Things To Know: Senator Hill Introduces SB835

News Release - Office of Senator Jerry Hill - January 6, 2014
Contacts: Aurelio Rojas, 916-747-3199 cell; Leslie Guevarra, 415-298-3404 cell

Senator Jerry Hill Introduces Legislation Phasing Out Non-Medical Use of Antibiotics in Farm Animals in California

Senate Bill 835 Fights the Growing Resistance to Crucial Antibiotic Drugs

SACRAMENTO – State Senator Jerry Hill introduced legislation today to phase out the non-medical use of antibiotics in farm animals in California, strengthening recently released federal guidelines that combat the growing resistance to these vital drugs. Senate Bill 835 will effectively make it illegal for farmers and ranchers to use antibiotics to make animals grow bigger.

More than two million Americans contract antibiotic-resistant infections each year -- resulting in 23,000 deaths. In December, the federal Food and Drug Administration issued a guidance document asking pharmaceutical companies, livestock and poultry producers to stop using antibiotics to promote faster growth in animals and to limit use to medical care only. The FDA’s guidance document, however, is not binding. The document contains only voluntary recommendations and requests pharmaceutical, livestock and poultry producers to comply.

“My legislation will make it clear that the FDA guidelines are the law in California,” said Hill, D-San Mateo/Santa Clara counties.

Medically important antibiotics used in food-producing animals are the same ones used in humans. Farms consume at least 70 percent of the nation’s antibiotic supply and repeated exposure to antibiotics can lead germs to become resistant to drugs such as penicillin and tetracycline that are used to treat common bacterial infections in humans.

This year, an outbreak of antibiotic-resistant salmonella linked to three chicken plants in California sickened nearly 400 people; 40 percent of those infected were hospitalized. Each year antibiotic-resistant infections result in at least $20 billion in direct health care costs and at least $35 billion in lost productivity.

"Antibiotic use in food-producing animals for non-medical reasons is a serious public health issue,” Hill said. “My legislation is intended to ensure that medically important antibiotics remain effective in treating bacterial infections in animals and humans.”

Hill’s legislation will ensure that California companies comply with the FDA voluntary guidelines. Drug manufacturers will be required to change labels for animal antibiotics so that they are designated as drugs that are to be sold only by prescription. This would prevent farmers and others who raise livestock from buying animal antibiotics over the counter and using them for non-medical purposes. Since the 1950s producers have been feeding low doses of antibiotics to animals throughout their lives to increase their size and weight. Pharmaceutical and livestock producers would be subject to penalties if they do not comply.

It will also require food producers to obtain a prescription from a veterinarian to use the drugs to prevent disease in their animals. With veterinary oversight, animal producers will still be able to use medically important antibiotics for legitimate disease treatment purposes.

In its Consumer Update, the Food and Drug Administration stated, “Because all uses of antimicrobial drugs, in both humans and animals, contribute to the development of antimicrobial resistance, it is important to use these drugs only when medically necessary.” In 1977, the FDA first reported that the non-therapeutic use of penicillin and tetracycline in livestock could lead to new superbugs resistant to antibiotics.

According to the Centers for Disease Control, "Antibiotics are also commonly used in food animals to prevent, control, and treat disease, and to promote the growth of food-producing animals. The use of antibiotics for promoting growth is not necessary, and the practice should be phased out."

Earlier this year Johns Hopkins University released a study which found that, “Administering nontherapeutic antimicrobials to food animals is particularly problematic since chronic administration of low doses of antimicrobials contributes to the evolution and proliferation of antimicrobial-resistant strains of bacteria. Accordingly, the widespread use of nontherapeutic antimicrobials in animals and the selection of genes conveying resistance can vastly diminish the effectiveness of antimicrobials to treat animal and human disease.”

The European Union banned the use of antibiotics in farm animals for non-medical purposes in 2005.

Many industry groups have voiced their support of the Food and Drug Administration guidelines:

Ø American Veterinary Medical Association: “AVMA lauds FDA for new regulation of antibiotics in livestock feed,”  the AVMA said in a statement. The AVMA has long advocated that greater veterinary oversight of the use of antimicrobials on the farm is a benefit to human and animal health.”

Ø Zoetis, the animal drug arm of pharmaceutical company Pfizer: “Zoetis supports the FDA’s efforts to voluntarily phase-out growth promotion indications for medically important antibiotics in food producing animals," Zoetis said in a statement released last month. It has been reported that Elanco, the animal branch of pharmaceutical company Eli Lilly, will follow the guidance.

Ø Animal Health Institute, which represents animal drug companies: “Animal health companies have supported this policy since it was announced in 2012 and will continue to work with the FDA on its implementation," AHI said in a statement, adding “We strongly support responsible use of antibiotic medicines and the involvement of a veterinarian whenever antibiotics are administered to food-producing animals.”

Ø National Chicken Council:  “NCC has supported and will continue to support FDA’s Guidance 213."

Ø American Meat Institute, which represents companies that process 95 percent of the nation’s beef and 70 percent of turkey said it welcomes the publication of the Food and Drug Administration’s Final Guidance 213: “AMI strongly supports the prudent and judicious use of antibiotics in food animal production under the care of a veterinarian as defined by the American Veterinary Medical Association, which is consistent with protecting both animal and public health, ensuring the ability to medically treat animals, and maintaining the highest standard of animal welfare practices and we believe Guidance 213 adheres to these principles.”

Nate Solov

Office of Senator Jerry Hill

916-651-4013

www.senate.ca.gov/hill