Updating our understanding about dogs ...CORRECTLY !!!

[Guest guest]

Not sure where you get that one, Laurie. As has been well described here,

the majority believes dogs are carnivores and humans are omnivores. Both are

incorrect.

 

Elchanan

_____

 

rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of

Laurie Swanson

Thursday, June 28, 2007 6:35 PM

rawfood

[Raw Food] Re: Updating our understanding about dogs ...CORRECTLY

!!!

 

 

Hi Elchanan,

 

What, then, do we make of the fact that the majority believes dogs are

omnivores?

 

Laurie

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Huh? The overwhelming majority of dog owners feed kibble or canned,

which is a high percentage grains and/or veggies. The majority of

the small number of rawfeeders feed veggies also. People who believe

in feeding raw meat without veggies are an even smaller number. Most

people believe that dogs need grains and veggies. Most vets even

recommend feeding veggies, fruits, and often other starches or

grains. I am sure a lot of this comes from the pet food industry,

and trying to " match " kibble formulas in some way (which are just

trying to use up waste products from other industries).

 

The rawfeeding list I'm on has many new members joining daily who

have read or been told by their breeders or their friends or their

vets that dogs are omnivores and need veggies. It is always being

explained to them that dogs are actually carnivores, as a few of us

here have said.

 

Laurie

 

 

 

rawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan wrote:

>

> Not sure where you get that one, Laurie. As has been well described

here,

> the majority believes dogs are carnivores and humans are omnivores.

Both are

> incorrect.

>

> Elchanan

> _____

>

> rawfood [rawfood ] On

Behalf Of

> Laurie Swanson

> Thursday, June 28, 2007 6:35 PM

> rawfood

> [Raw Food] Re: Updating our understanding about

dogs ...CORRECTLY

> !!!

>

>

> Hi Elchanan,

>

> What, then, do we make of the fact that the majority believes dogs

are

> omnivores?

>

> Laurie

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Says who? You? Your teacher Ray?

 

 

Belinda

 

 

> the majority believes dogs are carnivores and humans are omnivores.

Both are

> incorrect.

>

> Elchanan

> _____

[Guest guest]

So true Laurie. I am one of those that have believed the dogs need

some veggies. (but had nagging doubts about it at times) Would be a

whole lot easier to just feed the meat and bones than have to blend

up those leafy greens. Besided the dogs don't really like it and if

I don't add liver or ground meat or something to the veggies, they

won't even eat it. Then when they do, it doesn't appear to have

digested very well.

Which in what I have learned from El and our own diet, is that means

it wasn't designed as the best food.

 

I have also doubted the veggie thing at times. Because no matter how

little the carrots and similar veggies are ground, you still see it

in the poo. Actually when I feed leafy greens, carrots, and various

colorful veggies and fruits, the poo just looks like the dog ate

confettie. Any grass they eat comes out looking just like it went in.

 

Not so with the meat and bones though. It is completely processed.

Hs very little odor and totaly disenigrates shortly after leaving the

body.

I questioned te veggie thing that I observed and was assured the dogs

still got the nutrients from the veggies. I never could see how and

wondered if veggies should be made into juice.

 

Also, the cheapest dog foods out there contain far more grain and

veggies than meat.

 

Laurie, would you send me some links or tell me where I can find some

of the feeding dogs all meat sorta boards? Do it privately, if you

want.

 

I am on one board with raw feeders that truley fascinate me. I mean

some of these folks are serious. They raise rabbits and chickens

just to feed their dogs. AND they feed the rabbits and chickens a

natural diet in order for the dogs to get the best nutrients and

avoid any chemicals.

 

I am just reading up on this. But it is fascinating for sure.

 

Belinda

 

 

 

 

 

 

> Huh? The overwhelming majority of dog owners feed kibble or

canned,

> which is a high percentage grains and/or veggies. The majority of

> the small number of rawfeeders feed veggies also. People who

believe

> in feeding raw meat without veggies are an even smaller number.

Most

> people believe that dogs need grains and veggies. Most vets even

> recommend feeding veggies, fruits, and often other starches or

> grains. I am sure a lot of this comes from the pet food industry,

> and trying to " match " kibble formulas in some way (which are just

> trying to use up waste products from other industries).

>

> The rawfeeding list I'm on has many new members joining daily who

> have read or been told by their breeders or their friends or their

> vets that dogs are omnivores and need veggies. It is always being

> explained to them that dogs are actually carnivores, as a few of us

> here have said.

>

> Laurie

>

>

>

> rawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan@> wrote:

> >

> > Not sure where you get that one, Laurie. As has been well

described

> here,

> > the majority believes dogs are carnivores and humans are

omnivores.

> Both are

> > incorrect.

> >

> > Elchanan

> > _____

> >

> > rawfood [rawfood ] On

> Behalf Of

> > Laurie Swanson

> > Thursday, June 28, 2007 6:35 PM

> > rawfood

> > [Raw Food] Re: Updating our understanding about

> dogs ...CORRECTLY

> > !!!

> >

> >

> > Hi Elchanan,

> >

> > What, then, do we make of the fact that the majority believes

dogs

> are

> > omnivores?

> >

> > Laurie

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

" Credible " merely means offering reasonable grounds for being

believed. There is plenty of scientific research to support whatever

beliefs are held and evidence is only as good as the interpretation of

it.

 

Some food for thought,

Janet

 

rawfood , " Belinda " <MistyBlueTN wrote:

>

> I was referring to the debate on dogs are wolves and wolves are dogs.

>

> Creditable, in this case would be scientific evidence and

> documentation of the topic of conversation.

>

> Perhaps creditable would be a poor choice of words. Because

> creditable could be seen as a matter of opinion.

>

> Belinda

>

> > Hi RFers,

> >

> > The debate about the safety of feeding a dog raw meaty bones is akin

> > to questioning whether raw vegans get enough protein or vitamins.

> > These are the least of raw vegan concerns who follow a 80/10/10

> diet.

> > I'd venture to say that 99% of humans are not eating a species

> > appropriate diet, or rather, food our bodies are designed to digest

> > and assimilate with the least amount of wear and tear.

> >

> > Belinda wrote: " At that time I searched everything on the internet

> > that would tell me what El tries to say. I could find nothing that

> > was credible stating this. "

> >

> > What statement that Elchanan posted are you referring to, Belinda?

> > Also, my experience has been that " credible " sources of information

> > are likely the opposite, especially when their bottom line is

> > concerned. Think of the FDA, for instance. Many, many people

> consider

> > that corrupt agency to be " credible " .

> >

> > Janet

> >

> > rawfood , " Belinda " <MistyBlueTN@> wrote:

> >

> > Yes, Caron, this is what I was attempting to say.

> > Perhaps I should quote from someone that is more educated than I.

> > I found this digging through some of my info. I have lost my links

> > from years ago when I was researching the differences in dogs and

> > wolves. I too thought they were very different with different

> needs.

> > But I was wrong. At that time I searched everything on the internet

> > that would tell me what El tries to say. I could find nothing that

> > was credible stating this. Only found this info on websites of

> people

> > that thought feeding raw meat and bones to be cruel and dangerous.

> It

> > gets to be a very heated discussion on canine food and nutrition

> > boards about feeding a BARF or similar diet, whether or not dogs are

> > able to eat this way safely.

> >

> > So here it is. A quote from " Molecular Evolution of the Dog

> Family "

> > by Rober K. Wayne The Evolution of the Domestic Dog.

> >

> > " A limited mtDNA restriction fragment analysis of seven dog breeds

> and

> > 26 gray wolf population from different locations around the world

> has

> > shown the genotypes of dogs and wolves are either identical or

> differ

> > by the loss or gain of only one or two restriction sites, differing

> at

> > most 0.2% of mtDNA sequence. Dogs are gray wolves, despite their

> > diversity in size and proportion, the wide variation in their adult

> > morphology probably results from simple changes in developement. "

> >

> > There are bibliography references in this quote if anyone is

> interested.

> >

> > There are also tons more articles, publications, on the web that say

> > pretty much the same thing.

> > Encylopedias also agree with this.

> >

> > Both dog people and wolf, wolf/dog folks would love for their to be

> a

> > scientific way to tell the differences in not only wolves and dogs,

> > but between breeds.

> >

> > And maybe, one day there will be. Science is an ever changing

> thing.

> >

> > Belinda Belinda wrote:

> > There is no way(at this time) to genetically tell the difference in

> a

> > dog and a wolf OR to tell how much wolf or dog is in a wolf/dog

> cross.

> >

> > Without the genetic testing they cannot tell.

> >

> > With all due respect, did you not just contradict yourself, Belinda?

> > I mean to only clarify.

> >

> > Janet, I think Belinda is saying they currently cannot tell the

> > difference, as there is not genetic test for it (or not a conclusive

> > one showing differences, at least). There is an implication that

> > -with- genetic testing they could discern between the two, but

> > currently they cannot as the test isn't capable of it. Or am I

> > talking (and reading) round in circles?

> >

> > Caron

> >

>