Pet Fooled. Great documentary for all pet owners

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

Apparently vets get one class about nutrition and that is it. Amazing, isn't it...? They come out of school knowing almost nothing, relatively. It's kinda shocking...and most def disappointing.

Yes, RC/Hills/Iams etc are huge financial sponsors of vet schools and student programs. They conduct themselves just like how big pharma does with medical students...same thing, same shady practices in terms of paying for stuff and ingratiating themselves when they are students. We had the same thing in nursing school...as did our friends who were in medical school, PT school, dental...you name it.

So yeah, I agree that it's very hard to trust a vet who promotes RC or Hills, for me.

Honest question my vet doesn't push any food in fact I have never had a vet food pushed on we so when we say vets aren't educated enough in nutrition are we referring to them pushing prescription food or what? Only certain brands have prescription food and these foods save lives. So I'm confused. Are there vets who honestly beat people up about there food choices?

[mimimomo]

Originally Posted by Lovetodream88

Honest question my vet doesn't push any food in fact I have never had a vet food pushed on we so when we say vets aren't educated enough in nutrition are we referring to them pushing prescription food or what? Only certain brands have prescription food and these foods save lives. So I'm confused. Are there vets who honestly beat people up about there food choices?

Maybe this will help?
Myths About Raw: Is my vet really qualified to be giving nutritional advice?

I know you believe that RX food saves lives but it does not cure the underlying disease...it's also for short term use.
Carbs in pet food cause many illnesses, carbs are not good for people either.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by mimimomo

Maybe this will help?
Myths About Raw: Is my vet really qualified to be giving nutritional advice?

I know you believe that RX food saves lives but it does not cure the underlying disease...it's also for short term use.
Carbs in pet food cause many illnesses, carbs are not good for people either.

I disagree about prescription foods, with certain conditions it is necessary and life long. There maybe some that are for short them but definitely not all of them exspecially allergy foods. Many of these issues prescription foods are for can not be cured. Like IBD you can not use any other food for true food allergies unless home cooking or raw because other dog food comes in contact with foods your pet is allergic to in the factory. My dog will not eat home cooked and I find the risks higher with raw then the pros so I choose to feed prescription kibble. None of the vets I have gotten to have spoken out about raw I have only seen the AVMA do it and my teacher. Just because I personally am against raw food does not mean I'm an idiot. Y'all seem to think that because I'm against it that I must not have put research it in but I have. One of the reasons I have tried to stay away from the raw threads is because it gets pushed down your throats and research gets ignored. I don't want to be rude to you because I like you but what you said about prescription food is not true at all. I hope you will look further into it to learn about it. I'm over this thread though. I have been to two nutritionist for humans and did go over basic dog needs and carbs have their place and they do make energy. It's just getting a little to bashy on this thread but I guess all food threads eventually turn to that. I hate when people bash prescription food it's just sad because it does save lives.

[mimimomo]

Originally Posted by Lovetodream88

I disagree about prescription foods, with certain conditions it is necessary and life long. There maybe some that are for short them but definitely not all of them exspecially allergy foods. Many of these issues prescription foods are for can not be cured. Like IBD you can not use any other food for true food allergies unless home cooking or raw because other dog food comes in contact with foods your pet is allergic to in the factory. My dog will not eat home cooked and I find the risks higher with raw then the pros so I choose to feed prescription kibble. None of the vets I have gotten to have spoken out about raw I have only seen the AVMA do it and my teacher. Just because I personally am against raw food does not mean I'm an idiot. Y'all seem to think that because I'm against it that I must not have put research it in but I have. One of the reasons I have tried to stay away from the raw threads is because it gets pushed down your throats and research gets ignored. I don't want to be rude to you because I like you but what you said about prescription food is not true at all. I hope you will look further into it to learn about it. I'm over this thread though. I have been to two nutritionist for humans and did go over basic dog needs and carbs have their place and they do make energy. It's just getting a little to bashy on this thread but I guess all food threads eventually turn to that. I hate when people bash prescription food it's just sad because it does save lives.

Whoa, not sure what happened there...did I say something to offend or was it the link? Whatever I say is my opinion & surely did not mean to offend.

You know what, I must be the idiot , I did not know that RX food was for life in some cases. I've fed Hill's c/d b4 when Momo & Princess had struvite crystals long time ago. The vet said it was temporary & it also said that on the bag. Also, learned that they didn't need a diet change, just needed to liquefy their diet.

When Coco came to live w/us, she came w/a bag of Hill's i/d. It said the same thing on the bag. So I just assumed that it was short term use.

I changed her food to raw right away & she has had no problems. She wouldn't eat her i/d...she wanted what every other doggie was having. LOL

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by mimimomo

Whoa, not sure what happened there...did I say something to offend or was it the link? Whatever I say is my opinion & surely did not mean to offend.

You know what, I must be the idiot , I did not know that RX food was for life in some cases. I've fed Hill's c/d b4 when Momo & Princess had struvite crystals long time ago. The vet said it was temporary & it also said that on the bag. Also, learned that they didn't need a diet change, just needed to liquefy their diet.

When Coco came to live w/us, she came w/a bag of Hill's i/d. It said the same thing on the bag. So I just assumed that it was short term use.

I changed her food to raw right away & she has had no problems. She wouldn't eat her i/d...she wanted what every other doggie was having. LOL

Im sorry I must have taken it wrong and been overly defensive. Callie had IBD which is caused by allergies. She is on Royal Canin hypoallergenic small breed and it's ok for her to be on that her whole life and she will be. I had tried everything with her until she got diagnosed and we tried this food. It has been a life saver for her. The other two eat it also because what the other has is always what they want lol. Again I'm sorry. I think your great Jenny!

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by Lovetodream88

Honest question my vet doesn't push any food in fact I have never had a vet food pushed on we so when we say vets aren't educated enough in nutrition are we referring to them pushing prescription food or what? Only certain brands have prescription food and these foods save lives. So I'm confused. Are there vets who honestly beat people up about there food choices?

I'm not referring to pushing food here, per se. My huge contention with vets in regard to nutrition is that none of them even seem to know much of anything about it . Ever tried to have a really solid, in-depth conversation about the nitty-gritty of canine nutrition with a vet....? TRUST me, T, you know wayyyyy more than 95% of them out there with respect to nutrition.

Yet there they are making recommendations at times, about something they know almost nothing. And as far as "selling", I don't like or trust the fact that they (almost) all sell 1 or 2 brands of foods, to the absolute exclusion of anything else. If that doesn't scream a sort of "brainwashing" (I don't mean that in a dramatic way, btw, lol!)...I'm not sure what does. Ya know what I mean?

I honestly think vets just do not have the clinical time to keep up on animal nutrition unless that's their true focus. But bc of that, I don't think they should give out advice about it at all the either....ie "oh no, ALL raw is just bad!" -- when actually, they've likely NOT researched that statement at all; more likely they're parroting something they've heard/read and haven't necessarily *truly* looked at the opposing side OBJECTIVELY. That freakin' bothers me to no end....bc it reeks of ignorance, and that doesn't benefit anyone.

Save

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by Lovetodream88

I find a lot of dodds stuff to be lacking in actual research or going against the research. I don't want to argue about it but in my opinion and for me it's not a good source.

Then just ignore Dodd's, though you're missing a huge part of education if you do. Her vaccine studies are nothing like her other stuff. Her vaccine trials changed the very course of how *your* dogs are currently vaccinated and following the AAHA's schedule, btw. The fact that you're implying anything about her vaccine studies tells me you haven't actually read them or that you realize they are *published* and incredibly legit.

Focus instead on Schultz - he's the real leader in that sector anyway. He's published about DOIs countless times, as have many others.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

I'm not referring to pushing food here, per se. My huge contention with vets in regard to nutrition is that none of them even seem to know much of anything about it . Ever tried to have a really solid, in-depth conversation about the nitty-gritty of canine nutrition with a vet....? TRUST me, T, you know wayyyyy more than 95% of them out there with respect to nutrition.

Yet there they are making recommendations at times, about something they know almost nothing. And as far as "selling", I don't like or trust the fact that they (almost) all sell 1 or 2 brands of foods, to the absolute exclusion of anything else. If that doesn't scream a sort of "brainwashing" (I don't mean that in a dramatic way, btw, lol!)...I'm not sure what does. Ya know what I mean?

I honestly think vets just do not have the clinical time to keep up on animal nutrition unless that's their true focus. But bc of that, I don't think they should give out advice about it at all the either....ie "oh no, ALL raw is just bad!" -- when actually, they've likely NOT researched that statement at all; more likely they're parroting something they've heard/read and haven't necessarily *truly* looked at the opposing side OBJECTIVELY. That freakin' bothers me to no end....bc it reeks of ignorance, and that doesn't benefit anyone.

Save

The only food my vet sells is prescription food. I'm guessing there are vets out there who sell more then just the prescription food? Heck mine doesn't even sell my certain one because I have to get the small breed version of the hypoallergenic because Callie is EXTREMLY picky about the size of things she eats so they order it for me. I have never really got nutritional advise from a vet except when Callie was diagnosed with IBD and she laid the options out and explained the different prescription foods but that's been pretty much it. My instructor was the one who gave her opinion of raw and on one of our tests we had to list all the cons which were probably your basic ones you have heard before. I think if say Callie stopped eating her prescription food or we had a health issue pop up food wise I would probably go to a vet nutritionist. I'm honestly not even sure how my vet feels about raw or any food lol. The tech always asks at the beginning of the appointment what they are eating or if they are still eating so and so and all the meds questions and so on.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

Then just ignore Dodd's, though you're missing a huge part of education if you do. Her vaccine studies are nothing like her other stuff. Her vaccine trials changed the very course of how *your* dogs are currently vaccinated and following the AAHA's schedule, btw. The fact that you're implying anything about her vaccine studies tells me you haven't actually read them or that you realize they are *published* and incredibly legit.

Focus instead on Schultz - he's the real leader in that sector anyway. He's published about DOIs countless times, as have many others.

No I don't think I have read it. I disagreed with some of the stuff I saw so I stopped reading.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by Lovetodream88

Honest question my vet doesn't push any food in fact I have never had a vet food pushed on we so when we say vets aren't educated enough in nutrition are we referring to them pushing prescription food or what? Only certain brands have prescription food and these foods save lives. So I'm confused. Are there vets who honestly beat people up about there food choices?

Yep. I went to a vet who told me I needed to go on to a "quality food" like Iams, Purina or Science Diet and get off of the grain-free food that I was feeding. This was our old vet because naturally I did not go back. There was no discussion whatsoever. He just shut down my questions. He wasn't trying to *sell* me the food for his own profit, just telling me bottom line, it's what I should be feeding. I'm not even saying SD, Purina, etc, are terrible to feed. Sometimes they can be great choices depending on the pet. I even feed Purina Beyond sometimes when I need food quickly, etc. But to blindly state these foods are superior is what irks me.

My theory is just that it's what "works" (but isn't necessarily what's best). They don't have time to research every food out there (understandably) so they go with the brands that they are taught about in school and have a fairly decent track record. If they go and recommend... say, Orijen, to a client and then the dog gets sick, the owner is going to go and blame the vet.

My current vet is absolutely amazing. They are a bit of both -- they do some holistic and conventional. They believe combing the two can be extremely helpful in our pets. They look at the body as a whole to determine the underlying issues that are causing the problems and eliminate symptoms before throwing them on an RX food or medications that MAY not be needed (of course, sometimes they are, and they gladly will do what is best for your pet).

My vet will have a personal conversation with me regarding Jackson and take the time to listen to any concerns I may have or questions that are reasonable (I wouldn't sit there and take up all of her time lol) but she never makes me feel like a burden like vets in the past have. I no longer feel forced into anything (i.e. prior vets would just be like "oh he needs x, y, z, for sure, so I'm going to go and grab the vaccines and get them ready" and then I would be kind of sitting there like ... uhh, okay (I'm not a confrontational person so I would just be like, okay). And if I tried to be like "oh, what's this one for?" they kind of blow me off and just say he needs it. I went through... 3 vets prior to finding the perfect one because they were all pushy with one thing or another.

I do think vets get a bad rep on the internet and it's not deserved. Majority of vets are not in it for the money or greedy people. And I don't think the majority of them mean any harm. I believe it to be a combination of not wanting to change, not keeping up with latest research, maybe ignorance or looking at things one-sided or with blinders on.

I've chilled out a lot on my views. I used to be very anti-SD, RC, Purina, IAMS, you name it. *I* was one of those with my blinders on, lol, and couldn't see past an ingredient list on the back of a bag when it's about sooo much more than that and I do realize that now. Do I tend to lean towards the more 'natural' 'holistic' (I don't even like those words lol) approach? Yeah, probably. But I also appreciate those who maybe don't agree with me. I've gotten to the point where I'm very... feed your dog what you're comfortable feeding your dog. As long as it's in good shape, not dying from it, and has good stools and solid bloodwork... I'd say you're probably doing alright.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

I'm not referring to pushing food here, per se. My huge contention with vets in regard to nutrition is that none of them even seem to know much of anything about it . Ever tried to have a really solid, in-depth conversation about the nitty-gritty of canine nutrition with a vet....? TRUST me, T, you know wayyyyy more than 95% of them out there with respect to nutrition.

Yet there they are making recommendations at times, about something they know almost nothing. And as far as "selling", I don't like or trust the fact that they (almost) all sell 1 or 2 brands of foods, to the absolute exclusion of anything else. If that doesn't scream a sort of "brainwashing" (I don't mean that in a dramatic way, btw, lol!)...I'm not sure what does. Ya know what I mean?

I honestly think vets just do not have the clinical time to keep up on animal nutrition unless that's their true focus. But bc of that, I don't think they should give out advice about it at all the either....ie "oh no, ALL raw is just bad!" -- when actually, they've likely NOT researched that statement at all; more likely they're parroting something they've heard/read and haven't necessarily *truly* looked at the opposing side OBJECTIVELY. That freakin' bothers me to no end....bc it reeks of ignorance, and that doesn't benefit anyone.

Save

^ These are kind of my feelings, too. I mean there is clearly a bias. I would feel the same way if the only thing a vet recommended was Orijen or something. I would feel the same way if Champion was writing all of their textbooks and therefore Orijen and Acana were ALL they recommended to patients without considering that, hey, maybe just maybe... some dogs don't. do. well. on those foods?! What a thought, because, ya know... every dog is different.

I've seen gorgeous dogs on Purina Pro Plan and out of shape, poor skin, stool and coat dogs on Orijen and vice versa. What works for one dog may not work for the other.

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by Lovetodream88

No I don't think I have read it. I disagreed with some of the stuff I saw so I stopped reading.

Well, you said earlier that you think overvaccinating is the biggest issue facing our dogs and that it is "seriously effecting our dogs quality or life and how long they live".....and yet you haven't even read the preeminent research done in this field by Dodds -- who is the very reason that the AAHA has the new protocols that its had for the last 10 years+. Her valid, published studies are the reason you're following the protocol that you are with your dogs....rather than still vaccinating annually. And then you disparage her work even though you haven't read it.

I don't understand what you mean when you say you "disagreed with" her vaccine study results....what could you possibly disagree with there....?

[Wylie's Mom]

Originally Posted by Britster

^ These are kind of my feelings, too. I mean there is clearly a bias. I would feel the same way if the only thing a vet recommended was Orijen or something. I would feel the same way if Champion was writing all of their textbooks and therefore Orijen and Acana were ALL they recommended to patients without considering that, hey, maybe just maybe... some dogs don't. do. well. on those foods?! What a thought, because, ya know... every dog is different.

I've seen gorgeous dogs on Purina Pro Plan and out of shape, poor skin, stool and coat dogs on Orijen and vice versa. What works for one dog may not work for the other.

Yes, exactly!!! I would feel the same way if they all promoted Orijen or Primal or whatever - it's the principle of being swayed to promote/sell 1 or 2 brands only. That's not knowledge to me, that's about marketing power - and that makes me very suspicious, hesitant, and uncomfortable about those particular brands as a whole. I don't like how they use students as they do.

And yep - what works for not does not for another!

Save

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by Britster

Yep. I went to a vet who told me I needed to go on to a "quality food" like Iams, Purina or Science Diet and get off of the grain-free food that I was feeding. This was our old vet because naturally I did not go back. There was no discussion whatsoever. He just shut down my questions. He wasn't trying to *sell* me the food for his own profit, just telling me bottom line, it's what I should be feeding. I'm not even saying SD, Purina, etc, are terrible to feed. Sometimes they can be great choices depending on the pet. I even feed Purina Beyond sometimes when I need food quickly, etc. But to blindly state these foods are superior is what irks me.

My theory is just that it's what "works" (but isn't necessarily what's best). They don't have time to research every food out there (understandably) so they go with the brands that they are taught about in school and have a fairly decent track record. If they go and recommend... say, Orijen, to a client and then the dog gets sick, the owner is going to go and blame the vet.

My current vet is absolutely amazing. They are a bit of both -- they do some holistic and conventional. They believe combing the two can be extremely helpful in our pets. They look at the body as a whole to determine the underlying issues that are causing the problems and eliminate symptoms before throwing them on an RX food or medications that MAY not be needed (of course, sometimes they are, and they gladly will do what is best for your pet).

My vet will have a personal conversation with me regarding Jackson and take the time to listen to any concerns I may have or questions that are reasonable (I wouldn't sit there and take up all of her time lol) but she never makes me feel like a burden like vets in the past have. I no longer feel forced into anything (i.e. prior vets would just be like "oh he needs x, y, z, for sure, so I'm going to go and grab the vaccines and get them ready" and then I would be kind of sitting there like ... uhh, okay (I'm not a confrontational person so I would just be like, okay). And if I tried to be like "oh, what's this one for?" they kind of blow me off and just say he needs it. I went through... 3 vets prior to finding the perfect one because they were all pushy with one thing or another.

I do think vets get a bad rep on the internet and it's not deserved. Majority of vets are not in it for the money or greedy people. And I don't think the majority of them mean any harm. I believe it to be a combination of not wanting to change, not keeping up with latest research, maybe ignorance or looking at things one-sided or with blinders on.

I've chilled out a lot on my views. I used to be very anti-SD, RC, Purina, IAMS, you name it. *I* was one of those with my blinders on, lol, and couldn't see past an ingredient list on the back of a bag when it's about sooo much more than that and I do realize that now. Do I tend to lean towards the more 'natural' 'holistic' (I don't even like those words lol) approach? Yeah, probably. But I also appreciate those who maybe don't agree with me. I've gotten to the point where I'm very... feed your dog what you're comfortable feeding your dog. As long as it's in good shape, not dying from it, and has good stools and solid bloodwork... I'd say you're probably doing alright.

Luckily I have never had a vet do that to me. My vet is very good about saying ok here is the issue and here is what we can do. My vet is a fan of starting with generally the least expensive option first. I love my vet she is never pushy. I have a hard time with Purina because of the chicken jerky and then the issues with Beneful.

[Lovetodream88]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

Well, you said earlier that you think overvaccinating is the biggest issue facing our dogs and that it is "seriously effecting our dogs quality or life and how long they live".....and yet you haven't even read the preeminent research done in this field by Dodds -- who is the very reason that the AAHA has the new protocols that its had for the last 10 years+. Her valid, published studies are the reason you're following the protocol that you are with your dogs....rather than still vaccinating annually. And then you disparage her work even though you haven't read it.

I don't understand what you mean when you say you "disagreed with" her vaccine study results....what could you possibly disagree with there....?

Oh no I don't disagree with her vaccine studies just some of the other things. Time is hard to come by right now with classes, the new pup and everything but when life slows down a bit I will try to look at them. I know humans and dogs are different but why is it that we get shots as children/ babies and are good for life but it's not like that with dogs?