4 ms·
It seems a bit less cut and dry, and still unsolved. > is just as bad, or even worse, than meat. "By 2011, a total of 13.6 million kg (30 million lb) of antim
by richardw 8y ago
It seems a bit less cut and dry, and still unsolved.
> is just as bad, or even worse, than meat.
"By 2011, a total of 13.6 million kg (30 million lb) of antimicrobials were sold for use in food-producing animals in the United States,[53] which represented 80% of all antibiotics sold or distributed in the United States"
> Antibiotics can only be given to beef strictly by on-label usage, thus closing one of the possible routes.
"The FDA has asked drug companies to voluntarily edit its labels to exclude growth promotion as an indication for antibiotic usage."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibiotic_use_in_livestock https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibiotic_use_in_livestock
Even if the US comes down hard if there is are countries that still allows it, the risk remains. Resistance doesn't care about borders.
> Pro-vegan propaganda does not belong on HN.
Sure. But it seems an important issue and the facts seem to indicate it's not solved yet.
- bluGill 8y agoThe rules changed in 2015 so references from 2011 are not worth considering.
- _jal 8y agoBecause the virus world was put on notice at that time and changed their ways? A lot of damage was already done.
- palunon 8y ago> the virus world The bacterial one. Virus infections are (almost?) never treated with antibiotics.
- richardw 8y agoQuote 1 describes the scale of the problem. Quote 2 shows why it's not fixed yet.