truthaboutpetfood

Thanks to one of my wonderful newsletter subscribers, the following is a true story regarding a dangerous dog toy.  Please click on the link and read the story…

http://www.thechaistory.blogspot.com/

The terrible accident that happened with this toy concerns me a great deal.  It could happen to any dog with probably numerous brands of toys.  Please check every toy you have around the house to see if it is similar in design as the toy described in the story.  My suggestion is for you to discard these toys immediately. 

The design concern is that unlike typical squeak toys – there is an open hole in the dog toy.  When the toy is chewed on - it creates a vacuum and as in this case the dogs tongue can be (was) sucked inside the toy.  A dogs jaw is very powerful and although you might think the toy is strong enough not to be chewed enough to create suction – it can happen easier than you think.  I’ve seen this type of toy design many different times and my guess is that this story is one of many similar stories. 

Check to see if any of your dog’s toys could cause a similar injury.  Also be very cautious of toys that can be easily pulled apart or torn up.  I can’t count the number of stories I’ve heard of pets swallowing large enough pieces of toys or chews that could not be passed.  An obstruction in the intestinal system could cost your friend’s life.  Another reason to also monitor what they leave you in the back yard!  Cats can get into similar problems by chewing on and eating ribbon or string (or similar) that can cause an obstruction. 

Other dog toy concerns…

I have learned over the years that rawhide dog chews do not break down in the stomach and/or intestines as well as pork hide chews. Rawhide is not as digestible as pork hide.  Dogs will tend to chew on the rawhide until it becomes soft and can swallow a piece much larger than can easily be passed.  Since rawhide is more difficult to digest, it could cause an obstruction.  There is never a guarantee that an accident won’t happen but, should your dog swallow a large piece of pork hide, the chances are better that the chew will be digested if it is pork hide versus rawhide.  They can look exactly the same so be careful – read the label closely. 

Better safe than sorry - always monitor your pet chewing on toys or anything!

Thank you Misty for sharing this story.

A recent survey from the GoodLife Recipe Pet Food company provided by mediapost.com website states that two-thirds of pet owners don’t consider cost when selecting a dog food or cat food.  Their survey states that nearly 60% of pet owners said that “natural ingredients” are the most important issue to influence a pet food purchase.  The problem for pet owners is that searching for a pet food labeled ‘Natural’ can be like finding fools gold.

AAFCO (American Association of Feed Control Officials) and the FDA has no official definition for the word ‘natural’ in pet food regulations.  ‘Natural’ on a pet food label implies the food should be free of risky chemicals, colors, or any ingredient considered treated or disguised.  You know…natural.  But instead, under current pet food regulations, any pet food manufacturer can make the claim ‘natural’ on the label, yet the food could contain many ingredients most would not consider natural; such as added chemicals, colors, and other un-natural ingredients.  Even though there are no survey results to substantiate this, my guess would be that almost every pet owner who seeks out ‘natural ingredients’ in their dog food or cat food choices, firmly believes the food is natural.  The power of advertising.

A northern California newspaper – InsideBayArea.com puts advertising of pet food into a realistic light…” Playful puppies and adorable kittens almost seem to jump out of the colorful packages, beckoning pet owners to choose their very special brands of food. Large pallets containing bags of dry food, stacks of orderly cans and rows of moist pouches often leave pet owners literally dazed and confused with the overwhelming selection.  Marketing ideas leap off the products claiming to be “organic,” to have “no by-products” and to have “real, wholesome ingredients.” All of these speak to us as ways to provide the very best for our family members. But in light of pet food recalls and concerns about pet food manufacturing, how can pet owners really know they are providing the best?”

That’s a difficult question; really knowing you are providing the best food for your dog or cat is not as easy as it should be.  It should be that a pet owner can read the pet food label claiming ‘natural’ or ‘real wholesome ingredients’ knowing that label is providing true and accurate information.  It should be that pet owners are provided with ingredient country of origin information on the label.  It should be that pet food labels clearly state if dangerous chemicals or inferior ingredients are used.  ‘Should be’ is not what ‘is’ however. 
What ‘is’ legally allowed on pet food labels:

• Unqualified claims, either directly or indirectly.
• Pictures displaying choice cuts of meat even if no meat is provided in the food.
• Misleading pet food names such as Albacore Tuna ‘Flavor’ or Sirloin Steak ‘Flavor’ – no tuna or steak is required to be in the pet food.
• And on and on…

You can imagine that dog foods and cat foods providing accurate information on the label such as ‘Chemical Preservatives inside linked to tumors and cancer’ or ‘Includes By-Products rejected for use in human food’ wouldn’t be top sellers at the pet store.  The pet food companies that use these types of ingredients are not forced by regulations to tell you; which in turn hurts the companies that wouldn’t consider using risky chemicals or inferior by-products in their foods.  One pet food might actually contain natural ingredients yet because of existing rules and regulations – they can’t tell you anything different than the pet food who claims natural while using added colors and risky chemicals.  All pet food labels must stay within particular parameters – hiding the truth from pet owners.  Hiding the truth of quality ingredients and hiding the truth of risky ingredients. 

Pet food regulations need to be changed – yesterday.  As the research shows the majority of pet owners are actively seeking out dog and cat foods that are natural.  That’s great news and would be beneficial to millions of pets if only someone could decide what ‘natural’ means.  But since AAFCO and the FDA give pet owners no official definition for ‘natural’ – pet owners might as well be searching for Fools Gold.  Current pet food regulations provide ‘Fools Gold’ and ‘Natural Pet Food’ to have an equal value. 

A recent article in the Leaf Chronicle, Clarksville, TN newspaper has got the fur flying.  The Leaf Chronicle reported on euthanizing procedures for the county Animal Control.  Horrendous standard procedures flatly euthanize particular breeds regardless of the dog’s history or circumstances.  Simply because of their breed they are issued a death sentence without any chance of redemption.  The shelter reports that 40% of pure bred dogs are euthanized.  My guess is those numbers are greatly under reported.
                       
Remember Michael Vick and his collection of fighting pit bulls?  The Humane Society and PETA both lobbied to have Vick’s fighting dog collection euthanized.  However some intelligent pet lovers fought a little harder and won the right to rehabilitate these dogs.  The result was nothing less than amazing.  The dogs were provided with love and responsible training and are now loving family members living the life they deserve.  Here’s a link to a photo montage of Vick’s rehabilitated dogs:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/specials/interactives/
_national/rescued_dogs/index.html?SITE=NVREN

To flatly give a death sentence just because of an animals breed is not only unjust – it is down right irresponsible and cold hearted.  Animal Control Shelters that practice such breed discrimination (most do) are lazy and a useless waste of tax dollars.  Your tax dollars not only pay the salary of the county Animal Control director who decides the shelter death sentence protocol and employees who kill without just cause, but your tax dollars also pay to have the remains of thousands of euthanized animals removed from the shelter.  This ‘service’ is not cheap.  Euthanized animals cannot be buried in land fills – their chemical laden bodies pose a risk to wildlife who might consume the carcass.  The euthanizing drug – pentobarbital – has been responsible for the death of many species of wildlife including Bald Eagles who have consumed the euthanized animal.  Sadly, euthanized pets are rendered – cooked – and the end ingredients become part of various products; rumors have existed for years that euthanized pets become pet food ingredients.

Back in 1994 journalist Van Smith of Baltimore City Paper published one of the first of only a handful of reports on the elusive rendering industry.  Valley Proteins provided Smith with a tour of ‘pick-ups’ and the Valley Proteins plant.  The paper published his heart breaking report showing before and after photos.  Before photos were barrels of euthanized dogs and cats, after photos was an employee with a handful of finished product the article states is on it’s way to becoming meat and bone meal (a common pet food/treat ingredient).  After the article was published, journalist Van Smith was overwhelmed with comments from outraged pet owners, various media interview requests, and he later became the first witness to take the stand for Oprah in her lawsuit with the cattle industry.  If you have the stomach for it, Van Smith’s article is still available online: http://www.citypaper.com/about/vansmith.asp.  Scroll to the bottom of the page for two links to ‘What’s Cookin’.  A warning – the pictures are startling.  Also, here is the link to Smith’s recount of his experience with the Oprah trial in Texas: http://www.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=3727. 

Rumors continue that end ingredients from the processing of euthanized animals become ingredients in pet food.  The pet food industry denies that rendered euthanized pets become pet food.  To date there is no evidence that proves or denies the rumors.  The FDA tested dog food in 2000 and results proved positive for pentobarbital (the euthanizing drug) in many brands of pet foods.  The FDA website still provides the pentobarbital in dog food report at http://www.fda.gov/cvm/FOI/DFreport.htm.  Scroll to the bottom of the first page, click on Appendix to read further test results.  The bottom of the Appendix page provides another link to the list of pet foods tested and the results.  We know for fact that pentobarbital is in pet foods; or to be completely accurate we know for fact that pentobarbital was found in pet foods when the FDA last tested for it back in 2000.  My own personal campaign to DNA test pet foods for remains of pets has yet to discover a lab capable of the task, but last year I did speak to a scientist (Dr. Kupiec of DNA Solutions Research Labs) who shared with me his lab ‘frequently tests pet food for pentobarbital’.  So being completely accurate again, we also know that pet foods continue to be tested for pentobarbital privately.  But there is still the underlying concern of the species source of the pentobarbital we know is in some pet foods. 

Published in the January/February 2004 FDA newsletter are the findings of the Center for Veterinary Management (sub category of the FDA) testing results trying to determine the species source of pentobarbital in pet food.  The conclusion: “The results of this study demonstrated a lack of correlation between species identity and the presence of pentobarbital in dog food.”  Please note the words ‘lack of correlation’ between species identity.  Even though the CVM results proved no correlation or no connection of pentobarbital to a specific animal source they stated dog or cat DNA was not the source.  Confusing isn’t it?  The only solid information the CVM study discovered was that the common pet food ingredient ‘Animal Fat’ was found most likely to contain pentobarbital; in other words the pet food ingredient ‘Animal Fat’ is the most likely of all pet food ingredients to contain the remains of a euthanized animal and the drug used to end their life.  We still don’t know what type of euthanized animal.  Here is the link to the CVM findings: http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Jan-Feb04Vet.htm.  Scroll down the page to the article titled ‘CVM Scientists Develop PCR Test to Determine Source of Animal Products in Feed, Pet Food’. 

Regardless of where the remains of millions and millions of euthanized dogs and cats end up, the fact remains millions and millions of homeless animals are killed in the U.S. every year.  One organization – one man specifically – has proven time and time again the killing does not have to take place as many Animal Control and shelter directors insist.  The man is Nathan Winograd, his organization No Kill Advocacy Center - http://www.nokilladvocacycenter.org - has proven the killing can be stopped.  His book Redemption should be a must read for every Animal Control and shelter director; especially a must read for those that sign the Animal Control directors pay check.  Another warning – Redemption is challenging to read for those with a soft heart.  The profound evidence that Mr. Winograd provides of needless dog and cat killings is hard to take.  But it’s one of those books that every pet lover should read despite the reality of his words.  This book provides a solution to anyone willing to listen.  No animal shelter or county animal control should euthanize because of breed.  The Tennessee article can be read here: http://www.theleafchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080811/NEWS01/808110332.  Perhaps if Animal Control Shelters and other shelters who needlessly euthanize pets could learn to make some changes, open up to a newer, proven effective way of operation, perhaps there would be less of a concern of euthanized animals in pet food.  It could be a win/win for pet food and for pets if only someone would listen. 

Mars Petcare issued a limited recall of Pedigree dog food.  The recall is limited to Southern California and Las Vegas, NV.  A “component” of the food that tested positive for Salmonella contamination “was inadvertently shipped to our
Tracy, California facility and used in the production of 100 bags of PEDIGREE(R) Complete Nutrition Small Crunchy Bites with best buy dates of 07/2009.”  Products recalled were shipped to California and Nevada.If you or any pet owners you know that live in the recall area who feed Pedigree dog food, please alert them.  Here is the link to the press release of the recall: http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/mars-petcare-us-voluntarily-issues/story.aspx?guid=%7B32A1D75C-B54D-473E-A728-20CE0974B68F%7D&dist=hppr

This pet food recall has everything to do with lack of quality control – not specific to Pedigree or Mars Petcare, but specific to the pet food industry itself.  Similar circumstances caused the December 2005 dog food recall of Diamond Pet Foods.  Just like Pedigree’s Salmonella contaminated component was ‘inadvertently shipped’ to manufacturing instead of destroyed, safety procedures at Diamond Pet Foods were in place, they just were not followed.  In Diamond’s case it was the detection of a deadly mold that was overlooked.  Over 100 dogs died because someone did not follow testing and quality control standards. 

AAFCO – American Association of Feed Control Officials – is the organization responsible for the rules of pet food manufacturing.  Currently pet food manufacturing quality control guidelines – developed by AAFCO - are only ‘recommended’.  There are NO uniform nationwide quality control regulations that pet food manufacturers are mandated to follow.  This new Pedigree ‘limited recall’ and Diamond Pet Foods recall of 2005 (and who knows how many in the future) could have been prevented if AAFCO and the FDA would step up and accept the responsibility to develop and implement uniform quality control standards that every pet food manufacturer is required by law to follow. 

Pet owners are left with a side stepping responsibility dance between AAFCO and the FDA.  When a problem arises and someone tries to hold them accountable for lack of proper regulations, each organization has their standard reply.  AAFCO’s avoidance dance is claiming the organization ‘only recommends’ their pet food regulations, ingredient definitions, and manufacturing guidelines to the FDA and each U.S. state’s Department of Agriculture.  The FDA’s avoidance dance is typically not enough resources and not enough staff. 

Every company regardless if their product is pet food or toilet paper – makes mistakes.  However when the product is food for our furry family members, recommended quality control just doesn’t cut it.  FDA and AAFCO…perhaps it’s time to stop making recommendations and make some strict laws instead.  Perhaps if pet food manufacturing quality control was mandated, along with some stiff penalties and fines for mistakes – fewer mistakes would happen.  Whenever there are police equipped with radar guns on the highway, amazingly everyone slows down.  It’s time for radar guns in the pet food manufacturing plants.  

That’s what the first successful cloning of a dog is being called; the Booger project.  Booger was the cloned dog’s name.  Five cloned puppies were recently born at a lab in
South Korea – making them the first commercially cloned pets. 

I lost a great four legged love last year.  If someone gave me the opportunity to have ‘him’ again, I think I’d jump at the chance.  But since this is the ‘Booger’ project and not the ‘Cowboy’ project, I have my reservations.  I have worries of health problems enhanced from the cloning process.  I have concerns that the new ‘Boogers’ will somehow be lifeless look-a-likes of the original Booger.   

This all seems too much like a cheap science fiction movie gone bad.  The cloned ‘Boogers’ grow up to ‘booger up’ the world.  I guess it just boils down to something I don’t quite understand and that we don’t know enough about…yet.  While the Korean lab claims it has no plans to go into the pet cloning business, my guess is that regardless of price pet owners will be lining up to have a copy of a lost love.   

This is not for me.  Someday I’ll get another Border Collie like Cowboy; but it won’t be a clone of Cowboy.  Cowboy was unique – he could not be replicated in any lab.  And the next dog I get will be unique as well; and will probably steal my heart as well too.  No lab can clone love. 

I live in Florida; it’s hot here in the summer.  Yesterday while on some errands, in a Walgreens parking lot I found a van with a dog inside – in the middle of the day.  The windows were open – but c’mon – it’s August!  I hung around for ten minutes or so, walked back into the Walgreens and asked around – no one seemed to know whose van and whose dog it was.  Long story short, the owner came out and the dog was fine. 

My dogs want to ‘go’ with me every time I leave the house too.  But it’s summer, and unless I’m just going to the drive through at the bank they have to stay home.  Yes, it makes them sad when I leave without them but again I have to repeat this…it’s summer.   

Many years ago I worked with another trainer who had a great saying…’Being a parent and a pet parent – isn’t a popularity contest’.  In other words sometimes you have to do things that does NOT make your pet happy.  But you just gotta do it.  Sometimes you have to leave them at home even though they look sad.  

Don’t take your pet in the car with you in the hot summer or cold winter.  Leave them at home.  Keep remembering it’s not a popularity contest – it’s about what is best for them, not how much they like you. 

Recently the AMVA (American Veterinary Medical Association) held its annual meeting; reports of the topics discussed are discouraging.  Per an article reported in MedicalNewToday.com several veterinary speakers clearly continue to support major pet food manufacturers.  Dr. Sally C. Perea a veterinarian who consults with the pet food industry stated that smaller, specialty pet food companies may not be as safe as the larger pet food companies “because they may not have the same number of safety checks as a larger company.”  Dr. Jeannie Perron stated the 2007 pet food recall – the largest pet food recall in history of the world – prompted a “knee jerk” reaction from Congress and the new mandated pet food safety regulations might “not necessarily be well thought out reaction, to add to pending legislation provisions directed at pet food.” 

Ahhh c’mon Doctors.  For one, there is NO evidence that smaller pet food manufacturers are not just as safe as the ‘big dogs’.  In fact, history has proven they are MORE safe.  Smaller pet food companies

that do not have the extreme high profit margins, that cannot afford a multi-million dollar a year advertising budget, must rely on word of mouth advertising for their continued success.  Their existence depends on continued quality products.  Many of these folks are doing a fantastic job producing quality human grade, no import, health promoting pet foods.  And…excuse me?  Congress’s plan to reform the safety of human a pet food a ‘knee jerk reaction’?  That is clearly an endorsement of major pet food manufacturing wishing to continue to keep the pet owning public in the dark.  Nope, that doesn’t float either.

I’m not talking about your vet – but many vets are deep in the pockets of major pet food producers.  And it’s a shame.  For any veterinarian to recommend a dog food or cat food that is full of by-products and chemical preservatives – there is no excuse.  If veterinarians would stand up to the pet food companies that produce these less than quality foods and insist on healthier options – changes would happen in the industry.  Every practicing veterinarian could choose to offer their clients a line of premium dog foods and cat foods (human grade, no risky imports, no risky chemicals), and in turn provide their clinic with a nice additional income. 

Unfortunately most don’t.  This leaves their faithful clients who have learned the ‘truth’ about by-products, imports, and chemical preservatives in a quandary; to follow their vet’s advice or go it alone with their pet food choices.  For many pet owners, that is a struggle.  Many even hide from their vet the fact they have changed their pet’s diet to healthier options.  It’s tough to challenge the ‘Doc’.  If your pet is on an Rx diet that was prescribed to address the needs of an illness, you must stay on that diet regardless of the quality of the pet food.  The only other alternative would be – with your vet’s approval – find a qualified pet nutritionist who can develop a home made diet that still addresses the concerns of the illness.  But remember, illness comes first – nutrition second.  Your goal is to fend off illness with quality nutrition long before there is an issue.

Today.com has graciously invited me to begin a pet/pet food blog.  Let’s make this something wonderful.  A place to learn and a place to air your concerns.   So tell me, what do you want to learn about?  Want do you want information on?

What do you think about Rachael Ray gettng into pet food?  Think it’s a good idea or should she stick to ‘people’ food?

Here are the first six ingredients of Rachael Ray’s new line of dog food: Beef, Chicken Meal, Brewers Rice, Corn Meal, Soybean Meal, Animal Fat (Preserved with Mixed Tocopherols).  The food does have proteinated minerals for better absorption; does not have probiotics.  What do you think? 

Ok, here’s what I think.  In the first six ingredients (the majority of the food) the only two ingredients I like are the first two.  Beef  is a quality ingredient, and so is Chicken Meal (as long as they are a human grade).  The next three ingredients – Brewers Rice, Corn Meal, and Soybean Meal – I’m not real fond of.  They are not what I would consider red flag ingredients – they just don’t provide much in the way of health promoting nutrition.  And there is always the concern of a pet food manufacturer’s quality control with grains.  Grains are prone to a deadly mold called aflatoxin; when you see them in a pet food, there is always a worry if the manufacturer does proper testing to detect the mold.  And the last ingredient is Animal Fat.  I don’t like this ingredient at all.  The biggest reason is this particular common pet food ingredient has been determined by the FDA to be most likely to contain pentobarbital – which means it is most likely to contain some type of euthanized animal.   

I also think there is no excuse for a pet food not to contain probiotics.  With what modern science tells us – probiotics are proven to help keep the digestive system in healthy working order; which in turn helps keep the immune system strong.  This food has no probiotics.  I did not call to learn if the ingredients are all
U.S. or imported, nor learn if the meat is human grade or pet grade.  Lastly, the food contains Menadione Sodium Bisulfite Complex (Source of Vitamin K activity) – this is a synthetic vitamin with some pretty important controversy attached to it.   

I guess the best thing I can say about Rachael Ray’s new pet food line is that a portion of the proceeds will go to her charity – Rachael’s Rescue; an organization helping animal shelters across the
U.S.  That’s a good move.  Besides the charity, I’m disappointed with the pet food.  Here’s a link to her rescue site: http://www.rachaelray.com/pets/index.php.