Just because a food is expensive and popular doesn't mean it's better!

[blessedbrian1989]

@sharrylee I stand corrected, as it can contain bones as well: https://talkspetfood.aafco.org/whatisinpetfood

I can't speak to the reason for the corn, but byproducts aren't the horror you think they are: https://vetnutrition.tufts.edu/2016/05/dont-be-bothered-by-by-products/

Edit: normal poultry meat can also include bone

 

[sharrylee]

@blessedbrian1989 I'm not saying the by products are bad, I tried stating that there is no nutritional testing done on animal by products to prove they have the required amount of nutrients. One batch could have more bone, skin and eggs, another could have meat, organs and bone. Rendering animal products down isn't done by nutritionists or scientists, there is no formula.

 

[blessedbrian1989]

@sharrylee Ah, that makes a lot more sense. In theory, they'd have their own manufacturing processes that would likely be proprietary to help ensure this to a certain known degree. In theory, there'd also be quality workers whose sole jobs is just that. I suppose its possible those don't exist, but it would be strange.

 

[ashleyta]

@sharrylee 90% of dog food sales is about marketing. It's about exploiting and leveraging owner fear and guilt. I have no problem with this, but understand it. Packaging, food shape, etc., are all based on what companies think humans want and desire, not dogs.

 

[hesta]

@sharrylee Royal Canin is good dog food. I know it’s anecdotal, but my old dog (Doberman) lived till almost 15 and he had 0 health issues, he only ever ate Royal Canon.

 

[eront]

@hesta That's actually amazing for a doberman!

 

[theemcon]

@hesta Holy shit that's insane. Like world record amazing. I actually opted not to get one just because of the health issues. I still won't, but it's nice seeing healthy dobes live long lives.

 

[blessedbrian1989]

@sharrylee If you want to actually inform and educate yourself, here's a resource that's contains a bunch of links to fact-based and science-based articles and papers. It explains why the general idea you have is not really correct. https://www.reddit.com/r/dogs/wiki/nutrition

 

[sharrylee]

@blessedbrian1989 Thanks for the broken link.

It's funny that human based nutrition is now finding that overly processed foods, foods high is starch and carbohydrates, as well as cooked foods are not as healthy for us as raw fruits and veggies, and lean meats with some animal fat. Turns out when you process and cook things down it takes a good part of the nutrition out, and that's along side the damage done by pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, antibiotics and growth hormones, which goes into agricultural produce and livestock.

Yet dogs aren't affected by the same things we are I guess.

Edit* There are no nutrition based studies on dogs, it is a completely understudied field and dog nutrition is based off companies feed testing dogs to study their health and reactions.

 

[blessedbrian1989]

@sharrylee Yeah because dogs and humans are EXACTLY the same...
You must be on mobile, try opening the link in a web browser

 

[sharrylee]

There is absolutely no reason people on this sub should be messaging me threats and insults, that is just ridiculous and immature (but this is reddit) and anyone else doing it will be getting reported to reddit and the sub mod!

I made a very valid point, and for anyone that thinks the vets are always right, well science is always changing and there is almost no research in animal nutrition, and just like how our food pyramid changed after decades of it being "fact" dog nutrition will change too. Stop pretending vets and even doctors can never do wrong when they are following guidelines and regulations from private organizations and companies. There is a reason they don't post percentage of each ingredient on the bag, because they either have no idea what it is, or they don't want anyone else to know. Simple as that.

Good luck to anyone who is or will be affected by the upcoming worsening inflation and pet food shortages.

 

[georgearriolamusic]

@sharrylee Holy sh*t, this "just check the ingredients list" crap will never die, eh?

Whatever marketing department came up with that had geniuses on staff... Not very ethical people, but hella smart. It's brilliant in its insidiousness.

When you have people believing that reading ingredients lists is all it takes to make a good decision, not only can you use it to market your food, but it conveniently feeds several other myths as well:

• vets are not or barely educated in nutrition
• vets are shills that get kickbacks from whatever brands they recommend (or else why would they recommend such "bad" foods?)
• corn and meals are filler and bad and useless
• corn and wheat cause allergies
• pet food review sites are the only truly independent and ethical sources of information
• you as an end consumer get to dismiss any contradicting expertise because obviously, only you and like-minded people have the "real scoop" and can pity the sheeple - and let's be honest, people tend to enjoy that feeling of superiority

Bonus points if the person recommending just reading the ingredients list doesn't even know what the percentages in the list actually represent, i.e. the total weight of ingredients before they're processed. Yeah, you're 50% chicken ends up being what, a pound per bag? LOL

Like once, I had a company representative trying to sell me some boutique dog food citing that they don't "smuggle" in other proteins with their food in the name of honesty... Like, dude, you didn't mix in another protein so the chicken doesn't slip down from the number one spot, come on, now.

 

[eront]

@georgearriolamusic

Whatever marketing department came up with that had geniuses on staff... Not very ethical people, but hella smart. It's brilliant in its insidiousness.

That would be Blue Buffalo.

 

[jensearching]

@georgearriolamusic “No nasties” (with any kind of additives and by products listed under this claim) and claiming that kibble is like eating McDonalds every day is honestly the worst marketing fad these companies are claiming. I’m honestly surprised they can even get away with it.

 

[sharrylee]

@georgearriolamusic Vets do recommend brands that support the WVASA, that's pretty obvious. My vet doesn't sell any science diet or royal, she has also refused to vaccinate yearly for over a decade as she followed the manufacturers direction, not the vet associations guidelines, as over vaccinating has caused serious harm. Now its every 3 years for 4way on the vaccine schedule through the vet association.

There is ZERO available information on the nutritional contents inside a package of the 3 main brands foods, there is no percentages for each ingredient, there is very little testing on the food after it is processed, and if you want to know you need to pay for the test yourself. That's a fact.

And don't bother if you are going to use the "well there is 28% protein min, and 14% fat min, and 4% fibre max" what protein came from where? How much corn meal is in the bag to be of higher content then chicken by product, how much protein is from the corn meal vs the chicken by product.

Completely vague on purpose to trick consumers.

 

[wandalouise]

@sharrylee My puppy thrives on Purina Pro Plan, and my cat thrives on Hills Science Diet c/d.

A fed dog is the best dog.

If it works for them, great! If it doesn’t work for you, that’s fine as well.

This shaming of owners for FEEDING THEIR ANIMALS is absolutely asinine.

 

[sharrylee]

@wandalouise Not shaming anyone, the ingredients and nutritional information is there, if you can't see how you are over paying or you don't care, that's good for you, but for anyone else that cares and is going broke trying to feed their dogs the same cheap food in a shinier bag, well I hope this helps them.

 

[jensearching]

@sharrylee You do realise that’s standard marketing though? What you’re getting so worked up about is literal marketing. It’s like getting upset that Chanel sells bags for thousands of dollars when you can also get a quality bag for much less.

 

[sharrylee]

@jensearching I'm not getting worked up over anything, I've laid information out and if someone reads it and finds it useful then I'm good with that.

I was buying PPP for years, because everyone said it was so great, so it's just ridiculous that I've wasted thousands of dollars on food that's not worth it.

 

[jensearching]

@sharrylee sigh i understand that people feed raw but can you just stop guilt tripping those that choose not to? There is a really helpful nutrition wiki on this sub. Sorry you got upset over the previous post where the majority of the people praised Purina and Royal Canin but people really need to stop spreading misinformation about these brands in order to justify their raw feeding choice. It’s like vegans of the dog world.