Generated Summary
This study investigates the global challenge of reducing antimicrobial use in food animals to combat antimicrobial resistance (AMR). The authors explore the impact of different global policies on curbing antimicrobial consumption, including regulations, dietary changes, and user fees. The research employs data from 38 countries and estimates for 190 more to analyze veterinary antimicrobial sales volumes. The core methodology involves assessing the potential effects of these policies through quantitative analysis and modeling, with a focus on the potential reductions in antimicrobial use by 2030. The study acknowledges the link between antimicrobial use in animals and the rising AMR, emphasizing that this is a significant threat to both animal and human health. It examines three primary strategies: enforcing global regulations, adhering to nutritional guidelines for reduced meat consumption, and imposing a global user fee on veterinary antimicrobial use. The research seeks to quantify the potential impact of each policy, offering insights into their effectiveness and limitations in the context of global food production and public health.
Key Findings & Statistics
- In 2013, the global consumption of antimicrobials in food animals was estimated at 131,109 tons (95% CI: 100,812 to 190,492 tons).
- By 2030, the global consumption is projected to reach 200,235 tons (95% CI: 150,848 to 297,034 tons).
- Consumption levels vary significantly between countries, ranging from 8 mg/population correction unit (PCU) in Norway to 318 mg/PCU in China.
- A global regulation capping antimicrobial use at 50 mg per PCU per year could reduce total consumption by 64% (target 1A). If only OECD and China adopted this regulation, the reduction would be 60% by 2030 (target 1B).
- Limiting meat intake to 40 g/day worldwide could reduce global consumption of antimicrobials in food animals by 66% (target 2A).
- A more realistic global cap of 165 g meat/day could reduce antimicrobial consumption by 22% (target 2B).
- Imposing a user fee of 50% on veterinary antimicrobials could reduce global consumption by 31% (target 3C).
- A user fee policy could generate yearly revenues between US$ 1.7 billion and 4.6 billion.
- Alternative user fee rates of 10% or 100% would reduce global consumption by 9% and 46%, generating revenues of US$ 0.4 billion to 1.2 billion, and US$ 2.8 billion to 7.5 billion, respectively.
- China’s meat intake has recently revised downward its nutritional guidelines for meat intake to 40 to 70 g/day (10).
- The study determined the global average PED (price elasticity of demand) was -0.95.
- The current price on veterinary antimicrobials could reduce global consumption by 31% (target 3C).
- A user fee policy could generate yearly revenues between US$ 1.7 billion and 4.6 billion.
Other Important Findings
- The use of antimicrobials in animals has been linked to drug-resistant infections in both animals and humans, with particular concern for last-resort drugs.
- The primary driver of antimicrobial resistance in animals is the extensive use of antimicrobials in animal production, often for growth promotion and prophylaxis.
- European regulations have been effective in limiting antimicrobial use, while the United States relies more on consumer preferences.
- China, the largest consumer of veterinary antimicrobials, plays a critical role in addressing AMR.
- A user fee policy could be applied at the point of manufacture or wholesale purchase for imported products, with limited enforcement resources.
- Demand for veterinary antimicrobials is on average more elastic in LMICs (Protocol S4), with the notable exception of China.
- The combination of regulations, meat reduction, and user fees could potentially reduce global antimicrobial consumption by up to 80%.
Limitations Noted in the Document
- The study’s estimations for countries without reported antimicrobial sales rely on extrapolations, which may introduce inaccuracies.
- Economic analysis on the impact of user fees is limited by the lack of a global database on veterinary antimicrobial sales and pricing.
- Enforcement of global regulations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) may be challenging due to the costs of establishing surveillance systems.
- The study acknowledges that curtailing antimicrobial use in animals alone may not fully contain AMR in humans, as the spread of resistance genes involves complex pathways.
- The analysis is limited by the availability and quality of data on antimicrobial sales, particularly the breakdown by species and classes of compounds.
- The impact of user fees could be influenced by the price elasticity of demand (PED) for veterinary antimicrobials, which varies by region.
Conclusion
The research underscores the critical need to reduce antimicrobial use in food animals to combat the growing threat of AMR, emphasizing the intricate link between animal and human health. The study concludes that a combination of policies, including regulations, dietary shifts, and user fees, could significantly reduce global antimicrobial consumption. The authors highlight that a user fee policy offers a plausible approach for meaningful reductions, particularly in the short term. The potential revenues generated by user fees could finance improved farming practices, benefiting the livestock industry’s long-term viability. The study emphasizes that policy implementation should consider income group differences. A global user fee policy might circumvent the enforcement limitations found in regulatory approaches, yet it also acknowledges the potential for adverse effects on LMICs if not accompanied by strategies that reduce the need for antimicrobials. The transition to low antimicrobial use could benefit all countries, with the potential to limit the emergence of pathogens resistant to last-resort drugs and secure export markets. The study suggests that despite certain limitations, such as data availability and enforcement challenges, these policies offer a viable path toward sustainable food production practices. The key takeaway is the importance of a multi-faceted approach, integrating regulatory measures, dietary changes, and economic incentives, to effectively address AMR and promote a healthier global food system. The authors suggest that reducing antimicrobial use could also benefit LMICs to secure export markets where customers express preferences for products obtained without antimicrobials.