Wednesday, October 15, 2014

Case history on government intervention in antibiotic usage in food animals from Animal Health Institute

The Antibiotic Ban in Denmark: A Case Study on Politically Driven Bans

In the 1990s, the European Union made a political decision to phase out the use of antibiotics as growth promoters (AGPs). Denmark – with a pork industry roughly equivalent to the size of the pork herd in Iowa – led the way by instituting a full voluntary ban in 1998, and making it compulsory in 2000.

As there have been proposals in the U.S. Congress that would ban even more uses of antibiotics in animal agriculture, the Danish experience provides an interesting and instructive case study. The results have illustrated how counterproductive a sweeping ban can be, including several clear consequences, including:

  • Increased death and disease among animals;
  • Greater amounts of antibiotics used to treat animal disease, although overall use has decreased — total use declined by 26 percent between 1998 and 2009, while quantities used for therapeutic purposes increased 223 percent;
  • While resistance to some antibiotics has decreased in animals, resistance to other antibiotics has gone up;
  • Little evidence exists to suggest that antibiotic resistance in humans has declined, which was the purpose of the ban.

Bottom line: A ban on AGPs in Denmark has not had the intended benefit of reducing antibiotic resistance patterns in humans; it has had the unintended consequence of increasing animal suffering, pain and death.

Link to whole story


Friday, October 03, 2014

We have been getting bad nutritional advice for 50 years now The Big Fat Surprise with Nina Teicholz


​Nina Teicholz has never received any industry funding of any kind on the business of improving the health and wellbeing of consumers. She simply spent 9 years investigating why we get the nutritional advice we do and determined it has been politics as much as nutrition. Her book the The Big Fat Surprise is the result.
www.thebigfatsurprise.com


Link here to listen to the show

Request "Hormones In" your food


​Campaign starts today. Any establishment that promotes "hormone free" walk in and ask "Can I get hormones in my food?" When they say no respond "I only eat foods with hormones tell your boss". THEN LEAVE.... report back your experience and we will compile all the stories and I will give prizes to creative people. HORMONES IN starts now.

Thursday, September 25, 2014

Loos Tales for Sept 25, 2014 Farm Aid teams up with BOLD Nebraska comes to fleece Nebraskan's this weekend


​Today on Loos Tales Trent will shed light on why the consumer needs the Keystone XL pipeline. Incorrectly people believe this is all about oil but not building the pipeline hurts farmers bad. Farm Aid a bunch who lies about helping farmers is part the problem not solution.

Tuesday, September 23, 2014

I am not flocking you (Farm Aid Fraud AGAIN)


As printed in the High Plains Journal more at www.HPJ.com

The only thing worse than misleading the public about modern farming methods is doing so in the name of helping farmers. I am talking about Farm Aid, which may have started with good intentions but today is fleecing the public in the name of helping farmers. It is time to sort the wheat from the chaff.

Here is what you will find on the Farm Aid website:

"We've worked side-by-side with farmers to protest factory farms and inform farmers and eaters about issues like genetically modified food and growth hormones."

In another place on the site they define what a "factory farm" is. They say anyone who is confining animals and not grazing is a factory farm. That means our operation with 60 sows on dirt that farrow in a farrowing house with the pigs then going to a nursery is not considered a family farm by these "experts."

So with the Farm Aid organization working against every single technological advancement that has propelled the United States into its position as a global leader in food production, I should not at all be surprised that in September they will once again be campaigning against farmers and our ability to feed future generations.

Neil Young and Willie Nelson, the founders of Farm Aid, will appear alongside one another for a concert on Sept. 27 in Nebraska to protest the projected Keystone XL pipeline in Nebraska. If you think that is just an oil industry issue and has nothing to do with farmers, you better think again. This is about to be a nationwide crisis.

Community Health Systems (CHS) and others report the basis on farmers in the Great Plains, particularly the Northern Plains, is 50 cents per bushel, and there have been times in the past year when the basis was well over a $1 per bushel.

As the 2014 crop harvest is fast approaching, on-farm storage is still being consumed by a chunk of the 2013 crop. The number of railcars carrying crude oil on major freight railroads in the U.S. is projected to have grown by more than 6,000 percent between 2007 and 2013, according to the Association of American Railroads.

The state of North Dakota is now producing 1.1 million barrels of oil every single day and without a pipeline, it is being moved by tying up rail cars, which means there are no cars to transport grain, causing a serious problem for farmers. The average rail car moves 691 barrels of oil. The pipeline will move 750,000 barrels a day or the equivalent of 1,085 rail cars per day. A rail car holds 3,200 bushels of corn so 1,085 carloads amounts to 3.4 million bushel equivalent per day.

This rail car tie-up problem isn't limited to the farmers in the Northern Great Plains. Recently I was in the farming rich area of upstate New York. Ed Gale has been in the fertilizer business for 50 years and told me he has never seen the like in regard to rail transport of potash for his customers. They are backed up over 2 1/2 months, and it looks to get worse because potash comes from the Northern Great Plains in Saskatchewan.

There is a plenty of misinformation regarding the pipeline. I can't tell you how many times I have heard, "Trent, that Keystone pipeline isn't going to carry U.S. oil but just oil from Canada." Actually, 25 percent of the oil to be transported will be U.S. Bakken oil, but does it really matter? It ALL needs to be transported out of there to the end user, and we certainly use our share. Is it better to keep doing what we are doing and decrease revenue for farmers while we increase costs for consumers?

So when I hear that Farm Aid, who has not done anything except file lawsuits against farm families who are trying to make a living and produce food, is coming to Nebraska to protest against another thing that farmers need, I get agitated.

It is one thing for activist groups to work at causing the farming sector interference as the pseudo-environmental and animal rights groups do. It is a completely different thing when an organization fleeces the public for funds in the name of helping farmers and then uses those funds to shut farmers down.

Isn't it ironic that "fleece" is made from 100 percent petroleum yet pretends to be a product of agriculture? It is high time for all of us to expose the deceptive ways of Farm Aid and tell them to get the flock out of our hair.

Trent Loos is a sixth generation rancher who travels the country to promote the people in agriculture through his public speaking and radio programs. He writes columns for several publications and his work may be found at www.LoosTales.com.

Date: 9/22/2014


A few quick facts about the environmental impact of cell phone usage


​I was inspired to find the real facts of the environmental impact of cell phone usage and manufacturing after the tremendous interview that Michelle Fields for PJ Media did with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 


Over half of a phone's negative environmental impacts occur during the manufacturing process. Each phone consists of 500 to 1,000 components that must be shaped and fitted together in polluting factories most are currently located in China.


During the cell phone's use, its environmental impact results from the electricity generated to power wireless infrastructure and charge our phones. In just one year, it is estimated that one cell phone uses the energy equivalent to 32 gallons of gas, and emits 112 kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2). Modern cell phone chargers can draw about half a watt of power, even when there is no cell phone connected to them.


According to the report, using a cellphone for a year on average uses 4,221 MJ of energy (equivalent to 32 gallons of gasoline) and emits 112 kg of CO2 (equivalent to 12.8 gallons of gasoline). These values take into account the entire system and all the energy and materials needed to manufacture and run it: the phones, base stations, switching system, cable system, and administration. It assumes that each phone is used for one year and then replaced.


Consumers dispose of more than 350,000 mobile phones every day. According to the EPA, 141 million mobile phones were discarded in 2009 and only 12 million of those were collected for recycling. Roughly 100 million mobile phones are discarded in Europe and China each year.


Radiation given off by mobile phones and other high-tech gadgets is also suspected to cause problems for creatures who can't vocalize dissent. Cell phones are one possible reason for the recent increase in the occurrence of bee colony collapse disorder. The theory is that radiation from cell phones interfere with bee's navigation systems, and thus prevent them from returning to the hive.