But they clearly (in their own admission!) have no research to support that - which is why they say "There is - at least in theory - no reason...." .... That is not the same as saying 'research proves that'.... And all the videos posted above quote very different research which shows that dogs DO need meat... It's pretty clear that feeding humans little dry nuggets containing all the vitamins and minerals we need, would be way less adequate than a natural diet of whole foods - we know that - so why we're so resistant to accepting this in relation to dogs, I don't know...
First, here is a summary why we should be thinking about this at all (I'm being lazy in posting this rather than setting out the arguments) Time to Eat the Dog: The real guide to sustainable living https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427311-600-how-green-is-your-pet/ Well, they say: *Those interested in vegetarian companion animal diets should be aware of concerns about the nutritional adequacy of some such diets demonstrated by a number of studies over a significant number of years. However, to ensure a balanced view, they should also be aware that similar concerns exist about commercial meat-based diets. They should also be aware that, although rarely conducted in accordance with the highest standards of evidence-based medicine, a significant and growing body of population studies and cases have indicated that cats and dogs maintained on vegetarian diets may be healthy—including those exercising at the highest levels—and indeed may experience a range of health benefits. Vegetarian animals also experience a range of health problems, but these problems are also prevalent in companion animals maintained on meat-based diets. Finally, pet owners should be aware that a significant body of additional studies have demonstrated health problems in domesticated animals maintained on various meat-based diets.* Your point about the disadvantages of eating dry nuggets is a general point about commercial dog food.
There are a whole lot of "Mays" in that article.....that alone would have me supplementing with meat if I chose to feed a mainly vegetarian diet....
I totally agree that there is a huge conflict between ethically what is best for the planet and biologically what is best for a dog (or person, for that matter). The same conflict exists for humans as well - that's where all the articles about how we can't all keep eating this amount of meat and raising animals in crappy conditions, whilst at the same time there is increasing evidence that meat and animal fats are necessarily for optimal health. But the ethical side of things is a whole separate argument. It would be best to decide what is biologically optimal for a dog, to begin with. Then comes the decision about whether to sacrifice what is biologically optimal.... But that's a different debate. (Personally, I want to feed my dogs what is healthiest for them and what they have evolved to eat - not to sacrifice their health in any way, to contribute in some miniscule way to saving the planet... ) This is just poor logic. Just because some diets that contain meat are bad, doesn't really have anything to do (one way or another) with whether or not to feed a vegetarian diet. There is a 'bad' version of everything 'good', from open heart surgery to learning to ski. Using the 'bad' version of everything to make any argument, is just poor logic. Critical points in bold above...
But you started it. The only reason I'm arguing this at all is because you said: As a long standing vegetarian (not now, but that's a long story...) making assumptions about beliefs and the motivation of people is a bit of red rag.... But, I am bored now.
I think it's a pretty fair assumption to make. Are there people out there who eat meat themselves but choose to feed their dogs a vegetarian diet?! I honestly can't think of another reason....
