# Chicken By-Product Meal



## claybuster

I welcome CBPM in my dogs diet. I know it is there to for a reason and that is to deliver what the dog needs most. Carnivore style rations with focus on animal source proteins and the avoidance of gluten. I feel it is very beneficial for my dog.


----------



## Big dog man

good info, what are your thoughts on this.


----------



## claybuster

Big dog man said:


> good info, what are your thoughts on this.


My thoughts are SPAM.


----------



## RawFedDogs

Big dog man said:


> good info, what are your thoughts on this.


I think its garbage. It's an over priced sensationalized book with a lot of half truths in it. It proves that anyone can sell anything no matter how worthless over the internet.


----------



## TippysMom

And haven't several of us said that before? How about if you stop posting that crap here!?!?

Oh wait, I suppose Big Dog Man is the author! Hahahaha! It's still crap, and has nothing to do with any of the threads you've attached it to.

Please stop.


----------



## Doc

Ifn dat guy dont stop talkn bout wags, Iz iza gonna turn Tater, Lucy and Blu aloos on him and he will need more den a wag to help him. Ima tinkin he mustz be sick on da haid.


----------



## carolspets

CBPM is also a welcomed ingredient in foods I feed my dogs. We used to raise chickens and when the dogs "got" one, they ate everything including the beaks and feet...and left the feathers. They were one bunch of healthy dogs! We stopped raising chickens for obvious reasons


----------



## claybuster

Article from Abady on by-product meals:

by-products

I think it is a great article and they know how to feed carnivores!


----------



## RawFedDogs

Some of what they say in this article is correct and other things, not so much so. Remember this is promotional material from a dog food company. It is not scientific research. They want to leave you with the impression that carnivores in the wild live almost exclusively on the by-products of their prey. In fact, by-products make up a small part of the carcass. Muscle meat is by far the most prevelant part of a wild carnivores diet. Yes, by-products are a part of the diet but only something like 10% to 15% of the diet. Most carnivores will not eat intestines or intestinal contents which is the greatest bulk of by-products.


----------



## claybuster

Quote from another article titled "How to Choose..."



> The nutritional significance of by-products can be verified by the following observation. There is a pond on the property of the *Abady testing facilities *which is visited by wild geese and ducks. There are also a number of resident foxes on the property that don’t mind helping themselves to a duck or goose dinner from time to time. (Foxes are close relatives of dogs). The foxes eat only the head, feet, and internal organs including the intestines (today they are called by-products). They don’t touch the muscle meat presumably because the feathers are attached and are indigestible. Luckily for them that they don’t read the WDJ and discover that they should not be eating such stuff.


----------



## RawFedDogs

Do your research somewhere other than promotional hype from a dog food company and you will get significantly different information.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Do your research somewhere other than promotional hype from a dog food company and you will get significantly different information.


The significantly different information RFD is talking about is the promotion of omnivore nutrition. I wouldn't believe in any of that stuff. Abady research, Abady science is the best in the market place.

Abady quotes:



> Abady products center around protein adequacy. They are the only products in which the animal protein content ranges in the 80 to 90 percentiles. In addition, in Abady products the entire ration is focused on protecting the protein so that it can be used effectively by the body. Other brands offer very little quality animal protein regardless of how the ingredients are listed on the label. They offer mostly grain protein, gluten, which has a Biological Value of zero and has potentially serious long term side effects.





> The level of carbohydrates in Abady is moderated and the level of fibrous material included in Abady is so miniscule that it will not interfere with nutrient digestion and availability. The opposite is true of all other feeds in the marketplace. There are other foods on the market which include vegetables, potatoes, and fruit. These products are not species-appropriate and *many of these substitutes for grain (like potatoes) do not offer any advantages over grain.* Potatoes, peas, beans, and garlic contain saponins.


----------



## Doc

I can getz cekin backs purdy cheap - iz day by products? Tater, Lucy and Mutt likes ta rade da chekin coop nest door,


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> The significantly different information RFD is talking about is the promotion of omnivore nutrition. I wouldn't believe in any of that stuff. Abady research, Abady science is the best in the market place.


The promotion of *ANY* dog food including Abady. Abady research is not science, it is promotional material. If you read proper research you will see that carnivores do not eat "by-products" to the exclusion of muscle meat or bones. They eat basically the whole carcass, usually leaving the intestines and stomach contents. 

Proper research will show you that the goose story is a bunch of crap. I know several raw feeders who feed their dogs whole chickens, feathers included. The dogs pick off most of the feathers and then eat the rest of the chicken including muscle meat. My own cats will catch birds, pick off most of the feathers and eat the bird, not JUST the "by-products". Again, by-products make up about 10% to 15% of the carnivore's diet.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Proper research will show you that the goose story is a bunch of crap.


My own independent research:

I got my dog and went after a Pheasant I knew about the day before. Several had saw this bird head off in a direction, but it was getting late and nobody felt like hunting that bird.

The next morning I decided to go after that bird, so Zoey and I headed off in that last seen direction. It is a wooded area, bordering St. Forest land. We walk about 10 minutes in and Zoe starts to get hot, something definitely in the area. Not to far ahead she locks up in a solid point. We have a bird straight ahead no doubt. She breaks off her point, weak scent. I keep looking and a finally spot the bird on the ground dead. The head...gone, the feet gone, and the stomach cavity and guts eaten out. The rest of the bird all there, feathers and all, no breast meat or leg meat touched. Plenty of Fox in the area, close relative of the dog.

From my own experience, Abady's goose story is spot on, and they are the one company out there hitting you with the truth!


another great promotional quote...



> Because they are not consumed by people their cost is relatively low and can be used abundantly in rations while keeping the cost of the food moderate and the quality high. Intelligent dog food producers (like Abady) recognize this and take full advantage of it. In fact, it is *impossible* to make a dog or cat food today that contains enough quality animal protein without the* liberal inclusion of by-products*.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> another great promotional quote...





> Because they are not consumed by people their cost is relatively low and can be used abundantly in rations while keeping the cost of the food moderate and the quality high. Intelligent dog food producers (like Abady) recognize this and take full advantage of it. In fact, it is impossible to make a dog or cat food today that contains enough quality animal protein without the liberal inclusion of by-products.


Yeah, that statement is partially true. The big reason for inclusion of by-products in dog food is because it is so very very cheap. The same reason that grains are in dog food. But ... I'm not talking about dog food. I don't feed my dogs "dog food". I'm talking about real food that is eaten in the wild.

Foxes are not dogs. Dogs ARE gray wolves. I suggest you read some research by David Mech. Particuarly his book Wolves: Behavior, Ecology and Conservation (2003):

"To grow and maintain their own bodies, wolves need to ingest all the major parts of their herbivorous prey, except the plants in the digestive system." 
-p124 

BTW: I doubt a wolf would ever run across a chicken in the wild. [smile]


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Yeah, that statement is partially true. The big reason for inclusion of by-products in dog food is because it is so very very cheap. The same reason that grains are in dog food.


"Intelligent dog food producers (like Abady) recognize this and take full advantage of it."



> By-Products (internal organs) play a central role in the feeding of carnivores, as do muscle meat, fat and bone.
> Poultry by-products meal is an economical and nutritious source of high quality animal protein.
> It is composed of lungs, heads, gizzards, necks, feet, intestines (without their contents) and other clean parts of the carcass.
> *Nutritionally it is equal to superior to the ingredients discussed earlier *and it costs many multiples less.


_Abady_


RFD stated grains and by-products are in dog foods for the same reason. Don't be misguided here or fooled into believing grains are just as good as by-products because of costs (cheap). This is not true. By-products have the nutritional equivalent to that of meat muscle while grain protein has a biological value of zero to the dog.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> By-products have the nutritional equivalent to that of meat muscle while grain protein has a biological value of zero to the dog.


I didn't say any different. I was just talking about price. Any way you look at it, chicken by-product meal is still highly processed refuse from human food processors. It is garbage that would ordinarilly be thrown away if not for the dog food companies.


