Carcinogenic Pet Food: Study Findings & Impact on Pets

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tosh5457
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Food pet
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the potential carcinogenic effects of processed pet food, drawing parallels to findings in human dietary studies. Participants explore the implications of these findings for pet health, particularly regarding the shift to raw diets versus processed options.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant references a study indicating that most commercial pet foods tested showed positive mutagenic responses, suggesting a potential link between dietary heterocyclic amines and cancer in pets.
  • Another participant cautions that the findings are hypothetical and emphasizes the need for further research, noting the lack of testing specifically on dogs and cats.
  • Concerns are raised about the risks associated with raw diets, including the potential for foodborne illness, while acknowledging that switching to raw food may reduce cancer risk.
  • One participant discusses the complexity of cancer causation, highlighting the roles of genetic and environmental factors, and suggests that switching diets may not guarantee health improvements.
  • A question is posed regarding the safety of raw diets, specifically the risks of bacteria in uncooked food.
  • Another participant critiques the methodologies used by organizations assessing carcinogenic risks, suggesting that they may overestimate actual risks.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the study findings, the safety and efficacy of raw diets, and the overall assessment of cancer risks associated with pet food. There is no consensus on the best dietary approach for pets.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of access to the full study, the hypothetical nature of the findings, and the absence of specific testing on the pet species in question. The discussion also reflects varying opinions on the reliability of risk assessments related to carcinogenic foods.

Tosh5457
Messages
130
Reaction score
28
After reading on the World Health Organization's warning that processed meat is carcinogenic (in humans), even in small daily doses, I went on to investigate if this finding also applies to pets, and found this study:

"Twenty-five commercial pet foods were analyzed for mutagenicactivity using the Ames/Salmonella test with strain TA98 and added metabolic activation. All but one gave a positive mutagenic response. Fourteen of these samples were analyzed for heterocyclicaminemutagens/carcinogens and all but one contained 2-amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline (MeIQx) and 10 of 14 contained 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP) as analyzed by HPLC and confirmed by photodiode array peak matching. From these findings it is hypothesized that there is a connection between dietary heterocyclicamines and cancer in animals consuming these foods."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Mark+G.+Knize+MG,+Salmon+CP,+Felton+JS.+Mutagenic+activity+and+heterocyclic+amine++carcinogens+in+commercial+pet+foods.+Mutation+Research.+2003;539:195–201

Unfortunately I can't access the full paper, but I presume they tested with dogs and cats. If you find anything else about this topic I'd be glad to read it, I'm considering switching my cat's diet to a raw diet.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Hmm. Note the use of the word hypothesized in the abstract. That means there needs to be more study. No testing with dogs and cats apparently.

From these findings it is hypothesized that there is a connection between dietary heterocyclic amines and cancer in animals consuming these foods.
Raw food is an alternative. You can buy chubs of ground meat/vegetables, frozen, for pets at some grocery stores. However, processed canned food is shelf stable for long periods. Raw meat is not - meaning that you may be reducing cancer risk (reduce not eliminate) long term and simultaneously increasing the risk of food borne illness and death. It is a trade off. So handle your raw food carefully. I feed my dogs raw chicken for what it is worth, but carcinogenesis is not one of the reasons.

Cancer is not a single disease. http://www.cancer.gov/types -> for us humans.

It is basically caused two ways: genetic (inherited) and environmental. Genetic causes are circa 5% of cancers, environmentally induced cancers are about 95%. So what you are doing is eliminating one exposure factor.

What I am saying is: consider that you are maybe placating yourself about helping your cat. This may be some help for the cat but it in no way is it a guaranteed 100% win. If the cat really likes raw food, go for it. Make the cat happy. And make yourself a little happier too.

In a more pessimistic view: there are a lot more immediate concerns about your cat's health. Keeping your cat 100% indoors is a great start.
 
Tosh5457 said:
Unfortunately I can't access the full paper, but I presume they tested with dogs and cats. If you find anything else about this topic I'd be glad to read it, I'm considering switching my cat's diet to a raw diet.

What do you mean by raw diet? Giving them uncooked food loaded with bacteria?