# Benefits of Raw



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Raw is probably the best way to feed dogs for many reasons. 
1. Mainly, their stomachs were not built to digest cooked meat because when you cook meat, you kill the enzymes on the meat that the dog's body needs to digest it efficiently. So now in order for the dog to digest the food, it needs to take enzymes from other parts of its body to digest the food that no longer has these enzymes. This is called "enzyme robbing." http://www.knowbetterdogfood.com/news/?action=view&nid=16

2. When you feed them raw meat, they can process it easier and derive more nutrients from it, thus producing a happier, healthier canine friend. 

3. Processing it easier includes the wonderful side effects of the dogs pooping about once a day at the most, this poop will dissolve back into the ground after about four or five days of sitting out in the elements. Less clean up for you!

4. Dogs fed raw eat the bones of the meat which naturally helps clean their teeth, which naturally keeps their breath odor down. This also saves you uncountable amounts of money in dental treats and products, cleaning, and care. 

5. Your dogs will reflect their inner health outwardly, meaning they won't shed nearly as much or have that certain "doggy odor" about them. 

6. You know exactly what your dog is getting and you don't have to shop around for that perfect bag of food that has everything you want in it or one ingredient you really don't want. You can monitor your dog's in take of ingredients and add or subtract them as you see fit. 

7. When your dog's body is no longer focusing all of its other enzymes on digesting its food, then the body can then use those enzymes for what they are intended to do, which is naturally keep your dog healthy and build a strong immune system, thus saving you money on vet bills and medicine.

Check out Rawfeddogs' website for more information: http://www.skylarzack.com/rawfeeding.htm

Or if you prefer other sources: http://www.living-foods.com/articles/rawpetfood.html
http://www.barfworld.com/
http://www.dogsofthenorth.com/BARF.html
http://www.njboxers.com/faqs.htm


----------



## Guest (Jul 23, 2008)

*I would suggest books.*

I find them to be a bit more reliable as anyone can have a website but it's a little harder to get a book published.

I think there may be a list of books on this site somewhere???

I would suggest starting with Dr. Goldstein's "The Nature of Animal Healing" and then read the books he lists in the back. (Most public libraries carry this book.)

"The Whole Dog Journal" is another good source for food info.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

zentrainer said:


> I find them to be a bit more reliable as anyone can have a website but it's a little harder to get a book published.


I disagree. I find it very difficult to get a reliable book on raw feeding. The only one I've read that comes close is "Work Wonders", by Dr. Tom Lonsdale. Most of the other authors seem to have a product or products to sell.

It is very easy to publish a book in today's world. Many people are doing it. There was a time that when a book was published there would be a certain number of copies printed. When those were gone, they would print more (the 2n'd printing) then there would be the 3rd printing etc. They would print up several thousand copies in each printing. 

Today, most publishers print up books as they are sold. Got orders for 20 copies of a certain book? Print up 20 copies. Got an order for 3 copies? Print 3 copies. Modern Technology.

Self publishing is real common today also and you can't tell that the book is self published.


----------



## Guest (Jul 24, 2008)

*Books*

Dr. Goldstein's book is published by Alfred A. Knopf, Inc - not exactly a self publisher.
It was published in 1999. A bit before you started feeding raw. Dr. Goldstein doesn't sell anything.
Allen Schoen's book is published by Simon & Schuster, again, a bit before your time, 1995.
Pitcairn's book is published by Rodale Press, again in 1995. At that time, when I bought my copy, 200,000 copies were sold.
I'm not sure when Billinghurst published his first book.
These are the biggies. The forefathers of health for pets. They don't sell a thing and everything in their books is sourced.
There are web sites I like but they tend to be very established, don't profit from food in any way and source their material.
I don't go to roysrawfeeding.com


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

zentrainer said:


> [Dr. Goldstein's book is published by Alfred A. Knopf, Inc - not exactly a self publisher.


I think maybe I didn't do a good job of making my point. You made a statement that it was much easier to make a web page than to publish a book. I simply demonstrated how easy it is in today's world to publish a book. It's not difficult. I wasn't making reference to anyone in my statements.



> They don't sell a thing and everything in their books is sourced.


BIllinghurst has copyrighted the term "BARF" and now manufactures and sells BARF premade raw patties.



> There are web sites I like but they tend to be very established, don't profit from food in any way and source their material.
> I don't go to roysrawfeeding.com


You mean like these?
http://rawfeddogs.net/ 
http://www.rawlearning.com/
http://www.rawfed.com/myths/


----------



## pgnation (Sep 21, 2008)

I'm not commenting on the "raw or not discussion" but rather the book publishing vs. website creation.

I could make a new website for or against Raw Foods by tomorrow and have it 100% working and professional looking. With as little as $100/year (with paid hosting .. or 10/year for a domain with free hosting) Which is CONSIDERABLY easier to do.

A book takes not only the time, but the credibility. Nobody is going to "fact check" and take my website offline if my facts are right... But if a book has incorrect facts, citings, errors, etc. I'm more than likely to have to put a LOT of work into it to get the publisher involved and get going. You've got to go through a lot more than just simply "writing" and publishing. Heck, if I'm plagarising in my book, then I get sued and my book is discontinued ..

While I don't know about writing and publishing a book, I wouldn't think as to compare it to being "as easy as a website."

I think those statements were pretty bland and incorrect to say.
-------
PS: I'm a webmaster for myself and a few others, so I do know how easy it is to make a website.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

pgnation said:


> I'm not commenting on the "raw or not discussion" but rather the book publishing vs. website creation.
> 
> I could make a new website for or against Raw Foods by tomorrow and have it 100% working and professional looking. With as little as $100/year (with paid hosting .. or 10/year for a domain with free hosting) Which is CONSIDERABLY easier to do.


Ok make one about pro-raw feeding. Can't wait to see it.



> A book takes not only the time, but the credibility. Nobody is going to "fact check" and take my website offline if my facts are right... But if a book has incorrect facts, citings, errors, etc. I'm more than likely to have to put a LOT of work into it to get the publisher involved and get going. You've got to go through a lot more than just simply "writing" and publishing. Heck, if I'm plagarising in my book, then I get sued and my book is discontinued ..


You aren't familiar with self publishing are you?



> While I don't know about writing and publishing a book, I wouldn't think as to compare it to being "as easy as a website."


Well self publishing is pretty easy to do since the invention of the computer. 



> I think those statements were pretty bland and incorrect to say.
> -------
> PS: I'm a webmaster for myself and a few others, so I do know how easy it is to make a website.


I created web pages for a $50 Billion international electronics manufacturer for 5 years. I know how difficult it is to make a real interactive website with millions of hits/day. So what does that prove? Nothing.


----------



## pgnation (Sep 21, 2008)

What does it prove?
... That you're stubborn and are "always right" in your own mind?
It might be easier to self-publish with the pc invention... but what about the copier?...

And I'm not wasting my time nor money to show you something that you obviously "know about" ... 
Have you published any books?


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

pgnation said:


> What does it prove?
> ... That you're stubborn and are "always right" in your own mind?
> It might be easier to self-publish with the pc invention... but what about the copier?...


It proves that I have many more years of experience than you do and in much greater depth. You should try to learn from me rather that argue.



> And I'm not wasting my time nor money to show you something that you obviously "know about" ...
> Have you published any books?


Actually I have 3 friends that have. I know how they did it.


----------



## Kyle2008 (Oct 13, 2008)

Proponents of a raw food diet swear its benefits make it worth the switch from cooked food. However, if you’re eating a traditional diet you’re probably wondering what’s so bad about cooked food?
_______________________________________
Kyle
Send Red Roses loans with no credit check casas vilafranca mp3 ringtones


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Excessive waste and killing of naturally occurring enzymes that could otherwise cause us to be in better health in some foods?
We can live off of cooked food and indeed our bodies have adapted to it over the last few thousand years we've been eating it. We aren't saying dogs can't live off of cooked food, simply that raw is the best, and most natural way to feed a carnivore that's been eating raw food since its creation and has only very recently started eating cooked food. That's not nearly enough time to develop an entirely different digestive system.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

rannmiller said:


> Excessive waste and killing of naturally occurring enzymes that could otherwise cause us to be in better health in some foods?
> We can live off of cooked food and indeed our bodies have adapted to it over the last few thousand years we've been eating it.


Obviously dogs manage to live off cooked food because the majority do live off kibble which is cooked. Of course raw whole food is much more nturitious for a dog. 

I know people who will argue that the same is true of humans. I know several people who never eat cooked food. I had on lady tell me she had eaten raw hamburger meat since she was 5 years old. She never cooks meat or anything else for her own family meals. I can't say that she is wrong.


----------



## Kyle2008 (Oct 13, 2008)

Raw describes a material that is in its natural unprocessed form, or has not had the final stages of processing. Raw food refers to food that has not been cooked, and raw silk is the term for unprocessed silk. Raw also has symbolic meaning. See Claude Lévi-Strauss's The Raw and the cooked.
==============================
Kyle
Our mission is to provide high quality end to end solutions to the BPO segment in a manner that will improve the operational efficiency while reducing the cost of the services to the client.
[email protected]


----------



## LoveNewfies (Jun 18, 2008)

I know several people that eat only whole, raw foods themselves. Admittedly, most are vegetarians but some are not and do eat their meat raw. They have done so for years and have never become ill from consuming anything raw.

I equate this to a friend of mine that works in a daycare who barely ever contracts any virus that's going around the daycare. Exposure to some viruses and bacteria builds a natural resistance and can make a body stronger. 

Raw is indeed what every being was created to eat. After all, we invented all things that cook, process and store food. If we were brought up and lived our lives under the same premise that some of us take with our dogs and eat only what is completely natural and unprocessed, we would very likely be just fine consuming some bacteria on a regular basis as our bodies would be acclimated to it and be able to handle it just fine. Of course, those born with immune disorders may have to capitalize on our processing and cooking inventions.

We have destroyed our own immune and digestive systems with our incessant need to sterilize, overcook and process everything in our lives.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

LoveNewfies said:


> We have destroyed our own immune and digestive systems with our incessant need to sterilize, overcook and process everything in our lives.


Any bacteria that doesn't kill you is good for you.


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Could you feed raw food to infants though? I thought their immune systems were pretty weak at first. Of course, how else do you expect to toughen them up?


----------



## LoveNewfies (Jun 18, 2008)

As nature would have it, human babies would nurse for quite some time. Longer than most do these days. From there, they would be weaned onto whole, raw foods. When one is exposed to such things from the beginning, one's system, including immune system, would be acclimated to such....just as our systems are acclimated to cooked, sterile foods.

On the same note, bacteria that are naturally present would naturally not be a problem - our bodies would be strong enough for them to NOT be a problem - therefore, antibiotics wouldn't be required to kill these bacteria, and these bacteria would have no need to mutate and become stronger and more resistant.


----------

