Fat pets and pills for everything: More food for thought
By Gina Spadafori
April 8, 2007
We’ve made note in the Pet Connection blog (and in our syndicated newspaper columns) of new prescription medications that come along. Some are near-miraculous, and we happily acknowledge those.
Into this category, I’d personally put prescription heartworm and flea-tick control.
As I’ve already admitted to being old enough to remember when marshmallow peeps came only in yellow, I’ll also cop to being old enough to remember fighting fleas with noxious dips and sprays that gave me such severe breathing difficulties (I’m an asthmatic) that I could only shudder to think what they were doing to my pets. And yes, I know fleas — I’ve lived in California and, briefly, in Florida, all my life, and fleas can be a year-round problem in both places.
And as a person who ran a breed rescue for a few years and nursed a couple of heartworm positive dogs to health, I can vouch that a monthly preventive pill is a much, much better option.
So mind you, this is no screed against Big Pharma After all, were it not for a collection of truly remarkable advances in asthma medication (Singular, Advair) I not only would be able to live an active life (with my animal companions, of course!), but there’s a pretty good chance I would have died long ago. (Came really close twice, in the days before asthma meds stressed prevention of symptoms, not reaction to them.)
But I have a little problem with meds that are brought to market because they are marketable; that is, some smart folks have figured out there’s a profitable problem for which a drug can be one solution.
Which brings me to this piece in Newsweek, about the drug companies’ enthusiasm to tap into the pet market:
Developed by Pfizer and approved by the Food and Drug Administration late last year, Slentrol suppresses a dog’s appetite and limits fat absorption. [...A]t a cost of nearly $2 a day Pfizer believes the owners of at least 17 million dogs will be willing to try Slentrol. That could be a conservative bet: about one third of the 74 million dogs in the United States are overweight (5 percent are obese). And, increasingly, Americans are willing to open their wallets for Fluffy and friends, spending nearly $40 billion on their pets last year, double what they did in 1994.
Perhaps that’s because pets have become more prominent members of the family. “We’ve shown an increasing willingness to spend money on our pets as they’ve become a bigger part of our lives,” says Bob Vetere, president of the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association. This is partly because a decade ago, most pet owners were parents, but now more are owned by people with no children at all—empty nesters, gay couples and single adults. In many households, pets aren’t just presents for children—they are surrogate children. “Two thirds of homes in the U.S. have a pet,” says Vetere. “Twice as many [as those] with children.”
Whether we worry that our pets are eating tainted, potentially lethal food—or that they’re simply eating too much—we’ve made pet health a priority. In 2006, 77 percent of dogs were given medication, compared with 52 percent in 2004. According to APPMA, spending on pets’ surgical procedures and dental care—including floss and teeth whiteners—has also risen. Pet products now make up more than half an animal-health market once dominated by products for livestock, fueling what in 2005 was a $5 billion industry. “The companion-animal sector has snowballed into this unstoppable force,” says Richard Daub, who covers the industry for the trade publication Animal Pharm.
Here’s the rest of the piece.
Here’s the rub: While we humans have no end to the ways we can help ourselves put on weight, our pets can’t even open the refrigerator for themselves. And although we can find a million reasons not to exercise, you rarely meet a dog who doesn’t leap for joy when the leash comes out or a cat who can’t be tempted by the laser pointer.
Which means this is a drug that’s being given to the wrong animal: Obesity in pets is a human problem, not a pet one.
Want to save yourself $2 a day? Take a walk with your dog (it’s good for you both), or play with your cat. Cut back on the treats. Use the tried-and-true trick of substituting shredded green beans for some of the volume in your pet’s dish, and steel yourself against begging.
If you need some guidance, our Dr. Marty Becker has co-authored a book on slimming your pet down, “Fitness Unleashed!: A Dog and Owner’s Guide to Losing Weight and Gaining Health Together.” Martha Garvey has written two books, one for cats and one for dogs. There are others, and a simple book-site search will turn them up.
Eat less, exercise more. It good for you and your pets. It’s simple, and it’s cheap.
Now … my own guidelines for new analyzing new medications for pets:
- Is this treating something that can be fixed with a lifestyle change? Is that lifestyle change something I’m capable of doing or willing to do?
- Is this replacing something that works just as well, at a lower cost?
- Is this something that’s being pushed for my convenience, or is this really a something that will truly improve my pet’s health and quality of life?
You’ll have to discuss with your veterinarian these questions and others, and the answers you get will be unique to you and your pet.
Realize that managed care in human medicine has pharmaceutical companies looking to pet medicine to replace those profits. In many ways, this is great news, since it means products specifically developed for pets will help pets specifically. But in other ways … well, you gotta ask the questions when you’re talking with your veterinarian, and make the decision that’s right for your and your pet.
(By the way, if you have a veterinarian who doesn’t like to discuss your pet’s treatment, who seems annoyed, insulted or too busy to answer questions, you have the wrong veterinarian. My “primary-care veterinarian” is the absolute best at helping me honestly analyze the pros and cons of every treatment from every angle. Honestly, I wish I had that great a relationship with my own physician!)
If we’ve learned nothing else from the last three weeks, we’ve learned the importance of being informed and active consumers. Let’s take that newfound activism into all aspects of our pets’ care.
Bravo!! Great post with a great point. Thank you!!!
Comment by Marie — April 8, 2007 @ 8:56 am
this is some sad news. a bad fire at a humane shelter killed many dogs and cats. go to jackonville.com it’s on the home page
Comment by Mary Ann — April 8, 2007 @ 9:09 am
i’m so up set i forgot to put the right address in its http://www.jacksonville.com
Comment by Mary Ann — April 8, 2007 @ 9:11 am
Our medicalized culture is setting us up to take the easy way (and certainly the less healthy way) out of everything, including, now, our pets’ weight problems.
Disgusting.
Comment by Pamela J. Betz-Baron — April 8, 2007 @ 9:27 am
Here is some “dessert for thought”
‘Patchwork’ of pet food rules under scrutiny
Recall inspires U.S. Senate to set up hearings, including FDA testimony.
Sun, Apr. 08, 2007
By JENNIFER MANN
The Kansas City Star
A pet food recall that began more than three weeks ago for food made at a plant in Emporia, Kan., has since widened to six other U.S. manufacturers.
Even as the recall expanded to include some dry food and pet treats, pet owners still don’t know what has sickened and killed perhaps thousands of animals, and the process has left many wondering who is ensuring the safety of pet food and how.
“It just eats me up we poisoned our dog,” said Dan Wilson, whose family pet, a Chihuahua named Phoebe, died March 11. “How did this happen and how do we know it’s not going to happen again?”
While the Food and Drug Administration has oversight at the federal level, much of the day-to-day regulation is relegated to states, each with its own laws, rules and systems, resulting in a patchwork lacking cohesiveness and consistency.
U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin, a Democrat from Illinois, says the system needs fixing, and this week the Senate is set to begin hearings that will include testimony from the FDA.
“The uncertainty about what is safe to feed their pets has gone on too long,” Durbin said in a release announcing the hearings. “I want to hear how the FDA is going to work to resolve the current crisis and ensure this doesn’t happen again.”
Durbin is demanding that the FDA work with states to establish standard regulations and inspection requirements, which presently don’t exist.
“Where there should be federal regulation, there is instead a patchwork of state inspection systems and voluntary guidance,” Durbin said.
The FDA is responsible for enforcing the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which covers pet food and thousands of other products. The act requires that pet food, like human food, be “pure and wholesome and contain no harmful or deleterious substance and that it be truthfully labeled.” Officials with the FDA declined to comment.
Duane Ekedahl, president of the Pet Food Institute, an industry association, disagrees that the system is broken. He says it is a system of tight checks and balances, which is closley watched by the FDA.
“From our perspective, regulation is pretty complete,” Ekedahl said. “Like everyone, we’re anxious for this investigation to be concluded and to find answers.”
Ekedahl said products made by its members are the most highly regulated because they are made under federal and state oversight.
But Elizabeth Hodgkins, a veterinarian for 30 years and a former executive of Hill’s Pet Nutrition, based in Topeka, said in a letter to Durbin that, “The certification of pet foods with entirely insufficient data to justify that certification is nothing more than an historical ‘accident’ of the slow and haphazard evolution of the pet food industry itself.”
Hodgkins is slated to testify at the hearings.
The Missouri Department of Agriculture says it works to ensure that the 15 pet food plants in the state are inspected two times a year. The department randomly pulls product samples from all pet food and livestock feed manufacturers, with an aim of 20 percent of those being from pet food makers.
Tim Tyson, director of the agriculture commodities assurance program, the Kansas department charged with overseeing pet food, said he wasn’t certain exactly how many pet food plants there are in Kansas, but that over the past year, five or six facilities have been inspected.
“Most of the things we regulate have to do with licensing, looking at labels and guarantees, including making sure they have the required levels of nutrients, but we don’t test for toxins,” Tyson said. “It’s very tough to do. We don’t have the capabilities.”
The FDA had never inspected the Menu Foods pet food facility in Emporia until the recall but has contracted with Kansas for some inspections. In October state inspectors checked for BSE, or mad cow disease.
When it comes to pet food nutrition, the American Association of Feed Control Officials sets requirements. Most companies say they meet those standards, although there is no verification.
The association establishes guidelines for what can go into pet food. After reports of illnesses and deaths began, Menu Foods contracted with a New York laboratory to test the suspect food. It reported finding aminopterin, a poison used to kill rodents, in a sample of wheat gluten used in the food. But subsequent tests have not confirmed that.
Last week, for the first time, the FDA said it was certain that melamine, which isn’t a highly toxic substance, is somehow related to scores of pets succumbing to rapid kidney failure. Scientists just aren’t sure how it’s related.
“In the scientific community, it’s a substance we would label as moderately toxic,” said Steven Hansen, a veterinary toxicologist with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. “This is all very puzzling — there’s a lot of work yet to be done.”
Hansen said he knows the question that’s been asked time and again in recent weeks is if the FDA and Menu Foods acted fast enough to alert pet owners. And, questions surrounding oversight or lack thereof continue to build.
He said he would reserve his opinions until there is a better understanding of exactly what happened.“I think the debriefing of this whole disaster is a huge opportunity for us to learn and improve,” he said.
Comment by Steve — April 8, 2007 @ 9:32 am
NUTRACEUTICALS - National Animal Supplements Council (lobbying group)
With more and more pets living to a ripe old age, nutritional supplements for pets have become a fast growing business, as pet owners seek out health products for their furry friends that mimic those they use for themselves. At the same time, the regulatory gray area surrounding supplements for companion animals continues to constrict the market, a situation the National Animal Supplements Council is working to change through a concerted push within the industry to self-regulate while moving toward formal categorical recognition for the products. This all-new report covers supplement products in traditional forms, such as pills and liquids, as well as newer, nutraceutical forms addressing the all-important issue of palatability, such as gravies and treats. Its primary focus is on products for horses, dogs, and cats, but coverage also extends to other types of companion animals, including horses, birds, small animals, and herptiles. The report charts historical sales and projections; analyzes marketing and new product trends; profiles key players such as Farnam and Virbac; and examines detailed Simmons Market Research Bureau consumer data on pet owners’ purchasing of pet supplements vis-à-vis number of pets owned, purchasing venues, other types of pet products purchased, and attitudes about health, as well as in relation to human supplement usage.
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 10:07 am
NASC - National Animal Supplements Council
http://www.smartpakcanine.com/NASC.aspx
NASC - Haven’t heard much about them. What do they know about additives in gravies, etc., since they are “working closely” with the FDA???
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 10:19 am
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 10:07 am
“Self Regulate”
Comment by Steve — April 8, 2007 @ 10:22 am
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 10:19 am
Here you go
http://www.nasc.cc/Index.aspx
Comment by Steve — April 8, 2007 @ 10:27 am
PET FOODS IN THE U.S.: RIDING THE PREMIUM WAVE
(Extrapolated from Packaged Facts)
“The U.S. pet food market is experiencing healthy growth as marketers continue to convert pet owners to better quality, higher priced, more upscale fare. Premium pet foods cover all bases—natural/organic, fortified/functional, weight control, lifestage, breed-/size-specific, gourmet, etc.—and are increasingly being positioned not just as human style but as human grade. As a result, much of the growth is occurring at the upper-income tier of the pet owner spectrum, with U.S. households earning $70,000 or more now accounting for an impressive 44% of the aggregate pet food expenditure—up from just 15% in 1994.
Top marketers including Nestlé Purina, Mars, Iams, Hill’s, Nutro, and S&M NuTec clearly have their fingers on the emotional pulse of American pet owners, as well as some very big advertising guns. During 2005, they spent nearly $300 million on national advertising for pet food, virtually all of it encouraging the deep attachment Americans feel for their pets, while also launching the biggest surge of new products in the history of the market. The high level of interest in all things pet has also spurred a number of high-profile acquisitions, including Mars’ recent purchase of S&M NuTec (Greenies) and private-label producer Doane, Del Monte’s purchase of Milk-Bone and Meow Mix, Bain Capital’s purchase of Nutro, and Central Garden & Pet’s purchase of Breeder’s Choice.”
So, animal lovers, how long are we going to continue to put enormous profits in corporate pockets while they manipulate us and kill our pets? (And probably ourselves.)
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 10:34 am
Steve
Not a very impressive web site. Has it been taken down, or has it never gotten up?
Farnum has big NASC logos on their site. Big deal. What cons.
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 10:37 am
Steve had posted this for the PETFOOD Fourum in another post. I found it extremely interesting.
http://www.petfoodindustry-dig.....=texterity
Comment by MonkeyKitty — April 8, 2007 @ 10:45 am
So, animal lovers, how long are we going to continue to put enormous profits in corporate pockets while they manipulate us and kill our pets? (And probably ourselves.)
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 10:34 am
I doubt one single pet owner in the United States will ever again walk into a pet store food section and feel completely confident the safety of a brand has not been compromised for a long long time.
“Having pet food producers officially declare pet food safe for consumption’ sets a legally binding standard,” said Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, D-Mercer County, who is proposing the legislation. “If producers fail to live up to their declarations, then the state has a clear course of legal action to hold them accountable.”
http://tinyurl.com/2cfqys
Comment by Steve — April 8, 2007 @ 10:46 am
Not to promote Kevin Trudeau but when I get the chance have been reading the Updated Edition of
Natural Cures, etc, etc. On page 361/362 he states exactly what we keep saying we want the FDA or better yet an independent source to do to protect our pets’ food. Product reviews in addition to who owns the company making the product & visit manufacturing plants. Look at every ingredient & processing used in its
manufacture. Visit farms where things are grown to see if pure and good. Tell us what products are garbage & to avoid. Expose greedy corporations. Tell us what products are produced by honest people. Have message boards and chat rooms where we can communicate and share information.
Comment by VJ — April 8, 2007 @ 10:53 am
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 10:37 am
I am not big on the idea of a big business lobby group replacing “effective” [emphasis added] government oversight and staking claim that their particular seal of approval is to become the new standard which must be met by anyone desiring to enter the supplement business.
It will just end up a monopoly that will end up spending 95% of it’s time protecting the market share of it’s members. By whatever means necessary.
Comment by Steve — April 8, 2007 @ 10:57 am
By the way has Science ever been able to verify that “trees cause more pollution then cars”?
We’re still waiting for an answer after 20 years.
Comment by Steve — April 8, 2007 @ 11:15 am
Just a thought.
If you go to this website
http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Search_Chemicals.jsp
and type in Melamine,
———————————————————————-
Scroll down to the very bottom of the Melamine page where it says:
Related Chemicals Heading——for Melamine—-and it shows Cyromazine as a Parent chemical and Melamine is a breakdown product of the parent chemical. Cyromazine metabolizes to Melamine.
———————————————————————-
Here is a study showing Cyromazine/Melamine not being fatal/toxic to dogs.
http://www.epa.gov/EPA-PEST/19.....p24047.htm
In a 6-month feeding study in dogs the NOAEL was 30 ppm (0.75 mg/ kg). The LOAEL was 300.0 ppm (7.5 mg/kg) based upon decreased hematocrit and decreased hemoglobin. Groups of male and female beagle dogs (4/sex/dose) were fed diets containing cyromazine at 0, 30, 300, or 3,000 ppm (0, 0.75, 7.5, or 75 mg/kg/day, respectively) for 6- months. No treatment related effects were observed in survival, clinical signs or body weight parameters. Pronounced effects on hematologic parameters, were manifested as decreases in hematocrit and hemoglobin levels at 300 and 3,000 ppm.
———————————————————————-
The FDA said a few days ago Melamine was probably a marker for something else.
———————————————————————-
Cyromazine is used on Celery Head Lettuce Leaf Lettuce Spinach Onions Tomatoes and a lot of other things here in the U.S.
http://www.pesticideinfo.org/D.....Id=PC33510
———————————————————————-
It appears Melamine on its own is not a strong contender, unless, maybe the levels were way up there, but many Vets keep saying it does not explain what has has happened.
Margaret Bridge — April 8, 2007 @ 1:17 am Posted this link
http://www.emea.eu.int/pdfs/vet/mrls/060699en.pdf with this comment. “It mentions specific results in dogs n both a 6 month and a 12 month study - Number 5 and number 6 in the article. “
———————————————————————-
The FDA confirmed Melamine by lab analysis. Two other labs confirmed aminopterin—a rat posion. Did the FDA use the exact same samples (from the same can/pouch or bag) as the two other labs…hmmmm?
It appears from postings on this board, that pets have been fed recalled pet food with no symptoms, while others got sick and began to show symptoms within hours of eating the food.
Perhaps all the bags of wheat gluten have Cyromazine (a pesticide) which metabolizes to Melamine, but not all the bags have aminopterin—a rat posion because they purchase from many different farmers. Different farmers can use different chemicals…different amount perhaps in their home made brew of wheat gluten from batch to batch.
I personally hope the FDA does not take the road less damning to them. We really really need independent lab analysis done for aminopterin.
Comment by DeeAnn — April 8, 2007 @ 11:38 am
Citizens and Pet Owners want something that says we have a brighter future here.
Is The Pet Food Industry going to step up to the plate?
Comment by Steve — April 8, 2007 @ 11:41 am
Thought some happy news might be nice…here is an article about one woman’s crusade to save birds…and it worked.
Lights out: It’s for the birds
Pioneer Press
04/07/2007 12:07:04 AM CDT
Birds that have been collected over the years, identified and tagged, skinned and mounted, are part of a collection of bird skins at the University of Minnesota. (CRAIG BORCK, Pioneer Press)Songbirds migrating north along the Mississippi River this spring should have a safer journey through the Twin Cities, thanks to a Stillwater woman.
Joanna Eckles has helped persuade owners and managers of seven Minneapolis skyscrapers to participate in a new program designed to prevent the birds from crashing into tall buildings at night.
Dubbed “Lights Out,” the program calls for unnecessary interior and exterior lights to be turned off from midnight until dawn during spring and fall migrations.
Eckles is a former Minnesota Zoo bird trainer and U.S. administrator of the World Parrot Trust. She learned about the Lights Out program during a bird trainers’ conference two years ago in Toronto and decided to research the issue in the Twin Cities.
Most small songbirds migrate at night using the setting sun, stars and the moon to chart their course, she said. But the birds can be drawn off their route by lighted skyscrapers - especially if it is raining or there are clouds obscuring the moon and stars, Eckles said.
“They seem to get drawn into the cities by the lights, and it’s a confusing environment,” she said. “Instead of just passing on over, they end up circling around or hitting the buildings.”
In many cases, the birds circle the buildings until they drop from exhaustion, Eckles said. On the ground, they “face a totally alien environment with no place to hide and scavengers and traffic,” she said.
The Mississippi River is one of North
————————————————————————————————————————
Advertisement
————————————————————————————————————————
America’s principal flyways, and large numbers of birds migrate through or near the Twin Cities because of it, said Mark Martell, director of bird conservation for Audubon Minnesota.
Martell said cities that participate in the Lights Out program - including Toronto, New York and Chicago - have reported an 80 percent reduction in the number of nighttime collisions.
“The solution to this is straightforward, easy and saves money: Turn off the lights,” Martell said. “We’re saving birds, energy and money. All around, that’s a lot of positives.”
Audubon Minnesota is working with experts from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the University of Minnesota and the Wildlife Rehabilitation Center of Minnesota to promote the Lights Out program.
The group has asked building owners in Minneapolis and St. Paul to turn off their lights from midnight until dawn, March 15 through May 31, and again Aug. 15 through Oct. 31. The spans are the peak migratory periods for birds in the Twin Cities.
The change in Minneapolis’ skyline since March 15 has been dramatic, said Kent Warden, the executive director of the Greater Minneapolis Building Owners and Managers Association.
“It’s looking pretty dark,” Warden said. “It’s made quite a difference.”
Warden said Greater Minneapolis BOMA members were quick to sign up after they learned about the problem. Among those participating: Wells Fargo, Accenture Tower, U.S. Bank Plaza, U.S. Bancorp Center, IDS Center, 225 South Sixth Street and Riverplace.
“It’s not really an inconvenience for building owners,” he said. “If they had asked for an outright ban all year long on all architectural lighting, that might have been an issue. But it’s easy to do and err on the side of protecting the birds.”
Buildings in downtown St. Paul also will be turning out their lights this spring. St. Paul BOMA members voted to participate in Lights Out and “now we’re implementing it,” said Curt Milburn, president of the association. The four buildings in Bloomington’s Normandale Lake Office Park are also participating.
Eckles and other volunteers will be monitoring buildings around the metro area this spring.
While researching the problem last fall, she found about 150 dead and about 150 injured birds in both downtowns and around the University of Minnesota.
She worked at dawn, scanning city sidewalks and streets. If she spotted a dazed or injured bird, she would capture it with a small net and then release it south of town along the Mississippi River bluffs so it could continue its southern migration.
“Here’s what you do with them: You literally put them in a brown paper lunch bag,” Eckles said. “What they need is a quiet, safe place. I’d carry them until I was finished, stick them in my car or carry them with me until I finished. I could tell just after 20 minutes if they would be OK.”
She collected the dead songbirds in plastic Ziploc sandwich bags, recorded the date, time, location and species of the bird found, and stored them in her home freezer over the winter.
On Tuesday, she brought a small cardboard box filled with frozen birds to the U’s Ecology Building, where volunteers tagged and identified the birds. All the birds - collected under a special permit - will become part of the James Ford Bell Museum of Natural History’s collection.
“I brought everyone else cookies, and I brought you a box of dead birds,” she told Bob Zink, professor of ornithology and curator of birds.
The box contained fox sparrows, brown creepers, a black-capped chickadee, dark-eyed juncos, Tennessee warblers, golden crown kinglets and starlings.
“Cookies and starlings. Mmmm-mmmm,” Zink said.
Zink said he will use the data collected by the volunteers to research where bird-building collisions rank in terms of overall mortality threats to birds.
Eckles, who has been an avid birdwatcher since she was 9 and has owned a bird of some kind since she was 11, said she hopes the research will lead to long-term solutions the Twin Cities could adopt. Toronto, for example, recently implemented a voluntary migratory-bird protection policy that addresses light from existing buildings and suggests design guidelines for new construction.
“Because really, how silly is it for a bunch of people to go around picking up birds if you’re not coming up with long-term solutions?” she said.
Comment by Carole — April 8, 2007 @ 11:49 am
Apparently this has gone further than the Twin Cities and the FCC (yes, a government agency) is getting involved.
Duluth tower lights could get a makeover to save birds
The Associated Press
04/06/2007 03:39:29 PM CDT
DULUTH, Minn.- The antennas atop Duluth’s hills may switch from slow blinking lights to strobe lights in an effort to protect migrating birds.
The Federal Communications Commission is accepting comments on changing the lights on the communications towers through April 23.
Night-migrating songbirds are inexplicably attracted to the blinking red lights on towers. Birds circle the towers, particularly during foul weather, and are killed when they hit the tower, strike guy wires or become exhausted. Experts say the switch would prevent millions of bird deaths each year.
Threatened by lawsuits brought by bird groups, the agency is expected to require strobes to replace the smaller, slowly flashing lights.
“The FCC is required by the Migratory Bird Conservation Act to protect birds, and it’s past time they do it,” said Steve Holmer, spokesman for the American Bird Conservancy.
Broadcasting industry groups oppose changes, saying the actual environmental harm doesn’t justify the significant cost of the changes that aren’t guaranteed to be effective.
Comment by Carole — April 8, 2007 @ 11:52 am
VALUE OF PETS
Janine Motta, of the New Jersey Animal Rights
Alliance, said that while the legislation may provide a legal platform for pet owners, other issues, such as pain and suffering, should be addressed by lawmakers.
“Even though they’re considered property, (pets) have more value than a couch or a car,” she said. “It’s about time we started pushing the envelope.”
Want to talk about value? The pet industry knows very well that pets have value. Pets put $2.7 billion into the pockets of the pet industry.
The industry exploits us and I think we should be compensation for their bad behavior. Is anyone feeling really USED, as I am?
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 12:04 pm
VALUE OF PETS
The same nerve that the pet industry used to hit our emotions is going to come back to bite them in their rear.
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
Animals are smarter than humans when it comes to feeding their children (opinion)
http://www.newstarget.com/021778.html
By the way, I rate this website as a very good one. I signed up for the newsletter about 6 months ago after researching raw honey as an alternative to drugs for wound healing.
Comment by DeeAnn — April 8, 2007 @ 12:10 pm
Sorry, “$2.7 billion a year,” “compensated”
Comment by Nadine Long — April 8, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
Fri Apr 6, 4:47 PM ET
BEIJING (AFP) - Water supplies for about 150,000 people in southwest China may have been contaminated after high levels of heavy metals were discovered in a local river, state press reported Friday.
Excessive lead and other heavy metals were this week registered in a 100-kilometre (60-mile) section of the Honghe River in Guangxi region, the Xinhua news agency reported.
Guangxi
Important crops in Guangxi include rice, maize (corn), sweet potatoes, and wheat. Cash crops include sugar cane, peanuts, tobacco, and kenaf. Kenaf seeds yield a vegetable oil that is edible and high in omega antioxidants.
Comment by Steve — April 8, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
http://www.stephenvoss.com/sto.....story.html
This is a pretty good account on the current environment in China.
If you scroll down to the bottom there are some really good pictures.
Comment by MonkeyKitty — April 8, 2007 @ 12:42 pm
Yes, Gina, thanks for this post! It’s truly a typical American reaction to want to give a pill to solve a problem. It’s already hard enough to get vets to test for the prossiblity of thyroid problems, and I’m afraid this new product will make it even less likely. Here, take this pill, try this food and we’ll see what happens. First you have to make sure there’s not a physical problem. A dog can be underexercised AND be hypothyroid.
Comment by CathyA — April 8, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
I value my pets so high that money cannot do justice for them. Just yesterday I brought home another pound puppy (7 weeks) and already the stock on it has sky-rocketed. Yes, it will have to suffer with home made dog food, sleeping in the house at night and only playing outside in a 100’ square fenced in yard when it wants to. Excerise will be plentiful and entertainment provided by the big screen just takes the cake. In return, I will receive 100% unconditional love, humor & honor and I will give back in the same manner. Who needs stress pills when you have a animal or two?
Comment by Sunshine — April 8, 2007 @ 7:15 pm
Do I want the pharmaceutical companies getting involved in “designer drugs” for my pets. NOT! While we are in the process of checking who owns what companies, check to see how many pharmaceutical companies own P&G, Purina, etc and how many human food companies own pharmaceuticals. It’s like Steve and some others keep saying, follow the money.
Comment by VJ — April 9, 2007 @ 12:28 pm
When I was a young girl, I lived on a ranch and we had calves and cows and bulls and horses and dogs and cats. We also had a garden. We never bought dog food. Our Laddy ate scraps from the table, kitty too. Of course we ate good big meals and dad liked his food. Laddy ran around the ranch most times, never in a cage or locked up. He was a very happy dog and he was very healthy too. We didn’t give too much thought to what we might be doing wrong. All us kids got up early and fed the calves and helped out and ate big meals and after school we’d ride horses across the river into the forest and just generally have a great time of it. Laddy would be running along next to us most times.
That’s all I have to say about dogs being fat and pet food chucked full of you know what! I guess the pet food manufactures think we all are fools!
Linda MS
Comment by Linda — April 9, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
PET KIDNEY DISEASE: PILLS TO LOWER BUN LEVEL & PHOSPHORUS IN BLOOD
On a local TV station, the vet segment had a vet talking about kidney disease/lessened function/CRF. He said the “old” treatment used to be fluid therapy a few times per week and lower protein food, if people did not have access to clinics that offered pet dialysis.
He said now there are two pills that animals can take that serve as an enteric dialysis: Azodyl, to lower urea nitrogen levels (BUN) and Epaktin, to lower phosphorus levels in the blood. I did not hear him say that the pills would be accompanied by the fluid therapy or not.
I hope this helps someone’s pet. My apologies if this has already been posted. I admit I did not search for the names of the pills.
Comment by petlover — April 17, 2007 @ 8:16 pm