Poultry Antibiotics Dilemma
The poultry industry is one of the most successful businesses for agriculture in the United States. Recently in the past couple of years, the poultry industry has been shifting its focus to using fewer antibiotics because the transparent negative impact on public health. However, one of the top leading poultry producers, Sanderson farms is publicly announcing their continue use of antibiotics in their advertisement campaign emphasizing the benefits thereof. Sanderson farms is using dark marketing in an attempt to expose their competitor’s marketing strategy as a tactic to make more profit by raising prices.
Stainability vs Effects of Antibiotics
The producer’s object is to expose other competitor’s use of fewer
…show more content…
One company in particular, Perdue has proven that eliminating antibiotics can make the meat safer. They are able to be profitable without the use of antibiotics because Perdue created a customer-driven marketing strategy that in the best interest of the customer. Although Sanderson Farms believe antibiotic free chicken is a marketing gimmick the company is proudly promoting “100% Natural Chicken” Their definition of natural chicken means it is simply just chicken although antibiotics are used in the process. This impacts the consumer by being deceptive and misleading because while antibiotics are in use, the company still claims the chickens are 100% natural. This marketing and advertisement strategy does not capture value from customer because it designed to increase their profits at the expense of public health by using continuing the practice.
The practice of treating live animals with antibiotics can cause deadly diseases in humans. As more consumers are being more aware of the dangers of antibiotics, companies are doing the same. Many large restaurants and grocery stores now offer antibiotic-free meat to adjust their marketing environment and to stay competitive. Sanderson Farms will ultimately pay a steep price for its illogical and unwise behavior while it is putting consumers at risk for using antibiotics. This is a very big threat for the company because more consumers will switch over to buy other brands that do not use
Companies nowadays are using different and strong methods in marketing their food products. The Companies are very competitive, and the results can affect the people. When we think about this job field, it is convincing that those producers should use cleverly ways to gain their own living. In the other side they shouldn’t use misleading ways that could harm the people. Food companies should be straightforward with every marketing method they use. People have the right to know what they are consuming and also to know the effects of these products on them, whether it is harmful, useful, or even neutral.
Spurlock explains the corporations’ way of justifying their business and even defending against allegations that their products are causing consumers medical problems. For example, Spurlock explains that the McDonalds’ Corporation stated that fast food can actually be a part of a healthy diet. Also, Spurlock interviews a representative from a corporate lobbyist organization that defends the interest of several major food and beverage corporations. Despite what he has already proven, Spurlock then challenges the corporations’ opposition to his arguments by showing the audience information that contradicts the corporations’ claims. This further strengthens Spurlocks arguments by showing that some of the oppositions arguments are not entirely
“U.S. Meat Production,” PSR, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Washington, D.C. 2014. Print. Web 1 Apr. 2014.
Andrew F. Smith once said, “Eating at fast food outlets and other restaurants is simply a manifestation of the commodification of time coupled with the relatively low value many Americans have placed on the food they eat”. In the non-fiction book, “Fast Food Nation” by Eric Schlosser, the author had first-hand experiences on the aspects of fast food and conveyed that it has changed agriculture that we today did not have noticed. We eat fast food everyday and it has become an addiction that regards many non-beneficial factors to our health. Imagine the wealthy plains of grass and a farm that raises barn animals and made contributions to our daily consumptions. Have you ever wonder what the meatpacking companies and slaughterhouses had done to the meat that you eat everyday? Do you really believe that the magnificent aroma of your patties and hamburgers are actually from the burger? Wake up! The natural products that derive from farms are being tampered by the greed of America and their tactics are deceiving our perspectives on today’s agricultural industries. The growth of fast food has changed the face of farming and ranching, slaughterhouses and meatpacking, nutrition and health, and even food tastes gradually as time elapsed.
Due to false advertising, I feel that certain food companies are being careless in trying to make people buy their products in order to make money in the quickest way possible. My only suggestions for this situation are either the companies to tell the truth about their products, or stop advertising completely. If the companies could spend more time researching the effects of their products, then they could make improvements to their foods or maybe find alternatives to the ingredients. That way people can make the right decisions in buying what is best for them and their children. Thank you for your time.
There is a debate on whether direct-to-consumer advertising of pharmaceutical drugs is moral. These drug companies believe they are providing consumer awareness for patients potentially suffering illnesses, while critics argue that patients demand particular drugs from their doctor while there might be
Stewart, Philip S, (2001) states that antibiotics are elements that are used to kill, or hinder the multiplication and growth of organisms. Especially, these antibiotics are meant to control fungi and bacteria. In this case, the antibiotics that are used in killing bacteria are referred to as bactericidal, and the ones that are used to prevent the multiplication process are bacteriostatic. The primary microbes for antibiotics are bacteria and fungi. These microorganisms are crucial to facilitate the secretion of substances that kill harmful bacteria which confer competition for the limited available nutrients (Southern, P. J., &Berg, 1981).
If you had to choose between having Mad Cow Disease or becoming the top scientist in your field, which would you choose? The answer is obvious. Most realize that Mad Cow Disease, i.e. Bovine spongiform encephalopathy, is a fatal disease that has been present among cattle populations in Europe over the past couple decades. In BSE, brain cells begin to die, forming sponge-like holes in the cow’s brain tissue. Evidence shows that consumption of infected cattle could correspond with the contraction of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD), a similar disease in humans. Although few people have been diagnosed with CJD worldwide, they remain fearful of showing symptoms of CJD; commonly resulting in death within a year. For this reason, many Americans panicked when becoming aware that the first case of BSE was discovered in the United States in December of 2003. Unfortunately, the media is quick to show infected cows, distempered and shaking in their stalls, without giving sufficient information of the disease’s origin or the preventative measures being taken to halt its spreading. Before consumers restrict beef intake from their diets they should consider their risks. In America, chances of developing BSE is far slimmer than becoming infected with other food-borne illnesses. Although many Americans were recently startled by a reported case of Mad Cow Disease in the United States, they are assured protection from infection by: consumption of selected meats, closely guarded packaging plants, and regulation in beef imports.
“Impure Science” proves definitively how consumers, armed with thorough knowledge, can influence public health policy, budget funding, and even academic research toward their own goals in combating the diseases that threaten their lives.
“Misuse of antibiotics could result in selection for resistant bacteria”. This gentle warning mentioned by the inventor of antibiotics, Sir Alexander Fleming, seems to have lost its meaning over the course of years. Antimicrobial resistance is a growing public health concern; antibiotics used in factory farmed animals raised for human consumption contributes to this problem. Scientific evidence confirms that by the consumption of meat that contains antibiotic-resistant microbes, some antibiotic resistant bacteria are transferred from animals to humans ("GAO"). Factory farming has its benefits, but issues arise due to the overuse of antibiotics in factory-farmed animals, and this essay aims to propose a solution by analyzing Denmark’s successful antibiotic banning policies.
What most Americans don’t know is that their food supply is being controlled by a select few corporations. There are four food corporations that control 80% of the market; Monsanto, Tyson, Perdue and Smithfield. In the film, Food Inc., Tyson was reported as being one of the largest meat packing companies in the world. As seen in the film, one of the industrial chicken farmers under contract with Perdue gave a look into what industrial chicken farming looks like. The chickens were kept in overcrowded conditions that didn’t allow them to move. Many of the chickens died as a result of their accelerated growth and cramped conditions. The chickens were also fed antibiotics that are no longer working to prevent dangerous diseases. Corporations like Tyson and Perdue are producers of a large amount of food, in a small amount of land for a cheap price. Corporations have government agencies that are supposed to protect the consumer in their pockets and these agencies are allowing unsafe food products to be sold to consumers. Also in the film was the interview of Barbara Kowalcyk whose 2 year old son Kevin died after eating a burger that was infected with ...
Eric Schlosser of “Fast Food Nation” exploits the negative changes it causes. In “Fast Food Nation” Eric Schlosser takes parts to talk about how fast food changed the way animal were raised in order to meet demands from the people. He exploited larger proportion of fast food is made from sub-standard meats, which are taken from low quality animals. In short, the meat is not from one common placed, but rather from a host of parts that are pounded together to make a whole burger. To which a single disease like E.coli can spread to multiple meat products. “E. coli 0157:H7 is a mutated version of a bacterium found abundantly in the human digestive system. Most E. coli bacteria help us digest food, synthesize vitamins, and guard against dangerous organisms. E. coli 0157:H7, on the other hand, can release a powerful toxin- called a "Vero toxin" or a "Shiga toxin"-that attacks the lining of the intestine….A single animal infected with E. coli 0157:H7 can contaminate 32,000 pounds of that ground beef” (Schlosser). The likelihood of disease spread is very high since the meat is taken from different animals. In chapter 9 of the book, he provides a case in which ground meat was recalled after E. coli was identified. The worst part of that, was that 25 million pounds of the meat had been consumed. He also warns that with fast foods, the possibility of nationwide food
Pictures of happy cows, chickens, and pigs grazing on luscious grasslands litter every grocery store and product in America. This illusion of natural food is the ingenious plan of large business’s advertising. With the loose description of organic available, companies throw it around as though it means nothing, but sadly when combined with the picture of a happy farmer, it is sold as the healthiest food on the market. “The organic label is a marketing tool…It is not a statement about food safety. Nor is ‘organic’ a value judgment about nutrition or quality” (Pollan 179). Pollan uses the example of Rosie the “free-range” chicken. Rosie is from a supposedly organic farm that raises thousands of chickens to be sold at Whole Foods Markets. Rosie’s life is spent in one small chicken house, where she is tightly packed in with several thousand other “Rosies”. Her “free-range” label is allowed because of one small trap door that allows chickens into a few square feet of grass – which is never utilized, by the time the door is opened the chickens are already several months old and do not know how to live outside the chicken coop. Yet the advertisement clearly reads that Rosie is a free range, completely natural chicken. When compared to a truly natural chicken, Rosie is just the same industrial product as any other feedlot
One objection Norcross states in his essay is that “perhaps most consumers are unaware of the treatment of animals, before they appear in neatly wrapped packages on supermarket s...
More and More people are becoming concerned about what they eat, especially if they consume food products that are manufactured in food industries. However, it is hard to know what exactly you are consuming if food industries provide false nutrition content and mislead consumers by placing false advertisements on the packaging. When a company produces a product that contains misleading label, consumers are not receiving complete information about the food they are eating which could lead to health issues including allergies and problems with diabetes.