Minutus

http://rawfed.com/myths/omnivores.html I think we should probably carry on this discussion privately. I think we are getting off topic for this ist. I would be interested in joining your CATWELL group if you are interested in carrying this further to discuss the points of view?
Leora
3.) Internal anatomy and physiology
Dogs and cats have the internal anatomy and physiology of a carnivore (FeldhamerG.A. 1999. Mammology: AdaptationDiversityand Ecology. McGraw-Hill. Pg 260.). They have a highly elastic stomach designed to hold large quantities of meatboneorgansand hide. Their stomachs are simplewith an undeveloped caecum (FeldhamerG.A. 1999. Mammology: AdaptationDiversityand Ecology. McGraw-Hill. Pg 260.). They have a relatively short foregut and a shortsmoothunsacculated colon. This means food passes through quickly. Vegetable and plant matterhoweverneeds time to sit and ferment. This equates to longersacculated colonslarger and longer small intestinesand occasionally the presence of a caecum. Dogs have none of thesebut have the shorter foregut and hindgut consistent with carnivorous animals. This explains why plant matter comes out the same way it came inthere was no time for it to be broken down and digested (among other things). People know thisthis is why they tell you that vegetables and grains have to be preprocessed for your dog to get anything out of them. But even thenfeeding vegetables and grains to a carnivorous animal is a questionable practice.
Dogs do not normally produce the necessary enzymes in their saliva (amylasefor example) to start the break-down of carbohydrates and starchesamylase in saliva is something omnivorous and herbivorous animals possessbut not carnivorous animals. This places the burden entirely on the pancreasforcing it to produce large amounts of amylase to deal with the starchcelluloseand carbohydrates in plant matter. Thusfeeding dogs as though they were omnivores taxes the pancreas and places extra strain on itas it must work harder for the dog to digest the starchycarbohydrate-filled food instead of just producing normal amounts of the enzymes needed to digest proteins and fats (whichwhen fed rawbegin to "self-digest" when the cells are crushed through chewing and tearing and their enzymes are released).
Nor do dogs have the kinds of friendly bacteria that break down cellulose and starch for them. As a resultmost of the nutrients contained in plant matter-even preprocessed plant matter-are unavailable to dogs. This is why dog food manufacturers have to add such high amounts of synthetic vitamins and minerals (the fact that cooking destroys all the vitamins and minerals and thus creates the need for supplementation aside) to their dog foods. If a dog can only digest 40-60% of its grain-based foodthen it will only be receiving 40-60% (ideally!) of the vitamins and minerals it needs. To compensate for thisthe manufacturer must add a higher concentration of vitamins and minerals than the dog actually needs.
Is the dog an omnivore? Its dentitioninternal and external anatomyand physiology say it is not. Even its evolutionary history (discussed later) says the dog is a carnivore. So when people tell you the dog is an omnivoreask: "What about this animal makes you think it is an omnivore?" Make them explain their position to you before you explain yours. Chances are they'll cite this next myth as "proof".

Hi Leora, Yes indeed - That is indeed why I suggested Catwell.
To join just send empty email here - and answer the automated email
you receive please:
Catwell-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
(You will probably find everything about it in the archives already,
actually.. so that can be seen at your leisure, and discussed as you
wish as well.)
Not true.
This text has a lot of supposition and is out of date. Most of the
good research on cats is from 1998 and subsequent, and so this book
has none of it. I have a BSc in zoology and my own training is now
out of date - and supplanted by newer research.
Domestic cats (unlike large cats or cats in general) have rather
small stomachs and very short intestines, and though they can handle
the odd larger meal, they need to eat about 20 times a day to
maintain their high protein metabolism.

>
There is a difference between fermentation and digestion.
Cats can not digest vegetable matter.
But their gut bacteria can ferment some of it and produce nutrients
from it.

>

No. This is again incorrect supposition.
The reason plant material is not digested is that cats lack the
enzymes to digest it. Plant cell walls are made of cellulose, which
needs cellulase to digest it - and starch in plants needs amylase.
People have those - we even have amylase in our saliva - not so in cats.



People do not "know this" - it's fiction to say intestinal length is
why plants are not digested.
If you "process" vegetables and grains, do you mean cooking or ???
Cooking them breaks down the cell walls to overcome the problem from
lack of cellulase enzyme.
But it does not overcome the problem that vegetable matter uses an
alkaline system of digestion and meat uses acidic - and that cats
REQUIRE acidic digestion to maintain urinary tract health.

The vast misunderstanding and misinformation about this, is why the
leading cause of death in cats is kidney disease.
Dogs and cats are not designed to get their nutrients from plant
matter that they digest. They are designed to get it from a
combination of self-made nutrients (like Vit C which we do no make
but they do) and from healthy gut bacteria that ferment fiber (and it
has to be canine-fermentable fiber for dogs and feline-fermentable
fiber for cats, not just any fiber), and these gut bacteria (not
acidophilus but canine/feline-appropriate ones) manufacture B
vitamins, Vit D, and short chain fatty acids - specifically butyrate,
propionate and acetate, to sustain organ and immune system health of
the carnivore.
It's a completely different system from that of huamns and is GREATLY
jupswe3t by the introduction of anything that upsets the speciual
bacteria needed for the job.

You will need to read the research on this - the stuff you are
quoting is "what we thought" as opposed to "what we now know".
Manufacturers cook the food that they turn to kibble, BEFORE adding
(by spraying) the supplements onto it.
The supplements are necessary because the gut health is not being
taken care of in terms of fermentable fiber and the proper bacteria.
(In the wild it comes from the gut of prey.)
No because NONE of the vitamin/mineral nutrients it needs are
intended to come from grain.
The grain is used purely for energy, and the carbohydrate load of
commercial food is generally a disgrace - a higher protein and fat
content is better. this is why I RECOMMEND PROPAC KITTEN FOOD FOR
DOGS. It has more protein and fat, and less carbs - but no damaging
or toxic plants - and carnivores use fat for energy where we use carbs.
No it is to compensate for lack of healthy gut environment - it is
nothing to do with what is or is not in grain.
No.
That was never questioned.
But nor is it in question that wild food is only 55% protein.
What do you expect the other 45% to be then?

Namaste,
Irene
--
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."