I'd like to share a recent experience that I had feeding BARF. It has caused me to become a great deal more cautious about the diet, although I am not giving up on it. But it's obviously not as simple (or safe) as I thought it was from reading the various "authorities."

I've been feeding both my dogs green tripe AM and meat/veggie puree plus bones (turkey necks, chicken backs, or ostrich necks) in the PM. About a month after beginning the BARF diet, my GSD bitch developed bloody diarrhea and stopped eating. My supposition is that I overloaded her with too many bones--my larger male has had no problems--and they lacerated her GI tract. (I suspect it happened when I gave her several small turkey necks rather than one big one.)

Easily solved, as it turned out. A course of antibiotics and Tagamet cured her, and she's back on kibble until she's fully recovered. (It could have been worse, obviously!) Now I'll feed her bones less often when I put her back on the diet.

This was a reminder for me that BARF is not foolproof--dogs are individuals and their diets must be too.

One thing I noticed, however, that has me even more concerned is that her Blood Urea Nitrate (BUN) level is a bit over the high end of normal (it's 28, instead of between 7 and 27). This is a indication of how hard her kidneys are having to work to digest all the protein in the BARF diet.

Obviously, then, if I want to avoid blowing out her kidneys 10 years out or so, I've got to give her more veggies, more fat, or both. Anyone with similar experience? Or any recommendations?

Dave, was the BUN reading done when she was sick or just because. It is possible that the other problems she was having had something to do with it. If that was taken when she was under stress you may want to consider having it checked again during a more normal time. It can even change a little bit from one blood draw to the next.

Just my .02 worth....

Dr. Ian Billinghurst was just a guest on the Canada BARF list. He came on for a week and aswered everyone's posted questions, a real treat!

Your one problem is very easily solved. Grind the bones. I give my dogs ground necks/backs the butcher does for me. (I asked and he said yes).

HOw long have you been feeding BARF? If your dog is not able to digest the protein or is having to work overtime to do this, help your dog out! Give them enzymes. There are several powder ones on the market (the cheapest is Canna-dase). Or you could use some in a pill form from the health food store. There are several different kinds. I would recommend animal enzymes to help break down the protein from the meat etc.
Another thing to remember is that when you give ground bones, the dog does not have to work as hard to digest and break down the proteins. This process has already been started by having it ground, therefore your dogs body is not working as hard.

It is doubtful that your dog would 'blow' her kidneys out in 10 yrs. if you stuck to this diet as she would gradually start to produce more enzymes to break down the protein on her own. (unless there is something more going on in your dogs body that you are unaware of)

You are right that every dog is different and its needs are different.

Tripe is a good choice as it is loaded with enzymes. I always start my puppies when weaned on tripe.

How do you know that your dog lacerated her GI tract?

Dave,

If the BUN was the only renal test out of whack, it is more likely that the dog was dehydrated. If the urea and creatine are ok then you are looking at dehydration for sure. BUN is a function urea/unit of blood, if the dog is dehydrated the Urea goes up in proportion to the other components, when the dog re-hydrates the number will come back down. I work in medicine and this one thing we use for identifing dehydration in patients.

Dr Jean Dodds and Dr Billinghurst agree that elevated BUN levels in BARF fed dogs is normal and OK.

Also from Billinghurst (just a FYI), "Blood Urea Nitrogen is present in the blood as a result of the metabolism of
protein. The more protein that is metabolized, including being used for
energy, the higher the BUN."

I remember reading several years ago an article about protein and kidneys. It basically stated that high protein doesn't damage kidneys, it is already damaged kidneys that have a hard time digesting proteins. Don't forget, too, that most of the studies done on animals have been done on animals that have spent thier lives eating kibble.

Lisa--an interesting point.

Shandar--grinding the bones is certainly an option, but I was hoping not to, since it's my understanding that chewing up whole bones is particularly good for their teeth.

As for how I knew she had lacerated her GI tract, what else is likely to cause bloody diarrhea?

Enzymes: if the BARF diet is so "natural," why would you need to add enzymes? <g> I'd rather adjust the diet using other foods. And enzymes can also digest your dog's GI tract--they don't know the difference. I'm told there was a case where enzymes were added to pig feed and the pigs developed ulcers. So I'll save that as a last resort.

Richard--a good comment. I'll have the vet fax me the whole panel and let you know. I'll also have another panel run after she's back on full BARF, and then decide how to modify the diet.

In the meantime, I'm going to emphasize chicken backs as the bone source: the bones are softer, I think, and there's more fat on the pieces. I'll probably cut down on the ostrich meat, too, because it has almost no fat in it at all.

BTW, I'd like to comment on something else from another topic now closed, and that's the furor that developed over Chad's postings. I found them very useful: the addition of "book knowledge," esp. as regards how to use medical tests to verify how one's dog is responding to BARF, is something I'd rather not do without.

All knowledge is empirical; Chad's offense in the eyes of some on this board, it seems to me, was his insistence (natural for a scientist) on the importance of scientifically-verified data, rather than the anecdotal information that most of us rely on.

Anecdotal info is, of course, also empirical--in fact, Ed's wealth of empirical yet anecdotal information about raising and training dogs is one of the reasons most of us originally came to this board.

Ed, what I mean by saying that your information is anecdotal is simply that you've never run _controlled_ experiments on your dogs--that would require leaving some of them as controls and sacrificing their welfare to the scientific method. None of us could do that. Instead, we try things and observe carefully the results compared to former results, on the same or different dogs, which means there are many variables (the individual nature of each dog, for instance, or changes as they age, etc.) that we can't account for. The knowledge gained is valuable and real, but not as "precise" as the results of the scientific method. So I think we should be grateful for the scientific insight that Chad and people like him furnish, taking it as one more data point in our search for the best for our dogs.

My dogs for the most part only get ground bones, and their teeth are pearly white. It is actually an enzyme that the body produces that cleans the teeth. This enzyme is released when they eat raw meat. Now, for most dogs, eating and chewing bones is still something very enjoyable.

An infection can cause bloody dirreahea. Most times, when one sees blood in the stool (was it bright red?) it is often actually from straining and not from the GI tract.

Yes, enzymes are natural to the BARF diet but you have to remember that dogs that have been fed kibble for generations have had to produce them. This is how it was explained to me by a veternarian who is pro BARF and in fact has never fed kibble to his dogs.
"the stomach has a host of little "bugs" (for lack of a better word as I can't remember the one he used. ) The job of these is to take the food it is given and break it down and digest it. Dogs who have been fed kibble have not had a need for many of these things. Therefore, many have gone to 'sleep'. When you start to feed raw food, all of a sudden those that were working are not able to do all the work. Gradually as the dogs body adjusts more and more are woken up to do the work that they were intended to do.

In the meantime, for some dogs you may need to help the body along. So much really depends on the individual dog, it's parents , and so on.

My dogs are on 2 and 3 generation fed raw. I know longer need to add enzymes to break down their food, but I did in the beginning with some of my older dogs. It is giving the body a boost start. Enzymes are vital to good health. It would only seem logical to help the body along initially if that is what is needed to sustain health and get the most of thier food. Once you have fed your dogs raw for several generations you will see the difference.

(note we have not even touched the subject of vaccinations and how that can affect healthy absorbtion of food).

Another mistake that some people make when initially starting to feed BARF is not feeding enough red meat. This is vital!!!

Aiko--

That's good to know about your experience with ground bones. Anybody else here feed ground bones?

An infection was ruled out as the cause of bloody diarrhea (it was brick-colored)--there was no indication of an elevated white blood cell count or any other marker for infection.

I have a problem with your statement that "once you have fed your dogs raw for several generations you will see the difference." If you mean that raising puppies on BARF will mean they're used to it from the get-go, well OK, of course.

However, if you are implying that there's a genetic adaptation taking place that's passed from parent to child that increases their enzyme supply because the parent ate BARF, I can't accept that. That's called Lysenkoism (the inheritance of acquired characteristics), and it was discredited more than half a century ago, except in the very narrow case of viral modifications of genetic material.

But maybe I misunderstood what you were saying.

My dog used to get bloody diarhea on kibble. He suffered with EPI and my vet said the blood was from the intestinal inflammation. So she might not have her GI lacerated, merely very inflammed.

Lanegirl--

I suppose it could have been "merely" inflammation rather than laceration. Regardless, it wasn't something good, and I don't want it to happen again!