What did your dog(s) eat today?

[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