I see quite a few posters give their dogs marrow bones but I'm worried that the dogs may chip their teeth on these. I'm sure I read it somewhere although I can't remember where. Our market has bags of bones ready made up for dogs but usually contain some marrow bone. These would be classed as bones for recreation and not food is this right? How would this effect their daily food intake that day?

Marrow bones are recreational, not food. And you're also right that chipping teeth is far from rare - slab fractures of the molars are very commonly seen, and invariably the dog in question gets marrowbones.

Thanks for that. I won't bother with that then.

I have always given all of my dogs (from a very early age) marrow bones.  Perhaps its because they are fed a good diet that means they have good strong teeth, but I have never had any teeth chipped or anything else due to the bones.  My 11yr old has the cleanest teeth possible, never had to clean them or have them scaled.  This I believe is due to the fact that she always has access to bones.  they are  only doing what they would have done in the wild years ago.  

>they are  only doing what they would have done in the wild years ago.  

And quite possibly broken their teeth then too. ;-)

mine must just be lucky then and have inherited very good teeth!

My younger dog chipped a front tooth on a marrow bone, but my other dog who is 2 years older (now nearly 7), has never chipped a tooth yet.

Seems like opinions both ways then. Plenty of other bones to clean their teeth so why take the chance. Thanks for the balanced view.

> slab fractures of the molars are very commonly seen, and invariably the dog in question gets marrowbones.

Would that be in the vets so info through work JG?  I'd imagine working in a vets one sees much more of particular things than anyone because that's where dogs with problems get taken for treatment.  Dogs which enjoy good health rarely require examination to any degree after all - maybe an annual MOT (if that)

To the OP, FTR I've never had a dog with a chip of fracture to a tooth in nigh of 20 years and that despite all indulging in numerous marrow bones (and occasionally bricks LOL)

We see quite a few at work, but I've only ever had one dog out of all the ones I've had throughout my life not get them; mongrel, labrador, OH's family dogs; only one of the dals didn't. I've given up with them for dogs once the adult teeth are through.

Would you actually know though?

Our 9yr old Lab went in to have her teeth cleaned and the vet discovered she had two slab fractures. No signs, wouldn't have known if she hadn't been going in anyway!

Exactly - very many dogs turn out to have slab fractures and the owners genuinely don't know. Most people don't check their dogs' teeth properly.

> Our 9yr old Lab went in to have her teeth cleaned and the vet discovered she had two slab fractures

and do you give RMBs and large recreational bones Silver?  I've found the need for descale is nil with mine that enjoy bones whereas only one, which doesn''t see the attraction in gnawing without eating >sigh<, has ever needed a descale (twice :( )

> Exactly - very many dogs turn out to have slab fractures and the owners genuinely don't know

Is that info an opinion formed via your workplace JG?

Some breeds are more prone to tooth problems than others and certain lines within breeds may be better or worse off.  I also believe the level of nourishment given to the dam , rearing of the litter and subsequent nutritional input by the new owners must have an affect on such things too - just as with humans :)

> Most people don't check their dogs' teeth properly

I'd imagine a lot of people don't check their dogs teeth at all unless drummed into them by their breeder or perhaps their vet when recommending paste, brushes, and professional check ups .... 

Couldn't say for sure of course - just my opinion :)

>Is that info an opinion formed via your workplace JG?

Yes - I don't go around checking other people's dogs teeth when we're out for a walk! ;-) People bring in their dogs for their annual check; the teeth are checked as a matter of routine and that's when the damage is discovered.

>I'd imagine a lot of people don't check their dogs teeth at all

Yes - the vet finds the damage. It occurs even in barf-fed dogs, much to the surprise (and disbelief) of the owners.

>> Is that info an opinion formed via your workplace JG?
> Yes - I don't go around checking other people's dogs teeth when we're out for a walk!

LOL - somehow I didn't have you down as lurking behind trees to pounce on peoples' pooches with a dental pen :-D  I just think perhaps, as with anyone working in any medical environment, some conditions may appear more common than they genuinely are because the dog/cat/horse/parrot/reptile/or person is there for the purpose of being helped by a medical professional in the first place :)

>because the dog/cat/horse/parrot/reptile/or person is there for the purpose of being helped by a medical professional in the first place

The point is that these dogs are at the vet for a routine annual check - the owner is completely unaware that there's anything wrong. They're not there to be 'helped' by the medical profession - they're there simply because they were last there a year ago.

A very balanced article. (Scroll down for the piece about bones.)

> The point is that these dogs are at the vet for a routine annual check

But only dogs taken for them :)  Mine certainly don't go for specific 'routine annual checks'.  They go if they're poorly or I have some specific concern and sometimes I pop in with them to keep them socialised with the sights and smells of the place but that's about it.

I'm not trying to argue that these events/discoveries are specifically rare or frequent, merely that opinion based on info directly from a vet practice doesn't IMO make them common in the canine population - perhaps 'helped' was a poor choice of word.

I think the balance of any article on this subject is better weighed by ones belief in the content and personal knowledge of the credentials of the author and whether they sell or recommend any books, articles, diets or any other merchandise relating to the subject :)

I give marrow bones/knuckle bones, and yes, we do have a few chipped teeth over the years..

Emma on the other hand who really does grind into her bones (nothing left to throw away) has very little teeth left.. one canine is halved, another is wearing down at an alarming rate.. and premolars are worn down to the gum line.  Its her front teeth that have taken most of the damage, and no longer has a perfect scissor bite.they have worn down completely to gum line and idealy should be removed. when her mouth is closed to look at teeth I can poke a finger straight into her mouth

She is the only dog to get her teeth cleaned as well as having bones.. because of the damage, I need to brush them to stop any decay.. Vet has checked them.. no decay (yet) but sooner or later there will be nothing left to chew with

>But only dogs taken for them.   Mine certainly don't go for specific 'routine annual checks'.

Fair enough. How often do you check your dogs' teeth? As you say, most people don't at all, so unless their dogs are unmistakably in severe pain (swollen face from a dental abscess, or sudden change of temperament) they could be suffering in silence for years.

> Fair enough. How often do you check your dogs' teeth?

At least once a week - just like every other part of them in their main grooming session from pups throughout their lives :)  TBH I'd have thought anyone who shows dogs or has in the past would as a matter of course   Clearly presumption on my part (note to self, don't assume/presume!)

ETA I need to edit SO much more often these days - typos!

Yes, she does. Don't get me wrong - I'm not against marrowbones and similiar, I seem to think I've heard even nylabones can cause slab fractures if they're very enthusiastically chewed and used a lot (though don't quote me on that!).

I was just genuinely interested because I know we would have had no idea and we can't be the only ones!

Thanks Silver :)

>TBH I'd have thought anyone who shows dogs or has in the past would as a matter of course

What percentage of the dog-owning population is that? The vast majority of dog owners only see inside their dog's mouth when it yawns - these dogs are the ones that can be suffering without their owners ever suspecting.

As Silver says - genuine, caring owners don't always know that this has happened.

>> TBH I'd have thought anyone who shows dogs or has in the past would as a matter of course
> What percentage of the dog-owning population is that?

Come on now JG, please don't twist things - you *specifically* asked how often I checked my dogs' teeth and as you know very well that I show my dogs and have done for many years and I know that you also (or at one time) show your dogs I was surprised that you *specifically* asked about my routine because IME it's second nature to do it and, as I referred to, I thought that the case with anyone else who shows/ed their dogs.   Nothing more or less was meant/implied.

And yes, I accept that a great many very caring owners don't know to do it or how to do it sufficiently well just as they don't know about potential anal gland problems, the need to check for removal of grass seeds and dozens more other things.  Doubtless many groomers or their assistants could be of the opinion that matted coats, skin problems, ear mites, blocked anal glands, overgrown nails and horrendously deformed dew claws are 'common' BUT, as far as I'm concerned, that would also be based only on their clients - not a generalisation.

I have lost count of the amount of chipped/broken and holey teeth I have had over the years and I don't eat marrow bones (or chicken wings or kibble for that matter) ;)

Hope you're on the 'plaque off' then Ali :-D :-D :-D

>Come on now JG, please don't twist things

I'm not. I specifically asked how often you checked your dogs' teeth because I assumed that it would be more frequently than the average pet owner. If you choose to put on a different interpretation (I could easily have chosen to take umbrage at the unintentional suggestion that I, as an ex-show person, might not be so vigilant, but didn't!) that's your decision. I was right on both counts. You meant no insult, and also you check your dogs' teeth far more frequently than most 'ordinary' owners. Their dogs are the ones we see most of - very few 'show' dogs. Just because you've never seen damage to your dogs' teeth from hard bones doesn't mean that your experience (although utterly valid) is 'the norm'. Tooth damage is more common than the very rare, but undeniable, adverse vaccine reaction, for example.

> Their dogs are the ones we see most of

So in answer to my original query (now many posts later LOL) the answer is 'yes' yours is a personal opinion based on observations from the dogs seen in the veterinary practice in which you work :)

>Just because you've never seen damage to your dogs' teeth from hard bones doesn't mean that your experience (although utterly valid) is 'the norm'.

I'd have thought everyone's experience 'utterly valid' and as for 'the norm' that, again, can only be personal to each of us when based on personal observations within limited situations

>yours is a personal opinion based on observations from the dogs seen in the veterinary practice in which you work

And, as I said in my original response, my own dogs as well as those through work.

>as for 'the norm' that, again, can only be personal to each of us when based on personal observations within limited situations

'The norm' is more general than personal - it's what is more common in the population as a whole, rather than individuals. 'The norm' is the bigger picture, not the detail.

> 'The norm' is more general than personal - it's what is more common in the population as a whole, rather than individuals. 'The norm' is the bigger picture, not the detail.

Thanks for clearing that up. 

So IOW your points are based on your own dogs' experiences - much the same as mine albeit with different outcomes :)

and this generalisation

> you're also right that chipping teeth is far from rare - slab fractures of the molars are very commonly seen, and invariably the dog in question gets marrowbones.

is based on anecdotal evidence :) 

>Thanks for clearing that up. 

No problem.

>So IOW your points are based on your own dogs' experiences - much the same as mine albeit with different outcomes 

I reiterate again: my opinion is based not only on my own dogs but also the hundreds of dogs we see at work.

>is based on anecdotal evidence

I confess to assuming that the owners are telling the truth.

My immediately previous posts still stands - I'm sure I don't need to reiterate that either.

Your own experiences on your own dogs are as valid as anyones.  However your observations through work are restricted to a minority sample of the canine population and as such are not necessarily anymore accurate than the average claim in most TV and magazine ads such as '8 of 10 cats prefer such and such a brand' or '87% noticed a difference in skin/hair/weight in X days.....' etc

IOW not factual

All vet practices only see a minority sample of the canine population; that doesn't mean that the information they gather is irrelevant. In fact, quite the opposite, because they see a broader cross-section than most amateurs.

I used to think the same as you until I had more evidence put in front of me to learn from.

I'm sure a receptionist in an electrical company thinks there's an enormous amount of flawed wiring, or receptionist in plumbing poor piping/water pressure , etc - which doesn't make it so. 

IME however professionals dont make sweeping statements or generalisations outwith their own specific area of expertise and have in depth knowledge mainly within their own locale - whether a relatively small neighbourhood or large region that they cover.

I see you edited :)  True, we at one time did share many opinions, ideas, notions (and laughs as I recall). 

It seems your new role has changed you - or rather OUR relationship - quite a bit.

Where have I made any sweeping statements? I've not said that people shouldn't feed marrowbones, just confirmed that the what the OP had heard (about tooth damage) isn't an old wives' tale; it certainly happens, and it's not as uncommon as people (including me prior to greater experience) think.

> It seems your new role has changed you - or rather OUR relationship - quite a bit.

I'm the same person - just older and wiser than I used to be. :-)

> including me prior to greater experience

something some of us can only aspire to it appears :(   I'll leave you to your self assumed superior stance on all matters veterinary

>something some of us can only aspire to it appears  

I don't understand you. I'm sure you've learned all sorts of things in the past few years too. If I'd not had the opportunity to come across so very many more dogs than just my own my experience wouldn't have increased, would it?

> I'll leave you to your self assumed superior stance on all matters veterinary

Far from superior, I can assure you - unless 'willing to share' is somehow superior?

Doesn't that mean that JG's observations are utterly valid as well then?

OUCH!

> Hope you're on the 'plaque off' then Ali :-D :-D :-D

lol, hell yeah! plaque off all the way.

> I specifically asked how often you checked your dogs' teeth because I assumed that it would be more frequently than the average pet owner

I'm an average pet owner :) I check Busters teeth at least once per week, (he doesn't have bones) but frankly - I don't know what I'm looking for!!! I would notice any obvious difference, but his molars are not easy to see, as you open his mouth his lips/cheeks/muscles bunch up, pushing slimy flesh between the top & bottom molars. It needs 1 finger to try to keep all the slimy flesh out of the way (your finger has to pass between the top & bottom molars in order to push the flesh out of the way - HUGE teeth - very glad I started this when Buster was a pup!!), which leaves you with only 1 hand to keep this huge gob open that is trying to spit out the finger wedged in the cheek!!! I don't think a vet would spot anything wrong with his molars unless it was very obvious (he doesn't put his fingers in Busters mouth as freely as I do).
I wouldn't be suprised if there are many minor tooth injuries that go un-noticed, even during check-ups.

Ohhh - nothing against vets here, but they can only see what they can see, I'm sure they would find more tooth problems if dogs were routinely sedated for a check ups (not that I'm suggesting that should be the case).

Another valid point (or two!) Even the most caring of owners don't always know what to look for, especially when their dog shows no signs that something's wrong, and other equally caring owners have dogs that, for one reason or another, can't easily be examined for dental problems.