You asked and I’ve answered. Enjoy and try not to get too rough with me in your comments.
So you want to know what I feed my dogs?
The short answer first:
At home I feed Iams kibble mixed with whatever else I’m eating (or cooking with). At work? Z/D wet (a hydrolyzed nutrient source food made by Hill’s) mixed with lunch leftovers.
And now for the long version:
Am I addicted (or otherwise attached) to Iams or Hill’s as brands? No. In fact, the only reason I feed manufactured foods is the same reason my son gets cereal in the morning. Cheap. Enriched. Impregnated with all kinds of [questionably bioavailable] nutrients. And, above all, convenient. If nothing else, it provides me a little insurance that they’re getting some of the most basic nutrients they need.
Getting back to the brand thing, though, I will admit that I tend towards well-researched brands over brands with immaculate ingredients (both would be ideal). That means the likes of Iams, Waltham, Hill’s and Purina—yes, Purina.
No one spends as much on basic pet nutrition research than Purina. Whether you buy their foods or not, your pet has doubtless benefited from Purina’s exhaustive research over the past few decades—as have the companies that produce the high quality foods your pets now enjoy. Even all you raw feeders owe a debt to the nine checks. Really. Basic canine nutrition has come a long way and Purina has been a leader since the beginning. (No, they don’t pay me. I just like to give credit where it’s due.)
As to the kibble: I like to buy small bags so they’ll fit in a plastic container in the fridge and so when I leave it out (for reasons of sheer slovenliness) I don’t stress so much over the potential waste of oxidizable nutrients—it’s only a small bag, after all, how long could you leave it out before your dog(s) have managed to consume it? If you have a teacup Maltese…well…that’s another story.
The bulk of my dogs’ food? Home cooked heaven. In case I’ve never mentioned it here before, I’m an avid cook and a die-hard foodie. One of these days I’ll even manage my own hobby farm…of goats. I’ll be sure to let you know when I do so you can order the occasional pat of cheese. But I digress…
Point is, my dogs eat very(!) well. If I’m working on veal and pork meatballs (yesterday’s special—all free range and “organically” grown) they get some before (while still raw) and after (with whole wheat spaghetti, fresh tomato and roasted garlic sauce and fresh-picked basil with a sprinkling of lip-smacking, 24-month old parmiggiano). BTW, mushroom lasagna with home-made ricotta is tonight’s special. Tomorrow is one of those delicious, home-made meal-in-a-bowl soups, Thai-style. Yummy.
Ultimately, I feed my dogs the same way I feed myself and my son: a basic high-end cereal breakfast (in case the rest of the day goes to hell), a wide variety of fruits, nuts whole grains, vegetables and meats from high quality organic sources—local and sustainable if possible. Another thing we all get? A glucosamine and chondroitin capsule, an omega-3 fatty acid gelcap and a Flintstone’s chewable vitamin—for good measure.
Disclaimer: Just because I feed my dogs this way does not mean that this is how I expect anyone else to feed their pets. For starters, each individual pet has his or her limitations. My Sophie Sue, for example, is allergic to rice and carrots (verified by repeat testing). Other dogs have serious GI intolerances or other disorders that preclude my kind of free-range feeding. So be careful before adopting any kind of nutritional program that veers (to any degree) from your dog’s current diet.
Let me also say that the way I feed is in large part an admission of the importance of human lifestyle in feeding pets. That’s where the kibble comes in. It’s also an admission of my not knowing what the optimal diet might be—for my dog or any other. The science here is fuzzy—to say the least.
Just kibble? Good enough for the basics of life for the vast majority of dogs. Want to maximize your dog’s coat, energy level, longevity and performance? I tend to think mixing it up and providing the most variety (within the commonly accepted framework of canine nutrition) is the best way to go—but we just don’t know for sure.
