<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Don’t jump to conclusions on swine flu and pork production]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by enviroperk http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/ Wed, 29 Apr 2009 19:37:57 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/1 That is an excellent piece that puts the issue in perspective. Grist is fortunate to have contributers like Tom to see connections, research and document them and Merrit Clifton to provide some context for that research. Great stuff. Constructive discussion of the type that can bring change.

]]> That is an excellent piece that puts the issue in perspective. Grist is fortunate to have contributers like Tom to see connections, research and document them and Merrit Clifton to provide some context for that research. Great stuff. Constructive discussion of the type that can bring change.

]]> Comment #2 by x99x http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:13:13 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/2 I don't know. I'm always wary of both the people who sound too hysterical and the people who sound too level-headed in these sorts of situations. I think Tom's post struck just the right tone when we are faced with a corporate megalith that has very obviously been trying to sit on the people rather than solve the problem. The slowness to deal appropriately with this has heavily to do with pressure from the factory farm owners, and so it is vital that their influence be countered with extreme pressure from the rest of us. Maybe there is another cause than the outrageously unhygienic mess they've made of the Perote Valley, and the appalling pig corpses laying around, but the factory farm is the most likely source by far.

I guess I'm trying to say that this doesn't seem to be taking into account the kind of perfidies that can be, and I think have been, brought to bear on any investigation of this matter, and a too ready willingness to just sit back and wait for the agencies involved to make their eventual determination sounds like a promise to just take at face value whatever they may be pressured into reporting... in this world, and in this day and age, not exactly likely to be the facts, but rather more likely to be what they think we will swallow.

Plus, it seems to me it was reported here, also by Tom, that Smithfield is in the middle of trying to sell itself to a Chinese megalith, which makes it the more likely they will fight to the death to keep any chance of liability for this covered up.  It already feels like it with all the squirrelly stuff coming out of DHS, CDC, and WHO.  So, by all means, this should be investigated right down to the last DNA strand, but it will not resolve in the public's favor unless there is intense pressure.  I'm thinking that Russia and China riding WHO may be our best chance to see this gets tracked down and addressed properly.

]]> I don't know. I'm always wary of both the people who sound too hysterical and the people who sound too level-headed in these sorts of situations. I think Tom's post struck just the right tone when we are faced with a corporate megalith that has very obviously been trying to sit on the people rather than solve the problem. The slowness to deal appropriately with this has heavily to do with pressure from the factory farm owners, and so it is vital that their influence be countered with extreme pressure from the rest of us. Maybe there is another cause than the outrageously unhygienic mess they've made of the Perote Valley, and the appalling pig corpses laying around, but the factory farm is the most likely source by far.

I guess I'm trying to say that this doesn't seem to be taking into account the kind of perfidies that can be, and I think have been, brought to bear on any investigation of this matter, and a too ready willingness to just sit back and wait for the agencies involved to make their eventual determination sounds like a promise to just take at face value whatever they may be pressured into reporting... in this world, and in this day and age, not exactly likely to be the facts, but rather more likely to be what they think we will swallow.

Plus, it seems to me it was reported here, also by Tom, that Smithfield is in the middle of trying to sell itself to a Chinese megalith, which makes it the more likely they will fight to the death to keep any chance of liability for this covered up.  It already feels like it with all the squirrelly stuff coming out of DHS, CDC, and WHO.  So, by all means, this should be investigated right down to the last DNA strand, but it will not resolve in the public's favor unless there is intense pressure.  I'm thinking that Russia and China riding WHO may be our best chance to see this gets tracked down and addressed properly.

]]> Comment #3 by Mel77 http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 03:35:15 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/3 This is an interesting and sober article clearly not written by an agribusiness-paid troll. I did have to snicker a bit, though, that the author saw fit to cite that "Granjas Carroll,  however,  reported no unusual disease outbreaks among either pigs or staff" as if this had some factual bearing. Polluting corporations are well known for their forthright willingness to share any facts that might link them to the illnesses they cause, just look at GE, PG&E, Hooker Chemical, Dupont and Monsanto.

