In response to Ktee's link on the feeding board
- I am sure it does say everything you have been trying to tell me ;) but as the author notes they have gleaned their information from joining a Yahoo Rawfeeding list I don't see why their opinion is any greater or lesser than your own, Ktee :)
In the light of any more robust evidence I will continue to stick with the independant studies, such as More Thans, and indeed my own experience, being of equal value I believe to yours and your quoted author's, for my understanding of the general state of the dog population :)

How my dogs live well into their teens on the rubbish they supposedly eat I don't know :rolleyes:  I'm sorry but most of these would show my dog food to be the lowest of the low but our Pomeranian's live to around 17 on the food that we've fed for many years.  My Dilita lived til 12 and her daughter will soon be 14 and is still going strong.

Simba - labrador - 15 years
Jet - labrador - 14 years
Tramp - border terrier - 14 years
Gemma - labrador - 15 year
Purdey - labrador - 16 years
Thor - Australian shepherd - 9+
Loki - Australian shepherd almost 8+
Beau   )
Vinnie  )  Australian shepherds almost 5
Freya - labrador - 3

All have been fed on a general mix of whatever + whatever .....I certainly don't agonise over their diets - they get fed a diet that will balance out well over a 7-day period, supplemented by the occasional treat/dead rabbit/bacon buttie/quality street toffees/snaffled cat food/contents of cat litter tray........... :D :D

Margot

Holly  - CKCS  10.5 YEARS- BARF foods

Kass - Rottweiler 9yrs 10 months- BARF foods

Taffy - crossbreed 20 years ( always fed on tinned food / pedigree complete ) I know some people slate processed foods but he lived to 20, had a nice coat, good teeth and other than his legs going at the end, no trips to the vet, honest !!!

Ive taken now to predominantly reading journals rather than *websites*
Isabel I thoroughly recommend Journal of small Animal practice ( In conjunction with British Small Animal  Veterinary Association) registering takes seconds and gives you access to reams of other journals eg: Journal of physiology and animal nutrition,emergency veterinary care... blah blah.
As one of my avenues of exploration and benchmarks :)
I also signed up For journals to be mailed to me which help pass mundane train journeys into London each day :) (still throw in the odd Heat magazine though!)

Edited to say
oh darn it... it wont let you see :(
Google Journal of small animal practice, you'll get it then.
Shame as the article I linked to was perfect for your discussion.

Thanks for the link HG :)  I'll explore that.  Looks like I will just have to browse through month by month as I am too mean to subscribe :)

In case anyone's wondering why this isn't on the Feeding board, it's because I asked Isobel or Ktee to post here as I would expect any discussion on canine longevity to cover things like veterinary treatment, vaccinations, breeding/genetics, environment etc as surely no-one believes that diet alone is responsible for how long a dog lives ;-)

>surely no-one believes that diet alone is responsible for how long a dog lives <

Ahh....but some people do ....and infer that if fed according to X or Y the dogs would live longer

Margot

it is probably sensible to think about quality of life rather than plan for giving the dog a long life. Nothing can guarantee a long life but there are lots of ways to guarantee a quality of life. Each day is special not how many years..I guess that's as I did all I could to feed my dog on expensive food so he lived a long life and pick a long living breed and read up all I could to keep him safe and healthy but he never saw his 4th birthday. But I am glad he had a really terrific life.

I now feed mine on food that is convenient and reasonably priced and with good ingredients and do my best to keep them healthy while keeping a more balanced perspective on my hopes of how long they will live.

>I would expect any discussion on canine longevity to cover things like veterinary treatment, vaccinations, breeding/genetics, environment etc as surely no-one believes that diet alone is responsible for how long a dog lives

Quite so, but it is tricky isn't it because some of those factors you feel would promote longevity and some may inhibit it but as we know dogs are living long and healthy lives what we can, perhaps, say is no one factor is contributing to the extreme that some people fear.

I think in general, life span has increased in dogs and I say this because I regularly come across and hear of dogs 14, 15, and 16 plus nowadays, even large breeds, when this was very unusual 40 years ago.  Even my grandparents or people in close proximity never had dogs that reached this age and there was many. 

Although there was of course the odd dog which reached an exceptional age and 16 plus would have been considered exceptional in those days. 

Even cats, it's not unheard of to come across a cat 20 years plus these days.

But there will be many, many reasons for this, changes to lifestyle, better medical care, protection from the harsh extremities, more knowledge about medical conditions, preventative care, etc, etc, etc. 

Notwithstanding, feeding commercial food does not appear to have had any detrimental effect on longevity IMO.  Diet is impossible to define as a separate entity thou as there are so many other factors coming into play. 

Dogs at rainbrow bridge:
Spangler,  Golden Retriever - died aged 3 fed dog food and cooked food, occasional bones - vaccinated every year

Paddy, crossbreed (parents dog) died aged 17 - fed dog food, cooked food and raw - only vaccinated as puppy

Dougal, laparapso (excuse the spelling) brothers dog, died aged 14, fed a mix of dog and cooked food - only vaccinated as puppy

Dogs here now:
Jasper, Golden Retriever, 16 months old is fed barf - puppy vaccines and then titre tests

Henry, crossbreed, approx 2 years old is fed barf - had vaccines before but will titre test from now on

I think it is important to add about vaccines as someone mentioned, longevity isn't only about what we feed our dogs but lots of other things and vaccines being a major part of that. 

 

Suzie - Pomeranian, died aged 9, heart problems, fed fairly cheap complete dried food vaccinated every year.

King - Rough Collie,  died aged 8 cancer of the oesophagus - fed dried and also meat

Dusty - Pomeranian, died aged 16, was around same time as Suzie so fed the same food, only had first vaccination and booster.

Dilita - Spanish Water Dog, died aged 12, 1st lot of vaccinations and 3 boosters (one because PAT dogs required it at that time).  Fed working dog fairly cheap dried food and a semi-BARF diet.  Was PTS after she went deaf and then blind and she just couldn't cope with life without these instincts.

Melvyn, Pomeranian, died aged 10 fed similar to the above dogs.

Lydia, Spanish Water Dog and Dilita's daughter, only vaccinated as a puppy -  again working dog fairly cheap dried food and a semi-BARF diet (as and when I can afford to feed this way) she will be 14 in October and although had a few scares earlier this year she is now like a 2 year old again.

Bugsy - Pomeranian, aged 12, fit and well. Fed dried food and only vaccinated and had 1 booster.

Claire- Pomeranian, aged 13, fit and well and fed dried food.

Lastar, Spanish Water Dog, would think fed mainly scraps of meat, such as parts of chicken and a dried food diet in Spain for his first 6 years in life.  Vaccinated and had his boosters up until 7 years of age.  He is now 9 and fit and well.  Now has a dried food and a semi-BARF diet.  Well above average hipscore, but you wouldn't know it to see him.

Carina, Spanish Water Dog, 7 years old, fed as the other SWD's, extremely fit well and terribly bouncy.  Great hipscore (even though she was jumping 6 foot in the air from 5 months and still does this to the day) and clear eyes!

Lana, Spanish Water Dog, whoops, I think I might have missed her 7th birthday this month agggghhhhh!!  Fed a dried food.  When she spends her time with me has a semi-BARF died too.  Also has very good hipscore for the breed.

Anton, my Ickle Man and again a SWD son of Lana.  4 years old, fed the same as the others, extremely fit, very athletic build with extremely muscular legs and a very muscular neck :d :d  Not the best of hips but he has no problems with them (just above the breed average, although sliding around the floor and doing the wall of death around my living room I don't think helped as a puppy)!  Oh and clear eyes.

Carmen, 2 year old SWD, daughter of Lana and Lastar.   Fed the same way again.  Below average hipscore.  Does have an eye problem but not a hereditary one.  Had her puppy vaccinations and that's it.

PLEASE NOTE STOPPING OF VACCINATING OUR DOGS WAS DUE TO TOO MANY POMERANIAN'S DYING AFTER HAVING THEM DONE, THIS IS MY OWN PERSONAL REASON WHY I DO NOT DO IT, WATCHING DOGS DIE WITHIN 2 DAYS OR EVEN HOURS OF BEING VACCINATED WAS NOT VERY NICE ESPECIALLY AS I WAS A YOUNG CHILD AT THE TIME

That is a concern when you see something occuring more often than expected in a breed, or possibly a line.  What do the breed club say about it?

When we changed to the dead vaccine at the time, Nobivac, we didn't lose anymore pups.  I know vaccines are a lot better these days but I still don't want to take the chance!  A woman in the breed looked into it and found Nobivac was the best at that time.

But if you didn't lose any more pups when using Nobivac I think we can exclude vaccination, per se, as being detrimental to the breed.

You can exclude one vaccination and that was the Nobivac dead vaccine, you cannot exclude others!  Some of our pups died at the vets and I don't think that any of the deaths were ever reported although nowadays I would ensure that they were!

What I said is you can exclude vaccination per se.

Well, once a dog has immunity it has been found they have immunity for at least 7 years and most likely life.  This has been confirmed to me by a leading professor in animal vaccine from Glasgow Uni and I'm confident in his findings.

I understand exactly whay you mean perrodeagua about seeing a dog die within a short time after vaccine :(

As vast numbers of dogs are vaccinated regularly and yet longevity is now very good we can presume that vaccination has been a cause for good, or at the very least not a cause for bad, for the group as a whole.

Based on the training club I go to with people with dogs over many years (trainers and obedience competitors) most do not booster their dogs, some only have puppy shots and others have their first booster and no more after that.  Regular boosting seemed more prevalent among by breed showing friends, but many now question this.

Most people I know do, but if we are seeing less take up of regular vaccination perhaps we may see some changes in the general longevity.  Only time will tell.

Well Isabel you must run in different circles than I as the majority of show/obedience people that I know don't!  This isn't a new thing either, we and many people I know haven't been doing it for at least 15 years or so.

I guess I must do but then we are into different breeds :)  I was also including everyone I know amongst family and friends with just pet dogs.  I wonder if it is anything to do with them being more likely to use kennels with only having one or two dogs. 

Could be, as most kennels still request that you have them fully vaccinated.  I'm lucky as I have friends that look after my gang if I ever go away, whoops that reminds me, I'd better get asking around for when I go away for a long weekend next month :d

Teh people I am speaking of have only done primary vaccination and maybe one boster for 30 or 40 years with dogs living into their teens.

Our training club won't take you if you can't produce an up to date vaccination card for each dog.

Our training club only wants to see that the initial vaccinations are carried out.

Same here only applies to puppies.  I haven't vaccinated mine for several years (do them every third year and have stopped the annual Lepto with it being so ineffective anyway) and don't plan to do the older ones (over 7) again.  The two younger ones will have their Rabies for the Pet Passport.

Longevity of course does not mean healthy.  ;-) There are many dogs that reach a vast old age with a condition whereas years ago there was not the medical treatment available and they would be PTS to avoid suffering. 

Very true, which is why I say I think husbandry practices and health care are major contributors.  What we can say, though, is that the modern diet is not preventing that occuring.

I personally can't say I have seen any notable differences from my grandfather's collies fed on white bread, milk and table scraps to my father's hunting dogs on complete, table scraps and raw to my own fed on complete with this, that and the other.   There are breed differences here though.

I even know of a dog that was reared as a vegetarian , dog still lived to a ripe old age with no significant health problems. 

The body is a highly complex revolving regenerating organism; it will take what it needs from a variety of foods. 

That said I have no doubt that there are dogs that may 'do' better on a particular diet than another. 

If anything, too much nutrition and too much food are just as detrimental to health as too little IMO. 

I agree again :) 

In my own experience longevity is breed/line based and doesn't appear to have been influenced by food at all. Over the years my idea of feeding has changed dramatically - yet my original dogs lived to similar ages as the last ones. Since my first collies that were fed table scraps, to the ones that were fed tinned meat and mixer, to the ones that were fed good quality complete food, to the current ones that are fed a mixture of barf and complete, I'm not sure I notice a difference in the actual dogs :D All were active with shiny coats and bright eyes and the vast majority have lived to be 16 or 17. I've only had borzois (alongside collies) the last 19 years but again there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between the previous complete fed ones and my current barf/complete fed ones?

I think pretty much the same as you JaneG.  Genes and good, routine husbandry and health care contribute the greatest elements, I would say. 

Isabels point(from what i understand) was that the commercial foods available nowadays are assisting in the longevity of our dogs,or at least not hindering them.
My point was that it has nothing to do with the quality,or lack thereof,more to the point, of today's commercial foods,but it has more to do vet/medical advances,Less disease(parvo,distemper),and dogs being treated more as family members which deserve the same care as us when they get sick,compared to the old days of take em behind the shed and shoot em,or euthanasia if their dogs got sick.

Looking at the ingredients of the more popular dry foods available,anyone with an ounce of canine nutritional knowledge could not in their right minds say that they are optimum... I see so many fat,unhealthy dogs on a daily basis.So many young dogs dying of cancer and kidney and liver failure etc etc.I blame part,not all,of this on the the appalling diet most dogs are fed on.
I realise that poor nutrition cant be blamed for it all,but i'm pretty sure it play's a large part in the ill health of today's dog population.

>How my dogs live well into their teens on the rubbish they supposedly eat I don't know

Good genes perhaps? :) I'm not saying this is the case with your dogs,i dont know them,but i've seen plenty of old dogs,but their quality of life hasnt been good,they are on medication up the wazoo etc etc,cloudy eyes or half blind,and deaf,weak joints da da da.

>All have been fed on a general mix of whatever + whatever .....

How nice :)

>I certainly don't agonise over their diets

Neither do i,i've just educated myself on what the optimal diet for a canine should be,and a food full of cereals,grains,derivatives,colours,preservatives etc fed on a daily basis turns out not to be it,and certainly wouldnt help a dog live to it's fullest potential.

>surely no-one believes that diet alone is responsible for how long a dog lives

No JaneS,i dont believe anyone here believes that diet alone is responsible.But there are plenty who dont give it a second thought either,which i find highly irresponsible and the ostrich in the sand mentality.

Anyway here is the link mentioned earlier http://rawfed.com/myths/longevity.html entitled
"Myth: DOGS ARE LIVING LONGER LIVES BECAUSE OF THE BETTER NUTRITION PROVIDED BY KIBBLE."

I also see comments like this one regularly around here:

>once in the latter stages of pregnancy she'll need a higher grade food with more calories etc.

What,once the pups are gone the dog can go back to a lower quality food?

My non-working dogs,are on a high quality,high meat protein and fat diet,plenty of whole fresh foods and as least processed stuff as i can and are in optimum shape.

I also feel so strongly about diet because mine and my families dogs have been fed as above since i was a child,and not one,no joke, not one has had allergies,cancer,liver/kidney issues or ANY of the array of disease killing dogs today.They have all lived way into old age(between 15-19),until their bodies more or less gave out.On the other hand i have known people who have fed cheap commercial foods,and some nothing else(no real food) and their dogs have had all or one of the above conditions,coincedence,maybe,but i think not.

Now,i have never had a necropsy done on any of my deceased dogs so i cant say for sure what exactly ended their lives,but up until the day,no signs of any of the above were detected.

>once in the latter stages of pregnancy she'll need a higher grade food with more calories etc.

I can't speak for the author of your quote but I probably would not have worded it like that, but then I don't understand what you can possible mean by "higher grade" food.  Nutrition is nutrition there is no grade to it either meets a requirment or it does not :) 
I would talk about putting them on a more suitable food or appropriate food, for many people the puppy equivalent in the same range, that is all and I think that is what the author means.
When a dog lives to old age they greatly increase their chances of dying of cancer.  It has nothing to do with food and everything to do with cell replication.  It would be quite unusual for any elderly group of dogs or human to not show this.  It is not something I particularly worry about.  We are all destined to die and how they go is of lesser importance to having a long and happy life but taking a choice between general deterioration of the bodies organs and the course that cancer generally takes which is fairly insidious until the latter, generally short lived stages, particularly in dogs when euthanasia can be used when they do reach a stage of discomfort, I think I would opt for the latter personally.

>but then I don't understand what you can possible mean by "higher grade" food.  Nutrition is nutrition there is no grade to it either meets a requirment or it does not.

I'm Glad you said that isabel,you have proven my point.

As there certainly are grades of commercial foods.There are foods that meet the bare minimums of that requirement,and then there are foods that exceed it. You can not compare the cheapest supermarket food to the most expensive super premium.One is made from primarily grain/cereal where the dog has to eat loads to fill it's nutrient requirement,the other is made from 'cleaner' ingredients of meat,minus all the unnecessary junk of which the dog has to eat a more normal amount to meet it's requirement.On the former food the dog most likely has large poops because it cant use the indigestable ingredients and they simply pass straight through(big waste of money IMO),on the other the dog has smaller poops because the food is designed to be utilised as much as possible.Once again meat based V grain based.

Sorry Ktee just can't see the logic of more nutrition being better :)  You either meet a dogs requirements or you don't nor do I consider fibre a waste of money.  It is an essential part of the diet to facilitate elimination.  Do you consider the fibre you pass as wasted, I suppose it is in a way :D Too little is also likely to cause difficulties emptying anal glands, time and again we see posters being advised to increase this element to sort that particular problem.  A low output diet might suit some but it certainly dosn't suit all.  I can attest to that with my dogs :) If more has to be eaten so be it, again that may suit dogs very nicely providing more satisfaction and facilitating weight control without any distress.

>Sorry Ktee just can't see the logic of more nutrition being better

OK if you cant/wont understand this very basic principle i wont go into it deeper with you. :)

And i never meant 'more' nutrition,i meant a more concentrated,cleaner form of feeding.Nor did i say dogs dont need fibre,although there are some out there who would disagree with this.But comparing a food with a certain percentage of fibre added to a grain laden food is like apples and oranges.

Foods made of primarily cereals and grains are done so for one reason and one reason only,they are cheap! and rely very heavily on dogs being resiliant creatures,but they are not infallable,which takes us back to talk of all of these diseases.High meat diets are expensive and unfortunately not everyone is prepared to pay that price on their lowly dogs :(

Anal gland issues are caused more IMO by soft poops,Large or small,soft will not express anal glands.Cereal fed dogs seem to produce poops that more resemble cow patts than anything.

>i meant a more concentrated,cleaner form of feeding

I don't know that my dogs need concentrated, cleaner feeding even if I knew what on earth it meant :) as far as I understand they need food that meets all their nutritional requirements.
I agree with you about soft motions being no good for anal glands but fibre provides firm bulk and that is certainly the experience I have with my dogs.  Any dog that produces cow pats has probably got some form of intolerance to one of the ingredients.  Fibre in itself would not cause that, they must be passing excess fluid as well which is a failure of the bowel to function correctly in extracting this before defecation.
I can also assure you grainy foods suit my dogs very well as they do many others judging by the fact that our dog population fairs so well and grains are very commonly fed.  In my particular case high meat foods definately did not suit them although I am sure there are dogs that they do.  Even if that was not the case why pay for an expensive way to provide nutrition when a less extravagant one is perfectly capable of providing the same.

>Even if that was not the case why pay for an expensive way to provide nutrition when a less extravagant one is perfectly capable of providing the same.

Oh Isabel,Bless :D it's not quite that simple...

Not all foods are created equal. If each food provided the exact same nutrient profile then there wouldnt be a need or want for all of these different foods.There are huge leeway's in the pet food industry and many ways they can appear to meet the standard,but in different ways. Some provide  protein from corn/soy,others get their protein from meat,some provide vitamins in their synthetic form,others use the natural form ,some use artificial preservatives,others the natural form.This is what i meant by a cleaner,concentrated way of feeding,the second examples in all of the above fits this profile IMO.

>Some provide  protein from corn/soy,others get their protein from meat,some provide vitamins in their synthetic form,others use the natural form ,some use artificial preservatives,others the natural form.

Yes, simple old me understands that to be case :) 

>This is what i meant by a cleaner,concentrated way of feeding,the second examples in all of the above fits this profile IMO.

You've lost me again I'm afraid :)  I have no idea what "cleaner" means and I am not bothered if it is concentrated or not.  As far as I can see all that matters is that a dog is getting what it requires and I say again why pay extra for something that does nothing more for your dog than a more economical provision?

> I also feel so strongly about diet because mine and my families dogs have been fed as above since i was a child,and not one,no joke, not one has had allergies,cancer,liver/kidney issues or ANY of the array of disease killing dogs today.

Out of interest, were these related dogs or were they completely unrelated, adn were they all the same breed?

>My non-working dogs

Being a bit dense :o I wasn't aware you worked your dogs, Ktee. What do they do?

Personally, I think peoples experiences detailed in this thread have amply demonstrated that the other factors play a much larger part and it seems, other than a few specific breeds, almost impossible to malnourish a dog :D  I agree about overweight dogs these days but I think that is down to modern humans, only partly related to their eating habits and much more to do with their lifestyles.
You may look at the ingredients and decide they are not fitting with your nutritional knowledge but I am more interested in the nutritional knowledge of the people devising them.  Considering the requirement by law to make a product fit for purpose I doubt any of the large manufacturers are using people without the necessary qualifications to ensure that this is met.  Similarly, I see no relevent qualification in the credentials of the author of your link other than that use of Yahoo boards, you may as well just offer you own oppion and experiences I would regard it with the same value as anyone elses in this thread and judge it on its sense and logic.
You need to open you mind to the possibility that what goes round on these food boards may have the whiff of myth to them :)  Certainly grain based foods have turned out to be the optimum for my dogs.  None of the preservatives used in our country come anywhere close to safety limits and, again, this is backed up by the evidence that the majority of dogs in this country eat them everyday and we have a healthy dog population.  Some dogs are sensitive to certain colourings but the vast majority of the products used in the UK are not only tested safe they are copies made from the same chemicals that provide colour in foods anyway so if your dog shows no sensitivity I cannot see any logic in getting concerned about it.  The only objection I have is the thought I might be paying for something my dog cannot appreciate :)
You are right, quality of life is important and we should not forget that in all we are doing to enable our dogs to live longer we need to ensure that that quality remains and if they are no longer comfortable supported by heart drugs or analgesia we must let them go but I don't see how that detracts from my point that modern diets are part of what facilitates them reaching these fine old ages.

>>"Myth: DOGS ARE LIVING LONGER LIVES BECAUSE OF THE BETTER NUTRITION PROVIDED BY KIBBLE."

Almost definately not, I would say, the debate appears to have concluded to most peoples satisfaction that many other factors govern a dogs health and wellbeing but I would repeat again that I see no indication that they, or just about any other sensible diet, are inhibiting the ability to live to a ripe old age.   I would go a little further though and say that in this modern, busy world I think for many people they will be the best way of meeting that sensible diet requirement.

that detracts from my point that modern diets are part of what facilitates them reaching these fine old ages.

>>"Myth: DOGS ARE LIVING LONGER LIVES BECAUSE OF THE BETTER NUTRITION PROVIDED BY KIBBLE."

Almost definately not, I would say, the debate appears to have concluded to most peoples satisfaction that many other factors govern a dogs health and wellbeing but I would repeat again that I see no indication that they, or just about any other sensible diet, are inhibiting the ability to live to a ripe old age.   I would go a little further though and say that in this modern, busy world I think for many people they will be the best way of meeting that sensible diet requirement.

very sweeping statements that have no more credence than anything Katee has posted with links. As you so often say, we are all here unqualified to make such assumptions, only able to give our view on what suits our dogs best. Everyone here has found the food they like, and which works well for their dogs, but I would find it more balanced if the personal opinions were also a good mix of people who feed both, or have changed from one to another, and who use their dogs as working animals, as well as showing, pets, and the occasional breeding, and a good cross section of the dog owning public, not just the few of us who post here, but also people from gundog clubs, hound clubs, agility clubs, sled dogs (if thats the correct expression ) That to me would make a good cross section of dog owners to base a decision on regarding food.

As to dogs living longer.....how can we tell for sure why? can we be sure they are, not just that we have better communications now and can discuss this aspect more? is there any survays that show dogs live longer on the whole? If so, it could be food, could be better medical care, could be better housing, could be working/breeding/ill dogs are not PTS so often now as was, all manner of things really. As humans we live longer, they say we are like 40 at 50 now, many reasons for that I guess. never mind the reasons, lets just be happy they are! :)

It is quite clear from my post that I am stating my opinion.  
I think in the course of this debate we have had opinions from people across the spectrum of dog ownership and activity and we have also had the opinions of people that have tried different things.
There have been several studies on dog longevity, I remember in particular one published in the dog press a year or two ago by MoreThan.  The recent Kennel Club Breed Survey, although not comparative with other years, also suggests good longevity with all breeds, large and small, reaching a mean average age of over 11 years.
I think just about everyone in this debate has agreed that there are multiple factors involved and, like you say, as long as they are thriving I see no reason to worry too much about any particular one :) 

I thought the reason that this thread was put on the General board was so that it wouldn't become a food fight :D :D

Margot