They're all the same

After losing our beloved Labrador Beau at the end of last summer at the grand old age of fourteen, I began searching for another rescue dog to join our family. I had already decided that Beau would be my last big dog. Having suffered with sacroiliac joint problems all my life and more recently, a dislocated bicep tendon along with various other 'limb' issues, I’m not as physically capable as I was fifteen years ago. Simple everyday tasks like wiping Beau’s paws had become a total killer – not the bending down so much but rather supporting the weight of a big dog with one hand whilst being bent double – and so the search was on for a small dog. 

However, by December, two things had become apparent: 1) UK rescues were (mostly) full of big dogs, and 2) suitable homes for any available small dogs had to be dog-free. Even Many Tears Animal Rescue, from where we adopted Cindy and a resident dog is a requirement for many adoptions, had no suitable dogs for rehoming in our area.

Then I stumbled across a facebook post about a small, dog-friendly dog in foster in Norfolk. The post didn’t give many details, only that he had been found beside a pile of rubbish. I messaged the rescue only to be told that he had already been adopted, but that they had lots of other dogs looking for homes and suggested that I consider one in particular – named Rhubarb – who was similar in size and looks to the one in Norfolk. So I took a look at his photos and details, and it was then that I realised that the rescue specialised in rehoming Romanian street dogs. I could basically have my pick of dozens of small dogs, all of whom could be rehomed with a resident dog. I hadn’t set out to adopt a Romanian street dog though, and having heard various stories of people handing over money for dogs to what turned out to be fake rescue shelters, I did some research. The rescue organisation seemed legit, had founded a long-standing spay/neuter programme in Romania, and had numerous testimonials from happy adopters on their website and adopters’ facebook group. I also found out that a friend had adopted a dog from them four years ago. Things were looking good. 

My primary concern with adopting any new dog wherever it was from was that it had to be a good match for Cindy who is incredibly gentle and good-natured. She is twelve now and has always and absolutely avoided confrontation. She likes other dogs, is always happy to greet and walk with her doggy pals and will happily share her space with them, but it’s very rare that she will play with another dog – she gets overwhelmed by that kind of social interaction quite quickly, which opens her up to being bullied. I wasn’t fussed about breed, looks, age or sex, only that temperament had to be the right fit. Rhubarb had been found in a public kill shelter but had been in safe rescue at a large farm kennels since December. This is how the rescue operated – taking what it judged to be suitable dogs for rehoming from public kill shelters and placing them in one of two safe rescue locations in Romania – either the farm kennels or a large free-run shelter. There were around 130 available dogs listed on the rescue’s website. After reading all their bios, which (as expected) were very brief due to lack of history, I had a short-list of eight dogs (including Rhubarb) who I thought might be potential good matches for Cindy. Because the bios were so brief though, I then did some more detective work – trawling through the rescue’s social media pages for any other information about these dogs. I found little pieces of video footage of several of the dogs on my short-list and two in particular stood out as not being completely terrified – Rhubarb, and a little female dog named Henna. Both dogs were in rescue at the farm kennels but were in different pens, with each pen housing around a dozen, similarly sized dogs. Both dogs appeared to be super-friendly towards the kennel staff and weren’t at all shy in coming forward for affection. They also showed a lot of active-submissive behaviour both towards people (jumping up, licking, pawing) and the other dogs (licking, nudging) that they were kennelled with. This was good, and meant that both dogs had the potential to quickly adapt to life as pets. Both dogs’ ages had been guessed at between 2 and 3 years, which was also good because I didn’t want a puppy. 

Rhubarb was ginger and fluffy. Henna was fawn-coloured and short-coated. It was hard to choose between them but I eventually decided on Henna, and the rescue confirmed that she too would be a good match for Cindy. Described as ‘sweet-natured and great with other dogs’, she had been at the farm kennels for almost a year, certainly due in part to the suspension of the commercial importation of dogs originating from Eastern Europe between mid-March and the end of October 2022, but possibly due also to her not being as cute and fluffy as some of the other dogs that had been rescued and adopted both prior to and post importation suspension. I filled out a pre-adoption questionnaire and sent video clips of our house and garden to the rescue for our virtual home-check. Our adoption application was accepted! I signed the adoption form on 8th January, paid a deposit, and was given a transport run date of 23rd January. After months of searching, we would finally be welcoming a new dog into the family! As the first week of waiting ticked by, I kept thinking about Rhubarb. Although he’d had quite a bit of interest, he was still available for adoption. I asked if we could adopt him too, and was told yes, we could! It was too late for him to travel with Henna because the DEFRA paperwork wouldn’t be processed in time, and so his transportation date was set for 31st January. Both dogs had already been spayed/neutered and would be double micro-chipped (one to me, one to the rescue), fully vaccinated against rabies, parvovirus, distemper and leptospirosis, worm and flea treated, and with negative tests for Babesia, Brucella, heartworm and the five tick-borne diseases. The transportation runs would take 3-4 days and each dog would be delivered to my doorstep. The adoption process was quick and easy, and I received good communication from the rescue volunteers throughout, including a pre-adoption phone-call, and dedicated transport run chat groups on facebook for each dog. 

I’m not new to settling in rescue dogs, but because the overwhelming speel from those involved in rehoming overseas street dogs is that they are ‘different’ to UK dogs, I followed the rescue’s advice to the letter. I did everything that I could to prepare for their arrival. I set up two pens in the conservatory so that each dog had a safe, quiet space to retreat to that was away from foot-traffic, but close to the garden for ease of house-training and near enough to the rest of the house for them to get used to the sounds of kitchen appliances, the TV and doorbell. I bought collars, slip-leads, beds, bowls, and stocked up on chicken and rice. Thinking (as I always do) about each dog’s individual psychological needs, I made a cardboard kennel and filled it with straw for Henna. Straw as bedding was all that she had known for the past year, and I hoped that by giving her a little piece of the familiar, it would help her to feel more settled, more quickly. 

Henna arrived at 9.30pm on 25th January. I gave her slip-lead to the transport driver, then she (along with her paperwork) was placed directly into my arms and our photo taken for the rescue as proof of her arrival. As I carried her down our driveway, she licked my face and her tail was wagging – she was clearly bewildered, but wanting to appease rather than break free. I took her inside the house and into her pen, put her collar on, gave her some food which she ate with gusto and a waggy tail, and then sat on the floor with her while she buried herself into my lap. She then had the choice of a comfy cushiony crate bed or the straw box bed, and bless her, she chose the straw. 

With only a week to go until Rhubarb’s arrival, the pressure was on to settle Henna in as quickly and smoothly as possible whilst still doing everything at her pace and keeping her world small to prevent emotional overwhelm (or trigger stacking as dog trainers now call it). Routine is so important during the early days of settling in any dog – if they can predict what will happen in their day, they naturally develop their own sense of security as the days go by.

By morning, she had decided that the cushiony crate bed was more comfortable than straw, but I’m convinced that providing her with the straw to start with lessened the shock for her of being plunged into an alien environment with unfamiliar people, and allowed her to feel safe during her first few crucial hours with us. Outwardly, she didn’t appear to be too stressed by her sudden life-change. She showed nothing but friendliness and lots of active-submissive behaviour towards myself and my husband, however, her behaviour towards Cindy was the polar opposite to this. I did exactly as the rescue advised and used barriers (pen and stairgates) to keep them separate and to enable slow introductions. I have integrated many newcomers with resident dogs over the years. Normally it would be the resident dog that had a hard time accepting the newcomer, although I had never experienced this myself. With Henna, it was the other way around. She turned into a dog possessed every time Cindy appeared – hackles up, growling, screaming, barking and charging at the pen bars – and Cindy didn’t even have to be near her, merely in sight of her. Out of all the potential issues that could have arisen, a ‘sweet-natured and great with other dogs’ dog not accepting gentle little old Cindy was not something that I had anticipated, nor had it been suggested by the rescue organisation that this scenario was likely to happen (which I now know from hearing other adopters' stories, it's a pretty common occurrence). Forewarned would have been forearmed and would have lessened my stress knowing that this was a common issue and things would get better, but it would seem that on the whole, rescue organisations don't tell adopters that their new arrival may lose it at the sight of the resident dog. If they did, they would probably have fewer applications. 

The week or so that followed was incredibly stressful. I barely slept. I lost 4lbs in weight. To make things worse I had sustained a bite on the finger from a green-fanged tube web spider that had caused a severe reaction and was immensely swollen and painful (no superpowers unfortunately), which I’m sure was addling my brain and ability to think rationally. I contacted the rescue out of desperation and to make sure, given that everyone harps on about these dogs being ‘different’ to UK dogs, that a) I was doing everything right, and b) to ask if there was anything ‘Romanian rescue dog specific’ that I could be doing to help things along. From professional experience, the worst fights – sometimes to the death – occur between spayed female dogs, and whilst ‘giving them time’ is all very well, when one dog is old and frail and the other, young and strong, the potential for the oldie to get seriously hurt is very real even after a considerable amount of time has passed. It was possible that the active-submission that Henna had shown towards the other dogs that she was housed with at the farm kennels was a numbers thing – that within a large group of dogs she appeases and pacifies (sweet and great with other dogs) because anything else might get her injured or killed, but when faced with only one small dog, she chooses to compete aggressively for attention and resources. Had I made a bad judgement about her appeasement behaviour in the farm kennels? What if I couldn't resolve this? With the prospect of Cindy's last few years being made miserable through daily dealings with a dog in the home that wouldn't accept her, and Henna's life becoming one of permanent barriers and competitive stress, I prepared myself emotionally for potential defeat and having Henna as a foster placement until a more suitable home could be found for her.

Each rescue volunteer had their own idea of how to handle the situation. One pushed pack theory and that ‘scraps are normal’. One suggested removing Henna from the room when she kicked off so that she learnt her place. One offered a stream of '3-3-3' memes and to continue doing what I was already doing, which was to keep them apart and feed them separately, but to also reinforce Cindy’s position above Henna (i.e. always feed/give Cindy treats before Henna, etc). However, given that forcing a social hierarchy or letting dogs ‘sort it out themselves’ can in many instances increase competitiveness, I wasn’t seeing much change in Henna’s behaviour by doing this, and Cindy was starting to show signs of stress at Henna’s outbursts. I did try removing Henna when she kicked off (once only and to follow different suggested advice) but as expected for a dog that tends towards active-submission she kicked off even more and got barrier frustration. Quite clearly this was not the way to handle the issue. I even wondered whether Cindy’s pricked ears were part of the problem – that to Henna, Cindy looked like she was threatening her all the time. I contacted the rescue again – again asking if there was anything ‘Romanian rescue dog specific’ that I could be doing. This time I was met with 'time to think about getting a behaviourist in' but also ‘they’re all the same’. Wait … what? Romanian dogs are not different to UK dogs? 

This was somewhat of a game-changer because it gave me the freedom to handle things my way and how I would have advised a client with a similar issue. I started doing short sessions of positive association training with them –  throwing Henna a food treat every time Cindy appeared, and with Henna in her pen or separated from Cindy by a stairgate, doing alternate name/treat training with them both. As well as Henna learning her name, this helped to highlight what the issue had been all along – that Henna clearly saw Cindy as competition for me and my attention and she wanted her to f*** off – and so with the freedom of ‘they’re all the same’ and the focus on decreasing competitive behaviour, I began sitting on the floor next to the stairgate on Henna’s side rather than Cindy's side for our positive association training sessions. She would do her best to climb over me and wriggle herself between me and the stairgate to block Cindy, but I gently pushed her off each time and continued to do so until she stayed sitting or lying on the other side of my legs, and then I reinforced both her physical position and calm behaviour with food. If there is one thing I know for absolute certainly with dogs that tend towards active-submissive behaviour, it’s that removal of attention creates frustration and anxiety. Additionally, any physical handling or restraint must be done confidently but gently and calmly for the best chance of encouraging voluntary, pro-social behaviour. Even though we had only known one another for a little over a week, Henna was already learning that certain behaviours weren't going to get her what she wanted, whilst at the same time remaining desperate to not lose my attention and therefore stay receptive to learning what she could do instead. This was human-canine bond formation and balancing in action, and finally we began to make some progress. 

She became less hackly towards Cindy. She would still stiffen up when she saw her, but she had stopped shouting at her. I decided to move things on a step and with Henna on-lead and Cindy free to roam, I took them into the garden together and scattered some food titbits around for them to snuffle out together – sniffing being a calming behaviour that dogs often use to avoid confrontation. By this time, Rhubarb, now renamed Banjo, had arrived, and so poor Henna had yet another dog to compete against. Her chosen tactic with him was to try and control his movements and actively and aggressively defend doorways, toys and beds, but by this time she was responding to tone of voice and so I was able to nip this behaviour in the bud quite quickly.

Having Banjo around worked in our favour too because him and Cindy hit it off straight away and were hanging out together within view of Henna, which allowed her to observe how I interacted with them and what they needed to do in order to secure my attention. Like Henna, Banjo tends towards active-submission, but without the shouty aggressiveness towards Cindy when competing for fuss, and so although he was bit of a handful initially, his behaviour wasn’t potentially injurious to Cindy and therefore comparatively easier to manage.

A couple more weeks passed by. Exhausting weeks.

Henna was doing well with her lead-training and so I started taking her for short walks, which she really enjoyed and showed none of the ‘reactive’ behaviour towards people and dogs that adopters of Romanian street dogs so frequently report. I did daily ‘treat snuffling’ sessions in the garden with all three dogs – Henna on lead still, and Cindy and Banjo free to roam. 

By the end of the third week of February, Henna had softened towards Cindy outside enough for me to try her off lead in the garden.

I also worked on integrating her with Cindy in the house with the use of a short house-lead. Some sessions went well, others ended up with Henna growling at Cindy – once when Cindy was asleep in her bed and so as unthreatening as she possibly could have been as far as being competition for my attention goes – and so these sessions were swiftly ended without any fuss by removing Henna to her pen, but importantly, not socially excluding her completely.

Towards the end of the fourth week of February, I started walking both girls together, and by the beginning of March, I felt that I could trust Henna enough to be off lead around Cindy in the conservatory, kitchen and my office. The living room was still off-limits though as far as roaming free went unless under close supervision. By the 4th of March, Banjo had been with us for four weeks, and Henna, five and a half weeks. Until now, they had been in their pens in the conservatory during the evenings to give everyone a break from one another and the day’s continuous stream of social interaction, but as Henna had continued to soften towards Cindy in the house and become less concerned about competing against her for my attention – even seemingly being genuinely happy to see her on a couple of occasions first thing in the morning – I decided to give having them all in the living room for a couple of hours in the evening a try. And that’s pretty much how it’s been since. Henna and Banjo still go into their pens at certain times of the day – at mealtimes, when visitors first come into the house, and to sleep at night. It wasn’t my plan to keep the pens up long-term, but they hold such importance as the dogs’ safe spaces that it’s too early to think about removing them just yet. I can’t stress enough how valuable they have been with regards to making the settling in period, establishing a routine, enabling independence support and social down-time, integrating Henna with Cindy, managing the little space that we have in our two-bedroom bungalow and ensuring that everyone sleeps soundly and deeply at night, easier. It does mean that I have lost my art room and so a garage conversion is now on the cards to replace it, but that’s a small price to pay for contented and astonishingly well-adjusted dogs in such a short space of time. 

Above all though, no one gets special treatment beyond their individual needs. All dogs are equal in our house. There is no hierarchy between them – pack theory is well and truly dead. Instead, I use their natural willingness to defer to me along with their tendency to compete with one another and ‘fear of missing out’ to shape the behaviours that I want to see, in a ‘whoever’s bum hits the floor first gets the first treat’ kind of way. This has transferred nicely to beyond the house on walks, with all three dogs either generally ignoring or showing a normal level of interest in what could so easily spark reactive behaviour, such as other on-lead dogs barking and lunging, cats, birds and cyclists.

In the house, we have two rules – 1) no biting, and 2) no fighting. I let them jump up and lick my face. They are allowed to sit in my lap and lay on the sofa. It gives me enormous pleasure to watch Henna and Banjo zoom about the living room using the furniture as a parkour course. From the streets of Romania, to kill shelter, to safe rescue in farm kennels with 800 other ‘nobody’s dogs’, to life in a home in the UK as the pets that they always should have been, their life has changed beyond all recognition in the space of two months. With walking three dogs I am of course now getting the obligatory ‘you’ve got your hands full there!’ line, but also ‘gosh, they’re well-behaved aren’t they!’ and ‘oh what happy little dogs!’. 

Yes. Yes they are.

There is of course an awful lot more that has gone on, and is still going on, behind the scenes. I initially had to heavily referee Henna and Banjo's play. They both play very roughly, and it took a while before Henna relaxed enough to enjoy playing with him. She needed to learn that she could rely on me to step in when things got too much for her rather than having to sort it out herself, and Banjo needed to learn some impulse control. Their play is pretty equal now as far as 'who wins' and has become highly ritualised. Play is an aspect of their behaviour that may be different from that of many UK dogs. It's 'more' – more noisy, more fast, more frantic – but that could also be due to them both tending towards C-type temperament traits when under pressure. They both have a high prey drive, but no higher than my previous Irish rescue dog, Tilly. Henna developed separation distress from me within the first couple of days. This was to be expected as any rescue dog no matter what country it's from has the potential to bond very quickly with its new owner. She showed her distress by barking, howling and fighting the bars of her pen, which is typical of C-type temperament separation distress behaviour. We overcame this fairly quickly though with carefully planned departures and dedicated training, and as she naturally grew more secure in herself and her new home. Banjo came with his own set of issues – he was skin and bone, had an unwell tummy due to the heaviest worm burden I have ever seen in a dog, an umbilical hernia, and a terribly matted coat – but he's in much better physical condition now thanks to several doses of Panacur, lots of nutritious food, and learning to love being groomed.

Getting two rescue dogs at the same time has been incredibly hard work, but that's not because they are 'Rommies'. And it has in many ways made things easier. Being around the same age and size, they can entertain themselves quite happily when I need to be getting on with other things. Cindy can be as involved as she wants to be, and on the whole she does want to be, which is lovely to see especially after the initial worry that Henna's anti-social behaviour towards her caused. Importantly, they all walk together each day and, taking into consideration Cindy's age and that she's considerably more delicate that Henna and Banjo, I make sure that I provide other things that they can all do together, even if that's just ripping up some paper ...

Knowledge is power ~ what I learned as a result of Tilly's cancer that could help other dog-owners to make more informed choices for their best friends.

On Saturday 10th February, I had to make the decision that every dedicated dog owner dreads. Although I'd had a couple of months to prepare myself for it, I wasn't ready, and to add insult to injury it didn't happen how I'd planned it; how I'd wanted it to happen. I know that it wasn't what Tilly wanted either, but within the realms of the limited choices laid out before us at the time, it was the only decision that wouldn't have involved prolonged or unnecessary suffering for her. However, the point of this post isn't to discuss the right time to say goodbye to a beloved canine companion, nor how to cope with the devastating loss. It's about imparting the knowledge that I gained throughout the last eight months or so of Tilly's life, which might just help other dog-owners to make better, more informed choices for their best friends.

Although Tilly was officially diagnosed with gastric adenocarcinoma on 3rd January 2018, her symptoms had preceded this by about seven months. In June 2017, she developed a slight, intermittent tremor whilst resting; mostly in her hind legs, but sometimes the rest of her body would tense up for a couple of seconds and then release, as though she was shivering from cold. I filmed a couple of these episodes and took the clips and her along to the vet who advised, despite my concern that it might be abdominal pain, that it was probably nerve degeneration due to her age. Then, during July and August, she started vomiting – infrequently at first, maybe once every two to three weeks, and only during the early hours of the morning on an empty stomach. Another trip to the vet in September brought another 'nothing to worry about', but by November, the early morning vomiting had increased to a couple of times a week. I was 100% certain that she didn't have a gastro-intestinal blockage, and dietary changes had brought no improvement. The vet we saw mid-November time didn't seem overly concerned that she was vomiting a couple of times a week, or that her tremor had worsened, but I knew that something was seriously wrong. She had never been a 'sicky' dog. In fact, throughout her entire life with us prior to summer 2017, she hadn't vomited once. The first few times that it happened, she seemed genuinely surprised.

I wasn't happy that her symptoms kept being dismissed as 'due to age' and 'nothing to worry about' and asked for blood tests. Although these returned a supposedly clear result, during the first week of December she vomitted four times. We returned to the surgery and saw a different vet, who had recently seen another, very similar case. The vet had performed exploratory surgery, removed a benign tumour from the pyloric area of the dog's stomach, and the dog had made a full recovery. However, I wasn't prepared to put Tilly under the knife on the off-chance that the outcome would be the same. Instead, I opted for an ultrasound scan referral, and a week or so later, my worst fears were confirmed – a highly suspicious mass, approximately 6cm by 2cm, situated within the lining of the inner curvature of the gastric fundus.

In the midst of that awful moment, I knew that I had made the right choice with the ultrasound referral, because had I opted for exploratory surgery at my veterinary practice, it would have undoubtedly ended with Tilly having to be put to sleep on the operating table. And despite the vomiting, she still seemed bright, happy, and interested in living. I asked the ultrasonographer whether blood tests could indicate a cancer diagnosis, but was told no. I later discovered, through my own online research, that there is a blood test indicator for cancer – the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) – and if this had been common knowledge in general veterinary practice, maybe, just maybe, Tilly's cancer could have been diagnosed early enough for surgery to have been a viable option. The same could also be said about her 'shivering' episodes. However, at the time, we were where we were.

The ultrasonographer recommended referral to a veterinary hospital that could offer us a combined soft tissue surgery and oncology appointment, and a fortnight later, a squashed cell preparation and endoscopic biopies provided a definitive diagnosis: gastric adenocarcinoma – a highly aggressive cancer that is unresponsive to chemotherapy, and due to a combination of tumour location and size, removal and resection to prolong life with any degree of quality was no longer an option. Prognosis with palliative care was 1-2 months.

Between the ultrasound and soft tissue/oncology appointments, I was able to reduce the frequency of her vomiting with Ranitidine (an antacid) and Metoclopramide (an anti-emetic). She seemed brighter, and she was eating well. But the diagnosis also threw a spanner in the works in the form of Tramadol. In recent years, Tramadol has become the 'go to' pain relief drug for dogs suffering a variety of types of pain, from arthritis to cancer. For carcinoma cancers, it is recommended that Tramadol is given alongside meloxicam.Tilly had had meloxicam in the form of Loxicom some years previously and for an extended period of time, so I was fairly confident that this wouldn't cause her any issues. However, she didn't seem to be doing well on Tramadol. Her vomiting increased again, and she seemed to be in more pain, not less. It would have been easy to put this down to the cancer worsening her symptoms, but a small amount of online digging unearthed some interesting research-based facts about Tramadol and dogs; the main one being that dogs do not possess the necessary receptors for Tramadol to work as a painkiller. Furthermore, the drug still has to be metabolised by the liver, and dogs, as humans, may suffer nasty side effects including nausea, vomiting and abdominal cramps.
  

So I stopped the Tramadol. After a couple of days she seemed much brighter, more coordinated, and noticeably more comfortable; and I felt mortified that I had been giving her something, albeit on veterinary advice, that had not only been making her ill and causing her pain, but had been giving her liver yet another set of chemicals to deal with. The Ranitidine also seemed to have begun to correlate with vomiting episodes, so I stopped this too. During December it had worked well to reduce her stomach acid production, but I felt that it had served its purpose for the time-being. I continued to give her Loxicom and Metoclopramide, and for a few weeks she seemed to be doing better. We also tried veterinary acupuncture to see if it would reduce the frequency of her vomiting, which it did seem to do on a short-term basis as she always had at least one vomit-free day post treatment. She continued to eat well – even regaining the weight that she had lost during December. Her vomiting was occuring only when her stomach was empty, and she was still enjoying fuss, walks, and barking at the postman.

It was on the 9th of February that she took a turn for the worse and her vomiting suddenly spiralled out of control. Although she still managed not to throw up any food, she refused to eat from lunchtime onwards, and despite continuing to drink, she was becoming dehydrated. That night, she slept in my arms for what I knew would be the last time. Come the morning, the whites of her eyes were showing the faintest yellow tinge, and her blood pressure had dropped. I made the call, but despite being assured previously that whenever the time came, day or night, a practice vet would be available to her put to sleep at home, I was told that a home visit was not possible until Tuesday, which was three days away. However, if I could get her to the surgery by close of business at 12.30pm, a vet would do it there. I felt angry and cheated, but I couldn't allow my girl to suffer. I told her what was going to happen and we got a taxi to the surgery so that I didn't have to drive. She literally clung to me for the entire journey – her claws gripping my legs as she lay across my lap. She never laid across my lap. I knew what to expect when we got there – I've had other dogs put to sleep – but what I didn't need to hear from the vet was that he had to use twice the anaesthetic for a dog of Tilly's size, and that she was a strong little dog; a fighter. Not only did this add to the pain of letting her go, it added doubt to my decision to put her to sleep. Over a month on, the 'what ifs' are still haunting me.

And so, to the point of this post – knowledge. Whilst I do not advocate going against veterinary advice, I do encourage dog-owners to question it – particularly if it could cause, or appears to be causing, a dog more harm than good. Veterinary professionals aren't always up-to-date with the latest research, and importantly, no vet will ever know your dog as well as you do. 

Hind-leg tremor and/or shivering, as though cold. I know now that Tilly's tremoring was not due to age-related nerve degeneration, and that my initial, gut feeling that it was abdominal discomfort, was correct. I know this because lowering her stomach acid production with Ranitidine eased it considerably. Gastric adenocarcinoma causes ulceration of the stomach lining. When the stomach is empty, stomach acid and/or bile reflux will cause irritation and burning. If your dog is shivering on and off as though cold but is clearly not cold – particularly if this occurs a few hours after eating or whilst resting – it could be an indictation of abdominal discomfort; not necessarily of cancer, but of some kind of upper gastro-intestinal tract irritiation such as heartburn, acid reflux, gastritis or pancreatitis, that warrants further investigation. The same goes for early morning vomiting, known as bilious vomiting syndrome. This occurs on an empty stomach as a result of bile refluxing into the stomach and causing irritation. Despite being suggested as a fairly common, benign affliction in older dogs, it could be an indication that something more sinister is going on, and shouldn't be dismissed as being due to age. 

Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) (Uribe-Querol and Rosales, 2015). It is true that there aren't any blood tests that will diagnose cancer in dogs; however, research suggests that the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) may serve as a prognostic factor for cancer. Extrapolation of Tilly's blood results from November produces an NLR of 5:1 – this is the ratio that has been found to indicate cancer. 

The NLR cannot be used to specify cancer type, rather, it is a biomarker for various tumors including some lung cancers, hepatocellular carcinoma, nasopharyngeal carcinoma, colorectal cancer, melanoma, breast cancer and gastric cancer. My advice is to always ask for a copy of your dog's blood results, even if your vet tells you that everything is nomal. A full blood count will specify the levels of neutrophils (NEU) and lymphocytes (LYM) in your dog's blood. If NEU is five times higher than LYM, this may indicate that your dog has cancer, and in which case, depending on your dog's symptoms, the early use of non-invasive diagnostic techniques such as ultrasound, MRI and x-rays may be able to detect where this is, and perhaps buy your dog some valuable time in getting it diagnosed and treated.

Tramadol. It doesn't work as a painkiller in dogs (Budsberg et al, 2018). Tramadol is an opioid-like drug, but unlike true opioid drugs that act as mu-opioid receptor agonists, the analgesic effect of Tramadol is due to the drug's metabolites blocking M1 opioid receptors only (Minami et al, 2015). Whilst humans and cats have M1 receptors, dogs do not. Dogs are still subject to the serotonin and norepinephrine effects of Tramadol, which cause mild sedation; however, sedation is not pain relief. Effective painkillers for dogs, particularly when opiate-based pain relief is required, include morphine patches if a dog cannot take oral medication or is already suffering with abdominal discomfort or liver disease, and Pardale-V – a non-prescription analgesic that contains codeine, which has been specifically formulated for dogs. I wasn't aware that morphine patches existed for dogs until the end of Tilly's life, by which time it was too late. Given the terminal nature and symptoms of her illness, I feel that we should have been offered this option much sooner. Tilly had a reasonable-to-good quality of life right up until the end, but if we had been able to use morphine patches instead of oral pain relief, I believe that her quality of life would have been further improved. 

Meloxicam – Metacam vs Loxicom. Meloxicam is a NSAID medication – a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug. More specifically, it is a COX-2 inhibitor, which has been shown to slow the growth of adenocarcinoma tumours. Meloxicam is the active ingredient in both Metacam and Loxicom, but the two medications are not the same in other respects. The difference is in the excipients – substances that are formulated alongside the active ingredient of a medication, and are included for the purposes of long-term stabilization and other factors, such as palatability. I'm sure that most dog owners are aware that a substance called xylitol, a sweetener often used in chewing gum, is highly toxic to dogs. What I'm also certain of is that most dog owners are unaware that Metacam – the brand of meloxicam favoured by the majority of vets and prescribed for a wide range of inflammatory conditions – contains xylitol. Loxicom on the other hand, does not. I realise that the amount of xylitol in Metacam is probably small, but why include it in a medication formulated for use in dogs when there are plenty of other, dog-safe sweeteners available? I don't know whether the xylitol content of Metacam poses a health-risk to dogs who take it on a longterm basis, but what I do know is that based on ingredients, Loxicom appears to be the safer option. 

Euthanasia – advice for vets for dealing with clients. Please don't say that a dog needed more anaesthetic than would normally be required to end its life. It is a totally unnecessary thing to tell someone. It's also unprofessional. It provides zero comfort to the newly bereaved and worse, it may cause a client to further question what has certainly been an impossibly difficult decision to make. What a client needs to hear is that their dog seems ready to go, and if you have to use more anaesthetic than normal, keep that information to yourself. And unless you truly offer an unconditional, any time 'at home' euthanasia service, please don't mislead clients into thinking that this is an option.

If this blogpost has given the impression that I'm unhappy with the treatment that we received from the veterinary professionals involved in Tilly's care, this was not my intention. Everyone that we came into contact with was kind and caring, and I truly believe that they all had Tilly's best interests at heart. However, it was a lack of knowledge about the presentation of abdominal discomfort and gastric adenocarcinoma, NLR as a progostic factor for cancer, and the (in)effectiveness of Tramadol as a painkiller, that steered the course of Tilly's treatment along a particular path. This path could have been different. The possibility exists that had her symptoms been viewed differently and taken more seriously, and had the cancer been detected early enough, she may still be with us ... and so, if any of the knowledge that I have gained during the course of Tilly's illness enables just one dog and owner to have more time together, then something good will have come out of our experience. 

In loving memory of my beautiful, brave Tillybean.

References 

Budsberg, S., Torres, B., Kleine, S., Sandberg, G. and Berjeski, A. (2018) Lack of effectiveness of tramadol hydrochloride for the treatment of pain and joint dysfunction in dogs with chronic osteoarthritis. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 252: 427-432.

Minami, K., Sudo, Y., Miyano, K., Murphy, R. and Uezono, Y. (2015) µ-Opioid receptor activation by tramadol and O-desmethyltramadol (M1). Journal of Anaethesia, 29 (3): 475-479.

Uribe-Querol, E. and Rosales, C. (2015) Neutrophils in Cancer: Two Sides of the Same Coin. Journal of Immunology Research. 

Bibliography 

European Drugs Encyclopedia

Feeding for health and longevity: Raw vs. kibble vs. calories

In May last year I changed the dogs' teatime meal to a commercially prepared, 'ready-made' raw food diet.  At the time and for a long time beforehand, I believed that raw was the best way to feed a dog, but six months down the line, the diet wasn't working out well for Tilly.  I had to stop and re-evaluate my thoughts about raw feeding being the healthy option, and question what the domestic dog's 'species-appropriate' diet really should be. 

Dogs are carnivores, there is no doubting this, but carnivores fall into different types.  There are true or ‘obligate carnivores’ – animals that depend solely on the nutrients found in animal matter for their survival.  While they may consume small amounts of plant matter, they lack the physiology required for the efficient digestion of plants.  All felids including the domestic cat are obligate carnivores, requiring a diet consisting of primarily animal flesh, bones and organs. 

Dogs and other canids are ‘facultative carnivores’.  ‘Facultative’ means contingent, optional, or not required – in other words, while the primary diet of dogs is meat, dogs are actually capable of surviving without it.  Studies of the wolves of Yellowstone National Park in the USA reveal that even when prey animals are in plentiful supply, on average, the wolves only eat fresh prey every 2-3 days.  This can drop to only a few times per month during the winter, with the rest of the diet being made up of carrion (sometimes only frozen hide and bones) and whatever pickable, edible vegetation happens to be available.  In the wild, wolves don’t eat much, not even much of their primary food – fresh, raw prey – and they will go for days without eating anything at all. 

Dogs are also scavenger carnivores, meaning that although the meat that they would naturally consume may well be raw, it may not necessarily be fresh.  The decomposing flesh of carrion is in essence partly digested, with bacteria having already done some of the ‘eating’.

Being a carnivore, the dog’s dentition is geared towards a diet of flesh and bone.  Each side of an adult dog's upper jaw has 3 incisor teeth, 1 large canine tooth, 4 premolars and 2 molar teeth, and the lower jaw has 3 incisors, 1 canine tooth, 4 premolar and 3 molar teeth. 

The number and types of teeth reflect those of a ‘mesocarnivore’.  The earliest Carnivora family of Miacidae, of which Miacis, the earliest known ancestor of the domestic dog was a member, were mesocarnivores.  Modern day mesocarnivores include wolves, coyotes, foxes, civets and skunks, as well as dogs. 

Beyond the teeth, the dog’s gastro-intestinal system is that of a carnivore, being much shorter in proportion and in comparison with the GI tracts of herbivores.  The overall length of the canine GI tract (from mouth to anus) is about 5 times the dog’s total body length, whereas the length of the herbivorous equine GI tract is about 15 times the horse’s total body length.  The human GI tract is 10 times longer than the length of the body. 

The natural diet of a mesocarnivore would ideally consist of 50-70% animal and 30-50% plant matter.  In comparison, the diet of ‘hypercarnivores’ (e.g. cats, eagles, sharks, salmon) consists of more than 70% animal, and that of ‘hyopcarnivores’ (e.g. Black bear, raccoon) less than 30% animal.  While virtually all animals display omnivorous feeding behaviour according to conditions such as food supply, etc, animals generally prefer one class of food or another, for which their digestive processes are optimised accordingly.  The classification ‘omnivore’ refers to the adaptations and main food source of a species in general.  The main food source of an omnivore is variety in itself – pigs for example are true omnivores – but a plant-eating carnivore or a meat-eating herbivore is neither individually nor as a whole species omnivorous.  It may surprise you to learn that humans are not omnivores either, and neither are we carnivores or herbivores.  Like all of our primate ‘cousins’ we actually belong to a class of plant-eaters called ‘frugivores’, or fruit-eaters.  Just as carnivores can and do eat plant matter, frugivores (also herbivores, nectarivores, florivores and granivores) can and do eat meat.  The dog is a facultative carnivore, a scavenger carnivore and a mesocarnivore, NOT an omnivore. 

Being a mesocarnivore, the dog’s diet would ideally consist of 30-50% plant matter, but unlike herbivores, dogs lack the bacteria in their gut that produce the enzyme ‘cellulase’ and therefore the ability to break down cellulose – the major component in the rigid cell walls in plants.  Certainly, when some cellulose-rich foods are fed, they are still intact and recognisable within the dog’s faeces, for example, sweetcorn kernels, and grass (as anyone who has had the displeasure of removing grass-dangley-poops from their dog’s bottom will know).  For herbivores, the result of the digestion of cellulose is glucose, which is how they obtain their energy.

Dogs also lack the salivary enzyme ‘amylase’ needed to digest starchy plant matter found in cereals, grains and fibrous vegetables.  Coupled with the fact that dogs also lack grinding molars, the lack of salivary amylase is often used to uphold the theory that dogs are carnivores and therefore should not be fed plant matter at all, however, grinding molars and amylase are not needed for the digestion of ‘softer’ plant material composed mainly of water and simple sugars, such as fruit.  What is also often omitted in the ‘Prey Model’ of feeding is that although dogs lack salivary amylase, amylase is produced in the pancreas, so the digestion of starch-rich plant matter is possible once this has passed into the dog’s small intestine.

Contrary to popular belief, wolves do not eat the stomach contents of large, herbivorous prey animals.  Stomach acid is highly corrosive and would burn the mouth and oesophagus if eaten (and also corrode tooth enamel).  Occasionally, wolves will eat the stomach wall of large herbivorous prey animals, but only after shaking out the stomach contents.  The stomach contents of smaller prey animals such as rabbits, mice and birds is eaten, but only as a result of the entire animal being consumed – claws, fur, beak, feathers and all.

So … based on the domestic dog’s carnivore types (facultative, scavenger and mesocarnivore) and given its likely evolutionary route and self-domestication from the small Asiatic (Arabian) wolf, it could be concluded that the most ideal, most natural, most appropriate doggy diet ideally should consist of 50-70% small, raw, whole prey (flesh, bones, organs, fur, feathers, etc) including mammals, birds (and their eggs), reptiles and invertebrates such as worms and insects, and scavenged carrion (this could include fish and large animals), and a 30-50% mix of the stomach/intestinal contents of small herbivorous and omnivorous prey (e.g. rabbits, squirrels, mice, birds), ripe fruits and berries and various other ‘pickable’ plants and botanicals.  However, the latest DNA evidence suggests that the dog began to branch away from the wolf between 100,000 and 135,000 years ago.  We also know that around 15,000 years ago, at the end of the last ice-age, dogs became the domesticated canines that we know and love today.  During this time, and particularly so during the past 3,000 years of intentional, selective breeding, numerous anatomical and behavioural changes have taken place as a direct result of the domestic dog’s strategy of life, to stay near humans for the best chance of survival (which includes eating our food). 

The dog has not been a wolf for many thousands of years, and numerous features of the dog’s anatomy including skull, teeth, skeleton and GI tract differ significantly from those of wolves both of the past, and of the present.  This means that according to the domestic dog’s strategy of life – to stay near humans for the best chance of survival – the 50-70% animal part of the ‘dog as mesocarnivore’ diet should also include table scraps such as cooked meat and dairy (milk, yoghurt, cheese, etc) and the non-animal part, raw, cooked and partially cooked vegetables, cereals and grains, as well as a smorgasbord of excreted poop from humans and the local domestic and wild animal populations.  This gives a whole new perspective on ‘natural feeding’, and one that implies that popular raw diet formulae such as Prey Model, Natural Raw Diet, Raw Meaty Bones and BARF (Bones and Raw Food, Biologically Appropriate Raw Food) are all flawed in some way or another. 

What to feed is a personal choice that we make for our dogs based on what we believe to be the best.  There is no scientific research to support the claimed, nutritional benefits of raw feeding, only anecdotes and testimonials, however, there is scientific evidence to the contrary both in nutritional analysis studies of raw food diets for dogs and in veterinary case studies of cats and adult dogs and puppies fed various raw diet formulae.  Certainly in six months of feeding a commercially prepared, 'ready made' raw food diet to my dogs, both of whom were in great, general health to begin with anyway, I have seen no obvious beneficial health changes but instead the opposite, when throughout October and November Tilly began to suffer worsening, nightly abdominal discomfort that upon switching her back to her breakfast kibble (Acana) for her teatime meal, ceased completely.  Wanting to ensure that she was back to good health I had her blood tested, and although symptom-free at the time of these tests, she tested positive for pancreatitis.  Two months on since stopping the raw food and her blood lipase level is still double the norm, but I'm hoping that this will continue to drop now that I have switched her onto a bland, low-fat wet food (Chappie).  I am very thankful that my dogs sleep next to my bed, otherwise I would be none-the-wiser to her nightly discomfort and the seriousness of what was developing.  I am also thankful that I am not so far up my own bottom not to be able to change my long-held belief that raw just has to best, or to delude myself that Tilly's symptoms of digestive upset after 6 months of raw feeding must either be normal, or due to something other than the food.  However, I have seen the apparent health benefits of raw feeding in a client dog who had a multitude of infected tick bites on its head that despite several months of antibiotic treatment had failed to clear up.  After only four days on a raw food diet, the tick bites were no longer infected, and a fortnight later there was no evidence that the bites had ever been there.  I don’t think that this was coincidence and I do think that the healing was directly connected to nutrition.  Protein is needed for cell development and repair.  Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins.  Amino acids are critical to life and have many functions in metabolism.  Some protein sources contain higher levels of certain amino acids than do others, and some protein sources contain a broader range of amino acids than do others.  Cooking alters the molecular structure of protein, which may make assimilation difficult, and the cheaper commercial kibbles use lower quality protein sources in their formulae.  Before switching to a raw food diet the dog was being fed what I consider to be a low quality kibble (high in cereal, low in meat, and a minimum level of vitamin D).  I think that the raw food gave him a much needed protein and vitamin D super-boost, which finally enabled his body to repair the damage, and quickly too.  Many of the raw feeding anecdotes are along similar lines – "dog with chronic illness gets well when fed a raw food diet".  Maybe it would be more appropriate to use raw feeding as medicine for dogs, not as the primary diet, and like any course of medicine to stop giving it once the illness has been cured.  

And perhaps there is nothing wrong with long-term raw feeding if the nutrition truly is balanced, complete, and doesn't contain excessive amounts of fat, however, laboratory analyses of five raw diets including two that are commercially produced have shown up nutritional shortfalls in a wide range of minerals including iron, zinc, potassium, manganese, calcium and phosphorous, as well as vitamin E, and nutritional excesses including vitamin D and magnesium.  Similarly, whether homemade, canned or kibbled, there is nothing wrong with feeding a cooked diet that is nutritionally balanced and complete (according to AAFCO) and includes a small proportion of cereal or grain.  But whatever the diet, quality of the ingredients is important, and by quality I mean ‘additive free’.  Many raw-fed dogs are fed fatty, domestically raised animals that have been pumped full antibiotics, hormones and vaccines, and while raw animal flesh, bone and organs are worthy of inclusion into the dog’s diet, feeding fatty, ‘adulterated’ raw meat really is not the healthy option.  Feeding a raw diet that does not consist of between 30-50% digestible plant matter is, in my opinion, not dog-appropriate, and the practise of supplementing a raw or home-cooked diet with probiotic bacteria, digestive enzymes and/or vitamin/mineral/amino-acid rich ‘super-foods’ when the nutritional content of the diet itself has not been thoroughly analysed, is questionable both in benefit and ‘appropriateness’.

Adding supplements also suggests that the dog can’t get enough nutrition from a raw-food diet.  ‘Ah but …’ say many raw-feeders, ‘… in the wild, dogs and wolves would eat all of the carcass, so the nutrition would be balanced and complete.’  So disregarding the fact that dogs are not wolves and have not been living ‘in the wild’ for a very long time, let me get this right – the eating of the ‘non-meat’ parts of a raw carcass makes a meal balanced and complete, but commercially produced pet foods that may contain these ‘derivative’ parts (e.g. hair, hooves, feathers, beaks, sinews, tracheae, guts, eyes, snouts, bum-holes, etc) should be avoided like the plague because they are inferior, junk ingredients?  The fact is that predators will selectively eat for nutritional value, for the best balance of protein, fat and other nutrients, but this has nothing to do with eating an entire carcass, it has to do with having a much, much wider menu from which to self-select.  Self-selection as well as a huge variety of different foods is what today's feeding practices lack, regardless of whether or not the food given is raw or whole.  The dog's choice of what to eat, how much to eat, and when to eat it, is limited.  We decide for them.  The dog's natural feeding practice is 'buffet-style', but we take away this choice to feed naturally.  We prohibit the dog's natural inclination to self-select for balanced nutrition.    

I’m not suggesting that all kibbles are nutritionally 'complete'.  They may be complete as per AAFCO standards and balanced in the nutritients that they actually contain as in there are no excesses or no deficiencies of those ingredients, but some may be lacking in certain vitamins, protein amino-acids and nutrients essential for optimum health simply because there is no legal requirement for pet food manufacturers to include them, or they are included at minimum levels that aren’t sufficient for some dogs to remain in gleaming health (e.g. those with digestion or assimilation problems or chronic illness).  But at least the commercial kibbles aren’t pretending to be something that they are not, and supplementing a commercial kibble diet with a weekly portion of oily fish, the occasional whole, raw egg, a raw, lean, meaty lamb rib (as a meal replacement), a carrot, a broccoli stalk, a handful of blueberries or a few mg of ‘super-greens’ now and again is more likely to enhance overall nutrition than unbalance it.  Incidentally, the past and present feeding practices of captive wolves show that they live longer and remain healthier when fed commercial dog food.  No word of a lie.  According to the leading specialists in wolf husbandry and medicine, feeding commercial dog food, not raw prey, is the recommended practice.  To provide enrichment for the wolves and bait for husbandry purposes raw meat and bones are fed, but not as the main diet. 

But whatever diet choice we make for our dogs, whether that be raw or cooked, commercially produced or home prepared, fresh on the bone, canned, pouched or kibbled, expensive or cheap, one thing is absolutely certain - overfeeding reduces lifespan.  Overfeeding is perhaps the biggest error that pet owners make – even those who feed to manufacturers’ recommended guidelines and according to ‘ideal’ breed weight.  More than 60 years of scientific research shows us that calorie restriction is the only nutritional intervention that consistently extends the lifespan of animals.  For example, in a controlled study of 48 Labradors, feeding 25% less food than the calorie requirement for ideal body weight saw an average lifespan increase of around 2 years.  In addition, compared to the control dogs who were fed to maintain ‘ideal’ body weight, the food restricted dogs weighed less, had lower body fat content, lower serum triglycerides, triiodothyronine, insulin and glucose concentrations, and the onset of the signs of chronic disease was delayed.

Calculating the ideal daily energy requirement for a dog is a little complicated, but not difficult.  First, we need to know the dog’s ‘ideal’ weight.  The standard guideline is to be able to easily feel the ribs beneath the coat, see a definite waist when viewed from above, and an abdominal tuck when viewed from the side.  We also need to know the Metabolic Energy value (kcal/kg) of the food that we feed.  This information is usually easy to find on the packet label of commercially produced, complete kibbles and some canned and pouched foods.  The final piece of information that we need to calculate daily energy requirement is the dog’s age, sexual status and activity level.  Tilly’s ‘ideal’ weight by eye and feel is around 14 kg.  She is between 5 and 7 years old, spayed, and typically active. 

According to the dog food calculator (picture left), this gives me two category choices – ‘typical’ and ‘senior, neutered, inactive’.  She is neutered, but she is neither senior nor inactive, so ‘typical’ more accurately describes her. 

I feed her Chappie original canned, which has a Metabolic Energy value of 850 kcal/kg.  The resulting calculation is that she requires 796 calories per day and I should be feeding her 940 grams of Chappie per day, however, to follow the 25% food restriction diet to increase lifespan, a further calculation is needed. 

To calculate 25% of 796, we need to divide 796 by 100 (7.96) and then multiply this by 25 (199).  This gives a reduced daily calorie intake of 597 (796 – 199). 

