Beneful

I fail to grasp a connection between personalities and nutrition.

That system does have some big flawshttp://www.dogfoodproject.com/index.php?page=grading_kibble

Those concerns make sense to me, at least most of them. As we all know, individual dogs will vary in their responses to particular foods. However the scoring system is a quick way to clearly show that nearly any food is better than Beneful.

I fail to grasp a connection between personalities and nutrition.

I'm confused too [&o]  I wonder if Purina had scored 120+,would we have seen the same response?? []
Yes the test has flaws,but i think the 3 foods mentioned in the above posts would come out as some of the lowest in any such test,infact they dont need any tests,just a scan over the ingredient list and GA will tell you they're not fit for canine consumption [&o]

ORIGINAL: Edie

I fail to grasp a connection between personalities and nutrition.

I'm confused too [&o] I wonder if Purina had scored 120+,would we have seen the same response?? []
[&o]

You know...I'm seeing some MAJOR rudeness on this board lately and frankly, it's quite a irritating.
Sandra may feed all of her dogs Purina, but she home cooks too.
And, you know what?
WHO CARES?
No one OTHER THAN Sandra should care what she feeds her dogs. Are they living? YES. Are they healthy? I believe so, until she tells us otherwise.
Sandra didn't come on here asking us what she should feed her dogs. It is known what she feeds, she's quite content with it, you're going to do what you want, but please consider being a decent human being and quit making rude comments about it.
Opinions are like buttholes, EVERYONE HAS THEM. Yours is going to mean no more than anyone else's until Sandra asks for it.
Sorry, I'm having a rough day with this board and I'm sick of the "High and Mighty" of the dog food attitudes on here.
I feed what I feed my dog because that is what *I* believe is healthiest for her. But I do not think that I am better or know more than anyone else. And I'm not going to pretend I do and stick my e-nose up in the air and attach an emoticon to it.

I'm confused too I wonder if Purina had scored 120+,would we have seen the same response??
Yes the test has flaws,but i think the 3 foods mentioned in the above posts would come out as some of the lowest in any such test,infact they dont need any tests,just a scan over the ingredient list and GA will tell you they're not fit for canine consumption

Yes, you have seen the very same response from me. ...even if Purina had been at the top of the list with the highest score.  I would not go by a scoring test like that.  As to the correlation between  human relationships and nutrition, it is done the same way.  Someone says If you fish and you hubby doesn't not, subtract 10 points, If your hubby likes to dance and you don't subtract 5 points, if you and hubby both like steak well done, add 5 points, If the final score is below 50, then you will never stay married.    Or If the dog food has grain in it, subtract 10 points, if it has X in it, subtract 7 points, if it has Z in it, add 8 points. If the score is below XX, then the food isn't fit to eat.

It is all the same.  Someone made up the "questions" and decided how many points to be add and how many to be subtracted and you get the grading.  It isn't at all like a test in shcool  with 10 questions where if you say the capitol of Texas is Dallas you lose the  10 points because that is totaly wrong,  or you say Cleveland sits on Lake Erie and you get 10  oints..  These are without a doubt facts, thruth, and any other answer is wrong.. no matter what others may say or think.
 
PS  I am not defending Beneful or any other food.  I am just saying you can't go by those tests and the scoring.  I would not doubt at all if someone promoting a particualr brand of dog food make it up.  Who knows for sure.

ORIGINAL: sandra_slayton

I would not doubt at all if someone promoting a particualr brand of dog food make it up. Who knows for sure.

From the [linkhttp://pets.families.com/blog/grade-your-dog-food]original author[/link]

Hi, i've never actually posted here or even visited this site before, but i thought i'd step in and say that *i* am the original poster of this dog food grading system.

My name is Sarah Irick and i am a Great Dane owner and rescue volunteer. i am a Civil/Industrial Engineer, not a veterinarian or animal nutritionist by education or employment. i do not work for a pet food manufacturer nor am i affiliated with one. i am just an individual who is concerned about what i feed my dogs and wants to help others decide what to feed their own. i cannot remember the exact date i designed this system, though i know it's been more than a year (probably 2-3 years ago). i was concerned with the way people sometimes throw out names of "good" dog foods that maybe aren't so good, and others take their words for it. Foods that maybe used to be good before their ingredients were changed for the worse or before better options became available are still being touted by some as being super-premium and i disagree. Since many pet owners do not have the time or inclination to do as many hours of research into pet (specifically dog) nutrition as i and many of you have, i wanted an *easier* way for them to compare labels. Unfortunately it is still a bit cumbersome (sometimes 2 people calculate the same food and get different scores even) but it's better than nothing in my opinion.

Is it exact science? No. i don't claim for it to be. In fact i've had to make a couple of changes over time (which the above don't reflect) for new circumstances i've run across, such as the food that contained NO MEAT (not a special diet just one that was so cheap it didn't contain any meat at all) and needs a steep penalty IMO but still scored a decent grade on the original or the newer kibbles that contain no grain and IMO if it still has sufficient fiber and carbs then it deserves extra credit that wasn't previously reflected. Also i've gotten comments and opinions that i take seriously and incorporate if it seems appropriate.

i don't have a permanent site host for this although seeing how hugely popular it is and how widely spread without accreditation it has become perhaps i should do so. It isn't that i care so much about credit but many people will ask the questions that your posters have about my affiliations and biases, etc.

i don't officially support any one food; anywhere that i personally posted grades on specific foods it was to give an idea of where these foods fell so people didn't always have to do the math.

ORIGINAL: belleandcodysmom

" He don't have long ..."

NOT true !!!!  This dog, if fed and cared for properly can easily live another 10 yrs.

[sm=rotfl.gif]

ORIGINAL: LizzieCollie

ORIGINAL: belleandcodysmom

" He don't have long ..."

NOT true !!!!  This dog, if fed and cared for properly can easily live another 10 yrs.

[sm=rotfl.gif]

 
[sm=lol.gif][sm=rotfl.gif][sm=lol.gif]

Sandra [][] I've taken some of those tests, too.  The general consensus seems to be that DH and I should never have gone out on the second date, much less gotten married ... and for us it will be 40 years in January. About the only things we've ever totally agreed on is that LaBou has the best apple cinnamon muffins and that we'd keep both kids.  Not at all sure we'd agree on both of those anymore.

Joyce

Then you know exactly what i am talking about.  I just can't go along with those scoring tests that some one makes up according to what they think, believe or based on how they feel about something or what they have read..  I gotta admit, hubby did learn to fish, and I learned to dance a little, but don't care for it.  But we are still worlds apart on lots of things. We did totally agree on our boys names and that our move to Ohio was a total waste of 7 years, we belonged in Texas.[]