Been feeding a Barf diet to my 4 dogs but recently this seems to be getting expensive and sometimes when holidaying inconvenient, so I'm currently looking at the top premium foods with high meat content with no unnecessary fillers.
So been looking at Eden, Aatu, Millies Wolfheart, Akela and Simpsons, does anyone have recommendations please, confused when looking on allaboutdogfood that Simpsons comes out expensive per day yet one of the cheaper to buy by the bag?
Can't seem to find any stockists locally either.
Thanks

With many of the high meat content foods less is fed per day. So Simpsons is more expensive per day because more is given in each meal

There are a couple of grain free foods that you will find cheaper, and easily bought online with free delivery.  Breeder prices are even cheaper. 

http://www.fish4dogs.co.uk/

https://www.applaws.co.uk/

Just to note that "grain free" does not necessarily equal "high meat content", as there will be things other than grains such as potatoes etc which you may or may not consider "unnecessary fillers".

Also I would be careful with fish foods. Fish is full of toxins, some parts of the fish more than others in particular fish skins, fatty areas etc. (And of course some types of fish is more toxic than others but bottom line is all of them have toxins.) This is something to pay attention when eating for both people and dogs, though more dangerous for dogs because they tend to get the "worst parts". Its OK to feed fish occasionally, but personally I would not feed a fish diet every single day.

> personally I would not feed a fish diet every single day.

My two, because although one needs it, it's more convenient to have them both on the same food, have been on Arden Grange Sensitive for YEARS now.  This is a fish and potato diet and both have been perfectly okay - in fact way better than the kind of irritated stool I was getting from my 'post-Giardia' Basset.  Each to their own I suppose.

Having just changed my dog onto Autarky Salmon, I am interested in the possibility of "toxins" in the food, I would have thought that the manufacturers should test for heavy metals and antibiotics from the fish used, what other toxins could be present and what danger due they pose for a dog.  I suppose that raw food could also contain toxins from feed additives/antibiotics/growth promotors etc and grains/potatoes could also have fertiliser/pesticide residues, does anyone know if dog food is routinely monitored?

"Millies Wolfheart" online prices include delivery so no extra charges to add.

Think Millies Wolfheart looks favourite cost wise and they've got straight back to me, the Applaws looks too expensive

Thanks for the replies

> Having just changed my dog onto Autarky Salmon, I am interested in the possibility of "toxins" in the food

With fish/seafood is mainly mercury (link to wiki article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_in_fish#Current_advice) and other toxins including all the radioactive stuff from Japan...
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_pollution#Toxins). Also if dog food manufacturers use fish skins, it makes it even worse as it is here where accumulation of toxins is greatest (plus other fatty areas). Just thinking about it, the US FDA current advice for humans is to "eat up to 12 ounces (2 average meals) a week of a variety of fish and shellfish that are lower in mercury". Dogs aren't different from humans in this respect, that's why I wouldn't want to feed fish as their main diet.

Mind meats aren't free from toxins, but here I think it is easier for producers to minimise the exposure of their cattle, compared to producers/catchers of fish. It is also possible to buy various meats/bone offal organic and relatively inexpensive (plus often reduced in supermarkets), but with fish the only organic is salmon and the price is through the roof.

Plants and veggies normally have very little exposure to toxins, and grain or sweet potatoes and broccoli and carrots etc are very cheap to buy organic anyway. I feed my dogs organic grain and veggies in addition to meats for this very reason that they are non-toxic, and also that grain/veggies have certain compounds (such as cancer-preventing etc) that hopefully further help to ensure my dogs' health.

I've been homecooking for a few years for my two and it hasn't actually worked out too expensive. I cook at the weekend and freeze what I need for the end of the following week. Happy to share recipes if anyone needs!

> I've been homecooking for a few years for my two and it hasn't actually worked out too expensive. I cook at the weekend and freeze what I need for the end of the following week. Happy to share recipes if anyone needs!

When cooking, do you also cook meats (i.e. boil, bake etc)?

This is something I very much avoid and is the reason I would not opt to feed dry food no matter how good it is, because the meats in there are cooked. Various studies have been out for quite some years and not that long ago new statistics made the headlines, obviously in application to humans - that eating processed red meat causes cancer, and recommending people to limit their weekly intake to a number of portions etc.

Our dogs aren't different from humans in this respect, they also get cancer and it is possible that processed meat is just as equally a carcinogen for them. Taking into account that our dogs eat meat every single day in much greater amounts than humans (proportionate to body weight), feeding meats raw sounds a no brainer.

To be honest, my girls never really got on with raw food and I didn't particularly like it the process that much myself. I boil the meat for the exact reasons you mention - just trying to keep everything to as low a temperature as possible. They just seem to prefer cooked meat and from all of the literature I have found (mainly Lippert & Sapy 2003), the numbers point to dogs eating home-cooked food living longer lives. Definitely not placing a home-cooked diet any higher than a raw diet in terms of benefits to the dogs, but hopefully we are doing much better than a lot of the canned or dry processed foods. Thanks for the reply though monkeyj! love having these kind of convos!

> from all of the literature I have found (mainly Lippert & Sapy 2003), the numbers point to dogs eating home-cooked food living longer lives.

Home cooked or home prepared? I agree that cooking at home would be much better than feeding commercial dry/canned food, if not only due to much less/absence of preservatives. But do these studies make an argument that feeding home cooked i.e. processed meats and meals result in longer living dogs, than feeding equally home prepared diet but which is uncooked?

I've been using Eden and my dogs have lost tons of weight even though I'm feeding more then the recommended amount, also their coats have blown, I'm very disappointed with it.

This study in particular points to dogs eating 'home made food with products used in the owner's meals'. It is a comparison of home made versus industrially produced, not home prepared raw vs home prepared cooked. Super interesting read.

> This study in particular points to dogs eating 'home made food with products used in the owner's meals'. It is a comparison of home made versus industrially produced

Yes with this I agree absolutely!