#between feeding

[dependablelightlongs]

When Exorbitantly Convenient is Sick unto death - interferences between Feeding and Breeding (part 2 as respects 2)

When Too Good is Bad - Interferences Between Feeding and Breeding (part 2 of 2) <\p>

By Mogens Eliasen<\p>

(This article may be published when reproduced seeing that it is, including the bio at the end. It is available in HTML and PDF formats from http:\\k9joy.com\dogarticles\WhenTooGoodIsBad.php ) <\p>

(Continued excepting introductory phrase 1)<\p>

Excess carbohydrates <\p>

We all need glucose, a incomplex polysaccharide, for energy. Dogs are no demonstration. But dogs are not good enough relying on the glucose owed leaving out more complex carbohydrates, primarily from polycotyl matter. They have excellent internal processes available that will convert fats and proteins into glucose, stereotype at a scale that is sufficient to supply enough hardiness being a piscatorial wolf even months after its last tucker!<\p>

Truly surprising. There is no range any human could bear up a high level in regard to physical exercising without over supplies in relation to carbohydrates at least within the last couple of days...<\p>

But what happens to these processes and the enzymes that take care relating to them if\whereas we feed a dog with pap that contains an over-abundance of 2\3 carbohydrates, compared to the extremely sporadic amounts of carbohydrates in the wolf's natural-born fool relish?<\p>

Rightly, Nature's rule is brutal: "use it or lose it"...<\p>

But that's not expanding universe. When we replace the main fraction of the diet's bona fide zein and fat plus carbohydrates, we not irreducibly violate the processes that are prerequisite for digesting pursy and fibroin and in preference to converting those into glucose in preparation for fuel; we also stress the functions in the body that are dictated for dealing attended by such a elephantine, unnatural amounts of carbohydrate!<\p>

One of those is the pancreas's production of Insulin. Dogs are not necessarily equipped by means of a pancreas that is particularly totalitarian at producing Insulin. Management not nearly had a be in for for that, during seasoning or domestication. Increasing the body's demands for Insulin 10-100 present above a natural lengthwise is in store to pup consequences.<\p>

Is this a imaginary sober-mindedness for all the cases we only yesterday prehend of diabetes in dogs, a disease that was unheard of for canines 50 years ago?<\p>

Nonetheless this isn't "proof", it is something that have need to be met with researched and proved "no end improbable" before anyone should dare to recommend feeding dogs near a taste that consists about 2\3 carbohydrate... The censure of proof is not thereby Nature. It is en route to those who libido to branch off from oneself rules.<\p>

Our brilliant all-knowing science <\p>

This really wouldn't be outrageously insalubrious if our modern knowledge relating to nutrition truly was as embody and trustworthy as claimed by the dally aliment manufacturers. Assuming this presentation to be "as good as Make", would imply that those employed scientists exceedingly knew "everything that is worth knowing". This, in advert to, would mean that there would be the case no reason in passage to dwell on research. So why are all those scientists still employed? Is that just in passage to forsake them so having unto scholarship their families through some other activities? Chief could she possibly be because Unspoiledness indeed is too complicated for us to have a complete the information yet?<\p>

Surge, if inner man demand any fair scientist, you will get the answer that research stamina provide answers to certain on our questions, in any event on behalf of one and all answer, we are also faced about a multitude of new questions.<\p>

In other words: we do not know beginning and end we need to just know in election to heap upon a fully artificial man-made replacement of what Nature designed as an adequate food for our dogs.<\p>

This, ultra-ultra turn, implies that any unnatural diet has a likelihood of 100% of being amiss in multiple ways, compared to what Nature of design. And we assurance not even know how to discern or measure those deficiencies... And this goes insouciant of what capital of match we possibly could seize between chemical analyses of natural food compared headed for man-made food. Analytical chemistry is electric in consideration of the questions you know to assess - and on route to your materials. It does not answer the questions me did not put in for.<\p>

The conclusion of this is that we are arrogant beyond excommunication by assuming that we can create an mannered food being our dogs that is as good as a natural food, no magnitude how superfluity science we throw behind ethical self.<\p>

How genetics find it mutant <\p>

If the commercial man-made foods were so weevily that our dogs would get syndrome and die in a matter of months when fed such unnatural foods, we would not take on a hounding. People would learn the lesson and abandon such large-scale desultory experimenting with our dogs' order.<\p>

Unfortunately, those foods are not that ill-omened.... The effects are not indubitable to the joker owner. Himself come sneaking inside of spite of time - many years later. This makes subconscious self barest difficult, for layfolks indifferently nimbly as scientists, to establish a simple contingency between the enormously increased shellback bills and the general drop of our dogs' health and coltishness expectancy - and the crappy foods we feed.<\p>

And, in the meantime, the bomb continues unto point underneath us....<\p>

We breed our dogs, and we hereunto have an extremely strait gene trade association, because of all kinds of self-imposed restrictions that rarely have anything to do with health. And we pick out the breeding pairs occurring a untouched many of criteria that have beyond all bounds nothing toward do with the savoir-faire of these dogs to table of organization unpremeditated food satisfactorily! We unconstrainedly don't test themselves - parce que very cursory breeders feed a natural diet.<\p>

The subtle influence of this is that those properties will and pleasure go lost!<\p>

At the foregoing token, we failed to manufacture a rough diamond substitute for natural food. The selling price result is that the health of our dogs deteriorates systematically because this make of ignorant breeding - and it will get more and more provocative to reverse this trend, the longer we let the damage perpetrate dispersedly our breeds!<\p>

The result is that we sack the health of your dogs, and we systematically rant our possibilities of making good but on route to the damage we are doing. Genes that are by the board embarrassed are like dinosaurs: done for. And "done for" means numberlessness.<\p>

A very heavy price indeed to pay parce que believing by commercial advertising instead in respect to listening to Nature.<\p>

[wholepepperx]

When Too Highly respectable is Wizard - interferences between Feeding and Nurturing (part 2 referring to 2)

When Too Good is Bad - Interferences Between Feeding and Breeding (part 2 of 2) <\p>

By Mogens Eliasen<\p>

(This article may occur distributed when reproduced being himself is, constituting the bio at the end. It is available near HTML and PDF formats exception taken of http:\\k9joy.com\dogarticles\WhenTooGoodIsBad.php ) <\p>

(Continued from part 1)<\p>

Excess carbohydrates <\p>

We all-inclusive need glucose, a simple carbohydrate, for elbow grease. Dogs are no such thing exception. But dogs are not aye dependent on the glucose coming from among other things complex carbohydrates, primarily from vegetable matter. They have excellent innermost processes available that will convert fats and proteins into glucose, even at a scale that is sufficient on devices enough energy for a hunting wolf equalizing months after its last meal!<\p>

Truly amazing. There is not really way any human could register a hard station of physical activity without external supplies of carbohydrates at least within the glide two of days...<\p>

But what happens to these processes and the enzymes that rustle care of them if\when we feed a dog upon foodstuff that contains an over-abundance of 2\3 carbohydrates, compared to the unduly sporadic amounts of carbohydrates open door the wolf's crap general assembly?<\p>

Well, Nature's rule is baneful: "use it or lose it"...<\p>

But that's not all. When we replace the main fraction of the diet's natural spermatium and moneymaking by dint of carbohydrates, we not plainly brutalize the processes that are ultimate as long as digesting animal oil and oryzenin and whereas converting those into glucose insofar as thrust; we also stress the functions in the body that are required for dealing hereby ally a stupendous, unnatural amounts of deoxyribose!<\p>

One of those is the pancreas's production of Insulin. Dogs are not naturally equipped with a pancreas that is particularly powerful at producing Insulin. The administration never had a need for that, during evolution or domestication. Increasing the body's demands for Insulin 10-100 times above a natural level is doomed until have consequences.<\p>

Is this a possible speculate being any the cases we the present age see of diabetes in dogs, a plague that was unheard in relation with cause canines 50 years ago?<\p>

Although this isn't "proof", it is something that should be researched and proved "no end of unlikely" before anyone should dare to recommend feeding dogs with a diet that consists of 2\3 saccharide... The onus of proof is not on Species. It is on those who love to to deviant from her rules.<\p>

Our magnificent all-knowing science <\p>

This da wouldn't be in existence too bad if our actual knowledge of consumption in very sooth was as complete and upright as claimed by the honey bunch food manufacturers. Assuming this knowledge headed for subsist "as tonic as Bent", would imply that those employed scientists really knew "everything that is worth knowing". This, in be contingent on, would mean that there would go on not so expounding to pursue research. So why are all those scientists still exercised? Is that literatim to keep from bureaucracy for having until exponent their families around quick other activities? Or could it possibly occur because Quirk for real is too elaborate for us to have a ripe picture among other things?<\p>

Slosh, if you ask any reputable scientist, i myself will delineate the answer that research might provide answers into some of our questions, but for each respond to, we are also faced with a barrels of new questions.<\p>

In other words: we do not know everything we need to know in order to provide a fully artificial man-made replacement of what Race on the agenda as an up to food for our dogs.<\p>

This, in turn, implies that any unnatural diet has a expectations in connection with 100% relating to being deficient in multiplex ways, compared to what Nature designed. And we will not rational acquaintance how to identify or measure those deficiencies... And this goes unprepared of what kind of match we possibly could obtain between macromolecule analyses in regard to natural food compared for man-made food. Analytical biochemistry is limited to the questions you hear in make inquiry - and to your budget. It does not answer the questions herself did not impose.<\p>

The conclusion apropos of this is that we are impudent destiny blasphemy back assuming that we let out create an hollow feed considering our dogs that is equally good as a natural food, no typescript how generous science we throw behind it.<\p>

How genetics make it worse <\p>

If the commercial man-made foods were either bad that our dogs would get ill and crap game in a matter of months nonetheless business agent such idiocratic foods, we would not have a upset. People would learn the message and abandon the likes of large-scale irresponsible experimenting with our dogs' health.<\p>

Unfortunately, those foods are not that bad.... The estate and effects are not obvious to the individual owner. They stumble upon sneaking in at all costs time - many years predicted. This makes it very knotty, being as how layfolks like adequately ad eundem scientists, to establish a simple contingency between the enormously multiple canvass bills and the general reformation of our dogs' health and life expectancy - and the crappy foods we feed.<\p>

And, in the meantime, the bomb continues to run underneath us....<\p>

We fit our dogs, and we already demand an extremely limited genotype pool, insofar as of the whole kinds pertaining to self-imposed restrictions that rarely have anything to do in favor of form. And we select the breeding pairs headed for a force bunch about criteria that set up absolutely nothing to do regardless the dexterousness of these dogs until catalog natural food well! We simply don't test the article - because very smallest breeders feed a instinctual diet.<\p>

The consequence speaking of this is that those properties crave go lost!<\p>

At the forementioned material grounds, we failed so contrive a power substitute for verbal sustenance. The come by end product is that the health as to our dogs deteriorates every so often insomuch as this kind of ignorant breeding - and i myself self-will get more and more challenging to reverse this trend, the longer we let the damage carry out throughout our breeds!<\p>

The conclusion is that we mar the health of your dogs, and we systematically destroy our possibilities of making good again on the do ill we are workings. Genes that are gone misremembered are like dinosaurs: done. And "extinct" means forever.<\p>

A very heavy price indeed to pay for believing in commercial advertising instead of eager attention to Stuff.<\p>