Tick Tock to Thanksgiving


Thanksgiving is one of my favorite holidays.  This year my sister and her husband will be joining us for the first time in probably a couple of decades! They live in a galaxy far, far away known as Bedford.  With a melange of animals over the years to care for, to include two horses, both of them getting away for the holiday was impossible.  It fills me with joy that they will be here.


Maple Pecan Chocolate Tart Topography
To give them a chance to get on the road at a decent hour, we will do a 2 pm-ish dinner--sometimes things don't come together as planned, and the time can move--though generally in just one direction:  later.  I did have a dinner once where I had to ask everyone to come early as the turkey cooked far faster.  People should wait for food, not the other way around.  My guests have always been forgiving.  They have always received a great bounty for my tardiness.

As my daughter and her husband will be involved in the care and feeding of his family who has experienced some tumult, they will not be joining us.  It is the first TG in her life that we've not been together.  However, her providing a central place for that family to come together will be healing for them. I'm glad my daughter and SIL are stepping up for that.  Nevertheless, we will have 10, possibly 11 at the table.  That is a good sized gathering.

Eating earlier has another advantage:  It will also give me some downtime before tumbling into bed.  I've been cooking Thanksgiving since 1987 (I might be off a year). Bringing both sides of our family together was an answer to not having to eat two TG dinners. I had one year off when my daughter hosted us a couple of years ago.  That was quite nice.  But she has limited space, and anything over 6 is a problem.  I have 25 dinners under my belt.  And each year it gets a little harder as I get older.

In the next few weeks, I'll get my dinner logistics in order. What that really means is that I must conduct my EPA cleanup (no small task in our universe) earlier in the week to focus on the dinner prep and execution as well as don my casting director hat to determine who will be in the TG dinner production.  This cast has stalwarts, called upon time and time again, supporting members who are on rotation, and those that are cast once and then cast out (sometimes with impunity).   Of course I could ask folks to bring a dish to ease the preparations, but I've resisted such temptations. I'm not willing to have walk-on appearances.  Plus, my preference is to have my stuff and have others enjoy the meal with the only obligation of showing up on time.

The centerpiece of dinner is a brined, perfectly roasted Turkey paired with ham.  If you are new to Thanksgiving, visit Alton Brown's featured prep in the 2003 Bon Appetit.  You can find it here. If you don't have a digital thermometer that snakes through the oven, get one.  It is indispensable for any meal that you are cooking, but most particularly for THIS meal.  No one wants a turkey cooked too long or not enough.  And what accompanies turkey better than ham?  We love both and fix both.  Looking for a foolproof way to fix country ham?  Go to Jack Bett's blog here.

Outside of EPA clean up, "logistics" truly must begin with the taming of my magpie eye when it comes to desserts and side dishes.  There are two factors that complicate dinner preparation:  (1) number of desserts/sides; (2) complexity of desserts and sides.  Side dishes are the true bane as few can be 'held' with good results prior to serving.  Different cooking times and temperatures can be a problem.  Desserts, can always be prepared ahead, but they can be fussy and demanding, but the end result can be sublime.

Side dishes are similar:  regulars, rotating and dismissed.  Nevertheless, it is too easy to find intriguing ways to serve autumn's bounty.  Having a side dish number budget makes much sense.  Otherwise, the prep and execution will tax the cook's energy.  Besides, too many competing tastes are just that...too many.  Further, cutting down on the number but increasing complexity is akin to shooting one's self in the foot.  Moderation in all things during this immoderate eating experience.

Bon Appetit (BA)  is a magazine that I have subscribed to for as long as I have been making Thanksgiving (TG).  The BA TG issue is one that I relish. This year the suggestion is to try one new dish each Thanksgiving.  This 'new dish' suggestion has always been my  mantra for me; most of my dishes, techniques were inspired, instructed by those issues. Over the years, the new dishes have become staples.  Those staples have become so beloved that casting them out would be like banishing a family member from the table.

Scalloped oysters is a favorite that I have been making, but sometimes I think that spending $25 on a side dish is just too much. When I don't have it, it is asked about, and its loss is mourned.  Would I substitute my homemade cranberry sauce for a chutney?  A resounding no!  But the potatoes come in different guises:  garlic mashed, potato and turnip gratins and the like.  Sweet potatoes don't make it except in a pie.  Brussels sprouts have a number of incarnations.  The most recent, a Brussels sprouts hash that is so divine and beloved, that it is a staple.  It blends wonderfully with all of the other dishes.  My cranberry sauce is a staple...you can find my recipe for that here. 

So if one is not going to vote a dish off the island, then one has to expand the population.  That is side dish creep. Okay, there may be room for just one more.  But it has to be very seductive.

I hear of folks baking pie after pie.  Why one would have pumpkin and sweet potato, I do not know.  To my tasted they are nearly indistinguishable.  In my view, too many desserts spoil the meal--and make it hard to serve. After the big meal, guests should not have to make too many hard decisions. I limit desserts to two, and they are very different to accommodate different tastes.  Lately it has been a chocolate pecan pie and a sweet potato mascarpone pie (a Frankenpie from a combination of a pumpkin and a sweet potato recipe) .   I have two desserts.  My guest typically have a bit of both.  Here's a rundown of a few desserts over these past 25 years:

  • Maple Pecan Chocolate Tart:  This is my go-to dessert staple.  Click here for recipe. Served at 75% of past TG dinners.  Plain pecan pie is too sweet for my taste.  I have had made a walnut tart as well.  I like tarts, though tart dough can be a bit finicky.
  • Cheesecakes:  Meh....despite seasonal ingredients (pumpkin, etc), it just doesn't seem to be the right dessert for my tastes after dinner.
  • Bread Puddings:  Feel like a sugared up also-ran after dressing.  Not quite the right counterpoint for ending the meal.  
  • Frozen Pumpkin Mousse:  A lovely counterpoint:  cold, light, sweet, beautiful.  I've made this a couple of times.  It is in the rotation, but has not been picked in a while.
  • Pumpkin Pie:  I'm unclear if I have ever made pumpkin pie. 
  • Sweet Potato Pie:  I co-opted a Pumpkin Pie recipe with mascarpone cream cheese, and it is divine.  Beautiful flaky crust, light, and not too sweet.  I've been making this for the last three years, and guests love it. 
  • Lemon Tart:  A lemon tart is a nice ending for a TG meal.

I'm always looking for other cast members, and this year, I am eying for this year a BA dessert:  apple gallette.  I think that I'll make some salted caramel to go with this. And, just maybe, I will also have two other desserts.  Three desserts is definitely a departure from the norm.

Regardless of the fuss that I make above, the central idea of Thanksgiving is to give thanks for the large and small blessings in our lives.  Preparing and sharing a meal (simple or complicated) with the people we love and care about unifies and strengthens our ties to each other. 


DCS: Dexter Containment Systems

We have a 3 board fence on part of our road frontage to keep the canine vermin contained when vehicles come through.  It provides a psychological barrier.  As a physical barrier, it can be stepped through or squeezed under by motivated pups.  We used to have electrical wire that worked quite well.  But electrical fencing is a problem with vegetation, etc.

We've had Dexter on a long lead outdoors under our supervision for the last 3 months.  This umbilical cord was an important part of his training to keep him tethered to us physically and emotionally.  Because of his enthusiasm in attacking the girls, we also needed a way to get this 'trained' out of him.  That training evolved into the old yank and crank method.  A method of last resort I suppose.  But let's be clear, Dexter is a dog of last resort.  I would have NEVER chosen a dog with his habits.  But fate threw us together, and Mark and I are committed to him.

It has taken 3 very long months.  He has curbed his enthusiasm greatly, but now he is just in 'normal' all-out puppy mode. We want to give him more freedom, but in a mode that is safe for him, us and others.  Mark went to Tractor supply and bought some galvanized wire to provide an effective barrier underneath and between the fence boards.  It is wonderful to let Dexter out for bathroom and play without his dragging his lead (or us).

