The Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD), a DEFRA executive agency, held a liaison meeting with consumer bodies on the semi-palindromic date of 20.02.02. Consumer bodies were a bit thin on the ground. The National Council of Women of Great Britain, however, was well represented by Judy Brander and Dawn Ferguson, who came well briefed with plenty of interesting and awkward questions. Also with plenty of awkward questions were Alison Craig of PAN-UK (Pesticide Action Network - UK) and the ubiquitous Dr. John Godfrey. He wears so many hats that I am not sure which body he represented. The Editor of Consumer News attended for NCF, and David Atkins for the Food Standards Agency (FSA).
I am sure everyone knows what Coccsidiostats are except me. Happily a document supplied at the meeting contained a glossary of terms from which I learned that Coccsidiostats are products used for the control of coccsidiosis, a protozoa causing diarrhoea and dysentery. Coccsidiosis seems to be a condition you would wish to avoid if you were a chicken.
The question was asked ‘how confident can we be in eating imported poultry, particularly liver products?' It seems the answer is ‘not very confident' as the VMD admitted that investigations were taking too long. The Foot and Mouth crisis had prevented resources being directed to this monitoring but it was now back to normal and a pilot scheme in slaughterhouses was to be launched in March to speed up results dramatically. The plan for 2002 is to double the amount of testing. The VMD thinks that only small amounts of poultry liver products are imported, under the non-statutory surveillance scheme of the Veterinary Residues Committee.
There was also discussion about the authorisation of food additives and veterinary medicines. Food additives have been authorised since the 1970s and are being evaluated as individual products in the EU in much the same way as veterinary medicines. The VIVID is saying to the EU that Coccsidiostats should be evaluated as veterinary medicines and the FSA agrees.
Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic once used by salmon farmers, now prohibited. One Shetland salmon farmer caught using it was fined £6,000, a record for such an offence.
Tests on 175 farmed salmon last year showed one with traces of Ivermectin. The same level of testing is planned for this year. Imported salmon is also tested under the non-statutory scheme but the numbers tested are very small. Naturally we asked why, and it is a simple matter of lack of resources. All agreed the test samples should be much larger and all bodies concerned have been pleading for the resources necessary.
We were told that the surveillance in the UK under the non-statutory scheme was not being increased, though the EU was becoming much more active in insisting that countries which sold into the EU should have surveillance schemes at least as good as those inside the EU. In fact this is one of the problems facing countries which hope to join the enlarged EU.
Mr. Atkins told us that from 13 March no animal products from China would be allowed into the EU. The difficulty was in answering the questions ‘what is an animal product?' and ‘what is China?' For instance does it include Singapore and Hong Kong?
Britain imports 40% of its honey from China and he explained that 60% of samples of this honey had been contaminated with unacceptable levels of residues (see page 12). Most blended honey had an element of Chinese honey which was why it had been taken off the shelves.
Over-use results in surprisingly swift resistance and recent research shows that this resistance remains permanent and does not gradually disappear when the practice ceases. Most antibiotics become ineffective in time. Two are still allowed. We should ban them now said Dr. Godfrey.
Within the EU five growth promoters are still allowed though all will be phased out by 2006. None are based on human antibiotics. We were told that trends in farming are away from growth promoters.
A paper given out at the meeting contained details of sales of antimicrobial products used as veterinary medicines, growth promoters and coccidiostats last year in the UK. It showed that sales to wholesalers increased by 9.5% though there were some decreases. Dr. Godfrey was concerned at this increase. Too much use soon produced resistance.
One startling statistic was that the sales of coccidiostats had gone up by 356% !! It had been decreasing since 1994. The VMD thought that the reason for this was not that there had been any great increase but that previous figures had been incomplete. We suggested that the VMD should ask those who know i.e. vets, what was really going on.
Judy Brander explained that her organisation was worried that increased resistance to treatments made the task of control more and more difficult. The VMD replied that all products for treatment had to be licensed and were fully effective at the time of the licence but they were aware that, over time, efficacy could decrease. Passive reporting occurred, meaning that vets only reported when products did not seem to be working as well as they used to.
It was felt that vetting should be more proactive. The VIVID was asked to keep a close eye on the advertising of veterinary products, particularly where they were directed to farmers and pet owners rather than veterinary practitioners. The VMD explained that there was no legislation in the EU concerning advertising of veterinary products. In this respect the legislation for medicines for human use was much better.
Mrs Brander asked about products authorised for use as vaccines in case of Foot and Mouth outbreaks. These were available but whether or not to use them was a decision for the Chief Veterinary Surgeon.
Everyone who attended was grateful for the opportunity to express views and concerns in the knowledge that they would be taken seriously and acted upon where possible.
back to menu
Click Logo to Return to
Main Magazine Index