Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lady Lurksalot who wrote (25082)	9/28/1998 7:55:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Holly - Antibiotics have straightforward dose-response characteristics. The amount in meat we eat is maybe a thousandth (this is a max figure and probably way higher than what we really do get) of an active dose. i doubt our intestinal flora would notice - so I am not worried about untoward evolutionary pressures. Allergies typically require a sensitization episode. Most modern antibiotics have fairly low allergenic potential. we've come a long way since sulfa, a notorious allergen. I'd expect allergic responses to meat atbs to be vanishingly rare. Steroids get more interesting, since they are more metabolically stable. Also, low doses can have measurable effects. Here I would hope that the FDA and/or the USDA is figuratively minding the henhouse. The most interesting drugs these days are peptide hormones, like bovine somatotrophin. bST boosts milk production - and it doesn't end up in the milk! Clean, neat and nontoxic. But the press had their day with it, because it was new and genetically engineered. Americans (also Europeans and Japanese, anyone else wanna weigh in?) tend to be chemophobes. Environmental poisons are scary, and all chemicals are suspect in the public eye. What's often lost is a sense of perspective - how dangerous and in which way are some things really? Like saccharin or aspartame. Or tobacco <ggg>