Keeping Your Lawn From Bugging You

  • There's a movement to stop using pesticides and sprays on your lawn. (Photo courtesy of Horia Varlan CC-BY)

A lot of us have a love-hate relationship with our lawns. We love them when they’re lush. We hate them when they’re full of dandelions and dead patches. It’s easy to have someone come out and spray pesticides to take care of weeds and bugs. But some people say it’s not necessary and could do more harm than good. Rebecca Williams reports:

Transcript

A lot of us have a love-hate relationship with our lawns. We love them when they’re lush. We hate them when they’re full of dandelions and
dead patches. It’s easy to have someone come out and spray pesticides to take care of weeds and bugs. But some people say it’s not necessary and could
do more harm than good. Rebecca Williams reports:

So, you might be using pesticides on your lawn right now. And of
course, the pesticide industry says that’s okay.

The industry says the chemicals are safe to use on the lawn if you use
them correctly.

Alan James is president of Responsible Industry for a Sound
Environment, or RISE. It’s a trade group for pesticide companies.

“If individuals or professional applicators read the labels and follow
labels, the likelihood of misuse of pesticides is virtually zero because the
labels provide all the information a consumer or professional needs to
apply products both efficiently and safely.”

But the problem is, not everybody reads the label.

Alan James says if you’re hiring someone to spray your lawn you should
make sure they’re certified and insured. You should also take your kids’
and pet’s toys off the lawn before they spray.

But a lot of people say there’s no point in using chemicals just to make
your lawn look good.

Jay Feldman is with the group Beyond Pesticides. He says of the 30
most common lawn pesticides, most of them are suspected by the
Environmental Protection Agency to cause cancer, birth defects or other health problems.

“There’s a range of adverse effects that are indicated as a part of the
pesticide registration program at EPA. EPA knows this information.
Why not remove pesticides from the equation, especially in light of the
fact that they’re not really necessary?”

There’s a movement to stop using pesticides in North America. Both
Ontario and Quebec have banned the sale and cosmetic use of
pesticides.

So if you’re not going to use pesticides, what do you do?

That’s a question Kevin Frank gets a lot. He’s an extension agent at
Michigan State University and an expert on lawns.

“I love to mow my lawn on the weekends because nobody can call me on
the phone or email me with questions.”

He’s been showing me green, healthy test plots of grass and some that
look sad and neglected. The scientists here have been working to find
ways to have good-looking lawns without a lot of chemicals.

Back in his office, Kevin Frank says he tells people they shouldn’t be
afraid to experiment.

“Do you have it in you to let it go for one season and see what happens?
And it could be ugly, so you’ve got to be prepared for that!”

He says a healthy, dense lawn is actually really good at fighting off
weeds and pests all on its own. So, how do you get a healthy, dense lawn
without a lot of chemicals? Frank says it might take a couple years to get
there. And it means going against conventional lawn advice.

“We’ve done a great deal of research here at Michigan State that runs
contrary to what I call ‘turf dogma’. You know: water deeply and
infrequently – and we’ve shown if you do it on a more frequent basis you
end up with a healthier plan overall.”

He recommends watering lightly – just 10 minutes – every day instead
of soaking the lawn once a week. Frank says it’s also good to fertilize
twice a year, use a mulch mower, and mow high instead of giving the
grass a buzz cut.

He says that could make your lawn so healthy, it might mean you won’t
need to spray or hire someone to spray your lawn.

He says the biggest adjustment in reducing pesticide use is managing
your expectations, and deciding how many weeds and bugs you can live
with.

For The Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

EPA Questions Pet Pesticides

  • The EPA plans to develop more stringent testing and evaluation requirements for both existing and new products.(Photo courtesy of Isiegert CC-2.0)

Tens of thousands of pets are getting sick when their owners use flea and tick pesticides the wrong way. The Environmental Protection Agency wants the companies to change the directions on the labels. Rebecca Williams has more:

Transcript

Tens of thousands of pets are getting sick when their owners use flea and tick pesticides the wrong way. The Environmental Protection Agency wants the companies to change the directions on the labels. Rebecca Williams has more:

EPA officials are concerned about spot-on pesticides for fleas and ticks – the drops you put on your pet’s back.

