For those of you who crave more detailed information, there are several very good brochures and websites with factual and current information on the subject. These are important when we are trying to explain to the average urbanite what we know and how the entire industry is really following the guidelines about prudent usage of antimicrobials.

We hear the public and industry using terms such as ‘raised without antibiotics.’ This has severe ramifications from an animal welfare perspective and, simply stated, is the reason we have established withdrawal periods by law. These withdrawal periods ensure there are no antibiotic or other drug residues from things like NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) or vaccines in our meat or milk.

The best brochure I’ve seen is Worried about Antibiotic Use and Resistance in Cattle from Alberta Beef Producers (available at www.albertabeef.org by clicking on the Consumers pull-down menu).

It explains the four main categories of antimicrobials from Category 1 (meaning they have very high importance in human medicine) to Category 4 (not used in human medicine). The brochure gives examples of Category 1 antimicrobials we use in cattle, such as Excede or Baytril.

The very high and high category make up no more than one to two per cent of the antimicrobials used in cattle production. But we must still think twice before we use them. They should only be used for severe medical conditions, such as bad pneumonia. Veterinarians are continually advising that the least critical category is still likely to work on the condition at hand.

I have included a chart that compares the different classes of antibiotics used in cattle versus other species versus humans. You will see a big difference, so have a close look.

In dealing with cases in which there has been no response to drugs that previously worked, veterinarians are having more cultures done. This means the lab grows the bacteria causing the illness and then uses little discs impregnated with antibiotics to actually see which ones work. This gives us a much better scientific approach to treatment and should provide a higher success rate. The issue is this takes a couple of days to do, so in the meantime we as veterinarians must prescribe treatments, which are often based on previous protocols and success rates.

The possibility of resistant bacteria passing from cattle to humans is very remote because Category 1 drugs are so rarely used plus the fact that resistant bacteria would need to get through the packing plant and all the precautions they use (such as steam sterilization, UV light, and a very clean environment through the cooking process) and into a person, who would then have the antibiotic prescribed by the doctor and not work. This is a very, very unlikely chain of events.

There is now a research cluster (headed by Dr. Tim McCallister and including researchers from the cattle industry and veterinary colleges) looking at all these potential pathways to make sure all possibilities have been looked at. This alone is very positive evidence that the industry is doing its due diligence to protect livestock production and people.

A great quote from veterinarian Dr. Craig Dorin of Airdrie is, “It is our privilege and not our right to be able to use antibiotics in the animals we take care of.” Because of all the industry surveillance, drug resistance levels are very low in beef. That doesn’t mean they can’t increase and generally if resistance is found, the bacteria are resistant to most antibiotics in the same family of drugs. Veterinarians know this and will prescribe a different family of antibiotics if need be.

This year, your veterinarian will be much more involved with antimicrobials that are used in production animal medicine, especially those that were non-prescription for the most part but administered in the feed or water. More than 75 per cent of the drugs are used in feed, so enhanced oversight at this level is where you as producer will see the most changes. These are all steps that will be positive in reducing antibiotic usage where possible and using the most effective ones for the condition at hand.

The first thing removed from antibiotic labelling is the growth promotant indications. Increased growth from reduced disease incidence is often a secondary benefit but your veterinarian will need a medical reason to prescribe.

A great resource on AMR is the Beef Cattle Research Council website. It has clear information as well as a seven-minute video that everyone in the cattle industry should watch.

We need to get back to management practices we know will minimize sickness and hence antibiotic usage, especially giving calves adequate quality and quantity of colostrum (colostrum is the best ‘drug’ one can use), low-stress weaning, and pre-immunization up to two weeks before weaning. As well, more direct movement of cattle through satellite and internet sales eliminates lots of commingling.

All these practices can definitely reduce the labour to administer, the cost, and the usage of antimicrobials. I know that in some ways, it is easier said than done. But the potential for reduction in antimicrobial usage is great.

Pharmaceutical companies are focusing more and more on vaccinology so you will see broader coverage vaccines for viruses and bacteria. Intranasal vaccines can provide quicker coverage, and technology has and will improve the degree of immunity and length of coverage over time. In the future, we will most likely see more vaccines replacing antimicrobials.

A good rule for raising cattle is that it is far better to prevent by management and vaccination than treat with antibiotics. Watch the parasite treatments as keeping them greatly reduced in your herd will also stimulate the cattle’s own natural immune system and along with proper nutrition minimize sickness.

With increased usage of antibiotics there is increased resistance in that species so the veterinary communities’ oversight will focus on four things: Prevention, Production, Control and Therapy.

Another website worth checking out is www.raisedwithcare.ca (created by the Alberta Veterinary Medical Association). This website is very interactive and there are some quizzes you can take to test your knowledge. The questions you get wrong become an educating experience.

I encourage you all to check out these reference sources and tell the public so we all together in the cattle industry can do the right thing and be leaders and educators in helping with the global battle against AMR. Generally speaking, we are already doing a good job but there is always room for improvement. So question your veterinarian and yourself and ask if there is a better way if antimicrobial usage seems too frequent on your operation.

Responsible antibiotic usage is not about residues; we already do a fantastic job at that. It is about using the right drug for the right bug and for the right length of time.

Take pride in the fact the cattle industry is, in many ways, taking the lead and the medical profession can learn a lot from what you do. Tell your story.

Many times painkillers, supplements, vitamins, or minerals — rather than antimicrobials — may be the therapy of choice. Prevention of the disease through vaccination, low-stress weaning, and not commingling cattle can also greatly reduce the usage of antimicrobials. In specific instances we may be able to actually lower drug costs and have better outcomes while at the same time not contributing to any resistance.

There will be lots more on this topic in the future, so stay tuned. Tell a neighbour about the fact that all antibiotics will require a prescription as of Dec. 1.

This article was originally published on the Manitoba Co-operator.

The post There’s a story to tell about antimicrobial use — and it’s a good one appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

If they’re not, that could lead to parasitic resistance and drugs that just don’t work.

“You can’t just hammer drugs at the problem, because they won’t work forever,” said Lynn Tait, a sheep producer and small-ruminant veterinarian with OC Flock Management in Bowden.

Before treating them with anthelmintics (anti-parasitic drugs), sheep and goats need to be weighed and dosed to accommodate the heaviest animal in the group.

“Underdosing will result in resistance. If you are underdosing for the weight of the animal, you are opening the doors for those parasites that have resistance,” said Tait.

• Read more: Manage your sheep pasture to reduce parasites

An automatic drench gun should be accurate and fully calibrated, and should administer a full dose. A proper drench gun should go over a ruminant’s tongue and have a metal curve to it. Ivermec pour-on guns should not be used as a substitute.

“You have to get over the base of the tongue. If you don’t get it back far enough, they spit it out — and it doesn’t do any good if they spit it out,” said Tait.

Injectable dewormers work on sheep, but not on goats. Pour-on products designed for cattle should never be used on small ruminants.

Oral drenches will work better if food is withheld for 24 hours before the drench is administered. Tait recommends isolating sheep or goats in a pen the night before. If food is withheld, there will be less material in the rumen, and the dewormers will be more effective.

Only treat sheep and goats when they need it. Some groups may need it, but others may be fine.

In order to decide which to treat, collect a couple of manure pellets from a few animals in each management group. (A good time for sampling is first thing in the morning after letting them out on pasture.) The fecal samples will have eggs in them, showing the parasite load in each animal group.

“If you have a group of 50 animals, you will take five to six samples. It will not be accurate to the individual animal, but it will give you a good idea of where the group is, parasite-wise.”

This method can be used to identify parasite trends and will save money because not every animal is being tested. Producers who have more animals can learn to do fecals at home, which requires a microscope. Vets can also handle fecal samples.

A group of animals that looks sickly could have parasites, and may need to be treated, as can ones that lose body conditioning. Tait recommends culling any individual animals that are chronically underconditioned.

“Over time, you will build a flock that is more able to deal with a parasite load,” she said.

Animals from outside the flock should be quarantined in a dry pen, not on pasture. Tests should be done if you don’t know the history and management of the newcomers.

