[LabLady101]

If animals have died in past Iams research it is regrettable, but hardly for nothing. Any research Iams has conducted has gone to give our pets a happier, healthier, longer life. Where do you think all these supposed "higher" quality food manufacturers have gotten the research to develop their formulas? I can tell you it wasn't by doing their own research. No, they let the bigger companies (i.e. Purina and Iams) conduct the research while they sit back and wait for the results, and then they have the audacity to point fingers at Purina and Iams. Must be nice to have that wall of safety. I think it is all very hypocrital- especially PETA (of all organizations) pointing fingers at Iams. PETA kills thousands of animals each year, and they do it for nothing- and it's on the tax payers tab to boot!!!

This Uncaged organization is the UK version of PETA. An organization I'm also likely to take with a grain of salt. If you want to believe in these types of things, that's fine, you're entitled to your beliefs- but then you might has well sign up for membership at the next PETA rally to support those beliefs.

Also, those statistics are grossly misrepresented. A well respected breeder I know was investigating these very same claims. She contacted the company themselves. This is the response she got:

"Thank you very much for taking the time to forward the link to this horrible website. It positively sickens me, and is a gross misrepresentation of The Iams Company and the research we have conducted! We sincerely appreciate loyal customers like you who make the effort to investigate the truth about these horrible accusations. Uncaged Campaigns is an animal rights group in the UK that has connections with a tabloid in London that "broke" this story on Sunday.

Here is our official response:
An article published by a British tabloid newspaper (Sunday Express, "Pet Food Cruelty," May 27) contained inaccurate and misleading information about Iams nutritional studies. The Iams Company is appalled by these false allegations of animal cruelty. More than two years ago - well before our acquisition by Procter & Gamble (P&G) - The Iams Company independently made a firm and binding decision that we would not consider or sponsor any studies that required the euthanasia of dogs and cats. We determined that we could continue to make crucial health advancements without such studies because certain key findings had already been made, and new alternative research methods had been developed (for example, advances in MRI technology can now be used to examine the condition of bones and joints without using invasive procedures).

Early in our efforts to develop nutritional innovations, we sponsored university and veterinary school research in North America that identified important questions. The answers to those questions could potentially save and enhance the lives of millions of dogs and cats, but could only be determined through studies requiring euthanasia. We exhausted all other alternatives and made choiceful decisions in our research methodology. In those few instances, researchers used the minimum number of animals possible, and the results have benefited dogs and cats world-wide. For example, our studies of canine and feline kidney disease - a chronic and fatal illness affecting millions of pets - resulted in new renal diets that make a significant difference in the lives of dogs and cats with chronic renal failure. Our research into healthy skeletal development has made a big difference for large breed dogs, where painful and debilitating developmental bone problems can occur in up to 40% of puppies. Despite these facts, the story in the Sunday Express portrayed our published research findings in a sensational, negative, and misleading way.

The article repeatedly described ordinary veterinary health practices in unnecessarily horrific terms. For example:
* A skin biopsy - which is a common diagnostic test in both human and veterinary medicine - was described in the article as "giving the animal chest wounds."
* Giving an animal a routine vaccination was described as "injecting with live virus vaccines."

Clearly, this type of language is deceptive and counterproductive. Other leading pet food companies sponsor or have sponsored similar studies to those undertaken by our company. Unlike most of our competitors, Iams openly presents and publishes our findings (for example, veterinary conferences, peer-reviewed veterinary journals) so that other researchers can help improve the health and well-being of dogs and cats, without repeating research projects.

This raises an important question: If our research has been presented, published and part of public record for more than ten years - and if other leading pet food companies sponsor similar studies -- why was The Iams Company singled out now?

To answer that question, it is important to consider the source of the allegations: This story appears to have been sparked by Uncaged Campaigns, a UK-based animal activist organization that has long called for boycotts of P&G products.

To sum up, our research efforts have always been guided by a strict code of ethics that exceeds the highest standards established by the Animal Welfare Act of the US and the US Department of Agriculture. Today, and in the past, all of our feeding studies have been required to meet very specific criteria, namely:
* The care of animals is of paramount importance, and animal well-being is always our top priority.
* The results must help veterinarians and pet owners nutritionally manage important pet health conditions and give real benefits to dogs and cats world-wide.
* The studies must be unique, relevant, and truly pioneering - in other words, no existing research could answer the questions raised.

At Iams, we stand behind our research, and are proud of our 55-year track record of enhancing the well-being of dogs and cats by providing world-class quality foods. That is our mission, one that we live by every day in every corner of the company, starting with our Research and Development.
The negative Iams information that is flowing through the Internet right now is a distorted view of our research. Unfortunately, this type of sensationalism is at the expense of a company made up of people that are passionate about their dogs and cats, as well as their company's mission (to enhance the well being of dogs and cats by providing world-class, quality foods).

I wish I could share with you all the thousands of contacts we've had from dog and cat owners reporting on the impact our foods have had on their pets' health. My own dog has experienced terrible allergies that were greatly soothed by feeding her a Eukanuba Veterinary Diet. We are truly grateful for the long-term loyalty you have shown Iams. We hope that we have been helpful in addressing your concerns, but if you have additional questions, please call us at ***-***-**** or contact us anytime through our "Talk to Us" page at www.iams.com .

Sincerely,
Bev, Consumer Relations
The Iams Company"

Now, I know you're likely to say, "Oh, but you can't trust what the company says" and you'd be right in most cases. However, in this particular case, I'm WAY more inclined to believe the company over radical terrorist groups like PETA and Uncaged.

Here's another website to look over:
http://www.iamstruth.com- This has detailed reports of all ASPCA inspections that have been conducted at Iams research facilities.

Darcy

[NewfCrazy]

I would imagine that we could each list many websites that support our personal views on the matter. I've looked at the Iams site - and read each and every site visit report listed on the ASPCA's website as well. I would expect each person to do their own research and decide for themselves what they do or do not believe. And you are right, I wouldn't take anything Iams has to say on the matter as gospel - after all, who has the most incentive to lie? Organizations like Uncaged will always sensationalize (its how they get the public to take notice), and companies like Iams will always try to whitewash the facts to protect their profits. It's a fact of life.

I personally don't see the need for any kind of invasive animal testing by dog food companies. Any possible test they could want has already been done many times over and if for some strange reason it hasn't, it could surely be done in non-invasive ways.

Everyone has to decide for themselves what they can or cannot condone. I cannot condone invasive experimentation on animals for non-medical purposes and therefore choose not to support companies that practice it.

[LabLady101]

Originally Posted by NewfCrazy

I would imagine that we could each list many websites that support our personal views on the matter. I've looked at the Iams site - and read each and every site visit report listed on the ASPCA's website as well. I would expect each person to do their own research and decide for themselves what they do or do not believe. And you are right, I wouldn't take anything Iams has to say on the matter as gospel - after all, who has the most incentive to lie? Organizations like Uncaged will always sensationalize (its how they get the public to take notice), and companies like Iams will always try to whitewash the facts to protect their profits. It's a fact of life.

I personally don't see the need for any kind of invasive animal testing by dog food companies. Any possible test they could want has already been done many times over and if for some strange reason it hasn't, it could surely be done in non-invasive ways.

Everyone has to decide for themselves what they can or cannot condone. I cannot condone invasive experimentation on animals for non-medical purposes and therefore choose not to support companies that practice it.

That's fine, but I don't think you get it still. Iams NO LONGER uses invasive procedures! The only kind of tests that are conducted at Iams facilities these days are feeding tests and a possible skin biopsy or blood test. All other non-invasive tests are things such as X-rays and MRIs. Those animals live better than my dogs with heated floors and the works! And then, they are adopted out or go home to their owners (yes, that's right, some owners actually volunteer their animals for Iams tests. No, it doesn't make them bad owners. If your dog or cat has a mysterious illness and Iams could find possibly find a cure with a few blood tests, skin biopsies, and an MRI or two, wouldn't you do it- especially when it could help other animals as well?) after the tests to live full, happy lives.

