Scientific Articles on Raw?

[~Tucker&Me~]

So when I go on google scholar, all I can find are studies portraying raw as dangerous and not beneficial. I like to encourage people to go raw and my dad is halfway there (tentatively now buying some raw on his own without my recommendations ), but it would be MUCH easier if there was evidence of its effects besides the words of people online lol. I can come up with study after study of salmonella risks and 'no proven benefits' but absolutely zero in support of it.

Does anyone know of any scientific articles examining the benefits of a raw diet?

[naturalfeddogs]

I don't know of any "scientific" studies done on raw, but for me, the very best evidense I have had has been all the results and benefits of my own dogs. Nothing better than seeing it for yourself for proof! When other people see my dogs, their teeth, their tiny sometimes white no smell poops, and super soft shiny coats it makes them think twice about raw.

[Dekka]

The issue with raw is that who will fund the studies? Dog food companies fund studies, but of course they are going to focus on why raw is bad, and why people should buy their food.

No one wants to fund raw studies as there is no commercial benefit.

[Southpaw]

Unfortunately I don't think they exist. That was the problem with my parents too... They wanted proof that it was a good, safe diet, but for them it wasn't enough to just read anecdotal evidence. And there was too much info from veterinarians and such claiming it was dangerous.

[AdrianneIsabel]

Originally Posted by Dekka

The issue with raw is that who will fund the studies? Dog food companies fund studies, but of course they are going to focus on why raw is bad, and why people should buy their food.

No one wants to fund raw studies as there is no commercial benefit.

This, it's frustrating but true.

[~Tucker&Me~]

Originally Posted by Dekka

The issue with raw is that who will fund the studies? Dog food companies fund studies, but of course they are going to focus on why raw is bad, and why people should buy their food.

No one wants to fund raw studies as there is no commercial benefit.

I assumed this was the case and I know most of the dog food anti-raw studies were funded by dog food companies. I suppose I was just hoping there was one or two out there I hadn't come across that were pro-raw.

Oh well

[SaraB]

Not very scientific but I did a survey last year of dane owners comparing kibble fed to raw fed danes (360 total) and the various health benefits.

Here's the link:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B70Q...CNu1hvkG&pli=1

[ravennr]

A Dr Kollath did a study in Sweden on pets that were fed a cooked or processed pet food over raw, and showed that the raw food had significant decreases in age progression and health degeneration, while the opposite was true for cooked and processed pet foods.

It is referred to very often, but I haven't been able to find a translated version of the study itself.

[~Tucker&Me~]

SaraB, that's interesting, thank you!

Hm, I will have to take a look for that Swedish one when I am done studying Thanks.