One of the subjects that holistic vets and other advocates of alternative practices get really passionate about is the evils of commercial and conventional diets. They promote a laundry list of myths about pet food, many of which I’ve addressed before:
- Raw is better than cooked-
2.Vets know nothing about nutrition-
This is particularly hypocritical given that the claims made about the evils of commercial food and the virtues of alternative diets are generally made by—yup vets!— and these folks have no more training or expertise than the rest of us. In fact, the most reliable source of expertise on pet food are board-certified veterinary nutritionists, veterinarians with extensive training in nutrition. However, their claims are casually dismissed with innuendos or accusations about financial bias by vets who themselves make their living selling the stuff they advocate for.
What do Vets Know about Nutrition?
3. You can tell the quality of a food from reading the ingredients on the label-
Sorry, you can’t. Partly this is the fault of regulators, who don’t require truly important information to be put on pet food labels in a clear and understandable way. And partly the uselessness of labels as a measure of food quality comes from the meaningless vagueness of the concept of “quality” and all the myths and misconceptions about specific ingredients promoted by these vets.
Pet Food Nutrition Myths
Nutrition Resources for Pet Owners
Dog Food Logic
A recent article from the ever-unreliable Dogs Naturally Magazine gave some alternative vets a platform for repeating some myths and misconceptions about what are often called “prescription diets,” though this is technically incorrect. These are better referred to as “therapeutic diets” because they are intended to be useful in treating or preventing specific medical problems, not simply provide good overall nutrition, but they do not actually require a prescription, merely oversight from a qualified veterinarian.
The evidence for these diets varies from strong (e.g. kidney diets for cats with kidney disease) to weak (e.g. some of the diets for cognitive dysfunction in older dogs), but while there are some good arguments against some of these foods, none of the ones made in this article are worth taking seriously.
The article begins by asking a bunch of holistic vets to rank a few foods based only on the ingredient lists, with one food being a prescription diet. Not surprisingly, the vets tended to rank this diet quite low, based on these sorts of arguments:
Dr Marty Goldstein, author of The Nature of Animal Healing [said] Food #3 ranked last, based on the use of corn for its first ingredient, followed by by-product meal.
Dr Jodie Gruenstern: “This food was the lowest quality in the list. It contains GMO corn, soy (lots of it!), which is a common allergen, synthetic vitamins/minerals, shavings (if you didn’t know, the ingredient cellulose is literally sawdust), natural flavors, which usually mean MSG.”
Dr Jean Dodds: “Poor quality food: the first ingredients are corn, which is often GMO, and chicken by-product meal rather than whole chicken. Flax and soy are phytoestrogens.”
Dr Judy Morgan: “This is a Pet Store Food. Corn is the first ingredient, no muscle meat used, only by-product meal, synthetic vitamin/mineral supplement, corn and soybean are GMO, waste fillers are abundant. Overpriced in my opinion, considering the poor quality, cheap ingredients used).”
Dr Dee Blanco: “This one starts with corn to increase inflammation, then adds lighter fluid to it with soybean products and poor quality protein. Then it tries to make up for the poor quality foundational ingredients by adding synthetic supplements of the poorest quality, such as calcium carbonate, folic acid, ‘generic Vit E supplement’, etc. Looks like they added l-tryptophan to calm the nervous system down after putting the body into overdrive inflammation. Natural flavors?? Could be an entire cadre of carcinogens, allergens and toxins. Argh!”
So we have a long list of villainous ingredients supposed to cause inflammation and other health problems. Any truth in this fear mongering?
Corn and Soy are Evil–
Obviously, this sort of simplistic characterization of foods as inherently good or evil is not scientific in tone, and in the case of the particular claims she makes about these ingredients they are not consistent with mainstream opinion or the evidence. Veterinary nutritionists agree that particular sources of protein and carbohydrate in canine diets are not intrinsically harmful or beneficial and that the health effects of diet are a complex set of interactions between many factors. Duck and bison are no more nor less likely to trigger food intolerance than chicken or beef, and tapioca or potatoes or green peas are no better nor no worse than corn and wheat and soy as carbohydrate and protein sources.
GMOs are Evil–
This is a hot-button issue these days, and while it is complex, the evidence to date does not support the sort of hysteria about GMOs these vets promote. This is, of course, a topic which deserves multiple posts on its own. Dr. Dodds and others regularly list GMO ingredients as unhealthy, promoting inflammation and food intolerance, and there is no evidence to support this. While there is always the potential that particular modifications of food crops and animals could lead to health risks, the anxiety about genetically modified organisms is generally ideological and based on misconceptions or poor understanding of the relevant science. It is part and parcel of the Appeal to Nature Fallacy, and the existing evidence does not support most of the hysterical fears about GMO. Dr. Dodd’s claims are not based on research from nutrigenomics but are simply part of her own beliefs and prejudices, and she provides no compelling scientific evidence to support her claims. Relevant discussion of this issue and the evidence can be found here: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.
By-Products are Evil–
Here’s what one nutritionist I’ve talked to has say about by-products:
A by-product only means that it was not the intended main product of the industry. It gives no indication on nutrient profile, digestibility and bioavailability, etc. Many people who dislike by-products will happily buy wheat bran (a by-product of the baking industry). Moreover, by-products vary according to country and culture. Liver, an excellent source of nutrition, is considered a by-product in the US because skeletal meat is the primary product of slaughtering an animal and many people do not eat organs any more. By-products can be excellent ingredients in pet food and it would be wasteful (and terribly self-centered) to not use it to nourish humans or animals.
The concept is meaningless, and used to demonize foods that people think of as “icky” without any reference to their real nutritional value.
Let’s look at some of the other claims. he idea that corn is a major cause of inflammatory diseases is an unproven hypothesis. The claim that phytoestrogens in soy used in pet foods have negative effects on health is an unproven theory. Both of these are presented as facts when they are just personal beliefs.
“Natural flavors” usually means hydrolyzed animal tissues, not MSG, so this is just false. And “synthetic” vitamins are identical to those extracted from plants, so the idea that they are somehow less useful or more harmful is just the Naturalistic Fallacy in action.
The bit about “sawdust is particularly silly. Cellulose is a natural part of the wall of plant cells. Sure, it is present in wood, but it is also present in all the fruits and vegetables that these vets would laud as healthy for our pets. The usual source of cellulose as a dietary fiber in pet foods is the bran from cereals such as wheat, not “sawdust.” Such hyperbole is clear evidence of a preference for ideology over facts.
The article also uses a bit of drama to suggest that therapeutic diets are poor-quality or identical to over-the-counter diets and the designation only serves to justify charging more.
Now, a 30lb bag of the regular food is $47.99 at Petsmart. The prescription diet dog food can also be purchased at Petsmart for $84.95 for a 27.5lb bag. It’s twice as expensive!
Now, you might be thinking this is because the prescription diet was formulated and tested with a specific condition in mind. This is completely false.
While an over-the-counter food with a health claim (such as controls weight) is subject to FDA regulations and enforcement, the FDA practices “enforcement discretion” when it comes to veterinary diets. Put another way, this means the FDA has not reviewed or verified the health claims on any veterinary diet. Did you catch that? There are very few ingredients in veterinary diets that aren’t also in other regular diets.
In the example above, I’d say the pet store brand is a better quality food, wouldn’t you? The prescription diet contains by-product meal (which comes straight from the rendering plant), lots of soybean and corn products (a cheap replacement for animal protein) while the regular food contains more expensive, higher quality ingredients.
Again, here’s the response of a nutritionist who actually knows something about veterinary diets to this claim:
This is a misrepresentation. Veterinary diet claims do have to be substantiated as well. The FDA did have some leniency regarding veterinary diets regarding the extent of their health claims because they are usually used under the guidance of a veterinarian to improve the life of the pets. However, the FDA is concerned about many so called therapeutic diets now marketed directly to the consumer, so they might start enforcing legislation if they are not used properly, i.e. under veterinary involvement
Regarding price, good companies invest in research, that goes into designing the food, sometimes funding basic research that would further our knowledge on particular diseases (without an immediate product to market and sell) plus trials in healthy and diseased pets, etc. So, I understand why a veterinary diet from a responsible company costs more money, not because the ingredients are more expensive, but due to the knowledge invested behind it.
These holistic vets are so ideologically biased against commercial diets that they even claim that ingredients they routinely recommend as beneficial for many health conditions magically become harmful when included in such foods:
And fish oil is a terrible addition to pet foods. It’s much too fragile to be added to processed foods and as soon as the bag is opened, it will oxidate and cause inflammation in your dog. Ironic isn’t it, when the food is supposed to be treating inflammation in the first place?
