Post by Sherry on Jan 8, 2013 10:31:22 GMT -5
www.rawessentials.co.nz/media/documents/Evidence-Based%20Medicine.pdf
EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE
THE TRUE SCIENCE BEHIND RAW FEEDING
LYN THOMSON (BVSC DIPHOM) & ANNA MAIR (BVSC, GDIPTCHG)
AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND
~
Introduction
In this era of evidence-based medicine, a criticism that is often levelled at
raw-feeding a species-appropriate, prey-based diet to pets, is that there is a
lack of scientific research to support the practice. The purpose of this
document is to highlight the research that supports feeding pets their
evolutionary diet. The research covers three important aspects of feeding a
raw prey based diet:
- The nutrient content of raw food.
- The non-nutritive aspects of raw food (including dental health and
behavioural enrichment).
- Food safety issues or raw-feeding (for human and pet health).
It is imperative that we define the nutrient profiles of cats and dogs based
on current evidence, but we should look further than just nutrient profiles
and include the non-nutritive aspects of food. Finally, the evidence
available must support the safety of a raw food diet for pets and their
owners.
Defining Nutrient Profiles
Outlined below is a brief history of the challenges in defining nutrient
profiles for cats and dogs. The National Research Council (NRC) of the
United States National Academy of Science, and the Association of
American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) are the two most influential
bodies when it comes to feeding domestic cats and dogs.(1)
Since the 1940’s, the NRC have released reports on the nutrient
requirements of cats and dogs, based on available literature and research.
The reports have been updated as new research has come to light. The
NRC receives no direct funding for the reports, and is dependent on
sponsorship to fund the reports.1
AAFCO was formed in 1909 to establish a framework for uniform
regulation of the feed industry. Although not a government agency, it
operates within the guidelines of federal and state legislation, including
laws administered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).1
While companion animals are the ultimate beneficiary of the NRC
guidelines, the pet food industry is the key user of the reports. There is
currently a very legitimate and real concern about how to maintain the
high standard and objectivity of the NRC guidelines in the face of the
potential tensions of the pet food industry.
The NRC guidelines assume that availability and digestibility of nutrients
is uncompromised.1 Unfortunately, due to the nature of the raw materials
used in the commercial production of pet food, this assumption does not
hold true. As a result, pet food manufacturers concluded that the NRC
recommendations could not be used in a manufacturing environment.1 To
resolve this, in the early 1990’s, AAFCO formed the Canine and Feline
Nutrition Expert Subcommittees. These subcommittees comprised
representatives from the pet food industry and academia, and were
chaired by a representative of the FDA.1 They provided industry, and
industry regulators, with a vehicle for translating the NRC
recommendations into a set of practical guidelines which better suited the
pet food industry. These guidelines made life easier for the manufacturer.
AAFCO has accepted some of the NRC’s recommendations, but certainly
not all. These guidelines have not been reviewed since the 1990’s
In 2006 the NRC published an update of recommendations for cats and
dogs.1 The 2006 document represents a substantial improvement from
previous guidelines but has become an expensive document to produce;
severely limiting its outreach. It would certainly appear that AAFCO have
not taken note of the most recent nutritional research.
To summarise, AAFCO provides some basic nutritional guidelines; a
rough framework to build upon. The guidelines are very much concerned
with the practicalities of making pet food from a vast array of low quality
ingredients. They are minimum requirements, not optimal requirements.
AAFCO acknowledge the NRC guidelines, but do not uphold them. In
the words of Quinton Rogers (DVM, PhD), one of the AAFCO panel
experts,
“although the AAFCO profiles are better than nothing, they provide false
securities. I don’t know of any studies showing their adequacies or
inadequacies.” 1
Based on available nutritional science, it is best to take the AAFCO
profiles as a starting point. These profiles are well-established minimal
nutritional requirements of cats and dogs. Meeting a minimum
requirement is important for the pet food industry. However, optimising
our pets’ nutrition is essential for improving their health and wellbeing.
The Nutritive and Non-Nutritive Aspects of Food
We feel it is important to recognise food as not only having a nutrient
profile, but also as having a form and function appropriate to the species
being fed. The literature contains numerous references to the food habits
of feral carnivores and therefore the appropriate nutrient profile is readily
available.2 It is important to meet a minimum nutrient profile using
species-appropriate food - minimally processed and fed in a physical form
that meets a pet’s behavioural, needs and enriches their lives.
We are concerned with the nutritive and non-nutritive aspects of an
evolutionary diet of whole prey for cats and dogs. Our recommended raw
feeding regimes are based on the following research.
Ellen Dierenfield’s report4 on the nutrient composition of whole vertebrate
prey shows that a whole prey diet is more than adequate to meet the needs
of our carnivorous pets. The report discusses the nutrient composition of
prey species, focussing on the differences in composition of particular prey
species, with age, and sex and nutrient intake of the prey species itself.
The report confirms that whole prey, as long as the soft tissues and some
bones are consumed, meet all the nutrient requirements of carnivores, and
at the same time enhance and positively influence behaviour.4
The report covers water, protein, fat, ash, fat soluble vitamins, macrominerals
and trace minerals, and suggests that the diet consumed by the
prey species should be carefully assessed with respect to nutrient content,
interactions and persistence in tissues. The value of the prey species is
dependent on what the prey species consumes. Wild sourced prey are
likely to be more nutrient dense than farmed prey.4 Based upon current
research the study concludes that supplementation of whole prey-based
diets appears unwarranted.4
It is also important that we recognise the impact of diet on the psychology
and dental health of all of our pets. In the words of veterinarian Dr Jon
Lumley:
“you do not need a degree in nutrition to evaluate the effects of raw bones
on a dog’s dentition – in fact, it appears that the qualification would be a
serious disadvantage!” 3
Improved appetites, longer periods spent feeding and greater
possessiveness of food were noted in captive cheetahs fed a carcass based
diet.5. The study notes that processed foods lack the ‘hassle factor’ and as a
result of eating them animals suffer tooth decay, dental pathologies,
muscle atrophy and poor health.5 The study references Fagan’s 1980
presentation to the American Association of Zoo Vets (6) where the ‘hassle factor’ is defined. Dr Fagan, Zoo Veterinary Dental Consultant,
states
“it is possible to do something immediately and significantly to minimise
oral problems in (captive exotic) carnivores. That ‘something’ is to reevaluate
their diet. Animals need more ‘hassle factor’ per mouthful of
nutrients. The best kept secret of the last fifty years is that we must
eliminate the pre-processed, the overcooked, the smashed, the blended and
the pureed foods and feed our animals a more appropriate diet,
duplicating the feeding habits of feral conditions.” 6
For the last eighty years we have ignored the literature with respect to oral
disease in our pet carnivores.
The study concludes that a more natural diet (for example carcasses)
better meets the psychological as well as nutritional needs, by taking into
account diet consistency, texture, temperature, palatability and
variability.5 Non-nutritive factors should be considered when feeding
carnivores. Consumption of whole prey provides for a relatively high
intake of raw animal derived fermentative substances which may enhance
gut health, stimulate growth of microbial commensals and optimise
immune function in a very different way from heat treated, largely plant
derived processed foods.7
Recent studies have shown that changes in the macronutrient content of
the diet alters faecal microbial populations in the domestic cat.8 Cats have
evolved as strict carnivores with little or no carbohydrate in their diet. Dry
processed diets, with low protein to carbohydrate ratio have been linked to
obesity in cats. Emerging evidence suggest that microbiota are critical to
the development of obesity8,9 and shifts in the faecal microbiota may be as
a result of an increased carbohydrate load entering the large intestine due
to the low protein:carbohydrate ratio in the dry diets.9 Emerging science
continues to support the importance of the evolutionary diet of the
domestic cat.
Food Safety Issues
An increasingly global and complex pet food supply chain further
complicates the already substantial challenge of assuring pet food safety.
This is a shared concern applying to commercially prepared petfoods, raw
food diets and home prepared diets.10 As increasing numbers of consumers
rely on commercially produced pet foods, the potential impacts of hazards
associated with the manufacture, distribution and use of pet foods is
amplified. Common sourcing of ingredients (from a global supply chain)
and increased size of production lots lead to escalating problems.
