6 ms·

I realize I'm coming at this from a different angle than a lot of other HNers, but for me this is good science gone wrong. Dairy cows are some of the most mist

I realize I'm coming at this from a different angle than a lot of other HNers, but for me this is good science gone wrong. Dairy cows are some of the most mistreated and unhealthy animals in the agriculture system. This push for efficiency has created a large group of animals with very little genetic diversity. They are kept on a stream of antibiotics because one bad outbreak can take down the entire group. They often develop mastitis and cancer is common by the they are 5 or 6 ("retirement age") due to poor nutrition, over-milking, and living conditions. This kind of science really excites me, but the applications are almost always depressing and we should absolutely not be lauding squeezing out every last "inefficiency" in an animal based industry.

JoeAltmaier 14y ago
Lots of worse inbreeding problems - show dogs, fish etc. I live in Iowa, sorry I haven't seen the mistreatment you mention. I'm sure its a problem, any time large amounts of animals become dollars. Puppy mills, fish farms. But compared to beef cattle, dairy have it made. I'm not even sure humans are immune. Talk about a constant stream of antibiotics, low genetic diversity, inhumane living conditions, cancer rates.
- Falling3 14y ago
  Not to run off on a tangent, but you're wrong about the dairy beef comparison. Before heading to a feedlot, most beef cattle spend around a year of their lives grazing often allowed to stay with their mothers. Beef cattle are killed much sooner, but have something resembling a natural life for a time. Newborn dairy calves are removed almost immediately so no milk is wasted on them. Male dairy cows are used for veal (and I'm sure you know how that goes). The females are placed into small "igloos" with no chance for grazing or physical contact until they are old enough to reproduce. Then it's 4 or 5 years of constant pregnancy and milking until they are "spent" at the ripe ole age of 6. I'm honestly not trying to be preachy here as I know this isn't the appropriate venue, but this is just not an area I feel anyone should be commending for their efficiency.
  - randomdata 14y ago
    I grew up on a dairy farm, and while I'm sure some farmers operate exactly as you describe, I'm not sure you should paint the whole industry with one brush. Every farmer has their own opinions on how their operation should be operated, so every farm will be vastly different. > They are kept on a stream of antibiotics This was never true on our farm. Cows would be treated if sick, but that is it. I don't even remember them being sick all that often. The biggest problems were always related to calving complications (see below). > They often develop mastitis This largely came down to choices made by the animal, like laying in the muck even when there's a nice fresh bed of straw nearby. No farmer wants to see a cow with mastitis, even if just for profit reasons so you always do your best to try to avoid the problem. > The females are placed into small "igloos" with no chance for grazing or physical contact until they are old enough to reproduce. You mean until they are old enough to feed on their own. The reason they are individualized in early life is because otherwise the stronger calves will eat all of the food and who wants to see a calf starve? Even while in the hutch ("igloo"), the calves are free to interact with the nearby calves in other hutches. > Male dairy cows are used for veal (and I'm sure you know how that goes). I'm not sure the general population does know how that goes. I've heard all kinds of horrific stories about how veal calves, specifically, are mistreated. The only differentiator for veal is the age of the animal, otherwise they live like any other beef calf. > Then it's 4 or 5 years of constant pregnancy and milking until they are "spent" at the ripe ole age of 6. I remember plenty of cows that were milked for far longer, but we definitely lost a lot during calving, and as a result of that 4-5 years probably isn't far off the average milking span. Sadly, calving is hard on the animal. To be fair, this is something humans equally struggled with until the advent of modern medicine.
    - Falling3 14y ago
      And you may be aware that the family farm of previous generations is not what it used to be. Your family may have been a step ahead most of today's farms, but I still take issue with several of your points. >You mean until they are old enough to feed on their own. The reason they are individualized in early life is because otherwise the stronger calves will eat all of the food and who wants to see a calf starve? Even while in the hutch ("igloo"), the calves are free to interact with the nearby calves in other hutches. No I don't. The only reason that would be an issue is if they are not drinking milk naturally from the mother. All across the Midwest are small and medium sized cattle ranches with calves of all ages getting on just fine. The biggest reason is they must be separated from the mother otherwise the farmer is losing money. And I honestly have not seen a single case where calves are free to interact with each other. They're either tied up or fenced in. >I'm not sure the general population does know how that goes. I've heard all kinds of horrific stories about how veal calves, specifically, are mistreated. The only differentiator for veal is the age of the animal, otherwise they live like any other beef calf. I'm actually surprised you said this because it's 100% wrong. Veal in the US is almost exclusively the male offspring of dairy cows - usually Holsteins. They are never beef breeds and their lives are extremely different. In order to get the tender meat, they are put on a formula deficient in Iron and either tied up or kept in small crates, which I have witnessed many times. This combination produces the light, tender meat veal is known for. I have a very hard time accepting you didn't know any of this having grown up on a dairy farm. >Sadly, calving is hard on the animal. To be fair, this is something humans equally struggled with until the advent of modern medicine. It sure is. It's a tremendous amount of stress to put on a female's body. That's the issue.
msellout 14y ago
Don't forget all the people who now save a bit on their milk. This could add up to a significant amount annually, especially for the most poor. I'm not sure that I care about the living conditions of cattle at the expense of the living conditions of humans. Now, if you'd like to tax cattle farmers for the amount of horror and tragedy they create and then redistribute the tax proceeds as a lump sum to all citizens, that should properly balance the ethical situation.
- mseebach 14y ago
  That wont work. Assuming that the reason for the bad plight of the cows is that the worse treatment is more profitable, not that the farmer is sadistic, the farmer has two options: A) Conventional at cost X per unit and B) Animal friendly at cost X+N per unit. Now, to achieve your goal, you tax A at at least N per unit and subsidise B at the same rate. Now, people start buying B in favour of A and the farmers shift production to B, and soon production of A ceases - but as this is the object of the taxation, the tax revenue disappear and with it your budget for subsidising B. B now costs X+N.
- Falling3 14y ago
  Well I for one care about the treatment of other living creatures especially when weighed against what is essentially a luxury product. If you're really concerned about the living conditions, you'd want more expensive, better quality milk. I think we'd be better of, as a first step, ending subsidies to dairy farmers and enforcing some basic health and humane regulations. I mean, there are many dairy farms where discarded chicken meat and feces are fed to dairy cows. Here's a story about a guy feeding doughnuts and cookies. http://www.cheeseslave.com/farmer-feeds-doughnuts-and-cookies-to-cows/ http://www.cheeseslave.com/farmer-feeds-doughnuts-and-cookie... Cows have very specialized digestive systems meant for processing grass. Even if we grant that cow's milk is a good thing for us to have, certainly it doesn't apply with diets like that.
rmason 14y ago
My guess is that you haven't spent any actual time on dairy farms. Early in my career I worked in the fertilizer business and a large part of my customer base were dairy farmers. I worked with dairy farmers with as few as 100 cows and as many as 1200. These were family farms and they cared well for the animals. Antibiotics were only used on sick cows and not as a daily regimen. I really respect those guys, most of them are far better businessmen than the tradesmen in town. The few times that I saw animals mistreated were farmers who weren't very long for the dairy business.
- mumrah 14y ago
  As with most agriculture in the US (assuming you're talking about the US), family farms are the exception - not the rule.
  - mikebike 14y ago
    "In 2010, of all the farms in the United States with at least $1 million in revenues, 88 percent were family farms, and they accounted for 79 percent of production." -- http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/the-triumph-of-the-family-farm/8998/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/the-triu...
- spacemanaki 14y ago
  > as few as 100 cows and as many as 1200 I think those are actually pretty small numbers, and might not even count as CAFOs (confined animal feeding operation), right?
  - rmason 14y ago
    In Michigan a large CAFO is 700 or more dairy cows: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wb-npdes-CAFO-rules-final_247319_7.pdf http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wb-npdes-CAFO-rules-fi... I know that farms much smaller than that have to abide by some of the CAFO rules such as having approved manure application plans. Several of Michigan's larger farms use the manure to generate their own electricity.
16s 14y ago
Also, milk/dairy products in general are chocked-full of cow hormones that cause acne, baldness and prostrate cancer in men. It's best to not consume it. Sources: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18194824 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18194824 http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/qa/2008/PCPTQandA http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/qa/2008/PCPTQandA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrotestosterone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrotestosterone
- 1053r 14y ago
  The first link is a study that found a correlation between skim milk consumption and acne in teenage boys. It by no means conclusively shows causation. Perhaps teenage boys who have a hormone condition which leads to acne also have taste preferences which cause them to enjoy skim milk more, or perhaps skim milk really causes acne to teenage boys. The point is, we don't know. The second and third links talk about a study for a prostate cancer drug and a human androgen hormone. The word "milk" does not appear on either of those pages. Please make an effort to be more careful in your citations. When one adopts the tone and form of authority, by citing links to official looking urls, people sometimes take the advice offered without fact checking. And in this case, it could cause people to stop consuming dairy and start consuming something else, with unknown effects. edit: The P-Value for skim milk was the only one lower than the .05 significance level. So even in the cited study, there does not appear to be a correlation between whole, 2%, or 1% milk with acne.
  - peterwwillis 14y ago
    Not that it's necessary to pile on more here, but just the quote "It's best to not consume it." is an overreaction. Assuming that the cited articles actually showed causation, it would have to be a pretty significant risk to say not consuming it would be the best choice. It's a cheap and widely available source of protein and fat. Not everyone has readily available access to food, not to mention the cost of preparing and cooking it. It is, however, annoying that the price has gone up by about 22% in the last 10 years. (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ap http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ap)
yuhong 14y ago
Yea, why do you think the diary industry is fighting against raw milk?
continuations 14y ago
Not only are dairy cows mistreated, their babies are also slaughtered because of milk. Like any mammals cows only produce milk when they have babies. To keep their milk flowing cows are impregnated constantly. When the babies are born they are taken away from their mothers. Male babies are slaughtered. Dairy cows are also slaughtered at a young age when their milk production drops. Many people mistakenly thought no animals are harmed in milk production. That is not true.

JoeAltmaier 14y ago

Lots of worse inbreeding problems - show dogs, fish etc. I live in Iowa, sorry I haven't seen the mistreatment you mention. I'm sure its a problem, any time large amounts of animals become dollars. Puppy mills, fish farms. But compared to beef cattle, dairy have it made. I'm not even sure humans are immune. Talk about a constant stream of antibiotics, low genetic diversity, inhumane living conditions, cancer rates.

Falling3 14y ago
Not to run off on a tangent, but you're wrong about the dairy beef comparison. Before heading to a feedlot, most beef cattle spend around a year of their lives grazing often allowed to stay with their mothers. Beef cattle are killed much sooner, but have something resembling a natural life for a time. Newborn dairy calves are removed almost immediately so no milk is wasted on them. Male dairy cows are used for veal (and I'm sure you know how that goes). The females are placed into small "igloos" with no chance for grazing or physical contact until they are old enough to reproduce. Then it's 4 or 5 years of constant pregnancy and milking until they are "spent" at the ripe ole age of 6. I'm honestly not trying to be preachy here as I know this isn't the appropriate venue, but this is just not an area I feel anyone should be commending for their efficiency.
- randomdata 14y ago
  I grew up on a dairy farm, and while I'm sure some farmers operate exactly as you describe, I'm not sure you should paint the whole industry with one brush. Every farmer has their own opinions on how their operation should be operated, so every farm will be vastly different. > They are kept on a stream of antibiotics This was never true on our farm. Cows would be treated if sick, but that is it. I don't even remember them being sick all that often. The biggest problems were always related to calving complications (see below). > They often develop mastitis This largely came down to choices made by the animal, like laying in the muck even when there's a nice fresh bed of straw nearby. No farmer wants to see a cow with mastitis, even if just for profit reasons so you always do your best to try to avoid the problem. > The females are placed into small "igloos" with no chance for grazing or physical contact until they are old enough to reproduce. You mean until they are old enough to feed on their own. The reason they are individualized in early life is because otherwise the stronger calves will eat all of the food and who wants to see a calf starve? Even while in the hutch ("igloo"), the calves are free to interact with the nearby calves in other hutches. > Male dairy cows are used for veal (and I'm sure you know how that goes). I'm not sure the general population does know how that goes. I've heard all kinds of horrific stories about how veal calves, specifically, are mistreated. The only differentiator for veal is the age of the animal, otherwise they live like any other beef calf. > Then it's 4 or 5 years of constant pregnancy and milking until they are "spent" at the ripe ole age of 6. I remember plenty of cows that were milked for far longer, but we definitely lost a lot during calving, and as a result of that 4-5 years probably isn't far off the average milking span. Sadly, calving is hard on the animal. To be fair, this is something humans equally struggled with until the advent of modern medicine.
  - Falling3 14y ago
    And you may be aware that the family farm of previous generations is not what it used to be. Your family may have been a step ahead most of today's farms, but I still take issue with several of your points. >You mean until they are old enough to feed on their own. The reason they are individualized in early life is because otherwise the stronger calves will eat all of the food and who wants to see a calf starve? Even while in the hutch ("igloo"), the calves are free to interact with the nearby calves in other hutches. No I don't. The only reason that would be an issue is if they are not drinking milk naturally from the mother. All across the Midwest are small and medium sized cattle ranches with calves of all ages getting on just fine. The biggest reason is they must be separated from the mother otherwise the farmer is losing money. And I honestly have not seen a single case where calves are free to interact with each other. They're either tied up or fenced in. >I'm not sure the general population does know how that goes. I've heard all kinds of horrific stories about how veal calves, specifically, are mistreated. The only differentiator for veal is the age of the animal, otherwise they live like any other beef calf. I'm actually surprised you said this because it's 100% wrong. Veal in the US is almost exclusively the male offspring of dairy cows - usually Holsteins. They are never beef breeds and their lives are extremely different. In order to get the tender meat, they are put on a formula deficient in Iron and either tied up or kept in small crates, which I have witnessed many times. This combination produces the light, tender meat veal is known for. I have a very hard time accepting you didn't know any of this having grown up on a dairy farm. >Sadly, calving is hard on the animal. To be fair, this is something humans equally struggled with until the advent of modern medicine. It sure is. It's a tremendous amount of stress to put on a female's body. That's the issue.

msellout 14y ago

Don't forget all the people who now save a bit on their milk. This could add up to a significant amount annually, especially for the most poor. I'm not sure that I care about the living conditions of cattle at the expense of the living conditions of humans. Now, if you'd like to tax cattle farmers for the amount of horror and tragedy they create and then redistribute the tax proceeds as a lump sum to all citizens, that should properly balance the ethical situation.

mseebach 14y ago
That wont work. Assuming that the reason for the bad plight of the cows is that the worse treatment is more profitable, not that the farmer is sadistic, the farmer has two options: A) Conventional at cost X per unit and B) Animal friendly at cost X+N per unit. Now, to achieve your goal, you tax A at at least N per unit and subsidise B at the same rate. Now, people start buying B in favour of A and the farmers shift production to B, and soon production of A ceases - but as this is the object of the taxation, the tax revenue disappear and with it your budget for subsidising B. B now costs X+N.
Falling3 14y ago
Well I for one care about the treatment of other living creatures especially when weighed against what is essentially a luxury product. If you're really concerned about the living conditions, you'd want more expensive, better quality milk. I think we'd be better of, as a first step, ending subsidies to dairy farmers and enforcing some basic health and humane regulations. I mean, there are many dairy farms where discarded chicken meat and feces are fed to dairy cows. Here's a story about a guy feeding doughnuts and cookies. http://www.cheeseslave.com/farmer-feeds-doughnuts-and-cookies-to-cows/ http://www.cheeseslave.com/farmer-feeds-doughnuts-and-cookie... Cows have very specialized digestive systems meant for processing grass. Even if we grant that cow's milk is a good thing for us to have, certainly it doesn't apply with diets like that.

rmason 14y ago

My guess is that you haven't spent any actual time on dairy farms. Early in my career I worked in the fertilizer business and a large part of my customer base were dairy farmers. I worked with dairy farmers with as few as 100 cows and as many as 1200. These were family farms and they cared well for the animals. Antibiotics were only used on sick cows and not as a daily regimen. I really respect those guys, most of them are far better businessmen than the tradesmen in town. The few times that I saw animals mistreated were farmers who weren't very long for the dairy business.

mumrah 14y ago
As with most agriculture in the US (assuming you're talking about the US), family farms are the exception - not the rule.
- mikebike 14y ago
  "In 2010, of all the farms in the United States with at least $1 million in revenues, 88 percent were family farms, and they accounted for 79 percent of production." -- http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/the-triumph-of-the-family-farm/8998/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/the-triu...
spacemanaki 14y ago
> as few as 100 cows and as many as 1200 I think those are actually pretty small numbers, and might not even count as CAFOs (confined animal feeding operation), right?
- rmason 14y ago
  In Michigan a large CAFO is 700 or more dairy cows: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wb-npdes-CAFO-rules-final_247319_7.pdf http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/wb-npdes-CAFO-rules-fi... I know that farms much smaller than that have to abide by some of the CAFO rules such as having approved manure application plans. Several of Michigan's larger farms use the manure to generate their own electricity.

16s 14y ago

Also, milk/dairy products in general are chocked-full of cow hormones that cause acne, baldness and prostrate cancer in men. It's best to not consume it. Sources: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18194824 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18194824 http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/qa/2008/PCPTQandA http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/qa/2008/PCPTQandA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrotestosterone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dihydrotestosterone

1053r 14y ago
The first link is a study that found a correlation between skim milk consumption and acne in teenage boys. It by no means conclusively shows causation. Perhaps teenage boys who have a hormone condition which leads to acne also have taste preferences which cause them to enjoy skim milk more, or perhaps skim milk really causes acne to teenage boys. The point is, we don't know. The second and third links talk about a study for a prostate cancer drug and a human androgen hormone. The word "milk" does not appear on either of those pages. Please make an effort to be more careful in your citations. When one adopts the tone and form of authority, by citing links to official looking urls, people sometimes take the advice offered without fact checking. And in this case, it could cause people to stop consuming dairy and start consuming something else, with unknown effects. edit: The P-Value for skim milk was the only one lower than the .05 significance level. So even in the cited study, there does not appear to be a correlation between whole, 2%, or 1% milk with acne.
- peterwwillis 14y ago
  Not that it's necessary to pile on more here, but just the quote "It's best to not consume it." is an overreaction. Assuming that the cited articles actually showed causation, it would have to be a pretty significant risk to say not consuming it would be the best choice. It's a cheap and widely available source of protein and fat. Not everyone has readily available access to food, not to mention the cost of preparing and cooking it. It is, however, annoying that the price has gone up by about 22% in the last 10 years. (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ap http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ap)

yuhong 14y ago

Yea, why do you think the diary industry is fighting against raw milk?

continuations 14y ago

Not only are dairy cows mistreated, their babies are also slaughtered because of milk. Like any mammals cows only produce milk when they have babies. To keep their milk flowing cows are impregnated constantly. When the babies are born they are taken away from their mothers. Male babies are slaughtered. Dairy cows are also slaughtered at a young age when their milk production drops. Many people mistakenly thought no animals are harmed in milk production. That is not true.