# No More Chicken??????????



## Mfmst (Jun 18, 2014)

I think of the chicken as nature’s toothbrush. I use necks and there’s not a whole lot of meat or fat on them. The article premise is that our meat and poultry are fed crap, ergo... We need to be aware of that for ourselves, foremost. Dog owners should also be aware that chicken is often a culprit in food allergies because it is so common. Buck’s kibble is turkey based, but I doubt if they have a better diet than chickens.


----------



## Dechi (Aug 22, 2015)

MollyMuiMa said:


> I eliminated grain and then chicken/chicken fat/ etc from Molly's kibble diet but still feed her raw chicken, believeing what I'd been told about 'raw' chicken being 'different' ...that it would be ok......that it would be good, etc.... but now I read this in Dogs Naturally, and perhaps I should stop feeding chicken in any form! Long term effects............What do you think?
> 
> Google: Raw Chicken For Dogs: Why I Stopped feeding It
> 2017 Home Page - Dogs Naturally Magazine


She may be right, but I am sure if we looked at what other animals are being fed, it might even be worse. This is also a generalization, what those chicken in the article eat migt not be the same other chickens from all over the world eat.

If your dog is thriving on chicken, I wouldn't necessarily stop feeding it.


----------



## kontiki (Apr 6, 2013)

If you read the article it is because of the diet that the chicken is on. I suggest contacting the company that produces the raw chicken you feed and look at the ingredients.

Also feed your dog an extremely high quality Omega 3 oil ( I use Nordic Natural Omega 3 Pet ), even if you decide to eliminate chicken.

I have to chuckle about their comparison to beef. I have researched CAFO beef (what you get at the store unless it is organic or local and you know the farmer). Very interesting... My Spoo is totally raw fed, meat and fish as well as fruits and vegetables.

Interviews - Michael Pollan | Modern Meat | FRONTLINE | PBS

I am lucky that I get his organ meat from local farmers that grass feed their beef and do not use any corn, etc. I cannot possibly afford to feed him their normal beef, but I do buy their beef organs for him.

He knows what is bad for him, and refuses to eat any CAFO organs. Raw feeders are supposed to get 5% liver. I had been feeding him raw liver from my local grass fed farm beef. I went on a trip to Colorado to take care of my sister after a hip replacement. I was there for 3 weeks, so had to purchase his meat from the store. The first time I gave him store (CAFO) liver he hesitantly ate it, and then threw up later. I assumed perhaps he was not feeling well from 12 hours of flying.

So I waited a couple of days and tried again. The same thing happened. I then went to a grocer that had organic beef and got it there, he ate it and was fine. The next week I went to the grocers again and bought normal liver. This time he ate one bite, threw it up and refused to eat any more. He chose not to eat rather than eat it. I have now tried that from grocery stores in 4 states, same results.

When I did the CAFO beef research I discovered that liver disease is very prevalent in CAFO cows, and much of it they simply throw out.


----------



## kontiki (Apr 6, 2013)

I just wrote Dogs Naturally Magazine to try to find out where they got their stats about the beef, and other meats.


----------



## Charmed (Aug 4, 2014)

Poor Wilson! If I have to eliminate chicken from his diet he might wither away. Since I had him allergy tested, and found out that chicken was one of the few proteins that he did not react to, he has gained weight and lost all his red spots. He is no longer an itchy boy, either. I was rather shocked with his allergy tests as I thought most dogs were allergic to chicken. By the way, he can eat alligator(Zoic) with no problems. Must taste like chicken, ha-ha!


----------



## MollyMuiMa (Oct 13, 2012)

kontiki said:


> If you read the article it is because of the diet that the chicken is on. I suggest contacting the company that produces the raw chicken you feed and look at the ingredients.



Out here Foster Farms chicken is touted to be humanly raised. antibiotic, growth hormone and steroid free so I thought I was OK..........just went to their website and found out that they feed their reg grocery store chickens

"A highly nutritious balanced diet composed primarily of corn and soy meal, with vitamins and minerals added" 

Their Organic chicken is fed a "Organic vegetarian feed" (not in my budget!LOL!) and are free range

Oh yeah........they also tout that they are not caged but are in 'poultry barns' that have saw dust or rice hull substrate on the ground..........


----------



## scooterscout99 (Dec 3, 2015)

Maybe Dr. Dodds' NutriScan test for food sensitivity would help. After receiving results on my 9 yo non-poodle (sensitivities to everything except lamb, beef, peanuts, and soy) I ran it on my spoo. Chicken and corn were his only sensitivities. Thanks, Catherine, for introducing me to this test many months ago. One of my training partners also ran the test and solved skin allergies and gastro issues with her two dogs.


----------



## lily cd re (Jul 23, 2012)

I do not subscribe to the notion that if your chickens eat corn then you are eating corn when you eat their eggs. When an animal eats food it digests all of the macromolecules down to the monomer units that comprise that food. Starch is broken down to simple sugars, proteins to amino acids and so on. Those units are then reassembled to be chicken, beef, dog or human carbohydrates, proteins as needed. 

BTW the organic feed I give my chickens is mostly based on corn, so is corn really evil all on its own?

It happens that NutriScan showed all of my dogs to be sensitive to turkey but not to chicken so chicken it is. They are all doing very well on their current diet (home cooked and chicken based, not strictly organic). If your dog has a problem that is addressed by diet changes what matters is that the diet you change to is nutritionally complete and calorically adequate, not so much whether the vitamin D is in the food or in a supplement.

I also do not subscribe to the notion that raw foods are nutritionally better than cooked foods. Our dogs are dogs, not wolves in dog suits. Would any of you eat raw poultry? I sure wouldn't do that. Why should my dogs do so? If a food is heavily processed that is a different story, but cooked under normal conditions vs. raw? The only difference I see is an elevated risk of infectious disease for people who are immune suppressed or have chronic health conditions that may limit their ability to tolerate an infection like salmonellosis.

Now this is not to say that I don't think we should try to do better with how we feed and otherwise husband agricultural animals that we rely on in food production. We shouldn't be relying on chronic low levels of antimicrobials to suppress infectious diseases in poultry because we are unwilling or unable to allow them to have adequate space or to range for feed. We should not be using hormones to make meats more marbled or to increase milk yields. We should not have fallen into the trap of relying on using genetically non-diverse stocks of animals and plants that could easily be wiped out at the drop of a pin (new infections and the like). If you really want to see some of the worst of it all look at the links below. WARNING!!! Some of what is shown is very graphic.

For myself I will never eat a nonorganic poultry or pork product ever again since I find those industries to be particularly cruel, but we each need to make our own thoughtful decisions based on our health needs and ethical views of animal husbandry.

https://www.splendidtable.org/story/inside-the-factory-farm-where-97-of-us-pigs-are-raised

http://https://modernfarmer.com/2014/02/chicken-farming-discontents/

https://www.thedodo.com/chickens-video-legal-slaughter-gordon-1043872702.html


----------



## galofpink (Mar 14, 2017)

We all need to make decisions on what we will tolerate in our diets and the same for our dogs. We all have a different food journey, and it should be a journey - a constant evolution of what we deem appropriate and what we choose to support. 

While the author of the article posted by Molly seems to have some legitimate points - there does seem to be some source quotes missing for the omega 3 vs 6 graphs. Given the information is legitimate....

If you are concerned about a certain protein, try to go as back to nature as possible (financially as well as being able to source). While the article indicates that some species tolerate food wastes better, all mainstream conventionally raised commercial proteins (chicken, turkey, pork, beef) are fed feed stuffs and a grain based diet. The only way you are going to get around this is to purchase from local, pasture based, free range, mixed farming model, "hobby"/small scale farmers. Of course it will command a premium. Every little bit helps our system too; maybe you can't afford to feed organic everyday - instead feed it one day a week; that's one less day of exposure. If Molly seems to be thriving with no indications of reaction or inflammation to the chicken you are feeding, I would guess she is likely fine. If you want to believe what the Dogs Naturally article is saying, add vit D and omega 3 to help combat the nutrient profile of the chicken.

I am fortunate that I live in a rural area and could source pasture raised meat if I wanted to. Right now there is a real trend for small farms to sell their products and operate on a fixed delivery schedule. Many of them have prepackaged boxes that include a variety of different meats (steaks, chops, ground meat). I personally don't bother, but it's on my radar for the future. DH's parents have a dairy, so quite often we have access to ground beef from them. The difference between ground beef from the Holstein they raised is much different than the beef I can buy from the store - it's night and day. Super lean, unoxidized and flavourful. It really exemplifies what good beef should be. The animal they choose for slaughter is fed hay throughout its entire life, is given access to corn silage (usually once a day) and it given some (about a kg usually) of a life-stage commercial grain. The genetics are obviously different from a commercial beef breed, but the diet is also a stark contrast compared to a feedlot diet. And it shows. They don't push for gain by feeding grain and corn silage; the animal gets fed exactly like every other cattle beast on the farm does.


Something to keep in mind when choosing meat specifically is how companies are using buzz marketing words and what they really mean or don't mean. As consumers we really have to look at food companies with a very critical eye and really challenge "so what does this really mean". As someone who works in ag, I find it very frustrating that companies can throw buzz words around that sell products to customers that really don't provide the customers any assurance of anything and command top dollar.

By USDA standards (standard in bold, italics my comment): 

*FREE RANGE or FREE ROAMING: Producers must demonstrate to the Agency that the poultry has been allowed access to the outside. *_ There is no guidance on how much are constitutes free range - a 40,000 bird barn could be given a 2'x2' area of outside access and technically by this standard it would be free-range. But is this situation really any better than not being free-range? I'd say not, save the price difference and just buy conventional. However, if they are truly given sufficient roaming area then it may be worth it._

*NO HORMONES (pork or poultry): Hormones are not allowed in raising hogs or poultry. Therefore, the claim "no hormones added" cannot be used on the labels of pork or poultry unless it is followed by a statement that says "Federal regulations prohibit the use of hormones."* _So really this is a unneeded statement that is really only used to sell. All pork and poultry that you buy, anywhere in the US, will not have hormones, but splashing this disclosure across a product will certainly sell it faster than the competitors' even if both are meeting the same (mandatory) standard. _

*NO ANTIBIOTICS (red meat and poultry):
The terms "no antibiotics added" may be used on labels for meat or poultry products if sufficient documentation is provided by the producer to the Agency demonstrating that the animals were raised without antibiotics.*_Something to think about: growing animals without the use of antibiotics requires better herd/flock management (more $ paid for labour) and also usually involves higher death losses. If an antibiotic free program makes it really difficult for a herd/flock manager to treat animals when they are legitimately sick (e.g. animals must be segregated in sick rooms, properly tagged/identified, shipped for slaughter separately, etc.), will it be worth it for the herd/flock manager to treat a sick animal? If not, what then - are they humanely euthanized or left to suffer? _


Meat production and consumption is a very challenging and polarizing area; we all just have to use our head and common sense and make the best objective decisions on what we think is right.


----------



## lily cd re (Jul 23, 2012)

galofpink thank you so so much for getting at the heart of what I was trying to hint at. You have pointed out some of the gimicky issues that lull people into thinking all is good with the food on their plates or in their dogs' bowls with claims like antibiotic free. I know that is BS claim since all poultry and pork is antibiotic free. One of the reasons I only use organic poultry is not for the free of antibiotics, but the hopefully better quality of life for the animals before they ended up in the food production stream leading to my plate.

Food production is industrial in North America and it is as troubled an industry as any other. Clearly returning to local sourcing is not likely to give us all access to adequate nutrition, but the current system has problems at many levels too.


----------



## galofpink (Mar 14, 2017)

lily cd re said:


> One of the reasons I only use organic poultry is not for the free of antibiotics, but the hopefully better quality of life for the animals before they ended up in the food production stream leading to my plate.


I really, really, really hope that's true of the organic standard...and not another gimmick. Antibiotics are a great thing, when used appropriately. I hope animals are not suffering needlessly due to a commitment to a standard that makes therapeutic use of drugs difficult. DH asked an organic milk farmer up here one time if they could use antibiotics to treat sick (mastitis) cows; the farmer said they could, but that they tried to avoid as much as possible since the milk withdrawal (have to hold milk back from the tank) was a very long time. I don't recall the exact limit but think it was 30-60 days and conventional would be 2-4 days, depending on the drug. So if a farmer has to lose milk on a cow for 30-60 days will he treat the cow? I sure hope so.

The system does need reform in a lot of areas; the best we can do is try to support those who we feel are "doing it right" as much as possible. Organic, conventional but small scale, pastured, etc.


----------



## lily cd re (Jul 23, 2012)

galofpink said:


> *I really, really, really hope that's true of the organic standard...and not another gimmick.* Antibiotics are a great thing, when used appropriately. I hope animals are not suffering needlessly due to a commitment to a standard that makes therapeutic use of drugs difficult. DH asked an organic milk farmer up here one time if they could use antibiotics to treat sick (mastitis) cows; the farmer said they could, but that they tried to avoid as much as possible since the milk withdrawal (have to hold milk back from the tank) was a very long time. I don't recall the exact limit but think it was 30-60 days and conventional would be 2-4 days, depending on the drug. So if a farmer has to lose milk on a cow for 30-60 days will he treat the cow? I sure hope so.
> 
> The system does need reform in a lot of areas; the best we can do is try to support those who we feel are "doing it right" as much as possible. Organic, conventional but small scale, pastured, etc.


You and me and whole bunch of other people hope so. And yes it would be shameful if maintaining an organic standard prevented a farmer from using an antiobiotic to treat a sick animal and instead allowed suffering. A big part of how my feelings have been shifted is from having my own chickens. I feed them organically and they have nice digs with environmental interests available in the form of toys that they get their treats from, a swinging perch and the like, but I can tell that they really love to be allowed loose in the yard to forage. If I haven't been able to let them out for a few days the amount of little squabbles goes up. I work hard to balance keeping them safe from predators (particularly hawks and cats) and having them have freedom to get out of each other's way and even to chase each other around over a nice fat juicy slug that one of them found. I do think there is an important place for organic farming but also always try to support conventional small scale farming as much as possible too. Long Island still has a fair amount of agriculture (corn, potatoes, table crops and fruit, along with vineyard acres) and for example I only buy peaches in season at the local orchard. They are really spectacularly good and a very special treat in August. The same place also grows a small amount of pears and lots of apples. I am happy to support local agriculture and local business in general.


----------



## Verve (Oct 31, 2016)

Given her size and the fact that raw chicken supplements her kibble, I'd feed her organic chicken. That's a lot easier with a small dog than with two standards!


----------



## lily cd re (Jul 23, 2012)

Verve if I could afford it I would certainly feed organic chicken and to try to find a source for organic chicken livers, but with three large dogs (about 180 pounds of dog eating well over 2 pounds of meat each day) I would be out on the street with them as I watched the sheriff pitch all our belongings onto the lawn when my bank foreclosed on me. It is a much easier thing to think about when you have one small dog.


----------



## MollyMuiMa (Oct 13, 2012)

Galofpink and Lily.........Thank you for being the voices of reason! Not planning to take Molly's chicken out of her diet yet, as it is only a small part of her varied diet! 
I must say though that it is disturbing to hear/see the conditions our food source animals live in, in many cases.......I, like most people try NOT to think of it and of course it gives you a feeling of guilt when you ARE confronted by it. But that is another subject.......another thread!
Not ready to become a vegetarian yet!


----------



## lily cd re (Jul 23, 2012)

Food production is another topic altogether for sure, but certainly related to your original question about whether to feed chicken or not. 

For most of us we are really very far removed from food production and that is probably part of why we are willing to buy some of the things we consume without question. I see that in my students, many of whom have no clue where their food comes from. However the ones who are aware and savvy tend to be pretty careful eaters.


----------



## kontiki (Apr 6, 2013)

For some reason my Spoo loves chicken, but not chicken liver. But he does love organic beef, sheep, and goat liver! So that is what I give him. I can't afford organic meat overall, but the organs are reasonable. (As I said elsewhere he either refuses or throws up CAFO liver). 

Just now defrosting organic pork liver from the farmer down the road.... hope he likes that. When it defrosts I'll put it in 1/3 lb packages and refreeze


----------

