Published in the Washington Post
I began working on health policy as legislative staff in the Maryland House of Delegates in 2008. Since that time I earned a MSPH in Health Policy from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and have spent nearly a decade working to implement the Affordable Care Act so as to improve perhaps one of the most vexing and convoluted policy quagmires facing our nation today.
We need health policy experts in the Maryland House of Delegates. I'm running to serve as a public health champion in our state legislature. To that end I have analyzed recent legislation that was passed through the Maryland General Assembly that left open a wide loophole that severely hampers the statute from meeting legislative intent. That's why I wrote an op-ed on the topic, co-authored by MacArthur "Genius" Fellow Dr. Ellen Silbergeld, and why The Washington Post chose to publish it.
Antibiotic Legislation Falls Short in Maryland
On
October 1, 2017 a number of health-related bills in Maryland came into effect that
have unfortunately fallen short of where we need to be. The Keep Antibiotics Effective Act
of 2017 has
taken a step in the right direction by attempting to limit the prophylactic use
of antibiotics in livestock, fish, and poultry
so as to arrest the spread of antibiotic resistant strains of bacteria and to
thereby prolong the efficacy of our antibiotic drugs. Unfortunately this bill
does not require confirmation of an actual disease in a herd or flock in order
for the animals to be treated with antibiotics and it will therefore be
ineffective at addressing the legislative intent behind this statute.
The
legislation is to be commended for prohibiting the use of antibiotics in
livestock, fish, and poultry to promote weight gain or to improve feed
efficiency. However there is a loophole in this legislation large enough for a
battleship to pass through pertaining to the prophylactic use of antibiotics based on the judgment of
a veterinarian. At
first blush this sounds like a reasonable approach that would balance animal welfare and productivity.
Unfortunately this bill
does not require confirmation and identification of an actual disease in a herd
or flock in order for the animals to be treated with antibiotics.
In
order to select effective treatments, it is equally important to administer the
proper class of antibiotics to animals and thus prolong the effectiveness of antibiotics
for subsequent use by both humans and animals.
As a result, this
legislation will not be as effective in addressing the legislative intent
behind this statute as it might have been had this loophole been eliminated.
The World Health Organization opposes this sort of loophole since, given the
crowded conditions characteristic of factory farms, it would not be too
difficult for a veterinarian to conclude that every animal stands a reasonable risk of contracting a disease.
This situation is analogous to how a pediatrician might conclude that every child who attends daycare should
take antibiotics on a daily basis throughout childhood simply because they have
an increased risk of contracting the common cold.
The
most compelling argument for closing this legislative loophole is that without
these changes we will continue to erode the efficacy of our limited armory of antibiotics
for use in medicine. While all uses of
antibiotics contribute to the diminishment of their effectiveness, the volume
of antibiotic use in food animal production is greatly accelerating, which in
turn increases antibiotic resistance in bacteria that cause human disease. Humans who consume meat from
animals that received prophylactic antibiotics are exposed to strains of
bacteria that have evolved to survive the effects of the antibiotics
administered to livestock, fish, and poultry. In effect, our demand for
cheap and abundant meat has led to our careless use of prophylactic antibiotics
in animals that in turn has exponentially reduced the efficacy of antibiotics
for human use. The results are shocking.
Widespread
antibiotic resistance has become a crisis on a global scale in urgent need of
redress. The CDC indicates
that Marylanders endure a rate of healthcare-associated infections that are
higher than the national baseline. We incur large costs associated with
antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria that infect hospitalized patients. This results in extended hospital stays,
increased complications, increased costs born by payers (and subsequently by
all policy-holders through increased premiums), and increased loss of life. Some of the most well-known culprits,
sometimes referred to as “Super Bugs,” are Methicillin-Resistant
Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA)
and Clostridium Difficile
(C. Diff). These bacteria have developed resistance to many different antibiotics.
This crisis is exacerbated by the
lack of new antibiotic molecules. This
issue is recognized but it is a time consuming process to develop and test new
antibiotics. While we wait for these new discoveries we need to protect the
antibiotics that we have by prohibiting the administration of sub-effective and
inappropriate prophylactic doses of antibiotics in industrial food animal
production.
We support the actions of the
Maryland legislature in developing the Keep Antibiotics Effective Act
of 2017. There
is much that is good in this legislation but, in failing to prevent the abuse
of prophylactic antibiotic
uses in livestock, fish, and poultry, we will fall short
of accomplishing its intent of protecting the health of Marylanders.
Jordan Cooper has been involved with the
implementation of the Affordable Care Act at the Maryland House of Delegates, Johns
Hopkins Hospital, Kaiser Permanente, and in DC Medicaid. He has a master's
degree in health policy from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public
Health. Ellen Silbergeld is a
recipient of the MacArthur Foundation “genius grant,” the author of
“Chickenizing Farms and Food,” is a special consultant to the World Health
Organization Food Safety Program, and is a Professor of Environmental Health at
the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.