- Author: John M Harper
The following press release from USDA concerns access to pasture for organic livestock operations.
- Author: John M Harper
For those of you who watched the CBS Evening News Segement on antibiotic use in livestock on February 10th, you might appreciate the following comments forwarded on to me from Dr. Jim Oltjen at UC Davis. The actual comments are from H. Scott Hurd DVM, PhD who is the
Former Deputy Undersecretary Food Safety, USDA and the Director of WHO(World Health Organization) Collaborating Center for Risk Assessment and Hazard Identification in Foods of Animal Origin, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa. I hope this helps when you talk to your urban friends and family.
CBS: Antibiotics in Denmark are used sparingly and only when animals are sick. |
Ironically, once a pig does become visibly sick, the government allows farmers to use antibiotics that are similar to those used in humans. In fact, uses of these antibiotics have risen dramatically since the ban. One of these, tetracycline, is what American teenagers with acne often take for up to six months to treat their condition. |
CBS: The experiment to stop widespread use of antibiotics was launched 12 years ago, when European studies showed a link between animals that were consuming antibiotic feed everyday and people developing antibiotic-resistant infections from handling or eating that meat. |
HURD: No studies ever showed such a linkage. The government records clearly show it was a precautionary action due to the possibility of risk. It should be noted that Denmark is a very small country (about one-third the size of Iowa), which produces fewer pigs than the state of Iowa. So clearly, their “experiment” was not on a national (U.S.) scale in terms of size. Interestingly, farmers in Denmark are using zinc to prevent post-weaning diarrhea, which again was documented by the WHO. Recent data published by Danish scientists show that the use of zinc may actually be selecting for MRSA, which would be another unintended consequence of the ban on antimicrobial growth promoters. |
CBS: Since the ban, the Danish pork industry has grown by 43 percent – making it one of the top exporters of pork in the world. All of Europe followed suit in 2006. But the American Pork Industry doesn't want to. |
HURD: In 1997, the Danish pork production was 21,180,000 head. In 2008, the industry had grown to 27,078,000, but about 5 million pigs were exported to other European countries to be fed for market. That means that net growth in the industry was approximately 5 percent, not the 43 percent reported by CBS. DANMAP 2008 – the Danish Government’s own report – states that since 1998, the first year of the ban, active kilograms of antimicrobials used to treat animals increased 110 percent while animal production has only increased 5 percent. Because Denmark exports more than 85 percent of the pork it produces, it may be important for the government and producers to position the ban as a success, regardless of the apparent negative consequences. |
CBS: Without growth-promoting antibiotics, it only costs $5 more for every 100 pounds of pork brought to market in this country. |
HURD: According to a recent analysis by Iowa State University, a U.S. ban would increase costs by approximately $6 per animal in the first year. The total cost of a ban to all U.S. pork producers, spread across a ten-year period, could be in excess of $1.1 billion and lead to a 2 percent hike in consumer pork prices. Even though the ban raised pork prices and put small producers out of business, cost is not really the issue. The focus should be on public health. Did the ban in Denmark improve public health? Neither the World Health Organization nor I find any evidence that it did. |
CBS: Dr. Ellen Silbergeld said, "I think the Danish and European experience indicate that there will be real and measurable public health benefits," she said. "There'll be improvements in food safety and actually in the prevalence of drug resistant infections in people." |
HURD: The World Health Organization (WHO) has stated there was no evidence of improved public health (WHO, 2002, pp. 27-29). In fact, resistant rates in human Salmonella cases have increased, and Denmark is currently experiencing their largest outbreak of methicillin-resistant Staph Aureus (MRSA) in its history. Denmark has seen a largest increase in human MRSA cases since it banned antibiotic growth promotion in animal agriculture. |
CBS: According to one study, when different countries introduced certain antibiotics on farms, a surge occurred in people contracting antibiotic resistant intestinal infections one to two years later. One infection, Campylobacter, increased 20 percent in Denmark and 70 percent in Spain. |
HURD: The example of resistant Campylobacter does not relate to the use of antibiotics for growth promotion or even of any antibiotics in feed. The type of antibiotic, fluoroquinolones, was used to treat sick animals, and in the United States required a veterinary prescription. In pigs, they were delivered by giving the animals a shot. The antibiotics that have been used in feed in the U.S. are old— most have been used for more than 40 years. In addition, risk assessments have shown that they do not pose a risk to human health. In fact, FDA surveillance shows that resistance to these antibiotics in pork products is steady to declining. (NARMS) |
CBS: After the ban, a Danish study confirmed that removing antibiotics from farms drastically reduced antibiotic-resistant bacteria in animals and food. |
HURD: The only resistance that decreased was in Entercoccus spp., which is not a food-borne pathogen (DANMAP 2008). The total tonnage of antibiotic used in Denmark decreased after the ban. However, please note that the amount of product used to TREAT SICK pigs increased 100 percent. It doubled. Why? Because the prior usage, that was labeled “growth promotion,” was actually preventing illness. It was doing some good. Therefore, it cannot be termed “non-therapeutic.” Now, the key point is that the type of drug used to TREAT sick pigs was different than what had been preventing disease. These treatment drugs are very similar to those used to treat human illness. So, just what did the World Health Organization say about these events and data? “It is probable, however, that termination of antimicrobial growth promoters had an indirect effect on resistance to tetracycline resistance among Salmonella Typhimurium because of an increase in therapeutic tetracycline use in food animals.” “Increased tetracycline resistance among Salmonella may result in additional human Salmonella infections… since persons who take tetracycline for other reasons are at increased risk of becoming infected with tetracycline-resistant Salmonella.” So, based on this, there might be MORE risk now than before the ban because of an increase in treatments. Also, resistance in human food-borne pathogens, such as Salmonella and Campylobacter has not decreased at all. |
CBS: Danish scientists believe if the U.S. doesn't stop pumping its farm animals with antibiotics, drug-resistant diseases in people will only spread. "It's not going to be a time bomb that goes off like this," said Dr. Frank Aarestrup, of the Danish Food Institute at the University of Denmark. "It's something that's slowly getting more and more complicated, more difficult for us to actually treat infections.” |
HURD: That’s simply not an accurate description of what America’s pork producers do at all. This is evidenced by the grassroots initiative of Pork Quality Assurance Plus®. The program helps guide farmers through the proper and judicious way to handle and use antibiotics responsibly. It’s a program that’s been in place for more than 20 years. Also, as one of the primary government officials responsible for promoting the idea of a ban on antibiotic growth promoters, Dr. Aarestrup’s professional credibility depends on positioning the ban as a success. Drug resistance in food-borne disease is not the major concern with human-resistance issues. Less than 1 percent of food-borne illnesses require antibiotic therapy. The human-health crisis with resistance is focused on pathogens that are often hospital-acquired. Thus, bans, such as what Denmark implemented, will not address those issues. |
CBS: It costs very little to convert a farm to antibiotic-free. And it doesn't cost consumers much more either. The example was given showing that antibiotic-free pork production would only cost farmers $5 more per hundredweight or 5 cents per pound, so why not just do it to improve human health? |
HURD: U.S. economists have shown that if those same antibiotic bans occurred in California, it would add $5 to the cost of every pig. Because I spent three months working in Denmark, I can assure you these effects are real and still present. For this reason, I hope U.S. decision makers will balance this information with the goal of “protecting finite resources while feeding a growing population.” Antibiotics that prevent animal illness are good for us all. A recent study by Dr. Randy Singer at the University of Minnesota has shown that the consumption of subclinically ill poultry could increase the total number of human illness days. Any attempt to ban antibiotic use in livestock won’t improve human health, and indeed may result in an increase of food-borne disease. One published risk assessment (Cox, et al.) concluded that there would be 4,500 more cases of food-borne illness if one antibiotic were banned for each one person that may have an extended illness due to use of that antibiotic. |
CBS: The FDA has for the first time come out against using certain antibiotics to promote growth in livestock. |
HURD: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may be attempting to exercise the European form of the precautionary principle—an overarching view that says, if it looks bad, don’t do it. However, current FDA regulations state that each bug-drug combination (bacteria-antibiotic) must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis (Guidance 152). This approach is consistent with a scientific approach to decision making. |
- Author: John M Harper
The study on nontraditional lamb markets in the U.S. was sponsored by the American Sheep Industry Association. The study "Nontraditional Lamb Market in the United States: Characteristics and Marketing Strategies" provides an overview and insight into the growing nontraditional market for lamb in the U.S. and what opportunities may exist for the U.S. sheep and lamb industry.
The pdf version of the report can be found below. If it's not showing try clicking on the Comments. I think you'll find the study interesting and useful in planning how to tap into these specialty markets.
Nontraditional Lamb Market Study
- Author: John M Harper
See the release below from USDA concerning the National Animal ID Program.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 5, 2010-Agriculture Secretary Vilsack announced today that USDA will develop a new, flexible framework for animal disease traceability in the United States, and undertake several other actions to further strengthen its disease prevention and response capabilities.
"After concluding our listening tour on the National Animal Identification System in 15 cities across the country, receiving thousands of comments from the public and input from States, Tribal Nations, industry groups, and representatives for small and organic farmers, it is apparent that a new strategy for animal disease traceability is needed," said Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. "I've decided to revise the prior policy and offer a new approach to animal disease traceability with changes that respond directly to the feedback we heard."
The framework, announced today at the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) Mid-Year meeting, provides the basic tenets of an improved animal disease traceability capability in the United States. USDA's efforts will:
- Only apply to animals moved in interstate commerce;
- Be administered by the States and Tribal Nations to provide more flexibility;
- Encourage the use of lower-cost technology; and
- Be implemented transparently through federal regulations and the full rulemaking process.
"One of my main goals for this new approach is to build a collaborative process for shaping and implementing our framework for animal disease traceability," said Vilsack. "We are committed to working in partnership with States, Tribal Nations and industry in the coming months to address many of the details of this framework, and giving ample opportunity for farmers and ranchers and the public to provide us with continued input through this process."
One of USDA's first steps will be to convene a forum with animal health leaders for the States and Tribal Nations to initiate a dialogue about the possible ways of achieving the flexible, coordinated approach to animal disease traceability we envision. Additionally, USDA will be revamping the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Animal Health to address specific issues, such as confidentiality and liability.
Although USDA has a robust system in place to protect U.S. agriculture, with today's announcement, the Department will also be taking several additional actions to further strengthen protections against the entry and spread of disease. These steps will include accelerating actions to lessen the risk from diseases--such as tuberculosis--posed by imported animals, initiating and updating analyses on how animal diseases travel into the country, improving response capabilities, and focusing on greater collaboration and analyses with States and industry on potential disease risk overall.
More information on USDA's new direction on animal traceability and the steps to improve disease prevention and control is available at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/traceability.
- Author: John M Harper
This Saturday, February 6, when HBO’s Temple Grandin airs, farmers and ranchers across the country will be tuning in to honor Temple Grandin’s work in improving the care of cattle. Grandin, living with autism, revolutionized livestock handling by tapping into her ability to see the world in a different way to develop a deeper understanding of animal behavior.
“There’s not a rancher in this country that isn’t aware of her work. We have all been influenced by Temple,” says Clint Peck, Director, Beef Quality Assurance at Montana State University. “There is no question her work has helped us all understand more about our animals and how to handle them in a caring and humane manner.”
The beef checkoff-funded Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) program sets cattle handling and beef quality standards that are followed throughout the beef production process—from farm to fork—to ensure cattle are receiving proper care.
“Temple’s insight into animal behavior and low-stress handling is the foundation of the BQA assessment, which is the scoring system we use to verify cattle are handled properly. Her contributions are monumental,”said Ryan Ruppert, director, Beef Quality Assurance, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. Ruppert attended the Denver premiere of HBO’s Temple Grandin on Wednesday night as a guest of Grandin.
“I thought the movie did a great job capturing the challenges Temple overcame to improve livestock care in food production. What shocked me is how different the beef industry looks today than it did in the 60s and 70s as a result of her perseverance. She is a true pioneer,” said Ruppert.
Grandin’s work has touched every segment of beef production, from the farm to the feedlot and, ultimately, the processing facility.
"Temple Grandin has been a critical resource to Cargill, which has allowed us to continually improve our animal handling facilities and our animal welfare programs," said John Keating, President, Cargill Beef. Dr. Mike Siemens, Cargill Leader Animal Welfare and Husbandry, added, "Temple's insight and understanding of cattle behavior is truly unique. Her ability and expertise in facility design have been invaluable to the beef industry."
Cargill Beef is the second largest processor in North America and is one of the largest commercial cattle feeders in the United States. Cargill Beef sells fresh meat and other products to virtually every major chain, wholesaler and distributor in the country.
“Our facilities have been designed with Dr. Grandin’s philosophy in mind, and over the years we have continued to improve on this low-stress handling approach. We know these processes work based on how calm and quiet the cattle stay and ultimately how much easier it is for us to get our work done,” said Patsy Houghton, Ph.D. and owner of Heartland Cattle Company in Nebraska.
Heartland Cattle pioneered the heifer development business in the beef industry. Heartland’s heifer development and research center has bred more than 71,000 heifers and weaned more than 120,000 calves since its inception in 1990.
“When cattle arrive at one of our feedyards, they are moved through areas that are signature Temple Grandin, like the curved chute, that use the animals’ natural instincts to minimize stress. In fact, several of our processing facilities were built under her direction,” said Mike Thoren, president and chief operating officer for JBS Five Rivers Cattle Feeding, LLC. “Her insights and empathy into animal behavior revolutionized the cattle industry and continue to ensure cattle are handled humanely.”
Employing more than 650 professionals, JBS Five Rivers is the largest cattle feeder in the world with a combined feeding capacity of more than 839,000 head of cattle with locations in Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, New Mexico, Wisconsin, and Ohio.
Grandin’s unique understanding of animal behavior is used to teach low-stress handling techniques in feedlots, auction markets, and on farms and ranches across the country through the BQA Stockmanship and Stewardship program.
“Temple has been a wonderful advocate for animals and animal agriculture by improving the overall management and well-being of livestock. We take it to the next step and teach cattlemen how to effectively implement procedures to take advantage of the principles she has promoted throughout her career,”says Ron Gill, Associate Department Head for Extension, Animal Science Department, Texas AgriLife Extension. Gill travels the country training livestock handlers in BQA-approved cattle handling techniques.
“We’ve always cared for our cattle but Temple has given us more insight into their behavior. Personally, I have more confidence in how I handle animals because of her work,” says Peck.