Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyjane
(Post 3939023)
There are a ton of foods on the market...most of them, I would never give my pups. I am a firm believer that the company is as important, perhaps more important, than the ingredients. |
Definitely agree w/ this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladyjane As for calling any food horrible, I will not do that because I have seen pups live on what I think is awful food and actually be very healthy for all intents and purposes. I have a neighbor who feeds his pup something I would not even look at...yet the pup is living outside (something I hate for any pup) and is 14 years old. I don't think he has seen a vet's office much in his entire life. It kind of boggles the mind...and if I look back years ago when everyone I knew was feeding Alpo and their dogs were fine...I dunno....
Just saying. :)
And, no, I am not saying that we should go feed garbage to our pups. |
My uncle had a dog like this. His Husky never saw the vet, she did not get nearly enough exercise, or good food, never went to the vet and lived to be 14. Most would say she was "doing well". However she stunk, her eyes were always running, her coat always dull and dry, her ears smelled, and I spent a lot of time with her as she lived with us for a few years. These were things I noticed that every one attributes to just being normal dog things.
But I also have had lots of family members tell me of their long lived dogs, etc, and it does make you question.... Sometimes, I wonder too, if the dog food back when was less contaminated or processed, or whatever. It was a much smaller market, first of all. 30 years ago, grocery store food like Purina was much better quality than it is today, I think. As food prices have gone up and market more competitive, the dog food companies have started using poorer quality ingredients and more fillers to keep their profit margins the same. You also have to take into account that a lot of dogs were being fed table scraps (and not today's table scraps - back then, they were much better than today's crap) as well as some raw bones occasionally. I know my grandpa remembers always throwing his dog a bone or whatever. My grandma used to give her dog raw meat scraps and stuff. So you have to wonder if that made any difference. Because, I agree, you hear all the time about how long a dog lived, etc.
Then again, you also have to wonder... but how WELL were they doing? A dog "doing well" can mean so many things to different people. I've seen folks say their dog is in great health and doing well... then all I see is an over-weight dog, who smells like dog when you pet them, sheds like insane amounts of fur, has rank nasty breath and disgusting teeth, and can barely take a 10 min walk without passing out. But I think, especially 30-40 years ago, these were just considered normal things... while plenty of dogs were loved and part of the family, it still wasn't like it is today and they weren't necessarily paid as much attention to in certain regards. So I think a lot can depend on genetics, exercise, environment, lifestyle, etc, and it's too hard to say "well this dog ate x food and lived longer than dog who ate y food and had a shorter life" ya know?
I do think a lot of foods ARE a gimmick these days.... but that goes for both "high quality" and "low quality". I don't necessarily think five-six different meats in one food, a gazillion fruits, veggies, etc, is completely necessary. But I also don't think dogs will necessarily thrive on a diet full of corn, wheat, soy, and by products either. I like a happy medium from a trustworthy company, who doesn't use chemicals such as BHT, ethoxquion (sp?), menadione, etc.
I know I am kinda going off topic here... but I am very interested in the subject. As you do wonder what's just a gimmick and what's true. Bottom line is all the pet food companies have a business first and foremost. It's hard to trust who really has their best interest at heart.