76
submitted 2 years ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/news@beehaw.org
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 58 points 2 years ago

This has been known and warned for probably decades now.

But still we continue to "preemptively" use it in vast quantities in the meat, milk and egg industry instead of using sustainable or even humane conditions for the animals in question.

Guess who gets to eat antibiotics evey day, increasing likelihood of multi resistant germs?

Meat eaters. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8565197/

Nothing will be done about it until its too late. As is tradition. Profits are more important than world wide disaster. Again.

[-] Hirom@beehaw.org 21 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Multiple countries need to fix their inadequate regulations to stop aggravating antibiotics resistance, including:

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 8 points 2 years ago

I was also shocked to learn the US have over the counter antiobiotics that people pop for random illness and minor cuts/scrapes. Pretty much unthinkable here (EUN)

[-] bingbong@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago

We absolutely do not have over-the-counter antibiotics, they need a prescription every time

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago

Besides the topicals OTC that i outlined in here, US friends of mine "keep" their remaining prescription ABs for when they are sick again.

Like he got prescribed some for a COLD and then kept them to pop when he gets the next COLD :'D

Its nuts. Some OTC, others simply overprescribed.

Here you get a prescription if you have a severe infection, OR a substantial injury with high risk.

[-] bingbong@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Wait, I'm assuming you're from somewhere in Europe, you don't have topical antibiotics available without prescription?!

I wouldn't argue against antibiotics being overprescribed in America, they definitely are. The tendency is for medicine to be prescribed if a patient sees a doctor. Another crappy consequence of an expensive medical system, people won't be satisfied if they spent hundreds of dollars only to be told to rest and drink lots of fluids.

US friends of mine "keep" their remaining prescription ABs for when they are sick again

This is definitely a thing that morons do over here ๐Ÿ˜‚

[-] millie@beehaw.org 5 points 2 years ago

We definitely don't have that at all.

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yes, some topical AB are available according to a quick online search

Some topical antibiotics can be purchased as over-the-counter (OTC) medicines.
However, it is always recommended that you consult a medical expert before purchasing and using any medication.
Topical antibiotics are used to treat skin wounds, scrapes, scratches, and minor burns.
They are available in ointment, cream, spray, or powder forms and are used to prevent infection in topical skin ailments.
Some over-the-counter topical antibiotics include: Bacitracin (Neosporin)
Polymyxin (Polysporin)
Neomycin (Neosporin Plus Pain Relief)
Pramoxine
Benzoyl peroxide (Proactiv)

[-] millie@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

There's a huge difference between saying 'antibiotics are available OTC' and 'topical antibiotics are available OTC'. One is misleading clickbait nonsense, the other is true.

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago

Thats why i didnt write what you claim i did.

"they have over the counter antiobiotics"

As in antibiotics exist there that are OTC.

Is that so absurd?

[-] Swallowtail@beehaw.org 11 points 2 years ago

Go vegan. It's better for the planet too.

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 5 points 2 years ago

I know, i am vegan for those reasons and more :)

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 years ago

being vegan doesn't help the planet at all.

[-] amzd@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago

How does reducing land and water use through your food choice not help the planet?

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago

it doesn't actually reduce the use.

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 6 points 2 years ago

Please don't tell me you're gonna bring up the stupid soy fields in the rain forest argument :'D

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago

being vegan doesn't stop soy from being grown in rainforests

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 1 points 2 years ago

exactly, because almost 100% of that soy is for meat production

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago

85% of global soy is pressed for oil. the vast majority of the soy that's fed to animals is the industrial waste from that process.

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago

Wheree do you get your numbers from?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1254608/soy-production-end-uses-worldwide/

They seem off my guy.

Weird to not provide real numbers for someone calling me a liar

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago

https://ourworldindata.org/images/published/Global-soy-production-to-end-use.png

i can't click your paywalled link

here's what the UN's FAO says

oil is 17.2%. since a soybean is only about 20% oil to begin with, you need to crush 85% of all soybeans to get that much oil. do you see how the vast majority of what is fed to animals is called "soy meal" or "soy cake"? that's the industrial waste from processing soybeans to oil.

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 1 points 2 years ago

Its statista, they limit traffic. Try a different browser.

Btw funny you link OWID, you should read their article. It doesn't mention the feed as a side product of oil production, and I'm having trouble finding your quote.

Even if its 100% true and just not mentioned in any articles on the matter, then I guess large scale veganism still only removes loads of industrial processes/co2 production, unspeakable animal abuse and insane amounts - and i mean ludicrous amounts - of wasted drinking water.

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago

environmental destruction continues whether you are vegan or not.

[-] shapesandstuff@feddit.de 2 points 2 years ago

also what part of my comment prompted you to post that random response?

load more comments (15 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[-] fuzzywolf23@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

It takes less land and water to feed someone wheat, soy or corn than to feed them beef, chicken or pork.

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago

what crops that are fed to beef chicken and pork are parts of plants that people won't eat for the most part. The same fields that grow the soybeans we use for oil are growing soybeans that are used as feed. The same soybeans that are used for oil are used for feed.

[-] fuzzywolf23@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

This is sometimes true. However, e.g., about 4% of the farmland in California is used for alfafa, which is just for livestock. Alfafa is also a very water intensive crop.

Additionally, there are other uses that livestock corn feed could be put to if there weren't so many damn cows, so it's not like we'd be throwing away megatons of silage if it weren't for cattle.

[-] commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago

it's not like we'd be throwing away megatons of silage if it weren't for cattle.

I don't think there is a better use than making food. I'm fine with that.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2023
76 points (100.0% liked)

World News

23734 readers
50 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


For US News, see the US News community.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS