Antimicrobial Drug Use And Veterinary Costs In U.S. Livestock Production
Antimicrobial drugs are fed to animals at low levels to treat diseases, to promote growth, and to increase feed efficiency. Incorporating low levels of antimicrobial drugs in livestock feeds has been shown to be a factor stimulating the development of antimicrobial drug resistant bacteria in livestock. Since many of the drugs used to treat livestock are the same as or are related to drugs used in human health care, there is concern that resistant organisms may pass from animals to humans through the handling of animals or food derived from animals. The movement of pathogens from animals to humans, and vice versa, has been documented, but the extent to which it has occurred or could occur is unknown. Although it is estimated that as little as 10 percent of the problems of drug-resistant pathogens in humans originate in livestock health care practices, there is currently considerable debate about the frequency and costs of human disease outbreaks resulting from animals infected with drug-resistant pathogens. Several European countries have banned the growth-promoting use of antimicrobial drugs in livestock production as a precautionary measure to prevent resistant organisms from passing from animals to humans. This report presents preliminary estimates suggesting that discontinuing the use of antimicrobial drugs in hog production would initially decrease feed efficiency, raise feed costs, reduce production, and raise prices to consumers. Longer term effects were not examined.
|Date of creation:||2001|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.ers.usda.gov/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Mark A. Wade & Andrew P. Barkley, 1992. "The economic impacts of a ban on subtherapeutic antibiotics in swine production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(2), pages 93-107.
- Matthew T. Holt & Stanley R. Johnson, 1988.
"Supply Dynamics in the U.S. Hog Industry,"
Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie,
Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 36(2), pages 313-335, 07.
- Matthew T. Holt & Stanley R. Johnson, 1986. "Supply Dynamics in the U.S. Hog Industry," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 86-wp12, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
- Matthew T. Holt & Stanley R. Johnson, 1986. "Supply Dynamics in the U.S. Hog Industry," Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) Publications 86-wp12, Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI) at Iowa State University.
- Dermot J. Hayes & Helen H. Jensen & Lennart Backstrom, 1999. "Economic Impact of a Ban on the Use of Over-the-Counter Antibiotics," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 99-sr90, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
- Zilberman, David & Millock, Katti, 1997. "Pesticide Use And Regulation: Making Economic Sense Out Of An Externality And Regulation Nightmare," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 22(02), December.
- Babcock, Bruce A. & Lichtenberg, E. & Zilberman, David, 1992. "Impact of Damage Control and Quality of Output: Estimating Pest Control Effectiveness," Staff General Research Papers 10589, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:uersab:33695. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.