Published in PLOS One on 2026-04-07, this study is presented as an attributed evidence briefing. The excerpts below are the original researchers’ words, reproduced under their Creative Commons Attribution licence. Health Signal has selected the abstract and, where needed, opening background paragraphs; the complete methods, results, limitations and references remain in the linked paper.
Original authors: Daniel Teshome Gebeyehu, Temechew Munaw Abebe, Ayalew Negash Shiferaw, Md Shahidul Islam, Gashaw Enbiyale Kasse
Source: PLOS One • DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0346594
Read the complete primary study ↗ · Creative Commons Attribution licence
From the researchers
Abstract
While meat is a valuable source of nutrition, it can also serve as a vehicle for infectious and non-infectious diseases—especially when consumed raw. This risk becomes more serious when the meat harbors antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, often referred to as superbugs. This study assessed the health risks faced by consumers of raw beef in relation to infections from common enteric superbugs commonly transmitted through meat.
The investigation focused on detecting the prevalence of three key meat-borne bacteria—Salmonella, Shigella, and Escherichia coli—and evaluating their resistance to commonly used antibiotics. Bacterial identification was performed using culture techniques and biochemical tests, while antibiotic susceptibility was assessed via the disc diffusion method. The study also examined food safety practices at restaurants that serve raw beef, including hygiene measures and whether the meat underwent any thermal treatment. Health risk estimation was based on both likelihood factors (bacterial contamination and hygiene practices) and consequence factors (resistance to antibiotic treatments).
Meat samples showed an overall bacterial contamination rate of 45.2%, with E. coli being the most prevalent (62.8%), followed by Shigella (32.7%) and Salmonella (4.4%). Alarmingly, 26.8% of the E. coli isolates were identified as the highly pathogenic E. coli O157:H7 strain. None of the restaurants applied any form of heat treatment (cooking or chilling) to the raw beef before serving, and 76% had poor hygiene practices based on bacterial contamination findings. All isolates were fully resistant to amoxicillin, and Salmonella strains also showed complete resistance to erythromycin. However, all bacteria remained 100% sensitive to chloramphenicol. Most isolates demonstrated multidrug resistance to commonly used antibiotics including ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, erythromycin, and streptomycin. The estimated health risk to raw beef consumers was high, primarily due to significant exposure levels and limited effectiveness of post-exposure treatment options.
The combined effects of high bacterial contamination, poor hygiene, lack of heat treatment, and widespread antibiotic resistance pose a potential hygiene-associated risk to raw beef consumers. Reducing this risk requires prompt action, including raising public awareness, enforcing strict meat hygiene standards, and implementing strategies to curb antimicrobial resistance.
Introduction
Meat remains a cornerstone of human nutrition, offering a rich source of protein, essential amino acids, vitamins (notably B12), iron, zinc, and other micronutrients crucial for sustaining physical and cognitive health [1,2]. However, while it plays a vital role in promoting well-being, meat—especially when consumed raw—can serve as a potent vehicle [3,4] for transmitting foodborne pathogens [5] and non-communicable health risks [6]. With the escalating global crisis of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), the health risks associated with the consumption of raw meat have become even more alarming [7–9]. Pathogenic bacteria such as Salmonella, Shigella, and Escherichia coli (including E. coli O157:H7) that are resistant to multiple antibiotics—often referred to as “superbugs”—can severely limit treatment options, leading to prolonged illness, complications, or even death [10,11].
Reading this evidence
Use the full paper to check the study design, participant selection, comparator and outcome definitions before drawing a practical conclusion. An association does not by itself show cause and effect. A reported performance measure needs its denominator and uncertainty. A finding from a particular facility, sample or time period should retain that scope when it is discussed elsewhere.
This briefing makes the source accessible within the wider research & evidence desk. It does not assess an individual patient or certify a product. When considering relevance to another health system, examine the original authors’ account of context and limitations, then seek local implementation evidence. The related reporting below provides other studies to read alongside this one; it is a topic connection, rather than a claim that their results are directly comparable.
© 2026 Daniel Teshome Gebeyehu, Temechew Munaw Abebe, Ayalew Negash Shiferaw, Md Shahidul Islam, Gashaw Enbiyale Kasse. Excerpts reproduced under CC BY. Selection, formatting and contextual notes by Health Signal. The researchers are the authors of the source study, not members of Health Signal’s staff.
Explore connected evidence
- Evidence brief: Bacterial isolates and antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of pediatric meningitis at comprehensive specialized hospitals in Bahir Dar, Northwest Ethiopia
- Evidence brief: Bacteriological profiles, antimicrobial resistance patterns, and predictors of culture-confirmed neonatal Sepsis at Asella Teaching Hospital, Southeast Ethiopia
- Evidence brief: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus along the beef production line: Phenotypic resistance and mecA phylogeny in two ethiopian municipal abattoirs
