At 10:31 AM 3/6/01 -0500, John David Hickey wrote:
>Greetings!
>
>> suggests that many folks do great on raw meat, so go figure. My dog eats a
>> BARF diet and seems to be fine, although this alarmist URL says that any
>> time soon he'll be sick or dead.
>
>Now that I've picked up a blender, I'm about to put my kitty on BARF
>(Biologically Appropriate Raw Food or Bones And Raw Food), but I've been
>feeding him raw chicken necks, livers, and other assorted raw meat. He
>inhales it right up!
>
>Irene's dog is on BARF and you could power the Internet with the amount of
>energy that critter puts out.
Mine, too...
But actually, I'm jumping in here because another thought occurred--cooked
meat takes longer to exit my dog's systems, and the, er, output is, um,
larger and more... odiferous--wouldn't this imply that it's not being
digested as well? Would such, er, evidence also indicate anything useful
about humans?
And dogs do have more acid in their stomachs than humans, so they're more
likely to be able to process raw stuff... makes me wonder if the comfort
levels of those who can eat raw is due to higher acid in our bellies, as well?
As I recall, Ray talks about losing intestinal bacteria that used to reside
there to deal with stuff like grains... does stomach acid increase as
needed, as well? In which case, how much of one's ability to eat
raw/nearly raw might also hinge on giving the body a chance to build up the
extra acid to deal with it?
And on a related note, there are some things I don't think I'll be eating
raw anytime soon, either, like chicken or plain, whole eggs (mixed into
something like mayo's different)--but a lot of the reason is that the
*texture* bothers me... stuff that feels... slimy? to me is "ick"--I never
partcularly liked oatmeal, either, for the same reason! Nor "under cooked"
fat. I'm also not partcularly fond of things that are rubbery (so I don't
eat things like octopus when I get sushi/sashimi (before/after :))... I
wonder if these texture preferences actually mean anything?
Dianne
|
