Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Niall Taylor — Fri, 10 May 2019 22:01:49 GMT

I wonder which gold standard they regard as the gold standard?

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Fri, 10 May 2019 21:32:48 GMT

Quote:

"Based on evidence from the wider nutritional literature, the RFVS defines the gold standard diet for pets as:

The gold standard diet is as close to the evolutionary diet of dogs and cats as is practically possible, is made from fresh frozen raw meaty bones, meats, organ meats, fruits and vegetables, minimally processed by mincing and freezing. The diet contains no added synthetic supplements, additives or preservatives."

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Niall Taylor — Fri, 10 May 2019 20:55:29 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]Er, no it doesn't. I have just looked[/quote]

From their position statement:

"In a biologically ideal world every hunting carnivore would be fed on live prey. This is the gold standard"

Niall

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Fri, 10 May 2019 17:57:24 GMT

[quote user="Phil Hyde"] Evolution always produces compromise.[/quote]

Yes of course. We've been here before.

[quote user="Phil Hyde"]The point of the photos is to show the immense amount of tooth disease apparent in 5 to 7 year old lions DESPITE all the bones they chew on.[/quote]

I don't think anyone is suggesting that chewing on bones will protect the canine teeth or incisors from physical injury? Hence the irrelevance.

You can't see the state of periodontal health in these pictures, except round those fractured teeth.

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]As we don't advocate feeding either dogs or cats by providing a live zebra once a fortnight, it's all a bit irrelevant[/quote]

The raw feeding veterinary society regard exactly that as 'gold standard'. Have a look at their position statement:

https://rfvs.info/

Niall

[/quote]

Er, no it doesn't. I have just looked.

I hold no brief for the RFVS, I don't actively promote raw feeding but I won't condemn it either. I'm here to tell you that manufacured dog and cat foods, whatever they are, do sweet Fanny Adams for periodontal health. Not saying that raw food does any better though there is a little bit of research in dogs in its favour.

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Phil Hyde — Fri, 10 May 2019 17:28:39 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]The lions in the second and third pictures almost certainly got their teeth broken by a kick from a prey animal. As we don't advocate feeding either dogs or cats by providing a live zebra once a fortnight, it's all a bit irrelevant.[/quote]

Sorry, no. The point of the photos is to show the immense amount of tooth disease apparent in 5 to 7 year old lions DESPITE all the bones they chew on. In other words, natural does not equal best. Evolution always produces compromise.

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Robert FalconerTaylor — Fri, 10 May 2019 17:23:54 GMT

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]

The raw feeding veterinary society regard exactly that as 'gold standard'.

https://rfvs.info/

Niall

[/quote]

It's a shame RFVS are not more like BVDA etc. - an eduation resource rather than an agenda. It must be a big put-off to vets/vet nurses so rather defeats it's own objective. Whatever happened to free choice? Do we all really need converting to the Gospel according to Raw? Bit like following the shoe in Life of Brian!

From RFVS -

"Please join. We need funds to drive the raw feeding campaign forward....

...Together we can be the change."

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Niall Taylor — Fri, 10 May 2019 16:11:21 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]As we don't advocate feeding either dogs or cats by providing a live zebra once a fortnight, it's all a bit irrelevant[/quote]

The raw feeding veterinary society regard exactly that as 'gold standard'. Have a look at their position statement:

https://rfvs.info/

Niall

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Lucy Fleming — Fri, 10 May 2019 16:04:29 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]Are any "zoo" carnivores fed kibble or dried food?[/quote]

I think generally more of a 'prey model' is used, but I suspect that is as much for enrichment as it is a matter of whether it is the best diet. Life as a captive carnivore is fairly dull and a bowl of kibble won't keep them amused for long.

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Julie Innes — Fri, 10 May 2019 14:20:31 GMT

I feel it is a trend. I don't get excited about it and tell clients off for it, but I don't feed raw myself.

If people ask me what food is the best I always say "The one that suits your dog". WE don't sell food, so I am completely unbiased.

My dogs lick my face (I know, I know..!) I wouldn't rub raw chicken over my face, so I don't feed raw (and before anyone says my dog licks his own arse, he really doesn't, he is too good for that, I have to wash it!) My dogs take food out of their bowl too, and drop it. I have a separate shelf/box in the fridge for raw meat, I certainly wouldn't want it trailed about my floor. But each to their own.

I did laugh when I was brought a Shar-Pei puppy, whose breeder had informed my client that she MUST be fed raw, as it is "more natural". Which I guess it is, for wolves/ wild dogs. However the genetic mutilation of "natural" dogs to end up with a Shar-Pei makes that statement ironic. I suspect I have more in common with Piltdown man than the Shar-Pei does with a wolf!

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Bob Russell — Fri, 10 May 2019 13:52:29 GMT

Who decides which raw diets are good and which are poorly balanced?

Which are bacteriologically tested and which are not?

Raw diets are not a homologous bunch. Some are likely to be fairly safe and others really dangerous.

I generally recommend Natures Menu as I can be fairly sure production standards will be OK. So many small businesses seem to be getting in on the act and probably don't have a clue what they are doing.

I couldn't agree more that the Lonsdale's, Meacock's et al have done far more damage to the cause than good but does that bother them? If people are more interested in getting attention than a proper argument then the more fuss the better. Lonsdale sells his books and Meacock sells his blankets and sea water.

Pets live longer than ever and some breeds of dog have few dental problems.

Our Royal Canin sales have dropped from over £20K a year to less than £300 a month and I am still working on dropping it further!!

My dogs get fed a mid-range kibble that I get from Amazon because it is cheaper than through the wholesalers.

I accept there are pro's and con's with all diets and over the years I have become less impressed with any one food range. Perhaps I am just getting old!

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Anthony Todd — Fri, 10 May 2019 13:08:32 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]providing a live zebra once a fortnight[/quote]

Are any "zoo" carnivores fed kibble or dried food?

If dried foods are so superior by any standard shouldn't big cats be better fed Go Cat??

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Fri, 10 May 2019 12:18:00 GMT

[quote user="Martin Whitehead"]Feral cats living on only a wild-caught diet also have much periodontal disease and far more tooth fractures than pet cats. [/quote]

You have figures? How many feral cats live on only a wild-caught diet? Most feral cats are scavengers and scroungers. How can you determine what a feral cat is living on? However, you may be right, I wouldn't doubt your word.

But with regard to tooth fractures: feral cats have more tooth fractures because they fight; also because they are more liable to road accidents and the occasional projected half-brick. Nothing to do with diet. Any fractures they suffer in the cheek teeth are, just as in domestic cats, the end result of resorption – something we just do not know the cause of, but it appears to have no demonstrable connection with diet.

The lions in the second and third pictures almost certainly got their teeth broken by a kick from a prey animal. As we don't advocate feeding either dogs or cats by providing a live zebra once a fortnight, it's all a bit irrelevant.

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Robert FalconerTaylor — Fri, 10 May 2019 10:32:17 GMT

[quote user="Phil Hyde"]

A natural diet is often stated to be the best by proponents of RAW. Tell that to the king of the jungle...

[/quote]

Hits the nail on the head - pet dogs and cats live 'unaturally' long lives!

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Phil Hyde — Fri, 10 May 2019 06:36:34 GMT

[quote user="Martin Whitehead"]

From the biology / ecology literature, wild carnivores eating their natural diet appear to have just as much periodontal disease as our pet dogs and cats, and more tooth fractures. Feral cats living on only a wild-caught diet also have much periodontal disease and far more tooth fractures than pet cats. It is likely that such oral pathology is a significant contributor to mortality in wild carnivores and feral cats. Why would anybody think a natural diet is good for oral health?

[/quote]

A natural diet is often stated to be the best by proponents of RAW. Tell that to the king of the jungle...

On the other side of the argument, dogs seem to be perfectly healthy whatever they eat. My Golden Retriever seems to thrive on socks and underwear...

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Martin Whitehead — Thu, 09 May 2019 22:18:55 GMT

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Niall Taylor — Thu, 09 May 2019 22:09:58 GMT

[quote user="Lucy Fleming"]Kibble is killing our pets...[/quote]

I can vividly recall a quote from one of the raw feeding forums of a dyed-in-the-wool raw advocate bemoaning the fact she had 'fed her dog into cancer' by giving it kibble, in this very forum Roger Meacock suggested dog attacks on children could be because of them being fed kibble (the dogs, not the children!). This type of hyperbole is another reason why many folks find it hard to take discussions of raw feeding seriously and is a strong hint that raw feeding is a lifestyle choice or even faith-based, rather than anything to do with pet health.

At the end of the day the risks to pets and owners of raw feeding is well documented whereas the benefits are unverified at best and far-fetched at worst. I think a lot of people manage it well and derive satisfaction from doing so, and I wouldn't try to dissuade anyone from doing it if that was what the wanted and they were aware of the risks. But I'm convinced their motivation has more to do with their own attitudes to matters of health and how they see themselves than to animal health or welfare.

Niall

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Dinu Catilina — Thu, 09 May 2019 22:03:48 GMT

[quote user="Chris Geddes"]

Interesting review article:

https://avmajournals.avma.org/doi/pdf/10.2460/javma.243.11.1549

[/quote]

I'm going through it slowly. Got to the health risks on page 1554 and that is one biased piece of science like not many others. They extrapolate from meats for human consumption and create scenarios for pets almost misleading. Just look at the T gondi part where most of their time is being spent on how bad toxoplasosis is for people.

What about this study showing that feeding raw meat from retail stores to cats is a low risk for toxoplasmosis

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16419752

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Dinu Catilina — Thu, 09 May 2019 21:57:07 GMT

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]Processed foods are designed to be nutritionally balanced.[/quote]

Yes but this balance is not based on strong evidence. Do we really need to balance a do's food everyday?

[quote user="Niall Taylor"] It could be argued that if humans were fed the human equivalent of Royal Canin we'd all be much more fit and healthy.[/quote]

I really can't see how that can be argued when at least currently the advice is to eat simple, as less processed as possible and clean (whatever that means).

[quote user="Niall Taylor"]Dog food kibble is most decidedly not a Big Mac[/quote]

Tastes nothing like it indeed...

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Niall Taylor — Thu, 09 May 2019 21:50:16 GMT

[quote user="Kate Richardson"]I think it's high time we moved away from the association of raw feeding with Lonsdale and co and the accusations they have made about vets being in cahoots with pet companies and conspiring to make pets ill so we can make money.[/quote]

Couldn't agree more! I've always said Lonsdale and his foaming at the mouth conspiracy ranting put more people off raw feeding than any amount of scientific research

[quote user="Neil Wheadon"]I recently had the pleasure of spending a day at a practice where RAW diets were positively encouraged and bone feeding (the right ones) recommended. Nearly every mouth was perfect.[/quote]

Well, it would be great to see that sort of thing checked by making a proper comparison between balanced populations of raw and non-raw fed dogs but I could point to many days in practice when I have seen multiple dogs and cats with perfect teeth regardless of diet. My concerns are how can we be sure owners read the correct websites etc and give the 'right' bones, and how do those sloppy, minced raw diets help teeth when they require minimal or no chewing?

[quote user="Kate Richardson"]I think the argument for it being a more natural diet is far more substantial than in dogs[/quote]

I've never been convinced by the 'nature is best argument', loads of natural things (cholera, being eaten by lions) are bad for you. And processed foods designed for humans are aimed at our worst desires because they will sell more with oodles of sugar, salt, fat and so on. No one says they are best for you, we just like the taste (and buy more). Processed foods are designed to be nutritionally balanced. It could be argued that if humans were fed the human equivalent of Royal Canin we'd all be much more fit and healthy. Dog food kibble is most decidedly not a Big Mac

Niall

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Robert FalconerTaylor — Thu, 09 May 2019 18:09:20 GMT

[quote user="Lucy Fleming"]

- I do feel that the dry kibble manufacturers have perpetrated an excellent PR job...

[/quote]

According to a contact who's been in the industry for decades - most of the cost of kibble/tinned pet food is in the marketing - advertising, packaging etc., same trick used in luring us in to pay £££££ for a perfume (sorry fragrance). Raw is actually much better value gram for gram. When I was a boy we bought head meat and BIG bones twice a week from the butchers for the dogs. Latter they ate raw, former went into a perpetual stew on the stove with piles of veggies etc. When it cooled there was a layer of fat on the top as thick as a brick, just looking at it would give you a heart attack. Dogs thrived on it and it was cheap as chips too. This was Africa and we were poor white trash, but we could still afford to look after our dogs and feed them well. I do believe the dogs ate better than we did.

Now? I feed my dogs whatever dry kibble and tins I can buy locally and they hoover up any leftovers from us, so there's no waste. The local butcher charges £3.99 for half a cabbage so you can imagine what his meat costs.

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Anthony Todd — Thu, 09 May 2019 18:03:02 GMT

[quote user="Lucy Fleming"]*please note the majority of these opinions are not supported by much/ any evidence...[/quote]

Of course not!

There's £millions at stake in the dried food market, added to the subterranean realisation that the "new" artificial, irrational, unnatural, dried cereal diets for carnivores or omnivores really are as far from nature as you can possibly get!

Kitikat for a Derby runner anyone??

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Lucy Fleming — Thu, 09 May 2019 12:42:31 GMT

I think a lot of people get very passionate about this either way, when I'm not convinced there's evidence that either:

1) Raw food diets will lead to bacterial apocalypse

2) Kibble is killing our pets.

I personally wouldn't feed raw (too lazy!) and I don't really recommend it, but neither would I particularly counsel someone against it, if that's what they want to do. There certainly does seem to be some research being done, but studies so far have been small sample sizes and all the other usual limitations. Some things I like to make owners aware of:

- Shedding bacteria in faeces of raw fed dogs does appear to be an issue (though many also present in non-raw fed dogs). One study found listeria in some of the raw fed group, which wasn't in the non-raw group. This is a concern for young/old/pregnant/immunosuppressed.

