Tierhomöopathie Anhang-b

 

Samuel Hahnemann

Excerpt: Titel: “The homœopathic science of healing domestic animals” It is his major statement on veterinary medicine.

A 12-page manuscript Hahnemann had written for a lecture to the Society of Economists of Leipzig. Found in Leipzig. The document is not dated/suggested dates range from 1811 to 1829.

Veterinary medicine in general must be considered in a similar manner as medicine for humans, and that the same ideals govern the former as the latter.

1st: the exact observation of any given case of illness in the suffering animal;

2nd: the careful investigation into the pure effects of known medicaments on the various kinds of healthy domestic animals, in order to gain insight into the morbid changes each medicine is capable of producing in the state of the healthy animal, so that for each given case of illness in an animal we may select, from this store of positive, pure effects, a remedy that produces similar suffering in the healthy animal and will thus become the surest, fastest and most helpful remedy for the illness at hand.

For it is only through their tendency to induce similar suffering that medicines can overrule a given illness in the animal body, extinguish it and, in one word, cure with certainty and permanently.

He would like something better, of course, since he daily sees how little if anything can be achieved with his routine. But because it is something new, unusual and extraordinary to him, he resists it with all his might and prefers not to have anything better rather than to be forced to break with habit, with the familiar ideas, with his books that require mere parroting, in one word with the craftsman-like procedure he has been able to apply without deliberation, without any effort to speak of. He resists rather than lending an ear to the new and better procedure and applying it thoughtfully and with carefulness. This he deems impossible because, unfortunately, the new system has no similarity at all to the old routine.

This is the way of the mindless worker of lowly standing. A tanner bent on holding on to his old customs would, for instance, prefer to let his cowhides rot more than they tan for 12 months in the pit, covered with coarse oak bark shavings, in the manner he has seen his masters and fellow journeymen do. He would opt to produce poor quality leather at high and pointless expense rather than to acquire the new, fast tanning procedure based on comparatively correct knowledge and experience, according to which he could produce a much superior quality leather within three months, in one fourth of the time, thus turning over his capital four times faster and providing his customers with a still better product and with more of it than what he was able to produce with the miserable old procedure.

Yet he sticks to his guns, as the saying goes, because he is not of a mind to give up his routine. He abhors the new, be it ever so admirable and superior.

Would we expect the ordinary veterinarian to think otherwise? Would he not oppose a new yet infinitely better procedure just as stubbornly only because it is new, that is to say, because it is advocating a different approach unknown to him, which would require that he combine carefulness with observation, something that his old method did not require of him?

With the old approach and regardless of the circumstances, when a horse got ill, he would perform copious bloodlettings, stick a seton of leather on its chest, filling it with a purge made of ten or twelve ingredients, on occasion even pouring the concoction through a horn into the nose. It was thought that some evil matter was hidden in the animal’s body which had to partially be extricated with the bloodletting, to be diverted to another part of the body with a seton, and the remainder was to be flushed out massively through the intestines. The animal would become sluggish and exhausted, and if the illness was an old one, it usually remained as before.

Only a short, transitory illness was sometimes conquered by the horse’s strong constitution at the time of the cure. But this happened more slowly than would have been the case without the wrong kind of intervention.

If the disorder remained, he knew how to excuse by formulating a disease name that could be found in the medical books for horses, which would have a faint similarity to the case at hand.

One or several of the prescriptions would be copied and prepared at the apothecary’s, to be administered by mouth, as a rub, an enema, as a compress, or by inhalation. If this did not help, all the other long drug formulas printed in the book would be given. And if this still did not help, another disease name would be devised, according to which another treatment would then be required.

This and similar procedures were so familiar to him that there was no need for any research, thinking or particular observation. It was a pleasure to be a horse doctor. But now, they want to teach him a new approach according to which expensive medicines were no longer going to be prescribed at haphazard, from printed formulas and squandered at random, usually to the detriment of the animal. One worthwhile medicine is to be selected for reasons, lying in each individual animal’s total condition, which cures with certainty within a short time and permanently.

When he hears of this new approach, cold sweat pearls on his brow. Be it ever so reliable and easily applied by the conscientious unprejudiced observer, be it even more profitable for his business and helpful for the purpose, he will stubbornly oppose it with all his might. He is shocked at novelty, at the unfamiliar, even if it is a thousand times better than his old routine.

