"antibiotics" news and stories

Until now, we've only guessed the amount of antibiotics used were high to keep our pig, cattle and poultry stocks healthy. In fact, the Animal Health Institute predicted 11.1 million kilograms were used nationwide in 2005. But the Food and Drug Administration's records don't go back that far.

For the first time, the FDA has released an estimate. In 2009 alone, "13.1 million kilograms of antimicrobial drugs were sold or distributed for use in food-producing animals" in the U.S., cites Livable Future from the report (.pdf) made available to the public last Thursday. There's also a chart listing approved antibiotics in each drug class.

That 13.1 million kilograms is just short of 29 million pounds. "That's a lot," writes Maryn McKenna on her Wired magazine blog. (McKenna is a journalist specializing in infectious diseases, and the author of Superbug, notes Food Safety News.)

We think of antibiotics as a good thing, something to rid ourselves of disease, but overuse can lower resistance, and that's exactly what we're seeing in meat production. This in turn calls for stronger antibiotics, which don't just stay with the animal. It carries through to the land and those working on it, not to mention its unidentified consequences to those who consume the meat.

Nutritionist Marion Nestle notes in The Atlantic that since this is the first report, "it is not possible to say whether the numbers are going up or down. But the agency is now requiring meat producers to report on antibiotic use so we now have a baseline for measuring progress."

I'm usually glad to peruse tomorrow's New York Times headlines when it comes to food as I did last night. I say usually because last night the news I learned was rather disturbing. The FDA has issued an alert about the safety of five types of farm-raised seafood imported from China. It seems that multiple tests showed contamination from carcinogens and antibiotics.

The five types of seafood in question are shrimp, catfish, eel, basa (a type of catfish) and dace (Chinese mud carp). These fish will have to be tested before they can be sold in the U.S. The FDA noted that there's no immediate health threat, but that prolonged exposure could cause health problems. Somehow that doesn't make me feel very safe, probably because I've consumed more than a few cans of canned dace with black bean sauce in my day. And the ban may not be such good news for fish eaters in general, either. Chinese seafood accounts for 21 percent of all seafood imports. Shrimp lovers may be hit especially hard since it's the number one seafood imported from China.

Source

No additives, no hormones. no chemicals... do these phrases mean what you think they mean? The Diet Detective has a little guide to help you figure out what these designations mean, and it isn't always what you think.

• No antibiotics - Some antibiotics are given to treat sick animals, and given to the whole herd when one animal is ill. The "subtheraputic" use of drugs to boost animal growth is the main concern here, and labeling usually differentiates between the two. Organic farmers cannot use any animal for organic products that has been treated with antibiotics, so they are simple separated from the herd if they must be treated.
• No chemicals - This label means nothing (or anything at all), since there is no USDA or FDA definition of the term.
• No additives - There are 2,800 potential additives for meat in the US and the labeling applies to what was added to the meat, such as colorings and flavorings - not what was fed to the animal in the first place.
• No hormones - Hormones are not allowed in the production of pork and poultry. Period. Cows can be given hormones to speed their growth, though, so if the label specifies that "No hormones [were] administered," the cow probably lived a healthy and natural life.

The Detective notes that because the regulations are in place, doesn't mean that they are always followed. In many cases, there is little in the way of follow-up to prove that all producers are living up to their labels. Many suppliers, however, do live up to the standards set by law, if not to a higher standard of their own. Labeling may not be fail-safe, but it's still more reliable than the alternatives of no labels or completely unsanctioned ones.

Source

Food poisoning often occurs after eating a meal in a large, social setting such as a picnic, cookout, or cafeteria. According to the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM), foods in these settings are often prepared early and left unrefrigerated for long periods, allowing bacteria to form on the food. Food poisoning symptoms typically begin within two to six hours after eating the contaminated food. Signs of food poisoning are most often vomiting, fever, chills, headache, bloody diarrhea, weakness, and severe abdominal cramps. Treatment from a doctor is rarely necessary, unless dehydration occurs, says the NLM. To prevent dehydration, drink plenty of fluids, but avoid milk or drinks with caffeine. You should also avoid solid foods while severely nauseated. And antibiotics aren't usually needed to manage food poisoning.

I'm sure most of us have experienced food poisoning at some sort of summer get-together. We likely pinpoint the sickness to something we ate, often that strange tasting potato salad that looked good on the outside. The association of our discomfort with eating certain foods may then last a lifetime. Just as important, however, we may experience some sort of generalized bad feeling toward an activity, such as future church socials or family reunions. I wonder if anyone can trace the loss of their religious faith to a rancid salad... Just thinking.

The Institute of Food Technologists, a nonprofit group with over 22,000 members, studied over 20 years' worth of past research on antibiotics and antimicrobial resistance with a group of food scientists and microbiologists and came to the conclusion that using antibiotics to treat animals is not necessarily harmful to humans. The study was intended to provide a contrast to the claims of organic groups that promote antibiotic free foods as being the healthiest option.

While the results will be officially released tomorrow, scientists emphasize that they are not dismissing "concerns about overuse of antibiotics or antimicrobials," which can certainly be unnecessary and their overuse could even lead to the production of new, antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria. But the fact remains that the health of many animals would suffer if they were never treated with antibiotics; the cost of meat could increase, perhaps to levels that would be prohibitively expensive for some, if food production dropped and the supply of meat on the market went down.

The study does not say that antibiotics and antimicrobials are unconditionally safe, as they can certainly be overused or misused, but it does serve to reinforce the idea that food production doesn't exist in black and white or good and bad, even if there is a hard line between organic and non-organic.

Source