Friday Forward: “No Antibiotics Ever” Does Not Equate to Safer Meat

Last night I was watching my local NBC affiliate news. “You’ll want to hear what could be in your meat when we return,” caught my attention. It was a good 15 minutes before the story appeared (a tactic no doubt to get me to stay tuned – reminds me of the Saturday Night Live skit many years ago). The segment was the health reporter repackaging a story released by Consumer Reports about antibiotic use in meat and food labels. I was very unhappy with what I saw and heard, so I just had to respond. This is what I sent to the reporter:

Hi, XXXX. I appreciate all of the health info you cover, but I was a little disappointed about tonight’s “Antibiotics in meat/superbugs” story that aired tonight. I think it was very misleading (wish I could refer back, but the video is not offered online - UPDATE it is not featured on the homepage, but I'm not sharing a bad story!).

While I don’t believe anyone can discredit that routine feeding of antibiotics to animals, as well as overuse and misuse of antibiotics in humans contributes to resistance, my “take-a-way” from the story was that superbugs occurred in meat only from animals that were fed antibiotics any time in their lives. You led the viewers to believe that if they purchased meat that says “No antibiotics ever” or “Organic,” this would be a safer option.

I have talked to a local meat processor, and I learned that superbugs can be in any meat from anywhere, whether they were given antibiotics or not. But, I did not hear the Consumer Reports lady say they tested any meat and found superbugs. In fact, she didn’t say she tested meat at all. While contamination can occur, meat is routinely tested. This would have been an excellent opportunity to stress that all meat should be cooked to the recommended internal temperature. Food safety is critical. It would have also been helpful to relay that all animals must be antibiotic free when they arrive at the processor. USDA routinely checks this and removes any contaminated product they may find. In fact, they have stepped up their monitoring process.

I also noted the comment that routine antibiotics are given because of “unsanitary conditions”, another assumption. Have you ever visited a commercial poultry house? I have, and could not get over how much cleaner and less stinky it was than some more “natural” operations I have visited. (I have also now learned that routine antibiotic use is no longer industry practice - 40 years of industry experience offersopinion about antibiotic use in livestock.)

Lastly, I would like to encourage you to utilize the knowledge of our many Kentucky farmers for stories about food. Get a farmer’s perspective on why he or she may need to give antibiotics (I would be more inclined to eat a healthy animal than one that has been sick). Ask how antibiotic use has changed and how the livestock industry is addressing this issue. If you ever need help finding the farmers to talk to, I would be glad to put you in touch with them.

Here is a great post from John’s Custom Meats  – farm and meat processor in Bowling Green – that explains the issue at hand: http://www.johnscustommeats.blogspot.com/2010/09/increased-federal-beef-oversight-needed.html#more

I hate thinking this story was a way to get people to stay tuned to the end of the broadcast. It got my attention, but I wish the story was covered from all sides. I’m afraid people will be led to believe certain meat products are safer, when in fact they are not.

Sincerely,

Jennifer Elwell
Blog:  “Food, Mommy!” www.foodmommy.net
Twitter @foodmommy

I was also able to call on Kentucky farmer and meat processor Amy of John’s Custom Meats to tell me more. She offered this:

FSIS (USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service) is revamping the residue testing program. There is a new (and more accurate...better) test available that they will be using. In addition, they are increasing the amount of testing being done.

Here's the link to the FSIS press release http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News/NR_070212_02/index.asp

Translation: This is a good thing! The new test method can test for a whole multitude of residues all from one sample. This will provide a more accurate baseline to zero in on the main problem residues. What will result from that is focusing in on the main problem areas and increasing sampling in those areas. Eventually, leading to the source of the issue or just finding there is no real issue to begin with.

NOTE: On Friday’s, I will select a topic that I feel was “forward worthy.” Find many more posts and articles I have forwarded on my Facebook Page - http://www.facebook.com/FoodMommy - or Twitter account (@foodmommy).

Speaking of encouraging news reporters to talk with farmers, I have to forward this post as well. Another farmer/blogger acquaintance Ryan Goodman has been a recent and popular fixture on CNN’s Eatocracy – No Bull: Start a Conversation with a Farmer 

Homomes, Steriods and Antiobiotics. OH MY!

I just saw a commercial from Perdue saying their chickens are not given homones and steroids. I am sure this "new," more healthy alternative will cost you a bit more at the grocery, if food prices weren't high enough already.

Well, guess what? All the chicken at the grocery store is produced without hormones and steroids. My good friend who works for the Kentucky Poultry Federation told me that hormone use in chickens has been illegal since 1952. So, leave it to good old-fashioned marketing to make you believe you are getting a better product.

Now, if someone tells you that your food is full of homones, they are correct. Any living thing produces hormones naturally. Even plants.

Let's talk about a hotter topic, antibiotics. I am not one to pay more for animal products produced without antibiotics. One, there are strict guidelines that require the animal to be free of antiobiotics before harvest, and the products are tested, especially milk. If antibiotics are found in a truck load of milk, it is destroyed and the dairy farmer is not paid. I have heard that milk is more heavily tested than your drinking water.

My second line of reasoning is for the well-being of the animal. If an animal has an infection, I want it to be given medicine to be healthy. We do the same for ourselves and our children. The simple logic for me is, "why would I want to eat an animal that has been sick?"

That said, I am a regular consumer of all natural venison... free range and grass/bark/dirt fed. But I am very careful to make sure the meat is cooked properly... who knows what kind of diseases the local deer might have. I am much much more confident about the safety of meat I get from farms.

I heard an interesting story not too long ago. A chicken company that I won't name told me that they also started a "more natural" brand of product touting no antibiotics, which was obviously done to meet a marketing niche. He said that the chickens became infected with e coli within a week of being placed in the facility, yet they had never had a health issue with the conventionally-raised chickens.

Hmmm.