# In The Wild



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

I hear on a regular basis when people are talking about feeding their dogs "in the wild" as in "they wouldn't eat that in the wild" or "how do they get that nutrient in the wild" etc.

Have studies been done that show our dogs digestive systems and needs are still 100% the same as wolves? I would think with the years and years of domestication, and the 100's of generations, there would have been changes as the dogs that thrived on what they were being fed were the ones who produced the next generation, and the dogs who didn't thrive fell by the wayside. In some areas dogs may have been eating mainly a raw diet, but I think most generations of dogs, especially in the last 100 years or so, have probably been living on a combination of kibble, table scraps, etc with the raw diet only coming into play more recently. 

I'm not against the raw diet, but I am wondering how accurate comparing our dogs dietary needs to those of wolves really is.


----------



## Michele McAtee (Apr 10, 2006)

Good question(s) Kadi. It is true, the canine species has evolved over time, since wolves, hanging around the garbage dumps of the cavemen. 

I believe the exposure to kibble over generations of breeders has had to, in someway, effect the genetic makeup/tolerance ability for the dogs to thrive on kibble, obviously, they seem to do fine overall on kibble.

The topic really is fascinating to me, as the dogs appear to do fine on raw diets too.

I think the reasons people feed raw can be very personal and thus the justification(s) by likening the diet to the wolf diet. ? Just my 2cents. (1cent? lol)


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Mice Kadi, that is the answer. Mice. So now all you have to do is go to the pet store and get them. Then, about twice a year, feed them a sick deer or elk.


----------



## Michele McAtee (Apr 10, 2006)

But Jeff, I went to the pet store and was discussing breeding mice to do the raw thing with my cat and that guy said "you can't do that". What gives????


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Michele McAtee said:


> ... I believe the exposure to kibble over generations of breeders has had to, in someway, effect the genetic makeup/tolerance ability for the dogs to thrive on kibble, obviously, they seem to do fine overall on kibble.... The topic really is fascinating to me, as the dogs appear to do fine on raw diets too.


Yes, dogs are indeed omvivores/scavengers.

Their bodies and digestive systems are still those of animals designed to rip and tear and gulp raw prey, and they don't have the apparatus to thrive on cereal-based kibble, but yes, if you mean meat-based kibble, you're right that they adapt well to almost anything.

100 years is a mere blip on the evolutionary timeline.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Not when you are twisting it as hard as we are.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Connie Sutherland said:


> 100 years is a mere blip on the evolutionary timeline.


True, but some major changes can be made to a species in that amount of time, especially if we are talking about one that reproduces at a high rate. 

I was at the Museum of Natural Science in Denver recently and in one of their exhibits they were talking about Beavers and how they used to be a daytime creature. But due to the pressure of trapping they became an almost exclusively nocturnal species ("human selection" gave the ones with nocturnal leanings an advantage), and although they are now seen during the day again, they are still primarily a nocturnal species, but with daytime features (their eye size/shape for example). And this happened over the course of 30 or 40 years, maybe less. 

Actually the recent comments about how dogs can produce their own carbs http://www.workingdogforum.com/vBulletin/f25/bred-bitch-diets-11556/ is part of what got me thinking about this, again LOL It's something I've tossed around before. 

If an entire population of dogs was put on thyroid supplements throughout their life span, then it's concievable a few generations later we'd have a population of dogs with limited or no function in their thyroids since there was no selection for dogs with working thyroids. It would just depend on what breedings were done, since thyroid based health wouldn't be playing into it. Of course it's just as possible the population would have healthy thyroids after a few generations also, depending on the foundation dogs. 

So would it stand to reason that if an entire population of dogs was put on a diet that included carbs, it would be possible that their ability to create their own glucose could be affected over time, producing a population of dogs that need, or at least do better, on a diet that includes some carbs? Seems reasonable to me, but then I'm the one presenting the arguement


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Well, that thing about carbs was more about how canids don't necessarily need carbs for glycogen replenishment because of their system's use of protein in the production of glycogen.

The citation (that we didn't come up with yet  ) mentions that either increased protein or the addition of carbs to the diet of the pregnant and whelping bitch prevented the hypoglycemia that triggered pup deaths.

But yes, wild canids do ingest carbs. The thread that you refer to includes this from Maren:
_Wolves and other wild canids often eat lots of small rodents whole (who eat grains and grasses) or rabbits along with ingesting fruits and veggies themselves. Hence why I cringe when people proclaim they are feeding a "whole prey model diet" of chicken quarters or backs/necks and some occasional liver, as if wolves have the luxury of 10 lbs bags of chicken quarters from Wal-Mart._
This has been a big part of my own complaints about the so-called prey model web sites. Prey is not poultry quarters. :lol:

The videos of gray wolves from that US Gray Wolf Project that we linked researcher notes to here (I think it was 2006 -- wow; this board is old! :lol: ) were clear about the wolves eating small prey whole. There was no field-dressing. :lol:

In addition, they ate fallen berries and the very tender fern shoots that grow by water (like fiddleheads, looked like), and this was in a time of plentiful prey.

It didn't take a hundred years of crap-in-a-bag to evolve the canid diet to include small amounts of produce. It was already that kind of diet.

But canids are not designed to get their protein from corn, and so many of the commercial dog food manufacturers ignore this.

The good thing is, these days there are good choices. Even 15 years ago, this wasn't really the case. At least, it wasn't conveniently accessible, if such foods existed.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Not when you are twisting it as hard as we are.



That's a good point. We do a lot of stuff now that would take nature hundreds or thousands of years to do (if ever).


----------



## Al Curbow (Mar 27, 2006)

I always think about my fathers pitbull when i hear the raw/kibble debate, the dog is outside 24/7 all yr long, sleeps in a hole it dug under a tree and eats ole roy and table scraps and river rats, she's 15 and hasn't even lost a step, LOL amazing


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Al Curbow said:


> I always think about my fathers pitbull when i hear the raw/kibble debate, the dog is outside 24/7 all yr long, sleeps in a hole it dug under a tree and eats ole roy and table scraps and river rats, she's 15 and hasn't even lost a step, LOL amazing



So she is on a raw/kibble diet. :lol:

This dog is following a diet that dogs thrive on -- the one that features whole prey. 

River rats? :lol:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Al, that is more of how the pits have been bred so tightly, and got rid of the genetic crap, then anything else. When I hear people talk about this or that being too close, I realize that they either don't know shit, or are too chicken shit, as they know their dogs are genetic disasters.

QUOTE: 
If an entire population of dogs was put on thyroid supplements throughout their life span, then it's concievable a few generations later we'd have a population of dogs with limited or no function in their thyroids since there was no selection for dogs with working thyroids.

Kinda like the Dobermanns. Junk breeding, crooked breeders, junk dogs with so many health issues it is just ugly.


----------



## Jason Caldwell (Dec 11, 2008)

AL, you made me laugh. I'd like to see a pic of that dog.

There's a line with raw and barf where one crosses it over into silliness. Is tuesday the night I garnish the dog bowl with a mushroom cap or a lemon peel? I can't remember, let me ask the dog when he comes out of the sauna.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jason Caldwell said:


> ... There's a line with raw and barf where one crosses it over into silliness. ...


Yes, there is.

Replicating a prey diet when you're buying the ingredients at the supermarket (rather than, say, in the woods behind the supermarket) can indeed lead to some silly-sounding make-do stuff. :lol: :lol:


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

And interestingly, the more course-work I do and the more research I read, the more replicating a prey diet as closely as possible appears to be a very good thing. Of course, other folks (Hills) might read and hear the same information and come to completely different conclusions. :lol:


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I was at the Museum of Natural Science in Denver recently and in one of their exhibits they were talking about Beavers and how they used to be a daytime creature. But due to the pressure of trapping they became an almost exclusively nocturnal species ("human selection" gave the ones with nocturnal leanings an advantage), and although they are now seen during the day again, they are still primarily a nocturnal species, but with daytime features (their eye size/shape for example). And this happened over the course of 30 or 40 years, maybe less.


But isn't this an argument that supports folks who say even though dogs have been eating cereals for the past X number of years, they still have the digestive system of a carnivore? If I understand correctly, you're saying that human behavior has forced nocturnal behavior in the beaver, yet they haven't acquired the physical attributes other nocturnal mammals typically have.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Dogs are scavengers. In Coppengers book, they mostly scrounge the trash. Basically, I think that you can alter a dogs behavior with a diet that is either high, or low in whatever. I also think people with nothing better to do with themselves spend the most time with this stuff.

Nothing like the fat chick with the super buff dog to get you to see weakness in character. LOL


----------



## Lynn Cheffins (Jul 11, 2006)

Connie Sutherland
The citation (that we didn't come up with yet :oops: ) mentions that either increased protein or the addition of carbs to the diet of the pregnant and whelping bitch prevented the hypoglycemia that triggered pup deaths.[/QUOTE said:


> well here ya go...
> 
> http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/abstract/111/4/678


----------



## Matt Grosch (Jul 4, 2009)

Couple of thoughts...not a dog expert, but


1) Dont know the degree of parallel between dogs and humans, but the 'Caveman' or Paleo diet has been shown to be both very healthy and successful at getting humans in shape, despite the fairly recent trend towards over processed and high carb diets......is the raw diet just the canine version of this?

2) Off the top of my head, ref the dogs ability to turn protein to carbs.......people do the same thing. Thats one of the main reasons behind a high protein diet. It is said that (bad) fat has to go through zero conversion before it is stored as fat, carbs/sugar get converted to fat then stored, and protein must go through two conversions (glycogen then fat) before it is stored.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall (Jan 22, 2007)

Konnie Hein said:


> But isn't this an argument that supports folks who say even though dogs have been eating cereals for the past X number of years, they still have the digestive system of a carnivore? If I understand correctly, you're saying that human behavior has forced nocturnal behavior in the beaver, yet they haven't acquired the physical attributes other nocturnal mammals typically have.


It was just an example of how a species can change in a lot less then 100 years. It probably does support the "opposing" argument (I'm not on either side here, so can't really have an opposition view, just throwing out thoughts LOL) but I probably could have found others that support changes in dietary needs based on what is available, if I'd taken the time to do a little googling. I would be curious what Beaver's eyes looked like 200 years ago vs at the end of the heavily trapped period, and if there really were no physical changes, just strictly behavioral.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

You mean you don't have all day to google for examples??? Boo...hiss!!!


Interesting discussion though!


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> ... I also think people with nothing better to do with themselves spend the most time with this stuff. ...


How about the people who aren't even interested but still read the threads and comment?

:lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Oh, wait ... I forgot. Keeping us inferiors from straying so far onto the loser path .... :lol:


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Interesting discussion!

I had a gsd that would spend time in the paddock with my jrt picking field mice and shrews. The gsd had a really good technique...when he spotted/scented them, he would spring in the air, catch it under his paw on landing - and down the hatch, much the same way as you see foxes doing it only it looks more impressive with a large dog.

He was also very good at scenting out nests of young and would eat the lot, I used to encourage him as it would keep him busy for a while unsupervised lol

There never seemed too much wrong with his digestive system even though he was largely fed on crap! I've never seen too many other gsds do this.

What's the score on mouse in the diet out of curiosity?


----------



## kristin tresidder (Oct 23, 2008)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Dogs are scavengers. In Coppengers book, they mostly scrounge the trash.


side note - that is a great book - it changed alot about the way i look at dogs and what i thought i knew about their history.


----------



## Michael Wise (Sep 14, 2008)

There has to be *some* difference, or else their DNA would be exactly the same instead of really damn close.

I think wolves are the closest relative to base it off. Their diet is probably our best guess.


----------



## Tina Rempel (Feb 13, 2008)

I have to fence off my mini orchard or the dogs will go gorge themselves. The kiwi's are fenced off also, they could pick faster then I could. My raspberries are split between the dogs, bottom half of the bushes, and I get the top half. If I have them in the pasture and the blackberries are ripe, I know where to find them. 

I am still learning raw diet and using both raw and kibble now. Based on watching the fruit eating, I don't think I would go along with the meat only diets.


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

I read that during the last WW II, dogs had to eat potatoes and whatever came they way of meat, etc. and "existed".

For me, not only the diet has an important part in the dog's "existence" but the type of existence the dog has, even today, with the selection of foods, raw or kibble.

A very important factor to me has nothing to do with food. It has to do with providing the dog with a natural, or nearly natural, environment. 

Whatever the dog eats, it must be compatible with its exercise. Without exercise, the best Raw or Processed food will flunk.

Food is only part of the dog's life. If you feed raw or kibble and leave the dog to vegetate in the back yard, there will be problems. The dog needs exercise to digest that what it it is fed, raw or not.

I feed kibble and have done for a number of years with good results. My dogs lived to a healthy old life of 12,5, 13,5, 14,5 (all large dogs 40-70 kgs). 

I am not against Raw feeding but to hear that my dogs would be livelier, have better coats, etc. is for me not an argument to change.

The shining coat, the bright eyes, the liveliness are not just signs of the correct nutrition alone.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

We have berry bushes here and also apple, peach, pear trees. I throw a lot of old veggies, fruit to the chickens as we eat a lot of stir fry and also juice a lot, I feed 90% raw (fresh tripe, organs, bones, heads, legs including hooves and hide, meat mainly from beef, sheep, goats, pork, plus when in season venison and elk). We add eggs as well since we get about 1 doz/day from the chickens during the summer. Also, I have friends that their dogs go after livestock feed like crazy and my dogs never do. The only difference in the diets between friends' dogs and mine that I've discovered is that I feed all parts of the animal and they feed muscle meat and bones and think the tripe and organs are messy and icky... 

However, my dogs never go after the fruit and veggies. Maybe it's because they have all the green tripe that they want.. 

I've put out veggies and fruit to tempt the pups and they always go for the meat instead.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Debbie Skinner said:


> .... Maybe it's because they have all the green tripe that they want..


A great food to give!!


JMHO.


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

I used to feed raw to a previous dog of mine - green tripe in particular from the slaughterhouse, it didn't go down well. I also tried cooking it - not many things smell quite so bad as boiling tripe - it still didn't go down well. 

I settled on a mixture of minced off cuts and offal from the butcher, that did really well with that particular dog.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

maggie fraser said:


> I settled on a mixture of minced off cuts and offal from the butcher, that did really well with that particular dog.


What did you do for bones?

Or does "minced off cuts" mean "with bones" ?


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Yes - Great except when they lick you in the face after--UGGH! It keeps the older pups and adults occupied ripping and tearing at it. They will play tug-a-war with it as well so it serves many purposes! LOL Moma dog eats and regurgitates it for the little ones, which helps out a lot because it's impossible for me to grind with my food processor. I'm told it will even bind up in a commercial meat grinder.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Regarding bones, we give them the ribs, heads, legs, etc as nothing is deboned except the meat scrapes off a beef and they eat the amount of bone they want/need.


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Connie Sutherland said:


> What did you do for bones?
> 
> Or does "minced off cuts" mean "with bones" ?


 

There weren't any bones in there, I supplemented with raw bones, mainly beef bones and also wholemeal bread.

That dog looked liked a washing board till I switched her onto that diet, she seemed to do very well on it.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

maggie fraser said:


> There weren't any bones in there, I supplemented with raw bones, mainly beef bones and also wholemeal bread.
> 
> That dog looked liked a washing board till I switched her onto that diet, she seemed to do very well on it.


Bread? Wheat bread?

By beef bones, which ones do you mean? You don't mean recreational bones, right? You mean some kind of digestible bones?

I'm not jumping on you, but just being careful that no raw wannabe comes away from the thread thinking that minced meat and offal were sufficient. They are not sufficient, not without a calcium source like digestible bones (RMBs). 

Many raw feeders use poultry RMBs for accessibility and convenience (either whole birds, fed over time if they are too big for the dog) or maybe backs and some muscle meat, etc.

Recreational bones are very different from RMBs and are pretty much negligible as far as the diet goes.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Adults are not going to have the level of nutritional catastrophe that puppies do if fed an all-meat no-bone diet. Puppies are unable to lay down bone and grow teeth without the calcium their growing bodies need.

The first clue about the disaster that an all-meat diet is to a puppy is often fracturing bones during normal play.


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

The dog was fed a calcium supplement in powder form, a product called Stress - and you're quite right to state the failings of this diet, I don't know a lot about raw.

This was a lot of years ago where you fed a diet similar to this or you fed out of a can like what the vets would suggest.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

And you wonder why I make fun of retards that cannot feed themselves properly. I saw this when I first got into herps. People thought that iguanas were the best as they "are" vegetarians. They you see the soft bones and whatnot as they "only like lettuce" Nice, bad enough people cannot train a dog to sit, now they are breaking their body structure. LOL


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> .... breaking their body structure.


Unfortunately, this is no exaggeration. Making up some random raw diet for a growing puppy is insane. Commercial AAFCO canned food and/or kibble win hands down when compared to an all-meat diet (or any other raw diet that's way off in some major micro- or macronutrient). 

I don't mean you, Maggie; I don't know exactly what that diet was, and you were not even talking about a puppy. (The bread is a red flag, though.) Calcium is not really as simple to calculate as a supplement as some people on other boards have suggested.

Jumping on random raw diet posts is just so that a wannabe or new raw feeder doesn't come away from one of these threads thinking "Oh, I read this on the internet; looks easy; I guess I'll try that."


----------



## maggie fraser (May 30, 2008)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> And you wonder why I make fun of retards that cannot feed themselves properly. I saw this when I first got into herps. People thought that iguanas were the best as they "are" vegetarians. They you see the soft bones and whatnot as they "only like lettuce" Nice, bad enough people cannot train a dog to sit, now they are breaking their body structure. LOL


I don't quite get this post....maybe I'm a retard too? My body's a temple Jeff... is yours?

What has herpes got to do with anything?


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

maggie fraser said:


> I don't quite get this post....maybe I'm a retard too? My body's a temple Jeff... is yours?
> 
> What has herpes got to do with anything?


"Herps" -- reptiles and amphibians. 
_
QUOTE: I saw this when I first got into herps. People thought that iguanas were the best .... END_


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Kadi, I feed Raw...I do not go the route of what they will eat in the wild. Because what they would eat in the wild is not what's best, but what available. I do think thier is some validity to the idea of what thier biology is able to digest most efficently. I still believe this is a diet consisting of non processed foods. Kibble is a processed food. I do not think nature will ever adapt to this. Just as our bodies will most likely will never adapt to processed human food. The only evidence I have that this works is my own experience. What I have seen with the dogs that I have feed kibble to the dogs I have feed a Raw diet to is undeniable to me. Also the the dogs I have raised solely on Raw, when given kibble have many adverse reactions, mostly ear and skin problems. 

Also this country is one of many, and I think the idea that when we speak of dogs, we speak only of our own little bubble. So when we speak of dogs eating kibble for 100 years or so...or even table scraps. I think is a bit near sighted to our own community. And possibly not true.. kibble did not become popular till about the 1930's and then it was still not processed as the dog food we know today. It was not until the 1950's that it became a staple in the American home. Possibly when our country started turning to more processed foods for humans. I do not think that 60 years would allow for digestive evolution. One clue to this is a dogs teeth. And in other countries Kibble still is not a staple, Dogs are still eating what they can find or catch. And Science Diet would most defintly jump on a chance to till the rest of the world they have found and evolutionary change in a dogs digestive system that makes kibble a more bio-available food source.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

** deleted **


----------



## Gerry Grimwood (Apr 2, 2007)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I hear on a regular basis when people are talking about feeding their dogs "in the wild" as in "they wouldn't eat that in the wild" or "how do they get that nutrient in the wild" etc.


I feed raw and a good raw diet, I don't think my dog has ever been in the wild without wearing a leash or a collar.

He eats alot of pretty digusting things "in the wild" though and I'm guessing they're nutrient free :lol:.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Gerry Grimwood said:


> .... He eats alot of pretty digusting things "in the wild" though and I'm guessing they're nutrient free :lol:.



:lol:

Yeah, no need clogging up those yummies with a bunch of stupid nutrients. :lol:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

I got deleted for making a fat joke ?? Nice one.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

You have a reputation to maintain. You hadn't been modited in days.


----------



## Sanda Stankovic (Jan 10, 2009)

Kadi Thingvall said:


> It was just an example of how a species can change in a lot less then 100 years.


our dogs were never forced to evolve based on available diet. They are not selected naturally based on whether they do best on kibble or raw so I would assume their digestive system iis very similar (if not far inferior by now) compared to their relatives.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

But then again, you are assuming to have knowledge based on your "guess". 

They are scavangers. That much is sure, and if they are fed a same diet of dog food only for a period of time, they get to the point where anything else causes the squirts, and this is true.

Dog food companies have done years of research on this subject, and you guys have read a few article posted by GOD knows who on the internet.

So, really, it is just some sort of weird displacement behavior for humans. Feeling guilty about not training enough ??? Maybe your insecurity of not being a good trainer is showing through ?? Maybe you are bored ???

All of this is silly. Just feed the dog something. If your dog is not doing well, then just realize that it is probably genetics. LOL


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Quote: You have a reputation to maintain. You hadn't been modited in days.

Every****ing time I ****ing write a ****ing thing on the ****ity **** board, it ****ing moderates my ****ing ass. What the **** more could you ****ing ****ity **** want from me.

