Evidence at the core of The Balanced Canine

The Canine Evidence Hub

A growing evidence library for pet parents who want to go beyond headlines, marketing claims and social-media soundbites. Explore canine research across nutrition and food processing, the microbiome and gut-brain axis, nutrigenomics, epigenetics, longevity, botanical support, behaviour, environmental exposures, mobility and integrative care, with every indexed research record given a plain-English findings summary, evidence appraisal and visible limitations, while the distinction between direct canine evidence and indirect models stays clear.

01 / What this hub is for

Research should make you more informed, not more intimidated.


The aim is not to bury you under hundreds of abstracts. It is to create one calm, searchable home for the science that helps explain the principles behind TBC, while making the difference between interesting evidence, promising evidence and genuinely strong evidence much easier to see.

1

Learn the research basics

Understand study design, sample size, correlation, causation, endpoints, funding and why one paper rarely settles a nutrition question.

2

Find the paper, then understand it

Each research card starts with one plain-English takeaway. Open it only when you want the study design, findings, interpretation and limitations.

3

Build a wider evidence picture

Filter by raw and fresh food, gut health, early-life nutrition, integrative support, herbs, nutrigenomics, epigenetics, longevity and more.

02 / Research in 60 seconds

Six questions before you trust a headline.


You do not need a science degree to read research more critically. These six checks catch many of the problems that turn an interesting paper into an exaggerated online claim.

01What type of study is it?
Controlled trials can get closer to cause and effect. Observational studies are excellent for finding patterns but can be influenced by other differences between the dogs. Case reports and posters are useful for generating questions, but they sit lower on the evidence ladder.
02How many dogs were studied?
A result from eight dogs can be biologically interesting without being reliable enough to generalise to millions of dogs. Small studies are not useless. They simply need proportionate conclusions and replication.
03Association or causation?
If raw-fed puppies later have lower odds of a condition, diet may be involved. But raw-feeding households may also differ in exercise, body condition, environment, supplementation and healthcare. Associated with is not the same phrase as caused by.
04What outcome actually changed?
A microbiome shift, altered gene expression or lower biomarker can tell us that biology changed. It does not automatically prove that dogs lived longer, felt better or developed less disease. Always separate mechanism from clinical outcome.
05Were the diets really comparable?
Raw versus kibble can also mean high protein versus lower protein, low carbohydrate versus high carbohydrate, high moisture versus low moisture, different ingredients and different energy density. A study may show a whole-diet effect without telling us which single feature caused it.
06Who funded it, and what are the limitations?
Industry funding does not make research invalid, and independent funding does not make research flawless. Look for author conflicts, product involvement, missing controls and whether the paper itself acknowledges limitations. Then adjust how confident you are.
The TBC evidence promise

Supportive evidence will never be presented without its context.

This hub is intentionally aligned with the principles at the core of TBC, but it is not designed to cherry-pick. When a supportive study is small, observational, industry-funded, mixed or contradicted by another outcome, you should be able to see that before applying it to your dog.

01Every specific study links back to the paper, DOI, PubMed record or original research collection.
02Correlation and causation are described differently.
03Mechanistic findings are not automatically called health benefits.
04Raw microbial hazards are acknowledged while keeping actual clinical risk and transmission data in context.
05Integrative care means adding appropriate tools, not rejecting diagnostics, medication or conventional veterinary care when they are needed.
03 / The evidence library

Search the science without opening everything at once.


Only a short summary is visible at first. Search by topic, filter the library, then tap any paper to open its evidence notes. Every research record explains what researchers did, what they found, what it may mean and what it cannot prove. Imported papers now carry a structured appraisal and an evidence-strength judgement, with non-canine and mechanistic studies explicitly labelled so they are not mistaken for direct clinical evidence in dogs.

Loading research... Newest and featured evidence appears first. Evidence strength reflects study design and direct relevance to dogs, not journal prestige or whether a result supports a particular feeding philosophy.
04 / Helsinki DogRisk collection

One of the most useful longitudinal nutrition programmes in companion dogs.

The DogRisk team at the University of Helsinki has built an unusually broad body of work spanning early-life nutrition, atopy, chronic enteropathy, metabolic biomarkers, raw-food microbiology, trace elements, transcriptomics and the microbiome. The hub includes both peer-reviewed publications and clearly labelled posters or thesis work so readers can see how the evidence programme developed over time.

0 DogRisk or DogRisk-listed records currently indexed here
2015-26 from early posters and microbiology through recent intervention research
05 / Books that map the evidence

Useful synthesis, but not a substitute for primary research.


Two books have helped many pet parents discover the wider research conversation. They belong here as evidence maps and educational lenses. Their claims should still be traced back to the original studies before being treated as settled science.

Secondary research synthesis

Feeding Dogs: Dry or Raw? The Science Behind the Debate

Dr Conor Brady's book brings together a large reference base around canine ancestry, digestive physiology, macronutrients, processing, raw feeding and the structure of pet-food research. Its most useful role in this hub is as a map to questions and citations, rather than as a primary study itself.

  • Canine diet selection and digestive physiology
  • Protein, carbohydrate and fat in modern dog diets
  • Food processing and the dry-versus-raw evidence debate
  • How to question study design, industry influence and the meaning of "scientifically proven"

View the book record

Secondary research synthesis

The Forever Dog

Rodney Habib and Dr Karen Shaw Becker frame canine longevity as a whole-life equation involving food, movement, microbiome, environment and stress. That wider lens fits TBC's integrative approach, while the hub lets readers move from the book's themes back to individual papers.

  • Diet and minimally processed food
  • Microbiome and metabolic health
  • Exercise, enrichment and healthy ageing
  • Environmental exposures and stress reduction

Visit the official book page

A living research library

The evidence will keep moving. So will this hub.

New research on fresh feeding, integrative veterinary care, botanicals, the gut-brain axis, healthy ageing and canine nutrigenomics will be added as it is published. If you find a paper that belongs here, send it to TBC for review.

Educational resource only. This library does not replace veterinary diagnosis, treatment or individual nutritional formulation. A study being included does not mean The Balanced Canine considers every conclusion proven, every intervention appropriate for every dog, or every result clinically meaningful. Study design, population, funding, effect size, replication and the individual dog all matter.