He has made progress in so many ways since we picked him up three months ago.  Unfortunately, since returning from vacation and dealing with eldercare issues, his 'formal training' has slid.  But his informal training has been a rich experience.  That includes allowing him sit on the sofa and socialize while inside (v. going to his puppy lair which is still in the family area).  Having a 'pacifier' something for him to chew on, is critical.  Otherwise he will find it.  I have a bone bucket where he goes to and picks up bones.

Dexter is, without question, the most destructive, exuberant dog we have ever owned.  He's like a Sawzall, grabbing and chewing on everything in site.  He literally cannot be left up to his own devices for a minute, unless he is in his puppy lair, which is mostly Dexter-proofed once I put a dog gate in front of my window to keep him from further chewing the window sill.

His biting is still a problem.  It is so habitual.  While the behavior has lessened, it is still present and still unacceptable.  I'm determined to keep our trajectory on obliterating this behavior which was so ingrained in him prior to our finding him.  At least we believe we can prevail.  Giving him more yard freedom and free play will greatly help in channeling his energies.  I need to ensure that I still walk with him, because that has been great for my physical conditioning.


RAW: My Personal Q&A on how to avoid a RAW Recipe for Disaster

 My motivation to move to raw was founded on the following objectives: (1) I want to control the allergies in my allergic dog, Angel; (2) provide the balance of the dogs with wholesome food where I control the ingredients; (3) optimize ingredients for price and nutritional value; (4) optimize my time; (5) control weight; (6) minimize vet bills.

The pet food recalls are scary.  One of my friends lost a dog recently to contaminated pet food.  That's close to home, and it got my attention. Like many, I bought kibble and supplemented with canned food to make it more exciting.  However, their teeth did not look so good (despite various specious claims that kibble cleans teeth).  Providing them some real bones (supervised) to chew on was my first venture.  They loved them AND each of them had gleaming teeth without undergoing anesthesia and having their teeth cleaned.

Also, treating a dog with allergies can get expensive quickly.  When we got Angel, she had a staff infection and smelled like an old sponge.  With four dogs, having different foods for different dogs is not optimum.  Switching to RAW has made every meal exciting to them.  Our switch was easy.  None had gastric upset or any untoward effects. All appear to be thriving.  (I do have one holdout, Daisey, who vacillates between liking it and not!)

As I took the plunge into RAW, I had this panel of questions that I had to answer for myself prior to beginning my odyssey into RAW feeding (and certainly into the odyssey). I want to avoid the 'ahem' Recipe for Disaster--and truthfully, I was close to having a disaster.

  • Can I do this? With the wealth of information available in books and on the web, and with a decent ability to separate the good from the bad and the truly bad, I concluded yes.  Dog diets are like people diets:  there's lots of fact and opinion out there (to include moving to RAW from commercial diets), and I was prepared steep myself in understanding the facts, weighing opinions of others, and trusting my own homework. All bodies (dog bodies, human bodies, cat bodies, horse bodies) require some biological imperatives in terms of nutrition. Undertaking this effort meant that I needed to understand those biological imperatives (just as I had to do with my children, husbando and myself all these years).  It isn't rocket science; but it is a science, and one would do well to understand the basic principles.
  • What are the risks to my dogs, and can I overcome them?  I believe the main risks are these--and I believe that these are not remote risks:
    • Failing to provide nutritional completeness.  Risk mitigation includes
      • vigilance in assuring maintenance of  calcium:phosphorus ratios; 
        • mitigated by providing appropriate bone/meat ratios (see below).
      • use of appropriate supplementation to ensure no gaps  
        • Understand the vitamins/minerals needed and the ratios needed. These are published, and I've included links to these on my Pet Nutrition page.  I highly recommend Steve Brown's work in Unlocking the Canine Ancestral Diet which you can find on Amazon here.
    • Making my dogs ill from poorly handled raw materials 
      • This was easy.  I've never made my family sick in 3 decades of cooking for them.  It was unlikely I was going to make my dog sick, particularly given that I'm feeding them food for human consumption AND in the event of existing salmonella, my dogs' systems could handle this.  
        • keeping dog bowls clean and processing equipment clean ensures no cross contamination. 
After concluding that I could overcome the risks, then, I had to determine how I was going to manage the processing of the food..

Do I need a grinder?  I concluded a resounding yes. I have 4 dogs, so my usage profile is going to be much different than someone with small dogs or just one large dog.  

Bone=calcium | meat=phosphorus.  regular bone appears to have about a 2:1 ratio (I found it in a study, and also here at RetrieverPro),   Failing to maintain appropriate ratios or amounts over time may cause all manner of problems.  NRC recommends 1:.75 for adults and 3:2.5 for puppies (each per 1000 cal).  So getting both the ratio and the amount correct is important.

The Merck Manual describes these disorders here. Well meaning people who cook/prepare their pup's food without calcium supplementation have a recipe for disaster.  (And it is downright scary to read in various places what some well-meaning people feed their animals.)  Ultimately, over time, we cannot fool biological imperatives, and there is no arguing with the body's functional response to wrong inputs.   Peteducation.com also has a great article that you can find here.

It is also worth noting that a diet HEAVY in raw meaty bones oversupplements for Calcium and Phosphorus both on a ratio and absolute basis.  It was important for me to understand these requirements and how they translated into the food that I was preparing for my dogs.  Frankly, I started with a ratio that was high and amounts that were too high because I was using what I thought to be sound recipes--my RMB's were too high a % even though I was using chicken leg quarters.

Steve Brown's work helped me immensely in understanding these requirements along with my other research.  Balance really is key.  I HIGHLY RECOMMEND getting Steve Brown's Book  Unlocking the Canine Ancestral Diet.  I wished I had found it sooner, though I do not believe any harm was done.
    • Why did I buy a $511 grinder?
      Sure, I could just toss them chicken/turkey necks etc  but I'm unwilling to deal with gulping/choking risks and mess
        •  Angel, an American Bulldog, cannot eat these well due to the mechanics of having a squished face and underbite characteristic of brachycephalic dogs.
        • if they are eating in the house, or the dragging of the edible part in the dirt outside, grinding it gives them and me a safe, mess-free and eating experience.
      Well, if I was going to go through the trouble to grind poultry bone, then I wanted to be sure that I had a machine worthy of the task. (Plus, whole meats have less salmonella risk than ground meats so long as the surface of the meat is not contaminated). I elected to go with a #22 sized grinder by Weston.  Other manufacturers make this size.  And Avantco has a #22 with a 1.5 HP motor (v. the 1hp that Weston has).   No sense in taking a labor intensive undertaking and making it more labor intensive + adding additional measures frustrating.  And, the math (of course!) made the payback period quite short:  just 11 weeks on a machine that will last the balance of my lifetime.
      • Supplements:  To balance a cooked diet (which of course can include no bone), BalanceIT has a supplement that costs about $1.89 per day for one dog.  For four dogs, that number is $5.80 in addition to the cost of the food. That is $174 per month, or $2,088 per year.  Nope!  I do supplement with NUPRO, but 20lbs costs $99 shipped free from Chewy.com.  That is at least a 6 mos supply, or 1/10th the cost.  Nupro is not a full supplementation, but it goes a long way toward helping my pickster, Daisey, transition.  I do supplement with oils. A grinder gets paid for pretty quickly (3.5 months) using that math.
    • Commercial RAW (to rehydrate):  Yes it is convenient--just add water.  For my crew, the weekly feeding cost of a one supplier of dehydrated would be $81 (v. the $35 per week it costs now) or $4,200 per year. Nope!  So in 11.1 weeks I have achieved payback on my grinder investment (511/$46 weekly savings = 11.1 weeks) which I can also use to make good stuff for the family to eat!  But wait, wait, there is more....
    • Commercial RAW (ground):  At $15 per lb from at least 2 suppliers (and that is a delivered cost if I purchase $86 worth), that computes to $75 per day (@ 5ish lbs per day).    That's $525 per week.  That's a 1 week payback on the grinder. I don't pay $15/lb for my own food.  I sure as heck will not do that for my dogs.  There are other less expensive options, but one has to go through a RAW feeder group, and that is still at a premium per lb price than I am paying on my own sourcing.  And my own sourcing for my dogs is linked to my food sourcing.  The amount of time that I would spend putting in a large order, breaking it down etc, is likely more than I would be spending sourcing as I have.
    • Isn't my time worth something?  Actually, my time is worth quite a bit--but lets' evaluate by doing some math:  My last 'grind' took 45 minutes start to finish (to include cleaning up) and I made 22lbs of food at a total cost of $1 per lb. (Chicken legs, livers, gizzards and vegetables).  The price differential is $14 per lb ($15-$1=$14); accordingly, my savings (using this $15/lb model) are $308 for 45 minutes of work.  I'll take that! In fairness. that's a bit of hyperbole, because I would never buy something that expensive.  Nevertheless, even paying another $2 per lb, means that I'm saving $10 per day. That adds up to $3,650 per year.  
    Ultimately, it is not rocket science, but it is a science worth understanding, particularly with respect to proteins, fats, and calcium/phosphorus ratios.  
     

    Conversions and Calorie Counting for Canines

    Daisey has managed to be converted to RAW food as of the last two days--after having none of it when we started 1 month ago.  In defrosting some ground chuck tenders that had cooked slightly from the process, I elected to give this to Daisey.  I mixed in her Nupro, some no-salt green beans, and she ate with gusto.  The second meal was the raw  ground with the same accoutrements.  She ate it with no problem.  The last meal was ground chicken, bone-in, with liver/giblets and ground in snaps.  She ate it all. (Update:  this a.m. she refused the ground chicken)

    Happy Dance!   (tempered with a minor stamp of the foot).

    There is no question about it, this RAW feeding is a commitment...and a responsibility.  I would be lying if I didn't say that I had some concerns about missing something important their diet.  I've addressed this with supplementation, both with Nupro, Vitamin E and fish oil.  Most importantly, I'm using their poop and body condition as a guide.

    The chicken at Restaurant Supply comes from Mountaire Farms. The chicken is minimally processed, and these are "jumbo" leg quarters.  They are packed in a 40lb case with heavy duty blue liner to keep the juiciness in.  However, these are not sealed bags, so if they tip....   The ground yield on 40lbs of leg quarters (to include the back) is just about 34ish lbs.  Taking the skin/fat off of most of the quarters  (I leave it on about 4 complete quarters) yields waste of 4ish lbs of fat/skin on the quarters.  Further, there is an additional 2ish lb of  retained water.  I save the juice and use it to make the NUPRO slurry.  I used to mix it in with the meat, but it really does make it very soupy. 

    I'm channeling Adam Smith in trying to be more efficient in my production of this food.  Measuring the production yield against raw ingredients, determines storage, amount of other additives needed (organ meat).  I have added a page to this blog to consolidate some of the references that I have found that I want to easily share as well as find for myself.

    After processing, the mix has to be stored properly.  Though I bought 1 qt containers, I have quickly realized that as I'm going through 4 lbs a day, this is not effective.  I purchased some Cambro one-third storage containers and tops. One 40lb box of legs (with their reduced yield) fills 3 of these plus a portion.  Each holds 10lbs of food.  They are easy to fill, cover easily, and freeze.  I can defrost in the fridge while I use my non frozen stash as current food.

    Now for rubber hitting the road, and doing things that make my head hurt.  If you are going to feed RAW, then it is worth noting what your pet is getting nutrition-wise and calorie wise.

    Angel is acting a bit hungry on this diet.  I'll use this space to share some resources with you and to do some calculations.  I have been feeding her 12-14 oz of food for her 72 lbs at each feeding (2x per day)  using a rule of thumb of 2% of her body weight.  (or 23 oz).   She's an older, sedentary dog.

    According to Ohio State University's website, a pet's caloric need is based on the pet's resting energy requirements (RER) multiplied by activity level.  The following is what they say about RER and the calculation:

    Pets’ energy (Calorie) needs to maintain a healthy weight for their life stage depends upon several factors.  First, the energy to perform essential body functions like digestion, respiration, heart functions, brain functions, etc. (Resting Energy Requirements or RER), which can be calculated by multiplying the animal’s body weight in kilograms raised to the ¾ power by 70, for example, a 10kg (22lb) adult neutered dog of healthy weight needs RER = 70(10kg)3/4 ≈ 400 Calories/day. (My note:  this is actually 393 calories) One also can use the charts below to estimate resting calorie needs. Source:http://vet.osu.edu/vmc/basic-calorie-calculator

    Let's Do Math!

    . . . . . and see how this equation can be used to guide our evaluation of Angel's situation. Remember, you cannot improve what you cannot measure.  Doing THIS math gives us empiricism for calories per feeding.  It does nothing to tell us of the quality of the feeding.  Remember, I'm showing you MY process for feeding my dogs and evaluating what I'm doing and what resources I am using.  Please ensure that you do your own due diligence on any feeding regimen that you do for your dog.

    Step 1:  Firs, let's figure out Angel's Resting Energy Requirements (RER) using the Ohio State University basic calorie counter linked above.(You have no idea how happy I am to find this resources)

    We start by solving the equation for Resting Energy Requirements.  We will need to do some conversions along the way, but we are intrepid!!

    Equation  [ RER = 70(dog's weight in KG)3/4 ≈ ????? ] 

    Angel weighs 72 lbs.  That's not in kilograms, so let's convert.

    Step 2:  Convert lbs to kg.  Now, I have had a Microsoft calculator which I keep pinned to my sidebar.  I've used this for years for simple stuff.  Until recently, I had no idea of the power of this tool.  No longer will I go to websites to get conversion factors....it is all right there in the calculator!!! Just select the "view" to do use scientific, statistical, conversion calculations. How did I now know this!!???  We will need to do a little of both here!  Let's convert to grams:


    Okay, Angel weighs 32.7 Kilograms.

    Step 3:  complete the equation.  (Use the calculator!) 32.7 kilograms to the .75(3/4) power = 13.67.  Multiply this result by 70, and we get Angel's resting caloric needs of 957.

    RER= 32.7kg (.75) x 70 = 957

    As a dogs' resting caloric needs, I presume, are evaluated similarly to our own relative to keeping basic processes going at the baseline and then adding energy for other expenditure, then, anything less means that vital functions of the body are not fueled. (Bad!)  Accordingly, we then have to multiply our activity factors to determine what we need to maintain our weight at our current activity level. For those of us who are not active, then we are simply programing weight loss. Never should your diet contain less calories than needed to maintain your body processes on a sustained basis. (Don't even get me started on how Jenny Craig had my stepmom on less than 900 calories).

    Calories are calories no matter what the species.  And for those living on the edge, these base measurements matter.  Let's see what Angel needs to keep going--she's not living on the edge, but she has lost weight on this diet (not excessive) and she is grunting like a pig to tell me she is hungry.  (IN fact as I review this post at 4:14 p.m.  she is in her 'feed me' grunting mode.) This behavior is new.  She is mostly inactive due to her age, so we will use the following formula that OSU gives us as the  link from above:  Inactive/obese prone | 1.2-1.4 x RER

    Step 4:  Apply factor for the dog's activity level.  Let's split it in the middle and use 1.3  Angel needs 957 calories to stay alive in a full state of rest, and another 30% to fuel activity.  957 x 1.3 = 1,244 calories.

