|
|
|
|
FDA Report Has Data On Antibiotics Sold, Not Used
WASHINGTON, D.C., Dec. 15, 2010 - Contrary to proponents of banning antibiotics in food-animal production, a government report issued last Friday does not show America's livestock and poultry producers are using "massive" amounts of antibiotics.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration report includes data on sales of all antibiotics intended for use in farm animals. For 2009, 28.7 million pounds of antimicrobial drugs were sold; nearly 29 percent of that amount was ionophores, compounds not used in human medicine.
Opponents of modern livestock production are pushing the theory that antibiotic use in food animals is leading to an increase in antibiotic resistance in humans and, therefore, antibiotic use in livestock production must be restricted. Several groups support legislation that would ban the use in livestock and poultry of antibiotics that prevent or control diseases and of ones that improve feed conversion and, thus, weight gain.
"Pork producers use antibiotics responsibly, under the direction of a veterinarian, to protect public health and the health of their animals and to produce safe food," said Howard Hill, DVM, who serves on the board of directors for the National Pork Producers Council. "The FDA report does not show that livestock producers overuse antibiotics, and it doesn't show that they are being irresponsible. It simply shows that 28.7 million pounds of antibiotics were sold in the United States."
Randal Singer, associate professor of epidemiology at the University of Minnesota, who for 12 years has studied antibiotic uses and antibiotic resistance, has said that "all uses of antibiotics improve animal health, and these improvements in animal health can substantially improve human health."
The FDA report, which was required under the 2008 Animal Drug User Fee Act, did not include data on the quantities of drugs used to treat sick animals, to prevent or control diseases and to improve feed efficiency and weight gain.
"Despite the fact that the FDA report lacks the data," Hill said, "several groups continue to peddle junk science on the percentage of antibiotics used for 'non-therapeutic' reasons, which include prevention and control of diseases, and to make comparisons of antibiotics used in food animals with those used in humans."
[For more information about antibiotic use in pork production, visit factsaboutpork.org.]
U.S.-South Korea FTA Remains A Good Deal For U.S. Pork Producers
WASHINGTON, D.C., Dec. 3, 2010 - U.S. pork producers took one for the proverbial team as the United States and South Korea today resolved an issue with autos through a compromise on pork to finalize a free trade agreement between the countries.
The deal isn't everything the National Pork Producers Council wanted, but it's close enough, according to NPPC President Sam Carney, a pork producer from Adair, Iowa.
"We've worked particularly hard the past several years to get a good deal for U.S. pork in the FTA with South Korea," said Carney. "We had that but to get a final agreement, we needed to give a little, we needed to take one for the team. This is still a good deal for us."
At NPPC's insistence, the United States had negotiated in the agreement that was signed June 30, 2007, a zero tariff rate on most pork products going into South Korea effective Jan. 1, 2014, the same date Chile's pork and 30 months before the European Union's goes to a zero duty. Chile's FTA with South Korea was implemented in 2004; the EU's agreement will be in force July 1, 2011.
The U.S.-South Korea FTA had been held up mostly because of issues related to trade in beef and automobiles. The logjam was broken when U.S. pork producers agreed to move back the effective date on the zero tariff rate on some cuts of pork to Jan. 1, 2016.
"With the date for a zero tariff on pork moved back, we likely will lose some market share in the South Korean market to Chile," Carney said. "But as the lowest-cost producer of pork in the world, we'll hold our own. We still will go to zero six months prior to the EU."
The FTA, which still must be approved by the U.S. Congress as well as the South Korean National Assembly, would be one of the most lucrative for the U.S. pork industry, according to NPPC, which has championed the pact for more than three years now.
According to Iowa State University economist Dermot Hayes, by the end of the FTA's 10-year phase-in period, total U.S. pork exports to South Korea will be almost 600,000 metric tons. That represents nearly twice the current U.S. export level to Japan - now the top value market for the U.S pork industry. The FTA will lift live hog prices by a staggering $10 per animal and will generate an additional $687 million in U.S. pork exports. South Korea alone will absorb 5 percent of total U.S. pork production, and the FTA will create more than 9,000 new direct jobs in the U.S. pork industry.
The U.S.-South Korea FTA is one of three trade deals that are pending approval by Congress. Agreements with Colombia and Panama also have been awaiting action for more than three years.
INFORMATION
Event CalendarDid you forget your
password and username?
Contact the MPPA office
at (507) 345-8814 or
