Growth of interest in raw feeding
Over the last few years or so, there has been a steady growth in enthusiasm for feeding dogs on a more natural diet based on raw meat and bones. You may have heard it referred to as the BARF diet (Biologically Appropriate Raw Food), or RMB (Raw Meaty Bones) diet. These are actually two slightly different approaches to raw feeding.
Many thousands of dogs in the UK and abroad are now fed on a diet of raw meat and bones, or in the case of BARF, raw meat, bones and vegetables. One of the most widely reported benefits of raw feeding is improved dental health. This is significant because, according to the Royal Veterinary College, 87 per cent of dogs aged over three years in the UK currently suffer from periodontal disease. This shocking statistic has wider implications than it might for you and me, because dogs often require a general anaesthetic for even quite basic dental treatment.
The return to raw feeding is supported and indeed promoted by a number of veterinary surgeons, including Tom Lonsdale (RMB) and Ian Billingshurst (BARF), both of whom have written books on the subject. But it must be said that probably the majority of veterinary professionals do not currently support raw feeding and many are decidedly against it. Those opposed to feeding raw meat and bones have a number of concerns, including the following:
Some of this sounds plausible enough, and pretty scary. But what, statistically, are the risks?
Unfortunately, we still don’t have any reliable data linking any of the above with any particular diet, one way or the other. It is true that vets do sometimes see dogs with severe constipation and impacted bone in their digestive tract, but it is not clear whether these dogs have been fed recreational bones, cooked bones, or raw bones well wrapped in meat; nor do we know if these bones have been fed to dogs that are used to digesting bone on a regular basis; nor do we have any idea what proportion of completely raw-fed dogs (if any) get into difficulties in this way.
The situation with regard to infections is the same. At the time of writing, there are no long-term studies comparing the incidence of salmonella, for example, or any other food-borne disease, in raw-fed dogs with the incidence in kibble-fed dogs. We do know that salmonella occurs in raw chicken, and it has been found in kibble, too. What we also know is that most healthy dogs seem to be able to consume all manner of unpleasant substances, including the faeces of other animals, without becoming ill. And most raw-fed dogs consume large quantities of raw chicken without contracting salmonella or any other unpleasant illness that would almost certainly strike down you or me if we attempted to do the same. In fact, the risk of you infecting yourself through handling the contaminated meat is probably far greater than any risk to your dog.
Some of the potential hazards of raw feeding can probably be avoided or reduced by taking sensible precautions. Feeding large weight-bearing bones, for example, is more likely to damage your dog’s teeth than smaller bones, such as ribs.
Your dog’s digestive system
Those opposed to raw feeding will tell you that ‘modern dogs are not wolves’. They argue that dogs have evolved extensively since they became domesticated many thousands of years ago and adapted to life as scavengers, and are no longer suited to eating raw meat and bone. It is only fair to point out that, in evolutionary terms, ten or even twenty thousand years is actually not very long. When compared, the digestive tracts of dogs and wolves are, in fact, very similar. Both have jaws designed for tearing meat and crushing bone and the very short digestive tracts typical of carnivores. Both are capable of ingesting and digesting meat, bones and skin on a regular day-to-day basis.
Many thousands of dogs in the UK and abroad are now fed on a diet of raw meat and bones, or in the case of BARF, raw meat, bones and vegetables. One of the most widely reported benefits of raw feeding is improved dental health. This is significant because, according to the Royal Veterinary College, 87 per cent of dogs aged over three years in the UK currently suffer from periodontal disease. This shocking statistic has wider implications than it might for you and me, because dogs often require a general anaesthetic for even quite basic dental treatment.
The return to raw feeding is supported and indeed promoted by a number of veterinary surgeons, including Tom Lonsdale (RMB) and Ian Billingshurst (BARF), both of whom have written books on the subject. But it must be said that probably the majority of veterinary professionals do not currently support raw feeding and many are decidedly against it. Those opposed to feeding raw meat and bones have a number of concerns, including the following:
Bones might cause gastrointestinal blockage.
Splintered bones could penetrate the digestive tract.
Dogs might catch parasites from raw meat.
Raw feeding might lead to serious infections.
Bones might cause choking.
It might be too difficult to provide a balanced diet.
Bones might cause broken teeth.
Some of this sounds plausible enough, and pretty scary. But what, statistically, are the risks?
Unfortunately, we still don’t have any reliable data linking any of the above with any particular diet, one way or the other. It is true that vets do sometimes see dogs with severe constipation and impacted bone in their digestive tract, but it is not clear whether these dogs have been fed recreational bones, cooked bones, or raw bones well wrapped in meat; nor do we know if these bones have been fed to dogs that are used to digesting bone on a regular basis; nor do we have any idea what proportion of completely raw-fed dogs (if any) get into difficulties in this way.
The situation with regard to infections is the same. At the time of writing, there are no long-term studies comparing the incidence of salmonella, for example, or any other food-borne disease, in raw-fed dogs with the incidence in kibble-fed dogs. We do know that salmonella occurs in raw chicken, and it has been found in kibble, too. What we also know is that most healthy dogs seem to be able to consume all manner of unpleasant substances, including the faeces of other animals, without becoming ill. And most raw-fed dogs consume large quantities of raw chicken without contracting salmonella or any other unpleasant illness that would almost certainly strike down you or me if we attempted to do the same. In fact, the risk of you infecting yourself through handling the contaminated meat is probably far greater than any risk to your dog.
Some of the potential hazards of raw feeding can probably be avoided or reduced by taking sensible precautions. Feeding large weight-bearing bones, for example, is more likely to damage your dog’s teeth than smaller bones, such as ribs.
Your dog’s digestive system
Those opposed to raw feeding will tell you that ‘modern dogs are not wolves’. They argue that dogs have evolved extensively since they became domesticated many thousands of years ago and adapted to life as scavengers, and are no longer suited to eating raw meat and bone. It is only fair to point out that, in evolutionary terms, ten or even twenty thousand years is actually not very long. When compared, the digestive tracts of dogs and wolves are, in fact, very similar. Both have jaws designed for tearing meat and crushing bone and the very short digestive tracts typical of carnivores. Both are capable of ingesting and digesting meat, bones and skin on a regular day-to-day basis.
تعليقات
إرسال تعليق