Approved WDJ Pet Food

[font="trebuchet ms"][color=#000080][size=2]If you are looking for a good premium food to feed your dog/puppy or cat/kitty here is a list to help you find a good one. These don't have any of the nasty ingredients.  If your current brand is not on the list, I would seriously reconsider your current choice. [/font][/size][/color]

 
     I think its fair to say thats quite the uninformed statement!!! I don't give much credence to WDJ & their Top 10 list, mainly because they are not concerned with actual feeding trials to back up their claims that a brand their editors prefer is superior to another which did not make the list. Ingredients alone do not tell me how a food performs or what results it will give over a long term basis. The WDJ is not in a position to tell me that any of the foods they deem superior actually ahs a more precise vitamin/mineral premix or more beneficial protein/fat ratio, calciumhosporous ratio, or acceptable levels of EFAs including, but not limited to Omegas 3 & 6 plus DHA. What guarantee can WDJ give that pulling a dog off their black list of food (which included, Iams, Euk, Purina, etc) and placing them on their recommended brands will not be a recipe for disaster? Can they guarantee me that foods they recommend will not cause serious problems w/ my in whelp bitches or developing pups? Because, you know, certain WDJ foods have caused this household their fair share of trouble which includes hundreds of dollars in veterinary bills and avoidable problems with revious litters.
     I, for one, welcome a good nutritional debate, but I'm not too fond of blanket statements such as the one you made. Trust me, you have much to learn regarding proper canine nutrition if you think those foods the WDJ mentions are the only ones worth feeding!
     BTW, do the peeps @ the Whole Dog Journal know you are infringing on their copyright for the Top 10 List?   
 
    

I don't understand the use of so many bi-products when organ meat is only supposed to make up a small percentage of the diet.  So, if that's true and the companies are aware of that the rest of this bi product must be the undesirable stuff.  Right??  I mean it's right up as the first ingredient.  So, either the food is not nutritionally correct or it's the stuff you don't want.  It can't be muscle meat more than organ meat or they couldn't list the way they do, right? 
 
From my own personal standpoint, I'd rather not give my dog a huge array of organ meats anyway.  Besides the fact that they aren't supposed to be a large part of the diet if given they cause a lot of gastric issues for her.  And, it's not uncommon in other dogs I've known also.
 
It's not the use of by-product that stops me from using Bil Jac.  It's mainly the BHA.  I think they could do better than that. 
 
As far as the WDJ--that is NOT a top ten list.  The list is much bigger than only 10 and also it is NOT in any particular order at all.  If you subscribe you know this stuff. 
 
 

ORIGINAL: glenmar

I'm glad that Gina has already stepped in here.  Let me explain something....it doesn't matter if a member is new or old, that post was bordering on a personal attack on Colleen and if ANY of us, including us old geezers, had made that post, we would have been scolded. 

I agree. My point was just that I find it especially offensive for a new person to come barrelling in "educating" about nutrition in such a condescending way. And also considering that there are people here who have spent years studying nutrition and people that are basically nutrition experts like Papillon and MissKiwi.

It's not the use of by-product that stops me from using Bil Jac.  It's mainly the BHA.  I think they could do better than that.

Actually they can't.  Because the by-products they use (organ meat only) is fresh (more fresh than the kind most companies use---won't go into that) and the moisture content of them, BHA is the only preservative that is stable enough to preserve them.  I have not found any scientific evidence showing that trace amounts over a long period of time (aka lifetime) of BHA to be harmful.

I don't understand the use of so many bi-products when organ meat is only supposed to make up a small percentage of the diet.

 
Here is why it is used, this is taken from diamond, the full text is in the link below, there are also similar statements on there site and other manufacturers also.
 
