CATalyst Summit To Champion The Cat

Cat

The American Association of Feline Practitioners is holding The CATalyst Summit from February 5-6. The Summit is expected to lay the groundwork for a national initiative to champion the health and well-being of cats.

The initiative is being launched as statistics by the American Veterinary Medical Association show an increase in the cat population coupled with a continued decline in veterinary visits for cats. The percentage of cat-owning households that received no veterinary care in 2006 was 36.3 percent, compared to 17.3 percent of dog-owning households. There are an estimated 82 million cats in the US, yet cats are twice as likely as dogs to not see a veterinarian. This means many feline diseases or illnesses go undiagnosed or untreated.

For more information on The Summit, visit Steve Dale’s Pet World.

27 Responses to “CATalyst Summit To Champion The Cat”

  1. sadbuttrue says:

    Since the feline practitioners have been useless in the poison food matter, who cares what they have to say now?
    Where were they for the last year?

    Cats dropping dead did not seem to bother them much. Pet food company’s not paying the bills was of no concern, the cover up of the truth was OK with them, they were happy to sell crappy food that _causes_ illness .

    Less money rolling in, _that_ bothers them.

    Disgusting.

  2. mittens says:

    i agree with sadbuttrue-

    and like with human health care most people cannot AFFORD it and can only go when something is very wrong. cats are notorious for hiding their symptoms of illness anyway. my 6 cats lived to be 18- to over 20 years old and they certainly did not go to the vet every year save for shots and i stopped that after they were too old and the vet suggested stopping. in those 20 years i only found one vet who i thought highly of .

    we need better, more responsible to the consumer, affordable health care for pets and humans- not more of it for the sake of saying you have it. being tethered as it is to the pharmaceutical and insurance companies has rendered health the province of industry instead of human service and it’s no different for pets.the medical industrial complex demanding we use them more because they really really care about our pets. if they cared so much they would have stepped up when all those cats were dying because of tainted food. we’re bad parents if we don’t got to the vet every month but vets couldn’t be bothered defending those parents from poor quality and out right poisoned pet food.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Sponsored by the petfoodconglomerate-pethealthindustry pharma-pimps - how sweet!
    Why are they so afraid of initiatives for mandatory full disclosure of vaccine RISKS to consumers before sales??
    Consumer Education is PROTECTION. Would you ask Dr. Mengele to assess himself?

  4. Anonymous says:

    http://www.commondreams.org/ar.....1/02/6111/ BRIEF EXCERPT:
    “Long-life food: Mars has a U.S. patent for nano coatings that have been tested on M&Ms, Twix and Skittles. They are tasteless but could kill bacteria.”

    “Nano health supplements, such as antioxidants, are already on the market while the first of hundreds of new foods are expected to arrive in the next 12 months.”
    “..being introdeduced without any regulation or independent assessment to ensure they are safe - mirroring the controversy over the launch of GM foods ten years ago.
    Some critics have talked of the threat of the creation of a “grey goo” of tiny particles with hidden harmful properties.”

    MARS - THE PROUD NEW OWNER OF THAT WONDER FOOD FOR PETS - NUTRO - AMONG OTHERS.

    WHO’D LIKE TO JOIN ME IN BETTING THIS HAS BEEN TESTED ON OUR PETS?????

  5. sadbuttrue says:

    Keep in mind that Steve Dale has unsavory connections and an unseemly habit of kissing PFI butt.
    The only thing Steve Dale is expert about is how to sell out.

    He was an active part of the cover up. He still is.

  6. Stefani says:

    Steve Dale’s Banner features a ringing endorsement from an AVMA past president. (American Veterinary Medical Association). This should tell you that his affiliations are WITH THOSE who EXPLOIT our love of our animals for financial gain, and that he is NOT a true companion animal advocate.

    Why do I say that?

    Because LOOK at the positions the AVMA takes on important animal advocacy issues —

    Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, January 08
    http://www.avma.org/onlnews/ja.....80101c.asp

    The January 08 edition of the JAVMA announces revisions to the AVMA’s animal “welfare” policies.

    The revised animal welfare policies of the American Veterinary Medical Association include:

    — Reaffirmation of its support for the use of “randomly sourced” dogs and cats in laboratory testing

    My note: “Randomly sourced” dogs and cats often come from Class B dealers. For more information on Class B dealers and “randomly sourced” dogs and cats, see http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/.....a_cla.html
    And
    http://www.hbo.com/docs/progra.....index.html

    The HBO special showed how “randomly sourced” dogs and cats for a class b dealer were in some cases stolen pets. (Not that ANY animal, pet or not, deserves this treatment).

