# About Forums



## Herzo (Feb 5, 2011)

I decided to start a new thread so as not to derail the op any more in the other one in the raw section.

brindle I do agree with you we are becoming a society of wimps and I think it is us lady's that have to take most of the blame for that one. Oh we want our men to be..................senssssssssetive.........it makes me want to puke. Most women libbers are frauds, the womens movement has been taken over by people with an agenda, and it's not a good one.

I used the word abusive for lack of a better word but I do think he means them to be sometimes. Does he or doesn't he have an agenda, I guess that is objective but he sure does like to hurl it out to others so yes, it goes both ways.

I don't think most everyone here has a problem with a different opinion I think it's just how things are put and I believe you know that. You like to hint that those that feed raw think there better than others, that's BS. I don't feed all my dogs raw and No one and I mean no one has made me feel inferior for this.

So I just think it may be in your mind, maybe you feel like your not doing the best for your dog. I myself have no guilt I do the best that I can do and yes raw has completely healed up Marlo's allergy's. Now Turtle is another story and that's because she got into a loaf of bread and it spiraled from there. I do not believe that raw will cure all things.

And please by all means swat away, I also can't stand the way most everyone these days raises there kids either. I knew when I was a kid that if I did something wrong my mother would take a whack at me so I learned early not to do things wrong, easy peasy.

I think if you want a forum that lets you say anything you want then go find one there are some that let more slide but this one has to keep to the rules. You can't talk nasty about raw in the raw section and you can't talk nasty about kibble in the kibble section. Why do you think this is such a bad rule? It use to be the other way around and raw feeders were doing it in the kibble section. The kibble people were upset and rightfully so. Now you and monster - SmoothWire are doing it in the raw section and try to say I'm just so blunt.

No.... you have plenty of time to reread your posts as you type that's a cop-out.

Wheeuuu that's a load off!!!!!!!!


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

Herzo said:


> I decided to start a new thread so as not to derail the op any more in the other one in the raw section.
> 
> brindle I do agree with you we are becoming a society of wimps and I think it is us lady's that have to take most of the blame for that one. Oh we want our men to be..................senssssssssetive.........it makes me want to puke. Most women libbers are frauds, the womens movement has been taken over by people with an agenda, and it's not a good one.
> 
> ...


There you go, although I did start a debate thread


----------



## Herzo (Feb 5, 2011)

Yes and I went on and answered all your questions and was not able to post it. I think we just all need to take a breath and yes you need to just remember that others also have there opinions so there is a right way and a wrong way to put things. It does go both ways.

I have no children and so my dogs are my children and I also know there dogs but I would most of the time rather be around animals than people. I have always been this way. And It seems like I will always be, so sorry but that's just me. I don't judge you on the fact that you don't and I know you hate it but just let people be. Some of it makes me sick to.

But I do love my dogs more than most people and no I don't think I need help with that. I have often wondered just how long it would take me to get lonely if I didn't see people in a while. I think I could do it a long time.

But I also believe... yes you do talk nasty about raw when you use words like arrogance for those that are feeding PMR. That they don't have the knowledge to do so. You may wonder but you don't have any proof other than some on here have been doing it and raising puppies on it and if it was so bad they wouldn't be doing well. There is a reason dogs have been around a long time and yes I think they ate everything but kibble has only been around for a bit in time. And you seem to trust them.

I know dogs are not wolves and I know that drives you nutty but you can't say that they were born to wait for kibble to come along either.

So just don't get so bent that someone wants to feed PMR I don't think you want people to get bent over someone wanting to feed kibble.

And even though I do think your avatar is funny it is a hostel attempt at hummer. You say your blunt but it come across as hostel and I do believe that you are. I just don't know why.


----------



## Sprocket (Oct 4, 2011)

I am all for a proper debate, discussion and speaking your opinion freely.

However, it is the ever condescending tone that certain members use to express their point of view, that quickly turns a good debate into a mud slinging.


