At a 2010 Congressional briefing sponsored by Rep. Louise Slaughter, I warned the continued and routine overuse of antibiotics in U.S. meat production could be shooting the global competitiveness of that industry in the foot.
Data finally released last month by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) do little to allay those fears, while confirming the findings of a decade-old report from the Union of Concerned Scientists: More than 70 percent (74 percent, in fact) of all U.S. antibiotics are being used in food-producing animals. Most of our "medically important" antibiotics, like penicillins, tetracyclines and erythromycins, are used in animals, not people. And, nearly all of these are routine uses in feed for animals that are not clinically sick. Rather than to treat disease, these antibiotics are used for growth promotion or to avert sickness in animals that are stressed from the confined conditions in which they are raised.
There is no scientific basis for doubting the public health import of allowing antibiotics to be used in this way. The Center for Disease Control Director, the leadership of the Food and Drug Administration, the leadership of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the medical literature all conclude that agricultural overuse of antibiotics in feed is worsening the scourge of antibiotic resistance affecting the human and animal population.
The trade issue we raised in our presentation last March was that other countries, particularly in Europe, are also increasingly pointing to these feed antibiotics as worrisome and grounds for restricting imports of U.S. meat products.
In fact, a December 6, 2010 Congressional Research Service report itself confirms what we were saying six months earlier: "Although antibiotic use in animals has not been a significant factor affecting U.S. trade in meat products to date, evidence suggests that country restrictions on the use of these drugs could become an issue in the future and could affect U.S. export markets for livestock and poultry products."
What seems clear is that U.S. meat production is at a crossroads. Either we can try and cling to the way things have always been done, despite evidence that it is harming our citizens as well as putting our agriculture economy at risk. Or, we can all work together to make future meat production healthier, using fewer antibiotics, and become more competitive in a marketplace where people and countries care more and more about how their food is produced.
Follow David Wallinga, M.D. on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Food_Dr
Current factory farming practices are also contaminating the water supply and our crops. Everyone loses.
Let's not forget that the mass amounts of so-called kosher meats aren't even produced via kosher practices.
It's time to respect the innocent creatures who feed you. It's the least they deserve for being the food on your table.
Scientists agree that the widespread use and overuse of antibiotics to treat disease in humans is the primary cause for the increase in resistant bacteria. A growing body of science suggests a link between the low-level use of antibiotics in farm animals and the increase in bacteria resistant to the same or similar antibiotics administered to humans.
Why do we use antibiotics to fed livestock?
Treat sick animals, Prevent disease among animals susceptible to infections. Promote the growth of cattle, poultry and swine when they are fed low doses for long periods. This use affects a larger number of animals, because it usually involves treating a whole herd or flock, which increases the likelihood of genetic selecting for organisms that are resistant to the antibiotic.
It is also important to understand that resistance has nothing to do with potency. The resistant bacteria are not stronger; they simply cannot be treated with antibiotics that are currently available.
It is widely accepted that the primary cause is overuse and misuse of antibiotics. In some cases, doctors prescribe or patients demand the drugs too frequently or inappropriately, such as for illnesses that are not caused by bacteria and do not respond to antibiotics. There is also evidence that antibiotic use in food producing animals contribute to human drug resistance.
I absolutely agree with you. Based on the fact, many experts explained about antibiotic use in food animals over concerns of increasing antibiotic resistance in human medicine.
I think the following quotes are taken from the experts, may support how “as antibiotic use increased in both animals and humans, bacteria emerged that are resistant to the same drugs given to both.”
• “We have so many problems in hospitals that it is hard to imagine that veterinary uses are significantly contributing to microbial resistance in humans”
• “If all animal uses of antibiotics were terminated today, there is no evidence that human health would measurably benefit, while animal health would certainly suffer, and possibly human health as a consequence.”
• “We suggest that the role of food-producing animals in the origin and transmission of antimicrobial resistance and foodborne pathogens has been overestimated and overemphasized in the scientific literature; consequently, nonfoodborne transmission, including pet-associated human cases, has been underemphasized.”
• “While the initial value of sub-therapeutic antibiotics in animals was discovered as an improvement in growth and efficiency, and therefore were termed growth promoters, antibiotics are health promoters that lead to improved growth and efficiency of animal protein production.”
