Department of Health pictures AMR in Animals and the Environment
A clear depiction of how multi-facetted the problem is and how limited the opportunities to rectify the threat are imagined to be. This diagram is the only one that attempt to cover AMR from the perspective of the farm , environment and wild-life. All the other diagrams focus on aspects that are more obviously health related.
What the Intervention (blue) boxes do not say
The blue boxes in the Department of Health diagram are interventions to help prevent AMR- but listing them shows that despite, no doubt good intentions, the interventions fall into four categories:
- Impose burdensome costs on an already beleaguered industry
- Are aspirational and long term in outlook - which is not what is required in light of the stark warnings from the UK Government, UN and WHO
- Are not doable by a government that has set its face against international cooperation.
- Should already be ‘in hand’, and where they aren’t being done then given 1 aren’t likely to be.
Interventions - the blue boxes in diagram above | Notes - unintended/ unforeseen consequences | Most obvious cost implications |
Vaccination | Offset by ‘Veterinary
Care Acquired
Infections’ | |
Terminal hygiene | Will further subsidies to destroy large numbers of animals be so politically appropriate during a cost of living crisis? | Increased cost to ‘producers’ |
Biosecurity measures | Factory farms are designed to optimally efficient - so even ‘simple’ biosecurity are very costly to implement e.g. distancing. | Increased cost to supply chain |
Better Nutrition / Water Quality | see above - scientifically hard to prove that this, rather than stress is a bigger influencer on AMR. | Increased cost to ‘producers’ |
Housing / Cleaning etc | If its not being done - then its an extra cost. And if if is then its not going to make things better | Increased cost to ‘producers’ |
Stimulate antimicrobial diagnostics and novel therapies | Long term and aspirational goals, hard to imagine this happening soon | |
Infection Prevention
and Controls | The obvious goal but how is it to be achieved? | Increased cost to ‘producers’ |
Surveillance | Without structure and incentives for such a thing its Long term, ambitious and aspirational goals, hard to imagine this happening soon. | Increased cost to ‘producers’ |
Antimicrobial
stewardship
programmes | Currently (July 2022) only applies in health care setting https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/antimicrobial-stewardship-start-smart-then-focus | Increased cost across supply chain |
UK import
controls / EU controls on food production | Delayed till End of 2023 https://brc.org.uk/news/trade/government-delays-eu-gb-import-controls-from-july-2022-to-end-of-2023/ | |
[Adopting] Best practice in prescribing in EU and other countries. | Since Brexit there doesn’t appear to be much appetite for this from within Government. | Increased cost to supply chain |
International
consensus and
action on animal
husbandry | Long term, ambitious and aspirational goals, hard to imagine this happening soon | |
International
consensus and
action on controls
for antimicrobial
use | Long term, ambitious and aspirational goals, hard to imagine this happening soon | |
Best practice controls on
animal husbandry in EU and
other countries | Influencing foreign governments with no foreign aid budget. https://www.independent.co.uk/independentpremium/uk-news/overseas-aid-cuts-treasury-oxfam-b2130769.html | |
Processing
(e.g. pasteurisation
for dairy products,
irradiation) | If its not being done - then its an extra cost. And if if is then its not going to make things better | Increased cost to supply chain |
Appropriate cleaning,
cooking, contamination
controls and chilling
(FSA’s 4 C’s) | If its not being done - then its an extra cost. And if if is then its not going to make things better | Increased cost to supply chain |
🔗 Source: Antimicrobial resistance systems map: overview of the factors influencing the development of AMR and the interactions between them
Why intervention / mitigation rather than solution
Its hard to say, but perhaps because the Department of Health leads the creation of these diagrams there is insufficient attention given to anything that isn’t within that departments remit hence they write:
The map provides a visual representation of the various influences driving increased
infection within the population. This increase will in turn lead to an increase in the number of resistant infections both directly, through a higher number of infected individuals, and indirectly, through increased antimicrobial usage causing natural selection of resistant microbes.
🔗 Source: Antimicrobial resistance systems map: overview of the factors influencing the development of AMR and the interactions between them
What the blue boxes can not say
Factory Farming is designed for the efficient (low cost) production of ‘protein’ and AMR is another externalised cost of that efficiency.
“Factory farming (also known as intensive/industrial animal agriculture) is the cornerstone of a dangerous industrial food system that profits from the suffering of billions of cruelly farmed animals each year and contributes immensely to Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR). Animal welfare and sustainable development are inextricably linked.”
🔗 Source: Antimicrobial Resistance and Factory Farms
Imagine a different world
We could redraw the diagram above without the influence of factory farming.
Powered by