OSCO, Ill. — The impact of antibiotic use in meat production is a debate that continues to resurface.

 

Recently, Osco, Ill. pork producer Gary Asay took exception to an Augustana University professor’s editorial in the Moline Dispatch newspaper alleging that antibiotic use in meat production presents a growing human health threat (Antibiotics in meat real, growing human health threat; Feb. 26).

 

In a March op-ed published on QCOnline. com, Asay responded by informing the author and the website’s readers that oversight of how and when antibiotics are used by pork producers has improved through a collaboration between government, livestock farmers, veterinarians and other groups.

 

“This year, new FDA regulations went into effect, and American pig farmers were ready. Effective Jan. 1, it became illegal to use medically important antibiotics to promote livestock growth. Today, prevention, control and treatment of disease are the only permitted uses of both water and feed-applied medically important antibiotics; and only with the oversight and direction of a veterinarian,” Asay wrote.

 

The pork and grain producer believes the letter’s author, reporter Dan Lee, did not do enough research before printing and submitting his conclusions. Asay is also unhappy that the newspaper’s editors did not verify the claims made in the op-ed. Agriculture in Illinois is the state’s No. 1 employer, and its biggest exporter. “I would absolutely agree that agriculture has been fighting a fake news campaign for many years,” Asay said in a phone call after his op-ed appeared, “I’ve been frustrated for years that people can pull stuff off the Internet and put it out as fact, which is what this (letter) was. It’s very, very frustrating.”

 

Lee, who identified himself as the Marian Taft Cannon Professor in the Humanities at Augustana College and the son of a cattle farmer, sprinkles references to statements made in 2013 by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention regarding the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria and referenced a 2010 Consumer Reports article in his opinion letter.

 

“The crux of the problem is that prolonged exposure to antibiotics contributes to genetic mutations, the result being new strains of bacteria unaffected by antibiotics that were lethal to many of their predecessors. That is good news for bacteria but bad news for everyone else,” Lee opined.

 

Asay does not directly dispute that point, electing to focus instead on a new rule that took effect Jan. 1 limiting the use of animal antibiotics under FDA Guidance 209 and 213 and the Veterinary Feed Directive- developments Lee did not mention in his public letter.

 

“Pig farmers embraced this change and, in fact, some farmers implemented it years before the deadline,” Asay wrote. “The change in federal regulation also means that every pig farmer must have an established relationship with a veterinarian, and that veterinarian is responsible to prescribe antibiotics as they see fit to ensure herd health. This is a major step forward on the path of continuous improvement in caring for pigs ... Our world is at a turning point for antibiotic use in both human and animal health.

 

“The goal is to balance animal health and welfare with safe food production while minimizing the threat of resistance.  Pig farmers understand their role in appropriately using these valuable medicines-- for the benefit of both people and pigs.”

 

Asay’s letter concluded by advising those interested in learning more about the new FDA regulations to visit www.realchangeonfarms.org Both men’s op-eds can be accessed through web searches or visiting www.qconline.com