Sorry for not getting back to this thread
Issues like declawing and puppy mills are, for lack of a better word, easier to prove in terms of the inhumanity, so it's a little easier to get people (press, lawyers/courts) to make changes. Diet issues aren't as "easy" to prove, because the connection to illness isn't obvious except to folks like us who have learned it the hard way, or the rare vets like Drs. Pierson or Hodgkins. This goes back to the "show me the clinical study" attitude that pervades human and veterinary medicine.
Guess I was just overly naivé as it would have taken the same amount of time to shoot off a letter of concern to somebody who
might be unbiased, as it would to vent on a message forum or post a "share" on FB, IMO.
Back when I was writing letters, was providing proof (the Diabetic cats; Papers from both Harvard & U of Chicago Law Schools; PU Surgery threads from another huge forum; the teeth and jaws…) and somebody responded wondering why, if the foods were so bad, why was I the
only person he'd ever heard of finding an issue with it? That was the ONLY reason I tried to encourage others to help in contacting people who
might have some unbiased influence, to try to at least
warn people…
I really don't know what else to say. For me, personally, I think the best way to change things when it comes to what people are feeding their pets is to keep spreading the word. As Lola brilliantly stated, "When furkid parents aren't buying... then we will see changes." That's just my .
With all due respect to Lola, the only thing "brilliant" in most regions of this country is what marketers & vets in the PFI pockets continue to succeed doing -- getting MORE people loyal to Purina, Hill's and Royal C. There are LESS half-way decent choices at the over-abundance of pet stores now than there were during & just after the recalls.
Even once-decent brands like Innova, Wellness, Natural Balance, EVO, right on down the line, have gotten worse -- NOT better since the recall fiasco. Look at all the recalls & issues since they had been bought out.
And just try to get an *unbiased* objective, straight diagnosis on a pet ailment unless somebody lives West-enough for better odds. Just where are people supposed to take their pets when they can't diagnose everything online -- and
that's when they notice enough red flags and get desperate enough to even
GO online!
Again, I was naivé.
Popular demand will ALWAYS dictate what is available, and in this region, Purina and whatever else the vets are endorsing and "prescribing" are KING. No exaggeration. People here believe that corn & fillers are just fine, and so is kibble. That is why there were NO local options when I helped people try to convert a kibble-fish addict,
despite the abundance of both huge and small pet supply stores in this area.
Throughout the recalls, at least there were safe options. Something,
anything, should have improved, but it has only regressed.
It all depends on location. So I will (finally) conclude all ranting pertaining to this subject with this:
I wouldn't wish pet-ownership on my worst enemy in this region. They are in for a load of heartache, confusion, and financial dire-straits because there is NObody unbiased to diagnose ailments
objectively , as our family vet had done for so many years with unbiased thorough physicals & examinations.
Even among those who do know, who rotate foods/brands (mostly out of fear), just how many options -- in total--
are available to us, including online? Unless we go all raw/home-made, how many of us in-the-know can actually feel at ease with ANY commercial foods?
Comes right back to consumer demand.
That's why I brought Lawyers into the mix. Where is the
consumer protection in ANY/all of this? It's in the
dictionary that these species are carnivores; can't process carbs; no teeth & jaws to grind or chew; low thirst drives.... The
dictionary!