Blackwatch feed program

ORIGINAL: jenns

ORIGINAL: Misskiwi67

Its a scientific study... They feed the SAME food, except for the alterations that make the ingredients different. Therefore, if the study is looking at the difference between j/d and regular food, they would have used the same exact formula but without the additional fatty acids and glucosamine. You can't compare apples to oranges in a scientific study...

 If they were, then why wouldn't Hill's regular Science Diet maintenance diets have the same ingredients? 

Um... because there is no such thing as a perfect food? Even Iams, Purina, and Hills have different formulas, protein levels, calcium levels and so on in their own veterinary diets. Scientific studies are a guideline, not a means to perfection.

ORIGINAL: cc431
Problem was (and still is) those in control then never made the connections between meat-based diets (diets of the past) being vital in proper nutrition for a dog#%92s peak health.  No connections between benefits of red meat.  They went along with the industry standards of feeds between produced at the time using that as a guide to set the standards.  This is unacceptable.  The minimum standards are too low.

As for the red meat being essential... they've studied that lots of times (although not raw vs. cooked) and what you consider to be "minimum standards" are far from what have been found to be minimum, and even far from what is needed to THRIVE. In my opinion, from my research, a dog food should have a minimum of 4% fiber... your "research" says none... who is right???

quote:

ORIGINAL: Misskiwi67

Its a scientific study... They feed the SAME food, except for the alterations that make the ingredients different. Therefore, if the study is looking at the difference between j/d and regular food, they would have used the same exact formula but without the additional fatty acids and glucosamine. You can't compare apples to oranges in a scientific study...


And that's all that the studies on the prescription diets conclude, is that it "works" to treat whatever ailment it is that the food is being used for. Prescpription foods aren't designed for maximum, long term, whole body nutrition. If they were, then why wouldn't Hill's regular Science Diet maintenance diets have the same ingredients?

 
 
Yup. And if they fed a high-quality diet with these active ingredients added, instead of the corn-and-peanut hulls-diet plus active ingredients, I suspect most of the dogs on the prescription diets would do much better. That's the kind of study we need-- do dogs on j/d have less pain and better overall health than dogs on raw diets plus joint supplements?  I really doubt j/d would look good in that comparison.
 
I can see feeding one of those garbage prescription diets for a few months to stabilize a dog while you consult with a nutritionist to design a healthy diet for your dog, but feeding them long-term can't be good for your dog's overall health.
 
And why congratulate Hills?  they don't do the basic research on how to design diets to treat illnesses, they just keep track of the scientific literature and use it to come up with their diets.

I can see the value in giving digestive supplements to kibble, because in the end, regardless of what kibble you are feeding, a dog's digestive system isn't meant to digest dried pellets. And some of the better quality foods do not have ingredients in them to artificially firm the stools, so maybe the digestive supplements help.

I really don't know the value of digestive supplements and if it would be indicated for all dogs fed kibble, some dogs fed some kibbles, or no dogs fed kibble. I personally have found myself out a lot less money discussing each dog's individual needs with the holistic vet. One of my dogs has an appointment today due to tummy troubles. I'll definately post if she prescribes enzymes. He however doesn't eat kibble.

And that's all that the studies on the prescription diets conclude, is that it "works" to treat whatever ailment it is that the food is being used for. Prescpription foods aren't designed for maximum, long term, whole body nutrition

 
  Yes they are, because some conditions, such as kidney or heart disease, require the animal be on the diet the rest of their life.

[blockquote]quote:

[blockquote]And that's all that the studies on the prescription diets conclude, is that it "works" to treat whatever ailment it is that the food is being used for. Prescpription foods aren't designed for maximum, long term, whole body nutrition[/blockquote]


Yes they are, because some conditions, such as kidney or heart disease, require the animal be on the diet the rest of their life.

Yep,,,many people have said that their dog/cats will be on the prescription diets for the rest of their lives.[/blockquote]

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

And why congratulate Hills?  they don't do the basic research on how to design diets to treat illnesses, they just keep track of the scientific literature and use it to come up with their diets.

And then they do thorough investigations into those diets to PROVE they work... The "holistic" diets can make claims, but have yet to dish out the money to do their own research. The holistic diets are the fastest growing, highest earning area in dog food sales right now... you'd surely think if they cared as much about pet health as the prescription food makers they would want to prove their claims as well...

I can see the value in giving digestive supplements to kibble, because in the end, regardless of what kibble you are feeding, a dog's digestive system isn't meant to digest dried pellets.

 
Then how do they digest 80-90% of  kibble  Again 100% digestion is not healthy, and kibble is by design to be around 80-90% digestible. Is there no fecal matter with home cooking or raw ??

Pet food labeling laws will vary by State. If you're prohibited from making medical claims that would be the law, regardless of whether they claim is valid or invalid.

 
Ok so Solid Gold really can cure cancer but do to state laws, they cannot claim that they can.

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

Yup. And if they fed a high-quality diet with these active ingredients added, instead of the corn-and-peanut hulls-diet plus active ingredients, I suspect most of the dogs on the prescription diets would do much better. That's the kind of study we need-- do dogs on j/d have less pain and better overall health than dogs on raw diets plus joint supplements?  I really doubt j/d would look good in that comparison.

I totally agree. The average pet owner feeds something like Pedigree, Beneful, or other grocery store brand and their dog is overweight. So by comparison, J/D will make them lose weight and the joint supplements in the food will be an improvement. BUT, how much better would they do on a high quality, meat based diet with supplements added?

Excellent point Tamara []

I wonder how many pet owners go from feeding holistic foods such as TO,Natura,natures instinct or even raw or home made foods to science diet prescription foods???Not many i presume,because no doubt there dog would go backward healthwise.

But many will go from supermarket crap to rx diets so there will be bound to be some kind of improvement.

I took Floyd to the holistic vet. She prescribed a short course of a low dose of Flagyl not particularly as an antibiotic but as an anti-inflamatory. She asked me many questions about his preferences and behavior and said that he needed "cooling foods".
 
So...the recommendation for the stomach troubles of this particular dog was a turkey and barley cooked diet with other foods gradually added back in but with those two as the backbone of the diet. He does get probiotics in his Transfer Factor, but it is primarily for the prevention of Mast Cell Tumors.  If this fails to completely cure the problem she will recommend herbs. No recommendation of enzymes for digestion at least with this dog.
 
It sounds a bit strange, but I have no problem with turkey and barley in a diet and I'd much rather base a diet on those than on a "sensitive stomach" formula. Most of the people I know that have tried prescription foods have ulitmately rejected them because their pets dislike the taste. Floyd liked his turkey & barley dinner. I also gave that to the other two with a bit of cooked kidney and squash added.

ORIGINAL: abbysdad

Then how do they digest 80-90% of  kibble  Again 100% digestion is not healthy, and kibble is by design to be around 80-90% digestible. Is there no fecal matter with home cooking or raw ??

 
Very little, actually.  When I feed my dog Nature's Variety premade raw or a raw chicken wing, her poop is teeny tiny.  From what I can tell upon examination after a chicken wing (and yes, I did examine it, lol), it looked like most of it was skin tissue and bone, and it was in the form of a couple of small pellets.  Her poop when fed Innova was maybe 5 times the size, and maybe 10 times the size on SD.  So if 80-90% of the kibble is digested, then why does so much come back out? 

 Is there no fecal matter with home cooking or raw ??

 
There must be. My Bubblegum gets diarrhea for days after eating raw.  Ollie,,,my sons Dane gets it for longer yet.

ORIGINAL: dyan

 Is there no fecal matter with home cooking or raw ??

There must be. My Bubblegum gets diarrhea for days after eating raw.  Ollie,,,my sons Dane gets it for longer yet.

 
Most dogs whose systems are not used to raw will react this way, and what it means is that the raw food was not digested at all, it went straight through due to the digestive disturbance.

ORIGINAL: abbysdad  Ok so Solid Gold really can cure cancer but do to state laws, they cannot claim that they can.

 
Not on the packaging.  You can substitute the word cancer for hangnail above and say the same thing.  It does not matter what the claim is, what matters is the law.  They could probably reclaim unopened boxes and repackage under different labeling?