6 ms·

Yeah, we won't need rationing for humans if we just stop overuse in agriculture. Credits to the EU for regulation this aggressively.. I even think the US is do

by jopsen 9y ago

Yeah, we won't need rationing for humans if we just stop overuse in agriculture. Credits to the EU for regulation this aggressively.. I even think the US is doing something: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibiotic_use_in_livestock https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibiotic_use_in_livestock As with climate change, this is probably going to hit emerging economies the hardest.. due to lack of regulation and less ability to deal with cost of workarounds.

hycaria 9y ago
Wow wow wow, are you kidding ? You must be one of those regulators that constantly press breeders and veterinarians over lowering antibiotics usage in livestock, yet risible efforts in comparison are made in human medicine. Let's use latest generation antibiotics for the smallest procedures ! Who cares ?! Literally everyone is doing something about it in animal care (in the EU we lost availability of many specialties, or some are now usable only after antibiograms), yet it doesn't get better because MDs don't do shit. And what can they do after all, people can just go and find another practitioner. I just hope that with such reasoning you're ready to have your animal protein have its price tripled then or see your dog die of pneumonia, because that's what we're coming to. Or maybe everyone needs to brace themselves and endure having a cold for 2 more days and not resort to antibiotics for every little thing, or we will soon leave our YOPI (young, old, pregnant, immunosuppressed) to dying with no available care. By our current state of overpopulation, it's not a big deal after all.
- alkonaut 9y ago
  What's your point? That the EU banning antibiotics in healthy livestock is a bad thing, because it drives up meat prices? I'm completely happy with meat prices where I live and our ban on antibiotics for growth (i.e. in health animals) predates the EU regulation. > Or maybe everyone needs to brace themselves and endure having a cold for 2 more days and not resort to antibiotics for every little thing The reduction in antibiotic use here by doctors is also pretty noticable. I certainly don't get antibiotics prescribed for every little thing. Also, it's important to remember that while doctors might seem like they throw antibiotics at every patient, they typically prescribe the same very narrow antibiotics for everyone and use broad spectrum ones more restrictively (which is a good thing). It would be terrible if people could buy broad spectrum antibiotics over the counter.
  - hycaria 9y ago
    Not everyone is prepared for higher animal protein prices (I don't think it's a bad thing, and I don't consume them anyways). But the people most prone to ask for radical measures are often the least aware of situations and their consequences. >our ban on antibiotics for growth Which were the only approved use of antibiotics in animals in your country without a doubt. >I certainly don't get antibiotics prescribed for every little thing Yeah me neither yet the spectacular decrease we should see is not there yet. Maybe there are other, more exigent patients then ?! >they typically prescribe the same very narrow antibiotics for everyone and use broad spectrum ones more restrictively (which is a good thing). It would be terrible if people could buy broad spectrum antibiotics over the counter. Well luckily some are only available in hospitals or such. But when I hear war stories from a veterinarian friend who switched to human medicine and sees lastest quinolones used systematically no matter the health status of the person for benign procedures, we just facepalm. They don't want to take the 5% risk that someone will need aftercare I guess. But MRSA and nosocomial infections are the real, growing threat...
    - alkonaut 9y ago
      > Which were the only approved use of antibiotics in animals in your country without a doubt. You mean countries had (or has) laws that prohibited antibiotics for its proper use (to treat infection) but allowed antibiotics in livestock for growth stimulation? Which countries were that? And what would be the reasoning behind that? As I understood it, the "bad" countries allow antibiotics for both purposes, whereas the "good" countries started restricting antibiotics for growth, and eventually banned it completely. Have I completely misunderstood you mean?
      - hycaria 9y ago
        Prophylaxis (=treatment of healthy patients) antibiotics used to be a routine thing especially in younger animals more prone to infections etc. It was not stimulating growth per se, but as a coincidental effect. It is not very common anymore, and has not been for over a decade now (in the EU, I'm not sure about overseas). But it's still possible for some specific sicknesses (one is sick, you can treat others that are not sick preventively) or productions (ie poultry and pigs iirc). (Growth is still systematically stimulated through hormones injections in cattle at least in the Canada/US, and this is completely banned in the EU, maybe there's some mix up there ?) > eventually banned it completely No, luckily it's not completely banned anywhere I know of, and I hardly see this happening tbh. Even in organic productions and such its a number of treatments (or quantity per animal) limit per year. It is not banned and breeding animals would be hardly sustainable if it were.
- jopsen 9y ago
  > I just hope that with such reasoning you're ready to have your animal protein have its price tripled then or see your dog die of pneumonia Yes, absolutely. In fact higher meat prices probably wouldn't be a bad thing :) On topic: maybe I was a bit extreme, what I meant was that if we limit agriculture usage of antibiotics, then we can hopefully avoid the kind of dystopian rationing for humans that the article talks about. I'm certainly willing to see higher meat prices before we ration antibiotics away from humans who critically need it. (not talking about a cold that would go away on it's own)
legulere 9y ago
Sadly a lot of countries don’t enforce this properly: https://unisensor.be/sites/default/files/pictures/2016-08-01.jpg https://unisensor.be/sites/default/files/pictures/2016-08-01...
kikoreis 9y ago
Interestingly, in 2010 Brazil introduced legislation severely limiting access to antibiotics for humans. Since then you need to hand in a prescription with each purchase -- and it is kept by the pharmacy. Doctors still prescribe antibiotics more or less liberally, so it's not perfect, but most self medicated abuse has been drastically reduced.
- majewsky 9y ago
  After the first sentence, I expected something much harsher. Handing out antibiotics only to patients with a prescription seems like common sense to me.
  - DoreenMichele 9y ago
    My understanding: Brazil was pretty freewheeling for a long time. At one time, I was internet acquainted with someone into alternative remedies who moved there so they could do whatever the heck they wanted without answering to anyone, basically.
    - cassianoleal 9y ago
      That's absolutely not true. Brazil has legislations and regulations for things many countries just use common sense. If by alternative medicine you mean homeopathy, that's highly regulated and you need to be a registered medical doctor to use it. If you mean something else, then that would depend on what remedies (s)he was using.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  - woliveirajr 9y ago
    In Brazil you can buy almost any medical drug in a drugstore without a prescription. For some drugs you need different kind of prescriptions: antibiotics just need a regular prescription, some others will need special prescriptions that are only available for doctors who have applied, and so on. So, yes, things were hardned few years ago.

by jopsen 9y ago

hycaria 9y ago

Wow wow wow, are you kidding ? You must be one of those regulators that constantly press breeders and veterinarians over lowering antibiotics usage in livestock, yet risible efforts in comparison are made in human medicine. Let's use latest generation antibiotics for the smallest procedures ! Who cares ?! Literally everyone is doing something about it in animal care (in the EU we lost availability of many specialties, or some are now usable only after antibiograms), yet it doesn't get better because MDs don't do shit. And what can they do after all, people can just go and find another practitioner. I just hope that with such reasoning you're ready to have your animal protein have its price tripled then or see your dog die of pneumonia, because that's what we're coming to. Or maybe everyone needs to brace themselves and endure having a cold for 2 more days and not resort to antibiotics for every little thing, or we will soon leave our YOPI (young, old, pregnant, immunosuppressed) to dying with no available care. By our current state of overpopulation, it's not a big deal after all.

alkonaut 9y ago
What's your point? That the EU banning antibiotics in healthy livestock is a bad thing, because it drives up meat prices? I'm completely happy with meat prices where I live and our ban on antibiotics for growth (i.e. in health animals) predates the EU regulation. > Or maybe everyone needs to brace themselves and endure having a cold for 2 more days and not resort to antibiotics for every little thing The reduction in antibiotic use here by doctors is also pretty noticable. I certainly don't get antibiotics prescribed for every little thing. Also, it's important to remember that while doctors might seem like they throw antibiotics at every patient, they typically prescribe the same very narrow antibiotics for everyone and use broad spectrum ones more restrictively (which is a good thing). It would be terrible if people could buy broad spectrum antibiotics over the counter.
- hycaria 9y ago
  Not everyone is prepared for higher animal protein prices (I don't think it's a bad thing, and I don't consume them anyways). But the people most prone to ask for radical measures are often the least aware of situations and their consequences. >our ban on antibiotics for growth Which were the only approved use of antibiotics in animals in your country without a doubt. >I certainly don't get antibiotics prescribed for every little thing Yeah me neither yet the spectacular decrease we should see is not there yet. Maybe there are other, more exigent patients then ?! >they typically prescribe the same very narrow antibiotics for everyone and use broad spectrum ones more restrictively (which is a good thing). It would be terrible if people could buy broad spectrum antibiotics over the counter. Well luckily some are only available in hospitals or such. But when I hear war stories from a veterinarian friend who switched to human medicine and sees lastest quinolones used systematically no matter the health status of the person for benign procedures, we just facepalm. They don't want to take the 5% risk that someone will need aftercare I guess. But MRSA and nosocomial infections are the real, growing threat...
  - alkonaut 9y ago
    > Which were the only approved use of antibiotics in animals in your country without a doubt. You mean countries had (or has) laws that prohibited antibiotics for its proper use (to treat infection) but allowed antibiotics in livestock for growth stimulation? Which countries were that? And what would be the reasoning behind that? As I understood it, the "bad" countries allow antibiotics for both purposes, whereas the "good" countries started restricting antibiotics for growth, and eventually banned it completely. Have I completely misunderstood you mean?
    - hycaria 9y ago
      Prophylaxis (=treatment of healthy patients) antibiotics used to be a routine thing especially in younger animals more prone to infections etc. It was not stimulating growth per se, but as a coincidental effect. It is not very common anymore, and has not been for over a decade now (in the EU, I'm not sure about overseas). But it's still possible for some specific sicknesses (one is sick, you can treat others that are not sick preventively) or productions (ie poultry and pigs iirc). (Growth is still systematically stimulated through hormones injections in cattle at least in the Canada/US, and this is completely banned in the EU, maybe there's some mix up there ?) > eventually banned it completely No, luckily it's not completely banned anywhere I know of, and I hardly see this happening tbh. Even in organic productions and such its a number of treatments (or quantity per animal) limit per year. It is not banned and breeding animals would be hardly sustainable if it were.
jopsen 9y ago
> I just hope that with such reasoning you're ready to have your animal protein have its price tripled then or see your dog die of pneumonia Yes, absolutely. In fact higher meat prices probably wouldn't be a bad thing :) On topic: maybe I was a bit extreme, what I meant was that if we limit agriculture usage of antibiotics, then we can hopefully avoid the kind of dystopian rationing for humans that the article talks about. I'm certainly willing to see higher meat prices before we ration antibiotics away from humans who critically need it. (not talking about a cold that would go away on it's own)

legulere 9y ago

Sadly a lot of countries don’t enforce this properly: https://unisensor.be/sites/default/files/pictures/2016-08-01.jpg https://unisensor.be/sites/default/files/pictures/2016-08-01...

kikoreis 9y ago

Interestingly, in 2010 Brazil introduced legislation severely limiting access to antibiotics for humans. Since then you need to hand in a prescription with each purchase -- and it is kept by the pharmacy. Doctors still prescribe antibiotics more or less liberally, so it's not perfect, but most self medicated abuse has been drastically reduced.

majewsky 9y ago
After the first sentence, I expected something much harsher. Handing out antibiotics only to patients with a prescription seems like common sense to me.
- DoreenMichele 9y ago
  My understanding: Brazil was pretty freewheeling for a long time. At one time, I was internet acquainted with someone into alternative remedies who moved there so they could do whatever the heck they wanted without answering to anyone, basically.
  - cassianoleal 9y ago
    That's absolutely not true. Brazil has legislations and regulations for things many countries just use common sense. If by alternative medicine you mean homeopathy, that's highly regulated and you need to be a registered medical doctor to use it. If you mean something else, then that would depend on what remedies (s)he was using.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- woliveirajr 9y ago
  In Brazil you can buy almost any medical drug in a drugstore without a prescription. For some drugs you need different kind of prescriptions: antibiotics just need a regular prescription, some others will need special prescriptions that are only available for doctors who have applied, and so on. So, yes, things were hardned few years ago.