Search results for: raw diets

test

It’s fair to say that raw pet foods have clearly been source of H5N1 influenza infections in cats, some of which have been fatal – even though sometimes it’s impossible to make a definitive link between the food and infection because of when and how the infection occurred, and what could or could not be tested in timely manner. Sometimes raw pet food companies and their supporters use that missing link as a way to claim that there’s no risk or that the risk is overblown. Confusing (and let’s just say “opportunistic”) communication around test results also adds to consumer confusion – for example, understanding the meaning of “non-negative” test results.

The two most common ways in which the term “non-negative” is used with regard to test results are:

  1. Borderline positive: The test result was not quite strong enough to say it’s positive, but there’s a strong enough signal to make us very suspicious that there’s something there (i.e. the virus of interest). Since we can’t call it a positive or a negative, “non-negative” indicates that the sample could be positive, but we can’t say for sure.
  2. Reportable disease that requires government laboratory confirmation: For some diseases (usually really important ones, like reportable diseases), only the government lab gets to have the final say on the test result. If another diagnostic lab gets a “positive” result (even if it’s a really clear positive), they’re only allowed to call it “non-negative” until the result is confirmed by the government lab. That might mean running the same test, a similar test, or a complementary test. Sometimes, that confirmatory test might actually be less sensitive (i.e. less able to detect a positive), but is nonetheless the test used to provide the definitive answer to determine what response is required.

When we were doing our SARS-CoV-2 surveillance of pets in households with people with COVID-19, we had a few results that were positive/non-negative in our lab but were very close to the cut-off level, and were ultimately just below the cut-off at the federal lab. Those had to be called negative, even though we were pretty confident the virus was present in those animals, such as when we had a clearly positive dog (confirmed by the federal lab) and a non-negative dog in the same household. Odds are very high that the second dog with the borderline result was just shedding less virus than the first dog. But I digress…

Savage Cat Food has issued a recall of some of its raw chicken diets (lot code/best by date 11152026) following infections that were linked to the food and “non-negative” test results for H5N1 flu. . The food was distributed to California, Colorado, New York, Pennsylvania and Washington (not Canada).

  • In February, the company was made aware of a cat in Colorado that developed H5N1 flu and that had been fed their food. The cat fortunately recovered.
  • Sealed packages of the food were sent to the Colorado State University Laboratory and were tested “non-negative” by PCR for H5N1 flu.
  • A sample was then sent to the National Veterinary Services Laboratory in Ames, Iowa for virus isolation testing, which was negative. However, virus isolation is less sensitive than PCR, so PCR positive/virus isolation negative results can definitely occur with a contaminated sample, especially as flu virus is likely to die over time sitting in the food (virus isolation requires the virus to still be viable, whereas PCR can detect “dead” virus).
  • While this was being done, the manufacturer contacted retailers to have them pull the product from shelves.
  • A week after the negative virus isolation result was obtained, the company got a report of another cat with H5N1 flu that had eaten the same lot of food – in New York.

Some people will point to this and say “there’s no definitive proof” that the cats were infected by eating the food. Yes, that’s true, it’s not definitive, but it’s still solid. If they are able to sequence virus from both cats (meaning they find the same virus in two cats from two different states that were fed the same diet that had a PCR positive result) that makes it an even more solid presumptive link. If they are testing other food samples and get a positive, or even just more non-negatives, it reinforces the link further. If they are able to sequence the same virus from the food as they found in the cats, that would essentially be a slam-dunk.

The pet food company has a pretty straightforward influenza alert link on the home page of their website. They’re not saying the food was contaminated, since they indicate it tested negative at the Ames lab, but they are also (unlike some others) not trying to downplay the risk or deflect, so I give them credit for their response. (That said, I still take issue with various statements in their their general FAQ about food safety.)

This company does not high pressure pasteurize their diets. On with website, they say “No, our cat food is not subjected to High Pressure Processing (HPP). HPP can damage helpful bacteria and can change the taste and texture of foods, often times making it unappealing for cats.” That’s likely a big risk factor for why the food is contaminated and why these cats got sick. High pressure pasteurization isn’t perfect, but it’s a good tool to reduce contamination and (despite what the website says) there’s no real argument not to high pressure pasteurize raw pet food, especially high risk poultry-based diets.

