I think you misquoted - I didn’t say that, I think curlcoat did.
Karl and Frilly - thank you for all those links and for being patient.
I just got back from a tracking seminar, will snuggle up to the computer later and read through those.
I am glad that you’re not against raw diets across the board. 
I also want to point out quickly that my comment about “natural” wasn’t to say that natural = better. I’m completely aware that feeding cows, chickens and pigs doesn’t equal a “natural” wolf diet. Just that the aim of raw diets, basically, is to feed meat, bone and organ in whatever proportions would “naturally” occur in a prey diet. And that personally, I try to feed my dogs as closely as possible to whatever proportions prey-type animals “naturally” come in. So far that’s worked out pretty well, I think, in that I have fed this way for years and have healthy dogs.
Apparently, you didn’t read what I said, which was I was having connection problems and so didn’t look at any links. I just responded to whatever was in any given post. I also don’t tend to respond to just a link by itself (I don’t know if that is what you did or not since that was a while ago) because I get tired of reading and trying to figure out what part of a link a poster was using to make some point that I have probably missed.
Didn’t you say you were a vet with some training in nutrition? You don’t know that the prescription diets are only to be fed to the animals that have whatever health problem each individual food was developed for? Therefore, if there isn’t a marked difference in the ingredients between diets for a specific disease process and a diet that is supposed to be for any healthy dog, it doesn’t sound like the latter is a good idea, does it?
I am not alone in not liking Science Diet for larger dogs, particularly those who are doing any sort of work. I don’t know anyone who feeds it, and I know scores of dog owners. There was a time many years ago, when it was either new or for some reason a new big deal I forget which, and many people gave it a try. None of the people with bigger dogs that did much of anything other than hang around the house were happy with it. I don’t care what a food is made out of if the feeding results are bad.
Yes, you are - you are trying to “prove” that I cannot know enough to feed even myself in a healthy manner because I don’t know about micronutrients and how to exactly balance different things and on and on. Also, you want to “win” thru scientific theory rather than looking at actual results, whereas I am the exact opposite. Science has made enough mistakes over the decades that I believe nothing without trying it out myself. After 15+ years, there is simply nothing science can say that will override those years of great experiences with what I feed.
And no, I didn’t luck into feeding my dogs a “mostly balanced diet”, I researched it, tried different things, and tweaked it until I got to what I now feed. Of course there are dogs that are victims of malnutrition out there, but for you to assume that any dog eating a diet that you didn’t create or doesn’t come out of a bag is, well, rather egotistical. As I’ve said before, getting thru vet school doesn’t make you an expert on all things doggy, and it certainly doesn’t make you the only one to know how to properly feed a dog.
As to your list of things that can happen from diet issues - after 15+ years, don’t you think those things would have shown up in my dogs? In the dogs of all the others that I know who feed raw? I don’t care if you want to believe it, but these dogs are healthy, far healthier than the average pet dog that is taken to the vet because it has skin problems, parasite problems, allergy problems. Despite the fact that I am at some sort of dog event essentially every weekend, as well as getting together with friends to train, I use no flea or tick preventatives, I don’t vaccinate for kennel cough, I very rarely have to worm my dogs. They are in hard muscle with good endurance, good skin & coat, clean teeth, etc. They routinely live into their teens and usually are working right up until very close to the end of their lives. I think this is something that you are missing or overlooking - I am not feeding pet dogs, I am feeding dogs who are physically and mentally worked almost every day of their lives. If their diet was a problem, it would show up quickly.
I don’t need to know these things because I don’t have any of those breeds. I am aware of the health issues in my breed and we have yet to get any that are affected by diet.
Yeah right. The only reason I would need to do that would be if I was for some reason unable to see the results in their stools or condition.
As I said, my vet isn’t a know it all. He has seen my dogs at times like when Proxy broke her leg, or when Dodger came home from Montana with scabies and he has no concerns with their condition. When Dodger was neutered, when Proxy had her surgery and they get the pre-op work up - no issues. Same with the dogs before them.
This was one of the many resources I used to create the diet I now feed.
You know, if you had just asked about raw feeding instead of assuming that all breeders are idiots, none of this would have had to happen.
As you note in your next post, vaccines put stress on the immune system. If that immune system is not doing well already, then harm is going to happen. If too many vaccinations are given at once or too close together, the immune system can be overstressed.
Poor quality food can manifest itself as skin disorders causing the dog to scratch and create infections.
No. Again, I have not said that people should not feed kibble, all I have said is that feeding raw is at least as good.
Well, on a very quick look, the first that came up was this page, at the bottom has this -
“Bones from prey are required by wolves as the major source of calcium and phosphorus for the maintenance of their own skeletons. Bones, in fact, are a surprisingly well-balanced food for canids” (Mech, L.D. 2003. Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. pg125)."
This goes back to logic. Wild predators can only get calcium and phosphorus from the bones of their prey, so does it not make sense that those raw bones must be highly bioavailable?
No, vaccines put the immune system to work instead of idly waiting and circulating around (which is what they would do). You’re right that if the immune system is not doing well already, bad things are going to happen, but the immune system has to be bad first. The review does mention certain breeds that appear to have a predisposition to certain reactions, which appears to be the result of genetic problems and immune dysregulation.
For the majority of animals (and humans), the amount of vaccinations does not overwhelm their immune system. As to the “too close together” comment, I’m confused, since (the same type of) vaccine cannot be given “too close” anyways, you need at least 2 weeks if not more to develop the response that is looked for. Note that for the above, I’m talking about puppy booster series. Adult dogs can (and do) go on the 3-year schedule for most vaccines.
While this is true, in the case of zinc deficiency/zinc related problems (which, microscopically, can be distinguished from plain allergic reaction), it is also true that food allergy is one of the main cases of allergy in dogs.
And again, I repeat, that many people may have balanced diets overall for their pets, while many others don’t, and their pets end up with problems and seeing FrillyNettles and others. Because this is not uncommon, it is that veterinarians are very cautious and point out all the possible risks of raw feeding.
It makes sense, which is why I would like a peer-reviewed article to show up.
Some people with extensive resources to use selecting a dog food feed large breed working dogs Science diet, http://search.yahoo.com/r/_ylt=A0oG7qPO25JOzy8AHRxjmolQ;_ylu=X3oDMTBybnZlZnRlBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkAw--/SIG=136bl3ub2/EXP=1318276174/**http%3A//www.carsoncityguidedogs.com/Docs/5%2520-%2520nutritional-policy-10-2010.pdf
It is one of 5 common brands Guide Dogs currrently accepts. A few years ago it was the only one. Unlike some other service dog schools, they do keep their puppies on large breed puppy chow the entire first year. Perhaps those brands are now close enough to the ALS foods it make little difference. What the label on the bag says or the price the scanner picks up never hurt any dog’s hips. They breed hundreds of large breed puppies a year, supervise their care the first year, and remove from the program any that don’t score OFA good or better.
As for the ingredients in the regular and prescription foods, I am sure they start with mostly the same. I know the C/D we fed our one puppy was mostly corn and lamb. I am sure it had some minor ingredients to lower the urine pH. Dogs on prescription diets still need much of the same amono acids, fat, and calories other dogs do.
Don’t blame Guide Dogs for my misdeeds. They are inocent victims of my search engine.
I don’t think there is any funding for studies comparing the short-term, much less the long-term, health of dogs and/or cats eating a “natural” diet of raw meaty bones. For one thing, the corporations which produce pet food products are extremely entangled with the interests of all professionals who care for animals (vets most especially). There is a lot of money to be lost if it is found that feeding your dogs scrap parts from the butcher leads to by far the best health outcomes (and no vet bills - this has been my experience).
After looking at the very limited available science and applying common sense, I decided to conduct my own study, sample size five (if you count me and my ‘ancestral’ diet). So far, the results have been amazing, as have they been for every other person I know who has tried feeding their dogs and cats exclusively on bone-in animal parts. It’s sure not peer-reviewed but to me, it is concrete evidence supporting BARF diets.
Well I have a sample size of a few thousand and I see no reason to go to all the risk and work of raw when Pro Plan seems to work so well. Raw is an answer without a question.
Everyone is free to feed their pets as they wish. Thankfully.
I used to feed my (older) dog ProPlan. I was not at all satisfied with the results. High-end, grain-free commercial pet foods (Blue Buffalo, Ivo Innova) seemed to make her feel a bit better, but they cost more than feeding raw, and her health took such a dramatic and fast upswing for the better as soon as I tried feeding her raw there was no contest.
I can agree that if your pet has no health issues, there’s no real reason to change what you’re feeding. I only started meddling with their diet because I had a very tired and feeble 8-year-old dog who seemed to be on track to die of ‘old age’ in a couple years. Now I have a 15-year-old dog who is friskier than many puppies I meet.
Oh, but you are incorrect. Dr. Beth Hamper at UT Knoxville is a Hill’s Fellow currently studying raw food diets in cats–and she does this entirely on funding from Hills/Science Diet pet food corporation.
Um, stress isn’t always a negative, right? Causing something to go to work can be termed putting stress on that system, right? Yes, and if you put a bunch of vaccinations in a puppy at the same time or close together, and there is anything at all wrong with it’s immune system and/or anything is going on around it that would also stress the immune system, that puppy is far more likely to fall ill. Such as way back when FrillyNettles was talking about not feeding raw to puppies because s/he thinks their immune systems can’t handle it, and my response was that my puppies have great immune systems, partially because I don’t load them up with vaccinations.
