Dog nutrition - what is BEST for you and your dog?

[PrincessDiana]

Originally Posted by Ellie May

I want to know if parasite larvae is killed during freezing. Anybody know?
I can tell you reallllllllllllly want what is best. For us, the choice is so easy b/c she isn't allowed to have anything else medically. lol.

At this point, I think what diet is better for the doggies is based on hearsay and not necessarily science. We can say that wolves eat raw so dogs should, but is that the safest? Probably not. There are no studies that take a look at the overall picture. It's all one small area of the feeding plan and the control groups don't seem quite right to me. In the one study they tested what, 24 types of raw food against 4 types of kibble/canned? I dunno. Doesn't seem right. But then, of course raw is going to have more bacteria, etc. So nutritionally speaking we could say that dogs should get what wolves get b/c they are pretty much wolves. But that does not take the safety issue into account, the fact that what wolves eat my not be optimal, etc. Just like I can say homecooked is great if done correctly. I have no study to base that on. There are subjective reports of dogs doing well on it. There is no control group of kibble fed dogs. So it's coming down to testimonials pretty much. That's not all bad, but it's not science either. And I know for me the studies I do see on raw absolutely positively make me want to run the other way b/c unless I see raw fed dogs regularly living longer lives (it would have to be very obvious), then I wouldn't take the risk. I still see raw fed (and homecooked fed) dogs get sick and I don't see an increase in lifespan across the board (20 years +). So I think it's really still a ton of guessing.

It depends on the parasite. I would also think that typically, parasitic larvae IS killed by freezing but you would see them and thus not feed the infected meat. The issue, as yorkiepuppy pointed out, is the life stage BEFORE larvae, in which the parasite can lay dormant and survive extreme temp. levels. But then again, it depends on the parasite. If you have any specific parasites in mind I can consult my books!

[PrincessDiana]

Sorry to post three times but I also just saw that you posted a link to a case study involving dogs and Toxoplasma gondii. I'm not really sure why that study was done because cats are the only known host for T. gondii. Their presence shouldn't pose any problems to dogs.

[Mitzis Mom]

I didn't read the whole thread, so, sorry if I repeat somebodies post.
I tried about all there is from home cooked to raw to prescription diets to find the right food for our Maggie who is very allergic to a gzillion nutritional and environmental things AND a picky eater. I ended up with Orijen. All of my babies, including Maggie, are doing very very good with it, all love it, their poop is nice and firm, not stinky and less than with all other foods before (and believe me... even though Yorkies don't poop big piles it adds up if you have five of them...LOL) It is pricey though but I don't care as long as I don't have to pay for Vet visits and medications...

[DvlshAngel985]

This is an awesome thread! So much info flying around and so many opinions.

To answer the original question, the only person that can find the perfect food for *your* dog is you. Someone else probably said that, and said the following also. Each dog is different, and has different sensitivities and even different preferences.

Kaji will each pretty much anything. I do enjoy giving him fresh fruits and veggies as treats throughout the day. That is something I am comfortable with and I prefer them over processed dog treats, including most chews. (bullys) I do however feed him kibble. It's one thing we've had great results with, nice hard poops and not to smelly either. The kibble has very little fat in it, and if I control the portion, I control his weight. The guidelines on the label made it really easy for me to do this. Kaji has bad LP (3/4) and if he is even half a lb overweight, his knees pop. He got up to a full pound overweight and his knees popped non stop! It was freaking me out! I got the weight down and now, his knees rarely slip in and out. Plus, he's on a very predictable pee/poop schedule.

I did try Stella and Chewys and I didn't like what I saw. Kaji ate it fine, but his poops were soft. Not runny, but soft. To be honest, I hate the idea of having raw meat lying around. Kaji is a grazer, he eats in spurts all day. I serve him his daily portion and most days he'll grab mouth fulls here and there in between games of fetch. Other days he'll eat 90% of his ration in the morning, while other days he'll wait to eat till night. For the most part he's a grazer. I don't like the idea of having to leave anything non cooked out for him. He'll enjoy the new meal for a day or two, and after it's lost its novelty, he'll eat when he's ready. I can't do that with pre-made raw. I'm pretty sure if I leave it out, all the good processing to eliminate all the bad would have been for nothing.

I will say, that not all dogs seem to react to the exact same food the exact same way. Kaji's first dog buddy, Danger, was a pom with similar knee problems with the addition of a bad back due to bad breeding. He was on the same food, same routine, same everything. His poops were just awful! Squishy most of the time, stinky to the point that it made me gag, and a weird orangey color. I truly believe that each dog is an individual.

For now, I'm going to stick with the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Kaji is doing well on his food. He'll do tricks for kibble. Even with tid bits of plain chicken breast, fresh fruit, and veggies, he'll always go back for his fill of kibble. His hair is as shiny as a cotton coat can get, and it's so luxuriously soft, he's never out of energy, and he's happy as a clam. It just works for us.

[Melcakes]

Below are some really great excerpts and studies and points taken from raw feeders. After extensively reading through a lot of websites and yahoo groups I think I'm a believer that raw is by far the best for a dog. Below shows the myths about bacteria and parasites in raw fed diets and how they are more prevalent, which is not aware by many, but based on science more prevalent in pet foods - commercial and home-cooked. Sorry for the super long post!

"I'd really like to know what people think pets ate before the advent of cooked, processed, and kibbled pet diets? They received hardly any cooked food, as food was a precious commodity that very few people would waste on something like a dog (dogs have not always enjoyed the same social status they enjoy now). By and large the dogs of "old" foraged and scavenged on their own, or hunted small prey animals to supplement what little food they received at home. And before this? Wolf-dogs hunted with their masters and hung around the camps, knowing they would receive whatever raw meat, bones, and offal were left over. Thousands of years ago, people did not cook for their pets. Why should they? The animals were fully capable of obtaining their own food and moreover were a good "disposal" for unused parts of animals. The dogs ate what they were designed to eat.
What about increased longevity people ask? Well dogs' longevity has only recently been determined by research performed by the pet food companies. They use these "estimates" to show that their food helps animals live longer. But longer compared to what? No one cared about canine longevity in the earlier days when dogs only ate raw diets, so no one kept records or performed surveys. So this longevity estimate is only valid from when the surveys started, this "nutrition" has not contributed to longevity in nearly the same manner IMO that increased social status has.

The oldest living RAW-FED dog is Jerry, an Australian cattle dog-bull terrier mix. He is 27 and lives with his owner in Australia and it's thought he could be the WORLD'S OLDEST DOG! Here's a link to the story (USATODAY.com - Outback mongrel could be oldest dog)

Those who remember the 'early days' remember long-lived dogs enjoying better quality lives until one day they just did not wake up. This slow, accumulating progression of disease is invariably linked with processed foods—something that has been proven time and again in human medicine and is being proven daily by the amount of processed food-fed pets suffering from a variety of these ailments and sitting in vets' waiting rooms. Millions of dogs eat kibble, and millions of dogs fill the waiting rooms of veterinarians, bad breath and all. These pets suffer from dermatitises of all sorts, or from cancers, joint problems, heart problems, kidney problems, digestive problems ("lack of enzymes"), liver problems, pancreas problems, coat problems, tooth problems, anal gland problems, glandular disorders, allergies, and soft doughy bodies brought on by eating a grain-based, artificial, highly-processed, additive-filled food touted as "healthy" for your dog. Thousands of dogs die from diet-induced diseases like bloat each year (and that is not to say all diseases are caused by diet, but many of them link strongly with processed diets and diet-induced periodontal disease. If pets are living longer, then why are they being considered old at younger and younger ages? A dog is now a senior by the age of 7 or 8; some even say a dog is old at 5 or 6. Cats are considered seniors by the ripe old age of 7 (tell that to raw fed cats still going strong at the age of 20!). It's my believe this premature aging is caused in large part by processed foods, which are now today mainly fed to our pets. Cancer, diabetes, obesity, kidney failure, heart problems, and arthritis (among other things) are being seen in younger and younger dogs. Dogs 3 years of age are being euthanized for malignant, systemic cancers!

Also, I believe the parasite and bacteria issue is something than non-raw folk use as a scare tactic, telling you that your dog is going to die if it eats raw meat because it will get a weird parasite. They neglect to tell you the very low incidence of these parasites in meat deemed safe for human consumption; nor do they tell you the most "deadly" of these parasites come from things like infected sheep placentas or stillborn calves. Simple solution—do not feed those things to your dog. As long as one exercises caution in obtaining their meat, parasites are a non-issue. And generally speaking, if your dog has a healthy immune system, it can deal with the parasites before they even get a chance to establish themselves. Parasites hate a very healthy host.
Yes, there is bacteria in raw meat. Yes, this bacteria can harm you. Yes, this bacteria is sometimes shed in dogs' feces. So if a raw-fed dog licks you, are you going to get sick? I suppose all things are possible, but on the whole: no, you will not get sick. This bacteria does not persist in the mouth of a raw-fed canine. The absence of plaque means the dog's mouth is no longer a hospitable place for bacteria to inhabit. Infact people don't realize it but pet foods, commercial or homemade, provide an ideal environment for bacterial proliferation!

Most of the documented cases of severe bacterial septicemia are from kibble-fed animals or animals suffering from reactions to vaccines. Kibble in the intestine not only irritates the lining of the bowels but also provides the perfect warm, wet environment with plenty of undigested sugars and starches as food for bacteria. This is why thousands of processed food-fed animals suffer from from a condition called Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth. Raw meaty bones, however, create a very inhospitable environment for bacteria, as RMBs are easily digestible and have no carbohydrates, starches, or sugars to feed the bacteria. A kibble-fed and home cooked dog's mouth, however, provides the perfect environment for bacteria growth: plaque-covered teeth with sugary and starchy complexes provide both food and shelter for bacteria. The bacteria thrive in the mouth of a kibble-fed as well as home-cooked fed dogs because it provides both a perfect atmosphere and a good food source because of the bacteria in their gums and on their teeth . A raw-fed dog's mouth provides neither food nor a viable atmosphere for bacteria, which is why a raw-fed dog has odorless breath. So which dog would you be more worried about being kissed by and contracting disease from Thousands of people—even immunocompromised people—feed their dogs raw with no bacteria issues and with stronger immune systems as a result.

Commercial pet foods have been pulled off shelves more than once because of bacteria AND molds that produce a deadly toxin. Think about your dog—this is an animal that can lick itself, lick other dogs, eat a variety of disgusting rotting things, and ingest its own feces or those of other animals with no ill effects. The dog, plain and simple, can handle greater bacterial loads than we can. Can dogs get sick from the bacteria? I suppose they can. But it is rare and usually indicative of an underlying problem, especially when one stops to consider how much bacteria that dog probably comes in contact with every single day. One must ask "Why this dog? Why now? What has made this particular dog susceptible to bacterial overgrowth?" Something is not 'right' regarding the dog's health—a healthy dog does not suffer from bacterial infections or bacterial septicemia. That is just common sense. A dog suffering from "salmonella poisoning" is obviously not healthy, especially when compared to a dog that ate the same food with the same salmonella load but is perfectly healthy and unaffected. The first dog has suffered a 'breakdown' in its health that allowed the bacteria to become a problem."

[Melcakes]

continued below

[Melcakes]

Dangers with homecooking for one's dog. Some additional excerpts taken.

"The suggestion of cooking your dog's food is actually quite harmful! It is the cooked food that causes problems with the dog's digestive system and that can result in the nutritional deficiencies.

First, the act of cooking alters the proteins, vitamins, fats, and minerals in a food. This alteration can make some nutrients more readily available and others less available. Cooking can alter fats to the point of being toxic and carcinogenic (The American Society for Nutritional Sciences. April 2004. Meat Consumption Patterns and Preparation, Genetic Variants of Metabolic Enzymes, and Their Association with Rectal Cancer in Men and Women. Journal of Nutrition. 134:776-784.), and cooked proteins can be altered to the point where they cause allergic reactions whereas raw proteins do not (Clark, W.R. 1995. Hypersensitivity and Allergy, in At War Within: The double edged sword of immunity, Oxford University Press, New York. pg 88.).

Second, cooked food lacks all the benefits of raw food. Cooked food is deficient in vitamins, minerals, and enzymes, because the very act of cooking destroys or alters much of them (exceptions to this are things like lightly steamed broccoli or tomatoes, but these are not appropriate foods for carnivores!). This decreases the bioavailability of these valuable chemicals and makes them less available to the animal. This is why these things have to be added back into pet foods and why a variety of supplements need to be added to home-cooked pet food—and why a variety of species inappropriate items are utilized as ingredients in these meals! Vitamins and minerals can be added back into cooked food, but finding the appropriate balance is incredibly difficult. Synthetic vitamins and minerals do not always exhibit the same chirality (three dimensional structure) that the natural forms had, which means their efficiency and use to the body are substantially decreased. This is compensated by oversupplementation, which then results in the inhibited uptake of other necessary vitamins and minerals. For example, excess inorganic calcium reduces the availability of iron, copper, iodine, and zinc (Lonsdale, T. 2001. Raw Meaty Bones. pg 88). If you are feeding a cooked, home-made diet, can you be sure that your pet's needs are being sufficiently met if the very act of cooking destroys much of what is beneficial to your pet? Essentially, once you cook your pet's food you are now guessing which vitamins or minerals have been destroyed, how much of these might have been destroyed (which means you would have to know how much was present in the food in the first place), and how much supplementation your pet needs. Then you run into another problem: no one really knows what our pets REALLY need and use in terms of vitamins and minerals. . Additionally, how can we be sure that researchers have discovered all the nutrients necessary for our pets? This still is an on-going process (such as Eukanuba adding DHA to their foods; DHA is found in raw prey, so any dog or canid eating raw prey has been receiving appropriate levels of DHA), and since cooking food destroys minerals and vitamins and enzymes, researchers may be missing some very important nutrients. Feeding cooked food also causes pets to miss out on these 'unknown' nutrients, whereas raw food contains them in appropriate amounts.

People compensate for vitamin and mineral deficiencies without resorting to supplements: they simply add vegetables, grains, and dairy products to their carnivores' diets. Complex recipes are developed that create a wide range of foods for the dog (or cat) that must be cooked, steamed, blended, etc. in order for the dog to receive proper nutrition. Our carnivores once again have an omnivorous diet forced upon them in order to help them obtain all the appropriate nutrition that could simply be had by feeding a variety of raw meaty bones and organ meats. Simplicity and perfection are traded for complexity and imperfection.Raw food, however, has the perfect balance of vitamins and minerals if fed as a part of a prey-model diet . Raw food also has unaltered proteins and nutrients, and the bioavailability of these nutrients is very high. And raw food—particularly whole carcasses and raw meaty bones—provide the NECESSARY teeth-cleaning effects that are lacking in any cooked diet. Periodontal disease-causing bacteria are scraped away at each feeding, whereas a cooked food-fed dog has that bacteria remaining, which are then coated over by a sticky plaque resulting from the cooked grains, vegetables, and meat proteins."

[Ellie May]

I'm not quoting b/c it makes the thread too long to scross though.

Dogs can be infected with T. gondii although it's not as common as cats. Definitely still a concern. I think freezing does take care of it though.

Never really studied parasitology although it is becoming more interesting to me. If some of these cysts are killed at -20, then why don't more raw feeders do this/know this?

There will always be a world's oldest dog named. It looks like other dogs have tied this one in age and there was really no notation about them being raw fed. One did eat kangaroo and emu though. lol. Anyway, that is an isolated case. I would want to see a solid life span increase across the board.

A lot of the websites used by raw dieters honestly seem like a bunch of opinion to me. We still don't really know if raw fed dogs acually live longer. And I've seen that wolves live to age 30 which is not what most people say. Their life spans are very short. It may not be from the diet, but nevertheless, they are short. It's not appealing to me...

Gotta go for now.

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by Ellie May

Never really studied parasitology although it is becoming more interesting to me. If some of these cysts are killed at -20, then why don't more raw feeders do this/know this?

Since we were PMing about geeky foodie stuff -- I checked NV and they use High Pressure Pasteurization to kill their pathogens. I couldn't find anything on Primal, but maybe I'm missing something. (I feed Primal)

Originally Posted by Ellie May

There will always be a world's oldest dog named. I would want to see a solid life span increase across the board.

I agree. I would want to see a long-term study with a large sample. Even then, measuring the benefits of food/diet is extremely difficult - in any species. There is also exercise, genetics, disease, vaccination history, second-hand smoke etc. to consider - the variables are tremendous.

Originally Posted by Ellie May

A lot of the websites used by raw dieters honestly seem like a bunch of opinion to me. We still don't really know if raw fed dogs actually live longer. And I've seen that wolves live to age 30 which is not what most people say. Their life spans are very short. It may not be from the diet, but nevertheless, they are short. It's not appealing to me...

Even as a raw feeder myself, I don't really disagree with you regarding the websites. Many of them seem to foster the belief that there is only one way to feed your dog, period....and I just can't get on board with that at this time.

Probably more important than the type of diet is that it is balanced properly (according to AAFCO or a qualified nutritionist). An unbalanced diet can be dangerous to a dog...now that's a fact !

[Ellie May]

Ok, this thread is cutting into my study time.

I would be much more willing to read some of these raw fed sites if I thought a substantial amount of research was applied. I see long answers about why non raw feeder concerns aren't valid and that is not what I like to see at all...

There is a bunch of, "Those non raw feeders are just trying to scare you about the parasite thing." Welllllll, ok, but the potential of giving my dog worm cysts doesn't sit right with me and I know by cooking the meat, we have taken care fo the problem. If worms and cysts were destroyed in digestion, then why do dogs get worms and why can they be found in the heart and brain? That is why I appreciate the people on YT who take time to look into these things without just saying, "It's fine. Don't worry about it. Your concern isn't valid" which I think a lot of these sites do.

As somebody said on Yahoo Answers who lost her dog to the BARF diet (I know it's just one person's story, but it's the same as a pro raw feeders story), break one of these bones in half and see what you get. It's sharp edges and doesn't look too pleasant. She did everything right too and yes, they were raw bones. It happens with any chew, but when something is that sharp, it is a concern.

I'd just as soon add vitamins back in, balance the diet, and not take the chance. I'm pretty sure premade raw would be better as far as safety b/c their foods should be tested before leaving.

[zoesmybaby]

thank you so much for posting this. i have been wanting to ask same question here i have a yorkie - zoey 2yrs old and a pomchi - baby 6yrs old. been feeding kibble and wet food. though i hate the wet food. makes my pomchi have bad breath. i'd rather cook for them. thanks again for posting. much appreciated.

[yorkiepuppie]

Originally Posted by Ellie May

Ok, this thread is cutting into my study time.

haha. don't let it do that. you can always read the posts when you have free time. i had to study yesterday so i didn't have time to read all the posts. but i have time today. yay!

i tried to ask my nutrition instructor about feeding dogs raw diet, and asked her if the dog's system is similar to ours in it's reaction to raw foods....i don't think she really knows...(she said it's similar)she said to talk to my vet, and i told her vets are like human doctors, most of them don't know that much about nutrition. but she disagrees, (she thinks doctors don't know about nutrition, but she thinks vets know about dog nutrition.) well, i disagree with that.

[DvlshAngel985]

Originally Posted by Ellie May

Ok, this thread is cutting into my study time.

I would be much more willing to read some of these raw fed sites if I thought a substantial amount of research was applied. I see long answers about why non raw feeder concerns aren't valid and that is not what I like to see at all...

There is a bunch of, "Those non raw feeders are just trying to scare you about the parasite thing." Welllllll, ok, but the potential of giving my dog worm cysts doesn't sit right with me and I know by cooking the meat, we have taken care fo the problem. If worms and cysts were destroyed in digestion, then why do dogs get worms and why can they be found in the heart and brain? That is why I appreciate the people on YT who take time to look into these things without just saying, "It's fine. Don't worry about it. Your concern isn't valid" which I think a lot of these sites do.

As somebody said on Yahoo Answers who lost her dog to the BARF diet (I know it's just one person's story, but it's the same as a pro raw feeders story), break one of these bones in half and see what you get. It's sharp edges and doesn't look too pleasant. She did everything right too and yes, they were raw bones. It happens with any chew, but when something is that sharp, it is a concern.

I'd just as soon add vitamins back in, balance the diet, and not take the chance. I'm pretty sure premade raw would be better as far as safety b/c their foods should be tested before leaving.

I think have the same concerns you do. It's more he said she said instead of focusing their information and explaining the process the food goes into. When I tried Stella and Chewy's pre made raw, they (pamphlet and store workers) said to watch the video, it explains everything. No it doesn't, at least not to my satisfaction. I wish they would spend more time explaining how things worked and instead of just saying, "don't worry, there is nothing to be concerned about."
I did however like that if you have concerns, there is a package number that you can check and see the results of the analysis of the food contained in THAT packet.

[DvlshAngel985]

Originally Posted by yorkiepuppie

haha. don't let it do that. you can always read the posts when you have free time. i had to study yesterday so i didn't have time to read all the posts. but i have time today. yay!

i tried to ask my nutrition instructor about feeding dogs raw diet, and asked her if the dog's system is similar to ours in it's reaction to raw foods....i don't think she really knows...(she said it's similar)she said to talk to my vet, and i told her vets are like human doctors, most of them don't know that much about nutrition. but she disagrees, (she thinks doctors don't know about nutrition, but she thinks vets know about dog nutrition.) well, i disagree with that.

I thought you were taking a dog nutrition course for some reason.

I took a human one a few years back and I loved it. Our prof is a registered dietician and has her phd in nutrition. She started with the digestive system broke it down and then went on to explain our food needs and how it all works together. I loved it! Now, if only I would apply what I learned to how it eat.

[yorkiepuppie]

Originally Posted by DvlshAngel985

I thought you were taking a dog nutrition course for some reason.

I took a human one a few years back and I loved it. Our prof is a registered dietician and has her phd in nutrition. She started with the digestive system broke it down and then went on to explain our food needs and how it all works together. I loved it! Now, if only I would apply what I learned to how it eat.

i would love to take a dog nutrition class, but i have no idea where i can take a course like that. i started taking this nutrition class because i am interested in canine nutrition and since i can't find a class like that, i thought human nutrition class would at least give me some foundation and better understanding of how everything works. i do love the class. although i don't agree with everything taught in the class.