“Feeding Dogs” Gives You Food for Thought on Feeding Your Goldendoodle and Bernedoodle

Always Striving to Help Our Goldendoodles and Bernedoodles Thrive

Here at High Desert Family Doodles, we are always striving to grow more in our knowledge and understanding around helping Goldendoodles and Bernedoodles flourish in all stages of life. One particular area that we spend a large chunk of time is regarding what to feed our Goldendoodles and Bernedoodles.

Like many things these days, information about dog food is almost infinite. At points, this can dishearten even the most doggedly persistent seeker. Nonetheless, we think curiosity, initiative, and persistence can help us in our journey. Books stand out amongst countless mediums as great sources of information and wisdom, provided that one reads widely. So we are always seeking books - particularly significantly researched and recommended books -to help us find wisdom in the midst of the informational miasma on dog food.

One such book is Dr. Conor Brady’s “Feeding Dogs; The Science Behind The Dry Versus Raw Debate”. FD was recommended to us by a local dog trainer, who has found good results from applying aspects of Brady’s book. Also, the great “Raw vs. Dry” debate can be a surprisingly polarizing affair, and each side has their champions. So, this felt like a good quagmire to explore in order to better understand the situation.

So after reading the book, here are five surprising nuggets from the book (at least to us), along with a couple of reflections.

Feeding Your Bernedoodle; The Wild West of Dog Food Industry

The dog food industry is massive - much larger than I would have thought - and is even less regulated than our own food industry. There are massive financial incentives for companies to tap into this vast and growing market in the scramble for market share. While organizations like AAFCO offer oversight and guidelines, it’s easy to get bogged down or even lost in the minutia and double-speak. There are a number of recalls, and many of the perpetrating companies are the largest players in the industry. For instance, the largest dog food recall was for Hill’s Science Diet, which is touted as one of the better “scientifically-backed” food for dogs.

There are a variety of camps and specialties within the industry that relies on particular values and claims; raw, grain-free, kibble, etc, and they can passionate critique and condemn parallel camps. Each of these can appeal to particular studies or anecdotal stories that support their claims while condemning the others. However, the apparent objectivity of science seems to dissolve as one pushed deeper into it.

The image that came to my mind was one of those classic towns in the American west where the sheriff was at the very least overstretched, if not completely disregarded.

Feeding Your Goldendoodle; The Science Behind Dog Food Is Messier Than I’d Like

For me, science is particularly authoritative. I’d like to think that science can remove subjective biases and allow for the pristine, objective truth to shine through. However, science too has particular biases baked into it, as researchers and other members of the establishment subjectively sculpt things by just being involved, and researching dog-food is no less complex.

For instance, many of the studies that have supported the claim that kibble is better for dogs than other diets have significant financial ties to the largest kibble companies. At the very least, this seems like a conflict of interest. However, it could also be grounds for a much higher degree of skepticism.

Also, cornerstone studies can be overstated to deliver strong confirmations of conclusions that are dubious, such as the connection between DCM and grain-free diets (403).

Plus, most veterinarians are generalists, and have a general understanding of dog nutrition based of the established industry narrative. This narrative is at least sculpted by individuals who are publicly working on behalf of the large brands to create veterinary support in things like kibble diets.

Before you get too fired up, I’m not saying that science is a fruitless endeavor or some tool of power. I’m saying that it probably doesn’t offer the objective certainty that we’d like from it. I think it makes me more cautious to blindly accept the narrative, and instead be more curious about where it’s coming from.

This Goldendoodle’s a Predator; Domestic Dogs are Carnivores and Should Be Fed Like It

Brady spends the first couple chapters laying out the evidence supporting the claim that domestic dogs are carnivores. For instance, their digestive anatomy and physiology indicate a significantly carnivorous diet, compared to that of omnivores or herbivores. Their teeth structure, saliva, stomach acidity, and length of digestive tract indicate a heavy proclivity and reliance towards meat. Additionally, “dogs have zero physiological need at any stage for plant carbohydrate in their diet” (55).

Alongs with this physiological evidence, a diet analysis of feral and free-ranging dogs show that they “follow and almost completely carnivorous way of life” (42).

This evidence should help guide the way we feed our dogs, and Brady thinks it shows that a raw diet is superior to a kibble diet.

While I won’t go into the details of the diet that Brady lays out, it does include a variety of meats, along with organ meats, raw meaty bones, and some plant and power additions. He makes it clear that this is not a one-size-fits-all diet, but should be tailored to your dog’s specific needs.

Brady also goes over his list of what you shouldn’t feed a dog, ranging from the outright dangerous (chocolate) to the inflammatory (milk from cows).

Brady feels like this diet can provide more than just the minimum amount of nutrition, but an optimum amount that can help your Goldendoodle with a lifetime of benefits.

Reflections on “Feeding Dogs” and How We Feed Our Bernedoodles and Goldendoodles

I found this book intriguing almost to the point of being unnerving. It reminded me of several books I’ve read about human nutrition, or other health issues. There is an entrenched narrative thought of as canonical. However, a seemingly closer look at the issue shows it to be much more complex, if not even clandestine.

For instance, if the physiology of our dogs seems to point to a carnivorous diet, but the mainstream narrative funded by massive corporations and shared from stores, vets, and much of the information encourages a highly processed diet relying heavily on legumes and carbohydrates, then I can feel stuck in the midst of the crossfire.

While I can feel the “analysis paralysis” creeping in as I consider this Gordian knot of this situation, I also feel the importance of making the best choices we can with the information we have.

So at this point, I feel that “Feeding Dogs” offers some very sound critiques of the common narrative, and offers us some pretty strong counterpoints to it.

However - and call me an idealist - I trust in the scientific process and it’s ability to stumble towards truth. I’m very hesitant to view science as a tool wielded by the powerful and rich to keep it that way.

I think that this practically means that we will continue to integrate more raw meats - including RMB’s and organ meat - into our Goldendoodle and Bernedoodle diets, accompanying our kibble mixture and see how our Doodles respond to it.

I’m curious about how you respond to these thoughts or Dr. Brady’s argument; it’s definitely stirs the pot in a great way.