Concerning for pro Raw people

[PuggyMom]

This was posted on my facebook feed. AVMA may be voting on policy to stop the public from feeding raw food to their pets...

http://www.truthaboutpetfood.com/articles/very-bad-news-for-raw-feeders.html

Maybe with a big public response we can get them to reconsider.

[lmcpug]

 

now if that doesn't smack of favoritism to Big Pet Food Companys 

I will send in my vitriolic denouncement of the AVMA vote!

I have never, ever, ever heard of anyone getting sick
handling raw meat with pets or pets getting humans sick after
eating raw food!

WOW!  just totally stunned here!

[blanche]

You beat me to it.  I was just coming here to post that link.

Very very discouraging.

[dvm2012]

I think the AVMA's statement isn't such that it's forcing people to stop.  It's merely "discouraging" people to feed raw.  It may sound strong to pro-raw foodies but I think what they're trying to prevent is individuals who feed raw improperly and maybe prepare it such that it affects young children and immunocompromised individuals.  That said, you can still expose yourself to bacteria via cooked kibble (ie: Eukanuba incident).  While you are all doing great with your raw food diets and preparing them properly and keeping clean, you'd be surprised how many people don't.  

Really, this doesn't even only apply to pet foods.  Public health issues a warning for people to not eat sushi or consume any form of raw meats.  In a lot of restaurants, when "raw"/"undercooked" meats are served, the consumer warning clearly states, "Consuming raw or undercooked meats, poultry, seafood, shellfish, or eggs may increase your risk of foodborne illness."  Do we still do it?   Heck yes.  (Ever had medium rare steak, steak tartare...or sushi?).  But for a pregnant woman or immunocompromised person, they really should actually steer clear more from raw meats and that statement ensures that they've been warned and therefore, cannot sue for whatever happens (ie: if the child ends up with toxoplasma). 

The stakes for human medicine are high and humans can sue anyone for just about anything and now it's spreading onto vet medicine.  So the AVMA statement, I believe, isn't out to target anyone or be in cahoots with anybody but rather, to protect themselves.

It's unfortunate that pet nutrition has gotten to be such a fiesty topic and I wish people would stop fighting on forums and just lay out the facts they've learned and listen to each other's opinions respectfully rather than push any one belief (raw vs holistic vs prescription) at anyone and start a fight.  As a matter of fact, my wall on Facebook was pretty much invaded today before I could even post my response re: a photo I posted of good foods vs bad foods issued by breeders.  Unfortunately, it left two individuals extremely upset with each other, one of whom actually just walked off before I could actually even state my take on it.  

[Gerk]

It's unfortunate that pet nutrition has gotten to be such a fiesty topic and I wish people would stop fighting on forums and just lay out the facts they've learned and listen to each other's opinions respectfully rather than push any one belief (raw vs holistic vs prescription) at anyone and start a fight.  As a matter of fact, my wall on Facebook was pretty much invaded today before I could even post my response re: a photo I posted of good foods vs bad foods issued by breeders.  Unfortunately, it left two individuals extremely upset with each other, one of whom actually just walked off before I could actually even state my take on it.  

That would be me that walked off.  I tried to ask what I thought was a reasonable question (of you) but one of your friends got incredibly snarky about the whole situation and I had to leave the discussion before I got nasty about it all.  She decided to completely ignore anything valid I had to say (such as breed specific issues, allergies, quality ingredients vs lots of fillers with added nutrients, and bioavailability) and instead took pot shots at the nutritionists I've consulted with and took a real holier-than-thou attitude about it because she's had some veterinary training.  I don't think she would have been willing to concede in the slightest that any of the food on that list may have indeed been a bad choice (like Kibble's n Bits!).

With your experiences with pugs specifically I know that you "get it" in terms of some of the things I was trying to bring up in regards to food allergies and things like grains and pugs not always being a good combination so I apologize for causing such a ruckus, but your friend seems to have a pretty big chip on her shoulder and most definitely a know-it-all attitude and I had to leave the discussion before I got nasty with her.  I also unfriended you so that I couldn't even see the discussion any longer so I have no idea how she responded to my last statements -- nor do I want to know to be honest.

I'll just agree to disagree with her and have noted her name for future reference -- I would NEVER take any of my pets to her for diagnosis or treatment given her response to something like this.  I understand that she has "professional" training, but all the training in the world can't compensate for the refusal to learn something new or the ignorance to realize that decades of experience may actually count for something.  I take a very active part in my pets (and my own) health care and do a ton of research on all fronts -- not because I wan't to be -- how was it put "Dr. Google" ... but because I want to understand the upsides, downsides, risks and anything related that I can.  I'm a need to know kind of person and always will be.

[dvm2012]

The friend of mine actually isn't a veterinarian.  I can probably guarantee that at least 90% of my colleagues from my class are very well trained to not be snarky on forums and public places or take a dive at head-on collision with clients.  So this doesn't mean we're faking it up in front of clients but rather, at school, we're taught to lay out the facts in a very neutral way and to be respectful of other people's opinions but in return, we expect other people to be respectful on our takes as well and it seems like initially, that's where the conversation on my wall was headed until the insanity started...and I got home to an exploded wall...lol. 

The nutrition training in school (at least at our school) is very much quite different from a decade back with pet nutrition courses available in undergrad and then training from board certified non-sponsored and Phd animal nutritionists throughout vet college and a lot of training should you decide to pursue that in your final year - which I did.  While a lot of you seem already aware about this, I'd also like to put it out there that our education is NOT funded by big food companies (ie: Purina, Hill's, Iams, etc.) - but whoever knows of this "Hill's education trust fund for vet students", please let me know b/c I'd absolutely love for them to pay for my hefty student loans back! "I promise I'll sell only their food forever and ever and EVER"...kidding. 

 

[Gerk]

LOL. 

Ok, I'm glad you took this ok as it had nothing to do with you (aside from the fact that we did it all over your wall).  I was hoping for some good discourse and to see what you (and other vet students/grads) felt about the stuff I asked about and was more than willing to take it all as a learning experience and be open about it until it went south.

In the past, or at least I was told this was the case, there was sponsorship from Hill's for the nutrition parts of the course at UofG -- my previous vet and my current vet both told me that they learned very little about nutrition aside from things like "This is the Hill's diet to use for this type of situation".  It also sounds like neither took any additional optional courses on nutrition but I'm VERY glad to hear that's no longer the case and glad that you took the additional training available.  Also worth noting my vet sells nothing but Hill's exclusively and tend to push it as the end-all and be-all of pet foods and are "sponsored" by Hill's.  While I respect what Hill's does and all the work they put into things it's not the food for my guys (but I did a lot of reading and consulting with others before I came to that conclusion -- I didn't exclude it because it was on someone's list), but I respect other's needs and wants for their pets, and lastly it's certainly MUCH better than other things on that list like Kibbles and Bits or your other typical grocery store pet food!  On the same front I don't personally eat a lot of things that are processed or use them when I cook either.

Finally I just wanted to add that I think it's important for people to do the research for the needs of their pets and not just take whatever list someone hands you as gospel!  So in principal I agree with what you posted on that front.

[blanche]

I have to apologize as your name has gone out of my head, I have Adrienne in my brain--so correct me or confirm if I'm right or wrong.

Here's my concern and my ultimate bitch about the AVMA decision--it should be even handed and not just focused on raw.  The most recent bout of salmonella, e.coli poisonings affecting humans came from dog kibble.  Yes, raw food can have dangers, but frankly so can lettuce (recall recently on that) purchased from a grocery store.  It's the lack of even handedness that concerns me, dvm.  If they'd put a warning about ALL the food hazards and not just the raw, I'd have been fine, but that's not what happened.

And I'm afraid to say that I have had vets refuse to take my animals as clients because I feed raw.  On some levels, I'd rather know that they feel that strongly and have them refuse, but it is still a refusal of service based on what I feed my dogs. 

And yes, food is a very touchy subject.  And a frustrating one.  My Tank is currently suffering from what we believe may be IBD.  And yes, he's raw fed.  But I stopped the raw as I felt it was possibly too hard on his system and given the touchiness of the geriatric gut and his multiple issues, I decided to stop the raw and home cook for him.  I had a VERY unpleasant discussion with a specialist who told me that he HAD to eat the prescription diet or he would get worse and worse.  When I pointed out that the vet diet prescribed for Tank is loaded with many many things he is allergic or sensitive to, I was essentially told that I was a food crank and was spouting malarkey.  I didn't get into a fight with the vet as I saw no point.  However, I was pretty insulted.  And I was pretty upset that I was accused of neglecting my dog.  The specialist basically told me I had caused the IBD by feeding raw. 

So some of us have pretty good reasons for being pretty touchy about food.  I see way too many animals come through my house who have been fed vet diets and have paid for it.  I don't think ALL vet diets are bad, but I don't think they are the only foods out there and would like to see some more openness about feeding alternatives.  I have been lucky that my vet has been decent about it with me.  She doesn't like raw, but also admits she doesn't know much about it, and that I have some of the healthiest geriatric dogs in her practice who also mostly still have their teeth.  But I've been told by more than one vet and vet tech that I'm going to kill my dogs by feeding raw. 

[lmcpug]

I also add the fact that I have 2 seniors who made it
to 1 month shy of 19 and another heading toeards his 18
year.
They rarely have ever needed to go to the vets excepting
yearly visits.
I firmly believe that their homemade RAW diets have made a huge
impact on their longevity and super health!
I too have run into Vets who argue the fact that I am harming my
guys. BUT the fact is excluding Bubbas venture into CCD ... he is as
healthy as a 10 yr old pug and not only that Abi and Ada are at and
maintaining optimal weight and healthieness too!
Their coats are soft as silk and their eyes clear, bright and shiny!

One must ask ourselves this question "What was food for both canine
and feline before processed foods came along??"

So to all of a sudden decide to ban RAW because supposedly people
getting sick..... hogwash!
Personally I believe that the large kibble industry is behind this move!
They are losing ground and have come up with some diabolical
reason people are being harmed by an industry that is challenging
them. Not to mrntion biting into their profits!!

[dvm2012]

Again, I don't think they are *banning* raw per se.  They're discouraging it because there are truly idiots out there who can't handle raw meat properly.  Yes, a lot of you have a reason to be touchy about this subject but I guess that goes for us too.  Although we've seen many people who are able to prepare and handle raw foods properly, we've also seen way too many who haven't been able to.  Because we're a bunch of people who work at clinics, we always seen a lot of the bad over the good because short of annual wellness checkups, the other dogs come in because they're not feeling well.  

So yes, it's frustrating that you've met a bunch of people who've told you that raw is going to kill your dog, but I think someone eventually has to take the high road when the conversation tips towards an ugly point whether it be the client or the vet.  And really, I think the vet should first, which I understand doesn't always happen, just so as long as the client doesn't tell us that she leaves her raw meat out on a cutting board throughout the day and then serves it to her animals at the end of the day.  Have we heard if such insanity and stupidity...oh yes we have.  But for as long as people are going to fight about this topic, it's just going to get uglier.  And I just feel that BOTH vets and clients should really start being nice and respectful to each other about this and keep an open mind towards each other without either one lashing out when one respectfully disagrees (and justifies why) with the other.  I think ultimately, I always list the pros and cons of EACH diet and leave it up to the owner for them to decide what they want to do with good records (unlike clients, we can get sued if something goes wrong...) on my part as long as their dog isn't in a bad physiological state at the time of presentation due to diet, in my exam room.  

[lmcpug]

Too true Adrienne,
there are both sides of the coin or many facets!

Those who do not do, due diligence when going into RAW feeding and
those who are also just pro kibble.
There are many variations to this argument however......
it should NOT be up to any agency to "ban" a particular
food product. That is too empowering.

More, an agency should be educating and doing their best to provide ample
information on both the good and bad to both kibble and RAW feeding.

Kibble only came into production within the last 60 or 70 yrs and
only because people wanted something easier to deal with as thier lives
got busier.

Kibble is by far, not a proper diet. It has come a long way since
its origins and over the last few years but all in all it is still processed
and therefore does lose nutritional value.
It must be processed at high temps and a lot of what manufacturers put
in ie Vitamins and Supplements are and can be destroyed by the hi temps
that it is produced under. Therefore, making this part of the kibble moot as
far as a health option for canines.
Hence the reason RAW feeding started to become popular for a lot of people.
Whether these people did their research or not.

We , on this forum are actually quite lucky to have a lot of people
on here who have researched and done due diligence.
There is are many variations of RAW feeding information,
on here for anyone going into RAW feeding.
They have back up with being able to ask questions and receive educated, researched and
put to the test replies.

Anyhow, again there are many sides of the coin. It is an ongoing educational forum.
Much like educating people on responsible breeding and adoption.

[blanche]

I don't disagree, Adrienne.  You are inclined to see what happens when people do things wrong.  And I get that people will go to the grocery store, buy a bunch of chicken wings, fling them on the floor and think "Dinner for the dogs!".  

I just feel that so many people point their fingers at raw without also acknowledging the huge issues of the kibble world==and that is the one that is often viewed as "the best option".  

And I didn't think the AVMA was banning raw--although I do not doubt they'd like to.  And I know that it was a controversial topic as one of my two vets (I see both a traditional and a homeopathic one) was entirely opposed to the statement made by the AVMA.

