Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
August 21, 2014, 11:10:12 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: How the "Science" is done for pet food  (Read 2767 times)
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: September 13, 2007, 06:52:48 PM »

so....

gravy train?

 Grin


No...


And you can see from this thread why I won't post what brand I feed.  This was a set-up question.  If I do post the brand name and its a brand that Flower doesn't approve of, she's going to use it as ammunition on how veterinarians don't know anything about animal nutrition and use it to justify her OPINIONS on feeding canines.  If its a brand that other members feed, they are going to throw that back into her face to justify their feeding cheap as shit dog food.   

I don't endorse any single dog food brand.  There are some out there that are better than others.  What I feed my dogs is what I feed my dogs.  At no time have I tried to state that their feeding is better or worse than any of the other diets discussed here.   I will say that I very rarely feed them any table scraps and the rawhides I give them as treats are all unflavored minimally processed pig hide. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: September 13, 2007, 07:03:33 PM »

I don't believe I asked you what you think people MUST feed, I asked what YOU feed.   I have seen others ask you that same question. 

 Considering I don't feed kibble but have recommended a brand or 2 in the past, I thought maybe someone who actually FEEDS kibble and isn't some rumdumb, might say what he feeds. 

  If not just post your bank account and routing info instead, that's not very personal.   Smiley


They have?  I haven't seen it.  The only person on this forum I've had an indepth discussion with about foods is you.... and that goes back to homemade diets and people being able to formulate them correctly.   What you've posted tonight is a direct attempt to stir up shit.   I've tried to sidestep it as best I can, but you are continuing to push your own agenda. 


I will say this, Flower, from an evolutionary/biological standpoint some of what you have posted on this forum about canine diets is flat out wrong.    This is based on the physiology and comparative anatomy of the canine digestive tract.  I've briefly mentioned it several times, but I haven't pushed it because I figured it wasn't worth the resultant explosion.  I do strongly suggest that you review basic canine digestive physiology and comparative carnivore anatomy.  Just because an animal is of the Order Carnivora, doesn't mean it eats exactly the same as the others in that order.  Carnivora is a broad reaching group of animals encompassing more than 250 species of placental mammals.  The dietary requirements of carnivorans can best be divided into each individual superfamily within the order. 

That said, you've made up your mind that you are correct and the rest of the world can be damned.  Thats fine by me.  You aren't feeding my dogs. 
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21926



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: September 13, 2007, 07:09:55 PM »


No...


And you can see from this thread why I won't post what brand I feed.  This was a set-up question.  If I do post the brand name and its a brand that Flower doesn't approve of, she's going to use it as ammunition on how veterinarians don't know anything about animal nutrition and use it to justify her OPINIONS on feeding canines.  If its a brand that other members feed, they are going to throw that back into her face to justify their feeding cheap as shit dog food.   

I don't endorse any single dog food brand.  There are some out there that are better than others.  What I feed my dogs is what I feed my dogs.  At no time have I tried to state that their feeding is better or worse than any of the other diets discussed here.   I will say that I very rarely feed them any table scraps and the rawhides I give them as treats are all unflavored minimally processed pig hide. 

So it's Harbo Gummy Bears & Miller Genuine Draft

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

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #28 on: September 13, 2007, 07:15:48 PM »

So it's Harbo Gummy Bears & Miller Genuine Draft

 Grin

nah, my dogs only get the best.  Guiness and Michelob Ultra.   Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: September 13, 2007, 07:24:23 PM »


Quote
They have?  I haven't seen it.  The only person on this forum I've had an indepth discussion with about foods is you.... and that goes back to homemade diets and people being able to formulate them correctly.   What you've posted tonight is a direct attempt to stir up shit.   I've tried to sidestep it as best I can, but you are continuing to push your own agenda.
 

I believe it was Wooo (?) that asked recently.   You can think what you want.


er.
Quote
I will say this, Flower, from an evolutionary/biological standpoint some of what you have posted on this forum about canine diets is flat out wrong.    This is based on the physiology and comparative anatomy of the canine digestive tract.  I've briefly mentioned it several times, but I haven't pushed it because I figured it wasn't worth the resultant explosion.  I do strongly suggest that you review basic canine digestive physiology and comparative carnivore anatomy.  Just because an animal is of the Order Carnivora, doesn't mean it eats exactly the same as the others in that order.  Carnivora is a broad reaching group of animals encompassing more than 250 species of placental mammals.  The dietary requirements of carnivorans can best be devided into each individual superfamily within the order
 


I believe we went over the physiology and digestive track (in the raw feeding thread) and I asked you what had changed and you said I was correct.  Now you are saying it isn't?  Either say something or don't, but don't say that you COULD say something.
 

Quote
That said, you've made up your mind that you are correct and the rest of the world can be damned.  Thats fine by me.  You aren't feeding my dogs.
 

Dogs (carnivores) don't need grains, veggies, fruits in their diet and they aren't designed to digest them properly.  Can they eat them sure.  But a diet with them constantly in their diet all the time is not the most beneficial or optimum diet for a carnivore.   Dogs do live on those foods, I can't deny that, but they could have better overall health if not forced to consume species inappropriate foods all the time.  And some dogs with chronic problems could have an improved quality of life if taken off a processed diet. 

