Therapy dogs and raw diets a prudent mix

1
Therapy dogs and raw diets a prudent
mix?

• Sandi Lefebvre, DVM
• University of Guelph

2
Formula
1
Introduction to raw diets
2
Review of the evidence
Review of the evidence
3
Study of therapy dogs raw
4
Conclusions
3
Background

• B biologically
• A appropriate
• R raw
• F food

4
Evidence against BARF

• Risks of food being contaminated
• Nonspecific types of E. coli in up to 64 samples
• Salmonella spp in 6 80
• (Joffe Schlesinger 2002, Weese et al 2005,
  Strohmeyer et al 2006)
• Risks of raw-eaters shedding Salmonella
• 30-93 of stools from dogs fed non-commercial raw
  diets (Joffe Schlesinger 2002, Morley et al
  2006)
• In feces of 44 research beagles that ate 1
  contaminated commercial raw meal vs 0
  fed1 uncontaminated meal (Finley et al 2007)
• Risks of dogs transmitting Salmonella?

5
Context for the present study

• Question What are the incidence rates of
  specific pathogens in therapy dogs and do these
  rates vary by level of exposure to healthcare
  facilities?
• Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA)
• Extend-spectrum ?-lactamase (ESBL) E. coli
• Clostridium difficile
• Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE)
• Salmonella spp

Found both in healthcare facilities raw meat
and poultry
6
Strategy Follow dogs over 1 year, test every 2
months

• Data on confounders
• Types of places visited
• Consumption of raw animal foods
• Consumption of natural pet treats
• Antimicrobial exposure
• Age
• Breed
• Drinking from toilets
• Coprophagia

7
Results

• Raw feeders (n 40)
• 0 (0) VRE
• 1 (2.5) MRSA
• 5 (12.5) C. diff
• 19 (47.5) Sal
• 31 (77.5) E. coli

8
Results

• Raw feeders (n 40)
• 0 (0) VRE
• 1 (2.5) MRSA
• 5 (12.5) C. diff
• 19 (47.5) Sal
• 31 (77.5) E. coli

9
Results

• Raw feeders (n 40)
• 0 (0) VRE
• 1 (2.5) MRSA
• 5 (12.5) C. diff
• 19 (47.5) Sal
• 31 (77.5) E. coli

10
Results

• Raw feeders (n 40)
• 0 (0) VRE
• 1 (2.5) MRSA
• 5 (12.5) C. diff
• 19 (47.5) Sal
• 31 (77.5) E. coli

OR 0.41, 95 CI 0.12-1.17
11
Results

• Raw feeders (n 40)
• 0 (0) VRE
• 1 (2.5) MRSA
• 5 (12.5) C. diff
• 19 (47.5) Sal
• 31 (77.5) E. coli

12
Results

• Raw feeders (n 40)
• 0 (0) VRE
• 1 (2.5) MRSA
• 5 (12.5) C. diff
• 19 (47.5) Sal
• 31 (77.5) E. coli

OR 13.3, 95 CI 5.4-34.6
13
Specific to Salmonella spp

• Raw feeders shed Salmonella spp for prolonged
  periods
• 7 dogs tested positive twice in a row
• 2 dogs tested positive 3x
• 1 dog tested positive 4x
• Important to note the stools of all
  Salmonella dogs were normal

14
Identities of Salmonella serotypes (n47)
?
(One of) most common Salmonella serotype in
Canadians with lab-confirmed salmonellosis
Number of positive specimens
15
Conclusion

• Dogs that consume raw diets are considerably more
  likely to carry Salmonella than dogs that do not
• These dogs also appear to be considerably more
  likely to carry ESBL E. coli
• Just because dogs are shedding doesnt mean
  people are going to get sick
• Therapy dogs that consume raw diets should be
  barred from interacting with people in
  healthcare settings

16
Acknowledgments

• Nicol Janecko and her crew at the Canadian
  Research Institute for Food Safety
• Laboratory for Foodborne Zoonoses
• My committee David Waltner-Toews
• Scott Weese
• Richard Reid-Smith
• Andrew Peregrine