It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Researchers find animal antibiotics in vegetables

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2005 @ 12:19 PM
link   





Researchers find animal antibiotics in vegetables

Antibiotics given to livestock can end up in vegetables and pose a health threat to consumers, according to a study looking at the use of animal manure as a fertilizer.


The University of Minnesota study will add to the level of public concern about the food the eat. It also serves as a warning to food processors that they need to be vigilant when sourcing their vegetables.

The processing industry is under regulatory and consumer pressure to ensure the safety of their food products. Regular breakdowns in food safety and reports on contamination have raised consumer awareness about the problem.

The study, published in the Journal of Environmental Quality, indicates that processors will have to be careful when sourcing their vegetables, whether non-organic or organic. The contamination threat is due to the US laws allowing farmers to use animal manure as fertilizer in both conventional and organic agriculture.

In the study, University of Minnesota researchers found that corn, cabbage, and green onions absorbed chlortetracycline from manure fertilizer obtained from pigs that were given the antibiotic.

Chlortetracycline is a member of the tetracycline class of antibiotics that are used in human medicine to treat upper respiratory tract infections and other illnesses. Tetracyclines and other antibiotics also are used as feed additives in poultry, hogs and beef cattle.

Feed additives are not used to treat disease, but to promote slightly faster growth and to compensate for overcrowded and unsanitary conditions on industrial-scale farms.

When the antibiotics are ingested by a human they can spur the bacteria naturally present in the intestinal tract, including types of bacteria that can cause serious disease, to become drug-resistant, the researchers stated.

More...


This is not good.


It seems that everywhere you look, our food supply has serious problems...

*shakes head and goes back to bed*




posted on Dec, 5 2005 @ 06:27 PM
link   
This doesn't surprise me. But it REALLY pisses me off.




posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 04:37 AM
link   
I can't beleive they're feeding this to paying costomers. Its crap, the people who did this deserve to have there farm burned IMO



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 04:45 AM
link   
I have believed for a long time our suppossed increase in anitbiotic resistance has nothing to do with prescriptions, but rather the daily consumption of it in our food. It's obviously in the meats and dairy, but now passing through to vegetables?

By the way, farmers have always used manure, the problem is the way they are feeding the animals has now made that a problem. Since "they" have denied all allong that it is in the meats and dairy, why would anyone expect the manure to be a problem? Just saying, I don't think you can blame the vegetable farmers for the problem, it goes back the animals, and even those farmers are not the ultimate culprit. It's the companies like Monsanto who have sold the entire country on their products to adulterate our food supply.



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 07:12 AM
link   
With all these synthetic chemicals being added to livestock, earth, water and essentially everything then what happens next?

In my opinion life will eventually evolve leaving what it produced behind because they are unable to fight the superbugs that have evolved/adapted to the new conditions, utilising anti-bacterial cleaning products, anti-viral vaccines, toxic waste, increased CO2 etc. but.... this probably includes the wiping out ALOT of life in the process and yes that (in my opinion) include humans unless we can figure out a way to change ourselves to adapt to the new torn environment.

Thinking about it, where did all these superbugs come from in the first place??

Sofi, I listened to your podcast at the weekend and voted for it
some very good info and the way its presented is amazing, excellent work. I hadn't actually thought about where all these killer-bugs and viruses are coming from but its almost crystal clear they *EVOLVED/ADAPTED*.

Question is, CAN WE?



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas

Sofi, I listened to your podcast at the weekend and voted for it
some very good info and the way its presented is amazing, excellent work.


Thanks Hunting Veritas. Much appreciated.





I hadn't actually thought about where all these killer-bugs and viruses are coming from but its almost crystal clear they *EVOLVED/ADAPTED*.

Question is, CAN WE?


I hope so.

But I suspect we need to recognize the process, try to understand it - and help it along - not fight it.




clarity

[edit on 6-12-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Soficrow.....puts a whole new perspective on your spending a lot of time seeking good s**t...



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Thanks Hunting Veritas. Much appreciated.


No problem.



But I suspect we need to recognize the process, try to understand it - and help it along - not fight it.


I wonder if this can help,
BBC Radio 4 - Frontiers (Synthetic Life)

The field of genetic engineering has been around for nearly three decades but biologists and engineers are now beginning to take the research a stage further. They're trying to programme cells like tiny computers, to carry out a range of roles such as detecting toxic substances or even repairing our bodies' tissues.

This new, yet controversial field of synthetic biology appears to offer huge potential. As this week's Frontiers suggests, scientists may well be able to create totally new life forms of artificial life in the lab through this new technology.
click here to listen to the show.



clarity

Sorry?



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas

But I suspect we need to recognize the process, try to understand it - and help it along - not fight it.


I wonder if this can help,
BBC Radio 4 - Frontiers (Synthetic Life)

The field of genetic engineering has been around for nearly three decades but biologists and engineers are now beginning to take the research a stage further. They're trying to programme cells like tiny computers, to carry out a range of roles such as detecting toxic substances or even repairing our bodies' tissues.

This new, yet controversial field of synthetic biology appears to offer huge potential. As this week's Frontiers suggests, scientists may well be able to create totally new life forms of artificial life in the lab through this new technology.


My difficulty here is that the human body clearly is adapting to environmental change, and evolving. BUT - standard and new medical technologies all work to put as back together the way we were. They don't work to help us acheive the evolved form.

This means that current medical and scientific interventions work against evolution - and implies that 'medically treated' or engineered lifeforms will NOT be suitably adapted.

...Much to discuss here.




clarity

Sorry?


Just an explanation of my edit.



Like this one: format.


[edit on 6-12-2005 by soficrow]



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 08:33 PM
link   
I've been thinking about this. One of the main tenets of medical and genetic dogma is that nothing can cross species barriers - meaning if a drug or bug affects one species, chances are good it won't affect another. And certainly not its DNA.

Now, it seems everything is crossing species barriers - from prions to buckyballs, bird flu and antibiotics. The world has changed, indeed.

We know that animals excrete drugs, prions, and viruses in urine, which contaminates soil, then groundwater and waterways, or sewers then waterways. Then spreads to infect all kinds of other animals and species.

I knew prions could cross-infect plants and animals. But somehow, I am still surprised that antibiotics get into plants from the soil and water.

This wonderful world of ours is waayyy more inter-connected than I ever thought possible. And I have a GOOD imagination.



posted on Dec, 6 2005 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
This wonderful world of ours is waayyy more inter-connected than I ever thought possible.


I am just learning that lesson as well....



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
I've been thinking about this. One of the main tenets of medical and genetic dogma is that nothing can cross species barriers - meaning if a drug or bug affects one species, chances are good it won't affect another. And certainly not its DNA.

Now, it seems everything is crossing species barriers - from prions to buckyballs, bird flu and antibiotics. The world has changed, indeed.





We know that animals excrete drugs, prions, and viruses in urine, which contaminates soil, then groundwater and waterways, or sewers then waterways. Then spreads to infect all kinds of other animals and species.


uh oh.

Thats not good, but I guess its to be expected. I personally would think it highly plausible that for all the crap us humans have put into our environment there is bound to be some adverse reactions. Its just a shame its taken so long for people to figure it out.



posted on Dec, 7 2005 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas

Originally posted by soficrow
We know that animals excrete drugs, prions, and viruses in urine, which contaminates soil, then groundwater and waterways, or sewers then waterways. Then spreads to infect all kinds of other animals and species.


uh oh.

Thats not good, but I guess its to be expected. I personally would think it highly plausible that for all the crap us humans have put into our environment there is bound to be some adverse reactions. Its just a shame its taken so long for people to figure it out.


Not only plausible, but proven. By epidemiological studies and microbiology too.

But there be powerful forces that don't want people to know...





posted on Dec, 8 2005 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
My difficulty here is that the human body clearly is adapting to environmental change, and evolving. BUT - standard and new medical technologies all work to put as back together the way we were. They don't work to help us acheive the evolved form.

This means that current medical and scientific interventions work against evolution - and implies that 'medically treated' or engineered lifeforms will NOT be suitably adapted.


Okay, you keep talking about this and I am really trying to understand your point of view on this one.

I don't see how you can think that we are adapting to environmental changes being brought on by adulterating the environment, or that we should be. I also don't understand how adverse affects to the adulterating of the environment should be viewed as adapting or evolution.

I also don't see any medications for chronic disease (that are only treating symptoms anyway) should be considered contrary when an evolution causing chronic and progressing disease is no evolution in my book.

If adapting and evolution are being caused by un-natural events, shouldn't we be more focused on undoing the un-natural events instead of trying to adapt?

What am I not getting here?



posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Relentless

Originally posted by soficrow
My difficulty here is that the human body clearly is adapting to environmental change, and evolving. BUT - standard and new medical technologies all work to put as back together the way we were. They don't work to help us acheive the evolved form.

This means that current medical and scientific interventions work against evolution - and implies that 'medically treated' or engineered lifeforms will NOT be suitably adapted.


Okay, you keep talking about this and I am really trying to understand your point of view on this one.




Relentless - it's less a point of view than a hope - and one I've come to very slowly at that - kicking, screaming, and fighting all the way. In truth, I'm not quite there yet, and what's holding me up is psychological resistance. Much of what I write about this 'view' reflects my own attempts to come to grips with an established, but not-talked-about-publicly analysis. And not long ago, I argued against it - passionately. So basically, I'm smack in the middle of a turnaround, a 'conversion' if you will. Which inhibits my ability to talk about it coherently and explain it properly - never mind simplify. But I will try, and I will get back to you on it after a few days.


.


E_T

posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 02:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
I knew prions could cross-infect plants and animals. But somehow, I am still surprised that antibiotics get into plants from the soil and water.
Do you have any idea how loose and wide spread use of antibiotics is in "power" farming desired by "money controlled" societies?
For start they put antibiotics directly to all fodder they feed to cattle.

And taking into account all those growth hormones pumped into the cattles by this "farming industry" it's small miracle that there haven't been more serious consequencies.
Now only mad cow disease has been most publicized consequence caused by this power farming.



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by E_T

Originally posted by soficrow
I knew prions could cross-infect plants and animals. But somehow, I am still surprised that antibiotics get into plants from the soil and water.
Do you have any idea how loose and wide spread use of antibiotics is in "power" farming desired by "money controlled" societies?


Yes, I do know. I grew up with cattle. One of the reasons I know so much about prions. ...But I don't think society makes these demands - it's the large corporate structure that incidentally killed family farms.





For start they put antibiotics directly to all fodder they feed to cattle.
And taking into account all those growth hormones pumped into the cattles by this "farming industry" it's small miracle that there haven't been more serious consequencies.


The consequences are astoundingly severe. Check out this forum, and do a quick search on the "6th mass extinction."




Now only mad cow disease has been most publicized consequence caused by this power farming.


Unfortunately, you're dead on with that one. But there are many more diseases and consequences.





posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 03:56 PM
link   
There is only one solution to the problem.

What is the problem? .........................We are the problem.There are too many of us. Nature will fix this. The strong will survive, The weak will die. That is the way of things. We are not above this law of natural selection.



posted on Dec, 12 2005 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by IXRAZORXI321
There is only one solution to the problem.

What is the problem? .........................We are the problem.There are too many of us. Nature will fix this. The strong will survive, The weak will die. That is the way of things. We are not above this law of natural selection.


Sorry, no. That is not what's happening - nor do the "fittest" survive. What's happening is that industry has contaminated our world, and changed it's biochemistry. Those who survive need to change along with the bio-system, and adapt to it.

FYI - the microbes have a huge head start.


.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join