UN criticised over statement on overuse of antibiotics in farming

Statement calling for significant cut in antimicrobial drug usage is ‘real missed opportunity’, say critics

Animal health experts and UN leaders have called for a significant reduction in antimicrobial drug usage in food animals, which is already causing a “silent pandemic”.

But critics say the statement is “a real missed opportunity”, pointing to its failure to set reduction targets or even call for a ban on the use of antibiotics for animal growth promotion.

Drugs which are critical for humans are being used in enormous quantities in animal production. As a result there is a far higher probability of drug-resistant bacteria and viruses emerging. This could lead to some of the world’s most important drugs becoming ineffective against common infectious diseases such as pneumonia, tuberculosis and gonorrhoea, with death rates rising.

The joint statement issued this week by the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and the UN’s global leaders group on antimicrobial resistance called for “significant and urgent reduction in the amounts of antimicrobial drugs, including antibiotics, used in food systems” and said this was “critical to combating rising levels of drug resistance”.

The overuse of antimicrobials has led to what G7 leaders called a “silent pandemic” in June. Drug-resistant diseases already cause at least 700,000 human deaths globally every year, according to the statement. “The world is rapidly heading towards a tipping point where the antimicrobials relied on to treat infections in humans, animals and plants will no longer be effective.”

Antimicrobial drugs, which include antibiotics, antifungals and antiparasitics, are used in food production all over the world, the statement said, and are “administered to animals not only for veterinary purposes (to treat and prevent disease), but also to promote growth in healthy animals”.

But despite the statement’s strong wording, experts said it had few teeth.

“Basically what [this call] lacks is a clear target for reduction,” said Thomas Van Boeckel, an antimicrobial resistance, disease, and livestock production systems scientist at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology.

Although commendable, the statement does not say “quantitatively what they mean by significant”, Van Boeckel said. That meant, “they make no commitment, basically”, he added.

He said the targets must be country specific. “It would be unfair, for example, to impose stringent targets on developing countries who need livestock for their livelihoods.”

But, he said, high-income countries and China could aim for less than 50mg of active antibiotic ingredient per kilogram of meat raised. Many EU countries are using more than that, he said, referencing a 2017 paper he co-authored.

Van Boeckel’s paper found that implementing a global cap of 50mg of antimicrobials, per kilogram of animal product, per year could reduce total consumption by 64%.

The paper said the 50mg cap corresponded to the average global use of antimicrobials in 2017. It further recommended user fees and caps on veterinary use to control antimicrobials.

“This statement is far too cautious and a real missed opportunity,” said Cóilín Nunan, a scientific adviser at the Alliance to Save our Antibiotics. “There is no target [and] not even a call for an immediate end to the use of antibiotics for [livestock] growth promotion.”

Most disappointing, he said, is how little the statement says about intensive farming. “Intensive farming, the root cause of so much animal disease and antibiotic use, is once again let off the hook. Where is the global leadership that is needed if we are ever to move to more sustainable farming practices and drastically cut farm antibiotic use?”

Henk Hobbelink, an agronomist and co-founder of the small-farmer focused NGO Grain, agreed and said the use of antimicrobial growth promoters in factory farming needed “to be banned, immediately and everywhere”.

Another solution that has been suggested is to develop animal-only antibiotics. Timothy Walsh, who is working with a team to develop animal only replacements at the Ineos Oxford Institute (IOI) for antimicrobial research, said it was “bonkers to use the same drugs in animal feeds as you would to treat neonatal sepsis”.

The IOI’s vision, he said, is to “move to a place where in supermarkets across the UK and beyond food will be labelled NHA [meaning] no human antibiotics” but it “will take, time, effort, money, goodwill and global policy”.

Sign up for the Animals farmed monthly update to get a roundup of the best farming and food stories across the world and keep up with our investigations. You can send us your stories and thoughts at animalsfarmed@theguardian.com

UN criticised over statement on overuse of antibiotics in farming | Environment | The Guardian

The Guardian – London.

Regards Mark

Eurogroup for Animals condemns the authorisation of insect-protein in pig and poultry feed

20 August 2021

News

On 17 August 2021, the European Commission adopted the decision to amend the feed ban regulation, allowing insect-derived protein in pig and poultry feed. While the European Commission announced it as a step “in our journey towards more sustainable feed chain”, Eurogroup for Animals believes this decision could lead to false solutions and distract from the urgent need to transform into sustainable food systems.

The Farm to Fork strategy recognises the urgent need for a shift in European diets towards more plant-based food, but it also emphasises the role of improved animal welfare in a sustainable food system. Eurogroup for Animals cautions that allowing insect protein for feed will go contrary to the intentions in the Farm to Fork strategy by preserving the status quo of factory farming instead of achieving a dietary shift towards more plant-based diets in combination with higher welfare and sustainable  farming systems. Other than maintaining the status quo of intensive livestock farming, concerns are raised in the scientific literature with regards to environmental consequences, risks to the One Health approach and the lack of knowledge about insect welfare.