    – The AVMA also took the opportunity to reassert its support for the Pregnant Mare Urine Collection Industry.

    – It also reiterated its support for the use of animals in entertainment, including circuses. We all know how, for examples, elephants are treated in circuses.

    — It included a reference to “extremists in the animal rights movement.”

    Please see http://www.avma.org/onlnews/ja.....80101c.asp
    for details.

    The AVMA also refuses to decry fois gras production.

    The organized veterinary industry is NOT A FRIEND to our animal friends, but rather an exploiter of our affection for them. Moreover, their sycophants are wanna bes and exploiters, too.

    Stefani
    The Toonces Project.
    http://www.TheTooncesProject.com
    “Is Your Pet Safe at the Vet?”

  7. Tammy says:

    I mostly lurk but sometimes you all have no idea what you are talking about. Because a esteemed veterinarian once the President of AVMA says good things about Steve Dale - that does not mean that Dale agrees with everything the AVMA says and does? And if you listened to his programs, read his columns regularly - you would know that. In fact, he favored getting the foi gras bill passed in Illinois. As for the cat summit, it was his idea - according to some who appeared on his shows because cats are more abused than dogs and given up to shelters more, and all the rest. He is doing something to change that and industry is listening, obviouisly. If he has the ear of industry - isn’t that how change is affected?Also, again, read and listen - he’s hardly in bed with the PFI. I know he’s made a difference in fighting breed specific bans hugely - if you have a pit bull or even rottweiler, as I do - you love Steve Dale for that. But he’s done so much more for animals actually walking the walk in the face of criticism like what I’ve read. His behavior advice saves animals, so much. Odd replies here. Pet food recall and I’m in agreement on that. Most everyone posting here is too. Here’s a guy who works within the system and sometimes outside the system to affect the kind of change we all want to see. Besides, this is about cats. I have three of those, all shelter cats. And I agree cats are sometimes overlooked. If that can be changed, isn’t that a positive? You should be writing thank you notes to this guy. And while the pet food issue should not be forgotten. Everything isn’t about that is it? In fact, living in Illinois I can say I know some in Senator Durbin’s office who said Steve Dale was hugely helpful behind the scenes.

  8. stefani says:

    Tammy, that is good information to know, thank you for it. When I see people affiliated with the AVMA or endorsed by the AVMA, it’s like being endorsed by . .. oh, I dunno, think of the most orwellian organization you can. I will try to learn more about Steve Dale.

    The AVMA is in my opinion all about agribusiness. They pretty much fight at least half of the animal welfare bills that get proposed, and they were quite eager to call animal advocates “Terrorists” i.e. the AETA.

    All the same, I will look into Dale’s other positions.

    Stefani

  9. Don Earl says:

    Tammy,

    Unfortunately, you are the one lacking information. Steve Dale is a scumbag who doesn’t give a rip about pets or their owners beyond the extent to which he is able to bleed them for his corporate sponsors.

    sadbuttrue was being kind in calling him a PFI sellout. Steve is the kind of guy who would pimp out his sisters, wife and mom if he thought there was a buck in it for Steve.

    Quite obviously cats are seeing vets a great deal less this year compared to prior years. Steve’s corporate puppet masters killed so many of them with poisoned cat food that there aren’t that many left to take to a vet. You won’t see Stevie boy talking about that though. At least not beyond treating any caller on the topic like a Hillary fan on the Rush Limbaugh show.

    Why not call him up sometime and report back to us. I’m sure we’d all be curious to know how much he charges for his famale relatives.

  10. Sharon says:

    My elderly cat was ok until I took her to her vet for a long overdue checkup. She was given a vaccination and food that made her sick. She survived but will be on twice daily medication the rest of her life. I have no respect for the AVMA.

  11. Becky says:

    Now there’s a little bit of an internet uproar on this. Steve Dale attacked? That doesn’t seem right. I have a cat with a cardiomyopathy. He’s the one person who created a fund, raised thousands and now my cat has hope. I know he’s raised thousands for shelters, speaks for no fee a lot because there’s a group for trap and neuter returning that is located near us in Minnesota he spoke for.

    I have a dog trainer friend who says the guy walks on water because he stood up to Cesar Millan when no one else would. I know this is true because I heard a program when he actually went up against the Great Cesar.

    I met him one time and at a shelter event and he seemed very sincere and was quite respectful. and his talk was also funny. I admit I don’t listen to every program, but I’ve never heard him rude to anyone. He does support more physical exams for pets. I think he’s right about that.

    Becky N.

  12. sadbuttrue says:

    Steve Dale is a flunky for the PFI and that is a sad fact. Either they got something on him or he got $omething in exchange because from day one Dale has spouted the PFI party line on the recall. There are quite a few pet “experts” who showed their true loyalties by either dismissing it as a small matter of a few deaths or actually collaborating with the cover up.
    Dale did both. Repeatedly.

    Who cares that he can’t get along with Cesar? They are both really substandard self proclaimed experts with delusions of grandeur, I think of them as the Paris Hilton’s of the pet industry.

    Being good at being a celebrity pretty much means you are not too good at anything else.
    And it certainly means that mere ordinary peons do not need to get all quiver-chinned over being permitting to meet one - this worship and dog like devotion of celebrity is so overdone.

    Did any of these fabulous celebrities help get media attention and truth about the poison to the public?

  13. Don Earl says:

    RE: “I’ve never heard him rude to anyone”

    I contacted him some months back over misinformation he has been spreading over the pet food recall. His reply was that of a person with a size 12 ego stuffed into a size 4 soul.

    About a month or so ago, a pet owner I’d been working with on pet food testing contacted him about the results. He jollied her up and offered to put her on his show. She let me know about the arrangements. I was uneasy about the situation due to my own experience with the pet food company pimp, but didn’t warn her off as I figured if he gave her fair treatment maybe it would help get more information out to other pet owners.

    I still feel bad for not doing more to tip her off about this dirtbag. She went on the show, optomistic and completely innocent of the fact it was a set up. Stevie boy the pimp tore into her without mercy and spit her out - ripped her to shreds publicly and on the air.

    So, when I call Stevie boy a pimp, it’s probably a discourtesy to pimps. Pimps are better men than Steve Dale - at least you can expect a certain level of honesty from a pimp.

    Is it a big surprise Stevie boy is able to jolly up some of his marks? Hardly. That’s what con men are especially good at. A con man not able to gain the trust of his marks would hardly be successful, now, would he?

  14. PetLover says:

    A con man? You’re kidding. He was critical of the FDA (as were many), and early on critical of PFI for not responding, even went up against some of his colleagues. I know I heard with my own ears. Clearly someone here has some sort of personal vendetaa or just doesn’t like the guy. Itchmo is great and I’ve been lurking for a very long time. But some of the posts are over board. It’s too bad.

  15. sadbuttrue says:

    Gee, Don Earl, tell us how you really feel, don’t hold back! LOL!

    Between that post and the one where someone thought Dale should be thanked- cold day in hell for that- I have not had such a giggle in weeks, thanks.

    Not to imply that Dale being crappy to someone was funny, it is sad. So much has been so sad for over a year now.

  16. Steve B says:

    I’m am saddened and astonished by all the vitriol directed toward Steve Dale. Those who have accused him of being “in cahoots” with anybody are sadly ignorant when it comes to knowing ANYTHING whatsoever about Steve … and by the way, the word “ignorant” is not being used as a slam here, but as an accurate assessment of someone who does not have all the information. The accusations directed toward him by a few here are so absurd as to be laughable! I can assure all that Steve is one of only a handful of true blue friends to animals … PERIOD!

    How do I know this? I am a close friend as well as the former executive producer of two of his syndicated radio shows, “Animal Planet Radio,” and “The Pet News With Steve Dale.” Oh the stories I could tell you all about how much Steve’s integrity GOT IN THE WAY of making him money and picking up corporate sponsors for the shows! Here’s an example: Every year I would go to the International Housewares Show where many companies displayed new pet oriented products, and Steve would then report on the “new and unusual.” Many times I was approached by corporate reps with the idea that Steve could put his name on a line of their pet products, be they toys, foods, shampoos, etc. Keep in mind that back then his syndicated shows were hurting for sponsors and ANY financial support would have been welcome. When I would approach him about these potential sources of income for the shows, he’d flatly reject the idea on the premise that it compromised his ability to stay neutral and treat every story with the fairness each deserved. Suffice it to say, Steve has never sold out to anybody … and I seriously doubt he ever would - he has too much integrity for that.