Most producers think diarrhea and weight loss are signs of a parasite problem, but they could actually be signs of something else.

“If you deworm one animal, two animals, or an entire group of animals and there’s no change, ask yourself if parasites are really the problem,” she said. “I have seen animals that have been dewormed repeatedly with no improvement and that’s because they have Johne’s.”

Deworming without results might also mean that resistance to the dewormer has developed. Unfortunately, many producers have bad habits that can contribute to faster drug resistance, including mixing drugs together to create deworming cocktails. And rotation of dewormers should be avoided.

“Don’t rotate dewormers more often than annually. I’m a firm believer that if it’s working, don’t rotate it,” said Tait.

The post Ruminant parasite drugs are a precious tool — here’s how to use them appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The challenge is there are so many factors hinging on the outcome, so deciding which antibiotic to use — or if one is necessary at all — can be a very difficult decision. Also with the ever-present possibility of antibiotic resistance, we as veterinarians need to decide what antimicrobials to stay away from or to only use in clinical cases when a lower-class antibiotic is not efficacious. Hopefully after reading this article, the thought process will become clearer.

One article can’t clarify every possible combination, so you need to work with your veterinarian to decide on a strategy and the choices for at least the common diseases.

Reading the label is always beneficial as diseases for which clearance has been granted are written on the label. This alone gives you a start as to what types of diseases and subsequently what organ systems, the antibiotic will get into.

The majority of antibiotics, especially new ones, requires a prescription from your veterinarian and so you need to know the conditions it is used for, dosage, method of administration, precautions, withdrawal, etc.

The first decision is whether antibiotics are even necessary. If there is no bacterial infection present or expected in the future, antibiotics may be unnecessary (viral infections are one example). On large mature cattle or feedlot animals, withdrawal times definitely need to be considered. If a condition becomes chronic, slaughter may be an option as we don’t want to burden ourselves and the critter with a long slaughter withdrawal.

Other considerations will be the syringeability (especially important in winter), dosage amount, safety, means of administration (subcutaneous, oral, intravenous etc.), and the cost of the product per treatment day. Cost per day is really the way to truly compare treatment costs. The longer-acting products will cost more because they last longer. The upside is less labour and less stress on the cattle. (This may be nullified if other procedures or painkillers must be given on daily basis.)

The main questions we as veterinarians (and you as farmers) face are: What are the conditions, what organ system is primarily involved, and is causative bacteria likely? The answers to these questions determine the most appropriate first-, second-, and third-choice treatment options.

The best choice takes into account farmer preference, as well as past and current research. Veterinarians will even have different ‘favourites’ for specific conditions. There is almost never a single choice.

A few antibiotics are called broad spectrum, which means they work against a wide array of bacteria in different organ systems. The older sulphonimides as well as newer drugs like Nuflor, Resflor, or Excenel are fairly broad in their effect. Other drugs are very specific — for example, treatment of pneumonia. The macrolide antibiotics are a class of drugs which specifically get into the lungs. Drugs such as Zuprevo, Draxxin, Zactran, and Micotil are all macrolides, and are used primarily for bacterial pneumonia and only a few other things. All prescription antibiotics are fairly specific for pneumonia or only a few other conditions.

Veterinarians may also prescribe them for very specific things, such as seminal vesiculitis in young bulls. There will never be a label claim against these oddball infections. A veterinarian’s experience is invaluable in writing an extra-label prescription. If we do see resistance against one drug in an antibiotic class it is usually resistant to the other drugs in that class.

There are two big classes of bacteria — gram positive and gram negative. Clostridial infections such as blackleg or anthrax are caused by gram-positive organisms. We were always told at veterinary school: P for positive and P for penicillin. This older antibiotic is still quite effective against certain conditions and most veterinarians still use it. Diseases such as blackleg produce toxins and the animal succumbs quickly, so prevention in the form of vaccination is the only effective way to prevent this disease.

To be effective, the right drug must be administered at the right time and right dosage. Weight must be estimated correctly. These antibiotics have been formulated to be effective at the appropriate dosage. Twice as much as necessary will not be more effective and will only cost you more and result in an increased drug withdrawal time. The safety rule of thumb is that if you double the dosage, you double the slaughter withdrawal. Always keep that in mind.

I would be remiss here if I didn’t mention supplemental drugs, such as painkillers, anti-inflammatories, and appetite stimulants. For specific disease, they are often given in conjunction with antibiotics to quicken or improve the response. Again your veterinarian can advise what works best.

Selecting the appropriate medication for a specific disease takes some thought. The biggest step saver is recording what products you use (record either the active ingredient or trade name) and list the diseases it is effective against as well as the dosage. Have a first and second choice and your own specific farm SOP set up by the veterinarian. This will go a long ways to making sure the appropriate product is given especially by new workers.

As well, put up drug dosage charts (available for most products) by the chute, and list withdrawal times. Have epinephrine handy (in case you get a drug reaction) and have the appropriate syringes and needles. Remember a lot of products you use require a prescription and only use products approved for cattle unless you have a written prescription from your veterinarian. Refrigerate the appropriate products and protect others from freezing. Doing all these things should maximize effectiveness of the products.

The future will see more and more vaccines and immune stimulants used, but good management is required to minimize disease and antibiotic usage.

The bottom line is we will always need them to a certain degree, so selecting the right one and using it appropriately will yield the best results.

The post The criteria for selecting the right antibiotic appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The cattle health network, which has been tracking production practices of more than 100 cow-calf producers since 2012, found only 20 per cent of them use antimicrobials of high importance in human medicine in a given year.

“That doesn’t mean that they used them a lot,” said Cheryl Waldner, co-investigator in the study and professor in large-animal sciences at the University of Saskatchewan’s Western College of Veterinary Medicine.

“They could have used them only once. Most of the producers are not using Category 1 drugs ever in cows or pre-weaned calves.

“We have to be very careful and cautious and look for opportunities to minimize use, but this tells us that we are certainly doing that. It is a good news story. We are being prudent with our use in cow-calf herds.”

The study has found that antimicrobials were generally used to treat lameness in cattle, reproductive infections, eye infections, and respiratory diseases. Injectable oxytetracycline, penicillin, and flor-fenicol are the most commonly used antimicrobials in cows, while tetracycline and sulfa drugs are commonly used to treat calves.

“Most of the drugs used by cow-calf producers are Category 3 drugs, so they are pretty far down the list in terms of importance to human health,” said Waldner.

It’s also rare for producers to add antimicrobials to feed. Fewer than 15 per cent of the producers surveyed said they had added antimicrobials to feed, and producers who did said they used them for very short periods of time.

About half of the producers surveyed said that they think about antimicrobial resistance when choosing a product to treat their cattle.

The last time a study on antimicrobial use and resistance was conducted was back in 2002, when Waldner and other researchers collected data from 200 herds.

As part of the cattle health network study, local veterinarians collected fecal samples from 20 randomly selected cattle in about 100 herds in the fall of 2014. These samples were pooled, and E. coli and campylobacter were grown from the samples.

Resistance was pretty low. Only about 10 per cent of herds had one resistant organism.

“It’s not the majority of herds — it’s the minority of herds where we are seeing resistance,” said Waldner.

However, about 2.5 per cent of isolates were resistant to three or more antimicrobials.

“It’s not very common, but there is some evidence of multiple resistant organisms out there,” she said. “It’s a reminder to be cautious and that we need to continue to pay attention to this issue.”

The most common resistance is to tetracycline, which is expected since it’s the most commonly used antimicrobial.

Herds with the most antimicrobial resistance had higher calf mortality in the spring, and would have had a higher use of antimicrobials as a result.

“Herds that had more problems with the spring calf crop were the ones more likely to have higher levels of resistance,” said Waldner.

The post Producers careful with antimicrobials, survey finds appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

A research team led by James Tiedje, distinguished professor of microbiology found that in large swine farms where antibiotics are used continuously in feed for growth promotion and disease prevention, multi-drug-resistant bacteria are likely the norm rather than the exception.

