Steroids and Antibiotics Used in Meat and Dairy Products - Research Paper Example

of the Teacher’s Number: Meat and Dairy product industries should ensure the avoidance of unnecessary steroids and antibiotics use in livestock and Organic food certification should be mandatory for them. Farm factories are unable to risk their business when it comes to the diseases and growth issues related to animals. Only in USA 3.1 million head of cattle are slaughtered to fulfill the beef requirements of the country over 120 days, until September 2011 (U.S Cattle Feed, 2011) . According to the reports, two third of the cattle slaughtered daily, is being injected with steroidal growth hormones to increase the growth rate, weight and milk production by the use of some genetically engineered hormones. This increase in production means a lot of profit for the meat and dairy product industries but on the other hand it is also risking the health of its consumers. FDA and USDA claims that these hormones (steroidal in nature) are free from any harm. Antibiotics which are also used in cattle as preventive measures or to increase the weight of the animal are also producing health concerns in the consumers of the meat and milk. Although the use of antibiotics is banned in Europe it is still legal to inject the low doses of these antibiotics in America and Canada. First we need to be acquainted with Hormones and Antibiotics and to what extent they can affect the health of its consumer. Hormones are the biochemicals produced in the body of human’s as well as animals. Even though they are released in small amounts they control the important body functions such as growth, maturity and reproduction. They are produced by special organs which function to release the hormones according to the requirement and proper timings of its release. This is called the feedback mechanism of the body which manages the amount of hormone released. If body’s requirement of the hormone is fulfilled, by negative feedback mechanism, hormone production automatically stops. Unfortunately, if these hormones are being consumed from any outside sources they can cause serious consequences as there won’t be any mechanism indicating the red alert for the overconsumption. Hormones can be of steroidal or protein in nature. Steroidal hormones remain active even if they are consumed via mouth. Whereas, protein hormones needs to be injected as they are destroyed immediately in the G.I tract (Gastrointestinal tract) by the action of acids and other secretions such as insulin hormone injections by diabetics. Hormones are being used in farm animals to increase their weight and by the use of growth hormones they grow much faster and to a larger extent. They also increase the weight of the animal even if the animal’s food consumption is reduced. In cows, hormones increase the production of milk. Approximately 22% of the Cows are being injected or fed steroidal hormones to get the desired result. Thus, the faster animal reaches to the slaughter weight, the more profitable this procedure becomes for the industries. According to European Union Scientific committee on Veterinary Measures Relating to Public Health, Potential risk to human health can be caused by the use of six types of hormones, including both synthetic and natural hormones. Natural include Oestradiol, Testosterone and Progesterone. Synthetic hormones are Melengestrol, Zeranol, Trenbolone. (Artificial Hormones, 2006). Estradiol and Progesterone are natural female sex hormone and Testosterone is male sex hormone. The other three synthetic hormones are used as growth promoters. FDA approves the use of these hormones in sheep’s and Cattle but not on poultry and Hogs. Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormones (rbGH) is being used in dairy cattle but not on beef cattle.( Consumer Concern about Hormones in Food, 2010) The Committee also put forth questions regarding the issue of such hormone injected animal consumption can cause any imbalance in human hormone system. However, FDA and USDA continuously ensures the consumers that very little amount is injected in the animals and much less is transmitted in the humans as these hormones are released in the body through an implant under the skin which releases very small amount. These hormones are known to elevate the level of Insulin like Growth Factor (IGF-1) in the milk of the cows which are linked with increase in Breast and Prostrate cancers in human and Mastitis in Cows. EU (European Union) has banned the use of these steroidal hormones in beef cattle. Sex hormones, such as Progesterone and testosterone are considered to be carcinogenic or suspected as potential carcinogens. Until 1962, US law prohibited the use of any food substance that has a carcinogenic affect. After some modification in the law, use of carcinogenic substances were allowed as veterinary drugs and animal feed additives if no harmful concentration of these drugs are present in the meat. (Consultation on the Use of Hormonal Substances in Animals,1986) FDA states that the residue levels of these hormones are well below the average level which has any affect on human. But are these food products still safe for the long term consumption? Over exposure of steroids such as Estrogen is associated with increased risk of breast cancer and also its excess exposure leads to precocious puberty (Lawley, Laurie& Judy,2008). However, exposure to higher than average level of steroid through these hormone treated animal’s meat is still not reported. As these hormone disrupters are abundant in the environment, cancer cannot be solely attributed to the use of such meat but early puberty is associated with high risk of breast cancers. Large epidemiological researches are required to document the risk associated with the consumption of hormone treated meat and early puberty. The levels of naturally produced hormones vary from animal to animal but that remains within normal range, therefore it becomes difficult for the researchers to determine the amount of hormone which remains after the treatment. However, in early 1980s increased concern about girls reaching early puberty led to an investigation in Puerto Rico by Centre of Disease Control. Various samples of meat and chicken from the local stores were tested and one of the laboratories found a chicken sample with increased estrogen level. Zeranol was also reported to be found in the blood of the girls who reached early puberty. Following this USDA also tested milk, poultry and meat in Puerto Rico in 1985 and found no residue of DES, Zeranol or Estrogen in any sample. (Consumer Concern about Hormones in Food, 2010). Therefore, authorities are still in confusion over the issue. However, DES (Diethyl stilbestrol) is a synthetic Estrogen product, which is a female sex hormone, shown to have carcinogenic effects. Estrogen accelerates the growth rate in poultry and cattle. DES was withdrawn from the market during late 1970s due to its lethal effects. As rbGH is a protein growth hormone, it is automatically broken down in the stomach if it is present in the milk of the treated animal. Use of rbGH in cattle for increased milk production in US has been in practice since last 10 years and breast cancer development takes many years so there are no efficient knowledge regarding the subject. FDA ensures that the use of such drugs is harmless, stating that these entire endogenous steroidal hormone products are safe to use as they are delivered in the form of implantable pellets and are specially designed to deliver the hormone at a slow constant rate. Recent studies show that when these steroids are used in accordance with the approved terms and conditions of use, they produce the concentration of hormones that is same and within the physiological range found in the edible tissue of untreated animal. (FDA,2009). Therefore, no preslaughter withdrawal time is necessary as these drugs have such low half life (approximately 10min) that the amount found is almost negligible as compared to the amount of the hormone found in untreated animals and the amount that is naturally present in human body. Synthetic hormones don’t metabolize as fast as the natural hormones do. So FDA conducted many extensive toxicological tests to approve their safety in animal products. These tests were mandatory for the manufacturers to prove that the drug level left in the edible tissue is well below the safe level. However, the tests were conducted on rats over the period of 90 days, such short term tests are discredited by many of the consumers as insufficient evidence for health safety.(Artificial hormone,2006) The debate regarding this issue remains unanswered as there is no conclusive evidence to ensure the safety of hormone treated meat, nor do we have we have any robust evidence against its use. One other and very major health concern is posed by the use of antibiotics in the live stock to avoid mastitis and other diseases. Due to increase milk production, Cows get frequent infection, which are treated with antibiotics. So cows and other farm animals are frequently injected with the preventive doses of antibiotics. Also by an unexplained way, these antibiotics cause excessive weight gain in the animals due to which European Union has banned the practice but it is still legal in United States and Canada. Even if a single individual in the flock is diagnosed with the illness, the whole herd receives the antibiotic. This only indicates that these animals are being given antibiotics when they don’t need them. These animals with antibiotic treatment produce resistance strains of bacteria. Because antibiotics eradicate most of the bacteria, excessive use of the drug produces such strains which are resistant to these antibiotics and they grow and spread even faster than their former strains. By the consumption of treated animals meat or milk they come in contact with human, an example is Antibiotic resistant strains of Salmonella found in human food supply. Over use of such antibiotics not only create resistance in the bacteria but they also pass their traits to other strains which are unrelated and they also cause harm to human when they come in contact. According to CDC, there are 76 million cases of food borne illnesses a year and 5000 deaths nationwide due to bacterial and viral pathogens.(Prescription for trouble, 2010). By undercooked poultry, these resistant strains can cause harm to the consumer. Thus CDC has concluded that in US antimicrobial use in animal food is the main cause of antibiotic resistant illnesses. However, USDA routinely inspects meat, poultry and egg products for the antibiotic residues that exceed tolerance level but they seldom find anything harmful. The issue here requires attention involves concerns regarding antibiotic resistance not regarding antibiotic residues.( Low-Level Use of Antibiotics In Livestock and Poultry, 2005). Following the concern, a test was conducted in June 1998 in South Africa, in which level of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in retail chicken was determined. The results show that many of the bacterial strain show multiple antibiotic resistance (MAR). The investigation proved that this resistance was due to the use of low doses of antibiotics to increase the weight of the livestock. (Manie, Khan, Bro?zel, Veith, and Gouws, 1998) Concern regarding the use of steroids and antibiotics in livestock is somewhat controversial. Therefore, the solutions to the proposed problem are also vague due to the lack of proper health policy and also due to the complex nature of the dilemma itself. However, banning the use of such products or at least implementing prescription requirement for antibiotics for farmed animals can restrict the excessive use of the drugs. Since agricultural use of antibiotics account for 70% of antibiotic consumption in US and they are the main route of producing resistance bacteria and risking the health of the consumer. (Prescription for Trouble: Using Antibiotics to Fatten Livestock,2010). To ensure the safety of the food product, organic feed should be provided to the cattle, which will in turn reduce the requirement of such synthetic ways of growth promotion and increase milk production as well as health of the cattle will easily be maintained. Organic food certificate should be attained by the meat industries and its venders and such certified products should be labeled. For example USDA-certified Organic food label ensures that there are no artificial hormones in the product. There are many farmers who don’t till today, use steroids and antibiotics in the cattle, by purchasing milk and meat from such local farms; we can support a system which is safe and free from hormone related health risk. To get acquainted with the hormone free products has become essential to ensure good health. Although there is no hard evidence against the use of such drugs but precautionary measures to avoid the disproportionate use of meat is a better option. When meat is eaten it should be well cooked and not charred. Moreover, varied diet, such as diet rich in vegetables, grains and fruits is another healthy option. REFRENCES: Union of Concerned Scientist, Food and Agriculture: Prescription for Trouble: Using Antibiotics to Fatten Livestock, 2010 http://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/science_and_impacts/impacts_industrial_agriculture/prescription-for-trouble.html Food and Drug Administration, the Use of Steroid Hormones for Growth Promotion in Food-Producing Animals, 2009< Available at>http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/FDAVeterinarianNewsletter/ucm110712.htm Sustainable table: The issues of Artificial Hormone, 2006 http://www.sustainabletable.org/issues/hormones/ Cornell University: Consumers Concerns about Hormones inFood, 2010http://envirocancer.cornell.edu/factsheet/diet/fs37.hormones.cfm Top of Form Consultation on the Use of Hormonal Substances in Animals: Economic and Technical Implications : Final Report and Documents Presented : Montevideo, Uruguay, December 11-12, 1986. Coronado, Costa Rica: Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture, 1987. Print. Top of Form Lawley, Richard, Laurie Curtis, and Judy Davis. The Food Safety Hazard Guidebook. Cambridge: RCS Publishing, 2008. Print. Food Marketing Institute, Low-Level Use of Antibiotics In Livestock and Poultry, 2005, http://www.fmi.org/docs/media/bg/antibiotics.pdfBottom of Form Manie, T, S Khan, VS Bro?zel, WJ Veith, and PA Gouws. "Antimicrobial Resistance of Bacteria Isolated from Slaughtered and Retail Chickens in South Africa." Letters in Applied Microbiology. 26.4 (1998): 253-8. Print. USDA and k-State Ag. Economic, US Cattle Feed over 120 days, 2011http://www.agmanager.info/livestock/marketing/graphs/Cattle/Cattle%20on%20Feed/COF%20over%20120/cofover120.htm Bottom of Form Read More