• barsquid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think they mean more like plant-based diets where the farmers aren’t using antibiotics to cause physical growth.

        • barsquid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yes, I know. They probably should have phrased it differently. Can we agree there are fewer antibiotics on the crops, though, and that is likely what they meant?

    • Drusas@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Industrial agriculture, in the United States at least, relies extremely heavily on the use of antibiotics. If there is ever a future in which that is not the case, go ahead and support industrial agriculture if you want to (I’m keeping this strictly to the antibiotic problem). But as it is now, supporting industrial agriculture is also supporting the misuse of antibiotics and the growth of antibiotic resistant bacteria.

          • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            That’s not agriculture though, crops are. And crops are at least included in agriculture, even if you would expand the definition to also include animals, which I wouldn’t.

            • Drusas@kbin.run
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              Animal agriculture is absolutely agriculture. That’s why there’s a term for it, called animal agriculture.