New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Antibiotics Sales for Use in U.S. Farms Animals Dropping for First Time

The report comes from the Food and Drug Administration

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

CHICAGO (Reuters)—The sale and distribution of antibiotics approved for use in food-producing animals in the United States decreased by 10 percent from 2015 to 2016, a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) report said on Thursday.

It was the first decline in year-to-year sales since the FDA began collecting the data in 2009, according to food and consumer health groups.

For years scientists have warned that the regular use of antibiotics to promote growth and prevent illness in healthy farm animals fuels dangerous, antibiotic-resistant “superbug” infections in people.Major U.S. food companies including McDonald’s and Tyson Foods have stepped up efforts to curtail, and in some cases eliminate, antibiotics in their products.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“Actions speak louder than words, and the most action we’ve seen on antibiotics has come from food companies,” said Matthew Wellington, Antibiotics Program Director of public interest campaigning group U.S. PIRG. “We’re cheering this good news.”

Last month, the World Health Organization urged farmers to completely stop using antibiotics to enhance growth and prevent disease in healthy animals.

An estimated 70 percent of the kinds of antibiotics that are also used to fight human infections and in surgery are sold in the United States for use in meat production.

In 2016, sales and distribution of those medically important antibiotics for food production fell 14 percent, the FDA said.

Medically important antimicrobials accounted for 60 percent of the domestic sales of all antimicrobials approved for use in farm animals in 2016, the agency said.

The FDA’s data show chicken accounting for 6 percent of medically important antibiotic sales, with swine at 37 percent and cattle at 43 percent.

Avinash Kar, senior attorney at environmental activist group the Natural Resources Defense Council, said the overall decline offers a “glimmer of hope” that the growing epidemic of drug-resistant infections can be beaten.

While Kar attributed the progress to significant changes undertaken by the chicken industry, he said the pork and beef sectors lag behind.

Tyson Foods, the nation’s leading meat producer, this year became the world’s largest producer of no-antibiotic-ever chicken, the company said in an e-mail to Reuters on Thursday.

Tyson said it was working with independent farmers to reduce human-use antibiotics from its beef and pork supply chain.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe