Bacterium Gained Drug Resistance Thanks to Antibiotics Used on Farms
- Posted on February 22, 2012 at 8:34pm by
Liz Klimas
- Print »
- Email »
MRSA gained its ability to resist antibiotics on the farm.
Antibiotic resistant bacteria has long been a concern, but scientists reported yesterday that they had figured out just how the bacterium that causes invasive-skin infections acquired this immunity. It starts on the farm.
The research from the Translational Genomics Research Institute published in the journal mBio found that methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strain CC398 became resistant to antibiotics because of their overuse in livestock.
“Most of the ancestral human strains were sensitive to antibiotics, whereas the livestock strains had acquired resistance on several independent occasions,” said Ross Fitzgerald of the University of Edinburgh in Scotland. The statement on the research says this implies that the bacterium picked up the ability to fend off antibiotics after it migrated into livestock.
Essentially, the researchers found that once treatable strains of the bacterium became resistant when it moved to livestock it was exposed to many antibiotics. It then made the jump back to humans and has been spreading since. MRSA can cause skin and other tissue infections, respiratory infections, and sepsis, which can have major health implications. CNN reports that MRSA caused 278,000 hospitalizations and more than 18,000 deaths in 2005.
(Related: Cops: Man tries to rob cafe by threatening to spread his Staph infection)
Scientific American has more from one of the study’s authors:
“We can’t blame nature or the germs,” Paul Keim, director of TGen’s Pathogen Genimics Division and co-author of the study, said in a prepared statement. “It is our inappropriate use of antibiotics that is now coming back to haunt us.”
“The most powerful force in evolution is ‘selection,’” Keim said. “And, in this case, humans have supplied a strong force through excessive use of antibiotic drugs in farm animal production.”
The Union of Concerned Scientists estimated in 2001 that livestock farmers in the U.S. used 24.6 million pounds of antibiotics each year for non-therapeautic reasons. This practice was banned by the European Union in 2006.
Comments (15)
Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 690 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 660 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 524 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 362 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 328 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 212 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 227 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order Read More- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 212 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
familyfarm
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 5:55pmI would like to encourage everyone to do more research on this subject. There are numerous errors in the article that should be pointed out first of all Staphylococcus aureus is a very nasty bug that effects both domesticated animals and humans but the article is misleading when it references that 24.6 million pounds of antibiotics each year were used for non-therapeutic reasons. That is just what happened these antibiotics were fed the domesticated livestock to counter act digestive bacteria and target a different spectrum than antibiotics that are used to kill Staph. Which means that the antibiotics that are referenced have no effect on the antibiotic resistance that Staph displays against Penicillin, or simular drugs. Antibiotic resistance is of paramount importance in animal production why would we want more bugs that kill our animals and decrease our profits, which are already low enough.
Report Post »one-icon
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 10:10pmLuke 21:11 There will be great earthquakes, famines and pestilences (fatal epidemic disease) in various places, and fearful events and great signs from heaven.
Jesus foretold of these events as signs of the end of the age. Repent, cause this is the last generation.
redact3d
Posted on February 24, 2012 at 4:48pmI just can’t care about farmers profits when it means irresponsible use of antibiotics and growth hormones. I think that it has a noticeable effect, and I think science warned us and is now corroborating that story.
Keep in mind that most of the farming done in the united states are by corporate farmers. Nothing is wrong with corporations until they use their money and influence to get subsidies from the government and push politicians to create laws that force all farmers to buy their GMO seeds or hormones, etc. that’s something you can thank Monsanto for.
Did you know that Monsanto’s own employees wont eat GMO foods in their cafeteria. Probably because scientists are beginning to find that GE products cause mutations in the cells that assimilate them.
sorry to disagree with you, but theirs more than one side to any story.
Report Post »Razorhunters
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 4:13pmweather modification, gmo foods, chemicals and toxins in the air we breath , food we eat…
do some research while u still can.
Report Post »Razorhunters
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 4:14pmand the water we drink.
Report Post »ProbIemSoIver
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 5:28pmExactly. Preservatives, GMOs, hormones and anti-biotics in our food are killing us, in addition to chemtrails full of aluminum oxides, barium salts, ethylene dibromide, mycoplasmas and more.
These micro-biologists are as dangerous to mankind, animals and earth, as nuclear holocaust is.
I know the bees died from chemtrails and High frequecy microwaves produced by HAARP, in addition to a lot of birds.
All of these actions are due to a Global Bureaucracy that is out of control.
Report Post »Tropla
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 1:57pmAs soon as “science” blames farms and farmers for something, one should take the story with “a grain of salt” as the expression is in Dutch. Salt is the right medicine against bacteria. It is good to use it after meeting people with a cold who are coughing. Some salt on your tongue and the bacteria, you just inhaled, are dried out via osmosis. Have a good health with a lot of wealth!
Report Post »Joel Knows
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 12:06pmFirst off, much of “science” that is published today is paid for by Federal grants and funding. Much of the time the researchers are put in a position that the outcomes must be proved to obtain specified results for those who are paying the bills. Even if the researchers are trying to be unbiased, the fact that they are looking for specific outcomes to be proved can skew the interpretation of the data.
Report Post »Another thing to consider is the political nature of those who make the final decisions in such agencies as the USDA, NIH, and even the state agencies. If your job and income are based on a 4, 6, or 8 year cycle, the decisions made will be based on those timeframes. After that it will become someone else’s problem, so make the short-term decisions that will show impact. Farmers, doctors, and even the working level within the agencies have to do as they are told, even if they know the long-term cost will be high and negative.
As for antibiotics, there is a two-fold, long term effect. First off, bacterium do build resistance as those single organisms that are able to survive long enough to breed will pass the genetic material on to resist the antimicrobial used against them. Second is that our own immune systems do not build up a proper immunity to microorganisms. So what we experience is multiplied and more severe with devastating.
MyLord
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 10:29amI don’t know that small family farms are using antibiotics extensively; however, I believe corporate farms are. There are consequences to the use of antibiotics, hormones and genetic modification on our food supply. I think this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Report Post »Melika
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 9:21amThis story smells. Overusing antibiotics has long been considered a bad idea that doctors regularly ignore. However, to blame farmers for both this practice & the resultant resistance is premature at best. In hospital settings & offices, doctors routinely overuse antibiotics for a “non-therapeutic” reason- namely prevention. The latest craze of “disinfecting” hand gels is overusing an antibiotic for a “non-therapeutic” reason. Farmers tend not to spend money on things they don’t actually need, so I find it difficult to believe they are sinking all that money into an antibiotic program they don’t need. Any overuse is more likely the result of the gov’mt requiring it as part of standard practices or to mitigate litigation.
Report Post »I would be wary of any science article that states the study’s result without showing the study itself or allows the scientist to make wild statements of fact as this article does. It mentions ST398 strain made the jump to humans. That can be a big jump in the microbe world. What instigated it? Overuse of antibiotics in humans? What was the resultant genetic material? Did the adaptation that allowed the microbe to jump species also allow it to mutate much faster or be the catalyst that precipitated resistance? Then it makes the jump BACK to humans. Maybe not so big a jump since it came from humans, but it still had to alter its genetic material a bit to do it. Too many questions are left to allow the statements of fact to stand.
wvernon1981
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 12:31pmOne of the biggest issues in linking to the studies is that you will typically find that only the abstract of the study is available. The actual study may cost you 40 or 50 dollars to read.
Report Post »JimL
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 9:09amSo what’s been going on down at the farm these past seven years? Selection/ competition/ or less reliance on antibiotics?
Report Post »lukerw
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 4:41amThere are… Unintended Consequences… for everything that the Government gets involved in!
Report Post »AmazingGrace8
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 11:20amWhy Now? and also the FDA coming out about shortage in the inventory of drugs that have been around for years? Why Now?…monster in the room, the new- health-care program! Liberals way of cutting the herd, abortions & lack of life-saving drugs to save lives. Scary times!
Report Post »wvernon1981
Posted on February 23, 2012 at 12:33pmThere are unintended consequences to anything anyone with the ability to effect change does in a complex system.
Report Post »