Considering Raw Diet

[Guest ravenchilde]

Hey everyone,

 

I've got a 2.5 year old grey with likely IBD and I'm considering feeding her raw food. She's currently on Metronidazole and will be for awhile, presumably. Just wondering if anyone has ever tried to begin the raw diet while their dog was on antibiotics or not? Is it not a good time to begin something new? Or should I wait a few months when she's off Metronidazole (if she'll ever get there...)

 

Also, does anyone feed raw AND a good quality kibble? We have a kibble we like, so I don't necessarily want to discontinue, but was thinking about feeling half raw, half kibble. If you do feed half kibble, half raw, can you feel them both at the same time, or is it best to do raw for the morning meal and kibble for the evening meal?

 

PS - the kibble we are on is Go! Natural Duck (novel protein diet to help with IBD) and we're considering adding straight Duck meat (whole carcass raw food) from a reputable company in Canada - Urban Carnivore.

 

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts...thanks!

[Guest Desonia]

Hey.

 

I'm from Canada (french-sorry for spelling mistake) and I would like to know where do you buy the whole carcass raw food from Urban Carnivore? You travel there?

We feed our GH and whippet on raw... we started by feeding them kibbles in the morning and raw in the evening. For us it worked, but some says it better to feed only raw or only kibbles...

 

Thanks!

[Remolacha]

I started feeding raw 7 yrs ago because of a dog with IBD. At the time, there weren't any kibbles he could eat. He was still on Metronidazole when we started (he was about 2 1/2, too) It worked really well for him, he was able to get off the ABs and just takes them when he has a flare up. A little over a year ago, I tried to feed kibble in the morning and raw at night, to save time & money. I feed Taste of the Wild Pacific Stream. I do this every day with my girls, who do not have IBD, but even though the kibble doesn't have any of the foods that I know trigger an IBD episode, he still can only eat it about two days a week.

 

First, you have to figure out what foods your dog is sensitive to. Whether or not you can do part kibble and part raw (or home cooked) depends on if you can find a kibble she can tolerate. It seems that there is something in the processing of the food that affects a lot of IBD dogs, but not all.

 

If she is good with duck, adding the whole carcass sounds excellent! Good luck!

[dante2zoe]

I started feeding raw about 6 years ago because of an IBD dog - diagnosed through symptoms by my bet, not a scope - at the advice of my vet because nothing else worked. He was on AB and tylosin at the time I switched. Once he settled in, I stopped them both and have only used the AB sparingly, when needed. I also add Prozyme for him when he starts to loosen up and that helps, too. I also tried to add a meal or three a week of TOTW salmon for cost purposes but it was a disaster. He is doing very well and my vet is pleased. He will be 11 this summer! Good luck. Oh, and he loves duck carcasses, too!

[Guest Swifthounds]

Whether you can feed kibble in the morning and raw at night will depend on how well your dog does on kibble. I'd you're going to do that I would not feed them in the same meal.

 

What's the reasoning behind wanting to do half & half? Usually people want to save money or time. Both goals can almost always be accomplished without doing half kibble, but often people don't know how.

[Guest mcsheltie]

I started feeding raw over ten years ago because of a cat with IBD. She was in horrible shape. Constant cramping, bowel movements were water. I tried everything multiple vets and specialists had to offer. I changed her to a raw diet cold turkey in a last ditch effort not to put her down. In three days she had solid poop and is doing well to this day.

 

Short version... there is no need to wait. It will likely help. Adding L-glutamine has had a lot of success.

[Guest ravenchilde]

Heya,

 

Urban Carnivore is a company that makes raw food using whole carcasses. Check them out: http://www.carnivora.ca/

I don't need to travel anywhere but to my local "health" pet food store. They have retailers all over Canada. I should note that I haven't tried any of their products with my grey yet, still considering, but I know a few other GH owners who like them.

 

Yeah, I've heard that too, but don't know yet what to do...

 

 

 

Hey.

 

I'm from Canada (french-sorry for spelling mistake) and I would like to know where do you buy the whole carcass raw food from Urban Carnivore? You travel there?

