Similarties/differences in feeding the racing greyhound and the APBT

Epona im glad you see swettler the way we lookt at him back then. he was a drunk with lots of money who bought good dogs afther there careers overhere. His actif duty as a dogman lasted 1 min!!. when he was under pressure to show responsibilety for the breedings he made with other peoples hard work.. he came was neurvous was drunk got over the wal with his dog and fainted!!!!. he was send back . never to be seen again... as for Raw Diet/ Dry kibble. you know my point of view. and i swear bij it.. as the thuse the biggest sport dog industry there is..

 

Id bet the house most ranked dogs were fed mostly kibble. These dogs ain't greyhounds and workload is different closer to the work of sled dogs. The last few years we been looking at there feed programs. At the end of the day we chose redpaw brand to feed the yard. The truth is the good dogs don't need much voo doo to get the job done.

 

So True.

But why not look about adjust and tuning some things to get the job better done!?

 

Because dogs are basic there's no need to complicate anything. I don't believe there's any difference in performance by feeding raw.

 

Meat pickle sledge dogs work in sub zero minus temparature. where dense tight air is common + they work with there mouths open at a slow pace. Greyounds are the closed performace dogs to a apbt fiscal wize. and have been interbred when the breed was formed and are crosed upto today as hunting dogs called lurchers. hens many a terrier type of pitbull terrier looks like a greyhound ore wippet. but to eachs there own.. if you think slege dogs feeding program is closer then that of a greyhound power to you..

 

Enough mumbo jumbo big d. Id invite you over but we both know you ain't leaving that computer desk.

 

ooh wel i work from behind the desk these days!.. but send me a pm lets see what you have in mind for a nice inventation trip..

 

Been there done that. No need to act hard bud.

 

Limey this is no Crap, so fresh butchered you can smell the touch of death, yesterday this cow was still happy and alive never thought that she look like this on the next day.

I guess when you buy your meat to eat in the market it will not be much better than this

 

Thats od as it was YOU who send the open invitation!!.

 

The leaning tower of sheetsa

 

Moo.../....mooooooohha.........................................lol

 

This is the most intelligent post I've read in this pile of dung thread......
Slim, you a smart mofo....... Your posts are always eloquent verbally and well thought out.

On a different note, I will never believe in kibble ever being better than a raw diet. I've done it back, fourth left to right and vice versa and every time I end up back at the same conclusion, They shit less on raw and it dont take a rocket scientist to figure out thats because the body is using more of what it's taking in.... I feed both and my mentor to my feeding routine is 11 - 1 in the last couple years so I'm going to just keep doing what seems to be working just fine. When it really comes down to it, people are going to do what works for them. If raw works for you then stick with it and same for kibble or do your own research and find out what works best for your dogs.

JM2C that has nothing to do with the topic, sort of like 98% of this threads contents......

 

here you go.. Dunk pile this. Sins you AGK refuse to read it on another forum some others might find this educational . and learn from it insted of being afreight reading it..It will teach most of the people on this forum that balanceing a raw diet for performance is very very difeculd and is FULL with LACK of minerals and stuf.. and that feeding raw comes from a nostalgic culture. and that a performace dog needs lower bulk diets. wherther you are against raw ore kibble READ THIS STUFF..





Feeding the Racing Greyhound
Feeding for Performance
John Kohnke BVSc, RDA
Sydney, Australia
The sport of greyhound racing has become more popular and competitive over recent years, with the breeding and
purchase of finer, sprint bred greyhounds, improved race track geometry and surfaces, which have all helped to lift
the standard of performance. Training methods have changed based on exercise physiology research and with it, the
‘science’ of feeding has provided new guidelines for feeding to optimise performance. It is now even more important
that nutrition is not a limiting factor to performance. A nutritionally adequate and well balanced diet is paramount to
health, performance and adaptation of the greyhound to the physical and metabolic stresses of racing. The racing diet
for successful competitive racing has been refined since lure racing became the industry standard for grading
wagering odds relative to body weight and performance.
Although diets were traditionally based on fresh red meat and cereal meals, with zoonotic disease risks such as BSE
and the rising cost of inspected meat in many countries, there has been a change in the staple diet for racing
greyhounds to scientifically formulated high energy dense compounded dry foods to partly or fully replace meat. As
every trainer is looking for an ‘edge’ in performance to win and an improvement in nutrition can help ensure optimum
speed and competitive racing. Traditionally, both the training and feeding of the racing greyhound has been largely
considered an ‘art’ passed on by older trainers to younger trainers, based on ‘trial and success’ rather than a ‘science’.
Although scientific calculations can provide an estimate of the relative nutritional intake, based on the established
nutritional value of each constituent in the diet, the exact scientific requirements of racing greyhounds have not been
established. Not all trainers are able to purchase the best quality feed as there is a limit to the feeding budget in a
racing kennel. When the price of a certain meat increases, trainers switch to alternatives or feed a larger proportion of
dry feed. Feeding remains one of the areas of animal nutrition still influenced by tradition and folklore, with many
time honoured feeding practices.
The ‘Science’ of Feeding
Over recent years, there have been a number of extensive reviews on the traditional methods of diet composition and
feeding practices of racing greyhounds. A number of reviews of greyhound nutrition and feeding have been published
over the last three decades, summarizing the scientific and practical aspects of dietary needs, ration formulation, and
feeding methods.1-8. Some of the data has been extrapolated from the established nutritional needs of working dogs,
with adaptations to meet the often higher needs of racing greyhounds. The ‘art’ is knowing how much feed, when to
feed, and the likes and dislikes of an individual animal.2. The ‘science’ is understanding the nutritional needs of the
greyhound, the relative value of different feeds and the benefits or disadvantages of individual ingredients or
combinations.2. A racing greyhound needs an adequate intake of energy for maintenance and exercise, which besides
water, is the most important nutrient in a diet and often the one that is limiting to performance.
Nutritional Aims
In addition to maintaining health and vitality, the diet should meet the following criteria:
1. Provide an economical, palatable, low bulk, highly digestible ration to maintain body weight within set limits and
ensure optimal performance. 2, 7, 8.
2. Provide optimal proportions of carbohydrate, protein, fat and fibre to maximize energy density while minimising
gut weight and volume compatible with efficient digestive function. 3, 7.
3. Maintain optimal hydration, electrolyte, anaerobic buffering capacity and fluid balance over a variety of climatic
conditions and racing distances. 3, 6, 7.
4. Ensure energy and nutrient balance to counteract imbalances and inadequate levels in the diet and meet the
specific metabolic demand for performance.2.
5. Provide a diet formulated to counteract physical stress on the musculoskeletal system, ensure adaptation to and
optimal recovery from racing and injury, and maintain the immune response and resistance against disease
under high-stress situations of housing and repeated physical exercise.5.
Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 2
Nutritional Aims (cont.)
These aims can be achieved by careful selection of feed ingredients, regular monitoring of body weight, and use of
specific supplements to correct low or inadequate feed levels relative to performance requirements and level of
stress.1-8.
Highly Digestible, Minimum Bulk Diet with Adequate Nutrient Content
In addition to maintaining health and vitality common to all canine species, greyhounds are a specific athlete with
important performance related nutritional needs.
The diet must provide optimal and balanced proportions of carbohydrates, protein, fat and fibre to maximise energy
density, while minimising gut weight and feed volume compatible with efficient digestive function and power-toweight
ratio. Greyhounds have the highest power-to-weight ratio of any athlete. Gut fill and body weight has a large
influence on the speed and ultimate performance of a greyhound running over a range of distances between 300-700
metres. The traditional meat based diets with a total intake of 1000g daily (as fed) containing an average of 50-70%
fresh red meat by weight or 500-700g for an average 30 kg (66 lb) greyhound, combined with 30-50% of a low protein,
low fat dry food or kibble (300 g daily) are still popular. However, these feed combinations may be excessively bulky
for greyhounds to consume, especially as it is often fed as a single meal daily. The actual dry matter content of raw
meat in the fresh state is only 20% with water contributing the major portion of the weight and bulk. The advent of
low bulk, highly digestible extruded dry foods manufactured on a cereal and oil seed meal base, with high fat (20-30%)
and high crude protein (20-30%) as the major energy and protein sources, theoretically distends the gastrointestinal
tract to a lesser extent and are digested leaving a minimal bulk of stool.
Low bulk, complete feeds have not been well accepted in greyhound kennels because of a preference for traditional
meat-based feeding practices, as well as the perceived higher cost of these dry foods on a per kilogram basis (Table 1).
Dry foods processed by steam extrusion are designed to gelatinise starch to facilitate its digestion, enabling a reduced
feeding rate of 350-400g daily for a 30kg racing greyhound.
The negative aspect of a high protein, high fat, minimum bulk diet is that many trainers consider that the small bulk of
food leaves the greyhound appearing hungry, rather than full and content, when fed once daily compared to a more
bulky meat-based diet. The positive benefit of a low bulk, highly digestible diet is the lower stool bulk, which reduces
kennel and turn-out clean up time and less faecal odour in kennels when fresh meat is eliminated from the diet.
In countries with a warm climate, the amount of water consumed to maintain hydration can negate any weight
benefit obtained from feeding low bulk, high protein and high fat dry foods.
Various studies have found that high protein dry foods may be detrimental to speed and performance. On average, a
racing greyhound is able to run 0.1 metre/sec faster (about 2 lengths of the winning margin) over 500 metres when
fed a moderate protein diet (20-25% crude protein) as compared to a high protein diet containing in excess of 30%
crude protein.1.
These studies concluded that a dry food based diet, which contained 42% of the energy from carbohydrates, 33% from
fat and 24% from protein, provided the best dietary balance to optimise speed and performance over a standard 500
metre race distance. However, greyhounds on this diet were slightly heavier in body weight compared to greyhounds
fed a diet containing higher protein and fat, with a lower content of carbohydrate. This difference in body weight was
attributed to a greater muscle bulk in greyhounds fed on the medium protein diet.9.
How to Achieve the Optimum Carbohydrate, Fat and Protein Balance for Performance
A proportion of 50% of meat by weight in the total diet has been shown to be of benefit in helping to improve overall
speed in a racing greyhound. The ration ideally should contain a blend of meat and dry food to provide energy from
an optimum ratio of carbohydrate, fat and protein. This important balance must be provided in bulk that can be
consumed easily without adding excess gut weight.
Traditionally, Australian trainers feed a carbohydrate-based meal for breakfast in the form of cooked cereal biscuits.
The traditional evening meal is based on lean meat and dry food, with additional vegetables if required.
Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 3
How to Achieve the Optimum Carbohydrate, Fat and Protein Balance for Performance (cont.)
A simple calculation (in the table below) based on the energy content of carbohydrates, proteins, and fats can be used
to determine the balance needed between these foods to meet the average daily energy requirement for a
greyhound in training under moderate conditions (15-25oc). Under cold conditions below 8oc, it is best to increase
the carbohydrate content of the diet by 10%. During hot weather above 30oc, an increase in the fat content by 5-7%
will help meet the elevated energy expended as a greyhound pants to cool.
A good quality dry food can be combined with a meat base to provide the energy intake in the optimum ratios
between carbohydrate (CHO), protein and fat.
GREYHOUND BALANCED DIET
Energy Content provided by a ratio of:- Carbohydrate 40-42%
Crude Protein 22-24%
Fat 30-33%
Basic Ratio on per kg body weight basis
Breakfast Kibble 12% crude protein 5g/kg bwt
Main Meal Lean Beef 10% fat 20g/kg bwt
Dry Food 20% protein
10-12% fat 15g/kg bwt
Omega 3/Omega 6 oil 0.75-1.0ml/kg bwt
The amount fed must be monitored to avoid excess body weight as the diet is very efficient in providing energy for
exercise and excess will result in weight gain.
Greyhound Body Weight 25 kg 30 kg 32 kg
Breakfast Kibble 12% protein and milk 125g 150g 160g
Main Meal Lean Beef 10% fat 500g 600g 650g
Dry Food 20% crude protein
10-12% fat
375g 450g 500g
Oil Omega 3 – Omega 6 Oils
15ml
Increasing to
20ml
18ml
Increasing to
25ml
20ml
Increasing to
30ml
A slightly higher protein diet is beneficial to greyhounds racing on a regular basis.
Notes:
1. Where a greyhound requires extra energy to maintain body weight in hard work, increase the dry food by 50-
100g per day, whilst still maintaining the optimum carbohydrate balance for energy.
2. Where an excitable greyhound becomes dehydrated in hot weather, add an additional 1 tablespoon (17g) of
fat (lard/suet, meat trimmings, copha) per 300g meat in the diet.
3. Where lean meat, such as very lean or trimmed beef, horse meat, kangaroo or chicken is used in place of lean
10-12% fat beef, add 1 tablespoon (17g) of fat (lard, suet, meat trimmings) to the diet to maintain the
optimum energy balance with the correct CHOrotein:Fat ratio for speed and performance. Do not use fat
(dripping) from roasted meat.
4. Additional supplements of vitamin E (100iu daily), vitamin C (max 250iu daily13.) and iron (15mg daily) can be
provided, along with electrolytes.
The traditional meat-based diet contains a higher level of carbohydrates provided by cereals, rice or bread.2. Another
study suggested that greyhounds run faster race times when meat was added to a low protein and semi-lean diet,
presumably because the meat provided extra fat as an energy source.9.
Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 4
Provide an Economical and Palatable Ration
The high energy density of fat and the lower cost of freshly trimmed and rendered animal fat by-product of the beef,
sheep, pork and chicken meat industries, makes the combination of a fat-boosted minimal meat and commercial dry
food diet more economical as well as more palatable to racing greyhounds. Therefore, there is an increasing tendency
to feed a minimum meat diet, higher in fat and protein, to reduce feeding costs.2.
Table 1: Classes of dry food for racing greyhounds relative to meat content in diet.
Optimum Mineral, Trace Mineral, Vitamin and Electrolyte Supplementation
The provisions of nutritional supplements to correct low, imbalanced or adequate levels in meat and cereal-based dry
food rations is paramount to meet the elevated needs for minerals and electrolytes imposed on the musculo-skeletal
and metabolic system by racing. When trained and fit to race, a sound greyhound can be successfully raced twice
weekly. Adequate intake of minerals for bone development on a meat-based diet is particularly important to maintain
skeletal strength.
It is estimated that the daily calcium intake needed by a sedentary 30kg dog to maintain optimum skeletal strength is
357mg (NRC, 2006), compared to 6000-8000mg daily for a greyhound in full race training (Kohnke, 1998). It is also
recommended to add 20% more vitamin D than NRC (2006) guidelines to dry food formulations; as cereal based dry
foods, even with added calcium, have been associated with an increased incidence of bone fractures (Kohnke 1998).
The estimated requirement for most other minerals and trace minerals is 2-3 times higher in a racing greyhound as
compared to a resting dog.2. Recommendations for B vitamin intake and fortification of feed is at least three times
higher than NRC (2006), which reflects the higher metabolic rate during anaerobic exercise of a racing greyhound
(Kohnke, 1998; Table 2).
Demineralisation of skeletal and joint structures as a result of high-loading athletic exercise and cortisone-induced
muscle catabolism during exercise and respiratory lead to losses of fluid and complementary electrolytes, particularly
potassium.
The diet must be fortified with a large range of macro and micro nutrients to meet athletic demand and maintain body
reserves, optimum metabolic function and racing soundness.
Maintain Immune Competency
It is recommended that the ration provided for racing greyhounds contain additional nutrients such as vitamin A,
vitamin E, vitamin C and selenium to counteract immune suppression resulting from higher circulating cortisol levels in
greyhounds subjected to the stress of training and racing. This will help to maintain optimum resistance against
disease and assist recovery from racing and injury.2.
Use Energy
(Kcal ME)/100g
Crude Protein
(%) g/100g
Fat
(%) g/100g
Approx. Daily Amounts for
a 30 kg Dog
Group 1
Kibbles dry
food
Meat-based diets 270 13 2-3 200-250g daily mixed with
700g medium 12-15% fat
meat.
Group 2 Minimum meat
diets
290-300 17-20 8-19 250-300g daily mixed with
500-600g medium 12-15%
fat meat.
Group 3 Complete feeds 330-340 20-24 8-10 550-600g daily or 250-300g
mixed with 200-250g
medium 12-15% fat meat.
Group 4 High-energy
complete feeds
400 25-30 20-25 400-450g daily.
Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 5
Energy Requirement
Please Note: These notes were taken from Kohnke 1998 (Adapted) as the text is no longer in print.
Energy, with the exception of water, is the most important constituent of the greyhound diet.2. Diets can be
manipulated to improve oxidative yields and utilise short and medium chain carbohydrates and fatty acids over a wide
range of race distances and climatic conditions.2. Short-term, high-intensity exercise in the greyhound is fuelled mainly
from muscle glycogen and blood sugar to meet the predominantly anaerobic exercise demand.3.
The energy supply and exercise duration, intensity, and frequency are all interrelated and can be influenced by the
individual greyhound’s temperament, kennel and environmental temperature, and efficiency of metabolism.2. The
total energy requirement for a racing greyhound is a summation of maintenance, thermoregulation, exercise, and
racing expenditure, including behavioural influences and pre-race anticipation expenditure.2, 4. Regular monitoring of
body weight at least once weekly will assist in equating energy intake relative to expenditure.2. All estimates are as
metabolisable energy (ME) in kilocalories (Kcal). To convert kcal to kilojoules (kj), multiply by 4.184.
Useful Energy Equivalents for Feed Adjustment2.
Each 100gm (3 1/3 oz) of:
• Lean raw beef (10 to 12% fat) provides approximately 200 kcal ME.
• Dry food 24 to 28% crude protein, 8 to 10% crude fat provides approximately 300 to 310 kcal ME.
• Dry food 30 to 32% crude protein, 15% crude fat provides approximately 400 kcal ME.
• Each 17 gm (about ½ oz) or 20 ml (1 tablespoonful) of animal fat or vegetable oil provides approximately 150
kcal ME.
Maintenance. A greyhound requires approximately 132 kcal ME/kg body weight0.75 daily under temperature (15 to
25˚c or 60 to 77˚F) conditions.9. For greyhounds weighing between 25 and 35 kg, this equates to 55 to 60 kcal per kg
body weight. An average 30kg (66 pound) racing greyhound housed under temperature conditions requires
approximately 1700 kcal ME/day.2, 3. An excitable greyhound or one housed in a larger enclosure will have a higher
basal metabolic expenditure because of panting, barking, or hyper-activity in the kennel, and may require up to 2100
kcal ME daily additional fat included in the diet will increase energy input without significantly increasing ration bulk.2.
A weight check once weekly will enable adjustment of the fat intake to maintain body weight.
Thermoregulation. A greyhound housed and raced under cold weather conditions, between 10 and 15˚c, will require
an increase in energy at low range ambient temperatures to maintain body warmth.2, 5-7.
As a guide, for every 1˚c (2˚F) decrease in ambient temperature below 15˚c (60˚F), add 3 kcal ME/kg body weight0.75,
or approximately 40 kcal ME daily for a 30kg (66 pound) greyhound.6.
Under cold conditions increasing the amount of dry food (see energy equivalents above) relative to the decrease in
the ambient temperature will help to maintain body heat and body weight. Most greyhounds can consume up to a
maximum of 100 gm extra dry food (about 3 1/3 oz) daily without exceeding bulk or appetite limits. The greyhound
should be weighed at least once weekly to ensure that it is maintaining body weight. If a greyhound loses weight or
requires more energy under cold conditions, extra fat should be added to boost energy intake so as to avoid a
significant increase in the volume of feed the animal has to consume above the additional 100gm of dry food.2, 6. The
housing should be heated to a more comfortable temperature and a rug and adequate bedding provided under very
cold ambient temperatures.
During hot, and especially humid, weather, the energy expended by panting to eliminate excess heat may increase
daily requirements up to 3000 kcal ME for a 30kg greyhound.2. Exercise under these conditions may deplete glycogen
stores more rapidly.3. In addition, hot climates suppress appetite, and a more energy-dense diet boosted with fat will
help limit the ration volume, provide a useful source of metabolic water and minimise heat production from hindgut
fibre fermentation.6, 7.
High ambient temperatures for longer than 4 hours a day when a greyhound is panting will increase energy

 

part 2
requirements. As a guide, for a 30kg (66 pound) animal, each 1˚c (2˚F) increase between 26 and 30˚c (70 and 86˚F),
will require an extra 130 kcal ME daily and 160 kcal ME daily for a similar rise between 31 and 35˚c (88 and 95˚F).
Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 6
Thermoregulation (cont.)
Under hot conditions, up to a maximum of 100 gm dry food will provide energy as well as fibre to maintain hindgut
water reserves against panting losses.6. However, for energy needs in excess of this input under hot conditions, as
appetite and feed intake are often reduced, additional fat will meet the shortfall in energy requirement and provide a
metabolic source of water to counteract dehydration.2, 6. A weight check once a week will enable dietary adjustment,
which should also be matched to weather conditions. 2, 6. Adequate electrolyte and fluid replenishment is also
essential during hot weather to avoid dehydration and weight loss.
Racing Expenditure. Total energy expenditure for a greyhound in training and raced under temperature conditions
ranges from 150 to 190 kcal ME/kg body weight0.75, or approximately 1890 to 2390 kcal ME for a 30kg (66 pound)
greyhound.5. It has been estimated that an additional 75 kcal ME is expended in each 30 second trial or race, or 4 –
5% increase over maintenance requirements. Under temperature conditions the expenditure for racing can be
provided by the standard diet.
Behavioural Influences. Excitable, barking and “hard-walking” or hyperactive greyhounds may expend valuable
energy reserves and dehydrate during training and particularly during traveling or when kennelled in the pre-race
period. Although the amount has not been quantified scientifically, a diet boosted with 30 to 60 gm (1 to 2 oz) of fat
or vegetable oil in the pre-race meal about 6 to 8 hours before racing will provide extra energy expended in pre-race
anticipation. Additional fat is recommended for nervous or hyperactive greyhounds that lose body weight, dehydrate,
or perform below optimal levels.2. Regular body weight and condition assessment with appropriate dietary
adjustment are essential to maintain racing weight limits.
ENERGY SOURCES
Carbohydrates, proteins and fat included in the ration blend provide the major sources of energy to meet
requirements.
Carbohydrates
Energy Yield and Food Content. Carbohydrates (sugars and starches) yield 3.5 kcal ME gm,3, 9. and on average,
contribute 40 - 45% of the energy in traditional racing diets.2 Meat is low in carbohydrates, contributing only to 5% of
the total carbohydrate intake from the traditional 70% meat by weight diets.2. Dry foods contribute varying amounts
of carbohydrates, mainly from cereal grains, ranging from 35 - 40% carbohydrates in dry foods containing 27 - 30%
crude protein and 15% crude fat, to 55% carbohydrates in lower protein (13% crude protein, 2 - 3% crude fat), dry
foods or kibbles.2.
Excess Carbohydrates. Excess intake of carbohydrates in the form of cereal grain starches can have a number of
adverse effects in racing greyhounds. High starch intake may increase potential glycogen over storage in muscles,
with resultant accumulation of higher lactate levels and lower clearance rates, and ultimate earlier onset of metabolic
fatigue and risk of exercise rhabdomyolysis or cramping.1, 2, 5, 8.
High intakes of poorly digested carbohydrates, particularly in the form of cereal-based lower-protein human breakfast
or dry dog foods, may also reduce protein and fat digestibility and uptake of sodium, potassium, and calcium because
of their higher fibre content.5. The higher fibre, while helpful in maintaining faecal bulk, increases iliocecal water flow
and results in wetter faeces,5, 6. with less retained as an intestinal reservoir against dehydration during hot weather.6.
Feeding pre-race snacks provide soluble short-chain sugars, such as sucrose (sugar) and glucose (dextrose) and can
lead to increased insulin sensitivity.2, 7, 10. When excess amounts are ingested in the immediate pre-race period,
rebound hyperinsulinemia may be triggered, leading to lowering of blood sugar levels. The combined hypoglycaemia
and the effect of insulin decrease on mobilisation of fatty acids and glycerol from lipid stores may also delay liver and
muscle glycogen replenishment during the pre-race kennel period.2, 7, 10. Both these effects, in theory, can cause a risk
of earlier metabolic fatigues and reduced race performance. In practice, it is widely recommended to avoid feeding
large amounts of soluble sugars in a pre-race “snack” feed, limiting to 15 gm (½ oz) glucose or 60 ml (2 oz) honey
within 4 to 6 hours before racing.2, 6, 7, 10.
Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 7
Proteins
Energy Yield and Food Content. Proteins yield 3.5 kcal ME per gram.3, 9. Proteins provide a source of energy, as well
as essential amino acids, for protein synthesis. As a source of available amino acids, greyhound diets should contain
30 - 35% high quality crude protein on a dry matter basis.2, 4. Protein sources contribute, on average, between 35 -
40% of the total energy needs for a racing greyhound.2, 4. Lean meat ranges from 17 - 21% crude protein on an as-fed
basis, or approximately 60% crude protein on a dry-matter basis.2, 9. Dry foods contain a wide range of crude protein,
depending on the content of meat by-products and oilseed protein sources, and commercial products range from 17 -
35% on a dry-matter basis.2. Most greyhound diets based on meat and/or dry foods to
satisfy energy demands

contain adequate protein to meet daily requirements.

Excess Protein. High intakes of protein increase the cost of the ration blend, and the elimination of excess poorquality

protein, such as contained in cereal-based dry foods, is an energy-consuming process. It is much more

economical, and metabolically more efficient, to feed a diet containing adequate protein, with additional energy

provided by fat to greyhounds, during hot weather or those competing in longer-distance races.2.

Fats or Lipids

Energy Yield and Food Content. Fat or lipids yield 8.5 kcal ME/gram, or approximately 2.25 times that of

carbohydrates or protein.3, 9. Fats are a useful energy-dense feed that provide an energy boost without adding

excessive volume or weight to the ration.2. The lipids in fats and oils are a palatable, highly digestible source of

energy; greyhound diets should contain at least 12 – 15% fat on an as-fed basis, and greyhounds can tolerate up to 25

– 30% fat on a dry-matter basis.2. Higher fat intake is recommended for excitable, hyperactive greyhounds and during

hot or very cold weather conditions.2.

Both animal and plant oils and fats are highly digestible. Lipids with a high percentage of short-chain (unsaturated)

fatty acids remain liquid (oils) at room temperature.2. As the percentage of long-chain fatty acids increases, the lipid

becomes solid at room temperature as a fat and digestibility is reduced in fats with high long-chain saturated

content.2, 6. Short to medium chain saturated triglycerides, as contained in coconut, canola, palm, and copha are

considered better utilised, as these lipids are digested by pancreatic enzymes without need for bile emulsification.4.

Although it is suggested that up to 25% of the total fat be provided by these sources of short to medium chain

triglycerides,4. greyhounds may not readily accept these items in their diet. Stepwise introduction over 7 to 10 days

may be necessary to obtain acceptance.6.

Excess Fat. High intakes of long-chain saturated fats, such as beef and mutton fat (trimmings or suet) or butter fat,

can reduce overall lipid digestibility, although greyhounds find these animal fats naturally more acceptable. 2, 4.

Animal fat sources are generally cheap to purchase as trimmed fat or omental fat from carcasses. However, if more

than 60 gm (2 oz) of animal-derived fat is required to boost energy content in the ration during hot weather, or in

dehydrated greyhounds, it is preferable to provide additional fat in the form of vegetable oil.2.

Essential Fatty Acids. Greyhounds require essential fatty acids. The diet should contain at least 1% of linoleic acid, an

omega-6 fatty acid, on a dry matter basis, or 2% of ME intake, to prevent the characteristic dry, flaking dermatitis

associated with a deficiency in dogs.11. Linoleic acid is the precursor of other linoleic acid family members, linolenic

and arachidonic acid, if adequate linoleic acid is available in the diet.11.

CONCLUSION

Greyhounds are elite athletic animals which are subjected to extreme physical exertion during racing and the

cumulative effects of environmental, metabolic and physical stress when trained and raced on a regular basis. They

must be provide with a palatable, low bulk, high energy-dense ration, with a medium crude protein and fat content to

maintain competitive speed and stamina within set limits of body weight. An adequate intake of minerals, trace

minerals, electrolytes and vitamins to correct low, imbalanced or inadequate levels in meat-based diets, in particular,

is essential to maintain musculo-skeletal soundness, optimum metabolic activity, strong immune status and overall

health in greyhounds racing between a relatively young age of 15 months to a mature age of between 3 and 4 years.15.

Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 8

Table 2: Recommended daily intake (RDI) for a 30 kg resting and racing greyhound on a combined meat and dry

food diet. Updated from Kohnke 2002.15.

Nutrient

Recommended daily intake

(RDI) Practical guidelines for feeding racing greyhounds.

Resting Racing

Calcium 3570 mg 600-800 mg Supplement meat-based diets to 75% of RDI, dry food

diets to 30% RDI: essential in all young greyhounds in

training for musculo-skeletal development.

Phosphorus 2670 mg 5000 mg

Magnesium 246 mg 800-900 mg Add 50% RDI to the diets of nervous or cramping

greyhounds or hot weather.

Iron 20 mg 60 mg

maximum

Add 50% RDI, especially to chicken or fish-based diets

that are inherently low in iron.

Copper 1.8 mg 5 mg Add 50% RDI, especially to chicken or fish-based diets

that are inherently low in copper.

Zinc 21.6 mg 65 mg

maximum

Add 50% RDI to dry foods if calcium is supplemented.

Manganese 3.0 mg 6.0 mg Add 50% RDI to meat-based diets.

Selenium 100 ug/kg diet 200 ug/kg diet Add 100% RDI to high meat diets, 50% to dry food diets

(fish has high Se concentrations).

Iodine 0.36 mg 1.0 mg Add 50% RDI to high carbohydrate diets to optimize

metabolism.

Sodium 330 mg 3000-5000 mg

maximum

Do not add extra if more than 300g dry food with 1%

salt is fed; add 50% RDI to diet in hot weather.

Potassium 2670 mg 4500 mg

maximum

Add 50% RDI in hot weather, cramping, nervous

greyhounds.

Vitamin A

(retinal)

2250 IU

(0.675 mg)

3375 IU

(1.0 mg)

Add 50% RDI to lean-meat diets.

Vitamin D

(cholecalciferol)

240 IU

(0.06 ug)

260 IU

(0.09 ug)

Add 50% RDI to lean meat diets, or 360 IU (1.2 ug) when

calcium is included in cereal-based dry food.

Vitamin E

(tocopherol)

15 IU

(15 mg)

30-100 IU

(30-100 mg)

Freezing meat destroys vitamin E: add 50% RDI to meat

diets and up to 100% RDI in fat-boosted diets or high fat

dry diets. Do not exceed 400 IU daily as it may affect

performance (Marshall 20002 – optimum 100 IU daily,

pre-race 150-200 IU).

Thiamin

(Vitamin B1)

600 ug 1.8 mg Add at least 50% RDI to meat-based diets.

Riboflavin

(Vitamin B2)

1.5 mg 4.5 mg Add 100% RDI to fat-boosted diets.

Niacin 6.75 mg 20 mg Add 50% RDI daily when racing regularly on high energy

diets.

Pantothenate 6.0 mg 18 mg Add 50% RDI to diets containing cooked foods (stews)

Pyridoxine

(Vitamin B6)

0.6 mg 2.0 mg Add 50% RDI to high protein dry foods.

Cyanocobalamin

(Vitamin B12)

15 ug 45 ug Add 100% RDI to chicken or fish-based diets, which are

inherently low in vitamin B12.

Folic acid (folacin) 120 ug 360 ug Add 50% RDI to all racing diets.

Vitamin C Internally

synthesised

250-300 mg

can be

supplemented

Add 100% RDI when racing regularly, but not exceeding

300 mg daily. Limit 250mg daily. Pre-race 500mg.

Supplementing with 1,000mg daily appeared to slow

racing greyhounds (Marshall et 2002)

(Adapted from Kohnke, 2002)

Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 9

Table 3 – Foods for Greyhounds

Average Value as Fed Per 100g – (Adopted and Updated from Kohnke 1989,2. Hoskins & Kohnke 1994.14.

Metabolisable

Energy

(Kcals ME)

Crude

Protein (%)

(g)

Fat (%)

(g)

Calcium mg Iron mg

BEEF

Lean (Skirt/Beef flap) 123 22.4 4.6 7.0 2.1

Semi Lean 185 19.5 12.5 6.5 2.0

Lean-Medium 2/0 18.9 12.5 6.0 1.9

Medium 268 17.9 21.2 6.5 1.6

Medium-Fatty 280 16.3 25 4.5 1.3

Fatty 330 15.0 30 4 1.2

CHICKEN

Lean (meat only no skin) 107 20.3 5 6 0.6

Cull hen (meat only no skin) 165 190 10 5.5 0.45

Skin (boiled) 223 16.1 17.1 10 0.7

Cull hen (minced whole no

feathers, gut out)

250 21.2 19.4 200 (with bone) 1.0

Necks (minced with bone) 233 13.2 18.6 800 (high

proportion of

bone)

1.2

Feet (washed, boiled, minced,

whole)

96 15 5 2100 3.0

HORSE (meat only)

130 (average)

(110-150)

18.0-20.6

(average)

4-9% 170-200 4.2-4.8

SHEEP Lamb (leg meat) 240 17.9 18.7 6.0 1.7

MUTTON (leg meat) 265 15.5 22 5.5 1.5

Whole carcase no bones

minced

333 14.6 30.5 4.5 1.4

VEAL (meat lean average) 103 19.0 2.6 8.3 1.7

RABBIT (raw meat) 130 21.9 4.0 20.0 1.9

BEEF OFFAL

Beef Heart (raw) 100 18.2 3.0 5.0 5.0

Beef Kidney 91 17.1 2.5 15 5.4

Beef Liver 157 20.0 8.6 6.0 5.8

Tongue 200 17.2 14.6 6.0 3.2

Beef Tripe (cooked) 83 14.4 2.8 19 0.3

SHEEP OFFAL

Heart (raw) 122 17.8 5.6 5 3.9

Kidney 191 17.1 2.5 11 9.8

Liver 162 21.4 7.5 6 7.5

Tongue 200 15.3 15.5 7 1.9

FISH

Average (not cod) 100 18.0 1.0 27 1.1

MILK

Cows whole 65 3.3 3.5 120 0.05

Cows skimmed 59 3.6 0.1 120 -

Powdered Dry (non-fat) 363 35.9 0.8 1310 1.0

EGGS

Whole eggs with shell 147 12.3 10.9 9546 2

Whites 36 3.6g/yolk Trace 5.0 0.1

Yolk 58 (per yolk) 2.7g/yolk 12.2 45 0.4

Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 10

Metabolisable

Energy

(Kcals ME)

Crude

Protein (%)

(g)

Fat (%)

(g)

Calcium mg Iron mg

BREAD (Wholemeal/White)

216 (60/slice

28g)

8.8 2.7 23 2.5

White

233 (58.8/slice

25g)

7.8 1.7 100 1.7

FAT (fat trimmed from beef)

736 (147/18g

tbsp)

5.2 78.8 Trace 0.2

Lard, Suet

902 (153/18g

tbsp.)

- 100 - -

Polyunsaturated Vegetable Oils

884 (150/17g

tbsp)

- - - -

Table 4: Energy Equation Calculations

Carbohydrate Protein Fat

3.5 Kcals ME/g 3.5 Kcals ME/g 8.7 Kcals ME/g

Calculating Carbohydrate Content of Dry Food

Protein % + Fat % + Ash (9%) + Moisture (10%) + CHO = 100%

25% + 15% + 9% + 10% + CHO = 41%

25g

87.5 Kcal ME

15g

130.5 Kcal ME

- - 41g

143 Kcal ME

TOTAL

361 Kcals

ME/100g

 

sientific resourses of the above

Feeding the Racing Greyhound for Performance Page 11

REFERENCES

Please Note: Kohnke 1998: References 1-8 are taken from Kohnke JR. Nutrition for the Racing Greyhound. In Canine

Sports Medicine and Surgery. Bloomberg, Dee and Taylor Saunders 1998 Ch. 38 p 328-336.

1. Grandjean M: Nutrition and Performance in the Racing Greyhound. In Proceedings of Fourth Annual

International Racing Greyhound Symposium, 1-25. Florida, Eastern States Veterinary Conference. Jan 12-13

1988.

2. Kohnke J; Feeds and Feeding of Greyhounds. In Greyhound Medicine and Surgery. Proceedings No. 122,

Sydney. Post Graduate Committee of Veterinary Science, 1989, 421-466.

3. Grandjean D, Paragon BM: Nutrition of racing and working dogs: I. Eneregy metabolism of dogs. Compend

Contin Ed 14:1608-1615, 1992.

4. Grandjean D. Paragon BM: Nutrition of Racing and Working Dogs: II. Determination of energy requirements

and the nutritional impact of stress. Compend Contin Ed 15:45-57, 76, 1993.

5. Grandjean D, Paragon BM: Nutrition of racing and working dogs: III. Dehydration, mineral and vitamin

adaptations, and practical feeding guidelines. Compend Contin Ed 15:203-211, 1993.

6. Kohnke J: Nutrition for the Racing Greyhound. In Proceedings of Tenth Annual International Racing

Greyhound Symposium, 11-20. Florida, Eastern States Veterinary Conference Jan 15-16, 1994.

7. Britton S: The Role of Nutrition in Maximising the Performance of the Racing Greyhound. In Proceedings of

Annual Conference. 1-26 Canberra. Australian Greyhound Veterinary Association. March 9, 1994.

8. Blythe LL, Gannon JR, Craig AM: Digestive System and Nutrition. In Care of the Racing Greyhound. American

Greyhound Council, Inc. 1994, 107-125.

9. Harris P. Waltham Centre for Pet Nutrition. Proc. Of 2000 Conference. University of Florida, Gainesville,

Florida, USA. Pers. Comm.

10. National Research Council: Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats. Washington DC, National Academy of

Sciences, National Academy Press, 2006.

11. Reinhart GA: Fat for the Performance Dog. In Proceedings of Performance Dog Nutrition Symposium, 30-35.

Colorado State University. Iams Co. April 18, 1995.

12. Reinhart GA: Fiber for the Performance Dog. In Proceedings of Performance Dog Nutrition Symposium, 30-

35. Colorado State University. Iams Co. April, 1995.

13. Marshall RJ, Scott KC, Hill RC, Lewis DD, Sunstrom D, Jones GL, Harper J (2002) Supplemental Vitamin C

appears to slow racing greyhounds J. Nutr. 132, 16165 – 16215.

14. Hoskins R, Kohnke JR. Talking Greyhounds. (2002) Birubi Pacific 80-92.

15. Kohnke JR, Nutritional Biotechnology in the Feed and Food Industries. Proc. of Alltech Eighth Ann

Symposium. 2002: 497-502.

 

Good post lk....good points by all..............nice read......was all-ways interested in the sled dog diet as-well,,meaning when they be fed what was hunted etc;etc;...fish..+the like, is there a commerical food for sled dog's....???????????????

 

I didnt refuse to read it limey, I read it reluctently, then posted a rebutal to it on the forum you speak of. I feel the same way here, your balanced kibble isnt but a shit stain to a balanced raw diet and all the kibble research you post will not change my views on it since its common knowelege that kibble of any kind is inferior to a good raw diet. Again, I aint feeding racing greyhounds and just like I said there, your the only one that seems to think kibble is better than raw. Then again, you sell kibble, go figure...... It would be bad buisness for you to admit the truth so sincerly, I understand. If I sold chevys i'd talk shit on fords too........ All I see from the articles you post is kibble research that was more than likey bought and paid for by a major dog food company.. We arent on the same page because we aint even in the same book, your documentation is geared towards racing grey hounds, not box dogs and since I dont got not one grey hound I feed, your arguing about apples when I'm talking about oranges..... But since you don't seem to read the articles I posted there either I'll post them here for you too

Myth: DOGS ARE LIVING LONGER LIVES BECAUSE OF THE BETTER NUTRITION PROVIDED BY KIBBLE.

This is false logic. Dogs are living longer today because of improved social status and advances in medical care. "Back in the day" dogs were not considered the valuable family members and companions they are now. Dogs were left outside to brave the elements. They were guardians of house, possessions, and livestock. Dogs had a purpose, a job, and when they could not do that job, they were retired or disposed of. Medical care for dogs was scant and typically unimportant, as more prestige was gained from being a livestock vet than a canine vet. Very little notice was given to the dog's health as long as it could still do what was asked of it.
Nowadays, dogs enjoy a better life, one that is easier and less taxing (except for the great injustices that are kibble and excessive vaccination). They sleep inside with their owners. They enjoy the social status of family companions. People care more about their welfare. They receive the benefits of improved health care—much of which has evolved in the last 50 years because of the ailments caused by processed foods—and the added bonus of people caring about them receiving that care. For example, 100 years ago people would have never paid thousands of dollars to give their dog a hip replacement, or hundreds of dollars to get routine dentals performed on their pets. Nutrition has had a very negligible role to play in increased longevity other than the fact that dogs are no longer starving and do not have to hunt or scavenge (both of which are energetically costly). Instead of contributing to longevity, these "nutritional advances" have contributed to more and more health problems previously unheard of in dogs—diabetes, various cancers, inflammatory bowel syndrome, and bloat, for example. Veterinary medicine has evolved into 'modern veterinary medicine' because of the increasing prevalence of processed food-related diseases and the need to treat and fix them (which often involves switching your dog onto a higher-priced "therapeutic" processed diet). Granted, these diseases are diagnosed more frequently today because people actually know what to be looking for, but the amount of dogs suffering from these ailments today as opposed to earlier dogs indicates a VERY strong link to the foods they eat, links that have been proven to exist between humans in developed countries and processed foods.
What about increased longevity? Dogs' longevity has only recently been determined by 'research' performed by the pet food companies. They use these estimates to "show" that their food helps animals live longer. But longer compared to what? No one cared about canine longevity in the earlier days (except the select few concerned with breeding canines), so no one kept records or performed surveys. So this longevity estimate is only valid from when the surveys started. Indeed, kibbled food has been improving from the early prototypes that created a variety of nutritional deficiences (like overgrowth and bone malformations in puppies; this STILL is a problem.), but this "nutrition" has not contributed to longevity in nearly the same manner that increased social status has.
In reality, canine longevity and quality of life has been decreasing for many breeds since the advent of processed food. People who remember the 'old days' when dogs were fed raw meaty bones often report their dogs living well through their late teens. Nowadays it is a "miracle" and a testament to the "excellent nutriton" the dog must have received, and vets and pet food companies claim this "miracle" as occurring often enough to become 'commonplace'. Too bad most of the vets who remember the good old days have now retired or even moved on. It seems this new generation of veterinarians will know nothing but kibbled, processed food and the ailments induced by it.
So they say dogs are living longer. And indeed people can step forward and say they have 16-year-old Golden Retrievers and 14-year-old German Shepherds and 11-year-old Great Danes. But what about the quality of life for these old dogs? They have horrible teeth and rancid breath, severe arthritis or degenerative joint disease, cancerous or benign tumors, diabetes, kidney failure, nasty greasy coats, and soft fatty bodies lacking muscle tone. People say this is just "old age" and that we see this more often nowadays because dogs are living longer. But is this really true? Many of these ailments are caused by or heavily influenced by a lifetime of eating processed food and developing periodontal disease and bacteria-laden teeth (Lonsdale, T. 2001. Raw Meaty Bones.). Those who remember the 'early days' remember long-lived dogs enjoying better quality lives until one day they just did not wake up. This slow, accumulating progression of disease is invariably linked with processed foods—something that has been proven time and again in human medicine and is being proven daily by the amount of processed food-fed pets suffering from a variety of these ailments and sitting in vets' waiting rooms.
If pets are living longer, then why are they being considered "old" at younger and younger ages? A dog is now a senior by the age of 7 or 8; some even say a dog is "old" at 5 or 6. Cats are considered seniors by the ripe old age of 7 (tell that to raw fed cats still going strong at the age of 20!). This premature aging is caused in large part by processed foods (Lonsdale, T. 2001. Raw Meaty Bones.). Cancer, diabetes, obesity, kidney failure, heart problems, and arthritis (among other things) are being seen in younger and younger dogs. Dogs 3 years of age are being euthanized for malignant, systemic cancers! What happened to this "dogs are living longer" claim? It is high time we stop slowly poisoning our beloved friends through commercial diets and excessive "preventative" health care measures!
TIDBIT: The oldest living raw-fed dog is Jerry, an Australian cattle dog-bull terrier mix. He is 27 and lives with his owner in Australia (Outback Mongrel Could Be Oldest Dog. USA Today. 7-13-2004.). To see the full text story, please click here(if this link does not work, please tell me; it may mean the story has moved elsewhere).

Myth: RAW MEAT DIETS ARE NOT BALANCED.

Yes, all-meat diets are NOT balanced. You cannot feed a diet of just meat to your dog and expect it to do well. Your dog needs bones and organ meat as well to obtain the proper nutrients. This means feeding a prey-model diet based on a whole prey animal. Remember that your dog has no needs for vegetables, and that most of the nutrients in vegetables—even pre-processed ones—are unavailable to your dog (see the omnivore myth and the stomach contents myth for further reference). The alternative? Feed according to the prey model and provide variety. If you are feeding whole animals or a variety of raw meaty bones and organ meats, then your diet will be balanced. Raw foods contain the exact proportions of fat, protein, vitamins, minerals, and enzymes a dog needs.
One other concept of balance that should be addressed is the idea perpetuated by the pet food companies: "Dogs need complete and balanced nutrition in every meal." This is nothing but propaganda designed to make people buy into commercial dog food. This is not how the canine body—or any other body—operates! Take your own diet, for example. Do you eat a complete and balanced meal every time you eat? No! You eat a variety of foods over a period of time, and yet your body generally does very well and exhibits no signs of nutritional deficiencies. Dogs do not need "complete and balanced" nutrition at every meal. If they did, then any time they did not receive complete and balanced nutrition their bodies would get out of skew and problems would suddenly develop. This is not how it works. This is where one sees the concept of "balance over time" developing. This is the principle that many feel is adequate to explain how all living things obtain the proper nutrition. Nutritional needs are met over a period of time, and balance is achieved through time as the animal eats what it needs at the time it needs it or whenever it can get it. The nutrients the body MUST have and cannot synthesize for itself are supplied in sufficient amounts in the food the animal eats. Nutrients are stored within the body when they are eaten and are not needed, but when the need arises, they are essentially pulled out of storage and used. This is what allows animals (and people!) to fast for sufficient periods of time without starving or dying. They not only have fat reserves and protein reserves in their muscles, but stored up nutrients and vitamins in their tissues (fat soluble vitamins, for example, like A, D, and K).
One can logically ask: 'What is balance, anyway?' Balanced vitamins and minerals, carbohydrates, fats, and proteins? Can we ever conclusively know what balance is? How? No, this concept of balance is a myth. We hypothesize, guess, and draw up faulty food pyramids in attempts to define 'balanced' diets, yet as a society we are still plagued with obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and 'rare' bowel diseases like Crohn's disease that are becoming more commonplace (oddly enough, vets are seeing the same things occurring in our canine and feline counterparts). The food pyramid is being revamped as specialists argue about appropriate 'balanced' diets, which only further illustrates the truth that we do not know what balance is.
What about our pets? The standards for balanced pet food are approximated (and incorrect, I might add, since they are based on the myth that a dog is an omnivore. See the standards myth for more detail), and vitamins and minerals are added in excess to compensate for the decreased bioavailability of these nutrients in kibble. Dogs are fed "balanced" proportions of fats, proteins, and the carbohydrates that they have no need for whatsoever. Honestly, have you ever heard of an essential carbohydrate? There are essential fats, essential amino acids (obtained from protein), but no essential carbohydrates. Yes, an animal's body needs glucose to function, but glucose is easily made from amino acids via gluconeogenesis. Carbs are not necessary for our carnivorous pets, yet they are listed as part of a 'balanced' diet. For further discussion on carbohydrates, please visit the Carbohydrates page.
We can go one step further with this concept of balance. No one except nature conclusively knows exactly what is needed and in what proportions. Why? Well, a million years of evolution should be sufficient enough to show any naysayer that the diet nature provides for her creatures is precisely what they need to function, thrive, and survive. No one but nature knows exactly what the animal can actually use and absorb. We can only guess. So forget 'balance' of any kind when it comes to feeding our pet carnivores. There is no such thing as 'balance'. Think "carcass". "Carcass" is what sufficiently sustains wolves, dogs, wild cats, and ferrets, and that is what nature has perfectly provided for them. "Balance" is nothing but an insufficient human term, a vague concept that pet food companies employ to make people buy the foods for their pets. When feeding your pet carnivores, always remember the concept of "carcass".

Myth: THERE IS NO SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH TO BACK RAW DIETS.

"You know, the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views, which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that needs altering."
— Dr. Who
The implication here is that because there is "no scientific research" performed by institutions like the American Veterinary Medicine Association (AVMA), raw diets should not be fed. This 'no scientific research' declaration is a cop-out claim that has been used to "debunk" raw diets and suppress the truth. But one must realize that there is NO evidence whatsoever to prove that kibbled, processed foods are good for your pets. The only research that has been done into processed foods was performed to see a) if dogs could be fed a grain-based food, b) if dogs could survive acceptably on these processed foods for a short period of time, c) if X brand of food can do such-and-such for the dog (help with kidney disease, help with diabetes, help with obesity), and d) if X brand of food is "better" (more palatable, better liked, less total stool volume, etc.) than Y brand of food. No research has been done to determine the long-term effects of feeding kibble, nor to determine if it is actually healthy for your dog (it is just assumed healthy because it has passed a 6 month feeding trial, and then manufacturers falsely advertise their product as healthy.).
But as for raw diets: one million years of evolution apparently is not enough evidence for those citing lack of research and lack of studies in scientific literature. Neither the anatomical and physiological evidence of dogs, nor mtDNA evidence, nor circumstantial and statistical evidence of diseases in processed food-fed pets, nor anecdotal evidence are enough from those becrying the lack of "studies" and "research". Anecdotal, eyewitness evidence is dismissed because it is scientifically "unfounded" and anecdotal, even when the evidence is standing right before their eyes in easily seen, wonderful health (It is interesting to note that eyewitness evidence is enough to help condemn a man in a court of law, but is not enough for the "scientific" community composed of pet food manufacturers and their affiliates—which include vet universities and most vets.). People then expect raw feeders to take their anecdotal and eyewitness evidence as truth when they have already dismissed the evidence offered by the raw feeder as anecdotal. "I've seen so many dogs come into my clinic with nutritional problems because of raw diets!" (What about all the sick commercially fed pets that come into your office?) "Bones are going to kill your dog" (Oh yeah? Says who? Prove it!). This distinct bias has been used in veterinary literature to "prove" raw diets are not as good as commercial:
"Although there are numerous claims to the health benefits of raw food diets, all are anecdotal...The raw bones included in many of these diets carry risks, and although the actual incidence of complications resulting from ingestion of raw bones is unknown, there are reports of intestinal obstruction, gastrointestinal perforation, gastroenteritis, and fractured teeth..." pg 706, emphasis added (Freeman, L.M. and K.E. Michel. Evaluation of raw food diets for dogs. JAVMA. 218(5): 705-709)

 

The claims of raw food diets are dismissed as anecdotal, and then the readers are later asked to consider the similarly anecdotal, undocumented "reports" against raw food diets! This is nothing but a head-in-the-sand approach that attempts to maintain the status quo.
There is a lack of "scientific" evidence in the form of research studies on raw diets. Why? Well, who is going to pay for an extensive research study on raw diets when the evidence may be damning? People point to all the studies done by commercial pet food companies and cite the lack of similar studies done on raw diets as evidence that raw diets are bad and inferior. But let us look at how studies actually come about.
First, you must come up with a hypothesis and a purpose. What are you studying? Why are you studying it? What do you expect to prove? After you figure this out you design your study, including methods, control groups, and variables. You draw out everything in great detail, and then you incorporate this into a grant; after all, you need a large amount of money to run your study. So where do you get the money? You look at individuals, corporations, and companies that might be interested in your project. Some of the bigger companies and corporations already have pre-existing grant monies for which you can apply. Other times you have to present the grant to a company and ask for funds that have not already been set aside into a specific grant. How do you ensure the receipt of this money? You appeal to people who will have a great interest in what you are doing. You appeal to the companies that in some way have a financial interest in what you are studying (for example, a biomedical company that wishes to branch out from artificial joints into artificial menisci and artificial vertebral discs—which happen to be what you are studying!), and will therefore fund your project so as to find out more; it just might pay off for them in some way. That is the key: you are approaching companies that may offer you money because there will be something in it for them.
But what happens if the results actually reflect unfavorably upon the product you are testing or the method you are studying, and therefore reflect unfavorably upon the company that makes said product or endorses said method? It depends on how much is at stake. If there was very little at stake initially—perhaps it was a small pilot study with the company looking to see if artificial menisci might even be worth their time—then there should not be a problem. It tells them what they wanted to know and it was not a big loss (Some would argue that perhaps pet food companies did this with raw diets. But if that was the case, they would have all the facts and figures reflecting negatively on raw food readily available; they could simply parade out the results of that study to prove once and for all that raw diets are worthless. But, they do not do this. Why? Because they do not have these results.). But what if billions of dollars and an entire existing superstructure were at stake? What will happen to the results? In human medicine, this has led to the suppression of information, such as the suppression of information regarding the dangers of Vioxx (To read more about how this happens in industry, visit Mercola.com.).
Now let us apply this to the pet food manufacturers and to studies into raw diets. Almost every single study performed on commercial pet foods has been partially or fully funded by pet food companies. An example would be Purina's own study on extending the life of your pet; they discovered that by feeding smaller amounts of their Purina dog food and thus keeping the dog from getting fat, you could extend the life of your dog by two years. This, of course, supports the already well-known thought that keeping your pets trim is better for their health (once again, scientific "studies" being used to prove what is common sense.). But by using only their food in the study, they can then insinuate that it is Purina dog food that extends the life of your pet—and the little asterisk on the ad or the fine print on the TV tells you that this is only if you feed less than the recommended amount on the bag, thereby keeping your pet trim and not fat. But who reads the fine print?
Let us look at raw diets. Who would support a good, solid study into raw diets? What would happen if the results reflect negatively on commercial diets and positively on raw diets? Think of how much they have to lose!! Personally, I feel the lack of studies and the lack of willingness to do studies on raw diets indicates a desire to hide something, to cover something up that people do not want to be found. And I know of no pet food company that will pay for a raw diet research study. None of their control groups in their own studies are even fed a raw diet! The studies are performed under false assumptions that dogs are omnivores and can be maintained healthfully on grain-based, processed diets. Interestingly enough, it was the scientific research of the pet food companies that helped prove that dogs have no need for carbohydrates. The research in their own files (and in the Waltham Book of Dog and Cat Nutrition) demonstrates perfectly well that they know dogs are carnivorous animals. And yet they continue to mislead the public, the veterinarians, and the vets-to-be.
There have been "studies" done on bacterial content, nutritional analysis (according to AAFCO standards), and parasites in raw meat (using only the old, pre-existing literature on what kind of parasites could possibly be found in raw meat), but there are no studies that go in depth and objectively study the health effects of raw diets. Why would there be? This would involve a long, intense study requiring collaboration of vets nationwide and of multiple pet owners, or undue suffering to hundreds of "test" dogs who must be fed improper raw diets in the name of "scientific objectivity" (and there is the possibility that these poor results would then be used to show that ALL raw diets are bad). Indeed, funding is a huge issue as well, but I feel there are underlying issues: a fear of what may be found, that raw diets will indeed be proven better, that commercial diets will be proven unhealthy. This drastically cuts against the status quo and would destroy pet food companies and the veterinarians who depend on them to provide a clientele.
If raw diets were proven better and commercial diets were proven harmful, there would be a tremendous backlash against the pet food industries and the veterinary profession that is so entrenched with it. Legal rammifications would be a highly probable option: people suing vets for recommending a product that harms their pets; people suing the pet food companies for creating a harmful product without warning consumers of its dangers, for falsely advertising that product as healthy, and for lying and covering up the information that indicated otherwise; and vets suing the universities for providing an inadequate, faulty education. Thousands of people would be laid off, a multi-billion dollar industry would crumble, hundreds of veterinarians would find themselves jobless, and society would no longer have an 'acceptable' outlet for disposing of its dead, dying, and diseased meat, its grain waste, and the some 40% of euthanized pets that find their way into rendering plants and kibble, barbituates and all (Lonsdale, T. 2001. Raw Meaty Bones.; Martin, A. Foods Pets Die For.). All of this is what they have to lose if the results of a raw diet study reflect unfavorably on commercial foods. Can one see the incentive in never performing or publishing a proper study that objectively looks at raw diets and their effects on the overall health of the dog? Note: if you are a pet owner, veterinarian, or veterinary student who feels wronged by the pet food companies or their close ties to veterinary universities, please visit the Raw Meaty Bones website to get information on your legal options (click on the "Legal Remedies" link). Additionally, in the UK an organization known as UKRMB has helped spearhead an Early Day Motion against the alliance between pet food companies and the veterinary profession. To read about it, please click here.
This is not the only consideration when it comes to raw food research. To perform an adequate study that would satisfy all the critics, hundreds of dogs would need to suffer needlessly on improperly prepared raw diets, because in the name of 'science' all the major variations of the diets would be tested. That means dogs will be fed all meat diets, all chicken-back and neck diets, veggie glop and some meat and mostly bone diets, all beef-heart diets, etc. when all the researchers need to do is look to nature, who got it right a million years ago. It is just needless suffering. Next time someone bemoans the lack of scientific studies about raw, ask them if they would like to volunteer their dog for the study.
Instead of pushing for, funding, and advocating an unbiased study (which is a good thing in the sense it spares animals from unnecessary suffering in the name of science), vets and other "scientifically minded" people point out the lack of studies and retreat behind that facade in an effort to save face while ignoring a million years' worth of scientific studies performed in nature's laboratory. But there are some cruelty-free studies that could be performed; for example, researchers could start looking at the incidence of periodontal disease in raw-fed and commercially-fed pets. However, even something this simple-sounding can be a difficult thing to do correctly, as there are many variables that must either be minimized/weaned out of the study or that will have to be included. Plus, it requires a large sample size and great collaboration among pet owners, the vets, and the researchers. Once again, though, we come to the main impetus behind the study: who will pay for it and why?

Myth: THE AVAILABILITY OF MANY GOOD-QUALITY PREMIUM KIBBLED DIETS MAKES RAW UNNECESSARY .

This may seem fairly logical at first glance. After all, there are some rather high-quality foods on the market like Timberwolf Organics, Innova EVO, Nature's Variety, and Solid Gold. Whole Dog Journal regularly publishes a list of the top 20 commercial foods that includes some top brands from smaller companies. All the health problems associated with commercial food are related to lower quality, 'supermarket' brand kibbles, right? Besides, the pet food industry has been taking steps forward in terms of pet nutrition, haven't they? There is a good variety of healthy, 'premium' kibbles on the market, and feeding one of these to our pets does reap certain benefits when compared to their cheaper-fed counterparts (feed less food, smaller stool size, better coats, better energy, etc.). Granted, if you feed a premium kibble then you are feeding your pet a better quality food, but could your pet be fed even better food for cheaper? Is a premium kibble an appropriate food for your pets?
There are several high-quality kibbles on the market today, but there are still several significant issues that set raw diets apart from these premium kibbles. Let us look at several of the issues posed by premium kibbles.
1.) It is still a processed food. This means it has still been rendered, overly cooked, overly processed, and still has artificial vitamins and supplements added to it. Despite the claims of what went into this food at the start, this means the ingredients are still of a poorer quality when compared to fresh, whole, raw foods, and that problems associated with artificial vitamins and minerals still exist: erratic growth patterns, growth occurring too fast, the body not utilizing the nutrients as well, etc. While the better quality foods certainly do start with better materials, after processing these 'food' materials are still of a lesser quality compared to the fresh, raw, real thing.


2.) It still is an unnatural food for our pets. Our dogs and cats are not designed to eat processed food pellets regardless of how good of quality these processed food pellets are. A premium kibble would be like us eating a 'premium' cereal day in and day out; the premium cereal has to be better for us than one of those cheaper cereals, right (think of Raisin Bran versus Captain Crunch)?


3.) Premium kibbles still have a bunch of ingredients our pets do not need and/or cannot utilize. Many premium kibbles contain a relatively small amount of meat (usually from 'human quality' sources, but then it is rendered into an unrecognizable 'foodstuff') even if meat is listed as the first ingredient, because the rest of the ingredients combined far outweigh the presence of the meat our carnivores need (remember, meat, unless it says 'meat meal', is listed according to its wet weight. When all that water has been cooked out of it, meat places considerably further down on the ingredients list). Just read some of the labels. Some sort of meat will be listed, but it is then followed by all sorts of grains that are usually touted as more highly digestible than corn or wheat (rice, oats, barley, millet, etc.), vegetables (yams, potatoes, carrots, sweet potatoes, etc.), fruits (apples, pears, etc.) and supplements (kelp powder, spirulina, lactobacillus bacteria, etc.), not to mention all the artificial vitamins and minerals that need to be added. Of course, the presence of the vegetables, fruits, and supplements theoretically means that less artificial vitamins and minerals can be added because the nutrients can be obtained from natural sources, but how many of these natural sources are actually available to the dog or cat? How much of these natural nutrients are destroyed and rendered ineffective by the cooking process? Even with foods like EVO that contain a high proportion of meat and no grain (it uses potatoes, which are starchy and metabolize as such), the processed meat still is inferior to the fresh, real thing. Think of a processed, cooked orange versus a fresh, wholeorange. Which one is better?


4.) The issue of periodontal disease still prevails. The pet still does not get the beneficial, necessary teeth cleaning at each meal, so the problem of a bacteria-laden mouth that stinks and provides a gateway for bacteria, toxins, and collagenases to enter the body still exists. This is, after all, one of the best and biggest reasons to feed a raw diet with meaty bones.


5.) The animal still lacks the wonderful and necessary physical, mental, and emotional workout provided by raw meaty bones. Although it is being fed a premium kibble, your pet can undoubtedly still finish its meal in record time, rather than having to work at its food for a half an hour or more. Again, this translates to the body not being fully prepared to receive food and digest it, so the food will just sit in the animal's stomach until the parasympathetic nervous system kicks everything into gear.


6.) Premium kibbles are often more expensive that natural, fresh, raw food. If you are dishing out that much money for a 'premium' processed pet food, why not feed fresh, whole, raw food sources for less?


7.) You still have no control over what goes into your pet's body. Can you be certain that what is on the ingredients list is what actually enters your pet's body? Can you be certain of the quality of the ingredients? What happened to these ingredients during the cooking process?


8.) The primary question still remains: how is a processed pet food better for our animals than fresh, whole, raw foods?


It is for these reasons (and I am sure there are other reasons as well) that many raw feeders consider premium kibbles a waste of money. This includes those so-called 'therapeutic diets' available only through veterinarians. The pet food industry and veterinary community simply developed another artificial food to cover up and 'fix' the problems created by other commercial, artificial pet foods. Why not treat the problems at their source (could it have anything to do with money, perhaps? Remember, veterinarians can pocket up to 40% of the profits from selling kibbles like Hill's Science Diet [Parker-Pope, T. 1997. For You, My Pet. The Wall Street Journal. 3 November 1997. In Lonsdale, T. 2001. Raw Meaty Bones. p266].)? In this respect, the pet food companies and the veterinary community have drastically missed the mark, and it is our pets that must suffer for it. What sense does it make to simply switch an ailing pet onto another commercial, artificial pet food when similar foods caused the problems it was having in the first place?
With the growing number of food allergies pet have, the pet food industry has been becoming more and more creative, trying to find new protein and grain sources to make new 'hypoallergenic' kibbles. Have they even once considered WHY the pets were having allergy problems to the ingredients in their foods to begin with (Probably. But will they tell us that they know why? Probably not. Where's the profit in that?)? Ironically enough, pets switched to a raw diet can often eat the same meats that caused their allergies originally, because the meats are raw and not cooked (Clark, W.R. 1995. Hypersensitivity and Allergy, in At War Within: The double edged sword of immunity, Oxford University Press, New York. pg 88.). The cooking process changes the protein structures, and it is these changed, cooked proteins to which the body has an allergic reaction.
If you feed a premium kibble (or any kibble), please think through why you feed it to your pets. Could they benefit more from a raw diet? And ask the ultimate question: how is a processed diet better for my pets than a diet of fresh, whole, raw foods?

THE DAMAGE COMMERCIAL FOOD INFLICTS UPON OUR PETS

Please be forewarned: the pictures on this page are graphic and disturbing. However, they serve to illustrate the cruelty we induce to our animals by feeding a processed diet.
These pictures are of an 8-year-old pug's mouth. The dog was fed kibbled food his whole life until his owners switched him to wet food after he could not chew kibble anymore. His teeth had never been cleaned before, either.

​

Once the tartar on the back left molar (picture below) was scraped away, a pus-filled abcess was revealed. You can actually see some very nasty-looking pus up around the gumline of the teeth on the picture above.

​

The pug ended up having five teeth extracted—all because of the processed diet he was fed! The foul tartar and bacteria in this pug's mouth are the same tartar and bacteria that build up and multiply in the mouths of our kibble-fed, four-legged friends. Veterinarians see this EVERY DAY; why don't they do something about it? Wait, they did! Now you can shell out hundreds of dollars to put your pet under general anesthesia to have its teeth cleaned once a year . In between cleanings you can brush your carnivore's teeth with special toothbrushes and toothpastes. You can spend your money on artificial bones, toys, rawhides, and 'breath fresheners' to help clean up the nasty tartar kibble puts on your pet's teeth. All of this could be avoided if the pet was fed a species appropriate raw diet in the first place! What a great injustice our pets must suffer! If it was not for processed foods, veterinary denistry would not even exist in the form it is today. If it was not for processed foods, there would not be such a huge market for breath fresheners, artificial bones, tartar-scrubbing chew toys—NONE of which, I might add, are as effective as Nature's toothbrush of RAW MEATY BONES. If it was not for processed foods, our pets would not have to deal with the cruelty of a foul, rotten mouth!!