# Attention anyone that feeds raw meat pet food



## Apres Argent (Aug 9, 2010)

Attention anyone that feeds raw meat pet food or manufacturers of raw meat pet foods...the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) is about to vote on a policy against the feeding of raw meat pet food. If you want to protect your rights to feed a raw meat pet food, I suggest you take action before this gets approved. 

Dr. Amy Nesselrodt - veterinarian - first alerted me to this serious situation. She shared that at an upcoming meeting (August 2 or 3, 2012) the AVMA Council on Public Health and Regulatory Veterinary Medicine will vote to create a policy to "discourage the feeding to cats and dogs of any animal source protein that has not first been subjected to a process to eliminate pathogens because of the risk of illness to cats and dogs as well as humans." 

Why would the AVMA initiate an official policy discouraging the feeding of raw pet food? What is this action based on? 

It took two phone calls, but I eventually spoke with AVMA media relations Assistant Director Sharon Curtis Granskog (early Friday July 13, 2012). She explained the policy would be voted on by the board during the early August meeting. I asked if any veterinarian that works for Big Pet Food is on that board; not to her knowledge. I asked for a list of name of those voting (to confirm no veterinarian of Big Pet Food was on this board). I asked for the contact information of someone for pet owners to write to in order to express their opinion on this proposed policy. She promised to provide that information to me by end of day (Friday July 13). No information. No information Monday July 17. I left another voice mail message with Ms. Granskog on Tuesday 7/18. No return call, no email.

It certainly appears that the AVMA does not want pet owners involved in this decision. 

Since the AVMA didn't bother to provide contact information for pet owners to reply to - as they promised - the following is contact information taken from the AVMA website. If you would like to contact the AVMA and express your opinion on the proposed policy against the feeding of raw meat pet foods -

Headquarters:
1931 North Meacham Road, Suite 100
Schaumburg, IL 60173-4360
Phone: 800.248.2862 Fax: 847.925.1329

Governmental Relations Division:
1910 Sunderland Place, NW
Washington, DC 20036-1642
Phone: 800.321.1473, Fax: 202.842.4360

General Email: [email protected] (type in the subject line: AVMA Council on Public Health and Regulatory Veterinary Medicine)

My opinion...(and my message sent to AVMA)
AVMA, all meat is dangerous. We, pet owners - and you, the voting delegates of AVMA - take a risk each time you pick up a package of ground beef or chicken legs at the grocery. Raw pet food is NO more dangerous than any trip to the meat department of any grocery across the country. 

However, there is one significant difference...most all pet owners that feed a raw meat pet food are fully aware of the risk. They are educated pet food consumers and they understand the need to handle the food properly. Perhaps this is reason why there has never been an incident of human illness linked to a raw meat pet food. But to the contrary of raw meat pet food, there HAS been numerous cases of human illness linked to a kibble pet food (in the U.S. and in Canada). If your true basis of this policy is concern of human or pet illness, the AVMA would not be taking a stance solely against raw meat pet foods. There is no medical evidence, and further, science proves raw meat in the grocery, rare meat on the grill, raw meat pet food, and kibble pet food ALL pose a similar risk to humans and pets.

Should you decide to pass the policy against raw meat pet foods, we (pet owners) will know why. It will be crystal clear. We'll know that Big Pet Food has bought and paid for this policy and your vote. Won't it be a sad day when a national veterinary organization proves they actually work for Big Pet Food instead of working to protect the health of animals.



Added after original post: Here is the concern...When/if a national veterinary organization takes the public stance raw pet foods are dangerous, lobby organizations (such as PFI representing all the big kibble manufacturers) could take this 'opinion' to law makers. Their goal could be the future ban of all raw pet foods. Law makers, not knowing the truth about raw pet foods, would look solely at the opinion of AVMA and things could get out of hand quickly. Because there is no scientific foundation to base this policy on, and as well because the AVMA is seemingly trying to get this accomplished without much notice from pet owners (not responding to my queries) - I am very concerned there is more than meets the eye behind this policy. 



Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,

Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author, Buyer Beware
Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
TruthaboutPetFood.com
PetsumerReport.com











VERY Bad News for Raw Feeders


----------



## Carley's Mom (Oct 30, 2011)

Why am I not surprised... as long as I can buy meat for myself, Carley will have "raw" in her diet.


----------



## tortoise (Feb 5, 2012)

I'm not agreeing, but do have to point out that there IS scientific evience of the risk raw diet poses to people - and not just in preparation.

AVMA can't rule out the grocery store. :lol: But what they risk doing is pushing those who feed prepared raw into trying to make their own raw diet from the grocery store without correct information and causing harm to their pets.

.... sarcasm warning ....

'cause dog food is clearly safe and never contaminated with pathogens.  .....


----------



## Joelly (May 8, 2012)

tortoise said:


> what they risk doing is pushing those who feed prepared raw into trying to make their own raw diet from the grocery store without correct information and causing harm to their pets.


I'm affraid this would be me. I'm very worry. And to think that Charlie has been enjoying his prepared-raw diet since Thursday last week. This is after at least 2 days without eating. I can't imagine to limit him only to kibble.


----------



## Apres Argent (Aug 9, 2010)

*Please read!*

This is just one more way 
to limit our rights and insure
profit at our pets expense!
Make your feeling know,
comment to the AVMA BLOG!

A comment from raw food producer:
“When I saw this come through on my email this morning I was blown away by the pure stupidity involved behind the reasoning of this.
Here we all know that this is just silly and that RAW by no means makes people or animals sick so no preaching to this group is needed.
However if this becomes AVMA policy then it will be all that much easier for uneducated politicians to be presented this *policy* as fodder provoking legislation that CAN affect our rights to feed our animals the diets that we choose. Don't think for one second that the commercial pet food industry won't jump all over this if it's passed and use it to eliminate the little guys like me who supply healthy raw diets to raw feeders!
Our rights as pet owners and people are being stripped away from us one by one because the little *policies* that are stepping stones to legislation are put in act while we look the other way. Breed bans, Spay/Neuter policy, Breeding Regulations, & now feeding Regulations????All are ineffective against the things they are *supposed* to beinacted to prevent/cure - The CURE is EDUCATION OF THE PEOPLE!
If we spend half as much time teaching people about animals reproductive cycle as we do telling them to castrate…. How to be a responsible breeder instead of passing legislation....Properly Train & restrain their pets...How to safely handle raw food!
At one time all of us who now know better - did NOT know better. We were lucky enough to have someone show us the better way to care for our pets welfare. So go out tomorrow and TEACH someone something and fight back - Oh and post a comment on this stupid AVMA blog to about how raw feeding ROCKS! 
The Facts on AVMA’s Proposed Policy on Raw Pet Food Diets

(Allowed to cross-post, original poster is Erika Haferkorn,redangelraw.com )
:alberteinstein:


----------



## roulette (Feb 18, 2011)

I agree with your poster, AA. It seems to be taking shape of a several-pronged attack. You know, I saw a report of a "bounty-hunter" for HSUS, posing as an inspector to gain access to kennel properties in MO (HSUS has offered a $5000 reward for anyone who can expose a non-compliant commercial breeder) Scary vigilante style tactics. Add to that the AWA proposal, raw diet attack, and one realizes we are only playing defense to a very wealthy, scheming, organized opponent. How could we become more "pro" active before this slippery slope to invasive control becomes any steeper?


----------



## Kloliver (Jan 17, 2012)

I just sent my letter & fwded the link to every raw feeder/org. I belong to.


----------



## zyrcona (Jan 9, 2011)

I may be missing something here... but I'm failing to understand what it is they can actually do? Plenty of institutions etc. disapprove of things, but I don't see how they can enforce a ban on people feeding raw meat to animals. Many a time I have bought meat from a shop that came with a warning on the packet saying 'Ensure product is piping hot throughout before eating' and then ignored the warning and eaten it raw and no-one has come around and arrested me. The health services issue all kinds of restrictions and advice about what people can eat while they are pregnant because of absurdly small risks, yet if people choose to ignore the warnings and eat said things, there is nothing these institutions can do to prevent them. If I kill, buy, or otherwise procure meat and eat it raw or give it to my dog to eat raw, people can disapprove of me, but they can't stop me.

I'm guessing these institutions are just guarding their backs. If a pregnant woman eats mouldy cheese and suffers a miscarriage, she can't sue the NHS if her midwife told her not to. If I go out and shoot a pigeon and eat it raw and get worms and break my teeth on lead shot, having read on the website of some institution that to do such things is a great way to save money and rid myself of vermin at the same time, then I could sue the institution whose website it was on for issuing dangerous advice. There's no reason to believe there is a conspiracy between vets and pet food manufacturers (and many pet food manufacturers dealing in frozen meat food seem to be doing lucrative business, so it wouldn't make sense anyway).


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

I agree. I spoke with my Holistic, raw promoting vet about this. She said, she was not at all surprised, what else would you expect from the AVMA? She does not think that it will have any impact on anything. It's just an official stance.


----------



## faerie (Mar 27, 2010)

it is an official stance, but also it can set precedence to discredit raw food manufacturers. sure, we can purchase raw meats ourselves, but these companies are providing a product that's needed.


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

faerie said:


> it is an official stance, but also it can set precedence to discredit raw food manufacturers. sure, we can purchase raw meats ourselves, but these companies are providing a product that's needed.


And that's a valid argument, but my vet did say she doesn't think this will even have that much significance. I hope she is right!


----------



## zyrcona (Jan 9, 2011)

faerie said:


> it is an official stance, but also it can set precedence to discredit raw food manufacturers. sure, we can purchase raw meats ourselves, but these companies are providing a product that's needed.


All that would likely happen if such a law were passed is that the manufacturers would put some smallprint somewhere inconspicuous on their products' packaging, stating it is recommended that it be cooked thoroughly before being served. Tobacco products by law sport enormous warnings about the carcinogenicity of tobacco smoke and pictures of postmortems of diseased organs on the packaging, and people still buy them and use them. A lot of food packaging has a stupid coloured pie chart printed on it that's supposed to tell you how much sugar and fat is in it. If the pie chart has red on it, it's supposed to discourage you from eating it because you might get fat and it's the fashion these days for the government to be seen to be interfering with people's private business such as their diet and health. It can't take away your freedom to stuff your face with chocolate and possibly get fat if that's what you want. Everyone just ignores them.


----------



## outwest (May 1, 2011)

There is a risk to people with feeding raw to the dogs, but I don't think there is risk to the dogs if done right. People do need to be aware of that, but that isn't a reason to not feed raw for most. There is a risk driving a car, too. 

Although I do not feed more than an occasional raw treat, I don't think they should use their power this was to tell me what I can feed my dog. 

The dog food companies that have ruled the roost for decades (purina, Iams, science diet, for ex) are panicking because the gig is up for them. No longer will consumers settle for subpar foods in shiny packages with fancy commercials. Iams has come out with a better food lately, so perhaps not as fair to lump them in there. I have watched my local Petco go from an extension of the grocery store dog foods to over half the store carrying high quality pet foods. 

People are realizing that the kibbles of old were/are crap. Luckily, there are high quality foods in kibble form now available. I will still give my raw treats to the dogs.


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

outwest said:


> There is a risk to people with feeding raw to the dogs,


There is a risk to people cooking raw meat for dinner, too.


----------



## outwest (May 1, 2011)

Exactly, CM. There is risk in all of life. People need to take ownership of finding things out for themselves instead of relying on large companies/organizations/etc. to tell them what to think.


----------



## zyrcona (Jan 9, 2011)

outwest said:


> The dog food companies that have ruled the roost for decades (purina, Iams, science diet, for ex) are panicking because the gig is up for them. No longer will consumers settle for subpar foods in shiny packages with fancy commercials. Iams has come out with a better food lately, so perhaps not as fair to lump them in there. I have watched my local Petco go from an extension of the grocery store dog foods to over half the store carrying high quality pet foods.


They'll either move with the times and invent new products to appeal to modern interests, or they'll go out of business. That's how it works for everyone with products to sell. What's good for you is good for their business.


----------



## ROHAN-K9mm (Nov 20, 2011)

"All that is needed for evil to occure is for good men to do nothing"
too tired to remember who said it- but it is still true, Saw in paper that HSUS is being sued by Ringling Bros , and there was mention of RICO


----------



## Tessa's Dad (Jul 20, 2011)

zyrcona said:


> I may be missing something here... but I'm failing to understand what it is they can actually do? Plenty of institutions etc. disapprove of things, but *I don't see how they can enforce a ban on people feeding raw meat to animals....*





faerie said:


> *it is an official stance, but also it can set precedence to discredit raw food manufacturers.* sure, we can purchase raw meats ourselves, but these companies are providing a product that's needed.


I know it's an old thread but I think it needs to be kept in everyone's mind. Especially after the whole deadly dog food fiasco a couple of years ago. 

I looked on the AVMA web site and found they had posted something to clear up what they saw are "misinformations" floating around. 

_*THe Facts on AVMA’s Proposed Policy on Raw Pet Food Diets*
July 18, 2012 | [email protected] Editor

We’ve been seeing a lot of *misinformation *about the proposed AVMA policy on raw or undercooked animal-source protein diets for pets that will be discussed and voted on at the AVMA House of Delegates (HOD) meeting in San Diego in August, so we feel the need to clear things up.

First of all, this proposed policy *would be an AVMA policy* if approved, *not state or federal law*. The AVMA cannot, and will not, regulate what pet owners choose to feed their pets. If you already feed raw food to your pet, that’s your choice. This proposed policy *is about mitigating public health risks*, not about restricting or banning any products. Our policies are intended to present the scientific facts, which in this case are: 1) Scientific studies have shown that raw and undercooked protein can be sources of infection with Salmonella, Campylobacter, Clostridium, E. coli, Listeria monocytogenes, and enterotoxigenic Staphylococcus aureus. These infections can sicken pets and pet owners alike, and can be life-threatening; 2) unless a raw protein product has been subjected to a process that eliminates pathogens that can make pets and people ill, it poses a significant public health risk to both pets and pet owners.

Our policies are based on a thorough review of the scientific literature and are drafted by veterinarians with expertise in relevant fields (in this case, public health). If you’d like to read the proposed policy for yourself, here’s the exact document that will be considered by the HOD.

We realize that this issue is controversial. You are free to express your opinion, but please be aware that comments that are offensive, abusive, profane, or personal attacks will be removed.
_
Bold emphasis is mine. The RED is the important part. 
------------------------------------------------------------
So.... "this won't be state or federal law. "

BUT... they plan on putting this out there as a policy statement from a recognized national veterinary association, *THAT RAW PET FOOD POSES A PUBLIC HEALTH RISK???*

And they DON'T think this will catch the attention of lawmakers, legislators and public health authorities?


Of COURSE there is no agenda behind this.... :bird:



BTW, I'm feeding raw. Making it myself. For so many reasons...


----------



## patk (Jun 13, 2013)

having an animal as a pet living in one's home (and sometimes sleeping in one's bed) is a health risk. i doubt everyone bathes their dog before bedtime. think of where those feet, noses and that fur have been. nope, i have to go along with the conspiracy theory on this one: it's a put-up job by avma, doubtless "encouraged" by the kibble producers. and i don't feed raw. i just object to big business using its muscle to enhance its already huge profits (americans spend over $50billion/year on their pets, from what i last read). greeders exist everywhere.


----------

