Use of Antibiotics in Cattle: Changes Coming Dr Use of Antibiotics in Cattle: Changes Coming Dr. Dee Whittier Virginia-Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine

FDA Antibiotic Changes Changes coming in the way antibiotics are used in food animals. December 2013, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) published a final “guidance for industry” that starts the clock running on some of these changes. Initially: Animal health companies Adjustments that will eventually make their way down to the people who prescribe and use the drugs: veterinarians and livestock producers.

Antibiotic Changes The role of livestock antibiotics in contributing to resistant bacterial infections in humans is complex and has been long-debated. Producer associations have seen the writing on the wall for a couple of years now that these changes were coming. But what do they actually mean for producers?

The Development of Antibiotic Resistance Antibiotics

The Development of Antibiotic Resistance Antibiotics

Antibiotic Usage Over the Counter Prescription Extra-Label

Antibiotic Usage Prescription

Antibiotic Usage Extra-Label

Extra-Label Any species, any condition, any route, any dose other than label Conditions: Direction of a Veterinarian Proper Veterinary-Patient- Client relationship Exaggerated withdrawal times Proper labeling

Antibiotic Changes What will change? The labeled uses of “medically important” antibiotics for growth promotion and improvements in feed efficiency will go away. Extra-label use of feed grade antibiotics is illegal, these uses will continue to be illegal.

Antibiotic Changes Before a producer can obtain (for example) CTC (chlortetracycline- Aureomycin) crumbles for his calves or pigs, he will have to obtain a VFD form filled out by his veterinarian. (2016) The form will specify the farm and animals to be treated, the duration of treatment, and which drug is to be used. The feed mill or distributor would need to have a properly completed VFD before they could supply the feed.

Antibiotic Changes Before a producer can obtain (for example) CTC (chlortetracycline- Aureomycin) crumbles for his calves or pigs, he will have to obtain a VFD form filled out by his veterinarian. (2016)

VFD : Veterinary Feed Directive

A little Math 0.5 mg / lb body wt per day 1200 lb cow = 0.6 gm/hd/day If cows eat 4 oz per head per day 4800 gm / ton of mineral

Antibiotic Changes The VFD won’t be able to come from just any veterinarian. Right now VFD’s have to be issued in the midst of a valid veterinary-client-patient relationship (VCPR) that’s spelled out by federal regulation.

Antibiotic Changes What won’t change: The ability to use feed-grade antibiotics to treat, control, or prevent bacterial diseases. The term “prevention” is used in the situation where there is a very high risk of illness if you don’t administer the antibiotic. However, producers will need to obtain a VFD for these products as explained above.

Antibiotic Changes The Kind’a Good News: The FDA doesn’t have many resources for enforcement Now only act if there is a complaint or residue But: Do we really want to live having to always look over our shoulder?

Antibiotic Changes What won’t change: How one uses and obtains non-“medically important” feed grade products. Examples of these include ionophores like Rumensin®, Bovatec®, most coccidiosis medications, and certain growth-promoting medications like bacitracin (BMD). Since they’re not used very often if at all in human medicine, there will be no changes in their use.

Antibiotic Changes What won’t change: Uses of injectable antibiotics. However, this proposal would also move over-the-counter medically-important water medications to “prescription” status like many injectable antibiotics. Extra label uses of feed-grade medications. Any use of feed grade medications not in accordance with their label is illegal now, and it will remain so.

Antibiotic Changes Antibiotic resistance is a complex and sometimes contentious topic among animal and human health professionals. The complexity of the issue means that a “silver bullet” solution is not going to present itself any time soon.

Antibiotic Changes All of us involved in using these products—in animals and people alike—play a role in ensuring that they continue to work for the sake of our animals and our family members. Understanding these proposed changes and proactively deciding how they will work into your operation is a great first step that we can all take.

