Evidence of meeting #7 for Science and Research in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amr.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Liberal
Liberal
Jennifer McKelvie Liberal Ajax, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
My first question is to Dr. Barkema, and it's about environment.
We know things like carbamazepine pass through the body very easily and end up in waste water. Once they get into the treatment plant, they're very hard to break down.
Where are we in the state of science with antimicrobial drugs passing through the body, through the sewage system and into the environment?
Professor, Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, As an Individual
A lot of the drugs in animals and humans are shed through urine and feces. They end up in waste water or in runoff of farms and end up in the rivers, but we don't measure that at all. We don't look at antimicrobials, at antimicrobial resistance or antimicrobial resistance genes in water.
The people who work in water are not looking for another thing they have to check, but they need to be pushed, and there needs to be money to do that. That is really important.
Liberal
Jennifer McKelvie Liberal Ajax, ON
Are there standards on fertilizer? We know that manure from animals is then spread on farms. Are these the sorts of things we need to be looking at in a strategy, a monitoring network and standards and testing for fertilizer?
Professor, Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, As an Individual
I would have to look into that. I'm sorry; that's not my area.
Liberal
Jennifer McKelvie Liberal Ajax, ON
My next question is for Dr. Bogoch. I know you want to talk about phage.
We spend a lot of time focusing on the 100-plus or so bad bacteria that want to kill us. We have a lot of good bacteria.
How do we strike that balance on disinfectant and controlling bad bacteria but making sure that we're not wearing down the good bacteria that can also help fight disease?
Where are we in terms of thinking on the environment, open air hospitals, operating rooms and things like that? How do we strike that balance, and where are we in that regard?
October 6th, 2025 / 11:50 a.m.
Infectious Diseases Specialist, Toronto General Hospital and Professor of Medicine, University of Toronto, As an Individual
I really appreciate your bringing that question up. It's so important.
We often vilify micro-organisms, but they're an integral part of our ecosystem. Birds live in the trees, fish live in water and bacteria live all over the place, including on our bodies; and they do good things. The issue, of course, is that once in a while they get into the wrong place and cause disease.
The key word here is “stewardship”. We don't give antibiotics out like Halloween candy. We use them appropriately when someone is ill. When we start using them inappropriately, with misuse or overuse, we run into problems.
There are no issues with clinicians or doctors prescribing antibiotics for routine medical issues. That's not going to impact us if we use them appropriately. Where we run into problems is in the animal health sector, where 70% of the global consumption of antibiotics.... That is a key driver. If we ignore that, we're missing the point.
It's an issue when a physician accidentally gives an antibiotic for a viral respiratory tract infection. We need to work on that and do better, but we cannot ignore the other 70%.
Again, if we use the antibiotics appropriately, we'll be okay, and we'll preserve this very vital resource.
Infectious Diseases Specialist, Toronto General Hospital and Professor of Medicine, University of Toronto, As an Individual
These phages, bacteriophages, are amazing. Basically, in ultra, ultra drug-resistant infections, you can use a targeted virus that will kill that specific bacteria. That technology exists. It's used infrequently throughout the world. We have that technology in Canada.
One issue is that it's tough to regulate. It's not a mass-produced product that has all the regulatory bodies. If we want to use it, we have to go through a very appropriate and timely process to ensure that, for that specific instance, it's approved.
Anti-microbial resistance is not going away. This is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. It is not a matter of Canada doing the right thing; it's the world doing the right thing. We can get ahead of this. We can start to figure out how to use phage therapy more effectively and more rapidly.
This would be one of many important areas to study. We're looking at science and research, and this is one important pillar that often gets ignored.
Liberal
Jennifer McKelvie Liberal Ajax, ON
Then, in the small amount of time I have left, Dr. Conly, I know we have the pan-Canadian study on "one health" and that's working. Are there some priorities that you would like to make sure we are aware of at this point?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
Thank you.
We will now proceed to Monsieur Blanchette-Joncas for two and a half minutes. Please go ahead.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Castonguay, I agree with you. The five pillars are essential. They are innovation, prevention, surveillance, research and stewardship. That being said, from an economic standpoint, underfunding any of these pillars will end up costing more money in the long term. You prepared an economic estimate ahead of this meeting. Could you forward it to the committee?
According to your analysis, what would be the difference in Canadian dollars between a scenario where we invest right now to combat antimicrobial resistance and a scenario that maintains the status quo?
Assistant Professor of Health Economics, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
I’d like to clarify that I didn’t prepare an analysis per se, but I prepared a brief that sets out my arguments. I sent it to the committee, so you should be able to get hold of it.
I gave the example of a measure that I found in the literature, which was based on data from Canada and the United Kingdom. The data show that whole genome sequencing is one measure that could save $70 million annually in the Canadian context. This is a simple measure that we can implement. We have the technology. It’s one example of the many measures that could reduce costs. It's important to understand that this measure would save money. To help health systems, which are stretched to the limit, we need such measures, which will keep people healthy and bring health care costs down.
Bloc
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Do you have other essential recommendations that you’ve not had the opportunity to share today?
Assistant Professor of Health Economics, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
I agree with my colleagues. It’s important to adopt integrated approaches to address this issue, which increasingly involves multiple sectors. Decisions can no longer be made in isolation. We really need to introduce multisectoral public policies and make multisectoral decisions. For example, focusing exclusively on human health in policy development hinders the formulation of truly effective policies. We need to adopt integrated approaches to implement best policies.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Salma Zahid
We will have the last two for two minutes each. We will start with Mr. Baldinelli, then we will go to the Liberals for two minutes and then we will end this panel.
Mr. Baldinelli, you have two minutes.
Conservative
Tony Baldinelli Conservative Niagara Falls—Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses for being with us today.
All of you talked about the pan-Canadian action plan from 2023. Dr. Castonguay and Dr. Barkema, you spoke about the need to break down barriers that exist within all these government departments. Looking at the excellent briefing note that was prepared by our analyst, there's a combination of 14 departments and agencies all working on AMR.
To your point, how does one get to that point of breaking down barriers so there is no duplication? Valuable funds that need to be spent in this area could be used wisely if there were more coordination. Do you agree? Do you find that to be one of the issues?
Professor, Epidemiology of Infectious Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary, As an Individual
Yes, and I think we need an organization that really governs and organizes this and brings all the people together. Without that, we will spend a lot of time on AMR. In the years that I have been in Canada, I have not seen sufficient progress there. We need an organization that really brings everybody together.
