register for free
View our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Our sister sites
Steve Wishart
Dogsey Junior
Steve Wishart is offline  
Location: Surrey, UK
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 81
Male 
 
05-06-2008, 03:55 PM
Right, seems to be some confusion here.

Dogs need minerals and vitamins as part of a healthy diet.

Minerals

Calcium; found in bones, dairy products, peas, beans and lentils

Phosphorus; found in eggs, milk, meat (inc. organs)

Magnesium; whole grains, soya, raw wheat germ, milk and fish

Potassium; foods high in whole grains, bran and yeast

Sodium and Chloride; found in almost every food

Copper; fish, liver, peas, beans and lentils again

Iodine; fish, iodised salt and eggs

Iron; meat, liver, whole grains, peas, beans, lentils and fish

Maganese; green vegatables, whole grains, seeds and eggs

Selenium; meat and cereals

Zinc; meat and bone

Vitamins

A; yellow vegetables (carotene), liver, cod liver oil, dairy products

B1 (Thiamin); meat, fish, vegetables, milk and fruit

B2 (Riboflavin); organ meat, dairy products

B3 (Niacin); meat

B5 (Pantothenic Acid);raw meat and vegetables

B7 (Biotin); beef lier, brewer's yeast, raw egg yolk

B12 and Folic Acid; organ meat

C (Ascorbic Acid);citrus fruits and vegetables

D; liver, fish oils, dairy products

E; meat, liver, vegetable oils, nuts, leafy vegetables

K; green plants and vegetables, kelp, egg yolk

All of which has been uncharasmatically ripped from a book on what to feed your dog.

I am not contesting that a dog is much more of a carnivore than a herbivore, because that would be a very stupid assumption (and wrong), but I vehemently disagree that dogs are purely 100% carnivores and not at all omnivores. Dogs can digest certain vegetables just as easily as meat and some vegetables do contain minerals or vitamins that are somewhat needed to be part of a balanced diet and cannot be found in meat alone.

@ nickyboy

I have an Animal Behaviour BSc (Hons) from Cambridge and I am currently undertaking an Adv. Diploma in Canine Behaviour Management and looking to further my studies afterwards with a Higher Certificate of Cynoloy.

I don't really buy into associations because there are far too many about, set up by somebody that charges fees just to have you join their little group. I have coped fine without them and don't plan on joining any soon.

I have been around dogs all my life, but I have been charging people for years doing this, even whilst taking the courses, so professionally, I'd say coming up almost 8 years.
Reply With Quote
Evie
Dogsey Veteran
Evie is offline  
Location: N.Ireland
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,251
Female 
 
05-06-2008, 04:05 PM
Steve, that's a lovely little list you've got going on there; but much of what you listed is not appropriate feeding for dogs, nor would they normally consume in their natural state.

There is nothing a dog needs nutritionally that isn't accessible to them through meat, bone and organ. Their digestive system is designed, beginning to end to digest their prey. Not veg, fruit, milk (bar their mother's milk in puppyhood), cereals, pulses etc.

I could get going on explaining it all in great detail. But I've been there and done that many many times before and am to busy/tired right now to get into it all again. Besides, this is the behaviour/training section and not really on topic for here.
Reply With Quote
Sarah27
Dogsey Veteran
Sarah27 is offline  
Location: Somewhere
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,086
Female 
 
05-06-2008, 04:06 PM
Originally Posted by Steve Wishart View Post
All of which has been uncharasmatically ripped from a book on what to feed your dog.
And depending on which book you read, you will find different things. Wolves don't eat all those things in that list and our dogs' DNA is 0.2% different to a wild wolf's DNA. That's the same difference between a white man and a black man.

I prefer to go by experience rather than what I've read in a book

ETA: Just out of interest, does our dog eat all those things on that list?
Reply With Quote
Steve Wishart
Dogsey Junior
Steve Wishart is offline  
Location: Surrey, UK
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 81
Male 
 
05-06-2008, 04:32 PM
Right, so let me get this straight, my initial post was trying to underline the importance of a good diet consisting of many different things, meats as well as vegetables. A good mentality work out in both giving the dog boundaries as well as training sessions to teach the dog more, and physical exercise needed twice a day.

And yet the discussions evolved from the topic have all been about pedantic details based on an owners own perceived ideas, not mine, such as dogs are carnivorous, not omnivorous, a dog doesn't conform to the pack mentality as that idea was de-bunked several thousand years ago (that's an exaggeration) and some dogs need more exercise than others?

No offence guys, but a lot of the 'disagreement' posts in here were based on very loose seperate arguments and were only created for arguments sake. Yet it seems that the general approach of my first post and the majority of it, despite a bit here and there, is all agreeable, yet I'm still under the impression that my view is totally wrong?

I never said in the initial post that they were the causes of ALL problems, just the majority that I deal with on a daily basis. I didn't mention vet exams and thus, I must have clearly overlooked that (despite thinking it was universally known enough to not warrant a mention), lol, I get condemned and judged for apparently using the Flooding technique all the time, and it just generally feels like I am having to constantly defend my views on things that weren't even mentioned in the first post, simply because some members are being extremely pedantic about some issues.

Christ, I feel like I'm the one going through a vetinary examination!

Seriously, I only bothered writing the first post to try and underline the importance of some areas that would help maintain a happy healthy dog, it was essentially put out there as advice and instead, I'm having to defend the bloody thing as if it was some sort of statement, lol.

I needn't have bothered my bum.

Definitely won't be creating another thread for honest intentions without evaluating the potential car crash it may turn into, that's for sure!

I am all for a good argument, but this has gotten a bit silly.
Reply With Quote
Ben Mcfuzzylugs
Dogsey Veteran
Ben Mcfuzzylugs is offline  
Location: UK
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,644
Female 
 
05-06-2008, 04:33 PM
The problem with diet is there has been much less recearch done on what dogs eat than on what humans eat
currently we do not know all that people need and in what quantities - its would be impossible to make a compleate people food (and there would be plenty money in it if we could) the best human diet is a mixture of as much as we can
as omnivores then that makes total sense - a diet with lots of fruit and veg some meat and some carbs is what we would have found in nature so its the best for us
Unfort then people think in terms of balanced food for dogs and cos they can eat carbs they then assume that they should
Worse still of course dry food must be better
????
processed foods made up of the lowest grades of meat topped up with usless soya protien mixed with some veg and oils that we know the effect on humans so it must be the same as dogs then mixed with at least 50% carbs (usually wheat - v unatural for a dog) only because the carbs are needed in the making of the kibble

My dog eats the (massive) poos of kibble fed dogs and cats when he gets the chance cos they are filled with undigested veg protien
none of the dogs in the street look at my dogs poo (when I dont get there in time)
Carbs also change the acidity of the dogs insides - witnised by the fact that when you first change a dog over it has trouble digesting bones - then as it becomes more acidic much better
this less acid conditions make dogs more prone to fleas and worms as well as who knows what internal problems
Also as there is less water than is natural in dry food then most dogs pee is a little more concentrated (seen in the grass burns) which cannot be good for the insides

Pet food manufacturors are not a bunch of animal lovers in the main
They are buisness people trying to make as much money as possible by trying to convince you that their food is premium and the best for your dog while making it as low quality as they possibly can - and as low quality as dogs will survive on

recearch done in Germany (I have to find that link again) looking at pets after death found that dogs on petfood lived on average 2 years less than dogs on a raw or home cooked diet

When I changed Ben over I noticed incresed energy but better focus (meat is around 21% protien so not as high as many kibbles) much softer coat and smaller less stinky poos

I agree with some of what you have said and disagree with some, but it is a good debate
However I cannot really agree with you advocating the one type of food for helping behaivoral issues, sure if they are on bakers then you might be helping them out but I do not think you are even advocating the best dry food out there and deff not the best method of feeding
Reply With Quote
Malady
Dogsey Veteran
Malady is offline  
Location: Here !
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,681
Female 
 
05-06-2008, 04:47 PM
Originally Posted by Sarah27 View Post
And depending on which book you read, you will find different things. Wolves don't eat all those things in that list and our dogs' DNA is 0.2% different to a wild wolf's DNA. That's the same difference between a white man and a black man.
Not strictly true, as it has been proved there are many distinctions between different breeds and the degree of Wolf DNA in them, so not all dogs have the same degree or percentage of Wolf DNA
Reply With Quote
Malady
Dogsey Veteran
Malady is offline  
Location: Here !
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,681
Female 
 
05-06-2008, 04:48 PM
Originally Posted by Steve Wishart View Post
Right, so let me get this straight, my initial post was trying to underline the importance of a good diet consisting of many different things, meats as well as vegetables. A good mentality work out in both giving the dog boundaries as well as training sessions to teach the dog more, and physical exercise needed twice a day.

And yet the discussions evolved from the topic have all been about pedantic details based on an owners own perceived ideas, not mine, such as dogs are carnivorous, not omnivorous, a dog doesn't conform to the pack mentality as that idea was de-bunked several thousand years ago (that's an exaggeration) and some dogs need more exercise than others?

No offence guys, but a lot of the 'disagreement' posts in here were based on very loose seperate arguments and were only created for arguments sake. Yet it seems that the general approach of my first post and the majority of it, despite a bit here and there, is all agreeable, yet I'm still under the impression that my view is totally wrong?

I never said in the initial post that they were the causes of ALL problems, just the majority that I deal with on a daily basis. I didn't mention vet exams and thus, I must have clearly overlooked that (despite thinking it was universally known enough to not warrant a mention), lol, I get condemned and judged for apparently using the Flooding technique all the time, and it just generally feels like I am having to constantly defend my views on things that weren't even mentioned in the first post, simply because some members are being extremely pedantic about some issues.

Christ, I feel like I'm the one going through a vetinary examination!

Seriously, I only bothered writing the first post to try and underline the importance of some areas that would help maintain a happy healthy dog, it was essentially put out there as advice and instead, I'm having to defend the bloody thing as if it was some sort of statement, lol.

I needn't have bothered my bum.

Definitely won't be creating another thread for honest intentions without evaluating the potential car crash it may turn into, that's for sure!

I am all for a good argument, but this has gotten a bit silly.
Totally agree with you
Reply With Quote
Evie
Dogsey Veteran
Evie is offline  
Location: N.Ireland
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,251
Female 
 
05-06-2008, 05:02 PM
And yet the discussions evolved from the topic have all been about pedantic details based on an owners own perceived ideas, not mine
I don't believe the issue I raised with your first post was at all a "pedantic detail" nor based on my own "percieved ideas" as an owner. I've spent alot of time researching into nutrition for dogs, how their digestive system works etc in order to understand it better. The point you made about dogs being omnivorous was incorrect and I simply wished to point out that they are classified as carnivores.

This is a discussion forum with alot of members. If you start a topic you should expect some discussion, not all people will agree with you. We enjoy friendly debate here.
Reply With Quote
Steve Wishart
Dogsey Junior
Steve Wishart is offline  
Location: Surrey, UK
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 81
Male 
 
05-06-2008, 05:15 PM
Originally Posted by Evie View Post
I don't believe the issue I raised with your first post was at all a "pedantic detail" nor based on my own "percieved ideas" as an owner. I've spent alot of time researching into nutrition for dogs, how their digestive system works etc in order to understand it better. The point you made about dogs being omnivorous was incorrect and I simply wished to point out that they are classified as carnivores.
As someone said, the research into food itself is still very limited from what it should be, that said, I was taught by a viable enough source and someone who I didn't have any reason to doubt, so therefore, I can only believe what I have been taught and by what I use. Unfotunately, I lack the neccessary time to research food more indepthly than I needed to know.

If you have spent that time researching this more indepthly and have facts and results to back up your theory, then please, feel free to point me to a post where you have provided facts and results to back the theory up. It's a much better way to disclose the information than just disagreeing with someone without giving enough of a discussion on the matter, all under a bloody eye rolling smilie. As such, you came across as an arrogant know-it-all who didn't have the time or the respect to actually give constructive criticism.

This is a discussion forum with alot of members. If you start a topic you should expect some discussion, not all people will agree with you. We enjoy friendly debate here.
I don't expect everyone to agree, but I also don't expect everyone to disagree on points that weren't really being discussed in the first place. That isn't friendly debating in my book, that's just people arguing for the hell of it.
Reply With Quote
Sarah27
Dogsey Veteran
Sarah27 is offline  
Location: Somewhere
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,086
Female 
 
05-06-2008, 05:27 PM
Steve, us raw feeders are very passionate about what we feed our dogs. Here's a couple of links for you to have a look at:

http://rawlearning.com/

http://rawfeddogs.net/

http://www.rawmeatybones.com/

It's best to research as many different sources as possible before forming an opinion. That's what I was taught at uni anyway. No one is arguing for the sake of it, just sharing our experience of feeding.
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 4 of 18 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14 > Last »


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools


© Copyright 2016, Dogsey   Contact Us - Dogsey - Top Contact us | Archive | Privacy | Terms of use | Top