Raising Animals Without Antibiotics: U.S. Producer and Veterinarian Experiences and Opinions

Randall S. Singer; Leah J. Porter; Daniel U. Thomson; Mallory Gage; Amanda Beaudoin; Jennifer K. Wishnie

doi:10.3389/fvets.2019.00452

Raising Animals Without Antibiotics: U.S. Producer and Veterinarian Experiences and Opinions

Randall S. Singer, Leah J. Porter, Daniel U. Thomson, Mallory Gage, Amanda Beaudoin, Jennifer K. Wishnie

Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

33 Scopus citations

Abstract

Ensuring the safety, health, and overall well-being of animals raised for food is both an ethical obligation and a critical component of providing safe food products. The use of antibiotics for maintaining animal health has come under scrutiny in recent years due to the rise of antibiotic resistance globally. Some U.S. producers, especially in the poultry industry, have responded by eliminating their antibiotic use. The number of animals raised without antibiotics (RWA) is growing in the U.S., but there are concerns that RWA practices might negatively impact animal health and welfare. Therefore, the objective of this study was to survey U.S. veterinarians and producers about their experiences and opinions regarding RWA production. Veterinarians, farmers, ranchers, producers, and other stakeholders involved in raising broilers, turkeys, swine, beef cattle or dairy cattle were surveyed. Of the 565 completed responses received, 442 self-reported as practicing veterinarians or producers. Just over half of respondents reported having past or current experience with RWA programs. The main indicated reasons for raising animals without antibiotics were market driven; switching to RWA production was less commonly made for health-related reasons, such as to reduce antibiotic resistance or to improve animal health and welfare. Although respondents felt that RWA production has negative impacts on animal health and welfare, they overwhelmingly (>70%) indicated that the customer (retailer/restaurant/food service) believes that animal and health welfare will be significantly improved. Veterinarians and producers indicated that RWA programs will increase production costs with questionable effect on meat, egg or dairy consumer demand. Many respondents felt that there are times when the RWA label takes priority over animal health and welfare. Respondents generally felt that there was a need for increased auditing/assessment of animal health and welfare in RWA systems.

Original language	English (US)
Article number	452
Journal	Frontiers in Veterinary Science
Volume	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2019.00452
State	Published - Dec 6 2019

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
Conflict of Interest: RS has received funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, Elanco Animal Health, Zoetis, and Bayer Animal Health. DT has received funding from Agrilabs, Bayer Animal Health, Boehringer Ingelheim, Elanco, Epitopix, Merck Animal Health, Multimin, Zinpro and Zoetis. MG has received funding from Merck Animal Health. RS was partly employed by the company Mindwalk Consulting Group, LLC and LP was fully employed by the company Mindwalk Consulting Group, LLC. MG was employed by the company Gage Group Consulting, LLC.

Funding Information:
Funding for this study was provided, in part, by the Animal Agriculture Alliance. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright © 2019 Singer, Porter, Thomson, Gage, Beaudoin and Wishnie.

Keywords

NAE
RWA
animal agriculture
animal welfare
antibiotics
livestock

Publisher link

10.3389/fvets.2019.00452

Find It

Find It at U of M Libraries

Cite this

@article{e094605362084a7b8b70684e11dbfe29,

title = "Raising Animals Without Antibiotics: U.S. Producer and Veterinarian Experiences and Opinions",

abstract = "Ensuring the safety, health, and overall well-being of animals raised for food is both an ethical obligation and a critical component of providing safe food products. The use of antibiotics for maintaining animal health has come under scrutiny in recent years due to the rise of antibiotic resistance globally. Some U.S. producers, especially in the poultry industry, have responded by eliminating their antibiotic use. The number of animals raised without antibiotics (RWA) is growing in the U.S., but there are concerns that RWA practices might negatively impact animal health and welfare. Therefore, the objective of this study was to survey U.S. veterinarians and producers about their experiences and opinions regarding RWA production. Veterinarians, farmers, ranchers, producers, and other stakeholders involved in raising broilers, turkeys, swine, beef cattle or dairy cattle were surveyed. Of the 565 completed responses received, 442 self-reported as practicing veterinarians or producers. Just over half of respondents reported having past or current experience with RWA programs. The main indicated reasons for raising animals without antibiotics were market driven; switching to RWA production was less commonly made for health-related reasons, such as to reduce antibiotic resistance or to improve animal health and welfare. Although respondents felt that RWA production has negative impacts on animal health and welfare, they overwhelmingly (>70%) indicated that the customer (retailer/restaurant/food service) believes that animal and health welfare will be significantly improved. Veterinarians and producers indicated that RWA programs will increase production costs with questionable effect on meat, egg or dairy consumer demand. Many respondents felt that there are times when the RWA label takes priority over animal health and welfare. Respondents generally felt that there was a need for increased auditing/assessment of animal health and welfare in RWA systems.",

keywords = "NAE, RWA, animal agriculture, animal welfare, antibiotics, livestock",

author = "Singer, {Randall S.} and Porter, {Leah J.} and Thomson, {Daniel U.} and Mallory Gage and Amanda Beaudoin and Wishnie, {Jennifer K.}",

note = "Funding Information: Conflict of Interest: RS has received funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, Elanco Animal Health, Zoetis, and Bayer Animal Health. DT has received funding from Agrilabs, Bayer Animal Health, Boehringer Ingelheim, Elanco, Epitopix, Merck Animal Health, Multimin, Zinpro and Zoetis. MG has received funding from Merck Animal Health. RS was partly employed by the company Mindwalk Consulting Group, LLC and LP was fully employed by the company Mindwalk Consulting Group, LLC. MG was employed by the company Gage Group Consulting, LLC. Funding Information: Funding for this study was provided, in part, by the Animal Agriculture Alliance. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} Copyright {\textcopyright} 2019 Singer, Porter, Thomson, Gage, Beaudoin and Wishnie.",

year = "2019",

month = dec,

day = "6",

doi = "10.3389/fvets.2019.00452",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "6",

journal = "Frontiers in Veterinary Science",

issn = "2297-1769",

publisher = "Frontiers Media S. A.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Raising Animals Without Antibiotics

T2 - U.S. Producer and Veterinarian Experiences and Opinions

AU - Singer, Randall S.

AU - Porter, Leah J.

AU - Thomson, Daniel U.

AU - Gage, Mallory

AU - Beaudoin, Amanda

AU - Wishnie, Jennifer K.

N1 - Funding Information: Conflict of Interest: RS has received funding from Boehringer Ingelheim, Elanco Animal Health, Zoetis, and Bayer Animal Health. DT has received funding from Agrilabs, Bayer Animal Health, Boehringer Ingelheim, Elanco, Epitopix, Merck Animal Health, Multimin, Zinpro and Zoetis. MG has received funding from Merck Animal Health. RS was partly employed by the company Mindwalk Consulting Group, LLC and LP was fully employed by the company Mindwalk Consulting Group, LLC. MG was employed by the company Gage Group Consulting, LLC. Funding Information: Funding for this study was provided, in part, by the Animal Agriculture Alliance. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Publisher Copyright: © Copyright © 2019 Singer, Porter, Thomson, Gage, Beaudoin and Wishnie.

PY - 2019/12/6

Y1 - 2019/12/6

N2 - Ensuring the safety, health, and overall well-being of animals raised for food is both an ethical obligation and a critical component of providing safe food products. The use of antibiotics for maintaining animal health has come under scrutiny in recent years due to the rise of antibiotic resistance globally. Some U.S. producers, especially in the poultry industry, have responded by eliminating their antibiotic use. The number of animals raised without antibiotics (RWA) is growing in the U.S., but there are concerns that RWA practices might negatively impact animal health and welfare. Therefore, the objective of this study was to survey U.S. veterinarians and producers about their experiences and opinions regarding RWA production. Veterinarians, farmers, ranchers, producers, and other stakeholders involved in raising broilers, turkeys, swine, beef cattle or dairy cattle were surveyed. Of the 565 completed responses received, 442 self-reported as practicing veterinarians or producers. Just over half of respondents reported having past or current experience with RWA programs. The main indicated reasons for raising animals without antibiotics were market driven; switching to RWA production was less commonly made for health-related reasons, such as to reduce antibiotic resistance or to improve animal health and welfare. Although respondents felt that RWA production has negative impacts on animal health and welfare, they overwhelmingly (>70%) indicated that the customer (retailer/restaurant/food service) believes that animal and health welfare will be significantly improved. Veterinarians and producers indicated that RWA programs will increase production costs with questionable effect on meat, egg or dairy consumer demand. Many respondents felt that there are times when the RWA label takes priority over animal health and welfare. Respondents generally felt that there was a need for increased auditing/assessment of animal health and welfare in RWA systems.

AB - Ensuring the safety, health, and overall well-being of animals raised for food is both an ethical obligation and a critical component of providing safe food products. The use of antibiotics for maintaining animal health has come under scrutiny in recent years due to the rise of antibiotic resistance globally. Some U.S. producers, especially in the poultry industry, have responded by eliminating their antibiotic use. The number of animals raised without antibiotics (RWA) is growing in the U.S., but there are concerns that RWA practices might negatively impact animal health and welfare. Therefore, the objective of this study was to survey U.S. veterinarians and producers about their experiences and opinions regarding RWA production. Veterinarians, farmers, ranchers, producers, and other stakeholders involved in raising broilers, turkeys, swine, beef cattle or dairy cattle were surveyed. Of the 565 completed responses received, 442 self-reported as practicing veterinarians or producers. Just over half of respondents reported having past or current experience with RWA programs. The main indicated reasons for raising animals without antibiotics were market driven; switching to RWA production was less commonly made for health-related reasons, such as to reduce antibiotic resistance or to improve animal health and welfare. Although respondents felt that RWA production has negative impacts on animal health and welfare, they overwhelmingly (>70%) indicated that the customer (retailer/restaurant/food service) believes that animal and health welfare will be significantly improved. Veterinarians and producers indicated that RWA programs will increase production costs with questionable effect on meat, egg or dairy consumer demand. Many respondents felt that there are times when the RWA label takes priority over animal health and welfare. Respondents generally felt that there was a need for increased auditing/assessment of animal health and welfare in RWA systems.

KW - NAE

KW - RWA

KW - animal agriculture

KW - animal welfare

KW - antibiotics

KW - livestock

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85077274251&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85077274251&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3389/fvets.2019.00452

DO - 10.3389/fvets.2019.00452

M3 - Article

C2 - 31867349

AN - SCOPUS:85077274251

SN - 2297-1769

VL - 6

JO - Frontiers in Veterinary Science

JF - Frontiers in Veterinary Science

M1 - 452

ER -

Raising Animals Without Antibiotics: U.S. Producer and Veterinarian Experiences and Opinions

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Publisher link

Find It

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this