Knowing the terrible power of habit we exhibit when carrying out even the most ineffective types of action, it is my conviction that from among one hundred cartwrights or horse doctors, some of whom have carried out their craft routinely and for a long time, scarcely one will be found “cui ex meliore tutor fin xerit pracordia Titan”, scarcely one, who would be unprejudiced enough, have enough resignation and humility, who would have enough doubts about the incompetence of himself and of his old books, in order to lend an ear to the new and only safe and certain homœopathic procedure, thusly to be guided to a rational method of curing these noble domestic animals who are so useful and indispensable to us.

Only the young, those apprentices who have not yet been spoiled by the routine, can become true practitioners of this safe and propitious art. This beneficial reform can only be realized by teaching the young unspoiled minds still free of prejudice, malleable like wax and set to receive all impressions.

They hear the natural simple principles, they see them applied effectively in the stable for the sick and they wish nothing more than to be able to become such helpers,

such benevolent men. And when eventually they will get to see the routine of the old horse doctors, they will turn away with pity and consider themselves lucky to know a method based on reason and convincing certainty, and to be able to offer assistance in cases where the others torture the poor animals with borrowed prescriptions and inappropriate medicines to no end.

The ultimate prerequisite for the creation of such a school of veterinary medicine, established entirely in view of the benefits it has to offer, is a dedicated teacher and instructor well versed in the principles of the homœopathic doctrine of healing, who is convinced of the dignity of his beneficial art, who diligently and seriously devotes his life to it and whose exquisite faculty of observation let him combine humaneness with a clear and accurate presentation.

He would have at his disposal a testing stable of healthy animals on whom he tries out the most effective simple medicines under the eyes of his students, in order to first make out what signs of illness the given medicine provokes in several of these animals. They observe the particular type of fever and the noticeable changes it produces,

the kind of fire in the eyes, what internal sensations the animals hereby communicate, in what manner the pupils become dilated, in what position they put their ears, their tail, the general position of the whole body, how they move individual parts, their respiration, the moisture of the nose or mouth, the evacuation of the stool and urine, the temperature of the individual parts. They would observe the changes in the animal’s frame of mind and mood, what foods it refuses or desires, how it reacts to all exterior influences, in what manner it communicates pain in one or another part.

Once all the symptoms of disease each of the strongest remedies produces in all the animals present will have been observed and recorded exactly, they will constitute a materia medica based on nature and experience (not on assertions and deceitful conjectures). We will then possess a store of simple medicines, the true and positive medicinal effects of each which are known with certainty.

They will no longer be misused blindly and randomly in lengthy prescriptions of mixtures that torture the animals. Only one remedy for each illness will be administered: precisely the one that was observed to bring on specifically those symptoms in healthy animals that need to be cured now in the present animals disease. The more closely the morbid symptoms of the selected remedy correspond to the symptoms of the sick animal, the greater the certainty to cure the animal and the more quickly and permanently the cure will be effected. This will take place with almost mathematical certainty.

Only an inexperienced and dull observer would deny that animals can communicate the symptoms of their illnesses as aptly and certainly as humans. Although they have no language, the abundance of noticeable exterior changes, their comportment, the manner in which their natural bodily and vital functions take place are perfect substitutes for language.

Unlike humans who have often been spoiled by their education, whose morality has often been corrupted and whose passions change them in one way or another, animals are unable to simulate. They do not exaggerate the expression of their pain, conceal their feelings or report fictitious complaints. The animals’ symptoms of disease are thus very obvious to the observing eye and are a true expression of the inner state, a pure and true image of their illness.

Aside from this, the animals are subjected to our will; they must observe the diet we prescribe for them during the cure. They do not lie to us or deceive us, as humans do when they indulge secretly in what is harmful to them without letting the physician know it.

In one word, animals can be cured homœopathically at least as safely and certainly as humans. At another time I may have the honour to speak before this esteemed audience again, to deliberate in detail on the organization and handling of the sick animals’ stable .

So much for today. At least I will have spoken the first watchword for effectively freeing our domestic animals who are so precious to us from disease.

Because even these poor animals, unable to call their torturers to account, deserve the compassion of humane world-citizens.

