# Is 22% enough protein for puppies and young adults?



## YellowDog (Dec 19, 2012)

Hey all. 

I have a 6-month-old labrador and am looking for an adult food to feed since I was told she was old enough to switch to one.

I was thinking of Wellness since my previous lab did very well on that but saw that it had only 22% protein. Is this enough for a young dog? Wellness CORE (higher in protein) is a bit above my budget at the moment.


----------



## Sapphire-Light (Aug 8, 2010)

That rate is the safe minimum according to some dog food websites .

Here are some articles from the dog foods advisor about protein rates:


Low Protein Dog Foods

Dog Food Protein | Frequently Asked Questions


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

YellowDog said:


> Hey all.
> 
> I have a 6-month-old labrador and am looking for an adult food to feed since I was told she was old enough to switch to one.
> 
> I was thinking of Wellness since my previous lab did very well on that but saw that it had only 22% protein. Is this enough for a young dog? Wellness CORE (higher in protein) is a bit above my budget at the moment.


Depending on how much energy (how much you feed per day of the food) you would be feeding around 170% of the daily recommended ALS amount of protein @ 22% protein. The question is more how much of other non animal ingredients does the formula include at 22% protein?


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

For the cost of that food you can do better. If you go down the aisle in Petco or Petsmart, Royal Canin makes a large kibble for labs with 30% protein and 12% fat that seems like a better food for a Lab given the tendency to lose muscle tone as they age and gain weight. It is probably the same price.

If you have a feed store around there are better choices for half the price of Wellness.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

Before anyone makes ANY suggestions: what is the most important factor to you?

1. Ethics and reliability of the manufacturer?
2. Ingredient list?
3. Nutrient Profiles?
4. Amount of meat?
5. Protein source?
6. Recall history?
7. Price? 

With as many options as there are, there's no one best choice for everyone. You'll find many opinions on here in regards to kibble, so it's up to YOU to decide which factors are more important.
Royal Canin has been recommended already, and most here would agree that it's an overpriced bag of junk... but then there are those that apparently recommend it. I have yet to see a dog that I'm impressed with that is fed Royal Canin.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

CorgiPaws said:


> With as many options as there are, there's no one best choice for everyone. You'll find many opinions on here in regards to kibble, so it's up to YOU to decide which factors are more important.
> Royal Canin has been recommended already, and most here would agree that it's an overpriced bag of junk... but then there are those that apparently recommend it. I have yet to see a dog that I'm impressed with that is fed Royal Canin.


Royal-Canin is a good brand. By far the best of the big ones imo. You'll find amazing dogs eating Royal-Canin everywhere. It's a big favorite among working dog owners. Overpriced is a relative term. Compared to many other brands ppl recommend it is not that overpriced, especially if you buy the bigger bags or qualify for their Pro lineup. They overprice the small bags on purpose but as opposed to many others they offer big bags of formulas others only offer small bags of. If food safety is a major concern there is non better than Royal-Canin, they have gone out of their way lately to guarantee the integrity of their ingredients. All Royal-Canin formulas are low residue LIP foods. When others slam on a breed or size specific label they have close to zero money and resources backing the label. Royal-Canin does, they have spent and are spending millions and millions on meaningful research that translate to products that work for whatever is the target. Heck, their budget on extrusion dies alone is probably bigger than the overall budget of many other manufacturers. You can say what do I care about dies? When you for example have a small breed that tends to be finicky eaters, die (shape), density and taste are very much factors in getting them to eat properly. This costs money, money smaller brands don't have. I have seen small dogs refuse pretty much any food on the face of the earth, as soon as they where given one of the Royal-Canin Mini products they completely transformed into food guzzlers. Bowel movements reduced to *less* than 2 times per day on average, stool reduce greatly in size and firmed right up.

RC is definitely not "a bag of junk" They don't care about myths and scaremongering on internet and it pays of. They make a multitude of formulas ranging from around 20% to 60% NFE matter. The Royal-Canin 30/12 Lab formula is a good option for Labs and other dogs who tend to get obese very fast if not exercised enough.


----------



## Jacksons Mom (Jun 13, 2010)

I actually like RC - I appreciate their research, and feel safe with their quality control. I just really wish they had different ingredients. Almost all of their formulas are chicken-based. But some of their formulas, IMO, are better than others. I'd choose to feed the bulldog or GSD formula over the Yorkie formula.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

Jacksons Mom said:


> I actually like RC - I appreciate their research, and feel safe with their quality control. I just really wish they had different ingredients. Almost all of their formulas are chicken-based. But some of their formulas, IMO, are better than others. I'd choose to feed the bulldog or GSD formula over the Yorkie formula.


Royal-Canin refuse to pump out untested and sub par legume or potato based grain free or "holistic" formulas. Obviously they could have released GF formulas long ago and secured a big piece of the market, but they chose not to. They will probably come out with something new but they are taking their sweet time making sure it's good and work for most dogs, not just some. Legumes as main source of carbohydrates for dogs have minimal research behind it and potatoes are just inferior to grains. They are probably working on it as we speak and when they come out with something everyone else will piggyback on what they have learned in the process. Business as usual. I agree though, a fish alternative would be nice for example.


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

I've met a couple of dogs on Royal Canin and have never been very impressed with their condition :-/


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

One thing I just don't understand is, if these new grain free foods are inferior and don't have the science backing them, why do the majority of the dogs I meet that eat them look to be in better condition than the dogs I meet that eat the purina, eukanuba, science diet, royal cabin, etc?

Abbie eats Earthborn's Great Plaims Feast right now, and I can't tell you how many people I get telling me how soft and shiny and lean and beautiful she is.


----------



## riddick4811 (Nov 2, 2011)

meggels said:


> I've met a couple of dogs on Royal Canin and have never been very impressed with their condition :-/



I'm with you there. I tried it years and years ago and was not impressed at all with it. Probably wouldn't feed it even if it were free.


----------



## Sapphire-Light (Aug 8, 2010)

DaViking said:


> Royal-Canin is a good brand. By far the best of the big ones imo. You'll find amazing dogs eating Royal-Canin everywhere. It's a big favorite among working dog owners. Overpriced is a relative term. Compared to many other brands ppl recommend it is not that overpriced, especially if you buy the bigger bags or qualify for their Pro lineup. They overprice the small bags on purpose but as opposed to many others they offer big bags of formulas others only offer small bags of. If food safety is a major concern there is non better than Royal-Canin, they have gone out of their way lately to guarantee the integrity of their ingredients. All Royal-Canin formulas are low residue LIP foods. When others slam on a breed or size specific label they have close to zero money and resources backing the label. Royal-Canin does, they have spent and are spending millions and millions on meaningful research that translate to products that work for whatever is the target. Heck, their budget on extrusion dies alone is probably bigger than the overall budget of many other manufacturers. You can say what do I care about dies? When you for example have a small breed that tends to be finicky eaters, die (shape), density and taste are very much factors in getting them to eat properly. This costs money, money smaller brands don't have. I have seen small dogs refuse pretty much any food on the face of the earth, as soon as they where given one of the Royal-Canin Mini products they completely transformed into food guzzlers. Bowel movements reduced to *less* than 2 times per day on average, stool reduce greatly in size and firmed right up.
> 
> RC is definitely not "a bag of junk" They don't care about myths and scaremongering on internet and it pays of. They make a multitude of formulas ranging from around 20% to 60% NFE matter. The Royal-Canin 30/12 Lab formula is a good option for Labs and other dogs who tend to get obese very fast if not exercised enough.


Maybe it depends were you live, the RC food we have is made for latin america and they have unnamed meats on the ingredients, I did noticed that the one in the US does mention the meats.

Pompadour was on the small breed junior when I got him from the breeder, but he did stopped eating it when my father was feeding him leftovers from his plate.


Since then he became a horrible picky eater, we got some samples of the breed specific types, and he did refused to eat them including the poodle one.

He never accepted to eat only plain kibble again, so he is now on part raw, part homecooked wit a bit of kibble that is a rotation of propac and earthbond.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

When I meet in person one SINGLE dog that looks good on this food, maybe I'll give it some merit. 
For as popular as it is, to not have met one. single. dog. that looks impressive is kind of sad really. 
I work professionally with dogs.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

Problem with all the various grain free foods is that for 1 who is doing great there are 9 which are doing bad on the same formula. That's my experience. These 9 have to continue the search until they find a GF formula which agrees with their digestive system. Yes, I also read here and other places how great a dog is doing on this or that GF formula but it doesn't translate to real life, sorry. I see a lot of dogs in training throughout the week, what I see doesn't match up with what I read or at least the impression I get. Moist and stinky poops, nothing to write home about in terms of muscle development, nothing you can't achieve with a classic formula anyway. Nothing about their coats that stands out. High performers doesn't perform any better. There is a direct correlation between performance and what comes out. And the worst part is that the owners are oblivious to the fact that their pooch isn't digesting the food well. For some reason moist poop 2,3 or 4 times per day is ok it seems. I am not saying or even implying that ppl here isn't telling the truth or are unable to read their dog properly but the small amount of owners here on DFC isn't representative of what's going on out there.


----------



## riddick4811 (Nov 2, 2011)

Oh dear, if I had 4 poops a day per dog that would be 24 piles a day! I probably get that in 3 days. 

I started Joey out of Native when I got him. Wasn't working for him. We tried Dr. Tims, really didn't work. Then we tried Victors. Did ok, but it didn't work for him. So I put him on Now Puppy food. In 1 week there was a huge change. He gained weight, his poop firmed up, he started getting muscle tone, even in his bad leg (was broken in 2 places). His coat started shinning up. He is a super active, super busy, into everything all day long Greyhound puppy. I didn't really think a grain free would work, but I was wrong. 

Here is a picture of him last weekend after being on the food for about 3 weeks. He turned 5 months the day before the pic was taken. He is 46.2lbs as of today and eats 3 cups a day (divided morning and night) and gets some raw substituted for about 3-4 meals a week. Even that rear leg is started to muscle up.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

riddick4811 said:


> Oh dear, if I had 4 poops a day per dog that would be 24 piles a day! I probably get that in 3 days.
> 
> I started Joey out of Native when I got him. Wasn't working for him. We tried Dr. Tims, really didn't work. Then we tried Victors. Did ok, but it didn't work for him. So I put him on Now Puppy food. In 1 week there was a huge change. He gained weight, his poop firmed up, he started getting muscle tone, even in his bad leg (was broken in 2 places). His coat started shinning up. He is a super active, super busy, into everything all day long Greyhound puppy. I didn't really think a grain free would work, but I was wrong.
> 
> Here is a picture of him last weekend after being on the food for about 3 weeks. He turned 5 months the day before the pic was taken. He is 46.2lbs as of today and eats 3 cups a day (divided morning and night) and gets some raw substituted for about 3-4 meals a week. Even that rear leg is started to muscle up.


I like Now, made right up the street from me. I can *like* many GF foods for various reasons but as soon as I recommend one there are always too many who are doing terrible on it.


----------



## danea (Oct 25, 2008)

Sapphire-Light said:


> Maybe it depends were you live.


It does!
There were a couple of major incidents on RC starter formulas produced in Russia, a lot of puppies died. 
European and Russian RC also has unnamed meat products and fats
Their safety control and research is definitely not for everyone


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

That's interesting Viking, cause my experience is so different. I meet customers that feed Now, Earthborn, Natures Variety, TOTW, etc and I see pretty much all positive experiences, and beautiful dogs. Granted, I don't know what their poop looks like LOL. Abbie's is the best on the Earthborn, smaller and solid 1-2 times per day. I'm also slightly fanatical about stools, so loose stools 3-4 times per day would soooo not fly with me.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

meggels said:


> I've met a couple of dogs on Royal Canin and have never been very impressed with their condition :-/


You haven't seen many show dogs then.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

CorgiPaws said:


> Before anyone makes ANY suggestions: what is the most important factor to you?
> 
> 1. Ethics and reliability of the manufacturer?
> 2. Ingredient list?
> ...


'Most here" doesn't mean much to me because "Most here" operate in a world of phobia and misinformation. For everyone's benefit, how do you evaluate dogs on different products? Do you have a method that is controlled and unbiased?

The truth is you cannot just by looking. The differences in foods are only seen at the extreme's and in things like soft tissue injuries, endurance, recovery times etc. You have no idea how much excercise any dog gets and you have no idea of its breeding. So you cannot simply look at a dog in a shop or in a park and make that determination. It is simply impossible.

Trust me on this.

Given the products that are available here in the US, diet for the bulk of pets does not even rank as a health priority. Things like breeding, vaccination protocol, exercise, time in the sun and when or whether a dog has been neutered are vastly more important than diet. Most things people attribute to poor ingredients are problems in certain breeds or just poorly bred animals or dogs that were neutered too early, overvaccinated or sleep all day.

Anyone that believes otherwise, is just not informed. That is why spending more than say a $1.25lb for food is a complete waste of money for 99.5% of dogs, unless there is a legitmate reason to use a more expensive food like one that is all fish or red meat.

Go to a field trial event and ask about how much training dogs eating Sportmix, Pro Pac, Pro Plan get. You will be pretty amazed at the condition and endurance of these animals on such plebeian products.


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

monster'sdad said:


> You haven't seen many show dogs then.


Um, actually, I have.  

Since ya know, I lived with a breeder who shows frenchies, shows dogs for clients (typically frenchies), had a standard Xolo and a pack of Ibizans. All of whom show, have been to Westminster, etc. When I lived with her, we had dozens of client dogs in and out, and one or two were on Royal Canin. 

I would be careful with making assumptions Monster  Just bc someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean they are clueless.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

meggels said:


> Um, actually, I have.
> 
> Since ya know, I lived with a breeder who shows frenchies, shows dogs for clients (typically frenchies), had a standard Xolo and a pack of Ibizans. All of whom show, have been to Westminster, etc. When I lived with her, we had dozens of client dogs in and out, and one or two were on Royal Canin.
> 
> I would be careful with making assumptions Monster  Just bc someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean they are clueless.


The vast majority of show dogs in the US eat Pro Plan, Eukanuba and Royal Canin. In Europe, Royal Canin is by far the most popular food with show kennels.

That is complete fact has nothing to do with opinion.


----------



## riddick4811 (Nov 2, 2011)

DaViking said:


> I like Now, made right up the street from me. I can *like* many GF foods for various reasons but as soon as I recommend one there are always too many who are doing terrible on it.


But that is going to be the same with any food, not just grain free. Not every dog is going to do well on the food. Plus different people have different ideas of doing well. 

To me: dogs eats the food willingly is the first step! Maintain weight and muscle without eating tons of the food, little to no gas, firm small stool 1-2 times a day, good muscle tone and coat. No dandruff. Clean ears, eyes, healthy nails/paw pads. Good recovery after heavy exercise. Good endurance. 

These are some of the things I look for. Other people like my neighbors as long as the dog is still breathing, it is doing good on the food! 

There are many grain free foods I don't like just like there are many grain inclusive foods I do like. But out of all the GF foods I've tried, Now has worked with my problem dogs like no other food. My only issue is the price and size of the bag! I have issues paying $58 for 25lb bag, but I can't argue that is works, especially for Casper, Joey and Pongo. Ronon is doing fine the Victor Hi Pro, but he does well on most foods. My Frenchie Rocky is doing awesome on Victor Ocean Blend. His coat is so soft and shiny and he came to me with major skin issues.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

riddick4811 said:


> But that is going to be the same with any food, not just grain free. Not every dog is going to do well on the food. Plus different people have different ideas of doing well.


Not really. With older types of food you already have weeded out a lot of formulas and ingredients that simply does not work or produce lesser results over time. There are *a lot* of knowledge gathered on these formulas. They are proven to work for a wide range of dogs, breeds and sizes. With newer grain free foods it's hit or miss. In 10 years we will have much better GF foods.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

danea said:


> European and Russian RC also has unnamed meat products and fats


You'll see that with a range of European brands. Most European RC foods have named proteins though. They are required to follow EU regulation on ingredient naming, AAFCO labeling means nothing in Europe. The European RC nutritional panels are much better. You can actually see that even if 1 or 2 non animal ingredients are listed first starch content is still low. I know a few that would recycle their breakfast reading European labels, specially smaller brands who use a lot of unconventional and exotic alternatives for protein. I fed a RC 28/18 food to my working dogs back home in Norway. They replaced it with Cynotechnic 4300. Best food ever.


----------



## Unosmom (May 3, 2009)

Fromm gold is reasonably priced and no recalls (I also like their customer service). 
If you're looking for affordable grain free, theres nutri source, hi tek naturals, earthborn, and infinia.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers (Jun 28, 2011)

monster'sdad said:


> The vast majority of show dogs in the US eat Pro Plan, Eukanuba and Royal Canin. In Europe, Royal Canin is by far the most popular food with show kennels.
> 
> That is complete fact has nothing to do with opinion.


There's a couple problems I have with this. 

One, I actually believe your first statement is changing. Breeders are realizing good nutrition makes a difference. Yes, there still are the. Breeders who only feed Euk, Purina, or Iams, but a lot are actually feeding better foods now. Acana, Now/Go, Canidae, and Fromm and Taste of the Wild/4 Health especially seem to be popular. Along with that, the ones that are on Purina and the like aren't always doing fantastic. Grooming can make a dog look much better than it is in reality. Up close you also see the difference in coat quality and muscle tone. Along with grooming think about all the supplements they're getting. I don't think there are mant breeders out there who don't supplement with something, including canned food. There's also a good handful especially in Boxers that feed BARF or some kind of raw mixture. 

Quite a few kennels in the UK and Europe also seem more focused on foods that get around the tax, not necessarily quality.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> but a lot are actually feeding better foods now. Acana, Now/Go, Canidae, and Fromm and Taste of the Wild/4 Health especially seem to be popular.


How many are "a lot"?
The only selling point for TotW and 4Health is that they pretty much can get it at the same price as they pay for any of the big brands on a breeder contract. There isn't anything about these two brands that make them a better choice than alternatives from the big brands, regardless of what you put into the term "a good food"



SaharaNight Boxers said:


> Quite a few kennels in the UK and Europe also seem more focused on foods that get around the tax, not necessarily quality.


What does that mean?


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers (Jun 28, 2011)

DaViking said:


> How many are "a lot"?
> The only selling point for TotW and 4Health is that they pretty much can get it at the same price as they pay for any of the big brands on a breeder contract. There isn't anything about these two brands that make them a better choice than alternatives from the big brands, regardless of what you put into the term "a good food"
> 
> 
> ...


I honestly can't give you a percentage. I also only know about Boxers mainly. From discussions I've seen it seems like breeders are starting to realize non-big brands really do/can have better formulas and ingredients matter. As far as TOTW and 4 Health, it was just an example. TOTW actually seems to be quite popular along with Fromm for those that don't feed Euk, Purina and the like. I will say it's also probably influenced by the lower cost. I will say that I don't find either of those brands particularly fantastic and I would probably never try either one, but they're much better than a corn based formula. 

This sums it up better than I can on the tax. 
Value Added Tax
Certain foods are exempt from it. Some breeders focus more so on getting only tax free foods instead of quality.


----------



## danea (Oct 25, 2008)

*DaViking
*


> They are required to follow EU regulation on ingredient naming


It is true, but despite different labeling regulations there is a significant different in the ingredient list, for example there is no wheat or hydrolyzed animal protein in American RC Golden retriever 25.


> The European RC nutritional panels are much better


It might be so, but are you 100% sure they’ve put the same resources in developing these … alternative formulas? 
What was even the purpose of developing different formulas if they don't care about myths and scaremongering
There is significant difference between French and Russian RC, and we have the same ingredient list and price (around 5 euro\kg for breed specific formulas), I’m talking about diarrhea, hair loss, appetite loss in pets that where previously doing great on a French product.
IMO It’s kind of …not “cool”, for a company that claims to put tons of money in research and safety.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> There's a couple problems I have with this.
> 
> One, I actually believe your first statement is changing. Breeders are realizing good nutrition makes a difference. Yes, there still are the. Breeders who only feed Euk, Purina, or Iams, but a lot are actually feeding better foods now. Acana, Now/Go, Canidae, and Fromm and Taste of the Wild/4 Health especially seem to be popular. Along with that, the ones that are on Purina and the like aren't always doing fantastic. Grooming can make a dog look much better than it is in reality. Up close you also see the difference in coat quality and muscle tone. Along with grooming think about all the supplements they're getting. I don't think there are mant breeders out there who don't supplement with something, including canned food. There's also a good handful especially in Boxers that feed BARF or some kind of raw mixture.
> 
> Quite a few kennels in the UK and Europe also seem more focused on foods that get around the tax, not necessarily quality.


Very few if any show people believe they are better. In performance events, most notably hunt trials, I can say with 100% certainty you will not see any of those foods and next to sled dogs hunt trials are the most demanding.

Go to any NAVHDA or NSTRA event in PA and look at the dogs and talk to the owners about what they feed and how many hours they train.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> I honestly can't give you a percentage. I also only know about Boxers mainly. From discussions I've seen it seems like breeders are starting to realize non-big brands really do/can have better formulas and ingredients matter. As far as TOTW and 4 Health, it was just an example. TOTW actually seems to be quite popular along with Fromm for those that don't feed Euk, Purina and the like. I will say it's also probably influenced by the lower cost. I will say that I don't find either of those brands particularly fantastic and I would probably never try either one, but they're much better than a corn based formula.
> 
> This sums it up better than I can on the tax.
> Value Added Tax
> Certain foods are exempt from it. Some breeders focus more so on getting only tax free foods instead of quality.


I am European but I have never heard of some foods being exempted of VAT and some not. That's just not the case. All pet foods are treated equally in each country. VAT is a sweeping sales tax, a tax you can reclaim under certain circumstances if you are incorporated in some form. Inc, LLC, SA, SO, etc etc. A breeder have every right to incorporate if they want. This have nothing to do with nutrition or choice of food. I'd be willing to bet a lot of money on that it is American vets who are making bank on sick pets and not their European peers.

Regarding small brands and breeders. Many breeders have in the past and will in the future go with smaller manufacturers of food. Nothing new in that and I honestly don't think it have changed that much. Who's in vogue among the alternative brands have probably changed. Also, it doesn't matter much in the big scheme of things if an occasional home breeder switches because he/she get swayed by some easy to sell message.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

danea said:


> *DaViking
> *
> 
> It is true, but despite different labeling regulations there is a significant different in the ingredient list, for example there is no wheat or hydrolyzed animal protein in American RC Golden retriever 25.
> ...


Oh, don't misunderstand me, European and N. American products have some differences but they all make use of corn, wheat, isolates etc. etc., so there are no differences imo in terms of caving to scaremongering. The European formulas are the original formulas, not the alternatives. I honestly don't know anything about Russian products or specifically Russian Royal-Canin products. Since you (or others?) where previously feeding a French (European) manufactured product that worked well but now are feeding Russian made products that doesn't work well, did they recently build their own facility or did a Russian manufacturer take over?

How is Nutram Russia doing btw? I read they got some good distribution and traction over there.


----------



## riddick4811 (Nov 2, 2011)

DaViking said:


> Not really. With older types of food you already have weeded out a lot of formulas and ingredients that simply does not work or produce lesser results over time. There are *a lot* of knowledge gathered on these formulas. They are proven to work for a wide range of dogs, breeds and sizes. With newer grain free foods it's hit or miss. In 10 years we will have much better GF foods.


So you are telling me older foods will work for all dogs and newer ones won't???? I was saying not all foods will work for all dogs and I find that to be true. If they truly worked for all dogs we wouldn't have the issues we have with selecting foods for our dogs. They may be better formulated and work for a larger majority of dogs, but no food is appropriate for ALL dogs and that is what I was referring too. Name any food on the market and you will find someone that has an issue with it. 

Royal Canin didn't work for my dogs in the past. I can't remember the exact name of the formula, but it was their performance food. My Dobermans looked like shit on it. And by your logic, since they have been around and put money into testing they should work for all dogs. Casper is allergic to chicken. As far as I know, they pretty much have chicken in all their formulas, therefore they will not work for him. I don't care about the majority of dogs, I care about MY dogs. If the food won't work for them, it is useless to me no matter how much research they have put into it.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

riddick4811 said:


> So you are telling me older foods will work for all dogs and newer ones won't????


There is something in between you know. No one is saying there is one food for all dogs. And what is normally a great food can be a terrible choice for an individual, what's new? But the chances of bumping into something that doesn't work at all are much greater than with more classic type of formula that have been tested and adjusted into the ridiculous. And any randomly selected new GF formula seem to work appropriately for less dogs than an older style of food.



riddick4811 said:


> My Dobermans looked like shit on it. And by your logic, since they have been around and put money into testing they should work for all dogs.


No, you are interpreting it wrong. I am already assuming everyone here know what I said above. I don't see any point in having to state that in every thread and post. We can discuss individual accounts until we are blue in the face, it's not going to make much of a difference.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

riddick4811 said:


> So you are telling me older foods will work for all dogs and newer ones won't???? I was saying not all foods will work for all dogs and I find that to be true. If they truly worked for all dogs we wouldn't have the issues we have with selecting foods for our dogs. They may be better formulated and work for a larger majority of dogs, but no food is appropriate for ALL dogs and that is what I was referring too. Name any food on the market and you will find someone that has an issue with it.
> 
> Royal Canin didn't work for my dogs in the past. I can't remember the exact name of the formula, but it was their performance food. My Dobermans looked like shit on it. And by your logic, since they have been around and put money into testing they should work for all dogs. Casper is allergic to chicken. As far as I know, they pretty much have chicken in all their formulas, therefore they will not work for him. I don't care about the majority of dogs, I care about MY dogs. If the food won't work for them, it is useless to me no matter how much research they have put into it.


What he is saying is that proven foods like Pro Plan Chicken & Rice, RC Maxi and Eukanuba Maintenance have been fed to so many dogs for so long that the vast majority of dogs will do well on them because adjustments have been made to them based a real pool of experience. 

According to my friend that own a very high volume store, foods like Orijen, Acana etc have the lowest repeat buying he has ever seen in 30 years of being in business, whereas other foods like RC, Euk and PP people will not switch from no matter what. Because returns are so high in some of "better" brands, his staff is not allowed to recommend them and he keeps them in the back of the store.

Let's be honest, how many dogs eat Go or Now? What possible pool of data could that company have? It also seems that people that use these brands use one bag and try something else. I would be curious to know how many foods people on this forum feed in a 12 month period.


----------



## tem_sat (Jun 20, 2010)

monster'sdad said:


> According to my friend that own a very high volume store, foods like Orijen, Acana etc have the lowest repeat buying he has ever seen in 30 years of being in business, whereas other foods like RC, Euk and PP people will not switch from no matter what. Because returns are so high in some of "better" brands, his staff is not allowed to recommend them and he keeps them in the back of the store.


Likely a percentage of the returns are due to owner ignorance and/or staff ineptitude. A stat of one store is meaningless. I am sure you can dig up some better data at the PetFoodIndustry site.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

tem_sat said:


> Likely a percentage of the returns are due to owner ignorance and/or staff ineptitude. A stat of one store is meaningless. I am sure you can dig up some better data at the PetFoodIndustry site.


Whatever you say.


----------



## pogo (Aug 28, 2011)

I have to agree with the other over royal canin.

It's a very popular food here and i haven't met a dog fed it that i thought was in great condition, most are overweight, dull coats and overall bad condition.

Would i feed it? not even if it were free, i believe there are many better brands out there for much less cost.


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

monster'sdad said:


> What he is saying is that proven foods like Pro Plan Chicken & Rice, RC Maxi and Eukanuba Maintenance have been fed to so many dogs for so long that the vast majority of dogs will do well on them because adjustments have been made to them based a real pool of experience.
> 
> According to my friend that own a very high volume store, foods like Orijen, Acana etc have the lowest repeat buying he has ever seen in 30 years of being in business, whereas other foods like RC, Euk and PP people will not switch from no matter what. Because returns are so high in some of "better" brands, his staff is not allowed to recommend them and he keeps them in the back of the store.
> 
> Let's be honest, how many dogs eat Go or Now? What possible pool of data could that company have? It also seems that people that use these brands use one bag and try something else. I would be curious to know how many foods people on this forum feed in a 12 month period.



Um, a lot. Granted, I work in two stores that ONLY sell premium foods. One of them has a tiny tiny selection of some Eukanuba/Nutro but they barely sell it and will likely phase it out. 

My other friends store is the largest retailer in the northeast of premium foods and raw foods and he wouldn't sell Eukanuba or Purina. He sells a TON of Now, Nature's Variety, Earthborn, Precise, TOTW, etc. Oh, and he also sells thousands of pounds of raw food (Vital Essentials, NW Naturals, Nature's Variety) per week. He's helped thousands of dogs over the past 20 years by fixing their health problems by fixing what they are eating. 

To Your dog's Health,Thomaston Feed

So for all of your experience that supports Purina, Eukanuba and Royal Canin, I have the exact opposite...


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

He wouldn't sell Eukanuba but he's ok with TotW and Chicken Soup :biggrin:
Btw, he sells Royal-Canin.


----------



## Unosmom (May 3, 2009)

The store I work at sells a ton of Orijen and Acana, we cannot keep it in stock. Fromm is probably the second highest seller.


----------



## riddick4811 (Nov 2, 2011)

DaViking said:


> There is something in between you know. No one is saying there is one food for all dogs. And what is normally a great food can be a terrible choice for an individual, what's new? But the chances of bumping into something that doesn't work at all are much greater than with more classic type of formula that have been tested and adjusted into the ridiculous. And any randomly selected new GF formula seem to work appropriately for less dogs than an older style of food.
> 
> 
> 
> No, you are interpreting it wrong. I am already assuming everyone here know what I said above. I don't see any point in having to state that in every thread and post. We can discuss individual accounts until we are blue in the face, it's not going to make much of a difference.


But how MY dogs do on a food do make a difference to me. That is what you are not grasping. I could care less how 200,000 + dogs have done on a food if my dogs do not do well on it. How my dogs do is all I care about. You are looking at the big picture. I'm looking at what is sitting in my livingroom and how they do on something is all that matters to me not the vast majority. 

And like I said before, there is no perfect food and how a dog does is relative to the person feeding it. I've seen hunters who say there dogs do well on xxx food, but I think their dogs look bad, but it works for them.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

pogo said:


> It's a very popular food here and i haven't met a dog fed it that i thought was in great condition, most are overweight, dull coats and overall bad condition.


So you are basically saying you know better than all those that feed RC. You know what's up, they don't? Have you ever considered there is a reason for why it is so popular? Also realize that no food is going to make up for other issues. Maybe you are looking in the wrong circles. Maybe the dogs you see live a boring life. Maybe the dogs you see live in a home with a lot of negative stress. Maybe the dogs you see get a lot of treats. Maybe the dogs you see are overfed. There can literally be a myriad of reasons for what you see. Go out and get a broad look in sporting, working and show circles and you'll figure out how wrong you are.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

riddick4811 said:


> But how MY dogs do on a food do make a difference to me. That is what you are not grasping.


How am I not grasping that? If I didn't I wouldn't have said what I said a cpl of posts above. How hard is that figure out? I am not talking about your dogs but you seem to want me to talk about them. I want your dogs to be the best they can be and no one else know better than you. I *RARELY* talk about individual dogs and their issues on internet because it is meaningless. If I do it is very superficial. I do that privately and I charge for it. I am not going to start to misrepresent myself like some bordering on doing other places here.


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

DaViking said:


> He wouldn't sell Eukanuba but he's ok with TotW and Chicken Soup :biggrin:
> Btw, he sells Royal-Canin.


The list on his website isn't updated. He does have royal canin...maybe a few bags. But no more than 6, out of shelves and shelves of food lol. He actually doesn't sell a lot of Chicken Soup or TOTW anymore. When the latest Diamond recall happened, he transitioned those customers from TOTW to Earthborn, and Chicken Soup/Premium Edge to Nature's Variety/Precise/Verus. 

And raw is also a LOT of what he sells, both pre packaged and in bulk. He has two huge walk in freezers worth lol


----------



## Jacksons Mom (Jun 13, 2010)

Since we're on topic, I have a question. To me, most of these 'breed specific' foods look very similar. But ingredient-wise and protein/fat wise, if I were feeding RC, I would probably choose to feed the GSD formula (German Shepherd Food | Royal Canin) over, say, the Yorkie formula. I mean, is there anything WRONG with this? I don't really buy into breed specific formulas, to be honest. 

GSD
INGREDIENTS
Chicken meal, brown rice, oatmeal, chicken fat, barley, rice, natural chicken flavor, pork meal, soy protein isolate, sodium silico aluminate, wheat gluten meal, dried beet pulp (sugar removed), powdered cellulose, anchovy oil (source of EPA/DHA), soya oil, potassium chloride, salt, calcium carbonate, dried egg product, sodium tripolyphosphate, DL-methionine, L-tyrosine, taurine, dried brewers yeast extract (source of mannan-oligosaccharides), Vitamins [DL-alpha tocopherol acetate (source of vitamin E), inositol, niacin supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (source of vitamin C), D-calcium pantothenate, biotin, pyridoxine hydrochloride (vitamin B6), riboflavin supplement (vitamin B2), thiamine mononitrate (vitamin B1), vitamin A acetate, folic acid, vitamin B12 supplement, vitamin D3 supplement], choline chloride, glucosamine hydrochloride, marigold extract (Tagetes erecta L.), Trace Minerals [zinc proteinate, zinc oxide, ferrous sulfate, manganese proteinate, copper proteinate, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite], tea (green tea extract), chondroitin sulfate, rosemary extract, preserved with natural mixed tocopherols (source of vitamin E) and citric acid.

Yorkie
INGREDIENTS
Chicken meal, brown rice, rice, chicken fat, corn gluten meal, barley, wheat gluten meal, natural chicken flavor, powdered cellulose, dried beet pulp (sugar removed), anchovy oil (source of EPA/DHA), dried brewers yeast, potassium chloride, soya oil, fructo-oligosaccharides, sodium tripolyphosphate, salt, calcium carbonate, taurine, dried brewers yeast extract (source of mannan-oligosaccharides), dried egg product, choline chloride, DL-methionine, Vitamins [DL-alpha tocopherol acetate (source of vitamin E), inositol, niacin supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (source of vitamin C), D-calcium pantothenate, biotin, pyridoxine hydrochloride (vitamin B6), riboflavin supplement (vitamin B2), thiamine mononitrate (vitamin B1), vitamin A acetate, folic acid, vitamin B12 supplement, vitamin D3 supplement], magnesium oxide, Trace Minerals [zinc proteinate, zinc oxide, ferrous sulfate, manganese proteinate, copper proteinate, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite], glucosamine hydrochloride, marigold extract (Tagetes erecta L.), tea (green tea extract), L-carnitine, chondroitin sulfate, rosemary extract, preserved with natural mixed tocopherols (source of vitamin E) and citric acid.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

meggels said:


> The list on his website isn't updated. He does have royal canin...maybe a few bags. But no more than 6, out of shelves and shelves of food lol. He actually doesn't sell a lot of Chicken Soup or TOTW anymore. When the latest Diamond recall happened, he transitioned those customers from TOTW to Earthborn, and Chicken Soup/Premium Edge to Nature's Variety/Precise/Verus.
> 
> And raw is also a LOT of what he sells, both pre packaged and in bulk. He has two huge walk in freezers worth lol


The point is more that he had/have TotW and Chicken Soup in his premium "holistic" feed store when you said he wouldn't sell Eukanuba. That Diamond had another recall shouldn't have anything to do with anything. The fact that he have these, Royal-Canin, Canidae etc. tells me that he probably have a more nuanced view than many others here on DFC, and that's good.


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

DaViking said:


> The point is more that he had/have TotW and Chicken Soup in his premium "holistic" feed store when you said he wouldn't sell Eukanuba. That Diamond had another recall shouldn't have anything to do with anything. The fact that he have these, Royal-Canin, Canidae etc. tells me that he probably have a more nuanced view than many others here on DFC, and that's good.


He's pretty damn smart. He gets all scientific and crap, like you do LOL. But he's been in the industry for years and has helped several companies to formulate their foods, both kibble and raw. He's my go to guy for any dog health issue 

But he's anti vaccine and heartworm and flea/tick connventional meds, so I'm sure he would ruffle some feathers in this group.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

meggels said:


> He's pretty damn smart. He gets all scientific and crap, like you do LOL. But he's been in the industry for years and has helped several companies to formulate their foods, both kibble and raw. He's my go to guy for any dog health issue
> 
> But he's anti vaccine and heartworm and flea/tick connventional meds, so I'm sure he would ruffle some feathers in this group.


Actually I don't think so. There is nothing more annoying than opinions with no reasoning. (It's like making sense of NRA statements these days  ) That's more often than not a source of ruffled feathers  He sounds like a guy that can back up his opinions.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

Monsters Dad... You should really stop assuming that you're the only one with hands on experience on a professional level with dogs, and that anyone who has witnessed with their own two eyes things that contradict what you're selling are "uninformed" or stupid. 
My opinion on Royal Canin is based on the fact it is a VERY popular food and I work hands on with hundreds of dogs every month and have yet to be impressed by a single one on this food. In my experience most owners are blind to their dogs foul odor, huge sloppy stools, terrible coat quality, and lack of definition and chalk eating, sleeping, and pooping up to "doing great" on whatever food.

And for what it's worth, the last conformation show I went to I discussed food with a Boxer breeder who fed Pro Plan "because they have a great breeder rewards program and when you have six dogs it helps with cost." And it wasn't the first time I've heard breeders claim a rewards program as why they use a food. It's a shame people compromise their dogs health just to have more pets than they can take optimum care of.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

CorgiPaws said:


> Monsters Dad... You should really stop assuming that you're the only one with hands on experience on a professional level with dogs, and that anyone who has witnessed with their own two eyes things that contradict what you're selling are "uninformed" or stupid.
> My opinion on Royal Canin is based on the fact it is a VERY popular food and I work hands on with hundreds of dogs every month and have yet to be impressed by a single one on this food. In my experience most owners are blind to their dogs foul odor, huge sloppy stools, terrible coat quality, and lack of definition and chalk eating, sleeping, and pooping up to "doing great" on whatever food.
> 
> And for what it's worth, the last conformation show I went to I discussed food with a Boxer breeder who fed Pro Plan "because they have a great breeder rewards program and when you have six dogs it helps with cost." And it wasn't the first time I've heard breeders claim a rewards program as why they use a food. It's a shame people compromise their dogs health just to have more pets than they can take optimum care of.


Even if you correctly identified some of those dogs to eat RC your observations would still be statistically and qualitative 100% irrelevant as an observer at a doggy daycare. Accounting for personal second hand observations is full of flaws. There are a number of newer (and older) foods I believe to be absolutely garbage for most dogs but even I who analyze results methodically for clients does not have enough to proclaim publicly that they are crap. I could be shot down in a split second.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

Jacksons Mom said:


> Since we're on topic, I have a question. To me, most of these 'breed specific' foods look very similar. But ingredient-wise and protein/fat wise, if I were feeding RC, I would probably choose to feed the GSD formula (German Shepherd Food | Royal Canin) over, say, the Yorkie formula. I mean, is there anything WRONG with this? I don't really buy into breed specific formulas, to be honest.


The GSD formula are formulated for issues like skin problems, digestive permeability and chronically soft stools. Soy protein isolate is ultra digestible, leading to less undigested proteins reaching the colon. The smallest amount of undigested matter in the colon is a big problem for GSD's. The size and the shape of the GSD kibble also increases chewing which leads to less time in the stomach. The skin of the GSD also have a higher pH than other breeds. 

The Yorkie formula have a focus on skin and coat issues. Long hairs and no undercoat leave it vulnerable to dryness and external factors. It's formulated specially to stimulate production of carotene and maintain the skin moisture barrier.


----------



## pogo (Aug 28, 2011)

DaViking said:


> So you are basically saying you know better than all those that feed RC. You know what's up, they don't? Have you ever considered there is a reason for why it is so popular? Also realize that no food is going to make up for other issues. Maybe you are looking in the wrong circles. Maybe the dogs you see live a boring life. Maybe the dogs you see live in a home with a lot of negative stress. Maybe the dogs you see get a lot of treats. Maybe the dogs you see are overfed. There can literally be a myriad of reasons for what you see. Go out and get a broad look in sporting, working and show circles and you'll figure out how wrong you are.


I think you'll find MOST people round here feed RC as it's pretty much all that vets sell. 

I know a lot of working dogs, show dogs they are still shite looking dogs that are fed RC and other similar foods.

Don't assume you know best as you clearly don't :tsk:

ETA: i'm not saying there are not any dogs anywhere that look great on RC but from the dogs i've met and it's alot they are not what condition i'd want my dogs in.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

DaViking said:


> Even if you correctly identified some of those dogs to eat RC your observations would still be statistically and qualitative 100% irrelevant as an observer at a doggy daycare. Accounting for personal second hand observations is full of flaws. There are a number of newer (and older) foods I believe to be absolutely garbage for most dogs but even I who analyze results methodically for clients does not have enough to proclaim publicly that they are crap. I could be shot down in a split second.


Many of my client dogs spend 11 hours a day, 5-6 days a week in my facility. 
I'm not basing this opinion off a passing glance or couple hours of observation. I'm well acquainted with their stamina, energy level, etc.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

CorgiPaws said:


> Many of my client dogs spend 11 hours a day, 5-6 days a week in my facility.
> I'm not basing this opinion off a passing glance or couple hours of observation. I'm well acquainted with their stamina, energy level, etc.


Corgi Paws, despite my perceived tone and attitude, I have an enormous amount of respect for you and what you do. Anyone that lives in Idaho has a very good understanding of the importance of the outdoors and real appreciation for nature.

However, you simply cannot come to those conclusions in that setting. A simple thing like brushing a dog several times a week is generally more important than diet in coat quality. How do you know how many times each of those dogs get brushed? How do you know if those dogs are groomed properly? I am sure you know that most types of coat should never be clipped but many owners still clip them. You clip a guard coated dog and their coats are crap for a very long time. You clip a wirehaired dog and the result is even worse. All I am saying is that you don't know a lot about how a dog is cared for and almost nothing about its breeding.

To my astonishment, I see some of the finest gun dogs in the country eating the cheapest and nastiest food in the world but still they manage to run for mile after mile in 90 degree heat ahead of guys on horses.

If you think Sportmix is bad, go on the UKC Hound Boards and see what those dogs eat and I have never seen stronger more robust dogs than competition Walkers, some are fed hog feed by the way.

http://www.blackgolddogfood.com/champions.htm

Let's be honest, is anyone going to tell the guys above how to feed a heavily trained dog? I would say about 30% of the competing hound people use that brand, and not even the better formulas.

http://www.walnuthillgsps.us/

Above is one of the most decorated hunt kennels in the US. She uses SportMix Black Bag. I for one have the common sense to not argue with her.

To some extent, we are guilty of the same obession.

Again, no offense intended, but Royal Canin is an absolute luxury food in some ways.

As far as the RC GSD food is concerned, more Shepherds eat that food than all foods combined, for good reason, it works because of decades of development and experience.

For people with sporting dogs, keeping Karo syrup in the first aid kit is of paramount importance. I have only seen two cases of hypoglycemia in my life and both dogs ate Orijen. Thankfully we got syrup into them quickly.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

CorgiPaws said:


> Many of my client dogs spend 11 hours a day, 5-6 days a week in my facility.
> I'm not basing this opinion off a passing glance or couple hours of observation. I'm well acquainted with their stamina, energy level, etc.


Yes, and out of those, that are eating RC are not something I would base anything on. A fat dog with no energy and stamina is first and foremost a lifestyle issue. Throw some genetics on top of that. When you see fat dogs with no energy and stamina at your daycare it's a lifestyle issue. There are no two ways about it.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

I'm certainly not disqualifying other factors that come into play. Despite being borderline obsessive over what food goes into my dogs (which isn't even kibble) I do firmly believe that genetics play a much *MUCH* bigger role in health than anything else. Perhaps that's why I cringe terribly when people can't afford a dog from a breeder that health tests and finds a $200 puppy in the paper. As a breeder myself I do put a lot of weight on genetics and have a fair understanding on how they work.
As for lifestyle I will not sit and claim to know what lifestyle my clients live outside of my care. I'm quite familiar with some but not all. Some are incredibly active, some are show dogs, some compete in rally, agility, etc. I'm sure plenty are total couch potatoes. I will give you that.
A vast majority of the dogs we see in daycare, boarding, and training are also groomed in our facility by our groomers. Such is the luxury of having a loyal client base! 

All of that said, and KNOWING there are other factors going on... I'm not sure I could chalk it up to irony that I've never seen a great looking royal Canin fed dog. 

Now, know that it pains me to even say I've been impressed by kibble fed dogs... But there's two foods I've been continually impressed with. Nutri Source grain free foods, every dog I've seen on it seems to be doing great and it's quite favored by the agility folks in the area... And Innova (regular, not Evo or prime) has my brother's American Bulldog in amazing shape, awesome definition and his coat feels like a raw fed dog... So much so that past time I dog sat him I asked when he put him on raw... Turns out he just took him off of Evo (money is tight) and put him on Innova Adult. 

I am not convinced grain free is necessarily better, and I don't think potato is any better than rice. I think more than anything else "grain free" is a easy marketing angle for companies to replace ice with potato and charge twice as much.


----------



## danea (Oct 25, 2008)

*DaViking*
They’ve built their own facility here, claim they use the same equipment and ingredient suppliers as the French one. 

Sadly, Nutram is only widely available in St. Petersburg. Wanted to try it with my dogs, but finding it in Moscow on a regular basis is practically impossible.


----------



## doggoblin (Jun 6, 2011)

DaViking said:


> I am European but I have never heard of some foods being exempted of VAT and some not. That's just not the case. All pet foods are treated equally in each country.


Just because you have never heard of it doesn't mean it's not true. Never met anyone who knows everything.

You can buy food for dogs which is classified in the UK, not as pet food which has VAT added but as animal feed for working dogs. This doesn't get charged at the standard VAT rate. A lot depends on how it is marketed and labelled.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

doggoblin said:


> Just because you have never heard of it doesn't mean it's not true. Never met anyone who knows everything.
> 
> You can buy food for dogs which is classified in the UK, not as pet food which has VAT added but as animal feed for working dogs. This doesn't get charged at the standard VAT rate. A lot depends on how it is marketed and labelled.


Which foods are exempted of VAT in Europe? Tell me that.

Farm feed still have VAT added they are not exempted of VAT. You are missing the point. You can reclaim Value Added Tax as an operating expense. Farmers do that for their working dog feed with lower VAT and breeders do that for their kennel feed. Secondly, individual countries need exemption from EU law for local provisions like this, it's not the norm and doesn't work like that across Europe. The original claim was that European breeders in general choose low quality farm feed to save on tax is simply not true. And that's the context of my answer. There will always be someone trying to save a buck, that's no different wherever you go.

What I know was done back in the day in Norway was that some breeders in rural areas was buying dog food more or less "under the table" from local farmers. Those farmers got pallets of dog food shipped in from their local co-op as "animal feed" That practice have ceased as stricter accounting rules for farmers have been introduced.


----------



## doggoblin (Jun 6, 2011)

HM Revenue & Customs section 6.4. You can argue just for the sake of arguing but fact is you can save money on VAT legally by buying certain foods.

Buy Dr. John Platinum Medal Adult Dog Food Vat Free 15kg is one example or is that false?


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

doggoblin said:


> HM Revenue & Customs section 6.4. You can argue just for the sake of arguing but fact is you can save money on VAT legally by buying certain foods.
> 
> Buy Dr. John Platinum Medal Adult Dog Food Vat Free 15kg is one example or is that false?


When a breeder can reclaim the VAT how much will you save?
Ok, so the UK have provisions for sheep dogs, gun dogs and racing dog feed. Note that the UK provisions doesn't discriminate among foods. It's a sweeping loophole. And it doesn't make the original claim any more correct. European breeders aren't queuing up to get "low quality" food shipped from the UK. The food you linked would shipped to Scandinavia for example be more expensive than a great food bought locally.


----------



## doggoblin (Jun 6, 2011)

DaViking said:


> it doesn't make the original claim any more correct. European breeders aren't queuing up to get food shipped from the UK.


Original post you argued against:


> Quite a few kennels in the UK and Europe also seem more focused on foods that get around the tax, not necessarily quality.


So in the UK you can get around the Tax despite your assertion otherwise.. I don't know about the rest of Europe, I don't claim to, but the original statement seems a distinct possibility to me.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

doggoblin said:


> Original post you argued against:
> 
> 
> So in the UK you can get around the Tax despite your assertion otherwise.. I don't know about the rest of Europe, I don't claim to, but the original statement seems a distinct possibility to me.


I said I had never heard of that and gave an account of how it works for 99% of all Europeans when they buy dog food, including breeders. I don't think that is an unfair assertion or even wrong. If you want me to account for those who break the law I think you are asking too much. If someone want to break the law there is always opportunities. I didn't traverse the references to the law but I would assume these provisions are there to protect British cultural heritage, not supply Europe with cheap dog food. So you don't interpret the above statement as a sentiment of European breeders is more interested in evading tax laws than providing good nutrition? Why would they when there is nothing to save if you run a good kennel? And what do think will happen when the products enter countries with their own sales tax provisions? But ok, whatever.


----------



## doggoblin (Jun 6, 2011)

I have no doubt some breeders try to reduce costs which may include avoiding tax. Others join breeder programs to get cheaper food which has the additional advantage for the manufacturer that they are potentially also catching the purchasers of any puppies. People generally simply accept what the breeder feeds, after all as "they know best". I think a lot of breeders and owners do not know that much about dog nutrition in the first place and simply accept the marketing rather than checking the ingredients and considering what a dog actually needs.

Edit: Couple of points about your "edited/completely redone" post...



> If you want me to account for those who break the law I think you are asking too much. If someone want to break the law there is always opportunities.


There are many breeders of, lets see, greyhounds and working dogs who are definitely not breaking the law, simply using an exception built for them. I don't go into details about other European countries as lets see... I don't know how they work and what provisions they have so will not comment on things I do not know. I look at the one country I know something about and understand the language and can find an exception and a way to legally avoid tax. How, heard of it through the grapevine and I am not a breeder. Who is to say what provisions and exceptions exist for those other countries if people can find them? 

Fact is most people don't know a nutritionally good food but rely on marketing which tells them their product is a good food. I'm not simply talking about TV marketing here either as there are other subtle ways to push food. This goes for a lot of breeders (not only talking show breeders) and people who buy puppies from them. Cost would be a factor here. There are other breeders whoever who do take care about the nutritional requirements of their dogs and will steer people in the right direction. Just because these breeders do exist doesn't invalidate the original comment. Most breeders try to reduce costs otherwise you wouldn't have the successful "breeder programs" to encourage brand loyalty.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

doggoblin said:


> I have no doubt some breeders try to reduce costs which may include avoiding tax. Others join breeder programs to get cheaper food which has the additional advantage for the manufacturer that they are potentially also catching the purchasers of any puppies.


That is the same wherever you go.


----------



## InkedMarie (Sep 9, 2011)

I met a gorgeous black lab yesterday: dog was in great shape, nice % lean, shiny coat. Before I asked him what he fed, I asked him if he had just a bath; he hadn't. What does he eat? Eukanuba.


----------



## SaharaNight Boxers (Jun 28, 2011)

InkedMarie said:


> I met a gorgeous black lab yesterday: dog was in great shape, nice % lean, shiny coat. Before I asked him what he fed, I asked him if he had just a bath; he hadn't. What does he eat? Eukanuba.


This is what really makes me think genetics play a bigger part than nutrition. I wholeheartedly believe good nutrition and diet is needed, but genetics are still what they are and will be presented. Same with dogs bred for sport. Mushing, field work, the dogs are bred to have great endurance and fast recovery time. Diet only goes so far.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

SaharaNight Boxers said:


> This is what really makes me think genetics play a bigger part than nutrition. I wholeheartedly believe good nutrition and diet is needed, but genetics are still what they are and will be presented. Same with dogs bred for sport. Mushing, field work, the dogs are bred to have great endurance and fast recovery time. Diet only goes so far.



I keep telling you the same thing; the differences in diet are beneficial at the extremes and that people need not spend so much on high protein, high fat foods for the family pet. Many are going to do Fido in at an early age. Most ingredients in many foods are just marketing BS.

Breeding, limited vaccines, delaying or not neutering, exercise and sunshine exposure are far more important than diet in most parts of the world than worrying yourself to death about corn, byproducts or the first 5 ingredients. People complain about their dogs coat but can't remember the last time the dog was brushed, or they shear a Golden and wonder why the dog looks like a fright wig.

You live in PA, big state for field trials, go sometime and see with your own eyes. I don't know how old you are, I suspect 20 -30's but it wasn't long ago that performance foods were 22% protein, still today field dogs eat 24/20 foods.


----------



## doggoblin (Jun 6, 2011)

To answer the OP, EU food nutrient profiles list protein minimums at 18% for adults, 25% for <14 weeks and reproduction and 20% for "late growth"´which is >14 weeks. Not sure what the levels are in the american food profiles.


----------



## CorgiPaws (Mar 31, 2009)

monster'sdad said:


> I keep telling you the same thing; the differences in diet are beneficial at the extremes and that people need not spend so much on high protein, high fat foods for the family pet. Many are going to do Fido in at an early age. Most ingredients in many foods are just marketing BS.
> 
> Breeding, limited vaccines, delaying or not neutering, exercise and sunshine exposure are far more important than diet in most parts of the world than worrying yourself to death about corn, byproducts or the first 5 ingredients. People complain about their dogs coat but can't remember the last time the dog was brushed, or they shear a Golden and wonder why the dog looks like a fright wig.
> 
> You live in PA, big state for field trials, go sometime and see with your own eyes. I don't know how old you are, I suspect 20 -30's but it wasn't long ago that performance foods were 22% protein, still today field dogs eat 24/20 foods.



While I accept everything you said about genetics and lifestyle really playing more of an active role than a lot of people on this forum would like to admit, I just can't accept that diet doesn't really matter when I've seen with my own two eyes HUGE differences in overall health and condition in so many dogs thanks to diet change. And generally that change is from the big name brands like Pro Plan, Eukanuba, Royal Canin, etc that you recommend TO the foods you generally classify as a "waste of money."


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

doggoblin said:


> Not sure what the levels are in the american food profiles.


NRC recommend 1.67g of protein per kg of bodyweight per day. That is an ALS recommendation. AFFCO is slightly lower.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

CorgiPaws said:


> While I accept everything you said about genetics and lifestyle really playing more of an active role than a lot of people on this forum would like to admit, I just can't accept that diet doesn't really matter when I've seen with my own two eyes HUGE differences in overall health and condition in so many dogs thanks to diet change. And generally that change is from the big name brands like Pro Plan, Eukanuba, Royal Canin, etc that you recommend TO the foods you generally classify as a "waste of money."


I will gladly reconsider my position for Go & Now, The Honest Kitchen, Gramma Lucy's and the others when someone uses them at next year's Purina Invitational Endurance Challenge and takes 3/5 top spots like the trainer using Dr. Tim's this year, or wining the Iditarod and placing 2 other teams in the Top 10.

Deal?


----------



## riddick4811 (Nov 2, 2011)

monster'sdad said:


> I will gladly reconsider my position for Go & Now, The Honest Kitchen, Gramma Lucy's and the others when someone uses them at next year's Purina Invitational Endurance Challenge and takes 3/5 top spots like the trainer using Dr. Tim's this year, or wining the Iditarod and placing 2 other teams in the Top 10.
> 
> Deal?


My question is, if they work for pet dogs who or not competing and owners are happy with it, why are they so bad? More dogs are pets than anything else. You constantly mention sled dogs and their owners like we are all suppose to know who they are. I live in Florida and never in my entire life have I even seen snow. My dogs are HOUSE pets who entire mission in life is to keep me company. They are not out running for miles and miles in freezing temps. They are not actively competing in anything, but who gets the best seat on the couch. We are active as in we go hiking, go swim at the beach and stuff, but nothing extreme. Plus half of them are seniors. 

Just because a food works for sled dog, doesn't mean it is going to work for a house pet. Doesn't make it bad, just means it isn't the right food for what the dog is doing. Same is reverse. Just b/c Now is working better than any food I've tried for my pets and may not work for a performance dog, doesn't make it bad. You seem to base everything off performance/working dogs and most people just don't have them.


----------



## Sheltielover25 (Jan 18, 2011)

riddick4811 said:


> My question is, if they work for pet dogs who or not competing and owners are happy with it, why are they so bad? More dogs are pets than anything else. You constantly mention sled dogs and their owners like we are all suppose to know who they are. I live in Florida and never in my entire life have I even seen snow. My dogs are HOUSE pets who entire mission in life is to keep me company. They are not out running for miles and miles in freezing temps. They are not actively competing in anything, but who gets the best seat on the couch. We are active as in we go hiking, go swim at the beach and stuff, but nothing extreme. Plus half of them are seniors.
> 
> Just because a food works for sled dog, doesn't mean it is going to work for a house pet. Doesn't make it bad, just means it isn't the right food for what the dog is doing. Same is reverse. Just b/c Now is working better than any food I've tried for my pets and may not work for a performance dog, doesn't make it bad. You seem to base everything off performance/working dogs and most people just don't have them.


Amen. Two of my dogs, for example, can't have processed foods because they react to chemicals easily so we have to find meat they can eat that we're able to trace back to how it's been cared for and most importantly we have to know the slaughtering process since that's where a lot of chemicals are introduced. If I used your reasoning NO dog would be able to eat kibble because MINE can't. It doesn't work that way, dude. Just because you've seen animals do well on food with what I feel are inferior ingredients, doesn't make your word anymore valuable. I've baby sat dogs eating Royal Canine and OMG that stuff wouldn't even come in my house aftering see how it came out the other end of these animals. But does that mean I went up to the owner and told them my thoughts? NO. And this is the lesson you need to learn.

The vets are amazed by the health of my dogs, inside and out, so clearly dogs can do well on a variety of things. Just because a sled dog eats such and such or a dog pulling weights eat such and such doesn't really mean ANYTHING. That's why I get so annoyed with you because you never bring forth anything but your opinion, which is fine, but you seem to think your opinion holds more value than others, when in fact it holds not the least bit more weight than anyone else on here. If your dog is doing fine eating foods the majority of us consider inferior, then fine, keep him on it. But for those who come on here asking for a better food, it's not okay to bash them and say a better food will do nothing for them.

I'm pretty sure most people realize genetics play a role in everything. But the fact of the matter is, I have mutts and rescues and had no control over their DNA. So why would I say, well, their genetics caused them to have a messed up brain so let's just ignore anything that might help it, because in the end, genetics rules. uh, no. I searched for a couple years figuring out how to work with their genetic flaw, and guess what? NUTRITION plays a part. We have introduced kibble to them about a year ago to see what would happen, I think I was out of meat. Well, they each had episodes within 48 hours. So yeah, genetics are important, but many other things play into life and those things we have control over. I have crooked teeth and bad eyes, so chances are my baby might have the same. Should I not try to eat healthy during my pregnancy because I have bad genetics? LOL


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

riddick4811 said:


> My question is, if they work for pet dogs who or not competing and owners are happy with it, why are they so bad? More dogs are pets than anything else. You constantly mention sled dogs and their owners like we are all suppose to know who they are. I live in Florida and never in my entire life have I even seen snow. My dogs are HOUSE pets who entire mission in life is to keep me company. They are not out running for miles and miles in freezing temps. They are not actively competing in anything, but who gets the best seat on the couch. We are active as in we go hiking, go swim at the beach and stuff, but nothing extreme. Plus half of them are seniors.
> 
> Just because a food works for sled dog, doesn't mean it is going to work for a house pet. Doesn't make it bad, just means it isn't the right food for what the dog is doing. Same is reverse. Just b/c Now is working better than any food I've tried for my pets and may not work for a performance dog, doesn't make it bad. You seem to base everything off performance/working dogs and most people just don't have them.


The answer is simple. When a company works to such extremes, it is easy to take that body of knowledge and apply what is appropriate at a lowel level. All the companies I mentioned have foods for the regular pet at very honest and reasonable prices.

The point is I think most people would rather buy something from someone that knows what they are doing, rather than from a guy that worked at Nissan designing cars.

No testing, no knowledge and all marketing and high prices when it comes to the companies I criticized above.


----------



## Jacksons Mom (Jun 13, 2010)

monster'sdad said:


> I will gladly reconsider my position for Go & Now, The Honest Kitchen, Gramma Lucy's and the others when someone uses them at next year's Purina Invitational Endurance Challenge and takes 3/5 top spots like the trainer using Dr. Tim's this year, or wining the Iditarod and placing 2 other teams in the Top 10.
> 
> Deal?


honestly, though, I don't really think this is an amazing way to judge food. Dogs are extremely capable of surviving and adapting to whatever. I can't say that a dog on Dr Tims would do any better in Iditrarod than Acana. There's no way to know unless you try it out. I think a lot of times the main reason people continue feeding the same foods is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality. Which is fine! But who is to say those dogs won't do exactly the same, if not better, on a different food? And to be honest, I don't really care how well dogs are doing in sled races and competitions because my dog is a pet. An active pet, yes. But just like I can't honestly say that he wouldn't do just as well on Purina as he does on Acana because, well, I've never tried it. He seems capable of eating anything and being pretty good - I notice little things (less/more energy, more/less eye goop, more/softer/harder poop, etc) between different food and brands. But it's nothing that has ever affected his quality of life. Not to mention, he's still young at 4. How old are these dogs in competitions and sled dogs, etc? Most young dogs, it's going to be easy to say "oh he's so healthy" on such-and-such food.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

Actually no they are not all young. Ramey Smith uses Dr. Tim's:

*"Dr. Tim’s Momentum Premium Dog Food fits perfectly with our feeding program. We believe quality nutrition is one of the main factors in the longevity of our dogs and their performance. Several of our dogs have finished the 1000 mile Iditarod 9 times in a row, in the top 20 and with a racing career of 10 -12 years!! One of the standouts was Babe, Ramey’s 2008 Golden Harness Lead Dog, leading the team to a 3rd place victory in Iditarod at 11 years old! They can only do that if they are happy and very HEALTHY!"*

One of my very good friends races in New England. Bronze Medalist last year and her lead dog is 10.


----------



## InkedMarie (Sep 9, 2011)

MonstersDad, where in new England does your friend race? They usually have a sled dog race here in NH in February but I think it got canceled the last two years, due to no snow.


----------



## monster'sdad (Jul 29, 2012)

InkedMarie said:


> MonstersDad, where in new England does your friend race? They usually have a sled dog race here in NH in February but I think it got canceled the last two years, due to no snow.


She races in the ISDRA series in the 4 & 6 dog events. Last year she was in Jackman, Me. but they run a lot in Upstate NY as well. I really like her because she races purebred Siberians and has really nice dual purpose dogs. She is just at home in the show ring as the snow.


----------



## InkedMarie (Sep 9, 2011)

monster'sdad said:


> She races in the ISDRA series in the 4 & 6 dog events. Last year she was in Jackman, Me. but they run a lot in Upstate NY as well. I really like her because she races purebred Siberians and has really nice dual purpose dogs. She is just at home in the show ring as the snow.


Hmm, wonder if i've seen her here. We've gone twice to watch but when there's no snow, no race. Too bad they aren't racing this weekend, we have 10-18" coming tomorrow


----------



## mheath0429 (Sep 8, 2012)

Monster's Dad, 

I really wish you would stop making claims that state how popular all this food is in the show ring. I just spent a few weekends in the ring myself, including at an agility trial - all the top dogs and the ones who proceeded to nationals ate raw or a combination of raw and kibble. All of them. Not just a few. A lot of them even get their meat from the same suppliers I do.

You try this claim every time. There are lots of people in the show world, and many out here don't use those brands. I brought Dr. Tim's up in a meeting and NO ONE had heard of it...mind you, these are prominent breeders. I'm sure a lot of them feed RC and Pro-Plan, but that doesn't make them great or even mediocre..those top AKC dogs, they aren't eating all kibble..I guarantee that. I'd even go so far as to name a few if I have to prove myself.

Now, don't misunderstand me, I like Annamaet and Dr. Tim's, but they aren't readily available and I wouldn't call them perfect. I'd never use Pro-Plan or any Purina product and I refuse to feed a food with corn. Period.


----------

