THE DIET MYTH LIST
The problem with feeding raw and kibble is they digest at different rates. Kibble stats in the stomach longer possibly setting up bacteria and bloat situation.. When I fed raw I never mixed the two.
Survive vs thrive is completely different. Dogs are carnivorous with omnivorous tendencies. Just because a street dog can survive on scraps doesn't make it ideal.
If dogs had their way... They would never touch those little hard packed squares of rubbish labeled "dog food"
Most cancers in dogs, are thought to be related to the food the dog eats... And the same with humans...
The problem with all commercial dog food is that most dogs cannot digest the stuff...Their organs suffer and eventually the die of cancer..
Does anyone have a link to a study that showed dogs fed only a commercial kibble were having seizures as a result of that kibble? Would love to read them.
I read, including this one, says the same thing. RMBD warrant more research. Yet more research isn't done. Where would the funding come from. No kibble company is going to fund anything that may sway popular opinion from their products.
No one argues that good nutrtition is important, but their is a lot of controversy over what that means, where it comes from, and who should be consulting. According to Consumer Reports there is no need to buy anything other than O'Roy because it is complete and balanced just like all the other commercial dog foods. A large portion of vets and other professionals will say that RMBD is bad or might be good or maybe has some benefits and should be studied. Since studies are not available for these specific diets owners are left to do the best they can and then are condemned for it because there isn't any "proof".
There will never be any studies done on a raw diet, because no company can afford to do so when people can buy what they need from the grocery store and feed.
The "case study" of the St. Bernard was not a healthy raw diet at all.
It's not rocket science, it's basic nutrition for an animal that is mostly carnivorous with omnivorous tendencies.
And the delta society shunning a raw fed dog is pretty ridiculous as kibble fed dogs can still shed pathogens in their feces and saliva, no kibble is immune to that
Well, the dog food companies do plenty of research on dogs, that they keep at their facilites... euthanize them, and study bone, muscle studies...My opinion of Commercial dog food is that it contains chemicals that cause carcinomas as well as other maladies... The main problem with raw diet is...not feeding the whole carcas including the stomach contents, bone, and Intestines... If these were fed..It might provide those essential nutrients missing...
I haven't read all of this article yet, but will !!!! Balance and inclusion of all nutritional requirements is key in any diet. So my immediate curiosity is; I'd like to know how these cases compare to the thousands of untold numbers of health issues caused by kibble diets - or any other.
Great article ...My dogs have been feed RAW (not raw ) for 14 years.. I breed whelp and rear on RAW ..vet fees are non existant (hands on wood) my health checks are perfect or as close to it as possible ..but this is not just ground beef .. they are on a well rounded diet and lack nothing.. I know what is in the food they eat ..it is not cooked till all the goodness has gone.. there are no fillers in the food i feed.... RAW is the way to feed a Canine and Feline it is the natural way.. keep yp the great work
It appears the improper nutritional knowledge of what the dog requires from the diet is the problem. Many just do not know enough to offer a balanced diet when feeding raw or homemade diets.
The increasing popularity of raw diet is a worry in that many are not doing their homework! Feeding a well balanced raw diet is not difficult, nor is driving a car, but if you don't learn how to do it and just jump in, especially with puppies, of course there will be dangers. I have been feeding a raw diet for 7 years and my dogs and puppies are, without a doubt, in better physical condition than they were pre-raw. However, the basis of the diet is whole meats bought by myself, fed in the right ratio's not ground up packages which one has no idea of the content (some pre packaged diets are decent, but many are not). Ratio over time of bone to meat/offal and offering a variety are very important.
Thing is, whilst complete food is condemned and BARF promoted, little is done to educate that needed nutritional knowledge. Social media is rife with individuals slating complete diets ascertaining them as harmful to dogs but you have to wonder if such an argument is valid when you see evidence of dogs suffering from being fed BARF.
You can't blame people for wanting the best for their dogs but you can't expect them to be nutritional experts either.
I agree with the consensus: We would benefit from courses on canine nutrition. (Nod. Wink.) There is one self-styled "canine nutrition advisor" online: http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com... really a food-industry watchdog who provides notifications of food recalls, reviews on how published nutritional content of a given brand stacks up to the industry standard, and recommendations/ratings based on manufacturers' food-trial results. The ratings might be more believable - and the recommendations might carry more weight - if the advisor based his/her ratings on private (third-party, neutral) field-tests/food trials. Still, I subscribe to the site services because they've gone to the trouble to build a research library.
A significant portion of the bloat cases we see at the ER are raw fed, so that exempts kibble from being the sole source of the problem. Again, the only Dane I've had since 1991 to Bloat was exclusively raw fed. Any food can cause a problem, especially in an unhealthy or compromised digestive tract.
Not saying kibble is the cause of most bloat.. I've had my share of bloat in 35 plus yrs.. I do think grain causes gas and bacteria which can contribute to some bloat but I feed grain less food now and tack stomachs so I have had any bloat since starting that practice.
That is why I stated "I beg to disagree". Dogs who are fed BARF diets as well as home prepared diets (both cooked and raw) that consume foods other than just meat based also all digest at different rates. But ultimately I am a firm believer in each individual doing what works the best for their dogs and themselves. What works for one may not for another and so on, I do not judge...So long as the animals in question are getting a complete and balanced diet.
Is the processed food based on starches the problem? Maybe we should ask that question? Of course big corporations who make processed, starch based foods have a big interest not to reveal what their food does to the health of dogs and cats and how devastating they are for their well being.
Actually it's funny that the article suggests that you need to have special diets for dogs that only "dietitians" can come up with but yet, we don't go to dietitians to make foods for our kids. Maybe we should watch what dogs would eat when they had to find their foods if they humans were not around and form their diets based on it? ....That would be muscles, organs and bone and fat from around the stomach. No more greens other than what found in the stomach and it would not be a huge amount. Greens, not starches.
You yourself seem to have made made the (unconscious or not) connection that raw diet = not balanced. So if you can't understand why that would rial anyone that feeds raw... can't help you. And if you (and organisations) assume the raw diet I feed my dogs is less safe that the raw meat I eat, again, you're pre-judging. 'i think on some level you've answered your own question...
Agreed, this CAN happen. Although, I know puppies euthanized for seizures due to Purina food too though. Isn't there evidence that Cancer is cut 90% if pets are fed green leafy vegetables? Does anyone have a link to that?
I knew of a case of two pups dying owned by a woman who insisted on feeding raw only. Both had evidence of severe nutritional deficiencies, but she tried to blame the breeders. Claimed the 2 unrelated pups sold to her both had congenital/genetic abnormalities resulting in death.
What in the Purina food supposedly caused the seizures?
Beneful for starters.......
They did everything possible to figure it out and did euthanize one puppy, did pathology testing of every kind. Never did discover the proof. But 3 litters in different locations all on the same food. Remove the food, treatment - seizures gone.... it was a laboratory kibble though, so not your average Pro Plan... I've done raw for perhaps 15 years?
I am sorry I tagged the wrong person Catherine Coles and Catherine Houck. Does anyone have a link to a study that showed dogs fed only a commercial kibble were having seizures as a result of that kibble? Would love to read them.
Ever paper I read, including this one, says the same thing. RMBD warrant more research. Yet more research isn't done. Where would the funding come from. No kibble company is going to fund anything that may sway popular opinion from their products.
I don't know if anyone else reads Pet Food Industry, bit there is some interesting information. Aafco profiles have not been updated in years. I do not believe their recommendations are the final say in nutrition, but should be used as what they are which is a guideline. Here is an article on calcium. http://www.petfoodindustry.com/.../4178-aafco-ponders...
There's plenty of research to show that good nutrition is essential and both under and over nutrition of various elements contributes to skeletal disorders. Although there is certainly a genetic component, heritability is often low, so looking at diet (as well as exercise and general lifestyle) would seem to be indicated whenever evaluating a skeletal disorder- whether the dog is fed a commercially prepared diet (perhaps a high calorie food being given to a growing large breed dog) or a raw diet that may not be complete and appropriate for that dog. Both good and bad nutrition are possible with both commercial and homemade diets- recalls for excessive and deficient amounts of various nutrients have occurred in commercially prepared kibbles and commercially prepared raw diets, canned foods, etc, as well as in home made diets. Good education and having a variety of sources would seem to be in the best interest of our pets.
There will never be any studies done on a raw diet, because no company can afford to do so when people can buy what they need from the grocery store and feed.
The "case study" of the St. Bernard was not a healthy raw diet at all.
It's not rocket science, it's basic nutrition for an animal that is mostly carnivorous with omnivorous tendencies.
And the delta society shunning a raw fed dog is pretty ridiculous as kibble fed dogs can still shed pathogens in their feces and saliva, no kibble is immune to that
Well, the dog food companies do plenty of research on dogs, that they keep at their facilites... euthanize them, and study bone, muscle studies...My opinion of Commercial dog food is that it contains chemicals that cause carcinomas as well as other maladies... The main problem with raw diet is...not feeding the whole carcas including the stomach contents, bone, and Intestines... If these were fed..It might provide those essential nutrients missing...
I think we can wrap this up. The point that considering nutrition as well as genetic factors when looking for causes of skeletal disorders has been made. I'm not sure we've convinced Carol Beuchat that there are dangers in commercial foods as well as homemade ones, but I'd encourage anyone to know as much as possible about whatever they are feeding. For anyone interested, the FDA tracks pet food recalls, and did an interesting write up of the melamine recalls, but won't verify numbers: http://www.fda.gov/.../RecallsWithdrawals/ucm129932.htm However, over 20,000 pet owners received compensation through a class action suit, for the melamine contamination. This is certainly the largest recall and event, but it is by no means the only recall. http://news.vin.com/VINNews.aspx?articleId=20025
I'm not sure if you deleted a comment, or it was in another group, but you've made a comment that you'd let those of us with great pet insurance do raw, the clear implication being that raw is more dangerous than commercial. I absolutely agree that balanced nutrition is essential, but your post seems fairly clear considering diet as a factor in evaluating the cause of skeletal disorders. You also said you'd like to see research and you can find some, I can't get the full text but do some on OCD and diet. The FDA provides some basic information on recalls, but there is no centralized information on cause of death for pets, so I gave you the best info I had available to me, the FDA and the lawsuit, since you appear to not believe that there are safety problems, including imbalances, with commercially available foods. I'm not at all sure why a response that is in disagreement is considered ape shit crazy. My first post on this thread was pretty clear that I consider balanced nutrition important, and that either homemade or commercially available food can be safe and appropriate, or unbalanced. Nor do I think raw is the answer for everyone or every dog.
the melamine recall is perfectly relevant, if you consider that it was used to create appropriate protein ratios, and was a huge cause of illness and death in a large number of pets, caused by commercial diets. diet is easily one of the hot topics in dogs, so I'm not sure why you are surprised that you get push back when you make comments that are derogatory about raw diets.
I do find a lot of what you post deliberately provoking sometimes, and it is rather frustrating. If you want people to discuss "What is often considered genetic problems, but is actually a nutrient deficient diet" - Don't call "something "is raw diet the problem" and expect ANY rational thought. I don't care how many warnings you put on it, you come off as 100% someone with an agenda, and you're just baiting people, probably very defensive people. I'm willing to consider for example that my one litter that had hip dysplasia had bad hips to some degree because I fed a different commercial raw diet than I did for a different litter for example. The thought has crossed my mind long before this. But you're not building any trust with me - I try to not to eat processed food, and my dogs don't eat much of it either.
I've been aggressively bullied at a puppy class for being a breeder at all - AKA the devil. Some Therapy Dog organisations and canine blood banks ban dogs that are fed raw diet. My hobby sadly makes me defensive. Should I be banned from work if I eat sushi? Man I love sushi...
You yourself seem to have made made the (unconscious or not) connection that raw diet = not balanced. So if you can't understand why that would rial anyone that feeds raw... can't help you. And if you (and organisations) assume the raw diet I feed my dogs is less safe that the raw meat I eat, again, you're pre-judging. 'i think on some level you've answered your own question...
You can calculate the nutrients in a homemade diet without sending it off to a laboratory. Just use a reliable nutrient database and do the math. Then compare it to pet food guidelines, like those from AAFCO, NRC or FEDIAF. A simple yet scientific approach to feeding a homemade diet.
---------------
Gayle Watkins
Because there is little real data or information and the research is politicized on a grand scale. I knew David Kronfeld's. Well and know his wife and they won't even talk about dog nutrition research it has been so petered by the son food companies. She went to reptiles and David to horses and cattle where real research could be done. The dogs don't need grains came from David research. The only two times in a dogs life that it needs grains are female reproduction and weaning. The rest is cheap filler. Some dogs do ok on it. Some don't. But there are no "healthy" grains for dogs.
I had to get the papers from old library books. (I bought quite a few of them.). Dogs have a little bit more than wolves but no where near what humans have. Go look, at David's old research. He did the raw feeding studies in Alaska with the sled dogs in the early 70s.
I dug thru the literature on dog nutrition several years ago to find and read the foundational works. I bought many of them since they weren't available online. Proceedings, compilations, some dissertations. Dense reading but I treasure them since I think food is the source of life and health for all of us. But this effort also showed me that research today is sorely biased and not focused on making dogs as healthy as possible. Nor is research aimed at helping owners make good decisions but in intimidating them, such as the anti-raw movement. I've fed raw for almost 20 years. I've raised hundreds of puppies on raw. I have 0% CHD and a low but still annoying ED rate. Low allergies (10%), lowering cancer rate and better longevity. And unlike most dog people, I have a large populations. Is it the raw food that my breeding stock eats and pups are weaned onto? I don't know because I made some other changes in my husbandry but as I said, I think food is the basis for life and health. We couldn't eat Total cereal every meal of every day and be heathy. Neither can dogs.
------------------
Take Care In Selecting Proper Food For Doghttp://articles.chicagotribune.com/1986-08-03/news/8602260443_1_dog-food-ingredients-generic
August 03, 1986|By Deborah Lawson, Knight-Ridder Newspapers. Selecting the proper dog food from the bewildering choices so alluringly displayed on supermarket shelves is a problem for many pet owners.
A recognized authority on canine nutrition, David Kronfeld, D.V.M., professor at the University of Pennsylvania veterinary school, recently offered guidance on the subject at a Penn-sponsored symposium.
He warned that the National Research Council, which sets federal standards to which dog-food manufacturers must adhere, recently lowered its requirements.
``The protein requirement, for example, dropped from 22 percent to 10 percent,`` Kronfeld said. ``Whether an animal will thrive on such a diet is another question.`` He said many studies have shown that dogs need 25 percent to 30 percent protein in their diets to grow properly. Dogs that exercise heavily or are ill, pregnant or growing need even greater amounts.
Economy dictates the use of grain in dog food rather than meat, Kronfeld said. ``Cereal proteins are inexpensive, and the dog, while basically a flesh eater, has adapted more or less to a grain diet, provided that it is carefully supplemented with high quality protein, fat, vitamins and minerals,`` he said, while noting that cereal ingredients have drawbacks. For example, he said, soy products depress thyroid action and bind up calcium. To counteract this effect, he explained, manufacturers add calcium, which can diminish absorption of copper and zinc or block iodine uptake in the thyroid gland.
These interactions are involved in what Kronfeld described as ``generic dog food disease. It has been found that dogs fed generic foods exclusively can grow poorly, develop anemia or skin disease,`` he said.
Kronfeld said that the cooking of cereals in all dog foods to make them digestible destroys nutrients, and that the preservatives added to dog food can influence health. He warned that certain semimoist foods contain high amounts of acids and that recently acids also have been added to dry food. Another preservative, propylene glycol, can damage red blood cells.
``The picture is further complicated by the fact that the formula for dog foods changes, depending on the availability of the ingredients, in an effort to keep the cost low,`` Kronfeld said. ``You may be buying the same brand, but the ingredients are different in each part of the country, and the dog must adjust.`` He recommended that owners carefully check the labels of dog foods to ascertain the percentage of protein.
For those willing to pay the price, there are fixed-formula foods such as Science Diet, Iams and a few others of this kind. These generally are available from veterinarians or pet shops. They are denser than the regular commercial foods; dogs generally eat less of them, reducing the cost differential.
Survive vs thrive is completely different. Dogs are carnivorous with omnivorous tendencies. Just because a street dog can survive on scraps doesn't make it ideal.
If dogs had their way... They would never touch those little hard packed squares of rubbish labeled "dog food"
Most cancers in dogs, are thought to be related to the food the dog eats... And the same with humans...
The problem with all commercial dog food is that most dogs cannot digest the stuff...Their organs suffer and eventually the die of cancer..
Does anyone have a link to a study that showed dogs fed only a commercial kibble were having seizures as a result of that kibble? Would love to read them.
I read, including this one, says the same thing. RMBD warrant more research. Yet more research isn't done. Where would the funding come from. No kibble company is going to fund anything that may sway popular opinion from their products.
No one argues that good nutrtition is important, but their is a lot of controversy over what that means, where it comes from, and who should be consulting. According to Consumer Reports there is no need to buy anything other than O'Roy because it is complete and balanced just like all the other commercial dog foods. A large portion of vets and other professionals will say that RMBD is bad or might be good or maybe has some benefits and should be studied. Since studies are not available for these specific diets owners are left to do the best they can and then are condemned for it because there isn't any "proof".
There will never be any studies done on a raw diet, because no company can afford to do so when people can buy what they need from the grocery store and feed.
The "case study" of the St. Bernard was not a healthy raw diet at all.
It's not rocket science, it's basic nutrition for an animal that is mostly carnivorous with omnivorous tendencies.
And the delta society shunning a raw fed dog is pretty ridiculous as kibble fed dogs can still shed pathogens in their feces and saliva, no kibble is immune to that
Well, the dog food companies do plenty of research on dogs, that they keep at their facilites... euthanize them, and study bone, muscle studies...My opinion of Commercial dog food is that it contains chemicals that cause carcinomas as well as other maladies... The main problem with raw diet is...not feeding the whole carcas including the stomach contents, bone, and Intestines... If these were fed..It might provide those essential nutrients missing...
I haven't read all of this article yet, but will !!!! Balance and inclusion of all nutritional requirements is key in any diet. So my immediate curiosity is; I'd like to know how these cases compare to the thousands of untold numbers of health issues caused by kibble diets - or any other.
Great article ...My dogs have been feed RAW (not raw ) for 14 years.. I breed whelp and rear on RAW ..vet fees are non existant (hands on wood) my health checks are perfect or as close to it as possible ..but this is not just ground beef .. they are on a well rounded diet and lack nothing.. I know what is in the food they eat ..it is not cooked till all the goodness has gone.. there are no fillers in the food i feed.... RAW is the way to feed a Canine and Feline it is the natural way.. keep yp the great work
It appears the improper nutritional knowledge of what the dog requires from the diet is the problem. Many just do not know enough to offer a balanced diet when feeding raw or homemade diets.
The increasing popularity of raw diet is a worry in that many are not doing their homework! Feeding a well balanced raw diet is not difficult, nor is driving a car, but if you don't learn how to do it and just jump in, especially with puppies, of course there will be dangers. I have been feeding a raw diet for 7 years and my dogs and puppies are, without a doubt, in better physical condition than they were pre-raw. However, the basis of the diet is whole meats bought by myself, fed in the right ratio's not ground up packages which one has no idea of the content (some pre packaged diets are decent, but many are not). Ratio over time of bone to meat/offal and offering a variety are very important.
Thing is, whilst complete food is condemned and BARF promoted, little is done to educate that needed nutritional knowledge. Social media is rife with individuals slating complete diets ascertaining them as harmful to dogs but you have to wonder if such an argument is valid when you see evidence of dogs suffering from being fed BARF.
You can't blame people for wanting the best for their dogs but you can't expect them to be nutritional experts either.
I agree with the consensus: We would benefit from courses on canine nutrition. (Nod. Wink.) There is one self-styled "canine nutrition advisor" online: http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com... really a food-industry watchdog who provides notifications of food recalls, reviews on how published nutritional content of a given brand stacks up to the industry standard, and recommendations/ratings based on manufacturers' food-trial results. The ratings might be more believable - and the recommendations might carry more weight - if the advisor based his/her ratings on private (third-party, neutral) field-tests/food trials. Still, I subscribe to the site services because they've gone to the trouble to build a research library.
