A randomized controlled trial to compare the use of homeopathy and internal Teat Sealers for the prevention of mastitis in organically farmed dairy cows during the dry period and 100 days post-calving

P. Klocke; S. Ivemeyer; G. Butler; A. Maeschli; F. Heil

doi:10.1016/j.homp.2009.12.001

Homeopathy, Table of Contents

Homeopathy 2010; 99(02): 90-98
DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2009.12.001

Original Paper

A randomized controlled trial to compare the use of homeopathy and internal Teat Sealers for the prevention of mastitis in organically farmed dairy cows during the dry period and 100 days post-calving

Authors

P. Klocke

¹Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, CH-5070 Frick, Switzerland
S. Ivemeyer

¹Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, CH-5070 Frick, Switzerland
G. Butler

²Nafferton Ecological Farming Group, Newcastle University, Stocksfield, NE43 7XD, UK
A. Maeschli

¹Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, CH-5070 Frick, Switzerland
F. Heil

¹Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, CH-5070 Frick, Switzerland

Subject Editor:

Abstract

Introduction: Routine use of antibiotics to prevent mastitis in dairy cows is prohibited by organic farming regulations. Internal Teat Sealers have been proposed as an alternative. We compared two drying-off (DO) supporting measures (Internal Teat Sealer and Homeopathy) to an untreated control group to assess their protective effects against clinical mastitis and intra-mammary infections during dry period of dairy cows.

Methods: A field trial with 102 dairy cows from 13 Swiss organic dairy farms was conducted. Cows were randomly assigned to one of three groups within a herd. In the Internal Teat Sealer group (ITS; 36 cows) cows were treated with the commercial ORBESEAL (Pfizer) in all four quarters immediately after the last milking. In the Homeopathy group (HDT; 32 cows) the cows were treated per-orally by a herd-specific homeopathic formulation consisting of two remedies in 1:10⁶ dilution over 5 days before and after DO. The untreated group received no therapy (U; 34 cows).

Results: For ITS, HDT and U the clinical mastitis incidence rates for the first 100 days post-calving were 11%, 9% and 3%, respectively, and the proportion of normally secreting quarters was (quarter somatic cell count (SCC) [QSCC]<100,000/ml) 70%, 68%, and 65%, respectively. Power analysis indicates that a proportion of 75% would support the rejection of null hypothesis in the HDT, and 74% in the ITS group against untreated control. Quarters of cows with SCC<200,000/ml at DO showed significantly higher normal secretion in HDT group (odds ratio [OR] 9.69) compared to untreated control, whereas Teat Sealing lead to an OR of 3.09 (not significant, post hoc power 31.3%).

Conclusions: Under the studied conditions herd-specific homeopathic dry cow therapy was effective in increasing the number of animals with normal milk secretion after subsequent parturition, compared to untreated control. It may be an effective alternative to Teat Sealing, particularly in animals with relatively low SCCs. Further research is required to confirm these results, and under different environmental conditions.

Keywords

Dry cow therapy - Dairy cow - Mastitis - Teat Sealer - Homeopathy - Organic farming

Full Text

References

References
1 Hertzberg H., Walkenhorst M., Klocke P. Tiergesundheit im biologischen Landbau: Neue Richtlinien und Perspektiven für die Nutztierpraxis. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd 2003; 145: 519-525.
2 CEC. Council regulation no. 1804/99 supplementing regulation 2092/91 on organic production. Official J Eur Communities 1999; 42 (L222): 1-28.
3 Dodd F.H., Westgarth D.R., Neave F.K. et al. Mastitis – the strategy of control. J Dairy Sci 1969; 52: 689-695.
4 Berry E.A., Hillerton J.E. The effect of selective dry cow treatment on new intramammary infections. J Dairy Sci 2002; 85: 112-121.
5 Schaeren W., Maurer J. The use of an internal teat sealant, ORBESEAL, as a preventive measure for the dry cow period. In: Hovi M., Walkenhorst M., Padel S. Fourth SAFO Workshop: System Development: Quality and Safety of Organic Livestock Products. 2005. Frick (CH): University of Reading.;
6 Bradley J.M., Noone P., Townsend D.E. et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a London hospital. Lancet 1985; 1: 1493-1495.
7 Farnsworth R.J., Wyman L., Hawkinson R. Use of a teat sealer for prevention of intramammary infections in lactating cows. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1980; 177: 441-444.
8 Lim G.H., Leslie K.E., Kelton D.F. et al. Adherence and efficacy of an external teat sealant to prevent new intramammary infections in the dry period. J Dairy Sci 2007; 90: 1289-1300.
9 Whist A.C., Osteras O., Solverod L. Clinical mastitis in Norwegian herds after a combined selective dry-cow therapy and teat-dipping trial. J Dairy Sci 2006; 89: 4649-4659.
10 Woolford M.W., Williamson J.H., Henderson H.V. Changes in electrical conductivity and somatic cell count between milk fractions from quarters subclinically infected with particular mastitis pathogens. J Dairy Res 1998; 65: 187-198.
11 Hayton A.J., Bradley A.J. British Mastitits Conference. Stoneleigh. The control of mastitis on organic units 2004
12 Huxley J.N., Greent M.J., Green L.E. et al. Evaluation of the efficacy of an internal teat sealer during the dry period. J Dairy Sci 2002; 85: 551-561.
13 Woolford M.W., Williamson J.H., Day A.M. et al. The prophylactic effect of a teat sealer on bovine mastitis during the dry period and the following lactation. N Z Vet J 1998; 46: 12-19.
14 Berry E.A., Johnston W.T., Hillerton J.E. Prophylactic effects of two selective dry cow strategies accounting for interdependence of quarter. J Dairy Sci 2003; 86: 3912-3919.
15 Godden S., Rapnicki P., Stewart S. et al. Effectiveness of an internal teat seal in the prevention of new intramammary infections during the dry and early-lactation periods in dairy cows when used with a dry cow intramammary antibiotic. J Dairy Sci 2003; 86: 3899-3911.
16 Sanford C.J., Keefe G.P., Dohoo I.R. et al. Efficacy of using an internal teat sealer to prevent new intramammary infections in nonlactating dairy cattle. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2006; 228: 1565-1573.
17 Berry E.A., Hillerton J.E. Effect of an intramammary teat seal and dry cow antibiotic in relation to dry period length on postpartum mastitis. J Dairy Sci 2007; 90: 760-765.
18 Vaarst M., Paarup-Laursen B., Houe H. et al. Farmers' choice of medical treatment of mastitis in Danish dairy herds based on qualitative research interviews. J Dairy Sci 2002; 85: 992-1001.
19 Hektoen L. Investigations of the motivation underlying Norwegian dairy farmers' use of homoeopathy. Vet Rec 2004; 155: 701-707.
20 Barlow J., McCrory L., Mulloy E. et al. Evaluation of a Homeopathic Nosode for Mastitis Prevention. Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Mastitis and Milk Quality. 2001: 258-262.
21 Holmes M.A., Cockcroft P.D., Booth C.E. et al. Controlled clinical trial of the effect of a homoeopathic nosode on the somatic cell counts in the milk of clinically normal dairy cows. Vet Rec 2005; 156: 565-567.
22 Klocke P., Garbe S., Spranger J. et al. Homöopathie statt Antibiotika: Feldstudie liefert erste Ergebnisse. Ökologie & Landbau 2000; 28: 40-44.
23 Steingassner H.M. Homöopathische Materia Medica für Veterinärmediziner. Wien: Wilhelm Maudrich; 1998.
24 Robert A., Seegers H., Bareille N. Incidence of intramammary infections during the dry period without or with antibiotic treatment in dairy cows – a quantitative analysis of published data. Vet Res 2006; 37: 25-48.
25 De Vliegher S., Laevens H., Devriese L.A. et al. Prepartum teat apex colonization with Staphylococcus chromogenes in dairy heifers is associated with low somatic cell. Vet Microbiol 2003; 92: 245-252.
26 Schukken Y.H., Geer D., Grommers F.J. et al. Intramammary infections and risk factors for clinical mastitis in herds with low somatic cell counts in bulk milk. Vet Rec Oct 1989; 7: 393-396 (London: The Association).
27 Berry E.A., Hogeveen H., Hillerton J.E. Decision tree analysis to evaluate dry cow strategies under UK conditions. J Dairy Res 2004; 71: 409-418.