# Switching from raw to kibble



## anifunk1962

I've been feeding my 2 dogs a raw diet for almost 5 months. They really like it, but I thought they would be doing better by now, especially the older dog (6 years old). I recently stumbled upon a website with a vet talking about a study she did with dogs on raw diets and high quality kibble and how the dogs on a raw diet, in the long term, didn't do as well as the others. She also talked about thyroid imbalance with a raw diet. So now I'm worried I'm making my dogs sick and am not sure what to do. I'm thinking about switching to a high-quality dry food. Any advice or suggestions?


----------



## Guest

Oh, how I'd love to see RFD's response to this. Can't wait. RFD, are you awake?


----------



## Guest

anifunk1962 said:


> I've been feeding my 2 dogs a raw diet for almost 5 months. They really like it, but I thought they would be doing better by now, especially the older dog (6 years old). I recently stumbled upon a website with a vet talking about a study she did with dogs on raw diets and high quality kibble and how the dogs on a raw diet, in the long term, didn't do as well as the others. She also talked about thyroid imbalance with a raw diet. So now I'm worried I'm making my dogs sick and am not sure what to do. I'm thinking about switching to a high-quality dry food. Any advice or suggestions?



I'm not a raw feeder so I can't answer this, but RFD and rannmiller can of course help, and they sure will. Be assured, they will.


----------



## anifunk1962

I hope I'm not stirring up a hornet's nest. I just want to do what's best for my dogs. To be fair, the vet who did the study has her own line of dog food, but I've had a question in my mind about feeding raw for a while now because of what I've heard people say about dogs "evolving" and being "domesticated" and not adapting well to eating raw. I'm a little confused now because I can see the good and bad in both ways of feeding.


----------



## Guest

anifunk1962 said:


> I hope I'm not stirring up a hornet's nest.....
> 
> I just want to do what's best for my dogs. To be fair, the vet who did the study has her own line of dog food.


This just makes for interesting discussion which I appreciate because the Forum has been rather quiet lately.

Is the vet Dr. Jane Bicks who developed Life's Abundance dog food line? I have heard of her and the food she developed, in fact, I have had salespeople pushing Dr. Bicks' research and the food. 

We all want to do what's best for our dogs. That's why we are here.


----------



## RawFedDogs

anifunk1962 said:


> They really like it, but I thought they would be doing better by now, especially the older dog (6 years old).
> 
> 
> 
> In what way are they not doing better? In what way are they doing bad?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I recently stumbled upon a website with a vet talking about a study she did with dogs on raw diets and high quality kibble and how the dogs on a raw diet, in the long term, didn't do as well as the others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is this one study done by one vet who is pushing a brand of kibble? Define a "high quality kibble". Which raw diet? How long is "long term". How does she determine "didn't do as well"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She also talked about thyroid imbalance with a raw diet.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is no thyroid imbalance with a prey model raw diet. My dogs have been on a raw diet for 7 years with no thyroid imbalance. I had thyroid checked in one of them about a year ago and it was completely normal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So now I'm worried I'm making my dogs sick and am not sure what to do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's easy to read these websites that are pushing garbage and get scared. They use these tactics to get you to purchase their food. You can read web pages that will tell you you are killing your dog by feeding raw. Believe me, if that were the case, my dogs would be dead by now. They are both perfectly healthy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm thinking about switching to a high-quality dry food. Any advice or suggestions?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> There is no such thing as a high-quality dry food. It is all highly processed garbage from the human food processing plants. If the ingredients weren't used it dog food they would go to the dump.
> 
> Stop worrying. Think about it. Wolves have been eating a raw diet for millions of years. What do you think people fed dogs 100 years ago? 200 years ago? Kibble has only been around for a little over 50 years. Why don't you ask the dog food companies to prove their garbage won't kill your dogs. IMO it does.
Click to expand...


----------



## RawFedDogs

anifunk1962 said:


> To be fair, the vet who did the study has her own line of dog food, but I've had a question in my mind about feeding raw for a while now because of what I've heard people say about dogs "evolving" and being "domesticated" and not adapting well to eating raw.


Dogs haven't evolved. They still have digestive systems identical to wild gray wolves. Kibble has only been around a short while. Certainly not long enough for a dog to eveolve to eat that junk food.



> I'm a little confused now because I can see the good and bad in both ways of feeding.


If you can find anything good about kibble other than it's convenient and cheap, you found more than I have. That stuff is terrible to feed a dog. If you don't think so, try eating some yourself. See how you like it? Afraid to? then why feed it to your dog?


----------



## JayJayisme

RawFedDogs said:


> Afraid to? then why feed it to your dog?


While I don't necessarily disagree with your position and advice RFD, at the same time, I don't eat raw beef, raw chicken, raw bones, and raw organs. Raw fish sometimes at my favorite sushi place, but that's it. Just because I won't eat it doesn't automatically make it bad for my dogs.

BTW, my pups are doing okay on raw chicken every other day or so. If I have a couple more weeks of success with it, I'll slowly reintroduce raw beef ribs back into their diet. Thanks for the advice to try chicken awhile back.

Jay


----------



## RawFedDogs

JayJayisme said:


> While I don't necessarily disagree with your position and advice RFD, at the same time, I don't eat raw beef, raw chicken, raw bones, and raw organs. Raw fish sometimes at my favorite sushi place, but that's it. Just because I won't eat it doesn't automatically make it bad for my dogs.


I do know several people who do eat raw meat. I know this one lady on another board who is in her 60's I think and she has eaten raw meat since she was 6 years old. She said her grandmother used to feed her raw hamburger when she was 6. She never cooks any of her food anytime. She correctly maintains that cooking destroys nutrients. 

Kibble is cooked so not eating raw is no reason not to eat kibble. In my mind if a food is not good enough for me to eat, I won't feed it to my dogs. I will not put kibble in my mouth.



> BTW, my pups are doing okay on raw chicken every other day or so. If I have a couple more weeks of success with it, I'll slowly reintroduce raw beef ribs back into their diet. Thanks for the advice to try chicken awhile back.


I suggest you feed pork ribs a few weeks before moving to beef. I don't remember the size of your dogs but for medium to large dogs, I suggest feeding a slab of ribs rather than indivual ribs. Even if a slab is too big, I would feed 3 or 4 ribs still attached in one piece.


----------



## Doc

I've moved from chicken backs, quarters, to turkey necks, and pork ribs. What's next other than some organs and fish? Beef ribs?


----------



## RawFedDogs

Doc said:


> I've moved from chicken backs, quarters, to turkey necks, and pork ribs. What's next other than some organs and fish? Beef ribs?


Yes, or goat if you can find it or lamb if you can find it at a resonable price or venison. I think if I were you, I'd go ahead and start easing some liver or other organ meat into the diet. Just a little at a time with a meal.

*ETA:* All this is assuming they have good stools.


----------



## DaneMama

IMO....lets try and stay on topic for once LOL



anifunk1962 said:


> I've been feeding my 2 dogs a raw diet for almost 5 months. They really like it, but I thought they would be doing better by now, especially the older dog (6 years old). I recently stumbled upon a website with a vet talking about a study she did with dogs on raw diets and high quality kibble and how the dogs on a raw diet, in the long term, didn't do as well as the others. She also talked about thyroid imbalance with a raw diet. So now I'm worried I'm making my dogs sick and am not sure what to do. I'm thinking about switching to a high-quality dry food. Any advice or suggestions?



Could you post up a link to the website? I would love to see what her study included as far as length and variables.

That would be most helpful in this thread I think...at least for me to put up an answer to what I read and get out of the website you found.


----------



## Guest

Hasn't this subject (switching from raw to kibble) been discussed here on this Forum previously, I think if I remember rockymountainsweetie started a thread on that subject and talked about how her dogs lost weight and became ill on RAW so she put them back on kibble and suddenly they gained the weight back and seemed to thrive on the kibble...

I guess I'll have to dig through some old threads to find that one.


----------



## whiteleo

And where is Rockymountainsweetie today? I really had a hard time buying her explanations!


----------



## anifunk1962

LabbieMama said:


> This just makes for interesting discussion which I appreciate because the Forum has been rather quiet lately.
> 
> Is the vet Dr. Jane Bicks who developed Life's Abundance dog food line? I have heard of her and the food she developed, in fact, I have had salespeople pushing Dr. Bicks' research and the food.
> 
> We all want to do what's best for our dogs. That's why we are here.


The vet's name is Lisa S. Newman, N.D., PhD., and this is the website where I found the information: Cautions Against Raw Food Diets


----------



## anifunk1962

RawFedDogs said:


> In what way are they not doing better? In what way are they doing bad?


The 3-year-old Jack Russell doesn't seem to be much different than he was before starting the raw diet, so I'm not concerned about him too much. The 6-year-old collie/terrier mix is getting very fat, even if he doesn't eat that much, and his coat seems more dull and is turning lighter in color. He also coughs frequently like something is stuck in his throat. They both scratch a lot but I don't remember whether they did that before. The Jack Russell chews his paws a lot but, again, I can't remember if this is new. 

I guess I just expected them to be thriving by this time and they are obviously not. Maybe I expected too much too soon. 



RawFedDogs said:


> Is this one study done by one vet who is pushing a brand of kibble? Define a "high quality kibble". Which raw diet? How long is "long term". How does she determine "didn't do as well"?


Here is the website I found: Cautions Against Raw Food Diets


----------



## anifunk1962

RawFedDogs said:


> Dogs haven't evolved. They still have digestive systems identical to wild gray wolves. Kibble has only been around a short while. Certainly not long enough for a dog to eveolve to eat that junk food.
> 
> 
> 
> If you can find anything good about kibble other than it's convenient and cheap, you found more than I have. That stuff is terrible to feed a dog. If you don't think so, try eating some yourself. See how you like it? Afraid to? then why feed it to your dog?


You seem a little angry. I don't mean to cause a heated debate. I only want my dogs to be healthy and am open to all choices of dog food. I won't go back to the cheap kibble from Wal-Mart or wherever and I won't go back to a dog food with grain in it.

No . . . I would not eat kibble. Neither would I eat raw meat and bones. Why? Because I'm "afraid to." I know some humans eat raw meat but I doubt that they eat the bones too. I have heard of dogs eating road kill that has been flattened and baked in the sun for days, but I wouldn't eat that. I wouldn't eat any meat that I had gotten from someone on Craig's List who were cleaning out their freezer. I wouldn't eat other animals' poop like some dogs do. I wouldn't eat bugs (although some humans do). I think you get my point . . . I wouldn't eat a lot of things that dogs eat, so that argument doesn't really convince me. 

I was just asking for advice or suggestions - not a lecture.

By the way, as far as kibble being cheap? . . . in my opinion, some of it is rather expensive.


----------



## anifunk1962

danemama08 said:


> IMO....lets try and stay on topic for once LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could you post up a link to the website? I would love to see what her study included as far as length and variables.
> 
> That would be most helpful in this thread I think...at least for me to put up an answer to what I read and get out of the website you found.


Here is the website I found: Cautions Against Raw Food Diets


----------



## anifunk1962

I think I said the doctor who did the study on the BARF diet was a vet. I was wrong about that. She is an "N.D., PhD." and has both human and animal clients. Just wanted to clarify that.


----------



## JayJayisme

After a quick glance at the page where this "study" is posted (don't have time to read it carefully right now), this was based on the B.A.R.F. diet, which includes (or did at the time) 25% raw fruits and vegetables. This is not the prey model raw diet. Apples and oranges (or meat and potatoes if you prefer :wink: )

What I think is odd about the B.A.R.F. thing (from my understanding of it) is that the vegetables are fed in a raw state. I would think if anything should be cooked before it is given to a dog, it should be vegetables. They really don't have the means to process and digest raw vegetables so if that makes up 25% of their diet, it's no wonder they don't do well on it.

It would be interesting to see a modern study like this that includes the prey model diet in the comparison, along with some of the newer, modern, high quality commercial dog foods. It's clear that almost all the information out there on one side of the fence or the other is purely anecdotal. But it's also clear that not all "raw" diets are the same. B.A.R.F. and prey model are two different things.


----------



## RawFedDogs

anifunk1962 said:


> The 3-year-old Jack Russell doesn't seem to be much different than he was before starting the raw diet, so I'm not concerned about him too much. The 6-year-old collie/terrier mix is getting very fat, even if he doesn't eat that much, and his coat seems more dull and is turning lighter in color. He also coughs frequently like something is stuck in his throat. They both scratch a lot but I don't remember whether they did that before. The Jack Russell chews his paws a lot but, again, I can't remember if this is new.


None of these ae good things. Exactly what are you feeding? If I remember correctly you started feeding raw a few months ago. The dog getting fat is obviously eating too much for the amount of exercise he is getting. Remember that the volume of raw food will almost always be less than the volume of kibble fed to the same dog because the dog utilizes 100% of the raw food and maybe 50% of kibble.



> I guess I just expected them to be thriving by this time and they are obviously not. Maybe I expected too much too soon.


No, you are not expecting too much. They should be thriving. I think you have been raw feeding 3 or 4 months or more and you should see great improvement. Thats why I asked exactly what you are feeding.



> Here is the website I found: Cautions Against Raw Food Diets


Ahhh yes, Lisa Newman. I've run across her several times in the last 5 years or so. She is in the business of selling so called nutritional supplements and I believe her statements as much as I would believe a used car salesman trying to sell me a used car. Her page is full of half truths and plain old misinformation. It is much more a sales pitch than an actual scientific study. The terms and information are vague at best. There is no real scientific data in her so called study. It reminds me of an infommercial.


----------



## RawFedDogs

anifunk1962 said:


> You seem a little angry. I don't mean to cause a heated debate. I only want my dogs to be healthy and am open to all choices of dog food. I won't go back to the cheap kibble from Wal-Mart or wherever and I won't go back to a dog food with grain in it.


Hehe, this is not a heated debate. It is merely a discussion of what you should feed your dogs and why. I am not the least big angry. I am just correcting misinformation and sometimes I say things a little more harshly than I mean them.



> No . . . I would not eat kibble. Neither would I eat raw meat and bones. Why? Because I'm "afraid to."


Everyone I know is afraid to eat kibble as they should be. I have eaten raw meat just to see what it's like and I don't particularly like it. I have eaten raw beef, chicken, turkey, and pork. Its all pretty difficult to chew and not very tasty. It didn't kill me or make me sick. :smile: Humans just can't eat bones in the natural state. 



> I wouldn't eat a lot of things that dogs eat, so that argument doesn't really convince me.


The point of my statement is that humans won't eat dog food because they consider it dangerous to eat and not very appetising. Both of which are good reasons to me not to feed that stuff to my dogs. 



> I was just asking for advice or suggestions - not a lecture.


You haven't seen me give a lecture either. :smile: Those can go on forever. LOL



> By the way, as far as kibble being cheap? . . . in my opinion, some of it is rather expensive.


Yes it is but it's much cheaper than it would be if you left the fillers out of it and made it all meat, bones, and organs. The reason for most of the junk in dog food is to keep costs down. Those ingredients are very cheap making the overall cost of the kibble very cheap.


----------



## RawFedDogs

anifunk1962 said:


> I think I said the doctor who did the study on the BARF diet was a vet. I was wrong about that. She is an "N.D., PhD." and has both human and animal clients. Just wanted to clarify that.


I did a quick google search but I couldn't find where her degrees are from. Do you have that information?


----------



## whiteleo

Sometimes RFD, dogs need a little push. I supplement my dogs with Omega 3's and that has helped their production of natural oils and have stopped scratching, I also don't get the cheap fish here in the Pacific Northwest even though this is where most of the salmon comes from. Anifunk1962, are you feeding your dogs fish?


----------



## DaneMama

anifunk1962 said:


> Here is the website I found: Cautions Against Raw Food Diets


Thanks! Here I go...

The first problem that I see, is that there are no references. Where is she getting the information that she is boldly stating in her Intro, Discussion, Results, and Significant Findings? That is the main question for me? If she cannot prove that she got that info somewhere else, then it must be plagierized or her own opinion on things (which is clearly not scientific).

Because of that I cannot take this as real scientific research. A real full blown scientific research project paper would have at least 20-100 references, if not more than that. I have done a few primary research projects and I only needed 30 references (which is a VERY fundemental part of doing research). If she really is a PhD, she should know that...(she does have a "References" page, but that just takes you to a list of other things she has writen).

Secondly, a true scientific study is MUCH, MUCH harder to read. Trust me, I have had to read a few for school, and it is not my thing. Weeding through all the statistical data (which I see none in her paper, other than unsupported percentage numbers that appear out of no where), charts, tables, etc is tough. It takes practice to read scientific research projects, and actually be able to get something out of it.

Thirdly, this is not a published study. That means that it is not peer reviewed. This also supports that this is not a scientific study and should be overlooked. Scientific research projects have to be reviewed by a group of peers for it to mean something. If a group (usually consisting of a LOT of people) sees that a certain study is worth publishing, it is. It is VERY hard to get a scientific study published. One of my professors (Head of the Bio department and a very good friend of mine) has been working on writing a research paper for years now. Every time it goes into for review they send it back and say "you need more supportive data" or something like that. She is very prestigious in her world (parasitology) and has actually been able to name a species after her, which she discovered! 

Lastly, she is selling something. The name of her product pops up in the paper numerous times, everytime with a positive note. This has got to be a red flag to those who are not oriented in the scientific world. You HAVE to be cautious of people trying to sell you something, they don't necessarily care about you or your dogs, in this case, but rather their pocket book. 

To me, this is merely an opinion based paper, not one based on scientific findings.

*ETA*: Her procedures and variables seem weak to me. To really get good results I would have to say the structure of a similar study would have to be much more controlled and organized. The fact that she let the families of all the dogs/cats, rate their health of a scale of 1-10 is just flawed. First, the families would most likely be poor judges at what they really need to look for. Not knowing exactly what it is that makes a dog/cat truly healthy. Second, I am sure that Newman fed the families of the animals supporting her product with a bunch of "facts" about how it helps with their overall health. This probably swayed their judging system immensly, which made them think that their pets were doing GREAT!!! when in actuality there might have not been enough change for them to really see. Lastly, how does she know that all the test subjects were fed what the families said they were for sure, no questions asked? Maybe the observed health of the animals seemed to be deteriorating because of outside reasons?....does that make ANY sense?

But these are just MY opinions on this whole thing...you could overlook what I have to say as well :biggrin:

*anifunk1962*

I think if your dogs are not doing well on the prey model diet, I think that you need to reevaluate what exactly you are feeding. What, how much, how often, etc, etc. 

I think that you have 100% the right attitude about this whole thing and that is great. There are people on here that have lots of info and experience that are willing to help (sometimes they come off a bit strongly LOL take it with a grain of salt 

Whatever you end up doing, good for you! Not every dog out there is lucky to have someone as willing and commited to figuring out what is best for them!


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> There is no such thing as a high-quality dry food. It is all highly processed garbage from the human food processing plants. If the ingredients weren't used it dog food they would go to the dump.


I disagree. Sound like the nonsense you would read in a copy of the Whole Dog Journal. If it wasn't for the "garbage from the human processing plants"
(which BTW makes it automatically human-grade being this implies being used for the human consumption market), the dogs would be in a lot worse shape than they are today. These by-product meals spoken about above are the most effective means of delivering animal source proteins in a ration available for any dog food manufacturer. This line of thinking does an injustice to the animal along with the worthy of the dinner table thinking adopted by the WDJ.
Companies fear the marketing sales appeal.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> I disagree. Sound like the nonsense you would read in a copy of the Whole Dog Journal.


Actually I have never read WDJ but it is a true statement. 



> If it wasn't for the "garbage from the human processing plants" (which BTW makes it automatically human-grade being this implies being used for the human consumption market), the dogs would be in a lot worse shape than they are today.


Actually, its not human grade food. Just because it comes from a human food processing plant doesn't automatically make it human grade. Once it leaves that plant, it looses its "human grade" status. BTW: Did you know it is shipped from the human food processing plant to the rendering plant in unrefigerated trucks? Can you imagine the stuff shipped in July and August?



> These by-product meals spoken about above are the most effective means of delivering animal source proteins in a ration available for any dog food manufacturer.


Nahhh ... it gets highly processed and therefore looses a lot of nutrients. It's also pretty rotten by the time it gets to the rendering plant (see paragraph above). Whole fresh meat, bone, and organ is much more effective.



> This line of thinking does an injustice to the animal along with the worthy of the dinner table thinking adopted by the WDJ.
> Companies fear the marketing sales appeal.


What line of thinking? That kibble is made of refuse from the human processing plants? Thats a true statement. You can't deny that.


----------



## claybuster

anifunk1962 said:


> I guess I just expected them to be thriving by this time and they are obviously not. Maybe I expected too much too soon.


I saw some video not too long ago, someone was feeding some raw to their dogs. The dogs didn't look all that great either IMO. The coat looked nasty and the one appeared overweight.


----------



## claybuster

anifunk1962 said:


> He also coughs frequently like something is stuck in his throat.



You never know, we have had someone on this list already with a 3K trip to the vet emergency hospital. Eating raw out of nature is one thing, you ain't getting that out of a supermarket. The butcher shop IMO is no substitute for Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom. No matter what they tell you, prey model raw is just that, a model. It’s apples and oranges compared to natures raw. One would be much better off IMO if they just fed road kill.


----------



## whiteleo

Thats why some of us won't feed food from Walmart, I wouldn't touch that garbage they sell! Some people believe meat is meat, IMO if I won't eat it my dogs don't get to eat it, I will only buy grass fed beef with no hormones added, same with all the other meat products, I just buy in bulk from my local food co-op.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> You never know, we have had someone on this list already with a 3K trip to the vet emergency hospital.


I have heard of lots of vets taking advantage of natural situations from inexperienced raw feeders. I knew this lady on one list who panicked when her dog swallowed a chicken drumstick whole. She rushed the dog to the vet and they x-rayed him and low and behold, there was a drumstick in the dogs stomach. I don't know where else they would expect it to be. The vet did emergency surgery for $2000 to remove the drumstick. If he had left it there for 4 or 5 hours it would have digested and gone away. My dogs swallow whole drumsticks pretty regularly with no problem. My point is those emergencies aren't always emergencies. The bone stuck in the digestive track is almost never an emergency and will resolve itself in a few hours.



> Eating raw out of nature is one thing, you ain't getting that out of a supermarket.


How silly, of course it is. Other than grocery store meat having a little less O3's there is no difference. Problem is that cows and chickens are never found in the wild and pigs rarely are. Same meat, same bones, and same organs.



> The butcher shop IMO is no substitute for Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdom.


I agree that wild animals are somewhat more nutritious but grocery store meat is 100 times better than the processed garbage most people feed their dogs.



> No matter what they tell you, prey model raw is just that, a model.


You should try to feed it. You just might change your mind. Yes prey model is a simulation but a pretty close reproduction. MUCH MUCH MUCH closer than any processed food.



> It’s apples and oranges compared to natures raw. One would be much better off IMO if they just fed road kill.


My dogs have eaten that also. Road kill squirrels used to be my dearly deparrted Skylar's favorite treat. I sure miss that girl.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> I saw some video not too long ago, someone was feeding some raw to their dogs. The dogs didn't look all that great either IMO. The coat looked nasty and the one appeared overweight.


Raw fed dogs can be overweight just as any other fed dog can be. It has to do with how much is fed and how much exercise the dog gets. Many healthy dog's coat can look bad if they haven't been groomed recently.


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers

whiteleo said:


> And where is Rockymountainsweetie today? I really had a hard time buying her explanations!


I believe she left us... RIP! 
No, but really I think that she got tired of everyone saying that she was crazy for wanting to go backwards and return to kibble. 
I have no opinion in the matter. Everyone does what they feel is best for their dogs!


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers

danemama08 said:


> Thanks! Here I go...
> 
> The first problem that I see, is that there are no references. Where is she getting the information that she is boldly stating in her Intro, Discussion, Results, and Significant Findings? That is the main question for me? If she cannot prove that she got that info somewhere else, then it must be plagierized or her own opinion on things (which is clearly not scientific).
> 
> Because of that I cannot take this as real scientific research. A real full blown scientific research project paper would have at least 20-100 references, if not more than that. I have done a few primary research projects and I only needed 30 references (which is a VERY fundemental part of doing research). If she really is a PhD, she should know that...(she does have a "References" page, but that just takes you to a list of other things she has writen).
> 
> Secondly, a true scientific study is MUCH, MUCH harder to read. Trust me, I have had to read a few for school, and it is not my thing. Weeding through all the statistical data (which I see none in her paper, other than unsupported percentage numbers that appear out of no where), charts, tables, etc is tough. It takes practice to read scientific research projects, and actually be able to get something out of it.
> 
> Thirdly, this is not a published study. That means that it is not peer reviewed. This also supports that this is not a scientific study and should be overlooked. Scientific research projects have to be reviewed by a group of peers for it to mean something. If a group (usually consisting of a LOT of people) sees that a certain study is worth publishing, it is. It is VERY hard to get a scientific study published. One of my professors (Head of the Bio department and a very good friend of mine) has been working on writing a research paper for years now. Every time it goes into for review they send it back and say "you need more supportive data" or something like that. She is very prestigious in her world (parasitology) and has actually been able to name a species after her, which she discovered!
> 
> Lastly, she is selling something. The name of her product pops up in the paper numerous times, everytime with a positive note. This has got to be a red flag to those who are not oriented in the scientific world. You HAVE to be cautious of people trying to sell you something, they don't necessarily care about you or your dogs, in this case, but rather their pocket book.
> 
> To me, this is merely an opinion based paper, not one based on scientific findings.
> 
> *ETA*: Her procedures and variables seem weak to me. To really get good results I would have to say the structure of a similar study would have to be much more controlled and organized. The fact that she let the families of all the dogs/cats, rate their health of a scale of 1-10 is just flawed. First, the families would most likely be poor judges at what they really need to look for. Not knowing exactly what it is that makes a dog/cat truly healthy. Second, I am sure that Newman fed the families of the animals supporting her product with a bunch of "facts" about how it helps with their overall health. This probably swayed their judging system immensly, which made them think that their pets were doing GREAT!!! when in actuality there might have not been enough change for them to really see. Lastly, how does she know that all the test subjects were fed what the families said they were for sure, no questions asked? Maybe the observed health of the animals seemed to be deteriorating because of outside reasons?....does that make ANY sense?
> 
> But these are just MY opinions on this whole thing...you could overlook what I have to say as well :biggrin:
> 
> *anifunk1962*
> 
> I think if your dogs are not doing well on the prey model diet, I think that you need to reevaluate what exactly you are feeding. What, how much, how often, etc, etc.
> 
> I think that you have 100% the right attitude about this whole thing and that is great. There are people on here that have lots of info and experience that are willing to help (sometimes they come off a bit strongly LOL take it with a grain of salt
> 
> Whatever you end up doing, good for you! Not every dog out there is lucky to have someone as willing and commited to figuring out what is best for them!


110% agree. I work for scientific researchers and the work that goes into it is WAY more then any one person can put together. 'It takes a village' you could say, to make GOOD research! 
Even that, knowing what I know about research, It is still littered with opinions and perspectives. Little to no HARD phisical evidence!!


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers

claybuster said:


> I disagree. Sound like the nonsense you would read in a copy of the Whole Dog Journal. If it wasn't for the "garbage from the human processing plants"
> (which BTW makes it automatically human-grade being this implies being used for the human consumption market), the dogs would be in a lot worse shape than they are today. These by-product meals spoken about above are the most effective means of delivering animal source proteins in a ration available for any dog food manufacturer. This line of thinking does an injustice to the animal along with the worthy of the dinner table thinking adopted by the WDJ.
> Companies fear the marketing sales appeal.


And you are STILL trying to compair a kibble diet to a RAW diet. You cannot compair an apple to an orange. We all understand that you feel that your KIBBLE is superior to other KIBBLES, but you can NOT compair it to a RAW diet!!! It just doesn't work!! Take your kibble to a kibble thread and stop trying to sell up your kibble for raw. The are different and it really is getting tireing to see the same things copied and pasted onto EVERYTHING!! Seriously! Find something else to prove as a point. You feed kibble, wether it is in a 'granular' (ie, still cooked and processed) or if it is in a small little compressed shape that makes humane excited to see a new shape the their dogs food, so it 'has to be better, right??' It is all still kibble. If anyone wants to buy it for their dog, we will send them to you and you are more then welcome to talk their ears off about all that stuff. You obviously do not have a 'fan club for Adaby' on this site and I think that a lot of people won't buy it now that it is being pushed so hard! 
I have added a couple of pictures to compair the two... Oh wait, you can't they are different. As you can see! :biggrin:


----------



## anifunk1962

RawFedDogs said:


> None of these ae good things. Exactly what are you feeding? If I remember correctly you started feeding raw a few months ago. The dog getting fat is obviously eating too much for the amount of exercise he is getting. Remember that the volume of raw food will almost always be less than the volume of kibble fed to the same dog because the dog utilizes 100% of the raw food and maybe 50% of kibble.
> 
> No, you are not expecting too much. They should be thriving. I think you have been raw feeding 3 or 4 months or more and you should see great improvement. Thats why I asked exactly what you are feeding.


I started feeding raw on April 20. They get mostly chicken because it's hard to get much of a variety here. I fed them one batch of turkey wings. They get chicken necks a lot and seem to like them, chicken quarters, beef heart, chicken hearts, livers and gizzards. Sometimes they get beef and pork but not that often because of the expense (I'm out of work right now). The big dog (the fat one) likes beef kidney but the Jack Russell smells it and walks away from it. (I don't blame him - it stinks.) They get canned mackerel once a week with a raw egg and chicken liver. 

The dog that's getting fat doesn't get too much exercise because he has a sore leg. He will run some but not that much. I take them both outside about 6 days a week for sometimes an hour. The Jack Russell gets plenty of exercise but the mixed breed mostly walks and not very fast.


----------



## anifunk1962

RawFedDogs said:


> I did a quick google search but I couldn't find where her degrees are from. Do you have that information?


No -- I only saw the initials after her name but don't know where her degrees came from.


----------



## anifunk1962

whiteleo said:


> Sometimes RFD, dogs need a little push. I supplement my dogs with Omega 3's and that has helped their production of natural oils and have stopped scratching, I also don't get the cheap fish here in the Pacific Northwest even though this is where most of the salmon comes from. Anifunk1962, are you feeding your dogs fish?


