Category: Health

Hyvä paha häkki

9/8/2021

Häkittäminen on koiramaailman kuuma peruna. Kukaan ei halua ottaa häkkiin mitään oikeaa kantaa; se on AINA väärin, paitsi harrastuksissa, lääkärin määräämänä tai hotellissa. Häkkiin on totutettava, mutta siinä ei saa olla. Häkki ahdistaa, mutta oikeissa tilanteissa se rauhoittaa. Häkki luo stressiä, mutta toisissa tilanteissa poistaa sitä. Sekavaa? Älä. Avataanpa hieman sitä, mistä on kyse.

Häkki. Suomisanakirja.fi sanoo häkin olevan "Koppimainen rakennelma, jonka katto ja seinät (tai ainakin yksi niistä) on tehty (metalli)tangoista, verkosta tms." Koiramaailmassa häkki tarkoittaa yleensä tarhaa pienempää, mahdollisesti mukaan taittuvaa metalli- tai kangasviritelmää, joka tukirakenteidensa avulla saadaan pystytettyä verrattain nopeasti ja jonka sisällä koiran tulisi mahtua istumaan, makaamaan rennosti ja seisomaan.

Häkittäminen nousi tapetille jo vuosikausia sitten eläinsuojelujärjestöjen tehdessä hyvää työtä koirien ja muiden otuksien paremman elämän puolesta. Eläinsuojelulaki ei kuitenkaan mainitse kuljetushäkeistä, näyttelyhäkeistä tai harrastushäkeistä ihan kamalasti. Niissä otetaan kantaa lähinnä isompiin, koiran säilömiseen tarkoitettuihin tarhoihin. Pienemmistä häkeistä sanotaan ainoastaan seuraavaa: "”Kissaa tai koiraa taikka muuta eläintä saadaan pitää sen kuljetukseen tarkoitetussa laatikossa tai häkissä taikka muussa vastaavassa pienikokoisessa säilytystilassa vain, jos eläimen kuljettaminen, sairaus tai muu tilapäinen ja hyväksyttävä syy sitä vaatii.”

Mikä on tämä "muu tilapäinen ja hyväksyttävä syy"? Tässä tulee vastaan lain tulkinnanvaraisuus. Esimerkiksi minulle aggressiivisen rodun omistajana hyväksyttävä syy on muiden eläinten ja aggressiivisen eläimen itsensä turvallisuuden takaaminen. Tilapäisyyden tulkitsen niin, ettei koiraa saa säilyttää pienessä häkissä pitkiä aikoja eikä silloin, kun sille on mahdollista taata muulla tavoin turvallinen ympäristö, jossa se ei ole muille vaaraksi.

Kauanko häkissä saa viettää aikaa? Tämäkin on tulkinnanvaraista. Mitään tarkkaa aikarajaa ei ole määritelty. Tilapäisyys viittaisi kuitenkin siihen, ettei otus ole siellä toistuvasti pitkiä aikoja. Miten sitten esimerkiksi öiden nukkinen häkissä? Työkoiran pitkät päivät häkissä auton takana? Kummassakin tapauksessa kyseessä on perusteltu syy (kuljettaminen, lemmikin turvallisuuden takaaminen), mutta koira on häkissä toistuvasti, kuitenkin tilapäisesti.

Suomen häkkilaki on siis aika tiukka, vaikka sitä miten tulkitsisi. Kuitenkin esimerkiksi Yhdysvalloissa koirat ovat poissaolojen ajan lähes poikkeuksetta häkissä. Crate training on tärkeä osa sikäläisen koiranpennun yksinolo-opetusta. Myös Suomessa häkittämiseen törmää useimmiten juuri yksinolon kanssa. Jonkin verran siihen törmää myös silloin, jos talossa on useita koiria, jotka eivät tule toimeen keskenään ja kaikille olisi taattava tarpeeksi sosiaalista kontaktia ja vapautta.

Puolensa ja puolensa

Häkki ei aiheuta koiralle traumoja, mikäli häkissä oleminen ei ole koirasta epämukavaa tai sitä ei säilytetä siellä toistuvasti pitkiä aikoja sen ollessa hereillä. Öiden nukkuminen häkissä tuskin stressaa yhtäkään otusta, jos häkki on sille kyllin tilava. Jotkin koirat myös selvästi rauhoittuvat päästessään "luolaan" ja oikein sijoitettu, peitetty, pehmoinen häkki voi myös auttaa esimerkiksi hermostuneen lemmikin totuttamista vieraisiin. Häkki ei kuitenkaan oletusarvoisesti ole jokaisen koiran lempparipaikka.

Hereillä ollessaan häkissä odottava eläin herkästi turhautuu. Kun koiralla on halu tehdä, sillä olisi energiaa tehdä, mutta se on suljettuna pieneen tilaan se ahdistuu ja stressaantuu. Hetkellisesti hereillä odottamisesta ei ole haittaa, vaikkei koira siitä kamalasti nauttisikaan (vaikkapa harrastuksissa oman vuoron odottaminen), mutta toistuvasti ja pysyvästi liian pitkiä aikoja häkissä viettäneet eläimet alkavat ilmentää stressiä ja käyttäytyvät impulsiivisesti. Niillä on valtavasti patoutunutta energiaa, jota ne epätoivoisesti haluavat purkaa ihan mihin tahansa.

Juuri patoutuvan energian aiheuttaman stressin takia esimerkiksi itsensä tuhoilulla vaarantavan koiran häkittäminen työpäivien ajaksi on kaksipiippuinen asia; toisaalta se on perusteltua, monesti jopa ihan oikeasti tarpeellista, jos koira tuhoaa KAIKEN ihan vain nuoruuden innossaan (ja uskokaa minua, näitä koiria on. Jokaisella tuhoavalla koiralla ei suinkaan ole pitkittynyttä tylsyyttä tai eroahdistusta. Ne vain tykkäävät askarrella), mutta vaakakupin toisella puolella vaanii rajoittamisen aiheuttama stressi. Tämä stressi voi päin vastoin pahentaa tuhoilua. On siis ehdottomasti tarpeen pyrkiä mahdollisimman nopeasti pois työpäivähäkittämisestä tuhoilun vuoksi. Tämä vaatii yksinoloharjoittelua, treenaamista ja koiran elekielen tuntemista. Häkki on siis väliaikainen työkalu, jolla varmistetaan koiran turvallisuus pidempien poissaolojen ajan, ei suinkaan pysyvä ratkaisu. Työkaluna häkkiä ei kuitenkaan tule väheksyä, sillä esimerkiksi kodinvaihtaminen nuoruuden intotuhoilun vuoksi on ylimitoitettu ja koiraa huomattavasti enemmän stressaava ratkaisu.

Joissakin tapauksissa, hyvin harvoin, häkki ON pysyvä ratkaisu esimerkiksi poissaolojen ajaksi. Tällasia tapauksia on kuitenkin erittäin vähän ja syy on yleensä aina terveydellinen (henkisesti tai fyysisesti).

Häkkiin tulee opettaa, jotta häkki on koirasta mukava mesta. Osa koirista oppii pitämään häkistä huomatessaan, että siellä on kivaa, rauhallista ja turvallista. Osa koirista on sitkeästi sitä mieltä, että maailma ulkopuolella on häkkiä kivempi paikka. Tällaisille koirille häkistä on tehtävä miellyttävä paikka.

Kivan kautta

Meillä on lähes aina avonainen häkki olohuoneessa ja olen totuttanut koiria sinne nakkelemalla häkkiin nannaa tai ruokkimalla mahdollisen pennun siellä. Kaksi aikuisista koiristani pyrkii häkkiin nukkumaan, jos häkin ovi on auki, vaikka niillä olisi mahdollisuus valita mikä tahansa muu paikka. Kaksi suhtautuu häkkiin neutraalisti. Sotaperuna nukkuu mielellään häkissä yöllä, mutta ei muuten välittäisi olla siellä edes sitä 30 sekuntia, jonka aikana muut koirat ohittavat sen ulos mennessään. Jokainen osaa tarvittaessa rauhoittua häkkiin odottamaan, mikä on näyttelyissä ja muissa harrastuksissa usein tarpeen ja eduksi.

Minulla on aina ollut tapana mieluummin opettaa ja kouluttaa koira hyvällä hyväksymään asioita kuin puhtaasti vaatia sitä alistumaan kohtaloonsa. En sano, ettenkö vaatisi joitakin asioita, mutta hyvin usein valitsen opettamisen. Tiedän ihmisiä, oikein hyvä koiranomistajia, jotka vaativat mieluummin kuin opettavat tällaisista asioista puhuttaessa, eikä tästä ole näyttänyt olevan heidän koirilleen mitään haittaa. Itse pidän siitä, että koirat valitsevat tehdä kuten haluan niiden tekevän. Minulla on se kokemus, että voin tällä tavalla toimiessani luottaa koirieni päätyvän omalta kannaltani miellyttäviin ratkaisuihin silloinkin, kun en ohjeista niitä. Tämän saman syyn takia käytän kouluttaessani positiivista vahvistamista, mutta se nyt on täysin toisen blogipostauksen aihe.

Haikalanen on koiristani ehdottomasti häkkimyönteisin. Silloin tällöin olen löytänyt sen häkistä näin ja olen hetkellisesti surkutellut, että onkohan se vahingossa lukinnut itsensä häkkiin eikä tajunnut, että ovea työntämällä se pääsisi ulos. Testasin kuitenkin asiaa yksi päivä kutsumalla sitä luokseni ja se tottuneesti työnsi oven auki nenällään sen suurempia ihmettelemättä. Niinpä oletan, että se ymmärtää pääsevänsä halutessaan ulos. Se vain valitsee nukkua häkissä, koska siellä on omaa rauhaa ja turvallista.

0 Comments

Helpon koiran siunaus

2/3/2021

2 Comments

Kuten monet, myös minä halusin nuorempana väellä ja väkisin tehdä kaikesta hankalaa. Tuli tärkeä olo, kun koki tekevänsä vaikeita juttuja ja omistavansa hankalia koiria. Kuitenkin, omistaessani oikeasti vaativia koiria nyt, voin naureskella nuorelle itselleni ja sille raivokkaalle tarmolle, jolla yritin selitellä itselleni poikiani haastavammaksi kuin mitä ne olivat. Kyllä, Kenraalimajuri oli ja on vieläkin haastava koira hermorakenteensa puolesta, mutta noin muuten ei ollenkaan. Haikalanen on aina ollut ihastuttavan rentouttava elämänkumppani.

Varsinkin nuorilla koiraharrastajilla on tapana tehdä asioista välillä turhan hankalia. Syyllistyin tähän itsekin, joten voin näin vuosia myöhemmin myöntää sen ja myös todeta näkeväni sitä toisissa.

Koiranomistaminen on kilpavarustelua ja haastavan koiran kasvattamisesta voi lisätä sulan mentaaliseen hattuunsa. Niinpä koiraharrastajilla on tapana glorifioida vaikeutta ja hankaluutta ja tehdä ongelmia sinne, missä niitä ei todellisuudessa ole. Tämä on osaltaan tottumattomuutta, osaltaan antaa luvan olla silloin tällöin väsynyt ja lannistunut. Meidän tulisi olla armeliaampia itsellemme ja ymmärtää, että helponkin koiran kanssa on välillä vähän raskasta. Joskus on lupa todeta, että se vähäkin on tänään liikaa ja istua koko päivä katsomassa telkkaria ja syömässä lohturuokaa, kunhan koiran perustarpeista huolehditaan ja lusmuilu ei tule tavaksi.

Haastavuuden ihannointi johtaa helposti siihen, että hankitaan liian vaikeita koiria. Tämä voi osaltaan kannustaa käyttämään kyseenalaisia koulutusmetodeita, kun oma taitotaso ei yksinkertaisesti riitä. Helposti käy myös niin, ettei niistä mutkattomista arjen kavereista ja niiden kouluttamisesta tajua ottaa itselleen krediittiä, vaikka ehdottomasti pitäisi! Oli koira miten mutkaton tahansa, jokainen hyvin käyttäytyvä koira on kouluttaneelle syystäkin ilon, onnen ja ylpeyden aihe. Myös sillä helpolla koiralla voi olla tai sille voi kehittyä ongelma, ja se taas ei tarkoita automaattisesti sitä, että kouluttaja on surkimus. Takana voi olla vaikkapa trauma. Hyvin käyttäytyvästä koirasta saa ja siitä pitää olla ylpeä, oli sen rotu mikä tahansa.

Vaivaton, helposti arjen rutiinit ja tavat oppiva koira tulisi nostaa arvostuksessa korkeammalle kuin missä se on nyt. Sen kanssa pääsee nopeasti nauttimaan siitä, mitä koiranomistaminen on parhaimmillaan!

Karem on aina ollut lupsakka, iloinen, touhukas ja ystävällinen otus, johon voi luottaa ja jonka kanssa voi nauttia koiranomistamisen parhaista puolista. Toki onhan se ollut onnettomuusaltis ja remmirähinäongelmankin kanssa painittiin parin koirahyökkäyksen jälkeen.

Sujuvaa ja stressitöntä

Haikalasen kanssa lenkkeily on sitä, mitä koiran kanssa ulkoileminen voi parhaimmillaan olla. Joskus Haikalanen voi pelästyä vastaantulevia, mutta jos tilanteet ennakoi ja pysyy itse rauhallisena, myös Haikalanen selviää ohituksesta nopeasti. Se ei vedä, muttei jumita. Se menee tasaista tahtia hihnanmitan edellä, kiskomatta, nuuhkii silloin tällöin ja tekee asiansa, muttei jää patsastelemaan. Sen kanssa voi uppoutua ihailemaan kevääseen heräävää luontoa tai tarkkailla pikkulintuja pajupusikossa. Sen kanssa voi pällistellä puroja ja hienoja kiviä ja maisemia, tai sen kanssa voi hölkätä rivakasti eteenpäin kunnonkohotusmielessä.

Haikalanen ottaa kaikki ihmiset vastaan iloisesti. Se ei arkaile, ei ole vihainen, ei käyttäydy arvaamattomasti. Se ei tee itsestään numeroa vieraiden aikana, mutta tulee iloisena rapsuteltavaksi.

Haikalanen on arjessa ihastuttavan mutkaton koira.

Lumiprinsessa ja Sotaperuna ovat vaativia. Sotaperunan voimakas aggressio aiheuttaa erityisjärjestelyitä arkeen ja vaatii ahkeraa koulutusta ja treeniä pysyäkseen hallinnassa. Sillä on korkea energiataso ja se haluaa ja myös vaatii fyysistä ja psyykkistä haastamista. Lumiprinsessalla ei ole aggressiota, mutta se on aktiivinen ja touhukas koira, joka varsinkin nuorena tarvitsi roppakaupalla tekemistä ollakseen sisätiloissa ja lepohetkinä hallinnassa.

Vaativan koiran kanssa pääsee haastamaan itsensä ja kehittyy kouluttajana. Monesti hyvä harrastuskoira on myös arjessa vaativampi kuin lupsakampi ja rennompi kaverinsa. Vaativan koiran kanssa voi arjestaan saada sujuvaa, mutta se ollatenkin VAATII vaivannäköä. Tästä syystä tulisikin aina kysyä itseltään, onko sille vaivannäölle aikaa? Onko siihen halua? Mukava, mutkaton rotu/koirayksilö antaa aivan yhtä paljon, mutta huomattavasti vähemmällä säätämisellä. Jos ei ole tahtoa eikä tarvetta nähdä vaivaa ja tehdä töitä, kannattaa koira valita se mielessä pitäen.

Ruhtinatar on myös ollut varsin ihastuttavan rento elinkumppani. Se on itsevarma, omanarvontuntoinen, tasapainoinen ja rauhallinen.

Jokaiselle omansa

Vaikkei mikään koira ole vaivaton eikä helppo sellaiselle, joka ei koiran kanssa halua elää, vihkiytyneelle koiraihmiselle löytyy roppakaupalla suhteellisen helposti koulutettavia rotu/koiravaihtoehtoja. On paljolti myös asenteesta kiinni, minkä näkee ongelmana. Nuoren uroskoiran törttöilyt kuuluvat yksilöstä ja perimästä riippumatta usein asiaan. Ei niistä kannata vääntää ongelmaa. Ne ovat täysin tyypillisiä nuoren uroskoiran sähläyksiä, joihin kannattaa suhtautua nimenomaan sellaisina eikä vaipua ahdistuksen ja ankeuden suohon ja vakuutella itselleen oman koiransa haastavuutta. Ongelmia ei kannata tehdä sinne, missä niitä ei ole. Se lisää stressiä sekä omistajalla että koiralla.

Tulisuuden ja särmän vaaliminen on tärkeää silloin, kun koiran tyypillisesti tulee tällaisia piirteitä syystä tai toisesta ilmentää. Tällaisten piirteiden ihannoiminen ja niiden hakeminen silloin, kun etsinnässä on lupsakka ja helppo arjen seuralainen, on täysin turhaa. Myös maltillisella energiatasolla varustettu koira voi olla luonteikas arjen kaveri ja myös sen kanssa voi vaeltaa kilometritolkulla toreilla ja tuntureilla. Siihen tarkoitukseen ei kannata väellä ja väkisin etsiä sitä koiraa, jolla energiaa on kahmalokaupalla, jolla on voimakkaat vietit ja joka rotutyypillisesti suhtautuu asioihin varauksella.

Arjessa helpolla ja mutkattomalla koiralla on sielua parantava vaikutus. Sitä ei tulisi koskaan väheksyä. Haastavakin koira parantaa toki sielua sellaisella ihmisellä, jolla on tarjota sen vaatimuksille sopiva koti. Meidän kannattaakin kysyä itseltämme, mitä me haemme, ja valita seuraksemme koira, joka hakee samaa.

2 Comments

Commercial puppy food - a necessity or something to avoid?

4/10/2018

1 Comment

As long as there have been people feeding commercial foods to their. dogs there has been a debate of whether or not puppy food is good for your puppies. Those in favor say puppy food is a necessity, it has all the needed vitamins and minerals in a perfect, scientifically proven balance. Those against say puppy foods are not only unnecessary but even harmful for your puppies.

First, we need to understand what is puppy food. What makes puppy foods differ from adult foods or foods meant for all life stages? Why were puppy foods developed the first place?

Just like with us people, little puppies need more protein and in general more balanced diet than adults. Big food companies tend to recommend using their puppy formulas, but as one goes through the ingredient list, one big question arises; there is a difference, but it is minimal. Is it really necessary to feed puppy/junior formula, if there is no real difference between the foods?

Let’s take an easy road here and compare RC Adult Maxi Puppy with RD Adult Maxi (as RC has all the % in their PDFs easy to access). This is NOT to be seen as a recommendation OR a critic). You can click yourself into an in-depth site about the foods yourself and have a peek.

http://pro.royalcanin.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Click-here-to-download-the-Maxi-Adult-Pro-Technical-Sheet.pdf

http://pro.royalcanin.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Click-here-to-download-the-Maxi-Junior-Pro-Technical-Sheet.pdf

Let’s see the first paragraph. There is no significant important difference. Omegas are a bit higher in adult food.

Second paragraph lists minerals. As puppy foods are often said to have more calcium than adult foods and a different calcium-phosphorus ratio, it is pretty surprising to see there is absolutely no difference in calcium and not any kind of significant difference in calcium-phosphorus ratio. As we go lower on the list, we’ll see pretty much the same list on both sides, with a slight raise in iodine and iron in the puppy food.

Next paragraph of vitamins shows no surprise; almost the exact copy. Vitamin A is slightly higher in puppy formula, and even there we don’t really speak about anything major.

There is one ingredient in the whole list of ingredients that appears only in puppy formula; lutein. Lutein is an antioxidant found in spinach, broccoli and eggs, for example, and it affects eyes and skin. RC Maxi Junior has 5mgs of lutein per kg, so 0,5 mgs per 100 g (just to give you a general idea of the amount, one egg contains 0.1 to 0.3 milligrams of lutein).

At least in the case with RC Maxi Adult and RC Maxi Junior the difference between formulas is so insignificant it breaks a question; does a puppy really benefit significantly of puppy food? For research purposes, I compared yet another two common foods that offer both puppy and adult formulas. Hill’s Junior Large breed differed the most from Hill’s Adult Large breed, but the changes were still very minor. Most changes were with minerals such as copper and in the increased (slightly) amount of vitamin A, while calcium-phosphorus ratio remained the same and protein and fat levels were not that far from each other. Other vitamins than the mentioned A are about if not exactly the same.

In Acana Puppy Large and Acana Adult Large the difference is ridiculously small. It is in fact so small the ingredients lists are almost completely exactly the same, and the changes in them, while they appear are hardly noticeable.

So, all in all, we can right here in the beginning come into conclusion that puppy formula is so close to adult formula feeding adult formula to puppies MOST LIKELY doesn’t affect them negatively. But, once again, I am no nutritional expert nor do I recommend using this blog as an ultimate truth. Research, talk to people, make your own decisions.

Is puppy food harmful to the puppies?

This question raises up specially among large breed owners and breeders. The issue is, there are people saying feeding puppy formula to their puppies made the puppies grow too fast, causing abnormalities in bone structure. Some people and even vets say the exact opposite; that feeding adult formula will cause bone growth issues.

First suggested reason to puppy food causing problems with growth is that puppy food has too much calcium. At least in large food formulas I researched, this was not true. There was no more calcium in puppy foods or in adult foods and the ratio between calcium and phosphorus remained the same.

Another possible reason is too much protein. Once more, I did not see a significant raise in protein, however puppy foods do tend to have slightly more protein. This is because puppies need protein to grow.

I asked a question in a raw food group I am in, wanting to know if giant breed owners or breeders have or have not fed puppy formulas, if they have used kibble or raw, and if they have noticed abnormalities. Out of 6 people answering, one person said two puppies fed with raw food (the breeder did not identify whether the food was constructed by the owner or if it was store bought complete raw food) had developed abnormalities in bones. Four people said they had fed their puppies mostly with raw, some self constructed and some with MUSH Vaisto Puppy, and they had not met problems. One person said she had fed her puppies with both raw and kibble (she identified the kibble as puppy formula) and the puppies had grown up OK.

This leads me to think, if the problem with fast growth is both genetic and caused by feeding errors. You can make a difference in general to the dog’s life with a good diet, but there are things you can’t control. You can also break a perfectly healthy dog with a poor diet. So, it is very difficult to say whether or not, in cases where abnormalities form, the main cause is genetic, wrong kind of exercise, accident or feeding. One thing to note is that abnormalities are usually met with very large/giant breeds. This leads to another possible situation; large dogs may just be so big they are getting too big for their own structure.

One thing one can possibly say quite safely is that excessive/too little calcium and poorly constructed diet cause problems with growth. Puppies are much less forgiving with feeding than adults. When you feed your pup with raw food, make sure you really meet all the requirements. If you choose to go with kibble or 50 / 50, always go for a good quality kibble. If it is puppy formula or adult formula most likely does not matter.

1 Comment

Quality matters

6/7/2018

0 Comments

Another important matter to remember when rawfeeding, besides making sure your dog gets all vitamins and minerals needed, is the quality of the meat you feed. It's a common practice to use lower quality parts of the carcass in order to make minced meats for dogs. This means less meat and more tendons, throat, lung and muscle membranes.

Dogs can digest ”rubbish” parts of the carcass, as can we people. The problem is, there are little to none important vitamins and minerals in those parts of the body. We are talking about tissues that hold no vital nutrients, take longer to digest and can cause issues with the digesting system. One of the main reasons raw fed dogs develop rock solid stools is feeding too much bone and feeding low quality meats.

If you are not willing to pay loads of extra and only use human consumption quality meats from your nearest grocery store or raise your own meat, you unfortunately need to do a little research trying to find proper quality meats. It all likehood you can't find super meats, but you can find decent and good meats. As long as the meat is clean and you use the best product you can get with as much meat as possible, you are good to go.

How can I tell a good meat from garbage?

First, look at the meat. It's hard to see if a frozen meat is good quality, so if you are about to buy frozen meats, buy one package first, melt that and take a look. If the meat is stringy under the spoon, it has lots of big pieces of cartilage, membrane and throat and in worst case scenario, this all topped with bone, skip it. You can find better. Even without bone meat like this is not really giving anything to your dog. It just takes time to digest and makes stools hard. Many small dogs can't properly digest these kinds of meat, so I would recommend being careful with small dogs and bad meats.

Second factor is the smell. I recently changed our cow meat, which was not the best possible, to a new, way better beef, and the change in smell was huge. The previous meat, also stringy and filled with big pieces of whatever garbage parts of the body, also smelled horrible when defrost. This new meat smells the same as the minced beef I use to make meatballs (or I would use, if I'd make meatballs). It is finely minced and has nice texture and it's not overly bloody either.

Third factor is, unfortunately, the prize, but let me tell you, it doesn't always tell the ultimate truth! True, if the meat is dead cheap, it is probably not that great. Have a look at the prizes of different brands, ask around, and then pick test packages to defrost. That way you can find a nice quality food. II will list some good picks I use myself down below, but since I live in Finland and most people in the world don't, you might need to sneak around and do some research on your own among your own meat manufacturers.

Risks of membranes and cartilage

Like said, meats with lots of rubbish parts are harder to digest. Small dogs that are fed lots or cartilage, bone, membranes and other stuff like that can even suffer from clogs. This is possible even with larger dogs. Therefore, if you need to use not that great meats at one point, for one reason or another, mix them with finely minced good meats. From my experience I can say it's easier to find good quality minced turkey and chicken than good quality beef, pork and a mix of the two.

Even if your dog is able to digest these worse quality meats, their stools often get rock solid. This was one of the reasons I became aware of the problem; the stools were always hard no matter what I did and how much I fed fiber. When I played around with the meats and made sure I use better quality meats, the stools gradually got better.

Benefits of good meats

Shortest paragraph ever; more vital nutrients, softer stools, easier digestion! As simple as that. Better quality meats means better quality food, and better quality food is what we aim for, isn't it?

Some good products

Bear in mind, these brands are met mainly in Finland (some in Sweden too), so if you happen to be from somewhere else, I am afraid this is of little help.

MUSH:
Grounded salmon (jauhettu lohi): MUSH uses whole salmon, grounds it, and packs it with only one freezing behind each product. Their salmon is thus good quality and it has vitamin D to good extent. It does have lots of bones in it, up to 11%, and the ground is not super fine. Use it as a small part of food rather than main ingredient. If it's your only source of vitamin D, I would sometimes add D with another fish product or cod liver oil, for example.

Boneless minced turkey (luuton kalkkuna): Excellent product of finely minced turkey meat. Also comes with bone.

Boneless minced chicken (luuton kana): Excellent quality finely minced chicken. Also comes with bone.

Pork intestines (sian sisäelinseos): Lots of intestines that are considered just meat for the dog, but also liver. I have liked this product and feed it every now and then as a source of vit A.

Chicken gizzards and hearts (broilerin sydämet / broilerin kivipiirat): Excellent add-on sometimes. Just what it says they are.

Mur-Kis:

Minced white wish (siika kylkiruotoineen): Excellent, very finely minced product that has lots of vitamin D in it. So finely minced I have never met large pieces of bone in it. It's a bit pricey, but worth the money.
Chopped beef (naudan palaliha): OK. I was hoping to have more actual meat, and the product does have muscle menbranes in it, but works sometimes instead of minced meat.

KennelPakaste:

Minced turkey (jauhettu kalkkunan liha, luuton): Excellent product once more. As you can see, it is fairly easy to find nice quality turkey and chicken. Unfortunately they are also pretty expensive.

Salmon (jauhettu merilohi): I liked this one. It seems to have a little less bone in it that the MUSH equivalent. A bit finer minced, maybe.

Minced beef (naudan jauheliha): As far as I know, only beed meat and no other rubbish ingredients. Very expensive, too, but good.

Hurja:

I like the whole brand. Most of the meats have been very good, including salmon and some minced meats like turkey, chicken etc.

Kennelrehu:

This is the name of the company that delivers meats from various sources as well as produces some themselves. They have a truck stopping roughly once per month in certain towns and you can then pick up products you have pre-ordered through their website.

Some of the meats are very good, some not that great. I have tried many, and have grown fond of

Minced turkey (jauhettu kalkkuna): Boneless product. Very nice, fine mince, clean, doesn't smell and keeps the stools good.

Puppy minced beef (pentunauta): Best price/quality ratio beef I have found. Their minced beef has cow meat and minced cow hearts, nothing else. Excellent product used for small dogs and puppies, thus, because it's easy to digest.

0 Comments

The mystery of vitamin E

9/5/2018

0 Comments

It has been a while since I wrote. This will hopefully be a one timer; I have been very sick lately and very exhausted, and I had a very important test to focus into. Now however I am back in business, sort of, and I have some time at my hands to write about a matter I've been wondering lately and done some research on.

Being an enthusiastic raw feeder, I've been looking at the vitamins more closely, and specially the vitamin E, that is often said to be the second most plentiful vitamin to be getting from the food. However, giving it some thought I've found myself wondering why would a carnivore with just omivore potential, specialized in the usage of fat and protein as energy source, need such high doses in vitamin mainly met in certain vegetables and plant sources?

Internet is filled with different ideas of raw feeding. If you browse through sources you can't miss certain repeating numbers, such as the generally high needs for vitamins A and E. If you look at those sources deeper, however, there are hardly, if any, proof or reasoning based on studied facts. There are some, naturally, and from those some one is able to gather a basic guideline explaining certain dietary needs.

Wolves, the ancestors of our tame dogs, ate mainly meat. Wild meat includes very high levels of zinc, and if the wolf happens to get a hold of the liver, the liver contain incredibly high levels of vitamin A. Therefore, both the need for zinc and the need for vitamin A as well as the ability to filter some of the vitamin A out are explained with natural diet of the animal.
Vitamin D is essential for the development of dogs and wolves alike, and both need to get it from their food. Wolves get it much less on a daily basis, but we need to remember that dogs are not wolves and they have evolved towards omnivore metabolism. This may explain why dogs benefit from larger doses. However, there is vitamin D in the liver and wolves do, if given the change, eat liver in high amounts.

By far, the high need for Vitamin A is explained with evolution and metabolism of the dog. The need for vitamin D is also kind of explained, and the requirements in general are actually not that high. One is very able to achieve said amounts with just adding some fish to the food. However, by far there has been no explanation on why dogs would need such high doses of vitamin E. We will dive deeper into the world of dog nutrition in a second, but before that I want everyone to remember three things:

Nature is never optimal, so no matter many natural animals can go on with less, it doesn't mean they get the absolute optimal amount of vitamins from their natural diet every day. Many times, raw feeders aim for the said optimal, therefore feeding more than the animal would get when living wild.
Nature doesn't create an animal that can't survive with it's natural diet, or that will fall in sick when fed like it would eat in the wild.
Dogs are not wolves. Dogs use plant material and grains better (usually) than wolves, however being able to adapt to different food sources than meat doesn't mean dogs benefit from grain based or vegetable based diet. Many studies and real life examples show that dogs do best with mainly meat diets.

Lastly, no matter I have studied several sources, everything written here applies only as something I have read and personally found out and it is not to be taken as any ultimate truth. In general, I don't teach feeding. It is however my great passion, so what better than share the research with you.

Needs

People, as an omnivore species, have adapted to use grains and vegetables and therefore can extract vitamins and minerals from plant sources far better than dogs, no matter some dogs more than others are able to somewhat use plant sources as well. At the moment the recommended daily doses of vitamin E (in alpha tocopherol) for people are

adult men 11mg / day
adult women 8 mg / day
pregnant / breast feeding women 11 mg / day

Vitamin E is mostly met in plants, though one can also get some from eggs. Meat also has vitamin E, but excluding fish the amounts are pretty low. Considering the metabolism and evolution of the human species the said amounts are easily explainable with our natural food sources. We CAN get decent amounts of vitamin E from our ”natural” diet, and therefore our need for that is considered believable.

Now with the dogs, things make a turn to odd.

Dogs are mainly carnivore. They can use plant sources and grains to some sort, but most of their diet in wild in the past has been wild meat of large prey animals. If we, for example, take reindeer as our example animal, the reindeer meat would have 0,8 mgs of vitamin E in 100 grams of meat. Therefore, a wolf eating for example 600 grams of meat would get 4,8 mgs of vitamin E. If we play some more and think maybe the wolf will eat some eggs when it finds a nest (about 2 mgs of vitamin E just to make it simple), we could somehow think it is probably realistic to think the wold would get >10 mgs of vitamin E daily.

The current recommendations for dogs are 400 IU - 800 IU, some sources say 100 IU is enough per day. That means even at it's lowest the need of vitamin E would be approx 100 mgs a day.

That is about TEN TIMES the amount of adult human male meant to consume foods that are rich in vitamin E.

There are many articles about the benefits of vitamin E for dogs, mainly cellular health, immune system boost, faster recovery from stressful / physically exhausting activities and helping to maintain good skin and coat. The positive effects of vitamin E supplementing to sick animals and people alike have been tremendous. The amounts supplemented are high, sometimes multiple times the recommendations, and their effects have been positive when fed regularly during a short period of time. However, there have been no clear explanations on why the constant intake of vitamin E should reach the current recommendations, considering we people as omnivore would naturally consume much more vitamin E rich food sources and only need that 11 mgs a day, even during pregnancy. Nowhere it is stated why a dog as a specialized user of protein and fat would need such high doses of vitamin E on a regular basis, as it is clear it's a benefit during sickness. Evolutionally speaking, it makes no sense.

For and against

People who supplement high amounts of vitamin E on regular basis, as well as many supplement producing companies, explain that the use of vitamin E based products is safe because the extra, unnecessary vitamin E does not store in fat. Vitamin E is a fat soluble vitamin, but some studies suggest our system wouldn't be able to store too much vitamin E and that the extra would be naturally disposed. The benefits of vitamin E, specially to sport dogs, combined with this talk in advance of supplementing E continuously.

The question is, do the dog need such high doses? While it is undeniable that vitamin E does benefit dogs, how much do the dogs need it?

As vitamin E is naturally met in vegetable oils, mostly, the amounts are not that high. Nature rarely has hundreds of milligrams of vitamin in anything. Giving the dog too much vegetable oils to fill the mentioned recommendations (it's impossible even, I tell you, if you don't plan changing your dogs water to sunflower oil) will work against the dog. The more there is fat in the food, the more the dog would need vitamin E to avoid the fats becoming rancid. The only possible way to face the recommended limits is using supplements, but then we meet the problem of unnaturally high amounts of vitamin without any explanation on why a carnivore would need such doses. In nature it would never meet even a fracture of those said amounts.

Where lies the truth? What is ENOUGH, not too much but not too little?

These days I am making sure my dogs get some mgs of vitamin E daily, gotten mostly from cold pressed sunflower oil, and I don't exceed the oil limit of 15 ml with the bigger dogs (this means about 10-13 mgs of vitamin E / day from the oil). If we calculate the need with 0,5 mg / kg, they get the minimum they need during most days, however I don't really think that is the actual minimum. Based of what I have read and studied, my personal opinion is that as long as dogs get some mgs daily, and as long as they live the usual life of a usual pet dog, they probably get enough vitamin E. Vitamin E defficiency is usually not met with healthy dogs, and this speaks in the favor of dogs being able to work fine without ridiculous amounts of vitamin E as long as they are healthy. Does the added vitamin E do good things? Probably it does. It is necessary for the dogs health to supplement it with such high amounts continuously? Probably not.

Most sources seem to agree that higher doses should be fed in regimens, and this speaks in favor of the continuous supplementing of vitamin E on lower doses. If the high doses are fed only during some weeks, and the dog goes without most of the time, probably, if fed some vitamin daily, it will do fine with lower, more sensible amounts of vitamin E. Like said many times before, vitamin E is fat soluble, so feeding high doses of it during a short period of time is thought to ”fill up the stock”. If you feed the vitamin regularly, it doesn't necessarily need stocking since the absorbing is continuous.

This might also mean that the dogs with less body fat, such as sighthounds, may benefit from lower amounts of vitamin E daily instead of higher doses here and then, as they don't have anything to store the vitamin in. Just a thought.

I am no vet, I am no trained food expert, so don't take my words as truth. Like I have said, my opinions are based on both read facts, dog evolution, dog metabolism and some natural feeding sources.

0 Comments

Many kinds of help

12/4/2018

0 Comments

Dogs have been reported to have a very positive impact on the general health of us humans. They make us get up and go out, exercise and work, and they offer us love and affection. Many professionals also agree that they have a good impact on those who have difficulties expressing themselves in social situations, trust issues or mental health patients.

There are many studies proving dogs have positive impact on us. We all know they make us exercise, but they also have positive effects on mental health. Animal therapy is increasings it's popularity and dogs have been used to assist patients with PTSD, help inmates to learn responsibility and empathy, assist people with social difficulties and even encourage children to read.

While it is still unclear how much would be the ideal amount of interaction with a dog, many specialists admit that a therapy dog leaves a good mood behind. Sometimes the visit just lifts the general mood, but dogs also have a calming effect on people with stress, aggression issues and for example ADHD. The latter has been proved in many schools that have a dog visiting a class every now and then.

Therapy animals and care dogs

A person in my family has certified therapy animals and she regularly visits people with her dogs and ferrets. I asked her a couple of questions about her job and their visits, and also how the dog seems to take the visits. She answered the following:

Most commonly we visit mental health patients, elders and physically disabled. There have not been so many children as patients, but they are often present when we visit our customers. Mostly the welcoming is happy and warm. People who ask us to visit are mostly people who can't have their own pets so our visit stands as a highlight from their normal routine day.

She mentions most people say the dogs make them feel special and loved and their calm behavior calms the customers down, too. The dogs seem to enjoy their task and they are let to move quite freely among the customers, meeting people at their own phase. When they come home from a visit the dogs are tired but content, and they don't show any signs of stress or anxiety. For them, therapy meetings mean getting lots of hugs and pets and treats.

It takes a certain kind of dog to work in these changing circumstances, meeting many kinds of people who can't always control their tone of voice, behavior or strength. The dog needs to be calm, collected, trained and well-behaved. Certified therapy dogs have a test they go through, where their behavior and their level of training are measured. It's not an easy task to go through. We also have a group called Kaverikoirat, working under our kennel club, that trains dogs for less severe cases, such as visiting schools, happenings and elder homes. Any dog that behaves nicely among people and other dogs and is social enough to enjoy the company of people can attend. These dogs don't have any special privileges considering places that don't allow dogs, but they are evaluated to make sure the visits always leave a smile on everyone's face.

The issue of "uncertified service animals"

Here, and in many countries around the world, the only kinds of service dogs are those that have a certificate. Certified service dogs are supposed to wear a vest and behave at any circumstance, always under control. If the dog is not certified, it isn't allowed in places where dogs are forbidden. Unlike in many countries where the service dog title is far easier to acquire (and unfortunately means many dogs called like that are actually not that well trained or fit for the task), here you can actually trust that authorities and professionals have both trained and evaluated every dog wearing a vest, and in no situation may these dogs behave aggressive or out of control.

It does, I admit, bug me when people talk about their dogs as ”uncertified service dogs” and explain their bad behavior with lines such as ”this is just a dog, it's not a robot” or ”service dogs are dogs, too, they have instincts”. Both statements are correct, but a dog used in any kind of service task, allowed to go in places ”normal” dogs can't go to, should be in control at all times, showing good behavior both at work and outside work. Saying ”this is a trained service dog” doesn't make any dog a trained service dog. I can call my ferret a trained service ferret, no matter the hybrid one would probably bite any strangers touching it. Those are just words, and without any certificate to proof the quality so to speak, the only real measurement is behaving well both inside and outside of duty.

Service animals should also be able to act without any ”help” from ”tools” such as E-collars, chokers and prong collars. To me, having a dog that can't behave when it doesn't wear a tool like one of these is not having a service dog. Teaching your dog to listen to you and not pull is the first of things to train to a dog, and any animal lacking the basic knowledge like this is a very questionable service animal.

Of course, there are different kinds of service animals, and emotional support dogs, as far as I have heard, are not required to show as advanced training as for example deaf dogs. It is, in any case, questionable to demand a passage for an animal that does not know how to behave, and as long as there is no test to proof the qualities of the dog, how can we make sure it is safe to be allowed in places normal dogs can't?

Another question is, does the dog NEED to be a certified service animal to make you feel better? No, it does not. A dog in general, whether or not it is perfectly trained, is proven to work towards your mental and physical health. They lower the stress levels, calm you down and make you feel unconditional, indivisible love.

Like said before, kindness is powerfull. Sometimes all you need is a loyal dog.

http://time.com/4728315/science-says-pet-good-for-mental-health/
http://www.runagard.fi/

0 Comments

Positiveness is powerful

19/3/2018

0 Comments

Positive training methods have been widely adopted by many trainers around the world in the past years. This is partly because pets have gained a more important role in families and the demand of humane training methods is growing, but also because newest studies show positive methods have a striking effect on how fast and how eager the dog, or the human for that matter, is to learn.

Let's play a mind game. Imagine a leash around your neck, held by a massive creature that's as high as your house, speaking in odd tongue. There is no way for you to understand what the creature is saying, but it clearly wants something from you.

That's how it is for your dog. It is living in a world made for that big odd creature and the creature is expecting behavior that isn't always natural for the dog. Therefore the creature must teach the dog to behave like it wants it to behave.

I have talked about the process of learning earlier, and about how fear blocks learning. Therefore we don't go more into that, but talk about why positive methods are simply better and why certain tools and methods widely used in training based on negative reinforcement are not beneficial nor do they teach anything.

Learning doesn't happen on it's own

Just a quick example once more to show you the problem with training by negative reinforcement only.

The most common negative reinforcement we all have probably come across and even used is teaching the dog not to pull on the leash by pulling the leash.

Even writing that is contradictory.

How do you make the dog walk nicely by pulling and tugging on the leash? Why does the method ”work”? Well, the basic idea is pulling on the leash leads to nasty tugging and it learns to avoid pulling because it feels bad. It doesn't learn to walk nicely on the leash. Instead of learning to walk good because it knows it is expected to walk calmly on the leash, it only learns to avoid certain behavior, in this case pulling. This means for example that teaching it to work with you in canicross later can be terribly hard, because pulling has been a negative thing in the past. And if you teach the dog it is OK to pull in canicross, it may start to pull during normal walks, too, because it learns pulling, that has once led to nasty things, doesn't lead to them anymore.

Only that it does.

”Wait a minute. Why can I pull sometimes, and sometimes I can't?”

The idea of modern positive training is to train the dog to do the right thing, and this means the dog has to understand what is expected. It can't learn a behavior if it is not taught the behavior. Because of this methods like above are not encouraged, because they don't teach the dog any new way of behaving, they only simply try to make it avoid certain action. Obviously this method leads to a similar behavior with positive methods; the dog doesn't pull. It just doesn't really learn anything new either, and the negative stigma of pulling can interfere with possible future hobbies.

I admit I have taught my older dogs to walk on the leash by tugging the leash. This is exactly why I know it is a bad method. Teaching them to work with me in canicross was hard, because pulling had a terribly negative image in their head. I had to teach them to walk nicely with me again, with positive methods, only so that I could encourage them to pull while we do canicross. I had skipped training them to walk nicely on leash, I had only taught them that pulling leads to nasty tugging.

With my girls I used stopping when they pulled. I called them beside me or gently tugged the leash to get their attention, and we continued while they had returned to my side. This way they learned that fun stops when they pull, but also that fun continues when they walk nicely. They got treats for getting back to me, and they were far more eager to return to my side when I stopped than my boys had been in the past.

I admit I still did tug on the leash several times because the wrong way is imprinted in my brain. I did it no matter I knew it was wrong. Teaching myself to be more positive has been as hard as correcting the twisted behavior I caused with negative training in the past, because unfortunately many of the negative methods lead to results. They just do it in a way that is not beneficial for any later learning process nor to our relationship with the dog.

It takes time

It took you months to potty train and it takes us the total of several YEARS to learn the basics of what a human being must learn to function in this society. Just remember that when you start teaching the dog something and expect it to master it in a week.

Many times people justify their usage or harmful tools by saying they lead to fast results. That is right, but only partially; dogs learn to avoid things pretty quickly. It is a trait any animal, even us, have. We try to save ourselves from nasty and painful things, and electric shocks or pinches on our throat or squishing our trachea are all to be considered not so pleasant things to feel. However, they also learn to connect the nasty thing with the tool and many dogs that have been forced to use E-collar or choke chains or prong collars need to wear the tool every time when they are to be under 100% control. Otherwise they would not act trustworthy. This alone proves that they have not exactly learned to behave in certain way, they have only learned that while wearing the tool they need to avoid certain behavior, because then the tool does not hurt them.

They have learned no new behavior. They have not been trained. And if they are trained, then the usage of those tools is completely in vain. They are not needed. What is needed is time, because learning takes time. We can't justify unpleasant feelings or pain or danger with our own will to have the dog behave correctly fast.

Learning to learn

Teaching the dog to continuoisly avoid things to save it from unpleasant things leads to apathy.

Learning is based on offering new behavior and being praised about the right one. This is exactly the same with people and with dogs. In school we praise the children from doing the right thing, managing to find the result to a problem, not scold them from making a mistake that leads to a wrong answer.

Think about it; would you rather try to learn what the building-tall creature wants you to do when it gave you rewards, or when it punishes you if you accidentally offer the wrong behavior? Wouldn't the latter lead to sitting completely still, because while not getting rewarded, at least you don't get punished from doing wrong either? That is what happens with dogs. Dogs that are trained with punishment are not good at learning, because learning is a skill that gets the better the more you work on it. Dogs, as well as people, can learn to learn. While many people use both punsihment from the wrong and praise from the right action, the fear of punishment can interfere with the learning even if the right kind of behavior means rewards.

When the fear is let out, we as trainers are still in need of motivation for our student. Something to kickstart the will to learn now that it is made safe and offering new behavior only leads to positive outcome.

Some dogs are harder to motivate than others. The key is to find what motivates the individual the best. While fear blocks learning, reward encourages it. For us people the salary we get from our work motivates us to work. If we do things for free, the reward is not material but emotional. Either way, we work and in general we do things to benefit from it. Once more, dogs are exactly the same. While we are motivated by the change of buying a new car or a nice new pair of Phantom Of The Opera shoes (I'd do wonders to get one of those), dogs are usually easier and most are happy with a treat or a toy.

Some individuals, like many afghans, might need you to work harder to find their non-existent motivation. It is pretty safe to say, however, that every dog is motivated by something.

A success story

In the end I'd like to share with you a success story that hopefully helps to understand the power of positive training as well as shows that all negative things mentioned above caused by punishment really are true.

I have talked with this one young trainer I met in a web community we both belong to. She has been struggling in the past to find a proper trainer to help training her young, strong, energetic dog, and during her journey she came across many different styles of training.

”We told her our situation that [the dog] barks, lunges at every single moving thing, and that we cant take her to walks anymore, so she said I have to 'dominate' [the dog] and to show her her place.. we were never allowed toy rewards, just treats. The trainer suggested many people to use choke chains. She even said that they're better than prongs. So, whenever [the dog] tugged on leash, she said to pull her hard back with the chain and use strict tone.”

The person told me that they were told to use excessive force, and the trainer they went to even made the dog yelp by tugging her leash so hard. She said it felt bad to see, but since this person was said to be a professional trainer, they continued training their dog with the given instructions.

”This method damaged [the dog] heel so bad she saw ''heel'' command as a very negative thing, meaning whenever she doesn't do what humans want, she gets a hard pull on her neck.”

This is sadly a very common outcome with punishment. Dogs that have been trained with violence and force tend to act very tense and submissive when they perform, due to the negative impact the punishing has on the command. They don't work out from eager to be rewarded, but out from fear, and this often leads to stiff and untrustworthy performance.

”Since then we found the new trainer. The first times we only had individual sessions, as [the dog] couldn't focus at all around people and dogs. She (the trainer) immediatly saw our situation and what made [the dog] nerveous. She needed time to get used to the new training place, and even when we first met, [the dog] barked and snapped at the trainer, seeing her as a threat. So, she gave us many useful tips. Our previous trainer didn't even teach how to hold a treat in hand properly.
The trainer knew we had to fix our damaged heel command. We had to completely train [the dog] from the start, the new command being ''fus''. I was so happy now, because soon we stopped using the choke collar and only had positive training with treats and lots of play.” - ”We went to her many times and she gave us constant homework we had to do at home. Now that we used treats and toys and no choke collar, [the dog] didn't ignore me as she did before. We had more walks and she was looking at me more than before, because correct behavior meant big reward coming. She was happy to work with me since I didn't cause her any pain.

We have worked with positive training to the point I don't have to hold the leash anymore when we're walking. She has great recall, we can even pass people and bikes calmly without her snapping or barking because there was no tension on the leash. She is now free of the pulling and pain, which before seemed almost impossible, really. I didnt know that only such simple things can make her this happy to work with me and respond quickly.

Now, after a year since we went to the positive trainer, we can work in group sessions with many other people and dogs.

And really, all we needed was patience, time and effort.”

Inspirational, don't you think?

Do you have any positive success stories? Share yours in comments and pass the kindness on!

Mr. Hyperactivity likes happy and positive things. Be like him.

0 Comments

Violence is not training

18/3/2018

0 Comments

There are several reasons on why hitting your dog is not only unnecessary but also just plain dumb. Even so, many people admit doing so. In most cases it is used as a punishment for some action already passed, like launching on the leash or disobeying a command. Sometimes people explain hitting is necessary if the dog acts uncontrolled, to show ”who's the boss”.

First of all, let's clear out something. When I talk about hitting, I am not meaning gentle taps on the nose or little slaps on the neck. Small things like this don't hurt nor do they scare the dog (unless it's one of those you can't touch without causing stress. In those cases, even gentle tappings cause negative effects, so they are to be avoided). When I talk about hitting, I talk about using extensive physical force to correct the dog or stop a behavior WITH that force, or punishing the dog from disobeying WITH force. Whenever we use physical force as a main source of punishment, not as a reminder of looking at the handler (”Hey, I am here!”- kind of gentle taps) or holding the dog in place (grabbing a hold when the dog jumps against, for example), we are weakening our position as a trustworthy companion.

Excessive submission is not ”being sorry and asking forgiveness so mommy/daddy is not mad”, it is fear. Unfortunately very many people, even after being explained that, still insist their dog is ”knowing it did wrong”, not being fearful.

Submission after being punished with physical force is not shame. It is fear, and everyone who has studied dogs and their behavior agrees. Whenever dogs correct each other with teeth, they do it WHEN the other dog is acting up, not AFTERWARDS. If dogs correct, if one can say so, afterwards, they are usually tense dogs and nervous dogs that get worked up and remain in aggressive, nervous state. Later, that nervousness erupts as aggressive behavior. We as human beings that have given ourself the right to own a dog should be above primitive stress reactions such as blindly punishing an animal from an action that has already passed. It trains the dog nothing but to fear us. They may work out of fear, true, but stop calling it training. It is violence.

Submissive behavior after being hit often includes extensive tail wagging, lowered posture and ears against the head, possible licking of face or dog's own lips and ”being friendly”. Dogs use these gestures to lower the aggression of the other part and to show they are not a threat. It has nothing to do with being sorry about misbehaving, and therefore hitting is not training. If the dog behaves afterwards, it is not because of training but because of remembering it got attacked by it's owner earlier. In many cases the dog is also getting a completely wrong message; it gets punished when it does the right thing and gets back to it's owner's reach. There is hardly any sense in that.

Not so fun fact is, only dogs that are prone to search human advice and have a will to please submit after being hit. Hard headed dogs that have no will to please often attack back or start to act aggressive and tense themselves. Many people using physical force claim their dogs ”need” that or that their dogs ”can take it”. They take it because they want to work with their owner and they are submissive enough not to fight back. Try that attitude with a strong breed, like a livestock guardian, and you'll lose an arm.

Train your dogs. Violence is a bad option when trying to build a relationship.

0 Comments

Natural or artificial sources of vitamins?

7/3/2018

1 Comment

Rawfeeding has always been like a gold mine to supplement producers. Many rawfeeders believe in the power of vitamin jars and there are claims made to convince people that you can never achieve the required amounts with feeding. Since I disagree to a certain level, I will explain in depth what I feed, how that meets the requirements, and what I need to add from a jar.

When I started raw feeding first time years ago, I was very lenient with ingredients. I went with ”three different meats in a week”, added some veggies to that and liver every now and then, and that's it. When I started again after having a pause because of personal health issues and extremely lowered energy levels, I asked a friend to construct me a diet and then went with that.

I noticed certain changes in dogs that were positive, but there were some issues still I thought I wanted to fix. I started learning the matter more, asked some opinions from people who teach raw feeding, read posts made by self-proclaimed gurus, and finally came up with our current style.

I'm a strong believer in natural ingredients and that no animal is constructed so that it can't get what it needs from it's natural diet. Dogs are carnivore with some omnivore potential, and their genetics are not that different from that of wolves. This is also proven by the fact dogs and wolves can produce offspring that can further breed successfully. Dogs are NOT wolves, neither were they developed from the wolf species living in forests today, but even so many of their dietary requirements are similar.

Needs

As I listed before in a longer post, there are certain needs one needs to keep in mind when constructing a proper raw diet.

The most important vitamins A, D and E, all fat soluble, are ones the dog can't produce itself and it needs from it's diet. From minerals, calcium, if you can't feed bone, is a must, and so are zing and iodine. However iodin is needed in such ridiculously small amounts that feeding seaweed every now and then during a week meets the needs just fine. Therefore we don't list it here, though one has to keep in mind it is a needed supplement, no matter you go far with just 1 gram.

Vitamin A : dog needs 25 mcg / kg
Vitamin E: dog needs 0,5 mg / kg
Vitamin D: dog needs 0,3 mcg / kg

Calcium : dog needs 60 mcg / kg
Zinc : dog needs 1 mg / kg (optimum is often said to be 2 mg / kg)

We will use Ms. Dominance as an example here, because she eats about 500 to 600 grams a day depending on how much we are exercising. During winters 500 g seems to be enough, during our most active summer months I give her more if she seems like she's needing it. Let's now go with 500 grams, just for the simplicity. Also to be noted here, we have "different diet" days about twice or thrice a week, where I may boost some ingredients and tone down the others. These boost days are to balance out the overall diet, mainly the vitamin A and vitamin D.

We now know Ms. Dominance, using our numbers above and calculated by her weight, needs:

Vitamin A: 600 mcg
Vitamin E: 12 mg
Vitamin D: 7,2 mcg
Zinc: 24 mg
Calcium: about 1,4 grams

Her current daily diet consists of 250 grams of pork/beef minced meat that has 5% of liver in it, 125 grams of grounded whole salmon, 125 grams of turkey and about 20 – 30 grams of vegetables. Weekly she eats about two whole eggs, and also during two days the total of 100 grams of herrin fillets. She gets added 15 ml of sunflower oil a day, along with 5 ml of rapeseed oil also served daily.

In 250 grams of pork/beef minced meat there is

Vitamin A: 42,25 mcg
Vitamin E: 1mg
Vitamin D: 0,75 mg
Zinc: 9 mg

In 125 grams of minced turkey there is

Vitamin A: 16,25 mcg
Vitamin E: 0,875 mg
Vitamin D: 0,875 mcg
Zinc: 3,25 mcg

In 125 grams of grounded whole salmon there is

Vitamin A: 3,875 mcg
Vitamin E: 1,75 mg
Vitamin D: 6,5 mcg (minimum)
Zinc: 0,375 mcg

In 12,5 grams of pork liver there is

Vitamin A: 1900 mcg
Vitamin E: 0,06 mg
Vitamin D: 0,11 mcg
Zinc; 0,9 mcg

From oils she gets

Vitamin E: 9,33 mg + 2,8 mg

Let's do some maths and add the numbers from all our ingredients together and compare them to the minimum needs of the day.

Total of 1962 mcg of vitamin A. Requirements are more than met.
Total of 15,8 mg of vitamin E. Requirements are met.
Total of 8,2 mcg of vitamin D. Requirements are met.
Total of 13,525 mg of zinc. Requiremens are NOT met.

So, by far we have succesfully debunked the myth of natural ingredients being unable to meet the needed vitamin requirements. Now, of course one needs to remember minimum is not the same thing as optimal, but maximum is not the same as optimal either. More is not more, necessarily, when it comes to vitamins. Fat soluble vitamins also gather in the body, so it's not necessary to meet the needs daily, as long as the longer over all picture is balanced. I tend to fill the minimum needs every day, but during some days we might skip some ingredient just for the change. When the over all diet is in balance, changes like this don't affect the dog in any negative way.

Vitamin E is a vitamin that is needed in greater amounts the more fat there is in the food and the more the dog exercises, so it's the only vitamin that could be given as a supplement. However, some studies show that vitamin E supplements have been linked to cancer. Adding vitamin E from natural sources is safer than adding it from the bottle. In supplements, should one need to add them to the diet, natural sources are a must. Artificial vitamin E does not work or absorb as well. I have not added any extra vitamin E till this day, but if it seems that some of the dogs would need it, I shall try a supplement with natural vitamin E.

Hobby dogs, as well as very active people, need more than us ”regular folks”.

With vitamins A and D requirements are easily met in a balanced diet. Herrin fillets work as a boost for vitamin D twice a week, vitamin A is high enough not to need any boosting at all. Dogs are able to discharge up to 60% of vitamin A they eat, and therefore from any commercial kibble, for example, you get far more than the required amount of vitamin A. It is often used as a preservative, mostly because it's relatively harmless even in big amounts (to dogs at least). Even so, I tend to keep one or two days completely free from liver a week, just to even things out. As said earlier, with fat soluble vitamins this is possible.

Zinc, by far, is the only mineral needing a boost. Calcium amounts are more than met if you use products with bone, but as I do not and the salmon grounded with bones is just and just there, I usually add a touch of calcium powder just to be extra sure.

Since the amount of zinc is lower than the minimum is, I use two tablets of good quality zinc product for pets, adding the total of 30 mgs of zinc. This means the total amount of zinc will raise from about 13,5 mg to 43,5 mg. That is pretty much exact the optimal. The reason why most sources recommend zinc to be added in relatively high amounts when raw feeding is because zinc doesn't absorb so well and it absorbs even less the more fiber there is in the diet.

So, with all above it is pretty safe in my mind to say that you CAN meet the dietary requirements with a proper diet. The fact we often can't fill the need of zinc is that we give meat and maybe bone, but not the whole animal. In whole prey there would be a lot more zinc, too. However, adding zinc is usually very beneficial for any dog, and as long as one doesn't go over the recommendations mentioned in the jar, it is also safe. The same can't be said with fat soluble vitamins. You can't really cause an overdose with feeding, unless you feed terrible amounts of liver a day, but you can pretty easily cause problems with careless use of supplements.

More is not more. More is dangerous if you don't know what you are doing.

Why to construct a proper, diverse diet rather than lean on supplements only?

As said above, it is safer. You can't poison your animal with proper diverse diet unless you feed your dog terrible amounts of liver daily. It is very easy, however, to cause poisoning with supplements.

As said before, some studies have linked vitamin E supplements to cancer. Whether or not one thinks the dog needs some vitamin E boost, always consult your vet if you are unsure. Same goes with vitamin D. Vitamin D is, indeed, very important for any dog, but something to remember is the symptoms of vitamin D poisoning are very severe and highly similar with those of a dog poisoned with ratsbane. There is a reason for that; the poison causes critical vitamin D overdose. So, it's not really a supplement to play with. If you are not 100% sure your dog needs a supplement like that, I'd suggest constructing a diverse diet or feeding 50 / 50 rather than just buying a jar of supplement and throwing some pills in the food.

No matter most people choosing to prepare their dog's meals themselves try their best to build a good diet, some rawfeeders have adopted a very simply way of doing things. I have heard and ever read that many people choose minced pork/beef and just add supplements to that, and to me it breaks the basic idea of constructing a natural diet. There is hardly any natural to add pills from many different jars or feeding the one and the same meat with the excuse of ”I add all the dog needs from bottles”. This might be true, but the diet itself is not that much more natural and organic than feeding kibble. It's just changing the dry ingredients to a meat bough from a trusted source. The added artificial stuff is still there.

This is obviously my own opinion and in no way I am educated enough to tell anyone they are feeding their dogs WRONG. I am simply challenging the idea of being lazy and choosing to use chemicals rather than paying some attention in the ingredients because I think going as natural as possible with as many good quality products as possible is the basic idea of constructing your dog's diet yourself. Whether or not you cook the meat or give it raw, feeding balanced, diverse diet prepared from quality natural ingredients is healthy and tasty, and you can't accidentally cause any lethal overdose.

I used to go about saying even the simplest raw diet is better than commercial kibble. I don't think like that anymore, but I highly recommend thinking about preparing your dog's food yourself. If you can't go all the way full custom mode, prepare one meal a day. If you choose to go all for it, remember to consult some professionals and be critical. The information is out there, and most raw feeders are eager to tell how they do their thing.

OK. So what are those quality ingredients, then?

Excellent question.

In Finland our meat producers are very controlled, meats are often free from salmonella or other sorts of malicious bacteria and it's relatively easy to find good sources for preparing a proper diet. However, I am aware in many countries this is far more difficult. I'd suggest always asking the source of the meat or buying straight from the butchers you know to handle their animals and products properly. You can also buy products meant for people, if their quality is better regulated.

When searching for the right meat, stay away from leftovers. Specially with salmon it is fairly common to ground only the heads, fins and bones, the leftover parts in other words, after the precious meat has been removed. Unfortunately the meat is exactly the thing that has all the good stuff! Grounded bones and heads have little to no vitamin D and they are good mainly for adding calcium and adding some oil, as products like this can sometimes be rather oily. I suggest going for grounded whole salmon, meaning the whole fish was used, meat and bone alike. This way all the good stuff is there.

Minced meats should always have meat in them. If the product consists mainly of lungs and trachea, it doesn't really include anything. Make sure the meat you use has meat, not only leftover parts. The more, the merrier.

The last thing I want to mention are oils. If possible, use cold pressed oils. They are darker in color and also have more vitamin E left. You need less to achieve the same results. Using oils rich in vitamin E, like sunflower oil and the way more expensive but excellent wheat germ oil, is more beneficial than using large amounts of lighter oils since this also means you need more E as there is more fat.

1 Comment

Meaning of veggies in dog's diet

18/2/2018

0 Comments

I could have used shameless clickbait and name this blog post as ”dogs are not carnivores”, but that would be false assumption and pretty cheap. Dogs are clearly carnivore, if juDged by their anatomical features. However, if the classification is based on what food source the animal can use, then dogs are actually omnivore.

Let's start with what science says; they are part of carnivora order. They are mainly meat eaters, and their physical features support this. However, when we take a look at the dogs dietary system, it actually differs from creatures like cats and ferrets, for example, that can ONLY use meat sources for food. Dogs CAN use plant sources, and newest research show some individuals are better in that than the others. This means, living with people as scavengers has lead to the dog developing more towards omivore that can use various food sources. Evolution just isn't quite there yet.

In this post I am not going to talk about dogs being carnivore (anatomy) or omnivore (their ability to use plant sources) more than what has been stated. There are way better and more educated people out there to talk about that. However, it is important to understand that dogs are able to use plant sources, no matter what many BARF and prey model and raw feeders might tell you. There are multiple sources out there proving dogs can use carbohydrates and they can use plants, and that they can even use vitamins and minerals found in plants.

The most common explanation people have against using plants is that dogs don't have amylase in their saliva like herbivores do. They don't, that ius correct, but research has shown dogs do produce amylase in their body and they even have genes to support the digestion of plant based material (https://primalpooch.com/the-great-debate-do-dogs-need-fruits-and-vegetables/ has a great post about this matter with many different sources. Check it out!). This means, to some extent some individuals can use plants and will benefit from them

This leads us to the question I want to talk about today; why do I feel feeding vegetables along with meat supports your dog's health, and why I feel like adding vegetables to your dog's meat based diet is a good thing.

Fill in the gaps

Following is based strongly on the pet nutrition blogger Rodney Habib's research. He has studied pet nutrition and after discussing with numerous experts has came into conclusion that plants can be used to fill in the gaps in modern raw feeding diets.

These gaps are created mostly because raw feeders, such as me, rarely provide the dog with 95% of their prey animals, and we usually provide human bred meat from just a few sources. This means, dogs are not eating like wolves would in the wild. One also needs to remember dogs are not wolves, and that dogs have better adapted to use plant sources and for example carbohydrates. Therefore, we CAN use plant sources to fill in the gaps left with too simple meat based diet, specially when the meat is not from organic sources and thus richer in, well, everyhting than your basic factory meat.

Many raw feeders feed minerals and vitamins from jars. Some self proclaimed feeding experts state raw feeding and feeding organs and meat is never enough to provide the dog enough nutrients such as vitamins and for example zinc, so they turn to man-made supplements to provide their dog with that. They base their opinions on the same research material as I do, but we look the matter from different perspective. They think what I can't get from commercial meats I get from jars. I think what I can't get from commercial meats I must try to get naturally, because animals in the wild do not die from defficiency. They thrive, in best cases. There MUST be a way for me to mimic that. True, wild animals do lack some vitamins and minerals depending on what situation they have with their prey animals, how often they eat and where they live, but if they can get everything they need from their diet, then it is simply false to say one can't give the dog what it needs only by feeding it natural ingredients.

Research proves that while it is not possible to give the dog all it needs from veggies and plants, you can fill in the small gaps left with plants when you provide your dog with good, preferably organic meats. You might have to give your dog some supplements, like the added zinc, if you do not feed your dog whole prey animals from various sources, but you can get most out of meat and you can benefit from veggies if you just pay some attention.

Busting the myth; plants have vitamin and other stuff

The most common thing I hear against using plants in diet is that there is hardly anything else than water in plants.

My little sister went vegan a few years back. Like, not just partially but full damn organic vegan. She uses no supplements, either. She tries to get everything she needs from natural sources. Almost two years ago she also had a child, and she decided with her partner that the child would go full organic vegan too. I, as a meat eater, was very sure the child would have horrible problems in future because we people are meant to be omnivore by nature.

Turned out I was wrong. The child thrives, and should it be right what many raw feeders say, that there is simply not enough vitamins and minerals in plants, it should not thrive. It should be dead. It is wrong, just simply and plainly wrong, to say you can't get vitamins from plants. You CAN. You must, however, remember that dogs are not as good in using those vitamins as we are and that you can't provide dogs mainly plant based food and expect them to be healthy. Dogs do best when their diet is based on meat. Plants are there only to fill in certain gaps left when we feed our animals with two or three main protein sources and organs, leaving out other parts of the prey animals.

Steve Brown, dog nutrition experts too, is know to have said

“Vegetables provide essential nutrients, including fiber, minerals, and vitamins. Without plant matter providing those nutrients, an all-meat diet would need supplements. ”

I have not studied more about Mr. Brown's ideology, but it seems to go together with what others have said.

Also, In 2005, Purdue University conducted a study using fresh vegetables in canine diets. Their plan was to see if vegetables affected incidences of bladder cancer in dogs. The results show that vegetable consumption has been reported to reduce the risk of TCC in Scottish terriers who have a strong breed-associated risk for the disease (Raghavan et al. 2005). The numbers were as high as reducing the risk by 90% if the vegetables used were green leafy vegetables high in fiber and low in carbs.

Where is this based on?

Vegetables and cancer

To make this simple enough for my own brains; studies have shown that vegetables can be used to boost the process called autophagy, which means the process the body goes through to clean itself of debris, toxins and damaged cells and mitochondria. This leads to better over all health and longer lifespan of cells (meaning, longer life in general).

Cancer happens when the cancerous cells appear and start to grow. Protein and carbohydrates, specially getting more protein that is needed, has been reported to increase the growth of cells, even the growth of cancer. Behind this is the process called mTOR. The process has also been reported to inhibit autophagy, meaning the unnecessary growth of cells is messing up the system which takes care of cleaning up our system and making sure we have better cellular lifespan.

Implimenting fiber-rich and low carb vegetables in the diet can both boost the autophagy and benefit the microbiome inside the digestive system (this means, the better the microbiome, the healthier the dog), AND help slow down the unnecessary growth, meaning the mTOR, that would happen if the dog would get enormous amounts of protein. Since meat protein is where the dogs get their vitamins and minerals in raw feeding, producing some of the vitamins and minerals in the form of plants will slow down the process of growth without slowing down autophagy. The cleaning process continues, microbiome is kept healthy, but the unnecessary growth or unnecessary cells that would otherwise mess with the autophagy and cause tumors to spread is slowed down.

Now, this is highly speculative, BUT the study with Scottish terriers did show adding veggies to replace small portion of their diet of kibble (note here, high in carbs. Sugars stimulate mTOR too, like we remember) did lower their risks of getting cancer.

We are onto something here. We can't leave meat out of the diet because dogs need meat, but we can use vegetables to provide nutrients and fill the gaps and boost the microbiome, and it may also benefit us in the form of not having to feed humongous amounts of protein.

Nobody uses this now as any kind of justification on making their dog vegan. That is in any way against any biological facts. I am not saying feed your dog only with veggies. I am saying adding veggies in a little amount might be a good idea because of all the above.

Fascinating. Now what's the meaning of all this?

Well, I assume nothing else than knowing all the above. Knowing stuff in usually beneficial.

TO ME all the above means adding some small portion of leafy greens in my dog's diet, those rich with fiber and low in carb, is probably a good idea. I get vitamins, minerals and support digestive system and I can still offer my dog energy in the form it needs, protein and fat. I can also avoid chemicals and artificial supplements to certain extent. To me this adds to the purity of the food. The less we consume anything artificial, the better our system works. It's the same with dogs and people alike.

One needs to remember, always, that for a dog most of the vitamins and minerals come from organs such as liver, but individuals are more or less likely to get something out of vegetables too. Fiber and over all good effects of vegetables are something that affect every dog.

So your mom was right. Eat your veggies. Give your dog some, too, if you wish.

0 Comments

<<Previous

Hyvä paha häkki

Puolensa ja puolensa

Kivan kautta

Helpon koiran siunaus

Sujuvaa ja stressitöntä

Jokaiselle omansa

Commercial puppy food - a necessity or something to avoid?

Is puppy food harmful to the puppies?

Quality matters

How can I tell a good meat from garbage?

Risks of membranes and cartilage

Benefits of good meats

Some good products

The mystery of vitamin E

Needs

For and against

Many kinds of help

Therapy animals and care dogs

The issue of "uncertified service animals"

Positiveness is powerful

Learning doesn't happen on it's own

It takes time

Learning to learn

A success story

Violence is not training

Natural or artificial sources of vitamins?

Needs

Why to construct a proper, diverse diet rather than lean on supplements only?

OK. So what are those quality ingredients, then?

Meaning of veggies in dog's diet

Fill in the gaps

Busting the myth; plants have vitamin and other stuff

Vegetables and cancer

Fascinating. Now what's the meaning of all this?

Mistä on kyse?

Historia

Kategoriat

Puolensa ja puolensa

Kivan kautta

Sujuvaa ja stressitöntä

Jokaiselle omansa

Is puppy food harmful to the puppies?

How can I tell a good meat from garbage?

Risks of membranes and cartilage

Benefits of good meats

Some good products

Needs

For and against

Therapy animals and care dogs

The issue of "uncertified service animals"

Learning doesn't happen on it's own

It takes time

Learning to learn

A success story

Needs

Why to construct a proper, diverse diet rather than lean on supplements only?

OK. So what are those quality ingredients, then?

Fill in the gaps​

Busting the myth; plants have vitamin and other stuff

Vegetables and cancer

Fascinating. Now what's the meaning of all this?

Mistä on kyse?

Historia

Kategoriat

Fill in the gaps