Genetic markers and pet behavior problems
By Gina Spadafori
September 3, 2007
Later today, after I finish our syndicated pet-care page, I’ve got an essay to finish and post on two pieces that appeared in newspapers over the weekend.
The first, in Parade magazine, an “all is well” piece on how to feed your pet that may as well have been written by the Pet Food Institute for its reassuring tone that isn’t at all deserved in light of recent events. Yes, most pet-food is safe, and yes, the overwhelming majority of what’s on the market fulfills your pet’s nutritional requirements. But the home-prepared diets are risky nonsense and the there are three wonderful choices blather (dry, wet and semi-moist) is eye-popping in its blatant disregard for the larger issues of a globalized food system and what it means to us all.
The second, from the New York Times magazine, is about the fascinating parallel developments in the pet-food and people-food industries. The gist of it: In both worlds, we’ve come to a point where most in developed countries (people and pets both) eat industrialized, processed food while the affluent choose another path for themselves and their pets. Again, what does this mean?
When my brain cells are well-connected and my paying work is done, I’ll take a look at both pieces and put them in some (possibly) thoughtful context. Again, I am not against commercial foods. What I am against is the triumph of marketing over transparency in the food industry — for us all.
In the meantime, check out the article in the Boston Globe about the remarkable veterinary behaviorist Dr. Nicholas Dodman and his recent work on genetic links to behavior issues:
Using brand new genetic “chip” technology developed by researchers at the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, where the entire dog genome was sequenced a couple of years ago, Dodman is finally poised to do the experiments he’s been waiting years to do, exploring the genetics of complex psychiatric problems in dogs.
First, he’ll compare the DNA he has collected from Doberman pinschers who suck fanatically on their own flanks with DNA from normal Dobermans to see precisely where the genes for this compulsive disorder lie. Then, he will do the same DNA comparisons of normal bull terriers and abnormal ones with another compulsive behavior, endless tail chasing. Dodman and other scientists also hope to use the latest techniques to find the genetic roots of rage in Springer spaniels, which in theory might help explain some human aggression.
“This is absolutely revolutionary,” Dodman said last week.
Here’s the rest.
Today’s appetizer: Check out Wired magazine’s breakdown of what’s in a Snausages Snawsome. Mmmm! Crystaline fructose, anyone?
The potential of discoveries in genetic studies of dogs leading to new treatments for health and behavioral issues (for dogs and humans) is exciting! I am also happy that the dogs participation (as far I am aware of) is limited to swabs of their saliva sent to the labs.
I am hopeful that great strides in knowledge are within reach. I’ve read that the AKC is helping to fund some studies, which sounds like a good use for their funds since early studies will be done only on purebred dogs.
Comment by shadepuppy — September 3, 2007 @ 12:00 pm
I too read the Parade article, Gina and nearly gagged at the information presented. It was a good laugh for me.
Comment by VJ — September 3, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
The “They Eat What We Are” article almost made me cry by the end of it. And those lab dogs are “spoiled brats”? Ugh.
Comment by Janine — September 3, 2007 @ 6:24 pm
stick with store bought and don’t splurge on organic?! wtf?! and the real kicker about homemade, “contaminants and food-borne bacteria or toxins”. lol!~ have they not heard what’s in commercial food?! guessing they must have missed the FDA’s alert on safe pet food handling . . .
Comment by straybaby — September 4, 2007 @ 7:30 am
If this person is a vet, buyer beware! How can something organic not be better for you? That’s just common sense. Glad someone else thought it sounded like a PR blurb from the Pet Food Institute. What does it take to do a rebuttal in Parade?
Comment by Carol — September 4, 2007 @ 9:26 am
GINA or CHRISTIE: BLOGGING IDEAS HERE
http://www.wattnet.com/newslet.....forum1.htm
Dealing with activists and fanatics
Novel ingredients: Ways to be proactive
Research needed in pet nutrition
The US bioterror laws: How to comply
********************
Tracking the opposition to the petfood industry
http://www.wattnet.com/newslet.....1.htm#what
Plant biotechnology: Adoption and acceptance
http://www.wattnet.com/newslet.....1.htm#what
****************************
Yikes! I never knew an organization such as the one below existed!
Animal Agriculture Alliance
Action Needed to Stop HSUS from Exploiting the U.S. Postal Service
Sample Letter Protesting Microsoft’s Partnership with HSUS
http://www.animalagalliance.or.....rentIssues
Comment by petlover — September 4, 2007 @ 10:13 am
I don’t know if these are related in any way, however there is another behavior study going on to identify and understand the genetic background of panic, anxiety related disorders, compulsive disorders, and aggression in dogs.
http://psych.ucsf.edu/K9BehavioralGenetics/
Canine Behavioral Genetics Project is a collaboration between Dr. Steven Hamilton of UCSF and Dr. Karen Overall of Univ of PA.
Comment by Cathy Lynch — September 5, 2007 @ 10:17 am
Re: “How can something organic not be better for you?”
Just because something is “organic” doesn’t mean it’s safe or better. Pesticides kill pests. This is a good thing. Pests carry disease. Plenty of “natural” things are very bad for you. Mold is natural. Bacteria are natural. Viruses are natural. If you’ve ever watched the BBC Program “How Clean Is Your House” you’ll see plenty of people who’s excuse for living in pure filth is “I don’t want to clean with harsh, environmentally unsafe chemicals” while they breed immense colonies of lethal “natural” bacteria all over their homes.
Do you notice all the E. Coli reports on TV now? A large part of that is the ORGANIC food movement.
Here’s why:
“A new study finds that the most dangerous bacteria in America’s food supply, E. coli O157:H7, can actually get inside the tissues of such food plants as lettuce and spinach, where it can’t be washed off.
This is bad news for organic food buyers. The major reservoir of O157 bacteria is cattle manure—and organic farmers use large amounts of cattle manure to provide the nitrogen fertilizer necessary for their crops to grow. (Conventional farmers prefer to use pure nitrogen, taken from the air, on food crops, using animal manure only for feed corn and other nonfood crops.)”
http://www.cgfi.org/materials/....._8c_02.htm
Comment by Christopher — September 5, 2007 @ 8:32 pm