U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-11-2012, 08:31 PM
 
4,982 posts, read 5,045,239 times
Reputation: 6322

Advertisements

Quote:
So EU and China didn't use accredited scientific sources and facts to ban ractopamine?
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
No
I knew it, only American corporate science got everything right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-11-2012, 09:21 PM
 
4,982 posts, read 5,045,239 times
Reputation: 6322
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
I guess you didn't bother to read the OP or the words were too big for you: (it's called tit for tat)
Don't play your broken record on me, OK. I repeat my question, again. Do you have scientific data showing that soup of hundreds of agri chemicals has no detrimental effect on the plebeian' health?

Quote:
China banned it for:
China, EU, 80 more countries got it all wrong, only pocket Smithfield scientists got it right. Did they use precautionary principle. I forgot, precaution is the groundless propaganda debunked to ensure $50,000,000 paycheck of Smithfield CEO (not speaking of major investors making a kill in the dead chemically modified pig biz). Again, do you have first hand info proving that $50,000,000/year Smithfield CEO does eat Smithfield Frankenstein products on a regular basis? Yes/No? Simple Yes would mean 100 times more than all the pocket science combined. Same with Monsanto. Same with Tyson.

Quote:
As far as the rest of your rant goes there is the GMO thread which covers your GMO phobia nine ways from nowhere,
It's not a GMO thread. Besides, you have propensity for summarily dismissing facts you don't like/have no clue about, and playing broken record again and again. As with pigs, precautionary principle was also debunked by Monsanto scientists as alarmist propaganda.

Quote:
Again, all you speak about has been covered in the GMO thread, I'm not going to regurgitate it because you're too lazy to read...
Don't weasel out. I asked SIMPLE DIRECT question. Are you aware of any scientific study on synergistic effects of the hundreds agri chemicals on our health? YES/NO, please.

Just in case: An effect arising between two or more agents, entities, factors, or substances that produces an effect greater than the sum of their individual effects.

Quote:
Careful, your elitist nose is sticking up really high in the air right now: "ghetto and trailer park diet of the finest Frankenstein products food industry"
Nothing elitist here. Ghetto, trailer park, generally poor folks consume largest amount of the cutting edge Frankenstein products on the market. It's not a thread to discuss "why". They just do, and one of these day you may try mingling with those folks to observe their general health, appearance, etc..

Quote:
Not me, I eat only certified organic foods grown in soil that has been urinated and defecated on by numerous animals, enriched by the decomposed bodies of people and animals, had acid rain fall on it and dusted by microbes born by the winds from the Sahara desert.....
It's not a thread to discuss philosophical abyss of the natural world founded in the mutual consumption. Philosophical underpinnings of CAFOs (requiring all that cutting edge science of yours) are much more shaky and they are simply disgusting on multiple levels, "philosophical" and physiological. Like it or hate it, you are evolved to consume foods grown in soil that has been urinated and defecated on... You didn't evolve to consume ractopamine treated animals.

Quote:
I guess I must be purchasing the right Frankenstein products because I'm here reading your posts and I've eaten garbage foods for over 60 years.....
I asked whether or not you consume the cheapest, the most scientifically advanced, the most chemically modified breads on the market. YES/NO? In my opinion, the biggest science fans on city-data should gorge themselves on economy wonder breads etc. to prove their point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2012, 11:07 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,272 posts, read 28,076,984 times
Reputation: 28726
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
Don't play your broken record on me, OK. I repeat my question, again. Do you have scientific data showing that soup of hundreds of agri chemicals has no detrimental effect on the plebeian' health?
Do you have any data showing that agricultural chemicals in foods cause harm?

You keep demanding a study that shows no detriment. You can safely demand it, knowing that it is impossible to perform and will never happen.

