Dogged Blog

How to make anger, outrage and troubling news work for the animals

It's no secret we live in highly polarized political times, leading to a seemingly endless cycle of outrage, fear, and anger played out on the social media stage. You  may have been caught in the crossfire yourself. But what does this have to do with helping animals?

This heightened cycle of outrage has led to the rise of the "rage donation," the act of giving money as a form of expressing anger or disapproval of a breaking news story or new government policy. Primarily utilized as a form of personal activism and expression, it has been stunningly successful at funding the candidates or causes in question.

Of course, playing on people's fears and anger to raise money is nothing new. What's new is the spontaneity with which it's happening, and the enormity of its success. For example, the ACLU recently raised seven times more money in one weekend than they had in the entire previous year thanks to the response to a single federal policy change related to their core mission. What's more, they did little or nothing to spur these donations; they were driven primarily by individual response to spontaneous appeals on social media both from celebrities and average citizens.

This isn't a tactic unknown to animal welfare. Certainly triggering responses of anger, guilt, and even vengeance on the part of animal lovers has been a reliable staple of animal cause fundraising since long before Sarah McLachlan first crooned "arms of an angel" on late night television. And if the stream of horrifying images and stories flooding the feeds of animal lovers across social media are any measure, it's clearly a powerfully grassroots phenomenon in animal welfare, too.

So what's different now, and how can you utilize this information in your animal-related fundraising? And since ethics matter, how can you do it without sinking into manipulation and contrived outrage for the sake of financial gain?

The good news is that ethically centering a fundraising message around genuine and powerful emotions is not complicated, although it does take a lot of groundwork. It's not something you can throw together in a single hour after a news story breaks -- and to be honest, even an hour is probably too long.

Let's look at an example. There's a breaking story in your area that your organization will unquestionably be involved in.  It might be a puppy mill raid, a dog fighting bust, or a large-scale animal cruelty case.

Your social media and development teams -- even if that's one person with a smartphone and a plan -- need to be ready to respond within minutes by sharing the story on Facebook and Twitter. The key to doing this without creating a vulture-like impression or in fact being exploitative is to make sure these three elements are in place:

1. Your organization's involvement is central and confirmed. Fundraising on the back of a crisis when your involvement is tangential or speculative is a quick way to destroy your credibility, not to mention unethical.
2. Be genuine. The most important thing we have in terms of fundraising for animal causes is the deep love our target audience feels for animals. If we waste that in the name of raising money, we've violated that love and damaged our ability to effectively advocate for the animals. So ensure that your tone is sincere, compassionate, and focused on the animals and their needs, not yours.
3. Be transparent, specific, and timely. Tell people what you need the money for in as great a detail as possible, and then report back quickly on how it was used. Don't wait for a quarterly report or even for the crisis to be over. Tell them that evening, "Thanks to your donation of $1,500 in the last hour, we were able to purchase fencing supplies and construct emergency kennels on the grounds of our shelter."

Even if all those elements are checked off, your job is not finished. When you post, you need to ask your followers to share the story. Don't just assume they will; be explicit. On Twitter, add "Please RT!" On Facebook, come right out and ask them to make sure their friends, colleagues, and family members see the story. (Try to avoid using the word "share," as it can backfire, and may also trigger a negative response from Facebook's algorithm.)

One of the most important points to keep in mind is less simple, and requires both careful consideration of your audience and the ability to walk a fine line without falling off in either direction.

While triggering powerful emotions can inspire people to support a cause, negative images and stories can be very disturbing to some people. They've also been found to hamper pet adoption efforts. The last thing you want to do is see dozens or hundreds of angry comments because you posted a photo that was horrifying to your followers, or create the impression that pets who come into shelters are broken, damaged and traumatized.

The problem is that terrible things do happen, and animal organizations need money to respond to them. What's more, giving people an immediate, effective outlet for their anxiety and outrage actually helps them channel those negative feelings into something constructive, which is itself a way to process those feelings and feel better -- that's the very reason the "rage donation" is so widespread.

To improve your chances of walking that fine line, consider these tips:

1. Protect your followers. Instead of posting upsetting photos directly to your social media, publish them on your website and share the link on Facebook with a warning that it contains potentially disturbing images. There's nothing like being hit in the face with a terrible image to create the opposite reaction to the one you wanted, so make sure you're telling the whole story but still shielding your followers and readers.
2. Remind people there are heroes in the world, and invite them to be one of them. It might be a whistleblower, a compassionate law enforcement officer, or the heroic response of your own community or volunteers, but there are almost no stories, however dark, that don't involve some inspiring elements. Find the good in the tragedy and spotlight it, while letting people know how they can be part of the heroism.
3. Emphasize the redemption story. Remind everyone exposed to your message that the pets will be cared for. Share other stories of animals who recovered and went on to be adopted and live happy lives, or even become ambassadors for other abused animals. Don't leave people dwelling in the despair and anger; tell them that their support will turn their outrage into redemption, and show them how.

Definitely don't begin your social media response by asking for money; your first response should be to simply share the story. No one will fault you for asking for donations of needed supplies or volunteers. In fact, doing so makes people feel ownership of the event and your efforts, which can inspire the kind of spontaneous sharing that is so characteristic of the "rage donation." Requests for money should only begin after the event is over and the need is clear, or several hours into the event if it's ongoing.

It's critical that your social media team be empowered to put this plan into action without permission, review, or any other process that would slow the initial response. It's fine to coordinate after the first round of posts go out, but don't put up obstacles to the most rapid possible response once the story breaks, or even a little before if you have some advance notice.

Even though you shouldn't start asking for money right away, it's also important that your team knows how to update your donation page to include this incident, as people are going to be looking for it. Individual online givers are more likely to donate to earmarked causes than to give money to your general fund. They want to feel they're part of your emergency response effort, not that their donation might be used to buy printer ink.

You also need to develop a communications strategy long before the first incident. Your social media team needs updates and they need photos. Have a meeting with your emergency and communications staffers, and make sure anyone who will be in the field understands what's needed to cover an incident, and ensure the organization has the resources it needs to handle it.

Finally, keep in mind the three rules of fundraising: Tell people what you're doing, ask them for help, then tell them what you did because they helped. Don't let the story end until everyone who dropped off a crate, gave ten dollars, or shared your posts on their Facebook page has heard how it all turned out, and that their support truly made a difference. Not only is this simple human decency and good for your organization's image, it lets you make sure the story has a happy, or at least inspiring, ending.  And that will make all the difference the next time you ask for help for the animals.

Negative emotions are extremely powerful. It's not particularly difficult to use them to raise money. What is difficult is doing it ethically, compassionately, and sustainably. That takes preparation and it takes the will to do it; don't let your organization, and the animals in its care, miss out on either.

Why my bucket list is completely empty

Having a bucket list, or at least, announcing that certain items are on it, is a thing now. "Before I die, I'm going to do the following." But I don't have a bucket list, and I don't really think other people should, either. Here's why.

I've seen a lot of death. Because I'm from San Francisco and am a lesbian and am in my 50s, I saw a lot of people die of AIDS at a very young age, with all their dreams and goals unfulfilled -- or even unacknowledged. That brutal period in history taught me many lessons, and one of them was simply this: If it's within your power at all, never put your dreams off.

That's a big "if," of course -- we all have jobs and responsibilities and financial constraints and physical limitations. But to the best of my ability, I've chosen to identify and live out my dreams as soon as I become aware of them, instead of compiling them into a pre-death to-do list.

I've moved from city to country and back again multiple times, changed careers more than once, moved from San Francisco to Michigan, had many wonderful dogs, traveled, formed new friendships in unexpected ways with people I couldn't have imagined meeting. I've had different kinds of cars, clothes, and hairstyles. I've become involved with a number of charities, learned to fundraise, and done pro bono work to help animals.

Your dreams may be more exotic than mine. I don't know. All I know is that putting off our dreams may mean never living any of them, so all you'll find on my bucket list is this: Don't wait.

So you think they can't make people hate cats?

There's an ugly war being fought over the American love for cats right now... and the cats are losing.

Yes, most of us love cats, are intrigued by cats, watch cat videos, and in ever-growing numbers share our homes with cats. But if you'd had your ear to the ground of the last few years, you'd realize there's a force out there trying to change that.

It began with a series of high-profile headlines about how cats are murderous beasts. It was sustained by junk science and "alternative facts" about how many birds outdoor cats kill each year. And it was given credibility by the academic credentials of the virulent cat-haters behind this propaganda war, one of whom actually said in his book Cat Wars: The Devastating Consequences of a Cuddly Killer that felines should be removed from the landscape "by any means necessary."

(Which to the best of my knowledge is the first and only time a cat hater has quoted Malcom X to support his case. But I digress.)

You might accuse me of over-reacting, and I hope I am. But these guys are playing a long game here, slowly getting the media to pay attention to their anti-cat message and, more frighteningly, attempting to supplant the reality of the cats in our laps with the demonic image of a killing machine with an unquenchable appetite for endangered songbird. They're presenting to veterinary organizations and at science conferences. They're writing articles and books, and doing propaganda-filled book tours. They're courting the media. They're supporting hyped up media coverage of the risks of toxoplasmosis and rabies.

And what are we in animal welfare doing about it?

Good question.

Sometimes it seems we're all so engrossed in our own cat-positive worlds, doing TNR and helping shelters increase their feline lifesaving and singing the praises of community cats, warehouse cats, and barn cats that we're almost oblivious to the propaganda taking hold all around us.

When we do pay attention, we seem to think that cats will be spared by the irony of the fact that, by opposing TNR, these idiots are themselves the greatest barrier to reducing the number of unowned, free-roaming cats. 

We need to wake up. We need to write op-eds, write our own books, go on local radio programs, put our best and most articulate spokespeople forward, fund research, and stop burying our heads in the kitty litter. These guys are trying to eradicate cats from America unless they're safely locked in a high-security indoor environment -- which means they want to kill more than half the cats currently alive in this country.

And they're frustratingly, hypocritically doing it in the name of saving birds... birds who themselves have been responsible for more human and wildlife deaths than any other type of living creatures bigger than a pathogen.

And we're letting them.

How bigstockphoto.com and Shutterstock are screwing their customers

Last month, without any warning, the stock photo service I've used for at least 10 years made a small, nearly-unnoticeable change that very efficiently sucks money out of their customers' accounts.

They offer stock images in a variety of file sizes. Because I purchase them almost exclusively for use on the web, I have always bought the smallest and least expensive file size. For as long as I can recall, that was the size that was set as the default when I'd go to purchase an image.

Sometime in September, that changed. I noticed that an image I was using on a blog post for a client was taking a really long time to upload. No wonder -- it was huge. I went and looked at my download history at bigstockphoto.com, and saw that every image I'd purchased for the previous two weeks was much larger - and four times more expensive - than the images I'd always purchased before, and intended to purchase each time.

Every time I go to purchase an image, the default is set on this four-times-costlier option. It's a hard habit to break to move that default setting, and twice I forgot and ended up with a huge, expensive image I didn't want.

Sure, you can say that's my problem now that I'm aware of what they're doing. But you and I both know it's deceptive and unethical to make this change knowing that many customers won't notice at first, new and occasional customers might never question the default setting at all, and plenty of customers like me who noticed will nonetheless forget to move that check mark at least now and then.

In short, they implemented a change that will make them money by ripping off their customers.

Unable to find anywhere to control the default  setting, I emailed support to ask if it was possible, and complain about the change. I heard back the next day; my complaint was ignored, and my query about setting my own default was all he addressed:

At this time there is not a way to set the default download size of images on our site as it is up to our customers to always ensure when downloading images that they make sure they are selecting the size they require.

I will make sure that you feedback is received by management as we always want to hear from our customers on how we can improve our site to better fit the needs of our customers.

Please let us know if there is anything else we can do for you.

Best regards,

Joseph T.
Customer Care Advocate
Bigstock
350 Fifth Avenue, 21st Floor
New York, NY 10118a

So if you use Bigstock (which, by the way, is owned by Shutterstock), check the download history and see if you got caught by this. If not, be sure you don't. And consider switching to a different stock photo service. It's not like their aren't plenty of them out there.

Save

Sileo: A double-edged sword for dogs with thunderstorm and fireworks phobias

Sileo has been a miracle for my noise-phobic dog, Tim.

At the age of 7, Tim, a Silken Windhound, decided to become terrified of thunder and other loud noises. The first incident was during a wind and rainstorm -- no thunder -- and involved several rapid power off-and-ons, which sent him fleeing into the dark yard in the torrential downpour. I found him huddled in the corner where the fences meet, under some pine trees, and had to crawl in, drag him out, then carry him into the house.

I had some alprazolam (generic Xanax) and Trazodone (another anti-anxiety drug) that had been prescribed for a different dog, and gave him those. He finally fell asleep, trembling in my arms. From that night foreward, he began reacting to all kinds of things: Wind, rain, the sound of my generator running through its weekly systems check, people coming into the house to do work (this, from the world's most social dog), and of course, thunder and fireworks.

Since that day we've also been on a journey to find him some relief. We've checked him for Cushings and thyroid disease. He had a spinal tap and MRI, looking for brain tumors or nervous system infections. We've seen a boarded behaviorist. I've tried a Thundershirt, Adaptil, omega-3 fatty acids, lavender oil, Solliquin, Zylkene, and several other herbal and holistic remedies, as well as many different medications and combinations of medications.

It's been exhausting.

Some of those things helped a little bit, but nothing really got him the kind of quality of life I found acceptable, let along got him back to his old self. He was in a constant state of terror that seemed only to abate when he was deeply sedated. It was a nightmare, and I was getting to the point where  I was considering euthanasia to relieve his suffering.

I was actually hoping he had a brain tumor so there would be something we could treat, that's how desperate I was.

Then his behaviorist prescribed Sileo.

This drug has been miraculous for Tim. Its effect is fast and amazing. It even appears to be reducing his reactivity over time; he no longer reacts, for instance, to the tornado warning signal test siren or the sound of the generator running its weekly test cycle.

It's also blessedly cut his post-incident recovery phase to zero; the minute the noise is over, Tim is normal. This period used to last days after a serious event.

Problem solved? Actually, no. Of course, like all drugs, Sileo has potential side effects, but given the seriousness of Tim's condition and how close to euthanasia we had come, I was and am willing to risk those. To understand the problems, consider this: They're predicting thunderstorms lasting from 4:30 pm this afternoon until 12:30 pm tomorrow. That's twenty hours.

If that actually happens, that's twice the period during which you can give Sileo, which was brought to market on the absurd assumption that "noise incidents" wouldn't last beyond 10 hours.

You have to dose it every two hours. You can only give five doses before you're supposed to stop for an unspecified amount of time that, when I contacted the company, was told is ten hours.

So essentially:

• If you work and don't have your dog with you when storms or other triggers begin, this drug is useless.
• If you live somewhere thunderstorms regularly last more than 10 hours, you're screwed.
• Over the Fourth of July weekend, when fireworks go on for days, you have to guess about when to begin giving the drug and how best to spread it out.

What's more, while I haven't had any problems using the applicator or locking mechanism to control the dosage, apparently some owners do, leading to reports of accidental overdose.

My life this summer has been a constant vigil looking at weather reports, and trying to plan how I'm going to get Tim's Sileo into him before the thunder begins, and keep giving it to him at appropriate intervals to last the entire incident without hitting our maximum number of doses before the incident ends.

If this was a drug that could be dosed like Trazodone or alprazolam, I could give it to him "just in case," then leave the house or have him pre-medicated before a storm hit while I was asleep at night.  (While either or both have worked very well for other dogs, Trazodone and alprazolam did not help Tim and in fact, made him worse.)

 

When the stars align, it may be a miracle, but the dosing schedule, period of efficacy, directions for use, and delivery method are all preposterous. And although it doesn't really affect me because Embrace Pet Insurance pays all but 20 percent of the amount, it's also very expensive.

They have to do better with this drug. It works too well for desperate and terrified dogs to have its effectiveness hampered by these limitations. They need to develop a sustained release formula that can be administered over a longer period of time or at least without such a long washout period between incidents. And they need to make the application/administration idiot-proof.

I suppose adding "reduce the cost" is a hopeless dream when I've added many costly features to the drug, but it really breaks my heart to know how many dogs can't take it because it's unaffordable.

Tim is now on only two drugs all the time: Generic Zoloft and a low dose of gabapentin, an anti-seizure and nerve-pain drug that also has mild anti-anxiety effects. These, combined with the way Sileo seems to stop the cumulative worsening we'd been seeing after each incident, have managed his day-to-day anxiety to the point that he's like himself again between triggering events, and recovers rapidly from those that occur. His life is more than acceptable, it's good. I am incredibly grateful for this, but still hope for more, for Tim and for other dogs, in the near future. Paws and fingers are crossed at our house.

Disclosure: I didn't realize when I've commented on Sileo on my social media before that it's made by Zoetis. I occasionally write freelance articles for Zoetis for Shelters, their animal sheltering newsletter. I have no other ties to the brand, and did not receive any form of compensation, discount, or free product for this or any other post about Sileo.

 

 

3 great cruelty-free mascaras for sensitive eyes and contact lens-wearers

I have dry, sensitive eyes that tear at the slightest provocation. I also wear contact lenses. And while my lashes are fairly long and naturally grow in an upward direction, they've become very light in color and not as thick as they used to be as I've gotten older. All of which adds up to me being someone for whom mascara makes a big difference, but is almost impossible to wear comfortably.

Add to that the fact that I will only buy cruelty-free makeup and can't tolerate makeup with gluten, and it's amazing I have one brand of mascara to recommend, let alone three. (Please note: None of these are affiliate links, and I buy my own makeup.)

Chantecaille Faux Cils Longest Lash Mascara. Let's start with the best mascara I've ever used, and certainly the most expensive.

"Faux Cils" means "false eyelashes," and this is pretty much what they look like once you get a few coats of this gentle, deeply black mascara on your lashes. (It only comes in black.) It has never bothered my eyes at all, and doesn't make them look clumpy or spidery. This high-end mascara retails for $72 at stores like Nordstrom and Neiman-Marcus -- the latter will let you sign up to purchase every 30, 60, or 90 days, which I recommend. No one, but especially anyone with sensitive eyes, should wear a mascara older than 90 days. Which should be a significant motivator to wear mascara more frequently, if you decide to invest in this product.

Bonus: While I don't wear mascara daily, this one claims that if you do, it will actually make your lashes grow longer and thicker.

Bottom line: I don't see how this mascara could be better, even without the treatment claim.

Chantecaille's cruelty-free statement: "Chantecaille skincare products are free of phthlates, sulphate, detergents, mineral oil, petrolatum, palm oil, synthetic color, synthetic fragrance and GMOs. We are cruelty free."

Chantecaille information on Cruelty-Free Kitty

Chantecaille Faux Cils Longest Lash Mascara is listed on Nordstrom's gluten-free products page, and claims to be gluten free in correspondence with the Gluten-Free Makeup Girl blog.

Trish McEvoy Lash-Curling Mascara. Significantly more affordable at around $30, this mascara is very different from Chantecaille while being nearly as impressive.

It really does lift my lashes even more upward in their sweep (which is what "curling" lashes actually do), and hold them there for hours. It's a tubular mascara and thus a bit harder to remove than other mascaras I've tried, but I just press a cotton pad saturated with micellar water to my eye, hold it for several minutes, then gently pat the mascara "tubes" away.  The upside is that it literally will not and cannot smudge or smear, no matter how much your eyes might tear up.

The slight hassle is well worth it for this reliable, gentle mascara. Trish McEvoy is also available at Nordstrom and Neiman Marcus, and can be ordered from N-M on a 90-day replenishment basis. It's only available in black.

Bottom line: Long, curly, lashes with no smudging, at a reasonable price for high-end mascara.

Trish McEvoy's cruelty-free statement: The company only has a terse comment that they do not test on animals on their website.

Trish McEvoy is listed on Cruelty-Free Kitty's 2017 list of products not tested on animals.

Lash-Curling Mascara is noted as gluten-free on the Trish McEvoy website.

RMS Defining Mascara. At $28, this is the least expensive mascara I tried.

RMS is a lesser-known but excellent brand, with a passionate commitment to high-quality, organic ingredients. They're available at many smaller retailers, and are available online from Nordstrom. I originally purchased this product from Amazon and it was legit, but I've bought makeup on Amazon that I'm sure was fake, so I can't recommend it.

I may have been drawn to RMS Defining Mascara because of the brand, but it's a reliable, gentle mascara that never clumps or gets spidery. It doesn't have the va-va-va-voom of Chantecaille, but it's my go-to for daily use. I have one in my bathroom and one in my purse at all times. Like the others, it only comes in black, and is cruelty-free and gluten-free.

Bottom line: Reasonably priced for a higher-end mascara, great ingredients, gentle, makes lashes longer and darker without clumps.

RMS Beauty's cruetly-free statement: Their website says they do not test on animals.

RMS Beauty on Cruelty-Free Kitty

RMS states all their products are gluten-free.

 

.

High-end shopper or on a tight budget, there are cruelty-free makeup and skincare products for you

Your budget isn't a valid reason to buy cosmetics and skincare products that were tested on animals. Cruelty-free beauty products don't cost more or less than brands that torture animals for the sake of mascara and lipstick.

Because I've been writing more about makeup and skincare lately, I'm hearing from a lot of readers and friends who have their own thoughts on beauty products. Two of my friends should be careful not to meet each other, though, because my understanding is when matter and anti-matter meet, things explode.

The first friend told me, with great confidence, that she couldn't possibly use cruelty-free cosmetics because she was on a very tight budget and buys all her makeup and skincare at the drugstore. "Cruelty-free is for rich people," she said.

Just a week later, a second friend told me, also with great confidence, that the reason she didn't use cruelty-free cosmetics is because her skin is very sensitive and she can only wear high-end products or she breaks out. "They don't sell cruelty-free products at Nordstrom," she assured me.

The problem is, of course, that they're wrong. Both of them. Matter and anti-matter.

Cruelty free products are indeed sold at Nordstrom, Neiman Marcus, Saks Fifth Avenue, and countless other high end retailers. Some of the brands include By Terry, Trish McEvoy, Marc Jacobs Beauty (a separate company from Marc Jacobs Fragrances, which is not cruelty free), Jane Iredale, Paula's Choice, Trish McEvoy, RevitaLash,  and Chantecaille (of the $64 mascara that's worth every penny).

They're also sold at Sephora and Ulta -- Kat Von D, Anastasia Beverly Hills, BECCA, Hourglass, Urban Decay, Butter London. They're sold on Beautylish, which carries both affordable brands like cult favovrite RCMA, and pricey brands like Natasha Denona, Kevin Acouin, and Charlotte Tilbury.

And yes, they're sold at the drugstore. Some of the very best, least expensive cruelty-free products are sold at drugstores, in fact: Milani, Physicians Formula, E.L.F., Wet 'n' Wild, NYX, Makeup Academy, Sonia Kashuk -- all of them are affordable cruelty-free products sold in drugstores as well as big box stores like Target, online, and other retailers. There are more listed over at Cruelty-Free Kitty.

My purpose in writing this isn't to list cruelty free brands; others do that, and I'm grateful to benefit from their research. I'm simply saying despite what you believe, and regardless of whether you're Nordstrom's best customer or buy all your makeup and skincare products at Walgreens, you can afford to choose cruelty-free beauty.

Save

Save

Save

Save

How Teen Vogue brought my inner girl back to life

Politics. The loss of two beloved dogs in less than one year, one after a lightning-fast illness at a young age, the other after a long, slow, complicated decline in her senior years. And did I mention politics, or, as I think of it, the threatened collapse of everything that makes this America?

Those are the reasons I've not blogged as much as I used to. But the example of those badass journalists at Teen Vogue have me inspired to blog again about the subject nearest and dearest to my heart after dogs and politics: Makeup and skincare.

Have no idea what I'm talking about? Read The true story of how Teen Vogue got mad, got woke, and began terrifying men like Donald Trump. Seriously -- read it. It will give you hope at the same time it prompts you to buy the nearest teenage girl a gift subscription.

In it, the author says:

Everyone loves rainbow highlighters. They make you look like a beautiful pixie who fronts a glam-rock band. Also, white nationalism is a cancer on our democracy. Women are capable of holding both of these truths in their minds, and prioritizing them accordingly.

