I know numerous people who are very holistic who feed deer and other wild game.
They do not vaccinate, use nutrition for healing along with homeopathy and ABF remedies, etc.
Despite Irene’s cautions, they feed and promote raw, species appropriate diets, organic as best
possible. There success is mirrored thru generations of dogs that are extremely healthy for long
years.
t
From: J
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2013 3:42 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Cc: mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] dogs
I feed my dog mostly deer meat and he is extremely healthy
Julie
Sent from my iPhone
dogs
-
Julie Armour
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:00 pm
-
Irene de Villiers
- Posts: 3237
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 10:00 pm
Re: dogs
The oldest evidence I found was 12,000 years - article here:
http://www.usfca.edu/fac-staff/dever/dog_evo.pdf
But I can believe it may be longer.
Evolution is slow though, in nature. It takes about 50,000 generations to effect a standard deviation that is significant.
Under selective breeding by humans it is different - art least for polygene effects. Those account for the differences of "intensity" of characteristics - such as size, length etc. and thus the difference btween a chihuahua and a great dane.
But other genes called major genes, code for specific discrete tings, sich as for example an enzyme needed for digestion which is either there or not there- it is not an amount issue.
SO while dogs can vary a lot under human sleection criteria the variation is not basic enough to affect their overall metabolism. Dogs hvae indeed developed some TOLERANCE fro toxins that sows morein some breeds than others. Fore example, Siberian Huskies are closer to the wild dog genetically than many other breeds, and the result is their tolerance to toxibs is much less. Vets must accoutn for this in using drugs or anesthetics, and they can tiolerate less food toxins as well.
SO when you think that it is okay to feed yor dog humnan fgood instead of food the dog can actually use for health, it is not really a good idea. Being able to TOLERATE somethig is nbot anywhere like the same as being able to BENEFIT form it - or even to be neutral.
It is the same with cats - their small intestine is actually a little bit longer than it used to be before domestication - except in the newer breeds like Bengals, Savannahs etc who are closer to the wild genetics. These latter cats get sick and succumb to human toxins sooner..but they all succumb.
SO the wrong food does not do dogs or cats any GOOD - some of them tolerate it better than others without visible symptoms though it will destroy their kidneys over time. (Can also cause liver failu\re depending on RATE of toxin feeding.) It is not for nothing that domestic dogs and cats have chronic kidney disease/failure as the leading medical cause of death. It is from all the forced incorrect food.
"Tolerated" food is not beneficial. Kidneys have 75% overdesign at birth but if you feed wrong food all the time becasue it LOOKS like the dog eats it and does not drop dead immediately - that does not mean it is good food. The kidneys gradually get damaged till they fail.
Would YOU knowingly eat toxins daily rather than known beneficial food?
Why should your dog or cat be different?
But is that a fair thing to encourage?
It is possible but unlikely. Their prey however, would likely have contained grains in the gut of the prey, so the would be exposed to grain proteins/DNA.
NOt really possible.
Food has to be digested, not just swallowed. Either the ability to digest it is there, or it is not. Prey of dogs are not likely to be eating sweet potato.
When the food can not be digested, the most it can do is to feed the gut bacteria. That is a relevant thing but it does NOT provide calories or protein etc to the dog. It is relevant becasue in the case of sweet potato the gut bacteria can extract carotene which the dog can absorb, and dogs need carotene for the immuen system cells in the gut area. But there are other componenets that are toxic in sweet potato. A very tiny amount therefore can provide the needed carotene via the gut bactgeria (it cannot be digested by the dog) , but more would do kidney harm in too high amounts to sustain over time. The toxins have to be dealt with and they will reduce the dog's general health.
GIven the choice bwteen a small amont of grain adn a small amount of sweet potatol I'd use more grain (as rice for example has no dog toxins) and less sweet potaqto =- I'd use a tiny bit of pumpkin for carotene - less toxins than sweet potato, and more easy to process.
Check out cat foods they have higher meat content if you huynt them down.
(Redmoonpetfood makes a chicken and salmon one without potato but it is expensibve)
Namaste,
Irene
REPLY TO: only
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
http://www.usfca.edu/fac-staff/dever/dog_evo.pdf
But I can believe it may be longer.
Evolution is slow though, in nature. It takes about 50,000 generations to effect a standard deviation that is significant.
Under selective breeding by humans it is different - art least for polygene effects. Those account for the differences of "intensity" of characteristics - such as size, length etc. and thus the difference btween a chihuahua and a great dane.
But other genes called major genes, code for specific discrete tings, sich as for example an enzyme needed for digestion which is either there or not there- it is not an amount issue.
SO while dogs can vary a lot under human sleection criteria the variation is not basic enough to affect their overall metabolism. Dogs hvae indeed developed some TOLERANCE fro toxins that sows morein some breeds than others. Fore example, Siberian Huskies are closer to the wild dog genetically than many other breeds, and the result is their tolerance to toxibs is much less. Vets must accoutn for this in using drugs or anesthetics, and they can tiolerate less food toxins as well.
SO when you think that it is okay to feed yor dog humnan fgood instead of food the dog can actually use for health, it is not really a good idea. Being able to TOLERATE somethig is nbot anywhere like the same as being able to BENEFIT form it - or even to be neutral.
It is the same with cats - their small intestine is actually a little bit longer than it used to be before domestication - except in the newer breeds like Bengals, Savannahs etc who are closer to the wild genetics. These latter cats get sick and succumb to human toxins sooner..but they all succumb.
SO the wrong food does not do dogs or cats any GOOD - some of them tolerate it better than others without visible symptoms though it will destroy their kidneys over time. (Can also cause liver failu\re depending on RATE of toxin feeding.) It is not for nothing that domestic dogs and cats have chronic kidney disease/failure as the leading medical cause of death. It is from all the forced incorrect food.
"Tolerated" food is not beneficial. Kidneys have 75% overdesign at birth but if you feed wrong food all the time becasue it LOOKS like the dog eats it and does not drop dead immediately - that does not mean it is good food. The kidneys gradually get damaged till they fail.
Would YOU knowingly eat toxins daily rather than known beneficial food?
Why should your dog or cat be different?
But is that a fair thing to encourage?
It is possible but unlikely. Their prey however, would likely have contained grains in the gut of the prey, so the would be exposed to grain proteins/DNA.
NOt really possible.
Food has to be digested, not just swallowed. Either the ability to digest it is there, or it is not. Prey of dogs are not likely to be eating sweet potato.
When the food can not be digested, the most it can do is to feed the gut bacteria. That is a relevant thing but it does NOT provide calories or protein etc to the dog. It is relevant becasue in the case of sweet potato the gut bacteria can extract carotene which the dog can absorb, and dogs need carotene for the immuen system cells in the gut area. But there are other componenets that are toxic in sweet potato. A very tiny amount therefore can provide the needed carotene via the gut bactgeria (it cannot be digested by the dog) , but more would do kidney harm in too high amounts to sustain over time. The toxins have to be dealt with and they will reduce the dog's general health.
GIven the choice bwteen a small amont of grain adn a small amount of sweet potatol I'd use more grain (as rice for example has no dog toxins) and less sweet potaqto =- I'd use a tiny bit of pumpkin for carotene - less toxins than sweet potato, and more easy to process.
Check out cat foods they have higher meat content if you huynt them down.
(Redmoonpetfood makes a chicken and salmon one without potato but it is expensibve)
Namaste,
Irene
REPLY TO: only
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."