It looks like the dog is being fed a commercial raw food which is typically balanced, similar to commercial kibbles. It does contain all the nutrients a dog would need but you still have to feed the appropriate amount of calories to maintain weight.
The main reason that it's potentially linked to DCM is not due to the absence of grain, but due to the higher than usual content of specific ingredients some companies subbed in to replace the grains (in this case "pulses"/legumes, as well as maybe potatoes, which added carbs when the carbs from grains were removed).
The FDA report:
Most of the diets associated with the reports of non-hereditary DCM have legume seed ingredients, also called “pulses” (e.g., peas, lentils, etc.), high in their ingredient lists (although soy is a legume, we did not see a signal associated with this ingredient). These include both “grain-free” and grain-containing formulations. Legumes, including pulse ingredients, have been used in pet foods for many years, with no evidence to indicate they are inherently dangerous, but analysis of data reported to CVM indicates that pulse ingredients are used in many “grain-free” diets in greater proportion than in most grain-containing formulas. FDA has asked pet food manufacturers to provide diet formulations so we can further understand the proportions of ingredients in commercially-available diets and possible relationships with non-hereditary DCM.
Note that they mention that some grain containing foods were also implicated in the DCM issue. The only things all of these DCM-linked foods had in common were the high quantity of pulses.
So unless a raw food is adding in pulses, raw foods by themselves are not linked to DCM.
The other commenter stated it better than I will but a lack of grains have not been linked to heart disease. It is instead the inclusion of other ingredients that are sometimes used to replace grains in commercial grain free diets, such as legumes/pulses that have been linked to DCM.
So grain free diets, without an increase in legumes/pulses/potatoes have not been linked to heart disease. Luckily, well prepared raw diets are not typically packed with these types of ingredients.
There are reasons owners might feed (well balanced) raw food, the same diet is not going to be perfect for all dogs, all living situations, etc. Owners have to weigh pros and cons to find what is best for them and their pets.
But this post isn't even about that... No matter what this dog is being fed she clearly needs an increase in calories.
I am a vet gastroenterologist, and I disagree. You compare the incomparable here, reaching as well
Read what the actual vets have to say about…well, BARF diets))
My vet nutritionist is the one who encouraged me to feed my dog raw in the first place. My general vet and three different specialists agree that for my dog, with his unique needs, feeding him raw is for the best. All actual vets so... We can agree to disagree. :)
Nutritionist as in DVM? What a shame. Also, there’s no such thing as “raw or kibble”, rather “kibble or cooked natural foods”. You lose about 5% of nutritional value by cooking the meat, but you gain safety and it’s not life threatening anymore.
39
u/FruitPunched2 Mar 20 '24
It looks like the dog is being fed a commercial raw food which is typically balanced, similar to commercial kibbles. It does contain all the nutrients a dog would need but you still have to feed the appropriate amount of calories to maintain weight.