Following on from the talking about worms thread-worm counts

[devonlass]

Found a thread over on HHO,very recent an regarding worm counts,using westgate who I believe is who was replying to posts over here?? Don't suppose who did the count matters TBH,but is prob better to be talking about someone who's here rather than someone who isn't if you know what I mean (as long as they don't mind?? If so just yell and will ask for thread to be removed),anyway just thought it was interesting in view of the confusion and some of the questions raised in NF's thread about the lovely but poorly Tilley.

Now I am rubbish and can't do links,but if you go on the search facility on HHO and search devestated by worms in titles only then should come up (I just put worms in and came up but so did loads of others as you can imagine!!),if anyone more clever than me can do a link that would be great:smile:

Couple of particularly interesting posts on page 1 and 4 which I think highlight the danger of relying on worm counts,and of not understanding correctly how they work.

I appreciate this is going to look a little like I am anti worm counting,really I am not,I may even do it myself at some point if end up staying on a yard for a longer than planned as I am more than aware of the dangers of over worming with chemicals,BUT I do find the counts concerning,mainly due to a lack of understanding of their purpose and limitations,and thought the thread I mentioned showed only too well what the consequences of that can be.

Anyhow probably not overly exciting to many and I'm not becoming a worm geek honest lol,just thought it was interesting.

Just as am thinking of it, I wormed the spotty one on friday,some very small strange looking critters found in one or two piles yesterday (hence why I was searching for worm posts to identify!!) turns out was not horse worms but something that has deposited itself since so no worries there (and makes sense as not like anything I have seen come out of a horse before!!),only other things were bot larvae (they really are ugly looking things,like something out of an alien film yuk!!) so all good on the worm front and am pretty pleased with how healthy he is in a worming sense:smile:
Also pretty gutted he's going to be going to a yard day after tomorrow so that will all get messed up but hey ho,can't be precious about him all his life:redface:

 

[Dreamster]

There is reams and reams of information on Westgate Labs website and FB page about worming about what worm counts do and don't cover. If the owners don't bother to read it and appreciate it won't show up tapeworm or encysted redworm I'm not sure what else Westgate or any of the other worm count companies can do?

 

[Joyscarer]

There is reams and reams of information on Westgate Labs website and FB page about worming about what worm counts do and don't cover. If the owners don't bother to read it and appreciate it won't show up tapeworm or encysted redworm I'm not sure what else Westgate or any of the other worm count companies can do?

Ditto

They had an egg count done in June, not sure what happened before and after that.

No more info in there than has been given in NFs thread here.

There are things that egg counts don't pick up and I worm accordingly for these. I also have had a routine of egg counts after worming to check for effectiveness rather than blind faith that a wormer has worked.

A lone egg count just gives a snapshot in time of the detectable things. Multiple egg counts coupled with info about the animal and it's management is the name of the game.

Westgate Labs webby is a fantastic source of info which explains the importance of an intelligent worming programme (programme being the important word there) and what worm counts don't always see.

To my mind it is far more risky to rely on a wormer having done its job and then forget about it till next time then it is to begin a programme of checking effectiveness and worming accordingly.

 

[newforest]

You could have added this to the thread? You are mentioning another forum but not added links.
I do know the egg counts do not show up the tape or encysted.
L inks are up to let people know who didn't know.
It will cost anywhere up to 100 to do for encysted.

 

[Gill]

Thank you Dreamster, Joy and NF above. It is great to hear you all say these things.

I do my very best but people 'worrying' about other peoples worming programmes comes up time and again around the internet.

These folk should start worrying about their own horses worming programmes instead if they are relying on wormers and not doing testing.

Where others are using a good worm count service backed up with proper advice from qualified people who know what they are talking about, then there is no need to worry.

We have 4 Animal Health Advisors (used to be SQP) who talk to horse owners all day every day sorting out their worming. It is free advice, we want horses to be correctly wormed and for owners to be better informed. The smallest question is not a silly one if you need an answer.

These days there is no dispute about using tests to reduce doses. Vets, SQP's, parasitologists and wormer manufacturers all agree. It takes a long time to get through to people. (Twelve years for us so far and look at the progress in that time)

 

[Mr Ed]

I use a combination of worm counts and wormers. It's fairly straight forward really.

Worm counts only measure red worm burden, if your level is contantly <50 epg (the minimum measure) it's pretty unlikely that the horse would have any encysted red worms.

However, tape worm and other horrible things like bots are not measured for. Some people feel that horses should be wormed for tapes twice a year (spring & autumn) others once a year (autumn).

Depending on the yard/field arrangements for my horse, I tend to worm for everything in the Autumn (using Equest Pramox - covers encysted too). I then just worm count inbetween and might tape worm (Equitape) in spring too..

 

[devonlass]

There is reams and reams of information on Westgate Labs website and FB page about worming about what worm counts do and don't cover. If the owners don't bother to read it and appreciate it won't show up tapeworm or encysted redworm I'm not sure what else Westgate or any of the other worm count companies can do?

I'm not saying for one minute there is anything that can be done or that isn't being done,certainly not finger pointing or blaming.
Out of interest,is there any way the info could be made either easier to understand or make certain points stand out?? Like bullet points about still needing to use chemical wormer??
I haven't looked at the particular site BTW,just musing as you mentioned it,and wondering if the way info is displayed could be improved??
Just as you mentioned reams and reams of info is it possible there is too much and some points are getting missed amongst all the rest??

You could have added this to the thread? You are mentioning another forum but not added links.
I do know the egg counts do not show up the tape or encysted.
L inks are up to let people know who didn't know.
It will cost anywhere up to 100 to do for encysted.

Ok firstly you sound as though you think this was aimed at you,it wasn't I know you know all that stuff,it was just following on after the discussion and I didn't want to take over your thread with a specific point or detract from your own situation with Tilley,for whom I am keeping everything crossed BTW.

As for links,I did say in post why there aren't any:redface:
Believe it or not I am generally competant with pc's,I can do most things on them and have even been known to fix ours when they go wrong (well software issues and gremlins anyway,not so good with parts and technical stuff!!),BUT I cannot for the life of me post a link,I am sure it's very straighforward,but as I have never done it or bothered to try I don't have a clue lol
If anyone wants to rescue me please feel free:help:

I do my very best but people 'worrying' about other peoples worming programmes comes up time and again around the internet.

These folk should start worrying about their own horses worming programmes instead if they are relying on wormers and not doing testing.

Ok not going to get into handbags at dawn lol,let's play nice eh:wink:

I do for the record genuinely worry about it as opposed to just trying to annoy people like yourself.My very good friends horses would not have been on an efficient worming programme if I hadn't of known a bit about worming and was able to advise,as she thought worm counting on it's own was sufficient.She's not the only person I know either who either doesn't have all the facts or has had inaccurate counts.
I'm not pointing any fingers or laying any blame,but that thread illustrated well the problems that do surround worm counts,and there were people on here that weren't 100% about how it all works so thought it was pertinant (sp),and maybe helpful to some as there was some good points made and advice given.

I do worry very much about my own horse BTW,and don't think really it's fair to imply I don't just because I don't choose to worm count at this time.I'm sure whatever method any of us choose it's because we want what's best for our horses,I just thought the more views and info the better to make an informed choice:smile:

 

[Joyscarer]

I welcome any thread that highlights the need for a good worming programme and sings outs about the benefits of eggs counts and as it does benefit all of us with horses.

Egg counts, just as with worming, needs to be part of an ongoing programme to ensure best practice.

I guess that's the same with anything to do with horse management, shoes and trimming, saddle fitting, vaccinations, teeth....you don't just do it once and assume everything's ok. Ongoing monitoring is the key and is our duty as horse owners.

Given that you have specifically mention Westgate Labs in your OP and later in the thread have suggested that the information should be clearer, I really think it prudent that you should at least visit their site! I personally would be spitting bricks if this were my business you were questioning in such a way without having done so. Of course, Gill is going to be far too professional to be publicly seething and that in itself would be even more detrimental to her business which she clearly takes great pride over.

The tab for the information zone is very clear and the second question on the FAQ (the first link) answers the point about what isn't covered). Everything is laid out clearly and candidly.

If you are this interested in egg count programmes (and one particular company) to start a thread about it, whether for or against, it might be an idea to visit the information zone and see if you have grounds to make the point you have about clarity of information and email them with any suggestions for improvement you might have.

Just in case anyone wonders, I use a local egg count service, have never met Gill and have no personal interest in Westgate Labs. However, I find their site second to none for information and am grateful for such a resource. I'm sure Gill would appreciate any feedback regarding improvements to the site if it helps to educate and spread the message about just how serious the fight against worms is and how misplaced the over confidence is that chemicals are always effective against them. There have been so many instances of horses on a standard worming programme showing resistance.

 

[juliecwuk]

We had a surprise before Xmas, I decided to worm count my 3 plus my friends daughters loan pony...btw tara had been on the yard for about 5 years, mine about 2 yrs and major about 2 months, i poo pick through winter but taras paddock is just left till the spring for chain harrowing. we had the following results:

Major <50
Moet & Rosie around 600
Tara was 1600

I informed the YO as I was concerned as she was using the same wormer over and over. She was shocked as I think she genuinely didn't realise the worms were resistant.

I was fortunate that Major hadnt long moved to our yard, so using him as an example of an effective wormin programme she has now moved over to a combination of using worm counts and specific targeting with wormers.

I just think that if people live in their own little world (my YO) and don't read horsey magazines or use the Internet and forums like this then they genuinely don't realise there could be problems....

Do vets agree or approve regarding worn counts, resistance and target worming? I suppose they would be in the best position to highlight issues with people who may not realise there's a problem?

 

[clashnoir]

We had a surprise before Xmas, I decided to worm count my 3 plus my friends daughters loan pony...btw tara had been on the yard for about 5 years, mine about 2 yrs and major about 2 months, i poo pick through winter but taras paddock is just left till the spring for chain harrowing. we had the following results:

Major <50
Moet & Rosie around 600
Tara was 1600

I informed the YO as I was concerned as she was using the same wormer over and over. She was shocked as I think she genuinely didn't realise the worms were resistant.

I was fortunate that Major hadnt long moved to our yard, so using him as an example of an effective wormin programme she has now moved over to a combination of using worm counts and specific targeting with wormers.

I just think that if people live in their own little world (my YO) and don't read horsey magazines or use the Internet and forums like this then they genuinely don't realise there could be problems....

Do vets agree or approve regarding worn counts, resistance and target worming? I suppose they would be in the best position to highlight issues with people who may not realise there's a problem?

Couldn't agree more with you. Its been so common to just worm, worm, worm regardless and this new way of worming for the problem ones i.e tape and encrysted red seems to just make sense than throwing chemicals at them every 6-8 weeks.
I have a small closed herd luckily but Gill tests them 1-2 times a year and saves me a fortune!

 

[Gill]

Julie writes: 'Do vets agree or approve regarding worn counts, resistance and target worming?'

Of course they do and here is the link to guidelines published over two years ago now.
http://www.bva.co.uk/public/documents/BVA_Anthelmintics_poster.pdf

I find it totally astonishing that someone can post about 'making information clearer' without even looking at it.

I have spent hours writing, not only my web site but also many magazine articles, written in clear, easy to understand terms. I can't help it if people don't bother to read it and that is up to the individual but don't then blame the information or the system it promotes.

I would rather people didn't use worm counts at all and just kept on with hitty missy interval dosing than that they get it wrong and then rubbish the whole system on the internet.

I am passionate about improving horse worming and peoples knowledge of it, as we all are at Westgate Labs. This goes far beyond simply making a living and it always upsets me when ignorance provokes attack.

 

[newforest]

The other thread is called worms, let us talk about these horrors as in for everyone about any of them. Nothing specific about my horse, started because of what has happened. But there are lots of other worms out there.

What is the point of following on?
Agree with above, how can you ask for it to be easier to read when you have not looked at it!

 

[newforest]

I just think that if people live in their own little world (my YO) and don't read horsey magazines or use the Internet and forums like this then they genuinely don't realise there could be problems....

Do vets agree or approve regarding worn counts, resistance and target worming? I suppose they would be in the best position to highlight issues with people who may not realise there's a problem?

This in effect has what has been a factor in what has happened to me . They are in their own world and it is possibly not in this century.

My vet is pro worm counts, they Will discuss a programme with you, do the tests. Really no excuse not to know. However, this would mean your horse seeing the vet. I know many horses not vaccinated. My vet does teeth so again ample chance for them to monitor her.

 

[Dark Storm]

My vets attitude towards worm counts and the frequency of use has changed dramatically over the last few years

 

[popularfurball]

My vets also encourage worm counts and targeted worming as standard program. They will post you workers and count kits at times they need doing

 

[devonlass]

Given that you have specifically mention Westgate Labs in your OP and later in the thread have suggested that the information should be clearer, I really think it prudent that you should at least visit their site! I personally would be spitting bricks if this were my business you were questioning in such a way without having done so.

The poster happened to have used westgate,and I knew the owner of it had posted on the worm thread here,which I assuemd was actually better than if it were a third party that could not respond,but I didn't 'specifically mention' them by choice or imply anything negative about them so why would I need to visit their site??

I find it totally astonishing that someone can post about 'making information clearer' without even looking at it.

I would rather people didn't use worm counts at all and just kept on with hitty missy interval dosing than that they get it wrong and then rubbish the whole system on the internet.

I am passionate about improving horse worming and peoples knowledge of it, as we all are at Westgate Labs. This goes far beyond simply making a living and it always upsets me when ignorance provokes attack.

I didn't say you should make information clearer,try reading my post properly I ASKED if it *could* be made clearer when someone else mentioned there being reams and reasm of info,as I haven't looked at it I was questioning if that *could* be a reason why people don't always understand the issue completely and miss things.

I didn't see anyone rubbishing anything TBH,there were people who had problems and issues surrounding worm counts,and obviously a lack of understanding in some cases and perhaps mis-information,but that doesn't really qualify as rubbishing it,and they were genuine issues not just people saying stuff to be negative about worm counts.
I cannot see how you can view anything said here as attacking you,a bit dramatic and is just provoking bad feeling,which seems to be in abundance on this thread TBH,which is a bit of a shame as it should be possible to raise questions and points of interest without such an extreme reaction.

What is the point of following on?
Agree with above, how can you ask for it to be easier to read when you have not looked at it!

What's the point of any thread in that case?? I appreciate you're upset right now,but there's no need to be so abrupt,it sounds kind of rude TBH,have I ever questioned your choice of topics for a thread or tried to influence what you choose to post?? I have been nothing but polite to you when we have met IRL and on here,I would appreciate it if you extended the same courtesy to me:smile:

As for latter part of post please see above (or read my original post on the subject),I didn't ask for it to be be easier to read I asked if it was possible that it wasn't and therefore confusing to some people or if there a chance key info was getting missed.

Anyway this has become enough of a playground gang fest for me:wink:,really not worth any of us getting so worked up about.I was trying to make a genuine post about an issue that had recently been discussed that I thought was interesting,nothing more than that.

 

[Joyscarer]

It certainly is interesting. Have a read of the Westgate site as it really is a good read and very clearly presented without waffle. I personally thought it was all straightforward even though I'm easily confused and overwhelmed!

I haven't found the need to visit other sites but I've no doubt there'll be loads out there who really could do with clarifying their info. I personally am not going to trawling through other sites and taking in the cause but my personal commitment to egg counts and targeted worming remains as strong as can be.

At the end of the day nobody can force horse owners to read up on any aspect of horse care. All any business can do is provide the information in the best way they can and hope that people read it.

 

[devonlass]

It certainly is interesting. Have a read of the Westgate site as it really is a good read and very clearly presented without waffle. I personally thought it was all straightforward even though I'm easily confused and overwhelmed!

At the end of the day nobody can force horse owners to read up on any aspect of horse care. All any business can do is provide the information in the best way they can and hope that people read it.

I certainly will have a gander at some point,am sure it is very interesting,although that probably makes me a bit sad that I think so lol:redface:

Of course you are right,no one can ensure people will read or listen to any info or advice given,I was just musing in my post earlier as to whether there was a way to make it even clearer so that the majority of people would be able to pick put the most important bits with little effort.
Not sure if you know what I mean but sure you have read something before now where there was so much info that some important points got lost amongst everything else?? People end up skim reading when there is a lot to take in and if something doesn't jump out at them it might get overlooked.Prime example of what I have just said in my post there,too much waffle lol but hopefully get the gist!!

Anyway that's all I meant,wasn't being critical,wouldn't dream of doing so when haven't even looked at it,just questioning if there was room for improvment in regards to making it clearer to all:smile:

 

[daisysp8]

Worm counts only measure red worm burden, if your level is contantly <50 epg (the minimum measure) it's pretty unlikely that the horse would have any encysted red worms.

Simply not true.


My friends horse went out on working livery for 18 months, had always been egg counted and wormed accordingly.

9 months after the horse returned he went down hill rapidly, he had encysted redworm. Even though he`d been egg counted and wormed whilst on away on working livery, it didn`t account for the ones he`d ingested (in very large numbers) that had gone into a hibernated state (the encysted stage) and didn`t burst out until 9/12 months later (they can stay in the gut for up to 2 years and the animal will seem/be fine) ... a lot of others that had been at the same place, had the same problems.



The encysted/inhibited stages, can lay dormant in the gut lining and undetected via worm counts for up to 2 years ... It is only when they start bursting out of the gut lining, that the damage really begins ... Even then, owners/YO`s etc put the squits down to 'autumn flush' of grass, or a new batch of haylage etc ... Allowing the worms to lay on the paddocks, ready to be ingested and the cycle to continue all over again.

 

[juliecwuk]

^^ but during that horses worming programme I would have expected there to be a wormer that covered encysted redworm at least in autumn and then pos again in spring? (along with tapeworm)

With regards to encysted redworm - how long to they stay alive in the paddock? I'm just thinking of the best course of action for my mini herd...during the winter I poo pick, but during the summer my YO harrows, but last summer mine were kept on the paddock whilst she harrowed, I'm wondering if the best plan is for her to harrow and I move them onto adjacent paddock then move them back when she harrows that one...the paddock would only have 1-2 weeks rest though between grazing as our paddocks are small so it's not possible to rest for a long time.