Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
December 19, 2014, 06:15:03 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Truth About Raw Foods For Our Dogs and Cats  (Read 13666 times)
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3587


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


« Reply #25 on: June 13, 2007, 12:20:58 PM »


The butcher at the grocery store is ordering in some tripe for me.  It comes in 1# frozen packs.  I think he said it's white.  I seem to recall you guys saying it was green.  Am I getting the wrong stuff?  What should I do with it and how much at a time?


That is cleaned and bleached and all the goodness taken out of it.  Sad  Cancel the order if you can.   

 Green Tripe is not for human consumption and would not be sold in a grocery store or butchers.

    check out    www.greentripe.com  or www.aplaceforpaws.com  to order.

   Greentripe.com  west coast,   aplaceforpaws.com  east cost (for shipping costs reasons)
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21929



« Reply #26 on: June 13, 2007, 12:21:43 PM »


The butcher at the grocery store is ordering in some tripe for me.  It comes in 1# frozen packs.  I think he said it's white.  I seem to recall you guys saying it was green.  Am I getting the wrong stuff?  What should I do with it and how much at a time?


Yes...you do not want white (bleeched) tripe

All of the good stuff is gone.
Report to moderator   Logged
Butterbean
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 19426


« Reply #27 on: June 13, 2007, 12:22:35 PM »

I'm afraid to click on these.....are these like "how a hotdog is made" videos?
Report to moderator   Logged

R
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3587


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


« Reply #28 on: June 13, 2007, 12:51:54 PM »

I'm afraid to click on these.....are these like "how a hotdog is made" videos?

  lolz!!   There is nothing graphic on either of those links. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Princess L
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Female
Posts: 10375


I stop for turtles


« Reply #29 on: June 13, 2007, 01:49:05 PM »

That is cleaned and bleached and all the goodness taken out of it.  Sad  Cancel the order if you can.   

 


Damnit Angry
Report to moderator   Logged

:
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21929



« Reply #30 on: June 13, 2007, 02:09:53 PM »

Green Tripe will smell like cow shit.....


but man...will your pooch go bonkers!


I wouldn't of dreamed in a million years they would act that way.
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


« Reply #31 on: June 13, 2007, 04:03:28 PM »

And I wish that I had a dollar for every dog that has had allergies or IBD and made great IMPROVEMENTS by getting grains out of it's diet. 

  Exactly how much on nutrition/feeding were you taught in school, and who helped fund it? Hills?  What do you push in your office?  Science Death? What is your "incentive"? 

Hear about the acetaminophen found in Science Death recently?  What about all those recent deaths and health affects from all the tainted pet food?  Kibble has killed or injured many times over any harm done by raw feeding.  Now if someone thinks raw feeding is just throwing some hamburger down, then yes, there will be problems. It is not hard, but it does take a bit of basic knowledge.

  A carnivore is a carnivore, and just because man decided to make an "easier" way to feed does not change that fact.

  At least if you are going to push a kibble, do it with a better quality one. One that at least 3, if not 4, of the first 4 ingredients is meat.  It's a shame that even that no brainer is too hard to comprehend for most vets.  Of course then you couldn't treat for the skin problems, allergies, IBD, and other problems as a result of that poor diet. 


 

I have no specific brand loyalty.  I also do not push a specific brand of dog or cat food, except for prescription diets, which are used for specific medical conditions and are based on the needs of the individual animal, not on something that a pet food company is trying to sell.  Pet food companies have come full circle... they used to give and give and give to veterinarians in an effort to encourage veterinarians to push their particular brands.  That alone made me very suspicious, because again, its the needs of the individual patient that should determine prescription diets.  Over the last few years Eukanuba and Science Diet have both essentially yanked many of the "incentives" that they gave veterinary students 10 years ago.  Vet students cant even get discounts on basic diets anymore, which if anything is making more and more of them suspicious of the big food companies.   I can't remember the last time I got something free from a pet food company other than an ink pen.     

Since you asked, with the patients I see, I work with three nutritionists, one from Ohio, one from Kansas, and one from Missouri with determining dietary needs of my patients.  I'm in a very specialized field, so I think its worth it for my patients to get that level of care.  And just so you know, with my patients, the majority of thier food could be labeled "whole food" if you want to get technical.  I have a fairly strong background in animal nutrition---primarily based on the more exotic species nutrition as a result of classes I've taken voluntarily that were not part of a "required" veterinary school cirriculum. 

I just think that owners need to be very careful jumping on a "whole food" bandwagon.  Many of the diets I've seen praised on the internet are lacking in nutrient or the owners decide to cut corners and don't add all of the ingredients.  Over time, that is going to lead to health problems.  One of the worst I can think of off the top of my head are the owners of felid species or crocodilians who insist on feeding raw hamburger as the primary source of protein/nutrition.   Metabolic bone disease is a terrible disease.   The other huge issue is obesity.  A "small" piece of chicken for a human is not the same as "a small" piece of chicken for a pomeranian.  In my experience, obesity is a huge issue with these types of diets.   

You bring up the absolute best point of all with encouraging owners to read the labels of what they are feeding their animals.   I always read food labels on everything I eat.  I do the same for my pets.   I think the issues with melamine should drive that home for everyone.   READ YOUR LABELS and understand them.     
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21929



« Reply #32 on: June 13, 2007, 04:15:54 PM »

So what do you exactly label "Whole Foods?"


Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


« Reply #33 on: June 13, 2007, 04:45:58 PM »

So what do you exactly label "Whole Foods?"




Sorry, I use that term very, very loosely as meaning any noncommerically available/nonprocessed diet.   These include home formulated and homemade diets in addition to minimally processed diets. 

Basically I consider Science Diet a commercial diet, others are whole food.   


Does that make sense?
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3587


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


« Reply #34 on: June 13, 2007, 04:53:52 PM »

Since you asked, with the patients I see, I work with three nutritionists, one from Ohio, one from Kansas, and one from Missouri with determining dietary needs of my patients.  I'm in a very specialized field, so I think its worth it for my patients to get that level of care.  And just so you know, with my patients, the majority of thier food could be labeled "whole food" if you want to get technical.  I have a fairly strong background in animal nutrition---primarily based on the more exotic species nutrition as a result of classes I've taken voluntarily that were not part of a "required" veterinary school cirriculum. 

I just think that owners need to be very careful jumping on a "whole food" bandwagon.  Many of the diets I've seen praised on the internet are lacking in nutrient or the owners decide to cut corners and don't add all of the ingredients.  Over time, that is going to lead to health problems.  One of the worst I can think of off the top of my head are the owners of felid species or crocodilians who insist on feeding raw hamburger as the primary source of protein/nutrition.   Metabolic bone disease is a terrible disease.   The other huge issue is obesity.  A "small" piece of chicken for a human is not the same as "a small" piece of chicken for a pomeranian.  In my experience, obesity is a huge issue with these types of diets.   
   

If this was true, you would not have made your original comment about "whole food" diets.  I personally prefer the term "species appropriate".   I agree, and said so, that someone just feeding hamburger and thinking that is fine, is not the correct way to feed and will result in problems.   But if you want to lump all "whole feeders" in together, then I will lump all vets into substandard kibble pushers. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


« Reply #35 on: June 13, 2007, 04:59:19 PM »

If this was true, you would not have made your original comment about "whole food" diets.  I personally prefer the term "species appropriate".   I agree, and said so, that someone just feeding hamburger and thinking that is fine, is not the correct way to feed and will result in problems.   But if you want to lump all "whole feeders" in together, then I will lump all vets into substandard kibble pushers. 

What is your issue?   Seriously.   


You are making this a personal attack.   

All I've tried to do is come to this section of the board---one I was invited too by another member and share information from my perspective.   If you want to make it a battle, honey, I'm always up for a good fight.   You are presenting a large amount of what appears to be very one sided, very biased information.  I'm trying to encourage people to think about it instead of taking some of the crap you are posting up as gospel.     
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21929



« Reply #36 on: June 13, 2007, 05:06:24 PM »

Sorry, I use that term very, very loosely as meaning any noncommerically available/nonprocessed diet.   These include home formulated and homemade diets in addition to minimally processed diets. 

Basically I consider Science Diet a commercial diet, others are whole food.   


Does that make sense?

I guess   Undecided

but are you categorizing raw food & cooked food under "whole foods?"

Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


« Reply #37 on: June 13, 2007, 05:08:52 PM »

I guess   Undecided

but are you categorizing raw food & cooked food under "whole foods?"



