WHAT IS MASTITIS?

Waikato Times, Volume 121, Issue 20254, 24 July 1937, Page 26 (Supplement)

WHAT IS MASTITIS?

entry of germs. TREATMENT ANT) CURE. (No. 2.) All the evidence points to the fact that the Staphs and Streps enter the udder through the teat nipple duct. Attempts to reproduce mastitis or to lntroduoe the germs into the blood stream, or feeding them, usually fail, •whereas either projecting them through the duct or injecting Into the udder tissue directly will often cause infection. It is believed that very few ducts are capable of keeping mastitis germs out of an udder, particularly when it is remembered that most cows are turned out, after milking, with a tiny film of milk over the duct opening. Germs breed in this and some penetrate the duct to enter the udder There is plenty of evidence to show that cows with defective, injuryshortened, or diseased ducts and nipples are subject to mastitis more than cows with healthier ducts. This provides a great argument for adequate care of cho teats and ducts—a rare practice—and also for precaution against milking a non-infected cow shortly after having stripped out one with altered or ropey milk. Sources of the Germs. One other condition, or set of conditions, that may provide a chance for the ever-ready Streps and Staphs to invade the udder tissue is when outside occurrences, such as cold, or injury, set up a chill or a lesion in the vessel. This provides a focus for the germs, and if they be present in the tissue, mastitis usually results. A similar source of trouble is the cowpocked sores on the inside of the nipple duct of the teat. Here some tissue becomes destroyed, a focus of infection is formed, and a general invasion of the quarter soon follows. Tt must never he overlooked that these Streps and Staphs, when they are inside the udder, are living in an ideal medium—milk—for their own culture, and as this is at body temperature, they are multiplying to the maximum extent all the time. Their numbers are reduced at each milking, however, and they may be killed out entirely by the "white corpuscles in the blood stream. Treatment and Cures. Overseas, many treatments have been been developed, of which some are claimed to cure, and others are modest enough to use the words “arrest the progress of the disease.” Actually there is no cure, for udder tissue, once destroyed, cannot be replaced like ordinary flesh. The most that can be done, therefore, is to use a treatment that aims to check the further growth of the infection, and gradually to get rid of the germs in the udder. Methods so far developed depend usually upon stripping out cleanly the udder or affected quarter, and injecting a liquid wash that is both antiseptic and healing. Electrargol, rivanol, entozon, and trypalflavine are the names of some of these liquids. Their action, however, is not always successful, because usually the infection is too deeply situated in the udder tissue to be reached by any such antibacterial douche. The douche, also, has to be so mild as to prevent further injury to the tissue. So far the results gained from these liquids are not sufficiently good to warrant a recommendation to dairymen to use them. Mild cases have often been cured, but this is usually possible by the simple home treatment of massage and fomentation. Bad cases, however, are usually not cured by the use of liquids. Vaccines occupy a somewhat similar position. In Australia their history has been checked, and data collected. From it there are several pertinent facts. One is that no mastitis medicine can bo guaranteed as effective in preventing or curing mastitis. One, made by a reputable firm or organisation, may prove successful in one herd, but a failure in another. Taken over a largo number of cows, vaccines do have a definite, though moderate, effect as a preventative, and a lesser one as a cuie. This state of affairs, however, must not be construed as hopeless, because it is still within reason that with increasing knowledge of the germs that cause the disease, a vaccine, or set of vaccines, may be developed to work as effectively as in other diseases, such as anthrax or blackleg.

Is it Contagious? Whether mastitis is contagious or not is a very vexed question. Some dairyfarmers have regular epidemics of mastitis in their herds, whereas others, with just as many animals and of as high production, are able to keep mastitis within controllable limits. Everything would point, in the first case, to be fact that Strep-' tococal or Staphylococcic mastitis is contagious, but of late an opinion has been gaining ground that this is not wholly the truth. Certainly a virulent organism, such as a Strep, or Staph., must be present in dairy surroundings before the cows can show them in their milk, and to this extent the disease is contagious. Actually, however, as the presence of germs in milk does not mean that the cow has a spoiled quarter or two (in fact, her udder may be perfectly healthy) mastitis cannot be classed as fully contagious, as are pleuro-pneu-monia or piroplasmosis. Possibly the reason why some dairymen have been able to control mastitis is because they have learnt how to detect its earliest visible signs, and to give prompt treatment, such as fomentation and massage. If vigorous treatment be applied before the germs obtain a firm grip, there is every chance of preventing the development of mastitis. Otherwise the germs simply proceed to multiply and eventually will invade the whole quarter. Time may well indicate that this ability to diagnose mastitis in its “embryo” stage will be one of the most important items in the control of the disease, although a more positive type of relief is hoped for. Do Not Get Set Ideas. Reasons why farm hygiene and stock handling play a large part in the control of mastitis are that it is possible to produce mastitis in almost any normal milking cow by simple abuses. A non-sterilised teat syphon frequently inserted into a germ-rid-den, sore teat, milking sore teats with dirty hands, a teat dilator, or a bruise on the udder, often produce mastitis. Without these causes the malady would, perhaps, not have occurred. Possibly much more might he done in the control of mastitis by the farmer himself, with clean methods and gentle, wideawake care of cattle, than by all the aids that are offered. The main thing, of course, is to guard against fixed theories as to the cause of the disease, unless they are general ones, because theorising when in error produces methods of treatment that are a sheer waste of time. The old-fashioned fomentation and massage, coupled with early diagnosis, is still the most valuable asset, and if he can grasp the idea that mastitis may be caused by a host of things, some of which are known, but most of which are not, he is going to he much better off than a man who is literally waiting for a “new” cure.