Yes -- they get canned mackerel once a week with a raw egg and chicken liver (if I remember to thaw it).


----------



## anifunk1962

danemama08 said:


> Thanks! Here I go...
> 
> The first problem that I see, is that there are no references. Where is she getting the information that she is boldly stating in her Intro, Discussion, Results, and Significant Findings? That is the main question for me? If she cannot prove that she got that info somewhere else, then it must be plagierized or her own opinion on things (which is clearly not scientific).
> 
> Because of that I cannot take this as real scientific research. A real full blown scientific research project paper would have at least 20-100 references, if not more than that. I have done a few primary research projects and I only needed 30 references (which is a VERY fundemental part of doing research). If she really is a PhD, she should know that...(she does have a "References" page, but that just takes you to a list of other things she has writen).
> 
> Secondly, a true scientific study is MUCH, MUCH harder to read. Trust me, I have had to read a few for school, and it is not my thing. Weeding through all the statistical data (which I see none in her paper, other than unsupported percentage numbers that appear out of no where), charts, tables, etc is tough. It takes practice to read scientific research projects, and actually be able to get something out of it.
> 
> Thirdly, this is not a published study. That means that it is not peer reviewed. This also supports that this is not a scientific study and should be overlooked. Scientific research projects have to be reviewed by a group of peers for it to mean something. If a group (usually consisting of a LOT of people) sees that a certain study is worth publishing, it is. It is VERY hard to get a scientific study published. One of my professors (Head of the Bio department and a very good friend of mine) has been working on writing a research paper for years now. Every time it goes into for review they send it back and say "you need more supportive data" or something like that. She is very prestigious in her world (parasitology) and has actually been able to name a species after her, which she discovered!
> 
> Lastly, she is selling something. The name of her product pops up in the paper numerous times, everytime with a positive note. This has got to be a red flag to those who are not oriented in the scientific world. You HAVE to be cautious of people trying to sell you something, they don't necessarily care about you or your dogs, in this case, but rather their pocket book.
> 
> To me, this is merely an opinion based paper, not one based on scientific findings.
> 
> *ETA*: Her procedures and variables seem weak to me. To really get good results I would have to say the structure of a similar study would have to be much more controlled and organized. The fact that she let the families of all the dogs/cats, rate their health of a scale of 1-10 is just flawed. First, the families would most likely be poor judges at what they really need to look for. Not knowing exactly what it is that makes a dog/cat truly healthy. Second, I am sure that Newman fed the families of the animals supporting her product with a bunch of "facts" about how it helps with their overall health. This probably swayed their judging system immensly, which made them think that their pets were doing GREAT!!! when in actuality there might have not been enough change for them to really see. Lastly, how does she know that all the test subjects were fed what the families said they were for sure, no questions asked? Maybe the observed health of the animals seemed to be deteriorating because of outside reasons?....does that make ANY sense?
> 
> But these are just MY opinions on this whole thing...you could overlook what I have to say as well :biggrin:
> 
> *anifunk1962*
> 
> I think if your dogs are not doing well on the prey model diet, I think that you need to reevaluate what exactly you are feeding. What, how much, how often, etc, etc.
> 
> I think that you have 100% the right attitude about this whole thing and that is great. There are people on here that have lots of info and experience that are willing to help (sometimes they come off a bit strongly LOL take it with a grain of salt
> 
> Whatever you end up doing, good for you! Not every dog out there is lucky to have someone as willing and commited to figuring out what is best for them!


Thanks. I guess I'm gullible and believe everything I read. I feel better knowing that maybe I'm not killing my dogs after all.


----------



## anifunk1962

claybuster said:


> I saw some video not too long ago, someone was feeding some raw to their dogs. The dogs didn't look all that great either IMO. The coat looked nasty and the one appeared overweight.


Maybe the video was mine.  A fat dog with a nasty looking coat? Yep, that's Barret, my collie/terrier mix.


----------



## anifunk1962

Sorry I was hard on you, RFD. I'm feeling a little stressed and was afraid I was killing my dogs. 

Thanks to everybody who contributed to this conversation. I really appreciate it. Thanks for all the suggestions and advice. 

I'm not sure what to do or how long I'll be able to continue the raw diet because of the money. Does it hurt them if they get chicken all the time -- along with fish once a week? I can afford that -- leg quarters, necks, livers, hearts, gizzards. It's the beef and pork that break the bank, and I haven't been able to find any deals around here, like finding a butcher who throws meat out or sells it cheap. 

I do feel better, though. I've suspected for a while that the older dog (the fat one) may have a thyroid problem because he gains weight too easy and is very lazy. I was just afraid (after reading that other website) that I was making his condition worse.


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers

anifunk1962 said:


> Sorry I was hard on you, RFD. I'm feeling a little stressed and was afraid I was killing my dogs.
> 
> Thanks to everybody who contributed to this conversation. I really appreciate it. Thanks for all the suggestions and advice.
> 
> I'm not sure what to do or how long I'll be able to continue the raw diet because of the money. Does it hurt them if they get chicken all the time -- along with fish once a week? I can afford that -- leg quarters, necks, livers, hearts, gizzards. It's the beef and pork that break the bank, and I haven't been able to find any deals around here, like finding a butcher who throws meat out or sells it cheap.
> 
> I do feel better, though. I've suspected for a while that the older dog (the fat one) may have a thyroid problem because he gains weight too easy and is very lazy. I was just afraid (after reading that other website) that I was making his condition worse.



You are not making your dog worse. Have you tried to post adds on places like craigslist, kijiji.com and freecycle.com? Those are some great places to find people that are looking to clean out their freezers. I have had most luck with focusing my adds to the hunters, farmers, any butchers that might be reading and to people that are moving and can't take their frozen food with them. I just got ~50-60 lbs of pork (wild boar) from a guy that just wanted it out for this years hunting season. He gave it to me. I have had some people that have asked for like, $20 or something. But it really does work and it helps!
Hehe, and don't worry about RFD. He can handel it. He dishes it out pretty well sometimes too. If you have any other questions, don't be afraid to ask. That is what the forum is for.


----------



## whiteleo

Just cut your portions way down for the fat one!:biggrin: My female loves to eat, she gains weight just looking at her brothers food. Leo must have a much higher metabolism because he gets fed more than she does and the exercise is about equal for both, she even goes to swim therapy twice a week and he is still much thinner than her.


----------



## DaneMama

anifunk1962 said:


> Thanks. I guess I'm gullible and believe everything I read. I feel better knowing that maybe I'm not killing my dogs after all.


Its not about being gullible. Don't feel bad about having second thoughts about something, that is why you ask questions. At least you are not one of the people who 100% fall for what just ONE person thinks is fact. Its not easy to know what is real research if you have no experience in dealing with scientific research...its taken me years to get sufficient at it and I still don't care for it much, but I can point out very easy that the website you found had 0% scientific research findings on it!



anifunk1962 said:


> Sorry I was hard on you, RFD. I'm feeling a little stressed and was afraid I was killing my dogs.
> 
> Thanks to everybody who contributed to this conversation. I really appreciate it. Thanks for all the suggestions and advice.
> 
> I'm not sure what to do or how long I'll be able to continue the raw diet because of the money. Does it hurt them if they get chicken all the time -- along with fish once a week? I can afford that -- leg quarters, necks, livers, hearts, gizzards. It's the beef and pork that break the bank, and I haven't been able to find any deals around here, like finding a butcher who throws meat out or sells it cheap.
> 
> I do feel better, though. I've suspected for a while that the older dog (the fat one) may have a thyroid problem because he gains weight too easy and is very lazy. I was just afraid (after reading that other website) that I was making his condition worse.


Seems to me that you need a bit more variety in their diet, and that might contribute to why your dogs don't seem or appear to be as healthy as you think they should on a raw diet. I would say that you definitely need to try and add a bit more fish to their diet, especially fresh fish if you can get it. Maybe try an asian market if you have one? They usually have really good deals on fresh fish. And if getting fresh fish is out of the picture, supplement with fish oil capsules which are very good for their skin and coat (might be why your dogs coats look dull). You can get them at the grocery store.

If one of your dogs is gaining weight, just feed him less. Its not all about how much exercise he is getting, but it sounds to me that he might need a bit more exercise as well. Even if the dog is super lazy, cutting back the diet will be better than nothing, since the amount of energy he needs is lower due to the lack of physical activity.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Raw fed dogs can be overweight just as any other fed dog can be. It has to do with how much is fed and how much exercise the dog gets. Many healthy dog's coat can look bad if they haven't been groomed recently.


Nonsense...dogs become overweight for one reason only and that would be improperly structured diets. Owners are often blamed for lack of exercise and too many treats which is total BS. If you have an overweight dog that is raw fed the same holds true, the fault of improperly structured diet.


----------



## RawFedDogs

I guess thats more Abady stuff. More calories taken in than burned up equals weight gain. That is true of any animal in the world. More exercise equals more calories burned up. Thats also true of any animal in the world. A prey model raw diet is properly structured. Wolves have been eating it for millions of years. Most raw fed dogs if given the opportunity to eat all they want will get fat because they love the food so much. I know mine would.

How can one person make so many erroneous statements?


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> I guess thats more Abady stuff. More calories taken in than burned up equals weight gain. That is true of any animal in the world. More exercise equals more calories burned up. Thats also true of any animal in the world. A prey model raw diet is properly structured. Wolves have been eating it for millions of years. Most raw fed dogs if given the opportunity to eat all they want will get fat because they love the food so much. I know mine would.
> 
> How can one person make so many erroneous statements?




When's the last time you saw a fat wolf? You make no sense. The calories burned vs. exercise applies to humans, not animals. Dogs become fat due to improperly structured diets. When dogs are lazy with little to no exercise they eat less. You seem confused again which in not uncommon.


----------



## RawFedDogs

This is really getting old. You need to sit down and read some academic material. This Abady stuff really has your mind screwed up. If you studied real data, you would learn that wild wolves often walk over 30 miles in a day. They maintain territories that cover over 100 sq miles. Wolves usually don't eat every day. Hence, no or very few fat wolves. Lots of exercise, little food. 

I never saw a dog that ate less because of little exercise. Usually its the other way around. I am not confused. I actually do real research on canine behavior and nutrition and study real material. Not promotional material of a kibble mfg. Get real, CB, you are going off the deep end.


----------



## CorgiPaws

claybuster said:


> When's the last time you saw a fat wolf?


When is the last time you saw a wolf cooped up indoors without any running and playing? (real wolf- not hybrid)
Moreover, when was the last time you saw a wild wolf with a constant food supply who actually ate every day without any exercise whatsoever?



claybuster said:


> The calories burned vs. exercise applies to humans, not animals.


Are you kidding me? It applies to any animal. Calories are energy, when not used they turn into fat. This is not human specific.



claybuster said:


> When dogs are lazy with little to no exercise they eat less. You seem confused again which in not uncommon.


Not so. Most dogs will eat as much as you give them and whatever else they can get their paws on. My dogs will eat what I give them on a day they lounge around the house, as they will on a day full of activity.



claybuster said:


> You seem confused again which in not uncommon.


You seem entirely brainwashed by Abady, which is not uncommon.


----------



## anifunk1962

EnglishBullTerriers said:


> You are not making your dog worse. Have you tried to post adds on places like craigslist, kijiji.com and freecycle.com? Those are some great places to find people that are looking to clean out their freezers. I have had most luck with focusing my adds to the hunters, farmers, any butchers that might be reading and to people that are moving and can't take their frozen food with them. I just got ~50-60 lbs of pork (wild boar) from a guy that just wanted it out for this years hunting season. He gave it to me. I have had some people that have asked for like, $20 or something. But it really does work and it helps!
> Hehe, and don't worry about RFD. He can handel it. He dishes it out pretty well sometimes too. If you have any other questions, don't be afraid to ask. That is what the forum is for.


No, I haven't tried advertising for meat because I thought, by the time I paid for gas to go get it, I could just buy it at the market. Also, when I mentioned it to my son, he asked how could I trust people I didn't know to give me meat that was okay for our dogs to eat. I have mentioned to my friends and family about giving me their old meat if they clean out their freezers and they said they would but I guess nobody's cleaning out their freezer yet.


----------



## anifunk1962

whiteleo said:


> Just cut your portions way down for the fat one!:biggrin: My female loves to eat, she gains weight just looking at her brothers food. Leo must have a much higher metabolism because he gets fed more than she does and the exercise is about equal for both, she even goes to swim therapy twice a week and he is still much thinner than her.


I'm going to try that. It seems like he doesn't eat that much now, though. When I take them both outside, they scrounge around until they find something to eat, like old flower bulbs, grass or whatever else they find. They act like they're starving.


----------



## anifunk1962

danemama08 said:


> Its not about being gullible. Don't feel bad about having second thoughts about something, that is why you ask questions. At least you are not one of the people who 100% fall for what just ONE person thinks is fact. Its not easy to know what is real research if you have no experience in dealing with scientific research...its taken me years to get sufficient at it and I still don't care for it much, but I can point out very easy that the website you found had 0% scientific research findings on it!
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to me that you need a bit more variety in their diet, and that might contribute to why your dogs don't seem or appear to be as healthy as you think they should on a raw diet. I would say that you definitely need to try and add a bit more fish to their diet, especially fresh fish if you can get it. Maybe try an asian market if you have one? They usually have really good deals on fresh fish. And if getting fresh fish is out of the picture, supplement with fish oil capsules which are very good for their skin and coat (might be why your dogs coats look dull). You can get them at the grocery store.
> 
> If one of your dogs is gaining weight, just feed him less. Its not all about how much exercise he is getting, but it sounds to me that he might need a bit more exercise as well. Even if the dog is super lazy, cutting back the diet will be better than nothing, since the amount of energy he needs is lower due to the lack of physical activity.


I don't know of any Asian markets around here, and I don't have access to fresh fish. This may be a stupid question but do you use fish oil capsules for humans or do you buy ones especially for dogs?


----------



## whiteleo

If you have a costco or anything like that, just use the human grade Omega 3's they are full of sardine and anchovy oil, I use the enteric coated and the dogs get 1 cap. a day, it will really make a difference, give it a little while to work though, say at least 1 month is when I could tell a difference in my males brittle nails, and coat. As a rescue he came to me with cracked and brittle nails and breaking them all the time, even had to have one coterized once, people kept him in his crate covered with crap and pee, he didn't even know how to sit properly, he squated all the time. BASTARDS!!!!!


----------



## whiteleo

If you have a costco or anything like that, just use the human grade Omega 3's they are full of sardine and anchovy oil, I use the enteric coated and the dogs get 1 cap. a day, it will really make a difference, give it a little while to work though, say at least 1 month is when I could tell a difference in my males brittle nails, and coat. As a rescue he came to me with cracked and brittle nails and breaking them all the time, even had to have one coterized once, people kept him in his crate covered with crap and pee, he didn't even know how to sit properly, he squated all the time. BASTARDS!!!!!


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> I never saw a dog that ate less because of little exercise. Usually its the other way around. I am not confused. I actually do real research on canine behavior and nutrition and study real material. Not promotional material of a kibble mfg. Get real, CB, you are going off the deep end.


I am not interested in the veterinary science, WDJ, or Purina explanation of blame the owner not the food for overweight animals. That's your department, not mine. I have done my own independent research and witnessed the opposite of _your_ science.

In observation of my dog over the past 7 years I have noticed a trend. On a scale of 1-10, for a starting point give her a 5 on food consumption. During sm. game season here in CT, for about 16 weeks her food consumption is on the increase, give her a 6-7 on consumption. During the dogs days of summer, when she is more or less a couch potato, her consumption is on the decrease and give her a 3-4 on consumption. Her weight remains a constant. She only eats enough to meet her daily caloric need, regardless of the amount of exercise.

Not enough exercise, too many treats IS the industry explanation justifying their cheap diets. I feel that is deception. These ideas are institutionalized and by no means innocent mistakes. And despite you taking your dogs nutrition to a higher level and having a strong knowledge in nutrition, your explanations to problems are that of industry making.

They are designed by nature to be ready for feast or famine. They do not become overweight on either end of that spectrum, whether it be gorging themselves on a kill or logging 30 miles to get some.

They do become fat on improperly structured diets.

You had mentioned you know of some overweight dogs on RAW. I am guessing that does not happen often and more or less a rarity, assuming there are no other reasons like medical. A RAW diet is an inherently properly structured diet and that would be the reason you will not find a lot of chubby raw fed dogs.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> I am not interested in the veterinary science, WDJ, or Purina explanation of blame the owner not the food for overweight animals. That's your department, not mine. I have done my own independent research and witnessed the opposite of _your_ science.


Obviously you aren't interested in anything other than Abady promotional material. You really ought to read some other sources.



> In observation of my dog over the past 7 years I have noticed a trend. On a scale of 1-10, for a starting point give her a 5 on food consumption. During sm. game season here in CT, for about 16 weeks her food consumption is on the increase, give her a 6-7 on consumption. During the dogs days of summer, when she is more or less a couch potato, her consumption is on the decrease and give her a 3-4 on consumption. Her weight remains a constant. She only eats enough to meet her daily caloric need, regardless of the amount of exercise.


Thank you. What you just said in that paragraph is, "RFD is right. That is exactly what happens with my dog."



> Not enough exercise, too many treats IS the industry explanation justifying their cheap diets. I feel that is deception.


"Feelings" are not very scientific and inapproptriate in this discusion. We want facts of which you have been very short of. I will give you one thing ... many (most) kibbles have an over abundance of sugar which is high in calories and this causes many dogs to get fat because of excess calories.



> You had mentioned you know of some overweight dogs on RAW. I am guessing that does not happen often and more or less a rarity, assuming there are no other reasons like medical.


It is very rare but it happens. The reason is not what you think. Raw feeders are very sceptical in the beginning and are very conscious of feeding their dogs the right amount. Many learn very early that if you over feed a newly switched dog, digestive problems result. One of the early things raw feeders learn is how to judge their dogs build and adjust food volume accordingly. Yes, a prey model raw diet is properly structured automatically but that has nothing to do with weight gain.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> Thank you. What you just said in that paragraph is, "RFD is right. That is exactly what happens with my dog."


Nope. You stated prior with little to no exercise dogs will continue to eat the same amounts and can get fat. I'm telling you that does not happen with my dog. Dogs do not get fat from caloires, they get fat from improperly structured feeds.


----------



## anifunk1962

whiteleo said:


> If you have a costco or anything like that, just use the human grade Omega 3's they are full of sardine and anchovy oil, I use the enteric coated and the dogs get 1 cap. a day, it will really make a difference, give it a little while to work though, say at least 1 month is when I could tell a difference in my males brittle nails, and coat. As a rescue he came to me with cracked and brittle nails and breaking them all the time, even had to have one coterized once, people kept him in his crate covered with crap and pee, he didn't even know how to sit properly, he squated all the time. BASTARDS!!!!!


Thanks for the advice! I don't have a CostCo in my area but there is a Super Wal-Mart. I think I can find fish oil capsules there. How do you get a dog to take the pills?

That's sad about the dog that you rescued. Makes me want to cry, thinking about how he was mistreated.  I can't even watch the commercials that show abused animals or dogs in cages waiting to be adopted or put to sleep without crying.


----------



## MandyPug

claybuster said:


> Nope. You stated prior with little to no exercise dogs will continue to eat the same amounts and can get fat. *I'm telling you that does not happen with my dog.* Dogs do not get fat from caloires, they get fat from improperly structured feeds.


That's *with your one dog*, i can tell you right now if given the chance my 3 would eat until they're sick be it kibble, canned, raw, or your by-product crumb product that you love so much. More calories consumed than burned equals excess storage of fat whether the animal is eating canned, kibble, raw, or by-product crumbs! If they're not as active, my dogs (and many of my clients' dogs) will eat the exact same amount as if they're active coz at all times they'd eat anything edible or not in their paths.


----------



## whiteleo

I use a little dab of peanut butter to give the dogs their pills, some use cheese, other use hotdogs, (yuck) whatever works, some dogs will take them without anything.


----------



## claybuster

MandyPug said:


> That's *with your one dog*, i can tell you right now. ...


They're all built the same and only eat until their caloric intake needs are met.
Dog's do not get fat from too many treats and not enough exercise. That is nothing more than industry propaganda. They get fat from improperly structured feeds. You can have one bowl of Total or ten bowls of X.
You can have one cup of RAW or 20 Gains Burgers. The properly structured feed will yield the best results. Blame the owner not the food. Sorry, I don't buy into that line of thinking, that is Mr. Hills and Mr. Purina talking.


----------



## MandyPug

claybuster said:


> They're all built the same and only eat until their caloric intake needs are met.
> Dog's do not get fat from too many treats and not enough exercise. That is nothing more than industry propaganda. They get fat from improperly structured feeds. You can have one bowl of Total or ten bowls of X.
> You can have one cup of RAW or 20 Gains Burgers. The properly structured feed will yield the best results. Blame the owner not the food. Sorry, I don't buy into that line of thinking, that is Mr. Hills and Mr. Purina talking.


So what food do you think i feed Mr.By-Product Crumb dude?

Take a friggin guess.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> They're all built the same and only eat until their caloric intake needs are met.


CB, you need to retake 6th grade health class. I think you will learn a lot. :smile:

Dogs eat until their stomachs are full. They don't count calories. If calories taken in exceed calories burned, the animal (any animal) gains weight. Thats basic nutrition. Like I said, 6th grade stuff. That was around long before any of the dog foods.

*ETA:* I am in the process of loosing weight. I have lost 35lbs in the last 4 months. I did it by reducing calories and increasing exercise. Nothing else.


----------



## claybuster

MandyPug said:


> So what food do you think i feed Mr.By-Product Crumb dude?
> 
> Take a friggin guess.


It's doesn't friggin matter what you feed. It's about concepts over your head. You have clients with your attitude? What's this extra activity and stress these client dogs you see is all about that doesn't increase food consumption? Are they jumping through little hoops in the backyard at agility day and romping around with the other dogs?

Do really expect me to believe that dogs food consumption does not increase upon added work and stress? And consumption does not decrease when feeling lazy with no activity? These nutritional classes folks are talking about, do they come by way of yellow school buses by any chance?


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> CB, you need to retake 6th grade health class. I think you will learn a lot. :smile:
> 
> Dogs eat until their stomachs are full. They don't count calories. If calories taken in exceed calories burned, the animal (any animal) gains weight. Thats basic nutrition. Like I said, 6th grade stuff. That was around long before any of the dog foods.
> 
> *ETA:* I am in the process of loosing weight. I have lost 35lbs in the last 4 months. I did it by reducing calories and increasing exercise. Nothing else.


You are not a dog, and have different bodies...go back to 1st grade and start over. Get back on the yellow school bus with pug mama.:biggrin:


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> *ETA:* I am in the process of loosing weight. I have lost 35lbs in the last 4 months. I did it by reducing calories and increasing exercise. Nothing else.


Hey good luck with that and continued success!


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> Hey good luck with that and continued success!


Stop being nice. You ruin the whole thing. :smile:

Thanks for your comment.


----------



## MandyPug

claybuster said:


> It's doesn't friggin matter what you feed. It's about concepts over your head. You have clients with your attitude? What's this extra activity and stress these client dogs you see is all about that doesn't increase food consumption? Are they jumping through little hoops in the backyard at agility day and romping around with the other dogs?
> 
> Do really expect me to believe that dogs food consumption does not increase upon added work and stress? And consumption does not decrease when feeling lazy with no activity? These nutritional classes folks are talking about, do they come by way of yellow school buses by any chance?


Well you made a comment about feeding one cup of raw to 20 burgers of something. I feed prey model raw and my dogs will gorge themselves on it no matter what level of exercise i give them and guess what! They'll gain weight if they consume more than they burn!

I hardly believe your company's scare tactics telling you every biology textbook and course out there is sponsored by Hills or Purina. Have you even taken a biology course in high school or university? Or is all you believe written by your beloved Abady. 

My clients range from SAR dogs and K9 Unit dogs to national level agility competitors to jogging buddies to house pets. Yes these dogs will likely be fed more when they're burning more calories but if given the same amount they're fed in the on season in the off season they'll gladly gorge on it and gain weight. Be it raw, kibble, canned, dehydrated, homecooked; a dog that eats more calories than it burns will gain weight. Very few of my clients' dogs and none of the dogs i've ever had will self regulate. My dogs certainly will eat as much as they possibly can, my three certainly aren't going to go "oh well i didn't do much exercise today i shouldn't eat that much" or " i did tons of working out today i deserve to gorge!" most of the time they'll just eat and eat and eat until all the food is gone. 

I also hardly believe your thoughts that your processed chemical filled by-product grounds is the optimal diet for anything but pigs (and even pigs deserve better!). Expand your mind and read something not published by the industry on Canines and their bodies. It's out there... Maybe get a degree in biology, or do you think every word out there in the bio books about canines is put there by Mr.Purina or Mr.Hills?


----------



## Guest

RawFedDogs said:


> I have lost 35lbs in the last 4 months. I did it by reducing calories and increasing exercise. Nothing else.


I lost 5 pounds yesterday by getting a haircut and trimming my toenails. Nothing else.


----------



## RawFedDogs

LabbieMama said:


> I lost 5 pounds yesterday by getting a haircut and trimming my toenails. Nothing else.


Did most of the loss come from the toenails? :biggrin:


----------



## DaneMama

So I've been on vacation, and I have to say that this has gotten ridiculous. 

CB...no one cares what you claim on here. We all know that you are way wrong!

I don't even know why you bother anymore...if we are all the idiots, why do you keep coming back and trying to push your points here?

FYI: Metabolism mechanisims are exactly the same across the majority of mammals. Dogs and humans are both mammals. They metabolize food the exact same way that we do.

Here is a great link to some very basic information, read through it...you just may learn something:

Metabolism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PS...in none of the 120+ references at the bottom of the page are Mr. Hills, Mr. Purina OR Mr. Abady.


----------



## CorgiPaws

claybuster said:


> It's doesn't friggin matter what you feed. It's about concepts over your head.


CB, if you are so friggin superior to all else on this forum why do you even bother coming back? You claim everyone is so brainwashed by marketing, but you believe ANYTHING abady tells you without so much as looking into it yourself. What are you going to claim in a couple years when they release a vegetarian formula for dogs?



claybuster said:


> Do really expect me to believe that dogs food consumption does not increase upon added work and stress?


No CB, no one expects that of you- we know better than to expect you to think with logic.



claybuster said:


> And consumption does not decrease when feeling lazy with no activity?


Most definately not. My dogs will down whatever I give them on a lazy day, and still wait for more. Dogs do not count calories. They do not think like that. They eat until their tummies are content, and then some.


----------



## Unosmom

this whole thread is quite amusing, but I'll have to side with the majority, its a basic process of calorie input and output, I think I learned this in 1st grade.


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers

anifunk1962 said:


> No, I haven't tried advertising for meat because I thought, by the time I paid for gas to go get it, I could just buy it at the market. Also, when I mentioned it to my son, he asked how could I trust people I didn't know to give me meat that was okay for our dogs to eat. I have mentioned to my friends and family about giving me their old meat if they clean out their freezers and they said they would but I guess nobody's cleaning out their freezer yet.


Try it once, see how it goes and I think that you would be supprised how many people (especially hinters and such) will respond. A lot of times, they might even meet you half way somewhere. The gas in most cases is less then if you were to spend in to go to the store and then the time and money to buy it and drive home. Just a thougt/idea. The meat is usually not that bad at all too. I have had people give/sell me stuff that I ate. One lady was moving and couldn't take her food in the freezer, me and the dogs ate well for a few days! She had just been to the store in the last few weeks and though that they would eat all of the food, but ended up not able to and had to find somewhere for it! 
You can ask for free stuff or make sure that you emphasize that it needs to be CHEAP! That is what I did. I have gotten free meat and I have had some people say, $20 and you can have all of it. and I got a bunch of stuff!! Way less then I would have paid for a portion at the store. That is one of the only ways I have made it some months lately! I was out of a job for almost 4 months and still fed raw. It was hard, but I did it. 
Good luck and I hope things turn around for you again!  :wink:


----------



## EnglishBullTerriers

whiteleo said:


> I use a little dab of peanut butter to give the dogs their pills, some use cheese, other use hotdogs, (yuck) whatever works, some dogs will take them without anything.


My dogs know exactly what, lets go get some peanut butter, means. It means that it is time to take some pills. Titus has had to be on Acepromazine on ocassions for stress and anxiety and when he would get a pill, Owen would get some peanut butter also. Owen has been having a time with the fleas and mosquitos this summer and he gets a benadril or other med of that nature on ocassion when it gets bad and he can't stop itching and the same thing, Owen gets a pill and Titus gets some peanut butter. That way, they are both getting the peanut butter and the dogs don't taste the pill cause, really, who can taste anything through peanut butter!


----------



## whiteleo

Those bull terriers, they love anything as long as their human is giving it to them!


----------



## claybuster

danemama08 said:


> So I've been on vacation, and I have to say that this has gotten ridiculous.
> 
> CB...no one cares what you claim on here. We all know that you are way wrong!
> 
> I don't even know why you bother anymore...if we are all the idiots, why do you keep coming back and trying to push your points here?
> 
> FYI: Metabolism mechanisims are exactly the same across the majority of mammals. Dogs and humans are both mammals. They metabolize food the exact same way that we do.
> 
> Here is a great link to some very basic information, read through it...you just may learn something:
> 
> Metabolism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> PS...in none of the 120+ references at the bottom of the page are Mr. Hills, Mr. Purina OR Mr. Abady.


I'm not claiming anything, just giving you facts. I never said anybody was an idiot. Also not trying to push any "points", I just disagree to what is being claimed in this thread.

Dietary needs are varied amongst mammals. Dogs and cats both being carnivores sit at the top of the food chain, unlike other mammals. Any connections your want to make between metabolisms is fine, but irrelevant to say the least.

None of you here that I know of has a working dog that works, a sled dog that pulls, a herding dog that herds, a hunting dog that hunts, etc. When I speak of activity and stress and increases and decreases in food consumption, I speak from experience. You all may find that to be absurd, but I hate to bust your bubble, but that is the way it works. Just because you don't have the experience in the area to witness that, does not mean it doesn't happen. I think if you all have dogs that are seemingly constantly hungry, 100% all of the time, work or no work, 24/7, maybe that is an indication of problems with the diet.

There is another variable to consider when you think of increases and decreases in food consumption and that is the weather. Owners who kennel dogs outside full time year round will notices increases and decreases between winter/summer and consumption more or less a constant spring/fall.
Now, I don't think any of you kennel your dogs exclusively outdoors, but I'm sure you have opinion on that subject like you're crazy man, that doesn’t happen, go read this book, you've fallen off the deep end, etc. Again, just like work/stress, the weather can have an impact on food consumption. Hey guess what? Owners feedings properly structure diets (regardless of type and that includes whole prey model) for their dogs kenneled outdoors, will not notice problems with weight just because summer or winter rolls around. That may sound impossible but that is how it works because....they will only consume the amount of calories needed to fuel the body. They do not become fat from over ingesting cals, they become fat because of improperly structured diets.

No need for all the negativity folks...just because you may happen to disagree with what is being said, no need take conservation to a level of name calling, bitterness, rudeness, etc. Some of you seem young and heading in the direction of high blood pressure meds by the time you hit 25. Give it until at least the 40's, which I am on the downside of.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> No need for all the negativity folks...just because you may happen to disagree with what is being said, no need take conservation to a level of name calling, bitterness, rudeness, etc. Some of you seem young and heading in the direction of high blood pressure meds by the time you hit 25. Give it until at least the 40's, which I am on the downside of.


This is way beyond disagreeing. Where on earth did you get his stuff? Even Abady is not crazy enough to print this. Anyone who has had even most basic of biology courses knows better than this. You are way past having a discussion with but honestly I would like to know where you got this stuff then I won't make another post on this.


----------



## claybuster

RawFedDogs said:


> This is way beyond disagreeing. Where on earth did you get his stuff? Even Abady is not crazy enough to print this. Anyone who has had even most basic of biology courses knows better than this. You are way past having a discussion with but honestly I would like to know where you got this stuff then I won't make another post on this.


Well, then I guess the debate is over...I win! :biggrin:

The science to back it up:



> It is a scientific fact that dogs consume only the amount of food needed to deliver the number of calories they require. Calories are the body's fuel, they needed to fuel growth and reproduction. Animals must receive the number of calories they require to run all of their bodily functions and to fuel the production of all of its tissues and processes. When energy is undersupplied in a ration, the body will use the energy reserved for tissue-building to make up for the shortfall, potentially damaging the body.
> *A self-regulating mechanism prevents dogs from ingesting more calories than they require over the long-haul. Based on these incontestable scientific facts*, how can dogs become obese as a result of the over ingestion of calories. Obviously, they cannot.


Abady



Industry connected veterinarians writing books on canine nutrition want you to blame people, not the food. Too many treats, not enough exercise. It doesn't have to be that way when a feed is properly structured and can deliver. Industry high fiber high carb diets will be protected.


----------



## RawFedDogs

claybuster said:


> Well, then I guess the debate is over...I win! :biggrin:
> 
> The science to back it up:
> 
> Abady


I hate to burst your bubble (well no I don't), but that is not science. I am surprised that Abady thinks so little of his customers that he would write such junk. It just shows how stupid he thinks ya'll are. You have not shown one piece of scientific evidence since you came to this board with your wild rantings and unsubstantiated claims. A kibble company's promotional material is NOT science.



> Industry connected veterinarians writing books on canine nutrition want you to blame people, not the food.


You forget about not industry connected biologists and zoologists and animal husbandry people and thousands of others in the animal profession. Not one of which will back up Abady's fiction.



> Too many treats, not enough exercise. It doesn't have to be that way when a feed is properly structured and can deliver. Industry high fiber high carb diets will be protected.


YOu can't even say it correctly. Too many calories and not enough exercise. Treats don't have anyting to do with it. It's the calories/exercise ... nothing more.

Is your maiden name Abady? :smile:


----------



## claybuster

Abady Science and Technology is the best in the business. If they were printing lies then someone could file lawsuit. No one has filed lawsuit, because they don't have any science to disprove what they say (and neither do you). The last thing industry wants to hear about is science, they want you to believe it is all subjective. Did you ever wonder that, why haven't they been sued for printing lies? Because they print the truth and industry science cannot disprove what they stating.


----------



## BabyHusky

ok i've been waiting and waiting, and i decided to finally post. there are many good claims and discussions between people regarding the topic of the post so i have yet to lock the forum.

claybuster, please do not turn every discussion in recent threads to an "abady is best because abady said so" debate. it is obvious at this point that both sides have hit a wall. i know RFD is just continuing because he likes it hahaha. but really, do not turn every thread to an Abady commercial. i would appreciate it if you could put forth facts from this point on to back up your claims. not facts per Abady, but facts. Not every article, study, etc out there not by Abady is endorsed by Hills, Purina, etc and you know it. 

this is a dog nutrition forum, not a place for one person to continue to push their own beliefs without facts. i would like to ask all sides to please refrain from any type of insults or jabs at one another. keep it civil people.


----------



## CorgiPaws

claybuster said:


> Abady Science and Technology is the best in the business.


And I'm guessing Abady told you that? :biggrin:



claybuster said:


> If they were printing lies then someone could file lawsuit.


*Beneful* has "a perfect balance of wholesome ingredients"
*Pedigree* is "really good food for dogs"
*Hills *is "Precisely Balanced Nutrition to meet the Special Needs of your Pet"
*Eukanuba *"makes a good dog great"
* Iams* has PROVED their food will increase your dogs life span.
*Ol' Roy *is "Complete Nutrition"
*Kibbles N' Bits* is "100% Complete and Balanced Nutrition"
These are all claims made by dog food companies that you and I both know are total bs. Has anyone filed suit againt them fr these claims? no. The reason being the commercial dog food companies are ENTIRELY self-regulated, and have very little riles to follow. What makes you think Mr. Abady is any different?




claybuster said:


> No one has filed lawsuit, because they don't have any science to disprove what they say (and neither do you).


Show us some solid proof that what they say IS true/ And don't say "because they say so."



claybuster said:


> Did you ever wonder that, why haven't they been sued for printing lies? Because they print the truth and industry science cannot disprove what they stating.


Not so. Companies print lies all the time. See Above. Do you believe absolutely EVERYTHING you read? 











BabyHusky said:


> claybuster, please do not turn every discussion in recent threads to an "abady is best because abady said so" debate.


THANK YOU.


----------



## anifunk1962

EnglishBullTerriers said:


> Try it once, see how it goes and I think that you would be supprised how many people (especially hinters and such) will respond. A lot of times, they might even meet you half way somewhere. The gas in most cases is less then if you were to spend in to go to the store and then the time and money to buy it and drive home. Just a thougt/idea. The meat is usually not that bad at all too. I have had people give/sell me stuff that I ate. One lady was moving and couldn't take her food in the freezer, me and the dogs ate well for a few days! She had just been to the store in the last few weeks and though that they would eat all of the food, but ended up not able to and had to find somewhere for it!
> You can ask for free stuff or make sure that you emphasize that it needs to be CHEAP! That is what I did. I have gotten free meat and I have had some people say, $20 and you can have all of it. and I got a bunch of stuff!! Way less then I would have paid for a portion at the store. That is one of the only ways I have made it some months lately! I was out of a job for almost 4 months and still fed raw. It was hard, but I did it.
> Good luck and I hope things turn around for you again!  :wink:


Thanks for routing the conversation back to my problem. :smile: I guess I'm going to have to try that. I'm also going to mention again to my friends and family about giving me their old meat if they clean out their freezers before hunting season starts.


----------



## anifunk1962

claybuster said:


> I'm not claiming anything, just giving you facts. I never said anybody was an idiot. Also not trying to push any "points", I just disagree to what is being claimed in this thread.
> 
> Dietary needs are varied amongst mammals. Dogs and cats both being carnivores sit at the top of the food chain, unlike other mammals. Any connections your want to make between metabolisms is fine, but irrelevant to say the least.
> 
> None of you here that I know of has a working dog that works, a sled dog that pulls, a herding dog that herds, a hunting dog that hunts, etc. When I speak of activity and stress and increases and decreases in food consumption, I speak from experience. You all may find that to be absurd, but I hate to bust your bubble, but that is the way it works. Just because you don't have the experience in the area to witness that, does not mean it doesn't happen. I think if you all have dogs that are seemingly constantly hungry, 100% all of the time, work or no work, 24/7, maybe that is an indication of problems with the diet.
> 
> There is another variable to consider when you think of increases and decreases in food consumption and that is the weather. Owners who kennel dogs outside full time year round will notices increases and decreases between winter/summer and consumption more or less a constant spring/fall.
> Now, I don't think any of you kennel your dogs exclusively outdoors, but I'm sure you have opinion on that subject like you're crazy man, that doesn’t happen, go read this book, you've fallen off the deep end, etc. Again, just like work/stress, the weather can have an impact on food consumption. Hey guess what? Owners feedings properly structure diets (regardless of type and that includes whole prey model) for their dogs kenneled outdoors, will not notice problems with weight just because summer or winter rolls around. That may sound impossible but that is how it works because....they will only consume the amount of calories needed to fuel the body. They do not become fat from over ingesting cals, they become fat because of improperly structured diets.
> 
> No need for all the negativity folks...just because you may happen to disagree with what is being said, no need take conservation to a level of name calling, bitterness, rudeness, etc. Some of you seem young and heading in the direction of high blood pressure meds by the time you hit 25. Give it until at least the 40's, which I am on the downside of.


I think I'm lost in this conversation, and pardon me if this is a stupid question because I missed something. Claybuster: What do your dogs eat?


----------



## anifunk1962

I don't really like to admit that I don't know something that everyone else in this conversation seems to know but can someone please answer this question: What is Abady?


----------



## RawFedDogs

anifunk1962 said:


> I don't really like to admit that I don't know something that everyone else in this conversation seems to know but can someone please answer this question: What is Abady?


Abady is a dog food company. They make a grandular food that is like kibble except it isn't pressed into the little chunks. It's mainly made from chicken by-products and lard. If you google "abady" and "dog food" you will problably find a link to their web page.


----------



## claybuster

BabyHusky said:


> ok i've been waiting and waiting, and i decided to finally post. there are many good claims and discussions between people regarding the topic of the post so i have yet to lock the forum.
> 
> claybuster, please do not turn every discussion in recent threads to an "abady is best because abady said so" debate. it is obvious at this point that both sides have hit a wall. i know RFD is just continuing because he likes it hahaha. but really, do not turn every thread to an Abady commercial. i would appreciate it if you could put forth facts from this point on to back up your claims. not facts per Abady, but facts. Not every article, study, etc out there not by Abady is endorsed by Hills, Purina, etc and you know it.
> 
> this is a dog nutrition forum, not a place for one person to continue to push their own beliefs without facts. i would like to ask all sides to please refrain from any type of insults or jabs at one another. keep it civil people.


I understand what you're saying and that honestly is not my intent. I enjoy discussing the topics and try my best to avoid mentioning what I feed. If you take notice, in this thread I disagreed with RFD initial comments about blaming the owner with too many treats and not enough exercise. I think different, I don't blame the owner but rather cheap industry diets. RFD is the one who first started with what is that, more Abady stuff. Then somebody else has to jump on the bash Abady bandwagon, without me ever mentioning what I feed. And then another, and another, each displaying contempt for some reason over what I feed? That is sadly the case in other threads as well where I would like to partake in discussions and then folks have to bring up what I feed with persistent negative commentary and opinion.

I would hope to think it could be the other way around, more like inspiring some thought and conversation, rather than coming off like promoting one particular company.

You don't need to lock a thread or anything like that. I'll shut up and won't participate as much in the future. If I don't participate in topics then others won't be so inclined to bring up what I feed, and everyone will happier I guess.


----------



## DaneMama

CB: it's not that you feed Abady, I never once said that I disagree with you because of what you feed in my previous post. It is 100% your ways of thinking. I think the only reason why people mention Abady is the fact that you get 100% of your information from their website. Not because you feed their food, but more that you buy into their promotional material.

I think people are just trying to get you to branch out and research other things instead of adhering to one company's sales claims. People are just getting frustrated with you because you refuse to take the advice and research other things. Just because you research something, dies not mean you have to agree with it. There's a chance it might change your ways of thinking. Just give it a try...

In no way am I trying to be rude. Just trying to ease the tension.


----------



## jdatwood

claybuster said:


> The science to back it up:
> 
> 
> 
> It is a scientific fact that dogs consume only the amount of food needed to deliver the number of calories they require. Calories are the body's fuel.... blah blah blah
> 
> Abady
Click to expand...

Funny, this "scientific article" from Abady stating the "facts" you're here backing up isn't published anywhere. The ONLY places I can even find information on it are

1. On a VERY OLD Geocities web page
Dogs Get Obese?
(Abady Singapore??? )

2. In another dog forum almost 2 years ago 
Obesity in Dogs? An Article by Robert Abady - Dog Community, Dog Pictures, Dog Forum & Information ? Dog.community
(the cc431 user that's posting seems awfully similar to our beloved Claybuster. They even have the same dog... http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c231/Claybuster_AA/Zoe/zoehunt08A.jpg He's been removed from that forum by the admins HMMMM....)

Methinks such a GREAT scientist with THE FINAL WORD on dog nutrition would certainly have his "articles" posted up in other places, no? Most articles I've seen are submitted far and wide so as to receive the most attention, especially in this lovely digital age we call the Intarwebz

Just strikes me funny that the only mentions you'll really find on Abady are either from people selling the food (getting paid to mention it) or those that appear to be..... wait for it.... getting paid to talk about it :wink:



RawFedDogs said:


> Is your maiden name Abady? :smile:


Probably not BUT I have a feeling that Abady probably gives him free food or even pays him to post this Abady psychobabble.


Love it or hate it, this whole Abady thing has me scared.... It reminds me too much of the false profits we've seen over the past century. They claim to know it all and people follow them with blind faith. (and no, I do no support Hills or ANY kibble manufacturer, nor any scientist that supports them)


----------



## claybuster

jdatwood said:


> Funny, this "scientific article" from Abady stating the "facts" you're here backing up isn't published anywhere. The ONLY places I can even find information on it are
> 
> 1. On a VERY OLD Geocities web page
> Dogs Get Obese?
> (Abady Singapore??? )
> 
> 2. In another dog forum almost 2 years ago
> Obesity in Dogs? An Article by Robert Abady - Dog Community, Dog Pictures, Dog Forum & Information ? Dog.community
> (the cc431 user that's posting seems awfully similar to our beloved Claybuster. They even have the same dog... http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c231/Claybuster_AA/Zoe/zoehunt08A.jpg He's been removed from that forum by the admins HMMMM....)
> 
> Methinks such a GREAT scientist with THE FINAL WORD on dog nutrition would certainly have his "articles" posted up in other places, no? Most articles I've seen are submitted far and wide so as to receive the most attention, especially in this lovely digital age we call the Intarwebz
> 
> Just strikes me funny that the only mentions you'll really find on Abady are either from people selling the food (getting paid to mention it) or those that appear to be..... wait for it.... getting paid to talk about it :wink:
> 
> 
> 
> Probably not BUT I have a feeling that Abady probably gives him free food or even pays him to post this Abady psychobabble.
> 
> 
> Love it or hate it, this whole Abady thing has me scared.... It reminds me too much of the false profits we've seen over the past century. They claim to know it all and people follow them with blind faith. (and no, I do no support Hills or ANY kibble manufacturer, nor any scientist that supports them)


Yes, Abady Singapore. There is a world wide reputation that goes along, believe it or not.

Yes, I have posted on several boards going back throughout the years in regards to Abady. Everyone is just like you folks, complete disagreement in what they are saying about the industry as a whole, and no faith in appropriate nutrition solving a vast majority of problems found today. I am no longer a member of the board you trolled around to find. Yes, that was an old user name. After several years of participation there I was banned.

No I don't work Abady. No free food. From what I understand from people who have visited the place in NY they got the impression of Mom and Pop style. I would expect at least a free cap if I ever stopped in for all the chatting I've done about it in the past. But for right now, I don't really care to discuss it anymore, because if I do I'll probably get thrown out of here as well. Ok, so I'll give it a rest so you can all stop posting about it since it just causes problems. Forget I mentioned it.


----------



## DaneMama

claybuster said:


> Yes, Abady Singapore. There is a world wide reputation that goes along, believe it or not.
> 
> Yes, I have posted on several boards going back throughout the years in regards to Abady. Everyone is just like you folks, complete disagreement in what they are saying about the industry as a whole, and no faith in appropriate nutrition solving a vast majority of problems found today. I am no longer a member of the board you trolled around to find. Yes, that was an old user name. After several years of participation there I was banned.
> 
> No I don't work Abady. No free food. From what I understand from people who have visited the place in NY they got the impression of Mom and Pop style. I would expect at least a free cap if I ever stopped in for all the chatting I've done about it in the past. But for right now, I don't really care to discuss it anymore, because if I do I'll probably get thrown out of here as well. Ok, so I'll give it a rest so you can all stop posting about it since it just causes problems. Forget I mentioned it.


I don't think that anyone wants to kick you out...

Its just that your way of thinking differs GREATLY from pretty much everyone on here in regards to metabolism, genetics, somewhat nutrition as well (considering that Abady is not the best food out there...scores a 1 on dogfoodanalysis.com). 

*
Its really hard to have a well rounded debate with someone who only gets their info from one source. *

That is the point in which I am trying to get you to see...thats all.


----------



## jdatwood

claybuster said:


> Yes, Abady Singapore. There is a world wide reputation that goes along, believe it or not.


Doesn't seem worldwide given that the "article" isn't found ANYWHERE else besides an outdated Geocities page. You'd think that it would be linked to or published in hundreds or thousands of places give this "reputation" you hold so dearly.  Just makes me even more confused...



claybuster said:


> Yes, I have posted on several boards going back throughout the years in regards to Abady. Everyone is just like you folks, complete disagreement in what they are saying about the industry as a whole, and no faith in appropriate nutrition solving a vast majority of problems found today.


Interesting.... everyone from kibble feeders to RAW feeders disagree with your unsubstantiated claims from Abady... HMMMMM..... 



claybuster said:


> I am no longer a member of the board you trolled around to find.


No trolling, took all of 2 seconds in the magical thing called GOOGLE :wink:



claybuster said:


> But for right now, I don't really care to discuss it anymore, because if I do I'll probably get thrown out of here as well. Ok, so I'll give it a rest so you can all stop posting about it since it just causes problems. Forget I mentioned it.


Nobody is asking you to stop posting your opinion. The problem that we ALL seem to have is that it's YOUR way or NO WAY. You don't take anything that's said into consideration. You don't examine the information that's presented in rebuttal to your claims. You only come back with more (unproven) Abady rhetoric. It really does get old (as RFD stated earlier)

I'm glad I was on vacation (and fighting the flu) so I didn't even get involved a few pages back with regards to your posts about weight gain, metabolism, etc

I'd love to see you continue posting OBJECTIVELY...


----------



## rannmiller

For the record, aside from the white rice and the fact that it's cooked, I think Abady is actually a pretty darn good dog food. Not to start up the fighting again, or anything.


----------



## jdatwood

rannmiller said:


> For the record, aside from the white rice and the fact that it's cooked, I think Abady is actually a pretty darn good dog food. Not to start up the fighting again, or anything.


I never said it was a "bad" food either.

The claims that it's so balanced dogs can't get fat eating it.... or it cures hip displaysia just remind me of things like
Pirelli's Miracle Elixir


----------



## claybuster

CorgiPaws said:


> *Beneful* has "a perfect balance of wholesome ingredients"
> *Pedigree* is "really good food for dogs"
> *Hills *is "Precisely Balanced Nutrition to meet the Special Needs of your Pet"
> *Eukanuba *"makes a good dog great"
> * Iams* has PROVED their food will increase your dogs life span.
> *Ol' Roy *is "Complete Nutrition"
> *Kibbles N' Bits* is "100% Complete and Balanced Nutrition"
> 
> These are all claims made by dog food companies that you and I both know are total bs.


I have a few more: EVO

*The Ancestral Diet Meets Modern Nutrition
EVO...What to feed when you can't feed raw.*


----------

