Tuesday, July 14, 2009

FDA opposes 'non-therapeutic' livestock antibiotics

The head of the Food and Drug Administration told Congress Monday that the agency favors banning the use of antibiotics in livestock except to prevent disease. FDA commissioner Joshua Sharfstein said "Purposes other than for the advancement of animal or human health should not be considered judicious use,” and added that the FDA believes all medications used for prevention and control of livestock should only be administered by veterinarians.

Critics have said overuse of the drugs, usually to encourage animal growth, has led to increased antibiotic resistance in humans. Activists groups like the Union of Concerned Scientists estimate 70 percent of all antibiotics sold in the U.S. are used on food animals, typically to promote weight gain or improve food consumption; others say the bulk of animal antibiotics are used to fight disease.

Sharfstein testified at a House Rules Committee hearing on H.R. 1549, sponsored by Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., the committee chair. "The bill generally would eliminate the use of 'non-therapeutic' antimicrobials in food-producing animals unless they can be proven to pose no danger to human health. These 'non-therapeutic' uses are defined in the bill as 'any use of the [critical antimicrobial animal drug] as a feed or water additive for an animal in the absence of any clinical sign of disease in the animal for growth promotion, feed efficiency, weight gain, routine disease prevention or other routine purpose'," Tom Johnston of MeatingPlace reports. Slaughter's press release on the bill is here. A 2:49 video clip of Sharfstein's testimony, from Slaughter's site, is here.

Charles Abbott reports for Reuters: Last year, Denmark voluntarily banned its use of antibiotics for livestock growth promotion. The Pew Environment Group told Abbott that the ban had little or no effect on farm productivity, and human antibiotic resistance decreased, but the American Veterinary Medical Association says resistance in Denmark was unchanged while hog disease increased. (Read more)

No comments: