In a March 20 email to veterinarians, Hill’s Pet Food expanded its recall of certain canned dog foods found to contain excess vitamin D. The following notice from the company was provided to TruthaboutPetFood.com by a veterinarian friend:

“Following the recall, we conducted a detailed review of our canned dog foods. As we had expected, that review confirmed that the issue is isolated to the same vitamin premix used in canned dog foods and limited to specific production lots. However, our review did determine that there were additional products affected by that vitamin premix, and it is for that reason that we are expanding the recall. No dry foods, cat foods or treats are affected. ...

“We understand that this recall has caused pet parents considerable concern and that the well-being of their pets may have been affected. We are also aware of the disruption and difficulty that this has caused you and your staff. We have addressed the issues that caused this recall, and we are working to make this right.

“We have expanded the operating hours of our Veterinary Consultation Service and opened our consumer call center to 7 days a week. We will pay for the diagnostic screening for hypervitaminosis D for any pet consuming impacted food. We will pay for continued diagnostic testing for pets with elevated vitamin D levels until they are back to normal. We will reimburse pet parents for medical treatment for an affected pet eating impacted food.”

Customers wanting information about reimbursement should visit HillsVet.com/RecallResources.

DEAR DR. FOX: As the grandson of a cattle rancher, and with a father who taught me how to hunt and trap, it seems like you have it out for us.

The vets we see to care for our two dogs are not like you, or at least they don’t write stuff about animal rights. I admit some of your vet advice they agree with, but I don’t agree with you using your Animal Doctor column as a soapbox for your radical animal liberation and anti-business conservation and environment protection. Hunters and farmers are conservationists, after all -- otherwise there would be no ducks and deer left to hunt and no food on our tables. -- G.Z., Baytown, Texas

DEAR G.Z.: I could have written your letter myself because I am deeply aware of the divide between “us” and “them.” But you and I are on the same page, surely, for the love we have for our children, for the animals in our lives and for the “great outdoors.” Yet there is a gap between us in where we draw the line when it comes to killing other animals and how we should best farm and fish so as not to harm the planet any further.

It is time for us all to bridge the great divide that is widening every day, globally, between the rich and the poor, inviting conflicts over dwindling resources and polluting and destroying the great outdoors.

The essay about our divided cultural attitude toward wolves, “A Nation Divided: Lupophobia, Wolf Protection or Managed Slaughter,” posted on my website (drfoxonehealth.com), may help you see both sides. Then dedicate your life as best you can to the common good. For me, in particular through this column, that means helping maximize the quality of life for companion animals and all creatures great and small that are affected by our choices.

I received this relevant statement from a longtime associate: a holistic medical practitioner, acupuncturist, and one of only two veterinarians in the country trained and licensed to work on both people and animals -- and, like you, from a farming and ranching family. It reads as follows:

“How do we get people thinking holistically and ecologically vs. the typical Western way, whether in medicine, nutrition, agriculture or wildlife management? We are all connected from the soil on up, and the health of one affects the other. My grandfather farmer understood this. ... Some just can’t see interconnectedness. It is a mystery to me. I can’t understand how they can’t understand. My response would probably be to let kids taste soils, run in the woods and wild grasses, be quiet and learn. Then come home to a rescued dog or cat or two.”

(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.)

Chytridiomycosis, a disease caused by chytrid fungi, has caused the extinction of 90 species of frogs and other amphibians over the past 50 years, according to researchers from a number of worldwide universities.

The pathogen has caused huge losses of 501 species of amphibians, including the 90 extinctions and 124 other species whose populations have declined by more than 90 percent, according to a report by an international group of scientists published in the March 29 edition of the journal Science (“Amphibian fungal panzootic causes catastrophic and ongoing loss of biodiversity”). See also “Amphibian ‘apocalypse’ caused by most destructive pathogen ever” (National Geographic, March 28).

The highly contagious fungus eats away the amphibians’ skin. Unable to properly respire, they die from cardiac arrest. Amphibians that are resistant to it become carriers, making it nearly impossible to eradicate.

In my opinion, and from a One Health veterinary perspective, this disease is a symptom of frog and salamander immune system dysfunction, enabling this fungus to spread rapidly under the facilitative influence of the lucrative world trade in exotic pets. Amphibians are extremely popular as pets, but some owners later release the animals, having lost interest, or the animals escape and infect indigenous species.

Their immune and reproductive systems have been damaged by agricultural petrochemical insecticides. These and other chemicals are in the rain, acidified with carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, that falls ever more unpredictably on wetlands and jungle habitats. The documented disappearance of insects due to similar human causes means many insectivorous amphibians are malnourished or starving. The bats of North America dying from white nose fungal disease are casualties of similar causes.

These losses mean the web of life in many ecosystems, the natural biodiversity, is being destroyed. In the absence of adequate biodiversity controls -- namely bats, toads and frogs -- harmful insects such as mosquitoes and ticks proliferate.

The declining quality of air, water and habitats around the world must be addressed, along with climate change, for our own sakes as well as the frogs and salamanders.

Ironically, an unrelated drug-resistant fungus, Candida auris, is now infecting people around the world. The drug resistance found in several strains has been linked with the global application of fungicides to various crops. (“A mysterious infection, spanning the globe in a climate of secrecy,” New York Times, April 7). Remember: “As ye sow, so shall ye reap.”

DEAR DR. FOX: I have a wonderful and loving 12-year-old Weimaraner, who unfortunately has many fatty tumors on his body. Our veterinarian indicated that this is a common problem with this breed of dogs.

Is there anything I could have done to prevent these tumors from developing? Is it too late to correct the problem now? -- V.B., Palm Beach County, Florida

DEAR V.B.: These fatty growths, called lipomas, are not cancerous, but they can become numerous and large in certain breeds. They can require surgical removal when they cause discomfort, interfere with the dog’s range of motion and mobility, or become ulcerated or infected.

There are various theories as to why dogs develop these tumors, including genetic/breed susceptibility, metabolic syndrome with too much starch in the diet, neutering, and lack of regular physical activity.

Pending a pre-surgical risk evaluation, your dog may be in good enough condition for surgery. But if none of the growths are causing any discomfort, and it is only for cosmetic reasons, I would not accept the risk of surgical removal considering your dog’s age.

HOW OWNER PERSONALITY AFFECTS PET HEALTH

Research shows that pets and their owners become more similar over time, and the finding could be used to improve animal welfare and veterinary care, write professors Paul McGreevy and Pauleen Bennett. Owner personality affects how pets are treated and how frequently they receive veterinary care.

“Each clinical case must now be understood in the context of the human background baggage that enters the consultation room,” they write. (The Conversation, March 25)

(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.)

Sun bears can exactly mimic each other’s facial expressions, according to research by Dr. Marina Davila-Ross and Ph.D. candidate Derry Taylor, both at the University of Portsmouth. These findings, published in Scientific Reports, “(cast) doubt on humans’ and other primates’ supremacy at this subtle form of communication,” reads a report on phys.org. (For more, search the site for “facial mimicry.”)

The researchers found that “bears can use facial expressions to communicate with others in a similar way to humans and apes, strongly suggesting other mammals might also be masters of this complex social skill and, in addition, have a degree of social sensitivity,” said the report.

Dr. Davila-Ross said, “Mimicking the facial expressions of others in exact ways is one of the pillars of human communication,” adding that previously, only humans and great apes were “known to show such complexity in their facial mimicry.”

In certain countries, these intelligent bears are abused and exploited by being brutally declawed and defanged, then made to “dance” with a rope tied to a ring in their noses. These practices should be outlawed, and the bears living alone in captivity should be liberated into proper habitats to enjoy some quality of life -- if not returned to the wild.

DEAR DR. FOX: We saw your column, “A Shameful Drug Company,” which ran in the Tulsa World on March 26 and other newspapers over the previous days.

We at Zoetis want you to know that we take the issue of antibiotic resistance very seriously, and support the responsible use of antibiotic medicines in animals and in people. We recognize that animal and human health are interdependent and, therefore, advocate for taking a One Health approach to the responsible use of antibiotics across human and veterinary medicine. We believe that veterinary professionals should be involved in decisions about the use of antibiotic medicines in animals to protect animal and human health, to assure the safety of the food supply and to help reduce the risk of resistance.

We recognize that there are substantial differences in livestock production systems and degrees of food security in countries throughout the world, and that an efficient food production system will be required to continue feeding a growing world population.

Each country enacts regulations appropriate for their market needs and standards, and we work with the national regulatory authorities in international countries, including India, to understand, respect and comply with local regulatory interpretation and oversight. We are committed to working with regulatory authorities, veterinary professionals and livestock producers in developing countries such as India to help advance the understanding and implementation of sustainable production systems and practices with a goal of raising healthy animals.

We understand that the Indian authorities are in the process of reviewing the laws that regulate the use of antibiotics in medical feed additives to be given to animals. In parallel, Zoetis is currently reviewing our company’s medicated feed additive product regulatory claims. -- Elinore White, senior director of corporate communications, Zoetis

DEAR E.W.: Your response is appreciated. Having worked in India, I can attest to the difficulties that can arise due to corruption and disinformation, and sympathize to a degree with your company’s progress there.

You state that your company “advocates a One Health approach to the responsible use of antibiotic medicines across human and veterinary medicine.” But in my professional opinion, you have failed to act responsibly because of the cross-species, farmed-animal-to-human risk of antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections, especially when the antibiotics are sold in high volume to put into farmed-animal feed to promote growth.

When I gave the keynote address in 1994 to the Indian Veterinary Academy, I was shown data at the Veterinary College in Hisar of increasing antibiotic resistance in calves because of the overuse of antibiotics. That was 25 years ago! Enough.

To readers: I must add that India is the second-largest exporter of beef in the world, and also exports many dairy products and other animal products for human consumption in the U.S., Europe and many other countries. This increases the risk of widespread dissemination of “superbugs” -- bacteria from farmed animals resistant to most, if not all, antibiotics -- that cause food poisoning with fatal organ failure.

(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.)