# Raw meat only?



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

Those of you that feed raw do you only feed meat or do you supplement with veggies and fruit?


----------



## Unosmom (May 3, 2009)

it has to be balanced with bones and organs, otherwise your dog will not get the proper nutrition. 
Veggies are not necessary in raw diet, but they can still be used in minimal ammount, some people also add fish oil, enzymes, probiotics, etc, but its not necessary, except maybe fish oil since regular meat is difficient in omega 3's (unless you buy free range and organic)


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

Veggies can be fun for treats (a few of ours like carrots) but they have 0 nutritional value for the dogs. 

Your dogs bodies don't produce the digestive enzymes necessary to break down plant material

Raw meat, bones and organs (and fish oil if you'd like) is all a dog needs :biggrin:


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

jdatwood said:


> Veggies can be fun for treats (a few of ours like carrots) but they have 0 nutritional value for the dogs.
> 
> Your dogs bodies don't produce the digestive enzymes necessary to break down plant material :biggrin:


Why then do foxes eat fruits and veggies? We had one that raided the garden and would eat corn and canteloupes. I know that they eat persimmons and peaches also. I mean foxes and coyotes are basically dogs. Coyotes are the same way they will eat fruits and berries.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Why then do foxes eat fruits and veggies? We had one that raided the garden and would eat corn and canteloupes. I know that they eat persimmons and peaches also. I mean foxes and coyotes are basically dogs. Coyotes are the same way they will eat fruits and berries.



Foxes, Coyotes, Wolves, and domestic dogs are all classified in the same Family: Canidae. But despite their similarities, they are different. 

Foxes are considered to be omnivorous (eating plant material) on an evolutionary level, possessing the necessary physical attributes to help digest plant material (ie a longer digestive tract, altho they do not have the ability to breakdown plant material). They feed primarily on rodents and other small mammals, but also fruits/veggies when prey is limited.

Coyotes and Wolves are 90% carnivorous in the wild. They resort to eating garbage and other plant material when food is scarce. If they had a choice to eat meat compared to veggies, they would 100% go for the meat.

The domesticated dog is the decendant of wolves, but are so different because we have selectively changed their phenotype through breeding. There is much debate over whether domestic dogs are 100% carnivores, but just looking at their physical characteristics alone, they would be classified as carnivores. 

If you take into consideration that dogs do not possess the ability to breakdown plant material, then why should they be fed it? Of course, dogs, wolves, and coyotes resort to eating garbage and plants in a limiting environment, but are they getting all the nutrition they can from it? You would have to puree the fruits/veggies for them to get all the nutrients from them...but all the nutrients are present in the meat, bones and organs of their prey. That is where they get their whole nutrition from. So IMO it seems that meat, bones and organs are the best and easiest form to give them that nutrition, so why bother with fruits/veggies?

It certainly wont hurt to feed them fruits/veggies, although some dogs have a hard time with runny stools because of them in their diet. As long as your dogs seem to be fine, then there really isn't a problem feeding them.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> They feed primarily on rodents and other small mammals, but also fruits/veggies when prey is limited.


I have to disagree here. Foxes eat fruits and veggies when they are abuntant not only when prey is limited. Coyotes are omnivorous. Fruits and berries make up a large part of there diet.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> I have to disagree here. Foxes eat fruits and veggies when they are abuntant not only when prey is limited. Coyotes are omnivorous. Fruits and berries make up a large part of there diet.


They might eat them on a regular basis just because they taste good, even when food is not limited. I think that one would have to do extensive research into their diets and habits to know for sure. 

You also have to take into consideration that we humans are taking over their natural habitat. What was once their natural habitat (probably no veggies/fruit gardens) is now your backyard. I am sure if you look at strictly wild populations of Coyotes, they wouldn't go out of their way to choose a garden with fruits and veggies, they would stick to small mammals and other prey items in their territory. That is unless their food supplies are running short. 

Urban populations of Coyotes probably eat fruits and veggies more often than wild populations considering its an ample food source, that takes little to no energy to consume. This species is highly adaptable in an urban environment, because it takes advantage of people's gardens. Are fruits and veggies better for them than fresh meat, bones and organs? IMO I don't think so.

Here is some really basic research about Coyotes. All of these sources say that they are on average ~90% carnivorous in their diet (so yes, they are actually considered omnivorous), resorting to fruits/veggies in the fall and winter months. I do not know if all of these sources are looking at wild populations only or if they are looking at urban populations only or both... 

I like wikipedia, because it is an open website (anyone can change it, which means that there are tons of reviewers out there making changes, but resources are required to make changes...ie you have to prove why you are making a change). Its good for just general information:

Coyote - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

coyote or coyotes wildlife information - DesertUSA

Coyote - Canis latrans - NatureWorks

Coyotes, Coyote Pictures, Coyote Facts - National Geographic

Here is some basic research on Foxes. They are also ~90% carnivorous, but again since they eat some plant material they are considered omnivorous.

Fox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The fox website | Ecology | Basic facts

Red Foxes, Red Fox Pictures, Red Fox Facts - National Geographic

Again, basic info on wolves (which are considered to be strict carnivores):

Gray Wolf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

International Wolf Center Learn - Wolf Predation on Ungulates

And since the wolf is the closest extant species to the domesticated dog, I would expect that their diet be as closely mimicked as possible. Like I stated earlier fruits and veggies in a dogs diet certainly wont hurt at all...millions of dogs survive off of crap kibble anyhow.

Dog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> I have to disagree here. Foxes eat fruits and veggies when they are abuntant not only when prey is limited. Coyotes are omnivorous. Fruits and berries make up a large part of there diet.


A dog is not a fox. A dog is not a coyotte. A dog IS a wolf. A dog is not decended from wolves, and dog is a wolf. It has the same digestive system as a wolf. Neither dogs nor wolves can not extract nutrients from plant matter because of jaw structure, dentation, chemestry in their digestive tract, and length of digestive tract. Yes, wolves and dogs eat some berries. Most experts agree this is because they taste good, very similar to us eating cake and ice cream ... good taste, no nutrition. They will occasionally eat some fruits and veggies for the same reason. Not for nutrition. Of course a starving animal will eat anything.

There are no nutrients needed by dogs in plant matter that is not in the meat, bones, and organs of the animals that consume them (prey animals).


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> A dog is not a fox. A dog is not a coyotte. A dog IS a wolf. A dog is not decended from wolves, and dog is a wolf. It has the same digestive system as a wolf. Neither dogs nor wolves can not extract nutrients from plant matter because of jaw structure, dentation, chemestry in their digestive tract, and length of digestive tract. Yes, wolves and dogs eat some berries. Most experts agree this is because they taste good, very similar to us eating cake and ice cream ... good taste, no nutrition. They will occasionally eat some fruits and veggies for the same reason. Not for nutrition. Of course a starving animal will eat anything.
> 
> There are no nutrients needed by dogs in plant matter that is not in the meat, bones, and organs of the animals that consume them (prey animals).



Actually a dog is not a wolf anymore than your a chimp. They share 98.5 to 99.5 % Dna with wolves depending on who's study you believe. Fox share about 94-95 %. At any rate dogs eat what they have evolved to eat. Just because they share wolf Dna does not mean they should have the same diet. 
Red fox and Gray fox for example have different diets with the gray being far more of an omnivore evolving to climb trees to eat fruit as well as escape danger. Bears also have evolved different with Polar bears and certain Brown bears being 95-99% meat eaters and southern Black bears eating over 50% vegetation, fruits berries ect..
Also wolves in captivity live far longer than wild wolves and the majority of them are feed dry kibble. I know they get medical care ect. ect... but if they needed raw meat they certainly would not be living longer.


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Also wolves in captivity live far longer than wild wolves and the majority of them are feed dry kibble. I know they get medical care ect. ect... but if they needed raw meat they certainly would not be living longer.


Well that's because the main cause of death to wolves in the wild is bullets. Take away the bullets and most things are apt to live much longer.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

rannmiller said:


> Well that's because the main cause of death to wolves in the wild is bullets. Take away the bullets and most things are apt to live much longer.


No I think it's parvo and other adult wolves.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Actually a dog is not a wolf anymore than your a chimp. They share 98.5 to 99.5 % Dna with wolves depending on who's study you believe. Fox share about 94-95 %.


Wolves/dogs are about .2% different in mcdna and chimps/humans are 2% different.



> At any rate dogs eat what they have evolved to eat. Just because they share wolf Dna does not mean they should have the same diet.


Of course it does. If they needes a different diet, their digestive system would be different. Just like a cow digestive system is different from a wolf.



> Red fox and Gray fox for example have different diets with the gray being far more of an omnivore evolving to climb trees to eat fruit as well as escape danger. Bears also have evolved different with Polar bears and certain Brown bears being 95-99% meat eaters and southern Black bears eating over 50% vegetation, fruits berries ect..


Red fox/gray fox ... different species. Polar bear/brown bear/black bear ... different species. Wolf/dog ... same species.



> Also wolves in captivity live far longer than wild wolves and the majority of them are feed dry kibble.


Where do you get that inforamtion? Most of the wolf sanctuaries that I know of feed raw meat, bones, and organs. Most of the wolf rescues do also. Every single one of the wolf owners I know of without exception feed raw meat, bones, and organs.



> I know they get medical care ect. ect... but if they needed raw meat they certainly would not be living longer.


That is speculation on your part and not very accurate information. I would like to know what you base such a statement on. Are you are saying any animal would live longer on processed food than on whole raw food? Find me a nutritionist that would agree with that. That is, find me a nutritionist that doesn't work for a dog food company that would agree with that. 

At no time anywhere on earth is processed food more nutritious than whole raw food. There is never a time that any animal will live longer on processed food than he will in a good raw diet. Even the powerful rich kibble companies can't prove that a dog will live longer on their food than on a raw diet.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> Wolves/dogs are about .2% different in mcdna and chimps/humans are 2% different.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Gray and Red fox are of the same species as are the bears.

As for the info on kibble for captive wolfs that can be found on several zoo web site but here is one example.

Mexican Wolf Husbandry Manual
Prepared by Kent Newton, Rio Grande Zoological Park

Nearly all of the Mexican wolves currently held in captivity are
fed dry dog foods such as Ralston Purina Pro Plan TM (Ralston Purina Co., St. Louis, MO 63188) or
Hill’s Science Diet TM (Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Topeka, KS, 66606) should be fed. Such meat-based diets
are high in digestibility and are less likely to result in digestive upsets and diarrhea associated with
high cereal diets. Low quality “budget” dog foods should not be used due to uncertain control of
nutrient concentrations ad ingredient digestibility.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

"Wolves/dogs are about .2% different in mcdna" 

Thats only looking at dna from the female side from studies in the 90's.
Dna testing has come along way since then as I said depends on who's study you look at.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Nearly all of the Mexican wolves currently held in captivity are
> fed dry dog foods such as Ralston Purina Pro Plan TM (Ralston Purina Co., St. Louis, MO 63188) or
> Hill’s Science Diet TM (Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Topeka, KS, 66606) should be fed. Such meat-based diets
> are high in digestibility and are less likely to result in digestive upsets and diarrhea associated with
> ...


So let me get this straight. Are you saying that Purina Pro Plan and Hill's Science Diet are high quality and highly digestable meat based diets?


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> "Wolves/dogs are about .2% different in mcdna"
> 
> Thats only looking at dna from the female side from studies in the 90's.
> Dna testing has come along way since then as I said depends on who's study you look at.


BUT, this is the dna that is used to determine how animals are related. It is the dna that you would study to determine who is the same or different species. For example, mcdna determines that dogs have no other animals in their blood lines other than gray wolves. 

The experts who determine who belongs to which species, the Smithsonian Institution and the American Society of Mammalogists have determined that wolves/dogs are the same species. This classification was made during the early 1990s and hasn't changed.

Grey wolf is classified as Canis Lupus and dog is Canis Lupus Famiarias making them the same species. These clasifications are made by the experts listed in the previous paragraph and they are 100 times more knowledgable than you and I combined.

As for the foxes and bears, I don't have time to look up their scientific names right now but maybe tomorrow sometime I will have time to get them to show they are different species.

*ETA:* Black Bear = Ursus americanus
Brown (Grizzly) Bear = Ursus arctos 
Polar Bear = Ursus maritimus
There are actually 8 different species of bears.

Red Fox = Urocyon vulpes
Gray Fox = Urocyon cinereoargenteus


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> So let me get this straight. Are you saying that Purina Pro Plan and Hill's Science Diet are high quality and highly digestable meat based diets?


I didn't say anything. You asked about the info on captive wolves being feed kibble that is a quote from the Mexican Wolf Husbandry Manual
Prepared by Kent Newton, Rio Grande Zoological Park

But you can find the same info on several zoo web sites they feed there wolves meat based kibble.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> As for the foxes and bears, I don't have time to look up their scientific names right now but maybe tomorrow sometime I will have time to get them to show they are different species.


No need your right I was thinking of Genus.


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

rannmiller said:


> Well that's because the main cause of death to wolves in the wild is bullets. Take away the bullets and most things are apt to live much longer.


Ain't that the truth! Best thing we did this year was to keep the wolf murdering Palin out of the Oval office :biggrin:

Hunters take aim at Idaho's wolves - Defenders of Wildlife


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

jdatwood said:


> Ain't that the truth! Best thing we did this year was to keep the wolf murdering Palin out of the Oval office :biggrin:
> 
> Hunters take aim at Idaho's wolves - Defenders of Wildlife


If the population is substainable I see nothing wrong with hunting them.


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

mmc123 said:


> If the population is substainable I see nothing wrong with hunting them.


You should read up on the slaughtering of wolves in Alaska then. Palin's program wasn't sustainable hunting, it was mindless slaughtering. (the same thing nearly wiped out the wolves in the early 1900's)



> “Idaho hosts the core of the region’s wolf population, with approximately 1,000 wolves. By wiping out 220 wolves, the state is taking the first step toward crippling the regional wolf population by isolating wolves into disconnected subgroups incapable of genetic or ecological sustainability. This puts the wolves at risk for genetic inbreeding and disease outbreaks – and reduces the important ecological niche that wolves fill on the land.
> 
> “Idaho’s wildlife agency has stated that its intent is to reduce the population to only 518 wolves, while the Idaho state legislature’s official policy is that all wolves be removed ‘by whatever means necessary.’
> 
> “No other endangered species has ever been delisted at such a low population level and then immediately hunted to even lower unsustainable levels. This clearly is not responsible wolf management.”





> *Idaho officials have announced that they plan to allow hunters to shoot and kill up to 25% of the wolves in the state during this hunting season alone*. The state has also indicated that it plans to sell an estimated 70,000 permits to hunt wolves this year -- 70 wolf-killing permits for each of the 1,000 wolves estimated to live in Idaho!


Wolves should have never been removed from Protected status. I don't think Salazar realized the can of worms he was opening by delisting them.

https://secure.defenders.org/site/A...3.app217a&cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=1537

Maybe we should start hunting humans since the population is sustainable these days


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

jdatwood said:


> You should read up on the slaughtering of wolves in Alaska then. Palin's program wasn't sustainable hunting, it was mindless slaughtering. (the same thing nearly wiped out the wolves in the early 1900's)
> 
> You should read the link before just running off at the mouth :wink:
> 
> ...


I've read the link long before you posted it. I've been following this for several years and as an avid trapper and hunter I stand by my statement. 

IMO they should be delisted


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

mmc123 said:


> I've read the link long before you posted it. I've been following this for several years and as an avid trapper and hunter I stand by my statement.
> 
> IMO they should be delisted


Why? So you can add a nice wolf pelt to your collection?  

Wolves are still at endangered levels and should remain protected by our government. If you feel otherwise I'd love to hear WHY (not just because you're a hunter and say so)


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

Because the numbers justify it. They should have been delisted a few years ago. Despite what you think hunter don't want to wipe out every animal. It's because of hunter's that there are elk in Kentucky and Tennessee now. Wild turkeys have also have also made an amazing come back because of hunters.
There has been endless debate on the wolf population. There are enough breeding pair to substain the population. And no I don't want a wolf pelt for my collection. I'd sell it I think they are bringing a couple hundred bucks now.


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

There ya go putting words in my mouth. I never said hunting was a bad thing. It can be a great means of population control.

The sheer numbers they want to eliminate this year take it far past population control

Do you know for a fact there are enough breeding pairs to sustain the population? Are you ABSOLUTELY SURE that's not just propaganda from the hunter/farmer side of the debate?


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> If the population is substainable I see nothing wrong with hunting them.


The Defenders of Wildlife make a pretty good argument that it's too early in their recovery to delist them as an endangered species. Hopefully the courts will see things their way.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> I didn't say anything. You asked about the info on captive wolves being feed kibble that is a quote from the Mexican Wolf Husbandry Manual
> Prepared by Kent Newton, Rio Grande Zoological Park
> 
> But you can find the same info on several zoo web sites they feed there wolves meat based kibble.


Well if they think those Purina One and Science Diet are high quality meat based products, they don't know a whole lot about feeding wolves OR dogs. Both are very low quality foods made up pretty much of nothing but garbage.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

jdatwood said:


> Do you know for a fact there are enough breeding pairs to sustain the population? Are you ABSOLUTELY SURE that's not just propaganda from the hunter/farmer side of the debate?


I know for sure that they have exceeded the target numbers set forth by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife. 

http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/pressrel/09-02.htm

IMO they should have never been put on the endangered list anyway. Protected from hunting till the population recovered sure. But putting them on the endangered list makes people think they are about to go extinct which is not true. There are health pop. of wolves in Alaska and Canada.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> Well if they think those Purina One and Science Diet are high quality meat based products, they don't know a whole lot about feeding wolves OR dogs. Both are very low quality foods made up pretty much of nothing but garbage.


So when the experts agree with you they know a 100 times more than me or you and when they don't they don't know squat?


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> The Defenders of Wildlife make a pretty good argument that it's too early in their recovery to delist them as an endangered species. Hopefully the courts will see things their way.


They can't be endangered, dog/wolf same species, there is millions of 'em. :wink:


----------



## whiteleo (Sep 7, 2008)

Gee, doesn't this really sound like C.B?


----------



## BabyHusky (Jul 21, 2008)

since CB isn't in the discussion, please don't bring him into it. 

it seems like a good discussion between the two sides. both parties are bringing links and facts to support their opinion.


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

mmc123 said:


> So when the experts agree with you they know a 100 times more than me or you and when they don't they don't know squat?


If an "expert" is feeding Purina or Science Diet then I would say with great confidence THEY DON'T KNOW SQUAT


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> So when the experts agree with you they know a 100 times more than me or you and when they don't they don't know squat?


No, no, you have it all wrong. They don't agree with me. I am the one agreeing with them because they are the ones that know. I'm the one who doesn't know squat.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> I'm the one who doesn't know squat.


Oh that's too easy :biggrin: But seriously you make some good points though I'm not convinced.
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.

Same with the delisting of the wolves.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Oh that's too easy :biggrin:


Oh, sorry, I got confused. I thought we were talking about the dog being a wolf discussion. On the Purina, Science Diet discussion, I AM the expert in that area. Evidently I know a lot more about Dog food and feeding dogs/wolves than that person ever thought about knowing.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> They can't be endangered, dog/wolf same species, there is millions of 'em. :wink:


You know better than that. You are just being arugmenative now. However, I can't hold that against anyone, I have been accused of that many many times. :smile:


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

On the plus side, you got him to agree with you that dogs are, in fact, wolves. Therefore, they should be eating a wolf's diet to thrive to their fullest. And a wolf's diet consists of what again? I forget. Oh yeah that's right, corn, wheat, soy and rice. Oh no wait, that's an herbivore. 

Is it meat, fruits, whole grains, and veggies? No, that's an omnivore. Darn, I keep getting my species mixed up. 

OH that's right, carnivores eat meat, bones, and organs. DUH! :biggrin:


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

rannmiller said:


> On the plus side, you got him to agree with you that dogs are, in fact, wolves. Therefore, they should be eating a wolf's diet to thrive to their fullest. And a wolf's diet consists of what again? I forget. Oh yeah that's right, corn, wheat, soy and rice. Oh no wait, that's an herbivore.
> 
> Is it meat, fruits, whole grains, and veggies? No, that's an omnivore. Darn, I keep getting my species mixed up.
> 
> OH that's right, carnivores eat meat, bones, and organs. DUH! :biggrin:


Or Dick Van Patten's Natural Balance in the zoo :wink:


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Or Dick Van Patten's Natural Balance in the zoo :wink:


Problem is that there is nothing natural or balanced about Dick Van Patten's food.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> Problem is that there is nothing natural or balanced about Dick Van Patten's food.


Oh come on you've got to approve of these.

Dick Van Patten's Natural Balance®Zoological Formulas™ Carnivore Diets


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Beef, Beef Hearts, Beet Pulp, Tricalcium Phosphate, Ground Whole Flaxseed, Sodium Chloride, Choline Chloride, Taurine, Vitamin E Supplement, L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (source of Vitamin C), Niacin, Biotin, Copper Sulfate, Vitamin A Acetate, Vitamin D3 Supplement, Menadione Dimethyl-Pyrimidinol Bisulfite, Riboflavin, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Thiamin Mononitrate, Manganese Sulfate, d-Calcium Pantothenate, Folic Acid, Ethylenediamine Dihydriodide, Calcium Iodate, Sodium Selenite.

Yes I can definitely disagree with that! 
1. There's beet pulp and flaxseed in their, neither of which belong in a carnivore's diet since they're plant matter. 

2. The only thing they do to balance it to make up for the lack of real, nutritious ingredients is add a bunch of chemicals to it to make up for it. 

3. There's no liver, kidney, spleen, bones, anything in there at all which are essential for a truly balanced carnivore diet. 

4. Lack of bones means a lack of chewing means a lack of cleaner teeth. 

5. With only one protein source to choose from and feed, these animals are going to be _*sorely*_ lacking in the variety that is essential to a thriving carnivore.

