Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Really though, I was skimming through some of these posts, on here and on other sites, and am just terribly disappointed by the general misconceptions there are regarding vets and nutrition! To clarify: I am a current veterinary student, and have also worked in 3 separate clinics (including 1 large and 2 small animal) for 12 years, so that is my background.
Regarding nutrition classes: all school are different with different requirements, so I can only speak for my own. At my school (in the States), we are required to take 2 nutrition courses. There is a 3rd available that is an elective. It is not taught by food representatives. It is taught by a professor who has more letters behind his last name than most (including a Bachelors in animal nutrition, DVM, Ph.D. in nutrition, and board certification in nutrition). He has active research in nutrition focusing on small animal, as well as numerous publications in peer reviewed journals. Never, ever has any food rep taught even a portion of a single class. That would NEVER be allowed. Food reps ARE allowed to come on campus and host lunch seminars, in which students are invited, but not required or even encouraged to attend. These seminars exist to educate and (of course) promote their products.
No vet that I have ever worked for has EVER received a "kickback" for carrying/selling a prescription diet. They carry these diets because they believe it to be the best for specific conditions based on available research and have had success with it in the past.
To think that vets are idiots because of the diets they promote is laughable. Vet school is extremely difficult to get in to and only top students get in. To think that we are able to complete the rigors of vet school only to be absolute morons when it comes to nutrition because we don't skim the internet for some stay-at-home mom's version of pet nutrition is again, laughable.
The are claims that vets are only out to make money is completely false. For the amount of schooling we put in, we are among the lowest paid professions. Anyone in it "just for the money" would be in a different field. Rest assured, we all love animals and have their best interest in mind!
Thanks for the insight. I'd agree that if one wants to become rich, veterinary science is not exactly the way to go about it. Seems like vets receive and are required to learn far more about nutrition than MDs.
One thing I've always wondered about, is why is Science Diet in virtually every vet's office (the ones I've been in, in several different states)? It can't be the only decent dog food out there, nor is it likely the very best. Do you agree?
It doesn't necessarily have to be a "kickback", but when a business promotes a certain line of foods above others, don't they receive some sort of compensation for that?
Just wondering, because when Science Diet has been suggested to me, for one reason or another, I always question if there's another brand which is comparable, 'organic', cheaper or even more expensive. The answers have always been in the affirmative and I've been thankful for that. But I am also very picky about the vets I take my dogs to ~
Congrats on getting into school and your chosen field!
My guess as to why Prescription Diet and Purina prescription diets are found almost ubiquitously in different clinics- as far as I am aware, they are the only big companies that research diets for specific conditions (colitis, food allergies, renal disease, etc). There is research available that shows the efficacy of these foods given these specific conditions, which is why vets promote them. If any of my pets had a disease condition in which I thought they would benefit from eating these diets, they certainly would be eating them
In terms of Science Diet, neither of the vets I have worked for specifically promoted this brand, so I couldn't answer that question If they are carrying Science Diet and they are promoting it, they would make a profit by selling it, but they do not receive any additional kickbacks from the company.
My *personal* opinion on Science Diet. I don't feed it. I feed ProPlan and have had good results with my pets. Nutrition is such a funny thing. It's so individualized. Some dogs can thrive on a cheap dog food and others will develop cancer at a young age on the highest quality diet available. I think that people should feed the best food that they can afford.
School is different than when you go into practice and no one says that vets are stupid, but they focus on many other things and food is often the last priority. Also, keep in mind that most of the vets the majority of pet owners go to are not recent grads. In fact, I don't know of any recent grad that has their own practice. They work in the trenches so to speak the first few years, maybe at an E-Vet, etc. It is great that the education may be changing, but my BIL graduated a couple years ago from the top rated school and did not receive much in the way of nutrition - just the basics - the cliff notes version and attended seminars from the big companies.
Vet school isn't cheap and the kickbacks you get for selling a big companies food is quite lucrative. The doctors who teach the nutrition classes can be someone who is actually well versed in nutrition, but more often than not they also get representatives from food companies to come in. Why? Because they provide the school funding. Money does make the world go round. At the veterinary schools I am familiar with, I can tell you that the majority of their nutrition educators believe that Science Diet is a decent food. In some cases, that could be correct as some of the prescription diets no matter how horrible they are for average dogs can help some dogs with interesting issues. But, there are a lot of veterinary schools that are now going the homeopathic, natural, and organic route. The top veterinary school in the U.S. actually has a very educated Doctor that is very much pro-raw food diets for dogs and cats. They developed that knowledge on their own and with the experience of their own pets - not by who was bankrolling the programs.
Vet School is a long process and you are just in the beginning stages...it doesn't matter what school you go to. You will be influenced by the big food companies at some point. It is just how things go. But, hopefully you are one to do your own research, go to seminars taught by Dr. Jean Dodds, Dr. Lisa Pierson and others so that you become a vet that is conservative rather than driven by the deals given by drug manufacturers, and food companies.
BTW, Purina, Mars and Procter & Gamble actually do very little research regarding health conditions. Their research mostly involves your average dog and they do the same things over and over. The prescription diets are not based on new findings but rather findings from 10+ years ago. The philosophy in the food industry is if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Putting corn and other fillers in their food only ups their profit ratio allowing them to put their products in vet offices, with rescues, and shelters. Because the chances that someone adopting from one of those locations getting a dog with that brand of food and sticking with it is pretty high.
When you have over 100K in debt from school, try convincing me that you would not be happy to provide those products to your clients to pay off loans. I am sure that if Champion, and Nature's Variety could afford to bankroll programs that they would also be on campus but they can't even visit because the big 3 dominate that.
Good Luck with your Education! It is a very long four years!
Really though, I was skimming through some of these posts, on here and on other sites, and am just terribly disappointed by the general misconceptions there are regarding vets and nutrition! To clarify: I am a current veterinary student, and have also worked in 3 separate clinics (including 1 large and 2 small animal) for 12 years, so that is my background.
Regarding nutrition classes: all school are different with different requirements, so I can only speak for my own. At my school (in the States), we are required to take 2 nutrition courses. There is a 3rd available that is an elective. It is not taught by food representatives. It is taught by a professor who has more letters behind his last name than most (including a Bachelors in animal nutrition, DVM, Ph.D. in nutrition, and board certification in nutrition). He has active research in nutrition focusing on small animal, as well as numerous publications in peer reviewed journals. Never, ever has any food rep taught even a portion of a single class. That would NEVER be allowed. Food reps ARE allowed to come on campus and host lunch seminars, in which students are invited, but not required or even encouraged to attend. These seminars exist to educate and (of course) promote their products.
No vet that I have ever worked for has EVER received a "kickback" for carrying/selling a prescription diet. They carry these diets because they believe it to be the best for specific conditions based on available research and have had success with it in the past.
To think that vets are idiots because of the diets they promote is laughable. Vet school is extremely difficult to get in to and only top students get in. To think that we are able to complete the rigors of vet school only to be absolute morons when it comes to nutrition because we don't skim the internet for some stay-at-home mom's version of pet nutrition is again, laughable.
The are claims that vets are only out to make money is completely false. For the amount of schooling we put in, we are among the lowest paid professions. Anyone in it "just for the money" would be in a different field. Rest assured, we all love animals and have their best interest in mind!
Just had to get that off my chest!
Many veterinary students (and students of other disciplines in general) are very naive and idealistic and have absolutely no idea of what it is like to be a working veterinarian. They often experience a nasty reality check once they actually begin practicing.
No one has ever stated that veterinarians recommend certain brands b/c they are unintelligent or not well-trained. Rather, many recommend it b/c they do receive a kickback, which helps to keep their business afloat. As another poster stated, veterinarians are not usually millionaires; they need to be realistic about owning or being part of a practice, which, at the end of the day, is a business, just like a hospital. Sure, there are probably some vets who aren't receiving kickbacks for recommending such foods. But then, the question is, why--if you are a licensed medical practicioner--would you recommend such a food to a pet owner?
It is very difficult to justify the recommendation of pet foods that--even according to the FDA--contain the toxic remains of euthanized animals (i.e. animal fat preserved with mixed tocopherols), a standard ingredient in many commercial dog foods that vets have been recommending for years (and still recommend). Even if it is "perfectly safe," I do not know any pet owner that isn't unsettled by such an ingredient in pet food. Even if it is successful in treating a "certain condition," that doesn't mean that it should exist or be recommended to a pet owner. I find it very disappointing that these are the [very low] standards of veterinary professionals.
Kickback or no kickback, many of us take issue with being recommended products that are harmful to ourselves or our pets or that contain ingredients that, quite frankly, food should not contain.
What you are seeing right now is pet owners noticing that many "perfectly good" foods are causing health issues with their pets. This is something that has been occurring for quite some time with human as well as pet foods. Foods, prescriptions and treatments that were once thought to be "perfectly safe" were recommended by doctors b/c they were based on "research"--research that was then proven to be wrong (but that a lot of people, especially those suffering the ill effects, had already noticed) by yet more research.
I advise anyone in veterinary school to realize that the veterinary practices in this country are not infallible, and that many posters on this forum have first-hand experience successfully treating pet illnesses through methods that they did not learn in veterinary school but that, b/c they are not part of extensive research funded by a thinktank, are not recognized by the veterinary community. Veterinarians and veterinary students would be wise to listen to the experiences of these pet owners.
I can even fournish my own example of the fallibility of the veterinary establishment: I have a purebred GSD that I was told should be altered to prevent diseases, etc. This was ten years ago. I never spayed her b/c I felt uncomfortable about it; it wasn't based on reason or tons of research (b/c the research stated that "all altered animals live longer, etc") but, rather, it was based on instinct. Cut to ten years later when my vet informs me that "the research now shows that large breed females are better off not being altered b/c altering can affect their immune systems, leading to many cancers." I am sure that vets who were prescribing such procedures meant well in their recommendations, that they actually believed in what they were recommending. But it is naive to also not acknowledge that the veterinary community made a lot of money off of those surgeries as well as the treatments for animals that eventually became sick based on their initial recommendations. In short, veterinarians actually benefitted from improper recommendations. Whether they actually meant to or not is sort of a moot point for the people who ended up (and still wind up) spending thousands of dollars on veterinary care for their beloved pets based on research and recommendations that are later proven to be faulted.
School is different than when you go into practice and no one says that vets are stupid, but they focus on many other things and food is often the last priority. Also, keep in mind that most of the vets the majority of pet owners go to are not recent grads. In fact, I don't know of any recent grad that has their own practice. They work in the trenches so to speak the first few years, maybe at an E-Vet, etc. It is great that the education may be changing, but my BIL graduated a couple years ago from the top rated school and did not receive much in the way of nutrition - just the basics - the cliff notes version and attended seminars from the big companies.
What top rated school is that? And like I said, I cannot comment on other school's coursework in regards to nutrition, only my own.
Quote:
Vet school isn't cheap and the kickbacks you get for selling a big companies food is quite lucrative.
There are no kickbacks. There is obviously a profit made on food sold. Vets are a business and do need to make a profit
Quote:
The doctors who teach the nutrition classes can be someone who is actually well versed in nutrition, but more often than not they also get representatives from food companies to come in. Why? Because they provide the school funding. Money does make the world go round.
I just stated, food reps DO NOT teach our courses. Not even a single lecture hour. Not one. Ever. They also DO NOT fund the school. My tuition is a combination of my personal loans + the percentage the state funds. Do food companies fund some of the nutritional studies that go on at the school? Yes.
Quote:
At the veterinary schools I am familiar with, I can tell you that the majority of their nutrition educators believe that Science Diet is a decent food. In some cases, that could be correct as some of the prescription diets no matter how horrible they are for average dogs can help some dogs with interesting issues. But, there are a lot of veterinary schools that are now going the homeopathic, natural, and organic route.
No vet schools' curriculum promotes homeopathy. There are holistic clubs on campuses which may address homeopathy, but veterinary coursework promotes evidence based medicine, of which there is none for homeopathy.
Quote:
The top veterinary school in the U.S. actually has a very educated Doctor that is very much pro-raw food diets for dogs and cats. They developed that knowledge on their own and with the experience of their own pets - not by who was bankrolling the programs.
What school and doctor is that?
Quote:
Vet School is a long process and you are just in the beginning stages...it doesn't matter what school you go to.
I'm actually in my third year, about to start clinics Yay!
Quote:
You will be influenced by the big food companies at some point. It is just how things go.
Like I said, they have been on campus and hosted a number of lunch seminars in which we are invited to attend. This is the time they promote their products. This is not part of the curriculum, and attendance is not required or encouraged. It is simply available.
Quote:
But, hopefully you are one to do your own research, go to seminars taught by Dr. Jean Dodds, Dr. Lisa Pierson and others so that you become a vet that is conservative rather than driven by the deals given by drug manufacturers, and food companies.
I have heard of Dodds, but am not familiar enough with her to have an opinion one way or another. I have not heard of Pierson.
Quote:
BTW, Purina, Mars and Procter & Gamble actually do very little research regarding health conditions.
They do TONS of research. A VERY high percentage of their income goes to research and studies.
Quote:
Their research mostly involves your average dog and they do the same things over and over.
What things?
Quote:
The prescription diets are not based on new findings but rather findings from 10+ years ago.
A quick search of pubmed would indicate the high volume of recent studies to disprove that.
Quote:
The philosophy in the food industry is if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Putting corn and other fillers in their food only ups their profit ratio allowing them to put their products in vet offices, with rescues, and shelters. Because the chances that someone adopting from one of those locations getting a dog with that brand of food and sticking with it is pretty high.
I agree, except that corn is simply a filler. It has a rather high nutrient profile. I am not saying I think corn is an all star ingredient, but to discount it as simply filler is dishonest.
Quote:
When you have over 100K in debt from school, try convincing me that you would not be happy to provide those products to your clients to pay off loans. I am sure that if Champion, and Nature's Variety could afford to bankroll programs that they would also be on campus but they can't even visit because the big 3 dominate that.
Good Luck with your Education! It is a very long four years!
Good thing I'm almost done Although I have to say, it has gone fast!
Many veterinary students (and students of other disciplines in general) are very naive and idealistic and have absolutely no idea of what it is like to be a working veterinarian. They often experience a nasty reality check once they actually begin practicing.
This is extremely false. A very high weight is placed upon those applicants that have extensive experience working in a clinical practice. It is almost unheard of to be admitted to any veterinary school without hundreds, and often thousands of hours working directly with practicing veterinarians. As I noted, I have personally worked in 1 large animal and 2 large animal practices over the last 12 years. I am quite well aware of what I am getting in to Keep in mind those are only PAYING jobs, and does not include hours spent volunteering and shadowing.
Quote:
No one has ever stated that veterinarians recommend certain brands b/c they are unintelligent or not well-trained. Rather, many recommend it b/c they do receive a kickback, which helps to keep their business afloat. As another poster stated, veterinarians are not usually millionaires; they need to be realistic about owning or being part of a practice, which, at the end of the day, is a business, just like a hospital. Sure, there are probably some vets who aren't receiving kickbacks for recommending such foods. But then, the question is, why--if you are a licensed medical practicioner--would you recommend such a food to a pet owner?
I imagine because they have had success with those brands that they are carrying. And yes, they do receive a profit by selling those brands that they carry, but no additional "kickbacks."
Quote:
It is very difficult to justify the recommendation of pet foods that--even according to the FDA--contain the toxic remains of euthanized animals (i.e. animal fat preserved with mixed tocopherols), a standard ingredient in many commercial dog foods that vets have been recommending for years (and still recommend). Even if it is "perfectly safe," I do not know any pet owner that isn't unsettled by such an ingredient in pet food. Even if it is successful in treating a "certain condition," that doesn't mean that it should exist or be recommended to a pet owner. I find it very disappointing that these are the [very low] standards of veterinary professionals.
Oh good lord. This rumor has of euthanized dogs and cats ending up in dog/cat food is completely false. And just that- a rumor.
Quote:
What you are seeing right now is pet owners noticing that many "perfectly good" foods are causing health issues with their pets.
Such as?
Quote:
This is something that has been occurring for quite some time with human as well as pet foods. Foods, prescriptions and treatments that were once thought to be "perfectly safe" were recommended by doctors b/c they were based on "research"--research that was then proven to be wrong (but that a lot of people, especially those suffering the ill effects, had already noticed) by yet more research.
Yes, medicine makes mistakes. I am the first to admit. However, all we can do is offer our expertise based on the studies and information we have available.
Quote:
I advise anyone in veterinary school to realize that the veterinary practices in this country are not infallible, and that many posters on this forum have first-hand experience successfully treating pet illnesses through methods that they did not learn in veterinary school but that, b/c they are not part of extensive research funded by a thinktank, are not recognized by the veterinary community. Veterinarians and veterinary students would be wise to listen to the experiences of these pet owners.
Anedotal evidence is not good evidence. It has too many uncontrolled variables and subjectivity.
Quote:
I can even fournish my own example of the fallibility of the veterinary establishment: I have a purebred GSD that I was told should be altered to prevent diseases, etc. This was ten years ago. I never spayed her b/c I felt uncomfortable about it; it wasn't based on reason or tons of research (b/c the research stated that "all altered animals live longer, etc") but, rather, it was based on instinct. Cut to ten years later when my vet informs me that "the research now shows that large breed females are better off not being altered b/c altering can affect their immune systems, leading to many cancers." I am sure that vets who were prescribing such procedures meant well in their recommendations, that they actually believed in what they were recommending. But it is naive to also not acknowledge that the veterinary community made a lot of money off of those surgeries as well as the treatments for animals that eventually became sick based on their initial recommendations. In short, veterinarians actually benefitted from improper recommendations. Whether they actually meant to or not is sort of a moot point for the people who ended up (and still wind up) spending thousands of dollars on veterinary care for their beloved pets based on research and recommendations that are later proven to be faulted.
There are pros and cons to spaying and neutering. It may help reduce risk of some diseases and increase risk of others. Owners should be well informed before making that decision, I agree! As for myself, all of my pets are spayed and neutered and I am comfortable with that decision, and I find them to be happy, healthy, well adjusted pets.
I have seen new vets be a little intimidated doing large animal work.
Totally agree! Luckily I have a strong equestrian background and have worked at a large animal clinic so I feel comfortable with horses. Cattle on the other hand.......
Quote:
I would also encourage anyone in vet school to take some business classes.
Yes! Our curriculum does incorporate some business classes but I am actually considering taking some additional coursework post graduation.
To think that vets are idiots because of the diets they promote is laughable. Vet school is extremely difficult to get in to and only top students get in. To think that we are able to complete the rigors of vet school only to be absolute morons when it comes to nutrition because we don't skim the internet for some stay-at-home mom's version of pet nutrition is again, laughable.
Here is the issue people have with a percentage of the veterinary profession. All that education, and they are somehow unaware of the anatomies of the species they've not only studied, but examine every day?
Kindly explain how a cat, for instance, is supposed to chew and digest cereal when they don't even have teeth which grind? (I won't even get into the carbohydrate issue, nor their digestive capabilities, for merely looking into one's mouth should sufficiently explain things.)
Harvard Law student (now a practicing Lawyer) NOT a "stay at home mom"
Neither are these renowned veterinarians who have had countless patients "miraculously" recover/be cured merely by telling the clients to start feeding them species-appropriate diets.
Home | Diabetic Cat Care (DO check out the success stories right on the main page -- oh yes, they ARE told by stay at home moms and laypeople just like us.)
Conflicts Of Interest In The Veterinary Profession And The Origin Of (http://www.twobitdog.com/DrFox/specialreport_Article.aspx?ID=f78aec92-0b02-47f3-9575-cb1778647ad5 - broken link) Dr. M.W. Fox
I wised up some years ago when I wondered why my chronically ailing dog should be eating a "prescribed" diet of corn, peanut hulls, soybean, soy mill run, soy...... ethoxyquin, BHT...
Funny how his chronic yeast infections "magically" disappeared when I learned corn, soy and all the other fillers were NOT a suitable diet for a canine.
How did I learn all this? Thanks to VETERINARIANS, such as the above linked, with webpages and books chock full of facts.
While your university may not be harnessed by the almighty influence of the generous funding provided by these big conglomerates, you are not going to convince people who have learned it all the hard way that veterinarians in general -- not all of course, but an undeniable percentage -- have a clue when it comes to nutrition. Especially when an animal is not even capable of chewing something which a veterinarian is "prescribing" it be fed (which should explain why "puking" and "housecat" are synonymous.)
Veterinarians are DOCTORS and that is all I, for one, expect them to be. There are Holistic veterinarians who go on to focus on nutrition; They should be referred to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If they are carrying Science Diet and they are promoting it, they would make a profit by selling it, but they do not receive any additional kickbacks from the company. 
Yay!
Although I have to say, it has gone fast!
