Interesting visit to the vet...

I think the deal with raw, for a lot of people, and, I suspect, for vets, is that it's very easy to leave out a key nutrient or three unless you are extremely careful and knowledgeable of what you are doing, and adhere to best practices religiously.

Vets have seen what happens when pets are fed, over the long haul, a diet that might be lacking only one vitamin, or one trace element - and the one thing you can say about commercial food is that even the least expensive food, as long as it meets AAFCO standards, is that it does have all the basic nutrients needed. You might not be able to say that about all raw productions, I think.

Originally Posted by Fiddledee

Sorry if I sound offensive and I don't want to step out of bounds, but I am getting a tad offended and I feel like I'm being attacked over simple advice.

I say "talk with your vet" because you should. Yes, we [I'm enrolling in vet school] don't know your pets as well as you, but we do know a little something. I mean, I'm devoting 8-10 years of my life to learn everything I can about how to keep animals healthy, and for the sake of their owners. Me and other vets sometimes find it offensive when we went through the effort of schooling and sacrificed years to gain knowledge, only to have it doubted and thrown in our face. It's just advice from a well-rounded professional. I am not saying that anyone is incompetent, but it's not good to make any drastic changes in diet without having a vet to turn to for a little advice. Yes, we do know a little something and we want to share knowledge with pet owners for the sake of the animals.

Most vets are in contact with the latest research. The veterinarian I work for and will intern under has to go to at least 2 vet conferences a year. During those conferences, innovations and research is presented. Unless the owner goes out of his/her way to travel to these conferences [or if they are able to get in], or subscribes to vet research magazines, they won't get the same exposure to new things.

All a vet wants to do is help you and benefit the life of your animal. I feel that most people don't want to "talk to their vet" for some reason. It's as if vets are being told "you don't know squat." I don't want the 8 years I go to school to be in vain and a waste of money.



Sorry for the rant, I just felt my words were being unneedlessly attacked. Sorry if I offend anyone...but it really is not good to embark on something like raw feeding without doing loads of research yourself, asking your vet for advice, or talking to an animal nutrition specialist [which most of the time has a D.V.M.]

Click to expand...

I can understand that you are feeling attacked but it seems that vets are seen in the same vein as insurance agents. It's unfortunate but at the clinic where I work, the vet with the most experience seems to do tests on animals so the money justifies her experience. For example, yesterday, an animal came in and another Doctor had examined it. It had a very poor prognosis - spindilosis (sp), liver tumour etc. When the more experienced vet came in, she wanted to do more tests, but the other doctor said there really isn't a good prognosis so there was no point in doing the tests. But she did it anyway, charged the clients an extra $1300 and the animal was put down that afternoon. On another animal who had fatty liver, she wanted to do a liver ultrasound - why when we already know what's wrong with his liver? Because she has to make a daily quota to justify her existence.

I know this is not every vet but I think the money-grabbing reputation has preceded any new up and coming veterinarian. With respect to the food issue, I would plead with you to be open-minded as you go through vet school and not just accept things that are told to you. I'm not saying I'm right in what I feed my dog, it just makes sense to me that fresher, less processed food is better. I would love to talk to a vet who has investigated, with an open-mind, both sides of the story and can give me a reasonable, logical explanation why SD kibble would be better than raw or cooked food. I realize part of the issue is that a raw or homecooked diet may lack certain nutrients but the same could be said of kibble or canned food. Kibble or canned could contain the minimum requirements or more than the recommended amounts. who knows but we the public have to depend on big companies like Hills or Purina to feed our animals.

It's not that I think vets don't know anything; trust me, I don't know how they know all the little ins and outs about each animal. It's more that they seem to be 'stuck' in what they've been taught as opposed to learning both sides of the story. Instead of giving me a silly story, give me a logical explanation of why you think I should feed a certain way. I still may not agree but at least I'd respect you (I'm talking in general here, not you specifically).

Originally Posted by darlili

......- and the one thing you can say about commercial food is that even the least expensive food, as long as it meets AAFCO standards, is that it does have all the basic nutrients needed. You might not be able to say that about all raw productions, I think.

Click to expand...

Unless, of course, they don't bother to supplement that particular nutrient back in after the cooking process destroys it (the taurine deaths way back when), or purchase substandard ingredients to save themselves money (the massive pet food poisoning of 2007), or have a QA that really isn't (Diamond's recent thiamine deficiency in Premium Edge).

All three of these "mistakes" killed someone's beloved pet (thousands of them in the first two cases).

It all boils down to - do I trust a company who's bottom line is that happy little greenback, or do I trust myself and the attention to detail I WILL put into my cats' welfare?

Having already lost one to trusting them, I'll do it myself, thanks.

This is NOT a dig at folks who buy commercially-produced cat foods - it's a defense of those, like myself, who chose not to.

There are drawbacks to both choices, and those are legitimate and reasonable topics of discussion.... this particular comment, however, is a blanket statement that needs a bit of "softening". :-)

Kinda like when some folks say raw diets provide everything cat's need to thrive.... in a perfect world, of course they CAN, but in the real world, they are only as "good" as the person pulling them together.

Hmmm, I think maybe I'm cautioning everyone now. *chuckle*

Originally Posted by Auntie Crazy;2753131
[SIZE="4"


There are drawbacks to both choices, and those are legitimate and reasonable topics of discussion.[/size]... this particular comment, however, is a blanket statement that needs a bit of "softening". :-)

Kinda like when some folks say raw diets provide everything cat's need to thrive.... in a perfect world, of course they CAN, but in the real world, they are only as "good" as the person pulling them together.

Hmmm, I think maybe I'm cautioning everyone now. *chuckle*

Click to expand...

I have to agree with the above

Of course I would add there are Benefits to different feeding methods also...

Veterinarian Dr. Patty Khuly defines the issue pretty well here (better than I did!): People Food.

Her blog is the only one I have sent to my inbox, just so I don't miss any posts.

And (just for the record) the only drawback I actually see to raw-feeding is the time involved in preparing and cleaning. Obviously, I'm quite willing to put it in for the huge health benefits to my cats, but it is a negative component to the regimen. Ensuring the menu is nutritionally balanced is no more or less than I do for myself, and did for my kids when they were growing up.

Originally Posted by Auntie Crazy

Veterinarian Dr. Patty Khuly defines the issue pretty well here (better than I did!): People Food.

Her blog is the only one I have sent to my inbox, just so I don't miss any posts.

And (just for the record) the only drawback I actually see to raw-feeding is the time involved in preparing and cleaning. Obviously, I'm quite willing to put it in for the huge health benefits to my cats, but it is a negative component to the regimen.

Ensuring the menu is nutritionally balanced is no more or less than I do for myself, and did for my kids when they were growing up.

Click to expand...

Good article... Personally I would not be trusting a blogging Vet but I am old and have different ideals

Originally Posted by Fiddledee

All a vet wants to do is help you and benefit the life of your animal.

Click to expand...

I believe that whole heartedly. I have nothing but the utmost respect for veterinarians. I think it must be one of the most difficult professions to pursue and I can't imagine anyone doing it unless they have a genuine desire to help animals.

I feel that most people don't want to "talk to their vet" for some reason. It's as if vets are being told "you don't know squat." I don't want the 8 years I go to school to be in vain and a waste of money.

Click to expand...

Then make sure you keep an open mind.

Look, just ask yourself this: "Why are all these people turning away from processed foods and going with raw especially given the extra work involved with raw?"

I don't want to feed raw. I don't. I often fondly think back on the days when all I had to do to feed my cats was toss some dry food in their bowls.

I started feeding raw to address health issues in my cats when my vet could only offer "treatments" that really only treated the symptoms and did nothing to address the root of the problems.

I also do it as a preventative measure in response to the many diet related health problems I have not yet had to face but which I see in the cats of other people. Problems which evaporate when the cat is switched from a processed diet to a raw diet.

I've tried many times to convince myself that it would be OK to go back to a processed diet for my crew. But I know it isn't true. I know they are better off with a raw diet.

I'm fully aware of the risk I take in feeding a raw diet to my cats. But I'm confident that those risks are less than the risks in feeding processed foods.

Sorry for the rant, I just felt my words were being unneedlessly attacked. Sorry if I offend anyone...but it really is not good to embark on something like raw feeding without doing loads of research yourself, asking your vet for advice, or talking to an animal nutrition specialist [which most of the time has a D.V.M.]

Click to expand...

A point which is made repeatedly by many people in these forums and one for which I don't recall anyone, including you, ever being "attacked" for as long as all 3 possible sources of information are acknowledged.

Have there been any long-term studies on raw feeding, especially as done by lay people? I have seen references to, it seems, the same 3-4 vets, at best - but are there any other well-designed studies out there? That can be one reason a lot of vets are iffy about raw diets as done in the home - perhaps not enough substantiated clinical research out there yet.

Originally Posted by darlili

Have there been any long-term studies on raw feeding, especially as done by lay people? I have seen references to, it seems, the same 3-4 vets, at best - but are there any other well-designed studies out there? That can be one reason a lot of vets are iffy about raw diets as done in the home - perhaps not enough substantiated clinical research out there yet.

Click to expand...

One company has successfully passed the affco feeding trials with raw ...

Not very much in the way of double blind trials ... and as with many things in the veterinary field those might be a touch hard to do

Most vets that I know that are not raw feeders do sight the lack of Solid research as a reason they are cautious... YET NONE have said do not feed outside the er vets ...

Originally Posted by sharky

One company has successfully passed the affco feeding trials with raw ...

Not very much in the way of double blind trials ... and as with many things in the veterinary field those might be a touch hard to do

Most vets that I know that are not raw feeders do sight the lack of Solid research as a reason they are cautious... YET NONE have said do not feed outside the er vets ...

Click to expand...

One of my vets told me point blank to not feed raw due to risk of meat contamination - this was for Bugsy though, he is complicated. I have not discussed Raw feeding with my other vet; I am curious to think what he would say.

One company has successfully passed the affco feeding trials with raw ...

Not very much in the way of double blind trials ... and as with many things in the veterinary field those might be a touch hard to do

Most vets that I know that are not raw feeders do sight the lack of Solid research as a reason they are cautious... YET NONE have said do not feed outside the er vets ...

Click to expand...

Exactly. The reason my vet will not feed her animals raw is because of the lack of strongly supported studies that last over a period of greater than 10 years. However, she will support her clients if they do choose to feed raw; she advises against it if the client does not have the proper materials, experience, or time to devote to a raw diet. The quality of life of a cat on raw vs. a cat on a premium diet of dry/canned food and the health of it over its entire lifetime has not been done. Yes, many people verify that it does work [and it most likely is one of the best things for a cat], but trials are the best way to do it.

That's just personal opinions. Another vet I was employed for worked on the same grounds for everything, including medication. That's why she no longer carries Revolution as a heartworm preventative for dogs, because she waited to see official medical results in a controlled environment.

Most vets should approach everything the same way; with a slight suspicion. Vets and doctors are taught to not follow pharmaceutical reps' statements of praise on a miracle drug [unfortunately out of greed and laziness, some do] until it's been properly tested, or on the other spectrum with unproven homeopathic remedies that have not had official documented results.

Asking a vet what he/she does with her personal pets is another way to see how they truly believe.

Originally Posted by carolinalima

One of my vets told me point blank to not feed raw due to risk of meat contamination

Click to expand...

Mine also. Same with every vet (5 or 6) my friends have asked.

Originally Posted by darlili

Have there been any long-term studies on raw feeding, especially as done by lay people? I have seen references to, it seems, the same 3-4 vets, at best - but are there any other well-designed studies out there? That can be one reason a lot of vets are iffy about raw diets as done in the home - perhaps not enough substantiated clinical research out there yet.

Click to expand...

There's no profit in studying a home-prepared diet, so it's not likely to happen. Doesn't mean it won't, but it's quite unlikely and I wouldn't hold my breath. There might be something out there reference feeding zoo cats, though (here's a food-handling guide with somewhat relevant info: www.nal.usda.gov).

I'm currently writing an article on the whys and hows of feeding frankenprey and whole prey, but when I'm done, I'm going to work on a raw feeding analysis. It'll go beyond simply calling out all the "myths" of raw feeding and will include citations, reports, etc. for every point it makes.

I've become a bit frustrated lately with the repetitive push-back, especially when some of the claims are so patently false.

For instance, it's time to take my clowder to the vet for their annuals, and with this being the first visit since putting them on raw, I naturally called the doc to get a feel for his openness/knowledge on raw feeding. Without even pausing to take a breath, he launched into a clearly memorized RAW IS BAD, BAD, BAD speech.

When he started going off on the "hormones and antibiotics that even human-grade raw meat is full of", I had to ask him if he honestly believed pet food manufacturers purchased only holistic, free-ranging chickens for their products (rather than the agricultural castoffs, veterinarian euthanasia's, and spoiled grocery store products many of them actually do use - see Ann Martin's "Foods Pets Die For"), and got no answer.

This is a refrain I'm tired of listening to and one that needs to be put to rest. Generally-speaking, human-grade raw meat/organ products are cleaner than those tossed into the pet food industry's vats, and they are certainly fresher.

Another issue is the nutrients - folks keep saying home-made raw feeders can't be certain they're giving the cat everything it needs, despite the fact that 1) no one (including the pet food industry) knows everything a cat needs and 2 ) we're feeding the natural diet of the cat so we don't NEED to know everything the cat needs. I am absolutely, positively certain there are nutrients we have not identified that cats require as much as they need taurine and thiamine - but because my cats eat the diet they evolved to thrive on, I don't have to wonder if they're getting those nutrients. I know they are.

It's well-documented that many nutrients are unstable - some are even compromised by light and/or air (see page 12)- so it is beyond laughable to claim that heavily processed products are more nutritious for a carnivore than the same products in their fresh, raw, natural state. The PFC's spend millions of dollars trying to convince the public they only use the freshest, highest quality products but, in fact, whatever they use has been so heavily processed that it's a pretty safe bet the only "nutrients" the cat can possibly use are the synthetic vitamins added in at the end of the processing. This would certainly explain why cats died when taurine wasn't manually added in and when Diamond's product was shipped out without the thiamine supplement.

Sorry to go on and on.... the more I research and understand, the more appalled I am at the pet food industry... and the more I want to get the word out to people trusting in the information disseminated by the PFI's multi-million dollar ad campaigns.

Again, I'm not in a way inferring that folks who feed commercially processed cat foods don't care about their cats - of course they do! I'm just doing everything I can to reassure/inform folks on why raw feeding is not all that crazy (or dangerous) an idea. (Not trying to sound like a broken record, just making sure no one's feelings are hurt - my goal is to help, not hurt. *smile*)

If people are really that concerned about feeding raw and it not being balanced then feed whole prey As perfectly balanced as any cat food could ever get

But, in the wild, eating their natural prey, how long do cats live? Maybe five years or so? So, really, we have no idea how the 'natural' diet works for cats living well into their teens, which many indoor domesticated cats do, right?

Sort of like humans - back in the hunter/gatherer days, humans usually lived, well, a heck of a lot less years than we do now....not strictly an apples to apples comparison vis a vis diets, health, etc. Even a hundred years ago, people did die at younger ages, often of things we don't see that much in a first world country (e.g., childbirth fever, infections from getting cut by an ax, polio, etc.)

Again, I'd just like to see varied, reliable sources, not just the same 3-4 vets that seem to pop up on every raw food discussion, or personal anecdotes from lay people, that are cited over and over again. I don't mind when raw food true believers feel themselves on the cutting edge of nutrition from their own personal, and necessarily, small number of experiences, but I personally would like to see a whole lot more clinical studies over a wide range, and maybe with some certified feline nutritionists and DVM's signing off on them.

Obviously, nutrition is an evolving science - but there's the word - science - replicable results would be a nice thing to have when advocating anything, right? Also, since I'm not breeding my own prey foods in my back yard, again, and creating my own water and air, I think we're all dependent on the supply chain - and that includes 'human-grade' food and other foods for which there ware no real standardized definitions.

Originally Posted by darlili

Again, I'd just like to see varied, reliable sources, not just the same 3-4 vets that seem to pop up on every raw food discussion, or personal anecdotes from lay people, that are cited over and over again. I don't mind when raw food true believers feel themselves on the cutting edge of nutrition from their own personal, and necessarily, small number of experiences, but I personally would like to see a whole lot more clinical studies over a wide range, and maybe with some certified feline nutritionists and DVM's signing off on them.

Click to expand...

Can you point me towards the studies of that sort that have convinced you of the value and safety of processed foods when fed over the typical lifespan of an indoor cat (13-15 yrs)?

Well, when did cats start attaining life spans that now average into the teens, and even later - by any chance coinciding with the widespread introduction of commercially produced, scientifically reseached and constituted, foods? Of course, you have to factor in the widespread use of kitty litter, especially clumping, that made it far more acceptable for many people to keep their cats inside all the time. And, hey, more vets specializing in small animal care...maybe a factor? Increased emphasis on neutering - no doubt a factor, in my mind....

Maybe it is all just coincidence - but just saying, I haven't seen many, if any, clinical studies done on raw foods over an extended period of time - beyond the ever-present 2-3 vets that blog a lot about raw food. And, these vets never seem to point back to any studies themselves, other than their own experience. So, if we want to say, for example, let's give a lot of weight to these raw food advocate vets and their experience, why aren't we giving equal weight to the vets who are leery of raw food diets, given their own experience? Why do some constantly say that these trained professionals are too stupid, really, to utilize their scientific training to analyze data in the service of their clients?

I think it's close to libel to say so many vet students, and experienced vets, cannot see beyond a class presentation, no matter who's funding it, to the real data presented. Don't forget, at least in the last ten years, it's been harder to get into vet school than med school - these aren't a bunch of dummies we're talking about here, I think.

And, just not sure it's a reasonable argument to say, gee, cats in the wild eat mice, so therefore, mice and their equivalent are the best possible food for currently domesticated kitties with their, on average, extended life spans. As I asked, do cats in the wild who eat mice tend to live to 15-20 years, as so many domesticated cats in the US do these days? If not, may not be an apples to apples comparison. Also, if it were truly so easy to easily replicate any 'perfect' food - I suspect commercial companies would be right there on it- obviously, the pet care industry is a billion dollar business. Also, the Joyce Kilmer line comes to mind whenever anyone says how easy it is to duplicate something 'natural', doesn't it?

The Waltham Centre for Pet Nutrition might have some studies of interest - or any of the vet schools these days. I get both the Tufts and Cornell newsletters, for the past three years - the last reference to raw that I remember is the Winn Foundation undertaking a study, but the results aren't in yet, as I recall.

It's really a shame that there are not more certified feline nutritionists around to weigh in on this topic - both on the internet and in the real world - it would probably give people a lot more comfort when working out what to provide their pets to give them their best chances of thriving over the long haul. Raw may be great for a lot of pets - but I truly don't think there's a lot of clinical research there, yet, to back it up to provide comfort to medical professionals and a lot of pet parents.

When the research is there, I'm sure the raw advocates will provide it - and it will be good to read.

Originally Posted by darlili

The Waltham Centre for Pet Nutrition might have some studies of interest - or any of the vet schools these days. I get both the Tufts and Cornell newsletters, for the past three years - the last reference to raw that I remember is the Winn Foundation undertaking a study, but the results aren't in yet, as I recall.

It's really a shame that there are not more certified feline nutritionists around to weigh in on this topic - both on the internet and in the real world - it would probably give people a lot more comfort when working out what to provide their pets to give them their best chances of thriving over the long haul. Raw may be great for a lot of pets - but I truly don't think there's a lot of clinical research there, yet, to back it up to provide comfort to medical professionals and a lot of pet parents.

When the research is there, I'm sure the raw advocates will provide it - and it will be good to read.

Click to expand...

"Might"? So you don't know if such studies exist or not?

You require some number of long term, wide ranging studies to prove the value and safety of feeding raw foods but you require no such studies regarding feeding processed foods?

I find that an interesting and not uncommon position.

"Might" is actually being a little sardonic - obviously, the Waltham Centre has a wealth of information for those who choose to look there, but I'm thinking a lot of people just will not. Same with the vet schools - but people will keep saying that the schools and their students deliberately ignore scientific method and analysis.

And, guessing it's a tad difficult to either establish AAFCO standards, or adhere to them, without some work meeting professional standards - such as those labels that indicate feeding trials were conducted, maybe? And, yeah, guessing the prescription foods, for example, were just tossed together in five minutes, and then the companies just trusted that thousands of health care professionals would look the other way..... And that companies revise their formulas just for the fun of it, not in response to new nutritional information derived from research, because, Lord knows, it's cheap to re-do formulas.

Lok, just wishing the raw food diets had a ton of clinical reseach behind them to support assertions regarding it - sort of like, I don't know, herbal supplements being used for menopause relief - some compounds actually have been tested and are effective; some are still be checked and the jury's out; and some have been touted to have effects that we've learned are not supported by research. Placebos are powerful in and of themselves - another area of research that certainly hasn't been completely 'finished', if anything in health care can ever be said to be 'done'.

If people want to say they've had great results with their own pets with raw food, that's terrific - but the clinical research simply isn't there, to the best of my knowledge, as it exists for commercially developed foods.

When advising people about raw I try to use logic, though I may be the only one thats sees the logic, rather than studies. Studies do provide a good foundation for a solid argument. We know that cats have survived off of prey since the beginning of time, commercial food is 85+ years old. But the numbers of years they live in the wild is dependent on some factors, one of which is nutrition. Their body and bodily functions provide some insight on what they may be designed to eat. To me, the body shows a high protien ultra low carb diet.

One of the arguments you usually hear in the raw world is "no cooked mice in the wild". Indicating that cats lived off of non cooked meals. Though it is hard for us to show that raw is the only way to go. Mainly because of the limited number of studies and the fact cats have survived off of cooked food. People have to research for themselves and decide whether or not raw is the way to go. We do know that cooking destroys some nutrients. Raw food does have its risks. Conventional food has risks also. Using all government information, which I'm sure was figured through study, when can somewhat prove that raw provides everything a cat needs, just like dry friskies. I can't wait until solid research is published. But until then I will rely on what makes sense to me, the anatomy of a cat and its natural prey.