Balance needed in poultry and egg’s antibiotic usage

Finding the right equilibrium of antibiotic usage in the poultry industry will reduce confusion on antibiotic related labels, improve bird health and create a more sustainable supply.

Antibiotic use in the poultry and egg sectors has changed over the last decade to meet consumer demand, improve bird health and strengthen the poultry supply chain.

With antibiotics, consumers can choose products ranging anywhere from traditional chicken to no antibiotics ever (NAE) chicken, explained Poultry Business Solutions LLC owner Don Ritter at the 2024 Chicken Marketing Summit.

A responsible, balanced approach somewhere between these two extremes is wanted and needed by consumers and chickens, he said.

NAIHM and One Health could help

According to Ritter, the Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) One Health system could help the industry find balance in its antibiotic use. The One Health approach requires that antimicrobials used in animal agriculture be evaluated for efficacy in treating broilers and the potential impact on the effectiveness of their use in human medicine.

“The easiest way to think about One Health is that the health of people, animals and the environment are all interconnected. What happens in one sector affects the other sector. A balanced approach is needed to optimize the outcome for everybody.”

Additionally, No Antibiotics Important in Human Medicine (NAIHM) programs could move the industry to a more balanced place concerning antibiotic usage.

“Most consumers believe it is ok to treat and control infections using antibiotics, which aligns with restrictions on medically important antibiotic use.”

Unfortunately, this type of program does not allow for treatment of illness with medically important drugs and it can be difficult to communicate its purpose through labelling, as it is more of a product specification compared to a retail sales attribute, Ritter added.

Antibiotic misunderstanding, labelling’s role

There is a great amount of misunderstanding concerning how and why antibiotics are used among consumers in the industry, which stems from claims that poultry companies make on labels.

One large misunderstanding is the difference between antibiotic residues and antimicrobial resistance (AMR).

Antibiotic residues are trace amounts of antibiotics remaining in meat after an animal is treated with antibiotics. With residues, consumers express concern about eating antibiotics through the product. However, this is not possible due to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) withdrawal policy.

 “No meat in the meat case has any harmful antibiotic residue. It does not matter what the label says,” he stated. If a package of chicken is not labelled with an antibiotic claim, consumers believe there are antibiotic residues in the product.

“Absence labels imply that something is wrong with the unlabeled product. It’s a marketing label game that needs to stop.”

AMR is related to bacteria that is resistant to antibiotics. The concern with AMR among consumers is that a human foodborne illness will not respond to antibiotics from a physician if their chicken was treated with the same or a related antibiotic, said Ritter.

According to Ritter, all antibiotic use contributes to this problem, unless a NAE program is utilized. However, NAE programs have a significantly higher mortality rate compared to other antibiotic programs and research shows that most consumers will not pay the premium for NAE chicken.

Source: wattagnet.com