Hello from a 2nd year vet student

[karisma11]

Lurking around and thought I'd pop in... there seems to be a lot of misinformation about vets and pet food circulating around here!

Just FYI, besides working on my DVM, I have also worked as a veterinary technician in 3 small animal hospitals since I was 15. I would love to answer any questions about our curriculum or correct any misunderstandings about vets and our education/training (for example no, our nutrition classes are NOT sponsored in any way by pet food companies!)

[DaneMama]

Hello and

Glad you've joined up here!

What is your curriculum in regards to nutrition? How many classes in total?

Do any of your text books have any pet food logos in them (front or back few pages)? SD or Purina or Eukanuba or Royal Canin? Are any of these brands mentioned anywhere in those books?

Who are your professors and who trained them?

[karisma11]

I have had one nutrition class so far (not including what was required in undergrad). I know third year we have 2 more electives available, plus rotations during clinics 4th year. So 3 classes (only 1 required).

Our textbook (for small animal) is Small Animal Clinical Nutrition 5th edition.

As the veterinary world is somewhat small, and the student world even smaller, to remain anonymous I would prefer not to mention my specific instructor's name, but I will tell you he has a BS and PhD in nutrition, as well as a DVM, and he earned those degrees at major universities here in the US. He also has written multiple publications that are available in peer-reviewed journals.

Food companies do not sponsor our classes. Food reps do not teach our classes. Food reps *are* allowed to sponsor optional lunch seminars in which we are invited, but not required or even encouraged to attend. During these lunch seminars they of course promote their products.

[BabyHusky]

a friend of mine, who's currently in vet school, and I recently had a debate about this topic. I actually looked at her books and surprisingly didn't see any pet logos, brands, or companies BUT she did preach to me that SD, Eukanuba, and Royal Canin are high quality. After debating back and forth for a while, she ended the convo with a "i'm the one in vet school so you can't say thing", followed by my eye-roll. You can only debate so much with those that are closed off. Note: Her dog, who's on Nutro, is always sick and she just can't figure out why. Hmm. but Nutro is the best according to her. I'm scared for pet owners out there who go to her as a vet in the future. :D

[DaneMama]

So...how is it that nearly all vets/students are simply enthralled with the SD, Purina, Eukanuba, and RC brands?

Why is it that nearly every single one vet feeds and recommends these brands?

Is it just from these seminars that the companies push their products?

I'm sure the textbooks that you read for nutrition are written based on "scientific studies" but who conducts these studies?

How are these studies implemented and do they make sense/are they logical and complete?

[SpooOwner]

Lurking around and thought I'd pop in... there seems to be a lot of misinformation about vets and pet food circulating around here!

Since you're willing to jump into these debates, can you share some insight into why so many vets and vet techs are against raw feeding? And what is your opinion?

[karisma11]

Since you're willing to jump into these debates, can you share some insight into why so many vets and vet techs are against raw feeding? And what is your opinion?

I'll answer this one first because it kinda encompasses all the other posts

Simply stated, there is no peer reviewed scientific evidence available to support feeding raw. And there are risks involved. It's true, dogs and cats can get Salmonella and E. coli poisoning. How common is that? Probably not very common, but it can and does happen. Yes, I know you will point out that Salmonella has been detected in dry food, but that is very rare, whereas Salmonella is almost ubiquitous in raw meat. Cats and dogs do get intestinal perforations and obstructions from raw bones, as well as chipped and worn down teeth. These are all risks associated with raw feeding. That isn't to say it WILL happen, or that it those things COMMONLY happen, but it's still a risk. Another risk is an imbalanced diet. Everyone on this board seems fairly well versed in balancing diets, but unfortunately many pet owners are not, and nutritional deficiencies which had become very rare in this country are now being seen again, such as rickets and osteopenia. Essentially, because there is no proven benefit, and many risks involved, most vets do not recommend it.

The other big reason is liability. If a veterinarian were to recommend a raw diet for a pet, and that pet's owner improperly handled the raw meat and contracted a food borne illness from it, they can turn around and sue the veterinarian for recommending it. It's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

[karisma11]

'm sure the textbooks that you read for nutrition are written based on "scientific studies" but who conducts these studies?

How are these studies implemented and do they make sense/are they logical and complete?

To address the study issue, of course food companies conduct many of the studies. Many studies are also conducted by universities and are published in peer reviewed journals, in which the methods, materials, raw data, and conclusions are available to any scientist to criticize. Double blinded studies have shown efficacy of many of these diets. To date, there are no double blinded, peer reviewed studies for raw.

[karisma11]

And what is your opinion?

I believe in evidence based medicine. I personally do not feed raw to my pets because of a lack of evidence that there is any benefits, only potential risks. That isn't to say there are no benefits, only that they haven't been proven. There is much anecdotal evidence to support both sides.

[DaneMama]

I'll answer this one first because it kinda encompasses all the other posts

Simply stated, there is no peer reviewed scientific evidence available to support feeding raw. And there are risks involved. It's true, dogs and cats can get Salmonella and E. coli poisoning. How common is that? Probably not very common, but it can and does happen. Yes, I know you will point out that Salmonella has been detected in dry food, but that is very rare, whereas Salmonella is almost ubiquitous in raw meat. Cats and dogs do get intestinal perforations and obstructions from raw bones, as well as chipped and worn down teeth. These are all risks associated with raw feeding. That isn't to say it WILL happen, or that it those things COMMONLY happen, but it's still a risk. Another risk is an imbalanced diet. Everyone on this board seems fairly well versed in balancing diets, but unfortunately many pet owners are not, and nutritional deficiencies which had become very rare in this country are now being seen again, such as rickets and osteopenia. Essentially, because there is no proven benefit, and many risks involved, most vets do not recommend it.

The other big reason is liability. If a veterinarian were to recommend a raw diet for a pet, and that pet's owner improperly handled the raw meat and contracted a food borne illness from it, they can turn around and sue the veterinarian for recommending it. It's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

So....what happens when a vet recommends a commercially produced diet that then has a recall implemented due to salmonella contamination or some other chemical contamination that causes animals to become sick?

Or the diets that create such horrible dental disease in nearly all of their patients? There is a reason why 80% of all dogs and cats over the age of two have periodontal disease.

Or the diets that contain food allergens that wreck a dogs body? And then the vet promotes another RX food and lifelong medications?

To me its a larger liability to promote commercially processed and inappropriate diets.

To address the study issue, of course food companies conduct many of the studies. Many studies are also conducted by universities and are published in peer reviewed journals, in which the methods, materials, raw data, and conclusions are available to any scientist to criticize. Double blinded studies have shown efficacy of many of these diets. To date, there are no double blinded, peer reviewed studies for raw.

There's a reason (unfortunately) that no one will do a study on raw feeding. There's no money in it.

There's billions of dollars to be made in commercially processed diets for pets.

So, you didn't answer the second part of my question...are these studies logical and complete? I'm asking for your own opinion on the matter.