What consumers think this claim means

When shoppers see “No Antibiotics Ever,” “Raised Without Antibiotics,” or “Antibiotic-Free,” most assume the animals were raised without antibiotics—and that choosing those products helps reduce antibiotic resistance risk.

That intuition is understandable. But antibiotic labeling is one of the most misunderstood areas of U.S. meat labels.

---

What antibiotic claims actually mean (and what they do not)

1) Residues are not the same as on-farm use

All federally inspected meat must meet U.S. residue limits. That means “antibiotic-free” can be misleading if it is used to imply the meat is special simply because it has no unsafe residues. Residue compliance does not tell you whether antibiotics were used on the animal—only that withdrawal times and residue limits were met.

2) What changed in 2017 (and what did not)

In 2017, U.S. policy changes removed growth-promotion uses for medically important antibiotics and required veterinary authorization for medically important antibiotics administered through feed or water (via the Veterinary Feed Directive (VFD) or prescription).

However, medically important antibiotics may still be used under veterinary oversight for:

• Treatment (treating animals diagnosed with bacterial disease),
• Control (treating a group when some animals are sick to limit spread), and
• Prevention (dosing animals at risk of bacterial disease even when no clinical illness is present).

This is why a label that says nothing about antibiotics does not mean “no antibiotics were used.”

---

Why this matters now: the 2024 increase

In December 2025, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released its annual summary showing that sales/distribution of medically important antibiotics for food-producing animals increased 16% from 2023 to 2024.

Important limitation: FDA’s report tracks sales/distribution—not actual on-farm dosing—and species allocations can be imperfect when products are sold for multiple species. Even with those limitations, a large year-over-year increase is still a meaningful warning signal for antibiotic stewardship.

---

Did bird flu “cause” the increase?

Some observers have pointed to highly pathogenic avian influenza (bird flu) as a possible contributor to changing antibiotic use patterns. It is important to note that influenza is a viral disease, and antibiotics do not treat viruses.

That said, outbreaks and production disruptions can still be associated with increased antibiotic use for secondary bacterial infections or broader management responses. FDA’s sales/distribution data do not establish a single cause for the 2024 increase, and FAT does not assume one.

---

Common label terms and how FAT interprets them

FAT scoring focuses on two things: (1) what the claim actually promises, and (2) how the claim is verified (independent audit vs. producer documentation only).

“No Antibiotics Ever” / “Raised Without Antibiotics”

Meaning (when true): the animal did not receive antibiotics at any point in its life.

What varies: verification. Stronger versions are backed by credible independent audits and/or clearly disclosed program oversight. Weaker versions rely primarily on producer records without independent verification.

“No growth-promoting antibiotics”

This claim is frequently misunderstood. Since 2017, medically important antibiotics are not approved for growth promotion in U.S. food animals. Without a clear definition and verification, this claim may add little beyond what should already be true for medically important antibiotics.

“Antibiotic-free”

Not a reliable term. It is often used in ways that blur residues vs. on-farm use. FAT assigns no credit unless the producer defines the term in a way that is meaningful and verifiable (which is uncommon).

No antibiotic claim at all

Assume standard industry practices. Those practices can include medically important antibiotics used for prevention, control, or treatment under veterinary oversight.

---

How FAT evaluates antibiotic claims (Tier A / B / C)

Tier A — Full Credit

Clear “No Antibiotics Ever / Raised Without Antibiotics” claim supported by credible independent verification (for example, a program with auditing) and clear program controls.

Tier B — Partial Credit

Meaningful antibiotic restrictions supported by producer records and documentation, but without strong independent verification disclosed.

Tier C — Minimal or No Credit

Undefined marketing language (for example, “antibiotic-free”), vague wording (“responsible use”), or claims that do not clearly exceed legal minimums.