(2/2) Heating meat doesn’t change its nutritional content at all. If done via boiling to just barely 160 inside, the texture, enzyme reactivity, and ‘rawness’ can be maintained to ensure the dental benefits of a raw diet. Human-grade meat /must/ be heated to 160 F to be safe. Please think about it for your pet’s sake—especially if you live in an area with other dogs and could end up infecting less healthy dogs with passed or hosted parasites.
Incorrect. Dogs digestive systems have not changed since the introduction of cooked carbohydrate-based foods a few decades ago. These foods actually raise the PH promoting alkalinity as opposed to acidity, and the very limited research we have on canine ph has all been performed on kibble-fed dogs. Meaning on a raw diet their PH would drop even lower. Also you never mentioned the various other mechanisms by which dogs handle bacteria - only PH. You seem to forget that a dog’s entire physiology is geared toward a raw diet and this mechanism works in synergy with other factors. Just to outline some of the many ways dogs manage bacteria:Salivary lysozyme, very short gut length for pushing through raw animal protein as opposed to plant ‘fermentation’, gastric acidity and a very high bile load (Dr Karen Becker discusses bile in link below and in other vids).
Also it is proven by various literature that while fat-soluble nutrients are not drastically altered during cooking, water soluble nutrients are indeed lost when foods are heated (1, 2, 3, 4). Also here’s another one: "All vitamins decreased during cooking, with thiamine showing the highest losses, from 73% up to 100%. In conclusion, the cooking and trimming of meat cuts considerably affected the nutrients in various ways and to different degrees, which should be taken into account when the nutrient intakes of meat are estimated" (study). Another (seriously there’s hundreds): “Generally, moisture and fat contents of broiler meat were significantly decreased by cooking, but the fat content of the dark muscles showed no significant change when cooked by microwave. All cooked meats were significantly lower (p < 0·05) in thiamin content than raw meat” (study).
Protein is denatured (inactivation by heating, disrupting the 3 dimensional protein structure) and other enzymes which are invaluable in digestion are destroyed. Even if you compare 100g cooked vs raw beef heart on the USDA database, this is not at all accurate becuase of the moisture content (thereby seemingly ‘concentrating’ nutrients in cooked meat becuase it has lost so much water volume/weight). As for enzymes, there are thousands of different types, and sure there may be some that survive heating. However, all current research emphasizes that 'Enzyme research has revealed the importance of raw foods in the diet. The enzymes in raw food help start the process of digestion and reduce the body’s need to produce digestive enzymes. All enzymes are deactivated at a wet-heat temperature of 118 degrees Fahrenheit, and a dry-heat temperature of about 150 degrees. It is one of those happy designs of nature that foods and liquid at 117 degrees can be touched without pain, but liquids over 118 degrees will burn. Thus we have a built-in mechanism for determining whether or not the food we are eating still contains its enzyme content' (source). Cooking can actually be dangerous in some circumstances, for example cats who have an essential requirement for the amino acid taurine, which is also deactivated by heating meat. This is why kibble companies have to add synthetic taurine into the mixture following cooking.
You also seem to be forgetting that all dogs regardless of diet have very similar levels of bacteria in their systems (study here). Assuming they are on a correct raw diet, bacteria just passes straight through them (hence why you shouldnt handle/eat their crap). Kibble-fed pets are at an increased risk due to compromised gastric acidity and this is why so many are affected by kibble contamination recalls.
Again another thing you are forgetting is that bacteria is in everything. Dogs eat feces and roll in dead birds all the time but owners do not rush them to the vet becuase quite simply - they are not humans. Dogs have the physiological adaptations to manage bacteria. I totally understand your uneducated viewpoint and I even remember cooking a disgusting looking mince (eyeballs, intestines etc) for my dog way back in the kibble days. Wouldnt dream of doing it now. Parasites are also a completely moot subject becuase of regular worming treatment, deep freezing, and sourcing organs from human-grade heavily inspected facilities. Like bacteria, parasite eggs are also everywhere in the outdoor environment, from waterways to grass, animal feces, and dirt. In fact many of these places are ideal locations for certain stages of parasitic life cycles (eg many Nematodes). Education about the difference between carnivores, omnivores and herbivores is the key and I reiterate: Dogs are not humans.
Basic canine physiology/Raw Feeding - Karen Becker DVM
Cooked Food vs Raw (Incl refs)
Cooking can change nutritional profiles somewhat. It isn’t really an issue though. Raw food nuts may have a bit more of a leg to stand on with dogs and such than with people, but it’s still shaky.
As for the carbs, no, it hasn’t changed in a few decades, obviously. But dogs can digest carbs just fine. Which isn’t to say you can or should feed them a vegan or vegetarian diet. But getting some, even a lot of their food as carbs isn’t an issue.