Quote:
Originally Posted by BonBon  I posted in a thread earlier about how I personally liked a food to have more meat in it. Now I'm seeing this post and you have me really thinking about things from this perspective.
I wanted to ask what feeding trials you feel a food should have? Are the AAFCO guidelines enough? What else do we need to be aware of as far as testing and good quality control procedures?
Sorry you're getting so many diet/food questions today, but like the others I value your opinion!  |
These are such excellent questions Bonny. I am impressed with petowners who want to educate themselves. I will openly admit that I found this information too hard as a younger pet owner to sort it all out. I decided to home cook for that reason. I still believe I can do better than any company for my boys by home cooking for them with oversight from my vets. My dog Daisy unfortunately is another story and almost every diet from all meat and bone to vegetarian have failed her. She does best on diets designed for liver compromised dogs that consist of ingredients that sound terrible! She's 11, and nearing the end of her natural lifespan, so I am less worried these days about perfect balance and ingredients -- I just want to keep her alive!
BTW, AAFCO guidelines are not the same as AAFCO feeding trials. Ellie May can probably better explain the differences but basically when a company says that a food meets AAFCO guidelines, it only means they have done that on paper. AAFCO feeding trials means that they have run a trial of the food on pets. Then of course we have our own feeding trials at home - can OUR pets tolerate the food? And, pets are individuals, any BC nutritionist will say that, so what works for one will not work for another.