We know that 940 grams contains 796 calories, so to reduce this by 25% we divide 940 grams by 100, which gives 9.4 grams (1% of 940 grams), and then multiply 9.4 grams by 25 to give 235 grams.  940 grams minus 235 grams is 705 grams.  So actually, Tilly requires 705 grams of Chappie per day. 

Beau’s ‘ideal’ weight by eye and feel is 32 kg.  He’s 3 years old, neutered, and very lazy, so even though he’s a young dog, I place him in the ‘senior, neutered, inactive’ category.  I feed him Acana Grasslands kibble, which has a Metabolic Energy value of 3750 kcal/kg.  According to the dog food calculator, this works out at 1211 calories and 320 grams of Acana Grasslands per day.  To feed for increased lifespan, this is reduced to 908 calories and 240 grams of Acana Grasslands per day.  If I went by Acana’s daily recommendation for an inactive, 32 kg dog, I would be feeding him 320 grams per day – 80 grams more than is needed.  Beau’s ‘feeding for increased lifespan’ weight is around 31 kg.  Feeding for increased lifespan drops the ‘ideal’ weight by 1 kilo – that’s a whole kilo of excess fat!  Visually, the difference in my dogs between ‘ideal’ and ‘increased lifespan’ weights is that the ribcage is more defined, with the outline of the last three ribs visible beneath the coat (picture right).

  

It is much, much harder to calculate how much raw food to feed because meats, vegetables, plants, etc, differ greatly in their individual Metabolic Energy values.  The general guide to feeding raw food is around 2% of the dog’s ideal body weight per day.  For Tilly this works out at 300 grams per day in which to pack 796 calories (her ‘ideal’ weight calorie count).  To feed for increased lifespan, we need to reduce the calories to 597, but to feed for variety, the quantity of food fed per day will fluctuate greatly in order to provide the correct calorie count per meal.  For example, there are around 85 calories in 100 g of raw tripe, which means that an all tripe day for Tilly weighs in at 705 g, but if fed according to the 2% rule would provide her with a meagre 238 calories.  Raw lamb ribs are around 284 kcal per 100g, so an all lamb rib day for Tilly weighs in at 210 g, but feeding lamb ribs according to the 2% rule would provide her with 796 calories (and a huge quantity of fat).  Because the Metabolic Energy values of different foods is so inconsistent, realistically, the best way to feed a raw food or home-cooked diet is by calorie content, not by weight, whilst trying to keep the overall quantity of the meal at around 2% of the dog’s bodyweight.  That way, meals that combine meat, bone, offal, fish, egg, dairy and veg, fruit, grain, cereal, herbs based on the mesocarnivore 50-70:30-50 animal:plant ratio of the human-food-eating domestic dog could be made without overloading or starving the body with such wildly fluctuating daily calorie intakes and meal weights, although the ratios per meal would need to differ from dog to dog to accommodate individual calorie needs.      

But calories are only a part of the story.  Even if increased lifespan calorie counts for an individual dog can be achieved at around 2% of bodyweight per meal formula per day, the levels of protein, fat, vitamins and minerals will continue to remain inconsistent across each meal.  This could have three possible outcomes:

1. over time the inconsistencies balance themselves out
2. over time the inconsistencies saturate the body’s organs and tissues with excess waste (toxaemia)
3. over time the inconsistencies leave the body deficient in some way (malnourishment)

It’s tricky enough even with all the right information to get the long-term balance right with a home-prepared diet, and while it may be safe to assume that the producers of commercial ‘complete’ raw food diets have taken care of this for us, the full nutritional content with nutrient levels, along with Metabolic Energy values, are unavailable.  Some list the % values for moisture, protein, fat, ash and fibre.  Some also list vitamin, mineral and amino-acid content, but none list the levels of these nutrients and so do not provide enough information to know for sure that according to the 2% rule (or thereabouts) the food contains a complete and balanced compliment of vitamins, minerals and other essential nutrients.  If feeding only one meal variety that contains just one meat source (e.g. chicken only) and the same vegetable/fruit/‘other’ combination and meat:plant ratio as other meal varieties, this WILL give rise to nutritional deficiency or excess over time, unless the formula has been adjusted accordingly for balance (which to my knowledge, none have).  Even feeding a range of meal varieties is no guarantee of balance because they each tend to be made to the same meat:plant ratio and the same combination of 'plant', with the type of meat being the only element that changes.

My own journey into raw feeding has turned out to be nothing more than a detour, and even though I truly believed that raw was the best way to feed my dogs and to some extent still do, somewhat of a learning curve too.  I’m neither for raw nor against it, but until the commercial, ready-made raw food diet producers can supply complete and balanced nutrition along with full analyses and Metabolic Energy values of their meals and they can achieve this with a fat content of 4% or lower, I will continue to feed Chappie (Tilly) and Acana (Beau) as the primary diet – with the occasional added extra (fish fillet, handful of blueberries, chunk of apple, etc) for variety and to boost basic nutrition. 

I want my dogs to remain healthy and to live as long as possible, and the scientific evidence shows that reducing the daily calories of a commercially produced, complete and balanced kibble by 25%  allows for an average increased lifespan of two years.  Quality and appropriateness of ingredients is important.  Complete and balanced nutrition is also important – but ultimately, it’s reducing the calories that counts in the longevity stakes. 

Less really does mean more – more years, and better health for longer. 

.................................................................................................................................................................... 

Bibliography & Resources

Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation.
L. David Mech and Luigi Boitani.

Canine Behavior: A Guide for Veterinarians.
Bonnie V. Beaver.

The domestic dog: Its evolution, behaviour and interactions with people.
J Serpell.

Dog Food Calculator
Mike Sagman.

Dog Food Advisor: Saving Good Dogs from Bad Food.

Nutritional analysis of 5 types of “Raw Food Diets.”

L. Freeman, K. Michel.

Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 2001;218(5):705. 

Raw food diets in companion animals: A critical review.

Daniel P. Schlesinger, Daniel J. Joffe.

Effects of diet restriction on life span and age-related changes in dogs.

Richard D. Kealy, PhD; Dennis F. Lawler, DVM; Joan M. Ballam, MS; Sandra L. Mantz; Darryl N. Biery, DVM, DACVR; Elizabeth H. Greeley, PhD; George Lust, PhD; Mariangela Segre, DSc; Gail K. Smith, DVM, PhD, DACVS; Howard D. Stowe, DVM, PhD.

Science-based medicine ~ “Raw Meat and Bone Diets for Dogs: It’s Enough to Make You BARF”. 

Dr Brennan McKenzie, MA, VMD.

Predators Hunt for a Balanced Diet
Science Daily

.....................................................................................................................................................................

Tilly update, 10th February ~ Re-test for cPL has confirmed that finally, this has decreased to a normal level again.  The bad news is that proximal inflammation/damage to her small intestine as a result of the pancreatitis has left her with a folate (vitamin B9) deficiency, so I am working to increase this via dietary supplementation.  I will be re-testing cPL and folate levels again in a month's time to see whether we have continued, normal cPL, and an increase in folate.