Originally Posted by DevilEyes
Hmmm, that might be a good one.
To be honest, though, I don't know how large the intersection of "organic food eaters" and "hormone / antibiotic takers" is. Especially with hormones. I don't know very many people that haven't taken antibiotics, though. In which case, the argument reduces to:
Are antibiotics in your food just as bad as antibiotics in you?
The spinoffs being:
- are antibiotics bad for animals?
- does antibiotic A in non-humans have the same effect as antibiotic A in humans?
- how is the effect of antibiotics changed with passage from animal consumption to food to human consumption vs. direct human consumption?
- The "organic" standard includes a stipulation against feeding cattle antibiotics. Regardless of whether it's justified, this stipulation is packaged with the rest of the health benefits of the standard (no hormones, whatever). Thus, we couldn't decide to pay less for cattle that have been fed antibiotics, but have all the other benefits of organic, if we wanted to.
Thus, I don't think that the practical implications of this debate topic are great enough.