# Long live our dogs! + hollistic food



## TwoSweetBabies (Apr 28, 2008)

Hey guys!
I was just wondering...since i'm fairly young (22), I can't really say I know how long these hollistic dog foods have been around (canidae, halo, solid gold etc). This has led me to wonder, is there anyone around here who feeds a hollistic food, that has had atleast one dog that lived its whole life on a hollistic food? 
The reason I ask, is while I will never feed a dog food like Pedigree, Purina, etc (although I don't judge those who do), I was just thinking about all the people I know who have very old dogs that grew up eating those foods, like Pedigree. My fiances dog was fed anything from Pedigree - Kibbles n Bits - people scraps, and she just passed at almost 22 years old!
I'm just curious as to whether hollistic fed dogs really do fair better off in the long run?
Thoughts?


----------



## jesirose (Mar 27, 2008)

Every dog is different. Different breeds have different life expentancies. Just as different people eat different diets and have different results.


----------



## TwoSweetBabies (Apr 28, 2008)

Well yes, I do believe dogs have different life expectancy, thats fairly obvious. But I was mostly asking in general...


----------



## Zack_the_Mouse (Oct 2, 2007)

my Poodle has been on holistic food most of her life but so far it just creates less vet bills that works for me.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

I think there are other factors besides nutrition to be taken into account when determining longevity ... for instance keeping your dog at an ideal bodyweight throughout it's life, envorinment/exercize, and genetics. I also think you have to look at what's being fed besides the kibble, and how often. Fresh meat is just better absorbed by the body. By it's very nature, all kibble is a processed product - so adding fresh meat - i.e. table scraps - can definitely contribute to longevity. That's one factor you may find in common with most unusually old dogs ... they've been fed scraps or fresh meat on a regular basis. At least, that's been my own experience. The oldest dogs I know reached 17+ on scraps alone or scraps & the old standby foods (Pedigree, Purina, Science Diet, Euk). I know a retired police K9 handler with GSDs who have lived to 15-16 on nothing but Euk and some outstanding Veterinary care. 

That being said, holistic foods HAVE been around much longer than you think. You mentioned Solid Gold - they've been around for about 30+ years, and were really the first self proclaimed "holistic" manufacturer. Every dog, EVERY single dog I have seen on Solid Gold's products, have skin/coat problems. My friend's Chi has severe dermatitis on that Just A Wee Bit formula. A show Labrador breeder had awful results with their puppy food and one of the adult formulas. Her bitches were having conception problems and lactation problems. Milk was dring up when pups were 1-2 weeks old!!! We had a few puppy buyers feed varying formulas of Solid Gold, more recently the high protein Bark at the Moon food. All coat problems. 

Fromm is quite old - they've been around since the late 40s/early50s. Eagle Pack, Azmira, Avoderm ... these are all older companies. Obviously, they must work, or people would not still be purchasing them. But here you have a company (Fromm) producing feed for the pet market several years before Purina went mainstream with their brand and began selling to grocery/feed stores, and yet, it still has not achieved the same level of popularity or success. Smart companies tried their formulas with breeders and let their formula build a name for itself. Then based their marketing upon that. Which is what Paul Iams originally did, as well. If a feed is good, it attracts buyers, then you sell it based on how well it has performed for such and such show dogs, breeders, working dogs, etc. 

Many of the holistic companies are formulating their diets on computers, based on the research of the old Gaines company, Purina, Iams, Waltham. The companies with the feeding trials almost always have the better feeds, *regardless* of ingredients. Dogs will do better on a diet that has meat and bone meal or some other "icky" ingredient but has been tested to work on dogs and is digestable & has a vitamin premix that is well balanced. That's why we usually see dogs on Pedigree or Purina living to ripe old ages with few problems. I have honestely never heard of a dog kept on basically one or two main holistic foods living to 15,16,17+ ... if I had I'd certainly admit it & would probably try it myself, lol. And it's not because those foods haven't been around, it's simply that they don't work for more than a few months in most cases. Many people feeding holistic foods "rotate" every few months because the diets just don't work much longer than that. There should be no nutritional gaps in a good food, and if I need to rotate with another food for the dog to get all it's nutrients, I'd seriosuly second guess what I was feeding ...


----------



## TwoSweetBabies (Apr 28, 2008)

Urban,
Thank you for such an informative answer. Though I'm confused about your actual opinion on hollistic foods. Are you suggesting against them? I have a hard time understanding why foods like Pedigree, which contain cancer causing ingredients, would be recommended over one that doesnt. 
I fully understand that other factors come into the equation and that its impossible to relate it all back to the kibble fed. This was meant solely as a food based question as to what the owner fed and how long the dog lived. 
What do you feed, Urban?
THanks!


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

TwoSweetBabies said:


> Urban,
> Thank you for such an informative answer. Though I'm confused about your actual opinion on hollistic foods. Are you suggesting against them? I have a hard time understanding why foods like Pedigree, which contain cancer causing ingredients, would be recommended over one that doesnt.
> I fully understand that other factors come into the equation and that its impossible to relate it all back to the kibble fed. This was meant solely as a food based question as to what the owner fed and how long the dog lived.
> What do you feed, Urban?
> THanks!



I'm not suggesting any food in particular ... I don't care for Pedigree, either. Not because of the preservatives, however, but because when I fed it for a very short time, my pups were off the walls and had a bad body odor. I know people who feed Pedigree & have very healthy dogs. I also know other Beaglers who feed Black Gold, which also contains BHA, and their dogs do quite well on it. 

I'm not against any kibble, holistic or otherwise. It's very naieve, IMHO, to consider holistic foods better because their ingredient lists look nicer. They are still a processed product, and the chicken meal or turkey meal or lamb meal or whatever meat is in them is basically processed in the same way the meat in a McDonald's Chicken Nugget is. So ALL kibble from Innova to Pedigree is processed. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing for dogs, becuase they do have that scavenger nature and can eat quite a few things that would not be conducive to health in humans - such as raw meat  No, I wouldn't eat McDonalds or feed it to my kids, but my dogs ain't children and shouldn't be fed like humans. 

