For those living in the land of the free and the brave, there is a lot of scaremongering about the use of shark cartilage in dog treats. For a country self-proclaimed to be the capitalist leader of the free world, there is a wide gap between using a natural product that works brilliantly with man and woman’s best friend, and the concept of blanket bans.
We will now address what different countries are doing what, and why.
Research articles list three main factors at play with the usage of shark cartilage for alleviating dog pain. Because some unscrupulous fishing companies are happy to capture anything in the sea, including endangered sharks, there is a movement to protect sharks, and often that spills over to banning all shark fishing.
So the usage of shark cartilage is reliant on the level of conservation efforts in a country (or the power of lobby groups), the regulation framework to detail what sharks can be caught, and the cultural attitudes of various societies.
North America (America and Canada).
The bastion of free enterprise also seems to be the leading light behind banning shark cartilage dog treats. So banned, that major online influencers like Google disallow any advertising of google adwords.
YET, dog owners can still relatively easily find shark cartilage (from local and overseas companies) online and in supermarkets. This seems more than a loophole.
It appears that America and Canada suffer from a dual personality syndrome when it comes to shark cartilage as used in dog treats. Regulations exist to limit or ban it, on state-by-state basis, but they are not strictly enforced.
And the lobby groups that are trying to ban it, don’t seem to care how much it helps dogs for joint pain relief and rebuilding dog cartilage, and has zero side effects. It appears in the zeal to achieve their cause, that these powerful groups choose to ignore science and population counts of the various shark species, and just ban them all.
It’s almost like the vegan and vegetarian lobby are telling American humans and dogs what they can eat – even if it relieves major suffering of dogs. We would not allow humans to suffer like this.
Europe
Europe meanwhile has many very different countries sitting next to each other, speaking different languages and having very different beliefs. For this reason of diversity there are just as many views about what should and shouldn’t be used or banned for dogs.
The UK, Germany, and France have no issue with using dog shark cartilage treats. And considering that the UK is one of the largest dog ownerships per population countries in the world, this speaks volumes about how effective they know this product to be.
But with borders only loosely patrolled, and postage cost between countries relatively cheap, it probably doesn’t matter anywhere near as much in Europe whether a country bans a dog product or not.
Again for those countries that are choosing reduction, quotas or wholesale banning of shark catching based on advocacy groups, there are the counter group of health care experts and dog owners who will buy these very effective treats at almost any cost.
ASIA
East Asia, China, Japan, and South Korea are big consumers of all things shark, including shark cartilage for their dogs.
And while some of these countries still practice the despicable act of eating wild dogs, the region in general has gotten it right (well the dog owners anyway) about using shark cartilage to heal their dogs.
The reason that this might seem a little discredited, is that shark cartilage is sometimes the by-product of shark fin, that some countries use as a human health tonic. They confuse mystical / cultural beliefs of properties of the shark fin with no solid scientific basis as having high importance, and so often don’t mind shark finning (killing any breed of shark just for their fin) – and this bad practice reflects badly on shark cartilage – ie some people don’t trust that the shark cartilage wasn’t gained as part of this very poor behaviour.
CONCLUSION
If fishing companies did the right thing, and only caught shark breeds within scientific quotas, then there would be little need for regulations preventing the capturing of shark.
Shark cartilage on legally caught shark used to be wasted (it wasn’t a very attractive product for humans to eat, and held no magical properties.
But since discovering its great health benefits for dogs it seem that what is needed is a proper regulatory framework that ensure what is caught is the right kind of shark.
We strongly disagree with total bans that just force dogs back into overpriced pharmaceutical products that many owners can’t afford, which leads many dogs leading a life of suffering and joint pain.
