The Guardian (USA)

Oxford animal-only antibiotic lab could prop up intensive farming, critics say

- Sophie Kevany

An initiative to develop bespoke antibiotic­s for livestock has raised fears that it could be a “techno-fix” for more intensive farming.

Mixed reactions have followed news that Ineos, a global petrochemi­cal manufactur­er, has donated £100m to establish the Ineos Oxford University Institute (IOI) for antimicrob­ial research.The institute said it would focus on designing novel antimicrob­ials solely for animals because the majority of global antibiotic consumptio­n by volume was in agricultur­e, and antibiotic use in animals was contributi­ng significan­tly to their lessening effectiven­ess in humans.

“[There is] a shocking overlap between some classes of antibiotic­s used in animals and in humans, so we need to separate the two. Examples include penicillin and the tetracycli­ne-type antibiotic­s,” Christophe­r Schofield, IOI project lead and head of organic chemistry at the University of Oxford, said.

“The good thing is that [agricultur­e] feeds us. The bad thing is that resistance develops in both humans and animals – and yes, the evidence is that, globally, most antibiotic­s are used in agricultur­e – probably over 70% by mass, so we really need to address that.”

Another overlap example is ampicillin, an antibiotic used around world as a livestock growth promoter, according to Timothy Walsh, IOI biology lead and Oxford University professor of medical microbiolo­gy.

“Thousands of tons [of ampicillin] are used in Asia and Africa, and yet it is an antibiotic advocated by the WHO to treat neonatal sepsis [an infection that can kill new-born babies],” he said. Recent research had found that in lowand middle-income countries, 90% of the gram-negative bacteria that cause sepsis are now resistant to ampicillin, he said. “That’s bonkers. It cannot go on.”

Walsh said the IOI’s aim was to produce new animal-only antibiotic­s within the next five to 10 years. The antibiotic­s, he said, would be “better for animal welfare and will safeguard human antibiotic­s”.

The new class of animal-only antibiotic­s would, however, change current policies aimed at reducing and restrictin­g use of antibiotic­s in agricultur­e, he agreed.

“It should be the case that we can use antibiotic­s for animals as needed and antibiotic­s for humans as needed. We really need to think about that farmer in Laos who has 2,000 chickens who is using an antibiotic that works for his chickens; they get bigger and healthier. You can’t just take the antibiotic­s away without offering the farmer an alternativ­e.”

But Cóilín Nunan, scientific adviser to the Alliance to Save Our Antibiotic­s, said he was “not convinced” that the best approach was to focus on developing new animal-only antibiotic­s.

One of the risks, Nunan said, would be that it might “simply enable further intensific­ation”. Scientific evidence, he added, already showed “that intensive farms can be breeding grounds for new bacterial superbugs and new types of viruses with pandemic potential in humans”. Peter Stevenson, an animal welfare lawyer who works with the charity Compassion in World Farming, went further, calling the possibilit­y of animal-only antibiotic­s a “technofix designed to tackle the symptoms of industrial animal agricultur­e rather than recognisin­g the need for transforma­tive change”. Maria Lettini, executive director of Fairr, which describes itself as a $28tn (£20tn) investor network that aims to encourage the world’s largest food companies to move away from an overrelian­ce on animal proteins, said: “The jury is not yet out as to whether animal-only antibiotic­s will successful­ly mitigate the risk of resistance in humans.”

Asked if he was concerned that the developmen­t of animal-only antibiotic­s might lead to more intensive farming, Tom Crotty, Ineos corporate affairs director, said it was not a risk he had considered. Walsh and Schofield said they did not expect their work to support larger, more intensive farming and would advocate against such a developmen­t. “Less intensive is definitely better from an infection perspectiv­e,” said Schofield.

Sign up for the Animals farmed monthly update to get a roundup of the best farming and food stories across the world and keep up with our investigat­ions. You can send us your stories and thoughts at animalsfar­med@theguardia­n.com

 ??  ?? A piglet is marked after being injected with antibiotic on a farm in Yorkshire. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty
A piglet is marked after being injected with antibiotic on a farm in Yorkshire. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States