The urgent case for antibioticfree animals Leon Marchal

Translator: Ivana Korom
Reviewer: Krystian Aparta

There was a time
when simple infections were deadly,

but now, thanks to the wide
availability of antibiotics,

this is merely a relic of the past.

But actually, I should say “was,”

because nowadays,
we’re using antibiotics so much

that the bacteria
that cause these infections

are becoming resistant.

And that should really scare
the hell out of all of us.

If we do not change our behavior
and wean ourselves off antibiotics,

the UN predicts that by 2050,

antimicrobial resistance
will become our single biggest killer.

So we must start to act.

But “where to begin”
is an interesting question,

because we humans are not
the only ones using antibiotics.

Worldwide, 50 to 80 percent
of all antibiotics are used by animals.

Not all of these are critical
for human health,

but if we do not get it
under control right now,

we’re looking at a very scary future
for humans and animals alike.

To begin, let’s talk
about how we ended up here.

The first large-scale use of antibiotics
was in the early ’50s of the last century.

In the Western world,
prosperity was increasing

and people wanted to eat
more animal protein.

When animals were sick,
you could now treat them with antibiotics

so they did not die and kept growing.

But soon, it was discovered

that adding small and regular amounts
of antibiotics to the feed

kept the animals healthy,

made them grow faster

and caused them to need less feed.

So these antibiotics worked well –

really well, actually.

And with increasing animal production,

also antibiotic use skyrocketed worldwide.

Unfortunately,
so did antibiotic resistance.

The reason your doctor tells you
to finish the entire bottle of antibiotics

is if you shorten your dose,
you will not kill all of the bugs.

And the ones that stick around
build up the antibiotic resistance.

It’s the same problem with giving animals
small and regular doses of antibiotics:

some bad bugs die but not all of them.

Spread that across an entire industry,

and you can understand
that we accidentally build up

a large reservoir
of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

But I hate to break it to you –

the problem doesn’t stop there.

You know who else takes antibiotics?

Fluffy, your cat, and Rover, your dog.

(Laughter)

Pets rank even amongst
the heaviest users of all,

and they use antibiotics

that are much more critical
for human health.

Combine this with how close
we live with our companion animals

and you understand the risk

of you picking up antibiotic-resistant
bacteria from your own pet.

But how do these
antibiotic-resistant bacteria

in farm animals affect you?

Let me give you an example
we have, actually, data on.

The levels of antibiotic-resistant
salmonella in pigs in Europe

against different types of antibiotics

range from less than a percent
to as high [as] 60 percent.

Which means that in most cases,

this antibiotic will not work anymore
to kill this salmonella.

And there was a high correlation

between antibiotic-resistant
salmonella in the pig

and in the final product.

Whether that is pork chop,

spare ribs or minced meat.

Now, luckily, typically
less than one percent

of all raw meat, fish or eggs

will contain salmonella.

And this only poses a risk
when not treated well.

Still, there are over 100,000
human salmonella cases in the EU

and more than a million cases in the US.

In the US, leading
to 23,000 hospitalizations

and 450 people dead each year.

With antibiotic-resistant
salmonella on the rise,

this death toll is likely to increase.

But it’s not only
about consuming yourself.

This year, more
than 100 people got infected

with a multidrug-resistant salmonella

after feeding pig ears,
as a treat, to their dog.

So we really must cut back
on antibiotic use in animal production.

And luckily, this is starting to happen.

The EU was the first region to ban

putting antibiotics
in low doses in the feed.

From ‘99 on, in several steps,

the amount of different types
of antibiotics allowed was reduced,

and in 2006, a complete ban
went into place.

Antibiotics were only allowed

when a veterinarian determined
the animal was sick.

Sounds great, right?

Problem solved.

No, wait, not so fast.

As soon as the reduction program started,

it was very quickly discovered

that antibiotics had been
the perfect blanket

to cover up a lot of bad farm practices.

More and more animals became sick

and needed to be
cured with … antibiotics.

So instead of the total amount going down,

it actually increased.

Surely, that was not the way to go.

But luckily, that was not
the end of the story.

The whole European agricultural sector
started on a journey,

and I think it’s a journey
anybody can learn from.

This is also the time
I personally entered the scene.

I joined a large European feed compounder.

A feed compounder makes a total diet
for a farmer to feed to his animals

and often also provides the advice

on how to raise the animals
in the best way.

I was really motivated
to work together with my colleagues,

veterinarians and, of course, the farmers

to figure out how to keep the animals
healthy and antibiotic-free.

Now there are three major things
that need to happen

for antibiotic-free production.

Let me walk you through the playbook.

To start – and it sounds very obvious –

that our hygiene is the place to start.

Better cleaning of the stable
and the drinking-water lines

making it harder for the disease
to come in and spread across the stable.

That’s all very important,

but the part I was personally
most interested in

was better feeding for the animals,

better nutrition.

Feeding a well-balanced diet is important.

Think about it this way:

when you yourself do not eat
enough fiber, you do not feel well.

Part of the food you consume
is not digested by yourself

but fermented in your large
intestine by bacteria.

So you’re feeding those microbes
with part of your diet.

Initially, most young animals
were fed low-fiber,

high-starch and protein,

very finely ground
and highly digestible diets.

Like being yourself on a diet
of hamburger buns,

rice, waffles and protein bars.

We changed this to a lower-protein,

higher-fiber, coarser type of diet.

Like being on a diet of whole grains,
salad with meat or beans.

This shifted the bacterial flora
in the animals’ guts

to the more beneficial ones

and reduced the chance
that pathogens would flourish.

You might be surprised

but not only diet composition,
also diet structure plays a role.

Simply the fact
that the same diet is coarser

will lead to a better-developed
digestive tract,

and thus, a healthier animal.

But the best part was that farmers
started to buy this actually, too.

Unlike some other parts of the world,

Western European farmers mainly still make
their independent buying decisions:

who to buy the feed from
and sell their animals to.

So what you’re actually selling in the end

reflects the actual local need
of these farmers.

For example,

the protein content in piglet diets

in countries that are much more vigilant
in reducing antibiotics,

like, for example,
Germany and the Netherlands,

were already 10 to 15 percent lower

than in a country like the UK,
which was slower to pick this up.

But, like with better hygiene,
better nutrition helps

but will not totally prevent you
from becoming sick.

So more is needed.

And that’s why we turned
to the microbiome.

Making the water with the feed more acidic

helps to create an environment

that benefits the more beneficial bacteria

and inhibits the pathogens.

Like fermented food,

whether it’s yogurt, sauerkraut or salami,

they’ll all spoil less quickly, too.

Now, with modern techniques,

like the ones based on DNA testing,

we can see that there are many more
different microorganisms present.

And this ecosystem,
which we call the microbiome,

is much more complex.

Turns out there are about eight times
more microorganisms in your gut

as tissue cells in your body.

And for animals, the impact is no less.

So if we want to work
without antibiotics in animal production,

we have to make the animals
much more robust.

So that when a disease strikes,

the animals are much more resilient.

And this three-pronged
nutribiosis approach

involving the host, nutrition
and the microbiome

is the way to do it.

Now the practice of raising animals
on an antibiotic-containing

or antibiotic-use-provoking diet
is a bit cheaper at farm level.

But in the end, we are talking about
a few percent at the consumer level.

That’s actually quite affordable

for the middle- and high-income
part of the world population.

And a very small price to pay

when our own health
or our loved ones' health is at stake.

So what do you think,
what direction do we take?

Do we allow antimicrobial resistance
to become our biggest killer,

at huge financial
and a special personal cost?

Or do we, besides reducing
human antibiotic consumption,

truly start embracing
antibiotic-free animal production?

For me, the choice is very obvious.

But to make this happen,

we have to set reduction targets

and make sure that they’re followed
all around the world.

Because farmers compete with each other.

And at a country level,

trading block or the global market,

costs are very important.

And also, we have to be realistic.

Farmers need to have the possibilities

to invest more in better
management and better feed

in order to achieve this reduction.

And besides legal limits,
the market can play a role,

by offering antibiotic-reduced
or antibiotic-free products.

And with growing consumer awareness,

these market forces
will increase in power.

Now everything I’ve been talking about
seems to be great for us.

But what about the animals?

Now, guess what,
their lives get better, too.

Better health, less stress, happier life.

So now you know.

We have the knowledge
how to produce meat, eggs and milk

without or with very low
amounts of antibiotics,

and I’ll argue it’s a small price to pay

to avoid a future
in which bacterial infections

again become our biggest killer.

Thank you.