*ETA*: but at least it's raw and has meat in it, that's the only good thing I can say about it.


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers (Sep 10, 2008)

I would just like to say Thanks for this thread!! I am enjoying it!! I like that RFD finally has someone to keep his attention and debate him with the facts/truths that they have found.
I think that I will be able to form my own opinion on these subjects pretty soon, if the debate keeps going like this! 
Keep up the good work!


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

rannmiller said:


> Beef, Beef Hearts, Beet Pulp, Tricalcium Phosphate, Ground Whole Flaxseed, Sodium Chloride, Choline Chloride, Taurine, Vitamin E Supplement, L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (source of Vitamin C), Niacin, Biotin, Copper Sulfate, Vitamin A Acetate, Vitamin D3 Supplement, Menadione Dimethyl-Pyrimidinol Bisulfite, Riboflavin, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Thiamin Mononitrate, Manganese Sulfate, d-Calcium Pantothenate, Folic Acid, Ethylenediamine Dihydriodide, Calcium Iodate, Sodium Selenite.
> 
> Yes I can definitely disagree with that!
> 1. There's beet pulp and flaxseed in their, neither of which belong in a carnivore's diet since they're plant matter.
> ...


But what I'm getting at is this is what a lot of zoos are feeding there carnivores. But I guess they didn't reasearch the diet of wolves as good as you guys did.


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Oh you're right, I forgot that wolves and tigers always grind up their meat before they eat it in the wild. Silly me, how could I forget? They also make sure to bust out their vitamin bottles and add that to the mix, just to make sure they aren't forgetting anything and "balancing" their diet properly. 

Sarcasm over. 

My point being that while this may suffice as something to keep these animals alive, you cannot, simply CAN NOT argue that the food they're concocting in laboratories that are manmade are better than the original diet than nature designed for them. The diet they eat and thrive off of on a regular basis in the wild. And what does that consist of? Once again: raw meat, bones, and organs.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> But what I'm getting at is this is what a lot of zoos are feeding there carnivores. But I guess they didn't reasearch the diet of wolves as good as you guys did.


Yes, you're right. Obviously they didn't OR they use other criteria for choosing animal diets such as cost and convenience. Just because some zoo feeds something doesn't make it the correct diet for that species. 

I agree 100% with rannmiller. She is right on. This is a processed food with omnivore ingredients. The food is ground. Organs and bones are missing. There are nutrients missing and it's not balanced. Yeah, the wolves would survive on this diet but it is far far far from ideal. I know zoos that feed kibble to gorillas (not dog food kibble) and orangs. I have seen kibble fed to pandas.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

rannmiller said:


> Oh you're right, I forgot that wolves and tigers always grind up their meat before they eat it in the wild. Silly me, how could I forget? They also make sure to bust out their vitamin bottles and add that to the mix, just to make sure they aren't forgetting anything and "balancing" their diet properly.
> 
> Sarcasm over.
> 
> My point being that while this may suffice as something to keep these animals alive, you cannot, simply CAN NOT argue that the food they're concocting in laboratories that are manmade are better than the original diet than nature designed for them. The diet they eat and thrive off of on a regular basis in the wild. And what does that consist of? Once again: raw meat, bones, and organs.


What I am arguing is this is what the experts are feeding these animals in captivity and they are living longer than in the wild.

Here are feeding guidelines from the Scientific Advisory Group to the
American Zoo and Aquarium Association. 

http://www.nagonline.net/HUSBANDRY/Diets pdf/Red Wolf Nutrition.pdf

http://www.nagonline.net/HUSBANDRY/Diets pdf/Mexican Wolf Nutrition.pdf


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> What I am arguing is this is what the experts are feeding these animals in captivity and they are living longer than in the wild.
> 
> Here are feeding guidelines from the Scientific Advisory Group to the
> American Zoo and Aquarium Association.


The reason wolves or any other animal usually live longer in captivity has nothing to do with diet. In fact, they live longer in spite of the pitiful diet they are fed in captivity.

Again, we are back to this Purina One and Science Diet being touted as quality foods. These are among the 3 or 4 lowest quality dog foods made. Anyone who would recommend these "foods" to be fed to any animal should be fired. You can put no faith in either of those two papers because of that one fact. Of course there is a lot of misinformation throughout both papers.


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

I loved the first paper, actually! 

Let's see: *"Periodically, red wolves from the captive population may be selected for release into the 
wild. However, it is not the responsibility of the RWSSP to feed red wolves a diet that they will find in the 
wild."*

Basically saying, "We don't even _try_ to feed wolves a diet they'd find in the wild." 

Or this one: *"However, whole food, 
e.g. rabbit, mice, deer, etc., should not be the primary diet as this can make switching to dry chow more 
difficult when a wolf is moved to another facility that may not have the ability to offer similar food items. "*

Now saying, "And even if you do want to try to feed them their natural diet, this will make it inconvenient if you want to switch them to manmade garbage or another facility that feeds manmade garbage."

http://www.nagonline.net/HUSBANDRY/Diets pdf/Red Wolf Nutrition.pdf


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> The reason wolves or any other animal usually live longer in captivity has nothing to do with diet. In fact, they live longer in spite of the pitiful diet they are fed in captivity


Earlier you said: Most of the wolf sanctuaries that I know of feed raw meat, bones, and organs. Most of the wolf rescues do also. Every single one of the wolf owners I know of without exception feed raw meat, bones, and organs.

The fact is you didn't know what wolves were being feed in zoos. Earlier you wanted facts from a nutritionist that didn't work for dog food companys so I show you feeding guidelines from zoos. Now you don't like that. But all I've seen from you guys are opinions, no links to anything to back up anything you have said.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> But all I've seen from you guys are opinions, no links to anything to back up anything you have said.


I'm in a hurry now but I should be back this evening. Meanwhile, get the book Raw Meaty Bones Promote Health by Dr. Tom Lonsdale. It is a well referenced book that will explain why a raw diet is so superior to processed food consisting of garbage and chemicals.

There is also a couple of well referenced pages on the Raw Feeding Myths web site. I will get those links for you this evening.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Earlier you said: Most of the wolf sanctuaries that I know of feed raw meat, bones, and organs. Most of the wolf rescues do also. Every single one of the wolf owners I know of without exception feed raw meat, bones, and organs.
> 
> The fact is you didn't know what wolves were being feed in zoos. Earlier you wanted facts from a nutritionist that didn't work for dog food companys so I show you feeding guidelines from zoos. Now you don't like that. But all I've seen from you guys are opinions, no links to anything to back up anything you have said.


I remember posting up lots of links at the beginning of the debate with info on the NATURAL diets of Foxes, Wolves and Coyotes...isn't that enough info to base what a dog's diet should be?


----------



## Doc (Jan 17, 2009)

euel gibson would be so proud. but I ain't got a clue wot I iz gonna feed tater, lucy and mutt tonight. I tink I'm goin to Bojangls and get sum chickn and corn, taters, bitkits, rice, grain beans, pintos and woteber else and see wot dem dawgs will ate.


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers (Sep 10, 2008)

doc said:


> euel gibson would be so proud. But i ain't got a clue wot i iz gonna feed tater, lucy and mutt tonight. I tink i'm goin to bojangls and get sum chickn and corn, taters, bitkits, rice, grain beans, pintos and woteber else and see wot dem dawgs will ate.


love it!!!


