在中国，农业部(MOA)是国家兽医管理局。畜牧业是中国的一项重要产业，为了促进畜牧业的发展，中国政府采取了非常积极的措施。兽医行政管理系统的持续监测得益于兽医行政和公共卫生管理级别的严格组织。责任明确，效率高，表现明智，可与国际标准竞争。然而，风险依然存在。进出口动物检疫由国家质量监督检验检疫总局负责。省级有兽医管理机构，市级有地方兽医管理机构。然而，管理是相互联系的，这就确保了管理的流动性。根据预期的地方一级检疫水平，在州一级设立地方行政机构(Seri, 2013)。这将再次根据管辖范围、所养殖动物的形式、这些地区过去所面临的风险以及其他因素而有所不同。疫情过去的历史、使用的风险评估以及控制结构和程序将在几年内更新一次，以确保该系统是最新的。尽管有一个非常严格的制度，欧洲和中国都面临着监督和监测作为食品出售的动物体内残留药物的问题。这个问题仍然存在，因为监管当局实际上几乎不可能与兽医保持必要的密切沟通，了解使用兽药的安全和适当方式。这些动物可能没有根据体重给予适当的剂量。在停药期间可能发生了药物过量或剂量没有得到适当调整。如果动物被过量的兽药灌满，而兽药的用量超过了动物的体重，那么动物的剂量就无法在阈值期正常断奶。此外，英国等国还面临未经授权在兽医领域使用药物产品的问题。这导致了现有的阈值水平协议的问题，不适用于这些未被识别的药物产品。如兽医、兽药局或动物健康零售商的来源可能没有在这种情况下使用(Seri, 2013)。停药期间的安排应该考虑到一些特定的药物(受管制的药物)。这些导致了问题。此外，每一种药物的使用都有特定的戒断期。这些形式的撤离指示有时可能没有得到适当遵守。在这里，残留兽药在公共卫生中引起疾病的问题成为执法和管理的问题。一些农场也提到了与交叉污染相关的风险(中国农业部，2011)。交叉污染的风险主要是因为经过处理和未经处理的动物共享一个围栏，或者在某些情况下可能最终共享相同的饲料。交叉污染问题可能在很大程度上被忽视或未被报道，因为育种者认为交叉污染水平要么是太微不足道，要么是无法正确处理。如果这些交叉污染问题的记录没有得到正确的维护，那么随着时间的推移，整个管理系统就会崩溃。动物可能会因为在残留水平、适用的阈值等方面的不当认证而被出售(世卫组织，2014)。药物治疗历史记录可能没有妥善保存。也有一些动物被未经授权用于生产食品的药物治疗的案例，比如苯丁酮，一种消炎药。食品生产物种和其他物种之间也可能存在污染。
The adverse reactions usually have to be reported and the regulations and rules for this form of a reporting are also usually presented. Sometimes it has also been noticed that when organic substances are being used for the cattle then it is useful for the controlling of residual substances. Some of these concerns will be discussed in the literature section also. the literature review section also. In lines similar to the management provided by the European regulations, China also has specific regulatory sections in place but divided across many administrative units.
In China, the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) is the national veterinary administrative authority. Animal husbandry is an important business in China and in order to promote this business the Chinese Government has taken up very active steps. The constant monitoring of the veterinary administrative system is aided by the disciplined structuring of the management levels in veterinary administration and public health. The responsibilities are clarified, they are highly efficient and performance wise can compete with international standards. However, the risks remain. Quarantine aspects for the animals that are being imported and exported are being handled by the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ). At the provincial level there are veterinary administrative agencies and then there are local veterinary administrative agencies that work at city levels. The administration however is connected and this ensures there is a very fluid management. Local administrative agencies are set up on the prefecture levels based on the levels of quarantine that is expected at the local levels (Seri, 2013). Once again these would vary based on jurisdiction, the form of animals being bred, the risks that these areas have faced in the past and more. A past history of outbreaks, the assessments for risks that were used and the control structures and procedures would be updated once in a few years in order to ensure the system is up to date. Despite there being a very stringent system both Europe and China face issues in the surveillance and monitoring of residue drugs in animals being sold as food. The issue persists because at one end it would be almost impossible for the regulatory authorities to actually maintain the necessary close communication needed with their vet about the safe and appropriate way to use veterinary medicines. The animals might not be given the appropriate doses based on body weight. An overdose of medication might have occurred or the doses might not have been adjusted properly during the withdrawal period. Where animals are pumped up with veterinary medicines that are more than is required based on its weight then it so happens that the animal’s dosage cannot be weaned properly in the threshold period. In addition, countries such as the United Kingdom faces the issues of unauthorized medicinal product usage in the veterinary context. This has led to issues of the existing protocol for threshold levels not suitable for these unrecognized medicinal products. Recognized sources such as that of vets, veterinary pharmacies or animal health retailers might not have been used in such cases (Seri, 2013). The withdrawal period would have been arranged for with some specific medications in mind (the regulated ones). These leads to problems. Also there are specific withdrawal periods suggested for each of the drug use. These forms of withdrawal instructions might sometimes not be followed properly. Here the issue of residual veterinary medicine causing an illness in public health becomes an issue for enforcement and management. Some farms have also mentioned the risks that are associated with cross contamination (Ministry of Agriculture PRC, 2011). The risks of cross contamination occur mainly because treated and untreated animals share an enclosure or in some cases might end up sharing the same feed. Cross contamination concerns might largely go unnoticed or unreported because of the judgement made by the breeders that the levels of cross contamination are either too negligible or cannot be assed properly. Where records are not maintained correctly for these cross contamination concerns then with time the entire management system would come down. Animals might get sold off with improper certifications on residual levels, thresholds applied and more (WHO, 2014). Medicine treatment history records might not be maintained appropriately. There have also been case incidents where animals have been treated with medicines that are not authorized for use in food-producing species such as phenylbutazone, an anti-inflammatory medicine. Contamination is also possible between food producing species and other species.