Vetcetera Vets and vegetarianism: why more vets don’t go veggie

May 1st, 2007  

Add Comment21 Comments

I wear leather because I eat cows and pigs. To waste any part of the animal that died for you is criminal, imo.

Georg May 1st, 2007 04:19:00 PM

Good post Dr. Khuly. I personally love animals - have a lot of respect and compassion for them. I'm not a vegetarian because I think it's sort of hypocritical for me to be one considering that I spend a lot of money on cat food and cats can't be vegetarians. I also don't really have a huge ethical problem with eating animals considering that it's a normal thing that happens in nature. I think the thing we COULD be doing as human beings is simply treating animals better while they're alive, respecting them as fellow living beings on this planet, and giving them a quick, painless death when we do use them for food. I'm TOTALLY against killing animals for things other than food. Leather I can see because cows are killed for food but I can't understand killing an animal just for it's fur or ivory or worse yet - for sport. I think that's criminal and I hope as human beings we eventually rise above that. I'm also really hopping that cloning research continues because one thing I would eventually like us to develop is the ability to clone meat without having to have a living animal there that will eventually die. Think Star Trek :-) In any event - great site and congrats on the Miami Herald column. I'll be reading!

Maribel Piloto May 1st, 2007 04:58:00 PM

Dr. Khuly,

I love the way you're never afraid to question who you are and how you got there. Brava! for another thought-provoking post.

Gina May 1st, 2007 08:18:00 PM

I love this article. I wish that you would have taken me a step further with giving the names of some truly good organic producers or artisanal ones - I have tried to follow this path without the ability to visit and some listing of ones who are clean and humane for dairy, eggs ( I do not have the ability to get to small farms and live in the city), cheese and meats would be immensely helpful.

thank you-

Diana Van Auken May 1st, 2007 10:32:00 PM

Well done Dr.Patty but I still have a lingering question, as if you didn't see it coming. LOL

If all these wonderful places that you refer to can figure out what is best for their animals, why can't the rest of the nation do the same? Why do people feel the need to purchase rice proteins and wheat gluten from places like China went in fact, all they really need is probably right under their nose.

Stacy May 1st, 2007 10:40:00 PM

I knit a lot, usually with wool. How are wool-producing sheep usually treated? I've read Australian merino sheep are mistreated horribly, but I don't know about American or Canadian sheep.

Diane May 2nd, 2007 12:05:00 AM

I'm posting this from an archive of other material I've personally scribbled on the fly.

I am writing this from the POV of a scientist and one who has been involved in medical research and direct patient health care. I may have even drawn blood, collected other specimens and run tests for a distant family member of yours for all you know. :grin:
====
How about routine medical care? :)))

If someone goes in with a sore throat, a cut or injury that won't heal, a genital drip or sore, or food poisoning or an ingrown toenail gone septic, an inflamed joint or vertebrae, or some other thing -- the blood of a healthy sheep or even brain infused agar from beef and other animal products are part of the biological test media used in the lab tests (RESEARCH!) to find out what is causing the problem. An antibiotic that the patient isn't allergic to and that the microorganism is sensitive to can be chosen by doing culture and sensitivity tests. A pure culture swabbed out on a plate, shows where the nasty bug leaves a clear range of nongrowth around an antibiotic disc or clusters around an antibiotic that might be yummy or ineffective.

By checking the growth, size and morphology of colonies on chocolate (hemolyzed blood) or the growth and hemolytic patterns on sheep blood agar, the type of bacteria causing the problem can be determined or narrowed down by further culture and rapid tests when needed.

This research happens every single day, on every shift, and for emergencies. A single busy lab can use hundreds of petri-dishes and dozens of testtubes of media daily. Oh, was that a biopsy? Albumin helps fix the prepared micro slices of tissue onto slides for staining. Thank goodness for Animals and their products - we can save lives.

Did a parent have a heart attack, someone in the family with cancer? Does anyone need a premarital test? Or want a pregnancy test done? Is that baby's infection not improving? Is that water or ice machine contaminated with E.coli? HIV testing? Gluten sensitivity test? Got ulcers? Anticipating a relationship where exchange of bodily fluids might be involved? Have you heard of ELISA (Enzyme-Linked Immuno-Sorbent Assay) testing methodology? where DO those handy dandy monoclonal and polyclonal antigens come from? ;)

Thank goodness for Animals!

(sarcasm on) Oh, oops!! Gah, we need to get rid of absolutely all animal based research testing! :smirk:

Or is this about selective propaganda. Baby ARistas just want to FOCUS on the animal useage issues that the PCRM/PeTA and ALF target. They don't need to realize just how those organizations are USING THEM to achieve their goals.

Nothing like the ignorant, idealist, blind lead by the corrupt and disenchanted. They can't see how much their idols really 'care' about animals ...or humankind for that matter.

===
No offense to anyone intended.

Okay, I return you to your regular blog hosting... :)

Semavi Lady May 2nd, 2007 01:34:00 AM

Column in the Herald? When?

Ana May 2nd, 2007 08:03:00 AM

Ana: Column in the Miami Herald every Sunday! Hooray! It's in the Home and Design section, usually on the last page.

Diana: I read Hobby Farm, Gourmet, Saveur and Fine Cooking magazines. They always have great artisanal/organic sources with ordering information provided. I try them out after reading the magazine's reviews, checking out their websites and calling them to ask miscellaneous questions. It's a great hobby--especially when you can host dinner parties and turn your friends onto these great producers (who are uniformly nice people).

Stacy: Two words: money, greed. That, and the support of an industry that apparently serves to keep us unhealthily plied with an overabundance of animal protein.

Diane: I knit, too. And you can research your yarns online, call producers, etc. This industry has taken off in the past decade and there are lots of small, hobby farmers producing fiber from sheep, goats, llamas, alpaca and other ruminants. Most knitting magazines have a ton of resources. Interweave Press seems to have an article in every issue on miscellaneous small farms doing things right. Check it out.

Dr. Patty Khuly May 2nd, 2007 09:47:00 AM

PLEASE...can anyone hep me? I've tried all different sites and I can't seem to get an answer anywhere on this question: I want to start making homemade cat treats. I have a recipe book that calls for rice flour. I can't find any at my supermarket. Is it okay tp use "Gerber Rice Single Grain Cereal for Baby"? The 1st ingredient is rice flour, but then there are alot of other nutritional ingredients, vitamins, etc. I need to be sure there's nothing harmful in it for my cats. Anyone, any suggestions, please??? Thanks...

l stevens May 2nd, 2007 12:55:00 PM

1 stevens,
You should be able to get rice flour in health food or bulk food stores. Thats where I've seen it before.
Shannon

Shannon May 2nd, 2007 02:24:00 PM

I worked in an animal nutrition lab in grad school, and have spent a lot of time around feed mills (fish feed anyway). Protein is by far the most expensive component in animal feed, and feed mills are working on small margins and with large quantities. The demand from you (the pet owner) and for large scale animal ag operations is for large quantities of relatively cheap food. So if a mill can get a source of protein or filler cheaper somewhere else, it makes a lot of economic sense to do it. It’s not a question of knowing what’s best; it’s a case of needing to make a profit. These pet food companies aren’t trying to poison your dog/cat (that’s bad for business), but they have shareholders to answer to. If you don’t like it, do some research and pick out a quality pet food, there are plenty out there. Just be prepared to pay for it.

Chip May 2nd, 2007 03:04:00 PM

Chip, the difficulty is that up until now we've been making our choices in a vacuum of knowledge of what really goes into commercial pet food. Pet food labels are not nearly as informative as human food labels; in many ways, they're actively misleading. For years, I've paid a bit more for what I believed was higher-quality food for my pets. Now, my cats' canned food has been recalled in the latest round of recalls, every brand I've ever had any confidence in has had at least some of its products recalled, and I'm researching doing what I've been assured for years I can't do competently--cooking for my cats and my dog, because nothing else seems safe. And this has happened because they were SO focused on "cheap" to the exclusion of "fit for consumption" that they bought easily adulterated ingredients from a source known for a complete lack of quality and safety standards in food production.

Perhaps you could explain how, EXACTLY, more research would have gotten me this proprietary information. And do you really mean to say that paying any attention to the price of food means I'm giving consent to having my pets poisoned because it's cheaper for the manufacturer?

Lis May 2nd, 2007 03:41:00 PM

WOW, Dr. Khuly! Congratulations! That is so awesome. When I was in high school (in Miami) I always wanted to work there; I ended up going away to college and now I work in publishing, though I majored in journalism and I don't really do that for a living. But I always fantasize about working for the Herald if/when I move back home. You are my hero, now, and majorly cool.

Ana May 2nd, 2007 04:16:00 PM

After posting the point that we really will not be able to avoid use of animals and that even vegetarians are going to need the services of animal products above, I do also want to point out that modern practice of what passes as vegetarianism is quite diverse and can be viewed as an experimental population. It is difficult to study very well beyond the case level. But at the case level, I see have seen substantive evidence that is not a nutritionally sound dietary philosophy. But people often drop some of the problematic commercial foods and start to feel 'better', and tend to attribute this to the change in dietary sources. And it's true for some, but it is a red herring for depending on the quality of the vegetarian approach, it can be a vast improvement over what is called "SAD" or the Standard American Diet.

The great majority of people that I do know that have been long term vegetarians, have a different predisposition for and expression of inflammatory or degenerative disease markers - than do age related peers that are on SAD or other dietary approaches. So they are not a healthier population, they just have different disease markers. Gut problems from IBD and Chrons, to respiratory health and other immune dysfunction, loss in bone density, unstable blood sugars, depression and/or reactive personal profiles are common. Due to lack of nutrition, increased narrowing of pelvises in women (very difficult childbirth) is increased in that population. Newborns of long term vegetarians may be in the ICU longer, sometimes require more precedures before release, and are subsequently prone to patterns of immune disfunction and respiratory problems through their lives. The kids are usually shorter than their classmates. I never felt it has been good to experiment on children, but this is one area that gets a lot of 'lay' support.

I'm not interested in starting a debate on this, and certainly not on this wonderful forum. From a scientific POV, you will be able to examine the evidence if you study the literature. Vegetarianism is profiled as 'healthier' because they really DO tend NOT to get 'what everone else is getting'. Lowered incidence of common problems is not the same as increased health. They and their children have other health issues that are not common even among those that eat no better than SAD.

For anyone interested in general nutrition and how it has changed over time, take a look at the dentition and occlusion of the people in these photos
http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/0203cat/020305ppnf...
That is part two of a two part article. If it intrigues, then go on and read part I.

Anyway, I'm not against choices. My mother became a Tao (Asian) vegetarian about twenty years ago. She doesn't like sugary foods or bread so her current type of Syndrome X isn't due to habitual consumption of refined junk sugars. Yet she now has diabetes, chronic heart disease, bone loss and other sad issues that make her unique among her ancestors who are Asian and who generally have pretty stout pancreatic function. Her mother who I always remembered as willowy and tall, lived to be 96 years old, raised and sustained on a traditional Taiwan diet that included daily pork and fish, occasional chicken, a wide variety of seasonal and fresh veggies, with a side of starch (rice or a variety of noodles).

Semavi Lady May 2nd, 2007 07:32:00 PM

Semavi Lady: Never fear starting a debate. As long as your comments remain as interesting, respectful and erudite as yours do, they'll always be welcome here.

Dr. Patty Khuly May 3rd, 2007 11:19:00 AM

I consider myself a meat-a-tarian with the heart of a vegan. I voluntarily choose to have a diet high in meat content (since it's a choice and not biological, I'm not a carnivore as some others try to label me). My reasons for the choice is taste and texture, and I am in good enough health (low blood pressure and cholesterol, healthy BMI) that I do not feel it is a significant health risk.

However, I don't ever want to see my food while still alive, as I feel so bad for the "poor widdle animals." Maybe a trip to a farm would help or hurt that, I don't know. I also don't like the environmental impact that meat-eating has, so I'm working on the "eat locally" thing, checking labels and trying to pick things grown and/or packaged closer to me. This summer I hope to frequent some farm stands for the few veggies I do eat.

zandperl May 3rd, 2007 11:15:00 PM

Yes, farms do vary a lot. This is why I like buying live animals to eat. I know how it lived and how it died.

And it doesn't have to be more expensive; the big retail distribution chains squeeze both ends, and cutting them out can be very profitable. In exchange for having a big chest freezer (to handle a cow at a time) and a few hours of gross pathology lab a month, I find it's a lot cheaper.

For example, if you like pork, there are folks who trap nuisance wild hogs and sell them for cheap. I usually pay $20 for a 75-100 lb hog. Plus maybe $10 in ice and freezer bags. And hunting them to extinction would be doing the ecosystem a favor.

Herper May 7th, 2007 03:03:00 AM

It is somewhat pitiful that the extremist right-wing "God says we should eat meat" types that you are attracting would on the other hand put you down with an anti-Hispanic slur and worse.

Perhaps you do not understand the activities of the livestock industry and its associated lobbies? These are not the sanest, most educated people.

And certainly tolerance is nowhere in their vocabulary or mindset.

They will gladly use you, however, as an "expert" to promote whatever fanatical argument they are trying to make.

People like this http://www.consumerdeception.com are not exactly the most ethical.

Are these the people that you are support?

Jess Kramer May 19th, 2007 03:01:00 PM

A well written article...I'm in love with your whole blog here, been reading every post.

It's so hard for the average consumer to know which organic companies are truly doing a great job. I try to buy "cage free" but that doesn't mean those chickens ever saw the light of day. I've driven through Delaware and passed the poultry houses.

With that said, I love meat. If the animal wasn't cruely treated and isn't endangered, I'll eat it. Dolphin? Sure. Dog? OK if it wasn't someone's beloved. Chinchilla? As long as it's sanitary and killed quickly/humanely. Horse? If they served it I'd eat it. I do feel a little guilty eating veal though. My sister once inquired "Mommy, we're eating Lamb Chops?!! oh no!" She replied, "Yes, but they were all BAD lambs, so it's ok"

I have a huge problem with poorly run meat/dairy factories out there. How can I know which companies are doing a good job? Care to publish that list of places you've visited? Where can the average consumer get the nitty gritty on which companies idea of "cage free" involves actually letting their poultry outside and having more than 2 feet of personal space?

And, here's a quote you may or may not appreciate, from Anthony Bourdain, author of Kitchen Confidential, "Vegetarians, and their Hezbollah-like splinter faction, the vegans, are a persistent irritant to any chef worth a damn. To me, life without veal stock, pork fat, sausage, organ meat, demiglace, or even stinky cheese is a life not worth living."

and another from Mr. Bourdain, to go along with that great quote "I don't like to see animals in pain. That was very uncomfortable to me. I don't like factory farming. I'm not an advocate for the meat industry."

That's basically where I stand. Let us know how your goat cheese thing is going. That stuff is divine!

Justin July 27th, 2007 11:57:00 AM

Hi Doc... I think your original impulse to become a vegetarian was appropriate. I feel you sold out the animals when you began to eat meat again.

Mark June 18th, 2008 05:14:00 PM

Add Commment

Your Name:

CAPTCHA Verification