I hesitate to venture into this subject, as it is so controversial, but there is a lot of hubbub on my social media now about the development of mRNA vaccine use in the livestock industry. I'm predicting that the use of such vaccines in animals will become widespread golbally in the future. The Australian government, in particular, is taking the lead in this initiative, arguing that it is essential for economic reasons.
"Minister for Agriculture Dugald Saunders said the agreement with Tiba Biotech gives NSW another path towards developing mRNA vaccines for FMD [Foot and Mouth Disease] and Lumpy Skin Disease.
“It is critical that we develop mRNA vaccines for FMD and Lumpy Skin as quickly as possible to protect our State’s livestock sector,” Mr. Saunders said.
“The threat of FMD is ongoing and there are concerns Lumpy Skin Disease could enter northern Australia this coming wet season, so it’s critical we continue to do what we can as quickly as we can.
Current FMD vaccines use the virus itself, and there is yet to be an approved vaccine for use in Australia for Lumpy Skin Disease, so creating mRNA vaccines to combat either disease would be a game-changer for the industry. mRNA vaccines are cheaper and quicker to produce, highly effective and very safe.”
As an aside, I actually contracted Foot and Mouth Disease on a camping trip in Germany back in my mid-20’s. It is no joke!
I am not against vaccines – they play a vital role in disease prevention. Vaccines have saved many lives, both human and animal, and I support continued development of vaccine technology. However, I have developed a healthy skepticism of “experts” over the last few years. My skepticism is not limited to vaccines. I’m skeptical of most things – I’m a contrarian. But I’m certainly going to question anything involving the billions of dollars of profit potential – especially when Big Government, Big Ag, and Big Pharma and singing the same tune.
I’m even more skeptical when I read articles espousing “fake news” but when you dig deeper you find a kernel of truth. For instance, there have been reports that the mRNA Covid Vaccine has been found in human breast milk. If you do a cursory web search, you’ll find several headlines stating this is not true. However, if you actually read the references, you’ll see that a small study has shown the vaccine DOES reside in breast milk in trace amounts up to 48 hours post vaccination. Of course, they tell you this is insignificant; at the same time advising you not breastfeed 48 hours after getting the shot. So now extrapolate this to mRNA use in livestock – the obvious one being dairy.
I am focusing on this topic this week to provide context for the way we raise animals at Amber Oaks Ranch. We do not use any vaccines at all. The typical practice in the industry is to administer a variety of vaccines throughout the animal's life. This can be costly and time-consuming. In the limited time that we have been raising livestock, we have not had any disease outbreaks and have not observed any negative effects from not vaccinating.
Additionally, we do not use antibiotics unless I see an animal showing signs of distress. The industry uses antibiotics regularly because they concentrate thousands of animals together in unhealthy feed yards and factories. You can’t raise 10,000 animals on a few acres without them suffering respiratory infections (even worse for poultry). To prevent this the factory farms administer sub-therapeutic antibiotics. That means they treat them to prevent illness – not as a response to illness. They also use antibiotics for increased weight gain! This is a significant contributor to anti-biotic resistance in humans.
"Antibiotics were approved for use as animal feed additives in 1950 after it was discovered that their use increased growth rate, improved feed utilization, and reduced mortality and morbidity from clinical and subclinical infections in animals. Subtherapeutic use of antibiotics in animal feed grew extensively and concern has arisen that this "indiscriminate" use of antibiotics could lead to increased numbers of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria and ultimately compromise treatment of human bacterial infections. Three recently published studies seem to indicate that animal-to-man transmission of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria is possible. Increased debate on the continuing allowance of antibiotic feed additives has ensued. The National Resources Defense Council has recently petitioned the FDA to disallow penicillin and tetracycline use in animal feed, and legislation has been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives that would limit the subtherapeutic use of antibiotics in animal feed. Experts have predicted that meat prices would increase, and meat quality would decrease if antibiotics are disallowed as a feed additive. It is the opinion of the authors that there is no conclusive evidence at this time to support the premise that subtherapeutic use of antibiotics in animal feed poses a greater threat to human health than if antibiotic feed additives were banned."
Of course, they conclude that there is "no conclusive evidence" and that any harm caused by rising prices outweighs potential harm from antibiotic resistance.
All of this is a long-winded way of saying “know your farmer” and make informed decisions. The “experts” may not have your best interests at heart and are most likely getting paid by Big Ag and/or Big Pharma and Big Government (where do those grants come from).
