What did your dog(s) eat today?

[Roxyluvsme13]

dragondawg-Just to make a point, liking the food doesn't matter.. My dogs like their kibble, but it's certainly not the best for them..

[dragondawg]

dragondawg-Just to make a point, liking the food doesn't matter.. My dogs like their kibble, but it's certainly not the best for them..

Well, if one has dogs in perfect health on the current diet of "kibble" then how does one judge it's not best for them? Any criteria or metrics that can be measured? Any scientific studies published in the major Vet journals which measured these criteria? If not then it comes down to personal opinion and something that borders on religion.

[Roxyluvsme13]

Well, if one has dogs in perfect health on the current diet of "kibble" then how does one judge it's not best for them? Any criteria or metrics that can be measured? Any scientific studies published in the major Vet journals which measured these criteria? If not then it comes down to personal opinion and something that borders on religion.

Eh, true I suppose. I'd still much rather feed Raw.. and you really just made me realize that even though Roxy's on one of the lowest quality kibble's out there, she's perfectly healthy..

[Kfamr]

I agree Vela. Just because they seem to be healthy on the outside does not mean they are on the inside.


I mean.. lets think for a moment. McDonalds is the equivalent to Kibble N Bits. If you ate McDonalds everyday would you be healthy? NO.

[K9soul]

I have no desire to get into a debate on raw vs kibble or even kibble vs kibble here, however I'd like to relate this personal tidbit.

My collies spent much of their lives sub-par kibbles. Not grocery store brands, but still not the best. Willie did great in shows and looked great, Cody was beautiful too, but they suffered a lot of problems as they got older that now I truly wonder if they had been on a more nutritious diet, they might have functioned better and even lived beyond their 12 and 13 years, which is still considered pretty good for a collie. Willie got to where he couldn't tolerate certain dog food kibbles and kept developing allergies to them when he got older. Cody had joint problems and weakness, by the end he couldn't get up on his own from laying down and needed help. Willie got ear infections and had eye problems and got bladder crystals and infections more frequently as he got older. They both had hot spots and skin problems. They were from completely different lines and were not related but they were both always on the same foods. They really started showing deterioration around 8 and even more after 10.

Like Cody, Tommy was forming some seborrheic cysts. He had one on his chin and one on his hip. He's about at the age Cody was when Cody started forming his. I moved them to Innova EVO this spring, a grain-free, by-product-free kibble, and three weeks ago switched them to raw dinners. A few days ago I was grooming Tommy, and to my amazement, the cyst on his chin was completely gone, and the cyst on his hip was almost gone. His coat is thicker than it ever has been and I continue to see evidence of changes since they went off grainy kibble. I don't need a scientific study to tell me what's what, I have only to use my thoughts on what makes sense and my own eyes on the differences it is making.

In my job in medical transcription, I've seen time and time again "scientifically studied" and approved drugs and treatments that suddenly have been found to be dangerous and pulled off the market/recalled. So I'm just personally wary and skeptical to let scientific studies determine my beliefs and choices in and of themselves.

By the way, I found this a pretty interesting article on raw and scientific studies, why there haven't been any and why there probably won't be.
http://rawfed.com/myths/research.html

Anyway, sorry for the long post here...

My two got turkey wings for breakfast. They're getting some ground beef and beef liver and banana/yogurt frosty paws later.

[Vela]

Well, if one has dogs in perfect health on the current diet of "kibble" then how does one judge it's not best for them? Any criteria or metrics that can be measured? Any scientific studies published in the major Vet journals which measured these criteria? If not then it comes down to personal opinion and something that borders on religion.

How do you judge perfect health though, becuse they don't look like they are dying on the outside? That does not mean a dog is in perfect health. Yes dogs CAN survive on low quality food, but that does not mean they are in perfect health, and that is not something you can judge just by looking at them. People can survive on junk food too, in fact many teenagers look perfectly healthy and live on sodas and candy and junk, doesn't mean they are pefectly healthy.

[dragondawg]

Yes dogs CAN survive on low quality food, but that does not mean they are in perfect health, and that is not something you can judge just by looking at them.

Vela,

Since one can not judge perfect health by looking, what is your criteria for judging whether your dog is in perfect health? How do you determine this? What are your specific metrics and diagnostics?

K9soul,

I have no idea whether the Propet dog food I feed my dogs is considered sub-par kibble or not. But in answer to the comment in your link:

No research has been done to determine the long-term effects of feeding kibble, nor to determine if it is actually healthy for your dog (it is just assumed healthy because it has passed a 6 month feeding trial, and then manufacturers falsely advertise their product as healthy.).

I believe my previous dog which lived till 11 yrs of age, and the current two at 3 years of age far surpasses a 6 month feeding trial. I have no idea as to what the latest health claims Propet may be making for their product. What I do know is that my dogs flourish on the food. Mine have never had seborrheic cysts, bladder crystals, or persistent infections. They have never had a raw diet either. Now how do we explain the absence of these problems on a commercial dog food diet?

You do realize that Collies are genetically prone to skin disorders, not to mention Progressive Retinal Atrophy, and Collie Eye Anomaly a syndrome that involves one or more of the following: retinal degeneration, cataract, and retinal detachment? That's genetics not food. In another words you could have gave them a steak every night for their 13 yrs, but that would not have changed the genetic make up of the dogs.

P.S. Yes my previous dog enjoyed frosty paws- almost as much as a bowl of ice cream.

[K9soul]

As I said, I am not arguing YOUR kibble, or kibble vs raw. I'm saying I noticed a difference between the quality of kibble and diet my two are on now versus what they used to be on. I know nothing about your kibble, and my post was not at all directed at you specifically.

The eye problem wasn't the retinal atrophy that collies are prone to and they were both eye tested by their breeders as pups. It was conjuncitivitis/goopy type problems, that cleared up with medication. I also never claimed it was definitely their diet that "caused" the problems. I said I WONDERED if their diet had been better, if they would have not had the problems they did. They were not sickly dogs, but they did have problems as they got older that I wonder now if they had had a better diet, whether it be a better kibble, or raw, they might have had fewer problems.

As for my two now, I've witnessed their improvement since I changed them over from a grainier kibble, so I'm happy. I hope this clarifies my previous post a bit more. It was not intended to argue, but to provide my own thoughts and experiences. Take or leave anything from it you'd like