Let me know!

Our Maltese chewed her paws when her food had any chicken in it at all. I had to read the labels very carefully — chx broth, is still chx. Once we got rid of it she was fine until she developed renal disease & every single prescription dog food had chx in it. My poor girl.

Our Yorkie, Ruby was a fussy eater when she came to us at 9 mos. We continued w/the food the breeder had been feeding her. Ruby would push her plate around & make a mess. She has empty stomach syndrome & if she doesn’t eat breakfast, the middle of the day comes up even quicker. For months we tried diff premium foods w/o success. We finally hit on Farmina, an Italian brand.

She still gets a bit pissy now & again but we know what to do now! One day I decided to try to something new. While my husband held her, I hid her food underneath upside down plastic cups in the room we were sitting in & the kitchen. She went banana-pants watching me — she always has to know what’s going on. I took him from her & said let’s go find your food. She was off — knocking over plastic cups & eating her food. Same food as before, just made meal time interesting. Along the way we got a free Interactive Wobble Feeder w/a dog food purchase that she loves. We put breakfast or dinner in it, she smacks it around until it’s empty & her meal is over. Since then I’ve bought her a Snuffle mat on Amazon & a cpl Outward Hound Puzzle Nina Ottoson Puzzle Toys. Same principle.

Every pup is different. This is what worked for us & may not suit your situation. This is our third little love muffin & we are still learning. BTW, midday snack frozen peas & shredded cheese, or watermelon w/o seeds, string beans, etc. Try to keep it low cal.

My 6 month old has been a picky eater since I brought her home. I even went to store to my Alaskan salmon, which she likes. But I know she just can’t eat salmon. I make her chicken or beef with sweet potatoe and broccoli or spinach. Bought RC Yorkshire kibble which she eats a little. Sometimes hand feed one kibble at a time. Mixed a cooked egg with a little beef this morning and just ate a few bites. I buy blueberries to mix in.
Does anyone know about a the dry dog food Badlands? An actress laura? Came up with it as she raises alit of different dogs.
Would appreciate any feed back. Also looking for a soft chewable vitamin.

I would stick with the royal Canin and stop giving human food unless it’s just a small amount mixed with her kibble.

A big no on chewable vitamins. If you want to home cook, you really need a diet that is formulated by a vet nutritionist.

This is a website where you can get a free, balanced diet if you want to home cook. You do have to buy the supplements. The bottle is around $50 but lasts about three months.

www.balanceit.com

I personally would do as Taylor suggested.....stick with the YT kibble. My pups love it!

Once you start giving all sorts of different foods, they catch on quickly and will refuse food just to get another option. It's not a good thing to get into as it will lead to health issues in the future. Unbalanced diets are not good.

Thanks
After my message. Gave it another try.
She did eat a little RC yr, but not enough to fill her tummy.
Took my instant pot
1 lb ground lean chicken
1/2 sweet potato
1/4 carrots 1/4 broccoli 1/8 cup cauliflower little apple
Cooked with beef bone broth and water for 12 min.
Turned out a little watery, but that ok. Taste great
Put a little in her plate after she saw me eating it and she seemed to of really liked it. Even ate her vitamin. Today was a good day.

Unfortunately that’s not a balanced meal and it’s going to cause health issues. The vitamin doesn’t make up for it not being balanced. You need to only give her the dry food for multiple days so she knows she isn’t getting any other food. She could have significant bone loss from not having a balanced meal.

Need to find a better dog food than RC RT. Contains corn, chicken by products ( stuff they throw out) vegetable corn oil, etc. Notgoidfor any dog.

I’m sorry but you’re wrong about RC. It is a top dog food with years and years of science behind it. They have actual vets on staff. It is a top food.

Then they need to get rid of chicken by products such as beaks and feet, corn, corn oil etc. It’s all about the money. Most good products are gran free and no corn.

What vitamin are you giving her?

Clearly you are listening to the arm chair nutritionists on the internet who have NO idea what they are talking about.

If you really want to know about these things, I encourage you to visit the following website. You can search for topics such as by-products....beaks and the like. :rolleyes: The site is run by veterinary nutritionists. They have in depth information AND you can ask questions about topics that are not in their library.

https://www.petdiets.com/about

I ALSO encourage you to read their qualifications. In particular, Dr. Remillard who started that website. HIGHLY qualified.

There are SO many websites that are spreading ridiculous misinformation about pet diets. They usually talk about their "qualifications", but at the end of the day most don't have any in depth education regarding nutrition in animals.

LOL seriously? I am sorry, but that is ridiculous misinformation. I have linked a website in another of my replies if you REALLY want to know about animal nutrition.

The following is copied from www.petdiets.com If you click on "Ask The Nutrionist" you can search for topics you are interested in.

QUESTION: You stated many times (and I agree) that an ingredient deck can not be used to evaluate the supposed quality of a pet food. My question is would you be willing to give a detailed explanation as to why this can not be done.

ANSWER:
The only detail needed is that the ingredient description (AAFCO 2016 pg 210) for any one of the terms in the ingredient list is too vague to be certain of the nutritional value for 2 reasons:

1. The "terms" used in the ingredient list although ‘defined’ are of little to no value to anyone. They are defined for the player in the industry – not veterinarians, nutritionists or pet owners.

Example of the nasty terms rating web sites like to pick on: "by-products" (vegetable or animal type).

First, the definition of any “by-product" is simply the second product resulting after some processing of the primary intended product. If corn meal is the primary intended product, then the oil removed is a by-product and vice versa. It means nothing more than that.

Organ meats (kidney, livers, etc) are by-products of animal processing because the muscle meat was the first intended product. A pet food manufacturer could list "meat by-products" if the ingredient came as a mix of organ meats, or they could list the organs individually (liver, kidney, hearts, etc) on the label.

AAFCO definitions (paraphrased): rendered = cooked; non rendered = raw

‘Meat’: the clean flesh derived from the slaughtered mammals and limited to skeletal muscle, tongue diaphragm, heart, or esophagus with fat, skin, sinew, nerve and blood vessels. AAFCO 2016 pg 375.

‘Meat by-products’: non-rendered clean parts other than meat derived from the slaughtered mammals. May include lungs, spleen, kidney brain, liver, blood, stomach or intestines (excluding the contents of the stomach or intestine). This definitions goes on to specifically exclude hair, horns, teeth and hoof. AAFCO 2016 pg 375.

Now people think they know what ‘meat’ is and do not think twice about eating it themselves when served up in a restaurant but do not realize that in pet food term ‘meat’ includes tongue, esophagus etc and probably would think twice before they themselves eat a hamburger made of what AAFCO has defined as ‘meat’ although still nutritious.

The term ‘meat’ is for mammals so there are similar definitions for ‘poultry’. Another definition that people are unaware of is that “meat” can only be from beef, pig, lamb or goat. So there is no room for the exaggerated claim about horses, zoo, birds, wildlife, or game animals, etc in the meat definition. No dogs or cats either - The FDA developed a canine and feline DNA test and then tested pet foods and found no evidence of dog or cat DNA in any pet food products. So

‘Meat and bone meal’ is a cooked product of mammals that includes bone but cannot include blood, hair, hoof, horn, hide, manure, stomach contents or added extraneous materials (such as what some have claimed, i.e., floor sweepings or saw dust). AAFCO 2016 pg 377.

‘Meal’ is simply the ground product after the water has been removed by cooking. Water has no nutrient value, expensive to ship and can always be added back. So those who are anti-meal are simply not thinking.

There are additional calcium and phosphorous content specification on this particular ingredient so the pet food manufacturer using this ingredient can gage the amount of bone included. Some want high bone content to help with the final calcium and phosphorous content of their pet food, some do not because the calcium and phosphorous is coming from a different ingredient. There is no right or wrong here … it depends on pet food formulation desired and the other ingredients being used such that the FINAL nutrient profile meets AAFCO nutrient recommendations.

And here is what’s worth talking about and what does separate the good from the ugly……..

It is entirely the responsibility of the manufacturer to test each ingredient for nutrient value and a list of known contaminants before accepting and using that ingredient in their pet food product. The better manufacturers have very specific contracts with ingredient vendors which outlines the nutrient profile, and double check the ingredient nutrient profile in their own labs before using that ingredient. So when I see specific pet food manufacturers on the FDA recall list repeatedly for things that should have been discovered at the point plant delivery and before incorporation into their product ( such as aflatoxin or most recently …. pentobarbital) speak volumes to me about their quality control (QC).

Ingredient lists are virtually meaningless in evaluating a pet food but the reason why certain manufacturers come up on the FDA Pet Food Recall list speaks loudly about QC. The nutrient profile of an INDIVIDUAL ingredient is worthless to the pet owner and nutritionist because the nutrient profile of FINAL pet product is controlled, stated on the label and usually available upon request.



2. If not defined specifically, then a common or usual name can be used. AAFCO 2016 pg 210.

Many pet food manufacturer are using this 2nd 'escape' clause to attract pet owner as when they list individual fruits, e.g. apples. No doubt a common name and we all think we know what an apple is but there is NO way to known what parts of the ‘apple’ was used in the pet food: whole, skins, core, pomace, stems, pieces a by-product of making apple pies, etc are actually used in the food. Yes manufactures may have a picture of a wholesome looking shiny red apple on their website but there is no way to know if that accurately represents the ingredient used in the product – not without going to the plant to see for yourself.

If the definitions were tight with specific nutrient profiles we would all be happier but that is simply not plausible. The people rating pet foods based on the label simply are ‘rendering’ opinions without a full education on the subject – dangerous but allowable somehow on the web. Majority of those self-anointed pet food gurus have never been in any manufacturing plant, never worked for a manufacturer or been an ingredient vendor to know firsthand of what they speak. Then most website simply copy the rhetoric on another. So now we a whole slew of website repeating the same bunk in a never ending circle - absent of any reality check or first hand knowledge. Then pet owners visit these multiple “cut and paste made” web sites thinking they are all separate independent first-hand knowing web sites, and then the pet owner thinks they themselves have done “research” on the topic of pet foods – having read not one primary source of information. The whole thing is a house of cards…..

Very few people are given pet food manufacturing tours, veterinary nutritionist are among that select group (myself included), and notice how those individuals do not ‘rate’ pet foods. In fact most will tell you, the ingredient list is of very limited value to them in making pet food recommendations. Why?

Because in the end, any one ingredient, no matter how defined, does vary widely in nutrient content. The definitions are much too vague to "rate" any one ingredient and so no one can rate the entire ingredient list and say that it represents the entire pet food product. IF the information in the building blocks is vague and lacks detail, how can that poor quality information suddenly become a fine tuned instrument for “rating” the whole pet food product? It can’t and truth is it was NEVER intended by AAFCO that the ingredient list could be used to ‘rate’ pet foods. It is a very poor tool. The whole rating game online and in pet journals has no true value to the individual pet owner trying to do best by their dog or cat.

Again you are extremely misinformed. Grain free foods are heavy in peas, potatoes and legumes which is causing dogs to die of heart issues. There is absolutely nothing wrong with corn. Unfortunately you are listening the companies that are trying to just make money.