Antibiotic Residues Beef Cattle have a “good” record Beef Cows more than fed cattle Continue to struggle: Cull dairy cows Veal

Total Cattle Marketed Cattle Marketed Data from USDA-AMS Beef Cows Total Cattle Marketed by Residue Testing Class, Data from USDA-AMS Beef Cows Feeder Dairy Cows Veal Total/Yr Year 3,569,300 27,040,000 2,591,200 942,000 34,142,500 2008 3,178,000 27,492,000 2,496,900 744,800 33,911,700 2007 2,982,700 27,297,800 2,353,500 698,700 33,332,700 2006 2,522,900 26,558,100 2,252,100 717,600 32,050,700 2005 2,706,000 26,537,000 2,363,000 Not Avail 31,606,000 2004 3,163,000 28,255,000 2,860,000 34,278,000 2003   Cattle Marketed Data from USDA-AMS Beef Cows Feeder Dairy Cows Veal 2008 3,569,300 27,040,000 2,591,200 942,000 2007 3,178,000 27,492,000 2,496,900 744,800 2006 2,982,700 27,297,800 2,353,500 698,700 2005 2,522,900 26,558,100 2,252,100 717,600 2004 2,706,000 26,537,000 2,363,000 Not Avail 2003 3,163,000 28,255,000 2,860,000 AVE 2,910,520 27,227,980 2,465,100 720,367

Chemical Defects … Residues 1982 … just under 2% of all beef cattle 2008 …Random samples: Zero antibiotics, 0.3% avermectin & sulfa Percent Antibiotics & Sulfonamide Positive Calculations from Total Inspector Generated Samples (Targeted) Compared to Years Total Harvest Beef Cows Feeder Dairy Cows Veal Total Year 0.00199% 0.00007% 0.03917% 0.04183% 0.003462% 2008 0.00179% 0.00009% 0.04450% 0.03289% 0.003589% 2007 0.00536% 0.00010% 0.04347% 0.03192% 0.003537% 2006 0.00392% 0.00011% 0.03539% 0.02397% 0.002914% 2005 0.00248% 0.02560% Not Avail 0.004626% 2004 0.00269% 0.04063% 0.005018% 2003

What does this mean ? 0.0035% = .000035= 35 residues in 100,000 targeted samples. Overall 2008 0.00199 % = 20 residues in 100,000 targeted samples. Beef cows 2008 0.0392% = 392 residues in 100,000 targeted samples.

Chemical Defects … Residues OTC vs Vet Rx USDA-FSIS Red Book Data FSIS Veterinary Inspector In-charge Generated Samples Inspector Generated (IG)* Number IG Violative Residue (Num & Ratio) Total Samples VetRx# OTC# VetRx Ratio OTC Ratio 2008, 135,389 569 1064 0.53 1.87 2007, 149,590 418 904 0.46 2.16 2006, 79,909 332 922 0.36 2.78 2005, 129,865 264 734 2004, 153,542 213 1402 0.15 6.58 2003, 230,355 398 1496 0.27 3.76 [ OTC (Over The Counter): Sulfas (Su), PenG (Pen), Tetracylines (Tetra), Neomycin (Neo),] [ VetRx (Prescription): Gentamicin (Gen), Tilmicosin (Tilm), Florfenicol (Flor), Flunixin (Flun), Quinolone (Quin),Ceftiofur (Cet), Ampicillin (Amp)] * Inspector Generated (IG) samples are taken from cattle suspected by the inspector as having a high risk of containing a violative residue (Injection sites and active lesions)

Pinkeye or Infectious Bovine Keratoconjunctivitis (IBK)

Pinkeye Wt. Loss

Tetradure 300 mg/ ml Oxytetracycline 3 cc/100 lb. Metaphylaxis push – 5-7 days Better than LA-200?

Herd Treatment Treatment of an outbreak > 10 % of herd affected Move pastures if tall grass Fly spray to remove all flies Treat whole herd (just calves?) with long-duration tetracycline

3. Prevention of Bacterial and Viral Infections Pinkeye Prevention: 1. Face fly Control 2. Pasture Management 3. Prevention of Bacterial and Viral Infections

Pinkeye Conclusions Pinkeye will be with us for the foreseeable future Reduce Risk? Face fly control Pasture Management Early treatment