←back to thread

Egg prices are soaring. Are backyard chickens the answer?

(civileats.com)
314 points greenie_beans | 4 comments | 19 Feb 25 21:46 UTC | HN request time: 1.117s | source
Show context
philco ◴[20 Feb 25 19:48 UTC] No.43119264[source]▶
This feels like an insane proposition to me, I'll explain:

1. Soaring egg prices are due to culling + deaths related to the proliferation of H5N1 (Avian Flu).

2. The reason we have been proactively culling is to minimize spread AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, to minimize the number of exposures H5N1 could have to Humans.

3. The reason we want to minimize exposure between chickens and humans is because each exposure of an infected chicken to a human is an opportunity for the virus to jump host, and adapt to better transmit amongst humans. The mutation (mammalian adaptation of the virus) can happen in the chicken before it jumps to a passing by human, or in the human once infected with the virus.

We are only a few minor adaptations away from this thing being BOTH extremely deadly AND extremely transmissible between humans. Worst case scenario. The latest strands found in Canada and now Nevada are extremely deadly, and just need the Human to Human adaptation. With enough at bats, it will have it.

The idea of dramatically increasing the number of humans exposed to sick flocks by having people start their own backyard chicken coops feels suicidal, for humanity.

The latest hospitalized patient in Georgia was exposed through a backyard flock, by the way.

replies(8): >>43119321 #>>43119352 #>>43119830 #>>43119849 #>>43120011 #>>43120134 #>>43120906 #>>43120960 #
VincentEvans ◴[20 Feb 25 22:11 UTC] No.43120960[source]▶
Throughout entire human and chicken collective history we somehow haven’t managed to get wiped out by chicken transmitted decease - and suddenly its practically imminent and only massive mega farms can keeps us safe.

A thought occurs - perhaps it’s the mega farming that is the root of this problem and having some backyard chickens won’t really move the needle any closer to doom?

replies(2): >>43121105 #>>43121148 #
1. rubidium ◴[20 Feb 25 22:23 UTC] No.43121105[source]▶
Major diseases have been a part of human history throughout. There is no evidence that mega farming is making it worse.
replies(1): >>43122723 #
2. spdgg ◴[21 Feb 25 00:50 UTC] No.43122723[source]▶
Farming changed radically after the 1950s, so pretty recently. It's pretty reasonable to believe it will. If you've been anywhere near mega livestock operations of any kind then you would know.
replies(1): >>43123213 #
3. episteme ◴[21 Feb 25 02:01 UTC] No.43123213[source]▶
Why?
replies(1): >>43244684 #
4. xolox ◴[03 Mar 25 18:01 UTC] No.43244684{3}[source]▶
Well certainly antibiotics resistance (MRSA [1]) is a problem exacerbated by intense farming practices [2]. To the best of my knowledge there are two big sources of MRSA: Hospitals and livestock farming (the latter of which actually got its own acronym LA-MRSA as in livestock associated MRSA).

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to directly compare the development of bacterial antibiotics resistance with the adaptation of viruses to be able to infect other kinds of hosts. Surely these disease vectors follow different developments.

It wouldn't surprise me though if intensive animal farming [3] has the capacity to exacerbate these problems, if only based on the high concentration of animals kept together and the generally poor health of these animals (poorly functioning immune systems, which is the whole reason for the overuse of antibiotics).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methicillin-resistant_Staphylo...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibiotic_use_in_livestock

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intensive_animal_farming