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

Doc said:


> euel gibson would be so proud. but I ain't got a clue wot I iz gonna feed tater, lucy and mutt tonight. I tink I'm goin to Bojangls and get sum chickn and corn, taters, bitkits, rice, grain beans, pintos and woteber else and see wot dem dawgs will ate.


Oh well so much for an intelligent debate.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Oh well so much for an intelligent debate.


If you think its so easy, try making a post like Doc's. :smile:


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> If you think its so easy, try making a post like Doc's. :smile:


Sorta looks like we are gonna desend into mindless mumblings. This is sadly what happens in a lot of forums when you have a somewhat heated debate. 
Not wanting it to get nasty I belive I'll bow out.


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

mmc123 said:


> Oh well so much for an intelligent debate.


Just curious where the intelligent debate was.

Anyone believing that feeding kibble to a wolf is better than RAW is lacking in intelligence if you ask me (no, I don't have any links to back it up... just an opinion based on simple logic)


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

jdatwood said:


> Just curious where the intelligent debate was.
> 
> Anyone believing that feeding kibble to a wolf is better than RAW is lacking in intelligence if you ask me (no, I don't have any links to back it up... just an opinion based on simple logic)


But thats the problem. While it may not be better you have no evidence that it's worse. Not one scientific study to back up what your saying. I've posted links from the scientific advisory group to zoos because they are not caring for dogs and you guys belive anything that comes out of the dog food industry.(Not that I blame you there)

You guys have posted links from wikipedia. Show some science and not opinions or books written for profit.

With that being said I'm not of the opinion that feeding raw harms dogs because those who say that have no studies to back it up.

While you may like to think that you opinions backed by simple logic is an intelligent debate its not. Science demands facts not opinions gut feelings or simple logic. That would not even be classed a theory on any other scientific subject.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> But thats the problem. While it may not be better you have no evidence that it's worse. Not one scientific study to back up what your saying.
> 
> Oh, yes, I forgot the Lippert-Sapy study in Belgum that proves that dogs fed a non-commercial diet live an average of 36 months longer than dogs fed a diet of commercial dog food.
> 
> ...


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> mmc123 said:
> 
> 
> > But thats the problem. While it may not be better you have no evidence that it's worse. Not one scientific study to back up what your saying.
> ...


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> mmc123 said:
> 
> 
> > What qualifies the people in this so called "scientific advisory group"? Are they anymore qualified that the AAFCO that "advices" the dog food industry?
> ...


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

mmc123 said:


> 2. Expertise in nutrition/diet management:
> - Advanced degree in nutrition.
> - Demonstrated expertise in zoo or wildlife nutrition/dietary husbandry/feeding management.
> .


I don't belive your often quoted Dr. Tom Lonsdale has an advance degree in nutrition.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Wow thanks for that study it really opened my eyes. Table scrapes it is for my little darling.(Didn't see anything about raw)


Good ... glad to see you are finally seeing the light. Table scraps are more healthy for your dogs than any commercial foods. The study plainly proves that. 

Any nutritionist will tell you that cooking destroys nutrients in food. Raw food is more nutritious than cooked food in every case. Sooooo .... If home cooked food is healthier for your dog than commercial food, think how much better raw food is.

Better table scraps than refuse from food processing plants. Don't you agree?


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> RawFedDogs said:
> 
> 
> > . Demonstrated interest and commitment to zoo animal nutrition (as evidenced by):
> ...


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> There would be no science if not for logic. Someone must come up with an idea to study before it can be studies. This is done by logic. Science was created from opinions, gut feelings and logic.


No, science proves or disproves opinions or gut feelings.

Show me studies on raw. Change my mind.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> I don't belive your often quoted Dr. Tom Lonsdale has an advance degree in nutrition.


Read the book. Then come back and we will discuss that. You can download the book from Tom Lonsdale - Over 150,000 eBooks - eBookMall for about $9.95 I think. You will learn a lot from this well referenced book.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> And these people think Purina Pro Plan and Science Diet are quality foods? Baloney. These are in the lowest tier of quality in dog foods. You won't convince anyone on this list different.


Not trying to convince anyone I want you to convince me!

You keep saying what nutritionist would say and I show you what non-dog food nutritionist say and you blow it off.

Show me your nutritionist. Show me one scientific study that has been conducted by anyone other than someone trying to make a profit on a book.

I'm not going to buy Dr.Lonsdale's book. You have it,point me to some of the amazing studies he quotes.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> No science proves or disproves opinions or gut feelings.
> 
> Show me studies on raw. Change my mind.


I could have God himself appear before you and tell you a prey model raw diet is the ideal diet for a dog and you still wouldn't beleive it. You are that closed minded.

Dogs/wolves have been eating a raw diet for millions of years. They have been eating kibble for around 50 or so years. I think it is incumbant on dog food manufacturers to prove that their products are at least as good as a raw diet but no one ever asks for that. I'm sure if they could prove it, they would have by now. The best dog food companies can do is prove that 6 out of 8 dogs can survive for 8 months eating any particular kibble. Thats all any research by the dog food companies have ever proved, at least have made pubic.

You seem like a fairly intellegent person. Why can't you understand that processed foods are not as nutritious and whole fresh or forzen foods? This is knowledge known by 6th grade health students. Why can't you understand that proper nutrition will cause animals to live longer? Until you understand the basic principles, you can't make a good argument except to say, "prove it" and thats all you have done.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Not trying to convince anyone I want you to convince me!


Not my job to convince you. It's your job to learn on your own.



> You keep saying what nutritionist would say and I show you what non-dog food nutritionist say and you blow it off.


Yep, thats right and I tell you why the don't have a clue. I think I know what they are doing. They know that zoo's aren't going to feed a raw diet so they must come up with something else to feed the animals. They failed misserably.



> Show me your nutritionist. Show me one scientific study that has been conducted by anyone other than someone trying to make a profit on a book.


People only do studies to make a profit or sell a book. Thats what finances studies.

I don't have to show you a nutritionist. Just look in the yellow pages and find one and call them. Any nutritionist that is not working for the dog food industry.

You can try Dog nutrition for arthritis, joint, cancer, heart, kidney, bladder, liver, reproductive system, senior care, stress, anxiety, yeast, and fungal. Fish oil, essential fatty acids, EFA, green foods, kelp, herbs, herbal formulas, immune support, vitamins This page is owned by Lew Olsen, PhD. Her PhD is in natural nutrition. I have chatted with Lew on several occasions. I don't agree with a lot of what she says. She is selling products but she is right on a lot of what she says. Check out her newsletters.



> I'm not going to buy Dr.Lonsdale's book. You have it,point me to some of the amazing studies he quotes.


I've taught you a lot about canine nutrition and the dog food industry. I pointed to you to proof and how to find the research. If you want to see the proof and see the research you are going to have to get off your lazy ass and find it. It is where I say it is. I don't have time to do your research for you. I have 800 lbs of fertilizer to put on my yard this afternoon so I can't do your work for you.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

RawFedDogs said:


> mmc123 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, yes, I forgot the Lippert-Sapy study in Belgum that proves that dogs fed a non-commercial diet live an average of 36 months longer than dogs fed a diet of commercial dog food.
> ...


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> I've taught you a lot about canine nutrition and the dog food industry. I pointed to you to proof and how to find the research. If you want to see the proof and see the research you are going to have to get off your lazy ass and find it. It is where I say it is. I don't have time to do your research for you. I have 800 lbs of fertilizer to put on my yard this afternoon so I can't do your work for you.


I have been researching in fact I want to thank you for pointing me to the study by Dr. Gerard Lippert and Dr. Bruno Sapy. I'm trying to find a full english translation of their book "Junk food or vieEnquête on the deteriorating health of our dogs" (ISBN: 2874340324 / 2-87434-032-4) 

Here's a quote from it- "Same with dogs, it is best to start cooking the foods chosen water as rice, vegetables and meat. And then, little small, we can give the remains ménagers.Le dog, well fed, will be a companion full of vitality and health! "


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> You can try Dog nutrition for arthritis, joint, cancer, heart, kidney, bladder, liver, reproductive system, senior care, stress, anxiety, yeast, and fungal. Fish oil, essential fatty acids, EFA, green foods, kelp, herbs, herbal formulas, immune support, vitamins This page is owned by Lew Olsen, PhD. Her PhD is in natural nutrition. I have chatted with Lew on several occasions. I don't agree with a lot of what she says. She is selling products but she is right on a lot of what she says. Check out her newsletters.
> .


Looks like she agrees with me more than you.:wink:

We fed him a variety of different meats, such as beef, lamb, salmon or chicken. I would sometimes cook the chicken breasts in unsalted butter, as he needed the extra fat. Basically we aimed for a variety of foods to make it more interesting for him and we are fortunate, because he is such a good boy and will eat everything, however he seems to know not to eat the cracker or bread pieces that fall to the floor! He is just a treasure and so clever.

Some of the whole foods we feed him include natural yogurt, cottage cheese and a variety of different vegetables. We give him Asian greens, broccoli, cauliflower and garlic. The vegetable combinations depended on what was available at the shops, but we always added in garlic. I’d put the vegetables in the food processor for a smaller consistency and I’d make up enough to last a few days in the fridge for easy use.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> I could have God himself appear before you and tell you a prey model raw diet is the ideal diet for a dog and you still wouldn't beleive it. You are that closed minded.


Not true! You have convinced me to take her off kibble and feed her cooked meat, veggies and cooked rice. Thanks!


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

mmc123 said:


> Not true! You have convinced me to take her off kibble and feed her cooked meat, veggies and cooked rice. Thanks!


There's no good nutritional value in rice & veggies and you're wasting GOOD nutrients by cooking the meat


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

jdatwood said:


> There's no good nutritional value in rice & veggies and you're wasting GOOD nutrients by cooking the meat


Just going by the studies and links that RawfedDogs is suggesting that I read.


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

Next time I see a wolf in the wild I'll remind them they need to cook some rice up while they're steaming their veggies and grilling their meat...


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

jdatwood said:


> Next time I see a wolf in the wild I'll remind them they need to cook some rice up while they're steaming their veggies and grilling their meat...


Again show me the studies that support you veiws. The only study that has been posted was the one Dr. Gerard and Dr. Bruno Sapy(posted on a lot of the raw feed sites) and they advise cooked meat veggies and rice.

RawfedDogs also suggested Dr Lew Olsen and I had a look at her site and she is feeding
Raw and cooked meat along with veggies,yogurt and cottage cheese.


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

I don't need any studies to know that wolves eat raw meat, organs and bones. They don't eat rice or veggies even though Purina wants you to believe that


----------



## Doc (Jan 17, 2009)

My paw sayz to much science will make ya go blind. I ain't reel sor bout dat. I knows da Lucy dun better on da raw chickn. She dun got muscles like paws plow mule. I got sum half cooked chickn oncst, all it did fer me was gib me da johnny house quick step.

Now wots all dis jabber bout scientific data bout? I gib uins some data. Tater, Mutt and Lucy ates chickn backs in da mornin, and chickn lages fer supper. Sumtime day gits turkey nacks and sumtime day gits some pig rabs. Woteber day gits itz raw. Maw ain't gonna let me fix dem dawgs nuttin in her cast arn skillit. I wuza fading dem hounds dawg chow but da wood be droppin stank boms and cow pies all ober da place. Now wid dat raw meat day dont poop as much and in a day or two, it turns ta powder and it ain't much to it. Now wot duz dat say fer raw? And dat is science accordin to me.

I ain't seen no foxes or ky yots atin kibble nary atime. I tried it onct but it wuz gawd awful. Korse I ain't agonna ate no raw chickn no mor eider. Tore my tummy up for sur.


----------



## Doc (Jan 17, 2009)

Intelligent or not, I do not remember any industry recalls on raw chicken due to added contaminants ... I don't think the processed kibble industry can say as much. And what about the other "additives" that are used to preserve kibble? If it so damn good, why is there a "Use before date" stamped on the bag? A damn live chicken ain't got no stamp on his butt. You kill it then feed it to the dogs. Nice and fresh any even still warm.

butt no point alisenin to me, I iz just a backwoods simpleton. only thang ta lisen to me is tater, lucy and ol mutt. I jest lub dem dawgs of mine.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

Doc said:


> Intelligent or not, I do not remember any industry recalls on raw chicken due to added contaminants ... I don't think the processed kibble industry can say as much. And what about the other "additives" that are used to preserve kibble? If it so damn good, why is there a "Use before date" stamped on the bag? A damn live chicken ain't got no stamp on his butt. You kill it then feed it to the dogs. Nice and fresh any even still warm.
> 
> butt no point alisenin to me, I iz just a backwoods simpleton. only thang ta lisen to me is tater, lucy and ol mutt. I jest lub dem dawgs of mine.


But if you are buying raw chicken chances are it's been treated with chemicals.

Cetylpyridinium
chloride (CPC), a quaternary ammonium compound
used as an active ingredient in some mouthwashes, has been
approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and
the USDA for application to raw poultry products


----------



## rawfeederr (Sep 9, 2009)

I feed:

Raw Meat
Raw Bones
Raw Eggs

No veggies or grains here... they won't really hurt (unless they are veggies like Onions, or grains like Corn) but they aren't necessary, at all.


----------



## Doc (Jan 17, 2009)

And that same chemical isn't used on the chicken used in the processed kibble product? It also says *has been approved* not that it is being used in every processing plant. And what about free-range chicken, or organically grown chicken, of the one I "borrow" from the preachers coop in the field beside me???


----------



## Doc (Jan 17, 2009)

mmc123 said:


> But if you are buying raw chicken chances are it's been treated with chemicals.
> 
> Cetylpyridinium
> chloride (CPC), a quaternary ammonium compound
> ...


dat ain't nuttin but mouf warsh. why wood anybuddy warsh dair chickn wid mouf warsh? dats da sillys ting I eber heard of. chickn ain't got no stanky breff specially ifn its daed.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> I've taught you a lot about canine nutrition and the dog food industry. I pointed to you to proof and how to find the research. If you want to see the proof and see the research you are going to have to get off your lazy ass and find it. It is where I say it is. I don't have time to do your research for you. I have 800 lbs of fertilizer to put on my yard this afternoon so I can't do your work for you.


Ok how about the National Academy of Sciences. Or are they delusional too?

http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/dog_nutrition_final.pdf


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> The experts who determine who belongs to which species, the Smithsonian Institution and the American Society of Mammalogists have determined that wolves/dogs are the same species. This classification was made during the early 1990s and hasn't changed.
> 
> Grey wolf is classified as Canis Lupus and dog is Canis Lupus Famiarias making them the same species. These clasifications are made by the experts listed in the previous paragraph and they are 100 times more knowledgable than you and I combined.



Ok since they are a 100 time more knowledgable than you or I, what does the Smithsonian experts feed thier wolves.

Gray Wolf Facts - National Zoo| FONZ


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Here's a direct quote from that first link you posted: "Because dogs are descended from omnivores, they 
are not strict meat eaters."

What omnivores are they descended from? Bears? Pigs? Humans? Primates? I'm really confused on that one. So until I get an answer on that one, I'd have to say yes, they're delusional too.


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

And here's from the second link:


> Natural Diet: Gray wolves are carnivores, often preying on animals larger than they are, including elk, caribou, and deer, as well as beavers, hares, and other small animals.


Okay, that's all well and good. Then they have this:


> Zoo Diet: Dry kibble dog food made for wild canines, plus treats of chicks, mice, hard-boiled eggs, and oxtail bones.


So obviously these people are at least trying to go with a more natural approach to their wolves, but still are taking convenience and cost into effect as well.


----------



## JayJayisme (Aug 2, 2009)

mmc123 said:


> Ok how about the National Academy of Sciences. Or are they delusional too?


From, "YOUR DOG’S NUTRITIONAL NEEDS 
A Science-Based Guide For Pet Owners"

"Q: Does my dog need to eat meat? 
A: Because dogs are descended from omnivores, they 
are not strict meat eaters. They are remarkably adapt- 
able to a wide range of ingredients, texture, and form in 
terms of what they will eat. Though many dogs may 
prefer animal-based protein, they can thrive on a vege- 
tarian diet. Regardless of whether the protein comes 
from plant or animal sources, normal adult dogs should 
get at least 10% of their total calories from protein. Older 
dogs appear to require somewhat more protein to maintain 
their protein reserves, perhaps as much as 50% more. "

As rannmiller stated, what omnivores did dogs descend from? This is science? 

"...they can thrive on a vegetarian diet." Really? What is their definition of "thrive"? Exist, bark, play, and gain weight? What about illness and disease later in life? How often are illnesses in older dogs linked by your local friendly veterinarian to diet? Almost never, I'm sure. It can take years for some nutritional deficiencies to manifest themselves as illness and disease. I find it hard to believe that a canine can actually have a full, long, and healthy life on any vegetarian diet.

I also love the last sentence about older dogs. Perhaps this is the case because these poor dogs have been fed insufficient protein all their lives from eating crap kibble, grains, and fillers, and in their senior years the result of that starts to rear its ugly head. 

Sounds like a bunch of garbage to me. Anecdotal like just about everything else published on this topic. I'd be interested to know who funded the study. Doesn't say in the file.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Ok how about the National Academy of Sciences. Or are they delusional too?


Yeah, pretty much. Their belief that dogs are omnivores pretty much wipes out any advice they give in the nutritional area. "_Because dogs are descended from omnivores, they are not strict meat eaters._" I don't think even you dispute that dogs are decended from wolves (actually are wolves) and no educated person has ever described a wolf as an omnivore. I've seen this pamphlet several times before and have debunked 5 or 6 erroneous statements in it.

*ETA:* Dang, I wish I had read rannmiller's and jayjayisme's posts before I made mine. Looks like we said the same thing. I was about to make a post about the National Zoo feeding their wolves when I read her post so no need of me just echoing what she says. She is right.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> Yeah, pretty much. Their belief that dogs are omnivores pretty much wipes out any advice they give in the nutritional area


That pamphlet is based on the 400+ page study Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats by the National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Tom Lonsdale uses them as one of his scientific references when it fits his needs.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> Yeah, pretty much. Their belief that dogs are omnivores pretty much wipes out any advice they give in the nutritional area. "_Because dogs are descended from omnivores, they are not strict meat eaters._" I don't think even you dispute that dogs are decended from wolves (actually are wolves) and no educated person has ever described a wolf as an omnivore. I've seen this pamphlet several times before and have debunked 5 or 6 erroneous statements in it.
> 
> *ETA:* Dang, I wish I had read rannmiller's and jayjayisme's posts before I made mine. Looks like we said the same thing. I was about to make a post about the National Zoo feeding their wolves when I read her post so no need of me just echoing what she says. She is right.


Wow you guys are smarter than the National Academy of Sciences, and the Smithsonian all put together. Except when they agree with you then they are a 100 times smarter than you and I.:biggrin:


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

Wolves eat some insects, nuts, and berries.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> no educated person has ever described a wolf as an omnivore.


BANR Petdoor: Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats

Yeah I see what you mean none of these Guys has much of an education.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Dr. Tom Lonsdale uses them as one of his scientific references when it fits his needs.


How do you know that? You say you don't read his books.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Wow you guys are smarter than the National Academy of Sciences, and the Smithsonian all put together. Except when they agree with you then they are a 100 times smarter than you and I.:biggrin:


The 100 times smarter people are the ones who determine which species a particular animal belongs to, not the nutrition nuts.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Wolves eat some insects, nuts, and berries.


Hehe, insects are animals, thus proper food for a carnivore. Wolves eat berries sometime during their short season because of the taste much like we eat cake and ice cream. Not for nutritional value.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> BANR Petdoor: Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats
> 
> Yeah I see what you mean none of these Guys has much of an education.


There is something you obviously don't understand. The pamphlet that you linked to was BASED on the larger book written by those guys. It was one person's opinion based on what he took away from that book. Is there mention of dogs being omnivores in the real book? Do you think a dog is an omnivore? Why? What do you base that belief on?


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> How do you know that? You say you don't read his books.


He has some published papers.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> There is something you obviously don't understand. The pamphlet that you linked to was BASED on the larger book written by those guys. It was one person's opinion based on what he took away from that book. Is there mention of dogs being omnivores in the real book? Do you think a dog is an omnivore? Why? What do you base that belief on?


That Pamphlet is published by the same group. The National Academy of Sciences. Regardless the "real book" doesn't agree with your feeding views.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> Is there mention of dogs being omnivores in the real book? Do you think a dog is an omnivore? Why? What do you base that belief on?


 If you want to see the proof and see the research you are going to have to get off your lazy ass and find it. I don't have time to do your research for you. I have 800 lbs of fertilizer to put on my yard this afternoon so I can't do your work for you.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> There is something you obviously don't understand. The pamphlet that you linked to was BASED on the larger book written by those guys. It was one person's opinion based on what he took away from that book. Is there mention of dogs being omnivores in the real book? Do you think a dog is an omnivore? Why? What do you base that belief on?


Read the book. Then come back and we will discuss that. You can buy the book from Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats. For $265.50 I think. You will learn a lot from this well referenced book.


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Such hostility! I must say I am rather enjoying this thread though.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> That Pamphlet is published by the same group. The National Academy of Sciences. Regardless the "real book" doesn't agree with your feeding views.


I don't think you know what the real book conains. BTW: I don't have "feeding views", I have knowledge gained from 8 years of research.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> If you want to see the proof and see the research you are going to have to get off your lazy ass and find it. I don't have time to do your research for you. I have 800 lbs of fertilizer to put on my yard this afternoon so I can't do your work for you.


Hehe, I had to go back and buy another 200 lbs so I actually put out 1,000 lbs. :biggrin:


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Read the book. Then come back and we will discuss that. You can buy the book from Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats. For $265.50 I think. You will learn a lot from this well referenced book.


I prefer to learn factual information. Obviously these people don't have their facts.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

rannmiller said:


> Such hostility! I must say I am rather enjoying this thread though.


Naw no hostility. Just debate and a little good natured  and maybe a little


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> I don't think you know what the real book conains. BTW: I don't have "feeding views", I have knowledge gained from 8 years of research.


