# This is just frightening...



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

Ugh. In another form I'm on, someone just posted this...

Dogs are actually omnivores, not carnivores. They do just fine on a vegetarian diet, as long as it's balanced. And I don't think the high protein is what the vet said could kill the dog, but cooked meat, or things cooked with meat. And I know that cooked meat can actually be bad, or rather, the fat on the meat becomes evil once it's cooked. Dunno if it would kill them though, probably not.



...and...

If they were carnivores they could not survive on a vegetarian diet. Just look at cats, they are carnivores and they are intolerant to most types of fruit and veggies. Dogs tolerate fruit and veggies just fine, and can live quite healthily on on a vegetarian diet.

Even people who feed a "natural" raw diet include veggies.

I am doing a dog trainer course at the moment, and the person who covered the nutrition part said they are omnivores and live well as vegetarians. Carnivores CAN'T survive as vegetarians, just like humans can't survive on a meat only diet (we are omnivores, but mainly herbivore).




I'm just sitting here shaking my head, I don't even know what to say.


----------



## 3Musketeers (Nov 4, 2010)

Surviving isn't thriving!
Hopefully nobody believes what that person posted.
And cats CAN survive on a vegan/vegetarian diet, if given artificial taurine. It'd probably cut their life-span in half and cause it to have 50 billion problems but it'd be surviving still.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

It's posts like this one that remind me why I love it here on DFC. So many open-minded, logically thinking and intelligent people :thumb:


----------



## Krisy1021 (May 20, 2011)

I have a beagle which we all know are scent hounds, in other words she will eat ANYTHING except veggies. Just goes to show you, what dogs are. If you laid down a peice of raw chicken and a carrot, what do you think they would go to?? Poor pups


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

I so badly want to respond, but I don't even know what to say.


----------



## dmgmn (Apr 24, 2011)

I think most current thinking on this much debated topic is they are considered omnivores with a strong bias towards carnivore. they are adaptable to a certain degree as far as what they can and do eat


This posting says vegetarian diet! that would indicate a herbivore! it's a contradicting statement and shows no logic


----------



## Northwoods10 (Nov 22, 2010)

*Sigh

Its unbelievable to me how people can be so ignorant to science. It is what it is. Take a look in their mouth, the proof is all there.


----------



## eternalstudent (Jul 22, 2010)

I was discussing in class about the jaw movements of a human, and how we have to have circular movements so we can chew properly and start the digestion off and eat veggies. 

Dogs, well we all know the answers and are constantly boggled by the fact that others can't see it.

We are fighting a huge juggernaut that is misconception backed up by no facts, and perpetrated by the food companies.

Oh well we can only look to change the world one person at a time


----------



## dmgmn (Apr 24, 2011)

I tend to believe that dogs have evolved into being omnivores in part from human interaction/intervention and that they may actually benefit from being omnivore rather than being strictly carnivore.


----------



## luvMyBRT (Mar 8, 2010)

All you have to do is to open your dogs mouth and look at their teeth! Could it get any more obvious!? Those aren't the teeth of a vegetarian! :tsk::tsk:


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

dmgmn said:


> I tend to believe that dogs have evolved into being omnivores in part from human interaction/intervention and that they may actually benefit from being omnivore rather than being strictly carnivore.



Genuinely curious as to why you think that?


One of my dogs is still kibble fed and probably will be for the time being...but I've seen my french bulldogs condition really improve in the 6 weeks he's been on a strictly raw meat diet.


----------



## CavePaws (Jan 25, 2011)

dmgmn said:


> I think most current thinking on this much debated topic is they are considered omnivores with a strong bias towards carnivore. they are adaptable to a certain degree as far as what they can and do eat
> 
> 
> This posting says vegetarian diet! that would indicate a herbivore! it's a contradicting statement and shows no logic


They are opportunistic feeders and scavengers. If they were left to their own they would eat whatever they could get in their mouth that tastes good and satiates their hunger, preferably something with lots of meat because that is the most nutrient dense food they could possibly consume. Physically they are not omnivores, nor have they adapted to digest plant matter any better than their wild ancestors. They are carnivores and there isn't anything truly beneficial in adding plant matter that has been turned into slop to their diet unless their diet lacks sufficiently in organ meat. It's as simple as this; if dogs don't have access to cooked plant matter or predigested plant matter it won't offer any substantial nutrients. No one is pulverizing or cooking their veggies and fruit out in the wild for them, so the little plant matter they would consume is most likely only making them feel more full.


----------



## Echo2k3 (Apr 27, 2011)

My job frustrates the hell out of me. I do alot of study in pet nutrition so we have alot of people coming from different companies (euk, iams, hills, pro plan, etc) to tell us that each of there foods are better then the last... And EVERY one of them mentions that dogs are omnivores, every one of them say that dogs need corn etc in there diet, that all canine will eat the stomach contents of an animal to get their vegetable matter......

I refuse to pass this information onto customers, I only sit in and listen to it so I can get a pay rise lol. 

I think I spend most of my working day at work educating customers on dog nutrition, majority of them who walk through the doors don't care, plain and simple do not care what they are putting into their dogs mouths. It's frustrating the amount of people who think they HAVE to feed fruit and veg to their dogs. 


I do most of my study in canine nutrition out of work hours, I don't get paid for it, I enjoy doing it, my dogs love me for it and I am slowly educating other people around me.


----------



## Kofismom (Sep 14, 2010)

Northwoods10 said:


> *Sigh
> 
> Its unbelievable to me how people can be so ignorant to science. It is what it is. Take a look in their mouth, the proof is all there.


 I can understand their ignorance, as I never paid much attention to such things before.
What I find thoroughly inexcusable is speaking out of your ignorance as an authority. Obvious contradictory and uneducated statements spoken as if to inform.
Wouldn't it be wonderful if such ones would decide to educate themselves before they try to educate others?
Another great thing about this place is that's what people generally do here.


----------



## dmgmn (Apr 24, 2011)

I probably could have worded that a little different and i did not make that statement to insight yet another debate!
I am just pointing out the fact that dogs can and will eat anything, and the label of "carnivore" or "omnivore" may not necessarily apply to the dog in present times.

Why is one of your dogs still kibble fed?


meggels said:


> Genuinely curious as to why you think that?
> 
> 
> One of my dogs is still kibble fed and probably will be for the time being...but I've seen my french bulldogs condition really improve in the 6 weeks he's been on a strictly raw meat diet.


----------



## CavePaws (Jan 25, 2011)

dmgmn said:


> I probably could have worded that a little different and i did not make that statement to insight yet another debate!
> I am just pointing out the fact that dogs can and will eat anything, and the label of "carnivore" or "omnivore" may not necessarily apply to the dog in present times.
> 
> Why is one of your dogs still kibble fed?


I agree. They can and will eat anything. My dogs try to get into the cat's litter box and if they succeed...well, I don't think it's doing them any good but certainly no harm!  And I always wonder why people freak out about Salmonella and E.Coli in raw food when their dogs have probably eaten quite a few pieces of poo in their lives...


----------



## dmgmn (Apr 24, 2011)

I just think they should be called something other than "carnivore" because of their ability to eat other things.
Maybe the very definitions of these classifications should be more defined??
Maybe there should be more classifications or sub-classes?

You feed strictly "PMR" right? Do you give them supplements??




CavePaws said:


> They are opportunistic feeders and scavengers. If they were left to their own they would eat whatever they could get in their mouth that tastes good and satiates their hunger, preferably something with lots of meat because that is the most nutrient dense food they could possibly consume. Physically they are not omnivores, nor have they adapted to digest plant matter any better than their wild ancestors. They are carnivores and there isn't anything truly beneficial in adding plant matter that has been turned into slop to their diet unless their diet lacks sufficiently in organ meat. It's as simple as this; if dogs don't have access to cooked plant matter or predigested plant matter it won't offer any substantial nutrients. No one is pulverizing or cooking their veggies and fruit out in the wild for them, so the little plant matter they would consume is most likely only making them feel more full.


----------



## CavePaws (Jan 25, 2011)

Yep, I feed a strictly PMR diet. My dogs get fish oil as a supplement. That is it. I do rub Emu oil on one of my dogs injuries and she gets chicken feet as a supplement too...Since she gets chicken feet, everyone else does. I don't really view it as a supplement for them as they don't really need it.


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

dmgmn said:


> I probably could have worded that a little different and i did not make that statement to insight yet another debate!
> I am just pointing out the fact that dogs can and will eat anything, and the label of "carnivore" or "omnivore" may not necessarily apply to the dog in present times.
> 
> Why is one of your dogs still kibble fed?



I just started my frenchie on raw about 6 weeks ago. He NEEDED to be on raw because every kibble he did just "okay" on but was still having ear infections and dull coat no matter what I tried. 

My hound mix on the other hand is healthy as can be. I'm not really in the place financially or physically (space restrictions) to add a second raw fed dog right now, though in the future, I would like to eventually get her on PMR. She's in beautiful condition though, softest coat ever, smells wonderful, lean and ALL muscle, so I just try to feed her high quality kibbles for now until I am in the place to get her on raw.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

dogs are carnivores. to survive, they will eat anything to stay alive.

but just because a dog will eat blueberries, doesn't make them an omnivore or vegetarian.

what it makes them is hungry enough. 

eating to stay alive doesn't change their category. it just means they don't want to die.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

dmgmn said:


> I just think they should be called something other than "carnivore" because of their ability to eat other things.


You don't classify and animal based on what it will eat in extreme circumstances. You classify an animal based on what it's body is designed to eat and digest. Here is a little something I wrote a few years ago and I have kept it because it comes in handy from time to time.

_There are physical charateristics that make an animal a carnivore or omnivore.

1. Carnivores have large mouths as they eat other animals. Omnivores/herbivores have smaller mouths.

2. Omnivores have flat teeth in the back of their mouths. This is used to crush and mash plant material. All plant material has each cell coated with cellulose. You must mash and crush this shell to extract nutrients from the plant. Humans have these flat teeth. Carnivores don't have flat teeth. They can't get through the cellulose to get to the nutrients. Carnivore teeth are designed to kill prey(front teeth) and to rip and tear meat and crush bones(back teeth).

3. When omnivores/herbivores chew, they move their lower jaw not only up and down but also sideways in order to crush the cellulose. Carnivores don't have the ability to move their lower jaw from side to side. Only up and down.

4. Omnivores/herbivores have an enzyme called amylaze in their salava and stomach juices. Amylaze is used to digest plant material and digestion begins in the mouth for these animals. Carnivores don't have amylaze in their salava and very little in their stomach. They don't make the enzymes necessary for digesting plant material.

5. I don't know how to explain it with words but there is a difference in the way the lower jaw is hinged in omnivores/herbivores and carnivores. Feel your own jaw bone. It begins at the joint with the skull and goes down then angles toward the front. Carnivores jaws start at the skull and go straight toward the front.

6. Carnivores have very acidic stomach juices to kill bacteria on meats and to digest bones. Omnivores/herbivores have much less acidic stomach juices.

7. Omnivores/herbivores have relatively long intestinal tracts. Carbs must ferment in the gut for a long time during digestion. Carnivores being meat eaters have a very short intestinal tract in order to get the meat through the body quickly before it rots. With their short intestinal tract they are not able to have carbs in the intestines long enough to digest.

8. Omnivores/herbivores chew their food into a mush before they swallow it. Digestion in an omnivore begins in the mouth. Carnivores only rip, tear, and crunch their food until it is small enough to fit down their throat. They can fit some amazingly large pieces down their throat. Much larger than an omnivore is capable of.

So there you have your biology lesson in a nutshell. There is no arguing the fact that dogs are carnivores. They have all the physical characteristics of a carnivore and none of the omnivores characteristics._



> Maybe the very definitions of these classifications should be more defined??


No, they work just fine if you understand them.



> Maybe there should be more classifications or sub-classes?


I think they are pretty plain. Either an animal can digest animal parts or it can't. Either an animal can digest plant material or it can't. Possibly an animal can digest both. Can't get in simpler than that.



> You feed strictly "PMR" right? Do you give them supplements??


I know the question isn't directed at me but yes, I"ve fed PMR for 9 years with no problems. No I don't give supplements ... never have except I gave glucosamine for a few years but stopped it.

Another point: Yes, carnivores sometimes eat berries. Like humans, they love the sweet taste. They don't derive nutrients from them.


----------



## naturalfeddogs (Jan 6, 2011)

DaneMama said:


> It's posts like this one that remind me why I love it here on DFC. So many open-minded, logically thinking and intelligent people :thumb:[/QUO So true!! :amen:


----------



## naturalfeddogs (Jan 6, 2011)

I don't know what people are thinking sometimes.


----------



## martye (Mar 9, 2011)

naturalfeddogs said:


> I don't know what people are thinking sometimes.


they're not


----------



## naturalfeddogs (Jan 6, 2011)

very true.


----------



## SerenityFL (Sep 28, 2010)

Kofismom said:


> What I find thoroughly inexcusable is speaking out of your ignorance as an authority. Obvious contradictory and uneducated statements spoken as if to inform.


Bam! Precisely.


----------



## Cain (Feb 14, 2011)

Only supplement I find necessary is fish oil, and that is due to our poorly fed livestock.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

Cain said:


> Only supplement I find necessary is fish oil, and that is due to our poorly fed livestock.


do your dogs eat fish? because if they do, they don't need fish oil.


----------

