The Speaking of Science column of September 4, 2014 titled “Antibiotics in the chicken we eat” has evoked several responses and questions, and it is appropriate to address here some of these issues that have been raised.
The very first is about the use of calcium carbide to hasten the ripening of fruits, particularly mangoes. Calcium carbide, upon reaction with water, generates the gas acetylene which, along with the gas ethylene (produced through biotic reactions in the fruit), acts as a fruit- ripening hormone, thus hastening the process of ripening. The large scale mango marketer plucks the unripe mangoes from trees, stores them in bins containing calcium carbide which generates acetylene upon spraying with water. Apart from the general feeling that the tree-ripened fruit tastes better than synthetic-ripened, the worry is about the health effects of calcium carbide to the ones who handle it in the ripening centres, and those who might end up ingesting it. While acetylene and ethylene are not toxic, calcium carbide is suspected to be, as can be seen by accessing the sites >www.nj.gov/health/eoh/rtkweb/documents/fs/0312.pdf and www.fssai.gov.in/Portals/0/Pdf/Article_on_fruits.pdf> . It is reported to cause skin rash, dermatitis and inhaling it can cause pulmonary edema (a medical emergency). And commercial calcium carbide contains traces of arsenic and phosphorus compounds as impurities, both of which are health hazards for animals and humans.
Several other readers had commented about the use of oxytocin in dairy farms. This “love hormone” as it is dubbed, is a small peptide molecule whose main effect is to help in the delivery of babies. Naturally released in the body of the mother-to-be, this hormone, among other things, induces labour by increasing the contractions of the muscles of the womb, controls post-partum haemorrhage and stimulates milk release. But it is to be administered by the doctor only in cases of emergency, since it does have side effects. The reader can learn more about oxytocin, its benefits and side effects by accessing the sites > http://www.drugs.com/sfx/oxytocin-side-effects.html and > http://www.rxlist.com/pitocin-side-effects-drug-center.htm . Thankfully however, being a peptide molecule, oxytocin does not last long in the body when injected, but gets hydrolysed into amino acids
Turning now to the use of artificially injecting oxytocin into cows and buffaloes in dairy farms, the general belief is that is causes more milk production.
This is untrue. But what oxytocin does to the cow is to increase muscle contraction in the udders and make milk ejection faster. Many greedy dairymen also try and keep cows permanently lactating so as to keep the milk flow on a continuous commercial basis — the golden goose, as it were, for the unethical milkman. For more on this, please access > http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/827822.
Given this, is the governmental ban on the use of oxytocin and similar hormones in milk production alarmist? I think not. Curiously enough, some people have taken oxytocin use from the animal to the plant kingdom. This is with the belief that the animal hormone may have growth stimulating effect in plants. Two scientists Kerstin Uvnas-Moberg and Bengt Lundergaardh have actually taken a US patent on the use of a substance with oxytocin activity in order to stimulate plant growth. And Drs Netrapal Singh and others from Rohtak and Kurukshetra report (in International Journal of Bioengineering Science and Technology 2, 43, 2011) that oxytocin may be used, at least in vitro , as a morpho-regulatory agent in plants such as some gourds (e.g., turai, or beerakkaya, peerkangai ). Given this, I would not be surprised if this hormone suddenly becomes popular to mango-growers, with the notion that one swallow does make a summer (though I find it difficult to swallow the swallow itself!)
Coming finally to the use of the antibiotics in the poultry industry, several readers wondered whether these molecules are not destroyed by the high temperatures involved during cooking, and thus making it safe enough to eat the chicken.
Yes, this would be true for most of the molecules, and also for many of the bacteria present in the chicken itself. But recall that the inside of the chicken is a warm, hospitable reactor, or the genetic playground for microbes, where not only growth of the normal but also of mutant strains occurs. Some of these mutants can be heat-resistant while others are multi drug resistant strains.
Even if you burn off most of these in cooking, what about those in the inedible parts of the chicken which are disposed off into the environment?
Some are burnt off in incinerators, but those left in the soil and water bodies will affect the life forms there. And more often than not we encounter such germs infecting animals and moving from there to humans. Salmonella, and the more dangerous H1N1 and HIV are three such zoonotic invaders. Given this backdrop, is the appeal for banning the use of antibiotics in poultry farms an overreach?
