الكاتب: Multiple References

Sir—In the policy context of assessing whether developing countries that want cheaper, more-plentiful meat would be well-advised to use animal antibiotics, Collignon and colleagues reported in a recent article that “Some persons argue that the routine addition of antibiotics to animal feed will help alleviate protein undernutrition in developing countries by increasing meat production. In contrast, we estimate that, if all routine antibiotic use in animal feed were ceased, there would be negligible effects in these countries. Poultry and pork production are unlikely to decrease by more than 2%” [1, p. 1007]. In support of these conclusions, the authors cite a US Department of Agriculture report that, they claim, “calculated that the US hog industry would have a net saving of $7 million if the use of antibiotic growth promoters ceased” [1, p. 1012]. But what the cited analysis actually says is that “Each producer is able to improve his or her net returns by feeding antimicrobial drugs. However, when all producers act in concert, feeding antimicrobial drugs, the collective result is to increase hog supplies; the increased supplies decrease hog prices” [2, p. 7]. Thus, this analysis supports the claim that feeding antimicrobial drugs to food animals (specifically hogs) expands supply and reduces prices; presumably, this is a significant finding for developing countries that desire these outcomes