[Labsnothers]

Originally Posted by nico8

I'm sure the people who eat at McDonald's everyday don't enjoy reading the nutritional facts of their double quarter-pounder with cheese while they munch away.

This is a good example of the invalid reasoning so common in discussions of dog food.

The common brands of dog food aren't like poorly balanced fast food. They might better be compared to the carefully nutritionally balanced meals served in cost conscious institutions.

[pugmom]

Originally Posted by Labsnothers

This is a good example of the invalid reasoning so common in discussions of dog food.

The common brands of dog food aren't like poorly balanced fast food. They might better be compared to the carefully nutritionally balanced meals served in cost conscious institutions.

Like in correctional facilities and school cafeterias

[nico8]

Originally Posted by Labsnothers

This is a good example of the invalid reasoning so common in discussions of dog food.

The common brands of dog food aren't like poorly balanced fast food. They might better be compared to the carefully nutritionally balanced meals served in cost conscious institutions.

You missed my point. I was getting at the fact that people who eat a Big Mac probably aren't scanning over the nutritional value while they eat it(or ever), because who wants to think about that while they enjoy their burger? Out of sight, out of mind. Seems to be the same way with you... you hate these side-by-side comparisons of the ingredients in Science Diet(or even your beloved Pro Plan) with any of the higher end foods.

The comparison was between you and the person who eats at Mcdonald's, not Science Diet and the Big Mac.

Originally Posted by Labsnothers

This is a good example of the invalid reasoning so common in discussions of dog food.

The common brands of dog food aren't like poorly balanced fast food. They might better be compared to the carefully nutritionally balanced meals served in cost conscious institutions.

I think my dog deserves better than prison food but that's just because she's extra special

[bully]

Originally Posted by nico8

You missed my point. I was getting at the fact that people who eat a Big Mac probably aren't scanning over the nutritional value while they eat it(or ever), because who wants to think about that while they enjoy their burger? Out of sight, out of mind. Seems to be the same way with you... you hate these side-by-side comparisons of the ingredients in Science Diet(or even your beloved Pro Plan) with any of the higher end foods.

The comparison was between you and the person who eats at Mcdonald's, not Science Diet and the Big Mac.





I think my dog deserves better than prison food but that's just because she's extra special

That's not the only point that seems to have been missed by some.. Even if it it slapped them upside the head they still wouldn't get it. But that's fine because the world (and this forum) would be boring if will all "got it" .

[lovesaints]

Originally Posted by SweetJeannie

Hey everyone

I have 2 pomeranians.

Aiko - 6 months old
Mischa - 6 years old

Aiko has been on Nutro since he was a puppy. He doesn't like it. He will only eat it because I give him no other choice. Before his cute little face would get him table scraps and treats to supplement his lack of eating much of it.

We've cut off that addiction. No more human food, and extremely limited treats.

I want to get him something that he wants though. That is healthy but taste's good too!

Mischa I just adopted from the shelter. Apparently she's been on Science Diet which she loves. However I read a lot about how it's not a good food and I would love to switch her to something healthy but good tasting as well.

ALSO, since their ages differ so much, do I have to get different food? I'm hoping I can purchase one kind of food for them both.

I was told by several people that because Pomeranians tend to have lots of teeth problems that dry food is best.

Anyone have any suggestions?

I'm trying to do my own research on it, and I've looked at several sites. However I am curious about other peoples opinoins.

If you're not going to feed "people food" then feed Canidae or Innova, so they get some good things.

Science Diet and all those so called premium brands like Iams, Eukanuba, any of the Purina formulas are nothing but "crap in a bag". There is nothing wrong with feeding your dogs people food if it's the right things, like fresh veggies and fruits, chicken, turkey fresh whole grains (cooked well!)eggs and yogurt... if you are not going to feed them good whole fresh foods and only feed then dry or canned dog food, then make sure it is Innova or Canidae or Wellness a brand that has some good things in it!!!! It may cost more per bag, but you will save money in vet bills!!!!!!!!!!

[Labsnothers]

The real way to save on vet bills is to find a breeder that takes health seriously when choosing breeding stock.

[Wlfdg]

Originally Posted by Labsnothers

The real way to save on vet bills is to find a breeder that takes health seriously when choosing breeding stock.

The real way to save on vet bills is to rescue a mutt and feed a super high quality diet, ie. raw meat, edible raw bones, organs & HIGH QUALITY grain free kibbles.

[DobManiac]

Originally Posted by Labsnothers

The real way to save on vet bills is to find a breeder that takes health seriously when choosing breeding stock.

It's a little of both, genetics and nutrition. I like to think that genes draw a line that no amount of work on the part of the owner can cross. The dog can never be healthier or more physically fit than those genes will allow. I've seen people bike their dogs 4 miles a day, and wonder why they still don't have good muscle tone. The dog's genes just aren't capable of it.

But diet, exercise, and general care and management get you closer and closer to that line. Finding what works best your individual dog, will allow them to be the healthiest they are genetically capable of.

My breeder often tells me Ollie is physically one of the best conditioned dogs she has bred. Ollie is well muscled without an ounce of fat on her, and her coat has the perfect color and texture. While the other owners have to bike their dogs two or three times a week to achieve this, me and Ollie are sitting around watching TV.

And these are dogs are all from the same gene pull. It just requires a little more work on a daily basis for them than for me. But that is always the difference I hear between RAW and kibble. Kibble is mostly carbs and more carbs. And those carbohydrates are what puts fat on your dog. That is what makes their waist line disappear, and that horrible lump over their shoulder blades. Ollie stays solid and lean without maintenance work.

[nico8]

Originally Posted by DobManiac

Kibble is mostly carbs and more carbs. And those carbohydrates are what puts fat on your dog. That is what makes their waist line disappear, and that horrible lump over their shoulder blades.

I think this is an unfair generalization. Most kibble is mostly carbs. Not all kibble though. I feed high protein/low carb kibble and I'd be quick to compare my dog's waistline with any out there.

I personally know of a lot of dogs that do eat a high carb kibble and are still at an ideal weight. Yes, many dogs out there are overweight from their high carb kibble but it's inaccurate to make such a broad generalization.

[DobManiac]

Originally Posted by nico8

I think this is an unfair generalization. Most kibble is mostly carbs. Not all kibble though. I feed high protein/low carb kibble and I'd be quick to compare my dog's waistline with any out there.

I personally know of a lot of dogs that do eat a high carb kibble and are still at an ideal weight. Yes, many dogs out there are overweight from their high carb kibble but it's inaccurate to make such a broad generalization.

Your right, it was too broad. I didn't mean to include grain free foods. But even grain free foods do contain carbohydrates. They usually come from the addition of potatoes and sweet potatoes.

But I don't think most people realize how lean dogs are supposed to be. And in my experience to achieve that leanness with a grain based kibble diet, a physical exercise program is a requirement not a luxury. While on RAW, I'm not forced to stick to an exercise regime to keep Ollie in show condition. In fact, she is usually in better condition than her competition.

[nico8]

Originally Posted by DobManiac

But I don't think most people realize how lean dogs are supposed to be. And in my experience to achieve that leanness with a grain based kibble diet, a physical exercise program is a requirement not a luxury.

Yes, I can definitely agree with that.

[bully]

Originally Posted by DobManiac

Your right, it was too broad. I didn't mean to include grain free foods. But even grain free foods do contain carbohydrates. They usually come from the addition of potatoes and sweet potatoes.

But I don't think most people realize how lean dogs are supposed to be. And in my experience to achieve that leanness with a grain based kibble diet, a physical exercise program is a requirement not a luxury. While on RAW, I'm not forced to stick to an exercise regime to keep Ollie in show condition. In fact, she is usually in better condition than her competition.

+1

You really need to watch the amount a dog eats on cheap kibble. It's a fine line between feeding enough so the dogs absorbs enough "real food" hidden in all the crap, and watching the waistline and fluid movement all dogs should have.

[lovesaints]

I think that sums it up!!!! Thank you!!!!!!!!!!

[Labsnothers]

Originally Posted by DobManiac

Kibble is mostly carbs and more carbs. And those carbohydrates are what puts fat on your dog. That is what makes their waist line disappear, and that horrible lump over their shoulder blades. Ollie stays solid and lean without maintenance work.

This is just plain wrong. I have seen thousands of fine, lean dogs eating Pro plan. Yes, I have actually see thousands of them.

Your dog definitely should be narrower at the waist than the hips and chest. You
should be able to easily feel the ribs, but not see them. Each dog is different.
Standard recommendations are a good place to start, but each dog must have its
food and exercise adjusted to its individual needs. Here is a link to a good
illustrated guide, http://www.longliveyourdog.com/twoplus/RateYourDog.aspx

[Wlfdg]

"STOP THE MADNESS!!!"
Canis Lupus Familiaris is a carnivore! Whether it's a wolf living in the mountains around my home here in eastern Idaho or my neighbors wirehaired cowdog mix mutt.
Grains aren't good for people nor are they good for cows how could they possibly be good for dogs?

[canteloupe]

Originally Posted by Labsnothers

This is just plain wrong. I have seen thousands of fine, lean dogs eating Pro plan. Yes, I have actually see thousands of them.

Sure you have. Statements like this just reveal your real agenda, because there is no such thing as a food that every single dog, out of thousands, does well on.

At this point, I have come to the conclusion that either you are actually working for one of these companies, or you are deeply emotionally invested in believing that they are good foods because you can't allow yourself to acknowledge that you aren't giving your dogs the best.

