Re: Re: To BTD or not BTD

July 29, 2006

wrote:

> I appreciate your post, , and I take on board all that you

> say.

> I just feel that we don't know, and we can't categorically say that

> there are 'no' healthy vegetarian type 'O's, and so we shouldn't.

I'm not in agreement here because there is no logic involved.

It's a bit like saying you expect some cows to be healthy carnivores.

They are not *designed* that way!

This isn't about " finding some diet " as you suggest - it's about using

what we have discovered about how our bodies function chemically. If we

do not use our bodies as they are intended to function- it would be like

feeding cows a meat diet, and just as no cow thrives on meat alone, no

human thrives on plants alone. We're designed to use meat and plants -

not either one alone. It's called omnivore.

It's that simple - for ANY diet to make sense. We need specific

ingredients in a specific ratio and we have the *equipment* to get them

from an omnivore diet, not from meat alone or plants alone - it's why we

are biologically classified omnivore - not vegetarian :-)) That's just

scientific FACT.

It's all about how WE are made - what WE need nutritionally.

To try to be vegetarian you go against every design metabolism we have!

Creation just did not make us some other way - we are omnivores whether

we like it or not. Vegetarians try hard to close their eyes to that

FACT,. but the fact is still there whether you look with open or closed

eyes.

> It is too easy to try a new diet, and find vast improvements, and so

> lay blame on the old diet

No.

This is the other way round. We studied what our bodies are DESIGNED to

use and what essential things they need - and we then gave it the food

for THAT design - and it should be no surprise that our bodies

*appreciate* getting what they are designed for - every time.

Our bodies do not appreciate failing to get what they are designed for

- and hence complain every time they get all vegetarian or all

carnivore. The omnivore design is there and it's an abuse of our bodies

(and an insult to the Creator who made them that way) not to honor that

design and feed them accordingly.

This diet was not an accident or guesswork - it is completely based on

how we were designed, and is continually improved as we learn more about

how we were designed. It's not some guesswork:-))

> Serious vegetarians research and find out about, and then decide

> their diet.

And therein lies the problem.

They are not researching how humans are designed. They are researching

how plants are designed. Big difference. No amount of plant research

will give them how we are designed and what we need.

> All I'm saying is that I feel we should have a

> " we claim the privelage to follow whatever health and diet

> guidelines we choose, and allow all others the same privelage "

We do have that. If some consenting adult wants to eat mud instead of

food I do not know a law to stop it. Maybe they do great in depth

studies of the nutrients in mud, and more power to them.

But until they and we look at how WE are designed and what OUR bodies

need - no diet will make SENSE or build health.

You first have to know the objectives - what the body needs - before

looking to see what foods will meet those objectives. We KNOW the body

needs meat and vegetables both. We know that. It's not the dark ages

when we did not understand our design:-))

Researching mud (or plants) won't give you meat and vegetables, however

much you have a right to pretend they will.

> This diet will work real wonders for some

Some? Who did you find that it did not help?

It helps all - it's predictable because it fits our DESIGN -

specifically - and at the detailed chemical level. The only other diets

that help are those that are also devised for OUR design - like the

Perricone approach which chooses food according to whether it helps or

hinders individual cellwall health. (Cell walls determine whether toxins

exit and nutrients enter and the body is entirely made of these cells.)

> This didn't have to become a big deal, I was just tired of hearing

> the same old broken record stuff which people on here may believe,

> but don't know;

On the contrary - we DO know. Unlike many diets - this one IS based on

what we are designed to eat. How humans are designed has been studied

more than anything else - it's no mystery to science:-)) It is

vegetarians and mud eaters who have not bothered to find out how they

are designed. The scientific community has been in no doubt for a very

long time!

> and it is wrong to influence others by saying

> you 'know' when you don't,

BUT we *do* know. How we are designed is known:-)) I personally spent 14

years studying the sciences that have to do with how man and other

species are designed:-) I can tell you first hand that all the

scientific community put together over the years - have not got this

wrong! We ARE omnivores:-))

All this diet does is to match food to that design. As such it can't go

wrong:-)

> because some will believe just because of

> the better use of grammar and strength of feeling portrayed or

> qualifications bandied about, or an overly confident manner put

> across, w....

Interesting how vegetarians change the subject when they run out of

excuses to avoid logic. This is not about grammar or confidence - it's

about how the human body is designed, and the food that it LIKES to get

to be healthy.

Vegetarians try so hard to avoid that most relevant and logical concept:-)))

We also know from good science that logical thinking comes from the

brain - and that the brain needs lots of cholesterol to do that

thinking. There's not a whole lot of it in plants.

Namaste,

Irene

(who is going off to eat mud, albeit attached to dandelion roots on a

heap of beef and egg)

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.

P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.

www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)

" Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it. "

July 29, 2006

I thought I'd mention that this is, in fact, a list for those

interested in, or exploring, or using, the BTD, so there's

nothing wrong with boasting about this way of life to the

exclusion of other, inferior, ways. People are not on this

list to hear about unlikely exceptions to the rule.

Gretchen

July 29, 2006

In a message dated 7/29/2006 10:53:44 AM Eastern Standard Time,

firesprite68@... writes:

I just feel that we don't know, and we can't categorically say that

there are 'no' healthy vegetarian type 'O's, and so we shouldn't.

Well I do because, to me, that's like telling me that smoking is OK when I

know better (not " feel " that it's bad but know that it's bad because of the

research). Any healthy veg Os will start getting sick as they get older with

the

diseases discussed here. Watch your friends take more meds, get sicker and

just don't understand why. It's very sad to watch. They " feel " that being a

vegetarian is OK too.

July 29, 2006

In a message dated 7/29/2006 12:59:33 PM Eastern Standard Time,

mcpherson.bg@... writes:

People are not on this

list to hear about unlikely exceptions to the rule.

Right on!! People come here and try to negotiate. Well, I don't negotiate.

I'm not going to endorse by silence or any other way vegetarian diets for

type Os. I'm not throwing sand in their sandbox but I will answer questions and

challenge statements that I know (not " feel " ) are wrong. That's what we're

here for. This is a diet for improving your health. Weight loss is a

byproduct. It's not a fad diet and it is not that easy to follow.

July 29, 2006

I totally agree!!

mcpherson.bg@... wrote:

I thought I'd mention that this is, in fact, a list for those

interested in, or exploring, or using, the BTD, so there's

nothing wrong with boasting about this way of life to the

exclusion of other, inferior, ways. People are not on this

list to hear about unlikely exceptions to the rule.

Gretchen

---------------------------------

Be a chatter box. Enjoy free PC-to-PC calls with Messenger with Voice.

July 29, 2006

Interesting how vegetarians change the subject when they run out of excuses to

avoid logic.

**Thankyou Irene, a very interesting answer, but I'll just add here - I'm not a

vegetarian, and was never arguing against the blood type diet.

)

http://tinyurl.com/g434u - independently certified organic personal care

products.

http://www.freewebs.com/inspire/

http://www.freewebs.com/amiva/ - dogs!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.

It has removed 339 spam emails to date.

Paying users do not have this message in their emails.

Try SPAMfighter for free now!

July 29, 2006

firesprite68 wrote:

> **Thankyou Irene, a very interesting answer, but I'll just add here - I'm not

a vegetarian, and was never arguing against the blood type diet.

You sure wrote like one:-))

" I just feel that we don't know, and we can't categorically say that

there are 'no' healthy vegetarian type 'O's, and so we shouldn't....

Serious vegetarians research and find out about, and then decide

their diet..... "

You were being pro-vegetarian and that boat won't float here.

Namaste,

Irene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.

P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.

www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)

" Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it. "

July 30, 2006

>>You were being pro-vegetarian and that boat won't float here.

**No, I was being pro-fairmindedness and not delusional.

I have, like many others here have been 'the other side of the fence', and don't

have the horror story experiences others did. I also know some 'healthy'

vegetarians, and whatever science can or can't prove, you can't argue with what

is there in front of your face and deny it exists.

Take for example dogs - they are carnivores, carnivorous teeth, carnivorous

digestive system etc. so it 'should' follow that they would all do well on a

raw diet of RMB like their ancestors from the wild, but they don't, some have

lived to be 14 yrs old and die peacefully in their sleep on a totally vegetarian

diet. Some cannot cope with raw and need it cooked - not everything follows

logic and how it 'should' be, and if dogs have had time enough to evolve from

pure carnivores into scavengers, then people have had time for small changes to

creep in.

I am simply trying to be realistic and open-minded, because I know these things

exist.

The fact is, there is not much research to back up the blood diet, I went

through the D'Adamo site with a toothcomb when I started on it and could fully

understand others sceptisism as the back-up material just wasn't there.

I was arguing neither for nor against either diet, it was the attitude that I

was talking about.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.

It has removed 343 spam emails to date.

Paying users do not have this message in their emails.

Try SPAMfighter for free now!

July 30, 2006

In a message dated 7/30/2006 4:53:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,

firesprite68@... writes:

I also know some 'healthy' vegetarians

But are they Os? Type As can be successful vegetarians.

July 30, 2006

In a message dated 7/30/2006 4:53:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,

firesprite68@... writes:

some have lived to be 14 yrs old and die peacefully in their sleep on a

totally vegetarian diet.

Dogs are scavangers and not exclusively carnivores like cats. So, you knew

dogs that like lettuce, cucumbers, corn and pasta? The dogs probably would

have died in their 20s and been a lot healthier eating a more balanced diet.

They

were probably eating the pasta because of the butter on it. Many dry dog

foods are just wheat or corn meal dipped in grease (an interesting History about

how this came about). Dry vegetarian dog food manufacturers cheat and dip

theirs too or the dogs wouldn't eat it. The dogs eat it because they're

starving

because they have clueless owners. Just like clueless Os who are

vegetarians-overeat, get fat, and still starve. My dogs have NO allergies, no

skin

problems, no growths, no mouth diseases, no mange, great shiney coat, and are

not

overweight. I feed them a combination organic mix of lamb, chicken, rice, and

vegetables. No vitamins, no meds, and they thrive.

Max

July 30, 2006

In a message dated 7/30/2006 4:53:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,

firesprite68@... writes:

No, I was being pro-fairmindedness and not delusional.

LOL--interesting that you would think of the word delusional. I thought

delusional meant " A false belief strongly held in spite of invalidating

evidence " .

We've given our evidence. Offered the research. Besides a few folksy

stories where's yours? Now who's being delusional? You won't even look at the

research.

I'm not saying vegetarians are bad people any more than smokers are bad

people. I'm just saying they're misinformed and will pay physically for it. I

feel sorry for them.

I have to say that I have never met a pure vegetarian over the age of 40.

They all eat chicken, fish, milk, cheese, or drink broth. To me that makes them

animal eaters who eat a lot of vegetables. It also makes them two-faced.

Max

July 30, 2006

In a message dated 7/30/2006 4:53:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,

firesprite68@... writes:

The fact is, there is not much research to back up the blood diet, I went

through the D'Adamo site with a toothcomb

Boy, where have you been reading?

July 30, 2006

In a message dated 7/30/2006 6:00:14 PM Eastern Standard Time,

sharonferris@... writes:

My cat isn't totally a carnivore. He loves to lick almond butter off my

fingers.

I used to have a ferret that liked a slice of banana.

July 30, 2006

My cat isn't totally a carnivore. He loves to lick almond butter off my

fingers.

Just my 2 cents to lighten up this discussion.

Regards,

Sharon (Ontario) Canada

Re: Re: To BTD or not BTD

In a message dated 7/30/2006 4:53:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,

firesprite68@... writes:

some have lived to be 14 yrs old and die peacefully in their sleep on a

totally vegetarian diet.

Dogs are scavangers and not exclusively carnivores like cats. So, you knew

dogs that like lettuce, cucumbers, corn and pasta? The dogs probably would

have died in their 20s and been a lot healthier eating a more balanced diet.

They

were probably eating the pasta because of the butter on it. Many dry dog

foods are just wheat or corn meal dipped in grease (an interesting History

about

how this came about). Dry vegetarian dog food manufacturers cheat and dip

theirs too or the dogs wouldn't eat it. The dogs eat it because they're

starving

because they have clueless owners. Just like clueless Os who are

vegetarians-overeat, get fat, and still starve. My dogs have NO allergies, no

skin

problems, no growths, no mouth diseases, no mange, great shiney coat, and are

not

overweight. I feed them a combination organic mix of lamb, chicken, rice, and

vegetables. No vitamins, no meds, and they thrive.

Max

July 30, 2006

In a message dated 7/30/2006 8:43:41 PM Eastern Standard Time,

salbud@... writes:

Do you make your own mix?

I can and I have but it's a lot of work. It had a lot of meat, eggs, some

rice, some pumpkin, carrots, oats, etc. Got the recipe online from a vet clinic

(kinda like an Irene but for dogs). Their reasoning was that the non-meat

items in the food simulated ancient dogs who used to kill animals and then eat

the stomach and entrails. That's why it's also cooked to break down enzymes

like the stomach acid would. I tasted it and thought it was pretty good. Tried

it out on my dogs, neighbor's dogs, daughter's dog, etc and ended up giving

away freezer bags of it. They all loved it. If you want the recipes, just let

me know. Made doggie treats from liver too. They loved them too. It's hard

to find treats today that aren't loaded with wheat or corn meal. I get meat

sticks and also feed them bones on occasion.

I found a dry dog food that has meat (lamb and chicken) as a main ingredient

that is more convenient for me. The ingredients are close to what was in the

food I made. It's called Ultra and is made by Nutra. It costs a little more

and you have to go to someplace like Petsmart to get it but the dogs love it.

I tried to mix in the Purina they used to eat and they'd pick out the Ultra

chunks and leave the Purina.

Just like diets, there's a bizzard of conflicting information about feeding

dogs all the way from the vegan approach to feeding them live animals. I just

see what the dogs consistantly like and move in that direction. I could just

see them with a live animal. They'd probably make friends with it.

Max

July 30, 2006

Do you make your own mix?

Re: Re: To BTD or not BTD

In a message dated 7/30/2006 4:53:38 AM Eastern Standard Time,

firesprite68@... writes:

some have lived to be 14 yrs old and die peacefully in their sleep on a

totally vegetarian diet.

Dogs are scavangers and not exclusively carnivores like cats. So, you knew

dogs that like lettuce, cucumbers, corn and pasta? The dogs probably would

have died in their 20s and been a lot healthier eating a more balanced diet.

They

were probably eating the pasta because of the butter on it. Many dry dog

foods are just wheat or corn meal dipped in grease (an interesting History

about

how this came about). Dry vegetarian dog food manufacturers cheat and dip

theirs too or the dogs wouldn't eat it. The dogs eat it because they're

starving

because they have clueless owners. Just like clueless Os who are

vegetarians-overeat, get fat, and still starve. My dogs have NO allergies, no

skin

problems, no growths, no mouth diseases, no mange, great shiney coat, and are

not

overweight. I feed them a combination organic mix of lamb, chicken, rice, and

vegetables. No vitamins, no meds, and they thrive.

Max

July 30, 2006

wrote:

> Can't agree with the rice though, as dogs are obligate carnivores

No - they are carnivores but not obligate carnivores. Cats are

obligate carnivores - which means it is literally impossible to stay

alive without meat. In the case of cats the main difference is the

nutrients that cats can not make such as taurine for example - but which

carnivores like dogs can make.

Dogs can stay alive without meat, but they are designed to eat a mainly

meat diet. Unlike cats, dogs actually can and do obtain some nutrition

from plants.

> and

> have the dentition and digestive system only set up to deal with a

> carnivorous diet,

This is part of the carnivore design yes.

> not producing amylase in the mouth

Correct. no point making amylase for starch digestion when you don't get

starch in meat.

But dogs can get into plant cells to a limited extent - and have some

enzymes and intestinal length to do so, and VERY limited enzymes for

plant digestion. That's why plants like garlic, alfalfa, yucca, broccoli

etc are toxic to dogs.

They need carotene to keep the immune system healthy for example, and

use it directly, not converted to Vit A - and that comes from plants.

Dogs will eat and digest berries and very few other plants, NOT many,

and it would be a mistake to feed the wrong plants or too many plants to

a carnivore, even a non-obligate one such as a dog.

Due to gut contents of prey, they do have the ability to use grains for

energy if they must - and they get fermentable fiber from prey gut

contents (or from added rice bran in commercial food.)

Dogs also can eat raw meat.

Domestic cats on the other hand have no way to open plant cells to get

at the contents, and no cellulase for the task, and no liver enzymes to

detoxify complex plant parts and no long intestines to help digest plant

material. They are simply " obligate " carnivores.

They do have 12 times the need for carotene that dogs have and in the

wild get it in gut of prey via grains and can absorb it way better than

other creatures. But cats should never be fed raw meat unless it has

only just been slaughtered. And even if bone is included it is an

unbalanced food as it lacks the essential nutrients in the blood of

fresh-slaughtered hunted prey.

Unlike dogs they are not designed to eat carrion at all. The enzymes

on the meat surface change right after death and are bad for cats,

depleting their nutrients. It's why they are designed with a sen's

organ unlike carnivores designed to handle carrion like lions and dogs.

It's also why you often see cats turn their noses up at food that dogs

(and humans) think is great.

The biggest mistake I see in any commercial foods - especially the

" holistic " ones for dogs and cats - is the inclusion of inappropriate

plants, especially the toxic ones like garlic, alfalfa, yucca, rosemary

extract, broccoli etc.

That and the notion that raw meat and bones type of food is a complete

food when actually it is not as it lacks the blood and gut contents (not

stomach contents, there is a difference) of " prey " . The *fermentable*

fiber obtained from prey gut contents (or it needs to be provided

another way) is not optional but essential to good carnivore health.

They *rely* on the gut bacteria who eat this fermentable fiber, for a

long list of nutritional aspects that we omnivores get from plants but

they do not. Without that gut environment, they WILL be malnourished.

What I would like to know is how dog and cat diet is blood type related.

All I can say from just personal observation, is that cats with blood

type B can eat a lot more things without indigestion than the usual

blood type A cats.

Namaste,

IRene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.

P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.

www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)

" Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it. "

July 31, 2006

> sharonferris@... writes:

> My cat isn't totally a carnivore. He loves to lick almond butter off my

> fingers.

Being a carnivore does not mean that nothing else is eaten - it just

means that the essential nutrients for the species by design are from meat.

So eating a taste (not a lot) of almonds is common among cats - mine

like a bit too now and then - but they are not designed to get their

nutritional needs from there:-))

SO - your cat is still totally a carnivore, even though he eats some

plant food. Being carnivore or omnivore or vegetarian - has to do with

where the essential nutrients come from (by design) for the species.

Namaste,

Irene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.

P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.

www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)

" Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it. "

July 31, 2006

Maddviking@... wrote:

> I found a dry dog food that has meat (lamb and chicken) as a main ingredient

> that is more convenient for me. The ingredients are close to what was in the

> food I made. It's called Ultra and is made by Nutra.

Max,

Check it for Garlic. If I am not mistaken the last time I looked at

the ingredients that was one.

Garlic is toxic to dogs (damages the red blood cells so they can not

properly carry oxygen - called Heinz body anaemia, and not easy to see

on a blood test.)

There isn't a perfect commercial food on the market, but one option is

to start with something like ProPAc kitten dry food as it has 34%

protein, no by-products and thus less carbohydrate. It has not got the

inflamamtory omega-6 from flax either.

See it at ProPAcpetfood.com

To that for dogs you need to add cooked pumpkin and spinach type things

to provide better carotene and vit K sources; also some acidophilus.

This is my recommendation to nearly all my dog owner clients.

Another option that is surprisingly better than one might expect is the

Walmart Maxximum kitten food which is easily available and similar.

I recommend kitten food for my dog clients as it has far better protein

that the stuff out there labelled dog - and I use it for adult cats too

of course.

My criteria are based on nutrition research from the Feline and canine

international nutrition symposia scientific papers.

Next best commercial options I can find are

maet and Nutro Max kitten (but not Nutro " complete care " as that has

yucca; it used to have alfalfa, seems that has at least been removed now.)

All or most of the above have around 34% protein and hence less carbs -

and they put more fat in the product as well. I am all for fat for

energy in carnivores rather than carbs, and plenty of protein.

Also good nerve nutrition requires more magnesium and it is usually

too low in those low protein foods. (Because carbs plus carnivore urine

plus magnesium = struvite precipitation and blockage) so the

manufacturers arrange for a deficiency of magnesium to avoid crystals,

and they don't give a fig about what the body needs magnesium for!!!!

It costs a little more

> and you have to go to someplace like Petsmart to get it but the dogs love it.

> I tried to mix in the Purina they used to eat and they'd pick out the Ultra

> chunks and leave the Purina.

The MAxximum kitten you get at Walmart is likely manufactured by Purina

- but is not the junk that the regular Purina is with all its

by-products and carbs.

> Just like diets, there's a bizzard of conflicting information about feeding

> dogs

There is politics behind it. The manufacturers want big bucks for

garbage and flog it via the vet clinics: The vets promote the products

(Iamks, Eukanuba, Hills mainly - all junkfood) in return for big bucks

donated by manufacturers to AVMA to " get rid of the competition from

alternative health " (which they do by pro[posing excusionary replacement

veterinary practrice law wording to State legislatures and lobby to get

thaty passed.

There's also Monsanto and General Mills trying to flog their grain

junk somewhere and all the meat processing plants trying to get rid of

what's left after they sell the meat for human consumption (and that's

what " by-products " means in junkfood animal feed - so it is beaks and

feet and hooves and innards and such - not food you'd knowingly give to

your dog.)

The other problem with availability of canine (and feline) nutrition

data is that " holistic " vets have no training in canine nutrition but

pass round their notions anyway. The REAL independent and in depth

research is hidden!! by the likes of Iams who tries to look good by

" sponsoring " the international symposia I referred to - but then they

bind the research papers presented into " copyright " books (to keep it

all out of the National Library of Medicine - it would make Iams look as

awful as their food) and the volumes are never indexed either. It is

hell to wade through it all in scientificese language too of course.

Hence the research exists in original scientific papers, but is well

hidden. And no manufacturer seems to care enough to wade through it ans

read and apply it either.

So you have to be a saint (or a nut like myself) to buy and read them

all and get the value and truth on the research findings. I discuss it

all on my Cat health list (Catwell) where a few of us have invested in

all the volumes since 1998 and a great deal of the chatter is to unravel

it all.

It's a passion of mine for the benefit of my canine and feline

clients too of course.

Namaste,

IRene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.

P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.

www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)

" Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it. "

July 31, 2006

>>Unlike cats, dogs actually can and do obtain some nutrition

from plants.

**This is puzzling, as dogs donot have any of the teeth which are designed for

crushing plants. This being the case, how can they get goodness from plants if

they haven't broken through the cell walls by the crushing action of the teeth ?

Many I know who rawfeed also subscribe that it is the extra burden placed on

the pancreas to produce large amounts of amylase to deal with the starch,

cellulose, and carbohydrates in plant matter, which undermines the immune system

and indirectly is a cause of much illness in dogs - that and all the

allopathic meds. and those wonderful 'adjuvenants' of course.

**I know when I originally researched the rawfeeding, the information I found

said that dogs were obligate carnivores - but I can't give references as I have

had a computer crash since then and lost a lot which was not converted to files

yet.

I suppose again, there are a myriad of views, all with some info. to back them

up.

I know dogs have evolved somewhat from necessity to scavenge aswell, but

dentition and digestion at the very least appear to indicate that they were not

designed for anything other than a carnivorous diet.

The latest studies by Mech state that wolves donot eat the stomach

contents of prey, and thus, other than nibbling at berries [which could simply

be as they are sweet, much as we have a sweet tooth] occasionally, indicates

that they donot eat any vegetable matter, although I can see that berries would

be a source of the carotene you talk about - it's very interesting.

You obviously are well-up on the subject - do you have any views on the raw

myths site, I find it a very good one.

http://www.rawfed.com/myths/

And did you know there is now a U.S. RMB site ? - might interest you.

http://www.usrmb.net/

Where does it fit in with blood type diet - it didn't, I just thought that

being as the U.S.RMB site was new, that Max may not have come across it yet and

may find it interesting, and I find the myth site v. good so that is always

tagged on for those who donot know about its existance.

July 31, 2006

firesprite68 wrote:

>>>[irene] Unlike cats, dogs actually can and do obtain some nutrition

> from plants.

> **This is puzzling, as dogs donot have any of the teeth which are

designed for crushing plants.

Correct. Dogs are not designed to chew plants. They select berries and

such which crush between tongue and palate and are swallowed.

<<This being the case, how can they get goodness from plants if they

haven't broken through the cell walls by the crushing action of the

teeth ?>>

They can't do it directly. But their gut bacteria do the job for them.

Gut bacteria in carnivores are an essential aspect of their nutrition.

I can send an article on that if you are interested?

<< Many I know who rawfeed also subscribe that it is the extra

burden placed on the pancreas to produce large amounts of amylase to

deal with the starch, cellulose, and carbohydrates in plant matter,

which undermines the immune system>>>

A lot depends on quantity and quality.

Quantity:

The commercial food I suggest has 34% protein, 22% fat, 34%

carbohydrate, (and 10% moisture) but more common dog foods on the market

have a whole lot less protein and a whole lot more carbohydrate. Wild

food that is mainly meat, is about 55% protein - so there is still 45%

from " other " on dry matter basis.

Quality:

So many plants are toxic to dogs, that finding a commercial food not

loaded with them is very hard to do currently.

Soy is common in dog food and that DOES skew the immune system. So do

vaccines and drugs. I don't know of other foods that skew the immune system.

<<< and indirectly is a cause of much illness in dogs

Most dog foods cause illness for a muiltitude of reasons ranging from

excess carb ratio, to toxins present - and the awful notrion that

" by-product " is edible protein. IT trashes the kidneys over time due to

inappropriate ratiops of amino acids, and the leeftovers have to bwe

handled by the kidneys.

Fats in dog food are also wrong - usually flax or other plant oil is

used, and hence highly inflammatory.

Magnesium is too low leading to urinary tract issues.

And the list of food mistakes is long....

<<- that and all the allopathic meds. and those wonderful 'adjuvenants'

of course. >>

I do not vaccinate at all, and advise all my clietns to use homeopathic

nosodes instead. Vaccine adjuvants are a horror. And any vaccine damages

the immune system.

> **I know when I originally researched the rawfeeding, the information

I found said that dogs were obligate carnivores - but I can't give

references as I have had a computer crash since then and lost a lot

which was not converted to files yet.

It may be a difference of opinion in scientific circles using different

classification definitions - known to happen:-)

What really matters is to understand their nutritional needs and their

design. They are less dependent on meat than small cats - but there is

no getting around that they are carnivores.

> I know dogs have evolved somewhat from necessity to scavenge aswell,

Not enough to write home about.

Their intestines are marginally longer to enable them to eat a few extra

plants without dropping dead:-)

<<< but dentition and digestion at the very least appear to indicate

that they were not designed for anything other than a carnivorous diet.

I agree.

But they do need a few things from non-meat, such as fermentable fiber

and carotene. It's not a lot, more like a teaspoon or two per day.

> The latest studies by Mech state that wolves donot eat the

stomach contents of prey,

Not stomach contents but carnivores do eat the intestines or at least

the contents. I've seen them run the intestinal gut through their teeth

with a paw on it, squeezing out the contents. That is where their gut

bacteria come from, and they get frequent re-injections of those.

:-)

<< and thus, other than nibbling at berries [which could simply be as

they are sweet, much as we have a sweet tooth] occasionally, indicates

that they donot eat any vegetable matter>>

The berries provide beta-carotene and also another antioxidants that

detoxify the system, so even though that happens only seasonally, it is

a useful and relevant part of the design of canines. Without sufficient

beta-carotene, the immune system fails, and in winter they get it from

gut contents of prey.

I notice that my cats will eat cooked pumpkin in tiny amounts - but only

when they feel they need it. Some days they ignore it.

> You obviously are well-up on the subject - do you have any views on

the raw myths site, I find it a very good one.

It's better than the other raw sites I have seen by a good bit, but it

fails to note the difference in nutrition between meat as we buy it and

meat as an animal would get if they killed prey.

> http://www.usrmb.net/

I read bits of this site but it would take too long to comment it in

detail here.

I'll just note that what matters to me is the bootom line of meeting the

health needs of dogs and cats, and that I would never advocate any kind

of canned food (for several reasons not only that it messes up the teeth

and gums leading to innumerable diseases) but also I do not believe in

RMB as such. I see it as an optional part of a complete diet for dogs

(not cats). The raw meaty bones concept fails to recognize all the

minerals and trace elements and vitamins that come from blood of prey in

the wild, but which are drained from the meat in supermarkets.

The few companies currently making fill-in products are stacking them

with canine toxins along with real nutrients - so all in all not

currently a useful approach.

For cats raw meat is not acceptable for many reasons.

So personally I find that nutrition needs are best met in healthy dogs

and cats by using a product like ProPac kitten dry food, and adding

what's missing - cooked pumpkin, fish oil and acidophilus for example.

For ill dogs/cats I devise special home made custom foods, and do not

advise the commercial ones that are supposed to be specific for illness

conditions - they are all terrible unfortunately.

Namaste,

Irene

--

Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.

P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.

www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)

" Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it. "

July 31, 2006

>>I can send an article on that if you are interested?

**Yes please, that would be super !

Very interesting posts, may I share the info. to add a new dimension to how

others view canine dietary needs please ?

I may direct some others to your cat list who rawfeed their cats at present if

that is o.k. ?

Thanks v. much

)

http://tinyurl.com/g434u - independently certified organic personal care

products.

http://www.freewebs.com/inspire/

http://www.freewebs.com/amiva/ - dogs!

July 31, 2006

What would you recommend me to feed my 1 year old female boxer. (she is spayed)

She weighs about 60 lbs...We usually feed her the pedigree in the yellow bags.

Irene de Villiers <furryboots@...> wrote: