I must say I do like the Daily Express they are leading with Obesity in dogs now and page 7 (sorry no idea how to do links) they say half of pet dogs have a weight problem.

I think about that at 6am when we start exercising our two and 7pm at night after the third and last walk.

Why have a dog and leave it on the couch???

Unfortunately some people do get a dog because they think they want one to cuddle and fuss, and are naive enough not to actually know enough about a dog's care and welfare. 

I know when I was taking Indie to see the specialist orthopaedic surgeon following a second op to her knee (she ruptured her cruciate) he was very pleased with her weight, and she was one of the few dogs that was at what he would describe optimum weight for her size and frame, the vast majority, even though they were seeing him for joint problems, were carrying excess weight to some degree :(

Here's the link to the article in the Express btw ;)

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/189367/Half-of-pet-dogs-are-too-fat-

It's in the Telegraph too.

Thank you I need one of my sons at home to do links and download photos that technology eludes me!

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1297926/Half-dogs-Britain-suffer-painful-early-deaths-owners-let-fat.html
The link to the Mail which on the face of it is not a pic of an obese dog, well not to me at this angle, also owner walking the dog?!!

I spoke to a lady yesterday who has pups and she said that someone was enquiring about her pups and wanted to know if they had to be walked(energetic large gundog breed), these owners have a toy breed and at a guess don't get walked   surfice to say they won't be getting one of these pups..

Also I think vets need to be putting a lot more pressure on some owners where dog is obese, proper advice and also details of what a good diet is, also a lot of neutered dogs have a tendency to put on weight more easily, vets should be advising this to the owners too.

The caption underneath the article in the Mail is about being responsible, so I suppose the photo is depicting what a dog should look like, and that you need to walk and exercise dogs.

I own gundogs, well, pretend ones ;) and the amount of people who think as a breed they SHOULD carry excess weight is unbelievable.  I've even had another dog walker insist my two bitches can't POSSIBLY be pedigree, because they're lean, her dog (same breed and colour coincidentally) was so overweight it couldn't go past a fast walk, it was the same age as the older of my two bitches. 

The picture in the 'real' version of the Telegraph is an excellent one of an obese yellow lab sitting beside a normal-weight one. The contrast speaks volumes. I wish I could find it online.

A friend gave up showing her large breed dogs because she felt that there was too much pressure in the show ring to have them heavier than she felt was suitable to keep them fit and joint problem free :(

Daisy

I would agree with the articles that there is a link between the obesity in humans that is reflected in our pets. Both of ours are kept 'lean' and I still find it odd to be stopped by complete strangers telling me that they are too thin! I learnt very early on that you should feed for the amount of exercise, friends of ours had an Otter hound with server leg problems that weighed in well over nine stone and although advised many times that he should loose weight continued to increase his food intake according to his weight even though he was struggling to walk.

And it was panting - unlike the slimmer version.

I was told that when you run your hands over your dog's ribs it should feel as though it is wearing a blanket and not a duvet :-)

">Thank you I need one of my sons at home to do links and download photos that technology eludes me!

Me too
With you all the way on that LOL  :)

I think there are a number of things that cause obesity in our dogs:

1) Just throwing the cat amongst the pigeons here, and it is just my opinion but I think it has a lot to do with the processed pet food not only the portions fed but also the junk in the pet food. I think I am correct in saying that dogs cannot digest 'grain' and most pet foods are processed biscuits/wheat etc which cannot be metabolised, so just turns into fat - hence overweight under active dogs?  However, a raw diet for dogs is easily digestible and does not contain much wheat (if any).

2) Then there is the argument about castration vs entire dogs.  Again I think dogs which are left entire have a faster metabolism because of the level of hormones, than those that don't and are more energetic. Bit like when we hit the menopause and the hormones decline along with the energy and the weight gain, so we have to exercise much harder and eat a lot less to remain the same :)

I have 2 dogs both fed the same diet (BARF) and one is very lean (entire male) and the other we have to watch his weight constantly (castrated male).  The castrated male does get tired more easily than the entire male (similar age).  In fact the entire one never gets tired!

So, do most pet owners know that once a dog has been castrated/neutered that they should cut thier food intake by 20% a day to keep the dogs weight the same? Probably something the vets should mention before and after neutering.

3) Exercise:  is also really important and a lot of people that keep dogs don't exercise them as much as they should.

> Why have a dog and leave it on the couch???

LOL, I wanted a 'couch-potato' dog that didn't require lots of excersise and was happy being a home-bod - because I am :)
However, he is fed to his requirements. It makes no difference wheather a dog is entire, castrated, runs for 10 miles per day or potters for 20 mins, is fed top quality food or processed 'rubbish'. It's simply a case of calories in vs calories out, just as it is with us humans :)

I have a sedate (lazy,) dog that is fed processed food and is lean :)

My last dog was castrated at about 6 yrs old, he did have a tendancy to put on wieght, but that was easily managed with portion controll (or more to the point, stopping the rest of the family giving him lots of left-overs!).

There is no excuse, fat dogs are simply fed too much food :(

mastifflover,
I agree to a point with the calories in vs calories out theory, but if a dog or human ate 100 calories of good food eg: fruit, veg, protein, carbs (all unprocessed) vs 100 calories of processed food he/she would be able to metabolise the unprocessed food more quickly than the processed.  Too much processed food really does slow down the metabolism causing low energy which in turn = weight gain.

Hormones also play a major part in weight with people, therefore I assume (rightly or wrongly) it is the same with dogs. 

I personally don't beleive people are overweight because of their genes/frame, that really is a case of calories in vs calories out exactly the same with animals.  But processed food cannot be turned into energy as easily as  unprocessed.

> Too much processed food really does slow down the metabolism causing low energy which in turn = weight gain.

If that is the case, why is Buster lean?

I personally don't beleive people are overweight because of their genes/frame,

well i find the above statement rubbish
i have 4 boys, 2 big framed overweight, 2 skinny ribs- both fed the same food from birth, throughout childhood and now as adults
so how can this be if genes arent involved at all?

If that is the case, why is Buster lean

Is Buster the sedate lazy one you speak about ?

well i find the above statement rubbish
i have 4 boys, 2 big framed overweight, 2 skinny ribs- both fed the same food from birth

I guess if they are big framed then they will carry more weight but if they are obese then this will come from too much of the wrong type of food surely?

I have 2 daughters one is almost 6' tall and the other is 5'4" so you could say the taller one has a larger frame which she does, but neither are over weight, both have been heavier than they would like and both are now very skinny.

It is what we eat, how much and of what type of food we eat, combined with exercise that determines whether we are over or underweight. It is only an excuse blaming genes on weight issues.  without wanting to get into a slanging match with you tina s, blaming being overweight on genes is rubbish statement. 

>I think I am correct in saying that dogs cannot digest 'grain'

I'm not sure where this comes from, but dogs certainly can digest 'grain'. Some have intolerances to it, just as some people are gluten intolerant; just because it doesn't suit a particular individual doesn't mean that it's wrong for the whole species.

>I have 2 dogs both fed the same diet (BARF) and one is very lean (entire male) and the other we have to watch his weight constantly (castrated male).  The castrated male does get tired more easily than the entire male (similar age). 

Not only do spaying and castration slow the metabolism they also alters the way fat is deposited in the body.

> Is Buster the sedate lazy one you speak about ?

Yep, but that was the breed-trait that atracted me to the Mastiff in the first place :) 

I have found no difference to his overall energy levels with diet change,
I have fed the following combinations :
50% complete kibble with 50% raw (tripe/beef chunks/minced beef/heart/white fish)
100% complete kibble
50% complete kibble with 50% tinned food
50% raw with 50% mixer biscuit.

I have tired different complete kibbles and have found no energy differences (only coat condition & 'output' changes).

However, when feeding 100% complete I found he had a burst of extra energy just after a meal that he hasn't had on other combinations, BUT, that diet was fed as a pup so the burst of energy could be an age thing (ie. 'yay, I've been fed!') as opposed to a physical energy increase.

I find the recommendations on the packets are way over what you should feed. My dogs have a walk each day, so they do burn off energy, and to keep them nice and trim I feed about 60% or 70% what the packet says, can't remember exactly as it's years since I've looked at the recommendations!

perry
if you saw the 2 larger ones standing beside their fat grandmother you would agree they have her genes. btw they are both ideal weights now as they have spent their lifetimes dieting. all im saying is that their 2 slim bros dont have to diet they are naturally slim. maybe different metabolisms? but i still say they have the fat gene from their fat grandmother

There is a LOT more to keeping the correct weight than calories in V calories out!   Animals (and people) are not bunsen burners.   If it was simply a case of calories in and out why is is that some people/dogs need more food than others?   

When growing up I had quite a few friends who were quite frankly lazy, they would have taken a taxi to the toilet if they could have and certainly never walked to/from school or anywhere else.  These same people also spend most of their time EATING.  Not healthy food either, chips, fried stuff, chocolate, cakes, crisps...  And yet they were without exception very slim bordering on skinny.

On the other hand, I walked (OK ran - I was always late) 2 miles to school and back every day carrying 2 stone of satchel/books - I know because my father weighed it.  I also walked everywhere outside school and would cover between 3 and 4 miles with the dog every day.
I also had what is now determined as the optimum diet, mainly fresh fruit and veg with small amounts fish and meat, rarely fried as I couldn't digest it and it made me ill - it still does.  None of my friends could believe how little I ate, especially since no-one would ever have accused me of being skinny.  None of my friends could keep pace with me walking either despite being much taller than me.

Those friends are mostly still skinny   I lost the weight after puberty and for a while was like a Barbie doll, but then it all changed when I had the children and it's been an uphill struggle ever since.

To suggest genetics plays no part is ridiculous, but then no-one wants to admit that a person's weight might not be completely under their control, it's not a fashionable concept and there'd be no-one to blame   ;)

To suggest genetics plays no part is ridiculous

I agree totally, if you read the posts you will see I gave a number of reasons: metabolism, exercise, type of food, quantity etc. and genes obviously play a part in the metabolism, but genes alone are not an excuse for someone who is overweight.

I was overweight as a child and I was told I was 'big boned' well, I am 5'2" with a petite frame, so not sure how I could have been 'big boned' as a child.  The reason I was overweight was because I ate far too much of the wrong type of foods.  Which takes me back to dogs being overweight, I believe, it is not written in their genes alone, but a number of factors as stated above. 

Owners have to take responsibility for their overweight pets just as we should take responsibility for our own health.

> There is a LOT more to keeping the correct weight than calories in V calories out!   Animals (and people) are not bunsen burners.   If it was simply a case of calories in and out why is is that some people/dogs need more food than others? 

Metabolism.

The recomended daily calorie intake for a woman is 2000, I know I am sedate (my work is at a desk) but if I consumed only 1800 calories per day I would gain weight - I need less than the 'average' woman to maintain my current weight. It doesn't matter what type of food I eat, if I clock the calories up, I'll put fat on. It is that simple, excess energy in animals (including humans) is stored as fat.

When I went on a calorie controlled diet and lost 4 stone, I did that on junk food (including chocolate for breakfast), it was not a healthy diet, but restricting the calories caused the weight loss.
My OH on the other hand can eat much more than the recomended 2500 cals per day for a man and not gain a lb.

Genetics will influence many things that will effect the metabolism but it still comes down to a basic equation in the end. If we consume more calories than we need as an individual we will get fat, exactly the same for a dog.

perry you said:

blaming being overweight on genes is rubbish statement.

and yet you totally agree perry that saying genetics has no part in being overweight is ridiculous

am i going crazy or have you just contradicted yourself totally?

No tina s I haven't contradicted myself, if you see my first post I say there is a number of reasons that point to dogs becoming overweight, metabolism being only one of them.  I believe it is the same with people.

However, I personally would never blame my genes alone for becoming overweight, I would have to be logical and honest with myself and realise that I had eaten far too much - the same with dogs.

We have to take responsibility and stop blaming our weaknesses on 'genes' alone - end of story!

I'm glad I'm not the only one who diets like that! I simply don't like healthy food - can't stand salad or muesli, don't much like fruit and veg. The only way I lose weight (starting yet another diet this week!) is to restrict the amount of unhealthy food and increase exercise. I'm a slow yo-yo dieter - lose 2 stone over a year or so, put 3 stone on over the following year, lose it again over another 18 months, put it on in another year or two. And so on - I've lost the same 2 or 3 stone about 4 times in the last 10 or 12 years!

>When I went on a calorie controlled diet and lost 4 stone, I did that on junk food (including chocolate for breakfast), it was not a healthy diet, but restricting the calories caused the weight loss.

Snap re the yo-yo thing.

> I find the recommendations on the packets are way over what you should feed

Funny that, cos I give mine more than the recommended amount & both my dogs are 'perfect weight' (This is Mia, according to my vet) and slightly lean (Curtis, who at 8 years old is still an exercise junkie who wants 3+ hours of exercise a day!).

My dogs are of good weight too and they get exercised daily. The eldest wouldn't put on weight for love nor money, no matter what i fed him, he's now just about right. The youngster loves his food, but i don't over feed them. They are both fed the max end of what the recommended amounts are of the foods. They also get raw food on top, but no every meal time.

Surely you want your dogs to be healthy, so giving them the best food you can afford is the least we should be doing. If I ate junk food all the time, i may not put that much weight on but my god my insides wouldn't be healthy. Think of all that fat, additives etc...I'm lucky in a sense that with my genes our family are slim, but thats not say we couldn't get fat or even stay slim and being very unhealthy on the insides.

What you put in is what you get out!!
I for one wouldn't feed Bakers to my dogs, just like I wouldn't have my diet on MCDonalds and the like..

I always say...... You eat MacDonalds all the time, you end up MacDonalds shape!

> Surely you want your dogs to be healthy, so giving them the best food you can afford is the least we should be doing. If I ate junk food all the time, i may not put that much weight on but my god my insides wouldn't be healthy

The difference between human junk-food and processed dog food is that dog food is designed to be a balanced, complete diet. Many dogs do live long, healthy lifes on a diet of non-expensive dog food.

Human junk-food would be better compared to dog treats - food designed as an occasional treat.