Science Diet?

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by ironmike86

Your right. I was looking at the 2012 date. The recalls were for 2007. And if a company does have a recall it's how they fix the problem or ignore it. I know not all foods are the same but any foods that have the first 3 ingredients that are simply "filler foods" I wouldn't feed that. And reviews are subjective also. My pup loves Royal Cain. But I don't feed him that. I feed Fromm. I use RC as a biscuit for treats. I just don't like corn filler. I just don't like foods with no nutrition value. For me or my pup.But there is something in that RC that makes him go nuts.JMO
Dog Food Advisor | 1-Star Dog Foods

I don't use that site to choose a dog food. The qualifications of the person rating the food are not what I look for in a person when considering what to feed my pups.
I prefer the advice of a veterinary nutritionist.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by ironmike86

But having a finicky eater before. I wouldn't hesitate to feed it anything it would eat. I would just try to supplement the food. Nothing worst then worry about your pup not eating at all. It is easy to put DOWN dog foods when your dog eats a food that is "thought" or "Rated" better. And easy to forget that dog may not eat that. I like to supplement with fresh foods anyways JMO

I homecook for one of my pups because she has a medical condtion. She loves her food and is thriving! I have actually considered cooking for all of them; but it is quite time consuming. Not sure I could hang with it....but I am thinking about it.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by chachi

Well thats not exactly what Im saying. I shop for My dogs like I shop for my family for example if kraft mayonaise has more fat I dont buy it because I like kraft as a company I buy one that has lower fat. Thats what I mean by buying for ingredients. If a company changed their formula forr the food and the ingredients werent what i desired I would buy from a different company that offered a food that was more to my liking

I see what you're saying. I do agree with you -- I look at company first, then ingredients.... I don't just put aside ingredients either. I do think it's important. Even if a company has a stellar reputation but what are IMO not great ingredients, I'm not going to feed it. Just like a good food can have an astounding ingredient list, but a company that I do not like or trust, I'm still not going to feed it. The Hills Ideal Balance posted above is fine, very typical of most other grain inclusive formulas, but it's not a good representative of SD. Most formulas look like this, so this would be a better overall feel for what most SD foods are. Let me be clear, I'm not talking about their RX foods... talking about the regular SD.

Whole Grain Corn, Whole Grain Wheat, Chicken By-Product Meal, Soybean Meal, Animal Fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), Chicken Liver Flavor, Corn Gluten Meal, Flaxseed, Fish Oil, Dried Beet Pulp, Lactic Acid, Powdered Cellulose, Soybean Oil, Natural Flavor, Potassium Citrate, DL-Methionine, Choline Chloride, L-Lysine, Calcium Carbonate, vitamins (L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (source of vitamin C), Vitamin E Supplement, Niacin, Thiamine Mononitrate, Vitamin A Supplement, Calcium Pantothenate, Biotin, Vitamin B12 Supplement, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Riboflavin, Folic Acid, Vitamin D3 Supplement), Taurine, Vitamin E Supplement, minerals (Manganese Sulfate, Ferrous Sulfate, Zinc Oxide, Copper Sulfate, Calcium Iodate, Sodium Selenite), Iodized Salt, L-Tryptophan, L-Threonine, preserved with Mixed Tocopherols and Citric Acid, L-Carnitine, Phosphoric acid, Beta-Carotene, Rosemary Extract.


I also don't think just because a company has a recall, we should write it off either.

Dole has had quite a few recalls. I still will buy their products. Lots of human food companies are recalled every day and often people have no idea...

So yes, I pick my company first (I feel very few are trustworthy) and all of them are big into marketing one way or another. SD has a huge great marketing team who emphasizes "vet approved", Champion encourages it's "biologically appropriate" food, Fromm has it's "four star meals!" They are all great at convincing us they are the best lol.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by Britster

I see what you're saying. I do agree with you -- I look at company first, then ingredients.... I don't just put aside ingredients either. I do think it's important. Even if a company has a stellar reputation but what are IMO not great ingredients, I'm not going to feed it. Just like a good food can have an astounding ingredient list, but a company that I do not like or trust, I'm still not going to feed it. The Hills Ideal Balance posted above is fine, very typical of most other grain inclusive formulas, but it's not a good representative of SD. Most formulas look like this, so this would be a better overall feel for what most SD foods are. Let me be clear, I'm not talking about their RX foods... talking about the regular SD.

Whole Grain Corn, Whole Grain Wheat, Chicken By-Product Meal, Soybean Meal, Animal Fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), Chicken Liver Flavor, Corn Gluten Meal, Flaxseed, Fish Oil, Dried Beet Pulp, Lactic Acid, Powdered Cellulose, Soybean Oil, Natural Flavor, Potassium Citrate, DL-Methionine, Choline Chloride, L-Lysine, Calcium Carbonate, vitamins (L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (source of vitamin C), Vitamin E Supplement, Niacin, Thiamine Mononitrate, Vitamin A Supplement, Calcium Pantothenate, Biotin, Vitamin B12 Supplement, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Riboflavin, Folic Acid, Vitamin D3 Supplement), Taurine, Vitamin E Supplement, minerals (Manganese Sulfate, Ferrous Sulfate, Zinc Oxide, Copper Sulfate, Calcium Iodate, Sodium Selenite), Iodized Salt, L-Tryptophan, L-Threonine, preserved with Mixed Tocopherols and Citric Acid, L-Carnitine, Phosphoric acid, Beta-Carotene, Rosemary Extract.


I also don't think just because a company has a recall, we should write it off either.

Dole has had quite a few recalls. I still will buy their products. Lots of human food companies are recalled every day and often people have no idea...

So yes, I pick my company first (I feel very few are trustworthy) and all of them are big into marketing one way or another. SD has a huge great marketing team who emphasizes "vet approved", Champion encourages it's "biologically appropriate" food, Fromm has it's "four star meals!" They are all great at convincing us they are the best lol.

I have chosen the one that does feeding trials. Makes me more comfortable.

As for "typical" SD food....I don't think that has anything to do with the price of milk. I said this: I choose a company first and ingredients second and feel I have chosen wisely. I don't honestly care about all of the other foods a company makes...I choose what works for my pups. I am not as convinced as some of you that corn is that bad...but that is a total different topic that I really don't want to get involved in.

[Britster]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

I have chosen the one that does feeding trials. Makes me more comfortable.

As for "typical" SD food....I don't think that has anything to do with the price of milk. I said this: I choose a company first and ingredients second and feel I have chosen wisely. I don't honestly care about all of the other foods a company makes...I choose what works for my pups. I am not as convinced as some of you that corn is that bad...but that is a total different topic that I really don't want to get involved in.

Bolded: Huh?? lol

Fromm does feeding trials as well, just thought I'd throw that out for anyone reading who may be interested in this topic. I *believe* Precise does too.

I don't really feel feeding trials are done that great anyways. It takes big bucks to fund clinical trials because they are usually very in depth and take a long time to complete so of course smaller companies aren't going to be able to do them (which I'm not necessarily saying is a "good" thing). And most would most likely not be impressed at the regulations and requirements for these "clinical" trials anyways because they are in no way sufficient to produce accurate, life long results. It's a nice extra step, I think, but I'm not sure if it's worth it. I guess it's a nice added peace of mind.

Dog food and cat food feeding trials that would prove the food provides proper nutrition for an adult dog/cat has the requirement "the test shall run for a minimum of 26 weeks." In other words, a pet food feeding trial runs only for six months; it is doubtful that many/most nutritional inadequacies or excesses would be shown in the dog/cat in just six months (26 weeks).

All dogs in the trial are given a complete physical examination at the beginning and end of the test. This 'physical examination' can be provided by any veterinarian including the pet food manufacturer veterinarian; a clear opportunity for bias.

Up to 25% of the dogs/cats that begin the test, can be removed and the reasons why the dogs/cats were removed are not required to be included in the final results.

The "diet fails if any dog shows clinical or pathological signs of nutritional deficiency or excess." However, the only stated clinical signs of nutritional deficiency and excess are...

1. "No individual dog/cat shall lose more than 15% of its initial body weight."
There is no requirement for dogs that experience weight gain; nothing that would cause a pet food to fail the test if the dog/cat gains 15% or more body weight.

2. There are minor blood test minimums required for hemoglobin and serum alkaline phosphatase values, and with cat foods there are minimum requirements for taurine levels in the bloodwork.
Dr. Cathy Alinovi (certified in veterinary food therapy) shared with me her thoughts on these blood tests...
"They are testing minimal things: number and size of blood cells, one type of protein, and one general measure for liver/bone levels. Very non-specific. They are not measuring vitamin or mineral levels, they aren’t measuring body pH, a modern indicator of true health.

PS - I just wanted to add, I'm not trying to argue. Just adding both "sides" because, as you said, others may come in and read this thread and want to research and find out info for themselves to find out what is best for their pups.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by Britster

Bolded: Huh?? lol

Fromm does feeding trials as well, just thought I'd throw that out for anyone reading who may be interested in this topic. I *believe* Precise does too.

I don't really feel feeding trials are done that great anyways. It takes big bucks to fund clinical trials because they are usually very in depth and take a long time to complete so of course smaller companies aren't going to be able to do them (which I'm not necessarily saying is a "good" thing). And most would most likely not be impressed at the regulations and requirements for these "clinical" trials anyways because they are in no way sufficient to produce accurate, life long results. It's a nice extra step, I think, but I'm not sure if it's worth it. I guess it's a nice added peace of mind.



PS - I just wanted to add, I'm not trying to argue. Just adding both "sides" because, as you said, others may come in and read this thread and want to research and find out info for themselves to find out what is best for their pups.

I did not say that they did not do feeding trials....I said I chose Hill's because they do. I am no expert in animal nutrition and honestly am not as interested as many of you....that is why I go to who I think are experts. One of them is here: www.petdiets.com

I am also not trying to argue. I bolded because that was really the main sentence I was addressing...although then I added the other. Bolding did not mean I thought what was said was incorrect. Of course companies market things.

[Britster]

No i meant i bolded the sentence I didn't get lol:

"As for "typical" SD food....I don't think that has anything to do with the price of milk."

I didn't get it, lol

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by Britster

No i meant i bolded the sentence I didn't get lol:

"As for "typical" SD food....I don't think that has anything to do with the price of milk."

I didn't get it, lol

Oh! Well, you made a comment about typical SD food and I was addressing that.

Sorry...I thought I bolded something else I guess. Must need a nap.

[ladyjane]

My main focus is on keeping my pups healthy. The numerous recalls over the years scared me. I used to look at only ingredients but one day I started worrying and spoke with my vet about it...she suggested I contact the vet nutritionist at A&M for guidance. After that, I went with Hill's ... I can only say that it works for my pups...and I will continue to let people know that because so many on this forum bash that company and I feel that it is important to let people know that someone is using Hill's and the pups are thriving on it. I won't argue ingredients because I don't feel qualified to do that...I also do not only look for a company without recalls. That had nothing to do with my choice...but it IS interesting that they don't have the numbers of recalls that many do.

[Ellie May]

I don't think kibble is a perfect canine food. I'm not sure anybody knows what that even is.

I choose company first. Quality control is so important when considering most dogs eat the same things twice a day for months or years. It is important or peope food too, but our diet is more varied. It is also much easier to check the practices of one kibble company over hundreds of people food companies.

Ingredients are somewhat important to me, but IMO the companies with the best qc use ingredients that people don't like and that is ok with me. I'm more concerned or safety than what people think sounds good.

As for nutritional profiles, well the argument could but made that byproducts can be much more nutrient dense than meat meal..depending on the source. Palalibilify stops huans from eating some of these things. Dogs don't care.. I don't think the nutrient profile of corn and wheat is omehow dreadful compared to rice and barley. And grain can be more digestible than ither carbs. As for an ingredient list started out with carbs, that is going to happen if the food is not high protein.

I don't thonk SD was ever against grain free food. They make it now bc there is a market or it. That is not o say that they are suddenly agreeing corn is bad or that they will now make only what ppl think is acceptable.

there have been foods that did not pass the feeding trial. I see no reason to skip it except not wanting to shell out money. Actually, if they can't shell out the 20k, that concerns me. Very small companies that can't afford that little bit leaves me wondering how they can afford sufficient qc. Besides, the other way to get AAFCO approved is a nutrient analysis. Much cheaper. It is a good step, but this is where the boots and oil analogy comes in. It would pass a nutrient analysis but not a feeding trial bc of bioavailability.

[chestermama]

they get a kick back for doing science diet, thats why. I personally would not feed it to much corn and by products

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by chestermama

they get a kick back for doing science diet, thats why. I personally would not feed it to much corn and by products

I think my vet would survive very well without whatever pittance she gets from selling Science Diet....besides, she only sells the RX ones and for good reason. The RX foods save dogs' lives.
Those of us who have had very sick pups and have had to use these foods know that they work. Hopefully your pups will never have a need.

[BabyGirl Rosie]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

I think my vet would survive very well without whatever pittance she gets from selling Science Diet....besides, she only sells the RX ones and for good reason. The RX foods save dogs' lives.
Those of us who have had very sick pups and have had to use these foods know that they work. Hopefully your pups will never have a need.

I really don't care if my vet got a kickback. The food helped Rosie when she was so sick. So if he did get a kickback so be it. I would have given every penny in my account to him to save her life. My vet only carries the RX food as well.

[concretegurl]

Thus far all dog food recalls by companies have been voluntary based on their own independant testing and reporting.

Diamond had recall issues innitially out pf the same newly purchased facility. Then a year later in another newly purchased facility...both during their expansion period tripling their production power they bought about 7the new facilities.

[Ringo1]

My vet doesn't sell any dog food; but Lucy has been recommended to use Royal Canin Urinary SO by the specialists at OSU due to her bladder stone issue.

I have to go to Petsmart to get it ~ with a prescription ~ because most Vets around here do not keep food (even prescription food) in their office. So I am not sure where they are getting the big kickbacks from.

Luxy LOVES the food; she used to be the pickiest eater EVER until now. I feed her dry in the morning (with a little warm water on it) and canned of an evening. She has put on at least one lb with it.

It really doesn't matter if I like the ingredients or company because I can't take the chance of her getting bladder stones again and needing more surgery. So, this is the food for her per the IM specialist.

Ringo does eat BB Wilderness and it has worked well for him for a long time - neither dog could eat the other's food and do well on it.

So, to some extent, I agree with the best food is what works for your dog and for you.