FEEDING ANTIBIOTICS TO HEALTHY ANIMALS RISKS CHILDREN’S HEALTH

The influential American Academy of Pediatrics, which numbers 64,000 pediatricians, has added its voice to the growing movement of public health professionals who are demanding an end to the dangerous overuse of antibiotics in meat and poultry production.

A new technical report by Dr. Jerome A. Paulson and Dr. Theoklis E. Zaoutis of the AAP Council on Environmental Health and Committee on Infectious Diseases described how the widespread agricultural practice of dosing healthy, if overcrowded, livestock and poultry with antibiotics to induce weight gain and prevent disease has contributed to the proliferation of antibiotic-resistant microbes.

“Infants and children are affected by transmission of [antibiotic-resistant, disease-causing pathogens] through the food supply, direct contact with animals, and environmental pathways,” they wrote. “…For most [food-borne] infections, incidence was highest among children younger than 5 years.” And when antibiotics fail, these children are in a fight for their lives.

Paulson and Zaoutis took aim at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, whose guidelines urge meat producers to take voluntary measures to curb the use of antibiotics on well animals. “Because the lines between disease prevention and growth promotion are not always clear,” they wrote, “the current FDA policy may allow drug manufacturers to continue using ambiguous language on labels of antibiotic drugs.”

“The message is to change the practice of agribusiness, either through government changes or marketplace changes, so everybody is safer,” Paulson told CBS News. “I think if people vote with their pocketbooks, then industry will be required to change. Hopefully the USDA and the FDA will require them to change. I think this is something that with a large enough movement in society, the industry will be forced to change.”

Antibiotic-resistant bacteria cause about 23,000 deaths and 2 million illnesses in the U.S. each year, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And about one in five antibiotic-resistant infections are caused by germs from food and animals.

The public community’s demands for action intensified recently, when, according to the Reuters news agency, Chinese scientists reported that they had discovered a new “superbug” gene in people and pigs that could render useless “last resort” antibiotics called polymyxins. Medical professionals consider polymyxins, widely used in agriculture, the last line of defense against certain antibiotic-resistant pathogens that cause serious illness in humans.

What can families do reduce their risk?

Take antibiotics only when necessary and use them precisely as instructed by your doctor. Click here to learn more tips from the CDC about antibiotics use.

Children, who are especially vulnerable to pathogens, can be exposed to antibiotic-resistant bacteria by eating contaminated meat or through contact with the animals. Treat all meat as if it is contaminated: cook it thoroughly and avoid cross-contamination in the kitchen.

When shopping for meat, look for labels that confirm no antibiotics have been used on healthy animals. These include:

USDA Certified Organic

Certified Humane

Animal Welfare Approved

American Grassfed Association

Food Alliance Certified – Grassfed

Global Animal Partnership

When dining out, ask restaurants where they buy their meat and their suppliers’ antibiotics policies. Some fast food chains such as Panera have already begun serving meat exclusively from animals that have not been treated with antibiotics.

A Guide for First-Time Parents

You've survived 9 months of pregnancy. You've made it through the excitement of labor and delivery, and now you're ready to head home and begin life with your baby. Once home, though, you frantically realize you have no idea what you're doing!

These tips can help even the most nervous first-time parents feel confident about caring for a newborn in no time.

Getting Help After the Birth

Consider getting help during this time, which can be very hectic and overwhelming. While in the hospital, talk to the experts around you. Many hospitals have feeding specialists or lactation consultants who can help you get started nursing or bottle-feeding. In addition, nurses are a great resource to show you how to hold, burp, change, and care for your baby.

For in-home help, you might want to hire a baby nurse or a responsible neighborhood teenager to help you for a short time after the birth. Your doctor or the hospital can be good resources for finding information about in-home help, and might even be able to make a referral to home health agencies.

In addition, relatives and friends often want to help. Even if you disagree on certain things, don't dismiss their experience. But if you don't feel up to having guests or you have other concerns, don't feel guilty about placing restrictions on visitors.

Handling a Newborn

If you haven't spent a lot of time around newborns, their fragility may be intimidating. Here are a few basics to remember:

• Wash your hands (or use a hand sanitizer) before handling your baby. Newborns don't have a strong immune system yet, so they are susceptible to infection. Make sure that everyone who handles your baby has clean hands.

• Be careful to support your baby's head and neck. Cradle the head when carrying your baby and support the head when carrying the baby upright or when you lay your baby down.

• Be careful not to shake your newborn, whether in play or in frustration. Shaking that is vigorous can cause bleeding in the brain and even death. If you need to wake your infant, don't do it by shaking — instead, tickle your baby's feet or blow gently on a cheek.

• Make sure your baby is securely fastened into the carrier, stroller, or car seat. Limit any activity that could be too rough or bouncy.

• Remember that your newborn is not ready for rough play, such as being jiggled on the knee or thrown in the air.

Dogs and cats help babies' health, study finds

Fido the dog and Ginger the cat need not worry about being replaced by a new baby — in fact, they could be helping parents raise healthier children.

A new study finds that children who lived with dogs or cats during their first year of life got sick less frequently than kids from pet-free zones. The study, published in Monday's edition of the journal Pediatrics, provides fresh evidence for the counterintuitive notion that an overly clean environment may not be ideal for babies.

Sharing a home with a pet may be an early form of cross-training for the body's defense systems. Previous research has shown that owning a cat or dog was associated with less risk of gastroenteritis in young children.

Studies also suggest that the dirt — and microbes — brought indoors by pets could bolster the communities of helpful bacteria, yeast and other microscopic creatures that live in a developing child's body.

For instance, a paper presented last month at a meeting of the American Society for Microbiology showed that mice fed dust from homes with dogs were less likely than other mice to contract respiratory syncytial virus, which is thought to play a role in the development of childhood asthma. In addition, the composition of microbes in their guts was significantly different from that of mice that were not exposed to doggy dust.

For the new study, European researchers tracked the health of 397 Finnish children born between September 2002 and May 2005. When the infants were 9 weeks old, parents began keeping weekly diaries to document a number of indicators of their children's health, including runny noses, coughs and ear infections. Parents also noted when their babies were given antibiotics. When the children celebrated their first birthdays, the parents were asked to complete a questionnaire.

Overall, the researchers found that cats and dogs were linked to a reduced incidence of various types of illness. The effect was stronger for dogs than for cats: Babies who lived with dogs were 31% more likely to be in good health than their counterparts who didn't, and babies with cats had a 6% advantage over those without feline family members.

The children with pet dogs were 44% less likely to develop ear infections and 29% less likely to have used antibiotics during their first year, the report said.

Here's where the plot thickened: Although living with a cat or dog was correlated with good health, the benefit was biggest when those pets weren't around the house very much.

In cat-owning households, babies whose cats were indoors more than 16 hours a day were healthy 70.8% of the time. But in homes where the cat was inside for less than six hours a day, babies were healthy 78.2% of the time. For the sake of comparison, young children who lived in cat-free zones were healthy 66.1% of the time.

A similar pattern held for dogs: Kids with homebody canines were healthy 72.2% of the time, and that figure rose to 75.7% for children whose dogs spent fewer than six hours indoors each day. In dogless households, babies were healthy 64.8% of the time.

The researchers offered a possible explanation for the puzzling pattern: Pets that spent more time outdoors brought more dirt into their homes, giving babies more opportunities to encounter it. That exposure could have caused their immune systems to mature faster than they would have otherwise, they wrote.

Until now, studies on the ways pets influence human health have largely focused on allergies, not illness, said Dr. Danelle Fisher, vice chair of pediatrics atSt. John's Health Center in Santa Monica, who wasn't involved in the study.

"It's more support in a growing body of evidence that exposure to pets early in life can stimulate the immune system to do a better job of fighting off infection," Fisher said.

The new findings could help assuage parents-to-be who worry about the health consequences of exposing their infant to a pet.

"What I always tell them is this: It's actually very helpful to have a cat or dog around because we tend to see less allergies," Fisher said. "And now I can tell them we've even seen less chance of upper respiratory infection in the first year of life."

 Author,

Amina Khan.