FDA Limits Usage of Antibiotics in Livestock After Activist OutcryAnthony Gucciardi However, the FDA is not completely revoking approval for the antibiotics, only placing an order for farmers to stop using the drugs solely to help animals grow whats more, the farmers are given another 3 years before any real legal action goes into effect. The initial proposal was introduced back in 1977, and the FDA has stalled for decades to give a final answer. That means that antibiotics used to treat animal diseases, or even prevent future diseases, will be perfectly fine under these guidelines. The result may have to do with the livestock corporate juggernauts, who refused to admit that the mass drugging of animals with superbug-breeding antibiotics posed any real threat to the public. Many consumer activists, such as Laura Rogers from thePew Campaign on Human Health and Industrial Farming, fear that these new guidelines are so broad that they mean virtually nothing. If you were to ask me whats the biggest gap, its that theyve left way too much wiggle room [leeway] when it comes to preventative uses, said Rogers. Thats going to have to be shored up [i.e., made more specific] in order for this action to be meaningful. In fact, the resistanttuberculosis strains a direct result of excess antibiotic consumption are so serious that scientists are calling it the new white plague. Even members of the World Health Organizations Stop TB Partnership are outraged over the man-made disease progression, with memberLucica Ditiustating thatthe drug-resistant TB is a totally man-made disease. Outside of super viruses, antibiotics have also been linked to mental illness as a result of compromised gut health. Explore More: This article first appeared at Natural Society, an excellent resource for health news and vaccine information. 