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

Herzo said:


> Yes and I went on and answered all your questions and was not able to post it. I think we just all need to take a breath and yes you need to just remember that others also have there opinions so there is a right way and a wrong way to put things. It does go both ways.
> 
> *I know I can't stop anyone from feeding raw and I don't particularly care to. *
> 
> ...


Answers above.


----------



## Dude and Bucks Mamma (May 14, 2011)

I get very sick and tired of seeing nastiness in EVERY thread. It seems that so many threads get derailed now and I can't imagine what newer members must think when they try to ask a question and their thread turns into an argument. It's not something that is going to encourage them to stay and this is one of the best forums to learn about dog food of all kinds. 

My dogs are my kids because we do not plan on having any but I am capable of always remembering that they are, indeed, dogs. They are one of the main focuses in my life but they are still dogs and are treated as such. They have rules. They cannot be in the kitchen, period. They are not welcome on the bed or the couch unless invited. They must learn their manners, etc. I see nothing wrong with that. I don't particularly care for people either. Society is just too nasty in this day and age for me to want much to do with most people. I choose, instead, to surround myself with my dogs, my husband, and the few friends I know I can count on. Again, I see nothing wrong with that. If we were all the same life would be extremely boring. If someone dislikes animals then that's fine too. I don't care as long as they don't go around kicking puppies. I have relatives who don't like animals yet I still love them dearly. 

For me, at this point, feeding raw is just what I do. If someone is interested in it or is looking for a new way to feed then I will suggest raw as a possible choice should they want to research it. If not, then that's their choice. I choose to feed my dogs one way, others choose to feed a different way. I don't feel superior to the rest of my family. I am the only one who feeds raw in my family. Again, not a big deal. 

I just don't see the need to be hostile in a freaking internet forum. Sure, everyone has their moments but continuous hostility is just plain ridiculous.


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

Dude and Bucks Mamma said:


> I get very sick and tired of seeing nastiness in EVERY thread. It seems that so many threads get derailed now and I can't imagine what newer members must think when they try to ask a question and their thread turns into an argument. It's not something that is going to encourage them to stay and this is one of the best forums to learn about dog food of all kinds.
> 
> *I don't see hostility, I see questioning of your beliefs. What is so wrong with that?*
> My dogs are my kids because we do not plan on having any but I am capable of always remembering that they are, indeed, dogs. They are one of the main focuses in my life but they are still dogs and are treated as such. They have rules. They cannot be in the kitchen, period. They are not welcome on the bed or the couch unless invited. They must learn their manners, etc. I see nothing wrong with that. I don't particularly care for people either. Society is just too nasty in this day and age for me to want much to do with most people. I choose, instead, to surround myself with my dogs, my husband, and the few friends I know I can count on. Again, I see nothing wrong with that. If we were all the same life would be extremely boring. If someone dislikes animals then that's fine too. I don't care as long as they don't go around kicking puppies. I have relatives who don't like animals yet I still love them dearly.
> ...


Mine in bold again.


----------



## FBarnes (Feb 17, 2013)

brindle said:


> i have been rude. I will attempt to be more civil, but I must say there are a couple of members with the exact elitist/superior attitude that I DESPISE. I realize that ALL members do not deserve my disrespectful tone.



Nope, not hostile at all.


----------



## MollyWoppy (Mar 19, 2010)

*You are right. Whole food is ideal. BUT I think that a PMR diet isn't done properly by 80-90% of people and the diet becomes insufficient nutritionally. These deficiencies can take a long time to develop. They can also be quite destructive in a way- use PMR for your dogs teeth-- yet I've seen sooooo many people talking about slab fractures and chips in their dogs teeth, then they need to be removed. That is counter productive... improve their dental health by pulling out half of their teeth! 
*
In your experience, how long does it take before a PMR diet starts to show it's 'deficiencies'?


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

Herzo, i belong to many forums and groups.

in each group there is usually one or two who argue, debate, call it what you will...and do so without reading what they write. 

anyone who knows me knows i am a rabid (yes, i used this word) raw feeder. 

i've mellowed somewhat and now focus my attentions on human nutrition, holistics for both dogs and humans, and i try to stay out of unstable discussions. 

everywhere i go, however, there's always at least one person who wants proof or wants to debunk without considering sometimes things just work. or that processed food is a lot newer than real food or that certain herbs have been used for thousands of years with great success....witness oil pulling as an example.

i've said it a million times. sometimes, things just work and have for many years; hence willow bark, though now we could use aspirin.


so many times, the mechanism of action for a particular treatment is 'unknown', and believe me, more studies for that particular drug have been carried out.

and yet, it's acceptable to promote a drug when no one even knows why it works.....or why it works for something other than its intended use. 

i believe people have a right to their own opinion.....

i have, on enough occasions forgotten my manners....and now i see just through observation how disruptive that can be. manners. just use them. be it in real life or in real forums which have real people who do not desire their threads being derailed.


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

FBarnes said:


> Nope, not hostile at all.


Rude would definitely be different then hostile.


----------



## riddick4811 (Nov 2, 2011)

I really hate bickering. I don't mind a good discussion, but I hate it when people harp on an issue. Make your point, move on. I have left several places b/c of certain people constantly arguing (even when I had nothing to do with it) to the point the forum was no longer educational. I like learning and reading and hearing different peoples experiences. While I think sometimes not knowing someone personally or being able to see facial expressions and just reading what they write it not always accurate way to judge them. Some people are better at explaining/wording things than others, but still no reason to be rude, mean or pick on someone. 

My dogs are my kids. I do not now nor ever have wanted children. I honestly do not care to have anything to do with infants. They smell funny to me and I have no desire whatsoever to hold them despite friends/family/coworkers oohing and awwing over them. Just not my cup of tea. 

But I do realize my dogs are dogs, especially some of the breeds I choose to have. I understand what they are and what they are capable off. But they are spoiled and I spend every free moment I have with them and we go as far away from people as possible! I prefer my dogs to spending time with people. Been that way since I was a child and honestly don't see it changing anytime soon. 

I have fed raw, did so for years. Only had one issue- my Doberman bloated on lamb necks. But never had a nutritional deficiency proven by bloodwork even after years of only raw. Reason I stopped- we got hit by 3 hurricanes back to back and I lost all 3 big freezers and have never had the money to replace them. Plus most of my suppliers went out of business and the prices have increased to where it is no longer within my budget. So my dogs eat kibble as the base and I add in raw, home cooked, can food, etc. Works for me. All I ask in what I feed my dogs is I have to be able to afford to start with and for my dogs to like it, eat it willingly, have good skin/coat, clear eyes/ears, good poop, little to no gas, no doggie odor, and maintain their weight on the food (not have to feed a ton to keep weight on or feed so little they are starving to keep weight off). So I will feed whatever it takes to do that within my means. And I have no issues with other people feeding differently. To this day, I have never had any vet question my ability to feed my animals, most compliment me on how healthy I'm able to keep a lot of dogs. Better than many owners that just have one dog.


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

magicre said:


> Herzo, i belong to many forums and groups.
> 
> in each group there is usually one or two who argue, debate, call it what you will...and do so without reading what they write.
> 
> ...


I know what you are referring to when discussing "holistic" remedies. My grandfather has been attempting all of these things his ENTIRE life. It has done him little good... why? Genetics.
You may extend your life a day, a month, or a year but truly not significantly. Same with your dogs. 
When it is your turn to croak, you will. Accept that. Same goes for our canines. 
I REFUSE to bend over backwards when I realize this inevitable truth. 
Of course we want to live forever. Of course we want our dogs to live forever. But the honest to god truth is, we won't. 
You'll die. Your dogs will die. Accept that. If you just can't accept that, don't get anymore pets... for no other reason then to save your sanity. 
I argue the comment "sometimes things just work".... because sometimes they just DON'T work. I tried it, in an effective way; in the same way you, Liz, naturalfeddogs, rawfeddogs and all of the other seniors on this site have used it. It DID NOT WORK FOR MY DOG. I refuse to put my dog through a host of attempts on a diet that simply isn't the ultimate for her. 
I saw raw and there were stars in my eyes. I was wowed and excited and thrilled for this option. I was disillusioned. It didn't work.
If it works for your dog, GREAT! I hope there is no long term damage. I hope your dogs don't require teeth pulling. I hope your dog doesn't die from sepsis when it's bowels are perforated. Or that it develops such a severe impaction that it causes permanent bowel damage. I sure as hell hope not. 
Of course there are concerns with kibble as well. I must say that *I* have never had an issue with it. 
My dog have lived long, healthy lives. No this is not subjective. 
When a 15 year old giant breed dog bounds up to you like a puppy while on some generic brand kibble.... I don't know how that wouldn't be measured as health..? Could he have lasted 2 more days on raw, maybe? Or maybe he would have his bowels perforated and died at 2. God only knows. 
We are not discussing drugs. We are discussing diet. 
There is NO PROOF that raw is any better (or worse) then kibble. None. You can't have the same dog eat kibble, die and then eat raw and die again. That would be the only way to efficiently KNOW whether it is ideal for EVERY dog. 
The conveniences, cost, flexibility and availability of kibble have all been worth it to me. Although I do love spoiling her with some raw items in the summer (she will be eating half raw in summer).
This group isn't too bad. There were a few in the beginning that really flaunted their raw feeding as if it was some revolutionary gem of a discovery, and anyone who didn't use it were a bunch of morons that shouldn't own dogs (I had a couple people tell me to just euth my dog if i wouldnt feed an "appropriate" diet). Most of you, however, are pretty normal (with a couple of exceptions).


----------



## Tobi (Mar 18, 2011)

brindle said:


> You're right. I have questions. Questions that nobody sufficiently answers.


There is a defining line between being combative, and direct. Your tone in your responses even in this thread is combative...



brindle said:


> Correct. My perceptions have been skewed in the past but there are a handful of members I would really like to have a go at. I try my best not to be a b word but this is my nature. I like to say it like it is regardless of people's feelings on it, this is a character flaw.


This is a combative attitude, it is ultimately your choice how you conduct yourself, but it just takes some people longer to mature I suppose.

This is why I have for the most part checked out of this forum, I don't like to argue with keyboard warriors, and hot heads, it saddens me that the human race is so petty that we fight, and bicker over what we feed our pets. Flaws are generally to be worked on, not admitted to and then forced to live with.


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

riddick4811 said:


> I really hate bickering. I don't mind a good discussion, but I hate it when people harp on an issue. Make your point, move on. I have left several places b/c of certain people constantly arguing (even when I had nothing to do with it) to the point the forum was no longer educational. I like learning and reading and hearing different peoples experiences. While I think sometimes not knowing someone personally or being able to see facial expressions and just reading what they write it not always accurate way to judge them. Some people are better at explaining/wording things than others, but still no reason to be rude, mean or pick on someone.
> 
> My dogs are my kids. I do not now nor ever have wanted children. I honestly do not care to have anything to do with infants. They smell funny to me and I have no desire whatsoever to hold them despite friends/family/coworkers oohing and awwing over them. Just not my cup of tea.
> 
> ...


Kids are a choice like anything else. 
Dogs are pets, not kids. 
I agree with pretty much everything you said...


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

As riddick said, You can only argue a topic so long and it becomes kind of inane. I'm done now lol
Just... don't expect everyone to believe everything you say as gospel truth. And for the love of god, stop giving medical advice when you have no place to. You could kill a dog with your good intentions. 
Even if there was a vet/vet assistant/vet tech on here, they shouldn't advise as they have not seen the patient. I believe it might be illegal even... not sure though.


----------



## Herzo (Feb 5, 2011)

Yes Re I know I usually don't get into these little heated debates, it just seems that some days I am more chatty than others 

Brindle.....I just can't understand that in the above you state that you don't understand that others believe something that has no scientific evidence like that is the end all then your very next answer you throw out 80 - to 90% of people you think don't do it right.

Unless I'm mistaken you just came up with that out of thin air. I am getting confused you want scientific evidence then you just throw things out which is it?

Just a couple of things that I was thinking when I went out yesterday and was picking up dog poo. Just for the record you were not the one that derailed that other thread md was when you gave your opinion that you thought the op should go to the vet was just fine to me. The first post that is, then he chimed in and then it went haywire.

You for some reason think it is wrong if people want to ask someone on here a question. That's there business they can take your advice or they can take the others then it just needs to be left alone. I also don't go to the vet with everything nor do I go to the doctor for everything. If you want to and it's your money then by all means go. 

And I'm sorry you have questions that you have not gotten sufficient answers for. I'm not sure there would be any, it might just be in your mind that you don't like the answer.

The avatar, yes I do think you did it in a hostile manner, because of the timing for one thing and the looks of it. You are really going to try and tell me you just had been meaning to do it and just had time yesterday to get to it. Oh and sorry for the miss spelling on that one, I am the worlds worse speller.

Hostile: 1. Having or expressing enmity or opposition; antagonistic; unfriendly.
2. Of pertaining to, or characteristic of an enemy


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

Tobi said:


> There is a defining line between being combative, and direct. Your tone in your responses even in this thread is combative...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Please don't get on your high horse and act like you have no flaws... at least I am open about them.
Yet again, if you don't like me, ignore me. I think you wouldn't engage unless you enjoyed doing so.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

brindle said:


> I know what you are referring to when discussing "holistic" remedies. My grandfather has been attempting all of these things his ENTIRE life. It has done him little good... why? Genetics.
> You may extend your life a day, a month, or a year but truly not significantly. Same with your dogs.
> When it is your turn to croak, you will. Accept that. Same goes for our canines.
> I REFUSE to bend over backwards when I realize this inevitable truth.
> ...


you are, of course, entitled to your opinion. 

genetics, indeed, play a part in health or lack of health.

so does diet, environment, vaccinations, and a whole host of other things.

i have no desire to provide proof. i've done my research as i know how to do and i am satisfied with my findings.

are there dogs who will live to a ripe old age on ol' roy? sure. are there dogs fed raw, not vaccinated and reared holistically who are tragically taken from us too soon? sure.

what i am talking about has nothing to with proving to anyone why i believe what i believe. what i use and my reasons for using it.

the horrors you speak of..i fervently hope my dogs do not suffer from lost teeth, or impacted bowels or all the other armegeddon possibilities that can happen over the course of a life time.

be it a raw fed dog or a kibble dog, a traditionally treated dog or holistically treated dog.....the only thing that matters is the person doing whatever they are doing is doing it because they believe....not because someone else said so or said not to.

i edit this to change the word holistic to natural.


----------



## FBarnes (Feb 17, 2013)

Raw can only be a miraculous cure if kibble was the problem in the first place. For many dogs, kibble is a problem. So switching to raw can be a night and day difference. Let's not downplay the fact that it CAN be a miracle just because it doesn't happen to every dog. 

For some dogs it's not a miraculous cure. Sometimes it's not a miraculous cure because people don't do it right. Sometimes it's not a miraculous cure because of other problems not related to kibble. Even though I believe natural food is always a better option and I also believe dogs that do fine on kibble now may suffer later on from chronic conditions caused by a lifetime of processed food, I don't tell people what I think they should feed. Feed what you want. I used to feed Ole Roy and had mostly healthy dogs although I now suspect catching and eating their own rabbits daily gave them a little help. But interfering on raw threads just because one's dogs didn't have a huge turnaround? I don't know how that can be taken as anything but inflammatory.


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

Herzo said:


> Yes Re I know I usually don't get into these little heated debates, it just seems that some days I am more chatty than others
> 
> Brindle.....I just can't understand that in the above you state that you don't understand that others believe something that has no scientific evidence like that is the end all then your very next answer you throw out 80 - to 90% of people you think don't do it right.
> 
> ...


I'll give you an example... 
Someone's dog is having issues with their diet. Say slightly loose stool. 
The first thing that would come up is "add more bone". Why do some dogs require more bone and some require less? Where is the validity or science in that other then bone firms up poop? Couldn't they then be getting too much calcium? Is the diet not then unbalanced? 
Or the dog is constipated-- add more organ meat. So why would some dogs require more organ and some require less? Or the bone has become constipation for the dog and organ is known to cause loose stool so you counter balance it? Where is the science in that? Why is everything a dog needs judged by its poop? What about vitamin A, these "need more organ" dogs will be consuming far more Vit A then the average dog. Their poop dictates that this is what they require? Doesn't that sound ridiculous?
If I were to poop loose I wouldn't say WOW I need more white bread and proceed to alter my diet to accommodate a bunch of white bread. White bread is constipating but shouldn't be consumed in large amounts. See what I'm getting at?
This would NOT be nutritionally balanced at ALL!
Oh their coat is dry-- throw in some fish oil... what if the dog had hypothyroid?
Oh their poop is loose-- give em more bone... what if they have coccidiosis but it becomes hidden because the dog is not constipated from bone. 
Or the dog is underweight-- give them a higher percentage of meat... what if the dog has a severe case of tapeworm infestation. 
These issues can be (and are) hidden with this "balance over time" that you speak of. 
This is not nutrition. These are uneducated guesses.


----------



## FBarnes (Feb 17, 2013)

brindle said:


> Please don't get on your high horse and act like you have no flaws... at least I am open about them.
> Yet again, if you don't like me, ignore me. I think you wouldn't engage unless you enjoyed doing so.


If he is on a high horse, he still has a way to go before he is even close to you on yours.


----------



## Tobi (Mar 18, 2011)

brindle said:


> Please don't get on your high horse and act like you have no flaws... at least I am open about them.
> Yet again, if you don't like me, ignore me. I think you wouldn't engage unless you enjoyed doing so.


Of course I have flaws, everybody does, but the idea is that when you recognize such a flaw, you work on fixing it, not pushing it off on strangers on a forum. No need to be defensive.
I'm not combative with other members on this forum in such a way that I come off as rude, or hostile. It's a public forum I engage in what I choose, and in a manner that I choose, it's self control girly...



> These issues can be (and are) hidden with this "balance over time" that you speak of.


Regular vet checkups a few times annually, and common sense come to play a part here...


----------



## bett (Mar 15, 2012)

brindle said:


> I'll give you an example...
> Someone's dog is having issues with their diet. Say slightly loose stool.
> The first thing that would come up is "add more bone". Why do some dogs require more bone and some require less? Where is the validity or science in that other then bone firms up poop? Couldn't they then be getting too much calcium? Is the diet not then unbalanced?
> Or the dog is constipated-- add more organ meat. So why would some dogs require more organ and some require less? Or the bone has become constipation for the dog and organ is known to cause loose stool so you counter balance it? Where is the science in that? Why is everything a dog needs judged by its poop? What about vitamin A, these "need more organ" dogs will be consuming far more Vit A then the average dog. Their poop dictates that this is what they require? Doesn't that sound ridiculous?
> ...



Whew.
Do you require scientific backing for everything, all of the time ( whether it be dog or human) or do you, at times, go with your gut and experience?


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

magicre said:


> you are, of course, entitled to your opinion.
> 
> genetics, indeed, play a part in health or lack of health.
> 
> ...


Agreed completely. I respect your statement.


----------



## FBarnes (Feb 17, 2013)

bett said:


> Whew.
> Do you require scientific backing for everything, all of the time ( whether it be dog or human) or do you, at times, go with your gut and experience?


Well, she says 80-90% of raw feeders are doing it wrong. So I suspect scientific backing demands are only when it suits...


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

> Of course we want to live forever. Of course we want our dogs to live forever. But the honest to god truth is, we won't.
> You'll die. Your dogs will die. Accept that. If you just can't accept that, don't get anymore pets... for no other reason then to save your sanity.


my goodness, i won't speak for others, but i certainly know with all of my being that my dogs will die. either from old age, the unforseen, the genetics about which you speak......dogs die. 

what i do.....i do to try to level the playing field. for me, raw is a miracle for my badly bred pug, my corgi mix and my blue merle rough collie, who was born of non vax'd parents and was weaned to raw. structurally, he is sound. his temperament is awesome and his health is fantastic.

can something happen to cut his life short? of course it can. in the meantime, though, i'll be the one in control of his food, his lack of vaccines, the natural gentle medicines he may need and right down to the amount of bone and organ he gets.

do people who are new ask questions about loose stools or constipation? sure they do. time is the great teacher. that and lots and lots of questions....we who have travelled the road prior to them will try the simplest solution first and then keep going...it is how medicine works.....peeling the onion, so to speak......

if it's a worm, we'll know soon enough. if it's dead nuts serious, we'll know that too. if it's deadly, the dog would die no matter what. 

dogs die. and on the flip side, many dogs live a whole lot better because of what we do.


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

bett said:


> Whew.
> Do you require scientific backing for everything, all of the time ( whether it be dog or human) or do you, at times, go with your gut and experience?


I go with a combination. My logic has always said whole foods are superior, but my gut has also lead me to the constant questioning of whether a PMR diet is truly ideal. Who is to say that dogs have not evolved to be omnivorous. They evolved an ability to better digest/glean nutrition from carbohydrates... 
If I were to do whole feeding again, it would definitely be a (self) ground BARF diet. Veggies would be included in the mush as well as a vit supplement once per week. I would also go with a nutritionist again.


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

Tobi said:


> Of course I have flaws, everybody does, but the idea is that when you recognize such a flaw, you work on fixing it, not pushing it off on strangers on a forum. No need to be defensive.
> I'm not combative with other members on this forum in such a way that I come off as rude, or hostile. It's a public forum I engage in what I choose, and in a manner that I choose, it's self control girly...
> 
> 
> ...


I am working on it right now. You don't think you are trying my patience?  
I have found you quite rude at times. Being referred to as "girly" isn't exactly my cup of tea.


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

magicre said:


> my goodness, i won't speak for others, but i certainly know with all of my being that my dogs will die. either from old age, the unforseen, the genetics about which you speak......dogs die.
> 
> what i do.....i do to try to level the playing field. for me, raw is a miracle for my badly bred pug, my corgi mix and my blue merle rough collie, who was born of non vax'd parents and was weaned to raw. structurally, he is sound. his temperament is awesome and his health is fantastic.
> 
> ...


I understand. I respect your choices


----------



## brindle (Mar 14, 2013)

FBarnes said:


> If he is on a high horse, he still has a way to go before he is even close to you on yours.


You know, I am humble enough to admit when I have done/acted wrong. I don't know what more you all could possibly want from me at this point.
I refuse to follow along with the questions stuck in my mind and say/do nothing for fear of being attacked/shunned/disregarded by the majority. If I have a question, I will ask it. Regardless of the majority's irritability at the questioning of their staunch beliefs. 
Sometimes txt may come across as "hostile" but that is a matter of perception. I am now attempting to be very civil with all of you (even though I disagree with much of what you believe) and all I am getting in return is--the same thing you have accused me of-- hostility. 
If you want respect from a fellow member, perhaps you could reciprocate. 
I've had enough for now.


----------



## Roo (Oct 17, 2010)

brindle said:


> I'll give you an example...
> Someone's dog is having issues with their diet. Say slightly loose stool.
> The first thing that would come up is "add more bone". Why do some dogs require more bone and some require less? Where is the validity or science in that other then bone firms up poop? Couldn't they then be getting too much calcium? Is the diet not then unbalanced?
> Or the dog is constipated-- add more organ meat. So why would some dogs require more organ and some require less? Or the bone has become constipation for the dog and organ is known to cause loose stool so you counter balance it? Where is the science in that? Why is everything a dog needs judged by its poop? What about vitamin A, these "need more organ" dogs will be consuming far more Vit A then the average dog. Their poop dictates that this is what they require? Doesn't that sound ridiculous?
> ...


This is assuming that dogs are all the same, and intake/process the exact same nutrient amounts. Yes there is nutritional requirements, but those requirements, even when met to the T would not be absorbed the same or processed the same for every dog. More than just diet plays a role in overall health, and each individual dog is like each individual person, the bodies function all uniquely.


----------



## FBarnes (Feb 17, 2013)

Roo said:


> This is assuming that dogs are all the same, and intake/process the exact same nutrient amounts. Yes there is nutritional requirements, but those requirements, even when met to the T would not be absorbed the same or processed the same for every dog. More than just diet plays a role in overall health, and each individual dog is like each individual person, the bodies function all uniquely.


The thing about raw feeding is it's not one size fits all, like with dry food which is consistent in every way, from one bag to the next, nutritionally equivalent, each bag meeting all a dog's nutritional requirements. Or at least you hope so.

When I started feeding my dog raw I gave him liver the second day. He did fine. I see now how rare that was, but I did it and suffered no consequences. I tried it on a foster dog and paid a huge price, as did the poor dog. It's trial and error.


----------



## Roo (Oct 17, 2010)

FBarnes said:


> The thing about raw feeding is it's not one size fits all, like with dry food which is consistent in every way, from one bag to the next, nutritionally equivalent, each bag meeting all a dog's nutritional requirements. Or at least you hope so.
> 
> When I started feeding my dog raw I gave him liver the second day. He did fine. I see now how rare that was, but I did it and suffered no consequences. I tried it on a foster dog and paid a huge price, as did the poor dog. It's trial and error.


Right but even if dogs are fed kibble (perfectly calculated nutrient amounts), there still will be variation between dogs on how much of those nutrients are absorbed and used, same with people, it's an individual bodily process.


----------



## FBarnes (Feb 17, 2013)

Roo said:


> Right but even if a couple dogs are fed kibble (perfectly calculated nutrient amounts), there still will be variation between dogs on how much of those nutrients are absorbed and used, same with people, it's an individual bodily process.


Yep and the quality varies greatly, too. My issues with kibble stem from the fact they are not required to tell us exactly what quality is in there and I firmly believe that if the ingredients were halfway decent a bag of dry food wouldn't be affordable. People are astounded that some of the better dog foods are $70 for just a few pounds when similar ingredient dog foods of other brands are much cheaper and I believe that's because the very expensive foods might be using meat that wouldn't appall most of us if we saw it before it went into the vats.

But you don't talk on kibble forums about how much bone they are getting, or whether they have enough variety in the kibble, etc. It is more complicated to feed raw although not as complicated as some people make it. Someone once said "Start with 2% of their body weight" and somehow that turned into a rule, not a guideline. I have a dog that eats 1-1.5%. SOme dogs eat 8% or more. Some dogs start out with 2% fine and some don't. We have to use our brains more in order to feed raw. There isn't a checklist to go down and everything will be guaranteed to go right - that is true with kibble also, but with kibble the window is narrower.


----------

