ANIMALS ON DRUGS - Foodopoly: The Battle Over the Future of Food and Farming in America - page 88

The FDA continues to be conflicted. It is unwilling to completely ban the dangerous and inappropriate
use of antibiotics. And it currently insists that industry voluntary efforts will address this public health is-
sue. Wallinga says, “Politics is holding public health hostage. The FDA has effectively done nothing over
thirty years after first labeling this a problem. We need federal legislation—PAMTA—despite the fact that
it makes the big pork producers unhappy. Unfortunately, they scream louder than the AMA and the doctors
calling for PAMTA to pass.”
Failure to pass the Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act is not surprising. The drug-
health industry spent $2.3 billion lobbying from 1998 to 2011, and of this amount, $1.5 billion was from
the pharmaceutical manufacturing group. Total campaign contributions to federal elected officials between
1990 and 2011 amounted to $131 million, with 66 percent going to Republicans and 34 percent to Demo-
crats.
The Animal Health Institute (AHI) is one of the trade associations that lobby for the veterinary medicine
side of the drug industry. Among the gimmicks used by the AHI is Celebrity Pet Night, where for the past
fifteen years members of Congress and their staff are invited to a reception to mix and mingle with celebrit-
ies. The event features a Cutest Pets on Capitol Hill photo contest. This is just one example of how the
animal drug industry hides behind the cuddly image of medicine for household pets.
AHI also represents companies that have promoted the use of another dangerous feed additive: arsenic.
The FDA approved the use of the arsenic-based drug roxarsone as a feed additive in 1944, when Franklin
D. Roosevelt was president. Industry researchers had discovered that roxarsone promoted growth, in-
creased feed efficiency, and gives the appearance of health by brightening the color of flesh. Between 1995
and 2000, 70 percent of broiler chicken producers used roxarsone feed additives. Its use is prohibited only
in organic chicken production.
Arsenic is an element that does not break down in the environment; instead, it combines with other ele-
ments to form compounds. Nearly 90 percent of the arsenic fed to chickens is excreted through urine and
feces. An estimated 2 million pounds of roxarsone are fed to chickens each year, contaminating much of
the estimated 26 billion to 51 billion pounds of waste that broiler chickens produce each year. Most of that
waste is applied to fields as fertilizer, causing arsenic to leach into soil, water, and crops.
Arsenic-based feed additives are also used in the turkey and hog industries to prevent disease and pro-
mote growth, but there is far less research on the public health and environmental impacts from its use in
these industries. One study has found evidence of inorganic arsenic in waste lagoons on large hog opera-
tions where arsenic feed additives are used. 17
Poultry farmers also use arsenic to control a common poultry disease known as coccidiosis that is
caused by the coccidian parasite. Affected birds experience a variety of symptoms, including diarrhea, im-
paired food absorption and growth, immune suppression, and even death. While not all chickens infected
with coccidia die, their meat and egg production is impaired, leading to significant economic losses.
Arsenic poses problems both in the chicken meat itself and in chicken waste. U.S. chicken consumption
has increased significantly over the last several decades, and new studies demonstrate that arsenic residues
may be higher in chicken meat than has been previously known. More research is necessary to understand
just how much arsenic Americans consume in chicken. Arsenic is also present in chicken waste, where it
converts to more dangerous forms than those originally used in the feed.
Chronic exposure to arsenic is associated with increased risk for several kinds of cancer, including blad-
der, kidney, lung, liver, and prostate. It is also associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease and
diabetes, as well as neurological problems in children. Each exposure contributes to a person's total arsenic
exposure, and sources such as the American Cancer Society urge the importance of reducing arsenic ex-
posure from any venue as much as possible.