A significant portion of the bloat cases we see at the ER are raw fed, so that exempts kibble from being the sole source of the problem. Again, the only Dane I've had since 1991 to Bloat was exclusively raw fed. Any food can cause a problem, especially in an unhealthy or compromised digestive tract.
Not saying kibble is the cause of most bloat.. I've had my share of bloat in 35 plus yrs.. I do think grain causes gas and bacteria which can contribute to some bloat but I feed grain less food now and tack stomachs so I have had any bloat since starting that practice.
That is why I stated "I beg to disagree". Dogs who are fed BARF diets as well as home prepared diets (both cooked and raw) that consume foods other than just meat based also all digest at different rates. But ultimately I am a firm believer in each individual doing what works the best for their dogs and themselves. What works for one may not for another and so on, I do not judge...So long as the animals in question are getting a complete and balanced diet.
Is the processed food based on starches the problem? Maybe we should ask that question? Of course big corporations who make processed, starch based foods have a big interest not to reveal what their food does to the health of dogs and cats and how devastating they are for their well being.
Actually it's funny that the article suggests that you need to have special diets for dogs that only "dietitians" can come up with but yet, we don't go to dietitians to make foods for our kids. Maybe we should watch what dogs would eat when they had to find their foods if they humans were not around and form their diets based on it? ....That would be muscles, organs and bone and fat from around the stomach. No more greens other than what found in the stomach and it would not be a huge amount. Greens, not starches.
You yourself seem to have made made the (unconscious or not) connection that raw diet = not balanced. So if you can't understand why that would rial anyone that feeds raw... can't help you. And if you (and organisations) assume the raw diet I feed my dogs is less safe that the raw meat I eat, again, you're pre-judging. 'i think on some level you've answered your own question...
Agreed, this CAN happen. Although, I know puppies euthanized for seizures due to Purina food too though. Isn't there evidence that Cancer is cut 90% if pets are fed green leafy vegetables? Does anyone have a link to that?
I knew of a case of two pups dying owned by a woman who insisted on feeding raw only. Both had evidence of severe nutritional deficiencies, but she tried to blame the breeders. Claimed the 2 unrelated pups sold to her both had congenital/genetic abnormalities resulting in death.
What in the Purina food supposedly caused the seizures?
Beneful for starters.......
They did everything possible to figure it out and did euthanize one puppy, did pathology testing of every kind. Never did discover the proof. But 3 litters in different locations all on the same food. Remove the food, treatment - seizures gone.... it was a laboratory kibble though, so not your average Pro Plan... I've done raw for perhaps 15 years?
I am sorry I tagged the wrong person Catherine Coles and Catherine Houck. Does anyone have a link to a study that showed dogs fed only a commercial kibble were having seizures as a result of that kibble? Would love to read them.
Ever paper I read, including this one, says the same thing. RMBD warrant more research. Yet more research isn't done. Where would the funding come from. No kibble company is going to fund anything that may sway popular opinion from their products.
I don't know if anyone else reads Pet Food Industry, bit there is some interesting information. Aafco profiles have not been updated in years. I do not believe their recommendations are the final say in nutrition, but should be used as what they are which is a guideline. Here is an article on calcium. http://www.petfoodindustry.com/.../4178-aafco-ponders...
There's plenty of research to show that good nutrition is essential and both under and over nutrition of various elements contributes to skeletal disorders. Although there is certainly a genetic component, heritability is often low, so looking at diet (as well as exercise and general lifestyle) would seem to be indicated whenever evaluating a skeletal disorder- whether the dog is fed a commercially prepared diet (perhaps a high calorie food being given to a growing large breed dog) or a raw diet that may not be complete and appropriate for that dog. Both good and bad nutrition are possible with both commercial and homemade diets- recalls for excessive and deficient amounts of various nutrients have occurred in commercially prepared kibbles and commercially prepared raw diets, canned foods, etc, as well as in home made diets. Good education and having a variety of sources would seem to be in the best interest of our pets.
There will never be any studies done on a raw diet, because no company can afford to do so when people can buy what they need from the grocery store and feed.
The "case study" of the St. Bernard was not a healthy raw diet at all.
It's not rocket science, it's basic nutrition for an animal that is mostly carnivorous with omnivorous tendencies.
And the delta society shunning a raw fed dog is pretty ridiculous as kibble fed dogs can still shed pathogens in their feces and saliva, no kibble is immune to that
Well, the dog food companies do plenty of research on dogs, that they keep at their facilites... euthanize them, and study bone, muscle studies...My opinion of Commercial dog food is that it contains chemicals that cause carcinomas as well as other maladies... The main problem with raw diet is...not feeding the whole carcas including the stomach contents, bone, and Intestines... If these were fed..It might provide those essential nutrients missing...
I think we can wrap this up. The point that considering nutrition as well as genetic factors when looking for causes of skeletal disorders has been made. I'm not sure we've convinced Carol Beuchat that there are dangers in commercial foods as well as homemade ones, but I'd encourage anyone to know as much as possible about whatever they are feeding. For anyone interested, the FDA tracks pet food recalls, and did an interesting write up of the melamine recalls, but won't verify numbers: http://www.fda.gov/.../RecallsWithdrawals/ucm129932.htm However, over 20,000 pet owners received compensation through a class action suit, for the melamine contamination. This is certainly the largest recall and event, but it is by no means the only recall. http://news.vin.com/VINNews.aspx?articleId=20025
I'm not sure if you deleted a comment, or it was in another group, but you've made a comment that you'd let those of us with great pet insurance do raw, the clear implication being that raw is more dangerous than commercial. I absolutely agree that balanced nutrition is essential, but your post seems fairly clear considering diet as a factor in evaluating the cause of skeletal disorders. You also said you'd like to see research and you can find some, I can't get the full text but do some on OCD and diet. The FDA provides some basic information on recalls, but there is no centralized information on cause of death for pets, so I gave you the best info I had available to me, the FDA and the lawsuit, since you appear to not believe that there are safety problems, including imbalances, with commercially available foods. I'm not at all sure why a response that is in disagreement is considered ape shit crazy. My first post on this thread was pretty clear that I consider balanced nutrition important, and that either homemade or commercially available food can be safe and appropriate, or unbalanced. Nor do I think raw is the answer for everyone or every dog.
the melamine recall is perfectly relevant, if you consider that it was used to create appropriate protein ratios, and was a huge cause of illness and death in a large number of pets, caused by commercial diets. diet is easily one of the hot topics in dogs, so I'm not sure why you are surprised that you get push back when you make comments that are derogatory about raw diets.
I do find a lot of what you post deliberately provoking sometimes, and it is rather frustrating. If you want people to discuss "What is often considered genetic problems, but is actually a nutrient deficient diet" - Don't call "something "is raw diet the problem" and expect ANY rational thought. I don't care how many warnings you put on it, you come off as 100% someone with an agenda, and you're just baiting people, probably very defensive people. I'm willing to consider for example that my one litter that had hip dysplasia had bad hips to some degree because I fed a different commercial raw diet than I did for a different litter for example. The thought has crossed my mind long before this. But you're not building any trust with me - I try to not to eat processed food, and my dogs don't eat much of it either.
I've been aggressively bullied at a puppy class for being a breeder at all - AKA the devil. Some Therapy Dog organisations and canine blood banks ban dogs that are fed raw diet. My hobby sadly makes me defensive. Should I be banned from work if I eat sushi? Man I love sushi...
You yourself seem to have made made the (unconscious or not) connection that raw diet = not balanced. So if you can't understand why that would rial anyone that feeds raw... can't help you. And if you (and organisations) assume the raw diet I feed my dogs is less safe that the raw meat I eat, again, you're pre-judging. 'i think on some level you've answered your own question...
You can calculate the nutrients in a homemade diet without sending it off to a laboratory. Just use a reliable nutrient database and do the math. Then compare it to pet food guidelines, like those from AAFCO, NRC or FEDIAF. A simple yet scientific approach to feeding a homemade diet.
---------------
Gayle Watkins
Because there is little real data or information and the research is politicized on a grand scale. I knew David Kronfeld's. Well and know his wife and they won't even talk about dog nutrition research it has been so petered by the son food companies. She went to reptiles and David to horses and cattle where real research could be done. The dogs don't need grains came from David research. The only two times in a dogs life that it needs grains are female reproduction and weaning. The rest is cheap filler. Some dogs do ok on it. Some don't. But there are no "healthy" grains for dogs.
I had to get the papers from old library books. (I bought quite a few of them.). Dogs have a little bit more than wolves but no where near what humans have. Go look, at David's old research. He did the raw feeding studies in Alaska with the sled dogs in the early 70s.
I dug thru the literature on dog nutrition several years ago to find and read the foundational works. I bought many of them since they weren't available online. Proceedings, compilations, some dissertations. Dense reading but I treasure them since I think food is the source of life and health for all of us. But this effort also showed me that research today is sorely biased and not focused on making dogs as healthy as possible. Nor is research aimed at helping owners make good decisions but in intimidating them, such as the anti-raw movement. I've fed raw for almost 20 years. I've raised hundreds of puppies on raw. I have 0% CHD and a low but still annoying ED rate. Low allergies (10%), lowering cancer rate and better longevity. And unlike most dog people, I have a large populations. Is it the raw food that my breeding stock eats and pups are weaned onto? I don't know because I made some other changes in my husbandry but as I said, I think food is the basis for life and health. We couldn't eat Total cereal every meal of every day and be heathy. Neither can dogs.
------------------
Take Care In Selecting Proper Food For Doghttp://articles.chicagotribune.com/1986-08-03/news/8602260443_1_dog-food-ingredients-generic
August 03, 1986|By Deborah Lawson, Knight-Ridder Newspapers. Selecting the proper dog food from the bewildering choices so alluringly displayed on supermarket shelves is a problem for many pet owners.
A recognized authority on canine nutrition, David Kronfeld, D.V.M., professor at the University of Pennsylvania veterinary school, recently offered guidance on the subject at a Penn-sponsored symposium.
He warned that the National Research Council, which sets federal standards to which dog-food manufacturers must adhere, recently lowered its requirements.
``The protein requirement, for example, dropped from 22 percent to 10 percent,`` Kronfeld said. ``Whether an animal will thrive on such a diet is another question.`` He said many studies have shown that dogs need 25 percent to 30 percent protein in their diets to grow properly. Dogs that exercise heavily or are ill, pregnant or growing need even greater amounts.
Economy dictates the use of grain in dog food rather than meat, Kronfeld said. ``Cereal proteins are inexpensive, and the dog, while basically a flesh eater, has adapted more or less to a grain diet, provided that it is carefully supplemented with high quality protein, fat, vitamins and minerals,`` he said, while noting that cereal ingredients have drawbacks. For example, he said, soy products depress thyroid action and bind up calcium. To counteract this effect, he explained, manufacturers add calcium, which can diminish absorption of copper and zinc or block iodine uptake in the thyroid gland.
These interactions are involved in what Kronfeld described as ``generic dog food disease. It has been found that dogs fed generic foods exclusively can grow poorly, develop anemia or skin disease,`` he said.
Kronfeld said that the cooking of cereals in all dog foods to make them digestible destroys nutrients, and that the preservatives added to dog food can influence health. He warned that certain semimoist foods contain high amounts of acids and that recently acids also have been added to dry food. Another preservative, propylene glycol, can damage red blood cells.
``The picture is further complicated by the fact that the formula for dog foods changes, depending on the availability of the ingredients, in an effort to keep the cost low,`` Kronfeld said. ``You may be buying the same brand, but the ingredients are different in each part of the country, and the dog must adjust.`` He recommended that owners carefully check the labels of dog foods to ascertain the percentage of protein.
For those willing to pay the price, there are fixed-formula foods such as Science Diet, Iams and a few others of this kind. These generally are available from veterinarians or pet shops. They are denser than the regular commercial foods; dogs generally eat less of them, reducing the cost differential.
