The Noble Quest for Kinder and Gentler "Nutrition" Postings

ORIGINAL: papillon806


 
 I'm working on it and am eager to post more studies relating to this! []
 

 
Please do.  I am looking forward to reading them.
 

ORIGINAL: papillon806


I just didn't like the fact he was bashing graduate studies and scientific research as if higher education is insignificant and not worthy of appreciation. 
 

 
I am sorry.  I surely didn't mean to leave that kind of impression on you.
 

ORIGINAL: willowchow



To Billy---I see a pattern in your threads and I'll start reporting them if you don't knock it off.  I've been on this board a long time and I'm tired of every so often seeing it flare up because of posters like you.  This board isn't a joke to those of us who have been here. 

 
You will forgive me if I don't accept your authority to determine the appropriateness of my postings?  And with all due respect, how long you have been a member of this board is of little consequence to me.  Please, report away, if you feel my postings violate the TOS.

I wanted to add that one of the main reasons there are not studies on "which dog food is better" is because we know so much about the ingredients, composition of the ingredients, and their effect on each other and the monogastric GI system, that by looking at these ingredients seperately on a label of two comparing dog foods, we can determine whether or not which one would be better. (Most likely the reasoning behind why nobody will fund such a broad study, although I'm sure if I got enough interest, almost like a petition, we could find someone to fund it!) []

  papillon806, You said you are a grad student studying animal nutrition and that you were taught as an undergrad that meat based protein is better than plant based protein for dogs. If that's the case, who are the companies like Pedigree hiring to determine what ingredients go into their food?
     I think most dog food companies would do everything they could to prevent the study you mentioned because the results would be too embarrassing for the majority of them, and they are quite content with spending their money on advertising instead of spending it on developing better dog food.

The problem with the majority of people in my field is that their studies are focused mainly on ruminants and animals used for human consumption (cattle, etc).  In that "world" they are used to calculating feed rations and nutrient analysis on a least-cost basis. Soooo, big companies like Proctor & Gamble (Euk.) and Pedigree hire these types of nutritionists who will tell them what types of nutrients/ingredients they can use that will maintain life in the most minimal way so that they can make the most profit and still pass AAFCO regulations.  It's really sad....

*Luckily there are a few like me who are out to do the opposite!

If that's the case, who are the companies like Pedigree hiring to determine what ingredients go into their food?

Accountants []

   I hope you can make a difference. I believe the majority of dog owners don't bother to read the ingredients on a bag of food like Pedigree or Kibbles and Bits. They believe the commercials and trust that what they're buying is best for their dog. When we adopted Jessie from the shelter, they advised us to read the ingredients and buy a food where meat was the first one listed. We were lucky to have that advice. Dog owners need to be educated about their dog's nutritional needs to make an informed choice when purchasing dog food.

I see the value of your proposal. If we had such a study, we would have a standard against which to measure food quality and viability. We would have something we can direct new owners to who have food questions. Until then, they have to navigate the minefields like we do. Some people are great at giving advice and some, while having some good advice, have a natural talent of seeming arrogant while they give advice.
 
Until then, there's a few things that an owner can go by. Unless your dog has kidney problems, find a food that has a meat meal as the first ingredient. Use the AAFCO guidelines for your type of dog, such as large breed adult. There will be a percentage of protein and fat and fiber and moisture that your dog will need, based on size and age. Find a food that provides at least that amount, and one with a little more won't hurt, either. To that end, a food with a statement that it was found to provide the proper nutrient profile for your size and age of dog through AAFCO guided feeding trials is a good place to start. It doesn't automatically mean that your dog can handle that food. It may have ingredients that give your particular dog fits in its system.
 
I have a pet theory, if you'll pardon the pun, that the simpler the food, the better, even in kibble. But even that experience will vary from dog to dog. Another pet theory is that dogs of different sizes handle different ingredients differently. A corrolary theory that dogs with inherited sensitive stomachs may have a problem with some foods.
 
Then, there's also the ancient engineering principle, if it works, don't fix it. In the same breath, use the scientific method. Observe, hypothesize, observe some more and change hypothesis if data changes require it. By that, I mean, if you buy a food for your dog that looks good enough for you to eat and your dog has problems with it, don't keep feeding it because you believe it's a good food. Feed your dog what they can handle. Find out what it is they need and stick with that.
 
In order to accomplish such a study would require a methodology to successfully handle all the data. The study would take at least 15 years. Necropsies would have to be performed on all subjects, with full lab analysis and a consolidated way of handling blood profiles. To limit the number of variables, it would probably have to be done with pure-breeds, where you can know in advance what genetic defects might affect a certain subject in order to rule out a food issue or determine if a particular food is better for that breed with that problem. Such a study, as some do, would seem to ask more questions than it answers.

Ron, I think you summed things up very nicely.
 
As I did in my very first post in this thread, I'll admit that there are foods that I consider CRAP and that I don't hesitate to call crap.  However, I've tried to be much more careful in my phrasing, recognizing that one catches more flies with honey than vinegar.  There are many foods that I just flatly will not feed with or without scientific evidence to back up my position.
 
Papillion,I'm really glad that you've joined us and I look forward to seeing more of your posts

Thanks, Glenda. And as usual, you are being the vanguard, leading the way to how we should interact. You can't help being an angel. I think it's something genetic (an unfounded theory that I will stand by.)

ORIGINAL: ozzie72

If that's the case, who are the companies like Pedigree hiring to determine what ingredients go into their food?

Accountants []

 
Hey!  Lets not crap on ALL accountants....some of us are ethical!!

Awwww,you made me BLUSH!!!

Publication of a scientific study is an invitation for peer review. No more, no less. One study isn't definitive evidence of anything. The study has to be repeatable, more than once, before it's even a theory, much less a conclusion.

I think y'all are once again arguing semantics. I appreciate papillon806's presence on this board because obviously she is an insider in animal nutrition science and  publications. I don't have enough knowledge to say whether the study she posted has merit. But I also see Billy's perspective that in the world of science, the list of things that have been PROVEN is very, very, short. And after all, if our scientific  "conclusions" weren't open for debate, we would still believe the world was flat.

Cheryl

ORIGINAL: lexibelle



I'd like to call someone out, too, but it certainly isn't him.  I see someone totally harassing him, and I'm not sure why they think it's appropriate to do so.

 
Thank you, Lexi, but I honestly don't feel harrassed.  What I feel is that I am not doing a very good job of expressing my opinion, and that is totally my fault.
 
Well, maybe I am being harrassed a little bit, but that's okay, I guess.  I have pretty thick skin.  I just don't think name calling has any place in a debate, and when I see it, I will usually suggest to the offender that they might want to sharpen their debate skills a tad.  []

ORIGINAL: papillon806


*Although I do think it is ironic because many euk. products use corn gluten meal, lol

 
That is interesting, isn't it.  []