DEAR READERS: The journal Emerging Infectious Diseases published an article last fall on cats and COVID-19. Researchers reported that serum samples from cats sent to a veterinary diagnostic lab for conditions unrelated to COVID-19 revealed SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence levels similar to those of people in the same geographic areas. This suggested that humans transmitted the virus to the cats. (Full story: News Medical, Oct. 27)

This summer, the same journal reports that people who share a bed with, cuddle and kiss cats and dogs while sick with COVID-19 are more likely to pass the disease to their pets. The study's lead author, professor Dorothee Bienzle from the University of Guelph, said the results suggest that cats have a higher rate of COVID-19 infection than dogs. She added that the team was surprised by the high prevalence of COVID-19 antibodies in cats: "We did not expect quite that many," she said. "Over half of the cats that live in a household with a person who had COVID had antibodies. That's very high." (Full story: The Globe and Mail, June 26)

This timely study confirms what I consistently advocate, as do others with veterinary, medical and scientific backgrounds and an understanding of epidemiology and zoonoses: All owned cats should be contained or enclosed and not be allowed to go off their owners' property. This would help prevent local wildlife and stray and feral cats from being infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus and becoming a public health risk as reservoirs of potential infection for years to come.

Also, cats infected by humans with this virus could pass on the infection to people, as has happened in Thailand. Virologists have established that a cat belonging to a COVID-19 positive family sneezed in the face of a veterinarian testing the cat for this disease, and that the doctor soon tested positive. Such cases of cat-to-human transmission are probably rare, and researchers emphasize that people should care for their infected cats -- taking extra precautions when handling them -- and not abandon them.

Another viral complication to be aware of is myocarditis. Amid the surge in COVID-19 cases late last year, veterinarians in the U.K. saw a higher-than-usual number of dogs and cats with depression, lethargy, poor appetite, abnormal heart rhythm and fluid in the lungs, all of which are signs of myocarditis. The owners of many pets with confirmed myocarditis seen at The Ralph Veterinary Referral Centre had confirmed or suspected COVID-19. Six of 11 animals tested positive for the SARS-CoV-2 alpha variant or antibodies to the virus, researchers reported in Veterinary Record. (Full story: NBC News, Nov. 5)

DEAR DR. FOX: What is your opinion of Alley Cat Allies? I deal with stray and feral cats in my neighborhood constantly, and the TNR (trap, neuter, release) activities by some resident volunteers only make matters worse. -- J.H., Minneapolis

DEAR J.H.: The propaganda of Alley Cat Allies is well known, as are their activities. They are absurd from a science-based perspective, with regard to cats carrying diseases transmissible to humans, and from an ecological perspective of feral cat colonies' impact on wildlife. Cats outdoors are super-predators that, even after being fed by humans, will kill birds and small mammals in their domain.

The only ethically and biologically acceptable feral cat colonies are isolated from all wildlife, and their feline residents must be fed regularly by volunteers, provided with shelter, neutered, vaccinated and given veterinary care as needed. Few such colonies meet these basic standards of cat welfare, too often being open to other free-roaming, diseased and unneutered cats. These insufficient facilities then suffer the consequences of fights, infection and territorial competition.

Alley Cat Allies has, without local veterinary support and supervision, become a cult of well-meaning but misguided cat lovers. Human sentiment leads to the avoidable suffering of cats living outdoors and the wild animals who fall prey to 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: For years, I have ranted and raged against people -- including too many veterinarians -- using toxic insecticidal products on pets to kill fleas and ticks. These products often cause seizures or otherwise sicken the poor animals, and sometimes even kill them. (For details, see my past articles: drfoxonehealth.com/post/companion-animals-harmed-by-pesticides and drfoxonehealth.com/post/preventing-fleas-ticks-and-mosquitoes.)

Now, at last, we are seeing our government address this issue. The House Committee on Oversight and Reform's Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy just released a major report entitled, "Seresto Flea and Tick Collars: Examining Why a Product Linked to More Than 2,500 Pet Deaths Remains on the Market."

I commend all involved in producing this well-referenced report. I am presenting its executive summary and another excerpt below, and urge all to read the full document at oversight.house.gov.

OVERSIGHT SERESTO REPORT: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This staff report presents the findings of a 16-month investigation by the Committee on Oversight and Reform's Subcommittee on Economic and Consumer Policy into the safety of the Seresto flea and tick collar that contains the insecticides flumethrin 4.5% and imidacloprid 10.0%. Bayer Animal Health -- the original owner and manufacturer of the collar -- and Elanco Animal Health, which purchased Bayer Animal Health in 2020, have sold millions of Seresto collars since the product entered the market in 2013. Pet owners embraced the convenience of the eight-month flea and tick protection offered by the collar -- for under $70 -- when many other flea and tick treatments must be reapplied monthly.

In March 2021, a report from USA Today revealed that, as of June 2020, there had been more than 75,000 incidents -- what the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calls unexpected effects from the use of a pesticide -- and approximately 1,700 pet deaths linked to the Seresto collar. Since the USA Today report was published, the reported numbers have increased to more than 98,000 incidents and 2,500 pet deaths.

The Subcommittee's investigation found that EPA knew about the dangers posed by the collar -- and the many consumer complaints about the collars -- for several years yet failed to take action.

OVERSIGHT SERESTO REPORT: NOTABLE EXCERPT

EPA learned in 2016 that the Seresto collar was deemed too dangerous to be sold in Canada. PMRA's (Canada's Pest Management Regulatory Agency's) Seresto report -- which EPA received in July 2016 and which has not been made public prior to this Report -- contained a number of striking findings. PMRA closely reviewed 961 "Death and Major" pet incidents using enhanced data provided by Bayer, and found that the Seresto collar probably or possibly caused 737 -- or 77% -- of them. More broadly, PMRA expressed great concern over the "number and severity" of animal incidents linked to the Seresto collar. The PMRA report revealed that from 2012 through 2015, there were over 19,000 reported pet incidents in the United States, including 381 deaths and 1,342 major incidents.

DR. FOX HERE: It is notable that Elanco's recombinant bovine growth hormone, injected widely in America's dairy cows, has been banned in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan and all 27 nations of the European Union for reasons of consumer safety and cow health and welfare. Additionally, Elanco's branded ractopamine hydrochloride products -- Paylean for pigs and Optaflexx for beef cattle -- are not approved or available in China. This is a psychotropic drug that causes stress and distress in animals. (Details at drfoxonehealth.com/post/pharmaceutical-cruelty-in-animal-farms-consumer-beware.)

DEAR DR. FOX: I recently found a medium-sized lump on the side of my dog's neck. She's an 11-year-old Shih Tzu mix. I took her to my vet and he suggested removing it, because after a needle aspiration, he determined it wasn't a cyst.

I'm very worried about the surgery, given the location of the lump and her age. Could you give me any suggestions on what to do? Her surgery is scheduled for next month. -- S.H., Charleston, South Carolina

DEAR S.H.: It is always distressing to find a possible cancerous growth on one's dog. The veterinarian is probably saving you money by not sending in a biopsy of the growth to determine if it is malignant or not. It may simply be a benign growth like a lipoma, a fatty tumor common in older dogs. But at least an X-ray of the lungs should be taken to see if there are signs of cancer spread, which would pose an anesthetic risk.

I am hopeful that you found this lump before such complications developed. If you closely follow the pre- and post-surgery instructions, all should go well for your canine companion.

Many dogs develop various cancers as they get older, which is just one reason an annual wellness examination is called for. This should include blood sampling for heartworm testing, as well as kidney and liver function. Ideally, older dogs should see the veterinarian twice yearly.

(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: My friend David O. Wiebers, M.D., professor emeritus of neurology at Mayo Clinic, co-authored an excellent article entitled “All Life Protection and Our Collective Future.” It was recently published in the journal Neuroepidemiology, and I present highlights below, as quoted in a news release about the article from the One Health Initiative.

Via onehealthinitiative.com:

"Climate change solutions must include changes in our food systems and in the way that we eat. 'Our global trajectory on factory farming is incompatible with the long-term survival of our species,' says lead author David O. Wiebers, M.D.

"Regarding human nutrition, the authors state, 'For the sake of humans, nonhumans and the Earth, there is a fundamental and urgent need for us to rapidly evolve toward eating forms of protein that are safer for humans, including a wide range of time-honored fundamental plant-derived food sources as well as the more recently developed plant-based meat/dairy and egg alternatives and cultured meat (produced by culturing animal cells).

"'Additional investment in plant-based agriculture to grow crops to feed humans -- rather than livestock for human consumption -- will feed far more people while utilizing far less land and water, allowing for the preservation of vital ecosystems for innumerable species. A recent University of Oxford study analyzed and valuated the health and climate change benefits of dietary change and concluded that a transition toward more plant-based diets that are in line with standard dietary guidelines could avoid 5.1 million human deaths per year and reduce food-related greenhouse gases by 29-70% by 2050.' ...

"The authors introduce the concept of All Life Protection and describe why it has now become clear that protecting all life forms is key to the survival of humankind: 'As physicians, we have a sacred obligation to protect the health and wellbeing of our collective patients. Given the profound interconnectedness of all life, it has become apparent that it is neither wise nor sufficient to approach our patients, or our world, from a purely human-centric point of reference. We call upon our colleagues and friends in these arenas to move beyond working in separate silos, to join forces in true interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary ways, and to help forge an All Life Protection movement, invoking a more advanced and inclusive concept.' ...

"They go on to say that in the absence of change, 'the coming decades will bring with them widespread environmental and agricultural devastation, massive famine, flooding, disease and warfare, with hundreds of millions of so-called climate refugees. All of this will be experienced in most of our lifetimes, and will become a dominant part of the lives of our collective children and grandchildren. Whether or not we can stop global warming is in our hands, and our collective future clearly depends upon the decisions that we are making now.'"

Dr. Fox here: I would add that the risk of dementia, now escalating, can be reduced by changing diets to include whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, nuts (especially walnuts), legumes and olive oil, and by selecting Organically Certified foods, since many pesticides have been linked to various forms of dementia and cancer. For more details, see this article by Devatha P. Nair: sentientmedia.org/factory-farmings-toxic-relationship-with-the-pesticide-industry.

Ideally, all industrial, commercial and consumer activities should accord with the physicians’ Hippocratic oath: “First, do no harm.”

DEAR DR. FOX: Our 14-year-old, 50-pound Lab, Bo, does not like me adding a tablespoon of turmeric and ginger to his food, as you have recommended in the past. Any simple ideas to get him to like the taste? -- D.D., Winston-Salem, North Carolina

DEAR D.D.: I should always advise, when suggesting dogs be given these and other beneficial supplements for various conditions, to put in a small pinch to begin with, mixed in with wet food. Sprinkling a little Parmesan cheese on top may also entice many dogs. Then slowly add more and more to the daily amount suggested. If there is diarrhea or any signs of discomfort, reduce the quantity.

Most supplements are best given with food to facilitate digestive uptake and minimize any possible stomach-lining irritation/inflammation.

If you dog still avoids food with a small amount of ginger and turmeric, put the powders into 250 mg capsules your pharmacy may provide, and give two such capsules of each before feeding your dog.

(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.)