Benefits of raw meat (in cats)

[Aroura]

I know this is about cats, but I found it interesting and it proves my theory that cooking meat destroys vital nutrients...

in 1932, Francis Pottenger, MD, began a ten-year experiment that compared the effects of cooked and raw meats on cats. One group of cats was fed a diet that consisted of 2/3 raw meat scraps (including bone, muscle and viscera) and 1/3 market-grade raw milk and cod liver oil. The other group was fed an identical diet, except their meat scraps were cooked.

The group fed raw meat remained consistent in size and form over the generations, with males remaining visibly different from females in size and facial structure. They had excellent tissue tone, good fur quality with little shedding. The calcium and phosphorous levels in their bones were optimal, and organs were well-developed well and fully functional. This group was also resistant to infection, fleas and other parasites. They were friendly, outgoing and even tempered, producing litters of even size with few complications.

The group fed cooked meat was not so lucky. The cats were all of different size and all looked different. Their long bones got longer and thinner, resulting in hind legs longer than front legs. Their bones also showed evidence of calcium loss. By the third generation of kittens, these cats' bones were soft and bone infections were commonplace. Heart and vision problems abounded, along with marked increases in irritability and hostility. The cats were plagued by skin and organ problems. This third generation was so nutritionally deficient that none survived beyond six months, effectively terminating their line.

Females being fed cooked meat became more aggressive, while males became less so. In fact, it seemed that the coked diet reversed the sex roles. Males' sex drives declined. There was also an increase in abnormal sexual activity between the cats. The kittens born to cooked diet cats weighed less than their raw-fed counterparts. Their infant mortality rates were higher and they developed many allergies.

Pottenger summarized his finding by saying that something about raw food helps to activate and support growth and development. Whatever this may be, it seems easily destroyed by the cooking process. Cats who spent one year on a diet considered fine for human consumption so damaged the vitality of cats that it took 3-4 generations of raw feeding to resolve these problems genetically. Some cats were so damaged that no amount of raw feeding resolved their genetic problems.

[Horsefeathers!]

Ah, but cats are much different. Feline nutrition is very tricky. The more I'm learning about it, the more confusing it gets, but their protein requirements are nowhere near the same as for canines. If this is the ONLY evidence, I still can't buy that cooking ruins nutritional content... at least not cooking at the temperatures that would be found in a home environment (extruded food cooked under extreme temperatures would be vastly different). I've heard of far less (no) ill effects feeding cooked meat to [b][u]dogs[/u][/b] than raw. Same with people... if cooking ruined nutritional value, we'd all be starving to death. It's just not a valid argument to compare cats and dogs, so it still doesn't "prove" anything.

It was interesting to say the least, but I still don't see where it would have any bearing on canine nutrition. Cats' needs/systems are WAY different than dogs'. Cats are true carnivores (despite the occasional nibbling of such things as catnip and houseplants). Dogs are not. I know that's the BARF argument... that dogs are truly carnivorous, but....

[Aroura]

I'll post anymore evidence I find, but I'm researching cats at the moment and I do understand they do have different nutritional needs (I'll be getting a cute little bundle of Devon Rex in the near future :D :D :D ). Cats are more simple to feed, a bit of raw meat, a few chicken necks, an egg or two a week plus a few extras and they are set. Dogs are omnivores, and have a whole lot of different needs all together, although I do think this proves something about the cooking of meat.

[Horsefeathers!]

Nah... it just proves cats are the exception to any rules :P . Remember... we cook our meat, too. :wink:

I have five cats, btw. Want one? :-?

[Aroura]

LOL, no we've had our fair share of moggies here!!! Nearly all of the cats we've ever owned (including the two we had in Canada) have been strays that we've brought in, usually full of a litter of kittens too!!!
Between snake bites, cars and members of the family moving out, we only have one cat left, my cat Tiger, son of Marmalade the stray. I've had him for the past ten years now and though I love him to death, I've decided I'm never getting another cat with that much fur!!! He's got no more fur than any normal cat, but you know how some cats have real allergy fur? He's one of them!!!
Of course me being so dam stubborn I'll still sleep with him and cuddle him etc even though I can't breathe :)
But yes, I've decided to go Devon! Although they are very rare, and I will probably be on a year or two waiting list... :roll:

[Horsefeathers!]

I think cats try to live forever just to spite us. I already had four cats ranging in ages from 6 years old to 8 years old and most of them having some sort of health problems (asthma, chronic urinary tract problems, one has a deformed back end and heart murmur). I swear they only come here to live if they are sick! After all this I still took in a kitten a few months ago. He's about six months old now. About time to go have his doodads snipped off. LOL All these cats and I always say I'm not a cat person. :roll:

[Aroura]

Yup, I say exactly the same thing!!!
Life wouldn't be the same without a cat in the house :wink:
I think Tigers got another 10 years in him yet, healthy as ever, except for something on his nose, its always bleeding... I think he has cancer :cry: