Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Antibiotic Resistance Due to Modern Agricultural Practices: An Ethical Perspective

  • Review Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The use of subtherapeutic doses of antibiotics in food-producing animals has been linked to antibiotic resistant infections in humans. Although this practice has been banned in Europe, the U.S. regulatory authorities have been slow to act. This paper discusses the regulatory hurdles and ethical dilemmas of banning this practice within the context of the risk analysis model (risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication). Specific issues include unethical use of scientific uncertainty during the risk assessment phase, the rejection of the precautionary principle leading to ineffective risk management, and the criticality of risk communication to build consensus and force action. The underlying root cause is a conflict of values (Type I ethical problem) among key stakeholders, which is examined in depth along with an ethical analysis using public health ethical values.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anomaly, J. (2009). Harm to others: The social cost of antibiotics in agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 22(5), 423–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, G. L., Conn, L. A., & Pinner, R. W. (1999). Trends in infectious disease mortality in the United States during the 20th century. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 281(1), 61–66. doi:10.1001/jama.281.1.61).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, N., Gollust, S., Goold, S., & Jacobson, P. (2007). Looking ahead: Addressing ethical challenges in public health practice. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, 35, 657–667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Botti, C., et al. (2004). In M. Matuzzi & J. Tickner (Eds.), The precautionary principle: Protecting public health, the environment and the future of our children. Copenhagen: World Health Organization.

  • Boucher, H. W., Talbot, G. H., Bradley, J. S., Edwards, J. E., Gilbert, D., Rice, L. B., et al. (2009). Bad bugs, no drugs: No ESKAPE! An update from the infectious diseases society of America. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 48(1), 1–12. doi:10.1086/595011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buttel, F. H. (2003). Internalizing the societal costs of agricultural production. Plant Physiology, 133(4), 1656–1665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaway, T. R., Anderson, R. C., Edrington, T. S., Elder, R. O., Genovese, K. J., Bischoff, K. M., & Nisbet, D. J. (2003). Preslaughter intervention strategies to reduce food-borne pathogens in food animals. Journal of Animal Science 81(14, Suppl 2), E17–E23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caplan, A. (2009). Right to reform. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 119(10), 2862.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M. L. (2000). Changing pattern of infectious disease. Nature, 406, 762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Couric, K. (2010). Antibiotic overuse hurting humans? Retrieved 11/27, 2010, from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/09/eveningnews/main6191530.shtml.

  • Cranor, C. F. (2003). How should society approach the real and potential risks posed by new technologies? Plant Physiology, 133(1), 3–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dean, W., & Scott, H. (2005). Antagonistic synergy: Process and paradox in the development of new agricultural antibiotic regulations. Agriculture and Human Values, 22, 479–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (1979). The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Washington, D.C.: OPRR Reports.

  • Dundon, S. J. (2003). Agricultural ethics and multifunctionality are unavoidable. Plant Physiology, 133(2), 427–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Environmental Defense Fund. (2009). McDonalds—antibiotics. No more playing chicken with antibiotics. Retrieved 11/27, 2010, from http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=2039.

  • European Commission Health and Consumer Protection Directorate General. (1999). Opinion of the scientific steering committee on antimicrobial resistance.

  • European Medicines Agency. (2009). Joint opinion on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) focused on zoonotic infections. Joint opinion on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) focused on zoonotic infections. EFSA Journal, 7(11), 1372. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1372.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAO/OIE/WHO. (2004). Second joint FAO/OIE/WHO expert workshop on non-human antimicrobial usante and antimicrobial resistance: Management options.FAO/OIE/WHO.

  • Gallagher, J. (2009). Study: Antibiotics problems cost U.S. between $17B and $26B a year. Triangle Business Journal. Retrieved 8/15, 2011 from http://www.bizjournals.com/triangle/stories/2009/10/19/daily4.html

  • Gorbach, S. (2001). Antimicrobial use in animal feed—time to stop. New England Journal of Medicine, 345(16), 1202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A. B. (1965). The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 58, 295–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, H. S. (2003). On finding solutions to ethical problems in agriculture. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 16, 439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joint FAO/OIE/WHO Consultation. (1997). Risk management and food safety, report of a joint FAO/WHO consultation, Rome, Italy, 27 to 31 January 1997. (FAO food and nutrition paper no. 65). Rome: FAO.

  • Joint FAO/OIE/WHO Expert Workshop. (2003). Non-human antimicrobial usage and antimicrobial resistance: Scientific assessment. FAO/OIE/WHO.

  • Kass, N. (2001). An ethics framework for public health. American Journal of Public Health, 11, 1776–1782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khachatourians, G. (1998). Agricultural use of antibiotics and the evolution and transfer of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 159, 1129–1136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klevens, R. M., Morrison, M. A., Nadle, J., Petit, S., Gershman, K., Ray, S., et al. (2007). Invasive methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in the United States. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 298(15), 1763–1771.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, S. (2010). Comment docket no. FDA-2010-D-0094. Retrieved 08/15, 2011, from http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2010-D-0094-0438.

  • Marshall, B. M., & Levy, S. B. (2011). Food animals and antimicrobials: Impacts on human health. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 24(4), 718–733. doi:10.1128/CMR.00002-11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, C., & Lopez, A. (1997). Global mortality, disability, and the contribution of risk factors: Global burden of disease study. Lancet, 349, 1436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences. (1980). The effects on human health of subtherapeutic use of antimicrobial drugs in animal feeds. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Grain and Feed Association. (2010). Docket no. FDA-2010-D-0094 - draft guidance #209: The judicious use of medically important antimicrobial drugs in food-producing animals; availability. Retrieved 08/15, 2011, from http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FDA-2010-D-0094-0455.

  • National Pork Producers Council. (2010). Where’s science behind FDA antibiotics ‘Guidance’? Retrieved 11/22, 2010, from http://www.nppc.org/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=25859.

  • National Research Council. (1999). The use of drugs in food animals—benefits and risks. National Research Council.

  • Neiwold, T. A. (2007). The nonantibiotic anti-inflammatory effect of antimicrobial growth promoters, the real mode of action. A hypothesis. Poultry Science, 86(4), 605.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paine, L., Deshpandé, R., Margolis, J. D., & Bettcher, K. E. (2005). Up to code. Harvard Business Review, 83(12), 122–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Public Health Leadership Society. (2002). Principles of ethical practice of public health. Retrieved 11/27, 2010, from http://www.apha.org/NR/rdonlyres/1CED3CEA-287E-4185-9CBD-BD405FC60856/0/ethicsbrochure.pdf.

  • Roberts, R. R., et al. (2009). Hospital and societal costs of antimicrobial-resistant infections in a Chicago teaching hospital: Implications for antibiotic stewardship. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 49, 1175–1184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rollin, B. (2001). Ethics, science, and antimicrobial resistance. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 14(1), 29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayre, L. (2009). The hidden link between factory farms and human illness. Mother Earth News, 232, 76–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, T. (2011). Just who is at risk? The ethics of environmental regulation. Human and Experimental Toxicology, 30(8), 795–819. doi:10.1177/0960327110379252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sperling, D. (2010). Food law, ethics, and food safety regulation: Roles, justifications, and expected limits. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 23, 267–278

    Google Scholar 

  • Swann, M., Baxter, K., & Field, H. (1969). Report of the joint committee on the use of antibiotics in animal husbandry and veterinary medicine. United Kingdom: HMSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Union of Concerned Scientist. (2008) Hogging it!: Estimates of antimicrobial abuse in livestock. Retrieved December 15, 2008, from http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/solutions/wise_antibiotics/.

  • United States Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2004). Antibiotic resistance: Federal agencies need to better focus efforts to address risks to humans from antibiotic use in animals. Washington, DC: United States Government Accountability Office (GAO).

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration Center for Veterinary Medicine. (2010). The judicious use of medically important antimicrobial drugs in food-producing animals. draft guidance. No. 209). Washington, DC: US Government.

  • Vose, D., Acar, J., Anthony, F., Franklin, A., Gupta, R., Nicholls, T., Tamura, Y., Thompson, S. Threlfall, E. J., van Vuuren, M., White, D. G., Wegener, H. C., & Costarrica, M. L. (2001). Antimicrobial resistance: Risk analysis methodology for the potential impact on public health of antimicrobial resistant bacteria of animal origin. Revue Scientifique Et Technique De l Office International Des Epizooties, 20(3), 811–827.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization. (2003). Impacts of antimicrobial growth promoter termination in Denmark: The WHO international review panel’s evaluation of the termination of the use of antimicrobial growth promoters in Denmark. Paper presented at the Impacts of Antimicrobial Growth Promoter Termination in Denmark: The WHO International Review Panel’s Evalutation of the Termination of the use of Antimicrobial Growth Promoters in Denmark, Foulum, Denmark. Retrieved from http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2003/WHO_CDS_CPE_ZFK_2003.1.pdf.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to acknowledge Freda Patterson, PhD., Assistant Professor of Public Health at Temple University for her guidance in the writing of this manuscript and to thank the anonymous reviewers of an earlier version of this paper for their helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Temple University, 123 Federal St., Philadelphia, PA, 19147, USA

    Joan Duckenfield

Authors
  1. Joan Duckenfield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joan Duckenfield.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Duckenfield, J. Antibiotic Resistance Due to Modern Agricultural Practices: An Ethical Perspective. J Agric Environ Ethics 26, 333–350 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-011-9370-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-011-9370-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation