# A drop in the bucket...



## kclime (Jul 17, 2010)

So here it goes, I'm going to speak out and advocate for Science Diet, even though I KNOW it's not what you're going to want to hear...

I must start by saying that I do not work for Science Diet in any capacity, nor do I feed it to my dog. Personally, I think SciDi gets a bad rap from websites like this and other "dog food ratings" websites. Science Diet, at first glance, does seem to have some low-quality ingredients, but sometimes you can't just take a word for what it is. If you had your choice between the chicken McDonald's puts in their nuggets or a Purdue boneless, skinless chicken breast, which would you choose? Now, if you had to list the ingredients for that it would just say "chicken". But does that say ANYTHING about the quality of the meat you chose? Nope. Science Diet purchase their "chicken by-products" from Purdue. And AAFCO (association of american feed control officials) certifies chicken by-product meal to be "ground, rendered, clean parts of the carcass of slaughtered chicken, such as necks, feet, undeveloped eggs and intestines, exclusive of feathers, except in such amounts as might occur unavoidable in good processing practice." This being said, a company doesn't HAVE to use all of these parts of the chicken to classify it as chicken by-product meal. It comes down to how much you trust a company to use quality ingredients. As far as using organ meat is concerned, if your dog took down a deer in the wild, do you know what the first parts it would consume would be? Not the muscles - it'd be the organs, which contain many essential nutrients. 

As far as meat not being the first ingredient, the meat that is used is in "meal" form, which means it is powdered, dehydrated, concentrated protein that weighs the same before and after cooking. In many "premium" brand dog foods, the first meat ingredient is in fresh form, containing up to 80% water before processing. This means that after the kibble is cooked, that ingredient slides far down the list as far as weight and percent make-up is concerned. If the meat-first foods list a meal as their first meat ingredient, they are likely above the 20-30% recommended protein content as stated in the key nutritional factors section of Small Animal Clinical Nutrition (note this protein percentage range is based on dry matter basis - take the moisture percentage out of the food, and divide the protein percent by what's left, that's your dmb so for a 35% protein food with 10% moisture, the dmb for protein would be 35/90 = .388 so 38.8% is the dmb for protein - well above the recommended 20-30%. And yes, exceeding these recommended protein levels CAN cause kidney disease and WILL further the disease's progression if occurs. The kidneys have to work much harder to filter out the extra protein, potentially causing or exacerbating a disease that as it is is only detectable by blood test, and even then, usually not until 2/3 of the kidneys have stopped functioning. I'm not saying high-protein diets are wrong, but I do recommend annual blood tests for kidney failure if that's the route you choose to go. 

To attest to the quality of Science Diet's by-product meals, they list the ash content of the food right on the label. Canidae (not to bash, just an example, most foods don't list the ash content) may not use by-products, but they don't tell you the ash content of their food. Any idea where ash comes from? Bone. Well, not just bone, but it is the left-over product of any food that is completely incinerated in the cooking process, meaning it is often over-loaded with trace elements and minerals 

On to the corn and fillers. The idea that corn is cheap is completely absurd. With the recent trend toward ethanol-based fuels, corn is at a premium in this country. Science diet pays a pretty penny to use corn in their foods. Corn, when processed properly is 98% digestible. Yes, if a dog eats a whole kernel of corn, it's going to poop out a whole kernel of corn. But if the corn is properly processed and ground, the dog can actually digest almost the entire thing, exclusive of the outer-most layer of the kernel that is cellulose - a great source of fiber to keep things moving in the digestive system. Corn listed as "corn gluten meal" is a FANTASTIC source of protein for dogs (which I must add are NOT carnivores, but rather omnivores - cats are true carnivores). To those out there who say "my dog is allergic to corn" - I'd like to see the results of the $1000 skin-prick test that is necessary to truly determine this, and then I'd like to let you know that you are among the minority. Corn contributes to about 5% of all documented dog allergies. 70% of all dog food allergies come from dairy, beef, or wheat. The other 25% come from chicken, eggs, lamb, and soy. Corn is a great source of carbohydrates for your dog, as well. Any human athlete out there knows that energy comes from carbs, not protein - in fact, remember when Atkins was the rage weight-loss method and led to tons of health problems. Animals NEED carbohydrates to survive. Corn is also rich in linoleic acid and provides many essential amino acids for dogs. 

Also, in meat-first foods, check further down the ingredient list. For instance, in Canidae's All-Life-Stages diet - after the first three meat meal ingredients, the next three are brown rice, white rice, and rice bran. How many different ways can you say "rice"? By splitting up filler ingredients into different "names" it makes the food look like it has more meat in it, because if you combined the weight of the brown, white, and bran forms of rice, chances are, it would outweigh some of the meat. (yes I realize this doesn't apply to grain-free)

Basically, Science Diet IS more science based than most foods, formulating their food based on nutrients, not ingredients. While feeding your dog a food that has blueberries in it may make you feel warm and fuzzy, your dog's digestive system doesn't care if the antioxidants in its food come from blueberries or a vitamin E supplement (which is what SciDi uses). 

Ultimately, you'll feed what you will and what makes you feel good and works for your dog, but I feel like a lot of the Science Diet-bashing comes from a severe lack of understanding regarding proper canine nutrition. I also think everyone who is concerned with giving their dog the best nutrition should take a look at Small Animal Clinical Nutrition easily accessible at most university libraries or for purchase on sites like Amazon. Remember, nutrients not ingredients....

Okay, let the uproar begin.


----------



## Eurobox (May 17, 2010)

And I should assume that the 'ground peanut hulls' are only premium ground peanut hulls right? :tongue:

Why are you defending them? Why would anyone that does not work for the company or is somehow connected to/getting paid by the company defend them? 

I don't really care, as I will never feed this food to my dogs.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

This guy must be claybuster's brother. :smile: I'm not even going to try to teach him anything. He has already been irretrievably brain washed by the Hill's marketing department. I wish I had read this post before I answered his other post earlier. I wouldn't have bothered.

I will point out one thing ... he mentions the great ingredients in SD products ... some of the products has an ingredient called "powdered cellulose". Thats a marketing department word that means "sawdust".


----------



## ruckusluvr (Oct 28, 2009)

thank you the the nightly entertainment. 
would had been better with happy hour.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

I just went back and checked other posts by kclime. It seems his first post on this board was in the thread "top 5 dog food brands" ... Here is his list:
Orijen
Taste of the wild
Wellness
Chicken soup
Merrick 

Not one mention of SD!!! :biggrin::biggrin::biggrin:

Some of these are pretty high protein foods also. :smile:


----------



## ann g (May 6, 2010)

Why advocate what you dont feed to your own dog???


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

Thank you, after a long day, this thread made me laugh. 
So silly. 
:tongue:


----------



## luvMyBRT (Mar 8, 2010)

I stoped reading after the first sentence! :tongue:


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

saraj2878 said:


> I stoped reading after the first sentence! :tongue:


Could that be because the remainder of the text simply did not matter? I love it when people prove in the very first sentence that they have NO idea what they're talking about. :biggrin:


----------



## luvMyBRT (Mar 8, 2010)

CorgiPaws said:


> Could that be because the remainder of the text simply did not matter?


Yup! How did you know??? :tongue:


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

saraj2878 said:


> Yup! How did you know??? :tongue:


haha, lucky guess I suppose.:biggrin::tongue::smile:


----------



## versatile_shelties (Jun 3, 2010)

Oh hai, Science Diet company rep/worker/pusher. Thank you for the nightly entertainment *snickers*


----------



## PUNKem733 (Jun 12, 2009)

kclime said:


> So here it goes, I'm going to speak out and advocate for Science Diet, even though I KNOW it's not what you're going to want to hear...
> 
> I must start by saying that I do not work for Science Diet in any capacity, nor do I feed it to my dog. Personally, I think SciDi gets a bad rap from websites like this and other "dog food ratings" websites. Science Diet, at first glance, does seem to have some low-quality ingredients, but sometimes you can't just take a word for what it is. If you had your choice between the chicken McDonald's puts in their nuggets or a Purdue boneless, skinless chicken breast, which would you choose? Now, if you had to list the ingredients for that it would just say "chicken". But does that say ANYTHING about the quality of the meat you chose? Nope. Science Diet purchase their "chicken by-products" from Purdue. And AAFCO (association of american feed control officials) certifies chicken by-product meal to be "ground, rendered, clean parts of the carcass of slaughtered chicken, such as necks, feet, undeveloped eggs and intestines, exclusive of feathers, except in such amounts as might occur unavoidable in good processing practice." This being said, a company doesn't HAVE to use all of these parts of the chicken to classify it as chicken by-product meal. It comes down to how much you trust a company to use quality ingredients. As far as using organ meat is concerned, if your dog took down a deer in the wild, do you know what the first parts it would consume would be? Not the muscles - it'd be the organs, which contain many essential nutrients.
> 
> ...


----------



## cprcheetah (Jul 14, 2010)

Science Diet gets a bad rap for a reason, personally I know it killed several of my young (under 3-4) dogs back in 1997/1998 due to different forms of cancer due to the chemical preservatives it uses/used (Ethoxyquin/BHA/BHT). I switched off of SD and have only lost 1 dog to cancer since. Science Diet uses Corn which is not easily digestible by any stretch of the imagination. Even in people, I know corn comes out just as it went in. :biggrin: Dogs are carnivores not Herbivores. Corn is more appropriate to be fed as chicken feed not dog or cat food. I work for a vet/daycare and I can tell by the poops which dogs are on SD, I honestly feel bad for them as they look like they are pooping 2x4's because it is so hard and dried out. That can't be comfortable and it doesn't look comfortable with all the straining they do.


----------



## DaneMama (Jun 27, 2008)

kclime said:


> Animals NEED carbohydrates to survive.


So...what is the daily minimum requirement for carbs for dogs? You say that they are needed for survival. Well, my dogs should have been dead long ago if that were the case. Two of our dogs have never eaten a carbohydrate source their entire lives...but they are at peak health???

And there will be no uproar, people realize that it is pointless to try and teach someone who is obviously not interested in learning and having an open mind. From the responses so far, I would say that people don't want to put in the effort even to read your post. So, why even post it???

Welcome to the forum, I really hope you learn a thing or two while you're here because there is much that you need to learn when it comes to carnivore nutrition :biggrin:


----------



## Unosmom (May 3, 2009)

Wow.. thanks for the laugh, I needed it this morning:wink:


----------



## xxshaelxx (Mar 8, 2010)




----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

> Science Diet purchase their "chicken by-products" from Purdue. And AAFCO (association of american feed control officials) certifies chicken by-product meal to be "ground, rendered, clean parts of the carcass of slaughtered chicken, such as necks, feet, undeveloped eggs and intestines, exclusive of feathers, except in such amounts as might occur unavoidable in good processing practice."


here's the get out of jail sentence....'except in such amounts as might occur unavoidable in good processing practice'. oops....the feathers fell in.

first, this is where i stopped reading...and purdue? my g'd...even the man admitted packing his chicken full to bursting to get more money when they went to market.....that's hardly a selling point.

i don't know what the deal is with vets and people with their science diets...but i would be willing to bet these are the ones who think their doctors know no wrong and their vets are miracle makers...and know everything...so should be followed blindly.

the shame is that some lurkers will read this and think it reasonable.


----------



## Doc (Jan 17, 2009)

Uins meen it aint da truff? Well, no madder cuz I aint eber fed dat to my dawgs. Iz dident knowd uins had to be a scientist to fed a dawg. Tater ates bout any ting and da utter two day jest ates when day hongry. Day dont much cared ifn da food comz outta a bag or from da woods. Dem two been seen a in da creek fishin and trotin to old man Hawleys hen house fer a treat.


