As microbial resistance to antibiotics grows into an ever-expanding problem for doctors and veterinarians, Lux Research has identified some solutions that fall into three main categories, the company said in a research paper.
There is no silver bullet that will replace conventional antibiotics, Lux said, and alternatives will act primarily as preventative strategies that will reduce the need for antibiotics in animal feed. Plus, there are tradeoffs that livestock producers need to be aware of before investing in any antibiotic alternative, the paper said.
ANTIBIOTIC ALTERNATIVES
Of the assortment of potential alternatives to antibiotics, Lux researchers identified three groups that describe biochemical functions and modes of administration. These were: eubiotics, targeted antimicrobial agents and vaccines.
Among those groups, Lux researchers looked at seven technologies aimed at promoting animal health while reducing the use of antibiotics in livestock production, the research paper said. These were: probiotics, prebiotics, organic acids, phytogenics, bacteriophages, antimicrobial peptides and vaccines.
For each technology, researchers assessed modes of action, the current landscape, key developers, the current state of evidence for efficacy by livestock type and current challenges and provided their take on effects and opportunities.
Eubotics were described as products that help regulate the gut environment or directly affect gut microflora to promote key health or performance outcomes, the paper said. This category included prebiotics, probiotics, organic acids and phytogenics.
Targeted antimicrobial therapies were those that select for a specific pathogen, group of pathogens or virulence factors. These therapies include bacteriophages and antimicrobial peptides.
Vaccines were defined as the introduction of attenuated or killed microorganisms, toxins, antibodies or cells to prevent disease by proactively activating the host’s immune response.
OVERUSE, MISUSE CRITICAL FACTORS
It’s no secret that overuse and misuse of human and animal antimicrobials are driving factors in increased resistance by bacteria, Lux said. The drugs are fed in low dosages to prevent illness, especially in disease-prone stages of production. Keeping animals healthy reduces death loss, reduces the need for stressful treatment once animals are sick and, thus, increases feed efficiency.
Admirable goals, to be sure, but since the drugs are administered in low dosages, bacteria have a chance to develop immunities, and problems with resistance multiply.
Producers must weigh the costs and efficacy issues of all antibiotic alternatives before deciding on a course of action to replace or reduce antibiotic use in their livestock, Lux said. And since antibiotic alternatives are in an early stage of adoption, uncertainty reigns.
Lux advised producers to consider health outcomes and decide which might be the best alternative for them.
CATTLE, BEEF RECAP
Fed cattle trading last week was seen at $104 to $106 per cwt on a live basis, down $3 from the previous week. Dressed-basis trading was reported at $165 to $166 per cwt, down $3 to $4.
The USDA choice cutout Monday was up $0.34 per cwt at $207.83, while select was down $2.91 at $188.49. The choice/select spread widened to $19.34 from $16.09 with 105 loads of fabricated product and 30 loads of trimmings and grinds sold into the spot market.
The USDA reported Monday that basis bids from livestock feeding operations in the Southern Plains were down $1 to $7 at $1.08 to $1.20 per bushel over the Dec CME futures contract, which settled at $4.17 3/4 a bushel, down $0.01 1/2.
There were no delivery notices against the Oct live cattle futures market Monday.
The CME Feeder Cattle Index for the seven days ended Friday was $133.70 per cwt, down $0.31. This compares with Monday’s Oct contract settlement of $133.70 per cwt, up $0.17 and the Nov close of $130.57, up $0.92.