BARF and Raw Food for Dogs

Holistic Nutrition – The BARF Raw Food Diet

A critique by John Burns BVMS MRCVS

The BARF (“Bones and Raw Food” or “Biologically Appropriate Raw
Food”) diet is a system of holistic nutrition which is
championed by Dr Ian Billinghurst who is an Australian vet. Dr.
Billinghurst has published several books on health and
nutrition. The best known of these is called “Give Your Dog a
Bone”. The BARF Evolutionary philosophy is at first glance an
attractive one; it seems to be truly natural because it tries to
emulate the lifestyle of the dog in the wild.

But, after due consideration I am of the opinion that the BARF
theory, like the emperor’s new clothes, does not stand up to
critical inspection.

The BARF or “Evolutionary” Diet is based on the principle that
domestic dogs should be fed on a diet which replicates as
closely as possible the diet of the wild dog. According to Dr
Billinghurst domestic dogs have been fed on processed (cooked)
foods for only approximately 70 years and this is not a long
enough time to adapt to cooked foods.

To replicate the diet of the wild dog he recommends that all
carbohydrate should be avoided and pet dogs and cats should be
fed on a diet based on raw meaty bones and raw vegetables . Dr
Billinghurst insists that because of this evolutionary history
the BARF DIET is the ONLY correct way to feed the modern
domestic pet dog.

The problem with the evolutionary argument is that domestic dogs
bear little relationship to the original wild dog. Very early in
their association it is likely that man selected and bred those
animals which suited his purpose e.g. guarding, hunting, more
docile, less independent – even better suited to the food
provided by man.

There are practical reasons why the diet of the wild dog is not
automatically suitable for the domestic dog. The modern dog and
its lifestyle bear no similarity whatever to the wild dog. We
provide shelter in heated houses, they do not have to forage or
compete for food, they eat every day, and they have little
exercise compared to a wild dog.

Many dogs have dietary sensitivity which means that they need a
highly digestible diet, low in protein and low in fat. I can’t
see how that could be achieved with a BARF diet.

Modern farm livestock is reared in such a way that the fat
content, even in “lean” meat is very high. So a diet high in
meat will inevitably be high in fat too.

The Carbohydrate Question

According to Dr Billinghurst dogs cannot digest carbohydrate. In
reality, the dog has very sophisticated, sensitive and efficient
mechanisms for breaking down carbohydrate and ensuring its
absorption. This could not have evolved if carbohydrate was
detrimental.

But, according to BARF, carbohydrate causes so many health
problems e.g. inflammatory disease such as pancreatitis. While
it is true that low-quality or refined carbohydrate may be
undesirable, my experience is that I have had excellent results
in treating and preventing inflammatory disease using both home
cooked and commercial diets which are based on whole grains i.e.
high in carbohydrate.

On a simple level what vet has not recommended chicken and rice
to treat gastro-intestinal disease?

There are other major flaws with the BARF philosophy. One which
flies in the face of the facts is the assertion that raw food is
more digestible and that cooking destroys that digestibility.
Simple common sense and experience tell us that cooking actually
increases digestibility. Increasing the digestibility of the
food is an important way of treating bowel disease and problems
of malabsorption. Cooking does this.

I suspect that any success claimed for the Raw Food system is
due to a much more mundane explanation than its grandiose but
erroneous philosophy. This is that any benefits are due to the
avoidance of ingredients which cause dietary intolerance. My
main criticism of the BARF philosophy is its self-righteousness.

BARFism puts forward a flawed theory with a certainty which
bears comparison to religious fundamentalism; it brooks no
dissent. It advocates a system which is impractical and does not
fit well into the lifestyle of present society, denying the
possibility of alternatives, thereby condemning those pet
owners, the majority, to feelings of inadequacy for failure to
follow its teachings. see http://www.burns-pet-nutrition.co.uk