Feeding for Ultimate Health...

[Gypsy Wolf]

Though dogs and wolves are the same species, dogs are technically a sub-species. A sub species that evolved eating our refuse, scavenging carcasses and latrine areas.
If the raw folks REALLY want to get back to basics - to the food that dogs evolved on, they would take them to the local dump. That's what dogs evolved eating.
Instead raw folks use pristine cuts of meat (in the wild, dogs eat the diseased, dying or very young prey, rife with worms), etc.... the real wild diet includes DUNG, hair, hide, antlers, developing eggs, rotten fruit, entire digestive tracts of large prey animals or the ENTIRE small prey animal, beaks, feathers, feet... they eat MAYBE once or twice a week. Real wild dogs and wolves do not have their hips checked. They have worms of all kinds. Intestinal, heart, et al. They are not expected to exceed 5 years, if they are lucky.
We have created a sub-species far removed from the wolf and I do not think there is any way to really feed dogs what they evolved eating. And feeding them like wolves is not necessarily in their best interests either. Wolves have a short life-span and not necessarily the best health.
Dog food companies have done tons of research to find out what the minimum requirements are. Again, I have not seen any long-term studies done on raw diets or any comparing them to commercial diets. Instead there are a ton of different raw schools of thought - as well as there are a ton of different commercial dog food recipes.
The lifespan and general health of wild dogs doesn't impress me as something to strive for. I want my dog worm-free and to live a long life. Certainly dogs nowadays greatly outlive their predecessors.
The folks that bash kibble ironically bash some of the "bad fillers" when, in reality, that's exactly what a dog would be eating in the wild - from feet to beaks to hair and feathers - and scavenging the dead, diseased and dying animals... so perhaps what goes into kibble *IS* closer to what dogs evolved eating than an "organic, grass-fed raw diet".....

[Gypsy Wolf]

Also, if I were so inclined, I can find studies that find the opposite conclusions of the ones you've quoted. Statistics are easily manipulated to support a point of view.
I am simply going on what I have personally seen in 17 years of dogs - my own, my friends' dogs, etc. That said, another point is EVERY DOG IS DIFFERENT so their metabolism is different too. Some dogs do better on one diet over another. I have tried just about every premium food on the market (as well as having tried raw back 10 years ago for about a year) and there are some whose recipe I like better but the bottom line is how my dogs do on the diet - it might be a better food according to experts, but if my dogs do not do well on it, it's worthless to me.
So I go by their coat, stool, energy level, muscle tone, mucous membranes, breath, scent and tartar build-up, if any. So far I have kept coming back to Royal Canin formulas time and time again as my dogs seem to do the best on it overall. I like Taste of the Wild's recipe, though, so I use that, too. I do not ascribe to feeding a dog just one kibble, I think that leads to potential gaps in nutrition.
And though some folks may say that large breed puppy food is OK, I am not willing to take that chance - I've been safe with what I've done so far and I am satisfied with that. I would feel so stupid if I tried a puppy formula and my dog came up with Pano - because I knew better!
So I am slow to change what I think is working just fine. If I see good reason to, I have no problem doing it, but otherwise I will stick with what works for my guys.

[yukidomari]

Raw asides, you asked for an opinion, I provided one, with studies.

Wolves have a short life-span in the wild due to factors beyond diet.. ask zoos and/or zookeepers.

Even if you don't trust raw, kibble is nothing more than more-convenient home-cooked (which people do too & that's cool too). And if you read the guaranteed analysis for kibble, you can match vitamin level for vitamin level, protein level for protein level, and mineral for mineral if you were to research and balance a raw diet. The USDA site provides nutrient breakdowns on all sorts of meats & cuts. Personally I don't need a study to show that eating fresh food (cooked or otherwise) is better than eating a cereal when done right.

Either way, the sources I posted apply to kibble & otherwise so there's no reason not to read them if you actually want to know more about current studies in feeding dogs.

(just read your most recent post - please post sources, I'd like to read it)

[Gypsy Wolf]

I did say "if I were so inclined" which I am not... takes too much work to dredge up other veterinarian's articles manipulating data to their point of view - plus, as I mentioned, a lot of it is my own experience and other dog friends' experiences that have influenced my decision.
And yes, I do want to know what others feed, whether it is raw or not, but I did not want a "raw vs kibble" debate - I think each camp is quite entrenched in their opinion, though I did want to point out that unless you are taking your dog to the city dump, it is not eating what it's ancestors did.
That's where I take exception to the argument that it's "better because it's more natural"...
I was totally grossed out by Luna eating all the sheep poo, she will also try to eat dead critters she finds (the deader, the better) but dogs have been DOMESTICATED... I don't want her worm-ridden and trying to kiss me with poo in her teeth.
For a semester in college I studied coyotes on Mount Desert Island in Maine. They ate anything, of course, and their scat was typically what we dog owners would term "blow-out diarrhea"... can't imagine I would want to mimic that diet and deal with the consequences in an urban environment.
But I do like a lively discussion and other people's take on the topic, and wonder if the raw folks encourage their dogs to eat poo like in the wild.

[yukidomari]

Dogs are opportunistic eaters - pretty much they'll eat anything even slightly edible, poop & antifreeze alike.

I don't think either poop OR antifreeze is optimal to their diet, although they will eat both. I would refrain from feeding the dog antifreeze, JMHO.

What they will eat and what they are physically built for are different, of course.

Either way, even when we fed kibble, we did not feed, say, Ol' Roy, even though they passed the same AAFCO standards as TOTW or otherwise. It is up to the human to read the ingredient label and pick the one most biologically appropriate.

A lot of us raw feeders do feed what is considered .. well, not optimal meat. We do accept road kill from wildlife services, as well as years old freezer burnt meat as freecycle. Dingos and other feral dogs will scavenge, they will also hunt & eat fresh meat.

Again RAW ASIDES, at the very least you should realize that protein level is not a concern when feeding dogs.. there is no safe upper limit when it comes to that. As well as safe calcium/phosphorus.. which adult food really is not suitable for.

[Gypsy Wolf]

Here's a Veterinarian who thinks it's better for your dog to eat poo and dead carcasses than a raw diet...
<shrug>
Not that I am particularly impressed by his opinion, as I think a healthy immune system and the stomach's hydrochloric acid should be sufficient to the task, but...
http://www.therapydogs.org/documents...Eat%20Poop.pdf

[yukidomari]

That's an article, but it cites no actual study. Yeah, dogs shed Salmonella et al in their feces on raw, but so do dogs on kibble.
BTW many of those links I posted are from one of those large food companies - Eukanuba, to be exact.

[Gypsy Wolf]

I do also remember reading that there certainly *IS* such thing as too much protein... just anecdotally, as a Vet Tech (I'll see if I can find any articles on it), high protein was always taken into account when it came to renal issues and Pano, among other things... Interestingly, a few years ago, there was quite a difference of opinion in "Senior" diet recipes - some insisted on lower protein due to it's affect on aging kidneys, stone formation, etc. - particularly in breeds prone to it like Dalmatians, where others promoted the idea of higher protein as older dogs have a tougher time assimilating protein (and their muscles get all stringy)...
And in the case of Dalmatians, for instance, Dal folks insist on low Protein diets as 100% of Dals have a uric acid production defect and protein in the diet ends up as sludge and then stones in the bladder. The lower the protein, the better, and most Dal folks I know prefer NON-ANIMAL protein sources, saying that in their experience, vegetarian diets seem to be better when it comes to the Uric Acid issue....
As an aside, the Dal folks DID introduce an English Pointer into select lines about 35 years ago (the Back Cross project) to introduce normal uric acid production genetics - they are not "recognized" by AKC even though they are 99.99% pure Dalmatian at this point - the purists consider them "mixes"... even though they are the only way to bring in the genetics to end the uric acid defect... talk about shooting yourself in the foot...

[yukidomari]

Re: renal failure & seniors - that was addressed in the UPenn article I posted already.


And Dals.. again, it's not protein level, but rather it's purines. Just that purines are extremely high in things like organ meats, commonly in high protein diets. So, no, our Dal friends cannot feed organs regularly as other raw feeders do. (Dal raw feeders are heavy on the white meat - low in purines - and substitute organs with supplemental vegetable shakes).


Dal breeders who don't believe in the backcross project.. sad... we know of the backcross project & friends with Dals have met dogs out of the backcross project and can't tell that they are mixed at all.

[Gypsy Wolf]

Again, my own anecdotal experience really does influence me more than a study. You know that old saying "should I believe you or my lying eyes?"...
I have a dog friend with both "pure" and BC Dals - no difference, well, actually, I think the BC Dals she has have better markings, technically, than the "pure" ones...
That's one thing about having a limited genepool that is worrisome. Nutrition aside, our basic building blocks are the genetics.
And as far as food goes, really - I use premium foods. I know lots of folks who have dogs with food allergies, intolerances, etc...
Not that I recommend brands like Ol' Roy, but I don't like to see food allergies/intolerances as "acceptable." A dog really should be able to eat anything. "Soy" is not a four-letter word! I don't like the idea of breeding dogs with such issues - immune-related, no doubt.
There are some recipes I wouldn't feed my dogs, but I also would be very wary of keeping dogs that need specialized diets in the gene pool. No better than a hothouse flower!
Certainly a wild dog/wolf with a food allergy would be weeded out of the gene pool...