• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

NCBA on Chicken Antibiotics

Mike

Well-known member
Feed-Level Antibiotics Increases Poultry Growing Costs
Use of growth-promoting antibiotics in chicken feed is a financial loser for poultry growers, says a Johns Hopkins University economics study. Using data from poultry giant Perdue, the study concluded the benefits of accelerated chicken growth with such use of antibiotics were offset by the products' cost, with the total cost rising by about 1¢/chicken.

In a news release, the Keep Antibiotics Working coalition (KAW) admits Perdue, Tyson, Gold Kist and Foster Farms eschew use of growth-promoting antibiotics but says the claims are unverified as the government doesn't collect drug use data. The organization supports federal legislation, "The Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act, (H.R. 2562/ S. 742), sponsored by Edward Kennedy (D-MA), incoming chairman of the Senate Health Committee. The bill would phase out the use of antibiotics that are important in human medicine as animal feed additives within two years.

The National Cattlemen's Beef Association (NCBA) opposes such Congressional action, however. On its Web site, NCBA says its members are "strongly opposed to Congressional action in determining the safety and efficacy of antibiotics. This is the role of the Food and Drug Administration, and we ask Congress to empower the agency to do their job effectively, based on science, in an open, transparent process."
-- Joe Roybal
 

mrj

Well-known member
Mike, do you have a problem with NCBA worries that the proposal is a foot in the door to eliminating ALL use of antibiotics to save food animals from illness or death which could be prevented by proper and safe use of antibiotics?

MRJ
 

Mike

Well-known member
MRJ said:
Mike, do you have a problem with NCBA worries that the proposal is a foot in the door to eliminating ALL use of antibiotics to save food animals from illness or death which could be prevented by proper and safe use of antibiotics?

MRJ

I have problems with all the use of antibiotics in chicken feed.

The NCBA could use this subject to our advantage if they had any balls!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
MRJ said:
Mike, do you have a problem with NCBA worries that the proposal is a foot in the door to eliminating ALL use of antibiotics to save food animals from illness or death which could be prevented by proper and safe use of antibiotics?

MRJ

I have problems with all the use of antibiotics in chicken feed.

The NCBA could use this subject to our advantage if they had any balls!

Could it be that it would mean NCBA going against one of its benefactors/puppeteers? Can you say Tyson Foods?
 

Bill

Well-known member
Mike said:
MRJ said:
Mike, do you have a problem with NCBA worries that the proposal is a foot in the door to eliminating ALL use of antibiotics to save food animals from illness or death which could be prevented by proper and safe use of antibiotics?

MRJ

I have problems with all the use of antibiotics in chicken feed.

The NCBA could use this subject to our advantage if they had any balls!

Or just maybe R-Klan could make hay with it if they had any interest in the beef business except protectionism.

Looks like they are too busy worrying about Canada to give a rip about chicken antibiotics or a snow and ice storm devestating some of their membership.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Yeah, why should we worry about Canada? The USDA is only going to open the door for you to send us BSE positive cattle, and the fact that we'll never know which ones they are before we eat them and circulate the prions thru non-ruminant feed and back into cattle feed shouldn't cause us any concern at all. Heck, we've got nothing to even lift an eyebrow over. We should be concentrating on chicken antibiotics with the NCBA.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Mike said:
MRJ said:
Mike, do you have a problem with NCBA worries that the proposal is a foot in the door to eliminating ALL use of antibiotics to save food animals from illness or death which could be prevented by proper and safe use of antibiotics?

MRJ

I have problems with all the use of antibiotics in chicken feed.

The NCBA could use this subject to our advantage if they had any balls!

Could it be that it would mean NCBA going against one of its benefactors/puppeteers? Can you say Tyson Foods?

You have no verification, only your 'coffee shop wisdom', to verify your claim that ANYONE other than the cattle producer members determines what NCBA does or does not support.

FACT: there are groups attacking ALL animal agriculture with a vast array of ammunition/tactics. Stopping antibiotic use to keep animals healthy is only one tactic. Poultry is only the FIRST 'animal' they are going after.

FACT: liking, or not liking, use of antibiotics in poultry feed has nothing to do with with the ability to understand that this is just ONE attack against animal agriculture, with attacks against beef to follow any success with this one.