****ing fat chicks training dogs **** **** ****. Lose the ****ing weight, stop ****ing worrying about every****ingthing but your own ****ing weight ****ing problem

Stop ****ing eating so ****ing much and the ****ing weight ****ing falls the **** off.

So there you go, feel free to moderate the **** out of this.


----------



## Sanda Stankovic (Jan 10, 2009)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> But then again, you are assuming to have knowledge based on your "guess".
> 
> They are scavangers. That much is sure, and if they are fed a same diet of dog food only for a period of time, they get to the point where anything else causes the squirts, and this is true.


that is more genetics than anything else combined with effects on intestinal development early in life. 




> Dog food companies have done years of research on this subject


 :lol:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Cannot tell you how many little english inbred pointers got hacked when I was working for research. The mysteries of the dogs digestive tract are not really mysteries for them.

Some of the research I did was to see what made a dog operate at the highest level with different formulas for fuel, and then the downer, how to do close to the same with cheaper ingredients.

So yeah, years and years of research, none of which I know of is on the internet.


----------



## Sanda Stankovic (Jan 10, 2009)

what none published in a peer review journal? 



> Some of the research I did was to see what made a dog operate at the highest level with different formulas for fuel,


did you focus at all on how healthy digestive tract needs to be and how food can have a huge effect on intestinal flora and therefore how much of that stuff is freely available for absorption?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

There is always a portion of that, but the big thing we were trying to accomplish was to be able to keep weight on hunting dogs...and cheaply.

Different ingredients always digest differently. Especially when you are trying to substitute "Y" for "X". That is a no brainer. LOL

Other than bird dogs and **** dogs, most dogs do not really need to eat everyday, and they do not need that great of a diet. Dogs are a lot like Goldfish, put your hand over their bowl and they are hungry. If not, then you just think "in the wild" and realize the dog would be dead.

The whole idea is to make a profit for your company. You know, Capitolism ?? LOL


As far as publishing, think about that for a second. These are not geeked out professors, these are cutthroat businessmen that want to be the ONLY dogfood company. Why the **** would they share this ?? That would give the competition a few years head start.

**** em, let them do their OWN research and waste time and money. : )

Think about this, most just broke other companies food down chemically, and then just guessed what would be an improvement. LOL

"Our research indicates" and all they did was nothing. HA HA.


----------



## Sanda Stankovic (Jan 10, 2009)

oh, no, you sold your soul to the industry... :lol:



> but the big thing we were trying to accomplish was to be able to keep weight on hunting dogs...and cheaply.


I think that is always the case with any commercial dog food. Cheaply... So why would I believe that the first thing on their mind is the health of my dogs?


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Cause if your dogs are dying on our food, then that would cause a loss of profits.

I didn't sell shit to them. I worked for them, saw what they were feeding, and the actual results, not "LOOK HE IS SHINY" like most of the retards that spend WAY too much time with only a quarter of the brainpower of the people in these companies trying to feed their dogs.

How many raw people graduated high school ?? How many from Jr College ?? How many from a 4 year ?? How many had a major that was science based ?? 

**** them. They are laughable at best. It is the new religion.


----------



## Sanda Stankovic (Jan 10, 2009)

Well it takes a lot for a dog to actually die of poor food. How are you going to relate particular food with dog's longevity or hip dysplasia development? You should know that the outcome of those experiments depends a lot on what you are actually measuring. Long-term health, short-term vs long-term performance, the type of performance. And I can guarantee that you didnt do 5 year long-term health and performance evaluation on those dogs... 

I dont know any human that eats canned food or high preservative food hoping that it will give them health benefit. Or do we now want to think that dog's food requirements are much more complex to fulfill then human? What is the benefit of feeding kibble over normal fresh food according to your company's slogan? "Balanced". We all know very well that dogs survived for thousands of years before this 'balanced diet in a bag' culture started.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

I have 10+ dogs and feeding raw is simply a cheaper way to feed the dogs a high quality diet. It's definitely more labor intensive unless you buy raw already prepared. However, the butcher would just toss the bi-products from butchering if I didn't take it off his hands and he would have to pay for the disposal. It's not rocket science to feed raw or to know how to feed oneself correctly. The less processed and fresher and "simpler" ingredients are always better. 

What I can't understand though is a lot of people are super concerned with their pets diet, but then drive through McDonalds or buy crap at the store for themselves to eat. ](*,)

BTW, my Ag Bio degree doesn't come into play much when making meals around here for us or the animals. And most of the "good" pesticides that I learned about in college are now banned in CA anyways. If not, I would of solved my wasp problem long ago and wouldn't have to feed after dark every night and get up at 4:30am to feed in the summer. 

I do get a laugh out of all the funny posts. I don't dare put the scientific name of the wasp in fear of being misunderstood :-D


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Debbie Skinner said:


> I have 10+ dogs and feeding raw is simply a cheaper way to feed the dogs a high quality diet.


See, Jeff, I'm not the only one who finds it cheaper to feed raw!


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

My distributor for Evo is "customer no service" and plus has had a couple price increases. I pay $41 for a 28 lb bag. I'm thinking of switching brands for the boarding kennel and the small amount that I feed. I'm, going to trying Canidae Salmon grain free..my price $42 for 30lb bag. Also, Taste of the Wild and it's $34 for 30lb bag. I pay about $100 for 300 lbs of boxes of goodies from the butcher and the heads, feet bones are thrown in at no charge.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Quote: See, Jeff, I'm not the only one who finds it cheaper to feed raw!

Dead animals on the side of the road do not count. : )


----------



## Jennifer Coulter (Sep 18, 2007)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> How many raw people graduated high school ?? How many from Jr College ?? How many from a 4 year ?? How many had a major that was science based ??



Lee has TWO degrees. I should probably just go with what he feeds his dogs.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> .... Lose the ****ing weight, stop ****ing worrying about every****ingthing but your own ****ing weight .... How many raw people graduated high school ?? ..... How many from a 4 year ?? How many had a major that was science based ?? .....


I call and raise you with an "I am not fat" and a "more than one degree."

:lol: :lol:

How many people are totally uninterested in raw feeding (or even which kinds of kibble might be better or worse) but still follow the threads religiously and post. A lot. :lol:


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

It is the religious zeal that I attack, not the feeding. It is the OCD that I attack. That, and I have seen a lot of these peoples dogs, and what do I know, most of them are not even shiny.

How did this get on a working dog forum anyway ?? Did they have to have at least one subject you are qualified to talk about ???

HAAAAAAAAAA GOT YA !!!!

You love the pot stirring, don't EVEN lie.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Debbie Skinner said:


> .... What I can't understand though is a lot of people are super concerned with their pets diet, but then drive through McDonalds or buy crap at the store for themselves to eat. ....


That's pretty astonishing to me too.

Luckily, Jeff is not guilty of that kind of hypocrisy. :lol:


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> That, and I have seen a lot of these peoples dogs ..... most of them are not even shiny. ...




AH-HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


You got me good. I was TRYING to drink coffee, you a$$hole. :lol:


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> ... How did this get on a working dog forum anyway ?? Did they have to have at least one subject you are qualified to talk about ???



Yes. I bribed 'em. It was either "add canine nutrition and health or I won't hang out and modit Jeff." I drive a hard bargain.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Quote: See, Jeff, I'm not the only one who finds it cheaper to feed raw!
> 
> Dead animals on the side of the road do not count. : )


Still free!! (and tastes the same!) =P~=P~=P~


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Konnie Hein said:


> Still free!! (and tastes the same!) =P~=P~=P~



But is the dog shiny?!


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

So shiny I can see my reflection! 

Road kill is awesome! I'm going to start bagging and selling it.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

We feed them "Show Sheen" for that. 1 Tablespoons/10lbs of dog!


----------



## Jennifer Coulter (Sep 18, 2007)

I get mine for free too. It is a comercial product, I get various protien sources, some ground, some things the dog has to chew. 

Now that I have a sponsership, I no longer have to spend the time hacking deer apart with a sawsall in the backyard:wink: Okay...a little in the fall, just for fun

I fed my dog some kibble (albeit a grain free one) last year for almost two months when I was in another province and was moving around a lot. I did not notice any difference in the dog's energy or shiny-ness! 

I did notice his shits were bigger and his teeth got yuckier. One other thing that I didn't like when the dog was eating kibble was how frickin' thirsty he was all the time. I like that with the raw he gets most of his water from his food and I have to carry a lot less water around for him on my back when I am working.


My dog would be "STOKED" to just eat Alpo every day, and I would be "STOKED" to eat french fries and milkshakes every day too. I know that dogs and people can survive on all sorts of crap. 

I like the idea of eating fresh, non processed food. It is intuative. Hope I don't need a science degree to know that. I am sure that McDonalds has scientists working for them too, and also keeps more customers if they don't kill them. 

Why process the crap out of flour for example and then have to add vitamins back to it? And how the F*** can that be CHEAPER than real food that has had less processing? Same goes for dog food. I like the idea of the dog getting nutrients from food without them having to add a bunch of crap that was removed by the processing process.

I recognize that there are not a lot of "studies" to support feeding a dog raw. I think of the diet as an experiment I am personally doing on my own dog. With disclosure. I know what the risks are. If I don't like how it turns out for this dog, I won't do it again. It is that simple. So far I am pleased.

At least I am not one of those crazy people that COOKS for their dog...now THOSE people are CRAZY:wink::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Tina Rempel (Feb 13, 2008)

Geeze I wished I lived where I could pick up dead animals, larger ones thank you, from the side of the road. Not allowed to do that in this state. Nor can you hunt for multiple deer. Me? I just bought a whole grass fed natural raised steer on the hoof and will be there when they butcher. Much of the steer will be packaged for the dogs. I also have some goats growing....

I don't have access to local butchers here either, Safeway doesn't count, to get the freebie stuff. I do have some friends ready to start river fishing for salmon I'm going to sweet talk into saving me the heads and stuff to freeze then feed later. And hopefully another friend for some lamb and pig "stuff", if I have room in the freezer at the time after getting the steer!

And yes I feed my dogs better then I eat. :-\"


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Many many old dogs that have eaten Alpo their entire lives. Since most of you just base your decision on dirty teeth, and bigger poop, then really, is it worth the hassle ??

I am still waiting for the video of the 18 year old dog fed raw it's entire life running and skipping about. You just pointed out that your dog looked and acted the same on dry dog food. 

HA HA. Freaks. : P


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Konnie, I have seen vids of your dog and he looks the same as any other dog. SO there. HA HA


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Those vids were prior to me purchasing him, Jeff. Annnnnd...you haven't seen vids/pics of my Labrador. Instead of a mirror, I brush my teeth while looking at my reflection in his shiny coat! No cavities!

And, you're forgetting that my dogs' poop disintegrates upon contact with the ground...just another benefit of roadkill feeding!


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Food quality (fresh) is the best IMO. However, there's also other things to consider that give a dog a better life again JMO. I get tired of hearing about people housing their dogs in crates! I've had people call and ask how my dogs tolerate a crate! I say that crates are for transporting or for short amounts of containment. Hey, but I'm off topic. ](*,)


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Konnie Hein said:


> .... And, you're forgetting that my dogs' poop disintegrates upon contact with the ground...just another benefit of roadkill feeding!



Free, shiny, and no poop to pick up. How can this possibly be better! :lol:


Looks like "in the wild" has run its course, unless anyone else has comments?


----------



## James Downey (Oct 27, 2008)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Many many old dogs that have eaten Alpo their entire lives. Since most of you just base your decision on dirty teeth, and bigger poop, then really, is it worth the hassle ??
> 
> I am still waiting for the video of the 18 year old dog fed raw it's entire life running and skipping about. You just pointed out that your dog looked and acted the same on dry dog food.
> 
> HA HA. Freaks. : P


Jeff I was skeptic, till my wife's 9 y/o catahoula riddled with arthritis would not longer take the 2 stairs to the garage to eat her food. playing ball was no longer an option. My wife decided to try Raw, the dog had been failing fast for the prior year. In 2 weeks we noticed changes in her range of motion, and energy levels....in a month she was back to playing ball on a daily basis almost pain free, except for some stiffness after playing. She was just put down at 16. After I saw an older dog with problems look like the were now 3 years younger. I became a believer. Nutrition is important, It directly effects thier health and well being. I think cleaner teeth, and small poop is a benefit...and actually less poop is substantial proof that the body is asorbing more of the material entered into the digestive tract. 

I also think that the body is pretty good at making shitty food work for awhile but the cummalitive effect is great. Ever see, "Super Size Me". In 30 days a relatively healthy person was in danger of having a heart attack. That's an extreme example. But I know lots of people who drink, smoke and eat shitty food live to be 80. But the quality of life is suffering. I am not so convinced that RAW will make a dog live longer...and maybe it will give it a few more years. But I am positive it's much easier to keep them healthy.

And my dogs do have immediate problems when fed kibble. I guarntee they will get skin and ear infections with in a few weeks of feeding kibble.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

The guy in super size me was a vegan. He also increased his daily intake of food by quite a bit. 

I am glad your old dog got some benefits.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

James, you have wrapped it up nicely.

Allergies, joint inflammation, dental plaque, and much more are reduced (IMHO) by going from a grain-heavy to a fresh diet.

I do think that we finally have good commercial foods. It is now quite doable to feed a good diet without going to raw.

My preference is fresh food, but there are loads of dogs doing very well on good kibble.

There's a huge difference between the grain-based crap-in-a-bag that's in some vet waiting rooms and many of the meat-first foods introduced in the last 15 years or so.

"Less poop" is actually because of "less non-digestible fiber," and would be the same with humans. The fiber in grain foods that cannot be digested is obviously going to come out in poop.

Jeff posted once about an ex-GF who had him on some "health-food" diet that made him feel lousy and unable to do the running distance that he was used to. This didn't improve until he went back to steak dinners.

Without commenting in any way on what that "health-food diet" was, that's a pretty clear anecdote about the effect diet has on both overall well-being and performance (OK, that's on humans).

Some of us have switched adopted dogs from a lifetime of really bad commercial food (corn in top place, say) to raw, and then the differences can really be stunning. Biologically appropriate food as fuel makes sense to me.

However, the "hassle" Jeff mentions does put many people off. In that case, again, there are now pretty darned good commercial foods to choose from.

I've streamlined raw buying and feeding to such an extent, over the years, that it takes me only a little more time than dumping out kibble. But it can be daunting at first, I agree.

Also, random raw diets (say, missing the digestible bones ](*,) ) are catastrophes. Any balanced commercial food is going to be better than an all-muscle-meat diet. So it also takes a little bit of learning. The dogs whose diet we control can't instinctively correct a glaring error by taking down some prey (or stopping at the supermarket).


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> ... I am glad your old dog got some benefits.



Yes, senior dogs do show the benefits most clearly, IME.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter (Sep 18, 2007)

Good dental heath seems to be more than just cosmetic. I think that they are linking bad oral hygene to various non mouth related illnesses these days.

I can think of a couple of working SAR dogs that have had to be on antibiotics and have teeth pulled because of rotten mouth. (thechnical term I know ) This when the dog was just 7-8 yrs old.

You could brush your dog's teeth, or have them put under for professional teeth cleaning....now IMO THAT is a hassle.

I am with Jeff on one thing...raw feeding is a bit on the cultish side! I personally beleive it has many benefits, but it is not a miracle. It can't give a dog that had no drive on Alpo mad skills when it was switched to raw for example.....


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jennifer Coulter said:


> .... It can't give a dog that had no drive on Alpo mad skills when it was switched to raw for example.....



Ohhhhh. #-o

Damn.


----------



## Konnie Hein (Jun 14, 2006)

Jennifer Coulter said:


> It can't give a dog that had no drive on Alpo mad skills when it was switched to raw for example.....


Well, I guess you haven't tried my road-kill in a bag raw diet yet!! :lol:


----------



## Anna Kasho (Jan 16, 2008)

Jennifer Coulter said:


> It can't give a dog that had no drive on Alpo mad skills when it was switched to raw for example.....


Didn't you learn ANYTHING?? You gotta add ground-up wasps for that. Or gunpowder.:-$


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Chris M has been doing that for weeks, and it didn't work for shit. LOL


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Chris M has been doing that for weeks, and it didn't work for shit. LOL



Don't give up, Chris. It can take months.


----------



## Michael Wise (Sep 14, 2008)

Konnie Hein said:


> Instead of a mirror, I brush my teeth while looking at my reflection in his shiny coat! No cavities!
> 
> And, you're forgetting that my dogs' poop disintegrates upon contact with the ground...just another benefit of roadkill feeding!


 Whatever. No big deal.

My dog's turds themselves shine.:razz: No poop polishing 'round here.

Beat that.


----------



## Connie Sutherland (Mar 27, 2006)

Michael Wise said:


> My dog's turds themselves shine.:razz:


That's really a training issue. 



:lol:


----------



## Gerry Grimwood (Apr 2, 2007)

It's whatever floats your boat, someone with a bunch of dogs probably isn't going to want to spend the money. At the very least it looks better in the dish and makes you feel like a caveman.

It's probably more beneficial than participating in a barfing for distance contest..now, if it were a longest fart flame competition that would be different.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Jeff Oehlsen said:


> Dog food companies have done years of research on this subject, and you guys have read a few article posted by GOD knows who on the internet.
> 
> So, really, it is just some sort of weird displacement behavior for humans. Feeling guilty about not training enough ??? Maybe your insecurity of not being a good trainer is showing through ?? Maybe you are bored ???
> 
> All of this is silly. Just feed the dog something. If your dog is not doing well, then just realize that it is probably genetics. LOL


Yep, the dog food manufacturers spend a lot of money and lots of years on research all right - figuring out what appeals to people so they can sell more product; what the cheapest fillers are they can get away with using to bulk up the few microscopic bits of nutritionally beneficial ingredients they do add; research to figure out what dogs think is palatable (rancid fat) so they can use it to coat the cheap kibble so the dogs will not only eat it, but gobble it down; and now research to figure out what they can say to convince people they aren't near smart enough to figure out how to feed a dog on their own using whole and fresh ingredients. It's just not that hard to feed an adult dog, it sure as hell isn't rocket science.


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Did you know that for years and years women fed their newborn babies formula exclusively because they were convinced (through advertising) that breast milk was inferior to their manufactured formula products? In fact the baby food manufactures pretty much had mothers convinced if they were "good" mothers and wanted to raise "healthy and strong" kids, then they needed to be sure whatever went in to their kids mouth was out of a box or a jar until the kid had all it's teeth and could walk.

A very good friend of mine is head chair at a teaching zoo. Did you know that for years many zoos fed Purina zoo chows exclusively thinking it was what was most healthy for the animals because they were told by the manufacturer the food was nutritionally complete based upon scientific research? Interestingly enough, many zoos have gotten away from 100% chow foods and either feed fresh whole foods exclusively or heavily supplement with fresh and whole foods and guess what? The animals are healthy, have fewer medical/dental issues, and live longer on average. Is this a scientifically based conclusion? No, it's anecdotal, but it's also also common sense. What a concept!

I am not saying that there are not companies that make a quality kibble product, of course there are. I am not saying that some people feed an UN healthy RAW diet, of course they do. I am ALSO not saying that all dogs or even most will automatically be faster than a speeding locomotive and able to jump tall buildings in a single bound or even live a day longer JUST because they are fed a RAW diet. 

What I am saying is RAW is a viable and legitimate alternative to kibble. What I do know is in general all mammals tend to do better when whole fresh foods are a normal part of their diet rather than the all cereal, all the time diet.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

I agree with Susan. Raw can be easy to feed  "Petit dejeuner" of squirrel for my Beauceron pups.


----------



## Anna Kasho (Jan 16, 2008)

Debbie Skinner said:


> I agree with Susan. Raw can be easy to feed  "Petit dejeuner" of squirrel for my Beauceron pups.


Great pics, Debbie! Yep, squirrel is on the menu here too, ever since the fat little bassids started raiding my garden. I'm a good shot with a pellet rifle, and my dogs really like them. Free food, YAY! But don't tell the neighbors, I think they're setting out peanuts to deliberately attract the little beasts...:-$:-#

\\/\\/\\/


----------



## Jason Hammel (Aug 13, 2009)

Debbie Skinner said:


> My distributor for Evo is "customer no service" and plus has had a couple price increases. I pay $41 for a 28 lb bag. I'm thinking of switching brands for the boarding kennel and the small amount that I feed. I'm, going to trying Canidae Salmon grain free..my price $42 for 30lb bag. Also, Taste of the Wild and it's $34 for 30lb bag. I pay about $100 for 300 lbs of boxes of goodies from the butcher and the heads, feet bones are thrown in at no charge.


wow I am spending about $46 bucks on a 30lb bag of Innova - I do have one of those local all natural dog food stores close buy.

Butchers we don't have very many of in close proximaty since I'm in the burbs. I am a wannabe jump on the raw train but right now w/ all the stuff we do in my small family its just been more convenient to feed a good quality kibble until I figure something else out.

Open to suggestions b/c kibble is expensive when you don't buy product made from ingredients cultivated in China and cured w/ formaldihyde.


----------



## Matt Grosch (Jul 4, 2009)

You can get raw chicken from the grocery store for much cheaper than that, it seems like people are split on feeding it raw or cooked.


I do raw chicken and kibble. (Pro plan, salmon and oatmeal)


----------