----------



## whiteleo

Well, I have to put my two cents worth in, talking about these things made me remember back to when I was pretty young, 11-13, my dad was quite a hunter, large animal mostly and he went to Alaska on a Caribou hunting trip. He had flown back a puppy he bought up there from some natives. Chimo, was 3/4 malmute and 1/4 wolf, she really did great for the longest time , my dad would take her to work with him everyday. When those days became fewer, she reverted to her nature and started killing ducks and chickens, all I know is that their intestines would be laying every where and she hadn't touched them, but she ate most of the rest.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> I didn't say any different. I was just talking about price. Any way you look at it, chicken by-product meal is still highly processed refuse from human food processors. It is garbage that would ordinarilly be thrown away if not for the dog food companies.


I'm glad you said 'human food processors', and yes therefore human grade quality as well. Keep in mind, we Americans are way out numbered compared to those who eat (mostly Asian folks) chicken by-products. You won't catch too many Asians turning there nose up and heads and feet...all human grade quality from those human food processors!


----------



## RawFedDogs

Hehe, you are trying to twist words to suit your own puirposes. By-products are GARBAGE from human food processing plants and are not human quality. There is no such thing as human quality by-products. They are automatically not human quality. By definition they are food that humans don't eat. Liver, gizzards, and heart are NOT by-products.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Hehe, you are trying to twist words to suit your own puirposes. By-products are GARBAGE from human food processing plants and are not human quality. There is no such thing as human quality by-products. They are automatically not human quality. By definition they are food that humans don't eat. Liver, gizzards, and heart are NOT by-products.


Learn something new every day I suppose... do the billions and billons of Chinese hear this nonsense! Hey, stop eating those heads and feet, RFD says you got it all wrong!


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> do the billions and billons of Chinese hear this nonsense! Hey, stop eating those heads and feet, RFD says you got it all wrong!


Yep, thats right.


----------



## claybuster

Here's what Abady would tell you about that yucky by-product stuff (more promotional kind of stuff from Abady). Warning, you won't find this type of info off some of those highly rated kibble websites, those kibbles offering you potatoes, fruits and vegetables. You know, those kibbles masquerading around the foundations of raw meat diets that can fool even the raw feeders by offering fruits and vegetables and potatoes as a carnivore ration.



> Clear examples of the public being drawn in by slick advertising are exemplified by the rush toward fresh chicken and turkey-based products, lamb and rice diets and chicken meal-based diets. These diets are claimed to be more nutritious and better for dogs *because they do not contain by-products and are more digestible, along with a host of other equally mythical claims*





> Poultry by-products meal is an economical and nutritious source of high quality animal protein.
> It is composed of lungs, heads, gizzards, necks, feet, intestines *(without their contents)* and other clean parts of the carcass.





> It is not true that heads or even feet (which represent only a small component of poultry by-products meal) are undesirable as components of dog food.
> *While they have little aesthetic appeal to humans, heads contain valuable brain, tongue and ocular tissue, and feet are 20% protein & 16% fat.
> Both are rich in various amino acids and fatty acids of the most important varieties.*Among these can be found *Arginine* (essential for fertility and immune system support) *Glycine* (a potent free-radical scavenger and a component of glucose tolerance factor which regulates insulin metabolism) and *Aspartic acid *(which helps with the synthesis of glycoprotein and with the detoxification of ammonia).
> Feathers are NOT a component of poultry by-products meal, unless it is of very low quality.



Well, if that is not too appealing to some folks, better stick with Sweet Russet Potatoes, Apples, and Cranberries I guess. That seems to be the norm away when it comes to those big name diets even raw feeders would support...maybe because of mythical claims and slick advertising about being biological appropriate and something evolutionary for the modern canines?


----------



## RawFedDogs

Hehe, go read Purina's or Iam's promotional material and they will give you just a glowing reports of their crappy ingredients and convince you they are the best ingredients around. Of course we all know better. And to set the record straight I don't support any artificial processed food for dogs. I just say some is less bad than others. It is terrible to feed dogs ANY of that crap and that included Abady.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Hehe, go read Purina's or Iam's promotional material and they will give you just a glowing reports of their crappy ingredients and convince you they are the best ingredients around. Of course we all know better. And to set the record straight I don't support any artificial processed food for dogs. I just say some is less bad than others. It is terrible to feed dogs ANY of that crap and that included Abady.


It's what's NOT included in Abady that makes it the best!



> There are a number of dry formulas that masquerade as raw meat-based formulas – some contain ingredients such as: soybeans, beet pulp, tomato pomace, alfalfa, sorghum, oats, peas, beans, potatoes, garlic, and yucca, all of which contain saponins. Because their molecules are large, saponins are not absorbed readily from the digestive organs. Nevertheless, when ingested by dogs at sublethal levels on a regular basis, they will corrode the digestive organs, allowing the saponins to enter the bloodstream as if they were injected.


----------



## claybuster

I would take a cup of Abady Granular over a cup of Raw any day of the week for my dog. It's twice as powerful. Abady Raw products (also the best in the marketplace) were developed first in the early '70s. Granular was introduced later as a convenient option for those for whatever reason don't want to mess with the raw products. You get the same benefits and safety
in feeding Abady Granular as you do with the Raw. Again, when looking at Abady Raw, just like the Granular, it is what they do NOT contain that makes them the best products. Look at commercial Raw products today at check the ingredients. They seem to have followed the same path as those high end kibbles with an omnivore direction. You find Raw products with Oats, Peas, and a whole host of other species inappropriate ingredients. Just like the Granulars, you won't that stuff in Abady Raw.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> I would take a cup of Abady Granular over a cup of Raw any day of the week for my dog. It's twice as powerful. Abady Raw products (also the best in the marketplace) were developed first in the early '70s. Granular was introduced later as a convenient option for those for whatever reason don't want to mess with the raw products.


Hehe, you have fallen for their marketing hype hook line and sinker. They LOVE people like you. :smile:



> You get the same benefits and safety in feeding Abady Granular as you do with the Raw.


Thats just absolutely not true. There is no time, no where, no how that processed garbage from human processing plants is ever nearly as good a quality as natural raw food. Never, every, in any way.



> Again, when looking at Abady Raw, just like the Granular, it is what they do NOT contain that makes them the best products. Look at commercial Raw products today at check the ingredients. They seem to have followed the same path as those high end kibbles with an omnivore direction. You find Raw products with Oats, Peas, and a whole host of other species inappropriate ingredients. Just like the Granulars, you won't that stuff in Abady Raw.


You are correct when talking about COMMERCIAL raw products. Many of them are nothing more than raw kibble. We agree on that. I'm not talking aboaut commercial raw. I never feed that. I feed whole raw animal parts. Period. Nothing else. I don't think that the Abady commercial raw products are any better than the others. I don't think that has ever been proven other than by marketing hype.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Thats just absolutely not true. There is no time, no where, no how that processed garbage from human processing plants is ever nearly as good a quality as natural raw food. Never, every, in any way.


Yes way! Take what you feed (hormone and steroid injected), animal parts from commercial food sources, put it in a blender, and you still get around 400 cals per cup. You would need at least 2 cups of raw to match one cup of what I'm feeding.

If you think about it, the animal parts that you get are just the human refuse slop parts that nobody wants to eat anyway. If there wasn't a raw feeders market, they would just throw those garbage parts out! If you can't be in control of your own meat source, then you're no better off as before due the fact you don't know what has been in that animal (steroids, hormones, drugs). Considering those possibilities, probably better off with a biological appropriate kibble like Orijen or the next best thing to raw like EVO.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> Yes way! Take what you feed (hormone and steroid injected), animal parts from commercial food sources, put it in a blender, and you still get around 400 cals per cup. You would need at least 2 cups of raw to match one cup of what I'm feeding.


You REALLY need to do some research. NO and I mean NO chicken parts are hormone or steroid injected, fed, drank or in any other way introduced into the body of a chicken headed for the human food market.



> If you think about it, the animal parts that you get are just the human refuse slop parts that nobody wants to eat anyway.


The animal parts I feed come directly from the grocery store. They are human food. Except for deer meat, I buy ALL my animal parts from the grocery store or a wholesaler who sells directly to grocery stores. It is definately human quality food. They are from the human food market.



> If there wasn't a raw feeders market, they would just throw those garbage parts out!


I thought you knew just a little bit about this but there is no "raw feeders market". Most every raw feeder I know buys directly from grocers or grocery wholesalers. A very few buy directly from farmers but not many. I don't have a clue what "garbage parts" you think we feed.



> If you can't be in control of your own meat source, then you're no better off as before due the fact you don't know what has been in that animal (steroids, hormones, drugs).


I am in as much conatrol of my animal's meat sources and I am my own meat sources as the meat comes from the same place. I often take food out of the dog's food to feed myself. Its the same stuff you eat. No drugs, steroids, or hormones in any poultry sold in grocery stores in the USA. I'm not sure about beef and pork but I don't feed a lot of either of those. I know the deer meat I feed are free of chemicals.



> Considering those possibilities, probably better off with a biological appropriate kibble like Orijen or the next best thing to raw like EVO.


There is no such thing as a biological appropriate kibble but Orijen and EVO are the closest. The only biological appropriate food for our dogs is raw meat, bones, and organs. Nothing else is needed nor is anything else fed to my dogs. They do get by-products too but only in the normal porportion.

You really need to learn some of this stuff.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> You really need to learn some of this stuff.


I know enough that if I were to incorporate raw in my dogs diet, I would choose Abady Raw diets.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> I know enough that if I were to incorporate raw in my dogs diet, I would choose Abady Raw diets.


Hehe ... then you don't know enough. :smile:


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Hehe ... then you don't know enough. :smile:


I also know you have absolutely no advantage over me with store bought meats and I have greater safety and more benefits.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> I also know you have absolutely no advantage over me with store bought meats and I have greater safety and more benefits.


OK, tell you what. Why don't you find a nutritionist who is not employed by a dog food company, either a nutritionist in human food or dog food who will say that highly processed food is healthier ore even AS healthy as fresh whole foods?

Name some of those benefits.

Maybe you could explain why Abady adds 24 different chemicals to their food. And you complain about two or three in grocery store meats? hehe

Perhaps it would do you some good to read the following web page The Many Myths of Raw Feeding You will learn so much more from reading those pages than wasting time here with your futile arguments with me. :smile:


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> OK, tell you what. Why don't you find a nutritionist who is not employed by a dog food company, either a nutritionist in human food or dog food who will say that highly processed food is healthier ore even AS healthy as fresh whole foods?
> 
> Name some of those benefits.
> 
> Maybe you could explain why Abady adds 24 different chemicals to their food. And you complain about two or three in grocery store meats? hehe
> 
> Perhaps it would do you some good to read the following web page The Many Myths of Raw Feeding You will learn so much more from reading those pages than wasting time here with your futile arguments with me. :smile:


Few things here:
First, I would never seek counsel from a canine nutritionist. They IMO are more or less agents of the industry, money backed by the big names. These nutritionists all seem to promote the same agenda in regards to canine nutrition, and that would be the promotion of omnivore diets. No doubt, they would promote canned pumpkin and string beans (processed) over something like fresh chicken by-product meals. Therefore IMO, consulting a canine nutritionist in regards to fresh or processed foods would be a complete waste of time.

Second, Abady Granular feeds are not highly processed. They are lightly processed and at the same time ingredients are independently processed. Meats are lightly processed one time, and not processed at high temps needed for say white rice (which as explained in another thread if you followed the link serves up miniscule protein levels). Vitamins are not subject to processing heat and added in at the end to preserve their value.

Third, Abady is 'natural' food. Therefore when you cite "chemicals", that is very misleading. However, misleading folks seems to be the norm when it comes to some of the advice I hear you offer. I have examples. One, in another thread you recommended omnivore nutrition to someone, which is contradictory to what you profess. If I were to be asked what to feed besides Abady, I would without hesitation promote nothing other than raw or home prepared meat based diets, but never steer someone into the direction of omnivore nutrition. Back to the chemicals, they would be naturally occurring chemical compounds found in nature, which deliver naturally occurring vitamins found in nature. I realize, this is probably very confusing to you, but that is the reality of those "chemicals". I have examples of natural. Abady will cite natural or organic oils used, because you have natural sunflower oil and sunflower oil of the genetically engineered variety.
Those types of ingredients not deemed 'natural' are not welcome in the ration.
Corn is a perfect example. Dropped from the Abady lineup of ingredients for the natural aspect. Gods given corn is hard to find because all we have now is GM corn. Considering the great lengths Abady goes to be 'natural' and preservative free, you citing "chemicals" only shows ignorance.

I have already read the promotional data in regards to raw (myths) and I do not disagree with any of that information. I reviewed that piece several years ago and again have no issues with any of it...good stuff.

Oh, another thing that you recently stated which I found inaccurate is there most certainly is a 'raw feeders' market out there. Raw feeding has had a very strong rise in popularity the past 5 years and companies all across the county are probably shipping frozen turkey and chicken necks to all corners of the country (and some other parts they would normally throw in the garbage). Recall the bully-stick thing a few years back, another part raw feeders started using that would normally get tossed. Many dog food companies have moved into a raw lineup like Natures Variety, Bravo, etc. Yes, there is without question a raw-feeders market out there.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> Few things here:
> First, I would never seek counsel from a canine nutritionist. They IMO are more or less agents of the industry, money backed by the big names.


I can't disagree with that. Thats why I said find one that is not employed by a dog food company if any exist.



> Second, Abady Granular feeds are not highly processed. They are lightly processed and at the same time ingredients are independently processed.


More promotional material. This processing is no different than any other dog food company.



> Meats are lightly processed one time, and not processed at high temps needed for say white rice (which as explained in another thread if you followed the link serves up miniscule protein levels). Vitamins are not subject to processing heat and added in at the end to preserve their value.


Again, exactly the same process as any other dog food company.



> Third, Abady is 'natural' food. Therefore when you cite "chemicals", that is very misleading. However, misleading folks seems to be the norm when it comes to some of the advice I hear you offer.


There is nothing natural about Abady. We will discuss the chemicals further down in this post.



> I have examples. One, in another thread you recommended omnivore nutrition to someone, which is contradictory to what you profess.


In this case, YOU are the one twisting the truth. I didn't recommend anything. I just compared some kibbles and said some are better than others. I never recommend feeding kibble. What I have said is that if I HAD to feed a kibble it would be EVO or Orijen. I don't recommend them.



> If I were to be asked what to feed besides Abady, I would without hesitation promote nothing other than raw or home prepared meat based diets, but never steer someone into the direction of omnivore nutrition.


Then you wouldn't be helpful to some people who need it. Some people just aren't going to feed a proper diet, no matter what. In that case you lead them to the least bad choice.



> Back to the chemicals, they would be naturally occurring chemical compounds found in nature, which deliver naturally occurring vitamins found in nature. I realize, this is probably very confusing to you, but that is the reality of those "chemicals". I have examples of natural. Abady will cite natural or organic oils used, because you have natural sunflower oil and sunflower oil of the genetically engineered variety.


You are right in that all these chemicals are naturally occuring but that doesn't stop them from being chemicals. Most of them are in the body of a prey animal but during the intense processing, they are processed out of the food. The dog food companies (all the dog food companies) make an attempt to replace these lost chemicals at the end of the processing. What we dont know is did they get all the chemicals back in and in the right porportion and in a bioavailable manner? We just don't know, do we? BTW: sunflower oil is a species inappropriate food for a carnivore. It's omnivore food.



> I have already read the promotional data in regards to raw (myths) and I do not disagree with any of that information. I reviewed that piece several years ago and again have no issues with any of it...good stuff.


Cool. I have known Carissa for about 7 years and consider her a good friend. She has an advanced degree in biology and is very knowledgable in all phases of the inner workings of animals. I consult her often when I need information.



> Oh, another thing that you recently stated which I found inaccurate is there most certainly is a 'raw feeders' market out there. Raw feeding has had a very strong rise in popularity the past 5 years and companies all across the county are probably shipping frozen turkey and chicken necks to all corners of the country (and some other parts they would normally throw in the garbage).


I don't know where you live but chicken and turkey necks have been sold in grocery stores for a zillion years around here. All grocery stores have carried them forever. I would guess that the necks sold in the raw feeding would be less than one one hundredth of one percent. They would never throw those things in the garbage. If they weren't sold in the human food market, they would be sold to the dog food companies.



> Recall the bully-stick thing a few years back, another part raw feeders started using that would normally get tossed.


I can't argue with the bully stick thing but I think of all the bully sticks "created", only a very small percentage make it to the dog treat market. The rest are in by-product meal.



> Many dog food companies have moved into a raw lineup like Natures Variety, Bravo, etc. Yes, there is without question a raw-feeders market out there.


I can't argue with that either except to say that i consider these foods as nothing more than raw kibble. Most have the same basic ingredients.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> BTW: sunflower oil is a species inappropriate food for a carnivore. It's omnivore food.


Well, being that you mentioned this, there is a reason. I quote:


> *Avoiding foods that include by-products, animal fat, or sunflower oil is absurd.* No dog food can be adequate without the first two. The third ingredient, *sunflower oil, is the most valuable back-up source of omega 6 fatty acids. It is the only non-toxic oil in the market place.* Omega 6 fatty acids are the most essential and valuable fatty acids in nutrition. Life cannot proceed without them. How then should you choose your dog’s food? By its record.





> The essential fatty acid linoleic acid and its derivatives are the omega 6’s. Linolenic acid and its derivatives are the omega 3’s. They cannot be synthesized by the body - they must be present in the diet. *The most important of the two are linoleic acid and its derivatives, the omega 6’s because they have more tasks to perform; they can even replace the omega 3’s if the omega 3’s are deficient or absent.* Those tasks may not be performed as well, but the regulatory functions will nevertheless continue to be performed. Most tasks require that the essential fatty acids, either the omega 6’s or the omega 3’s be of the 20 to 22 carbon length variety.





> When plant oils are used they provide the 18 carbon chain fatty acids which the body has to lengthen in order to be able to use them. In that competition the omega 6’s have the advantage. Given equal amounts of the 18 carbon starting materials (omega 6 and the omega 3’s), the *enzymes will prefer to use linoleic acid to make its longer chain derivatives *and will use *very little linolenic acid (omega 3’s) to make its longer-chain derivatives (EPA & DHA*).





> Sunflower oil was selected because it *has the highest concentration of omega 6 fatty acids, is the purest, and the only non-toxic oil in the marketplace. Virtually any other omega 6 oil could be used. Sunflower oil is a marvelous source of omega 6 fatty acids and for proper dietary balance it should be combined with adequate supplies of omega 3 fatty acids. *Overstating the amounts of omega 3 fatty acids in a diet in relation to the amounts of omega 6 fatty acids is a prescription for disaster (we know of one company that makes this error and brags about it as if it were advantageous - it isn’t) particularly because the omega 3’s cannot substitute for the omega 6’s, while the omega 6’s do substitute for shortages of the omega 3’s. The Abady Company *was the first company*, over 30 years ago, to recognize the need for omega 3 fatty acids and to address it.



So there you have the condensed version of why certain ingredients are used.
Plant fiber is inappropriate in carnivore feeding but plant oils on the other hand the dogs body can utilize. Same can be said for Flaxseed Oil, richest source of omega 3's yet you don't want to see it as fiber source, only the benefits from the oils from the fatty acids.

You can put your trust in Abady research and technology. They won't steer you in the wrong direction, and it's been that way since 1972 when the first commercial raw was introduced.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> They won't steer you in the wrong direction, and it's been that way since 1972 when the first commercial raw was introduced.


Hehe, as long as you believe promotional material from a dog food company and use their marketing hype as your sole source of research, you just don't have a leg to stand on in this discussion. If you go to the Purina or Iams or any other dog food web site you will find very similar untruths about their ingredients and how good they are for your dogs but we know those aren't true either don't we? They will even tell you that corn is one of the best ingredients you can put in dog food. :smile:

Again flaxseed is an omnivore food since it is a plant. Dogs have no need for it. The food dogs eat is heavy in O6's even if you do nothing to them. There is no need to add O6's to the diet. You do need to add 03's.

You just need to do a lot more reading from sources other than from dog food company's marketing hype. You will be much more able to present your side then.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Hehe, as long as you believe promotional material from a dog food company and use their marketing hype as your sole source of research, you just don't have a leg to stand on in this discussion. If you go to the Purina or Iams or any other dog food web site you will find very similar untruths about their ingredients and how good they are for your dogs but we know those aren't true either don't we? They will even tell you that corn is one of the best ingredients you can put in dog food. :smile:
> 
> Again flaxseed is an omnivore food since it is a plant. Dogs have no need for it. The food dogs eat is heavy in O6's even if you do nothing to them. There is no need to add O6's to the diet. You do need to add 03's.
> 
> You just need to do a lot more reading from sources other than from dog food company's marketing hype. You will be much more able to present your side then.


Ok, so you know more about dog food than the people who first developed commercial raw feeds. That’s fantastic.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> Ok, so you know more about dog food than the people who first developed commercial raw feeds. That’s fantastic.


Don't know more about it, just have nothing to gain by lying to you. If I was a used car salesman, I'd love to have you for a customer. I'm sure you also believe all the ads you see on TV.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Don't know more about it, just have nothing to gain by lying to you. If I was a used car salesman, I'd love to have you for a customer. I'm sure you also believe all the ads you see on TV.



Where do they lie, that's what I would like to know? Where do think they are telling lies and why?

If you were a used car salesman, and you treated your customers they way you treat people on this forum, you would be a broke used car salesman with no customers.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> Where do they lie, that's what I would like to know? Where do think they are telling lies and why?


They are telling lies when the speak in glowing terms of how their ingredients and mfg process is superior to any other dog food company. They are telling these lies to get you to buy their product. Seems to be working in your case.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> They are telling lies when the speak in glowing terms of how their ingredients and mfg process is superior to any other dog food company. They are telling these lies to get you to buy their product. Seems to be working in your case.


Well, their lies have been working great for over 7 years and I have a been getting a lot of mileage out of my dog...with no breakdowns.


----------



## BabyHusky

there's people that feed pedigree to their dogs and have a healthy, long living dog. i've been reading this debate between you two and have found it very interesting and enlightening. i looked into abady products myself and (never thought I would say this), I agree with RFD. Abady is no where bad and definitely decent BUT its still processed. Even if its only a little, or not as much as the others, etc etc. You're still bottomline comparing processed to not processed. 100% natural to treated by humans.

thanks to both of you though. its a really good debate.


----------



## claybuster

BabyHusky said:


> there's people that feed pedigree to their dogs and have a healthy, long living dog. i've been reading this debate between you two and have found it very interesting and enlightening. i looked into abady products myself and (never thought I would say this), I agree with RFD. Abady is no where bad and definitely decent BUT its still processed. Even if its only a little, or not as much as the others, etc etc. You're still bottomline comparing processed to not processed. 100% natural to treated by humans.
> 
> thanks to both of you though. its a really good debate.


You're Welcome Baby Husky, thank you for the commentary. Notice how RFD merely stated his opinion of why he thinks they (Abady) are lying to the public to get sales. And, you know what they say about opinions, opinions are like (fill in the blank) and everybody has one. RFD has stated nothing proof wise, that Abady lies to the public. RFD and probably plenty of others on this board never heard of Abady products. That is because they don't market to you, people find them. You don't see it often in stores, you'll never see a TV commercial, and you won't see them in magazine advertising unless maybe a specialty type. What RFD doesn't understand in the commercial dry feed business what makes a carnivore ration and what is not, no clue. Case in point, his blessings go the way toward feeds like EVO and Orjien, and when you compare ingredient profiles, the obvious is there in black and white. The two I mentioned are loaded up with all sorts of non-species appropriate ingredients yet you only really find one (white rice) in Abady. White Rice is there for good reason serving up little protein not jeopardizing the protein core. It is the composition of the protein core that dictates whether or not the feed is successful...all the time. When gluten source proteins dominate the protein core which is the case in commercial omnivore nutrition that is where the line is crossed between what makes carnivore feed and what doesn't. The industry as a whole openly admits it's feed omnivores, all except Abady.
EVO states something about the 'modern' canine or 'evolutionary' diets for today’s dogs, and it's good to introduce Apples and Cranberries, Tomatoes, Kelp (seaweed) in the modern canines diets. Orijen more of the same with 'biologically appropriate' and the same old omnivore style ingredients.
Who's telling the lies here? Who is marketing more heavily to you the reader?
You here me talking about Abady, but that's about it. You hear a lot about EVO and Orijen because there in a whole bunch of stores and got a lot a advertising out there in magazine and such. Again, the reason is Abady is not marketing to you, people will find them. Only solid reputable companies can stay alive under that scenario and that is the repeat customer that makes it happens. Customers come back because the products work.

So, how do you dominate the protein core of a ration so it's 90+ plus animal source proteins, non-dependent of gluten? There is only one way, and Abady understands this, you do it with the liberal inclusion of by-products meals, the richest source of animal based proteins available to feed makers, that is the only way.

Abady doesn't have to answer to stock holders, they don't have to make a profit for anybody, therefore no lies and deception. They tell it like is, dogs are indeed carnivores and you feed them near zero fiber, low carb, and you pump in by-product meals and pork fat. If people don't like that then they don't by the products.

Thanks again Baby Husky for following along with the thread. It would be nice if we could hear more than that stuff sucks and they tells lies as a best effort to get your point across….but unfortunately it seems about all we get here.

Oh before I forget. Yes, of course there is processing to make a commercial dry feed, but doing it natural and preservative free for your dog makes it THE BEST!


----------



## mcbosco

*abady is next best thing to raw*

I feed both abady and raw organs mostly, green tripe especially...you cant go wrong with Abady, in fact its the best food by far that you can buy already made...

I use Maintainance & Stress and could not be happier. I have used several of the formulas for about 15 years and had a jack russell live to almost 19.

All the hysteria about by-products is silly as they are better if the quality is good than muscle meat.


----------



## claybuster

Hey, another Abady feeder! Great. Welcome to dog food chat.


----------



## claybuster

15 years with Abady, that's great. I have 7 under my belt, mostly Classic and Basic, but I have fed the Maintenence and Stress. They are all good IMO.


----------



## RawFedDogs

mcbosco said:


> I feed both abady and raw organs mostly, green tripe especially...you cant go wrong with Abady, in fact its the best food by far that you can buy already made...


Who are you??? Claybusters mother?? :smile:


----------



## CorgiPaws

claybuster said:


> I would take a cup of Abady Granular over a cup of Raw any day of the week for my dog.


Let me get this straight, because I have a hard time believing that even YOU could be this ignorant...... We've already established dogs are carnivores. We've also established that processing that takes place for ALL dog foods, including your beloved Abady kills most of the nutrients found in fresh foods. You'd rather have that for your dog than a SPECIES APPROPRIATE diet? NO kibble out there is entirely species appropriate. None. I find it hard to believe that someone would actually pick processed over fresh. I don't care how much meat by product your food has in it, most of the nutrients in it are dead after processing anyway... and somehow you find it superior? 



claybuster said:


> Abady Raw products (also the best in the marketplace) were developed first in the early '70s. Granular was introduced later as a convenient option for those for whatever reason don't want to mess with the raw products.


You're trying to argue a dead subject. When raw feeders on here refer to their raw diets, it's generally NOT a pre made diet like that. It's fresh meats, purchased at a grocery store. The same place we get meats for our own family dinners and whatnot. 



claybuster said:


> You get the same benefits and safety
> in feeding Abady Granular as you do with the Raw.


How can you possibly buy into that crap? You do NOT get the benefits of raw because you kill nearly all the nutrients in the processing. Not to mention the rice they add as the #2 ingredient. How species appropriate is that?



claybuster said:


> Look at commercial Raw products today at check the ingredients.


Again, a dead debate. RFD and other raw feeders on here are not defending the commercial raw diets, but rather a prey model diet free of processin and manufacturing plants. EVEN SO, a commercial raw diet is still superior to a dead commercial kibble diet. 



claybuster said:


> You find Raw products with Oats, Peas, and a whole host of other species inappropriate ingredients. Just like the Granulars, you won't that stuff in Abady Raw.


The chicken quarters and pork necks I bought at the grocery store for the boys had no oats, peas, OR RICE in it. 

You're the first to jump on anyone else's back about buying into media and hype, yet you whole-heartedly put all your trust in one company and their "studies." A study can be tweaked to prove whatever you want it to, just for the record. Anyone who has done a 6th grade science project knows that. Perhaps consider doing your own research? Your own observations? Any dog food company can make whatever claims they want about their food. Just ask Pedigree and their "really good foor for dogs" or beneful and their "complete balanced nutrition."

As for there being a market for raw feeding and whatnot, you're right and wrong all at the same time. YES, there is a market for commercially made raw foods like Primal and Nature's Variety, but NOT for prey model raw. Any meat that I've bought for my dogs in the grocery store was stocked and sold there long before. Prey model raw feeders are not buying into any promotional material whatsoever. Let me know when Foster Farms Chicken, Cedar-Springs Lamb of Smithfield Pork releases promotional data in reguards to raw feeding dogs.

Edited to add: As for by products:
I don't frown upon by products as much as I do grains in my dog's food, but the bulk of by products in dog food are intestines, which dogs in the wild would not eat unless on the brinks of starvation. A diet consisting mainly of By-Product meal and Rie can in no way shape or form deliver balanced nutrition for any dog.


----------



## claybuster

CorgiPaws said:


> I find it hard to believe that someone would actually pick processed over fresh. I don't care how much meat by product your food has in it, most of the nutrients in it are dead after processing anyway... and somehow you find it superior?


Abady research:

*Fresh animal tissue is processed once. The animal meals are also processed only once, as are fats and oils, unlike kibble in which animal meals are processed twice. Importantly in Abady granular products the vitamins are never exposed to heat or pressure. Dogs do not have a requirement for carbohydrates and generally fare better with lower levels. Only the Abady Company’s special process permits the levels of each ingredient to be included independently, allowing an increase in fats, an increase in protein, and a decrease in carbohydrates according to the requirements of that formula. In Abady granular most of the grains are fully processed, independently of most of the TBN content. Both grains and tissue building nutrients are blended together at the end of the process, (after each has been appropriately processed), not at the beginning. In addition this special food has a granular texture that does not require it be chewed. This prevents plaque from forming, just as in Nature, thereby maintaining cleaner teeth.*


How do I find granular superior to raw? Good question Miss Corgi Paws and I will try to explain. You're average cup of raw, even if you took whole prey and blenderized it, your looking at about 400-450 cals per cup. I feed 800 cals per cup. You need 2 cups of raw to match what I can do with one cup.

I would not gamble with commercial store part meat parts regardless of where it comes from (butcher shop or Wal-Mart) unless it was first cooked or at least lightly processed. The ONLY raw I feed my dog comes from what I hunt myself. In other words, I am in control of my meat sources, not Sam the butcher or Sams Town food store. You see that way I know the animal I am feeding was not taken down by drugs like sodium pentothal. That way I know my dog is not subject to the hormone, steroid and antibiotics commonly found in cattle feeds. You think I want that junk going into my dogs body? All the preservatives going in there to keep it fresh so it can last an extra week on the shelves...no way I want that for my dog. If my dogs get any commercially bought meats, yes I am cooking it, without hesitation or reservation. Hopefully some of the steriods, hormones, drugs, etc. can get cooked out. Another gamble, the choking hazzard. More dogs probably end it at the emergency vet with internal bleeding from something lodged the wrong way due to raw feeding. The emergency vets must love you folks, that must be 3K per trip. Yes I have far greater safety with a cup of granular than your commercial meat parts, and I am getting all the same benefits.

You know how confident I am Miss Linsey? I'll put my dogs blood work up against anyone’s on this list for the better numbers. I'll hit a 9.9 or a 99.9 every time. Any takers? Loser has to donate $25 to the winners choice (make it something like a Zoo, shelter, SPCA). Anyone, I don't care how long on raw, my dogs eats straight granular with no mixing of other feeds, and I'll put her blood work up against any raw feeder on this list.


----------



## CorgiPaws

claybuster said:


> Abady research:


Credibility to any word in that quote lost. 
I just don't get how YOU can jump on anyone for "buying into advertising" and here you are, totally blindsighted by one copany and their "research". I said it before and I'll say it again, ANY idiot can tweak a test or experiment to give the results they want it to. ANYONE who has done a 6th grade scence project knows that. So why is it that you don't care enough to look at any other research, or experiment yourself, and just go alonw with whatever Abady says? I thought you were actually more intelligent than that, Mr. no-advertising-can-reach-me.



claybuster said:


> How do I find granular superior to raw? Good question Miss Corgi Paws and I will try to explain. You're average cup of raw, even if you took whole prey and blenderized it, your looking at about 400-450 cals per cup. I feed 800 cals per cup. You need 2 cups of raw to match what I can do with one cup.


Calories alone do not make a food superior. How does your highly processed food stack up when it comes to protien? (keep in mind the majority of the protein listed on your commercial bag is dead due to processing) You're a big advocate of feeding a species-appropriate diet, yet your second ingredient is rice. How do you justify that? You'd honestly rather give your dog a cup of rice than a whole raw chicken breast?



claybuster said:


> or at least lightly processed.


Again claiming processed food is better than raw? I'd hate to be your dog... 
I really hope this isn't how you think in reguards to your own health. Have you not seen the damage processed foods can do to your own species, when our food is a million times regulated than the dogs? And yet you're not just kay with processed foods for your pup, but you find them SUPERIOR? My, my, my you have a lot to learn. 



claybuster said:


> Another gamble, the choking hazzard.


You're right, gotta watch those carnivores, I hear they don't know how to eat meat. 



claybuster said:


> More dogs probably end it at the emergency vet with internal bleeding from something lodged the wrong way due to raw feeding. The emergency vets must love you folks, that must be 3K per trip.


You're right about this in reguards to cooked bones, or size-innapropriate bones. As far as raw meaty bones, you're wrong. 



claybuster said:


> Yes I have far greater safety with a cup of granular than your commercial meat parts, and I am getting all the same benefits.


Safety is debatable, and that depends on what research you want to buy into. As far as the benefits, you're getting none of them. You're giving your dog a species innapropriate diet (by product is animal product, yes, but the bulk of it is intestines, which they do NOT naturally eat) consisting of primarily by products and rice, and as if that weren't bad enough, they're processed killing what good was in them to begin with. Where's the benefit in that?



claybuster said:


> You know how confident I am Miss Linsey? I'll put my dogs blood work up against anyone’s on this list for the better numbers. I'll hit a 9.9 or a 99.9 every time. Any takers? Loser has to donate $25 to the winners choice (make it something like a Zoo, shelter, SPCA). Anyone, I don't care how long on raw, my dogs eats straight granular with no mixing of other feeds, and I'll put her blood work up against any raw feeder on this list.


Sounds like a waste of time to me. I'm not going to spend the time and money to disprove you, which is exactly what would happen.


----------



## claybuster

CorgiPaws said:


> Credibility to any word in that quote lost.
> I just don't get how YOU can jump on anyone for "buying into advertising" and here you are, totally blindsighted by one copany and their "research".


So, a 37 year proven track record with no recalls not good? Why should I believe the research of Innova or Champion PetFoods? Is their research better in their tenure? How long have feeds like EVO and Orijen been around? Have 37 years worth of research gone into those foods? I don't even think these feeds have been around much longer than 5 years. Yet with the limited experience, their research is something special that makes those feeds better than Abady? I am not anti-raw as you know, I feed raw on occasion (when I can hunt the meat). I realize there are benefits in raw.
Yes fresh foods would be more ideal over processed. But there is absolutely no way you or anyone else could ever possibly convince me that omnivore kibble diets like EVO and Orijen are better option that what I am doing with the Granular. I'll take Abady research and science over the rest pack.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> But there is absolutely no way you or anyone else could ever possibly convince me that omnivore kibble diets like EVO and Orijen are better option that what I am doing with the Granular.


I'm not saying they are better, just saying they are not any worse and none of them can be classified as an option to a proper raw diet.



> I'll take Abady research and science over the rest pack.


Have you actually seen any of that "research"? What is it about their so called research that convinces you it is better than the other companies. Truthfully, I have never seen any research by any of them and seriously doubt if it exists. Would you trust research by Ford Motor Company "proving" that Fords are superior automobiles? I doubt it. Any research done on any product by the company that makes it is always highly suspect.


----------



## CorgiPaws

claybuster said:


> Yet with the limited experience, their research is something special that makes those feeds better than Abady?


What does one dog food company's "research" have a damn thing to do wtih dogs being carnivores? It doesn't take much research to know that dogs are carnivores, therefore need a food that has as much meat content as possible. By throwing in animal parts that a dog would NOT normally eat (intestines in by-product meal) and mixing it with rice you're simply not getting a quality product. Any idiot off the streets that knows a thing about carnivores could tell you that. Does your food have more animal product? Maybe, but even then it's the parts of the animals they DON'T NORMALLY EAT, therefore it's a mute point.



claybuster said:


> I am not anti-raw as you know, I feed raw on occasion (when I can hunt the meat).


Let me get this stright. You don't trust meat from the grocery store that has strict standards laid out by the FDA for human consumption, but you trust a dog food company with very little standard made for them by law?



claybuster said:


> I realize there are benefits in raw.


Yet you refuse to realize you're not getting a single one of these benefits. 



claybuster said:


> But there is absolutely no way you or anyone else could ever possibly convince me that omnivore kibble diets like EVO and Orijen are better option that what I am doing with the Granular.


IMO, EVO isn't much better than Abady because there is no kibble that can even come close to a raw diet. The reason I feel it is superior to other kibbles is that the quality of meat products used is far superior to the by-product heavy in intestines used in your food. They use muscle meats, which should make up about 80% of a dog's diet. Are the fruits and veggies appropriate? No, absolutely not, but neither is your rice so we can call it even at that. 



claybuster said:


> I'll take Abady research and science over the rest pack.


That's fine. Your dog can have her intestines and rice. Mine will eat their Lamb, Venison, Buffalo, and Beef.


----------



## claybuster

CorgiPaws said:


> What does one dog food company's "research" have a damn thing to do wtih dogs being carnivores?


Because Linsey, the industry goes out of it way to try and convince the public that dogs are omnivores. The industry openly admits they are feeding omnivores. They skew their test results in an attempt to disprove the scientific fact that dogs are carnivores....all but Abady. Can't you see that?
Sure, EVO and Orijen talk a good game, then they give you cranberries and blue berries. Come on Linsey, you can't you see through that farce? Abady is NOT dependent upon other companies already done research that attempts to prove dogs are omnivores. Abady was a bio-chemist, did his own research on the ingredients and they have their own testing and research facilities...for 37 years.



> Does your food have more animal product? Maybe, but even then it's the parts of the animals they DON'T NORMALLY EAT, therefore it's a mute point.


That would be a moot point, not mute, and it is not a moot point. Animal source protein IS animal source protein, whether that be muscle meat or brains and intestine. Fresh muscle meat is part of the problem today as to why foods are inadequate (kibbles). Calculate out the moisture content (75%) of meat muscle, the entire ingredient amounts to only about 12.5% actual chicken protein. These are exactly the type of diets that need the "heavy supplementation", but with what? Cranberries? Apples? Garlic? mono something clay which amounts to nothing more dirt? No thank you. I'll gladly take the nasty aesthetically unappealing ingredients for my carnivore any day of the week over the omnivore buffet seen today even in those high end kibbles.



> That's fine. Your dog can have her intestines and rice. Mine will eat their Lamb, Venison, Buffalo, and Beef.


Don't forget the omnivore buffet that follows! BTW, those 4 ingredients you listed represents about 300% water out of 400% (75% each). Being only a portion of the remainder is actual meat proteins, those 4 ingredients would only equal 50% of the protein core. Not to worry, the buffet that follows will fill the remainder of the protein core.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> I'm not saying they are better, just saying they are not any worse and none of them can be classified as an option to a proper raw diet.
> 
> 
> 
> Have you actually seen any of that "research"? *What is it about their so called research that convinces you it is better than the other companies.* Truthfully, I have never seen any research by any of them and seriously doubt if it exists. Would you trust research by Ford Motor Company "proving" that Fords are superior automobiles? I doubt it. Any research done on any product by the company that makes it is always highly suspect.


Because the other guys are trying to convinve me my dog is an omnivore. If not, if they talk a carnivore theme, they don't back it up with the ingredients, trying to convince me apples and blue berries and seaweed are the answers. Abady tells me dogs are true carnivores and back it up with some undefatted beef liver, fish meal, and of course lots and lots of by-products...I like that in a dog food!


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> Abady tells me dogs are true carnivores and back it up with some undefatted beef liver, fish meal, and of course lots and lots of by-products...I like that in a dog food!


And L O T S and L O T S and L O T S of rice. No way are by-products equal to real animal parts in nutrition.

On another subject, you should read the white paper on the Orijen web site.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> On another subject, you should read the white paper on the Orijen web site.


Orijen White Paper promotional data all sounds very nice. I don't have any issues with most of what there saying, they're just skewing certain things to justify what they're doing. There is no real progress so to speak when it comes to the end result of the food themselves. They talk the carnivore theme, yet are still subject to the same exact drawbacks and limitation of a kibble. Case in point, grain matter was no doubt the glue holding together a kibble. They shun the use of grain yet need to find some new glue. So, the solutions are fruits and vegetables. A fiber swap, grains for plant matter. I think most all dogs got along perfectly fine with the grain matter (surviving, yet probably not thriving) yet the grains now are not ....fashionable. Potatoes are the common fix, technically not a fiber per se, but acts like just the same and helps serves as the binder. Abady research would indicate, potatoes are one of those ingredients that should be avoided. There is a lot working in the diet besides the potatoes to get the fiber.

The promotional data White Paper is the perfect example of talking a carnivore theme but NOT delivering the goods. It is the perfect example of what I would refer to as the omnivore buffet of ingredients.

Buffet in Bold:

Fresh boneless chicken, chicken meal, turkey meal, *russet potato*, fresh pacific salmon (a natural source of DHA and EPA), herring meal, *sweet potato*, *peas*, fresh lake whitefish, fresh northern walleye, chicken fat (naturally preserved with vitamin E and citric acid), chicken liver, salmon meal, fresh turkey, fresh whole eggs, fresh deboned herring, *sun-cured alfalfa*, salmon oil, *chicory root*, *dehydrated organic kelp*, *pumpkin*, *carrots*, *spinach*, *turnip greens*, *apples*,* cranberries*, *saskatoon berries*, *black currants*, choline chloride, psyllium, *licorice root*, *angelica root,* *fenugreek*, *marigold flowers*, *sweet fennel*, *peppermint leaf*, *chamomile flowers*, *dandelion*, *summer savory*, *rosemary*, sea salt, vitamin supplements (vitamin A, vitamin D3, vitamin E, niacin, vitamin C, thiamine mononitrate, riboflavin, vitamin B5, vitamin B6, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12), mineral supplements (zinc proteinate, iron proteinate, manganese proteinate, copper proteinate, selenium), dried Lactobacillus acidophilus, dried Enterococcus faecium fermentation product.

See my point? Yes, they also have some very fine ingredients as well, but with all that? I think I know why the White Paper mentioned Herbivore and Ruminant after looking at all leaf they got in there, not to mention flowers and roots and lawn weeds like Dandelion. 

Yea, I saw they fired a shot in Abadys direction with the 1970's specialty diets
claiming these diets were in essence the same as run of the mill kibble. Don't buy into it, you know why? Abady sold Raw from '72 till about '88 until the Granulars came about. And, it goes without saying when you feed natures diet a true carnivore diet like Raw, you do solve problems and these dogs do keep dogs med free and out of the Vets office. Because you know as well as anybody RFD, it does work when done right. They can say what the want about 1970 specialty diets, these were raw diets and they worked for all dogs. Abady has been in trouble in the past with labeling and medical in regards to the urinary track infection foods for cats. NY state wouldn't allow them to sell making medical claims on the product labeling. That was in the late ‘90s I think.


----------



## claybuster

then again, re-reading the part a 1970's diets they mention a shift to the Vets office to buy food. Hills and Purina are probably the real devil in the
70's diets making claims? Abady never sold in Vet offices I don't think (they're in the business of repeat customers so the Vets stay away).


----------



## claybuster

And, RFD, those speciality diets sold at the Vet offices I would have to agree are garbage and no better than the run of the mill kibbles. Some of the worst ingredient profiles I've seen were at the Vets office.


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers

I have a question... What is 'undefatted beef liver'?? Isn't saying 'undefatted' a bit of an oximoron word?
I am a bit slow, so type slowly for me!!


----------



## CorgiPaws

You are controdicting yourself. Your food has just as much species inappropriate matter as Evo. Your first ingredient is made up of mostly intestines, which they don't normally eat. Then the second is rice, which is entirely species inappropriate. 
Sure Evo has a little bit of a few things, but yours is heaps and heaps of rice. Rice is nothing but a cheap filler. 
I am by no means saying that Evo is perfect. No kibble is. The only thing I feel that sets Evo one (or two) steps up from your intestines and rice diet is the QUALITY of meats used, being that they are muscle meats that a canine would actually eat in the wild, not intestines which they would not. And the lack of grains, for obvious reasons. 
No kibble is perfect. No pre-made raw is perfect. The ONLY perfect diet is a raw diet of only muscle meats, bones, and organs. 
My Evo and your Abady don't even come CLOSE to that.


----------



## claybuster

CorgiPaws said:


> Rice is nothing but a cheap filler.


White rice is one of the most expensive ingredients for manufacturers to purchase as far as the fillers go, so it is an expensive filler, not a cheap filler.

Abady avoids and shuns the use of gluten source proteins. White rice is brown rice with the hull and bran removed, therefore it remains gluten free and that is why you see it in Abady. Another other filler type ingredient could be used, but white rice IS the preferred choice for its gluten free status. Abady does not jeopardize the protein core with gluten and prides itself on having the highest concentration of animal source proteins in the market. Abady Economy Maintenance (now called Bottom Line Maintenance) was the first Granular from Abady, introduced over 20 years. No modern manufacturer (and that includes EVO or Orijen) has yet to match the strength and concentration of animal source proteins of Abady's Bottom Line Maintenance of 20 years ago. *White rice does not jeopardize the protein core of the food and keeps it gluten free.* 

OH, BTW, chatting with a friend at work in the cafeteria and I thought of you. He just got a Pom I think a few months back and the Pom has been on EVO up until last week. He had come home from work and found the dog had horrible diarrhea like you described with one of your Corgies. And it happened around the same time period of last week. Maybe there has been a bad batch of EVO circulating around of recent? Who knows, maybe just a coincidence, but in any event I hope your dog has turned it around by now and feeling much better. Wishing you nothing but the best for you and the pooches. He took his dog into see the Vet and was told the usual when this sort of thing happens, chicken and *white rice*.


----------



## claybuster

EnglishBullTerriers said:


> I have a question... What is 'undefatted beef liver'?? Isn't saying 'undefatted' a bit of an oximoron word?
> I am a bit slow, so type slowly for me!!



I think it must mean they leave the fat on? I guess maybe it is common to trim the fat off liver when processing so leaving the fat on could only be considered a bonus when it comes to the dog? Whatever, doesn’t sound better than a lawn weed like a Dandelion ending up in your dog food? What are you people thinking?


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> What are you people thinking?


We are thinking that you aren't playing with a full deck. :smile:

Seriously, I have never seen liver described that way. I think they may be playing games with it. All the dog food companies play word games in their ingredients list.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> We are thinking that you aren't playing with a full deck. :smile:


After reading promotional data from Orijen White Paper, and then seeing this
*marigold flowers, sweet fennel, peppermint leaf, chamomile flowers*
thats what happens.

And you folks make a big deal about White Rice....

Phewww


----------



## JayJayisme

claybuster said:


> White rice is brown rice with the hull and bran removed, therefore it remains gluten free and that is why you see it in Abady. Another other filler type ingredient could be used, but white rice IS the preferred choice for its gluten free status.


 

Er...rice is gluten free regardless of whether it is long or short grain or whole (brown) or milled (white). Neither the bran layer or the germ in brown rice, nor the starchy endosperm in both brown and white rice contain gluten. Some brands of white rice may have a enrichment coating applied that may contain some sort of gluten in it. But these coating are actually very rare. At least that's how I learned it when I studied human nutrition many moons ago. :biggrin:

Whether it is appropriate or not for dogs will probably be argued until the end of time. But there is no gluten in rice.


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers

claybuster said:


> What are you people thinking?


I am thinking that I feed my dog the best food that I can feed him... RAW!!!!
I only feed the other dogs that come in and out of my house the next best thing, and that is a high ANIMAL protien kibble with as little fillers in it as possible. I do what I can with what I have to work with. Then I take it from there!! :biggrin: 
I hope you stick with your arguments! It is very interesting to watch everyone go in circles saying the exact same thing as the next person, but with different words. And then turn around and change their story!!  I am enjoying this thread!


----------



## CorgiPaws

claybuster said:


> White rice is one of the most expensive ingredients for manufacturers to purchase as far as the fillers go, so it is an expensive filler, not a cheap filler.


Compared to the cost of real quality meat, it's cheap. Thus making it a cheap filler. 



claybuster said:


> Abady avoids and shuns the use of gluten source proteins. White rice is brown rice with the hull and bran removed, therefore it remains gluten free and that is why you see it in Abady.


Unless they turn it from a grain to a meat, it's no better.



claybuster said:


> OH, BTW, chatting with a friend at work in the cafeteria and I thought of you. He just got a Pom I think a few months back and the Pom has been on EVO up until last week. He had come home from work and found the dog had horrible diarrhea like you described with one of your Corgies.


Yeah, Griss was having some terrible diarreah when I started him with Evo, but I wasn't transitioning him from another kibble, I was taking him from raw to kibble temporarily until I can move out of my family's house. I think it was the switch from raw to kibble that did it, not necessarily the Evo, he's fine now. totally solid stools. 



claybuster said:


> He took his dog into see the Vet and was told the usual when this sort of thing happens, chicken and *white rice*.


Vets also recommend Royal Canin, Pukanuba, and Science Diet. Their recommendations and opinions mean nothing to me.


----------



## BabyHusky

its funny because i've read multiple times that rice is a pricey filler. where are you buying rice to think its so expensive? theres different kinds and of course brands that claim there's gives you wings, but bottomline...rice is cheap. i would know...i'm korean...every freakin meal used to have rice (when I lived at home). I think i read it in some other post somewhere but if rice is sooo expensive, why are so many poor countries living malnourished on rice only? you'd think they'd go grow some corn or something.


----------



## claybuster

CorgiPaws said:


> Compared to the cost of real quality meat, it's cheap. Thus making it a cheap filler.


Apples and oranges Miss Corgi Paws, for you should compare meats to meats and fillers to fillers. Chicken By-Product meal is a cheaper source of animal source proteins than meat muscle. White rice is of course in their for reasons of economics (helps keeps cost lower for the consumer), obviously a filler type ingredient, but it is not a cheap filler.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> White rice is of course in their for reasons of economics (helps keeps cost lower for the consumer), obviously a filler type ingredient, but it is not a cheap filler.


It's there cause it's cheaper for Abady. I'm with BabyHusky on the rice. You just won't question Abady's promotional material in the least will you, CB. Of course none of it is designed to make you want to buy their product. It's just there to tell the 100% truth. HA! :smile:


----------



## claybuster

JayJayisme said:


> Er...rice is gluten free regardless of whether it is long or short grain or whole (brown) or milled (white). Neither the bran layer or the germ in brown rice, nor the starchy endosperm in both brown and white rice contain gluten. Some brands of white rice may have a enrichment coating applied that may contain some sort of gluten in it. But these coating are actually very rare. At least that's how I learned it when I studied human nutrition many moons ago. :biggrin:
> 
> Whether it is appropriate or not for dogs will probably be argued until the end of time. But there is no gluten in rice.


I wouldn't bet on that. I doubt when you see brown rice in dog food you're getting Uncle Ben's gluten-free long grain brown rice. It is the hull and the bran that comes in play as to whether or not it is ideal for dogs. White rice is without question and no debate less fibrous than brown rice. Abady foods
not only take the gluten issue very serious, fiber is another serious issue and dogs fare better with lower levels of fiber. That would be another reason besides the gluten as to why white rice is superior over brown rice for dogs.

from Wiki:

Rice bran also contains a high level of dietary fibers (beta-glucan, pectin, and gum). In addition, it also contains 4-hydroxy-3-methoxycinnamic acid (ferulic acid), which is also a component of the structure of non-lignified cell walls. However, some research suggests that there are particularly high levels of inorganic arsenic (a toxin and carcinogen) present in rice bran, and that any health benefits may not be worth the potential detriments.[1]. Other types of bran (derived from wheat, oat or barley) contain less arsenic than rice bran.  bran


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> It's there cause it's cheaper for Abady. I'm with BabyHusky on the rice. You just won't question Abady's promotional material in the least will you, CB. Of course none of it is designed to make you want to buy their product. It's just there to tell the 100% truth. HA! :smile:


Ask yourself this, why is it you hardly ever see white rice in dog food? Could it be that just might cut into the profit margin? If it really is a cheap filler how come they are not all using white rice? You don't see it because it is an expensive filler ingredient for manufacturers to purchase. Same can be said for Lard. Pork fat is an expensive type of fat for manufacturers to purchase, therefore you will rarely see it in dog food.


----------



## claybuster

Rice Protein
The protein in rice is considered incomplete because it has lower levels of certain essential amino acids. If all essential amino acids are not present in sufficient quantities the rice protein cannot be used for growth or maintenance of tissues. In this case protein in rice is often burned as fuel or converted into fat and stored. The protein will only be converted to fat if too many calories are consumed. riceprotein

Tissue building nutrients come from aniaml source proteins, not white rice. There is no risk of jeopardizing the protein core of the food which is at 90% plus animal source. White rice thus being low fiber, gluten free, and very weak in protein makes it IMO the prefect filler type ingredient.

I don't know, some would opt for *lawn weeds *like dandelions in their dog food, along with some marigold flowers, and some Saskatoon berries.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> I don't know, some would opt for *lawn weeds *like dandelions in their dog food, along with some marigold flowers, and some Saskatoon berries.


I don't know why one would opt for fillers at all.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> I don't know why one would opt for fillers at all.


Economics, helps bring costs down for consumers. No gluten, less fiber, and non-allergenic make its it good choice.


----------



## steve

*Chicken By-product Meal*

No one has mentioned yet in the pages that i read that CBP contains the bodies filtering organs and contain the toxins of animals that were raised far faster than they would have been in the wild. Just a thought


----------