MRJ
 

mwj

Well-known member
Check the past election in Az. and see if these people can and will get there foot in the door!!!!!!!! What was rcalfs official stand on the 2 issues that were passed pertaining livestock production?
 

mrj

Well-known member
On second thought, you boys are giving anti-animal ag extremists way too much fodder for their mills in this thread and others going hard and heavy at the moment. Is that what it takes to make you feel important?

MRJ
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
MRJ said:
On second thought, you boys are giving anti-animal ag extremists way too much fodder for their mills in this thread and others going hard and heavy at the moment. Is that what it takes to make you feel important?

MRJ

It sounds to me that you are saying you don't want the truth leaking out.
 

mrj

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
MRJ said:
On second thought, you boys are giving anti-animal ag extremists way too much fodder for their mills in this thread and others going hard and heavy at the moment. Is that what it takes to make you feel important?

MRJ

It sounds to me that you are saying you don't want the truth leaking out.

How ridiculous can you get, Sandball (like a snowball, but even less substance)?

The 'truth' of this story was out, at least, MOST people have known for years that poultry production is heavily dependent upon antibiotics.

What I and some others disagree with is calling even more attention, creating a false sense that the cattle industry is equally dependent. It is not.

Why would ANY cattle producer support a cause and a bill sponsored and espoused by Sen. Teddy Kennedy??????

You obviously have not noticed that the Beef Checkoff and NCBA recently announced new projects calling even more attention to the SUPERIOR NUTRITION available from beef. Research supports honest education and advertising on that POSITIVE news.

MRJ
 

flounder

Well-known member
Mike said:
MRJ said:
Mike, do you have a problem with NCBA worries that the proposal is a foot in the door to eliminating ALL use of antibiotics to save food animals from illness or death which could be prevented by proper and safe use of antibiotics?

MRJ

I have problems with all the use of antibiotics in chicken feed.

The NCBA could use this subject to our advantage if they had any balls!



Most Recent Warning Letters Entered Into Database (Since 1/2/07)



Rickland Farms, LLC



The inspection also revealed that you caused the new animal drugs sulfadimethoxine, neomycin, and spectinomycin to, become adulterated within the meaning of section ...........

where it was slaughtered~ ~on or about August 4, 2006: USDA/FSIS Analysis of tissue samples collected from that anirnal identified the presence. of 0.64 ppM sulfadimethoxine in muscle tissue and 0 .74 ppm sulfadimethoxinein liver tissue.

A tolerance of 0.1 ppm has been established for residues of sulfadimethoxine in uncooked edible tissues of cattle as codifled . in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 556.640 (21 CPR 556.640). The presence of this drug in muscle and liver tissue from this animal in this amount causes the food to be adulterated within the meaning of section 402(a)(2)(C)(ii) [21 U.S.C. 342(a)(2)(C)(ii)] of the Act: .

Our investigation -also found that you hold als under conditions that are so inadequate that medicated animals bearirig potentially harmful drug residues are

likely to enter the food supply. You lack an adequate system to ensure that

animals medicated by you have been withheld from slaughter for appropriate

periods of time to permit depletion of potentially hazardous residues of drugs from

edible tissues . For example, your firm's animal treatment records do not include

the dosage given, route of administration, and appropriate withdrawal times for

milk and meat. Food from animals held under such conditions is adulterated

within the meaning of section 402(a)(4) [21 U.S.C. 342(a)(4)] of the Act.

In addition, you adulterated sulfadimethoxine, spectinomycin, and neomycin

sulfate within the meaning of section 501(a)(5) [21 U.S.C. 351(a)(5)] of the Act when

you failed to use these drugs in conformance with the approved labeling.

"Extralabel use," i.e., the actual or intended use of a drug in an animal in a

manner that is not in accordance with the approved labeling, is only permitted if

the use is by or on the lawful order of a licensed veterinarian within the context of

a valid veterinarian/client/patient relationship. ..................



For example, you administered sulfadimethoxine oral suspension intravenously to

lactating dairy cows, which is not in accordance with the drug's approved labeling.

Sulfadimethoxine is prohibited from extralabel use in lactating dairy cattle and

your administration of this drug. was in violation of 21 CFR 530.41(a)(9) .

Furthermore, your extralabel use resulted in an illegal drug residue, in violation of

21 CFR 530 .11(d) . In addition, you administered spectinomycin sulfate and

neomycin sulfate to animals contrary to approved labeling and you did so without

the supervision of a licensed veterinarian, in vioiahon of 21 CFR 530 .11(a).

