Replies to LegCo questions

LCQ13: Use of antibiotics in food animals for human consumption

Following is a question by the Hon Starry Lee and a written reply by the Secretary for Food and Health, Dr Ko Wing-man, in the Legislative Council today (January 20):

Question:

It has been reported that currently, half of the antibiotics across the world are used in agriculture, and the relevant ratio in the United States even stands at 80%. This situation has aroused the concern that long-term consumption of food containing antibiotics may increase the opportunities of the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Earlier on, the Consumer Council has written to nine local fast food chains to enquire about their policies on procuring and using food ingredients containing antibiotics, and urge them to devise plans to phase out the procurement of food ingredients containing antibiotics and release the relevant information to the public in a timely manner. Nevertheless, no concrete responses have been received so far. On the other hand, three major fast food chains in the United States have pledged that they will gradually stop using food ingredients containing antibiotics, and feeding of antibiotics to food animals in Denmark is permitted only for treatment of diseases. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(1) whether it conducted, in the past five years, any study on the health risks of consuming food containing antibiotics; if it did, of the details; if not, the reasons for that;

(2) whether it will consider encouraging local fast food chains to make public their policies on using food ingredients containing antibiotics, so as to enable consumers to make informed choices; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and

(3) given that the Public Health (Animals and Birds) (Chemical Residues) Regulation (Cap. 139, sub. leg. N) has listed two types of antibiotics as prohibited chemicals, and specified the maximum residue limits of 37 types of antibiotics and antibacterial compounds in meat and animal tissues, whether the authorities will review the regulation and bring the relevant regulations on the limits of antibiotics in food animals in line with those in force in advanced countries/regions (e.g. the European Union), so as to enhance food safety; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?

Reply:

President,

In recent years, consumers from different parts of the world have expressed concerns over the use of antibiotics in modern livestock farming, which may result in contamination of food animals for human consumption with antibiotic residues. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the use of veterinary drugs (including antibiotics) is beneficial to animal health, but it should be used judiciously in order to reduce the emergence of drug-resistant bacteria in food animals, thereby lowering public health risks. As chemical drugs that effectively work against bacteria and protozoans, antibiotics play an important role in the food production process. Not only would they help protect the health and welfare of food animals, but they are also conducive to meeting the increasing global demand for safe food of animal origin, including milk, meat and eggs.

The Government has all along adopted the "from farm to table" strategy. Through establishing a regulatory system and safety standards, complemented by proper monitoring, surveillance, testing, self-discipline and public education, the Government seeks to ensure the proper use of antibiotics in husbandry and safeguard public health and food safety. Pursuant to the above strategy, the Government enacted the Public Health (Animals and Birds) (Chemical Residues) Regulation (Cap. 139N) and the Harmful Substances in Food Regulations (Cap. 132AF) to regulate the feeding of drugs and chemicals to food animals as well as the level of antibiotic residues in food, with a view to ensuring the safety of meat products. Besides, the Centre for Food Safety (CFS) takes food samples at import, wholesale and retail levels for chemical testing (including testing for antibiotics) under the routine Food Surveillance Programme to ensure their compliance with local statutory requirements and fitness for human consumption.

My reply to the various parts of the question is as follows:

(1) As pointed out in the second paragraph above, the CFS exercises the power conferred by the Harmful Substances in Food Regulations (Cap. 132AF) to regulate the level of about 40 veterinary drugs (including antibiotics) in food. If any food is found to contain residues of veterinary drugs (including antibiotics) not specified under the regulations, the CFS conducts risk assessment to determine whether consumption of such food is hazardous or harmful to health.

The CFS has put in place an ongoing monitoring mechanism in local slaughterhouses to detect the presence of residues of veterinary drugs (including antibiotics) in animals to be slaughtered to ensure that the meat and offal of these animals are safe for human consumption. Under its routine Food Surveillance Programme, the CFS from 2011 to 2015 took more than 12 400 samples of meat, poultry and aquatic products in total for antibiotic residue testing. Eight samples were detected with antibiotics exceeding the maximum concentration level permitted by law and six samples (0.1%) were found to contain a prohibited substance called chloramphenicol. Testing results of all the other samples were satisfactory. According to risk assessment based on the above testing results, the presence of antibiotic residues in food supplied in Hong Kong does not pose a major risk to public health.

(2) It takes the co-operation of the Government, the relevant trade and consumers to safeguard food safety. We welcome the initiative of the local catering sector to provide further food safety information to address consumers' concern. The CFS also reminds the trade from time to time to observe the guidelines on the use of antibiotics issued by relevant international organisations to ensure that antibiotics are used in animals only under the supervision of veterinary surgeons. The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department has also prepared the Handbook on the Use of Antibiotics for reference by poultry and livestock farmers, and provides them with necessary technical support. For the procurement of food of animal origin, the local catering sector should procure such food from suppliers who follow good practices on the use of veterinary drugs. Fresh pork, beef and mutton (i.e. non-chilled or non-frozen meat) must come from livestock slaughtered in local licensed slaughterhouses. The import of chilled/frozen meat or poultry meat requires an import licence issued by the CFS, together with a health certificate issued by the relevant authority of the exporting jurisdictions to certify that the imported meat or poultry meat is free from any harmful substances and fit for human consumption.

(3) At present, the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance (Cap. 132) stipulates that all food for sale must be fit for human consumption. The Harmful Substances in Food Regulations (Cap. 132AF) govern the import and sale of food containing harmful substances, including veterinary drug residues. As regards the use of veterinary drugs in food animals, it is regulated by the Public Health (Animals and Birds) (Chemical Residues) Regulation (Cap. 139N). To safeguard public health, we keep in view the international development and circumstances relating to the use of antibiotics as well as regulatory control of food safety (including level of antibiotic residues in food), and review the relevant legislation and regulatory arrangements. We plan to brief the Panel on Food Safety and Environmental Hygiene of the Legislative Council in the second quarter of 2016 on the latest position of our efforts to regulate animal feed for livestock and cultured fish and the presence of veterinary drug residues.

Ends/Wednesday, January 20, 2016
Issued at HKT 18:10

NNNN