to use them, for higher profit -- simply make the ins

So yes if antibiotics is indeed the problem, and farmers are required, by contract and livestock insurance to use them, for higher profit -- simply make the insurance company liable for the unintended consequence of over use of antibiotics. If a meat wholesaler knew that they could be sued by hospitals for overuse of antibiotics, they would move to protect their profits and forbid it or agree to guidelines. If it is true and factual, scientifically based, this should be no problem proving this in court. Because people don't want unknown unknown counter party risks. On another note, my dogs, which are breed for livestock guardian, have a very special trait. If one of my livestock (chickens) show any sign of illness, they immediately kill it. Because the risk of a sick animal that dies and attracts predators, which is unacceptable to them. Also it eliminates a vector for the disease to spread. I don't interfere with it. So even nature has a way of dealing with this problem. What ends up happening is that the rest of the flock goes to pass their better genetics and they don't get sick. Another thing is that a few of my older chickens have caught on to this and appear to hide their sneezes. I might be anthroprojecting.