Salmonella, Salmonellosis and Raw eggs

Food, Fitness and how to keep them healthy.

Postby Big_Ant » August 29th, 2006, 12:02 pm

If you claim that it's so "RAMPANT" then show us case studies where it shows actual infections of dogs from raw eggs?

Potential for Harm is everywhere. I could slip and fall when I go bleed the lizard in a minute, I could trip getting on the train and break my nose, but until it happens, that's all it is.

- Anthony
User avatar
Big_Ant
Enlightened Bully
 
Posts: 1743

Postby msvette2u » August 29th, 2006, 12:28 pm

Big_Ant wrote:If you claim that it's so "RAMPANT" then show us case studies where it shows actual infections of dogs from raw eggs?

Potential for Harm is everywhere. I could slip and fall when I go bleed the lizard in a minute, I could trip getting on the train and break my nose, but until it happens, that's all it is.

- Anthony


You know, I'm not putting this up to get into an argument - far from it - I just wanted people who were unsure of this practice to know that it might NOT be as safe as it seems. In the last post (which you might have missed):

Vaccine 2002 Feb 22;20(11-12):1618-23 Immunogenicity of chi4127 phoP- Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium in dogs. McVey DS, Chengappa MM, Mosier DE, Stone GG, Oberst RD, Sylte MJ, Gabbert NM, Kelly-Aehle SM, Curtiss R. "Salmonellae are commonly isolated from dogs. The number of dogs infected with Salmonella spp. is surprisingly high and greater than the incidence of clinical disease would suggest. Salmonellosis is common in greyhound kennels. Morbidity can approach 100% in puppies and the mortality ranges to nearly 40%."

Morbidity means death. I am not going to go find the studies, but I beleive they were done and are probably correct.
Like I said, if you're willing to assume the risks, then go ahead. I'm not the food police here! ;)
User avatar
msvette2u
I live here
 
Posts: 6812
Location: Eastern WA

Postby Big_Ant » August 29th, 2006, 12:42 pm

msvette2u wrote:You know, I'm not putting this up to get into an argument - far from it - I just wanted people who were unsure of this practice to know that it might NOT be as safe as it seems. In the last post (which you might have missed):

Actually, you did put this up for argument. You were trying to make Chea look bad from another thread. You've been doing this since you met her. Honestly, I have yet to see you succeed.

msvette2u wrote:Vaccine 2002 Feb 22;20(11-12):1618-23 Immunogenicity of chi4127 phoP- Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium in dogs. McVey DS, Chengappa MM, Mosier DE, Stone GG, Oberst RD, Sylte MJ, Gabbert NM, Kelly-Aehle SM, Curtiss R. "Salmonellae are commonly isolated from dogs. The number of dogs infected with Salmonella spp. is surprisingly high and greater than the incidence of clinical disease would suggest. Salmonellosis is common in greyhound kennels. Morbidity can approach 100% in puppies and the mortality ranges to nearly 40%."

That means nothing to me unless there are actual details shown. I can spout off statistics all I want, but in order for anyone to believe something, they'd want to see details. Show me studies of kennels. They mention common in greyhound kennels. So show me some greyhound kennel studies? They can't.

msvette2u wrote:Morbidity means death.

Really? Did you learn that in ACO school? Don't try and chastise me.

msvette2u wrote:I am not going to go find the studies, but I beleive they were done and are probably correct.

believe and probably??? Go look those up in the dictionary and show me how that would fit in with something that you seem to show as being "factual".

msvette2u wrote:Like I said, if you're willing to assume the risks, then go ahead. I'm not the food police here! ;)

Again, you have said nothing here that has shown that there is a true risk.

- Anthony
User avatar
Big_Ant
Enlightened Bully
 
Posts: 1743

Postby SisMorphine » August 29th, 2006, 1:05 pm

Big_Ant wrote:
msvette2u wrote:Vaccine 2002 Feb 22;20(11-12):1618-23 Immunogenicity of chi4127 phoP- Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium in dogs. McVey DS, Chengappa MM, Mosier DE, Stone GG, Oberst RD, Sylte MJ, Gabbert NM, Kelly-Aehle SM, Curtiss R. "Salmonellae are commonly isolated from dogs. The number of dogs infected with Salmonella spp. is surprisingly high and greater than the incidence of clinical disease would suggest. Salmonellosis is common in greyhound kennels. Morbidity can approach 100% in puppies and the mortality ranges to nearly 40%."

