AVMA to vote to take a stand against raw feeding

[emilymaywilcha]

It looks like the CDC is hysterical with that long list of methods for preventing cross-contamination. Seriously, has anyone ever gotten sick just by washing cat food bowls in the kitchen sink or feeding cats in the kitchen? They are crying wolf there.

Thank God I never knew a vegetarian who goes around telling omnivores to stop eating and drinking animal products. I would be furious if anyone told me to do that.

 

[violetxx]

Well said Laurie!

You brought up some really good points and backed it all up with evidence. My only one criticism which is very teeny, is for the last sentence I'm not sure the phrase "poorly thought out decision" would be the best way to end it.

Maybe you could write something to the effect of:

The evidence shows that pathogen-avoidance has not been found to be of great concern in raw food due to the evidence presented above, therefore without more legitimate reason, the decision for AVMA to discourage the public (through vets) from feeding raw does is not in the best interest of the consumer nor the pet consuming it and without proper evidence proving otherwise.

Thank you .... blah blah.

Feel free to alter it plenty or not use it at all, I didn't summarize everything..I just wanted to display an alternate ending without that little critical point. It just sounds more professional without the "poorly thought out decision".

Great job btw!

Now for some other issues to attend:

Presidential candidates are always backed by big businesses. Nobody cares about that. All that matters is who gets elected in November and what he will do the next four years. No need to be sorry for ranting.

Wow.

First off, how do you know what your candidate will do in the next four years if you don't know who his corporate sponsors are...

I could go on for days about this, but its not the place to do it..

 

[ldg]

Oooo, great suggestion Violet!

Yeah, I wrote it in a rush and didn't spend much time revising /proof reading. I realize it's missing the Morse citation too. And there's another study I obviously forgot to bookmark where they intentially fed dogs salmonella, and despite huge loads being poured into them, most didn't get sick (unless it was via IV ), and again, not a high percentage shed it! So PLEASE. But that would be another good source to include to back up my claim.

Anyone with further suggestions for improvement, please let me know. I have a few days before I need to send the letter.

Thanks.

 

[ldg]

Anyway, my main point is that their reference studies indicate that meat has pathogens. HELLO? NOTHING documents animals passing those pathogens to people - in fact, the literature seems to indicate it's rare (other than with DRY foods). And our animals are already walking respositories of bacteria (just like our CHILDREN are) - and WE are.

So what's with this focus on pathogen-avoidance, when the real issue is simply good hygiene management?

It makes me sick, really.

 

[emilymaywilcha]

Do you really think this is all about cross-contamination? I don't. I think they are forcing the issue on us in an attempt to make people believe there really is a valid reason to worry about bacteria in raw food.

 

[ldg]

I agree that the politics behind the proposal are meant as a scare-tactic, and they're using flimsy "research" published in peer-review papers to back it up. But those studies only show that the meat has salmonella in it, and then the animals eat it without cooking, so it COULD be a "public health" risk.

But the passage of animal-human salmonella (or other pathogens) has never been documented (other than toxo, which isn't a food problem).

So to counter their argument, the logic has to follow (IMO) with the "science" that shows many of our animals already CARRY pathogens, aren't sick from them, aren't making their pet parents sick from them, and this issue is HYGIENE, not pathogen avoidance. The AVMA wants science. Well, the science is there to back up these claims. Opinions won't persuade them, and probably nothing will, as clearly they're just being a shill for the Pet Food Industry.

But like I say, it doesn't hurt to try.

As I've told you before, Emily, there are a million reasons why something can't be done, you just need one why it can. And I'm sending them the science - that I'm sure they know exists, but no one's thrust in their face.

 

[mschauer]

I'm adapting this comment to the AVMA site I just made into the letter I'll be emailing and sending. (The comment is pending moderation).

This Facts page states, “This proposed policy is about mitigating public health risks, not about restricting or banning any products. Our policies are intended to present the scientific facts…”

<snip>

Now *this* is an intelligent, reasoned response. If this were the text of a petition I would sign it.

Nice job Laurie.  

 

[ldg]

THE AVMA VOTE IS IN

House of Delegates Wrap Up: The Vote on the Proposed Raw Animal-Source Protein Policy (Resolution 5)
August 3, 2012 | Dr. Kimberly May | 1 Reply

As you may already be aware, the AVMA House of Delegates was scheduled to discuss and vote on a proposed policy about raw/undercooked animal-source protein diets for companion animals during their meeting today. It certainly has been a controversial topic, as shown by the large number of comments on our previous AVMA@Work blog entry.

The resolution was thoroughly discussed Thursday afternoon by a reference committee, and two amendments were proposed. (see the attached document, Raw or Undercooked Animal.amendments. The amended text is in red on the attached document.) The first amendment added a paragraph that acknowledges that there are some pet owners who prefer to feed thes diets, and states that vets should ensure that owners are aware of the risks and measures that should be to prevent mitigate the health risks. The second amendment changed “never feed” in the first bullet point to “avoid feeding.”

The HOD discussion and vote took place today. Prior to the discussion, all in attendance were requested to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. (This is standard procedure.) Those opposing the amendment felt that it weakened the policy and that the policy is based on sound evidence that there is risk. Those supporting the amendment felt it was necessary to allow vets to serve clients without facing conflict with AVMA policy.

The HOD voted NOT to pass the first amendment to the proposed policy with a majority vote 66.6% against the amendment.

The second amendment, which changed the first bullet point’s “never feed” to “avoid feeding,” was PASSED with a majority vote of 91.9% in favor of the amendment.

Following the discussion, the House voted on the amended proposed policy via electronic balloting. In order for a resolution such as this to pass, a majority vote is required. The final outcome of the vote was 90.9% in favor of the amended resolution. This proposed policy is now policy as amended.

Please keep in mind that this policy is NOT a ban on raw foods for pets and it is not a regulation that requires veterinarians (regardless of whether they’re AVMA members or not) to comply, or even agree with it. It’s not a debate on the healthiness of or risks associated with raw foods versus other commercial pet foods. Nor is it an attempt to force a ban or restrict pet owners’ rights to feed their pets how and what they want.

Another blog post on the rest of the resolutions and bylaws amendments will be posted after the meeting has concluded.

http://atwork.avma.org/2012/08/03/h...aw-animal-source-protein-policy-resolution-5/

 

[emilymaywilcha]

If the policy is not an attempt to to make people want to stop feeding raw diets, why even have a policy at all?

 

[flintmccullough]

This is being discussed on another board. I don't feed raw, but came across this information, and wanted to share it. I copied and pasted the post:

Quote: House of Delegates Wrap Up: The Vote on the Proposed Raw Animal-Source Protein Policy (Resolution 5)  August 3, 2012 | Dr. Kimberly May | 1 Reply  As you may already be aware, the AVMA House of Delegates was scheduled to discuss and vote on a proposed policy about raw/undercooked animal-source protein diets for companion animals during their meeting today. It certainly has been a controversial topic, as shown by the large number of comments on our previous AVMA@Work blog entry.  The resolution was thoroughly discussed Thursday afternoon by a reference committee, and two amendments were proposed. (see the attached document, Raw or Undercooked Animal.amendments. The amended text is in red on the attached document.) The first amendment added a paragraph that acknowledges that there are some pet owners who prefer to feed thes diets, and states that vets should ensure that owners are aware of the risks and measures that should be to prevent mitigate the health risks. The second amendment changed “never feed” in the first bullet point to “avoid feeding.”  The HOD discussion and vote took place today. Prior to the discussion, all in attendance were requested to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. (This is standard procedure.) Those opposing the amendment felt that it weakened the policy and that the policy is based on sound evidence that there is risk. Those supporting the amendment felt it was necessary to allow vets to serve clients without facing conflict with AVMA policy. The HOD voted NOT to pass the first amendment to the proposed policy with a majority vote 66.6% against the amendment. The second amendment, which changed the first bullet point’s “never feed” to “avoid feeding,” was PASSED with a majority vote of 91.9% in favor of the amendment.  Following the discussion, the House voted on the amended proposed policy via electronic balloting. In order for a resolution such as this to pass, a majority vote is required. The final outcome of the vote was 90.9% in favor of the amended resolution. This proposed policy is now policy as amended.  Please keep in mind that this policy is NOT a ban on raw foods for pets and it is not a regulation that requires veterinarians (regardless of whether they’re AVMA members or not) to comply, or even agree with it. It’s not a debate on the healthiness of or risks associated with raw foods versus other commercial pet foods. Nor is it an attempt to force a ban or restrict pet owners’ rights to feed their pets how and what they want.  Another blog post on the rest of the resolutions and bylaws amendments will be posted after the meeting has concluded.   http://atwork.avma.org/2012/08/03/h...aw-animal-source-protein-policy-resolution-5/

 

[emilymaywilcha]

It has already been posted here: http://www.thecatsite.com/t/246595/avma-to-vote-to-take-a-stand-against-raw-feeding/90#post_3234666

 

[yayi]

I give raw as a treat but when it is fresh, never frozen, just bought from the butcher/market. I noticed that when I give defrosted raw (warmed) my cats will not eat it. 

As for this new AVMA policy it is good to know, but knowing that most vets are not animal nutrition experts, it does not matter much to me. 

 

[ldg]

Well, as Emily pointed out earlier, the AVMA has a an official position on declawing that states that vets should educate owners to alternatives.

How many of them pay attention to that one?

In the end, it is all about the money.

It's a sad day.

 

[carolina]

Well, I have to say, I am not shocked, nor do I think this will make much of a difference....
Imho it is a sign that raw feeding is indeed growing and becoming quite popular. It got their attention.
My vet did not tell me to feed raw, but he supports me 100%, and says this is what cats should be eating anyways. He knows what has done to Bugsy, he won't change his diet recommendations to me, and if he does, it won't matter the very least to me.
My holistic vet, well, I went to him for help with my raw diet, within other issues, and he always fed raw. Has books about it. He won't change.
Their dentist feeds some raw too.
I deal with the same issue on another subject of my life: vaping. It is a money issue all the same. And it is dealt quite similarly, but on a bigger scale, as the campaigns are heavier when you are dealing with human lives.... I know it has helped my health tremendously though, and so does my doctor. And about the rest.... Well... Little by little we go uphill.
Imho these are not wars that you win or you lose. These are many many little battles, that you fight everyday, and keep going.
Raw feeding is obviously growing to a point that it damaged profits considerably from the pet food industry, I think particularly of the prescription food manufacturers, as it resolves so many issues.
Imho we should see this as a good sign.
To me, to my pets, this won't make a dent.
We need to continue feeding, and educating. Imho raw will continue to grow by example, no matter what vets say about it.

 

[auntie crazy]

...
We need to continue feeding, and educating. Imho raw will continue to grow by example, no matter what vets say about it.

 

  The popularity of raw food is growing because people are paying attention to their pets, and the near instant and sometimes mind-boggling improvement in health and vitality when a beloved cat or dog is transitioned to raw is deeply motivational - raw feeders are driven to tell other pet-owners about it.

Nor can the damage and disease caused by commercial products be hidden any longer no matter how many marketing dollars the pet food industry pours into the effort.

Rock on, my raw feeding friends!

AC

 

[carolina]

    The popularity of raw food is growing because people are paying attention to their pets, and the near instant and sometimes mind-boggling improvement in health and vitality when a beloved cat or dog is transitioned to raw is deeply motivational - raw feeders are driven to tell other pet-owners about it.

Nor can the damage and disease caused by commercial products be hidden any longer no matter how many marketing dollars the pet food industry pours into the effort.

Rock on, my raw feeding friends! :bigthumb:

AC

I take pride in educating my vet about it too :nod:
I made sure to take Bugsy in for a wellness exam- note, wellness! after he had been on raw for 6 months, and my vet couldn't believe it was the same cat.
Yes, he looked the same.... But Bugsy is healthy now, and he was NEVER a healthy cat. My vet and I went through a lot together to keep Bugsy well..... He was thrilled and was telling everyone about raw.
I guarantee you that he will suggest raw to Ibd cases now before other potentially health-compromising treatments.
imho sharing our experiences is a given, especially with pet parents who might be going through the same issues as we were.... But educating our vets is essential. Vet school will not do it, after all. It is up to us.

 

[auntie crazy]

I take pride in educating my vet about it too

I made sure to take Bugsy in for a wellness exam- note, wellness!

after he had been on raw for 6 months, and my vet couldn't believe it was the same cat.
Yes, he looked the same.... But Bugsy is healthy now, and he was NEVER a healthy cat. My vet and I went through a lot together to keep Bugsy well..... He was thrilled and was telling everyone about raw.
I guarantee you that he will suggest raw to Ibd cases now before other potentially health-compromising treatments.
imho sharing our experiences is a given, especially with pet parents who might be going through the same issues as we were.... But educating our vets is essential. Vet school will not do it, after all. It is up to us.

Bugsy would make an AWESOME poster child for IBD kitties! 

Hmmmm. I was kidding, but now that I think about it, there's some merit to that... Carolina, I'm pm'ing you.

AC

 

[feralvr]

Well, I have to say, I am not shocked, nor do I think this will make much of a difference....
Imho it is a sign that raw feeding is indeed growing and becoming quite popular. It got their attention.

.

Took the words right out of my mouth. :lol3: Seriously, raw feeding IS becoming much more popular. Absolutely. Every natural health food store is proof of this. The commercially made raw is flying off the shelves. THAT is why, IMO, this policy was brought to light from the AVMA. It IS a money making issue for them and the pet food industry. IF everyone starts to feed raw OR goes to home-made..... the loss of revenue would hit hard. What a shame... I also feel this way about (not to get off the subject) but vaccinations and the drug companies that make them. They don't want people to become aware that vets in this country are over-vaccinating pets. OH no.... it brings too much business for vets and the drug companies alike. Really, burns me up, more so, for the innocent pet owners who completely trust their vets, no matter what they say, it is the TRUTH and they follow their instructions to a "T". Most people do not go home and do their own research, they just take the word of their vet. I am not saying all vets are unethical. But, yes, there are many.

 

[auntie crazy]

.... Really, burns me up, more so, for the innocent pet owners who completely trust their vets, no matter what they say, it is the TRUTH and they follow their instructions to a "T". Most people do not go home and do their own research, they just take the word of their vet. I am not saying all vets are unethical. But, yes, there are many.

And this brings to mind something else I've noticed since this became a hot topic.... quite a few vets who were previously as blindly trusting of the PFI as their clients are of them have become aware of two things: the first, there are whole bunches more raw feeders than they ever knew and the second, the extraordinarily low opinion a growing percentage of pet owners hold for people in their profession.

I don't believe vets set out to become poison-pushing shills of the pet food industry. I think they are pet lovers just like us who are incredibly busy people whose gratitude to the PFI for their easy and conveniently-packaged nutritional "training" and the extra money brought in by their products makes it super difficult for them to be motivated enough to carve out the time and energy to look more closely at those products and their efficacy.

Over the last few years, however, the tide has begun to turn, especially recently. Vets are beginning to see healthier animals and are learning about raw through their own clients (like my vet), others are uncomfortable with the public's perception of their lack of integrity and are doing their own research. And they're learning the shocking truth just as we are: standard commercial products are causing terrible damage to the animals consuming them.... and balanced, raw diets are returning those damaged animals to health, at a higher level than they'd ever experienced.

In fact, I'm sure this move by the AVMA is, in part, an attempt to stem the growing number of veterinarians who are recommending and/or supporting raw feeding.

The curtain's down; the cat's out of the bag (thank God). There is no going back and this policy is nothing more than a Hail Mary pass for a PFI desperate to hold onto their profits and using every bit of leverage they can to do so. It will, I believe, make spreading the word about raw feeding more difficult in the short term... but the truth will prevail in the end.

AC

 

[melesine]

Until they can show me evidence that cats cook their food before eating it then they don't have a leg to stand on with their opposition to raw food. If cats could hear and understand their proposal they would be slapping their heads in astonishment of the stupidity of it. 

I was just at the vet this week and she didn't even blink when I told her I feed raw. 

 

[otto]

And this brings to mind something else I've noticed since this became a hot topic.... quite a few vets who were previously as blindly trusting of the PFI as their clients are of them have become aware of two things: the first, there are whole bunches more raw feeders than they ever knew and the second, the extraordinarily low opinion a growing percentage of pet owners hold for people in their profession.

I don't believe vets set out to become poison-pushing shills of the pet food industry. I think they are pet lovers just like us who are incredibly busy people whose gratitude to the PFI for their easy and conveniently-packaged nutritional "training" and the extra money brought in by their products makes it super difficult for them to be motivated enough to carve out the time and energy to look more closely at those products and their efficacy.

Over the last few years, however, the tide has begun to turn, especially recently. Vets are beginning to see healthier animals and are learning about raw through their own clients (like my vet), others are uncomfortable with the public's perception of their lack of integrity and are doing their own research. And they're learning the shocking truth just as we are: standard commercial products are causing terrible damage to the animals consuming them.... and balanced, raw diets are returning those damaged animals to health, at a higher level than they'd ever experienced.

In fact, I'm sure this move by the AVMA is, in part, an attempt to stem the growing number of veterinarians who are recommending and/or supporting raw feeding.

The curtain's down; the cat's out of the bag (thank God). There is no going back and this policy is nothing more than a Hail Mary pass for a PFI desperate to hold onto their profits and using every bit of leverage they can to do so. It will, I believe, make spreading the word about raw feeding more difficult in the short term... but the truth will prevail in the end.

AC

I love your positive attitude. The vets against raw feeding are already creeping out of the woodwork. Petfooddirect.com sent this little gem out today

http://www.petfooddirect.com/Shop/N...spects&rrid=T000231718&rmid=8-4_NWS_Prospects

The vet who wrote the article is careful not to sound too biased in the article. which is good. But in the comments below the article he is very clear that he is against clients feeding their pets a raw diet.