Documented problems include: chemical contaminants in food (melamine
and cyanuric acid), high levels of aflatoxins due to improper sourcing of
ingredients, botulism in improperly canned dog food, and several recent
bouts of salmonellosis directly linked to contamination of dry pet foods
and pet treats. Microbiological issues are often traced back to the use of
contaminated raw materials, typically grains such as peanut flour.
Managing Salmonella in the production of dry pet food can be very
challenging, as many of the raw materials are naturally contaminated.
The most prevalent argument against raw feeding is to do with food safety
as it pertains to both humans and pets. Earlier this year the American
Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) released a statement regarding
raw-feeding.11 They referenced several studies which suggested that raw
protein sources may be contaminated with pathogenic organisms, and that
pets may develop clinical illness from these organisms. They also stated
that cats and dogs with either clinical illness, or subclinical infection are a
health risk to other animals and humans. They concluded with a
recommendation to (in the interests of public health) avoid feeding raw
food (inadequately treated animal-source protein) to cats and dogs.
Certainly food safety must be considered as a potential hazard when
dealing with raw animal protein, and given the numbers of pet owners
feeding their cats and dogs raw food the Veterinary profession would be
wise to establish guidelines to educate owners about harm reduction.
Instead, the AVMA released a blanket statement advising against any
kind of raw feeding. This is unhelpful to a large number of pet owners,
and only serves to marginalise them.
Upon examining the references, (which we discuss in greater detail in a
separate document) on which the statement is based, one could be
forgiven for feeling somewhat confused as to what the AVMA believes constitutes evidence-based policy. Many of the conclusions drawn were
only very loosely based on study results, if at all.
The AVMA have been questioned about their motivations for this policy
when there is currently a relatively much greater problem regarding
contamination of processed foods, and the known incidences of human
illness caused by these foods (“raw pet foods comprise approximately less than
1% of the pet food market” 12). Dr David M. Chico, chair of the AVMA
Council on Public Health and Regulatory Veterinary Medicine,
acknowledged that there are concerns regarding commercial processed
foods. The reason he gave for addressing raw food rather than processed
were that “the council had simply dealt first with issues connected with raw
meats.” 12
Conclusion
A thorough search of the literature reveals the depth of nutritional
information available to us as veterinarians. The literature shows the
importance of a minimal nutrient profile being a starting point for the
selection of an optimal diet for domestic pets, and confirms the
importance of the diet being presented in a physical and functional form
that meets the physiological and psychological needs of our companion
animals. Food safety is confirmed as an issue affecting the global supply
chain of pet food and an issue which must be addressed by all pet food
manufacturers. In this era of evidence-based medicine, the current and
emerging science supports the feeding of a raw prey-based, speciesappropriate
diet, to domesticated carnivores for optimal health and
wellbeing.
References
(1) Butterwick, R.F., Erdman Jr., J. W., Hill, R. C., Lewis, A. J., &
Whittemore, C. T. (2011). Challenges in developing nutrient guidelines
for companion animals. British Journal of Nutrition. 106, S24-S31.
doi:doi:10.1017/S000711451100184X
(2) Landry, S. M. (1979) Food habits of feral carnivores: A review of
stomach content analysis. Journal of American Animal Hospital
Association. 15:6, P. 775-782
(3) Lumley, J. (1993, August). Raw meaty bones: Cats and dogs. Control
and Therapy Series, Series 25, 3406, 556. Retrieved from
www.cve.edu.au/elibrary/article/3579
(4) Dierenfeld, E. S., Alcorn, H. L., & Jacobsen, K. L. (2002).
Nutrient composition of whole vertebrate prey (excluding fish) fed in zoos.
Published by: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, National Agricultural Library, Animal Welfare Retrieved
from purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS80845
(5) Bond, C.J., & Lindburg, D.G. (1990) Carcass feeding of captive
cheetahs(Acinonyx jubatus): the effects of a naturalistic feeding program on
oral health and psychological well-being. Applied Animal Behaviour
Science, 26, 373-382.
(6) Fagan, D.A. (1980) Diet consistency and periodontal disease in exotic
carnivores. Proceedings of the Conference of the American
Association of Zoo Veterinarians, Washington, DC, 34-37.
