Re:India's farmed chickens dosed with world's strongest anti...
by jlamberts on Friday February 02, 2018 @01:55PM
(#16293157)
By the utilitarian argument, wouldn't the answer just be to stop eating meat and eat whatever we're feeding to livestock (or some other food grown in its place)? Meat is a pretty inefficient source of food compared to large scale agriculture.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:India's farmed chickens dosed with world's strongest anti...
by drak0n1c on Friday February 02, 2018 @01:58PM
(#16293203)
True, and it helps that India has a large religiously vegetarian population. But that's not everyone. Government policy can only do so much - it can enforce a ban on large farms using antibiotics with some effort and resources, but it's nearly impossible to prevent people from eating meat entirely. Total prohibition of consumer goods doesn't have a good track record.
Re:India's farmed chickens dosed with world's strongest anti...
by sevenfive on Friday February 02, 2018 @02:30PM
(#16293467)
So what is the trolley problem? People who are starving don't buy meat.
Re:India's farmed chickens dosed with world's strongest anti...
by drak0n1c on Friday February 02, 2018 @03:53PM
(#16294126)
If there is a supply glut of a staple food, the prices of food in general, even not of that type tends to driven downward - because to some extent foods are interchangeable. Similar to how an overabundance of residential skyscrapers has a downward effect on the price of less attractive homes. There's a lot of history on food shortages and prices that can be found with a cursory level of searching. Each person can only eat so much in a day.
Re:India's farmed chickens dosed with world's strongest anti...
by sevenfive on Friday February 02, 2018 @04:01PM
(#16294168)
Thanks for linking me to an article about Supply and Demand. I hadn't thought about that. You are still wrong.
The problem is that factory farmed animals usually eat grain which could be used to feed humans. Even if only 10% of their feed is suitable for human consumption, it's still a net loss of food, because meat is an extremely inefficient source of calories.