A26-U6£lsft) < YarUififc; Star**'Mart***; IStT' -'
Biotechnology Conference Explores Somatotropin
BY MARTHA J. GEHRINGER
PHILADELPHIA - Bovine
growth hormone or bovine
somatotropin the milk
production enhancer by any name
arouses just as much interest. The
second day of the Biotechnology
Conference, held inconjunction
with the National Dairy Herd
Improvement Convention, focused
on the controversial substance.
Tom Craig of Murmac Farms,
Bellefonte, recently used bovine
somatotropin in his herd as part of
a 15-month field trial. “It provided
me the opportunity to ask what
bovine somatotropin can do for
me,” Craig explained in his con
ference presentation.
From his first-hand experience
with somatotropin, Craig con
cluded: “I’m convinced that if it
becomes available, I’ll be one of
the first one to adopt it. But there
are still problems to be answered. ”
He added, “There was nothing in
the experience to prevent me from
using it.”
Until BST does become com
mercially available, Craig noted
he needs to improve his nutrition
program, improve his economic
knowledge, and improve his dry
cow management to maximize the
effect of BST in his herd.
Craig estimated an added in
come per cow per lactation of $lB5
by using BST. He calculated this
savings with numbers from his
farm, a milk price of $11.50 per
hundredweight, and an estimated
BST cost of $7O per cow.
“BST does not require large
outlays of money,” Craig noted.
“Most industry people project that
BST will provide a minimum
return of $2 for every $1 that
dairymen invest,” he added. Craig
called the product “self-financing”
since the milk check may come
before the bill for BST.
Somatotropin will benefits all
dairymen regardless of the size of
the producer’s farm, the Bellefonte
dairyman said, as it increases the
efficiency of production. However,
he cautioned, “BST with inefficient
management practices equals
disaster.” He urged his fellow
producers to fine-tune their
management skills before using
BST.
“If BST becomes available, it
will be'well worth your time and
effort,” he advised.
Public Perception
One of the keys to making BST
commercially available is the
public’s perception of the product,
he commented. The dairy industry
needs to educate the consuming
public of the facts of BST produced
milk, Craig explained.
A key point that the public needs
to understand is that BST occurs in
all milk at low levels. And the
amount of BST in milk from
treated cows is not significantly
different that milk from untreated
cows, he said. “Education is im
portant to make BST produced
milk a marketable commodity.”
“Everyone hqs already
re h Nothin
prejudged this material,” said Dr.
James Crowley, University of
Wisconsin professor and extension
specialist. He noted sociologists
have denounced the product by
claiming it will create a rural
crisis by causing unemployment
for farmers.
He discounted this by explaining
that without BST cow numbers
have decreased by 60 percent from
1945 to 1079 and production has
more than doubled.
Public perception of the product
will hinder the Food and Drug
Administration’s approval of BST.
“Consumers need to be convinced
to drink milk with bovine growth
hormone,” Crowley said.
“This is the first time people are
petitioning the FDA not to license a
product because it works too well,”
said David Walton, American
Cyanamid marketing manager.
“BST has become a potential
political football.”
Washington activists are
threatening to boycott dairy
products made from BST produced
milk. Some want to shut down the
field trials, he explained. The
Washington activists want to let
food safety become an emotional
issue not scientific, Walton con
tinued.
Milk consumption has been
adversely influenced on the
University of Wisconsin campus,
Crowley explained, because the
college herd participated in an
experiment with BST. A warning
was circulated which cautioned
against drinking milk by injecting
cows with hormones, he noted.
Some producers will be unable to
sell milk produced with BST,
Crowley said, because of the public
opinion. Dairies will not accept the
milk.
Craig noted that the FDA
scrutinized his practices and en
countered some resistance in
marketing his milk and cull cows
from the experiment.
Walton stressed the need to
educate consumers about BST. He
noted the facts as: BST becomes
biologically inactive in the
digestive system because it is a
protein. Enzymes in the digestive
system break proteins into har
mless component amino acids.
BST offers potential benefits to
both the consumer and producer.
“The real issue in my mind is
whether dairymen have a choice to
use it or not use it in the 19905. Can
the industry afford to shut out cost
reducing technology,” Walton
commented. He emphasized the
need to keep technological
freedoms.
Not all cows are a candidate for
BST injections, Crowley said. He
questioned if 2-year-old cows
respond sufficiently to BST to
make use of the product
economically feasible. Also
problem cows, or nervous cows
would not be candidates for the
injections due to difficulty in ad
ministering the shots and less than
In This Ex i
expected returns. Not every cow
responds to the product, he added.
“Even in herds that want to use
the product can only realistically
expect to use BST on half of the
cows,” Crowley stated. He
cautioned against too much op
timism with use of the product. If
dairymen expect a 20 percent
response from the product, this
will yield an actual 10 percent
annual increase in rolling herd
average.
“We don’t have all the answers,
that’s why we’re still resear
ching,” he said.
A leading researcher, Dr.
William Chalupa, University of
Pennsylvania professor of
nutrition, explained “BST is a
naturally occurring protein found
in all animals and produced in the
pituitary gland.” BST works by
coordinating the cow’s metabolism
to direct nutrients to milk instead
of body tissue. This is the same
response which is seen in
genetically superior cows, he said.
BST research started in 1936,
Chalupa noted, when investigators
found that by taking crude
pituitary extracts they could
stimulate milk production.
A study which involved four
universities and in which Chalupa
participated showed no effect on
the fat or protein composition of
milk, he said, when energy and
protein were balanced in the
ration. “I have never seen tests
where the fat was lower in BST
treated cows,” Chalupa said. He
speculated the fat test could in
crease with BST depending on the
cow’s ration.
Feed intake increased
correspondingly to production
increase, he noted. "Cows
responded like higher producing
cows would.”
Cows in the test produced more
milk per unit feed consumed,
Chalupa said, because of increased
feed efficiency.
Long-term studies indicated no
health problems, he commented.
Reproductive factors remained the
same or improved. “At 50
milligrams there was a small but
significant increase in the SCC.
There was no difference in smaller
doses,” Chalupa said.
While there were no adverse
effects on health or reproduction in
the university studies, “34 cows
don’t tell the whole story,” he
noted. Larger studies are in
progress, Chalupa added.
A Management Tool
He described somatotropin as a
management tool. It can convert
good producers to better
producers, better producers to
excellent producers. In field trials,
Chalupa said, increases of eight to
15 pounds of milk per cow per day
were recorded.
Walton explained a likely
production increase of 10 to 20
percent per cow could be expected
from use of the protein.
rience To Prevent Me From Usl
Research
“This is the first significant
product of biotechnology for the
dairy industry,” he said. “The
keyword here is bovine
somatotropin potentially increases
efficiency.” Increased efficiency
will increase income and decrease
costs, he added.
He predicted a maximum
adoption rate of BST by 50 percent
of the dairymen in five years
following approval by the FDA.
Echoing Chalupa’s comments,
Walton said that BST provides
dairymen with other options. “It’s
a management tool.”
With the use of BST there is no
new capital investment and there
is an immediate payback, he
noted.
The degree of profit depends on
the management level of the
producer, Walton said. “To sur
vive, dairymen need to work on
efficiency. That’s what BST is
designed to do.”
Presently, the FDA has not
made any dosage recom
mendations. Nor has the product
been priced, Walton added. The
product must be priced fairly to
yield profits for dairymen.
Dr. George Conneman, Cornell
University professor of
agricultural economics,
speculated the adoption rate of
BST would be slow. He added, the
impact on the dairy industry would
occur over a long period of time,
not immediately.
Impact
“Some say that bGH will have a
significant and immediate impact
on the dairy industry,” he said. He
posted the following worst case
scenario which many individuals
accept as fact:
•Adoption by 85 percent of
dairymen within three years after
product introduction.
•A 25 to 30 percent increase in milk
production per cow resulting in a
“glut” of milk and increasing the
surplus.
•A large decrease, of $1 to $2 or
greater per hundredweight, in the
price of milk.
•A 25 percent decline in the
number of dairy farms and a 30
percent drop in cow numbers.
•A drastic one time increase in
reduction of 25 \th
Dr. William Chalupa
Gray Named Legislator Of The Year
WASHINGTON, D.C. -
Congressman William H. Gray,
111, 2nd district, has been
recognized by the Pennsylvania
Farmers union as Legislator of the
Year for 1986.
Chester L. Reed, Executive
Director of the general farm
organization, said Gray received
the award “because of his voting
record and the understanding he
has shown toward fmaily farmers
when Farmers Union visited with
him over the last session of
Congress.”
“Congressman Gray has an
appreciation for agriculture that
you would expect from rural
IP
immediate adoption.
He posted what he believes will
likely happen:
•Routine use of bGH is further in
the future than is suggested.
•FDA approval wUJ take con
siderably longer than anticipated
because of extensive field trials
and consumer concern.
•A slower than predicted farmer
adoption rate.
•Per cow responses will vary from
0 to 25 percent.
•The aggregate impact will be
more like a 10 to 15 percent in
crease in milk per cow.
On the opening day of the
Biotechnology Conference,
Monday, Dr. Kenneth Butcher,
manager DRPC, gave an outline of
the DHIA data base that includes;
genetic evaluation, production
information, reproduction in
formation, somatic cell count,
health, cows leaving the herd,
replacement females and herd
survey comparisons.
Dr. Michael Tomaszewski from
Texas A & M University, sought to
creatively use the static data base
that gives historical information
and turn it into an intelligent
projection base that will help
dairymen make management
decisions. “Profit equals sales
minus cost,” Tomaszewski said.
“We should use our computers to
help us forecast our business
outcome.”
Stephen Spencer, Penn State
University, showed the progress in
milking machine systems from
buckets to pipelines and gave ideas
on how new management
possibilities might happen with
milking systems automation.
Philip Dukas, director of
technical development National
DHIA, discussed milk weighing
devices and identification. Dr.
Paul Thompson, president of Dairy
Equipment Company, had the
topic milking systems. And Dale
Gordon, product manager of
Babson Brothers, discussed
milking and feeding systems.
Robert Kindig, Pennsylvania
DHIA president opened the session
and Glenn Shirk, Lancaster County
dairy agent, was the moderator for
Monday’s session of the
Biotechnology Conference.
representatives,” Reed said.
“With farmers making up only a
small percentage of the
population, getting our message
through to urban and suburban
Congressmen like Representative
Gray is essential,”he added.
According to Reed, the message
which all twenty-three Farmers
Union state oraganizations carry
to Congress is that family farmers
are a vital part of the American
economy, and they need a fair
price for their product in order to
survive.
“Farmers don’t want govern
ment handouts,” Reed said, “they
just want a fair chance to compete.
’owley