Once again Ryan O'Meara and K9 Magazine have been exposed for publishing extremely dangerous advice. Why is this man and his companies allowed to print material that is clearly incorrect? What is even more amazing, he has quoted a very credible source to support his beliefs. That source has totally refuted that her book ever recommended or supported the advice this magazine and its editor-in-chief Ryan O'Meara have printed and published.

He likes to believe and be seen and introduced as some sort of dog expert. He is not qualified, neither is he a practicing dog trainer or a dog behaviourist. He runs no classes is not training dogs one to one basis. Something that PAACT: The Professional Association of Applied Canine Trainers requires for membership is ongoing education and study. That is something this man has never done. All he does is create web based companies. He is effectively a computer nerd and should not be allowed to give advice under any circumstances.

He has called me obsessive. But all I am doing is replying to his rants and lies which are now becoming more shrill and could easily be described as deranged. I never started this O'Meara did because I refused to be on their panel of experts or write for them anymore.

He has written almost a dozen long posts about me. Pretending to be from different companies not associated with K9, yet all the posts are by him.

Another case of credential deception from this fantasist. Up until recently I only put up one post in reply. Until I copied his rage against the very people that buy his services and posted a couple of links on Twitter. He has even claimed that I have deceived the general public. Yet he is has been forced to put up that he is an Ex Trainer on a his blog's and CV's. But still on many of his sites he is claiming to be a dog trainer. That is a lie as is most of what this man utters.

He has been caught out deceiving people into believing he was a dog trainer. This is true deception claiming that you are a dog trainer when you are not. He has not done any professional dog training since 1998 12 years ago. And even then he was apparently working for a supposed world class trainer (whom for some strange reason he refuses to name), therefore not on his own merit.

Why does he refuse to name this trainer, I find that very odd. Is it all lies again or does the trainer not want his name associated with this vindictive bullying man?

Ryan O’Meara

I just report the truth, his strange obsession with me being one of them. Anger management is another of his major problems. . He is supposed to be Editor in Chief of K9 Media and K9 Magazine. If that is the case why has he been shunted sideways? Could it be he is a total liability and needs moving before he does anymore harm?

He talks about his brother Sean O'Meara as the one that commissions editorial work for K9 Magazine on dogs. Yet freely admits his brother knows nothing about dogs, He probably wouldn't know a sheepdog from a corgi, yet here he is commissioning work relating to dogs, dog training and dog behaviour.

Talk about the blind leading the blind. Is it any wonder they post articles that are frankly dangerous and potentially fatal to your pets.

I wrote to his brother with my concerns over the recommendation that you should feed up the eyeballs a young 9 month old Cocker Spaniel that was restless.

Dangerous, foolhardy, and potentially life threatening advice. The biggest killer of dogs in the UK is obesity and this man is recommending it. Follow this mans advice and you could also be banned from owning pets for 10 years, and castigated in the press like John Green recently. John owned Barney the Dalmatian that weighed a whopping 11 stone twice the normal weight. My thanks to RSPCA for Picture

This is the Killer he has put up yet another post attacking me and saying he is here to tell the truth. If only he knew what the word means.

This is taken direct from his accusations:

"Here’s where it starts to become worrying about how little Stan Rawlinson actually knows about dogs. As has since been pointed out to him:

“Our domestic dogs can readily adapt to a number of feeding regimens, the primary ones being portion-controlled feeding, time-controlled feeding, and free-choice or ad libitum feeding (Case et al,. 2000)” ~ Source: Nutrition for Veterinary Technicians and Nurses  By Ann Wortinger.

Note the source, it’s hardly a discreditable one."

I agree totally for once with O’Meara that Ann Wortinger is a very creditable person who has written informed and well researched work. And he has the audacity to say "this is where it becomes worrying about how little Stan Rawlinson knows about dogs.?"

Unlike O'Meara and K9 Magazine, I have actually read her book and was aware of her recommendations so I wrote to Ann and sent the information that is still on the K9 website.

These are her replies:

Stan,

I can understand your concern, and as you suspected, the information is taken out of context and is not complete.

Attached is the entire information with explanation.  Please let me know if you have any other questions.  See the underlined italicized portion at the end of the information.

Feel free to rebut this incomplete information with the correct information!

Ann's second e-mail said this:

Eh gads, I would never recommend feeding a dog up to his eyeballs for any reason!!  What about some distraction and exercise?!

Sounds like someone has way too much energy and too much time for causing trouble! (She means the young dog here)

Saw at the end that the recommendation was for raw.  If they'd read my book at all, they would have seen that there are multiple reasons to not feed raw food, especially to puppies, families with small children or free choice.

