Pet food and sustainable practice

This week - pet food.  A friend of mine shared this link on Facebook and it stimulated me to blog on pet food.  I m going to steer away from the raw feeding vs commercial foods debate, and focus on the sustainability aspects.  

Lets now look at some specific sustainability issues of Pet Food

image source

Drivers of change

• Humans want a more whole food diet, therefore start looking at one for their pets
• Pet owners want to provide environmental enrichment for their pets - food is one way to do this (chewing, hiding it so they can hunt for it and so forth)
• The majority of pet owners look for convenience as well as wanting to do the best by their pets.
• The food miles travelled by commercial brand pet foods are huge, and even bigger when you consider the individual components travelling to the site of processing.  However it is worth noting: Shipping has by far the lowest footprint of any type of transport, what we really have to be worried about is people getting in their cars to drive to the supermarket and transporting products by truck across country (country of origin and country where product will be sold).
• Unsustainable sourcing of some products e.g. Marine products, but also need to consider the unsustainable practice of growing mono culture crops over large areas (e.g. grain sources)
• Meat production for food is highly energy intensive (more than processing and packaging)
• Processing is highly energy intensive.  
• Increasing numbers of domestic pets in the western world - which means increasing demand for pet foods.
• More disposable income of pet owners to sped treating pets keeping them alive longer - and specialised nutrition is used for many of these
• A growing movement for raw feeding, but only anecdotal evidence to support it
• Increasing corporatism of commercial pet foods - under ownership of some of the main food companies in the world e.g. Royal Canin by Nestle, Hills by Colgate Palmolive, Eukanuba by Mars.  Increasing corporatism is changing money distribution making the rich richer and the poor poorer, which is breaching system condition 4 let alone other breaches these multi-nationals make all the time.  
• The continued funding of the veterinary profession by the premium pet food brands - very real potential for bias towards premium commercial pet food brands
• Research funding dollars come from the multi-nationals, which own the premium brands, so it is difficult to find truly unbiased research 
• People are convinced by the marketing hype that the only way to give your pet the best is to feed a premium brand commercial pet food so are put off exploring other options and also the overall sustainability of what they are feeding, as giving their pet the best nutrition is the primary concern.  
• The unsustainable marketing juggernaut that is pet food sales and marketing.  
• New emergent diseases that can be associated with the advent of the commercial pet food industry - acknowledging  though that other diseases have all but disappeared (e.g. rickets)
• Up to 50% of food produced for consumption in the western world ends up wasted - people no longer find this acceptable.  
• Lack of unbiased evidence-based educational resources for people who choose to feed whole foods, similar to the education provided to parents about what to feed children. 

Image source

Vision when 4 system conditions are being met

• Locally sourced food from sustainable sources - think rabbits/chickens rather than beef and fish for lower environmental impact.
• Use unpoisoned vermin and pests such as possums (in NZ) as part of the diet
• Less processing - therefore less waste, less energy intensive
• Energy used is renewable
• Less miles travelled for food from production to consumption
• Pet owners travel by sustainable methods of transport (walk/cycle) to purchase pet foods or products to be fed to their pet.  
• Better use of waste products from human consumption - so less waste from that industry
• Research that supports and guides pet owners in local food feeding to their pets
• No or limited packaging - any packaging ideally compostible or recyclable and then compostible (e.g. cardboard making a closed material loop).
• A swing towards pets that provide a food source for humans e.g chickens, rabbits and/or limits to the number of cats/dogs per household or going back to only keeping pets that have a purpose, on top of companionship e.g. cat that keeps the rodents away, a dog used as part of a waste disposal system.
• Allowing pet owners to take more control of their pets health, rather than relying on commercial multi-nationals - clear guidelines on how to effectively feed their pets using local food, following quality unbiased research
• Pet food producers operate on carbon neutral, zero waste basis - this will require significant change.  
• All pet foods required to state carbon footprint
• All faeces from dogs/cats are disposed of in a way that is not damaging to the environment.  

There is so much more to this discussion - this blog is really just touching on it and trying to open up some discussion.   There are ins and outs of all of the above.  If you want to dig more into this then a suggested purchase is Time to eat your dog by Robert and Brenda Vale.  What is interesting to note in this book is that if you compare a dog fed a dry food diet compared to one fed an appropriate "human" diet, the footprint of the dry food diet is roughly half.  What does not appear to be in this book though is the marketing juggernaut associated with the dry pet food which surely must have an impact.  

For me, just what I have researched and written here tells me that the focus needs to be on thinking carefully about pet ownership and making sure we select wisely if we decide we need a pet to one that could be eaten or has a function in society such as for rodent control or as  guide dog and that very statement I have made is going to be significantly challenging to the people this blog is for!

Looking forward to your thoughts and feedback

Have a great week.  

Veterinary Cleaners and disinfectants

I hope you all read last weeks blog - I was surprised I didn't stimulate more feedback!  I am not anti pedigree pets, but I do think we need to look at what we are breeding from a sustainability perspective, including ethics, and we also need to focus on improvements and actions to improve the health of these animals.

This week, lets look at cleaners and disinfectants.  While this is a key area of veterinary practice, it is also valuable for everyone - from the home to animal care facilities, or any other business.

Drivers of change

The aspects affecting reasons to change are: 

• Deteriorating water quality
• Products that are damaging water quality or having other environmental impacts
• Products that are damage the staff coming in contact with them - e.g. contact dermatitis, respiratory problems and so forth
• Use of high level disinfectant products in areas that don't actually need high level cleaning - e.g. at home you shouldn't need anything more than a cake of soap for 99% of personal hygiene.

Meeting the system conditions

To meet the system conditions we need:

1. To avoid taking limited resources from the Earth's core - e.g. oil use for manufacture and transport is an issue;
2. To avoid creating products that the environment can't decompose efficiently and sustainably;
3. To avoid damaging ecosystems with the manufacture or contamination of products into the environment - e.g. products may contain things like Palm Oil, which is produced in a way that cases massive destruction of rain forests;
4. Ensure people are able to meet their needs - that they are safe using the product, that the product effectively kills unwanted pathogens, and that the product is fit for purpose (i.e. don't want to use high level products for a low risk area).  
5. Finally the company that produces the product should look after the 4 system conditions during production and distribution as well.  

Auditing your own disinfectant use:

Have a go at auditing the cleaners and disinfectants used in your work or home, or both. For each disinfectant, look at:

• The level of protection required in a particular area vs the level of protection of the product claims;
• What bugs must the product kill?  At home - unless someone is sick it might be better to just reduce the pathogen level by using plain soap;
• What is the toxicity to animals?
• What is the toxicity to humans? - You can get an idea of how toxic it is by how much protective gear is required when handling it;
• What is the toxicity to water ways - think carefully about this.  If it says the half-life is two days, that means half of the active chemical is still in the environment after two days, a quarter after four days and so forth.  It really needs to be non toxic at every stage.
• What are the breakdown products? Are they benign like water? Or are they something more hazardous?
• What is the level of VOCs (volatile organic compounds) - the aim is for these to be zero;
• What are the ingredients? If its palm oil, where is it from? 
• Where is it made?  If its not NZ, is there a local alternative?
• What are the company's policies and actions around sustainable practice - eg is the water that goes into the factory cleaner when it leaves? Are the people looked after? Does the company invest in reducing impacts on the environment? 
• Think about the cost per diluted product of say 100ml to complete a true comparison
• Look at the plastic volume too - can I purchase it in bulk and reuse small containers or is it only in small containers?
• Can you think of other questions?

Some examples:

When you look at high level disinfectants, Virkon, Accel and F10 come out better than Trigene and Safe4 for example

Image Source

In some areas of a work place or at home, you can often get away with natural cleaners using baking soda and vinegar rather than something commercial. If you must use a commercial cleaner go back and look at the questions above.

Continually re-evaluate - maybe its an annual task to bring up the audit and check that all things are considered if new products are added. 

Set a goal at your home or workplace that the water leaves your house in the same state as it entered, but ideally better.  This makes you think about everything going down your drains and in some cases you might consider a filter system prior to it being released into the water system.  

Image source

Lets get some collaboration going

We at Otago Polytechnic School of Veterinary Nursing have set up a very rudimentary comparison of some common veterinary disinfectants.  You can all access this and edit it at this link. It needs more disinfectants adding and more of the blank spaces filling.  The more collaborators we have the better this comparison will be and the outcome will hopefully be that we all choose more sustainable disinfectants, leading to cost effective disease control, better safety for staff and less environmental contamination.  

Have a great week and we look forward to hearing about what you discover in your non veterinary cleaners and disinfectants and seeing some additions to the veterinary cleaners and disinfectants chart above too.  

Unethical and Unsustainable or not?

After last weeks blog, we received a comment on our Facebook page from a veterinary nurse who was working in a practice that ticked all the boxes for a future focussed veterinary clinic. Well done to that practice!  I am hoping to be able to interview that veterinary nurse at some stage this year so watch this space.  If anyone else has got some stories to share, please let me know.  

A Boxer - a pedigree breed with a very long list of inherited diseases
Wikimedia commons

This week my blog is inspired by a conversation I had with a colleague over the sustainability and ethics of pedigree pets.  Remember, all pets have environmental impacts such as high carbon footprints from transportation of food or waste, in fact just one family Labrador Retriever has the same environmental impact as an SUV  If this topic interests you, this book would be worth a read.  But this time, we are talking about something different; the sustainability of producing pedigree pets that require a great deal of veterinary care to address inherited diseases. 

Breeding of many pedigree dogs focuses mainly on physical appearance such as short noses, wrinkled skin, broad shoulders, short legs, long ears and many others. Some of these physical attributes are not ideal for the pet and are linked to undesirable health complications such as luxating patellas. In addition, focusing on appearance rather than fitness has led to breeding animals that carry genetic predisposition for disease, just because they look especially nice. Boxers are a good example as they are highly predisposed to heart disease but because it often doesn't show up until breeding age, the animal may have already been bred and passed on the problem to a new generation. For those of you that wish to read more on this subject, there are many articles available online. Here are some examples:
1. Pedigree dog predisposition to cancer
2. Canine Inherited disorders database
3. Genetic diseases of cats

A Bulldog - this breed cant even give birth naturally due to the very narrow hips compared to the size of a puppies head.
Wikimedia commons

While there are breeders out there who do try to breed lines of pedigree dogs that are healthy and not predisposed to specific diseases, it is challenging to select for completely disease free lines without loosing the phenotypic (physical appearance) traits which are so important to the kennel club rules. In addition there are many unscrupulous breeders out there who will breed unfit dogs just to make money on selling offspring. Many prospective dog owners don't know exactly what to look for when choosing a pedigree breed.  

Hereditary conditions in pedigree pets, especially cats, dogs and rabbits, form the basis for a significant amount of profit in companion animal veterinary practice. Third eyelid flap surgery, total hip replacements, surgery to correct patella luxation, skin fold pyoderma treatment, dental surgery, heart disease management, cancer diagnosis, chemotherapy, inflammatory bowel disease diagnosis and treatment............the list goes on.  So many diseases have a genetic basis and are common in our pedigree dogs, with different breeds having predisposition to different sets of diseases. 

A Maltese - you rarely see one of these without at least a Grade 1 luxating patella identifiable at the puppy stage.
Wikimedia commons

So in summary the issues are: 
Social/Ethical - breeding dogs that are fundamentally unsound that suffer more pain/illness than is necessary,  breeding these dogs and selling them to the public is socially and ethically unacceptable. 
Financial - increased financial burden on owners
Environmental - increased need for surgery and/or medications which create a large waste trail.  

So, as companion animal veterinarians and veterinary nurses, do we just accept the status quo and keep treating these dogs without taking action or do we take a more ethical and social approach and take some of the following actions:

1. Educate clients on this issue, advise them away from pedigree pets but if they are going to choose a breed, help them choose a good breeder and a healthy pet. 
2. Lobby kennel club and breeders to change breed standards to allow these diseases to be bred out.
3. Work with genetic technology companies to develop tests to screen for the genes that carry specific diseases.
4. Lobby for licensing of breeders, or as a profession set up a license system and market it well so that breeders want to be a licensed.  

Would this put veterinary clinics out of business?  If the businesses aren't future focussed, yes probably, but if they are future focussed and looking ahead at the drivers of change they will foresee that by being more social and ethical, clients will be more loyal to the business. In addition, a future focused business is focused on wellness and preventative medicine rather than just treating illness. How good would that be?

Have a great week

Meeting the needs of veterinary nursing staff

This week I thought I'd raise some of the challenges and solutions around the people side of veterinary practice - focussing on veterinary nurse employees in this blog rather than the veterinarians or clients.

What are the drivers for change?

As I see it, the drivers for change in this area are: 

• Under-utilised veterinary nurses - the skills that they learn in training are not being utilised
• Under-valued veterinary nurses - employers of VNs think of them as dispensable and/or not able to contribute to the practice value
• Lower than optimal wages - in many cases VNs get lower than the published living wage
• Lack of say in a veterinary practice situation
• Hours of work - often not family friendly, and little opportunity to work as a group on solutions
• Employers do not always take the time to interview/train staff in a way that ensures they are a good team fit and that they bring skills (clinical and personal) that enhance the team.  
• Higher than optimal staff turnover - staff leave due  to the factors listed above in many cases and the high cost of training new staff puts pressure on the business finances and prevents the business from growing and developing new services. 

These drivers of change contribute to violations of system condition 4 - which describes how it is important to ensure peoples' needs are met. The above list is a general overview of what I see as common factors in most practices but certainly there will be exceptions where practices are already doing many of these things. 

What is a vision for veterinary nurses in practice when system condition 4 is being met?

Image source: Otago Polytechnic School of Veterinary Nursing

If system condition 4 is being met in the veterinary practice:

• Veterinary Nurse skills are being fully utilised - the veterinary nurses are managing all aspects of routine fluid therapy, dental prophylaxis, collection of ECG tracings, radiography, preparing for surgery, caring for hospitalised patients, implementation of care plans, nursing management, nursing consults, nursing preventative health clinics, puppy preschool and kitten kindy, as well as providing basic nutritional and behavioural advice.   
• The employers of the practice highly value the veterinary nursing staff and involve them in practice decisions.
• Veterinary Nurse wages are always above the minimum living wage with some even offering shares in the business to enable employees to share in the business profit.  This further enhances the veterinary nurses feeling of being valued and of wanting to improve the business they work in.  
• Veterinary nursing staff are given one paid day per year to volunteer in the community, 
• The business implements a flexible work policy to make it easier for employees with children or those with outside interests to work around their other obligations.  
• Valued staff are able to consider innovations such as how a complete restructure of daily practice activities might improve efficiency, profits and staff wellness.
• Staff turnover is low due to high job satisfaction and all of the above, allowing the practice to grow from strength to strength with new initiatives to get clients in through the doors of the veterinary clinic.

Do the above factors match your vision?  What would you  add or take away? 

Can this really be done?

Yes! The approach to achieve the ideal conditions above is to show how each improvement (from the current state to the ideal vision) will improve profits/the bottom line.  Here are some examples of what can be done:

• Improve staff job satisfaction and thus prevent them from leaving - Each time a staff member leaves/resigns from the practice it takes the equivalent of 1 year's salary in costs to hire and train new staff back to where the previous staff member was. Here is a uk based article that explains this further.
• Keep staff happy and healthy - If staff are happy, they take less sick leave, are more productive and this rubs off on clients.  Read this link for more information on this. 
• Give incentives for high productivity - Share profits with employees.  There are many articles that show this to be very good for profits/the bottom line.  Here is a newspaper report on John Lewis and Waitrose in England who has done just that.

The above changes are not only good for individual staff members, it is good for the veterinary profession. Carefully consider these changes for your practice and let us know what happens. 
Even if it is something you have already done, or are considering. Let us know.  We'd love to hear your stories.

Have a great week.