I read that as meaning dogs are now being fed better food than merely tablescraps and the bone from the Sunday joint, as used to be the case. Commercial foods have meant there are far fewer substandard diets than in my young days.

I find this recurring debate amusing. All of the working dog owners that I know feed commercial diets, and not often the premium brands.

The results are hard-working healthy dogs that are also able to rear strong, healthy litters. Added to the convenience and cost benefits, it is difficult to see why they would want to change.

Given the levels of waste and over-production in the modern world, set against the deprivation in other nations, I consider it a positive bonus that by-products can be used in the production of dog food.

I cant help thinking that the debate often gets fuelled more from sentimentality and anthropomorphism than any genuine benefit for the dog.

The proof of the pudding, eh Havoc?!
:)

I have found this debate very interesting. I feed a raw diet primarily because I prefer, for my human family as well, not to eat much in the way of processed foods. It does strike me from reading many comments here, that food may not have much to do with a dog's health. So many other factors are involved. If working dogs can live a healthy life on commercial foods - perhaps it is down to their general quality of life, with plenty of exercise and probably good, down-to-earth husbandry. Maybe the life-style that some people force upon their dogs has more influence than the food ? :) :)

Daisy

I think you could have a very valid point there Daisy :-D

Sorry is that not the discussion that's been going on. That because we have improved from the scraps and leftovers dogs are living longer. Now take it one step further
If a dog's diet is improved its health and longevity improve,. so the better the diet the long term health of dogs does improve. So Ingredients must matter ? 

But cow meat is cow meat, whether it's prime steak or offcuts ... The 'leftover bits' that go into petfoods are just as valuable nutritionally! :)

Fine but if that's the case why are manufactures reluctant to a/ list what's in the food
B/ use cereal as the number 1 ingredient
Some companies i.e. Arden grange, Burns, Trophy, JWB (at the moment) list what's in their food. The original post on this subject asked about chappie .Compared against These Company's it fails to give proper ingredients and is mainly cereal based. Lets just have a bit of honesty by the manufacturers and perhaps this ongoing debate might become a bit clearer. 

Jo english
Manufacturers do not list everything on their labels because their formulae constitutes knowhow which would be easily replicated by competitors if listed comprehensively.
Cissy

well of the mark and Simply not true- some do  some dont mainly  those with something to hide Jo

There are many products with secret recipes - coca-cola, Worcester sauce ...

recipes yes ingredents no.

If all the actual ingredients are listed, by law they have to be in proportional order. It wouldn't take long for rival companies to work out a recipe from a list of ingredients, and a sample of the finished product.
:)

thanks Jo for your comment but I'm not off the mark. If consumers are worried about the ingredients then they can contact the manufacturer and ask for them - but you won't be told the percentage of ingredients because that is proprietary information.

  Fair point, thanks for putting me right with that one its just some firms do put the meat and rice %on bags and labels 

Cissy,

Actually the technology has existed for decades to analyze a food product and duplicate it exactly. Lack of an ingredient list and recipe is not an obstacle.  It's patent law and other industrial regulations that prevent one company from duplicating another company's product. 

Stacey

Dazzle,"this person from Australia" who's  first rescue dog came to me an extremely fussy eater with an even worse appetite,she was over 2 stone underweight.a bag of bones and she still didnt eat,she will always be like this wether i chop and change her food or not,she is the reason i took a backward step and started feeding my particular dry food(very high in calories) which i have never done with any of my dogs .And then my wee pup Bonnie came along who was a brilliant eater,but slowly she started cottoning on to Emma's bad habits and if emma didnt eat then neither did Bonnie,i had never had poor eaters before,i have always had rotties,i never even knew fussy dogs existed.I hazard to say you have large dogs?which do not tend to be finicky.Both my dogs think nothing of skipping a day or two of food,they ARE weird,they are far from food orientated dogs,now that i have explained a bit what was the purpose of that statement?

Cissy the brands in question would have a very tough time in listing all of the ingredients as the contents change from batch to batch,the by-product from one batch might consist of pigs guts maybe some fecal matter etc. where as the next batch might have a few eyes,a euthanized dog or two(yes this does happen)or whatever lands on their back doorstep that day! There is absolutely no consistency,no scruples and above all no concience on what they put in their feed :(
The company that makes the food i feed have no problem in sharing the percentages,as they have nothing to hide and are very proud of their product.Not all manufactures are the same,thankfully.

JG some peoples dogs are allergic to rice and grains,mine are not,nor am i a purist barf feeder.After this bag is finished i will be switching to the grain free variety,no grain,more meat,i dont think you could pick apart that one??

Christine, you may have objections to pigs' guts and eyes, but eyeballs are perfectly safe to eat (they are renowned for being a delicacy in many countries) and pigs' intestines have been used for hundreds of years as sausage skins! Again, there is nothing wrong with eating them! There is no reason why they shouldn't be used in dog food if people are becoming too squeamish and removed from reality that they can't face eating such things themselves. In fact, far better that they are used in pet food than wastefully incinerated.

And forgive me if I've got in a muddle here, but I thought your dogs were shih tsus? If I'm right, I'm struggling to imagine one being two stone underweight. They're only meant to be 18lb maximum! I'm sure I'm wrong, and your first dog was a larger breed.
:)

<<<<<<<<<<where as the next batch might have a few eyes,a euthanized dog or two(yes this does happen)or whatever lands on their back doorstep that day! >>>>>>>>>>>>>
And would you like to supply proof???? Because you cant make sweeping statements like that without proof. That is just scare mongering.
Lea.

As well as scaremongering I would have thought that it comes very close to Libel!!!

I do happen to know that a Pedigree rep regularly reads this board.

Ozzie you are very wrong in your assumption I actually have small dogs not large ones.

I shall try and find out the website addy's where these claims are stated,there are a few! I read them a couple years ago,so may take a little while to find them. I thought it was common knowledge that euthanised dogs and cats were used in some low end brands,but hey if the dogs do well on the particular foods,then who cares,right! There are plenty of people who agree with diplorable practice as they have the same mind set as some of you in not wasting a scrap,whether it be good or bad.

Gee why do you all think i am so dead against cheapo foods?????

Stay tuned.

There was a company in the UK that was fined & it eventually was stopped from making dog food that using dogs & cats in their food & they were the same firm that put meat into cattle fodder !! I will not name names as the firm since has had a tital change in ownership directors etc but a search of the orgins of BSE show the firms invlovement

What you may find is that things have changed drastically here in the last few years due to the outbreak of mad cow disease and there are stringent rules that all feed producers have to now comply with, maybe they haven't in Australia.

Christine, if you find the idea of dogs eating pigs intestines so nauseating, perhaps chitterlings aren't for you! But it's perfectly acceptably human food.

By the way, you still haven't put me right as to what breed your 2-stone underweight rescue dog was. I'm genuinely interested, because letting a dog get that underweight is wicked.

OH NO,JG my bad,sorry! 2KILO not 2 stone :o I was wondering why you kept questioning me about this,i would have thought there are many dogs more than 2 k underweight :D  It was only as i was typing this reply that i realised my boo-boo. Well i'm sure miss emma would have been on deaths door had she been 2 stone underweight!!
Please accept my apology,my head is spinning today!

No problem Christine! I was sure I'd got the right breed, and two stone underweight would have meant she'd have vanished entirely! I was really puzzled! :D

Remember that the pet food laws are much more lapsed in Europe than they are in the u.s or canada,so if they can get away with such practices over there imagine what can be swept under the table in europe????

Are you all familiar with the 4D's which accompanies meat derivatives and by-products? 4D's- Dead,Diseased,Dying.Disabled !!

Here is a british site,it refers to cat food but could have also been written about dog food.

http://www.messybeast.com/cat-food-industry.htm

If you have the time read the following link, where it states that Meat and Bonemeal has been voluntarily removed from the Pet Food Chain by manufacturers in the UK by 1990

This is part of the BSE Report in 1998.

http://www.bseinquiry.gov.uk/files/yb/1990/07/09003001.pdf

That is an official government report.

That does appear to categorically state that these products are not in UK pet foods, even though there is no health risk from them.
:)

The pet food regulations are very strict bith in the UK & in Europe They even amended the regulations about cremating non food animals to ensure no residue can get into the food chain

Quote : "Are you all familiar with the 4D's which accompanies meat derivatives and by-products? 4D's- Dead,Diseased,Dying.Disabled !!"

I fear that you are letting sentiment and squeamishness cloud your argument. Dead, diseased, dying and disabled animals are exactly the kind of food that wild canines are likely to eat. Indeed much of their diet will be made up of carrion, which would hardly consitute suitable or appitizing food for human consumption.

If you look back over the centuries I think you will find that mankind started out  with a pretty similar diet However with the power of forward thought and a few centuries later we have discovered that by improving our diet we will live longer and healthier lives .And as mankind is the guardian of the plant and  has domesticated dogs we should also be able to pass this knowledge on to our four legged friends .to say what dogs would eat in the wild should be the bench mark to what they eat now is implying that we too should eat raw and non processed food because that's what we would eat in the wild.. 

>is implying that we too should eat raw and non processed food because that's what we would eat in the wild.. 

That is exactly what many people believe!
:)

Yep - I'd go along with that!

Jo,

Thats true, and thats why I feed a commercial diet. I'm just making the point that there is nothing particulary 'natural' about  dogs only getting 'best' quality food, and dont see much evidence of any obvious health or performance benefits.

While my dogs take great pleasure out of eating maggot-ridden carcases and excrement when out in the fields, I'm not going to get too squeamish about what goes into their food.

yes the benifits may not be visable for years to come and whilst we can not stop dogs doing what come natural
we need to be aware that some cheep ingredents only promote the profits  of big business and not the long term welfare of animals.

>whilst we can not stop dogs doing what come natural

Of course we shouldn't. To be allowed to behave naturally is their birthright. And many people advocate feeding horse manure to a dog to stimulate a poor appetite. We mustn't forget that different species have differing dietary requirements. What is suitable for us is not necessarily suitable for dogs. Equally, it works the other way around - what is suitable for dogs isn't necessarily suitable for us.

I wrote to defra some time ago & I posted their reply on here,(couple of yrs ago now I think) so maybe a search will bring it up if its still there. The answer I got from them was that no, 4d animals are now put into pet food in the UK.
But it did used to happen & it is still does happen in USA not sure about Asia. Also pet food & ingredients for it are still imported from USA & elsewhere to UK. It`s not only diseased animals used but ones that have been euthanized, tests from pet foods revealed the drug used to euthanize them was in the food.
Theres no denying complete pet foods have chemicals & additives & colourings & artificial flavourings & unnecessary sugars, the same ones that are causing scientists/doctors/nutritionalists an awful lot of concern for the health of us humans.

The least chemicals/additives/colourings/artificial flavourings/sugars that my dogs get, the better as far as I`m concerned.

Christine, Spain.

Just to clarify, Christine, did Defra tell you that it used to happen in the UK and happens in the US.

I'm not sure I agree with you that scientists et al are awfully concerned with chemicals etc in food stuffs, not as a body anyway, I am sure there will be some mavericks :) it is after all they who will have advised governments what the safe levels are and what level to set the permitted levels (generally much lower). 

Isabel I know it used to happen there was a big TV exposure on it on our local TV, there were actual pictures of the dog & cat bodies being prepared :(

The plant  was closed down as a result(it was in breach of the government regs anyway)inspections by two inspectorates are now done unannounced-one for hygene & the other checking source matter & content, they hace recently found a local animal(not dog)feed plant in breach & the plant has been closed this case has yet to come to court, but the firm has been placed in liquidation

The TV program was so graphic it was shown after well after the watershed. I remember being physically sick after watching just a little bit of it.

The BVA also looked again at their advised methods of disposal of non food animals & most surgeries now routinely have dogs etc cremated unless the owners wish to bury the animal on their own land.

One of the two locally pet crematoriums is run by someone I know & she personally collects the animals on a daily basis(she collected my Brett on the day he was PTS & it was a sunday)They cremate the same day & return the ashes ASAP if they are wanted & if the owner doesn't want the ashes back they are scattered in the woodland on her farm. The EU have very strict rules about the temp the animals are cremated at this ensures there is no chance of them getting into any food chain.

It was rather what they didn`t say Isabel & what I asked them about the past. I don`t have the email anymore thats why I said if anyone did a search they might come up with it. As to it happening in the UK I believe in the past(possibly in the same thread even) I`ve also posted the site to the official American government food agency that did the tests & published them. Thats when it become more widely known what was happening.

Thats fine if you don`t agree with me about scientists et al being concerned about chemicals, I know what I believe, which is more important to me & certainly wouldn`t class the ones who opinions I go with as mavericks :)
As to whom advices the government on what safety levels are safe... well anyones who interested can look up them up on government pages then do a little more searching & find out what companies they sit on as board of directors/advicers etc. But far be it from me to say they would have anything like a vested interest or are biased in any way.

Christine, Spain.

I have no idea how to post links on here,it just wont work.
Here is one website which states what i said,if this one doesnt satisfy you then i have 50 more to post if you are at all interested,i remember reading one from Britain AND australia,i shall try and dig them up,but this practice does go on all over the world!

http://777-health.members.easyspace.com/poisonpetfood.html

Remember there are plenty more where this one came from as i'm sure someone will pick it to bits :(

By the way i spoke to a very well known aussie canine nutrition author/vet this afternoon and he 100% backs up the euthanised dog and cat practice,he actually saw it with his own eyes! I never,ever state things if i cant back it up 100%.

P.S it's nearly bed time here,so if i dont respond straight away,it doesnt mean i'm ignoring you'll :)

Not picking you to bits but.........(yes I know I know :D)
Have you got anything on British pet foods. As that article was about America and Canada. And seeing this is a predomintly British board, it would be useful to see about British foods.
Lea :)

I digress,no amount of debating or begging is going to make people change to a better food.At least i know that every ingredient in the dog food i feed is pure,organic and 100% whole with nothing that would make me want to vomit!

I really wish i didnt care,i wish i could switch off and say "let em' feed what they want,they arent my dogs" it's just that i have a huge problem in feeding my dogs something that would repulse me,i realise some people dont! :(  And i truly do care what each and every one of your dogs eat,otherwise i wouldnt bother wasting my time or breath here,i dont particularly care what you have for dinner as you have a choice,but when it comes to dogs and particularly nutrition,there is not much in this world that i am more passionate about.

If i was feeding a bad food and didnt know or didnt want to know much about canine nutrition and someone came on and enlightened me and told me what crap was in the food i was feeding,i would be horrified and embarrased and extremely grateful that someone took the time to tell me the realities of what goes into dog food!Wether my "dog was doing well" or not,there is always room for improvement and i will always strive for better health and a better understanding of nutrition. I love my dogs so much and i know i am giving them the best,they deserve nothing less!Can you look on your ingredient list and say the same?

This thread has really drained me,i think i have had got my point accross,i will be happy if i have got through to just one person who will take the time and make an effort next time they go dog food shopping.

I find it a little rich that you describe others as small minded when you consider that myself, Jeangenie et al believe there are many foods and feeding methods that will give a dog a healthy diet and meet all its need whilst it is you that feels that certain foods must not be fed because they contain things you think are bad (despite you feeding things others think are bad :))  I don't think anyone should feel guilty in what they feed as long as their dogs are obviously doing well on it it is an absolute puzzle to me why anyone should

You've said it in a nutshell Isabel, everyone has a choice as to what they feed their dogs, the same as they have a choice as to what they feed themselves and I still say if it ain't broke why fix it.

My dogs have done very well thank you on the diet I have chosen to give them and while that continues I see no reason to change.

Am I not right in saying that a certain person from Australia has very picky dogs, well I wonder why.  My dogs have never been and hopefully will never be picky in what they eat, so I must be doing something right.

In my experience the picky dogs out there tend to be because the owners swap and change their food and the dogs get the upperhand in choice and the owners are twisted round their little fingers

But I think it is also important to say, Lady Dazzle, that I am sure that everyone on this thread is feeding what they feel is best for their dogs not chosen lightly in anyway and everyone should have the decency to respect that, I am sure there are people in the world who don't care much what they feed their dogs but are they really likely to be the sort to spend large chunks of their spare time on a dog message board :)

I don't think that spending large chunks of spare time on a dog message board always signifies good ownership - I should be out doing some training :D :D

Daisy

and I have spent far too much time on this board today, good job I have a day off isn't it LOL