Mastitis: A clinical trial was conducted on a Mexican dairy farm, with 26 animals divided into two groups of 13 each. One group received homœopathic treatment, the other placebo. Monthly milk pro­duction was carefully recorded for each animal, as were the results of the California Mastitis Test (CMT) performed on each quarter of the udder. The proportion of ill-affected quarters according to CMT was 32% in the treated group, and 68% in the control group.

Average milk production in the treated group did not differ significantly from that of the control group.
The study confirms previous observations of the benefit the homœopathic method can provide in disease control in animal populations.

A homœopathic combination consisting of: Phytolacca decandra 200c (50%), Phosphorus 200c (30%) and Conium maculatum 200c (20%) was administered to the treated group. Over a total of 30 days each animal in the group received oral doses of not less than 50ml starting with a dose every 48 hours for the first 2 weeks, after which they received 2 doses in one week and finally a single dose in the last week.

After a month of treatment and placebo, the CMT was repeated, quarter by quarter, and milk production recorded for each animal in both groups. The CMT results were converted to a numerical equivalence scale to establish the average reaction of each functional quarter per cow, obtaining a value in the continuous scale for each animal in both groups.

Results and discussion

Of all the animals included in the experiment, 51 functional quar­ters were considered in the treated group, and 52 quarters in the control group (there was one blind quarter in the first group).
The control group was exposed to the risk factor, not having received preventive (homœopathic) treatment. Of the functional quarters in the control group, 37 had a positive reaction to the test, against 17 quarters in the treated animals (Table 1)

Perhaps results would have been better if the homœopathic com­bination included a medicine for decreased milk production, such as Lac canium or Urtica urens.

It is important to mention that the pluralist homœopathic approach used in this study meets the need to cover a great variety of signs of the disease and of environmental variables related to the problem. It was not practicable to individualise either the patient or the homœopathic prescription.

The trial reported in this paper establishes a possible approach to animal health problems and care that differs from the traditional. From a population standpoint, this is supported by the results con­cerning the prevalence of subclinical mastitis by quarters. Such experiments must continue, with single and complementary homœ­opathic medicines, to define the strategies that will best control mastitis in dairy herds, ultimately evolving a unicist approach. Future studies should consider medicines that correct low milk production. On the other hand comparative studies are recom­mended that include bacteriological parameters, in order to justify the homœopathic approach to the control of this disease from the public health point of view.

TABLE 1. Contingency table including clinically affected quarters

 

Control group

Treated group

Total

Subclinical mastitis
positive

37

17

54

negative

15

34

49

Total

52

51

103

This trial, by Roberto Searcy-Bernal and two others, was published in the British Homœopathic Journal of April 1995. It is a very abridged version printed here.

64 cases of clinical mastitis, from a commercial herd of 600 cows, were assigned randomly to either a homœopathic or antibiotic treatment regime. Double aseptic foremilk samples were collected prior to treatment and approximately 21 days post treatment for bacteriology and somatic cell counting. The most common bacteriological isolates were Streptococcus uberis (23% of cases) and coagulase negative staphylococcus (20% of cases).

Bacteriological negative results accounted for 50% of clinical mastitis cases. Bacteriological cure (disappearance of original pathogen) was observed in 85% and 81% of antibiotic and homœopathic treated cases respectively. Bacteriological cure rate for Streptococcus uberis positive quarters was 57% and 63% for anti­biotics and homœopathy respectively. The somatic cell count was significantly reduced (P<0.05) to less than 5% of the pre-treatment somatic cell count for quarters treated with homœopathy or antibiotics.
The results to date suggest that cows treated with homœopathy achieved a similar bacteriological cure rate to antibiotic therapy and that homœopathy may be bioequivalent to antibiotic therapy, the scientists conclude.

The following is a condensed version of the very interesting paper the researchers presented

To date there have been few published studies on the use of homœopathy in the treatment of mastitis. The homœopathic studies on mastitis in dairy cows have predominantly focused on reducing the somatic cell count (SCC) or using it as a preventative strategy with mixed results (Day, 1986; Egan, 1995; Barlow et al., 2001). One of the few studies using homœopathy in the treatment of clinical mastitis compared homœopathy with antibiotic therapy in a series of 100 cases. The cure rate for both therapies were similar (Merck et al.1989).
The aim of this work was to determine whether homœopathic therapy was equivalent in efficacy, or bioequivalent to, antibiotic therapy. To test for bioequivalence, a range is selected within which both treatments need to fall. For the purposes of this study a range of +15% around an expected cure rate of 75% for antibiotics was established as the bioequivalent range for the homœopathic regime. An additional treatment, of non-treatment of clinical cases, was rejected on the grounds of animal welfare and ethical con­siderations.
This experiment was designed to test the efficacy of the homœopathic approach to treat a clinical disease rather than the effectiveness of an individual remedy, therefore a selection of six “standard” remedies was chosen.