We feed our GH and whippet on raw... we started by feeding them kibbles in the morning and raw in the evening. For us it worked, but some says it better to feed only raw or only kibbles...

 

Thanks!

 

Did your grey do well on the kibbles while on Metronidazole? My girl is doing rather good on Metro and the Go Natural Duck kibble right now. But, I'd REALLY like to get her of the meds if she can tolerate it. I'm glad to hear that there is some evidence to show that we'll only need Metro when she has a flare up.

 

At this point, I have no idea if she'll tolerate raw food! Did you move your grey onto it cold turkey, or gradually introduced it over a couple of weeks?

 

 

I started feeding raw 7 yrs ago because of a dog with IBD. At the time, there weren't any kibbles he could eat. He was still on Metronidazole when we started (he was about 2 1/2, too) It worked really well for him, he was able to get off the ABs and just takes them when he has a flare up. A little over a year ago, I tried to feed kibble in the morning and raw at night, to save time & money. I feed Taste of the Wild Pacific Stream. I do this every day with my girls, who do not have IBD, but even though the kibble doesn't have any of the foods that I know trigger an IBD episode, he still can only eat it about two days a week.

 

First, you have to figure out what foods your dog is sensitive to. Whether or not you can do part kibble and part raw (or home cooked) depends on if you can find a kibble she can tolerate. It seems that there is something in the processing of the food that affects a lot of IBD dogs, but not all.

 

If she is good with duck, adding the whole carcass sounds excellent! Good luck!

 

Glad to hear that you've also been able to manage the IBD with diet mostly! That's why I'm strongly considering this option, as opposed to continuous AB's or Tylosin. What's in the Prozyme?

 

 

 

 

I started feeding raw about 6 years ago because of an IBD dog - diagnosed through symptoms by my bet, not a scope - at the advice of my vet because nothing else worked. He was on AB and tylosin at the time I switched. Once he settled in, I stopped them both and have only used the AB sparingly, when needed. I also add Prozyme for him when he starts to loosen up and that helps, too. I also tried to add a meal or three a week of TOTW salmon for cost purposes but it was a disaster. He is doing very well and my vet is pleased. He will be 11 this summer! Good luck. Oh, and he loves duck carcasses, too!

 

The reason I was thinking half and half was because my vet wanted Miley on a really high fiber diet. So, that's what the kibble is providing her right now, and it had definitely bulked up her stools. But this food is pretty low in protein (20%) and I was thinking I could add a little bit of raw food in there for added protein and excitement for Miley at mealtime. She also needs to put on some weight - she lost 8 pounds about 6 weeks ago, to a horrible SIBO and hookworm infestation (which, we had treated 3 times with Panacur (about 2 weeks apart each), but those hooks can encyst and pop out when they feel like it.) So far, Miley has been doing really well on this kibble, but she's still on the Metronidazole, so who knows what she'll be like without the AB's? Maybe this isn't the right time to try something new...?

 

 

Whether you can feed kibble in the morning and raw at night will depend on how well your dog does on kibble. I'd you're going to do that I would not feed them in the same meal.

 

What's the reasoning behind wanting to do half & half? Usually people want to save money or time. Both goals can almost always be accomplished without doing half kibble, but often people don't know how.

 

Ah ha! See, it's results like these that make me want to make the switch, but I'm so chicken. My vet is against the raw diet, but if it was so bad, how come all I hear are success stories? I'll have to look into the L-glutamine - what is it and what does it do?

 

 

 

I started feeding raw over ten years ago because of a cat with IBD. She was in horrible shape. Constant cramping, bowel movements were water. I tried everything multiple vets and specialists had to offer. I changed her to a raw diet cold turkey in a last ditch effort not to put her down. In three days she had solid poop and is doing well to this day.

 

Short version... there is no need to wait. It will likely help. Adding L-glutamine has had a lot of success.

[MaryJane]

Have you talked this over with your vet? The reason that I ask is that some vets might recommend cooked food for any dogs that are showing "immune" issues. Raw food (especially chicken) could contain a host of bacteria that could cause further medical issues. Raw meats like a beef roast has less surface area exposed to harmful bacteria and might be better choice if you are determined to go this route but, check and see what your vet recommends.

 

You might also consider going to a nutritional vet.

[Guest Desonia]

Thanks for the info ravenchilde!

[Guest mcsheltie]

L-glutamine is an amino acid. It heals the gut. It works very well for IBD dogs be cause it repairs the damaged intestinal epithelial cells and minimizes inflammation. It is also helpful with food allergies and intolerance, because it helps stop/repair leaky gut syndrome. These are often what lead to IBD in the first place.

 

Just FYI, other uses are during chemo, to help guard against GI toxicity (cause of lack of appetite during treatment) and is used when needing to rebuild muscle.

[Guest Swifthounds]

I like this company, and get many of my supplements here. Puritan's Pride

 

No one has better customer service.

 

Vets are largely against raw (especially "nutritionist" vets ) because of ignorance. They don't understand it and, by and large, they don't do a whole lot of research or learning on their own. Most of what they know is what is spoon-fed to them by vet schools, who are in the unfortunate position of being the appreciative recipients of funds from pet food/supply companies and pet pharma. The relationship works for them because it pays off for each, but it does so at the expense of pets and their people, who never get unbiased information.

 

The specialty vet practice I use is the only vet I've ever really discussed diet with, and that's only because they commented on how good my hounds look and how much easier they are to handle than all the other greyhounds they see.

 

If you're considering raw, ask questions. There aren't too many raw feeders here, but we're a pretty dedicated and helpful segment.

[Guest Desonia]

Swifthounds, I like your thinking!

Oh! I would like to share Raw Feeding BARF diet

[MaryJane]

Just a note that most nutritional vets are not likely to recommend raw diets because of the bacteria that is prone with feeding raw and not because of "their own ignorance". There are certain strains of E. Coli bacteria that can cause severe digestive problems in canines and these same bacteria can even cause death in immune-compromised individuals. That's why there are complaints/issues when raw-fed dogs visit nursing homes, children's hospitals or live in a house where someone is undergoing chemo. I'm not against raw feeding if it is in very sanitary conditions (keeping dog clean) and no immune compromised people living with dog or dog does not have immune condition, and no feeding of chicken/poultry which is a bacterial nightmare due to the way it is eviscerated.

 

That said, it's true that decades ago you could say that most vets pretty much went by what dog food companies would say but, that is not common today especially with vets in large cities that specialize in nutrition and engage in their own research on animal diets or are likely to "pour over" data that dog food companies provide.

[Guest Swifthounds]

Just a note that most nutritional vets are not likely to recommend raw diets because of the bacteria that is prone with feeding raw and not because of "their own ignorance". There are certain strains of E. Coli bacteria that can cause severe digestive problems in canines and these same bacteria can even cause death in immune-compromised individuals. That's why there are complaints/issues when raw-fed dogs visit nursing homes, children's hospitals or live in a house where someone is undergoing chemo. I'm not against raw feeding if it is in very sanitary conditions (keeping dog clean) and no immune compromised people living with dog or dog does not have immune condition, and no feeding of chicken/poultry which is a bacterial nightmare due to the way it is eviscerated.

 

That said, it's true that decades ago you could say that most vets pretty much went by what dog food companies would say but, that is not common today especially with vets in large cities that specialize in nutrition and engage in their own research on animal diets or are likely to "pour over" data that dog food companies provide.

 

Except that that particular mythology is the work of the system described above. Yes, raw meats can contain things like salmonella and e coli, but so does kibble. If you test the fecal matter of kibble, raw, and "home-cooked" diet dogs, you find the same bacterium. As to immune compromise, the worst place for one who is immune compromised is a densely populated area where the population is transient - like a hospital or the various rehabs and "homes." A germy dog is the least of the worries there. There are plenty of immune compromised people feeding their immune compromised dogs raw, without incident - they just don't feed or handle road kill. Bottom line is that dogs are not sterile, but they are not dangerous because of it.

[4My2Greys]

 

That said, it's true that decades ago you could say that most vets pretty much went by what dog food companies would say but, that is not common today especially with vets in large cities that specialize in nutrition and engage in their own research on animal diets or are likely to "pour over" data that dog food companies provide.

 

By "pour over" do you mean scrutinize or do you mean as a basis for their knowledge. Because quite frankly I don't see a dogfood company providing any data that would reflect positive on raw feeding.

[seeh2o]

I started feeding Carl raw just over a month ago. The results were so amazing that I felt like I had to do the same for Claire. So long as I can afford it, I will feed them raw. Neither has IBD, but Carl was getting some ugly cholesterol lumps on his skin (though he does not have high cholesterol). His cholesterol bumps are visibly going away and his coat, though still thin, is like that of a bunny. His body has changed, he looks more "ripped" (as if he de-puffed), but hasn't lost a single pound. I'm really happy I did it.

 

My vet practices allopathic as well as homeopathic and is 100% supportive of a raw diet, she feeds her pack at home raw as well. When I discussed it with my vet she supported the idea, but did not push me to do it at all.

[MaryJane]

 

That said, it's true that decades ago you could say that most vets pretty much went by what dog food companies would say but, that is not common today especially with vets in large cities that specialize in nutrition and engage in their own research on animal diets or are likely to "pour over" data that dog food companies provide.

 

By "pour over" do you mean scrutinize or do you mean as a basis for their knowledge. Because quite frankly I don't see a dogfood company providing any data that would reflect positive on raw feeding.

 

They scrutinize the data (if available).

 

Many nutritional vets are now able to start relying on their own data (note, nutritional vets have only been vogue the last decade or so). My nutritional vet (at Angel) has updated her recommendations based on her experience with clients. Every time I have gone in for updated diets I have told her what I have been providing for my dogs and she has the benefit of getting current lab results (blood and urine).

 

As to data reflecting positive on raw feeding, I don't think there is much data that vets have on raw feeding, as you said why would a dog food company provide data on raw feeding. Unfortunately, much of the information that is going around is people's experience and that is not backed up by research and/or blood/urine tests. I think if raw feeders are really passionate about the diets they should see if they can hook up with a nutritional vet and provide information to them (yearly blood work, pictures, diets, vet examination results, and so on). If enough people do it and use the same vet, that vet could do a write-up of the findings and have it published.

[MaryJane]

Just a note that most nutritional vets are not likely to recommend raw diets because of the bacteria that is prone with feeding raw and not because of "their own ignorance". There are certain strains of E. Coli bacteria that can cause severe digestive problems in canines and these same bacteria can even cause death in immune-compromised individuals. That's why there are complaints/issues when raw-fed dogs visit nursing homes, children's hospitals or live in a house where someone is undergoing chemo. I'm not against raw feeding if it is in very sanitary conditions (keeping dog clean) and no immune compromised people living with dog or dog does not have immune condition, and no feeding of chicken/poultry which is a bacterial nightmare due to the way it is eviscerated.

 

That said, it's true that decades ago you could say that most vets pretty much went by what dog food companies would say but, that is not common today especially with vets in large cities that specialize in nutrition and engage in their own research on animal diets or are likely to "pour over" data that dog food companies provide.

 

Except that that particular mythology is the work of the system described above. Yes, raw meats can contain things like salmonella and e coli, but so does kibble. If you test the fecal matter of kibble, raw, and "home-cooked" diet dogs, you find the same bacterium. As to immune compromise, the worst place for one who is immune compromised is a densely populated area where the population is transient - like a hospital or the various rehabs and "homes." A germy dog is the least of the worries there. There are plenty of immune compromised people feeding their immune compromised dogs raw, without incident - they just don't feed or handle road kill. Bottom line is that dogs are not sterile, but they are not dangerous because of it.

 

 

Maybe I have this wrong but, kibble containing salmonella would get recalled or be considered "tainted" and kibble containing the strain of E.Coli that is very virulent would also be recalled and also be considered "tainted". If "other strains" of E.Coli are found in kibble, the FDA would determine what course of action would be necessary depending on what strain is found - some strains are not an issue.

 

The fecal bacterial content of a human or a dog depends on many factors but, they both have bacteria that is normally found in the digestive tract and excreted. But, salmonella is not considered normal, if ingested it would end up going through the system and get excreted and thus allow contamination by anyone having contact with the feces (in addition to getting the dog sick). If the salmonella was ingested from eating a contaminated chicken (as in raw feeding), then the fur around the face, the legs, and maybe the chest area could also be sites of possible contamination. Note, that beef has much less issues of contamination except for hamburger which has a high risk of E.Coli contamination because it goes through a grinder and more of the meat surface area gets exposed.

 

Totally agree that dangers exist for "immune compromised" people in nursing homes, hospitals and the like and for this reason, people should be much more vigilent in making sure that a dog with possible salmonella on it's fur is not brought in because these people are already dealing with a "hot soup environment". It's noteworthy to mention that dogs going into an area like this should probably be washed (anyplace where contact is made like face, back, chest, feet) before being brought back into your own house otherwise the dog may be harboring MRSA (antibiotic resistant staph). Contamination works both ways .....

 

I totally agree that dogs (or humans) are not sterile but, they can be lethal to "immune compromised individuals" if they are carrying a virulent bacteria like salmonella or the mutant E.Coli strain. For example, if I handle chicken that is contaminated and do not take the proper precautions, I could contaminate other work surfaces in my kitchen that are used for items like salad and cause someone to become very sick. The same with a dog, if a dog eats raw and if proper precautions are not taken, someone could get sick by handling (patting) the dog and not washing their hands before eating.

 

I may be wrong but, I think most of the bacterial issues associated with raw feeding could be almost eliminated by not feeding chicken/poultry or hamburger.

 

As to immune compromised dogs eating raw and immune compromised people feeding raw to dogs -- this gets into "people's experience without adequate research" as I mentioned in another response. Not to say that it isn't valid but it needs to be worked into a study to be taken seriously by the medical community. With that in mind, I think raw feeders should get together and work with a nutritional vet and get some studies done and have them published. They could even do some studies comparing dogs fed kibble, home-cooked, and raw over a period of many years.

[Batmom]

I may be wrong but, I think most of the bacterial issues associated with raw feeding could be almost eliminated by not feeding chicken/poultry or hamburger.

 

Dunno about "most," but certainly "many." If you have a need to feed hamburger raw rather than cooked, best to buy the larger pieces of meat and grind it yourself just before feeding.

[MaryJane]

I may be wrong but, I think most of the bacterial issues associated with raw feeding could be almost eliminated by not feeding chicken/poultry or hamburger.

 

Dunno about "most," but certainly "many." If you have a need to feed hamburger raw rather than cooked, best to buy the larger pieces of meat and grind it yourself just before feeding.

 

I agree that this is a good solution but, if the grinder is not cleaned properly after each use it brings up the possibility that it becomes a breeding ground for clostridium which is an especially nasty bacteria.

 

Best way to avoid contamination that I can see if to buy big roasts and sear the outside while leaving inside raw and then cut up into chunks.

[Batmom]

Absolutely you would need to keep the grinder pristine! I was thinking of dogs with medical issues such that they can't have larger chunks.

[Guest mcsheltie]

MaryJane, what you say in theory could be true, but have you ever fed a raw diet and experienced these problems?

 

I have been feeding multiple cats and dogs a raw diet for well over ten years. I thaw the meat in the sink over night. I have fed meat that smells off. I feed that dangerous eviscerated chicken on a weekly basis, ground beef, eggs and ground turkey on a daily basis. For myself, I put a raw egg in my protein shakes each day because I do not care for cooked eggs. I eat raw hamburger and sushi often. I have never had one instance of food borne illness.

 

The majority of my client dogs eat kibble. I can't tell you how many times I have opened a new bag of food (the brand they have been eating for quite a while) and they got diarrhea. I have had three instances of food borne illness that involved vomiting, diarrhea, dehydration and kidney involvement caused by contaminated dry food.

 

There are several web sites that list processed food recalls, one can be found on the AVMA site. You can see for yourself the MANY recalls of dry and canned food each year for Salmonella, e Coli and Clostridium contamination. In addition processed food also has recalls due to toxic levels of ingredients. Many are not found until a consumer has had a sick pet and reports it.

 

95% of contamination in the human food chain, where we buy our meat, is found in produce and moldy grain.

 

There is a Yahoo raw feeding list that has over 4000 members. You could ask how many have experienced a food borne illness.

 

Dogs and cats digestive tracts vastly differ from our own. They are able to handle bacteria that we are not. I have fed a raw diet to cancer patients and animals with immune problems and they not only handled it, but thrived on it.

 

Theories of what dangers abound can be found in any situation, but real-life experience of how these dangers actually play out has more value. In reality there is just as much risk involved in feeding processed food, as a fresh food diet.

[MaryJane]

In theory ???

 

I guess I'm a little confused as to what you consider theory. Granted, my theory that feeding meat chunks is safer than feeding chicken or hamburger is not proven and I don't have the abilities (resources) to do testing that would withstand scrutiny.

 

But ....

 

- There have been studies that look at the effects of salmonella and certain strains of E.Coli and their damage to people and canines including recent outbreaks that identified E.Coli as the culprit - is this what you are considering a "theory"?

 

- There are studies on "bacteria transferring" from one host to another, that's why in the last decade or so nurses have taken to wearing gloves all the time and changing them between patients in addition to using germicide on their hands - do you consider the "transferring of bacteria" a theory?

 

- FDA has recommended washing all surfaces that come into contact with raw chicken because of the high incidence of bacterial contamination which they have identified through testing -- do you consider raw chicken having bacterial contamination a theory?

 

- FDA recommends cooking hamburger to specific temperatures to kill bacteria because hamburger has been identified in some outbreaks of E.Coli - do you consider not fully cooked hamburger having a chance of bacterial contamination a theory?

 

The above points cover the "facts as determined by studies" of bacterial issues with chicken and hamburger, the transferring of bacteria, and the damage that bacteria can do. These are not theories of "possible harm", they have been proven. But, I do agree that with any possible danger there is a "risk level" which is measurable and while some people might be able to cope with a higher risk level, others cannot. Also, some people may choose to expose themselves to a higher risk level and if they are making an informed decision - then it is their right. What I would object to is exposing someone else that is immune-compromised and not letting them now of the dangers. For example, if I don't wash my hands after handling raw chicken and then go into a nursing home and interact with the seniors - I am putting them at risk and they have not agreed to be exposed to that risk while I did by not washing my hands. Another example, how would anyone feel if their surgeon did not wash their hands before starting a surgery on them?

 

Your point about dogs and cats being able to handle bacteria differently is true but, if a dog is immune-compromised a "bad" bacteria that is normally kept in check by all the other good bacteria" may have free rein in the gut once an individual or canine is started on antibiotics as the antibiotics tend to kill all the "good bacteria" first and that leaves the bad bacteria" to have a real good time.

 

As you noted and I agree, kibble can be contaminated and can also cause problems.

 

Your point about 4000 members not experiencing a food-borne illness is a good point but, does not mean that they never will or that there are no food borne illnesses experienced by the rest of the population. And, it is important to note that they are "assuming the risk" of any contaminants and if they are healthy, they may be able to brush off any illnesses easily -- it is the people that their dogs come into contact with that might not be able to. Small children that come up and pat the dog and then don't wash their hands later, elder people that hug a dog and also "forget" to wash their hands or face are much more susceptible to any bacteria that they come into contact with. One point that is valid here is just how much responsibility the raw feeder has in protecting the rest of the public. This is similar in arguments to the "vaccine issue". Is a parent responsible for vaccinating their child even though they don't believe in vaccines and think that it harms their child but yet, does this not put other children at risk ... Is the parent of a not vaccinated child required to let others know of their decision?

 

Another point you made is that 95% of the food borne illnesses are from produce and grain - while I know that the number is high -- that seems too high. Can you provide an internet reference for that from a reliable source?

 

As to your question whether I have fed raw - yes I have and I had severe problems with my older dog on it and stopped it very quickly. It's important to note again that I'm not against raw, I am only against the lack of information presented about bacterial contamination and the risks.

 

One other point that fit in here is the "black swan". The black swan theory is simply not being able to say that "something cannot not happen" because all it takes is one incidence to disprove. In the case of the "black swan", investigations had concluded that there were "no black swans" but, recently some were found in Australia.

 

 

edited to add -- sorry for the extremely long post

Edited March 28, 2011 by MaryJane