severe mites--need Dex dose quick

Post Reply
Evangeline

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 3:46 pm


And since pigs are never supposed to have empty stomachs to start with, the point is totally moot. Or mute, if Cara prefers.

User avatar
Lynx
Celebrate!!!

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 3:53 pm


Hey, Paisley, you did a super job on the summary. It was a pain wading through the long article and really helps to have some of this information more readily available vs. reading it through. Yes, I think we all learned something (assuming this article is accurate). I see they didn't mention that there can be necrosis (dying of the tissue) at the injection site. This is primarily due to the carrier, propylene glycol, which can cause problems for some animals.

User avatar
swannie
For the love of pigs!

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:01 pm


Has anything new been added to this thread? The last post I am seeing is Paravati's, and it says in the forum index that Lynx was the latest poster.

Edit: Ah, there they are. Weird.

kleenmama
I GAVE, dammit!

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:13 pm


Lynx, if they are injections, you still need to dilute with propylene glycol?


And don't feel bad, Swannie, it has been doing that to me for 2 days now.

My vet's receptionist called, said Dr. Sperlich has my message, has been swwamped, and she'll get back to me when she gets the time. Hmmmm.

User avatar
Lynx
Celebrate!!!

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:20 pm


The injectable ivermectin is suspended in a solution containing propylene glycol and something else (I forget). You can't get away from injecting propylene glycol.

kleenmama
I GAVE, dammit!

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:21 pm


OK, just wondering.

Paisley

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 6:08 pm


Thank you, Lynx.

I didn't see anything on necrotic tissue at the injection site, either. However, the study did mention that injections can cause localized swelling in horses. (page 3)

Evangeline,
Yes, guinea pigs (and rabbits, too) are supposed to have "full" digestive systems at all times. Both species can be harmed if "fasted". Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think both species can develop liver problems very quickly if "fasted" or "off-feed".

I should clarify that the effect of food on Ivermectin efficacy was studied with horses, hence the recommendation to dose on an empty stomach.
The effect of food was observed in horses. Feeding immediately after an oral administration of ivermectin resulted in the drug’s adsorption onto the food, consequently oral administration on an empty stomach is recommended.
(Page 3)

Here are some thoughts of my own:

Even though a guinea pig's stomach should *not* become empty before dosing with oral Ivermectin, would it be better to wait for a short period of time after its administration before allowing the guinea pig to eat again? By short period of time, I mean 10 - 30 minutes or so. Would the oral Ivermectin work better then?

Or should we just allow access to hay & water after oral administration of Ivermectin?

I'm not sure if we'd want to feed the guinea pigs their "one cup of vegetables a day" directly after an oral administration of Ivermectin.

What do you think?

User avatar
Paravati
I GAVE, dammit!

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 7:06 pm


Ah, well that clears things up a bit. I was trying to work out how to make sure my pigs had as empty a stomach as possible when I dosed them next, and they are such fat little eatin' all the time porkers!

Charybdis

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 7:19 pm


Hold on a minute here.

I'm ignoring the clinical discussion for the moment (about absorbtion and routes and full stomachs, etc.) to bring to everyone's attention something that HAS to be acknowledged.

KM was dosing orally with HORSE PASTE. So she can't possibly assert that oral Ivermectin is less effective than topical or injectable because SHE WASN"T USING THE SAME FORMULATION.

In addition, I'm STILL wondering if the study Paisley is quoting measured the efficacy of INJECTABLE Ivermectin dosed ORALLY against INJECTABLE Ivermectin dosed subcutaneously.

This is an important point, people. Am I missing the answer somewhere? I do agree that horse paste is not as effective as the injectable form.

And furthermore, Bilbrey:

So why all the silliness about not posting new unproven ideas?

Oh, geez. I just can't say what I want to about that. You're a nice person but I think that thought is dangerous. It is a big deal. Pigs die when people don't get the right information. That's why we're here.

Evangeline

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 7:42 pm


Ivermectin is ivermectin. Both paste and injectable are suspended in propylene glycol, in different amounts.

kleenmama
I GAVE, dammit!

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 8:25 pm


I'm thinking along the same lines as Evangeline, here. If the dosages are correct, it can't make that much of a difference whether you are using the paste or the injectable, right?
I know there was speculation that the horse paste can't be mixed as well, or the amounts can't be perfectly mixed in the tube, but I'm not sure I agree with that. They have mixed it in a stable solution, no different than when injectable is mixed with propylene glycol.

Chary, are you saying that the right dosages of horse paste mixed with propylene glycol, and injectable ivermectin, are different?

My only thought is that we HAVE the amounts of ivermectin no matter what form you are using. We have to accept the fact that these are correct.

Paisley

Post   » Wed Aug 20, 2003 8:37 pm


I have to agree with Evangeline and kleenmama. Ivermectin is Ivermectin, whether it is in paste, injectable or pour-on (topical) form.

Post Reply