Cure For What Ails Your Dog

[GreatDanz]

"When I'm told by dog food reps in pet barn, or vet nurses at my (holistic!) vets', that I'm risking my dogs lives by feeding them raw, it annoys me, but it also scares me.

The dogs who I'm feeding raw now look great, and are recovering really well from their various complaints. I have a gut feeling I'm doing the right thing, but I don't have any means of comparing their condition now to how they'd be if they were eating supercoat everyday, as our previous dog did.

She had bad skin and died at 6 yrs from osteosarcoma - she was on supercoat and a pharmacuetical oil thing specifically for her skin but I have no way of knowing if I could have helped her then by feeding her a different diet... "

Mana, you are doing the right thing by being skeptical, this is your baby, you need to take care of her, right?

Let me just say this, if you were truly putting your dog's life in danger, wouldn't there be at least ONE person on here telling us their horrible story?

The chances of this diet killing your dog are slim, very slim. Give it a try, if it doesn't work for you just switch back. :D

[raz]

There is a Ruddocks product Polyvite, which I have found excellent - specially for dogs with itchy skin.

Brilliant. Thanks Jed :D

[haven]

A thought Jeanne, the reason dogs rarely come down with food related infections such as salmonella poisoning, is because their digestive tract IS short. Bugs are not in there long enough to cause trouble.

Yes, as a carnivore, a dogs intestines is much shorter than a humans or other animal designed to eat vegetable matter.

Lets look at the dogs digestive system

The jaws of a dog move in an up and down motion with a crushing vice-like action. Unlike an animal that is designed to eat grains and vegetable matter they can not move their jaws from side to side in a masticating/grinding motion. Their teeth, including their molars, are sharp and pointy designed to crush and rip apart, not flat like the grinding teeth of plant eaters. They have prominant canine teeth in the front designed to, pierce, hold and rip.

Unlike humans, whose saliva contains enzymes which start the digestion process, the saliva of a dog is merely for lubrication. Teeth, jaws and saliva act to crush and tear large pieces so they can slide down to the stomach, often in large pieces.

The stomach has a high degree of acidity - much higer than a humans - this is where a majority of the digestion process to break up the food takes place.

The intestines are short and are smooth, unlike a humans which is ribbed. Food can transit fairly quickly through the intestines, particularly when it is not slowed down by the presence of grains which do tend to slow the progress of food through the digestion process.

The high acidity and quick digestion time all contribute to a decreased chance of problems with bacteria. Remember, dogs (and wolves, and dingos, in fact all animals within the classification Canis Lupus) are designed to be not only hunters, but scavengers. Their system from start to finish is designed to take on large pieces of meat and bone often with a higher bacterial load than can be consumed by humans.

As for a dog that has a reduced length of intestines, this in itself i do not personally feel is of major concern, but rather the fact that her immune and digestive system have been compromised and will need supporting while it regains 'strength'. There is no reason that I can personally see why a dog such as this could not eat a raw diet, though certainly at first I would be sticking to foods which were in smaller pieces and more easily digested (probably ground at first, and later building to softer whole bones such as chicken necks and wings and then larger later as the dogs system becomes accustomed to them) and making sure that the dogs system was supported with probiotics and other antioxidants. Of course I have no knowledge of this actual dog and am only going on the information provided in this thread. It is only my personal feeling of what I may do if the dog were in my care.

Now lets all play nice shall we? After feeding a raw diet for over 10 years and running several major rawfeeding email lists, may I say that if nothing else I have learnt that you can catch more flies with honey and out and out confrontation tends to lead of the breakdown in discussion just like we have seen here. I do strongly believe in feeding a raw diet, have seen the benefits from doing so, and love teaching people about it, but as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you cant make it drink (and beating them over the head with the bucket wont make them want it more). The horses will drink when they are good and ready, as long as we make sure the nice fresh clean inviting water is available to them .

Tracy

www.yahoogroups.com/groups/rawbreeder

Well said!

[Prydenjoy]

The chances of this diet killing your dog are slim, very slim. Give it a try, if it doesn't work for you just switch back. :D

On that note I would just like to add that when my dogs aren't feeling 100 per cent I generally take them off raw until they are better. Well not "generally" - it depends what it is. When my kitten got ill with FIP I took her off raw completely. When my Boxer pup had allergies and we were trying to work out what it was (hacking and coughing) I took him off lamb, beef, roo etc and just fed him chicken to reduce the risk of Neospora, which Boxers are prone to, but are only likely to become infected if they are fed meat contaminated with neospora when their immune system is comprimised.

As with all things in life you've got to be cautious and know what your dog can and can't handle, there is no reason why a healthy dog can't eat raw food. Hey, when I do feed kibble it is always soaked, my dogs have nearly choked on the stuff many a time and countless dogs around the world have died from bloating related to kibble - I feel a LOT safer feeding my dogs a chicken wing than I ever do feeding them kibble, everything in life carries a risk and in the case of feeding raw foods the benefits far outweigh the risks, however the opposite holds true for kibble.

[arawnhaus]

For people still learning about DOGS and what to feed them, a thread such as this one should not be titled CURE FOR WHAT AILS YOUR DOG??????

it is not logical .....Many come here trying to find a solution to a problem not be PREACHED TO ON THE PREFERRED EATING HABITS OF SOME........

I or anybody else here dont need to compare literature found on the internet or take any challenges.

the arguement between meat and not is as old as the mountains :D

It is really good it works for your dogs, GD but it is not for all

CANINE IS CLASSIFIED IN THE ORDER OF CARNIVORA, SO ARE MANY OTHER SPECIES NOT ALL THESE SURVIVE/THRIVE ON MEAT ALONE

[fiery_di]

Jed - where can you buy Polyvite from?

Cheers,

Fiery Di

[GreatDanz]

For people still learning about DOGS and what to feed them, a thread such as this one should not be titled CURE FOR WHAT AILS YOUR DOG??????

it is not logical .....Many come here trying to find a solution to a problem not be PREACHED TO ON THE PREFERRED EATING HABITS OF SOME........

I or anybody else here dont need to compare literature found on the internet or take any challenges.

the arguement between meat and not is as old as the mountains

It is really good it works for your dogs, GD but it is not for all

CANINE IS CLASSIFIED IN THE ORDER OF CARNIVORA, SO ARE MANY OTHER SPECIES NOT ALL THESE SURVIVE/THRIVE ON MEAT ALONE

If you don't want to be a part of this discussion then don't respond to the thread. It's also not titled "PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO COME AND BITCH WHEN THEY DON'T WANT TO SPEND THE TIME OR $$ FEEDING RAW"

RAW has been a positive diet for a multitude of dogs with different conditions, from allergies to IBS.

FYI:

Main Entry: car·niv·o·ra

Pronunciation: kär-'niv-&-r&

Function: noun plural

1 capitalized : an order of eutherian mammals that are mostly carnivorous and have teeth adapted for flesh eating

2 : carnivorous animals; especially : members of the order Carnivora —car·ni·vore /'kär-n&-"vO(&)r, -"vo(&)r/ noun

-ALSO-

carnivora

\Car*niv"o*ra\, n. pl. [NL., neut. pl. from L. carnivorus. See Carnivorous.] (Zo["o]l.) An order of Mammallia including the lion, tiger, wolf bear, seal, etc. They are adapted by their structure to feed upon flesh, though some of them, as the bears, also eat vegetable food. The teeth are large and sharp, suitable for cutting flesh, and the jaws powerful.

I never made the claim that dogs could not survive if food other than meat was fed, it's not nutritionally NECESSARY to feed them, but if your dogs enjoy veggies then feed them! They certainly are not going to do any harm.

Thank you for the mature educational post.

[Pits' Paradise]

For people still learning about DOGS and what to feed them,  a thread such as this one should not be titled CURE FOR WHAT AILS YOUR DOG??????

it is not logical .....Many come here trying to find a solution to a problem not be PREACHED TO ON THE PREFERRED EATING HABITS  OF SOME........

I or anybody else here dont need to compare literature found on the internet or take any challenges.

the arguement between meat and not is as old as the mountains   

It is really good it works for your dogs, GD but it is not for all

CANINE IS CLASSIFIED IN THE ORDER OF CARNIVORA, SO ARE MANY OTHER SPECIES  NOT ALL THESE SURVIVE/THRIVE ON MEAT ALONE

If you don't want to be a part of this discussion then don't respond to the thread. It's also not titled "PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO COME AND BITCH WHEN THEY DON'T WANT TO SPEND THE TIME OR $$ FEEDING RAW"

RAW has been a positive diet for a multitude of dogs with different conditions, from allergies to IBS.

FYI:

Main Entry: car·niv·o·ra

Pronunciation: kär-'niv-&-r&

Function: noun plural

1 capitalized : an order of eutherian mammals that are mostly carnivorous and have teeth adapted for flesh eating

2 : carnivorous animals; especially : members of the order Carnivora —car·ni·vore /'kär-n&-"vO(&)r, -"vo(&)r/ noun

-ALSO-

carnivora

\Car*niv"o*ra\, n. pl. [NL., neut. pl. from L. carnivorus. See Carnivorous.] (Zo["o]l.) An order of Mammallia including the lion, tiger, wolf bear, seal, etc. They are adapted by their structure to feed upon flesh, though some of them, as the bears, also eat vegetable food. The teeth are large and sharp, suitable for cutting flesh, and the jaws powerful.

I never made the claim that dogs could not survive if food other than meat was fed, it's not nutritionally NECESSARY to feed them, but if your dogs enjoy veggies then feed them! They certainly are not going to do any harm.

Thank you for the mature educational post.

You are still being smug and generally nasty.

You should lift your game.

What is your problem?

Do you enjoy portraying yourself as a prat?

Why do you expend so much energy vilifying people who mildly disagree with some of your more contentious posts?

You seem to feel threatened by people who don't share your simplistic views on feeding canines.

You do not do yourself or your "cause" a service by this sort of stuff:

FYI:

Main Entry: car·niv·o·ra

Pronunciation: kär-'niv-&-r&

Function: noun plural

1 capitalized : an order of eutherian mammals that are mostly carnivorous and have teeth adapted for flesh eating

2 : carnivorous animals; especially : members of the order Carnivora —car·ni·vore /'kär-n&-"vO(&)r, -"vo(&)r/ noun

-ALSO-

carnivora

\Car*niv"o*ra\, n. pl. [NL., neut. pl. from L. carnivorus. See Carnivorous.] (Zo["o]l.) An order of Mammallia including the lion, tiger, wolf bear, seal, etc. They are adapted by their structure to feed upon flesh, though some of them, as the bears, also eat vegetable food. The teeth are large and sharp, suitable for cutting flesh, and the jaws powerful.

It could be thought that you are being deliberately antagonistic and offensive. I'd be very surprised if any one thinks that is not your main aim.

The facts are that canis lupus familiaris is not an obligate carnivore. You will not be able to provide any reliable scientific source that says otherwise. Ever. So don't try

Dogs eat meat, and they eat vegies. Get over it, accept it, and move on.

And stop being so nasty and obnoxious; it does not become you.

Thank you for the mature educational post. 

Nasty, nasty, nasty; uncalled for and unwarranted.

:rolleyes: :shakehead:

Pits' Paradise

[GreatDanz]

For people still learning about DOGS and what to feed them,  a thread such as this one should not be titled CURE FOR WHAT AILS YOUR DOG??????

it is not logical .....Many come here trying to find a solution to a problem not be PREACHED TO ON THE PREFERRED EATING HABITS  OF SOME........

I or anybody else here dont need to compare literature found on the internet or take any challenges.

the arguement between meat and not is as old as the mountains   

It is really good it works for your dogs, GD but it is not for all

CANINE IS CLASSIFIED IN THE ORDER OF CARNIVORA, SO ARE MANY OTHER SPECIES  NOT ALL THESE SURVIVE/THRIVE ON MEAT ALONE

If you don't want to be a part of this discussion then don't respond to the thread. It's also not titled "PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO COME AND BITCH WHEN THEY DON'T WANT TO SPEND THE TIME OR $$ FEEDING RAW"

RAW has been a positive diet for a multitude of dogs with different conditions, from allergies to IBS.

FYI:

Main Entry: car·niv·o·ra

Pronunciation: kär-'niv-&-r&

Function: noun plural

1 capitalized : an order of eutherian mammals that are mostly carnivorous and have teeth adapted for flesh eating

2 : carnivorous animals; especially : members of the order Carnivora —car·ni·vore /'kär-n&-"vO(&)r, -"vo(&)r/ noun

-ALSO-

carnivora

\Car*niv"o*ra\, n. pl. [NL., neut. pl. from L. carnivorus. See Carnivorous.] (Zo["o]l.) An order of Mammallia including the lion, tiger, wolf bear, seal, etc. They are adapted by their structure to feed upon flesh, though some of them, as the bears, also eat vegetable food. The teeth are large and sharp, suitable for cutting flesh, and the jaws powerful.

I never made the claim that dogs could not survive if food other than meat was fed, it's not nutritionally NECESSARY to feed them, but if your dogs enjoy veggies then feed them! They certainly are not going to do any harm.

Thank you for the mature educational post.

You are still being smug and generally nasty.

Right, because the previous post was well thought out and kind. I did take time to read posts from some of the regulars on here, and my response is catered to the poster based on my perception of their game.

You should lift your game.

Nope, thanks for the advice though.

What is your problem?

My problem? I really don't appreciate "rolly-eyed" advice and criticism on nutrition from people who think feeding your dog puppy food so you can feed less is a good idea.

Do you enjoy portraying yourself as a prat?

I have little patience for people who join threads simply to start a flame war. If you have something worthwhile or educational to add, please make sure you come back and share it.

Why do you expend so much energy vilifying people who mildly disagree with some of your more contentious posts?

I'm sorry, my post was contentious? OK, sure.....

You seem to feel threatened by people who don't share your simplistic views on feeding canines.

No, I think those that are being forced to THINK about what they are putting into their canines are feeling threatened, I feel just fine!

You do not do yourself or your "cause" a service by this sort of stuff:

FYI:

Main Entry: car·niv·o·ra

Pronunciation: kär-'niv-&-r&

Function: noun plural

1 capitalized : an order of eutherian mammals that are mostly carnivorous and have teeth adapted for flesh eating

2 : carnivorous animals; especially : members of the order Carnivora —car·ni·vore /'kär-n&-"vO(&)r, -"vo(&)r/ noun

-ALSO-

carnivora

\Car*niv"o*ra\, n. pl. [NL., neut. pl. from L. carnivorus. See Carnivorous.] (Zo["o]l.) An order of Mammallia including the lion, tiger, wolf bear, seal, etc. They are adapted by their structure to feed upon flesh, though some of them, as the bears, also eat vegetable food. The teeth are large and sharp, suitable for cutting flesh, and the jaws powerful.

It could be thought that you are being deliberately antagonistic and offensive. I'd be very surprised if any one thinks that is not your main aim.

Thank you for your kindness! :rolleyes:

The facts are that canis lupus familiaris is not an obligate carnivore. You will not be able to provide any reliable scientific source that says otherwise. Ever. So don't try

What a coincidence, that's EXACTLY what I posted here: http://forums.dogzonline.com.au/index.php?...=obligate&st=15

Dogs eat meat, and they eat vegies. Get over it, accept it, and move on.

That's right, however their nutrition comes from the meat. They can eat veggies, it certainly won't hurt anything.

And stop being so nasty and obnoxious; it does not become you.

But it certainly adds to your charm!

Thank you for the mature educational post. 

Nasty, nasty, nasty; uncalled for and unwarranted.

And???

[raz]

Jed - where can you buy Polyvite from?

Jed???

[Staranais]

Can I ask the BARF people here a question?

Are there any types of meats or offal that you shouldn't over-feed your dog on?

My dog regularly chows down on breakfasts of lamb hearts, chicken carcasses and beef RMB (as well as his evening meals of kibble and table scraps...)

I want to start including some other types of offal in his breakfast (triple, giblets, kidneys, brains, pork bones) - are all of these OK for dogs?

Thanks.

[Prydenjoy]

Amhailte, as long as the offal doesn't exceed about 10% of the total diet then you should be fine. Liver should be equal to half the offal fed, heart isn't considered offal, I'm not sure about giblets? I'd think they would be considered muscle meat too. Pork is good in moderation but I wouldn't feed it as a staple. As for over feeding certain types of meat, well a staple of roo is deficient in fat, but aside from that as long as you aim for variety and your dog isn't reacting badly then you can't go too far wrong! Just remember too, lots of bones

[poodlefan]

Amhailite, I wouldn't bother with 'normal' tripe. Its been washed to remove stomach contents and doesn't really have much nutritional value. Some hard line BARFers source green (unwashed) tripe but access to such stuff can be an issue.

Any meat source is fine - variety and balance are the key. My dogs diet is chicken based because its cheap and the bones are a good size for littlies to eat. They also get pork (a great source of taurine), beef and two of the three get lamb (its too fatty for one of mine)

The 'no more than 10% offal' rule of thumb is a good one to remember. You'd probably be better off to up the RMBs and cut back more on the kibble than to increase offal in the diet.

Edited August 4, 2005 by poodlefan

[t-time]

Great Danz - I have read this thread and I feel you're being extremely overzealous (I hope this term doesn't come over as being offensive to you.)

Someone said something about "the minister preaching to the choir" - can't be bothered to go back and find the quote.

YOU ARE PRETTY MUCH PREACHING TO THE CONVERTED! And certainly, this topic has been covered many times before on DOL.

So many people here on DOL already feed their dogs RAW food. In fact, a lot of contributors to this thread DO feed their dogs Raw Meaty Bones. For some people it might not be all meat - perhaps BARF but obviously they have decided what is good for their own dogs.

It's great that feeding only raw meat to your dogs has worked you and your dogs. Can you accept that this diet might be "best" but not ideal in other cases? For other people?

You just seem to be preaching. Yes, maybe that's an "electronic" thing but now that you've been made aware that people ARE uncomfortable and feel threatened about it - whether they feed their dogs like you or not - why don't you try and change the "tone" a little bit? I'm not being nasty, cynical, sarcastic,mean or anything - just making an observation about how heated this thread has gotten and making a suggestion about how MAYBE the "tone" could lighten up.

Personally, I've already taken your "challenge" years ago and I wouldn't have it any other way. So I don't need to take you up on it and heaps of people who have responded to your topic, don't need to "take up" your challenge.

I feed my dogs raw meaty bones but they rarely touch offal despite it being offered at regular intervals. I have to offer supplements, often in the form of kibble but more often Missing Link or Sasha's blend as a result, as the meat alone without the offal is not going to sustain their nutritional needs. For the record,at least once a week, they raid my vege patch and especially love pumpkins. They also eat every cow pat/horse poo/possum dropping/chicken poop in sight and would probably eat the animal who did it if they were allowed!!

Would love it if someone would throw dead roos over my fence but I source most of my meat from home-kill. I live in a rural area too.

No - I'm not a scientist here, wouldn't have clue about calcium ratios/kilojoules/cellulose levels. But I have read nutrition books to enable me to bettter understand what's good for my dog to eat. My Grandparents had Great Danes 20 years ago and one of them had such bad allergies that eventually all he got was Raw Meaty Bones. So, the idea about this type of feeding for GDs has been around at least since then and obviously longer...this is what led to me, as an adult, exploring food for my dogs.

The best book I've found FOR ME is "Give A Dog A Bone". Have you read that too?

:rolleyes:

[Staranais]

Thanks Jeanne and Poodlefan.

I'll definately keep on basing his breakfasts on the RMB, chicken carcasses and hearts then. Perhaps start throwing in a few bits of liver & giblets and pork bones for variety in the mornings. And i won't bother with the tripe.

[GreatDanz]

OK, t-time, point taken.

This thread was written to those that don't feed raw though, and I have seen quite a few out there. All I am asking for is a two month trial, if they don't like it, then they go back. Simple as that.

It looks like this thread may have convinced one poster on here to give it a go, and my hat goes off to them. :rolleyes:

"Would love it if someone would throw dead roos over my fence but I source most of my meat from home-kill. I live in a rural area too."

Isn't that the truth! Of course for me it would be chickens and cows, but I'd take it!

It is amazing what a dog will eat, well, except Java who is the anti-dog.... If I even change is brand of ground beef he won't want to eat for a day or two.

Anyone who has fed raw and hasn't had success is welcome to share their points of view here too. I love learning more about this subject.

Anyway, I'll move to the side now since I have somewhat achieved my goal. Hopefully the one poster will have as much success as I have had, but I wish all your sweet puppies the best of health always!

[KitKat]

Amhailte - tripe is good if your dog needs to lose some weight as they feel full but there's nothing fatty (or much of anything else..lol) in it. So if your dogs aren't fed tripe it's not a worry

[espinay2]

Raz, to be honest I would be more likely to suggest fish oil capsules as an omega supplement rather than any other. You can get these from most chemists and health food stores. Foods such as chicken (esp the chicken fat) are high in omega 6, so if you are feeding that, they will get plenty. Omega 3 however, is the one you want to be looking at - it is the one that assists in 'calming' the skin being 'less' inflammatory (I am splitting hairs here by not calling it 'anti' inflammatory, mainly because a good friend of mine in the field has admonished me in the past for this being 'technically incorrect' though probably not incorrect from a laymans understanding ).

The thing you have to remember with essential fatty acids is that they are not that stable. Oils need to be protected from light, air and heat. If the oil is not in capsule form (which is protected from air in particular) it can go 'off' and lose effectiveness very quickly (I will still refrigerate capsules too and make sure it is stored in a cool place before opening). This is one reason I am wary of any omega oil supplement which is not sold refrigerated.

In relation to feeding organ meats, picture the prey animal (think of a rabbit for example) and compare the amount of meat to organ meat. This is the ratio you want to achieve. As someone has said, about 10% in total. I find a lot of people find it easier if they get a picture in their mind.

[KitKat]

All I am asking for is a two month trial, if they don't like it, then they go back. Simple as that.

But the thing is...if peoples dogs are doing beautifully on kibble or what ever....why should they change over? even for a two month trial? just because someone says they could be doing better?

It's up to the individual and their dog as to what food works best, i feed mostly BARF...but the fact that others don't doesn't upset me...as long as the food they feed their dog is decent quality and their dogs are healthy what business is it of mine? well...actually...in general what business of is it of mine what others feed their dogs?

[Staranais]

In relation to feeding organ meats, picture the prey animal (think of a rabbit for example) and compare the amount of meat to organ meat. This is the ratio you want to achieve.

Thanks Espinay, that's useful.

But heart doesn't count as offal, right, since it's muscle tissue? I feed lamb hearts a couple of times a week - they're so convenient, one lamb heart seems to be a good sized Staffy breakfast. Same as one chicken carcass.

Edited August 5, 2005 by Amhailte