Running head: POLICY FOR THE FUTURE 1

Policy for the Future

Taylor R. Schmidt

Chandler Gilbert Community College

POLICY FOR THE FUTURE 2

Everyone needs to eat food and meat is a part of many peoples’ diet. However, have you

ever stopped to think about what is given to these animals? Medication, like antibiotics, is given

to animals just like people and this has an effect on humans. In January of 2017 the FDA

(Federal Drug Administration) set out a new policy on the use of antibiotics on livestock. This

was the third update to the many policy updates in the mission of preventing AMR

(antimicrobial resistance) which is when normal illnesses (common cold) that cannot be fought

off with antibiotics. The purpose of this analysis is to show who is impacted, why this policy was

in place, the direct and indirect implication, and the effect of AMR on the world.

Antibiotic use on animals can be traced back to 1940’s and was used for the accelerated

growth, cost was low and was pushed by propaganda. For livestock the quicker you can get your

head to grow, more you can sell per pound. So when antibiotics where able to improve average

daily weight, the average weight of chickens when sold rose 50% between 1955 to 1995

(Graham, Boland, Silbergeld, 2007, p.2). In result to antibiotics being used to accelerate growth,

chickens now weigh far more since 1940 before antibiotics.

Money is what runs our world and the same can be said for farmers. Around this time

was when Pearl Harbor happened in 1941 and everyone was encouraged to grow a “Victory

Garden” to feed troops. Propaganda arouse stating the benefits of antibiotics to boost

productivity in hens by stating “It’s the American Farmer’s Job to Keep Them Fed! Don’t Let

Disease, Parasites, Careless management, Wasteful Feeding and Accidents.” (Ogle, 2013, p.3)

This promoted the use of antibiotics use on livestock to decrease disease and parasites in the food

to be able to give them to troops. Antibiotics didn’t stop in the 1940’s, the reasons only changed

from accelerated growth, cost was low and was pushed by propaganda.
POLICY FOR THE FUTURE 3

When the FDA released a new policy on antibiotics in livestock on January 1, 2017 and

was directed at all livestock owners, veterinarians and food corporations across the United States

(Policy Update- January 2017, 2017, p.1). Livestock owners take day-to-day care of animals,

which includes medical care like antibiotics. Now livestock owners cannot obtain

Chlortetracycline, Sulfamethazine, Penicillin, Hygromycin B, Lincomycin, Oxytetracycline,

Neomycin, Ormetoprim, Tylosin, Sulfamethazine and virginiamycin (Drugs Transitioning from

Over-the-Counter (OTC) to Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) Status, 2016, p. 2). This means

that owners cannot get these antibiotics without a VFD which requires the animal to be sick or

treatment is not allowed. Veterinarians are in charge of their clients (Livestock owners) along

with overseeing animals’ health. It is now veterinarian's duty to fill out VFD forms in order to

get the antibiotics for the livestock owners (Veterinary Feed Directive Requirements for

Distributors (Who Do Not Manufacture VFD Feed), 2015, p.1). These VFD forms are now

required of the new policy that puts more responsibility on the veterinarian's. Food Corporations

are in charge of packaging for the food products and now have to oblige to the new rules set up

by the FDA. The new regulation is that antibiotic used in food production needs to be included to

all food labels (Policy Update- January 2017, 2017, p. 1). This means that now meat that has

been given an antibiotic before it was slaughtered, will be said on packages label. The FDA

released these new rules on January 1, 2017 that now implements new food regulations, VFD

forms and prescription use of antibiotics.

This new policy was in place due to high forgery of antibiotic goods, unnecessary

antibiotic given to livestock, no consumer knowledge of their food that were all caused by the

public. This policy now has veterinarians fill out the proper VFD forms in order to give the

antibiotic to the owner of the livestock which will create less forgery to occur (Policy Update-
POLICY FOR THE FUTURE 4

January 2017, 2017. P. 2). 97% of the antibiotic drug was sold over the counter, forgery is more

present and easier to happen (Tavernise, 2014, p. 3). Although this new policy it will prevent this

because of the paperwork needed by a Veterinarian. This policy's target is to discourage

livestock owners from buying antibiotics to prevent unnecessary usage of the antibiotics that is

supported by the World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

Nations, and World Organization for Animal Health (Policy Update- January 2017, 2017). In

The Issue: Antibiotics and the Food Animal Industry it states, “Industrial farms have been adding

antibiotics to livestock feed since 1946, when studies showed that antibiotics caused animals to

grow faster and put on weight more efficiently, increasing meat producers' profits.” Therefore,

this policy will stop the unnecessary use of antibiotic animals because of the rules implanted on

the policy. Statistics have shown how people don't know what's in their food and this is

necessary so consumers can make an educated choice on what then put into their body (Changes

to the Nutrition Facts Label, 2017, p.1). According to the Global Consumer Food Safety and

Quality research on September 2015 it states, “An overwhelming majority of respondents (91

percent) say it’s important to them to know where their food comes from.” The new policy will

help inform the 91% by educating the public on if there was any antibiotic use on the animal

before production on the label. These statistics and data show how high forgery of antibiotic

goods, unnecessary antibiotic given to livestock, no consumer knowledge of their food are issues

of why the policy was emplaced

The January policy was in place because of the lack of accurate record keeping,

government spending was too high, and AMR which are all caused by government. The third

update regarding antimicrobial stewardship policy will help keep records of all antibiotics sold. It

is harder to collect data for the amount of antibiotics sold because 80% of all antibiotics are
POLICY FOR THE FUTURE 5

given to livestock and because most drugs were sold from a website or company it is harder to

track an accurate number of antibiotics sold (The Issue: Antibiotics and the Food Animal

Industry, 2017, p.2). The government needs the data on how much citizens buy in order to

calculate annual spending and correlation to AMR. Because antibiotics don't need a prescription,

the new policy is estimated to decrease spending on antibiotics. The estimated cost written in the

FDA policy on antibiotics in livestock says it costs the industry $1,411,000 which will decrease

by $13,000 in over 10 years (FDA, 2015, p. 2). This will enable the government to use the

money saved from the antibiotics and used to improve other issues regarding antibiotics Lastly,

the reason this policy was in place was because the overuse of antibiotics in livestock may create

an AMR in humans (FDA, 2017, p. 1). These studies have shown a correlation to when industrial

livestock production rose between 1985-2001 and so did the resistance to infections in humans

(GRACE Communication Foundation, 2017, p. 1). The FDA analyzed these correlations and

came to a concession that the prevention of AMR needs to be a focus on this policy. The

government related problems like the lack of accurate record keeping, government spending was

too high and AMR are the targets for this new policy.

The unforeseen implications of this policy are a stronger dependence for livestock owners

on their veterinarian, loss in livestock, and use of alternative antibiotics for livestock. Before this

new policy antibiotics were very easy to get in a short notice. But the January policy now

requires the VFD fill to be filled out that takes weeks. Therefore when a short notice antibiotic is

necessary for the health of the animal, it cannot be obliged which results at loss of head (Nikki

Work, 2017. p. 1). This effect wasn’t part of the policies but could be seen as a result of the

policy in the following months. Alternative antibiotics have been found instead of using the

listed drugs previously stated that needs a VFD. Therefore, popularity will occur in the drugs of
POLICY FOR THE FUTURE 6

the rising cost of livestock. Shown in the studies conducted by the Feed International, 2017,

states that feed additives to promote health in livestock will increase in 2017. The survey

comprised of veterinarians, nutritionists and livestock owners and predicts the implications of the

policy for the future. Lastly, contact between the livestock owners and veterinarians were

minimal with veterinarians only being called in severe cases. Although now, with antibiotics

used for pinkeye and footrot you need a veterinarian therefore strengthening relationship with

between the two that is caused by the constant contact (Gene Johnson, 2017, p. 2). This

implication from the policy directly relates to both veterinarians and livestock owners in the

United States. In conclusion the implications not foreseen on the actually policy will occur with a

stronger dependence for livestock owners on their veterinarian, loss in livestock, and use of

alternative antibiotics for livestock

One of the reasons that this policy was the third addition to the VFD was because of

AMR (antimicrobial resistance) which happens when people consume meat that was given

antibiotics, food isn’t handled properly, animal feces, and the hospital. AMR is when an

antibiotic no longer can fight the bacteria, but instead the bacteria grow within the body. This

happens from people taking antibiotics that kill the bacteria but also good bacteria protecting the

body. This allows the little bacteria that survive by the fewer amounts of good bacteria and the

bad bacteria give their drug resistance to other bad bacteria. This means that any antibiotic

cannot fight the common cold or even the flu which affects 2 million people a year in the United

States shown by the studies by (CDC, 2017, p. 1) But, not only is this an issue in the United

States but a global crisis on this new policy will help stop. The way that AMR When farmers

feed their animals antibiotics the drug-resistant bacteria can remain on the meat if it is not

cooked properly or handed properly. These studies have shown a correlation to when industrial
POLICY FOR THE FUTURE 7

livestock production rose between 1985-2001 and so did the resistance to infections in humans

according to (The Issue: Antibiotics and the Food Animal Industry, 2017, p. 1). Therefore the

core principles for this declaration are to reduce the development of AMR. Another way to

transfer the drug-resistant bacteria is from the animal feces from the animal that was used as a

fertilizer on crops. This then gets ingested by humans and the bacteria remains in their immune

system. Studies explain how animals don't fully digest 75% of all antibiotics and contaminate the

environment (The Issue: Antibiotics and the Food Animal Industry, 2017, p.2). Because of this

it can increase the spread of AMR the more antibiotics are given to animals due to this data. Just

by having an unsanitary hospital you can contract AMR. AMR is gathered 30% to 40% of all

ways to get AMR from cross-infection via hands of hospital personnel (McGowan, 2001, p. 2).

This means that the resistance germs can spread from surface to surface in a hospital. To

conclude, not only can humans get AMR from consuming the meat by the animal and crops

fertilized, but by its feces but by hospitals.

AMR, also known as “superbugs” have an effect on our world as we know it by affecting

government spending and the population. With antibiotics not being able to affect disease due to

AMR, the government spending on this issue will increase (McGowan, 2001, p.2). The U.S.

government has spent a total 1.7 billion in total form AMR research reported in 2015 (Mckenna,

2015, p.3). This number can only be rising since the last two years because of AMR, so

government spending is highly affected. People have died every year because of the resistance to

fight infections therefore effecting this world's population. The CDE has reported, “Each year in

the United States, at least 2 million people become infected with bacteria that are resistant to

antibiotics and at least 23,000 people die each year as a direct result of these infections.” These

statistics will lead to our population dropping drastically due to recent studies that 10 million
POLICY FOR THE FUTURE 8

people will die by 2050 (Cox, 2016, p.1). These issues of the economy and the population creates

an issue of public safety which the January policy will help to solve.

The effort of the third installment of the January policy affects the health of the public

and the government. This policy goes as far as preventing AMR that can be obtained through

animals and the people. The January policy that regards the regulations on antibiotic use on

livestock translate to the bigger picture of the global issue of AMR that affects our world today.

References

Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics. (2014). What is Antibiotic Resistance and Why is it

a problem? Retrieved June 16, 2017, from

http://emerald.tufts.edu/med/apua/about_issue/antibiotic_res.shtml

Center for Control and Prevention. (2016, December 16). National Antimicrobial Resistance

Monitoring System for Enteric Bacteria (NARMS). Retrieved June 16, 2017,

from https://www.cdc.gov/narms/faq.html

Center for Control and Prevention. (2017, April 06). Antibiotic / Antimicrobial Resistance.
POLICY FOR THE FUTURE 9

Retrieved June 16, 2017, from https://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/about.html

Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, 0. (2017, June 14). Labeling & Nutrition –

Changes to the Nutrition Facts Label. Retrieved June 16, 2017, from

https://www.fda.gov/food/guidanceregulation/guidancedocumentsregulatoryinformation/l

abelingnutrition/ucm385663.htm

CIDRAP. (2017, April). Policy Update - April 2017. Retrieved June 16, 2017, from

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/asp/policy-update/policy-update-april-2017

Foundation, G. C. (2016, May). Antibiotics. Retrieved June 16, 2017, from

http://www.sustainabletable.org/257/antibiotics

Medicine, C. F. (2015, August 10). Development & Approval Process - Veterinary Feed

Directive Requirements for Distributors (Who Do Not Manufacture VFD Feed).

Retrieved June 16,2017, from

https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/ucm455415.htm

Planta, M. B. (2007). The Role of Poverty in Antimicrobial Resistance. Retrieved June 16, 2017,

from http://www.jabfm.org/content/20/6/533.full

Regents of the University of Minnesota. (2017, April). Policy Update - April 2017. Retrieved

June 16, 2017, from http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/asp/policy-update/policy-update-april-

2017

Tavernise, S. (2014, October 02). Antibiotics in Livestock: F.D.A. Finds Use Is Rising.

Retrieved June 16, 2017, from

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/03/science/antibiotics-in-livestock-fda-finds-use-is-

rising.html?_r=0

Trace-one. (2015, June & july). Infographic - Global Consumer Food Safety and Quality
POLICY FOR THE FUTURE

10

Research. Retrieved June 16, 2017, from

https://www.traceone.com/en/market-insight/infographic-global-consumer-food-safety-

and-quality/

5 Alternatives to Antibiotics in Food Animals. (2016, December 15). Retrieved June 16, 2017,

from

http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/analysis/2016/12/15/5-alternatives-to-

antibiotics-in-food-animals

McGowan, J. E. (2001). Economic Impact of Antimicrobial Resistance.Emerging Infectious Diseases,

7(2), 286-292. Retrieved June 25, 2017, from https://dx.doi.org/10.3201/eid0702.700286.

CDC. (2017, April 10). Antibiotic / Antimicrobial Resistance. Retrieved June 26, 2017, from

https://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/threat-report-2013/index.html

McKenna, M. (2017, June 03). How to Fight Superbugs: Start Spending Money. Retrieved June 26,

2017, from https://www.wired.com/2015/02/oneill-amr-2/

C. (2016, April 12). Superbugs are on track to kill 10 million people by 2050 if things don’t change

fast. Retrieved June 26, 2017, from https://qz.com/657514/superbugs-could-kill-10-million

Graham, J. P., Boland, J. J., & Silbergeld, E. (2007, Jan. & feb.). Growth Promoting

Antibiotics in Food Animal Production: An Economic Analysis. Retrieved June 27,

2017, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1804117/

Ogle, M. (2013, September 3). Riots, Rage, and Resistance: A Brief History of How Antibiotics

Arrived on the Farm. Retrieved June 27, 2017, from

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/riots-rage-and-resistance-a-brief-history-

of-how-antibiotics-arrived-on-the-farm/