An economist from Goldman Sachs who conducted a review of antibiotic use in livestock in Britain recommends significantly reducing such medication at least to the international agreeable limits.
Jim O'Neill, who leads the review commissioned by the British government, believes that livestock growers must go easy on antibiotics in order to reduce the incidence of antibiotic resistance.
In the United States, at least 80% of the antibiotics purchased are used in livestock produce. Growers provide them to animals such as pigs and chickens to make them more immune to common diseases that can eventually kill them.
However, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), food animals can become reservoirs of pathogens that may be resistant to antibiotics, and they may be passed on to humans when they eat the meat.
Last month, both the Chinese and the British health experts have discovered a new strain of E. coli that is resistant to colistin, the last-resort drug for people who have antibiotic resistance. The strain is found in food products such as pigs and raw pork. A significant characteristic of the strain is the presence of plasmid, a kind of DNA molecule that can move from one type of bacteria to another.
O'Neill's report, which he already presented to a London briefing, pegs the cost of the health threat at around $100 trillion within the next 35 years and death of no more than 5 million people around the globe annually.
One of his recommendations is to follow the lead of other European countries such as Denmark and Netherlands, which have set up maximum limits on how much antibiotics can be provided on livestock. For example, Denmark allows no more than 50mg of antibiotics every year for every kilogram of livestock.
Nevertheless, he stressed that more actionable steps should be taken by policymakers. So far, the G-20 members have already agreed to tackle the issue on their next meeting, as written in their latest communiqué.