We are deeply concerned that insect protein is announced as a sustainable solution to animal feed. Replacing soy with insects, that will be industrially produced on a massive scale, to feed factory farmed pigs and poultry is not the way forward to create sustainable food systems. We need to urgently move towards a dietary shift, with more plant-based diets and systems with fewer animals that allow for higher animal welfare. Unfortunately, the decision to authorise the use of insect-derived protein for pig and poultry feed serves to prop up intensive animal production in the EU rather than supporting the transition to a truly sustainable food system

Reineke Hameleers, CEO of Eurogroup for Animals

Read Eurogroup for Animals’ full feedback

Regards Mark

With thanks to Stacey at ‘Our Compass’ for the article and associated video. (below).

Stacey | Our Compass (our-compass.org)

Regards Mark

There are more laws and regulations surrounding my trash and trash disposal than there are for sentient species who have the same capacity to suffer, feel pain, and experience emotion as humans. To treat animals like this, hidden in dystopian waste lands of suffering, toxicity, and greed, means humans have lost the war with good, the human species is apathetically evil towards the most vulnerable and helpless beings. It is estimated that globally greater than 4700 animals are killed each SECOND. How long does it take you to rationalize killing them? Consuming them? Forgetting them? Who are you consuming and how did she suffer and violently die for your 5-minute meal? SL

Download Your FREE Vegan PDF HERE

Order a FREE vegan kit HERE

Dairy-Free Info HERE

Take the Dairy-Free Challenge HERE

Click HERE for more Dairy-Free

Fish alternatives can be found HERE

Learn about eggs HERE

Find bacon alternatives HERE and HERE

Take PETA’s Cruelty-Free Shopping Guide along with you next time you head to the store! The handy guide will help you find humane products at a glance. Order a FREE copy HERE

Searching for Cruelty-Free Cosmetics, Personal-Care Products, Vegan Products, or more?
Click HERE to search.

Free PDF of Vegan & Cruelty-Free Products/Companies HERE

Click HERE to find out How to Wear Vegan!

Want to do more than go vegan? Help others to do so! Click below for nominal, or no, fees to vegan literature that you can use to convince others that veganism is the only compassionate route to being an animal friend:

PETA HERE

Vegan Outreach HERE

Get your FREE Activist Kit from PETA, including stickers, leaflets, and guide HERE

Have questions? Click HERE

How The Meat Industry Is Mimicking Tobacco Giant Tactics To Dodge Climate Change Blame

It’s come as global meat giants’ PR and lobbying techniques were diligently researched by an award-winning environmental organization

The meat industry across the globe is mimicking tobacco company tactics in order to dodge climate change blame, according to a major investigation.

Award-winning environmental organization DeSmog is behind the research.

Meat industry

It involved a five-month investigation into the industry’s public relations and lobbying techniques. This included reviewing hundreds of documents amongst some of the largest companies, such as JBS and Tyson Foods.

According to the findings, the animal agriculture sector is portraying itself ‘a climate leader through the following tactics:

• Minimizing the environmental impact of farming animals
• ‘Casting doubt’ on the efficiency of plant-based meat alternatives
• Promoting meat health ‘benefits’
• Moreover, big animal agriculture players are even painting meat as the answer to climate change, the study claims.
• JBS told DeSmog: “As a leading global food company, we recognize the importance of reducing our environmental impact to combat climate change.”

·         ‘Peak meat’

• Despite vast growth in the plant-based sector, DeSmog claims figures are indicating the world is far from reaching ‘peak meat’. This means they predict the global meat production to rise over the next decade.
• Kristine Clement, of Greenpeace Denmark, told the organization that meat companies are ‘ramping up’ marketing efforts to make products appear climate-friendly.

• This is, Clement claims because they fear politicians will halt the ‘endless’ production.

  

Tobacco tactics

• In building on the report, an environmental studies Professor told The Independent these tactics are similar to the tobacco industry.
• Dr. Jennifer Jacquet said: “Tobacco didn’t challenge the existence of lung cancer, but they kept denying and deflecting the causal link [with smoking]. 
• “And that’s what we’re seeing with beef and dairy.”

Climate change

Despite the meat industry’s tries, the evidence attesting the opposite is overwhelming.

Reports indicate animal agriculture is in fact responsible for a staggering 87 percent of greenhouse gas emissions.

However, companies are tightening their grips onto their financial clutch on the global food system.

For example, an industry group in South America recently revealed plants to defend animal agriculture ahead of a UN summit. This includes Brazil, the world’s biggest beef exporter.

You can view DeSmog’s full investigation here

Meat Industry Mimicks Tobacco Tactics To Dodge Climate Change Blame (plantbasednews.org)

 

Regards Mark