Homeopathy and Poultry Farming

Even the field of poultry lends itself very well to homeopathic therapies. There are numerous experiences both clinical and experimental that highlight how homeopathic treatments obtain good therapeutic and preventative results, while simultaneously lowering the costs of intervention.

Intervention schemes take into consideration the peculiarity of each farm and keep under control the most fearsome diseases: from the summer heatstroke to colibacilosis , from respiratory problems to parasites, from the fragility of the hens’ hull to the diseases of turkeys support systems.

One of the most interesting results put into relief the homeopathic treatment schemes with regards to the organoleptic characteristics of the treated subjects: these are almost constantly higher than those subjects treated traditionally, and the flavor, the consistency, the color and the fragrance of the chickens and turkeys bred with homeopathic criteria are recognizable at first glance. We can guarantee that the staff at the slaughterhouse will easily recognize the subjects treated homeopathically. Pending objective criteria which can encode unambiguously and correct such improvements, there will be anyway disinterested customer judgements to confirm the validity.

However, there are very difficult obstacles to overcome. First of all, the high number of variables existing in the poultry field: seasonal problems, weather, logistics, breed, cyclical, nutrition, and the phenomenon of diseases continuously modifying. These determine such a maze of possible combinations that it prevents the use of a standardized treatment model.

It’s also necessary to keep in mind that intensive farming is absolutely antithetical to natural biological laws. The higher a concentration of animals in a confined space, the more nature answers by way of natural selection in the form of diseases. The more medicine we administer to curb certain mass diseases, the more nature will process increasingly acute forms of diseases to “bring back the order”. It’s therefore conceivable, that the future theater of intensive farming will consist of increasingly difficult fights between medicine and powerful and devastating diseases. In this depressing picture, a form of therapy which aims to enhance natural defense mechanisms, like homeopathy, will obviously find a prominent position.

The poultry sector, due to their large number of subjects, are in a position to lend their support to the experimental work. The only way to afford homeopathy is to acquire scientific dignity.

The Campbell Test

The Campbell Test: performed with puppies in the range of six to eight weeks of age.

 

Exercise No.1 is called “Social Attraction”. It’s used to assess the probability level of dependency that it will have with the future owner. We move a few meters away from the dog and after kneeling in his direction, clap our hands.

The possible reactions are:

Very Dominant (VD): Rushes quickly with tail up, jumping on him and biting the hands.

Dominant (D): Comes to meet by scrabbling the hands without biting them.

Submissive (S): Approaches quickly with tail down.

Very Submissive (VS): Undecidedly approaches with tail down.

Inhibited (I): Stays away.

 

Exercise No.2 is called “Attitude to Follow a Person”, and it will assess the tendency to follow the owner.

We begin walking away from the puppy with a normal pace, making sure the he is watching us.

Possible reactions:

Very Dominant (VD): He follows us with tail up, biting the feet.

Dominant (D): He follows us voluntarily.

Submissive (S): He follows us with tail down.

Very Submissive (VS): He follows us undecidedly with tail down.

Inhibited (I): Stays firm or stays away.

 

Exercise No.3 is called “Reaction to Submission”, and it’s used to assess the probability level of submission to the owner. Kneeling beside the puppy, rub his back delicately and keep this position with one hand on the chest for thirty seconds.

Possible reactions:

Very Dominant (VD): Rebels violently, biting the hands.

Dominant (D): Rebels by wriggling.

Submissive (S): Rebels for a short time.

Very submissive (VS): Licks the hands.

Inhibited (I)

 

Exercise No.4 is called “Social Dominance”, and it’s used to assess the probability level of the acceptance of hierarchical superiority. Always on the knees, stroke the puppy with light pressure from head to the tail for thirty seconds.

Possible reactions:

Very Dominant (VD): Growls, bites, and rasp with paws.

Dominant (D): Jumps and rasp, without biting.

Submissive (S): Licks hands.

Very submissive (VS) : Turns to lick.

Inhibited (I): Tries to escape.

 

Exercise No.5 is called “Dominance by Elevation”, and it’s used to assess the probability level of dominance acceptance. Raise the puppy about twenty centimeters from the ground, holding it with his hands folded under his belly for thirty seconds.

Possible reactions:

Very Dominant (VD): Wriggles violently, growling and biting.

Dominant (D): Wriggles violently.

Submissive (S): Rebels calmly and licks the hands.

Very submissive (VS): Licks the hands.

Inhibited (I)

For an overall judgement, you have to check the consistency of the responses.
A puppy with at least two Very Dominant (VD) or three Dominant (D), will become an adult dog that reacts with aggression at every provocation.
With three or more Submissive (S) it will be gifted with a good capacity for adjusting to a family and will be a sweet and balanced dog. If the relations will be two or more Submissive (S) or Very Submissive (VS), it will become an adult dog that will always have to be treated with kindness and understanding.
Finally, if he will have two Inhibited (I), he will be extremely submissive and will require a lot of affection, coming to bite only for self-defense. A subject with this type will be a dog suitable for all children.

For convenience, use the following table:

1-2 VD or more Dominant and Aggressive
2-3 D or more Dominant and Extroverted
3 S or more Balanced
2/3 VS Submissive
2 I Poorly Socialized Puppy

In every case, whatever character set of the puppy, it will be important to apply education methods that take into account the individual difference. It’s literally impossible to apply a standard method in the educative process of a puppy.

The character of a dog is also determined by the individuals capacity to learn and remember experiences.

If you are lucky enough to have chosen, consciously or unconsciously, a Submissive (S) or Very submissive (VS) subject, there will be no problems.
If a puppy is VD or D, it’s very important not to underestimate or justify the first signs of aggression, thus unknowingly preparing the way for an escalation of violence. The dynamic looks impressively similar to how it happens with many cohabiting couples.
It starts (usually with the male, but increasingly there are cases of violent females) with insults and switches to a slap that is unfortunately accepted by the partner. Step by step, you get punches, beatings, and incrementally serious injuries, in some cases even resulting in killing. Especially later when deciding to leave or having already left the violent partner.
With dogs, the progression is similar. Often, the Very Dominant subject has already started from a few weeks of life by growling at the “owners”, rebelling towards impositions, then comes the first bite, and then successive increases towards more serious attacks if it is not stopped in the correct way. The main problem is the authority level of the owner. Unfortunately, leadership capacity is largely innate.
As to say that, if we go back to finding the predominance numeric of a puppy, it’s easy to understand that many dogs first bite humans who are not pack leaders themselves! (sorry for the joke)

The distinction between dominance and leadership is in the application method of authority.
A dominant subject controls just because it is the strongest. A leader, on the contrary, commands because the submissive recognize the advantages derived from it.
As to say that a leader is also dominant while the dominant is not automatically a leader.

The peak of degeneration arrives when a subject comes to kill a child or an adult of the family where it lives.

We are not talking about a few cases; dog violence regards a significant number of families.
Too often, evidence of their situation is denied. This situation is perfectly similar to problems we have with humans: the incredible mistakes in education and the relational behavior of family that is only noticed by relatives, acquaintances, and friends.

Finally, I want to emphasize the statement of personal clinical experience gained in the field of “home” dogs, and how breeders need a scientific basis for behavior.

I believe these observations can represent a theme to confront and discuss with specialists better mechanisms for understanding and regulating the behavior of man’s best friend.

Dangerous Breeds

Dangerous Breeds: the debate

The debate on breeds considered to be dangerous continues. Without questioning, almost all technicians are convinced that they don’t exist and that the problem is always the owners.
And yet, looking at the premise (Eisenberg Philosophy claimed that if the premise is incorrect, all of the consequences are incorrect), we realize that we are starting from the wrong conventions.

If you judge carefully before the start of any work or theme, you will avoid a series of incredible failures, misinterpretations, and outrageous mistakes. One of the fundamental problems in the canine field arises from the fact that these animals have undergone impressive changes in the last 35 years, with the peak of the phenomenon between 1975 and 1985. They have been affected both in their behavior and by diseases.
These very rapid changes are shown by personal experiences of experts as compared to older data.
We tend to believe what we see in our own historical period as normality, and act accordingly.

In this regard, it’s striking the judgement that many experts give the current Fioroni, at the considered time most experts of dog breeds from both the structural and character point of view. I happened to hear, at a meeting with leading dog lovers that Fioroni was imbecilic, because he stated, all dogs are brave and kind.
From what I have seen in my years of dealing with 50 dogs a day, I can confirm that what is written by Fioroni corresponds with reality. Chihuahua or mastiffs were meek (apart from the obvious few exceptions), very sweet with children, and absolutely reliable, however, ready to become fierce in the presence of danger, of a threat, or in the case of an absent owner from the home. Simply, they defended the owner and children when it was necessary.

In the last few years, the following striking changes have occurred:

Puppies at the age of 20 days, perhaps still with semi closed eyes, had more than 60-70% of subjects intolerant to manipulation, especially opening their mouth. Some of these young puppies even growled menacingly. At two months old, two of the puppies were hyperactive and would not come close to visitors. After a few years, I changed my advice in choosing a puppy. I used to suggest choosing the lively one, so the owner would have a nice pack leader. Now I think it is better to opt for a more “dumb” one, which will become a normal dog in most cases.

Aggression in dogs has become much more common. There is an old proverb that says “dog doesn’t eat dog”, but it has become common to witness puppies slaughtered by adult dogs, and fierce and often fatal quarrels among adult dogs. Before this change, it was common to see small dogs being aggressive towards very big dogs without the giants reacting. At that time, dogs would stoically endure any harassment from children, without ever dreaming of biting them. Obviously, I have always insisted on the need to educate children to respect animals without torturing them, but it used to be that the printed ancestral laws inside every dog prevented an aggressive reaction. These laws don’t work anymore, and experts are forced to warn the owners of almost any breed of the risk of a possible attack, often for a futile reason.

The actual aggression of the dogs has two completely different causes:

The first is a currently unknown factor and involves the whole dog species.

The second is due to the idiotic human selection of dominant and aggressive dogs, identifying the breeds suitable for defending their flocks and their owner from predators. Some of these dogs unfortunately are still used for fighting competitions, which distorts their natural instincts an proliferates altered subjects who are aggressive against all odds, and who are true and real war machines. However, there are frequently dogs born from non-selected parents according to this aberrant criteria, that are completely reliable and docile dogs. To confirm that there is no dangerous breed itself, but there are subjects that come from parents and “calibrated” ancestors, that are really dangerous.

Both in the first and second case, the dog, obviously, is just a victim and doesn’t hold the responsibility.

It is said that much depends on the attitude of the owner, but in this regard we work on the effects and not on the causes. It has become difficult to find a person who has good self-esteem and authority, so we have to work towards helping the dogs rather than trying to fix the owners.

It’s possible that the increase of dog aggression is related to a defect of the main neurotransmitters acetylcholine, norepinephrine, and serotonin. The attention is on serotonin, since it was verified that its deficiency causes increased aggression. Among the causes of such shortage, there could be the presence of pesticides, largely used in the cereals that we administer to the dogs with the kibbles, pasta, or rice.
Another cause could be the shortage of Omega3 in the food, or the presence of pharmacological residues in the meat coming from intensive farming.