Actually, it’s not ironic, it’s just a bit of ignorance and prejudice masquerading as an informed opinion. Fish oils can be added to foods in a manner that has all the same health benefits of giving them separately, if this is done properly by a company with real nutrition experts who know what they are doing.
I usually write brief summary of my conclusions for these posts, but in this case I could not write anything that makes the point better than the following, again from a nutritionist knowledgeable about these issues:
All these arguments are just guilt trips and not based on reliable science and assume the quality of a final product depends solely on certain random criteria form the individual ingredients rather than in deep knowledge of the current state of nutritional science, excellent quality control during formulation, reception of ingredients, extrusion, and storage conditions.
What we have here is unsubstantiated belief presented as fact. And this kind of fear mongering has real dangers. There is, for example, very good evidence that feeding commercial diets for cats with kidney disease can reduce suffering and prolong life. Yet I have seen clients feeding unbalanced and completely inappropriate homemade concoctions instead because they have been frightened and misled by this kind of propaganda and are unwilling to feed diets with proven benefits.
As I’ve said many times, no one knows the perfect diet for any given patient, and I am open to the possibility that there are benefits to feeding alternatives to the usual canned and dry commercial diets. But these benefits must be proven, not simply invented out of whole cloth or wrung out of twisted misrepresentations of nutrition science.
Our pit mix (part SharPei, part unknown, maybe lab and/or boxer) was having occasional diarrhea issues, so we started from the idea of chicken and rice and decided to do our own. We boil boneless skinless chicken thighs with a good-sized sweet potato and some carrot and mash that up with brown rice and canned pumpkin. Then we give her that with a topping of some grain-free dry kibble (have used various, all higher-end). Easy and fast to make and the dog loves it, and diarrhea has not been an issue since (except occasionally when she eats some weird poop or something on a walk before we can stop her).
Unfortunately, such homemade diets are often nutritionally incomplete or unbalanced, so I always recommend consulting a veterinary nutritionist to formulate a healthy, individualized diet. You can usually find one at the nearest veterinary college, and there are also some who provide consultations online (e.g. http://www.petdiets.com, http://www.balanceit.com).
Do you have an opinion about this article? I find it disgusting the FDA is allowing these kind of meats into pet food, or as a scientific vet, do you have studies to present that this is ok?
What article are you referring to?
not sure what happened to my link..trying again
What then would you recommend as a nutritional dog food?
There is no single “right” food for every dog. Most dogs can thrive on a wide variety of different complete and balanced commercial diets, from dry to canned to fresh, as well as on a properly formulated home-cooked diet. My main message is that we need to stick with measured, evidence-based claims and be less susceptible to claims about tremendous benefits or harms associated with specific ingredients or with broad categories of foods. If you want a detailed, science-based analysis of canine nutrition and the issues involved, I recommend Dog Food Logic by Linda Case.
It was Dr Marty who cured my cat from chronic diarrhea because a regular vet could not. The info from Dr Marty via his book the nature of Animal Healing cleared up 80% of my cats chronic diarrhea within 24 hours. He has proven how some vaccinations are toxic. His book is one book all should read.
Glad you cat is doing well, but most of Dr. Marty’s claims about vaccines and nutrition are nonsense.
Just like w Coronavirus patients recovering after taking the chloroquine type treatment, your cat’s diarrhea may have been able to clear up anyway without whatever dr Marty treatment you followed. Unfortunately it requires properly devised scientific studies to determine facts, and even then, its interpretations of data and might never know for sure for an individual case.
Evidence based medicine it what is now being taught more often in human medicine now, rather than purely “anecdotal” information. Picking the right vet is as important to your pet as picking the right doctor. As a nurse, I found that too many people were picking doctors based on how close they were to home or work. People often pick their vet the same way. Not all doctors are great and not all vets are great. I drive clear across to town to see my doctors and my dog’s vet. If your clinician seems to see you or your pet as something to check off of their to do list, you probably aren’t getting very good care. It is not uncommon for “the wrong clinician” to miss certain details that are important for a correct diagnosis. The other big issue is follow up. Many clinicians assume if you don’t come back, that everything cleared up. A good clinician utilizes staff for proper follow up, and may even contact you themselves. If you just give up with a problem, you may be part of the problem yourself, albeit inadvertent.
All this crap about a nutritionally balanced is just that: a load of crap. Do any of you really think that canines in the wild are concerned about balancing their diet with rabbit, fowl, maybe gazelle for dinner twice per week. And oh yeah, dont forget to put some salmon on your shopping list.
They eat what they can find and catch. They do not eat vegetables, per se. The only vegetables they comsume come from the stomach content and whatever vegetables are found in the striated muscle tissue and fatty tissue of their prey. They do not seek out vegetables to supplement their diet.
In fact, it has been recently found that legumes, potatoes and certain grains are harmful to a dog’s kidneys, pancreas and spleen.
In the wild, nothing goes to waste. Thet eat lungs, liver, pancreas, kidneys, and many will crush the bones to get at the nutrient-rich marrow. Those are considered by-products because humans do not generally eat them. As long as those animal parts are rendered properly and according to established guidelines, they are perfectly acceptable.
My 63 lb., perfectly healthy dog is my best friend, my little buddy, my certified support animal. She sleeps on my bed, goes everywhere with me. In short she is all i have. My rock during severe depressions, the only family, friend, sounding board, she conforts me when i’m really down.
But bottom line: she is a tame animal who came from wild, uncouth, living in the wild, doing whatever need be done to survive. The pups we love so much, would give up everything for, who gives us doggy kissies and lives us in return came from wild animals and there is still a part of that “wild” in them.
Yes, animals in the wild eat what they can find, not the optimal diet. That is one of the reasons they are often sicker and shorter-lived than well-cared for domestic animals.
I’m so happy to have found this website! Educating clients about nutrition is one of the hardest things I do, simply because of all the garbage information that has been put forth by pet food companies. This is a fantastic blog post that I will use next time I have a client digging in their heels about switching off of raw, boutique, grain free, “holistic”, and expensive diets. Your short, succinct answers to everybody’s questions are great.
Dr Marty is appalled that workers clean the intestines of slaughtered animals of feces before putting them into cat food. His point is that this still leaves some fecal matter behind. But in the wild cats kill and eat small mammals, complete with their unevacuated intestines.
This is just one example of this guy’s hypocrisy and nonsense.
I have had almost all my dogs die from tumors over the last 20 years. ABout 5 years ago we started a home made food on our two 8 year olds, offspring of the ones who had died from cancer, and they are now 13 with no tumors. I still woory a lot about how complete our food is. We use rolls of ground human grade turkey meat. Its a 7 pound roll, and we add 6 eggs, and 1.5 cups of barley. Sometimes peas and carrots. We boil it till the barley is cooked and then add about one third Hills dry food recommended by our vet. Now I hear barley is bad! I just don’t know what to do. Martin Goldstein is big on freeze dried meat, and says it hasn’t lost any value. Im not so sure. What do you think of my home made recipe? How about that stuff always on national radio that’s a powder supplement—Dino something?
I switched to raw dog food with my previous shepherd. Just to try it out. The results were more energy, his coat became shinier, he was very regular in bowel movements with much less than with dry dog food. And overall he was healthy until he passed away. It was on the advice of my vet at the time.
My current shepherd is allergic or sensitive to a lot of foods. I have my own opinion as to why this is, not related to food. However, she is also on a raw food diet. We are lucky I think, in that we have a number of raw dog food companies who have a reputation of keeping up with current research in pet nutrition. I buy only meat and add my own veggies as I find most of our raw mixes have one or two veggies that I know she can’t tolerate. The meat is frozen so there is no problem with prep or storage ( if you have a decent freezer). And they follow human guidelines for health and safety.
I am always looking for actual research on current pet nutrition but it’s not easy to separate real from, as you say, belief based opinion. It would be nice to find a reliable source. Like a lot of vets here, my vet is not a fan of raw food, but admits it’s not her specialty. She supports my choice nevertheless. Like doctors, I realize they get very little nutritional training unless they specialize. I am in Canada so if you have any suggestions for research sources, that would be greatly appreciated.
If you search for “raw diets” you will find numerous posts discussing specific research article.s The bottom line is that the kind of anecdotal experience you have had hasn’t yet been found in research studies, though there are not many. Like most things, anecdotes and personal experiences about raw diets are subject to all kinds of sources of error, so they can suggest things to test, but they often don’t accurately predict how diets and other medical treatments will work. Unfortunately, there IS evidence that these diets raise the risk of infectious diseases significantly, so stacked against the lack of evidence for benefits, it is hard to make a strong case for them.
How does dr. marty get his information? Besides vet school and all that
He makes up a lot of stuff, extrapolating from his clinical experiences, anecdotes, etc. There problem with opinion-based medicine (as opposed to evidence-based medicine) is that there is no emphasis on critically evaluating our sources of information, so we come to believe e “know” things without any awareness of where the information comes from nor how reliable it is or is not.
Here is my experience: I have a chow chow and he has dealt with some type of allergies for the past 5 years. I have changed his food at least 5 times thinking it was diet. He would also throw up at night until I diagnosed he was allergic to chicken. One traditional vet said he needed more liquid in his diet as I was only feeding dry. So I started feeding 1/2 can and dry. Helped somewhat. This past year was the worst, he chewed almost all fur off his tail and multiple hot spots then rolled on his back all night and moaned. He was miserable from itching. I’ve had him on Apoquel which helps, but did not want to keep him on it long term.
His vet was at a loss, saying he had bad allergies and referred me to dermatologist. So I took him during Covid which I could not go into the appt. Diagnosis , he most likely has environmental allergies but to determine exactly what specifically he is allergic to, we need to do more testing at $1,000. (I just spent $300 for this information, wow!).
Fast forward to now, thank God I found Dr. Marty. Julius is off Apoquel and Cytopoint! He has been taking Dr Marty’s Pro Power plus since early July 2020 and is a new dog! No throwing up, no licking, no itching and all fur growing back. He has more energy than my roommates dog and they are the same age. Not saying this works for all dogs but after years of changing food, going to emergency vet, his traditional vet and putting him on Apoquel. I am a believer that it was his gut health not environmental allergies, which can also equate to human health issues too.
Glad your dog is doing well, but as hard as it is to believe, that doesn’t mean Dr. Marty is right or his products work. The same kinds of stories exist for prayer and homeopathy and witchcraft and pretty much every imaginable treatment for disease. Anecdotes are a test nothing ever fails. When we use them to guide us, we do a lot worse than when we use science.
Why Anecdotes Can’t be Trusted
I find it annoying that cat food gets lumped into “pet food” and then most of the comments, data, articles and food ingredients are for dogs, if you read a bit further. I’d love to have more research, results and discussions for what are called “obligate carnivores” separate from omnivores, i.e. dogs. After all you wouldn’t discuss a diet suitable for your pet rabbit in the same bucket as that for your dog. But since cats are late to the indoor pet game they still haven’t gained their own attention space, it seems. (P.S. this article came up as a top result for an advanced search for cat food.) Unfortunately, these days reading the ingredients for dog food and cat food it’s hard to find much difference. Throw a little bit of taurine in the mix and stick on a different label and you’re there seems to do the trick.
There certainly are significant differences in the nutritional needs of cats and dogs, as well as less research evidence for cat diets. That said, cats’ needs and the associated evidence is specifically discussed here and elsewhere, and the kind of nonsense this holistic vets put forward are applied to both species. Here are some articles you might find useful-
Canned or Dry Food for Cats?
Dietary Carbs and Cats
Dietary Carbs and Cats Again
Diabetes and Diet in Cats
I use BalanceIT and so far we love it!
Presenting facts to people who believe in special diets, exercise plans or lifestyles is just as ineffective as presenting facts to someone with any other belief. You can’t disprove something that lacks a factual basis and you can’t prove a belief with a personal anecdote.
Science and religion have one thing in common- the unknown, but religion seeks acceptance while while science seeks understanding.
Seems like Brian disappeared. I would be interested in what you feed as well since you commented on the topic.
Pingback: Book Review- The Forever Dog: Surprising New Science to Help Your Canine Companion Live Younger, Healthier, and Longer |
I will never understand why “prescription” kibble is recommended for cats with diabetes, kidney, or urinary tract issues. After more than a year of prescription foods, BG testing, and insulin injections, a switch to grain free canned food got my cat off insulin within two weeks and she lived to be 20. I personally don’t think healthy cats should eat desiccated food, but certainly cats with diabetes, CKD, or urinary problems shouldn’t. Of course my experience is just that, my experience, but hard to argue with it. I hope more research is done because I like science.