Rotating Foods

[Naddi]

Just wondering... I went to check on dogfoodadvisor.com and I can't find the food the breeder said she was feeding her puppies with. The name was Extra. She told me it was some kind of food only available to breeders and so on. Was it some kind of bs or was it true? Anyhow, I had to change food only a few days after we got our dog since she was smelling so bad, vet said the food was way too rich for the puppy. We could tell Naddi had an accident when we were three rooms away from her

 

Anyone ever heard about that brand?

 

Also, after switching about 5 times, we finally settle with Arcana Grassland ( or any Regionals one, since we like to go around with flavor). Her stomach was very sensible when she was younger and she had a coprophagia problem which, thank god, is over now. Now she doesn't seem to be hungry all the time and her poops are nicer.

[Liz P]

Acana is an excellent brand.

 

Never heard of Extra.

 

I feed RedPaw PowerEdge 32K and love it. I also do some food rotation. Other brands I like are Acana, Eagle Pack and Origin. Royal Canin has some good foods and even Purina has some good formulas.

[simba]

I never quite understood 'you can feed much less of this for the same nutrition' as a benefit for the average pet owner, except perhaps in storage space. Most people have trouble not overfeeding dogs anyway, you'd imagine something low-calorie that looked satisfyingly huge in the bowl (to the human) would be better.

 

I am also completely skeptical of the claims of most dog foods, especially the more expensive ones. I could whip up an incredibly unhealthy meal using wonderful-sounding ingredients, and considering the lack of any real testing of long-term health effects, and the dubiousness of many of the advertising claims ('all-natural', 'holistic', 'a pure dog food', 'raw ingredients' on a cooked kibble) it seems to all come back to 'feed it and see what happens'.

[gcv-border]

I never quite understood 'you can feed much less of this for the same nutrition' as a benefit for the average pet owner, except perhaps in storage space.

 

Errr - What goes in, also comes out. The less that goes is, the less I have to pick up when it comes out. That is a benefit to me.

 

Jovi

[Liz P]

Well, I am not your average pet owner. I have working dogs and have no trouble limiting their feed. Also, there is only so much room in my dogs' stomachs. If the volume of the food is too large, they can't eat enough to maintain their weight. Real working dogs will sometimes run into the problem of not being able to consume enough calories if their food isn't nutritionally dense enough.

 

Also, eating a large volume of food doesn't always prove to be more satisfying. If that were the case, all you would have to do to lose weight is eat a lot of fiber (bulk). You need to take more into account, like protein and fat content as well as glycemic index. Plenty of morbidly obese dogs are eating foods that are very low in calories and full of fiber to supposedly make them feel full.

[juliepoudrier]

Simba's comments were specifically directed toward average pet owners, not average working dog owners. I think it's a valid point. My neighbor's cocker is a prime example. The little dog has become anorexic (many vet visits, no explanation as yet, except perhaps an as-yet undiscovered neoplasia). It's been a couple of months and the dog still hasn't lost enough weight to even be noticeable to someone used to seeing fit dogs. They feed what we would consider junk food, and no doubt that has contributed to the dog's state of being overweight, but if they were feeding a super premium food that required a lot less food be fed to maintain a healthy weight, then that poor dog would probably be even fatter than she is now, because the average pet owner isn't goiing to adjust the amount fed to compensate for the denser nutrition.

 

I am not advocating cheap foods, and in fact it has always amazed me that people feed their LGDs crap dog food, because I think they're the hardest working dogs out there. But I also don't see a great benefit in the super premium foods either. If a person can afford to feed them, then they certainly should do so, but there tends to be an attitudeof "if you don't do as I do, then you're doing your dog a disservice," and that bothers me.

 

No food is perfect (which is why so many people rotate, apparently), and I'm quite sure most owners do the best they can. Certainly the people who ask questions here are at least thinking about it, and that's certainly a step above the average pet owner.

 

When my dogs are working long days doing set out, I do give them extra, but in general I don't have long working days for my dogs on a regular basis so haven't found that I need some high-octane feed to keep weight on them., And if I did, I'd add fresh meat and oatmeal....

 

J.

[Naddi]

Personnaly, even if I can afford to feed my dog a higher quality food, I would never go around and tell someone who can't afford it that they are wrong. If one month that I need to buy my dog food, which is not a working dog, and I dont have the money to buy a 35$ bag, I'll simply go for a cheaper food like RC.

 

Dog food is just like human food. Someone who is on a strict diet will sometime go around and tell other that they are so wrong for not eating as healthy as them. Human or dog, there is some of us who cannot afford the high end food, een if we would love to.

 

Good exemple is when I go to the boutique I buy the Acana at. They have those ready to serve portion of premium raw food. The lady there was telling me how she feed her great dane this food, and how she love raw and so on. When she told me it was about 50 freaking dollard a portion, my jaw kinda dropped.... Yet she was telling me how I should REALLY feed my dog raw food, and how it is better than anything else. Like if I buy only dry food I'm a bad owner

 

The breeder I got my puppy at was the same. She had a contract with a butcher near where she live, and she was feeding her adult dog raw food. She was telling me how it would be mandatory for me to feed Naddi raw food when she will be adult. Yet her dogs are farm dogs, they are outside all the time, running around, helping her with the cows and horses. Mine isn't working, I'll start some agility training when she will be a bit older but at the moment she is just an average active pup who run around and play all day.

 

Even if I kinda see some benefit into feeding a dog raw food, I can't afford it. I can afford good rated food but when I cannot I'll feed my girl what I can buy. As long as she is healthy, and that she have a good weight, this is what matter to me.

[Liz P]

I feed a premium food, but it's only $44 for a 40lb bag because I've done some calling and worked out a deal. So just because I feed my dogs well doesn't mean I spend a fortune doing it. I can't afford to spend $80 for a 30lb bag with 5 dogs. It just won't happen. You need to feed the best you can afford, but keep in mind that more expensive isn't always higher quality.

[simba]

Liz P- those are good points, and I know it can be a problem (like for human athletes) to get the calories in, but I was just talking about pet owners, and not necessarily ones here. I would doubt 50% of the dogs of members are obese. People here are a self-selected group who share particular ideas of care for dogs.

 

And while I know that bulk doesn't make food more filling, I was thinking more of the human desire to 'fill the bowl' than the dog's hunger levels. I've got an easy keeper, and many people tell me to feed more despite the fact that the dog is grossly overweight and not losing weight on the amount fed. Even if more is put in and the dog stops eating the answer then is to tempt the dog with something else. The fact that it looks like an unsatisfying portion to the human is more important than the effect on the dog.

Agree totally with your point on 'more expensive isn't always higher quality'. I have seen dog food at the shop, two labels, two prices, identical ingredient lists and nutritional information, made in the same factory by the same company.

 

Gcv-border: fair point!

[WWBC]

<p>Something to keep in mind when checking dog food ingredient lists, ingredients are listed by pre processed weight; Because of that, one tactic used by some producers is to use whole meat as an ingredient. Because whole meat has a high water content it will weigh the most and as a result of that can/will be the first listed ingredient on the bag. Once the food is processed the end result is that there is actually not as much meat product in the food as the mislabel would lead a consumer to believe. The best first, early ingredients are named meat meals. The named meat meals will be meals made from a meat source that has had the water basically pressed out of it, so if a food lists a meat meal in the early ingredients then you are actually getting meat protein and not paying for water weight that is not contributing to the protein source. Consumers need to learn how to read dog food labels to decipher things like that..........salmon versus salmon meal, the salmon meal, by weight will be more "real" salmon and not water.

[Gary_and_Karen]

Good point, that some owners ask about this stuff is good, because I have seen dog owners that feel like dogs can eat anything like humans can, even pasta, greasy hamburgers, fatty hot dogs, ect., not that some of those things eaten on a rare occasion might be a problem, but greasy foods can even be upsetting to humans if you try to avoid cooking in grease like we do.

 

. Certainly the people who ask questions here are at least thinking about it, and that's certainly a step above the average pet owner.

 

 

J.