H.R. 962 would amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to preserve the effectiveness of medically important antibiotics used in the treatment of human and animal diseases.
Detailed Summary
Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act of 2007 - Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to deny an application for a new animal drug that is a critical antimicrobial animal drug unless the applicant demonstrates that there is a reasonably certainty of no harm to human health due to the development of antimicrobial resistance attributable to the nontherapeutic use of the drug. Defines "critical antimicrobial animal drug" as a drug intended for use in food-producing animals that contains specified antibiotics or other drugs used in humans to treat or prevent disease or infection caused by microorganisms.
Requires the Secretary to withdraw approval of a nontherapeutic use of such drugs in food-producing animals two years after the date of enactment of this Act unless certain safety requirements are met.
Requires the manufacturer of such a drug or an animal feed for food-producing animals containing such a drug to report sales information to the Secretary.
Status of the Legislation
Latest Major Action: 2/9/2007: Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Points in Favor
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
Points Against
(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
Visitor Comments
Brian
This bill represents a welcome and long overdue step towards agricultural reform and increased consumer safety. We’ve known the dangers of unrestricted use of antibiotics a long time, and we are literally decades behind European countries in amending our regulations to protect ourselves from these dangers. It is deplorable that any elected representative in our country would choose to promote corporate laziness and greed over their responsibility to protect the health of their constituents. I believe that each member of Congress or the Executive branch that fights against such important and beneficial legislation ought to have to go back to their constituents and look them in the eye and explain to them why they are willing to sacrifice their health in order to please corporate lobbyists; they owe them at least that much.
I sincerely hope that this is just the first step of many to come.