# Raw vs grain free kibble



## Larry Krohn

How many people have tried raw and quality kibble and have compared real results?


----------



## Nicole Stark

Larry I presume you mean who has tried feeding raw and a quality kibble separately or do you mean who has mixed them?

My short answer irrespective of how you intended to phrase the queston would be that my experience has been that it depends upon the dog.


----------



## Larry Krohn

Nicole Stark said:


> Larry I presume you mean who has tried feeding raw and a quality kibble separately or do you mean who has mixed them?
> 
> My short answer irrespective of how you intended to phrase the queston would be that my experience has been that it depends upon the dog.


Yes, separately Nicole. Not at the same time


----------



## Christopher Smith

I have used raw, grain free kibble and a mixture of the two. I really don't know what info your looking for here other than that, but if you ask me specific questions I' ll try to answer.


----------



## Katie Finlay

I've noticed dramatic improvements in both dogs and the cat I switched from kibble to raw in both skin, coat, teeth, breath, allergies and stool.


----------



## Larry Krohn

Christopher Smith said:


> I have used raw, grain free kibble and a mixture of the two. I really don't know what info your looking for here other than that, but if you ask me specific questions I' ll try to answer.


Looking to see if you noticed any difference in your dog good or bad


----------



## Christopher Smith

Larry Krohn said:


> Looking to see if you noticed any difference in your dog good or bad


My dogs were about the same on kibble as they were on the kibble/raw diet. When I went to all raw there was a noticeable change in coat for the better. But that might be due to the high percentage of fish, both raw and canned, that I'm feeding. Energy levels were the same on all foods. Clean up is remarkably better on raw. Most of the poop crumbles to dust before I get to it.


----------



## Annie Wildmoser

Katie Finlay said:


> I've noticed dramatic improvements in both dogs and the cat I switched from kibble to raw in both skin, coat, teeth, breath, allergies and stool.


+1


----------



## Amber Scott Dyer

the dogs look better - 

the poop might be crumbly and easier to clean up, but it has a definitely different smell that I hate. Not a big deal for big dogs that go outside, but I also have a little chihuahua who is box trained, and it can be foul.


----------



## Sarah Platts

Larry Krohn said:


> How many people have tried raw and quality kibble and have compared real results?


I tried both and didn't really notice any difference other than the consistancy of stool. However, I have noticed variation of stool between dogs on the "wrong" formula of kibble (same with raw). I would rather clean up behind a dog on the right form of feed vs one that isn't. 
However I am feeding hunting dogs which aren't noted for sensitive systems unlike some of my GSD/Mal/BH friends who are dealing with a host of digestive/skin issues. I travel with my dogs a good bit and keeping raw is a bigger headache than I want to deal with. I tried it early on in my SAR career and after a couple of years of dealing with storage and space issues, stopped and switched to a kibble diet with occasional raw thrown in for a treat. I just don't have the time or inclination to deal with a dog with sensitivity issues. It's just easier to throw a bag of kibble in the suitcase.


----------



## Tom Connors

I did raw for a time then tried the Evo. Never looked back even with the recent recall of Evo due to salmonella risk. I had a dog with EPI that did fine on the Evo. I still will feed raw every now and again but my three dogs have thrived on Evo.


----------



## rick smith

this thread might go forever and rival the what do you feed your dog threads //lol//
the last post cracked me up //rotf
i had exactly the opposite results with EVO vs raw

had a dog on EVO for a few months and never smelled so many farts in my life; he would routinely clear the room and you didn't want to be downwind or light a cigarette when he was outside either ... and it was VERY expensive to "import" ... same dog went fartless on raw
- also had a EPI dog on EVO who improved significantly .... after it was switched to raw //lol//

i've had some embarrassing moments with my current raw fed dog when he has pooped on a slope and i had to chase down the turds b4 they got away 

go figger //lol//


----------



## Tiago Fontes

I feed Orijen and raw meat/fish occasionally and haven't noticed a difference in terms of energy. Coat looks much shinier when more fish is added to the diet (whole sardines). 


Regards


----------



## rick smith

what i forgot to write in my post is that it is a perfect example of what Nicole wrote .. way back in the beginning 

and there was also the case of a wandering dog i finally picked up near my house a few years back ... it had obviously been living on street garbage for months since i had to have a few ingrown nails surgically removed by the vet ... i also chipped off a LOT of teeth gunk with a small screwdriver
...but actually the poor girl was in pretty good condition otherwise and fur condition was fine ... so ... wth ????


----------



## Alice Bezemer

I've fed raw and kibble, never really saw any improvement but for stool. My dogs get fed Royal Canin and I don't intend to ever switch, they do great on it so why change a winner? 

I have to say, my dogs are outside in kennels. Outside dogs allways look better then dogs kept inside the house.


----------



## Katie Finlay

I've noticed little to no smell at all from my raw fed dogs' and cat's stool. My Corgi has IBD and had vomiting/diarrhea off and on every day of his life until I fed him a raw diet. He hasn't had diarrhea since. Even when the allergies were environmental I noticed an improvement in skin moisture and itching.

I have fed my Corgi just about every food available here.

Also, my inside dogs look just as good as the outside dogs I know, so that's kind of weird, haha.


----------



## susan tuck

Katie Finlay said:


> ...Also, my inside dogs look just as good as the outside dogs I know, so that's kind of weird, haha.


It's because where you live the temp almost never gets even remotely close to cold outside. You have 2 seasons: incredibly hot and hotter. :lol: When I lived in So Cali mine looked the same inside or out (short almost mole coats) pretty much all year round, until I moved up here, where there are actual seasons, it gets cold and even snows in the winter and there's lots of rain. Now my dogs have actual real GSD coats!!!!! They are outside during the day and inside at night.

I have fed grain free kibble, but dogs had lots of stomach issues, so I stick to raw.


----------



## Katie Finlay

susan tuck said:


> It's because where you live the temp almost never gets even remotely close to cold outside. You have 2 seasons: incredibly hot and hotter. :lol: Mine looked the same inside or out (short almost mole coats), until I moved up here, where there are actual seasons, it gets cold and even snows in the winter and there's lots of rain.


Do your dogs look better because of it?


----------



## susan tuck

Katie Finlay said:


> Do your dogs look better because of it?


ah, good catch, and you're right, they don't look healthier, just different to me. I attribute it to the much cooler climate. The coats are fuller, the inner coat is more dense, the outer coats thicker and longer than they were when I lived in So Calif.. I would have described my dogs coats as more sleek in So Calif (which is appropriate in that climate in my opinion), obviously they were still double coated, just a lot less of it. One other thing...it's a lot more work when they shed!!!!!


----------



## Katie Finlay

susan tuck said:


> ah, good catch, and you're right, they don't look healthier, just different to me. I attribute it to the much cooler climate. The coats are fuller, the inner coat is more dense, the outer coats thicker and longer than they were when I lived in So Calif.. I would have described my dogs coats as more sleek in So Calif (which is appropriate in that climate in my opinion), obviously they were still double coated, just a lot less of it. One other thing...it's a lot more work when they shed!!!!!


Sometimes I feel like mine look more groomed because I'm constantly brushing them! Makes sense though!


----------



## Lindsay Janes

I have had many positive experiences feeding raw to my dogs. About 10 years ago, I used to feed kibble and have tried many different kibble brands. I was never satisfied until I tried raw when I learned about it on Leeburg forum. I don't miss the horrible gases that my dogs passed, breath, and slightly overweight. When I fed my dogs raw, it's easier to control their weight. They aren't overweight or have any smelly breath. Their coat look better. Hopefully my three current dogs live until their ripe old age.


----------



## James Downey

I have tried just about every diet under the sun. Here's my take. First Grain free kibble is still kibble. It's cooked and raw ain't. Dog food Co. have made an effort to market it as something comparable, but it ain't. I have tried orijien (BTW got caught price fixing), EVO, back to basics....Blah, blah, blah. First and foremost....all my dogs drink enormous amounts of water on Grain free. That's because it dehydrates the dog. They are diuretic to the dog. Also the dehydration of the food does not remove water, it removes moisture....which is all kinds of liquids that the dog in no way can get from simply drinking water. Also my dogs teeth....All of my dogs teeth look 100 times better on raw. Now I just had a broken minor canine fixed by a canine dentist. We got to talking about diet. He knew my dog was fed raw by his teeth. He remarked at how bad kibble is for teeth and I asked why. He said because kibble sticks to teeth and that bacteria mouth then starts metabolizing it. This causes decay. and since kibble is incredibly diffcult to break down it sticks for a long time. now raw can stick too, but does not do so as much...but even salvia is powerful enough to break it down much faster. Now I do not know about anyone else buy teeth on a biting dog are very important. 

I also raised one litter of pups on raw and one kibble. The kibble raised litter grew very fast, got all gangly and odd looking. The raw feed dogs much slower and looked much more normal. I have noticed this in other dogs raised on kibble vs raw.


----------



## Billie Fletcher

Elsie is raw fed, but has been on Orijen, Acana grain free, Acana Sport & Agility and Pro Plan Performance. 

She farts a *lot* on kibble, her coat doesn't feel as nice, bigger/more poop... I do have difficulty keeping weight on her while she is raw fed, she eats so much!


----------



## Matthew Grubb

Wish I had the time and money to feed a BARF diet to my dogs... we do what I feel is the next best thing... Grandma Lucy's and raw bones.


Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## rick smith

didn't we have a Nutro rep on here ?

maybe that company has done some comparative studies that would show the benefits of kibble vs raw ?
...however No kibble maker would ever release or promote a study that would indicate feeding raw has nutritional advantages over their commercially prepared foods ... they always play the "stuck bone requiring vet removal" or "shedding nasty bacteria" cards when raw feeding is mentioned
-- there marketing strategies appear to be aimed at each other, with wild animals on the cover and the "close to natural, prey based wholesome ingredients not made in china" as the core selling point

Delta published lab data on both feeding methods, but mostly used the bacteria shedding issue as the reason they won't allow any raw items for a service dog ... instant disqualification :-(

bottom line seems to be that scientific comparisons just ain't gonna happen unless some raw feeder group with deep pockets will fund it and i'm not holding my breath that will ever happen

which means online forums with people on both sides will just continue to discuss it forever


----------



## Larry Krohn

James Downey said:


> I have tried just about every diet under the sun. Here's my take. First Grain free kibble is still kibble. It's cooked and raw ain't. Dog food Co. have made an effort to market it as something comparable, but it ain't. I have tried orijien (BTW got caught price fixing), EVO, back to basics....Blah, blah, blah. First and foremost....all my dogs drink enormous amounts of water on Grain free. That's because it dehydrates the dog. They are diuretic to the dog. Also the dehydration of the food does not remove water, it removes moisture....which is all kinds of liquids that the dog in no way can get from simply drinking water. Also my dogs teeth....All of my dogs teeth look 100 times better on raw. Now I just had a broken minor canine fixed by a canine dentist. We got to talking about diet. He knew my dog was fed raw by his teeth. He remarked at how bad kibble is for teeth and I asked why. He said because kibble sticks to teeth and that bacteria mouth then starts metabolizing it. This causes decay. and since kibble is incredibly diffcult to break down it sticks for a long time. now raw can stick too, but does not do so as much...but even salvia is powerful enough to break it down much faster. Now I do not know about anyone else buy teeth on a biting dog are very important.
> 
> I also raised one litter of pups on raw and one kibble. The kibble raised litter grew very fast, got all gangly and odd looking. The raw feed dogs much slower and looked much more normal. I have noticed this in other dogs raised on kibble vs raw.


A lot of good info here James, that's what I'm looking for. I have been doing my own comparisons like you mentioned because there are not any good long term studies out there. The dehydration is a big problem. My Rotty and GSD are on TOTW, and they drink non stop. My young Mal is on raw ans only drinks after a good workout. Every now and then ill give him TOTW just to see if there is a change and immediately he can't stop drinking which leads to him needing to go out constantly. Anyone that is interested in seeing a lot if good non biased info on raw and dog food company's should read Ted Kerasotes book Pukkas Promise. He became obsessed with helping his dogs live longer after his dog Merle died from cancer. That's his book called Merle's Door. The guy put a ton of time and effort in traveling the world for the answers on canine nutrition


----------



## Katie Finlay

A side note: my GSD has always been fed raw or kibble/raw and she is a non-stop drinker. I actually almost did testing for diabetes because I've never seen a dog drink so much sometimes. But she doesn't pee excessively, and only drinks water like that if it's outside the crate or kennel. If you leave water in the crate/kennel, she barely touches it. Just drinks a normal amount any other dog would. She's just a weirdo.

But she is raw fed. My other raw fed dog(s) hardly ever seemed to drink water.

I think my favorite thing is the poop. Dogs on kibble just poop SO MUCH poop!


----------



## mel boschwitz

All my dogs are raw fed. My working dogs stay outside most of the time and don't drink much water except after work. But when they come inside my big male will drink lots of water. Like yours Katie, he's just weird. Lol

All the other K9 handlers in my county feed TOTW. I got special permission to feed raw for my female, and there is no comparison between the coat, skin, poop size, etc. Rougher coat, drier skin, etc. And their dogs are gassy! Stink up the car! 

Cost isnt much different either, and my dog is the largest and most active.


----------



## Sarah Platts

I think that if someone wants to do a study it should be conducted by someone that doesn't have a dog in the fight so to speak. Everyone will skew the statistics to favor their viewpoint. No matter what you feed.

My family has about 30 dogs on kibble. There is not one water hog among them (a dog drinking lots without some reasonable explaination). On the other hand, I'm taking care of a friend's Rhodesian and that dog never saw a water dish it didn't like. I am not ready to label "thirst" as a by-product to feeding kibble because I see so much variation as opposed to consistancy due to this specific causal factor that I tend to think of it as an individual dog thing versus a system wide issue. 

Personally, I think this is a personal preference thing because I've seen happy, healthy, long-lived dogs on both diets. Unless you have specific digestion or allergy issues that warrant a specific diet I think either route is acceptable it just depends on what your wallet can afford and if you have the time and inclination to make your own.


----------



## Joby Becker

My buddy feeds Nutromax, has for 20 years now.
his dogs are doberman/pitbull crosses...since I have known him, he has had several dogs live to be 15+, one dog just passed away last year and finally was put to sleep at age 17.

are there any real studies done on the longevity aspect of the different types of diets?


----------



## Sarah Platts

Joby Becker said:


> My buddy feeds Nutromax, has for 20 years now.
> his dogs are doberman/pitbull crosses...since I have known him, he has had several dogs live to be 15+, one dog just passed away last year and finally was put to sleep at age 17.


I know one old lady who only feeds the cheapest thing she can buy (usually Ol' Roy) and all of her dogs llived to somewhere between 12 and 15, although one lived to 17. But sometimes I think that we have created our some of own problems by sticking to certain genetic lines that, over time, small or individual issues have magnified and developed into a breed wide problem (aka recessive gene is now dominate gene) 

Our GSDs of 50 years ago were fed whatever cheap kibble was on sale at that time from the grocery store. I wouldn't want to try that today.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

50 years ago kibble? You sure? 

One thing I can tell you:

25 years ago, nobody around me knew what kibble was. Our dogs were mostly fed of soups made of beef, chicken, pasta and veggies (carrots, broccoli). They did fine and lived long. 

Even if kibble was the healthiest thing for dogs I would always add meat or fish to their diet. Would you be happy eating corn flakes all your life? Even if it had all the nutrients required? I wouldn't... And because of that, I like to give my dogs good meat and bones, so that they can enjoy themselves and exercise their jaws. 


Regards


----------



## Nicole Stark

Tiago Fontes said:


> 50 years ago kibble? You sure?
> 
> Regards


*A Brief History of Dog Food *



*The first commercial dog food* was introduced in England about 1860. James Spratt, an electrician from Ohio, was in London selling lightning rods when he saw miserable street dogs ganged up along the piers waiting to being tossed mouldy hardtack biscuits and scraps of rotten food. 

*This was a very old type of feeding called "trencher feeding"* that had existed in the U.K. since before there were dinner plates. A "trencher" was a flat piece of bread once commonly used as a plate or underneath a rough wooden plate. Food was served on this bread and the bread and the table scraps (along with spoiled food and boiled knuckle bones) were then "tossed to the dogs."

*Spratt decided he could do better than bread and hard-tack biscuits,* and he came up with a biscuit, shaped like a bone, made of wheat, vegetables, beetroot and beef blood. Spratt's dog food company thrived, and around 1890 he took it to the U.S. where it became "Spratt's Patent Limited" which eventually diversified into other feed stocks (such as fish food) as well as veterinary medicines.

*In the 1950s Spratt's became part of General Mills,* and in 1960 it was bought by "Spillers" dog food company (a UK subsidiary of Purina which is owned by General Mills). Today Spillers makes "Bonio" bone-shaped biscuits which are very similar to those once manufactured by James Spratt.

*Other dog food companies sprang up,* many with paid endorsements from veterinarians who shilled for them just as veterinarians shill for Hill's "Science Diet" today. Right from the beginning pet food manufacturers discouraged their clients from supplementing with anything but food out of the box. A culture of dependence was being forged.

*In 1907, F.H. Bennett introduced Milkbone dog biscuits *as a complete dog food and a direct competitor to Spratt. Milkbone and Spratt's Dogs Food and Cake dominated pet food manufacturing until the 1920's when canned dog food was first introduced by Ken-L-Ration.

*Canned horsemeat was cheap after World War I* as huge numbers of horses and mules were being replaced by cars and tractors. The growth in canned dog food really shot up in the 1930s, and by 1941, canned dog food represented 91% of the dog food market in the U.S.

*Canned dog food fell out of favor* (and supply) during World War II when a shortage of tin made canning difficult and expensive, and as the horse surplus dried up. By 1946, dry dog food was king once again, and it has remained so to this day.

*The production of enormous bags of "kibbled" dog* *foods* began in earnest in 1957 when the Purina company began marketing extruded dry dog "chow" through grocery store chains. Purina followed on with cat chow in 1962. Today most grocery stores in the U.S. devote more shelf space to canned and kibbled dog food than they do to breakfast cereal or baby food.

*Ralston Purina created the soft-moist pet food category in 1971*, and this category now includes such foods as Purina ONE and Pro Plan.

*The rise in kibbled dog food in the U.S.* seems to coincide with a rise in canine skin problems arising from canine allergies to corn, wheat and perhaps other additives to dry dog food such as preservatives, coloring, and stabilizers.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Nicole Stark said:


> *A Brief History of Dog Food *
> 
> 
> 
> *The first commercial dog food* was introduced in England about 1860. James Spratt, an electrician from Ohio, was in London selling lightning rods when he saw miserable street dogs ganged up along the piers waiting to being tossed mouldy hardtack biscuits and scraps of rotten food.
> 
> *This was a very old type of feeding called "trencher feeding"* that had existed in the U.K. since before there were dinner plates. A "trencher" was a flat piece of bread once commonly used as a plate or underneath a rough wooden plate. Food was served on this bread and the bread and the table scraps (along with spoiled food and boiled knuckle bones) were then "tossed to the dogs."
> 
> *Spratt decided he could do better than bread and hard-tack biscuits,* and he came up with a biscuit, shaped like a bone, made of wheat, vegetables, beetroot and beef blood. Spratt's dog food company thrived, and around 1890 he took it to the U.S. where it became "Spratt's Patent Limited" which eventually diversified into other feed stocks (such as fish food) as well as veterinary medicines.
> 
> *In the 1950s Spratt's became part of General Mills,* and in 1960 it was bought by "Spillers" dog food company (a UK subsidiary of Purina which is owned by General Mills). Today Spillers makes "Bonio" bone-shaped biscuits which are very similar to those once manufactured by James Spratt.
> 
> *Other dog food companies sprang up,* many with paid endorsements from veterinarians who shilled for them just as veterinarians shill for Hill's "Science Diet" today. Right from the beginning pet food manufacturers discouraged their clients from supplementing with anything but food out of the box. A culture of dependence was being forged.
> 
> *In 1907, F.H. Bennett introduced Milkbone dog biscuits *as a complete dog food and a direct competitor to Spratt. Milkbone and Spratt's Dogs Food and Cake dominated pet food manufacturing until the 1920's when canned dog food was first introduced by Ken-L-Ration.
> 
> *Canned horsemeat was cheap after World War I* as huge numbers of horses and mules were being replaced by cars and tractors. The growth in canned dog food really shot up in the 1930s, and by 1941, canned dog food represented 91% of the dog food market in the U.S.
> 
> *Canned dog food fell out of favor* (and supply) during World War II when a shortage of tin made canning difficult and expensive, and as the horse surplus dried up. By 1946, dry dog food was king once again, and it has remained so to this day.
> 
> *The production of enormous bags of "kibbled" dog* *foods* began in earnest in 1957 when the Purina company began marketing extruded dry dog "chow" through grocery store chains. Purina followed on with cat chow in 1962. Today most grocery stores in the U.S. devote more shelf space to canned and kibbled dog food than they do to breakfast cereal or baby food.
> 
> *Ralston Purina created the soft-moist pet food category in 1971*, and this category now includes such foods as Purina ONE and Pro Plan.
> 
> *The rise in kibbled dog food in the U.S.* seems to coincide with a rise in canine skin problems arising from canine allergies to corn, wheat and perhaps other additives to dry dog food such as preservatives, coloring, and stabilizers.


 
I stand corrected, lol. Please accept my humblest apologies. O


----------



## Sarah Platts

Tiago Fontes said:


> I stand corrected, lol. Please accept my humblest apologies. O


After dumping the food into a trashcan, the sack was reused by whichever of us kids got tasked to clean up the backyard that week. This was in the early 60s. That plus tablescraps and whever was spoilt from the frig. Didn't matter if it was green or slimy, dogs were the 'modern day' garbage disposal system.


----------



## Brian McQuain

Sarah Platts said:


> I know one old lady who only feeds the cheapest thing she can buy (usually Ol' Roy) and all of her dogs llived to somewhere between 12 and 15, although one lived to 17. But sometimes I think that we have created our some of own problems by sticking to certain genetic lines that, over time, small or individual issues have magnified and developed into a breed wide problem (aka recessive gene is now dominate gene)
> 
> Our GSDs of 50 years ago were fed whatever cheap kibble was on sale at that time from the grocery store. I wouldn't want to try that today.


 
I've seen, and know of more than a few dogs on Ol' Roy that do just fine. My inlaws just put down a 15 year old mutt who lived on Ol Roy, chocolate (I can not convince them that chocolate is actually bad for dogs) and trash. That dog outlived two of my dogs...one was fed grain free kibbles his whole life (Orijen, Acana, etc), the other started life on crap kibble, and was switched to raw.


----------



## rick smith

last time i checked this thread there were over nine hundred views ...
so has anyone decided to switch from raw to kibble or vice versa based on what has been posted so far ?
...anyone now on the fence ?
...always been very curious about that aspect of these threads


----------



## Larry Krohn

rick smith said:


> last time i checked this thread there were over nine hundred views ...
> so has anyone decided to switch from raw to kibble or vice versa based on what has been posted so far ?
> ...anyone now on the fence ?
> ...always been very curious about that aspect of these threads


Good question Rick


----------



## Nicole Stark

My opinion has not changed nor will my approach or method of feeding.


----------



## leslie cassian

I would like to feed raw, and do sometimes give my dogs a meal or two of raw, but ultimately, at this point the convenience of kibble wins out. 

I still think about feeding raw, but some of the stumbling blocks for me are sourcing economical, local suppliers for meat, as well as storage for quantities needed and the concern that I won't get the correct balance of meat/bone/organs/extras and will cause all kinds of nutritional deficiencies. Plus when I did, briefly feed raw, having meat thawing in fridge was a real nuisance and it was never packaged in the right amount to portion out without having leftovers or not enough.

Kibble, one scoop twice a day. I can pick up a bag at most pet food stores. Easy-peasy.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

I am giving kibble for now. I have fed both and about the only change I have made is focusing on grass fed hormone free beef, lamb or wild caught fish...figure the poultry all gets fed GMOs corn. I figure kibble with good ingredients is better than raw from walmart 

Maybe if I got good I could sneak out before the neighbors woke up and start bagging my ever present supply of chipmunks and squirrels for the dog. They eat nuts and are probably quite healthy.

Here, the stores can't sell meat just out of date at any price. It is very irritating. You can in NC but not SC. I would do that with grass fed beef etc and feed raw that way. Maybe in the future...you really need a large freezer but we need to start buying meats that way anyway (from local farmers)

Neighbor has a 17 YO sibe on Pedigree. Who is to really say? How much is simply genetics? My dogs used to live longer eating Purina Dog Chow and (remember) Gravy Train and Alpo...I certainly remember dog food back in the 60s! In actual 50lb bags.


----------



## susan tuck

Tiago Fontes said:


> 50 years ago kibble? You sure?
> 
> One thing I can tell you:
> 
> 25 years ago, nobody around me knew what kibble was. Our dogs were mostly fed of soups made of beef, chicken, pasta and veggies (carrots, broccoli). They did fine and lived long.
> 
> Even if kibble was the healthiest thing for dogs I would always add meat or fish to their diet. Would you be happy eating corn flakes all your life? Even if it had all the nutrients required? I wouldn't... And because of that, I like to give my dogs good meat and bones, so that they can enjoy themselves and exercise their jaws.
> 
> 
> Regards


I agree. Common sense tells me fresh whole locally sourced (when available) organic foods are best, but that's just me. There's plenty of great kibbles and plenty of crap kibbles and some dogs do well on crap kibbles and some dogs don't do well on raw and some dogs (like mine) do crappy on expensive grain free kibble. That's the great thing, everyone can figure out what they want to feed and then feed it.

I will say those dog food companies have lots of people convinced it's waaaaaay too difficult for the average person to figure out how to properly feed a dog which is complete hog wash. 

Think about it: if Ole Roy is good enough and scavenging/dumpster diving is good enough, obviously it's not rocket science to get enough of the proper nutrients in a dog in order for it to thrive.


----------



## Zakia Days

Joby Becker said:


> My buddy feeds Nutromax, has for 20 years now.
> his dogs are doberman/pitbull crosses...since I have known him, he has had several dogs live to be 15+, one dog just passed away last year and finally was put to sleep at age 17.
> 
> are there any real studies done on the longevity aspect of the different types of diets?



I think just as how a dog will do on a specific diet is very much related to its genetics, so is its longevity. I too have heard of dogs eating Ol' Roy or Pedigree and living to ripe old ages w/ minimal issues. The majority of these dogs I'd seen were mongrels or crosses of some kind which possibly denotes some genetic advantage. Or, the dogs in a specific breed's pedigree all had longevity and so genetically it has good health and longevity. Who knows. We are probably missing that some of these kibble fed dogs may also be fed table scraps or help themselves to the trash can every now and again. Or, they are fed fruit or potato chips by the kids, or have hopped onto the counter a few times and eaten dad's steak or chicken thawing. No dog will just settle and eat the same kibble ("cornflakes") its whole entire life unless the circumstances are extenuating. All those things can have an effect on the health and longevity of kibble eaters. Someone mentioned "eating corn flakes everyday for the rest of your life." Unless the dogs were in a kennel situation where there is NO opportunity for variety, most kibble fed dogs probably get some variation to that kibble diet in some way, shape, or form. I don't believe any of our observations are absolute. I'm sure one or two accounts are, but not all.


----------



## Katie Finlay

If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right?

I started raw because mine were broke. It fixed them. The cat does fine on kibble so she was switched back. 

I'm sort of a food/nutrient weirdo anyway, so sharing my vitamins with my dogs and then also my food just sort of came naturally...We both get fish oil, they get most of the meat and I get most of the produce. They get vitamin e and diatomaceous earth too. I just get a multivitamin and magnesium.


----------



## Heather Archambeault

I fed Evo until P&G bought them out. I wasn't about to sit around & watch them screw it up like they did with Iams.

I have fed a couple different GF kibbles, inlcuding Orijin, which I was not impressed with. I didn't like the inconsistencey of the kibble. The color & text could & did change from bag to bag, sometimes. With GSD's I don't need random changes in their food like that.
The kibble that I liked the best was Fromm Surf & turf, but it's kinda hard to come by. You either have to order it online, or there's two stores in my county that sell it, & they don't always have the big bag in stock.

I have fed Common Sense raw, that I picked up from Susanne Eviston, but I stopped when I found out that most of their formula's were not grain free. I now feed Darwin raw. It's delivered to my house once a month. Yes, it's expensive, I pay about $260 month for two dogs, but I am very happy with the quality, & the dogs are doing great on it.
I'd pick Common Sense over most kibbles, but knowing that Darwins is all grain free, human grade ingredients, & costs about the same to be delivered to my door, it's a no brainer for me.

I've noticed a big difference in the amount of water consumption, between kibble & raw, even with the Fromm food. The poop of course is a major bonus. Much less to clean up & it's more solid, & not soft & squishy. 

I get comments all the time about how soft my dogs coats are. I atribute that to raw feeding.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Heather Archambeault said:


> I fed Evo until P&G bought them out. I wasn't about to sit around & watch them screw it up like they did with Iams.
> 
> I have fed a couple different GF kibbles, inlcuding Orijin, which I was not impressed with. I didn't like the inconsistencey of the kibble. The color & text could & did change from bag to bag, sometimes. With GSD's I don't need random changes in their food like that.
> The kibble that I liked the best was Fromm Surf & turf, but it's kinda hard to come by. You either have to order it online, or there's two stores in my county that sell it, & they don't always have the big bag in stock.
> 
> I have fed Common Sense raw, that I picked up from Susanne Eviston, but I stopped when I found out that most of their formula's were not grain free. I now feed Darwin raw. It's delivered to my house once a month. Yes, it's expensive, I pay about $260 month for two dogs, but I am very happy with the quality, & the dogs are doing great on it.
> I'd pick Common Sense over most kibbles, but knowing that Darwins is all grain free, human grade ingredients, & costs about the same to be delivered to my door, it's a no brainer for me.
> 
> I've noticed a big difference in the amount of water consumption, between kibble & raw, even with the Fromm food. The poop of course is a major bonus. Much less to clean up & it's more solid, & not soft & squishy.
> 
> I get comments all the time about how soft my dogs coats are. I atribute that to raw feeding.


 
What kinds of meat does Darwin Raw contain? Fish? 


Thanks


----------



## Brian McQuain

Anyone ever try ZiwiPeak?


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Brian McQuain said:


> Anyone ever try ZiwiPeak?



It's in the lead article of _Whole Dog Journal _this month, an article about dehydrated foods.

The Honest Kitchen is the brand of dehydrated I've used (and still do), for some variety added to the raw diet I feed, and also for travel.

I see from the article that ZiwiPeak is similar.


ETA:
See below


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Connie Sutherland said:


> It's in the lead article of _Whole Dog Journal _this month, an article about dehydrated foods.
> 
> The Honest Kitchen is the brand of dehydrated I've used (and still do), for some variety added to the raw diet I feed, and also for travel.
> 
> I see from the article that ZiwiPeak is similar.


Oh, my mistake .... on further reading, I see that ZiwiPeak (which is made in New Zealand) doesn't require rehydrating. That's different from the others.


----------



## Brian McQuain

I've only had one dog do well on Honest Kitchen. All my other dogs would get sick as soon as I started integrating it with the food they were already eating. As in throwing up and super soaker squirts.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Brian McQuain said:


> I've only had one dog do well on Honest Kitchen. All my other dogs would get sick as soon as I started integrating it with the food they were already eating. As in throwing up and super soaker squirts.


Wow!



I like it very much .... although I feed raw and I don't use THK as the main food. I make it into a "gravy" sometimes for variety. 

But I've traveled, using THK with RMB add-ins, very successfully.

(I have run into dogs who were suspicious of the texture at first, though, so I don't set off on a trip with a dog who hasn't had it before.)


If I had the issues you've had, I think the ZiwiPeak ingredient list looks enough different to give it a try. JMO.


----------



## Brian McQuain

Connie Sutherland said:


> Wow!
> 
> 
> 
> I like it very much .... although I feed raw and I don't use THK as the main food. I make it into a "gravy" sometimes for variety.
> 
> But I've traveled, using THK with RMB add-ins, very successfully.
> 
> (I have run into dogs who were suspicious of the texture at first, though, so I don't set off on a trip with a dog who hasn't had it before.)
> 
> 
> If I had the issues you've had, I think the ZiwiPeak ingredient list looks enough different to give it a try. JMO.


 
I dont know anybody who has issues with THK, just my guys. Ill stick with Ol Roy for now...kidding, kidding.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Brian McQuain said:


> Ill stick with Ol Roy for now...kidding, kidding.



:lol: :lol: 



PS
I don't really know anyone who has THK issues either .... some texture suspicion, as I mentioned, and a few with loose stools after a quick switch ... but I pretty much see it as a popular bridge to raw (THK with add-ins) and as a simple way to add variety to raw.


----------



## Brian McQuain

Connie Sutherland said:


> :lol: :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> PS
> I don't really know anyone who has THK issues either .... some texture suspicion, as I mentioned, and a few with loose stools after a quick switch ... but I pretty much see it as a popular bridge to raw (THK with add-ins) and as a simple way to add variety to raw.


 
I dunno. I rotate raw and Acana, and they do fine on both. They used to do fine on Orijen, but out of no where they got the squirts from it and everytime I tried it since, they didnt do so well. My young pup actually ripped up my back door trying to get out...he didnt make it. I love tile floors.


----------



## Katie Finlay

Connie Sutherland said:


> :lol: :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> PS
> I don't really know anyone who has THK issues either .... some texture suspicion, as I mentioned, and a few with loose stools after a quick switch ... but I pretty much see it as a popular bridge to raw (THK with add-ins) and as a simple way to add variety to raw.


THK is actually really popular for those of us who have dogs and cats with IBD for this very reason. Always a formed stool.

In fact, even if I feed Danni something weird and she gets loose stool a cup or two of THK mixed in with the raw solves the problem.

Brian's situation actually sounds like IBD?


----------



## rick smith

Brian 
big ditto for what Katie just posted

id probs are chronic, i sure hope you have done the proper EPI test by a vet familiar with it ... unfortunately i've had to deal with 2 EPI gsd's and 2 other client gsd's ... i have no idea how prevalent it has gotten but both of the clients dogs went way too long before they got properly diagnosed
...seems to show up a lot in the gsd breed

anytime those kind of runs get chronic is time to rule all of them ruled out and crossed off, but epecially EPI


----------



## Leah Hein

rick smith said:


> last time i checked this thread there were over nine hundred views ...
> so has anyone decided to switch from raw to kibble or vice versa based on what has been posted so far ?
> ...anyone now on the fence ?
> ...always been very curious about that aspect of these threads


Actually, with a new dog on the way I've been giving this a lot of thought. I was leaning toward raw until I read another article. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...e-diets-for-dogs-its-enough-to-make-you-barf/

My background is in the hard sciences, so while the personal testimonials and anecdotes that go along with raw feeding makes it very appealing, I'm left with a scientific review gap that I don't like. I've been looking into the raw manufacturers around me and finding huge differences in advertised content and not a single nutrition analysis. As he points out, ingredients don't equal measurable nutrients.

This article is a reminder that the raw food industry is unregulated and as I know from other sources, manufacturer claims regarding content can vary significantly from a products actual content. Dogs could be getting way too much of some things and not enough others with raw. Ultimately, he makes some very good points and I find myself continuing to sit on the fence. Not because I think raw is necessarily a bad idea or that kibble is wonderful, but among other reasons I distrust the unregulated manufacturers and I don't want to risk over and/or under-dosing my dog and causing other problems. That said, if I see that my dog is showing certain symptoms I would definitely try switching to raw. I'm unconvinced it's a magic bullet and doesn't come with it's own set of problems.


----------



## Katie Finlay

Would that apply to pre-made raw? I buy "people" meat for mine?


----------



## Connie Sutherland

The ScienceBased article linked above ..... Brennen McKenzie has concerns (valid, IMO) about unbalanced home-prepared raw diets and food-borne pathogens.

I'm careful about balancing the raw diet, and about sourcing the ingredients for it.


I do get why some vets are worried about wildly unbalanced raw diets. We've encountered a few here, in fact. There's the infamous all-beef (no digestible bone) diet, and the owner who didn't understand what a nutritional tragedy it was until his growing puppy started fracturing bones while playing. 

Some reading and some care are requirements, IMO. The dog can't usually head for the forest or barn to instinctively satisfy shortages in a human-devised diet.

But beyond reading and care, it's no more impossible for a reasonably intelligent human to feed a dog than it is to feed a baby, toddler, or young child.

Dr. McKenzie's vet college is one of the many whose small animal nutrition handbook was published by Hill's (the Science Diet folks) and is given (free) to the vet students.

ScienceBasedMedicine is no more immune than any other organization to the ubiquitous influence of Hill's Pet Nutrition, IMO.

Many vets disagree vehemently with the Hill's doctrine.



Again, I absolutely agree with Dr. McKenzie that an unbalanced and unvaried raw diet is a disaster. It certainly is not a magic bullet, and it has its own drawbacks. 

Raw is not automatically better just because it's raw (if it's not varied and balanced), and there are dogs with some health issues who aren't good candidates for a raw diet.

And I agree that care needs to taken in sourcing in this age of constant salmonella and e.coli messes. 


(Remember too that this raw meat is often the same raw meat that people are storing, handling, and preparing for their families.)


It's interesting that we have salmonella recall after salmonella recall of kibble, though. 

All JMO, of course.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

_"This article is a reminder that the raw food industry is unregulated ... "
_


Katie Finlay said:


> Would that apply to pre-made raw? I buy "people" meat for mine?



So do I.


----------



## Larry Krohn

Leah Hein said:


> Actually, with a new dog on the way I've been giving this a lot of thought. I was leaning toward raw until I read another article. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...e-diets-for-dogs-its-enough-to-make-you-barf/
> 
> My background is in the hard sciences, so while the personal testimonials and anecdotes that go along with raw feeding makes it very appealing, I'm left with a scientific review gap that I don't like. I've been looking into the raw manufacturers around me and finding huge differences in advertised content and not a single nutrition analysis. As he points out, ingredients don't equal measurable nutrients.
> 
> This article is a reminder that the raw food industry is unregulated and as I know from other sources, manufacturer claims regarding content can vary significantly from a products actual content. Dogs could be getting way too much of some things and not enough others with raw. Ultimately, he makes some very good points and I find myself continuing to sit on the fence. Not because I think raw is necessarily a bad idea or that kibble is wonderful, but among other reasons I distrust the unregulated manufacturers and I don't want to risk over and/or under-dosing my dog and causing other problems. That said, if I see that my dog is showing certain symptoms I would definitely try switching to raw. I'm unconvinced it's a magic bullet and doesn't come with it's own set of problems.


I've read this article before. It's a good article and just makes the decision more difficult


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Larry Krohn said:


> .... just makes the decision more difficult



Yes, it's not a one-size-fits-all.


----------



## Larry Krohn

Leah Hein said:


> Actually, with a new dog on the way I've been giving this a lot of thought. I was leaning toward raw until I read another article. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...e-diets-for-dogs-its-enough-to-make-you-barf/
> 
> My background is in the hard sciences, so while the personal testimonials and anecdotes that go along with raw feeding makes it very appealing, I'm left with a scientific review gap that I don't like. I've been looking into the raw manufacturers around me and finding huge differences in advertised content and not a single nutrition analysis. As he points out, ingredients don't equal measurable nutrients.
> 
> This article is a reminder that the raw food industry is unregulated and as I know from other sources, manufacturer claims regarding content can vary significantly from a products actual content. Dogs could be getting way too much of some things and not enough others with raw. Ultimately, he makes some very good points and I find myself continuing to sit on the fence. Not because I think raw is necessarily a bad idea or that kibble is wonderful, but among other reasons I distrust the unregulated manufacturers and I don't want to risk over and/or under-dosing my dog and causing other problems. That said, if I see that my dog is showing certain symptoms I would definitely try switching to raw. I'm unconvinced it's a magic bullet and doesn't come with it's own set of problems.


Here is the problem with this article. In here he says that captive wolves do best and live longest on kibble. I have contacted and spoke to many wolf specialists and sanctuaries from all over the country and every single one said that is bullshit. In fact not one of them thought that kibble should be fed to any dog and they would never give it to their wolves. That is enough for me to make that article very suspicious


----------



## catherine hardigan

Tiago Fontes said:


> ...Would you be happy eating corn flakes all your life? Even if it had all the nutrients required? I wouldn't...


One mistake many pet owners make is to anthropomorphize their animals. 

In my experience most dogs do just fine on kibble. Their overall health has more to do with genetics, exercise, and BMI.


----------



## Larry Krohn

catherine hardigan said:


> One mistake many pet owners make is to anthropomorphize their animals.
> 
> In my experience most dogs do just fine on kibble. Their overall health has more to do with genetics, exercise, and BMI.


Now I have to look up a big word


----------



## Christopher Smith

susan tuck said:


> Think about it: if Ole Roy is good enough and scavenging/dumpster diving is good enough, obviously it's not rocket science to get enough of the proper nutrients in a dog in order for it to thrive.


That's too simple.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

susan tuck said:


> I will say those dog food companies have lots of people convinced it's waaaaaay too difficult for the average person to figure out how to properly feed a dog which is complete hog wash.
> 
> Think about it: if Ole Roy is good enough and scavenging/dumpster diving is good enough, obviously it's not rocket science to get enough of the proper nutrients in a dog in order for it to thrive.


HERESY!

Only Hill's-Science Diet ("America's Pet Nutrition Experts") holds the secret, handed down from CEO to CEO since 1939.


It's a corporation thing; mere individuals can't hope to break the code.


----------



## Brian McQuain

rick smith said:


> Brian
> big ditto for what Katie just posted
> 
> id probs are chronic, i sure hope you have done the proper EPI test by a vet familiar with it ... unfortunately i've had to deal with 2 EPI gsd's and 2 other client gsd's ... i have no idea how prevalent it has gotten but both of the clients dogs went way too long before they got properly diagnosed
> ...seems to show up a lot in the gsd breed
> 
> anytime those kind of runs get chronic is time to rule all of them ruled out and crossed off, but epecially EPI


 
Good advice. For my guys, its not chronic, and its not ever been on any other food, raw or kibble. Just Orijen and THK


----------



## Faisal Khan

I have fed raw only as well as kibble only. Definitions are important, by raw I mean mostly harvested meat (venison, pork, birds, rabbits, beef etc) , non harvested meat is store bought chicken beef etc and not pre-packaged raw mix made specifically for feeding dogs. Kibble is good quality with good ingredients. 

Did not see any noticeable difference in performance or appearance, it's all good for a normal dog. Now if the dog has issues and one suits him more over the other then it is a health/genetic issue with that individual dog.


----------



## Joby Becker

we'll see.

I am rasing a pup now, feeding kibble.

My friend, a Raw NAZI, is raising her sister.

Everytime I talk to her, she asks me if I stopped feeding my dog the shit I am feeding her, and tells me how unhealthy kibble is 

it should be interesting to compare the 2 pups in a year or so.


----------



## Nancy Jocoy

Joby it would be a good comparison because while they are not identical genetically they are as close as you can get without being identical twins.

Look forward to hearing how it goes.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Joby Becker said:


> we'll see.
> 
> I am rasing a pup now, feeding kibble.
> 
> My friend, a Raw NAZI, is raising her sister.
> 
> Everytime I talk to her, she asks me if I stopped feeding my dog the shit I am feeding her, and tells me how unhealthy kibble is
> 
> it should be interesting to compare the 2 pups in a year or so.


It is interesting to me, too.

I'd be particularly interested if there was any atopy (or any inflammation-driven chronic conditions at all) in the preceding generation.

(Also, I'd like to know that the raw diet given is a good one. I know I keep saying it, but "raw" doesn't, in and of itself, mean "good." A good kibble way beats an unbalanced raw diet, especially for a growing dog, IMO. And I say this as someone who has fed a fresh raw diet for many years.  )


----------



## susan tuck

Connie Sutherland said:


> The ScienceBased article linked above ..... Brennen McKenzie has concerns (valid, IMO) about unbalanced home-prepared raw diets and food-borne pathogens.
> 
> I'm careful about balancing the raw diet, and about sourcing the ingredients for it.
> 
> 
> I do get why some vets are worried about wildly unbalanced raw diets. We've encountered a few here, in fact. There's the infamous all-beef (no digestible bone) diet, and the owner who didn't understand what a nutritional tragedy it was until his growing puppy started fracturing bones while playing.
> 
> Some reading and some care are requirements, IMO. The dog can't usually head for the forest or barn to instinctively satisfy shortages in a human-devised diet.
> 
> But beyond reading and care, it's no more impossible for a reasonably intelligent human to feed a dog than it is to feed a baby, toddler, or young child.
> 
> Dr. McKenzie's vet college is one of the many whose small animal nutrition handbook was published by Hill's (the Science Diet folks) and is given (free) to the vet students.
> 
> ScienceBasedMedicine is no more immune than any other organization to the ubiquitous influence of Hill's Pet Nutrition, IMO.
> 
> Many vets disagree vehemently with the Hill's doctrine.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, I absolutely agree with Dr. McKenzie that an unbalanced and unvaried raw diet is a disaster. It certainly is not a magic bullet, and it has its own drawbacks.
> 
> Raw is not automatically better just because it's raw (if it's not varied and balanced), and there are dogs with some health issues who aren't good candidates for a raw diet.
> 
> And I agree that care needs to taken in sourcing in this age of constant salmonella and e.coli messes.
> 
> 
> (Remember too that this raw meat is often the same raw meat that people are storing, handling, and preparing for their families.)
> 
> 
> It's interesting that we have salmonella recall after salmonella recall of kibble, though.
> 
> All JMO, of course.


Exactly.


----------



## Larry Krohn

It's amazing that this post has over 1800 views and still no clear answer. Hopefully one day there will be. I'm a research junky and if I don't know something, especially in the dog world, I become obsessed. In this case it makes it more confusing. My two older dogs do great on TOTW and my young malinois does great on raw.


----------



## Jennifer Coulter

I had a young mal that just did not do well on kibble. Tried different brands and protein sources, grains vs grain free, and always kind of had cow patty poops. Vet could not find anything wrong with stool samples or dog.

I switched to raw at 8 months and stools were instantly great, no more cow patty craps. The dog could eat a large variety of protein sources on raw and had no issues with digestion.

Fast forward, dog is now three years old. I am on an extended road trip (two months) and just decided I did not want to feed raw while I was away. (Two dogs with me). I have fed THK with no issues on the road in the past, but had to feed soooo much of it for the mal to maintain weight long term, I just decided to try something else. 

I tried a grain free Petcurean product called GO. The mal had zero issues with the switch, and for some reason has normal (for grain free kibble) stools. Not sure what changed in her digestion, but she now seems able to process it.

I am not finding that she stinks, or is itchy, or yeasty or any of the negative kibble comment one sees so far. She is shedding, but it is spring, so the "my dog's coat looks better on raw" verdict will be out for some time if I really want to compare things.

My only complaint so far is that I am having to feed A LOT of it to my mal. My other dog eats the regular "active dog" amount for his size. I started with the recommended "active dog" amount for my mal, and she was loosing weight, so I added a cup. It has been a week now, and I suspect she is still loosing weight. Seems weird to be adding another cup..... Four cups of high end, grain free kibble for a 42lbs dog seems a little much.

Anyways, just some musings from someone who has recently gone from raw to kibble...

I will go back to raw when I get back home in about a month.


----------



## Ben Thompson

Connie Sutherland said:


> It is interesting to me, too.
> 
> I'd be particularly interested if there was any atopy (or any inflammation-driven chronic conditions at all) in the preceding generation.
> 
> (Also, I'd like to know that the raw diet given is a good one. I know I keep saying it, but "raw" doesn't, in and of itself, mean "good." A good kibble way beats an unbalanced raw diet, especially for a growing dog, IMO. And I say this as someone who has fed a fresh raw diet for many years.  )


 Do you put your older dogs on a more plant based diet as they reach 10+ years? I talked to a woman who fed her dogs about 75% meat and 25% vegetables/fruit when her dogs were young.... then by the time they were old she reversed the percentages. When they are about 7 years old they are eating maybe 50/50 blend. The transition is very gradual.


----------



## James Downey

Connie Sutherland said:


> The ScienceBased article linked above ..... Brennen McKenzie has concerns (valid, IMO) about unbalanced home-prepared raw diets and food-borne pathogens.
> 
> I'm careful about balancing the raw diet, and about sourcing the ingredients for it.
> 
> 
> I do get why some vets are worried about wildly unbalanced raw diets. We've encountered a few here, in fact. There's the infamous all-beef (no digestible bone) diet, and the owner who didn't understand what a nutritional tragedy it was until his growing puppy started fracturing bones while playing.
> 
> Some reading and some care are requirements, IMO. The dog can't usually head for the forest or barn to instinctively satisfy shortages in a human-devised diet.
> 
> But beyond reading and care, it's no more impossible for a reasonably intelligent human to feed a dog than it is to feed a baby, toddler, or young child.
> 
> Dr. McKenzie's vet college is one of the many whose small animal nutrition handbook was published by Hill's (the Science Diet folks) and is given (free) to the vet students.
> 
> ScienceBasedMedicine is no more immune than any other organization to the ubiquitous influence of Hill's Pet Nutrition, IMO.
> 
> Many vets disagree vehemently with the Hill's doctrine.
> 
> 
> 
> Again, I absolutely agree with Dr. McKenzie that an unbalanced and unvaried raw diet is a disaster. It certainly is not a magic bullet, and it has its own drawbacks.
> 
> Raw is not automatically better just because it's raw (if it's not varied and balanced), and there are dogs with some health issues who aren't good candidates for a raw diet.
> 
> And I agree that care needs to taken in sourcing in this age of constant salmonella and e.coli messes.
> 
> 
> (Remember too that this raw meat is often the same raw meat that people are storing, handling, and preparing for their families.)
> 
> 
> It's interesting that we have salmonella recall after salmonella recall of kibble, though.
> 
> All JMO, of course.


And this is just my opinion also. I do think RAW is better just because it's raw. First, and foremost the most outstanding benefit to the dog's digestive system and other metabolic processes is that because it's not cooked. That's what the digestive systems are designed to process. The nutrition is more readily available, and there is simply more nutrition because heating meat and plant material to the point of cooking it destroys protein, vitamins, minerals. And I know they add some things back in after cooking. But what they do not tell you is that it has to be processed also so it does not decay also. It's like that movie, super-size me. Where they put a mcdy's french fries out for month and they do not decay, I have found kibble that has been hidden for considerably longer than a month and looks like it just came out of the bag. Why doesn't it break down? The next thing is the extraction of all the moisture that's in the food...that's not just water, that's all kinds of nutrition sucked out of the food...and the dog has to rehydrate that food with it's own stores of waters in its body. 

The next thing is balance. I am pretty sure There is more chicken in my dogs bowl in one day with real chicken then there is in a weeks worth of kibble meals. With all that goes into making kibble, it's considerably cheaper than raw....How do they do that? How do they take the same chicken I buy, process it, package it and send it to the store for a third of the cost. Buying in bulk? Does not add up to me. And I think the whole....what if it's not balanced, what if you miss some key supporting ingredient....is all fear tactics. If you give your dogs a meat, some plant material and some bone....Your giving enough to optimally support life. Really? Sure if you throw your dogs ground beef for every meal, they will get disease. as would you if you only ate the patty on a burger. But do any of you, make sure your getting enough vitamin A on regular basis. Nutrition has been made to seem like it's rocket science with dogs, as if somehow the earth is not providing the correct things to support life. But purina is. You learned everything you need to know about human nutrition in kindergarten. don't eat a lot of junk food, eat some grain, some meat, and some fruits and veggies....no one ran around the class telling you to make sure your diet had the correct calcium/phosphorus ratio. But get crazy when it comes to dogs. as if it's some mythical science, that if it is not just so....fluffy is going to die.

And along the lines of bacteria. I have seen my dogs running around find an animal that has been dead for days....and eat it. And not even get the runs from it. There is a co-op in Southern California that carried a pre-made dog food I feed. It contained tripe. It was killing the competition. A company that had been around for years. they also contained tripe. They got pissed and had the first food tested for bacteria....it contained over 100 times the allowable limit for E.coli in human food. Not a single dog ever reported sick with e.coli. I know breeders who feed it to weaning puppies. The first company in an effort to protect their buisness requested the other food be tested and co-op shot them down, saying that the company was the leader in tripe containing dog food. Tripe is like one stage away from being poop. It all contains high levels of bacteria unless it's been cleaned. And speaking of poop....I know dogs eat that stuff to at times. No one ever rushes the dog to the vet worried about bacteria poisoning then....they just think it's a gross behavior. Which it is. My point is, dogs can easily handle massive amounts of bacteria...In fact, at least 100 times the amount of a human. 

I have gone back and forth on feeding raw and kibble and everytime I buy a bag of kibble I throw it out a week later....the change for the worse is so evident, skin problems, massive amounts of water drinking...disgusting gas and stools, crappy coat, stinky breath, energy levels crash. 

Whenever I read something about the horrors of raw. I look around, I see all my working dog folks who feed it...all the pet dog people I know that feed it...and I have yet to see one, one substantiated case of the dog getting sick from raw, or having some sort metabolic problem from lack of a certain nutrient. But in a week of feeding of kibble I can see with my own eyes the health of my dogs go down hill. I can go in people houses who have kibble dogs and can smell the doggy smell in the air. If they have more than one dog it can choke me out some times. People come to my house, and I ask sometimes does it smell like dogs in here, and they say no....don't know if they are just being polite. but the doggy smell does not kick me in the face when I come in. Then people pet my dogs and cannot believe how great their coat feels. The signs of health are just evident for me. 

And beyond all that, when people I know switch to RAW....most of them reluctantly...within 2 weeks they are astonished on the transformation their dogs go through....and the older the dog it seems the more evident the effect.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

James Downey said:


> And this is just my opinion also. I do think RAW is better just because it's raw. First, and foremost the most outstanding benefit to the dog's digestive system and other metabolic processes is that because it's not cooked. That's what the digestive systems are designed to process. The nutrition is more readily available, and there is simply more nutrition because heating meat and plant material to the point of cooking it destroys protein, vitamins, minerals. And I know they add some things back in after cooking. But what they do not tell you is that it has to be processed also so it does not decay also. It's like that movie, super-size me. Where they put a mcdy's french fries out for month and they do not decay, I have found kibble that has been hidden for considerably longer than a month and looks like it just came out of the bag. Why doesn't it break down? The next thing is the extraction of all the moisture that's in the food...that's not just water, that's all kinds of nutrition sucked out of the food...and the dog has to rehydrate that food with it's own stores of waters in its body.
> 
> The next thing is balance. I am pretty sure There is more chicken in my dogs bowl in one day with real chicken then there is in a weeks worth of kibble meals. With all that goes into making kibble, it's considerably cheaper than raw....How do they do that? How do they take the same chicken I buy, process it, package it and send it to the store for a third of the cost. Buying in bulk? Does not add up to me. And I think the whole....what if it's not balanced, what if you miss some key supporting ingredient....is all fear tactics. If you give your dogs a meat, some plant material and some bone....Your giving enough to optimally support life. Really? Sure if you throw your dogs ground beef for every meal, they will get disease. as would you if you only ate the patty on a burger. But do any of you, make sure your getting enough vitamin A on regular basis. Nutrition has been made to seem like it's rocket science with dogs, as if somehow the earth is not providing the correct things to support life. But purina is. You learned everything you need to know about human nutrition in kindergarten. don't eat a lot of junk food, eat some grain, some meat, and some fruits and veggies....no one ran around the class telling you to make sure your diet had the correct calcium/phosphorus ratio. But get crazy when it comes to dogs. as if it's some mythical science, that if it is not just so....fluffy is going to die.
> 
> And along the lines of bacteria. I have seen my dogs running around find an animal that has been dead for days....and eat it. And not even get the runs from it. There is a co-op in Southern California that carried a pre-made dog food I feed. It contained tripe. It was killing the competition. A company that had been around for years. they also contained tripe. They got pissed and had the first food tested for bacteria....it contained over 100 times the allowable limit for E.coli in human food. Not a single dog ever reported sick with e.coli. I know breeders who feed it to weaning puppies. The first company in an effort to protect their buisness requested the other food be tested and co-op shot them down, saying that the company was the leader in tripe containing dog food. Tripe is like one stage away from being poop. It all contains high levels of bacteria unless it's been cleaned. And speaking of poop....I know dogs eat that stuff to at times. No one ever rushes the dog to the vet worried about bacteria poisoning then....they just think it's a gross behavior. Which it is. My point is, dogs can easily handle massive amounts of bacteria...In fact, at least 100 times the amount of a human.
> 
> I have gone back and forth on feeding raw and kibble and everytime I buy a bag of kibble I throw it out a week later....the change for the worse is so evident, skin problems, massive amounts of water drinking...disgusting gas and stools, crappy coat, stinky breath, energy levels crash.
> 
> Whenever I read something about the horrors of raw. I look around, I see all my working dog folks who feed it...all the pet dog people I know that feed it...and I have yet to see one, one substantiated case of the dog getting sick from raw, or having some sort metabolic problem from lack of a certain nutrient. But in a week of feeding of kibble I can see with my own eyes the health of my dogs go down hill. I can go in people houses who have kibble dogs and can smell the doggy smell in the air. If they have more than one dog it can choke me out some times. People come to my house, and I ask sometimes does it smell like dogs in here, and they say no....don't know if they are just being polite. but the doggy smell does not kick me in the face when I come in. Then people pet my dogs and cannot believe how great their coat feels. The signs of health are just evident for me.
> 
> And beyond all that, when people I know switch to RAW....most of them reluctantly...within 2 weeks they are astonished on the transformation their dogs go through....and the older the dog it seems the more evident the effect.


 
This was a great post. Thank you for sharing your experience.


----------



## mel boschwitz

James, that's pretty much my belief too. Except I haven't attempted to feed kibble since I made the switch 15 years ago. Great post!


----------



## Larry Krohn

I gave kibble to Luca, my 1 year old mal last week two times. He's been very sick with the worst diarrhea ever and it happened the last time I gave it to him also. Don't know if it's coincidence or not but I think he may be violently allergic to something in the TOTW kibble


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Ben Thompson said:


> Do you put your older dogs on a more plant based diet as they reach 10+ years? I talked to a woman who fed her dogs about 75% meat and 25% vegetables/fruit when her dogs were young.... then by the time they were old she reversed the percentages. When they are about 7 years old they are eating maybe 50/50 blend. The transition is very gradual.


I don't. 

I almost always have a couple (or more) geriatric dogs in the pack. Maybe an old dog will have some kind of GI issue, but I can't think of one that would lead me to to lower the meat protein in favor of produce. I do feed produce and green tripe, but produce probably wouldn't reach 25% of the diet I give (although that sounds OK to me if it's appropriate produce: low in sugar, not gassy, and not starchy). 

There are a few myths (JMO) about geriatric dogs needing low-protein diets, but maybe they have sprung mainly from the persistent one about protein and aging kidneys. This has been debunked over and over in recent decades, but it hangs around anyway. (High-quality protein, yes. Very efficient protein with less "nitrogen leftover." A low-protein diet, no. Again, MHO.) 

All JMO.


----------



## catherine hardigan

James Downey said:


> I have seen my dogs running around find an animal that has been dead for days....and eat it. And not even get the runs from it.
> 
> And speaking of poop....I know dogs eat that stuff to at times.


Kibble is a pretty big step up from dog shit and decaying carcasses.

Here's the thing: dogs are not wolves. For the last several tens of thousands of years they have evolved to eat human garbage, scraps (remember that humans cook their food thus the refuse is also cooked), and whatever else they found laying around... sometimes that included excrement and dead animals.

I know a couple people with graduate degrees in animal science. This is what they have said: Kibble is fine for dogs unless a particular animal has a genetic issue or metabolic idiosyncrasy. Some dogs (often purebreds) just don't have robust constitutions. The real issue for most dogs is that their owners feed them to the point of being overweight, and on top of that most dogs don't get enough exercise. Keeping a dog lean and fit will have a much greater impact on longevity than its diet. Most owners, however, don't want to hear that. They'd rather buy into some pet nutrition conspiracy theory and feed their dogs better than they likely feed themselves.

Both these folks were in agreement that many pet owners are ****ing insane. Everyone with a computer is an expert... _"I read about pet food on the internet, I know my shit."_ All those years spent at a university learning about physiology and chemistry, and then producing and defending a graduate level thesis or dissertation were worthless. 

Funny stuff.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Well, I've studied canine nutrition for a long time, in and out of school. I have a pretty good library on the subject too.


My dogs are lean and fit, and I agree on the importance of that. They get lots of exercise too. I'm thinking that this is the case with just about everyone on the thread. 


In my case, I usually choose food that isn't manufactured in a factory. For humans, and for the dogs.



That's JMO. I also think a dog can be well fed with commercial food, and that there are some very good ones.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Connie Sutherland said:


> Well, I've studied canine nutrition for a long time, in and out of school. I have a pretty good library on the subject too.
> 
> 
> My dogs are lean and fit, and I agree on the importance of that. They get lots of exercise too. I'm thinking that this is the case with just about everyone on the thread.
> 
> 
> In my case, I usually choose food that isn't manufactured in a factory. For humans, and for the dogs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's JMO. I also think a dog can be well fed with commercial food, and that there are some very good ones.


 
Hello Connie, 

Whats your opinion on exercise and young dogs ? (6 months and up). 


Thank you





*ETA Moved this exercise topic to* http://www.WorkingDogForum.com/vBulletin/f25/exercise-young-dogs-27458/#post398002


----------



## Connie Sutherland

I don't have one .... I'm sorry. 

Dog nutrition and allergies (atopy, flea hypersensitivity, etc.) are my main research/study focus.



I've seen some interesting threads here on the subject, though. 

Here's one:

http://www.workingdogforum.com/vBulletin/f50/working-dog-walks-exercise-14443/

Even though it didn't really start as a question about how to exercise a pup, there are a few posts in there that address that directly (after you weed through the usual "banter" ... :lol: )



*ETA: Moved this exercise topic to* http://www.WorkingDogForum.com/vBulletin/f25/exercise-young-dogs-27458/#post398002


----------



## Meg O'Donovan

The role of microbes inside the dog is something to consider too, and which type of diet can provide the best source and conditions for that. Research on humans is showing that the bacteria is crucial to our gut's function and likely minimizing inflammation in other body parts and processes. Some foods, especially raw, encourage the diverse populations of the types of bacteria that keep us healthy. Processed foods tend not to have that bacteria, or have much less. Kibble, being processed, would likely have less. There is speculation that some of the autoimmune issues that people suffer today is due to the limitations of the microbes in their gut and elsewhere. I haven't seen any research on this in regards to dogs, but it is worth considering.

To see the research on humans, look at this article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/19/m...t-make-up-your-microbiome.html?pagewanted=all

I've seen the the 75% vs. 25% protein/vegetable ratio before but regarding turtles, not dogs. I read that when turtles are young that is how they eat, but as/if they reach a ripe old age, that ratio gradually reverses to where the oldtimers eat 25% protein and 75% vegetables. 

I feed raw from Sept. through Feb., wild game. My Malinois muscled up and wintered well on it and seemed calmer. When the game runs out (or if I/we travel), she gets Acana salmon kibble. Lately I have been trying a Canadian salmon and pea kibble, called Pulsar. She has more appetite for it than the Acana, but she also eats more and poops more. It is a lot cheaper than Acana, so when I finish one bag, I go to the other brand for the next bag. She has no problems switching foods. She also eats raw vegetables and fruit (especially bananas) as treats when I have some to spare, and in the evening inside I give her the chance to look for and find dried salmon skins, which she loves.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

_"I feed raw from Sept. through Feb., wild game. My Malinois .... seemed calmer. "_


It's possible that you're seeing a reduction in glycemic spikes ("sugar rushes"). Some owners have commented for as far back as I remember about this. Then about 1999, research papers started popping up. 

There have been four or five threads here that talked about high-glycemic grain fractions, white potato, tapioca, etc., and the glycemic response in some individuals.

(A lot of this research centers on diabetic dogs, of course.)






_
"The role of microbes inside the dog is something to consider too, and which type of diet can provide the best source and conditions for that."_

Yes, this comes up in research on canine atopy too.


----------



## catherine hardigan

Connie Sutherland said:


> I'm thinking that this is the case with just about everyone on the thread.


We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't know anybody on the forum, but I see lots of out of shape working dogs.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

catherine hardigan said:


> We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't know anybody on the forum, but I see lots of out of shape working dogs.


I know some folks on this board, but not a majority. 

Among the working-dog folks I know, whether they're members here or not, I don't run into fat and out-of-shape working dogs often. That would be sad, and I'd probably speak up and lose friends.

Heck, besides real dogs, I also have adopted Pugs, and _they_ aren't fat or out of shape, either! :lol:

That's how important I think "lean and trim" is for dogs.


----------



## catherine hardigan

Connie Sutherland said:


> I know some folks on this board, but not a majority.
> 
> Among the working-dog folks I know, whether they're members here or not, I don't run into fat and out-of-shape working dogs often. That would be sad, and I'd probably speak up and lose friends.
> 
> Heck, besides real dogs, I also have adopted Pugs, and _they_ aren't fat or out of shape, either! :lol:
> 
> That's how important I think "lean and trim" is for dogs.


I didn't say fat, I said out of shape. I see a fair number of adult working dogs that look like they would struggle to keep up on a decent run. 

I do, however, see tons of fat pets.

I'm trying to imagine what some people think when they buy pet food. It must be something like, _"Yes, my JRT is very reminiscent of her timber wolf ancestors... I'll take the $80 bag of venison and tapioca."_ 

Anecdotally, all the large dogs I know who've been healthy and active to a ripe old age (13 years and older) have been feed kibble. Usually cheap kibble. The common thread is that all of them were mixes, and they all got lots... and lots... of exercise, not wild caught pheasant and fru-fru berries.

http://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/abs/10.2460/javma.2000.217.1678


----------



## leslie cassian

Connie Sutherland said:


> _"I feed raw from Sept. through Feb., wild game. My Malinois .... seemed calmer. "_
> 
> 
> It's possible that you're seeing a reduction in glycemic spikes ("sugar rushes"). Some owners have commented for as far back as I remember about this. Then about 1999, research papers started popping up.
> 
> There have been four or five threads here that talked about high-glycemic grain fractions, white potato, tapioca, etc., and the glycemic response in some individuals.
> 
> (A lot of this research centers on diabetic dogs, of course.)
> 
> 
> .


Can you give some info/links on glycemic spikes?

Curious about that. Foster dog is on high carb/low protein rice and corn food, but I now have permission to switch her to a high protein food. Makes me wonder if there is a connection with her hyperactivity and diet. (she makes my Mal look mellow)


----------



## Connie Sutherland

catherine hardigan said:


> I didn't say fat, I said out of shape. I see a fair number of adult working dogs that look like they would struggle to keep up on a decent run.
> 
> I do, however, see tons of fat pets.
> 
> I'm trying to imagine what some people think when they buy pet food. It must be something like, _"Yes, my JRT is very reminiscent of her timber wolf ancestors... I'll take the $80 bag of venison and tapioca."_
> 
> Anecdotally, all the large dogs I know who've been healthy and active to a ripe old age (13 years and older) have been feed kibble. Usually cheap kibble. The common thread is that all of them were mixes, and they all got lots... and lots... of exercise, not wild caught pheasant and fru-fru berries.
> 
> http://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/abs/10.2460/javma.2000.217.1678



You won't get an argument from me on physical fitness's importance.

Or on the idea that tapioca is somehow better than grain fractions because it allows a banner that says "Grain Free!" 





_"The real issue for most dogs is that their owners feed them to the point of being overweight, and on top of that most dogs don't get enough exercise."_

OK, then, my dogs, non-working Pugs included, aren't overweight or under-exercised.  I agree that both are very important.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

leslie cassian said:


> Can you give some info/links on glycemic spikes? ....


Yes. .... I can do this tonight.






ETA
Sending you a PM.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

I'm a fence straddler on this topic, sometimes I feed raw, sometimes I feed kibble, my dogs dog well on either, but I think these are important points.



catherine hardigan said:


> Anecdotally, all the large dogs I know who've been healthy and active to a ripe old age (13 years and older) have been feed kibble. Usually cheap kibble. The common thread is that all of them were mixes, and they all got lots... and lots... of exercise, not wild caught pheasant and fru-fru berries.





catherine hardigan said:


> I know a couple people with graduate degrees in animal science. This is what they have said: Kibble is fine for dogs unless a particular animal has a genetic issue or metabolic idiosyncrasy. Some dogs (often purebreds) just don't have robust constitutions.


I have no issues with the idea of a raw diet, I'm a believer in feeding your dogs whatever you feel is the best diet. Except that IMO there has been a definite decline in how robust the systems of some of our dogs have become over the years. When people are feeding raw because they feel that's the best diet for their dog that's one thing. But when they are feeding raw because it's the ONLY diet their dog will do well on, that's a completely different thing. And then those dogs are being bred, creating another generation of dogs with the same health issues that their parents had, that require them to eat a specialized raw diet to thrive.


----------



## jamie lind

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I'm a fence straddler on this topic, sometimes I feed raw, sometimes I feed kibble, my dogs dog well on either, but I think these are important points.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no issues with the idea of a raw diet, I'm a believer in feeding your dogs whatever you feel is the best diet. Except that IMO there has been a definite decline in how robust the systems of some of our dogs have become over the years. When people are feeding raw because they feel that's the best diet for their dog that's one thing. But when they are feeding raw because it's the ONLY diet their dog will do well on, that's a completely different thing. And then those dogs are being bred, creating another generation of dogs with the same health issues that their parents had, that require them to eat a specialized raw diet to thrive.


Very good point. Same as not letting a puppy run and jump, so its hips are more likely to be good.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

_"'I'm a believer in feeding your dogs whatever you feel is the best diet. .... Except that IMO there has been a definite decline in how robust the systems of some of our dogs have become over the years. When people are feeding raw because they feel that's the best diet for their dog that's one thing. But *when they are feeding raw because it's the ONLY diet their dog will do well on*, that's a completely different thing. *And then those dogs are being bred*, creating another generation of dogs with the same health issues that their parents had ... "_


This speaks to an issue that bothers me too. 

Canine atopic dermatitis and other allergies, like flea allergy dermatitis, and all that come along with them (chronic ear infections, skin bacteria and skin yeast overgrowths outside the ears that lead to infections when the skin is broken from scratching and licking, and on and on and on, including steroid over-use that can lead to still more chronic conditions) .... dogs who have a hereditary predisposition toward excessive production of IgE antibodies sometimes do much better on raw diets. In fact, IME, some really fail to thrive on a cereal-based kibble.

These dogs should not be bred, IMO.

I think it's hard for someone who hasn't faced the misery (of the dog) and expense (to the owner) of dogs with severe allergies to get that it's as serious as other chronic conditions that a responsible breeder would never breed to.

I've owned four dogs in the past who needed a non-kibble diet as part of the arsenal to control CAD and/or FAD, and I own one now. (I've taken surrendered dogs because I had experience in dealing with allergies, BTW ... I didn't just end up with five allergic dogs in the "luck of the draw" ... that would be pretty disheartening.) 


This is all JMO and partly anecdotal, and I'm not a breeder or a health professional. 



ETA
(Unfortunately, some dogs don't develop allergies until after breeding age.)


----------



## Larry Krohn

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I'm a fence straddler on this topic, sometimes I feed raw, sometimes I feed kibble, my dogs dog well on either, but I think these are important points.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have no issues with the idea of a raw diet, I'm a believer in feeding your dogs whatever you feel is the best diet. Except that IMO there has been a definite decline in how robust the systems of some of our dogs have become over the years. When people are feeding raw because they feel that's the best diet for their dog that's one thing. But when they are feeding raw because it's the ONLY diet their dog will do well on, that's a completely different thing. And then those dogs are being bred, creating another generation of dogs with the same health issues that their parents had, that require them to eat a specialized raw diet to thrive.


That's a very good point Kadi


----------



## Christopher Smith

Kadi Thingvall said:


> ... And then those dogs are being bred, creating another generation of dogs with the same health issues that their parents had, that require them to eat a specialized raw diet to thrive.


Why is the raw diet the specialized diet and kibble the normal diet? Shouldn't that be the other way around? The raw diet is basically what occurs in nature and the kibble is man made.


----------



## Meg O'Donovan

Christopher Smith said:


> Why is the raw diet the specialized diet and kibble the normal diet? Shouldn't that be the other way around? The raw diet is basically what occurs in nature and the kibble is man made.


I think it is because of urbanization and that people can't access the real food as easily/quickly as they once could (farms and forests nearby). Also kibble is more convenient for storage, measuring, etc. You make a good point about how the world has changed. We could ask the same question about how we, as humans, eat (well, maybe not raw, but unprocessed and prepared from scratch is likely not the norm for a lot of people).


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Christopher Smith said:


> Why is the raw diet the specialized diet and kibble the normal diet? Shouldn't that be the other way around? The raw diet is basically what occurs in nature and the kibble is man made.



Practically speaking, most owners feed manufactured dog foods. 

Kind of like manufactured baby formula .... turned the natural course into an anomaly.


----------



## catherine hardigan

Christopher Smith said:


> Why is the raw diet the specialized diet and kibble the normal diet? Shouldn't that be the other way around? The raw diet is basically what occurs in nature and the kibble is man made.


Dogs are not wolves. Yes, they are descended from wolves, but there are a few tens of thousands of years between your dog and his wolf ancestor. Dogs evolved eating human garbage and scraps. Since hominids have been cooking their food long before the domestications of dogs, I'd say that feeding them raw, while perfectly fine, is not better or "more natural." 

Do you eat like a _**** habilis_?


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Christopher Smith said:


> Why is the raw diet the specialized diet and kibble the normal diet?


The "norm" is what the majority does, and I believe the majority feeds kibble.



> Shouldn't that be the other way around?


We should all eat what is most healthy for us, humans and dogs 



> The raw diet is basically what occurs in nature and the kibble is man made.


I collect old dog books and even in photos from "way back when" people were mixing up a kibble/crumble/bread type of food with other items (milk, eggs,meat etc) for large kennels of dogs. As someone else mentioned on this thread the original dogs were eating what people ate, their left overs. Which was probably a lot of meat (cooked) initially, but as people's diets changed to include more grain, veggies, etc the dogs diets would have changed also. I'm not arguing that kibble isn't man made, but more that dogs have evolved to do well on a diet other than the original diet wolves ate.

As far as the raw diet being what basically occurs in nature, IMO an argument could be made that the raw diet as most people feed it really isn't, I don't know to many people who base their raw diet on elk, moose, caribou, rodents, rabbits, beaver, carrion, etc plus berries, earthworms, and other items. I will agree though that chicken, beef, etc is closer to this than kibble.

My point was that I know to many people who feed raw because their dogs can't thrive on anything other than a very specialized diet, only 1 or 2 protein sources, etc. The raw diet is being used to mask health issues. These very specific diets are not IMO a natural diet, not if you are going to compare it to a species who eats pretty much whatever it comes across that is edible. But the real issue IMO is that then these dogs are added to the gene pool, and we have more dogs that have to eat specialized diets to thrive, vs dogs that could eat whatever recently decent food they were given and thrive. 

Give me the choice between two dogs who are equal in other ways, but one can eat an average kibble and thrive, or one who can only eat a raw diet with a single protein source to thrive, and I know which one I'll take every time. But I have the same opinion if we are talking a basic decent kibble vs grain free, salmon and bison only, etc kibble. IMO dogs just aren't as robust as they used to be when it comes to their health, and I think the popularity of a raw diet is one reason why.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Meg O'Donovan said:


> I think it is because of urbanization and that people can't access the real food as easily/quickly as they once could (farms and forests nearby). Also kibble is more convenient for storage, measuring, etc. You make a good point about how the world has changed. We could ask the same question about how we, as humans, eat (well, maybe not raw, but unprocessed and prepared from scratch is likely not the norm for a lot of people).


 
I can't agree with the access argument. Pick any town in the US and I bet I can find many more stores that sell meat than sell high quality kibble. Who need the farm or forest when you have a grocery store? Storage is the only real advantage in my opinion.


----------



## catherine hardigan

Connie Sutherland said:


> Practically speaking, most owners feed manufactured dog foods.
> 
> Kind of like manufactured baby formula .... turned the natural course into an anomaly.


According to the CDC, as of 2009 76% of babies are breast-fed at birth. 47% are still breast-fed at six months.

I do not consider breast-fed babies to be an anomaly. 

I know that back in the sixties and seventies (maybe even the eighties) it was much less common. Maybe it's a generational thing.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

catherine hardigan said:


> According to the CDC, as of 2009 76% of babies are breast-fed at birth. 47% are still breast-fed at six months.
> 
> I do not consider breast-fed babies to be an anomaly.
> 
> I know that back in the sixties and seventies (maybe even the eighties) it was much less common. Maybe it's a generational thing.


_
"I do not consider breast-fed babies to be an anomaly."_


Mine were breast-fed babies (early 70s). But I shouldn't have gone so far off the topic.


_
"Give me the choice between two dogs who are equal in other ways, but one can eat an average kibble and thrive, or one who can only eat a raw diet with a single protein source to thrive ... "_


How did "a single protein source" get in there? 

I've been feeding raw for a loooong time, but not "a single protein source."

This might be a good place to throw in how relatively rare true food allergies are in dogs (only about 10% of all allergies in dogs are food allergies ... regardless of what the GP vet may suggest first for an allergic dog).

Flea allergy dermatitis and atopy are far and away the top two.



But still, if the reason a dog needs a fresh diet to thrive is FAD and/or CAD, then again, I agree that such a dog should not be bred.

But does that mean that raw diets contribute to less robust dogs in general? 
_
"IMO dogs just aren't as robust as they used to be when it comes to their health, and I think the popularity of a raw diet is one reason why."_


----------



## Katie Finlay

catherine hardigan said:


> Dogs are not wolves. Yes, they are descended from wolves, but there are a few tens of thousands of years between your dog and his wolf ancestor. Dogs evolved eating human garbage and scraps. Since hominids have been cooking their food long before the domestications of dogs, I'd say that feeding them raw, while perfectly fine, is not better or "more natural."
> 
> Do you eat like a _**** habilis_?


Having a dairy and possibly gluten allergy myself, I sort of disagree with this. Yes, dogs and people have evolved, but the rise of food allergies in both humans and animals leads me to believe that our digestive systems haven't changed much over time.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Connie Sutherland said:


> How did "a single protein source" get in there?


I threw it in there, to differentiate between a raw diet that includes a wide variety of protein sources and other stuff (veggies, fruits, etc). Basically the type of diet being fed by people who feed raw because they know their dog can't eat chicken, or beef, or whatever, vs someone who is just feeding raw because they feel it's better for their dog than kibble, but not because they are specifically trying to avoid something. I know, I went a little extreme, I originally had "2 protein sources" LOL




> But still, if the reason a dog needs a fresh diet to thrive is FAD and/or CAD, then again, I agree that such a dog should not be bred.


Which is my point



> But does that mean that raw diets contribute to less robust dogs in general?
> _
> "IMO dogs just aren't as robust as they used to be when it comes to their health, and I think the popularity of a raw diet is one reason why."_


I think it allows dogs to get into the gene pool that might not otherwise have been added, allowing them to spread their genes. It's happened in Malinois, 20 years ago nobody I knew was talking about "sensitive stomachs" in Malinois, now it almost seems to be the norm. Not saying this is all raws fault, it's the humans making the decisions, but I do know of dogs who are being bred who can only tolerate rate a raw diet with limited ingredients, but they look great, and work great, and are bred to. And not just a breeding or two, but entire lines. 

It's a human issue at the end of the day, but 15 years ago if a breeder told me "I feed raw" my response would have been "why, what's wrong with your dogs?" Now a breeder or stud dog owner who knows their dog(s) have sensitivity issues can tell people "I feed raw" and people think "because you care for your dogs and want to do the best for them" not realizing if they get a dog from that breeding they may have to feed it raw it's entire life, because it can't thrive on kibble. It's also quite possible the person has no idea their dog can't thrive on kibble, because they believe raw is the best, and so that's what they have fed since the day the dog first came home. And so without realizing it they are perpetuating genetics that don't do well on "the norm".


----------



## Connie Sutherland

I follow that.

I never really thought of it, but I follow it.



I will probably always feed non-kibble food, but OTOH, my dogs aren't in the breeding pool. 



I was thinking "there can't be a solid reason to say 'must thrive on manufactured food to be acceptable' " .... but I kind of get this.



_
"It's also quite possible the person has no idea their dog can't thrive on kibble, because they believe raw is the best, and so that's what they have fed since the day the dog first came home. And so without realizing it they are perpetuating genetics that don't do well on "the norm"."_

And throw in there the fact (again) that many dogs who have not developed allergies *yet *are bred, kibble-fed or no.


----------



## susan tuck

When I fed kibble, I fed Royal Canin, Innova and Canidae, my dogs have had no stomach issues with those foods. I switched to a raw diet in 2005. (green tripe, whole bones from various protein sources, fish, etc.) When I came up to the PNW for an extended visit in 2010, I didn't have a source for all that I need to feed 100% raw for my dogs, so I decided to try grain free kibbles. My dogs got the runs, were gassy, and the stools were gross. So for the duration of that visit (came for 2 weeks stayed for 3 months) I made do with Innova, no stomach issues. Before I moved up here in March 2012, I made sure I could get the same raw sources I fed down in So Calif.. It's a bit more spendy up here, but completely worth it as far as I'm concerned. My dogs look great, have tremendous energy, and go go go!

After what happened in 2007 I'm really happy feeding a diet of my own making, don't have much faith in big kibble manufactures these days.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Kadi Thingvall said:


> Give me the choice between two dogs who are equal in other ways, but one can eat an average kibble and thrive, or one who can only eat a raw diet with a single protein source to thrive, and I know which one I'll take every time. But I have the same opinion if we are talking a basic decent kibble vs grain free, salmon and bison only, etc kibble. IMO dogs just aren't as robust as they used to be when it comes to their health, and I think the popularity of a raw diet is one reason why.


I understand what your saying. But along that same line of logic, do you feed your dogs the worst possible food that they can do reasonably well on?


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Christopher Smith said:


> I understand what your saying. But along that same line of logic, do you feed your dogs the worst possible food that they can do reasonably well on?


I don't feed Ol'Roy  But I don't spend 50+ bucks a bag on food either, currently they are eating food from Costco, a couple are eating the low calorie food the rest the regular food. Which reminds me, I need to make a Costco run LOL I've fed other foods, but in general I'd say I feed an average decent food.

I will admit that I remember when I was in college feeding the occasional bag of Ol'Roy when money was tight, and the dogs I had at the time did fine on it, good stools, shiny coats, etc. For the most part they ate Nutra Nuggets though.


----------



## Jessica Kromer

Ya know... I feed myself and family a healthy, well rounded diet. I prefer produce grown locally with the fewest chemicals possible (usually organic), and local, pasture raised meat (from local farms and butchers); both are available at farmers markets and with a little bit of research. I eat some breads and pastas, but keep it a relatively small portion of my diet. If it comes in a box, it is not kept in stock in my pantry. I keep chickens for eggs and since most of the family hunts we have lots of wild game. I am not Nazi about it, and will swing by the fast food places or chain restaurants weekly and LOVE my desserts, but my kitchen is stocked with natural, whole, and healthy food. Can we eat, and do relatively okay on, processed, boxed foods? Yep, was raised on it  Does it make my friends who raise their kids on it bad people? Not at all, it is a choice that they make for convenience or cost. But based on my research and resources it is what we choose. 

Why would I do less for my dogs? They don't eat raw because the HAVE to, but if a healthier diet _might_ give them a healthier system that is better able to deal with the bad stuff, then I won't complain. They eat seven different sources of meat on a very regular basis (not just chicken) and some of it whole (rabbits and fowl whole with feathers removed for the mess factor). They get kibble as rewards in training. They get kitchen scraps. They probably get into the chicken feed and I know they snack on horse trimmings and droppings (blah!) 

I take in fosters pretty regularly. With out exceptions so far, they are kibble fed. I have not ever noticed a big change in coat, energy, etc once I switch them over to raw while they are here. Maybe they are not here long enough... The only noticeable difference is in stool and that is enough for me! Should the new owners choose to keep them raw fed I will hep them get started, but none have had a problem switching back to kibble either... 

Dunno. I guess I would rather my family and dogs do better on fresh, whole food than overly processed and preserved foods. Most can do well on either, but I would rather they do well on natural...


----------



## Brian McQuain

Kadi Thingvall said:


> I don't feed Ol'Roy  But I don't spend 50+ bucks a bag on food either, currently they are eating food from Costco, a couple are eating the low calorie food the rest the regular food. Which reminds me, I need to make a Costco run LOL I've fed other foods, but in general I'd say I feed an average decent food.
> 
> I will admit that I remember when I was in college feeding the occasional bag of Ol'Roy when money was tight, and the dogs I had at the time did fine on it, good stools, shiny coats, etc. For the most part they ate Nutra Nuggets though.


 
I know a few people who feed the Costco stuff too, and their dogs look and perform great. One dog is an American Bulldog who had all kinds of skin issues until he was switched to that kibble.


----------



## rick smith

re: "Costco" 
do you mean costco is now manufacturing their own dog food ? 
... or they are just having one of the larger pet food manufacturers make it and private labeling it for costco ?

as the big pet food companies buy up the smaller ones, and the big, non food companies want every product to also wear their store logo, it becomes harder to know who is actually making what ...

even in the military, it seems like there are more and more products made by the "military exchange", complete with their own labels and slightly cheaper prices, right next to the well known brands that sell for a bit more.


----------



## jamie lind

Looking at it from a puppy buyer. I'm suspect of a breeder that says to only feed raw, promotes only positive training, reccomends restricting certain activities for their puppys. Do you have to feed shit, do you have to only use compulsion for training, do you have to run the puppies for miles a day? No. but they are dogs and they should be able to handle whatever is thrown at it. If they "NEED" a certain program, they are not breedworthy.


----------



## Joby Becker

rick smith said:


> re: "Costco"
> do you mean costco is now manufacturing their own dog food ?
> ... or they are just having one of the larger pet food manufacturers make it and private labeling it for costco ?



Probably talking about *Kirkland*, made by Diamond I think. 
Another lower cost food I hear good things about.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Jessica Kromer said:


> Ya know... I feed myself and family a healthy, well rounded diet. I prefer produce grown locally with the fewest chemicals possible (usually organic), and local, pasture raised meat (from local farms and butchers); both are available at farmers markets and with a little bit of research. I eat some breads and pastas, but keep it a relatively small portion of my diet. If it comes in a box, it is not kept in stock in my pantry. I keep chickens for eggs and since most of the family hunts we have lots of wild game. I am not Nazi about it, and will swing by the fast food places or chain restaurants weekly and LOVE my desserts, but my kitchen is stocked with natural, whole, and healthy food. Can we eat, and do relatively okay on, processed, boxed foods? Yep, was raised on it  Does it make my friends who raise their kids on it bad people? Not at all, it is a choice that they make for convenience or cost. But based on my research and resources it is what we choose.
> 
> Why would I do less for my dogs? .... if a healthier diet _might_ give them a healthier system that is better able to deal with the bad stuff, then I won't complain. ....
> 
> I take in fosters pretty regularly. With out exceptions so far, they are kibble fed. .... Should the new owners choose to keep them raw fed I will hep them get started, but none have had a problem switching back to kibble either...



This is my preference too.


----------



## Louise Jollyman

I feed mostly raw and have done for 12 years. But when I travel, and I just spent the last month in Texas, I feed Taste of the Wild, my guys can switch between raw and TOTW with no problems. I notice a little better muscle tone and more energy in the older dogs on raw, but they look good on either.

I do also worry a bit about health problems not showing up with some husbandry practices (feeding, vaccines, pesticides) but still prefer to do what makes my dogs look the best. Everyone has to make their own decisions on that, I feed raw and try to use natural products but I also vaccinate a lot due to traveling back and forth to Europe and I also use standard flea/tick/heartworm chemicals.


----------



## jamie lind

For connie-out of the last two breeders I used. One had a list of things I should and shouldn't do, foods I could use, supplements to use. The next I asked what I should and shouldn't do, and was given the answer don't do stupid shit and the dog will be fine. Guess which dog had problems and which didn't.


----------



## Larry Krohn

jamie lind said:


> For connie-out of the last two breeders I used. One had a list of things I should and shouldn't do, foods I could use, supplements to use. The next I asked what I should and shouldn't do, and was given the answer don't do stupid shit and the dog will be fine. Guess which dog had problems and which didn't.


Thats funny


----------



## Connie Sutherland

jamie lind said:


> For connie-out of the last two breeders I used. One had a list of things I should and shouldn't do, foods I could use, supplements to use. The next I asked what I should and shouldn't do, and was given the answer don't do stupid shit and the dog will be fine. Guess which dog had problems and which didn't.


I understand what you guys are saying. Fresh food, long-chain Omega 3s, and other weapons against CAD (and in support of good health in general, IMHO) have helped to return life quality to atopic dogs in my care. Healthy dogs get the same treatment here. 

I guess I'm happy that I'm not a breeder.  No need to defend (or guard against) practices that might cast a deceptive glow of well-being over my dogs. :lol:


(I do get it, though.)


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Joby Becker said:


> Probably talking about *Kirkland*, made by Diamond I think.
> Another lower cost food I hear good things about.



Yes, Kirkland is made by Diamond, or was last time I looked.

It gets a pretty high rating on the analysis sites, too (4 out of 5 .... a rock star compared to, say, the basic Purina or Science Diet).


----------



## Joby Becker

Connie Sutherland said:


> Yes, Kirkland is made by Diamond, or was last time I looked.
> 
> It gets a pretty high rating on the analysis sites, too (4 out of 5 .... a rock star compared to, say, the basic Purina or Science Diet).


I fed a few bags of it, but am not a member of Costco, so did not stick with it when my source dried up


----------



## Larry Krohn

Ok folks thanks for all of you for taking part in this. The reason I posted this was because I have been researching this subject for a long time and really never came to a good conclusion. I can say this, I have two older dogs that have done very well on TOTW and one 1 year old that did TOTW puppy formula for first six months and raw for last six months. I've had the most health issues with the one year old but I don't know if that is diet related. I believe what I will be doing for now is TOTW for all of them supplemented with raw meaty bones such as turkey necks and chicken backs a couple of times a week. I will see how that goes and continue my research


----------



## jamie lind

Totw gave my female problems the salmon and duck would cause her to get hot spots. They would start and stop within a day or two of starting it and stoping feeding it. The buffalo wasn't as bad but she would get a rash on her belly from it. Again within a day or two. Tried orijen which was fine other than her crap was so runny I couldn't pick it up. She does fine with raw and diamond chicken and rice which I now use. No difference at all between the two. My male did fine with all of them. No difference at all other than he stinks more with the diamond than raw. But I think this is because he is a kennel dog and the crap smells worse. My female doesn't smell worse with the diamond over the raw but she is a house pet and doesn't come into contact with her crap. Energy levels and coat never changed with anything other than the hotspots and rash with the female.


----------



## Faisal Khan

I feed this stuff a lot 


























































































...and the stuff that comes in a bag but like I said before no noticeable difference in performance or looks other than poop.


----------



## Martin Koops

Looks like more fun than Kibble!


----------



## Larry Krohn

jamie lind said:


> Totw gave my female problems the salmon and duck would cause her to get hot spots. They would start and stop within a day or two of starting it and stoping feeding it. The buffalo wasn't as bad but she would get a rash on her belly from it. Again within a day or two. Tried orijen which was fine other than her crap was so runny I couldn't pick it up. She does fine with raw and diamond chicken and rice which I now use. No difference at all between the two. My male did fine with all of them. No difference at all other than he stinks more with the diamond than raw. But I think this is because he is a kennel dog and the crap smells worse. My female doesn't smell worse with the diamond over the raw but she is a house pet and doesn't come into contact with her crap. Energy levels and coat never changed with anything other than the hotspots and rash with the female.


Funny you say that because my Mal got a belly rash a lot when he was on TOTW puppy formula


----------



## Noel Long

I read through 12 pages of this thread because feeding raw has really been nagging on me the last year or so as I learn more and raw becomes more popular. I've joined a local raw yahoo group, have all these raw bookmarks. I'm still unsure. Like the OP says, there is no conclusive info.

Post 77 and 112 kinda touch on my hang ups:
1. How do you know the diet is the best nutrition? I'm no nutritionist. Don't know of any long-term studies or any studies at all, just anecdotes. 

2. HOW do you feed raw? Physically, how do you manage raw meat & bones that take a while to consume and leave a mess? Financially and logistically, how do you source it? 

3. Which kind of raw? There is debate within the raw feeders: BARF, prey model (and sects within that), freeze dried, prepared tubs, ...









Overwhelming!



Joby Becker said:


> Probably talking about *Kirkland*, made by Diamond I think.
> Another lower cost food I hear good things about.


Yep Costco's Kirkland is manufactured by the same company and at the same plant as TOTW. $35 for a 40lb bag of Kirkland; $45 for a The difference on the nutrition analysis label of Kirkland potato & salmon and TOTW's potato & salmon is 1% here and there.


----------



## Lalit Dukkipati

http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2013/01/dog-domestication-tied-to-starch.html 

This is a short article - recent study or research-- Diet shaped dog domestication


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Noel Long said:


> I read through 12 pages of this thread because feeding raw has really been nagging on me the last year or so as I learn more and raw becomes more popular. I've joined a local raw yahoo group, have all these raw bookmarks. I'm still unsure. Like the OP says, there is no conclusive info.
> 
> Post 77 and 112 kinda touch on my hang ups:
> 1. How do you know the diet is the best nutrition? I'm no nutritionist. Don't know of any long-term studies or any studies at all, just anecdotes.
> 
> 2. HOW do you feed raw? Physically, how do you manage raw meat & bones that take a while to consume and leave a mess? Financially and logistically, how do you source it?
> 
> 3. Which kind of raw? There is debate within the raw feeders: BARF, prey model (and sects within that), freeze dried, prepared tubs, ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overwhelming!
> 
> 
> 
> Yep Costco's Kirkland is manufactured by the same company and at the same plant as TOTW. $35 for a 40lb bag of Kirkland; $45 for a The difference on the nutrition analysis label of Kirkland potato & salmon and TOTW's potato & salmon is 1% here and there.


1. You follow a diet that has been analyzed and you go for variety. You learn what a diet that is calcium-phosphorus balanced looks like. You understand that the kibble industry knows no secrets that we cannot know as well about canine nutrition. You realize that kibble manufacturers must include enough starchy stuff to enable the kibbling process, but that a starch-heavy food isn't what a dog's system is designed to process (although a dog can certainly thrive on a grain-heavy food, and many certainly do!).

2. You feed RMBs (digestible bones with the meat on them) as the basis, knowing that recreational bones are a separate issue. (That is, marrow bones are not RMBs.) You find a good source of RMBs (probably poultry) and then you introduce the protein variety in the form of the added muscle meat. It's not practical to look for enough RMBs for a dog in, say, a cow. Most folks are going to end up with poultry (or rabbit) for their RMBs and, as mentioned, variety in the MM and other protein additions.

3. You realize that wild canids do eat a small amount of produce, both in the form of the gut contents of small prey (eaten in its entirety) and in the form of fallen berries and even tender young greens that grow next to water. Also, micronutrient requirements cannot be met on a RMB-and-nothing-else diet. They can if you have good access to green tripe, but they cannot with supermarket trays of meat and RMBs. "Prey model" is a misnomer unless it recognizes the rodents, rabbits, etc., eaten in their entirety, gut contents and all.


In 2009 I analyzed the Leerburg recommended sample raw diet. I found that it covered all required nutrients. 

But .... if I left out anything or didn't include the variety recommended, it fell short. To me, this shouted "variety." Variety is a good deal for scavengers, as it is for humans .... variety helps to cover all the bases and also to minimize the effect of something that falls short.

For example, say you are feeding poultry that has been raised on feed that was poorly formulated and yields protein with a limiting amino acid. Well, the added muscle meat from different animals (and maybe yogurt, maybe cheap canned mackerel, maybe frozen sardines, etc.) is going to make up for that limiting amino acid. 

Variety, while keeping an eye on the RMB ratio.* 

There are very good commercial foods these days, and no one feeding a good commercial diet needs to worry about not feeding raw, IMHO. (And there are dogs who for one reason or another are not candidates for raw.) For owners to whom a raw diet is overwhelming (for any reason!), there are good options nowadays. It's no longer just a choice between Purina and Ol Roy.


All JMO, of course!



*Here's a post I made elsewhere in reply to a question on RMB ratios:


_What a good question!

Here is something to have in mind as she devises the raw diet, as a double-check even after she has consulted books and percents and detailed weights:

She should end up with a third to a half of the diet being RMBs. 
_

_RMBs, as you know, are not recreational bones. RMBs are raw meaty bones. Raw meaty bones are soft enough for your dog to chew and eat completely. RMBs are the foundation of the raw diet. (Chicken backs and necks, and chicken quarters or thighs, are all popular RMBs.)

A third to a half may sound a little vague, but here is how you can further define that: If your RMBs are bonier (like back and necks), make them a third of the diet. If they are less bony and more meaty, like chicken quarters or thighs, make them half of the diet. 

This balance can certainly be over time, rather than meal by meal, but for someone looking for simplicity and very little figuring, making each meal a third to a half RMBs can streamline the menu planning.
_


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Here is my dog's diet:

Mackerel (frozen or fresh, but I always store in the freezer after purchase), Sardines (same procedure as mackerel), Rabbit, Chicken, occasional beef and home made soup left overs with raw eggs with shell and salmon oil. 

That's all.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Tiago Fontes said:


> Here is my dog's diet:
> 
> Mackerel (frozen or fresh, but I always store in the freezer after purchase), Sardines (same procedure as mackerel), Rabbit, Chicken, occasional beef and home made soup left overs with raw eggs with shell and salmon oil.
> 
> That's all.



There are a couple of simple tweaks I would make to this basically good and varied diet. 

One whole eggshell has enough calcium to cover two pounds of boneless meat. So people who feed eggs regularly with RMBs probably want to remove most of the shells (or at least, with adults, to watch for hard, dry poops [from excess calcium] that may cause straining; with growing puppies I'd be careful about not overdoing calcium). Also, it has been discovered fairly recently by a Bayer researcher that yolks actually do not contain nearly enough biotin to offset that inactivated by the avidin (a biotin-binding protein) in raw whites. It was long believed that they did contain enough.

Heat deactivates avidin.

I do give eggs; I just cook up a bunch at a time and discard the shells, with the rare exception of times when I might be short on digestible bones, such as having a bunch of cheap or free muscle meat. Then I would use a teaspoon of ground shell for every two pounds of boneless meat.

Of course, you may not be using enough eggs to bother with either of these.


I do want to say to all who give oil supplements (such as fish oil): You will find occasional blistering threads elsewhere about how a dog given therapeutic fish oil ended up with a Vitamin E deficiency. These threads are in the tone of "evil evil fish oil."

Canine nutrition researchers (me too) always stress giving Vitamin E with oil supplements. Otherwise oil supplements can deplete the body's store of E in processing the oil. (There are many threads here explaining E and fish oil, probably best found using _fish_ or _vitamin_ as search terms and limiting the search to this forum [diet and health].)


----------



## Noel Long

Thanks Connie for that knowledgeable response. You mentioned fish oil a couple posts down. Seems many raw feeders also supplements like fish oil, sea meal, various joint supps. 

Is sea meal required when feeding raw? I know kibble feeders who research the food & manufacturer whom I consider great owners and they don't add a bunch of supplements; maybe one joint supp. So why do raw feeders add supplements and kibble feeders don't?


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Noel Long said:


> So why do raw feeders add supplements and kibble feeders don't?




Well, many higher-end kibble manufacturers now emblazon across the bag "Now with Omega 3s !!!

As explained here in detail many times over the years, this is pretty much bull poopy, because they almost always refer to land-plant shorter-chain 3s: ALA (from flax, canola, etc.).

ALA is converted very inefficiently and unreliably by humans to the desirable long-chain EPA and DHA ("the inflammation fighters" would be a fair way to refer to them). Humans have, at best (and not all humans, BTW, have any), about a 5 to 14% conversion ratio.

In dogs, with rare individual exceptions, this is just about zero. Dogs need their long-chain 3s to be delivered to them AS long-chain 3s.

In the days of pasture-fed and -finished slaughter animals and wild-fed hunted animals making up the meat basis of the diet, this wasn't an issue. 

There are other factors, but this one is big.


Marine sources are now the simplest and easiest way to restore some of the 6-to-3 balance.

Remember that Omega 6s promote the development of the hormones that favor inflammation (which is a necessary healing response) and that 3s promote the ones that check inflammation, that keep it from running amok, beyond the necessary healing level and into the chronic pain and damage of the inflammation-triggered (or supported) ailments. These include osteoarrthritis, diabetes, IBS/IBD, periodontitis, atherosclerosis in humans, some cancers, and more. It's hard to think of a chronic ailment that doesn't have a big inflammation component.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Noel Long said:


> I know kibble feeders who research the food & manufacturer whom I consider great owners and they don't add a bunch of supplements; maybe one joint supp. So why do raw feeders add supplements and kibble feeders don't?


I don't give a bunch of supplements. 

Fish oil (and the E I give with it) is pretty much THE supplement for me. (I give a good varied diet for vits and mins.)

It's also the joint supplement I give to all healthy dogs. If and when there are OA changes, then I go into the GAG (glycosaminoglycan) supplements.

All JMO, of course.


----------



## susan tuck

I know a lot of kibble feeders who also feed supplements to their dogs, it's not just a raw feeder thing. Anyway, I feed raw and supplement with Salmon oil & vitamin E.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Connie Sutherland said:


> There are a couple of simple tweaks I would make to this basically good and varied diet.
> 
> One whole eggshell has enough calcium to cover two pounds of boneless meat. So people who feed eggs regularly with RMBs probably want to remove most of the shells (or at least, with adults, to watch for hard, dry poops [from excess calcium] that may cause straining; with growing puppies I'd be careful about not overdoing calcium). Also, it has been discovered fairly recently by a Bayer researcher that yolks actually do not contain nearly enough biotin to offset that inactivated by the avidin (a biotin-binding protein) in raw whites. It was long believed that they did contain enough.
> 
> Heat deactivates avidin.
> 
> I do give eggs; I just cook up a bunch at a time and discard the shells, with the rare exception of times when I might be short on digestible bones, such as having a bunch of cheap or free muscle meat. Then I would use a teaspoon of ground shell for every two pounds of boneless meat.
> 
> Of course, you may not be using enough eggs to bother with either of these.
> 
> 
> I do want to say to all who give oil supplements (such as fish oil): You will find occasional blistering threads elsewhere about how a dog given therapeutic fish oil ended up with a Vitamin E deficiency. These threads are in the tone of "evil evil fish oil."
> 
> Canine nutrition researchers (me too) always stress giving Vitamin E with oil supplements. Otherwise oil supplements can deplete the body's store of E in processing the oil. (There are many threads here explaining E and fish oil, probably best found using _fish_ or _vitamin_ as search terms and limiting the search to this forum [diet and health].)


 
Thanks a lot for your time. If I may just ask one question:

If you're feeding the whole fish (mackerel or sardines) should one be concerned about the amount of calcium/phosphorus intake? 

I find that my pup's energy level on fish and rabbit is much higher than on chicken. Another thing that I've been debating is, whether or not to add salmon oil, if I am giving the whole fatty fish to it.... 


Thank you for your time


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Tiago Fontes said:


> Thanks a lot for your time. If I may just ask one question:
> 
> If you're feeding the whole fish (mackerel or sardines) should one be concerned about the amount of calcium/phosphorus intake?
> 
> I find that my pup's energy level on fish and rabbit is much higher than on chicken. Another thing that I've been debating is, whether or not to add salmon oil, if I am giving the whole fatty fish to it....
> 
> 
> Thank you for your time



Is whole fish a major component?

I feed frozen sardines, canned bone-in mackerel, no-salt canned sardines, occasionally cheap frozen whitefish fillets ..... but the bulk of the diet is RMBs, usually from poultry or occasionally from rabbit, plus muscle meat from different animals. 

If this is a growing pup and whole fish make up more than, say, a quarter of the diet, I'll research the calcium-phosphorus ratio.


No, you don't need to give fish oil on days of feeding oily fish. 



Also, I hope everyone knows never to feed raw salmonids and other anadromous fish (swims upstream to breed) unless they are certain of the provenance and it's not the Pacific Northwest. Salmon poisoning (not an issue for us and other non-canid mammals) is over 90% fatal to dogs. It's easily treated, but the vet often has no idea that the sick dog has been on a fishing trip and had access to the leavings after filleting, etc.

It's usually fish caught west of the Cascades, but has now made its way north and south a few hundred miles.

The fish can have a fairly innocuous parasite, Nanophyetus salmincola. But the parasite itself can be infected with a rickettsia called Neorickettsia helminthoeca. This is the deadly (to dogs) rickettsia. (It's killed by cooking, so canned salmon is always safe from it.)


----------



## Jill Lyden

It looks like feeding an expensive vitamin with flax seed as the base (first ingredient) and no marine sources in the ingredient list yet still claiming "omega 3" content is likely not something that'll benefit my dogs. So, back to just ensuring variety in protein sources and ensuring decent balance between RMB and muscle meat. Occasional raw eggs and adding in some fish oil and vitamin e.  Bet that's cheaper than the stupid supplement I started last month. :evil:


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Jill Lyden said:


> It looks like feeding an expensive vitamin with flax seed as the base (first ingredient) and no marine sources in the ingredient list yet still claiming "omega 3" content is likely not something that'll benefit my dogs. So, back to ..... adding in some fish oil and vitamin e. Bet that's cheaper than the stupid supplement I started last month. :evil:


Well, in its defense (kinda) it may have been meant for vegetarian (non-fish-eating) humans.


----------



## Jill Lyden

LOL Connie - it's marketed specifically for canines. They also do a line for humans and one for horses. I'll ask them specifically about what you've mentioned about dogs not being able to convert short chain omega 3s.


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Connie Sutherland said:


> Is whole fish a major component?
> 
> I feed frozen sardines, canned bone-in mackerel, no-salt canned sardines, occasionally cheap frozen whitefish fillets ..... but the bulk of the diet is RMBs, usually from poultry or occasionally from rabbit, plus muscle meat from different animals.
> 
> If this is a growing pup and whole fish make up more than, say, a quarter of the diet, I'll research the calcium-phosphorus ratio.
> 
> 
> No, you don't need to give fish oil on days of feeding oily fish.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, I hope everyone knows never to feed raw salmonids and other anadromous fish (swims upstream to breed) unless they are certain of the provenance and it's not the Pacific Northwest. Salmon poisoning (not an issue for us and other non-canid mammals) is over 90% fatal to dogs. It's easily treated, but the vet often has no idea that the sick dog has been on a fishing trip and had access to the leavings after filleting, etc.
> 
> It's usually fish caught west of the Cascades, but has now made its way north and south a few hundred miles.
> 
> The fish can have a fairly innocuous parasite, Nanophyetus salmincola. But the parasite itself can be infected with a rickettsia called Neorickettsia helminthoeca. This is the deadly (to dogs) rickettsia. (It's killed by cooking, so canned salmon is always safe from it.)


 
He gets at least one of his daily meals of whole fish (mackerel or sardines). The other is either rabbit/chicken/beef plus the homemade soup. 


Thanks again.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Tiago Fontes said:


> He gets at least one of his daily meals of whole fish (mackerel or sardines). The other is either rabbit/chicken/beef plus the homemade soup.



So about half the diet is whole fish? OK, I'll check. If it's higher in calcium than the range that's OK for growing pups, we can figure out how much of the RMB half will need to be boneless to make up. 

Oh, wait, you said beef. When it's beef, is it boneless? And the other two are RMBs?

And how often is it boneless beef? (That is, if every other day, only the fish part has bones, then that cuts down the calcium coming from that half of the diet by half.)


I can't get to this until tomorrow, but I won't forget.




BTW, an adult dog is able to excrete excess dietary calcium, and also isn't forming bones, teeth, etc. So the calcium-phosphorus ratio for an adult has a lot more wiggle room than for a growing pup.



ETA: This is pretty esoteric, so we are taking it to PMs.


----------



## Larry Krohn

Little update on this post. So when I posed this question my young Malinois was being fed raw and doing well other than inconsistent stools, usually loose. Switched back to TOTW and Instinct kibble for several weeks now and here is the difference I have noticed. The only plus was more consistence stools but many more. On raw it was 1 to 2 a day and on kibble four a day. The shedding is terrible since on kibble and he is drinking like crazy. It has also been hard to keep weight on him on the kibble. One of the more interesting factors is his behavior in the morning. On raw, he sleeps until I get up to let him out usually around 7:00am or later. On kibble he is up by 5:30am and very restless and moving around a lot in his crate. Definitely calmer and more relaxed on raw and he is a very high drive active Mal either way. Plus his teeth look like crap already just from weeks on kibble. Although kibble is convenient and easy I just don't think I can be comfortable feeding it as his main source of nutrition.


----------



## Vinnie Norberg

When you were feeding a raw diet, what were you feeding? And in what percentages? Sorry this thread is way too long to go back and read it all if you already posted this information.

If your only issue with feeding raw was inconsistent or loose stools, that many times can be a result of an unbalanced diet. Maybe it was a lack of bones or lack of fiber?


----------



## Larry Krohn

Vinnie Norberg said:


> When you were feeding a raw diet, what were you feeding? And in what percentages? Sorry this thread is way too long to go back and read it all if you already posted this information.
> 
> If your only issue with feeding raw was inconsistent or loose stools, that many times can be a result of an unbalanced diet. Maybe it was a lack of bones or lack of fiber?


I was feeding chicken, beef, fish, tripe, a little blended vegetables and fruits, but very little. Chicken backs seem to cause the most problems with the stools. It was not always loose but too often


----------



## Faisal Khan

Larry, shedding is seasonal. Many times people mistake the increase (blowing coat) to diet. A dog fed raw will still blow coat when the time is right, if you switch diets during this season the results can be misleading. Water intake is higher as raw is 80% water as compared to 15% or so with kibble so no biggie here, a dog needs a given amount of water to survive, it will ingest it separately or through food depending how much is contained in food. Poop frequency greatly depends on the type of kibble but is the only noticeable difference based on my experiments (unless off course the given dog has issues with any given type of diet then the other is the best for that given dog). Blanket statements are just not applicable if one does his/her homework diligently.


----------



## Larry Krohn

Faisal Khan said:


> Larry, shedding is seasonal. Many times people mistake the increase (blowing coat) to diet. A dog fed raw will still blow coat when the time is right, if you switch diets during this season the results can be misleading. Water intake is higher as raw is 80% water as compared to 15% or so with kibble so no biggie here, a dog needs a given amount of water to survive, it will ingest it separately or through food depending how much is contained in food. Poop frequency greatly depends on the type of kibble but is the only noticeable difference based on my experiments (unless off course the given dog has issues with any given type of diet then the other is the best for that given dog). Blanket statements are just not applicable if one does his/her homework diligently.


Maybe one day when we are too old to care they will do some good long term studies on this subject, or at least we can hope


----------



## Lisa Brazeau

Sounds like not enough bone. Try turkey necks and chicken necks. I usually feed bones in the morning - my dogs seem to digest them better in the morning than at night.


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

So to answer the original question...I switched from kibble to raw just over a year ago. So far I have been very pleased with results (except the price) and I chose Darwin's. 

What I noticed pretty quickly was stools went from pancake batter to small bricks- and less of it.

Itchy skin went away, coat is remarkably shiny and actually stops blowing undercoat when seasons change.

Now I have a question for other experienced raw feeders....

Have any of you experienced kidney problems from feeding a raw, higher protein diet???

I just got back from the vet and there are signs of kidney damage.

I went because my 5 yr old altered male has peed himself in his sleep 2 times this past week, and seems more thirsty than normal.

Urine, fecal, glucose, prostate all fine...just kidneys a bit off.

I brought the nutritional analysis and ingredients of the food and the vet was very impressed and wished he could get more clients to feed like this- but he said to swap 1/4 lb. of the food with brown rice and if it does not stop, then maybe he needs hormone shots.

Any thoughts or experiences???




Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Martin Koops

Have fed raw since 80's (well do fed cooked rice or porridge) never had problem but do vary the types of meat and only use human consumption grade.

My first two Rottweilers went to 12 to 12.5 yoa, current Rotty just over 12yoa but still going albeit slower.
My Malinois is 5yoa no problems.

Could problem be pre existing the change to raw?
Are you using Human grade?


----------



## Ben Thompson

This is a 5 month old thread....


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Then don't reply to it Ben.

Martin,

Yes, it is human grade. I switched to raw for other issues not kidney related and had blood work and organ function tested before hand to use as a comparison. The vets does not want me to change the food or certainly not go back to kibble, but to cut down a bit replace with plain brown rice. He said some dogs just handle the high amount of protein better than others.

I had to increase the amount he is fed about 6 months ago (he gets 2.5 lbs./day now) because he was almost too thin....I am guessing that may have been a little too much.

He thinks if it is just a bit too much protein, then decreasing it should clear this up pretty quickly....if not, he wants to try giving him a little testosterone. We re-check in 2 weeks.

I just wondered if kidneys were ever a concern or issue for others and how you keep it all balanced.


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Sally, I'd like to hear more about this:

_"I brought the nutritional analysis and ingredients of the food and the vet was very impressed and wished he could get more clients to feed like this- but he said to swap 1/4 lb. of the food with brown rice and if it does not stop, then maybe he needs hormone shots."_



I do have a lot of material on protein and the kidneys, and I'll get it pulled up and linked for you tomorrow. 

I'd like to learn more about what the vet's tentative hypothesis is. What hormone injections are we talking about? Erythropoietin? Or ... you mentioned testosterone?... is that still what you meant when you said "hormone shots" ?


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Yes he was thinking testosterone, although some males get estrogen....my dog isn't nuts so testosterone would be fine. 

His first thought was prostate but that checked out fine....since everything was normal other than his BUN and CR his suspects he may be getting a little too much protein. Cutting back seems simpler than hormones so he wanted to do that first.

I will send you a pm with the label I showed him. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Tiago Fontes

Sally Crunkleton said:


> Yes he was thinking testosterone, although some males get estrogen....my dog isn't nuts so testosterone would be fine.
> 
> His first thought was prostate but that checked out fine....since everything was normal other than his BUN and CR his suspects he may be getting a little too much protein. Cutting back seems simpler than hormones so he wanted to do that first.
> 
> I will send you a pm with the label I showed him.
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


 
Something to consider:

Why not fast your dog once a week? You can provide veggie mush that day and allow his system to rest.

My first reaction if I hear this, is to give the dog's system an opportunity to balance itself through fasting once a weeks. All my dogs do well on a fast...I provide veggie mush that day and mostly allow them to relax and go for a nice walk on the mountains. 


Hope this helps, 

Tiago


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Thanks for the suggestion Tiago, I just may try this!


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Sally Crunkleton said:


> Yes he was thinking testosterone, although some males get estrogen....my dog isn't nuts so testosterone would be fine.
> 
> His first thought was prostate but that checked out fine....since everything was normal other than his BUN and CR his suspects he may be getting a little too much protein. Cutting back seems simpler than hormones so he wanted to do that first.
> 
> I will send you a pm with the label I showed him.
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App



Actually, just a link to the food is fine. I was wondering more what the vet's tentative hypothesis is.

That is, in what way the kidney tests are off .... which number(s) in the lab results ... what the testosterone is meant to do ....

I'm not a health professional. I'm just confused, because when I have heard in the past "kidney problems, hormone shots," the hormone wasn't testosterone.

Let me dig up an overview of kidney tests meanings. I'll post a link.


----------



## Catherine Gervin

i find it reassuring to read that other people routinely encounter stools from healthy dogs which resemble pancake batter...my 8 month old female GSD eats Fromm with minimal enthusiasm, so much so that i was mixing Merrick's 96% canned diet and she was very excited about two--and only two--flavors, the duck and the mixed beef. this became a very expensive prospect for us and she is 8 months old, so we switched to duck and sweet potato adult formula kibble and it is somewhat more palatable on its' own. she gets a raw egg in the mornings and she gets sporadic raw scraps but her stomach is extremely sensitive and goes from solid stool to frothy liquid whenever she gets anything else, table scraps, doggie treats, found items of questionable classification, etc. i have never seen a dog be so disinterested in food; my Labrador ate gum off the street and my APBT ate whatever you put in the bowl but this girl has such a sensitive stomach.


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Connie Sutherland said:


> Actually, just a link to the food is fine. I was wondering more what the vet's tentative hypothesis is.
> 
> That is, in what way the kidney tests are off .... which number(s) in the lab results ... what the testosterone is meant to do ....
> 
> I'm not a health professional. I'm just confused, because when I have heard in the past "kidney problems, hormone shots," the hormone wasn't testosterone.
> 
> Let me dig up an overview of kidney tests meanings. I'll post a link.


Maybe I worded it in a confusing manner, so...

Dog has been wetting himself. 

He tested many things and it turns out his BUN and creatinine are both elevated. He meant if those return to normal after cutting some protein and he still is wetting himself- then it may be because he is altered. He didn't say the kidneys and testosterone had anything to do with each other. 

So next visit we recheck all they did yesterday....

What hormone shots do hear of most often with kidney issues? I am pretty sure he said testosterone, or estrogen only if it was because of being neutered.

Here is what he eats...alternating duck, chicken, turkey, and beef.

http://www.darwinspet.com/darwins-raw-dog-food/nutritional-details-chicken/


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Robbie Waldrop

Sally, I have fed my malinois raw for a year now and I have experimented with different foods. I was told that kidney damage can occur if the amount of raw you feed is too much. I was not given an amount. I did learn that it was not good to feed all of the raw after work meaning once a day. I feed a pound of raw with veggies and calcium in the morning and depending on the weight of the dog, I feed 1 to 1 1/2 pounds at night. 

When feeding all raw, the dog tends to lose weight quickly at first, so trying to judge how much to feed is the key. It also depends on working dogs vs. show dogs...calories consumed/calories burned.

Also, just to throw this out there, I did alot of research on raw and I decided to feed Blue Ridge Beef. The prices are the lowest that I have seen and my family has toured the facility where its manufactured. I pay $50 for 30 pounds. Hope this helps.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Sally Crunkleton said:


> Maybe I worded it in a confusing manner, so...
> 
> Dog has been wetting himself.
> 
> He tested many things and it turns out his BUN and creatinine are both elevated. He meant if those return to normal after cutting some protein and he still is wetting himself- then it may be because he is altered. He didn't say the kidneys and testosterone had anything to do with each other.
> 
> So next visit we recheck all they did yesterday....
> 
> What hormone shots do hear of most often with kidney issues? I am pretty sure he said testosterone, or estrogen only if it was because of being neutered.
> 
> Here is what he eats...alternating duck, chicken, turkey, and beef.
> 
> http://www.darwinspet.com/darwins-raw-dog-food/nutritional-details-chicken/
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App



I'm sorry ... I completely missed this part! _Dog has been wetting himself. _ 


Now I see. As far as the elevated values go ..... do you know that the BUN and the BUN/creatinine ratio are statistically somewhat higher in raw-fed dogs?

http://drjeandoddspethealthresource...affect-on-dog-urine-kidney-renal#.UlcIOBxa4zA

http://dogaware.com/health/tests.html#diet

http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/normal-blood-values-and-raw-fed-dogs/


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

Robbie- thank you for that info, and yes it does help. Especially when I get another dog I will look I to that because it would be like another mortgage to feed 2.

Connie- I just got in and have not been able to read the links yet- but thank you! I will be doing that tonight.

I did not know that the BUN/creatinine is expected to be higher, but it makes perfect sense. The vet did not see the need to stop, change, or dislike the food at all- he thought it was wonderful. 

When I first started I was told that a very active dog needs to consume 2% of his weight to maintain.....he got too thin so I added 1/2 pound.....basically I am now taking that away to see if it really is just a little more protein than he can handle. 

The BUN levels did not really concern my vet...it was only 33, but the creatinine being 1.6 was what he didn't like. The ALP was a little ow at 13, but that also is one the vet didn't care much about. His specific gravity from the urine sample was also a little low, but everything else was normal.




Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Connie Sutherland

_"The vet did not see the need to stop, change, or dislike the food at all- he thought it was wonderful."
_

I would supply him with the info about the difference in average values for raw-fed dogs, though. Some vets don't have many (or any) raw-fed patients. They need this info.

It's not something a vet who doesn't have many raw-fed patients would resent. I know I had to supply it to mine, years ago. (She has more raw-fed patients now.)


----------



## Sally Crunkleton

I will Connie, thanks and that's a good idea. After reading your links it propelled another research session. 

I did not know that the sight hounds have a CR of 1.6 which is normal for them.....and you were right, most raw fed dogs have a bit of an elevation in those levels.

I also found some better diet suggestions on keeping the phosphorus down.




Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------

