I just read in Whole Dog Journal that Delta Society - one of the largest organizations that registers "pet therapy" dogs - has said starting next month "any dog or cat from a household where raw protein food is fed is not eligible to be a Delta Society Pet Partner.” These are the dogs that go into hospitals, nursing homes, schools, etc. and provide therapy and companionship to people.
The reason is, according to them, “It is well known that animals fed raw diets (BARF or other) shed significant amounts of pathogenic bacteria, which studies have indicated may put some people at risk, as compared to pets being fed commercially prepared or cooked, home-made diets " They even go so far as to say pet's who share a home with raw fed pets may be problematic. “If a Pet Partner has access to the food or bowl used, it would be best to NOT feed any of the other pets raw meats. Inadvertent eating of raw meat or cross-contamination is very real.”
The science on this is far from convincing. One recently published study looked at 5 frequent causes of illness (Vanomycin-resistant enterococci, MRSA, Clostridium difficile, Salmonella & E. coli) and found that stool shedding was actually less for the first three in raw fed dogs than cooked food dogs.
The article correctly points out that "rather than proving that raw-fed dogs are dangerous, the studies suggest that all dogs, regardless of diet, may be agents of infection." and also questions if these institutions question the human visitors to these institutions: "Might their clothing or handshakes and kisses spread pathogens in all directions?"
As a believer that that germ theory of disease is quite simplistic and misleading, I think my favorite part of the article was this:
Another variable to consider is the human immune system. While it certainly makes sense to reduce the exposure of medically fragile patients to potentially harmful bacteria, the germ theory of disease does not explain every illness, and not all immune-compromised patients who are exposed to pathogens become infected.
In fact, some studies, such as “Effect of Petting a Dog on Immune System Function” by C. Charnetski, et al, in the medical journal Psychological Reports (December 2004), show that petting a dog boosts immunity. For more than 30 years, Delta Society has documented the health benefits of pet visits, and its website and published reports provide a wealth of information on this subject.
Delta Society denies that the fact they receive financial backing from Purina, or that one of its Medical Advisory Group members works for the company, has anything to do with its decision. They say "As board members learned of medical professionals’ concerns about the increased risk of the spread of pathogenic bacteria to humans by animals fed raw protein diets, it was determined that this was an issue that needed review." I find this rather disingenuous since only two of the pathogens listed above were found in the study mentioned to be shed higher in raw fed dogs.
One of the pathogens which was higher in raw fed dogs was Salmonella which dogs can get from humans! In fact, according to the article, "outbreaks of Salmonella infections in large animal teaching hospitals have been linked to the introduction of bacteria from infected human personnel, with subsequent spread to animals and then back to other human workers.”
I'm very sorry to see Delta Society take this position. I hope people look beneath the headline to the facts and don't assume feeding raw food to your pet is risky. There's no evidence that I see supporting the belief that dogs fed raw shed dangerous pathogens and should be excluded from being therapy dogs.
The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated in 2002 that 99,000 American deaths a year were linked to hospital-acquired infections. I think the dogs going into hospitals are more likely to catch a pathogen than give it.