Tonight i will be castrated by burdizzo

[lust4nutlessboiz (imported)]

The 'dizzo is not supposed to sever anything...ergo, bloodless. Bleeding is an unintended consequence fror some people who have their cords clamped.

I have to admit, I know precious little about burdizzo/clamping. Maybe someone can enlighten me? If I understand the concept correctly, the clamp crushes/severs the various veins and cords connecting the testicles to the body.

The part I don't understand is how this isn't 100% fatal. You're severing a not insignificant blood vessel with no suturing or cauterizing. How does anyone survive this without emergency medical intervention? How does one just cut apart a vein and not inevitably bleed to death?

[A-1 (imported)]

I have to admit, I know precious little about burdizzo/clamping. Maybe someone can enlighten me? If I understand the concept correctly, the clamp crushes/severs the various veins and cords connecting the testicles to the body.

The part I don't understand is how this isn't 100% fatal. You're severing a not insignificant blood vessel with no suturing or cauterizing. How does anyone survive this without emergency medical intervention? How does one just cut apart a vein and not inevitably bleed to death?

Look up Cerebral Vascular Accident and pay attention to what it says about the brain deprived of a blood supply.

The Burdizzo is made for animals. It has not had HUMAN medical trials. It is not a safe way of castration for HUMANS. Your anatormy is different from that of a farm animal. Your life is more valuable than that of an animal.

If you must be castrated, find a physician to do it. Do not take chances like this. You have the rest of your life to get castrated. If you do it now and place your life in jeopardy just to 'git 'er dun' you may not live to enjoy the results.

In short, it ain't worth it. By the way, I do not believe that you are really doing this. You are looking to influence the gullible and desperate.

This is a dispicable thing to do to ANYONE...

Slow down, get smart, and don't be stupid...

DON't DO IT!!! (http://jas.fass.org/content/81/5/1281.full)SURGICAL CASTRATION IS THE PREFERRED METHOD TO CASTRATE ANIMALS>>>

READ (http://www.avma.org/reference/backgroun ... e_bgnd.asp)

Backgrounder: Welfare Implications of Castration of Cattle

June 10, 2011

Printer-friendly version (PDF)

The Issue

Castration of male cattle is common practice throughout the world. Although castration inflicts pain on the animal and causes a period of slow growth rate and poorer feed efficiency there are benefits as well. Castration reduces aggressiveness1,2 and sexual activity by lowering testosterone levels, and modifies carcass characteristics by decreasing the number of animals with a high muscle pH ("dark cutters").1-8 Intact male cattle (bulls) tend to produce lower quality grade, less consistent, less marbled, and less tender meat.1,7-9 In addition, carcasses from bulls command lower prices at market when compared with carcasses from steers.9

There are several different methods of castration, however, they can be classified into three major groups; physical, chemical, and hormonal. These groups can be divided further by technique but overall, castration is achieved by removing the testicles surgically, damaging them irreparably, or causing them to atrophy by stricture of the blood supply.5

A survey of US members of the American Association of Bovine Practitioners (AABP) and the Academy of Veterinary Consultants (AVC) regarding castration methods has shown that surgical castration is the most common method used, and that one in five veterinarians reported using an analgesic or local anesthetic at the time of castration.10 In another survey of US members of the AABP, respondents indicated that they believed castration of dairy calves younger than 6 months old caused the least pain among a list of common procedures and medical conditions.11 Correspondingly, survey participants reported providing analgesic drugs to approximately 30% of calves castrated at less than 6-months of age.11

Physical Methods—Physical castration methods that are frequently used are those that involve surgical removal of the testicles, application of a constricting elastic band (rubber ring) at the base of the scrotum, and bloodless castration by the use of external clamping with an appropriate device (i.e. Burdizzo clamp).12 A combination of the Burdizzo clamp and rubber ring has also been used to castrate cattle (the ring is placed following application of the clamp).13,14

Chemical Methods—Chemical castration includes injection of sclerosing or toxic agents (e.g. 88% lactic acid) into the testicular parenchyma to cause irreparable damage and loss of function.15 Chemical castration requires additional procedural time and technical skill, and almost twice the healing time compared with surgical castration.15

Hormonal Methods—Hormonal castration (immunocastration) typically involves injection of immuncontraceptives to induce antibody production against gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH), resulting in decreased production of endogenous hormones.16 Although testosterone production is reduced for approximately 6 months after immunocastration, persistent mounting behavior, consumer concerns and the need for repeat injections have made the technique less effective and desirable than traditional, physical methods.2

Pain

Acute pain—All physical methods of castration cause pain.2,13,17 Animals exhibit pain responses during and after castration; these responses include struggling, kicking the hind legs, tail swishing, foot stamping, head turning, restlessness, stilted gait, reduced activity, increased recumbency, abnormal standing posture, reduced interest in dams and each other and reduced grazing and feed intake.7,18-24 Pain associated with the surgical and Burdizzo clamp methods is relatively immediate, whereas pain resulting from elastrator ring/band placement is delayed due to interruption of the blood supply by the band/ring.22,23 Burdizzo castration also causes a more severe inflammatory response than band castration.25 Three-to 4-week-old calves castrated using rubber rings exhibited no signs of pain at the time of ring placement; in contrast, Burdizzo-castrated calves demonstrated marked signs of pain if not anesthetized, and mild to moderate pain if anesthetized prior to castration.23

Application of a tight band around the scrotum and testes produces extraluminal compression of the arteries and veins, resulting in impeded arterial flow to and venous drainage of the tissues. Lack of perfusion compromises the supply of oxygen and metabolic substrates to the tissues and results in ischemia. Continued ischemia induces severe cellular damage and coagulation necrosis.25-27 Ischemic lesions of the intestinal tract or limbs are widely known to cause pain during the acute phase, followed by reduced pain as the lesion progresses. Blood pressures and heart rates of 2-month-old lambs remained high 4 hours after placement of rubber rings, suggesting the persistence of pain.28

Intratesticular injection of an 88% lactic acid solution in 50- to128-kg calves resulted in similar or increased severity of behavioral responses compared with those following surgical castration.15 No significant differences were observed in scrotal swelling and pain for the first 2 days after surgery.15 In addition, healing was prolonged and unsatisfactory for chemically castrated calves compared to those surgically castrated.15

Effect of age on response to castration has also been investigated.26,28 One- to 7-day old calves castrated using elastrator rings exhibited few behaviors associated with pain or distress, and plasma cortisol concentrations of castrated calves did not significantly differ from those of uncastrated controls.29 Although 6-day-old bull calves exhibited fewer violent pain responses than 21- or 42-day-old calves after castration, pain-associated behaviors were observed in all groups.22 Forty-two-day-old calves exhibited a high incidence of pain-associated behaviors and a marked increase in plasma cortisol concentration, possibly indicating these animals experienced more pain than 6- or 21-day-old calves.22 Recently, one author noted that similar cortisol concentrations were measured in castrated and simulated castrated calves.30 However, substance P was significantly increased in calves that were castrated.30 This suggests that substance P is likely associated with nocioception (pain) and may become a validated method of pain assessment in food-producing animals. More research in this area needs to be done as validated methods of pain assessment must be used for a drug to be indicated for pain relief in the target species.31

Chronic pain—Persistent wounds were observed in 14-month-old bull calves castrated using emasculator bands; these wounds may produce chronic pain.7 Assessment of chronic pain has primarily been based on reduced weight gain and growth, but findings suggest that pain may persist for several weeks following castration.17,23 On the basis of behavioral parameters and the presence of inflammation and sepsis, it appears that castration with rubber rings produces both acute and chronic pain, whereas application of the Burdizzo clamp and surgical castration produce less chronic pain.17 Another author23 reported similar observations in 21- to 28-week-old calves. Calves castrated with rubber rings developed purulent inflammation at the site of ring placement, as well as swelling and hardening of the issues, until the distal scrotum detached after a mean of 47 days.23 Significantly more abnormal posturing was exhibited by rubber ring-castrated calves than by Burdizzo-castrated calves for the first week after castration.23 In addition, calves castrated with rubber rings exhibited signs of pain in response to scrotal palpation for up to 4 weeks longer than those castrated using Burdizzo clamps.23 So although banding may cause less immediate discomfort than surgery, the overall impact of banding may be greater (e.g. greater overall reduction in food intake and daily gain14,24). Questions remain regarding the impact of chronic pain secondary to castration.2

Surgical Complications

Potential complications associated with castration include hemorrhage, excessive swelling or edema, infection, poor wound healing, and failure.4 Use of the Burdizzo clamp may be associated with a higher failure rate, most likely caused by operator error.2,4

Hemorrhage—Risk of hemorrhage is greater after surgical castration.4 In a survey of New Zealand cattle producers, surgical castration was associated with reportedly higher complications, including bleeding, swelling, infection, and death.32

Disease—Castration-associated immunosuppression may increase risks of local or systemic disease after the procedure. Murata33 observed significant reductions in circulating white blood cells and T-lymphocyte function and significant increases in total white blood cell count and neutrophil count in 3- to 4-month-old bull calves castrated using a Burdizzo clamp; values returned to baseline by 7 days after surgery. Surgical castration causes increased haptoglobin and decreased gamma-interferon production.6,7,21 Haptoglobin exerts a suppressive effect on lymphocyte function, and reduction of gamma-interferon results in suppression of the immune system's cell-mediated immunity and response to antigens.6,21 Administration of ketoprofen, either alone or in combination with local administration of lidocaine, decreased haptoglobin concentrations and prevented suppression of the gamma-interferon response; therefore, administration of ketoprofen reduced immunosuppression associated with surgical castration.6 In contrast, administration of xylazine in combination with butorphanol had no effect on haptoglobin concentrations after surgical castration.9 Increased haptoglobin concentrations were not observed following elastrator band castration of 14-month-old bull calves7 or ring castration of 6-month old bull calves when given flunixin meglumine in combination with local lidocaine use34.

Necrotic tissue, such as ischemic scrotal tissues and testes after banding, is prone to infection with pathogens.35 Similarly, the wound associated with surgical castration is at risk of infection. Clostridial organisms, ubiquitous in soil, may enter the wound and result in local or systemic infection; clostridial vaccination prior to castration is recommended.36 Use of rubber rings in calves older than 6 months may be associated with increased risks of tetanus or other infection.36

Performance—Cattle may demonstrate reduced feed intake and average daily gain (ADG) for a period of time after castration21,37,38 Many experiments failed to detect differences related to castration method,37-40 Differences may be found in specific studies where band castration may produce either superior41 or inferior growth rates7,42 when compared with surgically castrated animal or controls.

Delaying castration conveys no benefit in terms of carcass weight,7,43 and taste panels suggest that consumers prefer beef from cattle that are castrated at an early age.43 Castrating beef calves immediately after transport, however, may compound the stress experienced by the calves and lead to increased losses due to illness.44 Booker et al41 observed that delayed castration is beneficial in bull calves that were at high risk of developing fever in the feedlot.

Fisher et al3 observed that surgical castration of 5.5-month-old calves resulted in reduced ADG for the first 7 days after surgery, but calves to which local anesthetic had been administered before castration exhibited higher ADG for the same period when compared with calves undergoing surgery alone. Calves castrated using Burdizzo clamps exhibited ADG similar to control calves for the first 7 days, but ADG was reduced from the 15th to the 21st days after surgery.3 Surgical castration of 6- to 9-month-old bull calves reduced daily weight gain and feed intake.9 No effect of castration was observed on overall growth of 1.5- to 5.5-month-old calves for 42 days after castration using a Burdizzo clamp.45

Physiologic stress—Castration is considered to be one of the most stressful experiences for livestock.7,20,46 Blood cortisol concentrations have been studied as indicators of physiologic stress in animals. Regardless of the means of castration, cortisol concentrations are increased following the procedure; however, onset, magnitude, and duration may vary with the procedure used.4,13,17,37,46 Surgical castration appears to produce the most substantial rise in plasma cortisol concentration.3,6,17,32,46 Application of the Burdizzo clamp may also be associated with a similar, rapid rise in cortisol concentration due to the barrage of afferent neural impulses during and after crushing of the spermatic cord and scrotal nerves.13,17,47 Chase et al37 observed that plasma cortisol concentrations increased immediately after surgical castration; animals that were banded had cortisol increases of less initial intensity, but the concentrations were similar for both procedures on the second postoperative day. Salivary cortisol concentrations observed between 15 minutes and 2 hours after castration in 4- to 11-week-old calves undergoing surgery were much higher than those of calves castrated using rubber rings.20 Stafford46 observed similar overall cortisol responses for elastrator band, rubber ring, and surgical castration, but lower cortisol responses for castration using a Burdizzo clamp.

Placement of elastrator bands/rings without prior anesthesia produced a slightly lower cortisol increase than surgical castration.14 Immunocastration resulted in only transient increases in cortisol concentration, likely due to stress induced by handling and injection.3

Age of the animal at time of castration may affect the severity of the cortisol response. Plasma cortisol levels of calves castrated at less than one week of age did not differ significantly from those of uncastrated controls using elastrator bands29 although another study using a Burdizzo clamp did you calves showed behavioral and cortisol responses indicating pain and these were reduced with the use of as local anesthetic.48 Following castration by surgical, Burdizzo clamp, or rubber ring methods, post-castration cortisol concentrations returned to baseline values more quickly in 6- and 21-day-old calves than in 42-day-old calves.22 Use of a Burdizzo clamp or surgical castration produced a minimal response in 11-week-old calves, but a more profound response in 24-week-old calves.49 Cortisol responses of 1.5-month-old and 4.5-month-old calves castrated using a Burdizzo clamp were approximately one-half and one-third, respectively, of the cortisol responses of 5.5-month-old calves castrated using the same method.45

Anesthesia and Analgesia

Local anesthetics—Application of local anesthesia prior to castration is mandated in some countries, and significantly reduces the cortisol response to castration.13,23,46,48 Administration of lidocaine into the testicular parenchyma and distal scrotum virtually abolished the cortisol response to castration when elastrator bands or rubber rings were used on 3-month-old calves.46 Serum cortisol concentrations returned to baseline values within one hour of castration, and remained at those levels for the remainder of the 72-hour sampling period following lidocaine injection into the spermatic cords and scrotal neck.23 Local anesthesia had less effect on cortisol concentration when Burdizzo clamps were used, and a minimal effect with surgical castration.46 In several studies,local anesthesia with lidocaine23,48 or bupivacaine48 significantly attenuated the increase in plasma cortisol concentration after Burdizzo clamp castration. Lidocaine injected into the scrotal neck almost abolished the cortisol response to a combined clamp-ring castration approach in lambs, and injection into the spermatic cord reduced cortisol responses by 45% compared with animals castrated without local anesthesia.13 Similar results were obtained when lidocaine was administered before rubber ring placement in lambs, but no beneficial effects were observed from administration of local anesthesia prior to castration using a Burdizzo clamp.13,46 Suppression of the cortisol increase by local anesthetics is short-lived, and cortisol concentrations increase once the pharmacologic effects of the anesthetic agent have ceased.3,6,19 Administration of local anesthetic prior to surgical castration of 5.5-month-old calves resulted in improved ADG for the first week after surgery as compared with surgery alone, suggesting a longer duration of benefit.3

Epidurals—Epidural anesthesia or local anesthesia (with lidocaine) prior to castration using a Burdizzo clamp did not significantly reduce the integrated (area under the curve) cortisol response in 13-month-old bull calves compared with use of the Burdizzo clamp alone.19 Although peak cortisol response was reduced approximately 30% by administration of an epidural, suppression was only observed for the one-hour duration of effect for the epidural.19 Xylazine epidurals combined with intravenous flunixin meglumine produced no significant differences in animal health or feedlot performance than animals that did not receive anesthesia/analgesia.15,24

Sedation—Intravenous xylazine, alone or with ketamine, has been shown to reduce behavioral indications of distress and serum cortisol concentrations immediately after castration.50

Analgesia—Administration of NSAIDs results in prolonged postoperative analgesia.51 Administration of ketoprofen, either alone or in conjunction with local anesthetic, significantly reduced the cortisol response associated with castration.6,19,46 Cortisol responses of 22-week-old calves to which ketoprofen was administered prior to castration were similar to those of uncastrated controls, and the calves exhibited comparable growth rates for at least 7 days following castration.6 Administration of ketoprofen also reduced the postoperative rise in plasma fibrinogen concentrations; this increase was not attenuated by administration of local anesthetic alone.6 The combination of local anesthesia and preoperative ketoprofen virtually eliminated the cortisol response to castration in 3-month-old calves, regardless of method used.3 Ketoprofen administered to 13-month-old bull calves reduced cortisol response by 52% compared with cattle to which local anesthesia was administered prior to castration, and by 58% compared with cattle to which epidural anesthesia was administered prior to castration.19 Calves to which ketoprofen was administered prior to castration exhibited increased feeding and rumination activities and fewer pain-associated behavioral responses than those castrated without ketoprofen.19

Access—Obstacles to the provision of pain relief to cattle include limited availability of some pharmaceuticals and costs associated with their use.52,53 The only NSAID approved for use in cattle in the United States is flunixin meglumine, and its approval is for control of fever associated with respiratory disease or mastitis, and fever and inflammation associated with endotoxemia, rather than for control of pain. Use of flunixin meglumine is complicated by its intravenous route of administration (significant tissue reactions have occurred after intramuscular administration). It would be useful to determine whether flunixin meglumine is an acceptable substitute for ketoprofen, or that ketoprofen is preferable and so supported for extra-label use under the Animal Medicinal Drug Use Clarification Act of 1994 (AMDUCA). Ketoprofen has a short half-life and a withdrawal time of 7 days is recommended.54 Recently one author demonstrated that flunixin meglumine in combination with caudal epidural anesthesia appeared to improve stride length and visual pain assessment in calves.5 Improving the availability of approved, easily administered NSAIDs in the United States is necessary for safe and uniform use.55,55 Use of pharmaceuticals, which may be accompanied by a need for additional veterinary assistance, adds to production costs; however, research conducted in New Zealand suggests the associated increase is small in relation to overall farm costs.38

Summary

Castration is considered to be a necessary management practice for cattle. Although younger cattle exhibit less pain, stress, and distress in response to the procedure, all methods of castration induce pain and physiologic stress in animals of all ages. Pain and physiologic stress resulting from castration should be minimized to provide for the overall welfare of the animal. Although obstacles to immediate implementation exist, research results suggest that application of local anesthesia and the administration of analgesics have the potential to minimize or eliminate pain and stress associated with castration.

References

1. Kent JE, Thrusfield MV, Robertson IS, et al. Castration of calves: a study of methods used by farmers in the United Kingdom. Vet Rec 1996;138:384-387.

2. Stafford KJ. Alleviating the pain caused by the castration of cattle. Vet J 2007;173:333-342.

3. Fisher AD, Crowe MA, Alonso de la Varga ME, et al. Effect of castration method and the provision of local anesthesia on plasma cortisol, scrotal circumference, growth, and feed intake of bull calves. J Anim Sci 1996;74:2336-2343.

4. Stafford KJ, Mellor DJ. The welfare significance of the castration of cattle: a review. NZ Vet J 2005;53:271-278.

5. Currah, JM, Hendrick SH, and Stookey JM. The behavioral assessment and alleviation of pain associated with castration in beef calves treated with flunixin meglumine and caudal lidocaine epidural anesthesia with epinephrine. Can Vet Journ 2009: 50:375-382.

6. Earley B, Crowe MA. Effects of ketoprofen alone or in combination with local anesthesia during the castration of bull calves on plasma cortisol, immunological, and inflammatory responses. J Anim Sci 2002;80:1044-1052.

7. Fisher AD, Knight TW, Cosgrove GP, et al. Effects of surgical or banding castration on stress responses and behaviour of bulls. Aust Vet J 2001;79:279-284.

8. Important Farm Techniques and Management Procedures. Available at: http://www.fao.org/ag/AGP/AGPC/doc/publ ... 6/P609.htm Accessed October 9, 2006

9. Faulkner PM, Eurell T, Tranquili WJ, et al. Performance and health of weanling bulls after butorphanol and xylazine administration at castration. J Anim Sci 1992;70:2970-2974.

10. Coetzee JF, Nutsch AL, Barbur LA and Bradburn RM. A survey of castration metholds and associated livestock management practices performed by bovine veterinarians in the United States. BMC Vet Res 2010;6:12.

11. Fajt VR, Wagner SA, and Norby B. Analgesic drug administration and attitudes about analgesia in cattle among bovine practitioners in the United States. JAVMA 2011;238(6):755-767.

12. Stilwell G, Lima, MS, and Broom DM. Effects of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on long-term pain in calves castrated by use of an external clamping technique following epidural anesthesia. Amer Journ Vet Res 2008:69(6):744-750.

13. Dinniss AS, Mellor DJ, Stafford KJ, et al. Acute cortisol responses of lambs to castration using a rubber ring and/or a castration clamp with or without local anaesthetic. NZ Vet J 1997;45:114-121.

14. Mellor DJ, Stafford KJ, Todd SE, et al. A comparison of catecholamine and cortisol responses of young lambs and calves to painful husbandry procedures. Aust Vet J 2002;80:228-233.

15. Fordyce G, Hodge PB, Beaman NJ, et al. An evaluation of calf castration by intra-testicular injection of a lactic acid solution. Aust Vet J 1989;66:272-276.

16. Fisher AD, Crowe MA, Alonso de la Varga ME, et al. Effect of castration method and the provision of local anesthesia on plasma cortisol, scrotal circumference, growth, and feed intake of bull calves. J Anim Sci 1996;74:2336-2343.

17. Molony V, Kent JE, Robertson IS. Assessment of acute and chronic pain after different methods of castration of calves. App An Beh Sci 1995;46:33-48.

18. Fordyce G, Hodge PB, Beaman NJ, et al. An evaluation of calf castration by intra-testicular injection of a lactic acid solution. Aust Vet J 1989;66:272-276.

19. Ting STL, Earley B, Hughes JML, et al. Effect of ketoprofen, lidocaine local anesthesia, and combined xylazine and lidocaine caudal epidural anesthesia during castration of beef cattle on stress responses, immunity, growth, and behavior. J Anim Sci 2003;81:1281-1293.

20. Fell LR, Wells R, Shutt DA. Stress in calves castrated surgically or by the application of rubber rings. Aust Vet J 1986;63:16-18.

21. Fisher AD, Crowe MA, O'Nuallain EM, et al. Effects of cortisol on in vitro interferon-? production, acute-phase proteins, growth, and feed intake in a calf castration model. J Anim Sci 1997;75:1041-1047.

22. Robertson IS, Kent JE, Molony V. Effect of different methods of castration on behaviour and plasma cortisol in calves of three ages. Res Vet Sci 1994;56:8-17.

23. Thuer S, Mellema S, Doherr MG, et al. Effect of local anaesthesia on short- and long-term pain induced by two bloodless castration methods in calves. Vet J 2007;173:333-342

24. Gonzalez LA, Schwartkopf-Genswein KS, Caulkett NA et al. Pain mitigation after band castration of beef calves and its effects on performance, behavior, Escherichia coli, and salivary cortisol. J Anim Sci 2010;88:802-810.

25. Pang W, Earley B, Sweeney T et al. Temporal patterns of inflammatory gene expression in local tissues after banding or burdizzo castration in cattle. BMC Vet Res 2009;5:36.

26. Kumar V, Abbas AK, Fausto N. Cellular adaptations, cell injury, and cell death. In: Kumar V, Abbas AK, Fausto N. Robbins and Cotran Pathologic Basis of Disease. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2005;3-46.

27. Mitchell RN. Hemodynamic disorders, thromboembolic disease, and shock. In: Robbins and Cotran Pathologic Basis of Disease. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2005;119-144.

28. Peers A, Mellor DJ, Wintour EM, et al. Blood pressure, heart rate, hormonal and other acute responses to rubber-ring castration and tail docking of lambs. NZ Vet J 2002;50:56-62.

29. Mellor DJ. Effects of castration on behaviour and plasma cortisol concentrations in young lambs, kids, and calves. Res Vet Sci 1991;51:149-154.

30. Coetzee JF, Lubbers BV, Toerber, SE, Gehring R, Thomson DU, White BJ, and Apley MD. Plasma concentrations of substance P and cortisol in beef calves after castration or simulated castration. Amer Journ Vet Res. 2008:69(6):751-762.

31. US FDA, Center for Veterinary Medicine. Guideline No. 123. Development of target animal safety and effectiveness data to support approval of no-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID's) for use in animals. Available at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVete ... 052663.pdf. Accessed Jun 23, 2009.

32. Stafford KJ, Mellor DJ, McMeekan CM. A survey of the methods used by farmers to castrate calves in New Zealand. NZ Vet J 2000;48:16-19.

33. Murata H. Effects of Burdizzo castration on peripheral blood lymphocyte parameters in calves. Vet J 1997;153:229-231.

34. Marti S, Velarde A, de la Torre JL, Bach A et al. Effects of ring castration with local anesthesia and analgesia in Holstein calves at 3 months of age on welfare indicators. J Anim Sci 2010;88:2789-2796.

35. Magrath LA, Magrath JM. Tetanus in calves from elastration. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1954;125:451.

36. La Fontaine D. Dehorning and castration of calves under six months of age. Agnote, Australia. Available at: https://transact.nt.gov.au/ebiz/dbird/T ... 20and%20ca stration%20of%20calves%20under%20six%20months%20of %20age%22 Accessed October 9, 2006.

37. Chase CC, Larsen RE, Randel RD, et al. Plasma cortisol and white blood cell responses in different breeds of bulls: a comparison of two methods of castration. J Anim Sci 1995;73:975-980.

38. Stafford KJ, Mellor DJ, Dooley AE et al. The cost of alleviating the pain caused by the castration of beef calves. Proc N.Z. Soc Anim Prod. 2005;65.

39. Griffin D, Perino LJ. Banding and surgical castration techniques influence on average daily gain and feed intake of yearling feedlot bulls. Pers. com.

40. Kreikemeier KK, Stokka GL, Blasi DA et al. A Comparison of Surgical vs Banding Castration Methods in Nonstressed Stockers. Kansas State University, Cattle Feeder's Day 1995 Available at: http://www.beefstockerusa.org/research/ ... rgical.pdf Accessed September 6, 2007

41. Booker, CW, Abutarbush SM, Schunict OC, et al. Effect of castration timing, technique, and pain management on health and performance of young feedlot bulls in Alberta. Bovine Practitioner 2009: 43:1-11.

42. Berry BA, Choat WT, Gill DR. Effect of castration on health and performance of newly received stressed feedlot calves. 2001 Animal Science Research Report Beef and Dairy Cattle, Swine, Poultry, Sheep, Horses and Animal Products August 2001, Publication: P986, Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, Divison of Agricultural Science and Natural Resources, Oklahoma State University. Available at: http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/research/2001rr/21/21.htm Accessed September 6, 2007.

43. Heaton K, ZoBell DR, Cornforth D. Effects of delayed castration of British cross-bred cattle on weight gain, carcass traits, and consumer acceptability. Proceedings, Western Section, American Society of Animal Science, Vol 55. 2004.

44. Wagner S. Pain control in food animals. Available at: http://www.michvma.org/documents/MVC%20 ... agner2.pdf Accessed September 10, 2007.

45. Ting STL, Earley B, Veissier I, et al. Effects of age of Holstein-Friesian calves on plasma cortisol, acute-phase proteins, immunological function, scrotal measurements and growth in response to Burdizzo castration. An Sci 2005;80:377-386.

46. Stafford KJ, Mellor DJ, Todd SE, et al. Effects of local anaesthesia or local anaesthesia plus a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug on the acute cortisol response of calves to five different methods of castration. Res Vet Sci 2002;73:61-70.

47. Obritzhauser W, Deutz A, Kofer J. [Comparison of two castration methods in cattle: plasma cortisol levels, leukocyte count and behavioral changes] Tierarztl Prax Ausg G Grosstiere Nutztiere 1998;26:119-126.

48. Boesch D, Steiner A, Gygax L et al. Burdizzo castration of calves less than 1-week old with and without local anesthesia: short-term behavioural responses and plasma cortisol levels. Appl Anim Behv Sci in press.

49. King BD, Cohen RDH, Guenther CL, et al. The effects of age and method of castration on plasma cortisol in beef calves. Can J Anim Sci 1991;71:257-263.

50. Coetzee JF, Gehring R, Tarus-Sanf J, Anderson DE. Effect of sub-anesthetic xylazine and ketamine ('ketamine stun') administered to calves immediately prior to castration. Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia 2010;37:566-578.

51. Anderson DE, Muir WW. Pain management in ruminants. Vet Clin Food Anim 2005;21:19-31.

52. Wagner S. Pain control in food animals. Available at: http://www.michvma.org/documents/MVC%20 ... agner2.pdf Accessed September 10, 2007.

53. Watts JM. The welfare of cattle: review of recent literature. Available at: http://www.prairieswine.usask.ca/pdf/welfare/cattle.pdf Accessed July 10, 2005.

54. George LW. Pain control in Food animals In: Recent Advances in Anesthetic Management of Large Domestic Animals. Steffey EP (Ed.) International Veterinary Information Service: Ithaca NY.

55. Gehring R, Baynes RE, Riviere, E. Application of risk assessment and management principles to the extralabel use of drugs in food-producing animals. J Vet Pharm Ther 2006;29:5-14.

This information has been prepared as a service by the American Veterinary Medical Association's Animal Welfare Division. Mention of trade names, products, commercial practices or organizations does not imply endorsement by the American Veterinary Medical Association.

[Eunuchorn (imported)]

What if the hardness was the rigor mortis of the testis, followed by gangrene setting in?

[Caith721 (imported)]

The reason a burdizzo works on cattle is because their spermatic cords are rigid, unlike humans' infinitely more flexible tissues.

[janekane (imported)]

Okay? Let's see if I have anything usefully written and shared.

I categorically rejected any castration method other than proper (sterile field, properly skilled doctor, proper infection control prescription antibiotics, and really effective pain control) surgery, and did so because my intended purpose was to minimize my apparent (based on family history) cancer risk, because I thought it would hurt my family were I to needlessly die from cancer before I had finished doing a decent job of being a brother, son, husband, father.

I needed to have a castration method that would be much safer than not being castrated, and that left me with only surgical castration, with a proper surgical setting and proper surgical technique. Alas, in 1986 and before, I could not find anyone reasonably near where I lived who was willing to understand the Bayes Theorem based method I used to appraise contrasting risks in optimizing my decision regarding castration.

More than 25 years later, I can find no fault with my decision and the method(s) I used to avoid cancer. Yet I also know and understand that there is no way I will ever know for sure whether or not the orchiectomy prevented my having already died from cancer; that my dad and brother so died, and that I have the familial adenomatous polyposis gene as they did is not evidence that I would necessarily have developed cancer like they did, dying considerably younger than I now am. The only way I could know for sure that the orchiectomy, colectomy, and other surgeries were effective in preventing my having already developed lethal cancer would be to already have died from cancer, and, being dead now, what would I now know anyway?

I do not do very well when I am subjected to authoritarian dogmas. I thrive when my social environments (both interpersonal and intrapersonal) are authoritative. An authoritative social environment is, to me, one in which all beliefs are continually being revised as new information arrives that adds to the experiences through which and upon which beliefs are formed and based.

Some of the posts on this thread have generated very high authoritarian scores in my "authoritarian-authoritative evaluator," and intensely activate my "discomfiture neuron system." Yes, I just "made up 'discomfiture neuron system'." Except, I am not sure it is other than a real aspect of my neuronal structure (mostly of my CNS?).

Being what I surmise is optimally autistic in terms of my life as an individual person living in a social milieu which as-though profoundly questions the optimality of my individual life, I have a repertoire of social skills, some of which may notably surpass similar skills in people who are, to me, as though seriously deficient in autism. One such skill is perseverance. Perseverance may be very nearly the opposite of perseveration.

How did I persevere? I kept looking up doctors and describing my cancer risk concern and my understanding of the biology of that risk and the surgical procedures which I deemed worthwhile as ways of reducing cancer risk. When one doctor refused, I studied the method of refusal and devised strategies for overcoming that method, and used the strategies already devised in communicating with the next doctor.

The overall method I used is regarded by some salespersonship experts as the most effective known method to close a sale. There are only a few steps:

1. Greet the customer (or doctor?).

2. Qualify the customer (or doctor?).

3. Trial close.

4. If objections, overcome objections and go back to (3.); If no objections, close sale.

The vasectomy doctor who finally did the orchiectomy had one qualification none of the other doctors I consulted had. A few years before doing my orchiectomy, that doctor's dad had died not very long after developing prostate cancer.

I, and I alone, made the decision to be castrated, and my reason was cancer risk reduction. My decision was made beautifully easier by my being transgendered, and I am grateful for the gift of being transgendered as I am.

That no physician could match me in terms of understanding the relevant biology may have made it possible for that vasectomy doctor to do the surgery. However, if anyone really understands what it is like to find it impossible to avoid doing something "society" tends to scorn, I guess I have some such understanding. Society seems to me to scorn autism no less than transgender.

Were I to offer a biological theory as to why Burdizzo castration works in mammals in which it works, I would not attribute its working to spermatic cord rigidity. The biological theory I would offer is based on cell membrane properties and the relationship between cell membrane properties and the existence of multicellular organisms.

For animals to be other than unicellular, cells need to be able to stick together. In multicellular organisms, cells need to stick together, and for multicellurlar organisms to have different and separated organs, cells need to not stick together. Cell membrane stickyness needs to be a "sometimey thing" in multicellular, multi-organ animal life forms.

My biological theory of how a Burdizzo clamp actually works is based on cell membrane stickyness being sometimey. If the Burdizzo clamp generates sufficient pressure in the blood vessels (especially any and all arteries) of the spermatic cord as to displace the surfactants which keep the inner cells of the blood vessel from sticking together where blood flow requires that they not stick together, then an adhesion may form; and this can happen very quickly.

So, my biological theory is of the form that the pressure of the Burdizzo clamp results in cellular-level trauma of the innermost blood vessel cells within the spermatic cord, and that trauma results in an adhesion which blocks blood flow to the testicles.

The animal husbandry literature I have been able to find and read consistently tells of significant pain from both Burdizzo and Elastrator castration methods. Yes, surgical castration by licensed veterinarians can cost more in dollars, unless alternative methods result in animal stock losses that cost even more dollars, than a farmer doing it without a veterinarian.

And humans doing self-castration can indeed avoid paying a licensed surgeon for the castration, and that will save dollars unless complications happen which require medical care which costs even more dollars than a surgical castration would have cost.

My personal vote ought to be clear. For myself, I find proper, as-safe-as-possible surgery is optimal whenever it is actually achievable.

I do not seek pain, yet I recognize that, without pain, human life might be impossible because no one would have any sense of how to be, or not be, careful.

Over 25 years ago, I was able to get an orchiectomy that I surmise is in good measure why I am still alive. I sought the orchiectomy for what I continue to regard as totally appropriate reasons, and I was able to "bend the system" to my purposes.

I am now willing, and, I hope, also able, to share what I have learned with the goal of people for whom an orchiectomy is appropriate for whatever personal reasons exist, can have decent access to the safest and least painful method(s) available.

For myself, I simply cannot fault anyone whose life is experienced as having sufficient desperation as to do "self-surgery" for want of anything better actually being available in practicable terms.

I find people are invariably valid. Beliefs, however, are often, in my experience, absurdly, nonsensically unintelligible.

For me, the most absurdly, nonsensically unintelligible belief I have yet stumbled upon is the belief that some decision/choice/event which actually happened could have happened in a better way. Alas, I am unable to demonstrate to myself that the belief that it would have been better had some past event happened other than as it happened may be other than the essential foundational (neurologically and biologically false) belief which generates the common, albeit mistaken, notion that adversariality is a social process optimizer.

If it has been or can be demonstrated that Burdizzo clamping does not trend to at least partially occlude spermatic cord blood vessels through a variation on the theme of an adhesion forming process, I would love to know of the demonstration.

If I could find the following paper on the Internet, I surmise others can also find it:

http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_uploa ... _paper.pdf

That paper does mention apparently successful medically appropriate use of Burdizzo clamping on humans.

That said, Burdizzo, Elastrator, and ethanol methods do not happen to meet my personal standards in terms of cancer risk minimization and overall safety. However, I regard those as plausibly wiser than self-surgery done by a person not qualified in terms of doing surgery.

Yet I have no right, nor means, to impose my personal standards on anyone else. I am willing to describe and share what I have learned so that anyone who may find it useful may be able to find it.

The only complications of my 1986 orchiectomy have been the result of my having to promise to never identify the vasectomy doctor as a condition of my getting the orchiectomy.

Having MtE recognized as a valid condition for which orchiectomy is appropriate may do much to help many people whose internal sense of sexuality and/or gender does not fit neatly into the social nonesense of dichotomous binary gender as purported irrefutable fact.

It is not for me to judge people whose lives take them to places where I have never been.

(Apologies for any typos. It has taken me a while to write this, and vBulletin tends to disconnect, with my form of Internet access, when I take a while to write a possible post; I have been writing this without benefit of spell-checking...)

[feedback (imported)]

There have been some trials done on humans with the burdizzo, I believe The doctor did 10 or 12 people with a 90 percent success rate. Apparently no medical complications. Just can't find the article again to post it.

[sduyck_2000 (imported)]

a-1 is wrong

human trials have been done in 10 countries now including the usa...over a 100 now in south africa

doctor at wayne university in Wisconsin i think

talked to him by phone 6 months ago..they still do the procedure for transsexuals..at a cost of 700$

i believe you can find the article by searching .. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12031390

There have been some trials done on humans with the burdizzo, I believe The doctor did 10 or 12 people with a 90 percent success rate. Apparently no medical complications. Just can't find the article again to post it.

[janekane (imported)]

a-1 is wrong

human trials have been done in 10 countries now including the usa...over a 100 now in south africa

doctor at wayne university in Wisconsin i think

talked to him by phone 6 months ago..they still do the procedure for transsexuals..at a cost of 700$

i believe you can find the article by searching .. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12031390

The PubMed.gov abstract text I found is:

1. Urology. 2002 Jun;59(6):946.

Incisionless in-office castration using a veterinary castration device (Burdizzo

clamp).

Herzog ME, Santucci RA.

Department of Urology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit,

Michigan 48167, USA.

Nonoperative ablation of the testicular artery has been described in animals

using the Burdizzo clamp, but not in humans. We report a case of incisionless

castration performed using local anesthesia, in a transsexual who wished to avoid

the pain, expense, and scar associated with the open procedure. The Burdizzo

clamp crushed the spermatic cord bilaterally, and the testis was allowed to

atrophy. The soft-tissue damage was minimal, and the serum testosterone fell to

castrate levels. This method has proved useful for castration in a transgender

patient, but could also be used for castration in patients with advanced prostate

cancer.

PMID: 12031390 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

I observe that the citation is from about 9 years ago (i.e. 2002), and I find no evidence that A-1 is wrong as to what constitutes the contemporary medically-preferred method. I have done PubMed.gov searches before, and searched for "castration" and "Burdizzo" and found the above quoted item and exactly one more, which has a 2011 date, at

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

21756382

Were A-1 wrong about surgery being the medically preferred method of human castration, I would expect to have found many more PubMed references to the use of Burdizzo clamping in humans.

Nonetheless, having recognized an unacceptable risk of my committing suicide by neglect of cancer risk, I really doubt that anyone could have stopped me from parting with my testicles other than by killing me first, which did not happen.

Some people have an inner sense of personal reality which is effectively untouchable by reality as defined by society. While a majority vote may deem such folks delusional or worse, I happen to have accomplished some plausibly useful research which suggests to me that a vast majority of people may harbor one or more significant delusions having life-threatening potential.

There is a ongoing scientific dialogue as to whether the traditional notion of free will and personal responsibility for choices and their consequences is biological sense or biological nonsense. I have a hunch that the "free will is a harmful mythic fiction" camp is winning the dialogue, not that actual dialogue actually has winners.

All I have been able to find are a very few, very limited studies, which I find show mixed results regarding the comparative advantages/disadvantages of surgical castration as contrasted with Burdizzo castration.

Were I asked, as an expert witness, as to which is the wiser method, everything I have learned so far would lead me to state that, whenever it is actually feasible, castration by properly-done surgical bilateral orchiectomy is biologically preferable, because of safety and long term risk issues, to Burdizzo or banding castration.

At the same time, I well recognize that social prejudice sometimes makes properly-done surgical bilateral orchiectomy not actually feasible. For my part, I seek to reduce social prejudice.

[sduyck_2000 (imported)]

a-1 had this opinion in 2003

http://www.eunuch.org/forums/showthread ... male-human

[feedback (imported)]

I have a 18 inch burdizzo that has only been used once. Will send to who ever wants it. Vodka injections to care of the other one with less pain and no trauma to the cords.