Quote:
Originally Posted by BamaFan121s  No, the sheddig is genetic and not something that results from the diet, but the difference in the coat types results in a difference of needed nutrients.
But for breeds that are not natural "oil producers", wouldn't it stand to reason that their dietary needs would be different? More fats or missing link or flax oil to make up for the lack of secretions?
They can be addressed and labeled any which way that exists, but the bottom line it...the problems run more heavily in specific breeds. The problems are all effected by diet and nutrients. Therefore, the breed's "needs" are not the same nutritionally.
LP for example...runs in Yorkie pretty commonly where as it does not in all breeds. Glucosamine, be it in food or supplemented, promotes joint health. So in essence, the Yorkie is more likely than other breeds to need a variation in diet to address that issue.
(Hugs...off to run errands now and start Halloween. Thanks for the interesting and educational conversation Anne...I'll try to catch back up sometime this weekend.  ) |
In your first paragraph - that's exactly what I already said above - I said "shedding is genetic" (meaning, it
doesn't have to do with the food). So, some dogs are supposed to shed, some not --> therefore, a dog doesn't need different nutrients to mitigate that process, the follicles would be supported either way by a good diet since the shed/not shed is not a disease state.
As for the fats: if we eat more oil, does our skin become oily? No. Certain oils can be beneficial to skin issues, but that doesn't mean it will "increase secretions". In the scenario you mention also, the question would be: are the "non-secretion" dogs
supposed to be that way (i.e. why are we trying to change it? did they used to secrete and now they're not?)? Or has it become a breed
ING problem? Is that where it's coming from?
To your last part about problems running in breeds - we agree there, however, you wouldn't really want to formulate a "breed" kibble that "treated/accounted" for disease states. For example, just bc LP is prevalent in Yorkies, I wouldn't want therapeutic doses of glucos/chon. in a breed food for "Yorkies". I don't want my dogs treated for disease states they may not have. [this is getting in the realm of prescription diets too, again - a disease-state diet]
That's why I like the RDAs. We're kind of talking about 2 different things here really - there are RDAs for all pet foods. Those are *not* breed specific - those are species specific. Secondly, we're talking about disease states/illnesses - some of which run in breeds, but these diseases should be treated as *dog* specific, to be safe - in my mind.
Anyway, I know we're splitting hairs again here in Health and Diet and we've probably annoyed about 300 people. But again, I love this stuff and think it's FUN, bc that's how I roll my geekness -- so thanks for geekin' out with me, Misti.