# Hill's Science Diet



## SxyVixen (Feb 3, 2009)

I've seen it mentioned a number of times in my scanning of posts that Science Diet is believed to not be a good dog food. 

My vet swears by this brand and will not feed his dog anything but this. I've gotten the same recommendations from the 2 other vets that I've had. 

I've always been told that a bag of dog food tells you nothing about what is really in the food. The standards listed are the very very basic levels needed to keep your dog alive, so when it says 100% of need, it's only truly "just enough" for the dog to get by on. 

I'm curious as to why folks do not like this brand. I personally would rather go with a dog food that is always listed in the top 3 at nutritional vetrinary seminars than by going for the list of ingredients and back of the bag nutritional scorings alone.


----------



## fuzzypuppies (Dec 22, 2008)

Have you checked out Dogfoodanalysis.com? It pretty much explains why it's not considered a top of the line food.

I'm thinking Vet's probably recommend it because they get freebies from companies. As an example, I used to work for an OB/GYN years ago and we would always get samples of baby formula or birth control pills and my doctor would prescribe or recommend products because their company was very generous with samples and gifts.


----------



## SxyVixen (Feb 3, 2009)

fuzzypuppies said:


> Have you checked out Dogfoodanalysis.com? It pretty much explains why it's not considered a top of the line food.


I've looked over that site, thank you for the link. However, I can't find anything that states *who* these folks are that are doing the rating. Are they nutritionists? Other dog owners like ourselves? Veterinarians? All it says is that it's the "opinion of the Editors, who are a small team of volunteers each with a long standing interest in dog nutrition."

Their site also states "The ratings and reviews on this site are based solely on the ingredients the manufacturers state they use in the foods and other information given." So if they're going by the manufacturer, my guess would simply be that they are still only getting that bare minimum of needs information. 

Everyone is free to make their own choice, and if they choose to use this site, then I'm A-OK with that. I just don't think that I'd rely on it for my information.


----------



## craven.44 (Sep 10, 2008)

fuzzypuppies said:


> I'm thinking Vet's probably recommend it because they get freebies from companies.


I see your point, but the vet I work for is big on Science Diet and Eukanuba, but he gets no freebies or profit from sales of Eukanuba. I have learned tons from these forums and the dog food analysis website and I do not totally agree, but his motives are not profit based.


----------



## BoxMeIn21 (Apr 10, 2007)

SxyVixen said:


> I'm curious as to why folks do not like this brand. I personally would rather go with a dog food that is always listed in the top 3 at nutritional vetrinary seminars than by going for the list of ingredients and back of the bag nutritional scorings alone.


Not sure if you know this or not, but nutrition is not a requirement when getting a DVM. What classes they do take in nutrition are usually seminars put on by companies like "Hills" who are the makers of Science Diet. Personally, I wouldn't take nutrition advice from ANY vet unless they have a degree in nutrition. 
Take a look at www.dogfoodproject.com - this site is ran by a nutrionist and will give you a good guideline on how to choose a quality dog food. 
www.dogfoodanalysis.com is a good site - while it is NOT ran by a nutritionist or doctor, the way they rate the foods is pretty good. If anything, I use it to look up ingredients.

Personally I don't like Science Diet because it's full of stuff your dog doesn't need like by-products and fillers and little meat. JHMO of course.


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

I've tried SD's Active Adult formula recently ... was actually at the advice of a Vet. We had some health issues from feeding CORE so chose SD because of the moderate protein & also the sorghum, which is known for stabilizing blood sugar levels. I needed a feed that would normalize glucose levels after they dropped to 38 from what myself and the Vet think could have been a blood sugar spike/crash from the CORE, whose main carbohydrate is potatoes. I have since done my research and learned that potatoes do have drastic effects on the blood sugar level  Anyway ...

The food was approx $52 for 40lbs, but it did have good levels of kcals/protein so I wasn't feeding much, ofsetting the cost. Immediately, I notices VAST improvements in everyone's coat, there was just an absolute velvety luster to it! Honestly, if you've ever seen a show dog prepped for the ring, there is usually chalking of the white areas to remove any yellowing, or to just act as a highlight. Their coats were so highlighted and had such texture it honestly looked as tho they'd just been blow dried & chalked for the ring! 

I also noted good stamina in the previously hypoglycemic dog, as well as the others. The old man Beagle was really showing improvement in his mobility. My mutt actually showed the most drastic improvement. His coat has not looked so great - well, ever. He's had chronic ear infections since he was 2yrs old (is now 8yrs). Has been on amoxi, Otomax, Mometamax, T8 (the full name eludes me), and Zymox (OTC enzyme/cortisone treatment). NOTHING works 100%, and nothing has ever fully gotten rid of the infection. It gets better, but never goes away, is managed but never healed. The infection was almost completely gone on SD, his ears were almost as good as they were before the problem began!!!

On the downside, a few of the Beagles seemed to be going grey in the face - not just a few grey hairs but a very drastic change from deep pigment to grey face that looked like they'd aged 5 yrs in two weeks! And of course, the purchase price was steep for me, so I eventually discontinued feeding it. That being said, it had no such negative effects w/ greying on the mutt, and if I'm ever not broke, I'll probably resume feeding it to him as a senior diet.


----------



## fuzzypuppies (Dec 22, 2008)

Now that you mention it, my dog was fed SD at the rescue he was at and he had the soft coat when I first brought him home. When I changed his food I noticed right away the difference in the coat texture and he shed more. I've tried a few different foods, right now he's eating Harmony Farms and his coat texture is back to the way it was when he was on SD.


----------



## FilleBelle (Aug 1, 2007)

You'd rather take a recommendation from someone than look at the ingredient list? I hear Lucky Charms are as nutritious for people as SD is for dogs. Just don't check the ingredient list!

Seriously, though, the ingredient list tells you what is in the dog food and in what quantity. Isn't that the sort of information you need to select something healthy? The Science Diet maintenence formula has a grain in six of the top seven ingredient spots. Unless I ever own a dog/cow mix, I'd rather feed something with more meat product in the top ten spots.


----------



## BoxMeIn21 (Apr 10, 2007)

FilleBelle said:


> The Science Diet maintenence formula has a grain in six of the top seven ingredient spots. Unless I ever own a dog/cow mix, I'd rather feed something with more meat product in the top ten spots.


Winner, winner, chicken, dinner!


----------



## SaveStrayDogs (Feb 4, 2009)

Science diet has no good reputation because the first ingredient they use is corn/rice/maize.Many dogs do just fine on it.Others not.
I like eagle pack holistic.I had the best results on my dog.
Find a good quality dog food with meat as the first ingredient.

I started today purina pro plan(#1 salmon,hope i do the right thing!)
N.


----------



## SxyVixen (Feb 3, 2009)

FilleBelle said:


> You'd rather take a recommendation from someone than look at the ingredient list? I hear Lucky Charms are as nutritious for people as SD is for dogs. Just don't check the ingredient list!
> 
> Seriously, though, the ingredient list tells you what is in the dog food and in what quantity. Isn't that the sort of information you need to select something healthy? The Science Diet maintenence formula has a grain in six of the top seven ingredient spots. Unless I ever own a dog/cow mix, I'd rather feed something with more meat product in the top ten spots.


Please read what I stated again.

I stated that I would not go by what was listed the label *alone*. 

Also, when I've been told more than once, by more than one source, that the "recommended levels" to which the dog food is being compared to are the very bare minimum a dog needs, then the label of the food is not going to be enough information for me to make any decision by. 

Here's an article on why the labels for dog food are not the best thing to use as the sole source of information: http://www.dogfoodproject.com/index.php?page=labelinfo101

So, for me, I'm going to go by a vet I trust (and his recommendation based on his sources, education, etc.), reviews of the product, how it actually interacts with my dog, and other valuable information I can find about it.


----------



## BentletheYentle (Oct 6, 2008)

SxyVixen said:


> Please read what I stated again.
> 
> I stated that I would not go by what was listed the label *alone*.
> 
> ...


Ok, so does your vet somehow know exactly what makes up all those ingredients that aren't listed on the panel? Because if he doesn't, then he's still going to be recommending whatever foods he's getting freebies from. Very very few vets have any real education when it comes to nutrition. The few "classes" they get in vet school are taught by companies like Hills....Hmm, that doesn't sound biased to you?

Now, that said, if your dog is doing fabulously on Science Diet already, I probably wouldn't change, but I wouldn't say to put a dog on it from something else. For me though, my dog looked like crap on Science Diet and after a month, he started refusing to eat. I also think that Science Diet is quite pricey for what you get. I also go by reviews of product and listening to people talk about what they've found with certain foods and now my dog eats a food with no byproducts, corn, wheat or soy which is cheaper per pound than Science Diet (its Nutrisource, BTW). Would a vet recommend it? Nope, but then they don't get profit from it either...go figure.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

I feed what produces results.

Science Diet + My Dog = vomiting, hair loss, acid reflux, weepy eyes, rapid fire liquid diarhea

Current Diet + My Dog = Beautiful soft coat, excellent stools, clear eyes, no reflux


So no I don't like Science Diet. I don't care how many times a vet says its good.


----------



## odp1979 (Jan 5, 2009)

It's common sense that the ingredients in Science Diet are very poor. If it's not something you would eat yourself, I wouldn't recommend feeding it to my animal friend.


----------



## SxyVixen (Feb 3, 2009)

BentletheYentle said:


> Ok, so does your vet somehow know exactly what makes up all those ingredients that aren't listed on the panel? Because if he doesn't, then he's still going to be recommending whatever foods he's getting freebies from. Very very few vets have any real education when it comes to nutrition. The few "classes" they get in vet school are taught by companies like Hills....Hmm, that doesn't sound biased to you?



I was not here promoting it or discouraging it. I simply wanted to know why folks seemed to be against it. 

No, my vet is not a nutritionist, however he's basing some of his information on this brand from recommendations OF nutritionists for animals, as well as his own research for his own pets and clients. I trust in my vet. I have taken my pets out of vetrinary care of those that I did not like, or trust, though I'm sure they were qualified, they did not sit well with me. So, now that I've got a vet that I've trust in, I will place trust in his suggestion of a pet food and take that into consideration when making my final decision for my pet (amongst other things that I'd consider as well).

Everyone is allowed to choose what works best for them and their pet. I would definitely voice my opinion on one that I knew had been a horrible choice for my pet, but only as a word of "caution" to the person asking for the information. This way they can make their own decision based on other pet owners experiances as well as the knowledge of their own pet. I'd even definitely voice my opinion on something that I loved! But it's an *opinion* and the person can take it or leave it 

As of yet, my pup is not on Science Diet. I was asking here why people were against it. Yes, I've stated that I didn't like a particular website, or that I do not choose make my decision strictly by what is listed on a nutrition label of dog food, and that yes, my vet does recommend Science Diet.

I appreciate those that have commented on why they are against it, it's helpful information to me. Just as those that have found it to work well for their pet is helpful information.


----------



## odp1979 (Jan 5, 2009)

SxyVixen said:


> I was not here promoting it or discouraging it. I simply wanted to know why folks seemed to be against it.
> 
> No, my vet is not a nutritionist, however he's basing some of his information on this brand from recommendations OF nutritionists for animals, as well as his own research for his own pets and clients. I trust in my vet. I have taken my pets out of vetrinary care of those that I did not like, or trust, though I'm sure they were qualified, they did not sit well with me. So, now that I've got a vet that I've trust in, I will place trust in his suggestion of a pet food and take that into consideration when making my final decision for my pet (amongst other things that I'd consider as well).
> 
> ...


I still don't understand why a vet would recommend a product with corn,by products and fillers. That's like your primary care doctor saying its okay to eat candy, chips and soda as primary source of food.


----------



## Binkalette (Dec 16, 2008)

odp1979 said:


> I still don't understand why a vet would recommend a product with corn,by products and fillers. That's like your primary care doctor saying its okay to eat candy, chips and soda as primary source of food.


No kidding. Dogs can't digest corn. They get no nutritional value out of it. That's why dogs that are on a high quality, filler free diet will have smaller, less smelly poops than dogs who aren't. If it goes in, and isn't digested, it's going to come right back out. That's another reason why you will actually end up paying LESS to feed your dog a high quality dog food over a lesser quality food. They have to eat MORE of the lower quality food to get the same nutritional value as they would with the high quality food.


----------



## SxyVixen (Feb 3, 2009)

I'll be sure to prod my vet more on this topic the next time we visit with him.


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

when I asked my old vet if Science Diet was a good food he said "yes". When I brought in labels from a few different foods and showed him the ingredients list... He didn't pick science diet as the best option. I think we can all agree that there are dogs that are doing alright on it. There are also people that live long healthy lives on diets of mostly junk food. At the end of the day, we all have to do what feels right for us.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

odp1979 said:


> It's common sense that the ingredients in Science Diet are very poor. If it's not something you would eat yourself, I wouldn't recommend feeding it to my animal friend.


That's interesting.

There is absolutely nothing that my dogs eat that I would eat myself. They eat a premium kibble and weekly raw bones (for recreation and dental care.)

I myself prefer a good brisket or pork tenderloin or some fresh blackberries.

Oh, and I like corn.


----------



## AkiraleShiba (Dec 9, 2007)

Our Cairn started on Science diet as recommended by our vet: His coat was greasy, he reek and he got very fat.

He was so fat, that I convinced my dad to switch him to Eagle Pack Hollistic (not my first choice, but anyways) and he is loosing weight (10 lbs so far) and his coat looks and smell much better. Plus his looks better overall.

For my Shiba he started his life on Orijen having seen what Hill's does to dogs and Akira has a great lean muscular mass, stays at his ideal weight, does not eat alot, a great coat, he never stinks and always get A+ ratings at the vet.

Also I do not believe vets do not profit from the products they are selling, vet offices are businesses just like the groomers' or feed stores. They make profits, they get all sorts of posters to decorate their offices and were acquainted with that brand early on in school because Hill sponsors stuff.


----------



## Dad2labs (Jan 25, 2009)

SxyVixen said:


> No, my vet is not a nutritionist, however he's basing some of his information on this brand from recommendations OF nutritionists for animals, as well as his own research for his own pets and clients.


I don't think you will find a pet nutritionist that isn't employed by Hill's Corp recommending Science Diet.



> Everyone is allowed to choose what works best for them and their pet. I would definitely voice my opinion on one that I knew had been a horrible choice for my pet, but only as a word of "caution" to the person asking for the information. This way they can make their own decision based on other pet owners experiances as well as the knowledge of their own pet. I'd even definitely voice my opinion on something that I loved! But it's an *opinion* and the person can take it or leave it


This situation is not exactly as you describe it. There are some absolutes. If someone asked you which is healthier and more nutritious to eat Chocolate cake or grilled salmon. The answer is not opinion, its factual. Its often the same with dog foods. Don't look at the nutrients label. That is too easily manipulated. 

Instead look at the ingredients list. Remember that the ingredients must be listed in order of volume in the dog food. Do some research. Learn what those ingredients actually are. It's pretty easy to learn the little tricks they use to try to manipulate the ingredients. For example if a food has white rice as the 2nd ingredient and brown rice as the 3rd, you can bet that rice is the most prevelant item in the food and will outweigh the 1st ingredient.



> I was asking here why people were against it. Yes, I've stated that I didn't like a particular website, or that I do not choose make my decision strictly by what is listed on a nutrition label of dog food, and that yes, my vet does recommend Science Diet.


Again it's not the nutrition label, its the ingredients list. Thats whay makes Science Diet so terrible and I mean its really terrible. Science Diet kibbles are among the 2 or 3 worst of all the 100 or so kibbles on the market.

I like what someone else said. On your PC, cut and past the ingredients from 4 or 5 different brands of kibble. Only one should be SD. Print them out and take them to your vet without him knowing what brand each is. Go over the ingredients list with him. Have him pick out the best and worse. Let him tell you what ingredients made him pick the best and and worse.

To repeat myself, its a good idea to learn what those ingredients actually are. For example there are preservatives in SD that have been known to cause cancer. Some blends of SD contain what they call "powdered cellulose". Powdered cellulose is a fancy name for sawdust.

I hope this is useful to you.


----------



## sheltiemom (Mar 13, 2007)

I fed SD for a bit and my dogs did great on it...my problem with it is price...there are alot of comparable foods out there for less money....but in my opinion, SD isn't evil, and if your dog does well on it, don't worry.


----------



## flipgirl (Oct 5, 2007)

With all the money Hill's makes from their foods and marketing, they should be able to use better ingredients. I'm also wondering if the SD sold at pet stores versus that sold at animal hospitals have different ingredients. I've read the ingredients on Hill's prescription foods and the labels says they are preserved with mixed tocepherols and citric acid. Is the SD sold at pet stores preserved with BHT or ethoxyquin (sp?)?


----------



## jesirose (Mar 27, 2008)

flipgirl said:


> With all the money Hill's makes from their foods and marketing, they should be able to use better ingredients. I'm also wondering if the SD sold at pet stores versus that sold at animal hospitals have different ingredients. I've read the ingredients on Hill's prescription foods and the labels says they are preserved with mixed tocepherols and citric acid. Is the SD sold at pet stores preserved with BHT or ethoxyquin (sp?)?


Science Diet has prescription diets and regular diets. The NON prescription ones sold in your vets office are the same as the ones in the pet supply store.


----------



## ladyshadowhollyjc (Oct 28, 2008)

We had the paps eating SD. After reading about how it was crap, I still sort of doubted it. 
J.C. has always been so gasy so we decided that maybe his food had something to do with it. We switched and within a week we could tell a huge difference. They also don't stink nearly as bad when they come in from playing. Tear stains have virtually disappeared. The only thing we changed was their diet, so all the issues we had before I blamed SD. It also cost me an arm and a leg, which I didn't appreciate at all.
That is personally why I don't like it. 

Our vet has never recommended it ever tough. They don't swear by it, or even mention it really.


----------



## odp1979 (Jan 5, 2009)

I'm glad my vet doesn't carry SD at his practice. He carries, Wellness, Innova, EVO and another, which I forgot. I think some VETS are starting to come around.

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


----------



## SxyVixen (Feb 3, 2009)

ladyshadowhollyjc said:


> We had the paps eating SD. After reading about how it was crap, I still sort of doubted it.
> J.C. has always been so gasy so we decided that maybe his food had something to do with it. We switched and within a week we could tell a huge difference. They also don't stink nearly as bad when they come in from playing. Tear stains have virtually disappeared. The only thing we changed was their diet, so all the issues we had before I blamed SD. It also cost me an arm and a leg, which I didn't appreciate at all.
> That is personally why I don't like it.
> 
> Our vet has never recommended it ever tough. They don't swear by it, or even mention it really.


LadyShadowHollyJC: Can I ask what you switched to? Kai is very gasy, he's finishing out the very last of a bag of IAMS Large Breed Puppy and I would love to figure out what to go to next.


----------



## BoxMeIn21 (Apr 10, 2007)

sheltiemom said:


> I fed SD for a bit and my dogs did great on it...my problem with it is price...there are alot of comparable foods out there for less money....but in my opinion, SD isn't evil, and if your dog does well on it, don't worry.


It's not that it's evil, it's just the ingredients are really, really poor. There are tons of fillers, by-products and low quality protein sources. And as Dad2Labs mentioned, SD uses preservatives that are a known carcinogenic - these are the same preservatives that are banned from the human food chain for that reason. 

So it really doesn't matter if your dog does well on it or not, you could still feed a food with better ingredients.


----------



## odp1979 (Jan 5, 2009)

SxyVixen said:


> LadyShadowHollyJC: Can I ask what you switched to? Kai is very gasy, he's finishing out the very last of a bag of IAMS Large Breed Puppy and I would love to figure out what to go to next.


If you're looking for a good dog food that is within the same price range or cheaper than science diet, I would try Natural Balance. All natural ingredients, no by products, corn, fillers, etc.


----------



## ladyshadowhollyjc (Oct 28, 2008)

SxyVixen said:


> LadyShadowHollyJC: Can I ask what you switched to? Kai is very gasy, he's finishing out the very last of a bag of IAMS Large Breed Puppy and I would love to figure out what to go to next.


We switched to Taste of the Wild Wetlands formula. I've heard people say that their dogs get gasy from TOTW, but it cleared ours up haha. I'm sooo happy we tried it and it worked though.


----------



## jesirose (Mar 27, 2008)

I think it's easy to assume the dog is doing fine on a "crap" food. We fed our cats Friskies and 9 Lives for 2 years. Before, my cat Bear was always gorgeous but like most cats he and Felix had the STINKY POOP. That litter box REEKED all the time. Now, I haven't done that much research on the cat food brands but when I read about dog nutrition, I switched the cats to Felidae and Wellness. When I switched them we noticed they looked even better. A few months later we switched to raw and Bear and Felix BOTH got softer, shinier, and it's been 2 days since I scooped and I can't even tell. Felix's eye boogers are gone, we used to have to clean his eyes all the time. We just didn't notice these things as problems until they went away. Bear is the most gorgeous black DSH you'll ever see and I didn't think it was possible for him to get softer and shinier but he DID. 

Sadie has never had gas or skin problems, never had an issue with diarhhea when switching foods, etc. The worse problem she has is tear stains and I think I have linked that to pork. She was on a lot of foods as a puppy though so she may just be very tolerant of many different things (whatever the 'breeder' gave, blue buffallo, then california naturals, then canidae, then raw)


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

odp1979 said:


> It's common sense that the ingredients in Science Diet are very poor. If it's not something you would eat yourself, I wouldn't recommend feeding it to my animal friend.



So, have you ever made a meal out of whatever holistic kibble it is you feed your dogs? Or gnawed on a raw chicken wing? 
Dogs are not human and do not require the same diet.


----------



## odp1979 (Jan 5, 2009)

UrbanBeagles said:


> So, have you ever made a meal out of whatever holistic kibble it is you feed your dogs? Or gnawed on a raw chicken wing?
> Dogs are not human and do not require the same diet.


No, I was just making a statement. Would you eat by-products? Or corn gluten? Or most of the junk that's in these commercialized dog foods? By all means, go ahead, and tell me how you feel...


----------



## John Lee (Dec 28, 2008)

SxyVixen said:


> I stated that I would not go by what was listed the label *alone*.


No matter what though, you do realize that Ingredients are listed in terms of how much (so that the most of something is listed first, and so on). I had it out with my own vet (and don't go there anymore, as a result) because of a Science Diet (C/D diet) that he prescribed for my dog.

The ingredients starts: "Corn Gluten Meal, Pork Fat, Chicken By-Product Meal..."

I mean, you don't gotta be a brain surgeon to figure that out. And no matter how many degrees you say you have (my vet, I mean), it's not gonna convince me to feed this food.

And yes, I will question the morality of your practice, if you prescribe such a treatment.


----------



## SxyVixen (Feb 3, 2009)

John Lee said:


> No matter what though, you do realize that Ingredients are listed in terms of how much (so that the most of something is listed first, and so on). I had it out with my own vet (and don't go there anymore, as a result) because of a Science Diet (C/D diet) that he prescribed for my dog.
> 
> The ingredients starts: "Corn Gluten Meal, Pork Fat, Chicken By-Product Meal..."
> 
> ...


Knowing that the ingredients are listed in order of how much is in the over all product still doesn't mean that it's going to be the only reason I choose a food for my dog/pet.  I'm still going to do my research, talk to those that I trust and have knowledge in this area, and take into consideration my dog/pets needs (allergies, age, health etc). 

I'm not a dog food expert, nor even as familiar with them as some of you are. I am not claiming to be. I posted a question on why folks didn't like SD as my vet mentioned it to me. I gave some responses on how I would go about choosing (or not choosing) a dog food, but never have I gone in support for, or against, SD in this thread. I merely wanted to know why folks were against it. 

Asking why someone is against it does not automatically conclude that the person asking is for it  It simply states that they are trying to understand someone(s) thinking. 

My vet didn't prescribe it, he did suggest it though. I do plan to ask him further on it next time I see him. There has been a good suggestion on *how* to approach him about this too (the labels idea).


----------



## flipgirl (Oct 5, 2007)

Please let us know what your vet says about the label. I, for one, am very curious. I'd really like to know why he would think corn is a better protein than an animal protein. Maybe corn has its place but to place it before an animal protein in a dog food is illogical to me. But let us know.


----------



## Caroline162 (Jan 6, 2009)

odp1979 said:


> No, I was just making a statement. Would you eat by-products? Or corn gluten? Or most of the junk that's in these commercialized dog foods? By all means, go ahead, and tell me how you feel...


First of all, do you read the ingredients in every food you eat? Do you understand what all of them are? Just curious. I always wonder whether people that are so picky about their dog food ingredients do the same for their own food.

To answer your question... YES I do eat byproduct (in hot dogs and bologna - not daily, but a few times a year). I have no idea if I've eaten corn gluten, because I actually DON'T read all my ingredient labels all the time  but I eat corn, and corn starch, and corn syrup...


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I don't think Science Diet is horrible...I've known plenty of dogs who did well on it. Plus they've taken out the artificial preservatives and other really nasty stuff. It IS overpriced, IMO. You can get much better food for a better price.


----------



## sheltiemom (Mar 13, 2007)

BoxMeIn21 said:


> It's not that it's evil, it's just the ingredients are really, really poor. There are tons of fillers, by-products and low quality protein sources. And as Dad2Labs mentioned, SD uses preservatives that are a known carcinogenic - these are the same preservatives that are banned from the human food chain for that reason.
> 
> So it really doesn't matter if your dog does well on it or not, you could still feed a food with better ingredients.


This is the ingredients list of the formula I fed, when I fed it. If you don't think dogs should have grains, you're not going to like it, but there is nothing there I personally object to....some of the prescription diets I find more questionable though...


Lamb Meal, Brewers Rice, Rice Flour, Ground Whole Grain Wheat, Ground Whole Grain Sorghum, Corn Gluten Meal, Cracked Pearled Barley, Animal Fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), Dried Beet Pulp, Soybean Oil, Chicken Liver Flavor, Flaxseed, Potassium Chloride, Iodized Salt, vitamins (L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (source of vitamin C), Vitamin E Supplement, Niacin, Thiamine Mononitrate, Vitamin A Supplement, Calcium Pantothenate, Biotin, Vitamin B12 Supplement, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Riboflavin, Folic Acid, Vitamin D3 Supplement), Choline Chloride, Vitamin E Supplement, Taurine, minerals (Ferrous Sulfate, Zinc Oxide, Copper Sulfate, Manganous Oxide, Calcium Iodate, Sodium Selenite), preserved with Mixed Tocopherols and Citric Acid, Beta-Carotene, Rosemary Extract.


----------



## PureMutt (Feb 6, 2009)

Those are pretty questionable ingredients. I emailed Hill's regarding their ingredients, and they sent me an email with some brochures in a PDF file. I'm going to try to post them on here, if I can figure out how.


----------



## skelaki (Nov 9, 2006)

RonE said:


> That's interesting.
> 
> There is absolutely nothing that my dogs eat that I would eat myself. They eat a premium kibble and weekly raw bones (for recreation and dental care.)
> 
> ...


Ron, your dogs would like pork tenderloin, extra extra rare and blackberries for dinner tonight.


----------



## PureMutt (Feb 6, 2009)

Ok, I figured it out. I just uploaded to a file sharing website. Check it out here, Hill's brochure info on their ingredients. Pretty interesting. 

http://www.mediafire.com/?sharekey=7a89107118b0107408f8df73f2072ed6e04e75f6e8ebb871


----------



## BoxMeIn21 (Apr 10, 2007)

sheltiemom said:


> This is the ingredients list of the formula I fed, when I fed it. If you don't think dogs should have grains, you're not going to like it, but there is nothing there I personally object to....some of the prescription diets I find more questionable though...
> 
> 
> Lamb Meal, Brewers Rice, Rice Flour, Ground Whole Grain Wheat, Ground Whole Grain Sorghum, Corn Gluten Meal, Cracked Pearled Barley, Animal Fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), Dried Beet Pulp, Soybean Oil, Chicken Liver Flavor, Flaxseed, Potassium Chloride, Iodized Salt, vitamins (L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (source of vitamin C), Vitamin E Supplement, Niacin, Thiamine Mononitrate, Vitamin A Supplement, Calcium Pantothenate, Biotin, Vitamin B12 Supplement, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Riboflavin, Folic Acid, Vitamin D3 Supplement), Choline Chloride, Vitamin E Supplement, Taurine, minerals (Ferrous Sulfate, Zinc Oxide, Copper Sulfate, Manganous Oxide, Calcium Iodate, Sodium Selenite), preserved with Mixed Tocopherols and Citric Acid, Beta-Carotene, Rosemary Extract.


Animal fat? Which animal? Unnamed meat/fat sources would be my first red flag... And while Lamb meal may be the first ingredient, the next 6 ingredients are grains and low quality grain by products. So regardless of where lamb meal is on the list - the food is made up of mostly GRAINS. 5 of which are known allergens.
So to me, this food is _very_ questionable.


----------



## jbray01 (Dec 26, 2007)

RonE said:


> That's interesting.
> 
> There is absolutely nothing that my dogs eat that I would eat myself. They eat a premium kibble and weekly raw bones (for recreation and dental care.)
> 
> ...



haha i agree...

actually come to think of it, i wouldn't eat kibble, bones, or my socks.

my vet also sings the praises of SD. they also sell it there, so i think that 'may' have something to do with it.

imo i think the reason they sell it is because a lot of people think its outrageous to spend $45-50 per bag of dog food, and i guess they view SD as a better alternative to certain other foods.

i think this is flawed logic, but i think it is the vets way of maybe finding a happy medium between the total crap and the decent stuff.


----------



## titan1 (Feb 6, 2009)

The reason why most vets recommend Hills is because they get paid to. I have used it for my female who has chronic UTI's but after reading the ingredients I switched to Canine Caviar and it worked great. Yes I have to order it and it cost a little to ship but my dogs are worth it!


----------



## UrbanBeagles (Aug 13, 2007)

odp1979 said:


> No, I was just making a statement. Would you eat by-products? Or corn gluten? Or most of the junk that's in these commercialized dog foods? By all means, go ahead, and tell me how you feel...



Corn & wheat glutens are in many human foods such as breads, so yes, I have eaten them. By products are lesser used organ meats. Ever eaten sweetbreads? Ever had your Italian grandmother go on a rant until you downed that awful tasting cod liver oil or ate your ::shudder:: beef liver? Oh gawd, I have nightmares to this day about the smell of fried beef liver ... lol. The dogs, however, will KILL for a taste of beef liver ... blech =OÞ


----------



## woofbenzo (Feb 19, 2009)

So would it be safe to say that the consensus on the Science Diet is a - NO?!


----------



## cjac&mac (Feb 12, 2007)

SxyVixen said:


> I've seen it mentioned a number of times in my scanning of posts that Science Diet is believed to not be a good dog food.
> 
> My vet swears by this brand and will not feed his dog anything but this. I've gotten the same recommendations from the 2 other vets that I've had.
> 
> ...


Your vet probably swears by this because it is all he knows, along with medical(royal canin and technical) or eukanuba, or purina and pedigree.

To me it just sounds like your vet and the others you've seen are not nutritionally trained. All vets have to do a nutrition course put on by purina. However, a nutritionally trained vet will go to university for years to learn about the proper nutritional needs of animals. With that been said their knowledge is very limited to the brands they are offered, and by the views of the representatives who sell those products.

However in my professional opinion as a dog and cat nutritionist, many people can do a lot better than Science Diet.


----------



## rogueslg71 (Dec 6, 2007)

cjac&mac said:


> However in my professional opinion as a dog and cat nutritionist, many people can do a lot better than Science Diet.


what kind of degree do you have as a dog and cat nutritionist? sorry to go a slightly off topic but i have been looking into careers and have never heard of 'pet nutritionist' before. i know in the 'human world' that nutritionist as a term/title doesnt even mean anything because there is not regulation on the term nutritionist - just dietitian. i know there are 'animal nutrition' concentrations within programs but are there degrees that are JUST animal nutrition and not the nutrition part as a 'focus/concentration' inside another degree?


----------



## cjac&mac (Feb 12, 2007)

rogueslg71 said:


> what kind of degree do you have as a dog and cat nutritionist? sorry to go a slightly off topic but i have been looking into careers and have never heard of 'pet nutritionist' before. i know in the 'human world' that nutritionist as a term/title doesnt even mean anything because there is not regulation on the term nutritionist - just dietitian. i know there are 'animal nutrition' concentrations within programs but are there degrees that are JUST animal nutrition and not the nutrition part as a 'focus/concentration' inside another degree?


You are 100% correct. Unfortunately, there is nothing to recognize the level of education pertaining directly to the soul purpose of animal nutrition. Therefor to be recognized as an animal nutritionist, you have to affiliate yourself with a veterinary firm, pet counsellors, homeopathic care givers, pet care providers and so on. It is a sad world we live in. However, i know a few others like me who have taken the education, and we all call ourselves pet nutritionists. One day that will be our recognized title


----------



## PureMutt (Feb 6, 2009)

cjac&mac said:


> You are 100% correct. Unfortunately, there is nothing to recognize the level of education pertaining directly to the soul purpose of animal nutrition. Therefor to be recognized as an animal nutritionist, you have to affiliate yourself with a veterinary firm, pet counsellors, homeopathic care givers, pet care providers and so on. It is a sad world we live in. However, i know a few others like me who have taken the education, and we all call ourselves pet nutritionists. One day that will be our recognized title


An Animal nutritionist is a person who specializes in the dietary needs of agricultural animals, zoo animals, and pets. Their job sites include farms, laboratories, classrooms and commercial-based marketing for foods. Animal nutrition is a science combining chemistry, physics, biochemistry, mathematics, animal behavior, economics, food processing and animal production techniques.

A Bachelor of Science in agricultural, biological or related life sciences is usually required. A typical course would study metabolism of proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, minerals, vitamins and water, and the relationship of these nutrients and animal production.[1] A Master’s degree in nutrition is often seen in animal nutrition and the field often requires a Ph.D. in the science of nutrition. 

This is from Wikipedia.


----------



## cjac&mac (Feb 12, 2007)

Thank you Wikipedia. A person with a bachelor of science is not automatically considered a domestic pet nutritionist. Please tell Wikipedia to recognize those of us who deal daily in dog and cat nutrition and recognize the courses we've been through. I live in Canada, and where we come from, we are offered college level courses only, there is no further advancement specifically pertaining to this field. And when you are done you get a signed certificate saying, "Congratulations"


----------



## PureMutt (Feb 6, 2009)

That's very interesting.


----------



## rogueslg71 (Dec 6, 2007)

THanks for confirming that. PureMutt, I think the 'title' of pet nutritionist in most WORK places is probably just a 'job title' and that might typically require a bachelors and other additional experience/work to get the job but there is no academic/recognized certifications or degrees that specifically say you are a pet nutritionist (unlike how a md/phd program would give you one that says you are a doctor). 

So in theory the title of pet nutritionist isnt regulated and anyone can call themselves that. that makes it hard for a person to find someone or a source to trust when looking up information like the stuff that was looked for in this thread. Personally I think you should call yourself whatever you really are and then say what experience you have with dealing with pets' nutrition. That way not everyone is saying they are a pet nutritionist since technically that title does not mean anything or require any background what so ever.


----------



## cjac&mac (Feb 12, 2007)

I never asked anyone to TRUST me. I don't know any of you, and you don't know me. So as for what I call myself it is irrelevant. It is just a title. What you should be looking at is my advice and my experience on many other threads. I am credible in what I say, and if I don't know something I don't post anything. Anyone can say anything about who they are....advice is what counts. 

There are may people who are vet techs or veterinarians on this forum and others, are you going to trust them 100% because they have a specific title? Not to say that these people are not credible, but it's the point that not everyone has the right answers, even though they have a md or a phd...


----------



## rogueslg71 (Dec 6, 2007)

cjac&mac said:


> I never asked anyone to TRUST me. I don't know any of you, and you don't know me. So as for what I call myself it is irrelevant. It is just a title. What you should be looking at is my advice and my experience on many other threads. I am credible in what I say, and if I don't know something I don't post anything. Anyone can say anything about who they are....advice is what counts.
> 
> There are may people who are vet techs or veterinarians on this forum and others, are you going to trust them 100% because they have a specific title? Not to say that these people are not credible, but it's the point that not everyone has the right answers, even though they have a md or a phd...


i wasnt specifically talking about you, just people in general who are calling themselves pet nutritionists which i think is bad because its a title that anyone can use. in a lot of threads like this people are specifically advising for the person or whoever is asking for help to look for a 'dog behaviorist' or 'pet nutritionist', etc. i was actually just saying i thought it would be better for soemone like you to tell your actual experience/title (if any) and then give advice because then you are not associated with a group of people (aka 'pet nutritionists') that have no credibility.


----------



## PureMutt (Feb 6, 2009)

rogueslg71 said:


> i wasnt specifically talking about you, just people in general who are calling themselves pet nutritionists which i think is bad because its a title that anyone can use. in a lot of threads like this people are specifically advising for the person or whoever is asking for help to look for a 'dog behaviorist' or 'pet nutritionist', etc. i was actually just saying i thought it would be better for soemone like you to tell your actual experience/title (if any) and then give advice because then you are not associated with a group of people (aka 'pet nutritionists') that have no credibility.


That's what I was thinking, but speaking of science diet.... errr. ummm... what makes it so "scientific"?


