Antibiotics and Livestock

[boondocks]

Was just reading a microbiology textbook (fun Friday night here, y'all) and in the chapter on drug-resistant microbes, it was noted that "nearly 80% of all antibiotics in the United States are given to livestock...Enteric bacteria...that live in the normal intestinal biota of these animals readily share resistance plasmids [bits of genetic material that render the microbe immune to an antibiotic] and are constantly selected and amplified by exposure to drugs." There's more, but it get pretty arcane. I know there are strong opinions on this board, pro and con, on the topic of antibiotic use, particularly in feed, and I'm not looking to stir things up. (well, much! ;-) Milkmaid's interesting post about feedlots certainly gave the other perspective. Conversely I think Lucky P has cautioned once or twice about overuse of antibiotics (eg, using them to "cure" everything, even non-bacterial causes, or using a broad-spectrum drug where a narrower one would do, etc).

What do you think about that 80% figure? It does make you think...

Do you draw a distinction between antibiotics for an ill animal versus routine use in feed to promote growth and "just in case" of illness? Do you regularly feed w/ medicated feed, to animals that are not currently known to have a bacterial illness? Just curious...that stat has got me thinking.

 

[jltrent]

It should be stopped in animals that are not currently known to have a bacterial illness.

 

[Bigfoot]

I defer to the experts for the correct answer, but in my opinion they are over used.

 

[Commercialfarmer]

It's a BS statistic and proof that our educational system has been overtaken.

Please provide the citation and I'll happily tear it apart with data that should have made the cut had the author done any due diligence.

I can find a number of textbooks that claim global warming is real despite the evidence, along with any other given agenda you want where there's money to grease the wheels of research with a predetermined outcome desired. Used to be, we completed the study before writing the conclusion. Not so now.

Recall the food pyramid and the 50 year lie if you don't believe me.

 

[Nesikep]

I'm a minimalist when it comes to antibiotic use.. My cows get grass and a mineral mix, and vaccinated with Scourgard every Feb.. They don't get anything else. Once in a while I'll need LA200.. last time I used it was when a heifer had bad vaginal tears from having a 110 lb calf pulled... I also have a penicillin/sulfa that I used on a calf with what seemed to be navel ill this year.. it all cleared up fine.
I think routinely medicated feeds are a recipe for resistant strains... I don't think the beef industry is a really big offender here.. I think it's worse in dairies, and bad in the pork and poulty sectors.

It's really hard to estimate, but I think 80% might be PLAUSIBLE... Humans take a WHOLE LOT OF DRUGS, but most aren't antibiotics, and they aren't for sustained periods. Animals don't take a lot of Paxil, Ritalin, Demerol, or Zyrtec, but they do get loaded up pretty good on antibiotics.

Also, think of how much LA200 it takes to treat a cow, so I think that 80% could be right

I do agree that it seems that every piece of research I hear about does find conclusive 'evidence' that A is linked to B if they were out to find that link... By the same token A is not linked to B if they didn't want to find the link. The scientific method, while great in theory, is a little hard to test on some things.. Global warming (Ooops, its called climate change now) is just a fine example.

 

[regolith]

my brain being slow; I at first thought you meant that 80% of the classes of antibiotics are used in livestock.

Now if that was the case people would actually be in quite a good situation, presuming *people* are not misusing antibiotics and the remaining classes are capable of dealing to all likely pathogens.
I've come across instances where types of antibiotics are restricted to prevent resistance developing, thus preserving their usefulness in human medicine. So there are, or used to be, some separation.

In this country at least, the livestock far outnumber and outweigh the human population.

 

[Nesikep]

In the US, it's a little different though, they don't outnumber, and certainly don't outweigh the human population :hide:

 

[larryshoat]

Change is coming and it's not long off. A relationship with a vet will be more important than ever. Will the amount of antibiotics we use change? For myself the answer to that is no. For the smaller producer it may become even more difficult get antibiotics. The problem with that is, that often nobody wants to mess with a person with just a few animals. What I'm trying to say is that there is no restriction on who can own animals, but there are serious hurdles to acquiring the products and services to care for those few animals. The big feedlots always get bad publicity, when in fact they have the facilities and knowledge to care for livestock.