- A study in germany of a selection of commercial raw diet found a significant number (I must admit I can't remember how many, this information came from a webinar Marge Chandler did) were not complete and nutritionally balanced. What I suspect is not known is how significant this really is for an adult animal. After all, how many of us have exactly the right nutritional balance in each meal? But, if feeding the same diet for every meal, will this have cumulative significance? It does make me a little untrusting of raw diets marketed for growing animals where this is probably more significant. These are often small companies and extensive trialling/ analysis may not be feasible for them.

- There is a risk of tooth fracture feeding bones, or GI obstruction if a pet accidently swallows a chunk of bone. These cases are small in number, but potentially serious.

- I do feel that the dry kibble manufacturers have perpetrated an excellent PR job convincing people that feeding biscuits keeps their teeth clean (see Kate's comments above). Having said that, a study on feral (ie raw fed) cats vs owned (commercial fed) cats in Australia demonstrated that though the feral cats had lower calculus scores, the rate of tooth loss and other lesions was no better, so I'm not convinced that feeding bones does as much for periodontal health as raw advocates like to suggest either. They might look cleaner but are they healthier?

- For all the "he's raw fed and my vet always comments on how healthy his coat/eyes/weight/teeth are" I can think of as many pets fed dry or tinned diets that look just as healthy.

- Raw feeding (especially bones) is probably much more entertaining and enriching for pets, which could be significant.

*please note the majority of these opinions are not supported by much/ any evidence...

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Kate Richardson — Thu, 09 May 2019 11:31:56 GMT

[quote user="Edward Jones"]Apparently there is a paper coming out shortly documenting TB in cats and their owners, relating to raw feeding. I think it's been linked to an individual manufacturer, however.[/quote]

There is a paper coming out shortly, 4 cats diagnosed with TB with raw food as the source. Which is a real worry. But hopefully linked to one manufacturer and will lead to stricter rules in the manufacturing process.

[quote user="Dinu Catilina"]

A study published recently showed that 9 out 10 hydrolised diets were contaminated with proteins of various species.

My issue with dry food people is the lack of evidence. I know there are articles showing contamination of raw food but there are also those showing contamination for commercial diets. All dry foods have a heavy burden of storage and dust mites. Hill's recently, and others in the past related to one thing or another. I do not say that raw is better but there is certainly a double standard in comparing the two.

[/quote]

Absolutely agree. Recent batch of Hills dog food with excessive levels of Vit D in leading to hypercalcaemia and death in some dogs, think it was in USA as haven't heard much about it over here, but for a pet food manufacturer that promotes itself as being one the best quality diets, I think this was disgraceful.

How many people think that dry food is better for their teeth? Certainly as far as cats go, I don't believe this (exception being dental specific diets such as t/d, RC dental), and having now worked solely with cats for 2 years and performing on average 4 dental procedures per week, I can honestly say I see no correlation between what diet a cat is on and the likelihood of the cat having dental disease. I should really go through all my cases and record it properly . Most dry cat food gets swallowed whole and those that get crucnhed, the biscuit just splits or crumbles so has no actual cleaning action. My general recommendation for routine feeding of cats is predominantly wet food with some dental diet 'on the side'.

[quote user="Thomas Johnson"]Is a dry kibble diet more processed than a tinned diet?[/quote]

Probably not, but again as far as cats are concerned if you look at the percentage of carbohydrate to protein to fat to water in dry v wet, wet is far far closer to their 'natural' diet of small rodents.

https://catinfo.org/ Interesting read.

And this one

file:///C:/Users/Practice%20User/Downloads/Feeding%20cats%20for%20optimal%20welfare%20-%20CORRECTED%20Harvey%20-%20CR%20(1)%20(1).pdf

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Edward Jones — Thu, 09 May 2019 10:04:53 GMT

Apparently there is a paper coming out shortly documenting TB in cats and their owners, relating to raw feeding. I think it's been linked to an individual manufacturer, however.

RE: Risk / Benefits of raw pet diets

Anthony Todd — Wed, 08 May 2019 20:30:16 GMT

[quote user="Dinu Catilina"]Is there anyting wrong with a greyhound mouth's conformation? Cause their teeth are terrible. [/quote]

Once greyhounds were selected for dental health and not racing performance their dental health would improve.

Once race horses were selected for fertility and not racing performance their fecundity would improve.

Once bulldogs only gave birth only naturally......

And then given a completely foreign, totally,illogical, unnatural, diet modified chemically to avoid the obvious serious medical consequences and then justified by oceans of "research" proving it's all just "stress"........

Come on !!