Topic of the Week - Deworming chickens

[casportpony]

Earlier this year I contacted "Merial" one of the biggest manufactures of Ivermectin in the USA. They informed me that they have "no information on treating poultry with ivermectin". Where are others getting poultry dosage information?

Before I will use any medication, I need four questions answered:

1) who supplied the information
2) what was supplied
3) where was it supplied
4) when was is done

So I thought I would touch one this a little more, and since ivermectin was mentioned, I'll use it as an example.

Capillary worms - Source Veterinary Reference Manual. In this picture you will see that it suggests giving ivermectin @ 0.4 mk/kg, but two studies I read suggest that ivemectin isn't very effective at that dose.


Here are the studies:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2816174
Ivermectin as a bird anthelmintic--trials with naturally infected domestic fowl.

Oksanen A, Nikander S.
Abstract

To evaluate the use of ivermectin as a bird anthelmintic, 29 White Leghorn hens naturally infected with Ascaridia spp., Heterakis spp. and Capillaria spp. were treated with 0.2, 2 or 6 mg/kg intramuscularly or 0.2 or 0.8 mg/kg orally. Faecal samples were collected before treatment and at autopsy, 2, 6, or 16 days after treatment, when the intestines were also examined for helminths. None of the treatments gave satisfactory anthelmintic results.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9269125
Anthelmintic efficacy of ivermectin against Syngamus trachea and Capillaria spp. in pheasant.

Lamka J1, Svobodová V, Slézková J.
Author information


Abstract

Ivermectin (IVM) was perorally administered in dosage schemes 1 x 0.8 mg/kg of body weight (b.w.), 1 x 1.6 mg/kg h.w., 3 x 0.8 mg/kg b.w., and 3 x 1.6 mg/kg b.w. to pheasants infected by Syngamus trachea and Capillaria spp. The samples of faeces were coprologically examined. The clinical state of pheasant was controlled. In all of the used therapeutical schemes the helminthostatic or partially helminthocide effect against adults of worms was reached. The clinical signs of helmithoses were reduced only. IVM in tested doses is not possible to recommend as an effective drug of pheasant syngamosis and capillariosis.



And I keep track of posts like this:
https://www.backyardchickens.com/t/867541/important-information-on-ivermec-warning-autopsy-photos



From this book - http://avianmedicine.net/content/uploads/2013/03/18.pdf





From this book - http://avianmedicine.net/content/uploads/2013/03/09_therapeutic_agents.pdf





Source: http://www.the-chicken-chick.com/2013/03/scaly-leg-mites-in-chickens.html





From this book - http://avianmedicine.net/content/uploads/2013/08/36_waterfowl.pdf





Given all the above I have extrapolated that most vets would probably prescribe ivermectin in the 0.2-0.4 mg/kg range, but given at that dose, it may or may not be effective in treatment of certain worms.

-Kathy

 

[Pyxis]

How does the Vet make money? They charge for visits and they charge a high price for the meds they want you to buy. I will continue doing what I am doing. If I were a Vet I would do what they are doing.

...you do know that vets don't really make money from telling people their horses have worms, right? Because people just go out and buy the wormer from a feed store? One of the wormers I have for my chickens is Ivermectin horse paste that I bought very cheaply at Tractor Supply, so that argument makes no sense. I'm a vet student. I make no money from telling you what I just did, but I did because we don't care about the money, we care about the health of the animals. Why do you think most vets go into that field? Because they love animals.

But clearly you are not going to be swayed even in the face of facts, so I give up.

 

[casportpony]

...you do know that vets don't really make money from telling people their horses have worms, right? Because people just go out and buy the wormer from a feed store? One of the wormers I have for my chickens is Ivermectin horse paste that I bought very cheaply at Tractor Supply, so that argument makes no sense. I'm a vet student. I make no money from telling you what I just did, but I did because we don't care about the money, we care about the health of the animals. Why do you think most vets go into that field? Because they love animals.

But clearly you are not going to be swayed even in the face of facts, so I give up.

How did I not know that? lol, guess I should pay better attention!

-Kathy

 

[Pyxis]

How did I not know that? lol, guess I should pay better attention!

-Kathy

Lol, I'm not too far along yet. Currently working on a vet tech degree so I can start working in the field sooner. Next year I'll start interning in a vet clinic for 24 hours a week, unpaid. I'll probably be the queen of fecals because no one likes to do them so I'm sure the updaid intern is gonna see a lot of them.

 

[casportpony]

Quote: Should be lots of fun!

-Kathy

 

[casportpony]

Speaking of fecals... a friend of mine just acquired some peafowl, and since he does his own fecals, he was able to test his new birds, and guess what he found? Gapeworm eggs (Syngamus trachea)! So how does one go about treating them you might ask? Well, the ivermectin study above sort of rules that out for me, so what are the choices?


Fenbendazole study

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6750887
Efficacy of fenbendazole against helminth parasites of poultry in Uganda.

Ssenyonga GS.
Abstract

Fenbendazole 4% (Panacur, Hoechst) administered in feed was used to treat chickens infected with Ascaridia galli, Heterakis gallinarum and Railletina spp. It was also used to treat Syngamus trachea in broiler birds. There was a marked drop in helminth egg counts in the faeces on the second day of treatment and the faeces became negative by the seventh day after the last treatment. Post-mortem examination 15 to 21 days later showed that the drug was 100% effective against Ascaridia galli and Heterakis gallinarum at 10 mg/kg. However, for complete removal of Railletina spp. 15 mg/kg was required. Similarly 20 mg/kg fenbendazole was effective against Syngamus trachea It was concluded that fenbendazole is suitable for the treatment of the important intestinal and tracheal worms of poultry, a dose of 15 to 20 mg/kg for 3 consecutive days being recommended for use under field conditions.

Or this book:





Albendazole Studies:


Comparative anthelmintic efficacy of mebendazole thiabendazole and albendazole against syngamus trachea infection in chicken

Devada K.; Sathianesan V., 1989: Comparative anthelmintic efficacy of mebendazole thiabendazole and albendazole against syngamus trachea infection in chicken. Kerala Journal Of Veterinary Science. 20(1): 59-64

Three anthelmintics viz., mebendazole, (Gulfic) thiabendazole (MSD) and albendazole (SKF) were tried against Syngamus trachea infection in chicken under experimental conditions. Mebendazole dosed at a rate of 40 mg per kg body weight was found to be most effective with 96.22 per cent reduction of eggs in the droppings, 88.1 per cent of disappearance of worms in the trachea and 95.52 per cent of weight gain of the treated birds. This was closely followed by albendazole administered at 15 mg per kg body weight, which had an efficacy of 95.14 per cent 76.19 per cent and 95.02 per cent in the respective three parameters. Thiabendazole given at a dose rate of 500 mg per kg body weight showed anefficacy of 89.27, 45.24 per cent and 94.18 perc cent based on the egg counts, worm counts and gain in body weight of the medicated chicks respectively. Thiabendazole was found to be the least effective when compared to the other drugs tried.

Source: https://eurekamag.com/research/007/133/007133599.php
Efficacy of albendazole against Syngamus trachea in experimentally infected turkeys

Istvan, Varga; Gyorgy, Banhidi; Zoltan, Szell; Csaba, Balint, 1998: Efficacy of albendazole against Syngamus trachea in experimentally infected turkeys.Magyar Allatorvosok Lapja. 120(6): 336-338, E

Efficacy of albendazole of Syngamus trachea tested in groups of 8 to 9 turkeys experimentally infected with 500 larvae each at the age of 8 days. From day 17 after infection, the animals were orally dosed with albendazole at 10, 5 or 2 mg/kg b.w. over 3 to 5 successive days. The efficacy was evaluated by daily inspection of symptoms, daily faecal egg counts and worm counts at post mortem on day 24 after infection. The efficacy in the treated groups amounted to 100%, 100% and 94%, respectively. Remnants of wormpairs - mainly disintegrating males - were found in several animals of medicated groups as against all alive wormpairs in the control turkeys. The study shows high efficacy of albendazole at reduced dose rate against patent gapeworm disease in turkey.

Source: https://eurekamag.com/research/003/122/003122652.php


So given the above one can extrapolate that the Safeguard (fenbendazole) dose or the Valbazen (albendazole) dose.

I would choose this:


-Kathy

 

[Kay Kew]

Kathy - it is rigorous, clear, scientifically researched information such as you highlight on this forum, that makes it such a really worthwhile resource!! It is just so refreshing to read your posts! One of the great weaknesses of the internet is that so much of what is presented as 'established fact', is nothing of the kind, but rather a mishmash of hearsay, anecdote, personal preference and/or sloppy pseudoscience. I don't doubt that such information is usually presented with the best of intentions, at least on a forum such as this one, but it is critically important, both for us humans and for the animals which are at the receiving end of whatever treatments we choose, that we have a reliable source of information drawn from the scientific literature, which is based on well established, unbiased scientific methods. Thanks again!

In relation to vets and their motivations, well I would say that as with every other profession, some (hopefully most) vets are motivated solely, or at least primarily by the welfare of the animals they treat, and are meticulous in everything they do; but inevitably there are vets who do not always provide the best possible service, who may not really be up to speed on all aspects of the correct care of the animals arriving into their clinics and who just 'wing it' occasionally, while giving the impression of being completely on top of the situation. In my case of recent (expensive) visits to a small animal vet I had never attended before, whose practice has a reputation for treating more 'exotic' pets (i.e. anything other than cats and dogs I think!), I would say that
a) they should have asked me to bring in a faecal sample at least, and, in light of what I have read on this thread, they should probably have suggested doing a faecal flotation, before setting me on a course of oral dosing of my three hens with Panacur for 5 days. I did actually bring in a sample as I thought it might be relevant, but the vet only took a very cursory look at it and certainly didn't use a microscope or anything.
b) as a novice poultry owner, I should have been given much better information on how to administer the dose orally and also on the other options available for dosing, such as with feed etc. Had I not been helped by the well informed contributors to this thread such as yourself, I would have really been operating in the dark and could easily have administered the dose in a less than optimal way (e.g. inaccurate volume due to incorrect loading of syringe resulting in air bubbles and/or incorrect route i.e. over the opening into the trachea).

As I sit here typing this reply on a pleasant autumn morning on the east coast of Ireland, my three hens are scratching around happily in my garden and I am confident that if any problems arise, help is at hand, here on this forum. Thanks to you and everyone else who does their best to help in whatever way they can!

 

[Isay Willow]

I hope this study will answer some of your questions about DE. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21673156



Diatomaceous Earth


Chickens taking dust baths in diatomaceous earth benefit from a reduced number of external parasites, but the substance can help internally as well. A 2011 study by the University of British Columbia showed that adding a teaspoon of DE per cup of food dramatically reduces fecal egg counts of several parasites, including roundworms, eimeria and cecal worms. As a bonus, chickens consuming diatomaceous earth in their diets weighed more than birds without DE in their diets, and produced larger eggs that contained more yolk and albumen.

 

[Isay Willow]

I am told I cannot post a URL at present time do a search of the following..... University of British Columbia research on Diatomaceous Earth

Effect of diatomaceous earth on parasite load, egg production, and egg quality of free-range organic laying hens.

Diatomaceous Earth


Chickens taking dust baths in diatomaceous earth benefit from a reduced number of external parasites, but the substance can help internally as well. A 2011 study by the University of British Columbia showed that adding a teaspoon of DE per cup of food dramatically reduces fecal egg counts of several parasites, including roundworms, eimeria and cecal worms. As a bonus, chickens consuming diatomaceous earth in their diets weighed more than birds without DE in their diets, and produced larger eggs that contained more yolk and albumen.

 

[casportpony]

I hope this study will answer some of your questions about DE. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21673156



Diatomaceous Earth


Chickens taking dust baths in diatomaceous earth benefit from a reduced number of external parasites, but the substance can help internally as well. A 2011 study by the University of British Columbia showed that adding a teaspoon of DE per cup of food dramatically reduces fecal egg counts of several parasites, including roundworms, eimeria and cecal worms. As a bonus, chickens consuming diatomaceous earth in their diets weighed more than birds without DE in their diets, and produced larger eggs that contained more yolk and albumen.

Effect of diatomaceous earth on parasite load, egg production, and egg quality of free-range organic laying hens.

Bennett DC1, Yee A, Rhee YJ, Cheng KM.
Author information


Abstract

The effectiveness of diatomaceous earth (DE) as a treatment against parasites and to increase feed efficiency and egg production of organically raised free-range layer hens was evaluated in 2 breeds of commercial egg layers [Bovan Brown (BB) and Lowmann Brown (LB)] that differ in their resistance to internal parasitic infections. Half the hens of each breed were fed diets supplemented with DE (2%). Their internal parasite loads were assessed by biweekly fecal egg counts (FEC) and by postmortem examination of the gastrointestinal tract. Supplementing DE in diets of LB hens, the more parasite-resistant breed, did not significantly affect their FEC and adult parasite load. However, BB hens treated with dietary DE had significantly lower Capillaria FEC, slightly lower Eimeria FEC, fewer birds infected with Heterakis, and significantly lower Heterakis worm burden than control BB hens. Both BB and LB hens fed the diet containing DE were significantly heavier, laid more eggs, and consumed more feed than hens fed the control diet, but feed efficiency did not differ between the 2 dietary treatments. Additionally, BB hens consuming the DE diet laid larger eggs containing more albumen and yolk than hens consuming the control diet. In a subsequent experiment, the effectiveness of DE to treat a Northern fowl mite (Ornithonyssus sylviarum) infestation was tested. Relative to controls, both breeds of hens that were dusted with DE had reduced number of mites. The results of this study indicate the DE has the potential to be an effective treatment to help control parasites and improve production of organically raised, free-range layer hens.