Mixed messages from "experts"?

this may have come up before but have just come across the idea of CMTing high cell cows at drying off and just treating the infected quarter(s) rather than all 4. any thoughts @bovine,anyone?
 

Bruce Almighty

Member
Mixed Farmer
Location
Warwickshire
I do all my selective DCT based on CMT alone because I'm not milk recording.

CMT will only react at SCC's of 400+ so it depends what your thresholds for treatment is.

I was unaware of that, thanks.
I currently have a belt & braces approach of DCT & sealant.
Any cows over 200 at recording I CMT looking for sub-clinical, then tube any infected 1/4 I find. I accept I could (& should ?) reduce anti-biotic use but our rolling SCC is 126 & we are loose housed AYR calving.

I was involved in the MDC trial in 2004/5 as a control farm. I learned a terrific amount which I put into practice.
 

bovine

Member
Location
North
this may have come up before but have just come across the idea of CMTing high cell cows at drying off and just treating the infected quarter(s) rather than all 4. any thoughts @bovine,anyone?
No - don't treat at the cow level. The risk of the cow having an infection in another quarter is much greater when she already has 1 infected. You can spread locally in the udder, via teat prep and the milk pools from all 4 quarters in the cluster.

Either the cow is infected or not.
 

bovine

Member
Location
North
I do all my selective DCT based on CMT alone because I'm not milk recording.

CMT will only react at SCC's of 400+ so it depends what your thresholds for treatment is.
Then you are brave. It's not a good enough test in cows at drying off to reliably detect infected quarters.

In conclusion, only CMT was not adequate to determine subclinical intramammary infections at the dry-off cows, and to evaluate the findings of CMT with the results of bacteriological examination. http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/20143217278.html;jsessionid=5D16A86A3743B74E9615D636F9019A79
It will give you both false positive (ie classify a cow as high SCC when she is not) and false negative (ie classify a cow as not infected when she is).

The study I linked found it 50% effective - ie no better than a guess!

I wouldn't dream of basing the decision over selective dry cow on CMT alone. Some vets seem to be advocating a 'quick check' with CMT on suitable low SCC cows - this also muddies the water unnecessarily, and suggests they don't really understand how the tests work.
 

jondear

Member
Location
Devon
Then you are brave. It's not a good enough test in cows at drying off to reliably detect infected quarters.

In conclusion, only CMT was not adequate to determine subclinical intramammary infections at the dry-off cows, and to evaluate the findings of CMT with the results of bacteriological examination. http://www.cabdirect.org/abstracts/20143217278.html;jsessionid=5D16A86A3743B74E9615D636F9019A79
It will give you both false positive (ie classify a cow as high SCC when she is not) and false negative (ie classify a cow as not infected when she is).

The study I linked found it 50% effective - ie no better than a guess!

I wouldn't dream of basing the decision over selective dry cow on CMT alone. Some vets seem to be advocating a 'quick check' with CMT on suitable low SCC cows - this also muddies the water unnecessarily, and suggests they don't really understand how the tests work.
why is cows n grass brave if it works for him and he's within his level of SCC for his milk buyer carry on .To much pressure from vets like yourself to make farmers use more antibiotics keeping unessary low levels of SCC makes no odds to the milk quality !Always used as a tool to beat farmers with an excuse to cut the milk price paid .The hole industry is led with advertising for dairy famers to buy products that will cure this ,cure that ,produce more .Take a look at Fw .None of it has benefited the majority ,Just industrialised cows that only last 3 lactations and never feel the sun on their backs!And a crap milk price if your not on a direct contract!
 
No - don't treat at the cow level. The risk of the cow having an infection in another quarter is much greater when she already has 1 infected. You can spread locally in the udder, via teat prep and the milk pools from all 4 quarters in the cluster.

Either the cow is infected or not.
thank you for your input its nice to be able to back up what our own vet is saying. we will continue with what works for us. anything over 200 cells and/or has had a clinical case and 1 or 2 old ladies. It has been mentioned earlier in this thread that an antibiotic tube followed by a teat sealer does not seal the teat as well as a teat sealant on its own due to a chemical reaction I presume. Is there any evidence of this happening on farm ?
 

Sylution

Member
Location
Carmarthenshire
Andrew ran through his best practise protocol for drying cows off in order to minimise the risk of introducing bacteria.

"Firstly start with a teat clean enough that you'd be happy to put it in your mouth!" he jokes. "Remove all signs of muck on the teats. Always remember to clean the teats furthest away from you first, followed by the near ones. When you're tubing the cows reverse this order. This reduces the risk of introducing infection by brushing your hands against, and contaminating, clean teats. Then do the following:

  • Pre dip and leave the udder for 30 seconds before wiping dry
  • Clean the teat with surgical spirit and cotton wool and leave to dry
  • Strip the teat to remove bugs from the milk canal
  • Clean the teat again with surgical spirit and leave to dry
  • Use the antibiotic on all four quarters
  • Clean the teat again, using surgical spirit, if you are going to use a teat sealant
http://dairy.ahdb.org.uk/news/techn...answer-isnt-in-a-tube-or-bottle/#.Vkj8_r9Q2fI
Pre-dip, with a proper pre-dip product is vital. Allowing to dry after cleaning with surgical spirit is also vital - wet surgical spirit is not a disinfectant. It kills bugs by drying them out.

It is vital to pinch the top of the teat when infusing teat sealant.

It is vital to re disinfect the teat after the antibiotic, if you are then infusing teat sealant.

It is vital if the cow moves or kicks the teats you START AGAIN at dipping.

Gloves must me worn and must be spotless throughout.

Post dip afterwards and stand the cows for 30 minutes.

Never do it in a foot crush.

This type of exercise looks goid and easy written down on paper But in practice is much harder to maintain. I try to dry off in batches of 10. And keep all cows to dry off back from milking until last batch in parlour. Milk cows as normal and teat spray. They are always spotless after milking. Use medicated wipes to clean teats again. Sealent in and spray. Any over 150 antibiotic also.
Send cows into yard ready for dry cow shed or yard. Not as rigorous as
Some but it works.
Funny sometimes how the dried off cows get stressed and figity in the yard while being appart from herd and waiting to be moved. Offten seen one slip or slide with bag into some dirt. Always think, oh oh!! Its just typica. Cows are cows not robots.
 

bovine

Member
Location
North
It has been mentioned earlier in this thread that an antibiotic tube followed by a teat sealer does not seal the teat as well as a teat sealant on its own due to a chemical reaction I presume. Is there any evidence of this happening on farm ?

It's wrong. You increase cure rates in cows with a high cell count by using a teat sealant AND antibiotic. Seal everything, antibiotics only in the cows that need them.
 

bovine

Member
Location
North
why is cows n grass brave if it works for him and he's within his level of SCC for his milk buyer carry on .To much pressure from vets like yourself to make farmers use more antibiotics keeping unessary low levels of SCC makes no odds to the milk quality !Always used as a tool to beat farmers with an excuse to cut the milk price paid .The hole industry is led with advertising for dairy famers to buy products that will cure this ,cure that ,produce more .Take a look at Fw .None of it has benefited the majority ,Just industrialised cows that only last 3 lactations and never feel the sun on their backs!And a crap milk price if your not on a direct contract!

???

He's brave because he is using a test to decide whether he needs to do something that is not reliable in its outcome. He could just as well toss a coin to decide.

He's got a low cell count so its likely that the majority of cows will not need antibiotic. If you miss an odd cow that would have benefited from antibiotic the world won't end - she might even self cure.

I want him to milk record and use that information to make decisions. How anyone can properly manage the herd without that information I really don't know. Using the CMT is pretty pointless. That is my point.
 
???

He's brave because he is using a test to decide whether he needs to do something that is not reliable in its outcome. He could just as well toss a coin to decide.

He's got a low cell count so its likely that the majority of cows will not need antibiotic. If you miss an odd cow that would have benefited from antibiotic the world won't end - she might even self cure.

I want him to milk record and use that information to make decisions. How anyone can properly manage the herd without that information I really don't know. Using the CMT is pretty pointless. That is my point.

I said from the outset that it wasn't ideal but for you to compare CMT to a coin toss is complete bollock$.

Its something I've done for some time now and there are many thousands of cows dried off around here using the same method. With a whole herd of stale cows giving bugger all milk my SCC is 203 at the moment.

I do intend to start milk recording again but at current milk prices its all but impossible to justify the £10k I need for the sampling gear let along the extra money and extra labour required for the sampling itself.

CellSense is a product that has been around for years now. The creators of this and customers obviously have a little more faith in CMT than you.

http://www.licautomation.com/products/cellsense/
 
I also do them straight after milking. Unit off in goes the Antibiotic then the sealant then spray I make sure I don't touch the orifice. I must admit I don't even use the medicated wipes. SCC running anywhere between 80 and 200. Can't understand what all the fuss is about, but maybe we've just got a low mastitis burden on the cows. Planning to start selective therapy but only on the very lowest SCC cows just as a trial to see how we go. Not keen to be honest but if we've got to do it in the future i'd like to have an idea of how we're going to cope.
 

jimmer

Member
Location
East Devon
I also do them straight after milking. Unit off in goes the Antibiotic then the sealant then spray I make sure I don't touch the orifice. I must admit I don't even use the medicated wipes. SCC running anywhere between 80 and 200. Can't understand what all the fuss is about, but maybe we've just got a low mastitis burden on the cows. Planning to start selective therapy but only on the very lowest SCC cows just as a trial to see how we go. Not keen to be honest but if we've got to do it in the future i'd like to have an idea of how we're going to cope.

ditto
 

bovine

Member
Location
North
I also do them straight after milking. Unit off in goes the Antibiotic then the sealant then spray I make sure I don't touch the orifice. I must admit I don't even use the medicated wipes.

You have missed the point. We are talking about selective dry cow therapy. Using an antibiotic with the sealant covers up your bad technique. That will be suddenly exposed when you tube cows unhygienically without the safety net of the antibiotic.

Can't understand what all the fuss is about, but maybe we've just got a low mastitis burden on the cows.

Nothing to do with mastitis. It's the bacteria in the environment, on the cows teats, the contamination left from the milking machine, contamination for the dirty tubes that have not been stored properly.

Planning to start selective therapy but only on the very lowest SCC cows just as a trial to see how we go. Not keen to be honest but if we've got to do it in the future i'd like to have an idea of how we're going to cope.

Good - but I would encourage you to do it on everything with call counts less than 200,000 and no clinical cases. Without any shadow of doubt you will need to vastly improve your drying off practices or you will kill cows.
 

bovine

Member
Location
North
I said from the outset that it wasn't ideal but for you to compare CMT to a coin toss is complete bollock$.

Its something I've done for some time now and there are many thousands of cows dried off around here using the same method. With a whole herd of stale cows giving bugger all milk my SCC is 203 at the moment. .

You have a low cell count so the great majority of your cows are uninfected. Do you take mastitis cases into account or simply use the CMT? I suspect you could do away with the CMT and put antibiotic in only cows free from mastitis and still get good results.....

I do intend to start milk recording again but at current milk prices its all but impossible to justify the £10k I need for the sampling gear let along the extra money and extra labour required for the sampling itself..

I do appreciate that is a barrier. I don't know how many cows you have, but the savings in dry cow tubes can certainly contribute to that.

CellSense is a product that has been around for years now. The creators of this and customers obviously have a little more faith in CMT than you.

CMT is a useful test for some things. It is widely regarded as being unreliable in early and late lactation. It's main use is identifying infected quarters in cows with a high composite cell count. I use it mainly for identifying subclinical quarters for sampling. These automatic CMT gadgets are ok and give you a ball park figure - but they will also be less reliable early and late in lactation. We have some guys on robots with similar systems and the true cell counts do vary quite a lot in later lactation! You also get some cows that the kit repeatedly believes are high, but that is not reflected in the cell count.

The reason I am emphasising this is not because I don't believe you technically can use CMT to decide which cows to give antibiotic - it is that the test is not good enough to use that way. Someone else could come along and read your post and think 'this sounds like a good idea'. It's not. Practical experience of the CMT agrees. The published research shows it is not good enough to use. Personally I would strongly advise a client of mine against doing so.
 

jondear

Member
Location
Devon
You have a low cell count so the great majority of your cows are uninfected. Do you take mastitis cases into account or simply use the CMT? I suspect you could do away with the CMT and put antibiotic in only cows free from mastitis and still get good results.....



I do appreciate that is a barrier. I don't know how many cows you have, but the savings in dry cow tubes can certainly contribute to that.



CMT is a useful test for some things. It is widely regarded as being unreliable in early and late lactation. It's main use is identifying infected quarters in cows with a high composite cell count. I use it mainly for identifying subclinical quarters for sampling. These automatic CMT gadgets are ok and give you a ball park figure - but they will also be less reliable early and late in lactation. We have some guys on robots with similar systems and the true cell counts do vary quite a lot in later lactation! You also get some cows that the kit repeatedly believes are high, but that is not reflected in the cell count.

The reason I am emphasising this is not because I don't believe you technically can use CMT to decide which cows to give antibiotic - it is that the test is not good enough to use that way. Someone else could come along and read your post and think 'this sounds like a good idea'. It's not. Practical experience of the CMT agrees. The published research shows it is not good enough to use. Personally I would strongly advise a client of mine against doing so.
You sumbed it up pretty well with the words client .You have a vested interest in making farmers use antibiotics .
 

jimmer

Member
Location
East Devon
You sumbed it up pretty well with the words client .You have a vested interest in making farmers use antibiotics .

as much as most of the rest of what you say i agree with
if you re read his posts , he is trying to get his clients to use less drugs by using a sealant on its own in most cases

i am a if it aint broke type of person
i get away with a lot of stuff that i probably shouldnt , but i cant help but think one day it will bite me on the arse
 

jondear

Member
Location
Devon
What about using sealent aren't you supposed to withhold milk for quite a while after calving? ! Bet many don't stick to withdrawal periods .cheese makers hate the stuff doesn't it make black spots in cheese?
 
your right there was one local cheese maker who didn t have the right sieve who banned orbeseal for a couple of years but relented put in the sieve and removed the ban. I am not aware of any issue since then. As for withdrawl periods I am not aware of them being any longer than with antibiotics and under our cheese contract the first 4 milkings are not supposed to go into the tank anyway.
given the news coming out of china today on antibiotic resistance this could well be the tip of the iceberg. best practice, prevention and reduced antibiotic usage will become priority.
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 79 42.2%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 65 34.8%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 16.0%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 7 3.7%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,289
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top