rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Hier kun je al je vragen en problemen kwijt met betrekking tot de gezondheid. Raadpleeg uw dierenarts bij twijfel of urgente zaken.

Moderator: Lizzy

Barfplaats
Gesponsord bericht

rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Barfplaats

Staftime
5-sterren
Berichten: 840
Lid geworden op: Za 10 Nov 2007, 12:48
Locatie: Zwijndrecht
Contact:

rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Staftime » Za 22 Dec 2007, 09:47

Na het sturen van een email aan de dierenkliniek, kreeg ik dit antwoord met een aantal links.
Ik zou vooral willen vragen aan Tannetje Koning om hierop te reageren.
Alvast bedankt!


Beste mevr. Beumer,

Allereerst dank voor de moeite die U heeft genomen om uw ongenoegen aan ons kenbaar te maken.
Gaarne zou ik U toch even op enkele links naar wetenschappelijke publicaties betreffende dit onderwerp willen wijzen:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... stractPlus

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

Deze links verwijzen naar regulier wetenschappelijke publicaties verschenen in de afgelopen jaren, waarin toch enkele kanttekeningen worden geplaatst bij het voeren van rauw vlees en dierkarkassen aan gedomesticeerde honden. Het gaat hierbij niet enkel om gevaren voor de dieren zelf, maar ook om het belang van de volksgezondheid. Al het in de EU verkrijgbare commerciële diervoeder moet voldoen aan stringente bepalingen, zo mogen er enkel dierlijke(bij)producten in worden verwerkt die voldoen aan dezelfde veiligheidseisen welke worden gesteld aan producten voor humane consumptie. Natuurlijk gaat ook daar af en toe wat mis, maar in wezen is dit systeem bedoeld om te voorkomen dat mensen ziekte oplopen na contact met diervoeder of faeces van dieren.

Wel ben ik het met U eens dat de kans op versplintering van rauwe botjes vele malen kleiner is dan van gekookte botjes. Dit heeft zoals U al zeer correct vermelde te maken met verandering van structuur tgv het verhittingsproces.

Het is voor de meeste hondenrassen uitstekend mogelijk om van een dieet van enkel rauwe dierkarkassen te leven, mits deze in totaliteit worden aangeboden. Dit omdat b.v. de ingewanden (met daarin deels verteerd plantaardig materiaal plus de bijbehorende herbivore darmflora) essentieel zijn om aan de nutriëntenbehoefte van vleeseters te voldoen. Enkel het aanbieden van spier- en botmateriaal is dan ook niet aan te raden, maar ik ga er dan ook vanuit dat dit voor U al bekend is. Echter, onze dierenartsen zijn van opinie dat in het belang van het dier maar nog meer in het belang van de volksgezondheid (zie boven) het voeren van rauw vlees nimmer de voorkeur geniet boven het voeren van een kwalitatief hoogwaardig commercieel dieet. Het staat U natuurlijk vrij om hierin met ons van meining te blijven verschillen.

Met vriendelijke groet,

*****
Gebruikersavatar
~Joke~
5-sterren
Berichten: 1700
Lid geworden op: Ma 01 Mar 2004, 11:33
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor ~Joke~ » Za 22 Dec 2007, 10:01

De bekende vooroordelen van wetenschappers die zich niet goed in de materie hebben verdiept. Salmonella:  honden zijn daar niet erg gevoelig voor, hoeveel salmonella besmettingen zijn er de afgelopen jaren bij forumhonden voorgekomen? Honden vreten vuil ed dat is dus ook heeeeeel gevaarlijk. Zelfs brokken kunnen met salmonella besmet zijn. De protos? Wij voeren voor menselijke consumptie goedgekeurd vlees, verder doodt 24 uur invriezen deze parasieten.
Dierlijke bijproducten? Die tref je eerder in brokvoer aan. Jammer dat jouw da zoveel waarde aan deze negatieve artikelen hecht, er staan tig positieve artikelen tegenover.
Staftime
5-sterren
Berichten: 840
Lid geworden op: Za 10 Nov 2007, 12:48
Locatie: Zwijndrecht
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Staftime » Za 22 Dec 2007, 10:05

Ik wil dus graag weer een mail terug sturen met daarin bewijzen over wat jij net zegt.
Ook over het invriezen verhaal.
Gebruikersavatar
conleeuw
5-sterren
Berichten: 4130
Lid geworden op: Ma 18 Jul 2005, 14:12
Locatie: duiven (GLD)
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor conleeuw » Za 22 Dec 2007, 10:34

Finley R, Ribble C, Aramini J, Vandermeer M, Popa M, Litman M, Reid-Smith R.

Foodborne, Waterborne and Zoonotic Infections Division, Public Health Agency of Canada, 160 Research Lane Unit 206, Guelph, Ontario N1G 5B2.

Twenty-eight research dogs were enrolled to determine the prevalence of salmonellae shedding after consumption of 1 Salmonella-contaminated commercial raw food diet meal. Sixteen dogs were exposed to Salmonella-contaminated commercial raw food diets and 12 to Salmonella-free commercial raw food diets. Seven of the exposed dogs shed salmonellae 1-7 days after consumption of Salmonella-contaminated raw food diets. None of the dogs fed Salmonella-free diets shed salmonellae. No clinical signs were observed in either group. Five of the 7 dogs shed the same serotypes as those recovered from food samples used for feeding. Results showed the same serotypes and antimicrobial resistance pattern in 2 of the 7 shedders. Dogs fed Salmonella-contaminated raw food diets can shed salmonellae and may, therefore, be a source of environmental contamination potentially leading to human or animal illness.

PMID: 17310625 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

deze onderzoek is gedaan met "lab dieren"?  :-\ (niet duidelijk), waarvan  de uiteindelijke resultaat is dus dat 5 van de 16 honden die besmette vlees hebben gekregen dezelfde bacterie in hun ontlating lieten zien, uit deze getallen en verslag is niet te lezen hoe hoog de infectie druk op de aangeboden voeding was, bovendien laat men ook niet weten of het om honden gaan die regelmatig vers aten (dus een verhoogde maagzuurgehalte hebben) of dat het een incidentele voeding van besmette vlees is (wat ik vermoed) om nu te stellen dat vers voer honden een gevaar voor de volksgezondheid vormen vindt ik iets te kort door de bocht, punt 1, wij voeren over het algemeen vlees (rest vlees) die voor menselijke consumptie bestemd is, dus kan men er van uitgaan dat de besmetting met vooral Salmonella minimaal is, hoewel het wel gebeurt natuurlijk. Punt twee, onze honden eten altijd vers, dus hebben ze een meer effectieve maagzuur, hoewel het niet betekent dat ze geen salmonella in hun ontlasting zouden kunnen uitscheiden. Punt drie, de brokken honden die ik nu te logeren heb als voorbeeld. Die eten keurig sterielle brokken, maar als goede labaradors, vreten ze ook alles wat ze dood in bosjes kunnen opsporen, en ik kan je garanderen dat ook tussen de lijken die ze even snel naar binnen werken ziekteverwekkers zitten, wellicht kan het ook salmonella zijn, wat ook door hun ontlasting naar buiten worden gewerkt, voor de volksgezondheid zouden wij dus alle honden die buiten vreten moeten opdoekken. punt vier... ik vindt het verhaal niet volledig, het is al langer dan vandaag bekend dat ook wel eens in brokken salmonella voorkomt, ook de honden die dat eten vormen dus een gevaar voor de volksgezondheid. ;)

maar even zonder gekheid, je kan vaak bij mensen zie heilig overtuigd zijn van hun gelijk in deze niet met voldoende argumenten komen om ze te overtuigen van jou voedingsmethode. Ik geloof ook niet dat er een voldoende uitgebreide studie is gedaan op versgevoerde honden (buiten dit soort incidentele studie's, om een zinnige verhaal daaruit te kunnen halen. Ik ben geniegd om te zeggen, laat maar :-\
Gebruikersavatar
conleeuw
5-sterren
Berichten: 4130
Lid geworden op: Ma 18 Jul 2005, 14:12
Locatie: duiven (GLD)
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor conleeuw » Za 22 Dec 2007, 10:42

Darke PG, Roberts TA, Smart JL, Bradshaw PR.

An outbreak of acute paralysis in a pack of foxhounds, which followed the ingestion of raw and partially cooked meat, was almost certainly due to botulism. Botulinal toxin was detected in the serum of one of three hounds which recovered, and Clostridium botulinum type C was present in a sample of meat remaining from a batch fed to the hounds.

PMID: 788323 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


En??? ik kan mij niet indeken dat ik mijn honden botulime heb gevoerd, wel is het zo dat als ze een of andere dood dier ergens vandaan vissen, en ik zou dat bij hun dieet voegen, dan zou ik zeker een risico van botulisme besmetting hebben. Wij mogen er met z'n allen van uitgaan dat als ik vlees bij de poulier of bij de slager haal dat er geen botulisme in zit!!!!!!!!!! De bron van de vlees voeding wordt niet genoemd, dus, dit is geen argument voor de gevaar van volksgezondheid, en wat mij betreft ook geen argument voor het niet voeren van rauw voer, in KVV noch in de Barf die ik mijn honden zal er botulisme in zitten :P
Gebruikersavatar
~Joke~
5-sterren
Berichten: 1700
Lid geworden op: Ma 01 Mar 2004, 11:33
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor ~Joke~ » Za 22 Dec 2007, 11:07

From the desk of Mogens Eliasen, for immediate release
This article may be reprinted without further permission
when brought in its entirety, including the bio the end.
August 25, 2004
The Salmonella myth
Salmonella is, together with Rabies, a very unique disease: it can affect both
humans and dogs! No other known diseases can do that. Unfortunately, this leads
many people to fear Salmonella infections from their dogs, and veterinarians and pet
food manufacturers alike are quick to support this fear, regardless the risk being
utterly negligible.
How dangerous is Salmonella?
First thing to do is to get a serious understanding of what Salmonella is and how
dangerous it is to humans.
Salmonella is a bacterium that can cause some unpleasant reactions in our
gastrointestinal system, like vomiting and diarrhea, and often also fever. The attack
might last about a week. From the US Center for Disease Control and the US Center
for Health Statistics, you can find that, out of 1.43 million reported cases over the
two years 2001-2002 in the USA, 585 died, almost all them being infants and people
over 91. About 556 of those infections are known to be caused by food, not pets.
That leaves a maximum of 29 to possibly be caused by infections coming from dogs
and all other non-food sources... Considering the USA's population of 293,000,000,
Americans thus have a risk of about 0.25% per year of getting infected with
Salmonella, and 0.05 ppm (ppm="parts per million") of dying of a Salmonella
infection! Compare that to a yearly risk of 108 ppm for a man (33 ppm for a
woman) in the USA to get murdered, about 100 ppm for getting killed in traffic, and
11 ppm for a person less than 91 years old to die of Influenza or Pneumonia.
Add to this that there has been research done showing that dogs do not carry
Salmonella in their saliva or on their skin, not even after eating 100% Salmonella
infected raw food! But, when they do eat Salmonella infected food, about one third
of them will show a moderate concentration of Salmonella in their feces – yet no
clinical signs of being sick.
This means that the only way those 29 Salmonella deaths in 2001 and 2002 possibly
could have been originating from infection through dogs would be that the people
had eaten dog poop from an infected dog… (You can make your own guess at how
many of the 29 actually did that!)
The commercial scaremonger
Nevertheless, you will repeatedly find articles and posts, online and offline, typically
sponsored by pet food manufacturers or veterinary association, about the dangers of
Salmonella.

Well, given the facts above, it does not make sense from a point of view that is
dictated by health concerns. The risk is ridiculously small, if not outright ludicrous
to worry about…
But it makes a lot of sense when you consider the commercial aspects of it…
You get a serious perspective of the size of the "Salmonella problem" when you
consider that the Canadian government a couple of years ago published that an
estimated 80-85% of all chicken in North American supermarkets (approved for
being sold to consumers!) was in fact infected with Salmonella. When I, back in
2000, phoned the US FDA to get this confirmed, I did indeed get it confirmed... So,
it is a "general problem", not just in Canada!
As mentioned, raw fed dogs have been show to have a generally higher chance of
showing Salmonella in their poop than dogs fed sterile kibble full of poisonous
chemicals (called "preservatives" in order to kill all kinds of micro-organisms). No
surprise... something would have been seriously wrong with fundamental biology
and chemistry if this were not the case!!! (Actually, it might be surprising that only a
third of the dogs fed Salmonella contaminated chicken showed Salmonella in their
feces – it shows how effective the dog’s stomach is at killing such infections!)
So, if Salmonella seriously were problem for the public health, then why should it
concern us that 30% of all dog poop is infected, when it is acceptable to have 80-
85% of all edible chicken infected? Which source would be the greater danger for
healthy people?
There is only one conclusion: SALMONELLA IS NOT A SERIOUS HEALTH CONCERN
FOR OUR GOVERNMENTS! And it shouldn’t be.
Now, why are pet food manufacturers (and vets paid by them) then financing
studies to the effect of showing the link between raw food and Salmonella in poop?
There is, of course, only one answer: money.
How scaremonger can be turned into profit
The trick is to see how the leading pet food manufacturers can make money on this.
This way: many of them published many "scientific articles" online that point out all
kinds of dangers of raw feeding. Why? Because they are seriously concerned about
the loss of what in the past was an obvious market they could control! I am no
longer alone about advocating raw food for dogs - and the raw-food advocates
spread the words about what makes sense. We are a serious threat to their longterm
profits, if not to their existence! If everybody fed raw, there would be no
Purina or Iams or Alpo: belly up! Shareholders counting their losses....
The pet food manufacturers already know that people are scared of Salmonella,
because it is the only canine disease (except for the extremely rare Rabies) that also
affects humans. We have been blown full of this scare of bad hygiene and
"dangerous bugs" since childhood. The more it is being published as "something
bad" (note: without specifying exactly how bad, so we could make our own
judgments!), the bigger the chance of it being ingrained in our subconscious minds!
Hitler's propaganda minister in Nazi-Germany (Göbbels) once said: "If you tell a lie
often enough, people will believe it is the truth".

There you go! Tell the lie often enough - and you make people believe that
Salmonella is dangerous!
Now the pet food manufacturers cannot really do this without some caution. They
are smart enough to not want to get a lawsuit on their neck for spreading outright
false information.
And they do not have to. All they have to do is to create yet another opportunity for
them to publish that there is a link between "raw food" and "Salmonella". Then
people will automatically (because of their subconscious fear of bacteria that can
case humans to get ill) feel uncomfortable about the raw food - because we connect
it with "bacteria", and "bacteria" is already ingrained in our brains as something
"bad". We may not be aware of it - but that’s the way it does work! The media play
on this all the time! This way, the pet food industry can play on the average
consumer's subconscious mind and (that's what they hope) turn the tide so that
more people will be reluctant to shift to raw - and maybe some raw feeders will get
scared enough to come back to their comfortable "care"!
Remember, consumers do not make decisions with their logic. They make buying
decisions with their emotions - and then use logic afterwards to justify their choices.
All well-educated marketers know this, the leading pet food manufacturer's staff
most definitely included.
All it takes to get the average consumer to not listen to raw-food promotion is such
creation (or support) of an emotional block, put there by someone who confirmed
again and again that "raw" is linked to "Salmonella", and "Salmonella" is stored in
our brains in the drawer for "bad stuff" we should avoid. End result: the consumer
will avoid raw food because of this emotional connection, created by smart
marketers and media people!
This strategy is very well thought out. Using our subconscious minds to make
purchase decisions is far more effective than using logic. These corporate businesses
don't want us to use logic. They just want us to buy their products, no matter our
reasons! And they know well that we buy with our emotions.
Yes, it is manipulation. It is in fact the same as brainwashing... If we are not very,
very careful, it will catch us. It works on the subconscious level of our minds, so we
do not need to be aware of this in order for it to work in favour of the big
corporations. In fact, it works best for them if we are not aware of it....
But that's why it is so darn important to call this bluff.
Mogens Eliasen
-------------------------------------------
Mogens Eliasen holds a Ph.D. level degree in Chemistry from Århus University, Denmark and has 30+
years of experience working with dogs, dog owners, dog trainers, and holistic veterinarians as a coach,
lecturer, and education system developer. He publishes a free newsletter "The Peeing Post" containing
lots of tips and advice on dog problems of all kinds, particularly about training, behavioral problems,
feeding, and health care.
For more information about Mogens Eliasen, including links to other articles he has published, please send
a short e-mail to contact@k9joy.com.
Staftime
5-sterren
Berichten: 840
Lid geworden op: Za 10 Nov 2007, 12:48
Locatie: Zwijndrecht
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Staftime » Za 22 Dec 2007, 11:32

Heel erg bedankt zeg!
Dat ga ik doorsturen naar de kliniek, zullen ze niet blij mee zijn  ;D
Sennaruby
5-sterren
Berichten: 561
Lid geworden op: Di 08 Nov 2005, 13:17
Locatie: Blesdijke
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Sennaruby » Za 22 Dec 2007, 11:51

Maar doelen ze niet meer op salmonellagevaar voor mensen met dat gezeur over volksgezondheid?
Gebruikersavatar
conleeuw
5-sterren
Berichten: 4130
Lid geworden op: Ma 18 Jul 2005, 14:12
Locatie: duiven (GLD)
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor conleeuw » Za 22 Dec 2007, 11:53

komt toch op dezelfde neer....... als je geen hondendrollen consumeer, dan is het niet echt een gevaar voor de mens... dat is de strekking van het verhaal van Mogens Eliasen
Fido
5-sterren
Berichten: 1947
Lid geworden op: Zo 15 Jan 2006, 12:32
Locatie: Heiloo
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Fido » Za 22 Dec 2007, 11:56

Staftime schreef:Na het sturen van een email aan de dierenkliniek, kreeg ik dit antwoord met een aantal links.
Ik zou vooral willen vragen aan Tannetje Koning om hierop te reageren.
Alvast bedankt!


Beste mevr. Beumer,

Allereerst dank voor de moeite die U heeft genomen om uw ongenoegen aan ons kenbaar te maken.
Gaarne zou ik U toch even op enkele links naar wetenschappelijke publicaties betreffende dit onderwerp willen wijzen:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... stractPlus

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entre ... d_RVDocSum

Deze links verwijzen naar regulier wetenschappelijke publicaties verschenen in de afgelopen jaren, waarin toch enkele kanttekeningen worden geplaatst bij het voeren van rauw vlees en dierkarkassen aan gedomesticeerde honden. Het gaat hierbij niet enkel om gevaren voor de dieren zelf, maar ook om het belang van de volksgezondheid. Al het in de EU verkrijgbare commerciële diervoeder moet voldoen aan stringente bepalingen, zo mogen er enkel dierlijke(bij)producten in worden verwerkt die voldoen aan dezelfde veiligheidseisen welke worden gesteld aan producten voor humane consumptie. Natuurlijk gaat ook daar af en toe wat mis, maar in wezen is dit systeem bedoeld om te voorkomen dat mensen ziekte oplopen na contact met diervoeder of faeces van dieren.

Wel ben ik het met U eens dat de kans op versplintering van rauwe botjes vele malen kleiner is dan van gekookte botjes. Dit heeft zoals U al zeer correct vermelde te maken met verandering van structuur tgv het verhittingsproces.

Het is voor de meeste hondenrassen uitstekend mogelijk om van een dieet van enkel rauwe dierkarkassen te leven, mits deze in totaliteit worden aangeboden. Dit omdat b.v. de ingewanden (met daarin deels verteerd plantaardig materiaal plus de bijbehorende herbivore darmflora) essentieel zijn om aan de nutriëntenbehoefte van vleeseters te voldoen. Enkel het aanbieden van spier- en botmateriaal is dan ook niet aan te raden, maar ik ga er dan ook vanuit dat dit voor U al bekend is. Echter, onze dierenartsen zijn van opinie dat in het belang van het dier maar nog meer in het belang van de volksgezondheid (zie boven) het voeren van rauw vlees nimmer de voorkeur geniet boven het voeren van een kwalitatief hoogwaardig commercieel dieet. Het staat U natuurlijk vrij om hierin met ons van meining te blijven verschillen.

Met vriendelijke groet,

*****



Het gaat dus om de volksgezondheid (da zijn daar namelijk ook verantwoordelijk voor ;)), argumenten om geen rauw te voeren aan hond/kat hebben ze dus niet écht (en terecht natuurlijk ;D) dusssss gooien we het op de volksgezondheid :-\
Hitam
5-sterren
Berichten: 5656
Lid geworden op: Ma 15 Sep 2003, 11:44
Locatie: Otterlo
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Hitam » Za 22 Dec 2007, 11:58

90% van de Salmonella besmettingen van mensen komt uit hun eigen voeding. Van de besmettingen die door dieren worden veroorzaakt komt iets meer dan 80% van reptielen. Dus tot   nu toe vallen die honden wel mee.
Maar het argument zal zijn dat dat hoger zou kunnen worden doordat huisdieren meer rauw eten.

In principe klopt het theoretisch wel dat dat hoger zou kunnen worden. Of dat in de praktijk ook zo is zal moeten blijken. Misschien reden om de ontlasting van onze honden goed op te ruimen?

Gezien het feit dat van de 16 honden die een maal met salmonella er in kregen er maar 5 dezelfde salmonella uitscheiden zegt ook iets over de weerstand van honden tegen salmonella. Die is behoorlijk.
Dus ik verwacht geen schokkende toename van salmonellagevallen bij de mens.
Gebruikersavatar
~Joke~
5-sterren
Berichten: 1700
Lid geworden op: Ma 01 Mar 2004, 11:33
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor ~Joke~ » Za 22 Dec 2007, 12:42

YOU CAN TRY TO AVOID BACTERIA BY.......................

You can try to avoid bacteria by not feeding pets raw foods, but then
don't use a public restroom. Every time you turn off the water or pull
open the door to leave in a public restroom, you'll contaminate clean
hands. The same applies to your own bathroom shower, sink and toilet.
Each time that it's flushed your toilet propels invisible bacterial and
viral aerosols into the air that can float for up to 2 hours. Don't
forget your bathroom door knob either.

If you think handling raw foods for your pet will cause bacterial
problems in your home, then you certainly won't want to handle or
prepare meat for yourself or your family. Of course you cook your own
meats prior to eating them, but you have different digestive
capabilities than your dog, so we might expect a human to become ill
from eating raw meat when a dog won't.

Meat isn't the only source of bacteria. If you're worried, you had
better avoid vegetables, ice cream, and other dairy. Even organic fruits
and vegetables are not free of bacterial contamination. Fresh fruits and
vegetables can be contaminated with bacteria from soil, water, and other
environmental factors as well as during harvesting, handling, and
storage. The produce may also be contaminated with pesticides and other
chemicals used during cultivation. Pre-washed, packaged and clean
looking fresh fruits and vegetables sold in supermarkets carry millions
of bacteria on the surface. During the washing and cleaning process
bacterial population on fruits and vegetables is reduced but not
eliminated. During processing, improper handling and storage without
refrigeration, the residual bacteria rapidly increase in numbers. And
for doGs sake, keep the kids out of the vegetable garden. Thousands of
species of bacteria fill the soil. A teaspoon of productive soil
generally contains between 100 million and 1 billion bacteria. That is
as much mass as two cows per acre.

The growth of many kinds of bacteria can be reduced or stopped by
refrigeration and freezing-two important practices in the preservation
of food, including milk. However, refrigeration alone will not kill most
bacteria. This is best illustrated by the fact that at normal
refrigerated temperatures, milk will still, in time, turn sour. The
maximum allowable number of bacteria (SPC) in milk to be marketed for
human consumption is 100,000 bacteria per milliliter (about 10 drops) of
milk. Some dairy producers are satisfied with any bacteria count so long
as they can market their milk.

Okay, so no milk. You're thinking juice may be a better and safer
alternative right? Ninety-eight percent of the juice sold in
supermarkets is pasteurized (heat-processed to kill pathogenic bacteria
and removes all the goodness along with it). The remaining 2% is
unpasteurized and may contain harmful bacteria. For example, when fruits
and vegetables are fresh-squeezed, harmful bacteria from the outside of
the produce can become a part of the finished product. If it's ingested,
children, the elderly, and people with weakened immune systems risk
serious illness. E. coli O157:H7 is very resistant to acid, so it can
survive in an acidic medium like orange or apple juice for a long time.

Human Pathogen Associations with Vegetables and Fruits.

Cryptosporidium, parasite
(juice/cider and produce)
Cyclospora, parasite
(produce)
Escherichia coli O157:H7
(juice/cider and produce)
Norwalk Virus
(produce)
Salmonella
(juice and produce)
Shigella
(produce

Did you know you must observe the same handling and preparation methods
for vegetables and fruits as used with raw meat? I'll bet not.

* Wash hands with warm water and soap for at least 20 seconds before
and after handling food, especially fresh whole fruits and
vegetables and raw meat, poultry and fish.
* Rinse raw produce in water. Don't use soap or other detergents. If
necessary - and appropriate - use a small scrub brush to remove
surface dirt.
* Use plastic, rather than wooden, cutting boards. Bacteria can hide
in the grooves of wooden ones.
* Wash cutting boards with a solution of 1 teaspoon (5 milliliters)
of chlorine bleach in 1 quart (about 1 liter) of hot water. Always
wash boards after cutting raw vegetables.
* Store cut, peeled and broken-apart fruits and vegetables (such as
melon balls) at or below 41 degrees Fahrenheit (5 degrees Celsius)
- that is, in the refrigerator.
* Stick with pasteurized juices and cider. If you do buy
unpasteurized cider, boil it for 5 minutes before drinking. This
will kill bacteria.
* When buying from a salad bar, avoid fruits and vegetables that
look brownish, slimy or dried out. These are signs that the
product has been held at an improper temperature.


Even water can contain dangerous bacteria. How do you know if your water
is safe to drink? One of the standard methods of checking water quality
is a test for coliform bacteria; other tests include nitrate, hardness
and pesticides. With current concerns over water quality, chemical
contamination (nitrate, pesticides, etc.) usually receives most of the
attention. However, microbial or bacterial contamination remains the
most common type of contamination. When water supplies contain coliform
bacteria in levels greater than one per 100 ml of water, the water may
also contain pathogens that cause acute intestinal infections. While
generally considered to be a discomfort to health, these infections can
prove fatal for infants, the elderly and those who are ill.
Water-related disease outbreaks tend to occur in the summer. Although
rarely encountered today, typhoid, hepatitis and cholera, can spread
through water supplies.

Okay, what about the water at the beach? Is the water there safe? The
primary tool used at present to evaluate beach water quality is the
measurement of "indicator" organisms that estimate the level of fecal
contamination of the water. The indicator organisms most commonly used
are fecal coliforms, Escherichia coli (E. coli), and enterococci. These
coliform bacteria are microorganisms that usually occur in the
intestinal tract of animals, including humans. High levels of these
organisms in recreational water are indicative of fecal contamination
and the possible presence of intestinal-disease-causing organisms.

I'll bet you'd never guess that doing laundry could be hazardous! It's
yet another home for bacteria to thrive and be spread.One group of
scientists recently looked at the risk of laundry contributing to the
spread of infectious disease. It is generally well known that toilets
and kitchens are high risk areas for germ growth, but laundry is rarely
mentioned as a potential source of contamination. Recent research has
> shown that germs can spread from one fabric to another and from the
washing-machine drum to the next load. Even our hands can help the
spread when handling wet clothes that have just been washed. For years
it has been accepted that very hot water is necessary to kill germs in
the washing, but our wish to preserve modern textiles has led us to use
ever lower temperatures and, in our efforts to consume less energy, our
environmental concerns have also led to a reduction in washing powder.
The way that we do our washing today is not always sufficient to destroy
germs in clothes. Some germs from food, the body or other sources can
survive a wash cycle and spread via our hands to other surfaces. Among
them are staphylococcus aureus and klebsiella pneumoniae, two types of
common bacteria that are most difficult to eradicate.

Some simple precautions can effectively help control the spread of
potentially pathogenic germs while doing laundry :

- Before doing the washing, always separate "risk" items such as
underwear, towels, baby clothes, etc. About 30% of the population sort
their washing which, although the figure varies between countries, is a
small proportion considering the potential risk of not sorting.
- Wash hands in hot soapy water after placing the laundry in the machine
and again after handling damp washing. Washing hands after handling
dirty washing is quite common, washing hands after taking wet clothes
out of the machine is rare because clean washing is often mistakenly
seen as being germ-free.
- Look out for washing products that actually are effective against
germs.
- Wash dirty clothes as soon as possible and especially damp items such
as towels.
- Don't wait for clothes to get thoroughly soiled before doing the
laundry. The more germs on a garment before washing, the more remain
afterwards.

Don't dip into the cookie dough! Those raw eggs are lethal. Eggs should
always be assumed to be contaminated. It's best to avoid anything
containing raw or undercooked eggs, including raw cookie dough, cake
batter, eggnog, hollandaise sauce and caesar salad or other dressings
made with raw eggs. Eggshells should also be regarded as contaminated.
They should be disposed of properly and hands should be washed after
handling them.

Many insects such as flies, wasps and cockroaches carry food poisoning
bacteria on their legs and bodies, and contaminate food and work
surfaces when they walk on them. Rodents (rats and mice) excrete
bacteria in their feces which can also result in contaminated food and
surfaces in supermarket warehouses - the very food items you bring into
your home.

The University of Arizona published some research a few years ago.They
found that almost a third of the railings in public transportation-on
buses or subways-were infected with the same bacteria that is found in
feces and that 25% of the seats in movie theatres were infected with
E.coli bacteria, which is bacteria from feces. Another study by U.S. Air
Force doctors in Ohio found that money harbours bacteria which can make
both immuno-suppressed and healthy people very sick. It just proves that
your mother was right -- wash your hands after handling money

Salmonella - The BIG One!
Although most people relate salmonella infection with chicken and eggs,
the pathogen can actually be found in a variety of plants and animals -
including dogs fed commercial foods. Some of the less common sources of
Salmonella infections and the serotypes involved in outbreaks world-wide
are: beef jerky, lebanon bologna, ice cream, alfalfa, mung bean and
other sprouts, tomatoes, melons and cantaloupes, juices and cereal.

Did you know Salmonella bacteria can survive ...

200 days on contaminated earth and pasture
228 days on cloth
93 days on plastic cover slips
10 months on sweeper dust
148 days on rodent feces
1000 days on dried cattle feces
21-350 days on egg shells
4 years on dried whole eggs
Salmonella bacteria survive longer at lower temperatures. It can also
survive for at least 24 hours at pH 3.95 to 4.56:
170 hours in orange juice (pH 3.5 and 37.6oF)
10-20 days in tomato juice (pH 4.3 to 4.4)
6 hours on commercially prepared mayonnaise (pH 3.
6 hours in commercially prepared salad dressing (pH 3.2)

The Immune Compromised
Food-borne microorganisms cause tens of millions of cases of intestinal
illness each year in the North America. For most healthy people, the
distressful vomiting, abdominal cramps, and diarrhea are short-lived.
But in people with weakened immunity, symptoms are often severe, and the
infections are difficult to treat.

