{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03127641589180051, 'fraction_numerical': 0.028740490278951817, 'mean_word_length': 4.611374407582939, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of the clinical manifestations of feeding whole and hydrolysed chicken to dogs with hypersensitivity to the native protein.

Twenty-six dogs with known adverse food reactions were fed whole chicken for 14 days. From this group, 12 dogs with cutaneous manifestations following exposure to chicken meat were selected and randomly divided into two groups (n = 6). Each group was then fed hydrolysed chicken or hydrolysed soy for 14 days in a blinded crossover design with a 17-day washout period between each diet. Assessments of a CADESI (Canine Atopic Dermatitis Extent and Severity Index) score and pruritus were performed throughout the entire study, and combined in a global score (GS). Serum was collected weekly for the measurement of chicken- and soy-specific IgG and IgE. Dogs displayed the most severe clinical response when eating whole chicken compared to baseline (P < 0.001). The GS was significantly reduced in 11 of the 12 dogs when fed hydrolysed chicken were compared to those fed whole chicken (3.58 ± 2.81 versus 20.38 ± 14.65, P < 0.01). Serum immunoglobulin G and E responses were variable and did not show relationship with specific dietary exposure.