I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E

Transcription

1 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E N O. 1 POULTRY H E A L T H TODAY P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M Reality check: Giving your customers a clearer view 21 Special report: Being more transparent 23 Take-aways from the WVPA, AAAP conferences 32 C H A N G E S A H E A D Everything you need to know about the new guidelines for oral antimicrobials 9 U S e d i t i o n ZP130472

2 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H TODAY w h a t s i n s i d e C O V E R S T O R Y W O R D S & N U M B E R S Memorable quotes and figures from the world of poultry health C h a n g e s S O U N D S C I E N C E 5 a h e a d Everything you need to know about the new guidelines for oral antimicrobials What impact will FDA s new usage guidelines have on your production practices, the health and performance of your birds and perceptions of health-minded yet cost-conscious customers? Poultry Health Today editors take an in-depth look at FDA s Guidance for Industry No. 213 the rationale behind it and the changes in store for the US poultry industry. Supplemental bacitracin reduces mortality, C. perfringens in broilers Methods of diagnosing enteric disease clarified CVI988 vaccine use credited with decline in Marek s disease Organic raw poultry not necessarily safer P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M Sponsored by

3 1 O N T H E D O C K E T 7 D I S C O V E R I E S 32 S P E C I A L R E P O R T 23 Although FDA has introduced new guidelines for using feed antibiotics in poultry and livestock, some members of Congress would like the industry to go a few steps further. R E A L I T Y C H E C K REALITY 21 Building on a 60-year legacy, Zoetis scientists presented more than 20 papers and posters at the recent WVPA and AAAP conferences. Poultry Health Today summarizes a few key presentations. T H E L A S T W O R D 35 B E I N G M O R E T R A N S PA R E N T Should the poultry industry invest more time educating media and consumers about antibiotics and other production topics? Communications experts and dramatic results of a consumer survey suggest it could yield high returns. Confidently presenting facts not defensive rhetoric can go a long way toward shaping consumer opinions about commercial poultry production and the importance of maintaining flock health, welfare and efficiency. Zoetis veterinarian Jon Schaeffer says the success of Poultry Health Today rides on getting your candid feedback, constructive advice and story ideas. S i l e n c e : i t S n o lo n g e r g o l d e n Media experts urge poultry producers to tell their side of the antibiotic story d o i n g a : A little education goes a long way toward changing consumer attitudes about antibiotics

4 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY W O R D S & N U M B E R S Number of specific antibiotic-resistant pathogens that have possible connections to antibiotic use in food animals in the CDC s Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States, 2013; the other 16 are not related to animal agriculture. American agriculture has accepted the challenge of becoming more efficient in an effort to feed 9.1 billion residents of our planet. Why is that important? Because food insecurity not only causes children to die, it causes political unrest. Feeding the world is the right thing to do. RICHARD RAYMOND, MD, FORMER UNDERSECRETARY, USDA FOOD SAFET Y & INSPEC TION SERVICE, ADVANCES IN ANIMAL AGRICULTURE, OCTOBER Percentage of Salmonella isolates susceptible to all antibiotics tested by USDA s National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System, up from 74% 11 years ago. 300 Millions of dollars lost globally by poultry producers through decreased performance, morbidity and mortality associated with coccidiosis....farmers and ranchers...must do what is in their power to keep animals safe and healthy. And when animals are sick or at risk of becoming sick, they should be cared for in adherence with evidence-based standards of veterinary medicine to decrease suffering. TRANSPARENCY AND CONSUMER TRUST SURVEY RESULTS 2013, US FARMERS & RANCHERS ALLIANCE 4

5 1 S O U N D S C I E N C E...the success of the poultry industry hinges on healthy intestinal tracts and effective feed conversion, and that enteric disease in poultry can have devastating economic effects on producers... Supplemental bacitracin reduces mortality, C. perfringens in broilers Commercial broilers that received a bacitracin-supplemented diet had less Clostridium perfringens in their gut 1, according to researchers at Ohio State University. In their study, repeated with three flocks, the investigators evaluated the interaction between fresh versus reused litter and dietary bacitracin supplementation on the prevalence and load of Clostridium perfringens, Salmonella spp. and Campylobacter spp. all foodborne enteric pathogens commonly associated with poultry. C. perfringens is also a cause of necrotic enteritis, a costly disease for the broiler industry. Newly hatched chickens that had been vaccinated for coccidiosis were assigned to one of four treatment groups: fresh pine shavings and no dietary bacitracin, fresh litter and bacitracin at 0.04% of feed, reused litter and no dietary bacitracin or reused litter and 0.04% dietary bacitracin. At 10 and 35 days of age, the researchers tested samples from the ileal mucosa, cecal content and litter using specific quantitative polymerase chain reaction assays. Campylobacter was not detected in the samples. The amount of Salmonella was not affected by bacitracin, and reused litter did not contain significantly more C. perfringens or Salmonella. There was a correlation, however, between an abundance of Salmonella spp. and C. perfringens, say Shan Wei, PhD, and colleagues in the Oct. 25, 2013, issue of Veterinary Microbiology. Methods of diagnosing enteric disease clarified Diagnosing clostridial enteric disease in poultry remains a challenge primarily because many clostridial species can be a normal inhabitant of the gut, which makes it difficult to determine their role in virulence. According to scientists at the University of California-Davis 2, the success of the poultry industry hinges on healthy intestinal tracts and effective feed conversion, and that enteric disease in poultry can have devastating economic effects on producers due to high mortality rates and poor feed efficiency. The most common clostridial enteric disease is necrotic enteritis, caused by Clostridium perfringens and typically seen in broilers. The diagnosis is based on clinical and pathological findings. Negative culture and toxin-detection results could be used to rule out this disease, but isolation of C. perfringens and/or detection of its alpha toxin are of little diagnostic value because both are often found in the intestine of healthy birds, the investigators continue. Ulcerative enteritis, caused by Clostridium colinum, is the other major clostridial enteric disease of poultry. Diagnosis is made by documenting typical pathological findings, coupled with isolation of C. colinum from the intestine of affected birds, they say. Additional clostridial enteric diseases include infections produced by Clostridium difficile, Clostridium fallax, and Clostridium baratii, say Kerry K. Cooper and colleagues in the May 2013 issue of the Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 5

6 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY S O U N D S C I E N C E All flock types in nearly 50% of countries reportedly experienced an increased incidence of MD during the last 10 years. increased cvi988 vaccine use credited with decline in Marek s disease Increased use of CVI988/Rispens vaccines is credited with declines in the incidence of Marek s disease 3 (MD), according to investigators from USDA s Agricultural Research Service. A questionnaire was widely distributed in 2011 to estimate the global prevalence of MD. Responses representing 116 countries were obtained from numerous sources, including national branch secretaries of the World Veterinary Poultry Association, Marek s disease researchers and vaccine, breeder and production companies. All flock types in nearly 50% of countries reportedly experienced an increased incidence of MD during the last 10 years, according to at least one respondent, with most of these countries located within French-speaking Africa, Eastern Europe, East Asia and South America. The most common explanation for the increased incidence was the presence of other immunosuppressive diseases, say John Dunn and I.M. Gimeno in the June 2013 issue of Avian Diseases. Increased use of CVI988/Rispens was cited as the most likely reason for [the] decreasing MD incidence in 49 countries, the scientists concluded. In the US, the incidence of MD has decreased over the past 10 years, reaching a record low in 2007 of % as measured by leukosis-condemnation rates in broilers at slaughter, the investigators say. They note, however, that there was a recent increase in leukosis condemnations in North Carolina and Pennsylvania that needs to be closely monitored. organic raw poultry not necessarily safer Organic raw poultry is not necessarily safer for consumption than conventionally raised poultry 4, indicates a study from the University of Tennessee. Investigators evaluated the microbiological quality of whole chicken and turkey carcasses purchased from three retail outlets. There were 50 carcasses from organically raised chickens, 25 from organically raised turkeys and 25 from conventionally raised turkeys. They used an FDA protocol for rinsing the carcasses and enumerating aerobic bacteria, Campylobacter and Staphylococcus spp., and for qualitative analysis of Salmonella. The highest average counts of aerobic bacteria, Staphylococcus spp. and Campylobacter, were found in one brand of organic chickens, while another organic brand had the lowest average counts of four brands evaluated. Organic turkeys also had the highest average counts of these same bacteria compared to two brands of conventionally raised turkeys. A 5% prevalence of Salmonella was isolated only from organic chickens and turkeys, report Bridgshe Hardy and colleagues in the August 2013 issue of the Journal of Food Science. 1 Vet Microbiol Oct 25;166(3-4): doi: /j.vetmic epub 2013 Jun J Vet diagn invest May;25(3): doi: / epub 2013 apr 9. 3 avian dis Jun;57(2 suppl): J Food sci aug;78(8):m doi: / For more Sound Science, visit poultryhealthtoday.com. 6

7 1 O N T H E D O C K E T Five federal bills seek to curb on-farm antibiotic use Although FDA has introduced new guidelines for using feed antibiotics in poultry and livestock, some members of Congress would like the industry to go a few steps further. Following is a summary of five current federal bills seeking to restrict antibiotic use in food animals. Delivering Antimicrobial Transparency in Animals (DATA) Act In February 2013, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) introduced the DATA Act, which aims to provide more detail on the amount and use of antimicrobial drugs given to animals raised for food. The stated purpose of the bill is to help public health officials and scientists better understand and interpret trends and variations in antimicrobial resistance and identify interventions for preventing and controlling drug resistance. It would require: Drug manufacturers to obtain and provide more information to the FDA on how their antimicrobial drugs are used in each class of food animals; Large-scale livestock producers to submit detailed annual reports to the FDA on the type and quantity of antibiotics contained in animal feed; FDA to provide breakdowns of drugs sold or distributed by species and by state, as well as whether the antibiotic was used therapeutically or for growth promotion. Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA) Last March and for the fourth time since 2007 Rep. Slaughter also introduced PAMTA, a bill that would ban non-therapeutic uses of medically important antibiotics in food-animal production. The latest version of the bill has two updates: Inclusion of cephalosporins, bringing the total to eight classes of antibiotics that would be banned from non-therapeutic uses. Slaughter says she added cephalosporins in response to recent National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System data showing an increase in resistant bacteria over the last decade, especially on chicken and turkey products. Clarification of what is considered non-therapeutic to ensure that any use of medically important antibiotics outside of treatment of a sick animal is not permitted. P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 7

8 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY O N T H E D O C K E T Five federal bills seek to curb on-farm antibiotic use continued Antimicrobial Data Collection Act In May, Sen. Kristin Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) introduced legislation that would establish a research program to study the relationship between the sales, distribution and uses of antimicrobials in food-producing animals and antimicrobial resistance trends. The bill would also require: Additional reporting and publication of antibiotic sales data; Government Accountability Office study of FDA s approaches to eliminating injudicious antimicrobial use in food-producing animals and the effectiveness of FDA s data-collection activities regarding antimicrobial resistance. Preventing Antibiotic Resistance Act In June, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) introduced the Preventing Antibiotic Resistance Act of 2013, which directs FDA to prohibit the non-therapeutic use of medically important antibiotics in feed and water. Specifically, the bill would: Direct FDA to prohibit the use of medically important antibiotics in ways that allegedly accelerate antibiotic resistance ; Require drug companies and food-animal producers to demonstrate they are using medically important antibiotics to treat clinically diagnosable diseases, not exclusively for growth promotion; Preserve the ability of veterinarians and producers to use all available antibiotics to treat sick animals. Strategies to Address Antimicrobial Resistance (STAAR) Act Also in June, Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) re-introduced legislation aimed at addressing the issue of antibiotic resistance. The STAAR Act of 2013, previously introduced in 2009, would establish the Antimicrobial Resistance Task Force, including an external advisory board and an Office of Antimicrobial Resistance, reporting to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. The advisory board would be charged with collecting data to allow the government to assess the antimicrobial resistance problem. The scope of the bill includes human and animal antibiotics. In addition to these federal bills, there are several bills concerning on-farm antibiotic usage before the state legislatures in Maryland, Minnesota, North Carolina, New York and Pennsylvania. have an opinion? Tell Congress what you think. For contact information of your US senators and representatives, go to senate.gov and house.gov. Use the handy search tool in the upper right corner of each site. 8

9 C O V E R S T O R Y C h a n g e s a h e a d Everything you need to know about the new guidelines for oral antimicrobials the US poultry industry has already shown that it knows how to use antimicrobials judiciously. Whether the goal is to preserve the effectiveness of the limited tools available, to simply reduce feed costs or to avoid having poultry meat products rejected by vigilant government inspectors, poultry producers have ample incentives to abide by the rules and make every dose count. Using anything excessively or needlessly simply doesn t pay. So what impact will Fda s new usage guidelines have on your production practices, the health and performance of your birds and perceptions of health-minded yet cost-conscious customers? in this special report, Poultry Health Today editors take an in-depth look at what Fda calls guidance for industry no. 213 the rationale behind it and the changes in store for the US poultry industry. P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 9

10 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY The nuts and bolts of GFI No. 213 FDA recently rolled out new guidelines for antimicrobial usage in poultry and livestock not just how the medications are categorized and prescribed but also how, when and why they should be administered in the field. The two documents, officially known as Guidance for Industry (GFI) No. 213 and a proposed Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) regulation, aim to help producers, veterinarians and pharmaceutical companies use antimicrobials in ways that, according to FDA, address public health concerns while maintaining the health, performance and welfare of poultry and livestock. Although GFI 213 is written primarily for drug sponsors those companies that own the right to market the drug the content of the document will inevitably affect everyday management practices for veterinarians and producers. The updated VFD regulation is intended to simplify and streamline the existing process for veterinarians to authorize the use of certain animal drugs in feed. For the good of the industry, everyone is being encouraged to play by the rules or, in this case, the FDA s strongly recommended guidelines. What FDA wants More than anything, FDA wants the poultry and livestock industry to think twice before orally administering any antimicrobial drugs that have been deemed medically important to humans. In other words, any drugs that are considered important for treating infections in people penicillins, tetracyclines, fluroquinolones and macrolides, to name a few should be used sparingly in animal feed and water and only to target specific diseases or organisms. FDA also wants producers to consult with veterinarians before using any medically important drugs. Under the new guidelines, for instance, producers should first get a confirmed diagnosis and a veterinary prescription or a VFD from a licensed veterinarian before running any of these medically important medications through the birds drinking water or feed. A VFD is a written form issued by a licensed veterinarian authorizing the use of certain drugs in feed for a specific reason and time period. This document 10 So you know Antibiotics are substances produced by a microorganism that kill or prevent the growth of another microorganism. Antibiotics are antimicrobials, but antimicrobials also may be synthetic compounds.

11 C h a n g e s a h e a d C O V E R S T O R Y is provided to both the feed mill and the producer (see sidebar). Guidelines at a Glance In addition, FDA wants medically important drugs administered in feed and water to be limited to the treatment, control and prevention of disease. The agency acknowledges that improved growth and feed efficiency might be secondary benefits of maintaining healthier birds, but using medically important antimicrobials solely for production benefits is not considered a judicious use of such drugs under the new guidelines. FDA is also urging drug companies to remove performance claims from all medically important antibiotics within 3 years of GFI 213 s adoption. Notable exceptions There are two notable exceptions to the new FDA guidelines that poultry producers and veterinarians need to understand. First, the new FDA recommendations do not apply to synthetic anticoccidials or ionophores used in feed to prevent or control coccidiosis the costly, parasitic disease that threatens the health and welfare of all chickens. These compounds Antimicrobial drugs that FDA has deemed medically important to humans should be used in poultry and livestock only to prevent, control or treat a specific disease or organism. A Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) should be obtained from a licensed veterinarian before using any feeds containing medically important antibiotics; a veterinary prescription is required for medically important water medications. Medically important antibiotics should not be used solely for performance benefits, such as improved weight gain or feed conversion. Only those antibiotics not medically important to humans with approved FDA claims for increased growth rate and improved feed conversion should be used to optimize performance. Synthetic anticoccidials, ionophores and antibiotics not considered medically important to humans may be used without a VFD, though veterinary involvement is still encouraged for all antibiotic decisions. The new FDA guidelines are voluntary, but the agency plans to monitor industry progress and decide in 3 years if more action is required. 11

12 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY The nuts and bolts of GFI No. 213 are not considered medically important to humans and are used almost exclusively in poultry and livestock. No special paperwork is needed to obtain or use these products. The other exception is any group of feed antibiotics that FDA does not consider medically important to humans. In poultry, this would include antibiotics in the bacitracin and bambermycins families (see sidebar). That means poultry products like bacitracin methylene disalicylate (BMD ) can still be used without a VFD to prevent or control necrotic enteritis, another omnipresent and potentially deadly gut disease of poultry, although veterinary involvement with any antibiotic is still recommended. When used at 50 g per ton of feed coincidentally, the same level routinely used to prevent necrotic enteritis BMD can still be used for increased rate of weight gain and improved feed efficiency, which result from the antibiotic s ability to preserve the integrity of the gut wall, helping to ensure the absorption of nutrients from feed. 1 Flavomycin 4 (bambermycins) is another poultry feed medication that can be used without a VFD to aid feed conversion and growth rate. Previously approved combinations of anticoccidials, ionophores, bacitracins and other non-medically important drugs also may be used according to label directions without a VFD. 3-year phase-in While complying with the new FDA guidelines will be voluntary for drug sponsors, the agency says it will monitor the pharmaceutical industry s progress for 3 years before determining if further action is needed. FDA believes a proactive and collaborative strategy is the best approach to ensuring judicious drug use, as this provides a path forward for addressing public concerns [about on-farm antibiotic usage] in a manner that takes into account animal-health needs and the impact on animal agriculture, said William T. Flynn, DVM, MS, deputy director for science policy at FDA s Center for Veterinary Medicine. Speaking at an antibiotic forum held last year at the International Production & Processing Expo, he added, Antibiotics have historically played an important role in animal agriculture. Being responsive to the concerns being raised is critical to preserving the continued availability of these important tools. in a word 1 The new guidelines for antimicrobials suggest limiting the use of medically important antimicrobials to one or more of these specific uses: T R E ATMENT Administered only to animals exhibiting clinical signs of disease. 12

13 C h a n g e s a h e a d C O V E R S T O R Y What s a VFD? The phrase Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) may be new to poultry veterinarians and producers, but the process has actually been around since 1996, when Congress passed the Animal Drug Availability Act. In FDA's Dec. 11 announcement, Flynn added, We need to be selective about the drugs we use in animals and when we use them. Antimicrobial resistance may not be completely preventable, but we need to do what we can to slow it down. Want to learn more? For more information on the new FDA antimicrobial guidelines, visit poultryhealthtoday.com or go to fda.gov and search for GFI Miller SH, Skinner J, Davis SW. Efficacy of Probiotic and/or BMD in the Feed for Control of Necrotic Enteritis Caused by Clostridium perfringens in Broiler Chickens. Zoetis Global Poultry. Data on file. VFDs were developed by FDA to help the agency get a better handle on the use of certain new, therapeutic antimicrobial medications used in feed, primarily to reduce the rate at which resistance develops and thereby prolong medication s effectiveness. P U T T I N G I T I N W R I T I N G Previously, VFD only applied to new feed antibiotics. Any over-the-counter (OTC) feed antibiotics registered before 1996 were grandfathered in under old rules. Once pharmaceutical companies remove production claims from medically important antibiotics, thereby placing them under VFD status, veterinarians will need to issue a VFD authorizing their use. Basically, the VFD is a written statement that lets producers obtain and use certain drugs in poultry or livestock feed in accordance with the FDA-approved directions for use. VFD drugs must be used under veterinary supervision and in compliance with the drug s FDA-approved label. S P E C I A L R E L A T I O N S H I P S The VFD process is pretty straightforward. In the past, a licensed veterinarian one with a valid veterinarian-client-patient relationship, as the FDA calls it visited the farm, assessed the situation and determined whether use of a VFD drug was warranted. If the drug were needed, the veterinarian would issue a signed VFD order. Under the new guidelines, FDA has relaxed some administrative procedures with the goal of easing the shift from current OTC status to the new VFD umbrella. For example, rather than use a government definition on a veterinarian-client-patient relationship, the agency is deferring to AVMA practice standards criteria that licensed practitioners use anyway for defining relationships between veterinarians and their clients. For more information on the new procedures, visit fda.gov and search for Veterinary Feed Directive. 2 3 CO N T R O L Administered to a group of animals when a portion of the animals in the group exhibits clinical signs of disease. P R E V E N T I O N Administered to a group of animals, none of which are exhibiting clinical signs of disease, in a situation where disease is likely to occur if the drug is not administered. Producers are urged to refrain from using medically important antibiotics to enhance performance. Likewise, drug manufacturers are being asked to drop performance claims from the labels of these antibiotics. Only non-medically important antibiotics with established, FDA-approved performance claims could be used for increasing growth rate and feed conversion. 13

14 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY Rating an antibiotic s importance to humans how does FDA determine which antibiotics are medically important to humans? Basically, the agency asks five questions about each antibiotic: 1 Is it used to treat enteric pathogens that cause foodborne disease? 2 Is it the sole therapy or one of few alternatives to treat serious human disease or a drug that is an essential component among many antimicrobials in treatment of human disease? 3 Is it used to treat enteric pathogens in non-foodborne disease? 4 Is there cross-resistance within the drug class or linked resistance with other drug classes? 5 How easily does resistance to a drug cross over to other genera and species of organisms? 14

15 C h a n g e s a h e a d C O V E R S T O R Y table 1 Poultry antimicrobials and their importance to human medicine, according to FDA* IMPORTANT HIGHLY IMPORTANT CRITICALLY IMPORTANT Cephalosporins, 1st generation Cephalosporins, 2nd generation Cephamycins Monobactams Quinolones Aminoglycosides Aminopenicillins Antipseudomonal penicillins Carbapenems Cephalosporins, 4th generation Chloramphenicol Clindamycin Glycopeptides Isoniazid Metronidazile Natural penicillins Oxazolidones Penase-resistant penicillins Polymyxin B Pyrazinamide Rifamycins Streptogramins Tetracyclines Cephalosporins, 3rd generation Flouroquinolones Macrolides Trimethoprim/sulfa * List of medically important drugs will be reviewed periodically and updated by FDA as needed. 2 Source: Zoetis, based on GFI #152, Appendix A 3 MAKING THE GRADE If the answer to questions 1 and 2 is yes, the antimicrobial is considered critically important. If either question draws a nod, the antimicrobial is considered highly important. If the answer to questions 1 and 2 is no, but yes to questions 3, 4 or 5, the antimicrobial is rated important to human health. All other antimicrobials are considered non-medically important. Under the new guidelines, producers will be advised to obtain a VFD order before any medically important antibiotics are used in poultry, and then these antimicrobials should only be used to prevent, control or treat a disease indicated on the product label. Table 1 lists FDA s current rankings of commonly used poultry antimicrobials. FDA insists the list is not static, however, and that it will periodically be updated as necessary, taking into consideration such factors as the development of new antimicrobials for human therapy, the emergence of diseases in humans or changes in US prescribing practices. 2 Source: GFI #213 3 Source: GFI #152 P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 15

