sim.-ang.king":gcwzgql2 said:These both seem more like antibiotics bashing articles, or trying to fuel the fire. Notice they never said once what this super duper bacteria was? For all we know is it could be harmless, and always has been resistant.
boondocks":3n3fbcof said:sim.-ang.king":3n3fbcof said:These both seem more like antibiotics bashing articles, or trying to fuel the fire. Notice they never said once what this super duper bacteria was? For all we know is it could be harmless, and always has been resistant.
Not harmless and wasn't always resistant. Note: they weren't looking at one single bacteria, but rather trying to ascertain whether and to what extent bacteria from large feedlots was airborne. Nonetheless, the scientific study itself (if not the mass media articles) did identify some of the bacteria of concern: "Within these PM-associated bacterial communities were several genera that contain sub-taxa known to be infectious in humans such as Corynebacterium (present in 90% of all samples including 100% of downwind and 80% of upwind samples), Leptospira, Clostridia, Bacteroides, and Staphylococcus."
For the full study: http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/upl ... 5.acco.pdf
(PM=particulate matter in the above quote).
highgrit":z1qhrd4z said:You can make the numbers look and point any direction. Some folks will do anything to insure that the study is successful. Look no further than global warming, oh I forgot climate change. I'm still waiting for the hole in the Ozone to affect the earth. Remember freon is bad.
highgrit":2f503m7q said:I didn't read it all. That Dr. with the long weird name kind of ruined my reading. I don't use antibiotics as a growth hormone. So anything he said after that was irrelevant in my pea brain.
Are you applying that test to the mass media articles, or to the study itself? Just curious what you're trying to get at there...greybeard":2gg9gmon said:When one reads what used to be called yellow journalism, the most important thing to do, is note how many times the following words occur in the "scientific" article:
may
tend
might
think
indicate
can (instead of "do")
estimates (estimated)
suspect
could
perhaps
believe
suggest
Conclusion
In conclusion, PM generated at beef cattle feedyards contains distinct communities of bacteria,
antibiotics, and antibiotic resistance gene sequences. Thus there is significant potential for
widespread distribution of antibiotics, bacteria, and genetic material that encodes antibiotic
resistance via airborne PM as a result of the large mass of fine particles released daily from beef
cattle feedyards in the Central Plains of the United States. Dispersal of PM is facilitated by
significant wind energy potentials and frequent wind events in this region. It follows that feedlot
derived microbes, including those possessing antibiotic resistance, can be transported to new
locations where they may occupy new niches (Griffin 2007).
The 7th paragraph Boondocks, The Dr. Sirini Kamphampati who's probably the enemy in more ways than one.Drzr":3jsxcm89 said:http://www.kltv.com/story/28654796/airborne-super-bug-could-spread-to-east-texas-cattle-humans