http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew...ics_b_649673.h
tml



Andrew Gunther
Program Director, Animal Welfare Approved
Posted: July 20, 2010 07:30 AM

USDA Admits Link Between Antibiotic Use by Big Ag and Human Health




At a hearing of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Wednesday,
July 14, 2010, a representative of the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) finally caught up with the rest of the world -- and
his peers at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Center for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) -- and admitted that the use of
antibiotics in farm animal feed is contributing to the growing problem
of deadly antibiotic resistance in America.
Dr. John Clifford, Deputy Administrator for Veterinary Services for the
USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) read from his
previously submitted testimony that the USDA believes it is likely that
U.S. use of antibiotics in animal agriculture does lead to some cases of
resistance in humans and the animals.
Why is this news? Because the USDA has been continually playing the
Three Wise Monkeys game -- it sees no evil, hears no evil and speaks no
evil -- when it comes to deadly consequences to humans of the
non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in farm animals. In fact, Dr.
Clifford looked as if he'd been given a choice between testifying or
having his eye poked out with a stick and he lost the toss.
Others, though, readily stepped up to the plate. Despite the feeble
nature of the recent FDA Guidance to Industry on farm animal antibiotics
(read more about this in our blog), Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, Principle
Deputy Commissioner of the FDA, was clear in his testimony that the
overall weight of evidence supports the conclusion that using
antibiotics for production purposes in livestock farming (as growth
promoters and to prevent rather than treat illness) is not in the
interest of protecting and promoting public health.
Dr. Sharfstein also turned away a challenge from Representative John
Shimkus (R-IL 19) about the soundness of the science upon which his
findings rest. Mr. Shimkus, obviously unhappy with Dr. Sharfstein's
testimony, badgered him to come up with up a U.S. peer-reviewed study
(which Dr. Sharfstein did -- a 2003 Institute of Medicine study) and
then questioned the veracity of the findings. Dr. Sharfstein assured Mr.
Shimkus that the Institute has a peer-review process in place and
reminded him that "the Institute is considered our nation's leading
scientific expert ... "
Dr. Ali Khan, Assistant Surgeon General and the Deputy Director of the
National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID),
Center for Disease Control and Prevention, testified that there is
unequivocal and compelling evidence that the use of antibiotics in farm
animals leads to drug resistance that has an adverse impact on public
health. He also faced questions from a visibly agitated Mr. Shimkus, who
kept dismissing studies by the World Health Organization and others to
request "real science," which, from his posturing, is evidently only
that which supports Big Ag.
Mr. Shimkus played his role as Big Ag's Mouthpiece admirably. He
questioned every statistic, slide, study, expert, institution, report or
person cited that didn't agree with an antibiotic free-for-all in the
farmyard. "So far there's nothing that links use in animals to a buildup
of resistance in humans," he stated, recklessly ignoring all published
science since 1968 and the testimony of the doctors his government has
charged with protecting health, while making sure he gave Big Ag a
clear, concise statement around which it can issue an indignant press
release.
So let's recap -- the USDA, however grudgingly, is finally admitting the
link between the use of subtherapeutic antibiotics in farm animal feed
and human drug resistance; the FDA is impressed enough with the "weight
of the evidence" to begin calling for changes in how antibiotics are
used in farm animal production; and the CDC feels the evidence is
"unequivocal and compelling," yet there are still those calling for
"real science?"
Well how about the March 22, 2010, report from the Duke Infection
Control Outreach Network that a superbug call C. difficile is multi-drug
resistant and on the rise? Is that real science or should we conduct
more studies and perhaps hold a few more hearings?
We don't need more hearings, we need action. H.R. 1549, Preservation of
Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act, continues to languish in
committee while a few elected officials spend the taxpayer's time and
money to pretend the science they are calling for doesn't already exist
in mountains.
In the coming days, I expect that Big Ag will marshal their forces and
come out with its own brand of science and experts to refute all
testimony that threatens its profit margin. Of course, what I'm really
waiting for is the day the Subcommittee calls on one of the dozens and
dozens of AWA farmers to relate how changing from confined to
pasture-based farming has eliminated the need for subtherapuetic and
most therapeutic antibiotics because their animals and their farms are
safe and healthy to begin with.

--
Bill S. Jersey USA zone 5 shade garden
What use one more wake up call?