BLOG#11


                                 Antibiotic and the Consumers  

Antibiotic is something created by scientists to treat people and any living things depend on the diseases, everyone has their own type of antibiotic they can be treated with. In case of farming, the farmers used the antibiotics to feed the animals to make them grow faster and produce more. According to a research done by the FDA, they are reported that; they have found no harm so far to the public health by consumed the meat that are feed and treated with the antibiotics released this statement; "not all antibiotics are the same, some are used primarily in animals and are not medically important to people. And aren't leading to the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria that is harmful to people". Of the antibiotics used in farm animals today, about one third are called Ionophrones and are not medically important, nor used in humans. Meaning if resistance to the drugs did develop, it will have little impact on the public health. Further, use of medically important antibiotics actually decreased from 2010 to 2011 on farms while the meat production increased. So far there is no major effects on people or the consumer, because the antibiotics the farmers used are not harmful to the public. My concern is; if there is no effect on the public, the farmers are cleaned on that subject of the antibiotics, but what why the farmers need to treat the animals with antibiotics preemptively.

The farmers are reportedly saying that the used to the antibiotics is to treat the animals, human and animals’ health treatment differs. In human, doctors tend to treat the individual. In farm animals veterinarians tend to treat the herd. Farmers and ranchers work closely to with veterinarians to develop a comprehensive herd health program. Which includes many tools such as vaccination, proper housing, hygiene, and antibiotics. Preventing or controlling the spread of a disease is critical to keep animals safe and health. For example; I used to see my Dad have his animals vaccinated, which was on the best interest of the animals to keep them safe. Mostly when the Climate changes, also to prevent animals suffering or unsafe conditions. They can't stay isolate themselves waited to die when they are ill. It’s more human and safer to prevent illness than to treat a sick animal that may infect other animals. If the farmers are using the antibiotics in a good manner I think they should continued doing their jobs as farmers. 

Now while they researchers and FDA stated that there is no effect on public by feeding the animals the antibiotics, they should focused more what is caused the problem why some people got sick after consumer an humbugger, a sandwich, a meat ball where is the problem is from': it is from the processing industries, it is how they packing the meat where is the problem. According to a recent study done by FDA; www.fda.gov/animalveterinary/newsevents/cvmupdates/ucm335102htm they have found that "High rates of meat and poultry tainted with antibiotic- resistant strains of bacteria" 80% ground turkey, 61% pork chops and 55% ground beef so what is going on? if the farmers didn't do any harm now who is responsible for this problem. According to a survey by the consumer report they have came up with this scale.

 The turkey with no-antibiotics they have less E. coll, less Enterococcus, less staph and less ALL than those conventional.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is implementing a voluntary plan with industry to phase out the use of certain antibiotics for enhanced food production.

Antibiotics are added to the animal feed or drinking water of cattle, hogs, poultry and other food-producing animals to help them gain weight faster or use less food to gain weight.

Because all uses of antimicrobial drugs, in both humans and animals, contribute to the development of antimicrobial resistance, it is important to use these drugs only when medically necessary. Governments around the world consider antimicrobial-resistant bacteria a major threat to public health. Illnesses caused by drug-resistant strains of bacteria are more likely to be potentially fatal when the medicines used to treat them are rendered less effective.

FDA is working to address the use of “medically important” antibiotics in food-producing animals for production uses, such as to enhance growth or improve feed efficiency. These drugs are deemed important because they are also used to treat human disease and might not work if the bacteria they target become resistant to the drugs’ effects.

“We need to be selective about the drugs we use in animals and when we use them,” says William Flynn, DVM, MS, deputy director for science policy at FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM). “Antimicrobial resistance may not be completely preventable, but we need to do what we can to slow it down.”

FDA is issuing a final guidance document that explains how animal pharmaceutical companies can work with the agency to voluntarily remove growth enhancement and feed efficiency indications from the approved uses of their medically important antimicrobial drug products, and move the therapeutic uses of these products from over-the-counter (OTC) availability to marketing status requiring veterinary oversight.

Once manufacturers voluntarily make these changes, the affected products can then only be used in food-producing animals to treat, prevent or control disease under the order of or by prescription from a licensed veterinarian.

“This action promotes the judicious use of important antimicrobials, which protects public health and, at the same time, ensures that sick and at-risk animals receive the therapy they need,” says CVM Director Bernadette Dunham, DVM, Ph.D. “We realize that these steps represent changes for veterinarians and animal producers, and we have been working to make this transition as seamless as possible.”

Flynn explains that all the drugs affected by this plan are antibacterial products. They have long been FDA-approved for production (e.g. growth enhancement) purposes as well as for the treatment, control or prevention of animal diseases. Even today, he says, it is not entirely understood how these drugs make animals grow faster. The drugs are primarily added to feed, although they are sometimes added to the animals’ drinking water.

Bacteria evolve to survive threats to their existence. In both humans and animals, even appropriate therapeutic uses of antibiotics can promote the development of drug resistant bacteria. When such bacteria enter the food supply, they can be transferred to the people who eat food from the treated animal.

In 2010, FDA called for a strategy to phase out production use of medically important antimicrobial products and to bring the remaining therapeutic uses under the oversight of a veterinarian. The guidance document that FDA is issuing on Dec. 11, 2013, which was previously issued in draft form in 2012, lays out such a strategy and marks the beginning of the formal implementation period.

The agency is asking animal pharmaceutical companies to notify FDA within the next three months of their intent to voluntarily make the changes recommended in the guidance. Based on timeframes set out in the guidance, these companies would then have three years to fully implement these changes.

To help veterinarians and producers of food-producing animals comply with the new terms of use for these products once the recommended changes are implemented, FDA is proposing changes to the Veterinary Feed Directives (VFD) process. This is an existing system that governs the distribution and use of certain drugs (VFD drugs) that can only be used in animal feed with the specific authorization of a licensed veterinarian. Flynn explains that feed-use antibiotics that are considered medically important and are currently available, as OTC products will, as a result of implementation of the guidance document, come under the VFD process.

The proposed changes to the VFD process are intended to clarify the administrative requirements for the distribution and use of VFD drugs and improve the efficiency of the VFD program. Such updates to the VFD process will assist in the transition of OTC products to their new VFD status.

Flynn explains that the final guidance document made participation voluntary because it is the fastest, most efficient way to make these changes. FDA has been working with associations that include those representing drug companies, the feed industry, and producers of beef, pork and turkey, as well as veterinarians and consumer groups.

"Based on our outreach, we have every reason to believe that animal pharmaceutical companies will support us in this effort," says Michael R. Taylor, FDA's deputy commissioner for foods and veterinary medicine. Www.http.fda.gov.

We can all agree that the antibiotics have a good and bad side, the good side is that its maintained the animals healthy, grown fast but for our health it is a disaster according to the researchers. We have growth obesity populations, the heart disease rampage, and cancer. Even though there is no research related so far what causes cancer but we can have a point of view, those who consumed no meat vegetarians are less likely to suffer from those diseases than the meat consumers according to the researchers. We have a big population (USA) and it’s the government and the farmer to work together for those people to be fed, but they are not doing it in the right way. Using some antibiotics are murdered people, and I think the best thing is like so many country do is everyone farm they own meat and food but in here we don’t have time and space for that. We need people we can trust with what’s going in our system, people that will protect our society with the spread of so many killers(diseases), and I think we are so far away because everyone is worry about how much money they can make out of something not how hurt it will be to other people.