# best grocery store kibble for adult dog?



## Kyi (Jul 6, 2011)

Ok, I am just a normal dog owner. I am young and work and have bills to pay, so I'm not going to buy my dog gourmet meals that are better than what I typically eat. I know the raw diet is "in" right now, but I am okay with feeding my dog kibble. I'm not here looking for a lecture on how horrible it is for my dog and all the preservatives etc, gluten free pretentious dietary restrictions, I just want a decent kibble that is affordable. 

I used to buy him Iams, but now I am feeding him Purina One. I occasionally feed him dinner scraps as a treat, which usually consists of cooked white rice mixed with random meat bits, sometimes mixed with a bit of dog food. I also feed him a raw egg every now and then, but other than that, it's pretty much just dried dog food. I MAY buy a pet store brand, if its not that much more expensive, but otherwise, I think he seems pretty happy with whatever I give him.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

I've had two dogs that did very well on Purina One and one that got a chronically dry coat. I switched both my dogs to Chicken Soup for the Dog Lovers Soul (stupid name for a decent kibble) and both are doing well on it. It's about the same price as Purina One, but harder to find. I happen to drive past a co-op every day that carries it. Otherwise, it's a 50-mile drive to the next-nearest source. Still, many dogs do well on Purina One. 

BTW, be cautious about pre-qualifying the types of responses you'll accept on an open forum. When you post a question (and your topic title sounded like a question) or an opinion, folks may respond with something you don't want to hear. You don't have to follow the advice, but you don't get to filter it from being posted.


----------



## oldhounddog (May 31, 2010)

If your dogs are doing well on purina one you can use that as a rotation food with other brands that are in your price range and still good quality.

RonE gave you good advice on Chicken soup brand , another good brand in the same price range would be Diamond Naturals brand.

The key is how are your dogs doing on a given food ,if good, stick with what you know is working well. 

As far as grocery store dog food goes I have had bad luck with a store brand and will never do that again..........
Diamond Naturals is what I am feeding now.

Best , oldhounddog


----------



## OliveSheprador (Jul 14, 2011)

My advice is just to go to the grocery store and start reading labels. There's lots of foods there that surprised me with their ingredients - but I had never heard of the brand.

Try to at least choose something with a meat source as the first ingredient, and if you can find one that also doesn't contain wheat, corn, or soy, that's even better.

FYI, I am young and and work and have bills to pay, too ($650/month student loan payments, too!)...... but my dog & 2 cats still get the best I can afford, which is some high-quality stuff (Blue Buffalo Wilderness & Wellness CORE). If it means I live without a few "extras" like a frappuchino every day or a membership to a gym, I'm willing to make that sacrifice. I didn't _have_ to get a dog or 2 cats.

"gluten free pretentious dietary restrictions" to the dog owner who has a dog with food allergies that could be real offensive. SORRY - but like some people, dogs have them, too. 

And, many here agree that dogs are meat-eating animals that should have more meat protein in their diet than carbs or plant protein. It's not pretentious - it's the biology of the animal.


----------



## Fuzzy Pants (Jul 31, 2010)

The only grocery store brand I'd be willing to feed my pup would be Castor & Pollux which is sold at the Whole Foods Market. Right now I feed BB kibble topped with just a spoonful of another premium canned food or plain old canned tuna mixed in even though money is tight (one income and I'm in school though luckily have a scholarship).

You'd be surprised at how affordable some premium 4&5 star foods are. If there is a TSC near you you can find TOTW or 4Health which are good foods and usually cheaper than the over-priced grocery store brands. Also, read labels not just for the ingredients but also the serving size. You might think a premium kibble is more expensive but then if you compare serving sizes you usually feed much less of the premium kibble which then works out to it costing the same or less as the lower quality kibble that you have to feed more of.


----------



## Porphyria (Jul 18, 2011)

One of the best "grocery store" brands is Costco's Kirkland brand. I don't know if you shop at Costco or not, but that brand is much better than the foods you'll typically find at the grocery store.


----------



## sawsall (Jun 22, 2011)

Costco kirkland brand as has been said. I have my 3 month on the puppy formula right now. That one is only $13 for a 20 pound bag. The adult stuff is only $28 cdn(I believe) for a 40 pound bag. I don't know any other food of similar quality remotely close to that price point.

Here is a review of it:
http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-reviews/kirkland-signature-dog-food/

You can search around that site, they have similar write up's on tons of different foods. You'll notice that most typical grovery store brands are really bad, only 1 star rating..


----------



## Poly (Sep 19, 2007)

Nothing really to add here. Just make sure that whatever you get meets the AAFCO requirements for dog food. That's a minimum standard based on scientifically estabished norms. It means the food meets the minimum daily requirement for a complete diet and that your dog won't get any _known deficiency diseases_ if you use it as the sole source of food. 

I'm not going to recommend a brand. Just read the labels - the AAFCO compliance will be on there somewhere.

Then watch your dog response to the food. If he seems to like it and isn't showing any obvious signs that the food doesn't agree with him, you're probably OK.

I'm not saying that this will result in giving the "best" food to your dog. Although there is a lot of hype in the dog food world, to at least some extent you do get what you pay for. The more expensive specialty brands are usually better in some sense than grocery store or big-box kibble.


----------



## Kyi (Jul 6, 2011)

Thanks guys. I do not shop at Costco and don't think there is one near me, but if I ever do I will pick up some of the Kirkland. I may try out Whole Foods or the other two pet store brands, since there is a Petco near my grocery store, but like I said, if its a lot more expensive I will probably skip it. As for the ingredient labels, I'm not really sure what to be looking for. I want meat as my first ingredient and no corn stuff right? I read the back of my Purina One label... I don't know what half the stuff is after the first 10 or so.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Kyi said:


> Thanks guys. I do not shop at Costco and don't think there is one near me, but if I ever do I will pick up some of the Kirkland. I may try out Whole Foods or the other two pet store brands, since there is a Petco near my grocery store, but like I said, if its a lot more expensive I will probably skip it. As for the ingredient labels, I'm not really sure what to be looking for. I want meat as my first ingredient and no corn stuff right? I read the back of my Purina One label... I don't know what half the stuff is after the first 10 or so.


Here's a really awesome website that could help you out: Dog Food Advisor

As for a short list of things to avoid: You're right, you don't want food with corn as one of the top ingredients. You also want to avoid by-products, as they're basically slaughterhouse waste. 

I understand being on a restricted budget, as I was a full-time graduate student for two years and just graduated. However, diet is VERY important to a dog's overall health and longevity. Feeding your dog Iam's every day is like you eating McDonald's every day - it has tons of filler and doesn't meet many of their dietary needs. It can affect their coat quality, dental health and overall energy levels. It may seem "pretentious" to feed your dog a more expensive brand, but researching and feeding a quality food is actually a mark of responsible pet ownership. I'm glad your'e asking these questions, because we all had to start somewhere  I used to feed Science Diet and think it was great. Imagine my surprise when I learned that it's actually a terrible food! 

Check out that website, find the food you're feeding and scroll down to the review - it'll tell you what's good, what's bad and why. Learning how to read a label is the best place to start


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

there are some decent gorcery store foods depending on where you shop, Walmart for example as Actr1um Holistic which is quite good really, Loblaws has PC Nutrition 1st which is also very good, Cosco brand is exellent. it depends on what is available in your area. 

the main things to look for is, the first ingredient should be a named meat source(IE not "meat" or "poultry") preferably a meal(IE Chicken Meal) corn and wheat should be minimal to none. watch out for split ingredients, often times bad ingredents like corn and wheat are split on the lable to make it appear as though their is not as much in the food, so for example the food may list a meat as the first ingredient but then follow with Corn Gluten meal, Wheat Middlings, whole grain corn, Wheat Flour etc..but when you add them together, the first 2 ingredients are actually Corn and Wheat, and the meat is somewhere down the list.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Miss Bugs said:


> there are some decent gorcery store foods depending on where you shop, Walmart for example as Actr1um Holistic which is quite good really, Loblaws has PC Nutrition 1st which is also very good, Cosco brand is exellent. it depends on what is available in your area.
> 
> the main things to look for is, the first ingredient should be a named meat source(IE not "meat" or "poultry") *preferably a meal(IE Chicken Meal) *corn and wheat should be minimal to none. watch out for split ingredients, often times bad ingredents like corn and wheat are split on the lable to make it appear as though their is not as much in the food, so for example the food may list a meat as the first ingredient but then follow with Corn Gluten meal, Wheat Middlings, whole grain corn, Wheat Flour etc..but when you add them together, the first 2 ingredients are actually Corn and Wheat, and the meat is somewhere down the list.


My bold emphasis: There's a debate out there about the benefits of "meals" in dog foods. They're condensed, so they have much less water weight than regular meats like deboned chicken, deboned turkey or deboned fish. However, meals are not FDA approved for human consumption, nor are they monitored in order to meet certain health standards. Therefore, many "meals" are not high quality and are made as cheaply as possible in order to cut costs for the company. I prefer my first ingredient to be a human quality food that is FDA regulated and not be a "meal".


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Don't pay attention to the ingredients after the top 5 (except for artificial colors or chemical preservatives like ethoxyquin or BHA/BHT--definitely avoid those). Unless your dog has an allergy they really don't mean much.

I don't really agree that AAFCO certification means much. All they mean is that your dog won't die of any known deficiencies _for 6 months_, because that's how long the feeding trials are. After that you're on your own. I've seen some terribly unhealthy animals who were fed grocery store/dollar store generic dry food (which was AAFCO certified). Of course you don't want to buy a food that isn't AAFCO certified, but don't count on the certification to find an adequate food.

Purina ONE isn't terrible. Your dog will probably do fine if you keep him on it. There are a lot of better brands you could get for around the same price (already mentioned), but that of course depends on availability in your area. Independently-owned feed stores, boutique pet stores (they look pricey but usually the food prices are the same as anywhere else), and Tractor Supply are usually the best places to look. You can look up the brands' websites and run their store locators.


----------



## TStafford (Dec 23, 2009)

If you have a tractor supply near you you can by 4health. Its a little more than what you are feeding right now, but WAY better. If it wasn't for Porter's allergies he would still be eating that.


And for a while we were feeding 3 animals, taking care of us, paying bills, and paying rent on $800 a month and we still found a way to buy Porter Blue Buffalo. We did it because we're the ones that brought him into our home so we make sure he's as healthy as he can be. If you really want something you can find away to do it.

If you're in Atlanta GA there are a few Tractor Supply stores there. You should look at the foods they have.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Do you have a Tractor Supply near you? They sell brands like Acana, BB, Innova, & the food that I feed, taste of the wild. 

The dog food advisor link that someone above posted is a great site. It also has good info about recent recalls of products.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

dogdragoness said:


> Do you have a Tractor Supply near you? They sell brands like Acana, BB, Innova, & the food that I feed, taste of the wild.


No way! Yours has Acana? Mine doesn't. . .I don't think they have Innova either.

Going with the Sam's Club price of around $40 for 44 pounds of Purina ONE, I can get Diamond Naturals for less ($28.99 for 40 pounds). Most places charge more per pound than Sam's, so looking at that higher price I can also get Chicken Soup and 4Health for the same or less (both for about $34.99 for 35 pounds). TOTW is a bit more (43.99 for 30 pounds), but I feed less of it so it mostly evens out.


----------



## Porphyria (Jul 18, 2011)

I just thought of another option. It's more expensive than Purina One, but it's much cheaper than a lot of other natural foods. It's called Whole Earth Farms; it's Merrick's value brand, and it's got very good ingredients. They sell it at Petco. 

And Fuzzy Pants made a great point about bearing in mind how much of the food your dog will need to eat. If your dog will need to eat twice as much of a cheaper food in order to maintain weight and energy, that's not really saving you any money in the long run. The lower quality foods tend to contain a lot of fillers, which means your dog will need to eat more in order to have adequate nutrition. Higher quality foods are more nutrient rich and your dog won't need to eat as much. My dog's food is expensive, but he weighs 35 lbs. and only needs one cup a day, so each bag lasts me quite a while. For someone on a tight budget, I definitely recommend one of the lower-priced foods that don't contain a lot of fillers (examples mentioned in this thread are Chicken Soup, Diamond Naturals, Castor and Pollux, Kirkland, Whole Earth Farms); I really think that will give you the most bang for your buck. Not to mention it will be better for your dog!


----------



## katielou (Apr 29, 2010)

You do realize that you feed half if not less of a good food than you do a crappy one right? So it rarely works out more expensive.

Purina one for my dogs weight wants me to feed 5 cups a day!!!!!
On the rare day he gets kibble its 1 cup of TOTW or similar.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Some times they carry it, I think it has to do with when I go & which one i go to, depending on the region they are in, i have been into TSCs that didn't have TOTW but had diamond naturals lol lol. The one i went to not to long ago had some Innova but not much of it, i have noticed that they either have Acana or Innova products.

But stores like petco & PETsMART have innova for sure. I don't know if you have a Steinhausers (spelling???) around the GA area? They carry chicken Soup, Acana though their inventory varies by region as well, at least here it does.


----------



## Kyi (Jul 6, 2011)

Actually, I'm not sure how much food I should be feeding my dog. He is about 45 pounds and the foster parent before said she fed him two half scoops a day of Eukenubra (sp?). It doesn't seem like a whole lot of food and I don't want him to be hungry all the time, but I don't want to over feed him either. I do give him treats and table scraps though, so hopefully its enough. There are some feed stores around here... I guess they sell good dog food? I never been to any of them, just thought it was like plant and farm supplies. I will let my dog finish this bag of Purina before I get a new bag though. Or I guess I could mix them together?


----------



## katielou (Apr 29, 2010)

Kyi said:


> Actually, I'm not sure how much food I should be feeding my dog. He is about 45 pounds and the foster parent before said she fed him two half scoops a day of Eukenubra (sp?). It doesn't seem like a whole lot of food and I don't want him to be hungry all the time, but I don't want to over feed him either. I do give him treats and table scraps though, so hopefully its enough. There are some feed stores around here... I guess they sell good dog food? I never been to any of them, just thought it was like plant and farm supplies. I will let my dog finish this bag of Purina before I get a new bag though. Or I guess I could mix them together?


Yep mix and ween him over for about a week or 2.


----------



## TStafford (Dec 23, 2009)

katielou said:


> Yep mix and ween him over for about a week or 2.


Do this! I didn't one when I swapped foods and Porter had the worst gas, upset tummy, and runny poo ever. 

And to add to another post, your dog will eat less on better food. My dog (he's 103 lbs) was eating around 6 cups a day on Iams. On the better foods (Blue and 4health) he eats 4 cups a day, sometimes less.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

dogdragoness said:


> Do you have a Tractor Supply near you? They sell brands like Acana, BB, Innova, & the food that I feed, taste of the wild.
> 
> .


wow, outside of TOTW, the only decent quality food ours has is Blue


----------



## sawsall (Jun 22, 2011)

Kyi said:


> Thanks guys. I do not shop at Costco and don't think there is one near me, but if I ever do I will pick up some of the Kirkland. I may try out Whole Foods or the other two pet store brands, since there is a Petco near my grocery store, but like I said, if its a lot more expensive I will probably skip it. As for the ingredient labels, I'm not really sure what to be looking for. I want meat as my first ingredient and no corn stuff right? I read the back of my Purina One label... I don't know what half the stuff is after the first 10 or so.


If you are in Atlanta, Georgia there are plenty of Costco stores in that area. Go to costco.com and you can search for locations.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

sawsall said:


> If you are in Atlanta, Georgia there are plenty of Costco stores in that area. Go to costco.com and you can search for locations.


Even if there are plenty of locations, if he's not going to buy much there I don't think it'll justify the $50 membership fee. With just one dog he's not going to save that much on dog food. Now I think I could get my money's worth even just going once or twice a year to stock up. Too bad I can't try the food first--I wouldn't want to buy 6 months worth of food and find out it doesn't agree with my pets.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

katielou said:


> You do realize that you feed half if not less of a good food than you do a crappy one right? So it rarely works out more expensive.
> 
> Purina one for my dogs weight wants me to feed 5 cups a day!!!!!
> On the rare day he gets kibble its 1 cup of TOTW or similar.


I know very few people who follow the feeding recommendations on the bag, and I doubt that TOTW contains 5 times the nutritional value of Purina One.


----------



## BeyondBlessed (Jan 25, 2011)

I think it depends on which grocery store you shop at. The Fresh Market sells Wellness and Schnucks has a couple of varieties of it too. Our Walmart sells Newman's Own which is a good food and Natural Life which is a fair food, but not good for the price compared to what you can get at a pet store. The Walmart on the highway that I stop by sometimes on my way home from work doesn't carry either of these brands, so it all depends on your store. 

I like to feed my dog the best I can afford too. Right now Bo's getting canned TOTW in the morning and Orijen kibble in the evening. I buy all the varieties of the canned food and all of the Orijen varieties except the original, which has caused some problems, and I buy the small bags so I can rotate him around. He loves getting something new, or at least something he doesn't remember. The TOTW can be found a Rural King and a number of odd places, while I get the Orijen from a pet store. 

As far as a good cheap food, I have both a coworker and neighbor that feed Pro Pac. The reviews for it are mixed. It has chicken meal as the first ingredient and corn as the second. Based on it's protein content and lack of boosters they say it has a generous amount of meat, and it's cheap. I just like to feed my dog the best, but I'd probably give it a shot if it came to it.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

I highly recommend 4health for your situation. It's decent quality and cheap. As others have mentioned you can get it at Tractor Supply. 

I would also recommend Whole Earth Farms, which is Merrick's value line. I believe they started selling it at either Petco or Petsmart recently. Before that I bought it online because it was very affordable and they offered free shipping from their website. I'm not sure if it's more expensive now at the chain stores, but it's worth giving it a look to maybe add to a rotation of different affordable foods.

If you ever have a month where you can afford to go a tad more expensive, I really recommend Taste of the Wild, which is also at TSC. I'm also a college student and it's the cheapest food I've found that doesn't give my dog the itchies. It's grain free and really a bargain for what it is.

Finally, I'm not in love with this food but if you have to buy from a grocery store, I recommend Purina One Beyond. It's overpriced for what it is, but around here it's the absolute best you can get at a place like Wal-Mart.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

I started my dog on Purina One when I got him from the humane society (eating Science Diet there, but since that is a much crap at Purina AND far pricier...). He ate 3 1/2 cups per day to maintain weight and his coat was crap- dry, shedding etc. Also pooped big poops. Cost about $25-30/bag and needed a bag every 3 weeks.
So I switched (over a week!) to Earthborn Primitive Natural which is one of several grain-free lines they have. Now he eats 2 cups per day, has a shiny coat and very small poops. Cost about $48/bag and need a bag every 6 weeks.

4Health is a fairly good brand for the money, I know a few people who feed it with success. I personally think grain-free is the way to go.

But even if you keep feeding Purina One, which will give the basic nutrients at least and isn't near as bad as the really cheap stuff, you might wanna cut out the table scraps and read some of the threads on treats- especially ones made in China. Table scraps are often very fatty (leftover bits of meat) which is dangerous or they are of no benefit at all (empty calories, like junk food for humans).


----------



## sawsall (Jun 22, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Even if there are plenty of locations, if he's not going to buy much there I don't think it'll justify the $50 membership fee. With just one dog he's not going to save that much on dog food. Now I think I could get my money's worth even just going once or twice a year to stock up. Too bad I can't try the food first--I wouldn't want to buy 6 months worth of food and find out it doesn't agree with my pets.


I don't have a Costco membership, but I know tons of people with one. So I just find out when one of them are making a trip there, and give them the money to purchase the food. Everybody knows somebody with a membership.


----------



## luvntzus (Mar 16, 2007)

You could feed a couple of high quality foods with MUCH better ingredients, that cost the same as Purine ONE. I looked up prices:

Purina ONE 34 lb. $45.99

Taste of the Wild 30 lb. $41.99

Canidae 35 lb. $34.99


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

luvntzus said:


> You could feed a couple of high quality foods with MUCH better ingredients, that cost the same as Purine ONE. I looked up prices:
> 
> Purina ONE 34 lb. $45.99
> 
> ...


 What store was that? Canidae used to cost that much at my feed store but now it's $42.99, so I buy TOTW instead. And Purina ONE costs less than that at Wal-Mart or Sam's Club.


----------



## RonE (Feb 3, 2007)

> Purina ONE 34 lb. $45.99


That must be the Purina One purchased in a jewelry store.

I'd say Purina One the least-offensive kibble that is available just about anywhere. I'd probably be feeding it today, but it wasn't working for Molly.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Huh, those are pettfooddirect's prices. It should be noted that the Canidae is on sale and is normally $41.49 (still less than the ONE, though!). I always said that they inflate the prices of the lower-quality food (as if to punish you for buying your Purina online, lol) and I guess that's a good example.


----------



## luvntzus (Mar 16, 2007)

I got the prices from petfoodirect, which I've found is in line with the prices in stores around here. I think I do have the right price for TOTW. If I HAD to pick a grocery store brand it would be either Pro Plan (Natural Selects line only) or Purina ONE (Beyond only)


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

For the higher quality foods, petfooddirect's prices seem to be about the same as locally. For the lower quality foods, they really seem to jack up the price. I mean $36.99 for 44 pounds of Purina Dog Chow?!? I know for a fact that's about $22 at Sam's Club (because I just bought a bag to donate to the Humane Society). And not much more at Wal-Mart.


----------



## Poly (Sep 19, 2007)

Willowy said:


> Don't pay attention to the ingredients after the top 5 (except for artificial colors or chemical preservatives like ethoxyquin or BHA/BHT--definitely avoid those). Unless your dog has an allergy they really don't mean much..


Actually, you should pay attention to those ingredients if you want to know about the food, and not just from a negative viewpoint. You won't find important nutrients like inulin, acidophilus, or aspergillus among the top five ingredients, nor will you find oils to balance Omega-3 and Omega-6 fatty acids. These aren't covered by minimum standards, but a good dog food should have them. 




Willowy said:


> I don't really agree that AAFCO certification means much. All they mean is that your dog won't die of any known deficiencies _for 6 months_, because that's how long the feeding trials are. After that you're on your own. I've seen some terribly unhealthy animals who were fed grocery store/dollar store generic dry food (which was AAFCO certified).


Since the OP was asking for a minimally acceptable - i.e , inexpensive - dog food, that is the minimum acceptable. I'm pretty sure there isn't any other minimum standard.

And you are slightly incorrect. You are confusing feeding _trials_ with feeding _research_. The research that went into the standards often followed dogs for much longer then six months. 




Willowy said:


> Of course you don't want to buy a food that isn't AAFCO certified, but don't count on the certification to find an adequate food..


Obviously. Minimum standards don't work that way.


----------



## Abbylynn (Jul 7, 2011)

TStafford said:


> Do this! I didn't one when I swapped foods and Porter had the worst gas, upset tummy, and runny poo ever.
> 
> And to add to another post, your dog will eat less on better food. My dog (he's 103 lbs) was eating around 6 cups a day on Iams. On the better foods (Blue and 4health) he eats 4 cups a day, sometimes less.


Love the 4health from tractor supply. Good food. Was rated 4 star on the dog food advisor web. I searched for months for a good and affordable food. I am supplying food for 5 dogs. The dogs seem so much healthier ( instead of the the 1 star rated worst food on the market I was feeding them. Poor dogs! ) I mixed the 4health with the other food gradually over a two week period. The 4health lamb has the antioxidants where as the chicken formula does not. Both are still good foods. No imported ingredients.


----------



## BlueChaos (Mar 29, 2010)

Feed stores generally have much better selection then grocery stores. 

Some brands to look into

-Healthwise
-Whole Earth Farms
-4Health
-Premium Edge
-Diamond Naturals
-Canidae

just go to manufacturers website, most of them have store locators.


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

We do Taste of the Wild. We pay almost 1000 in rent every month and 400+ in students loans a month and manage just fine. 

As others have said already, if you get a better food, you don't need to feed the dog as much. We pay a little more for TOTW but we don't need to feed them nearly as much as we would if it were some grocery store brand full of wheat and corn.


----------



## Fuzzybutts (Jul 21, 2011)

Cant help you much on brand... I am one of those people with a dog that has "all the preservatives etc, gluten free pretentious dietary restrictions" LOL Get a dog with colitus (It is like IBS for dogs. Bloody, mucus covered diarrhea, lethargy, groaning from cramps, etc) and you will gladly pay more or spend the money on weekly visits from stanley steamer! NOT fun - or cost efficient!

I will say that the amount that is fed of a really good food may seem unbelievably small! That is where things even out a bit. Sure I pay $48 for 28 pounds of food... but that bag lasts me a month (you dont want to keep good foods around much longer than that or the fats in them (GOOD fats!) can go bad and the vitamin content starts declining). I am feeding 2 dogs for less than $2 a day!

You get a cheap food... you feed twice as much. SO... are TWO bags of it cheaper than one bag of a better food? Gotta do some rather difficult unit pricing based on feeding amounts to really figure it out!


----------



## Daenerys (Jul 30, 2011)

HerdersForMe said:


> We do Taste of the Wild. We pay almost 1000 in rent every month and 400+ in students loans a month and manage just fine.


Ok I just wanted to say this statement seemed a bit rude. The amount you pay monthly doesn't necessarily mean anything...what matters is income/outcome ratio, or what you have left over after bills to spend on things like dog food and groceries and whatnot. For all you know she only has $100 per month to work with for food for everyone and she could have a cat too.


----------



## Blue_Heeler (Jul 31, 2011)

I run into this at work ALL the time (lower income area, we sell a LOT of Beneful/Dog Chow/Pedigree). On one hand, it's YOUR money, YOUR dog, YOUR decision. I refuse to spend someone else's money for them or tell them that the food they pick out is terrible. It might be all they can afford and it's better then the dog eating McDonald's leftovers. The food in that dog food bag is nutritionally complete for dogs (per the AAFCO statement). Is it the best? No. But there are worse fate's then a dog "doomed" to eat Purina One for the rest of it's life. If a customer asked me where the Purina One was, I'd take them over, which formula do you need, need help getting that to the front, need any treats, have a nice day. IF they ask about the quality of the food, are there better foods, is this a good food, etc......it is considered a "good" food because it meets the MINIMUM nutritional standards for that dog. Then I'd go into how much do you want to spend, what are you comfortable feeding (Some people have no idea what by products are. And some just don't care. Same with corn), etc. I don't look down on anyone for buying that quality of food for their dogs. Most of my customers genuinely LOVE their dogs and think those are great foods. Their dogs see the vet, get groomed, are generally well taken care of...who am I to stand there and tell them they're buying the "wrong" food?

As far as lower cost, decent quality food...depends on what you consider good quality and what you consider low cost. Costco Kirkland's is really good food. I got a membership JUST to buy the lamb and rice until my ex husband's dogs started having issues with it. TSC has 4health, Diamond Naturals and TOTW..Nutro Natural Choice is decent but at the high end of "low cost."


----------



## OliveSheprador (Jul 14, 2011)

Daenerys said:


> Ok I just wanted to say this statement seemed a bit rude. The amount you pay monthly doesn't necessarily mean anything...what matters is income/outcome ratio, or what you have left over after bills to spend on things like dog food and groceries and whatnot. For all you know she only has $100 per month to work with for food for everyone and she could have a cat too.


This is true - but - I would feel I couldn't afford a dog if all I had left over at the end was $100. My groceries per month cost at least twice this. Everyone's different. But, there are lot of factors to pay for at the end of the day besides just your bills!


----------



## Greater Swiss (Jun 7, 2011)

Other people have mentioned this in a variety of ways, but I'll reiterate: Check the label both for ingredients and nutrients AND for the amounts to feed. Higher quality often means less food per day which means in the long run it may mean a similar cost. Also, if you see a bag of "decent" food for say 30 bucks, it might be worth the extra $5 to get a superior food....of course if it ends up being $10 or $20 more...yeah, its starting to break the bank. Also consider the vet savings with a good quality food, healthier dog can help mean less vet visits. We are pretty broke but are trying to keep a good quality food to help avoid things like hip problems in the future, and since ours is a large breed we're very conscious of this. Haven't asked for reviews of this food on the forum yet though....I'd be interested in the input though, should do that soon. 
Good luck!


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

Daenerys said:


> Ok I just wanted to say this statement seemed a bit rude. The amount you pay monthly doesn't necessarily mean anything...what matters is income/outcome ratio, or what you have left over after bills to spend on things like dog food and groceries and whatnot. For all you know she only has $100 per month to work with for food for everyone and she could have a cat too.


My point was you can get a high quality food without breaking the bank. 

I usually make the assumption if someone bothered getting the dog they have a certain amount to spend on food a month. A good high quality dog food is usually not much more, if not the same, as the lesser quality brands.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

OliveSheprador said:


> This is true - but - I would feel I couldn't afford a dog if all I had left over at the end was $100. My groceries per month cost at least twice this. Everyone's different. But, there are lot of factors to pay for at the end of the day besides just your bills!


Yeah...I've been exactly there and I got through feeding 4health and was lucky enough that Sydney didn't have any medical problems during this time. I'm just not willing to judge someone else on this matter. A person who could only afford a lower-mid quality food and put medical emergency expenses on a credit card or something is a better dog owner IMO than someone who has the money, doesn't research food and doesn't bother giving the dog medical care or grooming because they don't think it's necessary or think it's "just a dog." It's not about how much money you have. It's about the choices you make with the resources you have available to you.


----------



## Mr. V (Jan 28, 2010)

Unfortunately, a lot of people tend to assume that the pet foods labeled as premium (which actually means nothing by the way, law says any pet food can label themselves premium) are somehow packed with way more energy per cup of kibble when compared to some of the other brands commonly abused around these parts. Taste of the Wild high prarie formula, for instance, has 370kcal/cup. Purina ONE chicken and rice has 383kcal/cup. 

Also, keep in mind that you can't just look at ingredients if you want to evaluate a food. You have to look at the entire bag. Foods labeled as a formula/dinner/entree/etc... are required by law to contained 25% of that meat that they advertise on the bag (Ex: chicken dinner). Foods labeled as "with" are only required to contain 3% of that advertised meat. (Ex: XXXX with lamb). Flavors are only required to be recognizable by detection dogs. (Ex: Chicken Flavor)

If you think those companies (Purina, TOTW, whoever) are gonna go any bit over that 25% and use up material they dont have to you're kidding yourself.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I've never seen dry food labeled "entree", "dinner", "with", or anything like that. I thought that was just canned food. But companies do what their customers want. If their customers want 75% meat content dry food, and are willing to pay for it, the company will do it. I don't believe they'd stick to the bare minimum if their customers wanted something else. That would be poor business practice.

My dogs do need less of TOTW than of 4Health, even though the kcals are similar. Maybe it's more digestible?


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

Mr. V said:


> Unfortunately, a lot of people tend to assume that the pet foods labeled as premium (which actually means nothing by the way, law says any pet food can label themselves premium) are somehow packed with way more energy per cup of kibble when compared to some of the other brands commonly abused around these parts. Taste of the Wild high prarie formula, for instance, has 370kcal/cup. Purina ONE chicken and rice has 383kcal/cup.
> 
> Also, keep in mind that you can't just look at ingredients if you want to evaluate a food. You have to look at the entire bag. Foods labeled as a formula/dinner/entree/etc... are required by law to contained 25% of that meat that they advertise on the bag (Ex: chicken dinner). Foods labeled as "with" are only required to contain 3% of that advertised meat. (Ex: XXXX with lamb). Flavors are only required to be recognizable by detection dogs. (Ex: Chicken Flavor)
> 
> If you think those companies (Purina, TOTW, whoever) are gonna go any bit over that 25% and use up material they dont have to you're kidding yourself.


Not all calories are equal. You can't just look at the calorie count in food. By that logic eating 2000 calories of McDonald's every day would be no different than eating 2000 calories of any other food.

You have to look at the ingredients list. My dogs also need less food on TOTW. It has higher quality ingredients.

Purina has like 20+ different dog foods brands of varying quality. Some of them are reasonable and some are atrocious. Some of their food has corn as the first ingredient...


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

HerdersForMe said:


> Not all calories are equal. You can't just look at the calorie count in food. By that logic eating 2000 calories of McDonald's every day would be no different than eating 2000 calories of any other food.


It would be exactly the same as far as weight gain or loss goes. You would most likely be malnourished, but you wouldn't be fat either if you ate only the calories you need, even if those calories are junk food.


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

kafkabeetle said:


> It would be exactly the same as far as weight gain or loss goes. You would most likely be malnourished, but you wouldn't be fat either if you ate only the calories you need, even if those calories are junk food.


On the surface, ignoring all the side effects a horrible diet gives you, yes theoretically your weight would remain the same. Unfortunately it isn't that simple and a horrible diet has other side effects that do effect your weight and fat levels.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

kafkabeetle said:


> It would be exactly the same as far as weight gain or loss goes. You would most likely be malnourished, but you wouldn't be fat either if you ate only the calories you need, even if those calories are junk food.


I don't know. . .why would my dogs gain weight on TOTW if they're getting the same number of calories? I had to cut way back on their intake.


----------



## Mr. V (Jan 28, 2010)

Willowy said:


> I've never seen dry food labeled "entree", "dinner", "with", or anything like that. I thought that was just canned food. But companies do what their customers want. If their customers want 75% meat content dry food, and are willing to pay for it, the company will do it. I don't believe they'd stick to the bare minimum if their customers wanted something else. That would be poor business practice.
> 
> My dogs do need less of TOTW than of 4Health, even though the kcals are similar. Maybe it's more digestible?


Sorry, I forgot to include "formula" in my response. That term falls under the same umbrella as the "dinner/entree" rule = 25%. 

Why is it that people always try to relate dog foods they don't approve of to McDonalds? That is a terrible analogy - Clearly the consumption of fried food/grease filled burgers (that are teaming with fat) by people is not comparable to a dog eating something like Purina. This is just internet hooey that has gotten tossed around by people who want to scare the uninformed into going with the food they think is the best. I don't doubt that there may be some better ingredients in a garden variety "premium" product when compared to that of Purina one. But comparing it to fast food joints brings a phrase to mind that involves a couple of different types of fruit. We can grossly see the effects of eating McDonald's every day and the abnormalities it causes are picked up by physicians - if this were similar to the "lesser foods" as they've been labeled then why can so many dogs thrive on this food?

And, just to be clear, if someone wants to feed a totw or whatever I am all for it. I just don't like the idea of guilt tripping them into it by (pretty much) telling them their food is poison.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

Willowy said:


> I don't know. . .why would my dogs gain weight on TOTW if they're getting the same number of calories? I had to cut way back on their intake.


I can't really answer that because I honestly don't know. But even if it was true that they needed less because it was more digestible, it would work in the opposite of the McDonalds analogy. The assumption is that you gain more (unhealthy) weight on junk food like McDonalds, and less on healthy food, but with dog food you gain more per calorie on good food than bad. 

I agree that the McDonalds analogy is hooey and rhetoric I don't appreciate. But then I think it's annoying that McDonalds itself gets demonized so much, too. It's not the only cheap junk food out there, no one forced you to patronize them, and they DO offer things like salads, apples and parfaits which are decent if not nutritious. The fact is they just don't sell as well as the burgers and fries and that's not McDonalds' fault. But that is of course another matter entirely.


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

Mr. V said:


> Why is it that people always try to relate dog foods they don't approve of to McDonalds?


I wasn't comparing _any _dog food to McDonalds...I was making a point that not all calories are equal. It was a very good analogy for the point I was making. You can't just look at calories. You have to look at the ingredients and where the calories are coming from. I wouldn't feed my dog a food where the first ingredient is corn...



Mr. V said:


> I just don't like the idea of guilt tripping them into it by (pretty much) telling them their food is poison.


You're taking things way out of context again. People come here asking for advice on dog food. We're giving them our advice. The advice was there are some good dog foods out there that won't break the bank. You just have to read the ingredients before buying because there are some things out there that have lesser ingredients but really don't cost much less.


----------



## Mr. V (Jan 28, 2010)

Herders, I would have used your name or quoted you if I wanted to address you and your responses directly. You mentioned Mcdonalds and it reminded me of how many thousands of times here that I see it compared to dog foods that aren't "5 star."

Stay a while and keep your eyes open, you'll find that what I said is not out of context in these parts.

Oh yea, one more thing. Do you think that you have to look at the ingredients when comparing dog foods? Not sure...


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Mr. V said:


> Herders, I would have used your name or quoted you if I wanted to address you and your responses directly. You mentioned Mcdonalds and it reminded me of how many thousands of times here that I see it compared to dog foods that aren't "5 star."
> 
> Stay a while and keep your eyes open, you'll find that what I said is not out of context in these parts.
> 
> Oh yea, one more thing. Do you think that you have to look at the ingredients when comparing dog foods? Not sure...


Unless that statement is supposed to be facetious and I missed it... Why wouldn't you look at ingredients when comparing dog foods?

Like someone else said, kibble isn't labeled as "dinner" or "entre", those are wet foods. I don't even see "formula" on that many bags.



Blue_Heeler said:


> I don't look down on anyone for buying that quality of food for their dogs. Most of my customers genuinely LOVE their dogs and *think those are great foods*. Their dogs see the vet, get groomed, are generally well taken care of...who am I to stand there and tell them they're buying the "wrong" food?



My emphasis. They do THINK those are great foods, which is why you, as an educated employee, should attempt to share your knowledge with other people. You don't need to approach it all snooty with someone, like "oh, that's terrible food, why do you buy that?". There are LOTS of ways to approach people about what they're feeding. You can even ask "may I ask what you like so much about Iams/Beneful/Pedigree?" and see if you can share some of your information with them so that they're at least making a more informed decision. If, at the end of the day, they still buy Pedigree, then that's fine. But if you grab their interest and they like what you're saying, then you're doing both them and their dogs a service by sharing information.


----------



## Mr. V (Jan 28, 2010)

Mickle, Every single TOTW product is labeled as a formula. http://www.tasteofthewildpetfood.com/products/

Dont feel like looking up more but that's a start. On a side note about canned food. The law states that canned food may contained up to 75% water unless it is accompanied by a phrase like "in sauce" or "with gravy" etc... and in that case it can contain up to 86% water.

And, yes, I was just kidding around b/c she repeated it so many times.


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

Mr. V said:


> Herders, I would have used your name or quoted you if I wanted to address you and your responses directly. You mentioned Mcdonalds and it reminded me of how many thousands of times here that I see it compared to dog foods that aren't "5 star.


Well nobody was doing that in this thread...so I don't know why you brought it up unless it was a direct response to what I said...



Mr. V said:


> Oh yea, one more thing. Do you think that you have to look at the ingredients when comparing dog foods? Not sure...


Umm...yes?


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Mr. V said:


> Mickle, Every single TOTW product is labeled as a formula. http://www.tasteofthewildpetfood.com/products/
> 
> Dont feel like looking up more but that's a start. On a side note about canned food. The law states that canned food may contained up to 75% water unless it is accompanied by a phrase like "in sauce" or "with gravy" etc... and in that case it can contain up to 86% water.
> 
> And, yes, I was just kidding around b/c she repeated it so many times.


Ah, ok 

I'm all for educating people about the kind of food they're feeding. I didn't know anything about dog foods until someone approached me in a store, asked why I was feeding Science Diet and gave me a little schpiel about quality dog food. Interested, I went home, did some research and found out most of what I know today. Lots of people love their animals and want what's best for them, they just don't know what the "best" is, or even what "better" is. 

Also, to me, income is NOT an excuse to feed a dog a poorer quality food. As a graduate student, I fed my dogs $150 in Blue Buffalo every month. I didn't have extra money for coffee or snacks during the day, or that shirt I really wanted, or going out to movies all the time, but my dogs sure as heck got fed a decent dinner every night. It's all about budgeting in order to meet the needs of your dog. My biggest pet peeve about some pet owners is that they can afford the initial adoption or purchasing fee, they can afford the pretty leash and collar and nice bowls and some awesome toys, but as soon as it comes to nutrition, cheap and poor quality dog food it is. IMO, once you know how to "read" a bag of dog food, the ingredients list and other advertising schemes, there is NO excuse to buy Beneful or Pedigree ever again. 

I do use the McDonald's analogy sometimes, because it helps get through to people about what they're feeding. It's not "poison", but if you say "feeding your dog Beneful is like feeding your kid McDonald's every day", it tends to have an impact. And to a degree, it's true - neither your child or dog has any control over the diet you give them. McDonald's can be made to meet "minimum nutrition requirements" as they do serve fruits and veggies, but it's not a healthy diet, just as Beneful meets minimum nutrition requirements, but it's not a healthy diet. The phrase has enough shock value to get through to people that they need to RESEARCH and that's my main goal - I don't want someone to just take me at my word and walk away. I want them to get online, go to some dog food review websites and gain their own knowledge and opinions about dog nutrition.


----------



## jiml (Jun 19, 2008)

Therefore, many "meals" are not high quality and are made as cheaply as possible in order to cut costs for the company. I prefer my first ingredient to be a human quality food that is FDA regulated and not be a "meal".>>>>

that first ing inclusive of water is prob way down on the list when wayer is removed. A lot of the crap fat, gristle, tendons ect in meal while not appetizing in a steak for humans are perfectly fine nutrition wise for a dog.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

jiml said:


> Therefore, many "meals" are not high quality and are made as cheaply as possible in order to cut costs for the company. I prefer my first ingredient to be a human quality food that is FDA regulated and not be a "meal".>>>>
> 
> that first ing inclusive of water is prob way down on the list when wayer is removed. A lot of the crap fat, gristle, tendons ect in meal while not appetizing in a steak for humans are perfectly fine nutrition wise for a dog.


Yay, me too! Lots of people argue that a meat source, such as deboned chicken or fish has more water in it, therefore equating to less meat. However, meal is not monitored at all and who knows what it is allowed to be inclusive of? I want the ingredients in my dog's food to be human grade. I want them monitored, I want them quality controlled. I don't have kids, but if I did, I would surely feed them a diet of nutritional value. I don't know why people think we owe any less to our pets?


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

dmickle1 said:


> Yay, me too! Lots of people argue that a meat source, such as deboned chicken or fish has more water in it, therefore equating to less meat. However, meal is not monitored at all and who knows what it is allowed to be inclusive of? I want the ingredients in my dog's food to be human grade. I want them monitored, I want them quality controlled. I don't have kids, but if I did, I would surely feed them a diet of nutritional value. I don't know why people think we owe any less to our pets?


Because our dogs are not human children. A lot of what goes into meals which isn't considered human grade would be just as nutritious for humans to eat, it's just not appetizing for people to eat. Dogs like to chomp on raw bones and meat and that is very nutritious for them, yet most humans are not going to want to eat that, nor would it be healthy for them. I think the notion that dog food needs to be "human quality" is a fallacy. I'd rather have a larger portion of some sort of meat in my dog's food (regardless of whether it's "human grade" or not) than a tiny amount of human grade meat sprinkled on top of a load of corn or even potatoes.

Btw, the person you quoted was quoting someone else and their comments show that they do NOT agree with the notion that meals are inferior to meats.


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

kafkabeetle said:


> Because our dogs are not human children. A lot of what goes into meals which isn't considered human grade would be just as nutritious for humans to eat, it's just not appetizing for people to eat. Dogs like to chomp on raw bones and meat and that is very nutritious for them, yet most humans are not going to want to eat that, nor would it be healthy for them. I think the notion that dog food needs to be "human quality" is a fallacy. I'd rather have a larger portion of some sort of meat in my dog's food (regardless of whether it's "human grade" or not) than a tiny amount of human grade meat sprinkled on top of a load of corn or even potatoes.
> 
> Btw, the person you quoted was quoting someone else and their comments show that they do NOT agree with the notion that meals are inferior to meats.


You're correct, they do not have to be "human quality" ingredients. But I also don't like ingredients that are a mystery to what they actually are. A good example there is a popular dog food whose fourth or fifth ingredient is "meat and bones" or some such thing.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

HerdersForMe said:


> You're correct, they do not have to be "human quality" ingredients. But I also don't like ingredients that are a mystery to what they actually are. A good example there is a popular dog food whose fourth or fifth ingredient is "meat and bones" or some such thing.


Sure. But that has nothing to do with meat meals vs. plain meats in dog food. I'm not condoning just giving your dog whatever crap. I'm just saying meals have more meat than regular meats and therefore are superior to me as a first or second ingredient in a dog food.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

kafkabeetle said:


> Because our dogs are not human children. A lot of what goes into meals which isn't considered human grade would be just as nutritious for humans to eat, it's just not appetizing for people to eat. Dogs like to chomp on raw bones and meat and that is very nutritious for them, yet most humans are not going to want to eat that, nor would it be healthy for them. I think the notion that dog food needs to be "human quality" is a fallacy. I'd rather have a larger portion of some sort of meat in my dog's food (regardless of whether it's "human grade" or not) than a tiny amount of human grade meat sprinkled on top of a load of corn or even potatoes.
> 
> Btw, the person you quoted was quoting someone else and their comments show that they do NOT agree with the notion that meals are inferior to meats.


ARGH, lost what I typed! The quotes must have been misplaced and I misread that post.

I understand that my dogs can eat things I find unappetizing. My emphasis on human grade is a reflection of my mistrust of the dog food industry as a whole. Since meals and livestock feed corn are not FDA monitored, short cuts and unsanitary handling and storage are often present when combining these ingredients into dog foods. At least, with human grade ingredients that are FDA monitored, I know that the food has been handled properly, stored properly and is sanitary. Since meals and corn (which is mostly livestock feed) are not monitored, many shortcuts can be taken to make them cheaper ingredients to decrease the overall production cost of the dog food. On the other hand, when my food says "deboned salmon", that's exactly what I'm getting.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

dmickle1 said:


> ARGH, lost what I typed! The quotes must have been misplaced and I misread that post.
> 
> I understand that my dogs can eat things I find unappetizing. My emphasis on human grade is a reflection of my mistrust of the dog food industry as a whole. Since meals and livestock feed corn are not FDA monitored, short cuts and unsanitary handling and storage are often present when combining these ingredients into dog foods. At least, with human grade ingredients that are FDA monitored, I know that the food has been handled properly, stored properly and is sanitary. Since meals and corn (which is mostly livestock feed) are not monitored, many shortcuts can be taken to make them cheaper ingredients to decrease the overall production cost of the dog food. On the other hand, when my food says "deboned salmon", that's exactly what I'm getting.


I'm curious what you feed that doesn't contain any sort of food meals. Sounds like with your opinions on the topic you'd be far better off feeding raw. Btw, I don't have any awesome amount of faith in the FDA to keep food perfectly safe.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

kafkabeetle said:


> I'm curious what you feed that doesn't contain any sort of food meals. Sounds like with your opinions on the topic you'd be far better off feeding raw. Btw, I don't have any awesome amount of faith in the FDA to keep food perfectly safe.


Haha, better the FDA than no one at all, but point taken 

I'm actually transitioning to raw right now because of my distaste for dog food manufacturing  We'll see how the boys do on it.


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

There's nothing wrong with the concept of a meal. But when a dog food lacks ANY sort of real meat product I question that company. If I see several meat sources in a dog food I feel a bit more comfortable. 

I avoid where the top five ingredients include: corn, Brewers Rice (and other cheap grains), animal fat, chicken by-product meal (I really question "by-product" meals)

What I look for in the top five: Two to three meat sources at least one being a "real" meat and two to three vegetable sources


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

The USDA regulates animal feed. I'm sure they're just as good at it as the FDA (is that good? Is that bad? ).


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Willowy said:


> The USDA regulates animal feed. I'm sure they're just as good at it as the FDA (is that good? Is that bad? ).


I just don't feel comfortable risking my dog's health if another situation like the P&G scandal of 2007 crops up.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Was it P&G? I thought it was Menu Foods. 

Humans foods have recalls, too. Right now a bunch of people are sick from salmonella in ground turkey. Eating is risky business, it seems.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

dmickle1 said:


> I just don't feel comfortable risking my dog's health if another situation like the P&G scandal of 2007 crops up.


There have been plenty of human food scandals too. Think E. coli in spinach a few years back etc etc. I just think avoiding all non-human grade ingredients gives you a very false sense of security.

haha, Willowy. We posted at the same time.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Was it P&G? I thought it was Menu Foods.
> 
> Humans foods have recalls, too. Right now a bunch of people are sick from salmonella in ground turkey. Eating is risky business, it seems.


I read about that turkey recall just a minute ago! Yes, it seems like we really need to be careful about what we're consuming these days...

ETA: It could be argued that since human grade ingredients are monitored more closely, more recalls are reported, hence making the foods safer overall. Whereas with dog food the monitoring process is much less strict, allowing for more things to fly under the radar.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

Looking at the ingredients in a food is not necessary. As long as your dog is getting enough fat and protein it doesn't matter, unless it is a dog prone to allergies. Dog food gets over discussed and twisted in so many ways. A dog would eat by products if left a dead animal. Sorry, but that's the part they'd go for first. I don't understand people's logic anymore when it comes to dog food. Nutrients are what matter, not ingredients. It's the same with people food.


----------



## katielou (Apr 29, 2010)

My dogs are fed raw. Have been forever.
They get fed some pretty unsanitary stuff and to make it worse their favorite place to eat it is in the dirt in the yard  Good times!
Green tripe anyone?



Hallie said:


> Looking at the ingredients in a food is not necessary. As long as your dog is getting enough fat and protein it doesn't matter, unless it is a dog prone to allergies. Dog food gets over discussed and twisted in so many ways. A dog would eat by products if left a dead animal. Sorry, but that's the part they'd go for first. I don't understand people's logic anymore when it comes to dog food. Nutrients are what matter, not ingredients. It's the same with people food.


This is not true there is plenty of crap you need to read in the ingredients. Numerous thing known to be carcinogenic in dogs, synthetic K3 and more


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Hallie said:


> Looking at the ingredients in a food is not necessary. As long as your dog is getting enough fat and protein it doesn't matter, unless it is a dog prone to allergies. Dog food gets over discussed and twisted in so many ways. A dog would eat by products if left a dead animal. Sorry, but that's the part they'd go for first. I don't understand people's logic anymore when it comes to dog food. Nutrients are what matter, not ingredients. It's the same with people food.


Completely untrue. Your dog food shouldn't contain by-products or corn, even if your dog isn't allergic to them. They're fillers that provide very few nutrients. 

By-products in dog food are very different than a dog eating a dead animal. Do you know what by-products _are_? Chicken by-products include the head and feet of the chicken. Sorry, if Atlas found a dead chicken, I'm pretty sure the LAST thing he would eat would be the feet and beak.


----------



## katielou (Apr 29, 2010)

Abe will go for head a feet first.

The boy loves him some chicken feet and the head has juicy eye balls and brains 

Its all bout moderation.
Would i feed my dog a diet of completely feet and beaks? No 
Would i feed my dog a diet of completely muscle meat? No

Will i feed a happy combination of whatever i can get a hold of? yep!


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

Hallie said:


> Looking at the ingredients in a food is not necessary. As long as your dog is getting enough fat and protein it doesn't matter, unless it is a dog prone to allergies. Dog food gets over discussed and twisted in so many ways. A dog would eat by products if left a dead animal. Sorry, but that's the part they'd go for first. I don't understand people's logic anymore when it comes to dog food. Nutrients are what matter, not ingredients. It's the same with people food.


I don't know about anyone else, but I read the ingredients on my human food as well as my dog's food. I personally try to avoid MSG, artificial sweeteners and a whole slew of other chemicals in the food I eat. Why would I do any less when it comes to the food my dog eats?


----------



## katielou (Apr 29, 2010)

kafkabeetle said:


> I don't know about anyone else, but I read the ingredients on my human food as well as my dog's food. I personally try to avoid MSG, artificial sweeteners and a whole slew of other chemicals in the food I eat. Why would I do any less when it comes to the food my dog eats?


Duh because she's just a dog!


----------



## GottaLuvMutts (Jun 1, 2009)

If cost is an issue and there's a PETCO in your area, check out their PALS reward card. I buy one big bag of dog food quarterly and earn points for doing so. Those points get me 10% off during the next quarter, which I can use on the next bag of food. And THAT bag earns me points for the NEXT quarter. So I save 10% on all food I buy there, as long as I only buy it 4 times per year.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

katielou said:


> Duh because she's just a dog!


Obviously  And dogs can eat anything. 










ANYTHING.


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

Hallie said:


> Looking at the ingredients in a food is not necessary. As long as your dog is getting enough fat and protein it doesn't matter, unless it is a dog prone to allergies. Dog food gets over discussed and twisted in so many ways. A dog would eat by products if left a dead animal. Sorry, but that's the part they'd go for first. I don't understand people's logic anymore when it comes to dog food. Nutrients are what matter, not ingredients. It's the same with people food.


It's _not_ just as simple as getting enough fat or protein. You said it yourself, nutrients are what matter. Nutrients are not just protein, fat and carbs. And nutrients _come from the ingredients!!_ The ingredients do not have to be "human quality" food, but two of the first five ingredients should not be CORN. This is the case in many dog foods. Dogs, like people, need a variety of foods in their diet to get proper nutrition. This means multiple types of meats, veggies, and fruits. 

I could probably find a decent balance of carbs/protein/fat by eating just hamburgers everyday. Would doing this provide proper nutrients? No.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

A lot of really cheap pet foods are made from sawdust ("powdered cellulose"). Sawdust will have enough protein when tested. After all, beavers eat wood. And if that sawdust has the proper amount of fat mixed in, and all the right vitamins and minerals added, it'll keep a dog alive. But is protein from sawdust accessible to dogs? No. What is that dog's long-term health going to be like? Not great, IME. What will that dog look like? Terrible--either morbidly obese or scrawny--with an awful coat, IME.

You can make a sludge of motor oil, sawdust, and leather meet the AAFCO standards for dog food. Doesn't mean anybody wants to feed that to their dog. So yeah, I'm going to read the ingredients.


----------



## Kathyy (Jun 15, 2008)

This calls for a link to how to make the nutritious food Old Boots! Unfortunately the video is no longer online and a scheduled viewing on cable was canceled back last winter but here is a synopsis of the show.
http://redstarcafe.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/a-dogs-breakfast/


----------



## flipgirl (Oct 5, 2007)

Kathyy said:


> This calls for a link to how to make the nutritious food Old Boots! Unfortunately the video is no longer online and a scheduled viewing on cable was canceled back last winter but here is a synopsis of the show.
> http://redstarcafe.wordpress.com/2008/01/25/a-dogs-breakfast/


I was thinking the same thing! But.what if the dog is a.vegetarian? Would you use patent leather?  because they are just.dogs who cares what they eat... they are just animals who you've brought into your home. I'll just feed my dog.my old leather shoes.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

dmickle1 said:


> Completely untrue. Your dog food shouldn't contain by-products or corn, even if your dog isn't allergic to them. They're fillers that provide very few nutrients.
> 
> By-products in dog food are very different than a dog eating a dead animal. Do you know what by-products _are_? Chicken by-products include the head and feet of the chicken. Sorry, if Atlas found a dead chicken, I'm pretty sure the LAST thing he would eat would be the feet and beak.


This has to be the biggest myth out there. Chicken by-product meal is extremely nutritious. In some ways it's more nutritious than chicken meat alone. Your dog is not you, don't treat or pretend like he's a human. If he had a choice he'd chow down on chicken feet, you won't eat them but it's very good for your dog and he'll love it. People have a huge misconception about corn. Pull up some statistical data comparing it to rice, barely, and other "better" grains. The scientific data is what matters. As with anything, you can't believe everything you read in articles and on the internet. That's why you should end up on a scientific journal site when researching affects of corn rather than (insert random dog food site). When you break everything down to a biological level, corn provides more nutrients than most other grains and is a very amazing little grain. 

ps- I'm not asking to get jumped on, please be open minded about the corn statements.



HerdersForMe said:


> It's _not_ just as simple as getting enough fat or protein. You said it yourself, nutrients are what matter. Nutrients are not just protein, fat and carbs. And nutrients _come from the ingredients!!_ The ingredients do not have to be "human quality" food, but two of the first five ingredients should not be CORN. This is the case in many dog foods. Dogs, like people, need a variety of foods in their diet to get proper nutrition. This means multiple types of meats, veggies, and fruits.
> 
> I could probably find a decent balance of carbs/protein/fat by eating just hamburgers everyday. Would doing this provide proper nutrients? No.


 Corn, when balanced with right amount of other ingredients, is OK in dog food. The only way a dog is getting a true variety of of foods is with rotating, because eating the same dog food everyday, even if it has 5 different meats in it, is the same thing everyday. Like you eating a cheeseburger everyday. No variety. No dog food should be just corn, nor should it be mainly corn. A dog's diet shouldn't be mainly potato, rice, barely, etc either (Natural balance LID is mainly potatoes). IMO everyone should rotate, I've been doing it with my own dog for 3 years now.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Hallie said:


> This has to be the biggest myth out there. Chicken by-product meal is extremely nutritious. In some ways it's more nutritious than chicken meat alone. Your dog is not you, don't treat or pretend like he's a human. If he had a choice he'd chow down on chicken feet, you won't eat them but it's very good for your dog and he'll love it. People have a huge misconception about corn. Pull up some statistical data comparing it to rice, barely, and other "better" grains. The scientific data is what matters. As with anything, you can't believe everything you read in articles and on the internet. That's why you should end up on a scientific journal site when researching affects of corn rather than (insert random dog food site). When you break everything down to a biological level, corn provides more nutrients than most other grains and is a very amazing little grain.
> 
> ps- I'm not asking to get jumped on, please be open minded about the corn statements.


----------------------------- 


> Compared to herbivores a dog's digestive tract is much less specialized for digesting grains, or carbohydrates in general for that matter - especially in their raw, unprocessed form. However, dogs are not true carnivores but opportunistic feeders and can digest and utilize the starch from grains in dog food that has been converted by the cooking process. Digestibility depends on quality and type of grain used: rice (72%) is for example more digestible than wheat (60%) or corn (54%). Dogs can absorb the digestible carbohydrates from rice almost entirely, of the other grains about 20% are not absorbed. Indigestible fiber from grains contribute to intestinal health.


From The Dog Food Project, which uses studies to back its claims. You're very wrong about the digestibility of corn. 

This whole page is dedicated to why some grains are not quality ingredients for dog food: Dog Food Advisor - Grains



> The second item lists chicken by-product meal… a dry rendered product of slaughterhouse waste. It’s made from what’s left of a slaughtered chicken after all the prime cuts have been removed.
> 
> In a nutshell, chicken by-products are those unsavory leftovers usually considered “unfit for human consumption”.
> 
> ...


From Dog Food Advisor, which is a very trustworthy and reliable site for food reviews. 

Can we please get this straight - I'm not saying that by-products are bad by themselves. If you cut the head off a chicken and my dog will eat it, then great. It's the unmonitored handling processes because the foods aren't fit for human consumption that bothers me. Being widely unmonitored means that many unsavory things can happen to the by-products between leaving the chicken and entering your dog food, including unsanitary handling and improper storage. _It is the HANDLING and CHEAPNESS of by-products that make them an unhealthy ingredient in dog food. _


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

dmickle1 said:


> -----------------------------
> 
> 
> From The Dog Food Project, which uses studies to back its claims. You're very wrong about the digestibility of corn.
> ...


 Was the corn cooked in the studies? The digestibility of uncooked corn is very low, but when cooked properly (as it is when in dog food) its digestibility greatly increases. I have seen multiple studies where the corn isn't cooked. When the corn is ground and cooked it is a valuable source of nutrients. As for the byproducts, they're byproducts of animals deemed fit for human consumption almost always. They're almost always from USDA inspected plants that process OUR meat. For example, Bil jac obtains their byproducts and meat from the neighboring tyson plant. The argument for byproducts is almost always centered around "If I wont eat it my dog can't/wouldn't either" that's a very uneducated statement. Most of the time the person arguing that is unaware of the nutritional benefits, they're fixated on the fact it is parts a person wouldn't consume. Although in other cultures they are commonly eaten.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

> The other -- and prevailing -- school of thought is that byproducts should be avoided entirely, and that a dog's diet should contain meat, vegetables and absorbable grains. These critics say that *it's simply too hard to know what exactly is included in byproducts, and some say that these unwanted animal parts may contain bacteria or even parts from cancerous animals.* MBM used in cattle feed is suspected of being an agent in the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (also known as mad cow disease).
> 
> Similarly, there's a low-quality ingredient called animal digest, which is the dry or liquid byproduct of the meat rendering process. Experts say that although there is meat content in animal digest, it's of little nutritional value because it is not very digestible.





> The quality of the carbohydrate sources also matter. According to information from wildlife advocacy organization Born Free USA, dogs can absorb almost all the nutrients from white rice, *but grains like oats, flour and wheat have almost no nutritional value for them. Corn products aren't very valuable either, and peanut hulls have no value at all*. Glutens are another group of ingredients that experts say don't provide much nutritional value to dogs, and are a particular concern since 2007's massive recall of pet foods tainted by contaminated wheat and rice gluten from China.


All from Consumer Search, another reliable website.



> The nutritional quality of by-products, meals, and digests can vary from batch to batch. James Morris and Quinton Rogers, of the University of California at Davis Veterinary School, assert that, “*[pet food] ingredients are generally by-products of the meat, poultry and fishing industries, with the potential for a wide variation in nutrient composition. Claims of nutritional adequacy of pet foods based on the current Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) nutrient allowances (‘profiles’) do not give assurances of nutritional adequacy and will not until ingredients are analyzed and bioavailability values are incorporated.”*





> *Because of persistent rumors that rendered by-products contain dead dogs and cats, the FDA conducted a study looking for pentobarbital, the most common euthanasia drug, in pet foods. They found it.* Ingredients that were most commonly associated with the presence of pentobarbital were meat-and-bone-meal and animal fat. However, they also used very sensitive tests to look for canine and feline DNA, which were not found. Industry insiders admit that rendered pets and roadkill were used in pet food some years ago. Although there are still no laws or regulations against it, the practice is uncommon today, and pet food companies universally deny that their products contain any such materials. *However, so-called “4D” animals (dead, dying, diseased, disabled) were only recently banned for human consumption and are still legitimate ingredients for pet food.*





> Most dry foods contain a large amount of cereal grain or starchy vegetables to provide texture. These high-carbohydrate plant products also provide a cheap source of “energy” — the rest of us call it “calories.” *Gluten meals are high-protein extracts from which most of the carbohydrate has been removed. They are often used to boost protein percentages without expensive animal-source ingredients. Corn gluten meal is the most commonly used for this purpose.* Wheat gluten is also used to create shapes like cuts, bites, chunks, shreds, flakes, and slices, and as a thickener for gravy. *In most cases, foods containing vegetable proteins are among the poorer quality foods.*


All from Born Free USA. 

Firstly, you obviously don't know how dog food is made. The corn isn't cooked before being ground into the other ingredients. 

Secondly, I've provided plenty of links and studies that are from notable sources. I've also worked in the dog food industry for several years. 

I can give you quotes from reputable sources all night long and all you've given me is "you just don't want your dogs to eat it because you think it's gross!". Speaking of sounding uneducated...


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I believe there's a certaiin amount of chicken litter that's allowed in chicken by-products. Yeah, that means poop mixed with the corn cobs they use for litter. I'll see if I can find that info.


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I believe there's a certaiin amount of chicken litter that's allowed in chicken by-products. Yeah, that means poop mixed with the corn cobs they use for litter. I'll see if I can find that info.


Yummy. That's really what I want my dogs eating!

Would love to see that info if you can locate it  I've already posted about how bugs are allowed in the corns used for dog foods, which is another thing I find to be pretty unhealthy.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

dmickle1 said:


> All from Consumer Search, another reliable website.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 If I were you I'd rely more on published studies vs. websites. I don't know how dog food is made? That's a bit of an assumption. The corn IS COOKED in the dog food. The dog food kibble itself was cooked, of course the corn inside it is cooked. Let's hold the insults a bit eh? As far as the post about bugs in the corn, it is up to the company to what standards they hold their corn to. Science diet once rejected a shipment of corn because it didn't meet their criteria, it was then purchased by Frito-Lay and ended up in your potato chips! You can't tell by the back of the bag the quality of the ingredients, the chicken meal could be low quality as could the corn.

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/132/6/1704S.full
This is corn-http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5687/2
This is rice- http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5716/2


----------



## dmickle1 (Jun 19, 2011)

Hallie said:


> Give me published studies, not websites. I don't know how dog food is made? That's a bit of an assumption. The corn IS COOKED in the dog food. The dog food kibble itself was cooked, of course the corn inside it is cooked. Let's hold the insults a bit eh? As far as the post about bugs in the corn, it is up to the company to what standards they hold their corn to. Science diet once rejected a shipment of corn because it didn't meet their criteria, it was then purchased by Frito-Lay and ended up in your potato chips! You can't tell by the back of the bag the quality of the ingredients, the chicken meal could be low quality as could the corn.


You brought out the uneducated comment first, so you can hardly complain about it being thrown back at you. 

Cooking the corn amongst thirty other ingredients is not the same as cooking it separately and then adding it in. It IS up to the company to decide what standard to hold their corn to - which is why you shouldn't feed food with corn in it. Of course they're going to cut corners and make it as cheap as possible. By avoiding corn and other grains, you avoid the situation altogether.

Yes about the chicken meal. Which is why, earlier in this thread, you see me arguing that a "meal" shouldn't be one of the first ingredients, either. You can't trust its contents, therefore, why would you feed it to your dog?

Hallie, I know you're not going to agree with me. I'm certainly never going to agree with you.

The reason I'm being so adamant about this is because I see so many people on this forum who know next to nothing about dog nutrition. You seem to have at least done some research and formed your own opinions, which is totally fine, we're all allowed to have them. The point is that you're posting in this thread that checking ingredients doesn't matter, that corn is ok and that by-products are completely acceptable. While most of the posters in this thread disagree with you, what happens when a newbie comes along, looking for info on dog food, reads your posts and decides that Beneful is an ok diet for their dog because you say ingredients don't matter and it's AAFCO approved?

I love my dogs enough to spend the money to feed them a diet that I can trust to be healthy and of nutritional value. Which is why I'm switching to raw presently. If anyone thinks for one moment that any dog food company out there isn't cutting corners to make production cheaper, then they're deluded about the industry. The point is to feed a food that has the highest chance of being quality, which means avoiding ingredients that you don't know the composition of, like by-products, corn glutens and meat meals.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

dmickle1 said:


> You brought out the uneducated comment first, so you can hardly complain about it being thrown back at you.
> 
> Cooking the corn amongst thirty other ingredients is not the same as cooking it separately and then adding it in. It IS up to the company to decide what standard to hold their corn to - which is why you shouldn't feed food with corn in it. Of course they're going to cut corners and make it as cheap as possible. By avoiding corn and other grains, you avoid the situation altogether.
> 
> ...


 I understand your points and your logic. I would hope a newbie would do as we did and independently research dog food to learn rather than come to a forum, which I know many do. The point is to always do your research, not just about the dog food but the sources and the standards of the company. Too many people look at the back of the bag and read "chicken, chicken meal, rice,.." and buy it right away, gotta do your research. 

I do believe corn, in moderation, is not harmful for dogs. Are there better alternatives? of course but that's the case with almost anything. Personally, I've had my dog on foods that range from Orijen to Science Diet. I noticed only minute changes. She certainly gobbled Orijen down before it hit the bowl. She's on Nature's Variety Instinct now, not something you'd expect from my posts lol. And she loves it. 
I tried raw with Hallie but she refused to eat organ or bone. She absolutely loved premade raw though, I guess it was the texture of the organs throwing her off. Good luck with raw!


----------



## BeyondBlessed (Jan 25, 2011)

Hallie said:


> This has to be the biggest myth out there. Chicken by-product meal is extremely nutritious. In some ways it's more nutritious than chicken meat alone. Your dog is not you, don't treat or pretend like he's a human. If he had a choice he'd chow down on chicken feet, you won't eat them but it's very good for your dog and he'll love it. People have a huge misconception about corn. Pull up some statistical data comparing it to rice, barely, and other "better" grains. The scientific data is what matters. As with anything, you can't believe everything you read in articles and on the internet. That's why you should end up on a scientific journal site when researching affects of corn rather than (insert random dog food site). When you break everything down to a biological level, corn provides more nutrients than most other grains and is a very amazing little grain.
> 
> ps- I'm not asking to get jumped on, please be open minded about the corn statements.
> 
> ...


What if I'm just biased against corn farmers? Seriously, I live in Indiana and I'm sick of seeing the corn farmers, who get $.60 of every dollar they earn from Uncle Sam, fill up their tax write-off pickups with farm gas and come into town to protest welfare queens with the tea party. Corn may be superior in some ways, but this is the only country where we use it so much for things like artificial sweeteners. We even have corn-based fish food. Companies don't use corn because it's exceptionally nutritious. They use it because the price is artificially cheap. 

I'm not a health nut, I'm not an environmentalist, I'm not a vegetarian. I enjoy a Big Mac myself like anyone, but when it comes to my primary diet I'm not going to eat something Monsanto genetically engineered in a lab. Bo doesn't always eat grain-free. In fact all of his treats are grain-based, but it's not going to be his primary diet.


----------



## flipgirl (Oct 5, 2007)

While corn serves a certain purpose in Rx foods (i.e. regulating the ph of urine), I see no other reason for a dog food to have corn other than it being cheap. There are studies comparing corn gluten meal to chicken and meat meal and while it provides the same amount of protein, the chicken and meat meals were higher in digestibility and the corn gluten meal increased the mineral requirements for the food. Of course, this study was sponsored by one of the big companies so it's kind of ironic that these companies use CGM or corn in their foods so predominantly. This study was quoted by a DVM on a DVM site...

While our dogs don't live in the wild and do not need to reproduce quickly to ensure survival, the main source of protein should be animal protein. I think it's pretty arrogant of humans to assume because corn is cheap and has protein, that our dogs should eat it. They are scavengers but we have brought these scavengers into our homes so we should feel an obligation to feed them well. Not full of cheap fillers. Not to mention that much of the corn is genetically modified....corn belongs on a cob, not in a dog's tummy.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

BeyondBlessed said:


> What if I'm just biased against corn farmers? Seriously, I live in Indiana and I'm sick of seeing the corn farmers, who get $.60 of every dollar they earn from Uncle Sam, fill up their tax write-off pickups with farm gas and come into town to protest welfare queens with the tea party. Corn may be superior in some ways, but this is the only country where we use it so much for things like artificial sweeteners. We even have corn-based fish food. Companies don't use corn because it's exceptionally nutritious. They use it because the price is artificially cheap.
> 
> I'm not a health nut, I'm not an environmentalist, I'm not a vegetarian. I enjoy a Big Mac myself like anyone, but when it comes to my primary diet I'm not going to eat something Monsanto genetically engineered in a lab. Bo doesn't always eat grain-free. In fact all of his treats are grain-based, but it's not going to be his primary diet.


Have you seen the documentary King Corn? I thought it was VERY interesting and watching it a while back played a part in me switching my dog and also myself to a grain-free diet. It's what first got me interested in this stuff.

I have to say, though, I don't have a problem with the farmers themselves. They're just making a living. And I've also read about the positive results of the overuse of corn in our country, one of which is that food is cheap. Americans pay way less for food than people in most other countries, and that certainly helps the poor. But if I can afford better for myself I will, which is the same way I feel about dog food.


----------



## BeyondBlessed (Jan 25, 2011)

kafkabeetle said:


> Have you seen the documentary King Corn? I thought it was VERY interesting and watching it a while back played a part in me switching my dog and also myself to a grain-free diet. It's what first got me interested in this stuff.
> 
> I have to say, though, I don't have a problem with the farmers themselves. They're just making a living. And I've also read about the positive results of the overuse of corn in our country, one of which is that food is cheap. Americans pay way less for food than people in most other countries, and that certainly helps the poor. But if I can afford better for myself I will, which is the same way I feel about dog food.


I haven't seen it, but I have seen _Food, Inc_. I also work in a food processing plant. I don't know of anything that will kill you, but in the four years I've been there I've started relying on processed, prepared foods a lot less and shopping at the Fresh Market and the local co-op. I'm a political person, and I didn't have a problem with farmers until I went to another county work on a state representative's campaign. I had a corn farmer tell me the school district was doing fine financially and was closing schools just as a ploy to get more money. I got his name and checked with a local watchdog group that keeps track of farm subsidies in this district. Would you know he received $900,000 in government cheese over the last decade? The most I saw was $4 million. 

As far as cheap food and hunger, that's not a problem where I live. Not sure how that is possible when we supposedly have a meth epidemic, but whatever.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

BeyondBlessed said:


> As far as cheap food and hunger, that's not a problem where I live. Not sure how that is possible when we supposedly have a meth epidemic, but whatever.


Well, the cheapest food is usually the least healthy, so I can't say that I think obesity proves no one is struggling to feed themselves. A lot of poor people are obese partially because they have to buy the cheapest of the cheapest food which means white bread and ramen, etc.


----------



## Mr. V (Jan 28, 2010)

Dog food advisor, dog food project, dog food analysis, dog food whatever... are not doing research - sorry if this bursts anyone's bubble but reliable information doesn't happen with 1 google click. Databases such as PubMed are where you can find just straight articles with no spin on them. Did a quick search and found these. I'm sure there's more with varying results.

--------------------
Effects of six carbohydrate sources on dog diet digestibility and post-prandial glucose and insulin response

By Carciofi, A. C.; Takakura, F. S.; de-Oliveira, L. D.; Teshima, E.; Jeremias, J. T.; Brunetto, M. A.; Prada, F.

From Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition (2008), 92(3), 326-336
The effects of six extruded diets with different starch sources (cassava flour, brewer's rice, corn, sorghum, peas or lentils) on dog total tract apparent digestibility and glycemic and insulinemic response were investigated. The expt. was carried out on thirty-six dogs with six dogs per diet in a completely randomized design. The diets contg. brewer's rice and cassava flour presented the greatest digestibility of dry matter, org. matter and gross energy (p < 0.05), followed by corn and sorghum; pea and lentil diets had the lowest. Starch digestibility was greater than 98% in all diets and was greater for brewer's rice and cassava flour than for lentils and peas diets (p < 0.05). Dogs' immediate post-prandial glucose and insulin responses (AUC ≤ 30 min) were greater for brewer's rice, corn, and cassava flour diets (p < 0.05), and later meal responses (AUC ≥ 30 min) were greater for sorghum, lentil and pea diets (p < 0.05). Variations in diet digestibility and post-prandial response can be explained by differences in chem. compn. of each starch source including fiber content and starch granule structure. The nutritional particularities of each starch ingredient can be explored through diet formulations designed to modulate glycemic response. However, more studies are required to support these. 

-------------------
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
From Ciencia e Agrotecnologia (2005), 29(2), 436-443.

Intact male American Foxhound dogs (n=24; 34.61±3.42 kg) were fed once daily in the morning 4 diets formulated with 63% cereals (corn, sorghum, rice, and their 1:1:1 mixt.). The feed amt. was based on the Heusner prediction equation for maintenance energy plus 10%. The digestible dry matter, digestible starch, digestible energy, blood glucose, and blood insulin were detd. in 5-day trial after 15-day adaptation period. The rice diet had higher digestible dry matter and starch. The corn and rice diets had higher digestible energy. The dietary treatments did not influence the blood glucose and insulin levels. Thus, the different dietary sources of carbohydrates used did not influence blood glucose and insulin levels in health dogs. 

-----------------------------
Influence of dietary protein content and source on fecal quality, electrolyte concentrations, and osmolarity, and digestibility in dogs differing in body size

By Nery, J.; Biourge, V.; Tournier, C.; Leray, V.; Martin, L.; Dumon, H.; Nguyen, P.
From Journal of Animal Science (Champaign, IL, United States) (2010), 88(1), 159-169

When fed the same diet, large-breed dogs tend to produce feces of poorer quality compared with small-breed dogs. Moreover, German shepherds, although having a BW similar to Giant Schnauzers, are particularly prone to digestive intolerance, producing feces of poor consistency and increased moisture. Digestive tolerance reflects the reaction of the animal to the diet, and it can be assessed by detg. fecal quality (consistency, moisture, vol., odor, and color). This study was conducted to assess the effect of protein source and content on fecal quality, and to det. whether greater digestibility and lesser fecal osmolarity and electrolyte concns. are assocd. with improved fecal quality in dogs differing in body size and digestive tolerance. Twenty-seven healthy female dogs were divided into 4 groups according to BW and digestive tolerance: small, medium, large tolerant, and large sensitive. Five diets, varying in protein source (wheat gluten, poultry meal, and a 50:50 mixt. of both sources) and concn. (22, 29, and 39% CP on a DM basis for low, medium, and high, resp.) were tested. The present study was divided in 2 phases: 2 diets were studied in a crossover design in phase I, and 3 diets were studied in a Latin square design in phase II. Diets were fed for 14 d, followed by a 12-d transition period. Fecal score (1 = dry and hard feces, to 5 = liq. diarrhea), moisture, electrolytes (Na and K), and osmolarity, and digestibility of DM, energy, fat, CP, and ash were detd. Fecal score and moisture (P < 0.001) were less and overall digestibility (P < 0.001 for DM, CP, fat, ash, and energy) was greater for wheat gluten than for poultry meal diets. Large dogs had the greatest fecal score and moisture (P < 0.001), together with the greatest overall digestibility (P < 0.001 for DM, P = 0.054 for CP, P = 0.005 for ash, and P = 0.003 for energy). Osmolarity was less for wheat gluten-based diets (P < 0.001), and was not affected by dog size. Fecal electrolyte concn. varied mainly with dog group (P = 0.005 for Na, and P < 0.001 for K), being greater in large sensitive dogs compared with small dogs. Wheat gluten was proved to be a suitable protein source for modulating fecal quality in dogs, particularly in sensitive breeds. Poorer fecal quality in large sensitive dogs can be related to greater digestibility and greater fecal electrolyte concns., but not to fecal osmolarity. 

----------------------------------
Evaluation of maize gluten meal as a protein source in canine foods

By Yamka, Ryan M.; Kitts, Susanna E.; True, Alma D.; Harmon, David L.
From Animal Feed Science and Technology (2004), 116(3-4), 239-248

Ten mature female dogs (19.0 ± 0.4 kg) were used in a replicated 5 × 5 Latin Square expt. to det. the feeding value of corn gluten meal (MGM) in a complete food fed to dogs. All foods contained 100 g poultry meal/kg and graded levels of MGM (4-320 g/kg dry matter) resulting in foods that were 100, 150, 200, 250 and 300 g/kg crude protein (CP). Daily dry matter (DM) intake averaged 307 ± 7 g/d. An increase in MGM resulted in an increase in fecal moisture from 516 to 575 g/kg (linear; P < 0.001) and faecal DM output increased from 24.2 to 32.9 g/d (linear; P < 0.001). The coeff. for apparent ileal digestibility (CIAD) of DM decreased from 0.89 to 0.83 (linear; P < 0.001) and the coeff. for apparent total tract digestibility (CTTAD) of DM decreased from 0.92 to 0.89 (linear; P < 0.001) as MGM increased. The coeff. for apparent large intestinal digestibility (CLIAD; 0.29) was not affected by treatment. Faecal excretion of CP increased from 5.6 to 8.1 g/d (linear; P < 0.001) as MGM increased. Crude protein CIAD increased from 0.73 to 0.82 (linear; P < 0.002) with increasing MGM whereas, CP CLIAD was not affected by treatment (0.40). Crude protein CTTAD increased from 0.84 to 0.91 (linear; P < 0.001) as MGM increased. Methionine had the highest overall CIAD ranging from 0.92 to 0.93 and threonine had the lowest CIAD ranging from 0.65 to 0.75. These data indicate that MGM is a highly digestible protein source for canine foods with inclusions of 84 to 322 g/kg.

-----------------------------
Utilization of corn-soybean meal-substituted diets by dogs

By Moore, M. L.; Fottler, H. J.; Fahey, G. C., Jr.; Corbin, J. E.
From Journal of Animal Science (Savoy, IL, United States) (1980), 50(5), 892-6

Ten adult female pointers were used in metab. trials conducted to evaluate the efficacy of substituting portions of a corn-soybean meal basal diet with 20% tallow, 20% lard, or 30% meat and bone meal, and to compare cooked and uncooked high energy feeds (rice, oats, and corn). In all trials, dry matter digestibility was unaffected by treatment. The starch present in all diets was highly digestible. Cooking of oats significantly improved starch digestibility of this energy source over that of the uncooked control (95.8 vs 93.8%). Starch digestibility of rice and corn was unaffected by cooking. Cellulose [9004-34-6] digestibility was significantly increased when the 20% lard and 30% meat and bone meal diets were fed. Cellulose digestion by dogs fed cooked rice or oats was significantly greater than that by dogs fed uncooked feeds. Fecal moisture was reduced by 25.2% when meat and bone meal was substituted for soybean meal. Dogs fed 20% tallow or 20% lard consumed more N than did their resp. controls. Animals fed cooked rice ingested 6.6% more N than did those fed the uncooked cereal. More fecal N was excreted by animals fed uncooked oats than by those fed cooked oats (19.3 vs 15.5 g/5 days, resp.). Although significant treatment differences in absorbed and retained N were obsd., no differences in retained N expressed as a percentage of N intake were noted in any of the expts.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

dmickle1 said:


> You're very wrong about the digestibility of corn.


Argh, one of my biggest pet peeves EVER. Corn IS digestible. Entire cultures have relied on corn as a crop, they wouldn't waste their time if it wasn't digestible! But - the digestible bit is encased INSIDE the undigestible bit, so it either has to be ground, chewed, or cooked thoroughly. If you swallow kernals whole, no, you're not going to digest them - just like most seeds, because the whole point for the plant is to spread its seeds far and wide using animal poo as a vehicle, hoping that the animal didn't thoroughly chew its food.


----------



## HarajukuGoober (Aug 5, 2011)

RonE said:


> BTW, be cautious about pre-qualifying the types of responses you'll accept on an open forum. When you post a question (and your topic title sounded like a question) or an opinion, folks may respond with something you don't want to hear. You don't have to follow the advice, but you don't get to filter it from being posted.


Oh how true!! I've definitely learned this over the years...

Well here's my 2 cents on the subject...

My Dachshund, Shortdog, one time ate 40+ poisoned wasps(which are poisonous to begin with!). He has also eaten leftovers from barf with 409 sprayed on it. He has also eaten things that would make you question his intelligence. And he's at the ripe old age of 14 and in great health.

With that being said, dogs can and will eat anything. But we're talking about dog food here, not poisoned insects. And dog food is just that--food made for dogs! There's NO food on the market right now that is slowly killing your dog.

Now, OP(original poster), you said you are ok with feeding your dog kibble, meaning you aren't into the whole holistic thing or the raw diet. In that case, all you really have to do is pick a dog food you can afford, and if for whatever reason you don't feel like it's working out, just go get different dog food. And you can switch it up any time for no reason...

Personally, I am an Iams person. My grandma always fed her dogs Iams(and she too was HEAVILY into the dog world), and I have always fed my dogs Iams. I have never had a problem with it, and the dogs' "deposits" are never runny or a weird color. I do, however, like to add things to their food such as green beans(especially for my Dachshund, to control his weight), raw eggs, and raw chicken(for my German Shepherd Jackson)

As far as cheaper being worse, I don't agree when it comes to dog food. Your dog will not love you any less. I also don't 100% agree cheaper human food is worse. It just depends on how you decide to use up the energy. The whole key to losing weight is to expel more calories than you intake. So, if you decide to eat a cheeseburger or 2, sitting down afterwards to watch the Star Trek marathon is not a good idea...

But anyway, enough about that. There's my spiel on the subject =P


----------



## Blue_Heeler (Jul 31, 2011)

dmickle1 said:


> My emphasis. They do THINK those are great foods, which is why you, as an educated employee, should attempt to share your knowledge with other people. You don't need to approach it all snooty with someone, like "oh, that's terrible food, why do you buy that?". There are LOTS of ways to approach people about what they're feeding. You can even ask "may I ask what you like so much about Iams/Beneful/Pedigree?" and see if you can share some of your information with them so that they're at least making a more informed decision. If, at the end of the day, they still buy Pedigree, then that's fine. But if you grab their interest and they like what you're saying, then you're doing both them and their dogs a service by sharing information.


IF they ask, I do tell them the good, better, best rating on different dog foods. However, from personal experience, when "we" initiate that conversation, we chance alienating the customer. If we alienate the customer, there goes the future opportunity to educate them. And the sales on treats, toys, grooming, training, etc. My big box started carrying more "grocery" brands so we wouldn't lose these customers. I "stole" 2 different customers yesterday from the other big box store, 1 just from honestly answering her question on my opinion on Beneful vs Science Diet. I didn't make her feel bad for having fed Beneful to a previous dog or for feeding Science Diet to her current one. She was open to what I was saying about different qualities of food for the price. Most of my customers aren't. I pick my battles unfortunately. I would LOVE to get every customer switched over to Innova or Nutro Ultra or Holistic Select or Wellness or etc but I have to do the best I can. And Pedigree is still better then an unbalanced diet of table scraps.

And I would never tell someone their choice of dog food was terrible (NOT saying you were implying that). I've had plenty of customers tell me they get that reaction at certain other stores. And those stores lose that future educational opportunity. I'd chew my people out if they did something stupid like that.

My usual Natural Balance demo rep has this type of approach to customers. As soon as they walk in the door he's hammering them with information about that brand and why corn is bad and etc etc etc. We actually have to rescue customers from him. He will regularly have someone "agree" to try what he's pushing and leave it at the register. Then they go across the street to start buying their Beneful.



dmickle1 said:


> I do use the McDonald's analogy sometimes, because it helps get through to people about what they're feeding. It's not "poison", but if you say "feeding your dog Beneful is like feeding your kid McDonald's every day", it tends to have an impact. And to a degree, it's true - neither your child or dog has any control over the diet you give them. McDonald's can be made to meet "minimum nutrition requirements" as they do serve fruits and veggies, but it's not a healthy diet, just as Beneful meets minimum nutrition requirements, but it's not a healthy diet. The phrase has enough shock value to get through to people that they need to RESEARCH and that's my main goal - I don't want someone to just take me at my word and walk away. I want them to get online, go to some dog food review websites and gain their own knowledge and opinions about dog nutrition.


This is exactly what I do. I use McDonald's as an example because it's something that makes sense to people. Yesterday I used it and the light bulb went off over the customer's head. I gave her information on the higher quality foods, what the differences were between the different grades of food but not everyone is open to learning the truth, seeing the light if you will. That and anything I "push" can be viewed as self serving.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

HarajukuGoober said:


> Oh how true!! I've definitely learned this over the years...
> 
> Well here's my 2 cents on the subject...
> 
> ...


 I'm going to be way off topic here but, I know you from another forum years ago! I used to have Molly the black lab puppy, then got my Beagle Hallie. Glad to hear the boys are doing good!


----------



## HerdersForMe (Jul 26, 2011)

HarajukuGoober said:


> With that being said, dogs can and will eat anything. But we're talking about dog food here, not poisoned insects. And dog food is just that--food made for dogs! There's NO food on the market right now that is slowly killing your dog.
> 
> Now, OP(original poster), you said you are ok with feeding your dog kibble, meaning you aren't into the whole holistic thing or the raw diet. In that case, all you really have to do is pick a dog food you can afford, and if for whatever reason you don't feel like it's working out, just go get different dog food. And you can switch it up any time for no reason...
> 
> Personally, I am an Iams person. My grandma always fed her dogs Iams(and she too was HEAVILY into the dog world), and I have always fed my dogs Iams. I have never had a problem with it, and the dogs' "deposits" are never runny or a weird color. I do, however, like to add things to their food such as green beans(especially for my Dachshund, to control his weight), raw eggs, and raw chicken(for my German Shepherd Jackson)


We're not saying the food is killing dogs. It's about giving your dog the best possible nutrition so they are always doing their best. Diet is always the best prevention of health problems as well. Obviously dogs can survive on cheap grocery store brand dog food. It doesn't mean it is the best option. 



HarajukuGoober said:


> As far as cheaper being worse, I don't agree when it comes to dog food. Your dog will not love you any less. I also don't 100% agree cheaper human food is worse. It just depends on how you decide to use up the energy. The whole key to losing weight is to expel more calories than you intake. So, if you decide to eat a cheeseburger or 2, sitting down afterwards to watch the Star Trek marathon is not a good idea...


This isn't about getting fat. It's about nutrition. Eating a cheeseburger does a lot more to your body than just provide X amount of calories.


----------