Therefore, after I read this general idea about antibiotic, it makes sense that expert’s definition and your explanation how food producing animals contribute to human drug resistance.
biology eigth edition
I absolutely agree with you. Based on the fact, many experts explained about antibiotic use in food animals over concerns of increasing antibiotic resistance in human medicine.
I think the following quotes are taken from the experts, may support how “as antibiotic use increased in both animals and humans, bacteria emerged that are resistant to the same drugs given to both.”
• “We have so many problems in hospitals that it is hard to imagine that veterinary uses are significantly contributing to microbial resistance in humans”
• “If all animal uses of antibiotics were terminated today, there is no evidence that human health would measurably benefit, while animal health would certainly suffer, and possibly human health as a consequence.”
• “We suggest that the role of food-producing animals in the origin and transmission of antimicrobial resistance and foodborne pathogens has been overestimated and overemphasized in the scientific literature; consequently, nonfoodborne transmission, including pet-associated human cases, has been underemphasized.”
• “While the initial value of sub-therapeutic antibiotics in animals was discovered as an improvement in growth and efficiency, and therefore were termed growth promoters, antibiotics are health promoters that lead to improved growth and efficiency of animal protein production.”
Therefore, after I read this general idea about antibiotic, it makes sense the expert’s definition and your explanation how food producing animals contribute to human drug resistance.
Same with all food sources. Our health has dropped since we started importing all foods, and our bodies are fighting new bacteria sources.
Feeding the world was the push for the last thirty years, but going back to basics, now has to be how we see things. Stop using corn for fuel.....things need to be re evaluated and done before antibiotics were even produced.
The first step in protecting yourself from these adverse effects is to avoid unnecessary use of antibiotics. Since antibiotics can only treat bacterial infections (like strep throat, urinary tract infections, and severe sinus infections), they won't be effective against viral infections that cause the common cold, flu, or bronchitis. In addition to the risk of unnecessary side effects, inappropriate use of antibiotics can promote the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and leave you vulnerable to incurable infections later on.
I have nothing against people eating meat. But I do have a problem with mass "production" and the unethical treatment of beef cattle, pigs, chickens and turkeys.
You are right! We are eating unhealthy modified for the seek of money. The question is our plant earth is getting closer to its maximum carrying capacity, how can we address this issue without interfering to the natural state of the planet. As the same time, we are getting tones of disease that threatens our health. I wonder if there could be any solution to this problem.
I liked your point that you wrote about eating unhealthy food, but as this time, it is hard to believe that we buy and eat the meat in each of stores serve the people because mad cow disease is transmitted by eating infected cows. Cows raised in imprisonment are often fed meat. Cows living in the wild will only eat grass or other plants. They would not normally come into contact with any meat products. That is why captive cows are more likely to get the disease. And also if you looked at every time the beef meat cost increases six cents per pound. Therefore, to me, this increase of six cents per pound of beef is valuable since the USDA to mandate regular testing of every cow for mad cow disease. This also helps to keep people's healthy, but I personally recommended that not to eat beef meat at all!!
Which takes you to:http://mastercleansesecrets.com/book.php?hop=seclady
People actually pay $27 for that?
1. You should never have leftover antibiotics.
2. She didn't know the cause of her loose stools.
3. Antibiotics can make IBS worse.
4. She'd medicating herself.
Should I go on?
Countries that do not want to import antibiotic resistant diseases will resist US imports of meat at an inreasing rate...
this is very true because no one wants to buy meat products that cause pademic disease to his/her country. morally and ethically, it is unfavorable action. as a country, we need to work together and introduce healthy food to our society after that we can gain the trust that we lost. my question is why do we want to do that?
The event served as a wake up call to me. As a vegan (which my nephew and his family are not) I later became outraged to discover that MRSA ST398 originated in pigs due to antibiotic overuse in the livestock industry. How is this allowed to happen? Where are the public health authorities? We were visited by one infectious diseases specialist while in the hospital who offered no insights and didn't ever follow up with us.
Here is an article about MRSA and antibiotic overuse in animals from the NY Times. People are dying and will continue to die because of this, but no one seems to care. 18,000 Americans die of MRSA every year - more than die of AIDS, but still, no one cares.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/12/opinion/12kristof.html