Ann Wortinger BIS, LVT, VTS (ECC, SAIM)
Program Specialist
Veterinary Technology Program

The correct information can be found at the bottom of this page

Ann sent me this from her book. A book which I would advise any pet owner to read as it is excellent. (1) Please see bottom of page for more details.

Obesity is a common problem with animals that are fed free choice food. With a highly palatable diet, and a sedentary lifestyle the normal regulatory mechanisms used to control food intake are easily overridden. (2) In young growing animals this over consumption of energy has been shown to cause an accelerated growth rate and increased fat deposition within the body, further contributing to obesity later in life. (2)

Could it get any worse? The correct information is never free feed raw food when opting for a free choice feeding program for any dog, and especially for juveniles. Young dogs will not self regulate and will put on dangerous fat deposits. Yet he endorsed this advice and has since supported this dangerous and possibly fatal recommendation on numerous occasions. The recommendation as you can see is still up there. Unbelievable! What this man is not aware of is if you over feed a puppy it will create an increase and abundance of fat cells. When that dog come to maturity the production of fat cells stops.

Simply put feed a puppy the right amount of food for its breed and it will produce lets say 1 million fat cells. Overfeed a young dog and it will produce 1.5 million fat cells. Once the fat cells are there they cannot be reduced or removed. Therefore it will always have a propensity to obesity because of the increased level of cells.

He then goes on to say:

"Rawlinson no longer has the defamatory (and wrong) wording on his web page he has – wisely – removed it, either because he’s been made to look silly or because he’s had some good advice. Either way, he never issued an apology for essentially saying (in contradiction to a veterinary technicians source) that K9 Magazine had given out ‘dangerous’ or life threatening advice"

"One can draw from this one of two things 1) He doesn’t know much about dogs if he doesn't’t recognise that dogs in the wild have access to as much food as they can eat and yet that, in and of itself, is certainly not ‘life threatening’ (in fact it’s pretty obvious) and further he’s obviously not had enough experience to actually comment on ad-lib feeding systems which are used by various working dog kennels and is something I have personal experience of – or – 2) He’s prepared to basically say anything in an attempt to discredit me and K9 Magazine."

I do not need to discredit K9 Magazine or O'Meara, he manages to do that all by himself. My information is from the very person he quoted as the most credible and reliable source. What a pity he did not read Ann's book. He would not have totally shot off not just one foot but both.

We now know that it is K9 Magazine and Ryan O'Meara knows very little about dogs. Can you imagine the owner or editor of any other specialist magazine or paper misquoting a source so badly, and with such serious and potentially devastating consequences? This source is saying exactly the opposite of what he claims and her words echo mine when I said: "The advice was dangerous and potentially fatal".

I stand by every word I said and will repeat it.

"After reading this article I became extremely concerned as to their (K9 Magazines) abilities and knowledge of dogs. To advise feeding a dog until it pops is foolhardy in the extreme, and this dog is not a puppy. He is a nine months old Cocker Spaniel. In human terms that would be approximately 12 years old."

This magazine and it’s editor and publisher in chief Ryan O’Meara then supported the recommendation by saying:

“As for the feeding advice, I state again – IT WORKED. Why would I be dubious of publishing the advice when I have personal experience in using the technique, IT WORKS. Believe me when I say if I felt we had got it wrong, I’d have no problem stating it. On this occassion, Stan is wrong. Simple.”

I will give you one guess who wrote the following article on overfeeding dogs in August 2009 This is just a small part of it.

"Britain is suffering from a growing number of obese pets. As our domesticated animals share the lives and lifestyles of their owners, as society gets fatter so do our pets."

"As a society it’s time to give a name to the fat dog epidemic sweeping the country in order that the people responsible are completely aware of what they are doing. It’s animal cruelty. Plain and simple. Abuse by any other name is still abuse and whilst over-feeding our pets to the point of obesity may be a very modern form of animal cruelty, it is cruelty nevertheless and must be described as such."

"Dogs rely 100% on their owners for the diet they eat and lifestyles they lead. Unlike children of a certain age, dogs – with the odd exception – can not open cupboards, can not be duplicitous and conniving spending their dinner money on junk food instead of the healthy option they swore they were eating at school. Dogs are unable to read labels and they surely can not be expected to self regulate their calorie intake when their very instinct is that of the scavenger, eating as if unsure where their next meal will be coming from. It is this very instinct in fact which leads many owners to constantly give into the longing eyes, the charge to the biscuit tin and the general pressure our clever pets are able to exert over us with that ‘never been fed before’ facial expression that have mastered so well. Are they hungry? No, very unlikely. They are simply doing what dogs do, using their canine skills to convince their sole providers of their desire to eat."

This is from his current website under the ten myths about your pet, this is number 4.

4. Dogs will only eat as much as they need. Wrong. Dogs are descended from wolves who are scavengers, feeding off dead carcasses. It is natural for them to eat as much as possible because they don't know where the next meal is coming from. In addition, as pack animals, they want to eat as much as they can before another pack member pushes them out of the way.

This from a man that is currently supporting information that has been damned by one of the leading experts in the World, then goes and attacks overfeeding. This man has supported the original article suggesting feeding up to the eyeballs both before and after his article calling overfeeding abuse. Does that mean that by his support of overfeeding this young Cocker Spaniel that he is admitting to supporting Dog Abuse? I leave the answer up to you.

Do you really want to take advice from this mans sites, magazines, and companies where he clearly contradicting his own advice. This is a man that cannot admit he is wrong. Even at the expense of our animals health and future.

Let me explain a few other things he as done. He advised people to ignore manufacturers guidelines on not using shock collars on aggressive dogs.

Cesar Milan used a shock collar on an aggressive dog and it immediately turned round ands bit its owner. I believe every single manufacturer now states never ever use one for inter-dog or inter-human aggression. . O'Meara personally recommended ignoring manufacturers guidelines on the use of shock collars on aggressive dogs.

For your information O'Meara, manufacturers state never use on aggressive dogs as it often makes the dog more aggressive, It then attacks more viciously what it imagines is the source of the pain, ie what it was aggressing against when you shocked it.

For him to advise ignoring those manufacturers guideline is nothing short of stupidity.

I wrote an article called Canine Communication and Ryan O'Meara attacked it on his forum and said:

This is the same guy who reckons, when confronted with an aggressive dog a person should "Lick lips and yawn." Dangerous, dangerous advice and I'd be delighted to prove it to him with an aggressive dog.

The advice he's given (make yourself small and lick lips) could very easily get a child killed. Making oneself small would mean crouching and also becoming stationery.

He's misguided, dangerous. But a hoot to read.

Ryan O'Meara

Amazingly he had forgotten the fact that he had not only published this article for 18 months on K9 Magazine online. But had actually commissioned me to do it. It was one of the top articles ever on his site, evidenced by the enormous amount of e-mails congratulating me on the article, from both Ryan and Sean O'Meara.

If he stands by his original comment above, he must be constantly printing dangerous material. This man should really change his name to Gerald Ratner and his magazine to MAD.

This is part of the Newsletter sent out recommending people read my article:

Welcome to issue 15 of the K9 Magazine e-zine.

There is a distinct theme to this edition of the e-zine and that would be the subject of communication.

We have some truly incredible and side-splittingly funny footage of 'talking dogs' topped off with an excellent article written by top canine behaviour expert, Stan Rawlinson on how to understand dog body language and methods of canine communication.

I want you to remember that this man is constantly writing about and advising on dog training and dog behaviour Despite the fact he is neither a dog trainer nor a dog behaviourist. I am eternally grateful he did not say dog lover, that would have been too sickeningly hypocritical. However he does say he cares about dogs (that made me feel quite queasy.)

All my campaigning on his K9 forum was against cruelty. He allowed posters that were recommending using shock collars on puppies, partially blind and deaf dogs, and on dogs genitals.

He allowed videos showing showing disabled dogs being abused with a shock collar. An American ex cop took delight in what he called crittering, suggesting that shock collars could be used on all dogs including pups. This is the same person that was friends with Denis Carthy, a well know proponent of shock collars and the person on the DVD's on O'Meara's forum that put shock collars round dogs groins and genital areas. He was also the one that showed (once again on O'Meara' forum) the partially blind and deaf dog being abused by a shock collar.

This was the same Denis Carthy who was eventually expelled from O'Meara's forum. Not for the sickening videos of cruelty, but for sending indecent images to a 13 year old girl on that same forum. Who in their right mind would ever allow a child on a forum like that in the first place.

The same ex American cop wrote in K9 Magazine on the use of shock collars. Remember these collars are banned in parts of the UK but not in England YET!. This cop suggested on a forum using these collars on puppies just to teach them to sit. The American police force he worked with has now banned their use on service dogs.

In the hands of a professional behaviourist and trainer they MAY have a very small and limited role to play. Mainly in the case of stock chasing, but only by a registered experts in their use, not these bunch of dimwits.

Amazingly Ryan O'Meara claims he knows and cares about dogs? I would not let him within 1000 miles of any of my dogs and neither would I imagine many of my thousands of clients. which incidentally includes the King of Saudi Arabia whom he boasts about on his CV. I trained three of the Kings dogs whilst he was in the UK. I was asked for personally to work with his family the Princes and Princesses and their new dogs.

I will put money on that Ryan O'Meara was not asked for personally. His Royal Highness may have hoped that the alleged world class trainer that O'Meara claims to have worked for, (yet strangely refuses to name) was going to train these dogs.

Did the Saudi King ask for the real trainer and end up paying huge amounts for the little trainee to work on his dogs? We will probably never know, but we can certainly guess. My clients include the richest man in the UK, pop and rock stars royalty and stars of television, film, football, rugby and entertainment.

He has been boasting about how he going to be breaking into other areas and numerous countries like the USA. I wonder how that is going by the way? Given that he has managed to make a total mockery of his companies. I doubt they have that much value. They certainly have very little credence in the real dog world he so avidly despises.

He wrote to my solicitors saying I should be ready to be sued and that I had 14 days to apologise. That was seven months ago These are his words.

We intend to cover our remedy the damage caused to our reputation by your client and recover damages against him for the defamation against K9 Media Ltd, K9 Magazine and me personally. This letter will be CC’d to our commercial litigators.

I would recommend you advice your client to ready his defence.

Ryan O'Meara 

And the date of this letter? June 17th 2009

I have no idea what "cover our remedy means" it sounds like nonsense to me. Once again a man of many words but little substance, his threats are empty and vacuous. He knows he does not have a leg to stand on. And neither would his dogs if he fed them as he has endorsed.

I know he left School at 16 with I presume very little education and no qualifications. He only trained dogs between the age of 16 and 21 yet he still claimed in his CV for K9 Media that he is a professional dog trainer.

There are quite a few things that I despise, but a hypocrite and mendacity comes somewhere near the top of my list. What magazine and media boss would allow himself to be castigated in the way I have done without reply to legal recourse? It says a lot. I am taking legal recourse but it takes time. He just keeps saying he has bigger fish to fry.

Type in Ryan O'Meara, K9 Magazine and K9 Media and see where some of my comments come, and then tell me he can ignore it.

Be warned deal with his companies or follow their advice with great care.

dogmagazine.net
dognews.co.uk
dogchat.co.uk
K9 Magazine
K9 Media all their companies
K9 Online
Dogsblog.com
petcrash
Petfriendly magazine
dogmagazine.net
Total Dog Magazine

I have people writing to me about this bully. Isn't it always the same, they are bullies until you actually front them. He claimed he was a better trainer than me. Then when I challenged him and offered him the opportunity to prove it anywhere and at anytime.
Guess what? He totally bottled it. I expected no more.

That is the stamp of this individual. I have more experience training dogs than he has been alive on this planet. claiming to be a trainer yet we know he is not. claiming that he supported by professionals regarding overfeeding. Yet those professionals say he is totally wrong. Yet he still quotes them. When we get to court he will realise exactly who will back his claims and who will not. He has given dangerous and misleading advice and even more worrying it still readily available.

When he emerges as the amateur that he really is, I do hope we never again have to listen to a word this man says. Or buy into his numerous companies and his magazine K9, which has clearly given dangerous and foolhardy advice..These are some of the well known companies he says advertises with them. You may wish to contact them if you feel they are supporting people who allow dog abuse on their forum and giving advice that is clearly dangerous.

http://www.k9media.net/services/advertise/

Stan Rawlinson

 

See my other articles on this man an his companies:

SCORN AGAINST DOGLOVERS and RYAN O'MEARA SERIAL LIAR AND FRAUD

RYAN O'MEARA LOSES TOP JOB AT K9 MAGAZINE

---

(1)

If we look to the wolf for our domestic dogs feeding schedule, large meals fed infrequently would seem to be the natural way to feed. (2)  However, when domestic dogs are given free-choice access to food, they tend to eat small meals frequently throughout the day. (1, 2)  This pattern is similar to that seen with cats, with the exception that dogs tend to only eat during the day. (2)  Our domestic dogs can readily adapt to a number of feeding regimes, the primary ones being portion-controlled feeding, time-controlled-feeding and free-choice or ad libitum feeding. (2)

At the end of the chapter is the following information, which clarifies which regimen is appropriate for feeding.

While ad lib feeding is popular and appropriate for some animals, it is definitely not recommended for those who are overweight or inactive! My preferred method of feeding is measured feedings at regular intervals.

Feeding Regimens

The three primary feeding choices available for dogs and cats are free-choice or ad libitum, time-controlled feeding and portion-controlled or measured feeding. (2)

The method used will be determined by the owner’s daily schedule, the number of animals being fed , the type of food being fed and the acceptability of the method to the pet or pets.(2)

Free Choice Feeding

Free-choice feeding is having a surplus of food available at all times. This enables the pet or pets to consume as much food as desired at any time of the day. (2) This feeding method relays on the animal’s ability to self-regulate food intake so that only the actual energy and nutrient needs are met, and no excess energy is consumed. (2) Dry food is the best choice for this method as it will not spoil or dry out as easily as other products. This does not mean that by feeding dry food, the dishes do not need to be cleaned or the food refreshed daily though. (2)

When compared to the other methods, free-choice feeding requires the least amount of work and knowledge by the owner. (2) The food and water supply is only replenished once daily (or less often) and it is not necessary for the owner to determine the pet’s exact daily energy requirements. (2) When dogs are fed free-choice, they tend to consume frequent small meals throughout the day. This feeding pattern has the advantage of greater meal-induced energy loss through digestion when compared to dogs eating larger meals, less frequently. (2) However, this increased energy loss is usually more than compensated for by increased energy intake by most dogs.

Free-choice feeding can be a helpful way to feed those animals that are “poor doers” and do not eat sufficient calories to support themselves when fed time-controlled meals. This allows them to eat multiple small meals throughout the day, increasing their overall energy intake. This method can also be helpful for animals that work at a very high energy level by allowing them to replenish their energy reserves throughout the day. (2)

Free-choice feeding can be a disadvantage if animals are having problems with anorexia or over consumption as these problems may go undetected for an extended period of time. (2) If these problems are related to a medical condition, valuable time may be lost until the animal is sick enough for the owner to notice a change in the condition, where if the animal was meal or portion fed, the problem with increased or decreased intake would be evident to the owner within a short period of time. (2)

Obesity is a common problem with animals that are fed free choice food. With a highly palatable diet, and a sedentary lifestyle the normal regulatory mechanisms used to control food intake are easily overridden. (2) In young growing animals this over consumption of energy has been shown to cause an accelerated growth rate and increased fat deposition within the body, further contributing to obesity later in life. (2)

Time-controlled Feeding

Time-controlled feeding involves controlling the amounts of time that the animal is given access to the food, but they can eat as much as they want or can within this period of time. (2) This method also relays on the animals ability to regulate its own energy intake. At mealtime, a surplus amount of food is supplied and the animal is allowed to eat for a predetermined period of time. For most dogs and cats that are not physiologically stressed, 15 – 20 minutes is sufficient to meet their energy requirements. (2) This is usually done in either one or two meals daily. While most animals can eat a sufficient amount of food when fed once daily, twice daily is healthier and more satisfying for the animal. (2) Twice daily feeding will also help to reduce hunger between meals and decrease food-associated behaviors such as begging and stealing food. (2)

Some animals do not adapt well to time-controlled feedings. Some may not consume a sufficient quantity within the time period allotted, while other will gorge themselves throughout the entire period of time leading to obesity. Time-controlled feedings may actually encourage gluttonous behavior because animals quickly learn that they have to “beat-the-clock”. (2)

Portion-controlled Feedings

Portion-controlled feedings is the preferred method in most situations. (2) By feeding a predetermined amount of food once to twice daily the owner is given the greatest amount of control over the pet’s diet. Portion-controlled feedings also allow the owners to monitor the food intake more closely and notice any changes in intake or behavior quickly. (2) This method also allows the most control over growth rate and weight, and can be adjusted as needed to maintain the desired effect. (2) By doing this, conditions related to overweight, underweight or inappropriate growth can be corrected at an early stage. (2)

Portion-controlled feeding also demands the most amount of knowledge and effort by the owner. Guidelines for feeding amounts are provided on the bags or containers of food, these can be used as a starting point to determine the amount of food to be fed to the animal. (2) The Daily Energy Requirements ( DER ) can also be calculated using the pets’ weight, activity level and the energy density of the food. The manufacturer can be contacted to determine the energy density of the food, since this is usually not provided on the product label.

The time-commitment for portion-controlled feeding is usually not a problem for most owners unless a large number of animals are being fed at any one time. The easiest method is to coordinate the pets’ meal time with the owners’ meal time; this would also have the added bonus of decreasing begging at the table because they’re eating their own food. (2)

Sources