When I’m saying too close together, I’m talking about the different things puppies/dogs are vaccinated for, not boosters for the same thing. Regarding whether or not it is a majority of animals that do not have a negative reaction to multiple vaccinations at once, we don’t really know that yet since some of Dr Dobbs’ studies have indicated that long term issues may be set off. I haven’t kept up on that part of it, since the fact that all of the boosters that used to be recommended aren’t even needed was enough for me to back off of all those shots.
I wasn’t speaking to food allergies, I was talking about dogs that are brought to the vet because they are having skin issues, which clear up when the dog is switched to trial feeding of a food with unique ingredient sources. Many times when this happens, that is good enough for the owner and no actual allergy testing is done. If the dog’s skin problems were due to it being fed a sub par food, switching to a better food is going to have the same results.
And yet there is no uproar about people who feed their dogs sub par kibble? Raw feeding cannot be blamed for a few individuals who go into it clueless any more than premium brand kibble can be blamed for the stuff made out of sawdust.
The issue is that FrillyNettles said “don’t feed raw”, not “be sure to research a good diet”, or even “feeding raw isn’t as easy as just opening a bag of kibble”. Then s/he has gone on to pretend that it is next to impossible to create a balanced raw diet and that raw fed dogs must be lacking something somewhere. Later, when s/he admitted that (oh shit, I’m just going to pick one) her living is made by creating home cooked diets for pets, I had quite a bit of trouble not seeing bias.
I assume the link I gave you wasn’t peer-reviewed?
Note that your link said they only recommend the puppy food.
And the average hip score at the guide dog school in S Cal has a far worse average than I do. I’m not sure they are actually selecting for good hips, other than not breeding from a dog with less than a Good, so what they feed may be immaterial there. Most likely it is.
Apparently you missed it when I said that I switched to raw because I couldn’t keep my dogs in good enough coat and condition on kibble? And Pro Plan was one of the last kibbles I tried. I also use no flea/tick preventatives, no need for their teeth to be cleaned and clean up dropped to less than half. I don’t have a sample size of a few thousand, but we are well up into the hundreds - the results are so good that I am happy to go to a little more work to feed raw. I’m not feeding a kennel full of dogs any more, so I can see how just scooping kibble would be preferable in that situation, but it certainly doesn’t translate into there is something wrong with feeding raw.
[quote=“curlcoat, post:71, topic:598805”]
And yet there is no uproar about people who feed their dogs sub par kibble? Raw feeding cannot be blamed for a few individuals who go into it clueless any more than premium brand kibble can be blamed for the stuff made out of sawdust.
/QUOTE]
You have some cites on health problems from feeding inexpensive kibbles? And an ingredient list with sawdust near the top?
Also, a quote of where I said I feed thousands of dogs? Perhaps you need to read things more carefully.
You are reaching. Obviously, a dog fed a poor quality food is going to have health problems, and the sawdust thing was an exaggeration, which you really should know.
No, I said I don’t have a sample size of a few thousand, which was repeating exactly what you said.
No you are throwing a bunch of misinformation as fact, and then not backing it.
And yet, all you can say to it is “I feed Pro Plan and my dogs are fine”. If what I’ve posted were actually misinformation, you’d be able to prove it, but you haven’t done so. I don’t know why you are so threatened by the fact I feed raw, but you should at least notice that every time you come up with “proof” that there is something wrong with that, I’ve shown your the error of you ways.
I’m beginning to believe you are an at least 60 year old, old school field trialer - am I right?
Look, it’s pretty clear you don’t really understand the way the immune system works, curlcoat, and beyond that, you don’t really seem to want to. I think I have been trying pretty darn hard to answer your queries respectfully, and I take a lot of time to come up with well researched information in order to do so. I am not trying to “win” or “play games” no matter how you want to portray it. If you are TRULY interested in answers to your questions, fine. But otherwise, I am pretty much done spending time and effort in what I think is a game on your part. And for the record, my objections to feeding puppies raw go beyond the immaturity of their Gut Associated Lymphoid Tissues and underdeveloped cell-mediated immunity. I have pretty serious concerns about their development on anything less than a perfectly balanced diet. You started the thread saying you gave very little thought to balancing food because it wasn’t “rocket science,” though you later admitted using sources such as monicasegal.com, so maybe you just were not as aware that you were using someone else’s very well-balanced diet. And no matter what you are feeding your dogs, it won’t make them immune to fleas, ticks, and internal parasites from the environment, and you can’t see microscopic parasites with your naked eye in their poop. So not using preventatives is foolhardy, especially for heartworms. I can honestly say you are foolish to believe otherwise.
For anyone else that has genuine questions about any of this, I would be happy to answer what I can. I won’t be responding to curlcoat any longer, though, unless she wants to have an honest dialog that does not include implying I am some kind of money grubbing shill for the pet food companies. I can honestly say I don’t personally know anyone working for any of them.
I am sorry, but the only thing you have proved is that you can spew the same old crap I have seen over and over again, but have nothing to back it up. Fillers, sawdust, health problems from low quality kibbles, etc. I am sick of people having no idea of what real evidence is posting such junk. If you are going to take minority positions, it is up to you to provide the evidence. Where is it?
I am old enough to remember people that knew everything there was to know at 17, they were an old foggie at 21, and have spent the last 40-50 years impeding progress.
FrillyNettles is right, you aren’t worth responding to.
I would hardly call assuming that I cannot feed my dogs well to be at all respectful. You have been completely unable to address that concept with anything less than condensation - perhaps you don’t even know you are doing it.
I don’t believe I had any questions?
And yet you choose to ignore all of the dogs out there who have been raised since weaning on a raw diet for the past (at least) couple of decades. This is another area where you have been less than respectful - there are hundreds of breeders and owners out there doing “feeding trials” and having great results, but because it doesn’t fit with your narrow definition of correct, you just can’t accept that it works. Which actually wouldn’t be an issue for me, but you have to keep digging it in, insinuating that our pups must be growing up ill or something. Then you have the gall to say I’m not being respectful?
Misstating what I’ve posted also isn’t all that respectful - what I actually said was feeding raw doesn’t require getting a degree in nutrition. I gave it a lot of thought before I switched over completely to raw, read up on it, talked to others who were doing it, etc.
Shrug, again with the rude. I live in S Cal, I attend events with my dogs and field train, and I have not had any fleas for years and the very rare tick. I worm my baby puppies before they go to their new homes for just-in-case and no longer get poop with roundworms in it. I don’t need a microscope to tell if the dogs or cat have any internal parasites, since it would show up in their condition and as for heartworm, since it is rather rare here I make the decision to not poison them every month and trust the odds.
And the best part? This is true of all of the folks that I know here who feed raw (well, except for the heartworm thing - we all make our own decisions on that). This is probably the number one reason why more and more people are switching over to raw, as they see their friends’ dogs looking better and hear about the other advantages. I’m sorry it doesn’t fit with what you learned in school, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t work.
Again, respect involves actually staying with what I’ve said. You yourself said your practice involves working with clients to create home cooked diets, which is why I think people going out and creating their own diets could affect your bottom line.
I am perfectly willing to have an actual honest dialog on this, but since you cannot see past your bias against owners doing anything for themselves, nor do you really have a good grasp on what a raw diet is, I don’t see it happening.
Since you are spending an awful lot of time dodging and weaving on this subject, which affects you not at all, I think it’s just as well that we decide not to correspond. Those who want to feed kibble get no grief from me - it’s too bad that you all cannot extend that courtesy to raw feeders.
I do have to respond to this, because it breaks my heart to see dogs die from perfectly preventable diseases like heartworm. There were 1,955 confirmed cases of heartworm in the state of California in 2010, and that’s just what was reported to the Companion Animal Parasite Council. I’m glad you can see Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, Babesia, Anaplasma and Ehrlichia, because I can’t until they’ve either caused immune-mediated damage to the kidneys, blood vessels, eyes, or other organs, or I catch them on a screening test. And no fleas in California? That is impressive. I do hope you are at least treating your bitches for whips, hooks, and rounds to prevent transmission to those pups before birth and during nursing. The drugs used to prevent these parasites are not “poisoning” dogs. They work by binding glutamate gated chloride ion channels specific to nematodes and not found in mammals, such as dogs. The reason collie breeds have sometimes been sensitive to ivermectins has to do with a completely different mechanism, but has nothing to do with toxicity, and there are non-ivermectin drugs that can be safely used in the approximately 30% of those collies shown to have the mutated gene–an easy blood test.
You just can’t let it go can you? How about, the state of California is a really big place, and most of those cases of heartworm would have been in places where they have untreated standing water - we don’t have that here. It is extremely rare for me to even see a mosquito, particularly since the West Nile scare started.
We also don’t have much in the way of tick borne disease here either, mostly because we don’t have much in the way of ticks. And yes, we personally do not have fleas even tho they are in this area.
As for heartworm medication not being poison, I had a dog have a very bad reaction to one and I have heard of similar things. It may not technically be a poison, but at times it acts that way, and given the extremely low likelihood of any of my dogs getting bit by a mosquito carrying heartworm, I prefer to not take the chance.
Of course my vet knows all of this and has no problem with it given the condition of my dogs & cat.
Again, I know this doesn’t mesh with your training, but not everything is covered in school. But yeah, continue to assume that I must be a horrid owner.