  Nature is right, man is wrong.   I'm not nature so I can't take credit for being right.  I just am not trying to better nature by making them eat stuff they shouldn't long term with the goal of a longer life with a better QUALITY of life.

 All you have said til now is that you don't think people are capable of feeding a homemade (raw or cooked?) diet.  Now you say it's because they really don't need a carnivore diet.   Roll Eyes    hmmm........
Report to moderator   Logged
temper35
Getbig III
***
Posts: 732


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 13, 2007, 07:52:19 PM »

At least if Vet says it maybe people will see what I mean
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: September 13, 2007, 11:44:26 PM »

 

I believe it was Wooo (?) that asked recently.   You can think what you want.


er. 


I believe we went over the physiology and digestive track (in the raw feeding thread) and I asked you what had changed and you said I was correct.  Now you are saying it isn't?  Either say something or don't, but don't say that you COULD say something.
 
 

Dogs (carnivores) don't need grains, veggies, fruits in their diet and they aren't designed to digest them properly.  Can they eat them sure.  But a diet with them constantly in their diet all the time is not the most beneficial or optimum diet for a carnivore.   Dogs do live on those foods, I can't deny that, but they could have better overall health if not forced to consume species inappropriate foods all the time.  And some dogs with chronic problems could have an improved quality of life if taken off a processed diet. 

  Nature is right, man is wrong.   I'm not nature so I can't take credit for being right.  I just am not trying to better nature by making them eat stuff they shouldn't long term with the goal of a longer life with a better QUALITY of life.

 All you have said til now is that you don't think people are capable of feeding a homemade (raw or cooked?) diet.  Now you say it's because they really don't need a carnivore diet.   Roll Eyes    hmmm........



Fine, right here you are flat out wrong. 

Quote
Dogs (carnivores) don't need grains, veggies, fruits in their diet and they aren't designed to digest them properly.  Can they eat them sure.  But a diet with them constantly in their diet all the time is not the most beneficial or optimum diet for a carnivore.   

I've said it before and I'll say it again.   Wild dogs (foxes and wolves) will eat plant material, including fruits and other plants.  Its a well observed and well documented phenomena.  We've all seen our dogs eating grass in the yard.  True they are carnivores, but they are not the ULTRASTRICT MEAT ONLY carnivores that you seem to think they are.  In that assumption, YOU are the one who are feeding your dogs an inappropriate diet. 

Lets look at it from a biological standpoint (you asked for this one--I tried to warn you)....

Dogs are members of the Order Carnivora.  The Order Carnivora includes carnivores, omnivores, and even a few primarily herbivorous species, like giant panda.  Just because its a Carnivoran doesn't mean its a carnivore, meaning its a strict meat eating animal.   The Giant Panda example alone kills that logical reasoning.   

Using a common factor, the teeth, all carnivorans have the large, slightly recurved canine teeth which are  used to grab and hold prey, and the carnassial teeth complex which are used to rend meat from bone and slice it into smaller digestible pieces.   Dogs have molar teeth behind the carnassials for crushing bones and to a degree grinding plant material.  As an example, another carnivoran--a strict meat eater---cats, have only a greatly reduced, functionless molar behind the carnassial in the upper jaw. Cats will strip bones clean but will not crush them to get the marrow inside and they eat no plant material. Dogs will crush bone to get to the marrow inside. They will also use these molar teeth for grinding plant material.  More omnivorous carnivorans, such as bears and raccoons, have developed blunt, molar-like carnassial teeth which are more designed for grinding plant material.  So, from a dental standpoint dogs are omnivorous carnivorans.  It is a normal part of their diet to consume plant material in addition to meat as a portion of their daily food intake.

From the standpoint of relationships between species, the Order Carnivora is divided into three superfamilies....  The Superfamily Pinnipedia (Sea lions, seals, and walruses), which is by and large strictly carnivorous, but does contain some omnivorous species.   The Superfamily Feloidae, which is includes the following obligate carnivorous families: Felidae (cats), Herpestidae (mongooses), Hyaenidae (hyenas), and Viveridae (civets).  These animals are all obligate carnivores with specialized adaptions for the strict eating of meat such as reduced/specialized teeth for eating meat and retractable claws with special adaptions for hunting prey.  The Superfamily Canoidae includes Canidae (dogs, wolves, and foxes), Mephitidae (skunks) Mustelidae (weasels and ferrets), Procyonidae (raccoons and coatimundi), and Ursidae (bears).   This obviously widely diverse grouping of animals range from strict carnivores (ferrets) to much more herbivorous species (bears) including the completely herbivorous Giant Panda.   The dietary variation within Canoidae is so varied with almost all included species tend to be omnivorous to some degree.  This omnivorous nature is so uniform that all Canoidae have carnassial teeth that are less specialized for eating meat and have more premolars and molars in an elongated skull for grinding plant material.  Just because its a canoidae doesn't mean its a "strict" carnivore, almost all of them aren't. 