That means nothing to me unless there are actual details shown. I can spout off statistics all I want, but in order for anyone to believe something, they'd want to see details. Show me studies of kennels. They mention common in greyhound kennels. So show me some greyhound kennel studies? They can't.

For some reason people ALWAYS bring up racing kennels when discussing raw feeding.

MANY Greyhound racing kennels feed a raw diet, or partial raw, because they know the dogs need to be kept in extreme health to be able to perform. I have never once heard of a Greyhound kennel coming down with a rampant outbreak of Salmonella.

But also with Greyhound racing kennels there are too many variables to be able to conduct a true study. Some kennels feed top grade, some feed crap. Some spend time with their dogs, some don't. Some over vaccinate, some do the bare minimum, and some don't even do that. Some are abusive. Some are neglectful. But all are prone to the regular problems that plague ANY kennel environment, which will always bring down a dog's immune system.

I am involved in local and online raw feeding communities. I have never heard of a raw fed dog contracting Salmonella or E. Coli. I have read two articles with kibble fed dogs contracting Salmonella. And I had one client who's Golden puppy had contracted E. Coli from it's mother. That puppy was NOT contagious (per the vet). That puppy also was always fed a kibble diet (Iams and Science Diet), as was her mother.

I don't believe that my dog has a higher probability of contracting either of these diseases because he eats a raw diet. He's a carnivore. Their digestive tract move things through quickly. Because he is fed this diet he is in great health, therefore again less likely to contract these.

I truly don't find this relevent when it comes to feeding my dog. Humans, yes, we are omnivores, we are far more suseptible. But my dogs? Nope, I don't worry one bit when I feed them.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby mnp13 » August 29th, 2006, 1:17 pm

The number of dogs infected with Salmonella spp. is surprisingly high and greater than the incidence of clinical disease would suggest.


This is much like drug ads: "May help lower the chances of heart attack"

Translation: "This might make you less likely to get sick."

In other words: "Our claims don't mean crap"
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby msvette2u » August 29th, 2006, 1:20 pm

Many newbies come on here looking for advice: making things that have potential risks sound totally safe is irresponsible. Period.
Whether it's a training method or diet, this holds true.
User avatar
msvette2u
I live here
 
Posts: 6812
Location: Eastern WA

Postby mnp13 » August 29th, 2006, 1:30 pm

Nothing on the planet is 100% safe. Nothing.

I eat carrots. Someday I will die. Therefore, carrots are deadly.

Just because someone says "there is a 'higher' instance doesn't mean they have anything to back that up."
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby Jenn » August 29th, 2006, 1:46 pm

:| I read this once, while trying to help a coworker who fed his dogs nuts, onions, mushrooms, grapes along with plenty of other things that he shouldn't have been feeding. When I read about raw eggs, the first thought that crossed my mind was simply "OH".. I've given many dogs raw eggs, and never once had any problems. So I asked a friend, and was told to soft boil them enough to cook the white part. I now do that when I decide to give them a special meal.


Raw egg whites contain a protein called avidin, which can deplete your dog of biotin, one of the B vitamins. Biotin is essential to your dog’s growth and coat health. Additionally, raw eggs are often contaminated with bacteria, such as salmonella, and you could end up giving your dog food poisoning in addition to biotin deficiency.

Symptoms of biotin depletion are hair loss, weakness, growth retardation and skeleton deformity. If your dog is suffering from these symptoms the situation is urgent, and veterinary treatment is needed. Cooked eggs are high in protein and make an excellent treat. It is only the raw eggs that should not be given to your dog.

http://mooreshaven.com/pets/dogs/safety ... slist.html
User avatar
Jenn
undecided
 
Posts: 11382
Location: TX

Postby SisMorphine » August 29th, 2006, 2:04 pm

mnp13 wrote:Nothing on the planet is 100% safe. Nothing.

I eat carrots. Someday I will die. Therefore, carrots are deadly.

Just because someone says "there is a 'higher' instance doesn't mean they have anything to back that up."

There also is a higher chance of you getting in a car and dying than getting in a plane and dying. But do we all forgo the use of our vehicles because of it? Nope.

There's also a chance of anyone who comes in contact with a dog getting viciously mauled. But all of us who are in the pet industry take that risk every day.

There is also the chance of any of us women getting breast cancer. But we're not cutting our breasts off for fear it may come.

There's a chance of me getting TSS from wearing tampons but I'm not going to forgo them and just bleed through my jeans.

There are many "chances" that we take on an everyday basis. Everything we do is taking a "chance" whether we know it or not.

In perspective . . . the risk of a carnivore contracting salmonella is very low so that "chance" of feeding my dog is correct food is one that I am more than willing to take.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby Big_Ant » August 29th, 2006, 2:09 pm

SisMorphine wrote:There's a chance of me getting TSS from wearing tampons but I'm not going to forgo them and just bleed through my jeans.

Oh Come On! Could you not have just stopped at the Cancer example?

You women! I swear! :shock:

- Anthony
User avatar
Big_Ant
Enlightened Bully
 
Posts: 1743

Postby Jenn » August 29th, 2006, 2:13 pm

Big_Ant wrote:
SisMorphine wrote:There's a chance of me getting TSS from wearing tampons but I'm not going to forgo them and just bleed through my jeans.

Oh Come On! Could you not have just stopped at the Cancer example?

You women! I swear! :shock:

- Anthony


:lol3:
User avatar
Jenn
undecided
 
Posts: 11382
Location: TX

Postby SpiritFngrz » August 30th, 2006, 9:15 am

A few clarifications:

Morbidity = a state of illness

Mortality = death

It is clear just from that one statement that morbidity reaches 100%, mortality reaches 40%

I do morbidity/mortality studies all the time

In addition, streptavidin and avidin can bind to biotin but the chances of it binding to a majority of your biotin are small, you are getting enough biotin from your food. If people feeding the eggs had biotin deficiency in their dogs, from the clinical signs, they would know it.

Hang on, I am reading the review I received on this....
User avatar
SpiritFngrz
I live here
 
Posts: 2711
Location: Central Mass.

Postby Romanwild » August 30th, 2006, 9:20 am

I love ceaser salad made with raw eggs and extra anchovies. I ain't stopping! :P
User avatar
Romanwild
I live here
 
Posts: 2931
Location: Watertown NY

Postby cheekymunkee » August 30th, 2006, 9:50 am

Romanwild wrote:I love ceaser salad made with raw eggs and extra anchovies. I ain't stopping! :P


Me too & I LOVE a TRUE key lime pie with raw eggs. :drool:
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

Postby SisMorphine » August 30th, 2006, 10:17 am

I love cookie dough. Which has raw eggs. :wink:
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby SpiritFngrz » August 30th, 2006, 10:26 am

Ok, this review I received: Host adaptation and emergence of infectious disease: the Salmonella paradigm. R.A. Kingsley and A.J. Baumler. Molecular Microbiology. 2000.

is a review of various studies. It mainly focuses on different Salmonella serotypes, and equations/probabilities based on genetics that enables humans, or other hosts to be susceptible to disease (i.e. host adaptation). It mentions a couple Salmonella serotypes in chickens, S. typhi, which causes typhoid fever in humans and higher primates but not in other vertebrates. An example of "host adaptation." The idea of host adaptation is, they think, based on evidence that bacteria such as Salmonella use different virulence genes (genes they use to infect host) to cause infection in different hosts (i.e. human vs. cattle vs. mouse). It could cause local infection, systemic, or no infection at all and the host is just a carrier.
This article did not mention anything specifically about canine infection.
In the last section it did mention S. enteritidis epidemic from poultry, although this was 6 years ago, I do not know if this is still epidemic.
I'll quote it:
"The replacement of the avian-adapted serotype S. gallinarum with the zoonotic S. enteritidis in poultry triggered the epidemic increase in human cases of disease that could be traced back to consumption of raw egg products."
Again, this mentions human epidemic, and this review focuses on host adaptation, or what it takes for humans to be infected with a particular type of Salmonella.
There is no discussion of canine infection or canine host adaptation to any of the Salmonella serotypes discussed.
Based on this I can't conclude, or rather, there is no evidence here, that raw eggs cause Salmonella infection in dogs.
User avatar
SpiritFngrz
I live here
 
Posts: 2711
Location: Central Mass.

Postby SisMorphine » August 30th, 2006, 10:42 am

SpiritFngrz wrote:Ok, this review I received: Host adaptation and emergence of infectious disease: the Salmonella paradigm. R.A. Kingsley and A.J. Baumler. Molecular Microbiology. 2000.

is a review of various studies. It mainly focuses on different Salmonella serotypes, and equations/probabilities based on genetics that enables humans, or other hosts to be susceptible to disease (i.e. host adaptation). It mentions a couple Salmonella serotypes in chickens, S. typhi, which causes typhoid fever in humans and higher primates but not in other vertebrates. An example of "host adaptation." The idea of host adaptation is, they think, based on evidence that bacteria such as Salmonella use different virulence genes (genes they use to infect host) to cause infection in different hosts (i.e. human vs. cattle vs. mouse). It could cause local infection, systemic, or no infection at all and the host is just a carrier.
This article did not mention anything specifically about canine infection.
In the last section it did mention S. enteritidis epidemic from poultry, although this was 6 years ago, I do not know if this is still epidemic.
I'll quote it:
"The replacement of the avian-adapted serotype S. gallinarum with the zoonotic S. enteritidis in poultry triggered the epidemic increase in human cases of disease that could be traced back to consumption of raw egg products."
Again, this mentions human epidemic, and this review focuses on host adaptation, or what it takes for humans to be infected with a particular type of Salmonella.
There is no discussion of canine infection or canine host adaptation to any of the Salmonella serotypes discussed.
Based on this I can't conclude, or rather, there is no evidence here, that raw eggs cause Salmonella infection in dogs.

Yay for having someone who can actually read through the stuff that we see as "babble babble babble" and make sense of it!

Quite often, in all aspects, we humanize our animals. Not only does this mean that we treat them like human beings on an emotional level (which they are not), but we also humanize illness and disease. I think there needs to be a conclusive study done on Salmonella specifically in regards to dogs done by an unbiased 3rd party.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby cheekymunkee » August 30th, 2006, 10:44 am

Thank you for taking the time to read it & explain it to us. You're so smart it's scary!! :shock:
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

Postby SpiritFngrz » August 30th, 2006, 11:00 am

cheekymunkee wrote:Thank you for taking the time to read it & explain it to us. You're so smart it's scary!! :shock:


Good, it's working, I had you fooled! lol
No, just kidding. It is no problem. I myself LOOOOVE raw cookie dough, but we, as humans don't consume raw eggs on a regular basis anyway, so I don't think it's a problem. Those of us that are immune competent (healthy, not elderly, not a child) are for the most part able to fight any microbes we come across in our food before they wreak any havoc in our systems.
Just IMO
User avatar
SpiritFngrz
I live here
 
Posts: 2711
Location: Central Mass.

Postby Big_Ant » August 30th, 2006, 11:54 am

SpiritFngrz wrote:Those of us that are immune competent (healthy, not elderly, not a child) are for the most part able to fight any microbes we come across in our food before they wreak any havoc in our systems.

Tell that to the handful of people who got plastered and decided with the chef of a sushi bar that it would be a cool thing to eat crab live/raw, then had the nerve to get mad at the restaurant when they ended up in the hospital.

Haha. Idiots! They never fail in providing me with comic relief.

- Anthony
User avatar
Big_Ant
Enlightened Bully
 
Posts: 1743

PreviousNext

Return to Nutrition & Health

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron