Nezam El-Tayebat Fact CheckA scientific assessment of the “نظام الطيبات” nutrition system
Choose country
Choose language: English

Mostly true Scientifically well supported Certainty of evidence: moderate provisional C-RES-05

Antibiotics were (and are) used in poultry production to make chickens grow faster.

In short: This claim is correct: low-dose antibiotics were used to make chickens grow faster, are banned for this purpose in the EU since 2006, and are still used non-therapeutically on many Egyptian farms; their growth effect is small (about 3% better feed conversion), while modern fast growth comes mainly from breeding.
Conclusion: Historically correct; banned in the EU since 2006.
  1. Original statement
  2. Scientific assessment
  3. Scientific evidence in detail
  4. In plain language
  5. Studies on this claim
  6. Regional context
  7. What applies in my country?
  8. References

Original statement

كبر لك الفراخ بالمضادات الحيويه فهو عارف يكبر فرخه من 10 جرام كتكوت خلاها فرخه 3 كيلو في 40 يوم

verbatim according to source. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.

Translation

Antibiotics were (and are) used in poultry production to make chickens grow faster.

Origin

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live!لايف بصراحة (Open source)
Published
27 January 2026
Timestamp
0:59:35 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps; 'published' is the date listed by the archive. Passage read in context.
Claimed mechanism

Microbiome-mediated growth promotion.

Claimed health effect

Faster growth of chickens.

Geographic restriction by Elawady

none found

Diverging source versions

المضاد الحيوي والكيماوي بيزود العيان وزن

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live! الموت المفاجيء (Open source)
Published
14 July 2025
Timestamp
0:27:05 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps; 'published' is the date listed by the archive. Passage read in context.

Scientific assessment

Mostly true – Correct at its core, but with limitations or minor inaccuracies.

Certainty of evidence: moderate – Further research may still affect the assessment.

1. What was claimed?

Antibiotics make chickens grow.

2. What is demonstrably correct?

Antibiotics were authorised as feed additives in the EU until 31 December 2005 and then banned (I-RES-04). A meta-analysis of 183 experiments found that antibiotic growth promoters increase weight gain and improve feed conversion, mainly in the first three weeks (I-RES-111). Cox et al. reproduce the growth-promoting effect in mice (A-ABX-03). In Egypt, 65% of surveyed farms reported non-therapeutic use (I-CHK-117). WHO recommends complete restriction of growth promotion (I-CHK-118).

3. What is wrong or exaggerated?

The implication that today's broiler growth is due to antibiotics is not supported. The average effect is small (about 3% better feed conversion, with wide variation; I-RES-112), whereas genetic selection increased broiler growth by over 400% between 1957 and 2005 on the same feed (I-INTA-11). In the Egyptian survey, non-therapeutic use did not improve feed conversion (I-CHK-117).

4. What remains unclear?

Current growth-promoter use in Egypt.

5. Which studies support it?

I-RES-04, I-RES-111, A-ABX-03, I-CHK-117, I-CHK-118.

6. Which studies contradict it?

I-INTA-11 (growth from genetics), I-RES-112 (small effect).

7. What applies to Germany and Europe?

Banned since 2006.

8. What is known about Egypt?

Non-therapeutic antibiotic use (prevention or growth promotion) reported by 65% of 111 surveyed farms; half used colistin (I-CHK-117).

9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?

Historically correct; not a description of current EU practice.

Assessment details

Rationale for certainty of evidence

Growth promotion with sub-therapeutic antibiotics is historically well established (it is why the EU banned the practice in 2006) and is the basis of the mouse model in A-ABX-03. However, the fast growth of modern broilers (about 40 days to slaughter weight) is mainly due to genetics and feed, not antibiotics (general animal science; no source fetched), and EU broilers have been raised without antibiotic growth promoters since 2006.

Source quality

Machine transcript.

Regional transferability

EU: banned since 2006; elsewhere practice varies.

Regional scope of the claim
not specified
Last reviewed
26 October 2026 provisional

Scientific evidence in detail

Scientifically well supported – The claim agrees with consistent, high-quality evidence.

Research question: Were (and are) antibiotics used in poultry production to make chickens grow faster, and how large is the effect?

Research question in detail (PECO)
Population
Broiler chickens
Intervention or exposure
Antibiotic growth promoters (AGP) or non-therapeutic antibiotic use
Comparison
No AGP
Geographic scope
production-dependent (banned in EU since 2006; used elsewhere)
Outcomes
  • weight gain
  • feed conversion
  • current use

Study results as reported by the authors. Our assessment follows below.

What speaks for the claim?

What speaks against the claim?

What does the overall evidence say?

Editorial assessment based on the studies above – not itself a study result.

Which position is better supported?

Correct: antibiotics were and in some countries still are used to promote growth; their effect is small compared with genetic selection.

Why some studies weigh more

Meta-analyses agree on a real but small effect; regulation and surveys document use.

Is a causal relationship established? Yes, established Controlled feeding trials pooled in meta-analyses.

Remaining uncertainty

Current extent in Egypt (survey data only).

Justified conclusion

True as stated; the implication that modern fast growth is due to antibiotics is wrong.

Why do studies seem to disagree?

I-RES-111 (clear effect) vs I-RES-112 (marginal effect) and I-CHK-117 (no FCR effect in Egyptian farms): effect concentrated in early life and under poorer hygiene; modern conditions reduce it.

Does this depend on the country?
General biological effects
Growth effect biologically established.
Eating habits
Not relevant.
Origin of the food
Imported poultry from countries allowing AGP; EU import rules since 3 September 2026 also cover growth-promotion bans (the project's research files).
Contaminants
Residues and resistance (C-CHK-05).
National production conditions
Egypt: non-therapeutic use reported on 65% of surveyed farms.
Legal rules
EU ban since 2006 (Reg. 1831/2003); WHO recommends complete restriction.
Actual monitoring data
EU sales monitoring (ESUAvet); Egypt: none.

A regional difference is supported by robust data.

Statistical re-check
  • CI symmetry and practical size – 2.8% (1.3-4.3) symmetric; illustrative saving about 112 g feed per 2.5 kg bird (assumed values). recalculated
Certainty of the overall evidence (GRADE, simplified)
Main outcome
Growth promotion by antibiotics in broilers
Starting level
high (randomised trials)
Reasons for downgrading
  • inconsistency (effect size varies widely)
Result
moderate

Simplified assessment by a single reviewer, following the GRADE approach; not a formal GRADE panel. GRADE rates the body of evidence for one outcome, not individual studies.

Clinical guidelines and official statements checked
  • WHO: WHO guidelines on use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals (summary, Aidara-Kane et al. 2018, PMID 29375825) (2017) · Original publication
    Complete restriction of antimicrobial use for growth promotion and for prevention in healthy animals; reduce overall use of medically important antimicrobials.
  • EU: Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003, Art. 11 (existing study I-RES-04 / I-CHK-02) (2003) · Original publication could not be retrieved; content not used
Search strategy

Documented literature searches for this review (search strings in the original database syntax).

DatabaseDateSearchLooking forHitsIncluded
Europe PMC26 October 2026(TITLE:"growth promoter" OR TITLE:"growth promoters" OR TITLE:"growth-promoting") AND (TITLE:antibiotic OR TITLE:antimicrobial) AND (TITLE:broiler OR TITLE:poultry OR TITLE:chicken) AND (TITLE:"meta-analysis" OR TITLE:review OR TITLE:withdrawal OR TITLE:ban)both directions7
Europe PMC26 October 2026TITLE:"WHO guidelines on use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals"guidelines3

Open questions

National data on antimicrobial use in Egyptian poultry.

How deeply was this checked?

7 linked studies: 1 checked in full text (1 of them with a structured risk-of-bias assessment), 6 on the basis of the abstract, 0 bibliographically only. No formal assessment with two independent reviewers and no independent human expert review has taken place yet.

Last scientific review: 26 October 2026

History of the verdict
  1. 25 October 2026 · Phase 1 · Initial assessment: Mostly true (moderate)
  2. 26 October 2026 · Phase 4 (systematic evidence review) · Re-examined with extended evidence; verdict unchanged: Mostly true (moderate)
    Meta-analyses confirm a real but small growth effect; Egyptian survey shows ongoing non-therapeutic use. Verdict unchanged; it remains “Mostly true” because the statement is often used to imply that modern growth is antibiotic-driven.
    New sources: I-RES-111 I-RES-112 I-CHK-117 I-CHK-118

In plain language

Dr Elawady says chickens were made to grow faster with antibiotics. This is historically correct: low doses of antibiotics were used for this purpose, which is why the EU banned the practice from 2006. Today, the fast growth of chickens mainly comes from breeding and feed.

Studies on this claim

Studies supporting the claim (5)

  • EU ban on antibiotic growth promoters

    European Parliament and Council. Official Journal of the EU 2003
    Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    Since 1 January 2006, antibiotics may not be used as growth promoters in EU animal feed.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Unclear · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Ban growth promoters.

    How was the study done?

    Regulation.

    What was actually found?

    Ban from 2006.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    No legal antibiotic fattening in EU.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Context.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    High.

    Scientific details →

  • Antibiotics, gut bacteria and fat in mice

    Cox LM et al.. Cell 2014 · PMID 25126780 · DOI 10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.052
    Animal studycited by the Tayebat archivefull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment★ key study

    Low-dose penicillin early in life made mice fatter via their gut bacteria.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Test causality in mice.

    How was the study done?

    Experiments, microbiota transfer.

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    Mouse groups of about 3-10 animals per experiment.

    What was actually found?

    Continuous low-dose penicillin early in life increased weight and fat in mice (effects differed by sex); germ-free mice given the altered gut bacteria gained fat faster.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Shows a plausible mechanism.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Mouse model; tiny groups and many tests; continuous low dosing like farm growth promoters, unlike human treatment courses; effects inconsistent between sexes.

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Mechanism only.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Human effect.

    Scientific details →

  • Antibiotics in feed do make broilers grow a little faster

    Maria Cardinal K et al.. Poult Sci 2019 · PMID 31544941 · DOI 10.3382/ps/pez536
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    Across 183 experiments, antibiotic growth promoters increased weight gain and feed efficiency, mainly early in life.

    AGP increase weight gain and improve feed conversion, mainly in the first 3 weeks.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    What are the performance and economic effects of withdrawing AGP from broiler diets?

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis of 183 experiments plus economic model (Brazil)

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    174 articles, 183 experiments, 121,643 broilers

    What was actually found?

    AGP+ diets: higher feed intake, weight gain and lower feed conversion in the initial phase (1-21 d); no differences in the final phase (22-42 d); over the total period higher weight gain and better feed conversion. Economic impact $0.03 per bird.

    How large was the observed effect?

    AGP+ diets: higher feed intake, weight gain and lower feed conversion in the initial phase (1-21 d); no differences in the final phase (22-42 d); over the total period higher weight gain and better feed conversion. Economic impact $0.03 per bird.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    The growth effect is real but small.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Effect sizes not in abstract; Publication bias possible; Industry-economic framing

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports the claim that antibiotics were used to make chickens grow faster.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Banned in the EU since 2006.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Does not show that modern fast growth is due to antibiotics.

    Scientific details →

  • Egyptian farms report routine antibiotic use, often without medical need

    ElSayed N et al.. J Egypt Public Health Assoc 2025 · PMID 39828782 · DOI 10.1186/s42506-024-00180-w
    Cross-sectional studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    All 111 farms used antibiotics; 65% also used them for prevention or growth.

    Antibiotics are still used for growth promotion/prevention in Egypt, though without measurable FCR benefit in this survey.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    What antimicrobials are used on Egyptian animal farms, for what purposes, and why?

    How was the study done?

    Cross-sectional survey of farm personnel

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    111 of 150 farms (74% response)

    What was actually found?

    All surveyed personnel reported antimicrobial use; 65% used them for non-therapeutic purposes (prevention or growth promotion). Non-therapeutic use had no impact on FCR in any farm type. Most used: penicillins 81%, macrolides 78%, tetracyclines 72%. Half used colistin; 55% of these non-therapeutically.

    How large was the observed effect?

    All surveyed personnel reported antimicrobial use; 65% used them for non-therapeutic purposes (prevention or growth promotion). Non-therapeutic use had no impact on FCR in any farm type. Most used: penicillins 81%, macrolides 78%, tetracyclines 72%. Half used colistin; 55% of these non-therapeutically.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    In Egypt, routine antibiotic use in animals is common.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Self-report; Farms selected from a private platform list; Small sample

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports 'routine antibiotics' for Egypt.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Not applicable to the EU (growth promoters banned since 2006).

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Not representative of all Egyptian farms.

    Scientific details →

  • WHO: stop using antibiotics to make farm animals grow

    Aidara-Kane A et al.. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2018 · PMID 29375825 · DOI 10.1186/s13756-017-0294-9
    Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    WHO recommends ending antibiotic use for growth promotion and for prevention in healthy animals.

    Confirms that antimicrobials were used for growth promotion and recommends complete restriction.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    How should medically important antimicrobials be used in food-producing animals?

    How was the study done?

    Summary of WHO guideline developed with GRADE and commissioned systematic reviews

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    not applicable

    What was actually found?

    Recommends reduction in overall use of medically important antimicrobials, complete restriction of use for growth promotion and for disease prevention in healthy animals, and no use of critically important antimicrobials unless susceptibility testing shows they are the only option.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Recommends reduction in overall use of medically important antimicrobials, complete restriction of use for growth promotion and for disease prevention in healthy animals, and no use of critically important antimicrobials unless susceptibility testing shows they are the only option.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    The international health authority agrees that farm antibiotic use is a resistance problem.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Recommendations rest partly on low-certainty evidence

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports the resistance concern; does not quantify human harm.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    EU rules (Reg. 2019/6) largely implement these principles.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Not a measure of current use in any country.

    Scientific details →

Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (1)

  • Why do modern chickens grow so fast?

    Zuidhof MJ et al.. Poultry science 2014 · PMID 25260522 · DOI 10.3382/ps.2014-04291
    Otherindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    Modern broilers grew over four times faster than 1957 birds on the same feed, showing the role of breeding.

    Growth gains attributable to genetic selection.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Broiler genetics and growth

    How was the study done?

    Strain comparison on identical diet

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    180 chicks per strain

    What was actually found?

    Growth +400% from 1957 to 2005

    How large was the observed effect?

    FCR -50%

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Fast growth is mostly bred into the birds

    What are the study's limitations?

    One experiment

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Qualifies 'antibiotics make chickens grow' (C-RES-05)

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    High

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Whether antibiotics are still used in Egypt

    Scientific details →

Studies with mixed or unclear results (1)

  • Antibiotic growth promoters improve feed efficiency by only about 3%

    El-Fateh M et al.. Poult Sci 2024 · PMID 39504822 · DOI 10.1016/j.psj.2024.104472
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    On average, antibiotics improved feed conversion by 2.8%, with large variation.

    Growth promotion is real but marginal (2.8% better FCR); modern growth is mainly due to genetics (I-INTA-11).

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    What is the overall effect of AGP on FCR in broilers?

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis with meta-regression (PRISMA)

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    42 articles, 74 experiments, 19,562 chickens

    What was actually found?

    Overall FCR improvement 2.8% (95% CI 1.3-4.3%; prediction interval -10 to 16%). Breed, dose and location explained 53% of variation.

    How large was the observed effect?

    Overall FCR improvement 2.8% (95% CI 1.3-4.3%; prediction interval -10 to 16%). Breed, dose and location explained 53% of variation.

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Antibiotics are a minor factor in how fast chickens grow today.

    What are the study's limitations?

    Heterogeneous studies; FCR only

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports use for growth; limits its importance.

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    EU: banned.

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Does not measure residues or human effects.

    Scientific details →

Regional context

Germany / EU

Banned since 2006.

Egypt

Non-therapeutic antibiotic use (prevention or growth promotion) reported by 65% of 111 surveyed farms; half used colistin (I-CHK-117).

What applies in my country?

General scientific assessment

Mostly true Historically correct; banned in the EU since 2006.

The following areas of food safety are relevant to this statement:

  • Pesticides and pesticide residues
  • Veterinary medicines and antibiotics
  • Hormonal growth promoters
  • Contaminants (heavy metals, PFAS, PCBs, dioxins, nitrate)
  • Pathogens (Salmonella, Campylobacter, etc.)
  • Animal husbandry and feed
  • Controls, imports, recalls, labelling

Eggs · Poultry · Dairy · Fish and seafood · Red meat · Fruit and vegetables

Choose a country to see the checked information for it.

Limits: legal rules describe what is allowed, not what every single food contains. Measurement data come from samples and are meaningful only together with their method details.

Country of residence or purchase Compare with another country

References

  1. Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 on additives for use in animal nutrition, Article 11. European Parliament and Council. Official Journal of the EU 2003
  2. Altering the intestinal microbiota during a critical developmental window has lasting metabolic consequences.. Cox LM et al.. Cell 2014 · PMID 25126780 · DOI 10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.052
  3. Withdrawal of antibiotic growth promoters from broiler diets: performance indexes and economic impact.. Maria Cardinal K et al.. Poult Sci 2019 · PMID 31544941 · DOI 10.3382/ps/pez536
  4. Antimicrobial use in animal farms in Egypt: rates, patterns, and determinants.. ElSayed N et al.. J Egypt Public Health Assoc 2025 · PMID 39828782 · DOI 10.1186/s42506-024-00180-w
  5. World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines on use of medically important antimicrobials in food-producing animals.. Aidara-Kane A et al.. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2018 · PMID 29375825 · DOI 10.1186/s13756-017-0294-9
  6. Growth, efficiency, and yield of commercial broilers from 1957, 1978, and 2005.. Zuidhof MJ et al.. Poultry science 2014 · PMID 25260522 · DOI 10.3382/ps.2014-04291
  7. Effect of antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs) on feed conversion ratio (FCR) of broiler chickens: A meta-analysis.. El-Fateh M et al.. Poult Sci 2024 · PMID 39504822 · DOI 10.1016/j.psj.2024.104472

← Back to overview