What exactly does breed for resistance mean?
- Thread starter kathyinmo
- Start date
Quote:
I run small number of birds in a small pen. I have 20 pens all separated. IF ever one gets sick, rest assured the others in that pen have been exposed, and thus IF not sick have better resistance. Like someone said, how well you take care of your birds is, in my opinion, directly related how well your birds handle strange new bugs that go around. Fresh water and clean good quality food goes along way in preventing my birds from getting sick.
I run small number of birds in a small pen. I have 20 pens all separated. IF ever one gets sick, rest assured the others in that pen have been exposed, and thus IF not sick have better resistance. Like someone said, how well you take care of your birds is, in my opinion, directly related how well your birds handle strange new bugs that go around. Fresh water and clean good quality food goes along way in preventing my birds from getting sick.
Quote:
Leaving the Marans breed out of the discussion (that's just asking for a locked thread) I think this part of your post brings up another good topic for discussion - along the lines of breeding for resistance.
I think many, including myself, have experienced this. We order hatching eggs and/or chicks and those are the ones that get "sick". In my case, it was only the Welsummer chicks I ordered that got Fowl Pox, and only the roosters, but none of my other birds got it. Even something like Bumblefoot - originally with all of my birds coming from other breeders, I was doing a lot of bumblefoot surgeries. Now, I have NOT seen a single case in over a year. I've also read where others have ordered chicks, like Halo, and had them eventually get sick. My question is, instead of assuming that the new chicks were sick or carriers is:
Is it possible (and I believe it is) that the new ones weren't sick or carriers but that they did not have the immunities, the resistance, to the stuff (disease) that is present in your flock and your flock has naturally developed resistance to it and thus shows no sign of being ill, nor any of their offspring.
In other words, we've all read that worms are present in goats and chickens, just a way of life. I'm sure if I did a fecal on my chickens and goats poop something would show up but since they seem big and healthy and no signs of worms, they have a level that is "normal" and controllable for their system and I choose to leave well enough alone and not use poisons. We've also read that things like MG and many other diseases are present in the eggs and seemingly healthy birds. Again, it's starting to look like a lot of these "diseases" are commonly occuring things that some chickens have just developed a resistance to. So, when new chicks are brought in, they get sick because they didn't hatch from birds that had the resistance and they didn't grow up on the farm where immunities have been developed, so they get sick and die. Then "they" are blamed for being the sick ones and coming from sick/weak breeder birds.
Just a thought and up for discussion.......
I dont know. I really don't. All I know is that the chicks that I got eventually got sick, and I know that they came from a flock that had this very same sickness (Im assuming; the symptoms were the same). I also understand (maybe incorrectly) that MG can be transmitted thru the egg, so I just assumed that was where it came from, and got rid of it quickly.
I didnt mean to bring up Marans for any other reason than that has been a problem with them. They are being treated aggressively to correct this. Which brings us back to the different ways people deal with this, either treat or let nature take its course and let the strongest survive. Is this treating doing the Marans breed a disservice? Should Marans breeders play hardball and only keep and breed those that dont get ill? You could substitute any other breed in there, but I dont know of any other issues like this in other breeds.
Hi Halo - do know I only used your quote because it brought up what I thought was a good question. You aren't the only one that ordered chicks, from a breeder, or hatchery, and then have them all get sick. In your case apparently the Marans breeder knew they had a fatal illness in their flock and sold chicks anyway (but let's not condemn the entire Marans breed or all Marans breeders for that - I've never had a sick Marans). In other cases, all chicks from the same hatchery ended up being sick so that was clearly something wrong with the hatchery stock. BUT....in many other cases, the newly arrived chicks got sick when the breeder claimed there was no sickness on their property. It's those cases that I'm questioning.....was there an undiagnosed sickness from birds that show no signs of being sick or birds that have built a resistance to whatever is on their own property but the chicks are sent somewhere else and there is something else present there that they are not immune to?
Does that question/debate make any sense????
Leaving the Marans breed out of the discussion (that's just asking for a locked thread) I think this part of your post brings up another good topic for discussion - along the lines of breeding for resistance.
I think many, including myself, have experienced this. We order hatching eggs and/or chicks and those are the ones that get "sick". In my case, it was only the Welsummer chicks I ordered that got Fowl Pox, and only the roosters, but none of my other birds got it. Even something like Bumblefoot - originally with all of my birds coming from other breeders, I was doing a lot of bumblefoot surgeries. Now, I have NOT seen a single case in over a year. I've also read where others have ordered chicks, like Halo, and had them eventually get sick. My question is, instead of assuming that the new chicks were sick or carriers is:
Is it possible (and I believe it is) that the new ones weren't sick or carriers but that they did not have the immunities, the resistance, to the stuff (disease) that is present in your flock and your flock has naturally developed resistance to it and thus shows no sign of being ill, nor any of their offspring.
In other words, we've all read that worms are present in goats and chickens, just a way of life. I'm sure if I did a fecal on my chickens and goats poop something would show up but since they seem big and healthy and no signs of worms, they have a level that is "normal" and controllable for their system and I choose to leave well enough alone and not use poisons. We've also read that things like MG and many other diseases are present in the eggs and seemingly healthy birds. Again, it's starting to look like a lot of these "diseases" are commonly occuring things that some chickens have just developed a resistance to. So, when new chicks are brought in, they get sick because they didn't hatch from birds that had the resistance and they didn't grow up on the farm where immunities have been developed, so they get sick and die. Then "they" are blamed for being the sick ones and coming from sick/weak breeder birds.
Just a thought and up for discussion.......
I dont know. I really don't. All I know is that the chicks that I got eventually got sick, and I know that they came from a flock that had this very same sickness (Im assuming; the symptoms were the same). I also understand (maybe incorrectly) that MG can be transmitted thru the egg, so I just assumed that was where it came from, and got rid of it quickly.
I didnt mean to bring up Marans for any other reason than that has been a problem with them. They are being treated aggressively to correct this. Which brings us back to the different ways people deal with this, either treat or let nature take its course and let the strongest survive. Is this treating doing the Marans breed a disservice? Should Marans breeders play hardball and only keep and breed those that dont get ill? You could substitute any other breed in there, but I dont know of any other issues like this in other breeds.
Hi Halo - do know I only used your quote because it brought up what I thought was a good question. You aren't the only one that ordered chicks, from a breeder, or hatchery, and then have them all get sick. In your case apparently the Marans breeder knew they had a fatal illness in their flock and sold chicks anyway (but let's not condemn the entire Marans breed or all Marans breeders for that - I've never had a sick Marans). In other cases, all chicks from the same hatchery ended up being sick so that was clearly something wrong with the hatchery stock. BUT....in many other cases, the newly arrived chicks got sick when the breeder claimed there was no sickness on their property. It's those cases that I'm questioning.....was there an undiagnosed sickness from birds that show no signs of being sick or birds that have built a resistance to whatever is on their own property but the chicks are sent somewhere else and there is something else present there that they are not immune to?
Does that question/debate make any sense????
According to Dr. Peter Brown, over time, the ones who are carriers from an outbreak will eventually show symptoms. That was how one member here was able to weed the Coryza carriers from her flock over a period of a year. Many of my birds' progeny have been tested by others who are NPIP and also test for MG every four months. None tested positive for anything. I'm going on that plus the fact that not one bird here has ever had respiratory illness. Most were hatched here, the rest from hatcheries, and I don't go to shows or buy started birds from anywhere.
Quote:
Hi Cyn - thanks for sharing that information. I'm finding this a very interesting discussion. Because.....when a vaccine is administered, it is really a small dose of the disease and only makes the animal (or person) "slightly" sick but stays in their system so that they build immunity to that disease. So why wouldn't being exposed to a live/real disease and surviving (for whatever reason) not do the same? Why wouldn't they just now be immune and not "carriers" in the aspect that someday they are going to show symptoms and/or spread it to others? I'm not sure which way I'm swaying on this topic but I'm tending to sway to the side that says they would be immune and pass that immunity on to their chicks. Same way a mother passes her immunities onto her children.
Another, for example, as I said, I've never been sick. I breastfed my son, who not only has never been sick, he never got any of the childhood diseases and never got the commonly occuring ear or sinus infections, colds, bronchitis, - nothing - ever. He's now 27 and home for a visit from his tour in Iraq.
And speaking of my son, the soldier - it seems the army keeps messing up his records, especially his medical records and shot records. So, he's had to have the same shots and vaccines dozens of times including being shot full of every third-world disease and antrax on multiple occasions - never got sick.
I'm now of the opinion - "That which doesn't kill us makes us stronger."
Hi Cyn - thanks for sharing that information. I'm finding this a very interesting discussion. Because.....when a vaccine is administered, it is really a small dose of the disease and only makes the animal (or person) "slightly" sick but stays in their system so that they build immunity to that disease. So why wouldn't being exposed to a live/real disease and surviving (for whatever reason) not do the same? Why wouldn't they just now be immune and not "carriers" in the aspect that someday they are going to show symptoms and/or spread it to others? I'm not sure which way I'm swaying on this topic but I'm tending to sway to the side that says they would be immune and pass that immunity on to their chicks. Same way a mother passes her immunities onto her children.
Another, for example, as I said, I've never been sick. I breastfed my son, who not only has never been sick, he never got any of the childhood diseases and never got the commonly occuring ear or sinus infections, colds, bronchitis, - nothing - ever. He's now 27 and home for a visit from his tour in Iraq.
And speaking of my son, the soldier - it seems the army keeps messing up his records, especially his medical records and shot records. So, he's had to have the same shots and vaccines dozens of times including being shot full of every third-world disease and antrax on multiple occasions - never got sick.
I'm now of the opinion - "That which doesn't kill us makes us stronger."
Monique, not all vaccines are live ones. I think those are the ones that make the bird a carrier? I'm not sure since I don't use vaccines in my flock. Whatever you decide about managing your flock health, I'm of the opinion that you can never be too cautious with disease management.
Quote:
I agree Cyn. I now have a closed flock. My total "non-understanding" of exactly how vaccines and medicines work is one of the reasons I don't use them including on myself. I never even take aspirin or over the counter meds of any kind - never have.
I agree Cyn. I now have a closed flock. My total "non-understanding" of exactly how vaccines and medicines work is one of the reasons I don't use them including on myself. I never even take aspirin or over the counter meds of any kind - never have.
This was posted on another site
All current "tests" for CRD measure immune response of bird, ie vaccinated birds will all always test positive, as birds having or birds exposed to, and restistent. AN unexposed bird only will test neg.
Vaccinations will work only on crd free chicks, as mother will pass CDR to young thru egg.
CRD is cured only with a hachet or is said to be cured by one of the FLOROQUINALINE family of antibiotics-
ie Cephlin, Cipro, Baytril, etc.
Tylan 50 is not recommended for several reasons
1)Tylan is a toxic antibiotic, making dosage CRITICAL. Over dosage can effect fertility. Underdosage will yield a drug resistent strain.
2) Injectable Tylan is not recommended in BIRDS, period as it causes severe muscle atrophy, remember the toxic part?
(*Tylosin = Tylan)
Chris
All current "tests" for CRD measure immune response of bird, ie vaccinated birds will all always test positive, as birds having or birds exposed to, and restistent. AN unexposed bird only will test neg.
Vaccinations will work only on crd free chicks, as mother will pass CDR to young thru egg.
CRD is cured only with a hachet or is said to be cured by one of the FLOROQUINALINE family of antibiotics-
ie Cephlin, Cipro, Baytril, etc.
Tylan 50 is not recommended for several reasons
1)Tylan is a toxic antibiotic, making dosage CRITICAL. Over dosage can effect fertility. Underdosage will yield a drug resistent strain.
2) Injectable Tylan is not recommended in BIRDS, period as it causes severe muscle atrophy, remember the toxic part?
(*Tylosin = Tylan)
Chris
Last edited:
- Aug 29, 2010
- 44
- 3
- 22
I've had pigeons for over 40 years and first got into chickens about 30 years ago.
I practice "benign neglect". By this,I mean I give them all the essentials of life - shelter, food and water. That's it. I never medicate. Any bird ever showing any signs of being sick - is culled.
The birds with the genes that render them susceptible to disease are (over time) weeded out. In their place live the birds with constitutions that allow them to stay healthy. After all, they are all drinking the same water, eating the same food, and living in the same shelters. And yet, only a few young birds (if that) get sick every year. Why (if I have a long -term goal of owning healthy birds) would I ever want to medicate sick birds? Do I want to allow them to survive and breed and pass those genes along? I do not.
It sounds harsh to some, perhaps - but this what nature does. I have (a number of times) either bought, or inherited birds from people who believed in medication for their birds. Inevitably the birds from people who medicate suffer losses - over time - that my own long-term strains do not. Given enough time (and patience) the birds from other lines do eventually get tougher over time - usually noticeably so - even after just a few generations of "live and let die" husbandry.
It's not for everyone - but it has worked very well for me.
I practice "benign neglect". By this,I mean I give them all the essentials of life - shelter, food and water. That's it. I never medicate. Any bird ever showing any signs of being sick - is culled.
The birds with the genes that render them susceptible to disease are (over time) weeded out. In their place live the birds with constitutions that allow them to stay healthy. After all, they are all drinking the same water, eating the same food, and living in the same shelters. And yet, only a few young birds (if that) get sick every year. Why (if I have a long -term goal of owning healthy birds) would I ever want to medicate sick birds? Do I want to allow them to survive and breed and pass those genes along? I do not.
It sounds harsh to some, perhaps - but this what nature does. I have (a number of times) either bought, or inherited birds from people who believed in medication for their birds. Inevitably the birds from people who medicate suffer losses - over time - that my own long-term strains do not. Given enough time (and patience) the birds from other lines do eventually get tougher over time - usually noticeably so - even after just a few generations of "live and let die" husbandry.
It's not for everyone - but it has worked very well for me.
Last edited:
Brian, welcome to BYC! Thanks for weighing in on this issue. Chicken keeping does involve some harsh realities, as you indicated.
Similar threads
New posts New threads Active threads
-
Threads with more replies in the last 15 days
-
-
Over researched and made myself anxious about coccidiosis- Started by Echelontheory101
- Replies: 67
-
-
-
-
