Jebus . . . I'll read that tomorrow on my lunch break. However, from the little I've seen of it, the rebuttal to that article is from someone who's title consists of "animal advocate" (is there a degree for that? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> ), and arguments are propped up by vapid assertations (along the lines, of "Yeah, right!").

I'll delve into it more in depth later.

I will however completely blow the author out of that water as anyone with any "credibility" with this:

"The only parasite in muscle meat is trichinosis in pork. If you are worried about that, don't feed pork. Round worms, hook worms, tape worms etc are not transferred via the meat or bones. Those things are in the intestinal tract and the eggs pass out thru the feces"

<a href="http://www.biosci.ohio-state.edu/~parasite/echinococcus.html">Guess what, he's dead wrong.</a>

So you see, lay people trying to understand complex biology is not a good recipe for a health based decision.

OK, one more.

"This is neither here nor there. Bottom line, the dog is a carnivore. Period.
They are not designed to eat grains."

So why is it, that Dr. B, and many pro BARF folks are feeding their dogs grain?

YOu see, I spent all of 30 seconds reading that post (I'll read more, I promise), and already I've seen three inconsistencies (didn't list the third). Can't wait to have the time to really analyze.

Well here is at least one part of the debate I can put to rest:

Most if not all dogs come from wolves. But I don’t give this credence to the argument one way or the other. Because most wolves die young compared to captive wolves fed dog food or any other diet.

Recently Swedish scientists traced mitochondrial DNA, which is passed down from mothers to children, to conclude that modern dogs can be traced to at least five female wolves that lived in East Asia about 15,000 years ago. During four years of study, the researchers saw common factors in hair samples from more than 500 different breeds around the world.

Peter Savolainen, a senior scientist at the Swedish Royal Institute of Technology who conducted the DNA study, says the main reason for so many breed types is do to the enormous interest in breeding that swept across Europe after the middle Ages. I will point out that those dogs did not live as long as dogs today. And they did not have commercially balanced dog food. At the same time their veterinarian skills were not very good either.

Actually - Ann wrote one book about the evils of kibble and promoted feeding home cooked food.

Ann's second book was about the evils of kibble, and she suggested feeding home cooked again. The second book had 1 chapter on the dangers of raw feeding, and had other chapters on dangers of over vaccinating, cancer treatments, alternative treatments etc. She has never supported raw feeding.
Originally posted by Cindy Easton Rhodes:
this article is old news. If you notice they are promoting books....by Ann Martin.

She wrote one book about feeding raw and then another about how dangerous raw feeding is...

hmmmmm.....seems like she is trying to sell books to everyone..

And what about all the grain in kibble? Does that not break down into complex carbs and then sugars in the dog? In fact the grain puts a tremendous strain on the pancreas which is the leading cause of diabetes and pancreatitis in dogs today.

Again, I then have to wonder why people feeding their dogs a raw diet . . . are also feeding their dogs grain?

Aaron, it has to do with comfort level. My idea of a good time is raw meringue or a rare steak. I wouldn't have a problem feeding raw liver (although it is a little rich for Auster and the cat to have too much) or lung, but you obviously have issues with it so don't get your undies all bunched up over it. With a raw diet you have enough freedom to feed your dog what you feel is best. With kibble you just feed a processed pile of who knows what.

It actually takes a whole lot longer IMO to find a 1/2 decent kibble for your dog than to prepare a good raw diet. With kibble you have to accept or reject the whole thing, but with home made you can take out and add to suit your individual dog. I have a dog with a lot of sensitivities and if I followed your logic and just fed kibble because it was "balanced" she would be dead.

See, there ya go again. It's either raw or kibble. For someone so fond of the diversity of a home prepared meal, I would think you could appreciate those two options are far from the only ones available.

What about home prepared (and thus customized) that's cooked? The argument about "destroyed enzymes" MIGHT be a valid one . . . if only one of you advocates would be able to tell me which enzymes that would be.

As far as my undies. Well, they are in a bunch. However, that's hard to avoid when they're swirling around in the washer. All this talk about "raw" this and that has reminded me that it's laundry day, and if I don't get on it, the contents of YOUR dog's dish won't be the only raw meat around here.

 Quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Seydlitz:
As far as my undies. Well, they are in a bunch. However, that's hard to avoid when they're swirling around in the washer. All this talk about "raw" this and that has reminded me that it's laundry day, and if I don't get on it, the contents of YOUR dog's dish won't be the only raw meat around here.

lol...That was funny. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Originally posted by Aaron Seydlitz:
Again, I then have to wonder why people feeding their dogs a raw diet . . . are also feeding their dogs grain? Not ALL raw feeders feed grains. I do not. I know plenty others that also do not.

The dog diets can be compared to the many human diets out there... the zone, atkins, sugar busters, fit for life, the good old food pyramid, weight watchers. Just try and find any of those that will agree on all the foods a healthy person should eat, and I will be betting there will be some snow in hell on that particular day.

All dogs are different, all people are different. What works for a husky won't necessarily work for a pug. Why when people want to bash the raw diet they act as though we all feed the EXACT same way is beyond me....there are as many varieties of raw diet as there are raw feeders.

For starting the thread with what seemed be be a sincere interest, you have been incredibly negative throughout the thread....

Go unwad yourself and wash up... this thread is starting to smell.

Aaron,

A healthy third of that article is just strawman argumentation. I mean, I like insults as much as the next guy, but there's a time and place and these aren't even amusing.

In the rebuttal section, I'm at a loss as to what exactly the author is even rebutting...or whom. I.e. "Myth; dogs are carnivores". She must be concocting a non-existant BARF prototype against which to make her case, because I've never heard any such out-of-context assertion in any of my own BARF reading.

Furthermore, being that it's a rather general creed spanning any number of variations, I don't think respective represenatives speak on behalf of any other. Surely, there are more and less substantiated cases, respectively, made for feeding RAW, but it's not quite valid to pick and choose the stupidest ones and use them as represenatives in a conglomeration of out-of-context rebuttals.

As for the whole lifespan argument, does she not realize that wild animals don't get modern veterinary care? That pets aren't at the whim of draughts, wildlife cycles, and violence?

And I see her sources are quite the scholars too. Some guy who owns a wolf-dog comments:

 Quote:

Pomeranians, corgis, labs, jack russells (for example) and most of the other breeds we have today did not evolutionize from wolves over thousands of years.

Is that what animals do? Evolutionize? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

And it just goes on from non-sequiter to non-sequiter involving tooth angle, skull shape, etc etc.

She also keeps coming back to remind us that wolves eat more than muscle meat (and so should dogs). No kidding. Who is she rebutting exactly? Though go figure, she also keeps noting that dogs aren't even comparable to wolves in the first place. So which is it?

I could go on and on. Point is, this woman is a hack...not that I have a problem with dissenting viewpoints. It's just that hers happen stupid and contradictory. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />