memsaab.com brings every online Indian women closer to the people, information and communications tools that matter most to them - where, when and how they want it. Partners and advertisers want to be a part of that vision that is driving and keeping all of us together and striving memsaab.com to be the leading website.

Memsaab - The Global Indian Women October 25th, 2006 07:02:00 AM

Regarding pet food - we've heard so much about how we shouldn't feed our dogs any of the commercially prepared food that contains corn & animal by-products. Is that legitimate? We are currently feeding our dogs a 'human grade' dog food that is Very expensive and would love to be able to use a 'popular' brand instead, but we feel too guilty to do it. What is your advice?

Margie October 25th, 2006 09:17:00 AM

My sister is similarly afflicted with the I-must-feed-my-dogs-raw-human-grade-food thing. With a lot of talk therapy she`s finally getting past it. ;-) It`s not as if the commercial foods we feed pets come from unclean sources. Do they sometimes come from parts of the animals we might not choose to eat? Sure. that`s why I throw my dog the chicken heart when I debone the bird--I won`t eat it and she loves it. This doesn`t mean the foods are unwholesome. Human grade simply means the FDA has tested the ingredients as rigorously as they test human foods--before processing and packaging. It does not ensure that the food is a safe finished product. The FDA provides precious little security (as spinach and ground beef eaters know) for ingredient testing, so safety is elusive even for so-called human-grade ingredients. Pet foods from premium brands are tested for years on multiple breeds and generations of dogs (for their entire lifespans). This is the pet safety information I really want when I feed my dog. But I welcome and respect other opinions.

Dr. Patty Khuly October 25th, 2006 10:56:00 AM

Margie -- we feed our dog California Natural. It started as an attempt to figure out if her foot-chewing was caused by an allergy to one of the common ingredients in other dog foods (such as corn or wheat). Alas, the chewing seems to be a stress thing, but she's so in love with the taste of the food that we plan to keep her on it. "This is great, guys! Yum!" My mom's elderly German Shepherd is on another premium brand, because she throws up anything else.

I think, as long as your dog is of a healthy weight and doesn't have problems with allergies to the ingredients, one of the "popular" brands is fine. My parents' dogs lived to ripe old ages on such foods (except the aforementioned tender-stomached GSD). You could always get a smallish bag and phase it in, and if the dog gets ill or their coat gets nasty or something, just phase it back out.

Laura October 25th, 2006 01:32:00 PM

Wow Dr Patty,
Another controversial topic well worth discussing. I feel that the animal rights activist is misinformed and throwing accusations in the hopes of what? I used to associate with extremists such as the one responsible for the blog posting. In time I realized the dramatic different between animal rights and animal welfare. The former is the belief that animals should never under any circumstances be domesticated. Animal welfare on the other hand is the belief that all animals deserve to be treated humanely.

I am a strong believer in animal welfare. My personal preferences include choices like vegetarianism, not using leather, suede etc and not using products that have been tested on or contain animal ingredients.

However, I do keep cats as an active member of the rescue community here in Toronto. And I feel it is key to feed them something they will eat. I realize that cat foods have animal by products and such disgusting (to me) ingredients in them but I trust the pet food industry to provide nutritionally balanced meals.

I don't believe such claims that cremated pets are recycled into pet food.

Shannon

Shannon October 25th, 2006 04:43:00 PM

Of course it's insane to even suggest that veterinarians are charging for compassionate handling of remains and then selling the bodies for pet food.

However ... if your deceased pet ends up picked up by animal control and then by a "rendering" outfit because you haven't specified otherwise then yes, there is a chance your pet could end up as some sort of vaguely defined ingredient in animal feed.

Disgusting to think about, I suppose, but not some sort of nefarious plot.

As for my take on dog foods ... well, Dr. Patty, your talk therapy won't work on me. There are lots and lots of good commercial pet foods, and honestly, I don't hesitate to recommend any of them to readers. But ... I'm another of those folks who prepares a varied diet from both commercial products and fresh, whole foods for my gang.

Why? Well, if your doctor told you to eat one "complete and balanced" processed fod product -- Kraft People Chow, say -- all meals everyday for life, and never vary it with fresh, whole foods ... why you'd laugh her out of the exam room. So why would that pass the sniff test for our pets?

Gina October 25th, 2006 06:10:00 PM

Gina-
Agreed. One food alone seems like an awful huge gamble to me as well. My take? I like to alternate from one premium brand to another. I always supplement with raw veggies and fruit and the occasional non-fatty off-my-plate special. As long as it doesn't upset a pet's stomach I prefer to make a varied diet available. An exclusively raw diet is not my thing (especially afterthe serious E. coli and salmonella infections I've seen in raw-fed dogs). A high-grade commercial diet with supplements and a revolving-door policy on the brands seems to make a lot of sense. Truth is, no one knows what the ideal diet is--not even for humans. Variety, therefore, is my insurance policy.

On the subject of talk-therapy, my point is that my sister believes that human-grade stuff is necessarily better. In fact, many of those foods are offering less than the commercial brands do. It's hard to be a smart consumer when even the USDA and FDA don't know the rules or can't be bothered to enforce them when it comes to dog foods. How can we believe any fly-by-night company's claims when there's no oversight to ensure they produce the quality food the say they do. At least Science Diet and Iams, to name a couple, have a huge market to protect and, therefore, a vested interest in a safe product.

Dr. Patty Khuly October 25th, 2006 09:22:00 PM

Janine-
Of course it's not all untrue. That's what makes their arguments compelling to just about anyone. When you combine a kernel of reality (that deserves to be made public) with a variety of overblown points, one does a disservice to the truth. The Ann Martin book is a perfect example. A few key truths then a whole host of alarmist b.s. I read it, unfortunately--it was gross. She does, however, make fine points. I just wish she'd stayed on a more journalistic course throughout. And finally, I am indeed aware of the controversy in pet foods I just hadn't heard that vets were being made scapegoats for the companies' shortfalls, which I'm willing to believe are numerous. Give me an alternative to S/D or U/D or C/D or N/f or any of the others and I'd happily consider it, as I do read the ingredient lists and evaluate the key ingredient percentages. As it is, most of my chronic renal failure kitties are fed a non-commercial diet I've formulated--they won't usually eat anything else. We do try--food is just not an easy thing to deal with. Everyone has an opinion and, given the variety among the breeds of dogs and cats, I'm sure just about everyone is right some of the time.

Dr. Patty Khuly October 25th, 2006 09:33:00 PM

Thanks for your reply and clarifications. :) I am not a fan of commercial food in general (I feed raw), so my thoughts about a better commercial prescription diet probably don't hold much weight. I do know that Royal Canin makes prescription diets too, but I don't think they're much better, ingredient-wise, than Hill's. Maybe some formulas are better than Hill's, though.

That's cool though that you have a non-commercial diet that you made for your renal kitties. I'm not a member of the list, but I have heard great things about the Yahoo! Group K9KidneyDiet: http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/K9KidneyDiet/ Maybe you can get some ideas for kidney-related diets there. There may be other groups for other disease-specific diets too. I wouldn't be surprised.

At the risk of going off-topic, can I ask for a bit of detail about the E. coli and salmonella cases you referred to? What exactly were these animals fed, and how can you be sure the bacteria that infected them came from their food (i.e. was the food tested and the same bacteria strain in the food was the one making them sick)? I ask because I'm a member of a lot of really big raw feeding mailing lists, and not once has anyone said that their dog has gotten E. coli or salmonella poisioning from their food. I have heard that ground raw is more likely to cause bacteria overload problems though (the lists I'm on promote whole foods, not ground), so were these dogs perhaps fed ground raw food?

I definitely agree with variety. I think that in general, the "holistic" kibble brands (i.e. the ones not advertised on TV) are better than the big named brands, but not all brands are created equal, so research is definitely important, no matter what one decides to feed. :)

Janine October 26th, 2006 02:44:00 AM

Where did my comment go? I just write you a long one, Janine. Here goes again: The Salmonella infection was a rare neurological manifestation of salmonella inoxication in a ten-month-old Dobie fed a Kosher raw diet (not formulated at home). Because the dog lived in a Miami Beach high-rise we had no reason to believe the infection came from elsewhere. Two other cases of E. coli renal failure (in one geriatric and one very young dog) and multiple scholarly articles in scientific publications have also steered me away from raw. I'm a big fan of evidence-based medicine. This means we err on the dise of caution until we have scientific research that shows us we're definitively going in the right direction. So I'm conservative in at least one aspect of my life. ;)

The only problems I've had so far have come from mass-produced raw diets. Storage and handling are so crucial when feeding raw that it's just not a good idea for most people--they just don't get it. It's far safer to recommend a commercial kibble for the average client. If you're a careful person working hard to optimize your dog's health with a raw diet you prepare yourself then I'd say: go for it! My only caveat is that I prefer that pups and geriatrics aren't fed raw. IMHO, I just don't think the rewards are worth the risks.

Dr. Patty Khuly October 26th, 2006 09:42:00 AM

Back when I still worked as an animal health/veterinary journalist I wrote about this nonsense, including the hazards posed by that much vaunted alternative to commercial petfood, the wretched "Raw Meaty Bones" diet. You hear very little from the RMB lobby about the damage great bone splinters can do to the gut.

Anyway, to my point (I do have one, although I confess it's slightly off-topic):

Not far from our offices here in London, UK, is the HQ of an investment fund with interests in Huntingdon Life Sciences, the rather beleaguered contract research organisation. SHAC (Stop Hungtindon Animal Cruelty) regularly sets up camp outside this office building and hands out bizarre out-dated material aiming to convince passers-by that it's all just a front for sadists to get their jollys out of torturing poor defenceless animals.

I used to be very fond of asking them whether they thought veterinary drugs ought to be tested on animals or humans.

But they won't talk to me anymore...

Helena Louring Jensen October 26th, 2006 09:47:00 AM

Hi Dr. Patty,

I am new to reading your blog, and I love it. I am a raw feeder, just switched last April. I did cook for 2 years prior to the raw switch. I had a male Dobe with what we thought was CAH but it ended up that his heart was not pumping enough blood to his liver which created the elevated ALT etc, and once on heart meds with his DCM dx, his ALT was normal. So he was fed a home cooked diet and then he died last summer. I decided to go all raw about 6 months ago and am glad I did. I researched it, read a bunch of books and some websites, and believe I am feeding my dogs the best diet possible. I am 100% done with kibble. JMO.

Judi October 26th, 2006 04:18:00 PM

I recently took a class at VSPN about pet nutrition. It was aimed at vet techs and taught by a veterinarian. I did feel that the vet who taught the class was rather close-minded about pet food quality issues, and I've unfortunately seen the same thing with some vets I deal with personally, and whom I otherwise really like. They can recite whatever is written in "Small Animal Clinical Nutrition", but don't seem interested in exploring concepts like "kibble vs. wet food for cats", for example. I also don't think most vets have time to really examine the variety of foods now available for cats and dogs, not to mention raw diets. Regarding my own pets, I've seen definitive differences in their health and behaviour depending on whether I'm feeding them dry or wet, grains vs. no grains, etc., and I wish a vet had explored some of these ideas with me as a client.

So, I think a lot of what you read on that MySpace site was just foolish, but I also think many vets could use some in-depth study about pet food options. I also don't think vets should discount anecdotal evidence about certain foods perhaps working more effectively than others. I've had a vet suggest I try pheromone therapy with my phobic dog because she's "heard" that it can be helpful, yet I've had the same vet pooh-pooh my suggestion that putting my dog on an all-wet diet helped him lose weight while making him feel more full.

Leigh-Ann October 27th, 2006 12:35:00 AM

Leigh-Ann: I have to concede that most vets take a very conservative approach to nutrition. You have to understand that we are limited in our training to learning what's in the scientific literature. Most of what gets discussed in extra-veterinary nutrition circles is anecdotal information (not scientifically proven and based on trial and error only). The problem is that you're right. I'm sure the commercial foods can't possibly be best for every dog or cat. They've taken the closest stab at the right answer based on the literature. That's why vets tend to like them.

Have you ever talked to a pediatrician about your baby's nutrition? It's even more frustrating than talking to your vet. They all seem to have a completely different opinion.

When it comes to nutrition trial and error is best, but vets have to start somewhere and that's with the science we were schooled in.

Where I work we pay for the techs to take courses like the one you took. It's this kind of knowledge you need to fuel your curiosity about what's best for your pets. It also puts you in a great position to reach out beyond what the vet knows. As you said--there's so much we have to know that there are plenty of times when I'm grateful the tech has special knowledge of something like nutrition or behavior or dental charting, etc...

And forgive us our close-mindedness. As a group, we certainly have that tendency. ;)

Dr. Patty Khuly October 27th, 2006 06:51:00 AM

Dr. Khuly, I must argue with you on this one particular post.

#1 - Rendering Plants

Yes, many veterinarians in large cities both in the US and Canada ship their dead carcasses to rendering plants. Many Humane Societies and shelters do this as well. That is not to suggest that vets are telling people their dog will be cremated with ash return and then sending the bodies to the RP because they can't be bothered... that's (hopefully) ridiculous. However, many pets die and their owners do not have the funds to pay for cremation. The pets are then disposed of in the most financially acceptable way. It is pet food companies who use rendered fats who are really to blame.

#2 - Vet Foods

Dr. Patty, you continue to say that you have "researched" pet nutrition. Have you read the back of your text books? Are they not written by Hills? Walthams? They are certainly not written by an independant individual/company who is NOT on the payroll of one of these larger pet food companies.

Hills, one of the largest veterinary food manufacturers, still uses BHA, BHT, and ethoxyquin in some of their foods. It should also be noted that they don't have to list it on the bag if their chicken meal supplier adds the ingredient before they receive it. Call up Hills, and ask them if they can guarantee that their protein sources are free of these toxic preservatives. They can't, and they never will.

Hills also uses by-product meal, extremely high amounts of grain (surely if they've studied nutrition as well as they say they have, they realize that dogs and cats have ZERO nutritional requirement for carbohydrates), and things such as "poultry meal". They continue to use meats that are not human grade. This means they can use 4-D meats including meats from sick and downed animals. How can one say that this is acceptable?

This is not the same as chucking your dog/cat a chicken heart. This is like saying "I cut off the tumour and fed it to the dog."

As for the E.Coli issues, I have fed my dogs a raw diet for more then seven years, and I am currently using a pre-made food whose creator tested the salmonella/e.coli theory by taking hundreds of pounds of chicken and leaving it in their kennel for two weeks. In the summer.

Once the smell was bad enough they could no longer enter the building, the dogs feasted. No diarrhea, no illness, just a kennel full of happy dogs with beautiful coats, proper stools, and no ethoxyquin in their bowl.

The problem that we have is not with veterinarians such as yourself who do not feel that their food is the be-all and end-all. It is with vets who insist on their brand of food. And lets face it "good pet owners" listen to their vet, right? These are generally the same vets who insist on yearly vaccines.

Doctors can not sell pharmaceuticals. Why? Because it's a conflict of interest. And yet vets can sell drugs, and prescription diets.

There is a double standard there that needs to be addressed.

I am not a fan of commercial food at all. However, there are some people who simply should not be responsible for their pets nutrition. I believe that these people should be feeding a human-grade, naturally preserved, high-meat, low/no grain diet consisting of at least 50% canned food, with a supplement of at least raw veggies and a digestive enzyme.

Hills and Iams do not meet my criteria as an acceptable food, under ANY circumstances. Any brand that would actually petition AAFCO to insist that other pet food companies use the term "by-product" instead of specifying "heart," or "liver" to better even the playing field does NOT have my dog's best interests at heart.

One last note: as for the person who mentioned the dangers of bones, while I have never had a dog (or cat!) have an issue with any raw bone, we do choose them carefully with safety in mind. I have, however, had a dog choke on a stuffy toy, a piece of rawhide, and once try to swallow a tennis ball. I've also had to pull splinters of wood out of gums from branches in the park, and my big guy once passed an entire tea towel.

Given the dangers inherant in pet foods, I'll take my chances.

Dr. Khuly, the next time you have a dog with chronic ear infections, arthritis, allergies, chronic skin issues or simply bad breath... go out on a limb, and recommend a raw diet. After six weeks, I guarantee you that you will at least be willing to explore the concept further.

Kim November 25th, 2006 01:32:00 PM

That MYSpace Blogger described could have been me, only I was still totally in the dark back then, in 2006. Our nightmares were just culminating and if I had only known half of the information in KIM'S splendid post above, my dogs would still be alive today.

Not only are Doctors prohibited from selling Pharmaceuticals, let one attempt to sell junk (or ANY) food in their lobby. Better yet, let him attempt to up-sell food as "prescription"  -- when there is no medicine in said food.  

Until vets can prove that the animals are NOT carnivorous; that their digestive systems can sufficiently process Corn, Peanut HULLS, sawdust (among other detrimental, PROVEN allergens, such as SOY), I will consider it downright unethical  -- and yes criminal  -- that a vet is "prescribing" our pets eat the foods at issue here, in which the ingredients are the CAUSE of the health issues which Kim cites.  See also DIABETES, and pets kept on the high-carb "cereals" which gave them the Diabetes in the FIRST PLACE!

The worst thing is, people pay a "premium" price for "prescription" labels to KEEP their pets sick, only to have them suffer the inevitable kidney failures resulting from all the drugs as well. 

TooLate December 12th, 2008 03:39:28 PM

Hello Dr. Alternate Reality you must be living under a rock. If you want to see a video showing the pick-up of dogs and cats from vet clinics that end up at the West Coast rendering plant in Vernon California dated April 2007 then go to Outraged Pet Owners http://outragedpetowners.ning.com/ and you can see it there on the first page. Also do a search on stop the killing of strays in LA and you can see them killing and taking thousands of dogs and cats to rendering plants. These are not gossip these are videos and pictures of the truth... a truth that you either have been shielded from or choose to hide from. These are not rumor these are factual events that happen every day and you have the responsibility to know and understand this is happening, and hopefully help us at Outraged Pet Owners stop it!

Mike Considine April 3rd, 2009 11:43:39 AM

Hello Dr. Alternate Reality you must be living under a rock. If you want to see a video showing the pick-up of dogs and cats from vet clinics that end up at the West Coast rendering plant in Vernon California dated April 2007 then go to Outraged Pet Owners and you can see it there on the first page. Also do a search on stop the killing of strays in LA and you can see them killing and taking thousands of dogs and cats to rendering plants. These are not gossip these are videos and pictures of the truth... a truth that you either have been shielded from or choose to hide from. These are not rumor these are factual events that happen every day and you have the responsibility to know and understand this is happening, and hopefully help us at Outraged Pet Owners stop it!

Mike Considine April 3rd, 2009 11:48:00 AM