And there’s the rub: Everyone thinks they’re an expert and assumes the vet is clueless just because he/she tells the truth. What’s the truth? We just don’t know what the best diet is. Given that we don’t even know everything we need to know about human nutrition—far from it—anyone who says they have a surefire method of optimally feeding any kind of creature is almost certainly full of s---.
Want one example from my long list of feeding method pet peeves? Take the miscellaneous diets that advocate feeding dogs like wild animals: “But this is what wolves eat!” For starters, our dogs haven’t been wild for millenia. (I challenge anyone to find anything remotely wolf-like about my Frenchies.) Moreover, attempting to feed them as if they are wolf-like presupposes that we know what wolves eat. And, of course, we don’t really know what wolves eat, much less what’s best for them.
So while the battle rages (elsewhere, I hope), I plan to continue to feed my dogs this way until someone gives me enough good science (real, peer-reviewed research, not what passes for science among too many so-called experts) to make me change my ways. My advice to the educated dog owner? If it seems to be working for your dog (and you’re an attentive, careful parent) then keep doing it.
Over the next couple of decades, I expect many substantive changes in canine nutrition changes to come our way—so stay tuned. I’m sure to write more on the subject. In fact, I can’t seem to avoid it. In the meantime, I have a boiling pot of noodles to attend to. Bon apetít.
Add Comment29 Comments
With Sassy's allergies, we were feeding canned feline z/d for a while, and I was using a food dehydrator to make treats out of it. Yee Gods, that stuff smells too much like Parvo for my taste.
And the cats won't eat it past three servings.
Georg March 12th, 2007 05:38:00 PM
I love "unmolding" it, though. "Watch it wiggle"--doesn't it look like dog-food Jell-O?
Dr. Patty Khuly March 12th, 2007 06:26:00 PM
A little off topic...but could you post the recipe for your mushroom lasagna...sounds delicious!
Kara March 12th, 2007 06:40:00 PM
First of all, I think it's great that you give lots of variety in your dogs' diets. IMO, a lot of the reason that lots of dogs can't handle any food change is because they've been eating the same thing every single day of their lives. Variety helps keep the gut healthy.
As for wolves, I hate to break it to you (okay, not really, but still!), but your dogs are in fact wolves. They are Canis lupus familiaris--a subspecies of the gray wolf. They may not look like wolves on the outside, but physiologically they are pretty much exactly the same. We did not domesticate dogs from wolves by selecting for digestive tract changes--we selected for looks and personality. The teeth of even the smallest dogs are still the teeth of a carnivore (no flat molars), and the digestive tract is still relatively short. Their jaws still don't move side-to-side and there's still no amylase in their mouths. Dogs and wolves differ by at most 0.2% of their mitochondrial DNA--this is the same amount of difference between two unrelated humans. And, of course, dogs and wolves can quite easily breed and have fertile offspring.
And here's some science for you! :)
* http://www.fiu.edu/~milesk/Genetics.htm
* http://www.rawfed.com/myths/changed.html (raw feeding site, but this page has some quotes from very respected wolf researchers)
* "The Wolf: The Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species" by L. David Mech (one of the best known wolf researchers--there's an entire chapter about wolf diet in this book, so yes, we do know what wolves eat [at least to some extent])
As for what's best for wolves, I have far more trust in nature and natural selection than in human science and studies. As you said, scientists don't even know what's best for humans to eat--they certainly don't know what's best for dogs to eat. If wolves have not only survived, but thrived on their diet of whole prey for this long, then I can be reasonably confident that a diet close to this ideal is going to be pretty darn good for my dog.
I certainly don't think I have all the answers, but I do believe I'm closer than, say, Hill's or Purina is. :)
And thanks again for being so incredibly open about these topics! I know I say this almost every time I comment, but it's such a wonderful thing to have a vet who likes to discuss these sorts of topics--or, at the very least, is willing to do so. :)
Janine March 12th, 2007 07:57:00 PM
Wish I could feed Roxie a varied diet, or even better, some healthy human food for one meal of the day.
We're not there yet. She was malnourished from in the womb, and she's physically stunted. Not only that, but her system was used to nothing but chemicals and whatever godforsaken stuff is in Wal-Mart Brand dry kibble, which her former owner used to free-feed to about ten dogs.
I introduced Nutro's Natural Choice for puppies with lamb and rice to her gastro-intestinal system and we had 8 weeks of gastroentiritis, complicated by her socks and underwear saga. At one point she was eating an entire 18 oz can of pumpkin per week, because it was the only thing that regulated her system and prevented chronic diahrrea. During that same timeframe, she was only able to keep down boiled rice and hamburger.
We're now down to about three tablespoons of pumpkin for breakfast only every other day, instead of every meal. Obviously she gets about one-ish cup of kibble with the pumpkin too, I don't feed her just the pumpkin.
I tried her on oil to help her coat (I let her lick it off one finger) and we promptly went back to bad diahrrea. She can't eat *anything* but kibble and pumpkin, her digestive system just can't handle it. Maybe later, when it's recovered from the first 11 months of her life.
I compromise by giving her kibble meant for dogs that has ingredients in it that I can pronounce, and that I would eat myself. No corn, no wierd stuff, no by-products. Oh, and the pumpkin supplement. So far, it seems to be working.
Whitewater March 12th, 2007 08:34:00 PM
Oh yes, unmolding it is very easy- like carving jelled Cranberry sauce. Makes it easy to carve into half inch cubes to put on the dehydrator to make treats.
Georg March 12th, 2007 08:37:00 PM
I switched my mutts over from Pedigree to Fromm and they love it. Their coats look better, shiny even in the case of my German Shepard In the 8 years we've had her, her coat has never had any gloss or shine to it even after a bath and regular brushing. Taz has even shed a much needed pound or two. He actually has a waist now instead of looking like a sausage with head, tail and legs. Both of them also have more energy, so for now atleast, all is well in the diet department.
My issue with Hills and Iams? Corn. Not saying that corn is a bad thing, but is it really neccessary to put so much of it in dry kibble? And does it really have to be the first ingredients? How about chicken, beef, lamb or turkey, then corn?
The only people food my dogs get is the occassional piece of steak, that's it.
Stacy March 12th, 2007 08:40:00 PM
I lived on a farm in Vermont years ago, and I loved hanging out with the (female) goats. They were adorable.
My cat gets Pro Plan dry and a little bit of Nutro canned every day (she's not crazy about canned but at least I know she's getting a little fluid since she won't drink water out of a bowl). Her fur is always soft and shiny, and she's never needed non-routine vet care except for a broken tooth, so I guess she's doing ok.
Diane March 12th, 2007 09:43:00 PM
My kitties eat Hill's or Royal Canin/Waltham/IVD, w/the occasional piece of cooked, lean chicken as a treat. The pet food controversies are mind-boggling - kibble vs. raw vs. homeopathic vs. whatever...I honestly don't feel like I could ever know enough about all of them to pick the best one, and probably some version of each has worked wonders for somebody's pet. I figure if my kitties have shiny coats, nice skin, healthy teeth, lean bodies, bright eyes, and normal feces/urine, they're probably getting most everything they need nutrition-wise, as it's pretty easy to tell if an animal is eating an improper diet. I'm much more concerned about periodic blood screening, regular dental prophys, proper vaccinations, and the like than whether or not one particular diet has an edge over the other.
You are brave, indeed, Dr. Khuly...what a can of worms!
anna March 13th, 2007 04:39:00 AM
What do think about cat food? Currently my "boys" are on prescription dry and grocery store wet so that they get enough liquid. I don't really think that this is the best for them but I don't know what would be. Thanks for any feedback. Lynn
Lynn March 13th, 2007 06:47:00 AM
A friend and I have a long-running argument over commercial pet foods. She reckons that in the past, when there were less choices available in terms of both dry and wet food, most people used to cook food for dogs, including some of whatever the family was eating, cheap meat, rice/corn to bulk it up. She asserts that pets in general were healthier, and that all of her childhood pets died of old age or accidents.
My opinion is that given the comparative paucity of vet care 50 years ago, she has no idea of what 'silent' illnesses or cancers her animals suffered from. Or of how many of those problems could have been prevented by diet.
I figure that for my kiddles, I go with the best available food that I can afford (cats get Hills because of Toby's fish allergy, dogs get a local vet-only product called Vet's Choice), and that makes up most of their diet. They then all get smaller amounts of wet food, dogs get an extra cup of different dry food (they get bored otherwise), and a taste of whatever else is around.
On the cat menu as well - for Stuart I buy new indoor ferns every month or so, Toby has a yucca plant fetish (especially the red-tinged ones), and Sam has been caught breaking into the grocery cupboard to steal chocolate.
At least Tessa is relatively normal....
jcat March 13th, 2007 07:10:00 AM
I can't claim to be an expert on what to feed a dog, but I can claim to be something of an expert on canine evolution. And so, the rebuttal to Janine above:
Yes, dogs are wolves in the most traditional of senses. They can produce fertile offspring with their wild cousins, which is generally (though not always) considered the determining factor of specieshood. However, by the same token, wolves are dogs. Which came first? Well, wolves of course, or so everyone says. In all scientific honesty, the differentiation of the dog from the wolf represents a speciation moment. Although they are, currently, the same species, dogs are well on their way to becoming a separate animal. For instance, although the DNA of a teacup chihuahua and a wolf would most certainly combine in a test tube, the likelihood of them successfully mating on their own is slim to none (and a funny image). And that's not even taking into account that, given current ecological conditions, they would never meet in the first place. As such, dogs and wolves are separated by a human divider equivalent to the proverbial "speciation river" (an ecological factor which induces speciation). So, scientists of the future will look back at the wolf/dog like canines of 40,000 years ago and label them a common ancestor of the wolf and dog species.
That being said, we can assume that the common ancestor of both wolves and dogs shared traits in common with both. For instance, it was a preferred carnivore. However, it was likely a opportunistic omnivore. Wolves can and do eat things which are not meat, they just prefer not to. They prefer not to because meat, being a rich source of fat, is the best food for sustaining their active, carnivorous lifestyle. Yes, it's self perpetuating, but such is life.
Now, nobody can point to an exact instance where humans domesticated wolves. Likely, it occurred in several places at around the same time. However, we do know, from fossil evidence, that wolf/dog ancestors "associated" with humans long before their actual domestication. More specifically, their bones appear more frequently in sites associated with human habitation long before they start showing up with the regularity and positioning to indicate that they were actually living with humans. Current theories hold that these canines stuck around human populations because human trash heaps made for easy pickings. These animals would likely have had certain traits. Firstly, they would have been able to digest plant matter and grains as well as meat, becuase both are likely to be found in pre-historic refuse mounds. This is a good trade off because, not needing to hunt as much, they would not need the energy provided by an all meat diet. The animals this lifestyle attracted might even have been predisposed to like non-meat food, but that's just speculation. Secondly, these ancient canines would have been less afraid of humans then their more carnivorous cousins. This is a natural necessity of associating with human refuse. You'd have to accept human smell and their, at least occaisional, presence. As such, these canines would have been perfectly poised for human domestication.
Then comes the question of what these animals were fed during their domestication. Well, the same things their domesticators ate, of course. And, although early dogs were no doubt of great use to humans in hunting, its unlikely that early man would have been so willing to share the best pieces of their spoils with their animal friends. Meat, fat and marrow go to the hungry women and children...the dogs can get whatever's left. It doesn't take all that long for intestinal changes to evolve (just 5,000 years ago, all humans were lactose intolerant), and dogs have now been eating whatever their masters gave to them since they first peeked their black noses out of the forest.
So, what is best for dogs to eat? Darned if I know. I'm not a vet or any sort of nutritional expert. I've fed my pets kibble and canned food because it's convenient. They've all led happy healthy lives, but that doesn't mean what I did was the 'best' option. What I can say is that claims that dogs should eat only meat because its what's "most natural" are not well founded.
Becky March 13th, 2007 07:48:00 AM
Because of Sassy's grain allergies, (corn and rice and less so to wheat), all of our kitties get Innova Evo dry- a grain free dry food. Every morning, Nutro-Max in a pouch is given for breakfast (only a little wheat gluten in the gravy which they all think is the best part, otherwise grain free).
The dogs get Iams, but only because the Evo is expensive to feed to the dogs too. And they get to share a can of Pedigree for dinner. I can slip Dog's medication in it or in her cream cheese treat.
When Sassy passes on, the budget will determine if the kitties go back to Iams or stay on the Evo- it's as expensive as the Hills Science Diet, and I'm convinced better.
Georg March 13th, 2007 09:39:00 AM
My foster cats get a high quality dry food that I free feed them. I'm away from the house a lot and this way they can snack when they feel like it. Fortunately, I haven't noticed any weight gain besides what was needed. If anyone of them suddenly started getting huge I would obviously change my tactic.
They also get a third of a small can of Friskies moist food twice a day. One of my fosters is horribly fussy. And all she will eat in terms of moist food is the seafood varieties of Friskies. I've tried other foods including prescribed ones from a vets and she wouldn't touch it. She wouldn't even touch canned tuna that I bought her when she was going through a really picky patch. So the deciding factor for me when choosing food is what will the animal eat? And also, these guys aren't mine forever, so something that the average pet owner can find and afford to avoid any adjustments to their food intake when they get adopted.
Shannon March 13th, 2007 10:06:00 AM
My greyhound gets Iams dry with yogert and a little RD canned. Works great for him! Have always wondered if Iams was good. If it is good enough for a vet's dogs, it is definitely good enough for my greyhound.
Ann March 13th, 2007 10:22:00 AM
Hi Becky! :)
I do see your point about the speciation barrier. Would that mean that tiny dogs will also eventually branch off from large dogs, since they will most likely never mate? And then we'd have two (or more) species of domestic dogs? I guess it's possible. Though I'm not convinced that any of this will actually affect the anatomy or physiology of the digestive tract of these dogs.
The words "omnivore" and "carnivore", as you hinted, have different meanings to different people, and really, there's no law in nature that says any animal needs to stick to whatever we decide to classify it as. Wolves most definitely eat and digest some plant matter, but as you said it's a tiny portion of their overall diet, and there's no evidence that it's a necessary part of their diet either (they shake out the stomach contents of large prey before eating the stomach lining). I consider wolves and dogs opportunistic carnivores--that is, they thrive on animal matter, but will make do on what's available. Either way, wolves most definitely have not evolved to eat the large amounts of domestic grains (especially corn and wheat) that are in most commercial dog foods (I don't even think these ingredients are appropriate for humans).
The mention of lactose intolerance in humans is interesting. Just because humans are no longer all lactose intolerant now does not mean that we should be eating dairy products past infancy. Humans are the only mammals who regularly drink milk past a young age, and I think that says something about the inappropriateness of dairy for our species (especially dairy from another species). The fact that dairy causes so many problems for a significant portion of humans also says something. So, even if some of us "evolved" the ability to digest dairy as adults, that does not automatically mean that dairy is good, healthy, or appropriate for us.
So even if dogs have different digestive abilities than wolves (nothing I've read suggests this, BTW--in fact, wolf researchers often look to dogs to fill in the gaps of wolf knowledge), that doesn't mean that these abilities should be utilized. Heck, cats obviously can do something with plant matter, even though they're obligate carnivores--we know this because there are some people out there who have their cats on vegan diets, and some of those cats live full lives. I don't believe it's a healthy diet for a carnivore in the least, but it shows how just because an animal can eat and at least partially use something doesn't mean they should be (or that it's healthy).