Retrieved from www.colyerinstitute.org/pdf/diet.pdf
(7) Plantinga, E. A., Bosch, G., & Hendriks, W. H. (2011). Estimation
of the dietary nutrient profile of free-roaming feral cats: possible
implications for nutrition of domestic cats. British Journal of Nutrition,
106, S35-S48. doi:10.1017/S0007114511002285
(8) Bermingham, E. N., Kittelmann, S., Henderson, G., Young, W.,
Roy, N.C., & Thomas, D.G. (2011). Five-week dietary exposure to
dry diets alters the faecal bacterial populations in the domestic cat (Felis
catus). British Journal of Nutrition, 106, S49-S52.
doi:10.1017/S0007114511000572
(9) The Economist (2012, August 18). The human microbiome - Me,
myself, us - Looking at human beings as ecosystems that contain many
collaborating and competing species could change the practice of medicine.
The Economist, , 62-64. Retrieved from
www.economist.com/node/21560523
(10) Buchanan, R.L., Baker, R.C., Charlton, A.J., Riviere, J.E., &
Standaert, R. (2011). Pet food safety: a shared concern. British
Journal of Nutrition, 106, S78-S84.
doi:10.1017/S0007114511005034
(11) American Veterinary Medical Association (2012, July). Raw or
Undercooked Animal-Source Protein in Cat and Dog Diets. Retrieved
from www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Pages/Raw-or-
Undercooked-Animal-Source-Protein-in-Cat-and-Dog-Diets.aspx
(12) American Veterinary Medical Association (2012, 28 August).
Raw Pet Foods and the AVMA’s Policy. Frequently Asked Questions
About. Retrieved from
www.avma.org/KB/Resources/FAQs/Pages/Raw-Pet-
Foods-and-the-AVMA-Policy-FAQ.aspx
(13) American Veterinary Medical Association (2012, 15
September). Raw food policy draws debate. Journal of the American
Veterinary Medical Association News. Retrieved from
www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/120915q.as
px
EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE
THE TRUE SCIENCE BEHIND RAW FEEDING
LYN THOMSON (BVSC DIPHOM) & ANNA MAIR (BVSC, GDIPTCHG)
AUCKLAND, NEW ZEALAND
~
Introduction
In this era of evidence-based medicine, a criticism that is often levelled at
raw-feeding a species-appropriate, prey-based diet to pets, is that there is a
lack of scientific research to support the practice. The purpose of this
document is to highlight the research that supports feeding pets their
evolutionary diet. The research covers three important aspects of feeding a
raw prey based diet:
- The nutrient content of raw food.
- The non-nutritive aspects of raw food (including dental health and
behavioural enrichment).
- Food safety issues or raw-feeding (for human and pet health).
It is imperative that we define the nutrient profiles of cats and dogs based
on current evidence, but we should look further than just nutrient profiles
and include the non-nutritive aspects of food. Finally, the evidence
available must support the safety of a raw food diet for pets and their
owners.
Defining Nutrient Profiles
Outlined below is a brief history of the challenges in defining nutrient
profiles for cats and dogs. The National Research Council (NRC) of the
United States National Academy of Science, and the Association of
American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) are the two most influential
bodies when it comes to feeding domestic cats and dogs.(1)
Since the 1940’s, the NRC have released reports on the nutrient
requirements of cats and dogs, based on available literature and research.
The reports have been updated as new research has come to light. The
NRC receives no direct funding for the reports, and is dependent on
sponsorship to fund the reports.1
AAFCO was formed in 1909 to establish a framework for uniform
regulation of the feed industry. Although not a government agency, it
operates within the guidelines of federal and state legislation, including
laws administered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).1
While companion animals are the ultimate beneficiary of the NRC
guidelines, the pet food industry is the key user of the reports. There is
currently a very legitimate and real concern about how to maintain the
high standard and objectivity of the NRC guidelines in the face of the
potential tensions of the pet food industry.
The NRC guidelines assume that availability and digestibility of nutrients
is uncompromised.1 Unfortunately, due to the nature of the raw materials
used in the commercial production of pet food, this assumption does not
hold true. As a result, pet food manufacturers concluded that the NRC
recommendations could not be used in a manufacturing environment.1 To
resolve this, in the early 1990’s, AAFCO formed the Canine and Feline
Nutrition Expert Subcommittees. These subcommittees comprised
representatives from the pet food industry and academia, and were
chaired by a representative of the FDA.1 They provided industry, and
industry regulators, with a vehicle for translating the NRC
recommendations into a set of practical guidelines which better suited the
pet food industry. These guidelines made life easier for the manufacturer.
AAFCO has accepted some of the NRC’s recommendations, but certainly
not all. These guidelines have not been reviewed since the 1990’s
In 2006 the NRC published an update of recommendations for cats and
dogs.1 The 2006 document represents a substantial improvement from
previous guidelines but has become an expensive document to produce;
severely limiting its outreach. It would certainly appear that AAFCO have
not taken note of the most recent nutritional research.
To summarise, AAFCO provides some basic nutritional guidelines; a
rough framework to build upon. The guidelines are very much concerned
with the practicalities of making pet food from a vast array of low quality
ingredients. They are minimum requirements, not optimal requirements.
AAFCO acknowledge the NRC guidelines, but do not uphold them. In
the words of Quinton Rogers (DVM, PhD), one of the AAFCO panel
experts,
“although the AAFCO profiles are better than nothing, they provide false
securities. I don’t know of any studies showing their adequacies or
inadequacies.” 1
Based on available nutritional science, it is best to take the AAFCO
profiles as a starting point. These profiles are well-established minimal
nutritional requirements of cats and dogs. Meeting a minimum
requirement is important for the pet food industry. However, optimising
our pets’ nutrition is essential for improving their health and wellbeing.
The Nutritive and Non-Nutritive Aspects of Food
We feel it is important to recognise food as not only having a nutrient
profile, but also as having a form and function appropriate to the species
being fed. The literature contains numerous references to the food habits
of feral carnivores and therefore the appropriate nutrient profile is readily
available.2 It is important to meet a minimum nutrient profile using
species-appropriate food - minimally processed and fed in a physical form
that meets a pet’s behavioural, needs and enriches their lives.
We are concerned with the nutritive and non-nutritive aspects of an
evolutionary diet of whole prey for cats and dogs. Our recommended raw
feeding regimes are based on the following research.
Ellen Dierenfield’s report4 on the nutrient composition of whole vertebrate
prey shows that a whole prey diet is more than adequate to meet the needs
of our carnivorous pets. The report discusses the nutrient composition of
prey species, focussing on the differences in composition of particular prey
species, with age, and sex and nutrient intake of the prey species itself.
The report confirms that whole prey, as long as the soft tissues and some
bones are consumed, meet all the nutrient requirements of carnivores, and
at the same time enhance and positively influence behaviour.4
The report covers water, protein, fat, ash, fat soluble vitamins, macrominerals
and trace minerals, and suggests that the diet consumed by the
prey species should be carefully assessed with respect to nutrient content,
interactions and persistence in tissues. The value of the prey species is
dependent on what the prey species consumes. Wild sourced prey are
likely to be more nutrient dense than farmed prey.4 Based upon current
research the study concludes that supplementation of whole prey-based
diets appears unwarranted.4
It is also important that we recognise the impact of diet on the psychology
and dental health of all of our pets. In the words of veterinarian Dr Jon
Lumley:
“you do not need a degree in nutrition to evaluate the effects of raw bones
on a dog’s dentition – in fact, it appears that the qualification would be a
serious disadvantage!” 3
Improved appetites, longer periods spent feeding and greater
possessiveness of food were noted in captive cheetahs fed a carcass based
diet.5. The study notes that processed foods lack the ‘hassle factor’ and as a
result of eating them animals suffer tooth decay, dental pathologies,
muscle atrophy and poor health.5 The study references Fagan’s 1980
presentation to the American Association of Zoo Vets (6) where the ‘hassle factor’ is defined. Dr Fagan, Zoo Veterinary Dental Consultant,
states
“it is possible to do something immediately and significantly to minimise
oral problems in (captive exotic) carnivores. That ‘something’ is to reevaluate
their diet. Animals need more ‘hassle factor’ per mouthful of
nutrients. The best kept secret of the last fifty years is that we must
eliminate the pre-processed, the overcooked, the smashed, the blended and
the pureed foods and feed our animals a more appropriate diet,
duplicating the feeding habits of feral conditions.” 6
For the last eighty years we have ignored the literature with respect to oral
disease in our pet carnivores.