----------



## AddieNMel (Mar 14, 2010)

I dont agree that SD is good food at all. Dogs just like humans need variety. When a food is 90% corn the dog isnt able to get all the nutrients, amino acids etc it needs. Its just not that bioavailable to dogs. Yes dogs can digest 60% carbs in their diet, and can live that way, but it doesnt mean its ideal. SD is far more than 60% anyhow. What really gets me ( as stated before) is their inclusion of 'powdered cellulose' - saw dust. NO USE at all for the dog.. added filler for fiber. They can NOT digest this at all. 

Even though they may chemically meet AAFCO standards it doesnt mean its good for the dog - There was a study done that showed a 'food' having good amounts of fat, fiber, protein etc on paper, but when revealed the ingredients it was oil, rubber, leather and wood.

It is fallacy that high protein will cause kidney failure, please stop with that rumor. it WILL NOT. If a pet is in kidney failure it may make things worse, but will not cause the disease itself.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

kclime said:


> So here it goes, I'm going to speak out and advocate for Science Diet, even though I KNOW it's not what you're going to want to hear...


It has nothing to do with what we want to hear, and don't want to hear... it's moreso a fact vs. fiction concept here.... and I'm only posting this for any lurkers who may be confused by all this misinformation. I know this is "feeding the trolls" but there is just SO much wrong in this post... I gotta bite it. 



kclime said:


> Science Diet, at first glance, does seem to have some low-quality ingredients, but sometimes you can't just take a word for what it is.


The ingredients are utter garbage. Saw dust is in no capacity beneficial or appropriate to feed and domestic animal that I can think of, and certainly not a dog or cat. 



kclime said:


> It comes down to how much you trust a company to use quality ingredients.


There is nothing going for SD that makes me think "hmm, trustworthy!" I'm sorry, but if a company can not even make a halfway appropriate dog food, why in the heck would anyone trust that the ingredients they are using is of any decent quality. Premium Sawdust? Only the finest peanut hulls? Right....




kclime said:


> If the meat-first foods list a meal as their first meat ingredient, they are likely above the 20-30% recommended protein content as stated in the key nutritional factors section of Small Animal Clinical Nutrition


Plant based protein is not good in any capacity. Protein from animal sources is a non-issue and will not cause any issues. 



kclime said:


> Yes, if a dog eats a whole kernel of corn, it's going to poop out a whole kernel of corn. But if the corn is properly processed and ground, the dog can actually digest almost the entire thing, exclusive of the outer-most layer of the kernel that is cellulose - a great source of fiber to keep things moving in the digestive system.


Isn't the fact that it has to be processed to be of any use enough to think 
"hmm, my dog can not naturally digest and utilize this ingredient, perhaps it does not belong in his food!" No? As for it being expensive, don't worry, I'm sure they offset their cost with sawdust and peanut hulls... or are those super pricey, too?



kclime said:


> (which I must add are NOT carnivores, but rather omnivores - cats are true carnivores).


Alright, so we can go back and forth on the carnivore/ omnivore issue for days. Fact of the matter it, the dog food companies have brainwashed you into thinking that your carnivore needs to be lurking in the corn fields, and you're probably too far gone to ever come back. BUT... one thing we agree on is cats are carnivores. True to the core carnivores. So tell me, then, if Science Diet is this wonderful company that gets picked on oh so much by "sites like this" and their foods are truely formulated for optimum health... 

Brewers Rice _(go, go carnivore kitty!)_
Corn Gluten Meal _(mmmm, corn. nom.)_
Chicken By-Product Meal _(no named meat? Didn't think so)_
Whole Grain Corn _(wooot! corn! I love it when companies splice ingredients!)_
Animal Fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid)
Dried Egg Product _(cool. egg product. Because simple whole eggs makes too much sense)_
Soybean Oil _(allergies, anyone?)_
Chicken Liver Flavor _(oh goodie, at least it might taste like chicken.)_
.....and so on.

That's a Science Diet CAT food. Cats are carnivores. This is not one of their rip off RX formulas, either. Just a kitty food right off the shelves. Let me guess, Science Diet is superior in their dog foods but lacking in cat foods? Wrong. They suck. Period. Zero concept of what a dog or cat actually is beyond four legs, a tail, and some fur. 





kclime said:


> To those out there who say "my dog is allergic to corn" - I'd like to see the results of the $1000 skin-prick test that is necessary to truly determine this, and then I'd like to let you know that you are among the minority.


