Agricultural News
Animal Agriculture Alliance Upset Over Reporting About Antibiotic Use in Livestock
Sun, 17 Jan 2010 19:03:23 CSTThe Animal Agriculture Alliance is disappointed by the many unsubstantiated claims portrayed as fact in the widespread Associated Press article entitled Pressure Rises to Stop Antibiotics in Agriculture. Released on Dec. 29, the story was the third installment of a five-part series about antibiotic resistance in the United States. The Alliance contents that the authors did not offer a balanced analysis of the complex issue, instead relying on biased sources to portray America's food producers in a negative light.
"America's farmers, ranchers and veterinarians are committed to ensuring the health of their animals and the safety of their products," said Kay Johnson Smith, Alliance Executive Vice President. "Antibiotic use in agriculture is carefully monitored to provide a healthy, plentiful food supply for all."
The Alliance also believes that the AP article dangerously blurs the line between opinion and fact. Although the authors quote an unsubstantiated estimate that 70 percent of the antibiotics used in the U.S. are administered to livestock, they fail to acknowledge that nearly half of the total estimated amount is made up of ionophores and other compounds not used in human medicine that do not impact human resistance. The article also inaccurately suggests that animal feed is constantly "laced" with antibiotics. In reality, each antibiotic is administered according to the specifications of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved label that clearly indicates the number of doses and duration of use.
The Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production's 2008 report, Putting Meat on the Table, is cited multiple times in the story, despite its many biased and sensationalized claims. The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) and, most recently, the Federation of Animal Science Societies (FASS) have found "significant flaws" within the Pew Commission's report, stating that the group purposefully chose not to incorporate the findings of a significant number of participating scientists. FASS indicated that, while the Commission assumed that all large farms are inherently inhumane, there are many factors that influence animal well-being, including management, feeding systems, environmental features, and animal type. The Animal Agriculture Alliance Coalition provided numerous reports on the topics being considered for the Pew Commission's report, including antibiotic use, but input from the agriculture community was repeatedly ignored.
Click here to read the concerns about the Pew Report Raised by the Federation of Animal Science Societies.
Since we initially reported this in our daily email on Tuesday, January 12, 2010, we have received a copy of a letter that the Pew Commission has sent to FASS in response to their critique of the Pew report on Industrialized animal production. Click on the PDF file link below that will take you to that letter. They claim that sound science is on their side- and that the Animal Scientists represented by FASS are incorrect in their criticism of the Pew report.
02856_Pew_Commission_Response_to_FASS.pdf
WebReadyTM Powered by WireReady®NSI
Top Agricultural News
More Headlines...
