Approved & not Approved Pesticides

[happyfrenchman]

Firstly, if a drug is not approved, this does not mean it is or is not a hazard. It really means there has been no determination made as to it's safety. This is usually because there is no viable commercial reason to test it. (It is used primarily by small flock owners, or tomato gardners.... it is not in the food chain etc...) But even beyond that... why would you even consider giving an animal that produces food, (not is food, that is different but probably not much) any of these chemicals, if as some say, once you do so, you can no longer utilize them in their purpose. If it is so toxic, that you might have an issue second hand through an egg and after a assumed waiting period, you would think it would be so toxic it killed the subject. The fact is, that after a waiting period of a few days, the level of these chemicals is well below what would be considered a hazard (in the event you can even find data supporting what a hazardous level would be). I note a lot of confusion already. That is one good reason to use the older chemicals. They may not have been proven or tested, but they have been tested over the years by usage and experience, and are probably considerably better documented than the newer so called "approved" products.

 

[Lady of McCamley]

That's very different than saying extra label drug use is not allowed, or saying that one can never eat the eggs after using ivermectin, fenbendazole, albendazole, piperazine, etc, which I have seen people do.

I believe what I am saying may be misconstrued.

I am merely quoting the current FDA approved drugs for laying hens (2017), correcting an older listing that was posted in the first post from 2015, as the approved drugs have changed....the topic of the original post..."Approved FDA Drugs"

FARAD makes clear suggestions to vets in this publication:
https://vet.osu.edu/sites/vet.osu.edu/files/documents/extension/Egg residue considerations during the treatment of backyard poultry 2015.pdf

It is clear the FDA considers "pet" chickens as still food producing and instructs vets they should follow guidelines for drugs for food producing animals for backyard chcikens per FDA listings.

A drug is either approved or not approved, per the regulating authority in the US, the FDA....that can be considered "legal" or not, but the term is FDA approved. (Legal becomes semantics...whether or not legal proceedings could incur if a person has not upheld a written law or rule...FDA carries force of law with its administrative rules).

If you are a commercial poultry owner (over 3,000 birds), you come under regular inspection for which the FDA will enact penalties should residue of un-approved drugs be found.

If your a small holder (back yard owner), you can do whatever you want for personal use, as well as other, with the understanding that if an un-approved drug residue were ever found in your eggs that were sold or shared with the public (non immediate family), especially under food-illness situations, you are still liable for the FDA penalties.

Vets must consider any legal ramifications for themselves and their clients as their licensing requires them to uphold laws and administrative rulings, to the best of their abilities, thus instructing their clients appropriately.

Again, we are dealing with FDA rulings (which change), vet ethical and legal licensing requirements (which is somewhat interpretive, thus the FARAD publication), and personal risk comfort for the small holder.

Most back yard holders simply withdraw eggs according to the FARAD pull times to avoid any residue being found in their eggs. Some don't care, don't withhold, share at will.

It is all about the residue in the eggs...if un-approved drug residue is found, ETA (and zero tolerance is the norm in the US), then you could/would be liable for any FDA penalty. The only certain way to avoid the risk from penalty of drug residue ever being found is to never use the hen again for food production if the drug is not FDA approved....because of the FDA's "zero tolerance" levels...that is the "technical" answer...which I've stated before is often "winked" at by using withdrawal times.

Vets are becoming more reluctant to administer off label drugs for chickens because of the FDA approach to animals who also produce food (eggs).

There are clearly some banned drugs which are completely illegal to use in the US which would bring harsher penalties if used in animals, see the FARAD publication linked.

Just information for those who care to use as they see fit....my intent was to merely clarify new rulings have changed the "Approved" drugs by the FDA in the US.

LofMc
https://vet.osu.edu/sites/vet.osu.edu/files/documents/extension/Egg residue considerations during the treatment of backyard poultry 2015.pdf

 

[Lady of McCamley]

Firstly, if a drug is not approved, this does not mean it is or is not a hazard. It really means there has been no determination made as to it's safety. This is usually because there is no viable commercial reason to test it. (It is used primarily by small flock owners, or tomato gardners.... it is not in the food chain etc...) But even beyond that... why would you even consider giving an animal that produces food, (not is food, that is different but probably not much) any of these chemicals, if as some say, once you do so, you can no longer utilize them in their purpose. If it is so toxic, that you might have an issue second hand through an egg and after a assumed waiting period, you would think it would be so toxic it killed the subject. The fact is, that after a waiting period of a few days, the level of these chemicals is well below what would be considered a hazard (in the event you can even find data supporting what a hazardous level would be). I note a lot of confusion already. That is one good reason to use the older chemicals. They may not have been proven or tested, but they have been tested over the years by usage and experience, and are probably considerably better documented than the newer so called "approved" products.

...and that is the other half of the equation.

There are two completely different topics at hand.

What is FDA (government) approved, and what is healthy or safe.

The two are not necessarily the same thing at all. Countries and governments are very fickle. What one allows, the other doesn't.

I too find the older products good choice because a lot of history and observation is behind them. Unfortunately, in many areas, over exposure to those chemicals has created resistance in the pathogens and parasites which is why new products are created.

Unfortunately Congress is in the middle of these decisions, and they are lobbied hard by environmentalist groups, food ban groups, animal activist groups, and you name it.

So what comes out by way of actual regulation is a hodge podge of opinion not necessarily backed by science or common sense. (Many of the drugs are used in humans as well).

A recent fear has spread with some well known cases of persons supposedly contracting anti-biotic resistant strains from what was believed to be overuse in the livestock industry...so we got the Jan. 2017 new regs greatly restricting any antibiotic use, especially over the counter.

For personal use, common sense prevails, and some good research.

But, the original point of this thread was a listing of "approved" drugs originally posted with a link to an old, out-dated FDA drug listing with pertinent discussion of current lists and recommendations and side discussions of when someone might care to follow FDA approvals.

Many simply do not care, or follow the old routines. Unfortunately, that decision is slowly being made for us and many of these drugs are being removed altogether or being allotted to Vet prescription, with vets more and more reluctant to go against FDA approvals.

LofMc