Low doses of antibiotics are added to CAFO feed as a matter of course, not only to stave off inevitable infectious diseases created by the cramped, unsanitary conditions but also because they cause the animals to grow faster on less food. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued voluntary guidance on agricultural antibiotics in 2013, asking drug companies to remove indications for "feed efficiency" and "weight gain" from the labels of their antibiotic products.
They also required veterinarians to oversee any addition of these drugs to animal feed and water. Most companies agreed to comply with the guidelines and state they no longer use antibiotics for growth promotion purposes, but there's a major loophole being exploited. Instead of saying the drugs are being used to promote growth, they simply state they use the antibiotics for disease prevention and control, a use that is still allowed under the FDA's guidance.
Many CAFOs Still View Routine Antibiotics Use as Essential
In 2017, the FDA officially banned the use of antibiotics on CAFOs for the purpose of growth promotion and now requires a veterinary prescription for antibiotics on the farms. Yet, CAFOs saw little ramifications from the ban, which allows them to continue dispensing antibiotics as usual. The New York Times reported:1
As noted by the Times, "The Cactus feedlot is hamburger central, the middle passage of cattle's industrial journey." This is where they go in the months before slaughter, eating a diet of grain meant to make them gain weight the fastest."[T]he new rules were designed in cooperation with drug companies and industrial farm groups. 'That didn't affect us," Mr. [Paul] Defoor of Cactus [Feeders, a feedlot giant] said of the ban; his company sees the antibiotics added to feed as a preventive health measure. Similarly, Zoetis, a major livestock drugmaker, said on its website that farmers 'will see little difference' in its tetracycline feed additives, beyond needing the appropriate paperwork from veterinarians."
Comment: Grains which are more than likely genetically modified and drenched in glyphosate:
Torturing animals with Monsanto's genetically engineered feed
The spotlight on animal rights in CAFOs (Confined Animal Feeding Operations) is typically focused on cramped spaces and blatantly inhumane treatment. But some scientists, farmers and veterinarians are talking about another form of animal abuse: stuffing animals with feed grown from genetically engineered crops drenched in glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto's RoundUp.
What they've uncovered should give us all pause. Because the symptoms veterinarians and researchers have observed in animals are not unlike many of the chronic, and increasingly prevalent, health problems plaguing humans today. Digestive disorders. Damaged organs. Infertility. Weak immune systems. Chronic depression.
But cows are meant to eat grass. Grain feeding them encourages the growth of E. coli in the animals' gut, as it leads to a more acidic environment. Grain-fed cows also live in a state of chronic inflammation, which increases their risk of infection and disease and necessitates low doses of antibiotics in feed for disease-prevention purposes.2
"Tylosin [an antibiotic] controls liver abscesses, and Rumensin, another antibiotic feed additive, fights intestinal disease," The New York Times reported.3 In all, an estimated 80 percent of the antibiotics used in the U.S. are used by industrial agriculture, with industry veterinarians continuing to support their use. "For now, the view from the feedlot is that the risks are not evident enough to stop using drugs like tylosin," according to the Times.4
Yet, in a Consumer Reports study of 300 raw ground beef samples, grass fed beef raised without antibiotics was three times less likely to be contaminated with multidrug-resistant bacteria compared to conventional CAFO samples.5 The grass fed beef was also less likely to be contaminated with E. coli and Staphylococcus aureus than the CAFO meat.
Meanwhile, in November 2017 the World Health Organization (WHO) called on farmers and the food industry to stop the use of antibiotics for growth promotion and disease prevention in healthy animals. WHO explained, "The new ... recommendations aim to help preserve the effectiveness of antibiotics that are important for human medicine by reducing their unnecessary use in animals."6
They cited a 2017 study published in The Lancet Planetary Health, which found reducing antibiotic use in food-producing animals reduced antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the animals by up to 39 percent and may similarly reduce such bacteria in humans, particularly those who are directly exposed to food-producing animals.7
As it stands, the excessive use of antibiotics among CAFO animals has turned them into veritable "disease factories"8 and, in the U.S., when the FDA tests raw supermarket chicken, they routinely find antibiotic-resistant bacteria to be present.9 According to WHO, use of all classes of medically important antibiotics should be reduced in food-producing animals, while their use for growth promotion and disease prevention without diagnosed illness should be completely restricted.
Outrageously, USDA Agricultural Research Service administrator Chavonda Jacobs-Young said in a statement, "The WHO guidelines are not in alignment with U.S. policy and are not supported by sound science. The recommendations erroneously conflate disease prevention with growth promotion in animals."10
Antibiotic Use Rose 65 Percent Over 15-Year Period
Between 2000 and 2015, human consumption of antibiotics has risen by 65 percent, reaching 42 billion doses a year, according to research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.11 The increase was driven by low- and middle-income countries and, if no policy changes are made, it's estimated that global antibiotic consumption will rise up to 200 percent higher by 2030.
Use of antibiotics in high-income countries still remains higher than in most low- and middle-income countries (despite the latter having more cases of bacterial disease), but their use is rising fast - a concern, in part, because antibiotics are often available without a prescription in lower-income countries, making the potential for abuse high.
In the U.S., meanwhile, while rates of antibiotics didn't rise sharply, they also didn't fall, which shows efforts to scale back inappropriate usage may have failed. Lance Price, director of the Antibiotic Resistance Action Center at George Washington University, told NPR:12
In discussing what could be done to curb antibiotics overuse in humans, the researchers pointed to the importance of improved sanitation and clean water in lower-income countries, as this can significantly reduce diarrheal diseases that prompt many people to seek out antibiotics."The biggest driver for the evolution of superbugs is the use of antibiotics ... The more we use antibiotics, the more we are going to encourage the growth of these bacteria that are resistant to them ... [Already] you have these extreme cases like the woman [in Nevada] just about a year ago who died of an infection that was resistant to 26 different antibiotics ... So the bacteria are out there that are resistant to everything, and they are becoming more and more prevalent."
The study's lead author, Eili Klein, explained to PBS, "If you look at the history of the high-income countries in the 20th century, the primary driver that reduced infectious diseases was improvement in infrastructure, reducing - eliminating bacteria and other diseases from the water."13
Antibiotic Resistance Is Making Us Sick
Worldwide, 700,000 people die every year due to antibiotic-resistant disease, and it's estimated that more people will be affected by it than cancer by 2050.14 In the U.S., according to U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data, every year at least 2 million Americans acquire drug-resistant infections and 23,000 die as a result. Many others die from conditions that were complicated by antibiotic-resistant infections.15
As far as the food supply goes, the CDC estimates that 400,000 Americans get sick from antibiotic-resistant foodborne bacteria every year and states, "Antibiotic use in food animals allows antibiotic-resistant bacteria to grow and crowd out the bacteria that do respond to antibiotics."16 In a report by consumer advocacy group Food & Water Watch, it's further noted that about 22 percent of the antibiotic-resistant infections in the U.S. annually originate from foodborne pathogens.
"Antibiotic-resistant (AR) bacteria can spread from farm animals to humans via food, via animal-to-human transfer on farms and in rural areas, and through contaminated waste entering the environment," Food & Water Watch explained. "The most commonly affected populations are those with underdeveloped or compromised immune systems: pregnant women, children, the elderly and people with certain health conditions. But increasingly, AR bacteria have the potential to affect anyone."17
Among the most urgent antibiotic-resistant health threats, according to the CDC, is carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), which are resistant to the class of antibiotics called carbapenems.18 CRE has been dubbed a "nightmare bacteria" by the CDC's former director Tom Frieden because of their extreme resilience - it's nearly impossible to kill them. What's more, CRE have been detected on U.S. pig CAFOs,19 which suggests exposure may be possible via the food supply. According to the CDC:20
"Untreatable and hard-to-treat infections from carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) bacteria are on the rise among patients in medical facilities. CRE have become resistant to all or nearly all the antibiotics we have today. Almost half of hospital patients who get bloodstream infections from CRE bacteria die from the infection."
Fighting CAFO Expansion
CAFOs are known to destroy communities, polluting waterways, creating toxic air pollution and sickening area residents. Property values plummet when CAFOs are built, as does the local economy.
While CAFOs often tout increased tax revenue when trying to venture into new regions, the reality is that they drain resources from the community, while purchasing supplies from outside the area and paying workers low wages, thus providing little to no economic stimulation and, in return, leaving devastating environmental damage.21
So it's no wonder than when CAFOs try to come into a new region, residents often fight back. Such is the case in Lone Jack, Missouri, where a ranch is trying to expand its operation from 600 cows to 6,999. Why not 7,000? At that number, the ranch would have to comply with the state's odor regulations, but at 6,999, they're exempt. Residents are worried the animal factory would lead to polluted water, problems with air quality and more, including environmental damage from the CAFO's manure application.
Residents are hoping the state's Department of Natural Resources will deny the petition. The farm, Valley Oaks, was already penalized in February 2017 by the Food Safety and Inspection Service for using inhumane slaughtering methods. Unfortunately, the state has a history of siding with industry, as the Food & Environment Reporting Network (FERN) reported:22
What's the Best Way to Find Safe Meat?"Missouri communities are fending off CAFOs across the state, including in Calloway County, Cooper County, Grundy County and Barry County. In the latter two cases, residents initially succeeded in blocking the CAFOs through an appeal to the state's Clean Water Commission. But shortly after commissioners voted against the CAFOs, Missouri legislators changed the makeup of the commission to favor the agriculture industry.In late 2017, Governor Eric Greitens appointed three new members to the commission, all of whom are tied to large-scale agriculture. In the commission's next vote, the CAFOs were approved."
The average American is slated to eat about 800 burgers' worth of beef in 2018, or about 222 pounds.23 Where you get this beef, how it's raised and, ultimately, the way it is prepared make all the difference in how it affects your health and the environment. Source matters - greatly - and part of that includes knowing where your beef was raised. You'll want to avoid getting your beef from so-called "hamburger central," instead opting for organic, grass fed beef that's raised without antibiotics.
I encourage you to either buy direct from a trusted farm or look for the American Grassfed Association (AGA) logo, a much-needed grass fed standards and certification for American-grown grass fed meat and dairy.24 The standard allows for greater transparency and conformity25 and is intended to ensure the humane treatment of animals and meet consumer expectations about grass fed meat and dairy, while being feasible for small farmers to achieve.
An AGA logo on a product lets you know the animals were fed a lifetime diet of 100 percent forage, were raised on pasture (not in confinement) and were not treated with hormones or antibiotics.26 In addition, the AGA logo on your meat and dairy ensures the animals were born and raised on American family farms.27
In an era where we're facing the potential end of antibiotics as we know them, it's important for everyone to voice their opinion about the rampant overuse of antibiotics on CAFOs by supporting only those farms that aren't perpetuating the problem.
Sources and References
Americam soldiers need to get back to base for saunas, TV show, and pizza, Russian soldiers stay in the field and fight like hell.
The U.S. is bogged down in Afganistan. Russia and allies are winning out Syria, Winners and losers. The whole world sees.