• Please Remember: Members are only permitted to share their own experiences. Members are not qualified to give medical advice. Additionally, everyone manages their health differently. Please be respectful of other people's opinions about their own diabetes management.

Bovaer to be added to cattle feed

Amity Island said:
Thanks @Wendal for getting the thread back on track.

My point is that I'd like to be informed of what their definition of "safe" is. That's all. From there I can make an informed decision about any product or service. Without a definition we are none the wiser.

Similarly with the effectiveness of the vaccines, we only got told one side of the story, with their 100% effective, without being informed that the actual absolute effectiveness was around just 1%.

As I started the comments, the world was told that the mRNA vaccines do not come through breast milk of vaccinated people. This was all "Fact" checked as was popular during the pandemic, however, it wasn't long until this was proven to be a false fact, the mRNA was proven to come through the milk.
Click to expand...
No worries Amity Island and understand that none of us wants to be subject to anything that we considered may be harmful to us.
As I work in this space I am fairly confident to make my own judgements about treatments etc and do have a lot of faith in the regulatory authorities which I do understand many others do not share.
I am a big believer in Vaccination and much of my position was based whilst working for Merck at the time of the Andrew Wakefield questioning of the MMR Vaccine.
Eventually it turned out his concerns were unfounded and directly caused a lot of suffering as parents did not get the combined Vaccine based on the fears he raised.
There are of course potential risks with any Vaccine and I know many who take a totally opposite view to the one I take which is that the history of Vaccination has saved many lives assuming they have passed all the regulatory Approvals.
It is an individual risk reward which we have to consider for ourselves whether we wish to take any treatment but overall even though I have a reasonable knowledge of how the body works I still generally speaking follow the medical advice but am quite happy to challenge their opinion if I disagree with it.
Best wishes.
 
Wendal said:
No worries Amity Island and understand that none of us wants to be subject to anything that we considered may be harmful to us.
As I work in this space I am fairly confident to make my own judgements about treatments etc and do have a lot of faith in the regulatory authorities which I do understand many others do not share.
I am a big believer in Vaccination and much of my position was based whilst working for Merck at the time of the Andrew Wakefield questioning of the MMR Vaccine.
Eventually it turned out his concerns were unfounded and directly caused a lot of suffering as parents did not get the combined Vaccine based on the fears he raised.
There are of course potential risks with any Vaccine and I know many who take a totally opposite view to the one I take which is that the history of Vaccination has saved many lives assuming they have passed all the regulatory Approvals.
It is an individual risk reward which we have to consider for ourselves whether we wish to take any treatment but overall even though I have a reasonable knowledge of how the body works I still generally speaking follow the medical advice but am quite happy to challenge their opinion if I disagree with it.
Best wishes.
Click to expand...
I think you make such crucial points - and it's great to hear from someone who has actual expertise in this field. As you say, there's a risk that people pay disproportionate attention to the harm that medicines (including vaccines) can sometimes do rather than the massive benefits that medicines bring. After all, how many of us on this forum would be dead or seriously disabled without our various anti-diabetic medications (including insulin)?

I'm of a generation that caught measles as a matter of course: in my case it just meant feeling ill for a few days but of course it killed or disabled many children. Also, people of my parents' generation lived in fear that their children would contract polio.

We need to ensure that the success of vaccination programmes in the UK doesn't have the perverse effect of making people forget just how serious the diseases were that the vaccines eliminated! Some people find it exciting to try to unearth conspiracy theories. I don't believe that pharmaceutical companies are saints but as a general principle I tend to believe '****-up rather than conspiracy'.
 
Hi Cliff,
Thanks for kind words and yes the @#&£ up rather than conspiracy theory is one I ascribe to.
Yep big pharma like any corporate outfit can be tough and I have worked for ruthless US outfits in terms of pursuing the dollar and more patient centred firms mainly European but there is no deep state conspiracy or any wish to control or deceive the population.
I have worked in this industry a very long time and their prime motivation is to find the answers to address diseases and the profits will follow.
Enjoy the rest of your evening
 
Wendal said:
Hi Cliff,
Thanks for kind words and yes the @#&£ up rather than conspiracy theory is one I ascribe to.
Yep big pharma like any corporate outfit can be tough and I have worked for ruthless US outfits in terms of pursuing the dollar and more patient centred firms mainly European but there is no deep state conspiracy or any wish to control or deceive the population.
I have worked in this industry a very long time and their prime motivation is to find the answers to address diseases and the profits will follow.
Enjoy the rest of your evening
Click to expand...
I did some work as a management consultant years ago in the UK with a pharmaceutical company: the executives with whom I worked seemed much the same as executives in any other company in terms of their motivations and morals - some good and some bad and most in-between.
 
@CliffH @Wendal - my background is in the nuclear industry and empathise with the points you make. There is an additional point in that industry that most tend not to appreciate. If you get a safety decision hopelessly wrong then it would be you and the rest of the workforce who would bear the brunt and that concentrates the mind wonderfully.
 
Seems it is actually quite difficult to determine which dairy products (from labels etc) are from bovaer fed cattle. Organic is also not guaranteed unless it is also soil association certified. Another way to be certain if a product is bovaer free is to buy direct from local farms who can confirm if bovaer is not being added to the feed.
 
Amity Island said:
Starting with cows (what next?) bovaer has been declared a "safe" additive by both European and UK regulators as "it doesn't transfer into milk".

Bovaer is a compound made of silicon dioxide, propylene glycol and organic compound 3-nitrooxypropanol which is shortened to 3-NOP.

Bovaer is a dietary supplement for cattle that, when added to their food, helps reduce the amount of methane they produce in digestion, a gas that contributes to climate change.

www.dailymail.co.uk

ALL English cows to be given controversial Bovaer feed by 2030

A document mentioning a Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs plan to mandate the use of 'methane-suppressing feed products' English cattle is circulating on social media.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
Click to expand...
Basically sand, anti-freeze and something out of a chemistry set, sounds delicious.
 
SilverShaded said:
Basically sand, anti-freeze and something out of a chemistry set, sounds delicious.
Click to expand...
One certainly wouldn't consider 3nop as feed/food.

On the issue of safety of 3nop, if we refer to the pandemic as an example, "benefits to risks" is a phrase coined by the MHRA as their definition of "safe" (note not necessarily safe per se). Even if 3nop was actually safe, what benefit is it to the cow? What possible benefits are there to the cow against any potential risks to the cow?
 
Just picked up this thread. Personally, I do not have a problem with Bovaer or having vaccines. Everyone has to make their own minds up about these things. Having worked most of my working life with doctors and scientists I am happy to trust the science for the most part. Unfortunately, no matter how many trials are done there will always be some people who will adversely affected by a vaccine or a medication.

One of my friends is unable to take a statin for example yet her husband has been on them for years with no problems whatsoever. The majority of people I know who take them are fine but I also know people who have been unable to tolerate them.
 
Many farmers are refusing to add this to their cattle feed.
Some have no choice as they are in mid contract with Arler(?) Check where your milk is from..
We are lucky to be able to buy our milk, from our local farm shop and a herd that isn't feed Bovaer.
 
Maz2 said:
Just picked up this thread. Personally, I do not have a problem with Bovaer or having vaccines. Everyone has to make their own minds up about these things. Having worked most of my working life with doctors and scientists I am happy to trust the science for the most part. Unfortunately, no matter how many trials are done there will always be some people who will adversely affected by a vaccine or a medication.

One of my friends is unable to take a statin for example yet her husband has been on them for years with no problems whatsoever. The majority of people I know who take them are fine but I also know people who have been unable to tolerate them.
Click to expand...
Yes, I guess there's risk with all medical and scientific advances. However, would we really want to return to amputations without anaesthetic, or pneumonia killing large numbers of people (in the absence of antibiotics), or children growing up with scurvy or rickets or without any teeth, in the absence of our current understanding of the importance of nutrients such as vitamins and flouride - or, for that matter, children dying early from Type 1 Diabetes before exogenous insulin was developed?

It's always about doing a cost/benefit analysis using the information available at the time - and of course that analysis changing as significant new information comes to light.
 
CliffH said:
Yes, I guess there's risk with all medical and scientific advances. However, would we really want to return to amputations without anaesthetic, or pneumonia killing large numbers of people (in the absence of antibiotics), or children growing up with scurvy or rickets or without any teeth, in the absence of our current understanding of the importance of nutrients such as vitamins and flouride - or, for that matter, children dying early from Type 1 Diabetes before exogenous insulin was developed?

It's always about doing a cost/benefit analysis using the information available at the time - and of course that analysis changing as significant new information comes to light.
Click to expand...
I recall my Mom when she was growing up having Scarlet Fever, Rheumatic Fever and Diptheria in the house in their family of 10 children. In fact, her youngest sister died as a child of diptheria. Probably not spelled that correctly. I had a vaccine when I was a little girl for it and also for polio. Unfortunately, there was nothing for measles in those days and I ended up with that one as I think did most children in the 50s but I came through it unscathed thankfully. Others were not so lucky.

I am certainly very thankful for all the modern advances.
 
Maz2 said:
I recall my Mom when she was growing up having Scarlet Fever, Rheumatic Fever and Diptheria in the house in their family of 10 children. In fact, her youngest sister died as a child of diptheria. Probably not spelled that correctly. I had a vaccine when I was a little girl for it and also for polio. Unfortunately, there was nothing for measles in those days and I ended up with that one as I think did most children in the 50s but I came through it unscathed thankfully. Others were not so lucky.

I am certainly very thankful for all the modern advances.
Click to expand...
My earliest definite memory is my fourth birthday (late 60s): there was a small party going on but I was sitting on my mum's lap feeling miserable, as I had measles :(. I'm pretty sure that I would have been vaccinated against it by then and so I was probably just ill for a few days.

It's easy for us to forget those childhood killers - and to have the unrealistic belief nowadays that we're entitled to expect medical and scientific advances to be on a 'no risk' basis.
 
Maz2 said:
Unfortunately, there was nothing for measles in those days and I ended up with that one as I think did most children in the 50s
Click to expand...
And in the 60s and 70s (though I think MMR came in in the early 1970s). I think there was a measles vaccine a bit earlier but maybe it wasn't routinely given to children? Anyway, I'm sure I had measles in the early 1970s (and mumps, German measles as it was then called, chicken pox). My brother's a few years younger so got MMR.
 
Bruce Stephens said:
And in the 60s and 70s (though I think MMR came in in the early 1970s). I think there was a measles vaccine a bit earlier but maybe it wasn't routinely given to children? Anyway, I'm sure I had measles in the early 1970s (and mumps, German measles as it was then called, chicken pox). My brother's a few years younger so got MMR.
Click to expand...
Yes, I caught all those - and in fact children were encouraged to catch them, supposedly because it made us immune to a worse attack later in life. Those illnesses weren't regarded as killers any more by the late 60s, when I was catching them, I think because we were given some kind of vaccine - on a sugar lump, from what I remember. Also, I had the tuberculosis vaccine (BCG) in the early 70s.
 
Docb said:
@CliffH @Wendal - my background is in the nuclear industry and empathise with the points you make. There is an additional point in that industry that most tend not to appreciate. If you get a safety decision hopelessly wrong then it would be you and the rest of the workforce who would bear the brunt and that concentrates the mind wonderfully.
Click to expand...
I did some work with BNFL years ago as a management consultant: I was struck by the 'safety culture' that seemed to permeate every aspect of their work, because of the catastrophic potential consequences of error!
 
CliffH said:
I did some work with BNFL years ago as a management consultant: I was struck by the 'safety culture' that seemed to permeate every aspect of their work, because of the catastrophic potential consequences of error!
Click to expand...

One thing that comes with that comes with that culture is an appreciation that safety is relative, not absolute. Nothing is absolutely safe, it is just that one thing is safer than other. It also makes you think about risk and quantifying that risk. You can then set standards whereby a risk is considered to be of no consequence. That standard would be related to consequences but it allows decisions to be made on a rational rather than an emotional basis.

What I find interesting in the discussion in threads of this sort is the way concern about the infinitesimally low risks associated with a food additive for cattle is expressed by people who no doubt quite happily travel in motor cars, a form of transport that kills and maims people daily. Much higher risks become acceptable in when a situation is familiar.
 
CliffH said:
Those illnesses weren't regarded as killers any more by the late 60s, when I was catching them, I think because we were given some kind of vaccine - on a sugar lump, from what I remember.
Click to expand...
I think they still caused (rarely) significant harm. There just wasn't much that could be done about it since the vaccines weren't yet routinely available. The sugar lump was, I think, OPV, for polio. We switched entirely to IPV a bit later.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top