Toxic Chicks: Why Kenya’s fried chicken is a looming health crisis

Research shows poultry farmers lace birds with antibiotics, which prevent infections, increase appetite, and promote faster growth but cause gastroenteritis, liver damage and antimicrobial resistance 

The deep-fried chicken that Kenyans consume voraciously could be their undoing, health-wise, because scientific evidence suggests the birds’ rapid growth may be turbocharged with antibiotics. 

In Kenya, antibiotics are commonly used in livestock farming for several reasons: the treatment and prevention of infections and, controversially, for growth promotion. Antibiotic classes such as tetracycline and sulfonamide have been found to enhance growth rates and improve feed efficiency in livestock, where the animals gain the same amount of weight but on less feed. 

A 2021 study titled Antimicrobial Use by Peri-urban Poultry Smallholders of Kajiado and Machakos Counties in Kenya by Florence Mutua, affiliated with the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), examined antibiotic use by this population of farmers.  

The research found that 41% of them used veterinary drugs—including antibiotics, dewormers, disinfectants, traditional remedies, vitamins, and other products—to boost growth in non-poultry species. Of the 112 poultry farmers surveyed, 27 (24%) reported using antibiotics to promote the growth rate in their birds. 

While the mechanism is not fully understood, some scientists believe that antibiotics increase weight gain by reducing the population of harmful microbiota in the animals’ gastrointestinal tracts. This creates a more favourable environment for digestion and nutrient absorption, allowing animals to utilize their feeds efficiently. 

Rapid growth, risky practices

A study titled Use of Non-Antibiotic Growth Promoters in Chicken Broiler Production in Kenya by Dr Odede Rezin Ochieng, a veterinary doctor and technical director at Sidai Africa, compared the growth rates of broilers fed on regular animal feeds, feeds containing antibiotic growth promoters (AGPs), and those supplemented with organic acids. 

The findings showed that birds raised on diets with antibiotics experienced quicker growth and improved feed conversion efficiency than those on pure animal feeds or feeds enhanced with organic acids. Additionally, broilers fed on low-dose antibiotics exhibited the highest feed intake, indicating a stimulated appetite. 

According to the Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux International (CABI) blog, the veterinary use of antibiotics as growth promoters in Kenya is linked to economic gains─ they contribute to higher yields of meat, milk, and eggs, hence boosting food security and supporting livelihoods. 

The Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock reports that commercial poultry farmers in Kenya typically rear between 500 and 5,000 birds, with larger farms exceeding these numbers. 

When hundreds of birds are kept in confined spaces, this can lead to stress and poor hygiene, creating a perfect breeding ground for bacteria. Consequently, farmers put antibiotics in animal feeds and water to prevent the spread of infections. Flocks of chickens end up being dosed with antibiotics, whether sick or not. 

The scale-up of antibiotics, primarily as a substitute for good nutrition and proper hygiene in livestock production, including poultry, is unsustainable because it contributes to antimicrobial resistance. It also raises concerns about food safety and environmental impact. 

A Breeding ground for resistance

In 2021, Harrison Rware, the learning, monitoring, and evaluation officer at CABI in Africa, carried out a study that sought to examine veterinary antibiotic use in Kenya. He collected data from Machakos, Isiolo, Narok, Elgeyo Marakwet, and Trans Nzoia counties. 

His findings revealed that 80% of the surveyed farms used antibiotics; 58% administered antibiotics themselves, often without a prescription from the veterinary professionals. The same study found that 95% of farmers had acquired antibiotics without prescriptions. They relied on over-the-counter antibiotics, contributing to the risk of managing undiagnosed diseases, using the wrong medicine, and/or administering incorrect dosages. This can lead to the emergence of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics. 

Salmonella spp., Campylobacter spp., and Escherichia coli are some of the most prevalent bacteria responsible for infections in poultry species in Kenya. 

The World Health Organization (WHO) states that the use of antibiotics like ciprofloxacin in livestock has led to the emergence of ciprofloxacin-resistant strains of Salmonella spp., Campylobacter spp., and E. coli, which have caused difficult-to-treat human infections. 

These resistant bacteria (superbugs) are transmitted to humans via direct contact between animals and people or through the food chain and the environment.  For example, poultry meat can become contaminated with drug-resistant Campylobacter spp. through faeces during butchering. Consuming such chicken that is undercooked may lead to gastroenteritis, which is characterized by symptoms such as diarrhoea, abdominal cramps, fever, nausea and vomiting. 

Antibiotic-resistant genes have been detected in humans, suggesting indirect evidence of transfer through the food chain. In his study of Escherichia coli, Dr. Dishon Muloi, a veterinary scientist and affiliate of ILRI, identified antibiotic-resistance genes in humans, livestock, and wildlife in Nairobi. This revealed the interrelationship of these populations, with the results aligning with a similar study conducted in Maasai Mara by Winfridah Onyari, a Kenyan veterinary researcher. 

What needs to change

Indeed, the accidental discovery of penicillin by British scientist Alexander Fleming in 1928 marked the dawn of the antibiotic era, revolutionizing human and veterinary medicine. Antibiotics treated previously troublesome infections like cow mastitis. They have also enhanced livestock productivity, reshaping agriculture. 

However, the overuse and misuse of antibiotics have given rise to resistant bacterial strains ─ an unfortunate battle for humans and future generations. 

The use of antibiotics in livestock can impact public health. Failure to observe withdrawal periods can result in animal products with antibiotic residues. According to the WHO, consuming such contaminated products increases the risk of developing allergic reactions or liver damage in people with compromised immunity. 

As such, distributing veterinary products directly to farmers vis-à-vis doing so through animal health providers may lead to higher antibiotic use, potentially driving the development of antimicrobial resistance, while strengthening the role of veterinarians and other animal health professionals is vital to address this issue. 

To address antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in animals and decrease its impact on Kenyans, the government can improve surveillance systems that track antibiotic usage and resistance patterns, ensuring accurate data collection and analysis. 

It can enact legislation to limit non-therapeutic antibiotic usage, promote alternatives such as enhanced sanitation, biosecurity measures, and probiotics, and educate farmers and veterinarians about the dangers of AMR and responsible antibiotic use. 

Finally, experts can implement the One Health concept, which requires collaborative efforts among the health, agriculture, and environmental sectors, as well as research investments to produce novel vaccines, treatments, and diagnostic tools. These initiatives attempt to reduce antibiotic abuse, prevent the spread of resistance, and protect both animal and human health for long-term sustainability. 

Dr Sharon Wambua is a pharmacist and creative non-fiction writer.

Breast Cancer: ‘Should I remove a healthy breast to avoid a future diagnosis?’ 

This is the question emerging among urban women, particularly those with access to genetic testing… 

It began as a tiny lump the size of a groundnut, barely noticeable beneath the skin of her left breast. She found it by accident one evening while dressing for bed. There was no pain, no redness, no urgency. Just a silent voice in her head whispering, “Maybe it’s nothing.” 

Three months passed. The lump grew. Slowly and subtly. Her left nipple began to pull inward, a retraction she ignored, blaming it on her bra. Then came the discharge: clear at first, then tinged with blood. Still, she told no one. Life was too busy, money was tight, and the fear of hearing the word cancer kept her away from the hospital.  

By the sixth month, she was sleeping on one side to avoid the pain. Her breast had changed shape. Her armpit felt tender. At nine months, the pain began waking her up at night—sharp, electric pain that pulsed through her chest like a warning siren.  

At month 12, she finally walked into the clinic.  

What should have been an early-stage, manageable diagnosis had now progressed. The delay, the denial, and the misinformation had taken their toll not just on her body, but on her odds of survival.  

In Kenya, this is not an uncommon story.  

Fear leads many women to delay screening or panic unnecessarily  

One of the commonest misconceptions about breast health is the belief that every lump is cancer. This fear, while understandable, leads many women to delay screening or panic unnecessarily before diagnosis.  

In reality, most breast lumps are benign, especially among younger women. Common non-cancerous causes include cysts, fibroadenomas, and breast infections.  

According to data from the American Cancer Society and World Health Organization (WHO), up to 80 per cent of breast lumps in women under 40 are non-cancerous. These benign masses often require monitoring rather than immediate intervention.  

For women under 35 years, breast ultrasound is the preferred initial tool as it can clearly distinguish between solid and fluid-filled lumps.  

For women over 40 years, mammography is the gold standard, especially for detecting small, dense, or calcified lesions.  

Breast cancer is one of the few cancers where early detection makes a measurable difference in survival. When caught at Stage I, the five-year survival rate can exceed 95 per cent, thanks to advances in imaging, surgery, and targeted therapies.  

In the fight against breast cancer, genes carry a heavy weight  

Globally, the WHO reports that breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women, surpassing even lung and cervical cancers. Yet, when identified early through routine screening, mortality rates can be cut by up to 40 per cent.  

In Kenya, the picture is more sobering. According to data from the Kenyatta National Hospital (KNH) and the Ministry of Health, about one in four breast cancer patients present at Stage III or IV, when treatment becomes more complex, expensive, and the chances of survival drop dramatically. Late presentation is often due to fear, lack of access and myths surrounding diagnosis.  

In the fight against breast cancer, one word carries heavy weight: genes.  

Mutations in two specific genes—BRCA1 and BRCA2—are known to significantly increase a person’s risk of developing breast and ovarian cancer. These mutations impair the body’s natural ability to repair damaged DNA, making cancer more likely to develop.  

However, despite growing public attention, the reality is more reassuring: genetic mutations account for only five–10 per cent of all breast cancer cases. That means the vast majority of patients do not have a hereditary form of the disease.  

Risk of cancer shaped by genetic, hormonal, environmental, lifestyle factors  

Women with a strong family history, particularly if a mother, sister, or daughter had breast cancer before menopause, are advised to begin screening as early as age 25 to 30. In such cases, genetic counselling and testing for BRCA mutations may be recommended.  

If a BRCA mutation is confirmed, high-risk individuals may consider enhanced surveillance or, in rare cases, risk-reducing mastectomy. This is preventive surgery, not a treatment, and it’s a deeply personal decision made in consultation with specialists.  

Understanding your family history is an important step. But so is knowing that having a gene is not a sentence, and not having one is not immunity. Personal risk is shaped by many factors: genetic, hormonal, environmental and lifestyle.  

Sporadic breast cancer accounts for over 85–90 per cent of all breast cancer cases globally. It arises from a complex mix of factors that are not inherited genes, but rather lifestyle, hormonal exposure and age-related risks.  

The most common non-genetic risk factors include late or no childbirth, early menstruation (before age 12) or late menopause (after age 55), obesity especially after menopause, regular alcohol consumption and prolonged use of hormone replacement therapy.  

Should you remove a healthy breast to avoid a future diagnosis?  

All of these can increase lifetime oestrogen exposure, which fuels the development of certain types of breast cancer, particularly oestrogen receptor-positive (ER+) tumours.  

In 2013, Hollywood actress Angelina Jolie made global headlines after revealing she had undergone a preventive double mastectomy. She carried the BRCA1 gene mutation, which gave her an estimated 87 per cent lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. Her decision sparked what is now known as the “Angelina Jolie effect” a worldwide surge in awareness and interest in prophylactic mastectomy.  

Kenya, too, is seeing a shift.  

Among urban women —particularly those with access to genetic testing —the question is emerging: “Should I remove a healthy breast to avoid a future diagnosis?” For BRCA-positive women with a strong family history, preventive mastectomy is no longer taboo, but part of a difficult, data-driven dialogue.  

Still, it remains a deeply personal and ethically layered decision. Should someone undergo major surgery when no cancer exists? What does it mean for identity, femininity, and emotional well-being, especially in African cultures where breasts carry both maternal and symbolic meaning?  

Globally, studies show that preventive mastectomy can reduce breast cancer risk by up to 95 per cent in BRCA-positive women, but it is not the only option. Enhanced surveillance, hormonal risk-reduction therapy and lifestyle changes are all part of the toolkit.  

Early screening remains the critical gap between knowing and acting  

The dilemma remains, ‘cut before cancer comes’ or ‘monitor closely and live with uncertainty?’   

In Kenya, where access to consistent imaging and specialist care is uneven, this question weighs even heavier on the shoulders of women trying to choose between fear and freedom.  

While breast cancer awareness has grown across Kenya, early screening remains the critical gap between knowing and acting.   

Across the country, non-profit organisations have stepped in to bridge the awareness and access gap. The Faraja Cancer Support Trust, for instance, offers free screening, counselling, and patient navigation services in partnership with public and private hospitals. The Kenya Cancer Association runs mobile breast health clinics and targeted campaigns in underserved counties  

Access remains uneven. While clinical breast exams and ultrasounds are relatively low-cost (Ksh500–1,500 in most public facilities), mammograms remain unaffordable for many, ranging from Ksh2,500–7,000 in private clinics.  

Public hospitals like KNH, Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital (MTRH) and some county referral hospitals offer subsidised or free mammograms during national awareness months. Still, many rural women must travel long distances or wait months for appointments.  

To save more lives, Kenya must invest not only in machines and medics, but in trust-building, follow-up systems, and community outreach that make screening routine, not a luxury or a last resort.  

This story was first published by Willow Health Media on August 1, 2025.

DAR ES SALAAM, Feb. 19 (Xinhua) -- Tanzanian authorities on Monday called for efforts to protect Tanzania's beaches along the Indian Ocean from pollution.

"The beaches are often littered with garbage, including used plastics, which not only pollute the beaches but also present an eyesore for visitors," Selemani Jafo, minister of State in the Vice President's Office responsible for Union and Environment, said in a statement.

Jafo assigned the local government the responsibility to ensure robust pollution control measures on the beaches.

He also suggested that local government authorities explore ways to incentivize youth groups to collect plastic and other litter from beaches.

According to the Tanzania National Guidance for Plastic Pollution Hotspotting Report, 29,000 tonnes of plastics were released into the Indian Ocean, rivers, and lakes in 2018. - Xinhua