EPA has been investigating these products because of a recent huge jump in reports of negative effects on pets. Most are mild… such as skin irritation. But there have also been reports of vomiting, seizures and in some cases, death.

Steve Owens is with the EPA. He says these products are poisons. And he says the labels are not always clear.

“The consumers in many cases were left to guess for themselves the appropriate amount to be used on their particular pet.”

The EPA is working with companies to put more detailed directions on the labels.

In the meantime, Owens says you should be really careful about reading the directions. He says it’s especially important not to use dog products on cats.

For The Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Prairie Dog Wars

  • Keith Edwards, a rancher in Kansas, is in favor of poisoning the prairie dogs. (Photo by Devin Browne)

Often we hear stories about
the government trying to get
farmers and ranchers to do
things that are better for
the environment. But Devin
Browne has a story about a
rancher trying to do something
better for the environment
and getting in trouble with
the government:

Transcript

Often we hear stories about
the government trying to get
farmers and ranchers to do
things that are better for
the environment. But Devin
Browne has a story about a
rancher trying to do something
better for the environment
and getting in trouble with
the government:

In western Kansas, there’s a war going on. People are suing each other and threatening each other and there’s poisons and noxious gasses involved. They all call it the ‘prairie dog wars,’ but few of them agree on what it is they’re really fighting about.

Some people say this is about a bad neighbor who’s ruining things for other ranchers. Some say it’s about whether you can let wildlife live on your land. And still, other people say that the conflict in Kansas is about whether the government gets to tell you what you can do on your own land.

(sound of prairie dog barking)

Prairie dogs about a foot tall, in the squirrel family, though technically rodents. Ranchers hate them because they eat grass that’s meant for cows. But biologists love them because where there are prairie dogs there are also all the other animals that need them for food or shelter – hawks, foxes, badgers, owls, and maybe most importantly – the black footed ferret, one of America’s most endangered mammals. We’ll tell you more about the ferret in a moment.

“It’s been said that prairie dogs are the most important animals on the plains and I agree with that.”

At the center of all this controversy is Larry Haverfield He’s a bearded guy in bib overalls, a born and bred Kansas rancher. Four years ago, he stood up at a county meeting and said he liked prairie dogs. And he wasn’t going to kill them anymore.

Ever since then his neighbors have been organizing against him.

Keith Edwards is one of them.

“We’ve had county meetings, we’ve had a petition, we’ve filed the legal complaints that you can go through the county, and we’ve done that several times.”

Second, third, fourth generation ranchers will tell you so in no uncertain terms they’ve been fighting a war against the prairie dogs. But now these ranchers are fighting against one of their own, Larry Haverfield. It’s gotten ugly. Some might even say petty.

Again, Larry Haverfield.

“Well, they’ve threatened to come in on us, and they have, we haven’t paid all the bills yet either.”

When he says come in on us, he means come in onto his property. Exterminators hired by the county to poison the prairie dogs, the one or two days a year when he’s not home – when he and his wife are in court, in Topeka, battling lawsuits. And then, not only the poisoning, but the bill for the poisoning – for thousands of dollars.

This might sound like illegal trespassing, but, in Kansas, there’s nothing illegal about it. An old law, from 1901, says that the government can poison varmints on your land & then bill you if you don’t kill them yourself.

Haverfield says it’s not just the prairie dogs that are affected by the poisoning. The endangered black footed ferrets eat prairie dogs to survive. Since there are so many prairie dogs on the Haverfield’s land, it was decided that they should host one of the first re-introductions of the ferrets. Since it’s endangered, it can’t be legally poisoned.

But the ferrets didn’t stop the county. Haverfield says the state law and the federal Endangered Species Act are working against each other.

“That’s quite a conflict, we think the endangered species act will rule in that argument.”

And an environmental group thinks Haverfield should be able to do what he wants on his land. Ron Klataske is with the Audubon of Kansas.

“Basically, the conflict in western Kansas is: are landowners allowed to have native wildlife on their land?”

Ironically, ranchers such as Keith Edwards say they’re worried about being able to do what they want on their land too.

“Our question is: what will be able to do with our land when the black footed ferret becomes established? And we poison prairie dogs and it accidentally poisons a ferret? Does that leave us open for a lawsuit? Scares us to death.”

Edwards is afraid that this is only the beginning – that if he can’t poison what he wants on his own land, will he have any freedoms as a farmer at all?

Haverfield says he plans to stick to his principles and keep the prairie dogs & the ferrets on his land, no matter what it costs him.

For The Environment Report, I’m Devin Browne.

Related Links

Time to Eat the Dog?

  • Meredith Mull loves dogs. She owns five and works as a groomer. She's not getting rid of any of her pets to help the environment. (Photo by Julie Grant)

We’ve all heard about the
environmental problems our
gas-guzzling cars and trucks
cause. But some researchers
say our vehicles aren’t the
biggest energy hogs. The biggest
energy users actually live
in our homes. Julie Grant
reports about the new book
‘Time To Eat The Dog?’ about
the wasteful ways of our pets:

Transcript

We’ve all heard about the
environmental problems our
gas-guzzling cars and trucks
cause. But some researchers
say our vehicles aren’t the
biggest energy hogs. The biggest
energy users actually live
in our homes. Julie Grant
reports about the new book
‘Time To Eat The Dog?’ about
the wasteful ways of our pets:

Robert Vale is sorry. He didn’t set out to incriminate Fido. He and his wife Brenda Vale specialize in sustainable living at Victoria University in New Zealand. And they just wanted to see how much of the world’s resources it takes to do things like eat, work, play sports, and own pets.

“The thing that most surprised us, and was the most unexpected was the scale of the impact of pets – which was really, really high.”

Vale says a big dog, like a German Shepard, actually has a bigger ecological footprint than an SUV.

To measure the ecological paw-print of pets, the Vales looked at the ingredients in common brands of dried pet foods. Based on recommended portion sizes, they calculated that a medium sized dog would consume more than 3 ounces of dried meat a day. To get that much dried meat, the Vales found, it takes nearly a pound of fresh meat. Add that up each day, and they concluded a medium sized dog eats about 360 pounds of meat a year!

Robert Vale says raising that meat – beef, lamb and chicken – has an environmental impact.

“And we did the calculation based on a dog eating chicken, which is a fairly low footprint meat, rather than say beef, which is a fairly high footprint meat. So, we tried to bias it in favor of the dog. But it still came out really big. It was a big surprise, really.”

Vale says the dog takes more than 2 and a half times more energy and resources than building and driving an SUV 6000 miles a year.

These numbers aren’t just coming from the Vales.
The New Scientist Magazine asked the Stockholm Environment Institute in England to calculate a dog’s paw-print, and the findings were almost exactly the same.

But none of this really computes with dog-lover Meredith Mull. She doesn’t understand why Robert Vale would even look into this.

“He must not have a pet. He must not know what it’s like to be loved by an animal and take care of it and have it give you nothing but respect and loyalty and love. He must not know what it feels like.”

The Vales don’t have any pets. They used to have cats and other animals. But when they died, Robert Vale says they felt they shouldn’t replace them and use more of the world’s resources just to give themselves a little more comfort.

“We are increasingly pushing up to a question of limits. What can we have, what, everything. I think to some extent, that’s why it’s unpopular. We’ve all been brought up to believe that not only can we have more of everything, but it’s our right to have more of everything.”

But some people think the Vales are barking up the wrong tree.

Chetana Mirle works on global warming issues at the Humane Society of the United States. She says instead of blaming dogs, people should look at what they, themselves are eating – and how that contributes to environmental problems.

“So to me, I felt like, ‘are you kidding me?’ Um, we’re worried about our pets, and what our pets are eating instead of what we’re eating, and what our consumption is about – which has such a huge disproportionately large impact on climate change and the environment in general.”

It’s not that the researchers want people to blame dogs and cats instead of themselves. They say they just want people to understand that each choice we make – right down to whether we have pets – has an environmental impact.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Related Links

Your Pet and Toxic Toys

  • The government does not regulate pet products at all. An environmental group looked at pet toys and found some were contaminated with lead. (Photo by Jessi Ziegler)

An examination of pet products
on store shelves found some of
them were contaminated. Lester
Graham reports there is currently
no regulation of toxins in pet
toys and other products:

Transcript

An examination of pet products
on store shelves found some of
them were contaminated. Lester
Graham reports there is currently
no regulation of toxins in pet
toys and other products:

Your puppy’s chew toy might be poisoning him.

The government does not regulate pet products at all. An environmental group looked at pet toys and found some were contaminated with lead.

Mike Shriberg is with the Ecology Center.

“We found over a quarter of pet products had detectable levels of lead in them. Over 7% would have been recalled if they were children’s products.”

Signs of lead poisoning in dogs can be more aggressiveness – even toward the pet’s owner – or withdrawn behavior.

So, how do you tell whether your pet’s toy or bedding is safe?

“There’s no real way to tell. Our data base, healthystuff-dot-org is a first step. But, remember, we only tested a small percentage of the millions of pet products out there.”

Shriberg’s group is calling for the government start doing something to stop toxic chemicals such as lead from being used in pet products.

For The Environment Report, I’m Lester Graham.

Related Links

Kittens and Climate Change

  • Climate change is making cats' breeding season longer, resulting in more kittens taken to shelters (Photo courtesy of the US Humane Society)

Every year between three to four million
dogs and cats in the US are euthanized in
shelters. That’s according to the American
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
That’s because no one will take them in. Kavitha
Cardoza reports the
warmer temperatures caused by climate change are
making the problem of too many cats worse:

Transcript

Every year between three to four million
dogs and cats in the US are euthanized in
shelters. That’s according to the American
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
That’s because no one will take them in. Kavitha
Cardoza reports the
warmer temperatures caused by climate change are
making the problem of too many cats worse:

It takes just one cc of sodium pentobarbital and a few seconds to turn this…

(sound of cat mewing)

into this…

(silence)

Each year about twice as many cats as dogs are killed.

(sound of dogs barking)

At the Washington Humane Society Shelter there’s a large whiteboard with instructions
scrawled on it. Kittens “Rice and Gravy” need socializing. The dog Clint Eastwood
does not like other dogs.

Some animals are put down because they have medical problems. Others because
they’re aggressive. But, the main reason is there are just too many of animals and not
enough homes willing to adopt them.

It’s a year round problem, but Spring – around April, begins what’s called the “kitten
season.” Michelle Otis, head of the shelter, says that’s been changing.

“We’re finding that starts earlier every year with the climate change. We’re starting to
see large litters come in as early as February now.”

That would start to slow down in September, but now with warmer winters, it’s
continuing until December.

Otis says on a busy day they get what she calls “an avalanche” of kittens – about 100 a
day – some weighing less than a pound with their eyes still closed.

No one at this shelter wants to euthanize more kittens or puppies.

The only solution they see is to get more people to spay or neuter their pets. But that’s
not easy.

(sound of Jeep stopping and door closing)

Paul Hibler is an animal control officer in Montgomery County Maryland. He’s
responding to a complaint call.

(knocking on door)

Officer: “Hi is victor home?”

Lady: “He’s working.”

Officer: “Does he still have dogs?”

While he waits to get the owner on the phone, Hibler walks to the backyard and points
out the 6 large pups crowded in a small space. They’ve all got “cherry eye” or a red
inflammation of the eyelid.

“This is typical of someone who doesn’t understand the importance of spaying and
neutering. I think he just assumed well if the dog became pregnant she’ll have a couple
of pups and ill be able to find homes for them. And lo and behold she had 10 times the
number he thought.”

Hibler says overpopulation could easily be controlled if people would spay and neuter
their pets.

There are many reasons why pet owners don’t get their pets ‘fixed’. Often it’s the cost.
Sometimes they don’t know where to go. But it’s also myths people believe, such as
“my pet will become fat” or “not as affectionate.”

There are some owners who come to the shelter again and again with litter after litter.
That’s despite offers to spay their pets for free. It’s a huge financial burden for shelters.
And it’s an emotional burden for the people who work there.

Diana Foley at the Washington Humane Society says no matter how many times she’s
been present when an animal is euthanized, it’s never gets easier.

“Each time that you’re faced with that decision, and you’re in that moment, and you’re
thinking how can you make him have a good end. And you’re petting them and holding
them and kissing them and touching them, talking to them and you’re saying how can
you make that animal’s last moments peaceful.”

And with climate change making the breeding season longer, the animal shelter workers
are finding their spending even more “last moments” with unwanted animals.

For The Environment Report, I’m Kavitha Cardoza.

Related Links

Puppies, Poo, and Moose Tracks

  • Aimee Hurt, with the group Working Dogs for Conservation (Photo by Brian Mann)

Researchers and environmentalists are
experimenting with a new method for collecting
biological samples in the wild. They’re using
trained tracking dogs to sniff out everything
from rare plants to moose pellets. Brian Mann
joined the hunt in New York’s Adirondack Mountains:

Transcript

Researchers and environmentalists are
experimenting with a new method for collecting
biological samples in the wild. They’re using
trained tracking dogs to sniff out everything
from rare plants to moose pellets. Brian Mann
joined the hunt in New York’s Adirondack Mountains:

It’s early, the sun still tangled in the alder trees, when we set off
on foot down a
narrow logging road.

(sound of walking down the road)

Soon, Heidi Kretser with the Wildlife Conservation Society finds the
first evidence that
we’re not alone.

“These are moose tracks.”

New York’s moose population has surged in recent years, to move than
500 animals.
Researchers have been tracking moose using airplanes and radio collars.

But today, were tagging along behind a cheerful black lab mix named
Wicket.

(sound of dog’s collar jingling)

Wicket flashes back and forth across the trail, snuffling eagerly.
She wears a bright
red vest and that tinkling bell is designed to keep her from actually
meeting a moose
head-on.

Her owner and handler, Aimee Hurt, says using dogs to find biological
samples – everything from plants to rare birds – isn’t new.

“I think if you talk to a lot of biologists who’ve been out
in the field for
decades, ‘Oh yeah, my dog figured out that we were looking for —
whatever.’ And they
started honing in on it and helping out. So I really think that dog’s
have been
biologists’ partners for a long time.”

Hurt’s organization – Working Dogs for Conservation, based in Montana
– took the idea
one step further, training dogs in much the same way that police train
K-9 units.

Wicket knows how to find six different kinds of scat, including
mountain lion, grizzly
bear – and now moose

“She is an air-scent dog, which means there’s no tracking
involved — she’s
just sniffing the air for a whiff of scat.”

Heidi Kretser, with the Wildlife Conservation Society, says moose
droppings can tell a
lot about why these Clydesdale-sized animals are returning to New York, what they’re
eating, and how they’ll reshape this forest if their numbers keep
growing.

“By understanding the diet, we’ll get a better sense of what
habitats they
might impact long-term, since they eat 40 pounds of vegetation a day.”

(sound of birds and footsteps)

Wicket leads the team on long ramble through the radiant lime green
forest, and down
across a burbling creek.

(sound of creek)

We see moose sign everywhere – mule-sized tracks, maple trees
stripped of bark. And
then Wicket sniffs out her first pile of droppings.

“Whoopee, good girl. Very nice!”

More poop means better data. So the pellets are trucked away in a
plastic bag for the
trip back to the lab.

For Wicket, the reward is a few minutes of joyous play with a squishy
rubber ball.

(sound of squeezing toy)

“Let’s get to work!” (bell jangling)

Then the team is off again, with Wicket snuffling happily through the
trees. Biologists
hope to use the same method to study other wildlife – from grizzlies
to mountain lions.

For The Environment Report, I’m Brian Mann.

Related Links

Keeping Your Lawn From Bugging You

  • There's a movement to stop using pesticides and sprays on your lawn (Photo by Ilja Wanka)

A lot of us have a love-hate relationship
with our lawns. We love them when they’re lush.
We hate them when they’re full of dandelions and
dead patches. It’s easy to have someone come out
and spray pesticides to take care of weeds and bugs.
But some people say it’s not necessary and could
do more harm than good. Rebecca Williams reports:

Transcript

A lot of us have a love-hate relationship
with our lawns. We love them when they’re lush.
We hate them when they’re full of dandelions and
dead patches. It’s easy to have someone come out
and spray pesticides to take care of weeds and bugs.
But some people say it’s not necessary and could
do more harm than good. Rebecca Williams reports:

So, you might be using pesticides on your lawn right now. And of
course, the pesticide industry says that’s okay.

The industry says the chemicals are safe to use on the lawn if you use
them correctly.

Alan James is president of Responsible Industry for a Sound
Environment, or RISE. It’s a trade group for pesticide companies.

“If individuals or professional applicators read the labels and follow
labels, the likelihood of misuse of pesticides is virtually zero because the
labels provide all the information a consumer or professional needs to
apply products both efficiently and safely.”

But the problem is, not everybody reads the label.

Alan James says if you’re hiring someone to spray your lawn you should
make sure they’re certified and insured. You should also take your kids’
and pet’s toys off the lawn before they spray.

But a lot of people say there’s no point in using chemicals just to make
your lawn look good.

Jay Feldman is with the group Beyond Pesticides. He says of the 30
most common lawn pesticides, most of them are suspected by the
Environmental Protection Agency to cause cancer, birth defects or other health problems.

“There’s a range of adverse effects that are indicated as a part of the
pesticide registration program at EPA. EPA knows this information.
Why not remove pesticides from the equation, especially in light of the
fact that they’re not really necessary?”

There’s a movement to stop using pesticides in North America. Both
Ontario and Quebec have banned the sale and cosmetic use of
pesticides. And Home Depot in Canada recently said it will stop selling
traditional pesticides all together by the end of the year.

So if you’re not going to use pesticides, what do you do?

That’s a question Kevin Frank gets a lot. He’s an extension agent at
Michigan State University and an expert on lawns.

“I love to mow my lawn on the weekends because nobody can call me on
the phone or email me with questions.”

He’s been showing me green, healthy test plots of grass and some that
look sad and neglected. The scientists here have been working to find
ways to have good-looking lawns without a lot of chemicals.

Back in his office, Kevin Frank says he tells people they shouldn’t be
afraid to experiment.

“Do you have it in you to let it go for one season and see what happens?
And it could be ugly, so you’ve got to be prepared for that!”

He says a healthy, dense lawn is actually really good at fighting off
weeds and pests all on its own. So, how do you get a healthy, dense lawn
without a lot of chemicals? Frank says it might take a couple years to get
there. And it means going against conventional lawn advice.

“We’ve done a great deal of research here at Michigan State that runs
contrary to what I call ‘turf dogma’. You know: water deeply and
infrequently – and we’ve shown if you do it on a more frequent basis you
end up with a healthier plan overall.”

He recommends watering lightly – just 10 minutes – every day instead
of soaking the lawn once a week. Frank says it’s also good to fertilize
twice a year, use a mulch mower, and mow high instead of giving the
grass a buzz cut.

He says that could make your lawn so healthy, it might mean you won’t
need to spray or hire someone to spray your lawn.

He says the biggest adjustment in reducing pesticide use is managing
your expectations, and deciding how many weeds and bugs you can live
with.

For The Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Allergies: Are We Too Clean?

  • This label on a package of cookies has six foods of the Big Eight. Over 90 percent of food allergies are caused by just eight foods: milk, eggs, peanuts, tree nuts such as almonds, soy, wheat, fish and shellfish. (Photo by Lester Graham)

Doctors say problems with allergies are
increasing. Up to 30% of Americans are
allergic to something. Rebecca Williams reports
doctors are trying to figure out why allergies are
on the rise:

Transcript

Doctors say problems with allergies are
increasing. Up to 30% of Americans are
allergic to something. Rebecca Williams reports
doctors are trying to figure out why allergies are
on the rise:

Micaela Keller is ten years old. Her world is full of things that might
make her sick.

“I’m allergic to pollen, ragweed, anything in the daisy family, nuts, all
nuts, dairy, soy, cats and grass.”

Food allergies are usually the worst allergies. Micaela says she knows
right away if she accidentally eats something she’s allergic to.

“When I have soy I will get really itchy and might get red in the face. My
lips might start swelling up or something.”

In the worst cases… allergic reactions can make it hard to breathe.
Sometimes, your airways can shut down, your blood pressure can drop and you
can die.

Experts say cases of food allergies have doubled over the past 10 years.
Kids have seen the highest increases. But no one knows exactly why.

Dr. Marc McMorris treats kids’ allergies. He’s in charge of the Food
Allergy Clinic at the University of Michigan.

He says our immune systems are so complex that there’s probably not a simple
explanation. He says there are probably at least three different things
going on.

First, allergies run in families. If both parents have allergies, there’s a
70 to 80% chance their child will have allergies.

Second, there’s the way we process food in this country. Take peanuts for
example. Dr. McMorris says dry roasting peanuts makes them more likely to
cause reactions.

Then… there’s the third thing and it’s really causing a lot of debate.
It’s called the hygiene hypothesis. The idea is: we might be too clean for
our own good.

“The immune system is put there for survival, to fight
bacteria, viruses and parasites and that type of thing and in the last 50 to 80
years we’ve had antibiotics, vaccines and a much cleaner world, and if the
immune system doesn’t have to worry about those issues as much it’s going to
find something else to do.”

So… instead of constantly fighting off bacteria… the immune system
thinks something as harmless as a peanut butter sandwich… is going to hurt
the body. So the immune system treats the peanut butter like an invader.

Dr. McMorris says there’s evidence that the more germs you’re exposed to
early in life, the less likely you are to have allergies. He says it
doesn’t make sense to go back to a dirtier lifestyle. But he says we should
be careful about some things… like not over-using antibiotics and harsh
antibacterial soaps.

He also says being exposed to some kinds of bacteria might help. He says
there’s evidence that having pets in the house might make you less likely to
develop allergies.

“The data for pets would say if you have three or more cats or dogs within a
household that you have a lower risk for allergies.”

That’s because you’re exposed to a certain bacteria animals carry. It might
help your system fight off allergies.

But Dr. McMorris says it’s not a good idea to rush out and get a litter of
kittens if you already have allergies in the family. That could make the
problem a lot worse.

Remember Micaela, the girl with all the allergies? Her mom thinks having
pets in the house does help.

(Joy to dogs: “Say hi. High five!” dogs bark)

Joy Keller says her kids have grown up with dogs. They’ve been tested and
it turns out they’re not allergic. So their doctor said they should keep
the dogs. Keller says they just have to vacuum more often.

“We’ve been told right from the beginning, keep where they sleep clean but
don’t be obsessive about cleaning, they have to live in this world and so
the world is not a sterile place.”

The world is not a sterile place. But maybe… we’re trying to make it a
little too sterile.

For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Holistic Medicine for Pets

  • Many holistic veterinarians think both dogs and cats can benefit from being fed fresh food. (Photo by Kinna Ohman)

Veterinarians who use a holistic approach to healing make up only about one percent of
all veterinarians in the country. But their numbers are growing. And so is their
popularity among pet owners. The mainstream veterinary community wants to see more
science behind the methods used by holistic veterinarians. Kinna Ohman
reports:

Transcript

Veterinarians who use a holistic approach to healing make up only about one percent of
all veterinarians in the country. But their numbers are growing. And so is their
popularity among pet owners. The mainstream veterinary community wants to see more
science behind the methods used by holistic veterinarians. Kinna Ohman
reports:


The snow’s starting to fall as I arrive at a small, yellow farmhouse. I hurry my dogs up to
the front door and step inside.


(Sound of dogs)


This is the veterinary clinic of Dr. Konrad Kruesi. He’s a holistic veterinarian with a
different approach to animal healthcare. One thing Dr. Kruesi does is to take a lot of time
teaching clients how to help heal their animals. He says it’s hard work but most clients
embrace the idea:


“Nine out of ten of them do a wonderful job. They do make food, they learn
massage, they learn to stretch their animal, they’ll buy air filters for the allergic
individual. They see that healing is a progression.”


Pet owners who switch to holistic veterinarians such as Kruesi swear by this approach,
and Neil and Joannie Alcorn are perfect examples. They found Dr. Kruesi after the local
veterinarians said they’d run out of options to help their dog Poppy. Poppy developed
complications after picking up a rare parasite, and the veterinarians tried everything from
exploratory surgery to steroids. Neil Alcorn says after ten months of this, they told him
to prepare for his dog’s death:


“The vets were now basically saying you should get prepared for the fact Poppy’s
not going to last much longer. And they didn’t have anything else to offer.”


But the Alcorns decided to keep trying. They researched holistic veterinarians and came
across the name of Konrad Kruesi. Right away, Dr. Kruesi says he taught the Alcorns
how to prepare fresh, homemade food for their dog. They started with a simple puree of
natural foods and offered it to Poppy. Within a few days, their dog was showing more
interest in food for the first time in months. Dr. Kruesi then added natural supplements to
help build up Poppy’s strength. Neil Alcorn says the good results continued:


“It was so remarkable. Within between two to three months, she had been weaned
off of every single medication, including the steroids, and was beginning to function
again as a living being.”


Veterinarians such as Kruesi say this kind of care shows how a natural and holistic
approach should be part of standard veterinary treatment, but there’s no policy within the
mainstream veterinary community to link clients such as the Alcorns with holistic
veterinarians.


Dr. Craig Smith is with the American Veterinary Medical Association. He says most vets
are cautious about fully supporting holistic veterinary medicine until they see more
science:


“Unfortunately, for too many of the complementary and alternative veterinary
medical therapies, including some of the nutritional recommendations, we don’t
have the science. I’m not saying it doesn’t work, it obviously does work for some
animals. The question is how can you, as a practicing veterinarian, develop your
level of confidence to say this is going to work for your dog.”


So the larger community of veterinarians is reluctant to endorse holistic medicine as part
of standard animal care, but this doesn’t stop pet owners such as the Alcorn from
continuing to use the holistic methods for their animals. They’re much more involved in
their animals’ healthcare, from preparing meals to being part of decision making at the
local veterinary office. Neil Alcorn says they don’t need to go further than Poppy for
proof it works. She’s still going strong six years after the local veterinarians gave up on
her:


“She was sixteen years old this last September. This weekend I took her hiking for
several two to three mile hikes. And she still plays with us. She’s gray, she’s
showing her age but then so are we all. And we have every hope of sending birthday
congratulations to Dr. Kruesi on Poppy’s seventeenth birthday next September.
(laughs) Even to us, it’s a bit of an amazing story.”


For the Environment Report, I’m Kinna Ohman.

Related Links