Experts Revisiting the Use of Antibiotics in Animal Agriculture

Environmental Nutrition Newsletter

We eat for good health, but some of the practices in our food system may be putting us at risk. Routine use of antibiotics, which the industrialized food system relies on for managing the health and growth of livestock, might contribute to human health risk. Many reputable health organizations blame the widespread use in animal agriculture for the rise in resistant bacteria.

ANIMALS AND ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE

It's estimated that more than 70 percent of all antibiotics used in the U.S. are fed to farm animals such as cattle, poultry, pigs, and farmed fish for nontherapeutic purposes, in an attempt to grow them faster and move them more quickly to market. Many of the antibiotics used are identical, or almost identical, to human antibiotics, such as penicillin and tetracycline.

Experts believe that the drugs are added to animal feed and water in an attempt to compensate for the often overcrowded and unsanitary conditions that make these animals vulnerable to disease. What's of greater concern than the potential for antibiotics to end up in animal meat is the fact that antibiotics used in animal feed and water are absorbed into ground water, manure and soil, and carried by airborne dust, thus putting farm families and workers, as well as the surrounding communities at risk for antibiotic resistance.

The first step to preventing antibiotic resistance in humans is to control the number of prescriptions, then to make sure that people who are prescribed them take the entire course in order to avoid lingering bacteria that are not killed and may become resistant to the antibiotic the next time they get sick. There is also evidence that the overuse of antibiotics in animal agriculture contributes to antibiotic resistance.

In the June 2002 issue of Clinical Infectious Diseases, researchers published a two-year review of more than 500 scientific studies on the human health impacts of antimicrobial use in agriculture. They concluded that antibiotics shouldn't be used nontherapeutically.

If passed, the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA) of 2009 would require the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to go back and review the previously approved antibiotics used in human medicine for animal use, to see if they are unsafe for use in animals from a resistance standpoint. PAMTA is backed by about 300 health and medical organizations, including the American Public Health Association and the American Medical Association.

Despite the agreement by the World Health Organization, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the FDA that the overuse of antibiotics in animals is contributing to make antibiotics less effective, the U.S. Congress has not yet taken action.

A DIFFERENT VIEW

The Farm Bureau, the American Veterinary Medical Association, and the poultry, pork, and beef industries oppose PAMTA. They believe that the use of FDA-approved antibiotics prevents and treats disease before disease-carrying bacteria can enter our food supply, and that there is a lack of conclusive evidence linking antibiotics used in animal agriculture with an increase in human antibiotic resistance.

If you'd like to avoid antibiotics in animal products while you await a verdict on the future use of antibiotics in animal agriculture, organic meats and meats labeled "No Antibiotics Added" are available at local markets.

Available at Amazon.com:

Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children From Nature-Deficit Disorder

No More Digestive Problems

NEWS & CURRENT EVENTS ...

Health - Experts Revisiting the Use of Antibiotics in Animal Agriculture