Permalink Reply by Beth on November 16, 2010 at 7:10am
Haven't had a chance to read it all, but thank you! I have noted that many zoos feed wolves kibble, even though most large cats are fed primarily raw meat.
My favorite response is actually a cartoon from the New Yorker that I have hung on the fridge. I'm paraphrasing, but it's two guys sitting cross-legged around a fire, inside a cave, clearly "primitive" and one says "I tell you, Hal, something's wrong. We get lots of clean air and exercise, our air is clean, our water is pure, and we eat nothing but organic free-range food, yet none of us lives past 30."
Wild animals live short, harsh lives and many have nutritional deficiencies and heavy parasite loads.
The diet of the wild wolf is mostly meat, but first dogs aren't wolves. Secondly, wolves travel dozens of miles a day, sleep out in the elements, carry lots of parasites, and are usually either pregnant, nursing, or helping to feed a not-quite-mature litter of pups or young adults who are poor hunters.
They need lots of energy-dense food just to survive for the short time that they typically do.
Permalink Reply by Beth on November 16, 2010 at 7:15am
Also wanted to add that Delta Society no longer allows raw-fed dogs to go on therapy visits, because of apparent increases in the shedding of some pathogenic bacteria, in both feces and saliva.
They probably just want to avoid any and all possibility of law suits. Basically if you don't eat dog poo, you don't get bacteria from them. What goes in the mouth doesn't linger because dogs aren't people and they have different saliva meant to kill pathogens. I recall a time when everyone thought AIDS patients were seething volcanos of pathogens who could infect you by being near you.
Permalink Reply by Beth on November 16, 2010 at 3:59pm
Delta Society gives abstracts of the studies that they used to reach the decision. They are primarily concerned with the well-being of the often immune-compromised patients the dogs are visiting.
If your dog is eating raw food, it will have some bacteria on its body; the dog does not sanitize itself after every meal.
If people are going to feed raw, that's fine if it works for them. Anyone making any feeding choice, though, should look at the documented risks associated with that food.
While I am now more knowledgeable, I have to admit that my first two dogs lived to 14 being fed only Kibbles N Bits (I thought it looked healthy with all those pretty ingredients). I wonder if the fact that they had regular vet visits, were kept parasite free and I was meticulous about their weight had more to do with it than their diet.
I tried raw with Rufus, but thought his coat didn't look as good as it does on Blue Buffalo or Wellness, both of which I use these days.
Permalink Reply by Beth on November 16, 2010 at 10:18am
I had a cat that made it to nearly 17 on Friskies. She was healthy and active until near the very end, when she succumbed to cancer. Her kidney function was excellent and other than a cough when we moved into a new house (I think it was the off-gasing from the wood floors and trim stain), she was never sick a day in her life.
I don't think the posters' intentions were to suggest that a kibble based-diet is best. They were merely offering anecdotes to suggest that the relationship between health and diet is complex and difficult to simplify in a straightforward equation. Raw = good; Kibble = bad is not a helpful equation that takes into account the variation of things like physical activity, environmental factors and genetics, which also affect overall health.
Permalink Reply by Beth on November 16, 2010 at 4:42pm
Thanks! Yes, that was where I was getting. I do NOT feed Friskies to my new cat. She gets a mix of Iam's kibble and canned from Blue Buffalo, Innova, Wellness (which she actually doesn't like), and a few other companies along with an occasional treat of sardines or canned salmon or scrambled egg.