Antler chews for dogs

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Andreas Ege — Fri, 24 Jul 2020 23:11:45 GMT

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/224500#224500"]Is it?[/quote]

It is.

That is, unless organisations like WSAVA ["Are bones and raw meat beneficial for my pet’s dental health? No. Dogs do like to chew, but aside from the risk of bacterial contamination on raw bones, hard bones can fracture teeth and if ingested whole or in shards can cause obstructions and perforations anywhere along the gastrointestinal tract. Additionally, while teeth may appear cleaner and have less tartar build-up when pets are fed bones or collagen chews, there is no difference in the presence of gum disease between dogs fed raw meat and bones and those fed more conventional dry and canned diets." (https://wsava.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Frequently-Asked-Questions-and-Myths.pdf)], AVMA ["Bones or bone fragments in some raw diets can result in intestinal obstruction or perforation, gastroenteritis and fractured teeth." (https://www.avma.org/raw-pet-foods-and-avmas-policy-faq)] or practices like Dentalvets ["that bones and the like "naturally clean teeth" have no foundation in fact and are simply there to sell."

"These can be bones that have been cleaned up in some way or other objects, such as antlers or very hard nylon bones. None of these items we would consider safe and all of them result in fractured teeth that are referred to us for treatment."

(https://weu-az-web-cdnep.azureedge.net/mediacontainer/medialibraries/dentalvets/documents/toys_for_dogs_from_a_dental_perspective.pdf)]

and the american FDA ["No Bones About It: Bones are Unsafe for Your Dog" (https://weu-az-web-cdnep.azureedge.net/mediacontainer/medialibraries/dentalvets/documents/fda_bonesbreakteeth.pdf) as linked by Dentalvets] do not use experts/ specialists to draw up their recommendations.

[quote userid="2131" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/224500#224500"]And then "bones" can mean all sorts of different things, between chicken wing and bull femur, could be raw, raw meaty, boiled, roasted, all sorts of things.[/quote]Indeed. And imo that is very important. But as far as I am aware, none of the papers usually cited for the danger of bones had a look into what sort of bone it was that caused the problem or how it was prepared. Because, obviously, it was a bone. The recommendations above certainly don't differentiate.

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Fri, 24 Jul 2020 16:29:05 GMT

[quote userid="13609" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/224486#224486"]yet the expert advise still is that bones are evil.[/quote]

Is it?

And then "bones" can mean all sorts of different things, between chicken wing and bull femur, could be raw, raw meaty, boiled, roasted, all sorts of things.

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Andreas Ege — Fri, 24 Jul 2020 11:27:38 GMT

[quote userid="4367" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/223957#223957"]Why eat a bone? they are not great nutirionally and I'm fairly certain wolves don't actively eat proper solid bits either - any papers on this? [/quote]

Actually, wolves do. Depending on circumstance (mainly prey availability/ vulnerability) wolves eat pretty much everything but gut contents. More likely with smaller prey but, especially in winter or when food is scarce, also larger prey (Wolves - Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation, L. David Mech and Luigi Boitani, 2003):

"Small preay, up to the siye of a 20kg (...) Researchers may find nothing at all remaining (...) even from a 150kg moose calf in winter."

"Sometimes the rumen contents, with or without the surrounding rumen, freeze and become one of the few signs left of a kill in winter."

"Hide and bones are the final protions of a prey carcass to be consumed."

Why? Guess they are better than nothing, they do contain fat (i.e. energy) and some protein as well as minerals (obviously, mainly calcium, which the rest of the carcass probably wouldn't provide enough of, but also phosphorous and some trace minerals).

In addition to the paper your citing (which I haven't read yet), there's quite a few more:

Craniomandibular Trauma and Tooth loss in northern dogs and wolves: implications for the archaeological study of dog husbandry and domestication
Losey at al 2014
"This paper examines tooth loss, tooth fracture, enamel hypoplasia, and cranial trauma in a large sample of historic dog and wolf remains from North America and Northern Russia. The data indicate that the dogs more commonly experienced tooth loss and tooth fracture than the wolves, despite reportedly being fed mostly soft foods such as blubber and fish."

