Yes but its Very very expensive! Its actually cheaper for me to buy the wormer for 16 sheep than to get one FEC!
Agree but wont be if resistance rapidly increases! (I have inherited white wormer resisitance here and wouldn't know if hadn't done FEC) . Vets do seem to charge very different amounts.
----------------------------------------
It's a tricky one......
Stock keepers like horse keepers will end up with no wormers that work if we carry on routine wormingrather than targeted wormers. Because of resistance issues with people routine worming, horse wormers may soon be vet prescription only, the vet authorities are lobbying for this.
Not sure that's the best route as I think it may result in many people stopping worming altogether cos of the cost unless vets make the costs similar to current. But be warned, unless we stop routine worming the same could happen with livestock wormers.
It's very unfortunate that wormers can be cheaper than worm counting but smallholders and farmers should be doing the responsible thing and that is worm counting, not routine drenching. The only cases where wormers should be routinely used is for worms which are the most dangerous types and which don't show up on counts, for example with horses it is necessary to worm once a year for encysted small redworm as they don't show on the count but can emerge suddenly en masse and cause fatal colic. (tapeworm used to be Un testable for but there's now a blood test, unfortunately that is also more costly than a routine wormer.) I do think the costing structures need to be manipulated to ensure that testing is not more expensive than the chemical wormer.
Topic: Faecal egg counts (Read 7205 times)
