# Astonishing Article by a "Nutritionist"



## chowder (Sep 7, 2008)

I just got my free issue of Your Dog newsletter put out by the School of Veterinary Medicine at Tuffts University. It had an article by a DVM with a Masters Degree in Nutrition who is currently a consultant with a company that specializes in nutritional consulting for the pet food industry.
If anyone can get hold of a copy, it is fascinating and may make you rethink your opinions of nutritionists. Among the things it recommends are to never feed a raw diet because either the dog will become sick from bacteria, or if he tolerates the bacteria he will shed it in his feces and can contaminate the environment, possibly with salmonella and harm the young or very old or anyone with a comprimised immune system. 
Also, it's says that it's hard to make any kibble without carbohydrates in it so there are only a few companies that make a dry with low carbohydrates, and to be wary of any new diets, or any that don't test their food on animals. And the worst thing was that when asked what she feeds her own dog, she said Purina DCO veterinary dog food since her dog had soft stools. I looked up the ingredients of that food. The top ingredients were (in this order) "Ground yellow corn, dried beet pulp, poultry by product meal, corn gluten meal, barley, beef tallow, pea fiber, aniimal digest, menidione". If this is what a nutritionist feeds her own dog, what exactly is she recommending to the pet food industry?


----------



## rannmiller (Jun 27, 2008)

Bahahaha wow! Yes, I certainly trust that sort of thinking

Just wow.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

chowder said:


> If anyone can get hold of a copy, it is fascinating and may make you rethink your opinions of nutritionists.


Hehe, it just reinforced my feelings about them. I've been on to their game for several years now. :smile:



> Among the things it recommends are to never feed a raw diet because either the dog will become sick from bacteria, or if he tolerates the bacteria he will shed it in his feces and can contaminate the environment, possibly with salmonella and harm the young or very old or anyone with a comprimised immune system.


This is a partially true statement. Raw fed dogs CAN shed salmonella in their feces. So do kibble fed dogs but it's not quite as often. The lesson here is wash your hands after you handle dog poo before you put your fingers in your mouth.



> Also, it's says that it's hard to make any kibble without carbohydrates in it so there are only a few companies that make a dry with low carbohydrates,


It's not only hard to make it, it's impossible. The carbs are needed to stick the stuff together ... to form and hold together those little kibble shaped doom nugets.



> and to be wary of any new diets, or any that don't test their food on animals.


In order for a dog food to be called "complete and balanced", they must run tests on dogs. This test uses 8 dogs. 6 of those dogs must live for 6 months when fed nothing but that particular kibble. Of the 6 surviving dogs, they must "appear to be in reasonably good health" and cannot have lost more than 15% of their body weight. That is the ONLY test the majority of dog food companies make. The test proves nothing more than 3/4 of the dogs fed this food will live for 6 months. Doesn't that make you feel good about the kibble you feed? ("you" isn't directed at any one particular person but is the general "you" meaning kibble feeders.)



> If this is what a nutritionist feeds her own dog, what exactly is she recommending to the pet food industry?


Hehehehe, no wonder her dogs have soft stools. LOL

Thank you for posting this. It's very imformative and hopefully eye opening.


----------



## Postal (Jan 23, 2009)

Great find :smile:


----------



## ChattyCathy (Nov 22, 2008)

Thanks. Wow... it really goes to show you they don't know much at all!


----------

