# Wondering why .....



## FinnTastic (Apr 20, 2009)

vets seem to recommend Iams a lot. I have the Dr.s on at the moment and the vet who was on today recommended Iams for complete health. My vet also recommended it. I wonder why Iams and not something that people on the forum seem to really like like California Natural, Eagle Pack, or something like that. What do you think?


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

BC they get promotions and deals and are encouraged to do so- same with Science Diet.

I would never feed Iams or Science Diet. Eukanuba is a bit better IMO, but still not a choice I'd make when so many options seem healthier in my opinion.


----------



## fostermom (Sep 6, 2007)

I'm not touching this one with a 10 foot pole. Last time I gave an opinion on why vets recommend the food that they do, I was pretty much called an idiot.


----------



## FinnTastic (Apr 20, 2009)

It just seems so wrong to support something that may not be the best choice for dogs.


----------



## FinnTastic (Apr 20, 2009)

fostermom - I won't call you an idiot. I was just really curious and a little confused. I think it makes it harder to make a good food choice.


----------



## msdogs1976 (Dec 21, 2007)

I'm a little out of touch I guess as I don't know Dr s. I assume it must be a tv show. I would guess since Iams is easily accessible, affordable and a middle of the road food(some would argue that). I feed my lab Iams and he does very well on it. And I fed it to my old Golden retriever for many years. No complaints here.


----------



## msdogs1976 (Dec 21, 2007)

FinnTastic said:


> It just seems so wrong to support something that may not be the best choice for dogs.


Maybe they do think it is a good choice.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

But some people feel it IS the best choice. And that is where we become vicious! lol

To me is it? Lord no. Raw is absolutely, indisputably the best IMO, followed by certain kibbles (and yes some of my dogs eat kibble- Blue Wilderness- every day and all of them eat it at least occasionally). Raw takes some work to perfect, and is not for everyone or every dog. I will eventually switch all of mine to probably at least 75% raw, but we're making sure everyone is a good solid eater, one needs to gain, one needs to lose drastic amounts, etc.

It makes no sense to me why people feed dogs cheap foods with poorer quality ingredients, but it makes no sense to other people why I spend what I do to feed my crew. I can get wound up in these threads, but really- EVERYONE here loves his/her dogs and does what experience and research has told them is best for them.

Personally, at least two of my dogs cannot tolerate cheap food. Brooklyn came to me with disgusting, swollen shut, infected ears, gross teeth, and morbid obesity. Within two weeks of being here the ears healed without antibiotics, I scaled her teeth (and I know they will stay clean with raw, meaty bones) and she's lost quite a bit of weight. The other I did try on a mid-grade food when he was a puppy and he started scratching the next day (Starlite). So I gave the rest of it to my neighbor and went and bought some good stuff. To me, it's not even worth trying it with the others.

BTW the food that Brooklyn ate before I had her was Pedigree, which is always easy to spot thanks to the gross ears, poor coats, and massive yellow poops that usually go with it in my experience (at least with Goldens eating it- almost every fat infected foster I have ever had was fed Pedigree by the former owner). The food that made Starlite itch was Purina One, which I know many dogs do well on.


----------



## FinnTastic (Apr 20, 2009)

msdogs1976- That's true. They may think it is a good choice. I don't know what kind of research goes on with things like dog food. Maybe b/c it has been around longer they know more long term nutrition on that compared to the newer foods. I'm just thinking out loud here.


----------



## paula bedard (Feb 5, 2008)

My Vet's office also has a little boutique and they sell Science Diet, collars, leashes, cleansers, etc. I'm sure they think it's a healthy food or they wouldn't sell it or promote it. I personally do not like Science Diet. It gave Sam the world's worst gas. They do make some prescription formulas that are at times medically necessary. I have never tried Iams but my niece feeds it to her Lab and is happy with it.


----------



## msdogs1976 (Dec 21, 2007)

I think we all know whatever philosophy one takes with respect to dog food, it is a 'philosophy'. We can all link to sources to back up our choices, but there is no one clear cut scientifically proven way to go. We pick our food and if our dogs respond in a positive manner, we have made a good choice. I'm glad we do have several options to choose from because one method or brand of food does not work for all.


----------



## The_Artful_Dodger (Mar 26, 2009)

I asked my vet...who is a very good friend of mine. She says she would recommend Eukanuba or Science Diet over Iams, but would recommend Iams over brands like Eagle Pack, because she knows that they have done the research and clinical trials to show that thier food does not lead to issues like metabolic problems or hip dysplasia...I'm paraphrasing but it was something to that effect. I know she doesn't recommend food to me to make a profit or anything like that.


----------



## T&T (Feb 28, 2008)

"Once in practice, vets who sell Science Diet and other premium foods directly from their offices pocket profits of as much as 40%" 

WALLSTREET JOURNAL NOV '97
*http://www.4pawsu.com/vet_dogfood.htm*


----------



## MyBentley (May 5, 2009)

It has a lot to do with size and advertising dollars. Colgate-Palmolive (Science Diet) and Proctor & Gamble (IAMS, Eukanuba) are mega conglomerates. Their advertising budgets are huge and their products are available everywhere. They are names that have been known for decades - just like Maytag washers and Skippy peanut butter. There's a familiarity and comfort level about the products to much of the public. Some smaller companies advertise much more modestly and believe word-of-mouth by satisfied customers helps sell their products.


----------



## Mssjnnfer (Aug 9, 2009)

When I first got my cat I didn't know ANYTHING about food. They said I should feed her Iams. So I was for a long time... then I started doing research. Found about all the nasty fillers and junk, so I switched her to Blue Buffalo. She's done AMAZINGLY on it. Softer coat, better breath, better poops.

When we got Mojo, they suggested Pro Plan. I know a lot of dogs do well on Pro Plan, but I also knew it was Purina and still had fillers and stuff. It upset me that they were pushing it so hard on me. 

They've been on Natural Choice and have done very well. When I switch them to adult food I will be going with Blue Buffalo as well. 

I asked the vet about it because I didn't want the day to come up where they ask "what are you feeding them?" ... And they said they prefer Pro Plan, but really as long as it's a good quality food they are okay with it. 

So... I guess... yeah. They probably get pushed with Purina and Iams. 

Then again, my vet REALLY tries to push rawhide... and said NONONO to raw bones. :gotme::gotme::gotme:


----------



## Swampcollie (Sep 6, 2007)

Many Veterinarians recommend Iams because it's a good mid-range food. It's widely available, modestly priced and has a history of success over several decades with millions of dogs. 

It's a "safe" recommendation for normal healthy dogs.


----------



## jwemt81 (Aug 20, 2008)

Swampcollie said:


> Many Veterinarians recommend Iams because it's a good mid-range food. It's widely available, modestly priced and has a history of success over several decades with millions of dogs.
> 
> It's a "safe" recommendation for normal healthy dogs.


I totally agree. Tucker can't eat Iams/Eukanuba because of his allergy to corn, but our cats have been on the Iams Multicat formula for years and we have never had any problems. They all have great coats and lots of energy. My very first cat that I had when I was a kid lived for almost 19 years on Iams. My parents fed Iams to our pets religiously when I was growing up. Iams has been around for many, many years and a lot of dogs and cats thrive on it. While it may not be the right food for some dogs, like ours, it's certianly not a bad food at all.


----------



## msdogs1976 (Dec 21, 2007)

T&T said:


> "Once in practice, vets who sell Science Diet and other premium foods directly from their offices pocket profits of as much as 40%"
> 
> WALLSTREET JOURNAL NOV '97
> *http://www.4pawsu.com/vet_dogfood.htm*


I was in a local co-op plant/feed store the other day and I noticed they had Science Diet's product line. I couldn't believe how high a bag cost. I figured feed stores could be more competitive on the price, But I guess SD must have established prices to sell by. I don't use SD btw, just looked out of curiosity._ 

Thanks for the link.

_


----------



## jenlaur (Jun 24, 2009)

I juat have to say something good about vets since it seems, from some posts, that many of them are recommending lower quality foods. My vet stocks Innova and Evo. He has the presciription SD for special needs (2 of my cats are on a urinary formula).


----------



## Swampcollie (Sep 6, 2007)

jenlaur said:


> I juat have to say something good about vets since it seems, from some posts, that many of them are recommending lower quality foods.


"Quality" for many is based upon philosophical perspective, not the end result a product delivers. 

Most Veterinarians base their decisions on "outcome" or the result a product delivers. Do the higher end foods produce a better "result" when fed to normal healthy dogs? I don't think most Veterinarians believe they do. 

(I don't either.) 

Those that are not dealing with a normal healthy dog, such as one with allergies, have different concerns. They have to select foods that help to boost their dogs' weakend or malfunctioning immune system, so they can help their dog be the best it can be. This is a completely different perspective for selecting a food, when compared to owners of normal healthy dogs.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Honest question, though- if the higher end foods get better results for special dogs, then why not give ALL dogs the same benefits of better skin, coats, ears, immune systems, and digestibility? 

I can often guess the exact brand of food a rescue was fed- on a scale of how crappy it looks and how fat it is. After doing this dozens and dozens of times, my personal experience says it does make a difference.

I do have one dog (my Whippet) whom I believe could eat sawdust and he'd look amazing (I won't try it, though ). I realize some dogs are like that. 

I also wonder- how can anyone argue with the proof in the poop. I am always shocked when people tell me their dogs poop two, three, four, even FIVE times a day- and it's foul smelling yellow stuff. Ughhhh! I'd hate to be picking that up. Mine go once a day and it's small, hard, and nearly odorless. Doesn't that plainly show they're digesting more and they're eating better stuff?


----------



## Willow52 (Aug 14, 2009)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> ...BTW the food that Brooklyn ate before I had her was Pedigree, which is always easy to spot thanks to the gross ears, poor coats, and massive yellow poops that usually go with it in my experience (at least with Goldens eating it- almost every fat infected foster I have ever had was fed Pedigree by the former owner). The food that made Starlite itch was Purina One, which I know many dogs do well on.


Pedigree is what Hank's breeder was feeding. And when I mentioned that to the vet he said it was a good food. :yuck: I did buy a bag to help with the transition to Innova LBP and used the rest in the raccoon trap.

I must say though, we had a neighbor with a black lab, she had the most beautiful coat I had ever seen. I asked they what fed her...Iams. My lab -x ate Iams with no problems but when I fed it to my former golden she started with chronic ear infections so we went corn free.


----------



## Debles (Sep 6, 2007)

I didn't read all the posts:
My opinion is vets sell certain foods to make money. So they promote them. Iams/Science Diet push their foods to vets the way pharmaceutical salesman do to physicians.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

I do have to add that I think Euk, Iams, Pro-plan and other similar mid-grade foods are infinitely better than Pedigree or Beneful, which IMO are the worst of the worst. There is actually an Ol' Roy knock off of Purina ONE that is certainly better than Pedigree or Dog Chow IMO. Sometimes I suggest it to friends struggling badly with money.


----------



## Faith's mommy (Feb 26, 2007)

http://www.ourdogsonline.com/content/sciencedietscam.html

a link above to an article titled "the science diet scam" that was published online a while ago. not all will agree, but it's another perspective on it.


----------



## Swampcollie (Sep 6, 2007)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> Honest question, though- if the higher end foods get better results for special dogs, then why not give ALL dogs the same benefits of better skin, coats, ears, immune systems, and digestibility?


You're making an incorrect assumption. Special dogs need help so they can enjoy a nice healthy coat, skin and ears. But a normal healthy dog already enjoys those traits when fed a mid grade food. For them there is nothing to be gained healthwise by feeding something like Innova or CN.

The owner enjoys having to pick up less when on poop patrol but the dog isn't any healthier.

Comparing rescue animals is not neccesarilly a good gauge, as they also tend to have suffered from abuse, neglect, and lack of proper veterinary care. So when you first get them into rescue, they are usually not normal healthy dogs either. I would venture a guess that you could see an improvement in the overall health and well being of most rescues by feeding them a consistant diet of Ol Roy along with proper veterinary care and lots daily attention and exercise. There is a lot more involved in bringing a rescue back from the brink than food alone.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Well I certainly do know that  Grooming and exercise are huge parts of it too. I tend to avoid antibiotics and so forth unless it's an absolute necessity. 

I mean, I see what you're saying, but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I want even my most normal, healthy dog to have the best of the best- and maximize his quality of life and his time with me. 

I think picking up less poop does prove the dogs are getting more out of their food- and to me that has to be healthier.

Anyway, I don't mean any of this badly at all. I was just curious.


----------



## lgnutah (Feb 26, 2007)

IMO, stand outside a vets office and watch what salespeople come to visit. I would guess the IAMS people have salespeople who regularly visit the vet and indoctrinate him/her on how beneficial the food is.
A vet, like a medical Dr, is busy seeing patients so they depend on the salespeople who visit them to keep them abreast of what's good for the dogs/patients.


----------



## msdogs1976 (Dec 21, 2007)

Debles said:


> I didn't read all the posts:
> My opinion is vets sell certain foods to make money. So they promote them. Iams/Science Diet push their foods to vets the way pharmaceutical salesman do to physicians.


Maybe so, but it's hard for me to believe a vet is going to recommend something that he knows will bring about poor results for a dog, just for the profit. Now I can believe a vet might carry a more profitable product line over another if he believes the 2 has equal health benefits.


----------



## The_Artful_Dodger (Mar 26, 2009)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> I mean, I see what you're saying, but I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I want even my most normal, healthy dog to have the best of the best- and maximize his quality of life and his time with me.
> 
> I think picking up less poop does prove the dogs are getting more out of their food- and to me that has to be healthier.
> .


I think the difference of opinion comes from what people believe is the "best of the best". I have never seen anything to convince me that the "premium" brands are better for a dog than what you might call a "mid-range" food. The fact that certain foods are so consistently called "lower quality" makes it seem like fact, rather than opinion. Everyone wants to feed the best food to give thier dogs the best chance at a long healthy life - it's just that not everyone agrees on what the best food would be. If a dog with an allergy to say, chicken, does better on a food with a different protien source, that doesn't mean that the food with chicken is less healthy - it just isn't a good option for that particular dog. 

Dodger eats what you would probabaly say is "mid-range". He eats twice a day and poops twice a day - he poops out much less than what goes in and its never hard to pick up


----------



## LifeOfRiley (Nov 2, 2007)

I think it's a combination of factors - most of which have been mentioned already.
I think that most average vets (whether they'll admit it to their clients or not) don't know all that much about nutrition. I agree that they rely on the sales reps from companies like Iams to keep them informed about what's happening in the world of dog food and why their food is a good choice.
And I also agree that Iams is a safe suggestion. It's been on the market for years. It's a mid-range food with different formulas that vets can recommend to most of their clients, without really having to go out on a limb. I think most healthy dogs would do just fine on Iams, so it's a safe choice for most.

But personally, I don't like to give an opinion about any particular food being "good" or "bad". I can share the results I've seen, if it's a food that I've tried with my dogs, but beyond that I stay away from giving opinions. I probably know less about nutrition than most vets do.


----------