Incidence of tooth breakage among large, predatory animals
van Valkenburgh, 1988
and
Costs of carnivory: tooth fracture in Pleistocene and Recent carnivorans
van Valkenburgh, 2009
"It might be expected that the hypercarnivores would tend to break their teeth more often than the more omnivorous taxa because they encounter more bone but this was not the case. (...) Notably, red foxes and grey foxes, both omnivorous, had higher rates of tooth fracture than any felid species sampled." (and, excluding incisors, red foxes had a higher rate than wolves).
Generally suggests a higher incidence in dental fractures the harder the diet is.
Seems to me a fairly rough generalization and data between both studies is not fully consistent, e.g. in the 1988 study wolves had a higher incidence of dental fractures than hyenas while in the 2009 study at least some hyenas had a higher rate of dental fractures. Excluding incisors, two species of hyena had a higher rate and even the red fox had a higher rate of dental fractures than wolves. There also seems to be a tentative sex predisposition for dental fractures in females, particularly lions (but not wolves), though this seems to be a collection bias.
Also, the 1988 study found that the most likely teeth fractured were canines, which actually makes sense as they probably experience the strongest and most unpredictable forces while catching prey compared to (pre-)molars used for chewing.
Wolves have higher rate of dental wear than wild dogs (Losey et al above found the opposite...), so they argue that wolves eat more bones as an explanation. In the 2009 paper though red foxes have a higher rate of wear/ fractures than wolves and I am pretty convinced that foxes eat less bones (or at least, way weaker bones) than wolves, which they don't discuss at all.
For me, those papers show that a) catching prey is more dangerous for canines than chewing bones is for other teeth and b) that there is a tendancy of having a higher rate of fractures/ wear in animals eating hard stuff but that it is only a very rough generalization with a fair amount of exceptions, which makes it difficult to predict how much at risk an individual species is at suffering that problem.

Foraging and feeding ecology of the Gray Wolf (Canis lupus): lessons from Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming, USA
Stahler et al, 2006
"Wolves in YNP hunt in packs and, upon a successful kill, share in the evisceration and consumption of highly nutritious organs first, followed by major muscle tissue, and eventually bone and hide. Wolves are adapted to a feast-or-famine foraging pattern, and YNP packs typically kill and consume an elk every 2-3 d. However, wolves in YNP have gone without fresh meat for several weeks by scavenging off old carcasses that consist mostly of bone and hide."

Possibly (can't remember details of paper):
Oral and dental conditions in adult african wild dog skulls
Steenkamp et al, 1999
"Although other reports suggest that captive African wild dogs suffer more extensively from dental disease than those in the wild, we conclude that these wild carnivores suffer from the same oral diseases as their domestic relatives, suggesting that a natural diet does not protect against these diseases."

positive about feeding bones:
Control of dental calculus in experimental beagles
Brown & Park, 1968
"No harmful effects of feeding oxtails have been observed in the colony of 200 dogs after more than 6 years."

Raw beef bones as chewing items to reduce dental calculus in Beagle dogs
Marx et al, 2016
"No complications such as tooth fractures, pieces of bone stuck between teeth or intestinal obstructions were observed during the studies. Chewing raw bovine bones was an effective method of removing dental calculus in dogs. The SB bones removed dental calculus more efficiently in the short term."

Evaluation of teeth injuries in Beagle dogs caused by autoclaved beef bones used as a chewing item to remove dental calculus
Pinto et al, 2020
"Bones were highly effective for DC removal and gingival inflammation reduction. Despite the hardness of bones, no lesions or teeth root and enamel fracture, or esophageal or intestinal obstructions - complications related to bone ingestion were noted."

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Andreas Ege — Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:43:20 GMT

[quote userid="5012" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/224081#224081"] including recognised specialists and renowned experts in their field, who are very likely to be familiar with the most up to date research. I tend to listen to what they say and take it onboard [/quote]

I do as well, at least as long as I haven't looked at the evidence myself. Unfortunately, specialists and experts are as likely as us being biased and are, not too uncommonly, wrong. Bones being a point in case: there's 3 scientific papers now that show bones are effective as dental prophylaxis and not likely to pose problems, I can not find one other paper specfically examining the risks of bones ( retrospective studies showing that from x dogs with oesphagial obstruction, y had eaten bones only tells me it can happen, but it doesn't tell me how high that risk is, as Beats points out), yet the expert advise still is that bones are evil.

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Iain Richards — Mon, 13 Jul 2020 09:35:53 GMT

I know raw is a fad, presumably this is a staple diet?

RE: Antler chews for dogs

David Mills — Sun, 12 Jul 2020 15:36:43 GMT

It had eaten a stapler?

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Catherine Churchill — Sun, 12 Jul 2020 12:05:09 GMT

Just to add to the antler danger debate pulled this from a dogs stomach last weekend. Just glad it didn't get stuck in the oesophagus

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Iain Richards — Mon, 06 Jul 2020 07:57:20 GMT

[quote userid="12930" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/224080#224080"]I'll get the ball rolling with a wild guess at 20 out of 1000 dogs regularly getting antler chews experiencing a resultant tooth fracture?[/quote]

While agreeing that one needs to know figures to quantify risk, in this case it's relatively unimportant. The antler is being presented as a marketing ploy and isn't something that would be a routine part of an animal's diet or behaviour. So the absolute number of fractures is more important than the number per antler

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Clive Ansell — Sun, 05 Jul 2020 13:28:23 GMT

We have the consensus of 4 dentists on here, including recognised specialists and renowned experts in their field, who are very likely to be familiar with the most up to date research. I tend to listen to what they say and take it onboard

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Beats — Sun, 05 Jul 2020 11:44:48 GMT

[quote userid="3341" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/224058#224058"]The science is pretty clear on the subject of hard chews & the dangers of tooth fractures.[/quote]

Is it though?

All we seem to know is that there is an increased risk of tooth fractures with hard chews.

Do we know the magnitude of that risk? i.e. of 1000 dogs regularly given hard chews, how many get a resulting tooth fracture?

If we have a rough idea of number of quantifiable data such as number of antler chews sold in area [hard to do get this data though? perhaps would need survey of dog owners at a vet clinic] and number of dogs seen with tooth slab fractures could we make a rough estimate on this? The number of slab fractures resulting without a figure on how many dogs were using them could suffice if the number of cases was high enough but I doubt it is in this case in which case need a prevalence of use of antlers also?

If 999 out of 1000 dogs using these regularly get tooth fractures then I'm pretty sure evidence substantiating this would get them banned. Even 500 out of 1000 should do that easily.

If 1 out of 1000 then that's not something i would consider particularly risky?

Is there reliable science to give a decent estimate of risk of tooth fracture?

If there is not pretty clear science on this, then the next best would be estimate by experience in which case: what would contributors estimate this risk to be eg as how many out of 1000 dogs regularly using antler chews gets a resultant tooth fracture? Simply concluding that the risk is higher is meaningless unless we know what the actual risk is (doubling the risk of lifetime tooth fracture would be of little concern if the lifetime risk of tooth fracture was only 0.1% for instance). [although if there are better products without this or alternative risks, then even a low risk is an argument against.]

I'll get the ball rolling with a wild guess at 20 out of 1000 dogs regularly getting antler chews experiencing a resultant tooth fracture?

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Kate Richardson — Sun, 05 Jul 2020 09:16:51 GMT

I’m sure you’ll find something safer that they love just as much!

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Derek Lyon — Sun, 05 Jul 2020 09:12:57 GMT

Thank you all. Antler chews now picked up!!

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Bob Partridge — Sat, 04 Jul 2020 11:38:22 GMT

We all have the right to make choices.

But I guess that has to be tempered by a couple of things

1) We are making choices for our pets - who don't have the knowledge that we have gained

2) We are seen as examples to our clients. What we do (or advise) - they are generally likely to copy

The science is pretty clear on the subject of hard chews & the dangers of tooth fractures. We can ignore the science - or be prepared to set up our own studies to challenge the evidence.

The advice I give to clients is truly a "rule of thumb" - if you can't indent a chew with your thumbnail - it is probably too hard.

Bob

RE: Antler chews for dogs

bevs2251 — Fri, 03 Jul 2020 23:52:01 GMT

Saw a young year old Labrador for annual vaccination that was given antlers. Had worn off all the enamel on its carnassial teeth - slab fracture waiting to happen. Advised not to give these - too hard. Plenty of other options. Seems that antler and goat horns for dogs has taken off here in Australia as well.

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Norman Johnston — Fri, 03 Jul 2020 21:40:55 GMT

Brave of you to say so.

The most resistance I ever get from delivering the science on hard chews is at regional meetings. Our profession seems reluctant to listen to the changing evidence.

RE: Antler chews for dogs

vetbl.locum — Fri, 03 Jul 2020 18:58:49 GMT

[quote userid="2150" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/224024#224024"]Thank you to all who replied. Much appreciated. Consensus obviously is that antler chews are a no no. Despite that advice our 2 dogs love them and have perfect teeth, [/quote]

Just wondering and in no way meant as criticism

You asked a question, received fairly consistent expert advice, yet choose to reject it.

Is this a sign of Gove,s influence that we have had enough of experts? Brexit hangover?

Rgds

PS On reflection there has always been clients who are like that ...........

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Norman Johnston — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 14:53:29 GMT

Derek. Think of them as Russian roulette. You give him the gun and you can’t be sure if there is one up the spout

One if these days it’ll go bad

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Iain Richards — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 14:33:27 GMT

[quote userid="2150" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/224024#224024"]Despite that advice our 2 dogs love them and have perfect teeth,[/quote]

for now.....!!

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Derek Lyon — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 14:28:25 GMT

Thanks Kate. Yes will use them in moderation. One of our dogs is 7 and has beautiful teeth. I examine them everyday.

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Kate Richardson — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 13:22:53 GMT

Derek Lyon so curious- are you going to continue them even though you now know more about the risk of fractures?

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Derek Lyon — Thu, 02 Jul 2020 10:36:37 GMT

Thank you to all who replied. Much appreciated. Consensus obviously is that antler chews are a no no. Despite that advice our 2 dogs love them and have perfect teeth, Thanks again. Derek.

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 01 Jul 2020 13:51:49 GMT

[quote userid="12930" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/223950#223950"]So setting aside antlers as an option, what is/are the best options (specific named products ideally) for chew toys for dogs to satisfy their chewing time that don't get chewed to bits by the average "mouthy" dog quickly (thus leading to boredom) or risk resulting in GI obstruction.[/quote]

Rope "bones".

Rubber things if you like branded products.

Pig or ox ears.

Rawhide chews.

(I'm going to get criticised for this, I just know it )

And for the tough-guy chewer, BIG bones of round cross section, ox femur for example. The idea is that the dog gnaws the side of it without getting it between the cusps of the teeth. Possibly there's a slightly increased risk , but it's better than chewing the plaster off the wall, followed by the stone beneath.

Incidental anecdote. I once visited a house with several dogs. The owner was quite a skilled handyman. After treating my patient, I was admiring the kitchen chairs, whose legs were all encased in heavy copper tubing. Oh, said the owner, that's not for decorative effect, it's to stop him – indicating a small elderly Jack Russell – from destroying the chairs.

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Lucy Fleming — Tue, 30 Jun 2020 12:47:54 GMT

[quote userid="4367" url="~/001/veterinary-clinical/small-animal/dentistry/f/discussions/29184/antler-chews-for-dogs/223957#223957"]The raw food types will claim dogs have evolved to eat bones. I'm unconvinced. Why eat a bone?[/quote]

Also, wild canids and felids suffer from tooth fractures as well. They carry on and eat because, if they don't, they die.

(There was a small Australian study some years back that compared euthanased feral cats (subsisting on a "natural" diet of small rodents and reptiles etc) and owned cats, which I believe demonstrated lower calculus scores, but not much difference in dental health apart from that. Essentially raw fed pet teeth may "look" cleaner but possibly not be any healthier?)

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Iain Richards — Tue, 30 Jun 2020 10:26:29 GMT

The raw food types will claim dogs have evolved to eat bones. I'm unconvinced. Why eat a bone? they are not great nutirionally and I'm fairly certain wolves don't actively eat proper solid bits either - any papers on this? (Becuase I'm being lazy and not searching myself)

OH, couldn't resist: https://elifesciences.org/articles/48628 It seems that tooth fracture goes up with lowere prey availability so more of the carcass is consumed. WHich makes sense

RE: Antler chews for dogs

Norman Johnston — Tue, 30 Jun 2020 09:59:50 GMT

Anything that has “give” in it when the dogs bites down. The tooth has to enter the object by 3-4mm to avoid fracture. So rubber and rope good.