Fish farming-Another case of antibiotic misuse

Development of antibiotic resistance in human beings is becoming an increasing concern world over though it is more acute as being reported, in Western countries where antibiotic tweaked feed is routinely fed to poultry birds and live stock animals. This practice became widespread when the animal food industry realized that such feeds can add significant weights to their birds and animals. Antibiotic resistance is supposed to be developed when popular antibiotics used in human beings are preferred choice of the animal food industry. Many countries are taking appropriate action in restraining the industry from using these antibiotics to prevent serious disease causing pathogens becoming super bugs able to with stand the "kill effect" of such antibiotics. However another instance of serious misuse of antibiotics is reported to be emerging among fish breeders in some countries which has been overlooked earlier, adding new dimension to the problem. Here is a take on this alarming development.  

The concern surrounding animal antibiotics focuses on meat and poultry production, but a new study suggests we should also be paying attention to fish. Researchers at Arizona State University investigated 47 antibiotics in U.S.- purchased shrimp, salmon, catfish, trout, tilapia and swai originating from 11 different countries. Their findings, published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials, identified five antibiotics detected in shrimp, salmon, tilapia and trout. Oxytetracycline was the most commonly detected antibiotic compound, and it was found in farmed fish and wild shrimp. The researchers also found 4-epioxytetracycline, sulfadimethoxine, and ormetoprim in certain species and virginiamycin in farmed salmon marketed as antibiotic-free. Lead author Hansa Done, a Ph.D. candidate at ASU's Center for Environmental Security, told Time.com that antibiotics are added to the water in fish farms to treat and prevent disease or are directly injected into fish, but that they are not used for growth promotion. The antibiotic levels detected in the study were within legal limits, and the researchers report low risk of drug exposure from seafood consumption, but even the low levels can promote antibiotic resistance. The authors add that publications reporting antibiotic resistance in aquaculture have increased eight-fold over three decades.

It is sad that meat and fish food industries are indulging in such malpractices without caring for the well being of the consumers who after all provide them with their "bread and butter". Of course fish breeders may argue that they are using these antibiotics to make their products safer to the consumers. However this industry is forgetting that residues of antibiotics present in fish so raised can get into human system, slowly creating resistance in many microbes many of them virulent ones capable of inflicting severe health disorders. Similarly the antibiotic containing water where fish is raised is a potential contaminating source for the soil and water around. As most fish in the US market originate from countries like India, Thailand, China, Vietnam etc the implications are clear. Whether antibiotic use is practiced in the US also is not known though one can assume, knowing the attitude of food industry in general there, that US farmers also must be resorting to this practice. It is time suitable international protocols are arrived at for guiding the fish farmers and aqua culture industry for not using antibiotics which are commonly prescribed for treating diseases among human beings.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

CHICKENS ARE COMING TO ROOST-HERE ARE THE "JUMBOS"WITH JUMBO CONSEQUENCES!

When antibiotic resistant bacterial pathogens emerged in Western countries, many took solace that it would not happen in India. But if recent reports are to be believed India is on the threshold of such a contingency it the present poultry farming practices are any indication. Use of popular antibiotic drugs, commonly prescribed by physicians to cure illnesses among human beings, by poultry farmers is a controversial subject with many health experts claiming that constant exposure to such antibiotics lead to many pathogens learning to over come the lethal effect of these vital drugs over a period of time. It is true that there are a few strains of pathogenic bacteria which are not killed by any of the known antibiotics leading to a situation where human lives are exposed to fatal dangers. According to some investigative journalists, Indian farmers have also learned how to "fatten" their birds by administering sub-lethal doses of some antibiotics and the processed meat from them often contain antibiotic residues which are consumed regularly by the consumers without being aware of the adverse consequences of the same. Since there are no stringent regulations which are enforced, this undesirable practice is spreading fast in the industry. Here is a take on this critical issue. 

"Poultry farmers can now afford to count their profits before their chickens hatch — and they are big, with chickens weighing on average twice as much as they did 50 years ago. The broiler chicken of today, a product of controlled breeding, weighs around 2.2kg as compared to 1.2kg before 1960, say veterinarians and chicken farm owners. Contract farming started in India in the early 1960s, taking over from multi-breed coops that contained birds of various breeds and ages. Contract farming involves the industrialised breeding chickens of the same age and variety.This method of poultry farming employs improved feed formulations and vaccination, says R Prabhakaran, former vice-chancellor of Tamil Nadu Veterinary and Animal Sciences University. "Selective breeding has increased livability of the birds," he said. "Since the 1960s mortality rate of chickens has reduced from 10% to 2% due to improved nutrition and hygiene in farms." The downside of scientific poultry farming is that medication administered to the birds may find their way to the table. A study by the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) in July showed that one in two chickens in the country had antibiotic contamination. Farms give chickens feed mixed with antibiotics that act as growth promoters. Most stop the antibiotics a few days before slaughter. This allows the birds to flush out the remnants of the antibiotics. "Farms should ideally not feed birds antibiotics at least 10 days before slaughter," Prabhakaran said. Because farms seldom follow this, antibiotic residue in meat passes on to humans. Scientists have shown that large-scale use of antibiotics by the poultry industry has caused antibiotic resistance in people who eat chicken regularly, leaving them vulnerable to a range of bacterial infections. Scientists have shown that large-scale use of antibiotics by the poultry industry has caused antibiotic resistance in people who eat chicken regularly, leaving them vulnerable to a range of bacterial infections. Chickens also pass on residue of antibiotics through their faeces, which may spread through water and soil and eventually end up in crops, putting even vegetarians at risk of antibiotic resistance."

Though stopping feeding of antibiotic tweeted feed materials can be stopped 10 days before processing the birds to avoid significant presence of residues, there is no guarantee that the meat from such birds would be free from antibiotics. Regular consumption of such meats can also destroy some beneficial microbes in the intestine causing over all decrease in immunity. Besides the poultry excreta and waste which at present are not scientifically disposed off, also contain significant amounts of antibiotic residues which can potentially contaminate the soil and water. A country like the US is mulling over this issue and remedial measures are being seriously considered. Probably alternate set of antibiotics, which are not used by humans can be considered for use by the animal food industry which can considerably reduce the dangers of further evolution of antibiotic resistant pathogens in future.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

ANTIBIOTICS IN LIVESTOCK PRODUCTS-IS IT ALARMING?

"Antibiotic resistance" is a subject matter of intense debate with many medical experts taking the stand, it really poses a threat to the future of humanity. Logically such resistance is evolved over a period of time by the extra ordinary versatility of some of the disease causing microbes to develop the necessary metabolizing ability to make antibiotics incapable of disrupting their biological system. To day there are a few microbes which are not amenable to most known antibiotics and development of new antibiotics is not keeping pace with the onset of resistance with increasing number of species of pathogens. One of the reasons for antibiotic resistance is their indiscriminate use whether really needed or not enabling some of the cells of the microbes able to withstand the mode of action of the antibiotics. Another more important reason is the detestable practice among poultry farms to use antibiotics to accelerate the growth of the birds with minimum feed intake in order to increase their profit margins. Naturally residual microorganisms surviving after exposure to sub-lethal doses of antibiotics used in the feed become immune to the action of these life saving drugs. It is apprehended that such massive use of antibiotics can pose serious threat in the event of epidemics involving resistant strains of some of the deadly pathogens. Here is a critic's view about the gravity of the situation, 

Concern has intensified in recent years over the use of antibiotics in agriculture, which world health authorities agree contributes to the development of drug-resistant bacteria. These so-called superbugs infect hundreds of thousands and kill tens of thousands of Americans each year, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Legislation before Congress would rein in the use of medically important antibiotics on healthy livestock through mandatory restrictions as well as public disclosure of how antibiotics are used on animals and in what quantities. But such efforts face resistance from the meat industry, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration said the issue is better handled through voluntary guidelines it hopes to finalize this year. Critics doubt that a voluntary approach would decrease use and say the current lack of transparency would prevent anyone from knowing whether it did — an issue also noted by the Government Accountability Office. Health authorities say antibiotics should be used sparingly because any bacteria that can survive the drugs will multiply, increasing the strain's overall resistance. Dr. Jean Patel, deputy director of the Office of Antimicrobial Resistance at the CDC, calls antibiotic resistance one of the nation's most serious health threats. "Resistance often emerges in the health care setting where antimicrobial are commonly used," Patel said, "but these drugs are also used on the farm, and a number of foodborne pathogens, like salmonella, are becoming increasingly resistant to antimicrobial that are important for human health." The Environmental Working Group, a research and advocacy group, analyzed government data and reported last month that 69 percent of pork chops and 81 percent of ground turkey sampled in 2011 were contaminated with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Turkey raised without antibiotics — including organic turkey — carries fewer such pathogens, according to recent research by Consumers Union, the advocacy arm of Consumer Reports. About 80 percent of all antibiotics sold by weight in the U.S. in 2011 were used on livestock, according to FDA figures. That year, 7.3 million pounds of antibiotics were used to treat humans, compared with 29.9 million pounds sold for meat and poultry production. All parties in the antibiotics debate agree that it makes sense to treat sick animals with appropriate antibiotics. And almost all say that using antibiotics just to make animals grow faster — a practice long banned in the European Union — is, as the FDA puts it, "injudicious."

There are two aspects of this issue that defies logic. First the antibiotics, intended to save lives by destroying the causative bugs, are misused for a purpose other than protecting lives. Second, the reluctance on the part of safety regulators to ban such misuse through law. While in Europe such a ban is strictly enforced, in the US, the regulatory authorities under the influence of the poultry industry lobbies, refuse to frown upon the patently undesirable and dangerous practices of the industry for reasons not very clear. Imagine how crazy is the situation where 80% of the antibiotics produced in the US goes for weight increasing purpose! If this is not travesty of justice what else it is? It poses health dangers to not only US consumers but also to others importing poultry meat from this country. The current stance of the authorities to make it voluntary to declare use of antibiotics in poultry meat y the industry is shocking, being totally insensitive to the consequences that await in not too distant a future because of misuse of antibiotics! May be only a national calamity involving one of the antibiotic resistant bugs will wake the authorities for putting in place a strict regulatory/mandatory regime that will curtail the despicable practice of using antibiotics for non-medical purpose.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

MAKING ANTIBIOTICS WORK BETTER-NEW DEVELOPMENTS

How serious is the oft repeated assertion by medical pundits that mankind is running out of option as far as antibiotics' effectiveness is concerned? If the increasing antibiotic resistance exhibited by some of the deadliest of pathogens reported all over the world is any indication there could be many diseases that will not respond to traditional antibiotic therapy and a disaster of Himalayan magnitude is waiting to happen!. Though there could be many reasons for such a situation developing during the last three decades, the single most critical cause is the indiscriminate use of broad spectrum antibiotics whether they are needed or not. Many physicians consider antibiotics as a magic bullet that is a "cure for all" without diagnosing the real culprit agent that has caused the fever or other symptoms of their patients. Added to this is the wide scale reported use of antibiotics by the livestock and poultry industries for accelerated growth of animals, a use not originally attributed to these savior of humans and naturally the products of this industry will have antibiotics that gain access to human body day in and day out! Pathogens thus exposed to tiny doses of antibiotics evolve into super bugs that can over come the effect of the antibiotics over a period of time. Those which survive, as per the theory of evolution will be the fittest capable of withstanding the action of antibiotics. Since development of new antibiotics lag behind, the pace of resistance development by many pathogens to existing array of antibiotics is growing pretty fast. Recent reports that silver ion can boost the effectiveness of existing antibiotics are truly significant with far reaching implications for the future of mankind. Here is a take on this new development.  

"Silver has been used as an antimicrobial for centuries, but little has been known about how it works. The new research suggests adding it to existing antibiotics could counteract the rise of drug-resistant microbes. Experiments in mice showed the metal disrupts the biological processes of bacteria, making them more permeable to antibiotics, a US team reports. Bacteria are adapting and finding ways to survive the effects of antibiotics. According to England's chief medical officer, Prof Dame Sally Davies, antibiotics are losing their effectiveness at a rate that is both alarming and irreversible. Silver acts against Gram-negative bacteria - one of the two main types of bacteria - which are particularly difficult pathogens to treat".

Silver has been known since long as a protective agent in sterilizing water as it exerts a deleterious effect on most bacteria. No wonder silverware is increasingly being used for storing and consuming foods as small traces leached into the food are supposed to keep many dangerous bacteria out. Though it is empirically known that silver does have antibacterial properties, the exact mechanism of action is not yet clearly understood. But the above study gives a glimpse into the same and it is suggested that silver ion somehow makes the cell membranes more permeable to antibiotics to enter into the cell and disrupt the biological processes going on inside. What is amazing is that a small addition of silver amplifies the action of antibiotics several fold and this can result in the use of lesser concentrations of antibiotics in future formulations. Some of the most serious bacteria come from the gram negative group which include Helicobacter, E.coli, Shigella, Salmonella, Enterobacteriaceae, Psuedomonas, Moraxella, bacteria causing Gonorrhea, meningitis and Pneumonia. The discovery of the complimentary effect of silver is all the more significant because  as per the claim of the authors the bacteria can never develop resistance to silver though only time will tell whether it is so. Nonetheless the above development is as significant as the discovery of Penicillin in 1928 by Alexander Fleming.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

HONEY "LAUNDERING"-THE CHINESE EXPERTISE!

United States import honey from many countries and every imported consignment is supposed to be tested for safety and quality. In trade terms under WTO regime, anti-dumping duties can be imposed if the imports are valued low affecting adversely the domestic industry. As Chinese are known to indulge in dumping many of their products in many countries at unbelievably low prices, recourse is taken to impose import duty to make them almost on par with prices of domestic products. Honey is one such item which attracts anti-dumping duty if it originates from China. Naturally to circumvent such fiscal impositions, China often routes its honey through other countries as technically it is difficult to trace the origin of the product through existing testing protocols. While economic aspect is one thing, what is bothering the US is that Chinese honey farmers are known to be unscrupulous in using banned antibiotics to deal with infections affecting the bees in its production centers. Here is a take on this on going "honey war" between the two super powers and its consequences.  

The government is alleging that Chinese honey — which can be laced with illegal and unsafe antibiotics — was misdeclared when it was imported to the United States and routed through other countries to evade more than $180 million in anti-dumping duties. HSI and Customs and Border Protection said late last week they have stepped up efforts to combat commercial fraud that directly impacts the economy and public health. The charges come more than a year after an investigation by Food Safety News found that laboratory tests could not detect the origin of more than three quarters of honey purchased at retail locations because ultra-filtration methods remove naturally occurring pollen and make honey impossible to trace. Many in the industry say this practice contributes to honey laundering. As one honey producer put it: "It's no secret to anyone in the business that the only reason all the pollen is filtered out is to hide where it initially came from and the fact is that in almost all cases, that is China."

While one has heard about "money laundering" that refers to converting ill gotten money by individuals who do not pay appropriate taxes in their countries resorting to routing the same to tax havens where no question is asked or no explanation is given. Honey laundering refers more or less to the same technique where Chinese honey is shipped to a third country with which the US has good relations and from there it finds easy entry into the US with relatively less cumbersome inspection and surveillance.  Raw honey if not processed through ultra filtration equipment, will contain pollen and probably critical tests can pin point the source of honey through pollen testing. Chinese send almost all their honey after ultra filtration making it difficult for easy detection. Now that the US as well as the EU have been able to crack this racket, Chinese should not be allowed to go scot-free for this heinous and devious action.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

MEAT PRODUCTS-THE ANTIBIOTIC USE REALLY HURTS THE CONSUMER?

Use of antibiotics in raising food yielding animals is a subject courting intense controversy and no one knows the real situation at the ground level. Two important arguments one hears against wide scale use of a number of antibiotics by the animal food industry are that it makes many pathogens that cause disease in humans become more resistant to use of antibiotics when used against diseases and more than 80% of the US production of antibiotics goes for incorporation in animal feed stock. Both the above claims are sought to be debunked by a report which recently appeared in the media which makes some sense. Here is a take on this critique on antibiotics and animal food industry.  

From what I have been reading lately, it appears to me that the next big fight over agriculture's ability to provide consumers with plentiful, safe and affordable meat and poultry products will focus on the use of antibiotics in animals raised for food. And it also appears to me that the information being provided through media outlets is not designed to inform, but to misinform and play on the public's lack of detailed knowledge about the use of antibiotics in animals raised for food. And it also appears to me that the main thrust of the attack will be eliminating the use of antibiotics needed to maintain healthy animals in Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, or CAFOs. Eliminating antibiotics to control or prevent infections in our herds and flocks will eliminate many CAFOs and drive up the cost of protein to the point where many will have to look elsewhere for this portion of their diets. And many opponents of the use of antibiotics in animals say: "And that would be a good thing." So is the agenda to protect me from multi drug resistant bacteria or is it to reduce the amount of animal products we consume? To try and answer that question I want to supply the readers with some facts, facts that I will provide links for and can be repeated time after time as the truth, if anyone cares to listen to you. First of all, a statistic often repeated by the crowd calling for change is that 80 percent of all antibiotics sold in the U.S. are used in animals. The 80 percent number is meant to be a distraction from the real truth. In truth, the numbers posted on the FDA's website, titled 2010  SUMMARY REPORT on Antimicrobials Sold or Distributed for Use in Food-Producing Animals, are in total kilograms of drugs sold. The listing is not indicative of what the antibiotics were used for, nor is it an accurate reflection of illnesses treated vs. prevented, etc.
For instance, a 2,500 pound prize bull with pneumonia is going to be treated with a much larger dosage of an antibiotic than an 8 pound newborn with the same bacterial infection. But the numbers are the best we have for animal antibiotic use, so I will be using them today. For human use of antibiotics, the same caveat about weight applies. The antibiotic numbers sold for human use that I will use for this discussion come from a letter to Congresswoman Slaughter from the FDA dated April 19, 2011, citing the IMS Health, IMS National Sales Perspectives data Year 2009.
According to the FDA report, 28 percent of all antibiotics sold for animal use in 2010 were Ionophores.  Ionophores have never been approved for use in human medicine. Several other drugs sold for use in animals are also not approved for use in human medicine. When they are combined with the Ionophore total, the percentage of antibiotics sold for use in animals but having no place in human disease treatment reaches 45 percent.
The largest class overall of antibiotics sold or distributed for use in animals in 2010 was the tetracycline class.  This class accounted for nearly 42 percent of total sales. Tetracycline use in human medicine comprises about 1 percent of the total amount sold based on weight. Tetracycline used to be widely prescribed, but is now limited in use to treating the sexually transmitted disease caused by Chlamydia, Mycoplasma infections and Rickettsial diseases like Lyme and Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever. For these illnesses, there are antibiotics far superior to tetracycline. These other antibiotics, generally in the class called Macrolides, are the first line of therapy.

The above report raises serious questions regarding the role and credibility of scientists, the USFDA, the USDA and others involved in educating consumers regarding the truth vis-a-vis antibiotics use by animal food industry. If logic is the guiding factor the contention by the author of above critique sounds more convincing than the off-the-cuff opinions and views of critics who deride the practice of antibiotics use by the animal food industry. Another issue is that antibiotics in feed increases the yield of meat which is a desirable practice and no one should have quarrel on that unless it is proved unhealthy to the humans. Now that this controversy has been raked up there is a need for scientific clarity and make a revisit of the issue by those in power controlling the destiny of the food industry through their executive authority. 

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

MEAT PRODUCTS AND ANTIBIOTICS-THE LABELING GAME!

Increased emergence of bugs resistant to some of the commonly used antibiotics for treatment of serious diseases in human beings is a cause for alarm globally. While part of the problem can be attributed to the indiscriminate prescription by physicians of all hues and colors to treat any and every fever with strongest antibiotics available in the market, meat industry has to bear the major burden for such a situation because of large scale use (or mis-use?) of antibiotics in raising meat animals. It is scandalous that more than 80% of the antibiotics produced in the US goes for feeding meat animals, under the pretext that meat so produced will be safer from pathogens like Salmonella, virulent E.coli and others. However a reality check shows that antibiotics are used to improve the production economics as the animals grow faster using less and less feed inputs. The hapless consumer, in spite of his yearnings to consume antibiotic free meat products does not have ready access to such products because most of the meat produced comes from farms which liberally use antibiotics in their day to day operations. Here is a take on this vexatious issue that seems to be caught between the powerful meat lobby and aggressive consumer activists organizations.  

"Currently, there is no labeling standards for drug free meat products, but until there is, the researchers say, foods labeled "organic" are, by definition, required to be antibiotic-free. In addition, they say consumers can generally rely on labels that explicitly say "no antibiotics," but should be wary of terms like "natural," "antibiotic-free," "no antibiotic residues" and "no antibiotic growth promotants," as these terms can be misleading. But a coalition of agricultural advocacy organizations – including the American Meat Institute, the National Cattleman's Beef Association, the National Chicken Council, the National Pork Producers Council and the National Turkey Federation -  do not agree that there is a problem. "The research is clear that the contribution of using antibiotics in food-animal production to the human burden of antibiotic resistance is quite small, if it exists at all," the coalition said in a letter to Congress in June".

It is a shame that the government in the world's most powerful country, viz the US is unable to come to the rescue of its citizens through restraining policies that will discourage the meat industry from using antibiotics recklessly. Adding insult to injury, the powerful meat lobby does not concede the point that its large scale use of antibiotics is responsible for the drug resistance encountered in may pathogen infections, in spite of massive scientific evidence to the contrary! What prevents the US authorities in insisting on compulsory labeling of antibiotic treated meat is indeed baffling, the only charitable interpretation being its vulnerability to the lobbying power of the meat industry. Though consumers have an alternative in organic meats, the fact that they cost heavily compared to normal meat excludes many of them with limited income from patronizing such expensive products. Access to safe food is a fundamental human right and no government can shirk its responsibility in ensuring the same, no matter how powerful the food industry may be!    

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

A BACTERIOCIN FROM HONEY? NEW DEVELOPMENTS

Honey has been used since time immemorial for many therapeutic use and the exact mechanism as to how this natural plant derived product can achieve all the properties it is claimed to have is still not very clear. The fact that it has high sugar content especially the low molecular types, glucose and fructose, gives a clue that the "osmotic pressure" of the product might be responsible for the antibacterial activity attributed to it. However there are other unusual properties associated with Honey which makes it a unique natural nutraceutical. Its low water activity of about 0.6, low pH in the range of 3.2 to 4.5, ability to chelate free iron, slow release of Hydrogen Peroxide, presence of Methylglyoxal, all combine together to make honey a super food that can preserve itself and protect humans from bacterial pathogens. Presence of many antioxidants like chrysin, pinobanksin, vitamin C, catalase enzyme, pinocembrin further makes honey a formidable health promoting food. If honey was known to humans for the last 10000 years why is that it has recently captured attention of scientists in the US which is one of the top 3 honey producing countries in the world? In their relentless efforts to get a deeper insight into honey of different varieties, these scientists were able to stumble upon a new Bacteriocin, the newly emerging protein based antibiotics, with vast potential for use by agro-food industry. Here is a take on this latest development in the honey front.

"Randy Worobo, associate professor of food microbiology at the New York State Agricultural Experiment Station in Geneva, and his lab members tested more than 2,000 strains of bacteria from eight types of honey from the United States and New Zealand. One of them stood out. "In sunflower honey from South Dakota, we identified a strain of Bacillus thuringiensis the biological control known to organic gardeners as 'Bt' — which was effective against common food-borne pathogens including Listeria monocytogenes, the bacteria behind the recent deadly cantaloupe outbreak," said Worobo. "This Bt strain was intriguing, because it had both strong antibacterial and strong antifungal activity." In analyzing the compounds produced by the bacteria, they found one with strong antibacterial activity that they designated as thurincin H. They recognized it as a bacteriocin, a common class of antimicrobials that bacteria produce to compete against other microbes. But compared with the some 40 known bacteriocins, it is unique: It is coded in the bacterial DNA as a unit containing three identical copies of the same bacteriocin gene".

Bacillus thuringensis has been in the news recently for all wrong reasons as its genes were commercially exploited by the Genetic Engineering scientists to make transgenic cotton and a number of other plant crops to make the latter resistant to field pests. However this humble organism, especially its spores has served the organic food industry admirably well for use in place of chemical pesticides. There are many strains of a particular microorganism with minor variations in their properties and B.thuringensis isolated by the US scientists was found to contain a natural peptide based antibiotic that is active against both bacterial pathogens like Listeria and virulent forms of E.coli. There are at present over 30 bacteriocins derived from different sources and there is hope that these natural peptide containing antibiotics will eventually replace other dual purpose antibiotics now being used in food industry saving the world from the dangers posed by the new strains of antibiotic resistant pathogens.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

DRUG RESISTANCE-MEAT INDUSTRY MUST WAKE UP!

When Penicillin was discovered by Alexander Fleming as an antibiotic drug that can kill many pathogenic microorganisms, probably he would not have bargained for the large scale misuse of such antibiotics by the meat industry to create a food safety crisis of unparalleled dimension that is haunting the consumers to no end. That uncontrolled use of antibiotics in regularly consumed foods can lead to drug resistance eventually is well established by now and due to this undesirable practice by the industry, mankind is running out of effective and efficient drugs to treat microbial originating diseases, many of them life-threatening. A recent report about the implications of this industry practice is quite disturbing.

"It has been found that nearly half of the meat and poultry (47 percent) sold in U.S. grocery stores is contaminated with Staphylococcus aureus ("Staph"), a bacteria linked to a wide range of human diseases, and this bacteria is resistant to at least three classes of antibiotics in more than half (52 percent) of contaminated samples. This comes from a nationwide study by the Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen) published this week in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases. For the study the team collected and analyzed 136 samples–covering 80 brands–of beef, chicken, pork and turkey from 26 retail grocery stores in five U.S. cities: Los Angeles, Chicago, Fort Lauderdale, Flagstaff and Washington, D.C.. DNA testing suggested that the food animals themselves were the major source of contamination. The study was funded through a grant from The Pew Charitable Trusts as part of The Pew Campaign on Human Health and Industrial Farming".

The industry stance that use of antibiotics cut down the risk of food poisoning may be true but using life saving drugs like antibiotics for routine processing cannot be an excuse for their continued use because of the drug resistance phenomenon. What is alarming is that S.aureus, which was found widely in meat and poultry products in the market has its origin in the farm animals, despite the use of antibiotics in their feeds and this could have been possible only because of bad hygienic environment prevalent in the farms. There are well established protocols for maintenance of farms and industry must abide by these standards instead of using liberal doses of life saving antibiotics. Added to this there are reports that antibiotics are often used to accelerate growth of the animals and obtaining higher meat yield which is deplorable. The weak-kneed policies and ineffective implementation of safety protocols by the food safety agency vested with the responsibility are to be blamed for this malady. This is a lesson to be learnt by meat food industries world over when trying to ape the western models of food manufacturing practices.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

"HONEY" ANTIBIOTICS!- THE FSSAI'S TEPID RESPONSE

Recent uproar about antibiotic tainted honey seems to have opened up a Pandora's box and many culprits responsible for this fraud have been apprehended in Europe and the US. While China was blamed for this sorry episode of spreading honey products produced by treating the bees with antibiotic drugs, commonly used in treating human diseases, India was also implicated because of the presence of four types of antibiotics in honey marketed in this country. Whether these products were of Chinese origin or produced within India can at best be a matter of speculation because of the total apathy shown by the safety agencies responsible to prevent such episodes. Here is a take on the response by FSSAI to the reports about tainted honey which is nothing but prevarication and shirking of responsibility.

"The permitted levels of antibiotics for honey in India are almost equivalent to international levels, the Food Safety and Standard Authority of India asserted in a statement issued here Wednesday. 'In the matter of admissibility of antibiotics in honey, safety standards in India are similar to those in the European Union, Codex Alimentarius (collection of internationally recognized food safety standards) and the US - where they are completely prohibited,' the statement said. It said that standards for honey have been prescribed under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules (1955), which mention limits for different categories like sucrose and fructose-glucose ratio. Last month, the Centre for Science and Environment, a voluntary group, revealed that leading Indian and foreign brands of honey have high levels of antibiotics".

While the public would have liked to hear assurance from this bureaucrat dominated body, what they got was quoting of the rules under PFA! No one disputed the fact that Indian standards are on par with those enunciated by Codex Commission but by not taking action through country wide investigation, seizure of tainted honey and punishing the culprits, the Authority seems to have washed of its hands through the above bland press release, not worth a dime. Fortunately honey consumption in India is so low that even if antibiotic containing honey is marketed in the country it is unlikely to have any major impact. Of course this does not absolve neither those indulging in this practice nor the safety agency that appears to be a silent spectator, of the responsibility for this fraud.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

BAN ON ANTIBIOTICS IN PIG FARMS-RELIEF FOR HOGS OR HUMANS?

By now the topic of antibiotic use by the animal food industry is becoming increasingly a partisan issue with the industry and the consumer groups taking diametrically opposite views about the desirability or other wise of such practices. With increasing evidence emerging in Europe and other countries regarding evolution of highly drug resistant bacterial versions, a real situation is emerging where humans are left with little choice to treat serious infectious diseases due to ineffectiveness of most of the antibiotics available to the medical community.

The USDA, which normally defends agribusiness interests, recently asserted at a congressional hearing that there is a link between antibiotic use in animals and drug resistance in humans. That statement put the department on the same page as the FDA and the government's public health experts, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By targeting only drugs used for growth promotion, the FDA plan doesn't go far enough for supporters of the House bill, the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act, which would follow the Danish example and end all non-therapeutic uses of medically important antibiotics. Drugs could only be given to ill animals. "If we want to truly preserve antibiotics for future generations ... then we need to look beyond growth promotion," said Laura Rogers, project director of the Pew Campaign on Human Health and Industrial Farming, an advocacy group. The drug manufacturers contend there's insufficient evidence that drug-resistance is leaping from livestock to consumers. "It does not happen enough that we can find it and measure it," Richard Carnevale, a vice president of the manufacturers' trade group, the Animal Health Institute, said in testimony to the House committee. "We cannot say it does not happen, but we can say it is uncommon." Scott Hurd, a veterinarian at Iowa State University who served in the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service under former President George W. Bush, has often defended the livestock industry. But he said he can't criticize the FDA's decision to restrict the use of medically important antibiotics as growth promoters. "Honestly, the days of the growth promoters are numbered," he said.

It is understandable that the manufacturers of antibiotics take the stand that there is insufficient scientific evidence to substantiate the view about drug resistance because of their pecuniary interest that makes them refute the scientific findings, though they ought to have in mind the safety of the consumers affected by this controversy. There is sufficient basis for the food safety authorities world over to put a stop to this unsafe practice by the industry. Antibiotics are better known as life saving drugs and it is common sense that they are allowed remain so.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

WAKING UP TO ANTIBIOTICS "DANGERS"-CARROT OR STICK POLICY?

Using antibiotics for purposes other than treating the animals affected by diseases due to infection is fraught with far reaching adverse implications. It is not to be forgotten that antibiotics were discovered, starting with Penicillin, to treat human beings, that too as a last resort after exhausting other means to cure them. It is also known that many pathogens have the capability to build resistance to drugs if exposed regularly or continuously. Therefore the tendency on the part of many processors in the meat sector to use antibiotics for weight gain or any other purpose deserves to be condemned forthright. The current move to discourage such dangerous practices must be pursued relentlessly through persuasion or if necessary through mandatory steps.

"Giving animals antibiotics in order to increase food production is a threat to public health and should be stopped, the FDA said today. The federal agency says it has the power to ban the practice, but it's starting by issuing "draft guidance" in hopes the food industry will make voluntary changes. After a 60-day public comment period, the guidance will become FDA policy. The guidance is based on two principles: Antibiotics should be given to food animals only to protect their health. All animal use of antibiotics should be overseen by veterinarians.

"We are seeing the emergence of multidrug-resistant pathogens," FDA Deputy Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein, MD, said at a news conference. "FDA believes overall weight of evidence supports the conclusion that using medically important antimicrobial drugs for production purposes is not appropriate." Sharfstein said it's a public health issue when antibiotics important for human health are given to animals on a massive scale. Such use encourages the growth of drug-resistant bacteria that can cause hard-to-treat human disease. Like humans, animals sometimes need antibiotics to fight or prevent specific infections. The FDA says it has no problem with this. But producers regularly give antibiotics to food animals because it makes them gain weight faster or makes them gain more weight from the food they eat. This is the practice the FDA wants to end. Sharfstein hopes that by offering the carrot of voluntary guidelines, industry will avoid the stick of new regulations".

How far the FDA will go to prevent such unhealthy practices by the industry remains to be seen because of the disappointing experience of the past vis a vis FDA's proactive consumer protection record, invariably buckling under the lobbying and muscle power of the large industry conglomerates. While meat eating habit of human beings as a whole and the inhuman attitude of the meat industry towards the animals slaughtered by them are increasingly coming under criticism, the industry can do without another controversy regarding indiscriminate use of antibiotics.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

HONEY "TAINTING"-ANOTHER "FRAUD" UNDER SCRUTINY

Presence of antibiotics residues in human foods is an issue exercising the minds of food safety authorities world over because of fear of resistance by many pathogens to the action of antibiotics taken for combating many serious infectious diseases. Animal food industry is often found guilty of practicing indiscriminate administration of antibiotics to the animals to ensure safety of their products till they reach the consumers. But presence of antibiotics in honey, as reported recently in products originating from China has raised alarm signals as such practices are unheard of in the past.

"The Food and Drug Administration has just announced that it seized 64 drums of tainted honey from a Philadelphia distribution center last week. According to FDA sources, the honey was imported from China, and contained the potent anti-biotic "Chloramphenicol" which could lead to serious illness or death. Food safety specialists say that the anti-biotic was likely used to treat diseased hives – which is not legal in the US. According to the World Trade organization, China is the leading exporter of honey. Dr. Donald Schaffner is a food safety expert with Rutgers University. He says the general increase of Chinese food products sold in America poses some risk to consumers":

As China is a leading exporter of Honey in the world, such unethical practices will raise doubts about the bonafides of many other products exported by this country. The common concern being raised about the safety of Chinese food products probably could have prompted the FDA of USA to set up its safety monitoring offices in China last year. How far these safety out posts there will be able to get any insight into Chinese production and processing practices remains to be seen.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

ANTIBIOTICS, FOOD SAFETY AND DRUG RESISTANCE-THE ENDLESS DEBATE!

Use of any chemical in food production and processing attracts criticism, some genuine and others unfounded. Whether it is the use of pesticides for crop protection or thousands of chemical additives as process aids there are always two views. The very basis of the birth of organic food industry is because of apprehensions regarding the adverse health consequences that can result from ingesting external substances via the food. Several antibiotics, widely used in meat industry to prevent incidence of microbial contamination during production and processing, are being blamed for drug resistance in human beings and are being investigated for their impact. The meat industry naturally defends use of antibiotics as necessary to prevent avoidable food poisoning but credible scientific evidence against their use calls for a rethink on the issue.

"Without substantiating these claims with evidence from peer-reviewed research, the briefing provided little value to the antibiotics debate," added Love, who attended the briefings. "There is a sizable and rapidly expanding scientific literature documenting the relationship between antibiotic use in food animal production, antibiotic-resistant bacteria isolated from farmers, and the downstream presence of multidrug-resistant bacteria in the environment."

If antibiotics are banned in meat production there is bound to be increased clamor for clearing genetically modified meat products with built in resistance against serious pathogens like Salmonella. The emergence Bt crops is driven by the desire to cut down on chemical pesticides that leave residues in the processed products. A balanced view therefore is necessary when it comes to use of antibiotics, weighing the risk-benefit aspects of their use carefully.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

IRISH DAIRY INDUSTRY-AT CROSS ROADS?

Ireland is not a big country measured by any yardstick but technologically, being a part of European Union, is much advanced following all the safety protocols when it comes to food processing. Though it accounts for less than 1% of global milk production, more than 85% of its production is exported mainly to Europe, China and other Asian countries. Increased concerns about food safety world over, keeping the quality on par with international standards is a herculean task. Major problems include the high Somatic Cell Count(SCC), increased use of antibiotics in the farms, pronounced shift in the microbial profile from Staphylococcus aureus to antibiotic resistant Streptococcus uberis and E.coli which call for immediate remedial action to prevent avoidable export set back in future. Experts point out that all the stakeholders in Irish dairy industry are not appreciating the gravity of the situation.

"In essence, there are two food-safety hits: the high SCC of milk; and the increased use of antibiotics with residue and resistance pressures. Is it possible to address these on farm milk-quality issues? Yes, but the approach has to be holistic, methodically addressing farm issues within the trinity of milking machine, milking routine and the offending mastitis bug and its environment. There are certainly issues of conflict that prevent this SCC reduction on Irish farms.Are the milk processors seriously concerned about milk quality when they fail to offer any bonus payment for lower SCC milk and only apply penalties reluctantly to milk over the agreed limits? Do the milk processors care about public health when separate arms within these companies rely on volume sales of antibiotic milking tubes and dry cow tubes for profit? Is the Government serious about milk quality when it introduces poorly policed animal-remedy legislation, which hijacks milk-quality programmes and serves to shovel antibiotics into the food chain? Is the veterinary profession serious when some veterinary colleagues breach legislative and ethical guidelines by prescribing for whole regions and provinces of Ireland without ever setting foot on the farms or communicating with local vets?"

The issues raised are typical, being faced in many countries where technology intensive dairying is in vogue without adequate safeguards and overseeing. Indiscriminate use of antibiotics in the feeds and treating the milk teats with antibiotics certainly can create resistance in the infecting microbes over a period of time which can have disastrous consequences on the prevalent disease control practices in human beings

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com