And how is Iams protecting their profits? By admitting that years ago they actually did do invasive testing? "Whitewashing the facts to protect their profits" implies that they are lying and hiding things. Far as I can tell, they've been quite honest about their activities- even going as far as publishing their findings in public records. So, what's to whitewash?

Who has the most incentive to lie? Well, that's easy...PETA and Uncaged! Why? Because what they are STILL doing for nothing (killing animals), Iams actually did years ago (and has since ceased) to greatly advance veterinarian medicine. However, if they are pointing the finger at Iams and Iams is under the public's spotlight, the public isn't watching the horrible (and quite illegal) activities that are being performed by these organizations. It's the old slip of the hand trick, and both PETA and Uncaged have managed quite successfully to pull the wool over the people's eyes. They are not just sensationalists. It would be nice if that's all they were. They would be harmless then and I'd probably be more sympathetic to their cause. However, the truth is they are terrorists and murderers!! Doesn't anyone get that? Or have they suceeded in pulling the wool over the eyes of everyone here but me? I don't know how anyone can side with these criminals!

Non-medical purposes, huh? What do you think veterinarian medicine is?? Are you that blind that you don't consider your veterinarian a doctor who practices in a medical field? What, all of sudden because it's for the health of dogs and cats, it's non-medical purposes? I think you really need to rethink this...

[Booga]

When I first adopted my dog, he was fed cheap grocery store food, so he had hot spots. I also think the previous owner fed him junk food.
I friend of mine recommended Breeder's Choice Food. I get the Lamb formula for skin and coat. He's doing much better. Sometimes I'll mix in some vegetables or plain chicken or beef or even broiled fish. He loves everything.

[NewfCrazy]

By non-medical testing, I was referring to the federal government's requirement that all new human drugs be tested according to their protocols, which include animal experimentation. Although I don't agree with that either, that is a whole other subject.

Dog food manufacturer's, cosmetic companies and household product companies have no need to conduct invasive experiments on animals. And if you don't consider a biopsy to be invasive, then I would say you've never had one done.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion and if you choose to believe that Iams is not conducting invasive testing, then that's certainly your right. I hope that you will afford me the same courtesy.

[LabLady101]

Originally Posted by NewfCrazy

By non-medical testing, I was referring to the federal government's requirement that all new human drugs be tested according to their protocols, which include animal experimentation. Although I don't agree with that either, that is a whole other subject.

Dog food manufacturer's, cosmetic companies and household product companies have no need to conduct invasive experiments on animals. And if you don't consider a biopsy to be invasive, then I would say you've never had one done.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion and if you choose to believe that Iams is not conducting invasive testing, then that's certainly your right. I hope that you will afford me the same courtesy.

If you'd care to stop trying to find some false angle in an attempt to enable further finger pointing at Iams, I'd be happy to let this go and afford you the same courtesy. However, it just seems no matter how much you claim that people are entitled to their own opinion, you keep trying to grasp for straws. For example, your post implied that Iams doesn't have to follow any protocols and, therefore, can do anything it wants. This is false. If you think that Iams doesn't have strict protocols they have to follow, not to mention lots of "red tape" to even get approval for a test, you are sadly mistaken. Most times, it is A LOT easier to get approval for new human drug testing than it is for Iams to get approval for even a feeding test. Whether you choose to believe that or not, it is the truth. Also, by attempting to discredit my knowledge of biopsies, you have fallen into further fallacy. If you have nothing else but further false statements to make, you might as well just keep them to yourself.

[NewfCrazy]

As I said, you are certainly entititled to your opinion. I'm sorry that you seem to be so intolerant of differing viewpoints. I hope that others will choose to do their own research and come to their own conclusions.

[LabLady101]

Originally Posted by NewfCrazy

As I said, you are certainly entititled to your opinion. I'm sorry that you seem to be so intolerant of differing viewpoints. I hope that others will choose to do their own research and come to their own conclusions.

I also hope others to do their own research and come to their own conclusion. I'm sorry you think that I'm so intolerant of differing viewpoints. I am not. Actually, I just cannot stand it when misinformation (especially coming from terrorists groups like PETA & Uncaged who should do the least amount of talking but often do the most) is passed along as fact. It's like the pot calling the kettle black when in fact the kettle is silver- a bit of a tarnished silver, but still silver. If these claims were to come from a more reliable and reputable source, I might give more weight to them and not only understand your viewpoint but take the same. However, they do not come from reputable sources. If a reputable source is a group that proceeds to burn a corpse at the stake on the steps of a courthouse in an attempt to prove "meat is murder", then I really don't know and am actually very frightened to think of what this country (and the world for that matter) is coming to. Meat is murder...really?...well, seems to me they are doing exactly what they are opposing. If you can believe people who are the "do as I say, not as I do" type, then more power to ya! I just can't. But, hey, I wish you luck with that!

[ilovemychihuahua]

My Dog eats Kibbles 'n Bits, is that ok?

[workingdog]

Nooooooooooooooooooooo

[ilovemychihuahua]

Originally Posted by workingdog

Nooooooooooooooooooooo

does nooooooooooooooo mean it's good or bad?

[workingdog]

My opinion is it is BAD. To each his/her own, not a food i would feed.

[Kodi]

I also heartily disagree with purina being horrible, Its got meat as the first ingrediant and uses the same products such as corn meal and rice glutons that 90% of dog foods use. My boys have flourished on purina one lamb and rice. Healthy wieght, great coats, regular stools and healthy joints have all resulted in my feeding purina. As long as your not feeding a food thats ALL filler I dont think it should elicit *GASPS*. Try not to be such a dog foood nazi. Also I worked in a vets office and know from experience if ALL you feed is wet food, by the time your dogs 8 its teeth will be falling right out of its head.

Originally Posted by Alpha

*gasp* Iams and Purina are just about the worst foods out there! Maybe Kibbles and Bits is worse, but they're all near the end of the road!



I think the best food for dogs, is homemade meals. A proper variety, of organs, muscle, fat, bone, vegetables etc, is what's best for dogs.

But for many of us, including me , homemade is to time consuming. I barely cook for myself.

Canned is much better than kibble as well. Kibble is obviously dry, and a dog must drink much more water to digest it. The kibble absorbs all of the water in their stomach, and three small kibble can turn into a handful once it's absorbed to it's full capacity.

I'm with Prophet, I love Eagle Pack.

I've fed:

Iams- A few years ago. Didn't know than, but the reasons for my dogs shiny coat and firm poops were because there are chemicals put directly into the food for those exact purposes. Most people will look at a dogs coat, and stools to determine if a food is good. Iams people know this, and there's a chemical in the foods for that exact reason. I've heard people say, "I've been feeding my dog, so and so, then we switched to Iams and they firmed right up!"... There is a reason and it's NOT because Iams is a good food. It's one of the worst out there.

Eukanuba- I saw a commercial, saying that it contained a chemical called DHB, which enhances brain growth. It's true, but I'd rather my dog be all around healthy, than just have a big brain My girl was overweight, even though she was eating less than the required amounts.

Wellness- A higher end brand, when I became more educated about dog food. Although with it's factories changes to go maintstream, to grocery stores and enhance their profit, their formula has suffered.

So I switched to Eagle Pack, I'd prefer to feed Solid Gold or Innova, but neither are available to me. But Eagle Pack is a top of the line food as well.

I really like the fact that their customer service is great. Before switching I spoke to a nutrionist to decide what forumal to feed, and asked what the benefits of feeding canned to kibble were.

So now my guys are on a mixed diet, of canned, for the moisture, and raw protein and the kibble for their teeth.

Dave- Iams and Purina are horrible dog foods. Full of fillers and chemicals and a few months ago a few loads were recalled in my town because a dog died of salmonella poisoning. There are plenty more brands that aren't too expensive and you'll see a great change in your dogs health

[workingdog]

Originally Posted by Kodi

I also heartily disagree with purina being horrible, Its got meat as the first ingrediant and uses the same products such as corn meal and rice glutons that 90% of dog foods use. My boys have flourished on purina one lamb and rice. Healthy wieght, great coats, regular stools and healthy joints have all resulted in my feeding purina. As long as your not feeding a food thats ALL filler I dont think it should elicit *GASPS*. Try not to be such a dog foood nazi. Also I worked in a vets office and know from experience if ALL you feed is wet food, by the time your dogs 8 its teeth will be falling right out of its head.

Im not sure who you are referring to, as a dog food nazi but i do know that Kibble and Bits is an awful dog food. I like Purina One i have been feeding it for many, many years with great results. I now mix it with Chicken soup for the dog lovers soul and our dogs are doing great.I all so love pro Plan. I would never tell anyone unless asked, and i was, if a dog food was good or not(of corse JMO)

[LabLady101]

workingdog- I can't speak for Kodi but, from my understanding, I don't think he/she was referring to your post about Kibbles'n'Bits. (Just FYI, IMO I don't like Kibbles'n'Bits either, but I do think Purina ONE and Pro Plan are decent foods.)

[cujo3269]

I would love to feed my beloved cujo a steady diet of meat (raw or cooked), veggies and fruit, but man is that expensive. So i use purina everything. plus he usually gets some of what i eat.

[eilenej1]

Originally Posted by Alpha

I won't argue with you tirluc, I've spoken to many nutrionists, and other than homemade meals, canned is always mentioned as the way to go.

I still don't know very much about dog nutrition, since I've only had a dog for a couple of weeks now. But I do know that I fed my cats dry food for 12+ years and one of them was just diagnosed with diabetes. Many people chalk it up to the high carb diet of most dry foods. He was also a bit overweight for most of his adult life.

So, all of the cats are receiving more and more canned until they are about 75% canned and 25% dry. The diabetic cat is seperated and is on Inova EVO dry because he won't eat canned. This Inova EVO is a very low carb food - even lower than the Purina DM dry that most pets are placed on when they are diagnosed.

With this philosophy in mind, I decided that my puppy will be a mix of dry and canned too. I'm not buying the super premium $$$ foods for him and some would probably say I'm feeding him cr*p. But his Nutro Max seems to be working well, so I'll most likely stay with it. It's at least a LOT better than some of the foods I've fed my cats and they are all 10+ years old.

So basically, I think that certain high $$$ foods are worth it in select cases. But I also feel that the less expensive foods are just fine as long as the pet's health is good.

[RobDar]

there is no "BEST" dog food...
there are too many variables...
dog breed, dog size, dog health, dog exercise, dog living environment, dog's owners budget, dog food availability,...there just is not one answer to this question...
all there is is what you feel is the best food for your dog and no one can really answer that but you.
I know 14 year old dog's who have been perfectly happy on cheap junk foods like Country Squire for 6 dollars per 40 lbs at Menards...and dogs on real expensive foods and raw diets that are sick and have health issues...so who is to say for sure...
our vet says that any large scale commerically available food is designed to meet a dogs dietary requirements.

We feed Natures Variety...upper end of the mid scale foods...I do not like alot a grain in my dog foods and prefer as good of a quality as the rescue can afford...but that is me...
the underlying secondary reason for the Natures Variety is that is does not seem to give the Coonhounds gas like some others...
and trust me...Coonhound Gas is some of the worst there is...peel the paint of the walls!

Our personal rule is...
if in the top ten ingredients there is something you need a chemical engineer to explain to you, you cannot pronounce, or it does not sound like something you would feed your child...do not feed it to your dog.

[BellaDog]

I have a 8 month rotti, i know diffrent foods may work best for diffrent dogs, but does anyone have a rotti on a food that works well for that breed?

[compaq__]

There may not be a best dog food but there are junk dog foods. If the first ingredient or two is CORN or something other than a meat, they are skimping on quality to save cost. Also, take note if it is BY-PRODUCT meal. For instance, if it is Chicken BY PRODUCT MEAL, it is everything from legs, wings, other organs etc all ground up and put in your dogs food.