I have a female Papillon and her two male puppies. Anyone who has had a
Papillon knows they are fussy eaters. I have tried several commercial
dry and wet dog foods to no avail. Hollywood delivered puppies 6 weeks
after we got her from a breeders, to our surprise. Being worried about
Hollywood not eating to feed her nursing puppies, my wife gave her
cooked hamburger & rice and cooked chicken & rice. She seemed to like
this, and continued to like it for some time. Even though it was extra
work, I felt quite good about this considering the preservatives, food
coloring, fillers and poor quality of meat that is in commercial dog
food.

A few months ago I stumbled across the BARF (Bones and Raw Food) diet.
Initially I thought, no way, my fussy dogs would not eat raw meat.
Recently I found out that dogs can not digest cooked fat and that
cooked meat loses enzymes required for digestion. This is especially
important considering how short a dogs intestines are. So a couple
weeks ago I bought them some meaty bones, I flash boiled them for 5
minutes so that only the outside was cooked. The dogs loved them even
when they got to the raw meat. A few days later I tried them on regular
ground raw beef. They went nuts over it and even a week later, still
love it. My wife was not as thrilled with the idea. She spoke to our
vet's secretary and went on a Papillon site to ask if a dog should eat
raw meat. Both plainly said no. No explanation, just no. Well that is
not good enough for me. Is there a reason why raw meat, their natural
food source for centuries, is not good for dogs, or are these people
blindly saying no because they heard it somewhere else and are
perpetuating the myth.

I understand that they also need vegetables, grains, calcium suppliment
and misc other additives added to the raw meat to be a balanced meal.
With that in mind, can anyone tell me why dogs should or should not eat
raw meat.

"John Casey" wrote in message
ups.com...
I understand that they also need vegetables, grains, calcium suppliment
and misc other additives added to the raw meat to be a balanced meal.
With that in mind, can anyone tell me why dogs should or should not eat
raw meat.

.........Dogs who are not pregnant or nursing have no nutritional requirement
for carbohydrates. You do need to add a calcium source if your are not
feeding meaty bones. With the addition of eggs, yogurt, organ meats,
especially liver, there's no need to add grains. Veges should comprise only
a small part of the diet if you choose to feed them.

buglady
take out the dog before replying

In article t,
buglady wrote:
........Dogs who are not pregnant or nursing have no nutritional requirement
for carbohydrates.

Working dogs need carbohydrates - just as with humans,
they're a primary energy source, and just as with humans all
carbs are not created equal. Arleigh Reynolds has done a
lot of research on sleddog nutritional requirements and has
some papers out with specific recommendations for working
dogs in general.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

2/3 of the Social Security Trustees are political appointees

"Melinda Shore" wrote in message
...
In article t,
buglady wrote:
........Dogs who are not pregnant or nursing have no nutritional
requirement
for carbohydrates.

Working dogs need carbohydrates

..............they may be a cheaper source of energy for working dogs, but
there's still no nutritional need for them.

buglady
take out the dog before replying

In article et,
buglady wrote:
.............they may be a cheaper source of energy for working dogs, but
there's still no nutritional need for them.

Well, that's not what Arleigh Reynolds says. A couch potato
dog won't need them, but a working dog certainly will if
it's not going to do the canine equivalent of bonk. The
Alaska Dog Mushers Association has an audiotape for sale
that has Reynolds talking specifically about carbs. Dogs
rely on fats for energy more than humans do but they still
need carbs.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

2/3 of the Social Security Trustees are political appointees

"Melinda Shore" wrote in message
...
In article et,
buglady wrote:
.............they may be a cheaper source of energy for working dogs, but
there's still no nutritional need for them.

........I was distracted by a peeping cat wondering where breakfast was, so
this got cut off mid thought!

Dogs
rely on fats for energy more than humans do but they still
need carbs.
.......yes, that's what I should have said and realized it as soon as I sent
it, that dogs use fat for energy. They do not NEED carbs. Look, what you
are saying is that giving working dogs carbs maximizes their performance.
For all I know using fat instead of carbs would make them curl up and have a
nice long nap instead of getting back in the traces and running, because fat
slows down digestion (illeal brake) while carbs ups the blood glucose - a
faster source of energy. You're manipulating the diet with carbs to get
maximum performance out of a working dog. That doesn't mean they need them
nutritionally, only that they work best to get what you want out of the dog.
AFAIC there's a difference.

buglady
take out the dog before eplying

In article . net,
buglady wrote:
For all I know using fat instead of carbs would make them curl up and have a
nice long nap instead of getting back in the traces and running, because fat
slows down digestion (illeal brake) while carbs ups the blood glucose - a
faster source of energy.

Well, sort of. Muscle glycogens are depleted more quickly
than fat stores but if you're only doing sprinty, bursty
type activities that shouldn't be a factor in performance.
For more endurance-oriented activities glycogens will be
depleted during the activity and should be replaced to keep
what's known as "bonking" in humans from happening. That's
why human endurance athletes consume energy gels and drinks
during races - they need carbs to replace the lost muscle
sugars. While dogs rely more on fats for energy they also
need to have muscle glycogens replaced over longer efforts.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

2/3 of the Social Security Trustees are political appointees

"Melinda Shore" wrote in message
...

Well, sort of. Muscle glycogens are depleted more quickly
than fat stores but if you're only doing sprinty, bursty
type activities that shouldn't be a factor in performance.

..........which is true for most dogs. They play wildly for 20 minutes, then
rest. Then they do it again.

While dogs rely more on fats for energy they also
need to have muscle glycogens replaced over longer efforts.

............Well, to me, this is more accurate: *While dogs rely more on
fats for energy, working dogs also need to have muscle glycogens replaced
over longer efforts for maximum performance.*

...........Not even talking about couch potatoes here, but most dogs, active
or not, do not need the kind of NASCAR nutrition you might feed a sled dog.
And that's even sort of artificial, because you're tailoring a diet suited
to events like running an Iditarod race. I can't imagine that years ago the
Inuit fed carbs to their dogs on a regular basis and they're working dogs.
It might have meant they had to rest more often (as an example - in reality
I don't know), but they were just trying to get from one place to another
and time wasn't an essential factor. In any case nutrition for an athlete
is not the same as for the average organism as you're always considering
maximum performace. It's sort of an artificial need because you have a
specific artificial goal in mind. Whatever your expert says about carbs and
athletes may hold true in that situation, but it doesn't necessarily
translate as a generality to all dogs.

buglady
take out the dog before replying

In article et,
buglady wrote:
..........Not even talking about couch potatoes here, but most dogs, active
or not, do not need the kind of NASCAR nutrition you might feed a sled dog.
And that's even sort of artificial, because you're tailoring a diet suited
to events like running an Iditarod race.

No, not really. For example, in the cases of sled dogs it's
often the case that sprint races, which are short, are run
on multiple days. You want to make sure that their energy
stores on day 2 or 3 are where they were on day 1. This is
going to be true of, say, agility dogs and gun dogs, too.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

2/3 of the Social Security Trustees are political appointees

John,
The vast majority of veterinarians disaprove of the BARF diet. Not
one single Diplomate of the American Colelge of Veterinary Nutrition
agrees that BARF feeding is a good idea. The BARF phenomena is a fad
diet that is based on a series of myths. See below for the myths.
If you have children at home this is a dangerous practice.
Bacterial contamination in raw meats is extremely common. BARFers who
make the decision to feed the BARF diet do so entirely based upon
emotional decision, there is no data that supports this fad.

Myth 1 - Claimed similarities between modern wild canids and the
domestic dog, and thus modern domestic dogs therefore have identical
genetic development and nutritional needs as wild canids.
Myth 2 - Claims of increased disease levels and shortened life spans in
pet dogs versus claimed lack of disease and increased life spans in
wild ancestral canids like wolves and coyotes.
Myth 3 - Claimed reduced levels of parasites.
Myth 4 - Claimed reduced levels of food intolerance, adverse reactions
to foods, and or "allergies".
Myth 5 - Claims that feeding "raw meaty bones" are good for
domestic dogs.
Myth 6 - Claimed increased value of uncooked foods versus cooked
foods and subsequent loss of trace micro-nutrients by the cooking
process.

All of these myths are just that purely myths without any
substantiation in science.