Boiling water over kibble?

    • Silver
    This was interesting, but, honestly, has there been any evidence that dogs benefit from warmed food versus cold food? The clinic where I work at does not heat up nor pour hot water over pet food. I don't do this either. Very few dog owners that I know heat their dog's food. I honestly wonder if dogs actually receive a *significant* benefit from heated food. If not, I honestly feel as if heating dog food is simply another attempt to "humanize" our animals.
    • Gold Top Dog
    ORIGINAL: GreytPeke

    This was interesting, but, honestly, has there been any evidence that dogs benefit from warmed food versus cold food? The clinic where I work at does not heat up nor pour hot water over pet food. I don't do this either. Very few dog owners that I know heat their dog's food. I honestly wonder if dogs actually receive a *significant* benefit from heated food. If not, I honestly feel as if heating dog food is simply another attempt to "humanize" our animals.

    I think for certain animals it might help them to digest it easier (as far as softening the kibble), especially for smaller dogs and maybe old or sick dogs?  I often read about people complaining about thier dog swallows the food whole so maybe softening would help in those situations and makes it easier on their tummies, who knows.  But really I never thought about it in terms of health benefits.  I simply do it because my dog doesn't like cold fold.  I don't think thats me trying to "humanize" my dog.  I'm just showing her a little consideration.  As far as "humanizing", wild canines don't eat refrigerated food in the wild (and I'm not one that tries to imitate a "wolf diet" for my dog I'm just making a point here), they eat warm fresh meat and blood.  So how is giving them a warm meal "humanizing"? 
     
    Another benefit could be added water into the diet if the food is heated with warm water as I do.  The water also makes it possible to mix different foods and/or supplements into the kibble, without the water to mix everything up, she just eats everything else and leaves the kibble.
    • Gold Top Dog
    Pan frying meats converts fats into more harmful substances. We should't pan fry.

    Oven cooking meat converts sugars into carcinogenic substances. We shouldn't roast meat.

    Boiling meat takes all the nutrients out. We shouldn't boil meat. Meat should be eaten raw, then.

    Raw meat contains all sorts of deadly organisms. We shouldn't eat meat. We should only eat raw veggies.

    Wait, raw veggies are contaminated now too. Just don't eat.

    • Gold Top Dog
    "The microwave oven generates electromagnetic waves (called microwaves because they#%92re short) at a frequency of 2450 megahertz (FM radio waves are generated at around 100 MHz and cell phones transmit 800 MHz). The microwaves bombard the molecules of water in the food. These molecules each have a positive and negative end, or “polarity”. The polarized molecules try to line themselves up with the electrical field, like compass needles trying to point North. But because the electrical field is reversing polarity at a rate of 2,450 million cycles a second, the water molecules end up rotating at the same speed. That activity generates heat, which cooks the food, literally from inside out, as opposed to other types of cooking, which transfer heat convectionally from the outside in. Unfortunately, this violent movement of molecules causes substantial damage to some molecules, often tearing them apart or deforming them."


    Yes while they are IN the microwave, no evidence that it creates cancer causing substances in food.

     
    "The Food and Drug Administration in the U.S. states that “foods cooked in a microwave oven may keep more of their vitamins and minerals, because microwave ovens can cook more quickly and without adding water.” A Spanish study published in the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture in 2003 disproves that statement. Researchers from the Spanish scientific research council CEBAS-CSIC found that cooking by microwave is the worst way to preserve at least one key nutrient in vegetables. According to Dr. Cristina Garcia-Viguera, co-author of the study, microwaved broccoli loses 97 percent, 74 percent, and 87 percent of the three major cancer-protecting antioxidant compounds (flavonoids, sinapics and caffeoyl-quinic derivatives). By comparison, steamed broccoli loses 11 percent, 0 percent and 8 percent of the very same antioxidants."  


    again, we already know that microwaving food decreases some of the nutritional vaue, it does not cause cancer as you previously suggested

    "Vitamin B-12 is another nutrient that can be destroyed by microwaving. Japanese research reported in Science News in 1998 found that as little as six minutes of microwave cooking destroyed half of the vitamin B-12 in dairy foods and meat, a much higher rate of destruction than other cooking techniques. Microwaving baby formula is also a problem, according to Dr. Lita Lee of Hawaii in the Lancet medical journal in 1989. She wrote that microwaving baby formula converts certain trans-amino acids into synthetic substances like trans-fatty acids. Further, one of the amino acids, L-proline, converts to a substance known to be poisonous to the nervous system and to the kidneys."


    Yeah in massive amounts that you will never be able to obtain from food alone, in addition if you have normal kidneys, not a problem. Again, no proof that microwave food causes cancer.

    "Russian researchers found that people who ate microwaved foods had a statistically higher incidence of stomach and intestinal cancers, a general degeneration of peripheral cellular tissues, and a gradual breakdown of the digestive and excretory systems. Due to chemical alterations within the food, they had lymphatic malfunctions, causing a degeneration of the body#%92s immune system. For instance, microwaving milk and cereal grains converted some of their amino acids into carcinogens, thawing frozen fruits converted their glucoside and galactoside containing fractions into carcinogenic substances, and carcinogenic free radicals were formed in microwaved plants, especially root vegetables. They also reported structural degradation leading to decreased availability of Vitamins B, C, E and essential minerals at a rate of 60 to 90 percent in all foods tested.  As a result of that research, the Soviets banned the use of microwave ovens in 1976 and issued an international warning on the health hazards, both biological and environmental, of microwave ovens and similar frequency electronic devices. The ban has since been over-turned and the rest of the world appears not to have headed the warning."


    FYI, these "scientists" did not publish their studies. Hmm interesting no peer reviewed journals, why would they not want their peers to reveiw their data. Carcinogenic substances? Like what? Amino acids into carcinogens? No study published, no proof. If this was actually true and verifyable they would be famous,why wouldn't they publish. Oh I know, because it's not true.

    "In 1989, the Swiss food scientist Dr Dans Ulrich Hertel fed eight volunteers a range of raw, conventionally cooked and microwaved food. Blood samples, taken from each person after eating, showed serious irregularities in the structure of the food microwaved, and in the blood of those eating the microwaved samples. These changes included a decrease in all hemoglobin and cholesterol values, especially the ratio of HDL (good cholesterol) and LDL (bad cholesterol) values. Lymphocytes (white blood cells) showed a more distinct short-term decrease following the intake of microwaved food than after the intake of all the other variants." 


    8 people, wow huge study. Most studies that actually have enough power to show an effect have about 500-1000 patients FYI. Even if his study did show decreased Hgb/decreased WBC/or changes in cholesterol ratio that does not have anything to do with carcinogenesis. Again, no proof that microwaved food causes cancer. Just a short series of eight patients, with no power.

    "An article also appeared a Swiss environmental magazine entitled Journal Franz Weber, which stated that the consumption of food cooked in microwave ovens had cancerous effects on the blood as indicated by an increase of leukocytes, which could indicate cell damage, after eating microwaved substances. As soon as Doctors Hertel and Blanc published their results, the authorities reacted. In 1992, a powerful trade organization, the Swiss Association of Dealers for Electro-apparatuses for Households and Industry, known as FEA forced the Swiss courts to issue a “gag order” against them. The following year, Dr. Hertel was convicted for “interfering with commerce” and prohibited from further publishing his results. However, he fought the decision and both it and the gag order were reversed in 1998 when the European Court of Human Rights in Austria ruled that there had been a violation of his rights in the 1993 decision. In addition, Switzerland was ordered to pay him compensation."


    Increase in leucocytes, well your prior study said decrease. This one says increased leucocytes could indicate cell damage. HUH? Leucocytes (WBC) function with inflammation and infection, there are normal fluctuations in their numbers, and changes in their numbers do NOT indicate you have cancer. That's just silly. The court battle is neither here nor there. It is about the prevention of publishing which has nothing to do with how ridiculous the assertion that WBC increase again I emphysize could mean cell damage. Cell damage is not cancer. Every person reading this has cells which are damaged for various reasons everyday. We have great ability to fix our cells when they get hurt. Read about p53 on google. When this gene is out, people get cancer (this has nothing to do with this study just an example of how the body deals with cell damage everyday from sun, free radicals) This is not a prosepective, randomized study in a PEER reviewed journal, it is assumptions in a not well respected, non peer reviewed journal. Assumptions are dangerous in science.


    "Health writer Dr. Andrew Weil has suggested that reheating foods in a microwave oven may not be harmful. However, according to the American Journal of Epidemiology, an outbreak of Salmonella typhimurium in Alaska was traced to food taken home from restaurants. While 30 people had taken home “doggie bags” only ten became sick; they had reheated their food in a microwave oven, while those who used a conventional oven or frying pan did not get sick." 


    Ha ha ha, they were sick because the food in their doggie bags was infected and not heated to a certain temperature to kill the bugs. It is ridiculous to assert that if it was heated on a stove no one would have gotten sick. It's likely that the people who reheated it in the microwave didn't heat it the proper amount of time to get the internal temperature high enough. In addition. Also, they do not state what type of food these people took home. The ten that got sick could have had the same thing while the others did not. There is not evidence here that eating food from microwaves cause cancer.


    Ok, so to recap, no evidence that eating food cooked from micrawaves causes cancer and that is what you stated before. I think it's important to remember that not every study is a good study.

    oh and since I mentioned it, the "power" of a study is an actually statistical term which means the likelyhood of being able to see an effect. The bigger the sample size, the greater the power of a test.
    • Gold Top Dog
    ORIGINAL: ottoluv

    "In 1989, the Swiss food scientist Dr Dans Ulrich Hertel fed eight volunteers a range of raw, conventionally cooked and microwaved food. Blood samples, taken from each person after eating, showed serious irregularities in the structure of the food microwaved, and in the blood of those eating the microwaved samples. These changes included a decrease in all hemoglobin and cholesterol values, especially the ratio of HDL (good cholesterol) and LDL (bad cholesterol) values. Lymphocytes (white blood cells) showed a more distinct short-term decrease following the intake of microwaved food than after the intake of all the other variants." 


    8 people, wow huge study. Most studies that actually have enough power to show an effect have about 500-1000 patients FYI. Even if his study did show decreased Hgb/decreased WBC/or changes in cholesterol ratio that does not have anything to do with carcinogenesis. Again, no proof that microwaved food causes cancer. Just a short series of eight patients, with no power.

    "An article also appeared a Swiss environmental magazine entitled Journal Franz Weber, which stated that the consumption of food cooked in microwave ovens had cancerous effects on the blood as indicated by an increase of leukocytes, which could indicate cell damage, after eating microwaved substances. As soon as Doctors Hertel and Blanc published their results, the authorities reacted. In 1992, a powerful trade organization, the Swiss Association of Dealers for Electro-apparatuses for Households and Industry, known as FEA forced the Swiss courts to issue a "gag order” against them. The following year, Dr. Hertel was convicted for "interfering with commerce” and prohibited from further publishing his results. However, he fought the decision and both it and the gag order were reversed in 1998 when the European Court of Human Rights in Austria ruled that there had been a violation of his rights in the 1993 decision. In addition, Switzerland was ordered to pay him compensation."


    Increase in leucocytes, well your prior study said decrease. This one says increased leucocytes could indicate cell damage. HUH? Leucocytes (WBC) function with inflammation and infection, there are normal fluctuations in their numbers, and changes in their numbers do NOT indicate you have cancer. That's just silly. The court battle is neither here nor there. It is about the prevention of publishing which has nothing to do with how ridiculous the assertion that WBC increase again I emphysize could mean cell damage. Cell damage is not cancer. Every person reading this has cells which are damaged for various reasons everyday. We have great ability to fix our cells when they get hurt. Read about p53 on google. When this gene is out, people get cancer (this has nothing to do with this study just an example of how the body deals with cell damage everyday from sun, free radicals) This is not a prosepective, randomized study in a PEER reviewed journal, it is assumptions in a not well respected, non peer reviewed journal. Assumptions are dangerous in science.


    "Health writer Dr. Andrew Weil has suggested that reheating foods in a microwave oven may not be harmful. However, according to the American Journal of Epidemiology, an outbreak of Salmonella typhimurium in Alaska was traced to food taken home from restaurants. While 30 people had taken home "doggie bags” only ten became sick; they had reheated their food in a microwave oven, while those who used a conventional oven or frying pan did not get sick." 


    Ha ha ha, they were sick because the food in their doggie bags was infected and not heated to a certain temperature to kill the bugs. It is ridiculous to assert that if it was heated on a stove no one would have gotten sick. It's likely that the people who reheated it in the microwave didn't heat it the proper amount of time to get the internal temperature high enough. In addition. Also, they do not state what type of food these people took home. The ten that got sick could have had the same thing while the others did not. There is not evidence here that eating food from microwaves cause cancer.


    Ok, so to recap, no evidence that eating food cooked from micrawaves causes cancer and that is what you stated before. I think it's important to remember that not every study is a good study.

    oh and since I mentioned it, the "power" of a study is an actually statistical term which means the likelyhood of being able to see an effect. The bigger the sample size, the greater the power of a test.

    I did not write the article so that is not "my study".  The first study mentioned a decrease in Lymphocytes  the second said increase in Leucocytes.  Not the same thing.
    I really doubt that just by coincidence every person who heated food in the microwave ordered one thing and every person who heated in the oven ordered another thing.
    As for the rest, that is all your opinion, and while I don't appreciate the snide way in which you presented it, you are allowed to have it, and I will still have mine.
    • Gold Top Dog
    I dont COOK in my microwave, but i do HEAT up stuff.  i heat up the chicken stew I make for my dogs, not hot, just warm enough to take the chill off.  I heat milk/water mix for my International French Vanilla coffee, water for cup of hot tea, and i do defrost.  I also heat my occasional TV dinner.
     
    I don't add water to their breakfast kibble, but do at night when i add their stew or fish.  I sprinkle a little garlic powder over their food at night, and also add the Knox Nutrajoint for Buck and for KayCee and the water helped blend it.
    • Gold Top Dog
    I'm of the belief that microwaves are no more dangerous than many of the other modern conveniences we've come to depend on - cell phones, computers, plastics, etc.  I try to limit my exposure to ALL of them.  As far as the OT - my goodness you folks are nice doggie parents!!!  I have never even considered heating up Slick's food.  I've even fed it to him frozen solid when I'd forgotten to defrost.  [:D]
    • Gold Top Dog
    lymphocytes the second said increase in Leucocytes


    Lymphocytes ARE leucocytes FYIs
    Leucocytes are WBC(terms used interchangably), there are multiple types (lymphocytes, PMN, basophil, eosinophil, monocyte...). lymphocytes traditionally increased with viral infection. Cancer of these WBC (lymphocytes) is called leukemia. There are two types of lymphocytes as well B and T. They are the same thing ok, so yes the studies are conflicting.

    Snide? I posted a critique of the information which you posted, if you didn't want to have it addressed, then you shouldn't post it. Before you come to a conclusion on that information, you should at least understand the basis of the research IMO that's all I'm trying to point out. One of my biggest pet peaves is starting hysteria needlessly. Do you remember the "cell phones cause brain tumors" story that ran a few years ago. I had like hundreds of people show up demanding CT scans, over running clinics and ED's and wasting resources because a callous, poorly researched story was aired nationwide.
    • Gold Top Dog
    Pan frying meats converts fats into more harmful substances. We should't pan fry.

    Oven cooking meat converts sugars into carcinogenic substances. We shouldn't roast meat.

    Boiling meat takes all the nutrients out. We shouldn't boil meat. Meat should be eaten raw, then.

    Raw meat contains all sorts of deadly organisms. We shouldn't eat meat. We should only eat raw veggies.

    Wait, raw veggies are contaminated now too. Just don't eat.

     
    There was a group called Breatharians. They believed that you could get all the nutrients you needed from breathing properly. Of course, they've all moved on to a higher calling[;)]
    • Gold Top Dog
    ORIGINAL: ottoluv

    lymphocytes the second said increase in Leucocytes


    Lymphocytes ARE leucocytes FYIs
    Leucocytes are WBC(terms used interchangably), there are multiple types (lymphocytes, PMN, basophil, eosinophil, monocyte...). lymphocytes traditionally increased with viral infection. Cancer of these WBC (lymphocytes) is called leukemia. There are two types of lymphocytes as well B and T. They are the same thing ok, so yes the studies are conflicting.

