Headlines were made a few weeks ago when the “Delta Society” (an American organization which performs Therapy Dog work - similar to TDI and St John’s Ambulance) issued a release stating that effective July 1st 2010 they will no longer allow raw fed service dogs (known as Pet Partners in their program) for fear of passing salmonella on to the patients they visit.

What I find even more interesting is their “study” also indicates that almost 1 in 10 dogs fed processed kibbles contain salmonella in their excrement, yet 1 in 10 is somehow an “acceptable” risk to the society - if such a “risk” even exists!

To begin, we really need to understand salmonella and what it means to North American society.  Salmonella is quite often used by raw fed opponents (namely the multi billion dollar kibble industry) as some poster child against a natural raw meaty bone diet.  Let’s face it, this is a society consumed with fear.  It’s why the television news programs always have segments on “what in your kitchen could be killing you!” or “deadly swarm of killer bees could be coming to America”.  We’ve all seen them, and fear is used as a marketing tool.

However, is salmonella something that really needs to be feared?  If it were, then what does the government do to stop it’s occurrence?  A Consumers Report study found that 80% of store bought chicken contains the bacteria!   So, if such a real concern, then why is it allowed to be so rampantly present in THE MOST consumed meat sources in America?  

Salmonella is one of those few bacteria that are shared with both canine and humans, along with rabies, and why it’s one that is often used.  But that simple fact is that someone would be hard pressed to even find a case of dog to human transmission of the bacteria.

Do raw fed dogs have an increased risk of salmonella ingestion?  Of course!  They are eating meats in their natural state, not after high heat/rendering/extraction/purification/enzymolosis/hyrdolysis (all of which constitute “natural” per the AAFCO) laden with preservatives and other such additives.  But does this adversely affect dogs?  No!  Dogs digestive systems are short, lean, and mean.  They’re extremely efficient at processing meats thanks to highly acidic stomachs and short intestinal tracts - get it in, and get it out!

So now that we appreciate that salmonella does not really affect our dogs, so how does it affect us?  Well, for the most part, might mean some gut rot/aches, perhaps some diarrhea (from the greek meaning ‘to flow thru’ - how true!).   Salmonella is affects almost 3.4 Million Americans per year!  Yes, MILLIONS.  It’s everywhere out there - at the salad bar, in the meats we eat, at the fast foods we frequent, on the surfaces we touch.  And of those MILLIONS of folks hit with it annually there are roughly 500 who unfortunately succumb to the bacteria.

Of those that unfortunately die from salmonella annually, they are generally the very old or the very young and often have weakened immune systems unable to ward off the bacteria.  But of those 500, what is the cause of transmission? 

In 2001 there were 585 salmonella caused deaths in the United stated.  Of those, 569 were directly traced back to food ingestion!  So that leaves 26 cases out of the 1.4 million reported cases (the 3.4 million affected is estimated as very few cases are actually ever reported).  And of those 26 cases, not a single one is identified with a “dog to human” transmission.  Why?  Because there is no evidence that illustrates cases of dogs with salmonella bacteria shedding it on to humans!  It doesn’t happen.

Do dogs “shed” salmonella?  Well, if be shedding you mean pooping out the back side, then I suppose.  And if the concern is picking up salmonella from dog’s excrement, then people need to be concerned more so with other nasties contained in dog excrement in addition to salmonella - like try giardia on for size!  Or perhaps be more concerned about which end of the dog you’re giving a kiss to - the ‘brown rose’ should not be it lol!

So back to the Delta Society.  Is their concern a genuine one based on direct cases of salmonella being spread from canine to human?  No.  Is it based on fear?  Absolutely.  But if this fear of salmonella is so warranted, then why not approach the true known and documented sources of it?  Perhaps they should lobby for no poultry in senior’s homes since as much as 80% of it contains salmonella.  Or what about the treats that Pet Partner’s are bringing into the facilities for the residents to give to the dogs?  Yet another recall just from Merrick a few weeks ago with their Beef Treats along with studies showing that half (51%) of tested dried pig ears carried salmonella?  What about handlers handling those?  Isn’t the truth of the matter that with no demonstrated cases of death attributed to canine to human transfer of salmonella that the real risk is posed in the treats used, the contact with the humans themselves, and even the food fed to the patients?  What about a simple cold, a flu bug, a cough.  All these provide significant and real risk versus a fabricated one.

So, if there is no scientific merit to the position, then what could be the possible source of such a stance?  Well, visit the Delta Society website to begin with.  Scroll down to the lower right side - “Thank you to our incredible Partner and passionate pet people at Purina”. 

Perhaps now you’re thinking, ‘Dave, you’re going to make this into a conspiracy theory?’.  Well, to a certain extent, yes.  How else can one attribute an action with so little merit given the obvious publicly stated partnership between the two?  Nestle purchased Purina for 10.3 BILLION DOLLARS.  Yes, BILLION (!!).  Nestle, like any other business has one end mandate - to serve the shareholders - and that is only achieved by meeting the shareholder’s true goal = profit.  It’s not a bad thing, it’s what they’re supposed to do.  Doesn’t make them ‘evil’, simply means that when looking at their actions you need to consider the end goal.

The pet industry in the United States is forecast to see revenues of $47.7 BILLION dollars in 2010, with $18 billion of that being in food.  Add to this the growing surge of a raw natural diet movement (forecast at a growth rate of 23% this year) after so many recalls of kibble and heightened consumer awareness of what exactly we feed those that love us so unconditionally.  These billion dollar corporations see one thing - market erosion to a product they don’t sell or advocate, nor can they change their stance at this point.

Their influence runs deeper than a simple logo and funding, it runs right into the organizational fabric of such groups as the Delta Society.  Have a visit to the Delta Society “About Us” page and view the composition of the Board of Directors.  Scroll down to the seat of Secretary - Brenda Bax… who just happens to be the Marketing Director of Purina!

Still think there’s no vested interest from such individuals?  Well check out the latest patent application by the Director (Marketing Corporate Brands with Animal Charities).  My favourite section from the patent application is this “13. The method of claim 1 wherein the marketing program benefits the corporation by increasing marketing opportunities for the corporation”

So there you have it.  Some info on salmonella, some info on Delta, and some light on why such decisions could possibly be made without supporting positions.