    Step 5:  Evaluate the dog's current caloric intake:

    According to this USDA Website (see my pet nutrition page for links), raw, skinless chicken quarters have 34 calories per ounce v 61 calories per ounce if I were to leave the skin on. She gets some other things, but not that much, but let's just say that she is just getting the following:  34 calories x 23 to 28 ounces or 952 top end calories. No wonder that girl is vocalizing.  Shame on me.  She has lost weight which is to be expected (and RER x 1 is the weight loss computation). She now has very good body definition. Her energy level has been higher than ever this past month. That's good! However, this girl is vocalizing her hunger despite that I have been feeding  2% of her body weight which is what is recommended. That's bad!  However, I have been taking the skin and fat off of the chicken, so there is a large calorie loss in that--as skin and fat comprise 44% of the calories of skin on chicken leg parts. 

    Step 6:  Make Adjustments as needed. Now that I have found reputable resources (USDA) that have very good information that I can use, I'll recalibrate the amount of fat that I'm pulling off the chickens that I'm processing.  Note that if I were feeding her 23 ounces of skin on meat, I would be feeding her at 1395 calories at the low end, which is too much. I presume too that includes the normal fat accoutrements.

    Conclusion:  DO YOUR HOMEWORK.  The above shows why few things (feed 2% of bodyweight RAW).  Always do your own due diligence and never be afraid to do your own math!   To be clear, though, even if I had NOT gone through the math, her behavior and her observed weight loss were cues that she was getting suboptimal calories.  However, my preference is to work with known quantities.  I'm glad to have done this exercise on the blog.

    Angel is going to be happy that I did the math!

    P. S.  I'm pretty happy too at doing this math.  With a detailed nutrient profile of the foods that I'm feeding my dogs, I feel that I can monitor their calorie intake and calorie composition to ensure that they are getting what they need.  I also understand that I'm predisposed to being a geek about this, and I would not expect most to do this level of analysis.  

      







    Backpedaling and Introducing you to the NRA (National Renderers Association)

    I wrote a post referencing a RAW food supplier, and then I back pedaled and removed the reference.  Why? I'm going to be vague about the 'who' because the 'what' is not a confirmation, and I have no wish to cast aspersions another's way.

    Nevertheless, my one true talent (and it is how I make my living in consulting) is reconciling the dissonant stuff in business.  I've learned long ago to trust my reactions to dissonant stuff, and then give my brain and analytical abilities a chance to both discover and correct the problem.  (I'm good at that too).

    As I'm an intuitive person, I pay attention to what is on my mind in the morning.  In this particular instance I was wondering how 'pure ground beef' was being sold at less than 1/2 of what I could buy it for (but not chicken, turkey, etc).  I did a little extra nosing around, and found some conversations about this supplier that pointed to the fact that the  RAW food business being connected to the rendering business.

    I have no real exposure to the rendering business other than tangentially.  At the CPA firm where I started my career (many years ago), there was a rendering client.  I was never assigned to them, and I remember being glad for that! 

    I'm straying off my point.  My point is that I came to believe, reasonably, that the provider of the '100%, locally sourced, beef' was in fact providing fresh, rendered product that otherwise would be unfit for human consumption.  I don't know that it is a bad thing, but there is a bit of obliqueness in how the product is described. Rendering is not so much different than my Weston#22.  Into the hopper all things must go and then it is all ground together to get its 'start' in the process. I merely start with food fit for human consumption.

    I am still in the process of processing this information and more importantly, processing my reaction to it.  On an emotional level, I am adverse to using this 'locally sourced beef' as the source may be the on-site renderer which sources cattle from nearby operations who rely on renderers to take unusable product of their hands.  However, on an objective level, if it were safe, and I don't know how to fully evaluate that answer other than I see no negative reactions to the product by any on the internet, then such a product is useful to my pet and to the environment. As it currently stands, I'm not ready to commit to this product.

    While not ready to conclude on my feelings about any of this, it did get my fingers to do the internet walking.  I found some interesting stuff.  First, there is a lesser-known, NRA, The National Renderers Association.  You can visit them here.  There's lots of interesting statistics and resources.  One such resources is an on-line pdf book called Essential Rendering.

    One-third to one-half of each animal produced for meat, milk, eggs, and fiber is not consumed by humans.  These raw materials are subjected to rendering processes resulting in many useful products.   Meat and bone meal, meat meal, poultry meal, hydrolyzed feather meal, blood meal, fish meal, and animal fats are the primary products resulting from the rendering process.  The most important and valuable  use  for  these  animal  by-products  is  as  feed  ingredients  for  livestock, poultry, aquaculture, and companion animals.
    If you are interested in learning about about the pet food industry and rendered products, you can find a very informative paper here.

    A popular aphorism is 'waste not want not'.  Rendering surely provides a solution for following that prudent advice. Anything not used fully and completely is a shameful act.  However, things used inappropriately are shameful too.  I believe that rendering is a useful means of re-purposing animal parts for other purposes.  But heretofore I was blissfully unaware that rendering is the destination for euthanized animals of all sorts, to include shelter animals as well as single source animals such as beef and poultry, etc. Further, I have seen allegations of all manner of stuff thrown into the hopper and then passed off as consumable.  I have not, nor do I plan to, research this further. However, if you are bold and with stout stomach you can venture out.  The Last Chance for Animals website has some summary statistics.  There is a video there, but I have not/will not watch it.I get the point without having my face rubbed in it.

    There, is though, a "DOH!" factor in my self-professed ignorance:  "Just where did you think that it went?" is the correct retort.  I'm not going to express any indignation about any of this--to do so would be a little hypocritical.  We humans are enterprising, and rendering is a logical and even beneficial means of transforming waste into something useful.  (Soylent Green was too).  And any time we choose the better animals and/or the better parts of animals, we are still contributing to all of the excesses along the food change from inhumane raising, feeding and handling of protein sources for our or our pet's consumption to the waste products that are the fuel of the  rendering hopper feeder--and then go back in as a source.

    So long as we and our pets are eating animal-based proteins--we "feed" the cycle.

    I am culpable.

    Sigh.


    Pumpkin for the Pooches!

    My title is cynically enthusiastic.  There are many headlines about how good pumpkin is for your dog; however, until I read this article at Cesar's Way, I did not have any idea that too much pumpkin could lead to Vitamin A toxicity in dogs.  Herein lies my approach to evaluating the hype behind the hype regarding 'miracle foods' for my pet.

    Let's Do Math: Calculating Toxic Levels of Pumpkin in Dogs:

    RDA for dogs of Vitamin A:                                    2,272/lb of food or 50/lb of dog (1)
    Amount of IU in 1 cup of canned pumpkin:            12,231 IU (2)
    Amount of RDA for a 50 lb dog:                              2,500 (math: 50 IU x 50lbs)
    Maximum amount of canned pumpkin to add to your dog's food absent other supplementation: (2500/12231) x 1 or 1/5th of a cup.

    (1) source: http://www.vetinfo.com/vitamin-a-toxicity-in-dogs.html)
    (2) source:  http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/2601/2 

    I purposely added the qualifier of 'without additional supplementation' as my NUPRO supplement that I give my dogs provides 2,365 IU per scoop (3TBLS).

    Conclusion:  giving my dogs pumpkin regularly on top of their current supplementation would expose them to over supplementation for Vitamin A.  As you think about supplementation for yourself or your animals, research the risks of oversupplementation.

    Coprophagy

    Since I have been focused on RAW diets for my dogs, I have done quite a bit of research on all manner of dog issues.  Coprophagy, or 'poop eating', is one that I see referenced quite a bit as a malady experienced by many dog owners.  I'm not adding to the conversation, other than to say, that I have never owned a dog that ate their poop or other dog poop.

    Now, the cat snicker bars a la cat box are a different story.  I've never attributed a dog eating that particular delicacy, universally shared by most dogs, as true poop eating. And, most of my dogs will find and roll in any type of scat (other than their own or their fur family's) that they find in the woods.  Ugh.

    We've been lucky to not have to deal with any skunk encounters other than the faintest whiff from Daisey.    Others that I know, not so lucky.  Dawn and hydrogen peroxide are good to to keep on hand in COPIOUS amounts.  Great for skunks and red wine hazards in the household.