Sunday, 8 March 2009

MRSA in Pigs - The Americans discuss while Britain covers up

The American pork and veterinary industries are now at least discussing the issue of MRSA and pigs and are moving far ahead of Britain where lies, intimidation and cover-up still rules.

They are trying to use science where Britain is still using pay-offs and ill deserved gongs to try to smother crimes against humanity. British vets cannot win - they will be exposed.

"We want to know the answer, if it's good or bad, we want to know sowe can deal with it and do what's right for our pigs, our workers andour consumers," Greiner said.

The Danish experience, with antibiotic use doubling after the ban on nontherapeutic antibiotics, echoes the slightly earlier British experience.

Britain deliberately tried to hide up the figures by changing the basis of collection and publication, but the Soil Association managed to unravel the situation although wrongly attributed the reason to wrongful use as a growth promoter.

The real reason for the massive increase in antibiotic use was the hidden 1999 British circovirus (PMWS) epidemic.

Once again the facts here are completely in accordance with the Gardiner Hypothesis: that MRSA in people follows Circovirus epidemics in pigs.

The Danes, Canadians and now Americans are following the same disastrous route, but the pressure is now building in the US. Hence this article.

The Americans are well on the way to starting to tackle the issue on the ground. They already know their pigs and pork carry MRSA st398 (and C.Diff) a knowledge deliberately denied to the British public about British pigs.

The Americans will then be searching for the source of the problems.They will be arriving in Britain shortly. Then the proverbial hits the fan.

British vets are rather naively hoping to get support and comfort from their American colleagues. Some chance!

The American vets will be dumping on the British to save their own skins.

http://www.infozine.com/news/stories/op/storiesView/sid/34533/

Pork Industry Says Antibiotics Are Necessary for Animal AgricultureSunday, March 08, 2009 :: Staff infoZine

By Heather Lockwood - Some scientists say nontherapeutic antibiotics used in animal agriculture are contributing to the growing problem of antibiotic-resistant disease, but the pork industry says these antibiotics are necessary.

Washington, D.C. - infoZine - Scripps Howard Foundation Wire - TheFood and Drug Administration puts all antibiotics used in animal agriculture through a "very vigorous approval process" that considers the safety of the animals, their human handlers, consumers and the environment, said Jennifer Greiner, a veterinarian and director of science and technology for the Pork Producers Council. She is the daughter of pork producers.

The FDA approves antibiotics in animal agriculture for four uses:treatment, prevention, bacterial control and growth promotion. The FDA considers all but growth promotion to be therapeutic uses.

"We truly believe 'nontherapeutic' is just a bad term. Any time you use an antibiotic, whether it be a lower dose or a higher dose, that antibiotic is going to kill some kind of bacteria," she said.

"All antibiotics have some sort of therapeutic value." Feeding low amounts of antibiotics daily to livestock, particularly young hogs, is a preventive measure "with some beneficial effects onthe gut," said Jim McKean, extension veterinarian at Iowa StateUniversity and associate director of the Iowa Pork Industry Center.

"There are health advantages for those animals receiving low levels ofwhat people call 'sub-therapeutic' antibiotics," McKean said. "There is not a clear pathway from the use in animals to a public health disease."

They were reacting to a Capitol Hill briefing last week about a study that found MRSA, an antibiotic-resistant disease, in swine and their human handlers for the first time in the U.S. Before that MRSA was found almost exclusively in hospitals. It is hard to treat, and the researchers said their study meant people who work with or eat meat could be at a low level of danger.

Greiner said Denmark's pork industry, which is about the same size as Iowa's, provides a good example of the consequences of a ban on nontherapeutic antibiotics.

Denmark outlawed the use of nontherapeutic antibiotics in animal agriculture in 1998, followed by the European Union.

"The amount of therapeutic antibiotics - treatment, prevention andcontrol - has doubled, more than doubled, since that ban went into effect," Greiner said, referring to Denmark's swine industry. "It's really been an animal care issue."

McKean called the increase in the use of therapeutic antibiotics afterthe ban "fairly substantial."
The National Pork Board has invested more than $200,000 into theresearch of MRSA and swine. Researchers from University of Minnesota, Ohio State University and University of Iowa are involved in the project.

"We want to know the answer, if it's good or bad, we want to know so we can deal with it and do what's right for our pigs, our workers and our consumers," Greiner said.

"We know that they are precious tools and we don't have very many antibiotics in our toolbox, so therefore,we want to make sure that we're using the ones that we have responsibly and judiciously."

"We just want to make certain that we have all our ducks in a row.MRSA is a quirky little bug to try to isolate in a lab and then runall those special tests on," Greiner said.