I think it's interesting that you never responded to Ayanla's excellent posts on the kirkland puppy food thread. Here they are, again, in their entirety. Because, as RaeganW said, they're that good that you should read them twice. Or three times.

Originally Posted by Ayanla

Here's the thing that keeps bugging me about Labsnothers rabid stance that the guide dog school (which has yet to be named) does their own independent research and has decided that Science Diet is the best food ever.

Guide dog schools, many (if not all) of which are non-profit entities, have little motivation or, more importantly, money to do independent nutritional research to narrow down the best food. Don't get me wrong. I'm sure they do health screenings and vet checks on the dogs. I doubt, however, they have a lab analyzing anything as far as the quality of their nutrition.

Science Diet has promotional deals with shelters, veterinarians, and I'm sure guide dog schools nationwide. If you're a non-profit entity, and you're getting the food for free or at little cost, and the dogs aren't getting sick. That's good enough. Until I see evidence to the contrary, anything to indicate that this mystical school that shall not be named, is any different than every other not for profit shelter/school out there, I will continue to believe what is perfectly logical. That this school that runs on donations and volunteer labor, feeds the food that is donated or given to them dirt cheap because it is good enough. There has been nothing in any post to indicate this mystery school operates any differently than every other not for profit.

No one, not in a single thread, has said that Science Diet is going to kill your dog or make them sick. It's good enough. Purina is good enough. All that has been maintained is that Science Diet is NOT the best there is. One can only assume that your rabid defense of this food is, at it's root, defensiveness at a perception that we're attacking the care you give your dogs. That's no one's intent. We all do what we think is best. Some of us alter our dogs, some don't. Some vaccinate, some don't. Some feed Purina, some feed a highly analyzed balanced raw diet.

There is a lot of room on this board for differences of opinion. The tone of your posts, though, is not one of opinion. You're not coming from a position of giving your personal experience. You are trying to come from a position of absolute authority without ever showing that you are qualified to do so. It's ok if you believe Science Diet is the best, but maybe you want to allow room for people to make up their own minds rather than jump on every thread posting "facts" that aren't facts at all.

Originally Posted by Ayanla

What you are talking about is anecdotal evidence, even if it's "thousands" of dogs. Asking people what their dog eats, and then doing a basic vet check, is not a scientific study.

A scientific study of different diets would be done with controls. Type, volume, and frequency of food would be recorded on a daily basis including treats and supplements (ideally there would be no treats or supplements to cloud the results). There would be regular blood tests to check for deficiencies. There would be fecal examination and weighing to determine digestibility of the food and volume of fecal matter. There would be other testing that I'm not even aware of (because I'm not a vet or researcher) Dogs would be followed their entire life span, or at least a significant number of years, with health issues noted and life span recorded. Only after obtaining a volume of data for a variety of foods could conclusions be drawn, and even then, due to the nature of testing on a living being outside of the lab, it would only be a correlation study. I am entirely confident that this guide dog school is not running these types of nutrition studies. This kind of research takes teams of scientists and lots of money and man hours. The school probably doesn't even give a thought to what the dogs are eating while in the foster home, outside of perhaps making note of it on their chart, so long as they are of a healthy weight at their checkup.

I am making a logical conclusion based on available information. Guide dog schools are non-profit groups. Non-profit groups don't generally engage in expensive, rigorous, scientific study.

So let's look at a health survey about these guide dogs that you have been professing are so incredibly healthy.

http://www.morrisanimalfoundation.or...L_12-12-08.pdf

Some highlights (for those who don't want to read):

The average life span of a Labrador Retriever (most popular guide dog breed): 12.7 years.
The average life span of a dog in North America, averaging across all breeds: 12.8 years.

Please, do tell me again how healthy and thriving these guide dogs are.

[nico8]

+1

Well said Ayanla and thanks for posting canteloupe. My guess is that you're like me...you hate letting hype go unchallenged .

[canteloupe]

Originally Posted by nico8

+1

Well said Ayanla and thanks for posting canteloupe. My guess is that you're like me...you hate letting hype go unchallenged .

Definitely.

ETA: I fixed the second ayanla quote. When I first posted, it didn't include the quote on health stats in guide dogs.

Labsnoothers, if you care about the truth, you should read the Morris Animal Foundation's research at the link ayanla posted. More than 1000 people answered their survey. THIS is actual DATA, unlike your frequent, unsubstantiated claims that "thousands" of guide dogs eating purina and science diet are perfectly healthy.

[Wlfdg]

canteloupe, Thanks for re-posting those! They are genius!

[canteloupe]

Originally Posted by Wlfdg

canteloupe, Thanks for re-posting those! They are genius!

Aren't they? I gave Ayanla a heads up that I quoted her, and I hope she doesn't mind. I was really impressed.