]]> This is an interesting and sober article clearly not written by an agribusiness-paid troll. I did have to snicker a bit, though, that the author saw fit to cite that "Granjas Carroll,  however,  reported no unusual disease outbreaks among either pigs or staff" as if this had some factual bearing. Polluting corporations are well known for their forthright willingness to share any facts that might link them to the illnesses they cause, just look at GE, PG&E, Hooker Chemical, Dupont and Monsanto.

]]> Comment #4 by sindark http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 11:43:04 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/4  

Even if it turns out that this flu has nothing to do with factory farming, it still makes sense as a thing to investigate when mysterious new diseases emerge. Not every new illness comes from factory farms, clearly, but enough have done to warrant their place on the list of suspects.

Not checking, because it isn’t certain to be the cause, doesn’t strike me as a sensible approach. That being said, we should obviously make it clearly known that the cause was not factory farming, in those cases where it is determined to be so.

When it comes to public relations, having the general link between factory farming and human disease known seems important. While some people get worked up about the health and comfort of the animals themselves, I think most people are only concerned with the impacts our agricultural practices have on human beings.

]]>  

Even if it turns out that this flu has nothing to do with factory farming, it still makes sense as a thing to investigate when mysterious new diseases emerge. Not every new illness comes from factory farms, clearly, but enough have done to warrant their place on the list of suspects.

Not checking, because it isn’t certain to be the cause, doesn’t strike me as a sensible approach. That being said, we should obviously make it clearly known that the cause was not factory farming, in those cases where it is determined to be so.

When it comes to public relations, having the general link between factory farming and human disease known seems important. While some people get worked up about the health and comfort of the animals themselves, I think most people are only concerned with the impacts our agricultural practices have on human beings.

]]> Comment #5 by atreyger http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:08:35 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/5 The issue is not so much that we should or we shouldn't investigate or disclose where the origin (i.e. Vector One) came from, but reduce knee-jerk and as a result spurious conclusions about what the origin is, a la Tom Philpott's piece. The conjecture that he repeated after some other circumstantial pieces within the AP and Reuters, was of the same exact kind as the climate deniers claim that climate change is a figment of imagination from within environmental movement in order to bolster donations. Clearly, this claim is wrong, right? Right? So therefore, the claim postulated by Tom Philpott is also wrong, not because it is or isn't the truth, but because he has no evidence to back it up besides quoting some local who probably got fired by the CAFO in question.

]]> The issue is not so much that we should or we shouldn't investigate or disclose where the origin (i.e. Vector One) came from, but reduce knee-jerk and as a result spurious conclusions about what the origin is, a la Tom Philpott's piece. The conjecture that he repeated after some other circumstantial pieces within the AP and Reuters, was of the same exact kind as the climate deniers claim that climate change is a figment of imagination from within environmental movement in order to bolster donations. Clearly, this claim is wrong, right? Right? So therefore, the claim postulated by Tom Philpott is also wrong, not because it is or isn't the truth, but because he has no evidence to back it up besides quoting some local who probably got fired by the CAFO in question.

]]> Comment #6 by sindark http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/ Thu, 30 Apr 2009 12:45:04 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-29-swine-flu-pork-farm-reax/6 You don't need evidence to construct a hypothesis, which is all the claim about factory farms was. Your points about not going out on a limb make a lot of sense, but there do seem to be good reasons for supposing factory farms might be involved.

After all, there are plenty of precedents: mad cow disease, avian flu, foot and mouth disease, all the salmonella and e. coli outbreaks, etc.

]]> You don't need evidence to construct a hypothesis, which is all the claim about factory farms was. Your points about not going out on a limb make a lot of sense, but there do seem to be good reasons for supposing factory farms might be involved.

After all, there are plenty of precedents: mad cow disease, avian flu, foot and mouth disease, all the salmonella and e. coli outbreaks, etc.

]]>