Cargando…

Economic effects of policy options restricting antimicrobial use for high risk cattle placed in U.S. feedlots

The rising public health threat of antimicrobial resistance, the influence of food service companies, as well as the overall lack of positive image of using medical products in intensive farming are major drivers curbing antimicrobial use. In the future, government policies may affect practices of a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lhermie, Guillaume, Sauvage, Pierre, Tauer, Loren William, Chiu, Leslie Verteramo, Kanyiamattam, Karun, Ferchiou, Ahmed, Raboisson, Didier, Scott, Harvey Morgan, Smith, David R., Grohn, Yrjo Tapio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7491722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32931522
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239135
_version_ 1783582258106466304
author Lhermie, Guillaume
Sauvage, Pierre
Tauer, Loren William
Chiu, Leslie Verteramo
Kanyiamattam, Karun
Ferchiou, Ahmed
Raboisson, Didier
Scott, Harvey Morgan
Smith, David R.
Grohn, Yrjo Tapio
author_facet Lhermie, Guillaume
Sauvage, Pierre
Tauer, Loren William
Chiu, Leslie Verteramo
Kanyiamattam, Karun
Ferchiou, Ahmed
Raboisson, Didier
Scott, Harvey Morgan
Smith, David R.
Grohn, Yrjo Tapio
author_sort Lhermie, Guillaume
collection PubMed
description The rising public health threat of antimicrobial resistance, the influence of food service companies, as well as the overall lack of positive image of using medical products in intensive farming are major drivers curbing antimicrobial use. In the future, government policies may affect practices of antimicrobial use in beef production in feedlots, a prominent current user of antimicrobials in animal agriculture, but also the agricultural industry generating the highest cash receipt in the U.S. Our objective was to estimate the cost effect from the following policies in feedlots: 1) using antimicrobials for disease prevention, control, and treatment; 2) using antimicrobials only for treatment of disease; and 3) not using antimicrobials for any reason. We modelled a typical U.S. feedlot, where high risk cattle may be afflicted by diseases requiring antimicrobial therapy, namely respiratory diseases, liver abscesses and lameness. We calculated the net revenue loss under each policy of antimicrobial use restriction. With moderate disease incidence, the median net revenue loss was $66 and $96 per animal entering the feedlot, for not using antimicrobials for disease prevention and control, or not using any antimicrobials, respectively, compared to using antimicrobials for disease prevention, control, and treatment. Losses arose mainly from an increase of fatality and morbidity rates, almost doubling for respiratory diseases in the case of antimicrobial use restrictions. In the case of antimicrobial use prohibition, decreasing the feeder cattle price by 9%, or alternatively, increasing the slaughter cattle price by 6.3%, would offset the net revenue losses for the feedlot operator. If no alternatives to antimicrobial therapy for prevention, control and treatment of current infectious diseases are implemented, policies that economically incentivize adoption of non-antimicrobial prevention and control strategies for infectious diseases would be necessary to maintain animal welfare and the profitability of beef production while simultaneously curbing antimicrobial use.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7491722
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74917222020-09-18 Economic effects of policy options restricting antimicrobial use for high risk cattle placed in U.S. feedlots Lhermie, Guillaume Sauvage, Pierre Tauer, Loren William Chiu, Leslie Verteramo Kanyiamattam, Karun Ferchiou, Ahmed Raboisson, Didier Scott, Harvey Morgan Smith, David R. Grohn, Yrjo Tapio PLoS One Research Article The rising public health threat of antimicrobial resistance, the influence of food service companies, as well as the overall lack of positive image of using medical products in intensive farming are major drivers curbing antimicrobial use. In the future, government policies may affect practices of antimicrobial use in beef production in feedlots, a prominent current user of antimicrobials in animal agriculture, but also the agricultural industry generating the highest cash receipt in the U.S. Our objective was to estimate the cost effect from the following policies in feedlots: 1) using antimicrobials for disease prevention, control, and treatment; 2) using antimicrobials only for treatment of disease; and 3) not using antimicrobials for any reason. We modelled a typical U.S. feedlot, where high risk cattle may be afflicted by diseases requiring antimicrobial therapy, namely respiratory diseases, liver abscesses and lameness. We calculated the net revenue loss under each policy of antimicrobial use restriction. With moderate disease incidence, the median net revenue loss was $66 and $96 per animal entering the feedlot, for not using antimicrobials for disease prevention and control, or not using any antimicrobials, respectively, compared to using antimicrobials for disease prevention, control, and treatment. Losses arose mainly from an increase of fatality and morbidity rates, almost doubling for respiratory diseases in the case of antimicrobial use restrictions. In the case of antimicrobial use prohibition, decreasing the feeder cattle price by 9%, or alternatively, increasing the slaughter cattle price by 6.3%, would offset the net revenue losses for the feedlot operator. If no alternatives to antimicrobial therapy for prevention, control and treatment of current infectious diseases are implemented, policies that economically incentivize adoption of non-antimicrobial prevention and control strategies for infectious diseases would be necessary to maintain animal welfare and the profitability of beef production while simultaneously curbing antimicrobial use. Public Library of Science 2020-09-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7491722/ /pubmed/32931522 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239135 Text en © 2020 Lhermie et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Lhermie, Guillaume
Sauvage, Pierre
Tauer, Loren William
Chiu, Leslie Verteramo
Kanyiamattam, Karun
Ferchiou, Ahmed
Raboisson, Didier
Scott, Harvey Morgan
Smith, David R.
Grohn, Yrjo Tapio
Economic effects of policy options restricting antimicrobial use for high risk cattle placed in U.S. feedlots
title Economic effects of policy options restricting antimicrobial use for high risk cattle placed in U.S. feedlots
title_full Economic effects of policy options restricting antimicrobial use for high risk cattle placed in U.S. feedlots
title_fullStr Economic effects of policy options restricting antimicrobial use for high risk cattle placed in U.S. feedlots
title_full_unstemmed Economic effects of policy options restricting antimicrobial use for high risk cattle placed in U.S. feedlots
title_short Economic effects of policy options restricting antimicrobial use for high risk cattle placed in U.S. feedlots
title_sort economic effects of policy options restricting antimicrobial use for high risk cattle placed in u.s. feedlots
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7491722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32931522
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239135
work_keys_str_mv AT lhermieguillaume economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots
AT sauvagepierre economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots
AT tauerlorenwilliam economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots
AT chiuleslieverteramo economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots
AT kanyiamattamkarun economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots
AT ferchiouahmed economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots
AT raboissondidier economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots
AT scottharveymorgan economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots
AT smithdavidr economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots
AT grohnyrjotapio economiceffectsofpolicyoptionsrestrictingantimicrobialuseforhighriskcattleplacedinusfeedlots