http://www.fox5vegas.com/news/21656977/detail.html

Therefore, when Dr. Jennifer Schori (who earned a bit of notoriety on the Vet Blog when she discussed unauthorized autopsies on pets) wrote about a news story involving a cat wrapped in duct tape, I wasn’t that surprised.

However, as I read the post on her blog, I came to an alarming statistic: 8% of the people who responded to an online poll about the story thought the incident was funny.

The link between animal abuse and violence against people (progressing all the way to serial killing) is well established. With 8% of the population responding to the story in that manner, it may be time to buy an additional lock for the front door.

Photo: Myk Dowling

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

A New York congresswoman is trying to rally support for a federal bill that would restrict antibiotic use in food animals just months after a similar measure tanked in California.

Despite being voted down in Sacramento, a proposal that bans feeding antibiotics to cattle, hogs and poultry to increase their growth seems to be gaining momentum in the nation’s capital, where the Obama administration has condemned the practice.

The Union of Concerned Scientists estimates that as much as 70 percent of the antibiotics used in the United States are given to healthy animals. Conventional farmers and ranchers routinely feed antibiotics to their herd to help the animals use their food more efficiently and bulk up faster. They say the medication also helps ward off pathogens that could sicken or kill their livestock.

But scientists and doctors fear that the overuse of these drugs makes them less effective in fighting bacteria in humans and animals. Microbes that develop immunity to the drugs will multiply and flourish.

As I mentioned in my original post on this subject, I was surprised to learn in veterinary school that antibiotics are added to livestock feed in many instances strictly to cause food animals to grow more quickly. This economically motivated use of antibiotics is, in my opinion, unwise. Non-medical use of antibiotics could contribute to these medicines becoming less potent in sick animals and people. This activity does not pass the “smell test”. Nobody wants to eat meat that has been pumped with drugs.

Nonetheless the proposed law has its critics.

[S]ome ranchers and farmers argue that the measure would probably endanger livestock, flood the market with imported meat and raise the cost of producing food.

It is true that eliminating antibiotics from animal feeds could lead to higher food costs. But I suspect many ranchers (and food animal vets) oppose it because they fear it will dent their profits. I believe their logic is flawed.

I am not an expert in economics. But it stands to reason that if all producers of a good utilize a product (in this case, non-therapeutic antibiotics) that increases efficiency, then no single producer gains a competitive advantage. Competition will pass the savings from the efficiency to the consumer. This means that no rancher really benefits financially from antibiotic feed additives.

Except for those who decline to use them.

Many consumers already have turned to antibiotic-free meat and poultry because they want products that have been raised naturally and out of an industrial farm setting.

Many people (I suspect the number will be ever-growing) are willing to pay a premium for antibiotic-free meat. Producers of this product can charge a premium.

These producers in my estimation are the ones who have the most to lose from the proposed law. But I have a hunch they are not the ones most vocally opposing it.

Biological sense, or biological nonsense?

Some well-respected veterinarians have joined the ranks of people opposing the proposed law. And some of them are using logic that, in my opinion, is highly spurious.

“From a biological standpoint [banning antibiotic feed additives] doesn’t make sense,” said John Maas, a professor at UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine and a cattle expert. “Instead of using small doses to prevent illness, you’re going to have to increase the dose 100 fold when the animal gets sick.”

Typically using antibiotics to control disease can cut potential illness by 25 to 50 percent, [said Michael Apley, a clinical pharmacologist, veterinarian and professor at Kansas State University]

If antibiotic feed additives truly prevent disease, then why limit them to livestock? Drs. Maas and Apley, do you add penicillin to your pizza or tetracyline to your turkey? Do your compliment your childrens’ lunches with tylosin in order to prevent disease?

I didn’t think so.

Elimination of antibiotics from livestock feed is inevitable. It is time to embrace this fact and move forward.

From the July 31, 2009 issue of The Week.

What ‘meow’ really means

Cats are known to be manipulative, and a new study of their purring confirms just how clever they can be. Karen McComb, an animal-communication researcher at the University of Sussex in the U.K., analyzed the purrs of house cats as they begged their owners for food. She found that when cats were hungry, they altered their purring so that it was eerily similar to the cry of an infant. When McComb played back these cat cries to human listeners, people found them almost impossible to ignore. The mixture of frequencies in the sounds “subliminally triggers a sense of urgency,” McComb tells ABCnews.com. She suspects that this human-like vocalization is natural to cats, but that they learn to exaggerate it to get what they want from us.

Photo: Peeshy knows you will obey. Who could say no to her?

From the “It must be true . . . I read it in the tabloids” section of the July 3 – 10, 2009 issue of The Week.

Two baby flamingos at . . . London Zoo have developed a phobia of the color pink. The month-old chicks, named Little and Large, both have the pale gray plumage flamingos are born with. In an attempt to feed them, zookeepers used a pink sock-puppet of an adult flamingo, but it only terrified the chicks. Their resulting phobia of anything pink has worrying implications for their future mental health. “We’ll just have to hope they get used to the color,” said keeper Alison Brown.

Last October this blog covered a program in which veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder trained service dogs. The veterans enjoyed demonstrable improvement and the dogs went on to help other disabled individuals.

Merced County’s program is similar. In the program, at-risk high school students train assistance dogs. According to the county’s website, the students have reaped numerous benefits.

While training service dogs for the disabled, at-risk youth learn about child abuse, animal abuse, and domestic violence, and also explore empathy, citizenship, responsibility, and good choices.

The dogs are accepting and non-judgmental while offering love and motivating the students.

Watching the dogs’ rapid, measurable progress teaches the teens that positive reinforcement, empathy, and an encouraging, upbeat attitude are effective methods of interacting with others.

The children that participated have improved self esteem, behavior at home, school performance, and many are no longer involved in the child welfare system.

Through pre-testing and midway-point testing, HSA is able to show the teens knowledge of dog behavior, domestic violence, and child / animal abuse.

Interviews with the teens reveal diminishing gang involvement, self-injury, and substance abuse.

Interviews with parents show support for the positive impact on the teens, including improved home relationships, grades, and a decrease in trouble at school and negative peer relationships.

The community receives an increase of well-trained dogs to provide assistance to those in need.

As for the program’s downsides . . . I can’t think of any.

According to the County Website, the program was the idea of a social worker who noticed the positive effects of an in-training service dog on children. My hat goes off to that individual, and to the County of Merced.

I have seen a disturbing amount of animal suffering all over the world, from starving dogs in Nicaragua to whipped donkeys in Egypt to packs of dogs shot en masse in Thailand.

One incident in particular is unforgettable for me. I was with several other travelers on a Mekong River boat in northern Laos. We saw a person on shore relentlessly beating an elephant as it struggled to haul a felled tree up the river bank. At least one person in the group was moved to tears.

The incident sparked a conversation among us. Several of my fellow travelers had recently completed a trek that involved riding on elephants. They stated that they were mortified by the inhumane treatment the animals received at the hands of the guides.

I resolved then and there never to go on an elephant trek (although several fellow travelers argued that the treks were, all things considered, good for elephants).

However, surely travel in general can benefit animals. Participating in jungle adventures gives locals an incentive to conserve the forest. African safaris provide money to impoverished people and give them incentives to protect charismatic megafauna (although safari-goers are quite notorious for harassing animals such as cheetahs in their attempts to obtain perfect photos).

I have long wished for some guidance on how I can travel responsibly as an animal lover. Thanks to today’s “Gulliver’s Best” blog (a feature of The Economist), I now know where to go for that guidance.

Gulliver’s blog discusses a new website published by the World Society for the Protection of Animals. The site, compassionatetravel.org, offers tips ranging from volunteering with local animal welfare organizations to steering clear of animal rides such as elephant treks.

I’ll be reviewing the site thoroughly before my next big adventure. And I encourage you to do the same.

Tomorrow: back to reader question and answer!

Photo: Animal cruelty meets deforestation in northern Laos.

Macho B was the United States’ only known resident wild jaguar. Until his death he was arguably our most charismatic piece of megafauna.

His death after being captured by Arizona Game and Fish officials has sparked quite a controversy. I have weighed in on the matter twice: here and here.

Bill, from the Southwest Jaguars blog, recently contacted me for an internet question and answer session discussing wild cat captures in general and Macho B’s capture in particular.

You can find the interview here.

Photo: this is not, in my opinion, a good way to start a wild felid capture. Courtesy of Arizona Game and Fish Department.

Spay/Neuter Bill Returns

California state senator Dean Florez, D-Shafter, reintroduced legislation that requires pet owners to have their cats and dogs sterilized. The bill requires that dogs be spayed or neutered unless the owner gets an unaltered dog license. Roaming cats would have to be spayed or neutered.

Julie Mancuso, founder of Social Compassion in Legislation said the bill would cut euthanasia ratios and save taxpayer dollars.

Bill Hemby of PetPAC, a group that helped defeat a similar bill last year said the legislation arrives during financially tough times for the state, making enforcement a challenge.

Three-Legged Race for Agility

There’s certainly no stopping Amy, and her perseverance and tenacity carry over to Serena, her 10-year-old mixed-breed dog (although Amy prefers the agility term “All-American”). Serena recently earned her championship title in agility, despite having only three legs.

Adopted by Amy 9 years ago, Serena had been performing agility for many years when she suffered a severe fracture of her right front leg, which was already weakened by previous radiation treatment. The leg couldn’t be saved, but Serena’s love for the sport was undiminished.

Today, Serena continues to inspire people in competitions held around the country. Amy realized the impact Serena made on people’s lives when she met a father and son who watched Serena compete. Afterward, the father turned to the young boy and said, “Son, see that dog out there? Whenever you say you can’t do something in life, think of her. She’s the reason why you can.”

I have only one disappointing thing to say about Amy and Serena. I was able to find a MySpace page for Serena, but not a Dogster page. Amy, please, for Serena’s sake, upgrade to Dogster!

Photo: Lilly Mae does it with four legs.