    Snide? I posted a critique of the information which you posted, if you didn't want to have it addressed, then you shouldn't post it. Before you come to a conclusion on that information, you should at least understand the basis of the research IMO that's all I'm trying to point out. One of my biggest pet peaves is starting hysteria needlessly. Do you remember the "cell phones cause brain tumors" story that ran a few years ago. I had like hundreds of people show up demanding CT scans, over running clinics and ED's and wasting resources because a callous, poorly researched story was aired nationwide.

    lymphocytes are leucocytes but all leucocytes are not lymphocytes, the studies are not conflicting.  And yes, your previous comments were posted in a snide manner.  Critique all you want, I don't care.  I really don't care if you use your microwave or not.  I just posted the info so people can read it and make their own decisions about it (as I stated previously).  Whats wrong with making information available?  And cell phones do harm your brain.
    • Gold Top Dog
    lymphocytes are leucocytes but all leucocytes are not lymphocytes, the studies are not conflicting.


    Yes they ARE conflicting, think about it....

    1. the lymphocytes decreased then the leukocytes will be decreased (just like fractions, if you take away 1/8 then you have 7/8 of the whole)
    2. says leukocytes increased which is different then decreased right?

    lymphopenia causes leukocytopenia which is different from leukocytosis period, that's not an opinion, it's fact. It's just simple math. There is no debate as to whether or not lymphocytes are leukocytes or if your WBC drops if you have lymphocytopenia.

    EDIT:
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17148772&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum
    This is a recent study which shows both short term and long term use of cell phones are NOT associated with increased incidences of cancer

    I have to admit, I don't think it's even worth it at this point to post evidence, some people don't care, they want to believe something and don't care about facts.
    • Gold Top Dog
    ORIGINAL: ottoluv

    lymphocytes are leucocytes but all leucocytes are not lymphocytes, the studies are not conflicting.


    Yes they ARE conflicting, think about it....

    1. the lymphocytes decreased then the leukocytes will be decreased (just like fractions, if you take away 1/8 then you have 7/8 of the whole)
    2. says leukocytes increased which is different then decreased right?

    lymphopenia causes leukocytopenia which is different from leukocytosis period, that's not an opinion, it's fact. It's just simple math. There is no debate as to whether or not lymphocytes are leukocytes or if your WBC drops if you have lymphocytopenia.

    EDIT:
    [linkhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17148772&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17148772&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum[/link]
    This is a recent study which shows both short term and long term use of cell phones are NOT associated with increased incidences of cancer

    I have to admit, I don't think it's even worth it at this point to post evidence, some people don't care, they want to believe something and don't care about facts.

    There you go again being snide and putting down my right to have an opinion.  What you have posted is YOUR opinion.  You can find studies supporting both sides of ANY argument.  That doesnt make ME wrong.  In my opinion there is sufficient proof of one way, and in your opinion there isn't or there is sufficient proof of another way.  That makes us both having our own seperate opinions.  I'm okay with that, why do you have such a problem with it?  And why do you feel the need to put me down?
    And like I said before I would LOVE to believe microwave ovens are safe, it would make my life easier!!
    • Gold Top Dog
    Um, opinion would mean my interpretation of the data. What I posted is the interpretation of the authors of the studies that you posted and they conflict. I did not alter their interpretation at all just pointed out that they conflict. No one is saying you can't have an opinion lilea. Pointing out you are incorrect in your assertion about leukocytes and lymphocytes is just that, not an insult or attempts at being snide. Don't read more into it. Why do I care? Well becuase as an medical educator, I like people to better evaluate the facts before they form their opinions. I like people to make informed decisions based on fact and not hysteria. This is way off topic and we should probably get back to the question at hand which is boiling water and kibble. Seriously, don't be so offended it's not worth it. Truce? :)
    • Gold Top Dog
    ORIGINAL: ottoluv
     No one is saying you can't have an opinion lilea. Pointing out you are incorrect in your assertion about leukocytes and lymphocytes is just that, not an insult or attempts at being snide. Don't read more into it.

     
    sorry to everyone else on the thread I'm sure you are sick of this crap as am I, It's a sickness I can't help myself, I think I need an intervention.  I have to keep saying to myself, It's ok if people are wrong.


    I have to admit, I don't think it's even worth it at this point to post evidence, some people don't care, they want to believe something and don't care about facts.

    Sounds snide to me.
    • Gold Top Dog
    Yes, you boil nipples..to kill organisms!
    ORIGINAL: chelsea_b

    I lol when I saw this... being a current breastfeeder myself I thought YEOUCH! LOL