Antibiotic use in poultry sector rampant: CSE

Agencies
February 28, 2018

New Delhi, Feb 28: A green body has slammed an advertisement highlighting that no antibiotics are used in chicken as an "eye wash" and alleged that the use of antibiotics in poultry sector is "rampant". The Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) yesterday slammed the All India Poultry Development and Services Private Limited for its advertisement and said it was "complete misrepresentation". The advertisement refers to the results of a 2014 study conducted by the CSE on chicken, it said while strongly rejecting the way the study results have been twisted to suggest that there is no misuse of antibiotics in the poultry sector and that the chicken produced is safe. "This is complete misrepresentation of the facts and the antibiotic misuse practices adopted by the Indian poultry industry. Antibiotic use in poultry sector is rampant. "They are even using life-saving drugs like colistin to fatten the chicken. There seem to be no genuine attempt by the industry to reduce antibiotic misuse and this advertisement is an eyewash,? the Deputy Director General, CSE, Chandra Bhushan, said.

The advertisement which said that chicken should be eaten as it has a lot of benefits, also went on to say that the Indian poultry industry has already adopted usage of prebiotics, probiotics, phytogenic additives, acidifiers and immuno stimulants as an alternative to antibiotics. The deputy director general of CSE further said that the industry has ignored the results of its latest 2017 study, which show how poultry farms are breeding grounds of superbugs. "They are misguiding the nation and trying to dilute their contribution to the problem of antibiotic resistance. This will not help the industry in the long-term. They must act responsibly,? Bhushan said. Referring to the issue of maximum residue limits (MRLs) in the advertisement, Amit Khurana, a senior programme manager, Food Safety and Toxins team, CSE said that it is a "myopic" view as residue level in food is only one part of the problem. "Resistant bacteria can also get transferred to handlers and consumers. Unabsorbed antibiotics as well as resistant bacteria in chicken droppings which enter into the environment are a big concern. The problem starts with antibiotic misuse," he said.

Chandra Bhushan further added that India does not have any standards on residue levels in chicken meat. "Comparing residue results with the MRL of the European Union is meaningless. Our study was aimed at establishing the fact that banned, critical and highly prescribed antibiotics are being misused by the poultry industry ? we did not make any comparisons with MRL as India does not have an MRL of its own," Bhushan said. CSE researchers believe that even after so many years of the issue being highlighted, the government response to address the antibiotic resistance crisis has been inadequate so far. "There is no legal ban on use of antibiotic growth promoters in poultry. The 2014 advisory from the Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries has no legal binding. "The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India is yet to come up with final standards of antibiotic residues in chicken. We have a National Action Plan on AMR now, but unfortunately there are no funds allocated for it. The plan would have no real functionality without money put behind it," Bhushan added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
May 17,2020

Geneva, May 17: Spraying disinfectant on the streets, as practised in some countries, does not eliminate the new coronavirus and even poses a health risk, the World Health Organization (WHO) warned on Saturday.

In a document on cleaning and disinfecting surfaces as part of the response to the virus, the WHO says spraying can be ineffective. "Spraying or fumigation of outdoor spaces, such as streets or marketplaces, is... not recommended to kill the Covid-19 virus or other pathogens because disinfectant is inactivated by dirt and debris," explains the WHO.

"Even in the absence of organic matter, chemical spraying is unlikely to adequately cover all surfaces for the duration of the required contact time needed to inactivate pathogens." The WHO said that streets and pavements are not considered as "reservoirs of infection" of Covid-19, adding that spraying disinfectants, even outside, can be "dangerous for human health".

The document also stresses that spraying individuals with disinfectants is "not recommended under any circumstances".

"This could be physically and psychologically harmful and would not reduce an infected person's ability to spread the virus through droplets or contact," said the document.

Spraying chlorine or other toxic chemicals on people can cause eye and skin irritation, bronchospasm and gastrointestinal effects, it adds.

The organisation is also warning against the systematic spraying and fumigating of disinfectants on to surfaces in indoor spaces, citing a study that has shown it to be ineffective outside direct spraying areas.

"If disinfectants are to be applied, this should be done with a cloth or wipe that has been soaked in disinfectant," it says.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus, the cause of the pandemic that has killed more than 300,000 people worldwide since its appearance in late December in China, can attach itself to surfaces and objects.

However, no precise information is currently available for the period during which the viruses remain infectious on the various surfaces.

Studies have shown that the virus can stay on several types of surfaces for several days. However, these maximum durations are only theoretical because they are recorded under laboratory conditions and should be "interpreted with caution" in the real-world environment.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
March 3,2020

Taking multiple courses of antibiotics within a short span of time may do people more harm than good, suggests new research which discovered an association between the number of prescriptions for antibiotics and a higher risk of hospital admissions.

Patients who have had 9 or more antibiotic prescriptions for common infections in the previous three years are 2.26 times more likely to go to hospital with another infection in three or more months, said the researchers.

Patients who had two antibiotic prescriptions were 1.23 times more likely, patients who had three to four prescriptions 1.33 times more likely and patients who had five to eight 1.77 times more likely to go to hospital with another infection.

"We don't know why this is, but overuse of antibiotics might kill the good bacteria in the gut (microbiota) and make us more susceptible to infections, for example," said Professor Tjeerd van Staa from the University of Manchester in Britain.

The study, published in the journal BMC Medicine, is based on the data of two million patients in England and Wales.

The patient records, from 2000 to 2016, covered common infections such as upper respiratory tract, urinary tract, ear and chest infections and excluded long term conditions such as cystic fibrosis and chronic lung disease.

The risks of going to hospital with another infection were related to the number of the antibiotic prescriptions in the previous three years.

A course is defined by the team as being given over a period of one or two weeks.

"GPs (general physicians) care about their patients, and over recent years have worked hard to reduce the prescribing of antibiotics,""Staa said.

"But it is clear GPs do not have the tools to prescribe antibiotics effectively for common infections, especially when patients already have previously used antibiotics.

"They may prescribe numerous courses of antibiotics over several years, which according to our study increases the risk of a more serious infection. That in turn, we show, is linked to hospital admissions," Staa added.

It not clear why hospital admissions are linked to higher prescriptions and research is needed to show what or if any biological factors exist, said the research team.

"Our hope is that, however, a tool we are working for GPs, based on patient history, will be able to calculate the risks associated with taking multiple courses of antibiotics," said Francine Jury from the University of Manchester.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 27,2020

Washington D.C, Feb 27: New research shows that adults who have low fruit and vegetable intake are more likely to be diagnosed with an anxiety disorder.

"For those who consumed less than 3 sources of fruits and vegetables daily, there was at least at 24% higher odds of anxiety disorder diagnosis," says the lead author of the Canadian Longitudinal Study, Karen Davison, who is a health science faculty member, nutrition informatics lab director at Kwantlen Polytechnic University, (KPU) and North American Primary Care Research Group Fellow.

"This may also partly explain the findings associated with body composition measures. As levels of total body fat increased beyond 36%, the likelihood of anxiety disorder was increased by more than 70%," states co-author Jose Mora-Almanza, a Mitacs Globalink intern who worked with the study at KPU.

"Increased body fat may be linked to greater inflammation. Emerging research suggests that some anxiety disorders can be linked to inflammation," says Davison.

In addition to diet and body composition measures, the prevalence of anxiety disorders also differed by gender, marital status, income, immigrant status and several health issues.

An important limitation of the study was that the assessment of anxiety disorders was mostly based upon self-reporting of a medical diagnosis.

"It is estimated that 10% of the global population will suffer from anxiety disorders which are a leading cause of disability," says Karen Davison

"Our findings suggest that comprehensive approaches that target health behaviours, including diet, as well as social factors, such as economic status, may help to minimize the burden of anxiety disorders among middle-aged and older adults, including immigrants," she concluded.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.