Campylobacter jejuni infections are associated with eating or handling
chickens. Indeed, surveys show the bacterium contaminates from 20 to 100
percent of raw chickens sold at the supermarket. Other prime sources
are unpasteurized milk, non-chlorinated water, and cross-contamination
can occur, for instance, from using the same cutting board to cut up raw
chicken and then vegetables without cleaning in between. The second most
frequent bacterial offender is probably the more familiar Salmonella
bacterium, causing roughly 2 million to 4 million salmonellosis cases
annually. Salmonella bacteria frequently contaminate unpasteurized milk
and raw poultry, meat and eggs. Up to 40 percent of marketed raw
chickens carry this bacteria. Cross-contamination from raw poultry to
other foods during storage or food preparation is a major pathway for
Salmonella into the diet. Of the several types of Listeria bacteria, the
only one responsible for illness in people is Listeria monocytogenes.
Besides bloodstream infection, listeriosis can lead to meningitis
(inflammation of the membranes covering the brain and spinal cord) and
encephalitis (inflammation of the brain itself). The bacteria are found
in unpasteurized milk; cold smoked fish, poultry and meat and certain
cheeses, particularly soft-ripened varieties such as Brie and Camembert.
Even vegetables can carry Listeria and, once cut, support its growth.
One-cell parasites such as Giardia lamblia, found mainly in water, may
also infect immune compromised individuals.

Any raw animal-derived food must be considered to be contaminated with
harmful microorganisms. The following food safety precautions are smart
advice for anyone, but they're especially important for people whose
health is compromised, including those infected with HIV, cancer
patients, diabetics, transplant recipients, infants, pregnant women, and
the elderly.

At Home Preparation and Handling of Raw Meats for Human and Pet
Consumption

Keep shelves-counter tops- refrigerators-
freezers-utensils-sponges-towels clean to prevent bacterial
contamination of food at home. It is especially important to wash all
utensils and your hands with soap and hot water after handling one food
and before handling another. This helps prevent cross-contamination in
which, for example, bacteria in raw meat could be transferred to other
foods, such vegetables. Use a different board for cutting different
foods such as produce and meat. Wash cutting boards with hot, soapy
water after each use; then rinse and air dry or pat dry with fresh paper
towels. Non-porous acrylic, plastic or glass boards and solid wood
boards can be washed in an automatic dishwasher. (Laminated boards may
crack and split.) Sanitize both wooden and plastic cutting boards with a
solution of one teaspoon liquid chlorine bleach per quart of water.
Flood the surface with the bleach solution and allow it to stand for
several minutes, then rinse and air dry or pat dry with fresh paper
towels.
Hitam
5-sterren
Berichten: 5656
Lid geworden op: Ma 15 Sep 2003, 11:44
Locatie: Otterlo
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Hitam » Za 22 Dec 2007, 13:32

En dan mogen onze katten ook geen muizen meer vangen en opeten of vogeltjes. Die dragen ook heel vaak salmonella bij zich.
Staftime
5-sterren
Berichten: 840
Lid geworden op: Za 10 Nov 2007, 12:48
Locatie: Zwijndrecht
Contact:

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Staftime » Za 22 Dec 2007, 14:48

Dat was een flink stuk tekst!
Maar het maakt wel duidelijk dat er vreselijk wordt overdreven.
En als je met salmonella zo overdrijft, moet je dat dus met alles doen, zelfs met je schone was.
flin
5-sterren
Berichten: 3189
Lid geworden op: Do 01 Nov 2007, 19:57

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor flin » Za 22 Dec 2007, 15:25

persoonlijk vind ik niet zozeer dat er overdreven word,
sommige mensen nemen alleen niet de moeite om dingen te begrijpen en/of uit te zoeken.
Als je dus niets zelf wilt uitvogelen is 't dus makkelijker om dingen aan te nemen, zonder er daar zelf nog maar een seconde over hoeven na te denken,
zoals 't aannemen van  reclame bv
't word gewoon algemeen geaccepteerd, dus zal 't wel goed zijn
ook dit word door alles en iedereen gestimuleerd
helaas zijn veel mensen gefocused op de algemene waardeoordelen van andere mensen, en ja, je zal eens buiten de boot vallen?

open staan voor andere waarden, betekend ook:
niet denken dat je alles weet, dat blokkeert alles wat je nog zou willen leren

 
Barfplaats
Gesponsord bericht

Re: rauwvoer, gevaar volksgezondheid?

Berichtdoor Barfplaats


Terug naar “Vragen en Problemen over gezondheid”

Wie is er online

Gebruikers op dit forum: Geen geregistreerde gebruikers en 0 gasten