The rise of dangerous antibiotic-resistant bacteria is a public health crisis, and routine antibiotic misuse in industrial agriculture is part of the problem.
Since the 1940s, antibiotics have saved millions of lives and played a critical role in protecting public health. However, many of the antibiotics we rely on to cure disease in humans are also used on concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), or factory farms, to prevent disease in overcrowded conditions. This dangerous misuse of antibiotics in agriculture is partially responsible for the emergence of drug-resistant bacteria that pose a grave threat to public health.
Scientists, public health advocates, and consumers are pushing to end the inappropriate use of medically important antibiotics in livestock production, and while antibiotic use has recently declined in the United States, dangerous misuse is still a serious problem.8 Health care costs associated with antibiotic-resistant bacteria amount to about $20 billion each year in the US alone and amount to more than eight million extra patient days in the hospital.21 Workers at these facilities often carry (unknowingly) antibiotic-resistant bacteria into the general public; as one example, MRSA, a now-common staph bacteria resistant to many antibiotics, has been found to persist in the nasal passages of workers at industrial hog operations, even following extended periods away from these facilities. 2637
While the FDA announced a five-year plan to tackle these remaining concerns in 2019, some critics suggest the time frames should be accelerated to account for the urgent threat antibiotic resistance poses.40
In 2015, United Nations member states approved a World Health Organization plan to address antibiotic resistance, calling on countries to draw up action plans within two years.44 A recent study shows that banning GPAs in Denmark led to little more than a one percent drop in production of pork and only a slight rise in poultry production, which was offset in part by eliminating GPA costs; a ban in the US would likely produce similar results.45 Given these negligible impacts to the industry and the potentially catastrophic human and economic costs of a “post-antibiotic” world, it is imperative that governments and industry take swift action to curtail the overuse of these critical drugs.
Responsible livestock production doesn’t have to completely exclude antibiotics — they are still vital tools for treating sick animals that need to be used carefully. Farmers who raise animals on pasture with sustainable practices do not use antibiotics for growth promotion or other non-therapeutic reasons. In part, they rely less on drugs because the animals are raised in cleaner environments than those of confinement operations, with less stress and the ability to express natural behaviors, and thus are less prone to sickness. Generally, these farms use antibiotics only to treat acute infections in sick animals, just as they are used to treat human illness.
Animal Welfare Approved, a label certifying high animal welfare standards on livestock farms, includes standards for antibiotic use:
While USDA organic standards prohibit antibiotic use in animals raised organically, they also mandate that sick animals must be treated; if a sick animal is given antibiotics to treat infection, its meat or other products cannot be sold as organic, so these animals must be sold off to conventional producers after treatment.
You can help curb the systemic spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria by supporting meat and poultry that has been raised without non-therapeutic antibiotics:
Hide References