Feeding My Dogs A Vegan Diet

[Guest Swifthounds]

I used it in a lengthy discussion we had a few months back, so yes. I'm pretty sure I haven't seen anyone argue that dogs are obligate carnivores.

[silverfish]

I'm gonna really hate myself for coming back into this thread, but 'considered relatively unspecialised' by whom?

 

Dog and cat dentition is remarkably similar with the exception of the fact that the molars in dogs (the teeth behind the carnassials) are adapted for crushing bones, whereas the same tooth in the cat is quite small and appears not to do anything much.

[Batmom]

Some of the material in this thread is *in essence* arguing that dogs are obligate carnivores. That's why I wondered if people knew the difference. I'm glad to see that some do.

[Guest Swifthounds]

Hope someone will speak up if they were arguing that dogs are obligate carnivores. I didn't see any, but I might have missed a post or two.

 

Quite obviously, arguing that the quality and bioavailability of nutrients in meat is superior to vegetation nutritionally and from a perspective of the dog's mental and physical health is not the same as arguing that they are obligate carnivores.

[Guest barkdogs]

Does anyone here besides me know what "facultative" means?

 

 

...I do now, since I just looked it up on "Dictionary.com."

 

I am making no judgements here--I am open to possibilities, even the ones that I do not yet know enough about. The only thing I will add here is that we in the anatomy lab @UPenn vet school have a saying. . . ."go with your dentition."

[Batmom]

Agreed there . I was too lazy to go back and look for quotes. There are vegetable sources that are decent in terms of bioavailability, tho, enough that formulating a more-than-adequate vegan diet for a dog should be achievable. Vegetarian (allowing eggs) would of course be dead easy. ..... I do still wonder, tho, if anyone else (except maybe mcsheltie and me, and evidently Xan in progress) has ever tabulated what's in their dogs' food and compared that to an accepted standard to ensure adequate nutrition.

[Guest mcsheltie]

Dogs are not obligate carnivores, they are not omnivores and they are not herbivores.

 

Here is a picture of a dog's teeth. Take a look at the bottom right hand picture. Note the molars that do not have any flat surfaces needed for masticating plant matter. Their teeth are designed to quickly rip flesh or crush bones into pieces that are small enough to swallow whole.

 

Their teeth are quite specialized for this purpose. Like the wolves, they catch prey and have to eat it quickly so that other pack members do not get it first. Their digestion is also specialized for this task. And it does not begin in the mouth as ours does. Hundreds of years of domestication has not changed their eating habits, dentition or digestion.

 

Agreed there . I was too lazy to go back and look for quotes. There are vegetable sources that are decent in terms of bioavailability, tho, enough that formulating a more-than-adequate vegan diet for a dog should be achievable. Vegetarian (allowing eggs) would of course be dead easy. ..... I do still wonder, tho, if anyone else (except maybe mcsheltie and me, and evidently Xan in progress) has ever tabulated what's in their dogs' food and compared that to an accepted standard to ensure adequate nutrition.

Not if they are sane. It is too much like work!!!! :lol

Edited August 1, 2010 by mcsheltie

[silverfish]

Hope someone will speak up if they were arguing that dogs are obligate carnivores. I didn't see any, but I might have missed a post or two.

 

Quite obviously, arguing that the quality and bioavailability of nutrients in meat is superior to vegetation nutritionally and from a perspective of the dog's mental and physical health is not the same as arguing that they are obligate carnivores.

 

Nope. Cats are obligate carnivores, dogs are not, because they can and do eat other foods.

 

 

Agreed there . I was too lazy to go back and look for quotes. There are vegetable sources that are decent in terms of bioavailability, tho, enough that formulating a more-than-adequate vegan diet for a dog should be achievable. Vegetarian (allowing eggs) would of course be dead easy. ..... I do still wonder, tho, if anyone else (except maybe mcsheltie and me, and evidently Xan in progress) has ever tabulated what's in their dogs' food and compared that to an accepted standard to ensure adequate nutrition.

 

I don't know enough about the intricacies of canine nutrition to do a proper study, as I suspect is the case with most people here on Greytalk. Even the average vet in practice doesn't know enough to do a proper study. But I have read packets, and put that together with what I did learn in my animal nursing training and what I've learned since and come to the conclusion that relying on commercial dog food was almost certainly not going to cut the mustard. I feed a very mixed diet, and I try to make sure they get mostly good quality meat, with some vegetable matter and carbs in the form of biscuit and/or kibble. I do feed part raw, with some raw bones, and I do add supplements when I do that, or homecook. The proof of the pudding being in the eating, I should also add that my vets have frequently complimented me on my dogs' general condition and coats, and asked what I was feeding.

 

I didn't do a nutritional study to learn how to feed my kids either. Although to be fair, if I were thinking of feeding them contrary to the norm, I would have done, or consulted an expert.

[PatricksMom]

I have to say, that sort of I've seen the light, now let me show you all what you're in denial about is something that for me reminds me of my fundamentalist upbringing, and not in a good way.

 

I've been an omnivore, a lacto-ovo vegetarian, a vegan, and am now a pescaterian. I really don't think at any of these phases of my life telling people who disagreed with my choices that they were projecting their own inner conflict is or was helpful.

 

I suspect all of us are, to differing extents, trying to balance our desire to be compassionate, to be healthy (and to have healthy pets), and to live within the practical and financial limitations of our lives. That will naturally take us in different places, both as individuals and at different points in our lives.

Edited August 2, 2010 by PatricksMom

[Batmom]

My point re tabulating things is simply that if you haven't done it, how do you (in the generic sense) know whether a nutritionally complete vegan diet is possible?  You don't.  In many (certainly not all) cases, respondents to this thread assume that it's not possible to feed a dog a nutritionally complete diet without including meat, and some (again, certainly not all) assume that a diet consisting exclusively of meat is complete.  You probably don't need to do a nutritional study to feed a dog or a child adequately, but if you're going to claim that Diet A is better than Diet B, when the Diet B formulator IS doing the nutritional study ... well, then yes, you do need to compare those in terms other than "I think."

Edited August 2, 2010 by Batmom

[Guest Swifthounds]

I also must have missed the posts arguing that a vegan diet can't be nutritionally sufficient for survival.

[MerlinsMum]

What you see as defensive, is in fact, not .... but rather wanting to put *accuracy* where inaccuracy is thought to be correct. Many things you report as being abusive are not. A hot wire fence is NOT abusive. Ear tags are NOT abusive. Until many that are *rampant to point fingers at others & claiming abuse* are willing to actually participate in actively understanding or working in the environment they are pointing the finger at, I lose interest in hearing claims of superior compassion or understanding.

 

I think all of those practices ARE abusive, and in any event, I would not support any small "happy" farm either. I object to the USE itself of non-human animals by humans for pleasure, entertainment or convenience.

 

As for your statement that you'd like to be a dairy cow - does that include the moment in which they use the Rape Rack on you? Separate you from your baby? Send you to the slaughterhouse? Not sure what you can possibly mean by this.

 

For anyone who still thinks that there is such a thing as humane animal husbandry (I know there are a lot of you out there) - this statement was made just a few days ago by a guy who grew up on a family farm.

 

07/30/2010

 

I grew up on a family farm, a "humane" farm before we started using the word "humane" as a marketing tool.

 

Please know that when I use the word "humane" here I am trying to make a point, not perpetuate its use.

 

My point is that there is no such thing as "humane" animal farming. Yes, maybe "less cruel", but not "humane." The word "humane" is a cognitive release for those who don't want to believe eating animals means mutilating and killing them (against their will). And it is a financial boon for those profiting off of people trying to do the right thing.

 

On ALL animal farms (all!), we do horrible things to animals including castration (pigs, sheep, cattle, goats), burning off horns (cattle), cutting tails (sheep, pigs), breaking teeth (pigs), notching ears (pigs, cattle, goats) -- this is all "standard". You can picture them in green fields playing to ease your conscience, but you're ignoring a brutal truth (and that we ignore they want to play not die is another story).

 

If you would stand right there while a baby pig is being mutilated by having his tail cut off and testicles cut out, hear his cries, and hear his mother screaming and struggling to get to him to protect him, if you could stand there and somehow pat yourself on your back for being humane... well, something is broken in us. Something is terribly wrong.

 

My life on the farm haunts me. The screams of the animals are still in my head. I have such regrets for all the pain and horror I had a hand in. This is "humane"?!

 

Factory farms are so hellish that we've now come to revere smaller family farms because we want so badly a release from the pain, from the horror. We can't do that to animals, can we? Of course not -- look at all the "humane" farms, we tell ourselves. And it all feels better... for a little while. We lie to ourselves that "the animal I'm eating must somehow have magically missed the mutilations, the broken families, the confinement, the life at the total "mercy" of humans, and the final ultimate cruelty of stealing their life from them.

 

We want to escape the pain, the horror, and I appreciate that. I want to escape it, too. But the animals can never escape it. We control their lives from before they are born until we wipe our butts and consciences of them.

 

If you want to debate strategy, that's important and I appreciate it as I appreciate all efforts to build a more compassionate world. But, please don't call animal farming or meat or dairy "humane." It's a lie. It's a lie.

 

Respectfully and gratefully,

 

Matt Bear

 

Enough said. I added this, btw, because even though it's not specifically on-topic in the sense that it doesn't relate to feeding dogs a vegan diet, it explains the motivation behind such a decision by vegans. I posted it because if there is one thing that frustrated the heck out of me it's not the person who eats meat and doesn't really care, but the person who pretends to her/himself that they can eat the flesh or secretions of an animal in good conscience because the animal was "grass-fed" or reared "humanely" by good people who give their cows names and let their children pet them. That, to me, is psychologically way, way more creepy and messed up than even someone who operates a factory farm. The owner of a factory farm clearly doesn't give a crap, and never pretends to. Those animals are just numbers to him. The owner of the small farm pretends he's compassionate when really he perpetrates the biggest, most horrible betrayal of all - raising a pig in a certain way, getting to know her as an individual, getting to know her babies as individuals with their different personalities, and then turning around and sending them all to a premature death for his own interest. To me, there is no greater betrayal of trust. Of course if he did that to his DOG, people would start threads on dog forums and cry out, incensed at such cruelty and betrayal. But because she is a pig, it's somehow different, when it shouldn't be - a pig is just as sentient as your dog,with just as much right to live her own life free from exploitation.

[Guest Swifthounds]

I object to the USE itself of non-human animals by humans for pleasure, entertainment or convenience.

 

Does that mean your adoption group or your hounds previous owners should be expecting a phone call about returns? I do know people who hold that belief but, as a result, none of them own pets of any kind.

[Guest eaglflyt]

What you see as defensive, is in fact, not .... but rather wanting to put *accuracy* where inaccuracy is thought to be correct. Many things you report as being abusive are not. A hot wire fence is NOT abusive. Ear tags are NOT abusive. Until many that are *rampant to point fingers at others & claiming abuse* are willing to actually participate in actively understanding or working in the environment they are pointing the finger at, I lose interest in hearing claims of superior compassion or understanding.

 

I think all of those practices ARE abusive, and in any event, I would not support any small "happy" farm either. I object to the USE itself of non-human animals by humans for pleasure, entertainment or convenience.

 

As for your statement that you'd like to be a dairy cow - does that include the moment in which they use the Rape Rack on you? Separate you from your baby? Send you to the slaughterhouse? Not sure what you can possibly mean by this.

 

For anyone who still thinks that there is such a thing as humane animal husbandry (I know there are a lot of you out there) - this statement was made just a few days ago by a guy who grew up on a family farm.

 

07/30/2010

 

I grew up on a family farm, a "humane" farm before we started using the word "humane" as a marketing tool.

 

Please know that when I use the word "humane" here I am trying to make a point, not perpetuate its use.

 

My point is that there is no such thing as "humane" animal farming. Yes, maybe "less cruel", but not "humane." The word "humane" is a cognitive release for those who don't want to believe eating animals means mutilating and killing them (against their will). And it is a financial boon for those profiting off of people trying to do the right thing.

 

On ALL animal farms (all!), we do horrible things to animals including castration (pigs, sheep, cattle, goats), burning off horns (cattle), cutting tails (sheep, pigs), breaking teeth (pigs), notching ears (pigs, cattle, goats) -- this is all "standard". You can picture them in green fields playing to ease your conscience, but you're ignoring a brutal truth (and that we ignore they want to play not die is another story).

 

If you would stand right there while a baby pig is being mutilated by having his tail cut off and testicles cut out, hear his cries, and hear his mother screaming and struggling to get to him to protect him, if you could stand there and somehow pat yourself on your back for being humane... well, something is broken in us. Something is terribly wrong.

 

My life on the farm haunts me. The screams of the animals are still in my head. I have such regrets for all the pain and horror I had a hand in. This is "humane"?!

 

Factory farms are so hellish that we've now come to revere smaller family farms because we want so badly a release from the pain, from the horror. We can't do that to animals, can we? Of course not -- look at all the "humane" farms, we tell ourselves. And it all feels better... for a little while. We lie to ourselves that "the animal I'm eating must somehow have magically missed the mutilations, the broken families, the confinement, the life at the total "mercy" of humans, and the final ultimate cruelty of stealing their life from them.

 

We want to escape the pain, the horror, and I appreciate that. I want to escape it, too. But the animals can never escape it. We control their lives from before they are born until we wipe our butts and consciences of them.

 

If you want to debate strategy, that's important and I appreciate it as I appreciate all efforts to build a more compassionate world. But, please don't call animal farming or meat or dairy "humane." It's a lie. It's a lie.

 

Respectfully and gratefully,

 

Matt Bear

 

Enough said. I added this, btw, because even though it's not specifically on-topic in the sense that it doesn't relate to feeding dogs a vegan diet, it explains the motivation behind such a decision by vegans. I posted it because if there is one thing that frustrated the heck out of me it's not the person who eats meat and doesn't really care, but the person who pretends to her/himself that they can eat the flesh or secretions of an animal in good conscience because the animal was "grass-fed" or reared "humanely" by good people who give their cows names and let their children pet them. That, to me, is psychologically way, way more creepy and messed up than even someone who operates a factory farm. The owner of a factory farm clearly doesn't give a crap, and never pretends to. Those animals are just numbers to him. The owner of the small farm pretends he's compassionate when really he perpetrates the biggest, most horrible betrayal of all - raising a pig in a certain way, getting to know her as an individual, getting to know her babies as individuals with their different personalities, and then turning around and sending them all to a premature death for his own interest. To me, there is no greater betrayal of trust. Of course if he did that to his DOG, people would start threads on dog forums and cry out, incensed at such cruelty and betrayal. But because she is a pig, it's somehow different, when it shouldn't be - a pig is just as sentient as your dog,with just as much right to live her own life free from exploitation.

 

 

This is SO UNTRUE! NOT all who keep farm animals do even ONE of these procedures, let alone all! I have NO idea where you get this and I am offended that you state this as a FACT ... which it is NOT! Be a vegan, or a vegetarian, or whatever ... I really don't care. But, to use THESE untrue statements as a *BLANKET FACT* when it is NOT TRUE, just goes to being absolutely uninformed, or misinformed, and not checking any facts!!!

 

Our friends that own a dairy farm DO NOT slaughter any of their cows! Who tells you these things??? Did you read ANY of my previous posts? Do you understand *weaning* in a natural, free range setting by a herd of cattle? NOT safe, NOT humane, NONE of those things. Do you understand the use of ear tags? I cannot believe your incorrect assumptions that you state as fact! Would you prefer cows eaten alive with ticks? Would you prefer them bleeding from horse fly bites? If you use any treatments to prevent pests from bothering your dogs, you're doing the same thing. Are any of your dogs microchipped for safety?

 

We have farm animals ... all well fed, all cared for, NONE slaughtered, all vetted, all treated with kindness. Now I don't know what you're terming a *small family farm*, but what you describe is NOT what we have! And, for you to assume so is simply arrogant and WRONG! Your judgment of others is simply amazing and frankly, appalling!

 

There are NO premature deaths here! As a matter of fact, we currently have a 29 year old horse that is being followed and treated for cancer. How arrogant of you to assume anything about our farm. What are you actually doing to help any farm animals? Just let me know! How many animals are you financially providing for? How many times have you risked life and limb to care for a horse that has injured itself in a group interaction? How many times have you assisted in treating both horses and cattle after a huge tornado? What animals are you providing water to in the middle of winter? Do you even realize that most farms are about fruit and vegetables, or crops that are used to feed livestock and humans ... even the vegans that eat nothing else?

 

You know, our farm, as most others we know that have farms, are actually more of farm animal retirement homes than anything else.

 

You have just demonstrated the prevailing *holier than thou* attitude I have been attempting to address in this thread. You have made accusations that are untrue and unfounded. And, you feel much better about yourself in doing so. Wow, judgment of others much?

 

I invite you to personally visit our place some time in the future. Then, see for yourself how cruel and horrid we are in your opinion.

 

Frankly, it's this attitude that underlies much of this thread and it's not only incorrect, arrogant, judgmental, but wrong and infuriating. It must be comforting to have such a wonderful and superior opinion of yourselves as vegans (those of you with these opinions). You're not doing much for your cause with this type of behavior ... just sayin'.

 

eta

 

You know, in all my years of caring for animals ... including wildlife rehab and conservation efforts, I'm simply amazed. And, for the correct facts, there are NO rape racks for cattle that I have ever seen. Most cattle breed naturally. Those that don't use artificial insemination. When this is done, it is done with a squeeze chute utilized. If you have ever read any of Temple Grandin's writing, you would know more about a squeeze chute and how it is much more positive than negative. Go look it up, please. Artificial insemination may not be to your liking, but having witnessed both AI by a vet and natural breeding, nearly all breeding related injuries come from the latter. I am not saying I would utilize AI over natural breeding, just requesting you check your facts.

Edited August 2, 2010 by eaglflyt

[GreyTzu]

WOW! Find another topic in which to chew nicely on each other.

 

 

 

Locking of a thread does not necessarily imply the cause to be either the initial or the last post.

 

(this is an automated reply)