# Majority of Top Dogs ARE fed Pro Plan



## Retrieverlover

I was catching up on facebook and Purina Pro Plan posted the following. Thought it was worth sharing


----------



## Megora

I want to know which dogs those were (registered names, breeds, owners, handlers, pictures). I want to hear which types of diets they were on, how often they are fed, what else they are fed.... otherwise, this doesn't tell me anything.


----------



## Retrieverlover

Go to facebook, become a fan of pro plan and ask them.


----------



## Megora

Retrieverlover said:


> Go to facebook, become a fan of pro plan and ask them.


But I'm not sure I'm a fan of Pro Plan for dogs (I am for cats - because our peaches and cream kitty is thriving on their kibble). :

More seriously though - I've seen them tout that number before as a sales ploy and I wish they would identify who those champions were.


----------



## Pointgold

Right off the top of my head I can tell you that Cutter, the #1 Golden, is fed pro Plan. As is Dodger, the #1 dog all breeds, winningest Smooth Fox Terrier in history, and #1 Terrier. (Phil & Any Booth, handlers)

Do you really think that Purina would just make that number up? I doubt it, not when there are people who would jump 'em for fraud...


----------



## Retrieverlover

I only met a couple top dogs so far and all of them are fed ProPlan. (#1 Golden, #1 Dalmatian and #1 All breed dog Dodger).

I feed Sensitive Skin & Stomach to my show pup and All Stage Chicken to my two older dogs. Frankly, they never looked better. And my show pup (who is just 6.5month old) gets compliments on his coat all the time plus he probably doesn't look so shabby or he wouldn't have brought home his first point on his first weekend out.

Its a personal choice but if the top winning dogs are eating (and clearly winning) on it, it can't be that shabby.


----------



## goldensrbest

If, that is true, i want to know WHY?


----------



## Pointgold

goldensrbest said:


> If, that is true, i want to know WHY?


 
Ummm, because it works? :curtain:
Great coats, great condition, great stamina, great longevity... I get it, I've used it for nearly 20 years.


----------



## jackie_hubert

Absolutely did not work for the guide dogs on Pro Plan.


----------



## Retrieverlover

jackie_hubert said:


> Absolutely did not work for the guide dogs on Pro Plan.



What did you use and how long did you feed it?


----------



## Braccarius

Pointgold said:


> Right off the top of my head I can tell you that Cutter, the #1 Golden, is fed pro Plan. As is Dodger, the #1 dog all breeds, winningest Smooth Fox Terrier in history, and #1 Terrier. (Phil & Any Booth, handlers)
> 
> Do you really think that Purina would just make that number up? I doubt it, not when there are people who would jump 'em for fraud...


I wonder how many of those owners are paid to feed Pro Plan.....


----------



## goldensrbest

I TOOK A QUICK , LOOK, the beef and rice, has corn glutten, and animal digest, as a few of the ingredients.


----------



## Pointgold

Braccarius said:


> I wonder how many of those owners are paid to feed Pro Plan.....


I don't believe anyone is, and I GUARANTEE you that even if they were, it could not possibly be anywhere NEAR the amount of money the handlers are paid to condition, train, show, and WIN with those dogs. Not even close...
One Best in Show is a $600 dog/day for a handler. And as many of them have a dozen dogs with them at a show, $5000 (conservatively) can easily be invoiced for a 2 day show weekend. Multiply that by (again, conservatively) 45 weekends a year (and some are 3 day and even week-long circuits, so that is definitly conservative) and it's very, very unlikely that all these people feeding Pro Plan are being paid by them to do so. There are incentive programs with many dog food companies, but they do little to offset the expense of feeding multiple dogs. They feed it because the dogs do best on it, and WIN on it, whichis where the money is.


----------



## Pointgold

goldensrbest said:


> I TOOK A QUICK , LOOK, the beef and rice, has corn glutten, and animal digest, as a few of the ingredients.


So? Generations of dogs have done great on those foods.


----------



## jackie_hubert

Retrieverlover said:


> What did you use and how long did you feed it?


This has been discussed in various place on the board...the local guide dog group is sponsored by Pro Plan, their whole line. For years many of their dogs are falling apart from chronic ear infections, constanct scooting, itchy eyes, etc. Vet said it was the food. They are not allowed any other foods and obviously because they are working dogs no treats. It was really upsetting for everyone. I don't usually part-take in dog food discussion because I do not like how heated they become but I saw it cause pain for the dogs and that makes me not a fan. 
If it works for your dog then that's great! I wish it would have worked for the dogs we had.

Of course Pro Plan markets itself as the food chosen by guide dog groups. They choose it because they have no money and it's expensive to feed their dogs, not because they think it's a great food. Shelters take on the same type of sponsorship which I have experience with as well. I would definitely question any of these marketing ploys. It's the way of business and you see in especially in dentistry too!


----------



## MyBentley

I'd be curious to know how many of those feeding Pro Plan (or any other kibble) also give their dogs other foods and/or supplements: everything from meat scraps, vegetable, fruits, fish oil, etc.

We can't really draw any real comparisons between feeding dogs one kibble versus another for a year or more unless absolutely nothing else was ingested by the dog.


----------



## Pointgold

jackie_hubert said:


> This has been discussed in various place on the board...the local guide dog group is sponsored by Pro Plan, their whole line. For years many of their dogs are falling apart from chronic ear infections, constanct scooting, itchy eyes, etc. Vet said it was the food. They are not allowed any other foods and obviously because they are working dogs no treats. It was really upsetting for everyone. I don't usually part-take in dog food discussion because I do not like how heated they become but I saw it cause pain for the dogs and that makes me not a fan.
> If it works for your dog then that's great! I wish it would have worked for the dogs we had.
> 
> Of course Pro Plan markets itself as the food chosen by guide dog groups. They choose it because they have no money and it's expensive to feed their dogs, not because they think it's a great food. Shelters take on the same type of sponsorship which I have experience with as well. I would definitely question any of these marketing ploys. It's the way of business and you see in especially in dentistry too!


You are saying that all of the dogs had all of these problems? Are they all related? Have they all had other possible causes looked at (ie thyroid testing, etc)? It would sure seem that I'd have had similar issues in 20 years of feeding it to all dogs, related or not, of different breeds. As would the handlers who feed it to all of their charges (multiple breeds).


----------



## goldensrbest

Dogs, have also survived on table scraps, and bones, i remember my grandad, had hunting dogs, they always got table scraps, this was back in the 50's, and way before that.


----------



## Pointgold

MyBentley said:


> I'd be curious to know how many of those feeding Pro Plan (or any other kibble) also give their dogs other foods and/or supplements: everything from meat scraps, vegetable, fruits, fish oil, etc.
> 
> We can't really draw any real comparisons between feeding dogs one kibble versus another for a year or more unless absolutely nothing else was ingested by the dog.


Nothing but probiotics. And handlers don't give anything else, that's for sure.


----------



## hotel4dogs

I guess I'd better stop giving my 13 and 14 year old goldens Pro Plan (which they've eaten their whole lives) so they don't die young from crappy food.


----------



## Dallas Gold

hotel4dogs said:


> I guess I'd better stop giving my 13 and 14 year old goldens Pro Plan (which they've eaten their whole lives) so they don't die young from crappy food.


The fact they are 13 and 14 and have done well on this food speaks volumes to me.


----------



## Kmullen

I agree with Point gold and Hotel 4 dogs. I have tried Solid Gold, Blue Buffalo, and Wellness. They were okay. I switched a couple months ago to Pro-Plan as advised by my dog's handler and it has been great. I can honestly see a difference it her coat. Why switch if it work? Not every dog can thrive on every food. I know dogs that have lived to be 15 years old eating Kibbles and Bits and/or Ol' Roy.


----------



## Megora

hotel4dogs said:


> I guess I'd better stop giving my 13 and 14 year old goldens Pro Plan (which they've eaten their whole lives) so they don't die young from crappy food.


And I've said the same thing about the particular brand kibble I feed my dogs. 

I wasn't trying to pick a fight with the OP or anyone who feeds Pro Plan to their dogs. I do think it is a good food and I would probably choose it over some other brands simply because I'm pleased with my cat's health, if I weren't happy with the brand of food I feed my dogs. 

The reason why I asked my original question is because I'd like to know who and what those X out of Y dogs were, how much they are fed, what else they are fed. That's all.


----------



## Pointgold

hotel4dogs said:


> I guess I'd better stop giving my 13 and 14 year old goldens Pro Plan (which they've eaten their whole lives) so they don't die young from crappy food.


 
No kidding. Lyric was 16. Dave 14.5. Shame on me, right?


----------



## Pointgold

Megora said:


> And I've said the same thing about the particular brand kibble I feed my dogs.
> 
> I wasn't trying to pick a fight with the OP or anyone who feeds Pro Plan to their dogs. I do think it is a good food and I would probably choose it over some other brands simply because I'm pleased with my cat's health, if I weren't happy with the brand of food I feed my dogs.
> 
> The reason why I asked my original question is because I'd like to know who and what those X out of Y dogs were, how much they are fed, what else they are fed. That's all.


 
I'm sure you weren't picking a fight. I get that. 
The issue always is that Pro Plan is crap, because it only gets one (or even no) stars from some dog food rating site that promotes all of these "holistic", "natural" , and/or grain free diets, and all of a sudden, the foods that dogs who really truly need to be in their best condition, and look their very best are being fed (and have been for years...) is considered junk. And sorry, but most of the ones that they rate with a galaxy full of stars are too new to have been around to see how generations do. Additionally, even here on this forum, many folks who feed them are frequently switching, or having "issues", and of course it must be because a piece of grain somehow got in the bag :curtain: or something. And the ingredients in a food like Pro Plan are picked apart and treated as poison, which is funny to me, given that many of the same people who dismiss it as junk, feed stuff to their own dogs that I wouldn't ever let mine have (bully sticks, hooves, antlers, and pigs ears, and other delectable treats that are offal, and that have been brined and treated and that sit in warehouses til purchased...) and holler that Pro Plan type foods have BEAKS in them, for heaven's sake!!!!!

I'll stick with a food that has years of testing and successful feeding behind it, and continue to enjoy healthy, and I mean HEALTHY, long-lived dogs that look and perform great.


----------



## bailey & me

when looking at dog food, look at the ingredients, Pro Plan is worth every penny, if you love your dog don't feed him fast food. bailey & me


----------



## T&T

Not surprising.
Last I checked, the global petfood sales leaders (by far) were Nestle Purina, Mars, Colgate Palmolive & Procter Gamble. 
Chances are, 99.9% of all competing dogs were/are also being fed brands from one of these top 4 which includes Pro Plan.


----------



## ZanderTheShadowBear

*Just my opinion..*

I know this is only one website, but read the review entirely at the bottom. A dog can live to a respectable age on this food, but what quality of life is the dog in question receiving in the end? I know our bodies break down, but I have seen/heard of too many dogs that age with *numerous* health issues in the end instead of just one- All due to a poor quality diet. Do you think that perhaps with better food, there would be issues that could of been avoided? Could they live longer/more comfortably? I don't feel comfortable knowing this company doesn't even state whether or not they use a carcinogenic preservative for their fish. Is this wild caught(Unlikely) or farmed fish(What do these fish even eat before they're killed? Do they receive medicine during their short lives before slaughter? What if that is still present when they're added to my dog's food?) I don't like the idea of my dog's food being filthy, stressed, crowded and diseased before being prepared. Why skimp and use dirt cheap ingredients as fillers as well? Lastly, what do alot of these companies(Dog food manufactured by big name companies, which happen to also make soap and toothpaste) have to hide? "Animal" digest.. "Animal" fat? You do NOT want to know what this more then likely is... :no: Just some food for thought.. No pun intended. 

Review: Dog Food Reviews - Pro Plan Sensitive Skin and Stomach Formula - Powered by ReviewPost

EDIT: Again, this is just my opinion and I thought I would share my thoughts with you guys. All I know is, I do not trust these big name, multi-product companies. All they care about is money and my dog(My baby!) is NOT a garbage can. Long story short: I used to trust these companies(Along with a lack of knowledge on Canine nutrition) and didn't even think that the commercial dog food(s) I was buying for my dog were the reason why he had hot spots, ear infections, flaky skin, behavioural issues related to physical discomfort and lack of proper nourishment to the brain/rest of the body and even SEIZURES! All that has been history for about four years now, thanks to proper nutrition and self education.

This video is kind of hard to listen to at first, but this Holistic/Natural Veterinarian talks about things that don't hurt to be aware of..


----------



## tippykayak

hotel4dogs said:


> I guess I'd better stop giving my 13 and 14 year old goldens Pro Plan (which they've eaten their whole lives) so they don't die young from crappy food.


LOL. Definitely the best comment of the thread by far.


----------



## Pointgold

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> I know this is only one website, but read the review entirely at the bottom. A dog can live to a respectable age on this food, but what quality of life is the dog in question receiving in the end? I know our bodies break down, but I have seen/heard of too many dogs that age with *numerous* health issues in the end instead of just one- All due to a poor quality diet. Do you think that perhaps with better food, there would be issues that could of been avoided? Could they live longer/more comfortably? I don't feel comfortable knowing this company doesn't even state whether or not they use a carcinogenic preservative for their fish. Is this wild caught(Unlikely) or farmed fish(What do these fish even eat before they're killed? Do they receive medicine during their short lives before slaughter? What if that is still present when they're added to my dog's food?) I don't like the idea of my dog's food being filthy, stressed, crowded and diseased before being prepared. Why skimp and use dirt cheap ingredients as fillers as well? Lastly, what do alot of these companies(Dog food manufactured by big name companies, which happen to also make soap and toothpaste) have to hide? "Animal" digest.. "Animal" fat? You do NOT want to know what this more then likely is... :no: Just some food for thought.. No pun intended.
> 
> Review: Dog Food Reviews - Pro Plan Sensitive Skin and Stomach Formula - Powered by ReviewPost
> 
> EDIT: Again, this is just my opinion and I thought I would share my thoughts with you guys. All I know is, I do not trust these big name, multi-product companies. All they care about is money and my dog(My baby!) is NOT a garbage can. Long story short: I used to trust these companies(Along with a lack of knowledge on Canine nutrition) and didn't even think that the commercial dog food(s) I was buying for my dog were the reason why he had hot spots, ear infections, flaky skin, behavioural issues related to physical discomfort and lack of proper nourishment to the brain/rest of the body and even SEIZURES! All that has been history for about four years now, thanks to proper nutrition and self education.
> 
> This video is kind of hard to listen to at first, but this Holistic/Natural Veterinarian talks about things that don't hurt to be aware of.. YouTube - What's REALLY in Your Pet's Food!!


 
Wow. To think that all this time, I have not realized what a poor quality of life my dogs have lived. 
Wow.

Poor old girl.


----------



## tippykayak

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> A dog can live to a respectable age on this food, but what quality of life is the dog in question receiving in the end? I know our bodies break down, but I have seen/heard of too many dogs that age with *numerous* health issues in the end instead of just one- All due to a poor quality diet. Do you think that perhaps with better food, there would be issues that could of been avoided? Could they live longer/more comfortably?


Awful diet can surely cause a dog problems, but obesity is the single biggest predictor of geriatric disease in dogs, and the single biggest reducer of lifespan. 

The point here is that people whose dogs have to have great muscle tone, great coats, great teeth, and health evident in each step end up choosing ProPlan a lot of the time. I think what this tells us is that many of the overblown claims about dog food theory that we read online are largely full of crap and that if you want your dog to live for a long time and limit geriatric disease as much as possible, you'll feed him a food like ProPlan.

As a disclaimer, I don't feed ProPlan. However, I recognize that it is relied on by more successful dog professionals in show and sport than any other food.


----------



## ZanderTheShadowBear

Lol, holy guys, relax..:bowl: I stated that I was just sharing my info and things the company does that robs you for what you pay for. I never said you made your dog's life horrible and they do nothing, but lay around all day.. I am just stating that you are what you eat and the lack of care the company puts into its ingredients has its negative effects on our dogs internal(And sometimes external) well being. Again, I don't see why companies even bother making food if they can't be honest about ingredients. That just tells me they don't care and I'm not okay with that. I guess in the end, what works for you, works. And I *did not* post this with the intentions of making this discussion heated.. I came just to talk about the food, that's all. You all have beautiful dogs and I know you'd do what it takes to do the right thing for them- So that's why I shared my concern.


----------



## hotel4dogs

my 13 year old has a ton of issues....related to his being out of standard (tall), but as Tippy said, I've kept him very lean and that's the only reason he's still around. 
I'd race my (almost) 14 year old against most of your younger dogs, especially in the water, LOL! She has no issues, no allergies, no skin problems, never had an ear infection in her life. Of course at her age she could drop dead at any time, but I certainly cannot say she would have had a better quality of life had she been fed a different food (nor my 13 year old, either).
From the flip side of the coin....I trust the big companies more. They've put research $$ behind their foods, and have actually tested them on dogs before selling the foods. What a novel concept....test and be sure the food promotes long healthy lives, healthy progeny, etc. over many generations. 
Now the newer, costlier foods actually *might* be better foods, based on theories. But my dogs are not laboratory rats, and until they can prove it to me, I'm simply not interested.
That's just my opinion, and I strongly feel we each have to do what we think is the best for our own dogs, within the constraints of what we can afford. I know there are a lot of people, some on this forum included, who are really struggling to make ends meet and they should not be made to feel guilty for feeding a less expensive, perfectly acceptable food.


----------



## ZanderTheShadowBear

tippykayak said:


> Awful diet can surely cause a dog problems, but obesity is the single biggest predictor of geriatric disease in dogs, and the single biggest reducer of lifespan.
> 
> The point here is that people whose dogs have to have great muscle tone, great coats, great teeth, and health evident in each step end up choosing ProPlan a lot of the time. I think what this tells us is that many of the overblown claims about dog food theory that we read online are largely full of crap and that if you want your dog to live for a long time and limit geriatric disease as much as possible, you'll feed him a food like ProPlan.
> 
> As a disclaimer, I don't feed ProPlan. However, I recognize that it is relied on by more successful dog professionals in show and sport than any other food.


It definitely is used by alot of people- especially by those who show/breed. I am also aware that meat ingredients that are sustained non-organically(Commercially farmed, antibiotics, growth hormones, artificial preservatives, etc) can gradually build into preventable issues- Know what I mean? Cancer is probably the primary source of death in our Canine friends and I just believe we can prevent it for years more at least by taking the right nutritional path to avoid it. Yes, weight is a HUGE issue in dogs(Especially our poor Goldies, eh), so I do not discredit that.. But yeah, I'm just trying to point out steps we could take to side step the "would be" condition of our dogs' bodily functions from the inside out. We had to put a Golden down(Aged 15) two years ago that ate a sister flavour of the one I linked a review for and she had multiple problems that climaxed all around the same time, leading to her demise. I believe we could of given her more time if we had of known. What are your thoughts? I do know every dog is different- Genetically and geographically(Environmental factors). I *enjoy* discussing dog food, really.. Sharing my thoughts/experiences and hearing/learning from others!


----------



## hotel4dogs

oh BTW, Tito's hunting trainer, who trains hunting retrievers (to hunt, not to play hunt games like Tito and I do) feeds all of the dogs living with him for training, and his own dogs, nothing but Pro Plan performance. That's mostly labs, but some other sporting breeds as well. These are real working dogs, they go out and hunt all day at the hunt club where he lives/trains. A lot of the dogs are for "rent" to hunters who come out to hunt, and spend all day in the field. In our hunting seasons, it's cold and conditions can be brutal. The dogs need to be in prime condition with excellent nutrition to hold up to what's being asked of them. 
Apropo of nothing.


----------



## Pointgold

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> Lol, holy guys, relax..:bowl: I stated that I was just sharing my info and things the company does that robs you for what you pay for. I never said you made your dog's life horrible and they do nothing, but lay around all day.. I am just stating that you are what you eat and the lack of care the company puts into its ingredients has its negative effects on our dogs internal(And sometimes external) well being. Again, I don't see why companies even bother making food if they can't be honest about ingredients. That just tells me they don't care and I'm not okay with that. I guess in the end, what works for you, works. And I *did not* post this with the intentions of making this discussion heated.. I came just to talk about the food, that's all. You all have beautiful dogs and I know you'd do what it takes to do the right thing for them- So that's why I shared my concern.


 
Actually, you had the audacity to question the quality of life of dogs not fed what you have been convinced is better. And is not, frankly. 

"Organic" has plenty of chemicals, actually. And if it makes you feel better to pay twice as much for something stamped "organic", which has not been proven to be better/safer/yummier etc etc, go for it. But do not dare to presume that the quality of life of my dogs suffers because I choose not to. Take a look at just how many young dogs are dying of this or that who are fed these "better" foods. They won't tell you that they were better...


----------



## ZanderTheShadowBear

hotel4dogs said:


> I know there are a lot of people, some on this forum included, who are really struggling to make ends meet and *they should not be made to feel guilty for feeding a less expensive, perfectly acceptable food*.


I didn't mean to offend anyone who simply cannot afford a higher quality food- I apologize. Like I said, I was just dropping my two cents on what I thought of it. I also work in a healthy pet food store and I do know that there other brands that are actually priced a few dollars less and have a bit of a higher standard when it comes to what goes into their food. That being said, maybe it's not readily available to those who would buy it, so it's hard sometimes. Trust me, I understand.. I had a really tough financial period more then once in my life and had to scrounge to afford the best I could- it does help to read many labels, do research and compare prices in these times. Even some local butchers can offer you organically sustained meats for alot
less then what you'd think. I do think raw ideal..



> From the flip side of the coin....I trust the big companies more. They've put research $$ behind their foods, and have actually tested them on dogs before selling the foods. What a novel concept....test and be sure the food promotes long healthy lives, healthy progeny, etc. over many generations.
> Now the newer, costlier foods actually *might* be better foods, based on theories. But my dogs are not laboratory rats, and until they can prove it to me, I'm simply not interested.
> That's just my opinion, and I strongly feel *we each have to do what we think is the best for our own dogs, within the constraints of what we can afford*.


Precisely.

When it comes to research, I think we've had dogs around long enough that we should know their bodies just about as good as ours by now- And we do. The information is scientifically documented. We know what they need, we know that their stomach works in a very interesting way that needs to be treated with care and although dogs are *not* wolves.. they are still biologically only 0.2% different. That's not very different and their bodies still need to be respected in the sense that we bred for personality and many physical changes, but their dietary needs are still the same. Companies such as Orijen and the like DO test their dog food, humanely on pets that are in the home and owners report their dog's response prior to the food being released. *Every* food, big and small, goes through this- Some foods, like Iams, take it a step further and abuse their big name/money making status by opening labs and beginning to house dogs in small, metal grated crates and removing muscle mass from their legs to see what's happening. Those dogs are totally treated as lab rats! I do not support this what so ever. I think my bottom line here is be aware. I wouldn't want to accidentally fund any company that uses my money to treat animals in such a way. We already have enough data to formulate amazingly healthy food for them and we know what they don't need.


----------



## hotel4dogs

anecdotal owner survey reports do not constitute scientific evidence of food quality.
I'm not necessarily opposed to some studies that are done on animals. For example, the rabies challenge study being done now in which HUNDREDS of dogs (beagles) are going to be *sacrificed* for the purposes of determining the length of immunity of rabies vaccinations.


----------



## ZanderTheShadowBear

Pointgold said:


> Actually, you had the audacity to question the quality of life of dogs not fed what you have been convinced is better. And is not, frankly.
> 
> "Organic" has plenty of chemicals, actually. And if it makes you feel better to pay twice as much for something stamped "organic", which has not been proven to be better/safer/yummier etc etc, go for it. But do not dare to presume that the quality of life of my dogs suffers because I choose not to. Take a look at just how many young dogs are dying of this or that who are fed these "better" foods. They won't tell you that they were better...


I didn't question any individual dog's life, especially in terms of raising and personal care. I did, yes, say that I do not believe that this food is ideal. I also read and do research before buying. I am aware that alot of companies can say they use "Organic" ingredients and skimp on their claims(Especially dog food..). That is why I question their sources and narrow down exactly where the food is from and how it is raised. Like I said in another post, ideally, I would say go raw. Or at least Dehydrated Raw with raw meaty bones to clean their teeth properly. Naturally sustained food IS better for you and you receive alot of the natural properties that processed food removes. You do lose alot of nutritional benefits. I don't just read a single article and say "Oh, they must be right".. I don't like when people assume, so I try to keep myself in the know I want to feel like I can trust things/people.

And the surveys are actually extremely informational. They are definite predictors as to how different dogs respond as indivuals. We should already know ingredient quality prior to adding it- That research is seperate.


----------



## ZanderTheShadowBear

hotel4dogs said:


> anecdotal owner survey reports do not constitute scientific evidence of food quality.
> I'm not necessarily opposed to some studies that are done on animals. For example, the rabies challenge study being done now in which HUNDREDS of dogs (beagles) are going to be *sacrificed* for the purposes of determining the length of immunity of rabies vaccinations.


I am a firm believer of getting facts straight and doing repetitive testing to see if results vary, but I am a bigger fan of humane treatment(Even if they are dogs bred for nothing but testing). I don't see what makes them any less of a dog. And actually, vaccines are, for lack of better words, poison. I do rotated vaccines and do not take my dog for them annually, especially since he's had his boosters when he was young and is immune for years since then. He gets his annual check up and that's it.


----------



## fostermom

ZanderTheShadowBear, do NOT let yourself get too far into the debate. It will go on for weeks and weeks and weeks if you do, but you will never change anyones' mind. Talking about dog food on this site is like talking about politics.


----------



## tippykayak

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> It definitely is used by alot of people- especially by those who show/breed. I am also aware that meat ingredients that are sustained non-organically(Commercially farmed, antibiotics, growth hormones, artificial preservatives, etc) can gradually build into preventable issues- Know what I mean?


As a proviso, I'm a big fan of organic food. That said, growth hormone is illegal in chickens who are raised for meat, so that's not really a concern in chicken blends. Beef can still have it.

Large scale organic food studies in humans have shown no measurable health benefits at all for people who eat mostly organic ingredients vs. those who eat traditionally farmed foods. I still buy organic where I can for environmental reasons, but if there are any health benefits, they're very subtle and hard to find. Cancer rates are particularly scrutinized, and organic eaters currently don't have lower rates. So that argument, based on current evidence, is specious.



ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> Cancer is probably the primary source of death in our Canine friends and I just believe we can prevent it for years more at least by taking the right nutritional path to avoid it.


While good nutrition is important, there's no evidence that food from a "holistic" dog food manufacturer is less or more cancer-causing than food from Purina. In fact, the evidence we have about humans would lead us to assume that there probably isn't a difference.

Good health and strong immune function help prevent cancer, and while we see a lowering of cancer rates in dogs who are lean, there currently exists no data to say that dogs who eat "holistic" or even USDA organic foods have lower cancer rates. There are very few USDA organic foods for dogs that have any track record of nutritional research behind them, and even those only have to be 95% organic by weight to get their "USDA organic" symbol.

If there really is a difference, we'll first see it in studies of people who eat organic vs. traditional meat and produce, since those studies are actually funded well and dog food studies on the subject really don't exist, so far as I know.

I am very interested in preventing cancer in my dogs, and I've lost dogs to common and rare cancer both. I would venture to say that I've read more direct cancer research on dogs and people than most folks, and I've read nothing that would indicate that the popular bugaboos (grains, meat byproducts, etc.) have anything to do with mediating the cancer process.

I would point to all the obviously healthy dogs on ProPlan and ask what we want from a food beyond that. If the dog is very, very healthy on a food, that's his best chance at living a long time, and people are obviously getting that from ProPlan. The idea that there are secret, evil ingredients hiding beneath the surface of that healthy dog is simply not supported in the research.

I wish I could control cancer, and I feel such a need for a silver bullet that I want to believe this or that supplement or practice or breeding will work to prevent it. It's much easier to be drawn into that kind of thinking than to confront the reality that we do not understand the immensely complex mediation of cancer by genes and environmental factors and that most of what we talk about in terms of prevention probably has no effect at all.

The one thing I can point to as strongly indicated in the literature is that obese dogs develop some cancers at higher rates (in addition to all the other health problems it causes or accelerates), but my super-lean athlete, Gus, still died just after his 6th birthday of an incredibly rare kind of lymphoma. Was it the corn in his Eukanuba that gave it to him? No. Has that lymphoma showed up anywhere else in his ancestry? No (with the proviso that lymphoma was not routinely diagnosed in dogs until fairly recently, so theoretically, dogs could have died of this decades ago without its being documentd). The uncomfortable fact is that nobody has any idea why Gus got sick and died, and nobody could do anything about it. when it comes to preventing cancer.

Another thing that is at least hinted at in the literature as providing some benefit: fish oil supplements (but not megadoses).


----------



## tippykayak

hotel4dogs said:


> oh BTW, Tito's hunting trainer, who trains hunting retrievers (to hunt, not to play hunt games like Tito and I do) feeds all of the dogs living with him for training, and his own dogs, nothing but Pro Plan performance. That's mostly labs, but some other sporting breeds as well. These are real working dogs, they go out and hunt all day at the hunt club where he lives/trains. A lot of the dogs are for "rent" to hunters who come out to hunt, and spend all day in the field. In our hunting seasons, it's cold and conditions can be brutal. The dogs need to be in prime condition with excellent nutrition to hold up to what's being asked of them.
> Apropo of nothing.


I will second this as my experience with Eukanuba's comparable line (PP 30/20) has helped my dogs maintain the great coats and lean muscle mass necessary to summit mountains, fetch and swim for hours, and keep up with a really intense exercise schedule. (By keep up, I mean run out ahead of me as I'm dying doing my interval training).

I'm sort of tempted to try ProPlan because of all the great endorsements and testimonials by people I look up to in the dogsport world, but I also don't believe in trying to fix what ain't broke.


----------



## tippykayak

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> We know what they need, we know that their stomach works in a very interesting way that needs to be treated with care and although dogs are *not* wolves.. they are still biologically only 0.2% different.


I don't know how to put this politely, but that statistic is nonsensical. "Biology" is not a quantifiable quality, so you can't have percentage points of it. If you mean DNA, .2% is enormously different. 



ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> Some foods, like Iams, take it a step further and abuse their big name/money making status by opening labs and beginning to house dogs in small, metal grated crates and removing muscle mass from their legs to see what's happening. Those dogs are totally treated as lab rats!


Proof please?


----------



## Braccarius

Pointgold said:


> I'm sure you weren't picking a fight. I get that.
> The issue always is that Pro Plan is crap, because it only gets one (or even no) stars from some dog food rating site that promotes all of these "holistic", "natural" , and/or grain free diets, and all of a sudden, the foods that dogs who really truly need to be in their best condition, and look their very best are being fed (and have been for years...) is considered junk. And sorry, but most of the ones that they rate with a galaxy full of stars are too new to have been around to see how generations do. Additionally, even here on this forum, many folks who feed them are frequently switching, or having "issues", and of course it must be because a piece of grain somehow got in the bag :curtain: or something. And the ingredients in a food like Pro Plan are picked apart and treated as poison, which is funny to me, given that many of the same people who dismiss it as junk, feed stuff to their own dogs that I wouldn't ever let mine have (bully sticks, hooves, antlers, and pigs ears, and other delectable treats that are offal, and that have been brined and treated and that sit in warehouses til purchased...) and holler that Pro Plan type foods have BEAKS in them, for heaven's sake!!!!!
> 
> I'll stick with a food that has years of testing and successful feeding behind it, and continue to enjoy healthy, and I mean HEALTHY, long-lived dogs that look and perform great.


I have gone through various websites and I am going to say this specifically. There is an awful lot of bias in how they rate specific items... almost like its being produced by a specific company to make their food look good. You can't tell me that Blue is THAT much better than Purina when they literally just poisoned dogs with vitamin D. Also, people who feed raw (arguably the most healthy feeding method) give chicken necks and organs frequently.... but if you put that in a dog food it is suddenly evil? What?

I think people are better served looking at how much their dog is eating... I mean... a guy literally lost 27 pounds on a twinky diet and was healthier.


----------



## tippykayak

Braccarius said:


> I have gone through various websites and I am going to say this specifically. There is an awful lot of bias in how they rate specific items... almost like its being produced by a specific company to make their food look good. You can't tell me that Blue is THAT much better than Purina when they literally just poisoned dogs with vitamin E. Also, people who feed raw (arguably the most healthy feeding method) give chicken necks and organs frequently.... but if you put that in a dog food it is suddenly evil? What?
> 
> I think people are better served looking at how much their dog is eating... I mean... a guy literally lost 27 pounds on a twinky diet and was healthier.


It was Vitamin D, but I'm totally with you otherwise. You can make a mint these days by putting "biologically appropriate" on the bag along with a picture of a wolf, the word "holistic," and ingredients that conform to a few websites. Your food can be total crap with no research beyond an AAFCO study, but as long as it uses potato instead of corn, splits the meat into multiple components so the ingredient list looks meat-heavy, and fits the pseudo-holistic model, people will buy it and the dog food websites will give it five or six stars.


----------



## Pointgold

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> I didn't mean to offend anyone who simply cannot afford a higher quality food- I apologize. Like I said, I was just dropping my two cents on what I thought of it. I also work in a healthy pet food store and I do know that there other brands that are actually priced a few dollars less and have a bit of a higher standard when it comes to what goes into their food. That being said, maybe it's not readily available to those who would buy it, so it's hard sometimes. Trust me, I understand.. I had a really tough financial period more then once in my life and had to scrounge to afford the best I could- it does help to read many labels, do research and compare prices in these times. Even some local butchers can offer you organically sustained meats for alot
> less then what you'd think. I do think raw ideal..
> 
> 
> 
> Precisely.
> 
> When it comes to research, I think we've had dogs around long enough that we should know their bodies just about as good as ours by now- And we do. The information is scientifically documented. We know what they need, we know that their stomach works in a very interesting way that needs to be treated with care and although dogs are *not* wolves.. they are still biologically only 0.2% different. That's not very different and their bodies still need to be respected in the sense that we bred for personality and many physical changes, but their dietary needs are still the same. Companies such as Orijen and the like DO test their dog food, humanely on pets that are in the home and owners report their dog's response prior to the food being released. *Every* food, big and small, goes through this- Some foods, like Iams, take it a step further and abuse their big name/money making status by opening labs and beginning to house dogs in small, metal grated crates and removing muscle mass from their legs to see what's happening. Those dogs are totally treated as lab rats! I do not support this what so ever. I think my bottom line here is be aware. I wouldn't want to accidentally fund any company that uses my money to treat animals in such a way. We already have enough data to formulate amazingly healthy food for them and we know what they don't need.


 
I simply CAN afford a higher PRICED food - it's not about the money. It's about what I have seen in over 30 years of feeding generations of dogs, and doing fairly well in my chosen competitive venues, and in breeding generations of extremely healthy, fit, long-lived dogs who have a very good quality of life, thank you very much. All of the rhetoric that you quote is mainly propaganda.


----------



## tippykayak

I should also mention that I too can afford pricier dog food, and we have a boutique not far from the house that carries all the most expensive "holistic" stuff (on the same block as the independent bookstore, the chocolatier, the coffee shop, and the antique stores). In fact, the pet supply where I buy the Eukanuba is much farther from my house than this boutique. I choose the Euk because I believe in the results, not out of any budgetary needs.


----------



## Miley

I am reading this thread and can't help but laugh. Guys who cares. This debate can go on forever if you keep allowing it. Everyone do what they believe is best for their dog and stop thinking that your way is the right way or only way. JUST WORRY ABOUT YOURSELF and what works best for you dog. 

My family dog growing up was feed pedigree for all *19 *years of her life. It obviously worked for her. That being said, I will not feed that to my pup BUT, it worked for my parents and it worked for the dog. 

We will all have our own opinions and that is fair but way are people getting so defensive and their backs up...come on people!!!


----------



## LifeOfRiley

I'm coming into this a little late, but...

I'd be hesitant to doubt Purina's claim that 92 out of 100 top dogs are, or have been fed ProPlan. Dog food is such a hot button issue these days, that I can't see why they would make that statement without some sort of 'proof' to back it up. They have to expect someone to jump on it and dispute the claim.

But for those of you who do feed ProPlan, I would really love to know why. What is it about that food, specifically, that has convinced you it's the best choice? 
I know that many of you have said it's the results - you can't argue with what you've seen in your own dogs. I don't tend to argue with results either, for the record. But with most of these dogs, I have to think that their breeding plays a huge role in their appearance, overall health and longevity.
So why ProPlan? Is there something specific about it that would make you feel it's better than say, Fromm. (Which is what Riley's on.)


----------



## Toffifay

I switched to Pro Plan Performance for my working line German Shepherd, we work with the local police K-9 department. The physical rigors that these dogs are put through are nothing short of grueling. Of course, the dogs love it, or they wouldn't put their "All" into it! I have seen a huge difference in my dogs performance since feeding Pro Plan. Her stamina has improved outside of training, as well, we do lots of conditioning work on the days that we don't train and she can go longer and stronger than ever before. Oh, I've fed her many Holistic foods and raw, but she works better on PP.

Just my experience...


----------



## hotel4dogs

Yes, Miley, you're right. Never argue politics, religion, or dog food on forums. They're very emotional topics.
But the bottom line is, clearly everyone is trying to do what they personal feel is best for their dogs. That's all that matters in the long run.


----------



## Miley

hotel4dogs said:


> Yes, Miley, you're right. Never argue politics, religion, or dog food on forums. They're very emotional topics.
> But the bottom line is, *clearly everyone is trying to do what they personal feel is best for their dogs. That's all that matters in the long run*.


Well said


----------



## hotel4dogs

Absolutely the results.
But in selecting a food, I considered the amount of money and research that the company has put into their food(s) and into canine nutrition in general.
Purina has always been the industry leader in nutritional research, and they sponsor huge nutritional symposia (sp?) every year. Just for fun, go to their website and read some of their technical bulletins.
They were the first to recognize (yes, through actual scientific research) that older dogs need MORE protein, not less, and they upped the protein in their senior foods from 15% to between 25-30% depending on the formulation. Iams/Euk quickly followed suit, the others slowly came around. They also were the first to recognize that reduced calorie foods are frequently severely protein deficient, which results in muscle atrophy of the big thigh muscles, so they upped the protein in their diet foods as well.
Purina was the first to recognize that large/giant breeds have different micronutrient requirements, especially during growth phases, than toy or small breeds do. They formulated their foods accordingly, again, Iams/Euk quickly followed along (based on their own research). 
I will be the first to admit that their motives are not strictly altruistic. But they are able to sell huge amounts of dog food by producing a quality food that is at a price that's affordable. That's the key to staying in business; you provide the highest quality you can at a price that the market can bear. If people bought Purina (or Iams, etc) foods and the dogs were all dying of nutritional deficiencies at a young age, they'd not be in business long.
And THAT's why I picked Pro Plan. First I selected the company that I thought had the best tract record in terms of length of time in the business and amount of research (and we're talking published reports on general canine nutrition, not just research into their own foods) and then I picked the top of their line of foods.
But again, it also WORKS for my dogs. If it didn't, I would change their foods immediately, regardless of the reputation of Purina.



I'd be hesitant to doubt Purina's claim that 92 out of 100 top dogs are, or have been fed ProPlan. Dog food is such a hot button issue these days, that I can't see why they would make that statement without some sort of 'proof' to back it up. They have to expect someone to jump on it and dispute the claim.

But for those of you who do feed ProPlan, I would really love to know why. What is it about that food, specifically, that has convinced you it's the best choice? 
I know that many of you have said it's the results - you can't argue with what you've seen in your own dogs. I don't tend to argue with results either, for the record. But with most of these dogs, I have to think that their breeding plays a huge role in their appearance, overall health and longevity.
So why ProPlan? Is there something specific about it that would make you feel it's better than say, Fromm. (Which is what Riley's on.)[/QUOTE]


----------



## hotel4dogs

Just to stir the pot further...
If you REALLY want to get into some interesting data, talk to the veterinary rehabilitation vets about the relationship between diet and sports related injuries. There's a lot of anecdotal evidence that certain types of diets have a tendency to result in many more ACL and other structural injuries than other types of diets do, probably due to an imbalance of calcium/phosphorous. 
But the evidence is anecdotal, and I don't know if the relationship is also there for the typical couch potato family pets.


----------



## Pointgold

Miley said:


> I am reading this thread and can't help but laugh. Guys who cares. This debate can go on forever if you keep allowing it. Everyone do what they believe is best for their dog and stop thinking that your way is the right way or only way. JUST WORRY ABOUT YOURSELF and what works best for you dog.
> 
> My family dog growing up was feed pedigree for all *19 *years of her life. It obviously worked for her. That being said, I will not feed that to my pup BUT, it worked for my parents and it worked for the dog.
> 
> We will all have our own opinions and that is fair but way are people getting so defensive and their backs up...come on people!!!


I've never tried to tell anyone what they should feed to their dogs. On the other hand, I have actually been told (by a raw feeder) that "you are murdering your dogs feeding commercial kibble." I am told and read all the time that Pro Plan is junk/crap/no stars, blah blah blah. YES! Feed what you want and more importantly, what your dog does best on. But do NOT shove in my face that I am not doing what is best for mine. I WILL stack my dogs, and their health and longevity records, up against ANYone's. I think that would prove without doubt that I am NOT feeding junk to or "murdering" my dogs.


----------



## Florabora22

I often question the legitimacy of "organic" foods (people food, not dog food.) The Big Organic is expanding to attempt satisfying its growing customer pool, and as a result the word "organic" loses its meaning.

That said, I feed Pro Plan. I honestly don't care what other people feed. If it works for your dog, then great! I switched to Pro Plan because as a puppy, Flora's stomach could not tolerate the richer foods. I admit I've been tempted lately to try a more "holistic" or "organic" food because it appeals to ME, but Flora does so well on Pro Plan that I don't want to take that risk. A few days ago in the pet store a gentleman told me how gorgeous Flora's coat was and if she had been groomed recently? No, she hasn't been groomed for months, lol, although I do bathe her frequently.

Just find a food that works for your dog! Stop thinking about how YOU feel about it, and worry about how your DOG feels about it.


----------



## Pointgold

LifeOfRiley said:


> I'm coming into this a little late, but...
> 
> I'd be hesitant to doubt Purina's claim that 92 out of 100 top dogs are, or have been fed ProPlan. Dog food is such a hot button issue these days, that I can't see why they would make that statement without some sort of 'proof' to back it up. They have to expect someone to jump on it and dispute the claim.
> 
> But for those of you who do feed ProPlan, I would really love to know why. What is it about that food, specifically, that has convinced you it's the best choice?
> I know that many of you have said it's the results - you can't argue with what you've seen in your own dogs. I don't tend to argue with results either, for the record. But with most of these dogs, I have to think that their breeding plays a huge role in their appearance, overall health and longevity.
> So why ProPlan? Is there something specific about it that would make you feel it's better than say, Fromm. (Which is what Riley's on.)


#1 is results. #2 is consistency. #3 I want to make it VERY clear that ALL of the dogs that I have fed it to, regardless of breed or pedigree, have thrived on it. And the fact that professional handlers, with multiple breeds/breeding in their strings, are getting the same results, speaks volumes.


----------



## Megora

> But with most of these dogs, I have to think that their breeding plays a huge role in their appearance, overall health and longevity.


I had the same thought... 

If you have your dog on a poor diet, then it will most definitely not have as good a coat as he could. He might also have health issues due to deficiencies in his diet - either because the kibble or alternative diet (raw, barf, homecooked) does not provide the right nutrients, or they are not in the right form for his body to absorb them. 

So what you feed your dog DOES impact the health of your dog. 

But I'm concerned about people thinking that if they feed their dog Purina, that their golden will suddenly develop a show golden's coat.  And that's my concern with some of this kind of advertising from the companies or from the people who feed a certain type of good quality kibble. 

When it comes to the quality of a golden's coat, I'm sure there are more factors, including genes.


----------



## Florabora22

Megora said:


> When it comes to the quality of a golden's coat, I'm sure there are more factors, including genes.



I agree 100%. Whenever people compliment Flora's coat and ask me what I feed her, I generally say, "Well, I bathe her at least once a week and she's just got good genes!" She came from stock that all had thick, beautiful coats, so it's no surprise she has a thick beautiful coat as well.


----------



## Pointgold

Megora said:


> I had the same thought...
> 
> If you have your dog on a poor diet, then it will most definitely not have as good a coat as he could. He might also have health issues due to deficiencies in his diet - either because the kibble or alternative diet (raw, barf, homecooked) does not provide the right nutrients, or they are not in the right form for his body to absorb them.
> 
> So what you feed your dog DOES impact the health of your dog.
> 
> But I'm concerned about people thinking that if they feed their dog Purina, that their golden will suddenly develop a show golden's coat.  And that's my concern with some of this kind of advertising from the companies or from the people who feed a certain type of good quality kibble.
> 
> When it comes to the quality of a golden's coat, I'm sure there are more factors, including genes.


 
This is not just about coat. It is about overall health, condition, stamina, longevity. Genetics, obviously, play a huge part in how_ much _coat a dog is going to have, nutrition enhances the quality and condition of that capacity. As for everything else, I've suggested to folks with BYB's, rescues, and mixed breeds who were having skin & coat issues, weight problems (over/under), and concerns with the amount and quality of their pet's stool that they might try a particular Pro Plan formula. The change in the appearance and overall health and condition was always notable. And these dogs WERE in fact being fed one of the natural/holistic/expensive foods, so they weren't switching from Kibbles n Bits or something that _anything _would be better than. So, it is not just breeding.


----------



## Jo Ellen

I was feeding Daisy Wellness CORE but switched about 6 months ago to Purina Pro Plan, just because it's easier to get and less expensive.

I haven't noticed any difference in her coat or her health, she's done well on both. 

But I do notice that when I supplement with a couple of raw eggs each week, her coat gets shinier quickly


----------



## MyBentley

LifeOfRiley said:


> I'm coming into this a little late, but...
> 
> I'd be hesitant to doubt Purina's claim that 92 out of 100 top dogs are, or have been fed ProPlan. Dog food is such a hot button issue these days, that I can't see why they would make that statement without some sort of 'proof' to back it up. They have to expect someone to jump on it and dispute the claim.
> 
> *But for those of you who do feed ProPlan, I would really love to know why. What is it about that food, specifically, that has convinced you it's the best choice? *
> I know that many of you have said it's the results - you can't argue with what you've seen in your own dogs. I don't tend to argue with results either, for the record. But with most of these dogs, I have to think that their breeding plays a huge role in their appearance, overall health and longevity.
> So why ProPlan? Is there something specific about it that would make you feel it's better than say, Fromm. (Which is what Riley's on.)


I haven't seen any post from a ProPlan feeder that really answers your question of "what is it about that food specifically". One poster said that choosing a company you have trust in is the 1st step (I agree, but have different criteria in choosing a company); and many other posters report they like the results. But no ProPlan feeder has addressed what they specifically like about the formula. Just curious.


----------



## Everything's Golden

Pointgold said:


> I've never tried to tell anyone what they should feed to their dogs. On the other hand, I have actually been told (by a raw feeder) that "you are murdering your dogs feeding commercial kibble." I am told and read all the time that Pro Plan is junk/crap/no stars, blah blah blah. YES! Feed what you want and more importantly, what your dog does best on. But do NOT shove in my face that I am not doing what is best for mine. I WILL stack my dogs, and their health and longevity records, up against ANYone's. I think that would prove without doubt that I am NOT feeding junk to or "murdering" my dogs.


 
MY VOTE FOR BEST POST!

I really have to say this has been a huge eye opener for me. All the talk I have been hearing about food is recent years has been very confusing and I'm tired of people making others feel an inch high because they don't feed organic, holistic, grainfree, ect. I have learned so much from this conversation about how Goldens can live a long, healthy, thriving life on commercial brand food. I was definitely on the "holistic food only" wagon but I'm not anymore. Not saying I won't still feed it or am against it, I just know now it isn't the only way to go and I won't ever feel guilty if I chose to feed something else.
I also grew up in the world of feeding table scrabs (not just meat and veggies, but greasy leftovers and sweets) and alpo. My dad's dog is still sprinting the acres of his ranch at 14 years old. No cancer, no infections. Not saying that she couldn't be healthier...but she's happy. So, I don't see the need to put my nose up at those who feed what they want and see the best for their own dogs.


----------



## Enzos_Mom

I don't see a problem with those who feed Pro Plan and I feel that it's wrong for others to give them a hard time and say that they're feeding a bad food. It didn't work out with Enzo, but then again, not many foods did. We finally found one that works for him. That said, I also don't think that it's right for those who feed Pro Plan to jump down the throat of those who DON'T feed Pro Plan, either. I feed my dog Fromm. It's what he does best on. That's really nobody's business but mine. I feel like everybody should feed what they feel comfortable feeding and stay out of everybody else's business unless someone else is asking for suggestions. I don't mean this as a post attacking anybody. I just feel like it's always easier to say that what you're doing is the right thing and what others are doing is wrong, but dog food isn't a black and white issue. There are a million shades of grey.


----------



## Everything's Golden

kdmarsh said:


> I often question the legitimacy of "organic" foods (people food, not dog food.) The Big Organic is expanding to attempt satisfying its growing customer pool, and as a result the word "organic" loses its meaning.
> 
> That said, I feed Pro Plan. I honestly don't care what other people feed. If it works for your dog, then great! I switched to Pro Plan because as a puppy, Flora's stomach could not tolerate the richer foods. I admit I've been tempted lately to try a more "holistic" or "organic" food because it appeals to ME, but Flora does so well on Pro Plan that I don't want to take that risk. A few days ago in the pet store a gentleman told me how gorgeous Flora's coat was and if she had been groomed recently? No, she hasn't been groomed for months, lol, although I do bathe her frequently.
> 
> Just find a food that works for your dog! Stop thinking about how YOU feel about it, and worry about how your DOG feels about it.


 
ANOTHER GREAT POST.
I think that healthy, organic, holistic, ect. food appeals to US not necessarily our dogs. We are living in a society that is major on organic and health conscious right now, which is great, so every company is wanting in on that action.
When people start smarting off about what a healthy (and expensive) diet their dogs are on, I just want to scream WHAT ARE YOU FEEDING YOUR KIDS OR YOURSELF FOR THAT MATTER? 
These are the same owners who are overweight and stuffing fried, sugared, salted, fatty, preserved garbage down their children's throats. 
Or my favorite is when they say, well I'd starve and live on Romen before I didn't buy (whatever expensive and holistic brand) for my dog. REALLY?!
You would put your own health in jeopardy when your dog could do just fine on Purina?

Sorry for that rant but I've been holding it in for so long.
It is aimed at the food snobs and those who want to preach at others, not just the people who feed holistic in general. I do because the brand I found is affordable, is working for her, and supports a family business.


----------



## Pointgold

MyBentley said:


> I haven't seen any post from a ProPlan feeder that really answers your question of "what is it about that food specifically". One poster said that choosing a company you have trust in is the 1st step (I agree, but have different criteria in choosing a company); and many other posters report they like the results. But no ProPlan feeder has addressed what they specifically like about the formula. Just curious.


??? I must have missed that the question was asking to break down what we specifically like about the formula. 
I don't claim to be either a scientist or a nutritionist. 
But, here, I'll re-word it. I like the formula because it has ingredients that provide excellent results. I like the fat to protein ratios. I like that every bag that I have purchased is consistent. My dogs ALWAYS eat it enthusiastically. (Even dogs when bitches are in season, like Crew, who didn't want to eat right away because right now he is lovesick, but decided to because he LIKES his food.)


----------



## Pointgold

Enzos_Mom said:


> I don't see a problem with those who feed Pro Plan and I feel that it's wrong for others to give them a hard time and say that they're feeding a bad food. It didn't work out with Enzo, but then again, not many foods did. We finally found one that works for him. That said, I also don't think that it's right for those who feed Pro Plan to jump down the throat of those who DON'T feed Pro Plan, either. I feed my dog Fromm. It's what he does best on. That's really nobody's business but mine. I feel like everybody should feed what they feel comfortable feeding and stay out of everybody else's business unless someone else is asking for suggestions. I don't mean this as a post attacking anybody. I just feel like it's always easier to say that what you're doing is the right thing and what others are doing is wrong, but dog food isn't a black and white issue. There are a million shades of grey.


I have never myself, nor have I ever heard anyone, "jump down the throat of those who DON'T feed Pro Plan."


----------



## Megora

Pointgold said:


> This is not just about coat.


I know, but when you put the emphasis on show goldens and champions, people immediately think about coat quality. Because that's the first thing people notice when they go to shows.

So even though their dogs are absolutely healthy on what they are eating, you have people second guessing the quality of the food because of course their goldens don't look like champions. Or something to that effect. 

And I'm being honest here - if I knew for sure that switching to Purina would give my guy as thick a tail as your Tommy's (I was admiring his pics on the other thread a couple days ago), I'd seriously consider switching. 

But err.. I know that getting my golden to stop chasing his tail would do more to thicken up the tail feathers. :uhoh:


----------



## Pointgold

Jo Ellen said:


> I was feeding Daisy Wellness CORE but switched about 6 months ago to Purina Pro Plan, just because it's easier to get and less expensive.
> 
> I haven't noticed any difference in her coat or her health, she's done well on both.
> 
> But I do notice that when I supplement with a couple of raw eggs each week, her coat gets shinier quickly


 
Huh. The Dog Food Advisor ratings give Wellness Core their highest rating. They give Pro Plan their second lowest. It would seem that since there is no difference in the results, Pro Plan needs to demand 3 more stars...(or, to have 3 taken away from Wellness Core.)


----------



## Enzos_Mom

Pointgold said:


> I have never myself, nor have I ever heard anyone, "jump down the throat of those who DON'T feed Pro Plan."


 
It kinda seemed like it went that way in a lot of these posts. Jackie simply said that it hasn't worked in her experience. There was no need to argue her on how she fed it and what tests the dogs had undergone, etc. If it didn't work for her, it didn't work for her. That should have been the end of it.


----------



## Pointgold

Megora said:


> I know, but when you put the emphasis on show goldens and champions, people immediately think about coat quality. Because that's the first thing people notice when they go to shows.
> 
> So even though their dogs are absolutely healthy on what they are eating, you have people second guessing the quality of the food because of course their goldens don't look like champions. Or something to that effect.
> 
> And I'm being honest here - if I knew for sure that switching to Purina would give my guy as thick a tail as your Tommy's (I was admiring his pics on the other thread a couple days ago), I'd seriously consider switching.
> 
> But err.. I know that getting my golden to stop chasing his tail would do more to thicken up the tail feathers. :uhoh:


 
While I get what you are saying, people are missing the point, I think. The emphasis is not on coat. It is on overall condition. Show dogs _do not_ win on coat alone. Field trial champions certainly don't. Nor do agility or obedience dogs. The longevity and life-long health of a dog being fed "junk" like Pro Plan _is_ the point.


----------



## goldensrbest

You can't win, when it comes to a few people on here about food, we all feed what we think is best, we do our research, and decide, what matters is we do what we think is best, we love our dogs.


----------



## Jo Ellen

Pointgold said:


> Huh. The Dog Food Advisor ratings give Wellness Core their highest rating. They give Pro Plan their second lowest. It would seem that since there is no difference in the results, Pro Plan needs to demand 3 more stars...(or, to have 3 taken away from Wellness Core.)


Go for it


----------



## Maxs Mom

A statement I heard once and believe in "feed your dog the best food you can afford". That being said, the big name trainers, who are feeding Pro Plan, the hunt trainers that are feeding Pro Plan etc... are feeding MULTITUDES of dogs. I have shopped dogs foods, some of those premium foods sell for $70 for a 30# bag... how long would that last. 

Purina is a HIGHLY reputable company in the animal food world. They have varying degrees of their dog food. A LOT of dogs grew up on Dog Chow and lived great lives. 

Do I feed Pro Plan? No, only because I choose to buy a different brand, yes is a bit higher (not alot) in price however it is comfortably within my budget. I am not a fan of gluten, just me, so when I see that in ingredients I look elsewhere. We did look at Pro Plan at one point, we wanted to switch because the formula of the food we fed, changed and we no longer wanted to feed it. Maybe some day we would feed it. It comes HIGHLY recommended from a lot of sources. 

My sister fed her dog Molly Pedigree... all filler... her dog lived to be 15. Go figure. Sure her piles in the back yard looked like Mt Kilamanjaro, but she was a healthy happy dog.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Barb and Laura - thank you for your answers. 
It would be interesting to see the research Purina has done. When I have the time, I'll check out their website and take a look at that.




Pointgold said:


> This is not just about coat. It is about overall health, condition, stamina, longevity. Genetics, obviously, play a huge part in how_ much _coat a dog is going to have, nutrition enhances the quality and condition of that capacity. As for everything else, I've suggested to folks with BYB's, rescues, and mixed breeds who were having skin & coat issues, weight problems (over/under), and concerns with the amount and quality of their pet's stool that they might try a particular Pro Plan formula. The change in the appearance and overall health and condition was always notable. And these dogs WERE in fact being fed one of the natural/holistic/expensive foods, so they weren't switching from Kibbles n Bits or something that _anything _would be better than. So, it is not just breeding.


This is what really interests me - whether a dog like Riley, who _doesn't_ have the benefit of good genes on his side, could still thrive on this food. He doesn't have that leg-up to begin with, having come from a horrible BYB, so I've always sort of felt that one of the 'super high quality' foods was necessary for him. It's interesting that dogs like him have done better on ProPlan.
He seems to be doing well on Fromm, in terms of his overall appearance and energy level. The only thing I'm not thrilled with, lately, has been his stool. He's not as "regular" as he's been in the past and his evening stool is usually a little soft. I'm wondering if the Fromm might be a little too rich for him.
Based on what I'm hearing, I might just give ProPlan a look.


----------



## Pointgold

Jo Ellen said:


> Go for it


 
Ooh snap. 

The point being that there is an obvious bias/agenda of these dog food ranking sites.


----------



## timberwolf

I'm going to throw in my two cents worth (some days, it's not worth much more than that - some days even less!!!)

Timber's been on Pro Plan since he started food. Large Breed Puppy to start, Sensitive Skin and Stomach when we switched to Adult - not because he has a sensitive stomach or skin problems but because in my talks with his breeder about feeding, she stated she loves the coat her dogs have when on it and we thought we would give it a try. Tim loves it and we've never looked back.

I can honestly say that I don't think I've been out with him that someone, or most times, many people comment on his coat.
More importantly, in the words of my Vet (for whom I have the utmost faith in and respect for) - "Whatever you are doing with this boy, keep doing it, he's in superb shape!" 

As we have had such great results with ProPlan, we will stay with it - I am a firm believer if it's not broke, don't fix it 
As well, I believe that what is good for one is not necessarily good for another. As I have never walked in another's shoes, I learned long ago never to judge another's actions!!!
ProPlan works for us and in all honesty, I've never read anything anywhere that proves to me that we could do better with another food.

I'm sorry I don't have a more recent picture downloaded to show you his coat now (shhhh! I'm at work!) but this is a shot of Tim at a year.
As you can see, he had an amazing coat even then and a gorgeous tail!!!


----------



## Pointgold

Enzos_Mom said:


> It kinda seemed like it went that way in a lot of these posts. Jackie simply said that it hasn't worked in her experience. There was no need to argue her on how she fed it and what tests the dogs had undergone, etc. If it didn't work for her, it didn't work for her. That should have been the end of it.


Excuse me? It was in no way "jumping down her throat", nor was I arguing with her. I asked a valid question:

"You are saying that all of the dogs had all of these problems? Are they all related? Have they all had other possible causes looked at (ie thyroid testing, etc)? It would sure seem that I'd have had similar issues in 20 years of feeding it to all dogs, related or not, of different breeds. As would the handlers who feed it to all of their charges (multiple breeds)."

If it didn't work for her it didn't work for her may very well be the case, but trying to understand why, and if other possible causes had been investigated is only makes sense. For an entire colony not to do well on one food, I would certainly question whether they were all related. Whether they'd ALL had the same issues, and whether other factors were looked at as opposed to simply coming to the conclusion "It's the food." So, I asked. Because it is of interest to me.


----------



## ZanderTheShadowBear

Okay, I think I need to state again what someone else just asked on the other page(Because I am not trying to belittle people like they think, seriously!): You are okay with the ingredients and quality of ingredients put into this food? 

Tippy, I see your argument as there is alot of debate about Organically sustained food and also the relation of wolves to dogs. I believe *mentally* dogs are far different.. As far as food goes, here is my deal..
There is plenty of research and concrete evidence that eating not just Organically(Because I am not just talking about Organic.. I mean, Free Range, stress free, clean-No Growth Hormones, no anti-biotic injected- meat) is healthier for anyones body. And dogs are still very unchanged in the what their bodies need and how their stomach digests things. I just don't see how anyone could argue(And for what reason) that feeding farmed fish that is polluted with disease, medication and stress could even be healthier in any way/shape or form then to feed Wild Caught fish from clean lakes and rivers. Same goes with the poultry and red meat. These animals are very abused(Emotionally and Physically), fed an unnatural diet and kept in extremely unclean/cramped conditions. I just do not fathom how giving these creatures the proper set up and diet *couldn't* promote an overall healthier well being and *longetivity*!

So, my big thing isn't.. As someone said.. I think I am an inch higher, LOL. I actually took a good while to even THINK of posting my original post, because I do NOT like to argue or belittle people. PLEASE(please? lol), understand this. I had the idea that I would be slammed to some degree in return for my opinion and I am okay with this, because this is an extremely touchy topic as we all know. : The very same argumentation happens with dog trainers on training methods.. Old School Compulsion Training VS Progressive Reinforcement Training! The slogan is the same "It works, so why change it?". There is always room for improvement..  So, I know I can be a little, hmm.... Brutal with the facts, guys, lol. But, I assure you.. It's food for thought- Not a time for me to get on some white horse and parade around like I am better then someone else!!


----------



## ZanderTheShadowBear

Timberwolf: Your Golden does have a beautiful coat and his tail is fabulous.  He is lovely!


----------



## Dreammom

I wish I could feed an easy to find food like Pro Plan...I am actually jealous of those who can.


----------



## Megora

timberwolf said:


> I'm sorry I don't have a more recent picture downloaded to show you his coat now (shhhh! I'm at work!) but this is a shot of Tim at a year.
> As you can see, he had an amazing coat even then and a gorgeous tail!!!


*feels more tail envy* 

:yuck: <- Green with envy 

He's a beautiful guy. I wouldn't change his kibble either.


----------



## tippykayak

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> There is plenty of research and concrete evidence that eating not just Organically(Because I am not just talking about Organic.. I mean, Free Range, stress free, clean-No Growth Hormones, no anti-biotic injected- meat) is healthier for anyones body.


I would like to see this research. I too expected that this would be true, but the large scale studies that have been coming out cannot see differences between people who eat organic food vs. traditional. They can tell the difference between people who eat twinkies and people who eat broccoli, but they can't tell the difference between traditional and organic broccoli in health outcomes.

If there's research that contradicts what I've seen, I would love to read it. I find it counterintuitive and sort of depressing that eating organic doesn't do much for your health.



ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> And dogs are still very unchanged in the what their bodies need and how their stomach digests things.


You mean from wolves? They've spent 10,000 years evolving to eat human waste. They're very different from wolves in more than mentality. 



ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> I just don't see how anyone could argue(And for what reason) that feeding farmed fish that is polluted with disease, medication and stress could even be healthier in any way/shape or form then to feed Wild Caught fish from clean lakes and rivers.


If only it were that simple. Wild fish is often loaded with mercury, unsustainably fished, or prohibitively expensive. Some kinds of farm fish are horrible for the environment, loaded with mercury, and missing key nutrients found in wild fish. Neither is simply better. The idea of a fish caught in a wild, picturesque lake might appeal to us, but that doesn't necessarily make it healthier.



ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> Same goes with the poultry and red meat. These animals are very abused(Emotionally and Physically), fed an unnatural diet and kept in extremely unclean/cramped conditions. I just do not fathom how giving these creatures the proper set up and diet *couldn't* promote an overall healthier well being and *longetivity*!


Unless you're buying your chicken from a local farmer whose facilities you've visited, you don't know if you're getting factory raised chicken. It doesn't matter if the food says "holistic" or "natural" on it. Organic chicken can still be raised in a horrible environment. You just have to give the chickens organic feed and not use antibiotics in that feed (hormones are illegal in all chicken).

I'm with you in that I would prefer that my dogs be able to eat meat that's raised more ethically, and it does make sense that it would be better food. However, if we're talking about comparing kibbles here, the "holistic," "natural," or even USDA organic food that costs more may not involve less cruelty. And, from a coldly calculating standpoint, the amount of stress a food animal is under probably has no effect on the nutritional quality of its meat.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Maxs Mom said:


> A statement I heard once and believe in "feed your dog the best food you can afford"...
> 
> ...I am not a fan of gluten, just me, so when I see that in ingredients I look elsewhere.


I like to live by that philosophy, too. I just have a real hard time when I start trying to figure out which is the "best" food! :bowl:

And this might be a really stupid question, but why is gluten considered to be such a big no-no? I know it was the source of contamination in that big recall. Is that the reason, or is it something else?


----------



## tippykayak

PS to Zander:

I don't think you're on a high horse, and I don't feel insulted by what you've said whatsoever. I'm in this to knock ideas back and forth to try to learn something. I hope you can take my arguing in that spirit, and I apologize preemptively if I come off as aggressive or condescending. Tone is sometimes hard to calibrate in a forum post.


----------



## tippykayak

Jo Ellen said:


> Go for it


Hilarious. Stop stamping your feet, Jo.


----------



## goldensrbest

The people that do our yard, puts corn glutten on our grass.


----------



## Enzos_Mom

Pointgold said:


> Excuse me? It was in no way "jumping down her throat", nor was I arguing with her. I asked a valid question:


I've noticed that a lot of the time, your "valid questions" are pokes at people, though. And you may not be intending to argue with anybody, but you have to realize how it comes off over the computer. A lot of the time, you come off as insulting and judgemental. 

Also, I just want to throw out there that it's not just mixed breeds, rescues and dogs from BYB's that have skin/coat problems, weight problems, etc. There are many mixed or BYB dogs who don't have any of these issues. There are also dogs from reputable breeders who do have these issues. I'm not really sure why you specified those kind of dogs as the ones having issues.


----------



## Jo Ellen

I don't pay any attention at all to dog food rating sites. I have no idea what's what there. 

Hey, but here's a picture of the most beautiful dog tail in the world ... not on Purina Pro Plan at the time :gotme: ....


----------



## Pointgold

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> Okay, I think I need to state again what someone else just asked on the other page(Because I am not trying to belittle people like they think, seriously!): You are okay with the ingredients and quality of ingredients put into this food?
> 
> Tippy, I see your argument as there is alot of debate about Organically sustained food and also the relation of wolves to dogs. I believe *mentally* dogs are far different.. As far as food goes, here is my deal..
> There is plenty of research and concrete evidence that eating not just Organically(Because I am not just talking about Organic.. I mean, Free Range, stress free, clean-No Growth Hormones, no anti-biotic injected- meat) is healthier for anyones body. And dogs are still very unchanged in the what their bodies need and how their stomach digests things. I just don't see how anyone could argue(And for what reason) that feeding farmed fish that is polluted with disease, medication and stress could even be healthier in any way/shape or form then to feed Wild Caught fish from clean lakes and rivers. Same goes with the poultry and red meat. These animals are very abused(Emotionally and Physically), fed an unnatural diet and kept in extremely unclean/cramped conditions. I just do not fathom how giving these creatures the proper set up and diet *couldn't* promote an overall healthier well being and *longetivity*!
> 
> So, my big thing isn't.. As someone said.. I think I am an inch higher, LOL. I actually took a good while to even THINK of posting my original post, because I do NOT like to argue or belittle people. PLEASE(please? lol), understand this. I had the idea that I would be slammed to some degree in return for my opinion and I am okay with this, because this is an extremely touchy topic as we all know. : The very same argumentation happens with dog trainers on training methods.. Old School Compulsion Training VS Progressive Reinforcement Training! The slogan is the same "It works, so why change it?". There is always room for improvement..  So, I know I can be a little, hmm.... Brutal with the facts, guys, lol. But, I assure you.. It's food for thought- Not a time for me to get on some white horse and parade around like I am better then someone else!!


 
I DID switch to one of the foods that you would think is better - it had all of the qualities that you say are better. I switched because the facility I was training for offered it to me at cost. I figured "what the heck." My dogs did fine on it. For many months. Then, it all went south. Coats looked AWFUL, and then they blew down to nearly skin. They eliminated 7-8 times a day. They turned their noses up at it. I went back to Pro Plan. It took a long time to get coats back, I lost a lot of time. I'll never do that again. And to this day, the distributors think it's the best food out there. Those are the facts.


----------



## Pointgold

Enzos_Mom said:


> I've noticed that a lot of the time, your "valid questions" are pokes at people, though. And you may not be intending to argue with anybody, but you have to realize how it comes off over the computer. A lot of the time, you come off as insulting and judgemental.
> 
> Also, I just want to throw out there that it's not just mixed breeds, rescues and dogs from BYB's that have skin/coat problems, weight problems, etc. There are many mixed or BYB dogs who don't have any of these issues. There are also dogs from reputable breeders who do have these issues. I'm not really sure why you specified those kind of dogs as the ones having issues.


You will take from my posts what you want to, whether that was my intention or not. 
And I was not in any way saying it was only BYB's, mixes, etc that have those issues. I brought those dogs up because I was illustrating that it was NOT just well bred dogs who do well on Pro Plan, and that I've had dogs from every possible beginning that I have switched to it do well. 
Geeze.


----------



## Cathy's Gunner

I'll throw another one your way....I feed Gunner, Kumpi. I know 99% of you have never heard of this food. That is because you can't get it every where. Gunner's trainer was researching dog food over a 18 months ago and came upon Kumpi. She called the number that comes with the website and "the owner" answered the phone. She was on the phone with her for hours hearing about why she started her company, etc. etc.. I'm not expert on dog food but I do trust this woman, Evy Serpa. I've talked to her and also emailed her several times about many different things. If I couldn't get Kumpi I would go with Pro Plan as I value the opinion of Laura and her knowledge of the food. However, this is just me. Everyone has to decide on their own what they think is best for them and their dog. That is why there are sooooo many different dog foods out there. For any of you interested in checking out Kumpi, it's www.kumpi.com Read everything on her site and if you have questions, call the number. Evy will answer or will call you back if you leave a message....


----------



## Pointgold

tippykayak said:


> Hilarious. Stop stamping your feet, Jo.


She wasn't. :wavey:


----------



## Retrieverlover

I wish i would have a picture of my lab when he was on TOTW - he needed 6-8cups a day and still looked starved.'


----------



## Ranger

I think the hardest thing is there are so many variables. What works well on some dogs won't work well with other dogs and then it becomes "tainted" in the minds of those who fed it to their dogs and their dogs didn't do well. I can't feed Ranger kibble with grain; I tried it twice with a so-called crappy dog food (Iams) and then again with a food that always ranks high on those dog food sites (Acana) and the results were the same: itchy skin, ear infections and vomiting up undigested kibble 8 hours after a meal. But wait! Why would the results be the same when the quality of the kibble is supposed to be so vastly different? It had nothing to do with by-products vs non by-products - it was the grains. Didn't matter that one brand cost me $20 and the other cost me $70. 

I feed Ranger raw now after struggling with grain-free kibbles for a few months. Organs and offal are an important part to his diet - 10% of his weekly total is offal/organ so I don't see why by-products are a bad thing to be in kibble. Ranger loves his chicken feet and pigs tails...

I think the end result is to feed what you believe is best for your dog. An healthy dog who's doing well on his food will have easy to see signs: shiny coat, bright eyes, white teeth, energy, and stamina, etc. It's easy to see a dog who's food isn't working for him.


----------



## Abby

Personally, I just don't feel comfortable feeding my dog a food with ingredients like "poultry by-product" and "animal digest". If such foods work for you and you see good results, that fantastic, more power to you.
My breeder was feeding Chopin Nutro Natural, and I switched him to Blue Buffalo Life Protection. Worked well, he had firm poops and all that. I admit, I was sucked into the "holistic, organic, all-natural dog food!" sort of thing, so we switched to Orijen, which was a disaster, the protein content was simply too high and he had constant diarrhea (sp?) Then, after hearing people rave about Fromm on this forum, we bought a 15 pound bag of the Potato & Whitefish. It's working ok, poops are a little better but still has diarrhea occasionally and his regular poops are still super soft. I haven't seen any of the shiny coats, better tail feathers results on any of the different foods, perhaps because he's a puppy and growing his outer coat. Anyways, I think Chopin's the kind of dog who does better on the cheaper stuff, so we're probably going to go back to BB. 
As for all of this heated discussion, if your dogs do well on ProPlan, go for it! If they prefer raw or the natural, more expensive food, that's fine too. Whatever works well and fits your budget. There is no need to argue.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

I still want to know why gluten is bad.

I was checking out the ProPlan Sensitive Skin and Stomach (only because IF I were to give it a shot, that's probably the one I'd start with.) I noticed a couple things that raised more questions for me.

I noticed that this particular formula contains menadione - the synthetic Vitamin K. I had always heard that that stuff was bad news. Maybe not??
And... what exactly is "animal digest?" Do I even want to know?



Pointgold said:


> I DID switch to one of the foods that you would think is better - it had all of the qualities that you say are better. I switched because the facility I was training for offered it to me at cost. I figured "what the heck." My dogs did fine on it. For many months. Then, it all went south. Coats looked AWFUL, and then they blew down to nearly skin. They eliminated 7-8 times a day. They turned their noses up at it. I went back to Pro Plan. It took a long time to get coats back, I lost a lot of time. I'll never do that again. And to this day, the distributors think it's the best food out there. Those are the facts.


See, this is what happens with Riley. He's done well (VERY well, in some cases) on the "high quality" foods. Then after a while, it goes south.


----------



## Abby

LifeOfRiley said:


> I still want to know why gluten is bad.
> 
> I was checking out the ProPlan Sensitive Skin and Stomach (only because IF I were to give it a shot, that's probably the one I'd start with.) I noticed a couple things that raised more questions for me.
> 
> I noticed that this particular formula contains menadione - the synthetic Vitamin K. I had always heard that that stuff was bad news. Maybe not??
> And... what exactly is "animal digest?" Do I even want to know?
> 
> 
> 
> See, this is what happens with Riley. He's done well (VERY well, in some cases) on the "high quality" foods. Then after a while, it goes south.


Menadione is a very controvertial ingredient. It is a form of vitatmin K (k3). It is man made. Some say it is essential and harmless in small amounts for dogs.Others link it to liver toxicity, allergies and other things. But in extremely small amounts, it should be fine.

Animal digest is a chemicaly decomposed concoction of body parts from unknown animals. It is usually sprayed onto the surface of dry kibble to make it taste better.


----------



## The_Artful_Dodger

LifeOfRiley said:


> I still want to know why gluten is bad.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> I'm definitely not a nutrition expert - and I could have this completely wrong - but my understanding is that corn gluten is the protien part of corn and it probably wouldn't be good to use this as the main protien source in a food, rather than a meat protien source. But I'm not sure it's bad to use with another protien source to add to mix of amino acids, so long as the main source of protien is meat. I've read that it contains amino acids that are good for coat and skin.


----------



## JDandBigAm

Pointgold said:


> I DID switch to one of the foods that you would think is better - it had all of the qualities that you say are better. I switched because the facility I was training for offered it to me at cost. I figured "what the heck." My dogs did fine on it. For many months. Then, it all went south. Coats looked AWFUL, and then they blew down to nearly skin. They eliminated 7-8 times a day. They turned their noses up at it. I went back to Pro Plan. It took a long time to get coats back, I lost a lot of time. I'll never do that again. And to this day, the distributors think it's the best food out there. Those are the facts.


 How long did it take to get your dog's coats looking good again? I feed Candidae and I'm just not happy with Jonah's coat. He eats enough for an 80lb. dog but only weighs 65lbs and his coat going down the back around the croup appears dry.


----------



## AlanK

Well I guess you all would just :vomit:knowing I feed my boy Purina One Healthy Weight formula.

He has a nice shiny coat when he hasn't rolled in something dead. And gets around pretty darn good. He ate anything he could find I think before he came to live with me.

Al

Oh Forgot...he is on a Top Dog List...mine


----------



## goldensrbest

I want to know, what is animal digest, i have asked twice.


----------



## nixietink

goldensrbest said:


> I want to know, what is animal digest, i have asked twice.


From the page before in this thread:

"Animal digest is a chemicaly decomposed concoction of body parts from unknown animals. It is usually sprayed onto the surface of dry kibble to make it taste better."


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom

goldensrbest said:


> I want to know, what is animal digest, i have asked twice.





> *Animal digest*
> 
> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Jump to: navigation, search
> 
> This article *is an orphan, as few or no other articles link to it*. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; suggestions may be available. _(April 2009)_*Animal Digest* is a common ingredient used in pet foods. As defined by the AAFCO, it is material which results from chemical and/or enzymatic hydrolysis of clean and undecomposed animal tissue. The animal tissues used shall be exclusive of hair, horns, teeth, hooves and feathers, except in such trace amounts as might occur unavoidably in good factory practice and shall be suitable for animal feed.
> A cooked-down broth made from specified or unspecified parts of animals (depending on the type of digest used). If the source is unspecified (e.g. "Animal" or "Poultry", the animals used can be obtained from any source, so there is no control over quality or contamination. Any kind of animal can be included: "4-D animals" (dead, diseased, disabled, or dying prior to slaughter), goats, pigs, horses, rats, misc. roadkill, animals euthanized at shelters, restaurant and supermarket refuse and so on[_citation needed_].
> FDA: Digests, which are materials treated with heat, enzymes and/or acids to form concentrated natural flavors. Only a small amount of a "chicken digest" is needed to produce a "Chicken Flavored Cat Food," even though no actual chicken is added to the food. - (FDA)[1]
> Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_digest"


 
...........


----------



## HiTideGoldens

I would say that animal digest sounds nasty, but then again, my dogs eat bunny poop on a regular basis.  (Just trying to lighten the mood.)

We feed a food that our dogs do well on. We actually switched to another formulation of the same food and Jack blew all his coat. It could have been a coincidence since it was the end of summer and he just turned 1, but we switched back and, low and behold, his coat is coming back. Point is, if people have good results on Pro Plan, then awesome! I know a lot of people who feed ProPlan and I wouldn't hesitate to try it with our dogs based on what I've seen. I do think it's unfortunate that the dog food analysis websites will only give good ratings to grain free foods. We choose to feed grain free, but I don't think it's the be all and end all of foods. I also don't think that gluten is a problem ingredient unless there's an allergy. But again, just my opinion


----------



## Garfield

Not to mention that the top 92% of dogs in the country are impeccably bred and cared for (diet, of course, being a major component).


----------



## Pointgold

nixietink said:


> From the page before in this thread:
> 
> "Animal digest is a chemicaly decomposed concoction of body parts from unknown animals. It is usually sprayed onto the surface of dry kibble to make it taste better."


Not true. As defined by the AAFCO:

*Definition: **Animal Digest*: Material which results from chemical and/or enzymatic hydrolysis of clean and un-decomposed animal tissue. The animal tissues used shall be exclusive of hair, horns, teeth, hooves and feathers, except in such trace amounts as might occur unavoidably in good factory practice and shall be suitable for animal feed.

EDIT *****I misread the original post as being "decomposed body parts".


----------



## Pointgold

Garfield said:


> Not to mention that the top 92% of dogs in the country are impeccably bred and cared for (diet, of course, being a major component).


Impeccably bred and cared for would certainly not include feeding horrible food, would it?


----------



## Pointgold

Happy said:


> How long did it take to get your dog's coats looking good again? I feed Candidae and I'm just not happy with Jonah's coat. He eats enough for an 80lb. dog but only weighs 65lbs and his coat going down the back around the croup appears dry.


Close to 6 months to come back into good show coat, because again, they blew pretty much to skin.


----------



## HiTideGoldens

Pointgold said:


> Close to 6 months to come back into good show coat, because again, they blew pretty much to skin.


Ugh, I hope Jack's doesn't take that long to completely come back.


----------



## Rhapsody in Gold

I don't have time to read all the posts on this - so if it has been said - I apologize. 

At some point when I was discussing the choices in dog food, with someone who shows her dogs, I felt like she was trying to sell me on Pro-Plan. I don't like a hard sell - and she showed me pictures of her dogs and it seemed that Purina was a sponsor of a show she was at - the name was everywhere - banners, etc., and she had samples of Purina. I'm sure the food is fine, but I discounted it right away for that reason. There are a lot of good choices out there and Purina could be one of them, but my top dogs don't eat Pro Plan and they are heathy and they have very lovely coats.


----------



## Swampcollie

I have to agree with Pointgold, Pro Plan is one of the better foods available today. The proof is plain and simply demonstrated in the results delivered. 


The dog food rating sites typically base their rankings on how closely a particular product adheres to the website owners/publishers' personal philosophy regarding pet care and feeding. The rankings have absolutely nothing to do with the results that product delivers. If a product follows the desired philosophy, it receives a high score, it's as simple as that. 


Contrast that with Nestle Purina's Pro Plan (or P&G with Eukanuba). Its' position in the market place has been achieved by consistently producing outstanding results decade after decade. Let's see, dogs with clear eyes, nice coats, outstanding muscle mass and tone, great energy and endurance, good health and longevity, generation after generation. 

Hmmmm, what should I choose, philosophy or proven results?


----------



## tippykayak

Pointgold said:


> She wasn't. :wavey:


I dunno. It looked like foot stamping to me, and I'm an expert in it.


----------



## Jo Ellen

I just don't have an extremely high level of trust in the dog food industry and the mass production that goes along with it. I feed Daisy a commercial kibble because it works for us, but I can't entirely convince myself it's the best food for her, or that it's being made under safe conditions and that what's on the label is what's in the bag.

I really would like to see more focus and more oversight, even regulation, over the kibble industry. Who really knows what happens to food when you don't see it being processed  

Same goes for human food too. We find our comfort zones and we hope we make good decisions.


----------



## tippykayak

LifeOfRiley said:


> I still want to know why gluten is bad.


It isn't. It shouldn't be used as a primary source of protein to drive up the protein rating in an otherwise horrible food, but in moderation, it's just one kind of protein.

I think people get scared of it because of the human diseases that are caused by bad reaction to gluten (Celiac, etc.). I don't believe these conditions have ever been documented in dogs, though I'm sure it's possible for a dog to be sensitive to gluten and react badly to it.


----------



## Everything's Golden

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> Okay, I think I need to state again what someone else just asked on the other page(Because I am not trying to belittle people like they think, seriously!): You are okay with the ingredients and quality of ingredients put into this food?
> 
> Tippy, I see your argument as there is alot of debate about Organically sustained food and also the relation of wolves to dogs. I believe *mentally* dogs are far different.. As far as food goes, here is my deal..
> There is plenty of research and concrete evidence that eating not just Organically(Because I am not just talking about Organic.. I mean, Free Range, stress free, clean-No Growth Hormones, no anti-biotic injected- meat) is healthier for anyones body. And dogs are still very unchanged in the what their bodies need and how their stomach digests things. I just don't see how anyone could argue(And for what reason) that feeding farmed fish that is polluted with disease, medication and stress could even be healthier in any way/shape or form then to feed Wild Caught fish from clean lakes and rivers. Same goes with the poultry and red meat. These animals are very abused(Emotionally and Physically), fed an unnatural diet and kept in extremely unclean/cramped conditions. I just do not fathom how giving these creatures the proper set up and diet *couldn't* promote an overall healthier well being and *longetivity*!
> 
> So, my big thing isn't.. As someone said.. I think I am an inch higher, LOL. I actually took a good while to even THINK of posting my original post, because I do NOT like to argue or belittle people. PLEASE(please? lol), understand this. I had the idea that I would be slammed to some degree in return for my opinion and I am okay with this, because this is an extremely touchy topic as we all know. : The very same argumentation happens with dog trainers on training methods.. Old School Compulsion Training VS Progressive Reinforcement Training! The slogan is the same "It works, so why change it?". There is always room for improvement..  So, I know I can be a little, hmm.... Brutal with the facts, guys, lol. But, I assure you.. It's food for thought- Not a time for me to get on some white horse and parade around like I am better then someone else!!


If you are talking about me, I wasn't talking about anything you said. What I am talking about is things I've been hearing for the past few years from others...not from anyone on here. You are not being belittling, but there are some people out there who do...like the lady who told PointGold she is basically murdering her dog.


----------



## Everything's Golden

tippy, kayak "I'm in this to knock ideas back and forth and to try to learn something"

It really is all about education and I feel I've learned alot from owners who have had Goldens for years.


----------



## Pointgold

Marty's Mom said:


> I don't have time to read all the posts on this - so if it has been said - I apologize.
> 
> At some point when I was discussing the choices in dog food, with someone who shows her dogs, I felt like she was trying to sell me on Pro-Plan. I don't like a hard sell - and she showed me pictures of her dogs and it seemed that Purina was a sponsor of a show she was at - the name was everywhere - banners, etc., and she had samples of Purina. I'm sure the food is fine, but I discounted it right away for that reason. There are a lot of good choices out there and Purina could be one of them, but my top dogs don't eat Pro Plan and they are heathy and they have very lovely coats.


Eukanuba sponsors dog shows. So does Purina. So what? It kinda makes sense, don't you think? Kinda like Penzoil sponsoring car races? Corporate sponsorship is a normal, accepted part of a business's advertising plan. 

I'm not trying to get anyone here to switch to Pro Plan or anything else. But I will defend my use of it, and it's standing as an excellent product.


----------



## tippykayak

Jo Ellen said:


> I just don't have an extremely high level of trust in the dog food industry and the mass production that goes along with it. I feed Daisy a commercial kibble because it works for us, but I can't entirely convince myself it's the best food for her, or that it's being made under safe conditions and that what's on the label is what's in the bag.


I have my concerns too. Even if your company is great, there's still a chance a supplier will do something horribly unethical or careless: witness BB and their Vitamin D issues and Iams with the melamine contamination.

Since I cannot feasibly feed the dogs food bought entirely from my local farmer's market, I choose a company that has been responsible about recalling and has a proven track record of great dog nutrition. I try to pick apart all the claims I see about dog food so I can evaluate whether there's any real basis to change foods. I haven't yet seen one, so we stay with the food that works.

Seeing how many show and sport folks feed ProPlan makes me think about trying it, but our dogs already have clear eyes, shiny coats, amazing lean muscle, and about as much energy as I can handle.


----------



## Rhapsody in Gold

Pointgold said:


> Eukanuba sponsors dog shows. So does Purina. So what? It kinda makes sense, don't you think? Kinda like Penzoil sponsoring car races? Corporate sponsorship is a normal, accepted part of a business's advertising plan.
> 
> I'm not trying to get anyone here to switch to Pro Plan or anything else. But I will defend my use of it, and it's standing as an excellent product.


My point is I am not impressed by marketing or the announcement that "top dogs" are using it. I want to see the results in my own dogs.


----------



## Pointgold

Marty's Mom said:


> My point is I am not impressed by marketing or the announcement that "top dogs" are using it. I want to see the results in my own dogs.


I respect that. But you won't see the results unless you try it. I didn't start using Pro Plan because of their advertising. In fact, I was hesitant, because it was a Purina product, and I think Dog Chow is crap. For me it was word of mouth. I had been feeding Iams for years. (My Lyric was Iam's Tournament Of Champions Sporting Group Puppy of the Year) My dogs did well on it. But then I got my Pointers, and was needing to feed them each 6 cups, twice a day, just to keep weight on them. I was feeding them Eukanuba. Some Pointer people suggested that I try Pro Plan Performance. I did. And went from feeding 6 cups twice a day (2 dogs - do the math, it was ridiculous...) to 2 cups 2 x daily. They kept weight on, and their coat improved. Not to mention there being much less stool, and the cost factor... I had a litter of Goldens and decided to see how they did, so when I weaned them, I used Pro Plan Puppy. I also switched my Bred-By dog to Performance. The puppies did great, and the Bred-By dog, within 3 weeks, looked so much better (and he looked good to begin with, it's not like he was in poor condition...) that some friends saw him at a dog show and asked who he was - they'd just seen him 2 weeks prior. He got back to back majors and finished that weekend. I switched the rest of the dogs and never looked back. 
There are always going to be those who "hard sell", I suppose, but for the most part, it's more often than not the raw or "holistic" feeders who denigrate those who have chosen Pro Plan (or other commercial kibbles) and try to shove their philosophies down our throats. 
I've always said feed what your dog does best on. For me, and _many _others, that is Pro Plan.


----------



## Jo Ellen

No one here, including raw feeders, are trying to shove anything down anyone's throat. I haven't seen it once.


----------



## Pointgold

Jo Ellen said:


> No one here, including raw feeders, are trying to shove anything down anyone's throat. I haven't seen it once.


Nor did I say that anyone here did (with the exception of ZanderTheShadowBear suggesting that dogs not on holistic type diets have a lesser quality of life...) There _are _other forums/communities/email lists besides this forum, and I can assure you that it happens frequently. As I stated, I was actually told that I was murdering my dogs feeding a commercial kibble.


----------



## Jo Ellen

And I didn't say you did, did I. I said it doesn't happen _here._


----------



## Pointgold

Jo Ellen said:


> And I didn't say you did, did I. I said it doesn't happen _here._


No, JE, I suppose you didn't say I did, did you. As written, it looked as though you were suggesting that I had.


----------



## Kmullen

I can not yet figure out how to copy previous quotes, but I have read every page and it just seems some post are jumping on Point gold for some reason. I went back through all the post again to see if I missed something...she has not stated that anyone is jumping down her throat. She is standing by her food of choice just like others are. I too took the post that if you are not feeding holistic dog food that your dog is not having a good quality life. Well...I know that is not true. We all have different views of food. I have tried multiple dog foods from holistic to commercial and I am feeding what has worked best on MY dog. Everyone has different experiences with different foods and with different dogs....but just because one feeds their dog say (Pedigree) does not mean they are killing their dog.


----------



## Megora

> but just because one feeds their dog say (Pedigree) does not mean they are killing their dog.


Unless their dog actually dies from the food...


----------



## hotel4dogs

no, that was Blue Buffalo, not pedigree :



Megora said:


> Unless their dog actually dies from the food...


----------



## msdogs1976

kdmarsh said:


> I agree 100%. Whenever people compliment Flora's coat and ask me what I feed her, I generally say, "Well, I bathe her at least once a week and she's just got good genes!" She came from stock that all had thick, beautiful coats, so it's no surprise she has a thick beautiful coat as well.


I just say mine eats a daily dose of goose poop.:doh: Well not daily, but he would take that over a steak any day.

My dog is a labx and always has a good coat. I hear a nice coat compliment almost daily. I feed him a blend of Iams and Eukanuba Performance. But I can't say it's because of the dog food. He looked great when I got him and the rescue group had him on Science Diet. More than likely good genes.

I just saw this thread and when I saw 13 pages, I knew a good debate was going. And nothing wrong with that.


----------



## tippykayak

hotel4dogs said:


> no, that was Blue Buffalo, not pedigree :


Though I don't feed BB, and I find their marketing manipulative and distasteful, I don't want anybody to read that and think any dogs actually died. A dozen or so were severely sickened and recovered once they were off the food.


----------



## T&T

Braccarius said:


> I wonder how many of those owners are paid to feed Pro Plan.....


Purina does have a point program. 
Members can earn additional points by just dropping by a Purina booth to say "hi" , using the Purina logo on their websites/ advertising , referring the Purina ProClub, etc 

http://www.purina.ca/pro-club/mb_pro-points.aspx

http://www.purina.ca/pro-club/member-benefits.aspx

And not sure if Nestle Purina is still the official sponsor of the AKC handler's program 
http://www.akc.org/news/index.cfm?article_id=3653


----------



## tippykayak

T&T said:


> Purina does have a point program. Members can earn additional points by just dropping by a Purina booth to say "hi" , using the Purina logo on their websites/ advertising , referring the Purina ProClub, etc
> 
> Purina® Pro Club | Member Benefits | Pro Points


So they only get Purina swag? No cash? Doesn't seem like a huge incentive to feed a Purina food. Sounds more like they feed it because they like it and Purina gives them incentives to talk it up.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Thanks for clearing up my questions, guys! I remembered gluten being the source of contamination in that one big recall, and it seemed like quite a few foods and treats were being advertised as "gluten free" after that. We've stayed away from it, but I never really understood if there was a good, solid reason to do so, or if it was more of a reactionary/marketing type of thing.



goldenjackpuppy said:


> I would say that animal digest sounds nasty, but then again, my dogs eat bunny poop on a regular basis.  (Just trying to lighten the mood.)


LOL. I was thinking the same thing. Sure does sound nasty, but god knows Riley has eaten worse! 

It does bother me if it's true that the source doesn't have to be disclosed, though. If it can be taken from diseased animals?? I don't know that I like that. 



Jo Ellen said:


> I just don't have an extremely high level of trust in the dog food industry and the mass production that goes along with it. I feed Daisy a commercial kibble because it works for us, but I can't entirely convince myself it's the best food for her, or that it's being made under safe conditions and that what's on the label is what's in the bag.


I feel the same way. I don't trust them. It's not based on any legitimate reasoning, it's just how I feel. I'm trying to get over it, though. I'd hate to rule out a food that Riley could do better on, just because I'm paranoid.

And you know, mom and I were talking about this last night and we started looking at it from the other direction. If there IS a problem or a recall with the big food companies like Purina or Eukanuba, it's a big story. You'll probably hear about it on the evening news and could (hopefully) get your dog off the food quickly enough.
We feed Fromm (not a popular food in this area) and buy it from a tiny little boutique store. A recall with them probably isn't going to be big news and who knows how long it could take before we'd be aware of it. We might not know until we went into the store to buy another bag.
I don't know if that's sound logic, but it sort of made sense to us.


----------



## Enzos_Mom

LifeOfRiley said:


> If there IS a problem or a recall with the big food companies like Purina or Eukanuba, it's a big story. You'll probably hear about it on the evening news and could (hopefully) get your dog off the food quickly enough.
> We feed Fromm (not a popular food in this area) and buy it from a tiny little boutique store. A recall with them probably isn't going to be big news and who knows how long it could take before we'd be aware of it. We might not know until we went into the store to buy another bag.
> I don't know if that's sound logic, but it sort of made sense to us.


Are you signed up for their mailing list or are you a "fan" of them on Facebook? I would imagine that they would let you know if there was a recall in places like that.


----------



## hotel4dogs

I was horrified that several of my customers here at the pet hotel knew nothing about the BB recall, but then I realized I only knew about it from forums and email groups, didn't see it anywhere else.
One person with a lovely yellow lab had 2 bags of the recalled food, which she returned to the store when I told her about the recall. She is, of course, infinitely thankful to me.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Enzos_Mom said:


> Are you signed up for their mailing list or are you a "fan" of them on Facebook? I would imagine that they would let you know if there was a recall in places like that.


No, I'm probably the only person on the planet who _isn't_ on Facebook! lol.
I didn't realize they had a mailing list, though. Thank you!! I'm off to sign up for that like, right now.


----------



## Enzos_Mom

hotel4dogs said:


> I was horrified that several of my customers here at the pet hotel knew nothing about the BB recall, but then I realized I only knew about it from forums and email groups, didn't see it anywhere else.
> One person with a lovely yellow lab had 2 bags of the recalled food, which she returned to the store when I told her about the recall. She is, of course, infinitely thankful to me.


This is why I think you should always try to join the mailing list for the brand of food that you feed. I used to feed Enzo BB and signed up for their mailing list. I never unenrolled and they sent me an e-mail that they were recalling certain formulas.


----------



## Pointgold

Pro Plan has a "Pro Club". Members save weight circles and once they have XX# of pounds, send them in, and get back either certificates to be used toward the purchase of more food, or, they can get "stuff" - jackets, towels, hats, field dog stuff, etc. The certificates to be used towards food are helpful when you are feeding multiple dogs - who doesn't use coupons of appreciate a discount for something they regularly use? But seriously, to suggest that this, or getting a hat or jacket is the _reason _that anyone feeds their products is ridiculous. We spend FAR more on the food than _any _incentive could possibly give back. I'd feed it regardless. In fact, (ask anyone who's been to my home or kennel) while I do cut the weight circles off the bags, I often forget to send them in at all - I probably have several thousand pounds worth just laying around right now.


----------



## hotel4dogs

Yes, that's a really good idea and I had never thought of it. Thanks!



Enzos_Mom said:


> This is why I think you should always try to join the mailing list for the brand of food that you feed. I used to feed Enzo BB and signed up for their mailing list. I never unenrolled and they sent me an e-mail that they were recalling certain formulas.


----------



## goldensrbest

Iwonder since there is several breeders on here, if they would post what they feed?


----------



## hotel4dogs

Yikes, get those circles sent in before Dec. 1 so GRCA's health foundation can get their money!
You didn't mention this, but the reason a lot of people I know participate in the Pro Club has nothing at all to do with getting free stuff from Purina, because after all, you can only use so many jackets, towels, and so on. The coupons, while nice, expire in a year and unless you're feeding a lot of dogs you won't use most of them.
BUT
Purina donates $10 for every $100 of weight circles to canine health research. $5 of that goes to the AKC health foundation, and $5 of that goes to your parent breed club's health foundation (in our case, of course, GRCA) for research as the breed club sees fit. 
I don't remember the number from last year, but I know Purina donated many many thousands of dollars to GRCA for cancer research for goldens. Kudos to them.




Pointgold said:


> Pro Plan has a "Pro Club". Members save weight circles and once they have XX# of pounds, send them in, and get back either certificates to be used toward the purchase of more food, or, they can get "stuff" - jackets, towels, hats, field dog stuff, etc. The certificates to be used towards food are helpful when you are feeding multiple dogs - who doesn't use coupons of appreciate a discount for something they regularly use? But seriously, to suggest that this, or getting a hat or jacket is the _reason _that anyone feeds their products is ridiculous. We spend FAR more on the food than _any _incentive could possibly give back. I'd feed it regardless. In fact, (ask anyone who's been to my home or kennel) while I do cut the weight circles off the bags, I often forget to send them in at all - I probably have several thousand pounds worth just laying around right now.


----------



## Enzos_Mom

I also get coupons in my mailing list e-mails. =)


----------



## Pointgold

hotel4dogs said:


> Yikes, get those circles sent in before Dec. 1 so GRCA's health foundation can get their money!
> You didn't mention this, but the reason a lot of people I know participate in the Pro Club has nothing at all to do with getting free stuff from Purina, because after all, you can only use so many jackets, towels, and so on. The coupons, while nice, expire in a year and unless you're feeding a lot of dogs you won't use most of them.
> BUT
> Purina donates $10 for every $100 of weight circles to canine health research. $5 of that goes to the AKC health foundation, and $5 of that goes to your parent breed club's health foundation (in our case, of course, GRCA) for research as the breed club sees fit.
> I don't remember the number from last year, but I know Purina donated many many thousands of dollars to GRCA for cancer research for goldens. Kudos to them.


Thanks, Barb - I did forget to mention that. (Imagine an Evil Kibble Company doing good! Shocking! 

Seriously, I'm not going to feed my dogs a particular food because of ANY incentive. I feed my dogs a food because of the results. Period.


----------



## Tahnee GR

goldensrbest said:


> Iwonder since there is several breeders on here, if they would post what they feed?


I used to feed Canidiae but when I lost my job, I had to find something less expensive. For the past 6 months or so, I have been feeding Diamond Naturals, switching from beef to chicken every few bags or so. The dogs love it (but I have yet to find any food they won't eat!) and they are doing really well on it.

Now that I am employed, and Bindi is hopefully pregnant, I will probably switch back to Canidae in a few weeks, because it is an ALS food.


----------



## BeauShel

And also Purina Pro Plan is very big on rescue. They have the Rally to Rescue program. They give food to rescues and do events to help get animals adopted. Our rescue is one of the Rally to Rescue ambassador groups. With money being so tight on fundraising them donating food to us is a big load off us to help with the foster dogs. Purina Pro Plan Rally to Rescue®


----------



## T&T

*2008 GLOBAL RETAIL SALES*

- MARS ( Pedigree, Royal Canin, Cesar, Whiskas ... ) $13.6 billion
- NESTLE PURINA ( Purina, Alpo, Beneful ...) $ 12.8 billion

Sure hope couple thousands $ goes towards causes ...

Yes it's the latest marketing trend & I believe the industry calls it "cause-related marketing" 
No, I don't have a problem with that.


I do have a problem though with a company spending *USD11.5* *million* on marketing campaigns for the launching of one new product ... yet whose many dog & cat food formulas ingredient lists start with corn & end with inexpensive chemical additives & preservatives, not to mention colors, sugars, etc.

No, I'm not referring to ProPlan


----------



## hotel4dogs

Hmm, the "latest trend" has been going on for 12 years at Purina that I'm aware of, I'm sure PG can tell us how much before I was aware of it they started the program.
And yes, I hope that ALL of the companies, big and small, are making donations to worthy causes. Sure, the smaller ones are capable of smaller donations, but I hope they are also making donations relative to their sizes.




T&T said:


> *2008 GLOBAL RETAIL SALES*
> 
> - MARS ( Pedigree, Royal Canin, Cesar, Whiskas ... ) $13.6 billion
> - NESTLE PURINA ( Purina, Alpo, Beneful ...) $ 12.8 billion
> 
> Sure hope couple thousands $ goes towards causes ...
> 
> Yes it's the latest marketing trend & I believe the industry calls it "cause-related marketing"
> No, I don't have a problem with that.
> 
> 
> I do have a problem though with a company spending *USD11.5* *million* on marketing campaigns for the launching of one new product ... yet whose many dog & cat food formulas ingredient lists start with corn & end with inexpensive chemical additives & preservatives, not to mention colors, sugars, etc.
> 
> No, I'm not referring to ProPlan


----------



## timberwolf

LifeOfRiley said:


> No, I'm probably the only person on the planet who _isn't_ on Facebook! lol.
> QUOTE]
> 
> That would make me the second then as I am not on Facebook either!!!!


----------



## LifeOfRiley

If you guys wouldn't mind my asking, which ProPlan formula(s) do you feed? It looks like there are an awful lot of choices.
And if I do end up trying it, do you think it would be a good idea to start out, at least, with the Sensitive Skin & Stomach? Could that make the transition easier?




timberwolf said:


> That would make me the second then as I am not on Facebook either!!!!


Oh good, I'm not alone then! LOL.
(I don't "tweet", either. I do have a blog, of sorts, but I'm really bad about posting to it.)


----------



## HiTideGoldens

LifeOfRiley said:


> LOL. I was thinking the same thing. Sure does sound nasty, but god knows Riley has eaten worse!
> 
> It does bother me if it's true that the source doesn't have to be disclosed, though. If it can be taken from diseased animals?? I don't know that I like that.


I can't find anything that says conclusively whether it can be taken from diseased animals or not.

My husband reminded me that we boil down the nasty parts of turkeys and chickens to make broth, so I don't know why it would be perceived as being so bad for dog food.


----------



## BeauShel

I use the Purina Pro Plan all Life Stages with the purple label and a golden on the bag. The only ProPlan I wouldnt use is the kind with the shredded blend. I dont like the pieces. There are alot of them in the bag and they have soy in them. So we dont use that flavor.


----------



## Retrieverlover

I feed Allstage Chicken & Rice and Sensitive Stomache.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Thanks, Carol and Retrieverlover!




goldenjackpuppy said:


> I can't find anything that says conclusively whether it can be taken from diseased animals or not.
> 
> My husband reminded me that we boil down the nasty parts of turkeys and chickens to make broth, so I don't know why it would be perceived as being so bad for dog food.


I haven't found anything either, but I just got back to the computer and haven't really started looking too much yet. The only thing I saw was the Wiki article that Betty posted earlier in this thread. Granted, I'm a little skeptical of things you read on Wiki, but it does beg the question, I think. I'd like to find out more.
I've heard about the euthanized animals from shelters ending up in commercial dog food, but I haven't found anything at all to substantiate it. I have to wonder if, at best, it's an urban myth kind of thing. Or, at worst, a scare tactic to promote 'premium' foods.

And you had to remind me of that right before Thanksgiving, didn't you? : That's one of those things I try real hard not to think about.

But seriously, I wouldn't see a problem with it as long as it comes from "safe" sources and you wouldn't have to be concerned about contaminated or diseased 'pieces parts' getting into the food. I know quite a few of the raw feeders grind up some stuff that would make my stomach turn just thinking about it, but the dogs obviously love it and it obviously doesn't hurt them.
And it obviously doesn't hurt all the dogs who are eating it on a daily basis, so I'm thinking it's probably okay.


----------



## kathi127

I feed all 5 of my dogs Pro Plan Selects due to tremendous allergy and skin issues with one of my Goldens. They are all doing wonderful on it. I tried BB Life Protection Fish and Sweet Potato and Sammy's allergies flared up so bad he was digging himself raw so I went right back to Pro Plan and he is clearing up nicely. I'll never try switching them again!


----------



## Jo Ellen

I'm feeding Daisy the weight management formula.


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom

LifeOfRiley said:


> Thanks, Carol and Retrieverlover!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I haven't found anything either, but I just got back to the computer and haven't really started looking too much yet. The only thing I saw was the Wiki article that Betty posted earlier in this thread. Granted, I'm a little skeptical of things you read on Wiki, but it does beg the question, I think. I'd like to find out more.
> I've heard about the euthanized animals from shelters ending up in commercial dog food, but I haven't found anything at all to substantiate it. I have to wonder if, at best, it's an urban myth kind of thing. Or, at worst, a scare tactic to promote 'premium' foods.
> 
> And you had to remind me of that right before Thanksgiving, didn't you? : That's one of those things I try real hard not to think about.
> 
> But seriously, I wouldn't see a problem with it as long as it comes from "safe" sources and you wouldn't have to be concerned about contaminated or diseased 'pieces parts' getting into the food. I know quite a few of the raw feeders grind up some stuff that would make my stomach turn just thinking about it, but the dogs obviously love it and it obviously doesn't hurt them.
> And it obviously doesn't hurt all the dogs who are eating it on a daily basis, so I'm thinking it's probably okay.


Here's a you tube snipet from the Pres of AAFCO in regards to what generic "meat" (not a named source) could be. 



 Also, I believe the Wiki definition was taken from AAFCO if I remember right.


----------



## HiTideGoldens

I do wonder about the date of that video....it looks like it was shot some time ago.


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom

goldenjackpuppy said:


> I do wonder about the date of that video....it looks like it was shot some time ago.


 
From what I can find, it was 2006.


----------



## HiTideGoldens

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> From what I can find, it was 2006.


I saw that the date it was added to youtube was in 2006, but couldn't find anything about the date of the report itself.


----------



## Dallas Gold

For those curious about recalls:

Pet Food Recall Products List

Note: it is current only through Oct 1, 2010--almost 2 months behind. 
You can search by product name, pet or any combination thereof.

Somewhere else in the FDA website is a place where people can report adverse reactions to products.

I'm going to join the email list of the food we are using just in case that company gets the word out a little faster. I'm not a Facebookie either.


----------



## T&T

ZanderTheShadowBear said:


> ...
> 
> Tippy, I see your argument as there is alot of debate about Organically sustained food ... There is plenty of research and concrete evidence that eating not just Organically(Because I am not just talking about Organic.. I mean, Free Range, stress free, clean-No Growth Hormones, no anti-biotic injected- meat) is healthier for anyones body... Same goes with the poultry and red meat. These animals are very abused(Emotionally and Physically), fed an unnatural diet and kept in extremely unclean/cramped conditions. I just do not fathom how giving these creatures the proper set up and diet *couldn't* promote an overall healthier well being and *longetivity*!





tippykayak said:


> I would like to see this research. I too expected that this would be true, but the large scale studies that have been coming out cannot see differences between people who eat organic food vs. traditional. They can tell the difference between people who eat twinkies and people who eat broccoli, but they can't tell the difference between traditional and organic broccoli in health outcomes.
> 
> If there's research that contradicts what I've seen, I would love to read it. I find it counterintuitive and sort of depressing that eating organic doesn't do much for your health.
> 
> The largest study I am aware of was a 24 million $ project conducted by Carlo Leifert in the UK financed by the EU.
> 
> Official: organic really is better - Times Online
> 
> Organic food 'better than ordinary produce' - Telegraph
> 
> Of course The Journal of Clinical Nutrition (produced by the American Society of Nutrition) will claim there is not enough evidence !!!
> ... look at who their corporate sponsors are ...
> Coca Cola, Pepsi, McDonalds, Kellog, Campbells, Kraft, National Dairy Council, Monsanto, Pfizer, etc
> 
> Fruits/vegetables are sprayed with up to 30-40 different pesticides ... is there no scientific evidence that pesticides are harmful ?


----------



## The Trio

Ok Normally I don't get involved with this type of thread, but some people need a reality check! If you have owned dogs for any lenght of time they will eat/try anything. Especially mouthy goldens. I've seen dogs eat placentas (from a cow), cat crap, grass, twigs, dirt, leaves, and heavens knows what else the list goes on and on. Do I want my babies eating this crap, Heavens NO, but dogs are dogs. You have to remember they were once all wild and they still will eat random junk like that. It's called their natural instincts. Even after domestication and hundereds of years of being our best friends they still have instincts. It's your dog feed it what you want. WHO CARES as long as they thrive and are happy and healthy. You don't eat the same thing as everyone else do you? NO, so why epect your dog to?! As far as grain free or organic. OH MY G-D!!!! The scientific definition of organic is: Of, relating to, or derived from living organisms: _organic matter. _EVERYTHING IS ORGANIC!!!!! Coal is organic, but the only time you will find me giving my dog charcoal is if they ingest poison. When it comes to pesticides: Do you use OFF or other things on your body? Chemicals are everywhere. Hormones, we take them as women and humans. You won't eat a hambuger made from a cow, who, has had hormones, but you will eat a carrot grown in that cow's crap? Ya! Um "organic" farmers don't care where the crap comes from as long as they don't use pesticides to treat their crops. As far as if the cow was dead before it got to the plant or not WHO CARES!! They are killed to make the food anyway. Have you ever been to a meat packing plant? The way they kill them IMO isn't very humane, but I still love a good burger. If you eat hamburger then you eat dead cow. Yes, some cattle come on a rendering truck, but you don't know if it was sick of died of old age. New laws make it harder for dog food companies to use cattle that have died out of the plant, but they still do. And that goes back to the eating everything we find disgusting. Dogs don't care. If it tastes good they eat it. My parent's fed their dogs Pruina and Pedigree for years and they lived to be 13 and 12. I have tried Royal Canine, Pruina Pro Plan Shreded Blends, Pruina Pro Plan Performance, Taste of the Wild, Wolf King, iVet, Blue, and Newman's Own Dog food. I want to feed my babies the best their is, but Some of those dog foods cost more than $50.00 a bag. With 3 dogs (1 show and 1 performance), 2 cats, my husband, and 3 month old daughter. I simply cannot afford that. As far as a Raw diet. if you can afford it go for it, but in my neck of the woods I can't afford to feed myself all the foods required in a raw diet much less my dogs. Ok so I've had my rant. Feed them what you like and what they want. Common Sense People Common Sense.


----------



## Pointgold

Frankly, if it was still available, I'd likely still be feeding KenLBiskit. (Which, according to the dog food rating sites would, I'm betting, get negative 20 stars...
I have been to 4 Quaker Awards dinners at Westminster (it was THE event at the Garden), and KB used to be THE food of choice for all the top dogs. Here's a post from Larry Hardy, a former field rep, from a discussion a couple years ago on another forum when someone asked about whether it was still available:


"I was the Ken-L Biskit field representative back in the 1980’s. I attended dog shows and visited area kennels in my southern territory, representing Biskit. It was a great job because all the top show and field handlers were my customers. I attended the Quaker Oats award dinner at Westminster once. I believe Ric Chashoudian’s smooth fox won that year.
Back in 1980, Quaker hired 10 field reps to protect Biskit from the onslaught of the specialty foods such as Iams, Science, Nutro, and several more. The ten of us were all dog people. I was president of the Doberman Pinscher Club of Dallas at the time. Quaker was a grocery company that lacked representatives that could actually relate to the Biskit customer. Biskit was a step child that had no advertising funding and was initially only sold in 50# bags that grocery stores did not have room for. Therefore, it had very poor distribution until my team came aboard. Still, the large order quantity (three tons)required by Quaker was a major factor in its demise. That and the low profit margin compared to Iams, SD, ect. Biskit was forever the top food preferred by the show community. It was unique because it was a wheat based, baked kibble instead of an extruded pellet coated in oil. It has never been duplicated. I am surprised that one of the specialty companies has not bought the formula to resurrect it. This blog alone shows it still has fans. Dogs loved it and you could maintain condition and weight like no other food. The only negative was the stool was sometime loose in some dogs. To compensate for that, Eukanuba was often mixed with the Biskit. Almost everyone agreed that Biskit was required for any conditioning program. Those of us who remember it, miss it. I hated to see Iams and Science Diet bought up by grocery companies."


----------



## Tahnee GR

I well remember KenLBiscuit-it was a great food. It was recommended to me by two of the top Golden breeders at the time, who used it on their dogs. My dogs were in great condition on the KenLBiscuit, healthy and lived for a long time. I do miss it-I wondered what happened to it.


----------



## timberwolf

I remember cans of Ken-L Ration in the supermarket!!!
That sure takes me back!!!


----------



## Pointgold

timberwolf said:


> I remember cans of Ken-L Ration in the supermarket!!!
> That sure takes me back!!!


 
Remember the jingle???

My dog's faster than your dog
My dog's bigger than yours!
My dog's better cuz he eats Ken-L Ration
My dog's better than yours!


----------



## hotel4dogs

Oh my, I hate to admit that I DO remember it!



Pointgold said:


> Remember the jingle???
> 
> My dog's faster than your dog
> My dog's bigger than yours!
> My dog's better cuz he eats Ken-L Ration
> My dog's better than yours!


----------



## Toffifay

I do not have any experience with Ken-L-Biskit, but would our modern day Flint River Ranch be comparable? FRR is baked, not extruded, and the original formula contains lots of wheat. If not fed with careful portion control, it can cause loose stool, as well. Does anyone have an ingredient list for the old Ken-L-Biskit? I'm so curious!


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom

Toffifay said:


> I do not have any experience with Ken-L-Biskit, but would our modern day Flint River Ranch be comparable? FRR is baked, not extruded, and the original formula contains lots of wheat. If not fed with careful portion control, it can cause loose stool, as well. Does anyone have an ingredient list for the old Ken-L-Biskit? I'm so curious!


The only thing I found was on Doberdogs.com 



> KEN-L BISKITWheat FlourBeef And Bone MealSoybean Meal*Animal Fat Preserved With BHA*SaltIron OxideCholine ChlorineArtificial Coloring


----------



## Pointgold

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> The only thing I found was on Doberdogs.com


 
Like I said - I'm sure that today Ken-L Biskit would be slammed, given -20 stars, and for sure users would be told that they are doggie murderers. Yet, the generations of dogs fed that food were unbelieveably fit, sound, healthy, and long lived. Go figure.


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom

Pointgold said:


> Like I said - I'm sure that today Ken-L Biskit would be slammed, given -20 stars, and for sure users would be told that they are doggie murderers. Yet, the generations of dogs fed that food were unbelieveably fit, sound,k healthy, and long lived. Go figure.


I remember my childhood dogs being fed canned Skippy, and they also lived until a ripe old age. Again, go figure.


----------



## tippykayak

T&T said:


> The largest study I am aware of was a 24 million $ project conducted by Carlo Leifert in the UK financed by the EU.
> 
> Official: organic really is better - Times Online
> 
> Organic food 'better than ordinary produce' - Telegraph


Two articles. One study. More antioxidants in organic foods. No mention at all of other nutrients or effect on disease and lifespan. Hardly hard evidence.



T&T said:


> Fruits/vegetables are sprayed with up to 30-40 different pesticides ... is there no scientific evidence that pesticides are harmful ?


There's evidence that pesticides are harmful, but not that they make it into human systems (in normal eating habits) in a sufficient quantity to affect our health in a way that's measurable.


----------



## lgnutah

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> I remember my childhood dogs being fed canned Skippy, and they also lived until a ripe old age. Again, go figure.


Ewww! I remember Skippy dog food--cause that's what we fed our dogs and the smell was nauseating!!!


----------



## Retrieverlover

Wasn't it also way back then people don't really worried about dog food like they do today? My G'mans Entlebucher Mountain Dog gets the European version of beneful but she adds shredded lettuce, carrots, a hard boiled egg and I think yogurt. Why you ask? Probably she has always added leftover produce to her dogs food. They all turned 14-16years old and except for one Swissie, who developed cancer, they were all healthy. I admit, i add shredded carrots to my labs food but only if I have them leftover from baking carrot cake


----------



## Pointgold

Retrieverlover said:


> Wasn't it also way back then people don't really worried about dog food like they do today? My G'mans Entlebucher Mountain Dog gets the European version of beneful but she adds shredded lettuce, carrots, a hard boiled egg and I think yogurt. Why you ask? Probably she has always added leftover produce to her dogs food. They all turned 14-16years old and except for one Swissie, who developed cancer, they were all healthy. I admit, i add shredded carrots to my labs food but only if I have them leftover from baking carrot cake


 
If you have shredded carrots leftover from baking carrot cake, then you need to make more carrot cake.


----------



## Pointgold

Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-produced Food, Review Of Literature Shows

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/weekinreview/22bittman.html

Organic food is not better | zenSCI magazine



For every one that says up, there's someone that says down. 

Just sayin'...


----------



## T&T

Pointgold said:


> Organic Food Not Nutritionally Better Than Conventionally-produced Food, Review Of Literature Shows
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/weekinreview/22bittman.html
> 
> Organic food is not better | zenSCI magazine
> 
> 
> For every one that says up, there's someone that says down.
> 
> Just sayin'...


I have very strong evidence that my Mom's garden tomato tastes a whole lot better than the tomoto à la pesticide


----------



## Enzos_Mom

T&T said:


> I have very strong evidence that my Mom's garden tomato tastes a whole lot better than the tomoto à la pesticide


Let's be honest, though...garden tomatoes taste better than just about anything. =)


----------



## sharlin

tippykayak said:


> Two articles. One study. More antioxidants in organic foods. No mention at all of other nutrients or effect on disease and lifespan. Hardly hard evidence.
> 
> 
> 
> There's evidence that pesticides are harmful, but not that they make it into human systems (in normal eating habits) in a sufficient quantity to affect our health in a way that's measurable.



She quotes a study and you reject it? 
And then make a blanket statement without site?

It's nothing more than good "risk avoidance". A simple premise that if one is able to avoid risk where they can then that risk no longer appies to them in the same manner. You look both ways before going into traffic - risk avoidance; you have grab bars installed in your shower as you age - risk avoidance; you cook your raw meat - risk avoidance. If someone avoids the risk of ingesting pesticide residue by purchasing food that hasn't been sprayed or the ground sown with it then it makes sense they stand less chance of contamination then one who doesn't. Do I shop all organic - no, I'm too lazy to go to the trouble. But that doesn't mean I reject the fact that organic foods would be better for me - even if just from a risk avoidance standpoint. 

Tomatos better from the garden - oh yeah!!
But my favorite organic purchase is a nice fresh peach!!!!!!!
So much juicier and full of flavor then commercial grown. yummmmmm


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom

lgnutah said:


> Ewww! I remember Skippy dog food--cause that's what we fed our dogs and the smell was nauseating!!!


 
Maybe that's why tripe doesn't make me gag???


----------



## Retrieverlover

Pointgold said:


> If you have shredded carrots leftover from baking carrot cake, then you need to make more carrot cake.


Because Miss Zoom really wants more pupcakes


----------



## Pointgold

T&T said:


> I have very strong evidence that my Mom's garden tomato tastes a whole lot better than the tomoto à la pesticide


 
And I don't doubt that at all. A fresh garden anything is very likely going to taste better than one purchased at a store that has not been picked fresh and eaten right away. I love garden fresh foods. 
The debate, though, is whether or not they are truly better for you than the others.


----------



## T&T

tippykayak said:


> Two articles. One study. More antioxidants in organic foods. No mention at all of other nutrients or effect on disease and lifespan. Hardly hard evidence.
> 
> Close to 100,000 articles & 162 studies according to the ASN
> 
> There's evidence that pesticides are harmful, but not that they make it into human systems (in normal eating habits) in a sufficient quantity to affect our health in a way that's measurable.





Pointgold said:


> And I don't doubt that at all. A fresh garden anything is very likely going to taste better than one purchased at a store that has not been picked fresh and eaten right away. I love garden fresh foods.
> The debate, though, is whether or not they are truly better for you than the others.


Evidence that evidence gets killed before it can reach the consumer





 
Evidence that governing bodies' decisions are political & not scientific and proof of data manipulation 
Click on video
The more you watch the better it gets (or should I say the worse it gets)
http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2008/04/01/the-world-according-to-monsanto-a-documentary-that-americans-wont-ever-see-full-video/

And ... one doctor that's not afraid to talk ...
Dr. Epstein's article banned from Science Magazine
What About "Putting People First"?


My apologies to the OP
Really didn't mean to highjack this thread
Soooo I'm outta here :wave:


----------



## tippykayak

T&T said:


> Close to 100,000 articles & 162 studies according to the ASN


There's lots of studies about this or that vegetable or meat product and how there are superior nutrients in the organic version sometimes. My point, which has not been disputed in any of the evidence that you've posted, is that when you actually study outcomes, you simply don't see longer lifespans or lower cancer rates in people who try to eat organic. I still try! I think we'll probably eventually see some small advantage to eating more organically grown, local food, and we definitely see the environmental impact.

I do believe it's superior. I just don't see the solid evidence that people (and probably therefore dogs) are actually living longer or getting cancer less by eating organic.





T&T said:


> Evidence that governing bodies' decisions are political & not scientific and proof of data manipulation


Right now we're not talking about the FDA or other governing bodies' decisions, which are highly political and often unscientific. No argument there. We're talking about the basic research, which currently is not conclusive and seems to be pointing in a counterintuitive direction.

I guess what it boils down to is that I utterly reject the claim or even the insinuation that by feeding "holistic" or even USDA-certified organic food, you're measurably lowering your dog's cancer risk or increasing longevity. The evidence just isn't there to support the claim, and any insinuation that those who feed ProPlan instead of Karma are putting their dogs at risk is a totally irresponsible one.


----------



## Jo Ellen

While we may not be able to prove that eating organic is healthier for humans, growing organic is definitely healthier for the environment.

I watched a documentary with Prince Charles the other night, Harmony. Fascinating. I had no idea he was so... green  I was impressed. 

Though really, pesticides can't be good over the span of a lifetime for anyone or anything. That's just common sense, for me anyway.


----------



## Florabora22

Jo Ellen said:


> While we may not be able to prove that eating organic is healthier for humans, growing organic is definitely healthier for the environment.
> 
> I watched a documentary with Prince Charles the other night, Harmony. Fascinating. I had no idea he was so... green  I was impressed.
> 
> Though really, pesticides can't be good over the span of a lifetime for anyone or anything. That's just common sense, for me anyway.



Read Michael Pollens' "The Omnivore's Dilemna." He really gets into organic farming (as well as regular farming), and it's very eye opening. It put me off red meat permanently unless it is grass-fed red meat.


----------



## hotel4dogs

I have a neighbor that's a licensed organic farmer. You'd be amazed the chemicals and fertilizers that are allowed by "organic". It doesn't mean they're safer by any stretch, just that they have come from "natural" origins.


----------



## Ljilly28

hotel4dogs said:


> I guess I'd better stop giving my 13 and 14 year old goldens Pro Plan (which they've eaten their whole lives) so they don't die young from crappy food.


I really like hearing from people with goldens in the teens what their dogs eat. It is so reassuring. My Joplin lived far into his 15th year eating Eukanuba.

I lost a nine year old to cancer, though ,who was eating California Natural and Canidae. I don't blame the foods for her death by any means(her father also passed away at 9), but I do wish I had stayed with the Eukanuba rather than being "guilted" into a "better" food. 

Eukanuba Premium Performance and Pro Plan's top of the line have been studied and studied over decades. That makes me more comfortable than a label saying "organic" on a food that has been on the market since 2004.

I have thought about feeding The Honest Kitchen or Paw Naturaw for this same reason of a weird guilt and wanting to give the goldens the very best, but what holds me back is that lack of knowing 1000s of dogs have lived long lives over time. 

I have my doubts about food as the trigger for cancer in genetically predisposed dogs unless the dog is allergic to the food in a way that provokes year after year of inflammation.

I went to a lecture about teflon ( accidently burning on the stove) as a carcinogen for domestics dogs, and at that point, I realized how myriad the exposures to triggers beyond food really are in a dog's daily life. 

There's a wheel of genetic fate, I truly believe. My dog who lived so very long walked on the Yale Golf Course and even swam in the water traps, bc my vet at the time said dogs didn't live long enough to be sickened by chemicals like humans can be. Now, I would not hike/walk dogs on a golf course, but I have to think that Joplin simply did not have a genetic propensity for cancer. 

I also think systemic inflammation is definitely a villan over the longterm, and things that quell inflammation are helpful- like Doxy for lyme and maybe fish oil. Rhonda Hovan says perhaps a daily ascriptin shows promise, though is not scientificallly proven yet. Any dog food that creates inflammation is going to be risky for a particular dog, so once basic nutrional needs are met, much of it is about a good fit between ingredients and the dog.


----------



## Megora

Not all of us are doing holistic or so-called premium / natural kibble diets for our dogs because we have been guilted into it. Most cases it happens that we tried the more basic choices first and did not have much success with them. A highly advocated (and this could be Fromm or Purina or anything else) kibble is useless if it causes your golden to have major digestion issues or if your dog refuses to eat it. 

So I don't think anyone should be guilted into changing their kibble just because the rest of the crowd uses something else.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> Here's a you tube snipet from the Pres of AAFCO in regards to what generic "meat" (not a named source) could be. YouTube - The Truth about Dog and Cat Food Also, I believe the Wiki definition was taken from AAFCO if I remember right.


There's no question, that's disturbing. 

I can't help but play devil's advocate here, though. In that clip, he doesn't seem to be saying that pet food companies DO put euthanized dogs and cats in their products -- just that there was technically no law against it, if they wanted to. (At least that's how I took it.)

I don't know. In this day and age of "whistleblowing", cell phone videos and disgruntled employees, I have to wonder why there isn't more evidence of this practice (if the food companies do use euthanized cats and dogs, diseased animals, etc.) or even cold, hard proof of it.
Is there more evidence of it out there, and I've just missed it? I imagine that's possible. I haven't looked into these food brands for years.

I still don't know if the whole "animal digest" thing is something I could get past, though. I'd rather know what's in the food, especially with Riley. He has a real problem with pork, so if there are any pork-based by-products in the food, it would be a disaster.


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom

LifeOfRiley said:


> There's no question, that's disturbing.
> 
> I can't help but play devil's advocate here, though. In that clip, he doesn't seem to be saying that pet food companies DO put euthanized dogs and cats in their products -- just that there was technically no law against it, if they wanted to. (At least that's how I took it.)
> 
> I don't know. In this day and age of "whistleblowing", cell phone videos and disgruntled employees, I have to wonder why there isn't more evidence of this practice (if the food companies do use euthanized cats and dogs, diseased animals, etc.) or even cold, hard proof of it.
> Is there more evidence of it out there, and I've just missed it? I imagine that's possible. I haven't looked into these food brands for years.
> 
> I still don't know if the whole "animal digest" thing is something I could get past, though. I'd rather know what's in the food, especially with Riley. He has a real problem with pork, so if there are any pork-based by-products in the food, it would be a disaster.


I would urge anyone interested in their dog's food to read Dr Nestle's book, Feed Your Pet Right. Here's a thread I posted about it many months ago. She is well worth listening to about not only the pet food industry but our human food chain as well. http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com...ition-feeding-recipes/67212-food-thought.html


----------



## Pointgold

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> I would urge anyone interested in their dog's food to read Dr Nestle's book, Feed Your Pet Right. Here's a thread I posted about it many months ago. She is well worth listening to about not only the pet food industry but our human food chain as well. http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com...ition-feeding-recipes/67212-food-thought.html


 
Thanks, but no.  It's another one that will tell me that I am NOT feeding my pets "right". I don't rotate. I chose the food, not the company. I'm obviously either lucky, or, there's a ticking time bomb and it's just a matter of time before it'll be proven that I _have _murdered my dogs by feedling as I do. 

Honestly. Do what is best for your dogs. Books/You Tube videos/internet articles/food rating sites be ******.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> I would urge anyone interested in their dog's food to read Dr Nestle's book, Feed Your Pet Right. Here's a thread I posted about it many months ago. She is well worth listening to about not only the pet food industry but our human food chain as well. http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com...ition-feeding-recipes/67212-food-thought.html


That looks like an interesting read. Thanks!

ETA - I'm really interested in the thinking behind rotating foods. I almost think that's what we need to do with Riley. He'll do so well on a food for quite a while and then all of a sudden, not so much. I think maybe we need to switch foods, or at least protein sources, more often.


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom

Pointgold said:


> Thanks, but no.  It's another one that will tell me that I am NOT feeding my pets "right". I don't rotate. I chose the food, not the company. I'm obviously either lucky, or, there's a ticking time bomb and it's just a matter of time before it'll be proven that I _have _murdered my dogs by feedling as I do.
> 
> Honestly. Do what is best for your dogs. Books/You Tube videos/internet articles/food rating sites be ******.


 
Actually Laura, no she won't. She takes a hard look at a mostly unregulated industry and calls a spade a spade. She does not advocate (necessarily) the "designer" foods. She is not a fly by night zealot... please take the time to at least her bio.



> *About Marion Nestle*
> 
> Marion Nestle is Paulette Goddard Professor in the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health (the department she chaired from 1988-2003) and Professor of Sociology at New York University. Her degrees include a Ph.D. in molecular biology and an M.P.H. in public health nutrition, both from the University of California, Berkeley (continues below).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Her first faculty position was in the Department of Biology at Brandeis University. From 1976-86 she was Associate Dean of the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) School of Medicine, where she taught nutrition to medical students, residents, and practicing physicians, and directed a nutrition education center sponsored by the American Cancer Society.
> From 1986-88, she was senior nutrition policy advisor in the Department of Health and Human Services and managing editor of the 1988 Surgeon General’s Report on Nutrition and Health. She has been a member of the FDA Food Advisory Committee and Science Board, the USDA/DHHS Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, and American Cancer Society committees that issue dietary guidelines for cancer prevention. Her research focuses on how science and society influence dietary advice and practice.


----------



## Pointgold

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> Actually Laura, no she won't. She takes a hard look at a mostly unregulated industry and calls a spade a spade. She does not advocate (necessarily) the "designer" foods. She is not a fly by night zealot... please take the time to at least her bio.


 
I appreciate this, but as we are not permitted to discuss politics on GRF, I will refrain from adding my own comments about Dr. Nestle. 

I'll continue along the same path re: feeding my dogs as has worked forever.


----------



## Megora

Quick question for Pointgold - 

I know that you have a problem with the shredded kibble from Pro Plan, but what about Pro Plan Selects? I was browsing at Petsmart on my lunchbreak (I went there for a bag of Wellness cookies, wound up spending a half hour there and I have no idea how), and noticed the bag there in the Proplan side of the aisle. 

While I'm not anxious to change kibble, I definitely think that the Selects would be something I'd pick up for my guy. 

Just curious.

And the shredded kibble... what exactly is wrong with it?


----------



## Dallas Gold

LifeOfRiley said:


> That looks like an interesting read. Thanks!
> 
> ETA - I'm really interested in the thinking behind rotating foods. I almost think that's what we need to do with Riley. He'll do so well on a food for quite a while and then all of a sudden, not so much. I think maybe we need to switch foods, or at least protein sources, more often.


Life of Riley, I am halfway through the book, which by the way, has 35 pages of scientific, well-documented, appendixes and footnotes. Like Penny & Maggie's Mom, I believe she takes a non-judgmental approach to the pet food industry. It is a helpful tool in decoding all the ingredients listed on the back of the food label.


----------



## LifeOfRiley

Dallas Gold said:


> Life of Riley, I am halfway through the book, which by the way, has 35 pages of scientific, well-documented, appendixes and footnotes. Like Penny & Maggie's Mom, I believe she takes a non-judgmental approach to the pet food industry. It is a helpful tool in decoding all the ingredients listed on the back of the food label.


Good to know. I swear, the more "research" I do, the more confused I get! Maybe sitting down with an actual book in front of me will help me make some sense of it.


----------



## MyBentley

I think it's sad when someone refuses to check into or at least try reading a book, because they think it might have perspectives that don't entirely fit with their beliefs. I think of all the books I've read in high school, college and now in a book club that I never would have sought out on my own and felt somewhat skeptical about. Can't say I embraced all the books 100%, but they sure broadened my views and understanding.


----------



## Florabora22

MyBentley said:


> I think it's sad when someone refuses to check into or at least try reading a book, because they think it might have perspectives that don't entirely fit with their beliefs. I think of all the books I've read in high school, college and now in a book club that I never would have sought out on my own and felt somewhat skeptical about. Can't say I embraced all the books 100%, but they sure broadened my views and understanding.


Frankly, I understand Pointgold's unwillingness to read the book. Some websites, books, whatever, are SO biased against large dog food companies (Eukanuba/Iams, Purina, etc.) and oftentimes make those of us who feed our dogs those foods feel really guilty. I have honestly read some of this stuff and it made me feel like I was killing Flora, which is bull$***. No one should make me feel that way. It guilt tripped me into trying these other "premium" foods and I ended up spending months dealing with unnecessary diarrhea troubles in my dog.

I know you said the author is unbiased which is cool, but so many authors are not. I'm fine with reading differing opinions - but when those differing opinions begin to accuse me of doing something I am not doing... I'm done.


----------



## Pointgold

MyBentley said:


> I think it's sad when someone refuses to check into or at least try reading a book, because they think it might have perspectives that don't entirely fit with their beliefs. I think of all the books I've read in high school, college and now in a book club that I never would have sought out on my own and felt somewhat skeptical about. Can't say I embraced all the books 100%, but they sure broadened my views and understanding.


I am very well aware of the viewpoint of the particular author in question, and in fact have read a number of her writings before. I have no desire nor need to read her book to have an understanding of her viewpoint.


----------



## Pointgold

kdmarsh said:


> Frankly, I understand Pointgold's unwillingness to read the book. Some websites, books, whatever, are SO biased against large dog food companies (Eukanuba/Iams, Purina, etc.) and oftentimes make those of us who feed our dogs those foods feel really guilty. I have honestly read some of this stuff and it made me feel like I was killing Flora, which is bull$***. No one should make me feel that way. It guilt tripped me into trying these other "premium" foods and I ended up spending months dealing with unnecessary diarrhea troubles in my dog.
> 
> I know you said the author is unbiased which is cool, but so many authors are not. I'm fine with reading differing opinions - but when those differing opinions begin to accuse me of doing something I am not doing... I'm done.


I've not found this author to be unbiased in the past.


----------



## MyBentley

kdmarsh said:


> Frankly, I understand Pointgold's unwillingness to read the book. Some websites, books, whatever, are SO biased against large dog food companies (Eukanuba/Iams, Purina, etc.) and oftentimes make those of us who feed our dogs those foods feel really guilty. I have honestly read some of this stuff and it made me feel like I was killing Flora, which is bull$***. No one should make me feel that way. It guilt tripped me into trying these other "premium" foods and I ended up spending months dealing with unnecessary diarrhea troubles in my dog.
> 
> *I know you said the author is unbiased which is cool,* but so many authors are not. I'm fine with reading differing opinions - but when those differing opinions begin to accuse me of doing something I am not doing... I'm done.


I think you're confusing me with another poster - I am not the one who gave the information about the author or suggested the book. 

However, my point remains the same: I think it's sad for a person not to find out more about a book or even try reading a bit of it, because they think it might say something that doesn't fit with their current beliefs and/or practices. I guess we could get by with a lot fewer libraries and book stores if the majority of people felt this way. I'm not saying a person should run right out and buy the book or put their name on a waiting list at the library. But they could at least google the title of the book and see what others have to say about it. To immediately reject a book based on the title alone seems rather baffling - and again, somewhat sad. And I don't always like every book or article by a particular author. To read one or two publications of a specific author doesn't necessarily mean every future book will be the same.


----------



## MyBentley

Pointgold said:


> I am very well aware of the viewpoint of the particular author in question, and in fact have read a number of her writings before. I have no desire nor need to read her book to have an understanding of her viewpoint.


To my knowledge, she has written only one other book about feeding pets. Did you already read that one? Her other books, I believe, focus on the human food chain and nutrition - curious about which of her writings you're most familiar with.


----------



## Pointgold

MyBentley said:


> To my knowledge, she has written only one other book about feeding pets. Did you already read that one? Her other books, I believe, focus on the human food chain and nutrition - curious about which of her writings you're most familiar with.


Yes, most of her writings are focused on the human food chain. Being a human who eats food, I have an interest. 
As for other writings, she is a fairly regular blogger and I have read many of her postings regarding food and nutrition, as well as on pet food.


----------



## Diesel's Mom

Megora said:


> Quick question for Pointgold -
> 
> I know that you have a problem with the shredded kibble from Pro Plan, but what about Pro Plan Selects? I was browsing at Petsmart on my lunchbreak (I went there for a bag of Wellness cookies, wound up spending a half hour there and I have no idea how), and noticed the bag there in the Proplan side of the aisle.
> 
> While I'm not anxious to change kibble, I definitely think that the Selects would be something I'd pick up for my guy.
> 
> Just curious.
> 
> And the shredded kibble... what exactly is wrong with it?


 
I wondered the same thing. I feed proplan performance. I have not had a problem with it, which is great. With researching I often think about changing, because most sites give proplan low ratings. However, as long as my dogs are doing fine why change.


----------



## Pointgold

Megora said:


> Quick question for Pointgold -
> 
> I know that you have a problem with the shredded kibble from Pro Plan, but what about Pro Plan Selects? I was browsing at Petsmart on my lunchbreak (I went there for a bag of Wellness cookies, wound up spending a half hour there and I have no idea how), and noticed the bag there in the Proplan side of the aisle.
> 
> While I'm not anxious to change kibble, I definitely think that the Selects would be something I'd pick up for my guy.
> 
> Just curious.
> 
> And the shredded kibble... what exactly is wrong with it?


Those little shredded bits, made to look like pieces of shredded chicken, are soy. It's ridiculous, imo, to have added soy to their products, simply to be competitive in a market where the general pet buying public feels better when they see something like this in their Fido's bowl. As fpor Selects, I've not even looked at it, because I am perfectly happy with what I am feeding now.


----------



## Megora

Pointgold said:


> Those little shredded bits, made to look like pieces of shredded chicken, are soy. It's ridiculous, imo, to have added soy to their products, simply to be competitive in a market where the general pet buying public feels better when they see something like this in their Fido's bowl. As fpor Selects, I've not even looked at it, because I am perfectly happy with what I am feeding now.


Fair enough. <:

I looked at the proplan aisle because of the discussion here. So I went looking through at the ingredients lists out of curiosity... and I was happy to see those bags without any corn, soy, or wheat. 

I didn't look at the shredded kibble bags then, but doing a quick google right now... yeah, there's a lot of soy in there. I'm not totally against soy, as the food my dog is on right now has soybean oil in it and it isn't hurting him. But... :uhoh:

This is the ProPlan Selects (Turkey and Rice) ingredients list -



> Turkey, brewers rice, barley, chicken meal (natural source of glucosamine), dried egg product, brewers dried yeast, animal fat preserved with mixed-tocopherols (form of Vitamin E), oat meal, pea protein, pea fiber, dried beet pulp, natural flavor, fish oil, calcium carbonate, salt, potassium chloride, dried carrots, dried tomatoes, dried sweet potatoes, L-Lysine monohydrochloride, calcium phosphate, Vitamin E supplement, zinc proteinate, manganese proteinate, ferrous sulfate, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (source of Vitamin C), niacin, copper proteinate, Vitamin A supplement, calcium pantothenate, thiamine mononitrate, riboflavin supplement, Vitamin B-12 supplement, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, Vitamin D-3 supplement, calcium iodate, biotin, *menadione sodium bisulfite complex (source of Vitamin K activity*), sodium selenite.


Another option I looked at and could imagine going with - 

Sensitive Skin and Stomach (again, no corn, soy, or wheat - that I can see)



> Salmon, brewers rice, canola meal, oat meal, fish meal (natural source of glucosamine), animal fat preserved with mixed-tocopherols (form of Vitamin E), salmon meal (natural source of glucosamine), pearled barley, brewers dried yeast, animal digest, salt, potassium chloride, Vitamin E supplement, choline chloride, zinc sulfate, ferrous sulfate, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (source of Vitamin C), manganese sulfate, niacin, calcium carbonate, Vitamin A supplement, calcium pantothenate, thiamine mononitrate, copper sulfate, riboflavin supplement, Vitamin B-12 supplement, pyridoxine hydrochloride, garlic oil, folic acid, Vitamin D-3 supplement, calcium iodate, biotin,* menadione sodium bisulfite complex (source of Vitamin K activity)*, sodium selenite.


And then this is the Shredded Blend - :uhoh:



> Chicken, brewers rice, *whole grain wheat*, poultry by-product meal (natural source of glucosamine), *corn gluten meal*, animal fat preserved with mixed-tocopherols (form of Vitamin E), *whole grain corn*, *soy flour*, *corn bran*, *soybean meal*, fish meal (natural source of glucosamine), animal digest, glycerin, salt, dried egg product, calcium carbonate, calcium phosphate, potassium chloride, Vitamin E supplement, choline chloride, zinc sulfate, ferrous sulfate, sulfur, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (source of Vitamin C), zinc proteinate, manganese sulfate, niacin, manganese proteinate, Vitamin A supplement, calcium pantothenate, thiamine mononitrate, copper sulfate, riboflavin supplement, Vitamin B-12 supplement, copper proteinate, pyridoxine hydrochloride, garlic oil, folic acid, Vitamin D-3 supplement, calcium iodate, biotin, *menadione sodium bisulfite complex (source of Vitamin K activity*), sodium selenite.


----------



## MyBentley

Megora said:


> Fair enough. <:
> 
> I looked at the proplan aisle because of the discussion here. So I went looking through at the ingredients lists out of curiosity... and I was happy to see those bags without any corn, soy, or wheat.
> 
> I didn't look at the shredded kibble bags then, but doing a quick google right now... yeah, there's a lot of soy in there. I'm not totally against soy, as the food my dog is on right now has soybean oil in it and it isn't hurting him. But... :uhoh:
> 
> This is the ProPlan Selects (Turkey and Rice) ingredients list -
> 
> 
> 
> Another option I looked at and could imagine going with -
> 
> Sensitive Skin and Stomach (again, no corn, soy, or wheat - that I can see)
> 
> 
> 
> And then this is the Shredded Blend - :uhoh:


I'm not clear about what reasons you may be considering the ProPlan Sensitive Skin and Stomach; but if you're concerned about specific protein intolerances or allergies, I'd not recommend it. The inclusion of "animal digest" and "animal fat" leaves you wondering what specific animal it is. Plus, the type of animal could change from bag to bag. For example, if you thought your dog didn't handle chicken well, you really don't know if there indeed might be chicken in the formula. "Animal digest" and "animal fat" leaves the door wide open. When you can't specifically identify all the ingredients in a formula, it makes it harder to narrow down what the problem might be with a sensitive dog.


----------



## Pointgold

I'm thrilled with the Sensitive Skin and Stomach, which I am blending with Performance. Love what it is doing for coats. And Bueller, the Pointer puppy (at 27" at the shoulder, a tall, giraffe of a puppy) is gobbling it right up, and in very good weight. The Goldens don't turn their noses up at it, and Jag, the Smooth Collie, thinks it is a treat.


----------



## Enzos_Mom

Pointgold said:


> I'm thrilled with the Sensitive Skin and Stomach, which I am blending with Performance. Love what it is doing for coats. And Bueller, the Pointer puppy (at 27" at the shoulder, a tall, giraffe of a puppy) is gobbling it right up, and in very good weight. The Goldens don't turn their noses up at it, and Jag, the Smooth Collie, thinks it is a treat.


I don't think she meant that it was a bad food in general. I think she just meant that if you have an allergenic dog and you're worried about certain proteins, it can be troubling to not know which proteins are in the animal digest.


----------



## Pointgold

Enzos_Mom said:


> I don't think she meant that it was a bad food in general. I think she just meant that if you have an allergenic dog and you're worried about certain proteins, it can be troubling to not know which proteins are in the animal digest.


I was responding to Megora, actually, who posted that she could see using it. I've added it because I've been seeing what it does for coats in dogs out with a handler friend who has all the dogs in their string on it. 
That said, I'm not worried about animal digest. Maybe my dogs have iron stomachs. Maybe it's genetics. Maybe I'm just lucky. But I have never, ever had any dog with "food allergies" , or who hasn't been able to eat any of the Pro Plan products that I have used. Or the Iams/Eukanuba prior to that. Or the Ken-L Biskit for years before that. Only problem, ever, was one of the "holistic" foods. Go figure.


----------



## Enzos_Mom

Pointgold said:


> Only problem, ever, was one of the "holistic" foods. Go figure.


 
I get that your dogs do great on Pro Plan, and that's great, but you don't have to have such a condescending tone when it comes to those of us who choose to feed a different kind of food.


----------



## Pointgold

Enzos_Mom said:


> I get that your dogs do great on Pro Plan, and that's great, but you don't have to have such a condescending tone when it comes to those of us who choose to feed a different kind of food.


 
Oh, c'mon... Someone said that they could see themselves using it. I posted that I am thrilled with it. Not condescending at all. Read the dozens and dozens of posts that I have made stating "feed what your dog does best on"!
It's just a fact that my dogs never have had any problems, other than with the "holistic" product.


----------



## Enzos_Mom

Pointgold said:


> Oh, c'mon... Someone said that they could see themselves using it. I posted that I am thrilled with it. Not condescending at all. Read the dozens and dozens of posts that I have made stating "feed what your dog does best on"!
> It's just a fact that my dogs never have had any problems, other than with the "holistic" product.


 
Posting that you were thrilled with it wasn't what sounded condescending. You saying "go figure" that the "holistic food" is the only one your dog had trouble with DID sound condescending. I just feel like sometimes you aren't totally aware of how your remarks come off.


----------



## Pointgold

Enzos_Mom said:


> Posting that you were thrilled with it wasn't what sounded condescending. You saying "go figure" that the "holistic food" is the only one your dog had trouble with DID sound condescending. I just feel like sometimes you aren't totally aware of how your remarks come off.


You seem to take all my posts that way, when the intent is not there. "Go figure" is hardly condescending, honestly. It's nothing more than a phrase, expressing puzzlement, or questioning how would one explain it. It would seem to me that feeding "junk" like Pro Plan (as defined by several food rating sites) that going to a food that is considered ultra high quality that even if there were no improvement, there surely wouldn't be a regression. So, go figure. I'm old, It's an oft used expression regionally, as well as by "old folks". I say it a lot.


----------



## HiTideGoldens

Not to come in and play mediator on this little disagreement, but it came up in my User CP and I read it, so I felt like commenting.  I took it as pointing out the irony that the food that is supposed to be "healthier" for a dog didn't work for her dogs but that the food that is supposed to be "junk" works. 

And FWIW, we feed Acana Grasslands which is grain free and would fall into the "holistic" category of following current trends in dog food (I would think?) - but I definitely wasn't offended. I think we all can get a little on edge when there have been contentious threads on the issue in the past, this one included. And some people may just write more directly, which can be interpreted to be condescending or forceful but I don't think it's always intended to come across that way, this time included. (Can you tell I'm trying to work on being more optimistic? ) Anyway, just food for thought (pun intended).


----------



## Braccarius

Pointgold said:


> You seem to take all my posts that way, when the intent is not there. "Go figure" is hardly condescending, honestly. It's nothing more than a phrase, expressing puzzlement, or questioning how would one explain it. It would seem to me that feeding "junk" like Pro Plan (as defined by several food rating sites) that going to a food that is considered ultra high quality that even if there were no improvement, there surely wouldn't be a regression. So, go figure. I'm old, It's an oft used expression regionally, as well as by "old folks". I say it a lot.


PG, what websites are calling it junk? The one I checked the other day had it rated as recommended (and I used the same site to pick Harley and Miri's food). I'm always very heistant to believe what I read because of bias... and I think there's a LOT of bias about dog food depending on the site you're at.


----------



## Pointgold

Braccarius said:


> PG, what websites are calling it junk? The one I checked the other day had it rated as recommended (and I used the same site to pick Harley and Miri's food). I'm always very heistant to believe what I read because of bias... and I think there's a LOT of bias about dog food depending on the site you're at.


Right off hand,
Here's one:

Bad Dog Food List - Avoid The Worst Commercial Dog Food Brands on the Market!

Here's another:

Two Star Dog Foods


----------



## Megora

MyBentley said:


> I'm not clear about what reasons you may be considering the ProPlan Sensitive Skin and Stomach; but if you're concerned about specific protein intolerances or allergies, I'd not recommend it. The inclusion of "animal digest" and "animal fat" leaves you wondering what specific animal it is. Plus, the type of animal could change from bag to bag. For example, if you thought your dog didn't handle chicken well, you really don't know if there indeed might be chicken in the formula. "Animal digest" and "animal fat" leaves the door wide open. When you can't specifically identify all the ingredients in a formula, it makes it harder to narrow down what the problem might be with a sensitive dog.


My post was regarding my dog, who doesn't have food allergies. He's currently on a kibble that has lamb, chicken, and salmon in it, and he could eat any of those types of kibbles without any problems. 

Some dogs are allergic to or can't handle soy, wheat, and corn, so as a rule I don't want to see those things or too much of them in kibble. And I was glad to see that there are Pro Plan options. 

About food allergies or bad reactions -

I did have a problem when I briefly tried a more premium kibble (Prairie), believing it to be a better choice than his current kibble though they were both the same price. It was one of those kibbles that has higher protein from meat and was actually coated with dehydrated raw lamb. I just weaned him on a little (no more than 1/3 cup a day) and he just couldn't handle it. I returned the bag after 10 days, so no big deal.


----------



## katelyn29

I fed pro plan to Dakota once, then switched to Kirkland brand. Both my dogs coats are soo soft now. don't know if the food is responsible or the changing weather, but such nice soft pretty coats now.


----------



## msdogs1976

Pointgold said:


> Right off hand,
> Here's one:
> 
> Bad Dog Food List - Avoid The Worst Commercial Dog Food Brands on the Market!


From their website:

_*Dog Food Scoop is made up of a small pack of dog enthusiasts.*_

Most of these rating sites are made up of people with little or no formal veterinary or animal science background. Not that you have to, to be a dog enthusiast. But seems to me you need some formal training or credentials for these ratings to mean anything.


----------



## MyBentley

Megora said:


> My post was regarding my dog, who doesn't have food allergies. He's currently on a kibble that has lamb, chicken, and salmon in it, and he could eat any of those types of kibbles without any problems.
> 
> Some dogs are allergic to or can't handle soy, wheat, and corn, so as a rule I don't want to see those things or too much of them in kibble. And I was glad to see that there are Pro Plan options.
> 
> About food allergies or bad reactions -
> 
> I did have a problem when I briefly tried a more premium kibble (Prairie), believing it to be a better choice than his current kibble though they were both the same price. It was one of those kibbles that has higher protein from meat and was actually coated with dehydrated raw lamb. I just weaned him on a little (no more than 1/3 cup a day) and he just couldn't handle it. I returned the bag after 10 days, so no big deal.


I'm glad that your dog doesn't have any allergies - which leaves your food options pretty wide open. But for those owners who do have dogs with specific protein allergies, any kibble that has unnamed animal fat or animal digest can potentially cause a problem. You simply don't know if the "animal digest" or "animal fat" in a particular bag might contain the exact protein source your dog has a problem with.

As far as your experience with the Prairie kibble, I guess it doesn't have anything to do with allergies since as you say your dog doesn't have any. You never know when an individual dog won't take well to a specific kibble: expensive or inexpensive; grains or grain-free; high protein or low protein; limited ingredient formula or "the kitchen sink" formula - there will be some dogs who do great and others who will do poorly on any one of them.


----------



## Florabora22

MyBentley said:


> I'm not clear about what reasons you may be considering the ProPlan Sensitive Skin and Stomach; but if you're concerned about specific protein intolerances or allergies, I'd not recommend it. The inclusion of "animal digest" and "animal fat" leaves you wondering what specific animal it is. Plus, the type of animal could change from bag to bag. For example, if you thought your dog didn't handle chicken well, you really don't know if there indeed might be chicken in the formula. "Animal digest" and "animal fat" leaves the door wide open. When you can't specifically identify all the ingredients in a formula, it makes it harder to narrow down what the problem might be with a sensitive dog.


I guess I'd have to respectfully disagree. Flora is fairly sensitive - if she eats too much of a good thing, she immediately gets diarrhea. The richer foods (Blue Buff, Solid Gold - which Carmella did wonderfully on - Orijen, etc., all gave her really bad diarrhea.) Chicken is a no no with her. ProPlan Sensitive has never steered us wrong. I KNOW that some people are uncomfortable with some of the ingredients, but Flora does well on it and to me that is what matters.


----------



## Pointgold

I am one who is not a believer that all of these dogs have true food allergies (although certainly _some _may_). _More often than not, the issues experienced and being called food allergies are symptoms of thyroid disease. Treating the symptoms is not treating the root cause.

I've known several dogs whose owners were convinced that their dogs were allergic to XXX. I suggested having a thyroid panel done, and even if in "low normal" range, insist on supplementation. Once this was done, those dogs had no problems eating XXX.


----------



## MyBentley

Pointgold said:


> I am one who is not a believer that all of these dogs have true food allergies (although certainly _some _may_). _More often than not, the issues experienced and being called food allergies are symptoms of thyroid disease. Treating the symptoms is not treating the root cause.
> 
> I've known several dogs whose owners were convinced that their dogs were allergic to XXX. I suggested having a thyroid panel done, and even if in "low normal" range, insist on supplementation. Once this was done, those dogs had no problems eating XXX.


I certainly would not debate with any of the dog owners I know on dog forums or in my personal life who say their dog has an allergy or maybe an intolerance to specific ingredients. That's for them to know and find out. 

All I'm simply trying to say in my earlier posts, as concretely as possible, is this: for owners who believe their dog has an allergy or an intolerance to a specific protein, they may have their best success in choosing a kibble that specifically lists the animals being used in the formula - not grouping them together under the heading "animal" this or that. 

A simple parallel: I have a relative who feels ill when she eats the grain barley. So, when shopping, she reads ingredient labels and doesn't buy products (like certain cereals) that list "barley" on the ingredient list. No problem. But if the ingredient list only stated "grains", she would be taking a risk if she ate it and just hoped it didn't have barley.


----------



## Toffifay

I have to agree about the unnamed animal fat in Pro Plan. Now, I love how one of my dogs is doing on Pro Plan Performance, but I have another dog that has a confirmed beef allergy. She gets blisters and pustules between her toes if she has any beef or beef products. I fed her a lot of beef when she was a puppy and up to a year and half old, I sometimes wonder if I caused her to have the allergy? Anyway, before I knew what was causing her symptoms, I tried her on PP Sensitive Skin & Stomach, it could have been the food for her if it didn't have animal fat, but say chicken fat instead. But, it didn't help her and now I know why. Animal fat more than likely is beef (and pork) fat. Thus, she continued to have symptoms. As long as I keep her off any beef, beef by-products and that includes meat by-products and animal fat, she is fine!


----------



## Swampcollie

Pointgold said:


> I am one who is not a believer that all of these dogs have true food allergies (although certainly _some _may_). _More often than not, the issues experienced and being called food allergies are symptoms of thyroid disease. Treating the symptoms is not treating the root cause.
> 
> I've known several dogs whose owners were convinced that their dogs were allergic to XXX. I suggested having a thyroid panel done, and even if in "low normal" range, insist on supplementation. Once this was done, those dogs had no problems eating XXX.


I agree!

It is the nature of a lot of pet owners to want to believe that their pet is as close to healthy as possible, they just have allergies caused by bad ingredients. 
The reality is actual food allergies are very rare, and their pets more often than not have other underlying medical conditions, low thyroid being an example. 

There is a difference between feeding a pet with allergies, and undertaking a feeding/supplement plan to bolster a weak or malfunctioning immune system.


----------



## MyBentley

Swampcollie said:


> I agree!
> 
> It is the nature of a lot of pet owners to want to believe that their pet is as close to healthy as possible, they just have allergies caused by bad ingredients.
> The reality is actual food allergies are very rare, and their pets more often than not have other underlying medical conditions, low thyroid being an example.
> 
> There is a difference between feeding a pet with allergies, and undertaking a feeding/supplement plan to bolster a weak or malfunctioning immune system.


Perhaps you or Pointgold might want to start a new thread about the incidence of food allergies versus food intolerances versus underlying medical conditions. It might make for an interesting discussion; plus the posts about it have strayed away and are a broader topic than the original one about Proplan formulas.


----------



## Retrieverlover

Wonder if anyone just caught the PPP commercial...


----------



## Megora

It's running right now while I'm watching the National Dog Show....


----------



## SunGold

Our Casa was fed ProPlan during his career. He finished with 3 majors, one at a Specialty, and got multiple group placements. He did very well on the Performance formula.

GCH SunKissed Emerald City :: Casa


----------



## K9-Design

Hey I only got 4 pages into the thread before losing interest but I did want to answer the original question. Every few months ProPlan publishes a 2 page ad in either Dog News or Canine Chronicle (can't remember which, or both -- these are the two most popular dog show magazines) with a list of the top 100 show dogs all breed and highlighted are those that are fed ProPlan, it really is like 90% of them. Name, owner, handler, breed. 
I fed raw for 6 years but gave it up. I now feed ProPlan.


----------



## nixietink

Pointgold said:


> I am one who is not a believer that all of these dogs have true food allergies (although certainly _some _may_). _More often than not, the issues experienced and being called food allergies are symptoms of thyroid disease. Treating the symptoms is not treating the root cause.
> 
> I've known several dogs whose owners were convinced that their dogs were allergic to XXX. I suggested having a thyroid panel done, and even if in "low normal" range, insist on supplementation. Once this was done, those dogs had no problems eating XXX.


*Raises hand*

That was us, here! We thought Vito was suffering from a food allergy. Tested his thyroid, came back on the low side of normal. It took a good 4-6 months of supplementation, but he can now eat any food without a problem.


----------



## Pointgold

nixietink said:


> *Raises hand*
> 
> That was us, here! We thought Vito was suffering from a food allergy. Tested his thyroid, came back on the low side of normal. It took a good 4-6 months of supplementation, but he can now eat any food without a problem.


 

Yesssssssssssssss!!!!!!!
(Well, not "yes" that he has thyroid issues, but that you did that, have treated the root cause, and now can feed him anything!) Thanks for sharing that. He's another check mark FOR my theory.


----------



## Toffifay

My dogs are due for a check-up and I think I will ask to have their thyroid tested. Perhaps my dog that I am convinced has an allergy to beef (lol, I typed beer!) really has something else going on. I'll be sure and post results when I get them in!


----------



## BeauShel

Toffifay If you do have the thyroid panel done, make sure they do the full panel and if it comes back low normal insist that your dog is put on thyroid meds. Low normal is low for goldens. Some vets go for one level for all dogs on thyroid levels when it not true. If you can ask them to send it to Dr Jean Dodds for testing. Here is the website HEMOPET.HTM


----------



## Dallas Gold

BeauShel said:


> Toffifay If you do have the thyroid panel done, make sure they do the full panel and if it comes back low normal insist that your dog is put on thyroid meds. Low normal is low for goldens. Some vets go for one level for all dogs on thyroid levels when it not true. If you can ask them to send it to Dr Jean Dodds for testing. Here is the website HEMOPET.HTM


My particular veterinary clinic (10 vets) does not hold Dr. Dodds in esteem. According to my vet she recommended a client forgo giving her dog a Heartworm preventive and the dog contracted HW disease in just a short time.  We are in Texas and mosquitos are around all year, even in the dead of winter. HW prevention is highly recommended all year long for that very reason. 

Despite this issue with Dr. Dodds, I had an extended discussion with Toby's vet via email about using her lab anyway this past summer when we were having issues getting Toby's levels adjusted. This is a part of her response to me:

_With that said, I have investigated the Dr. Dodds "new" testing recommendations and surprisingly they are the same as the thyroid panel run at Michigan State University which I still regard as the leader in thyroid testing. Her test called the Thyroid 5 Panel includes the T4, free T4, T3, free T3 and TGAA which is the thyroid globulin autoantibody which we ran on both Toby and Barkley  The only thing new to her test is her citing of a new technology or process in which the TGAA is run. One of the internal medicine specialists on the veterinary website is quoted as saying, "I'm not aware of any published research which validates this new technology." I, too, cannot find any published data which validates that the way Dr. Dodds runs the TGAA is superior to the Michigan State method. Does that make sense?_

If anyone's veterinarian is resistant to getting Dr. Dodds involved you might ask to have everything done through Michigan State. MSU panels diagnosed both Barkley and Toby as hypothyroid several years ago. They are very good at giving written and telephonic interpretations. In both dogs' cases we contacted them multiple times for questions that arose, at no extra charge.


----------



## Megora

> If anyone's veterinarian is resistant to getting Dr. Dodds involved you might ask to have everything done through Michigan State. MSU panels diagnosed both Barkley and Toby as hypothyroid several years ago. They are very good at giving written and telephonic interpretations. In both dogs' cases we contacted them multiple times for questions that arose, at no extra charge.


This is automatically done where I live..... <- I've been meaning to have my guy's thyroid checked, just so I know where it is. I don't think he has any problems because he has zero symptoms. But it'd be a good thing to have it checked anyway. It does cost $130 though.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Megora said:


> This is automatically done where I live..... <- I've been meaning to have my guy's thyroid checked, just so I know where it is. I don't think he has any problems because he has zero symptoms. But it'd be a good thing to have it checked anyway. It does cost $130 though.


That cost sounds consistent with what we paid, and we incurred overnight shipping costs as well. I think it's good to know because Goldens are so prone to thyroid disease. We had another panel redone this summer through Michigan State when our Toby's thyroid went bezerk. It's now under control, but it sure was scary because he exhibited heat and exercise intolerance. We also did an abdominal ultraound and echocardiogram to rule other things out as well. We repeat a thyroid absorption test every few months just to make sure his level is okay.


----------



## Pointgold

Dallas Gold said:


> My particular veterinary clinic (10 vets) does not hold Dr. Dodds in esteem. According to my vet she recommended a client forgo giving her dog a Heartworm preventive and the dog contracted HW disease in just a short time.  We are in Texas and mosquitos are around all year, even in the dead of winter. HW prevention is highly recommended all year long for that very reason.
> 
> Despite this issue with Dr. Dodds, I had an extended discussion with Toby's vet via email about using her lab anyway this past summer when we were having issues getting Toby's levels adjusted. This is a part of her response to me:
> 
> _With that said, I have investigated the Dr. Dodds "new" testing recommendations and surprisingly they are the same as the thyroid panel run at Michigan State University which I still regard as the leader in thyroid testing. Her test called the Thyroid 5 Panel includes the T4, free T4, T3, free T3 and TGAA which is the thyroid globulin autoantibody which we ran on both Toby and Barkley  The only thing new to her test is her citing of a new technology or process in which the TGAA is run. One of the internal medicine specialists on the veterinary website is quoted as saying, "I'm not aware of any published research which validates this new technology." I, too, cannot find any published data which validates that the way Dr. Dodds runs the TGAA is superior to the Michigan State method. Does that make sense?_
> 
> If anyone's veterinarian is resistant to getting Dr. Dodds involved you might ask to have everything done through Michigan State. MSU panels diagnosed both Barkley and Toby as hypothyroid several years ago. They are very good at giving written and telephonic interpretations. In both dogs' cases we contacted them multiple times for questions that arose, at no extra charge.


 
I'd be very interested to know the details of the case where Dr. Dodd's allegedly said to forego use of preventative. Because, while I know that she prefers the "plain" (without flea/tick control) daily preventatives vs the monthly products, I've not know her to state that it shouldn't be used at all, unless in areas where it is not a known problem. Here is what she says on the topic in a Mastiff newsletter:


"You also asked about the advisability of giving monthly heartworm preventives for pregnant bitches. In general it's advisable to avoid unnecessary challenges to the health or immune system of animals that are undergoing hormonal changes such as estrus and pregnancy. It is specifically not advisable to vaccinate animals during these periods nor during the time of lactation, because of the exposure of young puppies to shed vaccine viral antigens from the feces of the vaccinated dam or other adults in the household. With respect to heartworm prevention, the manufacturer's directions should generally be followed if these products are used. There appears to be no contraindication for use of either of the monthly heartworm products during pregnancy. However, that does not mean it would be advisable to do so for all breeds of dogs under all circumstances. Certainly in a breed like the Mastiff with a relatively small gene pool and large size, the behavior of these animals to a variety of chemical and other immunological challenges may vary from that expected for the more common breeds of dogs or mixed breed dogs. I have seen adverse reactions to monthly heartworm preventives in animals that appear genetically and physiologically susceptible to these effects. Therefore, I recommend that these animals and their direct relatives or dog families/breeds with an apparent increased prevalence of immunological disorders, avoid use of the monthly heartworm preventives. Instead, I advise use of the plain daily heartworm products. The adverse reactions usually occur within the first 10-14 days after the monthly product has been administered, and typically begin after an animal has had 2-5 doses. Occasionally animals that have been taking monthly preventives for a relatively long time will develop subsequent product intolerance. It usually means that some underlying disease process has emerged to explain the problem. This is an important consideration, because if breeders are concerned and wish to return to using plain daily products, we should do so lest these products disappear from the marketplace (if the manufacturers deem that sales are insufficient to warrant their continued production). Lastly, it should be emphasized that unless heartworm disease is prevalent where the animals live, routine use of preventive is not recommended. This is especially important for dogs suffering from chronic allergic diseases of the skin and hair coat or those with bone marrow, thyroid or liver disease. [Specific literature references are available upon request]. W. Jean Dodds, DVM, Hemopet, 938 Stanford Street, Santa Monica, CA 90403 (310) 828- 4804.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Pointgold said:


> I'd be very interested to know the details of the case where Dr. Dodd's allegedly said to forego use of preventative. Because, while I know that she prefers the "plain" (without flea/tick control) daily preventatives vs the monthly products, I've not know her to state that it shouldn't be used at all, unless in areas where it is not a known problem. Here is what she says on the topic in a Mastiff newsletter:
> 
> 
> "You also asked about the advisability of giving monthly heartworm preventives for pregnant bitches. In general it's advisable to avoid unnecessary challenges to the health or immune system of animals that are undergoing hormonal changes such as estrus and pregnancy. It is specifically not advisable to vaccinate animals during these periods nor during the time of lactation, because of the exposure of young puppies to shed vaccine viral antigens from the feces of the vaccinated dam or other adults in the household. With respect to heartworm prevention, the manufacturer's directions should generally be followed if these products are used. There appears to be no contraindication for use of either of the monthly heartworm products during pregnancy. However, that does not mean it would be advisable to do so for all breeds of dogs under all circumstances. Certainly in a breed like the Mastiff with a relatively small gene pool and large size, the behavior of these animals to a variety of chemical and other immunological challenges may vary from that expected for the more common breeds of dogs or mixed breed dogs. I have seen adverse reactions to monthly heartworm preventives in animals that appear genetically and physiologically susceptible to these effects. Therefore, I recommend that these animals and their direct relatives or dog families/breeds with an apparent increased prevalence of immunological disorders, avoid use of the monthly heartworm preventives. Instead, I advise use of the plain daily heartworm products. The adverse reactions usually occur within the first 10-14 days after the monthly product has been administered, and typically begin after an animal has had 2-5 doses. Occasionally animals that have been taking monthly preventives for a relatively long time will develop subsequent product intolerance. It usually means that some underlying disease process has emerged to explain the problem. This is an important consideration, because if breeders are concerned and wish to return to using plain daily products, we should do so lest these products disappear from the marketplace (if the manufacturers deem that sales are insufficient to warrant their continued production). Lastly, it should be emphasized that unless heartworm disease is prevalent where the animals live, routine use of preventive is not recommended. This is especially important for dogs suffering from chronic allergic diseases of the skin and hair coat or those with bone marrow, thyroid or liver disease. [Specific literature references are available upon request]. W. Jean Dodds, DVM, Hemopet, 938 Stanford Street, Santa Monica, CA 90403 (310) 828- 4804.


I will not be able to give you any more detail about the dog in question, the underlying condition or any other details about the incident. I reported all I know as relayed to me by the veterinarian. I did press for more details but was not successful in getting anything else. The email quote I posted was a follow up question I asked of our vet a few years after this incident was initially reported to me when we first had the dogs tested. Our particular veterinary clinic simply will not use Dr. Dodds as a policy and will go through MSU instead. Since I was able to get the exact same testing accomplished through MSU I did not pursue it further. 

I do question the owner's common sense in not going back to the dog's regular veterinarian before stopping the heartworm preventive. I know if that particular recommendation was given to me for one of my dogs I'd certainly be speaking with the dog's regular vet to discuss further.


----------



## Pointgold

Dallas Gold said:


> I will not be able to give you any more detail about the dog in question, the underlying condition or any other details about the incident. I reported all I know as relayed to me by the veterinarian. I did press for more details but was not successful in getting anything else. The email quote I posted was a follow up question I asked of our vet a few years after this incident was initially reported to me when we first had the dogs tested. Our particular veterinary clinic simply will not use Dr. Dodds as a policy and will go through MSU instead. Since I was able to get the exact same testing accomplished through MSU I did not pursue it further.
> 
> I do question the owner's common sense in not going back to the dog's regular veterinarian before stopping the heartworm preventive. I know if that particular recommendation was given to me for one of my dogs I'd certainly be speaking with the dog's regular vet to discuss further.


Oh, I wasn't asking you to specifically provide the details, it was just a general statement (as with physicians, there is client confidentiality to be concerned with). I would have to believe that there is much more behind the recommendation, if in fact that was exactly what the recommendation was. I wonder if there was an underlying disease process occurring at that time, or auto-immune issues, or something of that nature... just curious. 
I have great faith in (and relatively easy access to) MSU Vet Clinics. I have also had excellent results with Dr. Dodds and do respect her.


----------



## Dreammom

In an immune compromised dog...sometimes hw preventative is not a good idea. I am not sure if Dr. Dodds (so don't quote her as saying it) told me with Aiyana or Wolfie that if I lived in an area that was not a big problem to give the least amount possible...ie, not at all during winter months and a 45 day schedule otherwise. Because they do not know the cause of AIHA/IMHA and there is such an increase in the number of cases... we can not rule out the possiblity that HW preventatives, flea and tick preps, etc. are not responsible.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Pointgold said:


> Oh, I wasn't asking you to specifically provide the details, it was just a general statement (as with physicians, there is client confidentiality to be concerned with). I would have to believe that there is much more behind the recommendation, if in fact that was exactly what the recommendation was. I wonder if there was an underlying disease process occurring at that time, or auto-immune issues, or something of that nature... just curious.
> I have great faith in (and relatively easy access to) MSU Vet Clinics. I have also had excellent results with Dr. Dodds and do respect her.


 
I suspect there was an underlying disease. I also wonder if there was some sort of misinterpretation of Dr. Dodd's specific recommendations by the dog owner. Was blood drawn and submitted to Dr. Dodds? If so, and if done through the veterinary clinic, the veterinarian in charge would insist on a copy of the recommendations and require an in-clinic consultation with the owner to go over the results and formulate a plan. That's been my experience at least. I actually prefer my veterinarian knowing exactly what we are doing for our dogs' health needs so when I have an emergency she is totally up to date with his health history. In Barkley's case that included giving her a list of all herbal remedies his holistic acupuncture veterinarian prescribed for his hips and allergies. Each was researched and approved or disapproved (in two cases) and we always followed our conventional vet's recommendations. That's why we paid her the big bucks! 

I suspect Dr. Dodds was consulted by the owner independently without prior knowledge by the dog's regular vet somehow. In any event, assuming the recommendation was to stop the preventive, the owner should have contacted the regular vet to discuss and obtain concurrence with the recommendation. I know when Barkley was diagnosed with hemangiosarcoma we had a lengthy phone conversation about his heartworm preventive schedule and his flea and tick preventive. We also had a discussion about vaccinations that were due, which were not given.

Whatever the circumstances it's good to know there are other good options out there, like MSU.


----------



## Dallas Gold

Dreammom said:


> In an immune compromised dog...sometimes hw preventative is not a good idea. I am not sure if Dr. Dodds (so don't quote her as saying it) told me with Aiyana or Wolfie that if I lived in an area that was not a big problem to give the least amount possible...ie, not at all during winter months and a 45 day schedule otherwise. Because they do not know the cause of AIHA/IMHA and there is such an increase in the number of cases... we can not rule out the possiblity that HW preventatives, flea and tick preps, etc. are not responsible.


 
If you are located in far northern Illinois I can understand it, but we are in Texas where we battle mosquitos all year long. The incident in question happened in Dallas. In any event the owner's regular veterinarian should be consulted before discontinuing anything.


----------



## Haahrp

I have 2 Goldens that we run in hunt tests, and agility. My puppy was put on Pro Plan Performance while away at the trainers. She looked wonderful when I got her back so I put my other female on it as well. Through the winter they were not as active and the puppy gained alot of weight. I took her into the vet and had them do a blood test. Her Thyroid levels were low and cholesterol very elevated. He told me to change her diet to regular adult pro plan and cut the amount back and have her retested in a few months. Her weight is great now, going in Monday to recheck thyroid and cholesterol levels. But she is not getting her coat in for the winter. Her coat looks bad. So I believe there is still a thyroid problem. I recently changed to Pro Plan Selects to see if over a few months I will see any improvement going all natural. Any thoughts or suggestions? I don't believe the thyroid issues are related to diet, but not sure. She was doing great last winter, and coat was amazing. My other female seems to be doing great on it. The puppy is 18 months.


----------



## Haahrp

How does Pro Plan Selects compare to Blue Buffalo?


----------



## nixietink

Haahrp said:


> I have 2 Goldens I run in hunt tests and agility. Last winter my pup was sent off to the trainers, who puts all his dogs on Pro Plan Performance. She looked so great when I got her back so I put my other female on it as well. A few months ago I noticed how heavy my pup had gotten. So I took her in and had her checked for thyroid problems. Her thyroid levels were low and her cholesterol was elevated. The vet had me change her to regular adult pro plan and reduce her amount. Since she is not as active during the winter this made sense. Her weight is much better and I take her in tomorrow to recheck her thyroid and cholesterol. But her coat looks bad. She is not getting her winter coat in at all. I slowly changed both of them to Pro Plan Selects this past week. Do you know much about this form of Pro Plan. I compared the ingredients to Blue Buffalo and it is similar, all natural. Does anyone know if these health issues can be caused by diet? I'm pretty sure the high fat levels in the performance formula could probably contribute to the high cholesterol but thyroid?


I'm pretty sure thyroid is not really diet related. It does require supplementation to fix.


----------



## Florabora22

Yeah, Carmella's coat was kind of shoddy before we got her on thyroid medicine. If your pup's thyroid has tested low, then ask the vet for some medication to take care of it. It's a simple pill, and relatively low-cost.


----------



## alijeanrn

Sadie's coat really started looking horrible over the summer so I took her to the vet and had the MSU thyroid panel done. She started her thyroid meds a little over a month ago now, and I'm starting to see some new growth. Thank goodness, people were starting to ask me if she's a lab!! I feed her Wellness lamb formula. If her coat doesn't continue to improve I'll be changing the brand and will consider Pro Plan after reading this thread.

Just as some background, Sadie was on Pro Plan large breed puppy from her breeder (a show breeder) and she did fine on it. She's also been fed Artemis med/large breed puppy (did fine on that too). She had diarrhea on Wellness large breed puppy. We are expecting a new puppy in a couple weeks (also from a show breeder) who is on Pro Plan puppy.

I bought into all that "holistic" marketing, but now I may be rethinking it.


----------



## tippykayak

Haahrp said:


> I have 2 Goldens that we run in hunt tests, and agility. My puppy was put on Pro Plan Performance while away at the trainers. She looked wonderful when I got her back so I put my other female on it as well. Through the winter they were not as active and the puppy gained alot of weight. I took her into the vet and had them do a blood test. Her Thyroid levels were low and cholesterol very elevated. He told me to change her diet to regular adult pro plan and cut the amount back and have her retested in a few months. Her weight is great now, going in Monday to recheck thyroid and cholesterol levels. But she is not getting her coat in for the winter. Her coat looks bad. So I believe there is still a thyroid problem. I recently changed to Pro Plan Selects to see if over a few months I will see any improvement going all natural. Any thoughts or suggestions? I don't believe the thyroid issues are related to diet, but not sure. She was doing great last winter, and coat was amazing. My other female seems to be doing great on it. The puppy is 18 months.


The food is not the cause of the thyroid problem, and food can't fix it.


----------



## Haahrp

Thank you for all the helpful suggestions and information. I took my girl back today. Her thyroid level was low- .9
But since she is only 19 months old my vet's suggestion was to wait on putting her on supplementation. He doesn't think there are any clinical signs significant enough to start her so early on meds. He told me to watch her coat with her new diet, and see if it is just slow coming back in, since she is indoors all the time and it is just starting to get cold around here. I know many of you suggested getting her started right away. I also know, I pulled this blog way off subject from the original "pro Plan" discussion, Sorry about that!  It is hard to dertermine what the factors are sometimes, diet?? Medical?? So all this talk has helped. I think I will watch her for the next few months and see what happens with her coat and the new diet of Pro Plan Select, and also watch for any other clinical signs for thyroid issues. Good idea? 
One more non-pro plan question though. Reading all these, made me realize how common thyroid issues were in Goldens. Is this a reason not to breed? I don't know if breeders are concerned with thyroid issues in their lines or not. If I need to post another thread I will, if this a good topic for disscussion. Teach me the ropes! I'm a "newbee" here! Thanks.


----------



## alijeanrn

Haahrp, I would get a second opinion about your vet's thyroid recommendation. The dog's poor coat quality is a significant clinical sign of thyroid disorder. T4 of 0.9 is the very low end of normal. I just went through this with my girl. I took her in b/c she lost so much hair, and from what I learned on GRF, I suspected her to be hypothyroid. The vet doubted that her thyroid was the problem because she was only 15 months at the time, but I insisted on her sending the Michigan State University thyroid panel. Her initial T4 also came back at 0.9 and when we got the MSU results, my vet was shocked that they were so out of whack. She had to call MSU to help her interpret them. MSU recommended starting supplementation right away to keep her T4 level on the high end of normal. The type of food you feed does not have any effect on thyroid disorders. I would ask your vet to at least send a thyroid panel to MSU to get a better picture of what is going on.

I am hypothyroid myself, and I can tell you, many human physicians also do not have a good understanding of thyroid function!


----------



## chinatow's golden

i only trust the prolan. good


----------



## IowaGold

Haahrp said:


> Thank you for all the helpful suggestions and information. I took my girl back today. Her thyroid level was low- .9
> But since she is only 19 months old my vet's suggestion was to wait on putting her on supplementation. He doesn't think there are any clinical signs significant enough to start her so early on meds. He told me to watch her coat with her new diet, and see if it is just slow coming back in, since she is indoors all the time and it is just starting to get cold around here. I know many of you suggested getting her started right away. I also know, I pulled this blog way off subject from the original "pro Plan" discussion, Sorry about that!  It is hard to dertermine what the factors are sometimes, diet?? Medical?? So all this talk has helped. I think I will watch her for the next few months and see what happens with her coat and the new diet of Pro Plan Select, and also watch for any other clinical signs for thyroid issues. Good idea?
> One more non-pro plan question though. Reading all these, made me realize how common thyroid issues were in Goldens. Is this a reason not to breed? I don't know if breeders are concerned with thyroid issues in their lines or not. If I need to post another thread I will, if this a good topic for disscussion. Teach me the ropes! I'm a "newbee" here! Thanks.


You can't rely on a T4 to determine if a dog is or is not hypothyroid. You need to do the full 6 panel thyroid test. The longer you wait to properly diagnose your dog, the more (possibly permanent) changes she will undergo.

A reputable breeder should not breed a dog with hypothyroidism (IMHO).


----------



## BayBeams

Haahrp said:


> Thank you for all the helpful suggestions and information. I took my girl back today. Her thyroid level was low- .9
> But since she is only 19 months old my vet's suggestion was to wait on putting her on supplementation. He doesn't think there are any clinical signs significant enough to start her so early on meds. He told me to watch her coat with her new diet, and see if it is just slow coming back in, since she is indoors all the time and it is just starting to get cold around here. I know many of you suggested getting her started right away. I also know, I pulled this blog way off subject from the original "pro Plan" discussion, Sorry about that!  It is hard to dertermine what the factors are sometimes, diet?? Medical?? So all this talk has helped. I think I will watch her for the next few months and see what happens with her coat and the new diet of Pro Plan Select, and also watch for any other clinical signs for thyroid issues. Good idea?
> One more non-pro plan question though. Reading all these, made me realize how common thyroid issues were in Goldens. Is this a reason not to breed? I don't know if breeders are concerned with thyroid issues in their lines or not. If I need to post another thread I will, if this a good topic for disscussion. Teach me the ropes! I'm a "newbee" here! Thanks.


Hi there,
My dog was started on Soloxine for hypothyroidism when she was only 2 years old. She only showed "soft" clinical signs of being low on thyroid but testing indicated otherwise. If there is a suspicion of thyroid issues further testing beyond the t4 needs to be done. Not so sure I would agree with your plan to wait and see...


----------



## Haahrp

Got it. I will have him send it to get the whole panel done. Thank you. I also have hypothyroidism. That's why I suspected something was going on and had her tested. My vet initially didn't want to do it and I insisted. So I will take your advise and get more done.


----------



## Florabora22

The right dose of thyroid medicine makes a WORLD of difference, believe me. If you do end up putting your dog on thyroid meds, you'll probably be shocked at the difference - not only in appearance, but in behavior as well.


----------



## Dallas Gold

I think it's unfair to the dog not to supplement a dog if he/she tests as hypothyroid no matter how young they are--they don't feel as well and in our case our dog was so lethargic and unlike his normal self. We knew immediately when the medication kicked in and it was a dramatic difference. I also want to point out that the levels can change so it's very important to keep on top of that as well with retesting and monitoring for subtle changes. We had a heck of a summer getting our Toby's levels adjusted--the stress of losing his sibling to cancer and the grief that resulted caused his hormone levels to plummet (this is the theory of our vet and I think she's right). We retested almost every month during the summer and early fall and made adjustments until we got him stabilized. We'll retest every 3 months now, just to make sure. 

By the way our vet was also hesitant to put our Toby on meds initially because his tests were on the lowest end of "normal". I basically listed out all the signs we were seeing at home and got her to agree to try a trial run (after getting a couple of interpretations with the great vets at MSU) and the results of the trial run were dramatic. Those symptoms included weight gain, increased exercise intolerance, poor coat, lethargy (he normally defines the term high energy), decreased mischief (not kidding--this dog enjoys causing mischief) and he developed a hot spot despite not being allergic to anything. She agreed his in-clinic demeanor and physical appearance was not normal and once I listed everything out and went over it with her, she agreed to try the supplement for 6 weeks. Sometimes it just takes an owner opening up and letting the vet know exactly what they are seeing at home. The vets aren't mind readers and need the owner to step up and fill them in. That's where the owners perceptions and perserverance comes in, for the best interests of their dog. The owner needs to communicate with the dog's vet so they get the full picture.


----------



## msc

Considering Pro Plan after years of the higher end foods.


----------



## hotel4dogs

don't tell my Tiny (16 years, 3 months eating pro plan) that Pro Plan isn't a higher end food!


----------



## GoldensGirl

Haahrp said:


> ...One more non-pro plan question though. Reading all these, made me realize how common thyroid issues were in Goldens. Is this a reason not to breed? I don't know if breeders are concerned with thyroid issues in their lines or not. If I need to post another thread I will, if this a good topic for disscussion. Teach me the ropes! I'm a "newbee" here! Thanks.


Welcome to the Forum.

The discussion of whether to breed a hypothyroid dog does belong in a new thread in this Forum, please: Golden Retriever Health, Anatomy, Physiology & Breed Standard - Golden Retrievers : Golden Retriever Dog Forums.

I also recommend continuing the discussion of hypothyroidism in that Forum, where more people with relevant experience are likely to see the discussion (not that you haven't already heard from some of the best, IMHO ).


----------



## CrazyZane

GoldensGirl said:


> Welcome to the Forum.


That post was from 12/6/10. I guess it's never too late for a welcome though. :


----------



## Tayla's Mom

I sometimes don't look at the date. It happens. No body's perfect.


----------



## CrazyZane

Tayla's Mom said:


> I sometimes don't look at the date. It happens. No body's perfect.


My comment was not to be taken serious, hence the smiley face. Lighten up a little....


----------



## GoldensGirl

:bowrofl::lol:

You got me! I checked the number of posts, not the date. That will teach me, no?

Perfect? I'm working on it, but probably not in this lifetime. 

Thanks for the good laugh at myself!


----------



## Google2011

Just to chime in, we have a service Golden for my son with autism and the service organization only uses Purina Pro Plan, and we have used it with great results


----------



## CrazyZane

I've tried many of the "4-5 star" kibbles and none worked for Zane except for California Natural puppy lamb and rice. After their last recall I switched Zane to Pro-Plan 28/18. I've been feeding him that since June '13 and he's been doing great on it and really loves it.


----------



## philovance

*List of Top 100 All Breed Champions fed Pro Plan (2014)*



LifeOfRiley said:


> I'm coming into this a little late, but...
> 
> I'd be hesitant to doubt Purina's claim that 92 out of 100 top dogs are, or have been fed ProPlan. Dog food is such a hot button issue these days, that I can't see why they would make that statement without some sort of 'proof' to back it up. They have to expect someone to jump on it and dispute the claim.


I realize I'm posting into an ancient thread but I thought that since a Google search for Pro Plan often brings up this site and even this thread I'd offer "proof" that in 2014 Purina fed 94 of the top 100 AKC show dogs. A PDF of the list is attached.


----------



## Jeffvd

I realize this is an old loooooong thread. This thread was one of my big reasons for starting our Wrigley on Pro Plan Large Breed Puppy. Results speak volumes...and I read a lot of folks posts with great results. Couple that with Purina being the industry leader regarding research and I was sold. I could care less what the ratings sites say!


----------



## Ljilly28

I feed Orijen, Bravo, and sometimes Fromm when the dogs are not out showing, but they eat Pro Plan 30-20 when they need to be in best coat . The reason I don't feed pro plan sport 100 percent ion the time s mainly irrational guilt/worry from those sites you mentioned.


----------

