First, Phil - I always love that you seek out data - you're so valuable to all the discussions that occur here
! But....I think I can only take this experiment with a grain of salt - PLEASE note what was tested here in "Phase 2":
"Raw dog and cat foods, exotic animal feed, and jerky-type treats purchased through the Internet were tested in Phase 2" ---- I mean...??!
How on earth do we know or not know whether 99% of the bacteria wasn't all found in these "jerky treats". Using this experiment as evidence against
proper feeding of properly bought and prepared raw PET FOOD (not jerky treats, NOT exotic feed) seems grossly unfair and inaccurate. Ever heard what is found on Bully Sticks (hello clostridium etc!)...? Treats are some of the most germ-infested items on the pet market. Totally unfair to put raw food (which is treated TOTALLY different in manufacturing!) and jerky treats in the same silo!
If I have some time, I will try to locate the info regarding salmonella in kibble bags...it's on YT somewhere, which can be tough to locate. It used to say "wash hands, salmonella warning etc" on every kibble bag, btw...so it's a very real thing - not something made up.
Bottom line is (and to Brit's good point) there are germs / bugs everywhere; our paper money bills are infested with e.coli at all times. My firsthand experience for the last *
8 years* of raw feeding is that the grim warnings are grossly overwrought and perhaps are put out there for other reasons. The FDA and USDA are not groups I trust - as their "studies" are often designed to achieve a message they want to craft, wrapped in statistics that aren't exactly clean, but still achieve their goal (the
real goal often being cloaked in some other end-point, which is hugely frustrating!).