Hormones in meat have been met with resistance and controversy.

Arguments on both sides of the issue have led to heated debate about the safety of hormones in use in factory farms.

In this article the author attempts to compare synthetic bovine growth hormone (RbST) with naturally occurring bovine (bST), hormone and hormones in plants and humans (HGH).

Felicia Stoler doesn’t acknowledge the slippery slope of problems created by the techniques of factory farming which lead to a torrent of ills.

The debate over whether to treat cattle with antibiotics is interesting – considering many of us would treat our pets with antibiotics if needed – why not livestock?

Antibiotics wouldn’t be necessary if cattle were fed grass instead of “feed” which contains corn, which cows can’t digest which causes bloat and extremely fast growth which leads to infections.

Artificially manipulating lactation for milk production also causes infection which demands antibiotic treatment, and this doesn’t even address the amount of puss from infection which is allowed into the food supply.

And, by the way, we don’t eat pets.

Time to re-evaluate our standards!

The USDA is defending the use of “pink slime”

The USDA, schools and school districts plan to buy the treated meat, categorized as “lean fine textured beef,” from South Dakota’s Beef Products Inc (BPI) for the national school lunch program.

The BPI product makes up about 6.5% of the 112 million pounds of ground beef that has been contracted for the National School Lunch Program, the USDA said.

There has been much debate over the ammonia washed, lean, fine, texturized beef.

The USDA’s defense of the safety of this product draws attention to the standards and practices of the agency.