Have the Amount of Antibiotics Used in Beef Cattle Decreased in the Last 20 Years?
Meat producers have fed growth-promoting antibiotics to food animals for years. Recently, scientists have raised concerns that, in conjunction with the general overuse of antibiotics in humans, this use of "sub-therapeutic" levels of antibiotics in nutrient animals may pb to serious health risks for people. Banning the employ of such drugs, however, would greatly reduce the efficiency of the industry, driving upwardly the cost of meat. Some in the manufacture believe that the scientific evidence linking low-dose usage of antibiotics to drug-resistant illnesses in people is as well inconclusive and does not justify banning their utilise. Here'southward a expect at the controversy, plus links to more information.
Ranchers and farmers have been feeding antibiotics to the animals we eat since they discovered decades ago that small doses of antibiotics administered daily would make well-nigh animals gain equally much every bit 3 percentage more weight than they otherwise would. In an industry where profits are measured in pennies per animal, such weight gain was revolutionary.
Although information technology is withal unclear exactly why feeding small "sub-therapeutic" doses of antibiotics, similar tetracycline, to animals makes them gain weight, there is some testify to indicate that the antibiotics kill the flora that would normally thrive in the animals' intestines, thereby allowing the animals to utilize their nutrient more than effectively.
The meat industry doesn't publicize its use of antibiotics, and so accurate information on the amount of antibiotics given to food animals is hard to come up by. Stuart B. Levy, M.D., who has studied the bailiwick for years, estimates that at that place are 15-17 million pounds of antibiotics used sub-therapeutically in the Usa each year. Antibiotics are given to animals for therapeutic reasons, merely that utilise isn't as controversial because few argue that sick animals should not be treated.
The biggest controversy centers around taking antibiotics that are used to treat human being illnesses and administering them to food animals. There is an increasing amount of evidence suggesting that the sub-therapeutic utilize of antibiotics in nutrient animals can pose a health risk to humans. If a group of animals is treated with a certain antibiotic over fourth dimension, the leaner living in those animals volition become resistant to that drug. According to microbiologist Dr. Glenn Morris, the trouble for humans is that if a person ingests the resistant bacteria via improperly cooked meat and becomes ill, he or she may not respond to antibiotic treatment.
Concern about the growing level of drug-resistant leaner has led to the banning of sub-therapeutic utilise of antibiotics in meat animals in many countries in the European union and Canada. In the United States, even so, such use is still legal. The World Health Arrangement is concerned plenty about antibiotic resistance to suggest significantly curbing the use of antibiotics in the animals we consume. In a recent report, the WHO alleged its intention to "reduce the overuse and misuse of antimicrobials in food animals for the protection of human health." Specifically, the WHO recommended that prescriptions be required for all antibiotics used to treat ill food animals, and urged efforts to "terminate or rapidly phase out antimicrobials for growth promotion if they are used for human treatment."
Although conclusive evidence straight linking the use of drugs in food animals to an increase in drug-resistant bacteria that make people sick has not been uncovered, a number of recent studies suggesting such a link business organisation many scientists. "There is no evidence that antibiotic resistance is non a problem, simply there is bereft evidence equally to how big a problem it is," says Dr. Margaret Mellon, with the Union of Concerned Scientists.
In ane report published in the New England Journal of Medicine on February 6, 2002, researchers found links that strongly suggested that the people who developed Cipro-resistant bacteria had acquired them by eating pork that were contaminated with salmonella. The report concluded that salmonella resistant to the antibiotic flouroquine can be spread from swine to humans, and, therefore, the utilize of flouroquinolones in food animals should be prohibited.
Another New England Periodical of Medicine study from Oct. 18, 2001, found that 20 percentage of ground meat obtained in supermarkets contained salmonella. Of that 20 pct that was contaminated with salmonella, 84 percentage was resistant to at least 1 course of antibiotic.
Cipro and Baytril
Some, including the FDA, believe the overuse of Baytril, an antibody used to care for sick birds, led to an increase in treatment-resistant bacterial infections in humans. Baytril is used past poultry growers to protect chickens and turkeys from E. coli infection. The size of commercial chicken flocks precludes testing and treating individual birds, so when a veterinarian diagnoses one infected bird, farmers treat the whole flock by calculation the drug to its drinking water. Full general use of Baytril, therefore, falls in the gray expanse between therapeutic and sub-therapeutic.
Baytril is the sister drug to Cipro, which is used to treat and forestall anthrax every bit well equally campylobacteriosis and salmonellosis in people. The Nutrient and Drug Administration, doctors, and consumer groups have all urged that Baytril be removed from the market on the grounds that its use in animals may eventually compromise the power of Cipro and similar antibiotics to fight affliction in humans. Cipro and Baytril belong to a form of drugs known as fluoroquinolone, among the most powerful antibiotics currently bachelor.
Baytril get-go came up for approving for use in chickens six years agone. Physicians accept used fluoroquinolones to care for food-borne illness since 1986, only fluoroquinolone-resistant bacteria were rare until 1995, when the FDA approved the apply of these drugs in drinking water for poultry. The FDA'southward rough estimate, using 1999 data, is that use of fluoroquinolones in chickens resulted in over 11,000 people that year contracting a strain of the campylobacter illness that was resistant to fluoroquinolones, contributing to unnecessarily severe illness.
When the FDA proposed pulling Baytril apply in chickens a year agone due to sharp increases in resistance to fluoroquinolones in campylobacter bacteria, one of the 2 manufacturers voluntarily withdrew its product. The other, Bayer, did not.
Bayer officials go along to offer the human drug Cipro at reduced rates to the American public, saying that they are non convinced that the employ of fluoroquinolones in animals tin can be blamed for increased resistance in people. Until more proof is found of the specific danger to humans, they volition non withdraw their product from the craven market.
The Meat Industry's Argument
For its function, the meat-production manufacture contends that there is not plenty conclusive evidence to support measures like the FDA's proposed ban against flouroquinolones. Although none deny that the spread of antibacterial resistance is a real problem, proponents of sub-therapeutic antibiotic use in animals point out that the trouble stems from overuse of all antibiotics, including therapeutic and preventative utilize in both animals and humans. Agronomical use may contribute to the trouble, but it is incommunicable to determine to what extent.
In its recent report, the Earth Health Organization blamed the worldwide upswing in resistance to antibiotics on a combination of factors that included "overuse in many parts of the world, particularly for pocket-size infections," and "misuse due to lack of access to appropriate treatment." The factors involved in the problem are clearly not express to antibiotic use in animal feed.
"When someone's ill and goes to the doctor, they still expect to get a prescription," said National Chicken Council spokesman Richard Lobb. He said that people should expect to themselves for the causes of antibiotic resistance, referring to the American exercise of prescribing antibiotics for even the most minor of illnesses.
Increased employ in hospitals may also contribute to the resistance problem. "Today, particularly in intensive intendance wards, the amount of antibiotics in the environment can go loftier enough that people in the vicinity of patients receiving antibiotics are exposed continuously to low levels of antibiotics," microbiologist Abigail Salvers of Academy of Illinois told Scientific American. This depression level of exposure, she contends, is one reason why highly resistant bacteria are developing in hospitals. She says that a similar miracle may be taking place in agriculture.
According to Alexander S. Matthews, president and CEO of the Animal Health Institute (AHI), removal of antibiotics from animals' feed and water "would pb to increased fauna disease, a reduction in nutrient safety and proceeds little, if anything, in the effort to control resistance." He suggests developing "prudent employ principles."
Lowering or halting sub-therapeutic antibiotic use in animal production could have serious economic effects on the meat and poultry industry. According to a report released in May 2001 by USDA's Economic Research Service, discontinuing the use of antimicrobial drugs in hog production would initially decrease feed efficiency, enhance nutrient costs, reduce product and raise prices to consumers. According to the same report, U.S. pig producers saved about $63 one thousand thousand in feed costs in 1999 due to their use of low levels of sub-therapeutic drugs; they would have suffered an estimated loss of $45.5 million in 1999 if the drug use was banned.
Even within the industry, however, at that place is a growing movement to reduce at least the sub-therapeutic utilize of antibiotics in animals raised for food. Tyson Foods, Perdue Farms and Foster Farms, which collectively produce a third of the chicken Americans consume, recently declared their intention to greatly reduce the amount of antibiotics fed to good for you chicken. In that location is still no manner for consumers to know whether one of these companies' chickens has been treated with antibiotics, although some corporate consumers, McDonald's, Wendy's and Popeye's amidst them, are refusing to buy chicken that has been treated with fluoroquinolones. Increased public pressure may cause the companies who abound animals for nutrient to collectively decide that putting extra weight on feed animals isn't worth the possibility that they are putting consumers' health at adventure.
| |
| |
| · The Use of Drugs in Food Animals: Benefits and Risks This volume, deputed by the USDA and published in 1999, addresses the many benefits and risks associated with using antibiotics in feed animals. In the chapter titled "Costs of Eliminating sub-therapeutic Use of Antibiotics," the authors conclude that if there were a ban on sub-therapeutic drug utilize, the almanac price to consumers would exist between $4.84 and $9.72 per capita. |
| · WHO: Global Strategy for Containment of Antimicrobial Resistance This September 2001 study from the World Health Organisation blames a combination of factors for the worldwide upswing in resistance to antibiotics, including widespread overuse and misuse. As for the apply of antibiotics in food animals, the authors say that "inefficient and inadequately enforced regulatory mechanisms regarding antimicrobial supply contribute to excessive and inappropriate drug utilise." The authors observe that the incidence of antibody-resistant campylobacter in live poultry has increased dramatically, and that resistant strains of salmonella have been detected in several countries worldwide. Before, in June 2000, the WHO released a major report titled "Overcoming Microbial Resistance." Here is the press release for that report, forth with audio links to good opinions almost the written report's findings. |
| · Antimicrobial Drug Use and Veterinarian Costs in U.S. Livestock Product According to this report, released in May 2001 by the USDA's Economic Research Service, discontinuing the use of antimicrobial drugs in grunter production would initially subtract feed efficiency, reduce production, and raise consumer prices. The writer says that U.South. squealer producers saved nigh $63 million in feed costs in 1999 due to their apply of low levels of sub-therapeutic drugs. |
| · CDC: Antimicrobial Resistance This is the CDC's site dedicated to the result of antimicrobial resistance. Elsewhere, the CDC publishes some other site about antibiotics, Promoting Appropriate Antibiotic Use in the Community. Both sites have plenty of background information. |
| · FDA: Antimicrobial Resistance A website nether the auspices of the FDA's Center for Veterinarian Medicine, the antimicrobial resistance section of this site includes FDA fact sheets and consumer information about drug resistance. Elsewhere on the FDA website is this site on antibiotic resistance, which has general groundwork as well as links to additional resources. |
| |
| |
| · "Growing Resistance" The author of this commodity from the December 2000 issue of Mother Jones asks, "Is agribusiness squandering i of medicine's well-nigh strong weapons?" (Female parent Jones, Nov/Dec 2000) |
| · "The Challenge of Antibody Resistance" "Certain bacterial infections now defy all antibiotics. The resistance problem may be reversible, merely only if guild begins to consider how the drugs affect 'good' bacteria also as 'bad.'" (Scientific American, March 1998) |
| · "Where'south the Beef on Farm Antibiotics?" In this article written past the publisher of JunkScience.com and published on FoxNews.com, the author argues that evidence to link the utilize of antibiotics in food animals to homo health problems is scant. "Bacterial resistance to antibiotics is on the rise. ... So far, the only cause that everyone agrees about is that physicians hand out antibiotics like candy," writes the author. (FoxNews.com, Jan. 12, 2001) |
| |
| |
| · Beef.org: Myths and Facts About Beef Production Beef.org, the website for the National Cattlemen's Beefiness Association and the Beef Lath, includes this backgrounder on antibiotic use in cattle. It says that "no residues from feeding antibiotics are establish in beef, and there is no valid scientific evidence that antibiotic use in cattle causes disease resulting from the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria." |
| · The Coalition for Animal Health This October 2001 press release from the Coalition for Animal Health, which includes the National Cattlemen'south Beef Association, the National Chicken Council, and the National Pork Producers Quango, says that "the employ of U.S. FDA-approved antibiotics in animals has been verified in scientific studies through the past 40 years as providing a critical, starting time line of defense to go on our nation'southward food supply safety and secure." |
| · Animal Health Institute The Brute Health Institute, which represents companies that make drugs for subcontract animals, publishes this fact sail nearly animals and antibiotics, in which information technology says that "there is no documented case where antibiotic employ in animals has caused treatment failure in people." |
| · Montana State University: Beefiness Briefs A beef specialist at MSU contends that in that location is no valid scientific evidence that feeding antibiotics to beef cattle leads to health problems in people. This is a cursory overview of his position, along with his list of supporing sources. |
| |
| |
| · Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics The website for APUA, a 20-year-old advancement group that promotes the proper use of antibiotics, is an excellent resource for information nearly drug resistance. APUA collaborates on projects with other organizations such as the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Earth Health Organization. Its site provides practical information for the consumer as well every bit in-depth information for practitioners. APUA's Project FAAIR (Facts About Antibiotics in Animals and Their Bear on on Resistance) crafted this menses chart tracking the several ways that antibiotics migrate from animals to humans. |
| · KeepAntibioticsWorking.com Go on Antibiotics Working is a coalition of health, consumer, environmental, and agricultural groups that is working to stop what it deems the "overuse and misuse" of antibiotics in fauna agriculture. It has compiled summaries and links to key scientific evidence supporting the coalition's position. |
| · Center for Science in the Public Interest: Antibiotic-Resistance Project CSPI is a Washington, D.C.-based advancement group that promotes food-safety awareness. Its Antibody-Resistance Project website includes links to several articles, including "Protecting the Crown Jewels of Medicine," its strategic programme for preserving the effectiveness of antibiotics. The site also has a legislative and regulatory update, which tracks new proposals. |
| · Marriage of Concerned Scientists: Antibody Resistance The Union of Concerned Scientists is a nonprofit alliance of scientists and other concerned individuals across the land. Amongst other things, the website for the group'southward antibiotic resistance project has a glossary of terms and background data on the FDA's approach to antibiotic regulation. |
REPORTS & Regime SITES home + industrial meat + interviews + the politics of meat + is your meat safe? + the inspection system
inside the slaughter-house + producer chat + introduction + word + video
tapes & transcripts + press reaction + credits + privacy policy
FRONTLINE + wgbh + pbsi
web site copyright 1995-2014 WGBH educational foundation
Source: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/meat/safe/overview.html