More Myths

Animal Scene - - VET VISIT -

Busted!

In a study of in a study of 278 cases of food al­lergy in dogs where the prob­lem $ * beef was far and away the big­gest cul­prit (95 cases). Dairy was num­ber two at 55 cases. Wheat came in third with 42 cases. Soy $ * +0 6 * % (https://www.petmd.com/blogs/nu­tri­tion­nuggets/dr-coates/2015/july/truth-about­food-al­ler­gies-dogs-32888) In fact, pro­tein sources are more of­ten to blame than grains. Beef, dairy, chicken, egg, lamb, * % * $ re­spon­si­ble for 231 food al­ler­gies, while wheat, corn, and rice com­bined for only 54. (Some dogs were al­ler­gic to more than one in­gre­di­ent, which is why th­ese num­bers to­tal more than 278.)

Busted!

Grain-free di­ets are one of the largest grow­ing seg­ments of the pet food mar­ket. More and more pet own­ers are choos­ing th­ese di­ets, which are billed as more nat­u­ral and less likely to cause health prob­lems and al­ler­gies. It all sounds great—ex­cept that those claims are not true. (http://now.tufts.edu/ ar­ti­cles/grain-free-di­ethealth­ier-my-dogs-and­cats) You must now know that sim­ply be­cause a sub­stance is nat­u­ral does not mean that it is safe and good for health. Many physi­cians ad­vo­cated cig­a­rette smok­ing in the 40s to the 60s be­cause to­bacco was nat­u­ral­ly­oc­cur­ring in na­ture. Then, there­fore, by log­i­cal de­duc­tion it must be safe, right? Wrong. (https://ar­chive.org/de­tails/to­bac­co_hyr04d00) Busted! Huh? No. Cats are clas­si­fied as strict car­nivors- not dogs. Plant ma­te­rial is more & $ * so her­bi­vores have much longer in­testines. And dogs, like om­ni­vores, fall some­where in be­tween, with an in­testi­nal length just slightly longer than the cat, so it makes sense that & om­niv­o­rous in this is­sue

Busted!

The AVMA dis­cour­ages the feed­ing to cats and dogs of any an­i­mal source pro­tein that has not first been sub­jected to a process to elim­i­nate pathogens be­cause of the risk of ill­ness to cats and dogs as well as hu­mans. Cooking or pas­teur­iza­tion through the ap­pli­ca­tion of heat un­til the pro­tein reaches an in­ter­nal tem­per­a­ture ad­e­quate to de­stroy path­o­genic or­gan­isms has been the tra­di­tional method used to elim­i­nate pathogens in an­i­mal­source pro­tein, al­though the AVMA rec­og­nizes that newer tech­nolo­gies and other meth­ods such as ir­ra­di­a­tion are con­stantly be­ing de­vel­oped and im­ple­mented. (https:// www.avma.org/kb/ Re­sources/faqs/pages/ Raw-pet-foods-andthe-avma-pol­icy-faq. aspx) And al­though we may not find such a wee-de­fined ad­vice from the PVMA, my po­si­tion on the mat­ter is to err on the side of cau­tion and do no harm to my pa­tient. That be­ing said, how did the AVMA make a cat­e­gor­i­cal list and not an ar­bi­trary one? I quote: “It only ad­dresses raw or un­der­cooked an­i­mal­source pro­tein, which in­cludes meat or prod­ucts from chick­ens (in­clud­ing eggs), tur­keys, cows, pigs, sheep, fish, deer, & * sources. It also in­cludes raw, un­pas­teur­ized eggs and milk. And more % * the need for elim­i­nat­ing pathogens from th­ese di­ets if they are to be fed to pets.” Mar­ket­ing is the pri­mary ad­vo­cate for “all nat­u­ral, raw, or­ganic food.” Their rea­son is that “feed­ing raw di­ets pro­vides nat­u­ral en­zymes and other sub­stances that may be al­tered or de­stroyed by cooking. How­ever, proof for th­ese % % & cur­rently re­stricted to tes­ti­mo­ni­als, and no pub­lished peer-re­viewed stud­ies ex­ist to sup­port claims made by raw diet ad­vo­cates.” Th­ese ad­vo­cates claim that raw foods are what an­ces­tor dogs ate; there­fore, in this day and age of mas­sive en­vi­ron­men­tal pol­lu­tion as well as con­tam­i­na­tion, it should be bet­ter for dogs. # > that mar­ket­ing hype has > % % @ minds and pre­vented them from re­ally think­ing about it. Ex­perts weigh in. Raw dog food di­ets are con­tro­ver­sial. But the pop­u­lar­ity of the di­ets, which em­pha­size raw meat, bones, fruits, and veg­eta­bles, is ris­ing. Rac­ing greyhounds and sled dogs have long eaten raw food di­ets. Billinghurst, a nu­tri­tion­ist, agri­cul­tural sci­en­tist, vet­eri­nary sur­geon, author, lec­turer, nu­tri­tional con­sul­tant, and pro­ducer of un­cooked pet food (this J that adult dogs would thrive on an evo­lu­tion­ary diet based on what ca­nines ate be­fore they be­came do­mes­ti­cated—in other words, raw, meaty bones and veg­etable scraps. Grain-based com­mer­cial pet foods, he con­tended, $ @ health. Many main­stream vet­eri­nar­i­ans dis­agree, as does the FDA. The risks of raw di­ets have been doc­u­mented in sev­eral stud­ies pub­lished in vet­eri­nary jour­nals. (https://pets.webmd.com/ dogs/guide/raw-dog­food-di­etary-con­cerns" ! # $%) Let me ask this of evo­lu­tion­ary hoax ped­dlers: who was there to in­ves­ti­gate, ver­ify, and val­i­date such claims? Un­less they have lived at the time of the first do­mes­ti­cated dog was seen, then and only then, will this writer be as­sured. So, in keep­ing with free­dom of speech, then, go ahead, feed your dog raw meat. I will not, nor will I ad­vo­cate them as well. (http://now. tufts.edu/ar­ti­cles/grain­free-diet-health­ier-my­dogs-and-cats)

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines

© PressReader. All rights reserved.