From Tom Lonsdale:
I advise an upper limit of one-third scrapes for dogs and rather less for cats. Liquidising scrapes, both cooked and raw, in the kitchen mixer may help to increase their digestibility."
He may not "recommend" it but he does "advise" it. I guess it is open to one's interpretation what he means.
Tom wrote that book before I knew him. I know he is the one that convinced me that I could stop feeding any plant material whatsoever. That the dogs have no nutritional need for anything that doesn't come from the body of an anima.
If you have read Raw Meaty Bones, Lonsdale main thrust has to do with canine tooth decay leading to an AIDS like conditions in dogs due to the toxic substances caused by tooth decay and gum disease and a dog's ability to fight off infection and diseases (perhaps another need for a good vitamin program - i.e. Mega C or the like).
In my mind, the main thrust of Raw Meaty Bones is to explain WHY someone should feed their dogs an RMB diet. There is very little about how to. I told him so after I read it and thats when he wrote Work Wonders. That is more of a "how to" book than a "why" book.
You mention further down in this post about wanting to see studies. Why don't you ask for studies as to what benefit, if any, there is to a dog when giving him Vitamin C. The advice I've seen from some people is that if you give megadoses of Vit C, you must do many doses throughout the day because they eliminate the excess so fast.
I found the book dwelling into the dental aspects of dogs and cats more than a book addressing the strengths of a raw fed diet.
Thats because Tom's profession is a vet dentist.
I agree with the concept of raw meaty bones, but I haven't seen any scientific data that shows that a dog is overall healthier i.e. blood serium levels, lower incidences of cancer, SIBO, EPI, pancreas defficiency etc. when fed a 100% raw meaty bone, organs and meat diet.
And you never will. Who would pay for such research? Certainly not dog food companies. There is really no one who has any great benefit if you switch dogs to a raw diet. I don't think you will find any scientific data on how much a dog's health is improved by giving megadoses of Vit C.
One major argument proponents tout is that a Prey Model Raw diet has all that is needed as far as nutrients for a dog. Although I have never seen any research or data that reports this, I submit that although the prey model may contain the necessary elements and nutrients, it may not be in a usable forum.
Actually we are doing the research now. What does a researcher do? He does something and observes the results. I have fed my dogs a PMR diet for 8 years. Not one single plant item have I fed my dogs or cats in that time. I know people who have gone 30 years without feeding plant material. My dogs are healthy and so are theirs. I have no doubt that PMR contains ALL the necessary ingredients for dogs to live a long healthy life. That has been proven by the fact that dogs/wolves have eaten this diet for a million years.
No one has shown me any information that states that raw meat, bones and organs (1) has all the needed elements to sustain health and growth, and (2) if it does, how much of it is in the available form.[/quote]
Since dogs/wolves have eaten a PMR diet for a million years and kibble has been around for maybe 50 years and only popular for maybe 30, kibble is the FAD diet, not PMR. Why don't you ask the same question of the kibble manufacturers? No one seems to need them to prove anything. All the proof is left up to the PMR feeders to provide. We have a million years to back us up, kibble has 30. Let them provide proof. They don't. All the research they have done is to show that 6 of 8 dogs can live 6 months on a kibble diet. Thats the sum total of their research.
Don't dogs pass bone fragments in their stools?
Occasionally. More so in newly switched dogs until they learn to produce the necessary enzymes to digest bone. I rarely see any bone fragments anymore. It's no big deal. They pass without problem.
Did the dog obtain the needed material from the bone before it was passed?
If they didn't, we'd have a bunch of dogs with calcium deficiency and we don't.
It obviously wasn't broken down into a liquid form so how available was it?
We feed our dogs much more bone that is needed. I'm surprised that we don't see more bone fragments.
In my opinion, the prey model is great for what is does. The great unknown is what it doesn't do.
I hope I cleared some of that up. If there was something it didn't do, wolves would have gone extinct thousands of years ago. Nature got it right. We still have wolves and dogs.