Raw diets carry documented infection and nutrition risks, and the claimed benefits are mostly unproven. Here’s the case on each side. We’ve graded every study by design and funding.
The risks are well documented, and most of that evidence is independent of the pet-food industry: raw foods carry higher rates of Salmonella, Listeria, and antibiotic-resistant bacteria that can spread to people, and home-prepared raw diets are often nutritionally incomplete. The benefits are thinner. Raw food is more digestible, but the bigger claims of more energy, stronger immunity, or a longer life rest on owner reports, not controlled studies, and every major veterinary body advises against feeding raw.
What the evidence shows can go wrong.
"There are documented risks associated with raw feeding, principally malnutrition (inexpert formulation and testing of diets) and infection affecting pets and/or household members."
The two main risks are diets that aren’t properly balanced and infections that can spread to the people in the home.
"Infants are mainly (50%) affected, and dogs fed raw meat-based diets are the major source identified, followed by exposure to cattle."
Of the human infections traced in this study, half were in infants, and raw-fed dogs were the leading source.
Four people were infected with the same genetically matched, severe strain of E. coli and one died. Three had contact with dogs fed raw tripe, and the bacteria were found in a raw-tripe sample.
Epidemiology & Infection, 2021 (England cluster)
"Only 6% of these diets were potentially nutritionally complete according to the Association of American Feed Control Officials adult dog maintenance standards."
Only 6% of these home-prepared diets met the basic nutritional standard for an adult dog.
All 11 homemade-style products fell below at least one AAFCO mineral minimum, with selenium the most common gap (about 91 percent), followed by copper and zinc.
Of 200 home-prepared maintenance recipes, 190 were deficient in at least one essential nutrient, and the only consistently adequate recipes were the four written by board-certified veterinary nutritionists.
"[O]ne of the most important issues regarding the feeding of RMBDs is the paucity of good data from high-quality studies."
The biggest problem with raw meat diets is how little high-quality research exists.
"L. monocytogenes was more HPP resistant than Salmonella and E. coli STEC."
High-pressure processing, a common raw-food safety step, knocked out Salmonella and E. coli more easily than Listeria, which was toughest to kill.
"There is currently no properly documented evidence of health benefits for RMBD, but there are well documented risks. As such, the WSAVA Global Nutrition Committee recommends that RMBD not be fed to dogs and cats."
"[T]he AVMA discourages feeding any raw or undercooked animal-sourced proteins (e.g., meat, poultry, fish, egg, milk) to dogs and cats because of their risk to human and animal health."
"AAHA does not advocate or endorse feeding pets any raw or dehydrated nonsterilized foods, including treats that are of animal origin."
"The CVMA holds that the scientific evidence of animal and human health risks in feeding RMB pet food products outweighs any purported benefits."
"[C]ompared to other types of pet food tested, raw pet food was more likely to be contaminated with disease-causing bacteria."
"[T]he results so far have identified 20% of samples positive for Salmonella spp., 11% of samples positive for Campylobacter spp., 9% of samples positive for MRSA, 11% of samples positive for STEC and 99% of samples positive for beta-glucuronidase-positive E. coli."
Testing of raw pet food found high rates of dangerous bacteria, including Salmonella in about 1 in 5 samples and MRSA in nearly 1 in 10.
UK Food Standards Agency, 2023–2024
What raw is sold on, and how well it holds up.
"[T]he effects of ingredient composition, macronutrient profile, and processing conditions cannot be distinguished from one another."
The study couldn’t separate what the food was made of from how it was processed, so it can’t say which produced any benefit.
"While RMBD-feeding might offer the advantage of a leaner body condition, concerns about nutritional imbalances warrant further investigation, even though RMBD-fed dogs do not show clinical signs of nutrient deficiencies."
Raw-fed dogs were leaner, a real plus, but may carry nutritional imbalances even without obvious symptoms.
"[This] suggests a causal relationship but does not prove it."
This raw-feeding survey hints at a benefit, but as a survey it can’t prove raw was the cause.
"[T]he limited published evidence does not support claims of reduced periodontal disease with raw feeding…"
There’s no good evidence that raw feeding leads to healthier gums.
Claims that raw feeding improves energy, immunity, or longevity rest on owner reports, with no controlled evidence.
No controlled study (owner-reported only)
Not all studies carry the same weight. We grade each by design:
We also tag who funded each study. Funding does not make a finding wrong, but it tells you whose interpretation to scrutinize.