4 ms·

Serious question: is this actually a concern for land animals like cows or chickens? They tend to be fed an exclusively vegetarian diet, so any bio-accumulation

by ac29 7y ago

Serious question: is this actually a concern for land animals like cows or chickens? They tend to be fed an exclusively vegetarian diet, so any bio-accumulation of heavy metals or similar should be minimal - the chain is pretty simple: sun -> plants -> meat animal. I can't say I'm aware of people getting mercury poisoning from beef, for example. Seafood is different, since the food chain can be significantly longer and more complex.

DoreenMichele 7y ago
American beef is often grain fed, not grass fed. There's also the issue of cannibalistic feed. A quick google got me this video, which I only watched partway through (it indicates fish is the worst, followed by chicken and cheese): https://nutritionfacts.org/video/cannibalistic-feed-biomagnification/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/cannibalistic-feed-biomagni... IIRC, such things tend to accumulate most in the fat, fwiw.
- ac29 7y ago
  "grain" and "grass" are both plants. The food chain isn't any more complex in either case: sun -> grain/grass -> food animal. Plants definitely do have different rate of heavy metal accumulation, and presumably other toxins, though I'm not aware of any evidence that a typical feedlot diet of corn+soy is better than all grass with regards to potential toxin bio-accumulation. This isn't to say that there may not be other health benefits to raising pasture animals on 100% grass. Animal-based animal feed is certainly a thing, though in my experience "100% vegetarian" diet is often the the cheapest type of meat. Organic meat, while more expensive, guarantees it will be raised "without antibiotics, added growth hormones, mammalian or avian byproducts" [0]. This does seem to exclude fish-meal type feed, which presumably is allowed to be used in organic meat production - though I'd assume its more economical to use a plant based feed in almost all cases. [0] https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Organic%20Livestock%20Requirements.pdf https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Organic%2...
  - DoreenMichele 7y ago
    I'm a bit confused because you've switched from asking my opinion, apparently in earnest, to shooting me down. But for the record: Grass fed beef is more nutritious than grain fed (easily googled). Grass fed beef is leaner and has a noticeably different fat composition (easily googled). This is pertinent to bioaccumulation because fat is usually where stores of toxic chemicals are at their worst, iirc. Grain fed beef is typically fattened up in feed lots which can be vectors for disease (easily googled). Grass fed is typically exposed to fewer pesticides. Sources: https://nutritiouslife.com/eat-empowered/grass-fed-beef-organic-beef-healthier/ https://nutritiouslife.com/eat-empowered/grass-fed-beef-orga... http://www.certifiedgrassfedmeats.com http://www.certifiedgrassfedmeats.com I'm not a stickler for only eating grass fed beef. However, I have gone through periods where I was extremely ill and found that it was very worthwhile to only get meat labeled "grass fed." I was much more able to tolerate it and it didn't severely acidify my system the way meat sometimes can, which is consistent with the fact that grass fed beef is much higher in Omega 3 fats. I'm not trying to lecture anyone, dictate how they should eat, etc. I was just making the observation that if the point of the article is to persuade, then they missed a potentially big detail in terms of arguing from a position of enlightened self interest rather than morality. It's a detail that's often overlooked by people trying to persuade others to "do the right thing, eat less meat!" and another reply to me cast a bit of light on possibly why it is so often overlooked.
