|
California Farmer
The California resolution adopted by the AMA House of Delegates said in part, "The spread of
bacterial resistance arises not only from unnecessary clinical use in human medication, but
also from massive use in animal agriculture, with increasing evidence that resistance
developed in animals is spreading to human pathogens." It said the California Medical
Association was beginning to address the unnecessary clinical use problem.
The AMA resolution brought an immediate response from Washington D.C. based Animal
Health Institute (AHI), which represents Pharmaceutical interests. "While we recognize the
importance of antibiotics in human health, the AMA resolution is far too broad and sweeping,
confuses therapeutic and subtherapeutic uses and is an ineffective solution to addressing
antibiotic resistance."
Despite invitations to California veterinary and other agriculturists, the defense of farm use of
antibiotics was left to Randy Singer, an epidemiologist at the University of Illinois College of
Veterinary Medicine, who was outgunned by seven experts and activists on other side.
Singer attempted to strike a balance between needed use, overuse, ease of feed store
availability and too few veterinarians for proper oversight. He was also critical of the
feed/farm press that only tells farmers what they want to hear.
"There is definitely abuse of antibiotics in the livestock," Singer asserted, "but the question is
how do you balance the need for animal health with the problem of persistence of antibiotics
in the environment, and the increases of resistance to antibiotics.
"Antibiotics used to improve animal growth and feed efficiency can reduce subclinical disease
and improve productive performance and overall health," he said.
Everyone seemed to agree that there is a lack of accurate data. AHI states that, "about 20
million pounds (of antibiotics) are used in animals, only 2.7 million pounds (13%) are used for
growth promotion." Margaret Mellon, Union of Concerned Scientists, called this estimate a
"repeated myth." She added that research sponsored by her organization from public
sources shows that animal agriculture uses more than 50 million pounds of antibiotics a year,
with more than 25 million pounds a year just to promote growth in animals for
"non-therapeutic" purposes.
Mellon admitted that no one knows for sure the amount of antibiotics used for human health,
but that their study suggests 3-million pounds. "Our estimate suggest eight time more
antibiotics are used for nontherapetutic purposes in the three major livestock sectors than in
human medicine. Our report has been out for six months and the numbers have gone
unchallenged. The government needs to collect data from users and pharmaceutical
companies."
Antibiotic use in agriculture "increases the risk of antibiotic-resistant foodborne illnesses and
increases the risk of treatment failure or worse diseases," says Tamar Barlam, a doctor with
the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Harvard Medical School. She noted that
Quinolene-resistant Campylobacter in Minnesota poultry increased from 1.3% in 1992 to
10.2% in 1998
In October 2000 the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine proposed to withdraw
fluoroquinolines for animal use. While one maker agreed, Bayer Corporation has chosen to
fight the proposed ban.
While the Forum's organizer Steve Heilig, SFMS's director of public health and education and
Litjen J. Tan, a senior scientist with AMA, seemed to hold out for compromise with agriculture,
the Bayer decision is the trust dividing line between the two sides.
"California's Foster Farms and Zacky were ready to voluntarily pull fluoroquinolines from use,
but backed off after the decision," explained Singer. "I don't think it was about money, it was
about banning a product based only on a perceived risk that could turn into long term policy."
The question left hanging was whether trust could be rebuilt and compromise based on
voluntary stewardship reached, or if war in the media, courts and legislative halls is the
choice of both sides over solutions. While the compromise door was left open, meetings
co-chair Lester Breslow, dean emeritus of UCLA's School of Public Health said, "It is like what
we faced with tobacco, we need to identify the enemy – who's standing in the way?"
That sounds more like a challenge to fight than find solutions.
|
