Stressful management that makes farmed pigs susceptible to infections is associated with high antibiotic use (AMU) and resistance (AMR). Pig farmers are key stakeholders to support the international agenda pushing AMU restrictions. We interviewed 58 pig farmers on AMU/AMR, biosecurity, veterinary assistance, disease prevention and treatment, aiming to understand practices and attitudes towards the AMU/AMR problem. Farmers described a reliance on antibiotics to prevent and treat disease while neglecting biosecurity measures. We identified inappropriate AMU practices (high use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, incorrect dosage or treatment length) and unrestricted access to antibiotics, which encouraged imprudent AMU. Nevertheless, most farmers considered this AMU legitimate to guarantee herd productivity and showed unpreparedness and resistance to changing AMU practices, perceiving limitations (economic, sanitary and inspection) more easily than alternatives to reduce AMU. Agro-industries and foreign markets were mentioned, and internal consumers dismissed as potential motivators for behavioral changes. Importantly, farmers’ economic, technical and social factors may limit their autonomy to change practices. We conclude that the observed distancing of pig farmers from the AMU/AMR problem limits the efficiency of policies aiming for a prudent AMU. Our study indicates a need for education, training and behavior change nudging that should include other stakeholders beyond farmers.

No abstract

We explored the attitudes of Brazilians towards different methods to deal with boar taint in pork (surgical castration without pain control, SC; surgical castration with pain control, SC+PC; immunocastration, IC; raising entire males, EM). Two surveys (Sv1, n = 441 and Sv2, n = 768) containing closed and open questions were conducted. Nearly 70% of Sv1 and Sv2 participants were unaware that meat of entire males may have boar taint and that SC is widely used in pig production in Brazil. In Sv1, acceptability of SC+PC (63%) and IC (53%) was greater than of SC (15%). In Sv2, acceptability of IC (55%) and EM (52%) was greater than of SC (18%). Open-ended responses indicated that participants objected to inflicting pain to pigs to attain a production goal, and were concerned with organoleptic traits and risks of exogenous residues in pork. Participants’ views regarding the potential increases in the cost of meat due to adoption of alternative methods varied; some argued that avoiding pain justifies an increase in the price of pork and others that this would impact especially lower income citizens. Our findings indicate that participants opposed surgical castration without pain control, and supported alternative methods. However, the concern with potential risks of presence of residues in meat, expressed by a few participants, may need to be addressed among consumers.

Preventative measures, such as biosecurity and vaccinations, are essential but not sufficient to ensure high standards of health in pig production systems. Restrictive, barren housing and many widely used management practices that cause pain and stress predispose high-performance pigs reared in intensive systems to disease. In this context, antibiotics are used as part of the infrastructure that sustains health and high levels of production in pig farms. Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global emergency affecting human and animal health, and the use of antibiotics (AMU) in intensive livestock farming is considered an important risk factor for the emergence and spread of resistant bacteria from animals to humans. Tackling the issue of AMR demands profound changes in AMU, e.g., reducing their use for prophylaxis and ending it for growth promotion. In support of such recommendations, we revise the link between animal welfare and AMU and argue that it is crucial to sustainably reduce AMU while ensuring that pigs can live happy lives. In support of such recommendations, we aimed to revise the link between animal welfare and AMU in pigs by analysing stress factors related to housing and management and their impact on pig welfare. In particular, we reviewed critical management practices that increase stress and, therefore, pigs’ susceptibility to disease and reduce the quality of life of pigs. We also reviewed some alternatives that can be adopted in pig farms to improve animal welfare and that go beyond the reduction in stress. By minimising environmental and management stressors, pigs can become more immunocompetent and prepared to overcome pathogenic challenges. This outcome can contribute to reducing AMU and the risk of AMR while simultaneously improving the quality of life of pigs and, ultimately, maintaining the pig industry’s social license.

The authors wish to make the following corrections to this paper [...]

Albernaz-Gonçalves R, Olmos Antillón G and Hötzel MJ ( ) Waiting for markets to change me-High-stakeholders' views of antibiotic use and antibiotic resistance in pig production in Brazil.

No abstract