Sunday, October 4, 2026

The Chicken, the egg, and the monopoly

 

Instead of clicking the link to expand, here's the rest of the text:

...but turns out I was dead wrong. 

The reality is that the immense majority of meat chicken farmers in the world get their chickens from one of 2 companies: Cobb-Vantress, owned by Tyson Foods, or Aviagen, controlled by Germany's EW Group (the Wesjohann family). 

They have a concept specific to the industry called grandparent stock: what you buy from these 2 companies is - essentially - a bunch of chickens with planned obsolescence. 

The way it works is that each company keeps "pure" bloodlines on its own farms. Let's label them A, B, C and D. Those are the crown jewels - these companies' IP - and they never leave the building. 

What they sell you are the "grandparents": chicks from those four lines, but each line in only one sex. You get A roosters but no A hens, B hens but no B roosters, C roosters but no C hens, D hens but no D roosters. Which means you can never breed more A, B, C or D birds yourself. 

What you can do is cross them. A roosters with B hens give you the fathers, C roosters with D hens give you the mothers - these are the "parents". The parents then give you the chickens that actually end up on our plates, slaughtered at around 6 weeks. 

And that's the end of the road. If you tried breeding those chickens, their chicks would be a complete genetic lottery: still chickens, sure, but without the genetic properties that make them commercially viable. They'd grow slower and less evenly, you'd have to sell them for way more than your competitors, and your business would be dead. 

So you have to go back to Cobb or Aviagen for new grandparents. Forever. 

Why buy grandparents at all, and raise 2 generations just to sell the third? The answer is scale. If you buy say 100 grandparents, each of them gives you around 50 parents, and each parent hen then gives you around 150 chicks: from those 100 grandparents, you have yourself some 600,000 chickens whose meat you can sell. 

It makes no sense for these 2 companies to sell the final chickens directly. They'd have to hatch tens of billions of chicks a year and ship them all over the world. Much easier to simply sell the grandparents and let farmers do the multiplying and pay for the farms, the feed and the labor. 

And, you knew this was coming, there is also a China angle here: as you can imagine, China isn't too pleased to be dependent on foreign companies for such a basic food item as chicken. So China did what China does best: long-term planning. The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs launched a plan for "national broiler genetic improvement" (2021-2035), which aims for domestically bred breeds to make up at least 60% of the domestic market by 2035 (https://globaltimes.cn/page/202307/1294882.shtml). 

And, of course, they're ahead of the plan. As of 2025, homegrown breeds held more than 30% of the market: halfway to the 2035 goal in just four years (https://agripost.cn/2026/08/17/chinas-top-three-domestic-white-broiler-breeds-roll-out-upgraded-varieties/). 

Can you escape all this as a consumer? Sure, you can buy organic or Label Rouge chicken, from slower-growing breeds raised for at least 81 days instead of 6 weeks, for two to three times the price. 

Except, plot twist: the genetics behind most of those slow-growing birds come from a French company called Hubbard... which has belonged to Aviagen since 2018 (https://euromeatnews.com/aviagen-announces-the-acquisition-of-hubbard-breeders/) 

And even if you could truly escape, you wouldn't want everyone to: we'd need vast new swathes of farmland, both for the chickens and their feed. Ironically, advocating for organic free-range chicken for everyone is one of the worst positions one can take for the planet's resources. 

If you want to minimize your environmental footprint, the counterintuitive answer is to buy the cheapest supermarket chicken - or eat less meat, of course. 

As my friend was saying last night, you may not like the way this industry works but, at the end of the day, it's what puts affordable protein on the plates of billions of people, using proportionally fewer resources than any other way of raising chicken. 

 

Toxic food?

 

The local congressional race: Pan v. Kiley

 The local congressional rate pits centrist Democrat Dr. Richard Pan against current (Republican, no "Independent") congressman Kevin Kiley, a MAGA stalwart. I'm not particularly thrilled about Pan, but Kiley has been an absolute horror show. So...voters have been offered the traditional choice between pretty bad and horrible.

Meanwhile, the campaign literature from Pan has called Kiley out for trying to conceal his Republican/MAGA roots--Kiley, is now touting his "independence," despite voting for Trump's programs 98% of the time. Pan has--correctly, in my humble opinion--declined to debate Kiley. What's the point of debating people whose bad faith and mendacity is off the charts?

In congressional campaign literature. Pan's mailings point out Kiley voted with Trump 98% of the time, voting to cut Social Security (actually increase the retirement age), and voting to increase prescription drug costs.

Kiley's mailing answering Pan's accusations cites the "California Globe," accusing Pan of just making things up. So I Googled the California Globe. Wikipedia says its editor "was charged by federal prosecutors with cyberstalking and harassment, for which he was pardoned by President Donald Trump in 2021. In February 2022, [the editor] Kurson pleaded guilty to state misdemeanor criminal charges of attempted eavesdropping and computer trespass related to his divorce." 

Wikipedia rates the Globe as "generally unreliable"... 🤣 Who says pardons don't matter? 


Meanwhile...

Friday, October 2, 2026

Miscellaneous short stories/links: AI betrayal of healthcare, Invertebrate Politicos, and Fear!

 AI Battle Between Insurers and Hospitals Jacked Up Patient Prices by Nearly $1 Billion

“Not exactly the cancer cure we were promised,” quipped one critic.

 

Artificial intelligence proponents claim AI will make healthcare more efficient, but an analysis published Wednesday suggests that the burgeoning technology is instead helping hospitals identify more lucrative diagnoses—and is driving nearly $1 billion in additional costs for patients and insurers.

Happy Oligarch Day as Trump-Aligned Billionaires Take Over Hollywood

(from Matt Stoller, reacting to the WB/Paramount merger)


I’m reminded of a conversation I once had with a legal scholar named Cass Sunstein, who is a widely cited and politically influential ex-Obama administration official. I met him at a book event for his now-discredited book Nudge and criticized his thesis. He didn’t defend himself, but instead listened and made my argument for me. It was weird, and then I realized, he was simply trying to make me like him. To him, being correct or not, or holding any sense of integrity, was utterly irrelevant. He simply didn’t want to offend anyone.

That’s what this culture is about, it’s completely vacuous courtier politics, people living as if they are seeking the favor of a monarch instead the honor of popular support. And that’s why this merger loss is useful. It shows that Trumpism isn’t about one man, and it’s not about a nation full of racist voters or anything like that. Democrats like Gavin Newsom and Rob Bonta did exactly what Trump did, on behalf of the same [Hollywood] oligarchs, because their basic view of power is the same. They simply cannot fathom a world in which we have equality before the law.

What Happens When Neoliberalism’s Only Got Fear Left to Sell?


Neoliberalism promised us prosperity, security and freedom through markets. Increasingly, it is delivering insecurity instead. So what does it have left to offer? Fear. And that is it.

We are told to fear government debt. We are told to fear the bond markets. We are told governments must maintain “fiscal credibility”, even when doing so means higher taxes, weaker public services, lower living standards and fewer jobs.

Why Can't Those South Americans Get It Together?

 

Today's Bee Letter: The DSA is silly!

RE: The DSA agenda may cost $200$. Who pays for it?
10/2/26 p. B-10

The Bee's opinion writer (Ingrid Jacques) joins the paid chorus of pundits promoting the lavender-haired trans lesbian lefties as representative of the silliness of anyone proposing a change in the current dog-eat-dog economy, with (bonus!) the largest homeless population since the Great Depression. Sorry, Ms. Jacques, there are going to have big changes from spending trillions on war while ignoring health, shelter, transportation and infrastructure. You may not like it, but the alternative is beyond painful.  As for whether public, rather than billionaire, ownership and management of the economy is a good idea. How's that alternative working out now?

The Chicken, the egg, and the monopoly

  I was having dinner last night with a friend working in the chicken industry and I learned something that blew my mind. Where do chicken ...