I do feed some raw, scraps, so when I look for a kibble, I now prefer ones that are cost effective and have a solid vitamin mix in lieu of ingredients that look nice. Keep in mind, most ingredients are similar - meat and bone meal is simply the meat of more than one tyoe of an animal mixed in the same batch - so chicken and beef or lamb and pork plus the dried bone meal from those animals. What's wrong with that? I've seen foods that list turkey meal as the first ingredient then a few ingredients down will list another meat source from an entirely different animal, say lamb meal. Essentially, that's what meat meal is, only it's more economical for the manufacturer to buy because it's just leftover parts (which is what is in all kibbles, don't kid yourself, your dogs ain't getting filet mignon with Innova) sold together. Bone meal ... nothing wrong with that. I buy bovine bone meal for myself. It's dried, crushed up bone. So that is what you need to be aware of with the holistic foods. They're worded differently, but not always better. You may be getting the same thing only packaged and arranged differently. There could be "cancer causing" preservatives in holistic foods that use a source o fmeat meal, say chicken meal. Did you know that "meals" are sold to the manufacturer as is and by law, the manufacturer does not need to list any preservatives their supplier used on their ingredients? That's what often happens with fish meal. Most of it is preserved by w/ ethoxyquin as per Coast Guard regulations, yet no manufacturer will list that their supplier's fish meal has ethoxyquin. If you feed ANY kibble, your dog is eating a pricessed product that has a high probability of having trace amounts of chemicals. That can be said for raw fed dogs, too, whose owner's unknowingly purchase "enhanced" meat. 

As for what I feed, it's not holistic  I've never had much luck w/ holistic diets. The best feeds I've used were "middle of the road" types, with basic ingredient lists. My dogs look and feel great, so will be continued on what they're currently eating ... I'd love for anyone to see my dogs pics & tell me they don't look 1000% healthy ... http://www.flickr.com/photos/houndmusic/


----------



## TwoSweetBabies (Apr 28, 2008)

Urban,
I just wanted to say again that I did not intend this to be a argument between regular kibble and hollistic kibble. Just simply a infomative topic about dogs longevity on hollistic diets. I personally am switching from Canidae to Halo, simply because I want to get as far away from the companys that were in any way effected by a recall. I do believe many dogs thrive on basic kibble, because, obviously I've seen them do it. But for my dogs I want the best, and if I have to pick between 2 processed kibbles, i'm probably going to pick the one that lists chicken as the first ingredient and doesnt list all the unpronouncable ingredients that are in basic kibbles.
I'm a marketing major at my university, and I clearly have an educated understanding in the possible "marketing lies" being made by Hollistic dog food companys, in no way am i naive to that. But if I have to pick one, i'm tempted to pick the hollistic one. But then the argument can be made that dogs have been doing well on basic kibble like pedigree for years. So I'm definitely confused. Would love opionions!


----------



## GreatDaneMom (Sep 21, 2007)

TwoSweetBabies said:


> Urban,
> I just wanted to say again that I did not intend this to be a argument between regular kibble and hollistic kibble. Just simply a infomative topic about dogs longevity on hollistic diets. I personally am switching from Canidae to Halo, simply because I want to get as far away from the companys that were in any way effected by a recall. I do believe many dogs thrive on basic kibble, because, obviously I've seen them do it. But for my dogs I want the best, and if I have to pick between 2 processed kibbles, i'm probably going to pick the one that lists chicken as the first ingredient and doesnt list all the unpronouncable ingredients that are in basic kibbles.
> I'm a marketing major at my university, and I clearly have an educated understanding in the possible "marketing lies" being made by Hollistic dog food companys, in no way am i naive to that. But if I have to pick one, i'm tempted to pick the hollistic one. But then the argument can be made that dogs have been doing well on basic kibble like pedigree for years. So I'm definitely confused. Would love opionions!



"marketing lies"... that doesnt only apply to hollistic. in fact, i see hollistic foods advertised MUCH LESS than low grade kibble. talk about a marketing lie, ever watch the commercial for Beneful where there are vegies raining from the sky, and they say its soooo great for your dog that hes being spoiled. thats a marketing lie, but so many people feed it because they say its the best. every food is going to say their the best for one reason or another, and it doesnt mean they are. its just plain marketing. i think personal research into food ingredients and canine nutrition is what will make a food good or not. once you can understand the lable, you can make your own decisions. 

the fact that dogs have been doing "well" on low grade kibble for years isnt even a good argument. if you really look back into ingredients in past years you will see a lot of change in formulas for those foods, most have declined in quality. those foods were what was available then to most people. also there were significantly less vet visits then too. many dogs died from tumors and cancer and such, but you dont hear about that because many people just took them into the back yard and shot them. thats just how things were. those dogs did "well" on the foods that were available, but very very few of those dogs ever were up to par on their nutritional standards as they could have been. also a lot of those dogs lived different lives than dogs now. dogs were not just pets that sat around in the house like some people have, or just went for walks. those dogs for the most part were workers. most on farms. they were hearding, hunting, etc. they werent laying on the couch. IMHO they were much better trained than most dogs as well....


----------



## TwoSweetBabies (Apr 28, 2008)

GreatDaneMom,
If you look at any of my other posts, you will see that I myself feed hollistic. Canidae switching to Halo right now. And I figured it was so obvious of the marketing lies basic main stream kibble companys tell, that I didnt need to mention it.
Everyone seems to not be able to stop arguing and get back to the point.
What do you feed?


