DEAR DR. FOX: I am an avid reader of your columns and books, and have learned much about caring for my pets. They have lived long and healthy lives because of the information you provide.

I am writing in response to the letter writer who threatened to stop reading your columns unless you stayed out of politics. When did it become problematic to read opposing views on issues, or acceptable to deny facts readily available from multiple sources? Shouldn’t we all seek more information on a subject so that we can evaluate that information and have more informed opinions?

I, for one, appreciate the knowledge you provide on all aspects of our world, the treatment of it and the animals we depend on. I encourage you to continue your advocacy of our planet and the animals that inhabit it. Thanks for your insights. -- M.R., West Palm Beach, Florida

DEAR DR. FOX: I loved your article titled “Trump brazenly claims environmental leadership.” It takes guts to make a political statement, because so many people are so easily offended.

Thank you for saying it like it is without beating around the bush. We need everyone to start seeing the facts and the truth about Trump. The only hope we have is for a completely overwhelming number of people to vote Democratic if there is any hope of saving our country -- and the world, as well. With all the gerrymandering, voter suppression, short voting hours on a workday, long lines at too few voting locations, picture I.D. requirements, misdirections sending people to the wrong voting places and so many other tricks and cheats being pulled to restrict voting only to the chosen few, we need the truth to come out by every source possible.

Thank you for reaching so many people who only get their news from (the other) Fox. -- T.L., Springfield, Missouri

DEAR M.R. and T.L.: Your words of support are appreciated -- but probably not shared by all readers!

Even if a Democrat wins the next presidency, there is an enormous agenda, not only to rectify the setbacks to conservation, public health and a sustainable economy created by the present administration, but to unify America and other nations to address the climate and extinction crises.

We pay taxes to support a democratic, civil society whose leaders should be democratic and civil -- leaders who do not abuse the power of office to undermine human rights and animal and environmental protection. The moral inversion of the Golden Rule into the rule of gold is normative to “developers” and others who destructively exploit nature, and in the process, commit crimes against humanity and other species and their communities. This global cult of mammon has its contemporary rebirth under the guise of Ayn Rand’s rational selfishness, materialism and objectivism. She stated, ”My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.”

The climate crisis and associated extinction crisis -- as evidenced by the accelerating loss of biological and cultural diversity, and of indigenous native peoples, plants and animals -- is accepted as unavoidable “productive achievement” by the dominant culture. Socially and economically, this rising technocratic monoculture is nonsustainable, and suffers the same vulnerabilities we see in ecological monocultures. Dystopia and dysbiosis go hand in hand.

This commercial, industrial juggernaut of “productivity” also means a loss of our humanity: of those qualities of humility, compassion and respect for all life that make us human. Civil society faces all forms of inhumanity. The call for justice for all is ultimately enlightened self-interest, along with planetary CPR (conservation, protection and restoration).

I am not alone in calling for a United Environmental Nations, with the burning of the Amazon forest being just one example of a single nation’s actions (or inaction) harming the entire world. Our numbers and appetites are unsustainable. Many scientists and visionaries have long warned of us reaching this point on planet Earth, as per Frances Moore Lappe’s 1971 book, “Diet for a Small Planet.” Over half a century ago, Jesuit priest, paleontologist and philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin wrote, “The day is not far distant when humanity will realize that biologically, it is faced with a choice between suicide and adoration.”

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DEAR DR. FOX: I have a 3-1/2-year-old white purebred Pomeranian. He is 7 pounds.

About a year ago, he started losing hair -- not the long outer hairs, but the short ones underneath. I heard of a remedy of coconut oil mixed with oil of oregano, which I tried, and I thought the hair was coming back in. I then went to a vet dermatologist who said “stop that, just give him melatonin.” No results, as I expected.

Now, six months later, I am back to the coconut and oregano treatment, but nothing is happening now. I believe the hair has been gone too long.

Anything you can tell me to try? -- L.J., Fort Myers, Florida

DEAR L.J.: Your little dog has a condition that will not be helped, to my knowledge, with coconut oil.

Melatonin may help in some forms of this alopecia. A daily supplement of vitamin D (200 IUs) or a few drops of cod liver oil may help, after a few weeks.

Your dog probably has alopecia X (AX), which is a hereditary condition that primarily affects Pomeranians and causes truncal alopecia and skin hyperpigmentation. To date, AX’s etiology remains unknown, although altered sex-hormone metabolism has been suggested as an underlying cause.

DEAR DR. FOX: I have an 8-month-old kitten, Frankie, who is wonderful. She uses the litter box (we use pine pellets), she’s playful, she sleeps through the night and is very affectionate.

For a week, I am babysitting my friend’s terrier. Frankie has not had any experience with a dog other than a day visit. Frankie suddenly has found the corner of my bathroom rug to defecate on, though she still urinates in the litter box. I wash the mat with hot water, but it is the third time this happened.

I’m sure this will resolve itself after the dog leaves on Wednesday, but I’d like your opinion. -- K.E., Boynton Beach, Florida

DEAR K.E.: This could be coincidence, not associated with the dog’s presence, because your young cat may be constipated.

This can be a serious problem when cats are fed only dry kibble, which they should not be. Give her canned food or soaked, freeze-dried food. Constipation is painful and cats may associate painful evacuation with being in the litter box, so they evacuate outside the box.

Alternatively, the cat may feel especially vulnerable when straining to defecate because of the presence of the dog; if so, the problem will resolve itself when the dog is gone, as you said. Many dogs like to eat cat poop, so be alert to that possibility!

DEAR DR. FOX: We had to take our Doberman back to the vet after she was spayed because some stitches had come out and there was a bit of blood.

The vet put in fresh sutures, put her on antibiotics and gave her tramadol for pain and discomfort. It made her so restless and agitated -- she would lie down and try to rest, then get up again, and sometimes she stumbled. So I took her off it, and she is doing better.

What is your opinion? -- G.K., Minneapolis, Minnesota

DEAR G.K.: This tramadol issue has come up before in my column. Some years ago, I used it on one of our dogs, with the same disturbing side effects, including rapid heart rate and anxiety. Recent reports in the veterinary literature indicate that this drug should not be given to dogs because it is not an effective analgesic.

As for the antibiotic prescription: If the surgical lesion was sterile and the dog had a normal body temperature, other than application of a topical antibiotic, an oral prescription was probably unwarranted. Both the veterinary and medical professions are adopting the precautionary principle with regard to antibiotic use because of overuse, especially by the livestock industry and the rapid evolution of antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

CRITICAL SHORTAGE OF RURAL VETS: CONGRESS MUST ACT

The United States has 190 regions in 44 states with a critical shortage of veterinarians, the USDA reports. Some of these regions have as few as one or two large-animal veterinarians available to care for thousands, or tens of thousands, of farm animals, writes AVMA President Dr. John Howe. A combination of low pay and high student debt drive the shortage, as newly minted vets opt for higher-paying work in urban areas. But Congress could alleviate the problem by passing the Veterinary Medicine Loan Repayment Program Enhancement Act, which would eliminate a 37% tax on student loan repayment funds, Howe writes. (The Hill, 8/27)

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)

DEAR READERS: In many communities in the United States and abroad, animals are being killed inhumanely because of religious tradition.

Religious freedom is an essential democratic principle, but should not preclude impartial evaluation of various associated traditions and beliefs. Ritual slaughter by butchers following Jewish and Islamic traditions involves slicing the carotid and jugular blood vessels in the neck. Suddenly receiving less oxygen, the brain triggers panic-suffocation reactions. This makes the animals struggle and gasp for air with blood being inhaled and exhaled through the trachea (wind pipe), which is also severed.

Furthermore, this form of ritual slaughter does not lead to immediate unconsciousness, because arteries supplying the brain (and therefore maintaining some degree of consciousness) travel through the bony vertebrae and are never reached by the knife.

Aside from that, animals show fear when being led to and restrained for slaughter. Advocates of more humane ritual slaughter are calling for pre-slaughter stunning to render animals unconscious prior to throat-cutting.

We appeal to all Muslim and Jewish communities around the world, and their leaders, to adopt this practice that has already been accepted, or is being considered, in several countries. Pioneering animal rights scholar/activist Al-Hafiz B.A. Masri, the former imam of Shah Jahan Mosque in Woking, England, proved in his 1989 book “Animals in Islam” that the captive-bolt stunning method is more humane, and is also in perfect consonance with the animal slaughter principles of Islam. We therefore appeal to these communities, globally, to urgently adopt this practice, as a way to move forward and mitigate further suffering.

-- Michael W. Fox, veterinarian, Golden Valley, Minnesota; Nadeem Haque, Al-Hafiz B.A. Masri’s grandson, Toronto, Canada

DEAR DR. FOX: I read with interest your column on whether other pets should be present when a dog is euthanized. Based on my experiences, I believe that other pets definitely should be present.

Several years ago, when we had to put our sweet Aussie, Mattie, to sleep, we found a wonderful vet who was willing to come to the house. He suggested that our cavalier King Charles spaniel, Lillie, stay with us through the whole process. Lillie was absolutely glued to Mattie until literally the exact moment that the doctor told us she no longer had a heartbeat. As he was telling us, Lillie got up and walked away. I pulled her back, but she refused to stay and walked away again. The doctor told me to let her go. He said dogs recognize the smell of death and know what it means, which was why he said she should be there. He said that even though she would be sad, she, like us, would know what happened to Mattie and she wouldn’t always be waiting for her to come home.

He was absolutely right: She grieved, but didn’t search for Mattie. It was one of the most amazing experiences that I have ever witnessed. In contrast, when Lillie died, sadly, we did not have the option to include our other dogs, Annie and Roxie -- she went into cardiac arrest at the animal hospital. When we came home without Lillie, both Annie and Roxie were constantly and obviously looking for her, especially Roxie, who was very attached to her. Fortunately, I had clipped some of Lillie’s fur after she died, and after a few days of heartbreaking sadness (they were unusually quiet, and they raced to the door whenever someone came in, walking away dejected when it was never Lillie), my husband suggested we let them both smell the fur. We did, and it worked. After that, they were still clearly sad, but they began to perk up, and never again raced to the door expecting her to be there. It was amazing.

I truly believe dogs know so much more than we realize. -- P.W., West Palm Beach, Florida

DEAR P.W.: I am glad to revisit this question with you, since many people have more than one animal in their homes. As in prior columns, however, I urge people not to allow their animals to witness the euthanasia procedure if done in-home.

For the cat or dog whose time has come because of intractable suffering, in-home euthanasia is the ideal and least distressing method. Some people would prefer a “natural” death for their animal companions, but chronic organ failure and eventual shutdown can be protracted and distressing for all. I always advise an objective, yet empathetic, clinical evaluation by a veterinarian.

I agree with you that dogs realize much more than we give them credit for. My concern about having other animals present during the administration of the euthanasia is that some may become disturbed and protective, or fearful toward the veterinarian and his/her assistant. Better, in my experience, to allow the dogs/cats to see their animal companion laid out on the floor after the procedure has been completed. As you have confirmed, there is more distress and a lack of “closure” when the deceased animal is left at the animal hospital and not brought home for the other animals to examine; and yes, most do seem to comprehend that their animal companion is deceased. This generally shortens their grieving time significantly.

(Send all mail to animaldocfox@gmail.com or to Dr. Michael Fox in care of Andrews McMeel Syndication, 1130 Walnut St., Kansas City, MO 64106. The volume of mail received prohibits personal replies, but questions and comments of general interest will be discussed in future columns.

Visit Dr. Fox’s website at DrFoxOneHealth.com.)