16

17 C h a n g e s a h e a d C O V E R S T O R Y w h y C O M p ly? W I L L I A M F L Y N N FDA s new antimicrobial guidelines are strictly voluntary to a degree. In the agency s own words, they do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities ; they merely describe the FDA s current thinking on a topic and, unless otherwise indicated, should be viewed only as recommendations. However, pharmaceutical companies that choose to comply with GFI 213 would effectively give up currently approved performance claims on antibiotics deemed medically important and place the remaining therapeutic uses under veterinary oversight essentially making them prescription or Veterinary Feed Directive products instead of over the counter. Once that happens, veterinarians and animal producers cannot use these drugs for increased growth or feed efficiency. So what incentives do drug sponsors have to comply? Apparently plenty. Over the 3-year period following the release of the final version of GFI 213, FDA plans to evaluate the rate of adoption of its proposed changes. If it thinks the process needs a boost, it will consider further action as warranted. In the meantime, the agency says it recognizes the significance of the proposed changes on the animal pharmaceutical industry, producers, the feed industry and veterinarians. It, therefore, opted for a voluntary phase-in to get everyone on board with its new direction. RIGHT WAY TO GO We are very optimistic that the industry will work cooperatively with us, William Flynn, deputy director for FDA s Center of Veterinary Medicine, told Poultry Health Today in a recent interview. We think this is the right way to go and it s important to make progress. And that s why we have set some fairly specific goals and timelines in connection with this. Even so, Flynn insisted it would not be a completely open-ended process. We re going to have to reassess where we are as we work through the voluntary process. We feel pretty confident, based on the interactions we ve had with the industry, that this will be a successful approach and will have a high degree of cooperation. But again, we ll have to re-evaluate at the end of [3 years] and make a determination if we need to take any other steps. MEASURING SUCCESS How will success be measured? There are many yardsticks available, but one clear indicator to Flynn will be the pace at which manufacturers drop performance claims such as an increased rate of growth and feed efficiency from the medically important antibiotics. Under the new guidelines, performance claims and over-the-counter availability will be limited to antimicrobials not considered medically important. P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 17

18 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY How do antibiotics promote growth? Under the new FDA guidelines, in-feed antibiotics with FDA-approved performance claims can still be used to promote growth and improve feed efficiency as long as they are not considered medically important to humans. That s good news for efficiency-minded poultry producers looking to meet escalating world demand for healthy, safe and affordable chicken and turkey. Still, the words growth promotion and the role these antibiotics play in poultry production are often misinterpreted by those outside of production. For example, one non-medically important poultry antibiotic that will retain its FDA-approved performance claims is bacitracin methylene disalicylate (BMD ). The product is indicated for increased rate of weight gain and improved feed efficiency in both broilers and turkeys when used at the rate of up to 50 g per ton of feed. Coincidentally, BMD is also labeled for broilers at the rate of 50 g per ton for the prevention of necrotic enteritis caused or complicated by Clostridium spp. and other organisms susceptible to the product s active ingredient. 'BIT OF A MISNOMER' That begs the question, does the antibiotic simply make birds grow or is improved performance really secondary to improved health that enables birds to reach their full genetic potential? The term growth promotion in itself is accurate but may be a bit of a misnomer, says Steven Clark, DVM, senior poultry technical services veterinarian, Zoetis Inc. For a long time, it has been thought that subtherapeutic doses of in-feed antibiotics enhance growth by modifying intestinal microflora, although exactly how isn t known for sure and is still up for discussion, he says. Explanations have included a reduction in subclinical infection, decreased production of microbial products that have toxic effects, depressed microbial competition within the bird for nutrients and enhanced absorption, according to the Poultry Science Association. 1 CHANGES IN MICROFLORA As far back as 1992, investigators from the University of California-Davis conducted studies indicating that feeding antibiotics may permit growth by preventing immunologic stress and associated metabolic changes. 2 Another theory emerged in 2007 with publication of a paper entitled The Nonantibiotic Anti-Inflammatory Effect of Antimicrobial Growth Promoters, the Real Mode of Action? A Hypothesis. The author argued that most antibiotics have a non-antibiotic, anti-inflammatory effect, which may in turn reduce wasted energy and spare it for production. Concomitant or subsequent changes in microflora are most likely the consequence of an altered condition of the intestinal wall, Professor Theo A. Niewold, PhD, of the 18

19 C h a n g e s a h e a d C O V E R S T O R Y T H E T E R M G R O W T H P R O M O T I O N I N I T S E L F I S A C C U R A T E B U T M A Y B E A B I T O F A M I S N O M E R. Steven Clark, DVM Catholic University, Leuven, Belgium, wrote in Poultry Science. 3 This theory would also explain why results with so-called growth-promoting antibiotics are highly reproducible, as opposed to those obtained by antibiotic alternatives that are aimed at microflora management, Niewold wrote. need to be treated with an antibiotic, but there is always a percentage of them that get the benefit of the drug because of low-grade intestinal illness. This is particularly evident in flocks that for one reason or another are experiencing greater stress and, as a result, a greater disruption in their intestinal bacterial flora. efficiency, consumers get the same amount of meat without requiring as much corn and soybeans for growth. That means more grain for other uses, Hofacre says. And if chickens can be grown more efficiently with less feed, Clark adds, there s less manure output and less impact on the environment. BENEFIT TO FLOCK HEALTH However they work, their benefits are well known to those involved in poultry production. Today, we know that one of the primary mechanisms of action these antibiotics have in poultry is preventing subclinical necrotic enteritis caused by Clostridium perfringens, says Charles Hofacre, DVM, MAM, PhD, University of Georgia. A flock of chickens is like a city of 25,000 people, he told Poultry Health Today. Someone is always going to be sick or getting sick. Not all birds in a flock may In these flocks, we will see a bigger benefit from the use of an antibiotic at the minimum necessary dosage for prevention of subclinical or clinical necrotic enteritis, Hofacre says. Clark agrees that antibiotics with performance claims are especially helpful for flocks in stressful situations, provided they are used judiciously. If the birds run out of feed or the birds don t eat as well for whatever reason, they re under stress and efforts to stabilize the situation by improving intestinal health can be helpful, he says. Hofacre and Clark see other secondary benefits from their use. By improving feed 1 Poultry Science Association. Newly proposed mechanism for the action of antimicrobial growth promoters (AGPs) may open the door to the development of new non-antibiotic alternatives to AGPs. Press release, Roura E, et al. Prevention of immunologic stress contributes to the growth-permitting ability of dietary antibiotics in chicks. J. Nutr. 1992;122: Niewold TA. The nonantibiotics anti-inflammatory effect of antimicrobial growth promoters, the real mode of action? A hypothesis. Poult. Sci. April 2007 vol. 86 no. 4. A F L O C K O F C H I C K E N S I S L I K E A C I T Y O F 2 5, P E O P L E... S O M E O N E I S A L W A Y S G O I N G T O B E S I C K O R G E T T I N G S I C K. N O T A L L B I R D S I N A F L O C K M A Y N E E D T O B E T R E A T E D W I T H A N A N T I B I O T I C, B U T T H E R E I S A L W A Y S A P E R C E N T A G E O F T H E M T H A T G E T T H E B E N E F I T O F T H E D R U G B E C A U S E O F L O W - G R A D E I N T E S T I N A L I L L N E S S. Charles Hofacre, DVM, MAM, PhD P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 19

20 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY the According to FDA, judicious use means administering an antimicrobial drug appropriately and only when necessary. After comparing notes with a few poultry veterinarians, Poultry Health Today editors borrowed the title from an early Clint Eastwood film to rate a few possible real-world scenarios: GOOD Using approved antibiotics in the feed or water to treat clinically sick birds, control the spread of a diagnosed disease or prevent commonly occurring, highly prevalent diseases like coccidiosis or necrotic enteritis. Administering a non-medically important antibiotic with documented performance benefits to preserve the gut wall of broiler chickens and optimize nutrient absorption, growth potential and feed utilization. Judicious drug use: the the and the GOOD BAD UGLY the Using a medically important antimicrobial without veterinary consultation or a VFD order. Using any antimicrobial solely for the purpose of promoting growth or improving feed efficiency. apparently healthy animals in the absence of any information that such animals were at risk of a specific disease. and the Using valuable medically important drugs Giving medically important drugs to BAD medically important or otherwise for a purpose or duration not indicated on the product s label. UGLY 20