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

I don't think anyone is arguing, just offering opinions  As I mentioned, I do not know any dogs that have been on a base diet of one or two holistic kibbles that have reached an extraordinary old age. I do know a few who are old now, and have been switched to holistc foods as seniors. I also know quite a few raw fed dogs (not in my own breed) who have been on raw since pups but haven't lived beyond average life expectancy. That was the original question, correct? Do we know of any dogs living to ripe old ages on holistic foods? My answer is no, personally, I don't & that's not because the holistic foods haven't been around long. Solid Gold has been around 30yrs and was the first to call itself a holistic food, then you have Azmira, Fromm, etc. I know there is another well known one that's been around for 30-40 + years, just can't think of the name right now, lol. 

A good friend who has one of my pups who will eventually be the foundation of her breeding program has a masters in animal science. She feels the same way I do regarding holistic/non holistic diets and we've had many interesting conversations about chelated minerals, etc., lol. Her dogs have always been on basic foods and have lived loooong lives. 

So that's my opinion, and my answer to your question. Not looking for and argument, it's simply a discussion & expression of opinions. I don't feed holistic food and have healthy hounds. My opinions on the subject & part of my reasoning in not feeding holistic foods are well reflected in this article:
http://www.showdogsupersite.com/kenlclub/breedvet/dogdiets.html


----------



## TwoSweetBabies (Apr 28, 2008)

I guess my point about arguing was that you didn't seem to understand that I agree with you, I don't know any dogs to live to ripe old ages on hollistic either. Which is why I asked the question. But I also don't know anyone who has been on hollistic their whole lives, so it doesn't really matter. 
I really do appreciate all opinions and yours has been the most informative, but I have been on forums where people were a little more supportive of peoples ideas, and I wish it was more like this on this forum! I do not believe that hollistic is the only way, because obviously basic kibble works well for so many. But in my attempt to provide the best, I am interested in finding more out about the ingredients in hollistic kibble. I, like I said, realize that there are untruths in the marketing done by hollistic food, but in theory, I cant see how their ingredients could possible be worse than regular kibble?
So are you saying you think hollistic is actually worse than basic kibble? And why do you think that?


----------



## jenns (Feb 16, 2007)

My dog's trainer had a GSD who just passed away at age 15. She was fed holistic foods for most of her life. Is 15 old for a GSD, I really don't know. 

How exactly do we define what a "ripe old age" is in a dog? Is it 14? 15? 18? 20? It depends on the breed and what one's definition of old age is. The average lifespan for dogs in the US is based on dogs eating Old Roy, Pedigree and Purina Dog Chow because that is what the vast majority of them are fed. Who knows what a dog's lifespand should be if they are fed an optimal diet. The Purina life span study showed that lean fed labs on Purina foods lived a median age of 13, and only 25% of the dogs lived to age 13.5. So I wouldn't go thinking that all these dogs being fed Purina and the like are living till 18 y.o. because Purina's own controlled study showed that to be false.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

TwoSweetBabies said:


> So are you saying you think hollistic is actually worse than basic kibble? And why do you think that?



Not at all! It's not a popular opinion, but I believe the following. Let's stray from the holistic vs. non holistic comparison for a moment, and classify kibbles as economy, basic, premium, super premium. I think most of us would agree that the "holistic" label applies to the premium & super premium category. Obviously, bargain basement/economy foods are going to skimp on quality or vitamins - these are usually generic or store brands and I don't give them any credence. Then you have the basic foods which are meat & grain plus *usually* more focus on vitamins, digestability, feeding trials, research & development. There can be cheaper and pricier types of these foods, and usually their ingredients don't look too appealing, but they generally work well. There are actually a few "Top 10" foods in this category - Nutri Source would be one of them. And I happen to think Nutri Source is an outstanding, underrated feed, from what I've seen of it. The basic foods range from Purina to Science Diet to Iams to Blackwood to Tuffys Gold to Royal Canin, etc. 

Then you have premium foods which are sometimes an upgrade of a manufacturer's original product - that used to be Eukanuba, which was the higher end version of Iams and Pro Plan, the upscale version of Dog Chow/Purina One. Now premium foods are basically holistc foods that have blander ingredient lists, such as Healthwise, the economy version of Innova. 

Super premium is the ultimate marketing gimmick, IMHO. It starts out as a decent diet but then would not be considered super premium unless you have herbal supplements, fruits, veggies, exotic oils, excessively high amounts of fat & protein, etc. These extras are of no use to dogs. And even if they were, consider that they are added in such small amounts, they either have no benefit, or in the case of kelp, which can interfere w/ thyroid function if fed too often, can actually cause damage. Save for the excessively high protein feeds, the super premium holistic foods are usually much higher in carbs than basic diets.

So no, I don't think holistic is worse or that basic is better, for that matter. I think there are different foods that are marketed to certain types of owners and most of them have their place. My very long winded point is that the holistic foods fill a marketing niche for people who want to feed their dogs a certain way but are not necessarily better because they are holistic. Just a processed food with a kitchen sink approach to the ingredient list. *Holistic food is probably the greatest misnomer possible.* It can't be holistic, because no matter what herb you throw in the batch, it's still processed food. Secondly, holistic referrs to lifestyle choices for humans. It's fresh, whole foods, proper lifestyle habits, plus treating illness with homeopathic remedies that target the root problem, not the symptom. It really does not apply to kibble, but the name sells a lot of food. 

And I think the reason those "holistic" foods don't often work long term is because dogs do well with the simpler foods that dont have 10 different sources of protein, a stick of cinnamon, exotic oils and 40% protein. Turkey meat doesn't upset my stomach unless I have it in a meat loaf with half a dozen other heavy ingredients added. I think it's the same with dog food. All the extra ingredients look and sound nicer, but in the end all it does is give my wallet and the dogs stomach agida  lol 

The moral of the story ... feed what works ... one is not inherently better than the other because of ingredients, but RESULTS.


----------



## TwoSweetBabies (Apr 28, 2008)

I see what your are saying, and like I said, being as that I am majoring in the field of marketing, believe me, I understand the need to appeal to a select target market that desire to feed more "natural" food, be it truly natural or not.
I understand your point of a dog food having a bunch of "froo froo" ingredients, just to sound better. _I get that._ That is one of the reasons I decided against Innova, it was just....too much. However I see Halo Spots Stew as a pretty basic dog food, minus all the preservatives and chemicals of the traditionally basic food. Sure they list quite a few vegetables, and i'm sure thats great, but i'm smart enough to know the quantity is so little that it probably doesn't matter.
Like I said, I would have a hard time justifying feeding a food that lists known carcinogens in the ingredient list.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

TwoSweetBabies said:


> Like I said, I would have a hard time justifying feeding a food that lists known carcinogens in the ingredient list.



Ah, but not all those basic foods have preservatives. Actually, most don't anymore. Pedigree does have BHA/BHT, but not even Science Diet contains preservatives anymore. Dog Chow doesn't have chemical preservatives either. Black Gold actually has a nice, semi holistic ingredient list, but many of their formulas contain BHA. Also, keep in mind that the studies proving those chemicals were carcinogens were feeding them to rodents in massive quantities. Are they desireable ingredients though? No, absolutely not. I'm not sure if I'd be comfortable feeding a food with preservatives, but jsut because they're not listed on the ingredient panel doesn't mean they're not there. I don't think anyone wants to feed diets with carcinogens - but then again that depends on what your definition of a carcinogen is? Preservatives, or actual ingredients? Some would say the food I use is a carcinogen in and of itself, lol. Anyway, the basic, cheaper foods do not automatically contain preservatives. The food I use does not. It's just as basic as you can get


----------



## JenTN (Feb 21, 2008)

I think one reason a lot of people don't see dogs with great long lives on holistic food is because, in my experience, the majority of holistic feeders own purebreds. Purebreds generally have more health problems and live shorter lives than mixed breeds, which are often on lower quality food. 

My puppy is a mix, as well as my kittens, and they are all on Innova, kittens on EVO. I must say I have noticed a HUGE difference in my kittens coats after switching from Science Diet, which I had them on for about 6 months. They no longer have dry skin and aren't hurking hairballs up left and right any more. Their coats also went from pretty dull looking to very satiny. I can only imagine what it does for their insides.

I transitioned Bo from Science Diet puppy to Innova large breed puppy a week after I got him, and his stools are much better/firmer and his coat usually looks like I waxed him with Turtle Wax


----------



## jenns (Feb 16, 2007)

UrbanBeagles said:


> Not at all! It's not a popular opinion, but I believe the following. Let's stray from the holistic vs. non holistic comparison for a moment, and classify kibbles as economy, basic, premium, super premium. .


Interesting you bring this up, because the word "premium" pretty much has no meaning anymore. Even Purina is now referring to all of their foods as Premium on their website. Next will be Ol Roy, lol. I don't worry about labels - it's not about holistic vs. non holistic vs premium because I don't think foods can be categorized as such. Like Urban Beagles said, kibble is kibble but I do think that ingredients matter to at least *some* degree. You can technically make a food that would meet AAFCO requirements out of leather and sawdust but of course that is not good for your dog. And "results" are so hard to guage when you are talking about things such as lifespan and cancer. You won't know until it's too late.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

JenTN said:


> I think one reason a lot of people don't see dogs with great long lives on holistic food is because, in my experience, the majority of holistic feeders own purebreds. Purebreds generally have more health problems and live shorter lives than mixed breeds, which are often on lower quality food.



There is absolutely no truth to that statement. The only purebreds that have short lives are the extra large ones - otherwise, a well bred purebred should have a normal, long lifespan with few health issues. Many show breeders feed Pro Plan, Pedigree, etc. and have healthy, long lived dogs. OTOH, out of my dogs, the only one who has chronic health issues is the mutt. He's 7 now, and has never been healthy. My 8yr old purebred Beagle is in better health.


----------



## TwoSweetBabies (Apr 28, 2008)

jenns said:


> And "results" are so hard to guage when you are talking about things such as lifespan and cancer. You won't know until it's too late.


Exactly, which is why I asked for people whom have possibly had or known a dog who has already reached old age on the more "hollistic" foods.


----------



## lucygoose (Feb 11, 2008)

This is soooooo interesting.....The link From Breeder Vet... DOG DIETS: DRIVING ME CRAZY.....wow.....Makes one think....I do have Willie on Ennova/EVO red meat....I am going to do some more thinking on this....Our Brittney lived to 14 but did have 3 different cancers in her life.....she was feed Iams all her life....


----------



## TwoSweetBabies (Apr 28, 2008)

I find it very interesting as well. Its just weird how supposedly these more natural foods have been around awhile (some have) but yet we just started to hear people talk about them. I think that may be why we don't know too many people having fed a pet this their whole life...


----------



## JenTN (Feb 21, 2008)

UrbanBeagles said:


> There is absolutely no truth to that statement. The only purebreds that have short lives are the extra large ones - otherwise, a well bred purebred should have a normal, long lifespan with few health issues. Many show breeders feed Pro Plan, Pedigree, etc. and have healthy, long lived dogs. OTOH, out of my dogs, the only one who has chronic health issues is the mutt. He's 7 now, and has never been healthy. My 8yr old purebred Beagle is in better health.



That's odd, because I have spoken with breeders of breeds ranging from toy to giant breeds, and they all (my vet as well) said that mutts generally live longer than purebreds. All the show breeders I talked to did not feed pro plan or pedigree.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

JenTN said:


> That's odd, because I have spoken with breeders of breeds ranging from toy to giant breeds, and they all (my vet as well) said that mutts generally live longer than purebreds. All the show breeders I talked to did not feed pro plan or pedigree.



The majority of show dogs are fed Pro Plan. 

There is also no scientific reason why a mutt would live longer than a purebred. They are not healthier due to "hybrid vigor" - if there is genetic disease in the stock, it's going to emerge, in a mongrel or purebred. There are certian breeds that are not known for longevity, others are, Schipperkes for example, who are known to reach 18+ years. 

Your argument is not making sense. You're not offering evidence to dispute why/why not "grocery" foods vs. holistic foods offer nutritional supported longevity, so you just say that grocery fed dogs are mostly mutts, and mutts live longer, so that's why they live longer fed those foods  You'll have to make a better argument. Furthermore, it's NOT true that most dogs being fed non holistic foods are mutts. Sorry, but Purina, in particular, has always been an adamant sponsor of hunters, breeders, sporting & show dogs. Their breeder program is excellent and they're a major sponsor of working/show events. The vast majority of show dogs are fed Pro Plan. This is statistically accurate. Several Westminster winners have been fed Pro Plan - including this year's winner, Uno  Probably 70% of the members of my old field trial club feed Purina products ... funny but they're all purebreds. Purina is HUGE with the hunting Basset people as well. And the sporting dog crowd, and the show crowd ... lol. 

The fact is, all my purebred dogs are on Purina and are thriving. In January, we bought an adult bitch whose owners had allowed to just go to pot  A mess of infections, hot spots, rotted teeth, no muscle mass, underweight, shed profusely & had a doggie odor. Can't forget she'd had a litter several weeks before and was still having discharge from the whelping ... Was a bit stif in the joints, probably from being "home raised" in a fricken crate. Anyway, 90% of what she got at my house was Purina ONE. Literally, this dog was a living MESS, in every sense of the word. She got no special treatment. I had her on amoxicillin for the hot spot for about 7 days. And she ate her Purina One with the other dogs and slowly her shedding died down, the coat took on shine, the fur on her tail (hot spot territory) grew back - she had a rat tail, now it's full with ample brush. She looks great, feels great, did a complete turn around from the state she was in before. That was 3.5 months ago, now you'd never know she was ever in such sorry shape. She was being fed Pro Pac, which looks much better on paper than Purina. You can't tell me she'd have turned around if the food was not healthy. Or that dogs doing well on non holistic diets are only doing well on them becuase they are mutts that are just healthier and longer lived anyway. That doesn't fly.


----------



## GreatDaneMom (Sep 21, 2007)

UrbanBeagles said:


> The majority of show dogs are fed Pro Plan.


i would love to know where you get that info from....


----------



## flipgirl (Oct 5, 2007)

First of all, the myth of hybrid vigor is just that, a myth. Especially if one or both of the parents is a mutt. It's almost like you're playing roulette with a dog's genetics. 

Second of all, keep in mind that dog food companies use the words 'holistic' and 'organic' very loosely. I've heard that that is soon going to change (as evidenced by Timberwolf having to take the 'Organics' out of their name). With human food, to be sure that it is organic, it must be 100% certified organic as any company can say its food is organic. If you think of the meaning of holistic, it means looking at the whole being as opposed to one part of the whole. IN terms of dog food, a holistic dog food would ostensibly contribute to the well being of the dog as a whole being - raising its quality of life, vitality, immunity whatever. If a dog food could be guaranteed organic, what would be the harm in your dog eating non-chemically treated food? I see nothing wrong with that.

Each dog is different which is why purina works well for some and not others; just as these holistic foods. I think when you find a food that your dog thrives on, it's important to feed him properly in terms of the amount for his weight, but also give him adequate exercise and exercise his brain. In my opinion, if you keep your dog at a good weight and feed him properly, then he will be able to live a long life. I think they say that if a dog is overweight by 1 pound, it's like an extra 10 pounds on a human.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

GreatDaneMom said:


> i would love to know where you get that info from....



Well, as I am am member of the Purina Pro Club breeder program, I have recieve their Today's Breeder magazine. The magazine features articles about breeders, indivigual dogs who are quite up there in breed points who are fed Purina products. And breeders who have had exceptional success in the show ring or field. This magazine is one of their greatest advertising venues so of course they are always keeping up with just who feeds their products - and it's not possible to pull a fast one on them, because to remain in the Pro Club one must submit weight circles from the bags. They know who is submitting circles, who is ordering the vouchers for discounted food. So, the ones who they have listed as feeding their foods, REALLY DO use their products. 

Now, I'm not going to go sorting through all my back issues but Purina is very wise to keep stats of the who's who of show/field breeders feeding their food. Based on testimonies and their records of who belongs to the Pro Club and orders vochers for the food, it's been attested to in several of the Today's Breeder magazines that *at the present time 79 of the top 100 AKC *show* Champion dogs are fed Purina.* For those not familiar wiht the show ring, that means that in all breeds, 79 out of 100 dogs who have accumulated the most points for their breed, are fed Pro Plan. THAT IS SIGNIFIGANT. And that is only show statistics. Purina is a staple of hunting/sporting dogs, particular Beagles & Bassets. While most of the show Dogs eat Pro Plan, you better believe that most of the field dogs are on Dog Chow or Hi Pro. And do just as well. 

This is from Pro Plan's website - again, my source is the Today's Breeder magazine, where you can read articles from the actual breeders and see pics of the dogs on this food. 

http://www.proplan.com/proplan/history.html

_Pro Plan® History
The Pro Plan® Story
Purina® Pro Plan® has a history of innovation. It was test marketed in the fall of 1986 and launched nationally in early 1987. It was the first super premium pet food manufactured by Ralston Purina Company (which is now Nestlé Purina PetCare Company) to be sold exclusively in the pet specialty channel of trade (i.e., pet stores, feed stores, pet supply stores, and veterinarians). 

Pro Plan® distinguished itself as the first and only full line life-stage specialty pet food to use real chicken as the #1 ingredient. The company's innovative process provided a distinct point of difference from other specialty super premium products that were using meat meal-based primary ingredients.

In 1996 Pro Plan® continued to innovate the super premium category by being the first pet food to provide formulas with real beef as the #1 ingredient. Pro Plan® was also the first pet food to gain FDA approval to make urinary tract health claims on its Urinary Tract Health Formula.

Pro Plan® is a widely used pet food among professionals in the United States, including top breeders and handlers. 79 of the top 100 American Kennel Club champions* are fed Pro Plan®. With Pro Plan®, you can do more to help your dog feel like a winner every day.

*American Kennel Club TopDogsSM All Breed Competition through Dec. 31, 2007._


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

There are WAY too many variables to know why a dog lives long or doesn't. Food is just one and really there's no way to adequately compare. There'll always be other variables at play in a dog's life- bloodlines, breed, food, healthcare, proper ownership, exercise, and I could go on and on...

What is important is to research and find what works best for you and what you are comfortable feeding your own dogs. I think based on my experiences that raw works best for my dogs however it is too much hassle to feed without a freezer and I'm a poor college student. So I found other kibbles that work well for me and I am much more comfortable feeding than what we used to feed which was Science Diet and then Purina. Canidae worked well for 3/4 dogs (we didn't have #5) but California Natural seems to work really well for all 5.

I had a dog live off of Pedigree and table scraps. He passed at 12 but you can't blame that on the food. He also had hip dysplasia from poor breeding. And he was a mutt so there goes the 'hybrid vigor' theory.


----------



## poodleholic (Mar 15, 2007)

Well, I had a mutt (Poodle/Terrier/Cocker mix) from the SPCA who was about a year old when I took him home who would not eat dog food period. So, he was fed poached ground meats/poultry, brown rice, steamed vegetables, and a multi vitamin for the 17 years he lived with us. Never went to the vet for health problems. 

I have a 25 year old cat who will be 26 yrs. old this month who is fed home cooked food as well. Will not touch cat food! She's very healthy, active, and still plays. Oh, and she was only vaccinated as a kitten, never again.


----------



## katiegro (May 6, 2008)

WOW! am I ever confused of what to fee my new puppy - my previous dog a Springer Spaniel ate a variety of kibble over his 13 years - along with occassional table scraps - and pancakes on Sunday mornings - He had a great life and was a happy dog till the last few weeks when he lost control of his functions......

Now my new puppy has so many more varieties to choose from and I can't figure out what to do - The little guy is so much smaller than Keats was and eats such a tiny bit. At one feeding he seems to love his kibble the next feeding he totally ignores it - perhaps he's just not hungry - Now I'm wondering if I should just cook for him - I tried eggs this morning - he wasn't interested!

i'm learning -rightly or wrongly - the berries in holistic food are not necessarily the best for puppies - it's not a natural thing they would choose to eat - 

my concern with cooking for him is will I overfeed him?


----------



## BullieCrazy (Feb 11, 2008)

My concern is that the older pet food companies have changed their recipes over the years and their ingredients somewhat. It concerns me that I hear more and more that dog are dying from cancer, purebred and so called mutts, to me dogs in general are developing cancer more. So I want to try and prevent the possibility of my dogs getting cancer. But realistically I know that I don't have the time to accomidate their nutritional needs with a home cooked diet, so I look to find a food for them that is made of better than throw away quality ingredients and meets the nutritional needs of my dogs and keeps out known cancer causing preservatives and ingredients from the mix and doesn't thrown in anything that is just filler to create more waste coming out. I can see a coat and skin difference in my dogs with a switch from Iam's, They are much more satisfied (full) on their new dog food, I don't think the food I've chosen to switch my dogs to is necesarilly "the food to feed your dog" I just feel that there are many choices and why not try and feed your pets food that will benifit their lives and health while they are with us. I just see a trend of more cancer and urinary problems in dogs and am looking to prevent those occurances in my pets.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

BullieCrazy said:


> My concern is that the older pet food companies have changed their recipes over the years and their ingredients somewhat. It concerns me that I hear more and more that dog are dying from cancer, purebred and so called mutts, to me dogs in general are developing cancer more. So I want to try and prevent the possibility of my dogs getting cancer.



This mentioning of cancer seems to be a recurring issue in discussing gorcery vs. holistic foods. It's as though people honestly believe that if they feed a holistic diet with cinnamon bark or kelp or dried cranberries, that the dog is less likely to get cancer and will live longer. Cancer is a complex issue, and if one wants to prevent it, sorry to tell you it's not as simple as feeding a holistic food with veggies and herbs. Nevermind you can alkalize the urine pH with too many veggies or cause thyroid problems when such foods as broccoli or kelp are consumed too often. But somehow, this processed product that happens to add in a sprig of this and a snippet of that is going to play a role in cancer prevention?! Nope. 

If you feel there is a real need for cancer prevention, the dog should be on a diet free of refined sugars (molasses, sorbitol, sugar, corn syrup) and place them on a specific supplement known for antioxidant properties - because you're not going to get the "extras" in holistic foods in any signifigant amount OR you're going to cause problems by supplementing them with herbs they just have no requirement for. Just because there are holistic herbs in a food does not make that food safe to consume on a daily basis. Even herbs have side effects. I use Ginkgo to help my epileptic, yet one of the rarer side effects of Ginkgo is to cause seizures - that doesn't surprise me, because with some homeopathic treatments we find "like cures like". Then you have green tea which is remarkably potent antioxidant but taken in excess causes anemia. So why even bother using a feed with those ingredients? Why not just use herbals in lieu of medication IF and WHEN a problem arises?

You also need to consider that the body condition of the dog predisposes it to cancer. Any excess fat increases the risk. If the dog is a couch potato, that increases the risk. It's been proven that bitches spayed before their first heat are predisposed to osteosarcoma. I do believe early altering plays a large role in lifelong health, and you can feed the best holistic food on the planet, that will not undo genetics and the lack of hormones from altering before adolescence. Certain breeds are predisposed to cancer, and mix breeds are NOT immune to this, becuase they still have the genetic makeup of the breeds or mixes their parents were. If you want healthier dogs, go to a breeder who makes health, hardiness, longevity the main priority. 

The moral of the story is, your dog is NOT going to get cancer just because he eats Dog Chow, nor does he have any less risk just because he eats Wellness ... or raw. Yes, I do know raw fed dogs who die at 8,9,10, 11 yrs old of cancer. And funny thing was, this is how long their kibble fed relatives lived and died of similar issues.


----------



## jenns (Feb 16, 2007)

UrbanBeagles said:


> This mentioning of cancer seems to be a recurring issue in discussing gorcery vs. holistic foods. It's as though people honestly believe that if they feed a holistic diet with cinnamon bark or kelp or dried cranberries, that the dog is less likely to get cancer and will live longer. Cancer is a complex issue, and if one wants to prevent it, sorry to tell you it's not as simple as feeding a holistic food with veggies and herbs. Nevermind you can alkalize the urine pH with too many veggies or cause thyroid problems when such foods as broccoli or kelp are consumed too often. But somehow, this processed product that happens to add in a sprig of this and a snippet of that is going to play a role in cancer prevention?! Nope.


I really don't think anyone here feeds holistic foods because of trace amounts of fruits and herbs, thinking that alone will prevent cancer. The idea behind holistic foods is avoiding the daily feeding of suspected carcinogens and feeding dogs more species-appropriate ingredients (ie, protein from meat instead of corn gluten). Sure there are many factors that play a role in whether our dogs will get cancer or not, but you certainly cannot say that diet is not at all a factor.


----------



## BullieCrazy (Feb 11, 2008)

UrbanBeagles said:


> This mentioning of cancer seems to be a recurring issue in discussing gorcery vs. holistic foods. It's as though people honestly believe that if they feed a holistic diet with cinnamon bark or kelp or dried cranberries, that the dog is less likely to get cancer and will live longer. Cancer is a complex issue, and if one wants to prevent it, sorry to tell you it's not as simple as feeding a holistic food with veggies and herbs. Nevermind you can alkalize the urine pH with too many veggies or cause thyroid problems when such foods as broccoli or kelp are consumed too often. But somehow, this processed product that happens to add in a sprig of this and a snippet of that is going to play a role in cancer prevention?! Nope.


I'm talking about the quality of ingredients (human grade), the true percentage of protein(using quality meal instead of rotting meat with a percentage of water content considered in the count of percentage of meat in food contents) and keeping out the fillers (also known as hard to digest corn, wheat, beet fiber and soy). I wouldn't base a food choice for a carnivore on the content of berries, herbs and veggies! Get real! Don't belittle and bully please, we are just sharing here.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

BullieCrazy said:


> I'm talking about the quality of ingredients (human grade), the true percentage of protein(using quality meal instead of rotting meat with a percentage of water content considered in the count of percentage of meat in food contents) and keeping out the fillers (also known as hard to digest corn, wheat, beet fiber and soy). I wouldn't base a food choice for a carnivore on the content of berries, herbs and veggies! Get real! Don't belittle and bully please, we are just sharing here.



There is no such thing as a human grade dog food. Tha's a marketing gimmick. And no dog food company is going to use rotting meat - sorry, if you want to have a nutrition discussion, please don't bring propoganda into it. Also, a food such as corn or soy is not a filler unless it's used in lieu of meat, and hold no nutritional value in the food. ANY grain can be a filler - rice, oatmeal, barley, corn - that does not mean that these foods are automatically difficult to digest. Ground corn is one of the most digestable grains, is NOT al allergen, and not inherently a filler. You mentioned that dogs would be more likely to get cancer eating no holistic foods as though the SOURCES for these brands were better than say Purina or Pedigree. ALL KIBBLE uses "leftover" meats that were imperfect and labeled for use as animal feed. Now, it ALL comed from USDA inspected plants, but that does not make Innova's meat human grade, and Purina's "rotted".


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

UrbanBeagles said:


> ALL KIBBLE uses "leftover" meats that were imperfect and labeled for use as animal feed. Now, it ALL comed from USDA inspected plants, but that does not make Innova's meat human grade, and Purina's "rotted".


"Meat and bone meal" does contain the remains of rotted animals. I've seen them going into the rendering truck myself, and spoken to the rendering plant employees. Living in a farming area, I see and hear a lot of things I wish I hadn't  . I guess the USDA figures that the rendering process takes care of all the nasties, but still....eww. They use that ingredient (meat and bone meal) in most livestock feeds, too.


----------



## melgrj7 (Sep 21, 2007)

Lucky - border collie X cocker spaniel - 17 years old - has been fed dads (for many years), iams, chicken soup for the dog lovers soul, eukanuba, purina one . . . and often what ever was on sale . . . and . . . lots of table scraps. I would say 50% of her diet is/was table scraps. Of dog foods, I would say overall she mostly got dads dog food. She is my family's dog (is one of the dogs I grew up with) she has some arthritis and a few bad teeth (vet doesn't want to put her under to remove them) but still acts like a puppy. Right now, she gets mostly table scraps and I think my parents just buy whatever is on sale at the grocery store.

My dogs get, currently pinnacle, and brown rice and boiled chicken and what ever looks iffy in the fridge and they look great. A few months ago, it was orijen (and table scraps, rice and chicken) and Lloyd didn't look as good, before that it was raw food (prey model) and looked great. Before that, innova large breed puppy (and table scraps, brown rice, chicken) and he looked great.

We have only had Allie for a few weeks, when we got her she looked pretty crappy, but she also has a tick born disease so that is probably the cause of why she didn't look so good (she is now being treated). Anyway, she was on eukanuba.

My grandparents lost their dog 2 years ago. She was black lab mix, she was about 16 years old. She ate mostly table scraps and iams dog food. My great grandma had a dog die at 18, she fed it mostly table scraps, and what ever kibble was on sale. My mom's cousin feeds her dogs strictly table scraps and what ever they catch on their farm, her dogs usually live to 15 years old or more. My uncles both feed their dogs dads dog food and pedigree (they seem to go back and forth) and table scraps and their dogs live 13-15 years usually (brittany spaniels and german pointers, and now one has gordon setters). 

I honestly can't think of any older dog I know that has eaten holistic only foods. I know plently of younger dogs who get only holistic foods, but they are all under 5 years old. Table scraps is the common denominater for all the dogs I know who have lived a long time. Some are/were farm dogs, others lazy couch potatoes . . .


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

melgrj7 said:


> Table scraps is the common denominater for all the dogs I know who have lived a long time. Some are/were farm dogs, others lazy couch potatoes . . .


Table scraps are frequently much better for dogs than any dog food. Of course, that depends on what the humans eat......tater tot casserole=not so good, hamburgers and broccoli=very good. My aunt and uncle had a Peke/Poodle mix that lived for 17 years with no vet care and kiving outside. He mostly get table scraps, too. But I do think that a high-quality dog food is also important. I know Willow would be dead by now if I kept her on grocery-store type foods.


----------



## JayBarnes (Jan 8, 2008)

Urban, all of your posts in this thread add up to what I think is one of the best kibble/dog food explanations I've ever read. And believe me, I've read alot. I agree pretty much with everything you have said.


----------



## Love's_Sophie (Sep 23, 2007)

Willowy said:


> "Meat and bone meal" does contain the remains of rotted animals. I've seen them going into the rendering truck myself, and spoken to the rendering plant employees. Living in a farming area, I see and hear a lot of things I wish I hadn't  . I guess the USDA figures that the rendering process takes care of all the nasties, but still....eww. They use that ingredient (meat and bone meal) in most livestock feeds, too.


Ditto on this...the trouble with dog foods, is that sometimes, especially with some of the 'cheaper' valued foods, is that companies don't pay attention to where their products are actually coming from; for all you know your dog could be eating three day old road kill...which, doesn't disappoint the dog, to be honest, but I don't want those kind of ingredients in a dog food. I forget the site, but there are analysis guides online, that rate foods according to how well 'maintained' the ingredients are...you can find out where your dog's food comes from, how long it sits in factories before actually making it to the shelf, even where the meat products come from. 

As far as feeding 'holistic' diets, I have fed nothing but for many years...I DO switch diets every couple of months, but not because the dog's aren't doing well on them, but rather because I like to, just so they can actually handle change without it becoming an issue...I rotate between three that have always worked...Canidae, Chicken Soup, and Taste of the Wild. 

I also 'supplement' with Raw bones, for their teeth, and they get Natural Balance (the rolls) a couple times a week; mainly during training sessions. My dogs have done well on the foods I have fed, although I don't have one that is 'ancient' yet...The dog's that I began with on the more 'super premium' diets I wound up having place in new homes when I went to college. One was put down due to a tragic accident, and the other is still thriving on holistic...not sure how old he is now. 

My cats have always been on the more 'holistic' type foods, as well, and have done well...I recently adopted a momma cat, who had a horrible coat and some icky teeth when she came to me; she was fed Nine lives, kibble and canned. She now has a superb coat, and her teeth are MUCH cleaner...which is good because she likes to sleep with her face nearly on my head...


----------



## MyRescueCrew (May 8, 2008)

This entire discussion has been very informative and it's also been very interestig to see what others feed their dogs, why they feed it, and their opinions on the different foods. I wanted to chime in here with a few opinions of my own as well. First, I have 6 rescue dogs, 3 of them get Purina Dog Chow, however my newest, and smallest, dog gets a mixture of the better canned foods (she has no teeth) such as Solid Gold, EVO, Nature's Variety, ect. I am very confused on if, and what to, I want to switch my dogs food. When I was younger, we always fed foods such as Pedigree, Dog Chow, and Iams. My little terrier mix breed died of cancer at only 9 years old. Our dachshund died of a heart attack at 14, and our 16 year old is still currently living but is riddled with tumors and no vet wants to touch them at her age.

However, here's a few others from another side of the coin. Where I work, a client has a 17 year old black lab that is in great health. The dog lives outside and has been on Purina Dog Chow its entire life. However, a black lab that we have living at my job is 8 yrs old, on Dog Chow, and is very arthritic, slow moving, and has a tumor on her neck. My co-worker has a 17 year old dachshund that has been on Science Diet its entire life, and has no tumors, cancer, ect., and she gets around great. Oddly enough, my aunt had a shih tzu that just passed away at 17, and it never ate dog food in his life. Nothing but table scraps. And lastly, my other aunt has a min. poodle that just passed away a few weeks shy of his 23 birthday(!!!) and he only ate whichever food was on sale at the grocery store.

So the thing is, my dog died at 9 of cancer on cheap food (and some table scraps) while my aunts dog lived till nearly 23. So I can't say cheap is better, or holisitic is better. The entire thing is confusing and like so many others, I wish there was a clear cut answer.

I do know that Purina has been around for about 75 years, however they are using preservatives now that weren't around 75 years ago. Processing plants are different, preservatives have changed, more chemicals are used now than ever not only in dog foods, but human foods as well. So that's not to say Purina is just as safe as it was even only 20 years ago. So I'm beyond confused on what to change to. The ones that are on it are active, happy, and healthy. However, when I had them on Wellness, they were active, happy, and healthy. I tried Solid Gold on Audubon, and her coat was HORRIBLE, while my friend's Great Dane looks beautiful on it. However, I tried Jake, for a short while, on Dog Chow, and he scratched like crazy.

I do not have children, so my dogs are my children. I pamper and baby them like crazy, from sleeping in the bed, to them going everywhere they can with me. So I obiviously want to feed them the best thing possible, whatever that may be. I've even considered raw, but I just can't afford it financially and really don't know if that's any better than Dog Chow as far as extending their lifespan goes.

Other factors, however, also include their overall health. My dogs are all rescues, all came from rescue orgs. or the pound. Two of them were bred several times before being rescued (Callie and Katie) and were spayed later in life, so that worries me. Bo is one of my newer rescues, and at 8 years old, just got neutered in Feb. However, Audubon is 7, spayed since 3 months old, and got a mass cell tumor on her leg at only 6 years old. Was food (mostly Nutro) a factor? I have no clue, but I can't help but wonder.

Anywho, that's just my two cents (sorry if it seems more like rambling!).


----------

