Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Talk about diets, exercise, and disease.

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby starrlamia » Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:09 pm

Great post sarah

Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk 2
User avatar
starrlamia
Addicted to PBF
 
Posts: 7394
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:59 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby Misskiwi67 » Wed Jul 25, 2012 9:30 pm

Savage Destiny wrote:But dogs shedding salmonella from kibble can make Grandma on chemo ill, children ill, etc. just as easily as raw. What I'm hating here is that this new policy or stance or whatever they want to call it is calling out JUST raw foods as dangerous. If they want to put out a public health warning, fine, but they need to be addressing EVERYTHING that can be dangerous.


I agree, kibble has been shown to be less than perfect also. It's mentioned in the proposed document, but it's an afterthought. I brought your concerns up on the vet board, and there is a lot of agreement on that point, with several mentioning the blue buffalo vitamin D screwup as well.

There's more support out there than you think, there really is. They can't make a position statement to avoid kibble though, the average joe dog owner isn't capable of providing an alternative.
User avatar
Misskiwi67
Addicted to PBF
 
Posts: 10521
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:37 pm
Location: Iowa City, IA

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby PBF lurker » Thu Jul 26, 2012 1:45 am

jamielvsaustin wrote:
HappyPuppy wrote:What I wanna know......... is HOW is grandma coming in contact with feces ?

What about the smaller dogs that happen to step in it while outside and then jump on granny's lap. Granny later rests her hands in her lap and even later itches her face.

If you think about it, dog owners generally are not the cleanliest people. Many bitches step in their pee, or it puddles under their feet. Many dogs pee on their front legs from time to time. As much as you may vacuum and keep up appearances, unless you prohibit your dog from enjoying their succulent genitals, unless you bathe your dog after every outdoor encounter, unless you wash your dogs feet every time they come inside, you're liable to get a little funk on your carpet, your couch, or your bedsheets. It's part of being a dog owner. Even Fi-Fi's mom is not immune.


My vet clinic does not support raw. I gave them a fair shot to advise me. From the conversations I've had with my vets, I realized they are entirely naive about the diet and were practically reading off prompts. I still feed raw.
User avatar
PBF lurker
Newborn Bully
 
Posts: 150
Joined: Mon May 23, 2011 11:39 pm

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby Celesteandthebullies » Thu Jul 26, 2012 12:54 pm

HappyPuppy wrote:What I wanna know......... is HOW is grandma coming in contact with feces ?

As said, through licking and such.
I *read* that while dogs contain lysozymein in their saliva, a dog with a plaque filled mouth can provide places for the bacteria to hide.

Trying to find it...
User avatar
Celesteandthebullies
Addicted to PBF
 
Posts: 4615
Joined: Mon May 17, 2010 8:40 pm
Location: Anderson, California

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby PITtsburgher » Thu Jul 26, 2012 3:03 pm

^Humans and animals both have lots of defenses against pathogens, including lysozyme, low gastric pH, local gut immunity, and so on. That doesn't mean either one is completely protected at all times from pathogens.
PITtsburgher
Matured Bully
 
Posts: 570
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 8:42 pm

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby Savage Destiny » Thu Jul 26, 2012 9:20 pm

Misskiwi67 wrote:
Savage Destiny wrote:But dogs shedding salmonella from kibble can make Grandma on chemo ill, children ill, etc. just as easily as raw. What I'm hating here is that this new policy or stance or whatever they want to call it is calling out JUST raw foods as dangerous. If they want to put out a public health warning, fine, but they need to be addressing EVERYTHING that can be dangerous.


I agree, kibble has been shown to be less than perfect also. It's mentioned in the proposed document, but it's an afterthought. I brought your concerns up on the vet board, and there is a lot of agreement on that point, with several mentioning the blue buffalo vitamin D screwup as well.

There's more support out there than you think, there really is. They can't make a position statement to avoid kibble though, the average joe dog owner isn't capable of providing an alternative.


Then why make a statement to avoid anything at all? Why not instead put out public health awareness information on how to safely feed EVERY type of dog and cat food? Instead of using scare tactics on one variety of diet, or taking a position against it, AVMA should be working to create more awareness of the dangers of every sort of diet. If public health is truly the concern here, then that is where their focus should be.
User avatar
Savage Destiny
Bully Ambassador
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:04 am
Location: Bend, OR

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby Misskiwi67 » Thu Jul 26, 2012 11:19 pm

Savage Destiny wrote:Then why make a statement to avoid anything at all? Why not instead put out public health awareness information on how to safely feed EVERY type of dog and cat food? Instead of using scare tactics on one variety of diet, or taking a position against it, AVMA should be working to create more awareness of the dangers of every sort of diet. If public health is truly the concern here, then that is where their focus should be.


Because the FDA, The Delta Society, and AAHA also have similar position statements, and the AVMA is following suit.

Because raw food ALWAYS has bacterial contamination, and cooked food does not. I cook my food, and there's good reason for it.

Because position statements are stepping stones to public awareness.

You see the studies as scare tactics, and you may not want to accept it, and I'm sorry about that. The fact is raw food has more bacteria, and has a HIGHER rate of shedding than cooked foods. Yes, dry dog food, treats, and even vegetables can become contaminated with pathogenic bacteria, but none of them will match the statistical 30% of chicken. Its not surprising, its not rocket science, its just the way it is, and frankly, its the way it has always been. Now its just written down in one more place for the world to see.

It does not mean you can't feed your dog whatever you want. It does not mean you can't accept the risks and be a hygenic and safe raw feeder. If you want to go out there and start a public awareness campaign on the risks of dry food, I'm sure all the public health officials would support you fully, as long as you don't say raw is safer, because from a public health standpoint, its not.
User avatar
Misskiwi67
Addicted to PBF
 
Posts: 10521
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:37 pm
Location: Iowa City, IA

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby Savage Destiny » Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:30 am

Misskiwi67 wrote:Because the FDA, The Delta Society, and AAHA also have similar position statements, and the AVMA is following suit.

Because raw food ALWAYS has bacterial contamination, and cooked food does not. I cook my food, and there's good reason for it.

Because position statements are stepping stones to public awareness.

You see the studies as scare tactics, and you may not want to accept it, and I'm sorry about that. The fact is raw food has more bacteria, and has a HIGHER rate of shedding than cooked foods. Yes, dry dog food, treats, and even vegetables can become contaminated with pathogenic bacteria, but none of them will match the statistical 30% of chicken. Its not surprising, its not rocket science, its just the way it is, and frankly, its the way it has always been. Now its just written down in one more place for the world to see.

It does not mean you can't feed your dog whatever you want. It does not mean you can't accept the risks and be a hygenic and safe raw feeder. If you want to go out there and start a public awareness campaign on the risks of dry food, I'm sure all the public health officials would support you fully, as long as you don't say raw is safer, because from a public health standpoint, its not.


Considering that the Delta Society has basically been bought by Purina, I don't think they're the best organization for AVMA to be basing policies on. Although apparently the Delta Society was who originally gave AVMA the idea or push to take a stance against raw.

If raw sheds so much more salmonella, why are there not people getting sick all over the place? I have never talked to anyone who has gotten sick or knows someone who has gotten sick from raw fed dogs. I've never read a news article about it happening either. I have read plenty of articles about people getting sick from kibble fed dogs. You say 30% of chicken has salmonella, but the study you quoted earlier says only 14% of raw fed dogs were found to shed salmonella.

Nothing is "safe". I think that's been proven with all the recalls over the last few years. What AVMA should really be pushing for is just safer pet food all around. I know a lot of us raw feeders wouldn't be so against kibble if there weren't pets getting sick or dying pretty much every year from processed foods. My problem with AVMA's stance right now isn't about me personally- I'll feed raw no matter what. I sort of have to, since kibble makes Riddle's hair fall out and gives her diarrhea. But even if it didn't, I'd still feed raw, because I don't trust the kibble companies not to kill my dogs and cats. Hell, Mazuri has a recall out right now on their different foods for small animals that has killed a lot of little fuzzies.

My problem with this policy is that it's worded to make raw sound scary and bad. It will scare people who aren't familiar with raw. It will make them think they should only feed processed foods, because they're safe. But they're not. Kibble is not safe, and the way things are right now it never will be. That is my problem with this, because so many people are going to take the word of AVMA as gospel, and not do more research into trying to find out what is best for their dog, because they've already been told what is safe and good.
User avatar
Savage Destiny
Bully Ambassador
 
Posts: 2171
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 2:04 am
Location: Bend, OR

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby El_EmDubya » Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:35 am

I don't know...maybe a little bacteria is good for you?

One of the many things that stuck from my nutrition course at UCSD was when the professor said "Please, please people let your kids eat dirt." We all laughed, but it has proved true when I look at my friends' children (and pets). Those that worry about germs are the unhealthiest, despite fighting a good fight with Lysol and bleach.

When I was working in Siberia, I purposely ate fermented foods as I was told that Americans immunities were so compromised by our focus on sanitation. I was living with the head of pediatrics at a large hospital while working for USAID and learned a lot about how Russian medicine differs from that practiced in the US. I guess when you have no budget for technology, you learn other means to make people well. Anyway, I credit her advice with keeping me healthy, and very productive, despite being exposed to many new germs.

Ever heard of "High Meat"? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDfBW93BhLY&feature=player_embedded

Americans are so compromised by poor nutrition (anything that comes in packaging and or feedlots, IMHO) and a lack of probiotics to fight off the bad bugs. Maybe if we stopped using hand sanitizers, antibacterial soaps, massive antibiotics for minor issues, and we went outside an got a tan (Vit D is an immunity booster), this wouldn't be an issue.

There is something to be said about letting nature work the way it should.
User avatar
El_EmDubya
Bully Lover 4 Life
 
Posts: 1374
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:21 pm
Location: Today? Overlooking Alcatraz or the French Alps

Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby mtlu » Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:46 pm

El_EmDubya - totally agree with what you said above. I pester a friend of mine who is a microbiologist with questions here and there and in short, not all bacteria is bad.

I don't feed raw but supplement Molly's kibble with things like kefir, raw honey, kelp, etc. Many vets give a blank stare as I go down the list of things but there are a handful who don't and those are the ones I go back to.

It would be refreshing if the AVMA would adopt a stance that helps people understand the risks - they don't need to promote one thing over another but to make a pronouncement against one particular way really does nothing to promote education about public health if that is the reasoning behind their stance.
User avatar
mtlu
Addicted to PBF
 
Posts: 5859
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:32 pm
Location: san francisco

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby Misskiwi67 » Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:42 pm

mtlu wrote:It would be refreshing if the AVMA would adopt a stance that helps people understand the risks - they don't need to promote one thing over another but to make a pronouncement against one particular way really does nothing to promote education about public health if that is the reasoning behind their stance.


I wish you all could read the vet boards. We agree, and there is a lot of concern that this statement will prevent good dialogue between veterinarians and their clients. We agree that good hygeine practices should be recommended across the board, and not just for raw diets.

I can tell you from clinical practice that less than 50% of people feeding raw diets understand their pet can get salmonella from raw chicken and eggs. There is so much "miracle cure" and "the way your dog was meant to eat" hype related to raw diets that people don't stop to think. Thats a sad, scary fact, and it needs to be addressed.

The FDA does not support raw feeding, are you going to say they are also influenced by kibble makers? I think they are in the business of protecting people, and so far the studies are remarkably clear and repeatable about bacterial contamination and shedding.

A member of Delta's medical advisory panel is on the vet board, and she has no idea what role Purina has in Delta Society. Delta society wrote their policies based on published international guidelines for therapy dog programs.
User avatar
Misskiwi67
Addicted to PBF
 
Posts: 10521
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:37 pm
Location: Iowa City, IA

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby mtlu » Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:46 pm

Misskiwi67 wrote:The FDA does not support raw feeding, are you going to say they are also influenced by kibble makers? I think they are in the business of protecting people, and so far the studies are remarkably clear and repeatable about bacterial contamination and shedding.

The day that the FDA takes on Monsanto (and similar companies monkeying w/genetically modified foods) will be the day I start believing they have public health and safety as their #1 priority :))
User avatar
mtlu
Addicted to PBF
 
Posts: 5859
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 2:32 pm
Location: san francisco

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby El_EmDubya » Fri Jul 27, 2012 3:28 pm

Misskiwi67 wrote:The FDA does not support raw feeding, are you going to say they are also influenced by kibble makers? I think they are in the business of protecting people, and so far the studies are remarkably clear and repeatable about bacterial contamination and shedding.


THEY ABSOLUTELY ARE INFLUENCED, if not bought off. Look at the history of things like Thalidomide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide#USA). Just one man stopped many babies from being born with horrible deformities, and from the stories my Biochem prof shared he was under severe pressure and WE were lucky that he stuck to his opinion that the chirality and active ring could potentially cause problems. All the other FDA scientists buckled under the pressure from the Pharm industry. ANYTHING tied to the government is manipulated by the Agricultural and Medical lobbies. IT IS ALL ABOUT THE GREENBACKS. I know this because I have a number of friends who currently and previously worked for the FDA in both research and health education. One recently quit her prestigious health education role in Wash D.C due to the politics involved in getting the right message into the marketplace. Her experience was really horrible as she was so passionate FOR womens' health issues having worked for +20 years for womens issues. She was specifically told she had to keep the pharm lobby in mind for any of her programs.

So why would kibble manufacturers influence the FDA? Kibble is the dumping grounds for organic substances deemed not suitable for human consumption. Just look at who produces the majority of the kibble in the US: Del Monte, P&G, Colgate Palmolive, Nestle, Mars, Etc....HUMAN packaged goods firms! Why? Because they figured out how to make money from waste.

LMW
User avatar
El_EmDubya
Bully Lover 4 Life
 
Posts: 1374
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:21 pm
Location: Today? Overlooking Alcatraz or the French Alps

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby Timas Mom » Fri Jul 27, 2012 10:38 pm

While it is possible for pets to get salmonella from raw food, in all the years I have been feeding and selling raw I dont know of a single client who's pet got sick.
I only sell pre-made raw and caution clients when they want to do it themselves with freezing, safety, cleanliness along with wild meat dangers.
I do know of over 20 clients who's pets were made ill by kibble, from recalls. I DIRECTLY know. Not heard from a friend etc.

I dont know of any of my clients who fed kibble who knew their dog could get salmonella from it nor did they know that vet food has been involved regularly in recalls.

Ignorance of facts is not an excuse. People are ignorant about a tonne of things. I know someone who thought mayonnaise was made from milk because it was white.

Perhaps unbiased education not fear mongering should be the focus.
User avatar
Timas Mom
Matured Bully
 
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 11:06 pm
Location: Langley BC

Re: Am Veterinary Med Assn ruling against Raw Pet Foods

Postby Misskiwi67 » Sat Jul 28, 2012 10:06 pm

Timas Mom wrote:While it is possible for pets to get salmonella from raw food, in all the years I have been feeding and selling raw I dont know of a single client who's pet got sick.


Probably because you are not a vet, so you don't get to determine what is real or not, everything is hearsay. I have 5 or 10 raw feeding clients, and I've seen 2 illnesses related to raw diets.

I've met half a dozen pets affected by the melamine recall, but I have hundreds (thousands?) of clients eating kibble. Luckily the blue buffalo vitamin D recall and the recent salmonella recall did not affect our area.

You also probably hear people who SAY their pet was poisoned, but they weren't. Any dog who got a stomach upset during the melamine recall was "poisoned" according to their owners, but melamine caused renal failure. Granted, the melamine recall was horrific and did kill hundreds of animals, but many more people made claims than were actually affected.
User avatar
Misskiwi67
Addicted to PBF
 
Posts: 10521
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:37 pm
Location: Iowa City, IA

PreviousNext

Return to Health Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest