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
February 7,2020

Birmingham, Feb 7: According to a new study, social media users are more likely to eat healthy or junk food after getting influenced by their peer group.

The research published in the scientific journal 'Appetite' found that study participants ate an extra fifth of a portion of fruit and vegetables themselves for every portion they thought their social media peers ate. So, if they believed their friends got their 'five a day' of fruit and veg, they were likely to eat an extra portion themselves.

On the other hand, Facebook users were found to consume an extra portion of unhealthy snack foods and sugary drinks for every three portions they believed their online social circles did.
The findings suggested that people eat around a third more junk food if they think their friends also indulge in the same.

The Aston University researchers said the findings provide the first evidence to suggest our online social circles could be implicitly influencing our eating habits, with important implications for using 'nudge' techniques on social media to encourage healthy eating.

Researchers asked 369 university students to estimate the amount of fruit, vegetables, 'energy-dense snacks' and sugary drinks their Facebook peers consumed on a daily basis.

The information was cross-referenced with the participants' own actual eating habits and showed that those who felt their social circles 'approved' of eating junk food consumed significantly more themselves. Meanwhile, those who thought their friends ate a healthy diet ate more portions of fruit and veg. Their perceptions could have come from seeing friends' posts about the food and drink they consumed, or simply a general impression of their overall health.

There was no significant link between the participants' eating habits and their Body Mass Index (BMI), a standard measure of healthy weight, however. The researchers said the next stage of their work would track a participant group over time to see whether the influence of social media on eating habits had a longer-term impact on weight.

The most recent figures from the NHS's Health Survey for England showed that in 2018 only 28 percent of adults were eating the recommended five portions of fruit and vegetables per day. In Wales, this was 24 percent, in Scotland 22 percent and in Northern Ireland around 20 percent. Children and young people across the UK had even lower levels of fruit and veg consumption.

Aston University health psychology Ph.D. student Lily Hawkins, who led the study alongside supervisor Dr. Jason Thomas, said: "This study suggests we may be influenced by our social peers more than we realize when choosing certain foods. We seem to be subconsciously accounting for how others behave when making our own food choices. So if we believe our friends are eating plenty of fruit and veg we're more likely to eat fruit and veg ourselves. On the other hand, if we feel they're happy to consume lots of snacks and sugary drinks, it can give us a license to overeat foods that are bad for our health. The implication is that we can use social media as a tool to 'nudge' each other's eating behavior within friendship groups, and potentially use this knowledge as a tool for public health interventions."

"With children and young people spending a huge amount of time interacting with peers and influencers via social media, the important new findings from this study could help shape how we deliver interventions that help them adopt healthy eating habits from a young age and stick with them for life," said professor Claire Farrow.

A dietitian called Aisling Pigott further mentioned that "Research such as this demonstrates how we are influenced by online perceptions about how others eat. The promotion of positive health messages across social media, which are focused on promoting healthy choices and non-restrictive relationships with food and body, could nudge people into making positive decisions around the food they eat."

"We do have to be mindful of the importance of 'nudging' positive behaviors and not 'shaming' food choices on social media as a health intervention. We know that generating guilt around food is not particularly helpful when it comes to lifestyle change and maintenance," Aisling 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.
News Network
May 11,2020

Panaji, May 11: Amid the COVID-19 outbreak, most of the people are more concerned about the health of their near and dear ones than their own well-being, says a study conducted by a leading business school in Goa.

People are now more conscious about any bodily changes, and even mild cold, cough and sneezing, it says.

The study, on public's reaction towards COVID-19 outbreak by gauging their psychological response in terms of anxiety and their coping behaviour, was conducted by the Goa Institute of Management's Dr Divya Singhal and Prof Padhmanabhan Vijayaraghavan.

It took into account inputs from 231 respondents residing in various parts of the country.

"Nearly 82.25 per cent of the respondents were more worried about the health of their loved ones than their own well-being," Singhal said.

"Majority of the respondents have become conscious of any bodily changes, sensations, a mild cold, cough, sneezing and experience concern, and attribute those changes to the symptoms of COVID-19," she said.

Besides, more than 50 per cent of the respondents said their social media usage has gone up as well as their time spent on watching movies and shows through online medium, the official said.

The respondents agreed that their technology usage to connect with friends and relatives has gone up, she said.

The study also indicated that a large group of respondents found it "depressing" to read forwarded messages on the deadly disease.

"An overwhelming majority of the respondentsagreed that they discourage unverified forwarded messages about COVID-19 on social media," says the study.

It also found that 41 per centof the respondents were not doing any physical activity, like yoga, during the lockown period, while another 19 per cent were not sure about engaging themselves in physical activities.

Besides, 57 per cent of the respondents were not engaged in any mind-calming practices like meditation, and 18 per cent were not sure about taking up meditative practices, the study said.

The respondents included 145 men and 86 women, aged 18 and above, with nearly 60 per cent of them residing in non- metro cities and rest from metros.

About 47.62 per cent of the respondents were employed in private or government sectors, and the remaining included students, retired persons and homemakers.

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.