The popularity of raw meat-based diets (RMBDs) for pets has been increasing in recent years even if the reputed health benefits are mainly anecdotal. A web-based survey was developed to better understand the motivations and habits of owners who decided to feed their dogs RMBDs. The questionnaire was completed by 218 dog owners, 62 of whom were living with people whose immune system was impaired or weakened. Internet was the preferred source of information for more than half of the respondents, and feeding dogs a more natural and healthier diet was the main reason behind owners’ interest in RMBDs. About 80% of the participants completely abandoned commercial pet food and showed marked distrust especially towards the lack of clarity on the ingredients used (n = 169). The vast majority of owners interviewed (94%) believed RMBDs to be absolutely safe for dogs, and shinier coat, muscle mass gain, and cleaner teeth were the principal improvements seen on their pets. Controlling the composition and quality of the ingredients provided to their animals was the main advantage of RMBDs for 57% of the owners, while the main disadvantages were related to the purchase of some components (38%) and the time required (22%) for the preparation of the diet. Only 8% of the respondents relied on veterinarians for RMBD formulation, and a wide variety of feeding regimens and combinations of ingredients was observed. As revealed by this study, most owners are unaware of the risks posed by the feeding of RMBDs for both animal and human health, and they often rely on questionable sources for advice on pet nutrition. Owners see RMBDs as a more natural and healthier alternative to commercial pet food even if the actual benefits remain unproven. Consulting veterinarians for proper information and board-certified nutritionists for the formulation of complete and balanced RMBDs should be promoted.

Acute diarrhea is a common, often self-limiting, cause of presentation for veterinary care, yet there is a paucity of data on frequently-prescribed treatments. The purpose of this randomized, double blinded placebo-controlled clinical trial was to compare two anecdotally-recommended treatments: a probiotic combination and metronidazole. Sixty dogs without concurrent comorbidities were randomized into three treatment groups. The time to resolution of diarrheal signs was evaluated using owner surveys and fecal scoring charts. Dogs presenting with acute diarrhea achieved acceptable fecal consistency after 3.5 ± 2.2 days when receiving probiotic, 4.6 ± 2.4 days with oral metronidazole, and 4.8 ± 2.9 days with placebo; statistically significant differences were not identified between treatment groups (p = 0.17). These findings failed to provide evidence for the common use of metronidazole in this cohort of dogs with acute canine diarrhea, and a larger study population would be required to identify a statistically significant effect of probiotics.

Background: Pet food storage plays a crucial role in maintaining the nutritional and sensory properties of purchased products over time. Methods: An online survey was developed to collect data regarding owners’ storage habits for both commercial and home-made diets. Results: The questionnaire was completed by 1545 dog owners and 676 cat owners. Pet and owner age played roles in the choice of the type of diet (commercial vs. home-cooked vs. raw meat-based) adopted. Kibble feeders (75.7%) usually bought one (50.1%) or two (24.6%) packages at a time, and most pets (64.4%) took a minimum four weeks to consume an entire bag. Almost half of the owners (43.5%) used a container to store pet food (plastic bins for 79.5%). Pet food was commonly stored in the kitchen (45.1%) and not exposed to direct light (94.5%); 23.6% of the kibble feeders said it might be exposed to high temperatures. Most commercial pet food feeders (67.3%) considered preservatives a potential health risk for pets. Among homemade diet feeders, 38.6% stored fish oil at room temperature. Conclusions: Pet owners should be educated in proper food storage management when receiving feeding instructions from veterinarians. More comprehensive information on the nature and importance of additives in pet food should be promoted by manufacturers.

Commercially available dog treats have become very popular and a common part of the pet’s diet, yet very little is known about peoples’ opinions and feeding habits; therefore, a survey was shared on a popular social network. Most of the self-selected interviewed owners (n = 1833, 83%) use treats regularly, mainly to reward their dog’s behavior or during training-sports activities. Owners usually buy several types of treats, of which biscuits and dental care sticks are the most common, and usually hand out one to five pieces to their dogs every day. Most owners read the labels of the treats to seek the ingredients list and the claimed health benefits; contrarily, many owners look for non-nutritional values, such as flavor (n = 321, 18%), brand (n = 72, 4%) or shape (n = 46, 3%). Seventy-five percent of the owners (n = 1369) follow the feeding instructions provided by the producers on the label. Treat feeding is a common practice among dog owners and there is great variability among regimens (e.g., types and quantities provided). Understanding the owner’s attitudes could help veterinarians educate them to manage treats in the dog’s diet.

The nutraceutical supplementation of Spirulina (Arthrospira platensis) in dogs and cats has not yet been investigated. The aim of this study was to evaluate if the dietary supplementation of increasing amounts of Spirulina for 6 weeks is palatable to pets and to assess the owner’s perception of such supplementation. The owners of the 60 dogs and 30 cats that participated in this study were instructed to daily provide Spirulina tablets starting with a daily amount of 0.4 g, 0.8 g, and 1.2 g for cats as well as small dogs, medium dogs, and large dogs, respectively, and allowing a dose escalation of 2× and 3× every 2 weeks. The daily amount (g/kg BW) of Spirulina ranged from 0.08 to 0.25 for cats, from 0.06 to 0.19 for small-sized dogs, from 0.05 to 0.15 for medium-sized dogs, and from 0.04 to 0.12 for large-sized dogs. Each owner completed a questionnaire at the time of recruitment and the end of each 2-week period. No significant effect on the fecal score, defecation frequency, vomiting, scratching, lacrimation, general health status, and behavioral attitudes was detected by the owners’ reported evaluations. Most animals accepted Spirulina tablets either administrated alone or mixed with food in the bowl. Daily supplementation of Spirulina for 6 weeks in the amounts provided in this study is therefore palatable and well tolerated by dogs and cats.