PS

I don't recommend raw feeding to anyone who isn't comfortable with it. You can feed a good diet using using commercial products.

And you don't have to decide right now, as you say.

But I do think you really want a vet who will support you when/if you decide to make the switch. (For one thing, I personally feel that a knee-jerk reaction to all raw feeding, regardless of care and research, isn't a good indication of what I want in a vet.)

BTW, as we've discussed here before, many vets are simply (and appropriately) concerned about random unbalanced raw diets. Even the worst crap in a bag kibble is usually calcium-phosphorus balanced.

My own vet is not a raw fan. A large part of this is exactly that fear. But she knows how much care goes into the diet my dogs get, she knows I know about canine nutrition, and she has said more than once, "I cannot argue with your results." She would never give me one of those auto-reflex "it's the raw diet" answers about a health problem. Sometimes (maybe lots of times), this is the best you're going to find.

Again, Big Kibble has a huge financial investment in supporting and controlling the nutrition curriculum at vet schools.

First I'd like to say thanks for all the responses, not only in this thread, but the other one I have going. This site has been a wealth of information and helpful people.

Kennedale is basically dallas, which is about 4 hours away from me. I'll check the link Tracy posted when I get home since the links on that website are not working on my cell phone.

I do believe that a raw diet managed properly will be better for Ziva and don't want to give up on it. I just hoped to find a vet close that I could depend on. Connie, I think every one I talked to that mentioned the food they suggested was science diet.

On a humorous note, I explained the diet to one vet whose answer was... If it was good for your dog, Purina would make it.. I hung up on that one!

"Connie, I think every one I talked to that mentioned the food they suggested was science diet."


This is a big problem for me. This is a corn-based food. It's a waiting-room food, as I'm sure you know. (BTW, some vets do carry GOOD commercial foods for sale.)

There is no analysis site, no independent source anywhere, that has SD anywhere near the top of the list. With few exceptions, the websites that analyze and review commercial foods place SD almost as low as Purina.

Here's an example:
http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-reviews/hills-science-diet-dog-food-adult-dry/

QUOTE:

"The first ingredient in this dog food is corn. Corn is an inexpensive and controversial cereal grain of only modest nutritional value to a dog. ... For this reason, we do not consider corn a preferred component in any dog food. .... The second item lists chicken by-product meal, a dry rendered product of slaughterhouse waste. It’s made from what’s left of a slaughtered chicken after all the prime cuts have been removed. .... In a nutshell, chicken by-products are those unsavory leftovers usually considered “unfit for human consumption”."

QUOTE:

"Bottom line? ... Hill’s Science Diet Adult is a grain-based dry dog food using only a modest amount of chicken by-product or lamb meals as its main sources of animal protein, thus earning the brand 2.5 stars. ... Not recommended."

No one who even just glances at the ingredient list can actually look at this bag of food and say "Ah, yes. Perfect ingredients for a dog." IMHO, there HAS to be a reason other than actual belief in the ingredient list for saying "this is the food I recommend."

I did talk to a couple of vets who recommended against it, but said it was ultimately my decision. I felt like while they may not approve it, they wouldn't condemn me for it either. I've got a few more to call, but I will probably end up with one I talked to extensively who was very nice about it. Right now I'm feeding her blue buffalo wilderness, which was given 5 stars on the site you posted about dog food ratings. Oddly enough, that site gave most of the thk products 4 stars.

While THK is balanced and can be used as a stand-alone (all but the novel-protein base version), that's not how we (and even they, on the package) recommend using it for most healthy even reasonably active dogs.

It would have 4 stars because of the ratings being based on the THK without the add-ins. This, of course, significantly lowers the meat that the dog is getting WITH the add-ins. Even then, it's always enthusiastically recommended.

You'll recall my saying "THK with RMBs."

Good thing to bring up .... we'll have to try to remember that dehydrated foods that recommend add-ins are going to be rated based on the food alone on analysis sites.

 Quote: James Childress

I did talk to a couple of vets who recommended against it, but said it was ultimately my decision. I felt like while they may not approve it, they wouldn't condemn me for it either. I've got a few more to call, but I will probably end up with one I talked to extensively who was very nice about it. Right now I'm feeding her blue buffalo wilderness, which was given 5 stars on the site you posted about dog food ratings. Oddly enough, that site gave most of the thk products 4 stars.

I really think that all you need is a vet who is respectful of your decisions and willing to be honest and frank with you. Ie, "I don't recommend it because of XYZ, but the choice is up to you" is fine by me.

I honestly don't think I've ever said anything specific to my vet about my dogs being raw fed. It's marked on their files when they go in for a check-up, but my dogs are always in great shape at their check-ups and the vet has never said anything one way or another about their diet.

IMO what you really need in a vet is someone who will be available if your dog is hit by a car. Someone who likes dogs and is well educated and has some years under their belt.
Someone with a quality Xray machine and decent anaesthesia, with a tech who knows how to handle dogs. Someone who is AVAILABLE to you when you need help.

There are 50 dogs with diarrhea/vomiting seen every week in standard small practices, and 95% of those are because stupid owners fed them something ridiculous.EG let dog eat the pan of 1 week old roast chicken, including the foil. Or rotten bratwurst, rotten hamburger, raw. People demand you put their dogs to sleep because it puked on the carpet AGAIN. They don't want to pay for another course of Flagyl for an 80 lb dog.

You talk to a vet who doesn't know you and mention raw food he thinks to himself this is going to be a dog with diarrhea and vomiting. Diarrhea and vomiting are euthanizing offenses in many homes, right up there with no housetraining and biting as causes for an early request for euthanasia.
So I'm sorry for the rant, but nobody cares what you feed your dog, as long as YOU don't make your dog deathly ill and then want US to fix it. Dog Chow may kill your dog slowly, but it's unlikely to kill it overnight, which is in fact the thing that does happen when your average pet owner starts feeding their dog" things it likes" that they have heard are "good for it".
Get someone who you like who knows medicine and takes night call. That is what you need.

Good point of view Dr. Betty.

My major vet and I were discussing raw diets one day and he said he does not recommend it to his patients merely because most people will not do the research that he feels is necessary in order to feed it successfully.

One of the minor vets I go to tells me it is only a matter of time before one of my dogs is having surgery because I will feed them raw chicken with bone. She strongly disagrees with the practice, says she has done surgery too often on dogs.

<shrug> I feed both kibble and raw. A lot of people on this board disagree with THAT practice.

Guess my point is that no matter what you do someone is always going to disagree with you. You have to do the research and do what is right for you.

If a vet is knowledgeable about different diets is not something that is really important to me. While it is something that comes up in the intake process it is not something I really see myself discussing at length with the vet.

I've been thinking about this thread more, you know the only times I can really think of that a vet has asked me what I fed was in situations where they were noting healthy things about my pups or healthy shiny coats on my adult dogs.

I've even had a vet ask what worming protocol I use on my pups because I was the only breeder that she never found worms when doing puppy fecals.

So I'm thinking if you dog is healthy, looks healthy, your vet is not really going to be concerned with what or how you feed.

Is it that important that your vet be knowledgeable or supportive of a raw diet? Are you looking for one that would give nutritional advice on it or recommendations on what to feed?

I'd really like to apologize for my rant last night, I was overtired and pissed off about something else!

Please don't take offense, no insults meant, vets should be more open to raw feeding,
it is a problem for clients who are educated and wish to offer the best to their dogs.