DDGS Tests to Ensure Quality Feed For Livestock and Poultry | Livestock

With the price of corn steadily rising, other means in which to feed the nations’ two and four legged food sources are being pursued. Corn, once considered the unquestioned king of all eatable crops, has grown unpopular over the years as a human food product as both unnecessary and expensive to produce.These days, it costs more to produce and refine corn than it can even sell for as food in the first place. Switching to producing ethanol based products is seen as both more cost effective and environmentally friendly.DDGS stands for Distillers Dried Grains with Solubles. It’s a by-product of the distillation process. As ethanol production has grown increasingly popular, DDGS have become an efficient, effective way to feed the nations livestock and poultry. It is an effective way to cut back on waste.Worries over the quality and nutrient values leave many resistant to it, preventing it from becoming the nation’s primary source of animal feed. Sold primarily as a protein source, it accounts for about 15 to 20 percent of a cow’s diet. As prices for DDGS fall, more studies are being done to determine just how much of a cow’s diet can be replaced.Each animal differs when it comes to diet and many of the studies have been focused on pigs, which leaves dairy farmers and livestock producers hesitant to fully embrace this new trend. As DDGS can slowly lose its nutritional value over time, there are also concerns about its actual cost effectiveness.The economics concerning cost effectiveness related to feed prices is determined primarily by three main factors. Feed prices, the cost of changing out feeds, and the overall difference in feed performance are all heavily taken into account before any drastic changes are made. In most cases, animals have taken favorably to their new diets, with few problems. Other farmers worry though about the catastrophic outcomes should their own animals not make the switch so conveniently.So far, the switch to DDGS has done little to affect the favor and substances of the nation’s animals as they are consumed by the public. Taste, texture and flavor all rated equally to those animals that were fed other diets. For the most part, nutrients remained equal among all the animals in relation to other feeds.Among other worries, many Americans are concerned about the things they put in bodies. Many swear they can taste the difference between grass-grazed cattle and feed based cattle, and can explain how farmed salmon is different from open sea versions.Many ranchers are worried that adding DDGS will cause a barely informed public to raise unnecessary concerns about the differences of how their burgers taste. Informing the masses of change can be an expensive, tricky and sometimes futile situation.A fickle meat-consuming public can lead to drastic drops in the meat market. Teaching and informing an already confused public about what DDGS actually is, is a task many in the meat industry would rather not face. With the push to increase ethanol in the U.S., Americans might just not have a choice.

The Norwegian Versus the American Healthcare System | healthcare

America’s history is rooted so deeply in freedom of choice to either win or lose in one’s economic decisions. This can be epitomized by so many early Europeans coming to the New World in search of a new life, many of which had very little wealth in terms of personal property or education, but eventually pioneered much of the American wilderness creating farms, small communities, and big cities. From the earliest Americans that came to Jamestown Virginia to the more recent immigrants coming through Ellis Island, many of these Americans have argued for less government intervention in their lives and created a culture that keeps the government from controlling everyday choices like gun control to even universal healthcare. Even today, America does not even have a universal healthcare system, even though many other industrial nations do.Many Americans argue that a universal healthcare system will not work in America because a large portion of Americans will simply take advantage of the system, in terms of not altering their unhealthy behavior, thus, running up the costs for everyone. Moreover, many feel that healthcare is simply not a privilege to be handed to everyone, and should be employer based to ensure everyone pays for their own healthcare, as much as possible. This seems to be a cultural issue rooted deeply in the American value of individuals being independent as much as possible from government influences. On the other hand, a country like Norway has some pure socialist practices, especially in the area of healthcare. In fact, everyone in Norway has healthcare. It is the law of the land.Norwegians are more practical than Americans in how they spend their money, they enjoy saving money for quality health care. According to Bruce Bartlett, a Forbes Magazine columnist, on a per capita basis, Norwegians spend $4,763 per year, and covers everyone, while Americans spend $7,290. By various standards of health quality, like life expectancy or rate of preventable deaths, Norway does better than the U.S. One key measure is physicians per capita: America has 2.43 physicians compared with Norway’s 4 doctors per every 1,000 people, even though Norway spends a third less of its Gross Domestic Product on health care than the U.S. does.Why is the cost of healthcare in Norway less than that in America? The eye catching statistic that reveals Norwegian superiority in providing lower cost healthcare is that the number of doctors in America, per capita, is actually less than in Norway. Perhaps increasing the supply of healthcare providers in America could lower overall healthcare expenditures for healthcare. Perhaps there is a deep rooted cultural reason in Norway that is helping to keep healthcare costs down. Maybe their society has a healthier population than countries like America.Finally, it appears capitalistic and socialistic policies both can benefit a nation like America. America has the greatest GDP of any nation, but yet, does not provide a universal healthcare system for its citizens. One would think that through sheer size and because of its economic output, America could keep its healthcare costs lower for its citizens than a country like Norway. Perhaps the free market system in America will one day solve all of the demands that its citizens want, like universal healthcare. If not, perhaps a more controlled socialistic policy will be created providing universal healthcare that is similar to the one implemented in Norway. There is a school of thought for each economic approach, but the bottom line is, there is a cost to be paid, and ultimately the consumer/taxpayer will bear that cost.