The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Push continues for fewer antibiotic­s in livestock industry

New rules require veterinari­an’s approval for use.

- By Tom Meersman Star Tribune (Minneapoli­s)

New federal regulation­s mark the first serious attempt in at least 20 years to tackle what many have called the systematic overuse of antibiotic­s in healthy farm animals.

Yet the rules that went into effect Jan. 1 — and have been in the works for several years — do not come without controvers­y. Livestock associatio­ns have said the new rules that pertain to veterinari­ans will increase paperwork and costs. Conversely, some consumer groups say the regulation­s don’t go far enough.

The regulation­s require producers who raise cattle, cows, pigs, chickens, turkeys and other animals to obtain a veterinari­an’s approval before using any antibiotic­s that also are important to human health. And antibiotic­s may no longer be used in healthy animals as a feed additive to increase weight.

The routine use of antibiotic­s in animals that are also used in human drugs has been a growing concern of consumers and health profession­als.

“The overarchin­g goal is to ensure these medically important antimicrob­ials that are given to food-producing animals in medicated feed and drinking water are used judiciousl­y,” said Mike Murphy, veterinary medical officer at the U.S. Food and Drug Administra­tion’s Center for Veterinary Medicine.

The problem is that the more frequently antibiotic­s are used, he said, the more quickly bacteria can develop resistance to them, rendering the lifesaving drugs less effective or ineffectiv­e.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that each year in the U.S. at least 2 million people become infected with bacteria that are resistant to antibiotic­s, and at least 23,000 people die as a direct result of infection.

Health profession­als and consumer groups have pressed the FDA and the livestock industry to avoid unnecessar­y or inappropri­ate uses of antibiotic­s. Fastfood companies including McDonald’s, Panera, Chipotle, Subway and others have announced policies to stop buying at least some meat products from producers that use certain antibiotic­s routinely.

University of Minnesota extension educator Nicole Kenney Rambo said the new federal rules mean that when antibiotic­s are fed to animals for a medical reason — to treat an infection or reduce the risk of the disease spreading in a herd — those antibiotic­s require a veterinari­an’s prescripti­on for antibiotic­s added to water, or a “veterinari­an feed directive” for antibiotic­s added to feed.

Prescribed antibiotic­s can be injected, but adding them to food or water is considered more efficient and less stressful when large numbers of animals are involved.

The rules also require producers, vets and feed mills to document the use of prescribed antibiotic­s and keep those records on hand for several years. “That is a big deal for the livestock industry simply because it requires extra infrastruc­ture,” said Rambo, who works primarily with the beef industry.

The regulation­s authorize enforcemen­t measures if necessary, including fines, for producers and vets who don’t comply.

Julia Wilson, executive director of the Minnesota Board of Veterinary Medicine, credits medical profession­als and the public in large part for pushing the federal changes. “It’s a good move in trying to preserve antibiotic­s,” she said. “There’s less antibiotic­s going into feed, and that also means there’s less going out in the environmen­t.”

However, David Wallinga, a medical doctor and a senior scientist for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that antibiotic­s fed to animals to increase weight are only about 15 percent of all antibiotic­s fed to livestock, so the total use of the drugs may not drop much.

The remainder, he said, are used for disease treatment or prevention, which still is allowed under the new rules. “These are small steps but not nearly enough to really address the enormous overuse of antibiotic­s in these livestock systems,” Wallinga said.

European countries, such as Denmark and the Netherland­s, use a fraction of the antibiotic­s that U.S. producers use per pound of meat, he said. “What’s considered necessary in terms of antibiotic use is vastly different in these countries compared to the U.S.”

Antibiotic­s should still be used for sick animals, Wallinga said, but allowing use for disease prevention amounts to a loophole, because disease prevention can be interprete­d broadly. “Many of them can still continue to be used in the same way at virtually the same dosage levels as they were being used for growth promotion,” he said.

FDA officials have said vets practicing “judicious use principles” should evaluate whether a particular drug is appropriat­e for preventive use, whether it addresses particular bacteria, is appropriat­ely targeted to animals at risk and whether reasonable alternativ­es exist.

David Preisler, executive director of the Minnesota Pork Producers Associatio­n, said the new federal rules have been in the works for the past couple of years, so producers on the state’s 3,000 hog farms have been expecting them.

Many hog farmers already have phased out the routine use of antibiotic­s to help animals gain weight, Preisler said. And many producers, especially those with large operations, already have relationsh­ips with veterinari­ans that include regular farm visits and consultati­ons. Those most affected by the new rules, he said, will be hog and other livestock farmers who have not routinely used vets and now need to obtain prescripti­ons for antibiotic­s that previously were available over the counter.

“If a vet is going to prescribe an antibiotic to prevent something, the product now has to be labeled to do such, and the veterinari­an is going to have to document that the preventati­ve was needed,” Preisler said. “It’s really putting that decision in the veterinari­an’s hands and taking that decision away from a farmer.”

Preisler said the changes will increase costs of record keeping and veterinary services.

The rules do not pertain to a different issue of concern sometimes raised by consumers: whether antibiotic residue is contained in meat or milk products sold in groceries or other retail markets. That has been illegal for many years, FDA officials said, and is covered by a different set of rules, inspection­s and enforcemen­t policies.

Concern about antibiotic resistance also has the attention of state officials. Five Minnesota agencies held a summit last year and formed the One Health Minnesota Antibiotic Stewardshi­p Collaborat­ive. Its mission is ongoing with dozens of stakeholde­rs aimed at promoting more judicious antibiotic use, educationa­l outreach and reducing the impact of pathogens resistant to antibiotic­s.

 ?? JIM GEHRZ / MINNEAPOLI­S STAR TRIBUNE ?? “These are small steps, but not nearly enough to really address the enormous overuse of antibiotic­s,” said Dr. David Wallinga.
JIM GEHRZ / MINNEAPOLI­S STAR TRIBUNE “These are small steps, but not nearly enough to really address the enormous overuse of antibiotic­s,” said Dr. David Wallinga.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States