
Why Is It Still Legal to Use Human Antibiotics on Farm Animals? - sageabilly
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/why-is-it-still-legal-to-use-human-antibiotics-on-farm-animals
======
rl3
Because large agribusiness doesn't actually care if people become ill and die
of things like MRSA as a result.

~~~
Qantourisc
Any other industry and we'd be calling boycotts. Get EU meat only ?
[http://europa.eu/rapid/press-
release_IP-05-1687_en.htm](http://europa.eu/rapid/press-
release_IP-05-1687_en.htm)

------
code_sterling

        “Let’s put it simply: would you rather have meat from an animal that was sick during its lifetime or one that was healthy?”
    

This if a false dichotomy. The only thing at risk is profit margin.

~~~
Sammi
I don't understand why it's a problem that an animal has been sick at some
point during its lifetime. People get sick, then if it's a bacterial infection
we get antibiotics, then we're fine again (hopefully). Why is this a problem
for lifestock?

~~~
code_sterling
It would requires veterinarians and proper care of the animals. If you YouTube
the animal farming, you'll see heavily overcrowded environments with animals
not able to adequately move. This leads to stress, and they will self harm or
harm others. So you have massive numbers of open wounds in unsanitary
conditions. In order to maintain this factory style farming, we essentially
need the antibiotics. Keep in mind turn around time as well. While a human may
be on antibiotics after an infection for a few months, this can be the animals
entire lifespan, as we dose them with steroids and growth hormones, and eat
the artificially ready "babies". To ensure the infection has been adequately
destroyed would disrupt production schedules.

This isn't a justification for using them, but if we continue to factory farm
animals the way we do, it's a necessity.

~~~
pvaldes
Because, if properly used, they are useful.

> If you YouTube the animal farming, you'll see heavily overcrowded
> environments with animals not able to adequately move.

And also wide meadows with three cows. Nobody (in TV, press or internet) is
interested in the normal, but the freak are guaranteed to receive big
exposure. To make conclusions about a population just seeing its outliers is
normally unwise.

~~~
code_sterling
Of course they're useful, that's not in question. It's whether the damaged
caused by creating antibiotic resistant strains, leaving us defenceless
against infection is worth the risk.

I was raised on a farm, and live in the prairies. And I've watched as factory
farming has slowly displaced every farmer that wasn't lucky enough to have oil
on their property. I've milked cows, and goats, and even rubber banded my fair
share calves for my buddy who hobby farms (He has the three cows in the
field). My uncle still has a dairy farm, but if it weren't for the oil, he
wouldn't be able to compete. But I can't show people my experiences with
factory farming conditions, so I sent them to youtube instead.

------
illivah
The title annoys me. Being "human" antibiotics is irrelevant. They don't kill
humans, and they're not human specific. They're just basic antibiotics.

If you were to cut out the alarmist, repetitive fluff you do actually have a
problem at the bottom of all this. overused antibiotics (anywhere, on any
species) tends to push evolution toward antibiotic resistance. That's bad.
That said, from what I read in this article, this bill is also bad.

~~~
mirimir
That's true. But, from a human-centric perspective, what matters most is their
ability to fight bacterial infections in humans. It's also true that
antibiotics are also used inappropriately in medical practice. Pediatricians
tend to prescribe them more-or-less as a placebo, to fend off freaked-out
parents. Flu suffers also tend to demand them. But there's always some
ambiguity, given risk of secondary bacterial infections.

There's no ambiguity in using antibiotics in livestock management to increase
feed efficiency. That's just about the money. It either needs to be illegal,
or we need some class torts ;)

~~~
illivah
I had a coworker tell me that they had the cold and that they're taking an
antibiotic for it. We went on a back and forth, with me repeatedly telling him
that antibiotics would make him worse, a cold is viral. I think he badgered
the doctor into giving him some. What was funny is that everyone in the shop
just about had that cold, and he had it longer than most people. But those
antibiotics were really helping.

~~~
mirimir
Some years ago, I did develop bacterial pneumonia after a bad cold. So maybe
the antibiotic saved my life. But the antibiotic prescription was based on
diagnosis and sputum culture, and not just prophylactic. Better yet, now I've
been immunized.

------
BurningFrog
What on earth are "Human" antibiotics?

Antibiotics kill bacteria. There is nothing specific to our primate subspecies
about them, AFAIK.

~~~
MaysonL
_What on earth are "Human" antibiotics?_

Simple – antibiotics approved for use to treat human illness. The problem is
that when they're used indiscriminately, whether on humans who don't need
them, or on livestock, bacteria develop resistance.

~~~
x5n1
When you use them on livestock you can guarantee they will be used
indiscriminately... with the respective consequences.

~~~
Laforet
Part of the indiscriminate use was out of necessity, but it is secondary to
the fact that many antibiotics seems to promote growth and improve conversion
of feed into weight gains. The exact mechanism is not well understood.

A good example is nitarsone which is an organoarsenic additive commonly found
in turkey feed until it was banned earlier this year. AFAIK it has not been
approved for human use ever.

~~~
mirimir
It may be that antibiotics also "promote growth and improve conversion of feed
into weight gains" in humans ;) In retrospect, that's not surprising.

------
Qantourisc
EDIT: DISCLAIMER: See a doctor, don't take this as advise !

“You should never give an antibiotic to anybody, human or animal, unless
they’re ill,”

IIRC that is even wrong !

You shouldn't be using antibiotics unless you have good change to get severely
sick or develop (long term, or very bad short term) complications (holes in
body due to infection, septicemia, ... )

~~~
staunch
Honest mistake but you shouldn't give medical opinions on public forums unless
you're a licensed medical doctor. You might convince some poor sap to wait
until they're septic to see a doctor.

As someone that's been on IV antibiotics, I can tell you that there's _no
fucking around_ with bacterial infections and only a doctor (an infectious
disease specialist) can evaluate the situation properly.

~~~
Qantourisc
Question: Any bacterial foothold should be considered dangerous ?