(Applause)

译者:Ivana Korom
审稿人:Krystian Aparta

曾经有一段
时间简单的感染是致命的,

但现在,由于抗生素的广泛
使用,

这只是过去的遗物。

但实际上,我应该说“曾经”,

因为现在
我们使用抗生素的次数太多


,导致这些感染

的细菌变得耐药了。

这应该真的
把我们所有人都吓坏了。

如果我们不改变我们的行为
并让自己戒掉抗生素

,联合国预测,到 2050 年,

抗菌素耐药性
将成为我们最大的杀手。

所以我们必须开始行动。

但是“从哪里开始”
是一个有趣的问题,

因为我们人类
并不是唯一使用抗生素的人。

在全球范围内,50% 到 80%
的抗生素被动物使用。

并非所有这些都
对人类健康至关重要,

但如果我们
现在不能控制它,

我们将看到人类和动物都面临一个非常可怕的
未来。

首先,让我们
谈谈我们是如何来到这里的。

第一次大规模使用抗生素
是在上世纪 50 年代初。

在西方世界,
繁荣日益增加

,人们想吃
更多的动物蛋白。

当动物生病时,
您现在可以用抗生素治疗它们,

这样它们就不会死亡并继续生长。

但很快,人们发现在饲料

中添加少量和定期
的抗生素可以

让动物保持健康,

使它们生长得更快,

并减少它们对饲料的需求。

所以这些抗生素效果

很好——实际上非常好。

随着动物产量的增加,

抗生素的使用也在全球范围内猛增。

不幸的是,
抗生素耐药性也是如此。

你的医生告诉
你用完一瓶抗生素的原因

是,如果你减少剂量,
你不会杀死所有的虫子。

那些坚持下去的会
建立抗生素耐药性。

给动物
小剂量和常规剂量的抗生素也是同样的问题:

一些坏虫子死了,但不是所有的虫子都死了。

将其传播到整个行业

,你就会
明白我们不小心建立了

一个巨大
的抗生素抗性细菌库。

但我不想告诉你

——问题还不止于此。

你知道还有谁服用抗生素吗?

Fluffy,你的猫,Rover,你的狗。

(笑声)

宠物甚至是
最重的使用者之一

,它们使用

对人类健康更为重要的抗生素。

结合我们与伴侣动物的亲密关系

,您就会了解

从自己的宠物身上感染抗生素耐药性细菌的风险。

但是

农场动物中的这些抗生素耐药细菌如何影响你呢?

让我举一个例子
,我们实际上有数据。

欧洲猪

对不同类型抗生素

的抗生素耐药性沙门氏菌水平从不到 1%
到高达 60% 不等。

这意味着在大多数情况下,

这种抗生素不再
能杀死这种沙门氏菌。

猪体内的抗生素抗性沙门氏菌

与最终产品之间存在高度相关性。

无论是猪排、

排骨还是肉末。

现在,幸运的是,通常
只有不到 1%

的生肉、鱼或

蛋含有沙门氏菌。

只有
在没有得到很好的治疗时才会有风险。

尽管如此,欧盟仍有超过 100,000
例人类沙门氏菌病例,美国则有

超过 100 万例。

在美国,每年
导致 23,000 人住院

和 450 人死亡。

随着耐抗生素
沙门氏菌的增加,

这种死亡人数可能会增加。

但这
不仅仅是消耗自己。

今年,
有 100 多人


给他们的狗喂食猪耳朵后感染了耐多药沙门氏菌。

所以我们真的必须减少
在动物生产中使用抗生素。

幸运的是,这开始发生了。

欧盟是第一个禁止

在饲料中添加低剂量抗生素的地区。

从 99 年开始,

逐步减少了允许使用的不同
类型抗生素的数量,

并在 2006 年全面禁止使用

只有

当兽医
确定动物生病时才允许使用抗生素。

听起来不错,对吧?

问题解决了。

不,等等,不要那么快。

减少计划一开始,

人们很快就

发现抗生素是

掩盖许多不良农场做法的完美毯子。

越来越多的动物生病了

,需要
用……抗生素治愈。

因此,总量并没有下降,

而是实际上增加了。

当然,这不是要走的路。

但幸运的是,这并不是
故事的结局。

整个欧洲农业部门
开始了一段旅程

,我认为这是一段
任何人都可以学习的旅程。

这也是
我亲自进入现场的时候。

我加入了一家大型的欧洲饲料复合机。

饲料混配师为农民制作完整的饮食
以喂养他的动物,

并且通常还提供

有关如何
以最佳方式饲养动物的建议。

我非常有
动力与我的同事、

兽医,当然还有农民

一起研究如何让动物保持
健康和无抗生素。

现在

,无抗生素生产需要做三件大事。

让我带你看一遍剧本。

首先——听起来很明显

——我们的卫生是开始的地方。

更好地清洁马厩
和饮用水管道,

使疾病
更难进入并传播到马厩。

这一切都非常重要,

但我个人
最感兴趣的部分

是更好地喂养动物,

更好的营养。

喂养均衡的饮食很重要。

这样想:

当你自己没有吃
足够的纤维时,你会感觉不舒服。

你吃的部分食物
不是你自己消化的,

而是在你的
大肠里被细菌发酵的。

所以你用部分饮食来喂养这些微生物

最初,大多数年幼的动物
被喂食低纤维、

高淀粉和蛋白质、

磨得很细
且易消化的饮食。

就像在
吃汉堡包、

米饭、华夫饼和蛋白质棒时做自己一样。

我们将其改为低蛋白质、

高纤维、粗粮的饮食。

就像吃全谷物
、肉或豆类沙拉一样。

这将动物肠道中的细菌菌群转移

到更有益的菌群中,

并减少
了病原体繁殖的机会。

您可能会感到惊讶,

但不仅饮食成分,
饮食结构也起作用。

简单地
说,相同的饮食更粗的事实

将导致消化道更发达

,从而使动物更健康。

但最好的部分是农民
实际上也开始购买这个。

与世界其他一些地区不同,

西欧农民主要仍然做出
他们独立的购买决定:从

谁那里购买饲料
并将他们的动物卖给谁。

因此,您最终实际销售的产品

反映了这些农民的实际当地需求

例如,

在德国和荷兰等对减少抗生素使用

更加警惕的国家,仔猪日粮中的蛋白质含量

已经比英国等国家低 10% 到 15%


而英国则选择较慢。 这个了。

但是,与更好的卫生一样,
更好的营养会有所帮助,

但不会完全防止您
生病。

所以需要更多。

这就是我们
转向微生物组的原因。

使饲料中的水更酸

有助于创造一个

有利于更多有益细菌

并抑制病原体的环境。

就像发酵食品一样,

无论是酸奶、酸菜还是意大利腊肠,

它们都不会很快变质。

现在,借助现代技术,

例如基于 DNA 测试的技术,

我们可以看到存在更多
不同的微生物。


这个我们称之为微生物组

的生态系统要复杂得多。

事实证明,
肠道中的微生物

数量是体内组织细胞的八倍。

而对于动物来说,影响同样不小。

因此,如果我们想
在动物生产中不使用抗生素,

我们必须让动物
更加健壮。

因此,当疾病来袭时

,动物的复原力要强得多。

而这种

涉及宿主、营养
和微生物组的三管齐下的营养

学方法就是做到这一点的方法。

现在,在农场层面
,以含

抗生素或使用抗生素的
饮食饲养动物的做法要便宜一些。

但最后,我们谈论
的是消费者层面的百分之几。 对于世界人口

的中高收入
部分来说,这实际上是相当负担得起的。

当我们自己
或亲人的健康受到威胁时,付出的代价很小。

那你怎么看,
我们走什么方向?

我们是否允许抗菌素耐药
性成为我们最大的杀手,

付出巨大的经济
和特殊的个人代价?

或者,除了减少
人类抗生素的消耗,我们是否

真的开始接受无
抗生素的动物生产?

对我来说,选择非常明显。

但要做到这一点,

我们必须设定减排目标

,并确保全世界都遵守
这些目标。

因为农民互相竞争。

在国家层面、

贸易区或全球市场,

成本非常重要。

而且,我们必须实事求是。

农民需要有可能

对更好的
管理和更好的饲料

进行更多投资,以实现这一减少。

除了法律限制外
,市场还可以

通过提供减少
抗生素或不含抗生素的产品来发挥作用。

而随着消费者意识的增强,

这些市场力量
的力量也会增强。

现在我一直在谈论的一切
似乎对我们来说都很棒。

但是动物呢?

现在,你猜怎么着,
他们的生活也变得更好了。

更好的健康,更少的压力,更快乐的生活。

所以现在你知道了。

我们知道
如何在

不使用或使用极
少量抗生素的情况下生产肉类、鸡蛋

和牛奶,我认为

要避免
未来细菌感染

再次成为我们最大的杀手,这是一个很小的代价。

谢谢你。

(掌声)