# Puppy food question



## MPHW (Apr 16, 2011)

Our breeder had Rudi on Pro-Plan Select puppy food. We switched him at 12 weeks to Blue Buffalo brand for large breed puppies. The problem is that Rudi does't seem that interested in this food. There are so many types of dog food out there and we're not sure if we've made a good choice. Our Vet sells and pushes Science Diet but the ingredients don't seem that great to us. Does anyone feed their dog Blue Buffalo? 

My other question is: Yesterday Rudi was sick in the evening - really runny frequent poop, and didn't want any food at all. I don't think it was the dog food, but rather something that he may have eaten outside. We cut the lawn and he ate a lot of grass the day before. Can that give a puppy the runs?


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

Why did you switch him off Pro Plan so early? Was he not eating the food or doing well on it? 

Switching puppy foods _can_ give them tummy issues.


----------



## MPHW (Apr 16, 2011)

We switched his food because our Vet said he should be eating large breed puppy food. He sells/suggests Science Diet, but we liked the ingredients of Blue Buffalo better and it had good user reviews. We did it over a 10 day period and he had some gas, but then was completely fine on it for a week. He just isn't enthusiastic about it. Food ingredients are confusing because there are so many contradictory views. By-products are bad/good. Meal is bad/good. Corn/soy is bad/good. We opted for Blue Buffalo. It's a crap shoot (pardon the pun hahaha).


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

could he possibly have worms still??? when was his stool checked last by the vet?? you can do boiled chicken/rice for a few days then slowly add back in his kibble.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

MPHW said:


> We switched his food because our Vet said he should be eating large breed puppy food. He sells/suggests Science Diet, but we liked the ingredients of Blue Buffalo better and it had good user reviews. We did it over a 10 day period and he had some gas, but then was completely fine on it for a week. He just isn't enthusiastic about it. Food ingredients are confusing because there are so many contradictory views. By-products are bad/good. Meal is bad/good. Corn/soy is bad/good. We opted for Blue Buffalo. It's a crap shoot (pardon the pun hahaha).


Ok... I do agree with your vet about the large breed kibble for puppies. 

I have no real advice on BB or the puppy's appetite. <- I've never fed the one and our past three puppies that we raised were greedy things who'd eat stuff even if it didn't taste good to them. :

Maybe put your puppy on hamburger and rice for today and see if that helps with the loose stool? If this has been going on for more than a couple days and there is no improvement, I'd head over to the vet. There are a few things that could be going on..


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

I'm generally in favor of LBP food for Golden puppies, though there's no official designation, so what it means can vary from manufacturer to manufacturer.

As far as appetite, some puppies just aren't chowhounds. I'm not totally clear what you mean when he says he's not interested. Does he eat at least some of it at each feeding? How long is he going without food entirely. What kinds of treats is he getting? He may just be getting more calories than he needs.

If he isn't getting too many calories, and he has runny poop, he could have a parasite. Giardia and coccidia can both cause a loss of appetite and loose stools, and they're pretty common in pups. Forgive the gross question, but is there mucus in the stool?


----------



## pensgirl (Apr 18, 2011)

I also did a switch from a Purina product(puppy chow) to BB when she was 8 weeks. She is now 14 weeks. It took close to 5 weeks to fully switch. She did have loose stools for a day or two after each addition. I have also noticed that if I add any kind of snack to her diet she also has a problem. I have considered putting her on Iams as my vet suggested but I really don't want to go through that again now she is going fine except for treats. When I added more bb I added some cooked white rice also. That seemed to help. I tried the pumpkin as some suggested, but she didn't like it in her food. Would eat it off of a plastic spoon but not mixed in. Last week she went through a few days where she didn't seem to want to eat. I mixed in some canned BB it helped. She was more interested. Get the chicken dinner or lamb. Don't get the fish. She loved it and gobbled up every bite, but it upset her tummy. About 6 trips outside in one night. Not fun. I think it is because BB is a high quality food and jumping from a 2 star food to a 5 star food is a big change on their little bodies. I am going to stick with BB large breed until she is 18 months. If I do switch brands it will be when she goes off puppy food to adult food.


----------



## MyBentley (May 5, 2009)

To the OP: yes, eating grass certainly can give the runs - as can some type of parasite, which is frequent with puppies. I would check the amounts you're feeding; exclude treats for the time being and see how it goes. You don't want to be switching foods constantly with young puppies; but I, too, would prefer to find a workable food other than Science Diet.

And to pensgirl: Adding canned food to kibble can provide interest and needed moisture, but it also can easily lead to soft stools especially in puppies. It's helpful to watch the amount you give and subtract the appropriate portion of kibble from the feeding.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

We switched our pup from Nutro Ultra puppy, which the breeder had been feeding them, to Blue Buffalo Large breed puppy over the course of about 3 weeks. Now she is completely on the Blue and LOVING it. We had to get a Kong Wobble to slow down the eating cause she litterally inhales the stuff. How much are you feeding? We feed ours between 2/3 and 3/4 a cup twice a day. (once in the morning and once at night) I would not suggest feeding as much as they recommend on the bag as that is way to much in my opinion. I think we are feeding half of what the bag suggests. We also give her cut up pieces of apples, carrots, and others treats such as Zukes minis and Blue Buffalo Healthy bars through out the day.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

mfreib1 said:


> We switched our pup from Nutro Ultra puppy, which the breeder had been feeding them, to Blue Buffalo Large breed puppy over the course of about 3 weeks. Now she is completely on the Blue and LOVING it. We had to get a Kong Wobble to slow down the eating cause she litterally inhales the stuff. How much are you feeding? We feed ours between 2/3 and 3/4 a cup twice a day. (once in the morning and once at night) I would not suggest feeding as much as they recommend on the bag as that is way to much in my opinion. I think we are feeding half of what the bag suggests. We also give her cut up pieces of apples, carrots, and others treats such as Zukes minis and Blue Buffalo Healthy bars through out the day.


You should be giving at least 1/2 a cup three times a day right now...


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

whats the matter with giving 2 meals a day? When i read the article that someone had posted about the slow growth method it said to switch to 2 meals a day at 10 weeks. She is right under 20 pounds so it's not like she isn't growing at a normal pace


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

MPHW said:


> Our breeder had Rudi on Pro-Plan Select puppy food. We switched him at 12 weeks to Blue Buffalo brand for large breed puppies. The problem is that Rudi does't seem that interested in this food. There are so many types of dog food out there and we're not sure if we've made a good choice. Our Vet sells and pushes Science Diet but the ingredients don't seem that great to us. Does anyone feed their dog Blue Buffalo?
> 
> My other question is: Yesterday Rudi was sick in the evening - really runny frequent poop, and didn't want any food at all. I don't think it was the dog food, but rather something that he may have eaten outside. We cut the lawn and he ate a lot of grass the day before. Can that give a puppy the runs?


 
Pro Plan is an excellent food, and if your puppy's breeder was using it, why would you switch? Obviously her dogs did well on it.
Did you bother to consult with the breeder about switching?


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

MPHW said:


> We switched his food because our Vet said he should be eating large breed puppy food. He sells/suggests Science Diet, but we liked the ingredients of Blue Buffalo better and it had good user reviews. We did it over a 10 day period and he had some gas, but then was completely fine on it for a week. He just isn't enthusiastic about it. Food ingredients are confusing because there are so many contradictory views. By-products are bad/good. Meal is bad/good. Corn/soy is bad/good. We opted for Blue Buffalo. It's a crap shoot (pardon the pun hahaha).


 
Pro Plan is an excellent food, and in fact, they make a "large breed" puppy formula (although I do not feel that it is necessary for Goldens, and don't use it.)


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Yeah, that Pro Plan... two lousy stars.:doh:


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

Someone likes Pro Plan........


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

mfreib1 said:


> whats the matter with giving 2 meals a day? When i read the article that someone had posted about the slow growth method it said to switch to 2 meals a day at 10 weeks. She is right under 20 pounds so it's not like she isn't growing at a normal pace


I see... I don't know anything about Rhonda's slow growth plan thingy. 

I thought you were referring to feeding pups in general...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

mfreib1 said:


> Someone likes Pro Plan........


And with very good reason.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

Megora said:


> I see... I don't know anything about Rhonda's slow growth plan thingy.
> 
> I thought you were referring to feeding pups in general...


Well you have me worried now haha, should i switch back to three a day or not mess with it if she is doing fine. Like i said she is right at about 19-20 lbs and is not quite yet 13 weeks


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

mfreib1 said:


> Well you have me worried now haha, should i switch back to three a day or not mess with it if she is doing fine. Like i said she is right at about 19-20 lbs and is not quite yet 13 weeks


Well... no. If you are feeding according to the plan and your dog is thriving, stick with it. 

As I said in my PM - when I glanced at the plan, my first thought was it was pretty involved and so it wasn't for me. But there are other GRF members who swear by it.


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

It certainly can give them a big bellyache!
Ive had to take my cow-dawg, Miss Liberty, to the vet before from eating fresh cut grass...(not the stuff that is still actually growing)...but the clods of fresh wet grass...



MPHW said:


> We cut the lawn and he ate a lot of grass the day before. Can that give a puppy the runs?


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

mfreib1 said:


> We switched our pup from Nutro Ultra puppy, which the breeder had been feeding them, to Blue Buffalo Large breed puppy over the course of about 3 weeks. Now she is completely on the Blue and LOVING it. We had to get a Kong Wobble to slow down the eating cause she litterally inhales the stuff. How much are you feeding? We feed ours between 2/3 and 3/4 a cup twice a day. (once in the morning and once at night) I would not suggest feeding as much as they recommend on the bag as that is way to much in my opinion. I think we are feeding half of what the bag suggests. We also give her cut up pieces of apples, carrots, and others treats such as Zukes minis and Blue Buffalo Healthy bars through out the day.


less than 2 cups total a day sounds very little for a 3 month old?? and you are only feeding her 2 x's a day?? iwould feed her 3x's a day til about 5-6 months and more food each feeding or 3/4 each feeding if 3 times..i guess it depends how she looks but sounds like she's inhaling because she is going thru a growth spurt and needs more food.. i just saw you are doing the slow growth...i was supposed to as well but its too strict for my liking...esp right at 3 months when they need food the most, i just kept an eye on him and he was always real lean, he was getting 3 cups total a day at 14 weeks and now at 18 weeks 3.5 cups total. Blue buff is also higher in calories so you may be ok.


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

I feed Tag Pro Plan puppy, but in the process of switching him to adult PP and he is 3 months old. I weaned the pups on Blue Buffalo as every store in this podunk town was out of PP. I kept them on it for a while but they had looser stools than I liked so did the switch gradually to PP (my plan all along-yes, I too love PP). Twister my JRT is on BB as it is the only thing I can find he will tolerate.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

oakleysmommy said:


> less than 2 cups total a day sounds very little for a 3 month old?? and you are only feeding her 2 x's a day?? iwould feed her 3x's a day til about 5-6 months and more food each feeding or 3/4 each feeding if 3 times..i guess it depends how she looks but sounds like she's inhaling because she is going thru a growth spurt and needs more food.. i just saw you are doing the slow growth...i was supposed to as well but its too strict for my liking...esp right at 3 months when they need food the most, i just kept an eye on him and he was always real lean, he was getting 3 cups total a day at 14 weeks and now at 18 weeks 3.5 cups total. Blue buff is also higher in calories so you may be ok.


Is 20 lbs to small for her age? I just worry about her having stomach issues if i increase the food to much, and I wonder why change her schedule if everything is fine? But does her weight seem ok at 20 lbs?


----------



## Our first puppy (Apr 15, 2011)

MPHW - We are feeding Loka First Mate High Performance/Puppy food, as it's what her breeder recommended. But after getting loose stool (the tests for worms came back negative), the vet (along with a family friend who's also a vet) seems to think she's got a sensitivity to it, so we're switching to Fromm's. Our vet recommended Hill's Prescription Diet, but like you we liked another brand's ingredients better. We just started the switch and plan to take it very slowly. I've also added some rice into each feeding and that has helped a bit with the soft stool. Is it possible that Rudy has developed an allergy or sensitivity to the new food? Or maybe he just truly doesn't like it that much!!  I wish you luck on finding something that works for both you and your pup! 

mfreib1 - Each pup is different, so please take this with a grain of salt, but 20 lbs does sound a little light to me. Loka was 18lbs at 11 weeks, and I suspect that she is close to 20 now at 11.5 weeks. But it could be that your pup is just smaller than Loka! And I'm certainly no expert in the size differences in puppies! We're feeding 1/2 cup, 3 times a day right now. Plus she gets some veggies, fruit and treats throughout the day. It sounds like things are working well for you though, so just keep in mind that you have to do what feels best for you and your girl!


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

yes 20 lbs sounds good actually, i think what threw me off is she is getting fed 2 times a day not 3. i know the slow growth is 2 times a day i just like 3 times at such a young age..add alittle more food and if her stools are fine then its good..she sounds like Oakley inhaling his food til i added more then he seemed more satisfied. i just looked, Oakley was 21lbs at 13 weeks and went up to 27 lbs at 15weeks


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

Our first puppy said:


> MPHW - We are feeding Loka First Mate High Performance/Puppy food, as it's what her breeder recommended. But after getting loose stool (the tests for worms came back negative), the vet (along with a family friend who's also a vet) seems to think she's got a sensitivity to it, so we're switching to Fromm's. Our vet recommended Hill's Prescription Diet, but like you we liked another brand's ingredients better. We just started the switch and plan to take it very slowly. I've also added some rice into each feeding and that has helped a bit with the soft stool. Is it possible that Rudy has developed an allergy or sensitivity to the new food? Or maybe he just truly doesn't like it that much!!  I wish you luck on finding something that works for both you and your pup!
> 
> mfreib1 - Each pup is different, so please take this with a grain of salt, but 20 lbs does sound a little light to me. Loka was 18lbs at 11 weeks, and I suspect that she is close to 20 now at 11.5 weeks. But it could be that your pup is just smaller than Loka! And I'm certainly no expert in the size differences in puppies! We're feeding 1/2 cup, 3 times a day right now. Plus she gets some veggies, fruit and treats throughout the day. It sounds like things are working well for you though, so just keep in mind that you have to do what feels best for you and your girl!


 Had my pup on Fromms..great food, great company but he was having trouble gaining weight and loose stools..he was also going 7-8 times a day when it firmed up. wish i didnt have to take him off of it, but i did and he goes 3-4 times now all firm


----------



## Our first puppy (Apr 15, 2011)

Thanks oakleysmommy, I'm glad to hear that 20lbs is a good weight. I suppose there's quite a range in sizes! And thanks for the info on Fromm's. I'm really hoping it'll work well for her as it seems like such a good food, plus we can get it easily both where we are now and where we're moving in the fall. But in case we have to switch again, what eventually worked for you? It'll be nice to have some backup choices, just in case...


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

i wish i couldve kept him on the Fromm's great customer service too. they emailed me back within an hour with my questions...i ended up going with Wellness LBP. its funny Oakley got a hold of my Labs food which is Wellness COmplete health,gobbled it up and no loose stools so it dawned on me as to why i didnt put Oakley on Wellness also..so it came about as a surprise!! He is doing great on it and its been a week. zero poop issues finally!! just start off slow on the Fromm's. for some reason for Oakley i think it was the multiple ingredients and the cheese...


----------



## cypress822 (Jun 3, 2011)

check out these web sites that have helped us decide dog food.
Dog Food Analysis - Reviews of kibble
Dog Food Comparison, Ratings, Reviews - In-Depth Guide to the Best Dog Food
Dog Food Reviews | Dog Food Ratings
Hope that helps


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

cypress822 said:


> check out these web sites that have helped us decide dog food.
> Dog Food Analysis - Reviews of kibble
> Dog Food Comparison, Ratings, Reviews - In-Depth Guide to the Best Dog Food
> Dog Food Reviews | Dog Food Ratings
> Hope that helps


With all due respect, I disagree strongly with the worthiness of these websites. All three are written by people with a very specific agenda on dog food that simply isn't science-based. They apply a limited set of unscientific principles to the ingredient list and make a rating. They don't look at how dogs actually do on the food, and they push their agenda rather than the health of the dogs.


----------



## Braccarius (Sep 8, 2008)

tippykayak said:


> With all due respect, I disagree strongly with the worthiness of these websites. All three are written by people with a very specific agenda on dog food that simply isn't science-based. They apply a limited set of unscientific principles to the ingredient list and make a rating. They don't look at how dogs actually do on the food, and they push their agenda rather than the health of the dogs.


I'm actually looking at this site and I'm not generally one to accept someone elses opinion, but it does make sense that Taste of The Wild, Acana and Blue are higher rated than Ol' Roy, Pedigree and Kibbles N' Bits. I don't know if that's much of an agenda or rather common sense.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

Braccarius said:


> I'm actually looking at this site and I'm not generally one to accept someone elses opinion, but it does make sense that Taste of The Wild, Acana and Blue are higher rated than Ol' Roy, Pedigree and Kibbles N' Bits. I don't know if that's much of an agenda or rather common sense.


I'm with you, if you go by quality of ingredients the ratings seem pretty fair. If your dog does not do well on higher protien foods then the previous poster is right, you may need to try something else. But to say they have an agenda????? Botton line: every dog is different and does well on a different food, feed what you want.


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

Braccarius said:


> I'm actually looking at this site and I'm not generally one to accept someone elses opinion, but it does make sense that Taste of The Wild, Acana and Blue are higher rated than Ol' Roy, Pedigree and Kibbles N' Bits. I don't know if that's much of an agenda or rather common sense.


 Well that is why i mentioned that site just to get "an idea" of whats just allittle better than puppy chow as corn is first ingredient..i agree ProPlan would be a good choice as well. but def not kibbles n bits..:no:


----------



## Feldenak (May 8, 2011)

mfreib1 said:


> I'm with you, if you go by quality of ingredients the ratings seem pretty fair. If your dog does not do well on higher protien foods then the previous poster is right, you may need to try something else. But to say they have an agenda????? Sounds like someone getting defensive cause they feed a food that is rated low.....maybe Pro Plan? Botton line: every dog is different and does well on a different food, feed what you want.


Go easy there, we're all on the same side here. We want happy, healthy, long lived pups. I've also heard a quite a few positive opinions of Pro Plan. Yes, it's a Purina product but just to dismiss it on brand alone is fool-hardy.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Braccarius said:


> I'm actually looking at this site and I'm not generally one to accept someone elses opinion, but it does make sense that Taste of The Wild, Acana and Blue are higher rated than Ol' Roy, Pedigree and Kibbles N' Bits. I don't know if that's much of an agenda or rather common sense.


Well, sure. Just because they're generally right about some foods, that doesn't mean that their guiding philosophy is accurate. If you rated foods by how much they cost, you'd find that Kibbles N' Bits got a low score and Orijen got a high score, but is cost a true measurement of quality? Of course not.

Some of the foods that get poor ratings on those sites are the same foods that are fed by top competitors in conformation and sport. And some foods are rated low because of prejudice about ingredients that isn't based in science (like their automatic preference for muscle meat meal over byproduct meal or the myth that this or that grain isn't digestible). And some foods are rated high even though lots and lots of dogs (at least on GRF) seem to get pretty sick on them.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> I'm with you, if you go by quality of ingredients the ratings seem pretty fair. If your dog does not do well on higher protien foods then the previous poster is right, you may need to try something else. But to say they have an agenda????? Sounds like someone getting defensive cause they feed a food that is rated low.....maybe Pro Plan? Botton line: every dog is different and does well on a different food, feed what you want.


"Somebody," eh? I don't feed ProPlan, though I would certainly recommend it to people as a food with a great track record. Many, many winning competitors in show and field give their dogs ProPlan. And I'm not defensive because of the food I feed. I'm critical of these sites because I can tell the difference between a claim that sounds good and one that's grounded in real evidence.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> "Somebody," eh?


Yes I was refering to you. You got all defensive and starting claiming these sites have hidden agendas and what not, when maybe, just maybe they are trying to inform pet owners. Obviously you should take everything you read and hear with a grain of salt. Call me crazy but I would think a food where the main ingredients are fish/chicken and fruits and veggies is better than some of the lower rated ones that include lots of corns and fillers. Personally I dont need any scientific proof or research, seems pretty cut and dry to me, I guess some people are different though....


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

mfreib1 said:


> Yes I was refering to you. You got all defensive and starting claiming these sites have hidden agendas and what not, when maybe, just maybe they are trying to inform pet owners. Obviously you should take everything you read and hear with a grain of salt. Call me crazy but I would think a food where the main ingredients are fish/chicken and fruits and veggies is better than some of the lower rated ones that include lots of corns, grains and fillers. Personally I dont need any scientific proof or research, seems pretty cut and dry to me, I guess some people are different though....


 i agree......


----------



## Feldenak (May 8, 2011)

mfreib1 said:


> Yes I was refering to you. You got all defensive and starting claiming these sites have hidden agendas and what not, when maybe, just maybe they are trying to inform pet owners. Obviously you should take everything you read and hear with a grain of salt. Call me crazy but I would think a food where the main ingredients are fish/chicken and fruits and veggies is better than some of the lower rated ones that include lots of corns and fillers. Personally I dont need any scientific proof or research, seems pretty cut and dry to me, I guess some people are different though....


I'll go with the science. If my vet says it's a good food and it meets the AAFCO guidelines, then the food is ok in my book. Why are we getting all confrontational on this? If your pup is doing well on a certain food, then by all means, recommend it. There's no need to deride someone else's opinion to make your point. You don't like ProPlan, ok. Personally, I don't feed ProPlan (we use Fromm) but it's on the list of recommended foods supplied by my vet, plenty of dogs do quite well on it and the food is nutritionally balanced.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

Feldenak said:


> I'll go with the science. If my vet says it's a good food and it meets the AAFCO guidelines, then the food is ok in my book. Why are we getting all confrontational on this? If your pup is doing well on a certain food, then by all means, recommend it. There's no need to deride someone else's opinion to make your point. You don't like ProPlan, ok. Personally, I don't feed ProPlan (we use Fromm) but it's on the list of recommended foods supplied by my vet, plenty of dogs do quite well on it and the food is nutritionally balanced.


Woah woah woah, I never said I didnt like Pro Plan, its just an example of one of the low rated foods that a lot of people on here use, and these same people have called these sites out for being BS for that exact reason. So when the previous poster who claimed these sites have agendas I figured I would use Pro Plan as my example. I agree if your dog does well on something feed them that. A lot of times Vets will recommend certain foods because they get free product and money from the food companies for pushing the product on patients and supply it in their Vet Clinics, thats fact, just as certain human doctors prescribe certain prescriptions. My Vet tried to push Hill's Science Diet on me but i never conisdered using it cause I had researched the ingredients. My breeder had warned me that the two biggest contributers to Vet Clinics and Vet Schools in our area are Purrina and Hill's which is why a lot of Vets will suggest these two products......she said she had tried Science Diet with her dogs cause they gave her a bunch of free product to try and get her to use it but the dogs did terrible on it so she switched back to what she had previously used, don't remember what is was though. My cousin gives her Golden Hill's Science Diet (we have the same vet so go figure) and her dog does great on it, but doesn't mean I'm going to use it. I think those sites are are good way to inform new owners of ingredients in the different foods so they can make their OWN informed decision on what to feed their dog.


----------



## CO_Dog_Lover (May 19, 2011)

Feldenak said:


> If my vet says it's a good food and it meets the AAFCO guidelines, then the food is ok in my book.


While I love my vets, I definately don't take their opinion on pet food. Most vets have very little to no nutritional training in school, and while they do have some valuable insight because of their training on the A&P of pets what nutritional training they do get is sponsered by pet food companies who will of course try to sell their product. My vet after moving to CO tried to push SD on me for my senior cat with IBD, I expressed my desires, and we came to an agreement we were both comfortable with (take him off a primary diet of raw and feed Wellness core as his primary with raw snacks throughout the day)


----------



## inge (Sep 20, 2009)

mfreib1 said:


> Yes I was refering to you. You got all defensive and starting claiming these sites have hidden agendas and what not, when maybe, just maybe they are trying to inform pet owners. Obviously you should take everything you read and hear with a grain of salt. Call me crazy but I would think a food where the main ingredients are fish/chicken and fruits and veggies is better than some of the lower rated ones that include lots of corns and fillers. Personally I dont need any scientific proof or research, seems pretty cut and dry to me, I guess some people are different though....


I think you should back down a bit...Everyone on this thread is entitled to give his or her opinion, without being called names. Food is always a hot topic on the forum, but it must be possible to discuss it without getting personal.


----------



## Feldenak (May 8, 2011)

mfreib1 said:


> Woah woah woah, I never said I didnt like Pro Plan, its just an example of one of the low rated foods that a lot of people on here use, and these same people have called these sites out for being BS for that exact reason. So when the previous poster who claimed these sites have agendas I figured I would use Pro Plan as my example. I agree if your dog does well on something feed them that. A lot of times Vets will recommend certain foods because they get free product and money from the food companies for pushing the product on patients and supply it in their Vet Clinics, thats fact, just as certain human doctors prescribe certain prescriptions. My Vet tried to push Hill's Science Diet on me but i never conisdered using it cause I had researched the ingredients. My breeder had warned me that the two biggest contributers to Vet Clinics and Vet Schools in our area are Purrina and Hill's which is why a lot of Vets will suggest these two products......she said she had tried Science Diet with her dogs cause they gave her a bunch of free product to try and get her to use it but the dogs did terrible on it so she switched back to what she had previously used, don't remember what is was though.


Maybe I just got lucky with my vet, she doesn't try to push any certain foods. She does stock SD in her office and it's on the list of recommended foods but she doesn't push it. I've asked her why she recommends certain foods/products and she'll explain the science behind her recommendation. Our cat's are fed SD (dental health formula) because their teeth are showing the age of the cats. Their teeth & gums have improved and they're in stunningly good health for their age. SD was recommended by the vet for their teeth but so were half a dozen other foods that she doesn't stock.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

inge said:


> I think you should back down a bit...Everyone on this thread is entitled to give his or her opinion, without being called names. Food is always a hot topic on the forum, but it must be possible to discuss it without getting personal.


 
I'm sorry....when exactly did I do any name calling?


----------



## inge (Sep 20, 2009)

Let's keep it focused on the food...


----------



## Mavrk (Mar 11, 2011)

I didn't read all the replies so please forgive me if this has been covered.

First, we tried the blue buffalo brand food for our adult dog (Rocket) and he would eat it VERY slow. He often would just leave it and skip a day. When we got Sunshine she was/is on Pro Plan puppy. We decided to go with the Pro Plan Selects for her adult food in the future, so we switched Rocket over to that. He now eats right away and finishes at a good rate (he actually chews food unlike Sunshine who is a vacuum). He actually had the regular Pro Plan a couple of times and eats that really fast.

Secondly, I read that your vet recommended a Large Breed food. There is a Pro Plan Large Breed Puppy (and adult) food. We don't use the large breed formula, so you really can go either way. Large Breed foods have fewer calories so you might need to feed more of it. To go with regular or large breed for a standard golden is really just a personal choice. My breeder does not use large breed for her dogs, so I don't either.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

inge said:


> Let's keep it focused on the food...


I believe we are.....Back to the topic of Vets suggesting food, we met another couple walking their Golden the other night and long story short the topic of food came up. I won't mention the food but their Vet had recommended it and they went on about how "O its the best no corn no nothing just chicken and good stuff, vet told us so" Well being the skeptical person I am I went home to do a little research, and sure enough after going to Petco's site and viewing the product, the 4th, 7th, and 8th ingredients were all corn meal or whole corn. Now I'm not suggesting a little corn is bad but they were under the impression from their Vet that there was zero corn in their food. I guess the moral of the story is to do your research along with your Vet's suggestion when it comes to food?


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

I think we all just want to feed what we feel it the best for our dogs..but what we feel is best isnt best for our dogs. Like i stated in another thread my shepard who is 13 eats science diet no health issues in 13 years..i try to tell my hubby to switch him to a "better" food he says why hes done great on this for 13 years..he's right though. if we switched him to something thats better in my opionin, we can open a whole new can of worms..whatever works works as long as they are healthy ...i eat cookies, cake, junk food is it healthy? nope but it works for me) im at the gym every day without fail...im healthy)))))


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

oakleysmommy said:


> I think we all just want to feed what we feel it the best for our dogs..but what we feel is best isnt best for our dogs. Like i stated in another thread my shepard who is 13 eats science diet no health issues in 13 years..i try to tell my hubby to switch him to a "better" food he says why hes done great on this for 13 years..he's right though. if we switched him to something thats better in my opionin, we can open a whole new can of worms..whatever works works as long as they are healthy ...i eat cookies, cake, junk food is it healthy? nope but it works for me) im at the gym every day without fail...im healthy)))))


 
Very well said


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> Yes I was refering to you. You got all defensive and starting claiming these sites have hidden agendas and what not, when maybe, just maybe they are trying to inform pet owners. Obviously you should take everything you read and hear with a grain of salt. Call me crazy but I would think a food where the main ingredients are fish/chicken and fruits and veggies is better than some of the lower rated ones that include lots of corns and fillers. Personally I dont need any scientific proof or research, seems pretty cut and dry to me, I guess some people are different though....


I didn't say hidden agenda. I said agenda. The agenda is as clear as day.

And on what basis do you think that an apple is more appropriate food for a dog than corn is?


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> My breeder had warned me that the two biggest contributers to Vet Clinics and Vet Schools in our area are Purrina and Hill's which is why a lot of Vets will suggest these two products.


Why don't we let the vets on the forum let us know whether they received pressure during their schooling or careers to push Purina products, rather than going off a breeder's word about some kind of seedy relationship between a company and a vet school. If a company donates to a vet school, I think that's a positive mark for that company. I doubt we'll see any evidence that the company is building some kind of inappropriate influence at the school.



mfreib1 said:


> I think those sites are are good way to inform new owners of ingredients in the different foods so they can make their OWN informed decision on what to feed their dog.


And I don't. Going off of somebody else's rating is not making your own informed decision, especially when that rating is created from a set of arbitrary principles rather than sound nutritional science. I find those sites entirely misleading when it comes to judging what's actually good for a dog.


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

we as humans eat crap food you cant say you dont, but i think we TRY to balance it out...same with our dogs theyre gonna eat crap whether its table scraps, kibble what have you. we can all eat healthier. but then again you can eat healthy all your life, chicken,veggies,salad fruit, workout everyday and drop dead of cancer or heartattack but we try to prevent it, but life gets in the way...for 3 years i did comps and dieted for 3 months straight living on tuna from a can, eggwhites up the wazoo, asparagus and fish i dreaded every moment of it..we all need that sugar rush to stay sane


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> I'm sorry....when exactly did I do any name calling?


You called me "defensive" twice. Hardly a nasty piece of name calling, but certainly focused at me rather than at the topic.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> I guess the moral of the story is to do your research along with your Vet's suggestion when it comes to food?


I definitely think doing your own research is a good idea. You just gave an example of how a vet was wrong about a food. If we can trust vets, why are you telling us to trust a dentist?


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> I definitely think doing your own research is a good idea. You just gave an example of how a vet was wrong about a food. If we can trust vets, why are you telling us to trust a dentist?


What are you talking about? Who said anything about a dentist. And your right, companies just donate to Vet Schools and Clinics out of the goodness of their hearts......haha get real its a calculated business decision and a very good one at that. Im not saying the Vet didnt know what they were talking about I'm saying the Vet led the patient belive something that was not true. Do ALL Vets do that......hell no


----------



## Feldenak (May 8, 2011)

mfreib1 said:


> Woah woah woah, I never said I didnt like Pro Plan, its just an example of one of the low rated foods that a lot of people on here use, and these same people have called these sites out for being BS for that exact reason. So when the previous poster who claimed these sites have agendas I figured I would use Pro Plan as my example. I agree if your dog does well on something feed them that. A lot of times Vets will recommend certain foods because they get free product and money from the food companies for pushing the product on patients and supply it in their Vet Clinics, thats fact, just as certain human doctors prescribe certain prescriptions. My Vet tried to push Hill's Science Diet on me but i never conisdered using it cause I had researched the ingredients. My breeder had warned me that the two biggest contributers to Vet Clinics and Vet Schools in our area are Purrina and Hill's which is why a lot of Vets will suggest these two products......she said she had tried Science Diet with her dogs cause they gave her a bunch of free product to try and get her to use it but the dogs did terrible on it so she switched back to what she had previously used, don't remember what is was though.


Maybe I just got lucky with my vet, she doesn't try to push any certain foods. She does stock Hill's Prescription Diet in her office. I've asked her why she recommends certain foods/products and she'll explain the science behind her recommendation. Our cat's are fed Hill's PD (dental health formula) because their teeth are showing the age of the cats. Their teeth & gums have improved and they're in stunningly good health for their age. PD was recommended by the vet for their teeth but so were half a dozen other foods that she doesn't stock.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> What are you talking about? Who said anything about a dentist. And your right, companies just donate to Vet Schools and Clinics out of the goodness of their hearts......haha get real its a calculated business decision and a very good one at that


You did. Click the link. Dog food advisor ratings are written by a dentist. 

And do you honestly think that donating to a vet school (good business decision, good PR, tax writeoff, sure) buys them influence like you insinuated? Do you think that vets will push a food they don't believe is best just because the company donated to their alma mater?


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

> And I don't. Going off of somebody else's rating is not making your own informed decision, especially when that rating is created from a set of arbitrary principles rather than sound nutritional science. I find those sites entirely misleading when it comes to judging what's actually good for a dog.


Do some research on corn you will find a lot more negative findings than positive. Corn subsidies have totaled over $75 BILLION since 1995 and could be over $5 billion this next year. Because of this corn is dirt cheap. Why do you think some companies use so much of it in food? Ever wonder why sometimes corn comes out whole when you poo? (sorry for the gross reference, and everyone knows it has happened to them) It's cause it's not easily digestible. Dogs were meant to eat meat and other things found natually in the wild.


----------



## Braccarius (Sep 8, 2008)

tippykayak said:


> I didn't say hidden agenda. I said agenda. The agenda is as clear as day.
> 
> And on what basis do you think that an apple is more appropriate food for a dog than corn is?


I think this is time for another GRF Challenge. I challenge TippyKayak to feed his dog 4 servings of corn and corncobs.... I shall feed my dog 4 apples in one day. He who has the worst diarreah loses...

LoL


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> You did. Click the link. Dog food advisor ratings are written by a dentist.
> 
> And do you honestly think that donating to a vet school (good business decision, good PR, tax writeoff, sure) buys them influence like you insinuated? Do you think that vets will push a food they don't believe is best just because the company donated to their alma mater?


I never spoke to any site in particular, and I have never been to the one you are making reference to, the one I have used is dogfoodanalysis.com. So no I never told anyone to trust a dentist. And yes I do believe that some Vets will push a food that donates to their alma mater if they think it is acceptable for your dog to eat but not necessarily what is BEST for them. I think if you put the ingredients of a lower rated food on one of these sites next to the ingredients of a higher rated food and took the "name brand" off the top and asked the vet which one would be better for your dog, 9 times out of 10 i would think they would go with the higher rated food. Just my opinion though.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

braccarius said:


> i think this is time for another grf challenge. I challenge tippykayak to feed his dog 4 servings of corn and corncobs.... I shall feed my dog 4 apples in one day. He who has the worst diarreah loses...
> 
> Lol


 
hahaha do it


----------



## cypress822 (Jun 3, 2011)

Anyways....I posted those websites just to give people a resource of reviews. Personally, I like the websites. They all seem consistent more or less...they seem to agree on which foods are good and poor quality.
Agenda? I disagree with that respectfully. I believe they are reputable websites and reviews. I cant imagine all three websites having the same "agenda", _and_ coming up with the same results. In addition, high end dog food boutiques seem to sell the "higher quality dog food" found at the top of the lists, as opposed to the "lower" quality dog food.
So, thats what im going with.


----------



## Feldenak (May 8, 2011)

cypress822 said:


> Anyways....I posted those websites just to give people a resource of reviews. Personally, I like the websites. They all seem consistent more or less...they seem to agree on which foods are good and poor quality.
> Agenda? I disagree with that respectfully. I believe they are reputable websites and reviews. I cant imagine all three websites having the same "agenda", _and_ coming up with the same results. In addition, high end dog food boutiques seem to sell the "higher quality dog food" found at the top of the lists, as opposed to the "lower" quality dog food.
> So, thats what im going with.


I like the websites too. It's a hand research tool to rapidly look at the ingredients of various dog foods without standing in the store and reading the labels there.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> Do some research on corn you will find a lot more negative findings than positive. Corn subsidies have totaled over $75 BILLION since 1995 and could be over $5 billion this next year. Because of this corn is dirt cheap. Why do you think some companies use so much of it in food? Ever wonder why sometimes corn comes out whole when you poo? (sorry for the gross reference, and everyone knows it has happened to them) It's cause it's not easily digestible. Dogs were meant to eat meat and other things found natually in the wild.


Research where? On a dog food website? Or in a scientific journal? Corn is a popular villain in food discussions these days, and corn byproducts are certainly overused in processed human foods. We certainly consume too much sugar in our human diets, and corn syrup is the most common of those sugars. None of this, though, has any bearing on whether ground whole corn is bad for dogs. It isn't.

If you really believe that you cannot digest corn, why do you eat it? Obviously you do, if it's showing up in your poop. What you see there, by the way, is called the pericarp, and it's the hard outer shell of the corn seed. You've digested the inner part where all the calories and vitamins are. Corn is perfectly digestible, and you don't believe that it isn't, or you wouldn't eat it, so why say that? Your argument is totally specious. Furthermore, the corn in dog food is ground, which makes it even easier to digest.

If dogs were meant to eat meat, why don't you feed your dog all meat? Why the emphasis on fruits and veggies? Are you claiming that dogs would eat apples in the wild but not corn? You don't actually believe the line of reasoning that you're using. You're just using it because you're trying to win the argument. You know that dogs thrive on a diet balanced with meat and vegetable matter, and you said it a few posts ago. The question is how much. Too much corn is a bad thing, but there's nothing to fear about corn itself.

Corn is certainly cheap, and we are unfortunately not allowed to have a political argument about whether corn subsidies should be ended. But there's no relationship between how nutritious something is and how inexpensive it is. Ever buy kale? It's dirt cheap.

You're using lines straight from those dog food websites, and I don't believe it there nor when you repeat it. It's based in assumptions and faulty reasoning, not evidence-based study of dogs.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Braccarius said:


> I think this is time for another GRF Challenge. I challenge TippyKayak to feed his dog 4 servings of corn and corncobs.... I shall feed my dog 4 apples in one day. He who has the worst diarreah loses...
> 
> LoL


If I feed my dogs the entire ear of corn including the cobs, they'll get really ill.

If you feed your dogs the entire apples, including the cores, I wonder how much cyanide they'll end up taking in. Probably not enough to kill them, but it can't be a good idea.

And if you're asking whether a dog would get sicker on corn off the cob vs. cored apples, I think the apples would make the dog much sicker much faster.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> If I feed my dogs the entire ear of corn including the cobs, they'll get really ill.
> 
> If you feed your dogs the entire apples, including the cores, I wonder how much cyanide they'll end up taking in. Probably not enough to kill them, but it can't be a good idea.
> 
> And if you're asking whether a dog would get sicker on corn off the cob vs. cored apples, I think the apples would make the dog much sicker much faster.


haha this person is in true denial. Calling me out for just wanting to start an argument huh? Pot calling the kettle black right there........And I'm not reciting stuff off other "dog" websites as you claim, my opinion comes from my personal research on corn and it's affects on animals. O and I eat corn cause I like the way it tastes, not cause I'm trying to eat something that is going to give me all kind of nutrients. I know im wasting my time right now typing because you are so dead set on just being right.......


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

cypress822 said:


> Anyways....I posted those websites just to give people a resource of reviews. Personally, I like the websites. They all seem consistent more or less...they seem to agree on which foods are good and poor quality.
> Agenda? I disagree with that respectfully. I believe they are reputable websites and reviews. I cant imagine all three websites having the same "agenda", _and_ coming up with the same results. In addition, high end dog food boutiques seem to sell the "higher quality dog food" found at the top of the lists, as opposed to the "lower" quality dog food.
> So, thats what im going with.


When I say "agenda," I simply mean that they have a particular philosophy of dog food that they push, and those websites are actually pretty consistent. They don't assess how dogs do on food, and they don't do any direct research. They look at the bag and assess whether the food fits their philosophy. And that philosophy is not based in scientific evidence, but rather in assumptions that are sometimes provably false.

For example:

Assumption #1: dogs are wolves, and wolves are carnivores so dogs should eat mostly or all meat. That's false. For over 10,000 years, dogs have evolved to eat human leavings and garbage, and they have significantly different dietary needs than wolves (though they're technically the same species as the gray wolf). Even most of the "grain free" foods simply substitute potato or some kind of starch because they know they can't make a kibble totally out of meat products that will really sustain a dog's health.

Assumption #2: grains are bad for dogs. That's false too. There's no evidence to support this claim. Grains are not as common an allergen as they'd have you believe, and grain allergies are fairly rare—not totally unknown, but fairly rare.

Assumption #3: byproducts are inferior to muscle meat. That's false as well. "Byproduct" is as carefully defined an ingredient as "meat" or "meat meal" in a dog food. It includes muscle meat, ground bone, skin, and organ meat. That means it has a different nutritional composition than muscle meat, but it actually has a wider variety of nutrients. One simply isn't better than the other. They're just different. Organ meat and ground bone may not appeal to our human sensibilities, but that doesn't mean they're bad; they're loaded with nutrients.

So that's what I mean when I say "agenda" and "evidence-based." And "high end" dog food boutiques sell expensive food that they can charge a high margin on. Just the same way that a grocery store sells cheaper food that they can move more of. Neither business model tells you if the food is any good.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> haha this person is in true denial. Calling me out for just wanting to start an argument huh? Pot calling the kettle black right there........


I'm not calling you out for wanting to start an argument. I'm saying that you're making points that contradict themselves because you want to win, not because you really believe in those ideas.


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

I, for one appreciate Tippykayak's studied responses. I have learned a lot in just his last few posts. I didn't know the corn "tracers" in in poop was called pericarp! :

Seriously, thank you Tippy for keeping grounded in this discussion and voicing unbiased commentary.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> I'm not calling you out for wanting to start an argument. I'm saying that you're making points that contradict themselves because you want to win, not because you really believe in those ideas.


Show me one place where I said a dog should eat corn....one place. If you can't do that then how have I contradicted myself.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

DNL2448 said:


> I, for one appreciate Tippykayak's studied responses. I have learned a lot in just his last few posts. I didn't know the corn "tracers" in in poop was called pericarp! :
> 
> Seriously, thank you Tippy for keeping grounded in this discussion and voicing unbiased commentary.


Are you kidding me? Definition of biased: Show prejudice for or against (someone or something) unfairly. This whole argument started because they pretty said they thought that those websites were complete BS and had an agenda. Seems like a pretty "biased" opinion to me.....BTW to add, definition of unbiased: Showing no prejudice for or against something; impartial. They do seem pretty impartial on the matter huh? Again are you kidding?


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> Show me one place where I said a dog should eat corn....one place. If you can't do that then how have I contradicted myself.


You said that dogs should eat fruits and vegetables in one post, then you said, "Dogs were meant to eat meat and other things found natually in the wild." 

So you're somehow making the argument either that dogs should only eat meat (which you yourself disagree with) or that dogs should eat meat and "other things." Which is it? Why is an apple more natural than an ear of corn?


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

Nope, not kidding! I do appreciate Tippy's responses to more than just that one post. De gustibus non es disputantum. (Meaning I can agree with his opinion if I wanna).


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> Are you kidding me? Definition of biased: Show prejudice for or against (someone or something) unfairly. This whole argument started because they pretty said they thought that those websites were complete BS and had an agenda. Seems like a pretty "biased" opinion to me.....BTW to add, definition of unbiased: Showing no prejudice for or against something; impartial. They do seem pretty impartial on the matter huh? Again are you kidding?


By your logic, liking those websites is equally biased.

I don't think I'm biased in my approach to the three dog food websites linked. Having read some of their reviews and their "about" pages where they explain their philosophies, I don't believe that those philosophies are grounded in hard science. They seem to be grounded in philosophy and assumption rather than in evidence.

I can't claim to be 100% unbiased, and I don't think anybody can, but I do think I can pretty honestly claim to have _fairly_ evaluated those websites.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

> Assumption #3: byproducts are inferior to muscle meat. That's false as well. "Byproduct" is as carefully defined an ingredient as "meat" or "meat meal" in a dog food. It includes muscle meat, ground bone, skin, and organ meat. That means it has a different nutritional composition than muscle meat, but it actually has a wider variety of nutrients. One simply isn't better than the other. They're just different. Organ meat and ground bone may not appeal to our human sensibilities, but that doesn't mean they're bad; they're loaded with nutrients.


This is random, but I was at the petstore last weekend to pick up dog food for my guy and I noticed a brand new brand that they are stocking. <- I don't remember the name of the dog food, but it advertized being all or mostly organ meat. 

Made me realize how far we've come since 2000 (or so) when we first started hearing about the BARF diet and feeding raw.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Megora said:


> This is random, but I was at the petstore last weekend to pick up dog food for my guy and I noticed a brand new brand that they are stocking. <- I don't remember the name of the dog food, but it advertized being all or mostly organ meat.
> 
> Made me realize how far we've come since 2000 (or so) when we first started hearing about the BARF diet and feeding raw.


I know! I always find the prejudice against byproducts odd when I know that some of the most serious raw feeders know that it's an amazing part of their dogs' diets.


----------



## Braccarius (Sep 8, 2008)

tippykayak said:


> If I feed my dogs the entire ear of corn including the cobs, they'll get really ill.
> 
> If you feed your dogs the entire apples, including the cores, I wonder how much cyanide they'll end up taking in. Probably not enough to kill them, but it can't be a good idea.
> 
> And if you're asking whether a dog would get sicker on corn off the cob vs. cored apples, I think the apples would make the dog much sicker much faster.


No fairs! I forgot about the stupid seeds and the fact that I have always cored any apples I've fed my dogs :doh::doh::doh:! You cheeted! .

On a more serious note, I would never feed my dog 4 apples in a day nor 4 full husks of corn. Even if they didn't get extremely sick they would certainly be very uncomfortable.


----------



## Feldenak (May 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> By your logic, liking those websites is equally biased.
> 
> I don't think I'm biased in my approach to the three dog food websites linked. Having read some of their reviews and their "about" pages where they explain their philosophies, I don't believe that those philosophies are grounded in hard science. They seem to be grounded in philosophy and assumption rather than in evidence.
> 
> I can't claim to be 100% unbiased, and I don't think anybody can, but I do think I can pretty honestly claim to have _fairly_ evaluated those websites.


You have to admit, using those websites is handy for checking the labels of multiple dog foods is helpful though. You can drive past their conclusions to easily evaluate foods for yourself based on their listing of the ingredients in many brands.


----------



## Feldenak (May 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> I know! I always find the prejudice against byproducts odd when I know that some of the most serious raw feeders know that it's an amazing part of their dogs' diets.


There's a lot of valuable nutrition in organ meat.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> By your logic, liking those websites is equally biased.
> 
> I don't think I'm biased in my approach to the three dog food websites linked. Having read some of their reviews and their "about" pages where they explain their philosophies, I don't believe that those philosophies are grounded in hard science. They seem to be grounded in philosophy and assumption rather than in evidence.
> 
> I can't claim to be 100% unbiased, and I don't think anybody can, but I do think I can pretty honestly claim to have _fairly_ evaluated those websites.


I never claimed to be unbiased, but i guess we are going to have to agree to disagree because I do not agree with your opinions and you do not agree with mine. I do not believe that anyone attempted to vouch for the scientific evidence, they just stated that they were good resources to check out different foods, again take that for what you want it to mean. I simply think it is "biased" and unfair for you to claim these people have agendas. Do you personally know the authors of these sites? To rule out the possibility that they are just trying to help people and provide a resource is asinine. I believe one of the sites states in their mission statement that they are not trying to throw anyone under the bus and state that you do not have to agree with their ratings. "It is not the point of this site to explain what is wrong with many commercial pet foods, or to expose the many scandals and unpleasant practices that have gone on in this industry. Rather, the intent of this site is to give an assessment of the various commercial foods available, based on the ingredient information given by the manufacturer. The ratings given and comments made about the foods assessed on this site and ingredients listed are the opinion of the Editors, who are a small team of volunteers each with a long standing interest in dog nutrition. If you disagree with their opinion, you are free to ignore it." If that is an "agenda" to you then I guess we have different defintions of the word. I am assuming you mean they are trying to give the big corporate manufacturers a bad name? Not so sure thats the case.


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom (Oct 4, 2007)

Feldenak said:


> You have to admit, using those websites is handy for checking the labels of multiple dog foods is helpful though. You can drive past their conclusions to easily evaluate foods for yourself based on their listing of the ingredients in many brands.


Be very careful because many of the ingredient listing were done years ago and are very outdated (some as far back as 2007). You're much better off going to the manufacturers website for the current info.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Feldenak said:


> You have to admit, using those websites is handy for checking the labels of multiple dog foods is helpful though. You can drive past their conclusions to easily evaluate foods for yourself based on their listing of the ingredients in many brands.


I tend to go to the manufacturers websites for ingredient lists, since the ingredient lists on the review sites aren't updated after the original review is written, but I agree that it's nice to have the lists pulled together in one place.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Braccarius said:


> No fairs! I forgot about the stupid seeds and the fact that I have always cored any apples I've fed my dogs :doh::doh::doh:! You cheeted! .
> 
> On a more serious note, I would never feed my dog 4 apples in a day nor 4 full husks of corn. Even if they didn't get extremely sick they would certainly be very uncomfortable.


Right. And I wouldn't feed my dog all muscle meat either. Each ingredient provides a different set of qualities and nutrients.


----------



## Feldenak (May 8, 2011)

Thanks. I guess I should read the fine print better.  It's a decent starting place anyway.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> I simply think it is "biased" and unfair for you to claim these people have agendas.


Not when those agendas are posted right on the websites themselves.



mfreib1 said:


> Do you personally know the authors of these sites? To rule out the possibility that they are just trying to help people and provide a resource is asinine.


I have refrained from name calling. I ask you to do the same.



mfreib1 said:


> I believe one of the sites states in their mission statement that they are not trying to throw anyone under the bus and state that you do not have to agree with their ratings. "It is not the point of this site to explain what is wrong with many commercial pet foods, or to expose the many scandals and unpleasant practices that have gone on in this industry. Rather, the intent of this site is to give an assessment of the various commercial foods available, based on the ingredient information given by the manufacturer. The ratings given and comments made about the foods assessed on this site and ingredients listed are the opinion of the Editors, who are a small team of volunteers each with a long standing interest in dog nutrition. If you disagree with their opinion, you are free to ignore it." If that is an "agenda" to you then I guess we have different defintions of the word. I am assuming you mean they are trying to give the big corporate manufacturers a bad name? Not so sure thats the case.


Don't assume. I mean, as I've said a couple of times, that they have a philosophy of dog nutrition that is not evidence-based, and they push that philosophy without using a scientific method. In particular, they ignore any information about how dogs actually do in real life. So I think that they mislead people towards more expensive foods that may be less good for dogs. That's why, when those sites are suggested, I feel it's appropriate to make a comment that I believe those sites are driven by an agenda to push a particular philosophy rather than by a look at hard nutritional science.

I believe that they're probably just trying to help people (though I won't rule out the possibility that they're trying to raise revenue for themselves), but I believe they are misguided and do more harm than good.


----------



## chuckd123 (Apr 5, 2011)

Megora said:


> Why did you switch him off Pro Plan so early? Was he not eating the food or doing well on it?
> 
> Switching puppy foods _can_ give them tummy issues.


Why? 

When I looked at what is in the two, they're almost identical. The size of the kibble is different but once they're 15 pounds or so, they can handle normal food. 

A lot of people suggest adult food as soon as possible for better bone development at a young age instead of too much fat too early. 

I guess it's six of one, half dozen of the other. I moved Alice to adult food pretty quickly and she's transitioned fine.


----------



## Megora (Jun 7, 2010)

chuckd123 said:


> A lot of people suggest adult food as soon as possible for better bone development at a young age instead of too much fat too early.
> 
> I guess it's six of one, half dozen of the other. I moved Alice to adult food pretty quickly and she's transitioned fine.


I can see switching kibble when your dog is 5 months old. And that was something our guy's breeder advised. <- I went with my vet's advice and kept my guy on Large Breed Puppy kibble until he was a year old. It didn't hurt anything and we kept him thin. 

If the two brands are the same or have the same stuff in them, why would you switch then?


----------



## cypress822 (Jun 3, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> I know! I always find the prejudice against byproducts odd when I know that some of the most serious raw feeders know that it's an amazing part of their dogs' diets.


If you believe animal by-products are fine for your pet--I disagree. Below are some references regarding animal by-products in pet food. Maybe after reading you will change your mind.
By the way, raw dog food diets do not have to contain animal by-products. Many high quality raw food diets actually state "no by-products".

***************

Animal by-products are ground, rendered, and cleaned slaughtered meat carcass parts such as necks, feet, undeveloped eggs, bones, heads, and intestines (and a small amount of feathers in the case of chicken) — yes, by-products are as gross and disgusting as they sound. The quality of animal by-products is very inconsistent between batches. In many cases, by-product meals are derived from "4-D" meat sources — defined as food animals that have been rejected for human consumption because they were presented to the meat packing plant as "Dead, Dying, Diseased or Disabled." 

**************************
*What mysterious "meat byproducts" really are*

Let's start with what usually appears as the protein source and the primary ingredient in pet food: Meat byproducts or meat meal. Both are euphemisms for the parts of animals that wouldn't be considered meat by any smart consumer. The well-known phrase "meat byproducts" is a misnomer since these byproducts contain little, if any, meat. These are the parts of the animal left over after the meat has been stripped away from the bone. "Chicken by-products include head, feet, entrails, lungs, spleen, kidneys, brain, liver, stomach, bones, blood, intestines, and any other part of the carcass not fit for human consumption," writes Henry Pasternak in _Healing Animals with Nature's Cures_. Meat meal can contain the boiled down flesh of animals we would find unacceptable for consumption. This can include zoo animals, road kill, and 4-D (dead, diseased, disabled, dying) livestock. Most shockingly, this also can include dogs and cats. That's right, *your pets could be cannibals*. _Fast Food Nation_ author Eric Schlosser writes, "Although leading American manufacturers promise never to put rendered pets into their pet food, it is still legal to do so. A Canadian company, Sanimal Inc., was putting 40,000 pounds of dead dogs and dead cats into its dog and cat food every week, until discontinuing the practice in June 2001. "This food is healthy and good," said the company's vice president of procurement, responding to critics, ''but some people don't like to see meat meal that contains any pets." 

Learn more: The true horrors of pet food revealed: Prepare to be shocked by what goes into dog food and cat food

****************************

* NO Animal By-Products *


At Earth Fare, we believe food should be real and healthy with NO unnatural ingredients.

Animal by-products are anything that is not fit for human consumption. This includes animal brains, stomach, necks, feet, bones, heads, intestines or feathers. Animal by-products are used because they are considered a cheap source of protein. There are no quality standards for animal by-products.

Much of what goes into animal by-products is derived from 4-D meat sources. This meat has been presented to the meat packing plant as *dead, dying, diseased or disabled*. Animal by-products are most commonly found in animal feed, pet food, medicinal products and cosmetics. 

*Why are Animal By-products Unhealthy? *

Animal by-products have been linked to diseases in animals, including mad cow disease. By-products could lead to diseases in pets. 







​


----------



## MPHW (Apr 16, 2011)

I started this thread so I'll answer a couple of questions that people asked me over the past couple of days. Why did we switch Rudi from Pro Plan? Primarily the reason was ingredients. But also, our breeder specified in our contract that we HAD to feed him Pro Plan and required us to send proof of payment of the puppy food for the first year of his life. This sat with us the wrong way. I'm sure it's fine food, but we wanted to make our own decision about what to feed our Rudi. 

He is over his diarrhoea now - we took him to the vet because he was getting dehydrated. He's on antibiotics and back to his usual self. As for feeding, we feed him 3 1/2 cups of food a day (3 feedings a day). He is 14 wks and 25 lbs. Based on his body size, I was thinking that he was too thin. The Vet said that he is in the ideal range for his size, and that he's going to be a large dog. He said that he's lost his square pudgy puppy shape and has taken on more of an adult dog shape. 

If he doesn't get more enthused for his food, we may switch him, but as long as he eats it all up we may stick with Blue Buffalo. I want to thank everyone for their information on food ingredients. This thread has been incredibly informative.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

MPHW said:


> I started this thread so I'll answer a couple of questions that people asked me over the past couple of days. Why did we switch Rudi from Pro Plan? Primarily the reason was ingredients. But also, our breeder specified in our contract that we HAD to feed him Pro Plan and required us to send proof of payment of the puppy food for the first year of his life. This sat with us the wrong way.


Seems really strange that there would be that stipulation......Could they be getting some money under the table maybe??????? Makes you wonder that's for sure.


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

Wow, I've never seen that in a contract, that you had to feed this and show proof of purchase. (Except in the "greeders" that are mixed up with some weird food). 

I sent each of my puppies home with an 8 pound bag of PP, for two reasons. One, so they would have a supply of food for the first week or two, and second so that they would have enough food so they could do a gradual switch over to the brand of their choice. 

I like PP, but there are other foods out there that I think are great too. Just for my circumstances and how my dogs do on the stuff, I'll stick with it.


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

mfreib1 said:


> Seems really strange that there would be that stipulation......Could they be getting some money under the table maybe??????? Makes you wonder that's for sure.


Hey, I wonder where I can find out about this money under the table from Purina? Maybe, I'll ask my vet.:doh:


----------



## MPHW (Apr 16, 2011)

Yes, I'm sure Pro Plan is fine food because so many people feed their dogs that food and everything is fine. I have to be honest that the contract stipulation had a lot to do with our switch. We didn't like the implications of it. Rudi seems very healthy with the minor glitch of eating the hockey puck sized hunk of grass that fell from the bottom of the lawn mower (I'm sure it had mold in it too) that gave him the runs. Every day I look at him and I can't believe how beautiful he is, and that we have this bundle of positive energy in our house with us.


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

MPHW said:


> required us to send proof of payment of the puppy food for the first year of his life.


What kind of proof did you have to send, if you don't mind me asking? Sales receipt or weight circle? If it was the weight circle, I know exactly what they are doing. They are turning them in for the rewards, Purina offers in their Breeder's Club. That's pretty shady if you ask me.


----------



## MPHW (Apr 16, 2011)

When you say 'weight circle', do you mean the bar codes? Yes, that's what was required. Not the sales receipt.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

cypress822 said:


> If you believe animal by-products are fine for your pet--I disagree. Below are some references regarding animal by-products in pet food. Maybe after reading you will change your mind.
> By the way, raw dog food diets do not have to contain animal by-products. Many high quality raw food diets actually state "no by-products".


I would not call unsubstantiated claims copied and pasted from a website "references" by any stretch of the imagination. And if you think I would start talking about byproducts without having read the kind of nonsense you just copied, you appear to have underestimated my ability to do research.



cypress822 said:


> Animal by-products are ground, rendered, and cleaned slaughtered meat carcass parts such as necks, feet, undeveloped eggs, bones, heads, and intestines (and a small amount of feathers in the case of chicken)


This is true, though "meat" by FDA definitions is allowed to have just as many feathers as byproducts are (usually defined as the amount that normally occurs during normal handling).



cypress822 said:


> — yes, by-products are as gross and disgusting as they sound. The quality of animal by-products is very inconsistent between batches. In many cases, by-product meals are derived from "4-D" meat sources — defined as food animals that have been rejected for human consumption because they were presented to the meat packing plant as "Dead, Dying, Diseased or Disabled."


This last bit is not true. The difference between "meat" and "byproduct" by the FDA definitions doesn't change what animals can be used. If you believe that dangerously diseased animals are being used in animal food (and by the way, there's little if any evidence of this), they're also being slaughtered for the "human" grade meat you're buying at the grocery store and the "meat" (or "beef" or "chicken") ingredient in any brand of pet food.

And I don't know what sounds so disgusting about organs. The mouse truffée in my fridge is mashed up chicken, duck, and pork livers. The haggis I bought in Scotland is stomach, intestines, and lungs. I once paid $30 for an appetizer of "sweetbread," which is thymus gland. It was really freaking good.

It's all meat, whether or not you prefer the flavor or the idea of a particular muscle or organ. And any violation of the law in handling that meat applies to "meat" just as it applies to "byproduct" on a pet food bag. Personally, I don't like "meat byproduct meal" as an ingredient simply because you can't tell which animal it came from and I prefer to keep my dogs' main food on a single animal protein.

So technically, "meat" meal could include cats, dogs, pigeons, rats, whatever (and by the way, just avoiding "byproducts" doesn't save you from this), but it generally doesn't, and the problem there is the FDA definition of "meat," not the definition of "byproduct."



cypress822 said:


> Animal by-products have been linked to diseases in animals, including mad cow disease. By-products could lead to diseases in pets.


This is so misleading that it borders on an outright lie. Brain used to be more common as a food for people and as an ingredient in byproducts, and mad cow (bovine spongiform encephalitis) is passed through the consumption of brain matter. Since the outbreak of BSE, cow brain is no longer considered a safe food and is no longer allowed in byproduct meal or in people food.

Aside from the risk of BSE (which is no risk under the current definition of byproduct), what diseases can be passed through byproducts that aren't equally problematic in muscle meat?

Please don't trust everything you read online. That quote from "Sanimal, Inc" is absolutely ridiculous, and I can't find anywhere online that even indicates they make pet food (they do market byproducts), much less that their executive ever said anything like that. Can you find any independent corroboration whatsoever of that claim?

Don't believe everything you read online! (including me!)


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

Perhaps the breeder stipulated ProPlan because she knows her dogs have thrived on it for years and wanted to ensure that the owners didn't cause growth problems by feeding a so-called premium food with too many calories and too much calcium and phosphorus.

Edit: I just read that the breeder is taking the proofs of purchase. If they can redeem those for perks, that's garbage.


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

MPHW said:


> When you say 'weight circle', do you mean the bar codes? Yes, that's what was required. Not the sales receipt.


The weight circle is on the upper part of the bag on the side. The bar codes do not qualify for the breeder program. What is the issue if you do not feed your puppy Pro Plan? Does it void your health guarantee? I hope not. Of course, a reputable breeder wouldn't make that stipulation (at least I hope they wouldn't).


----------



## Lilly's Nite Dream (Apr 13, 2011)

Any one have any experience feeding Taste of The Wild? My 6 month old loves it. She grazes on the dry food throughout the day and gets one can of wet per day. It says it is appropriate for all ages. I really like how natural it is... you can understand all the ingredients. Anyone have experience feeding this? Thanks!!


----------



## MPHW (Apr 16, 2011)

I'm pretty sure it's the bar code, but I'd have to check the contract to be sure. But yes, it voids the health guarantee. We didn't really care though because we're not ever going to give back our puppy if something goes wrong. I'm not convinced that our breeder is shady - I'd like to think that they just think that Pro Plan is the best food and know this to be so after many years experience as a breeder. And maybe they get some perks out of it. If the food was horrendous, I would have a problem with that, but I don't think it is. At the end of the day, something about it all seemed a bit underhanded, which I guess ...is a bit shady after all.


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

MPHW said:


> I'm pretty sure it's the bar code, but I'd have to check the contract to be sure. But yes, it voids the health guarantee. We didn't really care though because we're not ever going to give back our puppy if something goes wrong. I'm not convinced that our breeder is shady - I'd like to think that they just think that Pro Plan is the best food and know this to be so after many years experience as a breeder. And maybe they get some perks out of it. If the food was horrendous, I would have a problem with that, but I don't think it is. At the end of the day, something about it all seemed a bit underhanded, which I guess ...is a bit shady after all.


I'm not sure how I feel about that condition, but the best possible interpretation would be that the breeder is afraid of growth issues that might be worsened by the wrong kinds of nutrition (including the wrong premium food) and is trying to protect the dogs.


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

Interesting.


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

tippykayak said:


> I'm not sure how I feel about that condition, but the best possible interpretation would be that the breeder is afraid of growth issues that might be worsened by the wrong kinds of nutrition (including the wrong premium food) and is trying to protect the dogs.


I know how I feel about that, and it's not favorable. For one they have to feed PP for one year or it voids the guarantees. So, and I'm guessing here, the guarantees are only good for a year anyway? You can't OFA until the dog is 2 years old. Let's hope it is for the health and wellfare of the pup.


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> Please don't trust everything you read online.


But go ahead and trust EVERYTHING tippykayak says, he knows all, just ask him........


----------



## DNL2448 (Feb 13, 2009)

mfreib1 said:


> But go ahead and trust EVERYTHING tippykayak says, he knows all, just ask him........


How rude. :no:


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> But go ahead and trust EVERYTHING tippykayak says, he knows all, just ask him........


Umm...did you read to the end of my post? Or did you just get angry at me and post something mean?




tippykayak said:


> Don't believe everything you read online! (including me!)


----------



## jpajinag (Nov 25, 2010)

I have actually seen a few "breeders" that require that their pups be fed certian foods their first so many years or it voids health contracts (I was just looking online and curious about various breeders and their contracts). They always stated it was because they wanted what was best for their pups and to avoid weight induced joint problems etc.

On a seperate not, I mix various foods together for my 5 1/2 month old male, one of which is Taste of The Wild, and he too LOVES it. He is doing great on his food. 

Food choice is a very touchy subject. With all the food allergies / sensitivities (human and pet) everyone needs to do what they feel is best for their pet and family. Recommendations and experiences are just that! It is up to each individual to research and listen, but in the end to make their own informed personal decision. Good luck all


----------



## mfreib1 (Apr 8, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> Umm...did you read to the end of my post? Or did you just get angry at me and post something mean?


I didn't read it all. I feel/look stupid haha. My apologies


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

mfreib1 said:


> I didn't read it all. I feel/look stupid haha. My apologies


No worries. I enjoy a frank back and forth in a discussion. I don't like the posts that seem to get insulting, but since I'm guilty of those sometimes too, I also forgive them pretty freely (and I hope people forgive me pretty freely for my posts that seem mean or arrogant).


----------



## CO_Dog_Lover (May 19, 2011)

dang.... this certainly blew up while I was napping this afternoon! lol


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

CO_Dog_Lover said:


> dang.... this certainly blew up while I was napping this afternoon! lol


He he. We do get intense about food sometimes. It's important, though, and there's so much good information and so much misinformation out there. As long as everybody can be a grownup about trying to be nice and apologizing when our tone doesn't come across right, it usually works out OK.


----------



## desi.n.nutro (Mar 18, 2011)

tippykayak said:


> Why the emphasis on fruits and veggies? Are you claiming that dogs would eat apples in the wild but not corn?


Funny story and true.

I have 3 apple trees in the back. When they start falling on the ground in the late summer, the coyotes come through EVERY night and eat the apples. I have a corn stove. In the winter the coyotes come through occasionally and eat from the pile of corn. A vet told me that dogs can acquire a sweet tooth just like people so when they come and eat my sweet apples and corn I fear I am turning them into sugar addicts. lol. The apples and the corn keep them distracted from trying too hard to get my chickens, so YEAH.


----------



## desi.n.nutro (Mar 18, 2011)

I would love it if you looked at the company I work for.

Puppy Food | Large Breed | NUTRO® NATURAL CHOICE® Dog Food

And I just want to say that no pet food company would knowingly add an ingredient that would harm your pet. They are trying to increase their following not scare it off. However; there are ingredients that are better than others. In between potty training and puppy proofing the house, keep looking at all the resources you can. Good luck.


----------



## ebenjamin85 (Apr 13, 2008)

desi.n.nutro said:


> I would love it if you looked at the company I work for.
> 
> Puppy Food | Large Breed | NUTRO® NATURAL CHOICE® Dog Food
> 
> And I just want to say that no pet food company would knowingly add an ingredient that would harm your pet. They are trying to increase their following not scare it off. However; there are ingredients that are better than others. In between potty training and puppy proofing the house, keep looking at all the resources you can. Good luck.


Just looked. Third and Fourth ingredients are corn and wheat respecitvely... common allergens for many dogs. In fact these two ingredients are generally eliminated from most premium dog foods for just that reason.


----------



## Taracherrie (Apr 9, 2011)

Has anyone tried All stages Canidae to feed their pups?


----------



## tippykayak (Oct 27, 2008)

ebenjamin85 said:


> Just looked. Third and Fourth ingredients are corn and wheat respecitvely... common allergens for many dogs. In fact these two ingredients are generally eliminated from most premium dog foods for just that reason.


This claim is a popular one on dog food websites, but if you look at actual, scientific, peer-reviewed research into dog allergies, you'll find that wheat and corn are actually pretty far down the list. Chicken, beef, and pork are the most common allergens.

It's not unheard of, but it's actually fairly uncommon for a dog to have a true allergy to wheat, corn, or soy. A dog may not thrive on a food with a particular ingredient because his particular body can't handle them, but that may not be an allergy, and it's probably not the wheat or the corn in the food.

For example. You feed your dog a cheap food. He doesn't thrive. His coat's awful, he gets ear infections, and he gets rashes sometimes. Is he allergic to the corn? A premium dog food manufacturer wants you to think "yes!" and to pay more for their food. But do you really think a potato is nutritionally superior to an ear of corn or a piece of bread? They're different kinds of starch and different ratios of vitamins, but one isn't automatically better than the other.

The reality may be that the non-thriving dog simply isn't getting enough fat in his diet or that some other basic component he needs is missing because the food wasn't carefully formulated for health. This dog may actually thrive on a well-developed brand with a midrange cost that has both corn and wheat in it. He may _not_ thrive on a "premium" food because of its high protein and low vegetable matter (some dogs thrive on this, though).

Or the dog might be hypothyroid, and when he's switched to a richer food, his coat improves a bit and his itching is reduced. Again, it's just the addition of the extra fats that makes him look better, not a solution to the underlying condition. And it wasn't an an allergy at all.

A lot of what you hear talked about as "allergies" online may not actually be driven by allergies. Most owners will not sit and eliminate allergenic ingredients scientifically because it's hard on them and hard on the dog. So they switch food, and if the dog gets better, they figure it must have been one of these purportedly common allergens. So they unintentionally perpetuate the myth.


----------



## MyBentley (May 5, 2009)

tippykayak said:


> This claim is a popular one on dog food websites, but if you look at actual, scientific, peer-reviewed research into dog allergies, you'll find that wheat and corn are actually pretty far down the list. Chicken, beef, and pork are the most common allergens.
> 
> It's not unheard of, but it's actually fairly uncommon for a dog to have a true allergy to wheat, corn, or soy. A dog may not thrive on a food with a particular ingredient because his particular body can't handle them, but that may not be an allergy, and it's probably not the wheat or the corn in the food.
> 
> ...


Pet owners need to also be aware of the grey area of dogs having an "intolerance" to certain ingredients. Intolerance doesn't fit the true scientific definition of being "allergic", but it sure makes one want to avoid certain ingredients and avoid unpleasant side effects. For example, I have a relative who repeatedly gets stomach upset every time she eats quinoa. It's a healthy ingredient, but that has nothing to do with her intolerance to it. She does not have any true allergic reaction - her system simply doesn't handle quinoa very well. 

Being "intolerant" or "allergic" is really a whole different subject matter than discussing the nutritional values of various ingredients. 

I do agree that there can be a whole variety of reasons a given dog may or may not do well on a particular formula. Much of the time it's a matter of trial and error and perhaps we end up seeing a pattern of what our dog does well on over time.


----------



## Lilliam (Apr 28, 2010)

MPHW said:


> Our breeder had Rudi on Pro-Plan Select puppy food. We switched him at 12 weeks to Blue Buffalo brand for large breed puppies. The problem is that Rudi does't seem that interested in this food. There are so many types of dog food out there and we're not sure if we've made a good choice. Our Vet sells and pushes Science Diet but the ingredients don't seem that great to us. Does anyone feed their dog Blue Buffalo?
> 
> My other question is: Yesterday Rudi was sick in the evening - really runny frequent poop, and didn't want any food at all. I don't think it was the dog food, but rather something that he may have eaten outside. We cut the lawn and he ate a lot of grass the day before. Can that give a puppy the runs?


Going to by pass the whole debate. Will only say that my dogs have thrived on Evo. They ate Innova before Evo. Great coats, no allergies. Zeke died at 15 never having been sick a day in his life, he simply didn't wake up one morning. Cassie suffered from liver failure, as did two siblings. Dru's arthritis got so bad he couldn't move. Billy hasn't been sick a day in his entire life. Max is now on Innova LBP and doing fantastic, he's had two stomach upsets, one due to goose poop and the other due to a bully stick. At 18 months I'll switch over to grain free. 

OP - Max was on Purina Pro Plan (the one with the golden retriever on the bag!) until about six months, when I sought permission from his breeder to switch him to Innova LBP. He did VERY well on it. I'm switching him over to Innova Adult right now.

Never tried Blue Buffalo. We've had great success on Innova.


----------



## Radarsdad (Apr 18, 2011)

I',m in the process of switching over to Blue Buffalo. So far no issues. Energy seems to be up a little but he will need it.


----------



## desi.n.nutro (Mar 18, 2011)

ebenjamin85 said:


> Just looked. Third and Fourth ingredients are corn and wheat respecitvely... common allergens for many dogs. In fact these two ingredients are generally eliminated from most premium dog foods for just that reason.


 
Corn gluten is different than corn and is not a common allergen. Corn gluten meal is 60% protein which is higher protein than a lot of other meals. Non-premium foods commonly use corn meal or ground yellow corn while Premium foods commonly use corn gluten meal. 

As was said earlier, different dogs thrive on different diets. Nutro had foods that are corn gluten free and/or wheat free too. Take a minute to look around and go to the comparison site. Our new Grain Free is the _only_ Limited Ingredient diet that GUARANTEES the improvement of the skin and coat. No matter what food you land on, their individual websites are the best resource to find out about them all.

I feed the Large Breed Chicken because I have a dog that is very intolerant of Lamb but the Large Breed Lamb and Rice has no wheat or corn gluten meal if that is your focus. Plus, the LB L&R has optimized protein and fat levels for balanced growth for larger breeds.

Hope that helps while you are searching. There is a lot to know huh? I love to be helpful and love the spirit of caring that always shows up in the food discussions. As the child of a 70's working Mom who opened a lot of cans and frozen dinners for me, I have only got to learn about nutrition as an adult. It has become one of my favorite topics, obviously, second of course to the dogs, cats, horses, chickens, kids. lol


----------



## MPHW (Apr 16, 2011)

Just an update on Rudi and his diarrhea. The Vet gave us a gastro wet food for him to eat for 2 days while the diarrhea cleared up. We then started back on the Blue Buffalo and the runs started again. After another five days of runs, we gave him the gastro again for two days. Then, after we decided to switch his food to Fromm for large puppies. A few people in the forum have mentioned they use this food. Anyway, this is day two and is poops are completely normal so far. I guess certain dogs just have issues with certain foods. It's trial and error. Fingers crossed that this food works for him.


----------



## oakleysmommy (Feb 20, 2011)

How is Rudi doing??


----------



## MPHW (Apr 16, 2011)

Rudi is doing fabulously - thanks so much for asking. He's been on Fromm's for large breed puppies for a month now and his poop is completely normal, plus he loves the food. Funny how some food is great for some dogs and not so great for other dogs.


----------