Okay,how about those who had dogs with hot spots, ear infections, swollen eyes, and itchy paws on corn foods, and are totally perfectly fine without it? Let me guess, coincidence? My beagle had seizures on corn. Has not had one in three years since being put on decent food. Imagine that. 



kclime said:


> Any human athlete out there knows that energy comes from carbs, not protein - in fact, remember when Atkins was the rage weight-loss method and led to tons of health problems.


Anyone reading this thread knows we are talking about dogs, not humans. This is one of the biggest mistakes people make in regards to canine nutrition, they assume "it's good for me, it's good for them!" wrong. Dogs are NOT people and should not be fed as such. And by the way, the Atkins diet is alive and well. :wink:



kclime said:


> Animals NEED carbohydrates to survive.


Of this entire silly post, THIS is the most harmful sentence. Dogs do NOT need carbs to survive. In fact, carbs in any significant amount fed over a long period of time are dangerous. Tell this to my Corgi who almost DIED under one year of age because of CARBS. Tell me, what is the minimum daily requirement of carbohydrates for dogs? That's right, you have no idea because there ISN'T one. A low carb, or NO carb diet is absolutely best for dogs. Unless of course you WANT your dog to get cancer, diabetes, and have organ issues. In which case, feed carbs. But to say that dogs NEED them is absolute garbage. They do NOT. Not in any capacity. Even my science diet- pushing vet figured this issue out. Carbs CAN kill your dog. Do not underestimate that. 



kclime said:


> Also, in meat-first foods, check further down the ingredient list. For instance, in Canidae's All-Life-Stages diet - after the first three meat meal ingredients, the next three are brown rice, white rice, and rice bran. How many different ways can you say "rice"? By splitting up filler ingredients into different "names" it makes the food look like it has more meat in it, because if you combined the weight of the brown, white, and bran forms of rice, chances are, it would outweigh some of the meat. (yes I realize this doesn't apply to grain-free)


Most dog foods do in fact splice ingredients. Much like the whole grain corn and corn gluten meals listed in science diet. I bet they go wonderfully with the peanut hulls. 



kclime said:


> Basically, Science Diet IS more science based than most foods, formulating their food based on nutrients, not ingredients.


So tell me what part of this food is appropriate for a dog with diabetes or gastrointestinal issues, because surely it's scientifically formulated, and I'm curious which part of it is good. OH, and I see a ton of ingredient splicing going on. How many ways can YOU say soy?


Whole Grain Corn _ (just couldn't be healthy without corn!)_
Powdered Cellulose _(Sawdust... my dog LOVES sawdust!)_
Chicken by-product Meal_ (named meats made too much sense)_
Corn Gluten Meal_ (more corn. YES!)_
Chicken Liver Flavor _ (because actual chicken liver might actually up the quality.)_
Soybean Mill Run _Soybean mill run is composed of soybean hulls and such bean meats that adhere to the hulls which results from normal milling operations in the production of dehulled soybean meal. (AAFCO, 2003) This is considered a cheap, poor quality, by-product filler. _
Soybean Oil_ (more soy based ingredient! One was simply not enough, we REALLY want to go for allergies here!)_
Dried Beet Pulp_ (can never have enough cheap fillers.)_
Soybean Meal_ (I knew we needed more soy!!)_
Caramel Color _(what? it has to be a pretty color. My dog will NOT eat ugly food!)_





kclime said:


> but I feel like a lot of the Science Diet-bashing comes from a severe lack of understanding regarding proper canine nutrition.


I feel that most pro-science diet talk comes from a severe lack of understanding regarding proper canine nutrition. It is the result of being brainwashed by dog food reps and undereducated veterinarians everywhere, and blindly listening because the vet said so. Well, if we're being totally honest, vets are lacking in a LOT of areas. They, (much like human doctors) have a far better understanding of the function of medications than they do the basic functions and needs of the canine (or human!) body.


----------

