Articles / Antibiotics, Poultry Farming, Pronutrients, Swine

For the present without antibiotic growth promoters

Edgar Sanchez Pujals - 24/05/2016

In the near future, complete elimination of the use of antibiotics as growth promoters appears to be the most sensible and realistic option. Should also look for new alternatives to the use of antibiotics in animal feed and promote research that will aim to study. The line of Pronutrients of Biovet Laboratory is the most profitable productive and safe option.

The measure adopted by the EU to ban the use of an important group of antibiotics as animal growth promoters has been successful and demonstrates the sensitivity of our political and health authorities about the problem of resistance. Other countries like US, more permissive in the use of antibiotics as animal growth promoters, are gradually adopting similar measures. In any case, we must not forget that the use of antibiotics as growth promoters is a link in the chain of antibiotic use. The use of antibiotic as a prophylaxis and therapy in medicine, veterinary and agriculture also contributes to the selection of resistant bacteria. Therefore, today more than ever collaboration between different professionals (doctors, veterinarians, pharmacists, etc.) is necessary to implement policies rational and prudent for use of antibiotics in all areas that will control the problem of resistance.

Developments of the AGPs in Europe

1945- 1960s	Early warnings of risk of developing bacterial resistance and demonstration of its vertical and horizontal transmission
1960s	Start of the use of antibiotics in animal feed (penicillin, streptomycin, tetracycline, …)
1969	The Swann Committee recommends restrictions on the use of antimicrobials in feed, to allow only those not used as therapeutic in human and veterinary medicine
1970s	Most Swann recommendations are put into practice in the United Kingdom and the EEC
1975	Relaxation of Swann recommendations: allows to use as AGPs spiramycin and tylosin, despite having similar in human medicine.
1984	Swiss farmers ask their government to ban the AGPs because of consumer concerns
1986	The ban of AGPs in Sweden based on the development of resistance and its "unsafe" long-term effects.
1993	Early studies indicate a relationship between the use of avoparcin and increased transmission and vancomycin-resistant enterococci, antibiotic of the same group (glycopeptides)
1995	Sweden and Finland enters in EU, with permission to maintain its ban on the APGs. Prohibition of avoparcin in Denmark
1996	Prohibition of virginiamycin in Denmark and of avoparcin in Germany
1997	EU prohibits avoparcin OMS concludes that "it is essential to replace the use of APGs"
1998	The EU prohibits ardamicina as APG because risks of cross-resistance, and the use since 1999 of 4 other antibiotics (virginiamycin, bacitracin zinc, tylosin phosphate, spiramycin) as a "precautionary measure". Denmark prohibits all APGs
1999	The EC Standing Scientific Committee recommends abandoning the APGs that can be used in human and veterinary medicine, or to promote cross-resistance. Prohibited the use of inhibitors (olaquindox, carbadox) for labor health reasons
2000	The pharmaceutical industry is judicially opposed to the decision of the EC, without result.
2001- 2004	Removing of 6 anticoccidiósicas substances (amprolium, ditto + etopab ato, meticlorpindol, ditto + methylbenzoquate, arprinocida, nicarbazin) Removing antihistomoniásicos (dimetridazole, ipronidazole, Ronidazole, nifursol)
2006	Prohibiting the use of the remaining APGs (avilamycin, flavophospholipol, salinomycin, monensin,). The last 2 may continue to be used in chickens as coccidiostats.