FDA spox tells TCR, “FDA has received at least one report about Sunshine Mills products in that timeframe…” In both recalls, the major pet food company noted that “no illnesses have been reported in association with these products to date.” That’s a statement Sunshine may no longer be able to make.
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention spokesman Thomas Skinner confirmed to TCR on Tuesday evening that a case in North Carolina involving an eight-year-old Newfoundland dog that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and did not survive is one of two “ongoing investigations” being conducted by CDC researchers into animals with “severe outcomes.”
Details have started to emerge in local media outlets about North Carolina’s first COVID-positive dog, one of the four known COVID dogs that did not survive. Last week, TCR reported exclusively that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s One Health Office, which is part of the CDC’s National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, has quietly been working to produce a paper that will reveal long-awaited details of its investigations into the four dogs (and one cat) known to have died while infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.
More than one month after Buddy, the first dog in the United States to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19 in humans) was euthanized, information about that case and similar cases continues to be confusing and sparse. Testing for animals in the United States has been extremely limited, and the messaging about our dogs and cats from public health officials includes repeated caveats about “limited available information.” Yet those same officials are discouraging or all-together blocking that information from being gathered.
“The potential for contamination was noted after the firm was notified by the Georgia Department of Agriculture when a sample of a single 3-pound bag of the product was collected and tested positive for Salmonella,” the company press release says.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and arguably the most respected doctor […]
Americans may have less money to spend, but what they have, they appear to be spending on their dogs and more notably, on pet health insurance, a relatively small but exponentially growing market as Americans discover that their dog’s health insurance policy can be better than any policy the human members of their families have access to….
As of August 13, thirteen dogs in the United States have been confirmed to be infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus […]
A class action suit against sellers of prescription pet food (including Mars, Hill’s, Purina, two veterinary hospital networks, and retailer Petsmart) that was filed by six California dog and cat owners in 2016 was revived by a federal court last week, overturning a district court ruling. The claims are based on California consumer protection laws.
Asked about the enforcement process and how the Board implements its orders, Cave explained, “Because California is a huge state, the [VMB] can’t be everywhere at all times.” Cave added that if a person is aware of a veterinarian who is operating on a revoked license, that person should file a complaint as a way of alerting the [Vet Board] to the possible violation. “And, then, what the Board has at their disposal is either to send out an inspector or, at the Department of Consumer Affairs, we have our own law enforcement unit. They’re called the Division of Investigation (DOI). They’re actually peace officers, but they’re under DCA.” Cave says these officers are able to set up undercover sting operations depending on the severity. “If the board is tipped off, then they definitely move on those quickly.”