# Feelings on Merrick BG?



## VaBeachFamily (Apr 12, 2005)

So, after all of the issues with Diamond ( and my complete ignorance on knowing what Diamond actually produces, leading me to researching a bit more heavily, thought our oldest eats TOTW without problems) we spent over an hour reading bags( I love NUTRISOURCE grain free, price is right, dogs love it, they keep the weight on and they look awesome, BUTTTT it's only available at ONE store, limited hours, not open Sundays, need to know in case of.. flooding or snow lol that I can get to my dogs food a bit closer to home also!), talking to the store owner, and decided to go with BG by Merrick. I noticed that they have a new flavor ( Pork), but we went with Buffalo. After two days, I am not longer having to fight one or the other to eat the kibble, I don't have any vomiting, no diarrhea, and they are happy about it.

Just curious if anyone else feeds it? What do you think about the new Pork recipe?


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

All the BG foods are Chicken and turkey meal foods, don't let them fool you. So don't pay more for Salmon or Buffalo. The amount of Salmon or Buffalo protein is virtually zero, and at best 5% of total GA protein.

For Chicken foods these are also very high in ash for a 32% protein food at 9%.

Annamaet Salcha is about 6% and Annamaet Ultra is about 6.5%.

Merrick is slick, as for the Pork the ash content will probably be at the AAFCO limit of 12%.

Neither of these foods are up to my standards.


----------



## Konotashi (Jan 11, 2010)

I would take what Sable says with a grain of salt. He's always bashing good brands. 

Anywho, I feed my ferrets the feline chicken BG. It's a good price for a good food. Can't particularly speak up for their canine line, but my ferrets love their food. Plus it's cheaper, higher quality, and grain free, whereas foods marketed for ferrets are overpriced and lower quality.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Konotashi said:


> I would take what Sable says with a grain of salt. He's always bashing good brands.
> 
> Anywho, I feed my ferrets the feline chicken BG. It's a good price for a good food. Can't particularly speak up for their canine line, but my ferrets love their food. Plus it's cheaper, higher quality, and grain free, whereas foods marketed for ferrets are overpriced and lower quality.


I am stating facts, and you made my point that you feed it to ferrets.

These are chicken and turkey meal foods and average ones at best, with a very high amount of calories from starch.


----------



## Konotashi (Jan 11, 2010)

sable123 said:


> I am stating facts, and you made my point that you feed it to ferrets.
> 
> These are chicken and turkey meal foods and average ones at best.


You also seem to support lower quality foods. I'm not trying to bash you, but I strongly disagree with your opinions on foods, as I believe many other members do also. And yes, we're all entitled to our own opinions. I'm just opposed to yours.

And just a question - how did I make your point since I feed it to my ferrets? (You can PM me if you'd like, I don't want to hijack the thread).


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Konotashi said:


> You also seem to support lower quality foods. I'm not trying to bash you, but I strongly disagree with your opinions on foods, as I believe many other members do also. And yes, we're all entitled to our own opinions. I'm just opposed to yours.
> 
> And just a question - how did I make your point since I feed it to my ferrets? (You can PM me if you'd like, I don't want to hijack the thread).


You don't know what a quailty food is. You are a sucker for marketing. Are you telling me Annamaet is a lower quality food?

You have a cute little dog and I bet you are a lovely person, but you don't have the background that I have.

BG is a marketing con job.


----------



## Konotashi (Jan 11, 2010)

sable123 said:


> You don't know what a quailty food is. You are a sucker for marketing. Are you telling me Annamaet is a lower quality food?
> 
> BG is a marketing con job.


The first ingredient for Annamaet is chicken meal or catfish meal, yet you're saying BG is bad because it's a chicken/turkey meal food? 

First five ingredients of Annamaet adult dog food:
Chicken Meal, Brown Rice, Millet, Rolled Oats, Pearled Barley

First five ingredients of Merrick BG Chicken:
Chicken Deboned, Chicken Meal, Potato Dehydrated, Turkey Meal, Chicken Fat

I'd go with the Merrick, just based on that.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Konotashi said:


> The first ingredient for Annamaet is chicken meal or catfish meal, yet you're saying BG is bad because it's a chicken/turkey meal food?


No what I said was that Buffalo and Salmon were chicken and turkey meal foods in actuality but priced at a premium. There is very little Buffalo and Salmon in those foods because of the water weight, it is a gimmick.

Also, BG uses lower grade ingredients because the ash content is high for a 32% food. Not all Chicken Meals are the same quality.

Low Ash equals Higher Quality. 9% is very high. And only one Annamaet foods leads with Catfish, the allergy food but it is in a few, which is good. Catfish meal is great.


----------



## LARHAGE (Jul 24, 2006)

I have fed BG to both my dogs and cats, have never had an issue with either and my pets have readily eaten it, I am a fan of Merrick and buy every flavor of the canned varietys for both my dogs and cats, they absolutely love the variety.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Konotashi said:


> The first ingredient for Annamaet is chicken meal or catfish meal, yet you're saying BG is bad because it's a chicken/turkey meal food?
> 
> First five ingredients of Annamaet adult dog food:
> Chicken Meal, Brown Rice, Millet, Rolled Oats, Pearled Barley
> ...


You are comparing Annamaet's Adult 24% protein food. 

The proper comparison is Ultra, Salcha, Aqualuk or Manitok.

http://www.annamaet.com/html/grain_free_petfood.html

you cannot go by the order of the label. Merricks number one ingredient is water, yes water.

It is a low grade food. Merrick doesn't even use fresh potatoes. It is all show and no go.


----------



## VaBeachFamily (Apr 12, 2005)

LARHAGE - Yes, I am a huge fan of the canned foods, and keep a stock of them just as treats, dogs love them!!!! Also, Sable, I understand what you are saying, but although I love my dogs like family ( and we DO supplement with lots of RAW feedings in between the kibbles, so it's not like they live primarily on the kibble), I cannot afford some of the foods, especially a lot that are similar to the cheaper ones ( like... Orijen for example). I am paying under $50 for a 25 pound bag, versus 70 or so, so the price is Right! I do, though, respect your opinion, which is why I posted this to begin with!

Kono - the ingredient list is one of the factors in buying it compared to a lot also. Everything almost has meal, most as a first ingredient. I do know there is a lot of poultry in all of the flavors, but they seem to LOVE the food!


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

How do you figure out the ash content if it's not on the package?


----------



## Barb E (Jun 6, 2004)

I fed BG for a time and Dante did well on it....almost.

Gas  Clear the room Gas 

I finally decided he has a sensitivity to Potato


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> The first ingredient for Annamaet is chicken meal or catfish meal, yet you're saying BG is bad because it's a chicken/turkey meal food?
> 
> First five ingredients of Annamaet adult dog food:
> Chicken Meal, Brown Rice, Millet, Rolled Oats, Pearled Barley
> ...


I agree. Although I currently feed raw, Merrick BG was one of the kibbles I fed prior to going raw. I liked it & wouldn't hesitate to feed it again. IF it works well for your dogs go for it.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Emoore said:


> How do you figure out the ash content if it's not on the package?


I called I was in shock it was 9%. It tells me the protein meals are low quality. That is all I have to know. I also think its sleazy that they package in 25lb bags. That is underhanded. People don't always realize this, they buy down the price of a bag with a lower weight.

Ash of 9% is unacceptable in a food of this protein amount, especially chicken and turkey.

People make irrational decisions, based on marketing and when you name foods "Grammy's Pot Pie" you are good at marketing.

Merrick makes some crap called Beef and More that is not fit for any dog. That is another reason I am not a fan.

When people pick a Merrick food over Annamaet or Dr. Tim's it shows you the power of slick websites and a clever pitch.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Merrick's BG is a meat based kibble which I much prefer when feeding kibble. The ingredients in Annamaet aren't impressive. It certainly wouldn't be my 1st choice for feeding a carnivore.



> When people pick a Merrick food over Annamaet or Dr. Tim's it shows you the power of slick websites and a clever pitch.


So you say. *shrug* I think it shows that those choosing foods like Merrick can read and comprehend a list of ingredients.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

RubyTuesday said:


> Merrick's BG is a meat based kibble which I much prefer when feeding kibble. The ingredients in Annamaet aren't impressive. It certainly wouldn't be my 1st choice for feeding a carnivore.
> 
> So you say. *shrug* I think it shows that those choosing foods like Merrick can read and comprehend a list of ingredients.


 

Salcha has 4 low Ash meat meals, much higher ME calories and over 1% Omega 3's. Also the Annamaet ingredients are human grade. Chicken, Turkey, Duck and Catfish meals. Made in a EU facility. All ingredients are certified non-gmo.

BG has two average or below average quality meat meals and low ME calories 380 vs 430 for Annamaet, meaning the food is not as digestible. It also uses cheap dried potato flakes rather than fresh potatoes.

Where do you come up with the statement "meat based". 

I could go on and on about the differences.

The bottom line is that all the Merrick foods are just average kibbles sold at premium prices because they are marketed well.

Crap


----------



## Konotashi (Jan 11, 2010)

sable123 said:


> Salcha has 4 low Ash meat meals, much higher ME calories and over 1% Omega 3's. Also the Annamaet ingredients are human grade. Chicken, Turkey, Duck and Catfish meals. Made in a EU facility. All ingredients are certified non-gmo.
> 
> BG has two average or below average quality meat meals and low ME calories 380 vs 430 for Annamaet, meaning the food is not as digestible. It also uses cheap dried potato flakes rather than fresh potatoes.
> 
> ...


Oh yes, I forgot. We're all naive imbeciles, and Sable knows all.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Konotashi said:


> Oh yes, I forgot. We're all naive imbeciles, and Sable knows all.


No one can tell me Merrick is a serious pet food company when it sells foods that make gravy with names like Cowboy Cookout, low-end foods for Petco like Beef and More and has such a horrid recall history.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> Oh yes, I forgot. We're all naive imbeciles, and Sable knows all.


Konotashi, you made me smile there. I get that impression as well. 

IF I was choosing kibble for human consumption, I might prefer Annamaet, but for feeding canines I like the Merrick BG considerably more. FTR, I never fed Grammy's Pot Pie or Cowboy Cookout. Nor do I see anyone here interested in those foods so arguing against them seems just silly...Or is it a case of, since s/he can't dazzle 'em with brilliance then baffle them with cow poop.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

RubyTuesday said:


> Konotashi, you made me smile there. I get that impression as well.
> 
> IF I was choosing kibble for human consumption, I might prefer Annamaet, but for feeding canines I like the Merrick BG considerably more. FTR, I never fed Grammy's Pot Pie or Cowboy Cookout. Nor do I see anyone here interested in those foods so arguing against them seems just silly...Or is it a case of, since s/he can't dazzle 'em with brilliance then baffle them with cow poop.


Tell me why, the BG is a crap food. It is a total sham. The first ingredient is water, the second is a bad grade of chicken meal. 9% ash in a 32% food?? Deboned chicken is nothing but fresh chicken scraps mixed with even more water so it is like a paste. BG has dried potatoes way up on the list, Annamaet has fresh potatoes (with water) so the amount of potato is overtstated. Also, the term "deboned chicken" suggest they don't even make the food, could be Dad's makes it, like BB.

BG is also very low in calories. 25lb bags another trick. The salmon and bison foods are so dishonest, they are just disguised chicken and turkey foods.

Do you know anything about pet food and the gimmicks played? Do you know how much expertise Annamaet has with sport and sled dogs? 

Do some more research. Eventually you will see.

http://www.annamaet.com/html/about_us.html

I would give the marketing people at Merrick a big bonus they do a great job pawning the stuff off as high grade.

Has Merrick ever published any serious work on animal nutrition?


----------



## mysweetkaos (Sep 20, 2011)

I always go to dogfoodadvisor.com to get a breakdown of the food/ingredients, if that helps. Sometimes people get a biased with what they feed, so this is a good way to check them out, IMO.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

mysweetkaos said:


> I always go to dogfoodadvisor.com to get a breakdown of the food/ingredients, if that helps. Sometimes people get a biased with what they feed, so this is a good way to check them out, IMO.


So you seek the advice of a dentist who professes himself as an "expert label reader" rather than a real expert?


----------



## VaBeachFamily (Apr 12, 2005)

I never meant for this to become a bash fest. I honeslty just wanted an opinion. Like I said, I have tried - Orijen, Canidae, diamond of MANY labels, taste of the wild, natural balance, etc. I have never been pleased. I like this food, my dogs like it, and it seems to be working well with them ( though, not long term so no telling, but so far so good). I just was curious if there was something seriously wrong, like how Diamond seems to HIDE who makes their foods by not announcing it. At least BG says Merrick on the bag!!!


----------



## blehmannwa (Jan 11, 2011)

I have been feeding Merrick Turducken, Pot Pie and Cowboy Cookout. My very ill, old dog enjoys them a great deal. Our pet food guy gave me a can of Burger Pie and Sweetie Fries when I was having trouble getting her to eat. The Merrick foods work almost as well as tripe for her.


----------



## CelticGlory (Jan 19, 2006)

Its about what is best for the dog, not every food will be good for *your* dog. I also look at what other pet owners have been feeding (on other boards and this one). I also look at the breeders and see what works for them, what was the breeder feeding? I may have missed it if you have ever posted this before hand. If I don't know what a food is or can't find out the results of an animal eating a certain food I always post to the boards and get some good feedback. Also if you google your question you may be able to find a lot more pet owners who feed Merrick BG. I only knew a few people and they feed on a rotation.


----------



## lovethebreed (Feb 13, 2011)

Don't pay any attention to sable, he gets kickbacks from pushing Annamaet. 

He only posts when he can abuse anyone using anything else, then he goes on and on about how stupid people are for believeing what they read on the internet. Then he turns around and posts something he's pulled from the internet, calls it 'fact' when it's nothing but someone's opinion attempting to make a buck.

You also find him bashing people for feeding grain free and how potato has nothing over rice, yet his precious Annamaet sells grainfree.

Truly laughable.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

VaBeachFamily said:


> I never meant for this to become a bash fest. I honeslty just wanted an opinion. Like I said, I have tried - Orijen, Canidae, diamond of MANY labels, taste of the wild, natural balance, etc. I have never been pleased. I like this food, my dogs like it, and it seems to be working well with them ( though, not long term so no telling, but so far so good). I just was curious if there was something seriously wrong, like how Diamond seems to HIDE who makes their foods by not announcing it. At least BG says Merrick on the bag!!!


 
yes it does, how many recalls has Merrick had?


----------



## lovethebreed (Feb 13, 2011)

sable123 said:


> **********************.


 
In a word. Yes.

And this statement proves what many of us say about you. It certainly shows your true colors and why it is difficult for anyone take any recommends you make.

You must be a joy to be around with your persistant name calling...how many years are you going to stay 12? :shocked:


----------



## mysweetkaos (Sep 20, 2011)

Sable I'm assuming you're the "real expert" you are referring to? Regardless my answer was to the OP not for you to turn around and insult me with. I simply told her what I do if I am stuck between two brands. I unlike you did not tell her my opinion as fact, I offered a suggestion.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

mysweetkaos said:


> Sable I'm assuming you're the "real expert" you are referring to? Regardless my answer was to the OP not for you to turn around and insult me with. I simply told her what I do if I am stuck between two brands. I unlike you did not tell her my opinion as fact, I offered a suggestion.


 
No I was referring to Robert Downey who owns Annamaet. If I had to choose between an internationally known, published scientist and successful sportsman and the Merrick's touchy-feely marketing machine I would pick RD every time. Also Tim Hunt, good guy.

I think too many people suffer from "cognitive dissonance", and I mean that constructively.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

Sable, you make interesting points and I've learned some things from you. I also have you to thank for helping me find quality foods at a reasonable price that aren't made by Diamond. But have you ever heard the phrase "catch more flies with honey"? I think more people would be willing to listen to what you have to say if you didn't call them stupid and naive.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Emoore said:


> Sable, you make interesting points and I've learned some things from you. I also have you to thank for helping me find quality foods at a reasonable price that aren't made by Diamond. But have you ever heard the phrase "catch more flies with honey"? I think more people would be willing to listen to what you have to say if you didn't call them stupid and naive.


I think if you look at the evidence, it is all in self-defense.


----------



## lovethebreed (Feb 13, 2011)

sable123 said:


> I think if you look at the evidence, it is all in self-defense.


Oh no. Pull up your old posts, the majority of them are calling someone stupid for paying too much for food, for reading the internet, for feeding grain free, for having an aversion to corn...on and on and on.

Even if you do have any knowledge (which is in question), not too many are going to listen to anything you have to say because in your 12 yr old brain you are right and the rest of the world is wrong.


----------



## Packen (Sep 14, 2008)

VaBeachFamily said:


> So, after all of the issues with Diamond ( and my complete ignorance on knowing what Diamond actually produces, leading me to researching a bit more heavily, thought our oldest eats TOTW without problems) we spent over an hour reading bags( I love NUTRISOURCE grain free, price is right, dogs love it, they keep the weight on and they look awesome, BUTTTT it's only available at ONE store, limited hours, not open Sundays, need to know in case of.. flooding or snow lol that I can get to my dogs food a bit closer to home also!), talking to the store owner, and decided to go with BG by Merrick. I noticed that they have a new flavor ( Pork), but we went with Buffalo. After two days, I am not longer having to fight one or the other to eat the kibble, I don't have any vomiting, no diarrhea, and they are happy about it.
> 
> Just curious if anyone else feeds it? What do you think about the new Pork recipe?


BG is one of the foods that my dogs do real good on, I buy the chicken. They get either Canidae, Instinct or BG alongwith raw on certain days.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

lovethebreed said:


> Oh no. Pull up your old posts, the majority of them are calling someone stupid for paying too much for food, for reading the internet, for feeding grain free, for having an aversion to corn...on and on and on.
> 
> Even if you do have any knowledge (which is in question), not too many are going to listen to anything you have to say because in your 12 yr old brain you are right and the rest of the world is wrong.


 
Because when I make a point like with Corn, which is great example, it is based on science, fact, studies, tests, etc.

Not the dentist at TheDogFoodAdvisor.com or internet hysteria. Fact.

And when I say the chicken meal in BG is low quality it is based on Fact, the Ash content. That is how protein meals are graded. Fact


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

sable123 said:


> And when I say the chicken meal in BG is low quality it is based on Fact, the Ash content. That is how protein meals are graded. Fact


So if that is the case... why so much hate for Orijen and their low ash chicken? Don't tell me the price either. We know you don't like the price.


----------



## lovethebreed (Feb 13, 2011)

sable123 said:


> Because when I make a point like with Corn, which is great example, it is based on science, fact, studies, tests, etc.
> 
> Not the dentist at TheDogFoodAdvisor.com or internet hysteria. Fact.
> 
> And when I say the chicken meal in BG is low quality it is based on Fact, the Ash content. That is how protein meals are graded. Fact


You can't get the point no matter who makes it or how it's presented can you? I was mistaken on 12, make it 2. 

Let us know when your IQ passes your shoe size. (tongue in cheek as we know that day will never come) :wild:


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Lucy Dog said:


> So if that is the case... why so much hate for Orijen and their low ash chicken? Don't tell me the price either. We know you don't like the price.


"We believe dog lovers want to know where the ingredients in their dog’s food come from. For this reason we don’t buy the inexpensive, bulk commodity ingredients found in conventional dog foods. Instead, we use ingredients that are sustainably raised within our region by people we know and trust, approved ' fit for human consumption,' and then delivered to our door FRESH."

This is total bull. The fresh meat in Orijen does not represent a meaningful amount of the GA protein, rather it is the dry chicken and turkey meal that accounts for it. So it is neither fresh nor produced in Canada and yes it is purchased in bulk. The dry meal comes from plants in the US Southeast from people they don't know other than from dealing in business transactions. They make it sound like they come for Sunday dinner.

Shall I go on?


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

Who's the company selling them their meat meal from the US? Any idea who that company is and where they get that meat from? Do they sell to any other dog food companies?

As for the plant matter coming from the US as well... Where did you get this info from? Are all their plant matter being shipped from us sources?

Are you saying the only thing that's regional to that company is the water inclusive meat and nothing else?


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

Lol... I just read through this whole thread. Sable just about went off the deep end calling people stupid, morons, naive, and no one has the experience that he does. Good stuff, sable. Make them fear you if they don't believe you.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

I will go on:


"To match the meat-eating anatomy of dogs and cats, ORIJEN features much higher meat inclusions (75-80%) than conventional pet foods (25-40%). These rich and varied meat ingredients produce a Biologically Appropriate protein level of 38% or greater, which reflects the natural diet."

This statement is also extremely misleading because it is a weight comparison before cooking not a protein comparison. It might be true before processing but what is omitted is that the foods with 25 - 40% "meat" uses sources that are 70% protein, compared to 12% protein for fresh meat. So you pay the price for fresh meat and all you get is "meat meal"

I really like this one it is clever:

"wild-caught fish that are farmed or fished within our region by people we know and trust"

I have never seen a "wild caught fish" that was farmed. Orijen used to advertise that all its fresh salmon was wild, until I guess they realized that salmon season in Canada is only a few months and that was impossible.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Lucy Dog said:


> Who's the company selling them their meat meal from the US? Any idea who that company is and where they get that meat from? Do they sell to any other dog food companies?
> 
> As for the plant matter coming from the US as well... Where did you get this info from? Are all their plant matter being shipped from us sources?
> 
> Are you saying the only thing that's regional to that company is the water inclusive meat and nothing else?


"So, while our focus is “fresh and regional” our primary objective is always to achieve the highest standard in nutrition, palatability and food safety. Until chicken meal from human grade chickens is available in Canada, Champion will source its chicken meal from one of 2 USA chicken processors, whose chickens and facility are USDA certified, and who have the appropriate European Union qualifications (EU 1774)."

This would be nice to put on the website. Ethical too.


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

I understand the difference between meat meal vs meat. You lose a lot of water (and weight) as the meat is cooked. Not too sure how this is different than two brands that you constantly defend - eukanuba and pro plan. Both have water inclusive meats at the top of their ingredient list. The only difference I see is Orijen is followed by meat meals while eukanuba and pro plan don't.

Anyways... you still didn't answer my questions. The meat that they are getting from the US - where does it come from and is it supplied to any other dog food companies. Same for the US plant ingredients - who's supplying it? 

And last but not least... where are you getting this info from? I have read that the meat meal does not come from canada, but this is the first I'm hearing of some of the claims you're making. Just wondering where you got this info from.


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

And where does it say all of their ingredients are local? Do they make that claim anywhere? I know they say their FRESH ingredients are - because they are - but where does it say that everything is farmed and caught fresh and local? 

I just slightly skimmed over their website.. i've got to run, but maybe I missed it.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

Sable, you diss Merrick's BG b/c its #1 ingredient is water. This is absurd, especially since chicken meal is the 2nd ingredient & turkey meal is the 4th ingredient. Clearly a substantial amount of meat is used in making the product. Yes, prior to processing, deboned chicken is primarily water. Following processing, the finished product is nearly dry, & can't accurately be described as mainly water. This is equally true for meat meals prior to processing. They were at one time *gasp* 'mainly water'. All dry foods, prior to processing, are mainly water, ie water is the #1 ingredient. I'm not unduly interested in exactly who dessicated what & when. Note that Annamaet kibbles are also 'mainly water' pre-processing. 

As silly as that is, your arguments against Orijen are even more specious. Suddenly, rather than decrying the water in chicken, you're up in arms about using dry meal chicken & turkey. Your reasoning lacks both logic & consistency. Your impassioned claims seem to result more from your biases & intransigence than an abiding respect for & understanding of canine nutrition. 

Scientist & sportsman vs the dentist...Ummm, why is sportsman even relevant? Dentistry is grounded in science & many dentists are scientists. Using 'dentist' as a pejorative is quite a stretch.

Marketing??? OhMyNooooo. Say it isn't so! Surely these businesses aren't hoping to be profitable??? Yeahhh, they all market, they all aim to successfully sell product, & most of 'em are at least slightly slick whether they're producing a premium quality kibble like Orijen or a mid-market product like Pro-pak. Consumers need to be aware & informed of what's in the bag & how that pertains to their pets b/c marketing isn't going to disappear.

Kibble by its very nature is heavily processed regardless of what foods were used in manufacturing it. This is as true of Orijen as it is of Old Roy. Do heavily processed foods lack the quality of fresh products? Should we be feeding them to our beloved pets? There are fascinating discussions on the subject. For myself, I haven't found a definitive answer yet. I dislike carb laden diets for carnivores, but many dogs thrive on even cheap, low quality foods.

I currently feed raw. I've fed Propak, Super Sweet, Purina ONE, Orijen, TOTW, Merrick's BG, Nature's Logic, Canidae, Blue Wilderness, Earthborn, EVO, Wysong's Optimal Performance, Timberwolf Wild & Natural, Solid Gold Barking at the Moon & some I can't remember. MyTribe did well on all of 'em. They seemed to do every bit as good on Purina ONE as they do on raw. The biggest difference I've seen on raw is much smaller, less smelly stools. The biggest difference I saw on high protein, meat based kibbles is that my dogs were leaner despite getting more calories & they did this without contant foraging & grubbing for food. I like that, especially as my 2 girls were previously a bit plump & really, realllly HATE to diet (hence the foraging & grubbing for any stray edible).

