Episode 142: The Chicken Debate
In this corner we have the Center for a Livable Future’s Bob Martin, and in the other, Doctor John Glisson, representing the National Chicken Council! The debate? A new study from the Harvard School of Public Health gives what the Chicken Council calls a fair and balanced look at antibiotics in poultry, while Bob Martin, speaking for consumers, suggests it’s missing a few key details. A robust back and forth between the two sides characterizes this vigorous debate about the present course, and future expectations, of our food system. This program was brought to you by Cain Vineyard & Winery “The reason I thought this was an important study was not so much what it said or didn’t say – it was the way they dispassionately looked at the facts and what is known and drew their conclusions based on that. It wasn’t very speculative. They didn’t point fingers. It mostly concluded we don’t know enough to make conclusions. Thats’s why I thought it was refreshing.” [06:00] –Dr. John Glisson on What Doesn’t Kill You “The problem is really is the way antibiotics are used in farm animal production. They’re not used the same way in clinical medicine. In clinical medicine, an infection is treated with a strong enough dose to kill the bacteria. [..] The difference in food animal production is that low levels of antibiotics are used daily to suppress bacteria and that’s how resistant bacteria emerges.” [08:00] –Bob Martin on What Doesn’t Kill You
Embed this episode
No transcript yet.