WE HELP YOU LOOK AND SOUND BETTER
Home
Who We Are
What We Do
What People Say
In the News
Recent Releases
Olivier
Inspiritive
Podcasts
Corporate Podcasts
Podcast Classes
NetCastNow & NetCastFast!
Images & Branding
Corporate pages
Student pages
ZENLP
Contact Us
|
| New peer-reviewed risk assessment shows that the use of the macrolide class of antibiotics in food animal production has extremely low chance of harming human health May 3, 2004 – Scientific research published today shows that use of two macrolide animal antibiotics, tylosin* and tilmicosin*, does not adversely affect the safety of the food supply. The findings were reported today in the peer-reviewed publication, the Journal of Food Protection. “We found that there is an extremely low risk of a person eating beef, poultry or pork and acquiring a resistant infection that is untreatable with a human macrolide antibiotic,” said lead author H. Scott Hurd, D.V.M., Ph.D., Hurd-Health Consulting, Roland, IA. The study assessed two bacteria, which are known to have resistance to certain antibiotics, and developed a mathematical equation to determine if using these two macrolide antibiotics could lead to food-borne infections in humans that are difficult to treat. The results of the study, which was conducted by Dr. Hurd and a number of independent medical, food safety, and veterinary experts, show that the risk of acquiring a resistant Campylobacter infection from beef, pork, or poultry that results in a difficult-to-treat food-borne illness is less than one in 10 million. For resistant Enterococci faecium, the chances are even lower – less than one in three billion. “Given these results, and the fact that human macrolide antibiotics are rarely used to treat people who have food-borne infections, macrolides certainly are among the safest for use in food animal production,” said Ronald N. Jones, M.D., The JONES Group/JMI Labs, North Liberty, IA, who was one of the co-authors of the article. “Antibiotic risks associated with other infectious diseases, such as pneumonia or bronchitis, are infinitely higher than for macrolide-resistant bacteria that could be acquired from food,” he said. Dr. Jones said that antibiotic resistance efforts should focus on decreasing misuse of human antibiotics, such as prescribing them for colds and other viral infections that do not respond to treatment with antibiotics. Pat James, president of Elanco Animal Health, which assembled the expert panel, noted, “We are extremely pleased that the multidisciplinary expert group did a thorough risk assessment and found that tilmicosin and tylosin can be safely used in pork, poultry, and beef production. Elanco is committed to bringing forth the best science to assure all stakeholders that antibiotics can remain a very important tool for ensuring the health and welfare of food animals.” The two macrolide antibiotics included in the study, tylosin and tilmicosin, are used in beef cattle to treat respiratory diseases and to prevent liver abscesses. They are used in poultry and swine to treat, prevent, and control diseases and for health maintenance. The study was conducted using U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) risk assessment guidelines. The study authors analyzed the potential for a person to either acquire macrolide-resistant Campylobacter, a food-borne bacterium, or macrolide-resistant E. faecium, which is thought to carry antibiotic resistance genes, resulting in illness that does not respond to treatment by human antibiotics. Treatment failure was defined as additional duration of illness, progression to a more serious case of illness, or in the worst-case scenario, mortality. “Given the low probability of treatment failure as a result of eating meat or poultry from animals treated with these macrolide antibiotics, we concluded that using tylosin and tilmicosin in food animal production has a very low risk to human health,” said Dr. Hurd. The results were: Beef: The probability of a resistant infection from beef resulting in treatment failure is less than one case in 236 million per year for resistant Campylobacter and less than one case in 29 billion per year for resistant E. faecium. Poultry: The probability of a resistant infection from poultry resulting in treatment failure is less than one case out of 14 million people per year for Campylobacter, and less than one in 3 billion people per year for E. faecium. Pork: The probability of acquiring a resistant infection from pork resulting in treatment failure is less than one out of 53 million people per year for resistant Campylobacter, and less than one out of 21 billion people per year for E. faecium. Other co-authors of the article included Stephanie Doores, Ph.D., Penn State University, University Park, PA; Dermot Hayes, Ph.D., Iowa State University, Ames, IA; John Maurer, Ph.D., University of Georgia, Athens, GA; Alan Mathew, Ph.D., University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN; Peter Silley, Ph.D., MB Consult Limited, West Yorkshire, UK; and Randall S. Singer, D.V.M, Ph.D., University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. Elanco Animal Health, a division of Eli Lilly and Company, based in Greenfield, IN,USA, is one of the world’s leading animal health companies. Elanco develops and markets innovative technologies for use in animal production, care, and disease prevention and treatment. Elanco is a global animal health company with facilities located to serve the global marketplace. This simple comparison of various known risks highlights the safety of these substances. For the more scientific, this is the Macrolide Risk Assessment Model Methodology. The human and animal health impact of European Union ban on growth promoting antibiotics discussed in a new Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy article. That information is here. Dr Ian Lean applauds new Australian research. A note to journalists about the use of Dr Ian Lean as a spokesperson. You can find out more about Ian Lean on his corporate pages. The full (337 page) report is available here. The recent release from McDonalds is here. |