# The Difference?



## skadoosh

What is the difference between an obligate carnivore and a scavenger?? Or maybe I'm looking for the difference between an "obligate carnivore" and a carnivore...
This article was fascinating-- 
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_john_r_m_070505_are_dogs_carnivores_3f.htm


----------



## Tobi

An Obligate carnivore cannot create essential amino acids such as Taurine on their own. Cats, and large cats are in that group. Conventional carnivores such as Dogs can create these, They are still absolutely carnivores, but they are much more inclined to eat whatever they want if food is scarce.

It is curious though why they haven't evolved to create their own yet... likely because they have no need, they are such keen adept hunters that they can really just catch food when they need, unlike cumbersome wolves and dogs in comparison.


----------



## skadoosh

No one is going to comment on the length of the intestinal tract compared in cats and dogs. Seeing as this is one of the main parts of a raw feeders theory on why they are physiologically created to process only meat I'm surprised no one has commented on it. 
Also why aren't dogs compared to bears? They are relatives. Raccoons are considered carnivores, they certainly don't sustain themselves on a primarily meat diet...? Why not?
I started to question the whole "but wolves are a dogs relative and THEY are doing it". Bears, foxes and hyenas are also related, why don't we imitate what they eat?? Sometimes I wonder why people who feed full PMR raw don't question these types of things....


----------



## skadoosh

Tobi said:


> An Obligate carnivore cannot create essential amino acids such as Taurine on their own. Cats, and large cats are in that group. Conventional carnivores such as Dogs can create these, They are still absolutely carnivores, but they are much more inclined to eat whatever they want *if food is scarce.*
> 
> It is curious though why they haven't evolved to create their own yet... likely because they have no need, they are such keen adept hunters that they can really just catch food when they need, unlike cumbersome wolves and dogs in comparison.


I disagree with the bold part...
Depends on what relative of the dog I suppose. Wolves are consistently seen with vegetation in their GI tracts in the wild. As well as in their feces. This does not reflect (IMO) that they are necessarily starving when they ate the vegetation. I guess that would be a convenient assumption however...


----------



## lauren43

skadoosh said:


> No one is going to comment on the length of the intestinal tract compared in cats and dogs. Seeing as this is one of the main parts of a raw feeders theory on why they are physiologically created to process only meat I'm surprised no one has commented on it.
> Also why aren't dogs compared to bears? They are relatives. Raccoons are considered carnivores, they certainly don't sustain themselves on a primarily meat diet...? Why not?
> I started to question the whole "but wolves are a dogs relative and THEY are doing it". Bears, foxes and hyenas are also related, why don't we imitate what they eat?? Sometimes I wonder why people who feed full PMR raw don't question these types of things....


Raccoons, hyenas, foxes, and bears are omnivores.


----------



## skadoosh

American black bear - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia -- says here they are technically belonging to the group "Carnivora" hmmm...?
So are these little guys-- Raccoon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And what about foxes?? They fairly consistently eat vegetation and they have a similar GI tract and skeletal appearance... what of them?


----------



## skadoosh

lauren43 said:


> Raccoons, hyenas, foxes, and bears are omnivores.


No they are not. They are technically categorized as carnivores within the classification "Carnivora".


----------



## skadoosh

That still didn't answer my question concerning the difference in length of GI tract in cats and dogs....? Anyone know why?


----------



## whiteleo

I love when RFD was here so I'll post up an old thread that was a good one! "That's what the wolves eat"


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> I disagree with the bold part...
> Depends on what relative of the dog I suppose. *Wolves are consistently seen with vegetation in their GI tracts in the wild. As well as in their feces*. This does not reflect (IMO) that they are necessarily starving when they ate the vegetation. I guess that would be a convenient assumption however...


And there you go. I'm not going to waste my money on feeding something my dog can't digest.


----------



## skadoosh

Another question. I noticed a trend of kibble being blamed for the incidences in cancer in dogs (not saying crap food doesn't contribute). WHY do golden retrievers have a MUCH higher incidence of cancer then say your average pound mutt? Would you say because goldens eat more kibble or because they are simply genetically pre-disposed?


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> And there you go. I'm not going to waste my money on feeding something my dog can't digest.


They are also found with bone...


----------



## skadoosh

whiteleo said:


> I love when RFD was here so I'll post up an old thread that was a good one! "That's what the wolves eat"


Or maybe you could answer (or someone) could answer my question directly.


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> And there you go. I'm not going to waste my money on feeding something my dog can't digest.


This is kind of silly.... if you were to open a cow up would you not see the same thing?? I didn't specify digested or undigested...


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> They are also found with bone...


I agree with that. I see small bone shards in Duke's poop. Nothing major though.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> Another question. I noticed a trend of kibble being blamed for the incidences in cancer in dogs (not saying crap food doesn't contribute). WHY do golden retrievers have a MUCH higher incidence of cancer then say your average pound mutt? Would you say because goldens eat more kibble or because they are simply genetically pre-disposed?


Give me a minute to get a decent response on this one...Boxers have the highest incidence of cancer so I know a decent amount on this one sadly.


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> I agree with that. I see small bone shards in Duke's poop. Nothing major though.


I guess you should only feed muscle and organ then. hwell: that IS going with a typical raw feeders theory, yes?


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> Give me a minute to get a decent response on this one...Boxers have the highest incidence of cancer so I know a decent amount on this one sadly.


I'll give an example. A good friend of mine owned an afghan hound. She fed it PMR since it was a puppy at 8 weeks. Gorgeous, registered show dog. It died at 7 of liver cancer (which the breed is prone to). Can you blame kibble in this situation?
I MAY sound confrontational but I DO truly want to learn. I have heard kibble knocked so much but it has kept my father in laws dog kicking for the past 16 years (still healthy and YES for the love of god, thriving). I have seen this MANY times (this is NOT an exception). 
Everyone picks kibble apart and now I am going to argue semantics of feeding a full PMR diet. I feel entitled as I have had to justify why I do not want to feed my dog an all meat diet. I want answers. Factual answers backed with research. The same as you all want from kibble companies.


----------



## whiteleo

skadoosh said:


> I'll give an example. A good friend of mine owned an afghan hound. She fed it PMR since it was a puppy at 8 weeks. Gorgeous, registered show dog. It died at 7 of liver cancer (which the breed is prone to). Can you blame kibble in this situation?


Genetics is genetics and nothing not even PMR is going to change that, what PMR does do is gives dogs a fighting chance away from dental disease and kibble that is full of preservatives and stuff I don't even want to think of.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> I'll give an example. A good friend of mine owned an afghan hound. She fed it PMR since it was a puppy at 8 weeks. Gorgeous, registered show dog. It died at 7 of liver cancer (which the breed is prone to). Can you blame kibble in this situation?


Cancer has three parts to it to me. Environmental, genetic, and circumstantial. Environment would be different pesticides used around the dog, chemicals, etc. Genetics is obvious. And circumstantial, that would be feeding the right kind of food, raising it correctly. I think I might have botched that somehow though.


----------



## Roo

Old threads that might be worth reading through. . . 

http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/7364-facultative-carnivore.html

http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/9747-why-wolves-dont-live-long-domestic-dogs-raw.html

http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/dog-food-ingredients/2329-backed-scientific-study.html

http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/dog-food-ingredients/10892-carbs-dogs.html

http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/8215-wolf-vs-dog.html

http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/7529-dingo-should-we-look-their-feeding-habits-moreso-than-wolfs.html

http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/6453-dogs-omnivores.html

http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/6546-thats-what-wolves-eat.html


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> I guess you should only feed muscle and organ then. hwell: that IS going with a typical raw feeders theory, yes?


No, I also don't give veggies because of the sugar and carbs which can help to accelerate cancer and other diseases. To me it means the extra minerals in the bone isn't needed and therefore expelled.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> This is kind of silly.... if you were to open a cow up would you not see the same thing?? I didn't specify digested or undigested...


I believe not on a grass fed cow. On a grain fed cow, possibly.


----------



## skadoosh

whiteleo said:


> Genetics is genetics and nothing not even PMR is going to change that, what PMR does do is gives dogs a fighting chance away from dental disease and kibble that is full of preservatives and stuff I don't even want to think of.


My husband worked in the pork industry. If you KNEW HALF of what they do to those pigs... you might reconsider. They live in filth. They are constantly being pushed with antibiotics and other medicines. They have a crap ton of de-wormer pumped into them. There is so much abuse that is involved with raising meat.... That aside they are also in kibble but at least I know a lot of that crap is (hopefully) cooked out of the meat. You say the enzymes have changed in the kibble after is cooked. Well so are the antibiotics and other nasties that are pumped into the animal.
Dental disease is a non issue if you keep on top of your dog. It takes maybe 5-10 minutes a day to brush their teeth with an enzymatic cleaner. Bully sticks are a lifesaver as well as training your dog to stand still for an at home scaling. 
My dog will lay in her side with her head in my lap and I will scrape and scale her teeth- no issue. Preservatives.... you don't think they use preservatives in raw meat?


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> I believe not on a grass fed cow. On a grain fed cow, possibly.


So if you look at a grass fed cows intestines you see no identifiable grass? Or their excrement?


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> No, I also don't give veggies because of the sugar and carbs which can help to accelerate cancer and other diseases. To me it means the extra minerals in the bone isn't needed and therefore expelled.


Yes IF they already have cancer. If they do there is not much of a chance for them anyway. Specific carbs and sugars help feed cancer but I don't believe they ALL do.


----------



## skadoosh

Roo said:


> Old threads that might be worth reading through. . .
> 
> http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/7364-facultative-carnivore.html
> 
> http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/9747-why-wolves-dont-live-long-domestic-dogs-raw.html
> 
> http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/dog-food-ingredients/2329-backed-scientific-study.html
> 
> http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/dog-food-ingredients/10892-carbs-dogs.html
> 
> http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/8215-wolf-vs-dog.html
> 
> http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/7529-dingo-should-we-look-their-feeding-habits-moreso-than-wolfs.html
> 
> http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/6453-dogs-omnivores.html
> 
> http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/6546-thats-what-wolves-eat.html


I appreciate the forwards but I am asking for direct answers on THIS thread.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> Yes IF they already have cancer. If they do there is not much of a chance for them anyway. Specific carbs and sugars help feed cancer but I don't believe they ALL do.


But we already have cancer cells in our body, our good cells just destroy them before anything can happen. At least that's the view I agree with to a degree.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## lauren43

skadoosh said:


> No they are not. They are technically categorized as carnivores within the classification "Carnivora".


Yes they are classified as Carnivora, but they do not act as such.

Wiki also says they are mostly Omnivores:
Carnivora - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The classification has a lot to do with teeth and claw type as well as binocular vision..even pandas are part of the Carnivora classification while they eat mainly vegetation.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> So if you look at a grass fed cows intestines you see no identifiable grass? Or their excrement?


Like I said I don't believe, I've never looked at a cows intestines. Although, grain fed cows intestines are more acidic and favor E. coli where grass fed cows intestines aren't even acidic enough to have E. coli grow.


----------



## skadoosh

magicre said:


> i've read through this entire thread...and i'm not quite sure what it is you're asking.
> 
> my father is 89 years old, smokes five packs of cigarettes per day and to him, a diet consists of eating one less scoop of ice cream.
> *^^^ this is stated by all raw feeders (i guess all raw feeders has this type of father.... Hmmm). It basically states that this old man has VERY good genetics. That would be the equivalent of sayyyy Ol Roy for a dog. I don't prefer that either...*
> 
> 
> i am a raw feeder. whilst i do not expect my dog will live longer, i do believe feeding raw to my dog is species appropriate and i have seen with my anecdotal eyes that no longer do i deal with gastric and intestinal issues.
> *I think meat IS species appropriate as well as some fruits and veggies. I also think that they have evolved to some degree to glean nutrition from certain grains. *
> since i do believe that health begins in the gut and sugar is a toxic substance, it stands to reason that my dogs do not need sugar.
> *Not all dog foods contain sugar.*
> whatever allows the immune system to thrive is the goal for me....quality vs. quantity.
> *my dogs immune system did not thrive. Maybe her gut is more evolved  *
> that a dog dies from cancer isn't necessarily because of the food....that is but one factor.
> *I agree. *
> and, as farming has gone to hell, so has processed foods with their usda allowances for waste products.
> *Technically any meat you get is processed to a degree.*
> that kind of equals the playing field between meat and kibble.....both are equivalent in their containment of terrible things that should not be eaten.
> *yes.*
> i believe genetics, environment and food are the triad.....i cannot do much about genetics...but i can do something about environment and food.
> *Environment not so much and food to a degree. Even if you get an animal that is farm raised, grass fed. That grass is polluted, they use pesticides. Etc. *
> i choose to feed what i feel is the least toxic and the most beneficial.
> *I choose to feed what i believe is balanced. I also choose brands that are least toxic. *
> that short gut which dogs have doesn't allow them the time to digest plants in any appreciable form.
> *Yes they do digest it. Just as much as we are capable of digesting it. Of course in any animal you will see hulls and even whole pieces of food. This happens to us too! Should we start eating PMR?*
> and when i look at ingredients in kibble, i see ingredients that i simply don't 'get'. i don't understand why that particular ingredient is there.
> *I don't get why dogs turn in three circles before they lay down but i don't particularly care.*
> but when i look at that beautiful lamb my dog is eating, that actually looks like lamb meat, smells like lamb meat.....and i see my dogs' health...i think to myself that i am doing something that is right for my dogs.
> *then it is for your more then it is for your dog which seems to be a new trend.*
> we all have to sleep at night....my research over a period of seven years...has taken me down this road....
> *my research for 10 has taken me down the opposite way.*
> whilst i never stop questioning, i no longer doubt that what i feed my dog is different than what i've fed in the past....
> 
> so all things considered, i treat all of my dogs the same...i've had several different breeds, from mutts to purebreds....and the one thing that is different is the way i feed.
> 
> and that has made all the difference to me.
> 
> my malia is going on thirteen....she may not live any longer than she was going to on kibble. but i believe she will live better.
> *That is an assumption. We could also assume that she could choke on a bone and end her life prematurely.*


^^^ my statements in bold.


----------



## skadoosh

lauren43 said:


> Yes they are classified as Carnivora, but they do not act as such.
> 
> Wiki also says they are mostly Omnivores:
> Carnivora - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> The classification has a lot to do with teeth and claw type as well as binocular vision..even pandas are part of the Carnivora classification while they eat mainly vegetation.


EXACTLY. So perhaps there is a discrepancy in which class dogs are in? I believe so. I'm not sure omnivores but certainly opportunists. If you think for one second that if you passed away with your dog in the house that he wouldn't have a nice light snack... well...


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> Like I said I don't believe, I've never looked at a cows intestines. Although, grain fed cows intestines are more acidic and favor E. coli where grass fed cows intestines aren't even acidic enough to have E. coli grow.


My uncle being a natural grass fed cow farmer for years I will tell you there is absolutely undigested grass in their excrement. And they have four bloody stomachs! It's unavoidable.


----------



## BearMurphy

skadoosh said:


> My husband worked in the pork industry. If you KNEW HALF of what they do to those pigs... you might reconsider. They live in filth. They are constantly being pushed with antibiotics and other medicines. They have a crap ton of de-wormer pumped into them. There is so much abuse that is involved with raising meat.... That aside they are also in kibble but at least I know a lot of that crap is (hopefully) cooked out of the meat. You say the enzymes have changed in the kibble after is cooked. Well so are the antibiotics and other nasties that are pumped into the animal.
> Dental disease is a non issue if you keep on top of your dog. It takes maybe 5-10 minutes a day to brush their teeth with an enzymatic cleaner. Bully sticks are a lifesaver as well as training your dog to stand still for an at home scaling.
> My dog will lay in her side with her head in my lap and I will scrape and scale her teeth- no issue. Preservatives.... you don't think they use preservatives in raw meat?


I believe that the crap that is pumped into the meat is at a higher concentration in meat meals found in kibble and it is rendered which is a process that could introduce even more toxins. At least with whole foods we can see what we are feeding our dogs and choose to purchase it from a specific farm. Plus if you are horrified by the meat in the supermarket---do you think the meat in kibble is the same quality? In order to be profitable it is most likely lower quality. I have no references to back up these statements---to me its just common sense. Feel free to feed your dog kibble though I won't argue with that need but I like how my dog does on raw so I will continue to feed that way


----------



## Tobi

looks like this thread took a left turn somewhere...

Anyways, the information you're looking for is all over Skadoosh... you will find that a dogs digestive tract is on average 50-100% longer than a feline counterparts, in comparison to the length of their body. you'll also note that a cat is an obligate carnivore, and a dog is an opportunistic carnivore, so were really going to compare apples to oranges... how often do you compare a lion to a wolf? not often.

As it stands, some science believes that wolves, dogs, etc have a longer digestive tract simply to try to derive more nutrients from plant matter. That is a simple opinion of some science. Jaw structure plays a large part in what an animal is intended to eat. 

This is a bear skull, please note the flat molars, intended to grind, and flatten out plant matter... also note that they have very sharp incisors. Also note that a bear is classified as "carnivora" and referred to as an omnivore. I don't refer to wikipedia for anything that i want as a matter of fact.








There are actually 12 different family's of animals in the "class" carnivora. 2 of the subspecies are canidae, and ursidae. They are however not one in the same family.









This is a gray wolf skull, the closest relative to our carnivorous friends. Based on dentition alone, i can't see how you cannot see the difference between a bear and a dog, in reference to diet.


----------



## Roo

> I believe that the crap that is pumped into the meat is at a higher concentration in meat meals found in kibble and it is rendered which is a process that could introduce even more toxins.


I believe almost all commercial dog food companies have to also denture the meat as well before using it.


----------



## skadoosh

BearMurphy said:


> I believe that the crap that is pumped into the meat is at a higher concentration in meat meals found in kibble and it is rendered which is a process that could introduce even more toxins. At least with whole foods we can see what we are feeding our dogs and choose to purchase it from a specific farm. Plus if you are horrified by the meat in the supermarket---do you think the meat in kibble is the same quality? In order to be profitable it is most likely lower quality. I have no references to back up these statements---to me its just common sense. Feel free to feed your dog kibble though I won't argue with that need but I like how my dog does on raw so I will continue to feed that way


I certainly think the quality depends on the kibble. Would you say that generic grocery store brand beef is the same in quality as home grown, grass fed cattle? No. 
I can't assume how they render an animal and what parts they use (which I don't understand what that would matter at all considering a lot of raw feeders feed chicken heads, cow tongues/penis/testicle etc etc and any "unwanted freezer burnt meats"). What I KNOW is that it is cooked. Less chance of pathogens, parasites, bacteria and absorption of any nasties that were in the meat before it was rendered. I don't mind raw meat occasionally (I give my girl a frozen chicken quarter every 2 to 3 days for her teeth) but I dont see 100% pmr sustaining MY dog over her lifespan (it didn't sustain her over a 3 month period what would it have done to her over 15 years, if she made it). I do have proof of kibble sustaining dogs for their entire lifespan. 
Kibble is a temporary solution at this time. I want to develop my own way of feeding her. This will take a lot of time and research (I also have a 5 and 7 year old so they are my priority) but I am in the process of educating myself. 
Do I think kibble is the end all be all? No. Do I think PMR is nutritionally adequate all on its own? No.


----------



## skadoosh

Tobi said:


> looks like this thread took a left turn somewhere...
> 
> Anyways, the information you're looking for is all over Skadoosh... you will find that a dogs digestive tract is on average 50-100% longer than a feline counterparts, in comparison to the length of their body. you'll also note that a cat is an obligate carnivore, and a dog is an opportunistic carnivore, so were really going to compare apples to oranges... how often do you compare a lion to a wolf? not often.
> 
> As it stands, some science believes that wolves, dogs, etc have a longer digestive tract simply to try to derive more nutrients from plant matter. That is a simple opinion of some science. Jaw structure plays a large part in what an animal is intended to eat.
> 
> This is a bear skull, please note the flat molars, intended to grind, and flatten out plant matter... also note that they have very sharp incisors. Also note that a bear is classified as "carnivora" and referred to as an omnivore. I don't refer to wikipedia for anything that i want as a matter of fact.
> View attachment 8064
> 
> 
> There are actually 12 different family's of animals in the "class" carnivora. 2 of the subspecies are canidae, and ursidae. They are however not one in the same family.
> 
> View attachment 8065
> 
> 
> This is a gray wolf skull, the closest relative to our carnivorous friends. Based on dentition alone, i can't see how you cannot see the difference between a bear and a dog, in reference to diet.


I would not base a dogs dietary needs on their dentition alone. My dentition doesn't technically look omnivorous when compared to a bear (assuming a bear is omnivorous) yet I am in fact omnivorous.


----------



## skadoosh

No one has touched on why a cats GI tract is significantly shorter then a dog's and what that might mean.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

Tobi just said it. Cats can really only eat meat, anything else is detrimental. Dogs can eat plant matter and it may not harm them, but they still aren't meant to eat it.


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> Tobi just said it. Cats can really only eat meat, anything else is detrimental. Dogs can eat plant matter and it may not harm them, but they still aren't meant to eat it.


Maybe a dog's digestive tract being longer then an obligate carnivore's digestive tract is implying that dogs are able to/are meant to eat vegetation...?


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

Still no in my mind. They don't have the necessary enzymes or teeth too. If they were starving they would, but not as a dependent part in their diet.


----------



## Roo

> No one has touched on why a cats GI tract is significantly shorter then a dog's and what that might mean.


Hmmm not sure as to exactly why, I did find info from Auburn University, College of Agriculture, where it discusses dogs and cats digestive physiology.
http://www.ag.auburn.edu/~chibale/an02physiology.pdf


----------



## skadoosh

Dogs are OMNIVOROUS SCAVENGERS. They will eat and thrive on pretty much anything they can get their teeth on. Why is this so hard to grasp? 
Go to websites and they say "look at the dentition" "compare it to wolves" "look at their GI" "dogs are wolves"
Dogs are dogs. Not wolves. Just like foxes are foxes. Coyotes are coyotes. Hyenas are hyenas. Jackals are jackals. Bears are bears. DOGS ARE DOGS. Even WOLVES will scavenge and will eat vegetation when they find it (not necessarily when they are starving). 
This whole "dogs are wolves" thing makes me believe that a group of people developed this romantasized notion just to feel superior to the rest of all dog owners. That is all that I can see. 
I have been trying to find ANY evidence that a dog that eats an all raw meat diet does superior then a dog on kibble or on a home made cooked diet or on a barf diet, and there is literally NONE.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## skadoosh

HTML:







SaharaNight Boxers said:


> Still no in my mind. They don't have the necessary enzymes or teeth too. If they were starving they would, but not as a dependent part in their diet.


They do have the necessary enzymes. Just not in their saliva. They have it in their GI and in their pancreas. 
It had been proven that wolves will eat vegetation when they are in the middle of a meat filled, buffet summer. They have teeth period. They may not be shaped to eat vegetation (whatever that means considering our teeth aren't shaped in any way to eat meat) but they have teeth period, teeth capable of chewing vegetation.


----------



## pogo

Wow someone is bored -_-


----------



## pogo

To me the fact that veg needs to be ground/pulped for dogs to digest them means to me they DO NOT need them, and they certainly won't be part of my boys diet


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> No one has touched on why a cats GI tract is significantly shorter then a dog's and what that might mean.


I did... but why wouldn't you find the answers to that and fill us all in? Empower yourself, as knowledge is indeed... power.




> As it stands, some science believes that wolves, dogs, etc have a longer digestive tract simply to try to derive more nutrients from plant matter. That is a simple opinion of some science. Jaw structure plays a large part in what an animal is intended to eat.


I posted this in the most recent post i've made.

As far as dentition, that comes down to an opinion, the evidence is there... i suppose if you choose not to see it that is your choice.


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> HTML:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They do have the necessary enzymes. Just not in their saliva. They have it in their GI and in their pancreas.
> It had been proven that wolves will eat vegetation when they are in the middle of a meat filled, buffet summer. They have teeth period. They may not be shaped to eat vegetation (whatever that means considering our teeth aren't shaped in any way to eat meat) but they have teeth period, teeth capable of chewing vegetation.


The enzyme is amylase... and it's not present in carnivore saliva, it is found in ours, and bears, as well as all other omnivores, and even you say, it's not found in dogs... and that it falls to the pancreas to create it, if they were truly meant to eat such things amylase would most surely be present in their saliva would it not? 

Diet is pure speculation, we just look to the most recent ancestors, those being wolves for dogs, and some science looking to great apes, or cromagnon man for ourselves...


----------



## skadoosh

magicre said:


> i don't think all raw feeders have fathers such as mine.
> *They certainly seem to lol. That's the one thing I've heard repetitively come from people who feed raw. *
> but amongst us, be they kibble feeders, home cookers, or raw feeders either have someone in the family or a friend or friend of a friend whose dietary habits defy logic.
> *Yes. Maybe that is why some dogs can do well on a 100% meat diet.*
> if a barf style diet is what you think is appropriate for your dog, then that is what you have to feed.
> 
> personally, the benefits of plant foods, in my opinion, are not worth the risk of introducing sugar into my dogs' systems.
> Plants don't equal sugar. We are not talking about feeding our dogs straight sugar cane.
> all dog foods contain sugar. carbs= sugar. you have researched for ten years.....the process is on the internet how carbs turn to sugar. especially if over fed.....grains, starches, fruits, veggies, all contain sugars.....especially corn. go to nutrition data and look up the ingredients in dog foods. you will see sugar.
> *I wonder how much. Hmm. I'll eat a stalk of celery. Wonder how much sugar is contained in there. It is not a massive threat in my view. Maybe if I were extremist...*
> i don't know enough about your dog's immune system to comment.....
> *I know my dog looked and felt like utter crap on PMR.*
> meat that is processed to a degree is not the same as meat that has been slurried beyond all recognition....
> *basically it is the same. *
> if you mean slaughtering and then cutting it into pieces, then yes, i suppose meat is somewhat processed.....
> f
> but when i pick out the lamb that will be my dog's dinner....that lamb was whole. then died. then got packaged for my dogs to eat.
> 
> it's just not convenient or well mannered to throw a lamb, whole, into the back yard. my neighbours are old and they'd all have strokes.
> 
> the triad may not be equal....but they are equivalent....
> 
> digestion of plant material is not the issue, which is why i don't get what you're asking.....just because i can eat a food, doesn't mean it has benefit for me...unless i'm starving, in which case i would eat bark.
> *Dogs do not eat vegetation when they are starving. They eat it like we do. To compliment their diet. *
> i study ingredients.....and have for a long time, so if i don't 'get' something, it's a bit different than not 'getting' why my dogs circle before lying down...one is behaviour. the other is ingestion. i think there is a big difference between the two.
> *Well I suppose I am not obsessed with my dog. I have two children and they are my priority in life. But that's a whole 'nother story... I have found that dogs thrive on different things. Are you going to challenge my knowledge concerning my dog and say nope, raw is better for her. I have heard of dogs dying because people go down these paths with such an arrogant view. *
> i think if we search high and low, we can find stats and studies and research to take each of us down all kinds of paths....
> 
> and if my malia were fed kibble, she could choke on that, too. perhaps i should say, barring an unforeseen trauma, i believe her quality of life will be improved.
> *I have heard a lot of raw feeders speak about a dog choking on kibble but I have NEVER seen it. I have fostered/rescued over 200 dogs... that's a pretty good amount with literally none ever choking on kibble. *


My response in bold, yet again *sigh


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> Dogs are OMNIVOROUS SCAVENGERS. They will eat and thrive on pretty much anything they can get their teeth on. Why is this so hard to grasp?
> Go to websites and they say "look at the dentition" "compare it to wolves" "look at their GI" "dogs are wolves"
> Dogs are dogs. Not wolves. Just like foxes are foxes. Coyotes are coyotes. Hyenas are hyenas. Jackals are jackals. Bears are bears. DOGS ARE DOGS. Even WOLVES will scavenge and will eat vegetation when they find it (not necessarily when they are starving).
> This whole "dogs are wolves" thing makes me believe that a group of people developed this romantasized notion just to feel superior to the rest of all dog owners. That is all that I can see.
> I have been trying to find ANY evidence that a dog that eats an all raw meat diet does superior then a dog on kibble or on a home made cooked diet or on a barf diet, and there is literally NONE.


Are you trying to convince us or yourself? it seems you're trying to argue a point that wasn't even on topic with the first post.

Dogs, and wolves are extremely similar, in every way.. if you've really done any research on your own, and looked into it you would know that as well. Dogs and wolves can indeed mate and produce offspring... a dog cannot produce offspring with a bear, a cat, a duck or anything else, that would lead most logical humans to believe they are indeed EXTREMELY closely related to wolves.


----------



## skadoosh

pogo said:


> Wow someone is bored -_-


Well I suppose everyone on this forum is then...?


----------



## skadoosh

Tobi said:


> Are you trying to convince us or yourself? it seems you're trying to argue a point that wasn't even on topic with the first post.
> 
> Dogs, and wolves are extremely similar, in every way.. if you've really done any research on your own, and looked into it you would know that as well. Dogs and wolves can indeed mate and produce offspring... a dog cannot produce offspring with a bear, a cat, a duck or anything else, that would lead most logical humans to believe they are indeed EXTREMELY closely related to wolves.


But yet we are closely related to apes?? I'm confused. 
When is the last time a dog was wild. In their most wild form? Without human intervention?


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> But yet we are closely related to apes?? I'm confused.
> When is the last time a dog was wild. In their most wild form? Without human intervention?


When is the last time somebody mated with an ape and produced offspring, it's speculative that we are close in relationship to an ape... not FACT. there is no denying that Canis lupus, and canis lupus familiaris are one in the same with a different shell.

As far as the last time a dog was mating with a wolf... couldn't tell ya... maybe you can fund a study, or look one up if there is such a thing. :thumb:


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

Seriously why did you feel the need to do this? If you feel like PMR isn't right then great, congrats. If your dog looked like crap on it then again great, maybe you should try it a different way. This is how problems are created. If I go on the kibble side I'm not going to strike down kibble, if you come on the raw side you shouldn't strike down raw. If you think BARF is right, then feed it. Personally, I can't past the fact it spells barf...I thought it was a joke at first actually.


----------



## skadoosh

Tobi said:


> The enzyme is amylase... and it's not present in carnivore saliva, it is found in ours, and bears, as well as all other omnivores, and even you say, it's not found in dogs... and that it falls to the pancreas to create it, if they were truly meant to eat such things amylase would most surely be present in their saliva would it not?
> 
> Diet is pure speculation, we just look to the most recent ancestors, those being wolves for dogs, and some science looking to great apes, or cromagnon man for ourselves...


I could compare it to birds for one second. Soft billed seed eating birds cannot digest seed hulls on their own. They ingest small rock and dirt particles in order to digest the seeds and hulls. Why? Shouldn't they be eating something that is already 100% digestible without any assistance?
Same as dogs. Not they do not have amylase in their saliva but they do produce it in their GI and pancreas. To say-- dogs don't have amylase is a really incorrect thing to say.


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> Seriously why did you feel the need to do this? If you feel like PMR isn't right then great, congrats. If your dog looked like crap on it then again great, maybe you should try it a different way. This is how problems are created. If I go on the kibble side I'm not going to strike down kibble, if you come on the raw side you shouldn't strike down raw. If you think BARF is right, then feed it. Personally, I can't past the fact it spells barf...I thought it was a joke at first actually.


Im simply saying there are obligate carnivores and carnivores. Dogs are not obligate carnivores (I think we all admit that). If that is indeed the truth, why are we treating them like they are obligate carnivores?


----------



## skadoosh

Tobi said:


> When is the last time somebody mated with an ape and produced offspring, it's speculative that we are close in relationship to an ape... not FACT. there is no denying that Canis lupus, and canis lupus familiaris are one in the same with a different shell.
> 
> As far as the last time a dog was mating with a wolf... couldn't tell ya... maybe you can fund a study, or look one up if there is such a thing. :thumb:


So breeding= diet?
Look at a pug. Now look at a wolf. Are they the same? No. They are not. They may be able to reproduce but naturally this would not occur. 
Kind of like the "liger" the African lion crossed with a Siberian tiger... is that natural? Must be because they can reproduce.
If all of these changes are being made to the outside of a dog, why isn't it possible that there may just be changes going on internally?


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> I could compare it to birds for one second. Soft billed seed eating birds cannot digest seed hulls on their own. They ingest small rock and dirt particles in order to digest the seeds and hulls. Why? Shouldn't they be eating something that is already 100% digestible without any assistance?
> Same as dogs. Not they do not have amylase in their saliva but they do produce it in their GI and pancreas. To say-- dogs don't have amylase is a really incorrect thing to say.


Welcome to Evolution. :boink:

Dogs create amylase as a result of them eating something that causes that reaction... the reason amylase is in our saliva is to begin the breakdown process. THAT has been proven time and time again. It puts extra unneeded strain on their pancreas. Cats would have the same effect yet... they are obligate carnivores. I suppose if you want to go into grains and such, and it seems you have a bone to pick with "raw feeders" or raw in general... the AAFCO shows that dogs, and cats have NO dietary need for carbohydrates of any kind... and they are trying to push them :thumb:


----------



## wolfsnaps88

While I appreciate a good debate, I can not contribute to this thread. I shouldn't even post anything but since I spent a few good minutes of my time reading it, I felt I should pipe up.

Skadoosh, I believe, is trying to instigate us. If I went into the raw section and demanded everyone to tell me why carbs are good for dogs, I would probably be silenced. Which I should be...if I did that 

Reading this thread without bias towards anyone, it just seems like you want to start a fight. 

Kudos to Tobi for bringing FACT to this war...er..I mean 'debate'. 

While I am a raw feeder now, I certainly respect the opinions of kibble feeders and barfers. (hee hee, barfers).

I do not feel Skadoosh has respect at all here. 

"Why? Why? Why?" 

Like Tobi said, maybe do a little research. We are more than happy to help you out but you don't actually want to learn it seems. You are not open to it, obviously. If a new person came in here asking about raw and wanting to learn and then decided to stay on kibble, That is just great. They at least LISTENED.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> So breeding= diet?
> Look at a pug. Now look at a wolf. Are they the same? No. They are not. They may be able to reproduce but naturally this would not occur.
> Kind of like the "liger" the African lion crossed with a Siberian tiger... is that natural? Must be because they can reproduce.


Whats on the inside=diet 

But they are the same. One is people oriented and bred down and socialized, but they are still the same animal. And as far as ligers it's a whole other topic. Although, you could look at it like hybrids possibly.


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> So breeding= diet?
> Look at a pug. Now look at a wolf. Are they the same? No. They are not. They may be able to reproduce but naturally this would not occur.
> Kind of like the "liger" the African lion crossed with a Siberian tiger... is that natural? Must be because they can reproduce.
> If all of these changes are being made to the outside of a dog, why isn't it possible that there may just be changes going on internally?


These are examples of human intervention... they are indeed carnivores, and indeed still able to reproduce... albeit not in a natural state with something 8-10 times the size of them, the genetic material is still there.
There is no such evidence of internal changes going on in dogs or wolves, if you'd like to find some and show us we'd be more than happy to read it.
Just because humans interfered and created a hybrid of something doesn't mean it still isn't a dog/wolf... you're looking only externally, and that's very narrow minded.


skadoosh said:


> Im simply saying there are obligate carnivores and carnivores. Dogs are not obligate carnivores (I think we all admit that). If that is indeed the truth, why are we treating them like they are obligate carnivores?


who said anything about how we treat our dogs like obligate carnivores, we all know the difference. :thumb:

I feel like your attitude is one that will get this thread shut down, i'm happy with a good debate, or informed discussion but you haven't provided much of that so far.


----------



## skadoosh

Tobi said:


> Are you trying to convince us or yourself? it seems you're trying to argue a point that wasn't even on topic with the first post.
> 
> Dogs, and wolves are extremely similar, in every way.. if you've really done any research on your own, and looked into it you would know that as well. Dogs and wolves can indeed mate and produce offspring... a dog cannot produce offspring with a bear, a cat, a duck or anything else, that would lead most logical humans to believe they are indeed EXTREMELY closely related to wolves.


I am trying to find a balanced, healthy diet for a dog that I love. Do I live for it? No. Do I prefer what is best? Yes. 
I am not a one time occurance. There are many dogs that don't do well on an all meat diet. I don't care HOW you put it together. You can add more of this, take away some of that. Some dogs just get sick on it... they become unhealthy because they are deprived of essential nutrients and minerals. 
I notice that people can come onto the kibble forum and say whatever they feel and try to "convert" people onto raw. I am NOT trying to convert anyone , I am simply asking for proof of what you are saying. 
Evidence of teeth and length of GI tract, well... the teeth I don't know but I know the GI tract does imply that it can and will handle vegetation and provide nutrition to the animal.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## Roo

> Dogs are not obligate carnivores (I think we all admit that). If that is indeed the truth, why are we treating them like they are obligate carnivores?


Could you tell me the scientific amount of phytonutrients and carbohydrates needed and necessary in a dogs diet, because I couldn't find them listed with AFFCO standards or the 2006 NRC numbers for dogs?



> Some dogs just get sick on it... they become unhealthy because they are deprived of essential nutrients and minerals.


So you've actually broken down and researched the nutrient profile of a PMR diet, as I have, curious to know what exact nutrient and mineral deficiencies you came up with?


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> I am trying to find a balanced, healthy diet for a dog that I love. Do I live for it? No. Do I prefer what is best? Yes.
> I am not a one time occurance. There are many dogs that don't do well on an all meat diet. I don't care HOW you put it together. You can add more of this, take away some of that. Some dogs just get sick on it... they become unhealthy because they are deprived of essential nutrients and minerals.
> I notice that people can come onto the kibble forum and say whatever they feel and try to "convert" people onto raw. I am NOT trying to convert anyone , I am simply asking for proof of what you are saying.
> Evidence of teeth and length of GI tract, well... the teeth I don't know but I know the GI tract does imply that it can and will handle vegetation and provide nutrition to the animal.


Your comments have nothing to do with the original post whatsoever. 

The chip on your shoulder is making it hard to take you seriously... but i'll try once more.

Feeding what you like to your canine companion is your choice, nobody is going to force you to do otherwise. I would not agree that every dog doesn't do well on a pmr diet, i prefer not to use the term "all meat" because that isn't what raw is, it's meat, bones, organs etc, and it can be misleading for somebody new to the forum. Opinions are opinions, but carrying a thread 7pages long debating raw feeding vs anything else on an unrelated thread isn't okay.

You notice that people come into the kibble forum and say whatever they feel huh? well, i suppose mass scale segregation is in order.. heaven forbid that somebody mention raw in a strict kibble feeding section.. don't be ridiculous. I'm a raw feeder, but that doesn't make me any different than anybody else on this forum. I don't care if somebody feeds kibble or raw, i've said it once, and i'll say it again, it's not my dog. it's theirs and their choice to feed what they feel necessary, if a "raw feeder" is on the kibble section being rude, and obnoxious i'm sure it is taken care of, as well as the opposite. I've more than once offered advice about kibble, and mentioned raw as an option if they are into that kind of thing... there is nothing wrong with that.

The proof is out there, we don't' have to provide you with anything, to believe is completely up to you, and if you choose not to... well, again that is your choice, and your opinion. As far as dentition, and GI makeup, you "KNOW" the GI tract does imply that it can and will handle vegetation and provide nutrition to the animal, if you have proof of such things, please share with us, i'd be delighted to read up on that, if you have the studies close at hand.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

If a dog isn't a wolf what is it then? It had to be bred down from something.


----------



## Kayota

skadoosh said:


> No one is going to comment on the length of the intestinal tract compared in cats and dogs. Seeing as this is one of the main parts of a raw feeders theory on why they are physiologically created to process only meat I'm surprised no one has commented on it.
> Also why aren't dogs compared to bears? They are relatives. Raccoons are considered carnivores, they certainly don't sustain themselves on a primarily meat diet...? Why not?
> I started to question the whole "but wolves are a dogs relative and THEY are doing it". Bears, foxes and hyenas are also related, why don't we imitate what they eat?? Sometimes I wonder why people who feed full PMR raw don't question these types of things....


Dogs aren't just related, they ARE WOLVES. Hyenas, on the other hand, are more closely related to cats and are probably also obligate carnivores. 

A liger is a hybrid between TWO species. A pug/wolf is essentially a mixed breed dog (and ugly at that).


----------



## Sprocket

Despite the obvious intentions of the OP, this debate has to be the smoothest one in a long while. I really appreciate all the cool attitudes.

Thanks everyone for the great threads pulled up as well as the facts posted . :biggrin: :thumb:



Skadoosh - What do we need to tell you that hasn't already been in place? All the evidence is there, its time for you to read if you are truly intending to educate yourself. Other wise, this thread will go in the same circle.

As a suggestion, it is probably a good idea to lay out specific questions for us as opposed to thinking out loud.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## Tobi

magicre said:


> i think you've become combative and it's time for me to leave this thread.


I'll take my leave with you!

:wave:

but i just can't! :lol:


----------



## skadoosh

At no point in this conversation have I been rude or obnoxious I am just disagreeing. Your results are anecdotal and I suppose mine are as well. 
You say look at the teeth. Look at your teeth. Do they look like they should tear through meat? No. Yet we are omnivores. 
You say look at the GI tract. Well then mine would be considered too short for vegetable matter and too long for meat yet we eat both at the same time with (generally) no issues. 
We are 1.8 percent difference between being a chimpanzee. Do you look, act, or (generally eat) like a chimp? Rip up a little baby monkey and eat it raw and then you will be like our closest ancestor, maybe we can throw feces for a while for fun and really get into the spirit. 
Dogs have a 1% difference which may not sound like much but it is enough to be a SIGNIFICANT difference, kind of like that 1.8% that differentiates us and primates. 
Wolves have been going through selective breeding for hundreds of thousands of years. They can deal with raw meats and make it work for them. 
Dogs have been babied and coddled so to speak. They cannot. I believe they have evolved the ability to draw nutrients from plant matter. It literally wouldnt matter how much research I provided you would still contest it. I could get a canine nutritionist to tell you the differences between a wolf and a dog and that their nutritional requirements are similar but not the same. You would still say no, PMR is superior.


----------



## skadoosh

magicre said:


> excuse me, but dem's fightin' words...you callin' my pug ugly LOL?


At least they are severely deformed. If you want to call it a wolf, do that...


----------



## Sprocket

:argue::boxing:


Kayota said:


> Dogs aren't just related, they ARE WOLVES. Hyenas, on the other hand, are more closely related to cats and are probably also obligate carnivores.
> 
> A liger is a hybrid between TWO species. A pug/wolf is essentially a mixed breed dog (and ugly at that).





magicre said:


> excuse me, but dem's fightin' words...you callin' my pug ugly LOL?


:rofl: :rofl::argue::boxing:


----------



## skadoosh

Sprocket said:


> Despite the obvious intentions of the OP, this debate has to be the smoothest one in a long while. I really appreciate all the cool attitudes.
> 
> Thanks everyone for the great threads pulled up as well as the facts posted . :biggrin: :thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> Skadoosh - What do we need to tell you that hasn't already been in place? All the evidence is there, its time for you to read if you are truly intending to educate yourself. Other wise, this thread will go in the same circle.
> 
> As a suggestion, it is probably a good idea to lay out specific questions for us as opposed to thinking out loud.


I've seen evidence of relation through genetics but not evidence that their dietary needs are the same as a wolf. 
I have a question. Do you or anyone else on here have a study that says dogs fed PMR are healthier then dogs fed high quality kibble? Does anyone have proof or literature stating that dogs take zero nutrition from plant matter? That dogs don't get parasites from raw meat? That dogs never get salmonella/e. coli poisoning? That dogs that are immuno compromised aren't at risk when eating raw? That dogs don't excrete salmonella more frequently from their feces or even their pores? I would like answers with proof backing it up.


----------



## Kayota

magicre said:


> excuse me, but dem's fightin' words...you callin' my pug ugly LOL?


Naw pugs are cute, but a pug mixed with a wolf...?

PFFFFF dogs excreting salmonella from their PORES? That's the most ridiculous thing... Why on earth would salmonella go from the digestive tract to the _skin_? Excuse me for maybe ridiculing you a bit but... I want to know where you got that idea?


----------



## BearMurphy

skadoosh said:


> We are 1.8 percent difference between being a chimpanzee. Do you look, act, or (generally eat) like a chimp? Rip up a little baby monkey and eat it raw and then you will be like our closest ancestor, maybe we can throw feces for a while for fun and really get into the spirit.
> Dogs have a 1% difference which may not sound like much but it is enough to be a SIGNIFICANT difference, kind of like that 1.8% that differentiates us and primates.


If your facts are correct, I don't think it's a valid comparison to say that because the number 1.8% and 1% are close to each other it means that dogs are just as different from wolves as we are from a chimpanzee. You have to look at what that difference in DNA is responsible for to see how they differ you cannot just assume that comparing percentages proves your point


----------



## skadoosh

My 5 year old daughter has autism. She explores her world through her mouth (a sensory thing). She puts almost everything into her mouth that she finds. Are you saying there is no risk to feeding raw? Or even that the risks aren't increased? 
I fed my dog raw. She had physical side effects as well as behavioral side effects. Not only that-- one day I was cutting up a chicken quarter and it slipped (it was partially frozen) and fell onto the floor. There was ice blood all over my floor. I felt soooooo paranoid and so guilty! I washed and washed and washed and then I washed with vinegar and washed again. I mopped and got on my hands and knees. 
Do I think the possible slight benefits of feeding raw (not with my dog but say if I got another dog) is worth my child possibly getting salmonella poisoning or e. coli. Hell no. I think it's a calculated risk and if you take it-- don't cry to anyone when something bad happens. 
I don't care what anyone feeds their dogs, I just think that it is fantastical and its benefits are exaggerated.


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> At no point in this conversation have I been rude or obnoxious I am just disagreeing. Your results are anecdotal and I suppose mine are as well.
> You say look at the teeth. Look at your teeth. Do they look like they should tear through meat? No. Yet we are omnivores.
> You say look at the GI tract. Well then mine would be considered too short for vegetable matter and too long for meat yet we eat both at the same time with (generally) no issues.
> We are 1.8 percent difference between being a chimpanzee. Do you look, act, or (generally eat) like a chimp? Rip up a little baby monkey and eat it raw and then you will be like our closest ancestor, maybe we can throw feces for a while for fun and really get into the spirit.
> D*ogs have a 1% difference which may not sound like much but it is enough to be a SIGNIFICANT difference, kind of like that 1.8% that differentiates us and primates.*
> Wolves have been going through selective breeding for hundreds of thousands of years. They can deal with raw meats and make it work for them.
> Dogs have been babied and coddled so to speak. They cannot. I believe they have evolved the ability to draw nutrients from plant matter. It literally wouldnt matter how much research I provided you would still contest it. I could get a canine nutritionist to tell you the differences between a wolf and a dog and that their nutritional requirements are similar but not the same. You would still say no, PMR is superior.


Gaaaaah i couldn't let this one go...

That is where you're wrong... Selective breeding? so there are wolves out in the wild that didn't eat meat while they were "continually evolving" and what you're saying is that we found those plant eating wolves, and bred them all together and make "less meat eating dogs"? :lol:

“The domestic dog is an extremely close relative of the gray wolf, differing from it by at most 0.2% of mtDNA sequence....

In comparison, the gray wolf differs from its closest wild relative, the coyote, by about 4% of mitochondrial DNA sequence.”

Robert K. Wayne, Ph.D.

you can at least back it up... if you'd like to read more about Dr. Waynes work you may at this link.
2. Canid Genetics


----------



## skadoosh

BearMurphy said:


> If your facts are correct, I don't think it's a valid comparison to say that because the number 1.8% and 1% are close to each other it means that dogs are just as different from wolves as we are from a chimpanzee. You have to look at what that difference in DNA is responsible for to see how they differ you cannot just assume that comparing percentages proves your point


Dogs are not obligate carnivores. That is all I need to know. They have been able to thrive with a mixed bag *no pun intended* of foods since they began life alongside humans. I just decided that in all reality, in comparison to other things that are going on in the world, whether my dog eats kibble or raw meat doesn't matter that significantly... 
Thank you for the relatively mature responses. Good luck with your dogs and I hope raw works for them better then it did for my dog.


----------



## Kayota

Dogs are the SAME SPECIES as wolves. Humans are NOT the same species as chimpanzees. This has been PROVEN. Why do you think dogs are Canis lupus familiaris? Because they are a subspecies of wolf! Chimpanzees, on the other hand, are Pan troglodytes.


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> My 5 year old daughter has autism. She explores her world through her mouth (a sensory thing). She puts almost everything into her mouth that she finds. Are you saying there is no risk to feeding raw? Or even that the risks aren't increased?
> I fed my dog raw. She had physical side effects as well as behavioral side effects. Not only that-- one day I was cutting up a chicken quarter and it slipped (it was partially frozen) and fell onto the floor. There was ice blood all over my floor. I felt soooooo paranoid and so guilty! I washed and washed and washed and then I washed with vinegar and washed again. I mopped and got on my hands and knees.
> Do I think the possible slight benefits of feeding raw (not with my dog but say if I got another dog) is worth my child possibly getting salmonella poisoning or e. coli. Hell no. I think it's a calculated risk and if you take it-- don't cry to anyone when something bad happens.
> I don't care what anyone feeds their dogs, I just think that it is fantastical and its benefits are exaggerated.


Just because it's not for you, doesn't mean a crusade against raw, or asking others to prove themselves to you is needed. I've seen more benefits to raw than i can even tell you, i suppose if you have a little kid running around licking the linoleum you might want to think twice about raw... that's just a personal choice.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## skadoosh

Tobi said:


> Gaaaaah i couldn't let this one go...
> 
> That is where you're wrong... Selective breeding? so there are wolves out in the wild that didn't eat meat while they were "continually evolving" and what you're saying is that we found those plant eating wolves, and bred them all together and make "less meat eating dogs"? :lol:
> 
> “The domestic dog is an extremely close relative of the gray wolf, differing from it by at most 0.2% of mtDNA sequence....
> 
> In comparison, the gray wolf differs from its closest wild relative, the coyote, by about 4% of mitochondrial DNA sequence.”
> 
> Robert K. Wayne, Ph.D.
> 
> you can at least back it up... if you'd like to read more about Dr. Waynes work you may at this link.
> 2. Canid Genetics


Like the difference between a 180 pound mastiff and a 2 pound chihuahua. That's kind of what you are getting at? 
The fact is that there is still a difference. .2 is significant enough that the two are separate species....
Anyways I asked the questions that I wanted answered and have literally had no answers to them I'll repost them so you can see them again. You can pretend you know or you can just say that raw is literally a guessing game just like any other dietary choices. 
My dog doesn't thrive on raw. It's not the holy grail of all dietary choices. It's not what it cut out to be, not for Ruby anyway.


----------



## BearMurphy

skadoosh said:


> My 5 year old daughter has autism. She explores her world through her mouth (a sensory thing). She puts almost everything into her mouth that she finds. Are you saying there is no risk to feeding raw? Or even that the risks aren't increased?
> I fed my dog raw. She had physical side effects as well as behavioral side effects. Not only that-- one day I was cutting up a chicken quarter and it slipped (it was partially frozen) and fell onto the floor. There was ice blood all over my floor. I felt soooooo paranoid and so guilty! I washed and washed and washed and then I washed with vinegar and washed again. I mopped and got on my hands and knees.
> Do I think the possible slight benefits of feeding raw (not with my dog but say if I got another dog) is worth my child possibly getting salmonella poisoning or e. coli. Hell no. I think it's a calculated risk and if you take it-- don't cry to anyone when something bad happens.
> I don't care what anyone feeds their dogs, I just think that it is fantastical and its benefits are exaggerated.


if you eat meat you would take precautions to clean properly and use proper raw meat handling procedures. you should do the same when you handle raw meat for your dog. if you can't handle keeping your dog's area clean and preparing the dog's food then you shouldn't feed raw, but remember that there could be bacteria in your dog's kibble, in the rabbit poop it just ate or in the dead animal it picked up outside. I don't live in fear of bacteria but I do wash my hands and surfaces that come in contact with something that could contaminate whether I feed my dog raw meat or not. it is clear you do not think PMR is an appropriate feeding style but your arguments against appear to be more personal than factual


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## skadoosh

Tobi said:


> Just because it's not for you, doesn't mean a crusade against raw, or asking others to prove themselves to you is needed. I've seen more benefits to raw than i can even tell you, i suppose if you have a little kid running around licking the linoleum you might want to think twice about raw... that's just a personal choice.


My crusade isn't against raw. It's against a bunch of people that tout it as superior because of hearsay and rumors. Guesses and conjecture. No basis in fact. No studies just guesses. Good luck with all that. 
I never said I have a little kid licking the linoleum. Thanks for the rude implication though. Very nice.


----------



## Roo

> I have a question. Do you or anyone else on here have a study that says dogs fed PMR are healthier then dogs fed high quality kibble?


The only study I'm aware involving raw vs kibble vs home cooked is related to digestion done at University of IL, and it did show raw having a higher macro-nutrient digestion rate than home cooked or kibble. The study was done on cats, not dogs, however one of participants in the study, Dr. Cheryl L. Morris, PhD in Nutritional Sciences (Canine Nutrition), stated that while they did the study on domestic cats, they felt that the same results would likely be shown for domestic dogs, which they hope to do a similar study on in the future.
Evolve Animal Services: Raw Diet Research - FINALLY!!!

Any other info I have regarding raw vs high quality kibble would be all anecdotal, like my non holistc vet, who is the off site vet for the military dogs at our local AF base, and has been switching the military dogs over to raw diets because they've been seeing better performance and overall health from the couple of dogs they first switched to "experiment" with. 

Kibble is really convenient and usually cheaper, yet there are many owners out there that prefer to feed raw and continue feeding raw for years, my guess is that like me, they've seen enough of a beneficial difference from feeding their dogs kibble to feeding raw to make it worth the extra time and expense to fed raw.

Oh and I'm still curious about the specific nutrient questions I asked you, you never gave me an answer.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## skadoosh

magicre said:


> and i think it's rude for you to even infer that we feed our dogs raw because of hearsay and rumours.
> 
> now i'm really out of here.......this is no longer a debate. and now that i've read some of your answers, i'm not sure it ever was.


That is EXACTLY what raw feeding is. A rumor.


----------



## skadoosh

Roo said:


> The only study I'm aware involving raw vs kibble vs home cooked is related to digestion done at University of IL, and it did show raw having a higher macro-nutrient digestion rate than home cooked or kibble. The study was done on cats, not dogs, however one of participants in the study, Dr. Cheryl L. Morris, PhD in Nutritional Sciences (Canine Nutrition), stated that while they did the study on domestic cats, they felt that the same results would likely be shown for domestic dogs, which they hope to do a similar study on in the future.
> Evolve Animal Services: Raw Diet Research - FINALLY!!!
> 
> Any other info I have regarding raw vs high quality kibble would be all anecdotal, like my non holistc vet, who is the off site vet for the military dogs at our local AF base, and has been switching the military dogs over to raw diets because they've been seeing better performance and overall health from the couple of dogs they first switched to "experiment" with.
> 
> Kibble is really convenient and usually cheaper, yet there are many owners out there that prefer to feed raw and continue feeding raw for years, my guess is that like me, they've seen enough of a beneficial difference from feeding their dogs kibble to feeding raw to make it worth the extra time and expense to fed raw.
> 
> Oh and I'm still curious about the specific nutrient questions I asked you, you never gave me an answer.


The study was done on an obligate carnivore. That is not helpful concerning dogs.


----------



## Roo

> The study was done on an obligate carnivore. That is not helpful concerning dogs.


Did you miss this part or do you think someone with a PhD in canine nutrition is wrong in their opinion?. . . The study was done on cats, not dogs, however one of participants in the study, Dr. Cheryl L. Morris, PhD in Nutritional Sciences (Canine Nutrition), stated that while they did the study on domestic cats, they felt that the same results would likely be shown for domestic dogs, which they hope to do a similar study on in the future. 

Oh and I'm still waiting for your reply on the specific nutrients.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

Just another way to look at it with the chihuahua and mastiff. 

Say one person is from Europe and another from South America. They look different, sound different, may be different sizes but it's still a human, the same thing. Lots of people look different, but we're all the same.


----------



## skadoosh

Roo said:


> Did you miss this part or do you think someone with a PhD in canine nutrition is wrong in their opinion?. . . The study was done on cats, not dogs, however one of participants in the study, Dr. Cheryl L. Morris, PhD in Nutritional Sciences (Canine Nutrition), stated that while they did the study on domestic cats, they felt that the same results would likely be shown for domestic dogs, which they hope to do a similar study on in the future.
> 
> Oh and I'm still waiting for your reply on the specific nutrients.


I have seen PhD nutritionists say the exact same thing about kibble. I don't know the person nor their credentials so no I don't trust them.


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> Just another way to look at it with the chihuahua and mastiff.
> 
> Say one person is from Europe and another from South America. They look different, sound different, may be different sizes but it's still a human, the same thing. Lots of people look different, but we're all the same.


But they arent .2% different in DNA.


----------



## Kayota

Sure they are, you don't know that. I repeat: Dogs and wolves are the SAME SPECIES. This is SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN.


----------



## Rvent

Myths About Raw: Are dogs omnivores? I found this article to be very informative and it should answer some of the questions you asked related to intestine tract, teeth, and anatomy of dogs and cats... it comments on black bears as well.


----------



## skadoosh

Kayota said:


> Sure they are, you don't know that. I repeat: Dogs and wolves are the SAME SPECIES. This is SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN.


No they arent. A mastiff and a chihuahua are. A wolf and a dog aren't.


----------



## DaneMama

I closed this thread. Not because people were being rude or inappropriate. Applause to you all or keeping your cool. 

But I think a time out is needed. EDIT: reopened thread to see if people can take THEIR OWN time outs. 

Skadoosh in particular needs to come up and take a deep breath. Maybe just read and read for a while. That's what most people do. Research things FOR YOURSELF instead of relying on a bunch of biased raw feeders for answers, especially when you huff and puff and dismiss our knowledge/experience. Of course we are going to tout that raw is best....because most of us have fed kibble, homecooked, etc and wanted something more. Our dogs have done better on a PMR diet. I'd say in most cases when dogs don't do well ok a PMR diet it's due to user error, not the dog's biology/physiology.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> No they arent. A mastiff and a chihuahua are. A wolf and a dog aren't.


Where do you think dogs came from then?


----------



## skadoosh

It was not from user error. Of course you would say that though...


----------



## lauren43

skadoosh said:


> So breeding= diet?
> Look at a pug. Now look at a wolf. Are they the same? No. They are not. They may be able to reproduce but naturally this would not occur.
> Kind of like the "liger" the African lion crossed with a Siberian tiger... is that natural? Must be because they can reproduce.
> If all of these changes are being made to the outside of a dog, why isn't it possible that there may just be changes going on internally?


I don't understand where you are going with this one. Just because I don't look like my neighbor does not mean we are not somewhat genetically related. I believe they were able to trace human ancestry to Africa and that the way you look (ie. ethnicity) had no telling of how closely related you were to the "original" humans.
Besides the fact that every variation you see in dog breeds is man-made. For example breeds like English and French bulldogs would never ever exist in the wild. I believe in most if not all cases the mothers need c-sections to deliver and many times have to be artificially inseminated.
Which at the end of the day has nothing to do with what they eat.
Besides the fact that as dog became “man’s best friend” there was no such thing as dog food not until at least the mid-1800’s. So dog food has been around for150 years and yet dogs have been around for at least 10000 years…


skadoosh said:


> I've seen evidence of relation through genetics but not evidence that their dietary needs are the same as a wolf.
> I have a question. Do you or anyone else on here have a study that says dogs fed PMR are healthier then dogs fed high quality kibble? Does anyone have proof or literature stating that dogs take zero nutrition from plant matter? That dogs don't get parasites from raw meat? That dogs never get salmonella/e. coli poisoning? That dogs that are immuno compromised aren't at risk when eating raw? That dogs don't excrete salmonella more frequently from their feces or even their pores? I would like answers with proof backing it up.


There have been no studies done on raw vs kibble, because there is no money in it. 


skadoosh said:


> My 5 year old daughter has autism. She explores her world through her mouth (a sensory thing). She puts almost everything into her mouth that she finds. Are you saying there is no risk to feeding raw? Or even that the risks aren't increased?
> I fed my dog raw. She had physical side effects as well as behavioral side effects. Not only that-- one day I was cutting up a chicken quarter and it slipped (it was partially frozen) and fell onto the floor. There was ice blood all over my floor. I felt soooooo paranoid and so guilty! I washed and washed and washed and then I washed with vinegar and washed again. I mopped and got on my hands and knees.
> Do I think the possible slight benefits of feeding raw (not with my dog but say if I got another dog) is worth my child possibly getting salmonella poisoning or e. coli. Hell no. I think it's a calculated risk and if you take it-- don't cry to anyone when something bad happens.
> I don't care what anyone feeds their dogs, I just think that it is fantastical and its benefits are exaggerated.


You do realize that you or your child could still get salmonella from kibble, right? If your daughter does put everything in her mouth as you say, you would still have to ensure all kibble is eaten by the dog and that no kibble chunks go astray. As well as remembering to wash the dogs bowl every day and your hands after handling it. With raw, as long as you treat the meat the same way you would for yourself, you should be fine. Most people are familiar with how to handle raw meat but many people don’t realize you have to handle dog kibble in some-what the same manner.


----------



## DaneMama

skadoosh said:


> It was not from user error. Of course you would say that though...


How would we know? 

You just say your dog didn't do well...but you leave out important information, like what she was offered, how much, when, who your mentor(s) are/were, where you got your information, what books youve read, research done, etc. Are we supposed to just believe you when you say she didn't do well, especially since you've had a fairly negative attitude thus far toward Raw feeding?


----------



## Kayota

Dogs are a subspecies of wolf - Canis lupus familiaris. The wolf is Canis lupus. Similarly, the artic wolf is Canis lupus arctos.

Maybe this will help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies_of_Canis_lupus


----------



## Rvent

skadoosh said:


> No they arent. A mastiff and a chihuahua are. A wolf and a dog aren't.[/QUOT
> 
> The origin of the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris) began with the domestication of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) several tens of thousands of years ago.[1][2][3] Genetic and archaeological evidence shows that humans domesticated wolves on more than one occasion, with the present lineage of C. l. familiaris arising probably roughly 15,000 years ago as evidenced by the Bonn-Oberkassel site, 14,000 years ago.
> 
> Directly from From Wikipedia


----------



## meggels

magicre said:


> ah, i understand now. yeah, can't imagine what a pug/woofie would look like. LOL
























My attempt to lighten the mood in this thread :heh:


----------



## tem_sat

skadoosh said:


> Another question. I noticed a trend of kibble being blamed for the incidences in cancer in dogs (not saying crap food doesn't contribute). WHY do golden retrievers have a MUCH higher incidence of cancer then say your average pound mutt? Would you say because goldens eat more kibble or because they are simply genetically pre-disposed?


In an effort to maintain good forum searchability, please consider posting completely unrelated questions in a new post in the appropriate section.


----------



## tem_sat

skadoosh said:


> Dental disease is a non issue if you keep on top of your dog. It takes maybe 5-10 minutes a day to brush their teeth with an enzymatic cleaner. Bully sticks are a lifesaver as well as training your dog to stand still for an at home scaling.
> My dog will lay in her side with her head in my lap and I will scrape and scale her teeth- no issue.


I have a Dachshund sitting right next to me who has disproven the above statement over, and over, and over again. In addition, I personally would not scale my pet's teeth due to not being able to get under the gum line, risking damage to the tooth exterior, and not being able to follow the scaling with polishing. That's what turkey necks were made for.


----------



## Sprocket

tem_sat said:


> I have a Dachshund sitting right next to me who has disproven the above statement over, and over, and over again. In addition, I personally would not scale my pet's teeth due to not being able to get under the gum line, risking damage to the tooth exterior, and not being able to follow the scaling with polishing. That's what turkey necks were made for.


Also why do both scaling and feeding when we can kill two birds with one stone? :wink:


----------



## Celt

Just thought to add my 2 cents. First on the "bacteria thing", being a horrid housekeeper and feeding raw if it was "easy" to get these then people in my household would have done so (no one has to date). I've "lost" meaty rib bones, have had dogs "bury" meat in my bed, chicken pieces have been "flung" to slide across my kitchen floor. I seldomly use anything more than soap and water to clean up and to be honest the clean up is rather spotty. Next, I have personally experienced dogs choking on kibble. Yes, I've the same experience with raw (different doofuses though). I think the kibble incident was scarier, what with him coughing, hacking, me pounding, "fishing" and only "pieces" coming out. Third, dogs and wolves are very closely related. They can breed and produce fertile offspring. One indicator of how closely related critters are is their ability to produce fertile offspring. The majority of "hybrid" animals are not fertile but wolf hybrids are almost always fertile. I've seen a daschund ("I swear she's spayed"--PITA owner, wanted vet proof after that little incident) willingly breed with a wold hybrid. And yes little dogs will mate with larger ones. I've seen a few GSD/daschund crosses, and once a mastiff/poodle (miniature) cross. I'm sure others have seen equally "missized" crosses. Lastly, dogs are carnivores but that just means that meat is the most easily digested and used by the system. That's were all those "extra addons" come in to play, such as obligated-unable to get all nutrients from any source other than meat (except of course, we now have kibble which is "overly" processed to allow the "indigestible" to be digested with all the "missing" mutrients added in to keep the animal healthy, i.e. cat food), opportunistic-meat is best, but if "needed" can get nutrients from other sources, usually with some kind of "cost" to the animal (increase "work" the body needs to digest, consumption amount increase, etc). Omnivores are a kind of "blend" of a herbivore-carnivore digestive track, so omnivore will not have the long digestive tract of a strict plant eater, but neither will it have the short tract of a strict carnivore, same with teeth/jaw structure. So food can be processed with "equal cost" no matter the source. 
I hope this made some kind of sense, been kind of difficult typjng just now.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## skadoosh

I had to leave for a bit... getting a bit exasperated. 
I have nothing against what you all feed your dogs. 
I know kibble works best for some and not others. PMR works for some and not others. A mix of the two works best for some (my girl) and not for others.
I don't have 100% blind faith in the theories of PMR like some on here. I have strong reservations concerning PMR, now doubly considering how my dog reacted to it. Thanks for all of the info...


----------



## skadoosh

tem_sat said:


> I have a Dachshund sitting right next to me who has disproven the above statement over, and over, and over again. In addition, I personally would not scale my pet's teeth due to not being able to get under the gum line, risking damage to the tooth exterior, and not being able to follow the scaling with polishing. That's what turkey necks were made for.


Why cant you get under the gum line, i find it quite simple... What damage would happen to the tooth exterior? I'm not scraping a couple mm into the tooth! Lol


----------



## Swissy Lady

skadoosh said:


> My dog doesn't thrive on raw. It's not the holy grail of all dietary choices. It's not what it cut out to be, not for Ruby anyway.


Just curious....seeing that your dog didn't do so well on PMR....what was your feeding regimen? And why did your dog not do well? What happened?


----------



## whiteleo

skadoosh said:


> My husband worked in the pork industry. If you KNEW HALF of what they do to those pigs... you might reconsider. They live in filth. They are constantly being pushed with antibiotics and other medicines. They have a crap ton of de-wormer pumped into them. There is so much abuse that is involved with raising meat.... That aside they are also in kibble but at least I know a lot of that crap is (hopefully) cooked out of the meat. You say the enzymes have changed in the kibble after is cooked. Well so are the antibiotics and other nasties that are pumped into the animal.
> Dental disease is a non issue if you keep on top of your dog. It takes maybe 5-10 minutes a day to brush their teeth with an enzymatic cleaner. Bully sticks are a lifesaver as well as training your dog to stand still for an at home scaling.
> My dog will lay in her side with her head in my lap and I will scrape and scale her teeth- no issue. Preservatives.... you don't think they use preservatives in raw meat?


Actually, I do know how pigs are treated. It's pretty pathetic and sad that The USA can't come to grips with how to ethically treat animals they eat. However, I don't feed pork or chicken to my dogs and the vast majority, I'd say 95% of the foods that I do feed them are all grass fed A/H free, yes I do know exactly what is going in their bodies.......But, the bigger question is do you know what is going in your dogs?


----------



## RedneckCowgirl

Ok so I'm only on page 10 but I had to say something.

If dogs, in YOUR words, skadoosh, are not wolves, and wolves eats grass and such, then doesn't tht mean that our domesticated dogs very well could thrive WITHOUT those veggies? Since they are totally different (and you have made your opinion on that very clear)

Off to finish the thread now


----------



## RedneckCowgirl

I'm also curious to what you fed/how long/etc

One of my dogs went through a pretty intense detox period. She had no energy, started shedding about 4 times the usual, her breath was raunchy. She also dropped weight. It was pretty bad. HOWEVER, after about 3 months of that she now has great energy, soft coat with less shedding then before starting, no more ucky breath, and her weight has stabilized as well. I stuck with it, because I knew from seeing others dogs after switching that she would come out of it and be 100000000 times healthier than before. And she has. I firmly believe that every single dog will do best when fed a raw diet.


----------



## tem_sat

skadoosh said:


> Why cant you get under the gum line, i find it quite simple... What damage would happen to the tooth exterior? I'm not scraping a couple mm into the tooth! Lol


Google is your friend.

"The only way to remove subgingival plaque and calculus is by using sharp hand instruments and/or ultrasonic scalers under the gingiva which is uncomfortable and frightening to an animal that is awake and not under general anesthesia. The teeth are also not polished so after scraping the tartar and calculus there are now scratches on the enamel of the tooth that allow more disease causing bacteria to take hold. They may make the tops of the teeth look shiny but the majority of the bacteria that causes dental disease is located under the gums."


----------



## skadoosh

Swissy Lady said:


> Just curious....seeing that your dog didn't do so well on PMR....what was your feeding regimen? And why did your dog not do well? What happened?


I didn't do it for very long as I was a bit scared of how she was behaving. I tried it for 3 months total. 
Started out with chicken necks/backs (one per day), after about a week I started giving her quarters (poop was solid). Then after two weeks of just chicken I added duck (poop still great). After about a week of that is started her on moose/venison, small portions. After about the 1st month she started becoming listless and her poop started getting more loose so I added in more chicken bone and less moose/venison. Her poop wouldn't even out and she just kept getting worse... She is an almost 40 pound dog with a high metabolism and I was feeding her just under a pound per day. I was also supplementing her with canned tripe (which I have always done anyway and she is used to it), fish oil and vit e. 
Her coat became dull and brittle. It was very well.... gross. She was acting listless and (she is a very jokey/humorous dog-- part Boston terrier) just lost her sense of doggy humor-- for lack of a better term. She started getting lazy and not wanting to go in her daily walks. She was just not herself. Her poop started looking like chocolate pudding and it had a large amount of mucous in it, this was even after I went straight back to square one-- back to bony chicken. No dice. 
I put her back on Acana Ranchlands with a chicken quarter every day and she is back to her normal self 100%. I really appreciate you asking as no one else has shown a particular concern


----------



## Kayota

I was wondering actually. How long was it after you switched her back to only chicken before you decided to go back to kibble?


----------



## skadoosh

Kayota said:


> I was wondering actually. How long was it after you switched her back to only chicken before you decided to go back to kibble?


I would sayyyy I did just chicken again for around 10 days before I decided to go back onto kibble.


----------



## skadoosh

tem_sat said:


> Google is your friend.
> 
> "The only way to remove subgingival plaque and calculus is by using sharp hand instruments and/or ultrasonic scalers under the gingiva which is uncomfortable and frightening to an animal that is awake and not under general anesthesia. The teeth are also not polished so after scraping the tartar and calculus there are now scratches on the enamel of the tooth that allow more disease causing bacteria to take hold. They may make the tops of the teeth look shiny but the majority of the bacteria that causes dental disease is located under the gums."


Google is my friend.... debatable. I google headache I get brain tumor lol. Well I don't scale that often and she does very well.


----------



## Kayota

Ten days isn't long enough to see a difference I wouldn't think... It took a month for her to get ill on the moose and venison, wouldn't it take a while for her to feel better, too? I bet she was just allergic to one of those proteins.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## skadoosh

magicre said:


> i can see clearly why your dog didn't do well.
> 
> please don't blame raw when this is absolutely user error.
> 
> sorry it didn't work out for you....and i'm glad you're now comfortable with what you do feed.


If I hadn't tried raw none of this would have happened.


----------



## RedneckCowgirl

skadoosh said:


> If I hadn't tried raw none of this would have happened.


Honestly, your dog was just going through detox. Its insanely common, nothing to get so butt-hurt over.


----------



## skadoosh

RedneckCowgirl said:


> Honestly, your dog was just going through detox. Its insanely common, nothing to get so butt-hurt over.


Detox. Where are the studies that it is a natural process.... yet another anecdote. I have seen people go through months of "detox" with their dogs and they continue to torture the poor animals. I'm not doing it.


----------



## lauren43

I'm more concerned that you went from chicken to venison. Venison is very rich, the first time I gave it to my dog he had explosive diarrhea (in his cage no less!) and he wasn't new to raw. Then I waited nearly one month before trying it again and I got lucky he did really good with it. But many ppl have to introduce something venison painfully slowly like an ounce a day for a long while before they can make it a full meal.


----------



## RedneckCowgirl

skadoosh said:


> Detox. Where are the studies that it is a natural process.... yet another anecdote. I have seen people go through months of "detox" with their dogs and they continue to torture the poor animals. I'm not doing it.


When I stopped eating 90% of processed foods (still not all the way there, but trying! :smile I went through 2 weeks of detox, I should have just stopped? I think not. Listen, _you_ have to decide what its worth to you. Only _you_ can make that choice. The conversation here is pointless. If its not worth it to you, then it isn't. Period. Nothing I, Re, Tem, or anyone else can say or do about it. You want your answers? Many links have been provided, take some time and read them. Stop harassing us "raw feeders" for answers you don't want to hear or listen to.


----------



## Dude and Bucks Mamma

My God... This thread is just plain hilarious. Kudos to all of you who gave facts even though they weren't being heard. 

And I, for one, do indeed tout raw as superior. Just thought I'd throw that out there eace:



skadoosh said:


> I really appreciate you asking as no one else has shown a particular concern


Actually, it has been asked multiple times but you don't seem to be reading much of what people are saying as you have missed things that were said multiple times more than once.

And I, too, can absolutely see why your dog did so poorly.


----------



## naturalfeddogs

skadoosh said:


> My husband worked in the pork industry. If you KNEW HALF of what they do to those pigs... you might reconsider. They live in filth. They are constantly being pushed with antibiotics and other medicines. They have a crap ton of de-wormer pumped into them. There is so much abuse that is involved with raising meat.... That aside they are also in kibble but at least I know a lot of that crap is (hopefully) cooked out of the meat. You say the enzymes have changed in the kibble after is cooked. Well so are the antibiotics and other nasties that are pumped into the animal.
> Dental disease is a non issue if you keep on top of your dog. It takes maybe 5-10 minutes a day to brush their teeth with an enzymatic cleaner. Bully sticks are a lifesaver as well as training your dog to stand still for an at home scaling.
> My dog will lay in her side with her head in my lap and I will scrape and scale her teeth- no issue. Preservatives.... you don't think they use preservatives in raw meat?


Dental disease is a non issue if you feed raw bone......


----------



## naturalfeddogs

skadoosh said:


> I'll give an example. A good friend of mine owned an afghan hound. She fed it PMR since it was a puppy at 8 weeks. Gorgeous, registered show dog. It died at 7 of liver cancer (which the breed is prone to). Can you blame kibble in this situation?
> I MAY sound confrontational but I DO truly want to learn. I have heard kibble knocked so much but it has kept my father in laws dog kicking for the past 16 years (still healthy and YES for the love of god, thriving). I have seen this MANY times (this is NOT an exception).
> Everyone picks kibble apart and now I am going to argue semantics of feeding a full PMR diet. I feel entitled as I have had to justify why I do not want to feed my dog an all meat diet. I want answers. Factual answers backed with research. The same as you all want from kibble companies.


Raw has been around for thousands and thousands of years thanks to mother nature. I don't think there is a whole lot of "research" other than that. Mother nature designed carnivores to eat raw. Period.

Kibble. Designed by man about 100 years ago. Unnatural, full of artificial ingredients formed into little nuggets. Simple as that.


----------



## naturalfeddogs

skadoosh said:


> Maybe a dog's digestive tract being longer then an obligate carnivore's digestive tract is implying that dogs are able to/are meant to eat vegetation...?


There isn't any nutrients in any form of plant matter that isn't in raw meat, bones and organs. In fact, it's in very small amounts and not even in an available form for a dog to properly digest. Grass for example after eaten, comes out one way or another in the very same form it went in. Long strands, undigested.


----------



## Roo

Just so everyone can be on the same page, some of Skadoosh's past Posts/Threads. . .

*06-11-2012* "So I started raw 3 days ago. Just wanted to run by what exactly I am doing and any opinions would be helpful. I purchased pre-made as it is a more convenient option for me. It is called Spring Meadows. Made locally with no outsourced ingredients. Has unique meat sources-- chicken, beef, elk, goat, alpaca, lamb and venison. >> Natural dog food, natural cat food — raw food and pure fish oil pet supplements. It is a whole animal pre mix. Muscle, bone, organs, tripe and offal. My dog is a Boston terrier/APBT mix. She is 37 pounds and 12 months old. Her activity level is low-medium (kind of lazy). I started with chicken as a first protein source. Started with half a pound a day. With fish oil. And I gave her a couple of canned sardines as well. Her poop is awesome- not too soft and not too dry. Will also be giving her whole meats as well for the dental benefits- I have chicken necks and chicken backs right now (will be giving her a chicken back for supper tonight). Please let me know what you think of my regime as it stands. Thanks to all who read! Is there any serious danger for bacteria contaminating my house? I have two young children and would like to know if there is an actual increased risk to raw. (I feed outside, not in the house btw)"
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16308-started-raw.html#post202719

*06-11-2012 *"I started raw with my girl about 2 weeks ago. I do pre made. (it's whole animal, made locally, includes bone, organs, tripe and offal). I also do whole meats as well (starting out with chicken necks and backs). I give fish oil and the occasional canned sardines as well. She gets not quite a pound of food a day (she is a Boston terrier/Apbt, lean and fit, low-med energy level, 12 months old, 37 pounds [just weighed on Saturday])."

"I feed my girl whole meats (bone in) as well as pre-made. I purchased 16 pounds of pre-made for $39, a little bit under $2.50 per pound. I thought this was reasonable."

"My girl has a pretty darn tough stomach. She adjusted to raw with no Hershey squirts. So I'm hoping she will do ok... I will switch slowly though, don't worry!"

"I have noticed positive changes in her physicality but not her energy as of yet (shes only been on it for a couple of weeks)."

"I feed ground right now because it is the most convenient for my lifestyle ATM (2 young kids, my youngest being special needs- autistic). I researched this brand and technically I didn't watch the grinding process so no I suppose i don't know what's in there. BUT I have faith that it is much better then any kibble out there.
One day I might switch over to complete whole meats but right now the convenience of a mix (muscle, organ, bone, offal and tripe) all in one patty is definitely a convenience. She is getting half and half right now and it seems to be doing her a lot of good!"
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16316-just-some-raw-newbie-questions.html

*06-13-2012* "What are the benefits of apple cider vinegar? I've heard a bit about it but would like to know more...
How do you add it? To their food or water?"
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16342-apple-cider-vinegar.html

*06-14-2012* "I was just wondering what a person can expect concerning detox? How long does it usually last? What is the best way to know how well your dog is doing on raw? Is the poop the best way? Or are there other methods? How do you know if your dog is getting enough nutrition? Does anyone here believe in vitamin/mineral supplements? Is there ANY possibility that a dog can be effected by contaminated meat (e. coli, toxoplasmosis, salmonella etc). Is pork safe, I read somewhere about parasites..."

"Are canned sardines ok?? I don't feed them very often and I found saltless! It's more for additional nutrients and some extra omega 3"
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16360-random-raw-questions-put-them-here.html

*06-14-2012* "I sympathize. I really like kibble. Pour and go lol. I do pre-made too, anything else I feel would be overwhelming..."
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/dry-canned-dog-food/16359-would-any-kibble-work.html#post203411

*06-14-2012* "So... It's been a week! I started my girl Ruby on a raw diet because obviously it is the species appropriate choice. Not only that, she was beginning to have allergies-- chewing her legs, her bum and she had some yeast around her mouth. I started 7 days ago and I can honestly tell you that she has ALREADY improved! She has a shinier/softer coat, she doesnt reek like dog, her teeth are getting whiter and she had not been itching or biting. The yeast around her mouth is gone ALREADY. I tell you, if a 12 month old dog was already starting to have allergy symptoms, what would she look like in a couple of years?? I was very tentative to try raw as there are so many nay sayers. Especially because I have children... "you'll give them salmonella, they get toxoplasmosis, your putting them in danger". Yeah No ones dead yet lol I just want to thank you guys for the help and the confidence to switch over. It's already done wonders for my girl!" 

"She does look wonderful. She is still shedding quite a bit but I suppose not everything will improve immediately."

"I am trying although her poop is a bit crumbly coming out.... I added a bit more muscle meat this morning (chicken thigh and a bit of sardines) so hopefully that will help. Its really weird maybe but I enjoy watching her eat. She munches down those bones and she looks like she died and went to heaven! Lol"

"Well I'm hoping she avoids all of the above! I just started my cat on raw as well!  he has chronic constipation with blood in his stool (megacolon I suspect) and nothing has worked. So I decided to try raw and already he had a freakin small poop with NO BLOOD! Wow. That is all."
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16357-so-its-been-week-2.html

*06-14-2012* "Ok thanks! I was getting kind of concerned... her coat is gorgeous and shiny but yet seems to be shedding a bit more then usual. What are some fatty meats that you could recommend? I have chicken thighs and they seem to have quite a bit of fat on them. Also do eggs contain quite a bit of fat??
What are other symptoms of detox? Sorry to hi jack this thread. Maybe I'll start a new one..."
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16358-i-feel-like-ok-but.html#post203403
*
06-14-2012* "Exactly. I dont think raw is for everyone and I don't think every dog does well on it."
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16362-stepping-back-raw-2.html#post203507

*07-12-2012* "I'm gonna buy me some coconut oil lol!"
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16716-coconut-oil-3.html#post208297

*07-28-2012* "I have my girl on half and half as well. She gets Acana Ranchlands right now and a chicken quarter usually in the evening. I am thinking of keeping her on this long term. I don't think a dog should JUST eat kibble it's entire life but I dont know the science of raw well enough to do it 100% of the time."
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/dry-canned-dog-food/16964-really-considering-doing-half-kibble-long-term-3.html#post211715

*07-28-2012* "I don't have an issue with either raw or kibble or any other diet people choose to feed their dogs. If I might hijack the thread for a second....
I fed my dog raw-- she was listless, sick looking and her coat looked dull and shaggy (kind of odd considering she is a smooth coat dog). Her feces was constantly chocolate pudding and sometimes had mucous in it. I switched her back to kibbe and she is back to her old beautiful self. Why? I don't know and I don't care. If kibble works for her then that's what I'm using and I don't think anyone is offended by that..."
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16967-avma-voting-adopt-policy-against-raw-feeding-14.html#post211744

*07-28-2012* "I think idealistically it is the best diet. I just know it didn't work for my dog (and TRUST me, I did it BY THE BOOK)."

"Raw is whole and natural and I like the idea of that very much. So much, in fact, that I decided to try it. It didn't work. I listed off all of the reasons and raw feeders had an excuse for EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE REASONS I DECIDED AGAINST RAW. They weren't even particularly factual, very anectdotal. I DO in fact want to feed raw. BUT I would like some professional canine nutritionist to develop a form of guideline to follow to feed so that I can refer back to it. The whole 80 10 10 thing was much to vague for my liking...My dog did not do well. I did it the best I knew how. A lot of research, a lot of questioning. A lot of communication with people that have used it long term. It didn't work for my dog. MY dog." 
http://dogfoodchat.com/forum/raw-feeding/16967-avma-voting-adopt-policy-against-raw-feeding-15.html#post211784


----------



## lauren43

Thanks Roo that does explain a lot. I guess its time for me to walk away from this thread (though I'm sure I'll still read on)...


----------



## naturalfeddogs

skadoosh said:


> I've seen evidence of relation through genetics but not evidence that their dietary needs are the same as a wolf.
> I have a question. Do you or anyone else on here have a study that says dogs fed PMR are healthier then dogs fed high quality kibble? Does anyone have proof or literature stating that dogs take zero nutrition from plant matter? That dogs don't get parasites from raw meat? That dogs never get salmonella/e. coli poisoning? That dogs that are immuno compromised aren't at risk when eating raw? That dogs don't excrete salmonella more frequently from their feces or even their pores? I would like answers with proof backing it up.


Parasites don't come from muscle meat. Parasites live in the intestines and stomach. We don't feed that. If they eat a rabbit with fleas, possibly tapes yes. There are also natural dewormers for that.

PMR dogs on average see the vet much less due to a higher immune system. Their bodies are naturally more able to head off disease and parasites as well. Again, because of eating what they are meant to eat. Meat,bone and organs only. No added artificial ingredients.

I think they MAY be able to get SOME nutrients from plant matter, but in very small amounts and nothing that they can't already get from raw meat,bones and organs.

I have yet to hear of a dog getting salmonella OR e.coli. 

Immune compromised dogs will likely do better on raw. It's likely to boost the immune system.

They do have salmonella in their poop, but so do kibble poops. Just don't eat their poop or play in it and you should be fine. That includes YOUR own poop. Don't dig in the toilet!


----------



## naturalfeddogs

skadoosh said:


> I didn't do it for very long as I was a bit scared of how she was behaving. I tried it for 3 months total.
> Started out with chicken necks/backs (one per day), after about a week I started giving her quarters (poop was solid). Then after two weeks of just chicken I added duck (poop still great). After about a week of that is started her on moose/venison, small portions. After about the 1st month she started becoming listless and her poop started getting more loose so I added in more chicken bone and less moose/venison. Her poop wouldn't even out and she just kept getting worse... She is an almost 40 pound dog with a high metabolism and I was feeding her just under a pound per day. I was also supplementing her with canned tripe (which I have always done anyway and she is used to it), fish oil and vit e.
> Her coat became dull and brittle. It was very well.... gross. She was acting listless and (she is a very jokey/humorous dog-- part Boston terrier) just lost her sense of doggy humor-- for lack of a better term. She started getting lazy and not wanting to go in her daily walks. She was just not herself. Her poop started looking like chocolate pudding and it had a large amount of mucous in it, this was even after I went straight back to square one-- back to bony chicken. No dice.
> I put her back on Acana Ranchlands with a chicken quarter every day and she is back to her normal self 100%. I really appreciate you asking as no one else has shown a particular concern


Well, I have to say you started out great, but went to fast. You jumped into red meats too fast. Slow is always better. Why did you skip turkey? What happened to fish? I don't think you gave a long enough, fair chance. JMO.


----------



## Roo

> I didn't do it for very long as I was a bit scared of how she was behaving. I tried it for 3 months total. Started out with chicken necks/backs (one per day), after about a week I started giving her quarters (poop was solid). Then after two weeks of just chicken I added duck (poop still great). After about a week of that is started her on moose/venison, small portions. After about the 1st month she started becoming listless and her poop started getting more loose so I added in more chicken bone and less moose/venison. Her poop wouldn't even out and she just kept getting worse... She is an almost 40 pound dog with a high metabolism and I was feeding her just under a pound per day. I was also supplementing her with canned tripe (which I have always done anyway and she is used to it), fish oil and vit e. Her coat became dull and brittle. It was very well.... gross. She was acting listless and (she is a very jokey/humorous dog-- part Boston terrier) just lost her sense of doggy humor-- for lack of a better term. She started getting lazy and not wanting to go in her daily walks. She was just not herself. Her poop started looking like chocolate pudding and it had a large amount of mucous in it, this was even after I went straight back to square one-- back to bony chicken. No dice. I put her back on Acana Ranchlands with a chicken quarter every day and she is back to her normal self 100%. I really appreciate you asking as no one else has shown a particular concern


I'm confused, from your past posts it seems you didn't try raw for 3 months, only for possibly 2, as you had different start times listed in your posts. I can't say for certain, but it does seem like user error was possible given you were feeding pre made with included organ, and whole meat, fish oil and sardines, possibly coconut oil and ACV, plus different proteins in such a short amount of time. I know you said your dog has an iron stomach, but I would think that would be a lot for any dog newly switched. Also almost a full pound a day seems a bit high IMO, however I know every dog is different though, but my 38lb dog only eats 10-11oz a day.

You mention your dog had no energy, yet you said in your posts her activity level is low-medium (kind of lazy) normally, maybe I'm misinterpreting what you meant by listless. 

According to your posts in June, everything was ok, except for additional shedding, then at the end of July, you posted that you had switched back to raw and kibble, saying that your dog started doing horrible on the raw diet, and you were concerned that the guidelines of the diet were too vague, but that you really wanted to feed raw. My biggest question with all your posts is why didn't you come here and ask for help when you were having issues before just switching back to kibble, if you really wanted to feed raw? I know plenty of raw members on this board who would have been happy to try and help you, if that's what you had wanted. 



> So much, in fact, that I decided to try it. It didn't work. I listed off all of the reasons and raw feeders had an excuse for EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE REASONS I DECIDED AGAINST RAW. They weren't even particularly factual, very anectdotal. I DO in fact want to feed raw.


No offense, but when did this happen? I couldn't find a past posting of yours where you listed off the reasons why you decided against raw, and raw feeders had an excuse for every one. I hope you don't take my posts the wrong way, I think we're all just trying to understand what happened, nothing wrong with your personal choice to switch back to feeding kibble.


----------



## naturalfeddogs

skadoosh said:


> Detox. Where are the studies that it is a natural process.... yet another anecdote. I have seen people go through months of "detox" with their dogs and they continue to torture the poor animals. I'm not doing it.


The studies are what we see in our dogs. Sort of a before and after type thing. Raw feeding is not man made, so there are no official scientific studies. We see for ourselves how our dogs look before, we see how they look after. How they feel, their teeth etc.... Those are the studies. Our own eyes.


----------



## Dude and Bucks Mamma

Roo, you helped clear up a lot of confusion for me. I appreciate that. I think I may be with Lauren. I was going to involve myself in this discussion but I can see there is no point and, while I will continue to read, I don't think I will be participating further. This thread is nothing but Skadoosh trying to instigate an argument about her raw feeding experience where she didn't even follow the basic guidelines we all know work to switch dogs over to the raw diet. Had she actually followed the guidelines then maybe I could understand why this thread is even happening but she fed her dog a whole slew of things WAY to soon. No wonder poor Ruby did so poorly. 

I see this being a case of user error.


----------



## meggels

RedneckCowgirl said:


> When I stopped eating 90% of processed foods (still not all the way there, but trying! :smile I went through 2 weeks of detox, I should have just stopped? I think not. Listen, _you_ have to decide what its worth to you. Only _you_ can make that choice. The conversation here is pointless. If its not worth it to you, then it isn't. Period. Nothing I, Re, Tem, or anyone else can say or do about it. You want your answers? Many links have been provided, take some time and read them. Stop harassing us "raw feeders" for answers you don't want to hear or listen to.



I'm curious what happened when you detoxed from the processed foods. I know what can happen in dogs, never heard of what happens in humans though


----------



## meggels

Well, something sure isn't adding up lol...


----------



## Tobi

op2:op2:


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## Ania's Mommy

meggels said:


> I'm curious what happened when you detoxed from the processed foods. I know what can happen in dogs, never heard of what happens in humans though


Meg! Send her a PM. We don't want this thread to get off track! ound:

Here's my thing: Yes, a dog/wolf (same thing, pretty much) CAN survive off of vegetation if needed. However, it will thrive on a diet of meat bones and organs, as that is what it was made to eat. So, why would I feed my dog something that they would eat out of necessity, when I can feed her what she would eat in times of plenty?

ETA: I also feel that you gave what you call "PMR" (but isn't really) a poor shot. Despite the fact that us "raw feeders" don't have studies to back up our anecdotal eyes (Magicre - that phrase you made up had me DYING!), we really are a pretty darn knowledgeable bunch and could help you out. I don't think it's fair for you to weigh in on a raw diet when YOUR anecdotal eyes didn't give it a fair shot.


----------



## meggels

Ania's Mommy said:


> Meg! Send her a PM. We don't want this thread to get off track! ound:
> 
> Here's my thing: Yes, a dog/wolf (same thing, pretty much) CAN survive off of vegetation if needed. However, it will thrive on a diet of meat bones and organs, as that is what it was made to eat. So, why would I feed my dog something that they would eat out of necessity, when I can feed her what she would eat in times of plenty?
> 
> ETA: I also feel that you gave what you call "PMR" (but isn't really) a poor shot. Despite the fact that us "raw feeders" don't have studies to back up our anecdotal eyes (Magicre - that phrase you made up had me DYING!), we really are a pretty darn knowledgeable bunch and could help you out. I don't think it's fair for you to weigh in on a raw diet when YOUR anecdotal eyes didn't give it a fair shot.



I cannot tell if you were kidding or not lol


----------



## Ania's Mommy

meggels said:


> I cannot tell if you were kidding or not lol


I was.:smile: 

In general, if you can't tell if I'm joking, I usually am. It's that super dry sense of humor I get from my grandpa.


----------



## Roo

Can we please keep this thread civil and respectful?


----------



## MollyWoppy

Roo, you did what I did. Went back and looked at her posts from when she started raw trying to figure out what went wrong and if she asked anyone to help when it obviously wasn't going according to plan. I noticed the exact same discrepancies that you did, (3 months on PMR, energy etc) wish I'd thought to copy it all into a post. Starting PMR with both pre-made and PMR sort of beats the point of starting out on mild, bony chicken backs. There's normally a lot of ground bone in pre-made raw foods. 
Skadoosh seemed like a really nice person at the beginning and I'm really surprised she turned nasty. It's a shame because we are all here willing to put in our time and experience to help, should one ask.
And, I'm sorry that your kids have Autism Skadoosh. My nephew is terribly affected so I understand how hard it is on you and the family. But, my little nephew is the sweetest kid ever, wouldn't swop him for the world.


----------



## meggels

Ania's Mommy said:


> I was.:smile:
> 
> In general, if you can't tell if I'm joking, I usually am. It's that super dry sense of humor I get from my grandpa.


Haha, I do too. It's a little harder to read online though cause I can come across as just being a jerk


----------



## DaneMama

I was thinking of closing the thread again, but I'm curious to see what skadoosh says in response to her own post history, revealing quite a few inaccuracies in her story. That to me speaks louder than her claim of "my dog didn't do well on raw" because we can all see the many errors in her ways of raw feeding. 

I think its rather sad to know that someone gave up so quickly, but it happens. People are impatient and then blame the issues due to their impatience on the method of feeding as a whole. Very rarely do people actually own up to their mistakes.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## Liz

Bubba is a doll. Noses can be overrated  Plus he is a doll on the inside and that counts for so much more.


----------



## wolfsnaps88

I am always curious when I hear that a dog did not do well on raw. While I am not here to cram the raw feeding ideals down anyone's throats, I am always wondering WHY it didn't work?

In this case, we are pinpointing through skadoosh's posts that 1.) the dog was not given enough time to transition through a possible detox period and 2.) giving too much too fast or giving things that do not mix well together

All in all, the 2 most commonly made mistakes. 


So, if the people who claim their dogs did not do well on raw have made these types of errors (and I am not judging here. I made plenty of mistakes myself) do you think the dog COULD do well on raw?

We should take a poll of people that gave up on raw to see what happened.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## skadoosh

DaneMama said:


> I was thinking of closing the thread again, but I'm curious to see what skadoosh says in response to her own post history, revealing quite a few inaccuracies in her story. That to me speaks louder than her claim of "my dog didn't do well on raw" because we can all see the many errors in her ways of raw feeding.
> 
> I think its rather sad to know that someone gave up so quickly, but it happens. People are impatient and then blame the issues due to their impatience on the method of feeding as a whole. Very rarely do people actually own up to their mistakes.


There are inconsistencies but they aren't worth explaining. I was feeding it for a couple of months. Then quit for about 2 days then started again. There was a tiny break between attempts as she was looking so crappy. 
I do want to feed her whole foods but not for me (i think mainly it gives most of you an ego boost) for her. If I don't believe a (my dog) dog can thrive on an all meat based diet then I won't use it. If I had another dog that thrived on full PMR then I would use it. 
You all can say whatever you want concerning how I did it or that it is "user error", I dont particularly care. I know that I didn't like the results. I know many people that haven't liked the results. 
Maybe if you would allbe more helpful and less sarcastic and mocking...


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## skadoosh

I can admit a couple of things:
1) It may have been partial user error (although I don't believe it is every time) 
2) I may or may not have used too many proteins too quickly

I will tell you my specific reservations concerning full PMR:
1) There is no research done on PMR for canines, no guideline or literature to refer back to. I believe that the diet relation between a wild animal (wolf) and a long term domesticated pet are romantasized and make most raw feeders feel warm and fuzzy inside and that is NOT a reason I want to use this diet. 
2) I don't believe that *all* dogs can do their absolute best on an all meat, bone, organ diet
3) I have OCD and that makes life difficult dealing with raw meat. 
4) I am not of the belief that there are no pathogens/bacteria/parasites in raw meat and they do not effect people. Meaning- if a dog is chewing raw meat, it does go on their legs, paws, their mouths and therefore all over your home/children. Maybe some of you are willing to take that chance every day but I can't.


----------



## Liz

Skadoosh,

You seem like you have a lot in your life right now with little ones and are very busy. This is not really a good time for major lifestyle changes which is what PMR is. I have no problem with that at all. My mentors have fed their dogs (they breed shelties) for 32 years now on meat, organ and bone and have done very well. My dogs will eat the same. If supplements are needed for some reason that is fine. Aging dogs especially often need a bit of extra in their diet. 

There are many, many on this forum extremely happy with their dogs on kibble, canned or premades. Like Re said if you are happy and it is working for you and your dog. Great! I am glad you have found something you are comfortable with, that you can do and be comfortable with your children and feel your dog is doing well with. 

The only problem I have is your angry attitude. I searched and could find no thread where you were mocked or pressured for not staying on raw. You accuse the posters here of mocking you but have been doing just that and instigating between the raw and kibble forums. There really is no reason for this. I really am sorry you feel put out but this anger and instigation only makes you look bad. Anyway, JMHO. Have a great day.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> I can admit a couple of things:
> 1) It may have been partial user error (although I don't believe it is every time)
> 2) I may or may not have used too many proteins too quickly
> 
> I will tell you my specific reservations concerning full PMR:
> 1) There is no research done on PMR for canines, no guideline or literature to refer back to. I believe that the diet relation between a wild animal (wolf) and a long term domesticated pet are romantasized and make most raw feeders feel warm and fuzzy inside and that is NOT a reason I want to use this diet.
> 2) I don't believe that *all* dogs can do their absolute best on an all meat, bone, organ diet
> 3) I have OCD and that makes life difficult dealing with raw meat.
> 4) I am not of the belief that there are no pathogens/bacteria/parasites in raw meat and they do not effect people. Meaning- if a dog is chewing raw meat, it does go on their legs, paws, their mouths and therefore all over your home/children. Maybe some of you are willing to take that chance every day but I can't.


1. My research is looking in my dog's mouth at his teeth. Plus, all the research on wolves can transistion over to dogs. And I will admit, it gives me peae of mind. I was always worried about bloat to some degree and that fear is practically gone.
2. I can agree slightly, that's why I will supplement.
3. Ok, answer below
4. Ok, then try ground, they won't get it all over. Just wipe their mouth after. That's our routine.


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> I can admit a couple of things:
> 1) It may have been partial user error (although I don't believe it is every time)
> 2) I may or may not have used too many proteins too quickly
> 
> I will tell you my specific reservations concerning full PMR:
> 1) There is no research done on PMR for canines, no guideline or literature to refer back to. I believe that the diet relation between a wild animal (wolf) and a long term domesticated pet are romantasized and make most raw feeders feel warm and fuzzy inside and that is NOT a reason I want to use this diet.
> 2) I don't believe that *all* dogs can do their absolute best on an all meat, bone, organ diet
> 3) I have OCD and that makes life difficult dealing with raw meat.
> 4) I am not of the belief that there are no pathogens/bacteria/parasites in raw meat and they do not effect people. Meaning- if a dog is chewing raw meat, it does go on their legs, paws, their mouths and therefore all over your home/children. Maybe some of you are willing to take that chance every day but I can't.


1) It was, they are very transparent errors, it happens.
2) you did.

1) Welcome to the world of your opinion, millions of years of dogs eating this way is proof enough for most logical adults, I don't feel warm and fuzzy, and i surely don't feel superior to anybody else that doesn't feed this diet, I like feeding my dog something that is good for him, i like feeding myself, and my family that way also. Your opinion is that we all feel we are vastly superior to everybody that feeds kibble, and you're sadly mistaken. I've been more than helpful through this entire trollfest, and you've done nothing but shoot down all evidence that you could indeed be wrong in any way.
2)Everybody else has established that as well, your entry's are very redundant. If done correctly most... as in... 9/10 dogs will do better on raw than they would on kibble... again, if done correctly.
3) OCD... I won't go there.
4)We are introduced to a plethora of pathogens every day, here's an idea, build a bubble, fill it with sterile air, invent an air scrubber to keep your air recycled... live.

As far as other comments you've made about everybody mocking and being rude, i just can't see it, i've wasted countless hours responding to your thread with decent scientific evidence, and you've done nothing but turn it into a debate about raw Vs. Kibble, and how dogs aren't meant to handle it because you couldn't follow very easy instructions on how to feed your dog raw, and they did poorly.


----------



## skadoosh

Liz said:


> Skadoosh,
> 
> You seem like you have a lot in your life right now with little ones and are very busy. This is not really a good time for major lifestyle changes which is what PMR is. I have no problem with that at all. My mentors have fed their dogs (they breed shelties) for 32 years now on meat, organ and bone and have done very well. My dogs will eat the same. If supplements are needed for some reason that is fine. Aging dogs especially often need a bit of extra in their diet.
> * Yes I am quite busy. Autism is one of those things that keep a person on the go. ) *
> There are many, many on this forum extremely happy with their dogs on kibble, canned or premades. Like Re said if you are happy and it is working for you and your dog. Great! I am glad you have found something you are comfortable with, that you can do and be comfortable with your children and feel your dog is doing well with.
> *I am fairly content with her diet at this point. Not perfectly satisfied (why do you think I DID turn PMR) with her diet but I am doing what I feel I am able. *
> The only problem I have is your angry attitude. I searched and could find no thread where you were mocked or pressured for not staying on raw. You accuse the posters here of mocking you but have been doing just that and instigating between the raw and kibble forums. There really is no reason for this. I really am sorry you feel put out but this anger and instigation only makes you look bad. Anyway, JMHO. Have a great day
> * No offense but a lot of member pressure raw or suggest it strongly without being asked for advice. IN THE KIBBLE SECTION. This forum is called "dog food chat" not "raw food chat". I posted in the wrong category thinking I would get some new, mind blowing information. I didn't. The same exact information I've heard all over the place. Not substantiated. Kind of just.... repetitious anecdotes, no real studies. *
> *I can admit to being closed minded about PMR on this forum (perhaps unfairly) because I have had some really nasty kibble bashers say crazy things to me. I basically just want what is best for my dog. I want to extend her life as much as I can, which is what we all want. *
> 
> .


My responses in bold ^^^


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> 1. My research is looking in my dog's mouth at his teeth. Plus, all the research on wolves can transistion over to dogs. And I will admit, it gives me peae of mind. I was always worried about bloat to some degree and that fear is practically gone.
> 2. I can agree slightly, that's why I will supplement.
> 3. Ok, answer below
> 4. Ok, then try ground, they won't get it all over. Just wipe their mouth after. That's our routine.


I just can't base a diet entirely on dentition or the comparison between wolves and dogs. I think there are more factors to it that raw feeders aren't looking at. I understand the bloat concern but it can still happen on raw, there are other factors contributing to bloat.
I feed her outside but I don't think wiping her mouth/legs would be altogether effective in killing the pathogens.


----------



## skadoosh

Tobi said:


> 1) It was, they are very transparent errors, it happens.
> 2) you did.
> 
> 1) Welcome to the world of your opinion, millions of years of dogs eating this way is proof enough for most logical adults, I don't feel warm and fuzzy, and i surely don't feel superior to anybody else that doesn't feed this diet, I like feeding my dog something that is good for him, i like feeding myself, and my family that way also. Your opinion is that we all feel we are vastly superior to everybody that feeds kibble, and you're sadly mistaken. I've been more than helpful through this entire trollfest, and you've done nothing but shoot down all evidence that you could indeed be wrong in any way.
> * This isn't a troll fest. I wanted to find something NEW. A study done by professionals, NOT anecdotes by the general public. *
> 2)Everybody else has established that as well, your entry's are very redundant. If done correctly most... as in... 9/10 dogs will do better on raw than they would on kibble... again, if done correctly.
> * I don't agree with this, but then-- your GUESS is as good as mine  *
> 3) OCD... I won't go there.
> * You probably shouldn't. I'm sure there would be a whole new level of anecdotes  *
> 4)We are introduced to a plethora of pathogens every day, here's an idea, build a bubble, fill it with sterile air, invent an air scrubber to keep your air recycled... live.
> * I realize we are surrounded by pathogens. Why add more?*
> As far as other comments you've made about everybody mocking and being rude, i just can't see it, i've wasted countless hours responding to your thread with decent scientific evidence, and you've done nothing but turn it into a debate about raw Vs. Kibble, and how dogs aren't meant to handle it because you couldn't follow very easy instructions on how to feed your dog raw, and they did poorly
> * There has been no scientific evidence, just forwards to rawfed.com or whatever that useless site is called. I did the best I could with the information that I had. The rude comment I was referring to was my daughter licking linoleum, if that wasn't sarcastic, I don't know what is.*
> .


Responses in bold


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

What do you think the factors are then?


----------



## Roo

> No offense but a lot of member pressure raw or suggest it strongly without being asked for advice. IN THE KIBBLE SECTION. This forum is called "dog food chat" not "raw food chat". I posted in the wrong category thinking I would get some new, mind blowing information. I didn't. The same exact information I've heard all over the place. Not substantiated. Kind of just.... repetitious anecdotes, no real studies. I can admit to being closed minded about PMR on this forum (perhaps unfairly) because I have had some really nasty kibble bashers say crazy things to me. I basically just want what is best for my dog. I want to extend her life as much as I can, which is what we all want.


Just because someone who feeds kibble or raw exhibits poor behavior in any thread, does not mean everyone else has to or should do the same. The delivery in any thread can be respectful, no need for snark, or bad attitudes, people always have the option to be the bigger person. I thought you came to the raw forum to learn, and to try for your dog's health, just because it didn't work out in your case, did you have to get rude with some of your comments and be so disrespectful to others?


----------



## Tobi

skadoosh said:


> Responses in bold


1. You should have searched google for studies done on the differences between obligate carnivoes, and its alter.
2. My guess is that i've been reading about this diet, and looking into this diet for the better part of 3-4 years, i've also not put it into effect until the last year and a half. So i'll venture to say my "guess" is much better than yours. :wink:
3. OCD i just don't care.
4.By feeding kibble you're adding more as well... just fyi. CDC - Salmonella Infantis Infections Linked to Dry Dog Food - Salmonella
5. just google it then, obviously any information we give that we've learned over the years from countless studies that we have cumulatively read.. is going to be useless to you. The comment was intended to be sarcastic, it was also unintended to be related just at you. I'd say the same regardless of the issues you have with your child. I'm checked out of this thread, it's a joke.


----------



## lauren43

Ok I said I wasn't going to post again but I do have one question. In the posts Roo brought up you absolutely loved the results you were seeing in your dog, minus the extra shedding. But in all your posts since you've said your dog did horrendous. My question is did you see good results initially? Also when in the transition did she go from having great fur, not stinking, not having bad breath to suddenly listless and not looking too good. I guess it's possible, hey anythings possible but you went from loving the idea of raw (not needing anything other than antecodol proof) to hating it and wanting scientific information, in which many ppl gave what they know and you did not seem to like their answers. Which again is fine.

Finally I have no problem with kibble. My last thread was about kibble, my parents will never switch their dog to raw and that's fine but as much research as I put into raw for my dog, I also put into kibble for my parents dog.

I also wanted to ask if your dog is still suffering from minor allergies? Has the itching cleared up? What about the yeast you said was around her mouth? Did that come back? Or is she doIng ok now?


----------



## bernadettelevis

Myths About Raw: Is there scientific research to back raw diets?

they've done a study on blood values in raw fed dogs and kibble fed dogs:
http://www.mountaindogfood.com/RawHelp/Raw_Food_Study.pdf

A Raw Dog Food Q & A with Dr. Kim Schnepf | Sojos

The Truth About Raw Food | Optimal Pet Foods Calgary
"Dr. Kollath of the Karolinska Hospital located in Stockholm ran a study on animal nutrition, comparing cooked & processed foods to raw food. The results cite the animals fed the processed diet initially appeared healthy as young animals, yet quickly developed chronic degenerative disease symptoms and appeared to age at a much faster rate than the raw fed control group. The control group of animals raised on raw food were free of degenerative disease and aged less quickly."


"At the Karolinska Hospital in Stockholm, Dr. Kollath did an experiment whereby he put some animals on a Western diet of cooked and processed food and others on a diet of raw food to see what happened to their bodies. Initially there was no difference, however as the animals became adults those on a standard Western diet started to develop chronic, degenerative diseases resembling what we have in our Western diets such as osteoarthritis, constipation and osteoporosis. They found that the only way to bring the animals back to full health was to put them on the raw food diet. It stands to reason that the body cannot function properly for a long period of time on additives. And that is why Jamie, myself, and many other experts are advocates for putting our kids on a mainly additive-free diet, if you want them to live a long, disease-free life."
(Unfortunately i didn't find the study yet, but i already wrote an email, if there is any possibility to get the original study)

The Baby is the Book
"Dr. William Pollak D.V.M concurs as he refers to the results of a clinical trial which suggests that 74.7% of common diseases in dogs and 63% of common diseases in cats can be eliminated without medical intervention over a period of one year with proper diet modifications and an understanding of the healing process as exhibited through healing episodes. Approaching disease from the perspective of health is the most powerful means of eliminating disease."


I will do some more research to find studies or scientifical "proof".


----------



## skadoosh

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> What do you think the factors are then?


Well that's the thing-- there are no studies done in how a dog could possibly glean nutrition out of vegetation. If a dog CAN get 100% nutrition out of an all meat/bone/organ diet. What supplements are necessary. Etc. That is not understood. That's what *I* want to know.


----------



## bernadettelevis

skadoosh said:


> Well that's the thing-- there are no studies done in how a dog could possibly glean nutrition out of vegetation. If a dog CAN get 100% nutrition out of an all meat/bone/organ diet. What supplements are necessary. Etc. That is not understood. That's what *I* want to know.


So, please tell me then, how it is understood, how much and which proteins and supplements and so on have to be in kibble, so that it is fully balanced (whatever that means)??


----------



## skadoosh

I am kind of busy right now and so I will be on to respond in a little bit. This is starting to actually become fascinating,


----------



## skadoosh

lauren43 said:


> Ok I said I wasn't going to post again but I do have one question. In the posts Roo brought up you absolutely loved the results you were seeing in your dog, minus the extra shedding. But in all your posts since you've said your dog did horrendous. My question is did you see good results initially? Also when in the transition did she go from having great fur, not stinking, not having bad breath to suddenly listless and not looking too good. I guess it's possible, hey anythings possible but you went from loving the idea of raw (not needing anything other than antecodol proof) to hating it and wanting scientific information, in which many ppl gave what they know and you did not seem to like their answers. Which again is fine.
> 
> Finally I have no problem with kibble. My last thread was about kibble, my parents will never switch their dog to raw and that's fine but as much research as I put into raw for my dog, I also put into kibble for my parents dog.
> 
> I also wanted to ask if your dog is still suffering from minor allergies? Has the itching cleared up? What about the yeast you said was around her mouth? Did that come back? Or is she doIng ok now?


She did very well on the chicken and duck but as soon as red meats came into play she started developing symptoms. The yeast has completely gone away. I have NO idea what it was, vet said it might not have been diet related but that it was because of how her teeth fit into her flews?? He wasn't sure but I just started wiping her saliva in those areas and the issue stopped. 
Look I have admitted the faults that may lie with me... don't know what ya'll want?


----------



## skadoosh

bernadettelevis said:


> So, please tell me then, how it is understood, how much and which proteins and supplements and so on have to be in kibble, so that it is fully balanced (whatever that means)??


It isn't fully understood I'm sure ... just trying to decide what the best diet is for her as well as our lifestyle as it currently is. I DO have reservations. I can't make you question raw and you can't cause me to discontinue questioning it. 
I think any intelligent human being would question their dogs diet (in another post I stated clearly that I don't believe kibble is the end all be all either). Just because it SOUNDS wonderful doesn't mean it is. Raw feeders tend to sound almost identical to any low grade dog food commercial on tv. You can believe what you wish but I am forever skeptical.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

skadoosh said:


> It isn't fully understood I'm sure ... just trying to decide what the best diet is for her as well as our lifestyle as it currently is. I DO have reservations. I can't make you question raw and you can't cause me to discontinue questioning it.
> I think any intelligent human being would question their dogs diet (in another post I stated clearly that I don't believe kibble is the end all be all either). Just because it SOUNDS wonderful doesn't mean it is. Raw feeders tend to sound almost identical to any low grade dog food commercial on tv. You can believe what you wish but I am forever skeptical.


I didn't do the raw diet for a year. I researched uponed researched. I questioned myself immensely. I weighed the pros and cons and compared and contrasted every aspect of it. I am a major researcher and questioner. That's my personality, I'm skeptical too, but the results have proved themselves to me that this is the way to go.

Dogs are a major part of my life, they are the center. I'm showing one now, I hope he's the first of many. I want to always do something with dogs. I want to have Boxers that live over ten or twelve years consistently, dogs without cancers, heart problems, etc. Not to mention with the showing it's not cheap, anyone can tell you that! I want him to look his best, finish quickly, have breeders look at him and think about him and consider him. He always has to look his best andd be his best and I think raw will do that.

And sounding like a low grade dog food commercial? Really? Just because I know something works and I'm happy with it and fully support it doesn't mean it's like a commercial. I don't een fully understand what you mean by that, but it's kind of insulting almost. Would you like me to call you a low grade kibble feeder?


----------



## DaneMama

skadoosh said:


> She did very well on the chicken and duck but as soon as red meats came into play she started developing symptoms. The yeast has completely gone away. I have NO idea what it was, vet said it might not have been diet related but that it was because of how her teeth fit into her flews?? He wasn't sure but I just started wiping her saliva in those areas and the issue stopped.
> Look I have admitted the faults that may lie with me... don't know what ya'll want?


What do we want? To help you. We want you to have an accurate opinion on raw based on a fair assessment, not an opinion based on a failed attempt. From what you've posted in the past and on this thread you made many mistakes in the transition to raw....there's a reason why we stick to a tried and true method, because it minimizes difficulties transitioning. To me it seems like your skepticism of raw is based on how poorly your dog did after rushing into red meats....do you think that is a fair judgement on raw feeding as a whole? I strongly believe that if you had stuck to the guidelines of switching that we recommend you'd have seen wonderful results, there by negating all these negative beliefs on raw that you have. 

A far as the yeast issue on her cheeks, it's fairly common, it's called lip fold pyoderma and one of my dogs gets it occasionally.


----------



## Kat

18 pages later and I forgot most of the stuff I wanted to bring up lol. 

Raw may not work for everyone, but from what I have read, it seems as if you didn't give it a fair chance. My pug Ruby went through detoxes on and off for the first 3 months of switching to raw. Goopy eyes, musky smell, really dirty ears, and just like that it stopped. I can honestly say she is a totally different dog. She LOVES meal time now, before she just ate kibble cause there was nothing else to eat. She has always been a slim pug, but now her physical condition is better. 

I did have to scale her back 2 molars a few times from minor plaque buildup, and I brush every few days, but since finally getting the courage to try a pork rib, that has made a huge improvement (I have only tried the pork rib once, but she will be getting another one for dinner tonight). Just looking at her teeth before the pork rib and after, it took off 90% of the small amount of plaque that was there.

Not all of Rubys teeth came in, so I think it makes it harder for rmb's to get the back 2 molars perfect, but all her other teeth are pearly white.

No more food allergies. With kibble she would always be sick, I spent a lot of money at my vet testing her to find out what was wrong. Only to later realize it was the diet. And I did feed a high quality kibble.

Raw wasn't my first choice, I tried home cooking for a month but was not happy with the results and it made her teeth get dirty faster. 

Then I decided to try raw. I was desperate. I was so paranoid about germs too, I would boil hot water and soak the cutting board in boiled water before and after using (I really went to the extreme with it lol) and now, I'm still careful and wash all work surfaces and wash my hands, but I'm not as crazy as I was with boiling water. And it's been almost a year of raw feeding and neither my dog or anyone in the household has gotten sick from raw meat.

One thing I want to say about the pug thing... Pugs did not always have such flat faces, they were bred to look like they do now... In a way humans have sort of ruined the breed with how flat they made it since it is detrimental to their health (hot weather) if you look at older pictures of pugs, and bulldogs, and Boston terriers, they used to have longer muzzles, so yes they are desendants of wolves, selective breeding has made them the way they are today. 

There aren't going to be many scientific studies done on raw, because if there were, kibble companies and vets wouldn't be making a truck load of money off their prescription and pet store diets. Most of the things raw feeders know is from personal experience and seeing their own dogs and other raw fed dogs. 

People are always shocked at how soft Ruby is, which is part of being fed a raw diet. I was walking yesterday and pet a kibble fed pug, and what a difference in coat quality. The other pug had a rougher dry coat.

Another benefit of raw, no scientific studies but personal experience, faster healing time. Ruby was kibble fed when she was spayed, her healing time took forever and the incision site was raw, goopy, and red. She wouldnt eat her kibble, it made her nauseous, the whole time I was stressed and hated it. My friend just got her raw fed papillon puppy spayed, and holy what a difference! The next day her puppy was acting like her usual self, no inflammation or redness at the incision site, healthy appetite. There were no issues whatsoever.

An example of a wolf breeding with a dog, when my friends mom was a kid her family had a German shepherd who ran away into the woods, came back pregnant. Had the puppies, they were definitely part wolf. I saw the photos, they looked vey wolf like and had long fangs. 

Full PMR works for Ruby, I don't feed any additional veggies, and only give a tiny piece of fruit once every few months as a treat if I buy something organic. 

This is my personal experience with feeding raw to my dog, and I could never go back to feeding kibble after seeing her thrive on raw. I don't hate on kibble feeders, every dog owner has the right to feed what they feel works for them. The oly time I would intervene is if I see someone feeding a crappy brand like Beneful, pedigree, or something like that - then I need to say something.

ETA Rubys transition went smoothly until I got to red meats, those are a lot richer and take more time and smaller amounts to make the transition.


----------



## Kat

Sorry for all the typos, just fixed them now. I'm on my iPad and it's a pain to type on it lol.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## skadoosh

Gee that's funny. Posted another thread so kibblers could participate and no kibblers could reply.... wow. I'm done with this thread. Maybe this forum, not sure yet. There is such an obvious raw bias...
I apologize that everyone who is feeding their dogs kibble are killing their dogs with their obvious inferiority and ignorance.


----------



## lauren43

It was closed because you already have these 19 pages. This side of the forum is not closed to kibble feeders, they can respond if they choose.


----------



## Kat

skadoosh said:


> Gee that's funny. Posted another thread so kibblers could participate and no kibblers could reply.... wow. I'm done with this thread. Maybe this forum, not sure yet. There is such an obvious raw bias...
> I apologize that everyone who is feeding their dogs kibble are killing their dogs with their obvious inferiority and ignorance.


Um... No one said that in this thread. Raw feeders are clearly stating, myself included, that we do not hate on or discriminate on kibble feeders. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and what they believe is the best for their dog.


----------



## skadoosh

lauren43 said:


> It was closed because you already have these 19 pages. This side of the forum is not closed to kibble feeders, they can respond if they choose.


Why? So they can get their heads ripped off too?


----------



## Roo

> I apologize that everyone who is feeding their dogs kibble are killing their dogs with their obvious inferiority and ignorance.


As a kibble feeder (to foster dogs), and a previous kibble feeder to my own dogs, I find this statement to be very disrespectful to kibble feeders.


----------



## lauren43

Oh Tobi! 

Skadoosh, I think you should take a step back and take time to think and breathe. All your posts are now coming off extremely harsh and pointed.


----------



## Kat

I feed my dog raw, but I feed my two cats canned and kibble.


----------



## Tobi

Roo said:


> As a kibble feeder (to foster dogs), and a previous kibble feeder to my own dogs, I find this statement to be very disrespectful to kibble feeders.


I very much agree, my mom doesn't feed her dog raw, and she's not ignorant, nor inferior... in fact she was very open minded with the information i gave her about raw, she even tried it and it wasn't for her (too much work) and she just went to Orijen instead.... I can't believe how were getting labeled as kibblehaters because of a simple inquiry about obligate carnivores...


----------



## skadoosh

Roo said:


> As a kibble feeder (to foster dogs), and a previous kibble feeder to my own dogs, I find this statement to be very disrespectful to kibble feeders.


It was obvious sarcasm...


----------



## Roo

> It was obvious sarcasm...


Sorry, you've been so rude and disrespectful to so many members on here it wasn't obvious to me. Why would you use sarcasm about kibble bashing? Why is it even funny to joke about it? It's disrespectful no matter how you say it or intended it to be.


----------



## skadoosh

Roo said:


> Sorry, you've been so rude and disrespectful to so many members on here it wasn't obvious to me. Why would you use sarcasm about kibble bashing? Why is it even funny to joke about it? It's disrespectful no matter how you say it or intended it to be.


Im an advocate of kibble and now I'm bashing kibble? I'm confused. It was sarcasm, I'm sure you'll get over it.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## CorgiPaws

Skadoosh- you mention that raw feeders act superior and look down on kibble feeders, which admittedly I've seen on here a time or two, but I must say that the ONLY person being disrespectful in this thread is, in fact, YOU. Your sharp tongue and rude comments to the other members of this forum are not appreciated, and rather than close a thread in which every other member has handled themselves with respect and dignity, you're begging for another time out. 

Thank you to everyone else for keeping what has the potential to be a heated debate quite respectful and informative. 

Gonna go play with my pack o' CARNIVORES now.....


----------



## skadoosh

magicre said:


> ya know, we are trying so very hard to police ourselves and maintain a modicum of dignity and respect, so threads will not close.....which is happening very often.
> 
> the tone with which you are speaking now is simply not productive and non responsive and i fear the same thing will happen to this thread as is happening to so many others.


I agree. I'm getting very irritated. Ive made it pretty clear that I don't even hate raw feeding or any type of feeding. Select members are twisting my words. 
I think that dogs eat anything they can get their teeth on. Some of it, not so healthy . Vegetation even wolves eat (not when they are starving but regularly), if you all believe that a dogs diet should imitate a wolves then dogs should also eat vegetation. You are all denying what is obviously in front of you. You speak of their GI tract and their dentition but not their actual diet-- including low hanging berries, small twigs and grass etc.


----------



## magicre

:usa::usa::usa::usa::usa:


----------



## DaViking

skadoosh said:


> Gee that's funny. Posted another thread so kibblers could participate and no kibblers could reply.... wow. I'm done with this thread. Maybe this forum, not sure yet. There is such an obvious raw bias...
> I apologize that everyone who is feeding their dogs kibble are killing their dogs with their obvious inferiority and ignorance.


No one took your bait in the kibble section simply because at the end of the day you, me or anyone else will not become more educated or better dog parents by discussing, putting a negative spotlight or otherwise digging up negatives regarding other peoples beliefs when it comes to feeding. It's that simple and goes both ways. Never set out with the aim to dig up negatives about stuff, regardless of what it is. Sure, in the heat of the moment, and as a part of other discussions people will say out all kinds of things, including negative jabs about stuff they don't necessarily agree with but it's rarely smart to make that into it's own thread. Completely wrong focus in my opinion.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers

Well thank goodness it's over!!


----------



## DaneMama

Skadoosh...has left the building.


----------



## CorgiPaws

DaneMama said:


> Skadoosh...has left the building.


Woot. Maybe now we can go a day or two before our inboxes are flooded again? lol :tongue:


----------



## lindseycampbell358

I have been following this thread since the beginning, mostly just to see what would happen. And I have one question, where is RawFedDogs?? I was hoping to see a post from him on this blatant attack on raw feeding!


----------



## RedneckCowgirl

lindseycampbell358 said:


> I have been following this thread since the beginning, mostly just to see what would happen. And I have one question, where is RawFedDogs?? I was hoping to see a post from him on this blatant attack on raw feeding!


Sadly he hasn't been around for quite a while :/


----------



## Kayota

I just fed my dog some peas for fun after a ham hock for dinner, she catches them quite well... Do you think that's enough vegetation to mimic the natural scavenging behavior of the wolf?  She also gets peach and apple peel when I peel fresh fruit for smoothies! And some other "people food" and otherwise an all meat/organ/bone diet. But it's not a main part of her diet by any means, just treats.

EDIT: Oh she just got some cooked chicken as well, now she's on a stray dog diet! LOL

(actually it's a spoiled dog diet!  )


----------



## Tobi

Kayota said:


> I just fed my dog some peas for fun after a ham hock for dinner, she catches them quite well... Do you think that's enough vegetation to mimic the natural scavenging behavior of the wolf?  She also gets peach and apple peel when I peel fresh fruit for smoothies! And some other "people food" and otherwise an all meat/organ/bone diet. But it's not a main part of her diet by any means, just treats.
> 
> EDIT: Oh she just got some cooked chicken as well, now she's on a stray dog diet! LOL
> 
> (actually it's a spoiled dog diet!  )


Tobi loves him some Kale, and broccoli, and pretty much anything that isn't raw meat for that matter ound: spoiled is spoiled! lol


----------



## Liz

Species appropriate would be grass, twigs and berries I believe.  JK


----------



## Kayota

I'll go get her some sticks from the yard, should I bake them first?


----------



## Liz

Raw, always raw.


----------



## Kayota

LOL fantastic


----------



## CorgiPaws

lindseycampbell358 said:


> I have been following this thread since the beginning, mostly just to see what would happen. And I have one question, where is RawFedDogs?? I was hoping to see a post from him on this blatant attack on raw feeding!


He left when the BARF and Alternative Feeding section was introduced. Many still chat with him on Facebook, though.


----------



## naturalfeddogs

skadoosh said:


> Well that's the thing-- there are no studies done in how a dog could possibly glean nutrition out of vegetation. If a dog CAN get 100% nutrition out of an all meat/bone/organ diet. What supplements are necessary. Etc. That is not understood. That's what *I* want to know.


If they can get 100% nutrition, they don't need supplementation. They are getting 100%.

IF any supplements are given they would be fish oil. Only if the dog isn't eating an oily fish in the diet, OR not eating 100% grass fed red meats. In that case they would be getting all the omegas they need.


----------



## RedneckCowgirl

I realize that this thread is pretty much over, but I was reading through old threads (speaking of RFD lol) and found this to be very relevant to the conversation



RawFedDogs said:


> The thing that irks me over and over and no one has a satisfactory answer is why the heck don't you ask the dog food companies to prove their product is as good as a diet of raw meat, bones, and organs? A PMR diet has been around for a million years and dogs/wolves have thrived all this time on this diet. About 60 years ago this kibble junk came along and all of a sudden vet's offices are full of overweight allergic dogs with serious digestive problems (pancreatitis, colitis, ibd, ibs, etc) and periodontal problems. These problems didn't exist to any great extent 100 years ago. BUT people have to say, "Prove that PMR is as good as the kibble that causes all the above listed health problems." PMR has proved itself over and over thoughout eons of time. Artificial dog food has proved not one iota about anything. Does that not make you wonder?


----------



## meggels

I am insanely impressed, that after 22 pages, this thread was never shut down. I think that might be a record lol...eace:


----------



## lindseycampbell358

CorgiPaws said:


> He left when the BARF and Alternative Feeding section was introduced. Many still chat with him on Facebook, though.


Oh, that stinks! When I first joined, I went back and looked at the really old threads to get some info that way, and I always enjoyed reading his posts! Thanks.


----------



## nupe

meggels said:


> I am insanely impressed, that after 22 pages, this thread was never shut down. I think that might be a record lol...eace:


Oh my God you must have ESP.....N or something...I was thinking the same thing!!


----------



## doggoblin

I'm only browsed through the thread but having been away a while thought I'd just point out these:
BBC Nature - Dogs' evolution shows why they 'love' gnawing on bones

It's also worth noting the http://www.ukrmb.co.uk/images/LippertSapySummary.pdf from 2004 indicates that on average a home prepared diet enables a dog to live approximately 3 years longer. Not a small amount.

You then have reports such as Taurine deficiency in Newfoundlands fed c... [J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2003] - PubMed - NCBI from 2003 which indicates dogs can suffer from turine deficiencies. It's also been seen with golden retrievers which again points to the need for quality protein. 

Why not carbohydrates after all when we look at commercial food we are looking at high levels carbohydrates. This is what my understanding is:

Not all carbohydrates are equal. You have simple carbohydrates which have a high Glycemic Index (GI). These are processed by canines by:

Blood glucose levels rise above normal levels due to being a monosaccharide
The pancreas produces insulin at high levels to help drive elevated blood glucose values back to normal by facilitating their transfer into muscle and liver glycogen (carbohydrate stores)
Lipoprotein lipase (LPL), an enzyme, is released in response to high insulin. It stops the release of fat as energy (lipolysis)
High levels of insulin causes an increase in appetite
If muscle and liver glycogen stores become, or are full already due to high levels of simple/processed (high GI) carbohydrate sources then they are redirected to store as bodyfat.

So you get a high insulin response which can lead to

Increased fat storage
Increased fatigue
Behavioural issues
Potential to develop type I/II diabetes, cardiovascular and other health risk associated conditions.

You then have complex, low glycemic index carbohydrates. The process is 

Low GI carbohydrate food source digested
Blood glucose levels only rise slightly above normal levels due to being a polysaccharide, and therefore taking time to breakdown to a monosaccharide
The pancreas produces insulin at low levels due to only slightly higher blood glucose values being brought back to the normal range by facilitating their transfer into muscle and liver glycogen (carbohydrate stores)
Muscle and liver glycogen stores aren't completely filled due to being a complex carbohydrate source so they do not need to be stored as body fat to reduce blood glucose levels.

This can have positive health benefits.

Decreased appetite (feeling fuller)
Decreased fat storage
Decreased fatigue leading to much higher levels of energy
Decreased potential of health risk associated conditions and reversibility of diabetes (type II)

Whenever a carbohydrate source is cooked or processed the more it is broken down into a simple carbohydrate source. High digestibility which your hear at great length about by the kibble manufacturers is actually this conversion into a simple carbohydrate source. It's also interesting that Eukunaba actually counter what I have described above as outdated citing references to "newer" studies. When looking at the studies it worth pointing out they are in relation to people, not dogs. Examples:

Reavan GM. Effects of differences in and amount and kind of dietary carbohydrate on plasma glucose and insulin responses* in man*. Am J Clin Nutr 1979; 32:2568-2578.
Crapo PA, Insel RDJ, Sperlind M, Kolterman OG. Comparison of serum glucose, insulin, and glucagon responses to different types of complex carbohydrate in noninsulin-dependent *diabetic patients*. Am J Clin Nutr 1981; 34:184-190.
Dunnigan MG, Fyfe T, McKiddie MT, Crosbie SM. The effects of isocaloric exchange of dietary starch and sucrose on glucose tolerance, plasma insulin and serum lipids in *man*. Clin Sci 1970; 38:1-9.
I think we can all agree a dogs metabolism is different to a human.

The pet food industry's own nutrient profiles in both the US and EU have no carbohydrate requirement which is quite telling. If you do have carbohydrates however this should however be in the form of a complex, low GI source. Unfortunately kibble normally consists of simple high GI carbohydrates in very high percentages. Why? it's cheaper than quality protein sources. Carbohydrates do naturally exist in a raw diet in a complex form especially in liver which makes up around 5% of any raw diet as well as in some muscle meat.

As to insulin levels and spikes Bauer, J. E., D. Nagaoka, B. Poterpan, K. Bigley, T. Umeda, and K. Otsuji. 2006. Postprandial lipolytic activities, lipids, and carbohydrate metabolism are altered in dogs fed diacylglycerol meals containing high- and low-glycemic-index starches. J Nutr. 136: 1995S-1957S is an interesting read.









The attachment is an image from the report and shows the difference between High Glycemic Index (HGI) Carbs (commercial pet food) and Low Glycemic Index (LGI) Carbs (natural) in terms of insulin levels after a meal as well as glucose levels. Glucose levels roughly the same but high insulin spike for HGI carbs. Don't know any studies for long term effects in dogs but would be concerned about long term effects when it comes to diabetes amongst other things.

The study also specifies that HGI carbs are a likely source of obesity when compared to LGI carbs.

So then we are looking back to purely the idea of carnivore or omnivore which as already been discussed at length. At the end of the day, as far as I am concerned if you need to preprocess something before an animal can extracts nutrients efficiently from it, it's not natural. Whilst it can be beneficial to hit certain nutritional targets how much is really known about these targets in the first place. Scientific knowledge changes over time. Nature's done an excellent job over the years of making sure animals eat what they require. When humans interfere or assume they know better it frequently causes problems.


----------



## Sprocket

^^^ :kiss:


----------



## Herzo

Well I'm glad I found this thread, it has been a blast. Glad it wasn't closed but I have to say I'm sorry she was banned. I read this in two parts from page 17 to 22 then did some checking on her other posts and found out she had lied then had to go back and start at the beginning.

Good for you Roo for bringing that one up. Goodness I thought you all were very nice and even after she was found out for lying. My big question is I wonder what made her so mad, was she just bored as was pointed out or can she just not take it when she is proven wrong?

Very good thread and I really wish she was still here but I think she would have gone on her own soon. I guess I don't understand all this banning and closing threads. If someone is name calling I can but just because she got mad, let her. I also don't get it if this was flagged to the mods as this debate seemed to me to be fairly civil. 

I'm like re, let us debate all day long as long as it remains civil, whats so wrong with that if one doesn't like it don't read it. How hard is that?


----------

