Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Limitations of Reporting Requirements under California's Livestock Antimicrobial Restriction Law.
Quaade, Sebastian; Casey, Joan A; Nachman, Keeve E; Tartof, Sara Y; Ho, Daniel E.
Affiliation
  • Quaade S; Stanford Law School, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA.
  • Casey JA; Department of Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA.
  • Nachman KE; Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York, USA.
  • Tartof SY; Department of Environmental Health & Engineering, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
  • Ho DE; Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Environ Health Perspect ; 132(2): 25001, 2024 Feb.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38415616
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Antimicrobial use in livestock production is considered a key contributor to growing antimicrobial resistance in bacteria. In 2015, California became the first state to enact restrictions on routine antimicrobial use in livestock production via Senate Bill 27 (SB27). SB27 further required the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) to collect and disseminate data on antimicrobial use in livestock production.

OBJECTIVE:

The goal of this report is to assess whether CDFA's data release allows us to evaluate how antimicrobial use changed after the implementation of SB27.

METHODS:

We combine the CDFA data with feed drug concentration ranges from the Code of Federal Regulation to evaluate the spread of plausible antimicrobial use trends. We also estimate antimicrobial consumption rates using data from the National Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS) and compare these to changes in medicated feed production reported by the CDFA.

DISCUSSION:

We show that CDFA's reported data are insufficient to reliably estimate whether antimicrobial usage has increased or decreased, most notably because no information is provided about the mass of antimicrobials approved for use or medicated feed drug concentrations. After incorporating additional external data on feed drug concentrations, one can at best provide uninformative bounds on the effect of SB27. We find some evidence that antimicrobial use has decreased by incorporating data on national sales of antimicrobials for food-producing animals, but the weakness of this inference underlines the need for improved data collection and dissemination, especially as other states seek to implement similar policies. We provide recommendations on how to improve reporting and data collection under SB27. https//doi.org/10.1289/EHP13702.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Livestock / Anti-Infective Agents Limits: Animals Country/Region as subject: America do norte Language: En Journal: Environ Health Perspect Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Livestock / Anti-Infective Agents Limits: Animals Country/Region as subject: America do norte Language: En Journal: Environ Health Perspect Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States