Cows from a commercial herd of 600 were enrolled into the study at the first appearance of clinical signs of mastitis. This study commenced after calving and continued for the first 3 months of 2001/2002 season. Clinical signs included clots, discoloured or watery milk, blood in the milk, and/or pain, heat or swelling of the udder. Any cows showing additional systemic signs of infection such as high temperature, fever, low appetite were not enrolled into the study.

Double aseptic foremilk samples were collected from new clinical mastitis cases for bacteriology and SCC purposes by the herd manager, using standard aseptic technique. The teat end of the affected quarter was scrubbed with a cotton wool swab soaked in 70% alcohol, the first 2-3 squirts discarded, and then 2-3 squirts of milk drawn carefully into a sterile vial. A second larger sample was collected after additional scrubbing of the teat end. Samples were then stored in the fridge or freezer until collection. Milk samples can be tested for bacteriology and SCC following short term storage at -20 C (Murdough et al., 1996; Barkema et al., 1997).

Using a random sequence supplied at the start of the trial the cow was assigned (by the herd manager) to a particular treatment, either antibiotic therapy or homœopathic treatment. If more than one quarter within-cow (one of the cow’s four teats) was found to be infected at any one time, the same treatment was applied to all quarters, that is, treatments were assigned on a per cow basis, rather than case basis. When a new clinical infection was found whilst a cow was receiving a particular treatment or within the recovery period, the same treatment was applied to the new quarter.
Once the treatment was assigned to a new clinical case, a full course of antibiotic treatment was given or for homœopathy treatment the selected remedy was administered for up to four doses of the preparation, at 10 minute intervals, commencing after foremilk samples had been collected. Subsequent treatment involved giving one dose at each milking, for the next 3 days. Preparations were applied to the nose/mouth or vulva using a spray bottle.

For cows receiving antibiotic, the standard milk and meat withholding periods was adhered to. For cows receiving homœopathic treatments, milk was withheld from the bulk tank for the duration of homœopathic treatment - 3 days from commencement of treatment and longer if gross signs of mastitis persisted.
The herd manager recorded and monitored recovery of clinical signs. Bacteriological cure was determined by aseptic collection of 2 foremilk samples for bacteriology and SCC purposes 21 days after commencement of the treatment, by a trained technician.

It is recognised that homœopathy is the treatment of the individual whereby all clinical and behavioural changes are taken into account and an appropriate remedy is selected to treat that particular animal. Therefore a selection of six remedies was available (Table 1), with associated symptom sheet to enable the most appropriate remedy to be assigned.

TABLE 1: Homœopathy therapies and frequency of use in this study.

Homœopathic remedies

Frequency of use

SSC (Silica, Sulphur & Carbo veg)

15

Phytolacca

15

Bryonia

1

Belladonna

0

Urtica urens

0

Hepar sulph

0

The Helios company, in England, provided 29c potencies in a diluent of 96%-98% ethanol. To generate the working dilutions, stock solutions were prepared by diluting the medicated potency by 1 : 100 in 50% ethanol with succussion (vigorous shaking) to make C 30.

From these solutions, the working dilutions were prepared for distribution to the farm, by diluting the C 30 preparation by 1:100 in 25% ethanol. Distilled water was used to dilute the ethanol. Working solutions were stored on farm in sterile, brown glass bottles at room temperature, out of sunlight. When required, 5 -10 ml of the solution was decanted into a plastic spray bottle and used to treat the cow. Separate spray bottles were used for each preparation and were emptied and refilled at least once every 2 - 3 days. All working dilutions were prepared by Tineke Verkade, a qualified homœopathic practitioner operating through Homœopathic Farm Support, Hamilton.

