To medicate or not to medicate - why you do or don't

Sweetened wrote:I constantly think of my chicks and why they are dying. The first one was a surprise, unexpected, however I instantly started looking for clues, making observations and supplementing with gut-flora enhancing things. The first 3 declined so rapidly, I was at work when they passed and was unable to stop their suffering myself. The last 2 I put down myself. Was it easy? No. Nature isn’t easy. In my opinion, these chicks wouldn’t have survived in ‘the wild’, and thus weren’t healthy enough from birth. It’s a bit fatalistic, but let it be known I cried for each one.

Those that declined but returned are thriving, without a doubt. I made a lot of considerations and changes in how I do things, including less of a quarantine type environment between brooder and coop. It’s unfortunate that those of us who use non-medicated are viewed as not caring about our birds. For most of us, it’s the exact opposite. I must say, as well, there is time and effort required to specifically seek out non-medicated food. For those who feel as though we are being lazy or taking an easy way out, I believe you are sadly mistaken.

No one has said you are taking the easy way out or being lazy
You asked what other people did and why
so that is the answers you are getting.
I choose to do medicated because no matter if they are my purebred or my barnyard layers I am bringing them into this world and I want them to live
that is my choice how I do it just like yours how you do it.
I wish you luck in what you are doing and hope that it works for you
I just know it will not work for me

KathyS wrote:After I posted that, I wanted to add that I do understand what you are working towards Sweetened, and I admire it. Breeding up your own brand of strong, hardy no-nonsense chickens is a valuable, meaningful goal. Chickens like that will always be needed. Those are some of the characteristics I look for in my Chanteclers.
My goal with the Cochins is pretty much at the other end of the spectrum. They are slow growing so not particularly useful for meat. Not great foragers and all those feathers mean they can suffer from external parasites if not cared for properly. They can't fly to escape predators. In short, they are mainly meant to be beautiful, ornamental birds, and need human intervention/protection to survive. They are my pets more than livestock. So, like vaccinating my dogs, I'll keep using the medicated chick starter.

That about sums up how I feel about my houdans. I have read poultry books printed 100 years ago that even back then claimed the breed needed careful care and guidance if it were to flourish and survive. Here I am, Houdan 2.0. My first attempts to breed being an absolute bust. I could go on an list all the problems with the breed that would make anyone shake their head and ask me "Why?" Especially when there are easier breeds with better gene pools in which to get adults in which to create chicks.

I know some will say that the use of medicines/antibioticcs is counter productive if you want to achieve strong birds. However, I believe I am making the right choice for me and my birds. If someone believes holisitc medicines work better in achieving what they strive for, all the best to them. I don't judge anyone as they have the same goal as myself. If they find success, I will try what they are trying as it is all part of our education to raising healthier birds.

Everyone has made some good points. I think if I ran into a situation where I had chicks developing problems, I would consider using it. Knock on wood, I am just glad so far, that I haven't. I understand that on the coast, or in times of really wet weather, it could be a wise precaution. Having said that, I still will continue with the unmediated feed. I realize it is fed in low doses so that as they encounter the parasite, it does not gain a foot hold. I still believe there are other ways of providing low exposure though. Like I say, I do not use fresh bedding for brooding the chicks. Not old nasty bedding, but bedding that has been used for older groups. If I change the bedding, I through in a few handfuls from my layer coop and mix it around.
Being trained in microbiology, I have the most respect for antibiotics and drugs. In the right circumstance, they are lifesavers. But they have their downside too. Antibiotic resistance is one. The other is the negative impact on the intestinal flora that is not only necessary for fighting disease, but also important for optimal nutrition.
I also do not feel there is neccesarily one right way for any given circumstance. This is just my thought process and what has worked for me

I think I indicated that using medicated starter allows us to 'be lazy' and not focus on our chicken keeping practices, glosses over faults we may have with housing or bedding or how many birds we keep. But this was in relation to factory farms that keep such huge numbers of birds in ways that would kill them were they not pushed along with antibiotics. So it might have been me who brought up the 'lazy' topic. I think.

appway wrote:
But how many non medicated feed people have asked the question
What is wrong with my chicks they are dying
Something to think about

How many medicated feed people have asked the question, "What is wrong with my chicks they are dying?"

I have searched pretty extensively, and outside commercial broiler operations I can see no qualitative evidence suggesting small-holders who use medicated feeds have a lower mortality rate than those who don't. I have, however seen some pretty good anecdotal evidence that suggests letting the brooder bedding compost is far more effective than medicated feeds at preventing cocci.

Also, and I realize that this isn't going to be a very popular suggestion, but has anyone wondered whether incubator chicks having no resistance might have something to do with the lack of cocci in the incubating and early brooding environment. We do know why naturally brooded chicks have better cocci resistance, it's because the hens expose the eggs and chicks to low levels of cocci from day one.

Not controversial at all CTF. Naturally raised babies are exposed from day one if not before. Remember how porous that egg is.

Sweetened wrote:

Dark Wing Duck wrote:I have to disagree with you that all chickens carry the Coccidiosis disease!

Here is a link I found on Coccidiosis.
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Directly from your link:

How do birds become infected?

Normally, most birds pass small numbers of oocysts in their droppings without apparent ill effects.

A rebuttle site as well. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The last thing I will say is: being (clearly) oblivious of quality in chickens, the least I could do is give my useless, non-show quality ugly mutts which I have no background on (nor do I truly care) a fighting chance. I educated myself for my decision to not medicate as well as why people do. It's part of what this thread is about. Briarwood mentioned her environment is damp which is why she medicates -- I can see that. Interestingly (or perhaps not), my outbreak happened in a clean coop (surprise) after 2 days of extremely high humidity and storms.

You may prefer to breed for 'quality', though your definition and mine may, perhaps, be different. I can't say I find a lot of quality in a pure-bred, beautiful strain of any animal that becomes sickly at the slightest exposure to an illness/parasite and hasn't been bred for thrivability in as many conditions and against as much as possible. I do, however, find quality in hardy, durable birds who do well by themselves, whatever that means.

Thanks to those who have/will share their reasoning.

I in no way referred to your birds in a negative manner so I'm not sure where this is coming from! I never called them "useless" or "ugly", such as you have suggested, nor did I mention anything about "show quality"!! I only used the term "mutts" in reference to what you had called them your self in your earlier post! And when I suggested raising your birds for "quality", I was referring to size (for the table if that is what you want), egg production (to help pay for feed) and beauty (in your eyes). Nothing else was intended!

I guess one thing to consider is that Amprolium which is the active ingredient in most medicated feed is NOT an antibiotic. Its a thiamene blocker that does not allow the cocci to reproduce it does not kill them like sulfa (an antibiotic) does.

Antibiotics have their place and use for sure and so does this drug.

I found this statement by the amprol company on their website:


Strength
AMPROLIUM is a thiamine (Vitamin B1) analog and competes with the active
transport of thiamine by coccidia, which need this vitamin to actively
multiply in the gut of birds. The strong efficacy of AMPROLIUM against
coccidiosis is due to the high affinity of the thiamine transporting system
of coccidia, which is 50 times greater than that of chickens.

In addition, AMPROLIUM allows the gut to be exposed to first generation
schizonts enabling the host to develop its own natural immunity to coccidia,
which is particularly valuable in broilers with long lifecycle (>50 days),
breeder pullets or floor-reared layers.

With its unique mode of action, AMPROLIUM offers farmers a triple advantage:




•• No risk of cross resistance with other molecules

•• Natural immunity development

•• Strong efficacy & quick recovery of the flock


I think most will find that quite interesting being what has already been stated.

I've never seen any definition of anti-biotic that would not include Amprolium.

Just for kicks, from wikipedia:

An antibacterial is a compound or substance that kills or slows down the growth of bacteria.[1] The term is often used synonymously with the term antibiotic(s); today, however, with increased knowledge of the causative agents of various infectious diseases, antibiotic(s) has come to denote a broader range of antimicrobial compounds, including antifungal and other compounds.[2]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This article also offers some interesting evidence, the results of it suggesting that in well managed poultry barns amprolium has little actual impact on the health of broilers, though it lacks mortality data. Just some food for thought.

fuzzylittlefriend wrote:
I found this statement by the amprol company on their website:
Strength
AMPROLIUM is a thiamine (Vitamin B1) analog and competes with the active
transport of thiamine by coccidia, which need this vitamin to actively
multiply in the gut of birds. The strong efficacy of AMPROLIUM against
coccidiosis is due to the high affinity of the thiamine transporting system
of coccidia, which is 50 times greater than that of chickens.

A little off topic, but just sayin'.....

We had a big party on the weekend, lots of mosquitoes, lots of people used the patches that we purchased. These mosquito patches work pretty darn good. Endorsed by the Dragon Den's dragons, they bought into it (this was seen some time ago), so they thought it a pretty good product. Used by the Navy, if I am not mistaken...and many forestry people. All people that used the patch (put on 2 hours before exposure and can last up to 36 hours, also is waterproof), reported good enough results. Not 100%, but certainly better than spraying sprays with deet in them.

Guess what the active ingredient in the patch is? You'll never guess....yes, it is thiamine (vitamin B1) (from Thiamine HCL), 75 mg of thiamine per patch. I was particularly interested when Fuzzylittlefriend put this information in her post.

The patch is made by OmeZone, sold all over the place down here. I don't know if it is good or bad for ya, but it works and I am not afraid of thiamine . It is a bad year for mosquitoes here, guess it was the rainy season we had. Anyways, just a few cents worth of information, travelling off topic and lovin' every minute of it. Beautiful days, CynthiaM.

Oh did I mention, I think this is a very interesting topic and some good stuff in it and some not good stuff.

CynthiaM, it is not thiamine in amprolium, it is a thiamine analog, which means it is a chemical which acts like thiamine but actually is not it. Using this drug also limits thiamine function in a chickens body, the point basically being that chickens can survive without good thiamine in their bodies but cocci cannot.

Susan wrote:Not controversial at all CTF. Naturally raised babies are exposed from day one if not before. Remember how porous that egg is.

Thought it might be controversial because I am suggesting we should stop trying to sterilize our brooders and bedding.

I appreciate all the different views and opinions. It seems this topic comes up quite often but its good to dive in a bit deeper into what exactly is Aprolium and how does it work. I never really understood it and did not know it had anything to do with thiamine. Interesting! I do know it is not considered an antibiotic, in the sense that it would never be used in humans to fight infection. I always felt using medicated starter was more like a mild vaccine, in that it protects them from massive amounts of coccidia that could kill, but still allows a mild dose so the chick is allowed to build immunity naturally. Thats a pretty simplified way to think of it, but it works for me.

One thing I try not to do when looking for data on the internet is to compare what we do in our backyards with the way commercial poultry barns operate. We cannot, and would not want to copy their model of husbandry. It stands to reason that a commercial broiler barn would not normally have cocci problems. They bring in the thousands of chicks straight from the hatchery into a clean, disinfected barn. Grow them in climate-controlled facility, then 38 days later they are all removed and the building is again sanitized. Much different conditions from what we are doing in the backyard.
That said, I do everything possible to provide a clean environment with fresh bedding for new batches of chicks. I don't feed medicated as subsitute for hard work and diligence. I do whatever I can to give them the best start possible. My problem this year was no doubt partly due to using an unpainted wooden brooder box. Impossible to clean properly between batches of chicks. I'll be changing that next year.

I have to base my opinion on experience. When I use medicated starter, I don't have sick chicks and I don't lose chicks. Period. I don't have unexplained deaths. Almost every chick I have hatched and decided to keep for myself has grown up healthy with a good immune system and I keep some of my chickens for many, many years. When I have sold chicks to people who do not medicate, they may experience losses or illness, and I do believe a chick that is stressed and sick and fighting for its life will not have the same chance to reach its full potential.

Again, I need to stress that this is my own choice. I have found what works for me and I am not trying to convince anyone that it is the right way or only way. Simply sharing what I have found.

[quote="Country Thyme Farm"]I've never seen any definition of anti-biotic that would not include Amprolium.

Just for kicks, from wikipedia:

An antibacterial is a compound or substance that kills or slows down the growth of bacteria.[1] The term is often used synonymously with the term antibiotic(s); today, however, with increased knowledge of the causative agents of various infectious diseases, antibiotic(s) has come to denote a broader range of antimicrobial compounds, including antifungal and other compounds.[2]

Umm ok I am not sure the point of that because its talking about bacteria. The cocci we are refering to is not bacterial cocci its a parasite. Two totally different things requiring different treatments. It would be like dispensing say revolution to a client and calling it an antibiotic if you were to use that general terminalogy and include "other compounds". I dont know of what other theraputic effects amprolium has besides the treatment of parasitical cocci.

I agree with kathys that the broilers are raised in a total steralized environment and not only is cocci probably not an issue because of that but also because you can bet the chicks are vaccinated for it at hatch time as well.

I would say the concern in using "medication" is the sub-theraputic doses of antibiotics in the broiler barns to ward off any other issues be it respiratory etc that they are at risk for the type of conditions they are raised in. Thats where the backyard flock is differnt. Our birds have a whole differnt set of exposure risks.

I think, my personal opinion, is that like its been stated cocci is really everywhere. The chicks are obviously exposed no matter the cleanliness of condidtions. I think the people who feed medicated feed are giving the chicks the subtheraputic level of amprolium and as stated by the manufacturer it allows the chicks to become exposed but not over run and build a natural defense. Those chicks thrive because their systems are not as taxed as say the ones recieving plain starter. The ones receving plain are at a higher risk and exposure and may or may not be able to deal with a heavy load hence an outbreak. But they may tick along at a slightly slower growth rate becuse their bodies are dealing with that as well as growing. I dont think there is a right or wrong answer but I dont think the medicated feed should be shunned on.

Another clip from the amprol website ( this is UK data)


AMPROLIUM has the additional benefit to be the only coccidiocide in the world
permitted in a variety of situations including:



•• Throughout the lifecycle of birds: from day old chicks through the
day-of-slaughter with no withdrawal period in meat*

•• Whatever the type of production: broilers, broiler breeders,
replacement pullets or laying hens*

•• Whatever the weather conditions: no concern with heat stress

•• Whatever the farming conditions: AMPROLIUM is not an
antibiotic and can be used in antibiotic free farms.

Some good information, thanks FLF Good way of putting it into perspective and it helps clear things up about Amprolium

Fine, I've adjusted my bolding in the hopes of clearing up my point a bit. My point was that I believe the claim that Amprol is not an antibiotic is based on an outdated notion that all microbial infections are caused by bacteria, so at that time antibiotics were synonymous with antibacterials. I think it's incredibly misleading to the general population to say you don't use antibiotics while using Amprol just because coccidiosis happens to be caused by a protozoan. I consider it exactly the same as crop producer telling customers they don't spray while they continue to purchase treated seed. I would have no problem with a company saying that Amprol is not an antimicrobial.

Amprol is a synthetic compound used to control the population of a microorganism. You don't want to call it an antibiotic fine. Whatever you want to call it, it is a drug that is being grossly misused at subtherapeutic levels that are absolutely guaranteed to eventually result in cocci becoming resistant based on the current practices of backyard flock owners. This is especially problematic when good husbandry practices can get you your resistance factor without the drug.

Next time somebody tells me that organic certification is meaningless and you'll be safe if you just talk to your farmer, this thread will be one of the first things that comes to my mind.

I find it interesting that this is your take on things, CTF, as I would liken it more to Giardia, and treatment with panacur (a dewormer). I wouldn't consider panacur to be an antibiotic, though sure it's a drug. Every single day we use other antibacterial and antimicrobial substances, such as hand soap and hand sanitizer, so I really don't think it's the same ball of wax as using antibiotics and making super bugs.

Frankly, regardless of how great my husbandry practices are, if I don't use medicated feed I have problems with Cocci due to the humidity and high levels of rain here all spring. I don't really appreciate the notion that I HAVE to use medicated feed because I can't be bothered to clean my coops, because it's simply not true. I appreciate doing things as natural as possible, but I am not willing to dispose of numerous dead chicks every day just so I can pat myself on the back for not using a simple preventative measure.

Country Thyme Farm wrote:Fine, I've adjusted my bolding in the hopes of clearing up my point a bit. My point was that I believe the claim that Amprol is not an antibiotic is based on an outdated notion that all microbial infections are caused by bacteria, so at that time antibiotics were synonymous with antibacterials. I think it's incredibly misleading to the general population to say you don't use antibiotics while using Amprol just because coccidiosis happens to be caused by a protozoan. I consider it exactly the same as crop producer telling customers they don't spray while they continue to purchase treated seed. I would have no problem with a company saying that Amprol is not an antimicrobial.

Amprol is a synthetic compound used to control the population of a microorganism. You don't want to call it an antibiotic fine. Whatever you want to call it, it is a drug that is being grossly misused at subtherapeutic levels that are absolutely guaranteed to eventually result in cocci becoming resistant based on the current practices of backyard flock owners. This is especially problematic when good husbandry practices can get you your resistance factor without the drug.

Next time somebody tells me that organic certification is meaningless and you'll be safe if you just talk to your farmer, this thread will be one of the first things that comes to my mind.

I think I'm right on par with you here, CTF. Google defines Antibiotic as meaning:

A medicine that inhibits the growth of or destroys microorganisms.

Miriam Webster's dictionary of medicine defines Antibiotic as:

1: tending to prevent, inhibit, or destroy life
2: of or relating to antibiotics or to antibiosis

Antibiosis is defined by the same as:

antagonistic association between organisms to the detriment of one of them or between one organism and a metabolic product of another

This would include Amprol, as well as many other things.

I think there's a higher level of forgiveness for natural antibiotics (ie oregano oil) as it is a non-synthetic compound which has more in action than it's antibiotic tendancies.