Hello from a 2nd year vet student

[RawFedDogs]

You're very welcome. This thread is 6 months old, I'm not about to move it now.

[runwiththewind]

Too bad I'm 6 months late :). There's great info and no one will ever know what was said due to the positioning of it. Oh well.

[smexywhales16]

Why did you even start this discussion if your not prepared for an argument?
Your on the "raw diet" forum, will be against kibble all the way. There's no need to call people fools,in a way we're both backing up our claims with
proof and "scientific study".
Also as a vet its your job to inform your clients of all their options not completely oppose them.

[runwiththewind]

After reading the above comment, I went back to try to read all the posts. I didn't know this is a "raw diet" forum. I assumed people feed raw or kibble. Dog Food Chat to me means just that and doesn't limit the forum to "raw". Am I wrong?


"Why do zoos and wolf sanctuaries feed wolves raw meat?"

Not all do.
Gray Wolf Facts - National Zoo| FONZ

Chicago Zoological Society - Mexican Gray Wolf

This discussion came up on another forum. The person posting was a Researcher and worked with wolves. Apparently he did work for Discovery as well so I'm assuming his info is correct. He said some of the zoo’s use foods like Orijen and Evo. The wolf park in Indiana uses Taste of the Wild and Evo along with a lot of deer meat.

[RawFedDogs]

The discussion group "Dog Food Chat" is here to discuss feeding dogs. The particular forum this thread is in is the "Introduce Yourself" forum so discussing any method of feeding is acceptable in here. There is a raw feeding forum as well as a canned and dry food forum. You should stick to that particular type feeding in those forums.

Just because one or more zoos feed their wolves a particular way doesn't make it right. Both those articles indicated that wolves are carnivores. Kibble are highly processed "food" that contains a lot of inappropriate ingredients for a carnivore. These zoos feed kibble because its easier, cheaper (they think), and they feed what is donated to them. That doesn't mean that they feed what's best for the animals. I know Wolf Park only feeds kibble when they don't have deer meat. Most of their available deer meat is road kill.

[xellil]

When I was at Wolf Park, they didn't say they fed dry dog food - they said it was roadkill and donated freezer burned meat and aborted calves donated by farmers - it sounded like they get alot of meat like raw feeders do.

This person - DogAware.com: Wolf Park - writes that they only feed them three times a week. He also says they eat alot of rotten meat because of the carcasses not being entirely eaten at one sitting, which is interesting to me because some people think the "seasoning" meat gets from contact with the soil contains essential things dogs need.

I guess it makes sense they would feed dry dog food when they have no real meat, so as not to let the wolves go hungry. But I bet they don't like it, nor think it's ok to do that on a regular basis. Those folks really know their wolves.

[runwiththewind]

"Your on the "raw diet" forum, will be against kibble all the way. There's no need to call people fools, in a way we're both backing up our claims with
proof and "scientific study".


Thanks Bill for clarifying it for me. The above comment threw me off a little.

[Mondo]

Just joined the forum and just read this thread. Very informative. I did do some Googling on the book "Small Animal Clinical Nutrition". Interesting find:

Small Animal Clinical Nutrition book / Mark Morris Institute

Karen M. Just an FYI -
I purchased the SACN, 4th edition recently for some research. A few interesting things popped out (okay, one I checked on Google):
1. Mark Morris Institute (publisher and contributor) is an arm of Hill'sPet Nutrition ( http://www.vet.ksu.edu/index/awards/2002/frey.htm).
2. An interestingly large number of contributors to the book as a whole,and a majority of the contributors to the pet food sections work or worked for either Hill's or MMI.
3. Only large industry brands were studied in the book - Eukanuba/Iams,Purina, Hill's, and Nutro.
And, on a less factual note (more my opinion) it made people interested in making homemade diets look largely like unintelligent paranoid dolts.

As a whole, I was unimpressed with the pet food section. I was really looking forward to some unbiased, clinical information on different types of pet diets.
I won't respond to any flaming posts, but if anyone who has/has read this book wants to rationally discuss their views on this reference book, I would be interested to hear (read) your thoughts.

[sef183]

I just realized that this is an old thread but Im going to post anyway :)

I guess I'll share a related event that happened today- I am a groomer and I actually work in a vets office. Well, we had a "lunch and learn" today sponsored by Hills. The first ten minutes she talked about misinformation on food labels (I agree) and how all the untrustworthy companies get around them (somewhat agree). Then she began on how there is no difference between organic and regular foods (huh?), how corn is not just a filler and that it is very digestible and good for your dog (almost choked on my lunch), and that dogs are true omnivores that need carbs in the form of grains in order to be healthy and balanced. The really bad thing was that EVERYONE accepted and applauded what she said wholeheartedly, no questions asked! Even the vets were disparaging of all the products mentioned (some of whom were actually not bad companies) and they always promote Science Diet. My mother and I lost our Golden in the '07 recall, which is why I have been studying nutrition for 5 years, and this kind of blind acceptance can't be ignored anymore. I believe that a lot of schools are starting to have better nutrition classes but some aren't so we all basically have to promote doing your own research into this area and to avoid blind faith.

[Celt]

I read a book called Feed your Dog Right. It goes into details of various dog diets (kibble, can, homecooked, BARF, and rmb). In one section, it mentions the book: Small Animal Clinical Nutrition which they said was written by a Hill's offshoot company. In it, after copious amounts of warnings against homecook, the authors then make the statement that for owners who want to avoid various "bad" ingredients, they provide a generic (extremely generic) example "recipe" that is super simple.
Side note: I don't really reccommend this book though, some of it is really good but there's a lot I don't agree with. Even if the overall message is to feed your pet what your pet thrives on and that you're comfortable with.