The two antibiotic therapies used in this study were Lincoln® Forte (Pharmacia & Upjohn, Purrs, Belgium) and MasticillinTM (Stockguard Laboratories (NZ) Ltd, Hamilton, New Zealand).
If there was no improvement/severe worsening of the infection once therapy with either treatment (antibiotics or homœopathy) had commenced, the treatment was discontinued and an alternative therapy allowed. Unless the clinical signs of mastitis worsened to the point where the cow became visibly sick the chosen therapy was continued for a full 48 -72 hours. The change in treatment and reason were recorded.

Analysis of variance was carried out on log10 transformed SCC data to compare pre and post treatment SCC and effect of treatment, using GenStat (version 4.2). Chi-square analysis was used to compare bacteriological cure rate between homœopathy and antibiotic therapy.
Results

33 cases of clinical mastitis were treated with antibiotics and 31 cases were treated with homœopathy. The pathogens most commonly isolated in this study were Streptococcus uberis (Str uberis) (23%) and coagulase-negative staphylococcus (CNS) (20%). However, 50% of the pre-treatment milk samples were bacteri­ologically negative (Table 2). A quarter was diagnosed as being infected with a particular pathogen when the same organism was cultured from both of the foremilk duplicate samples.

TABLE 2: Distribution of major and minor pathogens isolated from foremilk samples of clinical cases of mastitis.

Pathogen

Antibiotics (%)

Homœopathy (%)

Str uberis

21

26

Staph aureus

0

3

Coagulate negative Strep

21

19

Other

12

3

No growths

45

48

Total (cases)

33

31

A quarter was considered to be cured clinically if the symptoms resolved within 3 - 5 days of treatment commencing and considered to be cured bacteriologically if the original mastitis causing pathogen was not present in the duplicate post treatment samples.
Clinical cure occurred in 100% of antibiotic cases and 94% of homœopathic cases. Only two cases of mastitis did not improve within 3 days of treatment with homœopathy and were re-treated with antibiotics.

The bacteriological cure rate of mastitis cases treated with antibiotics was 85% and 81% for homœopathy (Table 3). There was no significant difference in the cure rate between antibiotic and homœopathy treated cows (P>0.05). Antibiotics and homœopathy cured 57% and 63% of Str uberis infections respectively and 100% and 67% of CNS infections respectively. There was no difference in the effectiveness of antibiotics and homoeopathy in treating Str uberis or CNS infections (P>0.05).

Both antibiotics and homœopathy significantly reduced the SCC to less than 5% of the pre treatment SCC (Table 4). Within 21 days of commencement of treatment the post treatment SCC of cows treated with antibiotics was 2.2% of the pre SCC and homoeopathy was 4% of the pre treatment SCC. There was no significant difference between treatment regimes (P > 0.05).

TABLE 3: Bacteriological cure rate for cases treated with antibiotics or homœopathy.

Treatment

Pathogen

Bacteriological

Total

%cured

Antibiotics

Str uberis

4

7

67

 

CNS

7

7

100

 

Total

28

33

85

Homœopathy

Str uberis

5

8

63

 

CNS

4

6

67

 

Total

25

31

81

Discussion

The clinical cure rates of 100% and 94%, and bacteriological cure rates of 84% and 81 %, for antibiotics and homœopathy respectively were similar to rates observed by Merck et al. (1989). They treated 50 cases of clinical mastitis with homœopathy and 50 cases with antibiotics and observed bacteriological cure rates of 34% and 26% respectively (Merck et al., 1989). They also found that homœopathy was more successful in curing infections caused by Gram negative bacteria and conversely antibiotics were more successful in curing Gram positive bacteria. There were too few Gram negative bacteria isolated in this study to compare with these results.

The bacteriological cure rate for Str uberis positive quarters was 63% for homœopathy and 57% for antibiotics. In previous studies the bacteriological cure rate, using antibiotics, for Str uberis has ranged from 58% (Deluyker et al. 1999) to 83% (McDougall, 1998b). Therefore, the bacteriological cure rate for Str uberis for antibiotics or homœopathy observed in this study is comparable to other studies using antibiotics.

The most commonly isolated bacteria were Str uberis (23%) and CNS (20%), but bacteriological negative results accounted for 50% of clinical mastitis cases. In a study of the prevalence of clinical mastitis in 38 farms in the Waikato, an average of 22.3% of clinical cases were bacteriologically negative, but ranged up to 50% in some herds (McDougall, 1998a). McDougall (1998a) suggested that some herd managers may be more sensitive in their diagnosis of clinical mastitis than others, resulting in a higher number of bacterio­logically negative cases in these herds. This may have also been the case in this study.

The somatic cell count was significantly reduced to less than 5% of the pre treatment SCC for quarters successfully treated with homœopathy or antibiotics (Table 4). The foremilk SCC of quarters that were bacteriologically cured was reduced from 7,549,000 to 108,000 cells/ml. Since the foremilk SCC is usually higher than the composite cow milk SCC (Woolford et al., 1998) this reduction in the SCC would help to maintain the bulk tank SCC below 400,000 cells/ml, the level that attracts financial penalties. The reduction in SCC observed in this study was comparable to the reduction in SCC of clinical cases of mastitis treated with antibiotics carried out by Deluyker et al. (1999), where the SCC for bacteriologically cured quarters was less than 10% of the pre-treatment fore milk SCC, 20­22 days post treatment.
Oxytocin, another alternative therapy for clinical mastitis was found to have a bacteriological cure rate of 49% (Guterbock et al., 1993). The results to date suggest that cows treated with homœopathy achieved a bacteriological cure rate greater than oxytocin and that homœopathy may be bioequivalent to antibiotic therapy. However, more cases (say, another 75 cases per treatment) will be required to examine bioequivalence between homœopathic and antibiotic treatment strategies.

The results reported here are from the first stage of a larger trial to examine the efficacy of homoeopathy in the treatment of clinical mastitis compared to antibiotic therapy and to determine whether it could be used as a viable alternative on New Zealand dairy farms.

Tineke Verkade, the homœopath consulted for this study, is the author of Homœopathic Handbook for Dairy Farming (now in its 2 edition). The new edition is almost double the size of the first, with suggestions for the treatment of several conditions not previously covered. A study like the Dexcel one gives support to some of the book’s ideas, and Dexcel may carry out more experiments of this type.

 

The English homœopathic veterinarian Christopher Day has had a lot of experience with giving homœopathic remedies to herds of dairy cows with the intention of preventing and/or curing udder infections affecting the quality of milk.

He has reported his experience, admittedly with small herds (for example the 82-cow one and the 130-cow one illustrated in the tables which follow) but his strategies are sound and can be translated to large herds as several New Zealand farmers can attest. Day’s trial results are abstracted from the British Homœopathic Journal of January, 1986.

 

Study 1.

Using the nosodes of Streptococcus uberis, S. dysgalactiæ, S. agalactia, Escherichia coli, and Staphlococcus aureus-all C 30 and combined in one remedy.

A herd of pedigree Friesian cows was randomly split into two groups of 41 cows for the purpose of this trial. There had been no historical difference in disease incidence between the two sides of the building or in the individuals in either group. They were not split according to yield, age or calving date, for it was felt that this sort of division (usual in intensive UK dairy herds) could materially affect results. Two coded bottles were supplied to the farmer: a bottle of unmedicated solvent (control) and a bottle of Combined mastitis nosode C 30 tincture (treatment). These were administered to one or other group via the drinking water troughs. The results are shown in Table 1.

 

The one case in the treated group had suffered “summer mastitis” in her dry period earlier in the year in the same quarter of her udder. She contracted the recorded case in the first few weeks of the treatment period before, perhaps, the therapy had been given time to take effect.

In the control group several cows suffered repeated attacks in the same quarter. Revised results excluding the repeat cases are shown in Table 2.

Cell counts on bulk milk were recorded as a measure of subclinical mastitis status of the herd (Table 3). The favourable trend in all parameters makes this study very worthy of repetition.

 

TABLE 1. Double blind trial with unmedicated solvent (control) and Combined mastitis nosode (treatment) in a herd affected with mastitis (winter 1983/84)

            Control group             Treatment group

Cases of mastitis                                19        1

Average No. of quarters affected     1.16     1

Average severity (scored 1-3)           2.16     1

Average duration in days                  4.5       4

Average duration in days                  25        2.5

 

TABLE 2: Results of Table 1 revised to exclude repeat cases

            Control group             Treatment group

Cases of mastitis                                10        1

Average No. of quarters affected     1.2       1

Average severity (scored 1-3)           2          1

Average duration in days                  4.6       4

% of group affected                          25        2.5

 

TABLE 3: Cell counts on bulk milk (same herd as in Tables 1 & 2)

            Dec     Jan       Feb      Mar     Apr      May     Jun             Jul       Aug

1982/83 No treatment            n/a       316      326      378             362      295      516      608      598

1983/84 Treatment                 263*    273*    199*    255*             193*    283†    352†    184†    374†

 

* Treatment given to 41 cows only.

† Treatment given to whole herd.

 

Study 2

A problem herd of Friesian dairy cows was chosen as a very severe test of the ability of the nosode to favourably affect a disease situation. Historically incidence of mastitis had been at a very high, unacceptable level for the entire recorded life of the herd. Cell counts had run in the region of 1.000.000, and both parameters had proved intractable to all manner of management and medical control measures, calling in all available advisory bodies to assist.

 

It was finally decided, in order to limit the spread of mastitis in the herd, to separate the high risk cows from the low risk ones. There were now too many high risk cows to cull, so they were housed in a broken-down cubicle house away from the good cows. They were

identified by individual cell counting, mastitis history, age, conformation, and included all the cows which habitually rejected cubicles and chose to lie in the dung channels.

 

The good group was left untreated and to the bad group we gave the nosode in the drinking water.

Mastitis incidence and cell count figures have shown a decline in both groups. The good group was expected to improve once the high risk cows had been removed, but the bad group would not normally be expected to improve. It has however shown more rapid improvement than the good group (Table 4). Before treatment, there were 3x as many cases in the bad group than in the good group. After treatment (but with the water troughs still frozen) the number of cases in the bad group had gone down to twice as many as in the good group. Subsequently, in the warmer weather, with water troughs unfrozen, the bad group had 75% as many cases as the good group. There was a larger number of cows in the good group, but the trend is clear. The cell count was falling rapidly in the bad group until there was an upsurge in both groups in late March (Table 5).

 

TABLE 4: Result of treating group of cows with high risk of mastitis with Combined mastitis nosode compared to untreated low risk group (winter 1984/85, different herd from Tables 1-3)

                                   Low risk n = 80          High risk n = 50

Before treatment                    13                    38 (approx x 3)

After treatment (frost)           11                    24 (approx x 2)

After treatment (no frost)      20                    15 ( x 0.75)

 

TABLE 5: Cell counts for herd in Table 4

Date                Low risk         High risk

14 Dec 84       553                  1259

  2 Jan 85        464                  960

13 Jan 85        485                  856

13 Mar 85       558                  788

24 Mar 85       736                  971

 

Tineke Verkade, of Hamilton, has a dairy farmer clientele principally using a strategy she has devised. This is her method:

The following mastitis prevention programme, as used by a considerable number of dairy farmers, appears to be extremely successful. But the programme must be followed diligently and consistently in order to obtain the desired result.

Part One - Whole herd treatment

Mastitis nosode - Put one capful in the water trough, once a day for three days only. Then one capful in the water trough once a week during the season.

If the somatic cell count has dropped considerably below accepted levels then increase the period from one week to two weeks.

Part Two - Individual treatment

In the event that your animal(s) show signs of clinical mastitis use the following remedy dispensed from a spray bottle.

SSC - Spray once on the moist part of the nose or spray once on the opened vagina at a distance of 20cm. Do not dilute the remedy used in the spray bottle!

Repeat at next milking if needed, for no longer than four days.

Other than SSC (a compound of Sulph., Sil. and Carb-v.) these remedies may be needed:

Bry. Very hard quarters. The animal is in a lot of pain. Lies on the affected side and may have fever with the mastitis.

Phyt. Udder is hard and very sensitive. Can see swollen glands around the udder. The udder may have a purple hue and the milk may have clots in it.

Urt. The udder is extremely swollen and tight especially in heifers even before they calve and the udder drips with milk.

Pyrog. Remedy for septic states especially puerperal metritis. In the case of mastitis the udder is hard and swollen and the milk might be brown and contain pus.

Myristica Fistulas and abscesses with chronic mastitis.

If these prescriptions are not satisfactory specific nosodes, depending on the micro-organism present, can be considered.

 

 

Vorwort/Suchen                                Zeichen/Abkürzungen                                   Impressum