Bulldogs World

OK everyone I am sorry this is so long but I did not know how to put it as attachment, I friend of mine has two bitchs that she breed the first one was due last week and she went into labor a week early she lost all 8 pups very sad the second one is due in one week from today she is in labor at this time the vet is trying everything to save these pups as I was taking to her the only thing that she has changed was going on the RAW diet 1 year ago so I did some research and found this artical what do you all think it scares me a little.


The BARF diet - a dangerous FAD??
Dr Ian Billinghurst (a Vet not a nutritionist) based in the Australian outback has made a fortune from his book Give Your Dog a Bone. He is the guru of the BARF diet. Depending who you speak to BARF either stands for Bones and Raw Food or is an acronym for Biologically Appropriate Raw Food. With todays cattle that is a contradiction in terms. Unfortunately it is also an English word for someone who has vomited. Perhaps Dr Billinghurst is having the last laugh on his fanatical followers?

What amazes me is I am supposed to listen to the likes of Billinghurst who has nothing to do with nutrition yet I am accused of being a layman. I quote: Dr. Billinghurst acknowledges that there isnt any scientific data backing up his claims:" To date there have been no scientific trials conducted to determine if the re-introduction of dogs to the diet they all ate until about 60 years ago as having any benefit. Many veterinary specialists warn against the diet, arguing that Dr. Billinghursts claims arent substantiated with adequate if any medical research, and that the BARF diet actually has the potential to be life-threateningly dangerous.
The choice to feed raw meat as part or all of your domestic dog's diet is proving to be extremely worrisome. What started out as an unresearched and unsubstantiated diet that qualified veterinarians dismissed as a fad, has now become a real threat for the well-meaning dog lovers who are striving to give their dog's the best.
However this recommendation to feed raw meat, including chicken wings, beef, lamb pork and tripe is positively life threatening, the additives, antibiotics, preservatives, and toxicity in raw meats are nothing like you would ever find in the wild.
With regard to raw Tripe. Cattle are now routinely wormed with fairly potent concentration of Anthelmintics, usually Fenbendazol. This is administered via a Bolus which sits in the stomach and breaks down over selected periods of time into regulated doses.

I wonder what concentrations of the Anthelmintics in "tripe" is if the animal is slaughtered shortly after a release of the dose from the bolus? I fear the concentration may be far too much for small dogs and young puppies to cope with.
Raw Chicken is another area of concern. The amount of antibiotics pumped into them could surely have a culminative affect when fed to dogs over a period of time. Possibly creating a situation whereby our pets become immune to the antibiotics from our vets, resulting in enormous problems in post operative or even preoperative treatments.
We were recently approached by someone wanting a puppy, who stated they were going to start feeding the BARF diet. Of course, we had no choice but to refuse them. Our healthy hounds go back several generations fed on a high quality kibble, and to change one now to a raw food diet would require months of modifications. This would/could create serious future health issues, and because of this it would create more issues than we were willing to allow someone to experiment with, with one of our own hounds.
The most amazing thing to me was that they had recently lost their 10 year, nine month old wolfhound, of whom they had fed a kibble diet. Well, excuse me, but it would appear they were doing something right and of course diet had something to do with it. So why do people feel the need to fix what isnt broken?
Veterinarians across the United States have serious concerns about bones and raw food (BARF) in a dog's diet. History and current statistics show us that both wild and domestic dogs that eat BARF can and do become very ill for a number of reasons.
There has been a significant increase in a variety of illnesses due to a raw meat diet. Some dogs become ill right away and others have severe pancreatic, kidney, heart, and brain illnesses due to a long-term raw meat diet. Most dogs that die from a BARF diet do not show signs of illness until a few days before it kills them. This is true with pancreatitis, and with the raw chicken or turkey necks and backs, which injure the stomach and intestines.
The most compelling evidence are the growing number of dogs to actually die from a raw turkey or chicken back/neck tearing apart their stomach. Intestinal parasites from the raw meat can cause a slow death or severe illness. Apparently female dogs on a raw meat diet are more commonly dying while giving birth to a litter.
Research has been done interviewing and collecting data from several top veterinary universities and nutrition experts with degrees in science and biology. Not one of these credited experts could honestly say that a raw meat and/or bone diet for domestic dogs was anywhere near the realm of safe. In addition, there do not appear to be any holistic practitioners or raw meat advocates that can provide evidence that raw meat actually benefits the dog. For example, people often say "but my dog has a beautiful coat". It probably does, this is because raw meat is high in fat - this could also be achieved by adding a little olive oil to their diet, without the risk of illnesses associated with raw meat. More new studies are coming out most are opposed to raw meat and bone diets.
There are a variety of raw meat menus being offered. You can also find several home-made raw meat diets on the internet. It's quite possible that some of these are better/safer than others. However, it appears that experienced veterinarians and nutritionists say that they all have one thing in common - they are extremely unbalanced ultimately putting your dog at risk along with contracting unsafe bacteria and parasites. This is the opinion of the top veterinary universities and true nutritional experts. In my opinion, anyone denying there is risk, is just fooling themselves!
As there are no studies showing any benefit that a raw diet is responsible for, why risk the health of your dog?
"Neither the American Veterinary Association nor the British Veterinary Association endorses the health benefits of raw food. Both organizations caution that animals fed raw meat run the risk of contracting food-borne illnesses. The British veterinary group declares that "there is no scientific evidence base to support the feeding of raw meat and bones," and warns humans they risk exposing themselves to bacteria like salmonella."
Manufactured pet food generally is processed with intense heat, which destroys any potential bacteria. Opponents note that though the risk of bacterial infection can be greatly reduced with safe handling and trusted meat sources, there is always a potential for bacterial infection. An example of this danger can be seen in a disease that afflicts greyhound racing dogs, called "Alabama rot." The disease is caused by E.Coli in the raw meat that was given as part of their diet.

Some raw diet recipes call for freezing of the final product, which reduces, but does not necessarily eliminate the potential for parasites.

I also think it is very irresponsible for the Barfers to encourage bone-eating without warning about the dangers.
It may have been the case that the original domesticated dogs were not well suited to human food, but we can be sure that those dogs which adapted to eat cooked food as well as raw would survive better than those which could not.
There are practical reasons why the diet of the wild dog is not automatically suitable for the domestic dog.
The modern dog and its lifestyle bear no similarity whatsoever to a wild dog. We provide shelter in heated houses, they do not have to forage or compete for food, they eat every day, and they have little exercise compared to a wild dog.
Many dogs have dietary sensitivity which means that they need a highly digestible diet, low in protein and low in fat. I can't see how that could be achieved with a BARF diet.
From an evolutionary standpoint the "purpose" of living is to mature rapidly and to reproduce successfully. A long life is not integral to that. But that is not necessarily what we want for our domestic dogs. We probably don't want them to reproduce and we certainly want them to live a long time.
In his book, Dr Billinghurst mentions pancreatitis as a possible hazard when starting the Barf Diet. He says that this is more likely in the overweight dog receiving too much fat from, for example, fatty lamb. He himself recognises that fat causes pancreatitis and we must assume that he has encountered this condition several times on the BARF Diet.
Simple common sense and experience tell us that cooking actually increases digestibility.
My main criticism of the BARF philosophy is its self-righteousness. BARFism argues with a certainty which bears comparison to religious fundamentalism. It advocates a system which is impractical and does not fit well into the lifestyle of present society, denying the possibility of alternatives, thereby condemning those pet owners, the majority, to feelings of inadequacy for failure to follow its teachings.
Dr Billinghurst gave a paper to the American Veterinary Holistic Society. His paper was called "Evolutionary Nutrition for Pets Hearsay and Dangerous, or Hard Science and Healthy? I will leave you to make up your own mind on the answer to that question.
Is it not also unfortunate that those of us whose main interest is in improving pet health through proper nutrition should be criticising each other rather than the real culprits the producers of the poor quality pet foods which do cause the problems?