There is a difference between surviving on a diet and thriving on it. Millions of dogs eat commercial diets, and probably most of them eat the bottom of the barrel in terms of commercial diets (think: Ol' Roy and Kibbles and Bits). Yet we always hear stories about these dogs living long, wonderful lives. Does that mean that artificial preservatives, dyes, sugars, cheap grain parts, peanut hulls, and 4D meats eaten for every single meal of one's life constitutes a healthy diet?
Oh yeah, and I think one of the best arguments for dogs eating meat (and bones and organs) is the poop. Have you ever seen the poop of a raw fed dog? It's completely different than the poop of a kibble fed dog. It's probably about a third the size, and in a few days it dries up and crumbles into dust when stepped on. Poop size is a pretty good indicator of how much of the food is being utilized.
All that said, I personally don't have a problem with dogs eating plant matter, as long as it's not most of their diet. I don't believe it's a necessary part, and I certainly don't think that they should be eating >50% cheap grains (i.e. most kibble). I think a homecooked diet with human-grade ingredients (like Dr. Patty feeds) is miles ahead of any commercial diet. But I also feel the same way about human diets. Too bad it's so much easier for me to feed my dog an appropriate diet than for me to feed myself one--she's way less picky. :)
Janine March 13th, 2007 05:44:00 PM
Thank you so much for your honesty and your candor. It goes a long way...
P.S. I love your blog -- I read it every day, and link to you on occasion on my own blog too. You're doing a great thing - and the information you provide is invaluable!
Lynnette March 13th, 2007 09:10:00 PM
My dog gets lots of spaghetti due to my husbands proclivity for eating it! He is very much a little omnivore - except when it is in his dish. (He's a rescue, so I sometimes have to work on "breaking" some behaviors - like trying to live on treats.)
As to corn, it has been shown to be an endocrine disruptor in rats and there has been a rise in corn allergy in both animals and humans in the past few years. Of course, I'm biased, suffering from corn allergy.
Pax,
MLO
MLO March 14th, 2007 01:18:00 PM
I take exception to the promotion of Purina because of all the "research" done by the company. If pet food was researched to make sure the best quality and most nutritious ingredients were fed to our dogs, would the following ingredients from PurinaOne Chicken & Rice dog food really be included:
"Chicken (natural source of glucosamine), brewers rice, corn gluten meal, poultry by-product meal (natural source of glucosamine), whole grain corn, whole grain wheat, animal fat preserved with mixed-tocopherols (form of Vitamin E), non-fat yogurt, animal digest"
Where should I start? Animal Digest is a cooked-down broth made from unspecified parts of unspecified animals. Any kind of animal can be included: goats, pigs, horses, rats, etc. The animals can be obtained from any source, so there is no control over quality or contamination. Corn gluten meal is the by-product after the manufacture of corn syrup or starch, so it is the dried residue after the removal of the bran, germ, and starch - no nutrition there - just cheap filler.
Brewers rice,and whole grain corn and wheat are also filler. Dogs and cats have no dietary requirements for carbohydrate-loaded grains. A diet heavy in grain can increase insulin production and the production of inflammatory chemicals. Over-production of insulin makes it hard for the body to maintain its correct weight, and can lead to diabetes & other problems. Cats especially have no dietary need for grains. How many diabetic cats are there now - I know of quite a few.
Most of the big pet food companies have been acquired by the big food companies - Purina is owned by Nestle & Iams is owned by Procter & Gamble. What goes into the pet food is the leftovers from human food production. It was a profitable solution for the food companies!
People can and do live on junk food. I don't choose to live on packaged, processed food of questionable nutrition. I am sure not going to feed it to my dogs.
Susan March 14th, 2007 07:36:00 PM
Well said, Susan. :) No amount of research or "balancing" of nutrients can make up for the poor quality and poor bioavailability of the ingredients used.
Janine March 14th, 2007 08:29:00 PM
Hang on just a sec. No one's promoting Purina as a first-rate food source. In fact I didn't actually believe I was promoting anything. Last time I checked I wasn't even giving advice. I was simply lauding Purina for their research efforts--quite a separate matter--and confessing to my own personal choices. I've worked hard to stay away from "promoting" anything in this blog except for a conversation so let's keep it a friendly one.
Dr. Patty Khuly March 15th, 2007 11:43:00 AM
"What I can say is that claims that dogs should eat only meat because its what's "most natural" are not well founded."
I can't help wondering why claims that dogs should eat what they're anatomically constructed by nature to eat are not well-founded.
But as far as Dr. Khuly's appreciation of Purina is concerned, I agree with her, at least in regard to the scientists who do their research. Yet...here's the rub...many vets are totally unaware of their work on such things as the myth of protein restriction for dogs in all but the last stages of renal failure. Either that or they wilfully ignore it.
It's enough to make your head spin to realize that Dr.s Brown and Finco have clearly shown that restricting protein for a dog in most stages of kidney disease is nonsense but the company itself fills bags and cans with protein-restricted food for those dogs and vets routinely prescribe it.
Having lived with a dog in renal failiure, it just infuriates me to know how much better his last years could have been if I hadn't followed the advice of my vet and offered him nothing but garbage, which he ate little of and only because there was nothing else, instead of real food.
Gil. March 15th, 2007 06:42:00 PM
Gil: The problem is that a lot of nutrition, like a lot of medicine, comes down to fashion. And that's because we're constantly reworking old theories into new ones an more science comes down the pike. Unfortunately, that means that recommendations is one direction might change pretty dramatically in just a few years. Most pet food manufacturers just follow the current trend. Let's be honest, they're generally going for what sells best. And if a couple of articles in the NY Times or People magazine say some vet in Timbuktu likes low protein then that's what's going to sell. Sad, right?
Dr. Patty Khuly March 16th, 2007 07:50:00 AM
I used to buy my animals whatever was cheapest, and Iams was one I strove to afford. My rescue rottie went from being woefully underweight to hugely overweight, despite only being fed the amount recommended on the bag for her size. She also shed horribly, had dull, dry hair, and whined every time she got up. I realize some of that is due to having problems with her tendons, but it's not so much a problem anymore. When I rescued my boxer I did some research on foods - and found that they can tend to be as sensitive inside as my rott and our old Sheltie was. I realized that most of the filler ingredients the cheaper products used was not helping the health of my dogs in any way.
I would *like* to feed my dogs Innova EVO; however, it's a little cost prohibitive, so they're making do with Innova Adult. It's still pricey - but at $45-ish per month, it's definitely worth it. The rottie is very close to being a normal weight now - you can actually see her stomach curve inward looking down, instead of rounding out. She has the energy to play with the boxer (sometimes - he's only going on 2 but she's closer to 9), her coat is shiny, and my carpet no longer looks like a hairy Italian two days after I vacuum. (No offense meant with that comment, I assure you. My husband is Italian and there's nothing wrong with that. ;))
Oh, and yes... they get the occasional human food treat in their bowls. (Or off the kids' plates when the little ones dare to leave their food behind.) Maybe not the best thing - but certainly not the worst.
Brandy March 17th, 2007 02:40:00 AM
"Want one example from my long list of feeding method pet peeves? Take the miscellaneous diets that advocate feeding dogs like wild animals...our dogs haven’t been wild for millenia. (I challenge anyone to find anything remotely wolf-like about my Frenchies.)"
Granted, dogs can be very different on the outside but inside dogs are typical carnivores: unable to chew side to side, no digestive enzymes in their mouths, stomach acid that can easily deal with raw bone, short digestive tracts never made to deal with plant matter. I'd say that's wolf-like. And according to the American Society of Mammalogists, in accordance with the code of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, the dog "is" a wolf: canis lupus familiaris. I very much doubt their decision was made without serious scientific consideration of the anatomical structures of the dog and wolf.
