The FDA Raw Dog Food Conspiracy
Just imagine:
If seven out of a hundred is bad, is that sufficient proof that the whole lot is bad? No! As an intelligent person, what you probably do is to purchase from brands producing safe and healthy raw food.
Better still, the FDA should make public recalls of contaminated commercial pet foods. But to condemn the unhealthy raw diet along with the healthy ones is extreme and best called a conspiracy.
But wait, there’s more.
FDA is not alone in this conspiracy. Who is their co-conspirator?
The FDA and Their Co-Conspirator
Unfortunately, instead of other health agencies to address the misguided information led by the FDA, they further fueled the conspiracy theory. For example, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) blatantly expressed their disdain for raw pet food safety. They stated on their site that they don’t recommend raw diets for pets.
But here’s something really interesting:
They admitted that the kibble, canned and raw diets expose people to germs. However, CDC condemned only raw food.
Isn’t that interesting? Especially from a lobbying perspective…
These are the public health institutions we trust to provide objective and bona fide information. However, what have they done? They provided subjective, false, and outrageous deductions on the state of healthy raw food on human and pet health.
The FDA’s Double Standard
The historical records of the recalls of pet foods prove the FDA’s double standards. From the data provided by the Truth about Pet Food.com, from 2010 to 2012, there were thirty-five cases of salmonella bacteria found in pet food. Fifteen of them were kibble, sixteen were dog treats, and the other four were raw food.
How can the FDA say a study conducted from 2010 to 2012 proves that raw food is more dangerous than processed food, but the analysis of the recall records from 2010 to 2012 contradicts their findings?
You think something is fishy, don’t you? Well, we do too.
Apparently, the facts prove the direct opposite of what the FDA has to say about raw pet food. Sufficient evidence proves that Kibble has been more likely to be contaminated with Salmonella bacteria than raw pet food. Yet, they chose to look away.
Are there hidden financial interests in FDA’s actions? What do you think?
Let’s dig a little deeper and see what Dr. Jones has to say.
The 18 Consumer Alerts for Pet Food Products
Dr. Jones shares his concern on FDA’s Conspiracy and Raw Pet Food. He observes the recent trend of the FDA — an excessive number of raw pet food recalls. He comments on the information provided by Susan Thixton on the TRUTH about pet food.com.
“As of May 2016, the FDA had issued 18 consumer alerts for pet food products, and 50% of those have been for raw pet food. What’s going on”.
He expresses his concern as he explains:
Furthermore, he explains that the FDA’s concern that raw pet food is so much more dangerous than Kibble is not accurate.
Besides, he confirms the report provided by the TRUTH About pet food.com that:
“the historical records since 2012 proves that kibble is 75 times more likely to be contaminated with salmonella than the supposed risky raw pet food.”
Do you see where this is going?
The FDA is determined to shut its eyes to facts. They are determined to find the means to dissuade the public from feeding pets a raw diet.
The FDA definitely has a hidden agenda. What is this if not a conspiracy?
But wait, it gets worse.
The Human Food Regulation vs. the Raw Pet Food Concerns
Here is FDA’s double standard when it comes to regulations of human food and pet food:
The USDA Food Safety and Inspection is another Federal health agency responsible for the control of food safety in the US.
According to the USDA regulation on performance standard for Salmonella in raw chicken, the allowed presence of Salmonella in whole chicken is 9.8% and 25% in ground chicken.
That simply means, approximately 10 out of 100 whole chicken you come across in a grocery are allowed to have Salmonella bacteria in them. Likewise, for ground chicken, 25 out of 100 are allowed to be contaminated with the bacteria.
Astonishing, isn’t it?
We thought the FDA has zero-tolerance for Salmonella bacteria in pet food because of the danger to human lives?
Why is raw meat for human consumption allowed to contain some percentage of the bacteria but raw pet food isn’t?
It all boils down to this:
The contradiction in FDA’s tolerance for Salmonella presence in raw pet food and human food is revelations of their conspiracy against raw pet food.
Sadly, healthy commercial raw meat manufacturers are heavily paying the price. Dissuaded raw feeders are scared to feed their uncooked meat.
However, it seems the FDA public statement against the raw diet is a mere matter of convenience to them.
They have failed to provide any substantial evidence that healthy uncooked pet food is dangerous to human health. Yet they decided to drag them along.
The FDA’s Justification for Raw Pet Food Condemnation
Apart from its concern for the accidental consumption of Salmonella from handling raw food, the FDA shares its concern about contaminated excreta. They explain that the chance of being infected by Salmonella from picking up their pets’ poop is high.
But the truth? The facts show us the FDA may not have so much to worry about after all.
Strictly speaking, from the data the FDA based its warning, the risk of infection by picking up pet poop is not high. The study proves that the risk of human communicability through contact with infected feces is less than 1% in cats and 2.5% in dogs.
Think about it:
In comparison to the allowed presence of Salmonella in raw chicken, the risk of salmonella infection from cleaning after a dog or a cat is extremely low.
Nevertheless, the FDA is comfortable with the allowed presence in raw chicken for human food, but very insecure about the lower risk involved with infected excreta. How come?