Food choices should be made in the context of each person's dogs, budget, lifestyle, needs & concerns. What is ideal for one dog could be a disaster for another. There is a kibble I absolutely hate, yet many people whose dogs have allergies do exceptionally well on it. IF I was in their position I might, however reluctantly, find myself feeding that kibble. At the end of these discussions our pets' welfare trumps all arguments, b/c isn't it really about their well being?


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

?Sable, you diss Merrick's BG b/c its #1 ingredient is water. This is absurd, especially since chicken meal is the 2nd ingredient & turkey meal is the 4th ingredient. Clearly a substantial amount of meat is used in making the product. Yes, prior to processing, deboned chicken is primarily water. Following processing, the finished product is nearly dry, & can't accurately be described as mainly water. This is equally true for meat meals prior to processing. They were at one time *gasp* 'mainly water'. All dry foods, prior to processing, are mainly water, ie water is the #1 ingredient. I'm not unduly interested in exactly who dessicated what & when. Note that Annamaet kibbles are also 'mainly water' pre-processing."

Ruby, I don't think you understand the labels and how misleading they are. What you are saying is totally incorrect. As for BG, I made two criticisms 1) That the high ash content shows the quality of the ingredients is just average, nothing that justifies the high price and 2) The Bison and Salmon formulas are just disguised chicken and turkey formulas. When fresh bison meat and salmon meat are used the end product has virtually no actual bison and salmon in it.I have no second thoughts on these two statements.

As for your points, you are incorrect. Preprocessing means at the point the dog food is made, not two steps before. "Chicken Meal" goes in dry and comes out dry, "Deboned Chicken" goes in wet and comes out dry". Water is part of the weight when the order of the label is determined.

If you had a 30lb bag of food and 10lbs was "deboned chicken" it would have less than 4% protein, compare to over 20% for "chicken meal"

Does that help. Using fresh meat is just expensive optics. 

It is done solely to mislead the consumer. You could not possibly put enough fresh protein in a kibble to make a meaningful impact.

You statement about Annamaet is not correct.

"Scientist & sportsman vs the dentist...Ummm, why is sportsman even relevant? Dentistry is grounded in science & many dentists are scientists. Using 'dentist' as a pejorative is quite a stretch"

So if a well known canine nutritionist and champion sled dog racer offered you advice you would listen to the "expert label reader" human dentist?

Really?


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Lucy Dog said:


> I understand the difference between meat meal vs meat. You lose a lot of water (and weight) as the meat is cooked. Not too sure how this is different than two brands that you constantly defend - eukanuba and pro plan. Both have water inclusive meats at the top of their ingredient list. The only difference I see is Orijen is followed by meat meals while eukanuba and pro plan don't.
> 
> Anyways... you still didn't answer my questions. The meat that they are getting from the US - where does it come from and is it supplied to any other dog food companies. Same for the US plant ingredients - who's supplying it?
> 
> And last but not least... where are you getting this info from? I have read that the meat meal does not come from canada, but this is the first I'm hearing of some of the claims you're making. Just wondering where you got this info from.


That came from Bonnie at Orijen. The letter was actually posted here last year. As for their claims on sourcing Canadian, oh come on that is the whole Orijen mantra. Dude get real.


----------



## Gretchen (Jan 20, 2011)

None of the stores in my area sell BG by Merrick, some sell the cans, but the cats and dog are not big fans. I hope your dogs continue to enjoy the kibble. I find with our dog that she just gets bored with the same kibble over and over. Whenever I introduce a new kind, she seems to love for 5 days and then its just OK. 

We've had fairly good results with Nature's Variety kibble and raw.


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

sable123 said:


> That came from Bonnie at Orijen. The letter was actually posted here last year. As for their claims on sourcing Canadian, oh come on that is the whole Orijen mantra. Dude get real.


Again, I understand that their meat meal is sourced from the US. I've seen that quote you posted before. I'm asking (for the third time now) where you're getting the info for your other claims. And not just the source of your claims, but to go into a little more detail about them.

And since we're on the marketing side of things... Let me ask you this since you're so opposed to "marketing gimmicks". You're a big supporter of royal canin, right? How do you feel about their breed specific formulas? You know, their German shepherd 24, or the boxer 42 or their golden retriever 67 formulas? All of those formulas are exactly like the other, but they've got those very good looking popular breeds on the bag. Just wonder how you feel about that type of marketing by a brand that you approve of.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Lucy Dog said:


> Again, I understand that their meat meal is sourced from the US. I've seen that quote you posted before. I'm asking (for the third time now) where you're getting the info for your other claims. And not just the source of your claims, but to go into a little more detail about them.
> 
> And since we're on the marketing side of things... Let me ask you this since you're so opposed to "marketing gimmicks". You're a big supporter of royal canin, right? How do you feel about their breed specific formulas? You know, their German shepherd 24, or the boxer 42 or their golden retriever 67 formulas? All of those formulas are exactly like the other, but they've got those very good looking popular breeds on the bag. Just wonder how you feel about that type of marketing by a brand that you approve of.


 
Which other claims? Ask me again.

Your question about Royal Canin is a good one, but there is one big difference between Royal Canin and Orijen and that is research capability and overall scientific knowledge. 

Royal Canin feed trials every food it sells and does not do consumer trials, meaning its trial results are pure science. Also, Royal Canin started as a company that only made large breed foods, in fact it was started for GSD's. No company knows more about GSD's than Royal Canin. 

So I don't think breed specific foods are required but in light of the fact that RC has a real body of knowledge and these foods are $1.25lb compared to Orijen at $2.25 - $3lb, I give RC a break.

I will say that I think the Labrador formula is spot on and worth every penny. The design of the kibble and protein/fat are perfect.

So, I can really appreciate your question on RC, but if the food was an expensive as Orijen's I would trash it just the same.


----------



## VaBeachFamily (Apr 12, 2005)

Gretchen said:


> None of the stores in my area sell BG by Merrick, some sell the cans, but the cats and dog are not big fans. I hope your dogs continue to enjoy the kibble. I find with our dog that she just gets bored with the same kibble over and over. Whenever I introduce a new kind, she seems to love for 5 days and then its just OK.
> 
> We've had fairly good results with Nature's Variety kibble and raw.


 
Funny, ours are the same way. My female is the worst! We are considering buying a few more containers, and bulk purchasing a few foods/flavors to alternate every few days!


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

All of the royal canin breed specific formulas are pretty much exactly the same. The rices might be mixed a little different, but everything is exactly the same. The spot on Lab formula must be completely off from the Chihuahua puppy formula because they're virtually the same thing. I don't care how they do their research, their breed specific formulas are just as much (if not more) of a marketing gimmick as Orijen and their regional fresh ingredients. That's a fact.

And you mentioned you'd trash them if RC was more expensive? Are they really much of a difference? Based on the prices where I order my food (petfooddirect), they've got the RC lab formula at $59 for a 30 pound bag averaging $1.97 per pound. Orijen's 29.7 pound bag is $66 averaging $2.22 per pound. 

And when you compare these prices, are you factoring in calories per cup? RC lab is coming in at an extremely poor and low 293 kcal per cup while Orijen's coming in at 460 kcal per cup. I feed based on calories, not on cups or pounds. Factor that in and you're feeding much more RC than Orijen. That price per pound example you gave is completely irrelevant when you factor in how much more you have to feed. In the end, Orijen's price per pound is a much better deal without question. Still want to disregard RC's marketing gimmicks because of price?

About my original questions regarding your orijen claims. Since their meat meal is being sourced from the US... who's supplying it and do they supply any other dog food companies? Same goes for their plant material that you said was all coming from US sources that they don't know. Who are they getting them from? Does the same company provide all plant ingredients for them? Do they supply any other dog food companies?


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Lucy Dog said:


> All of the royal canin breed specific formulas are pretty much exactly the same. The rices might be mixed a little different, but everything is exactly the same. The spot on Lab formula must be completely off from the Chihuahua puppy formula because they're virtually the same thing. I don't care how they do their research, their breed specific formulas are just as much (if not more) of a marketing gimmick as Orijen and their regional fresh ingredients. That's a fact.
> 
> And you mentioned you'd trash them if RC was more expensive? Are they really much of a difference? Based on the prices where I order my food (petfooddirect), they've got the RC lab formula at $59 for a 30 pound bag averaging $1.97 per pound. Orijen's 29.7 pound bag is $66 averaging $2.22 per pound.
> 
> ...


You are wrong about the comments on the Lab formula, dead wrong. In the case of the Labrador food, the calories are lower because the fat content is so much lower. Labradors use calories from different types of foods differently. Sometimes calories don't tell the whole story. Labradors cannot use fat efficiently so they pork up. Have you ever wondered why so many Labs are fat? 

For example, calories from protein are largely meaningless. Protein is not used for energy, so much of the protein above what the dog needs for muscle repair and some metabolic functions is just flushed. So a high protein food's calories overstate the true nutrition. There are just a few dogs that actually need protein above 25-26%, the rest is just of waste of money. Also, foods with too much protein can actually work against the calories from fats and carbs because protein can use more calories than it provides. In the case of the Lab, this is a very good thing.

As for pricing, the RC GSD formula is $42.99 at my local store and the Lab formula is $45.

I do not have the name of the company that sells Orijen its protein meal and I really don't care. My point has never been that the chicken meal was bad, my point is that the company misleads the consumer in thinking that it makes a food from small regional farmers and ranchers, when the truth is the vast majority of the protein is the same chicken meal found in other foods and it does not come from Canada. Perhaps by weight that is true, but where the rubber meets the road it is blatantly false.

As for this, "Same goes for their plant material that you said was all coming from US sources that they don't know". I never said this. I really don't know what you are referring to.

If you feel your dog requires 38% protein, then you can make a smarter choice by using Earthborn Primitive and support a more ethical company.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Let me make another point, while generally you can use "cups" to compare calories, sometimes you cannot. This is true when one kibble design is so radically different different from another. It is very hard to compare large breed kibble designs to the average.

I think you will find the calories by weight are not as big as you think.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

sable123 said:


> For example, calories from protein are largely meaningless. Protein is not used for energy, so much of the protein above what the dog needs for muscle repair and some metabolic functions is just flushed. So a high protein food's calories overstate the true nutrition. There are just a few dogs that actually need protein above 25-26%, the rest is just of waste of money. Also, foods with too much protein can actually work against the calories from fats and carbs because protein can use more calories than it provides. In the case of the Lab, this is a very good thing.


So it's Atkins for dogs?


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Emoore said:


> So it's Atkins for dogs?


Yes pretty much. That is why very active dogs do poorly on this type of diet. I have seen them myself, no energy, they lose weight and they overheat.


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

Let's use the example of the GSD formula instead. 24% protein, 17.5% fat, 340 calories - similar fat to orijen, but less calories and we're comparing the same breed. You say you can get these bags for $43? I'm looking all over the internet and I can't seem to find anything lower than $52 for the 33# bags. Most average around the $56-$58 range. You're store sells for $10 less than the internets cheapest price and $15 less than the average... god bless you, sable. Your price might be great, but the rest of the world is paying a premium for a low calorie diet.

Royal Canin German Shepherd 24 Dry Dog Food 33 Pound



sable123 said:


> I do not have the name of the company that sells Orijen its protein meal and I really don't care. My point has never been that the chicken meal was bad, my point is that the company misleads the consumer in thinking that it makes a food from small regional farmers and ranchers, when the truth is the vast majority of the protein is the same chicken meal found in other foods and it does not come from Canada. Perhaps by weight that is true, but where the rubber meets the road it is blatantly false.


I understood the point of what you were trying to say. It was never about the quality of the food, but more the evil marketing. You don't like marketing gimmicks, but you'll give a pass if the price is right even though it isn't except for at your store that no one knows about. I'd just figure that someone who makes all these claims and goes out of their way to call companies regarding their protein ash contents to ask important questions like where the meat is actually coming from, but I guess I was wrong.

So, a company that sell chihuahua puppy, german shepherd, golden retreiver, labrador retreiver, etc, etc, etc, gets a pass because their lab formula is spot on, according to you? Seems weird that they focus these breed specific formulas on all of americas favorite breeds, right? They also put pictures of those breeds on the bags and charge a premium for it, but they get the pass because a hedge fund manager says so... gotcha! 

By the way, how does a hedge fund manager find so much time to know about dog food, but a dentist couldn't possibly know anything? What exactly are you hedging over there? I'd think with the way our market has been the last few years that someone who runs their own fund couldn't possibly find time to know so much about dog food. 



sable123 said:


> As for this, "Same goes for their plant material that you said was all coming from US sources that they don't know". I never said this. I really don't know what you are referring to.


I thought you mentioned that in that in an earlier post. So they get their fresh meats (not meat meal) locally, their fruits and veggies locally, but your beef is that their meat meals aren't local and they make it seem like it is. Ok... I can understand that. Everyone has the right to their own opinion... you have yours and i have mine. You'll give a pass to some marketing tactics, but not others. Understandable.



sable123 said:


> If you feel your dog requires 38% protein, then you can make a smarter choice by using Earthborn Primitive and support a more ethical company.


I use the food that works for me and the dogs I'm feeding. I'm not a dog food nazi. I don't go around calling young girls idiots because a supposed hedge fund manager doesn't like the food they feed. I'd have no problem giving some of those annamaet formulas a shot if my current kibble wasn't working. Same goes for the earthborn. What I feed works and it's a quality kibble, so I have absolutely no reason to switch. If that wasn't the case, I'd look into other options.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Calories per Kg of Food:

Orijen - 3900
Royal Canin GSD 24 - 4026
Royal Canin Lab - 3730
Dr. Tim's Pursuit - 4114
Dr. Tim's Momentum - 4630
Annamaet Ultra - 4228
Annamaet Salcha - 3980
Pro Plan Select - 4130

I don't understand why you keep calling Royal Canin GSD a low calorie diet. When it says "per cup" that means by volume. Any number of factors can mess up a cup to cup comparison. In this case the cross shape of the kibble.

You don't buy or feed dog food by volume. I randomly picked some foods and Orijen is the second lowest in calories but by far the most expensive.

As for my career, has nothing to do with it other then you sweat the details. I have had many dogs, bred many dogs and know people that have had more dogs and bred more dogs.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> For example, calories from protein are largely meaningless. Protein is not used for energy, so much of the protein above what the dog needs for muscle repair and some metabolic functions is just flushed. So a high protein food's calories overstate the true nutrition. There are just a few dogs that actually need protein above 25-26%, the rest is just of waste of money. Also, foods with too much protein can actually work against the calories from fats and carbs because protein can use more calories than it provides. In the case of the Lab, this is a very good thing.


Please supply links to information substantiating these claims.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

RubyTuesday said:


> Please supply links to information substantiating these claims.


No need to.


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

come on, the Bash Fest is good. sit back, read and enjoy.



VaBeachFamily said:


> I never meant for this to become a bash fest.


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

sable123:

have GSD, will travel.


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

You're overstating the GSD 24, it's actually 3944, and I haven't checked the others.

You do have a point with the volume vs weight... I will give you that. I'm just not used to feeding kibbles in the shapes of stars and stripes and all types of fancy designs so it kind of slipped my mind. It's still not 1.25 per pound like you say it is when the average price i'm finding is about $56 (and some more) for 33 pounds. It's still a marketing gimmick food with all their breed specific formulas.

Speaking of gimmicks and going back to your BG critisms... did you really put pro plan select on your list? A food with more "egg product" than actual meat in some formulas? A food they call "Natural Beef and Barley", but the first five ingredients are Beef, barley, brewers dried yeast, brewers rice, chicken meal. That "beef" formula? Don't knock BG for false advertising with their bison and salmon formulas, but continue to praise pro plan.

As for your career.... i can care less what you do. Actually if you don't mind, I'd love for you to send over a OM for one of your funds that I could take a look at. Maybe waive your minimum investment amount to let your good buddy invest too. 

The only reason I brought up your career was because you knocked a dentist for starting a dog food analysis website, but you're in finance and well, we all know why you're a member here. Kind of the pot calling the kettle black.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

Lucy Dog said:


> You're overstating the GSD 24, it's actually 3944, and I haven't checked the others.
> 
> You do have a point with the volume vs weight... I will give you that. I'm just not used to feeding kibbles in the shapes of stars and stripes and all types of fancy designs so it kind of slipped my mind. It's still not 1.25 per pound like you say it is when the average price i'm finding is about $56 (and some more) for 33 pounds. It's still a marketing gimmick food with all their breed specific formulas.
> 
> ...


Minimum investment for the fund is $1.5MM and for an SMA is $5MM.

Cut and paste from RC:

CALORIE CONTENT
This diet contains 4026 kilocalories per kilogram or 
343 kilocalories per cup ME (metabolizable energy) 
on an as fed basis (calculated).


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> No need to.


Why is that? Surely you can substantiate these claims you're making that go to the very heart of canine nutrition.


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

sable123 said:


> Minimum investment for the fund is $1.5MM and for an SMA is $5MM.


Can that be waived by the fund manager? Does the fund, not the managed accounts, allow individual investors?

Not trying to quiz you... Im generally interested.


----------



## Lucy Dog (Aug 10, 2008)

And how much under management if you don't mind me asking.


----------



## Konotashi (Jan 11, 2010)

sable123 said:


> You are wrong about the comments on the Lab formula, dead wrong. In the case of the_ Labrador food, the calories are lower because the fat content is so much lower. _Labradors use calories from different types of foods differently. Sometimes calories don't tell the whole story. Labradors cannot use fat efficiently so they pork up. *Have you ever wondered why so many Labs are fat? *


I think you're the one that is more gullible to all of the marketing gimmicks than anyone here. You TRULY believe that breed specific diets are necessary? Do you REALLY think that a lab has completely different dietary needs than a GSD? 

And to answer your question - because people over-feed them and under-exercise them. Same reasons ANY other breed gets fat.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

RubyTuesday said:


> Why is that? Surely you can substantiate these claims you're making that go to the very heart of canine nutrition.


This information is not a state secret. Canine Nutrition 101. Protein is not easily converted to energy, it is energy inefficient and creates heat.

When protein is limited to to amount needed for muscle repair, fat and carbohydrates are used resulting in a cooler dog and less stress on the dogs body.


----------



## lovethebreed (Feb 13, 2011)

RubyTuesday said:


> Please supply links to information substantiating these claims.





sable123 said:


> No need to.


 
Transalation: they don't exist.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

> Transalation: they don't exist.


Or the information as posted is wildly inaccurate & misleading. I'm mildly curious as to whether this is by design or through a combination of ignorance & hubris, but the reasons aren't important. 



> For example, calories from protein are largely meaningless. Protein is not used for energy, so much of the protein above what the dog needs for muscle repair and some metabolic functions is just flushed.


Only the excess amino group, ie nitrogenous wastes, are 'flushed'. Far from being 'meaningless' beyond muscle repair & metabolic functions, proteins are the most flexible of the basic nutritional units. Proteins can be synthesized to provide not only proteins, but also sugars & fats when necessary. Neither dietary fats nor carbs have this nutritional flexibility, because neither can be used to provide essential amino acids.



> Also, foods with too much protein can actually work against the calories from fats and carbs because protein can use more calories than it provides.


Similar & equally ridiculous dietary claims have been made for humans regarding eggs & celery. Canine weight loss, much like human dieting, is not so blissfully simple as just increasing dietary protein. There are a lot of pudgy, inactive dogs & their owners that only wish this claim was true!

In my personal experience, my dogs maintain a lean weight more easily on meat based high protein kibbles or raw than carb heavy kibbles. This might be due to less water retention, or less fat storage, but it's desirable and wholly consistent with the canine evolutionary diet.



> There are just a few dogs that actually need protein above 25-26%, the rest is just of waste of money.


Actually, dogs need little to no dietary carbs. They're included in kibbles b/c of the natural binding properties & even more importantly, b/c compared to meat, grains & potatoes are cheap. 

I'm curious as to why you persistently ignore this quite basic fact of canine nutrition. Unlike obligate carnivores, dogs can utilize dietary carbs, but they're neither necessary nor preferred. For years, marketing gimmicks were employed to blithely (& quite successfully) ignore this reality. This was done solely to make a ton of money on cheaply manufactured, mediocre but convenient, commercial dog foods. Most dogs will survive, & many will thrive, on even marginal diets. However, that's due more to the marvelous makeup of our opportunistic canine companions than the quality of commercial foods.

There has been speculation that the leap in canine diabetes might be due to the preponderance of dietary carbs in the modern canine diet. My vet thinks this is likely, especially coupled to the rise in canine obesity even among show dogs. Personally, I suspect a part of the rise in chubby dogs is due to carb laden diets. Regardless of the outcome of such speculations, I prefer a high protein diet b/c it's the diet dogs evolved on for millennia. 



> This information is not a state secret. Canine Nutrition 101. Protein is not easily converted to energy, it is energy inefficient and creates heat.


In temperate climates, & even in warm regions, much of the energy mammals expend, including dogs, maintains body heat. Even many of the hottest regions experience frigid nights. Of necessity, mammals are warmer than the environment most of the time. That necessary warmth comes from expended energy, ie heat production as a by product of the diet. 

Twist & turn, spit & sputter, it remains true that dogs evolved to be hunters & meat eaters. For most dogs, the healthiest diet will be meat based, high protein & low carb.

This is not an indictment of people that feed mid-level kibbles. I've done so in the past & might have to again in the future. Personally, I'm convinced canine genetics is tied more closely to health than kibble preferences or raw feeding. Despite that, people deserve facts & not distortions & inaccuracies that fit some biased & faulty agenda.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

RubyTuesday said:


> Or the information as posted is wildly inaccurate & misleading. I'm mildly curious as to whether this is by design or through a combination of ignorance & hubris, but the reasons aren't important.
> 
> Only the excess amino group, ie nitrogenous wastes, are 'flushed'. Far from being 'meaningless' beyond muscle repair & metabolic functions, proteins are the most flexible of the basic nutritional units. Proteins can be synthesized to provide not only proteins, but also sugars & fats when necessary. Neither dietary fats nor carbs have this nutritional flexibility, because neither can be used to provide essential amino acids.
> 
> ...


With all due respect you are completely wrong. Please do not give anyone advice on what to feed a dog. Proteins can be used as energy but it is very inefficient and creates a lot of heat. Protein above what is needed for muscle repair is never advised. Fat is the most efficient source of energy and carbohydrate is next. Most dogs cannot use fat efficiently, so carbs are better for some. Do you know what "fat adaptation" is? Well do you? Many dogs do not exercise in a manner that is considered "aerobic" so they burn carbs more efficiently than fat. Dogs need a mix of both. 

I have no agenda at all, well I do, I do not like how dog food elitists like yourself bully people into wasting money and time feeding their dogs.

You don't have a clue and I mean this constructively. You need to educate yourself.

The point I made about protein levels is Canine Nutrition 101. You must have missed that class.

Read this it is written at a level you can understand:

http://shepherdkennels.com/nutrition/performance.html


----------



## lovethebreed (Feb 13, 2011)

WHAT? Read something from the internet and believe it? YOU consistantly tell people how stupid they are for believing what they read on the internet, yet you continue to talk out of the other side of your mouth and post info you've pulled off of the internet.

You post a link from someone's kennel that has an article written by a vet? Really? We all know vets are the last people on the planet to go to about nutrition. 

So, they are stupid if they believe anything other than what you post. Sure buddy.

I'll repeat a question asked months ago of you that you never answered. What are your nutrition credentials mr know it all? 

I see you haven't addressed the $$$$ Back to Basics that is made by your pick of the week. I thought you hated gimmic marketing that jacks up prices? Your latest recommendation (company) makes one of the highest priced kibbles on the market.

What a joke.


----------



## RubyTuesday (Jan 20, 2008)

In what way am I a dog food elitist? Because you say so, or can you substantiate your absurd accusation in some meaningful way which might explain why you oh so erroneously think so? 

I'm completely wrong? Not hardly. You're barely 'partially right' in your spewings which either ignore or are totally ignorant of basic biochemistry & are equally bereft of even a basic understanding of canines.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

RubyTuesday said:


> In what way am I a dog food elitist? Because you say so, or can you substantiate your absurd accusation in some meaningful way which might explain why you oh so erroneously think so?
> 
> I'm completely wrong? Not hardly. You're barely 'partially right' in your spewings which either ignore or are totally ignorant of basic biochemistry & are equally bereft of even a basic understanding of canines.


Read what I wrote on the other thread. That sums it up. You have what is called "cognitive dissonance". 

What I said about protein and calories is a well known fact. It does not have to be substantiated in any way, shape or form.


----------



## lovethebreed (Feb 13, 2011)

sable123 said:


> What I said about protein and calories is a well known fact. It does not have to be substantiated in any way, shape or form.


Oh contraire derriere! You speak of someone that cannot substantiate anything you say. Facts are indeed substantiated, if they are not then they are not facts!


I'm keeping my fingers crossed your IQ hits the double digits sometime soon! lol Ok, I cannot lie, I'm not really some things are just impossible!


----------



## schroedes (Sep 10, 2010)

get Fromm, cant go wrong


----------