Quote:
China, EU, 80 more countries got it all wrong, only pocket Smithfield scientists got it right. Did they use precautionary principle. I forgot, precaution is the groundless propaganda debunked to ensure $50,000,000 paycheck of Smithfield CEO (not speaking of major investors making a kill in the dead chemically modified pig biz). Again, do you have first hand info proving that $50,000,000/year Smithfield CEO does eat Smithfield Frankenstein products on a regular basis? Yes/No? Simple Yes would mean 100 times more than all the pocket science combined. Same with Monsanto. Same with Tyson.
Where do you get the $50 million number? Mr. Pope is well compensated, but he does not make that much. I suspect he would be very pleased if he did.

The Smithfield CEO eats his own product:

Q&A with Larry Pope, president and CEO of Smithfield Foods | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

"I think people forget we are the largest bacon processor in the country. We are the largest ham company in the country. We're not even talking about Smithfield ham. Many of the private label products you buy under the store brand, they're our products. I just had a sausage and egg biscuit from McDonald's. That was our sausage and egg biscuit. Wherever you eat lunch today, I'm going to suggest you're going to see our product."

Quote:
You didn't evolve to consume ractopamine treated animals.
How do you know that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2012, 12:09 AM
 
4,982 posts, read 5,045,239 times
Reputation: 6322
[quote=suzy_q2010;27306367]
Quote:

Do you have any data showing that agricultural chemicals in foods cause harm?

You keep demanding a study that shows no detriment. You can safely demand it, knowing that it is impossible to perform and will never happen.
So, there is NOT a single study on synergistic health effects of hundreds of agri chemicals in our food. Who would guess? Yet, you are so sure that agri chemical soup causes no harm. Did you receive revelation of some sort? I'm tired of referring all the modified food enthusiasts to the precautionary principle. Burden of the proof is on you.

Quote:
Where do you get the $50 million number? Mr. Pope is well compensated, but he does not make that much. I suspect he would be very pleased if he did.
Yup, I mixed up total 2012 Executive Compensation, $46,833,980 with Pope's share of 16.2 millions.
SFD Smithfield Foods, Inc. Executive Compensation

Keep in mind that Smithfield reported $361 million in income. In other words upper brass alone (4 people or so) appropriated 12% of the loot. Then there are shareholders. I only can guess share of the tens of thousands of Smithfield wage slaves breathing toxic waste fumes and losing their limbs on conveyors.

Thanks for an interview, it's a pleasure to know what narrow-minded bean counters lead us into oblivion and make a killing while doing that. Yet, I clearly asked whether Smithfield CEO eats his products on a regular basis. Getting adventurous with McD biscuits once in a while doesn't cut it. Geez, every 2 years or so I do eat at McD myself. Mr. Pope does claim that he eats pork products every other day. All I want to know what kind of pork products he eats. He was somewhat elusive about that.


Quote:
How do you know that?
Because evolution takes much longer than 30 years it took for the agri biz to mushroom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2012, 05:49 AM
 
15,924 posts, read 17,375,046 times
Reputation: 7641
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
Don't play your broken record on me, OK. I repeat my question, again. Do you have scientific data showing that soup of hundreds of agri chemicals has no detrimental effect on the plebeian' health?
Since you are the one making the accusations YOU are the one that needs to prove to me they are dangerous to one's health... Again, this logic was discussed ad nauseam in the GMO thread, too lazy to read it? Not my problem.....

Quote:
China, EU, 80 more countries got it all wrong, only pocket Smithfield scientists got it right. Did they use precautionary principle. I forgot, precaution is the groundless propaganda debunked to ensure $50,000,000 paycheck of Smithfield CEO (not speaking of major investors making a kill in the dead chemically modified pig biz). Again, do you have first hand info proving that $50,000,000/year Smithfield CEO does eat Smithfield Frankenstein products on a regular basis? Yes/No? Simple Yes would mean 100 times more than all the pocket science combined. Same with Monsanto. Same with Tyson.
This BS was discussed ad nauseam in the GMO thread, too lazy to read it? Not my problem.....

Quote:
It's not a GMO thread. Besides, you have propensity for summarily dismissing facts you don't like/have no clue about, and playing broken record again and again. As with pigs, precautionary principle was also debunked by Monsanto scientists as alarmist propaganda.
Don't weasel out. I asked SIMPLE DIRECT question. Are you aware of any scientific study on synergistic effects of the hundreds agri chemicals on our health? YES/NO, please.
No and if you say there are I'll say BS, more liberal elitist propaganda.... ----->NO<-----

Quote:
Just in case: An effect arising between two or more agents, entities, factors, or substances that produces an effect greater than the sum of their individual effects.

Nothing elitist here. Ghetto, trailer park, generally poor folks consume largest amount of the cutting edge Frankenstein products on the market. It's not a thread to discuss "why". They just do, and one of these day you may try mingling with those folks to observe their general health, appearance, etc..
"Those folks"? "poor people"? Wow! You really do have your nose up in the air don't you?

Are you really such an elitist that you believe other people don't know what the word synergy means?

BTW, as usual with you types you are wrong:

Middle Class Largest Fast Food Consumer

http://www.hufed.org/library/2012/2/...-consumer.html

http://letmegooglethat.com/?q=larges...s+of+fast+food

Quote:
It's not a thread to discuss philosophical abyss of the natural world founded in the mutual consumption. Philosophical underpinnings of CAFOs (requiring all that cutting edge science of yours) are much more shaky and they are simply disgusting on multiple levels, "philosophical" and physiological. Like it or hate it, you are evolved to consume foods grown in soil that has been urinated and defecated on... You didn't evolve to consume ractopamine treated animals.
And just how do you know human beings haven't evolved to consume ractopamine treated animals, you have an inside track to the aliens that created us?

Quote:
I asked whether or not you consume the cheapest, the most scientifically advanced, the most chemically modified breads on the market. YES/NO? In my opinion, the biggest science fans on city-data should gorge themselves on economy wonder breads etc. to prove their point.
I thought I was clear on this, hell yes I eat Big Macs, Taco Bell, Wingstop, Arby's, raw chopped meat with raw egg (steak tartare to you elitists), rare rib-eye steaks, lots of Ding Dongs, tons of Nathans hot dogs, fried bologna (in butter) sandwiches etc....

I get a kick out of this forum with you holier-than-thou types always proclaiming how bad <cough><cough> the soup of hundreds of agri chemicals are to one's body.

And refuse to see that it's not the soup of hundreds of agri chemicals in your body that causes you to have weird symptoms that 99.99% of the population on Earth never experience but that there is something physically wrong in the chemical composition of your body... You have my sympathy and pity for your medical condition(s)....

So you and some others here find modern food to be "disgusting" "Frankenstein products" and always post the exact same crap: Prove to me I'm wrong and you're right

You people should really knock off the "I'm smarter than you" and "you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about"

It's a holier-than-thou attitude that permeates almost every thread in this forum...

Last edited by plwhit; 12-12-2012 at 06:30 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2012, 09:40 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,272 posts, read 28,076,984 times
Reputation: 28726
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post

So, there is NOT a single study on synergistic health effects of hundreds of agri chemicals in our food. Who would guess? Yet, you are so sure that agri chemical soup causes no harm. Did you receive revelation of some sort? I'm tired of referring all the modified food enthusiasts to the precautionary principle. Burden of the proof is on you.
Since one cannot prove a negative, the burden of proof is on the person who claims that the substance under discussion is harmful. Do you have any sources to support your contention that the residues of ractopamine in meat are harmful?


Quote:
Yup, I mixed up total 2012 Executive Compensation, $46,833,980 with Pope's share of 16.2 millions.
SFD Smithfield Foods, Inc. Executive Compensation

Keep in mind that Smithfield reported $361 million in income. In other words upper brass alone (4 people or so) appropriated 12% of the loot. Then there are shareholders. I only can guess share of the tens of thousands of Smithfield wage slaves breathing toxic waste fumes and losing their limbs on conveyors.
What does executive compensation have to do with ractopamine? Do you have a source for any employees being harmed by ractopamine?

Quote:
Thanks for an interview, it's a pleasure to know what narrow-minded bean counters lead us into oblivion and make a killing while doing that. Yet, I clearly asked whether Smithfield CEO eats his products on a regular basis. Getting adventurous with McD biscuits once in a while doesn't cut it. Geez, every 2 years or so I do eat at McD myself. Mr. Pope does claim that he eats pork products every other day. All I want to know what kind of pork products he eats. He was somewhat elusive about that.
It is not enough that he eats pork every other day? he has to eat what you consider to be some special kind of pork?

Quote:
Because evolution takes much longer than 30 years it took for the agri biz to mushroom.
Ractopamine is a beta adrenergic receptor agonist.That means it activates the same receptor as adrenaline, which is responsible for the "flight or fight" response that we learned about in elementary school. The evolutionary importance of that receptor is obvious. When given intravenously to humans, ractopamine is excreted rapidly by the kidneys. When it is taken orally, it passes first through the liver and metabolized. Since humans have a receptor on which ractopamine has activity and mechanisms for eliminating it from the body, it is indeed evolutionarily programmed to handle it.

Beta agonists are used to treat diseases in humans, including asthma and preterm labor. The extremely tiny residual amounts of ractopamine in food animals would not be expected to have a physiological effect in humans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 01:01 AM
 
4,982 posts, read 5,045,239 times
Reputation: 6322
Quote:
Originally Posted by plwhit View Post
Since you are the one making the accusations YOU are the one that needs to prove to me they are dangerous to one's health... Again, this logic was discussed ad nauseam in the GMO thread, too lazy to read it? Not my problem.....
Please, don't play your broken records again. I took trouble to copy paste definitions of "precautionary principle" and "synergistic effects" so you couldn't weasel out. Burden of the proof is on YOU. It's simple common sense.

Quote:
This BS was discussed ad nauseam in the GMO thread, too lazy to read it? Not my problem.....
What what discussed? Have we discussed dietary preferences of Monsanto and Smithfield brass in GMO thread? Have we discussed why findings of the American Corporate Science should trump decisions of 80 + countries?

Quote:
No and if you say there are I'll say BS, more liberal elitist propaganda.... ----->NO<-----
NO is the only correct answer. There are NO academic studies on synergistic effects of the hundreds agri chemicals on our health. We are guinea pigs that provide real life, no-cost data nobody cares to collect. Why?

Quote:
"Those folks"? "poor people
Quote:
"? Wow! You really do have your nose up in the air don't you?

Are you really such an elitist that you believe other people don't know what the word synergy means?
I used "those" because for you they are "those people". I live among them, I work with them, I know what they eat, I know how they look and feel, I know that most of them doesn't know anything about synergy and doesn't want to know. Geez, great many can't read to save their lives, many can't add 2+2 without calculator. Besides, they have much more exciting ways to escape reality than forum' bickering.

I don't have numerical data, but visually speaking most of them are walking ruins by the age of 50 or less. It's not only because of food, but the foods they eat don't help, mildly speaking.

Quote:
BTW, as usual with you types you are wrong:

Middle Class Largest Fast Food Consumer
As usually you don't read. I never implied that poor eat the most of fast food, I used the term "Frankenstein". I had a few stretches of intense hunger in my life, and I know well that fast food is a luxury few poor men can afford, it's not an everyday food. If you see poor folks at fast food joints, they are not that poor yet. Also, drugs is not the only thing that poor get hooked on. Regrettably, many poor folks are simply too stupid to figure out the cheapest way to survive, some do think that they get "value" at fast food joints. Since you are so inclusive and compassionate, try to find a ghetto grocery store and see typical food assortment for yourself. Another option - stand next to a Wall Mart check out and observe what poor folks (a step above ghetto) are buying. I know you are extremely not judgmental, but I know and you know poor folks when we see one. Frankenstein foods are not the cheapest (beans and rice would be cheaper) but poverty in America imposes severe psychological hardships on the people (physiological hardships are secondary) and poor self-medicate, including foods high in fat & sugars (mild anti-depressants). Incidentally, foods high in fat and sugars are favorites of the Frankenstein industry.

Quote:
And just how do you know human beings haven't evolved to consume ractopamine treated animals, you have an inside track to the aliens that created us?
Was this supposed to be a joke? Try again.

Quote:
I thought I was clear on this, hell yes I eat Big Macs, Taco Bell, Wingstop, Arby's, raw chopped meat with raw egg (steak tartare to you elitists), rare rib-eye steaks, lots of Ding Dongs, tons of Nathans hot dogs, fried bologna (in butter) sandwiches etc....
You are a rich man, you can afford expensive junk, you can afford the risk, and probably you can afford dentists and health care.

Quote:
I get a kick out of this forum with you holier-than-thou types always proclaiming how bad <cough><cough> the soup of hundreds of agri chemicals are to one's body.

And refuse to see that it's not the soup of hundreds of agri chemicals in your body that causes you to have weird symptoms that 99.99% of the population on Earth never experience but that there is something physically wrong in the chemical composition of your body... You have my sympathy and pity for your medical condition(s)....
Yup, formerly unknown ailments are quadrupling and ten-folding because out of sudden there is something wrong in the chemical composition of human bodies? Why? Obviously, in your la la la world Frankenstein foods and agri chemical soups have no effect on human bodies whatsoever. Thanks for your sympathies, but up to this ripe age I'm among those work mules who pay for everybody' health care and never collect a dime for themselves.

Quote:
So you and some others here find modern food to be "disgusting" "Frankenstein products" and always post the exact same crap: Prove to me I'm wrong and you're right
As I said above, I have extensive personal experience and observations that allows me to correlate consumption of Frankenstein products with poor health and general sense of dullness, doom and misery.

To clarify, Frankenstein foods - highly processes foods as well as unprocessed foods that require cutting edge agri & food science and chemicals to grow, process, create "taste", preserve "freshness", etc.. Most of that cutting edge food & agri science & chemicals are quite optional provided less greed, less "economy of scale", less specialization, less government subsidies, less monopolization & "vertical integration", less externalization of the costs on environment, society and future generations.

If you like your milk with MSG, a chemical pickle and fried maggot each morning, it's a personal preference, your preference. I find it disgusting, so what? How can I prove that your cravings for that sort of combo are wrong and disgusting? It's impossible. I'm privileged to know how real foods taste (most people don't) and I find "Frankenstein" products simply disgusting on taste grounds alone. Food industry manufactures Frankenstein products, but it also manufactures consumers of the Frankenstein foods using every marketing trick imaginable. I never will be able to understand people discussing fine points of Wendy's and Arby's "cuisine" but you can, I guess.

Quote:
You people should really knock off the "I'm smarter than you" and "you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about"
So where exactly did I say that I'm smarter and better and ....? You do try to pretend that you don't understand what precautionary principle is about, but I doubt it's because you don't understand, it's because it makes your stance very shaky.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 02:05 AM
 
4,982 posts, read 5,045,239 times
Reputation: 6322
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Since one cannot prove a negative, the burden of proof is on the person who claims that the substance under discussion is harmful. Do you have any sources to support your contention that the residues of ractopamine in meat are harmful?
Decisions of 80+ countries are not sources for you? And exactly WHY should we eat ractopamine on top of hundreds of other chemicals? Is it unavoidable like taxes or death? Why? You all corporate enthusiasts pretend that you don't understand what is synergistic effects are all about. Let's assume that ractopamine is 100% harmless by itself (if it does not exceed 20mg), but it's never by itself, ractopamine is a part of the chemical soup of hundreds of chemicals required to keep a corporate pig alive & fed, then they need to process that pig, make it "tasty", preserve it. That's a lot of ppms and mgs coming together. Nobody even tried to study effects of that concoction on our health. So where is your confidence coming from?

Quote:
What does executive compensation have to do with ractopamine? Do you have a source for any employees being harmed by ractopamine?
Each and every chemical they use serves to boost CEO compensation package (and ROI) by cutting every possible corner, every possible cost & every possible ethics concern using miracles of science, engineering and chemistry. Then they employ PR professional that wrap all that short sighted savagery of the greed and bestiality in the bright layers of "progress" and "feeding the world". Employee are breathing toxic fumes and losing their limbs for exactly the same reason pigs are injected with ractopamine - to boost ROI and managerial compensation. It's a truly noble cause we all can believe in and support no matter personal health costs.

Quote:
It is not enough that he eats pork every other day? he has to eat what you consider to be some special kind of pork?
I grew up on the real pork, I miss real pork, I know that Smithfield products are not real pork, not even close. Smithfield stuff is marginally edible if you are hungry or you grew up on the corporate foodstuff and know nothing else. That's why I'm curious what kind of pork $16 millions CEO consumes, if he doesn't care about chemicals (I doubt that) he most definitely cares about taste and he can afford to do something about that.

Quote:
Ractopamine is a beta adrenergic receptor agonist.That means it activates the same receptor as adrenaline, which is responsible for the "flight or fight" response that we learned about in elementary school. The evolutionary importance of that receptor is obvious. When given intravenously to humans, ractopamine is excreted rapidly by the kidneys. When it is taken orally, it passes first through the liver and metabolized. Since humans have a receptor on which ractopamine has activity and mechanisms for eliminating it from the body, it is indeed evolutionarily programmed to handle it.
Human body can metabolize methanol and cyanides. Ractopamine kills many pigs, "flight or fight" doesn't kill by itself.

Dispute over drug in feed limiting US meat exports - Business on NBCNews.com

In animals, ractopamine revs up production of lean meat, reducing fat. Pigs fed the drug in the last weeks of their life produce an average of 10 percent more meat, compared with animals on the same amount of feed that don't receive the drug. That raises profits by $2 per head, according to the drug's manufacturer, Elanco, a division of Eli Lilly. It sells the drug under the brand name Paylean.

The price of the matter - $2 per head.


The FDA ruled that ractopamine was safe and approved it for pigs in 1999, for cattle in 2003 and turkeys in 2008. As with many drugs, the approval process relied on safety studies conducted by the drug-maker -- studies that lie at the heart of the current trade dispute. Elanco mainly tested animals -- mice, rats, monkeys and dogs -- to judge how much ractopamine could be safely consumed. Only one human study was used in the safety assessment by Elanco, and among the six healthy young men who participated, one was removed because his heart began racing and pounding abnormally, according to a detailed evaluation of the study by European food safety officials. When Elanco studied the drug in pigs for its effectiveness, it reported that "no adverse effects were observed for any treatments." But within a few years of Paylean's approval, the company received hundreds of reports of sickened pigs from farmers and veterinarians, according to records from the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine. USDA meat inspectors also reported an increase in the number of "downer pigs" -- lame animals unable to walk -- in slaughter plants. As a result of the high number of adverse reactions, the FDA requested Elanco add a warning label to the drug, and it did so in 2002.



All of that because of $2 per head.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 06:41 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,272 posts, read 28,076,984 times
Reputation: 28726
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
Decisions of 80+ countries are not sources for you? And exactly WHY should we eat ractopamine on top of hundreds of other chemicals? Is it unavoidable like taxes or death? Why? You all corporate enthusiasts pretend that you don't understand what is synergistic effects are all about. Let's assume that ractopamine is 100% harmless by itself (if it does not exceed 20mg), but it's never by itself, ractopamine is a part of the chemical soup of hundreds of chemicals required to keep a corporate pig alive & fed, then they need to process that pig, make it "tasty", preserve it. That's a lot of ppms and mgs coming together. Nobody even tried to study effects of that concoction on our health. So where is your confidence coming from?

Each and every chemical they use serves to boost CEO compensation package (and ROI) by cutting every possible corner, every possible cost & every possible ethics concern using miracles of science, engineering and chemistry. Then they employ PR professional that wrap all that short sighted savagery of the greed and bestiality in the bright layers of "progress" and "feeding the world". Employee are breathing toxic fumes and losing their limbs for exactly the same reason pigs are injected with ractopamine - to boost ROI and managerial compensation. It's a truly noble cause we all can believe in and support no matter personal health costs.

I grew up on the real pork, I miss real pork, I know that Smithfield products are not real pork, not even close. Smithfield stuff is marginally edible if you are hungry or you grew up on the corporate foodstuff and know nothing else. That's why I'm curious what kind of pork $16 millions CEO consumes, if he doesn't care about chemicals (I doubt that) he most definitely cares about taste and he can afford to do something about that.

Human body can metabolize methanol and cyanides. Ractopamine kills many pigs, "flight or fight" doesn't kill by itself.

Dispute over drug in feed limiting US meat exports - Business on NBCNews.com

In animals, ractopamine revs up production of lean meat, reducing fat. Pigs fed the drug in the last weeks of their life produce an average of 10 percent more meat, compared with animals on the same amount of feed that don't receive the drug. That raises profits by $2 per head, according to the drug's manufacturer, Elanco, a division of Eli Lilly. It sells the drug under the brand name Paylean.

The price of the matter - $2 per head.


The FDA ruled that ractopamine was safe and approved it for pigs in 1999, for cattle in 2003 and turkeys in 2008. As with many drugs, the approval process relied on safety studies conducted by the drug-maker -- studies that lie at the heart of the current trade dispute. Elanco mainly tested animals -- mice, rats, monkeys and dogs -- to judge how much ractopamine could be safely consumed. Only one human study was used in the safety assessment by Elanco, and among the six healthy young men who participated, one was removed because his heart began racing and pounding abnormally, according to a detailed evaluation of the study by European food safety officials. When Elanco studied the drug in pigs for its effectiveness, it reported that "no adverse effects were observed for any treatments." But within a few years of Paylean's approval, the company received hundreds of reports of sickened pigs from farmers and veterinarians, according to records from the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine. USDA meat inspectors also reported an increase in the number of "downer pigs" -- lame animals unable to walk -- in slaughter plants. As a result of the high number of adverse reactions, the FDA requested Elanco add a warning label to the drug, and it did so in 2002.



All of that because of $2 per head.
Are you aware of any humans harmed by ractopamine in food animals anywhere in the world since it was introduced? A single one? If not, the rest of your argument is just obfuscation.

Humane handling of food animals is a separate issue entirely.

P.S. The way pork tastes has much to do with how it is prepared. Sorry you seem to have a problem finding someone who knows how to cook it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2012, 12:13 PM
 
2,737 posts, read 4,318,164 times
Reputation: 1785
Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
Your sources suck.

Helena Bottemiller is a volleyball playing college chick, who just happens to do a lot of provocative writing. She has ABSOLUTELY NO QUALIFICATIONS TO WRITE ANYTHING ABOUT FOOD SAFETY, other than that she was hired to write for an ONLINE RAG called "Food Safety News." She "grew up" in Seattle - the fruitloop capital of the world (and COMPLETELY disconnected from anything agricultural) - and wouldn't know the front end of a pig from the back end, even if the front end of said pig bit her in the boob.

And she's your source of "credible" information...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Green Living
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:27 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top