Trying to find information on dog food is a real minefield on Google. I've heard that cooked meat destroys a dog's gut flora, but others say the risk of parasites in raw meat is too high and that you have to cook it...
I'm completely lost.
To be more specific: the meat I give Loup isn't her main daily meal. It's just in small amounts (2 chicken breasts spread over the week) for training. It's her high-value treat (whether it's cooked or raw) and we can work well in any situation using it.
So my question is: can I cook the meat for her?
On the one hand, it's more practical because raw meat sticks to your fingers and the bag, so it's a bit of a nightmare when you're out and about...
On the other hand, my dog has a sensitive stomach and too much raw meat gives her diarrhoea.
What's the deal? Can I carry on lightly cooking the chicken before giving it to her (boiled for 5 minutes without salt) without the risk of destroying her gut flora?
Or should I just stick to dried and/or raw chicken?
Just for info, Loup is 8 months old (I don't know if that makes a difference).
Thanks!
Translated from French
The forum content is sometimes translated from another language, and posts may concern countries with different animal laws. Do your research before making any decisions.
Since the forum is translated by AI, the translations may contain errors.
My point is simply this: in my view, a digestively healthy dog should be able to digest all sorts of things, including the components of a raw diet (like raw meat, for example), even if that isn't the main diet we've chosen for them.
I believe a large portion of the "digestive sensitivities" currently being reported are actually down to a lack of dietary variety.
That is, at least, what my experience with Basile suggests. Initially, he handled raw meat VERY POORLY, and I could easily have permanently labelled him as "sensitive". Experience has shown that once he was able to digest that raw meat properly, he became capable of digesting pretty much anything and everything.
If I were a breeder, I imagine I’d choose to diversify my puppies' diets from a very early age—just like we do with babies!—to prevent them from starting life with the disadvantage of being unable to digest anything else (or only in very small amounts) besides one specific brand of dry food.
Think about it: the digestive systems of some dogs have hardly been in contact with anything since birth other than their mother's milk and one specific brand of kibble, assuming the buyer continues with the same food as the breeder. In that context, how could they easily get used to digesting anything else?
Actually, there’s something I’ve never understood: when an owner says they don't give their dog a certain food because "it gives him the runs," I never know if I should take that to mean the dog is painting the walls brown and doubling over in pain, or if he just has a couple of loose stools during the day.
Some foods result in softer stools (a bit like prunes for us!), but that doesn't mean they aren't tolerated well.
(On that note, I'm not a fan of starting a raw diet solely with raw chicken breast as is usually recommended: raw meat on its own produces quite soft stools and can make you think it’s poorly tolerated, whereas you just need to add things that provide a bit of "bulk"—namely bones!—to end up with normal stools.)
Obviously, when you're trying to catch up on habituation that wasn't done beforehand—whether the dog is 2 months old, a year old, or more—you can end up with a dog having bout after bout of diarrhoea. My opinion is simply that we can benefit from pushing past these little setbacks (using common sense, of course; it’s not about ignoring diarrhoea, but rather not systematically excluding every food that causes it, and instead looking at how to introduce it differently and more gradually) to make our dogs' guts sturdier.
As for the rest: I’m definitely not trying to talk anyone into switching their dog to BARF :)
Firstly, for the simple reason that I'm not 100% convinced myself that it's the best possible diet. Unfortunately, I don't think there's enough reliable data on the subject (as mentioned in my previous post: there are no properly conducted vet studies) and the reasoning behind it—that "dogs are descended from wolves"—is a bit shaky.
The reason I choose to mostly feed my dogs BARF is more of a "DIY" approach (as much for my own sake as for my dogs: I prefer cooking to buying ready-made stuff, as I don't have much faith in the commercial pet food industry). It was the only diet I found that was relatively easy to set up and meant I could avoid adding vitamin and calcium supplements; all the "home-cooked" meal plans I found required these supplements, which didn't really fit with my desire to do it myself. Plus, there's at least a bit of a track record now—there are more and more people who have fed their dogs raw for their entire lives and can share their experiences. As it happens, my experience has been completely positive, so I've stuck with it, though I'm not against giving them some dry food, grains, etc., every now and then.
"Kainate, so we have to have an exact quantity or we risk the dog dying? Personally, I think that’s a bit of an exaggeration."
Are you talking about bones ^^?
It’s not about exact quantities down to the nearest gram at all; it’s about general proportions to stick to, which you can easily eyeball without using scales. It’s absolutely no more complicated than managing the proportions of a standard home-cooked diet.
I don’t see what’s "exaggerated" about that.
With BARF, the advice is usually a 50/50 split between meaty bones and boneless meat.
Plenty of people just do their own thing and decide to only feed chicken thighs because they’re cheaper.
You can’t then go and blame the "BARF diet" when the guidelines weren't followed in the slightest. Feeding nothing but chicken thighs is no more a "BARF diet" than it is a balanced home-cooked meal; it’s just a total mess made by people who haven't taken five minutes to do their research.
Honestly, I’d really love to know the actual incidence, as reported by vets, of issues while on BARF (accidents with bones, deficiencies, parasite infections, etc.), just to get a clearer idea of how safe the diet really is. But I’ve never managed to get hold of that data, because in the few studies I’ve found on the subject, everything is lumped together ("commercial pre-mixed BARF", diets consisting solely of meaty bones, and so on).
I’ve asked a few vets about it, specifically regarding accidents with bones. They weren't able to remember if, in the cases they’d dealt with, the usual BARF advice had actually been followed (raw meaty bones, making up no more than 50% of the ration) or not (large weight-bearing bones from the butcher with no meat on them, dogs fed exclusively on chicken thighs, cooked bones, etc.).
“When it’s the season in Martinique, my mum’s dog eats at least 4 or 5 a day without any trouble at all”...... oh, I wish.... I’m basically pulling a face like Homer Simpson looking at a massive steak!
I’d also compare today’s raw meat to how it was 100 years ago. And let’s be honest, not everyone can afford to feed their dog organic food. Even for us, what we eat has become a real headache with all the preservatives, pesticides, colourings, antibiotics and so on. Cooking it is still a fairly simple way to make life easier.
@Kainate, so we have to have the exact amount or we risk the dog dying? Personally, I think that's a bit of an exaggeration.
And having followed a BARF diet to the letter, I know it just didn't agree with my dog. I wasn't going to keep pushing it at the risk of making him ill.
When I talk about the right diet, I don't mean not having any variety; as I said, I vary the meat and carb intake. However, I’m not going to buy into the ideology that says “this is the best way, full stop, and they just have to digest it” – especially since the BARF diet offers next to nothing in terms of carbs, starch and fibre.
It’s always around 80% to 90% raw meat. I agree with @Nordic Attitude on this; my dog is a rescue and she can digest anything. Including mangoes. When it’s mango season in Martinique, my mum’s dog eats at least 4 or 5 a day without the slightest problem.
For a dog that used to have digestive issues, things have improved massively, but I don’t stress over it anymore. I just try to stick to 50-60% meat along with a source of carbs and fats. Why would it be so strange if a dog on an 80-90% meat diet doesn’t digest things brilliantly? Maybe having some fibre, carbs or grains wouldn't be such a disaster, despite what some people might think.
Do we overanalyse things like this when a dog can’t digest Frolic? To me, a dog is built to digest everything; they’re neither a chicken nor a strict carnivore.
Then again, I don't think it's the raw meat itself giving him diarrhoea; it’s more likely the amount. He’s a White Swiss Shepherd, so he has a sensitive stomach, and I think he’s just naturally sensitive anyway, regardless of the breed. It’s impossible to change his dry food without him getting the runs... even just introducing a new treat in too large a quantity gives him soft stools immediately. Mind you, the breeder told me it was "normal" if the portions were too big. The trouble is, with raw meat, the little bits stick together, so it's hard to weigh out the right amount. That’s why I cook it. But if I gave him the same amount of cooked chicken, he’d also get soft stools or even diarrhoea.
Exactly, I don't think it's "normal" for a dog to have such a sensitive gut (even if it's a question of quantity), and my point is that we should stop treating this as standard (especially breeders...).
Either this sensitivity is genetic, in which case the breeder (and all breeders of the breed, for that matter) should rethink their breeding principles—I mean, a "digestive sensitivity" should never be seen as a "normal characteristic" of a breed. It’s a defect that breeders should be trying to eliminate, outcrossing if necessary. That should be a priority over sticking to a physical standard and producing show champions for any self-respecting breeder.
Or it’s an acquired problem, and my theory (it's only a theory) would be that your dog hasn't built up a diverse enough gut microbiome, partly due to a lack of variety in his diet. You’ve ended up in a bit of a vicious circle: you don’t vary his food because you’re worried he’ll get diarrhoea, so he never develops the ability to properly digest new foods when given in any real quantity. It’s something you’d need to work through gradually.
That’s just my opinion, but I can't accept that it's "normal" for a representative of a species that evolved by eating human scraps to be unable to digest anything other than one specific brand of dry food unless you spend months transitioning him. I mean, for things to be this way, we’ve definitely messed up somewhere. (Mind you, I'm not saying it's your fault; as I said, the problem probably lies further back with the breeding).
I completely get that cooked meat is better for training, and I don't see any issue with giving it to him as explained before... cooked, raw, dried—in my view, a healthy dog should be able to digest all of it!
In my opinion, the best treats to give are dried meats! You just slice them into strips and let them dry out in the oven. Here's a random recipe (there are loads of them about):
I don't see any problem with Furania giving cooked meat if it's more practical for training treats. However, if I were them, I'd still be a bit concerned that my dog isn't able to digest raw meat and gets diarrhoea whenever he's given some.
Mind you, I don't think it's the raw meat itself causing the diarrhoea, I think it's more about the quantity. He's a White Swiss Shepherd, so he’s got a sensitive stomach, and I think he’s just quite a sensitive boy anyway, regardless of the breed. It’s impossible to change his kibble without him getting the runs... even just introducing a new treat in too large a quantity gives him soft stools straight away. The breeder told me it was "normal" if he was given too much at once. So, the thing is, with raw meat, the little bits all stick together. I can't easily control the amount I'm giving him. That’s why I cook it. But if I gave him the same amount of cooked chicken, he’d still end up with soft stools or even diarrhoea.
