Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 9, Number 12—December 2003
Letter

Salmonella in Denmark

On This Page
Article Metrics

Cite This Article

To the Editor: In the large study by Evans and Wegener recently published in Emerging Infectious Diseases (1), salmonellae in broiler chickens and pigs significantly decreased after routine in-feed antimicrobial drug use for growth promotion was terminated in Denmark. Avoparcin was a frequently used growth promoter in poultry until its ban in Denmark in 1995 because of its association with the development and spread of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. On examining Evans and Wegener’s data, I noticed that a precipitous drop in salmonellae in broiler chickens appeared to have occurred in early 1996. Do the authors think this drop was due to the withdrawal of avoparcin? As the authors note, avoparcin has been associated with increased shedding of salmonellae (including a dose-response effect) in a number of studies (2,3). If the large drop (from approximately 25% positive samples in 1995 to approximately 10% in 1996) is not due to withdrawal of avoparcin, what do the authors suggest could have caused it?

Do the authors have sufficient numbers of samples to reanalyze their data in broiler chickens for three periods instead of just two (i.e., use the periods January 1995–December 1995, January 1996–December 1997, and January 1998–December 2000)? This change would take into account the potential effect of avoparcin withdrawal in 1995.

Also, the most important reason for decreasing food animals’ carriage of salmonellae is to protect people from becoming ill with Salmonella. Do the authors have any figures on domestically acquired human infections with salmonellae in Denmark since early 1995? Is there any temporal association with the withdrawal of growth promoters?

Top

Peter Collignon*Comments to Author 
Author affiliation: *Sydney University, Woden, Australia

Top

References

  1. Evans  MC, Wegener  HC. Antimicrobial growth promoters and Salmonella spp., Campylobacter spp. in poultry and swine, Denmark. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9:48992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Barrow  PA, Smith  HW, Tucker  JF. The effect of feeding diets containing avoparcin on the excretion of Salmonella by chickens experimentally infected with natural sources of Salmonella organism. J Hyg (Lond). 1984;93:43944. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrow  PA. Further observations on the effect of feeding diets containing avoparcin on the excretion of Salmonella by experimentally infected chickens. Epidemiol Infect. 1989;102:23952. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar

Top

Cite This Article

DOI: 10.3201/eid0912.030310

Related Links

Top

In Reply: The drop in Salmonella organisms in broiler chickens becomes evident in September 1995. The ban on avoparcin occurred in May 1995. These two facts suggest that the first flocks of broiler chickens produced without avoparcin were slaughtered in August 1995. Thus, the temporal relationship is evident. We have reanalyzed the data for the three strata January 1994–December 1995, January 1996–December 1997, and January 1998–December 2000. Each stratum is significantly different from the two others (p < 0.0001).

Arguing in favor of a causal relationship, apart from the temporal relationship, one would say that no changes in the Salmonella control program in this period could explain this reduction. Arguing against a causal relationship, one would say that the levels momentarily bounced back to nearly the pre-ban level in 1997, despite the avoparcin ban. The subsequent drop and consistent low level could be explained by changes in the control program (introduction of serologic Salmonella monitoring in 1997 to 1998). On the basis of our data, drawing a conclusion one or the other is not possible.

There is a clear temporal association between reduction in Salmonella in broiler chickens and reduced incidence of domestically acquired Salmonella infections that can be attributed to domestically produced broilers. This finding was recently reported in this journal (1).

Mary Evans Patrick, DeKalb County Board of Health, 445 Winn Way, Decatur, GA 30030, USA; fax: 404-294-3842
Author affiliations: *DeKalb County Board of Health, Decatur, Georgia, USA; †Danish Veterinary Institute, Copenhagen, Denmark

References

  1. Wegener  HC, Hald  T, Wong  DLF, Madsen  M, Korsgaard  H, Bager  F, Salmonella control programs in Denmark. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9:77480.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Table of Contents – Volume 9, Number 12—December 2003

EID Search Options
presentation_01 Advanced Article Search – Search articles by author and/or keyword.
presentation_01 Articles by Country Search – Search articles by the topic country.
presentation_01 Article Type Search – Search articles by article type and issue.

Top

Comments

Please use the form below to submit correspondence to the authors or contact them at the following address:

Address for correspondence: Peter Collignon, Professor, Canberra Clinical School, Sydney University, P. O. Box 11, Woden, ACT. 2607, Australia; fax: 61 2 6281 0349;

Mary Evans Patrick, DeKalb County Board of Health, 445 Winn Way, Decatur, GA 30030, USA; fax: 404-294-3842

Send To

10000 character(s) remaining.

Top

Page created: April 23, 2012
Page updated: April 23, 2012
Page reviewed: April 23, 2012
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external