7^th International Veterinary Congress

Biography

Biography: Krisztina Kungl

Abstract

Introduction and goals: the feeding RMBDs (so called raw meat-based diets) to dogs and cats reached significant popularity in the past few years in Hungary. In our study, the most common motivations of feeding RMBDs were analysed. Our main goal was to gain an insight into the common reasons of feeding this specific diet, where/when the owners learned about it, what were the most important motivations to choose RMBDs and how satisfied were they with the diet.

Material and method: Our study was based on a standardized web-questionnaire, filled out by dog owners (regardless of their pets’ diet). 767 people filled in the questionnaire. We selected 3 different groups based on the diet: (1) fed only RMBD (NY); (2) mixed diet (RMBD and other types of food) (V); (3) non-RMBD feeders (E). We had 438 responders from group NY, 91 from group V and 238 from group E.  Statistica 13 (StatSoft) was used for statistical analysis.

Results: Regarding the source of first information about nutrition, among non-RMDB feeders the most common source of advice was a veterinarian (38%), however among RMBD feeders, information came from facebook groups (34%) or “from a friend” (31%). This shows that info about raw meat-based diets reaches dog owners via non-scientific routes, meanwhile, most of the non-RMBD feeders follow diets based on scientific studies, which are advised by qualified persons. 75% of RMBD feeders put emphasise on RMBD as „natural diet”, which was important for only 10% of non-RMBD feeders, and 47% of mixed diet feeders. Additionally RMBD feeders pay attention to building a proper muscle structure, weight-control, to have an exact knowledge of what they are feeding, good digestibility dental calculus prevention and improvement of hair-coat quality.         It is remarkable, that 13% of group NY claim RMBD safe, only 1 person expressed concern on infectious pathogens. The results clearly point out that most people have no information or will not take in consideration the risk of pathogens with feeding of RMBD. In the RMBD group facebook groups were the primary (82 %) and for 54 persons (13%) the only information source for the detailed diet. RMBD feeders received detailed info from acquaintance (33%), scientific articles (32%), specific product/brand pages (29%), reader/user review sites and books 26% and 23% from their vet. The non-raw feeders primarily identified the vet as a source of detailed information (53%). From the aspect of complacency there was a significant difference between the groups. 84% of RMBD users were fully satisfied with their feeding practice, while in the other groups satisfaction ranged from moderate to high.

Discussion: RMBDs lack high quality scientific studies documenting their usefulness. Owners first hear about raw diets from non-scientific sources of social network groups and friends, additionally detailed info sources are mostly the same. It is worth noting that many RMBD feeders marked scientific articles as source of information, however, the authors found very limited access to such articles. RMBDs have some advantages, however, the assessment of better hair-coat quality or overall condition are highly subjective and high satisfaction rate is greatly influenced by social network groups. The raw diet users are either unaware or are not willing to admit the increased risk of infection both of their pets and themselves. Additionally public-health risk factors, which are documented in the public domain also must be taken into account when evaluating raw diets. Since the advantages of raw diets e.g. high digestibility can be achieved by other means as well, the authors do not recommend feeding of RMBDs.