Question at position 18 European countries elimination in animal agricultural of growth promoting antibiotics (and those important to human health) resulted in a decreased incidence of antibiotic resistant infections in humans.FalseTrueClear my selection单项选择题
A
False
B
True

Question

Question at position 18 European countries elimination in animal agricultural of growth promoting antibiotics (and those important to human health) resulted in a decreased incidence of antibiotic resistant infections in humans.FalseTrueClear my selection单项选择题

A

False

B

True

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

The question presents a true/false statement about Europe’s elimination of growth-promoting antibiotics in animal agriculture and its impact on antibiotic-resistant infections in humans.

Option 1: False. This claim would assert that banning growth-promoting antibiotics had no effect on human antibiotic resistance. In reality, multiple analyses after the EU ban observed reductions in antibiotic use in animals and notable declines in certain resistant bacteria in both animals and, over time, human populations. However, it is important to recognize that the relationship is not uniform across all species, antibiotics, or settings, and other risk factors influence resistance dynamics. Saying there is no effect ignores the documented reductions that have occurred for some organisms and contexts.

Option 2: True. This aligns with evidence from Europe showing that restricting use of antibiotics for growth promotion led to lower levels of antibiotic resistance in some human pathogens and in animal reservoirs. The mechanisms include reduced selection pressure in animals, decreased transmission of resistant strains to humans, and overall lower antibiotic exposure in the food chain. While the magnitude of impact can vary by antibiotic, pathogen, and surveillance period, the overall trend observed in several studies supports a connection between the policy and reductions in resistant infections in humans.

In summary, the false option incorrectly claims no effect, while the true option reflects the observed associations reported in European surveillance and research, acknowledging that results can differ by context and are part of a broader, evolving evidence base.