I'm not dismissing the possibility that some people aren't getting eggs. Its normal, for a host of reasons. I'm not dismissing the possibility that for some people, those reasons may have to do with TSC bringing out a pallet of feed that's been sitting in the warehouse for the past year plus+. Their inventory control has never been famed as the standard against which others should be measured. Or a miss milling. or a number of other potential errors in process.The results should be dismissed if they are meaningless anyway i.e. not a accused batch. Lot to lot variability I assume has far less quality control regulation for animal feed than in human food. Honestly what is the test for if you don't know what to look for anyway? Protein content for example won't matter if the manufacturing plant had some kind of mold blowing in during a certain time period. These things happen and if enough product is effected there can be an investigation/recall. We did recalls based on taking people's word for it. People would call to complain about x product doing x and we would have an investigation that could end in a recall. The people havings issues just need to notify the manufacturer. Sure people may dismiss test resuts if it doesn't fit their confirmation bias but you do the same exact thing by dismissing people actually having a problem. None of this helps.
I am saying that there is neither evidence nor plausible mechanism offered to support claims of a vast, many months long conspiracy which is both uniquely competent in its execution and implausibly inept in its roll out. At this point, there doesn't appear to be any credible evidence of persistent, widespread problems with (pick a Brand) feed, social media firestorm not withstanding.
Which has nothing to do with whether or no our Gov't is out to get us, or if market dominance doesn't allow companies considerable influence over a given market.
I've seen a lot of incompetence in business over the decades, but it is exceedingly rare to see one deliberately destroy their product* in order to increase pricing of a product in another market segment - particularly where there is significant competition by numerous other players. If you want to get out of a market segment, there are better, more profitable ways to do so.
I'll even grant that our Gov't seems out to get us - as we see almost every time an Agency reads ints mandate as a grant of new authority - i.e the Waters of the United States rule the EPA adopted to encompass every puddle that forms after a rain, or CDC's claims they have the power to enact rent controls. I'll even grant that the FDA, explicitly, has made clear its not fond of backyard producers and wants to further regulate "for the public good". Just like we are seeing with the efforts to force Mfgs to "voluntarily" take most livestock drugs off the shelf. None of those things are highly competent conspiracies - they are government agencies acting in ways typical of incompetent bureaucrats with institutional inertia, every where we look, in essentially every country through modern history.
No conspiracy needed.
*Even Habro/Wizards of the Coast backed down this month when they accidentally almost destroyed their Product in their efforts to further monetize it, and Coke brought back its classic in the face of the "New Coke" fiasco. I could name plenty of other examples. Pick a decade.
Last edited: