[Brightelf]

I am only 4.5 weeks into this raw thing, so I am still new, still myself learning, researching.. I am by no means expert. I have so much to learn. But:

If she wanted there to be research-- why didn't she do some personal, informal learning herself?

http://www.veterinarypracticenews.com/ve...food-peeve.aspx

I've spent a year listening to people say why they DO or DO NOT feed their dogs raw, and why. A year asking in person, meeting rawfed dogs in person, and also on the net. A year listening to people who DO (or do NOT) feed raw to help with (or due to) absorption issues, SIBO, IBD, behavioral issues. People who have had medical conditions turn around and improve because of raw-- and people who's dogs did better on a kibble diet. A year reading about successes.. about dangers.. about balance, about pitfalls, about wonderful results, about everything-- good and bad.

Meeting rawfed dogs, talking to owners who raw feed-- and also taking seriously people who don't, and why or why not. It was just a year of my life. My research isn't done yet, as I said, I'm new to this. But... they have both time and opportunity to do research. If health is important, nutrition too, and raw is "in trend," why not do a bit of personal research, instead of claiming there isn't any to be had?

 

[tracyc]

Or better yet, why doesn't she just do the research instead of decry the dearth of it? She's a veterinary scientist, not me. If she wants double-blind data--do it. She's got the skills. I would welcome some data, or guidelines, or something that would not only potentially help all of us feeding raw, but better inform the veterinary community.

I think the issue with doing research on raw-feeding dogs is entirely economic. In whose interest is it to provide scientific data on it? Who would fund such a study? Who would benefit and who would loose economically if it were proven that it is possible to feed your dog in a way that doesn't include kibble?

Until there is some research, my own anecdotal evidence is all that's relevant to me--I only care about the positive results of three individual dogs.

 

[kelso]

Originally Posted By: Luca_stlOr better yet, why doesn't she just do the research instead of decry the dearth of it? She's a veterinary scientist, not me. If she wants double-blind data--do it. She's got the skills. I would welcome some data, or guidelines, or something that would not only potentially help all of us feeding raw, but better inform the veterinary community.

I think the issue with doing research on raw-feeding dogs is entirely economic. In whose interest is it to provide scientific data on it? Who would fund such a study? Who would benefit and who would loose economically if it were proven that it is possible to feed your dog in a way that doesn't include kibble?

Until there is some research, my own anecdotal evidence is all that's relevant to me--I only care about the positive results of three individual dogs.

I couldnt think of a way to say what you did! Thanks!
I know the medical community does not want to do or use things that have not been FDA approved/researched and studied, at least in the human medicine world. So, while I cannot blame her for that, it does beg the question..who is going to do this research? In the human medical world there is drug companies that want to do the research to provide for the profit they will make if their drug is approved and does well.

Besides the fact that this isnt really about medicines, but diet. How do we even begin to quantify research on that when our own food pyramid seems to change http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_guide_pyramid Eggs are good, eggs are bad, eat more meat, eat less meat ect, ect. New studies come out all the time that contradict earlier studies. Dont drink..well maybe a glass of wine a day will help CV health....

I am just not sure who or what will do this for raw feeding and dogs. Does she have an answer for that? Or is it just a hypothetical question? Are kibbles that researched with scientific studies to prove benefits..maybe they are and feel free anyone to prove me wrong.. I do feed kibble as well as RAW..well we all know Science Diet is

But also heavily endorsed and backed.

The article I think is well written but also begs of a few questions.

I am also happy enough to report anecdotal evidence..how bout we all get together and perform a study? But alas, it appears the RAW food industry is doing quite well on anecdotal evidence alone

 

[3K9Mom]

I don't know that she's qualified to do research. Practitioners and researchers are often far different birds entirely. And *real* research takes organization and infrastructure that a sole-practitioner or partnership vet likely doesn't have. (Honestly, I don't want my vet doing research on my vet just because he's curioius about a topic.)

BUT...she went to a vet school. Alumni are influential forces. She probably has a vet friend or two as well, and they sit around and talk about this too. She could probably convince them to exert their influence. She likely belongs to professional organizations that could exert influence where and how they wanted to.

Whining that there's no research is a weenie way out.

And it appears that comments are welcome.

 

[JulesMichy]

I left a comment. I'm pretty sure I wasn't as articulate as I'd like, but **** if vets like this don't irritate me.

"4. Why change? Is our current approach so wrong?"

YES!!! How can you not see that?