I know what a lot of it contains. Most of it can be found online. Here's a good start, Nutrient requirements of dogs and cats - Google Books


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

rannmiller said:


> Such hostility! I must say I am rather enjoying this thread though.


And too I just want to be clear that even though RFD and I have had some heated discussions doesn't mean that I don't respect him and his opinion. He is passionate about what he belives and I think he wants the best for his dogs. I have searched thru the forums and have seen where he has stated that if you had to feed kibble that EVO was the way to go. So I am looking into it.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> And too I just want to be clear that even though RFD and I have had some heated discussions doesn't mean that I don't respect him and his opinion. He is passionate about what he belives and I think he wants the best for his dogs. I have searched thru the forums and have seen where he has stated that if you had to feed kibble that EVO was the way to go. So I am looking into it.


EVO or another grain free food would be the way to go if you were going to give your dog highly processed kibble. BUT it is very rich...my dogs could not handle the richness of the food.

They are doing fabulous on a raw diet. You might just want to consider that. Even if you do add in some veggies and fruit. I do it...Gave an entire banana to Akasha and she loved it, but she will eat anything. Our wolfdog will not touch fruit or veggies. Emmy and Bailey like carrots and apples, but they get diarrhea when I give them.

What would you choose to eat on a regular basis? McDonald's or whole fresh unprocessed foods?


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> You seem like a extremely intellegent person. Why can't you understand that processed foods are not as nutritious and whole fresh or forzen foods?


How can you not like someone who post stuff like this about you?


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

mmc123 said:


> How can you not like someone who post stuff like this about you?


I'd rather someone be a straight shooter with me and possibly hurt my feelings than sugar coat it to the point that it loses any real value.


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> What would you choose to eat on a regular basis? McDonald's or whole fresh unprocessed foods?


Mickey D,s !


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Mickey D,s !


Are you just being arguementative now? Or are you serious? I guess its ok for you to eat that since you have a CHOICE in the matter. 

We humans are in charge of what our dogs get to eat....so it matters a bit more what we choose to feed them. IMGHO...fresh, whole foods are ideal


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> Are you just being arguementative now? Or are you serious? I guess its ok for you to eat that since you have a CHOICE in the matter.
> 
> We humans are in charge of what our dogs get to eat....so it matters a bit more what we choose to feed them. IMGHO...fresh, whole foods are ideal


I'm serious I love McDonald's and I'm the picture of health.:wink:

Here's a recent pic of me. Ronald McDonald reject - Ugly Men - Funny Males


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> EVO or another grain free food would be the way to go if you were going to give your dog highly processed kibble. BUT it is very rich...my dogs could not handle the richness of the food.


Feeding her TOTW right now and she's doing a lot better on it than she was the Iam's that the breeder had her on.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> Feeding her TOTW right now and she's doing a lot better on it than she was the Iam's that the breeder had her on.


So are you curious about starting a RAW diet in the slightest???


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

danemama08 said:


> So are you curious about starting a RAW diet in the slightest???


I'm curious about feeding her the best that I can whether or not thats raw I don't know. She is very tiny (see pics in profile) so I don't know If I would be comfortable giving her bones.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> I'm serious I love McDonald's and I'm the picture of health.:wink:


Yeah, thats about what I had pictured for you. :smile:

Don't worry about bones for tiny dogs. You feed tiny dogs tiny bones. She could handle chicken wings with no problems and probably drum sticks. She probably wouldn't eat the whole bone but enough to get the nutritents she needs. I wouldn't give her a leg bone from a deer or a whole Boston Butt pork roast. :biggrin:


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> Yeah, thats about what I had pictured for you. :smile:


 You can print it off an throw darts at it. It'll make you feel better.:wink:


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Wow that is a tiny little dog! She'd be just fine with chicken wings. If my kittens can handle chicken wings, your pup can too :biggrin:


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers (Sep 10, 2008)

I am sorry but I have to say, mmc123... That is not a dog, that is a RAT! No, that is a mouse!! 
My sister has two like that (but only a little bigger) and I don't care for them either!! Sorry! It is cute in the pictures though! 
I would love to see you give a pork-butt or lamb leg thoug, if you ever did do that, you would HAVE to post pictures!  
I am very much enjoying this 'debate'. Even the heated parts!! I say, when you grab a dagger, you really dig it in!!  I like the points being made, but I also don't think that dogs and wolves are omnivores. The only reason that they eat things like berries, grass and things of that nature are when they have a tummy telling them that it will eat them if they don't put something in it. BUT, that is just an opinion.
I don't remember who posted it now, but humans are primates. There are human primates and non-human primates. I work with both!! Literally!  Along with 'researchers' and 'scientists'. I don't agree with them most of the time either, but they have to work just like I do!


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

EnglishBullTerriers said:


> I am sorry but I have to say, mmc123... That is not a dog, that is a RAT! No, that is a mouse!!
> My sister has two like that (but only a little bigger) and I don't care for them either!! Sorry! It is cute in the pictures though!


If you could see her you would think she's a lion. She is too brave for her own good. She only weighs 2.2 pounds and the vet said he didn't think she would get much bigger.



EnglishBullTerriers said:


> I am very much enjoying this 'debate'. Even the heated parts!! I say, when you grab a dagger, you really dig it in!!


I'm enjoying it myself,sometimes a little too much. :biggrin:

RFD is enjoying it too, probably most fun he's had in years.:wink:


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> RFD is enjoying it too, probably most fun he's had in years.:wink:


You betcha, I"m enjoying it. But it's not the only discussion I've had like this. People like you come along from time to time. There is one around here now but I haven't seen him in a couple of weeks or so. :biggrin:


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> If you could see her you would think she's a lion. She is too brave for her own good. She only weighs 2.2 pounds and the vet said he didn't think she would get much bigger


Definitely not to little for a RAW diet :biggrin:

Especially if she is like a lion. Small dogs like that (Chihuahuas especially) don't have great dentition, and most of them lose their teeth early in age, respectively...losing their teeth halfway throughout their lives. WHY?

Bad nutrition. Poor dental health due to tatar buildup. Gnawing on bones would do her good to keep those tiny teeth healthy. Just FYI. I do several dentals a week, so I am speaking from experience. Most of the time on small dogs, we pull every rotten tooth. Then their tongues hang out the sides of their mouths LOL


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Aww that sounds like the cats at the clinic I work at (it's feline only). They all have horrible teeth that need to be pulled by the age of 6 and i just want to shake these people and be like "well if you would stop feeding them cereal every day their teeth wouldn't look like this and you wouldn't be forking over $300 for dental work!" Poor kitties and puppies. My old dog had nasty yellow-brown teeth when I got her from my mom a year and a half ago. After a year on raw her teeth were white again! And I didn't brush them or have them professionally cleaned once. Her breath doesn't stink anymore either, thank goodness!


----------



## mmc123 (Sep 28, 2009)

RawFedDogs said:


> People like you come along from time to time. :biggrin:


You mean people that require more than anecdotal evidence to be convinced of your views.


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers (Sep 10, 2008)

mmc123 said:


> You mean people that require more than anecdotal evidence to be convinced of your views.


I do believe that is what he meant. I think that he just likes to argue sometimes too!


----------



## Doc (Jan 17, 2009)

heck, dair aint many folk round hair got any teef but day can gum some chicken off da bone. Noe Tater got all hisins and so duz Lucy and Mutt and day anythang day wont to.


----------

