Thank-you,for another wake-up-call, Recalls are good, for the health of pets.But taking chances?? Nope Going back to making my own food for my gang.

For the pet owner who has purchased the recalled food, it is their worst nightmare. No animal should have to suffer at the hands of a commercial entity. But that's fantasyland, we all know that. Toyota is a prime example in the human world. Big business means lower quality and errors. When big business becomes careless, it costs lives.
The fact that some pet food companies have taken steps to make their foods safer and thus implementing recalls when necessary is a good thing. But, I am firm believer that it should never have to come down to a recall. Pet food companies have an obligation to produce the best possible product, but obviously we still have a long way to go.
I do doubt that pet food companies will ever forgo profit in favor of pet health and longevity. So,this begs the question - Is it in the best interest of the food companies to make a better food? My pessimistic belief is that it is not, because making pet food with better ingredients (not sourced from China or Indonesia, etc.) means a smaller profit margin.
Pet food recalls are a temporary fix, but they don't address the bigger issue of corporate greed.

I feed raw now, but previously would buy in bulk and hope that recalls would be announced before I fed it. Never did have a recall.

I used to feed my dog Nutro Natural Choice Lamb and Rice dry kibble -- assuming that it was much higher quality than the crap found in supermarkets. However, I stopped buying it after my dog developed bladder stones which required surgery to remove (and which I now suspect may have been caused by the Nutro). Since then (which was five years ago), I have home-cooked for my dog.

I simply don't trust the quality or safety of commercial pet food. I would rather cook for my dog than rely on a corporation to voluntarily recall a dangerous product.

I DO think it's a good thing that recalls are happening more and more. But then again, it really is another reason to lament the current pet food industry. I cook for my guy for his evening meal but give him dry kibble in the morning. I try to buy the very best I can but that does not ascertain that his food will never be on a recall list. My cats also eat wet and dry commercial food. Guess I worry too much that I wouldn't be providing optimal nutrition if I did strictly homemade food for either.

I was hanging out with a friend when her vet called about the recall. She said what her vet told her was that there had been no incidents with the food, but that salmonella was found at the manufacturing plant. So they recalled that batch to be safe.

So how is that remotely *more* dangerous than feeding raw? I mean, the chance of salmonella (or other pathogens) being present in raw food is fairly high. At least the pet food company was aware of the potential problem and made sure they recalled it.

(by "fairly high" I mean in comparison to anything that's been cooked, not that all meat is contaminated)

I keep reptiles so salmonella is always on my radar. More recalls are good but using quality ingredients and enforcing health codes is better. In the melamine scare I had one contaminated can on the shelf. That was much more frightening to me than salmonella.

The raw foodies are on the soapbox but forget that human grade food is also being recalled regularly.

Just wash your hands people.

Good to see more recalls but voluntary recalls where companies make limited effort to get the message out to retail outlets that stock their product and therefore product stays on the shelf are useless. It should not be up to pet owners to find out about recalls and then make retailers aware and to remove the product to ensure other owners pets are safe.

As an Australian whose cats were paralysed & killed by Orijen in 2008 I am disgusted to see the same comments from north americans regarding recalled product being sold and retailers totally unaware of the recall as we had here nearly 2 years ago.

Sick to death of voluntary recalls which mean nothing because product is not proactively removed from the shelf. Sick of PFCs acting as though they have done all they can when they are generally forced into a "voluntary" recall and then post a message on their website and issue a press release and that seems to be about it.

Voluntary recalls do not work isn't it about time there was a compulsory recall available which would force PFCs' to get recalled product off the shelf.

I learned a long time ago that if the FDA approves a product, you're probably better off running the other way. It's all about power and money and greed. How would the same not hold true of the FDA getting involved in pet food? Somehow it all comes down to more money in their pockets and not necessarily the safety of our pets.

If dogs have the same digestive system as their ancestors, the wolves, and homeless dogs regularly eat rotten meat and garbage off the streets (with no ill consequences), then I'm not too concerned about my dog being able to handle something that might be slightly "off." In fact, I give my dog leftover meat if/when it starts to turn and my husband and I can't eat it. Dog LOVES it and has never had a problem digesting.

I would be more concerned about the chemicals and processing that goes into the pets food and how that affects the liver and other organs. I think this is a bigger part of the puzzle than what we tend to focus on.

