Sign up now!
Don't show this again
Sweepstakes Rules

We’re glad you’re enjoying Poultry Health Today.
Access is free but you’ll need to register to view more content.
Already registered? Sign In
Tap to download the app
REPORTSCollect articles and features into your own report to read later, print or share with others

Create a New Report


Read Later

Create a new report

Report title (required) Brief description (optional)
follow us

You must be logged in to edit your profile.

Sponsored by Zoetis

Sponsored By Zoetis

Influence Feed 08.28 Image

Author of California bill defends using antibiotics to prevent disease

California lawmakers passed SB-835 (Food animals: medically important antimicrobial drugs), which mirrors the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Guidance 213 (covered in Influence Feed edition “Real Voices“), reports the latest edition of Influence Feed.

Like the FDA’s recommendations in Guidance 213, this bill limits use of medically important antibiotics in livestock to treatment, control and prevention, outlawing their use as growth promotants.

Opponents of the bill within activist groups such as Sustainable Table criticized (PDF) the bill for being too weak.

Jonathan Kaplan of the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) articulated critics’ argument for limiting antibiotic use to treatment only, and not prevention: “We need laws to stop the practice of giving animals that are not sick low doses of antibiotics in their feed day after day.”

However, the bill’s author, state Sen. Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo), argued in The Sacramento Bee in favor of using antibiotics for prevention.

“[Critics] argue that SB 835 should also make it illegal to use antibiotics in livestock for preventative purposes. However, preventative use can be judicious,” he wrote in the editorial.

Hill noted that antibiotics are often given to humans for preventative purposes prior to surgeries. “Just as humans are given prophylactic antibiotics when a doctor deems it necessary, there are situations in which a veterinarian may determine that livestock need prophylactic antibiotics,” the senator added.

“Veterinarians are sworn to protect ‘animal health and welfare’ and to use their training for ‘the prevention and relief of animal suffering.’ We cannot simply remove a tool that veterinarians use to uphold their oath,” Hill said.

Visit Influence Feed for more industry trends and insights from key opinion leaders.


Posted on August 28, 2014

tags: , ,

You must be logged in to edit your profile.

Google Translate is provided on this website as a reference tool. However, Poultry Health Today and its sponsor and affiliates do not guarantee in any way the accuracy of the translated content and are not responsible for any event resulting from the use of the translation provided by Google. By choosing a language other than English from the Google Translate menu, the user agrees to withhold all liability and/or damage that may occur to the user by depending on or using the translation by Google.