backed by scientific study??

[jiml]

Welcome to the board. >>>>>

thanks. glad to be here.

While I may disagree w some of what you say. from what i have read I prob agree more than not.

[jiml]

Being a HUMAN doctor I have to think that with the greater amount of "holistic" vets and the increase frequency in some of them to recommend raw diets or higher meat based foods along with the expanding "premium" dog foods and prepared raw that research IS going on. Most research in medicine is not done by the big universities and big pharma. Its done in controlled case studies. when a few point in a direction It then is taken and followed up by larger groups.

I will argue not to outright dismiss any research (even if its backed by a dog food company and does not support the conclusion you want) just log its results, possible bias, the quality of the study (size, efforts to eliminate a pre-determined outcome). No single study really means a whole lot. Its only after a few studies combined (sometimes pieces of each) w observation do the have meaning.

It seems to me at this point most is opinion based stating such "raw is makes evolutionary sense" or "wolves live longer when fed in captivity with dog food"

An example would be this Cautions Against Raw Food Diets If looked at purely from a scientific standpoint w no bias towards raw or kibble one would say interesting. obviously had conclusions that supported the studies author's product, poorly done.
interesting, log the result, take with a grain of salt until more research supports the conclusion.

Anyway I simply have to believe that many case studies are in the works. Ultimately its up to the individual to weight benefits and potential risks(with the best info available) of any diet and make a choice.

[dobesgalore]

Just a head's up...my friend is in vet school up in Madison.
She told me that her nutrition textbooks (along with some other textbooks) were written by a major dog food company.

Not a good, holistic one either, obviously. :(

I also have a friend about to graduate from Auburn vet school in Alabama, and she said she has only had part of one semester in pet nutrition. Thats it. Vets don't get a whole lot of that in schooling. We know more about it than they do.

[jiml]

Vet school, if like med school, gives you the basis to understand nutrition by giving you the background in physiology, biochemistry ect. Most everything else is post graduate which is guided by the individuals interest

[RawFedDogs]

An example would be this Cautions Against Raw Food Diets If looked at purely from a scientific standpoint w no bias towards raw or kibble one would say interesting. obviously had conclusions that supported the studies author's product, poorly done.
interesting, log the result, take with a grain of salt until more research supports the conclusion.

I've been feeding raw for 8 years and began after a year of my own research. So for 9 years I've been seeing Lisa Newman's articles against raw feeding while pushing her own products. I don't buy anything she says any more than I buy the marketing material from the dog food companies.

I always view with suspicion any information given to me by someone who stands to make money from any decision I make based on this information.

In this particular aritcle that you linked to, she is "studying" a BARF diet which is not the diet most of us feed. BARF diet in general contains a lot of inappropriate foods for carnivores. It includes about 20% or more of carbohydrates. The BARF diet as recommended also contains too much bone and not enough meat.

Most of us here feed a Prey Model Raw diet. It's made up of meat, bones, and organs from a variety of animals. Mostly meat, some bone, and some organs.

Anyway I simply have to believe that many case studies are in the works. Ultimately its up to the individual to weight benefits and potential risks(with the best info available) of any diet and make a choice.

I really don't know of any studies at present and I don't think you will find any studies on any raw diet. Who would benefit from such a study? I think if you stay around here you will see our "study".

We do the same as scientific researchers. We take an animal, we do something different, and we observe the results. All of us raw feeders have done this. Many of us more than once. We take a kibble fed dog, switch him to a raw diet and observe the results. Overwhelmingly we find great improvment with the raw diet. Very rarely someone will have to switch back to kibble for one reason or another and then they observe those imporvements disappear.

One more good test. Join a lot of groups like ours. You will see many posts saying, "I am switching my dog to a raw diet ......". You will see very few posts saying, "I switched my dog to a raw diet and it didn't work and I'm switching back to kibble." You will also see a lot of posts saying, "I switched to raw because my dog had XYZ problem and after a short period the problem disappeard (or got significently better)." Again, rarely will you see, "I switched my dog to a raw diet because he had XYZ problem and he got worse on the diet." I can't remember seeing one of these ever.

[ruckusluvr]

i fed BARF for a while, and switched back to kibble after 4 months. my dogs lost weight and looked like crap.

but thats not PMR, so i cant comment on that.

[jiml]

Who would benefit from such a study?>>>>>

As stated - most case studies are practice based. with more vets advocating raw, you will start to see it in the literature.

[jiml]

A quick look at Pub MEd shows quite a bit of research regarding various aspects of a raw diet, biodegradability of byproducts, even some controversy in the vet field. However its $20 a pop to read them

[John Rambo]

I am a scholarly man, and that being said i would "tend" to believe that feeding a raw diet is more natural and healthier than feeding kibble. However, I do believe kibble has come along way, and I feed my dogs kibble. My animals coats are shiny with no signs of scaling or flaking of the skin. I do believe this forum is for debating/learning/sharing knowledge of KIBBLE, not the advantages or disadvantages of RAW diets. On a sidenote, I would love to hear if the people feeding their dogs RAW diets ever eat Mcdonalds, Wendys, drink milkshakes, ect or anything else deemed BAD by society. I would hope all these people have sculpted bodies!!!! It does seem as if the raw diet folks seem to constantly be defending/promoting themselves. I would say to try to stay on course and post in the correct forum. Once again, I do believe a raw diet is more natural and beneficial, lets just post in the correct places and let others who feed kibble learn in this forum...

[DaneMama]

Actually John, this forum is the "catch all" here where anyone can chat about anything pertaining to diets and nutrition, regardless of if it's raw or kibble. People who want to discuss and learn about kibble should look in the kibble section or here. People who want to discuss and learn about raw should look in the raw forum and here.