Thanks so much,
I’m shocked about the k/d because it’s not cheap. And my dog does hate it. But I made her eat it for months because I wanted her to stay as healthy as she can for as long as she can. At least it doesn’t make her barf like many of the cheaper dogfoods, so I figure I was doing the best I can by her.
I’ll be buying them some wings and neck the next time I’m at the grocery store. I bet they’ll like it more too.
[quote=“Battlepanda”]
I’ll be buying them some wings and neck the next time I’m at the grocery store. I bet they’ll like it more too.[/quote]
Don’t be discouraged if they take a couple of days to take to the raw stuff. Some dogs go for it right away, but others will give raw food a strange look before tucking in. Some dogs, especially younger ones that are really food driven, won’t chew the bones enough before swallowing. That’s actually not too much of a problem. If it’s really too big for their tummy to process, they’ll hack it back up and have another go at it. If it concerns you, just hold the bone to make them chew it before taking it down.
Regarding salt from scraps given to dogs, it really isn’t as much of a problem as one might think, especially if you’ve taken them off of dry food (which is pretty high in salt itself). A lot just depends on how salty YOUR diet is. Dogs are nowhere near as sensitive to salt as cats are. Our vet figures that if a dog is on the raw diet, then he should be able to handle salt from things like canned tuna or sardines with no problem. It’s only for older dogs showing signs of “geriatric” conditions and for dogs with poor kidney function that you have to worry about salt.
I figure that it’s best not to feed many scraps, though. If the salt won’t kill the dog before his time, then the complex fats found in modern foods will. Cooked vegetable oils are likely no good for a dog, and I’m sure that the hydrogenated or partially hydrogenated oils now found in damn near everything can really do a dog in.
Excellent advice, JT!
Just adding that uncooked oils are essential for dogs’ health: fish oil, cod liver oil, olive oil, flaxseed oil, etc.
Cheers!
Sean
I chickened out (har har) on the wings and decided to get my two buddy bears something boneless – chicken breasts. They inhaled it. There was no hesitation. My schnauzer, who if you remember is very omnivorous, practically took part of my hand off along with the chicken strip I was holding out to her.
Next, I’ll have them working on neck.
Good idea to work yur way up. The bones are the best (most nutritionally valuable) part!
One of my dogs began shedding hair like crazy a few months ago and never really stopped. The vet said she had some kind of skin condition caused by tiny worms at her hair follicles. So, we spent about three weeks treating her with pills from the vet that seemed to have little or no effect, besides draining my pockets. Then I remembered hearing that some dog foods can cause allergies and skin problems in dogs, so we switched her to an “allergy free” dog food. She is doing better now, but after reading this thread, I’m really wondering whether a special dog food is necessary. When I first got my dogs, they were skinny and very underweight. I had three at the time, so I got them a relatively cheap dog food to save time and money. Well, they stayed skinny, no matter how much I fed them, and they crapped about ten times a day. So, I switched to the more expensive stuff. They poop much less now, but they are actually a little over weight. I have to do some searching to feel their ribs. I have tried to cut down the amount I give them, but it doesn’t seem to make a difference. They just seem kind of flabby to me. So, I think I’m pretty much sold on this raw diet thing. I thought it might be a hell of a lot of work since I don’t even really cook for myself, but it sounds pretty easy after reading everyone’s advice. Thanks for the great info.
I’m looking forward to trying it out.
After scanning through a few of these posts, it seems like most of the people here are under the impression that the locally made Dog foods are vastly inferior to imported ones. Whether this is true or not, I’m not sure. I’m definintely not posting this to make a claim that they are as good or better, so please finish reading before you want to flame me! But after living here for over a year, and seeing how things like quality, quality control, cleanliness are in life around here, I don’t blame anyone for this possible misconception. We sometimes think the Taiwanese additude of “quick, cheap and dirty” that we see on the streets reflects into the locally made pet food as well, leading us to believe they are inferior quality wise and nutritionally to the more expensive alternatives.
However, because I prepare my dog a (cooked) homemade diet, including rice, oatmeal, meats and fish, and meat innards (liver, intestine, kidneys) that is balanced with vegetables, vitamins, and calcium, it is generally soft and not the greatest for clean teeth. I feel I need to throw in a bit of dry kibble sometimes for a hard chew to promote chewing and clean his teeth. Since it costs more (in time and money) to feed my dog a proper homemade meal, I didn’t want to spend too much on the dry kibble, as it isn’t going to be a large part of his diet anyways (less than 10% of his food), just want it to help clean his teeth on occasion.
Looking at the dry kibble, its easy to see that imported brands like: Nutro, Hills, and the like are usually at least double that of local brands. A large part of this is due to the shipping and taxes of importing this into taiwan (for example, Nutro dry kibble is 2Xs as much here as it is in Canada).
However, people seem to consistently put down the local brands without real evidence or justification. When I looked at the nutritional label of one of the local ones (Uni President Puppy mix), It was first of all ISO 9001 approved (which none of the import brands said they were I think) indicating it had high and clean standards, aslo, it had 26% protien (which comes from meat and eggs) and a short ingredient list including meat, meat by products, fish oil and animal fat and vitamins. These ingredients seemed comparable to the other imported brands. When I looked at Nutro Lamb and Rice, it had Lamb as the first ingredient (says min 26% dried lamb), along with some other similar ingredients. Both of them seemed to provide similar protien and fat levels (Nutro actually had 21% protien which was lower than Uni president) and both had vitamin supplementation. Therefore, it seems to me that it may not be worth it to pay double or triple the price for imported dog food, when locally made ones appear to be similar nutrition wise. Just from my analysis, it seems the extra price I’d be paying for imported dog food is going to the pet store and import/tax fees for the food, and not necessarily to my dogs improved health. The price of the Uni-president mix here is consisent with what Nutro should cost in Canada, so it didn’t seem so cheap that it was too good to be true.
I am not advocating whether you should buy local or imported dog foods. I justify myself buying cheaper kibble only because its not my dog’s main dietary food, and based on ingredients/nutritional label, seems comparable to some imported brands. I am just saying perhaps we should look into some more conclusive evidence and such before we are quick do judge. If all else are equal or similar, than why should we pay more for imported food when the marginal cost doesn’t outweigh the marginal benefit? If anyone has any subjective evidence about the local dog food, and not just random opinions, please let me know. I think we all love our pets, but at the same time, dont’ want to be hosed into buying expensive stuff if its certainly not that much better.
I don’t know about local vs imported, but I do know that kibble is a shite kind of food to feed your dog, as do you yourself, since you don’t feed it as the main food.
If you’re feeding a home-made diet (although personally I’d ditch the cereal and grain altogether), and all you want to do is clean his teeth, why not just chuck him a big raw beef bone every so often? Kibble won’t prevent nasty brown plaque from forming, by the way – bones will.
And they taste much better and are much better for him.
Since you’re obviously someone who cares about what goes into his dog, you might enjoy reading these threads:
http://www.forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopic.php?t=32211&highlight=canine+diet
http://www.forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopic.php?t=48192&highlight=canine+diet
Thanks for the posts guys, but I don’t want this thread to get into a Raw Food vs. cooked food discussion.
I’ve strongly considered the Raw bones diet, and have decided against it personally, in favor of a homemade cooked food diet. I’ve found conflicting views from vets advocating both sides, however, there does not seem to be any significant long term data or papers about dogs on the Raw diet. I agree that there are alot of benefits from a Raw diets, but there are also some risks too (Bacteria, Salmonella, dislodged bones in stomach (rare but does occur on occasion)). Until there is long-term scientific data done on domesticated dogs on the Raw diet, I’m going to play it safe. I wouldn’t eat raw meat and bones myself so why should I subject my dog to it? Also, the argument that Dogs have eaten raw meat and bones since their evolution, doesn’t hold any weight for me. Dogs have been domesticated for thousands of years, and as such their biology has changed. By the same token, Humans now don’t eat the same foods we did when we were Cavemen (raw meat) because our biology has changed over time as well. Our diets today, planned with scientific data can ensure we stay as healthy as possible.
Clearly, there are many benefits to a Raw Diet. If you have decided on this for your dog, I fully support your decision. However, I have decided against it because of risks I feel are present, and am looking for advice in the direction I have chosen.
Therefore, getting back on track to the Taiwanese dog food quality… if you have any personal experiences, or data/information on their quality in general, please do tell the rest of us …
I’d be very interested to see the research on cooked food.
We have fed over 250 animals on the raw diet and as yet have not had a single problem; in fact, our vet advocates the diet now, although, like you, he was skeptical before. He is particularly impressed in the speedy recovery he has witnessed in our dogs with skin diseases.
[quote]
Until there is long-term scientific data done on domesticated dogs on the Raw diet, I’m going to play it safe. [/quote]
Ask your grandparents what they fed their dogs: leftover table scraps and raw meaty bones from the butcher.
Your digestive tract is far different to a dog’s, and the acid they have in their stomach is far stronger than ours. Also, you’re using the word subject when you have already stated that you don’t know if the raw diet is healthy or not - that doesn’t make sense to me.
Do you really believe that dogs were fed only cooked scraps for all those thousands of years?
By the same token, Humans now don’t eat the same foods we did when we were Cavemen (raw meat) because our biology has changed over time as well. Our diets today, planned with scientific data can ensure we stay as healthy as possible.
That scientific data changes with the seasons. One day scientists are telling us that milk is good for us; the next, that it’s bad. Also, we were cavemen a loooooooooong time ago, but dogs were eating raw meaty bones in our grandparents day, until expensive TV commercials told us that food unfit for human consumption cooked to high hell and marketed at commercial pet food was the best thing for our dogs (without any data to back it up).
Another point: the Japanese are famed for their longevity, and they traditionally eat raw or very lightly cooked foods, including raw meat and fish. Your argument is holding less and less water.
But best of luck with your quest to find a good local convenience food to supplement your otherwise pretty healthy dog diet.
Hi Stray Dog,
I’m glad that the Raw diet has worked for your dogs, and I’m very Glad that the dogs you’ve changed to it have had no problems thus far. I do agreethat there are alot of positive benefits for this diet and for many dogs it may be beneficial. But the fact of the matter is that there are some undeniable risks to it:
Excerpts from “http://www.workingdogs.com/vcbarf.htm” state:
“But widely regarded veterinary textbooks, including Craig Greene’s Infectious Diseases of the Dog and Cat, have long held that animals—immunocompromised or healthy—that eat raw meat are susceptible to bacterial infections. E. coli and Salmonella are among the more serious infections that are transmitted through meat that isn’t properly cooked.”
“Both the pets and the people in the home are at risk of moderate to severe GI disease, especially if there are breaks in hygienic standards, and this has been well documented,” Dr. Abood said. “Although there are some who claim that dogs and cats can handle these bacteria, I would be just as concerned about the person preparing raw meals for the pet each day. Despite one’s best intentions, shortcuts or deviations in a hygiene protocol can occur, and put family members at risk for infection.”
So even though dogs may be better suited to handle bateria associated with Raw meat, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are immune to it as stated above.
If the benefits outweigh the risks to you, then it makes sense to switch to it. However, I feel I can gain most of the benefits without the risks above with a cooked diet. I’ve yet to read anything doucmented by a Vet that advocates against a properly balanced cooked homemade diet, or argue that a commerical diet is better than a cooked homemade diet. But I do read about vets Against both the Raw diet and the commercial diet.
I am still open to the idea of a raw diet, but am waiting for perhaps a publication or more conclusive scientific research to either prove or deny these risks first.
Just to respond quickly, there are undeniable risks to feeding kibble: it is no coincidence that the three oldest dogs in the world (documented) never had ‘dog food’ and were all fed on table and butcher scraps (raw). The oldest ever died several years before convenience food was devised; even ‘scientific’ diets have not been able to replicate the success of random feeding of leftovers and raw food.
I haven’t yet come across an animal that has suffered any form of disease from eating a biologically appropriate diet. Dogs have only been eating non-raw for the last 60 years, and were thriving before that - the research is there if you simply look at real life. Kibble is the unresearched fad.
And as for diseases communicable to humans from handling raw meat - we have all been handling raw meat throughout our lives, stuffing it, chopping it, and otherwise preparing it, shortly before we cook it.
Be careful that you are not reading alarmist reports by ‘scientists’ sponsored by the multibillion dollar pet food industry.
The two doctors you quoted are not animal nutritionalists, and both - rather unscientifically - mention their ‘concerns’ rather than quoting scientific data.
Again, my own research with over 250 animals fed exclusively raw tells me that the risk of disease from such diets is insignificantly low.
What has been scientifically proven is that, in most cases, the more you cook food, the less nutritional value it retains. Kibble, cooked to oblivion so as to store on shelves longer, is a chief culprit: your dog only gets 40 percent of the protein within (which takes it dangerously below essential levels); with raw meat, 90 percent is bioavailable (eggs, 100 percent). The data is clear that cooked food is ‘safe’ in the short term but bound to take its toll in the long term.
Why are you waiting for scientific data to show that dogs up intil 60 years ago were thriving because of the raw component in their diet, and yet you feed kibble and cooked foods, which also have no scientific research to support the claims that they are the best things for your dog?
I also considered feeding cooked to my dogs, and found nothing to turn me against it. But the research I did do into raw, which included checking the backgrounds of the so-called scientists who write against it, and also my own experiences feeding it over the last four years, tells me that raw is the best thing for our dogs, particularly those who are sick and in need of nutritional support. If bird flu ever hits the island, I will most likely switch to cooked until the problem passes.
It seems we agree on most points; I’m just pointing out some of the gaps in your knowledge of the raw debate (no offense intended).
Very glad that you are doing more than the majority of pet owners and at least seeking the best possible diet for your dog. 
Sean
In my experience dogs that eat raw meat don’t need to eat as much, don’t have huge messy poos, and generally have nicer, shiny coats and more energy. Supplement with big ol butchers bones and treaty biscuits.
when I was a kid we had several farm dogs and they were fed a combination of cooked offal and grains, sometimes raw offal and meat that we wouldn’t eat and raw bones and dry kibble. We used to make a huge pot of “dog soup” once a week and they would eat that. I guess they were healthy.
My neighbor feeds her 7 dogs bread crusts from the breakfast stores. I really wish someone would talk to her. She’s better about closing the door so I can get into my house but they just aren’t healthy. Sigh.
I’ve always thought of dry dog food as something you use for filler, and not great to be fed consistently. Lot’s of dogs won’t eat it after a while.
Can I have an English translation for the word “kibbles” please ? I have no idea if you’re saying what I feed my pets is good or not.
Dry fod, Matthew. Dry food.
Don’t you watch any American TV?
Dry fod, Matthew. Dry food.[/quote]Right O, I know what that is, you could have said that in the first place.
[quote]Don’t you watch any American TV?[/quote]Obviously nothing that refers to “kibbles”
Interestingly, canucktyuktuk, farm dogs tend to live longest - they have the right diet and environment:
[quote]Outback mongrel could be oldest dog
CANBERRA, Australia – A 26-year-old mongrel living with an Aboriginal family in Australia’s Outback has the potential to become the world’s oldest living dog, a newspaper reported Sunday.
Jerry, an Australian cattle dog-bull terrier cross, will next month turn 27 - the equivalent of 189 years for a human - said Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals veterinarian Honey Nelson in Sydney’s Daily Telegraph.
“He will be 27 … years in August - I have no doubt at all,” Nelson reportedly said after examining Jerry. “He could push on to 28, going by his good body condition.”
The oldest living dog in the 2004 edition of “Guinness World Records” is Butch, a 27-year-old beagle in the U.S. state of Virginia.
Jerry’s owner, Waddie Harris - an Aboriginal tribal leader in New South Wales state’s Wilcannia town, put Jerry’s longevity down to his high-protein diet of Outback wildlife.
An Australian cattle dog named Bluey, who died in 1939 at age 29, is thought to have been the world’s oldest dog, the newspaper said.
Source: Newspaper, The Associated Press, July 11 2004[/quote]
Incidentally, Bluey died several years before food unfit for human consumption was cleverly marketed as ‘dog food’.
Hey Stray Dog,
Have you tried feeding dogs a cooked diet before? If so, how are the results you found compared to ones on Raw? If you have done this I would be interested in knowing the results.
Also, are you suggesting that its better for me to not use any kibble at all? I never intended to use kibble as the main dietary source, just a sprinkle here and there to promote chewing and clean teeth as a cooked diet is generally soft. Also, I don’t want to turn him off kibble completely, as there may be some days I don’t have time to prepare cooked food and may have to feed kibble (mixed with canned) for a day here an then. I’m afraid that if he doesn’t get a little bit here and then he’ll stop eating it completely. We can all agree that homemade diets (cooked or raw) is more time consuming, but our dogs should be worth it.
Thanks for the info here. Not trying to pick a fight … just someone trying to make sense of what veterinarians and dog nutritionalists can’t agree on.