Arguments Against Factory Farms

In this brief, the reader will see the pros and cons in antibiotic livestock. They will see commonly misunderstandings about antibiotics and facts. Throughout the paper the reader will see what long term and short term problems and benefits in livestock. In this research paper it will be covering antibiotics resistance and also how antibiotics it has changed the face of medicine.

In the past century there has been a substantial change in the way human beings raise and keep animals meant for food. While in the past there were great numbers of widely spaced small individual farms, now there are relatively few, but extremely large industrialized farms. And as the numbers of animals kept and slaughtered for human consumption increases, these industrialized farms, known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations or CAFO's, are having more and more of an impact on the environment and people around them. The concentration of animals causes a major problem with the waste products they produce, as well as the gases, chemicals, and other types of byproducts. And the increased use of antibiotics in the animals is beginning to have a profound effect on the health of not only the environment but the communities that exist around these industrialized farms. CAFO's, and their secondary industries, are also a large consumer of oil, gasoline, and other fuels which can have an indirect, but devastating effect on the environment. Luckily there are some who have come to recognize the problems, and potential future problems, involved in this type of animal farming and have begun to inform the public to the dangers these farms pose. And in response to this information, the public is beginning to force changes in the way these CAFO's operate and the impact they have on the environment and

Then Tom continues education with a little education on the variety of antibiotics and how “crucial for treating serious human infections” (Philpott). Using a hotlink to a well-known credible organization like the “Food and Drug Administration” back up some of his statistics regarding over use of antibiotics in livestock operations. Tom continually notes

Over the last 10 years or so Americans have been at odds with themselves and other Americans regarding the treatment of food source animals. The term “factory farm” is being coined for method in which animals are being processed in the food system. I will be discussing what a factory farm is, who or what benefits from them, and finally at what cost? Factory Farms have become an institution in support of the American way life, regardless of what we think; they have advantages and disadvantages.

Industrial farms use antibiotics in animal feed and water to prevent disease in farm animals. Many farms use antibiotics before an infection has even occurred.

Presently, speculations have risen about the amount of antibiotics used in the livestock industry and the desire to consume antibiotic-free meats. What is not understood, however, is the USDA has been monitoring the amount of antimicrobial residue in meats for several years. If unsafe levels are detected the meat is not allowed to be sold for human consumption. Yet, fast food chains such as Subway and Chipotle are claiming to go completely antibiotic free within the next decade. The practicality of this becoming a reality is slim due to the need to control, treat, and prevent diseases. To truly understand the importance of the antibiotic usage in cattle it must first be understood what antibiotics are and the reasons they are used. Additionally, the use of vaccinations should be taken into account for the

By weight, eighty percent of antibiotics are used in agriculture to “fatten animals” and “protect them from the conditions in which they are raised” (McKenna). Animals are given micro-doses of antibiotics, that is, a small amount of antibiotics to prevent diseases from occurring. This micro-dosage amount allows for mutation that Fleming described. The routine use of antibiotics in agriculture has led to “[sixty-five] percent of chicken breasts” and “[forty-four] percent of ground beef” to house bacteria “resistant to tetracycline”. Additionally, “[eleven] percent of pork chops carried bacteria resistant to five classes of drugs” (McKenna). These bacteria then spread from animals to the humans who eat them, causing humans to get infections which cannot be treated. The issue isn’t as simple as ceasing to give antibiotics to animals. Most animals raised for consumption live in an environment ripe for infections and diseases to spread. Instead of giving the animals more room to live, the majority of farmers opt to give the animals antibiotics. For cattle, This prevents diseases and death to the immature weaned calves and cattle which saves the rancher both time and money—passing on the savings to the consumers. In a free market society higher prices tend to not go well. However, if antibiotics became useless farmers would have to “[enlarge] barns, [cut] down on crowding, and [delay] weaning”, which ultimately would increase the costs of raising livestock

coli and Salmonella” (Veldman). This statement allows the reader to see the negative impact of antibiotics used in livestock. Gay Miller elaborates on the subject when speaking with Veldman, saying, “Of course, it raises concerns about resistance issues… but from my perspective the most important thing to reflect on with regard to antibiotic resistance is from a benefit/cost perspective.” Veldman continues to explain that the National Cattleman’s Beef Association Website also says, “…science has not found a link between the use of antibiotics in food animals and development of resistant bacteria that might compromise the efficacy of related antibiotics in human medicine.” These two statements by Veldman and Miller tell the reader that even though there is a chance that certain antibiotics used in livestock could be harmful to consumers, there is no scientific evidence to support

The word “antibiotic” in the livestock industry endures an extremely toasty topic. This word appears on Facebook posts, Twitter feeds, and in television news. Antibiotics receive an unfair assessment, when in reality, the word is just one large miscommunication between agriculturists like myself, and the public consumers. October 20th, 2015 was a

The main threat for the overuse of antibiotics are the creation of antibiotic resistant microbes, or more commonly called superbugs. Antibiotics are used to kill mass amounts of bacteria, but they cannot kill all of them. Some bacteria still survive, so they will reproduce and pass their genes down to their offspring. The offspring will now have their parents genes, which includes being resistant to a certain type of antibiotic. Tom Philpott, an award winning writer about food politics, explained, “And the worst part is that antibiotics use in factory farms is not mostly matter of keeping animals healthy.” Philpott is saying farmers mostly use antibiotics to promote faster growth and not to treat sickness. American Cyanamid, a pharmaceutical company, tested animals with vitamin B12 to see if they grew faster. The animals saw significant weight gain, and more experiments were tested. What American Cyanamid found was the antibiotic in vitamin B12 was actually causing the weight gain. This discovery led to mass amounts of antibiotics being used in animals. In 1950, before the discovery, there were 1.6 million chicken farms raising a total of about 560 million chickens. 28 years later, 3 billion chickens were being hatched in about 31,000 large farms (Philpott). The discovery led to mass expansion of farms, because animals were able to grow faster and bigger, so farms took advantage. Factory farms have been overusing

Antibiotic use in animals has recently captured the attention of various professionals as the blatant, adverse effects have become increasingly prevalent. Agricultural manufacturers carelessly inject livestock with antibiotics in order to maximize their weight gain by minimizing the amount of energy consumed in fighting illnesses. This broad use of antibiotics in food-producing animals has contributed to the emergence and distribution of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, resulting in either mild or fatal illnesses. To put the severity of this issue in perspective, legislators must realize that 1 in 5 antibiotic-resistant infections are caused by bacteria from food and animals. Although antibiotic use in animals is not the sole culprit of the

Industrial agriculture is currently the predominant food production system in the United States. It is distinguished by large-scale monoculture, abundant use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and meat production in CAFOs. CAFOs are ‘Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations’, otherwise known as factory farms, which aim to cram as many animals in one space to boost efficiency and profit at the expense of animal suffering and environmental hazards.

This is due in part by the previous statement to get higher yields out every animal raised. Cattle, chickens and pigs alike are all subject to certain fattening diets, modern breeding techniques and growth hormone treatments. These forced practices have very adverse, life altering and threatening affects that lead farmers to use antibiotics in order to keep diseases at bay. The Committee on Drug Use in Food Animals states, “doses are used when pathogens are known to be present in the environment or when animals encounter a high stress situation and are more susceptible to pathogens “, (1999, p. 28). It is important to point out that the use of growth hormones and antibiotics dramatically increases body mass, drastically shortens the lifespan of animals such as cattle and is being detected in food for human consumption.

For decades farmers regularly used antibiotics to maximize the amount of animals in a confined space. Over time, the confined spaces allowed resistant bacteria to grow and evolve, contributing to the current antibiotic crisis . Two million Americans annually contract bacteria that is resistant to antibiotics, and experts warn of increases. In response to the growing crisis, many big food companies recently announced plans to use antibiotic free livestock. Chipotle is on the vanguard and an early adopter of using antibiotic free livestock. While, Chipotle found early success, it also serves as a cautionary example as other companies follow their lead. In 2015, Chipotle suspended its contract with a pork supplier for failing to meet animal welfare standards leading 40% of stores without pork. Chipotle’s strict policy on antibiotic use exacerbated this crisis, as many pig farmers are reluctant to adhere to their standards. Under Chipotle’s policy, if an animal is sick, given antibiotics, and recovers, Chipotle will not purchase that animal. Suppliers are then forced to sell the animal to a third party for less . Chipotle realized the need to rework their policy and now uses a supplier that allows for antibiotic use when an animal is ill. Reducing antibiotic use in livestock is vital both to a business strategy, and also to public

To understand the functions of antibiotic and antimicrobial use in the food industry one must consider how antibiotics became incorporated in the industry over the past few decades. Antibiotic use erupted during WWII where they were developed at a large scale to control human infections. This mixed in with the high demand for food during the war lead to antibiotics becoming economically advantages for use on farm animals. During the 1940s research labs conducted experiments to examine the effects of antibiotics administered to food animals. These experiment lead to findings of antibiotics being used to treat diseases in animals. Due to the high demand of food for the war antibiotics were used as nutrition for animals to supplement the plant-based