美国现行肉类和家禽生产中抗菌剂使用政策的有效性审查》(A Review of the Effectiveness of Current US Policies on Anticrobial Use in Meat and Poultry Production)。

IF 7.4 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Current Environmental Health Reports Pub Date : 2022-06-01 Epub Date: 2022-04-27 DOI:10.1007/s40572-022-00351-x
David Wallinga, Lidwien A M Smit, Meghan F Davis, Joan A Casey, Keeve E Nachman
{"title":"美国现行肉类和家禽生产中抗菌剂使用政策的有效性审查》(A Review of the Effectiveness of Current US Policies on Anticrobial Use in Meat and Poultry Production)。","authors":"David Wallinga, Lidwien A M Smit, Meghan F Davis, Joan A Casey, Keeve E Nachman","doi":"10.1007/s40572-022-00351-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Industrial food animal production accounts for most animal-source protein consumed in the USA. These operations rely on an array of external inputs, which can include antimicrobials of medical importance. The use of these drugs in this context has been the subject of public health debate for decades because their widespread use contributes to the selection for and proliferation of drug-resistant bacteria and their genetic determinants. Here, we describe legislative and regulatory efforts, at different levels of governance in the USA, to curtail food animal consumption of medically important antimicrobials.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The features and relative success of the US efforts are examined alongside those of selected member states (Denmark and the Netherlands) of the European Union. Evaluation of efforts at all levels of US governance was complicated by shortcomings in prescribed data collection; nevertheless, available information suggests deficiencies in policy implementation and enforcement compromise the effectiveness of interventions pursued to date. The political will, robust systems for collecting and integrating data on antimicrobial consumption and use, and cross-sectoral collaboration that have been integral to the success of efforts in Denmark and The Netherlands have been notably absent in the USA, especially at the federal level.</p>","PeriodicalId":10775,"journal":{"name":"Current Environmental Health Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9090690/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Review of the Effectiveness of Current US Policies on Antimicrobial Use in Meat and Poultry Production.\",\"authors\":\"David Wallinga, Lidwien A M Smit, Meghan F Davis, Joan A Casey, Keeve E Nachman\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40572-022-00351-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Industrial food animal production accounts for most animal-source protein consumed in the USA. These operations rely on an array of external inputs, which can include antimicrobials of medical importance. The use of these drugs in this context has been the subject of public health debate for decades because their widespread use contributes to the selection for and proliferation of drug-resistant bacteria and their genetic determinants. Here, we describe legislative and regulatory efforts, at different levels of governance in the USA, to curtail food animal consumption of medically important antimicrobials.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The features and relative success of the US efforts are examined alongside those of selected member states (Denmark and the Netherlands) of the European Union. Evaluation of efforts at all levels of US governance was complicated by shortcomings in prescribed data collection; nevertheless, available information suggests deficiencies in policy implementation and enforcement compromise the effectiveness of interventions pursued to date. The political will, robust systems for collecting and integrating data on antimicrobial consumption and use, and cross-sectoral collaboration that have been integral to the success of efforts in Denmark and The Netherlands have been notably absent in the USA, especially at the federal level.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10775,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Environmental Health Reports\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9090690/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Environmental Health Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40572-022-00351-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/4/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Environmental Health Reports","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40572-022-00351-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:工业化食用动物生产占美国动物源蛋白质消费的绝大部分。这些生产依赖于一系列外部投入,其中可能包括具有重要医疗价值的抗菌药物。几十年来,在这种情况下使用这些药物一直是公共卫生辩论的主题,因为它们的广泛使用导致了耐药细菌及其基因决定因素的选择和扩散。在此,我们介绍了美国各级政府为减少食用动物对具有重要医疗意义的抗菌药物的消费而做出的立法和监管努力:最近的研究结果:我们将美国所做努力的特点和相对成功之处与欧盟部分成员国(丹麦和荷兰)所做的努力进行了对比研究。由于规定的数据收集工作存在缺陷,对美国各级治理工作的评估变得更加复杂;然而,现有信息表明,政策实施和执行方面的缺陷损害了迄今为止所采取的干预措施的有效性。丹麦和荷兰的成功离不开政治意愿、强大的抗菌药物消费和使用数据收集与整合系统以及跨部门合作,而美国,尤其是联邦层面,显然不具备这些条件。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A Review of the Effectiveness of Current US Policies on Antimicrobial Use in Meat and Poultry Production.

A Review of the Effectiveness of Current US Policies on Antimicrobial Use in Meat and Poultry Production.

A Review of the Effectiveness of Current US Policies on Antimicrobial Use in Meat and Poultry Production.

A Review of the Effectiveness of Current US Policies on Antimicrobial Use in Meat and Poultry Production.

Purpose: Industrial food animal production accounts for most animal-source protein consumed in the USA. These operations rely on an array of external inputs, which can include antimicrobials of medical importance. The use of these drugs in this context has been the subject of public health debate for decades because their widespread use contributes to the selection for and proliferation of drug-resistant bacteria and their genetic determinants. Here, we describe legislative and regulatory efforts, at different levels of governance in the USA, to curtail food animal consumption of medically important antimicrobials.

Recent findings: The features and relative success of the US efforts are examined alongside those of selected member states (Denmark and the Netherlands) of the European Union. Evaluation of efforts at all levels of US governance was complicated by shortcomings in prescribed data collection; nevertheless, available information suggests deficiencies in policy implementation and enforcement compromise the effectiveness of interventions pursued to date. The political will, robust systems for collecting and integrating data on antimicrobial consumption and use, and cross-sectoral collaboration that have been integral to the success of efforts in Denmark and The Netherlands have been notably absent in the USA, especially at the federal level.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.60
自引率
1.30%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: Current Environmental Health Reports provides up-to-date expert reviews in environmental health. The goal is to evaluate and synthesize original research in all disciplines relevant for environmental health sciences, including basic research, clinical research, epidemiology, and environmental policy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信