DEAR DR. FOX: I want to call your attention to a recent article by Trisha Pasricha about letting your dog give you "kisses" on the face. What she writes contradicts what I read in one of your columns not long ago, where you said that it is generally OK. What is your response? -- B.M.V., St. Paul, Minnesota

DEAR B.M.V.: Dr. Trisha Pasricha is the Ask a Doctor columnist for The Washington Post. In the column you reference, she focused on the bacterium Capnocytophaga canimorsus, which she says can be “risky for the elderly, those who consume a lot of alcohol or among those who are immunocompromised.” She then quotes an infectious disease expert, who says that the odds of getting a case of sepsis from this organism are “around the same odds as getting struck by lightning.”

As I emphasize in my post on this subject (drfoxonehealth.com/post/dogs-kisses-licks-and-saliva-that-heals), pet owners should “always wash hands before preparing food and before eating, and wash out pets’ food and water bowls daily. The bowls could contain salmonella, E. coli, campylobacter and listeria from pet foods, which could infect family members. The main source of these harmful bacteria, some of which have evolved resistance to antibiotics, are the meat and poultry ingredients in raw and frozen pet foods (and in batches of contaminated dry kibble).”

Pasricha goes on to stress the importance of rabies vaccinations and of supervising children around dogs to prevent dog-bite injuries. This is all very well, but she then states that dogs should be given "an anti-parasitic medication monthly.” This is ill-advised, since some of these drugs can harm dogs, are an environmental hazard and can affect family members when they are applied to the dog’s skin. Such advice is imprudent in the absence of evidence that treatment is indicated by a veterinarian. Routine monthly treatments may be profitable for the manufacturers and prescribers, but can lead to parasites evolving resistance.

As a matter of medical clarity, humans kissing each other pose more of a health risk, especially from various serious viral infections, than your dog kissing you. (For details, see the study “Viral Diseases Transmissible by Kissing” by Jacobo Limeres Posse, et al, published in Saliva Protection and Transmissible Diseases in 2017.)

TSA: DON’T SEND PETS THROUGH AIRPORT X-RAY MACHINES

Airline passengers traveling with pets should not send their pets through airport X-ray machines at security checkpoints, as doing so needlessly exposes the animal to radiation, according to the Transportation Security Administration. Radiation exposure can cause cancer and other illness, says AVMA Immediate Past President Dr. Lori Teller, and pets being carried in the cabin should be removed from their carrier before the carrier is sent through the X-ray machine. “If you’re concerned that your pet may get freaked out or try to escape (during the security check) you can always ask for a private screening in a quiet room,” Dr. Teller said. (Full story: Houston Chronicle, Sept. 19)

HONEY HEALING HORSES: SAVE THE BEES!

Medical-grade honey applied directly within the synovial cavity was safe and effective in a study involving three horses that had undergone synovial sepsis surgery, veterinarians at Cotts Equine Hospital reported. No adverse effects were observed, and none of the three horses showed signs of lameness after treatment, says equine veterinarian Richard Coomer. (Full story: TheHorse.com, Sept. 19)

For all our sakes, let’s save the bees, decimated by the many diseases and pesticide poisoning we have brought upon them.

(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: This is Part 2 of a planned three-part series on the harms of the cattle industry.

The contributions of the U.S. beef industry to the climate crisis have been well documented, as well as the health risks of high beef consumption. Yet the cattle industry continues to be heavily subsidized with public funds, the termination of which many analysts are now calling for. (See the study “Public policies and vested interests preserve the animal farming status quo at the expense of animal product analogs” by Simona Vallone and Eric Lambin, published in One Earth, August 2023.)

According to a fact sheet from the Humane Farming Association (HFA):

“The Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP) is like an insurance policy for livestock producers where the taxpayer pays the premium rather than the livestock producer. When animals die in harsh weather, the producer files a claim with the USDA. Despite the fact that the producer provided no protection from inclement weather and paid no premium to insure the animals, he or she collects compensation for the dead animals. ...

"Figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act indicate that between 2013 and 2017, LIP issued payments of $198,877,658 to farmers and ranchers for animal deaths due primarily to weather-related issues. Since that time, says USASpending.gov, another $157,283,183 was paid to producers under LIP. LIP benefits represent misuse of taxpayer dollars and government waste at its most flagrant. ...

"Compensating producers for dead livestock without ever requiring adequate shelter, shade, or other safeguards is actually a disincentive to farmers and ranchers to take the necessary steps to provide their animals with protections from inclement weather.” (To read the full document, visit HFA-LIP-fact-sheet.pdf.)

To top this off, a vast tonnage of discarded animal parts unfit for human consumption -- notably the remains designated “4-D” from dead, dying, debilitated and/or diseased animals at the processing plants -- is profitably recycled into pig and poultry feed and pet foods.

This subsidization results in artificially low prices for beef and other animal products. According to one review from the American Institute for Economic Research, "The United States federal government spends $38 billion every year subsidizing the meat and dairy industries. Research from 2015 shows this subsidization reduces the price of Big Macs from $13 to $5, and the price of a pound of hamburger meat from $30 to the $5 we see today." (See aier.org/article/the-true-cost-of-a-hamburger.)

Our historical consumption of meat does not justify the present quantity and frequency of same. Raising an animal for consumption, or tracking and killing one to eat, are practices that are generations removed from most people in the world. Rather, most people have others kill and dismember the animals they will eventually eat. This is done in slaughtering facilities where there is much animal terror and mishandling, and, especially in the U.S., unsafe conditions for workers, many of whom are immigrants. (See the 2006 book “Slaughterhouse, The Shocking Story of Greed, Neglect, and Inhumane Treatment Inside the U.S. Meat Industry” by Gail Eisnitz.)

U.K. UNIVERSITIES URGED TO GO VEGAN

Hundreds of academics, politicians and health care and veterinary professionals have signed an open letter urging U.K. universities to switch to 100% plant-based meals. The full letter is available at bit.ly/3Rk9nvE.

I wish all such institutions in the U.S. would start a similar campaign to help shrink our carbon footprint, improve our health and reduce the suffering of billions of animals destined for human consumption.

DEAR DR. FOX: I noticed that one of your recent columns referenced an outdated stat -- specifically, that the global plant-based meat market was predicted to grow to $15.8 billion by 2028. Based on our most recent data, this figure has been updated, and the global plant-based meat market is now expected to reach $18.41 billion by 2030.

For your reference, and to verify the new statistics, please visit our page: worldanimalfoundation.org/advocate/how-many-vegans-are-in-the-world. -- Patricia Gomez, World Animal Foundation

DEAR P.G.: I appreciate you sending this update. It is indeed evident that more plant-based dog and cat foods will soon be on the market, leading to documented benefits for these animals and the planet.

(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: President Joe Biden has vetoed two Republican-drafted bills that would have reversed federal protections for the lesser prairie chicken and the northern long-eared bat under the Endangered Species Act. Habitat loss to fossil fuel development, agriculture, roads and power lines threatens the lesser prairie chicken, which is known for its elaborate mating rituals. White-nose syndrome (a fungal disease), wind turbines and indiscriminate logging by the timber industry all threaten the long-eared bat’s survival. (Full story: The Associated Press, Sept. 27)

These animals play vital roles in maintaining the health of ecosystems in which they evolved for millions of years before our incursion and destruction. Prairie chickens consume grasshoppers and probably help prevent them from morphing into crop-devastating locust swarms. The northern long-eared bat devours many species of insects and helps protect trees from invasive beetles.

"Bats are critical to healthy, functioning ecosystems and contribute at least $3 billion annually to the United States agriculture economy through pest control and pollination," Biden said in a veto statement.

From a One Health perspective, it is enlightened self-interest to protect all native species, whether plant or animal. This perspective links ecological and environmental health with public health, and calls on us to better constrain our destructive, consumptive urges.

The black-footed ferrets, like some species of the burrowing owl and the swift fox, have almost been pushed into extinction. But the relentlessly persecuted “prairie wolf” -- the coyote -- has been able to survive and is now colonizing many residential communities across the country, creating wildlife-human conflicts. Organizations such as Project Coyote are seeking to solve these conflicts with sound science and compassion.

The less we interfere with wildlife, the better for all.

ABALONE: A SEAFOOD DELICACY TO AVOID

Many people enjoy abalone, a mollusk harvested by the California fishing industry. But this industry wanted the sea otter taken off the endangered species list because otters consume abalone, clams and sea urchins, and are therefore seen as "competition" by the Commercial Fishermen of Santa Barbara and the California Sea Urchin Commission.

Thankfully, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rejected these groups' petition to delist the sea otter. Otters are already at risk from warming and acidifying waters, diseases such as toxoplasmosis, predation by sharks and toxic algal blooms caused by pollution. (Full story: fws.gov, Sept. 19)

This is yet another instance of vested human interests seeking to override the rights and interests of wildlife, much like ignorant deer hunters who regard wolves as competitors and want them exterminated, or “managed,” at barely viable population numbers.

Every wild animal species provides vital ecological services. Sea otters, in consuming sea urchins, help prevent sea urchins from decimating the kelp forests that provide essential habitats for many fish.

So think twice about consuming abalone -- and, in my opinion, any seafoods -- because of global overharvesting and the reality of declining biodiversity in ocean ecosystems.

A NOTE FOR THE DAIRY INDUSTRY AND ICE CREAM PARLOR

Overtreatment of dairy cows with mild or moderate mastitis is common, and could potentially contribute to drug resistance, according to a study led by researchers at Michigan State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine. Many dairy farmers continue treatment beyond the recommended duration based on the misconception that abnormal milk appearance is an indication of infection. However, previous research has shown that abnormal milk appearance is a sign of inflammation, not necessarily of infection. (Full story: Food Safety Magazine, Sept. 27)

GOOD MOVE FROM RINGLING BROS. CIRCUS

After a hiatus of several years, the Ringling Bros. Circus is returning, but it will no longer include animal acts of any kind. For details, see: onegreenplanet.org/animals/ringling-circus-returns-sans-animal-acts.

(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.)