Health Risks .. luck versus genetics versus environment - Page 1

The role of environment in both human and animal health is increasingly being shown to be related to 70-90 of diseases and cancers in particular.  Link below.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/12/17/study-up-to-90-of-cancers-not-bad-luck-but-due-to-lifestyle-choices-environment/?tid=hybrid_collaborative_2_na

Of course the companies selling Coke and dog foods don't want their products tied to health risks .. it's much better if they can claim the problems are all genetic.  Of course lung cancer is not caused by cigarettes, concussions do not cause brain injuries, and greenhouse gases do not result in global warming since these problems require more study ( usually 30 years or more ).  Perhaps it is time that pet owners require some feeding studies comparing a natural raw diet to dried kibble for our dogs because those tests have never been done even though dog food companies have sold waste products and tankage as healthy dog foods for around 70 years.  Environmental contamination and detrimental changes to the quality of air, water, temperatures, and food are the biggest problems facing the future of mankind and our animals.  An article link below on the "feeding trials" that dog food companies do which is in fact nothing other than a survival trial.  If the dog food companies could sell us cigarettes for our dogs they would if we would buy them.

http://www.whole-dog-journal.com/issues/15_6/features/Pet-Food-Company-Research_20546-1.html

Link to a pdf download by research done by UC, Davis saying that all dog food labels are BS .. there have been no life long studies or generational studies with commercial dog foods comparing them to a natural or alternative diet .. nor any alone.

http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/reprint/124/12_Suppl/2520S

Four large corporations control 80% of the dog and cat food industry valued at $41 Billion USD.

 

The proportionate influences of 'nature v. nuture / environment'
still have not been precisely worked out. Notwithstanding the
latest study in your Washington Post article. As someone
pointed out in a radio debate yesterday, comparing this new
set of results with those in the last one it mentions, that put
most cancers down to 'luck', how to explain childhood cancers ?
Lots of cases cited of the very young, who could hardly be said
to be victims of a dissolute lifestyle involving years of smoking,
alcohol and poor diet, some had hardly sampled the polluted
air we breathe before diagnosis. Cancers across the full range:
splenetic, bone, brain as well as liver and lungs.

There is still a long way to go; I agree research should not be
dragged out over decades to prevent suspected results inter-
fering with profits, on dog food or anything else. But we just
don't know it all yet.

The influence of environment on prenatal and post natal diseases including cancer is well documented .. puppies have a development cycle and growth rate 10X times that of humans and as such are many times more sensitive to environmental toxins and stressors.  Feeding mother dogs human grade food or raw foods prior to conception, during gestation, and while lactating is perhaps the cheapest and best health investment for the mother and puppies that a breeder can make.  The excerpt below refers to humans which have a slower and longer development cycle than dogs.  The more rapid the development during gestattion and post natal development the greater the risk of environmental toxins and stressors influencing post natal health.

• During prenatal development, environmental factors can significantly affect the development of the child. 
• Most everything the mother ingests, including food, liquid, and even medication, travels through the placenta to the fetus; anything the mother is exposed to in the environment affects the fetus.
• A teratogen is any substance or agent in the environment that can have a detrimental effect on a developing fetus. Various teratogens include drugs, alcohol, tobacco, and other environmental agents.
• The adverse effects of a teratogen depend on several factors, such as the dose or level of exposure, heredity, age of the teratogen, and any other negative influences.
• Any form of prenatal stress felt by the mother can have negative effects on various aspects of fetal development

 

True. However, many of the children described, it
was stated, also had parents who were less subject
to the range of environmental factors than average.

Must feel pretty hard take if you and your co-parent
do not smoke or drink, you've moved to a cleaner
rural environment, you are careful about what you
eat ... and yet your baby has a cancer. Seemed to
be an awful lot of cases where this was the case -
enough to pull me up from going "Oh well, the parents'
must have had crap lifestyles." Can't be quite as
simple as all of us living with the same junk chemicals
coming into us at all angles, or the rate of cancer victims
would be reaching nearer 100 % by now.

Bubba, you mentioned environmental toxins and feeding human grade dog food in prenatal and post natal stages for the mother dog. I have been feeding a good quality kibble with no grains and have been supplementing with raw, as well as giving a great multi-vitamin with all human grade ingredients that is manufactured in an FDA approved lab. I have recommended this vitamin supplement to others that have dogs with allergy and skin issues and they have started feeding this vitamin to their dogs and their allergies and skin issues has cleared up completely. Do you think that most skin problems and allergies are toxin related?

Good subject. However, as per 'human grade food'....I don't eat commercial 'human grade food' because of the contaminants that the fda finds 'acceptable', so won't feed to my dogs.
My 14 huskies were fed raw human grade chicken, fresh home grown beef and wild venison food for the majority of their lives and all but a couple of them succumbed to cancer, from bone cancer to hemangiosarcoma, although they did live to be fourteen to sixteen. So I'm not convinced that its best to feed 'raw' to avoid cancers.
On the other side, my four original smooth fox terriers lived to be fifteen and sixteen years old, they were all fed commercial kibble all their lives, were never sick and none developed cancer.
My gsds were fed raw chicken directly from the slaughter house and fresh home grown organic raw beef, goat and venison for most of their lives; two succumbed to hemangiosarcoma. Since then, I have gone back to feeding commercial kibble....I'd much rather copy my Smooth fox terrier record of health, so far, so good. My experience does not support raw food for health. Btw, all my dogs have had white healthy teeth and healthy gums for life no matter what their diets.

I firmly believe that there is a genetically precondition for a lot of deseases, some of them caused by triggers.

Maybe science needs to search the reason why some creatures DO NOT get cancer or something else ALTHOUGH they have the same lifestyle as ill persons.

There are and were a few people who smoked cigarettes and did not get cancer or died of something else first. There are a few people who can drink a case of beer a day and die of old age at 103. Neither examples make cigarettes or excessive alcohol consumption good for either their health or for the general population's health. The dog and cat food industry is run by 4 large corporations who control 80% of a 41 billion dollar industry with little or no government oversight or testing. Damages are limited to replacement cost for damaged or dead pets. Most recalls of pet food are for the health concerns created when children and adult humans are exposed to pathogens present in the pet foods for which the corporations have no protection against legal actions for human death or damages.   The label ingredients on the pet food labels imply a minimum content of nutrients but heavy metals and other contaminants can exceed the label minimum by 10 fold and still be in compliance with the laws.  There are some pet food brands that use deionized water in their final processes but most of the heavy metals and contaminants are added during the sourcing and processing of the generic " meals " made of who knows what that are purchased by the pet food companies from any supplier or any nation where they can get the lowest delivered price to their manufacturing facility.  Human grade ingredients are much safer for pet foods and human grade foods purchased at a human food store are better because the legal costs of poisoning and killing humans is so high as to be a detterent to food companies taking those risks.

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2010/11/04/nutrition-provided-by-your-pet-cat-food-or-pet-dog-food.aspx

To demonstrate, Dr. Jean Hofve, a holistic veterinarian and renowned expert on pet nutrition, in an article written for The Whole Dog Journal and republished here gave this example: “One critic of this method of feed formulation designed a "food" that met all the AAFCO nutrient profile requirements – even though the food was primarily formulated from old shoe leather, sawdust and motor oil with a multi-vitamin-mineral supplement. Obviously, there would be no guarantee that any animal would eat such a food, or could digest it, even though it contained all the vitamins, minerals, protein, fat, etc. that the nutrient profiles required.” In an effort to compensate for the limitations of the nutrient profiles, AAFCO included a ‘safety factor,’ which involved exceeding the minimum amount of nutrients necessary to meet ‘complete and balanced’ requirements.

AAFCO is a pet food and feed makers front organization that works for and is run by the feed conglomerates and has no regulatory powers nor any responsibility if the products do not meet their standards. 

Kiesgsd ... toxins from dog food are quite common since dead dogs and cats from veterinarians and kill shelters as well as road kill and dead farm animals end up in dog food.

Toxic Waste in Rendering Plants:

The following menu of unwanted ingredients often accompany with dead animals and other raw material:

        Pesticides via poisoned livestock

• Euthanasia drugs that were given to pets

• Some dead animals have flea collars containing organophosphate insecticides

• Fish oil laced with bootleg DDT

• Insecticide Dursban in the form of cattle insecticide patch

• Other chemicals leaked from antibiotics in livestock

• Heavy metals from pet ID tag, surgical pins and needles
• Plastic from:
  •       Styrofoam trays from packed unsold supermarket meats, chicken and fish

  •       Cattle ID tags

  •       Plastic insecticide patches

  •       Green plastic bags containing dead pets from veterinarians

Skyrocketing labor costs are one of the economic factors forcing the corporate flesh-peddlers to cheat.  It is far too costly for plant personnel to cut off flea collars or unwrap spoiled T-bone steaks.  Every week, millions of packages of plastic-wrapped meat go through the rendering process and become one of the unwanted ingredients in animal feed.

 

Thank you for that detailed response, bubba. After reading and further researching this, I'm definitely considering going to a more natural diet for my dogs and still supplementing with this multi vitamin that I have been using. I definitely don't want to be feeding these horrid things to my growing puppies and adult dogs. In all actuality, if I wouldn't eat it, why should I make my dogs eat it, too? Thanks for that insight. :)