Yes, I am, but if you want to get technical, they are very different because cooking will alter the nutritional content and it will decrease the risk of infectious disease (from meat sources).  Again, I'm using that term, very, very loosely.   
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21929



« Reply #38 on: June 13, 2007, 05:12:35 PM »

What is your issue?   Seriously.   


You are making this a personal attack.   

All I've tried to do is come to this section of the board---one I was invited too by another member and share information from my perspective.   If you want to make it a battle, honey, I'm always up for a good fight.   You are presenting a large amount of what appears to be very one sided, very biased information.  I'm trying to encourage people to think about it instead of taking some of the crap you are posting up as gospel.     

Well, not taking sides...but I do like the debates...seems like I get more from it.

I never liked the medical community.  I've always found Doctors/Vets/Medical Field 'witch craft'

Why I say that...is because something comes out as the end all cure one month & the next month it's tossed out as being old information.

I do find some findings 'intersting'...but I never believe everything a "Doctor, Lawyer, Car Salesman" pitch me.


I think you can understand that & won't take it personally
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21929



« Reply #39 on: June 13, 2007, 05:13:44 PM »

Yes, I am, but if you want to get technical, they are very different because cooking will alter the nutritional content and it will decrease the risk of infectious disease (from meat sources).  Again, I'm using that term, very, very loosely.   

Well..thats where I was heading.

When you lump them together in category...it's easy for someone to interpret it wrong.

Thats all
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3587


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


« Reply #40 on: June 13, 2007, 05:18:47 PM »

What is your issue?   Seriously.   


You are making this a personal attack.   

All I've tried to do is come to this section of the board---one I was invited too by another member and share information from my perspective.   If you want to make it a battle, honey, I'm always up for a good fight.   You are presenting a large amount of what appears to be very one sided, very biased information.  I'm trying to encourage people to think about it instead of taking some of the crap you are posting up as gospel.     

And what do you think I am trying to do?  To let people know they may just be intelligent enough to not have to feed from a bag.   If you have read other posts from me you would see that I have also provided information on choosing a better kibble.   I know raw feeding is not for everyone, so I try and educate on kibble also. 

  Unlike most close minded vets who preach the horrors of raw feeding, putting out fear mongering tactics and misinformation.   You many not push Science Death but how many vets do?   That is one of the bottom of the barrel foods in my opinion. 

  Remember, you made the "if I had a dollar" statement and just left it at that.
 
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3587


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


« Reply #41 on: June 13, 2007, 05:23:35 PM »

Yes, I am, but if you want to get technical, they are very different because cooking will alter the nutritional content and it will decrease the risk of infectious disease (from meat sources).  Again, I'm using that term, very, very loosely.   

  I don't advocate cooking.  I think it is too hard too make up for the cal/phos and other nutrients from the cooking.   

  Infectious disease from a meat source is more of a concern to the person feeding than the animal eating.  But if you can manage to handle meat for your family and yourself, I think most people can manage it for their pets. 

 And as we can see by the continued headlines of contaminated kibble, at least by raw feeding you know what you are feeding. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


« Reply #42 on: June 13, 2007, 05:28:03 PM »

Well, not taking sides...but I do like the debates...seems like I get more from it.

I never liked the medical community.  I've always found Doctors/Vets/Medical Field 'witch craft'

Why I say that...is because something comes out as the end all cure one month & the next month it's tossed out as being old information.

I do find some findings 'intersting'...but I never believe everything a "Doctor, Lawyer, Car Salesman" pitch me.


I think you can understand that & won't take it personally
Nah, I don't take it personally.   
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


« Reply #43 on: June 13, 2007, 05:30:49 PM »



  Remember, you made the "if I had a dollar" statement and just left it at that.
 

Sarcasm honey, sarcasm....



Seriously, I've seen way too many cases to even remotely keep track of of dogs with gastroenteritis secondary to feeding a variety of diets.    Thats what I was referring too.    I think there may be value to whole food diets---ie homemade diets, but you absolutely cannot forget that the average diet for the average American is by and large crap with too much fat, too much salt, and way too much sugar.  How can you expect them to feed their pets any better?   Its soemthing to think about.   
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3587


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


« Reply #44 on: June 13, 2007, 05:44:46 PM »

Sarcasm honey, sarcasm....

Seriously, I've seen way too many cases to even remotely keep track of of dogs with gastroenteritis secondary to feeding a variety of diets.    Thats what I was referring too.    I think there may be value to whole food diets---ie homemade diets, but you absolutely cannot forget that the average diet for the average American is by and large crap with too much fat, too much salt, and way too much sugar.  How can you expect them to feed their pets any better?   Its soemthing to think about.   

  And I know to many people that have dogs with skin problems and gastro problems that eat that crap.    I have lost count of how many people I have heard say the dramatic change when they got off the crap in a bag, and especially away from the grains. 

  You want to stick to your "people are too stupid to feed an animal" theory fine, but don't find fault with people like me that actually try and educate and enlighten.

  You think their may be value to a "whole foods diet"?  yes, feeding a carnivore like a carnivore, and the way it's digestive system is designed for, just  might have some value. 

   sarcasm, yeah I know it.
 

 
   
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


« Reply #45 on: June 13, 2007, 08:03:55 PM »

  And I know to many people that have dogs with skin problems and gastro problems that eat that crap.    I have lost count of how many people I have heard say the dramatic change when they got off the crap in a bag, and especially away from the grains. 

  You want to stick to your "people are too stupid to feed an animal" theory fine, but don't find fault with people like me that actually try and educate and enlighten.

  You think their may be value to a "whole foods diet"?  yes, feeding a carnivore like a carnivore, and the way it's digestive system is designed for, just  might have some value. 

   sarcasm, yeah I know it.
 

 
   



Ok, a quick question.  Are domestic dogs a carnivore?
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3587


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


« Reply #46 on: June 14, 2007, 04:19:20 AM »



Ok, a quick question.  Are domestic dogs a carnivore?

 Yes, though one could argue they are scavengers or opportunistic eaters, it still does not change their digestion system, which is how you would classify them.

  Unless you have some evidence that their digestive system has changed since domestication don't even bother.  What an animal can live on, is not the same as what it is best to live on.

  Now a question for you, why is it such an affront to most vets that a person chooses to feed an unprocessed diet?  I agree that not everyone should feed this way if they are not going to educated themselves, but why discourage or find fault with those that chose the healthier way?   In one statement you criticize people for the way they eat, yet don't encourage and actually discourage people for feeding an animal the way it is designed to eat. 

   That just makes no sense.   Undecided



   
   
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3587


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


« Reply #47 on: June 14, 2007, 05:19:38 AM »

 You can pick this apart and point out the flaws:


http://dogtorj.tripod.com/id51.html

Dogs are Carnivores
by Jeannie Thomason

I feel this bares repeating these days as so many people are thinking and treating their dogs like they are humans.    I too love my dogs like they are my children but we need to remember they are not humans.   Nor do they think like humans nor eat like humans.    God created dogs to be carnivores to help keep nature in balance.

The assumption that dogs are omnivores remains to be proven, whereas the truth about dogs being natural carnivores is very well-supported by the evidence available to us.
 
Like humans, dogs have two sets of teeth in their lives. The 28 baby teeth erupt through the gums between the third and sixth weeks of age. Puppies molars. Puppy teeth begin to shed and be replaced by permanent adult teeth at about four months of age. Although there is some variation in breeds, most adult dogs have 42 teeth, with the premolars coming last, at about six or seven months.

Look into your dog mouth. Those huge impressive teeth (or tiny needle sharp teeth) are designed for grabbing, ripping, tearing, shredding, and shearing meat (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 258.). They are not equipped with large flat molars for grinding up plant matter. Their molars are pointed and situated in a scissors bite (along with the rest of their teeth) that powerfully disposes of meat, bone, and hide. Carnivores are equipped with a peculiar set of teeth that includes the presence of carnassial teeth: the fourth upper premolar and first lower molar.
Hence, dogs do not chew,  they are designed to bite, rip, shred, crunch and swallow.
 
Canine teeth or as some people call them, Fangs for grabbing and puncturing, incisors for nibbling, premolars for tearing, and molars for crushing (not chewing or masticating) bone -- although the family dog may appear to be far more civilized than his wild relatives, he still has the same equipment for eating, grooming, greeting, and defense.
 

Four premolars line each side of the upper and lower jaws in back of the canines. These are the shearing teeth, used to rip great hunks of flesh from prey animals. Although they no longer hunt for survival, dogs can still eat in the manner of wolves - by grabbing meat with the premolars and ripping it off the bone.

The top jaw has two molars on each side, and the bottom jaw has three. These are the crushing teeth, use by wolves to crack caribou bones.

Their jaws hinge open widely, allowing them to gulp large chunks of meat and bone. The skull and jaw design of a carnivore: a deep and C-shaped mandibular fossa prevents lateral movement of the jaw (lateral movement is necessary for eating plant matter). Yes,  I emphasize the "gulp". Dogs do not "chew" their food.  In the wild resources are scarce, they are designed to be able to gorge and fast for this purpose;  as they are hard wired for this no amount of thinking "he knows he gets fed twice a day" etc will change the dog's perspective. He may crunch down once or twice but is just not designed to "chew" his/her food.  Many people new to raw feeding freak out that their dog might swallow the meat and/or bones whole.   YES, they will pretty much do that.  They will tear large chunks of meat off the bone and then if the bone is smaller such as a chicken or turkey bone,  they will crush the bone by chomping down once or twice and swallow.  God designed the dog's stomach acids to be much stronger than ours and they are designed for digesting large lumps of meat and even good size pieces of RAW bone.

However much we humans have done to tinker with and change theirs body design (resulting in varying sizes and conformations), we have done nothing to change the internal anatomy and physiology of our carnivorous canines.

Dogs have the internal anatomy and physiology of a carnivore (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 260.). They have a highly elastic stomach designed to hold large quantities of meat, bone, organs, and hide. Their stomachs are simple, with an undeveloped caecum (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 260.). They have a relatively short foregut and a short, smooth, unsacculated colon. This means food passes through quickly. Vegetable and plant matter, however, needs time to sit and ferment. This equates to longer, sacculated colons, larger and longer small intestines, and occasionally the presence of a caecum. Dogs have none of these, but have the shorter foregut and hindgut consistent with carnivorous animals. This explains why plant matter comes out the same way it came in; there was no time for it to be broken down and digested (among other things). People know this; this is why they tell you that vegetables and grains have to be preprocessed for your dog to get anything out of them. But even then, feeding vegetables and grains to a carnivorous animal is a highly questionable practice.

You see, dogs do not normally produce the necessary enzymes in their saliva (amylase, for example) to start the break-down of carbohydrates and starches; amylase in saliva is something omnivorous and herbivorous animals possess, but not carnivorous animals. This places the burden entirely on the pancreas, forcing it to produce large amounts of amylase to deal with the starch, cellulose, and carbohydrates in plant matter. Neither does the carnivore's pancreas secrete cellulase to split the cellulose into glucose molecules, nor have dogs become efficient at digesting and assimilating and utilizing plant material as a source of high quality protein.  Herbivores do those sorts of things Canine and Feline Nutrition Case, Carey and Hirakawa Published by Mosby, 1995

Thus, feeding dogs as though they were humans (omnivores) taxes the pancreas and places extra strain on it, as it must work harder for the dog to digest the starchy, carbohydrate-filled food instead of just producing normal amounts of the enzymes needed to digest proteins and fats (which, when fed raw, begin to "self-digest" when the cells are crushed through crushing  and tearing and their enzymes are released).

Nor do dogs have the kinds of friendly bacteria that break down cellulose and starch for them. As a result, most of the nutrients contained in plant matter—even preprocessed plant matter—are unavailable to dogs. This is why dog food manufacturers have to add such high amounts of synthetic vitamins and minerals (the fact that cooking destroys all the vitamins and minerals and thus creates the need for supplementation aside) to their dog foods. If a dog can only digest 40-60% of its grain-based food, then it will only be receiving 40-60% (ideally!) of the vitamins and minerals it needs. To compensate for this, the manufacturer must add a higher concentration of vitamins and minerals than the dog actually needs.  The result of feeding dogs a highly processed, grain-based food is a suppressed immune system and the underproduction of the enzymes necessary to thoroughly digest raw meaty bones (Lonsdale, T. 2001. Raw Meaty Bones).

Dogs are so much like wolves physiologically that they are frequently used in wolf studies as a physiological model for wolf body processes (Mech, L.D. 2003. Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation). Additionally, dogs and wolves share 99.8% of their mitochondrial DNA (Wayne, R.K. Molecular Evolution of the Dog Family). This next quote is from Robert K. Wayne, Ph.D., and his discussion on canine genetics (taken from www.fiu.edu/~milesk/Genetics.html).

"The domestic dog is an extremely close relative of the gray wolf, differing from it by at most 0.2% of mDNA sequence..."

Dogs have recently been reclassified as Canis lupus familiaris by the Smithsonian Institute (Wayne, R.K. "What is a Wolfdog?" www.fiu.edu/~milesk/Genetics.html), placing it in the same species as the gray wolf, Canis lupus. The dog is, by all scientific standards and by evolutionary history, a domesticated wolf (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 472.). Those who insist dogs did not descend from wolves must disprove the litany of scientific evidence that concludes wolves are the ancestors of dogs. And, as we have already established, the wolf is a carnivore. Since a dog's internal physiology does not differ from a wolf, dogs have the same physiological and nutritional needs as those carnivorous predators, which, remember, "need to ingest all the major parts of their herbivorous prey, except the plants in the digestive system" to "grow and maintain their own bodies" (Mech, L.D. 2003. Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation.).

Some people are under the impression that the bacteria in raw meat may hurt the dog.  IF your dog has an innunocompromised system or some underlying health problem then the bacteria may cause a problem.

Sadly,  Raw diets have also been blamed for causing things like pancreatitis and kidney disease, when in reality the underlying disease was already there and is was simply brought to light by the change in diet. Dogs are surprisingly well-equipped to deal with bacteria. Their saliva has antibacterial properties; it contains lysozyme, an enzyme that lyses and destroys harmful bacteria. Their short digestive tract is designed to push through food and bacteria quickly without giving bacteria time to colonize. The extremely acidic environment in the gut is also a good bacteria colonization deterrent. People often point to the fact that dogs shed salmonella in their feces, (but, then again, even kibble-fed dogs do this) without showing any ill effects as proof that the dog is infected with salmonella. In reality, all this proves is that the dog has effectively passed the salmonella through its system with no problems. Yes, the dog can act as a salmonella carrier, but the solution is simple—do not eat dog poop and wash your hands after picking up after your dog.

As mentioned above, even kibble-fed dogs can and do regularly shed salmonella and other bacteria. Most of the documented cases of severe bacterial septicemia though are from kibble-fed animals or animals suffering from reactions to vaccines. Commercial pet foods have been pulled off shelves more than once because of bacteria AND molds that produce a deadly toxin. The solution? Use common sense. Clean up well and wash your hands. And 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.

Let's face it, a healthy dog will not suffer from bacterial infections or bacterial septicemia. it 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; if one is talking in homeopathic medicine terminology, this is simply one more symptom that shows the dog is suffering from chronic disease.

I believe that it is the kibble, not the raw meat, that causes bacterial problems.  Kibble in the pet's 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 a condition called Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth, or SIBO (Lonsdale, T. 2001. Raw Meaty Bones. pg 85). 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.

What about Cooked diets?

"There are several aspects of cooked diets that pose problems. Tom Lonsdale deals with this in depth in Chapter 4 of his book Raw Meaty Bones.

Okay, now to the effects of heat. If you burn your finger, what happens? The skin tissue dies. Overly apply heat to food and the nutrients are progressively killed/destroyed.

First of all, 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.). If an animal has an "allergy" to chicken or beef, it may very often be cooked chicken or beef and not the raw form.
It should be well understood and recognized in scientific literature that heat breaks down vitamins, amino acids and produces undesirable cross-linkages in proteins, particularly in meat.
 
At 110 degrees Fahrenheit (approximately 43 degrees Centigrade) two of the 8 essential amino acids, tryptophan and lysine, are destroyed.
When food is cooked above 117 degrees F for three minutes or longer, the following deleterious changes begin, and progressively cause increased nutritional damage as higher temperatures are applied over prolonged periods of time:
*proteins coagulate
*high temperatures denature protein molecular structure, leading to deficiency of some essential amino acids
*carbohydrates caramelize
*overly heated fats generate numerous carcinogens including acrolein, nitrosamines, hydrocarbons, and benzopyrene (one of the most potent cancer-causing agents known)
*natural fibers break down, cellulose is completely changed from its natural condition: it loses its ability to sweep the alimentary canal clean
* 30% to 50% of vitamins and minerals are destroyed
*100% of enzymes are damaged, the body’s enzyme potential is depleted which drains energy needed to maintain and repair tissue and organ systems, thereby shortening the life span.
 
Dr. Kouchakoff of Switzerland conducted over 300 detailed experiments, which pinpointed the pathogenic nature of cooked and processed foods. Food heated to temperatures of just 120 to 190 degrees F (a range usually relegated to warming rather than cooking which, nevertheless destroys all enzymes), causes leukocytosis in the body. Leukocytosis is a term applied to an abnormally high white corpuscle count.

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, how 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. We only know what amounts are too much and what amounts are too little OVER A SIX-MONTH PERIOD, not over a period of years. 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 try to  compensate for vitamin and mineral deficiencies without resorting to supplements.  Instead,  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 (i.e. a whole rabbit) (Lonsdale, T. 2001. Raw Meaty Bones. Chapter 4.)

 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.

Cooking denatures protein. According to Encyclopedia Britannica, denaturation is a modification of the molecular structure of protein by heat or by an acid, an alkali, or ultraviolet radiation that destroys or diminishes its original properties and biological activity.

Denaturation alters protein and makes it unusable or less usable. According to Britannica, protein molecules are readily altered by heat:. Unlike simple organic molecules, the physical and chemical properties of protein are markedly altered when the substance is just boiled in water. Further: All of the agents able to cause denaturat-ion are able to break the secondary bonds that hold the chains in place. Once these weak bonds are broken, the molecule falls into a disorganized tangle devoid of biological function.

Again, according to Britannica the most significant effect of protein denaturation is the loss of the its biological function. For example, enzymes lose their catalytic powers and hemoglobin loses its capacity to carry oxygen. The changes that accompany denaturation have been shown to result from destruction of the specific pattern in which the amino acid chains are folded in the native protein. In Britannica is the acknowledgement that "cooking destroys protein to make it practically useless"

There are two ways to denature the proteins: chemically using digestive enzymes, or through the use of heat. Via heat, the body does not have the recombinant ability to utilize damaged denatured protein components (amino acids) and rebuild them once again into viable protein molecules.

Some Physiologists claim that cooking and digestion are virtually the same: that cooking is a form of predigestion where heat is used to hydrolyze nutrients that would otherwise be hydrolyzed at body temperature through digestion. This due to the enormous heat exposure during cooking, that denatures the protein molecule past a point of being bioactive, however, body heat is too low to effect the protein molecule so adversely.

When proteins are subjected to high heat during cooking, enzyme resistant linkages are formed between the amino acid chains. The body cannot separate these amino acids. What the body cannot use, it must eliminate. Cooked proteins become a source of toxicity: dead organic waste material acted upon and elaborated by bacterial flora.

When wholesome protein foods are eaten raw, the body makes maximum use of all amino acids without the accompanying toxins of cooked food.

According to the textbook Nutritional Value of Food Processing, 3rd Edition, (by Karmas, Harris, published by Van Nostrand Reinhold) which is written for food chemists in the industrial processed food industry: changes that occur during processing either result in nutrient loss or destruction. Heat processing has a detrimental effect on nutrients since thermal degradation of nutrients can and does occur. Reduction in nutrient content depends on the severity of the thermal processing.

Protein molecules under ideal eating and digestive conditions are broken down into amino acids by gastric enzymes. Every protein molecule in the body is synthesized from these amino acids. Protein you consume IS NOT used as protein: it is first recycled or broken down into its constituent amino acids AND THEN used to build protein molecules the body needs.

There are 23 different amino acids. These link together in different combinations in extremely long chains to create protein molecules, like individual rail cars form a train. The amino group gives each amino acid its specific identifying characteristic that differentiates it from the others. Excessive heat sloughs off or decapitates the amino group. Without this amino group, the amino acid is rendered useless and is toxic.

I am often berated for recommending a raw diet as being best for our carnivorous pets but after all my research and feeding my own pets this way for years now, I can not help but believe that our pet dogs and cats would be much healthier in the long run if fed live whole foods.

For more information on cooked food versus raw food, please check out the famous Pottenger cat study:

http://www.nutritionreallyworks.com/Pottengers-cats.html
http://www.price-pottenger.org/Articles/PottsCats.html
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3587


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


« Reply #48 on: June 14, 2007, 08:28:14 AM »

http://www.rawmeatybones.com/diet/exp-diet-guide.pdf
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21929



« Reply #49 on: June 14, 2007, 09:14:25 AM »

some of this stuff is going to take days to read.

Is there cliff notes available?
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!