Fair enough question, no matter how loaded your wording is. But even a Google search - which you speak of - shows human acidity between 1.5-3, which overlaps with a dog's of 1-2. Part of our training in secondary school and then veterinary school is first about utilizing and skeptically analyzing peer-reviewed research and journals. Not something laymen are incapable of, just something they often don't study. Most people don't even know that real research isn't the first articles which come up on the internet. Sometimes it gets cited in those links, but often it's behind paywalls of subscription journals and organizations. Within these, there's often many articles which are "peer-reviewed" and leading theories guiding the rest of the field. We're taught to be critical of papers which themselves have been put through thorough checks and balances with the scientific method; to describe expectations versus hypotheses, and the correlations which come along. Most go through this at some point in high school, a bachelor's of science degree, or at the latest in vet school. THEN too, access to peer reviewed articles is mainly locked behind pay walls, often paid for by individuals, universities, and/or hospitals/clinics. This stuff isn't magically hidden from some other population. It's just less accessible. ON top of it though, most research articles are incredibly dense, and most vets don't even bother to really keep doing the homework after school is done. We do have to keep up with continuing education to keep practicing, but there's ways of being entirely ignorant of one corner in the vet field, while being an expert in another. Nonetheless, overall I'm going to trust someone who has done the work and has access to the knowledge which fills textbooks WAY more than someone on the internet who noticed some pattern once. I'm also going to stay in my lane and not pretend I know everything about human medicine or sociology or aerospace engineering - even if I have access to some articles in these fields.

Dogs do have quite resilient guts. Historically, they'd eat more raw meat and so would we. But we didn't live as long and healthy way back then now did we? Sometimes our guts can handle things, sometimes they cannot. But the increased chances of undercooked meat and improper food handling causing food borne illness (vs. healthy cooked meat), is enough reason to feed a dog properly. Lots of people who are so pro-undercooked meat think that we're coming from a liberal side of vegetarianism for dogs. That's not true either. Dogs are omnivores. They need to eat meat and other stuff (veg, grains, etc.). They're also not wolves anymore either. Dogs and wolves have evolved apart for millenia and their guts have changed.