M2 VetSpeak Consulting, New Berlin, WI, USA.
East Tennessee Clinical Research, Inc., Rockwood, TN, USA.
Vet Parasitol. 2014 Jul 30;204(1-2):34-43. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2013.12.021. Epub 2013 Dec 31.
Contemporary management of nematode parasitism in cattle relies heavily on a single class of drugs, the macrocyclic lactones (MLs). The potency and convenience of the MLs, along with the low cost of generic formulations, have largely supplanted the need for critical thinking about parasite control, and rote treatment has become the default 'strategy'. This approach to parasite control has exerted substantial pressure to select populations of nematodes that can survive recommended dosages of ML products. Although macrocyclic lactones have been available for over 30 years, putative ML resistance in U.S. cattle was not reported until fairly recently. This pattern begs the question, "Is this a new, emergent problem, or an old issue that is finally commanding some attention?" The implications of bovine anthelmintic resistance should stimulate a paradigm shift for U.S. cattle producers and their advisors. However, there are significant obstacles to changes in current thinking. It is anticipated that cattle producers will be extremely reluctant to abandon historical practices unless they can be convinced of the value of alternatives that are communicated through targeted education, practical demonstrations, economic analyses, and scientific evidence. Historically, the management advice of practitioners has not relied strongly on parasite epidemiology, and practitioners may not have the knowledge to implement evidence-based recommendations. Pharmaceutical companies could play a significant role in helping to shape and shift the thinking about sustainable use of anthelmintics. However, their primary responsibility is to stockholders, and they have strong economic incentives for maintaining the status quo. It is complicated and difficult to change attitudes and practices, and it will take more than logic or fear to shift the parasite control paradigm in the U.S. cattle industry. Achieving that goal will require collaboration among stakeholders, a consistent, straightforward and understandable message about resistance, and recommendations that are practical as well as effective. But if we hope to ultimately influence producers and their advisors, we need to be conscious of how individuals and groups change their minds.
当前，牛寄生虫病的防治在很大程度上依赖于一类药物，即大环内酯类（MLs）。MLs 的高效性和便利性，加上通用配方的低成本，在很大程度上取代了对寄生虫控制的深入思考，而常规治疗已成为默认的“策略”。这种寄生虫控制方法给能够耐受 ML 产品推荐剂量的线虫种群施加了巨大的选择压力。尽管大环内酯类药物已经问世 30 多年，但直到最近才报道美国牛出现所谓的 ML 耐药性。这种模式引出了一个问题：“这是一个新出现的问题，还是一个终于引起关注的旧问题？”牛驱虫药耐药性的影响应该促使美国养牛户及其顾问们转变思维模式。然而，改变当前思维模式存在重大障碍。预计养牛户除非确信替代品具有价值，否则他们将极不愿意放弃历史做法，而替代品需要通过有针对性的教育、实际演示、经济分析和科学证据来传达。从历史上看，从业者的管理建议并没有强烈依赖寄生虫流行病学，从业者可能没有实施基于证据的建议的知识。制药公司可以在帮助塑造和转变对驱虫药可持续使用的看法方面发挥重要作用。然而，他们的首要责任是对股东负责，他们有强烈的经济动机来维持现状。改变态度和做法既复杂又困难，要改变美国养牛业的寄生虫控制模式，需要利益相关者之间的合作、关于耐药性的一致、直接和易懂的信息，以及实用且有效的建议。但是，如果我们希望最终影响生产者及其顾问，我们需要意识到个人和群体是如何改变他们的想法的。