So there, you have three very well documented/proven reasons why feeding a dog a pure meat diet isn't the "Best" diet for domestic dogs.   No wild dog species I'm aware of (meaning no Canidae) will eat only a meat diet.  They all consume some degree of plant material every feeding as part of their normal food intake. 
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: September 13, 2007, 11:48:01 PM »

At least if Vet says it maybe people will see what I mean

I didn't want to get into this argument.   Flower has a stick up her ass tonight and kept pushing.   I'm answering the questions based on the knowledge I have.   If I'm wrong, prove me wrong.   Just don't stand on your head and scream you are right without presenting anything other than your opinion. 
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: September 14, 2007, 05:56:02 AM »

So there, you have three very well documented/proven reasons why feeding a dog a pure meat diet isn't the "Best" diet for domestic dogs.   No wild dog species I'm aware of (meaning no Canidae) will eat only a meat diet.  They all consume some degree of plant material every feeding as part of their normal food intake. 

ok dokey.   Roll Eyes  Every feeding?   Wolves with shake out the stomach before eating to dislodge as much vegetation as possible before eating, that is a documented fact.  Of course some does remain, but the wolves clearly are not wanting to eat the vegetation.

I didn't want to get into this argument.   Flower has a stick up her ass tonight and kept pushing.   I'm answering the questions based on the knowledge I have.   If I'm wrong, prove me wrong.   Just don't stand on your head and scream you are right without presenting anything other than your opinion. 


Maybe when we were discussing it a few months ago you should of brought up these points, for some reason you didn't and in fact you said I was correct with what I had posted and that I shot you down in flames.  I had asked you then to show a different view.     Undecided

  I don't find anything compelling in what you have posted accept that dogs will occasionally eat grass.  So they can eat grass if they feel they need it.  I don't need to feed them a diet of processed foods consisting largely of grains to do that.     You've taken an animal known to be opportunistic and used that to say they regularly need plant material.    Most dogs that I know, eat the grass and hork it up. They are not deriving anything from it nutritionally.  I don't add any plant matter to their diet because they don't need any plant matter, especially REGULARLY.


Still a big difference to say they need PLANT MATTER and to feed a diet consisting mainly of GRAINS.  Processed meats and GRAINS.

  but whatever, if your dogs are alive on whatever they are fed, that is good enough.  Medical science usually has a way that it can suppress whatever problems come up, and then suppress the problems from that treatment and so on......it's all good
Report to moderator   Logged
temper35
Getbig III
***
Posts: 732


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: September 14, 2007, 07:33:59 AM »

I didn't want to get into this argument.   Flower has a stick up her ass tonight and kept pushing.   I'm answering the questions based on the knowledge I have.   If I'm wrong, prove me wrong.   Just don't stand on your head and scream you are right without presenting anything other than your opinion. 

It is because she is a pompous ass about the whole raw feeding thing.  If she is so into being as close to a wild dogs diet as possible, then she would feed them grains/foliage for 2-3 days straight and then feed them a huge serving of raw meat.  Ya know, exactly like the diet of a wolf...  She wants to treat her dogs like her babies, but feed them somewhat like wild animals, and then brag about it.  Go hard or go home.
Report to moderator   Logged
jmt1
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1587



View Profile
« Reply #35 on: September 14, 2007, 08:09:13 AM »

All scientific evidence points towards the fact that dogs, while not true carnivores, are opportunistic, carnivorous scavengers. Cats on the other hand are true, obligate carnivores, requiring animal protein to survive. There is a difference between a carnivorous scavenger and an omnivore though - dogs lack the dental characteristics, longer digestive tract and specific enzymes of true omnivores like humans. That is the reason why they can not digest grains and vegetables unless they are "predigested" by processing, mincing/grinding, breakdown by enzymes, or fermentation through bacteria. Once converted, they are fully available to the dog.

This does, however, not mean that your dog will thrive on a diet mainly made up of poor quality grains or grain fragments, which is what most cheap foods are. Whole grains, including their entire complement of nutrients are much more valuable - and this does not only apply for a dog's diet, but for humans as well!
Report to moderator   Logged
rockyfortune
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1939


"look, it's the drunk piano player."


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: September 14, 2007, 08:19:12 AM »

Pedigree dude!! dogs love it..and the commercials are great!  I am however trying the new dick van patten potato and duck dry kibble with dogs..in hopes of curing an itching allergy my lab has and god awful shedding my mix breed rottie has...


Report to moderator   Logged

footloose and fancy free
BigNBloated
Getbig III
***
Posts: 663


Always bet on Duke.


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: September 14, 2007, 08:30:54 AM »

Flower, what do you know about evo foods? The info i've read claim its an alternative for raw feeders.

btw here is the website for the co. who makes it  http://www.naturapet.com/
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: September 14, 2007, 08:40:37 AM »

ok dokey.   Roll Eyes  Every feeding?   Wolves with shake out the stomach before eating to dislodge as much vegetation as possible before eating, that is a documented fact.  Of course some does remain, but the wolves clearly are not wanting to eat the vegetation.

Bullshit.  Have you ever watched wolves feed?  They will specifically eat the rumen contents from downed moose and elk.  they don't "shake it out".  There is a feeding behavior and competition between individual animals that leads to the spilling of intestinal contents, but some of the most desirable parts are whats in that rumen.  Why do you think farm dogs eat cowshit?  its the same basic principle.  Undigested plant material.   When the dogs I had growing up on the farm had access to a dead cow carcass, you know what they ate first? The liver and spleen and the rumen followed by the intestine.  Almost every time.  They didn't chew on a leg until the abdominal contents had been eaten. 

Quote

Maybe when we were discussing it a few months ago you should of brought up these points, for some reason you didn't and in fact you said I was correct with what I had posted and that I shot you down in flames.  I had asked you then to show a different view.     Undecided 

Wrong, look back through the posts.  I posted back then the same thing that I posted above, except I didn't do it in as much detail.  I mentioned dogs being more omnivorous than cats and ferrets and I also mentioned wild dogs eating plant material and if memory serves me right I also said that dogs eat grass.  You bleeped right over it and ignored what I had posted because it went against your own raw dog food agenda.  From there the conversation continued with my thoughts on humans not being able to feed themselves appropriately, much less formulate a diet for their dog.


Quote
  I don't find anything compelling in what you have posted accept that dogs will occasionally eat grass.  So they can eat grass if they feel they need it.  I don't need to feed them a diet of processed foods consisting largely of grains to do that.     You've taken an animal known to be opportunistic and used that to say they regularly need plant material.    Most dogs that I know, eat the grass and hork it up. They are not deriving anything from it nutritionally.  I don't add any plant matter to their diet because they don't need any plant matter, especially REGULARLY.[/color]

I strongly suggest your review your comparative physiology.  You have a preconcieved idea about carnivora and you are missing the big picture because of your bias against scientific fact.   Dogs are omnivorus carnivorans.  Face it.  its that simple.
Report to moderator   Logged
jmt1
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 1587



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: September 14, 2007, 08:42:47 AM »

Flower, what do you know about evo foods? The info i've read claim its an alternative for raw feeders.

btw here is the website for the co. who makes it  http://www.naturapet.com/


looks like a good choice.

http://forums.dogfoodproject.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=dogfood&Number=15027&Searchpage=1&Main=15024&Words=evo&topic=&Search=true#Post15027

check out timberwolf organics also.

http://www.timberwolforganics.com/
Report to moderator   Logged
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #40 on: September 14, 2007, 08:46:57 AM »

All scientific evidence points towards the fact that dogs, while not true carnivores, are opportunistic, carnivorous scavengers. Cats on the other hand are true, obligate carnivores, requiring animal protein to survive. There is a difference between a carnivorous scavenger and an omnivore though - dogs lack the dental characteristics, longer digestive tract and specific enzymes of true omnivores like humans. That is the reason why they can not digest grains and vegetables unless they are "predigested" by processing, mincing/grinding, breakdown by enzymes, or fermentation through bacteria. Once converted, they are fully available to the dog.

This does, however, not mean that your dog will thrive on a diet mainly made up of poor quality grains or grain fragments, which is what most cheap foods are. Whole grains, including their entire complement of nutrients are much more valuable - and this does not only apply for a dog's diet, but for humans as well!

Yes.  

Canids will also not thrive on a diet devoid of all plant material.  They will survive, but they will not thrive.  Also remember a key factor is fiber content of the plant material consumed.  A grain is not fruit is not fibrous grasses.    
Report to moderator   Logged
rockyfortune
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1939


"look, it's the drunk piano player."


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: September 14, 2007, 08:55:07 AM »

i've read about the same stuff Vet is talking about...wild wolves dont' waste anything when eating prey..they dig into the guts, eat undigested food from the prey's stomach, intestinal contents..everything..



hey, vet..how come you had cows carcasses lying around!? Shocked  just curious...
Report to moderator   Logged

footloose and fancy free
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #42 on: September 14, 2007, 09:43:20 AM »

hey, vet..how come you had cows carcasses lying around!? Shocked  just curious...

LOL  Sorry....  I can se you getting a messed up mental image of that....  I grew up on a farm with about 300 head of beef cows/cattle and several thousand head of hogs.  Sometimes when an old cow would die, the dogs would discover her before the humans did.   Not only that, but we buried all of the dead cattle in one place in a back pasture on the farm.  To haul the body back, we used one tractor, then used a different one with a better scoop to dig the hole to bury the cow in.   Sometimes there was a delay between getting the dead cow back to the "Grave" and getting the hole dug.
Report to moderator   Logged
rockyfortune
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1939


"look, it's the drunk piano player."


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: September 14, 2007, 09:47:16 AM »

LOL  Sorry....  I can se you getting a messed up mental image of that....  I grew up on a farm with about 300 head of beef cows/cattle and several thousand head of hogs.  Sometimes when an old cow would die, the dogs would discover her before the humans did.   Not only that, but we buried all of the dead cattle in one place in a back pasture on the farm.  To haul the body back, we used one tractor, then used a different one with a better scoop to dig the hole to bury the cow in.   Sometimes there was a delay between getting the dead cow back to the "Grave" and getting the hole dug.


that clears it up...

beef cows...i guess it was best not to take any interest in the cows--meaning..don't get attached to any...or you could end up pretty depressed...
Report to moderator   Logged

footloose and fancy free
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: September 14, 2007, 10:08:41 AM »

http://rawfed.com/myths/stomachcontents.html

Wolves do NOT eat the stomach contents of their prey. Only if the prey is small enough (like the size of a rabbit) will they eat the stomach contents, which just happen to get consumed along with the entire animal. Otherwise, wolves will shake out the stomach contents of their large herbivorous prey before sometimes eating the stomach wall. The following quotations are taken from L. David Mech's 2003 book Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. Mech (and the others who contributed to this book) is considered the world's leading wolf biologist, and this book is a compilation of 350 collective years of research, experiments, and careful field observations. These quotes are taken from chapter 4, The Wolf as a Carnivore.

"Wolves usually tear into the body cavity of large prey and...consume the larger internal organs, such as lungs, heart, and liver. The large rumen [, which is one of the main stomach chambers in large ruminant herbivores,]...is usually punctured during removal and its contents spilled. The vegetation in the intestinal tract is of no interest to the wolves, but the stomach lining and intestinal wall are consumed, and their contents further strewn about the kill site." (pg.123, emphasis added)

"To grow and maintain their own bodies, wolves need to ingest all the major parts of their herbivorous prey, except the plants in the digestive system." (pg.124, emphasis added).

This next quote can be found on the Hunting and Meals page at Kerwood Wildlife Education Center.
"The wolf's diet consists mostly of muscle meat and fatty tissue from various animals. Heart, lung, liver, and other internal organs are eaten. Bones are crushed to get at the marrow, and bone fragments are eaten as well. Even hair and skin are sometimes consumed. The only part consistently ignored is the stomach and its contents. Although some vegetable matter is taken separately, particularly berries, Canis lupus doesn't seem to digest them very well."

From the mouths of the wolf experts themselves, who have observed countless numbers of kills: wolves do NOT eat the stomach contents of their large prey, and are carnivorous animals. Additionally, Neville Buck from the Howletts and Port Lympne Zoological Parks in Kent, England, notes that virtually no small carnivore (which includes varieties of cats, wolves, wild dogs) eat the intestinal contents of their large prey. The contents are spilled in the enclosures and are often rolled in by the animals, but very little is eaten (if any is eaten at all). His observations can be found in Appendix B of Raw Meaty Bones.



  Keep feeding grains.   Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
~flower~
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 3582


I be dead and stinkin up teh place!!


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: September 14, 2007, 10:18:38 AM »

Myth: DOGS ARE OMNIVORES.

This is false. Dogs are carnivores, not omnivores. Dogs ARE very adaptable, but just because they can survive on an omnivorous diet does not mean it is the best diet for them. The assumption that dogs are natural omnivores remains to be proven, whereas the truth about dogs being natural carnivores is very well-supported by the evidence available to us.

1.) Dentition

Look into your dog or cat's 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.

http://rawfed.com/myths/carnassials.jpg

Carnassial teeth

This is the skull of a weasel (also in Order Carnivora), courtesy of Centennial Museum. The carnassial teeth are marked with black arrows. You can find these same teeth in the mouth of your dog or cat or ferret.

Contrast this with your own teeth or the teeth of a black bear. A black bear is a true omnivore, as are we. We have nice, large, flat molars that can grind up veggies. Black bears, while having impressive canine teeth, also have large flat molars in the back of their mouth to assist in grinding up plant matter. Dogs and most canids lack these kinds of molars. Why? Because they don't eat plant matter. Teeth are highly specialized and are structured specifically for the diet the animal eats, and the difference between a bear's teeth and a dog's teeth (both species are in Order Carnivora) demonstrates how this can be (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pgs 260.). To see a visual comparison of the teeth of a dog to the teeth of a black bear, please click here. One can logically ask: If a dog (or cat or ferret) has the dentition of a carnivorous animal, why do we feed it pelleted, grain-based food?

2.) Musculature and external anatomy

Dogs (and cats) are equipped with powerful jaw muscles and neck muscles that assist in pulling down prey and chewing meat, bone, and hide. Their jaws hinge open widely, allowing them to gulp large chunks of meat and bone. Their skulls are heavy, and are shaped to prevent lateral movement of the lower jaw when captured prey struggles (the mandibular fossa is deep and C-shaped); this shape permits only an up-and-down crushing motion, whereas herbivores and omnivores have flatter mandibular fossa that allows for the lateral motion necessary to grind plant matter (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pgs 258-259.). Consider this quote from the previously-cited Mammology text:
"Canids, felids, and mustelids subsist mainly on freshly killed prey. These families show correspondingly greater development in 'tooth and claw'; they also have greater carnassial development and cursorial locomotion." (pg 260)

This translates to a simple fact: everything about a dog or cat's body design says they were designed for a carnivorous, hunting lifestyle geared toward killing prey. However, humans have done some major tinkering with this body design (resulting in varying sizes and conformations), but we have done nothing to change the internal anatomy and physiology of our carnivorous canines.

3.) Internal anatomy and physiology

Dogs and cats 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 questionable practice.

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. Thus, feeding dogs as though they were 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 chewing 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.

Is the dog an omnivore? Its dentition, internal and external anatomy, and physiology say it is not. Even its evolutionary history (discussed later) says the dog is a carnivore. So when people tell you the dog is an omnivore, ask: "What about this animal makes you think it is an omnivore?" Make them explain their position to you before you explain yours. Chances are they'll cite this next myth as "proof".   (the eating the stomach contents myth posted prior to this one)



All the myths are listed here, read it or not, I don't care. Feed, poison, use chemicals however you see fit.  If you think the body needs that much help then support it and suppress it and let other means you inject, apply, or let it consume, fix it the problems  Smiley

  http://rawfed.com/myths/
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21926



View Profile
« Reply #46 on: September 14, 2007, 10:19:55 AM »


that clears it up...

beef cows...i guess it was best not to take any interest in the cows--meaning..don't get attached to any...or you could end up pretty depressed...

Where I'm from....most all of my friends had farms.  

They used to name them "food names" so they wouldn't get attached.

Like when a calf was born....they would call them "steak-um", "Hamburg", "Veal", etc...

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

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: September 14, 2007, 10:32:22 AM »

http://rawfed.com/myths/stomachcontents.html

Wolves do NOT eat the stomach contents of their prey. Only if the prey is small enough (like the size of a rabbit) will they eat the stomach contents, which just happen to get consumed along with the entire animal. Otherwise, wolves will shake out the stomach contents of their large herbivorous prey before sometimes eating the stomach wall. The following quotations are taken from L. David Mech's 2003 book Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation. Mech (and the others who contributed to this book) is considered the world's leading wolf biologist, and this book is a compilation of 350 collective years of research, experiments, and careful field observations. These quotes are taken from chapter 4, The Wolf as a Carnivore.

"Wolves usually tear into the body cavity of large prey and...consume the larger internal organs, such as lungs, heart, and liver. The large rumen [, which is one of the main stomach chambers in large ruminant herbivores,]...is usually punctured during removal and its contents spilled. The vegetation in the intestinal tract is of no interest to the wolves, but the stomach lining and intestinal wall are consumed, and their contents further strewn about the kill site." (pg.123, emphasis added)

"To grow and maintain their own bodies, wolves need to ingest all the major parts of their herbivorous prey, except the plants in the digestive system." (pg.124, emphasis added).

This next quote can be found on the Hunting and Meals page at Kerwood Wildlife Education Center.
"The wolf's diet consists mostly of muscle meat and fatty tissue from various animals. Heart, lung, liver, and other internal organs are eaten. Bones are crushed to get at the marrow, and bone fragments are eaten as well. Even hair and skin are sometimes consumed. The only part consistently ignored is the stomach and its contents. Although some vegetable matter is taken separately, particularly berries, Canis lupus doesn't seem to digest them very well."

From the mouths of the wolf experts themselves, who have observed countless numbers of kills: wolves do NOT eat the stomach contents of their large prey, and are carnivorous animals. Additionally, Neville Buck from the Howletts and Port Lympne Zoological Parks in Kent, England, notes that virtually no small carnivore (which includes varieties of cats, wolves, wild dogs) eat the intestinal contents of their large prey. The contents are spilled in the enclosures and are often rolled in by the animals, but very little is eaten (if any is eaten at all). His observations can be found in Appendix B of Raw Meaty Bones.


Next time try to quote from a nonbiased source.... again, you are so clouded by you idea that you dogs MUST EAT MEAT that you are missing the point.  

Mech is a very credible source, however Mech himself has stated that sections of that book have been misquoted and misrepresented.  His observations within the field went against observations of other researchers with the Canis lupus species and that people have taking sections of his book out of context.   I will also tell you that i've observed wolves (and wolf hybrids) directly eating intestinal contents from whole prey.  I have that book in my storage locker somewhere--it was part of the required reading when we were talking about setting up the wolf enclosure.  I need to reread the pages mentioned, but there is a further discussion of eating of plant material if memory serves me correctly.   Its not just the little bit you posted.  There is a section that talks about the diet when prey is unavialable.    Not only that, but the diet changes from winter to summer.  This article:  Foraging and Feeding Ecology of the Gray Wolf (Canis lupus): Lessons from Yellowstone National Park.  Daniel R. Stahler4, Douglas W. Smith and Debra S. Guernsey J. Nutr. 136:1923S-1926S, July 2006 is a more recent source.

Quote
As most of our information on wolf kills comes from winter data, kill rates and prey selection are less known in summer. Current studies exploring this aspect of wolf predation are under way, but preliminary evidence indicates that wolf kill rates decrease as much as 25% in the summer (D. Smith and D. Stahler, Yellowstone Wolf Project, unpublished data). One indication of the seasonal differences in wolf foraging patterns is through an analysis of summer wolf scats. Scat analysis shows that summer diets are more diverse and include smaller prey species such as rodents, birds, and invertebrates, as well as ungulates, otherwise absent in the winter. Analyses of summer scats in 2003 show that mule deer was present in 133 (25%) of 530 scats analyzed. In addition, plant matter is prevalent in wolves' summer diet, with 392 (74%) of 530 scats analyzed containing some type of plant material, largely grass (Graminae). This is consistent with summer observations of wolves consuming grass and other plant material


Your main source alone in the last paragraph makes a mistake by grouping cats and canids together.... cats are not dogs are not wolves.  Cats are obligate carnivores.  They should not be placed in the same group as canids.  And just so you know, most often big cats (such as tigers) will eat the entire contents of smaller prey animals--including rabbits and birds.   They rarely "spill contents in their enclosures" and "roll in it".   As a matter of fact, i can't think of the last time any of the cats here at the zoo rolled in their diet---especially when offered whole prey as enrichment.  
Report to moderator   Logged
rockyfortune
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1939


"look, it's the drunk piano player."


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: September 14, 2007, 10:34:25 AM »

Myth: DOGS ARE OMNIVORES.

This is false. Dogs are carnivores, not omnivores. Dogs ARE very adaptable, but just because they can survive on an omnivorous diet does not mean it is the best diet for them. The assumption that dogs are natural omnivores remains to be proven, whereas the truth about dogs being natural carnivores is very well-supported by the evidence available to us.

1.) Dentition

Look into your dog or cat's 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.

http://rawfed.com/myths/carnassials.jpg

Carnassial teeth

This is the skull of a weasel (also in Order Carnivora), courtesy of Centennial Museum. The carnassial teeth are marked with black arrows. You can find these same teeth in the mouth of your dog or cat or ferret.

Contrast this with your own teeth or the teeth of a black bear. A black bear is a true omnivore, as are we. We have nice, large, flat molars that can grind up veggies. Black bears, while having impressive canine teeth, also have large flat molars in the back of their mouth to assist in grinding up plant matter. Dogs and most canids lack these kinds of molars. Why? Because they don't eat plant matter. Teeth are highly specialized and are structured specifically for the diet the animal eats, and the difference between a bear's teeth and a dog's teeth (both species are in Order Carnivora) demonstrates how this can be (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pgs 260.). To see a visual comparison of the teeth of a dog to the teeth of a black bear, please click here. One can logically ask: If a dog (or cat or ferret) has the dentition of a carnivorous animal, why do we feed it pelleted, grain-based food?

2.) Musculature and external anatomy

Dogs (and cats) are equipped with powerful jaw muscles and neck muscles that assist in pulling down prey and chewing meat, bone, and hide. Their jaws hinge open widely, allowing them to gulp large chunks of meat and bone. Their skulls are heavy, and are shaped to prevent lateral movement of the lower jaw when captured prey struggles (the mandibular fossa is deep and C-shaped); this shape permits only an up-and-down crushing motion, whereas herbivores and omnivores have flatter mandibular fossa that allows for the lateral motion necessary to grind plant matter (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pgs 258-259.). Consider this quote from the previously-cited Mammology text:
"Canids, felids, and mustelids subsist mainly on freshly killed prey. These families show correspondingly greater development in 'tooth and claw'; they also have greater carnassial development and cursorial locomotion." (pg 260)

This translates to a simple fact: everything about a dog or cat's body design says they were designed for a carnivorous, hunting lifestyle geared toward killing prey. However, humans have done some major tinkering with this body design (resulting in varying sizes and conformations), but we have done nothing to change the internal anatomy and physiology of our carnivorous canines.

3.) Internal anatomy and physiology

Dogs and cats 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 questionable practice.

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. Thus, feeding dogs as though they were 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 chewing 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.

Is the dog an omnivore? Its dentition, internal and external anatomy, and physiology say it is not. Even its evolutionary history (discussed later) says the dog is a carnivore. So when people tell you the dog is an omnivore, ask: "What about this animal makes you think it is an omnivore?" Make them explain their position to you before you explain yours. Chances are they'll cite this next myth as "proof".   (the eating the stomach contents myth posted prior to this one)



All the myths are listed here, read it or not, I don't care. Feed, poison, use chemicals however you see fit.  If you think the body needs that much help then support it and suppress it and let other means you inject, apply, or let it consume, fix it the problems  Smiley

  http://rawfed.com/myths/



this is from a raw food advocate website i assume?

i can't believe every damn dog food made today is poisonous or not healthful to dogs...some may be rubbish but i think with reasonable certainty that some commercial dog foods are actually pretty good for dogs.  i had a yorkie that lived 17 years on kibbles and bits...he died peacefully in his sleep--i don't know if feeding him raw food would have made his life any more healthier than he already was...i'm not knocking the diet...i've tried it and my rottie mix had a hard time digesting the raw food and i hated the bloody bones on my carpet.  i do give raw beef to them on occassion...so i'm not 100% against the type diet...
Report to moderator   Logged

footloose and fancy free
Vet
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 1679

Immortal


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: September 14, 2007, 10:46:08 AM »

Myth: DOGS ARE OMNIVORES.

