Antibiotic Resistance: A Miracle Squandered – Part 1
The CDC states, “Each year in the United States, at least 2 million people become infected with bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics and at least 23,000 people die each year as a direct result of these infections.”
There is concern that we will find ourselves in the same state as those in the pre-antibiotic era when infections were among the leading causes of death. For the 23,000 people dying of drug-resistant bacterial infections each year, that time has come already. But first, let’s understand how we got here….
Under the title, “15 Most Bizarre Medical Treatments Ever,” CBS News makes the following statement:
“Moldy bread has been used to disinfect cuts as far back as ancient Egypt. But what might sound crazy makes some sense. As Louis Pasteur famously discovered, certain fungi are known to block the growth of disease-causing bacteria. Think penicillin.”
But we had to wait…
In 1928, the first pharmaceutical antibiotic, penicillin, was discovered (by accident). Although used extensively in the war effort, widespread civilian use began after World War II. The course of history was changed almost overnight, but we are reversing the course of history and appear to be headed back to that pre-World War II era of limited resources against bacterial infection.
The value of antibiotics against infection encouraged their widespread use for humans and animals. There did not seem to be much of a downside to prescribing antibiotics just in case an illness was bacterial rather than viral, as with many colds. Overuse of the drugs resulted.
Now we know that there are also negative effects from the use of antibiotics. These drugs also destroy beneficial bacteria in the body, although the benefit of saving a life is indeed much greater!
We have learned also that the more antibiotics are used, the more likely that soma bacteria will be slightly affected but survive and become resistant. This can happen in a number of ways, as these examples attest:
The next article will speak of the human component in antibiotic resistance, but a much larger factor seems to be the extraordinarily high amount of antibiotics used on animals.
Keep in mind that the word “antibiotics” literally means “against life.” Like virtually all interventions in the body, antibiotics have "side effects," the other natural consequences beyond their intended effect.
Antibiotics used to cure diseases for animals is a very legitimate use of resources. But antibiotics are used in the United States on herds primarily to prevent disease and as growth stimulants.
Using antibiotics on whole herds or flocks to prevent disease and to increase speed of weight gain seem obvious abuses of the drugs. These practices also contribute greatly to the speed of development of antibiotic resistant organisms. These drugs are excreted into the environment along with the tremendous flood of waste from Concentrated Animal Feeding Organizations (CAFO).
This does not have to happen.
In the 1990’s, Danish pig farmers began a voluntary reduction in antibiotic usage. In 1999, the ban on nontherapeutic use of antibiotics became Danish law (all Europe is now under the same law). The results included a higher use of therapeutic antibiotics, but a much lower overall use of antibiotics.
Because infections did increase, the farmers were forced to take other steps to reduce disease according to this NPR report from 2012:
“The Danish secret? According to Gail Hansen, from the Pew Health Group, the Danes realized that they had to change their farming practices. They weaned their pigs later, reduced the density of their animals, changed the airflow to minimize disease transmission, and looked for animal breeds that seemed better able to withstand diseases. According to Iowa State's Hurd, those changes did increase their costs.”
We see three issues in the Danish example: antibiotic use decreased, animals were treated better, and costs went up for raising pigs and (therefore) for their meat. What do we Americans think of these trade-offs for decreasing antibiotic use?
About 80% of antibiotic use is for animals – cattle, pigs, chicken, etc. Most of this is either for weight gain, or as a preventative because of the unsanitary living conditions and inappropriate feed for animals raised for our own food.
Limiting antibiotic use to medically necessary conditions will slow down the rapid increase in antibiotic resistance by limiting the exposure to antibiotics in the environment. This will also reduce the unnecessary exposure of humans to antibiotics via food.
As the Danish example shows, this will also encourage those raising animals for our food supply to treat them more humanely, to use practices that increase their health rather than rely on pharmaceuticals to try to help the animals recover from the industry’s inhumane practices.
Antibiotics in our animal protein sources – along with hormones, and the GMO’s and chemicals in the feed – contribute to our need to buy organic to try and avoid needless toxicity used solely for short term gain.
Excellent resources for learning more are these websites:
Mercola.com, Michigan State University website, Medical Daily, CDC About Antimicrobial Resistance
Next article
The CDC states, “Each year in the United States, at least 2 million people become infected with bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics and at least 23,000 people die each year as a direct result of these infections.”
There is concern that we will find ourselves in the same state as those in the pre-antibiotic era when infections were among the leading causes of death. For the 23,000 people dying of drug-resistant bacterial infections each year, that time has come already. But first, let’s understand how we got here….
Under the title, “15 Most Bizarre Medical Treatments Ever,” CBS News makes the following statement:
“Moldy bread has been used to disinfect cuts as far back as ancient Egypt. But what might sound crazy makes some sense. As Louis Pasteur famously discovered, certain fungi are known to block the growth of disease-causing bacteria. Think penicillin.”
But we had to wait…
In 1928, the first pharmaceutical antibiotic, penicillin, was discovered (by accident). Although used extensively in the war effort, widespread civilian use began after World War II. The course of history was changed almost overnight, but we are reversing the course of history and appear to be headed back to that pre-World War II era of limited resources against bacterial infection.
The value of antibiotics against infection encouraged their widespread use for humans and animals. There did not seem to be much of a downside to prescribing antibiotics just in case an illness was bacterial rather than viral, as with many colds. Overuse of the drugs resulted.
Now we know that there are also negative effects from the use of antibiotics. These drugs also destroy beneficial bacteria in the body, although the benefit of saving a life is indeed much greater!
We have learned also that the more antibiotics are used, the more likely that soma bacteria will be slightly affected but survive and become resistant. This can happen in a number of ways, as these examples attest:
- The course of antibiotics is not sufficiently long to kill all bacteria and some survive a slight exposure, developing resistance.
- Antibiotic soap is used on the hands, but a slight amount gets on the wrists, not enough to kill bacteria but enough to make them resistant.
- Antibiotics used on animals are excreted and a slight exposure in the environment generates resistant bacteria.
- Resistant bacteria can even transfer resistance to other species of bacteria
The next article will speak of the human component in antibiotic resistance, but a much larger factor seems to be the extraordinarily high amount of antibiotics used on animals.
Keep in mind that the word “antibiotics” literally means “against life.” Like virtually all interventions in the body, antibiotics have "side effects," the other natural consequences beyond their intended effect.
Antibiotics used to cure diseases for animals is a very legitimate use of resources. But antibiotics are used in the United States on herds primarily to prevent disease and as growth stimulants.
Using antibiotics on whole herds or flocks to prevent disease and to increase speed of weight gain seem obvious abuses of the drugs. These practices also contribute greatly to the speed of development of antibiotic resistant organisms. These drugs are excreted into the environment along with the tremendous flood of waste from Concentrated Animal Feeding Organizations (CAFO).
This does not have to happen.
In the 1990’s, Danish pig farmers began a voluntary reduction in antibiotic usage. In 1999, the ban on nontherapeutic use of antibiotics became Danish law (all Europe is now under the same law). The results included a higher use of therapeutic antibiotics, but a much lower overall use of antibiotics.
Because infections did increase, the farmers were forced to take other steps to reduce disease according to this NPR report from 2012:
“The Danish secret? According to Gail Hansen, from the Pew Health Group, the Danes realized that they had to change their farming practices. They weaned their pigs later, reduced the density of their animals, changed the airflow to minimize disease transmission, and looked for animal breeds that seemed better able to withstand diseases. According to Iowa State's Hurd, those changes did increase their costs.”
We see three issues in the Danish example: antibiotic use decreased, animals were treated better, and costs went up for raising pigs and (therefore) for their meat. What do we Americans think of these trade-offs for decreasing antibiotic use?
About 80% of antibiotic use is for animals – cattle, pigs, chicken, etc. Most of this is either for weight gain, or as a preventative because of the unsanitary living conditions and inappropriate feed for animals raised for our own food.
Limiting antibiotic use to medically necessary conditions will slow down the rapid increase in antibiotic resistance by limiting the exposure to antibiotics in the environment. This will also reduce the unnecessary exposure of humans to antibiotics via food.
As the Danish example shows, this will also encourage those raising animals for our food supply to treat them more humanely, to use practices that increase their health rather than rely on pharmaceuticals to try to help the animals recover from the industry’s inhumane practices.
Antibiotics in our animal protein sources – along with hormones, and the GMO’s and chemicals in the feed – contribute to our need to buy organic to try and avoid needless toxicity used solely for short term gain.
Excellent resources for learning more are these websites:
Mercola.com, Michigan State University website, Medical Daily, CDC About Antimicrobial Resistance
Next article