    Suggest Steve Dale isn’t a friend to rescue animals or stolen pets? Absurd!! I helped write and edit many of the stories he reported on, bringing these unfortunate animals into the spotlight. I also listened to him conduct interview after interview seeking solutions to the problems. Steve tried VERY hard to convince me NOT to buy a purebred dog (I’d always had mutts or rescues prior) even though I had an interest in going through the breeding process just once for the experience. We had huge arguments over potential pieces that needed to be re-written because Steve was concerned that his integrity might be compromised by poorly phrased ideas that could be taken out of context. We did several interviews with circus bigwigs questioning whether elephants and other animals should continue to tour with travelling shows (and whether they should be used in ANY circus events ever). Trust me, Barnum and Bailey is NOT a fan of Steve Dale … Steve has always championed animals. Now I won’t say that Steve is “militant” the way some extremists would like him to be, but that goes with the territory - you simply can’t please everybody, and that’s what I think is going on here. Steve certainly would NOT protect the pet food industry if they were culpable for the deaths of our pets … after all, what do you think he’s feeding his pets? PET FOOD!

    The nasty comments above are an example where people who for whatever reason have placed a target on Steve Dale’s back and are trying to smear a man who truly has the best interests of animals at the fore. My opinion is that if you want conspiracy theory then question the motives of those who without any true knowledge of Steve Dale (one person above even admitted as much) would spout such hateful things about a guy who has proven over many years to have our pets best interests at the top of his priority list.

    I do want to thank and applaud the comments differentiating the individuals Steve has interviewed from the organizations they may be affiliated with. It is much too narrowminded to assume that because a particular person from an organization is a “friend of Steve’s” that he must automatically support everything those organizations stand for. I like to think that most people have the capacity to think for themselves and use “common sense” to arrive at these same conclusions. I believe Steve Dale thinks that way too. I hope we’re both right.

    I’ll tell you one more thing Steve probably would prefer I not mention … He is a VERY sensitive person, and I know that these baseless accusations bother him a great deal. If those of you who have spouted this garbage have any integrity of your own, you’ll offer him an apology - you certainly owe him a big one!

    Thanks for “listening,”
    Steve

  17. sadbuttrue says:

    There is a long list of the misinformation, dismissive remarks and plain insulting things Steve Dale has said or written regarding the recall.
    A transcript of the show referenced by Don Earl could make it longer.

    Not opinion, not accusation, Steve Dale’s own words. His_own_words_.

    His own words cost him the respect a lot of people _used_ to have for him.

    For such a “sensitive” guy, Dale sure knows how to hurt people who trusted him.

  18. Steve B says:

    Is that the best you can do, sadbuttrue? “Heresay” on your part does NOT equate to fact. If you want your remarks to be taken with even a remote sense of legitimacy I suggest you produce some of this so-called “misinformation, dismissive remarks, and plain insulting things.” Saying it exists and actually producing the proof are two entirely different things.

    …Oh and one more thing - if you DO manage to produce something that is questionable make sure you produce it in CONTEXT, because the way YOU interpret things may be wholly different from the way they were stated or intended. In two plus years of producing Steve’s shows I NEVER heard him say ANYTHING that was hurtful or untrue regarding a particular subject. There WERE occasions when Steve could seem “dismissive” of something a guest was saying, but in my experience those were instances (such as the interviews with Barnum and Bailey’s bigwigs) in which some of the things they were claiming on the air were 180 degrees from what most people accepted to be “the truth,” or they directly contradicted findings from what most people would consider “reliable sources.” In other words, Steve was “keeping it real” and standing up for animals.

    Go ahead and cite your sources if indeed they exist … then we’ll see whether you have a valid reason to badmouth one of the “good guys!”

    Regards,
    Steve B.

  19. sadbuttrue says:

    Take a look around, google is your friend, the “Dale” issue has been discussed on this and other sites many times during the last 9 months,
    it has been a long ordeal and Steve Dale was a frequent offender.
    Heated discussions about whether it was one pet food company or the whole PFI he sold out to, were frequent.
    Some posters felt that Dale was just easily duped, it was not deliberate.
    It seems other posters take issue with an endorsement on Dale’s website.
    It was the frequency that convinced me of intent over bumble.

    It has all been posted many times. By many people. Strange you missed all that. So many times. On so many of the pet sites, for so many months.
    Given the vigor of your feelings, eh?
    Don Earl posted some interesting things about a certain show, feel free to post the entire transcript, if you think context will make Dale look any better.

  20. Steve B says:

    As I’ve already stated, the onus is not on me to try and dig up background to support your position … it’s on you. If you’re so certain that he’s done all these horrible things, prove it to me … so far you haven’t done anything but make baseless accusations.

    I’ve already told you all you need to know about Steve Dale’s character, how he operates, and why you can be certain that he’s just about the last person who would ever “sell out” to either a sponsor or corporation. It’s just not in the man. What you may mistake for “selling out” is probably a misinterpretation on your part of something he’s said on the air or wrote in one of his columns. Is the man infallable? Certainly not, but I can assure you that his motives are pure.

    Being the executive producer of ANY show is kind of like being married to the principals - you get to know the players extremely well, whether you’re friends or not. Part of the reason I left was because I was sick and tired of dealing with the poor excuse for a syndication company that drove both shows into the ground before Steve finally parted ways with them himself. I happen to be friends with Steve, and given his character it’s not surprising that there are very few people who have any cause to dislike him or question his motives. It is clear to me both that you DON’T even remotely know the man, and that you are relying on second hand information provided by somebody who doesn’t know hiim and apparently holds some grudge against him. Again I suspect it’s guilt by association, just like the flawed remark made about the past president of the AVMA, who probably has nothing whatsoever to do with the recent policy changes, yet he’s magically held responsible for holding those same positions. Maybe he does and maybe he doesn’t, but it’s absurd to hold somebody in the past accountable for something CURRENTLY going on. It’s also absurd to assume that Steve Dale also holds those positions because he is friendly with the guy … in a word, “ridiculous!”

    Again, I suggest that if you are going to accuse the man of something you come equipped with reliable proof. Otherwise, I (and others) will continue to call you on what to this point are comments without any merit. If you do actually provide some meaningful facts to back up your opinion, you might even wind up having a meaningful exchange with Steve himself. I have no doubt that he would entertain the idea of having you on the show if you had something of value to debate rather than a lot of accusations and opinions. Steve has never been afraid of controversy, and he certainly is willing to admit if he’s been wrong. Instead of pointless attacks, try presenting an intelligent position that has some merit and you might find you’re able to move this conversation in a positive direction instead of hiding behind the anonymity of a “pretend” screen name on a website.

    Regards,

  21. Don Earl says:

    RE: “He was critical of the FDA (as were many), and early on critical of PFI for not responding, even went up against some of his colleagues.”

    Below is my email to Dale regarding an article he wrote denouncing the acetaminophen findings and his straight PFI party line rap about the 16 dead pets. Below my email is his reply. As my ungarnished opinion of Dale would get me kicked off Itchmo, I’ll refrain from expressing it. I copy and pasted the exchange as is, with no edits. You make the call. Is Dale a stand up guy? Or a PFI/FDA pimp?

    Subject:
    Re: Acetaminophen WAS Found in the Food
    Date:
    Fri, 20 Jul 2007 14:52:57 EDT
    From:
    PetWorld@aol.com
    To:
    don-earl@waypoint.com

    In a message dated 7/7/2007 12:13:20 PM Central Daylight Time, don-earl@waypoint.com writes:

    Mr. Dale,

    The most dangerous part of the pet food recall has been the media’s
    shameless disregard for anything even vaugely resembling investigative
    journalism.

    The FDA did NOT test the acetaminophen positive samples. I know that for
    a fact as one of those samples was mine. I refused permission for the
    FDA to take those samples off the lab premises, but granted permission
    for the lab to allow the FDA to test the samples on sight, with
    witnesses present to keep the FDA honest. The FDA flat refused to test
    the samples under conditions where it would be unable to lie about the
    results.

    Maybe you’re just another pet food lobbyist with a greesed palm. If so,
    then I’m wasting my time talking to you. If not, and you are a concerned
    pet owner, then you owe it to yourself and your pet to get your facts
    straight.

    At the simplest level, melamine and cyanuric acid are for all practical
    purposes non toxic. Those substances COULD NOT have produced the
    observed effect of dead pets! If you have a brain that works and is
    capable of producing something along the lines of logic, the first thing
    you should be able to figure out is that if pets died after eating foods
    containing a non toxic substances, the cause of death was something
    other than that non toxic substance.

    The best statistical information available indicates something on the
    order of 200,000 pets were killed as a result of eating poisoned food.
    To date, two substances have been identified in pet food which are toxic
    enough to produce those kind of results: aminopterin and acetaminophen.

    The FDA has refused to investigate either substance.

    I’ve tried to make it easy for anyone who wants to cut through the media
    and FDA smoke and mirrors by publishing the facts online, with
    everything carefully sourced and documented - including scans of the
    certified lab results showing pet food adulterated with acetaminophen.
    All you have to do is be able to read.

    Ignorance is a curable condition. Why not take a few minutes to cure
    some of your own?

    Don Earl

    http://www.petfoodrecallfacts.com

    I am tempted not to even respond to emails such as yours. However, I receive few like this one. My family raised me with - if nothing else - good manners. I’m
    not so sure how or why name calling helps our animals. However, it may illustrate the kind of person I am speaking to.

    So, you know, independent veterinary toxicologists have confirmed what melamine and cyanuric acid does, they believe. They say they are not positive but
    reasonably certain, and I’ve quoted them indicating as such. If you - for whatever reasons - don’t believe them, how about the human chemists I’ve been in
    contact with?
    Does the FDA secretly convince all these people? Even if they tried, how would they know who I am about to call?

    As per the number of deaths you claim - I have no idea how you invented that number. Apparently, some website said so, therefore it must be fact.

    As for the acetaminophen - other labs have tried to reproduce (independent labs) and also the FDA, none could. If you don’t believe the FDA, that I
    understand. If you don’t believe the other labs - that’s your right. I suspect all toxicologists, chemists and labs in America are secretly in a conspiracy to fool
    us. And veterinary schools too….If so, I am fooled.

    steve dale

  22. Steve B says:

    Well then, there you have it! I read your exchange above, and frankly I don’t find fault at all with the way Steve responded to you. If certainly seems as though you have an agenda, and it also seems (from your own words) as though you flat out reject the findings of anybody other than the lab you claim your results came from. Steve’s points questioning how the FDA would or could possibly influence the other sources he contacted (especially since they couldn’t possibly know who he would call) clearly call into question your belief that somehow they’ve all been tainted, yet your lab hasn’t…

    While I don’t personally know all the ins and outs of how melamine and cyanuric acid works, I have read and heard that they are, in fact, toxic to pets (and possibly also to us). When you consider the fact that chocolate is toxic to dogs while harmless to us, it is easy to understand how seemingly innocuous substances might be quite dangerous to our pets. Should chocolate be banned because our pets might ingest it and die? I mean come on … again we’re talking about common sense or in this case, the lack of it.

    Don, your viewpoint and your attitude here is obviously skewed by a belief that there’s a conspiracy going on, and presumably it is magnified in your mind by the injury or death that may have occurred to a pet you love. If so, I understand the anger, but unfortunately I don’t see anything here that implicates Steve Dale as being in any way culpable. Sorry, but I call it as I see it … I suspect many others will interpret what you posted the same way, and sadbuttrue’s reliance on your “information” to make his or her points reiterates what I’ve been saying all along - without valid and reliable sources those points just don’t hold up. You also didn’t cite the source for your estimate on how many pets had been affected by the tainted food. I’m not saying you’re wrong … just that I have no idea if you’re right because I don’t know if the source for your estimate is a reliable and accepted one or just a wild guess you pulled out of the woodwork or maybe even got from somebody else on the net, “just guessing.”

    I think the best thing at this point is for me simply to reiterate that the Steve Dale I know personally has gone out of his way over the years to support legitimate organizations helping animals, he’s set up and raised money for research to help cure diseases in pets (search “The Ricky Fund” for one that’s especially near and dear to him), helped craft a very effective law in Chicago holding dog owners responsible for their pet’s actions instead of creating largely ineffective breed bans that blames the animals directly (this law has been used as a model by municipalities all over the country and probably also around the world), etc. etc. etc. The list truly goes on and on.

    We are lucky in this country to have the freedom not only to hold multiple points of view, but to be allowed to express them. Feel free to disagree with a position Steve Dale may hold, but when you cross the line and start spouting untruths about him you’re not doing anybody any favors. Instead you only increase the chances that at some point down the line a genuine friend to animals gets replaced by somebody who truly is a “yes man (or woman)” who will sell out to whoever pays the bills. Trust me … you DON’T want to lose Steve Dale from the airwaves and newspaper print … There are few others in the business who can match Steve’s integrity … and THAT is, ironically enough, “sadbuttrue.”

    Regards,
    Steve B.

  23. PetLover says:

    Steve B. you are right, clearly this guy has it in for Steve Dale for whatever personal reasons or personal beliefs he has. I didn’t know all that about him. But I do agree that this is all crazy beacause of all the media people out there who write about pets, this is the guy who might do the most good. And that is the general sentiment on other websites these post have now appeared on. He went up against Rimadyl early on and was one of the first to really talk about the bad reactions too. You find those stories on his website. I read about and then went to the site to check for myself.

    If this Don guy thinks Itchmo is so good (and I agree Itchmo is good) and yet Dale is so bad, why doesn’t he attack Itchmo for being on Steve’s shows so often as he attacks Steve for talking with anyone Don disagrees wit? I’ve heard the Itchmo reports on the programs. If Itchmo thought Steve Dale was a bad guy I doubt he’d appear. Now for sure I go back to lurking since by saying anything even if it based in fact you are flamed.

  24. Steve B says:

    Petlover,

    You should never be afraid to speak up for what is right. Too many people feel an air of invincibility when they post on the net, and they wind up throwing all sorts of unfounded accusations out there without ever backing up their statements with that all important four letter word … “fact.” I’ve noticed in this case they feed off each other and if they say something enough it becomes “true for them,” nevermind whether there are any reliable sources of fact to back up their often outrageous statements.

    So what if somebody flames you? The important thing is that any reasonable reader of these exchanges will quickly begin to see the pattern of common sense presented by one side versus the other, and of course they almost can’t help but arrive at the conclusion that a few disillusioned people have begun spreading misinformation all around a community.

    It’s interesting and ironic that those people who spend so much time crying “conspiracy” are actually the ones creating a conspiracy on sites like this. Did you notice how sadbuttrue made vague references to “Some posters” who “felt this” and “other posters” who “took issue” with one man’s endorsement of Steve Dale because of his former affiliation with an organization they don’t like? Then sadbuttrue went on to conclude “It was the frequency that convinced me of intent over bumble.” All of these flawed conclusions based on hearsay and opinion but never even a single reference to hard fact in support of these accusations … I mean talk about a lack of credibility among the torch and stake bearers!

    So go ahead and let them flame you … with every new post they’ll simply reinforce the casual reader’s conclusion that their claims are without merit … and you continue to look like the reasonable, responsible contributor that you’ve already shown yourself to be by stepping up and not only defending Steve Dale against these baseless accusations, but by providing the sources necessary to back up what you’ve said.

    Best Regards,
    Steve B.

  25. Don Earl says:

    It’s always interesting to watch certain players on these boards show their true PFI colors, while posting under their aliases.

    Dale claims to have talked to labs about acetaminophen in pet food, then bases his response on crack pot accusations of the black helicopter variety. So, who did he call?

    To the best of my knowledge, only three labs have tested pet food for acetaminophen: ExperTox, UC Davis and the FDA. Of UC Davis and the FDA, neither have tested samples ExperTox found positive for acetaminophen.

    If Dale is the stand up guy his sycophants claim he is, why wouldn’t he at the very least contact ExperTox? Of the hand full of journalists that have done write ups on the topic, Dale is the only one that did not contact the lab making the findings.

    He does, however, have plenty of company on “16 dead pets” farce. Gee, over 60 million servings of toxic pet food were served, which were on the market for at least 4 1/2 months that we know of, but this putz Dale figures the only pets affected were the ones in Menu Foods’ feeding trial. So, a test of the food knocks half the cats exposed to the stuff dead in their tracks in a matter of days, but it had no effect on the millions of pets exposed to it over the course of 4 1/2 months? How stupid do the Stevie boy/PFI sycophants thing people are?

    The Banfield data shows a 30% increase in kidney failure during the recall period, but Stevie boy ignores that data completely. Menu Foods alone has received over half a million complaints. The FDA received over 18,000 complaints, which were from those pet owners with the tenacity to get through on the FDA hotlines.

    So, where do Steve Dale’s loyalties lie? They are with his corporate sponsors, and he agressively attacks any pet owners likely to get in the way of his shaking the money tree. He’d happily see every pet in the country drop dead as long as there was a fast buck in it for good ol’ Stevie boy.

  26. Steve B says:

    Donnie boy, Donnie boy, Donnie boy … you REALLY must stop allowing your misguided anger to cloud your judgement! I hear “decaf” tastes just as good as the high octane stuff. Seriously, did you actually go back and read your posts? Do you have any idea how obvious the “tunnel vision” comes across?

    It’s obvious that you know next to nothing about how journalists and broadcasters go about putting together their shows and columns. Not all sources necessarily get cited in a particular piece. You have absolutely no idea whether Steve Dale checked with the various labs, yet you ASSUME things you couldn’t possibly know and then try to pawn it off as fact. Furthermore, you spout misinformation (and try to put words in his mouth) regarding what Steve Dale accepts as fact regarding the number of pets affected by the tainted food and HOPE that nobody will question your obvious errors. For your information, Steve was one of the first to DIRECTLY question the FDA about it, and he stated his belief that the numbers were probably far greater than the 16 YOU keep citing. At the same time, Steve reported his belief that the other numbers reported seemed out of line with Banfield and were perhaps exaggerated for their own PR purposes. By the way, don’t take my word for it - check the FDA’s own press conference transcripts and you’ll find Steve was right there at the beginning questioning the numbers.

    As others have already correctly stated above, Steve Dale was critical of the PFI early on and very publicly. Again, don’t believe me - check his appearances at several veterinary conferences, one with a PFI guy at the table where Steve apparently criticized them for “sticking their heads in the sand” and not responding to the crisis early enough. Your problem is that again you don’t understand that as a journalist and broadcaster Steve Dale always tries to provide an opportunity for PFI or others on either side of any story to offer their points of view. The fact that you or others may have caught a portion of one of Steve’s shows in which “the opposing viewpoint” was allowed to be made doesn’t automatically mean that Steve promotes that view … unlike you Steve Dale doesn’t pick and choose - he tends to give everyone a chance to say their piece. Also, sometimes in order to get a particular interview a broadcaster has to agree to do things a particular way - in the case of the FDA interview Steve Dale wanted to bring live callers in on the interview but they wouldn’t agree to that … so Steve read emailed questions as a way around the issue. He received angry letters from both sides stating that he was both “too easy on the FDA” and “too hard on the FDA,” proving once again that you can’t please everyone…

    Contrary to your mistaken allegations, Steve reported Banfield data correctly (according to Banfield themselves) which some of the media did not, and retractions were given as a result. By the way, Banfield agrees the numbers of total pets who sadly died were more cats than dogs. And you’re right about reports of kidney failure, but Banfield also indicated death totals may have been exaggerated by some - which you conveniently left off. As for the complaints to the FDA, you’re right – and Steve indicated the complaint numbers as you just did story after story and “on-air.” Does this sound like a guy who’s “in bed” with PFI? Here’s another one for you. Steve is actively working to try and get a regulatory agency created to help prevent this sort of tragedy from ever happening again … sort of a “CDC” for the pet food industry. Again I ask you, does this sound like somebody “in bed” with PFI?

    It’s obvious that you’re very angry about something … I would guess that you lost a loved pet because of the tainted food. Regardless of why you’re angry, jumping to mistaken conclusions (as you’ve obviously done) and attempting to smear one of the most even-handed journalist/broadcasters out there only makes you look foolish, especially when Steve Dales track record of going above and beyond for our pets (as well as for people) spans many years and is above reproach. If you did some actual fact finding and research on the man instead of ignorantly bad-mouthing him you’d already know this.

    Look, I and others have already listed more than a fair share of Steve’s accomplishments and examples of the man’s integrity. Truth is, we barely scratched the surface regarding what a genuine and caring individual he is. But I believe that unless you do the research yourself and come to realize the mistake you (and others) have made by wrongly accusing one of the “good guys” with being “in bed” with the “bad guys,” nothing that I or anyone else can add will change your mind. For whatever reason you’ve got a vendetta going and unless you take a breather and think things through this thread has run its course. I believe that anybody who reads to this point will come to the correct conclusion about who’s right and who’s wrong here. Having said that, it’s my intention to put this matter to bed after this response.

    Write what you want … believe what you want. I’ve told you all you need to know about my friend and former colleague, Steve Dale. The only thing I would add is that it’s all fine and good if you feel you must hide behind anonymous comments on a website while making unfounded attacks on another person, but if you truly wish to arrive at a positive solution to whatever is eating at you I suggest you personally contact Steve again. This time, instead of attacking him (as the tone of your last email did) try opening up a conversation. For all you know you might get another opportunity to re-focus public awareness on finding solutions to the pet food safety problem - isn’t that what you want at the end of the day? Try becoming part of the solution instead of blindly attacking somebody who is probably more your friend than you know…

    Good luck with it and

    Regards,
    Steve B.

  27. online slot says:

    U’ve got good pics, the site could use a tiny bit of work (no offense) its still awesome


Close
E-mail It