The Food Bowl Connection: Pet Nutrition, Owner Preference and Public Health
- veterinaryvoicesuk
- 11 minutes ago
- 7 min read
To accompany the podcast on Vet Voices On Air The Food Bowl Connection: Pet Nutrition, Owner Preference and Public Health due for release 9/8/2026
While complete commercial cooked diets (commonly referred to as kibble) remain a common choice for many UK dog and cat owners, interest in other feeding approaches has grown rapidly. Raw meat-based diets, plant-based foods, insect protein, lightly cooked diets and minimally processed diets are all now part of a widening pet food landscape.
A series of studies involving researchers from the University of Liverpool has explored this changing landscape, examining not only the microbiological risks associated with some feeding practices but also why owners make the dietary choices they do and how veterinary professionals can communicate evidence-based advice more effectively.
Why Owners Choose Certain Diets
One of the most important themes emerging from recent research is that pet owners generally choose a diet because they believe it is the best option for their animal.
During a recent Vet Voices On Air podcast discussion, veterinary surgeon Dr Genever Morgan BSc (Hons) BVetMed (Hons) CertAVP PhD FHEA MRCVS and veterinary nurse Georgia Woods-Lee BSc (Hons) RVN CertCFVHNut VTS (Nutrition) emphasised that feeding decisions are often rooted in a desire to improve pet health, alongside personal beliefs about nutrition, natural living and wellbeing. Owners may have strong emotional connections to food and often view feeding as one of the few aspects of their pet's healthcare that they control directly.
This context helps explain the findings of the study A Dog's Dinner: Factors Affecting Food Choice and Feeding Practices for UK Dog Owners Feeding Raw Meat-Based or Conventional Cooked Diets, which surveyed 1,831 UK dog owners representing 3,212 dogs.
The study found that food choice is influenced by a combination of owner beliefs and dog-related factors. Owners feeding raw meat diets were more likely to own multiple dogs and frequently cited a desire to provide a "more natural" diet. They were also less likely to report that their feeding decisions had been influenced by veterinary professionals.
Instead, owners feeding raw diets were more likely to seek advice from social media, breeders, friends and family members. Many believed raw feeding offered benefits including improved coat condition, oral health, digestion, mobility, behaviour and performance.
Importantly, owners feeding raw diets generally did not perceive their chosen feeding method as posing a significant risk to their dog, themselves or other people and animals in contact with the dog. By contrast, owners feeding conventional diets were more likely to view raw feeding as risky, particularly in relation to bone injuries, foreign bodies and health concerns.
These findings highlight a major challenge for veterinary communication. Public health messages about feeding practices must not only be scientifically accurate but must also reach owners through trusted channels and acknowledge the values and motivations driving their decisions.
The Influence of "Natural" Feeding
The podcast discussion also explored the growing influence of the concept of "natural" nutrition.
Many owners are increasingly concerned about food processing, additives and ingredients, reflecting broader trends in human nutrition. As a result, feeding approaches marketed as natural or ancestral may appear inherently safer or healthier.
However, the term "natural" is often poorly defined. Georgia highlighted that many arguments supporting ancestral feeding are based on assumptions about wolves and canine evolution that may oversimplify the scientific evidence. Modern dogs are not direct descendants of modern wolves, and nutritional requirements have been shaped by thousands of years of domestication.
This does not invalidate owner concerns, but it demonstrates why feeding decisions are often influenced by values and perceptions rather than scientific evidence alone.
Microbiological Research and Pet Food
Food safety concerns become particularly important when considered alongside microbiological investigations of raw pet food.
In a study investigating raw and cooked dog foods, researchers tested commercially available raw meat diet samples and cooked kibble samples.
The results showed that raw diets could be contaminated with zoonotic and antimicrobial-resistant bacteria.
Antimicrobial-resistant Escherichia coli was isolated from 39% of raw meat diet samples.
Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing E. coli was identified in 14%
Third-generation cephalosporin-resistant E. coli was found in 16%.
Salmonella enterica was isolated from 5% of raw diet samples.
No Enterobacteriaceae were isolated from the cooked kibble samples tested, although the kibble sample size was smaller.
The study also identified practical concerns including damaged packaging and inconsistencies in traceability information. Taken together, the findings suggested that some commercially available raw diets may represent a One Health concern, linking animal health, human health and environmental contamination.
From Contaminated Food to Environmental Spread
The Liverpool research programme also investigated whether these bacteria remained confined to the food itself.
Subsequent work found that dogs fed raw diets were significantly more likely to shed antimicrobial-resistant E. coli in their faeces. Approximately 30% of dogs fed raw diets were shedding third-generation cephalosporin-resistant E. coli, including strains carrying multiple antimicrobial resistance genes.
This finding is important because the risk may extend beyond food preparation. Dogs interact with household environments, veterinary clinics, public spaces and other animals.
Resistant bacteria carried in faeces may therefore contribute to wider environmental dissemination and increase opportunities for transmission between animals and people.
Researchers highlighted that antimicrobial resistance is increasingly recognised as a global public health challenge. While exposure may not immediately result in illness, the spread of resistant bacteria can reduce future treatment options and contribute to more difficult-to-treat infections.
Discovery of ESKAPE Pathogens in Pet Food
More recent research has added another layer of conversation.
In the study Isolation of Carbapenem-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Other Gram-Negative ESKAPE Organisms from Samples of Raw-Meat Diets for Dogs in the UK, researchers reported the incidental isolation of antimicrobial-resistant Gram-negative ESKAPE organisms from raw diet samples.
These included:
Acinetobacter baumannii complex
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Enterobacter species
Some isolates demonstrated resistance to meropenem, a carbapenem antibiotic reserved for treating severe infections when other options may fail.
Although the authors acknowledged that the study was not specifically designed to isolate ESKAPE organisms, the findings reinforce concerns regarding antimicrobial resistance and the potential One Health implications of raw feeding practices.
Salmonella
The conversation around microbiological risk extends beyond complete diets.
A separate study examining dried animal-derived dog treats found Salmonella in 16% of tested samples. Many of these products are designed for prolonged chewing and may remain in household environments for extended periods.
Unlike a food bowl that is cleaned after feeding, a chew may be carried around the home, dropped onto furniture or handled repeatedly by owners. This raises additional questions about environmental contamination and opportunities for bacterial spread.
Alternative Diets Are Expanding
Raw feeding represents only one component of a broader shift in companion animal nutrition.
The review Alternative Diets for Dogs and Cats in the UK: Current Options and Potential Future Trends describes a growing market that includes raw and minimally processed diets, plant-based diets, insect protein and laboratory-cultured meat products.
Many owners are motivated by concerns relating to sustainability, animal welfare and food production ethics. However, significant evidence gaps remain regarding long-term health outcomes, nutritional adequacy and safety for many alternative feeding approaches.
What This Means for Veterinary Professionals
Perhaps the most important message from both the research and the podcast discussion is that feeding conversations should not be framed as arguments.
The evidence suggests that owners who feed certain diets often arrive at that decision through a combination of personal values, trust networks, experiences and beliefs about health.
Simply presenting risk information may not be sufficient to change behaviour.
Instead, veterinary professionals may be most effective when they adopt an educational and collaborative approach. Georgia described this as focusing on informed decision-making. Small improvements that reduce risk or improve nutritional balance may be more realistic and more productive than expecting immediate changes.
Owners may be more receptive when advice acknowledges why they chose a feeding approach in the first place while clearly explaining known risks and uncertainties.
For those who continue feeding raw diets, risk reduction strategies remain important. These include:
Careful storage and thawing
Avoiding cross-contamination
Thorough cleaning of bowls and preparation surfaces
Good hand hygiene after handling food or pet faeces
Avoiding exposure of vulnerable individuals such as young children, elderly people and immunocompromised individuals
However, current evidence suggests that these measures may only reduce rather than eliminate risk.
Looking Ahead
The UK pet food market continues to evolve rapidly.
Current evidence indicates that some diets are at higher risk of being contaminated with zoonotic and antimicrobial-resistant bacteria, including organisms resistant to critically important antibiotics.
At the same time, owner feeding decisions are influenced by complex interactions between beliefs, trust, personal values and perceptions of health.
As the research continues to develop, improving communication between veterinary professionals and pet owners may prove just as important as generating new microbiological data.
Future guidance will need to be scientifically robust, practically achievable and delivered in a way that owners view as trustworthy, respectful and relevant to the decisions they make every day at the food bowl.
Further reading and references
Comments