AKC Gazette article on Raw diets

[iluvboxers]

My new issue came yesterday and they have an article this month on raw diets, though you all would be interested. Sometimes you can get some articles on the akc site if you don't get the magazine.

[Alisha Mobley]

Is it good or bad? I'm trying to stay clear of the bad reviews on BARF diets until I'm more comfortable w/ the diet. I've started to read a few articles on BARF and the reason they are not good. I don't finish them because they start to make me doubt. I want to give the diet a chance before changing my mind.

The main thing I have read is that the bones can cause injury to the dog's "insides". One article was saying domesticated dogs do not have the same digestive system as wolves and can't properly digest the bones. Anyone have any problems w/ this? I also read that most people feed chicken necks and backs because of the smaller bones and easier digestion. The article then says this does not make for a balanced diet, when a wild dog eats a chicken they eat the whole thing making the diet more balanced. Any reasurrance here would be greatly appreciated. I add my veggies and supps to help balance the diet. Why wouldn't this be balanced? How can kibble be more balanced when they claim to use the same ingredients?

[JulieM]

The main thing I have read is that the bones can cause injury to the dog's "insides". One article was saying domesticated dogs do not have the same digestive system as wolves and can't properly digest the bones. Anyone have any problems w/ this?

Several I've heard this, too, but I don't buy it. In the first place, how can the fact that dogs now live with people have anything to do with their digestive system? Even if you consider all of the man-made breeds, to think that all of that selection affected every dog's digestive system in the exact same way to make all domestic dogs different from all wolves/wild dogs is just absurd.

Secondly, dogs and wolves have now been classified as the same species (used to be just the same genus, different species) - this was done because if you cross a dog and a wolf, the offspring are able to reproduce (crossing a dog with a coyote or jackal produces sterile offspring). Now tell me, if two animals have different digestive systems, how would their offspring be able to *live* much less reproduce???

I also read that most people feed chicken necks and backs because of the smaller bones and easier digestion. The article then says this does not make for a balanced diet, when a wild dog eats a chicken they eat the whole thing making the diet more balanced. Any reasurrance here would be greatly appreciated. I add my veggies and supps to help balance the diet. Why wouldn't this be balanced? How can kibble be more balanced when they claim to use the same ingredients?

Yes, chicken necks and backs are softer and easier to digest - especially good when you're starting a dog that has never really *had* to digest anything before. Vegetarians can tell you that after they have been meat-free for a while, if they happen to eat some meat they usually get sick from it. They are not used to digesting meat. They can get used to it again, but it takes some time.

Chicken necks and backs are also much cheaper, which is a huge reason they are so prevalent in raw diets. Most wild dogs don't eat chickens - they eat ungulates (hooved animals) - there's a discussion right now on one of my lists, many people feed primarily beef as they feel it more closely emulates a wild dog's diet. I personally cannot afford it but I understand the concept. Depending on the animal, wild dogs/wolves may or may not eat the whole thing - in fact, research has shown that they don't eat the stomach at all (which has caused quite a debate about the value of veggies, but they do eat the intestines which is where the "processed" veggie material is) - but they do eat more than just backs & necks! That is why we add offal, and veggies, and muscle meat, and supplements. Yes, I dream of the day when I will have flocks of chickens, warrens of rabbits, and herds of sheep just for the dogs, and just turn them loose to hunt (talk about a natural diet!) - but I don't think in reality I could deal with it

Kibble manufacturers focus on a "balanced diet" - day in and day out. This is *not* how wild dogs eat! Wild dogs kill and eat prey one day, maybe bury some of it, and don't eat again for 2-3-4 days. Or they eat berries and other fruits that they may find. After a few days they'll dig up/kill more prey and eat again. That is why the concept of BARF is "balance over time" - and why many people fast their dogs every so often. A wild dog does not get a complete and balanced meal every time it eats, but it does obtain that balance over several weeks.

As for the article in the AKC Gazette - I expect to see quite a few letters to the editor on that one The article is a synopsis of a study that was published last month in the JAVMA. The study was done on five different home-prepared and commercial raw diets, evaluating them for nutritional content. *One* meal from each diet was evaluated (already a problem in the BARF diet, which of course is not and has never claimed to be nutritionally balanced in every meal). Also, the home-prepared raw diets consisted primarily of chicken breasts - which, as you know, is *not* considered an appropriate source of RMBs for a raw diet.

What they *don't* tell you is who funded the study. Any guesses??
:
:
:
:
:
Purina.

*sigh*

[Alisha Mobley]

posted by JulieM
What they *don't* tell you is who funded the study. Any guesses??
:
:
:
:
:
Purina.

*sigh*

Ahh, makes sense.

One question, I know heart is a muscle meat but what else?


That's interesting to know that dogs crossed w/ jackles, etc will produce sterile offspring but w/ wolves it's fine. We once had a silver fox as a pet. He was very tame and would walk on leash so I would walk him like I do my dogs for exercise. A guy approached me and swore that my fox wasn't really a fow but was 1/2 dog. I wasn't sure since he did come from a breeder so the next vet visit I asked if "Fluffy" was 1/2 dog. I felt pretty silly when the vet told me dogs and foxes can't have babies.

[Edited by Alisha Mobley on 04-12-2001 at 07:46 PM]

[JulieM]

Heart is considered both muscle meat and offal, so are gizzards.

[edit - it just occured to me as I pressed the "submit" button that that probably wasn't what you were asking!]

Muscle meat is basically any boneless meat - boneless chicken breast; ground boneless chicken, turkey or beef; roasts; steaks. I think the term muscle meat is used just to help separate it from RMBs - sometimes people say "meat" and mean meaty bones, or ground meat which means ground RMBs - muscle meat just clarifies that there are no bones.


[Edited by JulieM on 04-12-2001 at 10:06 PM]

[Alisha Mobley]

Originally posted by JulieM
- muscle meat just clarifies that there are no bones.


[Edited by JulieM on 04-12-2001 at 10:06 PM]

Well that's easy enough, thanks.

[clarismom]

I was browsing through (haven't visited for a while) and found this post regarding AKC Gazette article. I was given this article by my vet who hates the Barf diet. I also found it very interesting that this "unbiased information" was lectured upon at a dog food convention! Hmmm.

I have had my 3 year old Boxer (Clari) on Barf for six months and she has done great on it! I give her beef brisket (has a decent amount of fat which I think they need) which I found for $1.48/lb. and chicken wing tips for $.19/lb (or sometimes free!). I actually think it is cheaper than the Eukanaba I was feeding her! Not to mention, much better for her.

Clari wouldn't have anything to do with necks or backs but she loves the wing tips which are nice and chewy but more with cartilage then bone.

Clari has lymphosarcoma and is receiving chemo and went into remission by her third treatment. However, I credit alot of her well being to this diet! It can be a hassle sometimes but to me Clari is well worth that hassle!

I tell tons of people about this diet, much to a lot of people's disgust! However, if I reach one animal owner, then it is worth it!

[JulieM]

Steve Brown, of Steve's Real Food For Dogs (one of the commercial diets analyzed in this study) is in a huge battle with the JAVMA and the researchers over this. There are several discrepancies in their data and his own, as far as nutrient levels, etc. They have not agreed to print a disclaimer, and in fact they have not publicized who actually funded the study (which they are required by law to do). Steve's been in touch with my friend who was at a Purina seminar where they freely (and proudly!) admitted they funded the study....we'll see what develops.

I've learned to just turn a deaf ear to those who want to argue with me about feeding a raw diet (except on this board, of course ) - I know I am doing the right thing for my dogs, and maybe when their 5 and 6 year olds continually die of cancer they'll think about what I've said.