  - GlenTheMachine 7y ago
    This is not exactly correct. The "grain" that is fed to animals in feed lots (or most other places) is typically not straight corn or whatever. It's an engineered pellet ration or a milled grain ration. In both cases it has additives in it - added nutritional components, and often also low-level antibiotics, just depending on what the folks running the feed lot prefer. I have a sheep farm. We have to be very careful not to confuse the sheep grain ration with the chicken feed. They look exactly the same, but chicken pellet has copper in it, and sheep can't metabolize copper. We also have to be careful not to accidentally buy or feed goat ration for the same reason. That said, "grass fed" is complicated too. In a lot of places the cattle are grazing on unimproved rangeland. It isn't even fertilized. But in some places the farmers will explicitly plant forage crops such as wheatgrass; these will typically be fertilized, and possibly treated with herbicide or pesticide. Fertilizer is usually an industrial nitrogen fertilizer, but it can also be composted manure. I know of at least some farms near where I grew up that were at points treated with concentrated sludge from sewage treatment plants, in which case you would definitely expect to get heavy metal accumulation, even in straight grass fed animals. Happily my family never went that route.
- kyllo 7y ago
  All beef is grass fed until a short period before slaughter, where American ranchers fatten them up with a diet of corn-based feed. What we call "grass-fed" beef is just "grass-finished" instead of "corn-finished."
azernik 7y ago
There's still bioaccumulation from any heavy metals in the soil contaminating the plants, but yes, much less than in a more complex food chain.
tomjen3 7y ago
It may be the case for the chickens you buy in the supermarket, but backyard chickens are not exclusively vegetarian -- I have personally witnessed one eat a frog and they are really happy if they get the chance to eat a worm.
- Digit-Al 7y ago
  I second that. Chickens are omnivores. My mum keeps a few chickens for eggs and when she gives them meal-worms for a treat sometimes they go absolutely crazy for them. Chickens naturally peck about for worms, insects, seeds, etc...
  - asark 7y ago
    Chickens and/or pigs used to be how one dealt with food scraps that couldn't go back into the field/garden. After first using them to make broth or whatever, if possible. A recycling system that turns garbage into food.
- PaulHoule 7y ago
  I've seen chickens fight with cats over rodent and frog carcasses.
jayventura 7y ago
> so any bio-accumulation of heavy metals or similar should be minimal What is "minimal"? Bioaccumulation isn't a magic meter that says "everyting below this trophic level is safe to eat." It depends on the persistent toxin ( I choose the word toxin because bioaccumulation can occur for chemicals beyond heavy metals, like organochlorine pesticides ) that you're looking at, and what is the safe dose for humans. E.g. let's say you have pesticide A and pesticide B. Cattle eat a certain amount of feed per day. At time of slaughter, pesticide A and B have a certain amount of concentration in fat tissue. It doesn't matter which has the highest concentration, it matters which is less safe to humans and at what concentration it harms us when it accumulates in our own tissues.

by ac29 7y ago

DoreenMichele 7y ago

American beef is often grain fed, not grass fed. There's also the issue of cannibalistic feed. A quick google got me this video, which I only watched partway through (it indicates fish is the worst, followed by chicken and cheese): https://nutritionfacts.org/video/cannibalistic-feed-biomagnification/ https://nutritionfacts.org/video/cannibalistic-feed-biomagni... IIRC, such things tend to accumulate most in the fat, fwiw.

ac29 7y ago
"grain" and "grass" are both plants. The food chain isn't any more complex in either case: sun -> grain/grass -> food animal. Plants definitely do have different rate of heavy metal accumulation, and presumably other toxins, though I'm not aware of any evidence that a typical feedlot diet of corn+soy is better than all grass with regards to potential toxin bio-accumulation. This isn't to say that there may not be other health benefits to raising pasture animals on 100% grass. Animal-based animal feed is certainly a thing, though in my experience "100% vegetarian" diet is often the the cheapest type of meat. Organic meat, while more expensive, guarantees it will be raised "without antibiotics, added growth hormones, mammalian or avian byproducts" [0]. This does seem to exclude fish-meal type feed, which presumably is allowed to be used in organic meat production - though I'd assume its more economical to use a plant based feed in almost all cases. [0] https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Organic%20Livestock%20Requirements.pdf https://www.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Organic%2...
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  I'm a bit confused because you've switched from asking my opinion, apparently in earnest, to shooting me down. But for the record: Grass fed beef is more nutritious than grain fed (easily googled). Grass fed beef is leaner and has a noticeably different fat composition (easily googled). This is pertinent to bioaccumulation because fat is usually where stores of toxic chemicals are at their worst, iirc. Grain fed beef is typically fattened up in feed lots which can be vectors for disease (easily googled). Grass fed is typically exposed to fewer pesticides. Sources: https://nutritiouslife.com/eat-empowered/grass-fed-beef-organic-beef-healthier/ https://nutritiouslife.com/eat-empowered/grass-fed-beef-orga... http://www.certifiedgrassfedmeats.com http://www.certifiedgrassfedmeats.com I'm not a stickler for only eating grass fed beef. However, I have gone through periods where I was extremely ill and found that it was very worthwhile to only get meat labeled "grass fed." I was much more able to tolerate it and it didn't severely acidify my system the way meat sometimes can, which is consistent with the fact that grass fed beef is much higher in Omega 3 fats. I'm not trying to lecture anyone, dictate how they should eat, etc. I was just making the observation that if the point of the article is to persuade, then they missed a potentially big detail in terms of arguing from a position of enlightened self interest rather than morality. It's a detail that's often overlooked by people trying to persuade others to "do the right thing, eat less meat!" and another reply to me cast a bit of light on possibly why it is so often overlooked.
- GlenTheMachine 7y ago
  This is not exactly correct. The "grain" that is fed to animals in feed lots (or most other places) is typically not straight corn or whatever. It's an engineered pellet ration or a milled grain ration. In both cases it has additives in it - added nutritional components, and often also low-level antibiotics, just depending on what the folks running the feed lot prefer. I have a sheep farm. We have to be very careful not to confuse the sheep grain ration with the chicken feed. They look exactly the same, but chicken pellet has copper in it, and sheep can't metabolize copper. We also have to be careful not to accidentally buy or feed goat ration for the same reason. That said, "grass fed" is complicated too. In a lot of places the cattle are grazing on unimproved rangeland. It isn't even fertilized. But in some places the farmers will explicitly plant forage crops such as wheatgrass; these will typically be fertilized, and possibly treated with herbicide or pesticide. Fertilizer is usually an industrial nitrogen fertilizer, but it can also be composted manure. I know of at least some farms near where I grew up that were at points treated with concentrated sludge from sewage treatment plants, in which case you would definitely expect to get heavy metal accumulation, even in straight grass fed animals. Happily my family never went that route.
kyllo 7y ago
All beef is grass fed until a short period before slaughter, where American ranchers fatten them up with a diet of corn-based feed. What we call "grass-fed" beef is just "grass-finished" instead of "corn-finished."

azernik 7y ago

There's still bioaccumulation from any heavy metals in the soil contaminating the plants, but yes, much less than in a more complex food chain.

tomjen3 7y ago

It may be the case for the chickens you buy in the supermarket, but backyard chickens are not exclusively vegetarian -- I have personally witnessed one eat a frog and they are really happy if they get the chance to eat a worm.

Digit-Al 7y ago
I second that. Chickens are omnivores. My mum keeps a few chickens for eggs and when she gives them meal-worms for a treat sometimes they go absolutely crazy for them. Chickens naturally peck about for worms, insects, seeds, etc...
- asark 7y ago
  Chickens and/or pigs used to be how one dealt with food scraps that couldn't go back into the field/garden. After first using them to make broth or whatever, if possible. A recycling system that turns garbage into food.
PaulHoule 7y ago
I've seen chickens fight with cats over rodent and frog carcasses.

jayventura 7y ago

> so any bio-accumulation of heavy metals or similar should be minimal What is "minimal"? Bioaccumulation isn't a magic meter that says "everyting below this trophic level is safe to eat." It depends on the persistent toxin ( I choose the word toxin because bioaccumulation can occur for chemicals beyond heavy metals, like organochlorine pesticides ) that you're looking at, and what is the safe dose for humans. E.g. let's say you have pesticide A and pesticide B. Cattle eat a certain amount of feed per day. At time of slaughter, pesticide A and B have a certain amount of concentration in fat tissue. It doesn't matter which has the highest concentration, it matters which is less safe to humans and at what concentration it harms us when it accumulates in our own tissues.