Your post is mostly conjecture using facts as condiments, how about we apply our critical thinking skills? It appeals to ethos and pathos and contains almost no

Your post is mostly conjecture using facts as condiments, how about we apply our critical thinking skills? It appeals to ethos and pathos and contains almost no appeal to logos. What does the amount of antibiotics in use by farm animals 50 years ago have with whether it is a good idea to give farm animals antibiotics? Why is it alarming? What is the number upon which 'alarm' should be sounded? So the EU banned some livestock drugs, what does that have to do with whether we should give antibiotics to animals? What does the corporate status (for-profit vs. non-profit vs. gov't) of hospitals have to do with whether antibiotics should be given to animals? Lets take your 'facts' and have a little fun with them. State run hospitals incentivize death as it is cheaper to the state. Perhaps these EU countries forbid animals to receive antibiotics in hopes that their population will die before requiring medical attention or other generous state benefits. This is what happens when you leave appeals to logic and facts out of your posts.