# My puppy prefers cheap supermarket food



## Middleagedmum (Feb 4, 2014)

We have a 9.5 month border terrier who has been fed on largely Lily's Kitchen and Taste of the Wild dry and wet food since 8 weeks old.
Over the last few weeks she has been off her food due to tonsillitis and false pregnancy both at the sane time.
Now much better and eating better but she is reluctant to eat Lily's Kitchen tray food as she used to (although she has never been very interested in her food). However, put a bowl of ASDA Hero Chicken and Ham tray or Morrisons Chicken and Bacon tray in front of her and she eats the lot with great enthusiasm!
At present I am just grateful she is eating at all and starting to put a bit of:weight back on but am worried about the long term effects of feeding cheap food.
I have read the labels and both products claim to be complete foods with added vitamins.
Has anyone else fed their dogs on supermarket dog food and have you had any problems? Am I worrying unnecessarily?
Thank you.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

I have a Jack Russell, Rosie, and she's nearly six years old.

She has fairly severe inflammatory bowel disease and, over the years, I've tried her on just about every food, including JWB, Barking Heads, Lily's Kitchen and Nature Diet, but she hasn't been able to tolerate any.

I fed her a raw diet for a while, but she can't tolerate offal or bone.

In the end, in desperation, I bought some of the Asda Hero Foil Trays and she can eat that food with no adverse effects.

She has half a tray in a morning and a cooked chicken thigh in the evening.

It's not what I would have chosen to feed her, but she tolerates it, it doesn't cause her any pain and her weight and general health are excellent.


----------



## El Cid (Apr 19, 2014)

Middleagedmum said:


> However, put a bowl of ASDA Hero Chicken and Ham tray or Morrisons Chicken and Bacon tray in front of her and she eats the lot with great enthusiasm! Am I worrying unnecessarily?
> Thank you.


My favourite food is strawberry jam donuts, it does not mean that it a good diet 

My 7 month old border collie doesnt seem to like raw meat, she will eat it if mixed with other food.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

I wouldn't stress about it TBH. Just feed the Asda stuff if that's what she will eat for now. Try adding other, better stuff along the line to ease your conscience but otherwise don't worry about it.


----------



## SixStar (Dec 8, 2009)

I would only use it in the VERY short term - a couple of days maximum if required - a lot of the supermarket foods, particularly the ones you mention, are absolutely dreadful - and the longer she is on it, the more she'll get hooked on all the sugars and additives.

I will admit to being a bit anal about dog food, I lost a boy to stomach cancer as a direct result of poor nutrition in his younger years (prior to coming to me) - he was fed predominately Wagg - which, like a lot of the supermarket grade foods - contains carcinogenic additives. 

Now she is over her illness I would try tough love - offer her the food you want her to eat (the Lily's and TOTW perhaps, as that's something she has eaten in the past and obviously likes) and if she doesn't eat it within 15 minutes, take it away and offer nothing until the next meal time. It really is the only way.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

I have friends who feed only mainstream supermarket brand food/wagg/bakers.

Their dogs are fine. They compete regularly, and successfully, in agility.

Another friend has collies who work on her farm and also compete in agility- extremely successfully- her dogs have supermarket own label mixed with whatever is leftover from the family dinner.

I wouldn't sweat about it.

Contrary to popular belief, there are standards for dog food which manufacturers have to adhere to. 

If you are interested, why not read Dog Food Logic: making smart decisions in a world of too many choices, by Linda Case For a balanced view of th dog food industry.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> Contrary to popular belief, there are standards for dog food which manufacturers have to adhere to.


Sponsored by the major, larger food manufacturers and written for the balance of ingredients used by those manufacturers. Why is this important.. absorbtion levels for minerals are often affected by certain other ingredients.

We aren't simply talking about surviving and doing well in the short term. For me it's a case of matching the best we can do to provide the best chance for long term health. Even the main manufacturers state that animal protein is the best protein source (Importance of Animal-Based Proteins in Dog Foods | Iams.com). Somehow 8% of animal derivatives doesn't match that for me 

Standards only really explain the minimums of requirements with some maximums also included. It doesn't include/exclude things added simply to be addictive. Simple example.. please explain why a dog needs various sugars added to food other than taste and to get a dog addicted to that brand?

I readily admit, I don't feed commercial food but can understand why people do. Even with commercial food surely it should come down to the trying to give dogs the best chance for a long healthy life. To do that I would look at the ingredients and make decisions based on the fact you are talking about an animal which is a meat eater, not a herbivore.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

These threads always make me laught when all the food fascists look down their nose at "supermarket food" (is that ALL supermarkets or only the downmarket ones like Aldi, Lidl, Morrisons and Asda as opposed to Waitrose?) lol

And is all pet food sold in supermarkets of the same ilk (ie Waitrose sell Arden Grange)

But what makes me chuckle the most is that every thread on poorly dogs contains loads of posts recommending good old Chappie.

It is a bit like all the tests on the premium range of supermarket foods v their regular range. Many of those find no difference or in some cases the regular range is as good or even better.

As Old Shep rightly says, the PFMA has strict guidelines on what can be in pet food and MILLIONS of dogs not only survive but THRIVE on it or worse.

Just as all the dogs who consume top of the range (according to their owners) food(s) also consume 

the contents of nappies
the excrement of various animals
putrefying dead carcases 
the contents of the toilet bowl.

The exclusivity practised by some also disenfranchises those who live on tight budgets. Should they not own animals if they can only afford (insert relevant El Cheapo product).

Still I guess if this approach to dog food makes some people feel superior at the expense of others it is perfectly acceptable?

OP, feed what SUITS YOUR DOG AND YOUR POCKET

ps I would love to see the studies providing evidence that such foods result in addiction in dogs....................


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

smokeybear said:


> These threads always make me laught when all the food fascists look down their nose at "supermarket food" (is that ALL supermarkets or only the downmarket ones like Aldi, Lidl, Morrisons and Asda as opposed to Waitrose?) lol
> 
> And is all pet food sold in supermarkets of the same ilk (ie Waitrose sell Arden Grange)
> 
> ...


^^

:thumbsup:

And regarding "sugars" in food. Carbohydrates are just sugars. Sugars are needed for energy. This is basic primary school stuff.

I would recommend Food Logic by Linda Case for hose who want to actually learn about feedin their dog, rather than those who just cut and paste alarmist nonsense from 't internet.


----------



## kare (Sep 8, 2014)

I agree the link for Linda Case is funded by big food companies.

The site I recommend is The Dog Food Directory - now listing 1285 dog foods! simple ranking of the foods with no bias on who made it and who sells it.

Unfortunately fats and sugars are yummy, and will be what you, your husband, your children, your dog and even your rabbit will pick if you do not make informed decisions for them.


----------



## Mum2Heidi (Feb 17, 2010)

I wouldn't use those brands for any longer than I had to either. If it turns out that it's all that suits your dog, then you have no choice but I would do it as a last resort.
Many that use Chappie do it to treat an upset tum and once it's sorted, back on their normal diet. The majority of those that are forced to use it because nothing else suits their dog would I'm sure use a better food if they could.

OP why not try a can of Butchers Tripe. it's not a bad quality food and a huge step up from what you are using. 

I hope you get it sorted soon and as mentioned, I wouldn't stress over it. At least she is eating something.


----------



## kare (Sep 8, 2014)

Old Shep said:


> ^^
> And regarding "sugars" in food. Carbohydrates are just sugars. Sugars are needed for energy. This is basic primary school stuff.


Yes basic primary education says carbs are complex sugars....however Who says carbs are needed for energy, especially for carnivorous animals? (Before you ask, they are carnivores on the evolutionary tree, science says they are carnivores)

My dogs do not eat carbs only carbs they get is a roast potato in a roast dinner every few months because we are weak and they are so happy when they get a roast.:rolleyes5:


----------



## paulcarmen (Sep 10, 2014)

omg i my shiba eat my food... beef, chicken... :ciappa:


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> The exclusivity practised by some also disenfranchises those who live on tight budgets.


You support then food which, although fulfills standards, has limited meat despite scholarly studies showing meat as the main protein source is desirable? You also support the expense of foods when "better" food is available within the same price range?

Do those who keep stating "standards" feed Wagg or Bakers? I doubt it and I doubt if they would feed the food being questioned either. Why is that, when it matches standards?

The idea of expensive = good needs to be thrown out the window. Do people pick the cheapest dog food, after all they all adhere to standards or should people look at the ingredients and budget and find what suits their dog based on that?

As for standards.. Already mentioned but for cats you have Epidemiologic study of relationships between consumption of commercial canned food and risk of hyperthyroidism in cats Cat food in general also matches the cat standards produced the same as the dog food standards. Doubt if more research has been done on it though, grants would not be easily available. That's how scientific studies and reports, especially "peer reviewed" works  Cow food "standards" said you could feed sheep brains to cows, that worked out well too.

Always find it amusing someone who always claims others need to provide scholarly articles, never provide their own to support their feeding methodology.



Old Shep said:


> And regarding "sugars" in food. Carbohydrates are just sugars. Sugars are needed for energy. This is basic primary school stuff..


Amazing how someone who pushes standards defends ingredients and their components not included in those standards..  Protein and fats can also be used for energy especially for dogs although human digestion is often quoted by studies. Show me studies, as you keep pushing for them, which show dogs require carbohydrates as a primary source of energy.


----------



## 8tansox (Jan 29, 2010)

As I sit here, I am looking at a Springer Spaniel who is 15 years old, he's been fed Wagg/Beta all of his life, he's as fit as a flea and still manages to walk and run for 3 hours a day.


----------



## El Cid (Apr 19, 2014)

smokeybear said:


> As Old Shep rightly says, the PFMA has strict guidelines on what can be in pet food and MILLIONS of dogs not only survive but THRIVE on it or worse.





> Some examples of nutritional requirements:
> Dogs:
> 
> Dogs need a careful balance of calcium/phosphorus and sufficient vitamin D for strong bones and healthy teeth.
> ...


That is what I came up with from FEDIAF - The European Pet Food Industry Federation, very blury guidelines. What are these "strict guidelines" that you mention?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

8tansox said:


> As I sit here, I am looking at a Springer Spaniel who is 15 years old, he's been fed Wagg/Beta all of his life, he's as fit as a flea and still manages to walk and run for 3 hours a day.


One of the oldest people to live smoked. Do you recommend that or would you advise what you could to give someone the best chance for a long life?


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

El Cid said:


> That is what I came up with from FEDIAF - The European Pet Food Industry Federation, very blury guidelines. What are these "strict guidelines" that you mention?


All foods for animals are governed by the same legislation and, as farm animals form part of the human food chain, the laws are necessarily stringent.

all foods for animals are governed by the same legislation and, as farm animals form part of the human food chain, the laws are necessarily stringent. - See more at: http://www.pfma.org.uk/uk-pet-food-legislation#sthash.xKz7FK3p.dpuf That link is probably what you are looking for.

However, just as in the human food chain their are good and bad across the board (look at coke for a start lol), it is all about finding what works for the pet and the owner.
Some dogs do well on 'cheap' brands, even thrive...whereas some will come out in itchy rashes at the mere mention of grain.

Would I feed such feeds as Bakers and Wagg? No, I would not.
Would I recommend either? Nope, never!

I can not ignore that there are many other dogs being fed these foods on a daily basis and do perfectly well :yesnod:


----------



## Guest (Sep 10, 2014)

If a cheap food is all that an owner can realistically afford, then I have no issue with that provided the dog still does ok on the food.

The thing is, for every dog that appears to 'thrive' on a low-quality food, there's one that doesn't. We've all seen 'bakers poo' - output like that hardly signals healthy. My dad fed his GR on probably the worst food available in the world - large triangular biscuits that look like dry weetbix. She stunk to high heaven and her coat was greasy and horrible to touch - you literally had to wash your hands every time you patted her. My grandparents' old GSD was the same - fed on the same food with the same horrible coat.

I just don't see why someone would feed foods like Bakers and Wagg unless they _absolutely_ had to, and even then we all know that with a bit of research they could probably find a better quality food that they'd feed less of for not much more. Yes, maybe the dog APPEARS to be fine, but is it worth the risk? A person who eats lots of processed food and sugar may look exactly the same as someone who eats lots of fresh fruit and veg and whole grains, but they're unlikely to be the same on the inside, or in the long run.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Goblin said:


> One of the oldest people to live smoked. Do you recommend that or would you advise what you could to give someone the best chance for a long life?


Yet my nana died at 75 due to Emphysema and had never touched a cigarette in her life


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

StormyThai said:


> Yet my nana died at 75 due to Emphysema and had never touched a cigarette in her life


Not liked as your nana died but there is a "lottery" when it comes to health. We are talking about chances, not definates.

Something else worth considering and all these "perfect" standards. A statistical study on dog longevity which looked at things across the board such as male/female owners, if the dog had a garden and spaying and neutering included food as one of the things to look at. They found that feeding "homemade food" as opposed to commercial food on average lengthened lifespan by around 3 years. What a shame studies couldn't be done to break down similar results into "types" of commercial food although no idea where funding would come from. I'm personally pretty sure, not backed by studies, that the difference wouldn't be so great for commercial food if only foods with better ingredients (animal based protein for a start) were included.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

There is such a lot of snobbery around feeding your dog with a superiority amoungst certain factions that if you are investing in separate freezers, go to the abbotoir for their meat and spend hours and hours chopping, grinding and shopping, that, somehow, they are a better dog owner than someone who chooses to buy something from the supermarket.

All food sold in the UK is ok for the vast majority of dogs. For a *few,* they will need something more tailored to their particular needs. But, as I say,in the vast majority of cases, a dog will do just fine on bog standard dog food.

That's all I'm saying.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Whether all foods have to comply with certain standards or not, there's no way I'd feed something like Bakers, Wagg, Asda own brand or whatever if I had any other choice. Having had Spencer on Wagg (he came to us on this), Markus Muhle, Taste of the Wild and raw there has been a huge difference with the different foods. Here are my completely non scientific findings based on Spencers reactions to different diets. Just in case anyone is interested 

Wagg, bouncing off the walls and unable to settle or focus. Horribly greasy coat. Gunky ears and eyes. Smelly. Itchy as hell. Huge soft poos.

Markus Muhle, same sort of energy level as he's had on raw. Reasonably calm, able to focus. Coat not great but not greasy, gunky eyes at times but nothing like they were on Wagg. Slight smell. Sometimes seems very itchy, other times not. Huge poos.

Taste of the Wild. Higher energy level than on raw but not bouncing off the walls after the first couple of days (first couple of days, nightmare!). Well able to focus and settle. No doggy smell, coat fantastic, no gunky eyes or ears, not itchy. Poos firm and not huge.

Raw. Fantastic coat, no doggy smell, small firm poos, lots of energy but also quite calm if that makes sense. Able to settle and focus. No gunky eyes or ears, no itchiness.


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

Old Shep said:


> There is such a lot of snobbery around feeding your dog with a superiority amoungst certain factions that if you are investing in separate freezers, go to the abbotoir for their meat and spend hours and hours chopping, grinding and shopping, that, somehow, they are a better dog owner than someone who chooses to buy something from the supermarket.
> 
> All food sold in the UK is ok for the vast majority of dogs. For a *few,* they will need something more tailored to their particular needs. But, as I say,in the vast majority of cases, a dog will do just fine on bog standard dog food.
> 
> That's all I'm saying.


Agree.

I wouldn't feed anything along the lines of Bakers or Wagg, purely for the fact you can get a LOT better for your money. Bakers is silly expensive given what it consists of, which shows that money most certainly does not buy quality.

There does appear to be a trend on dog forums for feeding raw and super premium foods, but the reality is that it does not suit every dog or their owners budgets. Let the dog be the proof in the pudding. My dogs have been fed all sorts, from raw, to expensive foods, right back to the cheap and cheerful ones that people scoff at - guess what they do best on?


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

I'm not a food snob (I hope!) and quite simply can't afford to feed something like Orijen any more than I can afford to buy organic for myself. Raw has worked for me and my dogs but I have nothing against kibble or wet food either. 

I don't think the hugely expensive, premium foods are necessary for most dogs and generally don't give advice on what to feed unless it's asked for or someone is having issues that may be linked to food (and in my limited experience food can have a HUGE effect on behaviour). And yeah, even as a raw feeder for the most part myself I get annoyed with the whole "raw is the only good way" attitude so many people seem to have. 

Something I have noticed though is that many people say their dog "does brilliant" on something like Bakers or Pedigree yet poops for England, stinks and has an awful coat. And has never actually been fed anything else for them to be able to say that their dog is doing "brilliant" on it.


----------



## Renata (Mar 18, 2013)

Goblin said:


> You support then food which, although fulfills standards, has limited meat despite scholarly studies showing meat as the main protein source is desirable? You also support the expense of foods when "better" food is available within the same price range?
> 
> Do those who keep stating "standards" feed Wagg or Bakers? I doubt it and I doubt if they would feed the food being questioned either. Why is that, when it matches standards?
> 
> ...


Show me a study that would confirm that it is effective for a dog to use protein as a source of energy.
Protein is not source of energy.


----------



## VickynHolly (Jun 23, 2013)

Sarah1983 said:


> Wagg, bouncing off the walls and unable to settle or focus. Huge soft poos.


This is my sisters Staffie. She is fed Wagg and whatever supermarket wet they get.
She came to stay with me for a week a couple of months back. I did not fed her the above food, my sister was fine with this. Lola got Purizon dry and Lilys Kitchen wet. She calmed down loads, she did little poos, oh and her coat was lovely and soft. Oh and she didn't leave anything, which she often does with the food she is fed. I was gutted that she had to go back to eating her normal food when she went home. My dad is not a fan of hers because she is so hyper, but while she was with me he was warming up to her. Same goes for Ted.
Think it is safe to say Lola looked and behaved better with good food, oh and she liked it better as well.


----------



## 8tansox (Jan 29, 2010)

Goblin said:


> One of the oldest people to live smoked. Do you recommend that or would you advise what you could to give someone the best chance for a long life?


This is not my dog, no I would not recommend it, but all I am saying is, people can feed their own dog on what they like, it's no-one else's business but theirs. I'd much rather a dog was fed a poor diet than not fed at all.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Renata said:


> Show me a study that would confirm that it is effective for a dog to use protein as a source of energy.
> Protein is not source of energy.


You are right.. not directly. Protein provides the amino acids used as the building blocks for muscle, bone and body mass, nerve function etc. However fat and protein are linked together in animal matter. Animal based protein has a much higher biological value than plant protein  On the flip side.. Where's your carbohydrate support studies... Certainly not studies like:

Recovery of muscle glycogen concentrati... [Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI or Maintenance energy requirements and the effect ... [Am J Vet Res. 2000] - PubMed - NCBI


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

Having just walked 7 different greyhounds at the rehoming centre who are all fed the same food, I believe, I would say that the consistency of poo is not always an accurate indicator. They all took a dump, and they were all different 

I know, cos I was the one picking them up 

I would say, don't stress - it's a dog


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Re using protein as an energy source:

This is what happens to diabetics in the absence of insulin (which breaks down sugars) resulting in the production of ketones and ketoacidosis, coma and death. It also happens in starvation. The mammalian body does not use protien as an energy source except in extreme circumstances. it is incompletely broken down and, as I said, leads to ketoacidosis. Not a nice thing at all.


I'm typing this from distant memory of lectures. Please don't shoot me if there is some small error.

As some seem to prefer anecdotes to data, I will also add that another friend I have has 4 dogs- all momgrels- all rescues. She is a dog trainer and behaviourist and competes with her scruffs in agility at a high level.

She makes her own dog food from butcher and kitchen scraps.

Her dogs are all fit and healthy.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

It's your pet you are talking about feeding, so aside from everything else. If you are happy to feed yourself on a supermarket "value" range of food as your sole diet, then you'll be happy to do the same for your dog and give it Wagg or something similar (can anyone seriously argue that something that costs pennies per meal is anything other than poor quality?). Or you may not be happy feeding yourself such low quality food, but happy enough to do so for your dog. Fine that's your choice, but there's no need to get annoyed at people who would like to try and feed their pets something they think is better.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

soulful dog said:


> It's your pet you are talking about feeding, so aside from everything else. If you are happy to feed yourself on a supermarket "value" range of food as your sole diet, then you'll be happy to do the same for your dog and give it Wagg or something similar (can anyone seriously argue that something that costs pennies per meal is anything other than poor quality?). Or you may not be happy feeding yourself such low quality food, but happy enough to do so for your dog. Fine that's your choice, but there's no need to get annoyed at people who would like to try and feed their pets something they think is better.


I agree with this sentiment, but you can actually make yourself a cheap nutritious meal from in season veg and pulses. Costs much less than expensive prepared food.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

_can anyone seriously argue that something that costs pennies per meal is anything other than poor quality?). _

Quite a few people actually, I feed roadkill, that is free, is it poor quality?

I can make very nutritious meals for humans for next to nothing.

It is all about judicious shopping, storage, using seasonal food and freebies.

Never did a post more adequately illustrate the old adage "correlation does not equal causation"

The fact that YOU may be unable to do this, does not mean it cannot be done. 

People managed it very successfully for many years during the war!


----------



## Fluffster (Aug 26, 2013)

Belle has been fed on Bakers all her life (or Bakers equivalents). She has awful teeth, and is generally a bit smelly, BUT she is 14 and still going strong!

I've switched her food as her poos were a quite scary colour, and I think her coat could be improved and general smell reduced. 

I'm not going to lie though, what I feed all our pets on is expensive, our pet food bill is probably around £90 a month now with a second dog and two cats, and I'm fortunate we are in a position to afford that. When I was single in a much lower paid job, trying to pay a mortgage meant for two people, I downgraded the cats food to supermarket stuff as I just couldn't afford an alternative, and they seemed to cope fine, no visible changes in output, coat or general health/weight. So I would never judge someone for feeding their pets a cheaper option, with the amount of malnourished pets around I'm just glad they're being fed! 

I do offer advice if asked about pet food, but I would never presume to tell someone what they are feeding their dog is crap. My friend feeds her three labs Wagg and they're all happy, healthy, although I do notice a slightly greasy coat and smell which I suspect is related.


----------



## Buzzard (Aug 10, 2012)

I look at it like this. I feed my family healthy meals with minimal additives, added sugar and salt and we avoid processed foods as much as possible. So Red gets fed food without added sugars etc and I like to see the meat source rather than read meat derivatives. I think there sometimes is a bit of snobbery surrounding dog food. The bottom line is in my opinion feed the best you can afford and a food that suits your dog. My parents had two Irish Setters when I was little. They were fed on winalot biscuits and pedigree canned meat, with the occasional bone my dad bought home from his butchers shop. They were healthy dogs, and lived to nearly 18 years old! I think we generally know much more now than we ever did about everything. We can all research things at length thanks to the internet.


----------



## Middleagedmum (Feb 4, 2014)

Hi everyone, thank you all for your responses. These have been very helpful and for the most part reassuring.Thank you especially for the links, especially to the dog food reviews which I have looked at and found very helpful. I have noted the brands which do well in terms of quality-we will try Wainwrights to see if she likes that.
Otter is improving every day, there seems to be no side effects to the ASDA/Morrisons food so far and she seems to really like them.
We have also found a dried food she likes and will eat - Millies Wolfheart(especially the Farmers mix) which I know is high quality and not too expensive so we are gradually increasing this in her diet. She loves a raw egg mixed with a little single cream so is having this for breakfast twice a week and she will eat her Lilys Kitchen Breakfast Crunch as long as it is broken into small bits and marinated overnight in the fridge with some cooked lambs liver.
Our aim now is to consolidate a consistent diet of Millies, Lily's Kitchen and the occassional tray of Morrisons/ASDA as a treat or if she is off her food again. Plus try Wainwrights for variety. She will be spayed in a couple of weeks so may have a few off days then.
At nearly 10 months Otter is still growing (plus she lost 4 weeks when she ate very little due to illness) so we want to give her the best food we can find and afford. Now she is feeling better and eating better she is bright, happy and full of energy which is great for us as her anxious owners.
Thank you again


----------



## ellenlouisepascoe (Jul 12, 2013)

smokeybear said:


> These threads always make me laught when all the food fascists look down their nose at "supermarket food" (is that ALL supermarkets or only the downmarket ones like Aldi, Lidl, Morrisons and Asda as opposed to Waitrose?) lol
> 
> And is all pet food sold in supermarkets of the same ilk (ie Waitrose sell Arden Grange)
> 
> ...


You know I don't always agree with what you say or how you say it on this forum but I couldn't agree with this more.

Like Smokeybear says, feed your dog whatever suits them, whatever suits your budget and whatever suits your lifestyle.

I was raw feeding up until recently when my freezer packed in and I'm currently not in a position to buy a replacement that will suit four dogs. I was made to feel extremely guilty for changing back to a dry food, especially one that only rates 4.4 stars out of 5 on All About Dog Food.co.uk  

However it seems to REALLY suit my dogs and they are doing extremely well on it , so b*gger what everyone else says really  My dogs are fed and happy and I can stop stressing out about coming home to 60KG of defrosted meat leaking all over my cupboard when my freezer decides to stop playing nice.

My Cavalier King Charles spaniel is a fuss pot but has been eating the new food for over a month now without turning his nose up

Lukullus Dog Food Charolais Beef & Trout | Free P&P on orders £29+ at zooplus!


----------



## Fluffster (Aug 26, 2013)

ellenlouisepascoe said:


> You know I don't always agree with what you say or how you say it on this forum but I couldn't agree with this more.
> 
> Like Smokeybear says, feed your dog whatever suits them, whatever suits your budget and whatever suits your lifestyle.
> 
> ...


That's awful, no one should be made to feel guilty 

I switched Daisy from all raw to a mix of raw and tins as we had to gets smaller freezer, and also she loves her tins  I'm happy with the mix, she gets Nutriment, chicken wings, Lily's Kitchen, some NatureDiet and whatever else we find on our travels. Belle gets NatureDiet, she was on Bakers previously and when her teeth are sorted I might see if she fancies any of the raw minces, but no biggy if not. :arf: to anyone who makes people feel guilty for their choices!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ellenlouisepascoe said:


> Like Smokeybear says, feed your dog whatever suits them, whatever suits your budget and whatever suits your lifestyle.


Here I disagree with you.. Look at the ingredients and what a dog is and then do the best you can in terms of budget and lifestyle. Not asking for everyone to feed the same, simply look into it and not simply accept marketing or pretty packaging.



ellenlouisepascoe said:


> I was made to feel extremely guilty for changing back to a dry food


Very few people I know of here on this forum would look down on that decision. The reality is circumstances change for all of us. I bet you looked into the possible options and chose what suited your dog  It's the looking into possible options which to me, personally, matters and I am sure I am not alone in that.


----------



## Firedog (Oct 19, 2011)

I will say that having Border Terriers, they do better not having wheat and gluten in their diets. Unfortunately most cheap foods contain both of these things.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Firedog said:


> I will say that having Border Terriers, they do better not having wheat and gluten in their diets. Unfortunately most cheap foods contain both of these things.


Why? What's special about border terriers?


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

ellenlouisepascoe said:


> I was made to feel extremely guilty for changing back to a dry food


This is what annoys me. There are way too many fanatics out there. I've left all raw feeding groups on FB because god forbid you feed your dog ANYTHING other than raw meat and bones! The world will end if you do! Same if you feed minces at all. Much as I like raw my dog is hardly going to keel over and die if I use roast chicken as a training treat or give him a raw carrot because he likes them  I'm sick to death of seeing people given the guilt trip because they can't feed raw or don't want to. Dog groups on FB are bloody awful for it.


----------



## Blackadder (Aug 25, 2014)

Goblin said:


> Here I disagree with you.. Look at the ingredients and what a dog is and then do the best you can in terms of budget and lifestyle. Not asking for everyone to feed the same, simply look into it and not simply accept marketing or pretty packaging.


+1 for the above. Buy the best you can within your budget, with research you might find a food with far better ingredients might be more expensive initially but due to those ingredients can work out cheaper to feed per day.

Use the allaboutdogfood site already posted to compare & you might be surprised at the results regarding cost.

Autarky Adult Salmon rated 3.5 out of 5! All About Dog Food

Bakers Complete Adult rated 0.1 out of 5! All About Dog Food

Prices might have changed a little but I know which I would choose.


----------



## El Cid (Apr 19, 2014)

Old Shep said:


> Why? What's special about border terriers?


I think like that too, why do some people think that their dogs have different requirements to other breeds. Most breeds of dog are at most a few hundred years old, can a different dietry requirement be formed in such a short space of time?


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

"Gluten free" and "wheat free" has become a bit of a fad in the human world too.

Drives me mad.

Most of these people-I'm not including people who actually have coeliac disease here (he only medically acknowledged reason to follow a gluten free diet)- don't even understand what gluten is and what foods contain it. They just think it's in wheat.

Like most of these things, it's much more complex than that.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

Can only speak for my own individual dogs and obviously haven't done scientific studies on them but they have certainly appeared to do far better on grain free foods than foods listing cereals, wheat or maize as one of the top ingredients. Whether raw or kibble fed. 

I'm finding this thread rather odd to be honest  If people want to feed their dog a food full of cereals and additives that's their choice. If people want to feed their dog organic unicorn chunks cooked by dragons breath and sprinkled with fairy dust then that's also their choice.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

I think it's developed because when the OP posed her question there were some people saying her dog would be damaged if it ate cheap food from the supermarket.

To be honest though, most people have responded more reasonably.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> I think it's developed because when the OP posed her question there were some people saying her dog would be damaged if it ate cheap food from the supermarket.


Depends on definition of damaged doesn't it. Even Iams state that decreasing animal protein leads to:

decreased lean tissue
increased body fat
decreased levels of blood proteins routinely used as markers of superior nutritional status

Your argument pushed for the fact there are standards. Standards which are based on laboratory tests. Motor oil, woodsavings, shredded leather boots along with additional EU permitted additives would also match those standards. I wouldn't feed my dog with the result.

Common sense says that not all food is equal but there are no long term studies of different foods that I know of. All we can go on is logic. 3 years average difference between lifespan for homemade food and commercial food on the only study I have seen comparing the two. What would have been the difference if they had looked at only those commerical food dog owners who looked at the ingredients list and considered what they were feeding? I'm personally convinced it would be far less of a difference. People do have budget and lifestyle restraints but within those bounds different options exist. Surely if people ask for advice on commerical food, the minimum people should do is ask them to look at the ingredients along with those options and consider as IAMS says...



> Feeding diets with primarily animal-based protein sources
> 
> Helps maintain muscle mass in dogs
> Helps reverse some age-related changes in skeletal muscles in senior dogs
> Can help enhance long-term health and well-being of adult and senior dogs.


This from a company whose ProActive Healty Mature Adult food ingredients starts with Corn Meal, Chicken By-Product Meal, Ground Whole Grain Sorghum, Dried Beet Pulp, Chicken... with no % listed. ???

I'd ask you to find a study which shows the opposite is true and animal-based protein has negative effects or that primarily corn based protein sources are even advantageous for dogs.

Simply saying "all dog food conforms to standards so it makes no difference" is therefore, in my opinion totally false.


----------



## ellenlouisepascoe (Jul 12, 2013)

Fluffster said:


> That's awful, no one should be made to feel guilty
> 
> I switched Daisy from all raw to a mix of raw and tins as we had to gets smaller freezer, and also she loves her tins  I'm happy with the mix, she gets Nutriment, chicken wings, Lily's Kitchen, some NatureDiet and whatever else we find on our travels. Belle gets NatureDiet, she was on Bakers previously and when her teeth are sorted I might see if she fancies any of the raw minces, but no biggy if not. :arf: to anyone who makes people feel guilty for their choices!


It's costing me a hell of a lot more to feed dry than it was to feed raw , I basically decided how much I could afford and found the best possible food that that price that won't upset Blade's tum. I looked at Millies and Eden but when I've given those previously it gave him explodabot so went for something less high in meat content. Luckily the first one I decided to try ( Lukullus) has suited him well and other than having to put up with bigger poos I've noticed no difference. In terms of Taz I've noticed he smells less , probably because all I could feed him was minces and recreational bones along with small chunks.



Goblin said:


> Here I disagree with you.. Look at the ingredients and what a dog is and then do the best you can in terms of budget and lifestyle. Not asking for everyone to feed the same, simply look into it and not simply accept marketing or pretty packaging.
> 
> Very few people I know of here on this forum would look down on that decision. The reality is circumstances change for all of us. I bet you looked into the possible options and chose what suited your dog  It's the looking into possible options which to me, personally, matters and I am sure I am not alone in that.


Ohh yes that is what I did  I'm spending £98 a month feeding dry. I was spending around £60 for raw so in my case I am forking out more every month.



Sarah1983 said:


> This is what annoys me. There are way too many fanatics out there. I've left all raw feeding groups on FB because god forbid you feed your dog ANYTHING other than raw meat and bones! The world will end if you do! Same if you feed minces at all. Much as I like raw my dog is hardly going to keel over and die if I use roast chicken as a training treat or give him a raw carrot because he likes them  I'm sick to death of seeing people given the guilt trip because they can't feed raw or don't want to. Dog groups on FB are bloody awful for it.


I definitely agree, I am a lurker in all those groups now I don't get involved. People are free to feed their dogs whatever they want. I remember someone on THIS forum giving me a hard time for feeding Blade some rice and pasta when he had an upset stomach while feeding raw


----------



## Jazmine (Feb 1, 2009)

Sarah1983 said:


> This is what annoys me. There are way too many fanatics out there. I've left all raw feeding groups on FB because god forbid you feed your dog ANYTHING other than raw meat and bones! The world will end if you do! Same if you feed minces at all. Much as I like raw my dog is hardly going to keel over and die if I use roast chicken as a training treat or give him a raw carrot because he likes them  I'm sick to death of seeing people given the guilt trip because they can't feed raw or don't want to. Dog groups on FB are bloody awful for it.


Ha, this is why I mostly keep quiet about what I feed my dogs. I feed raw, because I choose to, and have the time and space, but I fully understand that not everyone can, or indeed, not everyone wants to.

When I took on my foster boy back in June, I made the decision not to switch him to raw, but instead, put him on a decent quality kibble. Reason for this? Well, I know the chances are he will end up going to a home where they will prefer to kibble/wet feed, so I didn't really see the point in faffing about switching him to raw. Wow, the grief I got from some of my fellow fosterers for that! I was basically made to feel like I didn't care as much about my foster as I do my own dogs because I wouldn't raw feed him.

FWIW, he does sometimes get the odd bone or raw egg as a treat, I just really wasn't expecting the criticism!


----------



## Renata (Mar 18, 2013)

Goblin said:


> Depends on definition of damaged doesn't it. Even Iams state that decreasing animal protein leads to:
> 
> decreased lean tissue
> increased body fat
> ...


Stop talking about motor oil, woodsavings, shredded leather and such nonsense.
It is well known how much protein, carbohydrates, minerals, etc. the dog food should contain. Too many dogs died in scientific research. Every responsible owner will do his homework and will try to find out what is best for his dog. I agree that there are too many dog food fanatics around with too much spare time who have nothing better to do than give advice about the best dog food.


----------



## spannels (Sep 9, 2011)

Sarah1983 said:


> If people want to feed their dog organic unicorn chunks cooked by dragons breath and sprinkled with fairy dust then that's also their choice.


Ooooh! Can you buy it online? Is there a raw mince version? Organic unicorn sounds great. :biggrin:


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> _can anyone seriously argue that something that costs pennies per meal is anything other than poor quality?). _
> 
> Quite a few people actually, I feed roadkill, that is free, is it poor quality?
> 
> ...


:001_rolleyes:

Not quite sure how you can take a comment about Wagg and other supermarket dog food costing pennies per meal and therefore being poor quality to someone being able to create a nutritious meal for a human for next to nothing and have any valid point to make?

I'm thrilled for you if you can make a cheap and nutritious meal for yourself that costs pennies, same goes for someone who can do the same for their dog from roadkill, butchers scraps or whatever.

It's got nothing to do with buying cheap supermarket pet food though.


----------



## StormyThai (Sep 11, 2013)

Renata said:


> Stop talking about motor oil, woodsavings, shredded leather and such nonsense.
> It is well known how much protein, carbohydrates, minerals, etc. the dog food should contain. Too many dogs died in scientific research. Every responsible owner will do his homework and will try to find out what is best for his dog. I agree that there are too many dog food fanatics around with *too much spare time who have nothing better to do than give advice about* the best *dog food.*


Oh the irony :lol:


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Renata said:


> Stop talking about motor oil, woodsavings, shredded leather and such nonsense.
> It is well known how much protein, carbohydrates, minerals, etc. the dog food should contain. Too many dogs died in scientific research. Every responsible owner will do his homework and will try to find out what is best for his dog. I agree that there are too many dog food fanatics around with too much spare time who have nothing better to do than give advice about the best dog food.


So you are saying motor oil, woodshavings and shredded leather don't produce protein, fat and fibre along with minerals etc in laboratory test results or is it you simply don't like the idea of feeding your dog that?


----------



## LOLcats (Jun 21, 2014)

My new puppy is fed raw, though it is packaged mince, so not sure he is _really_ raw fed  As a vegetarian defrosting it and serving it is about as much as I can do. I can't be sourcing the best meats and preparing them.

My cats have a crapola diet. I mean poor. I have tired them on all the best wet, not raw I must admit, but they like the rubbish wet and occasional kibble (I'll be banned from cat chat )

For me, I think it's important to do what's right for you. No point preaching at people that feel guilty each time they give in and feed their pet what they'll eat, after days of putting decent food down only to pick the untouched bowl up _again_

I understand some people really feel passionately about educating people about feeding. But like all things in life, some just like to feel superior. It is usually these folk that are hiding an insecurity somewhere


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

LOLcats said:


> For me, I think it's important to do what's right for you. No point preaching at people that feel guilty each time they give in and feed their pet what they'll eat, after days of putting decent food down only to pick the untouched bowl up _again_


Haven't seen anybody say people have to feed anything or try to make people feel guilty. All I've seen is comments like.. "I wouldn't feed that" or "look at the ingredients and decide"


----------



## LOLcats (Jun 21, 2014)

Goblin said:


> Haven't seen anybody say people have to feed anything or try to make people feel guilty. All I've seen is comments like.. "I wouldn't feed that" or "look at the ingredients and decide"


To be fair I should have made it clearer that I meant threads over the years 

It's my issue I know. Lots of guilt over the cats diet but I do know I have tried and I haven't the stomach to ride out days of not eating.

George thankfully is eating raw. I guess I'm just saying that as I blitz the veg and add the salmon oil I _could_ feel all virtuous and chastise people who don't fed raw. I choose to say each to their own.

As long as the pet is shown love and affection and is being given the best food it will eat I think the owner shouldn't be made to feel guilty. Let's face it. Those of us that have animals that are trickier to feed _know_ we are not feeding the best our pet could get. We don't need to be judged and found wanting.

disclaimer - not necessarily on this thread


----------



## Guest (Sep 12, 2014)

spannels said:


> Ooooh! Can you buy it online? Is there a raw mince version? Organic unicorn sounds great. :biggrin:


I bet even Kenzie wouldn't be allergic to Organic unicorn! :w00t:


----------



## babycham2002 (Oct 18, 2009)

Jazmine said:


> Ha, this is why I mostly keep quiet about what I feed my dogs. I feed raw, because I choose to, and have the time and space, but I fully understand that not everyone can, or indeed, not everyone wants to.
> 
> When I took on my foster boy back in June, I made the decision not to switch him to raw, but instead, put him on a decent quality kibble. Reason for this? Well, I know the chances are he will end up going to a home where they will prefer to kibble/wet feed, so I didn't really see the point in faffing about switching him to raw. Wow, the grief I got from some of my fellow fosterers for that! I was basically made to feel like I didn't care as much about my foster as I do my own dogs because I wouldn't raw feed him.
> 
> FWIW, he does sometimes get the odd bone or raw egg as a treat, I just really wasn't expecting the criticism!


I also don't feed my fosters raw. Not because I care about them less than my own dogs but for the exact same reasons as you.

I do belong to one nice, non fanatical, normal people raw group on FB


----------



## Jem121 (May 6, 2012)

2 things dog owners will never agree on

1) what to feed their dog

2) how to train their dog


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Jem121 said:


> 2 things dog owners will never agree on
> 
> 1) what to feed their dog
> 
> 2) how to train their dog


Feeding, for some people is not just about nutrition, it's also an expression of love and devotion. They like to spend time, money and effort on feeding there dogs. It makes them feel good.

THERE IS ABSOLUTLY NOTHING WRONG IN THIS.

However, it does not mean you are necessarily a better dog owner than someone who pops into the supermarket. Lifts a packet of Bakers, and scoops out a cupful into their dogs bowl each day.

If you want to source your dogs food from a specialist company/butcher; read up on micronutrients; spend hours preparing and serving food then that's fine.

It doesn't make you a "better" dog owner.

Dogs won't be damaged by feeding supermarket food- but they won't be damaged by feeding carefully prepared bespoke diets either. One is not better than the other.

The only badly fed dogs are those who are over or under fed. Not those who are fed bog standard supermarket dog food.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Obviously I only feed UK responsibily sourced, sustainable, organic food bred, reared and slaughtered by legally employed staff who earn at least the minimum wage.

To drink only the finest filtered spring water transported in an eco friendly container transported by carbon neutral lorries.


----------



## Sarah1983 (Nov 2, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> Obviously I only feed UK responsibily sourced, sustainable, organic food bred, reared and slaughtered by legally employed staff who earn at least the minimum wage.
> 
> To drink only the finest filtered spring water transported in an eco friendly container transported by carbon neutral lorries.


Ah but is it organic unicorn and water from the fountain of youth? If it's not then it's simply not good enough I'm afraid.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Sarah1983 said:


> Ah but is it organic unicorn and water from the fountain of youth? If it's not then it's simply not good enough I'm afraid.


I realise that, and it is a burden of guilt that I will be carrying around for some considerable time.......................


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Old Shep said:


> Feeding, for some people is not just about nutrition, it's also an expression of love and devotion. They like to spend time, money and effort on feeding there dogs. It makes them feel good.
> 
> THERE IS ABSOLUTLY NOTHING WRONG IN THIS.
> 
> ...


Gotta bring you up on the Bakers thing, tho.  It's very poor food, contains two E numbers that I would hope not to consume myself, plus tons of sugar, not the healthiest thing. A good owner would surely check out ingredients and not give such rubbish? *Dons tin hat*


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

I believe (but don't know for a fact) that more dogs are fed Bakers than any other food in the UK.

It's FINE.

It's ok for dog food to be just "fine".


And personally, I only feed pink unicorn steak. Slaughtered at the full moon and prepared by dusky virgins in deep forest glades.

I must hang my head in shame and admit I do sometimes add some crushed sea pearls to their food. I believe it prevents cancer.


----------



## Blackadder (Aug 25, 2014)

Old Shep said:


> I believe (but don't know for a fact) that more dogs are fed Bakers than any other food in the UK.
> 
> It's FINE.
> 
> It's ok for dog food to be just "fine".


Maybe it is FINE in that it won't poison a dog after one mouthful but c'mon....

Ingredient(s): 
Cereals, Meat and animal derivatives (15% in the chunk), Vegetable protein extracts, Derivatives of vegetable origin, Oils and fats, Various sugars, Vegetables (1% dried chicory root (natural ingredient), green and yellow kernels: 0.6 % dried vegetables, equivalent to 4% vegetables), Propylene glycol, Minerals.

It's not even cheap! To suggest it's anything better than scavenged scraps is taking the pee... would you feed it to your dogs?


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

BlackadderUK said:


> Maybe it is FINE in that it won't poison a dog after one mouthful but c'mon....
> 
> Ingredient(s):
> Cereals, Meat and animal derivatives (15% in the chunk), Vegetable protein extracts, Derivatives of vegetable origin, Oils and fats, Various sugars, Vegetables (1% dried chicory root (natural ingredient), green and yellow kernels: 0.6 % dried vegetables, equivalent to 4% vegetables), Propylene glycol, Minerals.
> ...


Yes, I genuinely would. And I wouldn't feel guilty about it.

Dogs digestion has evolved to be able to extract amino acids efficiently from cereals.

I feed Happy Dog - not sure what variety, I can't remember. It's one of their cheaper ones. I bought it on special offer at SKC- 4 bags, 15kilos for the price of 3- delivery free. Works out at under £30 per bag- which is my limit, price wise. I wouldn't feel comfortable spending more on dog food. I'd feel guilty.

Before this special offer, I used Supadog sensitive. My old guy is inclined to get the scoots now and again and Supadog suits him- as does Happy Dog. The only food I actively avoid is those with obvious colouring. Not because I think it will kill him, I just think it's unnecessary to add colouring, so why do it. I'm paying for something unnecessary. I do have to watch what I feed the old man because of his scoots, though.

They get kitchen scraps mixed In. If there is anything tasty left over.

Treats are Fish For Dogs, which I get freebies of, and cheese. Sometimes I make liver cake, but it's a bit of a faff and stinks.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> Dogs digestion has evolved to be able to extract amino acids efficiently from cereals.


More of a case it's so heavily processed anyway digestibility is enhanced 

You still ignore any evidence that animal protein is better as you have done previously. Dogs aren't herbivores.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Goblin said:


> More of a case it's so heavily processed anyway digestibility is enhanced
> 
> You still ignore any evidence that animal protein is better as you have done previously. Dogs aren't herbivores.


You are exhibiting a gross lack of understanding of evolution with that remark.

Where have I "ignored any evidence animal protien is better..."?

Not that I'm saying it is.

Where did I say dogs are herbivores?

Sheesh! Sense of humour fail on your part.


----------



## Blackadder (Aug 25, 2014)

Old Shep said:


> Yes, I genuinely would. And I wouldn't feel guilty about it.





Old Shep said:


> The only food I actively avoid is those with obvious colouring.


That might be Bakers then?


----------



## picaresque (Jun 25, 2009)




----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

BlackadderUK said:


> That might be Bakers then?


Plus the BHT and BHA it contains. Rubbish food (in my opinion) and I would suggest to anyone that they avoid it.


----------



## Rafa (Jun 18, 2012)

Bakers Complete contains thirteen E Numbers, five of which are banned in other Countries, because they cause cancer, amongst other things.

I'm by no means a 'Food Snob', I can't be as my bitch is very restricted in what she can and can't eat, but there is too much evidence that Bakers is such a bad food.

Dogs like it because it has a high sugar content and flavourings, (artificial), to make it palatable.

I really believe you should feed what you think is best, within your budget, but I do think Bakers should be a last resort.


----------



## Hopeattheendofthetunnel (Jun 26, 2013)

Old Shep said:


> I believe (but don't know for a fact) that more dogs are fed Bakers than any other food in the UK.
> 
> *It's FINE.
> 
> ...


You know OS....whilst I fundamentally agree with all of your posts on this thread - the above in bold is a different matter.

Because I tell you the nanosecond it immediately ceases to be ok that a certain food was merely "fine".

And that is when your dog get's sick. Terminally ill. And way before his/her expected livespan.

At this precise moment, the "ok" food you fed will take on a new meaning. You WILL question and second-guess that IF you had fed him differently, would he have not gotten sick? Would a better diet have made his immune system stronger? Is there merit to the notion that a low sugar/carb diet really can minimize the risk of cancer? Could you have prevented this?

Obviously, your dog's diet may have had nothing whatsoever do do with his illness. Yet, our dog's diet is one of the VERY few measures of control we have in their health and wellbeing. And I assure you that the "what if?" question about their previous diet, if it was merely "ok", will drive you barmy with guilt and remorse when they get sick. 100%. Guaranteed. Been there.

Nothing wrong with Bakers, Wagg, Asda or any food. Most of them likely made by the very same contract manufacturing plant producing expensive "boutique" dog diets from the same quality main ingredients.

But if you want to avoid beating yourself up alongside feeling heartbroken when your dog gets diagnosed with something godawful, I'd heartily recommend spicing up his diet with the best, healthiest stuff you can afford. Yeah, the whole snooty-palooty organic stuff. Even if it's just on occasion. As much for your sake as his. Avoids tossing around sleeplessly in bed whilst playing endless rounds of the futile game "what if". And unless you have an amazingly fatalistic personality, and/or an emotional distance to your dog, you WILL play it. 

PS since you are only using the pearls ( ground up, of course)...can I have the oysters? Yumm! Not for the dog, obviously. Me, mine, all mine. Please?


----------



## Daffers (Jul 22, 2014)

I think - for what it's worth - that the views on this post just go to prove that all dogs are different and thrive on different types of food. I have 4 dogs, two are fed on raw, one is fed on canagan kibble with applaws wet or canagan tinned, the other one is fed on royal canin urinary support wet. I was horrified at having to feed her this, she was previously on raw, and couldn't wait for the vet to say we could try her on raw again, but you know her coat,behaviour,smell,poos are exactly the same as when she was fed raw and she is doing really well despite the ingredients. I am not sure I want her on it long term but if it takes away the risk of having to have another major op to remove bladder stones then I'll eat humble pie and go with it. I have researched alternative food until I am cross eyed and there is nothing out there, I could feed her home cooked but the list of high/moderate purine foods that she cannot have seems endless. I now use the royal canin as a 'base' and add other good stuff to it, cooked chicken/yumpro/yumega oil/boiled egg and various veggies so that she gets a good variety. So maybe if you have to or choose to use supermarket food, add the good stuff to it too afterall isn't it all about 'balance'


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

But there's the rub....
Lots and lots of assertions about "poor quality" food and "food causing illness".

Please can you show me the data to support this?

I will look at it and I a will consider my position in the light of it.

And to be clear, by "food causing illness" I'm not talking about dogs who are over or under fed, I mean proprietry dog food.

While we are at it, it may be worth some people actually finding out what E numbers are. They are merely a method of identifying ingredients in foodstuffs. They are not necessarily "bad".


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> I will look at it and I a will consider my position in the light of it.


Why when you've ignored the data in this thread already and other threads previously as it doesn't match what you want?

Be interested in reading, if could find any, studies which show the opposite, that all commercial foods are equal to support your view.

You always declare prove it.. prove your point.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Goblin said:


> Why when you've ignored the data in this thread already and other threads previously as it doesn't match what you want?
> 
> Be interested in reading, if could find any, studies which show the opposite, that all commercial foods are equal to support your view.
> 
> You always declare prove it.. prove your point.


I shall look at this thread in more drail to see if I have missed anything


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Goblin said:


> Why when you've ignored the data in this thread already and other threads previously as it doesn't match what you want?
> 
> Be interested in reading, if could find any, studies which show the opposite, that all commercial foods are equal to support your view.
> 
> You always declare prove it.. prove your point.


As I suspected, the only links on this whole thread are one about cats (?) and one about muscle glycogen uptake in racing greyhounds.

Please can you tell me where all the research is which states at commercially produced dog food is bad for dogs.

(And please could we keep this friendly? Thank you)


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> As I suspected, the only links on this whole thread are one about cats (?) and one about muscle glycogen uptake in racing greyhounds.
> 
> Please can you tell me where all the research is which states at commercially produced dog food is bad for dogs.


You skipped Animal protein's importance for dogs. You dismiss the studies showing how dogs work biologically such as the muscle glyogen uptake in racing greyhounds. You could also look at things like https://www.purinavets.eu/PDFs/ResearchReport1997_vol0.pdf which highlights the importance of protein stores and the negative effects:



> Dogs with depleted protein stores are more susceptible to effects of toxins, and may be more susceptible to infectious agents.


You have pushed that all dog foods match standards but as has been said, motor oil, sawdust and shredded leather with the addition of some artificial minerals etc would also match those standards. Would you feed a food like that just as it matched standards?

You ignore any reference to statistics (LipertSapy Statistical Study) which shows that dogs fed a varied homemade live on average 3 years longer than those on commercial but quite readily admit a high percentage of those commercial fed dogs are fed things like bakers. How many would live longer if not on Bakers? Given results like that, either all commercial is wrong or some are of poor quality. Personally I prefer to believe the later.

Not all commercial food is equal. Neither, it has to be said, is there a magical food which suits all dogs. Prices and lifestyle also have to be taken into account. However we can do better for our dogs than simply picking any pack from a shelf so long as it says "dog food".



> (And please could you adopt a less provocative tone? Thank you)


Hardly provocative, I simply asked you to support your argument. As stated you expect it of others.

Unless you can provide evidence to support your argument I'll let other readers make their own decisions.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

You stated that there were references to published trials on this actual thread which you caused me of not reading.

I have looked, and as I have already said, there was one to cats (which is irrelevant) and one to racing greyhounds ( which is not relevant either).

At NO time have I said dogs would survive on a diet depleted of any essential element.

I HAVE stated that all commercial foods available in the UK meet those requirements.

It it others who have stated they do not, yet are unable to support this assertion.

And any references to motor oil and sawdust only detract from meaningful discussion.

Namaste. :smile5:


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

http://www.cavalierhealth.org/images/Lippert_Sapy_Domestic_Dogs_Life_Expectancy.pdf

Did you read that?

It's of dubious provenance and doesn't meet even the minimal standards for a published work.

It wouldn't get someone a pass at first year uni. I couldn't begin to explain the problems with it.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> http://www.cavalierhealth.org/images/Lippert_Sapy_Domestic_Dogs_Life_Expectancy.pdf
> 
> Did you read that?
> 
> ...


As I thought dismissal of anything which you don't want.. yet nothing, one single piece to support your view.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

I found my decisions on good quality research.

That is an essay (neither peer reviewed nor published) by someone. Unless you have access to the data behind the conclusions, it's meaningless..

OK. Since you say I merely dismiss anything which does not confirm my views, can you explain to me the findings regarding food and longevity from that paper?

What do they mean by "home cooked"?

What so they mean by "industrial"

What do they mean by the other diet, which I cannot decipher?

This is extremely important. It's not a matter of semantics.

As I say, I base my views on actual science.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> As I say, I base my views on actual science.


Which you refuse to provide. No point in continuing this discussion until you do.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

Muscular glycogen uptake by greyhounds is only applicable to them and similar dogs when sprinting.

It does not apply to dogs which participate in endurance sports or anything in between those two extremes.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

smokeybear said:


> Muscular glycogen uptake by greyhounds is only applicable to them and similar dogs when sprinting.
> 
> It does not apply to dogs which participate in endurance sports or anything in between those two extremes.


You missed the study link posted, in the same post on the recovery of muscle glycogen concentrations in sled dogs during prolonged exercise 

Are you therefore saying all food is equal and people shouldn't at least look at the protein levels etc and the ingredients of what they are buying?


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Goblin said:


> Which you refuse to provide. No point in continuing this discussion until you do.


Lol!

It's not up to me to prove that commercially prepared foods are fine for dogs- it is YOU o have stated they cause all sorts of illnesses- without one iota of evidence!

Your argument is like stating that you know there are pixies at the bottom of your garden and demanding I prove there are not. It's a preposterous argument- and actually has it's own Latin name. But I've forgotten what it is.

It's a basic tenet of discussion that if you refute something you must provide evidence.

It is YOU who are saying hat the diet fed by the vast majority of people in this country is bad. Not me.

...anyway. If it was as bad as people say it is, we would be seeing the life expectancy of dogs declining- when they are not.


----------



## smokeybear (Oct 19, 2011)

No the benefit of certain nutrients to certain dogs in certain activites, or not.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> It's not up to me to prove that commercially prepared foods are fine for dogs- it is YOU o have stated they cause all sorts of illnesses- without one iota of evidence!


Please show where I have said that.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

I'm sorry, I must have missed something.

Are you now agreeing with me, that commercially prepared food is fine?


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

smokeybear said:


> No the benefit of certain nutrients to certain dogs in certain activites, or not.


Here are clearly some dogs that require a more specific diet than those of us with pets who may do the occasional days work- though I doubt you'd find a shepherd who fed raw or an expensive diet. They don't have the time or the money!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> Are you now agreeing with me, that commercially prepared food is fine?


No I'm not as that is not what you have been saying. You have been stating it doesn't matter what commercial food you feed, they all match the standards.

I'm saying, as I have all the way through, different commercial foods are different quality. Some may well have ingredients which aren't suitable for dogs and may have an effect on lifespan, much as eating McDonalds everyday may affect human lifespan. People should look at the nutrient labels and ingredients and do a bit of research. People should not pick food simply as it's been coloured to appeal to humans, not dogs. They shouldn't pick due to the fancy packaging and they shouldn't necessarily believe advertising either. They shouldn't simply pick either the cheapest or most expensive believing cheap = bad and expensive = good. Different foods are available within each different price bracket and you owe it to your dog to find the best available for them within what is practical and affordable.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Goblin said:


> No I'm not as that is not what you have been saying. You have been stating it doesn't matter what commercial food you feed, they all match the standards.
> 
> I'm saying, as I have all the way through, different commercial foods are different quality. Some may well have ingredients which aren't suitable for dogs and may have an effect on lifespan, much as eating McDonalds everyday may affect human lifespan. People should look at the nutrient labels and ingredients and do a bit of research. People should not pick food simply as it's been coloured to appeal to humans, not dogs. They shouldn't pick due to the fancy packaging and they shouldn't necessarily believe advertising either. They shouldn't simply pick either the cheapest or most expensive believing cheap = bad and expensive = good. Different foods are available within each different price bracket and you owe it to your dog to find the best available for them within what is practical and affordable.


What I have said is true. ALL commercial dog food In th eUK meets the required standards. There are legal obligations in the production of animal feeds and there are a variety of government organisations which oversee them. It's actually quite a complex issue with EU and UK legislation involved.

Your analogy with McDonald's is a complete red herring. A diet comprised of solely McDonald's does not constituent a balanced diet. 
Whereas the European standard for dog food does,

Simples.


----------



## Muze (Nov 30, 2011)

Old Shep said:


> Here are clearly some dogs that require a more specific diet than those of us with pets who may do the occasional days work- though I doubt you'd find a shepherd who fed raw or an expensive diet. They don't have the time or the money!


I was brought up around farmers and working dogs, especially sheepdogs, and many were fed raw.... fallen stock, old eggs, whatever they could catch etc. It was cheap then, think the legislation around fallen stock has changed since then though.


----------



## Old Shep (Oct 17, 2010)

Boiled sheep head was a favorite!

Also a fair ammount of oats in the form of porridge.

Probably not as balanced as it should be, but these dogs worked their furry little butts off!


----------