Let's compare chicken by-product meal to chicken meal or lamb meal,
ingredients that are marketed as being "healthier", because they presumably
come from parts of the slaughtered animal consumed by humans.
First, it is important to remember that a dog isn't a human. A dog has
higher protein requirements and, unlike humans, is very capable of
metabolizing fat (little risk for heart disease). As a concerned pet owner,
you probably know that dogs do have a weak link, and that's renal failure
(kidney disease). It is a relentlessly progressive disease that's strikes
older dogs (> 6 years). The primary cause? Excessive mineral formulation,
primarily phosphorus. Where does phosphorus come from in the formulation?
Mostly from the bone contained in the protein source (meat meal, lamb meal,
chicken meal, or chicken by-product meal).
That's why chicken by-product meal is a highly desirable ingredient.
Yes, it contains parts of the bird we don't eat (the viscera, the head, the
legs. The chicken feet which used to go into chicken by-product meal are now
sold to the Pacific Rim countries like Japan, Thailand, Korea as a human
delicacy. However, the wonderful thing about the viscera, heads and legs
contained in chicken by-product meal is that the ratio of highly digestible
protein to undigestible ash is high, 70% : 10%, or 7 : 1.
What does this accomplish for a dog? First, you know that the most
digestible nutrients are protein, fat, and carbohydrates, whereas ash (bone)
and fiber are the least digestible. A highly digestible pet food is high in
protein, fat and carbohydrates but low in ash and fiber. Chicken by-product
meal is a meat source high in protein and fat, and low in ash and fiber. So,
your dog has smaller stools, and less phosphorus in the diet attacking his
kidneys.
Is there a role for ash to play? Absolutely. We need higher levels for
puppies, which are growing and developing their bone structure. We need
higher levels for lactating and gestating females. But, for adult
maintenance foods, we really don't need more that 0.5% dry matter phosphorus,
and 0.6% dry matter calcium. Chicken by-product meal is a wonderful protein
source, highly digestible, because it is relatively low in ash.
Now, let's look at chicken meal, made from chicken parts we feed our
children, right? Chicken meal is rendered chicken necks and chicken backs.
Now, I would feed the meat from necks and backs to my kids. However, I would
never feed them the bones. Yet, chicken meal does contain all the bones from
the necks and backs as well. And, because there is so much bone, the ratio
of digestible protein to undigestible ash is much lower than chicken
by-product meal, 62% : 18%, or 3.5 : 1. A chicken meal based product
formulated to meet the same protein guarantee will deliver more ash and less
overall digestibility than a chicken by-product meal product.
Lamb meal is even worse. Made from mostly lamb heads, spinal column,
and stomach parts, the ratio of digestible protein to undigestible ash is
again much lower than chicken by-product meal, 55% : 24%, or 2.5 : 1. Now,
the worst case is meat and bone meal (2 : 1), but few super-premium companies
use meat and bone meal, so no need to compare.
This is not the way chicken meal and lamb meal are marketed, is it?
No, the whiz-kid marketing gurus make sure the brochures show pictures of a
whole chicken, or a leg of lamb. And then they tell consumers that chicken
by-product meal is less nutritious. And do they show any scientific evidence
to prove their point? No, they just play on people's emotions and tell them
how chicken by-product meal is "heads, feet and guts", and chicken meal is
"whole, fresh chicken", and lamb meal is "leg-of-lamb".
Here is a link:
 
[linkhttp://home.alltel.net/cjevans/drake/letter.htm]http://home.alltel.net/cjevans/drake/letter.htm[/link]

ORIGINAL: ColleenC
  But, there are many who don't know better and will think this list is a great resource.

 
IMO, and to be fair, this list is a great resource.  A dog owner who picks a food off of this list will do far better, by their dog, than will the owner who just heads down to Walmart and picks out the cheapest food they carry.

ORIGINAL: threedogjeep

Most people on most of the dog boards I have visited are quick to say that if something works well for your dog, GO WITH IT. It's one of the more refreshing aspects of true dog lovers.

With all due respect, sometimes people eat junk for years, and only get diabetes when they are older.  What most members here are interested in is whether a food will serve their dogs well over the lifespan.  But, I do agree that that is an individual choice. []

As to how to find accurate information on dogs foods, I would direct members not only to the WJD list, which is ok, but incomplete, I would suggest visiting www.thedogfoodproject.com.  One of our former members is responsible for that site, and has done a colossal amount of research on canine nutrition. 

IMO, and to be fair, this list is a great resource. A dog owner who picks a food off of this list will do far better, by their dog, than will the owner who just heads down to Walmart and picks out the cheapest food they carry.

 
I would agree, I think the problem becomes when "guidelines" start to be thought of as science.

When I started feeding Shadow Nutro, I thought by-product was something to be avoided. Even with this better understanding of by-product and its uses, I won't switch. Why? Because the food works for him. It meshes nicely with his metabolism. The ancient engineering principle: if it works, don't fix it. If it didn't work, I would change as soon as possible. And I would change to whatever works, be it TWO or Purina.
 
I think the value of the WJD is to give someone a place to start or consider, especially if one can identify a food allergy in a pet, such as some dogs being allergic to or having a reaction to chicken or beef. And, from what I've understood, an actual food allergy is usually an allergy to a chain molecule in one of the proteins, sometimes at the amino acid level. A dog might not be able to handle chicken breast but could maybe handle chicken by-product or even one organ, such as liver or heart.
 
There also varying levels of study. Some have read opinions for months. Some have engaged in scientific lab study for decades. We each seek the level that suits us and our pets the best, I suppose.
 

I can't stand it when people say "well the food is working, so why change?"  how can you possibly know it is working? because the dog isn't puking everywhere? Because the dog isn't dead? 
The only test of whether your food "worked" is if your dog makes it to a healthy old age. And since individual dogs may not make it to a healthy old age due to non-food-related issues (bad breeding, poison, car accident, pollution, bad luck), no one can ever say whether their food "worked" until someone does a really long-term study of different foods and many dogs.
And since I've seen many a dog that looked truly awful and unhealthy and had the owner happily say how well the dog was doing on FOOD X, I really don't believe anyone anymore who claims their food is working.
 
Ok rant over. Go pet your dog.

And since I've seen many a dog that looked truly awful and unhealthy and had the owner happily say how well the dog was doing on FOOD X

I guess "the food is working" is all in the eye of the beholder.

I really don't believe anyone anymore who claims their food is working.

If I heard "my food is great" from someone who never tried any others, I'd be skeptical. But I've talked to many, many people who go through hell and high water to find a good quality food that their pets will do good on AND is affordable. I'm one of them. I live in a rural area and have problems with availablity and affordability of many of the "must-have" brands. The closest store that carries *good* food is an hour round trip. I don't know about you all, but I have a job, two kids, and a husband who is hardly ever home since his job was moved 120 miles away. I try to keep my life as simple as possible. I am also on a budget. I suppose some would say I shouldn't have dogs to begin with because I don't have an extra $100 a month to blow on ultra-premium designer dog food, but others say I'm crazy to spend $50 a month already.

I've tried Canidae (caused a colitis flareup), Canidae Platinum (did great but extremely inconvenient to purchase), Nutro (locally available but occasional vomiting), HealthWise (soft poops, coats possibly getting dryer - weather?), Eukanuba (did great but can't buy locally anymore), Wellness (serious pudding poop) and the list goes on. After reading all the research & testimonials of others, my dogs would still be on Eukanuba if it were locally available. They did GREAT on it. Now that I "know better" I've been trying all sorts of foods becuase I figure that if I'm going to have to drive a great distance, I might as well buy a "better" food, right? Well, you know what? Haven't found one yet. So far Canidae Platinum and Euk are at the top of the "Huedy Dog Journal" list.

I think everyone should feed what their dog/dogs best on.  At one point I also wanted "better" for my old man, but it didn't work for him.  I know, I know, i only gave it to him twice a day for 4 days and he threw up twice a day for 4 day and I went back to Purina..  I was told i should have tried longer, I was told I should have tried this, that or the other brand. 
 
Is kinda like human food.  We are told that liver is great for us, but I bet half the people here will not sit down and eat plate of liver because they either don't like it, don't like the thought of eating it, or it disagrees with them.  Same with spinach, broccoli, baked fish, etc. Dogs won't eat food they don't like and we shouoldn't give them food that disagrees with them.  If mine were not doing so great n Purina, I would find something else. 
 
Maybe the "dog's condition" is in the eye of the beholder, but after being around dogs for 60 years, I do think i know a scruffy, smelly, dry coat, stinky gooey ears, goopy eyes, etc dog from one one with nice soft glowing thick fur, no smell (my goldesn sleep in the bed with me), etc.  As for their "internal health" I go by their physicals, blood work, energy and their looks.  I know that any one of them can be diagnosed with cancer at any time as it is a disease that strikes many,m many goldens regardless of what they eat.
 
It simply goils down to one thing for me.  I look at a list like this, I look at my dogs, and I know that list is not correct according to my dogs.  For others it is ideal.

I might as well buy a "better" food, right? Well, you know what? Haven't found one yet. So far Canidae Platinum and Euk are at the top

 
And here I will interject another favorite saying that I have learned to rely on over the 30+ years in dogs -- "the proof is in the pudding".
I have been very surprised to find out what some folks have fed their dogs. And how wonderful they look, and how long and healthy they live.
Feed what works.

Is kinda like human food. We are told that liver is great for us, but I bet half the people here will not sit down and eat plate of liver because they either don't like it, don't like the thought of eating it, or it disagrees with them. Same with spinach, broccoli, baked fish, etc. Dogs won't eat food they don't like

Do people actually NOT eat foods that they don't love? Seriously, I eat stuff on a fairly regular basis that I'd rather not (like my beautiful salad that I had for lunch, while my coworkers chowed down on calzones), because I don't like feeling like crap. Junk food is BAD for us, just as it is for our dogs, and I can feel the difference if I don't get my share of fresh veggies. I'd much rather eat pizza and chocolate cake for every meal than fresh fruits and veggies most of the time, but.... I'm an adult. I have to make decisions about my, and my dogs', diet. We *will* eat well, most of the time. We will have treats, and days where we eat badly, but most days, we'll eat our greens and our lean protein, with healthy fats and carbs.

And dogs WILL eat food that they don't like. Mine will eat, while they make faces and whine "Mooooom, do we HAAAVVE to eat the greeeens?" Yeah, they have to eat it if they want the chunks of meat to ever see their bowls.