Vet P.O.V. How do vets recommend pet food? (Part 2: Education)

June 14th, 2007  

Add Comment15 Comments

That's an interesting look into the way pet foods developed. Do you know when pet foods replaced giving pets food just like we eat? I had a collie growing up, and she died at 17. She didn't have hip problems, had nice teeth, and was still a happy active dog. She died in her sleep after just slowing down for a couple of weeks. We never bought dogfood, she ate leftovers from the table as well as the cheaper cuts of raw meat, eggs, and whatever my dad thought was good for dogs.

My next few dogs were fed dogfood - my parents thought they were doing a good thing for our pets. However, they all had hip dysplasia, became overweight, smelled bad, had dandruffy coats, etc. They also didn't live to be even 10. I am now feeding my collies real food, and their coats and teeth are gorgeous, and they don't have terrible doggy breath. They're still young, but I am hoping that contrary to what I've been told, they'll live longer than 8 to 10 years because of the better diet they receive. My cats don't have UTI's, either, and I am wondering, do you think this has anything to do with their dietary cahnges I've made?

Thank you for addressing issues that many vets seem to shy away from. My own vet needed some convincing when I began feeding my pets real food, but he's a believer now - he's never had to celan my pets' teeth, they hardly ever go in, etc.

Sorry for rambling, but this is something which really interests me, and I am grateful for the info you kindly share.


Cindy

Cindy June 14th, 2007 11:15:00 AM

Interesting point, Cindy...

I have said to many a vet in response to their declaration that they have not yet seen the benefits of home cooking or raw feeding... "well that's because those patients don't need to be here!"

While that's a bit of an exaggeration, (raw/home cooked food is certainly not the miracle cure or preventative that some proponents would have you believe it is) it is definitely true in my experience that my home fed dogs see the vet far less often than their kibble-fed counterparts. My nine year old retriever and my eight year old cat are both gleaming white examples of what real food can do for teeth. Compared to our much younger rescues who come in eating grocery food and must have teeth pulled and cleaned during their sterilization surgery, anyways.

Thank you, Dr. Patty, for saying out loud (ok, in print) that the Pet Food Company/Veterinary Community partnership is a cause for concern. Most vets are happy to take the perks and look the other way. Thank you also for pointing out that the efficacy of these products is also questionable, lacking any real independent or long-term studies.

Once again, it needs to be pointed out that there's a reason that human Doctors are not permitted to sell medication. It's unethical, and a huge conflict of interest. And yet their veterinary counterparts are permitted to not only sell prescription medication, but also prescription foods. It's time to put an end to the double standard...

Kim June 14th, 2007 01:16:00 PM

Cindy: You make a good point on the success of 1) common sense and/or good luck in your parents' dog's case and 2) your own (I assume) smart application of sound principles to your own dogs feeding. My point on the Purina thing is that most pet owners did not know what pets needed back then and often thought they were doing right by their pets in feeding protein-exclusive diets. Indeed in Argentina, the wealthiest owners often have the worst nutritional problems in their pets. Beef is the national staple and dogs often eat nothing but. When Hill's rolled into Buenos Aires, the wealthy pets fared much better after eating $100 bags of dog food (the upcharge on overseas shipment). There's a lot that goes into a good diet and it's worth remembering that these companies' foods, much though our own homecooking may best them, are still responsible for a net positive in pet lives.

Dr. Patty Khuly June 14th, 2007 03:25:00 PM

Kim: On your last point, check out the next installment of this series.

Dr. Patty Khuly June 14th, 2007 03:42:00 PM

I recently signed up for a CE class on "geriatric canine nutrition" which is provided for veterinary technicians. The notes for the class said all study materials would be provided "free of charge by Hill's", which seemed lovely at the time (I still paid a $50 registration fee). I received my "study materials" earlier this week, and they seem to be mainly comprised of a large guidebook to all the foods Hill's produces, telling you what food to recommend to a client for which condition. The class is taught by a veterinarian, but a vet who works for Hill's.

This really annoys me, because as a vet tech student, I want to learn about nutrition. I'd actually like to specialize in nutrition. But I can't seem to learn anything other than what Hill's wants me to learn, because every time I sign up for a nutrition class, Hill's is running the show. The instructor will mention "premium" foods, but will also pooh-pooh them as being misleading and not as nutritious as Hll's. Raw diets will be mentioned in passing as a dangerous fad. Any food which hasn't been specifically run through AAFCO feeding trials is taught to be a danger to pets.

I'm trying to keep an open mind about everything, and I can tell from my own personal "feeding trials" that my pets do well on both premium foods and raw foods. I try to read all the "alternative" websites on pet nutrition, the ones run by vets who are willing to talk about things like homemade diets. They're few and far between, though. I just can't imagine any other industry being allowed to control a profession the way the pet food industry controls veterinarians. I know the fast food industry briefly had its paws (no pun intended) in education, in exhange for giving money to schools, but that only lasted a few years before anti-junk food backlash started forcing them out.

Leigh-Ann June 15th, 2007 05:15:00 AM

Leigh-Ann- also check out Whole Dog Journal. They are all over the pet nutrition issue. They are running a lot of trials themselves and they have articles on RAW as well as conventional foods. Their goal is to get at nutrition, not brands/styles of feeding.

amy June 15th, 2007 09:30:00 AM

I would argue against the Whole Dog Journal not being into brands. This is the group that puts out it's list of best brands every year! After this year's canned food list being abysmal, I stopped paying attention.

On the "best food" list - Triumph Canned (which includes "Animal Liver" and "Meat Meal" in some of their recipes, and Natural Balance Eatables (which includes "Sugar," "Caramel Colouring," and "Modified Food Starch").

WDJ used to put out a great list of products that truly were among the best... I'm not sure what the reason is for the sudden lack of scrutiny, but their most recent lists have been abysmal.

Their dry foods also show very little investigative reporting. For example, Chicken Soup and Foundations both make the list despite the fact that they are considered "bargain" foods by those in the industry, and both parent companies have been responsible for some pretty horrific recalls.

Diamond Pet Food (Chicken Soup) had possibly the second largest recall before the current one, and killed hundreds of animals with aflatoxin infected grains. Petcurean (Foundations) recalled their Go! Natural after dogs started becoming ill and experiencing organ failure. After an investigation, it was determined that the food contained 10-13X the acceptable amount of BHA. This is doubly surprising because Go! is supposed to be their ultra-premium brand, free of all artificial preservatives.

There are a half dozen other foods on the list that shouldn't be there, but mostly because they are all grain protein and no meat, or contain questionable ingredients.

If you want a website that is truly nutrition based, check out dogfoodproject.com or dogaware.com

Both of these sites are run by private individuals who don't have subscriptions to sell, but who do what they do for the love of their animals, not for the big bucks associated with all things "premium" these days.

Dr. Patty... I'm itching for the next installment... ;O)

Kim June 15th, 2007 11:09:00 AM

Problems with their lists aside, I do enjoy WDJ. I've subscribed for a couple of years now, and appreciate things like their feature articles on how to feed your pet a raw diet, and how to feed a cooked diet. I found both very helpful. I actually appreciate that WDJ does have a relationship with the pet food industry, and is influential enough to speak at the large Pet Food Forum show this past April. I think it allows them to act as a bridge between the really commercial, and everything else. They seem to fill a niche of not being totally in the pet food companys' pockets, while not being completely alternative as well. I'll tell you my philosophy: I don't want to abandon all relationships with companies like Hill's, because I want to keep an eye on them. I actually subscribe to "Petfood Industry" magazine, just so I'll know what the big guns are doing.

If we're tossing out recommendations, I suggest that anyone interested in feeding alternative diets check out an issue of Animal Wellness magazine. They sell single issues on their website. I can't vouch for the articles (in the one issue I read, I thought one particular article was totally off-base), but the advertisement section is amazing. There are so many brands of frozen raw and dehydrated pet foods that I'd never heard of, and I learned a lot by browsing their ads, and then checking out websites. It's a rare occasion where advertisements enticed me more than the articles (the "Robb Report" does that to me as well ;-)).

Leigh-Ann June 16th, 2007 07:01:00 AM

I don't understand why Vets have failed to stand up for cats and dogs and tell pet food companies like Hills that you do not feed carbohydrate laden dry food to cats and dogs since cats are obligate carnivores and dogs are largely carnivores according to recent research from Liverpool University in England. Instead Vets have taken the funding and cheap or free pet food from Hills and let them fund the veterinary schools and in effect have let them get away with producing appalling food that is causing diabetes, struvite crystals, kidney failure, calcium oxalate stones, dilated cardiomyopathy, ibd, cancer as is shown in independent vetereinary research I have. I feel the veterinary profession by condoning Hills and other pet food is betraying pets and pet owners and letting cats and dogs get illnesses they would never get if they were not fed pet food. Purina in a paper they have written say that the high incidence of kidney failure in cats and dogs in the past 10 years is probably due to the pet food companies putting acidifiers in the pet food but Vets have just let them away with this and so countless animals have suffered kidney failure because the Veterinary profession as a whole has failed to stand up for the animals and the pet owners and demand an end to acidifiers being put in pet food. If they did this it would mean dry food would have to be banned because the acidifiers are put in to counteract al the alkalinity that loading the food with carbohydrate which cats and dogs were never meant to eat causes which was found to be causing struvite crystals in cats which can kill them within 24 hours if they are not catheterised. I feel the veterinary profession as a whole is betraying the pets and pet owners by failing to tell pet owners that feeding pet food like Hills is likely to cause diabetes, struvite crystals, cancer etc. Instead the Vets make 20% profit apparently from every bag sold and get pets hooked on this terrible food. On Hills 3 of my cats got cancer, one struvite crystals and one kidney failure and cystitis and so Hills is quite literally killing cats and my Vet should never have mislead me by telling me it was the best food to feed my cats because in reality it killed my cats.

Fiona MacMillan June 18th, 2007 04:17:00 AM

Fiona: You failed to mention my own personal pet peeve: the obesity issue. (Ever read how much food they want your pet to eat? It's right on the label.) I'm with you on the feline diets, for sure, but I have yet to see basic science address it well. And that's why I want our schools to take back nutrition. but itr's a complicated issue paved with all kinds of good intentions and now institutionalized to such a degree that it's neither black nor white any more. It isn't enough to decry the issue--we actually have to create conditions whereby schools can meet the needs of pets in ways that are realistic and responsible. It's not so easy. I'm working on a Part 4 that will address the issue some more in this regard. Thanks for your comment!

Dr. Patty Khuly June 19th, 2007 10:10:00 AM

Dr. Khuly, I too am very concerned about obesity and am very pleased that Dr. Elizabeth Hodgkins DVM in her new book called "Your Cat" goes into the needless obesity and diabetes caused by feeding dry food to cats and shows how she gets cats off insulin by taking them off dry food. It is good to know that there are Vets like you and her who refuse to betray pets by condoning pet food. Dr. Hodgkins used to work for Hills but in the book goes into all the illness that feeding pet food is giving cats. Lisa Pierson DVM too is concerned about pet food as she shows at her website www.catinfo.org and in the JAVMA Dr. Kathy Sinning DVM spoke out and said that "Put simply, it is as preposterous to suggest that pets should live only on man-made dry pellets as it would be to suggest that we humaan or any other living species should live on the same". Thank goodness these wonderful Vets and you are willing to speak out for the animal. You have my complete admiration.

Fiona MacMillan September 27th, 2007 09:46:00 AM

I agree that it is a tremendous conflict of interest for vets to be selling commercial pet food. Your medical doctor would never insist that you buy diet bars for an entire lifetime, yet that is the essence of what the pet owning public is being told by their vets.

There are no long term studies proving that these products are "healthy and balanced".

Do people realize that when a "food" is submitted for AAFCO certification that no bloodwork is done on the animals in advance? So there is nothing to compare the feeding results before and after. Not to mention that all these dry foods are causing so many illnesses and poor health conditions in cats -- obesity, FD, CRD, IBD and cancer. Cats are very sensitive to toxins.

I have tried to talk to veterinarians about this and they just want to talk about a certain lot number of a certain product -- this is what the PFI was telling them to focus on, only certain lot numbers, rather than the fact that these products are not healthy and balanced, do not represent good nutrition. So the arguement about making pet food "safer" falls apart. It's like saying, "well we want to continue to eat MacDonalds crapola and we want it to be nutritious." It's an oxymoron -- the basic ingredients do not contribute to good health.

And who is AAFCO other than special interest groups like the Cattleman's Association and the Renders Association, with handfuls of US state and federal officials friendly to them thrown in?

We need to see AAFCO labelling stripped off these products. That will make an impact on the industry because then vets will have no government sanctioned justification for selling it.....

Carol Auld May 6th, 2008 07:50:00 AM

Dear Fiona,
I have just filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission citing the FRAUD and detrimental conflict of interest which is being permitted, supplying them with all the evidence via links. (I had filed with them previously, but had left out the "fraud" aspect, case in point.)

I wish to thank you, as I have read your many postings on the Internet. I do provide the link to your compiled research evidence (via Dr. Fox and Feline Outreach sites) to all the media outlets qnd consumer sites I have been contacting for over a year and a half now. You are most appreciated and I thank you profusely for all you put into that endeavor.

I wish every deceived pet owner would file a complaint. Since when is Corn, peanut hull and soy "medicine", anyways? There's no medicine in that junk! Why is a doctor of medicine even permitted to sell it? If that's not fraud, I don't know what is!

Also, take note of which practices push pet insurance most aggressively! Heck, they push EVERYTHING most aggressively, but you get the gyst :>)

Cheers, All

Meg May 20th, 2008 11:39:00 PM

Meg, you are far too kind. I cannot take any credit since I do what I do out of grief over the illness my cats got on Hills. It will not bring them back sadly but I would like to do all I can to try to stop other pets getting the needless illness they got. Even 6 years later I am still haunted and heartbroken at the memory of what happened to them. I am really impressed at everything you are doing. Things do seem to be chaning and I am very thankful for Vets like Dr. Khuly, Dr. Hodgkins DVM, Dr. Lisa Pierson DVM, Kathy Sinning DVM, Martin Goldstein DVM and Richard Pitcairn DVM, Michael Fox MRCVS and Richard Allport MRCVS because these Vets are all unafraid to speak out for the animals in regard to the harm pet food is doing. I think this is an excellent website and I really admire you Dr. Khuly. We need more Vets like you and the Vets named above.

Fiona MacMillan June 7th, 2008 12:50:00 PM

The Veterinary Times in Britain dated November 12, 2007 in an artilce on Vets selling pet food quotes Cambridge University Veterinary students James Patrick Crilly and Lorna Brokenshire as saying that pet food companies must be stopped from having access to veterinary students and says "Veterinary student James Patrick Crilly asserted that pet food manufacturers must not be allowed exclusive access to veterinary nutrition teaching in order to prevent a "dangerous monopoly" which could undermine the free market approach to improving the quality of diets. Lorna Brokenshire (also of Cambridge University Veterinary School) argues that pet food companies should not be able to sponsor nutrition lectures. She said vets should be educated, informed and freethinking". It is surprising more veterinary students do not demand an end to pet food companies fund the veterinary schools and an end to them being allowed to teach nutrition to veterianry students but I admire these students for having the courage to speak out.

Fiona July 5th, 2008 10:01:00 AM

Add Commment

Your Name:

CAPTCHA Verification