Over the last while, a number of dairy farmers have been asking about non-antibiotic mastitis treatments for milking cows. Alternative treatments to antibiotics are being sold and farmers are asking if they are effective at treating mastitis. Some of these products have been around for a while, but others are new to the market. Mayo Healthcare has been selling a bolus called Maycillin for some time. This is a bolus containing allicin, which is found in garlic and is claimed to be an aid in supporting the cow’s immune system. The label states that cows over 500kg should receive two boluses with each bolus costing €30 each.

AHV advises farmers to use the bolus for all high-SCC and mastitis cases and use the liquid drench where there is also swelling of the udder

More recently, AHV has been selling non-antibiotic mastitis treatments. These treatments consist of a bolus and a liquid drench. AHV advises farmers to use the bolus for all high-SCC and mastitis cases and use the liquid drench where there is also swelling of the udder.

The AHV bolus costs around €45 and can only be sold in packs of 10 while the liquid drench costs €16. So treating a typical case of mastitis with a swollen quarter using AHV products will cost over €60. To put that in context, a typical antibiotic-based mastitis tube costs around €2.70 each, so if using three tubes to treat a cow, it will cost around €8 per case. Now, if using antibiotics milk must be withheld from the tank, for usually between 3.5 and four days. If a cow is yielding 20 litres per day and milk price received is 33c/l, then dumping that milk for four days will cost €26 so the total cost of treating with an antibiotic is €34.

However, it must be acknowledged that if a cow has clinical mastitis (clots in the milk) then her milk should be discarded, regardless of the type of treatment she is getting. So it is not the case that the loss in milk value is only associated with antibiotic-based treatment, particularly when it comes to treating clinical cases.

Label

A study conducted by Utrecht University in Holland in 2016 looked at the effect of feeding an allicin-based bolus to high-SCC milking cows across seven farms.

Fifty-four high-SCC cows in each farm were picked for the experiment and half were given bolus and half were given nothing. There was no significant difference in SCC between those that got the bolus and those that didn’t. AHV claims on its website that its treatments (based on additional minerals) “focus on disrupting the biochemical communication (quorum sensing) between certain bacteria.”

Improvements in SCC and a recovery from clinical mastitis has been observed in some cases

The information catalogue explains using drawings and pictures how the active substances enter the bloodstream and break down bacteria in the udder. Phrases such as “natural balance” and “optimally productive” are used throughout. What the actual active ingredient is, if any, is not stated. There appears to be no independent peer-reviewed research on the effectiveness of the AHV products. Feedback from farmers who have used these products has been mixed. Improvements in SCC and a recovery from clinical mastitis has been observed in some cases. However, it must be said that in some cases where no treatment is carried out, the cow will cure herself using her own immune system. This can also be said of the effectiveness of antibiotic treatments.

Farmers’ desire to move away from antibiotic-based treatments is noble. However, the effectiveness of alternative products would need to be tried, tested and verified in publicly available and peer-reviewed research before we can categorically say that there is any benefit to them. Furthermore, despite what some salespeople are saying, there are no plans to limit the use of antibiotics to treat sick animals, now or in the future.

Read more

Low-input pastures: multi-species and clover

Dairy management: reseeding, flies and spreading lime