One Farmers point of view

[ey_tony]

Socialists don't indulge in conspiracy theories, they KNOW they are right, and non-believers (the right wing and balanced centre ground) are always wrong.

It's curious that anyone who dares to question propaganda and information put out by government is immediately labeled conspiracy theorist!
It's as if governments never lied or withheld information or the likes!
I don't mind being labeled a conspiracy theorist by left wingers as they seen unable to grasp the fact that big business and politicians don't always tell the truth therefore I need more reassurance in the form of research that the milk from chemically treated cows is safe to consume. Hardly conspiracy theorist material really!

 

[RobinBHM]

As for conspiracy theories only coming from the right

Nobody said they did.

The hard left, are ideologically opposed to the West and it’s capitalism, so they hate America and support Putin propaganda and conspiracy theories.

The irony is that Trump / Farage supporters spread the same nonsense

 

[RobinBHM]

It's curious that anyone who dares to question propaganda and information put out by government is immediately labeled conspiracy theorist

No that’s not true Tony.

 

[RobinBHM]

but in any case I would like to see a sufficient number of independent studies/trials supporting the argument that milk from chemically treated cows by using Bovaer will not enter the food chain and that the milk is safe to drink

Fair point, I agree

 

[ey_tony]

Nobody said they did.

The hard left, are ideologically opposed to the West and it’s capitalism, so they hate America and support Putin propaganda and conspiracy theories.

The irony is that Trump / Farage supporters spread the same nonsense

Well tell that to Jacob as he's the one who introduced the subject of conspiracy theories being right wing. Post #156.
Quote " Why are conspiracy theories such a feature of right-wing "thought"?"

 

[Jacob]

Socialists don't indulge in conspiracy theories, they KNOW they are right, and non-believers (the right wing and balanced centre ground) are always wrong.

It's more that we know that the right are always wrong. The right look for excuses for not doing things. The blame game is popular. Or economical theories which are supposed to pay off years later, such as de-regulating, or encouraging growth.
The left don't need a theory - we just know that things have to be done a.s.a.p.

 

[selectortone]

Well tell that to Jacob as he's the one who introduced the subject of conspiracy theories being right wing. Post #156.
Quote " Why are conspiracy theories such a feature of right-wing "thought"?"

Since when has Jacob been the spokesman for us left-leaners?

 

[ey_tony]

Fair point, I agree

Robin I'm not saying categorically that it's unsafe but I just need reassurance in the form of sufficient validated and peer reviewed evidence/data to support the posture that there is no risk to humans from such chemicals fed to livestock finding their way into the food system.

If sufficient studies support the argument that its safe then I don't see any problem but the evidence and data need to be strong and valid otherwise there is a risk.
The clamour to find any ways possible to reduce greenhouse gasses by certain dates doesn't fill me with confidence that such as the feeding of Bovaer is completely safe at this moment in time unless of course those who believe it is safe can produce documented evidence in sufficiently large enough studies to eliminate and rule out any possible risks.

 

[ey_tony]

The left don't need a theory - we just know that things have to be done a.s.a.p.

If that statement was really true then left wing governments would have been consecutively in power for at least the past 50 years but they haven't which hints that the left don't know any more or have any more answers than the right wing politicians.

The problem with left wing ideology is that it's based on fantasy and not reality and could never work without the introduction of oppression which is evident in all left wing countries.

 

[Jacob]

I've not looked into it sufficiently to draw my own conclusions but clearly others have so from a safety aspect, can you or others point me to a valid and unequivocal series of studies of sufficient numbers of cows tested which supports the theory that the chemicals used in Bovaer will not infiltrate the food chain?

No of course not you would find fault with whatever anybody puts in front of you.
Do it yourself!
Ask a few questions, read a few articles. Don't be lazy. PS New Scientist is good for lots of things and highly recommended. If you just read the **** press you end up with a head full of ****.

I don't normally watch such videos or look at social media petitions etc but in this instance surely in the video they have a valid point if 'only' four cows were used in a study/trial?
How factually correct that information is, is anyone's guess but in any case

No it isn't a guess. Research the origins of the story. You are just lazily guessing that it is wrong.

I would like to see a sufficient number of independent studies/trials supporting the argument that milk from chemically treated cows by using Bovaer will not enter the food chain and that the milk is safe to drink.

Have a look for them, what are you waiting for?

As for conspiracy theories only coming from the right, perhaps that's because those who have left leaning ideologies don't have the capacity to question what they are told whereas those who vote to the right do!

Nonsense . You are just a lazy lot and believe anything you want to.

After all, one man's conspiracy theory is simply another man's legitimate questioning of information

Nonsense. Conspiracy theories are elaborate theories of all sorts of things going on and not the result of legitimate questioning.

....
Would you honestly trust anything implicitly that this man who is in charge of our country says?

No of course not. He is not the source of information on everything, like some sort of Wizard of Oz.

 

[Jacob]

Since when has Jacob been the spokesman for us left-leaners?

Speak for yourself!

 

[selectortone]

Speak for yourself!

I try to!

 

[RobinBHM]

Socialists don't indulge in conspiracy theories, they KNOW they are right, and non-believers (the right wing and balanced centre ground) are always wrong.

Socialists do indulge in conspiracy theories.

