Hi Dr. Tom,
My 22 month old shepherd has some tartar on her teeth. I recently started giving her oxtails and knuckle bones. There is still some tartar left at the gumline on her canines, as well as some on the her biggest molar or pre-molar on the upper arch. Will this eventually come off when eating RMBs? Or should i take her to the dentist?

thanks so much,

From: Tom Lonsdale
Subject: Re: [CSDogBookReview] pre-RMB tartar

Hi ....,

Depending where tartar is it can be a matter of little concern or major concern. But often gum disease arises without sign of much tartar at all. I don't want to confuse; it's that we need to understand a bit about gum disease and how the bacteria manage to get down between the tooth and gum and hollow out a pocket.

In the pocket the bacteria produce plenty of toxins and the body produces plenty of biochemical warfare agents and the trouble gets worse and worse.

Tartar down on the gum line, as you mention occurring on the canines, indicates likely increased problems at the point the tartar is in contact with the gum. If you look closely there you will likely see increased redness and swelling of the gum.

Once upon a time I thought canine teeth were used only for the killing action and thus only got cleaned when forced through tough hide. I had watched lions on kills and not made the connection that ripping chunks of meat off bone achieves the same cleaning effect. But when I saw wolves dismembering a carcass and Alison Tyler's dogs devouring shoulders of pork I was better able to see that the canine teeth should be used as rakes. The teeth get plunged deep into the meat and with a strong pulling action the chunks are pulled off.

So unless you are feeding whole carcasses or large joints of meat with the hide still intact it's unlikely the canine teeth will be adequately cleaned and the gums massaged. This problem becomes the more severe in long nosed and flat nosed breeds of dogs. Dogs with a wolf/dingo nose tend do best.

What to do about the hard tartar on the canines? If your dog is quiet, you or your vet may be able to scrape the tartar off with the patient conscious. Long term to keep the tartar at bay you can choose the first option: Feed whole carcasses and huge slabs of meat on the bone. Or you can brush/rub with a moist cloth the canine teeth and gums. Happily the canine teeth are the easy ones to clean.

Regarding knuckle bones: I know lots of dogs gnaw on them. But it's also true that lots of dogs chip or break teeth on those big hard bones. So probably best not to give them.

Best wishes,

Tom Lonsdale

Hi Dr. Tom, About the knuckle bones - my shepherd eats the whole thing. She knaws for awhile, and then when it is small enough to get in her mouth she crunches on it. and she wont give it back. So since she is determined to eat them, i need to find bones that are soft enough that wont break her teeth. I recently joined a great list called Healthy Aussies, LOL, and I will join the groups you mentioned too.

I would love to see a beef diagram of appropriate 'cuts' for dogs - kinda like the butchers have for people cuts, LOL. ps,I love the dog drawings in your Work Wonders book, the dogs are so wonderfully expressive. Did you do those?

thanks so much,

From: Tom Lonsdale
Subject: Re: [CSDogBookReview] Re: which beef bones?

Hi .... and all,

Several points:

1.) Many big dogs do crunch their way through enormous bones. It rather depends what else they have to eat and how much time they have with nothing better to do.

If, for instance, you feed beef brisket, the bone will be eaten rather quicker.

I guess the question arises: Do you feed raw bones as toys/passifiers or as part of the diet? In general it's better to think of meat on the bone as the staple. When there's nothing left but bone, some dogs eat the bone, others walk away.

It remains the case that big bones, especially those sawn lengthwise can break teeth.

2.) You mention your big dog won't give the bone back. I don't encourage a confrontation but for those reading this who have puppies I encourage you to work with your pup so that you can, without teasing, take the food away at will. Later on when your puppy grows into a big powerful dog you will be able to remove food at will and with safety.

3.) The beauty of feeding whole carcasses is that all parts are of value. So it really doesn't matter where you put the saw cuts. (Humans pay more for different cuts of meat and use them differently.) Check out Linda Evans' 28 whippet pups enjoying a kangaroo carcass at: http://www.rawmeatybones.com/readerspics2.html There were no prior saw cuts.

4.) Thanks for mentioning Bonnie Bullock's illustrations in Work Wonders. What a stroke of luck that Jackie Marriott was able to introduce me to Bonnie -- although she has neither fax nor email and lives in South Wales and I live in New South Wales. Not sure if Bonnie is available for commissions. However, if anyone is interested I shall happily put you in touch.

5.) Initial thoughts for the cover of Work Wonders was to use a photograph of Youlia Anderson's ceramic marching dogs. In 3D the sculpture is exquisite. But for the 2D image we used Youlia's inspiration and Bonnie's watercolour.

There's a photo of my prized Youlia Anderson sculpture at http://www.rawmeatybones.com/readerspics1.html and Youlia can be contacted through: http://www.furrytaleceramics.com>http://www.furrytaleceramics.com

Best wishes,

Tom


Subject: Re: resource guarding, Youlia Anderson sculpture

Hi Dr. Tom, thanks so much for your reply.

I have just received Jean Donaldson's book "Mine", which explains how to work with resource guarding without confrontation. I havent read it yet, but it is highly recommended by positive reinforcement trainers.

Youlia's sculpture is wonderful, and i so enjoyed the pics of the many whippet pups and all the other pups eating raw.

thanks again for your generosity and time,

Hi Dr. Tom, I really appreciate your concern about teeth. I loved your Work Wonders book. I am looking forward to finding even more info on teeth in your first book.

My shepherd will let me clean her teeth - any suggestions on what to use to get the tartar off the canines at the gumline?

I read something by a vet saying not to try to clean tartar off by myself, because bacteria can be released into the bloodstream. Perhaps this would apply only to diseased teeth and gums?

My shepherd is only 22months, so hopefully she doesnt have any gum disease.

thanks,


From: Tom Lonsdale
Subject: Re: [CSDogBookReview] Re: pre-RMB tartar

Hi again ....,

About cleaning teeth, it's best done by a vet who knows about these things. But of course you may have a struggle finding one and then a struggle getting him/her to do the job without anaesthetic and all the paraphernalia.

When I am visiting friends and come across a dog with a bead of calculus at the gum line of the canines I oftentimes ask for a teaspoon. Then with gentle downward strokes use the bowl of the spoon to scrape away the tartar. Purists complain that you can damage the enamel this way. Also you can't do a perfect job. But tartar control is a daily task and getting the bulk off is the initial objective. The main objective is to keep it off. (Of course more severe tartar accumulation needs the full general anaesthetic and works.)

That point about bacteria being released is something of an overstatement. When gums are inflamed just eating food releases a shower of bacteria into the blood. A one-off bacteraemia as a result of descaling one small area on each of four canine teeth is insignificant by comparison.

Now for your first statement:

I really appreciate your concern about teeth. I loved your Work Wonders book. I am looking forward to finding even more info on teeth in your first book.

I really appreciate your kind perspicacious comments. You will find lots of info about teeth in Raw Meaty Bones and with plenty good reason. Teeth, and gum disease, provide the main entry into discussions of each of the five facets of the pet food fraud. If you set aside the aberration that is human civilisation, then carnivore teeth are at the very leading edge of our evolution during this Age of Mammals.

Let me take you through the five points one by one:

**Cruelty, ill health and suffering of pets 10%

Raw Meaty Bones is full of the evidence of how gum disease (mouth rot/periodontal disease) is at the root of so many of our pets' and human diseases. It's the one disease that can be detected by the foul odours and can be seen on inspection and all junk food fed pets have the disease at some level. Pet food industry figures say that 80% have the disease at a level needing treatment by the time they are 3 years old. By 12 years of age their graph shows a 100% prevalence.

And the solution is easy too. Feed raw meaty bones in large pieces and that prevents/fixes the condition in nearly every instance. If you get the teeth/gum disease aspect under control nearly everything else follows on.

For the understanding and resolving the pet disease aspect I give a 5% scoring and for organising an appropriate diet I award another 5%. To my mind these are the easy bits.

**Misused and abused 'science'. 20%

It's not peculiar to vet science and research but it's pretty much absolute and without mitigation that vet science is wrapped up in and obsessed with:
a.) Reductionism
b.) Germ theory
c.) Treatment paradigm (Promoting elaborate treatment instead of promoting simple prevention.)
You'll need to read the book to get the fuller picture. But the point is that by focusing on how wrong they've been over periodontal disease we can reveal the inadequacies of the veterinary scientific method and practice and show how it can all be fixed by a U-turn. This U-turn can then serve as a wonderful example to the other medical disciplines.

**Blocking of significant scientific breakthroughs 30%

Who can say what breakthroughs lie in store? But in the same way that simple ideas like a round earth, that microbes give rise to wound infection and that Darwinian evolutionary concepts colour all aspects of our modern life; then I suspect something similar might happen when we focus more carefully on the role of carnivores in regulating our Age of Mammals.

Carnivores regulate the rest of us -- or at least used to do so until humans turned nature on its head -- by sinking their canine teeth into the necks of their prey. Arising from that carnivorous act the rest of the planet's terrestial biodiversity is linked. But carnivores regulating the rest of us without regulation themselves could and would create a problem. This, I believe, is where periodontal disease comes in. Regulating the regulators and the lessons to be learnt from that are the subject of Raw Meaty Bones Chapter 14 and the other 13 chapters were written in a supporting role. You may need to read the book a few times to get the full picture. But even reading it once should give you an idea of the scope.

**Economic, human health and natural environmental consequences 20%

By putting the junk pet-food/veterinary/faux animal welfare alliance in such a pivotal position of control then the human economy is badly skewed against the community and for the alliance.

Work Wonders Chapter 8 gives you some of the human health aspects, several of which hinge on periodontal disease, and you can find more at: http://secureshop.rawmeatybones.com/newsletter/view.epl?id=36

With the junk food industry, vet profession and pharmaceutical industries running at high speed providing unnecessary and harmful products and services, again considerably influenced by gum disease, the environmental costs are huge.

**Failure of the democratic, administrative and legal systems to deal with a cashed-up cabal 20%

Even though the elected representatives, media, government administrations and legal system (including the legal arm of the animal welfare protection organisations/government) know about the issues, including the abomination of widespread mouth rot, they refuse to act for pets and the community but serve other interests. By staying focused and staying on message about periodontal disease we can slowly get things altered regarding something that everyone can relate to.

Of course it's imperative that we don't wander off into fanciful abstractions due to the blandishments of the barfers and prey modellers but that's another story.

Best wishes,

Tom

Wonderful to hear from you again! And of course you're still fighting the good fight, as ever :)

This particular forum is such a great opportunity for folks to bounce ideas off you, hear your thoughts, and for all of us to be able to have the chance to read and take part. I really appreciate the time you take for these kinds of list discussion, Tom.

So before I ramble on any more, I best get to my question. I noticed in your reply to XXXXX that you spoke of not being too enthused about "prey model jargon" - that it "over-promises and under-delivers". Could you expand on that more for us, Tom?

I guess I'm just curious if it's the slick tidiness of any kind of such label/catch phrase (that seems to sum things up a little too tritely perhaps?), or if its something else about it that bothers you. I know you said you'd speak on this more when time allowed, but of course, I'm a busybody, who's curious about your thoughts on this particular subject, so thought I'd toss out my query right away.

Cheers,


From: Tom Lonsdale
Subject: Re: [CSDogBookReview] Hi Tom! Question regarding "jargon"

Hi .... and all,

Busybody or not, I think you are wonderful and it's wonderful to hear from you.

Thanks also for your thanks and for being a committed worker for the cause.

Whilst you did not say it was your view, I agree the marketing term 'prey model' is slick, tidy and trite. To my mind it's a term that does not communicate with the masses and does not advance the interests of animals or the community.

Recently I attempted to get this matter aired on the rawvet list. The moderators permitted two posts but banned the third post. Discussions with the moderation team have so far drawn blank.

Below is the full text of the March 18 post on RawVet entitled: Jargon, was Feeding Philosophies

Do we now anticipate the 'Jargon wars' or can we hope that this difference of opinion will be amicably resolved? I don't know, but I do know that this is something that should not be hidden under the carpet.

Keep well.

Regards to all,

Tom

--------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 18:04:44 +1100
Subject: [RawVet] Jargon, was Feeding philosophies
--------------------------------------------------------

Hi [name withheld] and all,

The emergence of the hybrid term 'prey model' seems to me to be a retrograde step -- jargon that neither enhances our understanding nor increases our store of knowledge. Or am I mistaken?

It seems to me the term, as I've seen it defined, fails on several counts.

Scientific:
'Parts of animals in which they are found' usually turns out to be an arbitrary and ill-defined set of numbers.

The hide, hair and guts are not included in the 'model'. From the point of view of being tough and chewy the hide and hair has it. But doesn't get a run.

The guts, complete with chyme are the genuinely different part of the prey with distinct nutrient makeup. They never get included in the 'parts list' due to bacterial contamination, putrefaction, storage, smell, health regulations and aesthetic concerns. As a result the chyme of part digested vegetable matter, digestive enzymes and the bodies and breakdown products of the biofilm 'whole prey' don't appear on the menu.

Apart from liver, the 'parts of animals' that are included in this 'model' comprise heart, tongue, kidney, maybe lung and sometimes tripe. Brain that might contribute different fatty acid profiles and pancreas that might include enzymes don't appear to feature much.

But in any case, from a scientific point of view, why would anyone spend much time and effort mixing and matching according to a formula or model (supposing that was an accurate formula or model) if there is no scientific rationale?

Liver apart, can someone tell me what is the nutrient profile difference between the items on a list of 'prey model' offal and say tripe which might form the basis of a diet. Similarly what is the nutrient profile difference between 'prey model' offal compared with the muscle, marrow, collagen framework, vasculature, osteoblasts/clasts and assorted cells in say a chicken backs and frames based diet? What are these 'prey model' offal parts supposed to add that is not in a predominantly raw meaty bones and table scrap diet with the haphazard addition of liver?

Isn't the calciumhydroxyapatite of bone, apart from where chemical gradients appear, largely an inert substance as far as the carnivore is concerned and excreted accordingly?

It seems to be me that these 'scientific' questions need answers backed up with substantial evidence.

Economy:
Of course whole prey are easily the number one food (and medicine) source for carnivores. But when it comes to the economics it's often, for most folks, hard to feed the optimum diet and a second best needs to be found. How do the dictates of the 'prey model' assist with economy when compared with, say, a raw meaty bones based diet or a tripe and raw meaty bones based diet?

Practicality:
Practicalities perforce prevail. If you can't get it you can't feed it. What does the elaborate, and rather arbitrary offal list offer that should persuade us to battle impracticalities to find, for instance, heart or kidney? For those who find chicken backs and frames an easy practical option with sometimes a pig's head thrown in or for those who can access ruminant stomachs by the barrow load, why should they worry there's no tongue or trachea in the mix? (Of course I assume the tripe/omasum fed animals also get some large pieces of raw meaty bones for variety and tooth cleaning.)

Do those who have hit on economic, practical options need to feel embarrassed or that they are in some way inadequate?

Jargon:
We've seen the discredited barf, vomit, puke, technicolour yawn jargon spew forth. Do we really need more jargon which according to the dictionary is:
>1 a : confused unintelligible language b : a strange, outlandish, or barbarous language or dialect c : a hybrid language or dialect
>simplified in vocabulary and grammar and used for communication between peoples of different speech
>2 : the technical terminology or characteristic idiom of a special activity or group
>3 : obscure and often pretentious language marked by circumlocutions and long words

Early and mid game:
To my mind anything we do now should be coherent, internally consistent and anticipate the end game.
Right now in the early stages of the raw feeding revolution we need to deal simultaneously with what I believe to be the five facets of the junk (cooked or barf) pet-food fraud:
* Cruelty, ill health and suffering of pets 10%
* Misused and abused 'science' 20%
* Blocking of significant scientific breakthroughs 30%
* Economic, human health and natural environmental consequences 20%
* Failure of the democratic, administrative and legal systems to deal with a cashed-up cabal 20%
The percentages are admittedly approximations, however I reckon they give an indication of the importance of each facet.

'Cruelty, ill health and suffering of pets' is listed at 10% because that's the easy bit to understand and is the most easily fixed. It comprises about 5% dietary information and 5% understanding of disease processes.

The 5% dietary information needs to be unadulterated and clearly articulated. Language and concepts should not create stumbling blocks that impede our attempts to deal with the 95% of issues deserving the bulk of our attention.

End game:
If we anticipate taking this all to a conclusion then we will need to get serious. And that means fighting the political fight and mixing it in the legal arena too. 'Barfmania' has done untold harm to our prospects of fixing things for pets, people and the wider community. If we burden ourselves and dependent public with a further hybrid and misleading term we shall live to rue the day.

The politicians, media and judiciary only need half an excuse to dismiss us as members of an obsessive sect.

To my mind the raw diet revolution is too important to become weighed down with more unwelcome baggage -- or am I mistaken?

Best wishes,

Tom

Hi Tom,

Thanks for taking the time to talk to us. I am a final year vet student in Perth, and I feed both of my dogs predominately raw (using kibble for training cause its easy). I would like your input on a question that I haven't been able to get my head around. I read in several texts that feeding raw bones to puppies, even large fast-growing ones, is OK despite the heap of calcium in them. However, its NOT OK to give calcium supplements to these dogs. Could you please explain why one form of calcium is OK, but the other isn't? (I presume you recommend lots of bones for giant breed pups as well?)
I have read and enjoyed your first book, but not yet the second.
Thanks!

From: Tom Lonsdale
Subject: RE: [CSDogBookReview] Questions for Tom

Hi .... and all,

Good to find a vet student joining the discussion. So much depends on the younger generation and the sooner you start the sooner things can be addressed.

Glad you read Raw Meaty Bones. These days any one can go to www.rawmeatybones.com and read Work Wonders

At this stage of the raw diet revolution it's a bit like being on a new planet/continent with surprises behind every bush. Initially we need to collect and store the evidence and only later do we need to investigate the mechanisms and relationships.

If anyone has any papers/documents showing biochemical and physiological evidence for the different uptake of calcium carbonate as opposed to the way the body deals with calciumhydroxyapatite then I shall be pleased to receive.

From first principles it's about evolutionary development of enzymes and chemical gradients across membranes.

Also, of course the results for the 'too much calcium being bad' experiments are universally carried out on junk food fed animals. Apart from the calcium, phosphorous, vitamin D, protein nutrition and over-nutrition aspects lacking proper control there are plenty of other confounding aspects.

Recently on the RawVet list someone published the following link as to why most published findings are false: http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/jour\ nal.pmed.0020124

Better at this stage to hasten the paradigm shift in vet research thinking. We wouldn't let a Flat Earther report on the orbits of satellites and it makes no sense to leave junk food protagonists in charge of research and education in our veterinary faculties.

Regarding feeding plenty of bone to large breeds: It's about more than just supplying calcium. We need to ensure plenty of tooth cleaning and massage as the pups teethe.

Ideally we need to keep the pups slim and no forced exercise.

By stressing raw meaty bones we hope to avoid the trap of owners feeding too much meat/offal -- especially during the growing phase.

Once an owner walks out of your surgery who knows what they will do? So best to err on the side of caution. Suggest feeding whole carcasses or in the absence of whole carcasses a diet based largely on large pieces of raw meaty bones.

Best wishes,

Tom


Subject: RE: [CSDogBookReview] Questions for Tom

Thanks for the reply Tom.
It sounds like that would be a good list for me to join then! So you have never seen any developmental problems with large breed dogs being fed a diet consisting predominantly of raw meaty bones?
Thanks

From: Tom Lonsdale
Subject: RE: [CSDogBookReview] Questions for Tom

Hi ....and all,

Thanks for the message.

Yes the RawVet list is a worthwhile option for anyone in the vet and allied professions
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RawVet/

The AussieRMB Group is based over there in Perth http://www.aussiermb.org.au/ There's so much to be done and it needs youth and vigour to get things done. So please feel free to contact them and maybe encourage your peers to get involved too.

No, I have not seen any developmental problems with large breed dogs fed a predominantly raw meaty bones diet nor do I remember hearing of any. In fact just the opposite. People usually report on the sound, but oftentimes slower growth of their large breed dogs.

Occasionally someone writes to me and says their dog has been diagnosed with hip dysplasia even though raised on a raw diet.

Of course raw diets vary and I'm seldom/never in a position to know what food and supplements have actually been fed. Hip dysplasia is considered to be multifactorial and I don't believe that raw meaty bones diets exacerbates the situation, but believe such diets are the best way to go.

The catch-cry raw meaty bones came into being in Sydney in the late eighties/early nineties as the secure way to wean folks off junk cooked food but without precipitating a crisis by encouraging the feeding of too much raw meat and offal with the attendant risks of skeletal disease.

Given the hostility with which the junk pet-food industry and the vet establishment viewed the Raw Meaty Bones Lobby then I think if there were problems demonstrably associated with raw meaty bones feeding of giant breeds then I think it's fair to say we would of heard all about it by now.

Another indicator is the support received from Dr Richard Malik and Dr Doug Bryden AM who recommended Raw Meaty Bones for the College Award of the Australian College of Veterinary Scientists. I think they would have been less keen to make the recommendations or would have qualified their recommendations if there was widespread or credible reason to doubt the soundness of a raw meaty bones based diet.

Despite the foregoing I think we need to keep an open mind and watch for credible evidence that might require us to modify our stance. Of course that also requires that in professional forums we continue to value freedom of speech and can feel free to raise legitimate concerns.

Good luck and best wishes,

Tom