Vet FAQs · for vets, nutritionists and dairy farmers
What it is, what it isn’t, and what we’re asking.
You don’t need the argument the rest of this site makes for a lay reader. Here is the device in plain terms, what you’d expect to see on the cow, the evidence with its gap stated, and the trial we’d like to run on a herd you know.
- Worn on the outsideNothing implanted, injected or ingested
- No withdrawalIt isn’t a medicine; no residue
- No ration changeFeed her as you do now
- About three weeksFitted after calving, then off
- Your data stays yoursWe ask to see it, not to own it
Recorded on working US dairies, 2014–2017. Captions cover the narration and the founder on camera.
The twelve questions below are the film’s chapters: each answer links to the moment it’s answered.
The short version
Other wearables measure what cows do. DMI Impact changes what cows do.
It is a wearable neurostimulation device, fitted after calving in the transition or hospital pen, where your staff already have hands and eyes on her. Nothing here is novel physiology. The only unusual part is that it acts on the cow’s own behaviour, not on her ration, her housing or her treatment.
- PromptAt the times the farm sets, between milkings, she is prompted to get up.
- UpA cow on her feet moves, as she would for any other reason.
- Feed barrierShe goes to the feed barrier, more often and for longer.
- IntakeHer intake rises, and her negative energy balance eases as a result of what she eats.
Every link after intake is the cow’s own response to what she eats. The device’s job ends at the feed barrier.
What you’ll see, against matched penmates
On the cow first, not on the milk sheet. Give her a week.
Each test cow wears a bright green sleeve, on purpose, so you or your client can set her against the penmates picked to match her: at the prompt time, and on the round the farm already makes. In the order a herdsman notices it, before any figure moves.
At the prompt time
Up, and to the feed barrier
She gets up, goes to the barrier and stays there longer than her penmate.
The first thing a cow usually does is go to the feed trough and eat an extra bite of feed.
Dr Kerry McGehee, Veterinarian · Film 7, 3:37 · Feeding time changed most consistently ahead of disorders: González et al. 2008 · UK
Between milkings
Cud chewing
Lying down chewing her cud while her penmate stands idle: the sign most herdsmen already use to judge whether a fresh cow is coming right.
Rumination in the 21 days after calving was lowest in the cows whose milk fell furthest below prediction: Kemel et al. 2025 · Netherlands and Belgium
On the round
Pen position and parlour order
From the back of the pen to the front, and among the first into the parlour, week on week.
the first ones to come in
Jeremy Setters, Herd Manager · Film 5, 1:38 · his observation, not measured
The measures you already use
Not a test of your client. Their own records, checking what they saw.
You already know what early energy balance means for everything after it. The trial reads the measures you and your clients use now, for the test cows against their matched penmates, in the order they move.
The data stays with the farm, and whether to share it is the farm’s decision.
The twelve questions
The questions we’re asked most, in the order they’re asked.
A short answer to each, written here, and a link to the moment the film answers it. Watch all twelve from the start (0:50) →
Q1Does prompting her to get up take rest and rumination from a recovering cow?
Rest and rumination come first, which is why the farm and its vet decide how often she is prompted. Start at one prompt a day and watch the cows at that time. Then decide, for the next cycle and the next cow, whether there is room for another.
Q2Does she feel it?
Yes: it is a vibration, worn on the outside, and you can hold one against your own forearm. In the film the founder does exactly that, and you can hear the vibration change as it starts up. Nothing is implanted, injected or ingested.
Q3What is it, and what is it not?
It is a wearable neurostimulation device. It is not a medicine and not a feed additive: no withdrawal, no residue. It does not replace treatment, and it does not mask clinical signs.
Q4How does it work?
It prompts her to get up. On her feet, she goes to the feed barrier; her intake rises, and her negative energy balance eases because of what she eats. Each farm’s units are programmed to its own milking schedule, and can follow different schedules within one herd.
Q5Does it replace the sensors a farm has already paid for?
No. It works alongside all of them. The device changes what the cow does; the collars, activity monitors, boluses, parlour meters and herd software already on the farm are what record the change. The more of them a farm runs, the more of its own data shows the result, and the better the prompting can be fitted to the herd and its milking times.
“Approximately 3 in 5 dairy farmers utilised automated cow monitoring technology.” Barraclough 2020 · UK
Q6How were your studies conducted?
By commercial observation over more than a decade, on six conventional and organic US commercial dairies. Every cow carrying a device was set against at least one control cow chosen to match her, so that the device was the only thing that differed.
Q7What were your results?
Behaviour first: more visits to the feed barrier. Then measured milk, from a +10% floor to a +16% ceiling in test cows over control cows. That is commercial observation, not peer-reviewed.
A percentage increase is anecdotal until scientific studies verify the correlation and the causation.
Q8When didn’t it work?
When the feed itself was the problem. The cows carrying devices were eating more of it, so they showed it first, and that helped the farm find the problem and put it right.
Q9What is in your research library, and how is it kept current?
More than 150 published sources, each read in full and kept on file. They are ranked by where the work was done (UK and EU first, then the US, then the rest of the world) and by relevance to cow health, milk production, reproduction and emissions. The library is refreshed every quarter, after AHDB’s quarterly review and Defra’s milk price notice.
Q10Which cows, and are there uses beyond fresh dairy cows?
Second- and third-lactation fresh cows first. The farms that used it also fitted it to cows with metritis, other sick cows and beef cattle. Formal studies on those uses come next.
leave her in the barn, in her normal pen. They don’t have to find a new pecking group in the feed trough
Jeremy Setters, Herd Manager · Film 7, 9:07 · his account, as he gave it
Q11Why restart in the UK and EU now?
Development in the US paused when the pandemic hit and demand for US dairy fell to its lowest. Britain and Europe stood out for the restart: the animal comes first here, and so does the quality of what the dairy produces. Herd health is now treated as an emissions question, and the aim is lower emissions per litre. The funding and regulatory environment backs this kind of work, and British farms already run the recording kit that shows the change.
Skuce 2022 · UK · Kyriazakis et al. 2024 · UK-led review
Q12What data do you want from a trial, and what happens after?
First, what the farm sees: each green-sleeve cow against her matched penmates. Then what its kit already records: her behaviour first, then health events in the first 30 days, body condition, milk to peak, and reproduction by day 90 on the first cycle of cows, all against matched controls in the same herd. After that, peer-reviewed studies designed with vets and universities, built on what those cows show.
The evidence, stated plainly
Every number we have was measured in America. The trial is how Britain gets its own.
More than ten years of commercial observation on six US dairies, conventional and organic: hundreds of fresh cows carrying a device, each set against a cow chosen to match her. It is not peer-reviewed, and that is the largest gap in this business.
We are not asking you to accept the American data. We are asking for help building the British data that would replace it.
A percentage increase is anecdotal until scientific studies verify the correlation and the causation.
To vet practices and universities: we want this work peer-reviewed in Britain. Help us design the studies that would settle it.
What a trial involves
Deliberately small, and deliberately matched.
up to 10
fresh cows carrying a device, in any 30-day window
up to 30
matched fresh cows as controls
A herd of around 500 calves enough cows to fill both groups in one pass, which is why it is our target. Smaller herds with robotic milking or detailed individual recording are often the more interesting sites, because depth of data per cow makes up for numbers; those trials run over more than one block.
- No change to the ration, and no change to treatment protocols.
- About three weeks per cow; about 15 minutes of handling per cow, all in.
- All data stays with the farm. We ask to see it, not to own it, and whether to share it is the farm’s decision.
- Ninety days, so reproduction is reached on the first cycle of cows.
- Nothing to buy: this is a pre-commercial evidence phase. The full trial, week by week →
The evidence behind this page · 10 sources
The milk figures are DMI Impact commercial observation and are not peer-reviewed. The research beside the answers is published and held in full in our library of more than 150 sources.
- DMI Impact commercial observation, six US commercial dairies, conventional and organic, over more than ten years: measured milk of test cows over matched control cows, +10% floor to +16% ceiling. Not peer-reviewed.
- González LA, Tolkamp BJ, Coffey MP, Ferret A, Kyriazakis I (2008) Changes in feeding behavior as possible indicators for the automatic monitoring of health disorders in dairy cows. J Dairy Sci · UK · doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0530
- Kemel C et al. (2025) Association of artificial intelligence-predicted milk yield residuals to behavioral patterns and transition success in multiparous dairy cows. J Dairy Sci · Netherlands and Belgium · doi.org/10.3168/jds.2024-26134
- McArt JAA, Nydam DV, Oetzel GR (2012) Epidemiology of subclinical ketosis in early lactation dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci · USA · doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-5443
- Roche JR et al. (2009) Body condition score and its association with dairy cow productivity, health, and welfare. J Dairy Sci · New Zealand, France and Ireland · doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2431
- Bédère N et al. (2018) Meta-analysis of the relationships between reproduction, milk yield and body condition score in dairy cows. Livestock Science · France · doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2018.01.017
- Sheldon IM et al. (2009) Defining postpartum uterine disease and the mechanisms of infection and immunity in the female reproductive tract in cattle. Biol Reprod · UK · doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.109.077370
- Barraclough RAC (2020) The use of advanced technology to enhance monitoring of dairy cow health. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh · UK · era.ed.ac.uk
- Skuce P (2022) Acting on methane: opportunities for the UK cattle and sheep sectors. Ruminant Health & Welfare · UK · ruminanthw.org.uk/actingonmethane
- Kyriazakis I et al. (2024) Improve animal health to reduce livestock emissions: quantifying an open goal. Proc R Soc B · UK-led review · doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2024.0675
The ask
Let us run a matched trial on a herd you already know.
Not that you recommend the device. Only that you put a herd forward, watch it with them, and tell us honestly what you see. The data, and whether to share it, stay with the farm.
Put a herd forward →Or speak to R.T. Barcik, Founder, directly: 07716 757420 · rt@dmiimpact.com
