Dog roll vs dog biscuits...

[SeaShell]

I think you have to consider the whole "byproduct" thing as well. When a dog food company says chicken byproduct, it doesn't always mean "crap part of the chicken", it can include the liver, or bone or any of the organs, and the difference between a quality dog food and a cheap one, is the reason for putting the byproduct in. For example, Hills ingredients will say "chicken, chicken byproduct" whereas say pedigree or coles brand might just say "chicken byproduct". This means that coles brand will throw in whatever part of the chicken is cheapest at the time or to fill it up, where hills will use more chicken than byproduct, and the byproduct will be put in for a reason.
Another example, in one of the dry biscuits like pedigree that say "results in firmer stools" or whatever, they add peanut husk to the food to bind the faeces together, whereas eukanuba use beet pulp which is a natural ingredient that allows the body to produce firmer stools, without irritating the stomach.
So even though the good quality foods, like Hills, Royal canin and eukanuba etc might still say they have byproduct and cornmeal etc, they put it in the food for a nutritional purpose, whereas a cheaper food will use it because its a cheap way to fill up the biscuit bag.

 

[KaotikJezta]

Actually most hills does not say chicken,chicken byproduct it just says chicken or meat byproduct. Beet pulp may be natural but not for dogs and how is cornmeal as the first ingredient nutritious to a carnivore.

 

[slim6y]

Of course it's bias - but.... Pet Food Ingredients and Myths | Hill's Pet Nutrition FAQs

"By-products are common ingredients found in both human and pet food. In fact Vitamin E, gelatin, beef bouillon, beef liver and vegetable oils are all by-products. In many countries, "by-products" are very desirable human foods.

Chicken by-product meal is a high quality, concentrated source of protein. We use it due to its low ash (phosphorus) content. It is also very palatable. This ingredient consists of ground, rendered, wholesome parts of the chicken. It includes white meat, dark meat, liver and viscera. The chickens are sourced from human grade processing plants.

Meat by-products consist of the non-rendered, clean parts, other than meat from slaughtered mammals. We specifically use beef or pork lungs, spleens, or livers in our products for consistency and optimal nutrient profile."

Assuming what they say is what they do then I am ok with that

And to answer the corn question, Hills suggest this:

"Corn is an excellent ingredient because of the benefits it brings to the product. Corn is a highly nutritious ingredient chosen as a source of protein (for muscle and tissue growth), carbohydrates (for energy), fiber, antioxidants (Beta-carotene, Vitamin E, Lutein) and linoleic acid - an essential fatty acid that promotes healthy skin and a luxurious coat.

Hill's uses grades 1 and 2 corn for our pet foods, which are the grades traditionally used for human food products.

While some individuals are concerned about allergies in pets, corn is NOT a common cause of adverse food reactions in pets. Studies have shown that corn causes no more food allergies than any other grain.

Most grains, including corn, are poorly digested before they are cooked. Once cooked, however, they become highly digestible. Corn is also highly digestible, higher than several other grains such as rice, wheat, barley and sorghum.

Some consumers are concerned that corn may be a filler. Fillers offer no nutritional value whatsoever. Corn, as mentioned above, is a superb source of nutrients.

We choose all of our ingredients for the nutritional value they contribute to each product we make."

Dogs are not obligate carnivores either.

We feed 'domesticated' dogs. Simple as that. They are not in the wild, they are not scavenging food. And we're trying to provide a healthy, happy lifestyle for our closest companions. Which is why I asked - is dog roll ok?

Oh - I keep thinking of silly answers after I've saved the post:

Two new things:

On Hills it says the following:

AAFCO Statement: Animal feeding tests using AAFCO procedures substantiate that Science Diet Puppy Large Breed provides complete and balanced nutrition for growing puppies

Where on other brands (eg, Australian made Pedigree) it says:

Pedigree is formulated to meet the nutritional levels established by the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) Dog Food Nutrient Profiles for Growth.

Basically that means that they have to put a minimum amount of x-substance in their food but it does not mean it is absorbed by the body. Where as the feeding tests prove that the nutrients given are in fact absorbed.

Further to the beet controversy - that it's not natural for a dog. Well, just take a look at your own diet for example. Surprisingly much of your fibre (eg bread etc) comes from processed foods. I'd have to say that human diet is far less natural than this puppy diet!!!

While I understand we believe natural is best - and for sure, for long lived animals like humans, we really do need to loo after ourselves. But dogs in captivity generally live for 12 - 18 years, and we need to give them the best they can get in that time.

In the wild, we know that their life expectancy is much less. There is plenty of good reason behind that, including diet!

All the vet has recommended is that we feed our puppy the best we can get for at least the first year of his life. We avoid dog roll at all costs. And we avoid giving foods he doesn't need because this will affect his liver and other internal organs. So on and so on.

I figure a vet has two motives - one, they want a healthy pet and two... They want to sell their product. And fair enough really!

But at least I won't be going to dog hypnotherapy or dog reflexology

I think I will stick to listening to the people who studied these animals in depth since veterinary science first began

 

[SeaShell]

Actually most hills does not say chicken,chicken byproduct it just says chicken or meat byproduct. Beet pulp may be natural but not for dogs and how is cornmeal as the first ingredient nutritious to a carnivore.

Youre right hills is cornmeal as its first ingredient, most of the others will say chicken, chicken byproduct, though. And no beet pulp is not natural for dogs, but when humans are asking for "firmer stools" it is an ingredient that will naturally achieve this, without the irritation of a cheaper item such as the peanut husk.

If you are so concerned with what is "natural for dogs", why don't you just let your dog go into the wild where it can hunt its own food? Thats natural isn't it? C'mon we are having a discussion about best nutrition for our PET dogs... no need for this 'I'm right, youre wrong' nonsense...

 

[KaotikJezta]

I'm not saying i'm right your wrong, i was just correcting the fact that you said Hills states chicken and chicken by products when clearly it doesn't. If people want their dogs to have firmer stools, the same can be achieved feeding raw food, that's all I was saying, well actually you are the one that started going on about firmer stools. I gave my opinion on the subject of the best nutrition for dogs so it seems your the one taking it way off topic. At the end of the day I am never going to trust a paid study or a study conducted by a multinational soap and toothpaste company when it comes to my dogs nutrition. There are plenty of vets out there that went on to study more than the one second year unit on animal nutrition and advocate feeding raw. They are not too popular with the AVA as it upsets there sponsors, but they do exist. I said before, it is a personal thing and as my dog had a severe reaction to Hills I will not be buying it again.

 

[phantomreptiles]

I think we all need to agree to disagree
What works for one persons dog, may not work for the next.
I have had a chat with the rep from the nz k9 natural company, he was very adamant my dog would never be right being feed on premium dry dog food.....he insisted I needed to feed my dog what she would eat in the wild....my dog would die within a week if she was in the wild. She is not conditioned for the weather, she is not use to the energy expenditure required, how would she find food, and I don't believe there are any queen sized beds in the wild!
A poster has already said "we are feeding pet dogs, NOT wild dogs" -huge difference.
I believe we are all trying to do the best for our dogs, and some of us believe raw is best, some think hills, euk, roy can etc is best, I personally think if you are arguing on this thread in regards to the best food, you must care very much for your dog
Me, huge fan of a balanced premium dry dog food, but seen many a dog on a raw diet looking blooming amazing!!!! So obviously it is working for them.
Though I do believe it is very hard to get the calcium intake right for pups on a raw diet, seen too many with problems when on an unbalanced diet at a young age, (too much/too little) a small breed pup will always need a higher calcium concentration than a large breed pup, but for completely different lengths of time - this is my only negative comment.
Ohhh I lie! I do not like bones, I think I already said, most slab fractures in canine teeth are caused by sawn off bones. Many a case of pancreatitis has been seen after a dog has ingested a large amount of marrow, along with many an exploratory surgery to retrieve lodged bits of bone, not forgetting the endless enemas caused by bones, and the emergency cases that have a bone lodged across their upper jaw....ahh bones.................

To play devils advocate though - why are 90% of male cats that have urinary probs, such as infections or becoming blocked are always fed an inferior food such as whiskies/friskies.........

 

[Firedrake]

Pretty sure there's a difference in feeding your dog what it would eat in the wiild and actually letting it out into the wild to catch food...

How about dogs with allergies to everything they use in commercial dog biscuits and tinned food? A friend of mine has just found out one of her dogs is allergic to just about everything in normal dog food and even in some of the hypoallergenic ones, corn, barley, oatmeal, beef and carrot to name a few. They got one from the vets but it's about $100 a bag and probably still has oatmeal and barley in it. It makes her itch and scratch poor thing and it's driving the whole family mental, is there anything she can put on the skin to stop it itching while changing her over to a raw food diet? I know all essential oils are out, Kaotik you said something a while back about Apple Cider vinegar working on your dog's ears, does that work on itching?

 

[Kitah]

I wasn't going to really post on this thread, because I don't particularly feel like justifying everything... but I will post on the topic of allergies

Food allergies, contrary to popular belief, are uncommon in the grand scheme of things- dogs become itchy etc far more commonly due to other causes- flea allergy, contact allergy, atopy etc.

Also- food allergies develop towards protein sources- meat sources are the most common reason - e.g. beef, chicken, pork, lamb/mutton. Also, an allergy can only develop to something the animal has previously been exposed to! if it has never eaten fish, it cannot have a fish allergy. If a dog does have a true allergy to beef for example, it cannot receive beef in any format, whether raw or commercially prepared (unless the commercially prepared diet uses the technique to essentially break down proteins so they are so small they're not recognised by the immune system, so the animal still gets the essesntial protein it needs but no reaction)

Also, a dog cannot develop an 'allergy' to things like preservatives, artifcial colouring etc- these are actually drug reactions, not allergies.

Firedrake-what type of dog is it, and how old? does the itching occur seasonally, or year-round? if the dog has something better to do, e.g. play its favourite game with the owner, will it stop mid-game to scratch, or does it not scratch at all when distracted/better things to do? and where is it itching? everywhere? or just the ventral abdomen, paws, forelimbs etc? over the tail base? does it have qutie red skin between the toes, in the arm pits and between the back legs? what is used for flea control? if you really think your friends dog actually has a food allergy (unlikely to be honest) then try this- Provide the dog with a novel food diet, i.e. a protein it has never exposed to before (such as duck, fish, venison, kangaroo, rabbit- so long as the dog has never exposed to before) plus a simple carbohydrate source such as boiled potatoes or rice. Feed this diet ONLY (no other treats, nothing- this is ESSENTIAL) for 6 weeks- if there is resolution of signs- you are correct and do indeed have a food allergy. To confirm, go back to your original diet- if signs come back- definite confirmation. However- these novel diets are NOT complete and CANNOT sustain an animal long term, it is soley used to diagnose the problem.

If you answer some of the questions about where she's itchy etc. I can provide some recommendations for you to help reduce the itching until you get the problem under control- you're probably best off PMing me though to avoid this thread going too off topic

____

Finally- if anyone wants to disagree with me, fine- but this is what I have been taught from a five year veterinary science degree, from which I am about to graduate. Yes, I will be another one of those 'vets,' but I'm still human, and have animals best interests in mind (contrary to what people think- vets aren't in it just for 'money'-and you'd be surprised at how little vets earn when you factor everything in) I've stated what I wanted to, so most likely won't discuss it any further unless someone actually has a productive question... I will try and help you if you like though, Firedrake.


Sorry for going somewhat off-topic slim6y. In a way it is related, however, because everyone seems to attribute 'food allergies' to commercially prepared diets.

 

[Firedrake]

PM sent cheers Kitah

 

[Cockney_Red]

I already have an idea about the answer to this - but I'd like to get several people's inputs that aren't necessarily vets trying to push the most expensive dog biscuits on the market on me.

Rather than feed you my opinion - this is what the vet said:

Do not feed your dog dog roll, it is usually low quality, full of fat and salt etc etc.

She also said the minimum standard is AFFCO.

I recently became a new dog owner (not being able to own snakes in NZ) and I am loving every minute of it. I have a wonderful puppy now 14 weeks old and he's a very good boy.

But... He doesn't like his biscuits (despite them being something like $40 per bag).

The vet has said, do not give him dog roll and keep at him with the biscuits. But I noted that the dog rolls even have the AFFCO backing on them and ingredients say beef, lamb, chicken, no salts, no colours etc.

So - what do you do for your dogs?

Like snakes, only the best is the real option - but is a vet just pushing their $40 small bags of awesome dog food on you? Or is there a real point behind the dog roll's hidden nasties?

As the official pooper scooper for 3 nutters.......Bikkies...

 

[SeaShell]

I'm not saying i'm right your wrong, i was just correcting the fact that you said Hills states chicken and chicken by products when clearly it doesn't. If people want their dogs to have firmer stools, the same can be achieved feeding raw food, that's all I was saying, well actually you are the one that started going on about firmer stools. I gave my opinion on the subject of the best nutrition for dogs so it seems your the one taking it way off topic. At the end of the day I am never going to trust a paid study or a study conducted by a multinational soap and toothpaste company when it comes to my dogs nutrition. There are plenty of vets out there that went on to study more than the one second year unit on animal nutrition and advocate feeding raw. They are not too popular with the AVA as it upsets there sponsors, but they do exist. I said before, it is a personal thing and as my dog had a severe reaction to Hills I will not be buying it again.

Yes of course, you aren't saying that you're right... you just like saying "Well actually..."
I am terribly sorry for my comment saying that hills states that it has chicken, chicken by product blah blah, I don't have a bag infront of me to read. I'm not taking it off topic, as I understand, this thread is a discussion about the differences in types of dog food, and I was discussing it... so sorry about that too...
If you will also read, I am no advocate of Hills, I'm not pushing it on anyone, it was merely one of the examples I gave, among others, in this "discussion". I have no problem with you feeding your dog whatever you want, and I respect you for the fact that you have gone out and researched your food, and have found whats best for your dog. At the end of the day, thats what matters.

And Kitah, thank you for your input too, I see that you are a bit put off with taking part in this discussion? Everyone here should be able to offer their opinion without someone saying "well actually, everything you just said is wrong, despite whatever experience, knowledge, study you may have..."

 

[Kitah]

I don't often like to contribute to threads that I know could end up that way... I just couldn't really be bothered dealing with it most of the time, to be honest.

I believe everyones entitled to their opinion, and I provided mine to Slim6y via a PM. I'm always quite eager to hear new opinions, but for a topic such as this I'm still going off my study, personal and professional experience. I'm not necessarily saying its the case here, but I just don't like it when others argue and believe their way is the only way- "theres more than one way to skin a cat."

The raw vs. processed pet food debate has been going on for a long time, many of the thoughts are flawed, and I just don't feel like debating it

Thats all I'll say to avoid going too off topic again

 

[SeaShell]

I agree, the arguement will go on for a long time, probably moreso because there will never be one diet that suits all, and there will be the people who maintain their way as the only way, like you said. Its a shame, I like animal nutrition, and enjoy talking about it and studying it, but this sort of nonsense kinda puts a dampener on things.

 

[slim6y]

"theres more than one way to skin a cat."

Being a vet, you should know that. But I've always heard the saying, I think I'd like Penn and Teller to prove if its possible now to skin cats differently

Kitah - I think what you've brought to the discussion is perfect and exactly what you believe. That's what this interweb thing is for. It's open forum that allows people to voice their opinion. Some more educated than others of course.

However, this topic was more bikkies v dog roll not bikkies v raw food. But I was quite happy to hear people's opinion on raw food too. It wasn't what I expected, but happy it came out

 

[Kitah]

Well at least the mutual agreement by everyone is not to feed dog roll sorry for going off topic!

 

[KaotikJezta]

Yes of course, you aren't saying that you're right... you just like saying "Well actually..."
I am terribly sorry for my comment saying that hills states that it has chicken, chicken by product blah blah, I don't have a bag infront of me to read. I'm not taking it off topic, as I understand, this thread is a discussion about the differences in types of dog food, and I was discussing it... so sorry about that too...
If you will also read, I am no advocate of Hills, I'm not pushing it on anyone, it was merely one of the examples I gave, among others, in this "discussion". I have no problem with you feeding your dog whatever you want, and I respect you for the fact that you have gone out and researched your food, and have found whats best for your dog. At the end of the day, thats what matters.

And Kitah, thank you for your input too, I see that you are a bit put off with taking part in this discussion? Everyone here should be able to offer their opinion without someone saying "well actually, everything you just said is wrong, despite whatever experience, knowledge, study you may have..."

Can you please stop singling me out and twisting everything I say Wild-Aura, how many times do I have to say its a personal choice and that my opinion and why I have it is just that, my opinion. You say you respect that and then you go on with the "well actually" BS , when did I say everything you said was wrong, what I said was you took it off topic and started discussing stools. Not going to respond to you again because you are just trying to start an argument and as Kitah has said the debate has been going on for a long time and neither side is likely to change there minds. I just PMed you by the way Kitah.

 

[slim6y]

See - we can all get along here

 

[Tsubakai]

I'm not saying i'm right your wrong, i was just correcting the fact that you said Hills states chicken and chicken by products when clearly it doesn't. If people want their dogs to have firmer stools, the same can be achieved feeding raw food, that's all I was saying, well actually you are the one that started going on about firmer stools. I gave my opinion on the subject of the best nutrition for dogs so it seems your the one taking it way off topic. At the end of the day I am never going to trust a paid study or a study conducted by a multinational soap and toothpaste company when it comes to my dogs nutrition. There are plenty of vets out there that went on to study more than the one second year unit on animal nutrition and advocate feeding raw. They are not too popular with the AVA as it upsets there sponsors, but they do exist. I said before, it is a personal thing and as my dog had a severe reaction to Hills I will not be buying it again.

They might not be popular with the AVA as its about evidence-based recommendations and nothing to do with sponsorship. The AVA are a little more professional than to pander to a particular viewpoint solely on the basis of a financial relationship.

 

[KaotikJezta]

So why was Dr Tom Lonsdale thrown out of the AVA when he did an expose on the link between dental disease and commercial dogfood.

 

[glassless_mind]

I have no idea. We get taught the link between dental disease, and some brands and forms of commercial dog food, but not all of them.

Some vets may have studied nutrition and advocate feeding raw.

Some vets may also have studied animal welfare and farm practices, and not drink milk because "milking cows is mean". Yet I'm a vet who's studied animal wefare and farm practices, and I don't agree. I've worked on many dairy farms and they've all seemed great to me.

What you feed your dog is opinion based - it comes from your personal education, as well as what you hear, see and are told by other people. It's also completely subjective, as to the breed of dog, age of dog, health condition, energy requirements and nutrient requirements of that animal.
e.g.
A dog that lies around all day, has a much lower energy level than a greyhound, and does not need to be fed food designed for racing greyhounds
A border collie that chases a ball a couple of times a day, does not have the same energy requirements as the border collie that works stock all day, and runs in excess of 30km per day.
A growing puppy has a different energy requirement to a 3 year old dog, even though they may do the same amount of exercise
A maltese needs different food to a great dane

PERSONALLY, I do believe in hills, but I would mix it with a cheaper brand to pad it out, and probably feed it mostly while the dog is still growing, and less so after that, because of the expense. That's just me.

The AVA is a very broad, national association. If they doubted everyone who came forward with a new idea, or different opinion, they woudln't be the SCIENTISTS, that they are trained to be. If you want to see the research and vets discussing it, go on VIN and read it all for youself, then make up your own mind. I find when people get thrown out of some association, the reason they give you is rarely the whole story.