Yeah, I agree. I think that the article is a tad over the top and I don't think they will take antibiotics out of the hands of the producers. First off, the pharmaceutical companies won't let that happen. I wouldn't doubt someone has figured a cure for cancer already, but if you cured that a ton of people would be out of work. There is a balance that has to be done. Although, I think the whole Ebola thing and vaccinations for that was definitely botched due to poor foresight by the CDC.
One thing to take into consideration is they used India as their example to base everything on. I've spent time in several places in the Middle East and South Asia isn't much different. The conditions in many places over there are deplorable. The CIA World Factbook estimates the population in India to be 1,236,344,631 in 2014. That puts those approximate 800,000 newborn deaths in India to be about 6.5% of their population dying annually at birth. On March 22, 2013, the Huffington Post last year published an article by Kay Johnson titled, "India Slums: 1 In 6 India City Dwellers Live In Conditions 'Unfit For Human Habitation'" and their estimated urban population in 2011 was about 31.3%. So, considering the living conditions, it is no wonder they have so many deaths due to bacterial reasons.
Whenever you compare the United States to India in a case like this, you are comparing apples with coconuts. Also, consider the cultural aspect of the population. Although it is a very advanced country, those folks living in those slums aren't exactly going to be those that know when to be treated before it is too late or if they even have the facilities available to be seen.
Lastly, the CDC is always the bearer of bad news. That is their job. If they said everything was just dandy, they would also lose some of their funding. If you make everything sound worse than it is, then you get more funding. I'm not saying that bacteria aren't becoming more resistant to antibiotics, but instead saying it isn't as bad as what the article portrays.
Oh, I would suggest that in treating cattle not to do like I have seen some producers do. That is, just giving it whatever they have that is an antibiotic and hoping it will treat whatever the problem is. My brother is dealing with that where he is. Antibiotics used for cattle are often developed for certain problem sets. You don't give Micotil or Baytril to an animal suffering from foot rot. I've seen it done. Education on what is given for the reason it is given is often the first line of defense. Also, invest in a thermometer. Does any mom out there just give medicine to their kid without putting their hand to their forehead or taking their temperature? In India, they probably don't.
CIA World Factbook: India
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/in.html
Health Education to Villages: India Basic Living Conditions
http://hetv.org/india/nfhs/nfhs3/NFHS-3-Basic-Living-Conditions.pdf
The Huffington Post: India Slums: 1 In 6 Indian City Dwellers Live In Conditions 'Unfit For Human Habitation'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/22/india-slums_n_2931634.html