21 1 R E A L I T Y C H E C K REALITY g i V i n g yo u R C u s to M e R s a C L E A R E R V i e w Confidently presenting facts not defensive rhetoric can go a long way toward shaping consumer opinions about commercial poultry production and the importance of maintaining flock health, welfare and efficiency. For this special feature, Poultry Health Today checked the facts behind three common claims about feed antibiotic usage. pe rc e p t i o n 80% of antibiotics in the US are used in farm animals. R e a l i t y This oft-cited figure can be misleading because it mixes numbers from two different reports neither of which has anything to do with the other. The first is an FDA report summarizing the amount of antimicrobials sold or distributed for use in food-producing animals in 2011; the other report summarizes human antibiotic sales based on IMS Health data from the same year. 1 Moreover, FDA issued a cautionary statement on its website last April in which it outlined several factors that further complicate a comparison, including discrepancies in indication and duration of use, the number of humans in the population compared to the number of animals, and differences in human and animal physical characteristics, such as weight. 2 In addition, the FDA noted that simply looking at weight of drug sold does not account for milligram dosage variations among antibiotics. For example, the standard dosage of virginiamycin for a 5-lb broiler is different from the standard dosage for penicillin. Weight of drug sold is therefore a poor proxy for use across different drug classes. Finally, the data in both reports reflect only the manufacturers sales or distribution of a drug say, to a pharmacy or veterinary clinic and not sales to the end user. For these reasons, the FDA says, it is difficult to draw definite conclusions from any direct comparisons between the quantity of antibacterial drugs sold for use in humans and the quantity sold for use in animals and that these points should be carefully considered when interpreting the data pe rc e p t i o n Antibiotic use in livestock animals is contributing to human antibiotic resistance. R e a l i t y The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that antibiotic resistance kills 65,000 people a year and costs $4 billion to $5 billion annually. Some consumer groups and news reports have tried linking this problem to antibiotic use in poultry and livestock, but there is little evidence to support this link. Of the seven bacterial pathogens deemed by the Infectious Disease Society of America to pose the greatest resistance problems in humans, not one is foodborne, nor are any linked to animal contact or antibiotic use. In fact, most do not affect animals at all. Only Pseudomonas aeruginosa, a fluoroquinolone-resistant hospital pathogen, has been known very rarely to cause mastitis in dairy cows, but fluoroquinolones have never been approved for use in lactating cattle. 3 continued 21

22 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY R E A L I T Y C H E C K REALITY continued from page 21 perception Antibiotic use in livestock animals is contributing to human antibiotic resistance. Reality Furthermore, 87% of antibiotics used in animals are either never, or almost never, used in human medicine. According to the 2011 FDA report on animal drug use, 45% of all antibiotics used in animals are not approved for human use. Another 42% are tetracyclines, which are used only rarely to treat a limited range of human infections. 4 Although the link between antibiotic use in animals and resistance in humans is currently very weak, multiple measures are in place to keep it that way. Prior to obtaining required FDA approval, all antibiotics used in animals must demonstrate safety, efficacy and low risk of contributing to antibiotic resistance. Once approved, all antibiotics are subject to oversight by the FDA, CDC and USDA. FDA, animal-health companies and third-party researchers also regularly conduct risk assessments and publish the results. In addition, judicious-use programs developed by government, veterinary and industry organizations offer species-specific guidelines to ensure the safe and prudent use of antibiotics in animals, especially ones that are critical to human health. These programs are designed not only to limit resistance but also to keep antibiotics safe and effective for humans and animals alike, thereby contributing to a healthy food supply and a healthy population. For more information on judicious-use programs in the poultry industry, search on your browser for FDA s Judicious Use of Antimicrobials for Poultry Veterinarians, or the American Association of Avian Pathologists Guidelines to Judicious Therapeutic Use of Antimicrobials in Poultry. pe rc e p t i o n MDR Salmonella in retail meats is a major public health threat. R e a l i t y The isolation of multidrug-resistant (MDR) strains of Salmonella from retail meats, particularly poultry, has raised concerns that consuming these products will lead to infections that do not respond to antibiotic treatment. Although the poultry industry takes both Salmonella and antibiotic resistance seriously, it is necessary to address widespread misconceptions about MDR Salmonella and its impact on human health. CDC estimates that Salmonella causes about 1 million (<2%) of the 48 million annually reported cases of foodborne illness in the US. According to a 2009 report by FDA s National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System, 83% of all human Salmonella isolates responded to all antibiotics tested. However, antibiotics are seldom used to treat salmonellosis regardless of resistance status unless the patient has a blood infection or is deemed to be high-risk. 5 According to published data cited by the Animal Health Institute, Salmonella is isolated from less than 1% of all bacterial bloodstream infections. Isolates from those infections showed resistance in less than 1% to fluoroquinolones and in 2% to 3% to third- or fourth-generation cephalosporins, the two preferred drug classes for treatment of severe Salmonella infections. It is important for consumers to understand that Salmonella is not a single bacterium but a bacterial category with many different subtypes, or serotypes, some of which are naturally resistant to antimicrobials. There is no evidence to suggest a link between multidrug resistance and antibiotic use in animals. Different Salmonella populations naturally rise and fall over time, but slaughter samples of chickens, pigs and cattle show no overall increase in multidrug resistance across serotypes. 6 Finally, consumers should be assured that properly cooking poultry kills all Salmonella, resistant or non-resistant. All poultry regulated by USDA comes with package instructions for cooking and handling that, when followed properly, ensure consistently safe eating

23 1 S P E C I A L R E P O R T B E I N G M O R E Should the poultry industry invest more time educating media and consumers about antibiotics and other production topics? Communications experts and dramatic results of a consumer survey suggest it could yield high returns. P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 23

24 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E S P E C I A L R E P O R T POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY S i l e n c e : i t S n o l o n g e r g o l d e n Media experts urge poultry producers to tell their side of the antibiotic story For decades the old axiom Silence is the hardest argument to refute was a safe communications strategy for businesses doing anything that was mildly controversial, even if the practice was perfectly safe and legal. We now have a 24/7 news cycle, and there s dialogue that goes around every news story, every claim, every advertisement. it s a brave new world for poultry and livestock producers In the poultry industry, for instance, if questions surfaced in the media about the use of antibiotics in poultry, most producers found it best to avoid the subject, keep their heads down and go about their business. As long as they complied with all the government s regulations and standards, there was no need to engage their critics or defend their position. Besides, they reasoned, the story would fade from the spotlight in another day or two. That s all changed, however. Between fast and easy Internet access, hundreds of cable channels, the explosion of social media, the rise of citizen journalism and the emergence of new digital news hubs and blogs, keeping quiet on controversial issues is no longer a wise option. Because today, if poultry producers don t tell their story, someone else will tell it for them and not always with great accuracy. F I L L I N G T H E V A C U U M The old phrase, Nature abhors a vacuum is accurate, says Bryan Reber, PhD, a professor of public relations at the University of Georgia who specializes in message framing and crisis communications. and the food industry one that demands a whole new level of transparency. F R A N K S I N G L E T O N When a vacuum exists, it will be filled by something. And when there is a lack of information on a certain topic, someone is going to provide that information. If you don t provide it, if you don t help frame the story, then you re letting someone else frame it for you. But telling a story isn t as simple as it used to be, according to Frank Singleton, an independent public relations strategist based in Atlanta with more than 20 years experience in the poultry industry. 24

25 1 if you don t help frame the story, then you re letting someone else frame it for you. B R Y A N R E B E R, P H D There was a time where, if an issue came up, you could make a certain pronouncement or claim and, if you made it often enough and passionately enough, you would find an audience and gain some traction, he says. But today, there aren t any audiences; there are only participants. He explains that people today go online, do research, vet information, ask questions and then share what they find with family, friends, colleagues or even perfect strangers with similar interests and views. Consumers have, therefore, become more conscientious, diligent and informed to the extent they can find accurate, balanced information online. They ve also become more vocal. A D I A L O G U E F O R E V E R Y S T O R Y Consumers are not just gathering news and information; they re participating in the conversation, Singleton says. We now have a 24/7 news cycle, and there s dialogue that goes around every news story, every claim, every advertisement. It s a brave new world for poultry and livestock producers and the food industry one that demands a whole new level of transparency. While that prospect might seem daunting at first especially to a highly integrated and competitive industry like poultry, which has long placed a premium on confidentiality the need for transparency actually creates opportunities for producers. Now you can engage customers and have a conversation in a deeper, more meaningful way, Singleton adds. You can create fans and believers around your product. if you have good information data-driven, scientific facts, for example that s very persuasive and useful to people who need to make decisions. B R Y A N R E B E R, P H D University of Georgia Social media requires an ongoing commitment to sustain one s point of view, however. You can t come and go, the strategist cautions. You have to stay if you want to have credibility and relevance. continued on page 27 P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 25

26 B E I N G M O R E t i p S F o r W o r k i n g W i t h t h e M e d i a Media experts offer these tips for talking with foodservice customers and consumers about antibiotics in poultry: B e p r o a c t i V e. If you re convinced antibiotics are essential for maintaining the health, welfare, efficiency and affordability of chicken, don t back down. Be confident in your position and share your knowledge, perspectives and experiences with the press, customers and consumers. F r a M e y o U r S t o r y. Identify your key points and back them with industry statistics, scientific data and your own experience raising safe and healthy poultry. Show passion for what you do and believe, but stick to the facts and give specific examples. S h o W r e S p e c t. While you might strongly disagree with people or groups with opposing views, acknowledge they exist without criticism, and explain in a calm, level-headed, professional manner why you believe their perceptions are off base. p U t i t i n W r i t i n g. Develop fact sheets, Q&As, position papers and other documents or links that articulate your company s position. You can also tap the power of social media and refer people to credible, objective articles and reports. h e l p p e o p l e U n d e r S t a n d. Most people tend to put all animal-health products under the same umbrella, whether they re antibiotics, anticoccidials, dewormers or vaccines. Explain your reasons for using antibiotics treatment, control, prevention, gut health, welfare and emphasize they are all used under veterinary supervision and in compliance with FDA guidelines and to meet USDA safety standards. d r a W o n i n - h o U S e e x p e r t i S e. Studies show that veterinarians wield tremendous credibility with consumers (see page 30). Get your veterinarian more involved in talking with your customers procurement and food-safety personnel. n e V e r g o r o g U e. Before approaching the media or customers with your views, solicit input from your colleagues and, of course, honor your company s communications guidelines to ensure a consistent message. 26

27 1 there are many opportunities to fail at social media...but to not engage is certainly to fail. F R A N K S I N G L E T O N continued from page 25 F R A M E Y O U R S T O R Y But first things first. Before producers join or even start a conversation about antibiotics or any topic in the headlines, they need to determine what to say and, more importantly, how to say it. According to Reber, research shows that most people are moved by statistics. If you have good information data-driven, scientific facts, for example that s very persuasive and useful to people who need to make decisions, he continues. You need to be proactive and help people understand. Only then can you begin to mold public opinion. Credibility, consistency and understanding how you re going to frame the story are important. Ideally, Reber says, poultry companies should always want to be out in front of the story instead of trying to catch it. But what if the story has already sprouted legs and opposing views are already making headlines and influencing opinion? If you can set the frame, acknowledge what the critics have to say and then refute it, that s going to be persuasive and credible, Reber says. Simply putting your perspective out there without acknowledging that there s another side especially when the other side has already been told is problematic. P U T I T I N B L A C K A N D W H I T E Developing quick-read fact sheets, Q&As, white papers and other handouts for customers, the press, consumer groups and its own website also can go a long way toward articulating a company s side of the story, Reber adds. The professor also reminds poultry companies to keep a cool head. It s human nature, when you feel like you re being attacked, to attack in return, he says. But that s precisely what you don t want to do. Tone and tenor are also critical. When talking about antibiotics in poultry production, for instance, keep the conversation positive, informative and professional never offensive or condescending. It s not particularly useful to vilify the other side, Reber adds. A rational, fact-based argument will win the day. Well, maybe not every day. He concedes there will always be people on the fringe that will hold their ground no matter what they re shown or told. There s that 5% that you will never win over, he says. You can say, Here are the reasons that those concerns are unjustified, but you shouldn t be dismissive. Acknowledge them and try to assuage that concern. J O I N T H E C O N V E R S AT I O N Singleton notes that online conversations about antibiotic usage in poultry and other topics will continue with or without the industry s participation. And to ignore them or to dislike them and then disengage will do your brand or product a great disservice, he adds. Because then the only commentary is one-sided. There are many opportunities to fail at social media, he continues, but to not engage is certainly to fail. People are much smarter when they ve been presented with some facts and a candid, sustained look at the industry. When talking about antibiotics, he recommends telling foodservice customers and consumers about how they are used how long, for what purpose, the health and economic benefits they bring. Tell them about the day-to-day involvement of veterinarians. Let them know about FDA regulations and USDA inspections. I think it s incumbent on the poultry industry, up and down the supply chain, to partner on that, he adds. P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 27

28 B E I N G M O R E h e l p i n g t h e M U n d e r S t a n d At a recent seminar, the US Farmers & Ranchers Alliance (USFRA) emphasized the importance of using everyday language and examples to talk to the public about on-farm antibiotic use. To tell your story more effectively, the trade group suggests building on these clear, simple messages: h e a l t h y a n i M a l S a r e t h e F o U n d a t i o n of a healthy, humane and safe food system. p r o d U c e r S W o r k c l o S e l y W i t h V e t e r i n a r i a n S to develop a comprehensive herd health program, which includes many tools such as vaccination, nutrition, proper housing, hygiene and antibiotics. p r o d U c e r S U S e a n t i B i o t i c S U n d e r V e t e r i n a r y S U p e r V i S i o n only when needed and in compliance with FDA-approved label instructions. Animals that need treatment are identified and monitored carefully until they recover. a n i M a l S g e t S i c k, j U S t l i k e p e o p l e. Without antibiotic treatment, many of these animals would suffer needlessly and die. U n l i k e p e o p l e, a n i M a l S c a n t S t a y h o M e and isolate themselves when they re sick. So, to keep disease from spreading, veterinarians tend to treat the whole herd or flock, rather than just the individual animal. (For similar reasons, doctors may prescribe antibiotics for a patient before surgery to prevent infection or for students in a college dorm to control the spread of contagious diseases.) For more ideas from USFRA, visit fooddialogues.com. 28

29 1 Do something about it Don t blame consumers if they seem are perceived as producer greed not to have little understanding of modern something that keeps their food safe, poultry and livestock production. wholesome and affordable. It s not their fault and it is not intentional. Hurd s down-home advice for reversing It is just the way society has evolved, this perception: Do something about it! insists Scott Hurd, DVM, PhD, an associate professor and director of Iowa State University s food-risk modeling and PROFOUND IMPACT policy lab. For starters, he urges producers to engage local reporters. The media [have] a profound impact on people s opinions. LOST ON CONSUMERS If you can help them understand, in the smallest way the care that goes into For that reason, he adds, a farm s everyday making the final product they buy in the inputs like land, water, fuel and labor are grocery store, then you will have helped lost on discriminating consumers peering us all, Hurd advises in his weekly blog at into the meat case. To them, antibiotics or hurdhealth.com. any technologies that promote efficiency If reporters experience the reality of farming and food production, they will be less critical, he adds. If they see and feel the human lives working to feed their own families as well as others, then food will t o t e l l p e o p l e i S t h at o U r o n e o F t h e t h i n g S W e F a i l not seem so strange. F a M i l i e S e at p o U lt r y i F r e p o r t e r S e x p e r i e n c e t h e r e a l i t y o F F a r M i n g a n d F o o d p r o d U c t i o n, t h e y W i l l B e l e S S c r i t i c a l. S C O T T H U R D, D V M, P H D Food-industry strategist Frank Singleton agrees. One of the things we fail to tell people is that our families eat poultry products, too. Poultry is produced in partnership with a lot of players up and down the supply chain, but everybody s a consumer at the end of the day, he says. If you can make that point, and make it in a human way, you can make a measurable p r o d U c t S, t o o. F R A N K S I N G L E T O N difference in public opinion. P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 29

30 S O U N D S C I E N C E A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E B E I N G M O R E T R A N S P A R E N T POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY A little education goes a long way toward changing consumer attitudes about antibiotics d o i n g a What a difference a few paragraphs can make. Back in 2008, Pfizer Animal Health (now Zoetis Inc.) conducted market research to get a better handle on consumer opinions about the use of antibiotics and other medicines for the treatment of sick farm animals. Based on their recent purchases, participants were split into beef, dairy and pork sub-groups and were then handed a one-page summary about 250 words that described current regulatory and production practices related to animal-health medicines used in that particular species (see accompanying sample). Although the study was done more than 5 years ago and was specific to beef, dairy and pork, the results still demonstrate how a small dose of education can have a big and positive impact on consumer perceptions. The survey involved more than 2,100 people in the US, ages 21 to 65. All participants were non-vegans ; 73% of them were women; and all shopped for groceries at least once a week and had purchased dairy, beef or pork products in the last month. To maintain objectivity, researchers did not identify Pfizer as the study sponsor. B A S E L I N E K N O W L E D G E Key messages in the handout: Veterinarians are involved in animal care. FDA approves medicines used if animals get sick. Animals that receive antibiotics are not allowed to enter the food supply until a withholding period has elapsed to ensure the medicine has sufficiently cleared the animal s system. Government agencies require the testing of milk and meat to ensure the absence of violative residues. All participants were initially asked a few baseline questions about livestock production, particularly about the management of sick and at-risk animals. About 40% of respondents rated their knowledge of production as very low 0 to 3 on a scale of 10 or said they were unsure, depending on the animal in question. The participants baseline confidence in safety, wholesomeness and quality was moderate. Less than 30% gave these characteristics a 9 or 10, and in some cases, the percentage receiving that ranking was as low as 16%. B I G AT T I T U D E S H I F T That s when consumers started to change their tune. After reading the simple narrative for dairy, the percentage of participants giving dairy wholesomeness a score of 9 or 10 on a 10-point scale increased by 46%. Similar rankings for beef wholesomeness and safety increased by 59% and 48%, respectively, while for pork, the same ratings each increased by 63%. 30

31 S P E C I A L R E P O R T 1 clear, simple information moves perceptions in a positive direction. R O B B I E M O O D Y S a M p l e n a r r a t i V e g i V e n t o c o n S U M e r S Below is a sample narrative Zoetis used in its market research to educate consumers about food-animal production practices. Though specific to cows, the text may be helpful when telling your story to poultry customers and consumers. Other notable changes in consumer perceptions: At baseline, more than 40% felt that animals receiving antibiotics should not be allowed into the food supply. After reading the narrative, 70% to 75% of participants agreed that sick animals should be treated with antibiotics if all the practices mentioned in the description are followed. Cows are raised by a team of people committed to the animals health and creating wholesome, high-quality food for consumers. From the beginning of cows lives, veterinarians have a very important role in overseeing their health. As a part of their care, vaccines are oftentimes administered to cows to protect them from various illnesses. At the beginning of the study, about half of the participants expressed concern that antibiotics given to farm animals might end up in their food. After reading the four-point narrative, more than two-thirds agreed, the practices described seemed adequate in ensuring animal products are safe for me and my family. As with any animal or human, cows can sometimes get sick over the course of their lives. In these situations, FDA-approved medicines, like antibiotics, are used to treat sick dairy cows under the supervision of licensed veterinarians. R E A L LY? T H E Y U S E V E T E R I N A R I A N S? The study s results also showed that only a small percentage of consumers were aware that farm animals were raised under the care or oversight of a veterinarian. In this study, 40% to 50% either were unsure or did not believe the statement. After the narrative, two-thirds of respondents said this fact improved their confidence. The study also showed low consumer awareness of the government s effort to regulate antibiotics or monitor meat and milk for unsafe levels of antibiotics both of which were rated highly as safety confidence-builders for these products. continued on page 34 If an antibiotic is administered to help a sick cow, then that cow s milk is not allowed to enter the food supply until the antibiotic has sufficiently cleared the animal s system. During this withholding period, the cow s milk is discarded. The withholding period, which is established by the FDA for each approved antibiotic, ensures that the antibiotic does not end up in the milk and dairy products found in grocery stores and markets where you make milk and dairy purchases. There is also an extensive testing system in place to ensure that no traces of antibiotics are in milk and dairy products. For instance, every load of milk sold by a dairy producer is tested multiple times for traces of antibiotics as established and overseen by state and government agencies. If their dairy products, including milk, test positive for any traces of antibiotics, these products are destroyed and the offending dairy producers are faced with steep fines. P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 31

32 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY D I S C O V E R I E S Building on a 60-year legacy, Zoetis presented more than 20 papers and posters at the recent World Veterinary Poultry Association (WVPA) conference held in Nantes, France, and the American Association of Avian Pathologists (AAAP) conference in Chicago. Here are summaries of a few key presentations, all based on research aimed at discovering practical solutions for improved poultry health. For more news reports from AAAP and WVPA, visit poultryhealthtoday.com. Field trials on two continents show practical, economic benefits of E. coli vaccine in broilers Recent studies on two continents have demonstrated that a modified-live vaccine reduced losses from Escherichia coli in broilers, even when the disease challenge was strong. 1 The studies were conducted on farms in the US and North Africa. There were a variety of conditions, but one thing in common was a higher than normal E. coli challenge, Kalen Cookson, DVM, MAM, a technical services veterinarian for Zoetis, said at the WVPA conference. In the US trial, investigators administered the vaccine Poulvac E. coli to more than 4 million broilers at hatch. They then compared performance to unvaccinated chicks hatched the previous week that were treated in ovo with the antibiotic gentamycin. Chicks that received Poulvac E. coli and no gentamycin had a better adjusted feed conversion, lower mortality after week 1 and fewer condemnations compared to controls, yielding a US $0.51 ( 0.39) advantage per pound. They also had significantly less disease and needed less antibiotic treatment and for a shorter duration of time (Figure 1), he said. One of the field trials in North Africa involved two broiler houses with 8,000 birds each on a farm with high E. coli mortality. Investigators treated all birds with an antibiotic in ovo, and then vaccinated one house with Poulvac E. coli at 3 days of age. The other house was not vaccinated but was treated with enrofloxacin for the first 3 days of life. At 40 days of age, vaccinated birds had lower total mortality, better bodyweight and a better feed-conversion ratio (FCR) compared to unvaccinated birds, Cookson said. In another field trial in North Africa involving 15 different farms with a history of E. coli colibacillosis, no preventive in ovo or in-feed antibiotics were administered. Compared to controls, broilers vaccinated with Poulvac E. coli had an overall better average daily gain and FCR and fewer E. coli lesions. When antibiotic treatment was needed, it was necessary for a shorter duration, Cookson said. Figure 1. antibiotic treatment and duration of treatment in US trial Poulvac E. coli Unvaccinated % Needing treatment Duration of treatment (days) 32

33 1 to our knowledge, this was the first study that employed a viral challenge to compare the efficacy of in ovo vaccine application devices for delivery of an hvt vaccine. T A Y L O R B A R B O S A, D V M, M S, P H D, A C P V Studies demonstrate benefits of dual-needle in ovo vaccination for Marek s disease In a challenge study believed to be the first of its kind, chickens vaccinated in ovo with a dual-needle delivery system were better protected from Marek s disease than those receiving the same vaccine with a conventional single-needle in ovo delivery system. 2 In a US study, broiler eggs were equally divided and injected at 18 days of incubation with a herpesvirus of turkey (HVT) vaccine, commonly used by the broiler industry to protect against Marek s disease. Half the eggs were vaccinated using the Embrex Inovoject dual-needle system, and for the other half, a single-needle system was used. At 3 days of age, investigators challenged both groups of vaccinates with the RB1B strain of Marek s disease virus and then evaluated the birds for 7 weeks, Taylor Barbosa, DVM, MS, PhD, ACPV, director of outcomes research, Zoetis, said at the WVPA conference. The level of protection, determined by the absence of tumors, was significantly better in birds from the dual-needle group compared to the single-needle group and a group of unvaccinated controls. This indicates that with the dual-needle Kilograms Figure 1. Bodyweight at 49 days of age after challenge Unvaccinated Single needle Inovoject system, the delivery of the vaccine was correct and allowed for better replication of vaccine virus, Barbosa said. The dual-needle group also had better weight gain (Figure 1), he said. To our knowledge, this was the first study that employed a viral challenge to compare the efficacy of in ovo vaccine application devices for delivery of an HVT vaccine, he commented. Barbosa also presented results from two field studies conducted at commercial broiler hatcheries in Brazil, where the dual-needle in ovo system resulted in better Marek s disease vaccine coverage compared to subcutaneous vaccine administration at 1 day of age. 3 Single dose of poulvac ibmm+ark protects long-lived broilers for at least 9 weeks One dose of the live, attenuated vaccine Poulvac IBMM+Ark effectively protected broilers against two infectious bronchitis (IB) strains for at least 9 weeks, a recent study shows. 4 The vaccine is intended for use in chickens to protect against Massachusetts-type and 793B-type IB strains. Although its efficacy has been well demonstrated, researchers wanted to determine whether the vaccine s duration of immunity met the needs of broiler breeds with longer lifespans, Luuk Stooker, DVM, a technical manager for Zoetis, said at the WVPA conference. In a study with specific-pathogen-free (SPF) chickens, researchers at the Animal Health Service, Deventer, the Netherlands, vaccinated birds with a single dose of Poulvac IBMM+Ark. At 9 weeks of age, they challenged 20 of the vaccinated and 20 of the unvaccinated birds with M41, a Massachusetts IB strain; they also challenged another 20 vaccinated and 20 unvaccinated birds with the variant IB strain 793B, which is from the same serotype as the Arkansas IB strain. The results were compared to unvaccinated controls. Five days after challenge, the ciliostasis test demonstrated that 95% of the vaccinated 33

34 I N N O V A T I O N S A N D P R A C T I C A L A D V I C E F O R S U C C E S S F U L F L O C K C A R E S P E C I A L R E P O R T D I S C O V E R I E S the results clearly demonstrate that a single dose of poulvac ibmm+ark effectively protected SpF chickens for at least 9 weeks after vaccination. L U U K S T O O K E R, D V M d o i n g a continued from page 31 Interestingly, the statements in the narrative also resonated with consumers who purchased organic and antibiotic-free milk and meat. Single dose of poulvac ibmm+ark protects long-lived broilers for at least 9 weeks chickens were protected against the IB M41 challenge while 100% of the unvaccinated birds were affected. Among birds challenged with 793B, 90% of the vaccinated birds were protected and 75% of the unvaccinated birds were affected by 5 days after challenge. The results clearly demonstrate that a single dose of Poulvac IBMM+Ark effectively protected SPF chickens for at least 9 weeks after vaccination, Stooker said. Better protection shown with recommended Marek s disease vaccine dose in two genetic lines The recommended dose of two Marek s disease virus (MDV) vaccines provided better protection in two genetic lines of meat-type chickens compared to a lower dose, the results of a recent study show, Tarsicio Villalobos, director of technical services, Zoetis, said at the AAAP conference. 5 In their controlled study, investigators sought to determine if the origin and dose of CVI988-strain MDV vaccines affect the efficacy against an early challenge with very virulent (vv) MDV. Commercial hatchery eggs from two different genetic lines were injected in ovo at 18 days of incubation. They received Vaccine A, a competitor product, or Zoetis Poulvac Ovoline CVI. Each vaccine was administered at the higher recommended dose of 4,000 plaque-forming units or at a lower dose. At hatch, females were sorted out, injected with ceftiofur and transported to North Carolina State University, where they were challenged with the vvmdv strain 648A. At 7 days of age, there were no significant differences in bodyweight between birds that received the high or low dose of either vaccine, but by 21 days of age, bodyweight was significantly better in birds that had received the full, recommended dose of Poulvac Ovoline CVI compared to a group of controls that were not vaccinated and challenged, Villalobos said. In addition, protection against the challenge as determined by the presence of MD lesions was significantly better at 51 days of age in birds that had received the recommended dose of both vaccines compared to the low dose and control. Both vaccines at the full dose did not seem to be affected by the genetic lines used in the study, he said. 1 Cookson K, et al. a modified live Escherichia coli vaccine reduces mortality and colibacillosis in broiler field trails world Veterinary poultry association conference, nantes, France. Fdah study #B RFt.R (us trial report) and Fdah study #3113C (Moroccan trial report). 2 Barbosa t, et al. efficacy and Marek s disease protection comparison between different vaccination methods world Veterinary poultry association conference, nantes, France. Zoetis inc. us study # R7B. 3 data on file. Zoetis inc. studies #3Z10R and # R7B. 4 geerligs h, stooker l, et al. efficacy of a live infectious bronchitis vaccine containing the strains ibmm and ark in spf-chickens nine weeks after vaccination world Veterinary poultry association conference, nantes, France. Zoetis inc. study #9118C Villalobos t, et al. american Veterinary Medical association convention notes; american association of avian pathologists symposium, 2013, Chicago. Zoetis inc. study # aQO. For more Discoveries, visit poultryhealthtoday.com. More than one-third of this subset, for example, felt strongly that organic farms should use antibiotics if the practices in the narrative were followed. About one-quarter of the same subset said they would not bother purchasing more expensive organic and antibiotic-free meat and milk if they were certain that all of the practices mentioned in the description were followed. T R U S T E D S O U R C E S Consumers also liked the idea of having third-party auditors or verification systems to ensure that the practices described in the narrative are followed. Nearly half said that having such systems which are already in place would make them much more comfortable. This study showed that consumers are receptive to the facts, says Robbie Moody, regional marketing director for poultry for Zoetis. Clear, simple information moves perceptions in a positive direction. The study also showed that consumers look to credible third parties for information about animal-health practices and food safety. Veterinarian and dietetic associations as well as universities received the highest marks as trusted sources of accurate information, Moody adds. Zoetis plans to do a follow-up study in the near future this time including poultry. Watch for results in a future edition of Poultry Health Today and at poultryhealthtoday.com. 34

35 1 To health! T H E L A S T W O R D Welcome to Poultry Health Today, a new magazine we re sponsoring to keep US producers, veterinarians and nutritionists on top of the latest developments in this critical area of production. In between issues, you can also log into poultryhealthtoday.com. Does the US poultry industry really need another magazine and news website? We thought so. Our friends in the poultry media do a fantastic job of covering the industry, reporting on everything from trade issues and consumer trends to politics, the environment and, of course, production topics. Our goal is not to compete with those media but to supplement them with editorial focused exclusively on a subject we know best: poultry health. Drawing on expertise Naturally, we ll draw on our in-house expertise to share our ideas on disease management, judicious antibiotic usage, food safety, new vaccine technologies, important industry trends and our latest research. editors present the nuts and bolts of the new FDA antimicrobial guidelines and what they mean to the poultry industry. There s also a Special Report called Being More Transparent (page 23), which provides helpful tips for communicating with your customers, the media and consumers about your production practices. We need your feedback Each issue of Poultry Health Today will also include several quick-read features designed to keep you posted on other important topics. In On the Docket (page 7), for instance, our editors summarize congressional bills related to on-farm antibiotic use. Sound Science (page 5) and Discoveries (page 32) provide recaps of noteworthy presentations at industry meetings. We re pleased to bring you this premier issue of Poultry Health Today, but the magazine s and website s success will depend largely on your candid feedback, constructive advice and story ideas. Please take a moment to complete and return the accompanying reply card or send an to editor@poultryhealthtoday.com. At the same time, we ll be offering perspectives from independent thought leaders, ranging from veterinarians, academics and nutritionists to industry groups, regulators and communications specialists. Poultry Health Today is also focused on the health of your business. For example, in our cover story, Changes Ahead (page 9), our Here s to working together to promote good poultry health today, and every day. JON SCHAEFFER, DVM, PhD Director, Poultry Veterinary Services Zoetis Inc. J O N S C H A E F F E R, D V M, P H D POULTRY H E A L T H T ODAY Poultry Health Today is published by PR Works and sponsored by the US Poultry Business of Zoetis Inc. Articles, comments and any other materials available through Poultry Health Today and its site do not reflect the opinions or analysis of the sponsor. Information available in this publication or on the site does not and should not be relied upon to replace the advice of your own animal-health advisors or the indications or safety precautions stated on product labels. Send subscription requests, address updates and editorial comments to editor@poultryhealthtoday.com. Editor: JOSEPH FEEKS Managing editor: DIANA DELMAR News editor: MEGHAN FEEKS Digital editor: SUSAN SPIEGEL Art director: SUSANNA RONNER Proofreader: RUTH MISIEWICZ Copyright, Articles may be reprinted with written permission of the editor. Printed on recycled paper Sponsored by P O U L T R Y H E A L T H T O D A Y. C O M 35

36