I try very hard to take the high road.  I am not absolutely wedded to only one type of feeding.  But I find it to be a struggle sometimes.  I do hope that you are correct in the new vets coming forward being more informed.  That would be a huge blessing in many ways.  Not just to the animals and their owners, but to the vet medicine world generally.

And if anyone has a sure fire way to get tapioca out of a dog's hair, let me know.  Tank is doing well on his new diet, but tapioca is a thing apart when it comes to adhesiveness.....

[lmcpug]

baking soda and water..... perhaps??

poor Tank
new alias: Tapioca Tank


and yes, I agree, on your statement too Blanche!
Feeding an animal has to be according to not only budget but time constraints, life style,
and education!
There ARE better kibble brands on the market today than ever before and again; it
all boils down to whether the pet friend, is a pro active pet owner or not and education.
Always education and researching information that is available in abundance everywhere!

Unfortunately, people take forever to change their attitudes towards animals, as we see
with BYB's and animal cruelty cases. Same goes for feeding an animal. Takes time to
educate for the betterment of all animals.

I DO believe that the new generation of Veterinarians and Technicians emerging from
their schooling, are better informed and will do research on, new concepts, whether
it is diet related or health, they seem to be more open to the homeopathic approach!
My Vet who graduated some 13 yrs ago, was even at that time, interested in alternative approaches.
It takes time to change attitudes.

[PuggyMom]

I just wanted to add to this conversation. I'm pleased that there is more up to date nutritional information available for veterinarians at OVC. I was told the other day by a student at U of G that there is actually a veterinary nutritionist on staff which is great. There's even a club for OVC students now that are interested in Alternative Medicine Although the club is small there are more students all the time that are showing interest in different alternative therapies which I find very promising.
I'm sad to say that presently at the Ridgetown Vet Tech program this is not the case. The nutrition course I took 1 year ago was so outdated. There was some very old information given to us. When I told the vet I worked for some of the stuff in our manual she was flabbergasted. I was pretty disappointed as I have a special interest in nutrition. I found I learned nothing new from the course and I learned more from my own research and from the many nutritional seminars I have attended as a pets store and veterinary employee over the years.
I'm in the alternative delivery program so there are only about 30 people in my year. Of the 30, only 3 of us had any experience with alternative therapies, raw diets, blood titres to measure virus immunity etc. I was also dismayed to find that there are already some students who have very strong negative opinions to these topics. In most cases this was due to attitudes they had experienced in clinic.
I agree that vets do often see more of the irresponsible people that feed an unbalanced raw diet. I have seen dogs so badly constipated due to the over consumption of raw bones and nothing else. There's always going to be people that try to take short cuts, try to cut costs and in general live in conditions that are not appropriate for preparing a raw diet for their pets. I now work in a clinic where we promote raw and raw education. We give our clients lots of information and support on proper handling of raw and we have a lot of success with our program. We have many dogs and cats on raw that are thriving not just surviving. Many of our clients got their pet's allergies and food sensitivities to decrease or cease with a change to a raw or cooked diet we formulated for them in conjunction with the appropriate supplements.
I just think a veterinary practice is not going that extra mile for their clients to just refuse treatment to raw fed dogs. I think it's up to the staff to educate their self (there's lots of raw companies that offer webinars or reps that will come in for lunch and learns) on the different pet diets out there. Medi Cal and Hills are not the only foods out there anymore so that shouldn't be the only foods that clinicians are comfortable with. I realize that there is so much information to stay up to date with for vets and techs but I think to just tell clients we don't agree with what they are feeding if we don't have all the facts isn't fair.
I just feel that diet and health go hand in hand. If vets don't educate their clients about what and how to feed pets, then the client will find the info from pet food stores, internet, groomers, friends etc. Some of this information may be helpful, but a lot of it may not be accurate or potentially harmful. I think that if other clinics start to get the facts about non kibble diets (cooked, raw, cooked or raw dehydrated, or freeze dried) they will see the potential benefits or in some cases pitfalls. If we are all more open minded as pet professionals it's only win win for clients and their pets. Clients won't feel anxiety about talking to their vet about their pets diet and may even be more honest with their veterinarian. We've had some clients come as far as an hour away to our clinic because they know we are open to alternative feeding practices.
In the future hopefully more clinics will keep an open mind because I don't think that alternative diets are just a fad, I'm certain they are here to stay (regardless of the position the AVMA has taken).