As to raw or kibble being a religion......
Show me a double blind study of raw that doesn't have holes in it big enough to drive a truck through, and I'll believe the benefits. Anything short of that is anecdotal.
Printable View
As to raw or kibble being a religion......
Show me a double blind study of raw that doesn't have holes in it big enough to drive a truck through, and I'll believe the benefits. Anything short of that is anecdotal.
I think the best "study" of how great raw is, is the fact that dogs and wolves have been living on it for millions of years. Kibble has been around for, what, 60 years? And how many diseases are we seeing frequently in pets these days?
As I said, I do not base it on "studies", I base it on my own experience. The improvement in my three very healthy animals is enough for me.
Their teeth: On kibble, yellow and built up. Raw bones are cleaning them right up.
Their stools: A good consistency, small
Their coats: I have not had to bathe them in weeks. Nala's has especially improved. On Nutro kibble she used to get a nasty film on her coat. They do not smell whatsoever, not even when they come in from outside.
Their overall energy: My almost 9 year old is a lot more active. He doesn't tire as easily.
There's my studies for you, and if you don't believe in them, that's your issue.
Yes, but the anecdotal evidence in Raw's favor is OVERWHELMING.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
I'm tired of the dog food debate. I think as long as you do some research and feed what you feel is best for what you can afford, then you are doing the best for your dog. Questions and information are great, it’s good to look into what is best for your dog......arguing, is not.
People may not have come out and said it exact, but I, personally, have gotten the impression many times that certain members here do look down upon you if you do not feed raw. It seems that at the moment raw is "in" and if you're not in the raw group then you're not taking as good of care of your dog.
Please come meet my mostly kibble (high quality) fed dog with a nice thick soft coat, perfectly clean teeth (brushing), healthy weight and tell me he isn't in as good of shape as a raw fed dog. ;)
I am not against any dog food diet--raw, homecooked, good kibble with the exception of very low quality kibble filled with just by-products/grains. If your dog is healthy and happy then you are doing great!
Ok, off my soap box now. ;)
A valid study would contain at least three groups, preferably large groups,with members of each study group with similar if not identical genetic lines to eliminate health problems of genetic origin. One group fed strictly raw, one fed kibble, one fed a mixed diet. The only variable for the study to be valid can be the diet. No environmental variables, all exercised the same, etc.
Until that happens, please leave the pseudo scientific pap out of the discussion, and admit that anecdotal evidence (as in my dog is .........) is just that. Anecdotal evidence.
And if you look for it, you'll find just as much negative anecdotal evidence about raw--about any particular brand of kibble, any drug, any supplement. Anecdotal evidence always goes both ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by CathyBogart
I'm sorry, I do believe I have every right to include my positive raw feeding, just like you have ever right to go against it. I'm not telling you not to express anything.
Thanks Amy, that was exactly what I was thinking. I'm SOOO incredibly tired of the constant raw vs kibble debate.
Plain and simple, feed something that your dog does well on, and something you're comfortable feeding.. whether it's kibble, or homecooked, or raw.
I am a raw feeder, and I am a believer in the diet. I absolutely do not recommend that anyone feed raw if they aren't comfortable with it. No one's making you believe in it. It's your choice, your decision. Don't like the idea? Fine. Leave it be and stop bickering.
Personal experiences and scientific facts are great. But really, how many times can we go back and forth from "raw bad, raw good" argument?
Actually, my point here isn't that raw is good, bad or otherwise. Feed whatever you want as long as the dog is healthy. My point is merely a request to stop using falsehoods (example:dogs don't get salmonella) as support for your statements for or against raw, and stop knocking down kibble as a good food. If you did a search in here for AAFCO, you would find statements left and right that XYZ ingredient is bad, therefore kibble is bad, with little to no scientific evidence backing up the statements.
Making a statement like "My dog does better on raw" is fine. Making a statement like " Raw is better than kibble" with nothing other than anecdotal evidence is absurd.
We've provided evidence, you shot it all down.Quote:
Making a statement like "My dog does better on raw" is fine. Making a statement like " Raw is better than kibble" with nothing other than anecdotal evidence is absurd.
"There is no benefit of feeding raw over a high quality commercial dog food."
Aha ahahaha. Ha. :)
I'm sorry, but that incredible blanket statement just made me giggle. I've heard of/met waaay too many sick kibble-fed dogs that have done a 180 on Raw to even consider commenting on that. And also what it has done for my pups!
Aren't we all at PT to not only discuss and share the love for our dogs, but also to learn more? As long as members are not giving out false or misleading information, why is that a problem? Didn't you notice that myself and others actually advised the OP to continue researching before switching to a Raw diet!? It's not like all the Raw-feeders jumped on her and said "Ohhh it's fine just throw some chicken at your dog." Not at all.
The only thing I truly tire of, is (I am not speaking of PT in particular, other boards & groups as well) people who actually discourage researching premium kibbles & Raw diets. People who say "If your dog looks OK to you eating grocery story food, stick with that!". It's crazy. Being well-informed and educating yourself in ANY area of our pets' health/behavior/life should be encouraged, IMO.
About every kibble recommendation thread mentioning Raw, so what? If that is what you feed, and you have seen wonderful results, why not recommend feeding it to others? Anyway, that is seriously an exaggeration... I just went to Dog Health and found p l e n t y of threads that do not even mention it, only recommendations for kibbles. I recommend kibble that in my experience are good quality (with studying nutrition, working at a feed store with a Vet as my manager, and feeding Gonzo a variety of foods over the years) all the time. I feed kibble occasionally. But I will never give up the benefits of Raw to both of my boys, Gonzo especially has done incredibly well on it! I did not even know how healthy he *could* be, until I switched to Raw. Of COURSE I would want to share that with others, and emphatically encourage them to research it & see if it's possible for them, because I want them to experience all of those benefits as well.
I agree with the above. I also have no problem with people feeding kibble, or raw, I just feel that there is always more to learn, and why NOT try to find out more information about dog foods and your dog's health so you can provide the best? I see people against raw bashing the heck out of it and yet honestly, if you haven't tried it for yourself, why are you bashing it? I feed a mostly raw and kibble diet. I use Innova Evo on days when I need to, and they do fine with that. All dog food is NOT created equal, and people saying feed whatever dog kibble is all the same, that it doesn't matter what is in it is just not even an intelligent statement in any manner. Yes dogs do fine on kibble, but dogs do great on raw, and often times have fewer health problems. ANYTHING you feed your dog ought to be looked into and researched. KIbble is not just kibble, there are so many different kinds, and some of that stuff is horrible for a dog's health. That does not make all kibble bad, but there is a vast difference in the health of dogs just based on what is fed. Someone who feeds a lower quality dog food thinks their dog is doing fine, but unless they TRY something else, whether it's a higher quality kibble with better ingredients, raw, home cooked, whatever, they have no idea how different their dog COULD be doing and in most cases how much better their health could be. I'm not pushing any diet, for ME raw works best but "gasp" I also feed kibble on occasion. I take issue with the dog food companies trying to push garbage on peopel as quality dog food but I also take issue with people being blind, when there is so much information available, and not even trying to see if there is somehting better and just blatantly bashing something they know nothing about because THEY don't feed it or do it. I'm not pushing raw, I am interested in everyone feeding their dogs the best they can for its health, because every dog deserves to feel its best. I have always said that people should research what they feed their dog and feed what they feel best about. I for one have never bashed anyone for feeding kibble or raw, but I have emphasized the need to research and try to feed the best foods you can based on ingredients. I see no harm in suggesting that.Quote:
Originally Posted by bckrazy
BcK,
It is the false and misleading information that drives me nuts, not the discussions about raw or premium kibbles.
Let's see if we got the progression right:Quote:
Didn't you notice that myself and others actually advised the OP to continue researching before switching to a Raw diet!? It's not like all the Raw-feeders jumped on her and said "Ohhh it's fine just throw some chicken at your dog." Not at all...People who say "If your dog looks OK to you eating grocery story food, stick with that!". It's crazy.
1. Advocate raw feeding, but of course research it before starting.
2. If anyone advocates the evil commercial food as being equal based on the dog's apperance then they are crazy.
But let's focus on the statement
and do a tie in to this one from another posterQuote:
It's not like all the Raw-feeders jumped on her and said "Ohhh it's fine just throw some chicken at your dog." Not at all.
Let's see now I look at my two 3-yr old dogs and see their coats in good condition, ideal weight, high energy levels, no allergies, no metabolic problems, no reoccuring infections. What have I left out? The Vet says they are in excellent health. Question: Is it possible to have fewer health problems than no health problems? But yet based on your criteria both the Vet and I must be crazy, because it's just impossible that my dogs have no known health problems. How could one have fewer than none, feeding that evil commercial dog food?Quote:
Yes dogs do fine on kibble, but dogs do great on raw, and often times have fewer health problems.
I chuckle at the almost religious zeal with no scientific basis that is used to discredit those who would dare to think a commercial dog food is equivalent to raw feeding. I have been told here that I am crazy for thinking my dogs are healthy (by looking at them), and that they could be doing so much better implying that I could be doing better by my dogs. In another thread I have someone telling me that meat by-products and corn in a dog food makes it a bad dog food. Therefore not only am I falling short on their care, but now I'm feeding them a bad dog food to boot! It gets better with every thread. I wouldn't doubt that someday I'll read that feeding dogs a commercial dog food is the equivalent of abusing your dog. LOL But then again I take comfort in knowing that no one can disprove the statement: There is no benefit of feeding raw over a high quality commercial dog food.