Zoey Freedman: Dining Services should explore antibiotic-free meat as an option

We often turn to antibiotics when we’re fighting off an infection, but not when we’re enjoying a burger for lunch.

Livestock are often fed antibiotics on farms to keep them healthy and fat. But these antibiotics are thought to reduce the effectiveness of human medicines and may lead to a breeding ground for superbugs, or strains of disease-causing bacteria that is resistant to most or all antibiotics.

In an effort to avoid the ill effects of antibiotics in meat, the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center and UCLA Medical Center, Santa Monica have begun to serve antibiotic-free meat in their cafeterias through the Health Care Without Harm’s Healthy Food in Health Care program and the Healthier Hospitals Initiative.

UCLA Dining Services should follow the medical centers’ lead to get ahead of the curve, and hopefully ahead of an epidemic, by looking to phase in antibiotic-free meat at on-campus dining facilities.

Exploring the antibiotic-free meat option would also go further in UCLA’s attempts to encourage ethical treatment of food animals and inform students about where their meals come from.

Antibiotic-free animals are raised in safer, healthier circumstances that do not require the use of drugs to prevent mass breakouts of disease. These safer living conditions are not only more humane for the animals, but also better for the environment.

UCLA dining halls already serve only cage-free eggs from chickens raised on an antibiotic-free diet in an effort to support humane treatment of poultry. In addition, programs like Beef-less Thursdays seek to improve student health and decrease environmental impact.

While hospital cafeterias and dining halls present different challenges and benefits, the principle is the same: When making institutional decisions, UCLA is obligated to pay heed to ethical issues such as student health and animal treatment.

So while UCLA dining halls might not be the petri dish where a superbug develops into an epidemic, the moral imperative behind choosing to consume livestock raised in healthier and safer circumstances is enough of a reason to look toward antibiotic-free meat as an option.

The hospitals are still in the process of transitioning completely to antibiotic-free meat and Dining Services can use its efforts as an experiment to find the best way to implement the program without causing large price increases for students.

Currently, about 30 percent of the hospitals’ meat purchases consist of antibiotic-free meat, including antibiotic-free chicken breast, beef patties and ground beef. The initiative is being pursued with the goal of eventually having all meat be antibiotic-free.

So far, the switch to antibiotic-free meat has cost the hospitals about $20,000 annually. But prices will not increase for consumers because of budget restructuring by the medical centers, meaning this healthy and sustainable option does not come at an additional price for the hospitals.

Dining halls can follow the hospitals’ model to find a budgeting plan to make sure food options remain affordable for both the university and students. And even if there are costs associated with the change, it is incumbent on the Office of Residential Life to at least broach the subject and see if students would be willing to foot part of the bill.

The hospitals’ move puts the spotlight on the issue of food sourcing and a similar shift by the dining halls could increase the magnitude of that awareness. Bringing attention to food issues that students may not even be aware of can increase demand for healthier dining and aid in the smooth implementation of this new initiative on campus.

Students never seem to ask about the meat they’re served in dining halls or at on-campus dining facilities. But if offered the option of a burger pumped with antibiotics or a burger without, the choice should be clear.

Email Freedman at [email protected] or tweet her @ZoeyFreedman. Send general comments to [email protected] or tweet us @DBOpinion.