I would say pushing is the right word. How many dog food threads asking about a good kibble have turned into a raw forum, inevitably with the comment that commercial dog food is bad?
Printable View
I would say pushing is the right word. How many dog food threads asking about a good kibble have turned into a raw forum, inevitably with the comment that commercial dog food is bad?
It's not like anyone here is threatening someone if they don't feed raw. Nor does anyone look down on someone for feeding kibble. I've never seen anyone say dog food is bad. I've never seen anyone say that there aren't risks to feeding raw, however they ARE very, very slim. I believe being fed kibble there are higher risks involved.
Often times people ask what type of dog food they should feed their dogs. Raw food IS dog food, therefore people mention it and suggest it. It has worked wonders for many dog owners here, myself included.
There are times where someone has had a health problem with their dog's where a change in diet may help. Raw is often mentioned because many believe it to be the best we can provide for our dogs, again, myself include.
I for one am quite sick of false information being spread about raw and so-called "high quality" dog foods. There is not a bowl dog food out there that will reach the nutritional value of a bowl of raw food - wether your dog enjoys it or not.
As for the OP, stick in there.
When you become financially supportive of yourself and your dog, look into it. Until then, research, research, research!!
followed by....Quote:
I've never seen anyone say dog food is bad
Nuff said.Quote:
I for one am quite sick of false information being spread about raw and so-called "high quality" dog foods. There is not a bowl dog food out there that will reach the nutritional value of a bowl of raw food - wether your dog enjoys it or not.
or
Quote:
For one, Iams is not a high quality dog food. Have you seen the crap in it?
Or from a thread asking about a good kibble....
Raw is like a religion. Not suported by science, but it's impossible to convince the true believers that there's another way.Quote:
Why not feed her raw , its like people food and better for her.
Perhaps you just don't understand raw vs. kibble. :) She did not say that Kibble was bad, she said that it would not reach the nutritional value of raw. This is a fact.Quote:
I for one am quite sick of false information being spread about raw and so-called "high quality" dog foods. There is not a bowl dog food out there that will reach the nutritional value of a bowl of raw food - wether your dog enjoys it or not
This is also a fact. Iams is not good dog food. She never said, all dog foods are crap?Quote:
For one, Iams is not a high quality dog food. Have you seen the crap in it?
I'm a little confused and I think you're reading in to this too much.
The funny thing is that most of the true believers started, switched, and saw the great changes.Quote:
Not suported by science, but it's impossible to convince the true believers that there's another way.
You aren't proving anything here. Not one time have I said kibble is bad, neither were any of those statement implying that. Maybe you comprehend them different than intended.
Yes, Iams is not a quality kibble. Will a dog live off of it? Of course! And I'll live off of McDonalds.
You keep saying raw is a religion, therefor dry dog kibble is a religion too. :rolleyes: I do not need anyone's scientific opinion to see the improvement in my animal's health.
As to raw or kibble being a religion......
Show me a double blind study of raw that doesn't have holes in it big enough to drive a truck through, and I'll believe the benefits. Anything short of that is anecdotal.
I think the best "study" of how great raw is, is the fact that dogs and wolves have been living on it for millions of years. Kibble has been around for, what, 60 years? And how many diseases are we seeing frequently in pets these days?
As I said, I do not base it on "studies", I base it on my own experience. The improvement in my three very healthy animals is enough for me.
Their teeth: On kibble, yellow and built up. Raw bones are cleaning them right up.
Their stools: A good consistency, small
Their coats: I have not had to bathe them in weeks. Nala's has especially improved. On Nutro kibble she used to get a nasty film on her coat. They do not smell whatsoever, not even when they come in from outside.
Their overall energy: My almost 9 year old is a lot more active. He doesn't tire as easily.
There's my studies for you, and if you don't believe in them, that's your issue.
Yes, but the anecdotal evidence in Raw's favor is OVERWHELMING.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady's Human
I'm tired of the dog food debate. I think as long as you do some research and feed what you feel is best for what you can afford, then you are doing the best for your dog. Questions and information are great, it’s good to look into what is best for your dog......arguing, is not.
People may not have come out and said it exact, but I, personally, have gotten the impression many times that certain members here do look down upon you if you do not feed raw. It seems that at the moment raw is "in" and if you're not in the raw group then you're not taking as good of care of your dog.
Please come meet my mostly kibble (high quality) fed dog with a nice thick soft coat, perfectly clean teeth (brushing), healthy weight and tell me he isn't in as good of shape as a raw fed dog. ;)
I am not against any dog food diet--raw, homecooked, good kibble with the exception of very low quality kibble filled with just by-products/grains. If your dog is healthy and happy then you are doing great!
Ok, off my soap box now. ;)
A valid study would contain at least three groups, preferably large groups,with members of each study group with similar if not identical genetic lines to eliminate health problems of genetic origin. One group fed strictly raw, one fed kibble, one fed a mixed diet. The only variable for the study to be valid can be the diet. No environmental variables, all exercised the same, etc.
Until that happens, please leave the pseudo scientific pap out of the discussion, and admit that anecdotal evidence (as in my dog is .........) is just that. Anecdotal evidence.
And if you look for it, you'll find just as much negative anecdotal evidence about raw--about any particular brand of kibble, any drug, any supplement. Anecdotal evidence always goes both ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by CathyBogart
I'm sorry, I do believe I have every right to include my positive raw feeding, just like you have ever right to go against it. I'm not telling you not to express anything.
Thanks Amy, that was exactly what I was thinking. I'm SOOO incredibly tired of the constant raw vs kibble debate.
Plain and simple, feed something that your dog does well on, and something you're comfortable feeding.. whether it's kibble, or homecooked, or raw.
I am a raw feeder, and I am a believer in the diet. I absolutely do not recommend that anyone feed raw if they aren't comfortable with it. No one's making you believe in it. It's your choice, your decision. Don't like the idea? Fine. Leave it be and stop bickering.
Personal experiences and scientific facts are great. But really, how many times can we go back and forth from "raw bad, raw good" argument?
Actually, my point here isn't that raw is good, bad or otherwise. Feed whatever you want as long as the dog is healthy. My point is merely a request to stop using falsehoods (example:dogs don't get salmonella) as support for your statements for or against raw, and stop knocking down kibble as a good food. If you did a search in here for AAFCO, you would find statements left and right that XYZ ingredient is bad, therefore kibble is bad, with little to no scientific evidence backing up the statements.
Making a statement like "My dog does better on raw" is fine. Making a statement like " Raw is better than kibble" with nothing other than anecdotal evidence is absurd.
We've provided evidence, you shot it all down.Quote:
Making a statement like "My dog does better on raw" is fine. Making a statement like " Raw is better than kibble" with nothing other than anecdotal evidence is absurd.
"There is no benefit of feeding raw over a high quality commercial dog food."
Aha ahahaha. Ha. :)
I'm sorry, but that incredible blanket statement just made me giggle. I've heard of/met waaay too many sick kibble-fed dogs that have done a 180 on Raw to even consider commenting on that. And also what it has done for my pups!
Aren't we all at PT to not only discuss and share the love for our dogs, but also to learn more? As long as members are not giving out false or misleading information, why is that a problem? Didn't you notice that myself and others actually advised the OP to continue researching before switching to a Raw diet!? It's not like all the Raw-feeders jumped on her and said "Ohhh it's fine just throw some chicken at your dog." Not at all.
The only thing I truly tire of, is (I am not speaking of PT in particular, other boards & groups as well) people who actually discourage researching premium kibbles & Raw diets. People who say "If your dog looks OK to you eating grocery story food, stick with that!". It's crazy. Being well-informed and educating yourself in ANY area of our pets' health/behavior/life should be encouraged, IMO.
About every kibble recommendation thread mentioning Raw, so what? If that is what you feed, and you have seen wonderful results, why not recommend feeding it to others? Anyway, that is seriously an exaggeration... I just went to Dog Health and found p l e n t y of threads that do not even mention it, only recommendations for kibbles. I recommend kibble that in my experience are good quality (with studying nutrition, working at a feed store with a Vet as my manager, and feeding Gonzo a variety of foods over the years) all the time. I feed kibble occasionally. But I will never give up the benefits of Raw to both of my boys, Gonzo especially has done incredibly well on it! I did not even know how healthy he *could* be, until I switched to Raw. Of COURSE I would want to share that with others, and emphatically encourage them to research it & see if it's possible for them, because I want them to experience all of those benefits as well.
I agree with the above. I also have no problem with people feeding kibble, or raw, I just feel that there is always more to learn, and why NOT try to find out more information about dog foods and your dog's health so you can provide the best? I see people against raw bashing the heck out of it and yet honestly, if you haven't tried it for yourself, why are you bashing it? I feed a mostly raw and kibble diet. I use Innova Evo on days when I need to, and they do fine with that. All dog food is NOT created equal, and people saying feed whatever dog kibble is all the same, that it doesn't matter what is in it is just not even an intelligent statement in any manner. Yes dogs do fine on kibble, but dogs do great on raw, and often times have fewer health problems. ANYTHING you feed your dog ought to be looked into and researched. KIbble is not just kibble, there are so many different kinds, and some of that stuff is horrible for a dog's health. That does not make all kibble bad, but there is a vast difference in the health of dogs just based on what is fed. Someone who feeds a lower quality dog food thinks their dog is doing fine, but unless they TRY something else, whether it's a higher quality kibble with better ingredients, raw, home cooked, whatever, they have no idea how different their dog COULD be doing and in most cases how much better their health could be. I'm not pushing any diet, for ME raw works best but "gasp" I also feed kibble on occasion. I take issue with the dog food companies trying to push garbage on peopel as quality dog food but I also take issue with people being blind, when there is so much information available, and not even trying to see if there is somehting better and just blatantly bashing something they know nothing about because THEY don't feed it or do it. I'm not pushing raw, I am interested in everyone feeding their dogs the best they can for its health, because every dog deserves to feel its best. I have always said that people should research what they feed their dog and feed what they feel best about. I for one have never bashed anyone for feeding kibble or raw, but I have emphasized the need to research and try to feed the best foods you can based on ingredients. I see no harm in suggesting that.Quote:
Originally Posted by bckrazy
BcK,
It is the false and misleading information that drives me nuts, not the discussions about raw or premium kibbles.
Let's see if we got the progression right:Quote:
Didn't you notice that myself and others actually advised the OP to continue researching before switching to a Raw diet!? It's not like all the Raw-feeders jumped on her and said "Ohhh it's fine just throw some chicken at your dog." Not at all...People who say "If your dog looks OK to you eating grocery story food, stick with that!". It's crazy.
1. Advocate raw feeding, but of course research it before starting.
2. If anyone advocates the evil commercial food as being equal based on the dog's apperance then they are crazy.
But let's focus on the statement
and do a tie in to this one from another posterQuote:
It's not like all the Raw-feeders jumped on her and said "Ohhh it's fine just throw some chicken at your dog." Not at all.
Let's see now I look at my two 3-yr old dogs and see their coats in good condition, ideal weight, high energy levels, no allergies, no metabolic problems, no reoccuring infections. What have I left out? The Vet says they are in excellent health. Question: Is it possible to have fewer health problems than no health problems? But yet based on your criteria both the Vet and I must be crazy, because it's just impossible that my dogs have no known health problems. How could one have fewer than none, feeding that evil commercial dog food?Quote:
Yes dogs do fine on kibble, but dogs do great on raw, and often times have fewer health problems.
I chuckle at the almost religious zeal with no scientific basis that is used to discredit those who would dare to think a commercial dog food is equivalent to raw feeding. I have been told here that I am crazy for thinking my dogs are healthy (by looking at them), and that they could be doing so much better implying that I could be doing better by my dogs. In another thread I have someone telling me that meat by-products and corn in a dog food makes it a bad dog food. Therefore not only am I falling short on their care, but now I'm feeding them a bad dog food to boot! It gets better with every thread. I wouldn't doubt that someday I'll read that feeding dogs a commercial dog food is the equivalent of abusing your dog. LOL But then again I take comfort in knowing that no one can disprove the statement: There is no benefit of feeding raw over a high quality commercial dog food.
LOL whatever floats your boat dude, have fun with the chip on your shoulder. Nobody said all dogs have to be fed raw not to have health problems. Yes corn and by products aren't great ingredients, but that's rather moot. Case in FACT as witnessed in my own dogs, SOME dogs with health problems can benefit from eating a raw diet, as far as their health goes. Nobody said it was a cure all to every health problem out there, and nobody said that dogs can't be healthy on kibble. Not one person said that. Enjoy your vastly superior knowledge safe and secure in the fact that your dogs are just fine, and nobody said otherwise. Have a nice day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vela
One could also put down a half rotting dead Possum next to their evil commercial dog food, and the chances are they would dive into the Possum without hesitation. In fact they would probably even forsake the raw chicken for something smelly. After all wolves scavenge for carion, the argument goes that centuries of wolves makes it ok for our dogs. I'm not sure if carion would be all that healthy for dogs, but at least by your logic it would be- after all it's the smell and taste that matters. Dogs will always eat what instinctly they know is best for them?Quote:
In actuality, KIBBLE is what is perceived by humans to be dog food, if you were to put both down, most dogs would choose the meat, at least once they realized they could eat it.
Any time someone says that raw is superior to commercial dog food, then that is a bash towards those of us who choose commercial. And as I just pointed out in another post one is even labeled as crazy, and for feeding bad dog food. But of course commercial dog food owners deserve such bashing - don't they? It's just terrible what we feed our dogs.Quote:
I don't care if someone feeds raw or not, but don't bash it just because you choose not to feed it.
Outside of knowledge- nothing.Quote:
Nothing makes you right more than anyone else.
Your dog(s) are having less health problems on raw since they got away from their food allergy. Mine have never had health problems on commercial dog food. So goes the testimonials.
It's one thing to post the myriads of "what did I feed my dog today". It's another to present misconceptions as fact.
My dogs never had a food allergy, my dog has crippling arthritis, which has nothing to do with a food allergy. She no longer needs medication or pain releivers for her arthritis and can run and jump and play, this is from changing her diet. So please don't proceed to tell me my dogs are doing better because they had a food allergy, because they didn't. I certainly never told you not to feed kibble and for ME raw is best. I don't give a rats behind what you feed your dogs, but it doesn't mean it's the best thing for them and it doesn't mean it's the worst thing for them, and I never said anything about it. You bash raw because you don't agree with it, well your way doesn't make you right just because you beleive it to be true. MY dogs do better on raw, and has nothing to do with a food allergy whatsoever. I never told you to feed your dogs raw, ever, or even that you should. I have ALWAYS said people should feed what they feel is best and what they can afford as long as they feel good about it, I personally beleive raw is better, but I'm not trying to make you feed it to your dogs, feed whatever you want, but stop bashing raw just because you don't do it or like it. Yes I do beleive raw is better, but I'm as entitled to think that if I like. That is not a bash to you because you don't feed it, but take it how you want. That's your chip on your own shoulder, not mine. I am not trying to make up your mind for you, but there is no need for you to put down those who do feed it and prefer it as better food for their dogs. Just because your dogs get excited about eating kibble doesn't mean they WOULDNT get just as excited about eating raw, they just don't know that it eixsts as food because it's not provided. Wheter a dog chows down their food or not is no indication of it being healthy or not for them. Most dogs eats whatever they are given, raw or kibble, and most get equally exicted about it, so if you are basing your dog's happiness at being fed on whether or not it's the best food, that's rather unrealistic. You seem to have this huge ego thing about your "knowledge" but OMG you don't know everything! Surprise!
I don't think people who talk about raw food are taking over posts as was eluded too, earlier in this thread.
It's just that there is so much to raw feeding.
A kibble diet is simple. Poor 2 cups of kibble in a bowl. The dog eats it.
But with raw it's completely different. There's lots and lots of info. to learn. How to buy it. how to cut it up. Portions. Proportions. Sources, vitamins and mineral content, etc. We just want to do it right and as healthily as possible. We are here to educate and inform each other what we've learned and what is working for our dogs.
We can do that w/out begrudging kibble feeders. Honestly there is no time for that. What we should all begrudge are the folks that starve their dogs.
yup same deal with Shadow, the vet called in premature aging, at 4 years old she had arthritus so bad she was unable to stand, she looked like a 13 year old dog rather then a 4 year old, all the vets said she would not live to see 5 and because she was already suffering so much we should put her down. we switched to raw because of Happy who had an allergy to grain(note the past tense, since the switch her grain allergy is gone, grains are no problem to her now) the switch took longer to benifit Shadow as she had been on kibble for 4 years and she was in such horrable shape, but after several months things started to clear up, her teeth got better, her arthritus vannished, and her intenstnial problems caused by her spay vannished never to return. she was on raw for 4 years, when we had to rehome her, by then all her problems were gone, she has been back on kibble for 2 years now and the effects of the raw have lasted, at 10 years old she continues to show no signs of the arthrtius that once crippled her. Raw is not a cure all however. when researched and fed properly it can be the best thing you can feed, but it not researched and fed right it can cause more harm then good .Quote:
My dogs never had a food allergy, my dog has crippling arthritis, which has nothing to do with a food allergy. She no longer needs medication or pain releivers for her arthritis and can run and jump and play, this is from changing her diet
dragondawg most of us raw feeders have fed both raw and several kinds of kibbles, you have fed only kibble and bash something you have never tried. when raw feeders complain about problems from kibble its from EXPERIENCE. you are bashing raw based on your own theorys.
I think you missed my point completely, Dragondawg. We've disagreed before... not because of what you feed your dogs - they sound very healthy, and that is AWESOME - but with the "tone" that you use in your posts. Talk about belittling.
My quote about grocery store kibble had nothing to do with kibble, and everything to do with educated dog owners. The fact is, I've seen you reply to many threads about people who feed lower quality brands who are unhappy with it and feel their dogs could do better, and your replies many times have simply been advocating the grocery store brand and telling them to stick to it. Yes, we are doing this for the love/health of our dogs, and they should eat what works for them. But, to discourage people from looking beyond the mega-massive "grocery store" kibbles, to me is what's crazy. People should know what is out there & make an educated choice on what is going into their dogs, beyond Iams and Beneful and the convincing commercials, as the vast majority of dog owners DON'T! If [insert brand here] kibble works for your dog and you are totally satisfied, that's great. But I know that I, as a young person who has learned a lot since getting Gonzo when I was 13 & fed him Nutro and similar brands, did not even know how healthy he could be with a better diet. We should all strive to improve our lives and the lives of our pets as much as we can, don't we agree on that? Why does it threaten you when people want to improve the diet & therefore the health of their dog?
Ucka. What Vela said, I'm getting too involved in this, when I know absolutely nothing I say will change anything.
GreyhoundGirl wrote: Nutro is good? Is it better than Purina 1? I have seen it in Wal-Mart, Which is handy. I would have to go out of the way for Canidae>>>>>>>>>>>>
My experience with these 3 foods:
PURINA ONE:
Purina one I read is one of the good dog foods carried in the Grocery
store. My X husband has been feeding this to his dog for several years
and his dog does very well on it.
Nutro:
I fed Nutro Natural Lamb and Rice to Sheba for 5 years.
Her skin and coat were beautiful with this food. I would have
no qualms feeding this kibble.
Canidae: I have used this food for almost 7 years now for Sheba and
Rocky.
Rocky has a bad stomach and he has done very well on this food
compared to others. Both dogs have never got tired of the taste and this is a good human grade food at a reasonable price.
* I also add a little human food such as meat, poultry, yogurt, and cottage cheese to their kibble.
My opinion, if your dog is healthy and happy stick with the food you are using.
(Some grocery dog foods are very low in quality and I personally would
stay away from these foods)
Check out the first few ingredients of the food, this will give you
an idea how to compare the different foods.)
I completely agree. This quote says it all -- "Outside of knowledge - nothing." Honestly I'm scared to post in the dog health section because of the amount of times I've felt like my advice has been belittled, and now I have to worry about it in dog general. I'm tired of the arrogance.Quote:
Originally Posted by bckrazy
The only food I'm against are low-quality kibbles. If you want to feed a high quality kibble, go ahead. If that's what works for you, great. I'm ecstatic to see so many people on PT interested interested in higher quality kibbles and raw. But I'm against the whole idea of lower quality dog foods -- I think it's wrong. I think that even if the dog appears to be doing well on it, things are going on insid ethat you can't see. My GSD died of cancer on a low quality dog food. Her sisters are still alive at 12 years of age with nothing but some arthritis. Everyone thought she was healthy --- sure, she had a doggy smell, she was overweight and had dandruff, and she chewed her one leg to pieces. But nobody made the tie to diet. Because that is what is normal these days. Dogs smell, dogs are greasy, dogs chew themselves, and when a dog is altered it gets fat. It's never the food, oh no.
Just because I feed raw and recommend raw does NOT mean that I'm against all kibbles and will belittle someone for feeding kibble. Even if they feed a low quality kibble I will not make any snide remarks or pound them with a bunch of textbook studies. If they are looking for something better, I will tell them what I believe is wrong with the food they are feeding, and what they should avoid in the future. As soon as someone sees me telling someone that raw is good and kibble is bad and all kibble owners should basically rot, call me on it. I tried dozens of kibbles, none of them worked for MY dog, and I don't want to feed kibble, that is ME, do what works for you. Raw is not for everyone. I've seen needless deaths and illnesses on raw because the owner didn't research properly --- I've also seen it on kibble.
Thanks, do you have any experience with Iams?Quote:
Originally Posted by KYS
I am quite sure I don't have the time to learn How to buy it. how to cut it up. Portions. Proportions. Sources, vitamins and mineral content, etc. I wouldn't have time to do that regularly :o . ( the 2 cups of kibble sounds much easier. )
I am quite sure I have come to what I think would be a wise move for my lifestyle right now. I am thinking Nutro with one egg a week ( Sun. evenings ;) ). Would that be good? Or does Nutro not need the egg? ( And I should feed the egg with the shell, right? )
Thanks again :)
GreyhoundGirl,
I never fed Iams kibble so I can not comment on their food.
All I can suggest is read the first few main ingredients and compare.
(I cook plain eggs for myself once or twice a week (with-out fat)
and share a little with each dogs I give them mostly the cooked whites
from my dish, no egg shells. : )
I would think a good grade kibble alone is fine, but as mentioned, I like to
add human food to their dinner.
I also add a little meat juice or warm water to their kibble.
This is just what I do for my dogs. :)
Kodie and Lucy get one raw egg each a week. Kodie gets the shell because he likes it, Lucy doesnt like the shell.Nutro is a great choice in food,Kodie had bad food allergies and they cleared up so fast when we switched to Nutro Natural choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyhoundGirl
Have you seen the crap that results from eating it? One of my main reasons to switch Niño's food.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roxyluvsme13
Ever since I started feeding Nutro to my pets, their health, skin, and coats have improved a great deal. I am so glad I found PT, because I never knew how to read pet food labels, I just figured that a more expensive food would be better. :o I was feeding Bil-Jac - which is more expensive and not as good in quality compared to Nutro.
That's what my mom thinks. Iams is the most $$$ one in the grocery store.Quote:
Originally Posted by JenBKR
Jen usually does get some people food with her meal ( things like blood from steak ), but I think one raw egg a week would be good with her Nutro.
My mom says I just have to finish the bag of Iams and the bag of purina ONE ( both about half gone ) than I can choose whatever food I want ( as long as it doesn't cost an arm-and-a-leg :p )
I wouldn't know what good resuts would look like. :o Jen has only ever been fed grocery store brands. :o I'm hoping on seeing some improvement once we make the Nutro switch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Suki Wingy
Oh you will, you'll see a big difference!Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyhoundGirl
GreyhoundGirl:My mom says I just have to finish the bag of Iams and the bag of purina ONE than I can choose whatever food I want.>>>>>>>>
Just remember when you make the switch do it gradually
by mixing some of the old food with the new food
so your dogs digestive system will get use to the change.
Yup, have about half a bag of mix-breed food.And Jen has her first bag of lamb-and-rice nutro. :D :D :D I'm so Happie !Quote:
Originally Posted by KYS
She is getting her first raw egg & shell on wedsday.
Just as there's no processed human food that's better than fresh veggies, meat, etc. Fresh food is always better than any processed food IMO. And no, I don't feed raw; I just don't have the time at this point in my life. My dogs and myself eat a lot of processed food and we do fine. Would we all be healthier if we only ate fresh food? Well, olf course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kfamr
W:eek:W
I've switched Keegan to raw for about 10 days now. I am surprised at the difference in her stool. Some of the reasons I switched is that I read that dogs that are overweight might lose weight on raw, dogs that are underweight might gain weight on raw, and pain from arthritis might be relieved.
These are not direct quotes. And I added the words "might be" so that someone won't come and bite me in the butt. Keegan has hip dysplasia and arthritis so I was willing to try anything to help relieve her pain. It isn't a cure-all and I understand that but if it MIGHT help her - I felt obligated to try it.