Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

kansascity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 133 posts

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#121

Post by Ghjklov »

Jedd wrote: post #120
fouc wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fairly easy to visually tell if the egg came from a free range chicken, the yolk is a dark orange color.

This isn't necessarily the case. Free range chickens will produce eggs with varying colour throughout the year. Some consumers have been told that dark orange equates to healthy / free-range chickens -- so some farmers use colour additives to the feed to adjust the colour of the yolks.

I wonder why that's okay for farmers to do? Let people believe that the color of the yolk is a tell for health and purchase eggs from companies they believe to have good eggs. (To my knowledge, just one example, a lot of the egg yolks I've seen from Japan are typically very orange and are said to be high quality). These farmers using color additives are in effect fooling customers and are presenting a product that isn't what it appears to be.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#122

Post by [deleted] »

Jedd wrote: post #116
bumby wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to add a little clarity, beef cattle all start eating grass and generally continue for a large portion of their life. It’s just whether or not they are “finished” on grass or grain. I’m not aware of farms using an “exclusively grain-based diet”

To clarify your clarity. Beef cattle historically have started on milk, and then moved to pasture. In industrialised countries, beef cattle are fed on grains for most or all of their lives. Perhaps for marketing reasons, I'm not sure, in some places, for some percentage of the herd, they're finished on pasture. Most CAFOs, as others have noted, are primarily started and completed with grain.

[deleted]

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#123

Post by bumby »

Jedd wrote: post #116
bumby wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to add a little clarity, beef cattle all start eating grass and generally continue for a large portion of their life. It’s just whether or not they are “finished” on grass or grain. I’m not aware of farms using an “exclusively grain-based diet”

To clarify your clarity. Beef cattle historically have started on milk, and then moved to pasture. In industrialised countries, beef cattle are fed on grains for most or all of their lives. Perhaps for marketing reasons, I'm not sure, in some places, for some percentage of the herd, they're finished on pasture. Most CAFOs, as others have noted, are primarily started and completed with grain.

Just to underscore the reason I felt the need to clarify, I don’t think it’s accurate to claim there are any cattle fed grain for “all” of their life. Like the previous statement about “exclusively grain fed diets”, it’s either needlessly hyperbolic or misleading.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#124

Post by downrightmike »

tehlike wrote: post #63
downrightmike wrote: post #28

He scammed out a couple dozen million dollars each year and is fined 128 million, which ruined him and he'd never be able to pay it back. This is the kind of punishment That needs to happen to a lot of industries, really any of the crimes people commit should cost them more than they gained. But he must have been too small potatoes, so he got an appropriate sentence.

I am curious - there are ways to shelter money, including sending it abroad. Can they claw it all back?

That's what the world's best military is for. Protect America's interests.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#125

Post by Jedd »

bumby wrote: post #123
Jedd wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify your clarity. Beef cattle historically have started on milk, and then moved to pasture. In industrialised countries, beef cattle are fed on grains for most or all of their lives. Perhaps for marketing reasons, I'm not sure, in some places, for some percentage of the herd, they're finished on pasture. Most CAFOs, as others have noted, are primarily started and completed with grain.

Just to underscore the reason I felt the need to clarify, I don’t think it’s accurate to claim there are any cattle fed grain for “all” of their life. Like the previous statement about “exclusively grain fed diets”, it’s either needlessly hyperbolic or misleading.

Okay, I see your point.

To weasel out slightly, I did say:

" ... beef cattle are fed on grains for most or all of their lives."

AIUI, CAFO-destined cattle are moved into feeding lots as soon as they're weaned -- say at a couple of months old. They're mostly on milk, with some grass, up to that point. But from that point on they're on grain-only.

You said:

> I’m not aware of farms using an “exclusively grain-based diet”

and subsequently

> My understanding is that these feedlots are where cattle are housed for the last few months to gain weight before slaughter.

This doesn't align with my understanding.

Once within a CAFO, the cattle stay there until slaughter -- say at age 18 months or less. During that time they're fed exclusively grain, as this ensures maximum growth / minimum time / best ratio of input cost to sale price / etc.

Some may be finished on pasture, as this is an increasingly profitable market, plus it drastically reduces pathogens within the animal, and improves the flavour (so I'm told).

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#126

Post by bumby »

Jedd wrote: post #125
bumby wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to underscore the reason I felt the need to clarify, I don’t think it’s accurate to claim there are any cattle fed grain for “all” of their life. Like the previous statement about “exclusively grain fed diets”, it’s either needlessly hyperbolic or misleading.

Okay, I see your point. To weasel out slightly, I did say: " ... beef cattle are fed on grains for most or all of their lives." AIUI, CAFO-destined cattle are moved into feeding lots as soon as they're weaned -- say at a couple of months old. They're mostly on milk, with some grass, up to that point. But from that point on they're on grain-only. You said: > I’m not aware of farms using an “exclusively grain-based die…

I think I understand where you’re coming from and I’m willing to bet you understand the nuance but my concern was mainly for the uninitiated reading and drawing too drastic of a conclusion.

I think the USDA info I read was that the “typical” cattle are pasture raised for around 4 months before going to a feedlot. Once there, the feed may be as high as 90-95% grain. At that point it almost feels pedantic to claim they are anything but grain fed, but a purely grain diet can cause them to founder like horses on grass as another commenter said.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#127

Post by Jedd »

bumby wrote: post #126
Jedd wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, I see your point. To weasel out slightly, I did say: " ... beef cattle are fed on grains for most or all of their lives." AIUI, CAFO-destined cattle are moved into feeding lots as soon as they're weaned -- say at a couple of months old. They're mostly on milk, with some grass, up to that point. But from that point on they're on grain-only. You said: > I’m not aware of farms using an “exclusively grain-based die…

I think I understand where you’re coming from and I’m willing to bet you understand the nuance but my concern was mainly for the uninitiated reading and drawing too drastic of a conclusion. I think the USDA info I read was that the “typical” cattle are pasture raised for around 4 months before going to a feedlot. Once there, the feed may be as high as 90-95% grain. At that point it almost feels pedantic to claim they…

Sure, and reading Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma -- which is where I first really got a good insight into these factories -- you'll discover that while corn may not be precisely 100% of the feed, chicken sweepings (manure, feather), peanut shells, fat from other slaughtered cows, etc make up a portion too.

CAFOs are objectively horrendous, and I don't want an 'uninitiated reader' thinking they're anything less than a woeful embarrassment for our species.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#128

Post by bumby »

Jedd wrote: post #127
bumby wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I understand where you’re coming from and I’m willing to bet you understand the nuance but my concern was mainly for the uninitiated reading and drawing too drastic of a conclusion. I think the USDA info I read was that the “typical” cattle are pasture raised for around 4 months before going to a feedlot. Once there, the feed may be as high as 90-95% grain. At that point it almost feels pedantic to claim they…

Sure, and reading Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma -- which is where I first really got a good insight into these factories -- you'll discover that while corn may not be precisely 100% of the feed, chicken sweepings (manure, feather), peanut shells, fat from other slaughtered cows, etc make up a portion too. CAFOs are objectively horrendous, and I don't want an 'uninitiated reader' thinking they're anything le…

I’m not trying to defend feedlots. Unfortunately I think if we aren’t careful about being accurate people are more likely to write off those opinions as pushing a narrative at the expense of truth, ultimately making good points lose relevance

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#129

Post by Jedd »

bumby wrote: post #128
Jedd wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, and reading Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma -- which is where I first really got a good insight into these factories -- you'll discover that while corn may not be precisely 100% of the feed, chicken sweepings (manure, feather), peanut shells, fat from other slaughtered cows, etc make up a portion too. CAFOs are objectively horrendous, and I don't want an 'uninitiated reader' thinking they're anything le…

I’m not trying to defend feedlots. Unfortunately I think if we aren’t careful about being accurate people are more likely to write off those opinions as pushing a narrative at the expense of truth, ultimately making good points lose relevance

Okay, so let's agree that cattle that end up in feedlots spend the vast majority of their time in feedlots ... they may have some milk and grass for the first few months of their life, but once they're in feedlots they're on primarily (90%+) grain, with some even more obviously dubious additions making up the other 10%.

These are animals that have evolved to digest various grasses, and get sick (to various degrees) when they eat any amount of grains.

Feeding them almost (is that okay?) exclusively grains makes them extremely sick - but happily (?) the high-grain diet ensures they put on fat (the bad kind, btw) fast enough that we can slaughter them before they have the opportunity to die from this diet.

People that find this acceptable only because they dispute a few percentile of grain quotient in the feed are unlikely to be swayed in any case, I suspect.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#130

Post by bumby »

Jedd wrote: post #129
bumby wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not trying to defend feedlots. Unfortunately I think if we aren’t careful about being accurate people are more likely to write off those opinions as pushing a narrative at the expense of truth, ultimately making good points lose relevance

Okay, so let's agree that cattle that end up in feedlots spend the vast majority of their time in feedlots ... they may have some milk and grass for the first few months of their life, but once they're in feedlots they're on primarily (90%+) grain, with some even more obviously dubious additions making up the other 10%. These are animals that have evolved to digest various grasses, and get sick (to various degrees) w…

I agree with everything you said until the last sentence. I think the issue is it's a lot to ask of someone to change their lifestyle, especially within areas that have a lot of contradictory (mis)information.

The easy choice is for someone to side with their confirmation bias ("what I'm doing is already ok"). As soon as they sniff out some misinformation in the counterargument, I think the arguing party loses credibility and any hope of convincing them otherwise. ("If you're willing to fudge the facts on that, what else are you misrepresenting?") It's not a matter of being pedantic, it's a matter of trust.

You see this with all kinds of controversial topics. Agriculture, nutrition, climate science etc. People will latch on to any misrepresented information as use it to discredit an otherwise well-reasoned argument. I just think it's best to clean up the point to avoid that risk.

Post reply on HN