Antimicrobial resistance not to be feared: expert

By 
Reading Time: 2 minutes

Published: December 5, 2013

Consumers are receiving confusing, over-simplified information about antimicrobial resistance in veterinary and human medicine, says an independent consultant.

“For the vast majority of people, their exposure to agriculture comes through the food that they eat,” Leigh Rosengren of Midale, Sask., told a Saskatchewan pork industry event in Saskatoon last week.

“So while the concern is very, very big, concern is not the same as risk.”

She said resistance could spread through salmonella, but that’s a food safety issue.

Regulations on withdrawal times from drugs are designed to keep antimicrobials out of the food chain, she added, but resistance is different.

Read Also

Alex Wood exhibits a bull at the Ag in Motion 2025 junior cattle show.

First annual Ag in Motion Junior Cattle Show kicks off with a bang

Ag in Motion 2025 had its first annual junior cattle show on July 15. The show hosted more than 20…

“Now we’re talking about the bacterial ecology in the animal, and no animal or person is sterile,” she said. “We all have millions and billions of bacteria in us and many of those bacteria will carry resistance genes.”

She said consumers who are concerned about the issue may also lump all antimicrobials together.

The tetracyclines and ionophores commonly used in livestock production aren’t the issue, she added. In the case of ionophores, which are used as an antibiotic or growth-enhancer, there is no human equivalent.

“Resistance to them is really not part of this discussion and part of this equation,” she said.

“That’s something we need to communicate.”

She said the bigger concern are the Class 1 drugs, such as ceftiofur, enrofloxacin and danofloxacin, which are more critical to human health.

Those drugs are handled with a prescription and oversight from a veterinarian.

Rosengren said producers and the industry must use antimicrobials carefully and diligently respond to criticism.

“It’s not just inappropriate use. It’s not just injudicious use. It’s not just the use of the wrong drug,” she said.

“Every time we use an antimicrobial, it has the potential to select for resistance.”

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration restricted the use of the antibiotic cephalosporin in cattle, hogs, chickens and turkeys last year.

“If that were to happen in Canada — we have very narrow labels for those products — it would be very restrictive for producers,” Rosengren said in an interview.

The FDA also encourages drug companies to voluntarily remove growth promotion from product labels.

She said there is greater concern about antimicrobial resistance in the United States, particularly with links between livestock and community acquired cases of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus.

“They’re far more politicized and they’re probably 10 or 15 years ahead of us, so we can watch them as sort of a weather forecast,” she said.

“The Canadian discussion is moving more slowly and more thoughtfully, which is a good thing.”

About the author

Dan Yates

Reporter

explore

Stories from our other publications