FDA's New Plan: Decrease Antibiotics in Livestock

On December 11, the FDA made an important announcement: a proposal to curtail indiscriminate use of antibiotics in food-producing animals.  This voluntary policy won't totally eliminate the danger of becoming ill with an antibiotic-resistant germ, but, still, it could be a big step in the right direction. The following Q/As explain the reasons for the new policy, what will happen next, and why.

Why are animals raised for human consumption fed antibiotics?

Antibiotics are given to cattle, pigs, and chickens for one or more of these reasons:

1)  The animals are sick.  (The FDA is not objecting to this use of antibiotics.)

2)  Low doses of antibiotics are added to the animals' food or drinking water in order to protect them from illness that may be caused by crowded and often unhygienic living conditions.

3) Animals fed antibiotics tend to grow faster and fatter on less feed, which are financial benefits for farmers. This use of antibiotics is commonly referred to as "production purposes" used for "growth enhancement" or "feed efficiency."

The second reason is considered by some to provide a loophole by allowing the continuation of antibiotic use supposedly to prevent illness when the real reason is "production purposes."

Why is the practice of giving unnecessary antibiotics to livestock considered a danger to humans?

Here's the FDA's explanation: "Antimicrobial drugs include all drugs that work against a variety of microorganisms, such as bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites. ...All antibiotics are antimicrobials, but not all antimicrobials are antibiotics. 

"Antimicrobial resistance is when bacteria or other microbes become resistant to the effects of a drug after being exposed to it.  This means that this particular drug, and similar drugs, will no longer be effective against those microbes."

CNN recently pointed out that, according to an FDA report, 81% of the raw ground turkey tested by the FDA was contaminated with antibiotic-resistant bacteria, as were 69% of pork chops, 55% of ground beef, and 39% of chicken.

The FDA urges judicious use of antibiotics and points out that governments around the world consider antimicrobial-resistant bacteria a major threat to public health.  According to the New York Times, "At least two million Americans fall sick every year and about 23,000 die from antibiotic-resistant infections."  (But food is certainly not the only source of antimicrobial-resistant germs.)

Exactly what has the FDA proposed regarding antibiotics and food animals?

The FDA proposal does NOT eliminate all antimicrobials now given to livestock. These are the agency's two main goals:

• to phase out the use of those antimicrobials that are also used to treat human illnesses, especially if they're used in animals merely for production purposes;
• "to bring the therapeutic uses of such drugs (to treat, control, or prevent specific diseases) under the oversight of licensed veterinarians." 

How are these goals to be accomplished?  The plan calls for voluntary compliance from the drug companies.  Now, most antimicrobial drugs given to food-producing animals are available to farmers over the counter.  The FDA is recommending labeling changes that would mean a veterinarian's okay would be necessary to purchase these drugs.

Why is this plan voluntary rather than mandatory?

The FDA says that's "the fastest, most efficient way to make these changes."  Why?  Mandatory changes would need to deal with each drug separately.  FDA has been working with associations of drug companies, the feed industry, producers of beef, pork, and turkey, veterinarians, and consumer advocacy groups in developing this plan.  Therefore, the announcement was no surprise.

Animal pharmaceutical companies can agree to revise their drug labels to remove animal production as an approved use.  The FDA points this out:   "Once product labeling is voluntarily changed, it will be a violation of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to use these drugs for production purposes."

How long would it take for the FDA's proposal to become actual practice?

These companies have 90 days to inform the FDA as to whether or not they will participate. The FDA expects compliance from drug companies, based upon statements made at public hearings. Then, the companies will have 3 years to actually make the label changes.

What drugs are involved?

The proposal is aimed at curtailing the use of drugs used to treat humans, for example penicillin, azithromycin, and tetracycline (according to the New York Times).  Meat extension specialist Dr. Jonathan Campbell, a faculty member in the Department of Animal Science at Pennsylvania State University, supplied us with the following statistics: tetracyclines make up the largest percentage of antibiotic use in livestock (approximately 41.1% vs. 3.9% in humans). Penicillins make up the largest percent of antibiotics used in human medicine (43% vs. 6% in livestock) according to FDA (2010 and 2011 data)."

Will the FDA's voluntary approach to the problem work?

Most would agree that it's better than no FDA action at all, but there is concern that the prevention-of-disease loophole will make it ineffective.  However, in the past, lobbying by various companies has made it impossible to pass tougher legislation.

When ask if the FDA went far enough, food process engineer Dr. Timothy Bowser replied, "Probably not, but additional measures may be forthcoming.  Rulings on this topic will evolve over the years."

Will there be compliance?  Dr. Bowser is optimistic. "The industry already complies with label recommendations for other medications and treatments and existing FDA requirements. They also understand that regulatory compliance is a part of doing business. A small percentage of growers will not comply with the antibiotic control program, but sadly there will always be those that do not follow the rules, regardless of the penalty."

Would it be better to ban all use of antimicrobial in livestock?

The answer is no, according to Dr. Campbell. We take care of illness in our children with antibiotics; we deserve to and have the responsibility to promote animal health in the same way. The swine industry in Denmark was devastated financially when that country implemented an immediate ban of ALL antibiotic use. I would hate to see that happen in the U.S.  It would not only lessen the health of our animals, but also diminish the value of our agricultural commodities, especially in uncertain economic times."

Why is this issue being handled by the FDA rather than the USDA?

Dr. Campbell explains: "While the USDA is charged with enforcing and monitoring the safety of our meat supply, FDA controls all antibiotic and drug use decisions, whether they concern veterinary or human medicine."

If food animals are not treated with the same or similar antimicrobials given to humans, will that solve the problem of antibiotic-resistant germs causing illnesses and death to humans?

Here's Dr. Campbell's answer to this question: "I do not believe this will curtail the presence and continued emergence of resistant strains of microorganisms. More research is needed to truly show a change in antibiotic resistant populations with decreased antibiotic usage in livestock and poultry destined for human consumption.

"Microorganisms are living, respiring cells that must live and adapt to their environment, and they do and have for millions of years. Human medicine created antibiotic-resistant bacteria as we currently recognize resistance. Using methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) as an example, the first case of MRSA in the U.S. was discovered in Boston City Hospital 50 years ago in 1963. That was just four years after the drug “Celbinin” (methicillin), the new penicillin, was developed in the UK."  Nevertheless, Dr. Campbell says FDA's 2012 ban on some drugs that mimicked or were the same as human antibiotics was "a good idea in general."

Dr. Bowser agrees that this FDA action is not a total solution: "This FDA initiative is intended to slow antibiotic resistance in humans.  The resistance process is inevitable, but it can be prolonged." 

Dr. Campbell also makes this interesting point:  "The scientific literature is also in conflict about the path of zoonotic transfer of these organisms. In other words, did we transfer antibiotic resistant organisms to livestock and poultry or vice versa? Better yet, is this transfer from human-to-animal and animal-to-human happening in both directions? The bidirectional model seems to make the most sense scientifically."

What can I do to decrease my chances of contracting a food-borne illness that is antibiotic-resistant?

At home, take the same precautions needed to prevent contracting any food-borne illness. 

Cook foods to a high enough temperature to kill pathogens: Check the temperature of foods you cook with a food thermometer.  (According to CNN, only 37% of people own one!) Cook foods to the recommended temperature.  To read more about this tip, go to this Shelf Life Advice article: "Why You Need a Safe Cooking Temperature Chart and How to Get One Right Now."

Avoid cross-contamination: Wash your hands well before handling food, especially raw meats and raw produce.  Do not rinse raw poultry and raw fish.  Use separate cutting boards when working with raw meats, raw produce, and products that are not going to be cooked (such as bread and cake).  For more information about cross-contamination, see the Shelf Life Advice article entitled "What You Can Do to Avoid Food-Borne Illness."

Source(s):

Jonathan A. Campbell, Ph.D.  Department of Animal Science, Pennsylvania State University.

Timothy J. Bowser, Ph.D., Oklahoma State University, Dept. of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering

fda.gov "FDA's Strategy on Antimicrobial Resistance"

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/GuidanceComplianceEnforcement/GuidanceforIndustry/ucm216939.htm

fda.gov "Phasing Out Certain Antibiotic Use in Farm Animals"

http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm378100.htm 

nytimes.com "F.D.A. Restricts Antibiotics Use for Livestock"

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/health/fda-to-phase-out-use-of-some-antibiotics-in-animals-raised-for-meat.html?hpw&rref=us&_r=0

abcnews.go.com "Stop Feeding Livestock Antibiotics for Growth Promotion...Please?"

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/fda-stop-feeding-livestock-antibiotics-growth-promotionplease/story?id=21175760

cnn.com "FDA hopes to curb antibiotic use on farms"

http://newday.blogs.cnn.com/2013/12/12/fda-hopes-to-curb-antibiotic-use-on-farms/

cnn.com "New Day" December 19, 2013.