Lasalocid is a veterinary "antibiotic" which is given as a feed supplement to certain farm animals and poultry including birds destined to become layers. You can read all about this highly toxic heart poison and how it is seriously afflicting UK egg production in this April 2004 Soil Association report, "Too Hard To Crack".

Lasalocid is sold worldwide by the pharmaceutical company Alpharma as Avatec 15% and the report calls for 'the suspension of marketing authorization for Avatec 15%CC and Avatec 15%CC Game as a matter of urgency'. The report shows that in 2003 'many people will have ingested quantaties of lasalocid which exceeded, sometimes many times over, the Acceptable Daily Intake' and that the problem is getting worse. Lasalocid is not licensed for use in laying hens in the EU and it is thought that contaminated feed mills and lorries, and wrong feed deliveries may be the cause. No one has been prosecuted and when the highest level of lasalocid residue ever recorded (3,450 micrograms/kg) was detected in 2003 no attempts were made to recall the batch or trace its origin says the report. On page 6 of the report advice is given which states, 'Adults with heart problems should eat only organically produced eggs or, where this is not possible, should limit their egg consumption, including food containing eggs, to a maximum of two in a single day'. It is my belief that the advice given in the report stating that the consumption of two eggs per person per day is safe is wrong. I was eating two eggs per day most days and since 1997 (at only 43 years of age) I had been suffering greatly with many severe attacks of atrial fibrillation lasting about 18 hours each. Then in October of 2002, after reading a couple of old Soil Association reports detailing the dangers of lasalocid residues I quit eating eggs and I have not had one single attack of atrial fibrillation in 4 years - see the 2006 update. I do however still experience many episodes of dysrhythmia lasting about 20 or 30 seconds each on most days (a lasting legacy of lasalocid residues in eggs?). As a precaution I also quit consuming the other dairy products and pork meat - I never ate beef, lamb or poultry meat. It turns out that pork may have salinomycin residue (another highly toxic ionophore) and the dairy products milk and cheese may be contaminated with lasalocid residue from the illegal use of Bovatec in dairy cows. Poultry meat also has issues with lasalocid and monensin (yet another highly toxic ionophore).

On the 15^th of December 2003 the BBC Radio Four Farming Today Programme transmitted a convertsation between Richard Young of the Soil Association (UK) and Bob Stevenson of the British Veterinary Association. Richard Young said that a new government report due out today would show an alarming increase in levels of lasalocid residue in eggs. Based on the sample rates he said that last year 500 million eggs were estimated to be contaminated with lasalocid residues and that 40 millions were contaminated to a worryingly high level. Given that 27 million eggs are consumed daily in the UK the figure of 500 million poisoned eggs per year represents a whopping 20 percent contamination rate and the 40 million highly contaminated eggs represents a significant 2 percent of all eggs. Richard Young went on to say that he thought the drug should be banned and a safer alternative of which there are a few should be used instead or failing that then vaccination of the birds should be brought in but he didn't think that was likely because of the cost differential. Vaccination costs are 7 times the cost of the toxic drug lasalocid. Bob Stevenson of the British Veterinary Association urged caution at the idea of replacing lasalocid with another drug because of a fear of eventual drug resistance and the subsequent depletion in the drug armoury available for veterinary medicine. Then, on the 17^th Feb 2004 the BBC National Radio News reported that 'there is an atrial fibrillation epidemic' which 'is estimated to cost the UK 1% of its annual national healthcare budget' and that it has been estimated that 1 in 10 over 65's and that 1 in 100 people overall suffer with atrial fibrillation.

Soon after the April 2004 Soil Association report "To Hard To Crack" was published the Foods Standards Agency (UK) issued its response: 'The Food Standards Agency is reiterating its advice about eating eggs in the light of the Soil Association's report on a particular feed additive residue in eggs. The report does not raise any immediate health concerns but the Agency is continuing to press industry to ensure that the additive, lasalocid, is not found in eggs. Lasalocid is used against internal parasites in chickens. It is illegal to use it in the European Union for laying hens. The levels of lasalocid in eggs do not raise any immediate health concerns for consumers. However, for some time the FSA has been urging industry to address this problem and is disappointed by the failure of industry to take effective action against bad practice. The Agency is considering further measures, such as a survey of eggs with a view to providing consumers with information, and supporting enforcement action where necessary. The Agency's advice about eating eggs remains unchanged, but it will be kept under review in the light of new information'. What is its advice about how many eggs may be eaten? 'The FSA doesn't recommend a limit on how many eggs should be eaten'.

According to the Veterinary Residues Committee (VRC) 2004 report vrcar2004.pdf which is the most recent annual report at this time, on page 37 it states that (2.83%) or 8 of 283 samples analysed proved positive above 50 micrograms/Kg (action level) for lasalocid residues. They were 50, 67, 100, 100, 110, 190, 200 and 300 micrograms/Kg respectively. The situation in domestic quail eggs is worse with (36.6%) or 11 of 30 egg samples testing positive with values 40, 41, 46, 53, 55, 58, 64, 158, 170, 240 and 2399 micrograms/Kg lasalocid residues. The action level for domestic quail eggs is 40 micrograms/Kg.

It is worth noting here that the VRC have raised the action level from 2 micrograms/Kg in 2001 to 40 micrograms/Kg in 2002 and again to 50 micrograms/Kg in 2003. The changes mean that many low-level and even some mid-level findings are no longer being reported as positives and when the FSA says; 'the Agency is continuing to press industry to ensure that the additive, lasalocid, is not found in eggs' how will they then know if the VRC reports continue to hide low and mid-range findings of lasalocid residues in eggs? The following table from the April 2004 Soil Association report "Too Hard To Crack" shows how residue levels have been climbing year on year leaving so called "action levels" far behind:

It is readily apparent from the table that most of the positive reports in the years 1998 to 2001 inclusive would now fall below the VRC/VMD radar and count for nothing yet I was still suffering from atrial fibrillation attacks when lasalocid residues in eggs were that low. I also find it interesting that the period 2002 when lasalocid residues in eggs began to skyrocket was the same period when my atrial fibrillation attacks became the most severe. Just as the lasalocid residue in eggs was increasing so was my experience of atrial fibrillation in severity and frequency. Though the 2004 figures are just under one quarter the 2003 figures in terms of positive samples above the action level there is nothing to say that the other egg samples from the 2004 survey are not just as injurious and contaminated with lasalocid residues as the samples from earlier surveys were. It is quite possible that many of those abitrarily "magicked away" sub 50 microgram/Kg results will continue to be a significant health hazard even when all samples are showing sub action level lasalocid residues. There may be zero incidence of reported lasalocid in tested eggs and yet the eggs may still pose a grievous danger to the consumer. The danger could be multiplied by additional or synergistic effects which may occur when other foods with residues are consumed proximally or if medication is being taken.

It has recently (November 2006) been verified by this author that certain dairy products may present a danger to consumers. After four years without consuming any known significant amount of any dairy, meat or eggs this author consumed about one third of a pint of cows milk (organic) each day for three consecutive days and was then hit by a severe 18 hour atrial fibrillation attack later in the third day. My first attack after four years free from this hell. Lasalocid is not licensed for use in cattle in the EU but then neither was it licensed for use in egg laying hens but its residue was still found in eggs. I believe lasalocid (perhaps from Bovatec) or one of the other ionophores or some similarly acting compound as a residue is contaminating at least some of the milk supply. Since lasalocid and other similarly acting ionophores are still in wide spread use I believe that the same human health problems caused by the mistakes and malpractise which plagues egg production are absolutely bound to have their analogues in other areas of the industry such as meat and milk/dairy production. I cannot be the only person affected by this problem and after the statements heard on national news about 'the UK atrial fibrillation epidemic' I believe that the practise of using compounds such as lasalocid in animal farming may be responsible for a significant number of deaths due to heart failure among the elderly, frail and sick in the UK.

The Veterinary Residues Committee (VRC) 2005 report vrcar2005.pdf is out. It begins with an up-beat commentary by the chairman on, interestingly, the lasalocid in eggs problem (page 5); 'It was greatly encouraging to see only a single positive result for lasalocid in hen eggs in 2005, no doubt, largely following the decision of the British Egg Industry Council to ban their members from using it'. But lasalocid was not licensed for use in laying hens! The only sample that was above the 50 microgram/Kg action level out of 294 samples tested came in at 760 micrograms/Kg. In a follow-up on that particular farm just one sample was tested and was found to be positive for lasalocid residue at 290 micrograms/Kg. It also turns out that of two samples of hens feed tested (one grit and one feed) the feed sample was positive (above the 100 microgram/Kg action level) at 2,490 micrograms lasalocid/Kg feed. See http://www.vet-residues-committee.gov.uk/papers/open2/vrc0529.htm for details of the followup. What this means is that this particular farm was churning out dangerously toxic hen eggs for a period of time. It's not just one sample. And then we must think about all the arbitrarily "magicked away" samples representing the many millions of eggs produced nationwide that may be contaminated with lasalocid residues of up to 50 micrograms/Kg. How can we know if the 'British Egg Industry Councils' ban on lasalocid' has been fully observed if the VRC doesn't publish findings below 50 micrograms/Kg? Another ionophore, salinomycin, also very toxic to humans, was detected in one sample out of the 294 samples tested, at a level of 15 micrograms/Kg. The action level for salinomycin residue was 2 micrograms/Kg as of the 2005 survey.

On page 2 of the report the VRC say, 'if there are no health concerns associated with particular residues, the VRC can recommend that a higher concentration is set, the Action Level. This is to prioritise the limited resources for investigations'. They don't have to investigate samples below their so called action level but they could at least publish those findings in their reports in order that a proper comparison with earlier data can be made by the reader. And how can the VRC imply that there are no health concerns in regard of lasalocid residues in eggs at the lower end of the scale (sub-action level) when what experiments that have been done with animals have shown that lasalocid is cardio-toxic at the microgram/Kg level. It is also known that lasalocid hangs around in the body thus levels will build up each time eggs or other similarly contaminated foods are consumed. It is clear from the VRC and Soil Association reports listed in this paper that eggs are not the only food to contain residues of toxic substances like lasalocid. If eggs with residues of lasalocid are consumed with other foods containing residues of the same or of similarly acting compounds and even if they are individually at sub-action levels the combined effect could still prove serious due to additive, synergistic or other effects. This could happen with broiler livers (monensin - another lethally cardio-toxic ionophore), chicken meat (lasalocid) or milk (lasalocid from illegal Bovatec use in dairy cows) for example. As a consumer how can I know if eggs are safe to eat if the VRC no longer publish findings which are below 50 micrograms lasalocid residue/Kg egg sample? I cannot know, therefore I cannot eat eggs nor can I eat any other food which might possibly have ionophore residue levels comparable to the ones which were causing me such harm between 1997 and October 2002. As for milk, the VRC doesn't even test it for ionophores (page 25). My November 2006 experience suggests that there is something in the milk. Then on page 22 they say, 'positive figures for lasalocid are based on the current reporting limit of 50 micrograms/kg. This was to have a common base for consistency'. Well, if the VRC wanted to be consistent then they would surely have continued to publish their findings in a manner that was consistent with earlier reports. That is to say residue levels down to 2 micrograms/Kg should have been recorded, that after all was the reporting limit in the earlier surveys. Changing action levels (the reporting limit) as you go along from survey to survey is not what I would call being consistent.

While the industry is to be commended in regard of it's reduction of lasalocid residue levels in eggs the VRC does not appear to be concerned with the low to medium levels of lasalocid residue in eggs, they imply that there are no health concerns at those levels. I suffered greatly even when those levels were generally low and consequently I would prefer to be assured that sub action levels of lasalocid residue are gone before I eat any eggs again. In fact I believe that the best thing would be if the ionophores as a group were completely withdrawn.

Soil Association (UK) press release 16 Jan 2002: Up to three-quarters of a million eggs eaten every day contain residues of a toxic drug that is widely used by intensive poultry farmers, according to a new report published today (16 January) by the Soil Association. The UK's leading organic organisation is calling for an immediate ban on lasalocid (pronounced la-sal-o-sid) which is found in 2.6 per cent of chicken eggs and also in chicken meat. Lasalocid was present in 60 percent of the quails eggs tested by the Government's Veterinary Medicines Directorate. The report will be discussed at a meeting with the Food Standards Agency today, which will be attended by nearly 100 organisations and called as a result of a previous Soil Association publication "Too hard to swallow" the truth about drugs and poultry. Lasalocid is too toxic to ever be used in medicine and has been shown to have potent effects on animals at low levels: rabbit hearts contract when exposed to the drug a discovery which prompted an experiment in 1974 using human heart muscle. Rapid contractions were observed and were still evident an hour after the drug had been given. Alison Craig, the reports author says, "Even low levels of lasalocid are dangerous to mammals and this raises concerns about how toxic the drug is to humans. We know that this drug hangs around in the body, so we could be accumulating it every time we eat eggs or chicken. The Government's testing programme for such residues is wholly inadequate, only one out of every 18 million eggs is analysed." Consumers are theoretically protected from veterinary drugs residues by maximum residue limits set by the European Commission. However, as lasalocid is classified as a feed additive, no limit has been set. Daily doses of lasalocid are routinely given to chickens and turkeys in their feed as a preventative treatment against coccidiosis - an infectious disease caused by a parasite which damages the birds intestines and causes illness and sometimes death. When large numbers of animals are crowded together (up to 100,000 birds may be kept in one unit) in warm and moist conditions, outbreaks of coccidiosis are likely to occur. Lasalocid is not prescribed by vets but sold as a feed additive directly to producers by pharmaceutical companies and feed merchants. Consumers who want to avoid poultry that may contain residues of this drug should look for Soil Association certified organic meat and eggs as lasalocid is not used by the organisation's licensed farmers. Lasalocid is not the only highly toxic drug fed to poultry which was finding it's way onto the kitchen table.

A June 2001 Soil Association report details the following: Nicarbazin has never been carefully evaluated for safety in humans. Studies have shown it can cause both birth defects and hormonal problems in animals. In 1999, the last year for which full figures are available, 17.8 per cent of chicken livers tested has residues of nicarbazin in excess of the Maximum Residue Limit of 200 micrograms per kg., the highest being 10,500 micrograms per kg., over fifty times the legally permitted level. Since then 127 out of 700 (18 per cent) of chicken livers tested have contained residues of nicarbazin. It is also been found in approximately 2 per cent of eggs. Where nicarbazin is present in liver it will also be present in flesh at lower levels. Dimetridazole (DMZ) has never been properly evaluated for as a contaminant of human food. Scientific committees disagree about its safety, but it is suspected of being able to induce both cancer and birth defects. It is licensed for turkeys and pheasants rather than chicken or laying hens yet in 1998 2 per cent, and in 1999, 0.5 per cent of eggs contained residues of DMZ. Lasalocid is not licensed for laying hens. It is a member of the potent cardio-toxic ionophores which have never been properly evaluated as residues in food. No Maximum Residue Limit has been set. Yet in 1999, one in every dozen eggs (8.5 per cent) tested contained residues of lasalocid above the informal action level of 100 micrograms per kg. The highest of these was 5,400 micrograms per kg. 12 per cent of chicken muscle also tested positive. In addition the drug is found in quail muscle and chicken liver. The Soil Association said it believes government regulators have seriously misled the public about the high incidence of dangerous drug residues found in chicken and eggs. Richard Young, coordinator of the Soil Association's campaign against the overuse of antibiotics in intensive farming says, 'Despite repeated assertions by regulators that nearly all poultry products are free from detectable residues, figures show clearly that about 20 per cent of chicken meat and 10 per cent of the eggs tested contain residues of drugs deemed too dangerous for use in human medicine.' Richard Young and Alison Craig, authors of the Soil Association report 'Too Hard to Swallow, the truth about drugs and poultry' challenge statements from senior officials in the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD, the executive agency of Maff responsible for residue surveillance), who assert that approximately '99 per cent of poultry meat and 97 per cent of eggs are free of detectable residues.' The report exposes that this distortion is achieved by a statistical trick. The results of positive tests for individual drugs are expressed as a percentage of all tests undertaken for all substance (most of which are never found). Of most concern are the drugs used to control tiny intestinal parasites in poultry and game birds that can cause severe losses in intensive production systems. These include nicarbazin, lascalocid and dimetridazole, all of which pose potential risks to animal or human health. Mr. Young continued, 'These antimicrobial drugs have never been properly evaluated for safety, but there is evidence that they have the ability to cause cancer, birth defects and heart attacks. Some residue samples are more than 50 times over the legal limit, yet the VMD has brought no prosecutions. We want to see their use stopped as quickly as possible.' The Soil Association says that more chickens should be reared organically where the routine use of drugs is not permitted. Intensive poultry producers could use vaccines instead of adding antimicrobials to feed, which would effectively reduce the risk of residues. However, vaccines cost almost 7p per bird, which for some producers is their entire profit margin per chicken. The Soil Association believes that consumers would willingly pay a little extra for chickens produced without these drugs.

The Guardian (UK) June 4^th, 2001 Special report - What's wrong with our food? titled "Drug traces in chickens 'pose health risk'" by James Meikle, health correspondent: About one in five chickens slaughtered for the dinner table contains traces of potentially dangerous drugs, according to a report which is to be studied by the government's food standards agency. Consumers might be at extra risk of cancer, heart attacks or producing defects in foetuses, because millions of birds and eggs eaten each year have residues from veterinary medicines used to treat poultry diseases, said the report, published last night by the Soil Association, the campaign group for organic farming. Its authors called for the use of such drugs to be banned while checks were made into their safety. They also accused veterinary watchdogs of misleading the public over the levels of residues. Richard Young, the association's policy adviser, said: "Despite repeated assertions by regulators that nearly all poultry products are free from detectable residues, figures show clearly that about 20% of chicken meat and 10% of the eggs tested contain residues of drugs deemed too dangerous for use in human medicine." The food agency said that the report was a welcome contribution to a debate in an important area. He added that it would invite the veterinary medicines directorate (VMD) - the agency responsible for monitoring residues - the authors, and other specialists to discuss the concerns. A spokesman said: "This is a complex area with differing expert views. The agency is keen to ensure that consumers are protected from any potentially harmful residues that occur in food and favour their use being kept to a minimum." The report alleged that the VMD pulled a "statistical trick" by asserting 99% of poultry meat and 97% of eggs were free of detectable residues. This expressed the proportion of negative samples as a percentage of all tests undertaken for all substances. But closer scrutiny of data revealed a more alarming picture, said the report. The drugs of most concern were those used to control internal para sites in poultry and game birds. In 1999, nicarbazin was found in 18% of chicken livers tested and in about 2% of eggs. Studies had shown it could cause birth defects and hormonal problems in animals. Lasalocid, which may damage the heart, was not even licensed for laying hens but had been found in one in every dozen eggs. It had also been detected in 12% of chicken muscle. Dimetridazole, suspected of being able to induce cancer and birth defects, was licensed for use in turkeys and pheasants, but had been found in one in 200 chicken eggs in 1999. Mr Young said: "These antimicrobial drugs have never been properly evaluated for safety, but there is evidence that they have the ability to cause cancer, birth defects and heart attacks. Some residue samples are more than 50 times over the legal limit, yet the VMD has brought no prosecutions. We want to see their use stopped as quickly as possible." Britons eat more than 750m chickens a year, accounting for nearly 40% of all meat sold, as well as nearly 10bn eggs. Low prices have helped create the surge in demand but the association argues consumers would be prepared to pay the little extra that would result from intensive producers vaccinating their birds rather than using drugs. The VMD denied statistical trickery. A spokesman said: "These are active ingredients which do have recommended levels and are safe from a veterinary point of view in the right dosage. We investigate where residues seem to be high." Roger Cook, from the National Office for Animal Health, representing the drug industry, said the anti-parasite treatments had made modern production possible. "There are vaccines but they are not as widely appropriate as the Soil Association is implying." The British Egg Industry Council accused the Soil Association of using "outdated" figures from 1999, but even then levels of nicarbazin were minute. No residues from nicabarzin had been found in eggs in 2000 and other residues in eggs were minimal. Problems had been caused by accidental contamination in feed mills or on farms.

Other information www.foodwatch.ca/know/eggs.htm: There are no studies evaluating the toxicity of ionophore to humans. Laboratory tests have, however, shown that the ionophore lasalocid has a strong effect on the human heart muscle at low levels and monensin, another routinely used ionophore, has been found to have a similar cardio-vascular effect in dogs at levels as low as one millionth of a gram per kilogram. Many of the animals that have died from ionophore poisoning have died from heart failure. Ionophores could be a particular danger to children and older people as they eat more eggs than any other group. Also, ionophore drugs can react negatively with some prescription medicines, yet doctors have not been notified of the possible presence of dietary ionophore residues in eggs.

This site is hosted for FREE by . Click here to get your own Free Website!