Dog meal with rice, meat and corn

Discussion in 'Dog Food' started by marieke, Mar 10, 2008.

  1. marieke New Member

    boil appr. 3 deciliters of water
    throw in the rice and add marrow bone
    depending on the size of the meat cubes add the meat too (smaller pieces, less cooking)
    if the rice has sucked up al the water before the rice and meat are done, add a little extra hot water
    throw in the corn in the last 5 minutes orso
    Make sure the rice sucks up all the water so you don't need to pour it out after the rice is done. That way you really preserve all nutrians and the marrow bone taste.

  2. leema New Member

    Sorry, there are a couple of reasons I wouldn't feed this:
    1. Not sure if the marrow bone is just for flavouring or is served with the meal, but marrow bones can shatter dog teeth, and so I don't feed them.
    2. Corn is a common allergen.
    3. Rice can cause the trots in dogs not used to it.

    I would just feed my dog the meat, RAW, and be done with it. :D Dogs get little value from grains or veggies. They're carnivores. They also don't cook their food in the wild. ;)

    If you intended this to be a snack, I'm sorry, but as a meal it is quite misbalanced.
  3. marieke New Member

    I take out the marrow bone after cooking becasue it's just for the taste. I didn't know about corn being an allergen though, it's an ingredient in many dog foods. And I never heard about rice not being good for dogs, lots of dog food contains rice. Sure you don't need to cook meat but Guus likes it when it's served still a bit warm.

    Of course dogs are carnivores but in the wild they do eat vegetables because they eat the stomic and it's contents of their prey.
  4. sarhaspups New Member

    They can not digest corn either. I will not give my dog kibble with corn in it , nor will I give them treats with corn. Just my opinion. Rice isn't bad and used many times when dogs have upset tummies. :)
    I'm not saying this isn't a good recipe for your dog but I do think that this shouldn't be meant as a meal. Marrow bones are great for them as a snack, raw.
  5. tango61 New Member

    I never knew that corn was bad for dogs...
    wow. But right now i give her a feed that is grain free... is that okay?
  6. lagomorphmonster New Member

    Grain free food is fine for your dog, as are food that contain corn or rice or oats. We've done this discussion many times, actually. Some dogs don't tolerate corn, and some dogs don't tolerate rice, just like some people get bloated when they eat grain (i.e. people with celiac disease), or some people can't have dairy (i.e. people with lactose intolerance) but that doesn't mean other people shouldn't eat those things.

    Don't believe everything you read on the internet - including this post. If you have doubts, ask your veterinarian, who actually have training in these subject matters, instead of any random person.
  7. leema New Member

    Apparently, vets don't spend much time studying nutrition and are almost sure to recommend products they sell.

    tango, what do you feed?
  8. lagomorphmonster New Member

    Hmm, vets might actually recommend things they sell because they believe they are good for your pets. I suppose it is possible for a vet to want to sell you rat poison, just to make your pets sick, and then he can charge you even more money to cure your pets....but I doubt it.

    I guess I don't understand why people think that vets recommending the foods that they sell are only in it for profit, but a pet store clerk trying to recommend foods they sell might somehow be more knowledgeable. Because most pet food shop clerks have been trained in nutrition? Because pet shop clerks care more about your dog's health than your vet? Because pet shop clerks have a colony of 100 dogs in their yard under double blind studies eating 10 different diets and they can tell who's healthier by chemically analyzing the poof everyday? What is the difference? Really?

    By the way, there are veterinary nutritionists, who are board certified specialists. Typically (in the US), that means they have been through 4 years of college, 4 years of veterinary school, then 1 year of internship, and 3 years of residency, then they must pass some rigorous test in their areas of specialty. If you think your pet has special needs, and you would like to consult a veterinary nutritionist, there is one veterinary school that offers consultation: There are others around of course, just that I don't have first hand information on their services.
  9. leema New Member

    Vets may believe that the products they sell are best. Pet stores may too. Or they may just be in it for profit. No one really knows and it depends on the store/vet in question.

    I am sure there are vets that have some nutritional qualifications. I was referring to the 'average' vet. To become a vet there is not much of a component regarding nutrition.
  10. Jean Cote Administrator

    Hi KrazyKaine3, I sympathize with you on commercial dog food... Just wondering, what do you feed your dog now? I'm still looking for better options for my dogs. :)
  11. sarhaspups New Member

    AMEN KrazyKaine!
  12. makakoa New Member

    The last post in this thread was extremely inflammatory and insulting. As a registered animal technician of 28 years, I am very offended by the comments made by "KrazyKaine."
    Making a blanket statement about the venality of veterinarians and staff is simply neither true nor appropriate to the tone of this forum.

    If KrazyKaine would like to have a calm and reasoned discussion about dog food, I would be happy to participate. Making unfounded and unreferenced statements about canine nutrition and the abilities and intentions of veterinarians and pet food manufacturers does not help our dogs or advance the knowledge of dog owners.

    Please, let's try to be courteous and open minded in these discussions.
  13. Jean Cote Administrator

    Hi Makakoa,

    Sorry that you felt offended, but I don't believe it was KrazyKaine's intention to offend anyone. I think she had a bad experience with commercial dog food and wanted to share it with us. :dogsleep:
  14. dat123 Experienced Member

    Well said, makakoa !

    On occassions there are information and facts given from a few that are unqualified opinions on important subjects , with no formal education in that area.

    Everyone should be open-minded and seek out several peoples opinions and research from other sources, professional and not, before acting on initial advice.
  15. snooks Experienced Member

    Respectfully I don't think feeding this and nothing else meets canine nutritional requirements as outlined by the AAFCO. If it were part of a 2-3 day meal pattern that did include the missing nutrients that would be different. Alone though it's lacking some crucial ingredients.

    First I don’t see a source of calcium or phosphorous other than the bone which is removed and therefore inadequate calcium and phos. Second I don’t see any good fatty acids and other nutrients. Just protein and corn. Or protein and sugar.

    Diabetic humans don't eat corn (unless very small amounts which they must offset to digest slower by eating non saturated fats and protein with it) because corn is a carb that converts straight to sugar. It does for your dog too. High fructose corn syrup used in most candy and high calorie sugary snacks obviously comes from corn. It is a cheap filler so a lot of dog food companies with profit minded bottom lines use it as the indigestible part of the dog food to make it look like it's a good filling meal. It's sweet and dogs have a sweet tooth so they like it. If you took the corn out what is left would be a small amount and your dog would not FEEL full at all.

    Comparitively diet breads for humans contain cellulose which is wood. Humans are not capable of digesting wood because we lack the metabolism of a termite so we get no calories from it. We fill full with less food-however at the expense to our liver, kidneys, adrenal system, intestines which must then process what is a toxin (since we can't use it) out of our systems. The same goes for your dog but he weights a fraction of what you do so the impact to his system is bigger. Imaging feeding your kids sugar all the time. yow!

    Vets despite their intelligence don't all specialize in nutrition, some do oncology, some orthopedic surgery, and some are highly educated on canine nutrition. Many also receive Science Diet (corn based) for a discount and do make a profit selling it. Therefore they stay in business and help more animals. Are they bad or wrong? Not nec. But there are only so many things one doctor can specialize in and most of them are not nutritionists.

    What happens to a diabetic human after years of high blood sugar is organ damage, organ failure, and early death. Feeding high glycemic carbs like corn to your dog is like putting him in a permanent state of diabetes, followed by digestion and a sugar crash, then up again. It's very difficult to decipher a dog food nutrition label because the companies make it hard to sound better to humans. Humans buy it and are sold on it after all. Only in the last few years are companies putting consumer decipherable best by dates on the bags.

    Dogs don't need or get much if any nutritional value from grains. Brown rice particularly is very hard for them to digest. White rice is easier but then you go back to the realm of higher glycemic carbohydrates(sugar). Is all this okay for some dogs sure, but the fewer ingredients that are not directly contributing to nutrition like preservatives, filler, beef digest (the contents of the rumen and colon that is not cleaned, antibiotics, growth hormone etc the better the chance your dog will not have a reaction or develop disease because of it. In this case less is better. Many foods contain wheat and corn gluten which are by-products of processing or trash and it is not removed but left in to be more cost effective and get a higher volume/cost ratio.

    Any food that has to add vitamins or fortify is the best food either because the nutrition is not coming from the primary ingredients. They are added as non-natural supplements and are therefore underutilized or not metabolized by the body. Same reason it's better to get vitamins naturally from your food than take synthetic pill replacements. That's why humans should eat their veggies not just eat pills. There is an ongoing debate on just what percentage of synthetic nutrients a body is able to utilize. Certainly it's less than 100%, so whatever it says on the bag of food not all of it is metabolized.

    Check the AAFCO guidelines for dog nutrition if you want to come closer to balancing your dog's diet with the proper nutrients. Though it's not perfect and a canine nutritionist would be better; it is readily available. The most common allergens are actually chemical preservatives and non-dairy proteins.

    Less processing is better since less nutrients are chemically altered by cooking/processing and rendered ineffective. Kibble is the most highly processed, canned a little less, home cooked if done right better, and raw least processed. The last two because you control all the ingredients are purest with no preservatives, inedible parts, digest/poop, contaminants like melamine which killed 1000's of dogs and cats around 2005-6, carcinogenic preservatives like ethoxyquin and cyanuric acid. Only in the last two years did dog food companies start disclosing their ingredient sources or even testing for contaminants. Ingredients came mostly from countries where quality control did not exist thus were cheaper.

    Most kibble protein source animals like cow are grain fed (much cheaper/pound to raise) their meat is much lower in healthy fatty acids which grass fed cattle are naturally rich in. Omega 3,6,9 fatty acids are necessary for cardiovacular health. So if you can buy grass fed beef/buffalo etc do so for you and your pets. If the company voluntarily discloses this all the better.

    That said without some education on balancing a raw diet, especially the protein, fat, calcium, and phosphorous for a growing puppy, you can seriously damage your dogs bones and health. In that case a kibble might be better because a totally uneducated raw feeder could cause worse long term health problems than a kibble feeder which does at least come closer to nutritional standards required by law. It's all in what you want to put into it ingredient and research wise.

    I am still researching raw after a year and it's not an easy thing considering the life of my dog and her years with me are a direct result of my competence. It's a little scary. If you are unsure ask a nutritionist. I believe someone here named UC DAVIS, perfect.
  16. samualjack New Member

    Thanxs snooks it is really a good info.
  17. parlance Well-Known Member

    This is an an interesting discussion. I think makakoa makes a good point that we can't say vets are only interested in promoting commercial food. My vet is a highly trained professional who really cares about dogs and all the animals he deals with.

    He sells packaged food, and I'm sure it would be most inconvenient for him to set up refrigerators and storage for raw food. He also sells packaged food because he thinks it is good for the dogs.

    On the other hand...I, like krazykaine, want to feed my dog mostly raw food, because I believe that is the best for her. That's my choice, and if I make that choice I believe it have a duty to inform myself IN DEPTH as to what food will keep her healthy.

    So I guess I'm saying that I think there's right on both sides of the pet-food debate.

    Another thing that massively influences me is that I don't trust the origin of many commercial ingredients. I live at the absolute end of the earth compared to the American continent or to Europe, yet we have exactly the same problems with multi-national companies and their inability to make sure the sources of their petfood are safe and ethical.

Share This Page

Real Time Analytics