Is it economical to feed chicken hormones?

Answer 1

Absolutely not, the cost of treating chickens with growth hormones far outweighs the value of the bird at market. Growth hormones must be given intra muscular ( one chicken at a time) and the average cost per shot is more than the chicken is worth. Hormones are banned in North America and most of Europe. The rumors that major chicken producers feed meat birds hormones is false. Feeding the birds hormones does nothing for growth rates and is therefore useless. These myths have been around for years and are false. The truth and the facts are regularly ignored by fear mongers who know nothing about the industry.

For the truth about chicken and hormones please see Related links.

Not necessarily true: Poultry in the US has higher than normal levels of synthetic estrogen (natural estrogen has been banned in poultry production in the US) than Canada and entirely more than EU nations (which banned estrogen in poultry feed altogether). Depending on the amount of estrogen given (fed) to chicken distinguishes the whole from broilers (larger). This allows chicken of the same, indeclinable pedigree to grow almost twice the size of their fellow chicken.

Debate over residual amounts of zeranol (synthetic) were also reported of girls in Italy and Puerto Rico who had reached puberty several years early. However, these results could not be verified by other laboratories.

Answer 2

Feeding chickens hormones is not economical or necessary. Hormones are not approved for use in poultry production in many countries, including the United States, due to health concerns. Chickens can grow and mature perfectly well without the use of hormones. It is more cost-effective to provide chickens with a balanced diet and proper care for healthy growth.