The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evaluation of bacterial and protozoal contamination of commercially available raw meat diets for dogs
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate bacterial and protozoal contamination of commercially available raw meat diets for dogs. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study. SAMPLE POPULATION: 240 samples from 20 raw meat diets for dogs (containing beef, lamb, chicken, or turkey), 24 samples from 2 dry dog foods, and 24 samples from 2 canned dog foods. PROCEDURE: Each product was purchased commercially on 4 dates approximately 2 months apart. Three samples from each product at each sampling period were evaluated via bacterial culture for non-type-specific Escherichia coli (NTSEC), Salmonella enterica, and Campylobacter spp. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed on selected isolates. Polymerase chain reaction assays were used to detect DNA from Cryptosporidium spp, Neospora spp, and Toxoplasma spp in samples obtained in the third and fourth sampling periods. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-three of 288 (53%) samples were contaminated with NTSEC. Both raw and prepared foods contained NTSEC during at least 1 culture period. Salmonella enterica was recovered from 17 (5.9%) samples, all of which were raw meat products. Campylobacter spp was not isolated from any samples. In 91 of 288 (31.6%) samples, there was no gram-negative bacterial growth before enrichment and in 48 of 288 (16.7%) samples, there was no aerobic bacterial growth before enrichment. Susceptibility phenotypes were variable. Cryptosporidium spp DNA was detected in 3 samples. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Bacterial contamination is common in commercially available raw meat diets, suggesting that there is a risk of foodborne illness in dogs fed these diets as well possible risk for humans associated with the dogs or their environments.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Surveys in Europe and North America have consistently found Salmonella species in a proportion of samples, typically of fresh‐frozen commercial diets.”
From Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards. (2019) · cites this paper as Strohmeyer et al. 2006
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“It has been noted by researchers sampling raw pet foods from commercial outlets that package warnings about preparation and hygienic handling of these pet foods are commonly absent (Finley et al. 2006, Strohmeyer et al. 2006, Mehlenbacher et al. 2012, Bojanic et al. 2017, van Bree et al. 2018) and that packaging may be defective and leaky (Bojanic et al. 2017).”
From Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards. (2019) · cites this paper as Strohmeyer et al. 2006
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Serovars isolated in studies and surveillance of ingredients and raw food for pets or working dogs are diverse (Strohmeyer et al. 2006) and include those considered to be of particular significance for human salmonellosis (Chengappa et al. 1993, Finley et al. 2008, Mehlenbacher et al. 2012, Bacci et al. 2019).”
From Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards. (2019) · cites this paper as Strohmeyer et al. 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Surveys of raw pet foods in North America (generally frozen and obtained through commercial outlets) have reported proportions of Salmonella‐positive samples ranging between 7.1% (Strohmeyer et al. 2006), 8% (Nemser et al. 2014), 9% (Mehlenbacher et al. 2012), 20% (Weese et al. 2005) and 21% (Finley et al. 2008).”
From Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards. (2019) · cites this paper as Strohmeyer et al. 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Higher prevalence values of E. coli‐positive samples have been found among commercial raw pet foods when compared with conventionally processed foods (Strohmeyer et al. 2006, Freeman et al. 2013)”
From Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards. (2019) · cites this paper as Strohmeyer et al. 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Campylobacter were not isolated from approximately 300 samples taken from raw food products in various recent studies in the USA and Canada (Weese et al. 2005, Strohmeyer et al. 2006, Lenz et al. 2009)”
From Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards. (2019) · cites this paper as Strohmeyer et al. 2006
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Similarly, DNA of Cryptosporidium (but not Toxoplasma or Neosporum) was found in a small minority of raw and canned foods in the USA (Strohmeyer et al. 2006).”
From Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards. (2019) · cites this paper as Strohmeyer et al. 2006
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Campylobacter jejuni—An Emerging Foodborne Pathogen
Altekruse, S. F., Stern, N. J., Fields, P. I., & Swerdlow, D. L. (1999) · Emerging infectious diseases · doi:10.3201/eid0501.990104 · Cited by 894
Homan, W. L., Vercammen, M. J., Braekeleer, J. D., & Verschueren, H. (2000) · International Journal for Parasitology · doi:10.1016/s0020-7519(99)00170-8 · Cited by 747
Yamage, M., Flechtner, O., & Gottstein, B. (1996) · Journal of Parasitology · doi:10.2307/3284160 · Cited by 264
Bacteriological evaluation of commercial canine and feline raw diets.
(2005) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 163
Preliminary assessment of the risk of Salmonella infection in dogs fed raw chicken diets.
(2002) · PubMed Central · Cited by 124
Evaluation of raw food diets for dogs
Freeman, L. M., & Michel, K. E. (2001) · Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · doi:10.2460/javma.2001.218.705 · Cited by 121
Public health concerns associated with feeding raw meat diets to dogs
LeJeune, J. T., & Hancock, D. D. (2001) · Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · doi:10.2460/javma.2001.219.1222 · Cited by 109 · cited 3×
“All raw meat products, whether intended for consumption by humans or pets, may potentially be contaminated with Salmonella spp, Escherichia coli, Campylobacter spp, Yersinia spp, Giardia spp, Toxoplasma spp, Neospora spp, Cryptosporidium spp, Echinococcus spp, Clostridium spp, Staphylococcus aureus, and others.(2,5,11…”
BackgroundMethodSepticemic Salmonellosis in Two Cats Fed a Raw-Meat Diet
Stiver, S. L., Frazier, K. S., Mauel, M. J., & Styer, E. L. (2003) · Journal of the American Animal Hospital Association · doi:10.5326/0390538 · Cited by 93
Transmission of Yersinia enterocolitica 4/O:3 to pets via contaminated pork
Fredriksson-Ahomaa, M., Korte, T., & Korkeala, H. (2001) · Letters in Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1046/j.1472-765x.2001.00922.x · Cited by 87
Prevalence of Salmonella in Raw Meat used in Diets of Racing Greyhounds
Chengappa, M. M., Staats, J., Oberst, R. D., Gabbert, N. H., & McVey, S. (1993) · Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation · doi:10.1177/104063879300500312 · Cited by 77 · cited 1×
“Although proponents of BARF diets maintain that bacterial contamination of raw meat is of no consequence for > 99% of dogs,(1) disease outbreaks resulting in morbidity and death in companion animals fed raw meat have been reported.(5-10) All raw meat products, whether intended for consumption by humans or pets, may po…”
Background
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Pet feeding practices of dog and cat owners in the United States and Australia.
Laflamme, D., Abood, S., Fascetti, A., Fleeman, L., Freeman, L., Michel, K. E., Bauer, C., Kemp, B. L. E., Doren, J. V. V., & Willoughby, K. N. (2008) · Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · doi:10.2460/javma.232.5.687 · Cited by 210
Schmidt, M., Unterer, S., Suchodolski, J., Honneffer, J. B., Guard, B., Lidbury, J., Steiner, J., Fritz, J., & Kölle, P. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0201279 · Cited by 169
Current knowledge about the risks and benefits of raw meat–based diets for dogs and cats
Freeman, L. M., Chandler, M. L., Hamper, B. A., & Weeth, L. P. (2013) · Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · doi:10.2460/javma.243.11.1549 · Cited by 235
“Nontype-specific E coli was found in 143 of 240 (60%) commercial RMBDs but in only 8 of 24 (33%) commercial dry extruded diets and 2 of 24 (8%) commercial cooked moist diets.(6) A 2001 study(41) revealed that 1 of 5 RMBDs tested (both commercial and homeprepared diets) was contaminated with E coli O157:H7.”
Raw diets for dogs and cats: a review, with particular reference to microbiological hazards.
Davies, R. H., Lawes, J. R., & Wales, A. D. (2019) · Journal of Small Animal Practice · doi:10.1111/jsap.13000 · Cited by 195
“…pet foods in North America (generally frozen and obtained through commercial outlets) have reported proportions of Salmonella-positive samples ranging between 7.1% (Strohmeyer et al. 2006), 8% (Nemser et al. 2014), 9% (Mehlenbacher et al. 2012), 20% (Weese et al. 2005) and 21% (Finley et al. 2008).”
BackgroundInfluentialZoonotic bacteria and parasites found in raw meat‐based diets for cats and dogs
van Bree, F. P. J., Bokken, G. C. A. M., Mineur, R., Franssen, F., Opsteegh, M., van der Giessen, J. W. B., Lipman, L. J. A., & Overgaauw, P. A. M. (2018) · Veterinary Record · doi:10.1136/vr.104535 · Cited by 206
Metadata
- Authors
- Strohmeyer, R. A., Morley, P. S., Hyatt, D. R., Dargatz, D. A., Scorza, A. V., & Lappin, M. R.
- Affiliations
- Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (US)
- Venue
- Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association
- Published
- 2006-02-15
- Volume
- 228
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 537-542
- ISSN
- 0003-1488 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2161516957
- Cited by
- 133
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 6.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Agriculture
- Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Salmonella and Campylobacter epidemiology
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Safety and Hygiene
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Listeria monocytogenes in Food Safety
- Keywords
- raw meat diet, dogs, bacterial contamination, protozoan parasites, Salmonella enterica, Campylobacter, Cryptosporidium, Neospora, Toxoplasma, antimicrobial susceptibility, food poisoning, canine nutrition, dry dog food
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Animal Feed, Bacteria, Consumer Product Safety, Dogs, Food Contamination, Food Microbiology, Longitudinal Studies, Meat, Prospective Studies, Colony Count, Microbial, DNA, Protozoan, Food Parasitology, Eukaryota
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
