disturbing photographs (kibble damage)

[mafiaprincess]

I just use a random petsmart kit. Toothpaste with finger brush and toothbrush.

Since dogs try to lick the paste of the brush while brushing unlike people, I don't think that people paste is a good idea.. Most of it would be swallowed..

[phoenix]

hey everyone,
I didn't post until I did a little reading to check on my facts...

First, plaque is the precursor to tartar, which is what causes the yellowish teeth ... and plaque is caused by bacteria which is a normal part of the dog's mouth, mixed with food residue and saliva. If the food or the saliva has an abnormally low pH, then the bacteria thrive and the build up increases and if not removed, calcifies into tartar.

Apparently, carbohydrate based foods cause an imbalance in acidity/alkalinity, which increases the bacteria levels, and then sugars (simple carbs like starches broken down by the enzymes in saliva as well as added dietary sugars) feed the bacteria... as well, the acidic environment allows minerals in the teeth (calcium, etc) to leach out, weakening the structure.

In humans, plaques are intensified by white bread and sugars, refined carbohydrates... and meat (??not sure why, I couldn't find out)...

So, yes the food is to blame for that, unless you were feeding all protein and no carbs or only complex carbs not acted upon by amylase, the enzyme in saliva. But it stands to reason that foods with fewer carbohydrates (such as the quality/holistic kibble that many of us recommend) will result in far fewer dental issues than those with large amounts of hi sugar/easily convertable carbohydrates.

Now, about the scrubbing action- I don't think that kibble really scrapes away the plaque, although my dogs do chew theirs. Their teeth are long, and the scrape from the kibble couldn't be more than the diameter of the piece of kibble, I think. The kibble would be broken before it did good to the upper part of the tooth. I've heard that giving dogs squash, apple or other fibrous fruit/vegetables can help to scrub their teeth as they chew up big pieces, and this makes sense to me. I've seen my guys with their heads sideways, grinding with their back teeth on a particularly tough piece of meat or fish to cut it up... they never do that with kibble!!

One website I read recommended cheese as a treat because it is alkaline and balances the acid environment, raising the pH while increasing saliva and diluting in the mouth.

HOWEVER: I do think that good genes have a lot more to do with dental health than diet or owner care do... For myself, I don't have a single cavity... and I can't say it's because i floss regularly or never eat sugar...

Here's an interesting review of some literature, from a feline vet: http://www.littlebigcat.com/index.ph...dcleantheteeth

"In my experience as a feline veterinarian, I've probably examined at least 13,000 cats' mouths. There was no real pattern to the dental and periodontal disease I saw. If anything, tartar and gum disease seemed to be more attributable to genetics or concurrent disease (such as feline leukemia or feline AIDS) than to any particular diet. I saw beautiful and horrible mouths in cats eating wet food, dry food, raw food, and every possible combination. Many of my patients initially ate mostly or exclusively dry food; yet these cats had some of the most infected, decayed, foul-smelling mouths I saw. If there was any dietary influence at all, I'd say that raw-fed cats had better oral health than cats on any type of commercial food. However, the overall effect of diet on dental health appeared to be minimal at most.

If your vet still believes the myth of dry food and dental health (which is still actively promoted by the pet food companies despite the utter lack of scientific support for the theory), here are a few references that refute the idea:


Logan, et al., Dental Disease, in: Hand et al., eds., Small Animal Clinical Nutrition, Fourth Edition. Topeka, KS: Mark Morris Institute, 2000, p. 487. "Although consumption of soft foods may promote plaque accumulation, the general belief that dry foods provide significant oral cleansing should be regarded with skepticism. A moist food may perform similarly to a typical dry food in affecting plaque, stain and calculus accumulation...Typical dry dog and cat foods contribute little dental cleansing. As a tooth penetrates a kibble or treat the initial contact causes the food to shatter and crumble with contact only at the coronal tip of the tooth surface...The kibble crumbles...providing little or no mechanical cleansing...." The author also reviewed two studies on cat "dental" treats which showed "no significant difference in plaque or calculus accumulation with the addition of dental treats to either a dry or a moist cat food." Of course, this book was produced by Hill's, so it heavily promotes t/d. However, although t/d provided a "statistically significant" improvement, when you look at the actual graphs, the difference between Dog Chow and t/d is not impressive.

