18 pages., Article 6, Via online journal., The discovery of the antibiotic Aureomycin as a growth promotor for the livestock industry was viewed as revolutionary in 1950. The use of antibiotics as growth promoters in livestock, however, has been questioned by health professionals concerned with the role this use might play in the development of antibiotic resistant bacteria. As a public health issue, newspapers have covered this topic since its discovery. Media, such as newspapers, have used frames to discuss the topic over time as new discoveries have occurred, policy changes have been implemented, and food animal production has changed. The purpose of this study was to determine the frames and sources used by national U.S. newspapers when discussing the topic of antibiotic use in livestock and antibiotic resistance. A quantitative content analysis was conducted on three national U.S. newspapers from 1996 – 2017 and found three primary frames were used when discussing antibiotic use in livestock and antibiotic resistance. The content analysis also indicated that over 90% of the news articles contained a scientific source when communicating about this scientific topic. Based on the frames identified some readers are being ill-informed about this topic and could be using this information in their decision making without having all of the facts. Science communicators should prioritize the inclusion of scientific sources in their writing as they communicate about complex, controversial topics.
Cooke, Andrew (author), Mullan, Siobhan (author), Morten, Charlie (author), Hockenhull, Joanna (author), Le-Grice, Phil (author), Le Cocq, Kate (author), Lee, Michael R. F. (author), Cardenas, Laura M. (author), and Rivero, M. Jordana (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2023-06-29
Published:
United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 206 Document Number: D12951
14 pages, Animal welfare encompasses all aspects of an animal’s life and the interactions between animals. Consequently, welfare must be measured across a variety of factors that consider aspects
such as health, behaviour and mental state. Decisions regarding housing and grazing are central to farm management. In this study, two beef cattle systems and their herds were compared
from weaning to slaughter across numerous indicators. One herd (‘HH’) were continuously
housed, the other (‘HG’) were housed only during winter. Inspections of animals were conducted to assess body condition, cleanliness, diarrhoea, hairlessness, nasal discharge and ocular discharge. Hair and nasal mucus samples were taken for quantification of cortisol and
serotonin. Qualitative behaviour assessments (QBA) were also conducted and performance
monitored. Physical health indicators were similar between herds with the exception of
nasal discharge which was more prevalent in HH (P < 0.001). During winter, QBA yielded differences between herds over PC1 (arousal) (P = 0.032), but not PC2 (mood) (P = 0.139).
Through summer, there was a strong difference across both PC1 (P < 0.001) and PC2 (P =
0.002), with HG exhibiting more positive behaviour. A difference was found in hair cortisol
levels, with the greatest concentrations observed in HG (P = 0.011), however such a pattern
was not seen for nasal mucus cortisol or for serotonin. Overall, providing summer grazing
(HG) appeared to afford welfare benefits to the cattle as shown with more positive QBA
assessments, but also slightly better health indicators, notwithstanding the higher levels of cortisol in that group.
20 pgs., Several U.S. federal government agencies collect and disseminate scientific data on a national scale to provide insights for agricultural trade, research, consumer health, and policy. Occasionally, such data have potential to provide insights to advance conversations and actions around critical and controversial issues in the broad agricultural system. Such government studies provide evidence for others to discuss, further interpret, and act upon, but to do so, they must be communicated well. When the research intersects with contentious socio-political issues, successful communication not only depends on tactics, but as this study illuminates, it also depends on relationship quality between research producers, study participants, and end-users. USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) conducted first-of-its kind national studies on cattle and swine producers’ use of antimicrobials. The use of antimicrobials in animal agriculture is considered a critical and controversial issue pertaining to antimicrobial resistance. In recognition of the anticipated wide-ranging interests in these studies, APHIS sought to understand stakeholders’ perceptions and experiences of the federal government research process and products with aim of improving their science communication and relations. This study reports on findings from in-depth interviews with 14 stakeholders involved in the antimicrobial use studies to make recommendations for improving communication and relations between the agency and its stakeholders. From this research, we draw implications that are transferrable to numerous types of government science communication efforts within agricultural sectors.
