search
|
Raw Meaty Bones Ch.7 Pt.2
Several conclusions flow from the results:
1. The eight animals were suffering a form of acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) attributable to a foul mouth or an artificial diet or both.
‘A’ is for ‘acquired’. Some forms of immune deficiency are inherited and not easily reversible. Most immune deficiency syndromes are acquired as a result of infection, environmental factors, toxins, diet or other stresses. Removal of trigger factors can, in certain instances, reverse acquired immune deficiency — as was shown with the eight
cases — thus confirming the deficiency I was dealing with as being acquired not inherited.
‘I’ is for the ‘immune’ system. Any component of the system may be affected. In HIV AIDS the T cell subset of lymphocytes are reduced in number. The eight Foul-mouth AIDS patients suffered from a reduction in both lymphocytes and neutrophils.
‘D’ is for ‘deficiency’. Deficiencies may be mild or severe. After treatment, and in retrospect, the eight patients could be seen to have suffered a severe deficiency of immune cells.
‘S’ is for ‘syndrome’ — i.e. ‘a combination of clinical signs resulting from a single cause or so commonly occurring together as to constitute a distinct clinical picture’.3 In the case of Foul-mouth AIDS the syndrome appears to be acquired as a result of periodontal toxins and other dietary factors. These factors are not infectious so please do not worry about the risk of catching AIDS from your pet.
Note: Feline AIDS derives its name from the Feline Immunodeficiency Virus (FIV) which affects cats but not humans. Researchers at North Carolina State University point out that in FIVinfected cats ‘clinical AIDS … is predominantly associated with secondary infectious diseases.’ 4 Perhaps oral bacteria, not FIV, are the principal agents which give rise to the condition called feline AIDS.
2. The acquired immune deficiency could be reversed by dental and dietary changes.
At the moment, HIV AIDS, once contracted, cannot be reversed. Lacking an adequate immune defence sufferers fall victim to infections, cancer, weight loss and death. In the terminal stages expensive drugs can be used to limit pain and slow progression of the disease but ultimately these drugs fail. Foul-mouth AIDS sufferers encounter similar wasting diseases. However, my small research project showed that without recourse to drugs, but with timely dental and dietary change, such patients can be saved. It follows that by institution of a natural diet and the maintenance of clean teeth Foul-mouth AIDS can be prevented.
3. The ‘normal’ reference ranges used by veterinarians for white cells (and other parameters) must be considered unreliable
.
While the increase of 77.7 percent in white cell numbers was dramatic, in some cases the increase occurred within the published so-called normal range for white cells. (University of Guelph ‘normal’ figures are: cats: 5.5 to 15.4 x 109 WBC/litre, and dogs: 6.1 to 17.4 x 109 WBC/litre.)5 Imagine having your legs chopped off and then being told your height is still OK and within the ‘normal’ range — the ‘normal’ range having been established using pygmies and American basketball players. You would rightly feel indignant being compared with either a pygmy or a basketball player instead of your individual ‘normal’ height. The same occurs when we consider white cell numbers. We each have an optimum and 77.7 percent variations must be significant.
If the so-called ‘normal’ range of white cells is so unhelpful we need to ask why? Did the investigators use Chihuahuas and Great Danes to obtain the reference ranges and thus obtain figures which are either too low or too high for most dogs? No, is the answer. They did much worse than that — they used diseased animals. So-called ‘normal’ ranges are based on blood samples obtained in two ways. The animals providing samples are either kept in a research colony or are pets presented at a veterinary surgery for non-medical reasons, for example vaccination.
Colony-raised animals fed artificial food are notoriously badly affected by periodontal disease. Similarly the majority of cats and dogs attending veterinary surgeries are fed artificial food and suffer from the disease. When researchers establish ‘normals’ they take samples from 40 or 50 animals in order to discover the span of values. In that number of periodontal disease affected animals the likelihood is that some will have been suffering a depressed white cell count. Others, in such a large group of periodontal disease sufferers, would likely be experiencing an inflammatory spike with an unduly high number of white cells. Instead of setting a reference range for health, it appears that the researchers have merely established the broad range of white cell values encountered in disease.
4. When the ‘pet food curtain’ disintegrates we can expect a rush of new scientific research and discovery.
Following the collapse of the Iron Curtain there was a rush of social, political and economic readjustment. By daring to peep behind the pet food curtain my simple research project provides a glimpse of the future. In the first instance the research will need to be repeated and expanded to reveal the full implications for pet health and haematological reference values. In the likely event that my findings are confirmed, information, dependent on flawed reference values, will need to be reevaluated. More detailed research will surely follow.
5. Inappropriate diet, periodontal disease and immune depression exert combined adverse effects on individual animals. In nature, things that adversely affect some may benefit others.
Inappropriate diet, including starvation, leads to periodontal disease and immune depression. Chronic infections, for instance periodontal disease, also depress the immune system. Those suffering immune depression, whether animals or people, are at greater risk of developing periodontal disease. (Dentists treating severe periodontal disease in humans may, where appropriate, recommend that patients obtain an HIV test.) Since periodontal disease and immune deficiency each worsens the other, a downward spiral ensues. Other organs are likely to become involved — for instance heart, liver and kidneys — in a complex interactive sequence. At first clinical signs may be subtle and overlooked, but ultimately manifest as severe disease — which coincides with and is often mistaken for the signs of old age.
Periodontal disease, immune depression and death may seem to be an undesirable endpoint for an animal. But in a natural setting death of one carnivore means less competition for food among the remainder — for them a positive effect. Similarly the prey of a pack of wolves or pride of lions gain some respite when a predator dies. Contemplation of the mixture of negative and positive effects led me to postulate a uniting hypothesis of periodontal disease, the subject of Chapter 14.
Getting published
Packaging this information in an acceptable fashion for the editor of a scientific journal was the next challenge. The raw experimental results had to be collated, reference material sourced and the manuscript typed. Even for experienced and respected researchers, gaining publication can be something of a lottery. Prestige United States and British journals pick and choose from a wide selection of submissions. By aiming a little lower I hoped to improve my chances. With trepidation and a trace of optimism I submitted the manuscript, entitled ‘Foul-mouth AIDS — a dietary disease’, to the Australian Veterinary Journal in July 1993.
Rejection
Prior to coming to his decision on whether to publish I knew that the editor would seek the opinions of referees. Referees are people with recognised expertise who volunteer their time to review new work. While my name, as author of the paper would be known to them, they would always remain anonymous to me. Within two months their verdict arrived in the post.
Each of the three referees found much to criticise and recommended that the paper be rejected. One of them opined: ‘Even after the paper is extensively revised and condensed, I doubt that it will be suitable for publication in the Journal.’ He or she went on to defend the current system: ‘The population of “normal” animals used to establish laboratory reference values should be as similar as possible to the population of animals which are seen in veterinary clinics. It is therefore appropriate that commercial foods are fed to the latter animals, if they are the diets being fed to most dogs and cats which veterinarians treat.’ A second referee stated: ‘Most of the animals used as examples in this study have “normal” haematological values and the variation quoted is also within “normal” limits.’
As we shall see in Chapter 11, referees often see their role as defending the status quo, not, as you might expect, the facilitating of useful new discoveries. These particular referees seemed to endorse the use of a biased system to derive biased ‘normals’, then to use biased ‘normals’ to justify a biased system. Clearly I had failed to persuade them of the faulty logic of this circular argument. But despite the gulf between us I accepted that many of their criticisms were valid. Dealing with those criticisms and also the despondency I felt were in the first instance too difficult. I closed the file and focused on other projects.
Success
Time heals and events unfold such that two years on I was ready for another round with the publishers. I forced myself to think as a conventional researcher and rewrote the paper according to the model used in the Journal of Small Animal Practice (JSAP). A prestigious journal, it had already published a letter from me on the effects of artificial diets on cats’ lower urinary tracts.6 I thought this augured well, and besides I was still a member of the British Small Animal Veterinary Association (BSAVA), publishers of the JSAP.
Rewriting the manuscript took time, references needed collating and sentences needed adjustment. Simultaneously I continued correspondence with the JSAP editor regarding the infamous intussusception article involving the telescoping bowels of young cats. The editor agreed to publish my observations in the journal and then without warning reneged on the agreement. As described in the previous chapter, I lodged complaints against the editor and the BSAVA, first with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons and then with the Queen as Patron of the College. Suddenly my chances of gaining publication of the Foul-mouth AIDS paper in the JSAP seemed remote — until fate lent a hand.
The long-time editor of the JSAP departed and was succeeded by Dr Frances Barr. It was to her that I sent a revised paper under the new title ‘Periodontitis and leucopenia’. Leucopenia means low white cell count — a less emotive term than AIDS — but in the covering letter I mentioned my belief that ‘veterinary surgeons and those researchers investigating human AIDS would be well served by publication of this paper.’ Just what passed through Frances Barr’s mind when she received the manuscript I don’t know. But perhaps she was fearful that if she didn’t give it favourable treatment I might report her to the Queen!
Within three months the paper, with minor modifications, was accepted for publication. After another three months, in December 1995, it appeared in print.7 It was a moment of pure elation, but no time for celebration. It was clear to me that the material would simply moulder in the archives if left to the usual forces. What was needed was a media campaign to stimulate interest.
Informing the community
Two things were prominent in my thinking. First, that the pet food industry and the veterinary profession continued to downplay the extent and severity of periodontal disease. This needed to change. Second, the community needed to know that artificial diets lead to many noxious diseases including a form of diet-related AIDS. But breaking the news had to wait for Christmas and the January summer holiday period to pass. When a general election was called for the month of February I knew that my media campaign would have to wait still longer.
By March 1996 the timing and preparation were as good as it gets. I had consulted fellow Raw Meaty Bone lobbyist Breck Muir as to the suitability of the proposed media release. Breck gave his approval of the wording and the veterinary meanings implied. But since truth alone might not be a sufficient defence in defamation proceedings, the legal position needed to be established. My legal adviser, who had provided advice throughout my struggles with the pet food industry and allied voices in the veterinary profession, read the draft. He corrected a spelling error, inserted one word and otherwise approved the draft. Monday 18 March 1996 was chosen as the day when the electronic and print media were widely circulated with the media release:
Many pets not old but stricken with
Diet-Induced AIDS
Modern processed diets are known to be responsible for periodontal or gum disease which affects more than 85% of domestic cats and dogs. Foul breath odour is an early sign suggesting that more severe heart, liver and kidney disease may follow.
An article published in the December 1995 issue of the British Journal of Small Animal Practice confirms that processed pet foods produce periodontal disease which often leads to an AIDS-like condition in affected animals. (JSAP 1995, 36, 542–546)
Dr Tom Lonsdale of Riverstone, NSW, author of the paper, admits that he, along with almost everyone else, used to recommend processed pet foods. “Previously we thought animals were suffering the effects of old age when in fact they were wasting away with periodontal disease and diet-induced AIDS.
“Now we treat the periodontal disease and provide the pets with a natural diet. The removal of the poisons allows the immune system to recover and owners frequently report that their old pet is like a puppy/kitten again.
“I believe that this information should have been available to Australian vets and their patients in 1993. The Australian Veterinary Journal refused to publish the research findings.
“In my view a committee of inquiry should be established. Diet-induced AIDS of pets is just as nasty as HIV AIDS for humans. In France HIV AIDS experts suppressed information for a mere two months and as a result were prosecuted and some gaoled for ‘complicity in poisoning’ (Science, vol 268, 16 June 1995).”
Dr Tom Lonsdale and other concerned veterinarians continue their campaign for the banning of what they consider to be misleading pet food industry advertising. “Pet owners should be informed that feeding processed pet foods is likely to lead to ill health, suffering and unnecessary vet bills.”
Circularising information to the media is usually an unpredictable activity. Even the most interesting information can be overlooked, especially if other big stories break at the same time. But on this occasion high level impact was guaranteed as a result of a leading science journalist’s involvement. Two years previously Julian Cribb, Science Editor for The Australian newspaper, had run a story on the devastating effects of artificial pet foods.8 When offered the opportunity to break the news on the AIDS connection he cautiously accepted. Julian satisfied himself of the validity of the claims prior to arranging for a photographer to take a photo of myself examining a dog’s mouth. The article and photo appeared in the 16 March 1996 weekend edition of The Australian under the heading ‘AIDS-like disease threatens family pets’.9
Denial and rebuttals
The Australian enjoys kudos throughout the Australian newspaper industry and consequently our story quickly gained momentum. In the following days numerous articles appeared in the press and on the radio. The pet food industry kept a low profile, but the Australian Veterinary Association responded with a media release:
Dr Pam Scanlon, president of AVA, sought to reassure pet owners that there is absolutely no evidence that periodontal disease causes anything remotely like “AIDS”.
“To claim that it does is alarmist and irresponsible and will cause caring pet owners unnecessary concern about the well being of their pet”, she said.
“I am disappointed that a newspaper of the high quality of The Australian would publish such a story without also seeking and reporting a second opinion. Dr Lonsdale apparently bases his claim that processed food causes an AIDS-like disease on the observation that the white cell count of a few dogs with periodontal disease may be reduced. To claim as this story does that this therefore indicates an AIDSlike syndrome is present is nonsensical and without any rational or scientific foundation”, Dr Scanlon said. Being used to having its views accepted without question the AVA was concerned that on this occasion its press release was widely ignored. As messenger bearing the Foul-mouth AIDS message I came under personal attack — mostly within the veterinary profession and away from public view. Professor Wayne Robinson of the University of Queensland was commissioned to ‘review’ the original JSAP paper and subsequent newspaper reports. Professor Robinson’s argument ran to four pages and included the statement: ‘Dogs with periodontal disease do not have clinical signs or disease processes that could be construed as being AIDS or even AIDS-like.’ The professor concluded: ‘I am afraid that I have little to offer in the way of suggestions to combat such behaviour of a member of the veterinary profession.’
The professor’s letter, on University stationery, was addressed to the President of the Australian Companion Animal Council (ACAC).10 ACAC circularised Professor Robinson’s letter and other documentation to Australian veterinarians, ‘in the interests of providing informed comments’. On closer inspection ACAC turned out to be an umbrella group of veterinary, pet industry and pet food organisations operating from the AVA offices in Sydney. AVA members received the eight pages of documentation during the 1996 AVA elections in which Breck Muir and I were candidates.
Dr Roger Clarke, an AVA heavyweight, wrote a letter of criticism to the JSAP. With the reputation of the journal and its referees under attack, the editor asked me and one of the referees — who had applauded the original manuscript — to respond to Dr Clarke’s letter. We quickly dispatched our replies in anticipation of open debate.
But instead of publishing the letters for all to see, the editor, in consultation with the editorial board and officers of the British Small Animal Veterinary Association, had a change of heart and ‘decided to publish no correspondence’.
The British veterinary publishing industry seems to experience difficulty coming to terms with the concept of a diet-induced acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Dr Frances Barr, editor of the JSAP, tells people she regrets publishing the original article. Clause two of the JSAP copyright agreement states: ‘In assigning your copyright you are not forfeiting your right to use your contribution elsewhere. This you may do after seeking permission from the Journal of Small Animal Practice…’ Three times I wrote to Dr Barr seeking permission to publish the paper at my web site and each time she sidestepped the agreement. Her final words were: ‘I therefore reiterate that I, on behalf of the BSAVA [publishers of the JSAP], do not give permission for reproduction of your paper, originally published in the JSAP, on your site on the Internet.’
Martin Alder, editor of The Veterinary Record, journal of the British Veterinary Association, was similarly obstructive. He claimed that on legal advice he was obliged to erase the words ‘including an AIDS-like condition’ from my 1998 Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons election manifesto. When pressed to reveal the origin of the legal opinion Mr Alder became evasive but was adamant that he would not publish the offending phrase.
Back in Australia veterinary dentist Dr David Clarke was critical of the JSAP paper. He promoted the view that a natural diet does not protect cats against periodontal disease and that ‘commercially available canned and dry foods have not been the sole cause, nor increased the prevalence, of periodontal disease in the domestic cat’.11 Dr Jill Maddison, a lecturer at the University of Sydney and consultant to Friskies, the Nestlé pet food company, said on television:
The theory that it [natural diet] promotes better overall health and prevents a wide variety of diseases from cancer to heartworm is not based on truth — and the claim that it prevents the AIDS-like syndrome is totally wrong. Because the AIDS-like syndrome doesn’t exist.12
While the pet food industry and its defenders exist I worry that pets will continue to suffer the catastrophe of Foul-mouth AIDS. As an activist I can be accused of bias so I leave the last word to the feline immunodeficiency virus expert quoted in Chapter 3, Dr Niels Pedersen:
With the world-wide HIV pandemic … immunodeficiency has become a byword of the age. Immunodeficiency, however, is not just a rare genetic disease or a common outcome of a widespread virus infection. Immunodeficiency results from a myriad of causes and can range from subtle to catastrophic in its clinical appearance.13
NOTES Chapter 7
Foul-mouth AIDS
1. Nance, J (1992) The Fido Fad: Out with tinned roo, in with alfalfa and raw carrot, ‘New age’ pets get on health kick, Sunday Telegraph, Sydney, 28 June, p 23
2. Lonsdale, T (1992) Raw Meaty Bones Promote Health, Control and Therapy No 3323, Post Graduate Committee in Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney
3. Blood, D C and Studdert, V P (1999) Saunders Comprehensive Veterinary Dictionary, 2nd Edition, W B Saunders, London, p 1107
4. English, R V et al (1994) Development of Clinical Disease in Cats Experimentally Infected with Feline Immunodeficiency Virus, The Journal of Infectious Diseases, 170:543–552
5. Jacobs, R M, Lumsden, J H and Vernau, W (1992) Canine and feline reference values, in Current Veterinary Therapy XI, Small Animal Practice, Eds, Kirk, R W and Bonagura, J D, W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 1250–1251
6. Lonsdale, T (1993) Putting FLUTD in context, Journal of Small Animal Practice, 34, 592 Web: www.rawmeatybones.com/FLUTD.html
7. Lonsdale, T (1995) Periodontal disease and leucopenia, Journal of Small Animal Practice, 36, 542–546
8. Cribb, J (1994) Processed food killing pets, say vets, The Australian, 10 March, p 3
9. Cribb, J (1996) AIDS-like disease threatens family pets, The Weekend Australian, 16–17 March, p 8
10. Professor Hughes, Dean, School of Veterinary Science wrote, in a letter to author, 8 July 1996: ‘I can advise that Professor Robinson was consulted by the Australian Companion Animal Council and that the opinion provided by him was in a private capacity.’
11. Clarke, D E and Cameron, A (1998) Relationship between diet, dental calculus and periodontal disease in domestic and feral cats in Australia, Australian Veterinary Journal, 10 690–693
12. Maddison, J (1997) Today on Saturday, TCN9 Television Sydney 8 am 23 August 1997
13. Pedersen, N (1997) Immunologic diseases of the Cat, in Feline Medicine, Proceedings of the Post Graduate Foundation in Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, 289 p 203
Unless otherwise stated, all information, articles, reports, photos and images on this web site are the copyright of UKRMB. Permission to reproduce anything from this web site must be obtained from info@ukrmb.co.uk.
|
|
