Bearing Witness

This open access book is the biography of one of Britain’s foremost animal welfare campaigners and of the world of activism, science, and politics she inhabited. In 1964, Ruth Harrison’s bestseller Animal Machines triggered a gear change in modern animal protection by popularising the term ‘factory farming’ alongside a new way of thinking about animal welfare. Here, historian Claas Kirchhelle explores Harrison’s avant-garde upbringing, Quakerism, and how animal welfare debates were linked to concerns about the wider ethical and environmental trajectories of post-war Britain. Breaking the myth of Harrison as a one-hit wonder, Kirchhelle reconstructs Harrison’s 46 years of campaigning and the rapid transformation of welfare politics and science during this time. Exacerbated by Harrison’s own actions, the decades after 1964 saw a polarisation of animal politics, a professionalisation of British activism, and the rise of a new animal welfare science. Harrison’s belief in incremental reform allowed her to form ties to leading scientists but alienated her from more radical campaigners. Many of her 1964 demands gradually became part of mainstream politics. However, farm animal welfare’s increasing marketisation has also led to a relative divorce from the wider agenda of social improvement that Harrison once bore witness to. This is the first book to cast light on the interlinked histories of British farm animal welfare activism, science, and legislation. Its unique scope allows it to go beyond existing accounts of modern British animal welfare and will be of interest to those interested in animal welfare, environmentalism, and the behavioural sciences

Pyrrhic Progress

Pyrrhic Progress analyses over half a century of antibiotic use, regulation, and resistance in US and British food production. Mass-introduced after 1945, antibiotics helped revolutionize post-war agriculture. Food producers used antibiotics to prevent and treat disease, protect plants, preserve food, and promote animals’ growth. Many soon became dependent on routine antibiotic use to sustain and increase production. The resulting growth of antibiotic infrastructures came at a price. Critics blamed antibiotics for leaving dangerous residues in food, enabling bad animal welfare, and selecting for antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in bacteria, which could no longer be treated with antibiotics. Pyrrhic Progress reconstructs the complicated negotiations that accompanied this process of risk prioritization between consumers, farmers, and regulators on both sides of the Atlantic. Unsurprisingly, solutions differed: while Europeans implemented precautionary antibiotic restrictions to curb AMR, consumer concerns and cost-benefit assessments made US regulators focus on curbing drug residues in food. The result was a growing divergence of antibiotic stewardship and a rise of AMR. Kirchhelle’s comprehensive analysis of evolving non-human antibiotic use and the historical complexities of antibiotic stewardship provides important insights for current debates on the global burden of AMR

Toxic confusion: the dilemma of antibiotic regulation in West German food production (1951–1990)

• Cultural risk prioritization strongly influences antibiotic regulation. • West German risk vernaculars and epistemes were residue-focussed. • Hazards resulting from bacterial resistance selection were neglected. • Successful bacterial resistance regulation depends on effective risk staging

Hardwiring antimicrobial resistance mitigation into global policy

This is the final version. Available on open access from Oxford University Press via the DOI in this recordIn the wake of COVID-19, antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has become termed the 'silent pandemic', with a growing number of editorials warning that international momentum for AMR mitigation is being lost amidst the global turmoil of COVID-19, economic crises and the climate emergency. Yet, is it sufficient to now simply turn the volume of the pre-existing AMR policy discourse back up? Although existing AMR initiatives have previously achieved high levels of international attention, their impact remains limited. We believe it is time to critically reflect on the achievements of the past 7 years and adapt our AMR policies based on the substantial literature and evidence base that exists on the socioecological drivers of AMR. We argue that developing a more sustainable and impactful response requires a shift away from framing AMR as a unique threat in competition with other global challenges. Instead, we need to move towards an approach that emphasizes AMR as inherently interlinked and consciously hardwires upstream interventions into broader global developmental agendas.University of ExeterWellcome TrustNorwegian Research Counci

Universal Methods for Transgene Induction Using the Dexamethasone-Inducible Transcription Activation System pOp6/LhGR in Arabidopsis and Other Plant Species

The use of chemically inducible systems for transgenes expression is a crucial requirement for modern plant biology research, as it allows (1) expression of transgenes that compromise plant viability or fertility when constitutively expressed and (2) spatio-temporal control of transgene expression levels. We describe the stringently regulated and highly responsive dexamethasone-inducible gene expression system pOp6/LhGR, which comprises of a chimeric transcription activator LhGR and a corresponding pOp6 promoter. Upon induction, the LhGR activator binds to the pOp6 promotor and induces expression of the target gene of interest. We provide detailed protocols for inducing transgene expression at different developmental stages and in different plant species and discuss dexamethasone stability and the use of its analogues. We also introduce new, versatile, GATEWAYTM compatible binary vectors that are now available for the pOp6/LhGR system

Why is the UK subscription model for antibiotics considered successful?

Commen

Reinventing the antimicrobial pipeline in response to the global crisis of antimicrobial-resistant infections

Opinion article. The pipeline for new antibiotics is dry. Despite the creation of public/private initiatives like Combating Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria Biopharmaceutical Accelerator (Carb-X) and the Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Centre, the current focus on ‘push-pull’ incentives for the pharmaceutical industry still relies on economic return. We propose a joint, internationally-funded antimicrobial development institute that would fund permanent staff to take on roles previously assigned to pharmaceutical companies. This institute would receive ring-fenced, long-term, core funding from participating countries as well as charities, with the aim to focus on transforming the largely dormant antimicrobial pipeline. Resulting drugs would be sold globally and according to a principle of shared burdens. Our proposed model for antimicrobial development aims to maximise society’s investment, through open science, investment in people, and the sharing of intellectual property

There is no market for new antibiotics: This allows an open approach to research and development

There is an increasingly urgent need for new antibiotics, yet there is a significant and persistent economic problem when it comes to developing such medicines. The problem stems from the perceived need for a 'market' to drive commercial antibiotic development. In this article, we explore abandoning the market as a prerequisite for successful antibiotic research and development. Once one stops trying to fix a market model that has stopped functioning, one is free to carry out research and development (R&D) in ways that are more openly collaborative, a mechanism that has been demonstrably effective for the R&D underpinning the response to the COVID pandemic. New 'open source' research models have great potential for the development of medicines for areas of public health where the traditional profit-driven model struggles to deliver. New financial initiatives, including major push/pull incentives, aimed at fixing the broken antibiotics market provide one possible means for funding an openly collaborative approach to drug development. We argue that now is therefore the time to evaluate, at scale, whether such methods can deliver new medicines through to patients, in a timely manner