Scandinavian countries are moving to suspend the mandated use of Bovaer, a methane-reducing additive designed to reduce bovine flatulence. A contributor to methane pollution, cow farts were supposed to be reduced by the additive to reduce climate-harming pollutant. However, there are widespread reports of collapse, lethargy, reduced feed intake, fever, diarrhea, and significant drops in milk production. There are also reports of cow miscarriages and deaths, though most involve discomfort and farmers reported that the cows improved after cessation of the supplement. What could follow is a colossal product liability lawsuit.
Various countries, like Denmark, made the additive mandatory for the inclusion in feed only to have widespread reports of serious harm to cows. Norway and other countries have suspended the use of Bovaer. It is also used in the United States, but it is not required.
Most reports involve sickness and reduced production in dairy herds.
The question is whether the manufacturer is liable. Elanco US is still advertising the benefits of the supplement:
“Every dairy could use additional, diversified income. That’s where Bovaer® from Elanco comes in. Bovaer is one of the most scientifically researched and recognized methane-reduction feed ingredients globally. Bovaer provides an access point for dairy producers to be financially rewarded for reducing their dairy’s carbon footprint by decreasing their herd’s enteric methane emissions.”
There is also the question of the liability of countries that forced dairy farmers to use the product.
If these reports are accurate, the manufacturer could be sued for a design defect and, in light of the statements above, possible warning defects.
Given the widespread complaints, there is a legitimate question of whether the drug was adequately tested. Alternatively, the company could argue that these reports are condition-related and reflect other causes, where correlation is not causation. The company could also claim that the problems are due to incorrect use of the supplement, such as incorrect dosage or delivery.
What is interesting about this case is the possible increase in damages in countries where the supplement was mandated. It is not clear if there are added protections or waivers granted to the company in these countries.
This could be a warning, manufacturing, or design defect. We do not have enough facts. A manufacturing defect is the least likely unless it is shown that the company failed to properly monitor the concentration of the active ingredients during production or allowed them to be altered by environmental conditions.
It could prove both a warning and a design defect. The company states that “Bovaer has no negative impact on the quantity or quality of milk produced.” It cites a 2022 study to support that claim: Hristov AN, Melgar A, Wasson D, Arndt C. Symposium review: Effective nutritional strategies to mitigate enteric methane in dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci. 2022:105(10):8543–57. However, that study also adds a caveat about the use of certain ingredients in some of these methane-reducing products. For example:
“The red macroalga Asparagopsis taxiformis has a strong CH4 mitigation effect, but studies are needed to determine its feasibility, long-term efficacy, and effects on animal production and health. We concluded that widespread adoption of mitigation strategies with proven effectiveness by the livestock industries will depend on cost, government policies and incentives, and willingness of consumers to pay a higher price for animal products with decreased carbon footprint.”
Again, we need to know more about the composition of the supplement used in these countries.
Under the Restatement Second of Torts, the consumer expectations test asks whether the product is more dangerous than the expectations of the ordinary consumer. Under the more demanding test of the Restatement Third, the question is whether there is a reasonable alternative design. Both would appear viable for plaintiffs if these accounts are proven correct.
The most obvious approach in the United States would be a class action lawsuit against the manufacturer. Indeed, we could see filings in various states and the need for the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) to intervene and consolidate the cases in a single district.
So this additive goes into cows. Cows produce milk that humans consume. So are humans consuming the additive and if so what are the consequences of that?
Just in case, I keep a box of Gas X in a first aid kit at home & in the SUV survival kit.
IIRC, veterinary pharmaceutical products dont provide labels with much detail that human pharma products carry. Thus the manufacturer label for Bovaer reveals nothing about its mechanism of action. A human drug label would provide important mechanistic details and results of clinical trials. Not so with Bovaer.
OTOH, a research study published on the safety and efficacy of the product provides plenty of information, enough to make an organic chemist scream in delight. In human medicine, we like to keep things concise so that we can make decisions affecting patients and research. The Wiley published article may have some answers as to the adverse events, but not being a vet or cow expert, I wouldn’t know (nor care) where to begin to determine which step in the mechanism is at fault.
Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of 3-nitrooxypropanol (Bovaer® 10) for ruminants for milk production and reproduction (DSM Nutritional Products Ltd)
https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6905
If all else fails, some might want to use the old reliable conspiracy shtick and ask whether these udderly smooth cows had their mammary teats milked with mRNA COVID vaccines, amiright!
Maybe Dr David B. Benson, PhD knows the answer since he is full of CH₄
😉
Another factor that I’ve not seen talked about in this is dosage. I have a suspicion that the forced use mandated by leftist politicians is likely at a higher dosage than those who are using it voluntarily elsewhere. Think about it: To the politician, the more methane you eliminate, the better, so they’ll be demanding the maximum dose. If you are a farmer who likes the incentives a bit, you’ll trial it out at a smaller dose. The smaller dose has less effect, but also causes less harm to the animal.
The old Doctor’s adage comes to mind: The difference between medicine and poison is dosage.
They’re just trying to kill off all of the food supplies all over the world so we become totally dependent on them. If they’re so worried about methane gas, why not just kill off all the humans that farts also? Insane.
Methane in the atmosphere breaks down in 9-12 years. This means that if the number of cattle does not significantly increase, the bovine methane contribution to atmospheric warming is already at it’s peak.
Perhaps Taco Bell needs to start adding Bovaer to it’s products.
Leave the cows alone. Concentrate on termites. They produce 20 million tons of methane a year. Liquidate them.
Adding this peak to all the other peaks makes the overall peak higher. There is a need to reduce the overall peak.
Human activity adds increasing amounts of greenhouse gases, methane being one of them. Reducing any of them is a positive step, but it needs to be a practical one.
OTOH the oil and gas industry carelessly vents methane in tremendous amounts and no one is looking to shove anything up the butts of oil and gas executives to make them stop.
I rather suspect that the average single volcanic eruption pushes more harmful gasses into the atmosphere than all the cow farts combined since the first cow herder herded his first cow.
Fart production in you meat eaters should only be enhanced and never curtailed!! You fart out of your mouths anyway.
Fart production in you meat eaters should only be enhanced and never curtailed!! You fart out of your mouths anyway.
I see that came from that extra anus that you have in your face that produces so much bullSchiff that it makes the other one you have jealous.
Its the Globalist Goal to destroy cows/cattle etc. for the bogus climate, eat bugs Globalist crowd. Bill Gates is pushing this idea of limiting cattle/cows to limit methane emissions and eat bugs and plant burgers, refer to his history and comments. These Globalist are crazy but their ultimate goal is to control people and all resources. Trump stands in their way.
I am quite far from being a globalist, and can see how truly awful Bill Gates is, but eating plant-based diet is better for humans, animals, and yes, the environment. This situation, completely avoidable, is terrible, but so is factory-farmed. Realizing we have all been programmed to accept animal harm as normal would be a huge step in our own survival, both individually and corporately.
Another reminder of the likely outcome of any struggle with mother nature. It is one thing to find new uses for ‘tools’ she has provided. It is another thing to modify systems she has built over billions of years of testing. Not to say that attempt to modify her systems are not worthy of consideration but caution should always be the byword…and it appears Elanco will be reminded of that.
Mother nature didn’t build the giant herds of dairy and beef cows. Humans did. So it is up to humans to struggle to fix the ill effects from that on humans.
Globalism is just plot to Destroy Western Society!
This column made me check the calendar to be sure it wasn’t April 1st.
Death, miscarriages, lethargy, fevers, diarrhea! I would like to know what the happens when humans consume the milk from cows that are treated with Bovaer. We have to get Bobby on this one.
I was raised on an Iowa dairy farm, and I began milking at age 8, raising every morning at 4:45 am. Following the logic of the Elanco geniuses, I should have passed to that great stanchion in the sky decades ago. Yet at 69 I still enjoy the waft of a milkhouse. Given that I drank unpasteurized raw milk until I was 20, I should have expired (pardon the pun). Yet I very much alive, quite healthy due to the grace of God, and will enjoy another 25 years or so.
Two political classes are among us. There are politicians who practice political science, a difficult and complex subject for which a world of alternatives are always in competition. The other class is that group of “political scientists,” people who don’t know much science but advocate for political positions using science, often wistful, usually untested, and expedient. You’ll find them on campuses, in government agencies, and pumping out pulp science books. The trans movement has many. Climate change has too many (even billionaires). Recall others: cold fusion, COVID-19, anti-vaxxers, obscure diets, laetrile, thalidomide, …
They should encourage methane production. Elon will buy it & fuel his rockets.
They should encourage methane production. Elon will buy it & fuel his rockets.
Another of the great Flat Earth ignominies brought to us by the Climate Hysterics. They substituted their Climate Hysteria God for a real God and think they should sacrifice anything and anyone to it. They, along with their Gender Fluid Maniac branch, will go down in history as some of the greatest wastes of treasure, talent, and time. All brought to you by the Democrat party and its progressive overlords.
Moscow is going to be cold this winter – indoors. Post while you can.
Will the progressively stupid old white women that buy organic milk, follow the science and bring Bovaer milk to their next “No Kings” protest?
https://www.newsweek.com/bovaer-additive-milk-elanco-methane-1995964
please have someone proofread these columns before publishing them.
Bovaer. What a great idea. With the best of intentions! What could possibly go wrong?
Perhaps we should give Bovaer to J. Boasberg?
I was thinking Eric Swalwell.
why not both?