antibiotics in farm animals

[OldDog/NewTricks]

US may restrict antibiotics in livestock 15 Jul 2009

The Obama administration will seek to ban many routine uses of antibiotics in farm animals with the aim of reducing the spread of dangerous bacteria in humans.

In written testimony to the House Rules Committee, Dr Joshua Sharfstein, principal deputy commissioner of food and drugs, said feeding antibiotics to healthy chickens, pigs and cattle — done to encourage rapid growth — should cease, reports the New York Times. He also said that farmers should no longer be able to use antibiotics in animals without the supervision of a veterinarian. Both practices lead to the development of bacteria that are immune to many treatments, he said.

The hearing was held to discuss a measure proposed by Representative Louise M. Slaughter, Democrat of New York and chairwoman of the Rules Committee. It would ban 7 classes of antibiotics important to human health from being used in animals, and would restrict other antibiotics to therapeutic and some preventive uses.

The legislation is supported by the American Medical Association, among other groups, but opposed by farm organizations like the National Pork Producers Council. The farm lobby's opposition makes its passage unlikely, but advocates are hoping to include the measure in the legislation to revamp the health care system.

The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated that as much as 70% of antibiotics used in the US is given to healthy chickens, pigs and cattle to encourage their growth or to prevent illnesses.

The use of antibiotics for "purposes other than for the advancement of animal or human health should not be considered judicious use," Dr Sharfstein said. "Eliminating these uses will not compromise the safety of food."
Much of Dr. Sharfstein's testimony summarized information that has been widely accepted for years by medical groups. But many farm organizations dispute such claims.

"There are no good studies that show that some of these antibiotic-resistant diseases — and it seems like we're seeing more of them — have any link to antibiotic use in food-animal production," said Dave Warner, a spokesman for the pork producers' group.

Robert Martin, a senior officer at the Pew Environment Group, which has paid for an advertising campaign to support the measure, said the prospects for the measure's passage were improving. "Just the fact that Congresswoman Slaughter is having a hearing today is a huge step forward," he said.

 

[High Plains]

:help: More HOPE and CHANGE. Better sign up a few more veterinarians if we're supposed to have a prescription and supervision for treating a case of pinkeye or foot rot. :shock: Do we not have some important matters on capitol hill that need some attention? Politicians are going to help you run your operation. It oughta be fun! I've got a few horses in mind that I'd like to let Barrack saddle up and go along for the doctoring session. 8) Maybe a couple out of Northern's string would be suitable.

HP

 

[nortexsook]

I certainly am against having to have a vet administer antibiotics such as LA-200 to sick animals.

BUT, as an industry we bring this on ourselves. Antibiotics in livestock feed to healthy animals SHOULD not be allowed. The feeding of antibiotics to livestock is epidemic and the science backs up the antibiotic-resistant strains of sickness in animals and in humans.

 

[OldDog/NewTricks]

BUT, as an industry we bring this on ourselves. Antibiotics in livestock feed to healthy animals SHOULD not be allowed. The feeding of antibiotics to livestock is epidemic and the science backs up the antibiotic-resistant strains of sickness in animals and in humans.

My Thoughts Also

 

[nortexsook]

To take it a step further and point fingers, you can lay this directly at the feet of the cattle feeders. They are the ones feeding antibiotics to every animal in every pen. They will be barely affected by the new regs because most have a vet on staff or a consulting vet.

The poor ranchers are the ones to suffer. Very few of them misuse antibiotics but they are the ones that will feel the brunt of having to have a vet come out to administer antibiotics. Now they'll have to pay a fee for a site visit or pay to load and haul. And you can bet that the price of the antibiotics themselves will suddenly be much higher. Just like human prescription vs. OTC drugs.

 

[High Plains]

Oh, there's always more tentacles to an issue than a person realizes. Those mean and nasty cattle feeders are feeding a little product called monensin to cattle in order to maintain the health of the rumen microbial population. It's not like every pen is getting what I would call "true" antibiotics in the ration on a daily basis. Not the kind of antibiotics that cure disease. Now if a pen of cattle does start to show too much sickness, or if they are high risk cattle, then perhaps they'll get some Aeromycin in the ration for a few days to get them healthy again. It's not quite the same picture that is being painted by the media and politicians. Perhaps chickens get antibiotics to keep them healthy everyday, I have no idea. Now, if you consider monensin to be a true antibiotic, which I'm sure many folks do, then you can convince yourself that this is the case for cattle. I don't know all of the science, so I'm just sharing my angle on it. I sure don't consider monensin to be an antibiotic, not with regard to this issue.

As far as the feeders ruining it for the ranchers, I can't even have that conversation with a straight face. Calves and feeder cattle would be worth even less if cattle couldn't be efficient in the feedlot. No monensin would mean higher death loss or less performance with higher roughage requirements, but something would have to give. I didn't set up the system, just trying to make some sense of the cause and effect. Pretty tough to have your cake and it eat too. Yes, yes, I do realize that lots of folks feed an all-natural diet and have a wonderful market for that beef. I'm talking about the entire industry on this topic, the one that produces sometimes over 650,000 head of cattle for harvest in a week. That's the industry that this legislation would effect in a serious way.

HP

 

[nortexsook]

Cattle on feed are almost all feed daily with one of the following antibiotics:

rumensin bovatec neomycin

Antibiotic resistance is a real issue and needs to be addressed.

I'm sure when it finally is addressed the feedyards will use it as another discount mechanism in bidding on feeder calves. But of course they wouldn't do that being the benevolent folks that they are.

The things we do and expect people to still consume our product is amazing. We feed em chicken shart, chicken feathers, we used to feed them ground up dead animals, and antibiotics.

Wow.

 

[High Plains]

Rumensin and Bovatec are both brand names for monensin. It's an ionophore. None of the feedlots that I have worked with feed neomycin in their rations daily, to my knowledge. I'll start asking them about these details to get further informed. There again, I'm in Nebraska and you're in Texas, so I can only speak to what is familiar to me. I don't know a lot of specific details about Texas feedlots.

Obviously this is a topic that is currently being addressed. A huge issue will be made of it and agriculture will get another black eye with mostly biased information with words like "factory farming" and these types of labels that are pretty much used to create hatred and misinformation with unknowing consumers. I'm not saying that an issue doesn't exist on this antibiotics topic, but it will be all twisted up and sensationalized by people that don't know which end of the cow eats grass. It'll be a headline story in many important places and the average person will go away thinking that farmers, ranchers, feedlots and the like are all terrible. They try to pay less for thier inputs and get more for their output. They pay too much for cattle more often than they don't pay enough. Have you seen any closeouts in the past couple of years?

If you sell cattle that go to a feedlot then I don't understand your disdain for feeders. I know a whole bunch of them and they are typically good and honest people that are an important part of our beef production system. Actually, my very best friends are cattle feeders and I consider them to be outstanding individuals.

If you're so upset with feedlots then I guess you should tell them your opinion right before you go to asking for bids on your calves or feeder cattle, assuming that you are a seller of those types of stock. That's a weird way to think about your customer if you ask me.

HP

 

[nortexsook]

I'm not against anyone in the cattle business. I just think this practice should stop. I'm sure there are many cattle feeders who are fine folk.

My problem is that the whole industry gets a black eye from the practice of this one link in the production chain.

 

[Kato]

Cattle are not the main target of this. It's chickens and pigs. It's also feed and water related antibiotics that are probably the ones most affected. Chick starter and piglet starter is pretty much always medicated, from what I've seen, and if it is suddenly withdrawn from the market, there will be consequences as far as death losses are concerned.

I bet this is making hog and poultry producers a lot more worried than any cattle feeders.

 

[cowman52]

If you are sooo convinced anti biotic's are the problem see how many survive without any and maybe you just think everyone can just swallow losing cattle {and MONEY] just to see who's A## is the blackest

 

[mrj]

It seems so silly, and even dangerous to the continuation of the production of adequate mounts of beef to be having this argument when the fact is that the diets of cattle in feedlots have been well researched and designed by the best scientists and searchers in our Land Grant Colleges and working to find the best cattle nutritionfor the feed companies and feedlots.

The products have been tested and the meats have been tested for residues, with none found after proper dosages and withdrawal times.

Unfortunately, people who do not seek the facts and just 'know' that use of antibiotics and ionophores is be wrong.

This isn't a case of preventing those who choose not to use those products from doing it their way, after all!

mrj

 

[TexasBred]

Oh, there's always more tentacles to an issue than a person realizes. Those mean and nasty cattle feeders are feeding a little product called monensin to cattle in order to maintain the health of the rumen microbial population. It's not like every pen is getting what I would call "true" antibiotics in the ration on a daily basis. Not the kind of antibiotics that cure disease. Now if a pen of cattle does start to show too much sickness, or if they are high risk cattle, then perhaps they'll get some Aeromycin in the ration for a few days to get them healthy again. It's not quite the same picture that is being painted by the media and politicians. Perhaps chickens get antibiotics to keep them healthy everyday, I have no idea. Now, if you consider monensin to be a true antibiotic, which I'm sure many folks do, then you can convince yourself that this is the case for cattle. I don't know all of the science, so I'm just sharing my angle on it. I sure don't consider monensin to be an antibiotic, not with regard to this issue.

As far as the feeders ruining it for the ranchers, I can't even have that conversation with a straight face. Calves and feeder cattle would be worth even less if cattle couldn't be efficient in the feedlot. No monensin would mean higher death loss or less performance with higher roughage requirements, but something would have to give. I didn't set up the system, just trying to make some sense of the cause and effect. Pretty tough to have your cake and it eat too. Yes, yes, I do realize that lots of folks feed an all-natural diet and have a wonderful market for that beef. I'm talking about the entire industry on this topic, the one that produces sometimes over 650,000 head of cattle for harvest in a week. That's the industry that this legislation would effect in a serious way.

HP

Couldn't agree with you more. Folks need to keep in mind that their are antibiotics (Ionophores) in name only ...and then there are REAL ANTIBIOTICS....Neither Bovatec or Rumensin fall into the same category as "real antibiotics" which are use for infections, etc. although both are excellent preventives and treatments of coccidiosis in young calves, reduction in liver abscesses with the secondary benefit of increasing feed utilization. As far as I know neither has a withdrawal period or at least don't in Texas and noone has ever had a drug induced reaction to it except a few horses and hogs that may have eaten feed containing either.