Antibiotics in Animal Agriculture
Resistance of infectious bacteria to antibiotics is an increasing problem. Bacteria may become resistant to not just one but to multiple antibiotics, making infections difficult to treat. New agents can be developed but this is a difficult, slow and expensive process adding significantly to spiraling healthcare costs. Even new agents may lose their effectiveness within a few years or months as bacteria devise novel mechanisms of resistance. The more antibiotics are used, the more likely resistance will develop. Much of the problem is related to overuse by physicians and they have responded by limiting prescribing of antibiotics to only the most appropriate situations. The fact is, however, that most antibiotics are not used to treat patients at all. Over 70% are used in animal agriculture, most in routine feed for growth promotion or for preventative treatment of entire flocks or herds. Such excessive use in crowded and unsanitary confined animal feedlots has resulted in colonization of animals with antibiotic resistant bacteria. Some of these are infectious for man such as Salmonella and these cause millions of cases of gastroenteritis annually in the United States. These infections not only make people ill but they also spread antibiotic resistance from food animals to humans thereby increasing the overall resistance problem.
There is ample scientific evidence that such events do occur. The Sierra Club and the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy in a 2002 report entitled Poultry on Antibiotics: Hazards to Human Health (pdf), describe a high prevalence of antibiotic resistant bacteria contaminating retail chicken and turkey products purchased in Minneapolis and Des Moines. Another report from the Consumers Union found similar high rates of contamination and antibiotic resistance. There is additional scientific evidence directly linking some of these resistant bacteria acquired by humans with the same organism in meat animals. While we do not know the exact contribution which antibiotic use in animals makes to the overall problem of resistance in human infections, even a small amount should be unacceptable. We would do well to err on the side of caution and preserve antibiotic effectiveness for treating human infections. Organizations such as the American Medical Association and The Union of Concerned Scientists support this approach. Some of these along with other groups have formed the Keep Antibiotics Working alliance. Their website, www.keepantibioticsworking.com, is a rich source of information.
So, what does all this have to do with the environment? First of all, to many of us, good health is an environmental issue. More directly, however, routine use of antibiotics is one of the linchpins for the successful operation of confined animal feedlots which do have substantial negative effects on the environment. Antibiotics enable the packing of hundreds or thousands of animals into crowded stressful and unsanitary conditions. Bacteria from leaking manure lagoons contaminate the soil and our rivers and streams. The oppressive odors degrade the quality of rural life. Workable alternatives are available. Denmark has successfully converted to antibiotic- free meat production and the European Union will ban routine use in feed by 2006. Independent sustainable farmers here in Minnesota (such as Hidden Stream Farm in Elgin) have been raising animals without routine antibiotics for years. Their products may be purchased directly from them, at farmers markets, and at some supermarkets. The Eat Well Guide provides information on availability including regional distributors such as the Southeast Minnesota Food Network, (in Winona), the Midwest Food Alliance, and the Whole Farm Cooperative. (507-765-2797) raises pork and lamb on pasture. He is part of the Niman Ranch growers association composed of 200 family farmers here in the Upper Midwest.
Some consumers complain that these meats are more expensive than food industry products. The difference is minimal, especially if you add in the hidden downstream expenses of industrial meat production such as higher health care costs and the costs of water and soil pollution. What can be done to change things? The FDA is reviewing policies which would restrict the routine use of antibiotics in animals and a bill providing similar restrictions has been introduced in Congress. However, these are slow processes with questionable outcomes and are subject to the pressures of powerful industry lobbyists. Individual consumers can act by requesting that grocers carry at least some meats produced without the routine use of antibiotics so that they may choose what is best for their families.