http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/antibiotics-in-crops

For half a century, meat producers have fed antibiotics to farm animals to increase their growth and stave off infections. Now scientists have discovered that those drugs are sprouting up in unexpected places.

Vegetables such as corn, potatoes and lettuce absorb antibiotics when grown in soil fertilized with livestock manure, according to tests conducted at the University of Minnesota.

Today, close to 70 percent of the total antibiotics and related drugs produced in the United States are fed to cattle, pigs and poultry, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. Although this practice sustains a growing demand for meat, it also generates public health fears associated with the expanding presence of antibiotics in the food chain.

People have long been exposed to antibiotics in meat and milk. Now, the new research shows that they also may be ingesting them from vegetables, perhaps even ones grown on organic farms.

Looking forward to that MRSA!

Ugh ;(

Problem solved...stop eating.:o

Are you calling me fat??

Thinking on it one has to wonder why a scientist would not realize that everything livestock eats goes to the soil sooner or later ;P

I think we've sort of brain farted on this angle everywhere. Just like how we're all polluting the water supply with the drugs running through our systems, yet that was "news" this year.

Thinking on it one has to wonder why a scientist would not realize that everything livestock eats goes to the soil sooner or later ;P

Because the scientists work for large corporations and their research is only published in a favorible light to those things which bring said corporations profit!

Life is grand, gimme my iPod, flat screen TV, cheap oil and all is good!

Thinking on it one has to wonder why a scientist would not realize that everything livestock eats goes to the soil sooner or later ;P

That isn't the question so much as we didn't have direct evidence that the various compounds were passing through the various livestock and plant metabolisms unaltered (that many antibiotic compounds will survive such metabolic cycles is known, most importantly by the people who have been selling this stuff). To the lay person there is an obvious "common sense" transformation of food matter but on the biochemical level large amounts what goes out isn't what "common sense" would lead you to expect.

The bit about the effects of composting was interesting, and on that point, it's important to note that antibiotics aren't a monolithic group of chemicals and they vary *widely* in how fully they are metabolized before being excreted. It's no surprise that the sulfa drug tested did not break down at all - the reason they are the first-line choice for urinary tract infections is precisely *because* they make it to the kidneys and bladder intact, unlike many of these medications - it should have been a 'no-brainer' to the folks marketing them for veterinary use that large quantities of the sulfonamides (of which sulfamethazine is one) would be excreted back into the environment.

Given the concentrations that are mentioned this (plant uptake of these antibiotics) strikes me as a low risk to human health *directly*, largely because, as I've mentioned in a previous post, soil fungi make many of these chemicals naturally and are dumping them into the soil (where they are taken up by their plant partners). In addition, there's almost no overlap between plant and animal pathogens because of differences in the cell types. What is far more worrisome is the fact that we are dumping large quantities of uncomposted manure containing these antibiotics into the soil itself where they're, as Sanchek and the author alluded to, putting selective pressure on the microbes there to develop resistance to them.

That said, as someone who has a drug allergy to sulfonamides which runs in my maternal line (which didn't go full-blown until my early 40s, started with blistering and swelling of the mucous membranes and hives in my early 30s), this does make me a bit curious about the reaction (mouth swelling, blistering, and itching) I experience eating several raw food plants, celery and cantaloupe in particular, which are very watery and typically eaten raw. We know now that most peanut allergies (overhyped, and much maligned) are actually allergy to a fungal aflatoxin that results from peanut storage - given that, it's certainly not too far-fetched to suggest that some individuals that are experiencing 'food allergy' to watery vegetables may in fact be reacting to other chemicals stored in those plant tissues.

Regards,
Nydia

One last note, on this topic:

As to the direct 'source' of the antibiotic contamination, our regulations (and track record) with regard to usage of untreated manure in agriculture are dismal - partially because we have such intensive meat farming in this country that we produce astronomical amounts of waste which has to go *somewhere*, and composting and proper treatment costs time and money. Our nitrogenous waste problem is a huge public health concern (orders of magnitude above the antibiotic contamination, or even the antibiotic resistance, issues) for ecological reasons - we're wildly altering nitrogen cycles in the areas (and those downstream from) where we practice intensive livestock farming which is impacting water quality, resulting in algal and bacterial blooms, fish kills, coliform contamination of food and water, and lots of things that are much more 'in your face' than the more subtle and indirect effects on where the antibiotics go, per se - and which the folks in North Carolina experienced in a *very* direct way in the aftermath of the last couple of major hurricanes to hit that region. We do truck liquid hog manure all over the country for use as fertilizer and it will be interesting to see if the Obama administration, in the face of our economic crisis, well constructively address the defunding of and corruption in the USDA - his pick for Dept of Agriculture head certainly isn't reassuring in that regard.

Regards,
Nydia

You are what you eat. Still holds true.

When folks are trying to insert new genes into cells, the plasmids will include genes for antibiotic resistance. That way, the petri dishes can sprayed with antibiotics so that the genetic engineers will be able to cheaply screen for the genes that they tried to insert: anything that lives is resistant to antibiotics.

http://www.organicconsumers.org/ge/genemarker.cfm
http://www.usao.edu/jloutsch/Microbiology/Chapter%2010%20part%203.ppt
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080127081611AAto2w7
Google book view with picture (http://books.google.com/books?id=FyBgrYjuLmoC&pg=PP158&lpg=PP158&dq=gene+insert+antibiotic&source=web&ots=CvZVJ4eCOn&sig=GRqw2EykhqRuJiXJtWdMF7Ioglg&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampicillin
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacillus_thuringiensis

The usual antibiotics are members of the penicillin family, and mostly ampicillin. There are documented cases of insects picking up genes from plants. One of the significant gene complexes being added to commercial agriculture plants is to make the plant produce the toxins that Bacillus Thuringiensis produces - in effect making the plant produce its own insecticide.

The usual antibiotics are members of the penicillin family, and mostly ampicillin. There are documented cases of insects picking up genes from plants. One of the significant gene complexes being added to commercial agriculture plants is to make the plant produce the toxins that Bacillus Thuringiensis produces - in effect making the plant produce its own insecticide.


I wonder if there has been any research into the possible correlation of absent bee populations and this phenomena.

I wouldn't phrase it "being suppressed" but it matches the pattern of cigarettes: denying there is any evidence and paying to hide it. One example is the wikipedia article on Colony Collapse Disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Collapse_Disorder). If you read the "talk" page for that article, you'll notice complaints about how the GMO section keeps getting reverted to the remark of No experiments have found evidence of any negative effect whatsoever on honey bee populations. The page is protected and reverted frequently.

These 2 books document how big business has used false-flag "scientists" to fake "controversy." Like how it took about 100 years between the first scientific evidence linking tobacco to cancer, and before it was generally accepted by the public. And how these very same patterns and techniques are used by other industries. America is one of the few industrialized nations where workers get silicosis from sandblasting, and how most European countries banned using actual sand in sandblasting back in the 1940s. If you want to cover up some nasty technology, these are the tactics you'll use.
Trust Us, We're Experts (http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Us-Were-Experts-Manipulates/dp/1585421391)
Toxic Sludge is Good For You (http://www.amazon.com/Toxic-Sludge-Good-You-Relations/dp/1567510604)

Why can't they just leave it all the fuck alone :(

I wouldn't phrase it "being suppressed" but it matches the pattern of cigarettes: denying there is any evidence and paying to hide it. One example is the wikipedia article on Colony Collapse Disorder (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colony_Collapse_Disorder). If you read the "talk" page for that article, you'll notice complaints about how the GMO section keeps getting reverted to the remark of No experiments have found evidence of any negative effect whatsoever on honey bee populations. The page is protected and reverted frequently.

These 2 books document how big business has used false-flag "scientists" to fake "controversy." Like how it took about 100 years between the first scientific evidence linking tobacco to cancer, and before it was generally accepted by the public. And how these very same patterns and techniques are used by other industries. America is one of the few industrialized nations where workers get silicosis from sandblasting, and how most European countries banned using actual sand in sandblasting back in the 1940s. If you want to cover up some nasty technology, these are the tactics you'll use.
Trust Us, We're Experts (http://www.amazon.com/Trust-Us-Were-Experts-Manipulates/dp/1585421391)
Toxic Sludge is Good For You (http://www.amazon.com/Toxic-Sludge-Good-You-Relations/dp/1567510604)

Thanks. Nice info.

Out of curiousity the "organic" meat that supposedly doesn't have antibiotics in it... I wonder if in fact it does b/c the manure used to grow it came from cows that did? Is there anyway to know for sure? I don't eat the organic meat b/c it's ungodly pricey but if it's pure maybe it's worth it?

It was mentioned in the article that the manure is probably being used to grow organic foods. Organic is still much better anyway though, if only to avoid having Starlink corn fed to the animals you're eating.