Excel To Exe Converter Torrent here. Not be used as therapeutics for humans and animals and not select for cross- and multiresistance to therapeutic antibiotics. Criticizing penicillin's allergenic properties, the Commission reported that DFG-commissioned microbiological evaluations had confirmed the danger of “infectious” (multi)-resistance emanating from AGP-fed animals. It was necessary to “assume that [AGPs] would reduce the therapeutic efficacy of antibiotics” for human and animal diseases—especially those associated with enterobacteriacae.

The Kewitz Commission recommended “no longer delaying unavoidable decisions.” West Germany should restrict nonmedical antibiotic use and only license nontherapeutic AGPs that did not select for multiple resistance amongst intestinal bacteria. With the exception of penicillin feeds, which were to be banned immediately, the Commission recommended a transitional period of three to four years for the introduction of AGP-restrictions. It was hoped that this would foster the development of nontherapeutic AGPs. Other recommendations included reducing antibiotic use during animals’ finishing period, mandating DFG-approved antibiotic dosages, and avoiding further expansions of antibiotic use. Conclusion In the end, West Germany never effectively addressed agricultural antibiotics’ selection for bacterial resistance. With consumers and farmers embroiled in Chemie-conflicts, rising levels of bacterial resistance remained an elephant in the room.

Everybody was aware of it but nobody cared enough to priorities it as a risk and regulatory issue. Real change occurred only after reunification with East Germany where researchers like Wolfgang Witte were already warning about resistance selection on farms.

Despite printing reports about antibiotic allergies and bacterial resistance in hospitals, early commentators failed to connect problems to antibiotic use on farms. However, by the. However, Kollath's Vitalstoff-focused warnings proved ineffective. Lohmann, 'Vorbeugung ist besser als Heilen', LWWL (18/1966), pp. This Pin was discovered by Nadja Zahnd. Discover (and save) your own Pins on Pinterest.

Download Free Software Cozinha Tradicional Portuguesa Maria De Lourdes Modesto Pdf more. During the 1990s, the BSE crisis and resistance against reserve antibiotics forced Europeans to reform agricultural antibiotic policies. In 1994, Germany supported the EU's ban of chloramphenicol AGPs. One year later, reports of cross-resistance between avoparcin and the reserve antibiotic vancomycin prompted Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands to veto a British re-licensing request for avoparcin dairy cow feeds. Germany subsequently followed Denmark's suit in banning avoparcin AGPs in 1996 and supported a 1997 EU ban. With Scandinavian countries pressing for further antibiotic restrictions, the EU decided to phase out virginiamycin, avilamycin, salinomycin-natrium, and flavophospholipol AGPs by July 1999.

The grace period for the four remaining AGPs did not last long. The 2001 confirmation of BSE in German herds resulted in a national crisis and a Green Minister of Agriculture who promptly announced an agricultural turnaround ( Agrarwende) and supported further antibiotic bans at the European level. Two years later, EU Directive Nr. 1831/2003 led to the phasing out of remaining AGPs by January 2006. Although the era of antibiotic growth promotion has ended, therapeutic antibiotics remain popular on German farms.

Their use is also more widespread than previously thought. Recent data collection reforms have revealed that Germans used 1706 tons of agricultural antibiotics in 2011—the highest amount in Europe. Although agricultural antibiotic use has since fallen to 1452 tons in 2013, larger amounts of less potent antibiotics have been substituted with smaller amounts of more potent—and therapeutically valuable—fluoroquinolones.

In this situation, the history of antibiotic use has lessons to offer. With bacterial resistance continuing to rise and the pipeline for new antibiotics stalling, regulators will have to reduce antibiotic dependency in both medicine and food production. Despite being invaluable therapeutics, it seems dubious to subsidize the development of new antibiotics if these will merely serve as temporary plugs for a leaking ship. Instead of focusing on technical fixes, regulators will have to redress the cultural root causes of antibiotic overuse in Western medicine and food production. With over half of global antibiotics used in agriculture, changes in current farming practices are necessary if global antibiotic use is to fall. Moreover, it will not be enough to reduce antibiotic use unilaterally—bacterial resistance knows no borders. Although the 1960s Swann bans and contemporary EU bans had important signal effects, only binding international treaties on reductions of antibiotic use will be able to preserve existing and future antibiotics’ efficacy.

Such a consensus will be difficult to reach. As has been shown for West Germany, there is nothing “natural” about being more concerned about bacterial resistance than about antibiotic residues in food. As highlighted by Ulrich Beck, knowing about a risk is not the same as being sufficiently afraid to regulate it. Instead, the successful cultural “staging” of a risk by experts, activists, and policy makers as well as a risk's successful adoption into consumers’ and producers’ vernacular risk repertoire is decisive for the creation of sustained societal action. In the case of agricultural antibiotics, future regulators will have to do more than merely state the all too familiar “facts” about antibiotic resistance to convince governments to reduce antibiotic use. Instead, they will have to learn and speak in the language of individual risk cultures before being able to successfully “stage risk” and convince consumers, farmers, and officials that substance restrictions are in their long-term self-interest. The nature of this challenge is not only scientific but also cultural.