----------



## cjac&mac (Feb 12, 2007)

My exact title is a "pet counsellor". I guide people in the right decisions for themselves and there pets. Ie. What is the best dog to get, what food should I be feeding, How many cats can I have, etc. I specialize in Pet nutrition, where I guide people on the appropriate diets for there healthy or sick pets. And I specialize in Dog behavior, where I help and train people and there dogs to curb unwanted behaviors as well as wanted. In both dog behavior and pet nutrition, i have taken exams and courses to educate myself, as well as many extensive hands on experience and reading.

I hope that helps.


----------



## BoxMeIn21 (Apr 10, 2007)

cjac&mac said:


> My exact title is a "pet counsellor". I guide people in the right decisions for themselves and there pets. Ie. What is the best dog to get, what food should I be feeding, How many cats can I have, etc. I specialize in Pet nutrition, where I guide people on the appropriate diets for there healthy or sick pets. And I specialize in Dog behavior, where I help and train people and there dogs to curb unwanted behaviors as well as wanted. In both dog behavior and pet nutrition, i have taken exams and courses to educate myself, as well as many extensive hands on experience and reading.
> 
> I hope that helps.


As a nutritionist...what do you make of these statements that a fellow forum member posted...just curious.  



RetrieverGirl41 said:


> Bad food is kind of like a drug......Have you ever seen a drug addict? Even on tv? When they are high, they almost feel like they can do anything...The sugar and the fat and the bad carbs in purina's food give your dog that burst of energy....They do get energy from crappy food, they DON'T get nutrition.
> 
> Now...What happens to a drug addict when you take away his drugs and put him in rehab??? He gets super sick! Hair falls out, immune system goes down, bad bowel movements...a TON of stuff goes wrong. This is EXACTLY what happens when you stop feeding a dog a bad food like purina and start feeding him a higher quality food like orijen etc....The dog goes through a bit of a detox period when you take him off bad food and put him on good food just like a drug addict does when u take his drugs away and put him back on a healthier track.


----------



## cjac&mac (Feb 12, 2007)

BoxMeIn21 said:


> As a nutritionist...what do you make of these statements that a fellow forum member posted...just curious.


I'm not sure I would compare it to a drug addict, but I do agree about the adjustment period. Essentially, it's like a reverse detox. When improving the food, even slightly, the body will rid it self of old proteins. Ie. hair and skin cells. These are the physical signs we see. Many other benefits occur. improved digestion, improved absorption and assimilation of ingredients, more energy, etc.

The same would go if you were to decrease the quality of the food. Hair and skin would change, digestion would change, appetite and energy levels would change. 

Essentially, any new proteins given to your dog over a period of 8-12 weeks will change certain aspects of your dog. Good or bad depending on the quality of food. 

Putting aside any complications a dog may have doing such a switch from Purina to Orijen, theoretically, there will be an improvement. The same way a dog eating mainstay to purina would improve. Personally I think it is too hard a a dogs system to do such a drastic change, there should be some sort of transition food in between (like Natural Balance, Now, NRG, cooked, etc.) Just like I think it's hard for a dog to drastically go from a product like Orijen to Kibbles'n'bits.


----------



## BoxMeIn21 (Apr 10, 2007)

cjac&mac said:


> I'm not sure I would compare it to a drug addict, but I do agree about the adjustment period. Essentially, it's like a reverse detox. When improving the food, even slightly, the body will rid it self of old proteins. Ie. hair and skin cells. These are the physical signs we see. Many other benefits occur. improved digestion, improved absorption and assimilation of ingredients, more energy, etc.
> 
> The same would go if you were to decrease the quality of the food. Hair and skin would change, digestion would change, appetite and energy levels would change.
> 
> ...


That makes a LOT of sense. I have often wondered when people state that their dog did horrible on a premium food, how much time they actually gave it to work.


----------



## PureMutt (Feb 6, 2009)

We got some really smart people on here! I'm glad I joined! Such a wealth of knowledge everywhere! Nice response cjac.


----------



## cjac&mac (Feb 12, 2007)

Thank you, I really appreciate that.


----------



## txcollies (Oct 23, 2007)

While I personally don't like the food, I will say that I have a friend who has a show rough and he's just perfectly gorgeous on SD. Lovely coat, energy, etc. He just needs one point to finish. 

*shrugs* So it can be done.


----------



## tp4060 (Apr 10, 2009)

i dont understand whats wrong with SD? i keep researching what people have to say about these dog foods that you guys are recumending, and many people say there dog got loose stool, and many health probs. my mini schnauzer is on SD and his stool is small and hes never had diahar. not only that his coat is a lot more beutiful then when on all natural pet foods. my old house caught on fire wile my dog was in my room asleep (i was out of the house). when my neighbor called me i rushed home to see huge cloud of smoke in the air. when the fire fighters finally got him, after i had to constintly beg and remind them, he was berlly breathing and had panted so much saliva was all over his musel. that night we rushed him to the vet hospital were he stayed the night. thank fully he survived and is still doing good today. when i went to get him from the vet she said if it wasnt for his for good health he would not have made it. and he has only been on SD his intire life. so i trust SD a lot.


----------



## cjac&mac (Feb 12, 2007)

tp4060 said:


> i dont understand whats wrong with SD? i keep researching what people have to say about these dog foods that you guys are recumending, and many people say there dog got loose stool, and many health probs. my mini schnauzer is on SD and his stool is small and hes never had diahar. not only that his coat is a lot more beutiful then when on all natural pet foods. my old house caught on fire wile my dog was in my room asleep (i was out of the house). when my neighbor called me i rushed home to see huge cloud of smoke in the air. when the fire fighters finally got him, after i had to constintly beg and remind them, he was berlly breathing and had panted so much saliva was all over his musel. that night we rushed him to the vet hospital were he stayed the night. thank fully he survived and is still doing good today. when i went to get him from the vet she said if it wasnt for his for good health he would not have made it. and he has only been on SD his intire life. so i trust SD a lot.


if it aint broke, don't fix it!


----------



## MoonStr80 (Oct 9, 2006)

If you take a look and do a comparison of other ingredients some owners calls it Science Death lmao I believe them I know what they're talking about, why fill your dog's system with garbage where there better food out there then SD? 

Here are the comparison foods
*SD: Adult Chicken & Rice*
Chicken
Ground Whole Grain Corn
Ground Whole Grain Sorghum
Ground Whole Grain Wheat
Chicken By-Product Meal
Soybean Meal
Corn Gluten Meal
Animal Fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid)
Brewers Rice
Chicken Liver Flavor
Soybean Oil
Flaxseed
Potassium Chloride
Iodized Salt
Calcium Carbonate
Choline Chloride
Vitamin E Supplement
vitamins (L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (source of vitamin C)
Vitamin E Supplement
Niacin
Thiamine Mononitrate
Vitamin A Supplement
Calcium Pantothenat
Biotin
Vitamin B12 Supplement
Pyridoxine Hydrochloride
Riboflavin
Folic Acid
Vitamin D3 Supplement)
minerals (Ferrous Sulfate, Zinc Oxide, Copper Sulfate, Manganous Oxide, Calcium Iodate, Sodium Selenite)
DL-Methionine
preserved with Mixed Tocopherols and Citric Acid
Beta-Carotene
Rosemary Extract.

*CN: Adult Chicken Meal & Rice*
Chicken Meal
Brown Rice
Rice 
Sunflower Oil
Flaxseed
Natural Flavors
Potassium Chloride
Salt
Vitamins
Minerals
Rosemary Extracts

*EP Holistic Select Chicken Meal & Rice Adult*
Chicken Meal
Ground Brown Rice
Ground White Rice
Oatmeal
Chicken Fat (Preserved With Natural Mixed Tocopherols)
Pork Meal
Dried Beet Pulp
Anchovy, Sardine & Salmon Meals
Flaxseed
Dried Egg Product
Tomato Pomace
Menhaden Fish Oil
Carrots
Peas
Sun-Cured Alfalfa
Salt
Potassium Chloride
Quinoa (Organic)
Blueberries
Apples
Inulin
Beta-Carotene
Cranberries
Dehydrated Kelp
Glucosamine Hydrochloride
Yucca Schidigera Extract 
DL-Methionine
Vitamin A Acetate
Vitamin D3 Supplement
Vitamin E Supplement
Riboflavin Supplement
Vitamin B12 Supplement
d-Pantothenic Acid
Niacin Supplement
Choline Chloride
Pyridoxine Hydrochloride
Thiamine Mononitrate
Folic Acid
Ascorbic Acid
Biotin
Lecithin
Rosemary Extract
Inositol
Polysaccharide Complexes of Zinc
Iron
Manganese
Copper and Cobalt
Potassium Iodate
Sodium Selenite
Lactobacillus acidophilus Lactobacillus casei
Enterococcus faecium
B. subtillus
Bacillus licheniformis
Bacillus coagulins
Aspergillus oryzae
Aspergillus niger.

*Wellness Core Original*
Deboned Turkey
Deboned Chicken
Turkey Meal
Chicken Meal
Potatoes
Dried Ground Potato
Tomato Pomace
Natural Chicken Flavor
Canola Oil
Chicken Liver
Salmon Oil
Flaxseed
Carrots
Sweet Potatoes
Kale
Broccoli
Spinach
Parsley
Apples
Blueberries 
Vitamins & Minerals
Chicory Root Extract
Yucca Schidigera Extract
Glucosamine Hydrochloride
Chondroitin Sulfate
Dried Lactobacillus plantarum
Enterococcus faecium
Lactobacillus casei
Lactobacillus acidophilus Fermentation Products
Rosemary Extract.


----------



## txcollies (Oct 23, 2007)

txcollies said:


> While I personally don't like the food, I will say that I have a friend who has a show rough and he's just perfectly gorgeous on SD. Lovely coat, energy, etc. He just needs one point to finish.
> 
> *shrugs* So it can be done.



Said dog just finished. In perfect coat and condition.


Feed what the dog does best on, no matter what.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

SxyVixen said:


> So, for me, I'm going to go by a vet I trust (and his recommendation based on his sources, education, etc.), reviews of the product, how it actually interacts with my dog, and other valuable information I can find about it.


Well, if you already know what you're going to feed, why did you ask for opinions? I'm all for feeding whatever your dogs do well on. UrbanBeagles feeds foods that I don't; I like her very much and I know she does the very best for her dogs. For ME, feeding a grocery store food or ScienceDiet, Purina vet or Eukanuba are like feeding your kids fast food daily. While the kids may do fine on McD's daily, they may even keep a nice figure, that doesn't mean that they're doing well inside. We just don't know for sure. 
For me, I can afford what I consider a higher quality food and I feel that I'm feeding the best I can to them. I prefer to feed a food higher in meats, little or no grain (depending on what I'm feeding at the time), no by products, no animal digest, etc. 
I do NOT trust my vet when it comes to diet. One vet used to work at another practice and she touted Iams and Eukanuba, as that's what they sold. Now, she has her own practice and it's Purina Vet diets and Science Diet and this is what she touts. No thanks. I'll do my own research and feed what I feel is better quality.

Oops. I didn't realize this thread was so old. My apologies. I need to start looking at dates before responding!


----------



## bondra76 (Feb 8, 2009)

My best friend is a vet and my other best friend's wife is a vet tech. They both have recommended Science Diet, and they work at different practices. They both have told me essentially the same thing about dog food - if corn is one of the first three ingredients, don't buy it. Corn is considered just a filler and doesn't bring a whole heck of a lot to the table for a dog.

Personally I'm moving to Science Diet Nature's Best. It's an expensive brand, but the ingredients actually look really great. And I have the luxury of being able to afford it.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

bondra76 said:


> My best friend is a vet and my other best friend's wife is a vet tech. They both have recommended Science Diet, and they work at different practices. They both have told me essentially the same thing about dog food - if corn is one of the first three ingredients, don't buy it. Corn is considered just a filler and doesn't bring a whole heck of a lot to the table for a dog.


But all the Science Diet formulas I looked up have corn as the first or second ingredient.....unless they've changed the recipe since petfooddirect listed them: http://www.petfooddirect.com/store/dept.asp?dept_id=1&brand_id=7&root_id=&parent_id=&Page=1 

So I'm a little confused by their advice.


----------



## PureMutt (Feb 6, 2009)

Yeah, all their food is made up of corn. What gives?


----------



## CorgiKarma (Feb 10, 2009)

Haha, thats odd to recommend Science Diet then not recommend something with corn as a major ingredient...
I agree that Science Diet and Iams are only recommended because the majority of vets are taught very little about nutrition...and guess who teaches them?


----------