The response of raw pet food companies to H5N1 influenza has been really variable.

  • Some have taken it seriously, talked about their risk reduction plans, and not tried to deflect.
  • At least one has started cooking their poultry diets.
  • Some have deflected and tried to downplay any risks.
  • Some are not saying anything.

Hopefully more of these companies are exploring high pressure pasteurization as a risk reduction (though still not risk elimination) method for customers who are still intent on feeding raw diets to their pets.

The Washington State Department of Agriculture and the Oregon Department of Agriculture have issued a public health alert because of H5N1 influenza virus contamination of another brand of raw pet food, following the deaths of two more indoor cats from separate households linked to consumption of the pet food.

Details are sparse, but both cats were euthanized due to severe disease from H5N1 influenza. Authorities tested the cats and the food from open containers in the household as well as unopened food samples, and found H5N1 flu virus in all of them. This shows that the food was truly contaminated at the source, and removes the potential that the food got contaminated in the household by the cats or some other source. (In a previous raw food-associated cluster of H5N1 flu infections in cats, the manufacturer of the implicated food tried to suggest the diet was contaminated in the household and was not the source of the virus, which was a very weak argument, and definitely not the case here based on the additional testing).

The recall involves Wild Coast LLC Boneless Free Range Chicken Formula, lots 22660 and 22664, Best Buy day 12/25. However, given that we have multiple instances of fatal raw poultry associated H5N1 infections in cats from multiple companies, the risk probably extends beyond this product.

To avoid the risk of H5N1 influenza from raw pet foods:

  • If raw diets are to be fed, use a non-poultry based diet, and choose one that’s high pressure pasteurized to reduce (though it will not eliminate) the risk.

Image from https://agr.wa.gov/lookuptypes/recallfile/131

The more H5N1 influenza continues to circulate in wild and domestic birds around the world, including here in North America, the more we have to be concerned about exposure of pets to H5N1 influenza through raw food diets. Recent documented infections in cats fed raw meat from infected birds have highlighted these concerns. For more information on the risks of H5N1 influenza from raw diets for pets and associated risk reduction measures, check out the latest quick podcast on Worms&GermsPod.

Find all our podcasts on most major podcast directories, or access them here directly through your web browser.

The FDA has issued a directive to pet food producers to ensure that their food safety plans address H5N1 influenza contamination issues. It’s in response to multiple cases of H5N1 avian influenza in domestic and wild cats fed contaminated raw diets containing poultry. Infection was fatal in many of these cats, and this also puts humans at risk of exposure from both the infected cats and handling the contaminated diets. The severity of disease in cats and the potential public health concerns with H5N1 flu in animals means action is needed to reduce the risk of infections. The FDA notice is directed at any manufacturers that use raw poultry or beef ingredients, but is most relevant for manufacturers of raw diets, since cooking during canned or dry diet production will kill influenza virus before it reaches the consumer or pet. Here’s what the first part of the notice says:

  • “The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has determined that it is necessary for manufacturers of cat and dog foods who are covered by the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act Preventive Controls for Animal Food (PCAF) rule and using uncooked or unpasteurized materials derived from poultry or cattle (e.g., uncooked meat, unpasteurized milk or unpasteurized eggs) to reanalyze their food safety plans to include Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza virus (specifically H5N1) as a known or reasonably foreseeable hazard. Furthermore, the FDA is issuing this update to ensure that cat and dog food manufacturers are aware of information about the new H5N1 hazard associated with their pet food products, which is an additional reason that manufacturers must conduct a reanalysis of their food safety plans.”

Manufacturers covered under rule mentioned in the notice have a standard requirement to reassess their food safety plan when the FDA determines there’s a need to respond to a new hazard, as they have here.  The notice also encourages producers to minimize H5N1 transmission through practices such as “… seeking ingredients from flocks or herds that are healthy, and taking processing steps, such as heat treatment, that are capable of inactivating viruses.” 

Will the FDA notice achieve much?

That’s a tough question. It won’t likely have an immediate direct impact, as it’s reliant on the companies taking effective action themselves. It’s a directive to consider changing their food safety plans, not a directive to actually do something specific to mitigate risk. Presumably, that’s because there are limits to what the FDA can require; getting into very granular actions (e.g. “you have to do this specific thing”) is likely beyond what the FDA can or would do in a situation like this. The impact will vary between manufacturers, but even if it won’t make everyone do something useful, it should help.

The good, more mainstream raw diet manufacturers are already likely taking the necessary steps to prevent H5N1 flu contamination in their products. Most of these companies use high pressure pasteurization (HPP), which is a useful risk reduction step (although it’s not guaranteed to eliminate risk of all pathogens). I assume the first cases of H5N1 in cats from raw diets already sparked a review of what they are doing and what they can do to reduce the risk of using contaminated meat in the first place.

The all-too-common dodgy raw diet producers usually ignore (or deny-and-deflect) infectious disease issues with their products, and some have been doing the same with H5N1 flu. They will likely continue to do so. Their “reanalysis” might be akin to “yep, we thought about it and we’re good. Go away.”

As is typical, the manufacturers in the middle might be the group where this could have the most potential impact. They may not know much about the issue or understand how serious it is. They also may be at a loss about what they can and should do to mitigate the risk. They probably don’t have much expertise in house to be proactive about emerging issues, and a notice like this helps to ensure it’s on their radar, emphasize the importance, raise some liability concerns (that might be the biggest driver of action for some – getting sued is a big motivator), force at least some consideration of the problem, and point them in the right direction in terms of what to do. It might also be another nudge to introduce better overall practices like high pressure pasteurization and better supply management. 

What else can be done to reduce the risk of pets getting H5N1 flu from raw diets?

It would be nice to have more consumer-facing education about the risks and how to reduce them to help help consumers protect themselves. It could also help drive better manufacturing practices, if educated consumers start spending their pet food dollars on products produced in safer ways. 

What can people do about the risk of H5N1 flu if they are adamant they want to feed a raw diet to their pet(s)?

  • Avoid poultry-based diets (and probably also beef in the US).
  • Use diets that are high-pressure pasteurized, and ask companies about if how the effectiveness of their HPP method is tested (not all HPP is equally effective).
  • Ask companies about their food safety plan and what pathogens they consider in their plan.
  • Use good food handling practices in the home to avoid cross-contamination of human food and other surfaces.
  • Report any illnesses in pets (or people) that might be linked to the diet.

For more general information about food safety and raw diets, check out the Worms & Germs and OAHN Raw Meat Diets infosheet, available on the Worms & Germs Resources – Pets page.

test

Blue Ridge Beef has (again) recalled a diet because of Salmonella contamination – this time a kitten diet. As is often the case, the issue was identified after a pet that was fed the diet got sick. This follows a recall of a puppy diet from the same company in December for Salmonella contamination was identified after a litter of puppies got sick that was identified after a litter of puppies got sick. (It seems like a bit of a “stealthy” recall too, as I see no information on the company’s website about it.) Of note, the company states on its website that its diets are high pressure-pasteurized.

A recall of raw pet food for Salmonella isn’t surprising. Bacterial contamination rates in these diets are high, and recalls are only the tip of that iceberg. Recalls of high pressure-pasteurized diets are more noteworthy but unfortunately are also far from rare.

High pressure pasteurization (HPP) is a process used to reduce pathogen burdens in raw food. It should markedly reduce (or perhaps sometimes even eliminate) bacteria like Salmonella and viruses like influenza. However, as we repeatedly see in situations like this, contamination can still occur. Whether that’s because of an inadequate method for HPP or post-processing contamination is unclear, but it probably relates to using methods that are not adequately tested and validated for the specific food matrix.

These repeated recalls raise a number of issues. One is the standard concern about contamination of these diets with bacteria like Salmonella, that cause disease in dogs and cats, and sometimes owners who have contact with the diets or animals. More recently, we now also have important concerns about H5N1 avian influenza virus contamination of raw meat diets for pets, as multiple cat deaths have been linked to consumption of such raw diets (including diets that were high pressure-pasteurized).

I recommend not feeding raw diets to pets. We cook food for people to kill things that can hurt us, and the same concept applies to pet food. If someone insists on feeding a raw diet, I recommend a high pressure-pasteurized diet to help reduce the risks, but this certainly does not eliminate the risks. Pet owners need to be aware that (despite all the claims on various companies’ websites) there are still infectious disease risks to pets and people with these diets, and safe food handling practices in the home are critical to reduce the risks to people in particular.

Since there’s no health benefit from raw diets beyond equivalent cooked diets, it’s best to go with a cooked diet. Post-cooking cross-contamination of food can also still occur, so while they still aren’t zero risk, they are much lower risk than raw diets.

test

Hot on the heels of the recent death of a cat in Oregon due to H5N1 influenza infection linked to a raw diet (that some raw diet proponents are trying to deflect or downplay), we have confirmation of a very similar case in California. Los Angeles County Public Health has issued a notice to avoid feeding Monarch Raw Pet Food “due to detection of H5 bird flu in product samples.” (note the plural). H5N1 was confirmed in one cat that was fed this diet and is suspected in four other cats from the same household.

The diet type was not reported, but the company’s website indicates “Our pet food is made of human grade USDA free-range poultry that is raised in the San Joaquin Valley.” Free range poultry are at increased risk of H5N1 infection from wild birds. Nonetheless, it would be interesting to know how infected poultry made it into the food chain (even the pet food chain), since H5N1 influenza usually causes widespread illness and death in domestic poultry, so it’s pretty obvious when it hits a poultry farm (and sick birds cannot be sent to slaughter).

The status of the infected cat wasn’t reported, but H5N1 infection in cats is often fatal based on what we know to date. Hopefully the cat had a milder infection, but I assume it was at least worse than a routine upper respiratory tract infection, since testing is usually limited to pets that are pretty sick.

The good news is that food-associated H5N1 influenza risks are totally avoidable… just don’t feed pets raw diets. The cost:benefit calculus is pretty easy since this virus kills cats and there are no health benefits of raw diets. More information about raw meat-based diets for pets (beyond the risk of H5N1 flu) can be found in the Worms & Germs / OAHN Raw Meat Diets infosheet, available on the Worms & Germs Resources – Pets page.

test

The Oregon Department of Health has issued a warning to pet owners about contaminated raw pet food after H5N1 avian influenza virus was detected in turkey-based raw (and frozen raw) pet food from Morasch Meats. Testing was performed after the death of an indoor cat from H5N1 flu in Washington County, Oregon. The virus from the cat and from the pet food were a genetic match, making a solid link between the two. The pet food company is voluntarily recalling some of their Northwest Naturals diets.

This highlights (yet another) risk posed by poultry-based raw pet food at the moment in areas like the US where H5N1 flu is actively circulating. There could also potentially be risk of H5N1 contamination of raw pet food made with beef, if the meat came from infected US dairy cattle. Risks could also extend to other raw pet food formulations if there is cross-contamination from these higher-risk ingredients.

There are no health benefits to raw diets beyond a properly formulated cooked (be it commerical or homemade) diet. H5N1 flu is now yet another potential threat to animals fed raw diets. The risk may extend to owners as well, through exposure to virus from handling food, and potentially from infected pets (especially cats, but we still don’t know the level of cat-to-human transmission risk).

We have seen foodborne H5N1 influenza infection in cats in multiple situations, often resulting in fatal disease. Foodborne disease probably helps explain some of the earlier reports of H5N1 in indoor cats, and in that respect it’s good to have an idea of how all these infections are occurring. The more infections we can’t explain, the more we worry about serious issues like unknown human (owner) infections with subsequent human-to-cat transmission. I’d much rather be able to attribute cases to straightforward food-associated transmission than have to explore other transmission pathways, or think that there may be silent human-associated spread.

The mitigation approach here is simple: just avoid raw pet food diets (especially poultry-based diets).

test

In some ways, I wonder why there even are recalls for raw pet foods and Salmonella. We know contamination is common, and the contaminated foods that get identified and recalled are presumably a very small portion of the amount of contaminated food that’s in circulation. At the same time, when a problem is identified and the FDA asks for a recall, I find it astounding that a company would ignore that.

Darwin’s Natural Pet Products is in the news yet again for selling contaminated raw pet food – and ignoring an FDA request for a recall.

As a result, the FDA has issued a public notice regarding Darwin’s Natural Selections Pet Food:

  • The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is cautioning pet owners that FDA samples of five Darwin’s Natural Pet Products raw cat and dog food made by Arrow Reliance, Inc. tested positive for Salmonella and a sixth FDA sample tested positive for Salmonella and Listeria monocytogenes (L. mono). 
  • The FDA recommended that Arrow Reliance, Inc. recall all six lots of product. To date, the firm has not recalled the affected products and could continue to distribute them. Therefore, FDA advises consumers to keep checking Darwin’s Natural Selection Antibiotic & Grain-Free products for the affected lot numbers prior to feeding to pets.

I could make a crack about Darwin’s “natural selection” but would rather the company just be responsible, recall their products and review their practices, to reduce the human and animal health risks.

Cleaning up some of the misinformation on their website would be good too, like where it suggests Salmonella is only a risk to puppies and kittens less than 4 months of age, or to those that are immunocompromised. Salmonella can most definitely cause disease in healthy adult dogs and cats, as well as their owners.

For more information about raw diets, including the risks and how to reduce them, see our recently updated Raw Meat Diets infosheet (produced in collaboration with OAHN) on the Worms & Germs Resources -Pets page.

test

A recent recall of a raw pet food diets in the US due to contamination with Listeria monocytogenes has sparked some concern about the risks to people (and pets) that might have been exposed to these products.

In some ways, the big concerns raised by the recall are misplaced, not because it’s not an issue, but because a large percentage of raw diets are contaminated with pathogenic microorganisms, but most raw food isn’t tested for them. So, this is not likely a rare scenario, it’s just one that we found out about.

It’s not clear what (small) percentage of commercial raw diets actually are tested and how (since when a company doesn’t really want to find anything, they would tend to use methods that don’t look too hard). In this case, “The issue was discovered during a facility inspection conducted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and The North Carolina Department of Agriculture (NCDA).” It’s not reported whether they identified issues with the facility and processes that triggered the inspection, or if they just collected samples for testing during a more routine visit.

That’s not to say Listeria in raw pet food isn’t a concern. It certainly is, but this recall has only flagged a small number of contaminated raw pet food products.

If we look at past studies of raw pet food, we know that finding bacteria like Salmonella, Listeria and E. coli (including multidrug-resistant strains) is common. A large FDA study in 2014 found Listeria in 16% (32/196) raw pet food samples, but in no dry pet food diets. So it’s totally unsurprising to find this bacterium (and others) in raw diets. It’s actually surprising to me that they bother to recall these diets at all, since it should be assumed that all raw diets that don’t undergo a pathogen reduction step (like high pressure pasteurization) are contaminated with pathogenic organisms. We expect these to be contaminated, whether they’re bought at the grocery store or a pet store. (That’s why we are supposed to cook raw meat and use good food handling practices for human food as well… since we often don’t do those well, it’s also why people end up barfing a lot).

What are the health risks from these diets contaminated with Listeria?

Risks to people

Listeria is certainly a concern in people, especially those who are elderly or pregnant. It can cause serious foodborne infection and outbreaks. In the US, approximately 1600 people get listeriosis every year, and about 260 of those people die from the infection. That’s not a huge number of infections, but that proportion of serious illness and death means we pay attention to it.

I’ve never seen a human infection with Listeria linked to raw pet food, but it’s certainly plausible that it could occur. The risk is probably pretty low, since infection would require ingestion of the bacterium from raw pet food, but given how poorly we often handle food (human or pet) and the potential for cross-contamination with human food, we can’t dismiss the potential, particularly in household with high-risk individuals.

Risk to pets

Listeria can cause disease in dogs and cats, but it’s quite rare since both species are fairly resistant to infection. The health risk to an average, adult, otherwise healthy dog or cat is going to be really low. Risks are probably highest in older dogs or cats, and in pregnant animals.