I say try and strike a happy balance - feed raw and/or fresh scraps wherever possible, and when you need to feed commercial food, try to get the best food your money can buy, preferably at a health food store. If we "are what we eat," then how would it hold any less true for our pets?

Dr. Khuly, maybe you can clarify something here. It was my understanding that dogs were less susceptible to salmonella because of the way their digestive system is constructed. Not that they are immune, but that what would sicken a human might not sicken a dog. Dogs evolved as scavengers, eating from the human settlements' trash heaps. For a long time, scraps are what they survived on. Many of them think poop is a delicious hors d'oeuvre or dessert.

I'm not suggesting that salmonella in dog food is okay, just that perhaps it poses a different threat to dogs than it does for humans.

I feed my dogs both raw and commercial foods. The raw food they eat comes from a farm. In over two years, nobody has gotten sick from their food. I store it properly, throw it out if it smells even slightly off, throw it out if the dogs refuse to eat it (they can smell things I can't) and they are healthy and happy.

Would love to know whether my assumptions here are incorrect. PS - my vets have never given me an issue over my food choices.

With all the pet food recalls for salmonella contamination (human food, too), I have to wonder what the root cause is. Are there better controls in place to find it, or more contamination than usual, or has it always been in the food supply chain and now we’re paying attention, etc.

Salmonella and other bacteria are everywhere in the environment. It’s in the dirt your pets walk on and on the grass they chew and on the butts they lick and in the food they eat (canned, kibble, raw and homemade). Microbiological testing for salmonella on pet food is done for a very tiny portion of an entire batch; and even with a negative result doesn’t mean there isn’t salmonella in the rest of the batch.

You can keep your pet inside your house all the time, but it’s in the grocery stores you shop in, in the restaurants you eat in, in the malls you walk in, and in dust particles in the air you breath and you can pass it on to them. Salmonella can live for 2.5 years outside the live host body.

There ain’t no gettin’ rid of salmonella.

For pets: they’re equipped to handle it in normal situations. A vastly infected host of salmonella in a very young or immune compromised pet would see a reaction to it.

For us: as Gina over at PetConnection so adequately put it: “all food — should all be handled with safety first and foremost in mind, and the risks, which remain relatively small, kept in perspective.”

To keep it in perspective: 36,000 people died in the US from influenza in 2009; only 30 people died from salmonella. I find very little info on dogs or cats that died from salmonella, but it has to be a minute number.

I think that although pet-food recalls are scary for people who feed that brand, I DO think they're a good thing in general, it means that SOMEONE is paying more attention to the food that people feed their pets... I'm sure that the food quality hasn't gotten WORSE over the years, it's just that before the 2007 recalls, noone really understood that the FOOD could be what caused the sickness or death, I'm sure people just stopped giving treats, stopped taking their dog to the dog park, went to the vet and gotten them REvaccinated etc... They didn't understand the cause of their pet's illness was the very thing they thought was safe, the kibbles and canned food they plopped into the bowl every day, sometimes twice a day (or more for puppies).... So now that people are paying more attention to the foods they feed, feeding better quality foods (when possible) and keeping an eye out for recall news, it means that in general pets MAY be safer.

Personally I feed my dog 100% Raw... *GASP!* I'm also a reptile owner, like someone else said. Feeding raw is not more dangerous than owning a reptile or even actually COOKING your own food in your kitchen... When you cook some fried chicken, the chicken STARTS as raw... Do you hyperventilate and just spray disinfectant all over ever single surface of your home? I doubt it, wash your hands, wash the utensiles when you're done... Don't let the dog kiss your kids, it's as simple as that.

Have any of you guys NEVER seen a dog eat a dead animal or poop, or lick his butt? Don't you think if his gut wasn't able to handle bacteria, he would DIE from his own normal activities. My dog loves his raw, he eats twice a day, I don't worry about him not getting the correct vitamins. I just emulated the ingredients list from PRIMAL raw food, they're AAFCO certified 100% nutritionally complete, just like regular kibble dog food, so I know if I feed the same foods that are in the PRIMAL, then I will be feeding the same or better than any kibble, because it's certified complete... Plus I can control the quality. I don't know what the meat and veggies in kibble look like before they're mixed into a brown chunk and baked hard... Plus he has ZERO gas, which he had pretty badly when he was eating Canidae and then Orijen. His breath smells divine, his teeth are cleaner, his poo is smaller and much easier to clean up and his coat is even shinier and softer.

