SHERRY DAVIS: Feeding dogs and the raw food debate
BY SHERRY DAVIS, Contributing columnist | Sunday, Aug 01 2010 12:00 PM
Last Updated Sunday, Aug 01 2010 12:00 PM
There's a bitter war going on out there.
But not one being fought with tanks and Blackhawk helicopters.
The troops in this war are armed with chicken carcasses and pigs' feet, and they're going up against the billion-dollar pet food industry.
The American Pet Products Association reports that $45.5 billion was spent on U.S. pets in 2009. A total of $17.56 billion of that amount was spent on food.
Estimates for 2010 are $47.7 billion, with $18.28 billion of that spent on food.
More than a decade ago, the term BARF was coined, referring to the "Bones and Raw Food" diet. Today it stands for feeding "Biologically Appropriate Raw Food."
Owners who insist that commercial foods are harmful to our dogs and have switched to a raw diet give the following reasons:
* A "natural" food cannot be scooped out of a bag.
* A raw diet is what our dogs' wild ancestors ate, and pet food companies and the majority of veterinarians do not want you to feed a raw diet because it affects their profits.
* Dogs are carnivores and do not need fruit or vegetables in their diets.
* Their digestive systems cannot cope with grains, which are the biggest source of allergies.
* Feeding raw simulates the diet of wild dogs, coyotes and wolves.
* Enzymes and amino acids are not destroyed or altered by cooking.
* Raw food contains no preservatives, chemicals or dyes.
* Dogs have healthier coats, and no doggy odor.
* Dogs have fresher breath and cleaner teeth that never require professional cleaning.
* There is less stool production and stools dry up and crumble into dust.
* Puppies develop at an appropriate rate.
* Chewing bones develops proper jaw, neck and shoulder muscles, and there is little, if any, danger in eating uncooked bones.
* Dogs have better energy.
* Allergies disappear in dogs previously fed commercial diets.
* Arthritis disappears.
* Females have easier pregnancies, with healthier and bigger litters and fewer lost puppies.
* Healthy dogs can handle salmonella or E. coli bacteria without risk.
* Food costs less, and healthier dogs require fewer vet visits.
* Dogs live longer.
Proponents of raw food diets further state that most veterinarians are severely lacking in knowledge on dog nutrition, and the only education they get on the topic comes from reps of large dog food companies who donate large sums of money to veterinary colleges.
They go on to say that most veterinarians advise their clients against feeding raw diets because pet food sales represent a large part of their income, but a large percentage of vets have become "enlightened" to its long-term benefits and are now singing its praises and encouraging their colleagues to change their views on feeding practices.
Advocates insist there has been no known incidence of humans infected with salmonella by dogs fed a raw food diet.
***
There are many who not only dispute the claim that dogs do better on raw diets, but also feel that feeding raw meat and bones can pose a significant risk.
Following a study comparing well-researched and balanced raw meat diets with high-quality commercial diets, an article in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association (March 2001) advised that "there are clearly nutritional and health risks associated with feeding raw food diets. All the diets tested had nutrient deficiencies or excesses that could cause serious health problems when used in a long-term feeding program."
There have been no clinical trials done providing hard evidence that feeding a raw meat diet is better for dogs, only unsubstantiated claims by individuals.
They go on to say raw food diets are dangerous for many reasons:
* Raw meat diets can cause nutritional imbalances; high-quality pet food is already balanced for all life stages and health conditions.
* Raw bones can splinter or fracture and become lodged in the throat or cause intestinal perforations or obstructions.
* Aggressive chewing of bones can cause dental fractures.
* Bacterial contamination is a risk and can cause persistent diarrhea.
* Raw food diets are ill-advised for immune-compromised dogs.
* Severe illness can result from improper storage, temperature control,. and thawing practices.
* Ingestion of parasitic organisms.
* Pathogens such as E coli, clostridium and campylobactor.
Because of the potential animal and human health risks, veterinary organizations and public health agencies believe that the risks inherent in raw feeding outweigh the purported benefits.
In 2008, a one-year study was done in Canada to evaluate the risks of shedding of salmonella and other potential pathogens by therapy dogs fed raw diets. Twenty percent of the tested dogs consumed raw meat during the study period, and 61 percent of that group were found to be shedding salmonella through nasal/fecal specimens collected as opposed to 8 percent in the dogs not fed raw meat. The findings caused the authors of the study (Lefebvre LK, Reid-Smith R, Boerlin P, Weese JS.) to recommend raw meat diets not be consumed by animal-assisted interventions (therapy dogs) due to the potential human health risk, especially expressing caution for those immunocompromised or at risk for infection.
From the Delta Society's "Raw Protein Diet Policy," updated July 9, 2010: "After careful consideration of known scientific facts, and on the unanimous advice of the Delta Society Advisory Group, who reviewed and took under advisement recommendations made by experts in animal-assisted interventions, infection control, public health and veterinary medicine from Canada and the United States, the Board of Directors voted to preclude animals eating raw protein foods from participating in Delta Society's Pet Partners program. This was a phased program beginning in mid-May, with complete compliance structured to be in place by June 30, 2010. This policy affects all Pet Partners regardless of species or breed."
It should be noted that despite public distrust of big business, pet food companies donate millions of dollars each year for research dedicated to fighting canine disease, rescue and adoption programs, assistance dog organizations and many others.
So ... there's the case for both sides. Your dog, your choice.
-- Sherry Davis is a dog trainer/owner of CSI 4 K9s. E-mail her at doglady@bakersfield.com. These are her opinions and not necessarily those of The Californian.