[Curbside Prophet]

Ok everyone, lets play nice. Make your point, state the facts the best you can, and move on. Making this topic personal isn't going anywhere. We're all intelligent enough to make our own decisions, and to talk to people who don't have opinions. Give us a chance to draw our own conclusions. Thank you.

[alundy]

I don't spend much time looking at websites that rate dog foods, I just look at the back of the bag and read the ingredients list. In my opinion, that is the only factual section on the bag - despite all the nice photos of chicken and vegetables they may show on the front cover!

I think companies like Purina and Iams have been around for decades because they charge a decent buck for really cheap food - huge profit margin. I won't argue that dogs benefit from carbohydrates, but I know corn is not the right choice. Many dogs have trouble digesting it.

And no one can tell me that by-products - feet, beaks, tumours, etc - are a better choice as opposed to real chicken/lamb/fish.

I think some of the big name companies like Purina have started to see more people switch to high quality foods, and are finally coming around and putting out some food with real ingredients to get their customer base back. So maybe we will start to see some improvements coming from them.

I like companies like Natura, Canidae, etc that don't need to advertise - their product speaks for itself.

[all4thedogs]

Well said aludy!

[LabLady101]

Originally Posted by alundy

I don't spend much time looking at websites that rate dog foods, I just look at the back of the bag and read the ingredients list. In my opinion, that is the only factual section on the bag - despite all the nice photos of chicken and vegetables they may show on the front cover!

I think companies like Purina and Iams have been around for decades because they charge a decent buck for really cheap food - huge profit margin. I won't argue that dogs benefit from carbohydrates, but I know corn is not the right choice. Many dogs have trouble digesting it.

And no one can tell me that by-products - feet, beaks, tumours, etc - are a better choice as opposed to real chicken/lamb/fish.

I think some of the big name companies like Purina have started to see more people switch to high quality foods, and are finally coming around and putting out some food with real ingredients to get their customer base back. So maybe we will start to see some improvements coming from them.

I like companies like Natura, Canidae, etc that don't need to advertise - their product speaks for itself.

Just for the record, I don't deny that most Purina and Iams/Eukanuba products are priced higher than they should be for the quality and they do make quite a profit margin for it. I'm just saying that most of those dollars do go towards something that is beneficial to animals and are not just lining some CEO's pocket.

I would never say that by-products are better than actual meat or meat meal. There should always be a named meat or meat meal as the first ingredient. However, I don't see anything wrong with by-product meals as a support protein source. Also, by-products, by law, cannot contain tumors, feathers, etc. In some foods feet and beak may be contained, but that is most likely very low grade foods like Ol' Roy. Decent quality foods such as Iams, Eukanuba, Purina One, and Purina Pro Plan do not contain beaks or feet. They only contain organs, intestines, and skin.

As far as Corn goes, if it is used correctly and finely ground, it is actually highly digestible. And, in reality and despite what most people think, there are actually very, very few cases of dogs being allergic to corn. Most often the culprit is either A) a protein source (which is why I prefer to feed my dogs a single protein diet, namely Chicken, so my options are wide open as far as an alternative protein source) or B) something else in the food- a preservative, wheat, soy, perhaps even things such as beet pulp or egg product. These allergies are by far the most common. All that said, there are many foods- again mainly cheap brands and extremely low quality products- that do use Corn incorrectly and as a cheap filler. These are the foods that use Corn as the first ingredient. Foods such as Ol' Roy, Beneful, Gravy Train, Kibbles 'N Bits, Science Diet (most), and Dog/Puppy Chow all fall into the category of using corn incorrectly.

Also, most of those "higher" quality foods may not need to advertise, but it doesn't change the fact that they are only popular at the moment because they feed a fad. I bet no one ever thinks about how some of these other companies are just putting ingredients in their food because it's what the public wants to see and not what is necessarily healthy for your dog. Canidae and Innova, for instance, both have MULTIPLE protein sources. If almost every protein source is in the food you are currently feeding, what will you do if your dog should develop a meat allergy? You don't have many options left for a novel or alternative protein source. So, these formulas look good on paper, but there are still some dogs do not do well on them. This is why I'm a bit skeptical when it comes to these products.

