# Raw *with* Cooked?



## CT Girl (Nov 17, 2010)

Swizzle often gets grilled chicken as training treats and sometimes cooked fish. He has also been known to eat a meatball. He has had no issues about this, quite the opposite, he liked it very much. The idea that you can't feed both raw and cooked seems silly to me.


----------



## Jamie Hein (Aug 17, 2013)

I'm not sure about the myth but I want to point out that our digestive system is very different than a dogs digestive system, so I wouldn't compare what we can/ should eat to them.


----------



## CT Girl (Nov 17, 2010)

Dogs have been with humans a long time getting cooked and raw food without issues, that is why that premise does not make sense to me.


----------



## Ruscha_Baby (May 22, 2011)

Jamie Hein said:


> I'm not sure about the myth but I want to point out that our digestive system is very different than a dogs digestive system, so I wouldn't compare what we can/ should eat to them.


Sorry, of course, I didn't make the comparison to suggest that I think we are the same, but to suggest that another omnivore (us) is able to eat both at once, and that for the most part of their existence dogs have eaten much of what we eat.


----------



## Ruscha_Baby (May 22, 2011)

CT Girl said:


> Dogs have been with humans a long time getting cooked and raw food without issues, that is why that premise does not make sense to me.


Just so I am not being misunderstood, I wanted to mention that I am referring to the two food types (raw and cooked) being fed at the very same time, in the same bowl, or at the very least in very quick succession, and that I am not referring to feeding raw and cooked at separate times.


----------



## Jamie Hein (Aug 17, 2013)

Ruscha_Baby said:


> Sorry, of course, I didn't make the comparison to suggest that I think we are the same, but to suggest that another omnivore (us) is able to eat both at once, and that for the most part of their existence dogs have eaten much of what we eat.


Dogs aren't omnivores. I don't see a giant issue with feeding cooked food if that is what works best for you, but dogs are not omnivores. The proof is in their teeth, short colon, and dogs lack the enzymes to break down plant products.


----------



## CT Girl (Nov 17, 2010)

I have fed my dog both raw and cooked at the same meal without issue. My uncle had a hunting pack that was usually about ten to twelve dogs and he routinely fed raw and cooked at the same meal. What do you think will happen? My dog has never had digestive issues, is that what you think will happen. Are you aware of dogs where this has been an issue?


----------



## Jamie Hein (Aug 17, 2013)

CT Girl said:


> I have fed my dog both raw and cooked at the same meal without issue. My uncle had a hunting pack that was usually about ten to twelve dogs and he routinely fed raw and cooked at the same meal. What do you think will happen? My dog has never had digestive issues, is that what you think will happen. Are you aware of dogs where this has been an issue?


There have been dogs on a raw feeding group I am a part of that puked or had diarrhea and the group said that the cause was raw and cooked in the same meal, since they digest at different rates. I personally haven't had issues feeding my cats and Kennedy raw and giving occasional cooked treats, and I dont think it is terrible to do both, I just don't see the point since it takes extra time to cook the meat. But I don't take issue with people doing both, like I said, to each their own and if one dog is fine with it and doesn't have problems, go for it if you like to cook.


----------



## liljaker (Aug 6, 2011)

Ruscha_Baby said:


> I'm a long-term raw feeder, and I have often heard it said that raw should not be fed with cooked/manufactured food because dogs digest them at different speeds.
> 
> BUT...
> 
> ...


That's interesting. I have heard that feeding raw and kibble is not preferable since they digest them each differently; I didn't know raw and cooked food (like meat) is also not recommended. I think it depends on the dog - I know people who add some raw on top of kibble and their dogs do just fine. I know with Sunny, I have to separate them as he does not do well when I add raw to kibble.


----------



## Ruscha_Baby (May 22, 2011)

Jamie Hein said:


> Dogs aren't omnivores. I don't see a giant issue with feeding cooked food if that is what works best for you, but dogs are not omnivores. The proof is in their teeth, short colon, and dogs lack the enzymes to break down plant products.


Please look up omnivore on Wikipedia and see what they say for dog. Dogs can live exclusively on plant material, which makes them omnivorous. 

Also, you seem to have missed my point. I am not questioning whether it is ok to feed cooked.


----------



## Ruscha_Baby (May 22, 2011)

CT Girl said:


> I have fed my dog both raw and cooked at the same meal without issue. My uncle had a hunting pack that was usually about ten to twelve dogs and he routinely fed raw and cooked at the same meal. What do you think will happen? My dog has never had digestive issues, is that what you think will happen. Are you aware of dogs where this has been an issue?


I don't really know why you are asking what I think will happen.

I have merely read (I think in Dr Billinghurst's book) that it is inadvisable to feed dog raw and cook either in the same meal or in close succession. All I am seeking is anecdotal evidence either to back this up, or to challenge the assertion.


----------



## Ruscha_Baby (May 22, 2011)

liljaker said:


> That's interesting. I have heard that feeding raw and kibble is not preferable since they digest them each differently; I didn't know raw and cooked food (like meat) is also not recommended. I think it depends on the dog - I know people who add some raw on top of kibble and their dogs do just fine. I know with Sunny, I have to separate them as he does not do well when I add raw to kibble.


That's the kind of info I was looking for, so thanks. 

So my thinking was that the majority of kibbles, canned and packet foods are cooked, and they are what I was referring to by mentioning cooked. I could have made that clearer in the thread to avoid causing confusion! Lol. It appears to be much as I thought though - there is no proven problem with feeding raw alongside any other form of food. I would agree that it depends on the dog in terms of stomach upsets, etc, but these are generally unlikely with a fit and healthy dog, or so it would seem.


----------



## SilverSpoo (Jan 15, 2014)

I personally have never bought into this theory. Your body releases the appropriate enzymes to digest whatever food you put in. It doesn't matter what form it is in.

I feed 1/2 cup of kibble mixed with raw each evening.


----------



## CT Girl (Nov 17, 2010)

Ruscha_Baby said:


> I don't really know why you are asking what I think will happen.
> 
> I have merely read (I think in Dr Billinghurst's book) that it is inadvisable to feed dog raw and cook either in the same meal or in close succession. All I am seeking is anecdotal evidence either to back this up, or to challenge the assertion.


I was asking because I honestly didn't know. I was not trying to be snarky just genuinely curious. I know some raw people don't think cooked food is as nutritious as raw. As for myself I feel that there is so much we don't understand in dog or human nutrition that is is not funny. Eat carbs, don't eat carbs, don't eat fat, fat is ok but only healthy fat ...
I have read dog nutrition books (not Dr. Billinghurst's) but I am still confused so I muddle along trying to do what makes sense to me. I have occasionally cooked for my dog because using raw chicken v. Grilled chicken for training treats cooked wins out. If I have fish I cook a little extra for Swizzle. I don't feed raw fish because of all the nasty parasites you can get. I will also give so little bit of what I am cooking on occasion - turkey, chicken, fish to make the raw food stretch a little longer if I can't get to the pet store and as a little treat for him. I admire the fact that you are doing the research. I do feel some raw advocates in their zeal go over the top castigating others who don't feed raw or use a different method of raw feeding. I feel there is no one right way.

I feed organic raw and Swizzle will spit out the vast majority of commercial treats but accepts lung puffs, dried liver - healthy stuff but I don't judge those who feed kibble. Perhaps they have tried raw and it did not work for them and their dog. I know my SIL who is a vegetarian is disgusted with what I feed Swizzle but if she babysits she feeds him his raw. She loves dogs but I don't think she could handle it if she had to feed raw so she feeds a good quality kibble. I am always open though so if there is a concern with combining raw and cooked please let me know.


----------



## Jamie Hein (Aug 17, 2013)

Ruscha_Baby said:


> Please look up omnivore on Wikipedia and see what they say for dog. Dogs can live exclusively on plant material, which makes them omnivorous.
> 
> Also, you seem to have missed my point. I am not questioning whether it is ok to feed cooked.


No, it means that they are not obligate carnivores (cats), but they are still carnivores. I would call them a scavenging carnivore since while they can survive on plant material if necessary, it is not ideal. Wikipedia is a poor source for information.


----------



## CT Girl (Nov 17, 2010)

I think dog advisor has a good explanation.

Are Dogs Carnivores - or Omnivores?


----------



## sparkyjoe (Oct 26, 2011)

My Standard boy *loved* egg, and I frequently dropped some in his bowl. Sometimes cooked, sometimes raw. He had a super sensitive tummy, and was usually ok, but sometimes it triggered stomach issues.


----------



## CT Girl (Nov 17, 2010)

I thank my lucky stars that Swizzle does not have a sensitive tummy. Who would think an egg would cause issues sometimes and be fine at others. Must be so frustrating.


----------



## Sweetp (Mar 23, 2013)

I presume kibble is considered cooked? When introducing raw to a puppy or new addition to household you have to do it slowly and mix the two. I don't understand why it would be harmful when the body produces the same digestive enzymes to break down meat, cooked or raw since both are protein. Raw is easier to digest because there are more digestive enzymes in raw that helps the body break it down faster.


----------



## Ruscha_Baby (May 22, 2011)

Jamie Hein said:


> No, it means that they are not obligate carnivores (cats), but they are still carnivores. I would call them a scavenging carnivore since while they can survive on plant material if necessary, it is not ideal. Wikipedia is a poor source for information.


It matters not what we might choose to call them (with the greatest respect) because they are omnivores based upon what they choose to eat, and what they are capable of eating, plus what they are recorded as eating. There is no category called "scavenging carnivore".

Please don't get me wrong, I believe the domestic (or wild) dog's alimentary canal is the greatest clue when it comes to classifying it, but the truth is that 1000's of years of living with man has brought the dog to best succeed if it can, at least, tolerate many sources of food. Any animal that freely eats fruit (mine pick directly from bushes) nuts, seeds, rabbit poo, etc, must be classified as an omnivore.


----------



## Ruscha_Baby (May 22, 2011)

CT Girl said:


> I think dog advisor has a good explanation.
> 
> Are Dogs Carnivores - or Omnivores?


I thinks that's great, and I agree. Trouble is we have to classify animals upon what they eat. I only feed raw meat but my girls pluck berries and nuts from trees and eat grass, so I cannot call them carnivores even though I might want to.


----------



## Jamie Hein (Aug 17, 2013)

Ruscha_Baby said:


> It matters not what we might choose to call them (with the greatest respect) because they are omnivores based upon what they choose to eat, and what they are capable of eating, plus what they are recorded as eating. There is no category called "scavenging carnivore".
> 
> Please don't get me wrong, I believe the domestic (or wild) dog's alimentary canal is the greatest clue when it comes to classifying it, but the truth is that 1000's of years of living with man has brought the dog to best succeed if it can, at least, tolerate many sources of food. Any animal that freely eats fruit (mine pick directly from bushes) nuts, seeds, rabbit poo, etc, must be classified as an omnivore.


What of when they will eat chocolate/ drink alcohol? Doesn't make it okay, natural, or good. Or what about when they eat shoes, shoeavore? My cat LOVES plastic and will eat it any chance she gets. I don't categorize her as an omnivore just because she will go eat plastic though.


----------



## Ruscha_Baby (May 22, 2011)

Jamie Hein said:


> What of when they will eat chocolate/ drink alcohol? Doesn't make it okay, natural, or good. Or what about when they eat shoes, shoeavore? My cat LOVES plastic and will eat it any chance she gets. I don't categorize her as an omnivore just because she will go eat plastic though.


Well no, of course, many wild omnivores eat things that are bad for them and not only dogs scavenge whatever they can fit down their throat. 

I want to agree with you, not least because I feed my dogs on a raw meat diet, but sadly we cannot classify animals by their tooth type or any other aspect of their physiology; only by their diet. 

The case stands that dogs would never have been so successful at living alongside humans if they were not omnivores and those least able to diversify died away 1000's of years ago. 

My view now is that we should be capitalising on knowing what would have been the best thing to feed dogs, and breed only from those who thrive on a raw meat diet. In a few generations the dog would be a far more healthy carnivore, as it should be.


----------

