Why raw pet food isn't worth the risk
And in light of the growing raw pet food trend, the American Veterinary Medical Association, the World Small Animal Veterinary Association, the FDA, and the Centers for Disease Control have all issued statements advising against raw diets.
What's wrong with a raw food diet for your pet?
'What is very evident are the possible disadvantages and risks, for the pet and the owner,' Varcasia says.
Pets that eat a raw food diet can be exposed to parasitic infections—like Toxoplasma gondii, the leading cause of death from foodborne illness in the U.S., and Echinococcus granulosus, a tapeworm that can cause gastrointestinal issues and may be fatal if spread to humans, which can happen through direct contact with food or via contaminated surfaces. Bacterial contamination can occur too, since Salmonella, E. coli, and Listeria are commonly found in raw meat and can cause severe gastrointestinal illness in animals and humans. A 2023 Salmonella outbreak in humans was linked to handling raw dog food, and a 2017 E. coli outbreak in humans was tied to dogs that were fed a raw diet.
Now, bird flu joins the list of possible germs that can get into raw pet food, likely due to infected chickens being used as an ingredient (on farms, bird flu killed over 20 million chickens in 2024). 'Cats and dogs can be infected if they eat sick or dead infected wild birds, drink unpasteurized milk or cream from infected cows, or eat undercooked or raw meat from infected ducks and chickens,' says Iowa State University veterinary pathologist Silvia Carnaccini.
How to protect your pets (and yourself)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - How thousands of unreviewed ingredients got into our food — and what FDA can do about it
At least 1,000 ingredients in food products on our grocery store shelves have never been checked for safety by the Food and Drug Administration. Dozens have raised serious safety concerns among experts. How did the FDA allow this? The answer can be found in the agency's lax interpretation of a little-known legal designation that lets companies decide for themselves if ingredients in their products are safe. Fortunately, there are steps the agency can take right now to stem the flow of potentially unsafe ingredients into our food supply. Environmental Defense Fund outlined these steps in a letter we recently sent to the agency, but first let's take a closer look at how we got here. 'Generally Recognized as Safe' is a designation Congress created in 1958 to allow commonly used food ingredients to bypass the FDA's pre-market safety review process. It was meant for food substances — such as oils, vinegar, baking soda and common spices — that were widely considered safe due to their long history of everyday use. Since 1958, this status has been coopted to cover a universe of foods that extends far beyond its original intent. According to FDA regulations, a chemical can receive the designation if experts widely agree that scientific evidence shows its use to be safe. But because 'Generally Recognized as Safe' wasn't meant for newer ingredients, Congress allowed ingredients so designated to skip the FDA's premarket approval process — despite requiring similar evidence for other additives. Under the agency's current interpretation, companies can designate the use of a substance as safe and take products with that substance to market without informing the FDA or the public of its decision. While companies may voluntarily submit a notice to FDA offering safety evidence, they are not required to — and often don't. Our organization estimated that manufacturers have notified FDA of fewer than half of the ingredients they market as safe under the 'Generally Recognized' standard. Companies that do bother to submit a notice to the FDA are free to withdraw it at any point and take their product to market, provided they can cite evidence of its safe use. But this 'evidence' is often far from independent. Companies can, and often do, enlist their own employees or handpicked consultants to conduct their safety assessments. The result is a process riddled with conflicts of interest that lets unsafe foods into Americans' homes. We analyzed 'Generally Recognized as Safe' notices received by the FDA, obtained via a Freedom of Information request, and found that of the 1,163 submitted by companies between 1997 and April 2024, 192 were later withdrawn, with safety concerns cited in at least a dozen cases. We also identified 31 ingredients that companies have advertised to be recognized as safe, such as in press releases, trade publications and on their own websites (see the Appendix of our letter). However, we were unable to find the scientific evidence required under this standard to demonstrate these ingredients are commonly regarded as safe among experts. This raises red flags that FDA should be taking seriously. Although a comprehensive fix to the 'Generally Recognized' standard will require legislation from Congress, there are significant steps the FDA can take right away to ensure a more rigorous determination process that better protects Americans' health. Starting today, the FDA can use existing authority to remove safe designations from ingredients it deems unsafe and take them off the market. It can also notify manufacturers, importers, distributors and retailers that the substance is no longer recognized as safe. In addition, the FDA can enforce the requirement that companies base safety designations on publicly available data. Although this won't curtail companies' ability to self-declare substances as safe, it will require those who do to be transparent in citing their evidence. Third, the FDA can enforce the requirement that safety assessments consider vital health information such as a substance's dietary sources, potential cancer risks and the cumulative health effects of similar substances. Finally, the FDA can make companies revise and resubmit their data for review when they submit 'Generally Recognized as Safe' notices that fail to comply with the criteria. The 'Generally Recognized as Safe' designation is far from a perfect system, but it can work better if it is interpreted and enforced more comprehensively. If the FDA is serious about protecting public health, it should start by fully exercising the tools already at its disposal. Maria Doa is senior director at the Chemicals Policy at Environmental Defense Fund. Maricel Maffini is an independent consultant focused on human and environmental health and chemical safety. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Egg recall over salmonella warning spans across nine states
Almost two million eggs have been recalled in the United States over concerns of salmonella contamination. The recall, announced on Friday by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, affects products distributed in nine states and is associated with various grocery store chains. According to the FDA, California-based August Egg Company of Hilmar is recalling 1,700,000 dozen brown cage-free and brown certified organic eggs due to potential contamination. The eggs were distributed from February 3 through May 15, with sell-by dates from March 4 to June 4, within California and Nevada. Products were distributed at locations including Save Mart, FoodMaxx, Lucky, Smart & Final, Safeway, Raleys, Food 4 Less, and Ralphs. Eggs were also distributed from February 3 through May 6 with sell-by dates from March 4 to June 19 to Walmart locations in California, Washington, Nevada, Arizona, Wyoming, New Mexico, Nebraska, Indiana, and Illinois. The recalled eggs will have the plant code number P-6562 or CA5330 printed on the carton or package, with Julian Dates between 32 and 126. The recalled retail eggs will be in fiber or plastic cartons, with the above codes printed on one side of the carton. Salmonella can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections in young children, the frail or elderly, and others with weakened immune systems, according to the FDA. Healthy persons infected with Salmonella often experience fever, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and even bloody diarrhea. In rare circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in more severe illnesses. A statement from August Egg Company read: 'It is important to know that when our processing plant identified this concern, we immediately began diverting all eggs from the plant to an egg-breaking facility, which pasteurizes the eggs and kills any pathogens. 'August Egg Company's internal food safety team is also conducting its own stringent review to identify what measures can be established to prevent this situation from recurring. 'We are committed to addressing this matter fully and to implementing all necessary corrective actions to ensure this does not happen again.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists make disturbing discovery in riverbed that could endanger millions: 'An emerging public health concern'
A new study has discovered evidence that the presence of microplastics in river water could influence microbial communities, leading to more pathogens and antimicrobial resistance genes. The research team collected water samples from the Oder River, which flows over 522 miles through Czechia, Germany, and Poland, putting them in sanitized containers and adding pre-drained sediment and microplastic particles. Compared to a control group, which did not contain microplastics, the test samples showed a higher abundance of pathogenic bacteria such as Aeromonas salmonicida, Vibrio spp., Escherichia coli, and Salmonella. The microplastic-contaminated samples also showed higher levels of antibiotic resistance genes, per the study published in Scientific Reports. "The presence of microplastics in [a] water environment and their bioavailability may contribute to, or alter the pattern of, the spreading of pathogens and antimicrobial resistance genes," the researchers stated, adding that this could be due to microbial competition and their use of microplastics to create biofilms, which makes these particles an environmentally favorable niche for some bacteria species. "This represents an emerging public health concern, particularly in the context of the One Health framework, which emphasizes the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health," researchers said. Antimicrobial resistance genes are problematic because they help bacteria resist the drugs meant to treat them. Antimicrobial resistance is one of the top global health threats, according to the World Health Organization, which says it makes infections harder to treat and other medical procedures and treatments, such as surgery and chemotherapy, much riskier. Meanwhile, this is not the first time scientists have sounded the alarm about microplastics, which are small plastic particles that break off of larger plastics as they degrade. These plastics are everywhere, including in water, soil, air, clothing, seafood, and salt. For instance, one study found microplastics in nearly every protein source tested, including chicken, tofu, and beef. While researchers and experts still don't understand the health impacts of microplastics, they've been linked to health problems such as cancer, dementia, and impaired blood flow in the brain. These tiny plastic particles could also be harming some of the world's most important archaeological sites. Researchers in England called attention to this issue following the discovery of microplastics in the soil at two historic sites. While it's difficult to remove microplastics from the environment, it's not impossible. For instance, one group of scientists has discovered a way to rid water of microplastics by using egg whites. How often do you worry about the quality of your drinking water? Never Sometimes Often Always Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Plus, some cities and countries are tackling plastic pollution, which is the source of microplastics. For one, England and France banned plastic cutlery for most fast food and takeout meals, while Los Angeles has banned Styrofoam takeout containers. You can cut down on your own plastic use at home by investing in reusable items like metal razors and non-plastic sandwich bags. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