But all the Venn diagram of believers of conspiracy theories and supporters of Trump and Farage….is a big overlap.

anti vaxxers and Trump supporters…peas in a pod
Man made climate change deniers and Reform supporters…..peas in a pod

And then there’s the good old “WEF / globalists and QAnon bunch…..always Trump or reform

 

[ey_tony]

No of course not you would find fault with whatever anybody puts in front of you.
Do it yourself!
Ask a few questions, read a few articles. Don't be lazy. PS New Scientist is good for lots of things and highly recommended. If you just read the **** press you end up with a head full of ****.

No it isn't a guess. Research the origins of the story. You are just lazily guessing that it is wrong.

Have a look for them, what are you waiting for?

Nonsense . You are just a lazy lot and believe anything you want to.

Nonsense. Conspiracy theories are elaborate theories of all sorts of things going on and not the result of legitimate questioning.

No of course not. He is not the source of information on everything, like some sort of Wizard of Oz.

Due to limited time available on my part and at the risk of being accused of procrastination, could you please provide links to actual case studies in sufficient numbers to validate that chemically 'altered' cow's digestion systems is no threat to human health?
That should be quite simple for someone of your reading ability and would save me time which I don't have trying to find examples.

 

[Blackswanwood]

Due to limited time available on my part and at the risk of being accused of procrastination, could you please provide links to actual case studies in sufficient numbers to validate that chemically 'altered' cow's digestion systems is no threat to human health?
That should be quite simple for someone of your reading ability and would save me time which I don't have trying to find examples.

If you follow the links in this it takes you to details of the evidence and tests considered by the Food Standards Agency.

https://food.blog.gov.uk/2024/12/05/bovaer-cow-feed-additive-explained/

I’m not qualified to say whether the results are valid (but have no reason to doubt the professional view of the scientists who have judged that they are) but it debunks the claim that only four cows were tested.

 

[woodieallen]

No of course not you would find fault with whatever anybody puts in front of you.
Do it yourself!
Ask a few questions, read a few articles. Don't be lazy. PS New Scientist is good for lots of things and highly recommended. If you just read the **** press you end up with a head full of ****.

No it isn't a guess. Research the origins of the story. You are just lazily guessing that it is wrong.

Have a look for them, what are you waiting for?

Nonsense . You are just a lazy lot and believe anything you want to.

Nonsense. Conspiracy theories are elaborate theories of all sorts of things going on and not the result of legitimate questioning.

No of course not. He is not the source of information on everything, like some sort of Wizard of Oz.

Blah...blah...blah..blah..blah.

Blah..blah..blah..blah

 

[woodieallen]

If you follow the links in this it takes you to details of the evidence and tests considered by the Food Standards Agency.

https://food.blog.gov.uk/2024/12/05/bovaer-cow-feed-additive-explained/

I’m not qualified to say whether the results are valid (but have no reason to doubt the professional view of the scientists who have judged that they are) but it debunks the claim that only four cows were tested.

They state 58 studies (which I think is where your comment re 4 cows is referring) but do not list those studies. Smacks of 'We know best'. I did pick upon these weasel word, though..

Will the milk from cows fed Bovaer be labelled?​

Feed additives are not labelled within the ingredients list of food products. In this particular case, the additive is metabolised by the cows so does not pass into the milk.

Why not ? Let us have the opportunity to decide for ourselves.

This is, of course, the same FSA who will allow anything below...2% I believe.. being left out of the ingredients list. Which basically says FU to anyone highly sensitive to allergens.

FSA = NFFP

 

[Blackswanwood]

They state 58 studies (which I think is where your comment re 4 cows is referring) but do not list those studies. Smacks of 'We know best'. I did pick upon these weasel word, though..

Will the milk from cows fed Bovaer be labelled?​

Feed additives are not labelled within the ingredients list of food products. In this particular case, the additive is metabolised by the cows so does not pass into the milk.

Why not ? Let us have the opportunity to decide for ourselves.

This is, of course, the same FSA who will allow anything below...2% I believe.. being left out of the ingredients list. Which basically says FU to anyone highly sensitive to allergens.

FSA = NFFP

No that is not the point of reference to the claim about four cows. If you click on the links and look through the appendices you will see the results tabulated with the number of cows tested.

I’ve no reason to not believe they know best.

That’s interesting that the FSA permit an ingredient of less than 2% not to be listed. Are you sure it’s correct as just looking at the packaging of a few items they all seem to have items listed with 0.1 and 0.2g per 100g ingredients?

 

[ey_tony]

If you follow the links in this it takes you to details of the evidence and tests considered by the Food Standards Agency.

https://food.blog.gov.uk/2024/12/05/bovaer-cow-feed-additive-explained/

I’m not qualified to say whether the results are valid (but have no reason to doubt the professional view of the scientists who have judged that they are) but it debunks the claim that only four cows were tested.

A quote from the link above "It was not found in milk in any of the trials presented to the FSA.".....call me a cynic if you wish but that is a red herring response as far as I'm concerned as it's not unequivocal!

Wording is very important. Just because it wasn't found in trials presented to the FSA, it doesn't mean to say that it wasn't or hasn't been found in other trials NOT presented to the FSA or means that there is absolutely no risk so I'd certainly treat that statement with caution.

It probably is safe but until I read up on sufficient numbers of testing procedures to convince me that it's entirely safe then I certainly would mark it as treat with caution and not drink milk products from cattle treated with the chemical.

I would also like to see a call for legislation to label all such chemical food additives so that the public has the opportunity to choose whether or not to consume the product.
From what I can gather the feedstuffs of animals bred for organically produced milk products will not contain Bovaer so that at least gives an opportunity for those who can afford it to avoid any potential risks.