# Replacement time



## ihatepavelbure (Jul 24, 2010)

Hi all, 

I'm not canine expert but I was dismayed when my dog store lady informed me about the California Natural Procter and Gamble situation. Pancake is a 2-year old beagle who has been doing great on the CN Lamb formula. She's got some allergies so I would like to replace her food with a food that avoids chicken and some of the more allergy-provoking grains. Her tummy can be sensitive and she's had vomiting when switching foods before.

I have concerns about switching her to Orijen. Beagles are dogs that will really get fat if you let them, and they LOVE to eat. I would like to switch her to something really similar to the CN, if possible, and although I understand how great Orijen is, it's clearly not that similar to CN (I realize some of you will say: 'Well, true. It's SUPERIOR to CN.' Duly noted). 

So what would you recommend as a good substitute for the CN lamb formula....meaning, what is high quality and has a similar caloric value and similar richness?


----------



## buddy97 (Mar 29, 2010)

ihatepavelbure said:


> Hi all,
> 
> 
> 
> I have concerns about switching her to Orijen. Beagles are dogs that will really get fat if you let them, and they LOVE to eat.?


my answer is it is up to the owner as to whether or not a beagle will get fat, regardless of what you are feeding.

if she doesnt need a limited ingredient diet, then yes, orijen will be highly recommended as kibbles go. it sounds like you are seeking a kibble with no chicken and possibly no grains. off the top of my head i would say orijen fish, canidae grain free salmon, wellness core ocean, acana pacifica, acana grasslands, maybe Natures Variety Instinct Duck or Instinct Salmon(im not sure all these are chicken free, but i think most are.)

oh, just a warning...some people here will make you feel like you have no right to be so concerned about the P&G acquisition to the point of switching foods. i say anyone has the right to be concerned, and if that means discontinuing feeding Natura, then so be it.


----------



## flippedstars (May 22, 2010)

You might take a look at some Fromm Four Star Nutritional kibbles. While all their formulas contain a bit of chicken cartiledge, they are considered "single protein source" foods as the chicken cartiledge is a)negligible in amount (even my dog deathly allergic to chicken tolerates the food), and b)not recognized by the dog's body as "chicken". I'd say maybe give the duck or pork formulas a try.

Both foods avoid the more "offensive grains" and stick to higher quality ones such as whole rice and other carb sources such as sweet potato.

The company is still small and privately owned, so finding the food can be a bit of a challenge, but go to their website and do a search, and also if you contact them, they'll send you coupons  Fromm Family Foods - Gourmet Pet Food, Naturally Holistic


----------



## cprcheetah (Jul 14, 2010)

Before I feed what I feed now (raw), my little chihuahua did well on Natural Balance Duck & Potato. She is allergic to chicken, beef, (in processed form) wheat and corn. My pom was doing great on Wellness Core (they have a salmon version with no chicken).


----------



## buddy97 (Mar 29, 2010)

cprcheetah said:


> Before I feed what I feed now (raw), my little chihuahua did well on Natural Balance Duck & Potato.


i always have to add my two cents on the Natural Balance LID's. since they are mostly potato and little meat at all, i would make sure a dog absolutely cant handle any of the more traditional kibbles before resorting to this. i recognize that for some dogs it is the only solution.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

before i switched to the dark side LOL, i used to feed my dogs wellness super five barley/lamb/salmon and we were just getting ready to switch to their limited ingredient food...they did well on that...plus salmon oil gelcaps....and a little bit of ocean kelp....


----------



## ihatepavelbure (Jul 24, 2010)

buddy97 said:


> my answer is it is up to the owner as to whether or not a beagle will get fat, regardless of what you are feeding.


I see what you're saying, and of course we would have the responsibility of making sure she got less food if the food was richer in order to maintain her weight. I'm not saying that quantity is our only concern obviously or even a huge priority--but I feel there is enough debate over dog food that Orijen is not THE only high quality food. I'd like to feed her something not quite so rich. Not to mention that as my pup loves to eat switching her to the highest caloric food and feeding her less would be a bit of a bummer for her! :smile: 



> oh, just a warning...some people here will make you feel like you have no right to be so concerned about the P&G acquisition to the point of switching foods. i say anyone has the right to be concerned, and if that means discontinuing feeding Natura, then so be it.


I wouldn't normally be concerned and would take more of a wait and see approach myself. But many people who do spend a lot of time focusing on the quality of dog food and are very educated about it, including the proprietor of our dog store whom I've been impressed with, ARE concerned. To me that is a red flag. I don't presume that I know more them then, so if they're concerned, I'm concerned.


----------



## bdb5853 (May 21, 2010)

What about Acana?


----------



## ihatepavelbure (Jul 24, 2010)

bdb5853 said:


> What about Acana?


What about it? :smile:

Yes, I am looking at Acana, along with Fromm, Go! and Wellness right now. Complicating the matter is our dog specialty store prefers only to carry American-made dog foods for ethical reasons (she wants to support this economy). If it comes to it, I will go somewhere else to buy a Canadian food if it is necessary, but it would be a small inconvenience.

I must say that this all seems pretty befuddling for me and frustrating. My childhood dogs lived to be 16 and 14, and although I don't recall what my parents fed them as I was young myself at the time, I know it was something along the lines of Purina or Iams which we would never feed to our pup. Our breeder fed her Pro Plan after experimenting with a lot of dog food options as well. And everyone says not to trusts vets on the food issue. So you'd think the solution would be to come to forums like this one, but that results only in a sea of contradictions and further confusion.  

Not to insult everyone who has been so very kind and helpful in this thread--I am speaking about other threads on this forum and in many other forums as well. I do appreciate everyone who has weighed in here. Any other opinions? Keep 'em coming!!


----------



## flippedstars (May 22, 2010)

I will say we did try the Acana Grasslands and we just weren't fans. I hated how it smelled, it seemed greasy, and my pups didn't care terribly for it, but thats all preference. I do still think its a great food! 

Right now we are introducing ours to The Honest Kitchen and they love it. I wanted something to compliment the Fromm. Even tiny sensitive tummy pup is doing well.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

ihatepavelbure said:


> I wouldn't normally be concerned and would take more of a wait and see approach myself. But many people who do spend a lot of time focusing on the quality of dog food and are very educated about it, including the proprietor of our dog store whom I've been impressed with, ARE concerned. To me that is a red flag. I don't presume that I know more them then, so if they're concerned, I'm concerned.


Anybody CAN be concerned but there is not one tiny remote bit of evidence that the quality has or will be compromised. There is a lot of hysteria making its rounds on the internet and it feeds on itself. Yes, anyone has a right to be concerned if they choose but no one as a valid reason.


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5 (Feb 11, 2010)

RawFedDogs said:


> Anybody CAN be concerned but there is not one tiny remote bit of evidence that the quality has or will be compromised. There is a lot of hysteria making its rounds on the internet and it feeds on itself. Yes, anyone has a right to be concerned if they choose but no one as a valid reason.


OP,it should be noted that rfd own stock with evo/proctor and gambles!not saying hes a bad guy but its hypocritical:biggrin:


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> OP,it should be noted that rfd own stock with evo/proctor and gambles!not saying hes a bad guy but its hypocritical:biggrin:


Exactly what statement did I make that way hypocritical? There is nothing ... and I mean nothing that can/will happen with these new P&G products that will effect the value of my stock in the least. They are just too small a part of the company to have any bearing whatsoever on stock price.


----------



## Unosmom (May 3, 2009)

My dog is eating wellness core and doing quite well on it. I also like acana provincial. 

You can also look into the new Blue Buffalo grain free fish formula.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

i too own stock in P & G. Does that mean i should bow out of any discussion concerning dog food companies they just bought? or currently own?

and, because i own stock in P & G, does it make me a hypocrite because i don't feed their products?

i don't know why people are getting so hysterical about the buy out. nothing has happened. and if it does, only then will action be called for. do i think things will change? yes, but i'd still feed it until that change happens....IF i were happy with the dog food and thought it benefitted his health.

i am learning as i get older....that...things do change. we learn much about nutrition and disease and how people or dogs get diseases....and why they get diseases and how to prevent certain diseases...like tooth decay and rot...like stomach issues....

to the OP....i think you're right. my childhood dog lived to be sixteen, in spite of or because of what he was fed. we used to give him t-bone steak bones (cooked)....things we would never do now.

i don't remember as a kid, being concerned about my dog's teeth or poops or general health other than the biggies like distemper and rabies.

so we innoculated, we got their teeth cleaned once a year...and now we're learning that nutrition plays a big part, a huge part in a dog's life....between the time they are born and the time they die...there's nothing confusing about improving the quality of life, no matter how long a dog lives.

i think you do the best you can with what you've got and what you believe in...and if your dog thrives, then you can sleep at night.


----------



## buddy97 (Mar 29, 2010)

RawFedDogs said:


> Yes, anyone has a right to be concerned if they choose but no one as a valid reason.


valid reason. lets say you are walking down the street. you see someone approaching you wearing a ball cap sideways, a hooded sweatshirt, and you think they just look shady. you move to the other side of the street.. why? you had no evidence to be concerned. he has never done anything wrong to you. you (or whoever has done something like this) did this out of pure instinct. is that a valid reason. it sure is in my book.

if my instincts tell me P&G will inevitably screw up Natura products, i feel that is a valid enough reason to step away. im tired of people being told what constitutes a valid reason for stepping away from Natura products. if they have a gut feeling that it wont go well, then i consider that a valid enough reason for them. i would add that most people that have said they are stepping away have not said "im done with them for good." ive seen more responses like "i will keep an eye on the products and see how thing go"

perfectly reasonable in my world.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

buddy97 said:


> valid reason. lets say you are walking down the street. you see someone approaching you wearing a ball cap sideways, a hooded sweatshirt, and you think they just look shady. you move to the other side of the street.. why? you had no evidence to be concerned. he has never done anything wrong to you. you (or whoever has done something like this) did this out of pure instinct. is that a valid reason. it sure is in my book.
> 
> if my instincts tell me P&G will inevitably screw up Natura products, i feel that is a valid enough reason to step away. im tired of people being told what constitutes a valid reason for stepping away from Natura products. if they have a gut feeling that it wont go well, then i consider that a valid enough reason for them. i would add that most people that have said they are stepping away have not said "im done with them for good." ive seen more responses like "i will keep an eye on the products and see how thing go"
> 
> perfectly reasonable in my world.




derek...just to play devil's advocate here.....i'm thinking it's not your instincts that make you cross the street. it is your senses, including any history you've experienced, signalling your brain that a stereotypical scene presents itself, so a stereotypical reaction is in order...

not the same as a response...it's a knee jerk reaction..

the study done with tall well built black men and small white women..i can't remember when that one was done...produced much the same fear in the women....

black men were dressed in suits....no one crossed the street. black men, the same black men...were dressed in gang outfits...and women crossed the street.

sorry if i'm not being politically correct here, but you get the point.

the dog will tell the story, as will watch groups and websites all over the internet.

if your dog does well on the product yesterday.....believe me, their systems will tell you they aren't doing well.

feeding my dogs beef liver, beef heart, and llama in one day told me a story...

we live. we learn.

but if we panic just because there is a buyout....nah...

my g'd...whatever will we do if they actually improve the product, rather than degrade it....that way, they can raise the price


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

buddy97 said:


> if they have a gut feeling that it wont go well, then i consider that a valid enough reason for them.


Taking any action about anything from gut feeling based on nothing concrete is nothing more than hysteria. It's practically the definition of hysteria.


----------



## buddy97 (Mar 29, 2010)

magicre said:


> derek...just to play devil's advocate here.....i'm thinking it's not your instincts that make you cross the street. it is your senses, including any history you've experienced, signalling your brain that a stereotypical scene presents itself, so a stereotypical reaction is in order...


yes, it is my senses..my gut instinct that makes me cross the street. i have never had any history of a negative encounter passing anyone on the street, so my personal history isnt guiding me. 

its just one example. its still a gut instinct of what "could" happen. there is nothing wrong with reacting to ones gut instinct, and in the case of P&G it harms no one. 

ive had lots of time to consider the P&G acquisition of Natura, so it is certainly not a knee jerk reaction at this point. my instincts have not changed. i believe their is a good likleihood that Natura products will go downhill over time, so i consider it reasonable to no longer feed their products rather than wait til they change.

now, for current Natura feeders who have dogs who really do well on Natura products and feel there are not better option out there, i think they are perfectly reasonable in sticking with Natura. im just not one of them..i personally have found what i consider better options overall, so dropping Natura becomes even more reasonable with the P&G acquisition just being one piece of the puzzle.


----------



## buddy97 (Mar 29, 2010)

RawFedDogs said:


> Taking any action about anything from gut feeling based on nothing concrete is nothing more than hysteria. It's practically the definition of hysteria.


not exactly, otherwise, anyone crossing the street in my scenario would be hysterical in your definition, when all they are acting upon is gut instinct.

_hysteria_

_1 : a psychoneurosis marked by emotional excitability and disturbances of the psychic, sensory, vasomotor, and visceral functions
2 : behavior exhibiting overwhelming or unmanageable fear or emotional excess _


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

buddy97 said:


> not exactly, otherwise, anyone crossing the street in my scenario would be hysterical in your definition, when all they are acting upon is gut instinct.


I disagree. Crossing the street is based on historical information.



> _hysteria_
> 
> _1 : a psychoneurosis marked by emotional excitability and disturbances of the psychic, sensory, vasomotor, and visceral functions
> 2 : behavior exhibiting overwhelming or unmanageable fear or emotional excess _


Both definitions pretty much describe why people are dropping Natura products.


----------



## buddy97 (Mar 29, 2010)

RawFedDogs said:


> I disagree. Crossing the street is based on historical information.
> 
> 
> 
> Both definitions pretty much describe why people are dropping Natura products.


i think hyperbole is another word we can throw out there to describe you last statement.

some folks dont trust P&G. that simply is not hysteria by any stretch. that does have some history behind it. for example, they bought Iams, claiming they were now in the market to provide high quality kibble at reasonable prices. they didnt. thats history for them. that alone is enough to base my mistrust of them where the dog food industry in concerned. so, i guess im not hysterical since i have history that i am reacting to.


i have never had any history with that guy approaching me or anyone else ive met while walking. i dont like the way that guy looks. im going to avoid him not based on personal history at all, but on a gut feeling. nothing hysterical about it.

the idea that people acting on gut instincts is some form of hysteria is ridiculous, imo.


----------



## ihatepavelbure (Jul 24, 2010)

buddy97 said:


> .i personally have found what i consider better options overall, so dropping Natura becomes even more reasonable with the P&G acquisition just being one piece of the puzzle.


This is kind of how I feel. If there is any question at all about Natura and there are options that are equally good and there's no question about them at this time, wouldn't switching be not a bad idea?


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

buddy97 said:


> yes, it is my senses..my gut instinct that makes me cross the street. i have never had any history of a negative encounter passing anyone on the street, so my personal history isnt guiding me.
> 
> its just one example. its still a gut instinct of what "could" happen. there is nothing wrong with reacting to ones gut instinct, and in the case of P&G it harms no one.
> 
> ...


if the hair on the back of your neck goes up, it's a physiological reaction, based on many things, not the least of which is the fight of flight syndrome.

when you have time to consider the buyout, remember that you are intelligent and that you have been spending time thinking about what you feed your dogs....

i think what you're doing is thinking that things will change because usuall that's what happens. you're presuming and assuming that this is big business doing what it usually does....

there are presumptions that we make concerning big pharma, big farms, food manufacturers....etc....gigantic country sized corporations that sell us a bill of goods that keep us up at night.

is coffee good or bad? CAN we please eat or not eat eggs...

why is it the dairy farmers have such a stranglehold on this country in particular and we feel we simply cannot cannot cannot wean. talk about the best marketing scam i've ever seen....

in all reality, though...the ingredients for these boutique companies were never that great. it sounded great. the marketing was on par....the ingredients....yeah, i'm sure the carcasses were organic, but they were still carcasses....

the meat i buy no longer has antibiotics or hormones injected....they are no longer allowed...are they doing something else? probably....

but i am not about to buy forty acres and a mule just to control what goes into my mouth...

i simply don't fool myself into thinking that orijen wasn't in it for the money......after all, they were pretty quick to sell, weren't they? 

did they tell, on their packaging, where exactly their proteins came from? were they us grown, grass fed/grass finished cows? what exactly does organic mean? does an organic chicken carcass make better meal than a non organic chicken carcass? 

probably...but it's still meal...

what was so special about natura to begin with that raw or home cooked couldn't dance circles around it...

that's why it really doesn't matter that P & G bought them out. it's still the same crap....they'll just have a wider base to sell it to....

and, for current natura feeders? feed or don't feed...i just think it's time to strip off the illusion that one food is better than another....

BECAUSE IT'S ALL PROCESSED.

there's your common denominator....it is not the food it was when it started, no matter what it was.


----------



## PUNKem733 (Jun 12, 2009)

Pretty funny how now, we're calling Orijen and Evo crap. LOL


For the life of me, I can't understand how a carnivorous animal can be allergic yo beef and chicken. How does that happen? Corn and grains sure, but meat?


----------



## buddy97 (Mar 29, 2010)

magicre said:


> 1) what was so special about natura to begin with that raw or home cooked couldn't dance circles around it...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



on point 1, agreed, no matter natura, orijen, whatever.

on point 2, if one does feed only kibble, i just cant agree that there are not big differences between certain kibbles. yes, they are all processed, but that doesnt make them equal when the ingredients being processed in various kibbles are so vastly different.

processed corn gluten (as the main ingredient in some foods) isnt the same as processed salmon meal, for example.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

buddy97 said:


> on point 1, agreed, no matter natura, orijen, whatever.
> 
> on point 2, if one does feed only kibble, i just cant agree that there are not big differences between certain kibbles. yes, they are all processed, but that doesnt make them equal when the ingredients being processed in various kibbles are so vastly different.
> 
> processed corn gluten (as the main ingredient in some foods) isnt the same as processed salmon meal, for example.


it levels the playing field simply because no matter what the ingredient started out as..it isn't that ingredient any longer..

extruded corn is not corn. not that it's any better for a dog than corn, but extruded? gotta love these words...and the explanations are even better.

if something like salmon...a wonderful food is cooked....let's see..i cook it for five minutes per side...maybe seven...

dog food manufacturers cook the salmon for days.....

how can that possibly be the same or equivalent?

the act of processing takes any possible benefit and knocks it out of play.

processing large quantities....it no longer resembles the food it once was.

and, that's what makes kibble crap...not the ingredients, which look great....hell, i'd eat it....it's what's done to those ingredients that kills it for me.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

PUNKem733 said:


> Pretty funny how now, we're calling Orijen and Evo crap. LOL
> 
> 
> For the life of me, I can't understand how a carnivorous animal can be allergic yo beef and chicken. How does that happen? Corn and grains sure, but meat?


i don't know of any dog on home cooked or raw that is allergic to protein.

other than dairy....which i think is un necessary for man and beast....

processing changes things...the composition is different...


----------



## buddy97 (Mar 29, 2010)

magicre said:


> dog food manufacturers cook the salmon for days.....
> 
> how can that possibly be the same or equivalent?
> .


im not trying to argue that its the same as fresh salmon, chicken (or whatever meat we want to talk about), but i am arguing that what the processing does to chicken, salmon, salmon meal, chicken meal, etc...doesnt make it the equivalent product that comes from processing corn gluten, grain sorghum, or other completely non meat products.

i am not arguing processed kibble vs raw

i am arguing processed kibble vs other processed kibble. they are not all the same...not even close. 

if they are all the same thing, then why, if i feed my dog a kibble with little meat content i will see a definite loss of muscle mass vs feeding him something made with more animal products. 

you seem to be arguing that processing turns everything into one equivalent pile of mish mash, no matter what they started out with.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

magicre said:


> what was so special about natura to begin with that raw or home cooked couldn't dance circles around it.
> 
> .................
> 
> ...


This thread is about Natura products, and the quality, or lack thereof, and resonable COMMERCIAL FOODS to replace them with. This section is for discussions on commercial foods. 
I'm not sure WHY homecooked and raw have been dragged into the conversation, but they have been. Please keep these topics out of kibble threads, they have no meaning here. If you only intend to bash all kibbles, and promote home prepared diets (cooked and raw) please take it elsewhere.

ETA: Can we please just live with the fact that SOME people are ok with the buyout, and SOME people want to leave Natura behind? Arguing back and forth about if they should be concerned or not doesn't really get us anywhere. Telling the OP not to worry about Natura products gets them no closer to finding an alternative when their mind is made up.


----------



## RawFedDogs (Jun 16, 2008)

buddy97 said:


> i am arguing processed kibble vs other processed kibble. they are not all the same...not even close.


Take an ear of corn. Cook it at a high temp until it turns to ashes. Take a piece of filet mignon. Cook it at a hight temp until it turns to ashes. Compare to two piles of ashes. See any difference? 



> if they are all the same thing, then why, if i feed my dog a kibble with little meat content i will see a definite loss of muscle mass vs feeding him something made with more animal products.


Placebo?? :smile:


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

buddy97 said:


> im not trying to argue that its the same as fresh salmon, chicken (or whatever meat we want to talk about), but i am arguing that what the processing does to chicken, salmon, salmon meal, chicken meal, etc...doesnt make it the equivalent product that comes from processing corn gluten, grain sorghum, or other completely non meat products.
> 
> i am not arguing processed kibble vs raw
> 
> ...


 i wasn't arguing processed kibble vs. raw.

that's a discussion for another day....LOL

kibble to kibble...yes, there are differences....

you're right, though, i do seem to be stating that processing turns everything into an equivalent pile of mish mash....and i guess i do that because i did once fed kibble foods...and i saw different outcomes for my dogs as i changed brands....the outcomes would change from brand to brand. one would give my dogs a shinier coat...one made their breath stink worse...one made me sneeze...don't ask...

one i had to add supplementations too....

i got it to the point where i thought my dogs looked good, acted great, were the right weight...were shiny....and even though their stools and dentition weren't the best, i wasn't expecting the best because i had been taught not to....

now, though, i have passed through a door from which i can not return....as such, i can no longer think the way i thought before...

i have studied nutrition and the making of foods for so long..i can no longer ignore the elephant in the room..and for me, the bottom line, for me, at least, is the process by which the food is made....the ingredients matter, of course they do...but the processing renders them inadequate. i won't say useless...but definitely not adequate for what people pay and for the nutrition the dogs are missing..not what they are getting, but what they are missing...


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5 (Feb 11, 2010)

not to mention that proctor and gambles current food and policies are enough to make you boycott them even if evo remains


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> not to mention that proctor and gambles current food and policies are enough to make you boycott them even if evo remains


I don't feel strongly on either side of the fence here, but this makes NO logical sense to me at all. 

SO, because company X makes a poor quality food A, you can't purchase their high quality food B?

What influence does food A have on food B?



If I remember right, you feed Canidae grain free. Should you not feed this because canidae has a couple of low quality foods? (their chicken and rice formula is pretty terrible)


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5 (Feb 11, 2010)

no, i mean proctor and gamble isnt ethical. canidae is very ethical they donate for freekibble.com or w/e that donatio nsite is named.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> no, i mean proctor and gamble isnt ethical. canidae is very ethical they donate for freekibble.com or w/e that donatio nsite is named.


Donations make you ethical? 
Pedigree is one of the biggest donators to shelters all over the country. 

I'm not sure where you're getting your logic from, forgive me but I don't understand. 

It's ok for Canidae to produce low quality foods, but not for another company. 

And then the reason it's okay is because Canidae donates?


----------



## jdatwood (Apr 13, 2009)

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> no, i mean proctor and gamble isnt ethical. canidae is very ethical they donate for freekibble.com or w/e that donatio nsite is named.


Donations are a very low cost means of "advertising". The cost for them giving away food far outweighs any ads they could buy on radio or TV. 

Why do they dontate? You've proven exactly why they do... it builds a false sense of security among consumers.


----------



## ihatepavelbure (Jul 24, 2010)

CorgiPaws said:


> This thread is about Natura products, and the quality, or lack thereof, and resonable COMMERCIAL FOODS to replace them with. This section is for discussions on commercial foods.
> I'm not sure WHY homecooked and raw have been dragged into the conversation, but they have been. Please keep these topics out of kibble threads, they have no meaning here. If you only intend to bash all kibbles, and promote home prepared diets (cooked and raw) please take it elsewhere.
> 
> ETA: Can we please just live with the fact that SOME people are ok with the buyout, and SOME people want to leave Natura behind? Arguing back and forth about if they should be concerned or not doesn't really get us anywhere. Telling the OP not to worry about Natura products gets them no closer to finding an alternative when their mind is made up.


No kidding, this is the same crap I see on all these message boards: debate ad nauseum about raw vs. dry, Natura's buyout being negative and not negative--it becomes very unhelpful. People can and do argue about this sort of thing for days. I guess everyone needs a hobby?

I just want to feed my companion a decent food, not get a masters-level education on the political and philosophical and engineering factors that go into creating the *perfect* food. Is the latter really necessary for the former?!:frown:


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

ihatepavelbure said:


> No kidding, this is the same crap I see on all these message boards: debate ad nauseum about raw vs. dry, Natura's buyout being negative and not negative--it becomes very unhelpful. People can and do argue about this sort of thing for days. I guess everyone needs a hobby?
> 
> I just want to feed my companion a decent food, not get a masters-level education on the political and philosophical and engineering factors that go into creating the *perfect* food. Is the latter really necessary for the former?!:frown:


please try to recognise a lively debate as opposed to crap about raw vs. kibble.

while i cannot turn back the clock and be a totally total kibble feeder, certainly i have enough experience to debate the finer points of processing kibble.....

kibble to kibble is the debate here...however, if you'd like, i'll be glad to start a thread about opening a door and finding the truth.


----------



## ihatepavelbure (Jul 24, 2010)

magicre said:


> please try to recognise a lively debate as opposed to crap about raw vs. kibble.


I'll try, but it's awfully difficult to see the difference at times.


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5 (Feb 11, 2010)

CorgiPaws said:


> Donations make you ethical?
> Pedigree is one of the biggest donators to shelters all over the country.
> 
> I'm not sure where you're getting your logic from, forgive me but I don't understand.
> ...


then pedigrees ethical as well in that regard. and yes it is ok to produce low quality foods. not everyone can affore orijen,evo,wellness,canidae grain free,taste of the wild....so should they not have dogs....

no they should be allowed to have dogs even if it means feeding pedigree.
pedigree and old roy arent bad companies for catering to lower class peoples.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> then pedigrees ethical as well in that regard. and yes it is ok to produce low quality foods. not everyone can affore orijen,evo,wellness,canidae grain free,taste of the wild....so should they not have dogs....
> 
> no they should be allowed to have dogs even if it means feeding pedigree.
> pedigree and old roy arent bad companies for catering to lower class peoples.


Hold on...
So P & G is evil for doing it, but it's okay for everyone else?
You said their current foods (Iams, eukanuba) and policies are enough to boycott them.
But I KNOW Iams is donated to shelters, too. 

And I find it very offensive to call people that feed these foods "lower class" people. Lower income maybe, but lower class? Wow...


I think this is a classic case of posting without knowing any of the facts.


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5 (Feb 11, 2010)

CorgiPaws said:


> Hold on...
> So P & G is evil for doing it, but it's okay for everyone else?
> You said their current foods (Iams, eukanuba) and policies are enough to boycott them.
> But I KNOW Iams is donated to shelters, too.
> ...


DO NOT turn my post..in to me insulting people whoa re not financially well. theres middle class there's lower class and theres upper class. i was not insulting these people..

i wasnt talking about p and gs foods as i said before, i was talking about how they treat animals..even for gillette products they test on animals.

also p and g charges premium prices...old roy and pedigree are helping the poor man feed their dogs.

and if iams has donated to shelters then thats a step up for them,but my opinion stands.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

ihatepavelbure said:


> I'll try, but it's awfully difficult to see the difference at times.


i know....but without the debate...we don't have opportunity to find a common ground or open doors....

sometimes it's tedious and sometimes it even goes too long....and sometimes during a debate that goes on and on....a door opens for someone who is just reading or listening and that person begins to research the path previously not taken....

and those who don't want to hear it anymore, move on to another topic...

it's kind of that old freedom of speech thing...

and the long standing tradition of pounding an idea until its either accepted as truth or rejected as 'i can't listen to this anymore'. LOL

i know that in real life...a debate doesn't really have moderation, can turn passionate and sometimes goes way beyond the clock....

we need debate, though..makes us think...keeps us on our toes..

i don't know when it happened...but on forums across the boards...if you're not feeding your dog kibble, then you're killing your dog and you're a raw freak...if you're feeding your dog kibble, you're killing your dog and what's wrong with you...

i so wish everyone could just come to my house....we'll have cawfee....we'll tawk.....and see what we see to come to a meeting of the minds....or agree to disagree....

but....in reality....passions run high and i suspect...that when a kibble feeder such as myself discovers raw and sees the changes.....it's so mind blowing....i know i want to share what happened to me and to my dogs....

it's mindblowing...and then i found out that not everyone agrees...from vets to dog food companies to individuals.....not only did they not get bathed in my light....they think i'm killing my dogs...

so...i'll debate it..and then i have to choose to walk away, just as you do....i don't blame either one of us..we believe what we believe....and thank g'd we are allowed to do that.

where i was born...not possible.


----------



## kevin bradley (Aug 9, 2009)

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> DO NOT turn my post..in to me insulting people whoa re not financially well. theres middle class there's lower class and theres upper class. i was not insulting these people..
> 
> i wasnt talking about p and gs foods as i said before, i was talking about how they treat animals..even for gillette products they test on animals.
> 
> ...



If we all believe that Pedigree/Iams/Old Roy are BAD for Dogs, how can we rationalize them in any way shape or form? 

And frankly, its more of an EDUCATIONAL issue than anything else. Most would SAVE money by at least moving into a Kirkland or Diamond Naturals...no I don't LOVE these foods but they are admittedly a helluva step up from Old Roy. 

We're literally talking PENNIES difference even if it IS a bit more money. If you cannot afford to give your Dog at least a MINIMUM of what they deserve and require....I hate to say it, but you probably shouldn't own a Dog. 

Again, I'm not talking feeding Orijen or Honest Kitchen. I'm talking about feeding just a halfway decent food. 

I saw Country Squire food in my local Menard's this weekend. For fun, I flipped the bag over and read the ingredients. Utterly shameful. I almost cried for any Dogs having to eat this stuff.


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5 (Feb 11, 2010)

kevin bradley said:


> If we all believe that Pedigree/Iams/Old Roy are BAD for Dogs, how can we rationalize them in any way shape or form?
> 
> And frankly, its more of an EDUCATIONAL issue than anything else. Most would SAVE money by at least moving into a Kirkland or Diamond Naturals...no I don't LOVE these foods but they are admittedly a helluva step up from Old Roy.
> 
> ...


maybe diamond or kirkland is around the same price as canidae.but nothing beats pedigree or kibbles and bits. i think theyre like 20 dollars for 10 bucks or so,although they prolly raised the price. most dogs live until 7-15 nowadays,so i dont think feeding them a food like pedigree is the end all in the decision making process on whether someone is fit to own a dog. if only orijen existed,most people would not own dogs,even people on here.
we can afford orijen,but i have reservations. ive also heard it smells foul,is greasy,and some people have bad results.


----------



## kevin bradley (Aug 9, 2009)

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> maybe diamond or kirkland is around the same price as canidae.but nothing beats pedigree or kibbles and bits. i think theyre like 20 dollars for 10 bucks or so,although they prolly raised the price. most dogs live until 7-15 nowadays,so i dont think feeding them a food like pedigree is the end all in the decision making process on whether someone is fit to own a dog. if only orijen existed,most people would not own dogs,even people on here.
> we can afford orijen,but i have reservations. ive also heard it smells foul,is greasy,and some people have bad results.



RC, Pedigree 40 lbs bags are about $20. 

I just saw Diamond Naturals 40 lbs bags on sale for $24...and I bet you'd feed less of it. 

There, no excuse for not feeding at least a minimally decent food. I don't love Diamond but would WELCOME feeding it over Pedigree. 

Takes education, not money. We've got to find a way to educate people into better foods. 

Sadly, not gonna be easy as we are going head to head w/ people who have Veterinarian Degrees not to mention multi million dollar advertising budgets. 

I'm currently working on my Aunt and Uncle. And YES, I'm trying to get them into Kirkland or Diamond. I don't LOVE it...but again, I like it a helluva lot better than Meijer brand which is what they feed now.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

RCTRIPLEFRESH5 said:


> maybe diamond or kirkland is around the same price as canidae.but nothing beats pedigree or kibbles and bits. i think theyre like 20 dollars for 10 bucks or so,although they prolly raised the price.


As someone who has fed FOUR of the five mentioned foods to one dog, I can tell you a few things here:

1. Kirkland is WAY cheaper than Canidae, and just about the same quality. Canidae, here, in san diego, and vegas, is roughly $50-$55 for a 44lb bag. 
Kirkland is $21-$24 for a 40 lb bag. 

2.I fed my dog the same amount of Kirkland as I did Canidae, so there was no feed less and save complex. It was literally half the price. For reference, I fed roughly 1 3/4 C twice a day of both foods, so 3 cups total per day.

3. I fed said dog (Champ) both Kibbles & Bits AND Pedigree before I knew better. Pedigree was the cheaper of the two, so I'll only go there. I paid $19 for a 40 lb bad of the regular adult formula. (large breed is more expensive, by the way) I fed three cups twice a day, so six cups per day. PLUS, we were in and out of the vet about gray diarrhea, orange diarrhea, and ear infections, which all went away after switching. 

I'd say that people feeding the lowest of the low would NOT spend more feeding kirkland.


----------



## RCTRIPLEFRESH5 (Feb 11, 2010)

but kirkland requires a membership to costoc,which costs money itself...also if youre not a member of costco itd be unreasnable to ask them to join.

idk where to even buy diamond naturals.


----------



## Unosmom (May 3, 2009)

If you ask me, its all about priorities, I've seen people load up bags of Ol' roy into a hummer, I bet they make good money and can afford better food, but to them, either all dog food is the same, might as well save a few bucks, or "its just a dog" mentality. I half broke most of the time, being a student and paying off loans, but I'd rather skip on things like eating out every week or shopping for new clothes which I dont need anyways and focus on keeping my dog happy and healthy.


----------



## kevin bradley (Aug 9, 2009)

Unosmom said:


> If you ask me, its all about priorities, I've seen people load up bags of Ol' roy into a hummer, I bet they make good money and can afford better food, but to them, either all dog food is the same, might as well save a few bucks, or "its just a dog" mentality. I half broke most of the time, being a student and paying off loans, but I'd rather skip on things like eating out every week or shopping for new clothes which I dont need anyways and focus on keeping my dog happy and healthy.



Let us not forget that you literally have thousands of VETS telling people it doesn't matter what the hell you feed your Dogs. 9/10 people are going to believe a VET over anything a regular everyday person tells them. 

You also have people like John Stossel(that Fox right wing nut who used to be on 20/20) telling people that it doesn't matter...yes, he did this in a book of his....he even had Professors from Vet schools quoted in his book as saying it doesn't make a dam bit of difference what we feed our Dogs.


----------



## magicre (Apr 7, 2010)

and then we have people who make their way to a forum...maybe they're not sure why..something niggles at them...and before you know it, they're hot and heavy into thinking about what to feed scruffy...or scruffette...

that's progress....

there ARE vets who are coming around, simply because it is what their clients want. and, if they want to keep their clients, they will begin to, if not support, not object to an alternative or a better kibble.

i can see how advertising is changing...and, whilst purina is still a crap food....they're marketing to an audience who is listening....there had to be some impact from premium dog food sales that influenced this surge of what's good to feed fido and don't you want the very best...

it's up to us, however, to check it out, research, make sure.....not the business, not their advertising companies...or campaign managers...but us....at the end of the line, it's up to us.

btw, RC...using terms like upper, middle, lower class....can be interpreted differently than how you probably meant it..and, whilst i believe you were referring to economics, there are those who use that term...

actually many people....understand those terms as a means that defines class as one who is either economically and socially upper, middle, or lower...lower class is generally associated with poor trash....not just.....poor or lower income..


----------



## RegDunlop (Dec 22, 2009)

Just read through this thread...very interesting thread, I think there will be more of these takeovers in the current economic conditions

Wellness was bought out by somebody last year, cant remeber who.......

....now Innova et al are bought out by P and G.

The small companies cant keep up with the mega corps, as getting operating credit is tight across the entire smaller business spectrum, and some commodity prices fluctuate so much that fixing costs must be very hard for smaller companies....obviously the mega corps do not have thses problems and can negotiate better prices on larger quantities.


I see many many people who are more educated about pet food, and while ll the big companies tried to change their packaging and created new "brands," that on the surface looked comparable to the premium pet foods, a quick glance at the labels revealed more of the same crap.


Are pet food companies required to notify when they change their formulas or do they only have to have acccurate ingrediant/nutrition profiles?


Whne wellness was bought out did they change the quality much after the buyout?


What independent companies are left?


----------



## kevin bradley (Aug 9, 2009)

Reg,

I've done some research on the takeovers, pre acquisition formulas/ingredients in the foods and honestly, the ingredient makeup of the foods doesn't/hasn't changed much. 

Example...one of the points that bothers me is that many people will say "Look what P&G did to Iams and Eukanuba." So I found some ingredient lists for Iams and Eukanuba pre takeover. 

For the most part, its not accurate. Iams and Eukanuba were always garbage foods litterrd with corn and fillers. I found very little changed in the formulas. 

I don't like the takeover, honestly. But if you think you are going to go look at the EVO ingredient list and see corn and soybeans as the 1st ingredients next week, I wouldn't hold your breath. 

Now if you want to talk about the QUALITY of the Chicken in Evo degrading or laxed quality practices at the plant level....thats a real possibility. 

On paper, EVO is still an outstanding food. 

I just hate Proctor and Gamble. Mainly for what they do w/ Animal testing.


----------

