# Surprised by advice from vet.



## Ponce418 (Aug 14, 2007)

We recently adopted a 6 month old lab mix after the death of our 15 year old lab. In more recent years, we had been really frustrated with all the dog food recalls, so we did a lot of research on dog food before bringing our new guy home. Ultimately, we decided to go with Fromm Four Star Nutritionals Grain Free kibbles. 

This past week, my husband brought our pup for his first check up while I was away on a business trip. Upon my return, I was rather stunned to hear that our vet was not pleased with our choice of dog food. She said that Fromm does a great job of marketing itself, but there are better quality foods out there. She specifically recommended switching our boy over to Eukanuba, Royal Canin, Purina One, or Hill's Science Diet. Now I'm REALLY confused, as none of those brands had the same high ratings as what I've read about Fromm's (Whole Dog Journal, Dogfoodadvisor,com, etc). In addition, I'm alittle suspicious as the vet's office sells at least 2 (maybe 3) of the dog food brands she's suggested.

Purina One is better than Fromm's? Seriously? Either the research we've done (mainly online and talking to the trainers at the dog obedience school) are way, WAY off base, or my vet is a bad resource for information. Thoughts?


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

A lot of vets push those brands. I honestly just wouldn't take nutritional advice from a vet. All those companies fund vet schools and those are the brands that they sell at many vet offices.

Fromm is better than all those brands. Don't worry about it. You're doing a good thing by keeping your dog on it


----------



## WonderBreadDots (Jun 26, 2012)

The vet is a general doctor for your dog, not a nutritionist. 

Those brands of food will certainly keep your dog alive, they may not be what is best for your dog.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

My vet, who I otherwise like and respect, recommended Purina Dog Chow.



> She said that Fromm does a great job of marketing itself


Funny thing: I'm not aware of any marketing from Fromm's at all, whereas those "recommended" brands advertise all the time.


----------



## BellaPup (Jul 7, 2007)

Our vet sells those brands at their office. They obviously get a good cut of the sales (esp considering they are almost twice as expensive there than at a pet store). I can't think of any other reason they would recommend that junk.


----------



## Adjecyca1 (Jul 25, 2010)

Stick with the food you got, don't listen to your vet about nutrition


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

Adjecyca1 said:


> Stick with the food you got, don't listen to your vet about nutrition


 Agreed.

In general, unless a vet has specific nutrition training outside of his VMD, or is giving advice about food/nutrition as it relates to a specific medical condition, and even then take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

RonE said:


> Funny thing: I'm not aware of any marketing from Fromm's at all, whereas those "recommended" brands advertise all the time.


I have never seen advertising for any of the better kibbles, other than Blue Wildnerness. I never even heard of Fromm, TOTW, Wellness, Acana or Canidae except on message boards online.

Purina, though, I can't watch TV for 10 minutes without David Duchovny telling me how great my dog is and I should repay him with corn and potentially carcinogenic preservatives.


----------



## cheebamaster (Jun 21, 2010)

Agreed, most vets are clueless on nutrition. I was lucky enough to find a holistic vet near me who feeds all of her dogs raw. She highly recommended brands such as orijen and fromm.


----------



## huntingharley (Apr 25, 2013)

Fromm is EXCELLENT most vets are "sponsored" by some line of dog food. I worked for a vet sponsored by purina that was horrified at the thought of feeding raw. I just dot take any feeding advice unless of course my dogs came down with diabetes or something serious. 


Sent from Petguide.com App


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

BellaPup said:


> Our vet sells those brands at their office. They obviously get a good cut of the sales (esp considering they are almost twice as expensive there than at a pet store). I can't think of any other reason they would recommend that junk.


I would just like to address this misconception. I don't know why it's so hard for people to accept that just because a vet has a different opinion about food than they do, that they are somehow orchestrating a nefarious plot to rake in dough from you. Food is typically not marked up very much at all at veterinary clinics and relatively little profit comes from them. As small businesses, most veterinary clinics cannot even _buy_ foods from their suppliers for as little as a big pet store can _sell_ it to you for because pet stores (especially the big national chains) are able to purchase foods in enough bulk to get substantial volume discounts. Many clients want to be able to purchase food at the clinic for convenience, otherwise a lot of vets wouldn't bother to carry anything but prescription diets at all. 

I also want to know where my "sponsorship" is. I don't even know what that means, honestly, but it seems like it should mean me getting stuff from someone and... I don't. 

As far as foods go, if your dog likes the Fromm and does well on it, feed the Fromm and don't worry about advice you don't agree with. There is a lot more opinion than fact about dog foods from all quarters -- keep in mind that dogfoodadvisor, etc are essentially just someone's opinion just like your vet's recommendation is just their opinion. It's very likely that your vet has likely seen hundreds if not thousands of dogs do well on the foods they are recommending, just like many people have seen dogs do well on other foods. Just pick what you like, your dog likes, and you can afford.


----------



## Kyllobernese (Feb 5, 2008)

When I took Lucy in because I thought she had a UTI they checked her urine, she had struvite crystals. I was really surprised that when the Vet said she would check with their food representative (I am sure it was Hills) she said they did not recommend any change in food but that it was not unusual to fine struvite crystals in a dog's urine.

I was not about to put her on anything from Hills anyway and from what I have read, changing the diet is not recommended anyway. Lucy seems fine, no problems peeing except for that one day almost a month ago now.


----------



## Abbylynn (Jul 7, 2011)

When I took Leeo to the ER ... The ER vet asked what I was feeding him. I began to say TOTW, 4Health ... and he interrupted me and said "The good stuff"  I was surprised to hear that. Maybe he thought Leeo was sick from a recall?

Whenever I tell my vet about the dog food I feed .... I never get an answer ... or any advice to switch. I guess it depends on who you see sometimes.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

There is little mark-up in the dog food that your vets sells.. The vet only sells/keeps it in the office for certain diagnosed diseases. If Fomm, TOTW and other _high_ quality foods were to do the studies and have the back up like HIlls does more vets would recommend them. With their license on the line vets will pick a food that has scientific back-up to it than a food who has no studies done on it for a medical condition. 

The corn debate. For years dogs were fed that and survived. Now it seems you are a bad owner if you feed your dog, food that has corn it. Pedigree and Ol' Roy are the top sellers and really do not see a whole lot of sick animals due to them eating a corn base food.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Eh, it's different now, though, what with all the corn being GMO and all that. We have no idea what that does long-term. And I disagree that the dogs eating Ol' Roy and Pedigree are healthy. I've never seen a dog eating either of those that didn't look terrible. 

I understand that Hill's does walloping amounts of research, but at the same time, I don't know what they're finding in that research or how they're using the info :/. For instance, their prescription food for feline hyperthyroid has no meat protein at all; it's all corn gluten. The only reason it reduces thyroid production is because it has no iodine. And now the newest research (not by Hill's) suggests that plant proteins stimulate thyroid production in cats: http://www.morrisanimalfoundation.o...ation.org/blog/category/cat/study-update.html I mean, they must have found some results like that in their research, if they're doing as much as they say they are. Couldn't they have made a food with actual meat content that has no iodine? 

And, well, I guess I don't trust any company to actually have my pets' best interests at heart. . .all commercial ventures need to make money, they aren't doing it for funsies. If something is cheaper for them, they're going to use it even if it's not the best.

So. . .rambling . If your dog does well on the food and you're happy with it, that's what counts.


----------



## georgiapeach (Mar 17, 2012)

My vet sells Royal Canin. We agree to disagree on what to feed my dogs...


----------



## aussiegirl6 (Mar 16, 2013)

Ponce418 said:


> We recently adopted a 6 month old lab mix after the death of our 15 year old lab. In more recent years, we had been really frustrated with all the dog food recalls, so we did a lot of research on dog food before bringing our new guy home. Ultimately, we decided to go with Fromm Four Star Nutritionals Grain Free kibbles.
> 
> This past week, my husband brought our pup for his first check up while I was away on a business trip. Upon my return, I was rather stunned to hear that our vet was not pleased with our choice of dog food. She said that Fromm does a great job of marketing itself, but there are better quality foods out there. She specifically recommended switching our boy over to Eukanuba, Royal Canin, Purina One, or Hill's Science Diet. Now I'm REALLY confused, as none of those brands had the same high ratings as what I've read about Fromm's (Whole Dog Journal, Dogfoodadvisor,com, etc). In addition, I'm alittle suspicious as the vet's office sells at least 2 (maybe 3) of the dog food brands she's suggested.
> 
> Purina One is better than Fromm's? Seriously? Either the research we've done (mainly online and talking to the trainers at the dog obedience school) are way, WAY off base, or my vet is a bad resource for information. Thoughts?


 Stay with what you have. 14 years ago Science Diet was all the craze, vets were getting a commission from the sales reps, then the truth came out, the first ingredient was corn, who the heck feeds corn to a carnivorous animal? That means more poop, sure it fattens them up but they can't digest it, then,,,ooops, SD realizes they have been found out and come out with all that processed crap. As Joey would say, "Forget about it". LOL 
YOU are a good doggie mom. Stay as you are....


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Willowy said:


> Eh, it's different now, though, what with all the corn being GMO and all that. We have no idea what that does long-term. And I disagree that the dogs eating Ol' Roy and Pedigree are healthy. I've never seen a dog eating either of those that didn't look terrible.
> *Yes gmo scare me too even though we have people (researchers) saying there is not a problem There was a girl at work who fed her dog pedigree. Her dog lived to be 13 or 14 years of age and he was a Rott. My statement was because of how much is sold we at the clinic are not besieged by sick animals because they are given these two foods. BTW- in my house right now in the food bins Blue Buffalo salmon and sweet potato, 4 health grain free, and earthborn costal catch*
> 
> I understand that Hill's does walloping amounts of research, but at the same time, I don't know what they're finding in that research or how they're using the info :/. For instance, their prescription food for feline hyperthyroid has no meat protein at all; it's all corn gluten. The only reason it reduces thyroid production is because it has no iodine. And now the newest research (not by Hill's) suggests that plant proteins stimulate thyroid production in cats: http://www.morrisanimalfoundation.o...ation.org/blog/category/cat/study-update.html I mean, they must have found some results like that in their research, if they're doing as much as they say they are. Couldn't they have made a food with actual meat content that has no iodine?
> ...


I remembering reading on a dog food site that a lady felt that yes she could not afford to buy expensive dog food that she bought middle of the road dog food so that way she could get the dog vaccines, heartworm and flea preventitive. I thought to myself, 'wow, shes right! If by buying the lower food she could then afford to get the other things for her dog which is just as important, than so be it"


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

luv mi pets said:


> I remembering reading on a dog food site that a lady felt that yes she could not afford to buy expensive dog food that she bought middle of the road dog food so that way she could get the dog vaccines, heartworm and flea preventitive. I thought to myself, 'wow, shes right! If by buying the lower food she could then afford to get the other things for her dog which is just as important, than so be it"


Well of course. Not much point in buying high-quality food if the dog dies from Parvo or heartworms.

Can healthy cats really eat y/d long term? I would think the iodine deficiency would get them eventually. And, LOL, I've never seen Hill's come out with a new improved version of a food with more meat. . .if anything, their foods have gotten less meat since I started paying attention to ingredients. Sometimes I feel like they're using their research just to see how cheaply they can make the food and still keep the animals alive, and charge 3 times more for it than any other food of the same quality :/. Of course the prescription foods "work", but the ingredients are so bad I really wonder about the long term effects. I suppose most pets needing a prescription food don't have much of a long term, though.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Yes correct on long termand not much time . Hyperthyroidism seems to affect a lot of old cats. So I would rather see a person feed Y/D than forget to med the cat. Long term from the studies seem that cats do better on the food than what they do on meds. No cat on the food was shown to have the kidneys effected, so I guess that would be better for the cat and owner. 

I will have to say the I/D can dog food looks a lot better. Several years ago open a can and all you could see was rice and corn. Now at least it looks meatier. Plus I did not know that Hills was owned by Colgate/Palmolive or is their parent company


----------



## KuroSaya (Jun 3, 2011)

RonE said:


> Funny thing: I'm not aware of any marketing from Fromm's at all, whereas those "recommended" brands advertise all the time.


 Haha I was going to say same thing I see zero commercials of fromm kibble. Only blue buffalo and wellness kibble commercials. 

Dog magazines might have fromm ad in it I'm not sure don't get dog magazines unless it has something I'm interested in it. 

I see beneful, kibbles and bits, purina every commercial break practically.

I respect vets opinion on things, but they should give reason not to feed certain kibble like I feel it has too much protein or whatever. 

Still your dog your choice what you feed it as long as you do your research and read ingredient labels and feel quality is good and the dog does good on it.

Bella my parent's boxer does great with fromm kibble.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

A close friend of mine is a vet and she feeds her pit bull Nature's Variety Instinct. Her office sells that crap your vet is recommending and she doesn't touch is with a a ten foot pole for her own dog. Take that for what you will...


----------



## Kyllobernese (Feb 5, 2008)

Has anybody tried their "new" foods?


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

Kyllobernese said:


> Has anybody tried their "new" foods?


No, I wasn't very impressed with the ingredients list. Better than the old Hill's but still crap lol the grain free is no good, just a big bag of potatoes...


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

It's the worst grain-free I've ever seen. . .. No chicken meal until the 5th-6th ingredient! It's all potatoes and peas. Even the Diamond Naturals grain-frees look better, and they aren't especially impressive (although they both get 3 stars on dogfoodadvisor so not much better).


----------



## Mr. V (Jan 28, 2010)

sassafras said:


> I would just like to address this misconception. I don't know why it's so hard for people to accept that just because a vet has a different opinion about food than they do, that they are somehow orchestrating a nefarious plot to rake in dough from you. Food is typically not marked up very much at all at veterinary clinics and relatively little profit comes from them. As small businesses, most veterinary clinics cannot even _buy_ foods from their suppliers for as little as a big pet store can _sell_ it to you for because pet stores (especially the big national chains) are able to purchase foods in enough bulk to get substantial volume discounts. Many clients want to be able to purchase food at the clinic for convenience, otherwise a lot of vets wouldn't bother to carry anything but prescription diets at all.
> 
> I also want to know where my "sponsorship" is. I don't even know what that means, honestly, but it seems like it should mean me getting stuff from someone and... I don't.
> 
> As far as foods go, if your dog likes the Fromm and does well on it, feed the Fromm and don't worry about advice you don't agree with. There is a lot more opinion than fact about dog foods from all quarters -- keep in mind that dogfoodadvisor, etc are essentially just someone's opinion just like your vet's recommendation is just their opinion. It's very likely that your vet has likely seen hundreds if not thousands of dogs do well on the foods they are recommending, just like many people have seen dogs do well on other foods. Just pick what you like, your dog likes, and you can afford.


Sass, why don't you take your facts and get out of here? This is a designated Hills, Purina, and Eukanuba bashing thread only. The evil vets and all of their kickback are trying to get in the way of my dog eating a 100% natural diet the way nature (and a huge extruder) intended.

PS: if you finally get the Hill's kickbacks/sponsorship/etc... PM me b/c I haven't received any of it


----------



## Hambonez (Mar 17, 2012)

The vet I used to work for recommended Wysong. We carried the major Rx brands, but for regular feeding, we had, and she recommended, Wysong.


----------



## rambusanna (Jul 14, 2008)

The brands she told you about are rated very low by dog nutrition experts. She is just trying to sell you what she gets money for. Do NOT listen to her when it comes to food. Fromm is by farrr better than any of those Petsmart brands. Any grain free food is better than those brands. It's sad that these highly educated people that we trust our furry friends lives to, give us wrong advice to make a quick buck. Tsk, tsk. It's one thing if she recommends you those foods if you asked her which food is good, but it's totally wrong of her to go out of her way to tell you that she is disappointed in the better product you are feeding your dog. Shame on her! My vet says nothing when I tell him I feed my dog Innova Evo. He realizes that it's a better food than what he offers so he just stays quiet. I can respect that. Here is Dog Food Analysis. They have almost every single food in America rated objectively. http://www.dogfoodanalysis.com/dog_food_reviews/
The brands your vet recommended are rated 1 or 2 stars on this website.


----------



## TRDmom (Mar 3, 2013)

WonderBreadDots said:


> The vet is a general doctor for your dog, not a nutritionist.
> 
> Those brands of food will certainly keep your dog alive, they may not be what is best for your dog.


I agree with this.


----------



## TTs Towel (May 22, 2012)

rambusanna said:


> The brands she told you about are rated very low by dog nutrition experts. She is just trying to sell you what she gets money for. Do NOT listen to her when it comes to food. Fromm is by farrr better than any of those Petsmart brands. Any grain free food is better than those brands. It's sad that these highly educated people that we trust our furry friends lives to, give us wrong advice to make a quick buck. Tsk, tsk. It's one thing if she recommends you those foods if you asked her which food is good, but it's totally wrong of her to go out of her way to tell you that she is disappointed in the better product you are feeding your dog. Shame on her! My vet says nothing when I tell him I feed my dog Innova Evo. He realizes that it's a better food than what he offers so he just stays quiet. I can respect that. Here is Dog Food Analysis. They have almost every single food in America rated objectively. http://www.dogfoodanalysis.com/dog_food_reviews/
> The brands your vet recommended are rated 1 or 2 stars on this website.


dogfoodanalysis is a website run by a dentist


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

LOL there's nothing objective about dogfoodanalysis. It's not a bad tool for comparing ingredients, especially if you agree with some of their philosophies about ingredients, but to say it's objective... no.


----------



## rambusanna (Jul 14, 2008)

Can you tell me why you think it's not objective? I think it's objective because the formula used for rating is consistent. It's not the most up to date website though.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

rambusanna said:


> Can you tell me why you think it's not objective? I think it's objective because the formula used for rating is consistent. It's not the most up to date website though.


Objective doesn't mean consistent. Objective means not influenced by personal opinions/biases. The whole rating system is built off of one set of opinions about ingredients in dog food. 

Like I said, it's a great tool for comparing ingredients between dog foods. And if you happen to agree with their opinions then the rating system a great guide for choosing a food. But if you happen to think that, for instance, there's nothing wrong with beet pulp or corn then it's probably not going to be all that useful.


----------



## rambusanna (Jul 14, 2008)

Yes, I'm aware of the definition of Objective. Corn, beet pulp, and tomato pomace are all fillers. This stuff does not digest in a dog's body and gets extruded as a waste byproduct. I personally agree with their ratings. Are they a little too picky at times? Sure. But that is why they use the 6star rating scale so they can group the best of the best at a higher rating. The site def needs to be updated though.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

rambusanna said:


> Corn, beet pulp, and tomato pomace are all fillers. This stuff does not digest in a dog's body and gets extruded as a waste byproduct.


That right there - it's opinion, not objective fact. In fact it's worse than opinion, it's not even true - corn is a perfectly digestible source of calories and carbohydrates. It's a "filler" in the sense of being used to fill in for more expensive sources of calories, but it is digestible nonetheless. 

That myth comes from the fact that the digestible part of corn is tucked inside an indigestible shell. So unless it's ground (which it is before adding to dog foods) or chewed thoroughly, it appears to not be digestible. One may argue whether corn is an _appropriate_ source of carbohydrates and calories for a dog - which again, is pure opinion - but not whether it is, in fact, digestible.


----------



## Kathyy (Jun 15, 2008)

It would be nice if that page had a disclaimer so people would know what the bias is. Could the bias be that dogs are carnivores but readily eat just about anything?

Digestible corn? I 'know' that corn that is properly processed is fine but Sassy's gut thought otherwise. On SD she had enormous sweet smelling poop. Interesting to pick up dog poop that smelled sort of like corn bread but I bought something else next time! Max never was offered processed corn but any grains disagrees with him. We read this same story over and over. Sure grain can be used for cheap calories, protein, fat, carbs, vitamins and minerals but many dogs have issues with something in there.


----------



## rambusanna (Jul 14, 2008)

sassafras said:


> That right there - it's opinion, not objective fact. In fact it's worse than opinion, it's not even true - corn is a perfectly digestible source of calories and carbohydrates. It's a "filler" in the sense of being used to fill in for more expensive sources of calories, but it is digestible nonetheless.
> 
> That myth comes from the fact that the digestible part of corn is tucked inside an indigestible shell. So unless it's ground (which it is before adding to dog foods) or chewed thoroughly, it appears to not be digestible. One may argue whether corn is an _appropriate_ source of carbohydrates and calories for a dog - which again, is pure opinion - but not whether it is, in fact, digestible.


Read this:
http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-industry-exposed/dog-food-corn/


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

rambusanna said:


> Read this:
> http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-industry-exposed/dog-food-corn/


Yes, that's a nice opinion piece. 

With a lot of weirdly contradictory statements. They say it's a myth that corn is digestible, but then pretty much say the same thing about corn's digestibility that I did - that the whole grain isn't very digestible and it needs to be ground first. LOL. 

I don't really care if people want to include corn in their dog's diets or not, I was just using it as an example. I'm just saying that site isn't an objective source of information.


----------



## TTs Towel (May 22, 2012)

rambusanna said:


> Yes, I'm aware of the definition of Objective. Corn, beet pulp, and tomato pomace are all fillers. This stuff does not digest in a dog's body and gets extruded as a waste byproduct. .


It's well documented that corn is digestible. You can find this information in the journal databases. Someone that has applied to med school has surely heard of these journal databases and would want to read some quality, peer reviewed information rather than opinion pieces by a dentist.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

TTs Towel said:


> It's well documented that corn is digestible. You can find this information in the journal databases. Someone that has applied to med school has surely heard of these journal databases and would want to read some quality, peer reviewed information rather than opinion pieces by a dentist.



TTs Towel, I am just going to call you out on this. Every time you bother to make a post, it really sounds like you are on some crusade against people who do not believe in a grain inclusive, kibble based diet. Of course, I could be misinterpreting your intentions since this is an online forum, therefore easy to misconstrue things, but you writing things like "you can find this in any vet textbook" and "you can find this in journal databases" is very very vague.

Next time you want to nitpick like this, and demand for sources of what others have said, please provide your own sources as well.


----------



## TTs Towel (May 22, 2012)

jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj


----------



## Jacksons Mom (Mar 12, 2010)

sassafras said:


> I would just like to address this misconception. I don't know why it's so hard for people to accept that just because a vet has a different opinion about food than they do, that they are somehow orchestrating a nefarious plot to rake in dough from you. Food is typically not marked up very much at all at veterinary clinics and relatively little profit comes from them. As small businesses, most veterinary clinics cannot even _buy_ foods from their suppliers for as little as a big pet store can _sell_ it to you for because pet stores (especially the big national chains) are able to purchase foods in enough bulk to get substantial volume discounts. Many clients want to be able to purchase food at the clinic for convenience, otherwise a lot of vets wouldn't bother to carry anything but prescription diets at all.
> 
> I also want to know where my "sponsorship" is. I don't even know what that means, honestly, but it seems like it should mean me getting stuff from someone and... I don't.
> 
> As far as foods go, if your dog likes the Fromm and does well on it, feed the Fromm and don't worry about advice you don't agree with. There is a lot more opinion than fact about dog foods from all quarters -- keep in mind that dogfoodadvisor, etc are essentially just someone's opinion just like your vet's recommendation is just their opinion. It's very likely that your vet has likely seen hundreds if not thousands of dogs do well on the foods they are recommending, just like many people have seen dogs do well on other foods. Just pick what you like, your dog likes, and you can afford.


^ yeah, that.


----------



## Jacksons Mom (Mar 12, 2010)

rambusanna said:


> The brands she told you about are rated very low by dog nutrition experts. She is just trying to sell you what she gets money for. Do NOT listen to her when it comes to food. Fromm is by farrr better than any of those Petsmart brands. Any grain free food is better than those brands. It's sad that these highly educated people that we trust our furry friends lives to, give us wrong advice to make a quick buck. Tsk, tsk. It's one thing if she recommends you those foods if you asked her which food is good, but it's totally wrong of her to go out of her way to tell you that she is disappointed in the better product you are feeding your dog. Shame on her! My vet says nothing when I tell him I feed my dog Innova Evo. He realizes that it's a better food than what he offers so he just stays quiet. I can respect that. Here is Dog Food Analysis. They have almost every single food in America rated objectively. http://www.dogfoodanalysis.com/dog_food_reviews/
> The brands your vet recommended are rated 1 or 2 stars on this website.


"Experts?"

I don't even visit dogfoodanalysis anymore because it's so outdated, but other sites dogfoodadvisor are all merely opinion. They don't even take into consideration where the food is produced, who manufactures it, how many recalls, how they were handled, etc.

You can look at a lot of foods by their label/ingredient list and think 'GREAT!' yet it's had tons of recalls and is making dogs ill. There's also a LOT of crappy grain-free foods out there. So to say you're better off feeding "ANY grain-free" over SD, RC, etc, is simply not accurate. 

Also, the person who runs dogfoodadvisor has zero credentials regarding animal nutrition. He's merely giving an opinion. It's a nice resource to compare foods and maybe read up on user's comments, etc, but not to be taken as a 'bible' of dog food.

I think we get so used to reading things over and over again online that we just take them as fact. I know because I used to do this. When I first joined online forums, I had no idea about this 'dog world' and suddenly you read things and just... start repeating them, without really knowing WHY. 'By products are bad, corn is bad' Then it's grains are bad. Now it's pea protein and too much legumes is bad. lol.

It's just... food is so complicated. Feed what works for your dog. It just so happens that my dog tends to do better on GF (or few grains) and moderately simple ingredient lists and moderate protein/fat.


----------



## PackMomma (Sep 26, 2011)

TTs Towel said:


> -------------------
> Digestibility of diets with different sources of carbohydrates and influence on blood glucose and insulin in dogs
> 
> By da Silver Junior, Jose Walter; de Oliveira Borges, Flavia Maria; Murgas, Luis David Solis; Valerio, Ana Gabriela; Medeiros, Guilerme Coelho; Viana, Renata; Lima, Lidia Marinho Silva
> ...


I personally wouldn't %100 trust any studies that came out of a textbook anyway, but thats just my own personal viewpoint.. I really don't trust much of anything that any government organization, big box companies or any type of politics have a say in..all these veterinary 'studies', honestly, mean zip to me. I don't care how many scientific studies or evidence are produced by people with important titles, all you have to do is look at the health of alot of dogs these days on low quality commercial diets, grain inclusive or not and so many develop intolerances to something or other in these foods because they just simply are not natural to them. Granted, yes, some dogs do great on a particular food while the other develops horrible issues. So how can any study say that this food is good, and this one is bad? You judge by the health of the dogs, plain and simple..that is the ultimate study. Same goes for people.. look how many people suffer from such a wide variety of health problems these days and it seems each year a new illness or disease is discovered and a lot of it is more than likely a result of our diets and whats in our food. You can't really avoid it, and same goes with dogs. 

Like Jackson's Mom said, food (not only for dogs, but for people, too) is always going to be a complicated and sensitive subject. No matter what you do, you'll never be able to perfect the ideal diet for human or dog. No, dogs were not designed to eat commercial foods with the all the fillers and ingredients that aren't natural or beneficial to their diet, and niether are humans, but we still eat them and do reasonably fine for the most part so long as everything is in moderation and we eat natural foods occasionally too. I feed raw because my dogs do best on this diet, and I know in my heart that its the closes to a natural diet I can offer them, I feel better knowing what they eat on a daily basis, rather than worry about which commerical food is going to get recalled or which one they won't eat or which filler wether its grains or potatoes is going to give them some kind of food sensitivity... I just don't want to deal with any of that so that is why I feed raw.. and even though they were healthy and for the most part did well on a partial kibble diet, they look even better now when I didn't even think it was possible for them to do better than they already were, but I know that even the raw diet is never perfect or ideal, I know I haven't perfected it, and I don't lose any sleep over it. So long as their healthy and I can avoid vet bills then I am happy. Same goes with me, I eat as close to natural diet as I possibly can, cut out sugars, wheat/grains, avoid GMO, eat organic where I can, and I eat my food raw %75 of the time, I was still healthy and for the most part did okay when I ate a pretty horrible diet but with the way I've changed my diet I've still noticed a huge difference in my overall health so to me, seeing is believing. I don't need all these controversial studies that are out there to tell me what's good or isn't good for me and same goes for my dogs. I can tell what's good for them by judging their overall health and condition, just as I do the same with myself, and of course, use common sense. While all the crap on the internet these days is for the most part controversial, its important to just do what works for you, and what feels right. You can pick almost any subject and you can find just as much studies about it that prove it wrong or bad, as studies that prove it right or good, so learn to take anything you hear, see or read over the internet with a grain of salt. I do my own studies, if it works, then it works, if it doesn't, then I try something else. 

Everyone is going to have their own thoughts, opinions and experiences when it comes to food. I know we all are or were guilty at one point of falling into some kind of trap when it comes to what we see and read on the internet and soon as everyone develops a thought or reason for feeding this or feeding that based on the 'studies' or propaganda they read on the interent, everyone jumps on or off the bandwagon and on to something else and I think in today's world it will always be like that. Its overwhelming but I think we all experience it at some point and regardless its still a valuable learning experience. there comes a point when we get fed up and just toss in the towel so to speak and resort back to doing things the way we feel comfortable doing, or simply just stick with what works. The internet is definitely resourceful and i'm thankful for it, but I try not to get too caught up with all the information available and take everything with a grain of salt. I think most everyone on here today agree's that just feed what works, there's no reason to feel bad about feeding your dog something if its truly working for them, their happy and healthy and your bank account is comfortable with.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

PackMomma said:


> I personally wouldn't %100 trust any studies that came out of a textbook anyway, but thats just my own personal viewpoint.. I really don't trust much of anything that any government organization, big box companies or any type of politics have a say in..all these veterinary 'studies', honestly, mean zip to me.


LOL, then what on earth could possibly convince you? All those studies say is that certain ingredients are digestible. 



> I don't care how many scientific studies or evidence are produced by people with important titles, all you have to do is look at the health of alot of dogs these days on low quality commercial diets...


Ok, well if you only believe personal anecdotes then I can tell you that over the years I've known literally thousands of dogs on grain-inclusive commercial diets that have no major health problems and live long, happy lives. I've known lots of dogs on all sorts of diets that do well or poorly. I've noticed a trend with a LOT of dogs on "high quality" grain-free foods that have terrible diarrhea or other digestive issues. 

So basically, I've come to believe there is no such thing as a true blanket statement when it comes to dog foods.


----------



## PackMomma (Sep 26, 2011)

sassafras said:


> Ok, well if you only believe personal anecdotes then I can tell you that over the years I've known literally thousands of dogs on grain-inclusive commercial diets that have no major health problems and live long, happy lives. I've known lots of dogs on all sorts of diets that do well or poorly. I've noticed a trend with a LOT of dogs on "high quality" grain-free foods that have terrible diarrhea or other digestive issues...


You obviously didn't read the rest of my post, I'm not sure how you got it into your head that I was bashing grain inclusive foods in anyway and promoting grain-free. There isn't a single phrase or sentence in my post that suggests either. Actually, I quite clearly stated that dogs can either do poorly or great on either food, but myself personally have not seen many dogs do great on 'lower' quality foods. I said nothing about grain free or grain inclusive, simply just 'low' quality, however, I have seen dogs develop problems on high quality foods too, which is exactly what my point is is that there is no such thing *in my opinion* as the 'perfect' food, or studies to suggest otherwise. But yes, I go my my personal experiences and I see and know far too many dogs suffering from some kind of health issue that, in my opinion, are likely strongly related to diet. Sure, they may not necessarily be severe issue's, but I personally don't know many dogs in my wide range of dog loving friends and family that don't suffer from something or other, whether its big, smelly poops, arthritis, food allergies, pancreatitis, sensitive stomachs, skin issues, gunky eyes, diabetes, obesity, dental issues, and the list goes on. I see and hear these complaints all the time (and yes, its just strong personal opinion that majority of these issue's are or can be related to diet), more so than I see dogs do perfectly well on a commercial food.. but then again that just leads to my point that there really is no such thing as perfect. Even though my dogs are on raw and they suffer from none of the above, YET... doesn't mean they can't or wont. I've tried probably all of the reasonably mid to higher quality grain inclusive and grain free foods on the market when I still fed kibble and no matter which one seemed to work, eventually, it just didn't. Grain inclusive foods caused skin issue's and gunky eyes and didn't matter which kind, grain-free foods caused diarrhea and terrible gas. I see much of same in other dogs, but I'm a little more OCD with this kind of stuff so I eventually switched to raw hoping it would help and so far it has but, it certainly still is not PERFECT, and doubt it ever will be, but its what's working for us. It keeps the vets and the vet bills and medications and all that other crap away that I see all my friends and family spending thousands and thousands of dollars on this treatment or medications for their dogs or cats and that is all I try my best to avoid, but I came to believe a long time ago that there is no such thing as a true blanket statement when it comes to food.. you feed what works, end of story.


----------



## SydTheSpaniel (Feb 12, 2011)

I think what really matters... is how the individual dog does on a certain food. My dog was eating Beneful when I adopted her, I switched her to Iams because that's what my dogs were eating, and my cats, when I was younger. My dogs lived very healthy lives. But Sydney, the moment I switched her to grain free (thanks to me getting a little older and doing more research)... her health improved drastically. It all depends on how the individual dogs!

My husband for example... eats pizza, lots of pasta, junk food. And everyone says he's going to get obese. Well... my husband is in near perfect shape - a little under weight -, and yet look at his diet! It really just depends.


The vet office I work at sells Veterinary prescription diets (Hill's), and also Purina veterinary diets. The vet tech who works there, breeds Labs (or used to), and is all about the grain free. Just because a clinic sells a certain food doesn't mean the DVMs there feed it to their own dogs! I trust my vet in regards to my dog's health, and always will.


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

Jacksons Mom said:


> "Experts?"
> 
> I don't even visit dogfoodanalysis anymore because it's so outdated, but other sites dogfoodadvisor are all merely opinion. They don't even take into consideration where the food is produced, who manufactures it, how many recalls, how they were handled, etc..


Those things have very little to do with the nutritional value of a food, and are entirely for us humans to think about from an ethical/safety perspective. Dogs, for the most part, can handle salmonella just fine - the recalls are a public health precaution to prevent humans from getting sick.


----------



## Jacksons Mom (Mar 12, 2010)

gingerkid said:


> Those things have very little to do with the nutritional value of a food, and are entirely for us humans to think about from an ethical/safety perspective. Dogs, for the most part, can handle salmonella just fine - the recalls are a public health precaution to prevent humans from getting sick.


No, it very much matters. I'm not just talking about salmonella. 

Evangers, anyone? Actually got warned by the FDA because their food did not even contain the meat it claimed it did (it was a different type). What if a dog got very ill when eating beef, but not chicken, and you're giving your dog a food you think is chicken-based, but there's NO chicken even in there?! 

http://truthaboutpetfood2.com/fda-warning-letter-to-evangers-pet-food-company
http://truthaboutpetfood2.com/more-problems-for-evangers-pet-food-owner

Are ingredients coming from China? Quality control? Who formulated the recipes? Credentials of those involved in nutrition aspect? Are ingredient lists just being purchased and then made together (has been done before)? What testing was done or is my dog the guinea pig while eating your food? How do you know your food is free of contaminants? Are feeding trials done? How much research is the company doing? Are they mostly just a marketing company?

These are very important issues that cannot simply be known by looking at an ingredient list.

I'm not saying I'm out there feeding Science Diet either. And I DO think my dog looks and acts better on grain-free and on a few certain brands, but really, most of these new 'holistic' companies simply haven't been around long enough to prove anything. I'm sure we'll find out in the next 10-15 years.

I mean, really, the chance of your dog dying or suffering some big illness from eating ANY dog food is probably very slim anyway. I think some of our "fears" (mine included) are overblown. I'm guilty of it. I always talk about Diamond for example, how I wouldn't touch it, etc. A lot of us are now TERRIFIED of Diamond produced foods. But really? our dogs probably have a one in a million chance of anything happening to them because of dog food. They probably have a higher chance of dying from a snake bite, or something crazy, then dying because of eating pet food. And the only reason I know about all this stuff is because of pet forums. If I was just a regular ole' owner, I wouldn't even think twice about this stuff, and I'm sure Jackson would be absolutely fine with whatever I chose to feed. 

But of course, we want the best for our dogs. I know I do. I pay attention to every little thing, lol. I'm kind of anal about it actually. With that said, dogs are scavengers, and evolved alongside humans... eating whatever scraps they could find and corn mush and whatever they could catch themselves. Was it the healthiest? Probably not, but they survived. Would I choose to feed a dog food knowing such stuff is in there? Nope, it wouldn't be my first choice.

Meh. Food. lol.


----------



## PackMomma (Sep 26, 2011)

Jacksons Mom said:


> No, it very much matters. I'm not just talking about salmonella.
> 
> Evangers, anyone? Actually got warned by the FDA because their food did not even contain the meat it claimed it did (it was a different type). What if a dog got very ill when eating beef, but not chicken, and you're giving your dog a food you think is chicken-based, but there's NO chicken even in there?!
> 
> ...


This post pretty much explains my reason for switching to %100 raw. I was reasonably happy with the 50/50 raw and kibble diet, although always wanting to go full raw due to minor issue's I began becoming more aware of with my dogs (itchy skin, ear irritations, diarrhea, buildup on teeth, gunky eyes, etc) until I joined dog forums LOL. Although I was feeding and rotating reasonably good kibble (NV Instinct, Fromm, TOTW, Acana, Timberwolf Organics, etc) I started to become aware of all the hype around dog foods here, but I was also becoming educated, however, it became so overwhelming with this ingredient and that, manufacturer recalls, processes, protein sources, etc that I just eventually gave up and went full raw. I'm glad I did because all those little minor issue's my dogs still suffered from occasionally cleared up instantly and they are in the best health they've ever been, and its costing me far less money BUT it is and can be a major PITA feeding raw exclusively.. but that's kind of the price I pay for peice of mind, right?

Well, after over a year of feeding %100 raw and taking a much needed break from the dog food hype on dog forums, I've come to realize, there will never be a perfect food or diet. There's always the pro's and cons. Yes, I feel better knowing what I'm feeding and my dogs have benefited from it tremendously, but it has its sacrifices for sure. But I'm not longer going to hesitate to feed my dogs kibble whenever it may be convenient. I'm going to keep a mix of a few flavors/brands in the freezer as a go-to when I'm either out of raw, or if I forget to thaw something out (happens quite often..LOL), or another that happens frequently is when we're camping or staying over at friends or family. Feeding PMR has definitely posed its challenges when it comes to the whole travelling thing, and the commercial premade raw I also keep on hand for convenience purposes is very expensive so i'm not going to fuss over feeding them kibble in some of these situations at this point. Don't think I'll feed it enough obviously for them to develop anymore issue's from it or have to worry about the quality or ingredients or what not, but it will be enough to aleviate some of the inconveniences of feeding raw in some situations so, balances out for me.


----------



## TTs Towel (May 22, 2012)

fffffffffffffffffffff


----------



## PackMomma (Sep 26, 2011)

I don't necessarily buy into the whole 'grains/corn, etc aren't digestible' myself, but I know that its perfectly reasonable to believe that not all dogs can digest them well. Everything totally depends on the animal, IMO. I can't even digest corn that well, tbh. I gave my dogs corn on the cob (leftover) once to gnaw on and it definitely came out the way it went in, However, digestible or not, a lot of dogs do seem to develop sensitivities to some grains, (or any filler for that matter), so it would lead one to think that they're bodies obviously have to be processing it in someway in order for it to cause any kind of negative reaction, but that's just me. Anyway, the only reason why I would personally avoid corn is because of things like GMO's.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

TTs Towel said:


> Well how about it, chief? You got what you asked for and then some. Where are the loads of resources that indicate corn (and other grains) are not digestible?? I dont know why I'm on a "crusade" when I just ask for references for those sort of ridiculous claims. Sorry if I dont bend over and take a bunch of internet forum hooey just because it has been repeated 400 times per day. So, how about it?


Actually the things you repeated ask for have already been covered, even specifically by a thread started not a couple of weeks ago. No one is asking you to accept whatever claims people are making to be true, but it's extremely irritating when everything has been covered before, and it just sparks off another debate.

I am still waiting for the sources of the kajillion other things you have taken the time to question. You have yet to acknowledge questions that have been asked on other threads asking for your sources, or the reasoning behind your opinions. When asked kindly, if you can't come up with a source, you downright ignore it.

And sorry if I don't have any medical journal sources to provide (I am not a vet or a vet tech, or even a student lol, I study Art History, a completely different field), but I know from experience (unfortunately this doesn't make a good argument). Seeing as everyone knows that doesn't make a "valid" argument, of course you're going to come off as somehow winning. The truth is, however, that many dogs do better on a grain free diet, or a high protein diet. I've never heard of a dog thriving off a grain based diet, period. So unless YOU can provide sources showing that dogs THRIVE from such a diet, I find your claims as invalid as anyone else's here.

I've seen what a grain free/high protein diet can do for dogs based off of my own dogs, my customers' dogs, and on this forum. That's "proof" enough for me that a grain based diet does not need to be defended. No one here claimed that grain free is always better.

You can't ask people to provide "sources" for their opinions that are based on experiences. I stay away from grain free because I've always had better results on grain free foods. Does that mean that this holds true for ALL dogs? Of course not.

Your posts add nothing important to forum discussions, I honestly think you get a kick out of getting people fired up.


----------



## Emmett (Feb 9, 2013)

taquitos said:


> Your posts add nothing important to forum discussions, I honestly think you get a kick out of getting people fired up.


I have a problem with this. I can't speak to other posts from TT Towels, but I can say that the posts on this thread did add to the discussion.

The fact is many who trumpet GF cite corn, specifically, as being indigestible to dogs. This however is NOT accurate as studies have shown. These same studies do not conclude that corn is nutritionally appropriate for dogs, just that they can eat it. I can eat Cheetos, doesn't mean I should. 

All my dogs eat GF and Raw and I strongly believe that these two options are the most nutritionally sound approaches to feeding the vast majority of dogs, but the science just isn't out there right now to definitively support this opinion. The problem I see with many GF advocates is that they state their opinion as fact and make claims that have not been scientifically validated. Some acknowledge this, but many times at petfood boutiques, at dog events, in blogs and even on this forum GF supporters make their opinion seem like something _more_ than just that, an opinion.


----------



## taquitos (Oct 18, 2012)

Emmett said:


> I have a problem with this. I can't speak to other posts from TT Towels, but I can say that the posts on this thread did add to the discussion.
> 
> The fact is many who trumpet GF cite corn, specifically, as being indigestible to dogs. This however is NOT accurate as studies have shown. These same studies do not conclude that corn is nutritionally appropriate for dogs, just that they can eat it. I can eat Cheetos, doesn't mean I should.
> 
> All my dogs eat GF and Raw and I strongly believe that these two options are the most nutritionally sound approaches to feeding the vast majority of dogs, but the science just isn't out there right now to definitively support this opinion. The problem I see with many GF advocates is that they state their opinion as fact and make claims that have not been scientifically validated. Some acknowledge this, but many times at petfood boutiques, at dog events, in blogs and even on this forum GF supporters make their opinion seem like something _more_ than just that, an opinion.


Unfortunately this is the first time TTs Towel have provided anything more than "read any vet textbook", but you're right. I will take what I said regarding him always not contributing anything important.

We can eat corn, but it doesn't mean it provides much nutritional value. The only study I have seen that has proven that dogs CAN digest grains/corn is a study that was discussed at length on this forum here.

I do agree with the issue that many people state their opinions as fact... but don't most people do this in general, not even with nutrition? That, and I am assuming this point was just to contribute to the thread, not specifically directed at my comment, but I have never said what I have gained from my experience is fact. TTs Towel often enjoys watching people struggle to justify their opinions (by asking for cold, hard facts, which is not appropriate for an opinion anyway), despite the general consensus of better dog health on certain types of diets.

But you're right. Definitely not enough research done regarding dog nutrition in general. I do what I believe is good for my dogs, and I have seen all dogs that I have switched to raw/grain free doing so much better, so it's just my preference.


----------



## TTs Towel (May 22, 2012)

taquitos said:


> Actually the things you repeated ask for have already been covered, even specifically by a thread started not a couple of weeks ago. *Yes, and nobody could back it up with any real sources then either. It appears nothing has changed in the last couple of weeks. *
> 
> I am still waiting for the sources of the kajillion other things you have taken the time to question.
> *I'm not sure if you know how this works. This is a very simple logical fallacy that is taught at a very early age. The burden of proof is always on the person making the assertion or proposition. Asking for proof from the person who questions it is wrong and is usually referred to as "argumentum ad ignoratium" (shifting the burden of proof). All I did was question what was claimed and still came out and provided proof anyway *
> ...


PS: I never request that anyone justify an opinion. They're always entitled to have that.


----------



## seaboxador (Sep 23, 2012)

"A lot of vets push those brands. I honestly just wouldn't take nutritional advice from a vet. All those companies fund vet schools and those are the brands that they sell at many vet offices."

When you're able to show independent double blind studies that show what you're saying actually matters then I'll take the word of some guy on the internet over a highly trained and educated vet professional.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Do they have independent double blind studies proving that kibble is better than fresh food? Just wondering. Can't say I've ever seen one but it's not like I see studies every day.


----------



## Benjismom (May 19, 2013)

My vet recommended Hills Ideal balance for my dog or Royal Canin. She gave me a long sermon on why she believed in these foods and to her credit, Hills has had no recalls and they have a tight control over there food and manufacturer.I do respect her opinion. The problem for me was when I went to purchase the Hills Ideal Balance something in me could not buy it. I was paying nearly $18.00 for bag of food and this was $9.99 on sale. I believe at times (not always) but the old saying "you can get what you pay for." it did not sit well with me. I was feeding NV Instinct rotation. His last bag was Duck which he did well on but was gaining weight. He needs to loose a few pounds only about 3 pounds at this point. Well the fat in this is still 18% or 15% so it made no sense to purchase this food. I tried CORE wellness which everyone RAVES about, and he vomited. I cannot trust a vet, personally it is not "one size fits all." It all depends on the dog. I have a Bichon Frise who is 4 years old.


----------