"...When comparing dry food only and non-dry food only fed dogs...there is no pattern to the trends (some teeth show an apparent protective effect from feeding dry food only, and others show the opposite -- for calculus index, the trend is protective for all five teeth in dogs feed dry food only, whereas for gingival index it is the opposite, and it is mixed for attachment loss). All maxillary teeth are significantly less likely to be mobile in the dry food only group, yet the mandibular first molar tooth showed the opposite effect." Harvey et al., Correlation of diet, other chewing activities and periodontal disease in North American client-owned dogs. J Vet Dent. 1996 Sept;13(3):101-105. Logan (above) assessed this study as follows: "In a large epidemiologic survey, dogs consuming dry food alone did not consistently demonstrate improved periodontal health when compared with dogs eating moist foods."

There is an excellent review of the literature by A. Watson (Diet and periodontal disease in dogs and cats. Aust Vet J. 1994;71:313-318). This study is fully of interesting historical items. For instance, one study of cat skulls found evidence of severe periodontal disease in 25% of 80 cats; 75 of the skulls dated from 1841 to 1958, and 2 were from Egypt during the time of the Pharoahs!

According to the above review, many of the early studies showed less tartar formation with hard dry food vs the same food mixed with water, and similar results were reported in a study with canned vs dry cat foods. In 1965 a study compared feeding raw whole bovine trachea, esophagus, and attached muscle and fat, vs the same food minced. Plaque and gingival inflammation were increased with the minced diet. Even more fascinating, they tube-fed the minced food and found that plaque and gingivitis did not decrease, "showing food did not need to be present in the mouth to induce these changes." In fact, gingivitis tended to increase when dogs were tube-fed, "suggesting that even the minimal chewing required with minced food had some cleansing or protective effect." Minced food is similar in texture to canned food.

A couple of studies showed that *large* dry food biscuits (not kibble) actually removed tartar, which is probably the theory underlying t/d's oversized chunks. Feeding of half an oxtail accomplished the same thing when fed weekly in another study. (I can just see it now, "Brand X's Tartar Control Oxtails.") The study also noted that "No harmful effects were observed from feeding oxtails to > 200 dogs for > 6 years."

Gorrel and Rawlings (The role of tooth-brushing and diet in the maintenance of periodontal health in dogs. J Vet Dent. 1996 Dec;13(4):139-143) state that: "In a previous study, we showed that the daily addition of an appropriately designed chew to a dry food diet is effective in reducing accumulation of dental deposits...the addition of the chew to the dry food diet also reduced the severity of gingivitis that developed, compared with the regimen of dry food diet alone." This points out that dry food does not prevent tartar/gingivitis without additional treatment.

Interestingly, Gorrel states in another article that "The consensus is that supragingival calculus per se is not directly involved in the etiology or pathogenesis of [periodontal] disease, and is mainly of cosmetic significance if plaque removal is adequate." (Periodontal disease and diet; J Nutr. 1998;128:2712S-2714S.)

A more recent review (DuPont G. Prevention of periodontal disease. Vet Clin N Amer. 1998 Sept;28(5):1129-1145) says, "In some dogs, dry kibble or fibrous diet helps slow plaque accumulation more than does soft or canned food...Other chewing behaviors may be even more important for reducing plaque than is feeding dry food." Not exactly a ringing endorsement of dry food! He cites 2 studies showing Hill's t/d to be effective for "decreasing plaque and calculus accumulation."

A review of feline neck lesions found no significant influence of diet. (Johnson N, Acquired feline oral cavity disease, Part 2: feline odontoclastic resorptive lesions. In Practice. 2000 Apr:188-197).
These studies show that dry food does not clean a cat's teeth any better than eating pretzels cleans ours! At best, we can say that dry food tends to produce slightly less tartar than canned food. For cats, the benefits of feeding canned food far outweigh any possible dental problems that may result. After all, it is much easier for your vet to clean your cat's teeth once a year than to treat diabetes, urinary tract problems, and other diseases that are either directly caused or aggravated by feeding dry food. "

[technodoll]

amen! phoenix, thank you so much for your post. i love the way you lay out facts & studies interlaced with your own points of view, makes for an interesting read + easy to follow and understand. i should have perhaps tried to do the same in my initial post, and will try to learn for the next time. now i feel the subject can be laid to rest, peacefully...

[jesse's mommy]

Originally Posted by technodoll

on a more serious note... why am i getting bashed for posting photos that challenge some of your beliefs, and make you get all defensive? jeeeez.... must be some truth to all of it, then. And i say "so what?". One of my own dogs is on kibble, so whoever said i thought the concept was evil is really full of it. Nice to be judged like that from one post, eh?

With the risk of sounding mean, but not having intentions of being mean or rude, but I do need to comment on this. The reason why you feel you are getting bashed is because you literally seek out sites that bash kibble. And according to these threads, it's all kibble, not just the low quality stuff. Look at a lot of the threads you've started, it bashes kibble. As it has been said many times before, all kibble is not the culprit, it's mis-educated people who choose to neglect their pets. I'm not bashing raw and I never will because it's a choice that some people make for their pets and it fits well with their budget and their pets system and it works. My aunt and uncle feed their dogs raw and it works great for them. But high quality kibble works too. That's all that we are saying. One is not better than the other. It's our job here to educate those who have questions on BOTH not to keep bashing one. It is a very fine line, but it's something that both the raw feeders and the non raw feeders need to respect in each other. It's not a race to see who can pull more people to their side. I think the main point is to be more open minded and respectful to those of us who choose not to feed raw.

Originally Posted by technodoll

what toothpaste do you recommend for a dog's teeth? would it be OK to use one for humans, as long as there is none swallowed? the doggy-ones i've tried (enzymatic toothpastes) don't "foam" and my boy is so engrossed in trying to eat the stuff, brushing teeth is a chore and leads to nowhere... any tips? yes he must have bad teeth genes, i agree, and since he's not going back on raw for a few months, i need to keep his teeth as clean as I can for now. they get so gross, so fast! And this on some of the best kibbles available, too.

Jesse hates doggie toothpaste, so we use childrens toothpaste. It cleans just as well as doggie toothpaste and it is safe for her to swollow. We use Curious George Berry Banana for her. We got it at Walmart for under a dollar. It's a fun game for her, she loves it. As I said before, I'm not very good at it because she loves sucking on the toothbrush, but she loves it and I'll never take that fun away from her.

[Puppyluv]

technodoll, I would be wary of using any toothpaste with fluoride. Burts Bees makes some great non-fluoride ones, both minty and fruity (kids) but there are other fluoride-free ones (eg. tom's of maine)
http://www.burtsbees.com/webapp/wcs/...Id=11718&top=Y
http://www.tomsofmaine.com/toms/dept.asp?dept%5Fid=400

[Prin]

From what I understood from the vet I worked at, the enzymatic toothpaste works even if you don't really get the chance to rub it in. The whole idea is that it's enzymes breaking down bacteria and the products of the bacteria, so even if you think you're not helping, you probably are. At least that is how I understood it...

[Lissa]

It is my opinion that even premium kibbles cannot compare to a raw diet because in the end, all kibbles are heated to such a degree that it is unnatural (and deficient). Not to mention, it is not normal for any animal to eat the same thing everyday with a total balance of nutrients at each meal - variety is healthy/normal not monotony JMHO!

Minnow who refuses to eat anything but Royal Canin has awful gums/teeth. My last Siamese was the same (she was on Go! Natural and refused to eat raw).
Our last family dog was fed kibble and she also had not to nice teeth/gums, even with daily brushing. When she was switched over to raw, her teeth were as white as her puppy teeth had been.
Dodger has had daily teeth brushing and was a fed premium kibble for all but 3-4 weeks of his puppy hood (when he still had milk teeth)...His teeth have always looked like the belonged to a senior dog (until he was switched to raw and within a 2-4 days his teeth were whiter than ever).
Bad genes? Quite possible! But there is no doubt in my mind that on a raw diet, their teeth/gums would not have been anywhere near as unhealthy (if unhealthy at all)... Prevention is the best cure and it is my opinion that this is what a raw diet provides.

I have no doubt that you all want the best for you dog and think you are giving it to them (just as I do). And contrary to what you may think, I respect everyone decision to feed whatever (it is certainly not my place to judge when Minnow is still on a crap kibble!)
I feed raw because even on premium quality kibble, Dodger’s teeth had awful plaque build up, he had terrible gas, pooped at least 4 times a day (usually soft), his coat was blah and his breath was bad. Otherwise he was “healthy” and active but once we made the switch to raw (everything is organic - no supermarket/factory farm meats) all of these "minor" symptoms disappeared. My issue is that these "minor" symptoms would have amounted to huge problems as he aged and became less active.

A view from someone who doesn’t feed raw but doesn’t believe in commercial diets:

”I'm not convinced dogs require raw food, necessarily, but certainly modern grain-based, super-processed preserved dog foods aren't doing dogs a favor, health-wise. I hang around with a bunch of dog-owners who feed mostly home-prepared diets (raw or not), and I'm frequently shocked when I meet other people's "grain fed dogs": they look horrible to me in comparison to meat-fed dogs. The owners think they are healthy and normal, too, because they mostly see only grain-fed dogs. Folks, it's not normal for dogs to smell bad in between baths. To have gunky teeth. To have greasy hair. To have allergies. To have no muscle development. To be fat. To be hyper or lethargic. To start aging at age 7. To produce huge piles of poop. To need their anal glands expressed. These are all caused by feeding a primarily carnivorous animal a diet better suited to a cow.”

Bottomline, we are all going to have differing opinions and that's good - especially so for new pet owners who want to make an informed decision! I don't think anybody is looking to start a fight or hurt each other's feelings - its just hard not to let emotions get carried away when you believe in something so strongly!

[erykah1310]

IM sorry but after just reading through this post, i cant help but wonder seriously, i believe a huge part in dental health depends on genetics, my Nikita is fed PEDIGREE for gosh sakes and her teeth are pearly white at 3 years old, not to mention that brushing her teeth is out of the question!!! I have never successfully managed to do it , so instead i keep a close eye on them. She does however chew, LOTS of bones. and not the fancy dancy ones that are $20 at the pet stores, NO im talking Moose/Bear/Cow legs!!! Come hunting season NOTHING goes to waste!!! All meat is consumed by US and bones by the dogs!! Pelts are tanned and used for many things too. Gloves boots, hats and so on! Call us barbaric if you like but thats a whole nother thread. Back to the topic on hand,
I believe that a dog who is cared for at all, will have less of a chance of looking as bad as that poor dog. I would spend the hundreds of dollars to clean my dogs teeth in a heart beat, I have an obsession with my teeth so why not theirs?

[phoenix]

Lissa, good point: we have two passionate viewpoints on this board (and both slightly defensive I think an uneasy mixture. Let's take comfort in the fact that everyone is trying to do the best for their animals within their means.

A couple of things- I became really interested in this topic and did a lot of reading and researching last night because I do feed both kibble and raw, and debate switching to completely raw now and then (I don't because my dogs spend an incredible amount of time with my dad, and that wouldn't be fair to ask him to do)...

Anyway, I found out that in the few studies that I could find, (human and dog...) genetics is huge. Much bigger factor than diet. It plays in the buffering of the acid in the mouth, the amount of saliva, the strength of the enamel, etc etc. Secondly, bones and rawhides (I know, dangerous!) were found to be the best tools at the dog's disposal for keeping teeth clean (so there you go Erykah!)... Thirdly, they did not find a huge difference between the three diets (raw vs kibble vs cooked) in terms of teeth, certainly not enough to make a dietary decision solely based on how the teeth were kept clean. Raw however was best for this...

Jesse's mommy: You said, it is our job to educate people on both raw and kibble based diets. I don't really agree with you, exactly. I think it IS technodoll's "job"/passion to educate people on raw... just as it is prin's "job" to educate people on kibble... some of us fall in the middle and each has supporters on both sides. It helps me a lot to hear the debate, not to hear oh yeah, both are equally good. They aren't equally good... each has its own plusses and minuses and I'm very happy to hear both sides from different, passionate people. It would be dishonest of technodoll to go on about the benefits of kibble, because she doesn't believe it. We all understand her bias, and if you want to critique the sites that were put up, great! I think critical examination of anything on the internet is fabulous... just as I critique everything I read from Solid Gold...
Oh yeah, and you shouldn't even use kid toothpaste with dogs. Anything with fluoride or baking soda can upset the stomach (...but as with anything, when it works...????? who knows)...
Anyway, I just want to say that I've found this really interesting and appreciate everyone's points. I don't think TD's intention is to bash kibble per sey, but to encourage raw feeding... and for every thread about raw I guarantee there are two supporting certain brands of kibble around here...

[meb999]

Buster has absolutely GORGEOUS pearly white teeth, and he eats a combination of home-cooked food and kibble. Of course his teeth are clean regularly, just as mine are. I also brush his teeth.

I agree that genetics and overall care have alot more to do with really bad doggy teeth then just blaming it on the kibble.

I eat an all natural diet, of salads and fresh meat (granted I don't eat it raw or with bone), but I eat what humans are supposed to. I don't eat sweets because I'm hypoglycemic. Even though I eat lotsa roughage, I still feel the need to brush MY teeth everyday, and go to the dentist 2 a year. I also have THE WORSE teeth EVER. I have a zillion cavities, even though I brush 3 times a day (sometimes twice a day) and floss evry single day. Why am I telling you all this? Well, I think my dog deserves the same care that I get.

I am not for or against raw feeding, I'm actually considering switching to the diet myself. I think the 'bashing' we find on this thread is due to a long list of 'raw is good, kibble is the devil' threads we've saeen emerging, and it's made more than one person one this board defensive. I agree with you Phoenix, that there's alot of threads of good kibble (alot more than threads on raw) but none of those kibble threads say that feeding raw is detrimental to your pet, and implies that you're a bad owner if you don't feed kibble.

You have to remember that raw is still a very controversial diet. Some dogs have gotten exceedingly ill on it. I find it strange that no one has ever posted all the 'bad press' raw gets, and the thousands of scientists and researchers who say it's a dangerous diet. Most of those researchers and vets agree that a fresh-food diet is better for your dog, but that it should be cooked. Just like OUR meat is cooked.

[Lissa]

Originally Posted by meb999

You have to remember that raw is still a very controversial diet. Some dogs have gotten exceedingly ill on it. I find it strange that no one has ever posted all the 'bad press' raw gets, and the thousands of scientists and researchers who say it's a dangerous diet. Most of those researchers and vets agree that a fresh-food diet is better for your dog, but that it should be cooked. Just like OUR meat is cooked.

You are right, BARF is a very controversial diet because it goes against what the pet food industry has told us. Vets are the one's with the incentive to not support a raw diet. Just as declawing was once accepted and now its not, I believe (and hope) that eventually the raw diet will transition from being taboo to being accepted as a healthy diet.
I know you are aware of this but I can't say it enough: the species you are talking about feeding raw to have evolved to deal with bacteria. A raw diet is digested in 4-6 hours whereas kibble often takes a full 24 hours...so I am not sure why raw is supposedly more harsh than kibble? I always understood that aside from the enzymes/minerals lost by cooking food, that the heat binds the food molecules together - making them tighter which takes longer to break down and digest and also keeps our pet's organs working overtime... (the Pottenger experiment)

I am sure everyone would be interested in reading and possibly dissecting an article that is against raw - but of course, finding an unbiased source would be hard. If you know of one, I think you should post it - we all want our debates to be well-rounded, fair and as eductaional as possible!

Dodger was on homecooked for a while as well...because he was even less likely to chew his food his teeth didn't improve and neither did anything else. His coat actually deteriorated and it was the only time he ever required a doggy smell.

I agree that there are a few dogs out there he cannot tolerate raw but I think you will find a zillion more dogs that thrive on raw than those that don't.

[erykah1310]

I agree that there are a few dogs out there he cannot tolerate raw but I think you will find a zillion more dogs that thrive on raw than those that don't.

IMO, it varies from dog to dog! How is it that my dogs are doing so wonderfully on the "junk" food i feed them, where as some others may not actually get much nutrition from the same food? Like people, animals react to diets differently,

I too am really enjoying this thread, I havent done any research, and no one is going to change my mind on what i feed my dogs, I considered switching to another food, but someone in another thread stated so wonderfully " why fix it if it isnt broken?"

Very good points on both sides of this debate, and its wonderful eductaion for others who are finding thier dogs need " something better"

[Prin]

Originally Posted by meb999

I am not for or against raw feeding, I'm actually considering switching to the diet myself. I think the 'bashing' we find on this thread is due to a long list of 'raw is good, kibble is the devil' threads we've saeen emerging, and it's made more than one person one this board defensive. I agree with you Phoenix, that there's alot of threads of good kibble (alot more than threads on raw) but none of those kibble threads say that feeding raw is detrimental to your pet, and implies that you're a bad owner if you don't feed kibble.

Exactly. When I talk about kibble, I never compare it to raw. I even suggest raw as an alternative when the cause of allergies just can't be found. But so far this past week, most of the raw threads have bashed kibble at one point or another. I don't get why promoting in promoting raw, it always comes back to something like feeding kibble means we don't care about our pets.

And good point Erykah, it does depend on the animal. I've said it before and I'll say it again- feeding a dog raw when they don't tolerate it or just plain reject it is just as bad as feeding a dog with chronic allergies something like Pedigree. You have to give your dog what it needs, regardless of what the norm is. Some dogs are even vegetarian because they just don't tolerate meat. That's just how they are, and raw meat (predator diet or whatever you call it) in that case would be just as "abusive" and neglectful as feeding ol' roy.

[phoenix]

Originally Posted by Prin

I don't get why promoting in promoting raw, it always comes back to something like feeding kibble means we don't care about our pets.

The reason feeding raw is contrasted with feeding kibble is because feeding kibble is the dominant paradigm.

Just as feeding holistic around here is always contrasted with feeding grocery store brands. Feeding holistic is the alternative to THAT dominant paradigm.

It's just the way debate works

But in no way do I think it means we don't care about our pets.. who the heck else sits around and types about them all the time??(it's funny to be arguing this side, as I'm a kibble feeder, lol)...I just think there is a perception of bashing because of the exposure of deep seated beliefs and fear of judgement/ie. what I feed is a direct expression of my love for my dog... same as some parents, the toys I give my kid are equal to my love for them. That's

I feel pretty safe in this debate because I am searching for a belief!! i have no deep seated convictions to worry about protecting.

[phoenix]

well for the sake of debate I'm going to help out meb with her search for an article against raw. Here's a bunch. I haven't read it all, thought someone else might comment... I didn't find any clear reason for bias in a preliminary search... but they are mostly vets who are commenting...
http://www.secondchanceranch.com/tra...eat/index.html

I'll keep looking... but um, I'm not finding thousands of scientists and researchers who are 'agin it'

[Prin]

I liked this little bit:

I have a wolf sanctuary, and the truth is that wild-born wolves taken into captivity are typically malnourished. Most people *assume* that because wild dogs don't have the opportunity to cook their food, that nature has set up the perfect diet for them. This is simply not true. We know from their carcasses that they die of splintered fowl bones and have very bad dentalia (dental problems).

[Prin]

So far most of what I have found are articles about bacteria of raw meat causing problems in dogs... (I found these on PubMed so can't post the whole articles because of copywrite things):

"Detection of Echinococcus granulosus coproantigens in faeces from naturally infected rural domestic dogs in south eastern Australia." Aust Vet J. 2006 Jan-Feb;84(1-2):12-6, by Jenkins et al:

Echinococcus granulosus coproantigens were detected in 99 of 344 dogs (29%) from 95 farms in south eastern New South Wales and 38 of 217 dogs (17.5%) from 43 farms in Victoria. [...] Dietary and worming data revealed many owners fed raw meat and occasionally offal from domestic livestock and wildlife to their dogs and few owners wormed their dogs frequently enough to preclude the chance of patent E granulosus being present in their dogs.

"Evaluation of the association between feeding raw meat and Salmonella enterica infections at a Greyhound breeding facility." J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2006 May 15;228(10):1524-32, by Morley et al:

S. enterica infections and environmental contamination were common at this facility. A portion of the Salmonella strains detected on the premises was likely introduced via raw meat that was the primary dietary constituent. Some strains appeared to be widely disseminated in the population. Feeding meat that had not been cooked properly, particularly meat classified as unfit for human consumption, likely contributed to the infections in these dogs.

"Evaluation of bacterial and protozoal contamination of commercially available raw meat diets for dogs." J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2006 Feb 15;228(4):537-42. Strohmeyer et al.

Bacterial contamination is common in commercially available raw meat diets, suggesting that there is a risk of foodborne illness in dogs fed these diets as well possible risk for humans associated with the dogs or their environments

.

But then I found this link:
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/CVM_Updates/rawdiet.htm
"FDA Issues Final Guidance on Raw Meat for Animals"... which is a summary of the findings of this report: http://www.fda.gov/cvm/Guidance/Guide122.pdf

This is from page 10 of the report:

There is significant risk of nutritional deficiency or excess when such products are improperly
formulated.24,25 Calcium and phosphorus are often deficient in foods based on raw meat, and
should be supplemented accordingly. In addition to the risk of physical trauma or impaction,
large pieces of bone may not allow for efficient digestion and absorption, possibly resulting in
nutritional deficiency when bone is intended to serve as a source of dietary calcium. Essential
fatty acids and some trace minerals may also be deficient. Alternatively, foods based on raw
meat could be excessive in vitamin A if liver is used as a major ingredient and cause vitamin A
toxicity if fed for extended periods of time.26 Other fat soluble vitamins may be either excessive
or deficient as well.24,25
Although there have been claims made that raw meat foods are superior with respect to
providing adequate nutrition than other products substantiated to be complete and balanced, FDA is not aware of scientific evidence to support such claims.

[meb999]

http://www.life.ca/nl/83/pets.html

on raw bones :

http://www.thepetcenter.com/imtop/bones.html
http://www.thepetcenter.com/xra/bonecomp.html


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...30/ai_85370059
http://www.bi-mar.com/pomeranianBarf.asp
http://www.oldmillpets.com/showpracf...D=89&Private=0

[meb999]

http://www.azmira.com/StudyRawFoodDiets.htm
http://www.vetinfo.com/drawmeat.html
http://home.att.net/~wdcusick/raw.html
http://www.secondchanceranch.com/tra...stimonies.html
http://www.provet.co.uk/petfacts/healthtips/meat.htm
http://www.belfield.com/article11.html
http://life.ca/nl/83/pets.html
http://www.greatdanelady.com/article...w_diet_htm.htm
http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/128/12/2686S

alot of these articles are 'on the fence' they aren't 100% against raw. It's just not a black or white issue. Again, I don't want to be labeled 'the one who's against raw feeding', because I'm not. I'm researching the diet carefully (not on the net, because the info isn't very reliable) and am seriously considering it for my dog. If you can't do this diet right, you shouldn't do it at all.
There is nothing wrong with what I feed him right now. He's got white teeth, a beautifull shiny coat, he has no skin problem, and no diarhea.

[jesse's mommy]

Originally Posted by phoenix

Oh yeah, and you shouldn't even use kid toothpaste with dogs. Anything with fluoride or baking soda can upset the stomach (...but as with anything, when it works...????? who knows)...

The vet said the childrens toothpaste is fine because it's such a small percentage of fluoride and Jesse is a larger dog -- 65 pounds. The said if she was a small/toy breed, it wouldn't be recommended because all systems are different. He told me to keep an eye out the first few weeks to be sure she didn't have any reactions. It's been a few months now, so as you say, if it works right?

[muckypup]

This is a picture of my 5 yr olds teeth.

She is fed kibble and I brush her teeth about once a month.

While I do believe a dog that is fed a raw diet requires less brushing, those pictures of the kibble dog with the bleeding mouth are just photos of neglect. That is neglect, that is not about what the dog is fed.

[Lissa]

I just want to let everyone know that I do want to respond to all the anti-raw sites but I am dogsitting and don't have the time to go through all of those sites right now... I will try to sift through them when I get the opportunity but there seems to be too many for me to address individually...give me time

So I haven't forgotten and I am not avoiding the issue - just runnnig short on time!

[technodoll]

hey lissa, here is one of my favorites
http://www.bestfrisbeedogs.com/mybluedog.html

Dr Billinghurst's rebuttal to the anti-raw "second chance ranch" article. a total delight to read

[OntarioGreys]

I am coming into this post late,

Genetics plays a huge role

those pictures of the kibble dog with the bleeding mouth are just photos of neglect. That is neglect, that is not about what the dog is fed.

I have a greyhound here whose tarter buildup looks worse than the photo below from the first post within 6 months of a dental though his gums are not as bad as the second photo, but they will be bleeding along the gumline, he gets his teeth brushed with an enzymatic paste 3 times a week, he gets turkey necks or a knuckle bone once a week, plus he is fed kibble and he gets dentals every 9 to 12 months, by age 7 he had 12 teeth extracted


My prior greyhound "may" have had one dental at her first adoption at age 3 1/2 though I doubt it, as her teeth did not accumulate tarter during the time I had her, so she likely never needed one then, her vet records were turned over to my vet from her first adopter she had no dentals in the 3 1/2 years they had her, at 9 1/2 year her teeth were worn down some, a bit or staining of the enamel but no tarter, my most recent adopted greyhound will likely need dentals every 3 to 4 years, my eskimo had her first dental at 7. Both Sunny and Callie retired from the track at 3 1/2 years old so the track diet does not explaing the difference in their teeth, and both Sunny and Callie ate the same food in my home, Even my vet is blown away by Sunny's teeth, he has never ever seen tartar form at the rate his does, he had checked Sunny's teeth under a microscope and said they looked like a sponge, we had tried sealants after the 2nd dental, it made no difference within 1 months of his dental the tartar formation will be apparent on his back molars. The dogs are all on the same diet, Nikki's teeth I do not brush because she gets too agitated and is too much of a battle yet her teeth after a year looks cleaner than Sunny's looks in one month and they are the same age

Could the photos from the first post be cause of neglect? maybe, but they could also be of a dog who has genetically bad teeth like Sunny, if I did not brush and bone and start antibiotics prior to the yearly dental his gums may very well look the same after only 1 year.

[technodoll]

awe poor sunny... i guess it's just like with humans, some have little to no cavities and beautiful teeth despite no matter what, and others' teeth just fall apart even with rigorous cleaning & dental work. i have to say though, that is a heck of a scary photo... thanks so much for sharing your experience!

[Prin]

With some kids though, their teeth future depends on what they eat when they are young, too...

OG, I still think it's neglect for the pug in the first post because of the way the gums are all infected. With your dog's teeth you can see the tartar but you can also see that it doesn't go so far up into the gum that the gum is starting to rot everywhere.

[OntarioGreys]

But that photo is from the pugs teeth, I said Sunnys tartar build up looks worse than this photo within 6 months of a dental. His gums probably look better right after the dental because he is put on antibiotics a week prior the dental and then continues antibiotics a week after plus gets an antibiotics injection during the dental.

[Prin]

Oh... That's sad. Poor doggy.