Now, I do love rainbow highlighters, but only on someone who has a complexion a lot different than mine. But I do love, and have always loved, makeup and skincare and hair. I started my career as a hairstylist at the age of five, when I gave Kathy Buoncristiani a bang trim with my construction paper scissors. My mother didn't let me have Barbie dolls, but my baby dolls all had hairstyles that ranged from what would one day be known as a punk rock buzz cut to intricate braids that would rock the runways even today.

After I finished college, I even went to beauty school, then worked in salons and opened three of my own in the golden age of 80s style.

When I went beck to journalism in 1991, news and investigative reporting proved too stressful for my somewhat fragile spirit. (Yes, I've toughened up since then, but I still find it impossible to build the rapport needed to get a great interview with someone knowing I'm doing it against their best interests -- unless they're honestly the devil. And at least back then, there were not that many devils.)

So I switched my focus to what we used to call "women's pages" and now call "lifestyle" -- health, home and garden, pets, and fashion and beauty.

Science and medicine were my great loves, and I was lucky to have some great opportunities writing about human medicine. My love of animals soon drove me to take that experience and start writing about veterinary medicine, plus animal welfare, which is where I am today.

But you know what I miss? Writing about makeup and skincare. And you know what I hate? Feeling ashamed of that.

So let's see if unleashing my inner girl allows me to find my blogging voice again. I've missed that, too.

 

Save

It's not you, it's me: Why I broke up with my foundation, and why I'm getting back together with it now.

Once upon a time, I had a skincare and foundation regimen that worked perfectly for me. Then one of the products I most relied on was discontinued, and then my skin changed, because I was getting older. I was left with rosacea (mostly flushing rather than breakouts, once benefit of getting older!), sensitive skin that reacted to all kinds of ingredients, and a new struggle with dryness and flaking. Yuck.

My product pool isn't just limited by my rosacea; I also won't buy anything tested on animals.

I finally found a group of skincare products that work for me (which I list below), but foundation was a different story. Liquid foundations separated on my skin and coagulated in my pores, or made my rosacea flare. Every powder foundation I tried was just too drying, and cream foundations floated messily above my skin and made me look like I had a disease.

One day, I picked up a few products at Whole Foods, by a company called Mineral Fusion. I had applied the pressed powder foundation tester to one side of my face, and the liquid to the other, while I shopped, and I was stunned at how nice my face felt on the powder side. For some reason, this product neither dries me out, nor separates on my skin. It was perfect.

And yet, I kept thinking there was something better. Don't ask me why. I might just be too big a snob to think a health food store product is "good enough." I might have been influenced by beauty vloggers on YouTube. So I kept trying other products -- IT Cosmetics Celebration pressed mineral foundation, Bare Minerals loose powder, Jane Iredale pressed powder, and a handful of others I've forgotten now. They all looked like crap on my skin, even when used with the primers and brushes recommended by the brands themselves.

So I went back to Mineral Fusion, and I'm kind of embarrassed at my long chase of something shinier.

My current products are these (these are not affiliate or sponor links, just plain old links):

• Aveda Outer Peace cleanser
• Solumn and Herbe Apricot Facial Scrub once a week
• Solumn and Herbe Rose and Silk moisturizing cream
• Evan Healey "Blue" rosehip serum and hydrosol
• Mineral Fusion color correcting primer
• Mineral Fusion pressed powder foundation in Neutral 2
• Lorac Touch-Up To Go Concealer Pen in Fair

The next product I'm going to try is an eye cream, because did I mention I'm getting older? I'm going to start with this one: Aveda Green Science Firming Eye Cream. I'll let you know what I think!

What happened to Rawley

I have never really explained what happened to my dog Rawley, although if you follow me on Facebook you probably know much of this, with the exception of the biopsy results.

The night of Dec. 20, I was tickling Rawley's tummy. I did this all the time; I'd definitely done it before I'd left on a week-long business trip the week before, and hadn't noticed anything wrong.

This time, I found some kind of growth at the base of his penis. I took him to the vet ER at Michigan State University the next morning, where they did a fine needle aspirate and found it was malignant.

They couldn't tell what kind of tumor it was, and I okayed a tru-cut biopsy, another kind of needle biopsy. They tried to schedule an appointment with the surgeon on Jan. 25, but I insisted it be dealt with sooner, holidays or no holidays -- it was huge, and hadn't been there the week before. I couldn't even imagine how big it would be in more than a month.

I went home and was paralyzed with worry and grief. I got Rawley after my mother's horrible death from cancer, and this seemed to unlock all those dark memories and emotions. I got myself mobilized just enough to enlist Rawley's wonderful internal medicine vet, Dr. Stacey Wylie there at MSU, to try and get them to schedule his surgical appointment sooner. She got him an appointment with the chief of soft tissue surgery, Dr. Bryden Stanley, on Jan. 4.

On Dec. 26, they called and told me the tru-cut biopsy was also inconclusive, but there was a possibility it was an atypical osteosarcoma. They suggested doing some sort of stains to diagnose it further; the minute I heard the word "osteosarcoma," my brain pretty much shut off and I couldn't really think.

Dec. 30 was Rawley's sixth birthday.

Up until Jan. 2, he had been totally unaware anything was wrong. That night, however, he seemed uncomfortable, and kept licking at the tumor that now mostly covered his penis and a substantial area of his groin on either side. The growth had doubled in size since Dec. 20.

On Jan. 4, we went in for his appointment. The results of the stains still weren't back, but he had x-rays and a CT scan, which found no metastases. Dr. Stanley was very positive about surgical removal.

I felt, for the first time, like I could breathe. Like there was hope.

The next morning, his surgery was scheduled for 11 AM, but he didn't go in until around 3 PM. I was able to stay with him all day in the private room they have for people who have lost a pet. Despite that sad association, it was carpeted, had two sofas, and was quiet and comfortable. I brought in a big dog bed for him, and lay down next to him on it and talked to him for hours while he dozed. It was incredibly peaceful.

They finally came for him. The surgery took over 5 hours. They had to amputate his penis and rebuild his urethra. They weren't sure there was enough skin to close the wound, so they told me they'd have to hobble his rear legs so he wouldn't put any pressure on the incision. Since no dog would tolerate that willingly, they said he would have to be kept heavily sedated.

I finally went home at around midnight the night of the 5th. I went back the next day to visit him, and while very sedated, he seemed comfortable.

The next morning, Jan. 7, at around 11 AM they called and told me they were going to let the sedation wear off and see if he could stand and walk, as the incision seemed okay. They said he might be able to go home Sunday. I said I was planning on coming that afternoon to see him, which they said was fine.

I was on a work call a little later, planning on going to see him the minute it was over. My call waiting showed a call from the hospital. I answered it, and they told me he was in respiratory failure and I needed to come immediately. It was an hour and 10 minute drive, and during it they called me twice to ask if I wanted him on a ventilator and if his heart stopped, did I want them to resuscitate him if it meant opening his chest.

I begged them to keep him alive until I got there if there was any way to do it without torturing him.

The rest is still really hard for me to talk about. I came into the reception area, and just pushed ahead of everyone and told them the surgical resident, Dr. Marturello, called and my dog was dying in the ICU. The receptionist got a strange look on her face and I said, "Did he die?" and started to sob. She said she didn't know, and then the resident was there, pulling me down the hall.

She had tears running down her face.

So did the whole ICU team, the anesthesiologist and the technicians, the veterinary student, everyone. They had Rawley on a table, intubated, sedated, and they were all standing around him, in tears.

For a few minutes I didn't know what I should do. I wanted to tell them to save him, to wait until we at least knew what kind of tumor we were dealing with. I wanted so desperately to bring him home somehow, even for one day, and let him die there, not in that hospital.

"Whatever the tumor is, it's very aggressive," Dr. Marturello said through her tears.

I had one of those proverbial moments of clarity, and felt sure that we were done. They helped ease him out of life while I held him and said the things to him I'd always said to him: That he was the best, most handsome man in all the land, my tiny man, my sweet boy.

Then I thanked them all and went and sat in the lobby on a bench for two hours, because I couldn't even walk to the car.

I didn't have a post-mortem exam done. We did get the biopsy results: not osteo. It was something called a carcinosarcoma, a rare malignant tumor made up of two kinds of cells. They think what actually sent him into respiratory failure was a blood clot going to his lungs. I think they're right.

The only thing left to say is that I wish I hadn't done the surgery, just brought him home for a few more days until he was too uncomfortable. I wish I had known how it would end before I had to make so many decisions. But I didn't, and I made the best decisions I could.

I love you, Rawley. Always.

Losing you is all too much

I have too many dog bowls now.

I have too many collars.

I have too many dog beds.

I have too many blaze orange safety vests.

I have too much room in my house.

I have too many Christmas ornaments.

I have too many signs.

I have too few dogs.

Rest in peace, Rawley. No one could have loved you more than I did.

 

So your dog has struvites

If your dog has struvite stones, he has a bladder infection. He doesn't need a special diet and he doesn't need his urinary pH adjusted. He needs his infection diagnosed and treated.

(To be perfectly accurate, there is a condition known as "sterile" or "metabolic" struvites that occurs very, very rarely in the dog. This condition isn't just a zebra, however; it's a unicorn. I'll say more about it later on.)

Why do dogs with urinary tract infections have struvite stones? Why do they so often have alkaline urine?

The urine becomes alkaline for the same reason the stones form: Because the urease-producing bacteria that usually cause canine UTIs produce magnesium, phosphate, and ammonium as waste products. The urine becomes super-saturated with these waste products. Add it all together, shake well, and you have struvite stones. It was once believed that the alkaline urine "caused" struvite stones, but that doesn't appear to be the case. Rather, it's now believed they are caused by the same thing, the bacterial waste products. In fact, sometimes struvite stones are called "triple phosphate" or "M.A.P" for "magnesium, ammonium, phosphate."

Should you acidify the urine of a dog with struvite stones to dissolve the crystals?

This is sort of like cutting the wire to the "check engine" light instead of fixing the engine. Diagnose and treat the bladder infection and the urinary pH will resolve naturally.

Won't acidifying the urine kill the bacteria?

That's a very common belief, expressed quite often on holistic email lists, but it's not true. While many bacteria don't like acid mediums, some do. More to the point, it's impossible to get bodily fluids and tissues acid enough to actually kill bacteria. There are bacteria that can live in vinegar (in fact, without some of them we wouldn't have vinegar). And as fast as you are acidifying the urine, the bacteria are in there alkalinizing it. The solution is to diagnose and treat the bladder infection. (Are you sensing a theme here?)

OK, how do you diagnose and treat a bladder infection?

To diagnose a bladder infection, you need to perform a test known as a urine culture. This should be done in combination with a sensitivity test to determine what antibiotics will be effective against the bacteria. It's helpful also to do a urinalysis, but you cannot diagnose a bladder infection, nor effectively treat it, with urinalysis alone.

A urine culture and sensitivity test will take about three days to run. If the dog has obvious symptoms, it's not unreasonable to begin antibiotic therapy before the results are known, as long as the urine sample is obtained before giving antibiotics. Antibiotics present in the urine will prevent bacteria from growing in the culture. Once the sensitivity results are in, if the chosen antibiotic was not appropriate, you can switch at that point.

Be absolutely sure to give your dog the entire prescribed course of antibiotics, as stopping the treatment too soon can create drug-resistant infections that are almost impossible to treat. If your dog has side effects from the antibiotics, even if the symptoms are gone, contact your vet instead of just stopping the drug.

But there were bacteria in the urinalysis, so why can't we just go ahead and treat without doing the culture and sensitivity?

A lot of vets do this, some because that's what they've always done and some because the clients won't pay for the extra testing. But this isn't a good idea for a number of reasons.

One, sometimes some other kind of debris is mistaken for bacteria. A properly obtained urine sample is less likely to have debris that is hard to differentiate.

Two, you can't tell what bacteria they are, so you have no real idea if you're choosing an effective antibiotic.

Three, if therapy fails, you won't really know what to do next. Was it the wrong antibiotic? Is this a new infection with a different organism? Is the problem something other than an infection?

Four, a culture done before, and again after, treatment gives you a yardstick to measure the success of your therapy.

My dog's urine culture was negative, but he has struvite stones. Does he have "sterile struvites"?

He might. He might also have an infection with a bacteria that doesn't grow in the culture that was used, or he might be infected with a bacteria that grows in tissue rather than urine. You can request a special, separate culture for mycoplasma/ureaplasma. If that, too, is negative, you can consider doing a biopsy of the bladder wall. However, at that point, many vets will instead put the dog on a trial of a drug effective against mycoplasma/ureaplasma, as a bladder wall biopsy is a very invasive test.

But yes, your dog might in fact have sterile struvites, in which case your vet's recommendation of a special diet and urinary acidification will be right on track. But those things are not appropriate for the vast, overwhelming majority of struvite stone cases, which are caused by infections that need to be diagnosed and treated.

My dog doesn't have struvite stones and he doesn't have a bladder infection, but he has struvite crystals. What should I do? Does he need a special diet?

If he has no symptoms and no stones and no infection, you don't need to do anything. Perfectly healthy dogs often have struvite crystals in their urine, and sometimes they will form due to the way the urine is handled. This finding is not significant.

Do I have to use antibiotics? Can't I treat the infection and stones with herbs and diet, even if acidifying the urine isn't enough?

There is no diet that will help treat a bladder infection, although of course proper nutrition will help a dog be more disease resistant in general. There are herbs that can help treat a bladder infection. Some of them are very potent, and are also powerful diuretics. Other, gentler herbs are also used in treating UTIs. Use them only as recommended by your qualified holistic vet, preceded and followed by a urine culture to make sure your treatment worked, just as you would do with antibiotic therapy. Don't cut corners and don't try to treat this on your own.

How can I dissolve the stones after I get the infection treated?

Most of the time, the stones will dissolve on their own once the infection is gone. If not, you can use urinary acidification or special diets temporarily to dissolve the stones. The commercial prescription diet S/D, formulated to dissolve struvites, is not intended for longterm feeding so should be discontinued when the stones are gone. Very rarely, surgery is necessary to remove the stones.

My dog gets infections over and over again. What causes that?

Your dog might not be getting infected over and over again; he might have one infection that is never fully eradicated. Doing a culture and sensitivity, then repeating the culture after treatment is finished, should clarify that situation.

However, some dogs have structural defects or other medical problems that cause them to suffer recurrent bladder infections. Other dogs have had surgical procedures such as a urethrostomy, which can make them more susceptible to bladder infections. Conditions such as Cushings also increase the incidence of bladder infections. Owners of dogs who suffer recurrent UTIs should ask their vet to refer them to an internal medicine specialist or veterinary college for an in-depth workup.

This article was written by Christie Keith and Nancy Campbell, RVT.