First survey on the use of antibiotics in pig and poultry production in the Red river delta region of Vietnam
Food and Public Health 2013, 3(5): 247-256
DOI: 10.5923/j.fph.20130305.03
First Survey on the Use of Antibiotics in Pig and Poultry
Production in the Red River Delta Region of Vietnam
Dang Pham Kim1,2,*, Claude Saegerman3, Caroline Douny2, Ton Vu Dinh4, Bo Ha Xuan5, Binh Dang Vu5,
Ngan Pham Hong6, Marie -Louise Scippo2
1Central Laboratory, Faculty of Animal Science &Aquaculture, Hanoi University of Agriculture, Vietnam
2Department of Food Sciences, Laboratory of Food Analysis, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, CART (Centre of Analytical Research and
Technology), University of Liège, Belgium
3Department of infectious and parasitic diseases, Research unit of Epidemiology and risk analysis applied to veterinary sciences (UREAR),
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Liège, Belgium
4Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Rural Development, Hanoi University of Agriculture, Vietnam
5Department of Animal genetics and breeding, Faculty of Animal Science &Aquaculture, Hanoi University of Agriculture, Vietnam
6Department of Veterinary Public Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Hanoi University of Agriculture, Vietnam
Abstract In Vietnam where epidemics occur regularly in an ima l production,the farme rs considerantibiotics as one ofthe
solutions to fight against livestock diseases, thus the risk of abuse, even illegal use of antibiotics in livestock is very high.
However, this is a recent issue and has not yet been thoroughly investigated. A cross-sectional study on the use of antibiotics
in pig and poultry production as well as the farmer’s knowledge on the danger of the antibiotic use in three different anima l
production systems (farm household, s emi-industrial and industrial) was conducted from July 2009 to March 2010 on 270
entities, in 3 representative localities of the Red River Delta (RRD). The results showed that a large volume of antibiotics was
used arbitrary in all anima l production systems. Animals were not only treated for acute diseases, but also for disease
prevention, and for growth promotion. At least 45 antibiotics of more than 10 classes were used. Fifteen antibiotics were used
in pig and poultry feed. For diseases treatment and prevention, antibiotics were used abusively and even illegally (e.g.
chloramphenicol) by both farmers and veterinarians. The findings of this survey will permit developing new strategies for
prudent use of antibiotics in livestock in Vietnam. These results will help not only to strengthen issues such as veterinary
networks; antibiotics use guidance, residues monitoring systems and food safety, but also to improve awareness and ethics of
producers and veterinary drug sellers.
Ke ywo rds Antibiotics, Animal Production, Veterinary Drugs, Red River Delta, Vietnam
development strategies, it results in some new problems such
as environmental pollution, as well as frequently occurring
1. Introduction
and uncontrolled epidemic diseases [2-4]. In 2003, during
In Vietnam, a country with more than 85 million
the avian influen za crisis, about 44 million poultry have
inhabitants and a very high population density, especially in
either died because of the disease or have been slaughtered
the Red River Delta (RRD), urbanization andindustrializa
because of the crisis. The Po rcine Reproductive and
tion increase rapidly. The demands of foodstuff from animal
Respiratory Syndrome (PRRS), and the Foot-and-Mouth
origin for do mes tic markets are more and more growing. The
disease have also been a constant threat causing regular
annual average consumption of animal products per
outbreaks in recent years[5]. In 2006, an epidemiological
Vietnamese capita in 2009 is 35 kg of carcass meat; 3 kg of
analysis about swine diseases in Northern Vietna m based on
milk and 80 eggs[1]. The development objective by 2020 is
4000 declarations highlighted a high incidence of porcine
56 kg of carcass meat, over 10 kg of milk and over 140
respiratory disease (50% of total reported cases). The
eggs [2]. As a consequence, the increase of intensive
proportion of digestive tract infections in piglets and
livestock husbandry models is an indispensable trend in the
Vietnamese context. However, because of the low level of
hygiene in livestock husbandry,the inadequacy ofhusbandry
zone planning and the lack of state management and
reproductive disorders in newly raised e xo tic sows were 30%
and 10% of total reported cases, respectively [6].
Facing this situation, producers consider antibiotics, used
for disease prevention and therapeutic purposes,as one ofthe
solutions to fight diseases in livestock. In fact, antibiotics are
the mos t common registered drugs (70% of all veterinary
drugs) used in an ima ls in Vietnam[7]. However, the
knowledge of famers is still very restricted while the state
* Corresponding author:
[email protected] (Dang Pham Kim)
Copyright © 2013 Scientific & Academic Publishing. All Rights Reserved
248
Dang Pham Kim et al.: First Survey on the Use of Antibiotics in Pig and Poultry
Production in the Red River Delta Region of Vietnam
inspection and management haven’t met practical demands
yet[8]. The use of antibiotics in animal production by
farmers in a casual, unmethodical manner, without any
veterinary prescription and supervision, may lead to the
presence of residues in anima l products and to antimicrobial
resistance[9-11]. These residues cause a danger for public
health[12], and bad influences on environment and animal
therapeutic sciences. A high proportion of the antibiotics
used in an ima l production is excreted in urine or faeces and
are found in manure[13]. When manure is applied on lands,
these antibiotics can enter surface and/or groundwater and
potentially alter the environment microbial ecosystem
[14-16]. It could also contribute to the presence of antibiotic-
resistant zoonotic agents and bacteria in the food chain
[17-22]. The situation in Vietnam is amp lified by the
integrated agriculture-aquaculture (IAA) farming system
encouraged by the government, wh ich often involves an
aquaculture system that is sustained through human and
livestock waste. This creates an environment that greatly
increases the ease through which antibiotic resistance genes
can be spread[23]. These antibiotic resistance genes can be
easily transferred to both human and anima l pathogens,
creating a severe health risk by greatly limiting the
antibiotics that can be used to treat infectious diseases[24].
consumers. Therefore, this problem has been discussed on
several occasions in meetings of the Vietna m National
Ass embly[25-27]. However, until now, there is no
systematic monitoring neither is there any regulation and
control strategy on antibiotic use in food animals, and litt le
information is availab le on antibiotic use.
For the reasons above, as well as to contribute to a
long-term strategy of the Vietnamese Government on food
safety, the collection of detailed information about
antibiotics used in animal production is necessary. The aim
of this study was to provide information on the use of
antibiotics in different pig and poultry production s ystems in
the RRD of Vietna m. Th is info rmation can assist new
strategies in the control of antibiotic use in pig and poultry
production in Vietnam.
2. Experimental
A cross-sectional study of antibiotic use in pig and
poultry production as well as farmer’s knowledge about
food safety related to the use of veterinary drugs in the
region of the RRD was designed and conducted from Ju ly
2009 to March 2010, on 270 entit ies representing 3 different
systems of livestock husbandry: farm household, s emi-
industrial and industrial, in 3 representative localities of the
RRD (Hai Duong, Thai Binh and Ha Noi) (Fig. 1)(Table 1).
In recent years, Vietna m had many alerts about veterinary
drug residues in general and antibiotics in particular. These
alerts have caused warnings to authorities and alarmed
Ta b l e 1. Est imat ion of the tot al number of pig and poultry production sy st em s inthe RRD
Provinces
Hai Duong
Total ( by production
Syst em of animal production
Industrial
Animal species
Ha Noi
10
10
10
10
Thai Binh
system)
30
30
30
30
150
270
Pig
Chicken
Pig
Chicken
Pig, chicken
10
10
10
10
50
90
10
10
10
10
50
90
Semi-industrial
Farm household (* )
Total ( by localit ies)
(*): only households who have both the pig and chicken
50
90
Fi gure 1. Map of Red River Delt a region indicatingthe three represent at ive localit ies where the samples were collect ed (Hai Duong, Thai Binh and Ha
Noi)
Food and Public Health 2013, 3(5): 247-256
249
2.1. Sampling Area
pigs or 10 sows for the pig and 200 anima ls for the poultry.
The Red River Delta reg ion is a flat plain formed by the
Red River and its distributaries join ing in the Thai Binh
River in Northern Vietna m. It is an agricu lturally rich area
and densely populated (1225 persons/km2, 4.8 t imes higher
than the average population density of Vietna m) . It includes
the capital, Hanoi, and 10 others surrounding provinces (Fig.
1). The pig and poultry production of this region are the most
developed of Vietnam (about 50% of the whole country
production) with 7.0 million pigs, 66.5 million poultry in
2008[28].
2.3. Information Collection
Questionnaires, contents ofwhich were compiled after test
survey and adjustment, were used for direct interviews of
owners, technical collaborators or veterinary doctors of the
farm. The information of veterinary drugs, antibiotic
components and active elements which weren’t noted in the
farm were tracked down and collected through labels on
re medy packs or jars left around anima l housing or at local
veterinary med icine pharmacy. In order to ensure the
objectivity of full re medy use information exploitation, all
householders’ names and addresses were kept in security
through encoding addresses just at the survey time .
Three representative provinces were selected not only for
their production capacity but also representative of their
geographic location and population density: Hanoi (3344
2
km ), Hai Duong (1661 km2) and Thai Binh (1542 km2). The
In this survey, antibiotics are considered to be used
abusively when they are used unscientifically and incorrectly
(under/overdosing, no exact diagnosis or result of a
susceptibility testing …).
population density of Hanoi, Hai Duong and Thai Binh are
1943; 1030 and 1155 persons/km2, respectively. The
population of pig and poultry is the largest in Hanoi (1.2 106
pigs and 15.7 106 poultry), followed by Hai Duong (0.6 106
pigs and 6.9 106 poultry) and Thai Binh (1.0 106 pig and 7.9
106 poultry)[28].
2.4. Statistical Analysis
All data and information were registered and checked
using Microsoft Excel 2003. The data were analysed
statistically and compared, in 2x2 and 2x3 contingency
tables, using the chi-square test and the Fisher's Exact Test,
when the chi-square test was not relevant, using the SAS®
Software 9.0. A Fisher exact test was performed using the
data of number of production system using antibiotics for
disease prevention, therapy or growth promotion (Tab le 2a),
in order to assess if there is a significant difference with
p<0.05) in the use ofantibiotics between the three production
systems (household farms , semi-industrial and industrial
production systems), as well as to assess if there is a
significant difference in the use of antibiotics (total of the
three production systems) between the different production
stages (piglets, fattening pigs and sows for the pig
production) and production systems (breeding poultry,
broilers and laying hens for the poultry production) (Tab le
2b).
2.2. Sampling Me th od
In each province, on the basis of the list provided by the
local agricultural office (for industrial and semi-industrial
systems), as well as from the lists provided by local
veterinarians, 50 farm households who have both pig and
poultry, 20 s e mi-industrial farms (10 for pig and 10 for
poultry) and 20 industrial fa rms (10 for pig and 10 for
poultry) were selected by random s amp ling for the survey.
Official local agricultural criteria were used to classify the
different farming systems.Farm household systemdisplays a
s mall number of animals, primarily for ho me consumption or
local markets or ceremonial use. Livestock is raised in the
garden, near the house of the farmer, and are fed with
available vegetables, product and by-products of agriculture,
or leftovers of the family kitchen (there is no supplementary
feeding). Semi-industrial systems are farms with at least 50
Ta b l e 2a. Antibiotics use as gr o wt h promoter, for disease prevention and therapy purpose in three different pig or poultry production sy st em s (in % of
production systems using antibiotics)
Percentage of production system using antibiotic
Growth promoter
Disease prevention
Th e ra py
Livestock
Farm
Semi-
Farm
household
(n=150)
Semi -
industrial
(n=30)
Farm
Semi-
household industrial
Industrial
(n=30)
Industrial
(n=30)
Industrial
(n=30)
household
(n=150)
industrial
(n=30)
(n=150)
(n=30)
Piglets
Fatteningpigs
Sows*
38.7a
31.3 a
16.2 a
43.3b
40.0b
20.0b
63.3c
66.7c
43.3c
13.3I
4.7 I
7.6I
10.0 I, II
13.3 I,II
3.3 I
30.0II
26.7II
16.7I
54.7α
54.7α
14.3α
43.3α
43.3α
10.0α
66.7α
66.7α
30.0α
Breeding
chicken
Broilers
Laying Hens
11.3a
33.3b
53.3b
20.0 I
53.3II
53.3II
10.7α
30.0β
23.3αβ
8.7 a
0.0a
26.7 b
0.0a
43.3b
0.0a
11.3I
2.7I
6.7 I
30.0II
13.3II
4.0α
0.7α
23.3β
16.7β
23.3β
13.3β
6.7I,II
*: Only 105 household farm s were having breeding sows from the 150 household farm s investigated
a, b, c : the % of production systems using antibiotics for growth stimulation without the same letter in the same row di ffer significantly (P < 0·05)
I, II : the % of production systems using antibiotics for disease prevention without the same roman number in the same row di ffe r significantly (P < 0·05)
α, β : the % of production systems using antibiotics for therapy without the same symbol in the same row di ffe r significantly (P < 0·05)
250
Dang Pham Kim et al.: First Survey on the Use of Antibiotics in Pig and Poultry
Production in the Red River Delta Region of Vietnam
Ta b l e 2b. Antibiotics use as growth promoter, for disease prevention and therapy purpose in three different types of pig and poultry products (in % of
production sy stem s using antibiotics)
Percentage of production systems using antibiotics
Livestock
Growt h promoter
(n= 210)
42.9a
Disease prevention
Therapy
(n= 210)
54.8a
(n= 210)
15.2a
9.0a
Piglets
Fattening pigs
37.6a
54.8a
*
Sows
21.8c
8.5a
16.4b
Breeding chicken
Broilers
Laying hens
20.5α
29.5α
13.3β
4.8γ
15.2α
16.2α
9.5αβ
0.0β
4.8β
* Except for sows: n = 165
a, b, c: the % of production systems using antibiotics for pig production without the same letter in the same column di ffer significantly (P < 0·05)
α, β, γ: the % of production systems using antibiotics for chicken production without the same letter in the same column di ffe r significantly (P < 0·05)
Table 3. Antibiotic use in pig andpoultry production in Red River Delta expressed in number of entities having used the antibiotic at least once
Use frequency (expressedin number ofentities)
Grou p
Antibiotic
Growt h promoter (n=210)
Disease prevention (n=210)
Therapy (n= 210)
Chicken
Pig
-
-
-
-
-
-
6
-
-
Chicken
Pig
-
3
-
3
5
3
7
2
1
-
Chicken
Pig
1
78
13
4
33
17
19
18
1
Bycomycin
Gentamicin
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
5
-
5
2
3
8
31
-
-
5
12
1
2
-
3
9
13
-
Kanamycin
Neomycin
Aminoglycosides
Spectinomycin
Streptomycin
Amoxicillin(i)
Ampicillin
Cefotaxime
Cefalexin
Beta-lactams
-
-
-
-
1
-
-
1
Cepharadin
-
-
Penicillin
-
-
2
1
1
14
Danofloxacin
Enrofloxacin(f)
Flumequine
Norfloxacin
Maduramycin
Monensin(r) (p)
Salinomycin(r) (p)
Erythromycin
Josamycin
-
-
-
-
3
6
38
-
-
-
-
-
-
14
-
6
-
-
-
1
1
-
10
-
17
-
-
-
-
-
-
5
-
5
-
-
-
-
-
2
62
2
16
-
-
-
-
-
Fluoroquinolons
-
Ionophores
Macrolides
5
13
-
-
-
Kitasamycin
Spiramycin(r)
Tiamulin(i)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
29
-
-
5
4
-
4
6
9
-
-
-
1
7
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
72
-
1
1
-
3
20
78
-
-
5
2
15
2
-
1
23
2
4
2
9
1
11
13
11
-
2
-
1
1
-
8
-
5
1
2
-
1
-
1
1
1
11
5
-
-
-
5
2
1
20
3
-
3
12
1
6
5
8
1
5
8
7
-
12
94
6
17
21
1
1
2
-
2
Tylosin
Chloramphenicol(f)
Florfenicol
Fenicols
Thiamphenicol
Sulfachlorpyrazin
Sulfadimidin
Sulfamethoxazole
Sulfaquinoxaline
Sulfaguanidine
Chlortetracycline
Doxycyline
Sulfonamides
1
12
31
4
-
24
-
56
-
Tetracyclines
Others
Oxyt et racycline
Tet racycline(i)
Bambermycin
Lincomycin
BMD(*)
9
-
12
-
-
1
-
22
-
-
Colistin(i)
44
-
6
Diclazuril(i)
Toltrazuril
-
2
Diaverindine
Trimethoprim
Number of different antibiotics used
-
-
9
-
-
11
9
16
31
-
4
25
4
16
29
-
6
33
(*): Bacitracin Methylene-Disalicylate -: not used (f): illegal use and (r): restricted use in veterinary medicine (MARD 2009d). (p ): illegal use as growth promoter for pig
and (i) : illegal use as growth promoter for both chicken and pig (MARD 2006, 2009b,c
)
Food and Public Health 2013, 3(5): 247-256
251
3. Results and Discussion
the use of antibiotics for disease prevention is lower in farm
households than in industrial systems (Table 2a).
3.1. Identification of Antibiotics Us ed in Pig and Poultry
Produc tion in the RRD
When the antibiotics are used for therapy, a significant
difference (p<0.05) between farm household and industrial
production systems is observed only for poultry production
(breeding poultry, broilers or laying hens), but not for pig
production (Table 2a).
In a general manner, antib iotics are less used in farm
households, and equally used in both s emi-industrial and
industrial production systems, except for growth promotion
purpose in pig production, where the industrial s ystems are
the largest antibiotic users (up to 66.7 % for fattening pigs),
and for disease prevention purpose in bro ilers, where farm
households and s emi-industrial production systems use less
antibiotics than industrial systems (11.3% and 6.7% against
30.0% respectively) (Table 2a).
In pig production, the use of antibiotics is not significantly
different between the three kinds of age groups (piglets,
fattening pigs and sows), when the antibiotics are used for
disease prevention. On the contrary, the use is significantly
different (p<0.05), when the antibiotics are used for therapy
or for growth promotion (Table 2b).
For growth promotion and therapy, antibiotics are less
used in sows than in piglets, and are equally used for pig lets
and fattening pigs (Table 2b).
In poultry production,the use ofantib iotics is significantly
different (p<0.05) between the three production systems
(breeding poultry, broilers and laying hens), for all
considered purposes (disease prevention, therapy or growth
promotion) (Table 2b).
Growth promoters are equally used in breeding poultry
and broilers and not used in laying hens.Antibiotics are mo re
used in breeding poultry for disease prevention, equally used
for therapy of breeding poultry and broilers, and less used for
therapy of laying hens (Table 2b).
If we consider the overall use of antibiotics for the 3
purposes, in the 3 production systems, the number of farms
which do not use antibiotics are the following: 2 out of 150
farm households, 13 out 30 s e mi-industrial pig farms , 2 out
of 30 semi-industrial poultry farms , 1 out of 30 industrial pig
farms and 6 out of 30 semi-industrial poultry fa rms .
Besides the non-compliance with dosage, length of
treatment and withdrawal time, the number of different
antibiotics used in each production system appeared to be
high.The data in the Table 4 showthat up to sixcategories of
different antibiotics can be used in a production system for
therapy of pig and poultry. The rate of breeders who used
from 1 to 2 antibiotics is high for all kinds of livestock and
production systems. Except for breeding poultry raised in
s emi-industrial systems, the rate of farmers using from 3 to 6
antibiotics is higher than those using 1 or 2 antibiotics
(16.7% compared with 13.3%). For fattening pigs, the rate of
farmers using from 3 to 6 antib iotics in the three production
systems (farm household, s emi-industrial and industrial) is
rather high (20%; 6.7% and 26.7% respectively).
At least 45 antibiotics representing more than 10 classes
were used in pig and poultry production in the provinces
studied, not only for treatment of diseases, but als o for
disease prevention and to promote growth.
For disease prevention purpose, 31 and 25 different
antibiotics were found to be used in poultry and pig
production, respectively, wh ile the number of different
antibiotics used for curative purpose in pig and poultry were
33 and 29 respectively (Table 3). These data show that in pig
production, antibiotics from aminoglycosides, tetracyclines,
fenicols, beta-lactams and fluoroquinolones groups are the
mos t commonly used for mos tly disease treatment, and to a
lesser extent for disease prevention. In poultry, antibiotics
from
sulfonamides,
beta-lactams,
tetracyclines,
aminoglycosides and ionophores, as well as colistin are
commonly used mos tly for disease prevention and to a lesser
e xten t for therapy.
For both prophylactic and therapeutic purposes, mos t
producers use antibiotics to prevent infection diseases not
according to the prophylactic or therapeutic dosage, length
of treatment and withdrawal t ime indicated on the product
label, but mos t of them use a higher dosage and don’t respect
the recommendations of the drug producer.
In the 45 antibiotics identified in this survey, colistin,
chlortetracycline and oxytetracycline are the mos t
commonly used. Chlortetracycline was overall used for
growth promoter purpose, oxytetracycline for disease
prevention and therapy, while colistin was used for all three
purposes. In particular, colistin was indicated for prevention
and therapy of gastrointestinal disorders in piglets and
poultry caused by gram negative bacteria (in particular E.
coli and Salmonella spp).
3.2.Antibiotic Use in Different Systems of Li vestock
It appeared that the use of antibiotics as growth promoters
in pig production was significantly different (p<0.05) in the
three production systems, displaying the following order:
industrial production system > s e mi-industrial production
system > farm household. In breeding poultrys and broilers
production, growth promoters are significantly less used in
farm households (11.3% and 8.7% respectively) than in
s emi-industrial and industrial production systems (up to 53.3%
of the farm for breeding poultrys), for which there is no
significant difference (Table 2a).
The use of antibiotics for disease prevention is
significantly different with p<0.01 for p iglets and with
p<0.05 in farm households than in s emi-industrial or
industrial production systems for fattening pigs, breeding
poultry, broilers and laying hens, but not in sows (Table 2a).
In piglets, fattening pigs, breeding poultry and laying hens,
252
Dang Pham Kim et al.: First Survey on the Use of Antibiotics in Pig and Poultry
Production in the Red River Delta Region of Vietnam
Ta b l e 4. Number of antibiotics used in each production sy stem (in % of production systems)
Percentage of production systems using antibiotics
Number of antibiotic
Livestock
Piglets
Farm household
(n=150)
45.3
Semi-industrial
(n=30)
56.7
used
Industrial (n=30)
No use
1 to 2
3 to 6
No use
1 to 2
3 to 6
No use
1 to 2
3 to 6
No use
1 to 2
3 to 6
No use
1 to 2
3 to 6
No use
1 to 2
3 to 6
33.3
43.3
23.4
33.3
40.0
26.7
70.0
23.3
6.7
46.0
36.7
8.7
6.7
45.3
56.7
Fatteningpigs
Sows
34.7
36.7
20.0
6.7
85.7
90.0
12.4
10.0
1.9
89.3
7.3
3.3
96.0
2.7
1.3
99.3
0.7
0
0
70.0
13.3
16.7
76.7
16.7
6.7
76.7
16.7
6.7
Breeding chicken
Broilers
76.7
13.3
10.0
86.7
10.0
3.3
83.3
3.3
Layinghens
13.4
3.3. Veterinary Ac ti vities and Issues Linked to FoodS afety in the Use of Antibiotics
Ta b l e 5. Vet erinary act ivit ies and issues linkedtofood safety concerning the antibiotics use, inthree different pigand poultry production sy stem s in the Red
River Delta
Percentage of production system (%)
Criteria of assessment
Owner
Farm household Semi-industrial Industrial
Total
(∑n=270)
(n=150)
(n=60)
(n=60)
59.3a
39.3a
1.3a
95.0b
5.0b
0a
100.0b
0b
76.3
23.0
0.7
15.9
35.2
4.4
Veterinary
Local vet erinarian
Both of them
act ivit ies
0a
Experience
7.3a
13.3a
38.3a
6.7b
5.0b
40.0a
36.7a
13.3b
0b
Veterinary
act ivit ies
Drug seller
After sending samples
Vet erinarian
Others (friends, market ing, books and
newspapers...)
33.3a
0a
Basis of
choosing
drugs
39.3a
23.0
20a
36.7b
10.0a
21.5
P ercent age of production sy st em s respect ingthe withdrawal
t ime, in which:
41.3a
58.3b
73.3b
52.2
Required by purchasers
8.1a
37.1a
54.8a
72.7a
2.8a
8.6a
37.1a
54.3a
86.7a
1.9a
4.5a
56.8a
38.6a
81.7a
0a
7.1
43.3
49.6
77.8
1.9
76.7
1.4
3.3
16.7
23.3
37.8
8.1
18.9
6.3
Mot ivat ion of
Prot ect ing consumers
respect is:
Others (economic, weight gain)
P ercent age of production sy stem s in which :
Technical st aff
Use of
vet erinary
drugs in
compliance
wit h sanit ary
legislation
safety
information
sources are :
Medias (T V, Radio ...)
Friends andcolleagues
Drug sellers
85.3a
0.9a
61.5ab
1.9a
73.5b
2.0a
5.5a
0a
2.0a
Others (indicat ion on product labels)
Changing remedies
Selling quickly
Slaughtering & consuming in family
Destroying
5.5a
35b
22.4b
20.0a
40.0a
6.7a
21.3a
44.7a
8.0a
31.7a
18.3b
10.0a
26.7a
6.7a
What is do ne
wit h ill
livestock with
bad prognosis
16.0a
4.0a
18.3a
11.7a
3.3a
Feedingother animals
Others
6.0a
6.7a
5.6
a, b, c : Percentage of production system without the same letter in the same row di ffer significantly (P < 0·05)
Few animal raising householders are trained on veterinary strial production systems, veterinary activit ies and therapy
practices; however, they are themselves in charge of mos t are main ly assumed by the owners (95% of them for
veterinary activ ities such as vaccination,anima l prophylactic s emi-industrial farms and 100% for industrial farms), wh ile,
and treatment. Especially for the industrial and s emi-indu for farm households, about 60% of them undertake
Food and Public Health 2013, 3(5): 247-256
253
themselves the therapy of their anima ls and nearly 40% need permitted[38-41]. Nine and 11 different antibiotics are used
the assistance of animal health workers, veterinary for growth promotion in poultry and pig production,
technicians or para-veterinarians (Table 5).
respectively (Table 2), from which 3 (colistin, diclazuril and
The antibiotics were mainly chosen on the basis of the tetracycline) and 6 (amo xycillin, t iamulin, monensin,
experience of the farmer, or advice from representatives of salinomycin, colistin and tetracycline) antimicrobials,
pharmaceutical companies or local drug sellers[according to respectively, are not allowed by the Vietnamese legislation
symptoms told by farmers) (15.9% and 35.2% respectively). [38-41]. This result confirmthat, in spite of their absence on
Very few s a mples of ill animals are sent to laboratories for the list of permitted antibiotics for growth promotion, s ome
diagnosis orsusceptibility testing before therapy. This shows antibiotics are popularly used yet, especially colistin and
that the use of antibiotic by farmers without any veterinary chlortetracycline in pig feed, found in 78 and 72 pig farms
prescription and supervision is very frequent in this region. respectively. This use may be related to diarrhea and oedema
This can be explained by the fact that in practice, the leading in pig lets, one of the mos t co mmon diseases in Vietnam[42,
role and the actions of local veterinarians are limited. In each 43]. One study in Hai Duong[44] shows that diarrhea in p ig
commune, there is a livestock committee of 1 to 2 is very high (48%) and that this occurs in any season of the
responsible anima l health workers (usually para-vets). Most year.
of veterinarians are only concerned by comme rcia l act ivities
(distributor of feed, or veterinary drugs) or in the marketing worrisome in developing countries, where the antibiotic use
network of feed or drug companies.
is not tightly controlled and where few detailed information
The state of antibiotic use in anima l production is
The results of this survey reveal that overuse and illegal is availab le on these problems[9]. The results of this study
use of antibiotics in pig and poultry production in the region are completely consistent with the above statement of the
ofthe RRD is worrisome. At least 45 antib iotics of mo re than WHO. Antibiotics from the groups of aminoglycosides,
10 different classes were shown to be used: - fourteen tetracyclines, fenicols, beta-lactams and fluoroquinolones
antimicrobial growth promoters used as pig or poultry feed are the mos t commonly used for disease prevention and
additives, - thirty four antibiotics used for disease prevention treatment, mainly for therapy in pig production, while
(31 antibiotics in poultry production and 25 antibiotics in pig antibiotics from the groups of sulfonamides, beta-lactams,
production), - thirty six used for disease treatment (in which tetracyclines, aminoglycosides, ionophores, as well as
29 antibiotics in poultry production and 33 antibiotics in p ig colistin, are commonly used for poultry disease prevention
production).
and therapy,but mainly for disease prevention.The results of
Antimicrobial feed additives have been used worldwide in this study confirm that antibiotics listed here, and considered
animal production for many decades because of their as critically important for humans by WHO, are still
favourable economic effects in livestock. However, there has commonly used in anima l production. Allowed antibiotics
been an increasing public concern about the possible links were used but also banned substances, such as
between their use and the transfer of antibiotic resistant chloramphenicol and enrofloxacin, by both famers and
organisms and resistance genes to humans[29]. Through veterinarians. In other countries, such as for exa mp le
studying bacterial strains isolated from eggs in Greece, Australia, the pig industry is based on drugs of low
Papadopoulou et al[30] concluded that antibiotic-resistant importance to human health (e.g. tetracyclines, penicillins
strains might be transmitted to human by the consumption of (including amo xicillin and ampicillin) and sulfonamides).
eggs containing multiresistant bacteria. In addition, the Only two drugs ofh igh importance for humans (ceftiofur and
results of an other study on antibiotic resistance of co mmon virgin iamycin) can be used legally in p ig production[45].
foodborne pathogens isolated from major meat products[31] Moreover, tetracyclines, sulfonamides and tylosin were
indicated that meat can be a source of resistant strains, which shown to be commonly used these last years in pig
could potentially be spread to the community through the production not only in China, Russia and Southeast Asia, but
food chain. Many scientists agree on the fact that the use of also in the European Union[46] and in the Un ited States[47].
antibiotics in anima l production for growth promotion, A recent study carried out by Kools et al.[48] showed that
prophylaxis and treatment can lead either to the selection of tetracyclines, beta-lactams, and sulfonamides are the mos t
resistant bacteria, wh ich can be transmitted through the food used groups in anima l production in EU. In 2005,
chain[32, 33], orto the horizontaltransfer of resistance genes tetracyclines were the mos t prescribed antibiotics among the
to human pathogenic or commensal microflora[34]. So, the 1,320 tons used for anima l production in France[49]. In
use of antibiotics, both in human and anima ls should be comparison, about 12,650 tons of antimicrobials were used
avoided, as far as possible[35]. Due to the emergence of in 2007 in the USA in veterinary medicine[50], 40% of
cross-resistance to antibiotics that are used in human which were tetracyclines and about 13% of the total amount
med icine and also in animal infections, the European of antimicrobials was used as growth promoters.
Co mmission decided to totally ban antimicrobial growth
Livestock breeders have very low awareness of the
promoters since the 1st January 2006[36]. In contrast, reasonableness and safety of antibiotic use as well as of food
antimicrobial growth promoters continue to be authorized in safety. According to regulations and guidelines of the use of
the USA under the FDA regulation and controlled on a veterinary drugs, antibiotics should only be employed to
case-by-case basis[37]. Meanwh ile, in Vietna m, th is is still treat bacterial infections, respecting the dose, the length of
254
Dang Pham Kim et al.: First Survey on the Use of Antibiotics in Pig and Poultry
Production in the Red River Delta Region of Vietnam
treatment and the withdrawal t ime provided by the and ethics of producers and veterinary drug sellers as well as
manufacturer or indicated by the veterinarian. However, training of para-veterinarians and farmers, public awareness
referring to the Vietnamese veterinary ordinance and strength of surveillance systems in slaughterhouses.
promulgated in 2004[51], the vio lations on the veterinary
In conclusion, antibiotics have been used largely and even
activities of livestock breeders are very widespread. Their illegally (e.g. chloramphenicol) in both poultry and pig
use of antibiotics is very unmethodical and unscientific, production for disease prevention and treatment.
mainly based on their experiences or on advices from
veterinary drug sellers.
The results of this study show that, although the
appropriate withdrawal period is mentioned on the label of
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was financially supported by BTC (Belg ian
the antibiotic used, in practice, only about 52% of the
Technical Cooperation), the Belgian Un iversity Co mmission
farmers surveyed were respecting the withdrawal t ime, from
toward Development (CUD) and HUA. Thanks to all local
which 60%, 40% and 27% were from farm household,
veterinarians, Ir. Dong Bu i Quang - Researcher of Center for
s emi-industrial and industrial system, respectively (Table 5).
Interdisciplinary Research on Rural Development, Ngai
Furthermore, anima ls in disease and therapy can be sold
Pham Thi and Tuyen Tran Thi - Veterinary students of HUA
quickly in order to save funds (this is the case in 40% of the
for their co-operation to this study.
farms investigated) or slaughtered and used for food, or feed
for other animals. This creates both difficult ies for
prophylaxis ofep idemic diseases and unsafety for consumers.
In particular, these practices lead to a high risk of undesirable
residues in anima l products[10]. Th is is one of the reasons
why traces of residues of veterinary drugs in general, and
antibiotics in particular, have been found in anima l products
and also in the environment[52]. One study about the
REFERENCES
[1] Tuy en, D.K., (2010). Evaluation of the livestock sector in
2010 and orientation for development in the coming years. In
G. Duteurtreuillaume and V.T. Binh (eds), Proceeding of the
emergence of fluoroquinolone resistance in the native
Campylobater coli population of pigs[53] indicates that a
single course of enroflo xacin treatment contributes directly
to the emergence and persistence of quinolone resistant C.
coli.
To collect information on the consumption of veterinary
drugs in general, and of antibiotics in particular, is not easy
in developing countries. In this context, the background of
animal production in Vietnam is low, scale is s mall and
scattered, the organization system and management
qualification of the animal production and veterinary sector
display a lot of inadequacies which do not meet the real
development requirements. The quality of food, safety and
hygiene is an urgent requirement for consumers. Differences
in animal production systems between developed and
developing countries lead to the need for different
approaches to control antibiotics.
Workshop on TheFutureProspects for Livestock in Vietnam:
How to Balance Livestock Industrialization, Rural
Development Strategy and Environmental Changes? Hanoi,
Vietnam, November 29th, 2010, p9-10.
[2] MARD (M inistry of Agriculture and Rural Development),
2009a. Livestock development strategy to 2020, Amended
and Reprinted in the first time. Publishing House for Science
and Technology.
[3] Ly, L.V., 2007. Livestock development in the customary
process of agricultural restructuring, Agricultural Pub. House,
(in Vietnamese).
[4] Ly, L.V., 2009. Sustainable livestock development in the
edu.vn/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=985
& Itemid=218. Retrieved April 28, 2010, (in Vietnamese).
[5] DAH (Department of Animal Health). - Update on HPAI and
gov.vn/index.php?option=com_content&task=category§
ionid=1&id=19&Itemid=64, 2010. Retrieved 04 August 5,
2011
4. Conclusions
[6] Porphyre, V., Nguyen, N. S., Ha, M. T., Genewe, S. & Henry ,
C. 2006. Local epidemiosurveillance in swine diseases in
Northern Vietnam: description and preliminary results. Ann
N Y Acad Sci, 1081, 528-30.
The antibiotic overuse and illegal use in p ig and poultry
production in the region of the RRD is highly worrisome.
Livestock breeders have very low awareness of the
reasonableness and safety of antibiotic use as well as the
food safety.Their use ofantib iotics is very unmethodicaland
unscientific, mainly based on their experiences of on advices
from veterinary drugs sellers after describing symptoms.
These preliminary results will be the basis for developing
newstrategies for a prudent use ofantibiotics in food animals
in the context of Vietnam. It is necessary not only to
strengthen the monitoring system, veterinary network,
antibiotic use guidance issues, but also to improve awareness
[7] An, N. Q., 2009. Report of antibiotic use in animal in Vietnam.
In: Global Antibiotic Resistance Partnership-Vietnam
Inaugural workshop. Hanoi: Oxford University Clinical
Research Unit, National Institute of Infectious and Tropical
Diseases.
[8] Thuy , T., 2009. Enhance the role of State management on
safety agricultural products. Available on line at website of
National Center for Agriculture & Fisheries Extension –
Food and Public Health 2013, 3(5): 247-256
255
c-hdknkn/b-tthuanluyen/nang-cao-vai-tro-quan-ly-nha-nuoc-
Environ Int., 35(4), 760-761.
ve-an-toan-ve-sinh-nong-san-thuc-pham/newsitem_view?sea
rchterm=s%C3%BAc&b_start:int=2380. Retrieved April 28,
2010, (in Vietnamese).
[23] Hoa, P., Managaki, S., & Nakada, N. (2010). Abundance of
Sulfonamide-resistant Bacteria and Their Resistance Genes in
Integrated Aquaculture-agriculture Ponds, North Vietnam,
edings/ec/03/pdf/BR_03015.pdf
[9] WHO, 2001. Monitoring antimicrobial usage in food animals
for the protection of human health,WHO/CDS/CSR/EPH/
2002.11, Report of a WHO consultation Oslo, Norway 10-13
September 2001.
[24] Zhang, X.-X., Zhang, T., & Fan g, H. H. P. (2009). Antibiotic
resistance genes in water environment. Applied microbiology
and biotechnology, 82(3), 397–414.
[10] Nhiem, D.V., Peter, P., Witaya, S., Frans, J.M .S. Moses, N.K.,
Maximilian, P.O. B., Karl, H.Z., Ngan, P.H., 2006.
Preliminary Analysis of Tetracycline Residues in Marketed
Pork in Hanoi, Vietnam. Annals of the New York Academy
of Sciences, 1081, 534–542
[25] Binh, L. D., 2003. Measures applied to control forbidden
antibiotics in aquaculture products in Viet Nam. In Joint
FAO/WHO Technical Workshop on Residues of Veterinary
723e/y5723e0e.htm Retrieved April 28, 2010.
[11] Conly, J. 2010. Antimicrobial resistance: revisiting the
“tragedy of the commons”. Bulletin of the World Health
Organization, 88 (11), 797–876.
[26] Dang, P.K., Degand, G., Danyi, S., Maghuin-Rogister, G.,
Scippo, M.L., 2009. Adaptation of a microbiological method
for the screening of quinolones, tetracycline and sulfamides
residues in shrimp tissues, Proceeding of the 5th National
Workshop on food safety, 25 December 2009, Hanoi,
Vietnam, 456-468 (in Vietnamese).
[12] Tollefson, L., & Karp, B. E., 2004. Human health impact
from antimicrobial use in food animals, Medecine Et
Maladies Infectieuses, 34 (11), 514-521
[13] Levy, S. B., 1992. The Antibiotic Paradox. How Miracle
Drugs are Destroying the Miracle. Plenum Press, New York.
[27] Khan, P. C. Situation and management of food safety in
Vietnam. Workshop on Management of food safety, Held in
Hanoiuniversity of Agriculture (Vietnam) by Faculty of Food
science and Technology on December 9th, 2010.
[14] Kumar, K., Gupta, S.C., Chander, Y., Sin gh, A.K., 2005,
Antibiotic use in agriculture and its impact on the terrestrial
environment, Advances in Agronomy, 87, 1-54
[28] GSO (General Statistics Office), 2009. Statistical data.
Available from:http://www.gso.gov.vn/default.aspx?tabid=
426&idmid=3. Retrieved April 16, 2009.
[15] Giger, W., Alder, A. C., Golet, E. M., Kohler, H. P. E.,
McArdell, C. S., Molnar, E., Siegrist, H., & Suter, M. J. F.,
2003. Occurrence and fate of antibiotics as trace contaminants
in wastewaters, sewage sludges, and surface waters, Chimia,
57(9), 485-491
[29] Lamming, E., 1992. A Report of the Expert Group on Animal
Feeding Stuffs, London: HMSO; 2.
[16] Duong, H.A., Pham, N.H., Nguyen, H.T., Hoang, TT., Pham, [30] Papadopoulou, C., Dimitriou, D., Levidiotou, S., Gessouli, H.,
H.V., Pham, V.C., B er g, M., Giger, W., Alder, AC., 2008.
Occurrence, fate and antibiotic resistance of fluoroquinolone
antibacterials in hospital wastewaters in Hanoi, Vietnam.
Chemosphere. 72, 968-973
Panagiou, S., Golegou, S. & Antoniades, G. 1997. Bacterial
strains isolated from eggs and their resistance to currently
used antibiotics: is there a health hazard for consumers?
Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis, 20, 35–40.
[17] Threlfall, E. J., Ward, L. R., Frost, J. A., & Willshaw, C. A., [31] Gousia, P., Economou, V., Sakkas, H., Leveidiotou, S., &
2000. The emergence and spread of antibiotic resistance in
food-borne bacteria, International Journal of Food
Microbiology, 62(1-2), 1-5
Papadopoulou, C. 2011. Antimicrobial Resistance of Major
Foodborne Pathogens from Major Meat Products. Foodborne
pathogens and disease, 8 (1) DOI: 10.1089=fpd.2010.0577.
[18] Adam, D., 2002. Global Antibiotic Resistance in S. [32] Witte, W., 2000. Selective pressure by antibiotic use in
pneumoniae, Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, 50
livestock. Int J Antimicrob Agents, 16:S19–S24.
(suppl.),1-5
[33] Mayrhofer, S., Paulsen, P., Smulders, FJM., & Hilbert, F.,
2004. Antimicrobial resistance profile of five major
food-borne pathogens isolated from beef, pork and poultry.
Int J Food Microbiol; 97, 23–29.
[19] Molbak, K., 2004. Spread of resistant bacteria and resistance
genes from animals to humans – The public health
consequences, Journal of Veterinary Medicine Series, B 51,
364-369
[34] McDermott, PF., Zhao, S., Wagner, DD., et al., 2002. The
food safety perspective of antibiotic resistance. Anim
Biotechnol;13, 71–84.
[20] Sarmah, A.J., M ey er, M.T., Boxall, A.B.A., 2006. A global
perspective on the use, sales, exposure p at hway s, occurrence,
fate and effects of veterinary antibiotics (VAs) in the
environment, Chemosphere, 65, 725-759
[35] Wegener, HC., Aarestrup, FM., Jensen, LB., Hammerum,
AM ., & Bager F. 1999. Use of antimicrobial growth
promoters in food animals and Enterococcus faecium
resistance to therapeutic antimicrobial drugs in Europe.
Emerg Infect Dis,5, 329–335.
[21] Wang, H.H., Manuzon M., Lehman M., Wan K., Luo H.,
Wittum T. E., Youssef A., Bakaletz L.O., 2006. Food
commensal microbes as a potentially important avenue in
transmitting antibiotic resistance genes, FEMS Microbiology
Letters, 254, 226-231
[36] EC (European Commission), 2005. Ban on antibiotics as
growth promoters in animal feed enters into effect,
ReleasesAction.do?reference=IP /05/1687&format=HTML&
aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en. Retrieved April
[22] Aarestrup, F. M. and Pires, S. M. 2009. Comment on: Causal
regulations vs. political will: why human zoonotic infections
increase despite precautionary bans on animal antibiotics.
256
Dang Pham Kim et al.: First Survey on the Use of Antibiotics in Pig and Poultry
Production in the Red River Delta Region of Vietnam
28, 2010.
[45] Jordan, D., Chin, JJ-C., Fahy, V.A., Barton, M.D., Smith,
M .G., Trott, D.J., 2009. Antimicrobial use in the Australian
pig industry: results of a national survey, Australian
Veterinary Journal, 87 (6), 222-229
[37] Viola, C., DeVincent, S.J., 2006. Overview of issues
pertaining to the manufacture, distribution, and use of
antimicrobials in animals and other information relevant to
animal antimicrobial use data collection in the United States, [46] Anonymous, 2001. Use of antibiotics in EU member states
Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 73, 111-131 and Switzerland,[in German]. Deut Tierärzteblatt 8:841
[38] MARD (M inistry of Agriculture and Rural Development), [47] Kolpin, D. W., Furlong, E. T., M ey er, M. T., Thurman, E. M.,
2006. Standard TCN 861:2006. Animal feeding stuffs –
Maximum levels of antibiotics and drugs in complete feed.
Zaugg, S. D., Barber, L. B. & Buxton, H. T. 2002.
Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater
contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999-2000: a national
reconnaissance. Environ. Sci. Technol., 36, 1202-11.
[39] MARD (M inistry of Agriculture and Rural Development),
2009b. QCVN 01-10:2009/BNNPTNT. National technical
regulation. Animal feeding stuffs – Maximum levels of [48] Kools, S. A., Moltmann, J. F. &Knacker, T. 2008. Estimating
antibiotics, drugs, microorganism and heavy metals in
complete feed for poultry.
theuseof veterinary medicines in the European Union. Regul.
Toxicol. Pharmacol., 50, 59-65.
[40] MARD (M inistry of Agriculture and Rural Development), [49] Moulin, G., Cavalié, P., Pellanne, I., Chevance, A., Laval, A.,
2009c. QCVN 01-12:2009/BNNPTNT. National technical
regulation. Animal feeding stuffs – Maximum levels of
antibiotics, drugs, microorganism and heavy metals in
complete feed for p igs.
Millemann, Y., Colin, P., Chauvin, C., 2008. A comparison of
antimicrobial usage in human and veterinary medicine in
France from 1999 to 2005, Journal of Antimicrobial
Chemotherapy, 62(3), 617-25
[41] MARD (M inistry of Agriculture and Rural Development), [50] AHI (Animal Health Institute), 2008. Sales of Disease-
2009d. Circular No. 29/2009/TTBNN to supplement and
adjust theCircular No.15/2009/TTBNN dated March17, 2009,
signed by the Minister of MARD on the List of medicines,
chemicals and antibiotics banned or limited from usage.
Fighting Animal Medicines Rise (press release November 14,
2010.
[51] Vietnamese Committees of the National Assembly, 2004.
Ordinance No 18/2004/PL-UBTVQH of April 29, 2004 on
Veterinary Medicine. Available online at website of the
Department of Animal Health - MARD of VietNam.
ry&Itemid =72&func=select&id=2, (in Vietnamese).
[42] Hai, N. N., Chau, T. M., Carles, M., Tripodi, A., & Bodin, G.,
2000. Etude de 91 souches d'Escherichia coli responsables de
la maladie de l'œdème du porcelet dans le sud du Vietnam,
Revue de Médecine Vétérinaire, 151(1), 23-32
[43] Dat, D.T., Phuong, P.T., My, L.N., Khang, H.V., 2001. Bệnh
ở lợn nái và lợn con[Diseases in sows and piglets, in [52] Le T. X., Munekage Y. (2004). Residues of selected
Vietnamese], Agriculture Publishing House, Vietnam
antibiotics in water and mud from shrimp ponds in mangrove
areas in Vietnam. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 49, 922–929.
[44] Dung, L. M., Thinh, N. V., 2002. Coopération entre
vétérinaires et groupes des foyers éleveurs. Contrat de [53] Delsol, A A., Sunderland, J., Woodward, M J., Pumbwe, L.,
prévention des maladies chez les animaux élevés. The
proceedings of the Workshop on "Des approches innovantes
au service du développement agricole" Hanoi, Vietnam,
septembre 23-24th, 2002, p9-10. Available from:
Piddock, L J. V., & Roe, J M., 2004. Emergence of
fluoroquinolone resistance in the native Campylobacter coli
population of p igs exp osed to enrofloxacin. J. Antimicrob.
Chemother., 53 (5), 872-874.
/expert_tech_agri/Fr/Documents/Doc/S82.pdf
.
Retrieved
August 18th , 2011
10 trang
18060
Free
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "First survey on the use of antibiotics in pig and poultry production in the Red river delta region of Vietnam", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên
File đính kèm:
- first_survey_on_the_use_of_antibiotics_in_pig_and_poultry_pr.pdf
