Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
Health & Nutrition
OTC Meds Scheduled to become Rx Only
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RDFF" data-source="post: 1792720" data-attributes="member: 39018"><p>I think that we're missing (or simply denying the validity of) one of the primary basis for curbing the availability of antibiotics. </p><p></p><p>There's been serious concern about "developing drug resistance" in bacteria/pathogens for a very long time... and THAT <strong><u>IS</u></strong> a very real thing. It's just like "herbicide resistant weeds"... and we should all be well aware of those. By restricting the use of very popular and effective antibiotics, and also by "required rotating" in the use of several antibiotics that are/may be effective against certain pathogens, we DO extend the effective useful life of them, and help to KEEP them effective. I'm not saying that there isn't some goal to effect "control" over the masses as well... I'm just saying that there IS good scientific basis for restricting drug use.</p><p></p><p>In large scale animal agriculture, we've gotten used to using many antibiotics on a prophylactic basis, and this is what that then becomes... those antibiotics DO, over time, become "less effective", because pathogens DO develop "resistance"... and THAT is what we need to avoid, so that when we DO need these drugs to save lives (in particular, HUMAN lives), they can and will still be effective. Just because we regularly use a drug against a particular pathogen in animal agriculture effectively, doesn't mean that the same or a variant of that pathogen won't crop up within the human population... If that pathogen has been widely exposed for enough time in the environment to a particular antibiotic, it WILL have had opportunity to have developed some degree of "resistance" to it. And THAT can then begin to have a cost in HUMAN lives. </p><p></p><p>None of us can deny how heavily and prophylactically tetracycline, for example, has been used in animal agriculture... along with many others. The more we use any particular drug, the more opportunity we are creating for resistance to it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RDFF, post: 1792720, member: 39018"] I think that we're missing (or simply denying the validity of) one of the primary basis for curbing the availability of antibiotics. There's been serious concern about "developing drug resistance" in bacteria/pathogens for a very long time... and THAT [B][U]IS[/U][/B] a very real thing. It's just like "herbicide resistant weeds"... and we should all be well aware of those. By restricting the use of very popular and effective antibiotics, and also by "required rotating" in the use of several antibiotics that are/may be effective against certain pathogens, we DO extend the effective useful life of them, and help to KEEP them effective. I'm not saying that there isn't some goal to effect "control" over the masses as well... I'm just saying that there IS good scientific basis for restricting drug use. In large scale animal agriculture, we've gotten used to using many antibiotics on a prophylactic basis, and this is what that then becomes... those antibiotics DO, over time, become "less effective", because pathogens DO develop "resistance"... and THAT is what we need to avoid, so that when we DO need these drugs to save lives (in particular, HUMAN lives), they can and will still be effective. Just because we regularly use a drug against a particular pathogen in animal agriculture effectively, doesn't mean that the same or a variant of that pathogen won't crop up within the human population... If that pathogen has been widely exposed for enough time in the environment to a particular antibiotic, it WILL have had opportunity to have developed some degree of "resistance" to it. And THAT can then begin to have a cost in HUMAN lives. None of us can deny how heavily and prophylactically tetracycline, for example, has been used in animal agriculture... along with many others. The more we use any particular drug, the more opportunity we are creating for resistance to it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Health & Nutrition
OTC Meds Scheduled to become Rx Only
Top