I just had an article from PetMD come across my facebook news feed: http://www.petmd.com/blogs/nutritionnuggets/jcoates/2013/nov/fda-finds-high-rates-of-contamination-in-raw-pet-foods#.Uo_AU8Rjum4
After reading the article, I find it lacks many details that would be useful to the consumer. It doesn’t tell you what brands of raw food were tested and which were positive for the bacteria. To me it seems like the purpose of the article is to scare people away from feeding commercial raw because there is supposedly a 25% chance that you’ll be feeding your pet contaminated food.
I’ve been feeding my Dane, Max, commercial raw for a couple months now with no issues. Has anyone feeding commercial raw ever had an incident with their pet getting sick because of bacteria?
I believe raw fed dogs are much more able to handle eating something that is contaminated. But FDA, in all their infinite wisdom and desire to appear to be doing something, is pushing for zero tolerance for bacterial contamination in all foods. We feel that they are moving towards requiring HPP of all raw foods. I’m not happy about this apparent move.
That’s what I figured. They’re making a mountain out of a molehill. I believe I also read somewhere that HPP could create superbugs?
I don’t know if it could create superbugs, but there are some bad bacteria that can be encysted and not killed by HPP, but any good bacteria that would be competing with them for the same resource would be killed off, so there could be heavier contamination from them.
Oh ok, that makes sense. Thanks Patty!
IMHO, the FDA’s issues with raw products are based on the fact that the big money companies don’t sell them.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.