One of the reasons that vets see dogs that are compromised on raw diets is not that raw is necessarily bad, but that owners are often not good at insuring that the raw they feed is balanced. You have to know what you're doing - it's not enough to toss the dog a few chicken backs every day, and a spoonful of yogurt, and assume that's a good raw diet.
As with any diet, there are drawbacks and there are benefits. I don't like to see anyone become a nazi over whether to feed kibble or raw. Some people don't want to spend all the time, energy and money to try to feed raw. Others, like me, feed kibble because another person in the household is immune compromised and is medically advised not to handle raw meat. If you listen to structure expert, Pat Hastings, she will tell you that she often sees puppies that are raw-fed develop defects. Again, most probably because the owners are getting the diet wrong, not because raw, which is a dog's natural food, is bad. If you are set on feeding raw, there are prepared raw diets that meet nutritional standards, so you don't have to guess at what your dog is getting. Or, you can certainly become well educated and do it on your own. I know that my own vet is leery of it because she sees dogs come in with bone related punctures, and with gastrointestinal problems, but she admits that there are dogs being fed raw that do very well, too. Being a trainer, I know that vets often aren't as up to snuff on behavioral aspects of care as we'd like, too. So, I take nutritional advice from them with a grain of salt. But, I would probably never feed my own dogs raw without consulting a canine nutritionist first to be sure I was getting the balance correct. I will say that my dogs are healthier than the dogs my friends have that get raw, but I don't necessarily think it's all related to diet. My Yorkie is 18 1/2, and my last dog died at 17 1/2. On the other hand, someone I know had a Golden live to be 17+ on raw diet. Pretty good for a Golden.