This is false. Dogs are carnivores, not omnivores. Dogs ARE very adaptable, but just because they can survive on an omnivorous diet does not mean it is the best diet for them. The assumption that dogs are natural omnivores remains to be proven, whereas the truth about dogs being natural carnivores is very well-supported by the evidence available to us.

1.) Dentition

Look into your dog or cat's 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.

http://rawfed.com/myths/carnassials.jpg

Carnassial teeth

This is the skull of a weasel (also in Order Carnivora), courtesy of Centennial Museum. The carnassial teeth are marked with black arrows. You can find these same teeth in the mouth of your dog or cat or ferret.

Contrast this with your own teeth or the teeth of a black bear. A black bear is a true omnivore, as are we. We have nice, large, flat molars that can grind up veggies. Black bears, while having impressive canine teeth, also have large flat molars in the back of their mouth to assist in grinding up plant matter. Dogs and most canids lack these kinds of molars. Why? Because they don't eat plant matter. Teeth are highly specialized and are structured specifically for the diet the animal eats, and the difference between a bear's teeth and a dog's teeth (both species are in Order Carnivora) demonstrates how this can be (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pgs 260.). To see a visual comparison of the teeth of a dog to the teeth of a black bear, please click here. One can logically ask: If a dog (or cat or ferret) has the dentition of a carnivorous animal, why do we feed it pelleted, grain-based food?

2.) Musculature and external anatomy

Dogs (and cats) are equipped with powerful jaw muscles and neck muscles that assist in pulling down prey and chewing meat, bone, and hide. Their jaws hinge open widely, allowing them to gulp large chunks of meat and bone. Their skulls are heavy, and are shaped to prevent lateral movement of the lower jaw when captured prey struggles (the mandibular fossa is deep and C-shaped); this shape permits only an up-and-down crushing motion, whereas herbivores and omnivores have flatter mandibular fossa that allows for the lateral motion necessary to grind plant matter (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pgs 258-259.). Consider this quote from the previously-cited Mammology text:
"Canids, felids, and mustelids subsist mainly on freshly killed prey. These families show correspondingly greater development in 'tooth and claw'; they also have greater carnassial development and cursorial locomotion." (pg 260)

This translates to a simple fact: everything about a dog or cat's body design says they were designed for a carnivorous, hunting lifestyle geared toward killing prey. However, humans have done some major tinkering with this body design (resulting in varying sizes and conformations), but we have done nothing to change the internal anatomy and physiology of our carnivorous canines.

3.) Internal anatomy and physiology

Dogs and cats 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 questionable practice.

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. Thus, feeding dogs as though they were 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 chewing 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.

Is the dog an omnivore? Its dentition, internal and external anatomy, and physiology say it is not. Even its evolutionary history (discussed later) says the dog is a carnivore. So when people tell you the dog is an omnivore, ask: "What about this animal makes you think it is an omnivore?" Make them explain their position to you before you explain yours. Chances are they'll cite this next myth as "proof".   (the eating the stomach contents myth posted prior to this one)



All the myths are listed here, read it or not, I don't care. Feed, poison, use chemicals however you see fit.  If you think the body needs that much help then support it and suppress it and let other means you inject, apply, or let it consume, fix it the problems  Smiley

  http://rawfed.com/myths/


Again, post from a nonbiased source.  You are regurgitating the biased opinions of others with your same biased ideas.  Unfortunately, you are wrong......  

Let me try this a different way because I've got a textbook chapter to finish this afternoon and I don't have time to put up references for everything.  If you break it down to the simplest of means you yourself have said that a dog can survive on plant material in repeated posts.  That fact alone makes them an omnivore or a herbivore.  A true carnivore---say a cornsnake as an example or if you want a mammalian example an ocelot will die if its feed a plant only diet.  They have absolutely no digestive capacity for plant materials.   Canids have some digestive capacity--thus making them an omnivore---look at the example of plant based dog foods with the corn, starches, and other plant materials you like to harp about.  Dogs live on these all over the world.  

Now, if dogs have a hindgut or rumen, then they'd be a strict herbivore, not an omnivore.  They don't so that means they are most likely an omnivore.  

Dogs can also survive on a meat diet---the apparently horrible (I'm being sarcastic) diet that you are feeding your own dogs is a testiment to this.   They may not be thriving, but they have the capacity to survive on it.   This means they are either a carnivore or an omnivore.  If you feed a herbivore a meat only diet, they will die.  Green Iguanas are the classic example of this.   That and the rabbit that I had as a patient that the owner fed Kentucky Fried Chicken too on a regular basis.  Herbivores cannot live on meat only diets, only carnivores and omnivores can.  

Ok let's put two and two togehter.......  a dog can eat plant material in commercial dog food.... AND A dog can eat a "meat only diet".... both dogs eating such a diet live an average lifespan of 12-15 years.... mmmmmm hmmmm .  That means a dog can eat both plants and meat without dying immediately.  If you feed a carnivore plants, it will die in a very short time frame.  IF you feed a herbivore meat, it will die in a very short time frame. That means they are an omnivore.  

You yourself have proven yourself wrong with your own posts.    
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!