First steps....Prior to learning about CFR, although I was aware of the need to curtail the usage of antibiotics in aniimal feed, I was not aware that many countries were already taking the first steps or lead in this direction. I decided to go look into any articles I could find about Europe or others implementing these directives and their reasonings why. Here is one of the articles I thought I would provide here for the board...........
European Union Bans Antibiotics for Growth Promotion
Europe is far ahead of the United States in the responsible use of antibiotics. On January 1, 2006, the European Union banned the feeding of all antibiotics and related drugs to livestock for growth promotion purposes. The sweeping new policy follows up a 1998 ban on the feeding of antibiotics that are valuable in human medicine to livestock for growth promotion. Now, no antibiotics can be used in European livestock for growth promotion purposes.
The restrictions on antibiotic use are intended to preserve the effectiveness of antibiotics for human use. Long-term, low-level feeding of antibiotics to animals, a practice common in U.S. livestock production, creates the ideal conditions for the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. The bacteria can be transferred to consumers in improperly cooked meat and can result in severe, even fatal, illness. People can also be exposed to antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the environment, due to the practice of spraying farm fields with animal manure, which allows resistant bacteria and antibiotics to enter the soil, air, and water. Farm workers can also contract antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections from working around livestock. Keeping antibiotics out of animal feed in the first place is the best way to limit the development of antibiotic resistance and keep antibiotics working in humans.
In the United States, antibiotics and related drugs are used routinely to encourage growth and to compensate for crowded and unsanitary conditions in the production of poultry, swine, and cattle. Livestock producers are not restricted from using antibiotics that are important in human medicine, nor are they required to get a prescription from a veterinarian or limit treatment to the few individuals who demonstrate symptoms of illness. Instead, antibiotics are commonly administered in drinking water to entire flocks of chickens, fed to pigs to stave off illness during forced early weaning, and given prophylactically to beef cattle to ease their transition from grass to a corn diet. The Union of Concerned Scientists estimates that 70 percent of antibiotics and related drugs used in the United States are used in animals.
Antibiotic-resistant illness causes tens of thousands of premature deaths in the United States annually and drives up medical costs. Restricting the inappropriate use of antibiotics in both the medical and the agricultural sector can save lives and money.
The United States has made some progress in addressing antibiotic resistance, largely through the voluntary decisions of private companies. In 2003, McDonald's Corporation announced it would only buy chicken from producers who do not use antibiotics for routine disease prevention, and recently four of the nation's top ten chicken producers (Tyson Foods, Perdue Farms, Foster Farms, and Gold Kist) divulged that they have stopped using antibiotics for growth promotion.
While UCS applauds these efforts, we recognize the need for a comprehensive approach to end the overuse of antibiotics in meat production. Leaders in Congress have introduced the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act (PAMTA), a bill to ban the use of seven classes of medically important antibiotics in livestock and poultry. Passage of PAMTA is critical to achieve broad-scale reductions in non-therapeutic use of antibiotics, and will create a level playing field for farmers as they transition away from the practice of routinely adding these drugs to animal feed.
Additionally, the cessation of antibiotic use in livestock must be accompanied by innovations that improve animal health and make the use of antibiotics unnecessary. In June 2005, delegates from European countries met in Brussels to discuss methods of raising animals without antibiotics. The group's suggestions included changing farming practices, such as weaning pigs later to give them a chance to develop sturdier immune systems; developing new veterinary drugs; and feeding animals dietary supplements. One barrier to progress is the lack of knowledge of basic animal digestive physiology, particularly bacterial colonization of animal digestive tracts. Further research on this topic will generate new alternatives to antibiotics for European and U.S. livestock producers.
The impetus to restrict antibiotic use in Europe was the entry of two countries with strong policies on antibiotic use, Sweden and Finland, into the European Union. Instead of allowing their standards to become watered down, these countries retained their own restrictions on antibiotics and asked that the European Union "harmonize upwards" by removing more drugs from the list of authorized livestock feed additives. The success enjoyed by European countries in producing quality meats under these standards demonstrates that responsible use of antibiotics need not come at the expense of the livestock industry or consumer pocketbooks.
Europe has taken the lead on reducing antibiotic use in livestock and ensuring the safety of the food supply for its citizens. Now it's time for the United States to take action by passing PAMTA, withdrawing veterinary approval for medically important antibiotics, and supporting sustainable techniques for raising livestock that don't rely on antibiotics to keep animals healthy.
https://www.ucsusa.org/food_and_agriculture/solutions/wise_antibiotics/european-union-bans.html