Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural diet?
#91519 - 12/07/2005 01:10 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 09-19-2005
Posts: 111
Loc:
Offline |
|
I searched and couldn't find the answer. If this has already been discussed, please point me in the right direction. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
I've always fed kibble. I usually stick with the "high end" stuff, but it's still stuff most of you would frown upon (commercially available stuff like Eukanuba, Science Diet, etc.) I've considered raw, and may go that way one day, but can somebody explain to me why RAW meat is better than cooked meat? All animals have parasites in them (even us). It seems that from a health standpoint, cooking the meat would be best. Cooking kills most parasites and bacteria that CAN cause serious health problems. I understand the theory that raw is natural, but there are lots of things in nature that are less than healthy.
Second, ingesting bones may not cause problems for most dogs. But knowing that it COULD cause blockage, if you avoid feeding bones to a dog that eats a natural diet, is his diet going to be severely lacking any vital vitamins/minerals/nutrients/proteins? I know many dogs eat bones without a problem. But like somebody posted recently, many dogs eat greenies without a problem but there are those rare cases where a dog dies from a blockage caused by greenies.
Any input would be appreciated. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />
|
Top
|
Re: Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural d
[Re: Ryan Burley ]
#91520 - 12/07/2005 01:21 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 09-14-2005
Posts: 843
Loc:
Offline |
|
eukanuba and science diet are pure garbage. especially science diet. yeccch. sorry. that is not my idea of a "high end" dry food. there are dry foods that are considered to be better quality: california naturals, and innova, to name two.
raw is better than cooked because cooking kills the natural enzymes in the meat. parasites can also be killed by deep freezing, and if you are feeding human-grade meats from a butcher, you shouldn't have to worry about it, they are inspected for parasites when they are slaughtered.
bacteria is rarely an issue for dogs. there is salmonella EVERYWHERE--its on your floors, in the soil in your yard. you can't protect a dog from bacteria, and it doesn't affect him like you and me anyway.
bones don't usually cause blockages, but too much bone without also feeding a balance of veggies and organ meats can cause impaction of the stools. the remedy is to feed organ meats and veggies on a regular basis.
however, dogs have died from asphyxiation from inhaling kibble. nothing in life is 100 percent safe.
bones are an essential ingredient in the canine diet, and a diet without bones is unbalanced and unhealthy. it's important, btw, to also feed ground eggshell to provide the right balance of calcium. i grind up whole eggs in the shell along with his ground up veggies.
what do you mean by "greenies" ? are you talking about those revolting things they sell at petsmart? or are you talking about veggies? i've never heard of a dog getting a blockage from eating vegetables. quite the opposite, it helps clean him out.
working Mastiff |
Top
|
Re: Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural d
[Re: alice oliver ]
#91521 - 12/07/2005 01:49 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 09-19-2005
Posts: 111
Loc:
Offline |
|
Eukanuba and Science Diet are "high end" when you're talking about food that is easy to find. I'm talking about stuff I can find at most pet stores. Obviously, I'm not talking about specialty food and I know there are plenty of better dry kibble diets out there, but honestly, I don't know enough about the subject yet to know the difference. Not to mention the fact that the "garbage" as most people refer to it makes up 90% of my 3 dog's diet and just about everybody who sees my dogs comment on how good they look (healthy coats, muscular/athletic build, etc.).
I'm familiar with human nutrition, and the enzymes found in fresh fruits, veggies, nuts, grains, etc. Seems strange to me that raw meat would contain any enzymes that carnivores/omnivores would need. I'll have to look more into that.
What about tapeworms? Or other common parasites found in raw meat? These aren't going to kill your dog overnight, but parasites are generally not good for you.
The "greenies" I was referring to are the ones they sell at Petsmart. I've never bought them, but I was using them as an example b/c someone was discussing it here just recently ( Greenies - Danger). I'm not saying they're good, just that anything ingested in large chunks can cause problems (even if it is rare). Seems like bones could cause similar problems.
|
Top
|
Re: Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural d
[Re: Ryan Burley ]
#91522 - 12/07/2005 01:53 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 11-27-2005
Posts: 297
Loc:
Offline |
|
I dont know how it works but it does. I've tried feeding kibble only and even with supplementation dogs didnt do as well as raw. Not to mention its cheaper for me. In the long run I believe dogs will do better in what Mother Nature intended for them. I mean dogs do well on it even without supplementation and vitamins added, would they on a diet of cooked meat and carbs (no added vitamins, etc.)?
|
Top
|
Re: Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural d
[Re: Ryan Burley ]
#91523 - 12/07/2005 10:07 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 05-20-2002
Posts: 389
Loc:
Offline |
|
First off, any properly supplemented homemade diet will be better than kibble. A raw diet, which is natural for carnivores to eat is better. To save time, allow me to post a link which may answer many of your questions:
Raw diet info
BTW, cooking food is a human thing! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />
Maggie |
Top
|
Re: Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural d
[Re: Maggie Baldino ]
#91524 - 12/07/2005 11:19 AM |
Webboard User
Reg: 04-29-2004
Posts: 3825
Loc: Northeast
Offline |
|
I freeze & then thaw & feed all my meats and bones. I feel that if there is a chance of any parasites in the food,BTW, the same food that I would eat myself, this will kill it. Raw diet is better for dogs, but must also be properly balanced to be healthy otherwise you can do more harm than good. There are better kibbles....but Innova, Evo, California Natural, as mentioned are 3 of the top ones. Also the new dehydrated raw that Ed sells...Honest Kitchen is excellent...It is available at the very better pet shops localy or as I mentioned Ed sells it. I use it as a supplement several days a week along with ground veggies & other suppliments in my dogs' diets. But it can stand alone as a diet if you wish. This has been discussed at length rencently. Do a search to find the links.
MY DOGS...MY RULES
|
Top
|
Re: Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural d
[Re: Ryan Burley ]
#91525 - 12/07/2005 12:04 PM |
Webboard User
Reg: 08-06-2005
Posts: 615
Loc: San Diego, CA
Offline |
|
As I just said in recent post, I've been feeding the raw diet for about 6 years, 5+ yrs. for one GSD and a few months for a new one. My eyes still glaze over when I start reading all the info there is out there about the pros and cons of the diet and how to determine the "right" balance.
The info on this web site and all the links posted by others will give you plenty to read. I researched 'til I was blue in the face, but there was one thing that convinced me I was doing the right thing - my dogs. After I switched:
- a couple years of the older dog's skin problems (w/ frequent scratching/chewing) cleared up in days and I stopped all medication for whatever dermatitis he had. Coats on both dogs look and feel healthier than they ever were;
- their energy level increased significantly;
- doggie breath (it should be called "kibble" breath) is gone;
- their teeth are whiter than mine;
- their poop volume went way down and it soon turns into a powdery white waste as opposed to the puddling-like fillers from kibble.
They always get good health reports from the vet, who does not recommend the raw diet "from a medical standpoint." Make the switch for a couple months and try it out. There's always plenty of kibble on the store shelves if you decide to go back.
Suppose you were an idiot.
Suppose you were a member of Congress.
But I repeat myself.
-Mark Twain |
Top
|
Re: Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural d
[Re: Mike Armstrong ]
#91526 - 12/07/2005 12:38 PM |
Webboard User
Reg: 09-14-2005
Posts: 843
Loc:
Offline |
|
i was a skeptic, too. the vet advised against it. certain breeders advised against it. i tried it for two reasons: 1. the breeder of my puppy only sells to those who commit to feeding a raw diet, and she was the breeder i wanted. and 2. my older dog's health was terrible, no matter how high quality the kibble was i put him on. he was a complete mess.
my pup's breeder said she would not try to convince me, but she asked me a few questions about my older dog:
1. does his breath smell?
2. does he get frequent ear infections?
3. is his coat greasy?
4. does he have doggy odor?
5. how's his energy level?
6. do his stools stink?
the dog had chronic ear and eye infections, smelled horrible, was unthrifty, had huge stinky stools, and his vet had just told me that he had an autoimmune disorder that was rotting out his teeth and gums and all his teeth would have to be pulled.
i mean, what did i have to lose? it was my idea to try the diet as the pup's breeder guided me for two months. this would enable me to find out:
1. how much trouble was it?
2. how expensive was it?
3. how did my dog respond to it?
i could always go back to kibble and give up getting her puppy if i didn't like it. for any reason.
i will tell you that after two weeks, the improvement in my older dog was immense. i realized i would never, ever return to processed dog food. this was a dog who had been to the vet twice a week for as long as i had owned him. there was always something wrong with him. the change in him after the switch to raw was nothing short of miraculous.
first of all, he never needed to go to the vet any more. tons of savings right there! secondly, he just loved his food--it was a joy to watch him eat. thirdly, when i did take him in, about six weeks later, to have his teeth and gums checked on, the vet was in shock. beautiful teeth and gums. she demanded to know what i had done. when i told her, she said "that's dangerous!" i quickly found another vet.
just try it. you may never go back to science diet. (bleechh!!!)
working Mastiff |
Top
|
Re: Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural d
[Re: Ryan Burley ]
#91527 - 12/07/2005 12:58 PM |
Webboard User
Reg: 10-20-2005
Posts: 335
Loc: Long Island
Offline |
|
You can find the real high end stuff at a feed store. Tractor Supply stores are all over the place. I feed Innova Evo; it's a raw diet in kibble form. If they are out of it, I switch to one of the varieties of Wellness. Before I knew there was a such thing as a feed store I was feeding food from the grocery store <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> I won't even mention the brands, I didn't know any better.
I feel the same way you do about the possibilities of blockages and bones shattering inside the dog. I attempted to start my dogs on a raw diet, against my bad feelings, because so many swear by it. My males turned their noses up at it. They're used to cooked and seasoned food. My female ate the chicken leg, but then threw up and was choking. It scared me, so I immediately gave up the raw idea. The benefits can't be disputed, BUT, I don't think there's much difference in cooking meat and feeding it. If you want to feed bones, you can cook chicken all day and the bones will crush under your fingers. I talked to a neo breeder and she told me she puts chicken, sweet potatoes with skin, carrots, and other misc. vegetables in a pressure cooker for hours until the bones are easily crushable. I do that too, but usually feed whatever we're having for dinner in addition to the Evo.
The parasites you are speaking of I don't think are transmittable to the dogs, unless you're feeding animals you've hunted and are giving them the innards, because they're not processed for human consumption. I heard you'll need to deworm a lot. One of my concerns was salmonella transfering to one of us thru the dogs saliva (licking). It just didn't seem hygenic to me. But letting the dogs give kisses isn't hygenic either <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
Look into Evo, and also the dehydrated food Ed sells if you're interested in switching. Tractor Suppy stores have a variety of different foods. Stay away from beet pulp, corn, and white grains is what I stick by.
|
Top
|
Re: Is RAW really necessary when feeding natural d
[Re: Barbara Erdman ]
#91528 - 12/07/2005 01:18 PM |
Webboard User
Reg: 09-14-2005
Posts: 843
Loc:
Offline |
|
barbara,
does evo have any kind of grains in it? that is one of the big problems with any processed food: dog's digestive tracts were not designed to handle grains. from what i have heard, it is not possible to create kibble without grain. if it is a raw diet, then it would have to be dehydrated raw food, which i believe would have to be reconstituted with water would it not?
if it is a dehydrated raw food, i'm going to look into it for backpacking. if it has any grains in it, i will not touch the stuff.
for all those reading here: NEVER NEVER NEVER FEED COOKED BONES OF ANY KIND TO A DOG NO MATTER HOW LONG YOU COOK THEM. cooked bones splinter. they are very dangerous.
working Mastiff |
Top
|
When purchasing any product from Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. it is understood
that any and all products sold by Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. are sold in Dunn
County Wisconsin, USA. Any and all legal action taken against Leerburg Enterprises,
Inc. concerning the purchase or use of these products must take place in Dunn
County, Wisconsin. If customers do not agree with this policy they should not
purchase Leerburg Ent. Inc. products.
Dog Training is never without risk of injury. Do not use any of the products
sold by Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. without consulting a local professional.
The training methods shown in the Leerburg Ent. Inc. DVD’s are meant
to be used with a local instructor or trainer. Leerburg Enterprises, Inc. cannot
be held responsible for accidents or injuries to humans and/or animals.
Copyright 2010 Leerburg® Enterprises, Inc. All rights reserved. All photos and content on leerburg.com are part of a registered copyright owned by Leerburg Enterprise, Inc.
By accessing any information within Leerburg.com, you agree to abide by the
Leerburg.com Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.