80% of antibiotics in the US are used in livestock farming, prompting the FDA to call for a halt.

　　The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided to ban the preventative use of antibiotics in livestock feed over a three-year period starting in 2014.

　　The FDA's decisive action stems from the alarming overuse of antibiotics in the U.S. livestock industry: a staggering 80% of antibiotics in the U.S. are used in livestock farming. Long-term consumption of "antibiotic meat" leads to antibiotic resistance in humans, resulting in approximately 23,000 deaths annually in the U.S.

　　Current Situation: Overuse breeds "antibiotic meat"

　　According to 2012 statistics from the U.S. federal government, 80% of antibiotics are used in livestock farming. Antibiotics enter the bodies of chickens, pigs, cattle, and other meat animals. However, farmers raising poultry and livestock are not required to report details of antibiotic use; the types of antibiotics used, the animals they are used on, and the dosage remain unknown.

　　U.S. livestock farmers use antibiotics primarily for two reasons: to help livestock stay healthy and to help them gain weight. According to farmers, in large-scale, industrialized farms, livestock are often crowded into small spaces, making them susceptible to various diseases. Adding antibiotics to feed enhances their immunity.

　　Furthermore, since the 1950s, many U.S. farmers have discovered that regularly feeding cattle, pigs, or chickens sub-therapeutic doses of antibiotics not only reduces feed consumption but also miraculously accelerates weight gain, a win-win situation. This practice quickly became widespread.

　　In the United States, various meats, including pork, beef, chicken, and dairy products, are abundant and inexpensive. This is because the high demand for meat in the U.S. has led to highly mechanized and mass-produced meat production and processing, resulting in a surplus and lower prices.

　　The Problem: Powerful corporations hinder government oversight

　　In fact, the entire U.S. meat production industry is monopolized by several giant multinational corporations. While the labels on meat products in U.S. supermarkets may list different farms, they all originate from the same multinational corporation's farms and slaughterhouses. These large companies monopolize the production of meat, dairy products, corn, and soybeans in the U.S., controlling what U.S. consumers buy regardless of where they shop. Consumers essentially lack both choice and informed consent.

　　For example, soybean production in the U.S. is primarily controlled by a company called Monsanto, which produces only genetically modified soybeans. Farmers who grow soybeans are also controlled by this company and have no say, and consumers may not even be aware of this. Furthermore, due to the immense wealth and power of these corporations, even the U.S. Department of Agriculture struggles to strictly regulate their production processes and quality.

　　In addition to resistance from livestock companies, large pharmaceutical companies in the U.S. are equally unwilling to lose their substantial profits and will try every means to maintain the use of antibiotics in livestock farming.

　　The Harm: Gradually inducing antibiotic resistance in humans

　　In modern pharmacology, the use of antibiotics is almost unavoidable, but it is clearly a double-edged sword. Animals that consume antibiotics through feed over long periods develop antibiotic-resistant microbes, which then enter the human food chain, causing resistance to the same antibiotics in human medicine. Excessive overuse is gradually inducing antibiotic resistance in humans, rendering antibiotics ineffective and resulting in approximately 23,000 deaths annually in the U.S.

　　Glenn Morris, director of the Emerging Pathogens Institute at the University of Florida, stated, "One of the biggest problems facing humanity in the field of infectious diseases today is the rapidly increasing resistance to antibiotics. This is partly due to human overuse of antibiotics; another reason is the presence of antibiotic residues in the meat we consume."

　　The Impact: Europeans fear the influx of "antibiotic meat"

　　Compared to Europe, U.S. food safety policies appear more lenient. The EU has always maintained strict food safety standards, with rigorous regulation and control of genetically modified foods, ractopamine, antibiotics, and pesticide residues. Furthermore, several food safety crises in recent years have led European consumers to demand greater transparency from food producers.

　　In the 1970s, the EU began suspending the approval of several major antibiotics for use in animal feed. In 1986, Sweden completely banned the use of antibiotics in livestock feed, becoming the first country to prohibit the use of antibiotics as feed additives. From January 2006, the EU banned the use of the last four antibiotics—olaquindox, carbadox, salinomycin, and monensin—as growth-promoting feed additives. Today, the EU has essentially eliminated the use of antibiotics in animal feed.

　　Currently, the U.S. and Europe are working to create the "world's largest free trade area." Industry experts worry that if a new trade agreement is reached between the U.S. and the EU, European consumers will face the risk of consuming "antibiotic meat."

　　Solution: Banning within three years

　　In 2010, the FDA called for a reduction in the use of antibiotics in animal farming. At the end of 2013, the FDA released an industry guidance document outlining a plan to ban the preventative use of antibiotics in livestock feed over a three-year period starting in 2014, thereby minimizing the risk of antibiotic resistance in consumers of livestock products.

　　According to this document, the FDA will urge U.S. animal pharmaceutical companies to voluntarily remove claims related to promoting animal growth and improving feeding efficiency from their antibiotic products. These antibiotic products will only be used to treat animals and will require regulatory approval. The FDA will give animal pharmaceutical companies three months to submit letters of intent, followed by a three-year transition period.

　　Furthermore, the document stipulates that farmers must obtain a veterinarian's prescription before receiving any type of antibiotic.

　　(--From Global Oriental)