This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Drug Therapy  • Drug Therapy, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Joan Stephenson, PhD

JAMA. 2003;290:1443.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

A study of Denmark's voluntary ban on the use of antibiotics in animal feed for growth promotion demonstrates that ending the practice can reduce human health risks without causing significant expense to farmers or harm to the health of farm animals, the World Health Organization said in a report released last month (http://www.who.int/salmsurv/links/gssamrgrowthreportstory/en/).

Low doses of antibiotics are routinely added to animal feed of livestock in many countries to promote weight gain. But the practice has long been criticized as encouraging the emergence of antibiotic-resistance strains of bacteria, including those that can cause human illness.

A new report from the World Health Organization suggests that the practice of putting antibiotics in animal feed to promote growth of livestock can be eliminated without excessive harm to animal health or farmers' income. (Photo credit: Brian Prechtel/ARS/USDA)

After the ban on antibiotic growth promoters, pig farmers increased their . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?