Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner

1 - 20 of 31 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
As anyone ever used a meat grinder to grind their raw food before feeding? I have never feed raw because I worry about my dogs choking on raw chunks. I have a friend that lost a dog due to a raw chicken piece getting caught in her thoat. I believe my butchershop will grind the meat for me with the bones still attached.

Is there any reason why the meat should be feed whole?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,104 Posts
For a dog with all of their teeth it seems like extra effort to grind their food.

However, two of my dogs came to us missing many teeth. So in the beginning I used to grind all of their whole chickens for one meal. And I gave them boneless muscle meat supplemented with calcium for the second meal of the day. I have since stopped grinding, for the most part. Even without several teeth they are quite capable of chewing down a chicken leg or wing just fine. And those pieces are a lot of bone, so I add some meat to compensate. For the second meal of the day I have found plenty of things besides chicken that have bones small enough for my little dogs.

If you feel that a raw diet is in the best interest of your dog and you have done all of the research to create a proper diet (a bad raw diet is far worse than a quality kibble) then go ahead and have the butcher grind for you. Just be sure to mix the ground meat well to disperse the meat, bone, and organs evenly throughout the mixture. Package it in containers that will serve no more than two day's worth of meals. Ground meat is more prone to creating the perfect environment for bacterial growth, so be sure to defrost it properly, keep it refrigerated, and use it within two day's time.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
221 Posts
Is there any reason why the meat should be feed whole?
Besides being easier on the caregiver, dental health and psychological well being plus its just fun to eat whole animal parts. Would you like to eat nothing but ground food your whole life?

briteday: what is a bad raw diet? I can't think of any that would be worse than eating kible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
Besides being easier on the caregiver, dental health and psychological well being plus its just fun to eat whole animal parts. Would you like to eat nothing but ground food your whole life?

briteday: what is a bad raw diet? I can't think of any that would be worse than eating kible.
I think Briteday means an improper rotation, or an improper supplemented raw diet. Meaning, poor balances of muscle meat to bone ratios, and such as that.

As for Feeding ground raw vs. whole.... I think it comes down to how comfortable one feels about feeding whole raw, and the realistic efforts it takes to have everything ground. Every owner has to do what's best for them and there dog. Is one worse or better than the other?... nope.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
221 Posts
Every owner has to do what's best for them and there dog. Is one worse or better than the other?... nope.
I strongly disagree. You are missing one of the major benefits of raw by grinding. Periodontal health. Owners who grind are doing what is best for the owner, not the dog. They can't quite wrap their minds around the fact that dogs are quite capable of eating whole foods including bones.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,966 Posts
Is there any reason why the meat should be feed whole?
I'd say the dental health of your dog, and also convenience. Unless your dog has serious dental issues, there's no real reason to grind up the food as long as you're feeding size-appropriate bones. You'd be really surprised at how much good a raw diet can do for teeth. Not just grinding bones, but ripping meat off them.

Trainer: A bad raw diet is one that hasn't been properly researched. I'd rather feed my dog Pro Plan than put her on nothing but chicken wings for the rest of her life.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
601 Posts
Like you, I was planning on purchasing a grinder when I decided to switch Molly to raw and feared she would choke on a bone. Realized a good grinder is going to cost quite a bit if it's expected to grind more than chicken bones. Then found a meat processing company nearby that sells ground meat/bone/offal for dogs. It didn't take long for me to feed her ground to realize it would be like having a child with a mouthful of perfectly normal teeth to be fed baby food. It took 2 days of hovering over like an idiot to see she knows exactly what she's doing eating a chicken quarter. Glad I didn't waste the money on a grinder and instead spent it on stocking up on a variety of meat and meaty bones. Her favorite is a nice meaty rib bone which can last hours, unlike the chicken which is gone in minutes.


Edit: People choke and die too, but you don't stop eating.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
221 Posts
Trainer: A bad raw diet is one that hasn't been properly researched. I'd rather feed my dog Pro Plan than put her on nothing but chicken wings for the rest of her life.
In Tom Lonsdale's book, Work Wonders, he says that many of his veteranary clients fed their dogs nothing but chicken backs and frames and they all appeared healthy. I advocate a much more varied diet than that but taking that into account, if all I could feed my dogs were chicken backs and frames, I would feed that before I would feed any kibble.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,104 Posts
As a medical biochemist, I see a bad raw diet as one that does not contain the proper meat/bone/organ requirements, lacks a proper calcium : phosphorus ratio, lacks diversity for a complete range of vitamins and trace minerals and instead relies upon commercial supplements, a diet that the dog does not thrive on, owners who lack the proper research of the details, lack the knowledge of implementing the diet without creating stress or illness in the dog, learning to properly handle / store / defrost / feed / clean up for raw fed dogs, and finding appropriate sustainable resources before beginning the diet. Deciding today to start a raw diet tomorrow, thinking that throwing a chicken quarter or backs at a dog day after day... does not fulfill normal nutritional requirements. The dog is nutritionally better off on a high quality kibble, IMO.

As far as dental health, I tend to part company with most raw feeders on that issue. As I mentioned, two of my dogs came missing many teeth when we acquired them. They had both been on reasonable quality kibble, and had dentals every 6 months with extractions at almost every visit. When I switched them over to ground raw diets their dental health immediately improved. It's not perfect, but we can manage it with daily brushing and occasional scraping / polishing. Neither of these dogs have lost a tooth since being on a raw diet, and for two of the three years that raw diet was ground or boneless. That being said, my theory is that by removing the carbohydrates (grains or whatever else commercial kibble is using for carb filler) you remove the source of excess simple sugars that feed the oral bacteria that in turn form the plaque on the teeth. While they were on ground diets they also got recreational bones to gnaw on for pleasure, but they didn't have a daily need to gain nutrition by tearing at the meat or bones. And their teeth were still healthy.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
221 Posts
I see a bad raw diet as one that does not contain the proper meat/bone/organ requirements,
What is the proper meat/bone/organ requirement and what is the acceptable devation from the perfect ratio? Where do you get that information? Is there scientific research?

lacks a proper calcium : phosphorus ratio,
What is the proper ratio and how much deviation would be acceptable? Where do you get that information? Wouldn't the ca/ph ratio be taken care of with the proper meat, bones, organ ratio? There is much conflicting scientific research, which do you believe and why?

lacks diversity for a complete range of vitamins and trace minerals and instead relies upon commercial supplements,
How much diversity is preferable and how much is acceptable?

a diet that the dog does not thrive on,
Don't you think that would take years to discover?

owners who lack the proper research of the details,
IMO reading Dr. Lonsdale's book Work Wonders will give you the proper research. It only takes an hour or so to read. I think most people just want the "how to" information without all the biological details. Don't you agree? Do you think a person needs more nutritional information to feed dogs than they do to feed themselves and their families?

lack the knowledge of implementing the diet without creating stress or illness in the dog,
How would you do that?

learning to properly handle / store / defrost / feed / clean up for raw fed dogs,
How would that be different from handling raw meat for the human diet? Isn't that something we all do daily?

and finding appropriate sustainable resources before beginning the diet.
You mean like the grocery store we all visit a couple of times a week anyway?

Deciding today to start a raw diet tomorrow, thinking that throwing a chicken quarter or backs at a dog day after day... does not fulfill normal nutritional requirements.
Do you believe a dog should have a completely balanced diet every day? Do you believe the same about humans?

The dog is nutritionally better off on a high quality kibble, IMO.
Do you have research indicating that? Do you believe that kibble is "complete and balanced" Have you seen this page written by a biologist. http://rawfed.com/myths/standards.html ? A quote from the page concerning AAFCO requirements for "complete and balanced", "It is, at best, an educated guess as to what our animals really need, and is based on less-than-scientific principles."

I disagree with you on the ground stuff also but I have asked enough questions for one post. :) Thanks for your time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
So the basic limitations are inconvenience and dental health. That makes sense. But honestly I was never considering raw because of teeth issues. It's a plus but not a requirement. All of my dogs' teeth are in good condition.

Edit: People choke and die too, but you don't stop eating.
I understand that. But that doesn't mean I want to take that kind of risk with my dogs. Maybe it's just hard to understand it until I see it. :confused:

I don't know. Anyway, it will be a while before I switch, still in the middle of research.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
221 Posts
Dental benefits are important. Even kibble companies will admit that 80% of kibble fed dogs will have periodontal diseash by the time they are 3 years old. So if your dog doesn't have it yet, it will if you continue to feed kibble. Periodontal disease is not just gum problems and bad breath. It can lead to serious heart, liver, and kidney problems and can even kill your dog.

Trust me. :) Your dogs know how to eat bones and are quite good at it. Dogs have been eating and digesting bones since there were dogs.

While you are researching, read Dr. Lonsdale's book, Work Wonders. IMO it's the best "how to feed raw" book ever written. It's straight forward, no nonsense and easy to read. You can download the book in PDF format from his webpage http://www.rawmeatybones.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Dental benefits are important. Even kibble companies will admit that 80% of kibble fed dogs will have periodontal diseash by the time they are 3 years old. So if your dog doesn't have it yet, it will if you continue to feed kibble. Periodontal disease is not just gum problems and bad breath. It can lead to serious heart, liver, and kidney problems and can even kill your dog.
Yes, I know all of this. But my dogs aren't all young. I have a 5 year old female that has the teeth of a one year old dog. I'm just not convinced right now that just because of an issue that may or may not show up I should consider feeding my dogs something that my be detrimental to their health.

My handler was showing the #5 Doberman in the country. And she died because she choked on a raw chicken bone. That scares me, and I don't think I'm being outlandish by taking note of it.

And since their all no nutritional detriments to feeding raw grinded food, I don't see it as a problem. Teeth can be maintained too many other ways.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
601 Posts
What is the proper meat/bone/organ requirement and what is the acceptable devation from the perfect ratio? Where do you get that information? Is there scientific research?



What is the proper ratio and how much deviation would be acceptable? Where do you get that information? Wouldn't the ca/ph ratio be taken care of with the proper meat, bones, organ ratio? There is much conflicting scientific research, which do you believe and why?



How much diversity is preferable and how much is acceptable?




Don't you think that would take years to discover?



IMO reading Dr. Lonsdale's book Work Wonders will give you the proper research. It only takes an hour or so to read. I think most people just want the "how to" information without all the biological details. Don't you agree? Do you think a person needs more nutritional information to feed dogs than they do to feed themselves and their families?



How would you do that?



How would that be different from handling raw meat for the human diet? Isn't that something we all do daily?



You mean like the grocery store we all visit a couple of times a week anyway?



Do you believe a dog should have a completely balanced diet every day? Do you believe the same about humans?



Do you have research indicating that? Do you believe that kibble is "complete and balanced" Have you seen this page written by a biologist. http://rawfed.com/myths/standards.html ? A quote from the page concerning AAFCO requirements for "complete and balanced", "It is, at best, an educated guess as to what our animals really need, and is based on less-than-scientific principles."

I disagree with you on the ground stuff also but I have asked enough questions for one post. :) Thanks for your time.
Briteday has posted numerous informative posts regarding many aspects of feeding raw diets. Do a search of her posts - you won't be wasting your time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
What is the proper meat/bone/organ requirement and what is the acceptable devation from the perfect ratio? Where do you get that information? Is there scientific research?



What is the proper ratio and how much deviation would be acceptable? Where do you get that information? Wouldn't the ca/ph ratio be taken care of with the proper meat, bones, organ ratio? There is much conflicting scientific research, which do you believe and why?



How much diversity is preferable and how much is acceptable?



Don't you think that would take years to discover?



IMO reading Dr. Lonsdale's book Work Wonders will give you the proper research. It only takes an hour or so to read. I think most people just want the "how to" information without all the biological details. Don't you agree? Do you think a person needs more nutritional information to feed dogs than they do to feed themselves and their families?



How would you do that?



How would that be different from handling raw meat for the human diet? Isn't that something we all do daily?



You mean like the grocery store we all visit a couple of times a week anyway?



Do you believe a dog should have a completely balanced diet every day? Do you believe the same about humans?



Do you have research indicating that? Do you believe that kibble is "complete and balanced" Have you seen this page written by a biologist. http://rawfed.com/myths/standards.html ? A quote from the page concerning AAFCO requirements for "complete and balanced", "It is, at best, an educated guess as to what our animals really need, and is based on less-than-scientific principles."

I disagree with you on the ground stuff also but I have asked enough questions for one post. :) Thanks for your time.
Just asking.... but are you able to provide scientific research that says dogs do not to be fed balanced diets, or even daily balanced diets? Besides obvious dental issues, can you provide the research saying that ground meat is inappropriate for dogs.? Lastly, could you provide the research that says calcium:phosphorus ratios are irrelevant?

As for the AAFCO standards, I agree with you that they are a joke. In order for a food to be approved by "AFFCO standards" the "test subject" dogs have to live six months! That is an extremely short time period.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
221 Posts
Briteday has posted numerous informative posts regarding many aspects of feeding raw diets. Do a search of her posts - you won't be wasting your time.
briteday has made over 5,000 post. No way I am going to search for them. These are valid questions about points she brings up often. She often talks about meat, bone, organ ratios but I don't remember seeing her saying what those should be or where she gets that information or how much you could vary from those ratios and still have a healthy dog.

Just asking.... but are you able to provide scientific research that says dogs do not to be fed balanced diets, or even daily balanced diets?
I nave never said they don't need balanced diet. I do say they don't need a balanced diet daily, just as humans don't. Look to nature. No way a wild dog or wolf would get a balanced meal every day. They most likely don't even eat every day. It's just common sense. For more information on balanced diets check this out. http://rawfed.com/myths/balance.html

Besides obvious dental issues, can you provide the research saying that ground meat is inappropriate for dogs.?
I think this will answer you question. http://rawfed.com/myths/ground.html

Lastly, could you provide the research that says calcium:phosphorus ratios are irrelevant?
I can when you tell me what the ca/ph ratio is of the food you ate for the last 6 months and how you know that. I can when you can show me absolute proof of what it is supposed to be. You see a wide range of perfect ratios from very knowledgable people. Once it is determined exactly what it should be then maybe we can determine exactly how important it is. I don't see how you can place importance on a number that no one know what it should be.

As for the AAFCO standards, I agree with you that they are a joke. In order for a food to be approved by "AFFCO standards" the "test subject" dogs have to live six months! That is an extremely short time period.
:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,838 Posts
I understand that. But that doesn't mean I want to take that kind of risk with my dogs. Maybe it's just hard to understand it until I see it. :confused:

I don't know. Anyway, it will be a while before I switch, still in the middle of research.

I have had dogs that scarf and choke a bit on kibble. They just don't understand that they need to chew it more thoroughly; with Raw, I haven't had that problem; it's like they know they have to chew more thoroughly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I have had dogs that scarf and choke a bit on kibble. They just don't understand that they need to chew it more thoroughly; with Raw, I haven't had that problem; it's like they know they have to chew more thoroughly.
Well, I have been researching all day and I'm starting to come around to it. I want them to have variety, and I think it will be ok if I feed the right kinds of pieces. I'v read that the bones in chicken quarters can be too thick and might cause choking. I also think I will spend time with them the first few meals making sure they slow down and chew. Hand feed them if necessary to prevent easy swallowing. I will most likely start with chicken backs or necks and see how it goes.

I hope to switch one dog this week. That way I can get a feel for it before I switch the other two.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
I wouldn't feed necks unless they are still attached to the back.
I was just starting to think that too. They will be most likely be too small.

As for as phosphorus:calcium ratio's, am I supposed feed an the same amount in weight of bone as I do in meat?
 
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
Top