July 10, 2013
Every time I go to the school nurse or the doctor for some sort of bacterial infection, they give me strict directions to follow in terms of taking antibiotics. I am told to continue the prescribed dose in a timely manner, even if I’m feeling better, to prevent “resistance.” Antibiotic resistance is a result of natural selection and some organisms possess genetic mutations that essentially result in the ineffectively of antibiotics. The mechanism of resistance is the same in human and animals. I recently learned that 80% of the antibiotics that are manufactured are for food animals. (Elaine et al. 5). Do their veterinarians impose strict consumption of the medications on livestock as well, because they too can develop resistance? But more importantly, I questioned if I would be directly affected by the medications that are indirectly put in my body. After some research, I learned that not only do food animal antibiotics directly affect human health, but also there are also indirect factors affecting us. Direct effects do cause an increased risk of resistance colonization, outbreak of resistant diarrheal disease, infection, and a resistance in the normal flora in the gastrointestinal tracts. Furthermore, indirect effects include the incorporation of resistant bacteria from waste into the water supply, which then affects normal human flora, and antibiotic containing pet food can trigger colonization and infection to the pets and their human owners (Elaine et al. 12).
I feel a little better knowing that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which I actually aspire to work for one day, is making an effort to assess food animal antibiotics and has created a guidance framework to evaluate threats to human health (Elaine et al. 12). Ultimately, the actual effect of food animal antibiotics remains relatively fuzzy, which reflects the nature of many controversial science topics; however, since there is little knowledge on the matter, my take on it is that we shouldn’t endorse the extensive use of food animal antibiotics. These antibiotics aren’t simply used to treat illness, but also to increase the size of the animal. Now, that just sounds unnaturally absurd and I would rather not put artificially grown meat into my body.
Coming from a health conscious family, we try to purchase antibiotic-free and hormone-free meats. We understand that even though there are no immediate consequences from consuming “altered” meat, time may cultivate undesirable health issues. The unfortunate truth about these organic meats is the expensive price tag; not everyone has the access to or the budget to consume the potentially safer meats.
- Christine Cunningham
University of Texas ‘14
Every time I go to the school nurse or the doctor for some sort of bacterial infection, they give me strict directions to follow in terms of taking antibiotics. I am told to continue the prescribed dose in a timely manner, even if I’m feeling better, to prevent “resistance.” Antibiotic resistance is a result of natural selection and some organisms possess genetic mutations that essentially result in the ineffectively of antibiotics. The mechanism of resistance is the same in human and animals. I recently learned that 80% of the antibiotics that are manufactured are for food animals. (Elaine et al. 5). Do their veterinarians impose strict consumption of the medications on livestock as well, because they too can develop resistance? But more importantly, I questioned if I would be directly affected by the medications that are indirectly put in my body. After some research, I learned that not only do food animal antibiotics directly affect human health, but also there are also indirect factors affecting us. Direct effects do cause an increased risk of resistance colonization, outbreak of resistant diarrheal disease, infection, and a resistance in the normal flora in the gastrointestinal tracts. Furthermore, indirect effects include the incorporation of resistant bacteria from waste into the water supply, which then affects normal human flora, and antibiotic containing pet food can trigger colonization and infection to the pets and their human owners (Elaine et al. 12).
I feel a little better knowing that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which I actually aspire to work for one day, is making an effort to assess food animal antibiotics and has created a guidance framework to evaluate threats to human health (Elaine et al. 12). Ultimately, the actual effect of food animal antibiotics remains relatively fuzzy, which reflects the nature of many controversial science topics; however, since there is little knowledge on the matter, my take on it is that we shouldn’t endorse the extensive use of food animal antibiotics. These antibiotics aren’t simply used to treat illness, but also to increase the size of the animal. Now, that just sounds unnaturally absurd and I would rather not put artificially grown meat into my body.
Coming from a health conscious family, we try to purchase antibiotic-free and hormone-free meats. We understand that even though there are no immediate consequences from consuming “altered” meat, time may cultivate undesirable health issues. The unfortunate truth about these organic meats is the expensive price tag; not everyone has the access to or the budget to consume the potentially safer meats.
- Christine Cunningham
University of Texas ‘14
Total Word Count: 488
My Words: 426
DISCLAIMER: Parts of this website are fictional and were created for a class. Please email my instructor with questions: [email protected].
My Words: 426
DISCLAIMER: Parts of this website are fictional and were created for a class. Please email my instructor with questions: [email protected].