Mixing raw & kibble...

...an interesting study which seems to turn the idea of kibble taking longer to digest than raw on its head!

http://therawfeedingcommunity.com/2015/01/08/digest-this-kibble-may-actually-digest-faster-than-raw/

Nicely put article.
Some of these pieces of 'advice' on feeding you find, come from people that never had one period of school biology. They have no idea how the digestive system works. They probably believe if you swallow a piece of bubblegum it takes 7 years to digest

My only criticism of the study is that they didn't measure what happens if you feed raw & kibble in the same meal - that would have made it far more complete!

Doesn't really matter. It's all going to go into the stomach as a mushy, chewed up, liquidized gunk, get digested and evacuated out, round about the same time. Food is only in your body for x amount of time. So if you have bone that's harder to digest than say kibble, the body will take out less from the bones and more from the kibble and it'll all come out at the same time.

Well, yes, but if you're going to do a study to try and prove something, all eventualities should be covered - just the icing on the cake, really.

The study seems to show that kibble travels through the intestines quicker than raw, but doesn't really say why. My guess is that there's less of use to the body so it's passed out quicker.

I'm digging into it. Carbs digest easier so as kibble is mostly carbs it'll digest quicker.

Geez, there's conflicting info on how digestive systems break down food.

Shisa wrote:I'm digging into it. Carbs digest easier so as kibble is mostly carbs it'll digest quicker.

Hmmm. Carbs aren't a whole lot of use to dogs, so that's no recommendation.

Shisa wrote:Geez, there's conflicting info on how digestive systems break down food.

That's the trouble, you can't get a straight answer - so many conflicting studies.

Caryll wrote:My only criticism of the study is that they didn't measure what happens if you feed raw & kibble in the same meal - that would have made it far more complete!

I would have liked to see the feeding regime for the two dogs reversed (after a suitable period of time for them to get used to the alternative diet) - the difference may have been purely down to the two individuals.

Lorraine wrote:

Caryll wrote:My only criticism of the study is that they didn't measure what happens if you feed raw & kibble in the same meal - that would have made it far more complete!

I would have liked to see the feeding regime for the two dogs reversed (after a suitable period of time for them to get used to the alternative diet) - the difference may have been purely down to the two individuals.

I think it was just one dog, wasn't it?

I read it as two - I'll have to check.



No, you're right - I need glasses

Maybe it'll trigger some more in depth studies?