What should be done if someone has purchased a recalled diet?

Overall, the risks to people in most households are low. The problem is inadvertent ingestion of Listeria from contaminated hands, contact with the dog’s face after it eats or cross-contamination of human food. Listeria exposure is also a concern through consumption of some human foods (classically deli meat) so we have think about this raw food exposure alongside the broader ecosystem of exposures that we have.

The FDA recommends: “If you find that you have products from Lot 21244, please contact Viva Raw at info@vivarawpets.com for a refund on any remaining product—you should then destroy the food in a way that children, pets, and wildlife cannot access. Do not feed the recalled product to pets or any other animals. FDA recommends humans do not touch the contaminated food product with bare hands. While wearing gloves or using paper towels, place the contaminated food in a sealed plastic bag and throw it in the garbage. Areas that may have come in contact with the contaminated product should be sanitized. Do not sell or donate the recalled products.”

For pets

If a dog or cat has eaten a recalled diet but still looks healthy, don’t worry. Testing a healthy pet that has eaten one of these diets is not something I’d recommend.

For people

“Talk to your physician if you’re concerned” is always the default answer, but realistically it’s very unlikely anything would be done for a person who is healthy. However, if someone is sick and has had contact with the recalled diet (or any raw diet), they should make sure their healthcare provider knows about the potential exposure to Listeria and other nasty bacteria.

Take home messages:

Feeding raw diets to pets carries inherent risks to pets as well as people.

Risks are greatest to individuals (animal or human) who are immunocompromised, elderly, very young or pregnant, so raw diet feeding in household with those individuals poses extra risks.

Raw diets are best avoided since there’s no evidence they are superior to cooked diets. However, if someone really wants to feed a raw diet anyway, those treated with high pressure pasteurization (HPP) are presumably lower risk, because HPP reduces (though does not necessarily eliminate) pathogenic bacteria in the food.

If a raw diet is fed, basic food handling and hygiene practices are the key, focusing on the food, the food bowl, any areas that the food contacts, and the pet’s feces. More information about raw diets and risk reduction can be found on the Worms & Germs Resources – Pets page, including our recently updated infosheet on raw diets done in collaboration with the Ontario Animal Health Network.

I got a question about an old post on this topic, so I decided to add a bit of information and re-post it. Not much has changed since it was written in 2018, apart from more reports of people and pets getting sick from raw pet food and raw treats.

“Is freeze-dried raw pet food any different than fresh or frozen raw diets, from a microbiological standpoint?”

We don’t have much pet food-specific research, but there’s little reason to believe there would be much difference between these types of diets when it comes to the microbes we’re concerned about. When I want to preserve bacteria, I freeze them or freeze-dry them – those are actually the preferred methods for long-term storage of bacteria. Freezing or freeze-drying is a pretty hospitable process and state for most bacteria. Some, such as Campylobacter, don’t tolerate freezing (or especially fresh-thaw cycles) as well as others, so freezing or freeze-drying might have some impact on those specific bugs. For the higher profile pathogens like Salmonella, E. coli and Listeria, it probably doesn’t have much of an effect. I can see there being some reduction in bacterial numbers but probably nothing substantial, and certainly not enough that I’d consider it when deciding whether it’s an appropriate diet for a particular pet and household.

The story is quite different for some parasites. Many parasites and parasite eggs don’t tolerate freezing – that’s why fish for sushi is typically frozen at some point before it is served. Some are hardier than others, though. Toxoplasma, a potentially important foodborne parasite, is susceptible to freezing, but only if the temperature is low enough and the time is long enough (e.g. -12C for 3 days will kill most Toxoplasma cysts.  To put that into context, typical household freezers run around -20C).

So, the take home message is that for of the microbes that we’re worried about with raw meat,  freezing or freeze-drying is NOT a food safety practice. It’s food preservation, not bacterial control.

Another point to add… advertizing around pet diets is variable and sometimes quite dodgy. I just checked two websites selling freeze-dried raw diet. One had good info. The other… well… not so much.  Don’t let company advertizing be your infection control guidance.

More information on raw diets and toxoplamsosis are available on the Worms & Germs Resources – Pets page.