"Moreover, attempting to feed them as if they are wolf-like presupposes that we know what wolves eat. And, of course, we don’t really know what wolves eat, much less what’s best for them."
Actually, we do know what wolves eat. Dr. David Mech, for instance, has studied the grey wolf for years and says quite definitely in this article that their primary source of food is the deer. http://www.wolf.org/wolves/learn/scientific/delgui... Plant material, such as berries, form a negligible part of their diet.
I will never understand how anyone can say that we don't know what's best for them. Wild dogs and wolves hunt prey animals, not wheat, corn or any other type of cattle fodder. Science seems to have looked at nature and said, "Oh, yeah?" to evolution and the evidence of its own eyes.
I think you know as well as I do that the intense interest in canine nutrition comes from the urge to make money off packaged convenience foods for dogs, foods that will last indefinitely on the shelves. It just surprises me that we're not eating People Chow ourselves. But I suppose the desire to eat something that at least resembles food still remains with us even though we deny it to our dogs.
Gil. March 20th, 2007 12:01:00 PM
I'm wondering what your opinions on low/no grain cat and dog foods are. It strikes me as an excellent idea (especially for our protein-loving feline friends) to feed foods that contain only muscle meat (no nasty condemned organs, thank you very much). I'm specifically talking about Merrick pet food, but I know there are other brands out there that have similar ingredients.
http://www.merrickpetcare.com/
Alanna March 20th, 2007 10:17:00 PM
Though your way of feeding sounds fine, I think it needs known that NOT ALL KIBBLE IS CREATED EQUAL! Some people bash all kibble. And, Iams, Science Diet and Purina are not "high end", they are all crap. Why spend your money on crap? By products and chemical preservatives have no place in our pet (or people) food. Good, quality meats, fruits and veggies and naturally preserved is what is top priority in looking for a good food. If you buy food w/grains, look for digestable grains, not fillers. My three Pugs do not digest grains at all, so they get Innova Evo. I have recently switched all the dogs to this as well, as more and more research (I've spent over 4 years doing my own research on dog food, and continue to learn every day) tells me dogs do NOT NEED GRAIN and that is can, in certain instances (my Pugs), be detrimental. So, why bother buying foods full of crap they don't need? I'll spend the extra money, knowing they are eating "real food", not fillers, by products or chemicals.
Bobbie March 24th, 2007 06:21:00 PM
Dr. Khuly, how much glucosamine and chondroitin do you recommend based on body weight, and how can I go about choosing a reputable brand? My dog's recent x-ray showed the beginnings of spondylosis (just one bridge with no symptoms) and I want to add a supplement while considering what's already added to his food (Eagle Pack holistic, lamb meal and rice because I believe lambs are killed more humanely than chickens).
Thank you so much for this blog, I just found it and I love it. I really appreciate finding accurate scientific information like this.
Melissa March 4th, 2008 11:33:00 PM
In 1981, ed hardy and his wife formed Hardy Marks Publications. In 2004, Christian Bale licensed the rights to produce the high-end Ed Hardy UK line, which is based on Hardy's imagery. Prior to the ed hardy clothing line, Bale was the Head Designer at Von Dutch Originals, which marketed the imagery of Kenny Howard. Don ed hardy, commented, As demand for my artwork continues to skyrocket, I felt it was ed hardy clothing time to take on a partner that could help me manage the demand and opportunities for the ed hardy T-shirts name. Iconix is at the forefront of brand management and clearly has the capabilities to dramatically grow the Ed Hardy UK business. I'm thrilled to have them as a partner. Cheap Ed Hardy are located in everywhere. We also believe that by owning the brand alongside ed hardy clothing, the founder, there will be opportunities to further leverage his iconic name along with his new artwork. Largest selection of Ed Hardy T-Shirts and Ed Hardy here
ed hardy sale October 23rd, 2009 01:49:29 AM
Add Commment