On the Ann Martin thing . . . she has also written books that have exposed the commerical kibble companies shortcomings. Which kinda blows the "kibble kick backs" out of the water. Unless of course she was selective in her bashing.

Any study can be slanted to make the person doing it look good! I personally look at common sense and the dogs nutritional needs and my decision is made for me.

We all seem to feed ourselves and our families without resorting to a bag of processed pellets, why can't people break away from the idea that they can't feed their pets without pouring nuggets from a bag they buy at the vets office? The advertising industry has us brainwashed to think we must feed a bowl of 100% complete and balanced kibbles to our pets or we are letting them down... I say, think for yourself and do the research. If you are waiting for someone to do it for you then you may be waiting a while.

Even if you don't convert to raw, homecooked is light years ahead of kibble, hands down.

Processed foods aren't good for people or dogs! I don't know who can argue that, no matter where they stand on raw feeding! (I hate the term BARF)

homecooked is light years ahead of kibble

I totally agree. However, it's raw feeding that I'm looking into.

 Quote:

Originally posted by Cindy Easton Rhodes:
Any study can be slanted to make the person doing it look good!

Sorry, but that's a weak argument. Good luck getting a "slanted" study published in the prestigious peer-reviewed veterinary medical journals. That's where I've gone looking for evidence that raw diets are healthier for dogs. So far, I've found nothing to support the claims.

I did find this though:

Can Vet J. 2002 Jun;43 6:441-2. Joffe DJ, Schlesinger DP.
Preliminary assessment of the risk of Salmonella infection in dogs fed raw chicken diets.

Abstract: This preliminary study assessed the presence of Salmonella spp. in a bones and raw food (BARF) diet and in the stools of dogs consuming it. Salmonella was isolated from 80% of the BARF diet samples and from 30% of the stool samples from dogs fed the diet. Dogs fed raw chicken may therefore be a source of environmental contamination.

Laura

Aaron, the parasites issue is really a non-issue for most BARFers. The dog is many times more likely to get parasites from eating rabbit poop in the yard than from fresh human grade meat. If you drag home a carcass and let it rot on the lawn for a few weeks or feed a lot of wild game I might be concerned, but not with regular meat. FRom what little I have heard, most wolf sanctuaries that feed raw meat use roadkill because of the cost issue. feeding roadkill and fresh human grade meat aren't the same.

Environmental concerns are another point that's causing me some hesitation. I have a two year old, and a pregnant wife. My wife can't change the litter for our cats due to the risk of exposure to toxyplasmosis. Which is also found in the feces of dogs fed a raw diet. As far as I'm concerned, my wife, child and unborn child rank a tad higher than my dog. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I'll start looking into the homeCOOKED diet for my rottie . . . but I think I'll leave the BARF diet to someone more willing to accept the risks.

Originally posted by Laura Sanborn:
Sorry, but that's a weak argument... Salmonella was isolated from 80% of the BARF diet samples and from 30% of the stool samples from dogs fed the diet. Where's the control group? Kibble fed dogs have salmonella in their stool as well. Now that study looks like a weak argument to me (unless they have done a lot of unmentioned control group testing under the same conditions)!

 Quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Seydlitz:
My wife can't change the litter for our cats due to the risk of exposure to toxyplasmosis.

Toxoplasmosis also comes from unwashed vegetables! The only way to completely avoid any risk is to eat well done meet, canned veggies, and live in a bubble <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> . On the contrary, it takes 24 hours to become infectious after it leaves the cat. If it is the same in the dog (check first), then as long as you bag the poop it doesn't pose any threat.

Originally posted by Lauren Woods:
Kibble fed dogs have salmonella in their stool as well. What percentage of dogs fed kibble have salmonella in their stool?
What is the source of your information?

Laura

True, in fact you can find salmonella and E. Coli EVERYWHERE. However, it's the concentration that causes the concern. Just because you can find these two everywhere doesn't mean that YOU should eat raw chicken.

Found <a href="http://www.workingdogs.com/vcbarf.htm">another</a> good article on the topic. It seems fairly balanced.

One thing I found particularly interesting:

"Instead of making proper investigations or simply being honest and admitting their ignorance of BARF, they make a series of assumptions and parade those assumptions as if they were scientific fact" - Dr. Billinghurst

This is completely false. I've received this article:

March 1, 2001 (Volume 218, No. 5)
Timely Topics in Nutrition
Evaluation of raw food diets for dogs
Lisa M. Freeman, DVM, PhD, DACVN, and Kathryn E. Michel, DVM, MS, DACVN

It goes into laborious detail on a lab analysis of three home style raw diets, and two commercial ones. Deficiencies were found in all five.

It simply illustrates that Dr. B seems willing to make broad sweeping claims with zero evidence, which I find unsettling.