Diatomaceous earth.

All this alone supports my dismissal. Everything the article mentions, gets listed here.
Screenshot_20230308_065308_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20230308_065318_Chrome.jpg
 
Last edited:

"Relative to controls, both breeds of hens that were dusted with DE had reduced number of mites. The results of this study indicate the DE has the potential to be an effective treatment to help control parasites and improve production of organically raised, free-range layer hens."

The control hens weren't dusted at all. Thoroughly dust a hen in just about any fine powder will show a reduction in external parasites.

Similar studies have been done with hardwood ash in dust baths with similar results.



"DE can be an important tool in the management of lesser mealworm insecticide resistance."

No doubt DE can reduce the number of lesser mealworms in feed. This is in part due to the dry packed nature of contained feed. The dry packed ensures that any parasite moving through the dry feed will eventually come into hard contact with the DE. This isn't the case with a chicken having a dust bath were the contact pressure is likely to be light.

None of the chickens I've cared for suffered from an abundance of lesser mealworms.:lol:



"DE controlled the lesser mealwormDiatomaceous earth and kaolin failed to reduce ectoparasites on non-user hens, and ectoparasites on user hens recovered after dustbox removal. A sulphur dustbox eliminated mites from all hens (including non-users) within 2-4 weeks. Residual sulphur controlled mites until the end of the experiment."

So the DE didn't work. It was the sulphur that worked. Again, controlling the lesser mealworm isn't realy relevant or comparable to a heavy Northern Fowl Mite infestaion.
 
All this alone supports my dismissal. Everything the article mentions, gets listed here.
View attachment 3425386
View attachment 3425387
Not sure I understand.
Yes, there isn’t enough information and working with a large amount of it is dangerous.
What has that got to do with the research study that was posted and I found surprising and quite interesting?
 
I have no horse in this race. I have never used DE and have no plans to do so though I am sure both my chickens and I have consumed it at times as it is sometimes used as a food additive (anticaking agent).

However, I do enjoy reading scientific studies particularly about chickens and so I read the study in full.

"Relative to controls, both breeds of hens that were dusted with DE had reduced number of mites. The results of this study indicate the DE has the potential to be an effective treatment to help control parasites and improve production of organically raised, free-range layer hens."

The control hens weren't dusted at all. Thoroughly dust a hen in just about any fine powder will show a reduction in external parasites.

Similar studies have been done with hardwood ash in dust baths with similar results.
Actually in the methods section of the study they describe that the control birds were dusted.

"DE can be an important tool in the management of lesser mealworm insecticide resistance."

No doubt DE can reduce the number of lesser mealworms in feed. This is in part due to the dry packed nature of contained feed. The dry packed ensures that any parasite moving through the dry feed will eventually come into hard contact with the DE. This isn't the case with a chicken having a dust bath were the contact pressure is likely to be light.

None of the chickens I've cared for suffered from an abundance of lesser mealworms.:lol:
This was referred to in a different study which I did not read. I believe the lesser mealworm (aka darkling beetle) is a real issue - it does not infest the chickens but it acts as a vector of many diseases both bacterial and viral that infect chickens and in some cases people. It is apparently not that attractive for chickens to eat which is why it thrives in the litter of a chicken coop.

***
What I found interesting about the first study posted was the findings about bodyweight and laying and in the discussion section was an interesting hypothesis about slowing gastric emptying allowing for greater absorption of nutrients.
Also speculation that the ingredients added to DE (an anticaking agent for an anticaking agent maybe?!) could actually be the source of some of the benefit.
 
This woman, Sonya Schaffer from Youtube, made an interesting video on DE.

I think she seems very practical from her other videos. She mentions how DE is good for dusting, but useless when wet so the deworming thing is disproven and cites a study done in BC, Canada. However, she offers an interesting theory of her own that the DE may have a secondary effect in the chickens' manure, because it dries out again and could potentially dry out worms in the manure so others chickens don't eat them. That makes sense to me because like she says, gardeners apply DE to their plants in a wet form and then it has its effect when it dries.

What do you guys think of this theory? Could this be the reason why some farmers swear DE reduces worms in their flock, yet studies have not proven that it's a "dewormer"?
 
I have no horse in this race. I have never used DE and have no plans to do so though I am sure both my chickens and I have consumed it at times as it is sometimes used as a food additive (anticaking agent).

However, I do enjoy reading scientific studies particularly about chickens and so I read the study in full.


Actually in the methods section of the study they describe that the control birds were dusted.


This was referred to in a different study which I did not read. I believe the lesser mealworm (aka darkling beetle) is a real issue - it does not infest the chickens but it acts as a vector of many diseases both bacterial and viral that infect chickens and in some cases people. It is apparently not that attractive for chickens to eat which is why it thrives in the litter of a chicken coop.

***
What I found interesting about the first study posted was the findings about bodyweight and laying and in the discussion section was an interesting hypothesis about slowing gastric emptying allowing for greater absorption of nutrients.
Also speculation that the ingredients added to DE (an anticaking agent for an anticaking agent maybe?!) could actually be the source of some of the benefit.



"DE may provide trace minerals that help the host cope with parasite burdens"

I'll amend my post regarding the non dusted control hens.
 
"DE may provide trace minerals that help the host cope with parasite burdens"

I'll amend my post regarding the non dusted control hens.
Yes I read the trace minerals part which is interesting. The problem from a study design point of view is that the additive in the DE also provides trace elements and maybe gastric slowing.
They used a commercially available product rather than pure DE (which I understand) so the results at a micronutrient level are muddy (which they acknowledge in the discussion section).
 
That would have been a coincidence then.
No, not coincidence lol that's funny. Look up "can DE be used to treat intestinal parasites?" On the internet. That's what I did before successfully training 2 cat's for intestinal worms. There is web site after web site saying yes you can. Charts why I did it and it worked. Like I said, do a little research, you'll see Im not the only one having success at it.
 
No, not coincidence lol that's funny. Look up "can DE be used to treat intestinal parasites?" On the internet. That's what I did before successfully training 2 cat's for intestinal worms. There is web site after web site saying yes you can. Charts why I did it and it worked. Like I said, do a little research, you'll see Im not the only one having success at it.
I've done tons of research and actual science says that it's impossible. It literally goes against how it supposedly works. Show me the scientific studies that show it works.
 
Last edited:

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom