View Single Post
  #18   ^
Old Sun, Aug-23-15, 11:24
Nicekitty's Avatar
Nicekitty Nicekitty is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 469
 
Plan: Banting
Stats: 150/132/132 Female 5'7"
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: PNW
Default

I've looked into the nutritional qualities of raw meat and cooked meat, while investigating a raw diet for my dog, and found there is not much difference. But cooking completely changes the proteins of meat as you might expect, to the point that they are much more likely to cause allergic/intolerance problems in a dog. Obviously humans have adapted well to cooked proteins. Cooking also destroys some compounds that are very beneficial to animals, such as enzymes, taurine, glucosamine and chondroitin. Taurine in particular has proven to be an absolutely essential nutrient for cats--deficiency can cause heart defects, blindness and other problems. I suspect there are other nutrients that we haven't even discovered yet, that will prove to be very beneficial, in raw meat.

I find it difficult to believe that humans started cooking just because it tastes better. Animals develop very strong taste preferences and dietary beliefs based on how they are raised. For instance some of my chickens will eat white cheese but not orange cheese, others eat both, based on the exposure to cheese they had as chicks. Cooking must provide some strong evolutionary advantage. I tend to think that cooking as a method of preserving meat allowed humans to consume their larger kills over a longer period of time, such as a wooly mammoth. My dog prefers cooked meat (especially organ meat) over raw meat, but I suspect that is due to the diet he was raised on as a puppy (kibble).
Reply With Quote