Larry

 

[Nesikep]

The problem is there are the real dumb hillbillies who don't care much about their stock, don't educate themselves about the drugs/antibiotics, etc that give all the small producers a bad name. I'm talking about the type of people who have 1 of everything.. goat, pig, emu, alpaca, cow, horse, donkey all running together, nothing is ever bred or productive, and the neighbors are lucky if the fences are maintained. The only things they have more than one of is wrecks in the yard, dogs and cats!

The majority of the smaller producers I know at least try to learn.. Most are responsible with their use of antibiotics, and I don't think they abuse them at all. Since I live 2 hours away from the closest vet, I'd like to be able to have a properly stocked medicine cabinet... When I have an emergency, the last thing I need to do is drive 4 hours and/or wait until the end of the long weekend to get what I need... I'd like to be able to make the phone call to the vet, describe what is going on, and then get it from what I already have.

Speaking of misuse of antibiotics, I had an 8 year old cow (Tizia) that suddenly seemed confused, would pace a lot, not much appetite.. this kept up for a while, so I brought her to the vet who gave her a physical exam, sent some samples to a lab (came back negative), Took her temperature (normal), did a blood cell count (textbook perfect), etc. Then he gave her LA200 and kept her overnight.
Long story short she didn't get better and I put her down after about a 3 weeks.
I could have played pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey injecting antibiotics and it wouldn't have cost me $400 to lose the cow anyhow and not have an answer. The reason I brought her was so she got the right treatment. I realize that the diagnosis isn't easy with something that can't talk back, and may not have common symptoms.

 

[msscamp]

Do you draw a distinction between antibiotics for an ill animal versus routine use in feed to promote growth and "just in case" of illness? Do you regularly feed w/ medicated feed, to animals that are not currently known to have a bacterial illness? Just curious...that stat has got me thinking.

Absolutely! Our cows were never fed feed that contained antibiotics without a valid reason, nothing was ever treated with antibiotics without a valid reason, and the weaning calves only got feed that contained antibiotics for roughly a month following weaning. We never used implants, either. I use the same protocols with my goats, but my kids only get feed that contains a coccidiostat - usually rumensin - not a broad spectrum antibiotic.

 

[sim.-ang.king]

If Antibiotic resistance was as a big of a deal as they make it out to be....we would of been screwed along time ago.

 

[milkmaid]

As I recall, the statistic is legit... 80% of the antibiotics used in this country are used in livestock.

***BUT*** remember that Rumensin and Bovatec, being antimicrobial ionophores, are included in that number. They are not antibiotics in the classic sense that we think of Draxxin, LA200, Baytril, etc - but because they change the animal's rumen microflora they are considered an antimicrobial. They make up the majority of that 80%.

It's also important to remember that cattle weigh far more than humans do, so in terms of volume it makes sense that cattle receive larger doses and more total antibiotics than the human population does. Even swine, likely included in that "livestock" statistic, typically weigh more than humans.

It's a statistic that anti- groups love to quote, but when seen in context it's not that impressive.

 

[sim.-ang.king]

As I recall, the statistic is legit... 80% of the antibiotics used in this country are used in livestock.

***BUT*** remember that Rumensin and Bovatec, being antimicrobial ionophores, are included in that number. They are not antibiotics in the classic sense that we think of Draxxin, LA200, Baytril, etc - but because they change the animal's rumen microflora they are considered an antimicrobial. They make up the majority of that 80%.

It's also important to remember that cattle weigh far more than humans do, so in terms of volume it makes sense that cattle receive larger doses and more total antibiotics than the human population does. Even swine, likely included in that "livestock" statistic, typically weigh more than humans.

It's a statistic that anti- groups love to quote, but when seen in context it's not that impressive.

Oh so true.

35cc's of LA300 would kill a man, but would help a cow.

 

[wbvs58]

Antibiotics are greatly overused. They are greatly abused by Vets as well. A vet has to always justify his call out fee by prescribing something which makes everyone feel warm and cosy. In the days before antibiotics the sky didn't fall in. More attention had to be given to simple things like making sure wounds had good drainage etc. These days AB are prescribed to make sure the wound doesn't get infected and they make zero difference. With good drainage wounds don't get infected the body has great powers to wall off and isolate these areas and healing starts and repairs the defect but giving an injection each day makes us really feel like we are doing something.
Have a read of the James Herriot books they give a great insight into how things were.
I spent my working career as a Vet and I would have to plead guilty to most of what I have said above.
Ken

 

[Aaron]

Changes will come in Canada, before the US. Two changes that are coming down the pipeline in the next 5 years or so here,

- restricting the sale of antibiotics by licensed veterinarians only, and sale only to those producers with a vet-producer relationship.

- elimination of antibiotics (ionophores) in feed.

Now take it with a grain of salt, as we have been on mandatory national ID with the cowherd for almost 15 years now, and the US struggles with voluntary ID.

 

[sim.-ang.king]

Antibiotics are greatly overused. They are greatly abused by Vets as well. A vet has to always justify his call out fee by prescribing something which makes everyone feel warm and cosy. In the days before antibiotics the sky didn't fall in. More attention had to be given to simple things like making sure wounds had good drainage etc. These days AB are prescribed to make sure the wound doesn't get infected and they make zero difference. With good drainage wounds don't get infected the body has great powers to wall off and isolate these areas and healing starts and repairs the defect but giving an injection each day makes us really feel like we are doing something.
Have a read of the James Herriot books they give a great insight into how things were.
I spent my working career as a Vet and I would have to plead guilty to most of what I have said above.
Ken

So if you let anaplasmosis drain, it will heal?
If you let pneumonia drain, it will heal?
What are you going to do punch a hole in their head, and lungs?

Seems like a pretty naive statement coming from a vet as if open wounds are what antibiotics are used mainly for. Open wounds is pretty low on the list of care needed for cattle, unless your a idiot that has your pasture as your junk pile.
Or is this just what James Herriot told you?

 

[wbvs58]

Antibiotics are greatly overused. They are greatly abused by Vets as well. A vet has to always justify his call out fee by prescribing something which makes everyone feel warm and cosy. In the days before antibiotics the sky didn't fall in. More attention had to be given to simple things like making sure wounds had good drainage etc. These days AB are prescribed to make sure the wound doesn't get infected and they make zero difference. With good drainage wounds don't get infected the body has great powers to wall off and isolate these areas and healing starts and repairs the defect but giving an injection each day makes us really feel like we are doing something.
Have a read of the James Herriot books they give a great insight into how things were.
I spent my working career as a Vet and I would have to plead guilty to most of what I have said above.
Ken

So if you let anaplasmosis drain, it will heal?
If you let pneumonia drain, it will heal?
What are you going to do punch a hole in their head, and lungs?

Seems like a pretty naive statement coming from a vet as if open wounds are what antibiotics are used mainly for. Open wounds is pretty low on the list of care needed for cattle, unless your a idiot that has your pasture as your junk pile.
Or is this just what James Herriot told you?

Well I think you are a f------ idiot responding like that Sim.
Of course there is a place for antibiotics to be used responsibly. The example of wounds is just one case where I believe they are over used. Many times AB are used as a substitute for good husbandry. By the sound of it you are one that likes to stick them with something because it makes you feel warm and fuzzy.
Ken

 

[sim.-ang.king]

Antibiotics are greatly overused. They are greatly abused by Vets as well. A vet has to always justify his call out fee by prescribing something which makes everyone feel warm and cosy. In the days before antibiotics the sky didn't fall in. More attention had to be given to simple things like making sure wounds had good drainage etc. These days AB are prescribed to make sure the wound doesn't get infected and they make zero difference. With good drainage wounds don't get infected the body has great powers to wall off and isolate these areas and healing starts and repairs the defect but giving an injection each day makes us really feel like we are doing something.
Have a read of the James Herriot books they give a great insight into how things were.
I spent my working career as a Vet and I would have to plead guilty to most of what I have said above.
Ken

So if you let anaplasmosis drain, it will heal?
If you let pneumonia drain, it will heal?
What are you going to do punch a hole in their head, and lungs?

Seems like a pretty naive statement coming from a vet as if open wounds are what antibiotics are used mainly for. Open wounds is pretty low on the list of care needed for cattle, unless your a idiot that has your pasture as your junk pile.
Or is this just what James Herriot told you?

Well I think you are a f------ idiot responding like that Sim.
Of course there is a place for antibiotics to be used responsibly. The example of wounds is just one case where I believe they are over used. Many times AB are used as a substitute for good husbandry. By the sound of it you are one that likes to stick them with something because it makes you feel warm and fuzzy.
Ken

So what cases can use antibiotics, and why do you believe so?

 

[wbvs58]

So what cases can use antibiotics, and why do you believe so?

First may I say that I received a very sincere apology from Sim and I apologised for my statement as well. Two wrongs never make a right.
Antibiotics as we all know are very usefull drugs. Just using your example Sim, Anaplasma would get Oxytet as the treatment of choice but you do have to know what you are treating, Imizol is also effective. If the likes of Draxin was your first line of treatment for any high temp then unfortunately it would have no effect. In Australia things are a bit different, all cattle bred on the coast in the northern part where ticks are prevalent have naturally occurring immunity to all 3 tick fever organisms and a high level of eared cattle are kept to keep the numbers of ticks down but not zero as the organism needs to be around to keep the immunity going in young animals. I live West of the range in tick free area and I need to vaccinate my bulls with the 3 germ vaccine so if people on the coast want to buy them they can take them straight away. This year I did have a bull get crook from the Anaplasma component of the vaccine and used Oxytet and he was OK in 24hrs. This is an example of how AB and husbandry can work effectively and very little use of AB is needed.
Pneumonia yes AB are needed and quickly. In Australia it is rare to see pneumonia outside of intensive feeding and housing situations like in feedlots as cattle tend to be grazed in paddocks all year round. Feedlots can greatly reduce the incidence of these problems by sourcing cattle that have been backgrounded properly with yard weaning and full vaccinations however they are treated aggressively with AB if needed.
The two local vets in town here do not carry any of the top shelf AB for cattle, Oxytet would be the main one used, anything else would sit on the shelf and go out of date.
And finally just on wounds there was some work done on the outcomes of lower leg wounds on horses comparing all the different treatments of dressings, meshes etc and the one that came up most favourably was for the wound to be left open and no treatment other than TT and TAT. Unfortunately I have not been able to find that study again and don't have the time to do a proper search
I do think the likes of James Herriot was better at locating and properly draining the likes of abscesses in the feet of horses and did a lot of the simple things better and had good outcomes. I do get emotional though when I read about him treating a young farmers calves that were scouring with Sulphanilamide for the first time ever with the knacker hovering over and the next morning to everyones amazement all the calves were back up and drinking. The young farmer would have lost his farm if they had died as expected.
Ken

 

[Nesikep]

Ken, I have great respect for vets like Harriot and others of the time.. They didn't have much to work with.. Not even the internet!

Sim-ang-king, I think I gave a good example of when even vets may abuse/overuse/misuse antibiotics in my last post.

I had an 8 year old cow (Tizia) that suddenly seemed confused, would pace a lot, not much appetite.. this kept up for a while, so I brought her to the vet who gave her a physical exam, sent some samples to a lab (came back negative), Took her temperature (normal), did a blood cell count (textbook perfect), etc. Then he gave her LA200 and kept her overnight.
Long story short she didn't get better and I put her down after about a 3 weeks.
I could have played pin-the-tail-on-the-donkey injecting antibiotics and it wouldn't have cost me $400 to lose the cow anyhow and not have an answer. The reason I brought her was so she got the right treatment. I realize that the diagnosis isn't easy with something that can't talk back, and may not have common symptoms.