Can a New White House Plan Catch Up to the “Superbug” Threat?


March 27, 2015

With the global health community increasingly on edge about the threat from potentially deadly bacteria that are immune to many of today’s most common antibiotics, the White House on Friday released an ambitious plan to stem the spread of such so-called superbugs.

The primary challenge of the superbug threat is that the more modern medicine makes use of antibiotics, the more resistant many germs can become to the drugs. Under the administration’s National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria, the government would have until 2020 to meet five broad objectives. The plan calls for slowing the spread of drug-resistant bacteria; improving the tracking of outbreaks; speeding the development of tests designed to cut unnecessary antibiotic use; getting new drugs to the market faster; and strengthening international cooperation around the issue.

“Antibiotics have been a critical public health tool since the discovery of penicillin in 1928, saving the lives of millions of people around the world,” according to an executive summary of the plan. “Today, however, the emergence of drug-resistance in bacteria is reversing miracles of the past 80 years, with drug choices for the treatment of many bacterial infections becoming increasingly limited, expensive, and, in some cases, nonexistent.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that drug-resistant bacteria cause 2 million illnesses in the U.S. every year, and kill another 23,000. In May, the World Health Organization characterized the problem as “so serious that it threatens the achievements of modern medicine.”

The White House plan calls on the CDC to reduce the rates of some of the deadliest and most widespread infections. For example, infections from carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae, which was linked to at least two deaths at a UCLA medical center last month, would decline by 60 percent. Clostridium difficile infections, which surged 400 percent between 2000 and 2007, would be cut by half, according to the plan’s targets.

To get there, the administration is seeking fixes big and small. Hospitals, for instance, would be asked to boost basic infection control procedures, like getting doctors and nurses to wash their hands. Larger initiatives include doubling screenings for tuberculosis among migrants coming from countries with high incidences of the disease from 500,000 to 1 million people per year.

The plan also takes aim at the problem of antibiotic use in food animals, which public health officials have long suspected of contributing to the rise and spread of superbugs. Up to 70 percent of all antibiotics now sold in the U.S. are used in food animals, in part because the drugs have come to be used not to treat a specific medical condition, but to help animals grow faster on less feed. To address the risk, the administration’s is calling on the Food and Drug Administration to eliminate the use of medically important antibiotics to promote growth in food animals.

Although the initiative represents the government’s first-ever attempt to broadly address the issue of antibiotic resistance, the plan has been quickly dismissed by some scientists and lawmakers for not going far enough. In an interview with Politico, Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.), the only microbiologist in Congress, said that goals set for 2020 are too far off to make up for lost ground.

“I’ve said to people, ‘Right now your government is not going to protect you,'” said Slaughter. “They’re about 10 years behind.”

Related Film: Hunting the Nightmare Bacteria

FRONTLINE investigates the rise of deadly drug-resistant bacteria.

Jason M. Breslow

Jason M. Breslow, Former Digital Editor



In order to foster a civil and literate discussion that respects all participants, FRONTLINE has the following guidelines for commentary. By submitting comments here, you are consenting to these rules:

Readers' comments that include profanity, obscenity, personal attacks, harassment, or are defamatory, sexist, racist, violate a third party's right to privacy, or are otherwise inappropriate, will be removed. Entries that are unsigned or are "signed" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. We reserve the right to not post comments that are more than 400 words. We will take steps to block users who repeatedly violate our commenting rules, terms of use, or privacy policies. You are fully responsible for your comments.

blog comments powered by Disqus

More Stories

What’s the Status of Healthcare for Women in Afghanistan Under the Taliban?
Before the Taliban took control of Afghanistan in August 2021, many women and girls were already struggling to receive adequate healthcare. A year later, the situation has worsened, sources told FRONTLINE. "It’s an absolute cataclysm,” said Heather Barr, associate director of women’s rights at Human Rights Watch.
August 9, 2022
‘Say to the Whole World, They Don’t Let Us Talk’: Women Held for ‘Immoral Behavior’ at a Taliban Prison Speak Out
In the FRONTLINE documentary ‘Afghanistan Undercover,’ Ramita Navai reports the Taliban has jailed women for ‘immoral behavior’ and held them without trial. Watch an excerpt.
August 9, 2022
The Disconnect: Power, Politics and the Texas Blackout
In February 2021, days-long blackouts in Texas left millions shivering in the dark. Hundreds died. How has the Texas grid changed since then? And how has it changed how people think?
August 8, 2022
'You Feel Safe One Second and Then Boom': A Conversation With the Filmmakers of 'Ukraine: Life Under Russia's Attack'
The filmmakers of "Ukraine: Life Under Russia's Attack" spoke about documenting life under bombardment and why they felt it was important to bring this story to an American audience.
August 2, 2022