Home Cooking vs. Raw

[fullyunderstand]

Cooper got to the point he just wouldn't eat anything!! I started homecooking and he is doing great.

[chilibee]

Hi,
I feed home cooking and love it. Dog's digestive tracks are just like yours and mine---I have a pack of 4 dogs--a labradoodle--almost a year, 2 chi mixes and Dash--my little 4 year old yorkie. Following the canine food pyramid will help you---protein is on the bottom--then veggies, then fruit--and grains are at the top. Remember that dogs get their energy from the fat in the protein so they don't need many carbs. A meal for my yorkie might consist of 2 tablespoons of chicken---today he had fish--browned in olive oil--very good for dogs----some green beans---and a couple of slices of apple. He loves the variety--I feed 3x daily as small dogs need to eat more often. Never been a fan of supplements as one has to be so careful---just feed balanced. Once a week we have some dairy--but use sparingly--I use with cottage cheese---or plain yogurt. The yogurt is wonderful for their digestive tracts--and also cuts down on any gas.

[YorkieChick1]

Originally Posted by jenn4yorkies

I agree! Your vet isn't the one you should speak to about this issue. My vet recommended Science Diet. That's what they carry there. After doing much research I learned myself that Science Diet wasn't a good choice.

I totally agree with this!! Brooke has 3 vets! One is her general practitioner(who by the way is fairly holisitic anyway), then she has a neurologist for her brain disease and then she has a Holistic/Acupuncturist Vet. I keep all of them in the loop when it comes to Brooke's health but I put more weight on each of their opinions when I ask them something that is specifically in their realm of expertise. For example, Brooke was having some digestive issues and her neurologist wanted her to be on a diet that has 50% Hill's w/d but that food doesn't have very good ingredients, so I talked to her Holistic vet and she said to continue with homecooking and just change the brown rice to sweet potato, so she will have more fiber!! I do homecook and add vitamin supplements. They loved raw but Brooke is immune compromised and I don't want to chance her getting a bacteria. Get all the opinions from experts and then choose what you think works for you and your babies!

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by chilibee

Hi,
Dog's digestive tracks are just like yours and mine

No disrespect, but they're actually much different. They have very short tracts, release enzymes differently - and they can handle toxins much differently than our systems.

This is a good read, if you're interested: Myths

[chilibee]

Well yes and no---the pathways are constructed the same way--unlike cows that that have 6 stomachs--and thus are able to digest grains. As far as the enzymes go--please elaborate.

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by chilibee

Well yes and no---the pathways are constructed the same way--unlike cows that that have 6 stomachs--and thus are able to digest grains. As far as the enzymes go--please elaborate.

From the link I posted above :

Dogs and cats have the internal anatomy and physiology of a carnivore (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 260.). They have a highly elastic stomach designed to hold large quantities of meat, bone, organs, and hide. Their stomachs are simple, with an undeveloped caecum (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 260.). They have a relatively short foregut and a short, smooth, unsacculated colon. This means food passes through quickly. Vegetable and plant matter, however, needs time to sit and ferment. This equates to longer, sacculated colons, larger and longer small intestines, and occasionally the presence of a caecum. Dogs have none of these, but have the shorter foregut and hindgut consistent with carnivorous animals. This explains why plant matter comes out the same way it came in; there was no time for it to be broken down and digested (among other things). People know this; this is why they tell you that vegetables and grains have to be preprocessed for your dog to get anything out of them. But even then, feeding vegetables and grains to a carnivorous animal is a questionable practice.

Dogs do not normally produce the necessary enzymes in their saliva (amylase, for example) to start the break-down of carbohydrates and starches; amylase in saliva is something omnivorous and herbivorous animals possess, but not carnivorous animals. This places the burden entirely on the pancreas, forcing it to produce large amounts of amylase to deal with the starch, cellulose, and carbohydrates in plant matter. Thus, feeding dogs as though they were omnivores taxes the pancreas and places extra strain on it, as it must work harder for the dog to digest the starchy, carbohydrate-filled food instead of just producing normal amounts of the enzymes needed to digest proteins and fats (which, when fed raw, begin to "self-digest" when the cells are crushed through chewing and tearing and their enzymes are released).

Nor do dogs have the kinds of friendly bacteria that break down cellulose and starch for them. As a result, most of the nutrients contained in plant matter—even preprocessed plant matter—are unavailable to dogs. This is why dog food manufacturers have to add such high amounts of synthetic vitamins and minerals (the fact that cooking destroys all the vitamins and minerals and thus creates the need for supplementation aside) to their dog foods. If a dog can only digest 40-60% of its grain-based food, then it will only be receiving 40-60% (ideally!) of the vitamins and minerals it needs. To compensate for this, the manufacturer must add a higher concentration of vitamins and minerals than the dog actually needs.

[RawfedYorkieLuv]

Excellent, outstanding post and research, my friend!!!
LOL, I guess that settles it then?!

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

From the link I posted above :

Dogs and cats have the internal anatomy and physiology of a carnivore (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 260.). They have a highly elastic stomach designed to hold large quantities of meat, bone, organs, and hide. Their stomachs are simple, with an undeveloped caecum (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 260.). They have a relatively short foregut and a short, smooth, unsacculated colon. This means food passes through quickly. Vegetable and plant matter, however, needs time to sit and ferment. This equates to longer, sacculated colons, larger and longer small intestines, and occasionally the presence of a caecum. Dogs have none of these, but have the shorter foregut and hindgut consistent with carnivorous animals. This explains why plant matter comes out the same way it came in; there was no time for it to be broken down and digested (among other things). People know this; this is why they tell you that vegetables and grains have to be preprocessed for your dog to get anything out of them. But even then, feeding vegetables and grains to a carnivorous animal is a questionable practice.

Dogs do not normally produce the necessary enzymes in their saliva (amylase, for example) to start the break-down of carbohydrates and starches; amylase in saliva is something omnivorous and herbivorous animals possess, but not carnivorous animals. This places the burden entirely on the pancreas, forcing it to produce large amounts of amylase to deal with the starch, cellulose, and carbohydrates in plant matter. Thus, feeding dogs as though they were omnivores taxes the pancreas and places extra strain on it, as it must work harder for the dog to digest the starchy, carbohydrate-filled food instead of just producing normal amounts of the enzymes needed to digest proteins and fats (which, when fed raw, begin to "self-digest" when the cells are crushed through chewing and tearing and their enzymes are released).

Nor do dogs have the kinds of friendly bacteria that break down cellulose and starch for them. As a result, most of the nutrients contained in plant matter—even preprocessed plant matter—are unavailable to dogs. This is why dog food manufacturers have to add such high amounts of synthetic vitamins and minerals (the fact that cooking destroys all the vitamins and minerals and thus creates the need for supplementation aside) to their dog foods. If a dog can only digest 40-60% of its grain-based food, then it will only be receiving 40-60% (ideally!) of the vitamins and minerals it needs. To compensate for this, the manufacturer must add a higher concentration of vitamins and minerals than the dog actually needs.

[MyFairLacy]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

From the link I posted above :

Dogs and cats have the internal anatomy and physiology of a carnivore (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 260.). They have a highly elastic stomach designed to hold large quantities of meat, bone, organs, and hide. Their stomachs are simple, with an undeveloped caecum (Feldhamer, G.A. 1999. Mammology: Adaptation, Diversity, and Ecology. McGraw-Hill. pg 260.). They have a relatively short foregut and a short, smooth, unsacculated colon. This means food passes through quickly. Vegetable and plant matter, however, needs time to sit and ferment. This equates to longer, sacculated colons, larger and longer small intestines, and occasionally the presence of a caecum. Dogs have none of these, but have the shorter foregut and hindgut consistent with carnivorous animals. This explains why plant matter comes out the same way it came in; there was no time for it to be broken down and digested (among other things). People know this; this is why they tell you that vegetables and grains have to be preprocessed for your dog to get anything out of them. But even then, feeding vegetables and grains to a carnivorous animal is a questionable practice.

Dogs do not normally produce the necessary enzymes in their saliva (amylase, for example) to start the break-down of carbohydrates and starches; amylase in saliva is something omnivorous and herbivorous animals possess, but not carnivorous animals. This places the burden entirely on the pancreas, forcing it to produce large amounts of amylase to deal with the starch, cellulose, and carbohydrates in plant matter. Thus, feeding dogs as though they were omnivores taxes the pancreas and places extra strain on it, as it must work harder for the dog to digest the starchy, carbohydrate-filled food instead of just producing normal amounts of the enzymes needed to digest proteins and fats (which, when fed raw, begin to "self-digest" when the cells are crushed through chewing and tearing and their enzymes are released).

Nor do dogs have the kinds of friendly bacteria that break down cellulose and starch for them. As a result, most of the nutrients contained in plant matter—even preprocessed plant matter—are unavailable to dogs. This is why dog food manufacturers have to add such high amounts of synthetic vitamins and minerals (the fact that cooking destroys all the vitamins and minerals and thus creates the need for supplementation aside) to their dog foods. If a dog can only digest 40-60% of its grain-based food, then it will only be receiving 40-60% (ideally!) of the vitamins and minerals it needs. To compensate for this, the manufacturer must add a higher concentration of vitamins and minerals than the dog actually needs.

Great post While we like to treat our dogs like little people, their nutritional needs are really quite different from a human's