I hope this helps clear up a few things about my thinking,
Darcy

[DC Whittier]

I have used the following "cheap" dry dog foods with satisfactory results

1.Garth Merricks Beef n More

2.Maxximum Nutrition Lamb & Rice(equivalent to purina one)

Occasionally,I may top the kibble with canned salmon or raw egg,with or without canned food

[all4thedogs]

Originally Posted by LabLady101

Canidae and Innova, for instance, both have MULTIPLE protein sources. If almost every protein source is in the food you are currently feeding, what will you do if your dog should develop a meat allergy? You don't have many options left for a novel or alternative protein source. Darcy

Im am speaking about Canidae only, as I have not researched Innova's formulas. Canidae's All Life Stages does have multiple protein sources, but they also carry a chicken line, and a lamb line. If your dog has allergies, these are the foods you should go with, not the All life stages.

Anytime my German Shepherd is fed anything with corn in it (Eukanuba, Iams, Purina One etc), his poop looks grainy, it actually looks like you can see the pieces of grain in his stool. Is it actualy grain, I have no idea, but it ONLY happends on foods with corn in them. He has also never had a firm stool on a food that contains corn. Its more cow pattyish. He doesnt have a problem with allergies (no itching, hairloss, excessive licking etc), only soft stools, when on what I consider a lower quality food. My conclusion is that he (MY DOG) is not digesting the corn (or other grain).

We currently feed Canidae, and his stools are amazing. (To gross everyone out), they are very small, firm, and turn white and dusty in a few days. No yard pick up needed. This is great when you have 2 XL dogs. This is also the first time in my GSDs life that he is a good weight, because he actually eats his food. And Canidae is high in calories.

My Dad feed his Lab, Gravy Train her entire life (I know this is lower quality then the foods you are defending), at 9yrs old, she has a terrible shoulder, fatty tumors all over her, no energy etc. Is it food related? I have no proof, but I believe it is at least partially. All those chemicals to preserve, and such, can not be good for the body. And I believe cause cancer

[tirluc]

Originally Posted by all4thedogs

Also about price. Have you priced Eukanuba or Iams, they arent cheap, ESPECIALLY for the ingredient list.

Canidae (VERY high quality) is $32 for 40lbs, Chicken Soup $26/35lbs. Both foods have NO by-products, or CORN.

Just because you feed junk, doesnt mean you have to post false information. Yes, many breeders feed Purina, Iams etc, but many feed Ol'Roy too (please tell me you dont consider Ol' Roy a good food). My vet pushes Science Diet, why? Because he gets major kick backs from them, as do many other vets in this country. Do you know, your vet only took 1-2 food related classes? And that was YEARS ago.

You can NOT say that the big companies dont get most of their customers from advertising. Thats why they do it! If they werent getting their $ worth, they wouldnt bother, and advertising isnt cheap.

Notice that the higher quality foods dont have to advertise and still sell the food? Its because of the performance of the food. Dogs are healthier.

first, let me say, i had my dogs on Canidae for almost five mo and the only good it did was help my older female to lose the weight that she needed to lose.......however, so did my other 2 that didn't need to lose weight (they had to be upped to 2x the amount just to maintain their weight) not to mention the fact that their coats went to h*##, they were pooping 2x the amount, and their energy level was down (and for Border Collies that's saying alot).....after they had been on it for the (almost) 5 mo i took them all in for their annual check up and my vet, who has known these dogs since my oldest (10) was a wee bairn, asked me what the h*## happened to them....then told me to put them back on the Pro Plan and leave them there....this is from a vet that attends nutrition seminars at least 2x a yr (he or his wife, also a vet)......so you can't tell me that he doesn't have any idea of what's good and bad.......

yes, i will admit that Purina has bad foods out there, but i don't believe that the Pro Plan or Pur. One are in that field......and face it folks, the majority of your people that love dogs just can't afford to feed foods that cost more than their own food does for a mo.....so w/ these ones they can get a good quality food for a price they can afford.......and when people go slamming others for feeding their dogs to the best of their ability, i think it's wrong.....i suppose next those same people are going to be telling others that they shouldn't have dogs b/c they can't afford $50 a 35# bag.....sorry, doesn't wash in my book

[Curbside Prophet]

I don't really think this debate is about cost or who can and can't afford x brand over z brand. At least I hope it's not...I hope it's about what we understand is best for our dogs. I'm sure many of us have experimented with different dog foods for all the reasons mentioned, and we've found a formula that works best for our dogs...be it our preference on the ingredients, our dog's coat texture, energy level, or poop composition. I don't think any of us can predict with certainty that if so and so feeds brand x, and their dog is otherwise perfectly happy and healthy, we should argue that brand z will still be better. If it ain't broke, why fix it, right? Obviously if someone knows something about brand x that unarguably should be brought to so and so's attention, that's important. For example, someone told me that when I was feeding Nutro Ultra, that it contained menadione, and that menadione was know to cause some forms of cancer. With a little research I made the judgement call that I didn't want to feed Elsa food that contained menadione...although the risks seemed very small and Elsa had otherwise been doing fine with Nutro Ultra. Information like this is what I find to be useful in this debate. Arguments like, well my brand is affordable and my dog is doing great...just doesn't do anything for me. Just as someone who says, well I wanted the best for my dog so I went with a premium food and he's doing wonderful. That's nice, and how does that make it the best food? I think with any food you'll find a dog or many that will perform well. Examples of this are great, but not very informative. Just as the argument that so and so's dog died early and he fed only brand x...there must be a correlation. Not really, no one can prove that...unless you have research to quantify your statements. And I guess this is my plea...maybe the debate should be less of a debate, and more informative. I don't know about you, but I'd rather learn about menadione than read about how wonderful so and so's poo looks. I think I'm like most people, I want to know the why's. I hope I'm making sense because I feel like I'm fighting with my words here. And for those of you attempting to do this, thank you. And just for the record, I write this post based on the feeling I have after reading all the posts...it's not a direct response or attack on anyone specific. Thanks for the time.

[Cheetah]

Originally Posted by tirluc

first, let me say, i had my dogs on Canidae for almost five mo and the only good it did was help my older female to lose the weight that she needed to lose.......however, so did my other 2 that didn't need to lose weight (they had to be upped to 2x the amount just to maintain their weight) not to mention the fact that their coats went to h*##, they were pooping 2x the amount, and their energy level was down (and for Border Collies that's saying alot).....

Every dog is going to do differently on every food, even the high quality ones. My two thrive on Canidae. This is why when I recommend foods, I recommend an entire list, and not just one. I've heard of dogs doing horrible, even on Innova, which is supposed to be the best kibble out there.

In my case, like many others, my older dog is highly allergic to corn. I have to avoid everything containing corn. Corn is also one of the top allergens out there for dogs right now (beef being #1 I believe).

[LabLady101]

Food allergies are misdiagnosed all the time. Many times, someone will automatically jump to the conclusion of a Corn allergy, when, in fact, it is very likely something else that is common to the different foods but is not necessarily obvious. There are lots of ingredients that are common amongst different dog foods that would fit into this category. It would definately be interesting to see how many cases, where Corn is supposedly the named allergy, are misdiagnosed. I bet the number would be astounding! I bet somewhere in the neighborhood of 75% of cases are misdiagnosed- and that, of course, would be if the cases were actually diagnosed by a liscenced Veterinarian in the first place.

All that being said, I am not necessarily saying that is the case with anyone's dogs- only you and your vet would know that. However, it is a very common misconception that Corn is a top allergen, when, in reality, there are actually very, very few correctly diagnosed cases of it. Beef, soy, wheat, and even preservatives are by far way more common allergens than corn.

Whether anyone chooses (and that's what it ultimately comes down to: a personal choice- same goes for by-products) to believe that Corn is not necessarily a horrible thing for your dog, is your choice. You choose. But, no matter whether you choose to believe or not, facts are that Corn and By-Products when used correctly can be a beneficial part of your dog's diet.

I rest my case.

tirluc, that was the Canidae experience of one of the breeders I had mentioned previously. Her dogs' coats fell out in clumps, their poops were huge and plentiful, and she had to feed twice as much to even attempt to maintain them. Needless to say, it took her over a year after switching to a different food to get them back into show condition! The same thing happened to her when Nutro changed their formula a few years back. But, the terrible thing about Nutro is that, even though there was a very obvious change in ingredients (you could tell by comparing old and new labels), the company, when asked about the change, denied and even still denies there was any change at all. How horrible is that?!

Darcy

[Cheetah]

I said "one of the top allergens," not "the top allergen" lol... I also never said what number it is, because I honestly don't know, and realize there are many others out there... I am just going by observation, reading, and what certified nutritionists have said.

[cstrick]

Hi, I had never thought that what I was giving my dog was not good. I have been feeding her Iam's since she was ours. I thought it was a good dog food. Thanks for the link to the web site on ingrediants. I now need to get another food for her Sheba is 1 yr and 3 months old , a rotty. Thanks

[LabLady101]

Originally Posted by cstrick

Hi, I had never thought that what I was giving my dog was not good. I have been feeding her Iam's since she was ours. I thought it was a good dog food. Thanks for the link to the web site on ingrediants. I now need to get another food for her Sheba is 1 yr and 3 months old , a rotty. Thanks

cstrick, I'm sorry you have gotten so confused. Truth of the matter is finding the right food can be confusing. However, once you find that food that works really well for your dog, don't change regardless of what others think of it.

Iams is not a horrible food. It is a quality product, despite what many think. Is there better? Yes. Is there worse? Definately. It just depends on how well your dog does on it. If Sheba is doing great on it (i.e. no gas, good firm poops, clear eyes & ears, good coat, etc.) then I wouldn't worry about switching. If that isn't the case, then looking for a different food is in order. I just wouldn't let others opinions dictate what I feed.

Good luck!

[broadwaybones]

Originally Posted by LabLady101

Wow! I cannot believe all the hate I'm feeling in this conversation...Purina and Iams have been around for a long time. And do you know why they have been around for as long as they have? No, it's not because of advertising. No, it's not because many vets recommend their foods. It's because those companies have put in decades of research into animal nutrition and, therefore, MANY dogs have benefitted and done very well on their products.

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily recommend their lower quality products such as Beneful, but Purina One and Pro Plan are decent quality foods and I'm not about the slam the results top quality breeders have gotten from these foods. Eukanuba and Iams are also not the worst foods on the market and are of decent quality.

Did anyone besides me notice that the list that was posted favored high priced foods? Well, I did and, to tell you the truth, I could not truthfully recommend any of those top foods as I don't know of any top quality breeder who has gotten decent results out of their dogs from them. In fact, I have heard just the opposite. Now how great are those "top rated", high priced foods? Not worth a cent in my book! Besides, that website is based purely on one person's opinion and it's never good to choose a food for your dog based solely off of another's opinion.

My dogs, like typical Labradors, do best with what most of those here would call a "low" quality food (although I would say it's middle of the road and decent- much like Pro Plan). I have already heard too many horror stories (from top quality breeders) about those "higher" quality foods and how they destroyed their dogs' proper Labrador coats (Labradors are not supposed to have shiny, slick coats. A proper Labrador coat should be somewhat dull, short, coarse, and thick). It took them at least a year or two to get their dogs back into showring condition!

My motto is feed what works best for your dog regardless of how others feel about it. If you do that, you're doing pretty good by your dog.

Darcy

Yes, some top quality breeders do use Purina, but they also get discounts as well! I would not feed my dog corn fillers, meat by products and cancer causing chemicals for the sake of a breeders choice or a vets opinion, for they also get kick backs on these products. I suggest that owners research what a dog should and should not eat through vetrinarian nutritional research and go from what they learn from that. Each dog breed has different nutritional needs, and what can negatively effect one dog may not negatively effect another. Ingredients (fillers) that I have research and have confirmed by vets that cause adverse reactions in canines are corn, chicken, soy, wheat, and dairy. These are not all of them but they are the usual culprits to excess weight gain, and allergies! Sounds like Purina needs to work on the quality of their products.

Originally Posted by LabLady101

Excuse me???? How long have you been doing research in animal nutrition? From your post above, my guess would be not very long!

You know little to nothing if all you can say is by-products and corn are junk. By-Products are actually the parts that would be eaten first by your dog if the prey were real, and they are, in fact, very nutritious. The ill feelings for by-products is just a stigma placed on them by humans who do not consume those products themselves and so then place those feelings on their dogs.

Corn, in fact, can also be nutritious if used correctly. Your dog does actually require a certain amount of carbohydrates in their diet- whether you choose to believe that or not. Corn, if finely ground, can be an excellent source of omega-6 fatty acids- the stuff that helps keep your dogs coat and skin healthy.


I did not say that I support Iams/Eukanuba and Purina. I said that they have been doing extensive research in animal nutrition for decades- which they have! Therefore, they do deserve a little of your respect. You may even owe Iams or Purina your dog's life someday if they ever become extremely ill. Iams and Purina have also been doing extensive health studies for decades. Can you name any other company that has dedicated so much to animal health and nutrition? My guess is not. So, before you go off on a tangent saying that Iams and Purina products are junk and outright hazardous, maybe it is you who has to put in more hours of research- and then certainly you will never be able to match the number of hours, days, weeks, months, and years that Iams and Purina has.

How long has your dog food company being doing extensive research in these areas? Or did they just steal their research studies from Iams and Purina? Do you honestly think that your dog food company did all of its own research to come up with their formula? Even I have to be honest with myself (because I do not feed an Iams or Purina product- despite what you may think) and say no.

Also, you may have talked to the owner of that website, but it still does not change the fact that the website is still based on one's opinion. So she can paste and copy ingredients, is that supposed to make the whole website factual? I don't think so. Actually, I could do the same thing. Would that make my website factual? No. It would be my opinion and I would not expect anyone to doing anything more than take it with a grain of salt.

One last thing, there was nothing in my post that constituted false information. I would never intentionally do that. However, there obviously was plenty in yours (for the reasons stated above). A few words for the wise, before you go trying to clean off someone else's front porch, perhaps you should clean off your own.

Darcy

I am sorry to do this .... but, you are wrong. If you have studied vet nutrition you would know that wild dogs eat the internal organs first. This is also there source of grain products! Not that they will eat corn.. but while eating the stomach of the prey they ingest the grain that their preyhad eaten before being killed. Another correction.. by products are in no way healthy for the dog to eat. These by-products consist of not only heads, feet and bills, but also tumors and other excess growths. These are not illegal to use according to the AAFCO. I have spent almost six months studying canine nutrition. Lastly, corn is not rich in Omega 6 fatty acids. It is true that some plant products like walnuts and flaxseed are high in Omega 6 .....However,corn is not! I feel bad having to correct you again. I would suggest you do some further research on canine nutrition because it sounds like you do care. However, you have been misinformed.

[katewill]

For all the dog lovers out there,try out Pedigree it works!!!!!!!!

katewill


http://allendonald.wordpress.com/200...5/hello-world/

[QuietStorm]

Originally Posted by LabLady101

I would never say that by-products are better than actual meat or meat meal. ... Decent quality foods such as Iams, Eukanuba, Purina One, and Purina Pro Plan do not contain beaks or feet. They only contain organs, intestines, and skin.

can you support this? (i'm not arguing - just inquiring. it's different that what i understand by products to be . . . i'm looking for something proven so i can make responsible decisions for my fur babies)

katie

[broadwaybones]

This is not true. The AAFCO has many guidelines that a pet food makers must abide by. One being proper description of ingredients by guideline terminology. Iams contain Chicken by-product meal which is according to strict regulations would consist of the ground, rendered, clean parts of the carcasses of slaughtered poultry, such as necks, feet, undeveloped eggs, and intestines, BUT exclusive of feathers, except in such amounts as may occur unavoidably in good processing practices. It also contain meat meal (unspecified meat is never a good idea) Meat meal consists of the rendered product from mammal tissues, exclusive of any added blood, hair, hoof, horn, hide trimmings, manure, stomach and rumen contents except in such amounts as my occur unavoidably in good processing practices..." The second ingredient in Iams is corn. No thanks!
This information comes directly from the AAFCO guidelines.

[marley334]

wow everyone!! i am on purina now so i dont know what to change to... Pedigree?

[ToysHaveMyHeart]

LOL...I knew this post looked oddly familiar...

TO every else wanting to state what they think or argue, a few of the people here are probably long gone by now, as this post was started in 2006...although the most recent posts are still valid, just be sure to pay attention to the dates.