A "Pack Lunch" special presentation...

Dr. Watts Published: May 18, 2008

Q: I am considering feeding my dogs a raw diet. What are your thoughts?

A: The popularity of Internet chat rooms, blogs, and personal web pages has brought increased interest in raw pet foods.

The internet definitely has helped spread awareness about raw food diets, as it does about many, many other issues both veterinary in nature and otherwise.

There are several types of raw diets, all made using uncooked meat, bones, and other ingredients. The diets began as homemade recipes, but their popularity has lead to the availability of commercial raw diets.

Raw diets were not "born" of homecooked diets, though the connection between dog owners who started out preparing home cooked meals and now feed raw cannot be denied. It is very important to note that a proper raw diet is NOT just an uncooked home-prepared meal and vice-versa. The increase of people who recognize the benefits of raw feeding has indeed given rise to a number of commercially prepared raw foods. It should be noted that these premade raw foods range in quality and formulation from very poor to very reasonable.

Proponents of raw pet food focus on the high quality, fresh ingredients used in the food.

Yup, one of the benefits of feeding a non-commercial product is the control over quality. The global nature of food production is spreading wider every day, and the nature of commercially prepared processed foods mean that the consumer has no real way of knowing what the sources of the dozens of ingredients are, nor the way in which they were handled. Many dog owners come to raw feeding as a solution to what they see is the problem of lack of legislation, regulation, and enforcement in the commercial pet food industry.

They also generally reflect on the “natural” diet of wolves and other wild animals which do not cook their meals.

Indeed. This is a cornerstone of one approach to formulating a raw diet. Most if not all domestic dogs descended from the gray wolf. Modern day wild gray wolves are our dog's "living ancestors" and given the lack of physiological (NOT morphological) evolution in the last 15,000 or so that dogs have been dogs it is a great tool to be able use wolves as a model with which to base a diet plan on.

Sometimes mention is made of enzymes in raw food that are lost through the cooking process. There is little doubt that most of these diets are nutritionally sound. However, there is considerable doubt about whether these diets represent optimum nutrition.

In order to discuss "optimum nutrition", a definition of "optimum nutrition" is needed. Also required are diets to compare. Dr. Watts is clearly making a differentiation between "nutritionally sound" and "optimum nutrition", but he is making blanket statements about raw food that doesn't appear to be based on any actual knowledge of a properly prepared raw diet.

In addition, there is serious concern about the safety of these diets.

Most safety concerns are not based on realistic assessments of risk. They can be easily put at ease with a presentation of scientific facts along with diligence in following proper methods for preparing raw diets and handling raw foods.

Veterinary nutritionists have published libraries of research on the digestive system of dogs and the way they utilize specific nutrients. The profession has also determined optimum requirements for many nutrients in specific breeds, sizes, life stages, and performance levels. For instance, we know precisely the optimum ratio of calcium to phosphorous for joint health in growing large breed dogs. We also know some sources of calcium can be efficiently absorbed by dogs and others cannot.

Which is why many raw feeders use this research to help them formulate their dog's raw diet and look after their health!

When you feed your dog a reputable premium food labeled for giant breed growth, your pet will benefit from a century of nutritional advances.

There has been no "nutritional advance" in the last century, that doesn't make sense whether you have a toy breed or a giant breed. Nutrition is nutrition, either we understand how to provide it or we don't. What has been accomplished in the last century is figuring out the minimum requirements for maintaining the lives of companion animals using substandard and unnatural ingredients. This is hardly about "optimum nutrition". Advances in processing and packaging techniques have meant that we can get away with feeding prepared foods that can be made on a larger and cheaper scale now than ever before.

If you grind beef bones and mix into a recipe from the Internet, you may not be providing optimal nutrition.

Maybe you are, maybe you're not! It depends on this "recipe" and what makes up the balance of the diet. This example is quite obviously one that Dr. Watts made up off the top of his head which is not rooted in knowledge of practicality nor common practice by raw feeders. Any raw feeder who grinds the food they feed will tell you that you can't grind beef bone with any standard household grinder. Grinders with the capability of grinding up bone from larger animals like cows, bison, pigs, or even lambs require heavy duty industrial strength grinders that cost thousands of dollars.

Dogs fed raw diet frequently have small pieces of bone visible in their stool. How much calcium was absorbed? How much phosphorous? Will this batch be the same as the last?

Yes, some dogs will pass small pieces of bone in their stool, especially when they first start eating a whole foods diet. I don't really see the relevancy of this observation. Anyone will tell you that food can be poorly absorbed even as part of a finely ground homogeneous sludge, as processed foods are. The question about "batches" again reveals that Dr. Watts doesn't really understand raw feeding. While some raw feeders do make up ground mixes, many don't at all, and most realize the necessity of feeding a diet which does NOT consist of the same meal day after day, week after week to avoid the very problem of deficiencies and excesses that they would be risking with a diet of the same "recipe" over a long period of time.

The life expectancy of dogs has doubled in the past 50 years in large part due to improved nutrition.

I'd really like to see supporting documents which back up this statement. I don't debate that the life expectancy of dogs has increased as well as the quality of life for many, but this is more likely due to the status of companion animals and their roles in our households than the shift to processed foods as Dr. Watts implies. Many advocates for raw food diets discuss this issue in various texts including Dr. Tom Lonsdale DVM, Dr. Ian Billinghurst DVM, and Carissa Keuhn on her well known website The Many Myths of Rawfeeding.

Being fed like a wolf may not be an optimal way to eat.

Granted, it may not, but it very well may be. This is a pretty non-committal statement!

Wolves live very different lives and generally die considerably earlier than our pets.

They are wild animals subject to any manner of threats in the wild that our dogs are not, nevermind the fact that dogs receive regular veterinary care.

The enzymes required for digestion are all produced by the body and do not need to be provided in a raw source.

This can be argued. Dr. Martin Goldstein, DVM discusses this in his book, "The Nature Of Animal Healing". Yes, the body does manufacture digestive enzymes, but there is evidence that eating processed foods where the natural enzymatic content has been denatured by heat puts an unnatural strain on the body and the organs that produce digestive enzymes.

In fact, since enzymes are proteins, most will be simply broken down by the saliva, stomach acid, and other secretions of the digestive tract.

This statement WAY oversimplifies the issue.

There is also considerable concern for the safety of raw diets.

As you've mentioned...

Several recent studies from different sources have cultured potentially pathologic bacteria from 30 to 90 percent of raw dog foods.

I believe the word you're looking for is pathogenic, not "pathologic".

OF COURSE there's been bacteria cultured from raw meat dog food. IT'S RAW MEAT!!! There isn't a single educated raw feeder out there who will deny the existence of pathogenic bacteria on the foods they feed.

Citing these sources at the end of the article would have been helpful and professional. Given that I don't have your sources I'm going to venture a guess that one of these "many" sources is a study done by Rita Finley et al. The CJVM has made the articles available online and I've had the opportunity to read thru that one. I find that study to be FULL of faults and no testament to support the argument that raw food is hazardous.

While most dogs do not get sick from these germs, some do. The bacteria are particularly dangerous for puppies, old dogs, sick pets, or those on certain medications.

Or in other words immunologically suppressed dogs. Adult dogs most susceptible to infection caused by normal loads of bacteria found in one's environment (including on the food one eats) are chronically ill dogs. One way to avoid chronic illness and disease is to eat a healthy diet -- a raw diet.

Another recent study found 30 percent of dogs fed raw diets have positive fecal cultures for these same dangerous organisms.

The implication here is that that is bad. The way a dog's body safely deals with high bacterial loads entering it's system is to quickly and efficiently send the bacteria through the system before it can take up residence and colonize. We have to remember that whether a dog is raw fed or not it's going to encounter high bacterial loads doing what a dog does -- sniffing it's surroundings, checking out other dogs, grooming itself with it's mouth. Any dog that has the opportunity to "ground score" edible items like decaying food or another animal's feces is going to shed the bacteria these items carry in it's feces.

This study dispels the myth that a dog’s stomach acid kills all the bacteria in the food.

Good, because it's just a myth!

It also raises concern for children, elderly people, or immune-compromised individuals who come into contact with dogs that shed these bacteria in their feces.

There's an easy solution to this "problem" -- it's called common sense and reasonable hygiene. Wash your hands regularly. Don't let your kids eat dog poop. Follow safe raw meat handling practices. Don't let your dog eat raw meat on the living room couch....

At a recent conference I attended, a veterinarian from the University of Minnesota presented a sad case of a litter of puppies that died of bacterial meningitis. The bacteria cultured from their brain tissue matched the bacteria cultured from their mother’s raw diet. Although well-meaning, this pet owner’s choice of pet food directly led to the death of the puppies. This was certainly not an example of optimum nutrition.

This is indeed unfortunate, but hardly a reason to take into question the practice of raw feeding. How many non rawfed dams and pups suffer bacterial meningitis? Surely it's not a malady confined to raw fed dogs! Though I'm not going to argue that this happened, again I think that the focus isn't in the right place. One must consider why this happened to this particular mom and pups. Was it related to unsafe handling? Was this dog more severely compromised health wise than other dogs in her demographic? Maybe a better issue to raise is why the thousands and thousands of raw fed breeding dogs and their progeny don't all die of bacterial meningitis?

However, it probably does accurately reflect what happens in wild wolves from time to time.

I doubt it. "Mother Nature" or whatever you want to call it doesn't allow for animals to be sickened by their natural diet.

Like most veterinarians, I never recommend raw pet food.

Like most veterinarians you appear to know very little about raw food, and if you're like "most vets" you probably have very little training or experience in the field of nutrition. There are definitely vets out there who do, and who feel comfortable discussing raw diets and recommending raw to their clients.

I advise my clients on ways to provide optimum nutrition.

"Optimum nutrition" as defined by who? Last time I checked there was hardly a consensus on what foods are capable of delivering "optimum nutrition". It would be nice if there were -- every dog owner in the world could just feed this one food and stop worrying about it!

For those who choose to disregard the advice of the overwhelming majority of veterinarians, the FDA has issued guidelines for feeding raw pet foods. The guidelines can be found at fda.gov/cvm/CVM_Updates/rawdiet.htm.

Those guidelines in my personal opinion are pretty lax, even just plain misinformed, then again it doesn't take the FDA issuing a list of guidelines to tell me that my own prepared foods should be kept frozen in transport or that the companies who make prepared foods that I might buy should self-regulate their practices to avoid contamination. FYI, raw dog food should NEVER be thawed in the microwave as recommended by the FDA. I've seen the danger of this one first hand.

Dr. Watts is a companion animal general practitioner and owner of Clevengers Corner Veterinary Care. He can be reached through ClevengersCorner.com or by calling 428-1000.

Anika Evans does not hold a veterinary degree, but has owned between one and three dogs at a time over the last decade and spent much of the last three years intensively researching topics related to the world of veterinary care, nutrition, physiology, commercial pet food manufacturing, among other things. She has experience with natural food diets and non-pharmaceutical oriented health care for both humans and companion animals. She has been feeding her own dogs a completely raw diet with no reliance on commercially prepared foods for over three years now. She can be found participating in discussions about health, nutrition, and raw feeding on the Dogster.com forums. You can contact her through her website at www.manteega.com.

Back to Pack Lunch articles page

Anika Evans Photography home