So What Do We Actually Think About The Relationship Between Vets And "vet Food Companies"?

[Wile]

I'm unsure as to the relationship, but from what I've heard companies such as these write a lot of material for vets in school, and once they graduate they firmly believe it IS the best food, so they sell it (some get paid for this, some don't) and put lots of dogs and cats on it because it's what they've learned is the best thing for them. They feed their own pets this food so to me this says a lot.

You know this is a really interesting point. I've heard this mentioned a lot in different online posts, that cat/dog food companies are essentially writing the textbooks for animal nutrition courses and brainwashing vets. A lot of vets claim that it isn't true, so I decided to look into it myself.

I just did a search for syllabus for a nutrition course offered by U of Guelph's vet school, which is well known in Canada. http://animalbiosciences.uoguelph.ca/sites/default/files/ansc_4560_course_outline_f17.pdf

From what I can see the authors of the main text book listed (Canine and Feline Nutrition) do in fact mostly work for the big cat/dog food companies.

Linda P. Case, MS (Now independent)

Autumn Gold Consulting, Mahomet, Illinois; Adjunct Assistant Professor, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois

Leighann Daristotle, DVM, PhD (now works for Blue Buffalo?)
Manager, Scientific Communications, Procter & Gamble pet Care, Lewisburg, Ohio

Michael G. Hayek, PhD
Associate Director, Research and Development, Procter & Gamble pet Care, Lewisburg, Ohio

Melody Foess Raasch, DVM
Manager, Scientific Communications, Procter & Gamble Pet Care, Mason, Ohio

Diane Hirakawa - Senior VP of R&D at Iams

This doesn't mean that these people can't be good researchers, or that all studies/research produced by corporations cannot produce good nutritional information. But I would say there is a real crisis of confidence among pet owners who don't feel they can trust in the information they are being given.

 

[cheeser]

I'm unsure as to the relationship, but from what I've heard companies such as these write a lot of material for vets in school, and once they graduate they firmly believe it IS the best food, so they sell it (some get paid for this, some don't) and put lots of dogs and cats on it because it's what they've learned is the best thing for them. They feed their own pets this food so to me this says a lot.
We were desperate with a sick animal once and tried the vet diet suggested, and the dog that obsessively ate horse shit like it was a delicacy, and could raid the compost heap and ingest the most disgusting matter on the planet (and CRAVED it) wouldn't touch the 3-buck-a-can food. So that got us thinking a little.
No matter how you roll the dice, I'm OK with a vet suggesting a vet diet that I would prefer to stay away from. They're making a suggestion, doing their job, and I'm happy with that.
However...if I decline, I don't want the smack down run around about how this is the ONLY thing my animal should consume and if I do any differently they'll die a horrible painful death.
Likewise, vets that feed raw and feel it's the best can suggest the diet to owners and encourage them to read literature on it, but if the owner doesn't want to (are afraid of not balancing it, doesn't feel it's affordable for them, live in a smaller area and can't find room for a freezer, etc.) the same thing applies. No bullying.

I know that in some cases, special formulas from RC or Hill's are a godsend for some kitties, and I'm glad they're available for those who need them and can benefit from them.

And I don't really mind when vets seem to automatically recommend a particular brand and/or formula for whatever is ailing one of our cats, because we've learned that not all vets are as knowledgeable about feline nutrition as we once thought. We learned that the hard way.

But I do get rather annoyed when it reaches the bullying stage.

 

[Ladewyn]

I think vets are just working with what they have. There's a wariness for anything that doesn't have evidence (especially when you factor in their professional status on the line). Just as an example: a major concern right now is that current evidence is showing that grain-free diets are making some dogs sick (dilated cardiomyopathy). So that puts canine grain-free diets in this limbo state, at least until it's understood *why* this happens. For that reason, I think it makes sense that a lot of vets stick with certain brands and are wary about alternative diets when you consider that sort of thing happening.

Mind you, the vets I've been to usually don't suggest diets unless it's for a specific medical reason. I don't think either has told me to take my cat off of his grain free diet and feed the one they sold instead.

My vet back home does both prescription diets and homemade diets (she practices both 'holistic' medicine and more standard medicine, and even sold the supplement mixes for homemade diets). I always appreciated this because she just wanted to work with people regardless of diet. If she thought a prescription diet was best, that's what she'd recommend. If she had someone who wanted to try homemade, she had a recipe book at hand to make sure they were doing a properly balanced diet. I never felt like she wanted to push me to a particular diet, she was just there to make sure my cat was healthy and to offer her professional opinion if I had questions.

 

[1 bruce 1]

Another thought is to always make sure your vet understands you've done your research, print out the recipe if you must (catinfo recipe was done by a cat specialist vet, of course) and let them know that if your animal does NOT do well on this diet, you will find something that they DO do well on and you're not so obsessed with a certain diet that you'd feed it to an animal that's not thriving.
I think the vets were happy with us when we took our inflammatory mess of a cat off raw because it wasn't working for him and we saw that. If he was able to get well, we might try it, but for now we don't want to be one of "Those" who says "raw is perfect. My cat is so healthy. Aside from the fact he has asthma attacks, his coat is crap, he only poops 2 times a week, his eyes look terrible" etc.
The cat couldn't crap on raw, any type, boneless, watered down to nothing, etc., so we said "it's not working" and did something else.
Decades ago we had one with the opposite problem, diarrhea, and raw with a higher bone content did wonders. They're individuals. Raw won't always "fix" or somehow prevent every disease ever and make your cat immortal and still kicking at the age of 78, but neither will a vet diet.
Go with your common sense, go with what feels right, and go with what works.

 

[molly92]

I think vets are just working with what they have. There's a wariness for anything that doesn't have evidence (especially when you factor in their professional status on the line). Just as an example: a major concern right now is that current evidence is showing that grain-free diets are making some dogs sick (dilated cardiomyopathy). So that puts canine grain-free diets in this limbo state, at least until it's understood *why* this happens. For that reason, I think it makes sense that a lot of vets stick with certain brands and are wary about alternative diets when you consider that sort of thing happening.

I'm so annoyed that the FDA has spread this "information" so irresponsibly, and that vets are so ready to give it credibility. It's very well known that cardiomyopathy in dogs is caused by a taurine deficiency, a genetic predisposition, or both. If they are going to jump to conclusions without doing any studies, which they have, the logical one would be that foods low in taurine are causing the problem, not a lack of grains! What is probably happening is that there are companies that cut costs when they made a grain-free line by using peas (that do not contain taurine) to inflate their protein percentage until they met minimum requirements instead of using enough meat (which does contain taurine). There are plenty of dog foods-raw and canned but also some kibbles-that don't use any grains but also have high amounts of animal meat, their protein percentage is well above the minimum, and even sometimes added taurine. Taurine deficient and high quality meat based foods alike are getting grouped together unfairly. I understand it's a scary disease, but the amount of vets that don't seem to be doing any critical thinking and are pushing their clients to change dog foods regardless of the quality of the food is seems ridiculous, not to mention unfair to the companies that will suffer for making a good food. My mom's vet is doing exactly that, and she'd rather please him than fight a battle.

For anyone worried about their cat food in this situation, it's not a concern. AAFCO does not have a minimum taurine requirement for dog food (although that would be a great solution!) but it does for cat food, so any approved cat food is going to have enough taurine to keep diet-related cardiomyopathy at bay, grain free or not. Before taurine was required in cat food, cats had cardiomyopathy at much higher rates, but today it is rarely an issue.

 

[Ladewyn]

I'm so annoyed that the FDA has spread this "information" so irresponsibly, and that vets are so ready to give it credibility. It's very well known that cardiomyopathy in dogs is caused by a taurine deficiency, a genetic predisposition, or both. If they are going to jump to conclusions without doing any studies, which they have, the logical one would be that foods low in taurine are causing the problem, not a lack of grains!

As far as I'm aware they haven't been making claims that the lack of grains is the problem (although no doubt some websites make that claim ). I believe that article I linked specifically points to legumes (like you mentioned with peas). I personally have only seen articles stating that the issue is occurring in association with some grain-free diets, not specifically do to the lack of grain. It's not irresponsible in my opinion to share that information since I think it's something people should be aware of, but a lot definitely gets taken out of context (such as seeing that grain-free diets being implicated means this is all grain-free diets rather than just a few specific varieties; no doubt some are taking that and running with it to demonize anything and everything that is grain-free).

For anyone worried about their cat food in this situation, it's not a concern. AAFCO does not have a minimum taurine requirement for dog food (although that would be a great solution!) but it does for cat food, so any approved cat food is going to have enough taurine to keep diet-related cardiomyopathy at bay, grain free or not. Before taurine was required in cat food, cats had cardiomyopathy at much higher rates, but today it is rarely an issue.

Yes this! I didn't mean to imply this is an issue with cat food or anything. I haven't seen any studies come up about cats and grain free (I feed my cat grain-free personally!). I also wasn't trying to make grain-free seem bad in any way, my apologies if it comes off that way. I only bring it up as an example of why vets stick to certain brands, out of caution. The logic probably being that they have a figurative paper trail with the typical vet brands, which doesn't exist with some random brands found elsewhere.

TL;DR not trying to turn anyone away from anything, just trying to comment on the idea of vets and why they may tend to stick with certain brands. Hope that clarifies <3

 

[molly92]

As far as I'm aware they haven't been making claims that the lack of grains is the problem (although no doubt some websites make that claim ). I believe that article I linked specifically points to legumes (like you mentioned with peas). I personally have only seen articles stating that the issue is occurring in association with some grain-free diets, not specifically do to the lack of grain. It's not irresponsible in my opinion to share that information since I think it's something people should be aware of, but a lot definitely gets taken out of context (such as seeing that grain-free diets being implicated means this is all grain-free diets rather than just a few specific varieties; no doubt some are taking that and running with it to demonize anything and everything that is grain-free).


Yes this! I didn't mean to imply this is an issue with cat food or anything. I haven't seen any studies come up about cats and grain free (I feed my cat grain-free personally!). I also wasn't trying to make grain-free seem bad in any way, my apologies if it comes off that way. I only bring it up as an example of why vets stick to certain brands, out of caution. The logic probably being that they have a figurative paper trail with the typical vet brands, which doesn't exist with some random brands found elsewhere.

TL;DR not trying to turn anyone away from anything, just trying to comment on the idea of vets and why they may tend to stick with certain brands. Hope that clarifies <3

I definitely didn't mean to contradict or attack you, just add information! I have just heard anecdotally so many vets applying "grain-free = bad" logic in broad strokes and scaring people off of so many good foods that I'm very annoyed, and it shows...oops!