DEAR READERS: Per a recent model, cuts to global development funding could lead to 9.4 million additional deaths in the next four years -- with about 2.5 million of those being children under age 5 -- than if funding had been maintained at 2023 levels. The study comes roughly one year after the U.S. Agency for International Development was wiped out by the Trump administration, compounded by cuts made by other top funders such as the United Kingdom, Germany and Canada.

"We should take the precise numbers with caution, but I think the overall conclusion is likely correct," said global-development researcher Lee Crawfurd. "People will die in large numbers." See "Impact of two decades of humanitarian and development assistance and the projected mortality consequences of current defunding to 2030" by A.F. da Silva et al., published in Lancet Global Health in February.

From a One Health perspective, it would be enlightened self-interest for more affluent countries to provide medical aid, food and fuel to poor communities, coupled with family planning resources. Doing so would not only prevent much human suffering, but also decrease the spread of communicable diseases. Some of these can come from wildlife being killed for food, and may pose a potential pandemic threat. For details, see my 2025 book "One Health: Veterinary, Ethical and Environmental Perspectives."

DEAR DR. FOX: When my dog Garbo was around 7 years old, blood tests showed he had elevated lipid levels. I was told that this was dangerous, and was advised to switch him to a prescription diet. However, I was also informed that this diet would likely disrupt the function of a different organ, and that it was essentially a matter of choosing which risk to accept.

I could not fully accept this explanation, and instead sought advice from a specialized pet food store. There, I was told that, given his lipid levels and other numbers, a prescription diet was not necessary. They said that simply improving and adjusting his diet would be sufficient.

Before all this, I was feeding Garbo the Potato and Fish formula from Japanese company Morinaga Milk Industry. I then transitioned him to a diet combining dry food with canned food, focusing on high-quality protein sources and rotating between fish and different meats -- an approach that closely reflects what you describe in your writing.

The result was striking: His blood values improved significantly. This experience made me acutely aware of how the authority of something being "veterinarian-prescribed" or labeled as a "therapeutic diet" can obscure the underlying issue. Rather than addressing the root causes or viewing the animal's health holistically, the focus often shifts too quickly to managing individual numbers through products.

In Japan, this problem is compounded by the fact that many pet owners judge food primarily by marketing phrases such as "made in Japan" or "breed-specific," without questioning the underlying formulation or philosophy. I strongly feel that this mindset -- and the structure behind it -- needs to be discussed more openly.

I appreciate your writings on this issue in your book "Not Fit for a Dog: The Truth About Manufactured Cat and Dog Foods," which helped me through this issue for my beloved dog. -- S.K., Tokyo, Japan

DEAR S.K.: I am glad that you received good advice on your dog's diet and that the book, which I co-authored with two other veterinarians, was helpful. In her contribution to this book, the late Marion E. Smart, DVM, Ph.D., exposed the scam behind many special prescription diets -- namely, that they would not be needed if dogs and cats were fed wholesome food from the start. Several recipes for in-home preparation are provided in this book for dogs and cats.

Taking a closer look at the Morinaga Fish and Potato Diet: It is billed as a premium, low-allergen food for dogs with food sensitivities. As the name suggests, key ingredients include potato, salmon meal, whitefish meal, cellulose and "fish digest," the latter being sprayed on the dry kibble to enhance palatability.

Potatoes may not be ideal for diabetic dogs due to potential blood sugar spikes. And in my opinion, we must reduce our consumption of fish to counter the over-harvesting of ocean resources, and to avoid ingesting (or feeding our animals) contaminants like PFAS ("forever chemicals"), mercury, microplastics and other pollutants.

Cat owners, take note: The most common food allergen for cats is fish!

OCEAN LIFE ENDANGERED EVEN MORE

A 5,000-square-mile ocean preserve east of Cape Cod -- the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument, established by former President Barack Obama -- has been opened to commercial fishing under proclamation by President Trump. He reportedly sees its former restriction as "an unfair penalty on commercial fishermen."

Ocean life around the world is rapidly diminishing, calling for greater international collaboration to protect and restore it. This ill-advised proclamation is yet another crime against nature, and should be rescinded.

(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: Satellite telecommunications devices send nonionizing radiation to receivers around the planet. Now it has been reported that Elon Musk and other investors are planning a nearly $1 trillion venture to put data centers into orbit that would be solar-powered and would not need water for cooling. That might sound sensible, but it would mean more life forms on Earth being exposed to nonionizing radiation frequencies, to which they are not biologically adapted -- and which can be fatal, especially for insects.

It could also exacerbate electromagnetic hypersensitivity in humans, which is a medical condition linked to exposure to electromagnetic fields and radiation. The rising incidence of brain tumors (glioblastomas) in children may also be related to such exposure. For additional information and extensive documentation, see my post here: drfoxonehealth.com/post/electropollution-existential-threat-to-public-health-and-life-on-earth.

The insect kingdom is already being decimated by habitat loss, climate change and pesticides, which does not bode well for the future of life on Earth for many other species, including us. An increase in electromagnetic exposure is likely to make the situation worse. See these two studies for more: "Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure on cancer in laboratory animal studies" by Meike Mevissen et al., published in Environment International in 2025; and "Electromagnetic Fields Act Similarly in Plants as in Animals" by M.L. Pall, published in Current Chemical Biology in 2016.

A few decades ago, it was discovered that we were destroying the protective ozone layer in the upper atmosphere by releasing various chemicals, most notably chlorofluorocarbons. Now we have this new man-made threat from wireless radiation, and the ozone layer will not protect us.

The environmental and public health impacts of this technology need to be addressed. We are fortunate to at least have the nonprofit Environmental Health Trust, which is attempting to hold congressional oversight committee members (as well as Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr) to account.

Please see this recent post from the EHT:

"On Jan. 14, 2026, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology held an oversight hearing of the Federal Communications Commission. Although committee members questioned the FCC about its plans for removing obstacles to broadband expansion, not one member asked why the FCC has not yet acted on the court mandate requiring the FCC to address scientific evidence of damage to human health and the environment caused by wireless radiation. ... Why is the U.S. so far behind other countries in protecting its citizens from excessive wireless radiation? This is a question (the subcommittee) needs to ask as part of its oversight of the agency." For more details, visit ehtrust.org.

In an act of solidarity with EHT's petition to the FCC, Children's Health Defense has filed a motion urging the FCC to collaborate with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to set wireless radiation exposure limits that protect public health.

According to professor Olle Johansson of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, "It must be concluded that the existing public safety limits are inadequate to protect public health, and that new public safety limits, as well as limits on further deployment of untested technologies, are warranted." See his scientific analysis, "Disturbance of the immune system by electromagnetic fields," published in Pathophysiology in 2009.

Another study exposed mice to electromagnetic fields. Researchers found that "EMF exposure not only led to depression-like neurobehavioral disorders, but also to gut microbiota imbalance." See the study "Electromagnetic field exposure-induced depression features could be alleviated by heat acclimation" by Xue Luo et al., published in Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety in 2021.

While there is inconclusive evidence that exposure to EMFs and nonionizing radiation can increase aggressive behavior, media content does. (See the study "The impact of electronic media violence" by L.R. Huesmann et al., published in the Journal of Adolescent Health in 2007.) Some studies suggest EMFs (like microwaves) can disrupt learning and memory by affecting neurotransmitters, but this does not directly translate to human aggression.

Studies do link increased screen time (which involves EMFs) in children to externalizing problems like aggression and hyperactivity, but also to internalizing issues like anxiety, suggesting a broader behavioral impact, according to the American Psychological Association. For more, visit apa.org/news/press/releases/2025/06/screen-time-problems-children.

(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: Our dietary choices affect much more than our individual health. Please see this Jan. 30 write-up from Nature.com:

"Debates over what to eat -- more protein, say, or less ultra-processed food -- often neglect any mention of how our food systems affect the biosphere that keeps us alive. But nutrition doesn't exist in a vacuum, notes Earth-systems scientist Johan Rockstrom. He co-chaired the latest update to the Planetary Health Diet, which aims to optimize human health globally and reduce environmental and social harms. (The update) notes that 'global greenhouse-gas emissions could be cut by 20% by 2050 by eating healthily, reducing food waste and adopting sustainable production practices. ... If diets remain unchanged, however, emissions will increase by 33%.'"

Read more at Nature.com, or search online for the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy, sustainable and just food systems.

One recent analysis shows that, contrary to popular opinion, plant-based diets (PBDs) are often less expensive than the alternatives. "Cost reductions are primarily driven by eliminating expensive animal products, with savings often exceeding increased spending on fruits, vegetables and legumes," reads the study's abstract. "Global modeling incorporating health and environmental externalities further demonstrates that PBDs are more cost-effective than current omnivorous diets when external costs are considered." (See the study "Cost and affordability of plant-based diets: global evidence from 2000 to 2025" by David Goldman and Matthew Nagra, published in Academia Nutrition and Dietetics, 2026.)

Animal-derived foods such as eggs and red meat are the richest dietary sources of choline, an essential nutrient. But increased consumption of these foods is associated with elevated risks of cardiovascular disease, cancer, fatty liver disease and other chronic conditions. There are plant-based sources of choline, including soy products, legumes, nuts, seeds, cruciferous vegetables and some whole grains.

These options are discussed in another study by Goldman and Nagra: "Choline adequacy and health outcomes in vegetarian and vegan diets," also published in Academia Nutrition and Dietetics, 2025. The authors write that "animal sources are often accompanied by saturated fat, cholesterol, heme iron and other pro-inflammatory or atherogenic compounds. In contrast, plant-based sources provide fiber, phytochemicals and unsaturated fats, which can confer benefits."

NEW BOOKS ON REFORMING AGRICULTURE

It has now been 40 years since I wrote the book "Agricide: The Hidden Crisis That Affects Us All," and since that time, harmful agricultural practices have increased -- along with the suffering of billions of animals. Now, a new generation of writers are addressing this urgent issue, calling for a total revision of our food production systems and eating habits. Check out the following books:

-- Paul Shapiro's "Clean Meat: How Growing Meat Without Animals Will Revolutionize Dinner and the World"

-- Michael Grunwald's "We Are Eating the Earth: The Race to Fix Our Food System and Save Our Climate"

-- Bruce Freidrich's "Meat: How the Next Agricultural Revolution Will Transform Humanity's Favorite Food -- and Our Future."

Young people may feel despair in these critical times of social and climatic upheaval. Transitioning to plant-based diets is one way that they -- and the rest of us! -- can help make a difference, and improve their own health in the process.

MULTIPLE PATHOGENS FOUND IN RAW CAT FOODS

From the abstract of a recent study: "Microbiota sharing between people and their companion animals is a concern for development of antimicrobial resistance. To assess the risks associated with feeding raw products to cats, with an emphasis on previously understudied freeze-dried products, a collection of 112 conventional and raw products was purchased and investigated."

Pathogens were found in frozen, freeze-dried and refrigerated products; most had no warnings on their labels, and some salmonella strains genetically matched those associated with human salmonellosis cases. "Parasite genes were exclusively detected in raw foods," the report reads. "The presence of pathogenic species and high load of resistance genes in raw commercial food products, particularly those sold on shelves at room temperature, suggests a considerable health risk to cats and the families who care for them."

See the study "Analysis of the microbiota of raw commercial feline diets to prioritize food safety investigations" by Guillaume Reboul et al., published in Communications Biology, 2025.

As I have stressed repeatedly, cats and dogs should never be fed raw meats or fish.

(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.)