Re: German Shepherd diet hijack

[Anonymous]

[quote author=kizkiznobite link=topic=7101.msg238452#msg238452 date=1220022552]
my only input in this debate…vets…diets…dont make me laugh… :what:

they get a couple of lectures…they get to choose an animal for a marked assignment……….are you serious….so from your point of view then they learn every diet suitable for animal a …z.. antelope to zebra…rather un- realistic is that not? ….vets are good at what they do…they good at surgery and diagnostics and repair …it what a vets does….no …you are wrong..they have not had that education unless they have specialised….and the products that vet surgery outlets sell.??… it on commission…it a pay back for bursary funding…and most vets will go that route because they do not have the indepent dog gut system knowledge or because they are employed by a practice…most vets tell folk dont feed bones…most vets say the allergy is due to xyz in diet here have a can of this and feed it for life…

please…i can accept most of your argument but diets….. nahhhh…you in the land of the blind… 🙂
[/quote]

If you think that your knowledge of small animal diet is better than a vet’s – fine. I’ve spent a lot of time recently looking at published – scientifically verifiable – stuff about dog and cat dietary requirements and I’ve seen some of the blindingly dangerous stuff promulgated on the internet about diet by amateurs who think they know better.

So, who would I ask about pet diet? A vet or someone who thinks they know better? I’ll go with the vet every time.

[Foxisle_crazy]

[quote author=PhiltheBear link=topic=7101.msg238474#msg238474 date=1220032611]
[quote author=kizkiznobite link=topic=7101.msg238452#msg238452 date=1220022552]
my only input in this debate…vets…diets…dont make me laugh… :what:

they get a couple of lectures…they get to choose an animal for a marked assignment……….are you serious….so from your point of view then they learn every diet suitable for animal a …z.. antelope to zebra…rather un- realistic is that not? ….vets are good at what they do…they good at surgery and diagnostics and repair …it what a vets does….no …you are wrong..they have not had that education unless they have specialised….and the products that vet surgery outlets sell.??… it on commission…it a pay back for bursary funding…and most vets will go that route because they do not have the indepent dog gut system knowledge or because they are employed by a practice…most vets tell folk dont feed bones…most vets say the allergy is due to xyz in diet here have a can of this and feed it for life…

please…i can accept most of your argument but diets….. nahhhh…you in the land of the blind… 🙂
[/quote]

If you think that your knowledge of small animal diet is better than a vet’s – fine. I’ve spent a lot of time recently looking at published – scientifically verifiable – stuff about dog and cat dietary requirements and I’ve seen some of the blindingly dangerous stuff promulgated on the internet about diet by amateurs who think they know better.

So, who would I ask about pet diet? A vet or someone who thinks they know better? I’ll go with the vet every time.

[/quote]

:what: :nono:

[Sweetypye]

I suggest you ask your vet what amount of time is spent at university discussing and studying nutrition and dietetics for all the species and then dogs in particular.

I can tell you that vets get a whole day (if they are lucky) by a Commercial rep from say Hills, Royal Canin etc.

Now, in an earlier post you made reference to unbiased and unprejudiced views, I would think that even you may consider that a seminar given by a sales rep is hardly one to give the pros and cons of various diets.

I have been to a couple of these one of them specifically aimed at the GSD owner and his knowledge was sadly lacking and in fact he consulted me for some information about onoe or two items which he was unaware of!

There are one or two vets that specialise in nutrition, but not many.

If they knew so much why are they selling commercial diets that are mostly carbs when even PEDIGREE state on their site that there is “no proven need for carbohydrates in a dog’s diet”? :nono:

[Anonymous]

[quote author=PhiltheBear link=topic=7101.msg238474#msg238474 date=1220032611]
[quote author=kizkiznobite link=topic=7101.msg238452#msg238452 date=1220022552]
my only input in this debate…vets…diets…dont make me laugh… :what:

they get a couple of lectures…they get to choose an animal for a marked assignment……….are you serious….so from your point of view then they learn every diet suitable for animal a …z.. antelope to zebra…rather un- realistic is that not? ….vets are good at what they do…they good at surgery and diagnostics and repair …it what a vets does….no …you are wrong..they have not had that education unless they have specialised….and the products that vet surgery outlets sell.??… it on commission…it a pay back for bursary funding…and most vets will go that route because they do not have the indepent dog gut system knowledge or because they are employed by a practice…most vets tell folk dont feed bones…most vets say the allergy is due to xyz in diet here have a can of this and feed it for life…

please…i can accept most of your argument but diets….. nahhhh…you in the land of the blind… 🙂
[/quote]

If you think that your knowledge of small animal diet is better than a vet’s – fine. I’ve spent a lot of time recently looking at published – scientifically verifiable – stuff about dog and cat dietary requirements and I’ve seen some of the blindingly dangerous stuff promulgated on the internet about diet by amateurs who think they know better.

So, who would I ask about pet diet? A vet or someone who thinks they know better? I’ll go with the vet every time.

[/quote]

It wasn’t very long ago that you described the ignorance of another person as astounding, but quite frankly your ignorance of how a large number of vets in the UK operate is very naive. You are completely missing the point that Kizkiznobite was making & instead have gone on the defence.

The fact is a large number of vets in the UK do not recognise natural feeding as acceptable practice in ANY form and are paid commission to only recommend commercial pet foods from certain companies. They are not generally experts in canine nutrition unless they have chosen to specialize in that field. Just because someone is a vet does not mean they are always transparent about what diet is best for people’s pets.

Perhaps you have not researched general practice in the UK very much.

[Anonymous]

[quote author=Sweetypye link=topic=7101.msg238476#msg238476 date=1220033381]
I suggest you ask your vet what amount of time is spent at university discussing and studying nutrition and dietetics for all the species and then dogs in particular.

I can tell you that vets get a whole day (if they are lucky) by a Commercial rep from say Hills, Royal Canin etc.

[/quote]

As I have a postgraduate qualification n research rather than asking a vet I went straight to one of the University vet schools to get their answer. Answer – 10% of the the first year is taken up with nutrition for domestic animals. Slightly under that amount in year 2.

Not exactly one lecture by a pet food rep is it?

And that’s current teaching.

[Anonymous]

Well you hear what you want too life tells a different story

[/quote]

As I have a postgraduate qualification n research rather than asking a vet I went straight to one of the University vet schools to get their answer. Answer – 10% of the the first year is taken up with nutrition for domestic animals. Slightly under that amount in year 2.

Not exactly one lecture by a pet food rep is it?

And that’s current teaching.
[/quote]

[Sweetypye]

Actually any of us can get this information out of the vet schools as there are so few and there is a syllabus.

So watch this space.

[Anonymous]

[quote author=Mark. link=topic=7101.msg238479#msg238479 date=1220033580]
It wasn’t very long ago that you described the ignorance of another person as astounding, but quite frankly your ignorance of how a large number of vets in the UK operate is very naive. You are completely missing the point that Kizkiznobite was making & instead have gone on the defence.

The fact is a large number of vets in the UK do not recognise natural feeding as acceptable practice in ANY form and are paid commission to only recommend commercial pet foods from certain companies. They are not generally experts in canine nutrition unless they have chosen to specialize in that field. Just because someone is a vet does not mean they are always transparent about what diet is best for people’s pets.

Perhaps you have not researched general practice in the UK very much.
[/quote]

No, but I have researched pet nutrition – largely because I was given a lot of misleading information about ‘natural’ diets.

The problem seems to be that most natural diets are fads with no real basis in provable fact for their efficiency or safety. As a matter of provable (that is, scientifically verifiable) fact some ‘natural’ diets can be downright dangerous.

What tends to happen is that amateurs get hold of an idea that seems to make sense to them but don’t follow through to investigate fully. They then jump up and down and shout that they are right – but don’t produce any evidence to prove it. And – by evidence I mean hard data obtained in controlled conditions.

Want to use the BARF diet? Be my guest. Then have a look at clinically controlled trials showing the amount of salmonella it’s possible for a dog to ingest. Think your dog’s nutritional system is immune to salmonella – total myth. Think those chickens you are buying from the supermarket are safe? According to Defra 30% of them carry salmonella. Natural food – or potential poison?

Does that mean BARF is wrong? Maybe – maybe not. However, on the basis of hard evidence would I ever use BARF? No. The real evidence – not amateur hearsay – says the risk is too high.

So, yes I’ve researched this – in reading peer reviewed studies by competent veterinary university departments and not just listened to someone who has said – “I fed my dog this, he’s been fine”. So he will be – until he gets food poisoning.

[Sweetypye]

Nothing in life is risk free.

Dogs die from salmonella that have never eaten raw.

There is plenty of work out there by VETS (yes your heroes) which SUPPORT raw feeding; Their books/information are easily available, these would include Ian Billingshurst, Tom Lonsdale, Nick Thompson, Christopher Day. Richard Allport etc etc

some of us do not need theoretical information, we have empirical knowledge.  Feeding our supremely healthy dogs for years on raw, nott only healthy but successful in working disicplines etc

None of my dogs or my child nor myself have ever contracted salmonella, e-coli, neosporum caninuum, campylobacter, cryptospiridium, coccidosis etc etc etc

Oh, and not needed any treatment from the vets other than jabs for 8 years now.
perhaps you can point us in the direction of these peer reviewed studies on raw feeding?

Ps not had any answers to the questions put to you re your wife’s extensive knowledge and skills with GSD security dogs either?  Any info on anything that you claim going to be forthcoming?

[Sweetypye]

http://www.holisticvet.co.uk/nutrition.htm

http://www.naturalmedicinecentre.co.uk/content/view/13/35/

http://www.any-uk-vet.co.uk/day/

[Anonymous]

[quote author=PhiltheBear link=topic=7101.msg238489#msg238489 date=1220036108]
[quote author=Mark. link=topic=7101.msg238479#msg238479 date=1220033580]
It wasn’t very long ago that you described the ignorance of another person as astounding, but quite frankly your ignorance of how a large number of vets in the UK operate is very naive. You are completely missing the point that Kizkiznobite was making & instead have gone on the defence.

The fact is a large number of vets in the UK do not recognise natural feeding as acceptable practice in ANY form and are paid commission to only recommend commercial pet foods from certain companies. They are not generally experts in canine nutrition unless they have chosen to specialize in that field. Just because someone is a vet does not mean they are always transparent about what diet is best for people’s pets.

Perhaps you have not researched general practice in the UK very much.
[/quote]

No, but I have researched pet nutrition – largely because I was given a lot of misleading information about ‘natural’ diets.

The problem seems to be that most natural diets are fads with no real basis in provable fact for their efficiency or safety. As a matter of provable (that is, scientifically verifiable) fact some ‘natural’ diets can be downright dangerous.

What tends to happen is that amateurs get hold of an idea that seems to make sense to them but don’t follow through to investigate fully. They then jump up and down and shout that they are right – but don’t produce any evidence to prove it. And – by evidence I mean hard data obtained in controlled conditions.

Want to use the BARF diet? Be my guest. Then have a look at clinically controlled trials showing the amount of salmonella it’s possible for a dog to ingest. Think your dog’s nutritional system is immune to salmonella – total myth. Think those chickens you are buying from the supermarket are safe? According to Defra 30% of them carry salmonella. Natural food – or potential poison?

Does that mean BARF is wrong? Maybe – maybe not. However, on the basis of hard evidence would I ever use BARF? No. The real evidence – not amateur hearsay – says the risk is too high.

So, yes I’ve researched this – in reading peer reviewed studies by competent veterinary university departments and not just listened to someone who has said – “I fed my dog this, he’s been fine”. So he will be – until he gets food poisoning.
[/quote]

Well that’s all very nice for you but you still seem to be missing the point point by about 500 miles. Who said anything about BARF?

[Anonymous]

[quote author=Sweetypye link=topic=7101.msg238495#msg238495 date=1220037393]
http://www.holisticvet.co.uk/nutrition.htm

http://www.naturalmedicinecentre.co.uk/content/view/13/35/

http://www.any-uk-vet.co.uk/day/

[/quote]

Excuse me, you’re supposed to be ignorant, remember? lol

[SuzAndTheDiva]

Phil, I was agreeing with a lot of what you said until I started reading this stuff on diet and nutrition.

FACT – my dog is a hell of a lot healthier on a natural diet than commercial food

FACT – only one of the vets at our ractice has the slightest idea on how to go about a natural diet – I dont speak to them because I wont take advice from the uneducated. THey may do plenty of research and learning on diet while training – but how much covers natural/barf etc etc? Again I wont take advice from someone whos training is at best one sided in the learning.

FACT – id rather take a small risk of salmonella than see my dog scratch herself into an early grave – because the VETS refuse to consider diet as a cause. When I have the evidence in front of my own eyes that diet is indeed the cause.

Vet’s competent or not DO NOT know everything – simple as that – stdies or not and with all the best will in the world they cannot knowwhat is best in all situations. And I dont think dismissing peoples experiences is a good idea, if I had done that id probably have a dog now on steroids…………….or any other crap the vet thought ‘might’ help.

[Anonymous]

In regard to BARF and similar diets – try these sites, which contain scientific evidence rather than hearsay:

http://csuvets.colostate.edu/pain/Articlespdf/Problems%20with%20Raw%20Meat.pdf  You will note, particularly, that the sources quoted are authoritative and appear in papers that have been independently reviewed (just to remove any doubts about the idea that these studies may have been funded by the pet food industry – which is the normal ‘conspiracy theory’ reaction from those who wish to ignore factual evidence).

Fancy a bit of salmonella yourself? “Human Health Implications of Salmonella-Contaminated Natural Pet Treats and Raw Pet Food”, Rita Finley, Richard Reid-Smith and J. Scott Weese, 2006, Infectious Diseases Society of America

A snippet from their results: Human salmonellosis occurs mainly as a result of handling or consuming contaminated food products, with a small percentage of cases being related to other, less well-defined exposures, such as contact with companion animals and natural pet treats. The increasing popularity of raw food diets for companion animals is another potential pet-associated source of Salmonella organisms. Pets that consume contaminated pet treats and raw food diets can be colonized with Salmonella organisms without exhibiting clinical signs, making them a possible hidden source of contamination in the household. Pet owners can reduce their risk of acquiring Salmonella organisms by not feeding natural pet treats and raw food diets to their pets, whereas individuals who investigate cases of salmonellosis or interpret surveillance data should be aware of these possible sources of Salmonella organisms.

In America the largest on-going source of post-qualification veterinary courses is VIN. One of the things VIN does is run a website for pet owners who may have questions that they want answered by experts. Here’s a quote from Wendy Brooks, their education director: “There is an important exception to the “Salmonella is rare in adult dogs” rule and that is the case of dogs fed a raw food diet.   It has, unfortunately, become popular to feed raw foods to pets with the idea that a raw food diet more closely approximates the natural diet that the feline or canine body evolved to consume, and thus such a diet should be healthier than commercially prepared foods. In fact, the cooking of food is central to removing parasites, bacteria, and bacterial toxins from food. A recent study evaluating raw food diets found that 80% of food samples contained Salmonella bacteria and that 30% of the dogs in the study were shedding Salmonella bacteria in their stool. Adult dogs are often asymptomatic but any infected animal or person will shed the organism for at least 6 weeks thus acting as a source of exposure to other animals or people. Salmonella organisms are very difficult to remove from the environment and easily survive 3 months in soil.  Again, dogs used for therapy around the elderly or children should be cultured for the presence of Salmonella.

There are two syndromes associated with Salmonella: diarrhea and sepsis. Salmonella bacteria, once consumed, attach to the intestine and secrete toxins. The toxins produce diarrhea that can be severe and even life-threatening in the young.  If this were not bad enough, some Salmonella can produce an even more serious “part two.”  These bacteria are capable of invading the rest of the body through the damaged intestine.”

Or how about Dr. Bob Judd, DVM (DVM is the US Vet qualification) “Campylobacter is a bacterial pathogen that causes fever, diarrhea, and abdominal pain.  As this bacterium is common in birds, most raw poultry has this organism on it and infection usually develops from eating undercooked chicken.”

In June 2006 the following results were found in a study of commercially available raw pet food diets: “Feeding raw meat diets to high performance dogs such as greyhounds and sled dogs has been a common practice for some time.  Recently, feeding raw meat diets has become popular with owners of pet dogs.  The proponents of these diets believe the dogs feel better, have more energy and less disease.  However, there is no scientific evidence whatsoever to support these claims.  The concern about these diets is the bacterial contamination in these foods.  Although the people who sell the raw food diets indicate bacterial contamination is not important in most dogs, it is possible it could cause a problem in pets as well as their human owners.

To determine the actual contamination of these raw meat diets, the staff at Colorado State University in conjunction with the USDA evaluated 21 commercially available raw meat diets from three different retail stores.  All diets were stored frozen until evaluated.  The study revealed 53% of the diets contained e. coli, which can cause severe intestinal problems in dogs and humans.  This is the same bacteria that usually cause illness in humans who eat undercooked hamburgers.  Salmonella, another bacteria that causes intestinal disease, was also found in 5.9% of the samples.”

Want to investigate yourself?

Here’s some websites that carry information you may not want to read:

http://www.petdiets.com/  – have a look at ‘Myths’, specifically Myth No 8

http://www.thepetcenter.com/xra/bonecomp.html – read ALL the article. Note specifically that it says bone content is 2/3 is a mineral compound called hydroxyapatite that is composed of nothing more than Calcium, Phosphorus, Oxygen and Hydrogen.  There are no Vitamins, Fatty Acids, enzymes, proteins or carbohydrates in it. Of the other 1/3rd nearly 95 % is a substance called collagen. Collagen is a fibrous protein.  It is poorly digested by the dog and cat. But don’t stop there – have a look at the splintered bones shown. Would you be happy with your dog eating those? But bones are a major part of BARF and similar diets.

http://www.balanceit.com/ – run by specialist qualified vets who have also gained further specific qualifications in nutrition – yet all their recipes are using cooked food.

http://www.woodhavenlabs.com/barf-myth.html – explodes all the myths proposed by BARF exponents

Proponents of the BARF (and closely allied diets) are in the same sort of position as people who propose homoeopathy as a serious medical remedy. All the scientific evidence says they are wrong. They don’t have a shred of verifiable evidence to prove that they are right. Just because you’ve been lucky so far doesn’t mean you will continue to be lucky.

I’ve seen countless postings on the web saying things along the lines of “I’ve always fed my dogs X diet and they are much healthier than other dogs”. Really? By what criteria?

It has been pointed out that Billingshurst (‘inventor’ of BARF) is a vet. It’s seldom pointed out that he’s a vet with a vested interest (e.g. he sells books). It’s also seldom pointed out that some of the things he claims are just plain wrong. For example, he claims that you shouldn’t include grain carbohydrate in a dog’s food because the dog’s digestive system hasn’t evolved to cope with it. That’s not true – at all. It IS true that too much grain can cause IBS type problems in dogs but it’s a matter of quantity and type. Dogs will normally tolerate grain carbohydrate in their diet – but some don’t.

I’m continually amazed at the ignorance displayed by some dog owners about feeding. Recently I came across a posting on a “dog lovers” website where someone posted a weekly diet sheet that included garlic as a regular ingredient. What made it so bad was that other dog owners were joining in and saying how great it was. Perhaps they’d like to have included grapes and chocolate too.

I’m sure that none of the foregoing will make the slightest difference to people who will blindly follow these diets irrespective of the evidence. But I’ll repeat what I’ve said before – if these alternative diets are so much better then show me independent evidence that’s the case. Don’t rely on hearsay.

[Foxisle_crazy]

So what did dogs do before ‘dog food’ was invented  ::)

Anyways, i thought this was a discussion about german sheps not about any other subject you know will start an arguement.  Or maybe you’re just a troll?  :boooo:

[Author]

Posts