[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [SANET-MG] no smoking cow?
To Lawrence and Jeff,
Here are two current publications (in press) on the occurrence of E
coli 0157 in USA , Both studies show a shocking level of the toxic
bacteria in US farm animals, mainly cows.
1: Emerg Infect Dis. 2006 May;12(5):780-6.
Shiga-toxigenic Escherichia coli O157 in agricultural fair livestock,
United States.Keen JE, Wittum TE, Dunn JR, Bono JL, Durso LM.
Agricultural Research Service, US Meat Animal Research Center, United
States Department of Agriculture, Clay Center, NE 68933, USA.
keen@email.marc.usda.gov
Agricultural fairs exhibiting livestock are increasingly implicated in
human Shiga-toxigenic Escherichia coli O157:H7 (STEC O157:H7) outbreaks.
To estimate livestock STEC O157:H7 prevalence at US fairs, we collected
2,919 fecal specimens at 29 county fairs in 2 states and at 3 state
fairs in 2002. Fly pools were also collected. STEC O157:H7 was isolated
from livestock at 31 (96.9%) of 32 fairs, including 11.4% of 1,407
cattle, 1.2% of 1,102 swine, 3.6% of 364 sheep and goats, and 5.2% of
154 fly pools. Cattle, swine, and flies at some fairs shared
indistinguishable STEC O157:H7 isolate subtypes. In 2003, a total of 689
ambient environmental samples were collected at 20 fairgrounds 10-11
months after 2002 livestock sampling while fairgrounds were
livestock-free. Four beef barn environmental samples at 3 fairgrounds
yielded STEC O157:H7. These data suggest that STEC O157 is common and
transmissible among livestock displayed at agricultural fairs and
persists in the environment after the fair.
doi:10.1016/j.vetmic.2006.07.021
Veterinary Microbiology in press
Short communication
Prevalence of shiga toxin-encoding bacteria and shiga toxin-producing
Escherichia coli isolates from dairy farms and county fairs
Seongbeom Choa, Francisco Diez-Gonzalezb, Charles P. Fosslera, Scott J.
Wellsa, Craig W. Hedbergc, John B. Kaneened, Pamela L. Ruegge, Lorin D.
Warnickf and Jeffrey B. Bendera, ,
aDepartment of Veterinary Population Medicine, University of Minnesota,
1354 Eckles Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA
bDepartment of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, St.
Paul, MN, USA
cDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis, MN, USA
dThe Population Medicine Center, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, MI, USA
eDepartment of Dairy Science, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA
fDepartment of Population Medicine and Diagnostic Sciences, Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Received 18 April 2006; revised 21 July 2006; revised 27 July 2006.
Available online 2 August 2006.
Abstract
Shiga toxin-encoding bacteria (STB) and shiga toxin-producing
Escherichia coli (STEC) were detected and isolated from dairy cattle and
their farm environment and from manure piles at Minnesota (MN) county
fairs from 2001 to 2002.
A total of 2540 samples were collected from 28 dairy cattle farms (8
organic and 20 conventional), 17 calf pens (5 organic and 12
conventional), and 12 county fairs. STB were detected from 71 (3.2%) of
2208 fecal samples with 20 (71.4%) of 28 dairy farms having at least one
positive animal sample. In samples collected from conventional farms, 41
(2.3%) of 1750 fecal samples were STB-positive and 13 (65%) of 20 farms
had at least one positive animal. Thirty (6.6%) of 458 fecal samples
from organic farms were STB-positive and 7 (87.5%) of 8 farms had at
least one positive animal. STB was detected from 31 (17.4%) of 178
samples and 7 (58.3%) out of 12 manure piles at county fairs. A total of
43 STEC isolates were recovered and belonged to 26 different serotypes
(19 O and 18 H types). Among STEC, 60.5% possessed only stx1, 30.2%
stx2, and 9.3% both stx1 and stx2. The genes eae and hlyA were detected
in more than 50% of the STEC isolates.
STB can be found on most dairy cattle farms including organic and
conventional herds and county fairs. The presence of these potentially
pathogenic bacteria in county fairs may pose a risk to the public who
have contact with cattle or their environment.
My comments, the results of these recent surveys should alert USDA and
the sate Ag departments to begin to take action to insure that massive
outbreaks of the toxic bacteria are prevented and the bacterium is
rolled back.
sincerely, joe cummins
Lawrence F. London, Jr. wrote:
Jeff Schahczenski wrote:
Is E coli 0157 in every cow not matter how it is raised? This seems
to be the implication?
Where did you get that idea?
jcummins wrote:
> Your composted manure will, no doubt, be free of E. coli 0157. However,
> it is clear that healthy cattle frequently have E. coli in their
> intestines which does not cause them to have diarrhea or have any
> symptoms. E coli kills people but not cows because the human has a cell
> surface receptor on the cells of the gut that allow the bacteria to
> inject verotoxin into their cells, cows lack such those receptors. The
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> healthy cattle could pick up E coli 0157 from a visit from the vet or
> from a neighbors car or truck.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It does seem that every cow is capable of carrying E coli 0157 but
that is not
the norm. They would have to pick it up from other animals.
Maybe it is not transmitted that easily. If you want to use feedlot or
dairy farm
manure, have it tested. Pasture manure from grass-fed free range
animals (any kind)
would seem to be the safest. As Sal mentioned, alley cropping with
livestock,
using a rotational grazing and cropping system would allow the manure
to be used
in the most efficient way. Short of that, collecting the most manure
in the smallest
space by feeding hay in the same spot would be second best.
Historically, how often has E coli 0157 been a problem for producers
and what
were the circumstances in those incidents? For fruit and vegetable
farmers growing
adjacent to or in proximity to dairy or beef operations it would
always be wise to
plan irrigation, drainage and runoff carefully.
********************************************************
To unsubscribe from SANET-MG:
1- Visit http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html to unsubscribe or;
2- Send a message to <listserv@sare.org> from the address subscribed to the list. Type "unsubscribe sanet-mg" in the body of the message.
Visit the SANET-MG archives at: http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html.
Questions? Visit http://www.sare.org/about/sanetFAQ.htm.
For more information on grants and other resources available through the SARE program, please visit http://www.sare.org.