The study concludes that a more natural diet (for example carcasses)
better meets the psychological as well as nutritional needs, by taking into
account diet consistency, texture, temperature, palatability and
variability.5 Non-nutritive factors should be considered when feeding
carnivores. Consumption of whole prey provides for a relatively high
intake of raw animal derived fermentative substances which may enhance
gut health, stimulate growth of microbial commensals and optimise
immune function in a very different way from heat treated, largely plant
derived processed foods.7
Recent studies have shown that changes in the macronutrient content of
the diet alters faecal microbial populations in the domestic cat.8 Cats have
evolved as strict carnivores with little or no carbohydrate in their diet. Dry
processed diets, with low protein to carbohydrate ratio have been linked to
obesity in cats. Emerging evidence suggest that microbiota are critical to
the development of obesity8,9 and shifts in the faecal microbiota may be as
a result of an increased carbohydrate load entering the large intestine due
to the low protein:carbohydrate ratio in the dry diets.9 Emerging science
continues to support the importance of the evolutionary diet of the
domestic cat.
Food Safety Issues
An increasingly global and complex pet food supply chain further
complicates the already substantial challenge of assuring pet food safety.
This is a shared concern applying to commercially prepared petfoods, raw
food diets and home prepared diets.10 As increasing numbers of consumers
rely on commercially produced pet foods, the potential impacts of hazards
associated with the manufacture, distribution and use of pet foods is
amplified. Common sourcing of ingredients (from a global supply chain)
and increased size of production lots lead to escalating problems.
Documented problems include: chemical contaminants in food (melamine
and cyanuric acid), high levels of aflatoxins due to improper sourcing of
ingredients, botulism in improperly canned dog food, and several recent
bouts of salmonellosis directly linked to contamination of dry pet foods
and pet treats. Microbiological issues are often traced back to the use of
contaminated raw materials, typically grains such as peanut flour.
Managing Salmonella in the production of dry pet food can be very
challenging, as many of the raw materials are naturally contaminated.
The most prevalent argument against raw feeding is to do with food safety
as it pertains to both humans and pets. Earlier this year the American
Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) released a statement regarding
raw-feeding.11 They referenced several studies which suggested that raw
protein sources may be contaminated with pathogenic organisms, and that
pets may develop clinical illness from these organisms. They also stated
that cats and dogs with either clinical illness, or subclinical infection are a
health risk to other animals and humans. They concluded with a
recommendation to (in the interests of public health) avoid feeding raw
food (inadequately treated animal-source protein) to cats and dogs.
Certainly food safety must be considered as a potential hazard when
dealing with raw animal protein, and given the numbers of pet owners
feeding their cats and dogs raw food the Veterinary profession would be
wise to establish guidelines to educate owners about harm reduction.
Instead, the AVMA released a blanket statement advising against any
kind of raw feeding. This is unhelpful to a large number of pet owners,
and only serves to marginalise them.
Upon examining the references, (which we discuss in greater detail in a
separate document) on which the statement is based, one could be
forgiven for feeling somewhat confused as to what the AVMA believes constitutes evidence-based policy. Many of the conclusions drawn were
only very loosely based on study results, if at all.
The AVMA have been questioned about their motivations for this policy
when there is currently a relatively much greater problem regarding
contamination of processed foods, and the known incidences of human
illness caused by these foods (“raw pet foods comprise approximately less than
1% of the pet food market” 12). Dr David M. Chico, chair of the AVMA
Council on Public Health and Regulatory Veterinary Medicine,
acknowledged that there are concerns regarding commercial processed
foods. The reason he gave for addressing raw food rather than processed
were that “the council had simply dealt first with issues connected with raw
meats.” 12
Conclusion
A thorough search of the literature reveals the depth of nutritional
information available to us as veterinarians. The literature shows the
importance of a minimal nutrient profile being a starting point for the
selection of an optimal diet for domestic pets, and confirms the
importance of the diet being presented in a physical and functional form
that meets the physiological and psychological needs of our companion
animals. Food safety is confirmed as an issue affecting the global supply
chain of pet food and an issue which must be addressed by all pet food
manufacturers. In this era of evidence-based medicine, the current and
emerging science supports the feeding of a raw prey-based, speciesappropriate
diet, to domesticated carnivores for optimal health and
wellbeing.
References
(1) Butterwick, R.F., Erdman Jr., J. W., Hill, R. C., Lewis, A. J., &
Whittemore, C. T. (2011). Challenges in developing nutrient guidelines
for companion animals. British Journal of Nutrition. 106, S24-S31.
doi:doi:10.1017/S000711451100184X
(2) Landry, S. M. (1979) Food habits of feral carnivores: A review of
stomach content analysis. Journal of American Animal Hospital
Association. 15:6, P. 775-782
(3) Lumley, J. (1993, August). Raw meaty bones: Cats and dogs. Control
and Therapy Series, Series 25, 3406, 556. Retrieved from
www.cve.edu.au/elibrary/article/3579
(4) Dierenfeld, E. S., Alcorn, H. L., & Jacobsen, K. L. (2002).
Nutrient composition of whole vertebrate prey (excluding fish) fed in zoos.
Published by: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Research
Service, National Agricultural Library, Animal Welfare Retrieved
from purl.access.gpo.gov/GPO/LPS80845
(5) Bond, C.J., & Lindburg, D.G. (1990) Carcass feeding of captive
cheetahs(Acinonyx jubatus): the effects of a naturalistic feeding program on
oral health and psychological well-being. Applied Animal Behaviour
Science, 26, 373-382.
(6) Fagan, D.A. (1980) Diet consistency and periodontal disease in exotic
carnivores. Proceedings of the Conference of the American
Association of Zoo Veterinarians, Washington, DC, 34-37.
Retrieved from www.colyerinstitute.org/pdf/diet.pdf
(7) Plantinga, E. A., Bosch, G., & Hendriks, W. H. (2011). Estimation
of the dietary nutrient profile of free-roaming feral cats: possible
implications for nutrition of domestic cats. British Journal of Nutrition,
106, S35-S48. doi:10.1017/S0007114511002285
(8) Bermingham, E. N., Kittelmann, S., Henderson, G., Young, W.,
Roy, N.C., & Thomas, D.G. (2011). Five-week dietary exposure to
dry diets alters the faecal bacterial populations in the domestic cat (Felis
catus). British Journal of Nutrition, 106, S49-S52.
doi:10.1017/S0007114511000572
(9) The Economist (2012, August 18). The human microbiome - Me,
myself, us - Looking at human beings as ecosystems that contain many
collaborating and competing species could change the practice of medicine.
The Economist, , 62-64. Retrieved from
www.economist.com/node/21560523
(10) Buchanan, R.L., Baker, R.C., Charlton, A.J., Riviere, J.E., &
Standaert, R. (2011). Pet food safety: a shared concern. British
Journal of Nutrition, 106, S78-S84.
doi:10.1017/S0007114511005034
(11) American Veterinary Medical Association (2012, July). Raw or
Undercooked Animal-Source Protein in Cat and Dog Diets. Retrieved
from www.avma.org/KB/Policies/Pages/Raw-or-
Undercooked-Animal-Source-Protein-in-Cat-and-Dog-Diets.aspx
(12) American Veterinary Medical Association (2012, 28 August).
Raw Pet Foods and the AVMA’s Policy. Frequently Asked Questions
About. Retrieved from
www.avma.org/KB/Resources/FAQs/Pages/Raw-Pet-
Foods-and-the-AVMA-Policy-FAQ.aspx
(13) American Veterinary Medical Association (2012, 15
September). Raw food policy draws debate. Journal of the American
Veterinary Medical Association News. Retrieved from
www.avma.org/News/JAVMANews/Pages/120915q.as
px