Preventative drug removal in pork sector increases carbon footprint, argues expert
Dr Greg Thoma, professor of chemical engineering at the University of Arkansas, told delegates at the International Production and Processing Expo, that Life Cycle Analysis work in the pork sector revealed that removing preventative use of medicines in the production process was less sustainable.
Speaking at the Animal Agriculture Sustainability Summit, he said: "The sector asked us to do this work, because there’s a lot of pressure to change systems.
"In Europe they claim to have removed the preventative use of antibiotics from production, but they seem to use as much antibiotics for therapeutic purposes as they would for prevention," he said.
Meanwhile, the industry was urged to define sustainability as being "good for business".
Setting the scene for the summit, Dr Marty Matlock, executive director for the University of Arkansas’s Office for Sustainability, said sustainability was about continuous improvement and the challenge was to continue meeting growing demand without increasing resource use.
"We’re going to have to double and, in some cases, triple production from the same amount of land," he said. "If we want to preserve biodiversity we have to freeze the footprint of agricultural production."
He said clear communication was important with the wider community: "When we talk in big, glib, hand-waving ways, it does not help us to communicate to our constituents what we are doing.
"When people ask what sustainability is, I want you to say that sustainability is good for business. It increases efficiency, and it drives down negative things. The second thing you need to say is that sustainability is about continuous improvement."
