Yes, Natural Balance makes limited ingredient crunchies, bison, deer and duck...

"but DOES have by-products?"

I want by-products. Natural Balance does not have by-products.

When I'm looking for foods that meet specific requirements, I look them up on Pet Food direct. I don't necessarily buy from them, but they publish ingredients for each food. It's much easier to read those online ingredients listings than the tiny labels at market.

Here is a link that might be useful: Pet Food Direct

Why do you want by-products? That's the one thing I avoid in any of the foods for my pets. You don't know what you're getting when you get by-products.

Here's a list of Animal By-products:
* blood meal from slaughterhouse operations
* poultry by-product meal clean parts of the carcass of slaughtered poultry, such as necks, feet, undeveloped eggs, and intestines
* chrome shavings from a stage of leather manufacture
* collagen and gelatin from the boiled skin and other parts of slaughtered livestock
* feathers from poultry processing
o feather meal from poultry processing
* fetal pigs
* lanolin from the cleaning of wool
* manure from animal husbandry
* meat and bone meal from the rendering of animal bones and offal
* poultry litter swept from the floors of chicken coops
* whey from cheese manufacturing

This might not meet your specific requirements but I had success with Nature's Variety "Prairie" Lamb Meal & Oatmeal Medley. I went through just about every type of food trying to get something my cat could tolerate and this was a winner.

It has no filler, corn, wheat or soy. Everyone tells you to stay away from grain but she had no problems with the oatmeal. It's really hard to find because Lamb isn't a popular choice. The specialty stores may carry it (we have Benson's that does). They discontinued the large (more economical bags) because of lack of popularity. I order from the link above harebell provided. Check out the list of ingredients on the site, maybe you would find it acceptable to test out.

They also make it in a canned variety.

I just posted but then had to look at what exactly by-products consisted of from Annz list. This food contains ground lamb bone, and eggs from duck, pheasant quail and chicken. So, there are some by-products for you too. The chicken eggs (don't know if that would cause the same reaction as chicken) are way down at the bottom so shouldn't be cause for concern.

There are plenty of good foods that meet your requirements. But no idea what you mean when you ask for 'by-products'. Can you be more specific on what you mean? Or tell us what it is that you're trying to ensure. You don't want UNNAMED byproducts in a food. To find high quality kibbles stay out of the grocery store. You need to go to a quality pet store and read the labels. PetFood Direct is a good web source. Taste of the Wild makes a salmon based food, and a venison food that might be good if you're working with a dog with allergies. Orijen and Acana make high quality foods too. A good place to start is with the Whole Dog Journal's annual approved food list. You can google it.

For those aghast at "by-products", just what do you think feral and wild cats eat?

No one carefully filets choice portions for them-they eat what they can and that includes bones, connective tissue, organs and even some skin, feathers, fur or dirt. The indigestible stuff is horked out later, or passes through the poop chute. If there is metal or manure in your cats' food, then it does not pass basic standards or wasn't made in the US, OR your state lacks reasonable oversight measures. It is your own state's feed control officials who determine what can and can not be present in pet foods. So if you really think that by-products in commercially available cat foods include some of the things on annz's list, then perhaps it's best to point that manufacturer out to your state agency.

" FDA Regulation of Pet Food - Labeling
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates that can of cat food, bag of dog food, or box of dog treats or snacks in your pantry. The FDA�s regulation of pet food is similar to that for other animal foods. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) requires that all animal foods, like human foods, be safe to eat, produced under sanitary conditions, contain no harmful substances, and be truthfully labeled. "

FDA does not require pre-approval of foods, but its sanitary standards must be met.

" Some people prefer to pass up animal by-products, which are proteins that have not been heat processed (unrendered) and may contain heads, feet, viscera and other animal parts not particularly appetizing. But protein quality of by-products sometimes is better than that from muscle meat, ...

"Meal" is another ingredient that some people like to avoid. In processing meat meal or poultry by-product meal, by-products are rendered (heat processed), which removes the fat and water from the product. Meat or poultry by-product meal contains parts of animals not normally eaten by people."

There is some oversight in pet food manufacture, I'll agree that it's substandard but is better than no oversight. If you feed your pets ONLY skeletal meat (muscle meat) mixed with a lot of carbs, then you are feeding inadequately. And please remember that farming practices can leave undesirable toxins in those cereals, vegetables or fruits that you find in your pet foods too. Those "by-products" are probably far more abhorrent than meat by-products.

So don't let by-products scare you off. They may not always be great but they're usually not as bad as popular opinion (and alarmist websites) will have you think.

No one is 'aghast at by products'. I am constantly suprised by some readers inability to understand this point though: You want to avoid UNNAMED byproducts because it could be poop for all you know. Animal parts don't need to be called 'byproducts', they can be named. See the confusion? And that the poster is requesting 'by products' without defining what she is trying to include is another sign of confusion on the topic. You wouldn't go to a restaurant and order 'meat.' You could be served rat meat which I'm sure has some nutrition, but is that what you want? You order chicken or you order beef or you order lamb. Take the same approach when selecting a food for your dog. Select a food based on NAMED ingredients.

What I attempted to correct is the general ignorance I see about "by-products" and their legal inclusion in pet foods. Yes, "named" by-products will make the HUMAN consumer feel better about the foods offered to pets. It's the same as putting the term "wholesome grains" on cat food labels, when there is no such thing as "wholesome grains" for cats-it's a term that PEOPLE identify as good, so, without question, they buy the "wholesome grains" stuff.

The minimal regulations in pet food manufacture STILL preclude the addition of manure, chrome (what part of leather manufacture includes chrome?), lanolin and floor sweepings from chicken coops, or whatever else you want to accuse manufacturers of putting into pet foods. What manufacturer would actually pay to procure and ship these substances into the plant?

It's more important to look for named meats as a rule. You can assume that meat by-products used in a particular manufacturer's foods will include bones, connective tissue, and organ meats (excluding intestine, fur and feathers among other prohibited things) from any of the meats used in any of that manufacturer's products. This means that if a manufacturer makes a line of pets foods using beef, rabbit, chicken, turkey, etc., then that manufacturer's by-products will include any or all of those meats. So a turkey food may contain some beef by-products. This only becomes a problem if a cat may have food sensitivities. It's hard to cut out a meat if the by-product in another meat variety may include the meat to which the cat might be sensitive.

Named or un-named, your pets aren't likely to consume any more manure or chrome than YOU would from the manufactured foods that YOU eat. The confusion isn't mine.

In cases of allergy all is lost if you don't know what is in a food, right down to the flavor enhancers and dyes. The only way to know the offending ingredient can be an arduous process of elimination. Knowing what you are eliminating is obviously helpful.

I don't freak out at the mention of by-products. I've seen lunchmeats with things like cow lips and crushed beef hearts listed right on the label.......and sort of wished they'd just have said beef by-products instead, LOL.

What I don't understand is why somebody would actually be looking for products specifically containing them. They are essentially ingredients used to bring down the cost of production and if I see a food with by-products listed I assume it's because they aren't obliged to reveal by law what is in it. Bone meals and organ meats and stuff like that are routinely put on labels of the pet foods I buy, and it's no big secret.

Cow lips? In people food? Awesome, calliope! You do share some interesting things.

I don't know whether to laugh or be ill. That'll probably be on my mind all day. I'm stunned that the company making that meat would include it on their label. But it is funny. Lips are definitely not on our menu by choice. No reason they're not, they're probably excellent nutrient sources.

Yes, in case of allergy the un-named by-products are a problem. There is a process that derives meat protein from meats, it essentially removes the specific meat source's allergens. I forget what it's called. It's helpful for sensitive cats but hard to find (especially when I can't remember what it's called!). By definition, it's a rendered by-product. And it can come from any animal or part thereof. Excluding fur, feathers, beaks, intestine, etc.

Using organ, bone and connective tissues bring down the cost. I'd rather see by-products in my cats' food than grains or potatoes or other fillers. As quoted earlier, some by-products are more nourishing than muscle meats, because cats derive nutrients from whole prey, not just tasty, picturesque roasts.

You raised a specific point that I believe cynthia was trying to express: The manufacturers aren't obliged to list individual by-products. That bothers people.

I use whole prey sometimes-sorry, kitties, I have a hard time handling raw foods so it's not your everyday food. The prey is skinned and eviscerated, then allowable parts are replaced as the carcass is ground up-bones, connective tissue, and organs EXCLUDING fur, feathers, beaks, intestines, as regulated. This is by-products. I like that the whole prey by-products are not rendered or by-product meal but no one has shown that rendered by-products are unhealthy. They just make US feel squeamish.

I know I forgot to mention dog or cat kibble, but I wander why every one assumed I meant cat food? I meant to specify that I meant dog food. Sorry about that.

I knew this was going to come up...

Not all by-products are equal. And yes you CAN know what by-products and from what animal source are put in food by simply asking.

So why do I want them? Because they're natural sources of glucosamine, chondroitin, and collagen.

I mean no offense for saying this but don't blindly follow what you hear. What you copy and pasted isn't even worth reading to me, despite what you might think. I don't pay attention to propaganda perpetuated by companies who market dog food such as Blue Buffalo, and the other similar really expensive ones that rely on certain marketing techniques, such as scaring people away from other brands of dog food. By doing so, they've lost my interest and trust. Their food may or may not be good but they are certainly lacking in glucosamine, chondroitin and collagen and those three things are so important for joint health.

Yes, you can give supplements but glucosamine, chondoitin and collagen are more effectively absorbable in natural form.

And that is why I am looking for a dog food with FDA acceptable by-products. A proper dog food is not complete without by-products.

Thank you Harebell for your voice of reason and insight. It is refreshing.

I read the PDF from the FDA too. No propaganda there, just unbiased facts that have been backed by real science. Named meat meal is wonderful. It's more nutritionally dense than skeletal meat because it contains less water and fat. It may or may not contain some organ meat. I would hope that it does contain some organ meat because that's the most nutritious kind there is, which is why they tell you not to over feed it. Organ meat is also eaten first by predators that don't swallow prey whole. Who am I to keep a dog from eating some organ meat because I happen to not want to eat it myself?

The process that Harebell spoke of is when they Hydrolyze. Such as hydrolyzed chicken. The proteins are broken down into such tiny particles that they're not supposed to be recognized by the immune system. Science Diet is the only dog food that I'm aware of that has it but I believe it also has soy and I know that it lacks by-products.

Wonder, not wander. If only GW allowed editing!

I'm not sure your natural sources are surviving the high heat cooking process of kibble very well, if at all. I think that's why companies have to add the vitamins, minerals etc. synthetically back in to the dry foods.

I know you were asking about kibble, but have you considered feeding a home prepared balanced raw diet?

This way you could control what your dog is eating and know that all the nutrients (vitamins, enzymes, amino acids, minerals etc.) from the fresh food are easily digestible and absorbed by their body, from fresh food sources. It's possible that your dog would not be allergic to the raw proteins vs the cooked ones. I know other raw feeders who's dogs are allergic to cooked chicken but are able to eat raw chicken without issue. I feed a prey model raw diet, which is simply a variety of raw meat, bones, and organs/offal. When I finally took the plunge to try it, I found it to be easier and cheaper than I assumed it would be, however I understand not everyone may find this to be true, or even feel comfortable feeding raw.

My second suggestion would be to check out The Dog Food Chat forum and maybe ask for kibble suggestions over there too. It's a very active dog nutrition forum with kibble and raw feeders that are fairly knowledgeable and may be able to help with info on some different kibbles that might work for your dog or raw feeding (you can read raw feeding experiences, ask questions, get info from knowledgeable experienced raw feeders etc.). It's just like the Garden web forum, you don't have to join or be a member etc., you can just lurk and read.

Dog food chat forum

More info on raw feeding, if you're interested. . .
Prey Model raw diet

Leerburg feeding a raw diet

Raw fed dogs

Raw learning

Yeah.........cow lips has stuck in my mind for quite a few years and still makes me smile. I am married to a retired butcher whose family owned a slaughterhouse. I feel sort of like an insider when it comes to meat, how it's processed and what is consumable. It also makes me not so squeemish or influenced when I read about foods processing.

I was curious about why the OP wanted a product with 'by-products' because it was so far removed from the usual desire consumers would express, and her reason satisfies me as legitimate.

I also prefer to go directly to legitimate documents for information and most of them are public record. My background is in chemistry and agriculture and I can usually wade through the details without much difficulty.

That being said, my issue isn't with something like by-products nearly as much as product labeling. Case in point are things like junk food snacks with 0 grams transfat per serving on the packaging. rofl. Yes.....that's truthful. They may have .999 percent transfats, but they don't have a full gram and the serving might be so small as to inhale through a nostril, but it's an honest label. Misleading maybe, but legally true. Food producers have been batting heads with those responsible for truth in labeling for a long time, and likely always shall. Yes......sometimes you have to contact a company and directly ask what is in their by-products and phrases like 'natural seasonings'. One's choice of what they want to consume or feed their animals is and should be their own choice......but they need true and accurate information on which to base those decisions.

ms_minnamouse, sorry about the non-stop cat references. I've been fighting for feline nutrition intelligence for ages and apparently all animals are cats to me. When I go to hay the neighbour's horses I can be heard to call out "O-KAY, kittykids, come get your luncheon". Even my grand-daughter is a good cat sometimes. I honestly mean dogs too. There are differences in what dogs and cats can HANDLE in their diets, but I think IDEALLY their diets are practically the same.

Calliope, you and I could probably make some damned good arguments for understanding labelling. What you point out is something that makes me snarl.

Minnamouse - not ALL byproducts are good sources of g/c. Chicken feet are good source of that. Please reread what others have written here. Both you and Harebell are definitely in the same place in saying assuming all byproducts are the same. They are not.

I will give up here, but saying 'all byproducts have g/c' is like saying 'all vegetables are red.' You need to do a little reading on diet and nutrition to understand the distinctions. But thank you for at least thinking about your pet's diet. Can I recommend again that you read some Whole Dog Journal Articles? Another very good source of nutrition information is the DOGAWARE.Com site.

I will never feed her a raw diet. That's very similar to animal abuse in my way of thinking because it opens her up to a whole world of harm that is totally unnecessary. I don't even want to discuss it and all the wrong information put out there by people who sell raw food materials or the odd following this diet has. A raw food diet is one of the most ignorant things I've ever heard of. Over cooked food has significant nutrient loss. Properly cooked food does not, despite what random people on the internet and those companies say. A lot of vegetables even HAVE to be cooked to some degree to offer more nutrients than in uncooked form, such as spinach for one. And any few nutrients that may have been saved from not cooking the meat likely are passed since raw meat isn't as easily digested as cooked meat since the proteins begin to break down. Why do you think predators eat their feces? Also, where the heck do they come up with the absurd fact that dogs are obligate carnivores and require only meat?? Even wolves are omnivores, dogs even more so. I could cut and paste raw food diet propaganda here all day long but that doesn't make any of it fact. This is yet again where people need to stop blindly believing and following what they hear. I'm not exposing her to food born parasites, pathogens and all the other harm that has a very strong chance of occurring when eating raw meat. They are JUST as prone to these problems as we are. Saying they have strong stomach acids that prevent any problems is ignorant nonsense because dogs have their own set of food born parasites and pathogens that have co-evolved with their digestive tract.

Not knowing scientific fact is one thing, ignoring it is completely different.

You're an odd kitty Harebell... Lol.

No problems about the thinking I meant cat thing. The only real difference in their foods, as far as I know, is that cats are obligate carnivores and actually require meat in order to live and also require higher levels of protein than dogs.

I thought I had a lead on a food that fit my criteria but it had chicken by-products in it... Sigh. Why can't dogs with allergies be entitled to the benefits that other dogs are in their food??

I do like to give her buffalo, pig, venison, and lamb (and fish when I can find it) chews such as tracheas, tendons, ears, scapulas and such but they're SO expensive! Which is crazy considering that if they didn't get sold as dog chews, then they'd be rendered for livestock feed or fertilizers, which people buy for pennies on the dollar!

But they found a market to cash in on.. Like that company that put out a wood dog chew. It's just literally a stick of wood. A piece of a branch.

Like cynthia said, I think most of us have to give up here since minnamouse appears to know exactly what he/she is looking for.

I thought it was a cat, too until someone referenced a dog! Sorry about that. Prairie does make dog kibble but now I'm kind of lost about what your are specifically looking for!

Ingredients: Lamb Meal, Oatmeal, Brown Rice, Barley, Canola Oil (Preserved with Mixed Tocopherols and Citric Acid), Flaxseed, Menhaden Fish Meal, Dicalcium Phosphate, Flaxseed Meal, Montmorillonite Clay, Natural Lamb Flavor, Alfalfa Meal, Potassium Chloride, Vitamins(Choline Chloride, Vitamin E Supplement, Ascorbic Acid, Niacin Supplemnet, Biotin, D-Calcium, Pantothenate, Vitamin A Acetate, Riboflavin Supplement, Thiamine Mononitrate, Pyridoxine Hrdrochloride, Vitamin D3 Supplement, Ethylenediamine Dihydriodide, Menadione Sodium Bisulfite Complex, Vitamin B12 Supplement, Beta Carotene, Folic Acid), Sea Salt, Minerals(Zinc Proteinate, Iron Proteinate, Zinc Sulfate, Ferrous Sulfate, Manganese Proteinate, Copper Proteinate, Manganese Sulfate, Copper Sulfate, Sodium Selenite), Lamb Liver, Inulin, Flaxseed Oil, Dried Enterococcus Faecium Fermentation Product, Dried Lactobacillus Acidophilus Fermentation Product, Apples, Carrots, Peas, Freeze Dried Lamb, Freeze Dried Lamb Hearts, Freeze Dried Lamb Livers, Pumpkinseeds, Ground Lamb Bone, Butternut Squash, Broccoli, Lettuce, Spinach, Kelp, Salmon Oil, Apple Cider Vinegar, Parsley, Honey, Blueberries, Alfalfa Sprouts, Grapefruit Seed Extract, Persimmons, Olive Oil, Duck Eggs, Pheasant Eggs, Quail Eggs, Sage, Clove, Rosemary Extract

The dog food is formulated to meet the nutritional levels established by the AAFCO Dog Food Nutrient Profile for All Life Stages.

Guaranteed Analysis:
Crude Protein (min.) 26.0%
Crude Fat (min.) 14.0%
Crude Fiber (max.) 3.4%
Moisture (max.) 10.0%

Calories: 409 per cup

Here is a link that might be useful: ingredients list

You're entitled to your opinion on raw, I'm sorry I couldn't be of more help. Since you don't wish to discuss it, I'll spare you my rebuttal to your raw diet views, except for the animal abuse comment.

My dog had clinically diagnosed chronic colitis which she suffered from for over 3 years. I tried several kibbles, low and high quality, nothing helped. Finally tried a raw diet and after 3 months on raw, all her symptoms have disappeared. No more crying in pain for hours, no more bloody stool, no more vomiting, no more contorting her body. Along with her chronic health problem clearing up, her teeth and gums have greatly improved as well as her coat and ears.

According to you I guess I'm abusing her by feeding her a diet that has changed her health and quality of life for the better.

Cynthia... If I said exactly this:
"Not all by-products are equal."
Then how can I possibly be in a place where I assume that all by-products are the same??? That doesn't make ANY sense based on what I clearly stated.

Please show me where exactly that I said that ALL by-products have g/c!

I thought I explained by-products but I'll say it again. I'm looking for sources of glucosamine, chondoitin and collagen. I'm looking for by-products that offer those. Connective tissue, cartilage, etc.

I am not looking for, nor did I ever claim the following to contain chondroiten, glucosamine and collagen: Hair, claws, fecal matter, etc.

On second thought, I'm in the mood for discussion...

"I don't even want to discuss it and all the wrong information put out there by people who sell raw food materials or the odd following this diet has."

None of the raw websites I linked were selling any food, they were giving free information on feeding a home prepared raw diet.

"A lot of vegetables even HAVE to be cooked to some degree to offer more nutrients than in uncooked form, such as spinach for one."

You're right, but I wasn't talking about veggies, I was talking about meat, bones, and organs.

"And any few nutrients that may have been saved from not cooking the meat likely are passed since raw meat isn't as easily digested as cooked meat since the proteins begin to break down. Why do you think predators eat their feces?"

Cooking meat is easier to digest for humans, but dogs have different digestive systems and to be honest I can't remember the last time I saw a wild dog or wolf cooking their meat. One of my dogs use to eat poop all the time when she was kibble fed, but oddly has stopped since feeding raw.

"Also, where the heck do they come up with the absurd fact that dogs are obligate carnivores and require only meat?? Even wolves are omnivores, dogs even more so."

Last time I checked dogs are scientifically classified as carnivores due to their physiological make up (teeth structure, jaw movement, digestive system etc.), which would mean meat is the majority of their diet, not their sole source of nutrition. A diet of only raw meat would be dangerous for any dog, which is why you must include more than just raw meat.

I feed portions of raw meat, bones, and organs/offal using NRC guidelines. I think NRC is more in depth than going by AFFCO standards. My dogs do get a little veggies as they are fed a fair amount of raw green beef tripe that contains not only the stomach lining but a little bit of stomach contents which would be digested plant matter.

"I'm not exposing her to food born parasites, pathogens and all the other harm that has a very strong chance of occurring when eating raw meat."

No diet is risk free, kibble can contain bacteria, mold, etc. as noted by the many pet food recalls. I will say I know several raw feeders who have fed this way for years with no issues, if this diet was so commonly dangerous due to the parasites and pathogens I would think there would be a lot less dogs being fed it and a lot more dogs dying from it. According to my vet, my dogs are both healthy, yet they are raw fed, how strange.

Most of the parasites are found in the intestines of an animal, which most raw feeders don't feed. As mentioned by Veterinarian Dr. Karen Becker, who has years of experience working with wildlife and her veterinarian practice where she advocates feeding a properly balanced raw diet to her clients when it's appropriate for the pet.

Why Dogs and Cats can eat raw meat

Roobar, I said information posted by BOTH the companies AND the odd following this diet has. I never said it was posted by JUST companies. You correctly quoted me right above where you incorrectly stated that I said it was just companies posting that information.

Also, I said I don't want to discuss it so I apologize but I haven't read what you wrote beyond the first sentence or two. I also won't read whatever you link to because like I said before, just because you copy and paste something doesn't make it fact AND because I've heard all this nonsense before. Science has clearly proven it's not a good idea, in my opinion, and most veterinarians will agree with me, I mean IF they can take time away from their evil business of being paid to promote commercial dog foods, or whatever other conspiracy theories a lot of raw feeders claim when a vet doesn't agree that raw meat is a good idea.

I will not feed my dog raw meat or even entertain the idea but of course, you're welcome to believe whatever you wish and feed your dog raw meat if you so choose, which you clearly have.

"I also won't read whatever you link to because like I said before, just because you copy and paste something doesn't make it fact AND because I've heard all this nonsense before."

That's fine, I can certainly understand, it can be hard when you don't have any experience feeding the diet or haven't done any research on it to be able to discuss it. I'm posting links because you may not be the only one reading this thread and I think it's important to show information and where I'm coming from.

"Science has clearly proven it's not a good idea"

Dogs have existed much much longer than we have been making and feeding kibble, strangely enough science has shown that they survived back then without eating kibble. Science has also shown that their digestive systems have not evolved since then, so I'm not really sure how it's been 100% proven to be not a good idea. I also haven't read yet that science has proved without a doubt that feeding a highly processed food diet with little moisture content everyday was better for any living animal's health than feeding fresh foods properly. However if you have some different information on this, I'm open to reading and considering it.

"most veterinarians will agree with me, I mean IF they can take time away from their evil business of being paid to promote commercial dog foods, or whatever other conspiracy theories a lot of raw feeders claim when a vet doesn't agree that raw meat is a good idea."

I think this is a really generalizing statement and a little unfair to both vets and raw feeders. I think it depends on the vet, their education/experiences/beliefs as to what may or may not shape their personal views on dog nutrition. For some vets I've talked to they say it's not the diet that concerns them, it is the liability factor of people feeding the diet. If you're gonna feed a raw diet, you need to do your homework and educate yourself on how to feed it properly.

I don't think raw feeders are any more of a group with "conspiracy theories" than those that believe the opposite. You have your own theories as to why you would not feed a raw diet, but I wouldn't call them a conspiracy. Why have such dislike towards people just because they believe differently from you?

Are there some vet students that get perks from dog food companies? I would say possibly, I read an article that supposedly was posted in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association written by Michelle Dally, a law grad and 2nd year vet student. She refers to her experience of the freebies from dog food companies, drug companies etc. However just because these perks are offered doesn't mean all vets take them, or that they blindly just believe in what the companies are saying.

Free Pizza, Pet Food and Products in Veterinary School Settings

Since you may not respond, I just wanted to say that I hope that you have better luck finding a commercial dog food that can be helpful with your dogs health problems than I did, and that your dog is feeling better soon.

I've done plenty of research. You can make any claims about me you'd like. You can say I'm a martian. But saying it doesn't make it so. But your first sentence is as far as I got before I stopped reading. Why?

Because you just don't seem to get it, do you?

I'm not feeding raw, I'm not discussing raw, I don't like raw, I don't believe in raw, and I'm certainly not looking at your raw propaganda.

You can keep copying and pasting whatever you like. You can also champion opening your dog and yourself and the general public (as a result of contamination in public places from your dog's fecal matter) up to health problems if you like. I'm not sure I understand the point though since I'm not reading it and I'm not going to read it. I'm just not interested.

You can ignore scientifically proven facts if you'd like and you can counter them with as many outrageous claims that you'd like that go against any reasonable logic. However, I trust in science. You can claim evolution doesn't exist. You can claim global warming is not happening. You can make any other claims you like. And you can post as many links to a plethora of websites where random people are claiming the same thing. Sadly, it doesn't make it true.

But if you want to believe it, please continue to do so. Don't let me stop you.

But I'd appreciate if you kept me out of it. I'm not interested in hearing about your raw fixation.

"I've done plenty of research. You can make any claims about me you'd like. You can say I'm a martian."

I apologize for getting the wrong impression about you, because you said you'd never had any interest in feeding it, I assumed you probably hadn't done any research on it, which wasn't fair to you, and I would never call you a martian, that would be rude.

"Because you just don't seem to get it, do you?"

No I got it, you're only reading the first sentences of my posts, and you're not feeding raw, not discussing raw, don't like raw, don't believe in raw and you're certainly not looking at my opinion on raw or any info I may provide regarding it.

You've shared your opinions and I just wanted to respectfully offer a different view on some of the things you brought up, that's all.

I thought that was kind of the point of a forum, to share different opinions/views on things in a respectful way. If you don't want people to possibly comment with their views that may be different from yours, then no offense, but I'm not sure why you're posting in a public forum.

"You can also champion opening your dog and yourself and the general public (as a result of contamination in public places from your dog's fecal matter) up to health problems if you like."

I'm pretty sure all fecal matter contains bacteria with the possibility of contamination in public places, no matter if you feed kibble or a different diet like home cooked or some type of raw. I have yet to read any scientific proof that says fecal matter is sterile and clean. I think a little common sense like picking up after your dog in public places, washing your hands after picking up after your dog, and trying not to eat dog poop would be helpful though.

Roobear, thank you for being so polite on a thread that could easily go downhill very fast.

Roobear - You are well informed and making sense. Sadly, some folks don't want to learn :(

Roobear, I don't recall saying that ANY fecal matter is sterile. ALL feces is unsanitary and there are health risks associated with coming in contract with it. You are correct in that respect.

However, science yet again proves that fecal matter from animal who consume raw meat is even more of a safety hazard.

LeJeune, Jeffrey T and Dale D Hancock, “Public health concerns associated with feeding raw meat diets to dogs,” JAVMA, Vol 219, No. 9 (November 1, 2001): 1222-1225.

Jeffery T and Dale D Hancock are actual veterinarians who have gone through veterinary medical school, not random people, who consider themselves experts, on the internet who have no such qualifications. Despite the extraordinary claim that I hear quite often from people who have had their veterinarian not support their feeding a raw meat diet, I highly doubt that there is any conspiracy where every one of these veterinarians are being paid off by the dog food companies. Again, you can believe there is such a conspiracy if you want, however I don't and I won't because it's ludicrous and I've seen no evidence supporting such a claim. And any efforts to try to change my mind will go to waste.

Cynthia, your comment doesn't even bear commenting on. You can think that you "got me" since you won't hear any replies from me in regards to what you write next, but the truth is that I'm just not going to waste my time reading anything that you have to say.

I wonder who properly cooks the meat for the wolves, coyotes, and foxes.

I understand why someone would want by-products, the intestines and organs are where much of the good nutritional stuff is at... and its what the wild animals eat first.

You may want to try Nature's menu, it does have organs in it. Its sold as raw food, but you can cook it.

Here is a link that might be useful: nature's menu

I read the article, including all the footnotes, that you referred to and I wouldn't call that an article based on the two vets research. It consists of paragraphs they've taken from articles across the world and IMO it appears a lot of the studies do not relate to the typical owner who is careful about what they feed their pets. Some of the research refers to dogs that are eating aborted cow fetuses, raccoon, muskrat, bear & pork....just to name a few.....and I'm pretty sure this is not the normal diet raw feeders are feeding.

Just because someone has a title after their name doesn't mean they are always experts in every field of medicine or veterinary care. If they had done current research based on pets that are fed raw, instead of grabbing data out of context from other articles, then I might be swayed by the title of their publication. But, unfortunately, it's too piecemeal to be very convincing.

No, I don't feed raw, simply because I need a more convenient diet for my dog and cat.

It's sad that you're not open to a rational discussion since this could be such an interesting thread. I have one request....... please look up the meaning of conspiracy before you start using it so freely.

Wild animals die all the time from food related problems... Obviously.

People may consider the following ad hominem but I've refrained from resorting to it long enough and have seen enough of it from other people in this thread to not be encouraged to use it in my own replies now.

Annz, what you said is quite ignorant. I won't grace you with a response beyond the following: You can bandy around words like rational, freely, or whatever else you like. You can even apply them incorrectly or when they don't pertain to anything that I've said. It's a free country. You have a right to be as ignorant as you like or to use the English language as incorrectly as you like. You can also claim that those veterinarians don't know anything or know much less than you but while you may convince yourself of that, I'm less inclined to agree.

I don't think you quite comprehend the meaning of the word conspiracy but I used conspiracy correctly and I understand the definition and its applications but again, I won't stop you from saying or believing whatever you want.

However, your butchering of the English language and the ignorance you spout hurts my eyes and I'd rather not see it and these replies are indeed getting tiresome. I've yet to see much logic or anything that can be backed up by real science, or that can't be refuted by science, pertaining to this raw meat diet so I'm just going to stop looking at any replies as they are a waste of time. I know I'll miss out on maybe one or two useful and intelligent responses but when you use the internet and don't want to put up with the rest of the riffraff, that is the price one pays. Sad but true. So consider this me effectively filtering out your riffraff.

Please feel free to respond with whatever you want but I'm just not going to bother wasting anymore of my time reading it.

My recommendation would be to stop feeding the troll, whether it be raw food or kibble. :P

"However, science yet again proves that fecal matter from animal who consume raw meat is even more of a safety hazard."

I read the article you mentioned, but only found it to say that raw meat can contain bacteria (as can kibble) and that it "may" pose feeding risks (as can kibble). I didn't see any factual evidence stating exactly how much more of a risk exists from feeding a raw diet in comparison to kibble, but it's possible I might have missed it.

Salmonella, that the article mentioned, I believe said "may" pose a risk, which is not definite or exact.

Human health implications of Salmonella-contaminated natural pet treats and raw pet food
Author(s): Finley R, Reid-Smith R, Weese JS Source: CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES Volume: 42 Issue: 5 Pages: 686-691 Published: MAR 1 2006 Times Cited: 4 References: 40 Citation Map

"Abstract: Human salmonellosis occurs mainly as a result of handling or consuming contaminated food products, with a small percentage of cases being related to other, less well-defined exposures, such as contact with companion animals and natural pet treats. The increasing popularity of raw food diets for companion animals is another potential pet-associated source of Salmonella organisms; however, no confirmed cases of human salmonellosis have been associated with these diets. "

When talking about bacteria, I think it's important to take a step back and look at the big picture. Bacteria is everywhere, we don't live in a sterile environment. For example, Salmonella can be commonly found in dirt, carpets, toilet seats, raw meat you prepare to cook for yourself, commercial dry dog food, etc., so I'm not sure that feeding a dog a raw diet really lessons your potential for exposure all that much in comparison. Again using common sense like washing your hands after possible exposure to any bacteria and picking up after your dog in public places would be helpful.

Also a large amount of dogs naturally carry Salmonella, as mentioned by the Merrick Veterinarian Manual. "Many dogs and cats are asymptomatic carriers of salmonellae. Clinical disease is uncommon."

Lew Olson PHD nutritionist mentions this as well,

"Research indicates that approximately 36 percent of healthy dogs and 17 percent of healthy cats carry Salmonella in their digestive tract.3 The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) agrees with these numbers.4 It is interesting to note that these numbers are based on kibble-fed dogs-which means that Salmonella is a natural part of life for our pets regardless of what they are eating."

3. Hand, M.S., Thatcher, C.D., Remillard, R.L., and Roudebush, P. (2000)

Small Animal Clinical Nutrition. Mark Morris Institute. Pg. 36-42,188.

4. http://www.avma.org/reference/zoonosis/znsalmonellosis.asp

"Jeffery T and Dale D Hancock are actual veterinarians who have gone through veterinary medical school, not random people, who consider themselves experts, on the internet who have no such qualifications."

Above in one of my posts I linked Veterinarian Dr. Karen Becker's video discussing raw diets for cats and dogs and why bacteria is nothing to be concerned about according to some veterinary medical journals, she is also an actual veterinarian who has gone through veterinary medical school.