Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Forums
Cattle Boards
Health & Nutrition
Question for Larryshoat ..
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support CattleToday:
Message
<blockquote data-quote="milkmaid" data-source="post: 600762" data-attributes="member: 852"><p>RR, if you're going to play the "use each drug according to label directions" card, then you'd better follow your own rules. You mentioned using Nuflor for navel ill... that's off label. You mentioned using LA200 for navel ill... that's also off label, in case you weren't aware.</p><p></p><p>Shucks, if we're going to get technical about it, here's the label for LA200:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The treatment of pneumonia and shipping fever complex associated with <em>Pasteurella</em> spp. and <em>Hemophilus</em> spp.; infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis (pinkeye) caused by <em>Moraxella bovis</em>; footrot and diphtheria caused by <em>Fusobacterium necrophorum</em>; bacterial enteritis (scours) caused by <em>Escherichia coli</em>; wooden tongue caused by <em>Actinobacillus lignieresii</em>; leptospirosis caused by <em>Leptospira pomona</em>; and wound infections and acute metritis caused by strains of staphylococci and streptococci organisms sensitive to oxytetracycline.</li> </ul><p></p><p>So unless a person cultures each and every case of bacterial illness prior to treating they may well be using something like LA200 off label. What if you're treating a case of Salmonella-caused calf scours with LA200? that'd be off label too.</p><p></p><p>I agree that there would be less drug resistance if proper doses were used, the right drugs used for the right <u>bacterial</u> infection, and the animals were treated long enough. I picked up some calves this spring that even Gentimycin and Draxxin wouldn't hardly touch, and I'm rather... I won't even say it... about antibiotic treatment now because those drug-resistant calves were a mess. However, I do disagree that a person must follow drug instructions precisely, because the drug labels often are only covering the basics, or only covering a few specific items so that the antibiotic can be approved with the least cost and lowest withdrawal times. LA200 will work for cases of E. coli mastitis based on that label, but it's sure not approved for it. It can also be used for Actinomycosis (Lumpy Jaw) yet that's not listed on the label either. I've used sulfas for urinary tract infections, Baytril for ear infections, and penicillin for uterine infections/acute metritis, all things they aren't approved for but work quite well for. IMO there's nothing wrong with that.</p><p></p><p>You might get away with using penicillin at low doses because you have a closed herd and rarely treat -- or maybe you're just lucky, but the average producer with an open herd has to use penn at 5mL/100lbs to get any response. The label says 1mL/100lbs or 2mL/150lbs.</p><p></p><p>You're also contradicting yourself over there, RR. According to you it'd be wrong for a producer to treat beyond the time listed on the label because that's off-label use, but yet you say "Maybe if people followed through on drugs and treated for a full course instead of forgetting to give the next dose or figuring the animal was well enough to make it on it's own thus causing resistance...". The problem with most antibiotics out there is that the label says "a maximum of 2 treatments 48 hours apart" or some slight variation on that. That is NOT a full course of treatment and is a major problem with the drug label. If people did the research to know what to use, when, how, why, and how long, or else vets were more honest about the length of time to treat, we wouldn't have near as much antibiotic resistance.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="milkmaid, post: 600762, member: 852"] RR, if you're going to play the "use each drug according to label directions" card, then you'd better follow your own rules. You mentioned using Nuflor for navel ill... that's off label. You mentioned using LA200 for navel ill... that's also off label, in case you weren't aware. Shucks, if we're going to get technical about it, here's the label for LA200: [list]The treatment of pneumonia and shipping fever complex associated with [i]Pasteurella[/i] spp. and [i]Hemophilus[/i] spp.; infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis (pinkeye) caused by [i]Moraxella bovis[/i]; footrot and diphtheria caused by [i]Fusobacterium necrophorum[/i]; bacterial enteritis (scours) caused by [i]Escherichia coli[/i]; wooden tongue caused by [i]Actinobacillus lignieresii[/i]; leptospirosis caused by [i]Leptospira pomona[/i]; and wound infections and acute metritis caused by strains of staphylococci and streptococci organisms sensitive to oxytetracycline. [/list] So unless a person cultures each and every case of bacterial illness prior to treating they may well be using something like LA200 off label. What if you're treating a case of Salmonella-caused calf scours with LA200? that'd be off label too. I agree that there would be less drug resistance if proper doses were used, the right drugs used for the right [u]bacterial[/u] infection, and the animals were treated long enough. I picked up some calves this spring that even Gentimycin and Draxxin wouldn't hardly touch, and I'm rather... I won't even say it... about antibiotic treatment now because those drug-resistant calves were a mess. However, I do disagree that a person must follow drug instructions precisely, because the drug labels often are only covering the basics, or only covering a few specific items so that the antibiotic can be approved with the least cost and lowest withdrawal times. LA200 will work for cases of E. coli mastitis based on that label, but it's sure not approved for it. It can also be used for Actinomycosis (Lumpy Jaw) yet that's not listed on the label either. I've used sulfas for urinary tract infections, Baytril for ear infections, and penicillin for uterine infections/acute metritis, all things they aren't approved for but work quite well for. IMO there's nothing wrong with that. You might get away with using penicillin at low doses because you have a closed herd and rarely treat -- or maybe you're just lucky, but the average producer with an open herd has to use penn at 5mL/100lbs to get any response. The label says 1mL/100lbs or 2mL/150lbs. You're also contradicting yourself over there, RR. According to you it'd be wrong for a producer to treat beyond the time listed on the label because that's off-label use, but yet you say "Maybe if people followed through on drugs and treated for a full course instead of forgetting to give the next dose or figuring the animal was well enough to make it on it's own thus causing resistance...". The problem with most antibiotics out there is that the label says "a maximum of 2 treatments 48 hours apart" or some slight variation on that. That is NOT a full course of treatment and is a major problem with the drug label. If people did the research to know what to use, when, how, why, and how long, or else vets were more honest about the length of time to treat, we wouldn't have near as much antibiotic resistance. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Cattle Boards
Health & Nutrition
Question for Larryshoat ..
Top