Neomycin and spectinomycin are not approved for use in female dairy cattle 20

months of age or older. Because your extralabel use of these drugs was not in

compliance with 21 CFR Part 530, the drugs were unsafe under section 512(a) [21

U .S .C. 360b(a)] of the Act and your, use caused the drugs to be adulterated withiri

the meaning of section 501(a)(5) [21 U.S.C. 351(a)(5)] of the Act. .............snip.........end



http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g6191d.pdf



PALMER FARMS



http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g6189d.pdf



WILLIAMS FARM INC.



http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/g6188d.pdf



STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS (MRSA), COMMUNITY ACQUIRED, HUMAN, EQUINE - CANADA
***********************************************
A ProMED-mail post
<http://www.promedmail.org>
ProMED-mail is a program of the
International Society for Infectious Diseases
<http://www.isid.org>

Date: Sun 7 Jan 2007
From: ProMED-mail <[email protected]>
Source: Vancouver Sun [edited]
<http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=c4aeb2e6-0106-4101-83bf-986c2faef45b&k=23599>


Horse and pet owners are at more risk of contracting an infection
spreading across the country than the rest of the population, a
leading veterinarian researcher says.

Scott Weese, associate professor at Ontario Veterinary College,
University of Guelph, started looking at community associated
methicillin-resistant _Staphylococcus aureus_(CA-MRSA) after a
cluster of cases was found in horses in Ontario.

A human strain of the bacteria was found in the horses, meaning the
infection initially was passed from people to horses, Weese said.
"But now it moves between horses and people. People working with
horses have a higher prevalence of carrying this bug," he said.

Surveys have found that about 14 percent of equine veterinarians are
carrying the bacteria and more than 10 percent of people working with
horses are carrying the bug. Almost all have the unusual strain found
in horses, Weese said.

Fortunately, much of the time the bacteria will be carried in the
nose and will not cause problems for either horses or humans, he
said. "But if the horses are carrying it, they are at greater risk of
infection, and there is a risk of transmitting it to people. It would
be skin and soft-tissue infections, similar to what happens in the
community," he said.

MRSA has also been found in domestic pets, such as dogs, cats and
rabbits, but, unlike horses, the strain of bacteria mirrors whatever
is found in people. "It's not picky about its host," Weese said.

"We started finding the strain in animals in California a year and a
bit ago, and it moved to Canada about a year ago," he said.

The bug can easily move among pets, people and other animals, Weese
said. That means pets can act as a reservoir of infection, and
doctors treating people with MRSA should also be looking at the pets,
particularly if people in a household are becoming re-infected, he said.

Unless infection sets in, the bacteria do not seem to stay in animals
for long, Weese said. "If you can keep them from getting re-infected,
by separating them from infected animals and humans, they get rid of
it themselves," he said.

In a report last week in the Canadian Medical Association Journal,
health officials warned that the organism is poised to sweep across
the country.

Vancouver Island Health Authority officials say that Victoria appears
to be the epicenter of the countrywide epidemic. Victoria already has
seen 800 cases of CA-MRSA, and its cousin, hospital-acquired MRSA,
since April 2006. While HA-MRSA is resistant to many antimicrobials,
the good news is that CA-MRSA responds to several types of common
treatment. Typically, it is seen in high-risk groups like the
homeless and drug users, but increasingly it is being seen in the
military and sports teams.

Routine infection control, prudent use of antibiotics and hand
washing are the best protection, Weese said. "Hand washing is
critical between touching horses."

[Byline: Judith Lavoie]

--
ProMED-mail
<[email protected]>

[Indeed, in the past few years, Dr. Weese has published a number of
papers regarding CA-MRSA in horses and humans. Among them are these
citations with their corresponding abstracts:

1. Weese JS, Rousseau J, Traub-Dargatz JL, et al:
Community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in
horses and humans who work with horses. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2005;226: 580-83.

Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of nasal colonization with
methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in horses and
horse personnel.

Population: 972 horses and 107 personnel from equine farms in
Ontario, Canada and New York state.

Procedure: Nasal swab specimens were collected from horses and humans
on farms with (targeted surveillance) and without (non-targeted
surveillance) a history of MRSA colonization or infection in horses
during the preceding year. Selective culture for MRSA was performed.
Isolates were typed via pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, and
antibiograms were determined.

Results: MRSA was isolated from 46 of 972 (4.7 percent) horses (0/581
via non-targeted surveillance and 46/391 -- 12 percent -- via
targeted surveillance). Similarly, MRSA was isolated from 14 of 107
(13 percent) humans (2/41 -- 5 percent -- from non-targeted
surveillance and 12/66 -- 18 percent -- from targeted surveillance).
All isolates were subtypes of Canadian epidemic MRSA-5, an uncommon
strain in humans. All isolates were resistant to at least one
antimicrobial class in addition to beta-lactams. On all farms with
colonized horses, at least one human was colonized with an
indistinguishable subtype. For horses, residing on a farm that housed
more than 20 horses was the only factor significantly associated with
MRSA colonization. For humans, regular contact with more than 20
horses was the only identified risk factor.

Conclusion: Results confirm a reservoir of colonized horses on a
variety of farms in Ontario and New York and provide evidence that
one MRSA strain is predominantly involved in MRSA colonization in
horses and humans that work with horses.

2. Weese JS, Rousseau J, Willey BM, et al: Methicillin-resistant
Staphylococcus aureus in horses at a veterinary teaching hospital:
frequency, characterization, and association with clinical disease. J
Vet Intern Med. 2006;20: 182-86.

Methicillin-resistant _Staphylococcus aureus_ (MRSA) is an emerging
equine pathogen. To attempt to control nosocomial and zoonotic
transmission, an MRSA screening program was established for all
horses admitted to the Ontario Veterinary College Veterinary Teaching
Hospital, whereby nasal screening swabs were collected at admission,
weekly during hospitalization, and at discharge.

MRSA was isolated from 120 (5.3 percent) of 2283 horses: 61 (50.8
percent) at the time of admission, 53 (44.2 percent) during
hospitalization, and 6 from which the origin was unclear because an
admission swab had not been collected.

Clinical infections attributable to MRSA were present or developed in
14 (11.7 percent) of 120 horses. The overall rate of
community-associated colonization was 27 per 1000 admissions. Horses
colonized at admission were more likely to develop clinical MRSA
infection than those not colonized at admission (OR 38.9, 95 percent
CI 9.49-160, P less than 0.0001). The overall nosocomial MRSA
colonization incidence rate was 23 per 1000 admissions. The incidence
rate of nosocomial MRSA infection was at the rate of 1.8 per 1000
admissions, with an incidence density of 0.88 per 1000 patient days.

Administration of ceftiofur or aminoglycosides during hospitalization
was the only risk factor associated with nosocomial MRSA
colonization. MRSA screening of horses admitted to a veterinary
hospital was useful for identification of community-associated and
nosocomial colonization and infection and for monitoring of infection
control practices.

3. Weese JS, Archambault M, Willey BM, et al: Methicillin-resistant
Staphylococcus aureus in horses and horse personnel, 2000-2002. Emerg
Infect Dis. 2005;11: 430-35.

Methicillin-resistant _Staphylococcus aureus_ (MRSA) infection was
identified in 2 horses treated at a veterinary hospital in 2000,
prompting a study of colonization rates of horses and associated
persons. 79 horses and 27 persons colonized or infected with MRSA
were identified from October 2000 to November 2002; most isolations
occurred in a 3-month period in 2002. 27 (34 percent) of the equine
isolates were from the veterinary hospital, while 41 (51 percent)
were from one thoroughbred farm in Ontario. 17 (63 percent) of 27
human isolates were from the veterinary hospital, and 8 (30 percent)
were from the thoroughbred farm.

13 (16 percent) horses and one (4 percent) person were clinically
infected. 96 percent of equine and 93 percent of human isolates were
subtypes of Canadian epidemic MRSA-5, spa type 7, and possessed
SCCmecIV. All tested isolates from clinical infections were negative
for the Panton-Valentine leukocidin genes. Equine MRSA infection may
be an important emerging zoonotic and veterinary disease.

Europe (for example, Moodley A, Stegger M, Bagcigil AF, et al: spa
typing of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from
domestic animals and veterinary staff in the UK and Ireland. J
Antimicrob Chemother. 2006; 58: 1118-23) has also reported this
finding - Mod.LL]

================================================



AND it is getting much worse, with VRSA on the rise, which the vancomycin will not stop as in MRSA.

I know ;


Subject: FSIS--MEETING ON INTERNATIONAL MEAT AND POULTRY FOOD SAFETY MARCH 27, 2003 [TSS SUBMISSION]
Date: March 10, 2003 at 1:33 pm PST

Subject: FSIS TO HOLD INTERNATIONAL MEAT AND POULTRY FOOD SAFETY MEETING
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2003 15:41:55 -0600
From: "Terry S. Singeltary Sr."
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

Greetings FSIS,

in response to public meeting on March 27 on
food safety;

My name is Terry S. Singeltary Sr. and i wish to make
submission to this meeting. i am disabled from neck
injury and cannot come to meeting. i wish my submission
to be made public at the meeting please.

> Topics will include global perspectives on multi-drug
> resistant pathogens, assisting small plants in meeting
> food safety requirements and biosecurity.

i wish to comment on all topics.

i will try and make my nightmare as short as possible.

my mother died on 12-14-97 of Heidenhain Variant Creutzfeldt
Jakob Disease, an exceedingly rare strain of sporadic CJD,
now documented at 6 known phenotypes. i have researched human
animal TSEs for almost 6 years. i am no doctor, i have no
PhDs and i am President of nothing. i will get to food
safety and bio-security last...

1st -- milti-drug resistant pathogens

Nov. 30, 2001, i went in for my 3rd neck surgery,
second inter body fusion (always use my own blood
and bone). this time around they were to fuse all
my neck and add a titanium plate. since there is
no, I REPEAT NO questions on hospital admittance
forms of any kind asking about CJD/TSEs, i thought i
should inform him my situation with my mother and hvCJD.
i cannot give blood, be a donor of any kind and since
mom did die from hvCJD, they did use some disposable
items and did use a bone grinder that would not be used
on anyone else and i did share a lot of data with my
neurosurgeon about all this (with reference).
now, as my neurosurgeon said, damn terry, this was not
suppose to happen to you. i refused blood and bone
due to CJD/TSEs, and what do you suppose happened,
somehow (as with TSEs, nobody knows), they infected
with MRSA (methicillin resistant _Staphylococcus aureus_),
damn near killed me. about 7 weeks of vancomycin with long
line straight to heart. course nobody would fess up to it,
but every nurse i spoke with said it was hospital acquired,
and the week i was in there i was told there were 7 cases
from that hospital room? i have never been the same since,
but who's asking.

now, as my nightmare through the world of TSEs continued,
i began searching data on MRSA. while looking for
ruminant-to-ruminant feed ban warning letters aka mad cow
feed ban warning letters (before FDA stopped issuing
them, all this will be documented below), i began seeing
these warning letters on antibiotic and hormone use of
all sorts in cattle. the more i researched, the more disgusted
i got. human drugs (or equal) being used in mass proportion
by the cattle industry, on animals to sick to slaughter.
i have often wondered why young girls are maturing at such
young ages (hormones in cattle/dairy products), and why humans
were becoming resistant to antibiotics (antibiotic use in cattle),
then it all began to make sense. so, i would like to submit
the below data with reference's. i will first reference
the warning letters on antibiotics and hormones, then
will post url with much more data on the topic. please
look at where the data is referenced from. then i will
post data on meat safety (TSEs) and finally something
i submitted to the documents on bio-security in the USA
with potentially TSE/BSE tainted products entering the USA
through a BIG hole (passenger air traffic and TSE/BSE
SUITCASE BOMBS)...

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

Dallas District

4040 North Central Expressway

Dallas, Texas 75204-3145

March 18, 2002

Ref: 2002-DAL-WL-12

CERTIFIED MAIL


snip...full text ;



http://www.microbes.info/forums/index.php?s=d8f931df8e68c2b456632f2106d2508b&showtopic=155&pid=474&mode=threaded&show=&st=&#entry474



In the United States the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recently published a guidance document for the agricultural animal industry for the use of antimicrobial agents in animals that are bred for human consumption. This recommends that manufactures of new agents conduct vigorous testing, including human risk assessment, before submitting to FDA. The alliance for prudent use of antibiotics, which has long pushed for the release of guidelines, has further recommended that the use of antimicrobial agents for economic purposes in agriculture, such as growth promotion , be discontinued. Reference: www.apua.org or www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/98fr/ For details refer to document 98D-1146.

3.5 What is the problem?

This exposure to low level antibiotics on a regular bases allows the bacteria to develop resistance to the drugs being used as only the bacteria that are not killed live to reproduce for the next generation. Also mutational resistance develops in the chromosome that controls susceptibility to a given antibiotic. Resistance can also develop as a result of transfer of genetic material between bacteria. Once a bacteria or micro-organisms develops resistance to a certain antibiotic, it may also be resistant to other antibiotics that use the same "mechanism of action"

Much of the problem is created by this low level use of antibiotics in feeds. This is because it involves the feeding of low doses to large numbers of animals over long periods of time. These resistant bacteria may be either pathogenic and cause disease, or may be common, harmless bacteria known as commensals. Both pathogenic and commensal resistant bacteria pass through animal waste to other animals, and into the production environment and, in some cases, into waterways and other nearby ecosystems. Therefore, there is exposure risk not just from the consumption of food products that may harbour resistant bacteria but also from the environmental sources such as recreational waters.

In turn people eat the food products produced from these farming systems and in turn these resistant bacteria are passed on to the consumer. Using the phase " we are what we eat", this resistant bacteria gains a presence in the home post purchase, via washing the food on removal from the packet and other handling.

And so when an illness is contracted (more than likely in an older person where their immune system is low), and antibiotics are prescribed by the doctor to treat the subsequent infection, antibiotics may be ineffective against the bacteria. The problem can emerge as a "super bug"

Another point of interest (although not directly involved with this report) is the increased use of antibacterial household products. Ten years ago only a few products containing antibacterial agents, or biocides, were being marketed for the home. By the year 2000 more than 700 were on the market in the United States alone. Among the newer products in the antibacterial front are plastic food containers impregnated with an



antibacterial agent. Whole bedrooms and bathrooms can be outfitted with products that containing triclosan (a common antibacterial agent), including pillows, sheets, towels, and slippers. This increase in household products is having an effect, in that it is increasing awareness of the fact that anti-bacterial products may contribute to the increasing resistant problem.



http://www.nuffield.org.nz/media/Andrew%20Fox%202004.pdf



Antibiotic use in animal feed and its impact on human health
Authors: Barton M.D.1; Barton M.D.*

Source: Nutrition Research Reviews, Volume 13, Number 2, December 2000, pp. 279-299(21)

Publisher: CABI Publishing


Abstract:

Antibiotic resistance in bacteria that cause disease in man is an issue of major concern. Although misuse of antibiotics in human medicine is the principal cause of the problem, antibiotic-resistant bacteria originating in animals are contributory factors, with some types of resistance in some species of bacteria. Antibiotics are added to animal feeds to treat and prevent infections and to improve growth and production. Until recently, the major concerns about incorporation of antibiotics in animal feeds related to antibiotic residues in products from treated animals. Although, in 1969, the report drew attention to the potential for antibiotic-resistant bacteria to spread from treated animals via the food chain, there was little response until the detection of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in animals fed a related glycopeptide, avoparcin. Subsequently, attention started to focus on the issue and other examples of transfer of resistant bacteria through the food chain, such as enterococci resistant to quinupristin–dalfopristin or to everninomicin, fluoroquinolone-resistant campylobacters and multiresistant Escherichia coli, and salmonella such as Salmonella typhimurium DT104. Reviews and committees in many countries have highlighted the need for better control of licensing of antibiotics, and codes for prudent use of antibiotics by veterinary practitioners and farmers. The continued use of antibiotic growth promoters has been questioned and there is a need to ensure that antibiotics important in human medicine are not used therapeutically or prophylactically in animals.



http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/cabi/nrr/2000/00000013/00000002/art00008



Abstract:

Simply stated, the use of antibiotics is the root cause of antimicrobial resistance.

Keywords: antibiotics; antimicrobial resistance

Document Type: Miscellaneous

Affiliations: 1: Infectious Diseases Microbiology, Pharmaceutical R&D Division, 5 Research Parkway, Wallingford CT 06492-7660, USA. [email protected]



http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/apl/eop/2001/00000002/00000002/art00001



for those interested in the overuse of antibiotics in the farm food raised animals and resistance to humans ;



http://www.google.com/search?num=30&hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=d&edition=us&q=usda+antibiotics+fda&btnG=Search



TSS
 
Top