Nutrition

Veterinary nutrition is a topic that has become unnecessarily polarized. On one side, there is the traditional view that commercial kibble is the safest, most practical, and most scientifically reliable way to feed dogs. On the other side, there is a growing movement toward fresh food, raw food, home-prepared diets, and more biologically appropriate feeding strategies. My own opinion falls somewhere in the middle, although I will openly admit that I have a strong bias toward fresh, minimally processed food.

I also think it is important to understand how the commercial pet food industry developed over time. Modern pet food did not necessarily begin as an attempt to create the perfect biologic diet for dogs. It evolved out of convenience, manufacturing, shelf stability, cost efficiency, and the ability to use ingredients from the human food supply chain that might otherwise have been wasted. In the early 1900s, commercial dog biscuits and canned foods became more common. By the 1920s, canned dog food had become popular in the United States, including products such as Ken-L Ration. During and after the 1930s and 1940s, food processing technology, economic pressures, changing household lifestyles, wartime rationing, and the desire for shelf-stable products all helped push the industry toward dry, convenient foods. By the 1950s, extrusion technology allowed companies to produce the expanded, uniform, dry kibble that most people recognize today. That history matters because kibble was not created in a vacuum. It was shaped by practicality, industrial food processing, distribution, storage, and marketing as much as by nutrition.

Commercial pet food has served an important purpose. It created a convenient, affordable, shelf-stable way for people to feed dogs. It has undoubtedly helped millions of dogs receive calories and balanced macronutrients in a consistent and practical format. Many dogs eat kibble their entire lives and appear to live normal, happy, healthy lives. I do not believe every dog eating kibble is being harmed, and I do not believe every owner needs to feel guilty for feeding a commercial diet. Life is complicated. Budgets, time, access, medical conditions, household logistics, and the individual dog all matter.

However, I do not believe that simply meeting minimum nutrient requirements is the same thing as optimal nutrition. There is a difference between surviving and thriving.

That distinction is where I think veterinary nutrition deserves more honest discussion. Commercial kibble can keep dogs alive and provide adequate nutrition as defined by current standards. But I am not convinced that a highly processed, shelf-stable, carbohydrate-heavy food should automatically be considered the ideal diet for a species that evolved eating animal tissue, scavenged foods, and a much broader variety of fresh nutrients. Dogs are not wolves, and they are clearly capable of digesting a wider variety of foods than strict carnivores. But they still retain a strong carnivore bias, and their biology should not be ignored simply because kibble is convenient.

One of my biggest concerns is not that kibble exists. My concern is the way some commercial pet food companies market kibble as if it is unquestionably superior to fresh food. In almost every other area of health, we recognize that whole, fresh, minimally processed foods are preferable to highly processed foods. We tell people to eat real food, avoid excessive refined carbohydrates, avoid artificial additives when possible, and prioritize nutrient-dense ingredients. Yet in veterinary medicine, we often reverse that logic and suggest that a brown, extruded, shelf-stable pellet is somehow more ideal than a properly formulated fresh-food diet.

I find that hard to accept.

To be clear, fresh food is not automatically better simply because it is fresh. A poorly formulated homemade diet can be dangerous. Dogs require appropriate amounts of calcium, phosphorus, trace minerals, essential fatty acids, vitamins, amino acids, and other nutrients. Feeding chicken breast, rice, and vegetables indefinitely is not a complete diet. Good intentions do not guarantee nutritional adequacy. If an owner wants to prepare food at home, the diet should be formulated by a veterinary nutritionist or created through a reputable formulation system designed to meet nutritional requirements.

I also think raw food is often unfairly demonized. Raw feeding is frequently discussed as if it is automatically reckless, dangerous, or irresponsible, and I do not think that is a fair or balanced position. There are legitimate concerns with raw diets, including bacterial contamination, food handling, zoonotic risk, nutritional imbalance, and the potential for inappropriate bones or poorly constructed recipes. Those concerns should be taken seriously. But they should not be used to dismiss the entire concept of raw feeding as inherently irrational or harmful. I do not believe every dog needs to eat raw food, and I do not believe raw food is automatically the best choice for every household. At the same time, I am not opposed to raw feeding when it is done thoughtfully, hygienically, and in a nutritionally complete and balanced way. Many commercial raw products exist that have done the hard work with nutrient balancing and recipe formation making it a lot easier and safer. Feeding a commercial raw food is very different compared to mixing raw ingredients in your own kitchen without a recipe. As with any diet, the details matter.

But when fresh-food diets are complete and balanced, I think it is difficult to argue that they are inherently inferior to kibble. In fact, I think the opposite is more likely true. A diet based on high-quality animal protein, healthy fats, lower levels of refined carbohydrate, and minimally processed ingredients seems more biologically sensible than a highly processed kibble diet built primarily around manufacturing efficiency, shelf stability, and cost control.

This does not mean every dog needs a raw diet. It does not mean every dog needs a boutique fresh-food company. It does not mean kibble is poison. It means we should be intellectually honest. Kibble is convenient. Kibble is practical. Kibble can be nutritionally complete. Kibble can be a reasonable option for many households. But I do not believe we should confuse convenience with optimal health.

I also think we need to be humble. There is not one ‘best diet’ that is ideal for all dogs. Genetics, breed, age, activity level, body condition, gastrointestinal tolerance, immune function, neurologic disease, endocrine disease, allergies, and lifestyle all matter. Some dogs do beautifully on kibble. Some dogs clearly improve when moved to fresh food. Some dogs need prescription diets. Some need lower fat. Some need novel protein. Some need hydrolyzed food. Some need carefully controlled calories. Nutrition should be individualized, not treated as a one-size-fits-all doctrine.

My personal bias is that, when possible, I prefer fresh, minimally processed, complete-and-balanced diets over traditional kibble. I believe food quality matters. I believe the gut matters. I believe chronic inflammation, obesity, allergies, gastrointestinal disease, immune dysfunction, and possibly even some neurologic conditions may be influenced by diet and the microbiome. We do not have all the answers, and I would never claim that diet alone can prevent or cure every disease. But I do think nutrition is one of the most powerful daily inputs we have into an animal’s long-term health.

For owners, my advice is simple: do the best you can within your real-life constraints. If kibble is what works for your household, choose the highest-quality food you reasonably can, keep your dog lean, avoid excessive treats and table scraps, and consider adding appropriate fresh foods when safe. If you want to feed fresh food, make sure it is complete and balanced. If you want to cook at home, use a properly formulated recipe. If your dog has a medical condition, work with your veterinarian before making major diet changes.

Veterinary nutrition should not be about guilt or marketing. It should be about honest discussion, biologic common sense, scientific humility, and individualized care. My position is not that kibble is always bad or that fresh food is always perfect. My position is that fresh, complete, minimally processed food is a more logical nutritional ideal for many dogs than highly processed commercial kibble.

Dogs can survive on many diets. The better question is: what diet gives that individual dog the best chance to truly thrive?