Buying Baytril - Buyer Beware

It is readily available in Aus, but then so too are cigarettes . It all comes down to personal choices and I can see no reason not to use it in ornamental birds. However I would think twice about using it on the off chance that it might save a bird and come back to bite you later.

How? How is it different than using it in an ornamental bird?
 
Because we don't eat ornamental birds or their eggs.

Well, that was exactly my point... I don't eat my peafowl or their eggs. So how is my using Baytril on my peafowl different than using it on a parrot? Or on my dog?

And even if I were to eat my peas' eggs (which I don't do, and won't do), how is that different than eating beef or swine that has been treated with Baytril and then has been sold to me at the grocery store, (me all unaware of it too!)?

I guess I'm trying to understand the statement about using it on a bird and having it come back later and bite me...
 
Last edited:
Well, that was exactly my point... I don't eat my peafowl or their eggs.  So how is my using Baytril on my peafowl different than using it on a parrot?  Or on my dog?

And even if I were to eat my peas' eggs (which I don't do, and won't do), how is that different than eating beef or swine that has been treated with Baytril and then has been sold to me at the grocery store, (me all unaware of it too!)?

I guess I'm trying to understand the statement about using it on a bird and having it come back later and bite me...

Sorry, I should have said, " however when it comes to treating birds that might be a possible food source I would think twice......................."
You can only deal with known dangers and if the FDA scientists are correct , baytril in chickens can be of serious consequence in humans.
 
Sorry, I should have said, " however when it comes to treating birds that might be a possible food source I would think twice......................."
You can only deal with known dangers and if the FDA scientists are correct , baytril in chickens can be of serious consequence in humans.

Well, I can agree with that statement. And I am completely aghast that any -- ANY -- antibiotic is still permitted to be used in any kind of animal feed.... I feel that should NEVER have been allowed, and certainly with what we know now, it should have been stopped long since. Medicating a demonstrably ill animal is completely different in my view from indiscriminate use as a growth enhancer.

Not to mention that such bulk uses seem to me to be more likely to contaminate other aspects of the environment such as water from runoff... Antibiotic contamination in the water supply is a growing problem.
 
There's a place somewhere on the FDA website that has names and violations of people and their infractions, some drug related.
sad.png


-Kathy
 
Probably pretty safe to assume that they're antibiotic free... Once they get to a certain age they're switched from a starter to a grower, and none of the growers I have seen have antibiotics in them.

-Kathy

Well ingesting birds with current antibiotics in them creates the risk for the human developing resistant bacteria. But ingesting birds that have previously been fed antibiotics, depending upon how the antibiotics were used, poses the possibility of ingesting or being contaminated with bacteria which have already developed resistance while the bird was getting the antibiotics.

I think this latter route of acquiring antibiotic-resistant bacteria was the primary reason that baytril was banned for poultry. But I am still somewhat baffled as to why it's okay to treat food animals with it. I'm thinking it's more a money issue...
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom