Thoughts on canine & feline nutrition

In this episode:

Pet Joke of the Week: Clever dog quote from a famous historical figure.
Personal comment: Thoughts on canine & feline nutrition

Transcript of personal comment from this episode of The Web-DVM:

I am once again foregoing the news this week in favor of another rather substantial personal comment. As promised last week following my personal comment about dogs and wolves being very different species that should not be considered the same, and certainly should not be fed the same, this week I turn my attention to canine and feline nutrition. Let me begin by quickly addressing the feeding of a raw meat diet.

In dogs, I already explained last week that having a less acidic gastric pH than their wolf ancestor, dogs do not have a good natural defense against raw meat bacteria and parasites. As such, feeding raw meat carries a high risk of food poisoning in dogs as it does people, some cases of which can be life threatening. Like people, we regularly see cases of raw meat induced food poisoning including salmonella, e. coli, klebsiella, and campylobacter, to name some of the more common ones. And for you raw feeding proponents that think this does not occur because it has not yet happened to your dog? Think again, I have seen it time and again in practice. If your dogs have not gotten sick you have been lucky, and I hope that you do not ever have to face both the expense and emotional toll of your pet getting violently ill, while living with the guilt that your insistence on feeding in a manner that the vast majority of veterinarians recommend against for good reason, was the cause. And if you feed raw because wolves do and you think that dogs should eat the same as a wolf, then I urge you to please watch last week’s episode focused on the many ways the two species are different.

Also, feeding a canine an exclusively protein diet is a poor approach to promoting good health. In order to break down protein into smaller chains that can be properly absorbed by the gut, metabolic reactions must occur that generate ammonia as a primary waste product. Thankfully the liver processes this ammonia and converts it into a less harmful analog called urea, which then gets transported to the kidneys for elimination in the urine. However, feeding an exclusive or disproportionately high level of protein, subsqently puts metabolic stress on the liver and kidneys because of this, while starving the body of other important nutrients that the canine needs, such as carbohydrates, fiber, and fat. You see, dogs are not carnivores that require a diet exclusively of meat, nor even mostly of meat. They are, like people, omnivores, requiring a diet properly balanced in nutrients.

Regarding cats well, like in many other ways, they are different from dogs. For one thing, they ARE carnivores, that is, they can thrive on a diet of pure meat protein, having the physiological adaptations to more efficiently create non-protein nutrients from protein. That said, raw meat is still not good idea for them either. While cats seems to be able to withstand raw meat food poisoning a bit better than dogs, I have still treated a number of confirmed food poisoning cases, the most common of which has seemed to be salmonella.

Now, even though cats can thrive on a pure protein, meat diet, they still seem to do better with some degree of vegetable matter in their food, with some fiber, complex carbohydrates, and antioxidants making invaluable contributions to overall health. So while we still like to feed cats diets that are proportionally heavy in protein, it is advisable to offer some vegetable and fibrous carbohydrate sources as well.

Now the breakdown. Starting with dogs, they do best with the following breakdown of nutrients: 25%-35% protein, 35%-45% carbohydrate, 5%-15% fat, and 5-10% fiber. Cats do best with 35%-45% protein, 25%-35% carbohydrate, 15%-25% fat, and 1%-5% fiber. Cats also cannot manufacture the amino acid taurine, making it an essential additive to all feline foods. Deficiency of taurine can lead to severe cardiac disease in cats.

So what kinds of pet food should you select? I am not here to promote any one brand of food nor am I going to blast any particular brands as tempting as it may be to do so. I will offer this, however: avoid grocery store and superstore brands, as these foods are consistently very bad diets, heavy in fillers and poor quality nutrient sources. And, the companies that make them are sneaky.

They make the food so that the nutrient label matches well with better quality diets, but what they do not tell you is that, while a reputable pet food company may use good quality protein sources such as muscle and organs, a grocery store brand will use hoof, hair, and skin. Both technically protein, but the absorption and utilization will not be the same. While a reputable diet may use quality carbohydrate and fiber sources such as rice and vegetables, a grocery store brand may use fillers like corn and wheat. If you want to feed your pets well, resist the temptation to go down that pet food isle while at the grocery store.

Instead, look for diets that are comprised of whole foods and vegetables, with meat and veggies listed first in the ingredients, with byproducts listed further down the list. Many of these better diets are sold at veterinary clinics and large retail pet stores.

If you can fit it into your budget, consider feeding a diet free of preservatives and fillers. These so called holistic diets are made of whole foods, primarily meats and green veggies, omitting the use of chemical preservatives and highly allergenic grain fillers, such as wheat and corn. Confused about which diet to pick in a sea of options? Ask your vet, as he/she is the best source for pet food recommendations.

Regarding texture, I almost always favor a dry diet versus a canned one primarily for the dental health benefits of dry, crunchy food. Chewing a crunchy diet cleans the teeth and massages the gums, promoting good overall oral health.

For more indepth information about canine and feline nutrition broken down even further into specific life stage, please refer to the nutrition page on our parent site, Web-DVM.net.

Are dogs and wolves really that similar??

In this episode:

Pet Joke of the Week: The Faithful Cat
Personal comment: Are dogs and wolves really that similar??

Transcript of personal comment from this episode of The Web-DVM:

In my personal comment tonight, I want to compare and contrast domestic dogs with their ancient ancestor, the wolf. I feel compelled to do this in light of a movement that is gaining some momentum that is directed toward treating dogs like wolves because they are essentially the same. This is most profound with regard to feeding, with some people not only themselves convinced, but vehemently trying to convince other dog owners that dogs should be fed raw meat diets. Many of people of this ilk even believe that all or most health problems of dogs arise simply because most are not fed a raw meat diet like their wolf ancestors. Others take this even further and refuse vaccines, deworming, heartworm and flea preventive…because this is how wolves live and dogs are basically wolves.

I am here to tell you today that this premise that dogs are nothing more than well trained wolves could not be further from the truth. There are physical and some behavioral similarities to be sure, but please allow me to explain that the comparison of the two species pretty much stops there – dogs and wolves are clearly separate and distinct species.

Let us begin with the wolf. The wolf is an ancient wild canid, the product of hundreds of thousands of years of natural selection, which is essentially the fact that, in the wild, only the healthiest and most physiologically well adapted to the environment survive to breed, thereby passing along to offspring only the best genes that reflect the best physical characteristics to survive. After countless generations of such natural selection, the wolf we see today is very hardy creature, physiologically capable of digesting raw meat and dealing with raw meat bacteria and parasites. They have physiological adaptations that enable them to process a diet composed largely of protein, withstand temperature extremes, are more resilient to disease, and have thick skin to better handle insect bites, mites, fleas, and ticks.

The domestic dog, on the other hand, is descended originally from the wolf indeed, from a time in our own ancient past when our ancestors found the most docile examples of wolves convenient to keep around as an easy food source in time of need, as an aid in hunting, and who knows, maybe even for companionship. This occurred presumably about 100,000 years ago, when the fossil record shows the first domestic dog bones found among those of early humans, as a representation of a novel divergent species separate from wolves and clearly living among people. This is proof that selective breeding of dogs began to occur around this time and has influenced the dog’s evolution to this day, and it is this selective breeding that has made dogs so very different from the wolf.

First, since of course only the most docile and people friendly examples were logically kept by people, the wild nature of wolves was very much bred out over successive generations of dogs. Next, keeping shelter with humans and sharing their food, ancient dogs did not have an adapt or die reality imposed on them as was the case with their wild cousins. Being cared for by humans, fed cooked meat and the more diverse diet of humans in general, dogs were able to survive and breed with less physiological stress placed on them, which eventually created a species that is far less hardy and resilient than their wolf cousins, essentially a species in many ways, more like us.

Add in the highly selective breeding for the creation and maintenance of separate dog breeds that became popular in relatively recent canine history, and what have today, is an example of the opposite of the hardy wolf born of natural selection. We have instead the domestic dog born of very UNnatural selection. Selective breeding indeed gave us the physical and temperament characteristics people seeked for dogs, but with that came unwanted genetic baggage, known as recessive genetic disease that served to further weaken the species. Case in point, perhaps more than half of the canine disease I see in practice has a genetic origin.

So what does this mean when comparing the two species? Well first, the ability to deal with raw meat bacteria and parasites is far greater in the wolf than the dog. This is because the wolf is physiologically adapted to deal with raw meat pathogens with an extremely acidic stomach pH of 1 or less, poised to effectively kill raw meat bacteria and parasites. The dog, on the other hand, has a stomach pH considerably less acidic and more along the lines of people at a pH of 2.5-3. Just this week, I have treated at least 5 cases of dogs with GI disease secondary to intestinal parasites. In my career as a whole, I have treated many cases of bacterial food poisoning from the ingestion of raw meat, usually by accident, but in some cases fed purposely by owners caring for their dogs under the false notion that dogs should eat raw because they are just like wolves.

Regarding breakdown of nutrients, although wolves are omnivores, meaning that they need a mix of meat and at least some fiber and other nutrients in their diet, with the bulk of their diet coming from meat and a minority coming from the plant material present in the guts of their mostly herbivorous prey, they are physiologically adapted to thrive on a much higher percentage of dietary protein than dogs. In short, biochemically they have a greater ability than dogs to convert protein into non-protein nutrients such as fats and carbohydrates.

Dogs, on the other hand, are, like the humans they have cohabitated with for 100,000 years, are far more omniverous, needing a balance of dietary nutrients of 20%-30% protein, 10%-20% fat, 35%-45% carbohydrate, and 5%-10% crude fiber. Feeding a dog the same percentage of dietary protein that the average wolf would consume relative to other nutrients, would lead to excessive metabolic stress on the liver, kidneys, and pancreas among other problems.

If I have not yet convinced you that wolves and dogs are very different, let us compare their DNA. The dog’s DNA sequence differs from that of the wolf by an average of 1%. On paper this does not seem like much of a difference, but if you consider that the DNA of humans and our closest living evolutionary cousin, the chimpanzee, is only 1.8%, one can understand that a difference of 1% is rather significant. If even this fact is not enough to convince you, consider that the percentage difference between the DNA of a 175 pound Mastiff compared to that of a 6 pound Yorkshire Terrier, both variants of the domestic dog, is virtually mathematically undetectable. If there is virtually no difference between the DNA of a 175 pound domestic dog versus a 6 pound domestic dog, how can we be made to believe that the dog is basically the same as a wolf from whom its DNA differs by an average of 1%?

Finally, the notion that dogs do not need vaccines, flea, tick, and heartworm preventive because wolves don’t, is just absurd. In truth, while wolves seem to be more resilient to withstand the bites of fleas, ticks, and to combat infectious disease due to their hardiness born of natural selection, they would still benefit from these measures as well. For example, wolves are susceptible to infectious diseases that we regularly vaccinate dogs against, such as rabies, distemper, parvo, as they are also prone to heartworm disease. We do not hear about it or know about it, since they are certainly not routinely checked out by a vet. However the effects of not being protected from these diseases as dogs are is clearly evidenced by their relatively poor neonatal survival rates and much shorter average life spans. Respectively, only 40% or less of wolf cubs survive to adulthood, and the average lifespan of a wolf in the wild is only 3-5 years.

In summary, I urge you to not be misled into believing that your dog is merely a wolf and needs to be fed and treated as such. Wolves are a product of hundreds of thousands of years of natural selection, survival of the fittest in the simplest terms. Dogs, while originally descended from the wolf more than 100,000 years ago, have evolved into a less wildly adaptive, separate and distinct species from breeding under the care, shelter, and diet of humans, then later very selectively bred into distinctive and unique breeds. All of this resulted in domestic dogs being generally a less hardy species than wolves, requiring a more diverse and cooked diet, having a greater susceptibility to the elements and infectious disease, and being prone to genetically inherited disease. They are little more like wolves than humans are like chimpanzees.

That is our show for tonight. Please help us continue our discussion by visiting our blog at webdvm.blogspot.com, where comments posted there will be read and addressed in my live broadcast at BlogTV.com this Sunday evening at 7:30 pm. Please tune in next week when I will be discussing canine and feline nutrition more indepthly, including a bit more on the feeding of raw meat and the evidence we have for why it is a bad idea.

Dental disease in pets: more than just bad breath!

In this episode:

Pet Joke of the Week: The prophetic parrot
Personal comment: Dental disease: more than just bad breath!

Transcript of personal comment from this episode of The Web-DVM:

With national animal dental health month approaching in just over a week, I wanted to address a topic about which there is too little awareness about, and a topic that too many pet owners are dismissive of. All too often people simply think that their cat’s or dog’s bad breath is just a consequence of nature, that they are animals, and they are supposed to have stinky breath, end of story. What I want to tell you today is that dental disease in animals is very real, is capable of causing severe pain, suppressing the immune system and leading to overall poor health, can rot and dissolve jaw bone, and can lead to infections being seeded elsewhere in the body. I want to tell you that dental disease is far more than just bad breath!

Let us begin with the pain aspect. Anyone who has had a bad tooth ache knows the excruciating pain one bad tooth can cause. Now, imagine that instead of having just one bad tooth, your mouth looks like this (see image on video).

Most of us cannot fathom the kind of pain that teeth like this cause. But then, when I examine a mouth like this and tell the owner about the level of pain this is causing, they almost always tell me, “But he doesn’t act like he is in pain.” Folks, just as I do my clients, allow me to educate you on pain in animals. In the wild, they are programmed to not show signs of pain since, if they show any weakness, other wild animals will opportunistically bully them away from food, hunt their young, chase them out of their shelter, and generally take advantage of them. Even though our animals are domesticated, they still carry this tendency to hide their pain to the best of their ability, which can make them very cryptic about showing owners signs of pain, which is especially true in cats. And since they cannot speak to us and articulate the fact that something hurts, it often goes under our radar. But believe me when I tell you, this mouth HURTS!

Next, let us talk about suppressing the immune system. Pain leads to stress, which we know leads to immune system suppression in people, and that is no different in dogs and cats. The oral bacterial load associated with this level of tartar is severe, with virulent bacteria being swallowed constantly by patients that suffer with dental disease, keeping the immune system very busy, and subsequently weaker. As a result, patient’s with dental disease also commonly suffer from opportunistic infections of the skin, urinary tract, and ears.

While on the subject of bacteria, these pathogens that live in the mouth can also directly seed elsewhere in the body to end up infecting the heart and/or kidneys, leading to life threatening complications that are very difficult to treat.

Locally, I cannot tell you how many times I have seen pathological fractures of the jaw because tooth root infection has eroded bone, or this phenomena (see image on video) called an oronasal fistula, a tooth infection of the upper arcade of teeth that is so severe that it has eroded up into the nasal sinuses.

What is so upsetting about all this is that it is so preventable. All you have to do is take your pet to the vet regularly for its yearly visits, which include getting vaccines current, heartworm screening, stool analysis to check for parasites, all a good idea, but also a thorough examination which includes an inspection of the teeth. If your vet notices early stage dental disease and recommends a dental scale and polish based on that examination, don’t blow it off and make the appointment to get it done. Afterwards, if the vet recommends dental chews, feeding dry pet food, or other measures to keep your pets’ the teeth and gums healthy, take heed and do it. Maybe next year, your pet may not need dental work because of his recommendations.

So let’s go over some common reasons why owners decline dental cleanings, as I refute why most of these reasons are not justifiable. I already discussed that people simply dismiss dental health as unimportant, and am pretty confident we explained how wrong that is. So that brings me to the next most common reason: cost.

Not having the financial resources to have the work done is unfortunate, and I sympathize with anyone in this position. I would not recommend anyone put themselves or their family in financial jeopardy to having the pet’s teeth cleaned. But there are others that actually can afford the dental procedure, but money is still generally tight and they cannot justify the expense. I think some of these folks also tend to fall in the same category as the previous group we just discussed, that generally dismiss the importance of dental health. For these people, I will say this: an investment in a dental could potentially save you a great deal of money in the future. For treatment of secondary heart infection, kidney infection, pathological fracture of the jaw, oronasal fistula, and other health consequences of dental disease, cost a heck of a lot more to treat then that dental that would have prevented them. I cannot tell you how many clients have lived to regret declining my recommendations to have the teeth addressed, because of the financial ramifications that resulted in their non-action.

The final most common reason that pet owners decline dentistry is fear of the anesthesia required to perform the procedure. Sorry folks, our patients do not simply open up and say ah. Anesthesia is necessary to have the work done. And besides, if we have to extract teeth or perform deep root cleaning as we often do, they have to be under general anesthesia for that anyway.

My answer to this fear is that it is unwarranted for two important reasons. First, is that complications that arise from dental disease are statistically far more dangerous for the pet than anesthesia. With advances in anesthesia protocols and monitoring equipment that rival that of human medicine, the reality is that death from anesthesia is exceedingly rare, especially with all the precautions we take, starting with a pre-anesthetic exam and bloodwork.

So let us celebrate National Animal Dental Health month with some good common sense dental prevention, beginning with dry pet food, regular dental chews, and weekly tooth brushing (but I would reserve the tooth brushing only for pets that do not resent it too much – most cats will not be too amenable to it). Most importantly, if your vet recommends some cleaning and dental work, if it will not break you financially, by all means do it.

Thank you for watching, I will once again not be available for my live broadcast this Sunday evening, as my beloved NY Jets will be playing a monumentally important playoff game, but I plan to be back on BlogTV.com with my live show next Sunday. As for this show, please join me next week, when I will be discussing domestic dogs vs. wolves, are they really as similar as many think, or are they very different separate and distinct species’.

Who is smarter, dogs or cats??

In this episode:

Pet Joke of the Week: The cat and the husband
Heroic 9/11 rescue dog cloned
Personal comment: Who is smarter, dogs or cats?

Transcript of personal comment from this episode of The Web-DVM: Who is smarter, dogs or cats??

In my personal comment tonight, I will answer the age old question of which species is smarter, dogs or cats, as well as tell you exactly how it is that we know the answer. But first, seeking to get an idea of which species people generally think are smarter, I went to PetCo in Viera, Florida to ask patrons of the store what they thought. Here is what I found out.

(See video for PetCo footage)

Interesting view points and I thank all that participated in our survey, but it does seem that people opine in favor of dogs being smarter – and they are right.
Sorry cat people, but it is true, and here is how we know that dogs are the more intelligent species. Cats operate more through instinct and fight or flight response when it comes to hunting and survival, whereas dogs and their ancient ancestors. wolves, rely more on social interaction and coordination. For example, wild dogs and wolves will make distress calls to other pack members when injured or in danger, alert the pack of approaching danger, and formulate complex hunting strategies with pack members when taking down prey that is larger than themselves. They form a cohesive, productive, and functional group by establishing a social hierarchy among one another, with the alpha as leader, all the way down to the lowest ranking member, the omega. This level of social interaction and pack coordination requires a significantly higher degree of intelligence than simply hunting and surviving solitarily and through instinct and stress hormones.

Some erroneously mistake instinct for higher intelligence which would make cats perhaps seem more intelligent in comparison to other species, given their cautious nature, adept innate hunting and self grooming ability. But if one considers that waterfowl, known to be very low on the intelligence scale, still instinctively know to fly south for the winter among many other instinctual skill sets, one can clearly see that instinct and intelligence are not the same.

Being primarily stress driven in animals is actually a prevalent sign of a lower level of intelligence. Stress driven, means that the general survival of the animal depends primarily on its tendency to react in a fight or flight mode in response to even minimal stimulus. In other words, they spook very easily. Cats are so stress driven that moderate elevations in their white blood cell count and of their blood sugar on routine blood work is considered normal, as these are physical consequences of stress generated merely from the trip to the clinic and the office visit. I have actually had to hospitalize cats and place feeding tubes on many occasions because of illness brought on by a sudden stoppage of eating, attributable only to changes in the home, such as new furniture, new pets, construction, and even one time, a big painting hung in the living room. It is hard for most of us to imagine any level of stress that would lead us to literally begin starving ourselves to death, yet it is not surprising when this happens to a feline. These are phenomena we do not really see in dogs, because they are not nearly as driven by stress, their higher intelligence enabling them to rely more on pack interaction and coordinated strategy for survival and contentment.

That said, this does not necessarily make dogs better pets than cats, depending on what you seek in a pet. Being innately solitary by nature, cats are not as needy as dogs, can be left at home alone for longer periods of time, and are generally lower maintenance. I will always have cats because being driven by instinct and stress, having a cat in the home to me is akin to having a tame wild animal in the house that you can pet and snuggle with – yet that wild nature is never too far off to see, as they slink around the house, stalk and pounce on the dog’s tail, and meticulously groom after a meal. There is no doubt, they are cool in their own way. They may not catch a Frisbee, fetch a ball, swim in the pool, retrieve a duck, or go jogging with you, but they are quirky, entertaining, and affectionate creatures that make a fulfilling pet, just in a different manner than dogs do. I choose to not choose between having dogs versus cats, and elect to have both, giving me the best of both worlds.

So back to the cat people, while you may be dismayed by this information, please do not mistake this post for being some kind of critique against cats, when in fact this is quite the opposite. This is actually a defense of cats for those who dislike them because of all the reasons they are not like dogs, not as trainable, don’t come when they’re called, are a bit more aloof, etc. They are not that way because they are dismissive or by nature disrespectful; they are that way because their intelligence and stress driven survival nature imposes these limits on them. If anything, given their innate wild and solitary nature, we should applaud this species that can adapt themselves to readily cohabitate with people and thrive in our homes. If you do not find that remarkable, try keeping a raccoon as a pet and you may begin to understand – that is, of course, if you live through it.

Next week’s personal comment – Dental disease: far more than just bad breath!

Don’t forget to catch my live broadcast this Sunday 7:30 PM EST at blogtv.com, where I will address comments posted on this blog installment!

The myth of the rich veterinarian.

In this episode:

Show announcements
Pet joke of the week
The decade’s biggest animal news stories
Personal Comment: The myth of the rich veterinarian

Transcript of personal comment from this episode of The Web-DVM:

In my personal comment tonight, I just want to briefly address a misconceived notion that I saw gradually materializing in this past decade, and that is the notion that veterinarians generally are very wealthy people. I do not fully know the origins of this idea, but the truth is actually quite the opposite. While most veterinarians earn enough to live a comfortable middle class existence, only a very select few ever enjoy the kind of wealth that many people erroneously believe is the status quo. Where this can shed a poor light on us in the minds of pet owners is when, frustrated with having their own earning power ever decreasing in this currently challenging economic climate and faced with veterinary bills for their pets’ health care, some cynically characterize vets as fat cats, living in the lap of luxury as we gouge the pet owning public for every last cent they have. So let me set the record straight tonight and tell you how it really is.

According to the American Veterinary Medical Association, our governing body, the average veterinarian makes $79,000 per year. When taken in the context of the average veterinary graduate starting their careers $120,000 in student loan debt, most of us have an insta-mortgage with payments ranging from $700 – $1200 per month right out of the gates, only with no home to show for it. Factor in rent or an actual home loan, car payment, and other expenses, and one can see how that average salary does not go as far as one would think, or as one would like it to.

Others think, well the average veterinarian does may not make all that much, but the owners of practices are cleaning up. This sentiment is also quite wrong, with practice owners being included in that average salary statistic. The truth is that in order to buy a practice, yet more money has to be borrowed, with significant portions of gross revenue allocated to practice, real estate, and working capital mortgages. Add payroll and tax liabilities, property and business insurance, employee health benefits, utilities, equipment maintenance, building maintenance, inventory costs, continuing education, corporate taxes, and a huge gamut of permit, business, and professional licensing fees, and one gets a clear picture of the staggering overhead of a veterinary hospital.

Now, am I complaining about this? Am I unhappy about this? Absolutely not! I love my job and can envision doing nothing else, and that, is priceless. I thank the good Lord every day that I get to be a veterinarian, not because it stands to make me rich, but because it is my passion. Understand that if money was our primary motivation, any one of us could have attained the big bucks having gone the route of human medicine. It sure would have been a heck of a lot easier, with 131 medical schools in the United States as opposed to only 28 veterinary schools, making acceptance to veterinary school 5 times more difficult. And medically mastering only one species instead of 7? It may seem more attractive to some, but not to those of us that chose to take the harder road that ultimately pays considerably less.

Again, most veterinarians are not hurting for money and most make a good old fashion American middle class living with a decent degree of financial security. And one day when I have my student and practice loans paid off and I sell my practice, I stand to have what will likely be a comfortable retirement. Life certainly could be a heck of a lot worse. But make no mistake, the vast majority of veterinarians, especially young veterinarians are not wealthy, and certainly do not act the part of fat cats with money as our primary motivation. We did all the school and do what we do first and foremost because we love it.

Next week’s personal comment: Who is smarter, dogs or cats?

Don’t forget to catch my live broadcast this Sunday 8 PM EST at blogtv.com, where I will address comments posted on this blog installment!

Romeo’s Law is about protecting people as much as it is animals.

Transcript from today’s episode of The Web-DVM:

This story brings me to my personal comment tonight. My cynical side reads this story and thinks that its a darn good thing that Romeo’s assailant was not a famous NFL football star, since if he were, there would not likely have been a serious conviction nor the creation of Romeo’s Law. Some degree of cynicism is an unfortunate byproduct when considering some of the reactionary comments to my Michael Vick piece last week, where I was taken back not only by the number of people that were strongly in support of him, but also some of the vile comments posted on my You Tube channel and sentiments they wrote in his defense. To be fair, the majority comments did tip in favor of those who wholly reject Michael Vick no matter what he can do on the playing field or for a football team, and a few comments in support of him did offer at least reasonable alternate opinions.

However, the majority of pro Vick comments were offered in the most profane and disturbing fashion. I will not repeat the comments directly, but leave you to read them for yourself still posted on my YouTube channel. Parental discretion is advised.

In the PG summary, some of my critics insinuated that I am some kind of animal rights extremist, picking the well being of another species over that of my own. Another justified cheering for Vick because the life of a dog is less important than that of a person. Yet another accused all of those who oppose Vick of being racists.

Folks, this issue is not a matter of picking the well being of another species over that of people, it is trying to prevent innocent pain and suffering and removing those who wantonly engage in such acts of cruelty against the innocent. Does this beautiful animal pictured here deserve abuse for no reason other than the fact that he was defenseless and vulnerable?

Should the man that abused him for no other reason than sadistic pleasure be allowed to act in that manner without any accountability. Is that the kind of people we want to be? Apparently some do.

Make no mistake, ladies and gentlemen, cruelty and crimes against the innocent and vulnerable illustrates the true nature of a person whether enacted upon animals or children, or women. Studies prove time and again that those who abuse animals are likely commit domestic violence and other violent crimes.

70% of animal abusers were found in one 20 year study to have then committed other crimes, and 44% went on to harm people. (Arluke, A. & Luke, C. 1997).

In another recent study 99% of animal abusers had convictions for other crimes. (Clarke, J. P. 2002). In that same study it was found 100% of people who committed sexual homicide had abused animals. (Clarke, J. P. 2002). That study also revealed 61.5% of animal abusers had assaulted a human as well. (Clarke, J. P. 2002).

63.3% of inmates in one prison study who were in for violent crimes admitted to abusing animals. This doesn’t include the ones who didn’t admit it. (Schiff Louw Ascione, 1999)

Police have actually found animal abuse is a better predictor of whether someone will commit sexual assault than previous convictions for murder or arson. (Clarke, J. P. 2002). That is remarkable!

71% of women in a battered women’s shelter reported their abuser either abused a household pet or threatened to abuse a pet. (Ascione, 1998)
In another study 88% of child abusers also abused the animals in the home. (Ascione)

[References for all of these studies if your are interested, are posted on our blog at webdvm.blogspot.com.]

These statistics prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that animal abuse laws are as much about recognizing the danger to people from animal abusers as these laws are about protecting animals. The lives of humans as well as animals depend on it. The sooner we recognize that, the better off we will all be.

I congratulate Kentucky for having the wisdom to recognize this, and make a bold statement in the name of an innocent, defenseless victim they gave a voice to, and other victims they will continue to give voices to. I just hope that the rest of the country takes notice and follows their example.

That is our show for this Friday, December 18, 2009. I will be taking the next 2 weeks off for Christmas and New Year’s. I want to thank all of you viewers for making us a success with your participation, having progressed from just 105 views in our first episode, to now attracting between 3000 – 7000 views per episode. I look forward to bringing you the news and reading your reactionary comments to my commentary in the new year ahead. We will return on Friday, January 7, 2010, where I will be discussing The Myth of the Rich Veterinarian, so be sure to tune in.

Happy Holidays to all from The Web-DVM!

Michael Vick is no person to cheer for!

Transcript from this episode of The Web-DVM:

My personal comment tonight once again takes us back to our old nemesis Michael Vick. As you well know, Michael Vick was arrested in July 2007 and later convicted of participating in, funding, and providing the venue for the raising of dogs for the blood sport of dog fighting. At the time it happened, the Atlanta Falcons fans were appalled by this man, felt betrayed to their core, and could not run him out of town fast enough. Back then I wondered to myself, do these people revile Vick more for his crimes, or for what his arrest did to their beloved football franchise. After all, the Falcons had recently signed a new coach who later left the team mid-season because of the turmoil left behind in the wake of Vick’s departure, and they had traded Vick’s talented back up Matt Schaub to the Houston Texans – this franchise was in trouble. Then it occurred to me that whatever the people’s motivation was really irrelevant, since Vick would for life remain a pariah, one that no NFL franchise would risk tarnishing their image to sign. I mean, O.J got acquitted and we never saw him make another Naked Gun Movie! Boy was I wrong.

Still, when Vick served his time as mandated by our animal cruelty inept criminal justice system, when Philadelphia actually showed interest in signing Vick, I actually supported Roger Goodell’s decision to allow him back into the NFL. For one, having grown up in northeast NJ on the other end of the turnpike supporting NY teams, I favored anything that would make the Philadelphia Eagles look bad. But also, I figured he served his time, and as much as I despised him, he earned the right to make a living the only way he has ever known how. And if the creep is going to be free, might as well let him work so that the country can at least benefit from his income tax revenue.

That was my thinking until this past week, when the Philadelphia Eagles visited the Falcons to play in a year that has been marred for Atlanta by a disappointing season in large part because of the play of second year quarterback, Matt Ryan, who left high expectations following his breakout, amazing rookie season performance last year. I did not see the game for myself, but watched ESPN Sportcenter report later on that Philadelphia pretty much manhandled Atlanta, in a game that featured Vick make a few impressive plays which included a touchdown pass. I then felt my hair stand up as ESPN reported that, frustrated with their own team’s performance, Atlanta fans started chanting, “We want Mike, we want Mike!”, every time Vick took the field or Atlanta did not play well in later quarters.

That crowd showed me a lot that day. They proved that the people of Atlanta did not reject Vick for what he did to those 60 and likely hundreds of other dogs. They rejected him only because of the state that his actions left their football team in, without an identity, without a leader, without a coach, and unable to win. Few really ever gave a dam about those canine victims, they were just upset that their ability to win football games was compromised.

For the record, I completely and unequivocally rescind any support I had for allowing Michael Vick back in the NFL, because my past position was begotten from an overestimation of the notion that my fellow citizens would never embrace this man again, and certainly not elevate him to the status of hero, after knowing what really is in his heart. He does not belong back in the NFL because America clearly values having a winning football team over compassion for animals that were sadistically brutalized for entertainment! And as long as our citizens have such little regard for the suffering of other living beings, the best message we can send in a case like Vick’s is that someone like him will simply not be allowed return to the NFL, a place where all is forgiven as long as you play well for our team. The best message we can send, is to render him insignificant.

I will leave you with one last thought. Before you consider jumping on the Vick bandwagon and cheering for him, consider this. By all accounts Michael Vick had participated in and loved the cruel sport of dog fighting since he was a teenager. He had the world at his finger tips, a lucrative playing contract, the status of being the name and face of a franchise, all kinds of endorsement revenue, and still, he was willing to risk it all for the rush, for the pleasure of having his very own dog fighting ring and houses of torture to cultivate the most tormented and mean dogs to inflict the most violence on their opponents. He loved it all so much that he would risk all that!

You think that 16 months of jail time takes that level of cruelty out of someone’s heart? Think again. When you cheer for that man, you cheer for the very worst in humanity.

The importance of pet name selection!

Transcript of personal comment from this episode of The Web-DVM:

Onto my personal comment tonight, which is the importance of giving your pet a good name, something that new pet owners would be wise to give serious consideration to. Pets’ names in a significant way contribute to setting the tone for their life. They have the power to make them either distinctly recognizable, or just another pet among millions.

But naming a pet goes beyond potentially saddling a pet with a lousy name, it also reflects on the pet owner who named it, either eliciting a good chuckle or comment from others for its humor or creativity, or have the opposite effect, leaving others thinking that the pet owner may lack imagination, sense of humor, or creativity.

In the veterinary profession, in practice where we see literally thousands of patients, distinctive, funny, or creative pet names make individual patients often instantly recognizable to us by mere mention of the name, while with some others, the name does not click without seeing the pet with the owner in the setting of the examination room, or even not until its file is in my hand.

I often laugh when clients may see me in town and say, “Hey Doc, remember me? I’m Bailey’s Mom.” In most cases, I am not going to be able to distinguish this Bailey from the hundreds of other Baileys I have as canine patients, and have to politely tell the owner that I appreciate her friendliness toward her veterinarian, but with so many Baileys registered in my clinic, it is hard to pin point just one.

On the other hand, when the owners of the cat Fat Man Jackson run into me and say hi, there is no mistaking who their pet is.

So, for those of you thinking of a name for your new dog or cat you just adopted or plan to adopt, let me offer you some advice and give you some names to avoid, just because they are overplayed, beat to death, and run the risk of making your pet seem ordinary.

Starting with dogs, we already talked about Bailey, perhaps the most overused canine name in the history of the species. Others include: Marley, Harley, Fluffy, Buffy, Molly, Maggie, Lucy, Ginger, Chloe, Sophie, Zoe, Max, Buddy, Jake, Rocky, Buster, Cody, Charlie, Bear, and Jack. Take my advice and take pains to avoid these.

On to cats, you may want to steer clear of Midnight, Shadow, Patches, Callie, Chloe, Tiger, Tigger, Missy, Princess, Blackie, Smokey, Simba, Sam, Sammy, Sox, or Oliver.

Better choices? Perhaps go with something very personal to you, or something unique about the pet. An old friend of mine originally found her beloved mutt running down the New Jersey Turnpike and subsequently named her Jersey. When my college roommates and I adopted a house kitten, as we were overwhelmed with the exceptionally foul odor and abundance of his flatulence, one of my roommates conceived of the name, Stinky.

Favorite professional athlete names or their nicknames can also lead to neat names, producing some of my favorites, such as: Moose, Butkus, Ditka, Magic, Catfish, and Mickey to name a few.

I can go on and on with examples of cool, unique, creative, and meaningful pet names, but that is only simply because I know a lot of pets. Unfortunately, more often than not, the pets I come across are stuck with boring, common, or corny names.

So don’t feel rushed into naming your new pet. Sometimes it is best to let a cool one come to you, whether it be something funny that your pet may do in your early days together, an experience you may have with one another, or anything else that may be special or unique between you and your pet. Sometimes it comes quickly, sometimes it takes a little while.

The day I first met my late yellow lab Tiffany when she was a 12 week old puppy, her hazel green eyes reminded me of fine jewels, hence the name that came to me immediately. For my mutt Lulu who is thankfully still with me, it did not happen so quickly, and she was without a name for the first 2 weeks we were together, when suddenly for reasons I cannot explain, I called her Lulu.

In conclusion, when naming your new pet, take your time, try to be creative, personalize, and most of all, have fun with it.

We invite you to share your cool pet names with us in our respective comments sections, whether you find us through our blog or through YouTube. Please include a brief explanation of what led you to the name you chose.

That is our show for this Friday, December 4, 2009. I look forward to reading all of your cool pet names! Thanks again for watching.

How to clean dog/cat ears & prevent ear infections

Transcript of personal comment from this episode of The Web-DVM:

Welcome back to the studio, where in my personal comment tonight, I will break down the root causes and effective prevention of ear infections, discussing the most appropriate ear cleansers for your pet.

So why is one dog or cat plagued by recurring ear infections, when the majority are not? You just were acquainted with my lab, Bernie, who tends to get yeasty wax build up in his ears that will lead to infection if left unaddressed. Yet in the same household, there are two other dogs, as well as one cat, whose ears I never have the need to even clean.

The answer to this oddity is that micro-organism overgrowth and waxy build up occurs most commonly due to underlying skin allergy. The sensitive skin that lines the ear canals is prone to inflammatory changes in the allergic patient that increase glandular secretions and irritate the tissue. Allergens that affect the ears are the same as those that affect people with allergic sensitivity, airborne allergens such as: pollens, mold spores, and dessicated grasses. This resultant allergy stimulated inflammation within a region that tends to be warm and poorly ventilated, creates an environment of tissue that is ripe for overgrowth of yeast and/or bacteria.

However, this situation does not necessarily have to spiral into a severe raging ear infection where a visit to the veterinarian is the only alternative. If you put the time and effort into keeping the ears clean, dry, and fresh, you can often prevent full blown infections, saving your doggy or kitty a lot of discomfort, while saving yourself a lot of money.

So let us start with good ear cleanser selection. Good ear cleansers should do three basic things: degrease, dry, and acidify the ears. This creates an environment less hospitable for infectious micro-organisms to grow and reproduce, and is accomplished effectively with cleansers that have a small percentage of acetic acid and alcohol. However, we do not want to make the ear canal tissue more irritated, so the inclusion of these agents needs to be well balanced with soothing ingredients such as aloe and omega-3-fatty acids. Vet Solutions ear cleanser fits these criteria well, and for years has been one of my favorite choices for regular ear cleanings. If the discharge that builds up in the ears of your dog or cat is yellow to yellowish light brown in nature, this indicates that it is primarily wax and perhaps some bacterial overgrowth, making Vet Solutions an ideal choice.

If like my dog Bernie, your dog or cat tends to get a dark brown waxy discharge in the ears, then the build up is likely the result of yeast overgrowth in the ears, making Vet Solutions still a decent choice, but you can likely do better with a cleanser that has an additional ingredient that kills yeast. As you saw in the video, I used T8 Keto on Bernie, which combines many of the ingredients that make Vet Solutions effective, with the addition of ketoconozole, an antifungal that has powerful yeast killing properties. Since we recorded this video earlier this morning, however, the company that makes T8 Keto has announced an indefinite back order on this line of product, making it increasingly difficult to find. A good alternative product has the identical ingredients as T8 Keto, called Triz Ultra (EDTA)with Keto, making it an ideal alternative. Again, that product is called Triz Ultra (EDTA) with Keto. Both Vet Solutions ear flush and Triz Ultra (EDTA) with Keto can be purchased from your vet, or through online pet medication retailers.

Whether Vet Solutions or Triz Ultra (EDTA) with Keto are the appropriate choice for your pet based on the criteria I discussed, you should flush the ears just like I showed you in the instructional portion of this program, once daily for 7 days, then maintain with flushes1-3 times weekly as needed. If you follow this and remain consistent with the care of your pet’s ears, you have a good chance of preventing full blown infections, making for a happier pet and a happier bank account.

That is our show for this Friday, November 19, 2009. We will see you again in 2 weeks, as we will be taking next week off for the Thanksgiving Holiday. I wish you all a safe and happy Thanksgiving.

Animal cruelty laws are far too lenient

Transcript of personal comment from this episode of The Web-DVM:

As I stated, this leads into my personal comment tonight, which is in regard to a sad reality that I have voiced my grievance with before: that our criminal justice system is disgustingly lenient with its punishment in animal cruelty cases. The fact that operating what was essentially a torture and death camp for innocent animals bears only misdemeanor offenses is nothing short of appalling. That sends a message to our citizens that torture and murder is evil, but when enacted on animals, is simply just naughty. It certainly does little to nothing to deter sick individuals from enacting their sadistic fantasies on innocent animals.

I find it curious that the only circumstance that makes these offenses felonies, are if the deceased animals were ultimately found to have been the property of other people. Now this sends another lovely message: torture of animals is only wrong if they are the property of other people, but strays and wild animals? No worries, torture away, there’re plenty more where they came from.

What kind of criminal justice system is this? Having grown up near New York City, and practiced veterinary medicine just 10 miles west of the town where McDonough allegedly committed these atrocities, I know that New Yorkers consider themselves the most savvy and sophisticated citizenry in the country and even the world. Yet with regard to animal cruelty, the criminal justice system is as backwards as a third world country.

You will recall that I reported on Michael Vick some time ago, that I actually supported his reinstatement back into the NFL, because he had served his time in accordance to our criminal justice system, and as such, had a right to rejoin society and make a living the only way he knows how. You may also recall, however, that I felt his penalties were a joke for the degree of his offenses.

I am not deluded into thinking that stiffer penalties will truly lead these cruel individuals to see the error of their ways. While I support affording Michael Vick the right to make a living, I still feel strongly that in his heart he is a cruel sadist. If cruelty is in someone’s heart, they are not sorry for their crimes, they are just sorry that they got caught – these leopards rarely change their spots.
However, stiffer penalties accomplish a number of positive things. First and foremost, they remove these people from society, sparing innocent animals their wrath. Next, it serves as a deterrent the perpetrators and others who share their brand of evil intent, that if you are caught, you will serve the time and be branded with the stigma of being a convicted felon. Lastly, it sends a message to all that torture of animals is not just wrong, but a serious crime against society.

So rise up, New Yorkers, and make a stand for the animals of your state. I know how most of you love and care for animals, with many of you I was privileged to have as clients in the three years I practiced in Long Island. Make your voices be heard, that you will no longer accept your laws being so tolerant of animal cruelty. And that does not just go for New Yorkers, but any other state that essentially condones animal cruelty with lax penalties for violators. Remember the enlightened words of the great Mohandas Gandhi:

“The greatness of a nation can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”