General Discussion

immoderate

(20,885 posts)

37. Studies of feedlot animals are not long term.

Reply to progressoid (Reply #36)

Tue Sep 8, 2015, 11:38 AM

Sep 2015

Nor are they "scientific." Here are problems with these studies:

The populations are not equivalent. They are from different eras, and differ in several characteristics, like weight, milk production, breast size in chickens, etc. No controls!
Feed lot animals are slaughtered after living a very short life, not enough to show organic abnormalities.
These animals are raised on a diet of feed lot food and antibiotics. Not appropriate for health studies, I think.
Unhealthy animals are cut out prior to market, not counted. Their diets, lacking forage, are unsustainable for a normal life span.
There is no comprehensive study of pathologies on vital organs. They just have to be healthy enough to slaughter.
It might be significant that A. L. Van Eenennaam worked as a researcher for Monsanto before moving to the U of California, which gets money from Monsanto.

This is another of those 'data dumps' I mentioned. It's not good science.

--imm

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

47 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Anti-progressive John Roulac: Anti GMO leader, Big Organic businessman, master manipulator [View all] HuckleB Sep 2015 OP

Okay what is the deal with Organic foods? Rex Sep 2015 #1

I grow lots of food in my yard, and it would all be considered "organic." HuckleB Sep 2015 #3

Organic farmers actually end up using more pesticides. progressoid Sep 2015 #17

This is "guilt by association." immoderate Sep 2015 #2

I probably have you on ignore because evidence does not matter to you. HuckleB Sep 2015 #4

You are making implications about people by associating them with Roulac. immoderate Sep 2015 #9

+1000 G_j Sep 2015 #11

BTW, I'm very tolerant. HuckleB Sep 2015 #5

I'm here longer, and AFAIK, no one else has had me on ignore. immoderate Sep 2015 #7

You wouldn't know. HuckleB Sep 2015 #8

I did respond. Did I make it before the lock? immoderate Sep 2015 #10

Noting that your posts have no content is an insult? HuckleB Sep 2015 #14

My response is pretty evident. Your obstinacy noted. Guilt by association. immoderate Sep 2015 #15

It has been subjected to independent study. progressoid Sep 2015 #18

Thanks. I've gone through these. immoderate Sep 2015 #22

Who finances them? Click on the study to find out. progressoid Sep 2015 #26

I meant the aggregate studies. But where does all this money originate? immoderate Sep 2015 #34

Of course I know Syngenta produces GMOs. progressoid Sep 2015 #36

Studies of feedlot animals are not long term. immoderate Sep 2015 #37

OK, progressoid Sep 2015 #40

Each of these studies cite some organic anomalies. immoderate Sep 2015 #41

Those concerns can be applied to non-gmo crops as well. progressoid Sep 2015 #44

Yep. But latching on to GMOs and their pesticides exacerbates some of that. immoderate Sep 2015 #46

Honk. HuckleB Sep 2015 #6

HAHAHAHA laundry_queen Sep 2015 #12

You haven't bothered to read it. HuckleB Sep 2015 #13

Why �GMO-free� is a marketing ploy you shouldn�t fall for HuckleB Sep 2015 #16

"Keeping you scared is the key to their political and business strategy" Major Nikon Sep 2015 #20

Unfortunately, if too many of them buy into that, food insecurity could be worsened. HuckleB Sep 2015 #21

That's a big if Major Nikon Sep 2015 #23

The vast majority doesn't have to know for the few to have an ugly effect. HuckleB Sep 2015 #24

All sorts of hucksters prey on the poor Major Nikon Sep 2015 #25

I won't deny the first part, however... HuckleB Sep 2015 #27

Certainly some are doing it for the profit motive Major Nikon Sep 2015 #28

And the reason they are chemophobic is because of propaganda pushed by profiteers. HuckleB Sep 2015 #30

Some of them Major Nikon Sep 2015 #31

Again, they were pushed in that direction. HuckleB Sep 2015 #32

We don't need products to be voluntarily labeled GMO-free, as the Republican bill calls for. pnwmom Sep 2015 #29

Wow! One of the four people I've ignored are still posting to this old thread. HuckleB Sep 2015 #19

And I'm happy to be one of them. immoderate Sep 2015 #33

When those I can't see defend a scumbag like this, well, it's sad. HuckleB Sep 2015 #35

Pointing to a scumbag, doesn't validate your arguments! immoderate Sep 2015 #38

Why Vaccine and GMO Denial Should be Treated Equally HuckleB Sep 2015 #39

ANTI-GMO ACTIVISTS AND CLIMATE CHANGE DENIERS � NO SCIENCE HuckleB Sep 2015 #42

Pesticides In Organic Farming HuckleB Sep 2015 #43

Organic food: the biggest scam since bottled water HuckleB Sep 2015 #45

The war against genetically modified organisms is full of fearmongering, errors, and fraud. HuckleB Sep 2015 #47