Coles says "No hormones in Beef"

[freediver]

I don't think that there is any scientific evidence that dosing animals with antibiotics affects humans also.

What about antibiotic resistant bacteria? Do they affect humans?

[Outlaw Yogi]

Soy beans and derivative products contain high levels phyto-oestrogen, which mymics oestrogen, and the body responds as if it were/was oestrogen. So supposedly 'hormone free' animals fed soy & corn meal still get their dose.

The US FDA has oestrogen (or estrogen) listed as a carcinogen.

Maybe phyto hormones should be considered/regarded as medical treatment ... ie - soy toxins put in pills and sold as 'Natural HRT'

Estrogen receptor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estrogen_receptor

[J.W. Frogen]

I like hormones in beef, it sounds like porn.

[boxy]

You're no more ingesting "hormones" by eating meat from hormone treated animals, than by eating non-treated animals.

They metabolise the hormones.

It increases weight gain per feed input (as well as being used for other health benefits such as preventing disease realated to castration, at least in sheep).

As to antibiotics, they are heavily regulated. The ones we use for human medicine, are different, I believe.

[Outlaw Yogi]

Not hormone related, but certainly corporate factory farming related ... and I remember there was pretty much the same scenario a couple of years back when a Euro nation rejected US meat because of hormones.

Wikileaks cable reveals U.S. conspired to retaliate against European nations if they resisted GMOs

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/030828_GMOs_ ... z19xPmV9mq
http://www.naturalnews.com/030828_GMOs_Wikileaks.html

This does have hormone related aspects

“Coexistence” with Monsanto: Hell No!
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/12/23
"If you put a label on genetically engineered food you might as well put a skull and crossbones on it."
Norman Braksick, president of Asgrow Seed Co., a subsidiary of Monsanto, quoted in the Kansas City Star, March 7, 1994

After 16 years of non-stop biotech bullying and force-feeding Genetically Engineered or Modified (GE or GM) crops to farm animals and “Frankenfoods” to unwitting consumers, Monsanto has a big problem, or rather several big problems. A growing number of published scientific studies indicate that GE foods pose serious human health threats. The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) recently stated that “Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food,” including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system. The AAEM advises consumers to avoid GM foods. Before the FDA arbitrarily decided to allow Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) into food products in 1994, FDA scientists had repeatedly warned that GM foods can set off serious, hard-to-detect side effects, including allergies, toxins, new diseases, and nutritional problems. They urged long-term safety studies, but were ignored

An appeals court recently ruled that consumers have the right to know whether the dairy products they are purchasing are derived from cows injected with Monsanto’s (now Elanco’s) controversial recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), linked to serious animal health problems and increased cancer risk for humans.

Monsanto’s Roundup, the agro-toxic companion herbicide for millions of acres of GM soybeans, corn, cotton, alfalfa, canola, and sugar beets, is losing market share. Its overuse has spawned a new generation of superweeds that can only be killed with super-toxic herbicides such as 2,4, D and paraquat. Moreover, patented “Roundup Ready” crops require massive amounts of climate destabilizing nitrate fertilizer. Compounding Monsanto’s damage to the environment and climate, rampant Roundup use is literally killing the soil, destroying essential soil microorganisms, degrading the living soil’s ability to capture and sequester CO2, and spreading deadly plant diseases.

[Sappho]

You're no more ingesting "hormones" by eating meat from hormone treated animals, than by eating non-treated animals.

They metabolise the hormones.

It increases weight gain per feed input (as well as being used for other health benefits such as preventing disease realated to castration, at least in sheep).

As to antibiotics, they are heavily regulated. The ones we use for human medicine, are different, I believe.

I've just done a check and found that traces of hormones remain in meat boxy.

http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl ... =&as_vis=1

[boxy]

I've just done a check and found that traces of hormones remain in meat boxy.

http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl ... =&as_vis=1

Hahaaa. You pluged "are hormones in meat fully metabolized" into google scholar.

Bravo.

Did you actually read any of them

[Sappho]

I've just done a check and found that traces of hormones remain in meat boxy.

http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl ... =&as_vis=1

Hahaaa. You pluged "are hormones in meat fully metabolized" into google scholar.

Bravo.

Did you actually read any of them

yes... did you?

[boxy]

I read a bit of the top two... and they didn't seem to be supporting your contentions, so I gave up.

[Sappho]

I read a bit of the top two... and they didn't seem to be supporting your contentions, so I gave up.

well, i'm not going to spoon feed you boxy. the evidence is there for the looking. the fact remains that trace elements of hormones are found in meat and that is in contradiction to your unsupported claim.