The Reason for The FDA’s Double standard
Guess why the FDA tolerates the presence of Salmonella in human food? The reason is not far-fetched: Salmonella is everywhere in the environment.
To say there shouldn’t be a bit of it in raw chicken is like telling the world not to eat chicken anyway. But they know it is impossible.
Debbie Philipson shares her opinion on this matter. She reveals that:
“The unfortunate thing about the food modernization act…the FDA decided they were going to have zero tolerance for Salmonella in pet food— that is more stringent than what human food has.”
“For human food, there’s a low tolerance and pet food Zero. This just isn’t realistic because Salmonella is everywhere in the environment. There’s like twenty-two hundred plus strains everywhere…”
And still, they choose to discredit the raw pet food market only—even though kibble has proved to be more of a threat.
What is the real reason behind this? …
Debbie Philipson isn’t the first person to explain that the Salmonella bacteria are present in the environment. Similarly, Dr. Karen Becker explains:
“Salmonella can be isolated from 36% of healthy dogs and 18% of healthy cats irrespective of what the food they consume.”
“They harbor the Salmonella bacteria as part of their normal GI flora. Thus, dogs and cats can naturally shed Salmonella in feces and saliva regardless of the food they eat.”
“All non-typhoid Salmonella are commonly present in the environment and reside in the GI tracts of many animals including pets.”
The only way to be safe is through proper hygiene practices — it is essential to wash your hands thoroughly after feeding your pet. Also, disinfect the working surface and utensils used.
Nevertheless, does the FDA have a genuine reason to worry about a raw diet? Maybe, or maybe not.
Does the FDA have secret financial reasons? You make the guess.
Isn’t it interesting that FDA’s policy goes so well in line with the financial interests of the major pet food brands, who sell Kibble but not raw dog food?
But do they have any objective reason to condemn healthy commercial raw pet food? Obviously, no.
The Myth About the Danger and Nutritional Deficiency of Healthy Raw Food
The common belief of most veterinarians against raw diet is; raw pet foods are not nutritionally balanced. However, this an incorrect proposition.
Commercial raw pet food companies adhere strictly to the FDA guidelines and AAFCO recommendations in ensuring that their products have balanced nutrients.
In an interview with Rodney Habib, Debbie Philipson sheds some light on the misunderstanding. She says:
“I think a lot of veterinarians in the veterinary community, in general, equate raw food with home fed diets.”
“There have been studies showing that a lot of homemade diets…are not meeting the guidelines for a dog or cat. For me, I think that’s where it stems from.”
“The veterinary bias against raw foods does not necessarily understand that there’s commercial food where these companies are following FDA guidelines and AAFO recommendations and these ingredients are complete and balanced”.
Unfortunately, these veterinarians’ opinions aid the FDA’s conspiracy. Will there be an end to the talk-down against raw pet food?
Healthy Raw Dog Food – FAQ:
• What Is the Healthiest Food to Feed Your Dog?
The healthiest food to feed dogs is organic, unprocessed, synthetic-ingredients free dog food. Although dogs can have processed food once in a while, it is unhealthy to feed them processed food regularly.
A lot of raw dog food brands use synthetic products, and that makes it difficult to choose a random raw dog food in a store. However, Carna4 dog food produces dog food with synthetic-free ingredients, with no by-products. So, it is raw, but now raw organic.
• Is A Raw Diet Better for Dogs?
Raw diets are fresh. Unlike kibble, canned, and cooked dog foods, they are unprocessed, therefore retaining all its nutrients. Hence, they are better for dogs. What is essential is to make sure the raw diet is balanced and organic. Some commercial raw dog food brands that produce a balanced organic raw dog food diet are:
• Do Vets Recommend Raw Diet?
Certified veterinarians often, but don’t always, recommend the raw diet. Dr. Karen Becker and Dr. Andrew Jones are some of the raw diet proponents. Dr. Andrew Jones states that he feeds raw pet food to his animals and suggests you feed it to yours.
In 2015, the FDA spent a fortune to test raw pet food for the presence of Salmonella bacteria – a total of $750,000 just on what comprises 1.3% of the pet food industry.
That is a little extreme, isn’t it?
However, they claim not to have the resources to address other health concerns regarding 98.7% of the pet food market.
It seems like the FDA will go at any lengths to get what they want. And to what end? To see that everyone, including you, stops feeding dogs and cats raw food?
But why should you stop feeding your dog healthy raw pet food?
If the FDA desires the eradication of raw food in the pet food industry, they have to do better than propounding theories that clearly verifies their bias and raw diet food phobia.
Unfortunately, some veterinarians and institutions such as Tuft University keep on posting articles about the dangers of raw food. From what we learned today, commercial raw pet food is different from homemade raw diets.
Contrary to what the FDA might say, healthy raw pet food is obviously not dangerous to your dogs and cats.
Now that you know this, it’s your turn to tell the story to another. Exposing the FDA’s conspiracy against healthy raw food is up to you now.
Why not do a favor to fellow pet owners? Why not share this story?
Author: Hannah George & Stefan Loa
Share this article