My vet evaluated him and said he was in Excellent Health in Ideal Weight... That was after 2 months on a completely raw diet.

For good or ill, FDA, via CVM, and unaccountably in my opinion
via AAFCO, regulates commercial pet food safety and quality.
FDA has done a very poor job of safety and quality regulation
for a really long time.
Consumers shouldn't have to worry if there's salmonella or e-coli, or imbalanced vitamins and minerals, or dangerous dyes and
chemicals, or unhealthy rendered animal fats, or mislabeled disguised meat products and grain products in commercial pet food.
The commercial pet food industry for profit and the veterinary
profession by silence have gotten us to a sorry point in commercial pet food production where profit is more important
than pet food safety or pet food quality.
So I'm all for the FDA having the power to mandatorily recall
dangerous pet food products as often as FDA finds them and think it would improve the caliber of pet food produced in the
U.S. immensely. Go, FDA, and make commercial pet food safer and
more wholesome even if it costs companies and vets some profits.

Is a double-edged sword. Yes so glad we're being notified of potential dangers but why so many issues in the first place? Wish pet food companies didn't outsource their manufacturing process. Everyone is out to save a nickel these days, and I still don't believe that these generic factories care one bit about safety. Also who knows where most of these ingredients originate? Pet food companies need to bring food processing back under their control, buy safe food components, and take some responsibility for issuing recalls as necessary. Totally agree the FDA should have mandatory recall authority.

ANY increased scrutiny is good.

If these recalls cause the public to take a second look at that scoop of kibble, then GO FDA.

On the question of "how salmonella?" we need to turn our attention away from the food companies and towards the FOOD SUPPLIERS.

This is what happens when non-human grade meat is used.

What doesn't help is that most of these factory's systems are enclosed. After touring a half dozen factories and really not seeing much actual ingredient processing (everything is contained in vats, closed mixers, covered conveyors) aside from the Orijen tour that actually included raw materials, it's so easy to see how these things happen. Trying to eradicate every single organism from this equipment while ensuring that not a single drop of cleaner gets into the next batch is not an easy task.

Although I think that Dr. K said it best her very own self.

"Reading this, some of you pet-food-jaded types might be thinking I'm getting what I deserve. "If you get lazy and stop cooking for your dogs … and if you're stupid enough to align yourself with a company that's recalled its foods more than a couple of times over the past few years," you might say, "that's what happens."

And yes, you would be right."


I agree with this. Unfortunately, I also agree with Christie and Gina that ANY food you buy should at the very least be uncontaminated.

The question I have is what's the plan now, Dr. K? Finally ready to take the raw leap? Nature's Variety's Bison is a huge hit among our raw feeders. Lean, grass fed/free range by necessity and an alternate protein. Spring Meadows also makes one without the added veggies.


Extra special kudos do Dr. K - who I haven't been easy on lately - for taking on the food company interests in a straightforward, no BS, say whatever you want style... again. You're an original, and Gina is right (in the language I can assume she used) about the attendance at the anti-BARF event. I do wish that someone had gone through that crowd and gotten the opinions of those who went and are Kibble Believers and those who went and are either on the fence or Raw Believers themselves. Is a transcript of this seminar available?

If there is a 0.000000000000000000001% chance that my animals will get sick or die from any type of food, there is a 0.0% chance that I will feed it to them.

Hi Patty. Would love to be able to meet you and argue many things for the entire night & probably the following week.
You say you don't bite but at times you do. I feel sorry for people who try to do what they can for their animals only to be told by you ( in no uncertain terms that) they got it all wrong.
FOOD? Any person who just fills a bowl with biscuit is lazy, uncaring and inconsiderate. I love baked beans on toast but not more than twice a week. Why should a dog eat that bowl of biscuit EVERY DAY?
My dogs ALWAYS get a varied dish. That can include fish, YES FISH, many dogs love it, At least 2 brands of biscuit, a basic cheap one as a filler but a good quality one for the benefits it provides, cooked chicken, (fresh liver and kidney in small quantities) good quality tinned meats and also low quality pork, turkey or ham roll that is intended for human consumption. I enjoy seeing them enjoy their food, not simply eating for survival. It is no diferent to our foods. If some are not too good but you only eat a small amount it is unlikely to do any harm.

Or another word for it might be busy, but the bottom line is I have made room in my life to take care of several dogs, some of them special needs rescues, even if I don't have time/space/money to feed them raw or home cooked meals. I rely on prepared diets, including special diets for allergies and weight management, and my dogs are all doing very well on them. I think more recalls is a good thing because as another commenter said, people are looking at diet as a possible cause of illness, and the good companies will have to look at their supply chain and manufacturing processes.

A couple of comments - first, salmonella might not be too alarming for your pet but I still think it's important to recall these products because most people are not going to handle canned or dry dog food the way we handle say, raw chicken. Perhaps we should but most people don't. And yes, I'll say it, there may be people who eat food intended for pets, and in that sense it should be safe for humans too.

The other comment is that it's a mistake to assume that contamination has only to do with poor quality ingredients and companies that don't care about pet nutrition, lowest common denominator etc. If you don't remember the 2003 Go Natural dog food recall, you might fine it interesting to research it. Go Natural was and is a high-end food and they had a bad batch and animals died from eating it before it was recalled.

The FDA may be catching up to all the bad manufacturing...

It doesn't really concern me, too much, as I stopped feeding my pets products from those companies a long time ago. Sadly, some of my relatives still don't care about animal cruelty, and irresponsibility. Iams, Pedigree, etc. are STILL on animal cruelty lists. We use 'green' and 'cruelty-free' products ONLY in our household. As we become aware of more hazardous products, we change our usage. It doesn't surprise me, AT ALL, that there are so many recalls... but then, I wouldn't believe anything the FDA said anyway... so I guess it's a moot point:)

I do believe that the increased recalls indicates increased surveillance and that can only be a good thing. I feed my dog raw poultry and chances are there's salmonella in some of it. Dogs don't usually get sick from salmonella but the humans who handle their food do. So it's important to wash hands after handling ANY dog food, kibble or raw! The thing which frustrates me is that irradiation can kill the harmful bacteria quite effectively but it's not used. Why? Because ignorant consumers are convinced it will harm them. I'd worry a lot more about melamine than salmonella in my dog's food, but I don't have to because she doesn't eat commercial dog food.

My hospital spent hours calling all clients who had purchased these foods. we explained the problem in detail. The veterinarian was on the phone in a flash if you had a question. Moreover, I actually performed salmonella cultures on two patients who had been recently ill. We paid for it. We also issued immediate credits for all recalled foods purchased. Other vet hospitals did the same.

Sure, you may pay more at the vet's––and I do not support the veterinary-only distribution of Rx pet foods––but damn if you don;t get service with your purchase. Think about it. What if we could organize pet food distribution so you'd always know whether a recall affected you? Would you willingly pay more for your food?

"If there is a 0.000000000000000000001% chance that my animals will get sick or die from any type of food, there is a 0.0% chance that I will feed it to them."

Then your animals are going to starve to death, because there is NO 100% guarantee of safety.

Prior to the 2007 poisonings, there was really much scrutiny of pet food safety. Now, there is more scrutiny, and with more scrutiny comes more recalls. But even the standards for human food safety aren't what they should be. When I was a kid and our meat came from the local butcher who got it from local and comparatively small-scale sources, I'd snack on little bits of raw beef while I was following my mother around the kitchen learning to cook. And our idea of properly "cooked" beef was "still bleeding" and red rather than pink inside. Now? No way no how. And why? Because large scale slaughtering facilities, long-distance shipping, and an assumption that meat only has to be safe WHEN COOKED AT LEAST MEDIUM-WELL DONE, mean that contamination is tolerated at the slaughterer's that should never be.

One of the arguments against raw-feeding our pets is that there's feces in the meat. Why should there be feces in the meat? Why don't the FDA and the USDA and the vets who tell us it's not safe to raw feed regard THAT as the problem?

Why as a DVM do you feed kibble to your carnivore?

I have seen such amazing results with a raw meat and bones diet, I am always surprised when I read about a DVM using kibble. The fact that the food is so dry and full of carbs and starches should easily convince you to move to a healthier and easy to use raw meat and bones diet.

Is it really true DVM's get no training on simple nutrition unless it is given by kibble manufacturers?

Thanks for your time

"What if we could organize pet food distribution so you'd always know whether a recall affected you?"

I signed up at the FDA site for recall notices (for anything, not just pet foods) to be sent to my email address. There are so many coming in I wish there was an easy way to filter them for just the states I and my kids live in.

The probabilities are against getting something nasty from any particular recalled product but after experiencing it twice I'd just as soon avoid, for the humans, cats, and dogs in the family, repeating the thrill of a G.I. tract trying to turn itself inside out.

"...and easy to use raw meat and bones diet."

Sorry, but this is as dishonest as FDA vets trying to scare people about how near-impossible it is to handle raw food safely. (Apparently, the plate can tell whether you're preparing raw meat for cooking for yourself, or preparing it to be served raw to your dog.) A healthy, well-planned, home-prepared raw diet is more work and more time-consuming than feeding any commercial product, kibble, canned, pre-made raw, whatever. Not too hard for anyone to learn to do, but not a practical choice for everyone. And whether it's cheaper, about the same, slightly or a lot more expensive than a decent-quality kibble depends a lot on where you are and what sources you have access to.

Eilis, this same argument you're making could be made for any number of things in your life as to what's "practical" or not. You could eat from McDonald's 3 times a day rather than make home cooked for yourself, as that would be "time consuming". You could choose not to exercise; or you could choose not to clean your house; or you could choose not to brush your teeth; or you could choose not to hold a job, etc. All time consuming life events that everyone has to prioritize. But if you equate "more work" and "time consuming" to what you decide to feed your pet, then your pet isn't very close to the top of your list of priorities.

I think the real argument is why would anyone feed kibble, when there are plenty of pre-made raw and good quality canned foods available if time is of the essence in your life.

Ah, yes, low-quality kibble or raw, McDonald's or filet mignon. The fallacy of the excluded middle.

The "middle," btw, includes high-quality kibbles, high-quality canned, pre-made raw, a variety of other products that aren't kibble or canned OR pre-made raw.

And then, of course, there's home-cooked, which also involves more work and is more time-consuming than feeding commercial products, but is a lot closer to how dogs actually evolved than feeding raw. (No, sorry, "RealityCheck," dogs didn't evolve eating raw. Wolves evolved eating raw. Dogs evolved from wolves eating human leftovers, mostly cooked. Now, THERE'S a reality check, for you.)

There's no One True Way. And, no, sorry, you don't get to rule that those who don't feed the way you feed, don't really love their dogs or don't make them a high priority in their lives.

I have a small, fluffy, non-shedding dog, and my sister has a Lab. I love the time I spend grooming my dog and taking care of her wonderful coat, and frankly, I'd much rather have the extra cuddle time involved in grooming than extra time vacuuming. My sister, OTOH, would rather spend a little extra time vacuuming, and have the time she spends with her dog be spent running, playing fetch, hiking in the woods.

Now, I might say that if my sister really loved her dog, she wouldn't begrudge the time spent grooming and would certainly prefer extra grooming to extra vacuuming. OR, my sister could say that, if I really loved my dog, I wouldn't want to spend extra time on a "chore" like grooming, and would instead want to spend more time hiking with her.

But we'd both be wrong.

I feed my dog a mixed diet of home-cooked meals, Honest Kitchen dehydrated raw, and a rotation of high-quality kibbles. This does involve more work than just feeding a pre-made commercial product of ANY kind. I would ever claim otherwise. It also takes LESS time than than feeding all home-cooked.

I feed the way I do because I think it's the best balance of quality, variety, and NOT spending all my time and money on feeding my dog rather than being able to, you know, actually spend time with her. But I have only the one dog and the one cat, and myself.

For people who have more pets, and/or larger human families to feed, finding the right balance involves the reality that any time-consuming option is going to be MORE time-consuming, and more time may not be available. Furthermore, though it's anathema to say so in raw feeding circles, not every dog responds well to raw feeding. Many do, no question, and there's a non-trivial number of dogs who never did well on ANYTHING before their owners started raw feeding. But that's not every single dog.

And people may want, crazy thought, to actually spend time with their dogs.

Also, many people, not unreasonably, do ask their vet for advice on feeding their pets well. And, sadly, it really is true that unless a veterinary student specializes in veterinary nutrition, most of the nutritional education they get is funded by the major pet food companies. But people don't know that if they want that kind of advice, they should ask for a referral to a veterinary nutritionist. The vets give what they believe to be correct advice, and for most vets, that's "feed one or more of these brands of "premium" pet food, either kibble or canned."

No, not everyone who loves their dogs knows how to do research on pet food. Not everyone who loves their dogs knows where to BEGIN doing that research, other than at the vet's.

And not everyone who loves their dogs has the time, space (freezer space, space to put a large freezer), or, depending on where they are and what's available to them, the wherewithal to feed a good raw diet.

"and NOT spending all my time and money on feeding my dog"
This comment is fear mongering to lead all those people you reference above as to not having any knowledge of animal care that home cooked or raw takes ridiculous amounts of time to prepare and one would need to spend their life doing so.
Not everyone is down and out financially or constrained for time, and home cooked/raw should never be poo-pooed to the point that stating other parts of your life would be compromised if you do so.

Well, other people may be doing better than you are at reading and absorbing my repeated comments that the cost of going raw or home-cooked depends in part on where you are and what resources you have available. I'm not personally acquainted with anyone who has successfully gone raw WITHOUT a good freezer for storage of raw meat, for instance, and availability of higher-quality meats at a reasonable cost is regional. It's one of those things you should check locally before make assertions about what either you or others can or can't do.

My point, "RealityCheck," is that people may make different choices than you, and even make choices that you don't understand, and still love their dogs, place a high priority on them, and take excellent care of them.

For sure there are people, many people, who genuinely enjoy cooking as an activity in itself, and would find it well worth their time to do a full home-cooked diet, very likely with the dog(s) and/or cat(s) following them around the kitchen, not in the way, just enjoying the time with Mom or Dad.

And there are people who may or may not feel the same way about cooking, who nevertheless either home-cook or serve home-prepared raw because they've found their pets do much, much better on that than anything else.

I feed the mix I do for a variety of reasons. The 2007 poisonings were very scary, and I feel much better knowing that I can, if there's another spate of recalls, switch over entirely to home-cooked for a while much more easily than I was able to then. At the same time, I don't love spending time in the kitchen; cooking is a chore, a necessary part of eating a reasonably healthy diet. Also, I'm a big believer in variety, variety, variety in achieving good nutrition, and even a fairly small amount of meat can feed my little dog for a bit longer than I like to keep her on just one thing. ALSO, if for any reason, she had to spend more than a few days in anyone else's home, for instance my sister's, I'd have much more confidence in her getting fed adequately without disruption if she knows kibble is food.

Before I added in the Honest Kitchen, I was feeding two home-cooked and one kibble meal a day. Now, it's one home-cooked, one Honest Kitchen, and one kibble meal. I've seen some small but nice improvements, such as the near-elimination of tear-staining, since adding in the HK.

Her weight is perfect, her muscle tone is excellent, her vet is thrilled with how well she's doing--and was very happy to learn about Honest Kitchen.

What we're doing works for us. Presumably what you're doing works for you and your dogs. And other people, shockingly, make different choices that nevertheless still work for them and their pets.

I agree with Eilis that raw/kibble has become a very unproductive false dichotomy where people push their approach and demonise the other--rather than talkign about what the reliable information on nutrition and safety really is. This is why when people start talking raw, or dog training methods, or a number of other issues, I tend to edge towards the door.

I welcome the recalls. I mean I don't think it is good that a company needs to recall their product, but I'm glad not only that they are aware of this sort of thing, but that they are telling the public. Only way we can make our world safer is to be aware of what can go wrong.

The other side of this is that the recalls get us talking about this. A lot of these comments are very pro one way or the other. But we are talking about it. If you don't know that something can be an issue, you don't learn about it.

If these recalls got people to open their eyes and learn a little bit about nutrition for their pets, then that is a good thing, no matter what they decide to feed their pets.

I enjoy your site and the info. You are no doubt, a brillant young lady

Like what my vet always says about my pets, too much of a good thing is bad. Whether it applies to medicine, supplements, or food.

cesg, I agree completely. It was the recalls in '07 that got everyone talking to begin with, and I feel I (and hopefully lots of others) have come a long way in understanding nutrition for our pets as well as the contamination that can occur with it. So discussions that are open, friendly, no name calling and no SHOUTING are always welcome.

I do occasionally come across the raw food/home cooked myth that to prepare it takes "all my time and money." My argument is not that it is the best and only quality food source for pets. It is just another alternative that should be considered by people without misrepresentation of the facts.

I've had to change my sleeping position several times over the past 20 years depending on how many cats we had at the time.....

And sleeping with them day and night definitely helped DH recover from major surgery much quicker and more peaceful.