In studying large-scale swine farms in China and one population of pigs in the U.S., the researchers confirmed the presence of many partner genes — resistance genes and mobile genetic elements found together.

When one gene increased or decreased in abundance, partner genes increased or decreased in nearly identical fashion.

Some of these partner genes can make bacteria resistant to antibiotics that were not even fed to the animals. So when one antibiotic is used, resistance to many antibiotics can increase, the scientists report in a study published in mBio.

“In the fight against the rise of antibiotic resistance, we need to understand that the use of one antibiotic or, in some cases, antibacterial disinfectants may increase the abundance of multi-drug-resistant bacteria,” he said.

“Tracking the source of antibiotic resistance is quite complicated because antibiotic use, which increases the occurrence of resistance, is widespread, and antibiotic resistance can spread between bacteria.”

The Chinese farms are quite close to large cities. So controlling antibiotic resistance in pigs and farms is important to minimizing human risk, he said.

“This is a global issue rather than one that’s simply isolated in China; multi-drug resistance is just a plane ride away,” Tiedje added. “This is why our work in China is definitely as relevant as in the United States.”

They also found that at the Chinese farms, there were up to 14 partner genes, all occurring together in farms that are thousands of miles apart, said Tim Johnson, lead author with MSU’s Center for Microbial Ecology. “These genes confer resistance to up to six kinds of antibiotics, and some allow bacteria to reshuffle the order of their genes.”

In Chinese soils that received manure-based fertilizer, the same resistance genes were found in manure and in high abundance. However, the kinds of bacteria present in soil were quite different. This indicates that on the Chinese farms, the potential for resistance gene transfer among environmental bacteria is likely, said Yongguan Zhu, co-author from the Chinese Academy of Science.

The post Bacteria share antibiotic resistance with genetic partners appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The two organizations will be awarding $1.5 million in grants for research in the following areas:

• Identify and/or develop practical and economically viable modifications to current beef production practices that reduce the need for non-ionophore in-feed antimicrobials, such as tylosin and oxy/chlortetracycline. (The development of pre/pro/synbiotics, the use of plant-based or other chemical antimicrobial alternatives will not be considered under this research call.)
• Identify and/or quantify differences in animal biological processes or genetics that affect animal health responses to high-grain diets.
• Develop and pilot rapid and/or chute-side diagnostic techniques that can identify antimicrobial-resistant bovine pathogens and help inform antimicrobial treatment decisions in real time.
• Quantify baseline antimicrobial use data at both the cow-calf and feedlot levels.
• Quantify the prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in bovine pathogens in cattle arriving at the feedlot prior to any antimicrobial treatment at the lot, and/or in cull cattle arriving for slaughter.

Projects can be between one and three years in duration, but must be completed by Sept. 30, 2019.

The post Research on antimicrobial use and resistance to be funded appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

But it could be causing increased resistance to antibiotics used to treat cattle, say two experts.

There’s no question that using antibiotics increases the odds of bacteria becoming resistant, said Reynold Bergen, science director of the Beef Cattle Research Council.

“Antimicrobial use — whether we are using it in humans or pets or livestock, agriculture or horticulture or beekeeping — is going to increase antimicrobial resistance,” Bergen said during a recent research council webinar.

Some antibiotics used in livestock are closely related to antibiotics used in human medicine, and antibiotic resistance can be transferred between different types of bacteria, he said.

“There’s concern that all of these factors can add up to a reduction in the efficacy of drugs that are used in human medicine and that’s actually where the big question mark is,” said Bergen.

Antibiotic resistance is a naturally occurring phenomena, and even bacteria never exposed to antibiotics have been found to develop resistance.

“Antibiotic resistance is natural, but if we add extra antibiotics through the various ways they are used, we can really speed up the rate at which antibiotic resistance develops,” said Bergen.

• Read more: 12 tips on the proper use of livestock antibiotics

But so far, there’s very little evidence antibiotic use in the cattle industry is posing a threat to human medicines. According to work done by the Canadian Integrated Program for Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance, there is next to no resistance to antibiotics that are classed as “high importance” in human medicine, and more resistance to drugs that are “less important” in human medicine.

“In the cattle side, the antimicrobial resistance is looking very, very good,” said Bergen. “Any other livestock sector in Canada would be proud to have results that look this good.”

The “very high importance” and “high importance” drugs account for only 20 per cent of all drug sales in the cattle industry.

“When we look at the human side of things, it’s close to 80 per cent,” said Bergen. “Chances are, if these drugs aren’t working in human medicine, it’s because of the way they are used in human medicine.

“There is no evidence that antibiotic resistance in Canadian beef cattle production is causing the antibiotics in human medicine to be less effective and that is in spite of the fact that people are really looking to see if that exists.”

But that doesn’t mean all is well.

Cattle producers and feedlot operators used to consider antibiotic use as a right — but they need to realize it’s a privilege, said Dr. Craig Dorin, veterinarian with Veterinary Agri-Health Services in Airdrie.

“Society is going to review how we do this and they’re going to have expectations of us,” he said on the webinar. “And so we need to have a mind shift on how we approach our use of these products so we can defend that we are using them prudently and in a sustainable manner.”

More veterinary oversight, fewer over-the-counter antibiotics, and the removal of growth promotion claims are all being phased in over the next couple of years, but cow-calf producers need to rethink their management approach. Despite the rising concerns about antibiotic resistance, some producers are still using antimicrobials prophylactically.

“With the values of calves as high as they are, people don’t want to lose them, so we are hearing that people are using antibiotics inappropriately — when the animals might need treatment as opposed to when they know they need treatment,” said Dorin.

Most feedlots have stringent protocols for antimicrobials and pen riders are given extensive training in disease recognition. However, some feedlots treat all high-risk calves, whether or not they are sick. This has reduced cases of respiratory diseases and death loss, but it may not be a sustainable practice, said Dorin.

“The question we have is if we can defend the use of this long term,” he said. “Is society going to allow us to use antibiotic products on animals that might get sick if they aren’t currently sick?”

A 2014-15 survey of feedlots conducted by Alberta Agriculture and Forestry and Alberta Beef Producers found some resistance to antibiotics. It also found multi-drug resistance was increasing.

“Antimicrobial resistance does exist, it’s an issue we face and the question is whether it’s going to be a growing issue or something we can control,” said Dorin.

The post Antibiotic resistance threat can’t be dismissed, say experts appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“The industry is driving the bus right now and that’s a good thing,” said Dr. Tom Inglis, a vet and managing partner of Poultry Health Services in Airdrie.

“It behooves us to think a little bit about the impact of some of these choices, and they do have a huge impact.”

The industry is “not going to educate Canadian consumers,” Inglis said at the recent Western Poultry Conference.

“We have to listen to what they want and provide it in the marketplace,” he said. “And one of the things that consumers are concerned about is antibiotics.”

He pointed to consumer concerns about drug residues in meat — even though poultry meat has either none or, at worse, “residues of tiny proportions.”

But the industry is nevertheless revamping its use of antibiotics, he said.

“We’re in a period where things are getting changed and where they will change quickly,” said Inglis.

In both veterinary and human medicine, doctors used to treat first and ask later, now the reverse is becoming the norm as both professions seek to reduce antibiotic use. Regulators are also now publishing results of poor findings rather than overseeing corrections and fines.

“If you get a salmonella violation, for example, they’ll just publish it and let the retail world take care of you,” he said.

By year’s end, growth promotion claims will no longer be allowed for medically important antimicrobials, and those drugs can only be used in food animals under the direction of a veterinarian for treating specific diseases. The industry is also tackling the issue of extra label use. The poultry industry has also taken a proactive use to voluntarily quit using Category 1 drugs, which are important to human medicine, for prophylactic use.

The bottom line is that the industry is responding to public concerns, said Inglis.

“In terms of the judicious use of antimicrobials, I would say that we’re well on our way,” he said. “Most of the time, we’re not doing therapeutic treatments in our flocks. That’s a really positive story that we’re sitting quietly on top of.

“We’re doing all the right stuff. Our story is that most of the time, we don’t need antibiotics. This is a good story.”

Recent studies also suggest there is a reduction in antimicrobial resistance.

“It’s important to me that we measure resistance outcomes,” said Inglis. “If we’re not getting better results, then we’re not winning.”

But he also warned that raising poultry without any drug use isn’t possible.

“The truth is that raising birds without any antibiotics ever is not a sustainable industry position,” he said.

But producers have to do everything they can to reduce the threat of disease. That includes good nutrition, vaccination, clean water, and proper disinfection procedures, as well as things such as ensuring proper temperatures in barns.

“Getting the birds started right is critical — if you chill a bird, the immune system does not function properly and they will not do well, ever,” he said. “Chickens do much better if they have the same humidity and temperature as at the hatchery. It makes a huge difference if we get that right.”

The post Message received on antibiotic use appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

The new gene, called MCR-1, makes bacteria immune to a group of antibiotics used as the last defence to fight resistant bugs. MCR-1 was confirmed to have surfaced in China in November, and that prompted health agencies around the globe to search for it on home soil.

Last month, the Public Health Agency of Canada said it had found the gene present in three cases from among 1,600 reviewed — two involving ground beef in Ontario in 2010 and one involving an Ottawa woman in 2011.

It is a warning that can’t be ignored, said Darrell Dalton, registrar for the Alberta Veterinary Medical Association.

“The livestock and food production industry has to recognize that they are the ones where change has to occur,” said Dalton. “They’re the ones who have to stand up and say, ‘I’m responsible and then use antibiotics responsibly.’

“They’re going to have to say that, and do that. Down the road, I would fully anticipate an audit process to make sure that antibiotics and antimicrobials aren’t making it into feed or foodstuff.”

The big fear — and it’s a terrifying one for health authorities — centres around the fact that MCR-1 is resistant to a group of antibiotics called polymyxins, which includes a drug called colistin. The latter is a drug of last resort when fighting antibiotic-resistant strains of illness caused by resistant bacteria and viruses. Already an estimated 700,000 people die annually from otherwise treatable conditions and losing colistin could see that number soar.

Colistin was never registered for use in Canadian livestock production, said Jean Szkotnicki, president of the Guelph-based Canadian Animal Health Institute.

“The product was never, and isn’t registered in Canada for food animals,” she said. “It doesn’t have much to do with our membership, who all have licensed products.”

Nevertheless, there is evidence that the pharmaceutical ingredient was used in food animal production here.

“In a drafting of early swine producer guidelines, the use of colistin as an active pharmaceutical ingredient was one of the alternatives — it’s been removed, but that indicates that there must (have been) some use,” she said.

It was also given to veal calves, she said, which may explain why the public health agency found it in hamburger samples.

The situation highlights the danger of producers importing drugs under own-use regulations.

“Nobody wants to talk about it (so) it’s hard to know how much antibiotics or antimicrobials is going into the feeds,” said Dalton.

But currently, farmers can “go down (to the U.S.) with an empty trailer and bring back all the antibiotics or pharmaceuticals they want,” he said.

“In some areas — Quebec being one of them — they’re using active pharmaceutical ingredients, said Dalton. “They’re importing them by the barrel and adding them to the feed, but that isn’t registered in Canada, or listed as an antimicrobial. That’s what happened in the colistin case.”

The Alberta Veterinary Medical Association has been trying to raise awareness of resistance and promote responsible antimicrobial use, including recently launching a new website: www.raisedwithcare.ca.

While genotyping is showing there’s “not a lot of similarity between the antibiotics and antimicrobials used in veterinary medicine versus human medicine,” said Dalton, producers need to be doing everything they can to reduce their use. That includes using vaccinations, biosecurity, anti-parasite control, and reducing stress in animals to lower incidence of disease.

Szkotnicki said that although she hasn’t heard any specifics, she expects Health Canada will soon be bringing in new regulations for drug use in livestock.

Some new rules are already on the way.

Next year, all growth promotion claims will be taken off antibiotics and antimicrobials. As well all water solubles and feed additives for medically important antimicrobials will require a veterinarian’s prescription.

The post Livestock drug use back in the spotlight appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.