|
|
It is bacteria versus people
If I were to write my own dictionary, I would define "disappointment" as the failure to achieve what was expected. Given that definition, I would suggest that the National Institute of Animal Agriculture's symposium on Antibiotic Use in Animal Agriculture was anything but a disappointment simply because I expected very little and that is what I got. Sure, there were tremendous presentations from the best in their fields, looking at the issue of prudent use of antimicrobials in food animals. However, the final message coming out was not nearly direct enough to address this problem. For example, the evidence is very clear in Denmark where sub-therapeutic use of antibiotics was banned in 2007. The use of total antibiotics per pig has now surpassed previous levels because the need for treatment has increased three-fold. The United States government and individuals within the Food and Drug Administration can sit through this presentation without dispute and still say, "It looks like a good place to start." First off, we need to go back and look at why we are even having this discussion. Quite frankly the best presentation was by Mike Apley from Kansas State University. Apley said, "We say we have a problem with some bacteria developing a resistance to the antibiotics we use. We need to define 'resistance' because the science clearly illustrates that each organism and each bacteria within each species is different. So the car won't start; before we give the engine an overhaul let's make sure the battery is working." The real eye-opening presentation came from a clinical microbiologist who knew nothing about animal agriculture before coming to the symposium. Hailing from JMI Laboratories in North Liberty, Iowa, Dr. Robert Flamm clearly showed the growth in the number of cases of antibiotic-resistant bacteria was occurring not only in the United States but globally. This means that the resistance is equal in countries where antibiotics are used in animal agriculture to those where they are not. What does that tell you? In the past five years the growth in antibiotic resistance has exploded ironically in almost a direct correlation between measures taken to ban certain antibiotic applications. Clearly the measures currently being taken are not working. My suggestions for Flamm is that it is fairly clear to me that the only avenue of fixing this problem is being more direct with the consumer. We have to tell them, "We found the problem and it is you. You are using antibiotics too frequently in your daily life and the per capita consumption is too high, resulting in the development of antibiotic resistance." It is as if we are afraid that we are going to offend someone. We would rather just float a series of messages out there about the prudent use of antibiotics in humans and hope they catch on. It is not good animal husbandry to refrain from using a tool that you have in your toolbox to promote better preventative health strategies in animals and it is not good preventive human health care to continue to allow people to overuse something that can have a detrimental effect to public health. I am going to squarely put the blame for this situation on the backs of our medical community. I am telling you that if the consulting veterinarian were as negligent in getting facts to farmers about animal health as the medical doctor is to his patient, both the vet and the farmer would be broke and out of work. The science is extremely clear and I cannot for the life of me understand why these highly informed medical professionals can't get it right. I liken it to much of the other bad information I hear about them giving. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard of someone visiting their doctor for one thing or another and they can't figure out the real cause so they say it must be MRSA. Or it is all of the allergies to gluten, fish, peanuts, lactose and on and on. Or maybe they should drop red meat and eggs from their diet. We live in the information age where we think we need to have a reason and a scapegoat for everything. However, when you have such a body of evidence that is contrary to the approach and direction that legislators and regulators are taking, it is time to stand and say, "Hold your horses here." I believe that falls squarely on the shoulders of one of the most trusted professions in the world--the DVM. I realize we are short staffed here in the real world and time is hard to come by but how long can we sit back and whine about doctors not listening when we are going to lose antibiotics at some level as a tool for animal care? I say no more. Every DVM should be up in arms about the oath they took to protect the health and well-being of the animals in their care and they rightfully know their job is getting tougher because of these regulations and limitations for treatment. Now for my role: I know right from wrong. I know medical doctors and I will know even more 6 months from now. It is my personal mission to find as many as I can and give them a personal stress test on finding the truth in getting to the source of this problem. The bacteria continually find a way to evolve and survive. Are you telling me that we are going to let them win? I personally choose people over bacteria. Editor's note: Trent Loos is a sixth generation United States farmer, host of the daily radio show, Loos Tales, and founder of Faces of Agriculture, a non-profit organization putting the human element back into the production of food. Get more information at www.FacesOfAg.com, or email Trent at trent@loostales.com.
1
Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2012. High Plains Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com |
|
