Poultry Bones - Page 2

I wouldn't call it "cold, hard facts" just yet.  Raw diets are mostly anecdotal rather than factual, based on our experiences.  MANY have had good luck with it and some have not, but those that have not had good luck either fed it incorrectly, had a dog that didn't learn how to chew and just swallowed the whole darn thing, or had some underlying health problems.  Many dogs have weak digestive systems either by genetics or some other cause, so this must be taken into account.  I could find you more sites on it, but overall it's a very, very good diet IF DONE RIGHT to the needs of the dog. 

"I really wish someone would take this issue seriously enough to do a controlled scientific study."

So do I, but how will that be conducted with the sheer variety in foods along with the sheer variety in genetics?  Raw results can differ breed to breed as well.  And if they do it with BARF, it may not translate to prey model.  But when breeders feed/recommend raw, working people recommend it, and very experienced people recommend it and they feed ALL their pets raw/natural, something has to be good about it.  It draws a lot of controversy because it dings the profits of the pet food companies and the vets who sell kibble in their clinics, and also see lots of money from ear problems, coat/skin problems, allergies, etc.  Not all of the vets, of course, but a good number.  Many people have had health problems go away after getting on a raw diet.  Another big part of the stigma is that raw is bad for us.  Everyone screams about E. coli this, salmonella that, and they think that this is bad for dogs as well.  I guess they forget the fact that dogs will eat poop if they get the chance!

I've eated the ends of cooked rib bones before, yes they are soft, but cooking does change the chemical structure of things so I don't really eat more than that.  I prefer not to risk it and will only give raw bones.  Obviously, dogs that root through the trash must eat cooked bones, but since bones are eaten raw in Nature and predators evolved around that instead of a Weber, I'll stick with what has worked over millions of years. :)

Aural, I have a degree in biology as well as training as a nurse. Evolution and genetics were two of my special interests, and I can't believe that something like 14,000 years of domestication hasn't changed the dog's genetic makeup and ability to eat EXACTLY what wild canines do. I think they are much better adapted to eating table scraps and cooked food, as well as the bits of animals the humans threw out. This would, of course, include both cooked and raw bones as well as scraps of hide, skulls, offal, and the organs not considered fit to eat (depends on culture and type of animal eaten.) In most early hunter-gatherer societies, they lived at subsistence level, and very little got wasted. But I'd be willing to bet that if someone did a study, they'd find that domestic dogs can digest grain much better than wolves can. And never mind those who say dogs CANNOT digest corn. Dogs in China that are raised for food are fed the cheapest possible food, which is mostly corn meal.

And you're right, 'cold, hard facts' are rather thin on the ground when it comes to having a logical discussion about this. You tend to get either those who are fanatically FOR a raw diet, or fanatically opposed to it, and n'er the twain shall meet, as Kipling said.  It's good to be able to have a civil discussion about this, and try to uncover the truth.

"I can't believe that something like 14,000 years of domestication hasn't changed the dog's genetic makeup and ability to eat EXACTLY what wild canines do."

The GSD as a breed has been around how long? Only around the 100 year mark with known wolf breeding.

I don't think it has anything to do with the dog not being able to digest cooked chicken bones. I believe it is that cooked bones are more brittle and can splinter and have a much better chance of peircing on the way to be digested than do raw.

But being able to digest a food and subsist off of it is not the same as thriving off of it.  We have raised livestock on horrible stuff over time and yep, they're still alive.... pumped full of hormones and antiiotics, yes, but still alive.  Look at us, we can live off of our fast food crap but many of us aren't exactly the pictures of health, either.  I'm one of those who think corn is best left to those built to digest it.  We're quite the herbivorous omnivore (long digestive tract, pitiful canines, but we do not ruminate nor do we have multiple stomachs) but even with us, one glance in the toilet and we can tell who's been eating corn.  Corn is another debate altogether, though. 

Yes, the dog has been domesticated for 14,000 years or more but do we really know when dogs started eating more cooked foods?  Do the Bedouin continue to toss their prized salukis an animal from the day's hunt as a reward (oh how much would I love to visit a Bedouin tribe and pick their brains)?  Do the African natives feed their basenjis cooked foods, raw foods, or leave them to hunt?  All I know personally is kibble was invented in the last century so they surely have not evolved to eat this alone.  You mention that they have evolved over time to eat grains.  I think there is more to that.  We cannot typically digest raw grains, we must cook them, mash them, squoosh them, step on them, grind them, beat them to a bloody pulp and cook them some more to digest them.  But then we digest them well and I think this is much the same for dogs.  Have they evolved to tolerate it more?  Perhaps, but there are plenty of zoos out there that supplement their wolves' diets with kibble and they live a similar lifespan to our dogs, so I believe it's not so much "evolved to handle grains" as "finally, someone figured out how to make grains more digestible for the hoofless kind." 

Plus, different breeds of dogs have different tolerances.  Our beloved GSD breed as a whole has a digestive system about as fragile as a porcelain doll.  Sad but true.  Other breeds have stronger systems as a general group and can live off of whatever they find.  I'm not sure how it happened over time but we sure did a great job breeding dogs with weak stomachs and systems.  Sweeping generalization, yes, but on the board I hang out on I see no end to EPI, SIBO, allergy this, intolerance that, it's depressing.  My GSD x chow could probably live off a dumpster and survive just fine.  Note that I did not say "thrive," but his system is solid. 

Now here is where a new twist comes in.  Kibble is not just "grains and meat."  Many kibbles have dyes, not so good preservatives, poor quality ingredients, questionable meat sources, even added sugar, so there are a lot more potential issues than simply grain.  I think a homecooked diet that does include grain would go a  long way to improving quality because the ingredients are more tightly controlled and there aren't any unnecessary chemicals.  The diet can also be varied.  I am a huge believer in variety.  Eating the same old thing day in and day out is unhealthy for us and it's also unhealthy for most animals out there save for several exceptions (koala is one that comes to mind).  A dog eating the same kibble day in and day out surely isn't getting everything it needs.  Nutrient-wise it may, but the body gets used to dealing with only one thing and I think that's a root issue to many other problems.  Our immune systems need practice and I believe so do our digestive systems, but do note the phrase "I believe."  It's not factual.  I would much rather see a dog on a homecooked diet with quality meats, veggies, fruits, and grains than most kibbles out there.  Also, even the highest qualit

Now I *know* I'm rambling too much... continuation:

Also, even the highest quality kibble still must be baked at ridiculous temperatures.  Cooking alters the chemistry of a food and the cooking that goes into kibble is a radical alteration, not to mention it eliminates nearly all the moisture from the food.

Sheesh, my first day of posting after years of lurking and I've managed to ramble forever.  This is a good topic, though; I hope we have someone jump in who can discuss in depth the difference between cooked bones and raw bones.  Now those who know me where I hang out know that I am very much pro-raw and pro-homecooked and anti-grain, but I do know that there are dogs out there that do well on grains, either because they have versatile systems OR their systems are so out of whack that their systems aren't strong enough to handle all-meat.  In any case, a diet that results in small poops that aren't very stinky, no doggie odor, no doggie breath, clean ears, excellent skin, dazzling coat, clean teeth, no extra carb weight, great vigor, and even energy levels is a diet that's on the right track! :)

I noticed in my other post I used the word "eated."  I meant "eaten," of course.  Please excuse that painful-sounding typo.

Aural, just wanted to clear one thing up. I didn't mean to imply that dogs do WE::l on a corn-based diet! I can show you the improvement in my own dog from the time I adopted him (fed really cheap kibble and table scraps) until he grew in a nice, shiny coat from eating premium kibble that is mostly meat-based.

Gotcha!  I won't argue that they can live off it, but I bet the difference in your dog was a very large one.  It was the same with my little butthead. :)  He went from whatever junk he was on when he broke off the tie-out to Nutro Ultra with the lady who rescued him to Solid Gold Barking at the Moon with me and then on to raw, also with me.  He shines like a waxed car in the sunlight.

I'm sure I don't need to tell you which picture is which! He was on that chain 24/7, winter and summer. Oh, and notice the excess weight, too!

"But I still think that if a dog can digest raw chicken bones, then cooked ones should not be a problem either. Next time you have chicken, try chewing the end of one of the bones."

you're comparing apples to oranges.  YOU would be chewing on a cooked chicken leg (I would hope) and so the bone, being cooked, is brittle.  It cracks and breaks and can have shards and fragments that can puncture going down or be lodged in the gut, cause damage.  COOKED and therefore BRITTLE chicken bones should never be fed to animals.  Very dangerous.  But RAW chicken bones are not brittle, the dogs can crunch them up, they don't fracture when they chew them, they grind up.  Poop is, as someone already said, powdery and often crumbly - sometimes even white powder!  But you don't see pieces of bone in the poo.  Unless of course you feed the dog cooked bones, in which case you're lucky that the pieces come through in the poo and are not stuck in the gut somewhere.

molly

Sunsilver I feed RAW chicken all the time. I grind most of the bird because as I have said before ,it gives me piece of mind. I feed wings and necks whole. Been at it for 4 years now. As said raw bones are softer and will bend, cooked will break and splinter (sorry about your cat). My dogs have never been healthier while on this diet. I do feed some Orijen too. If you have the proper ratio of meat vs bone the dogs stool is small, firm, and stink free!!!! If fed too much bone it can be whiteish and chaulk like, if way to much they can become impacted.I will come back and read the posts prior, especially Auralythic, he/she sounds to be on the same road I am on. But I just got home from training after not going for several months and woo- hoo did we have fun!!! Time for dinner. Oh yes I did have the opportunity to see a wolf demised. The skull and teeth were much bigger than a GSD, but the whole frickin' animal was bigger too! It was a female and I measured her, 31" at wither with bone like twice my big boned male...it is all relative, a coyote would be much smaller  (than a GSD)and be more likely to get into the chicken coop!