Comments on: Which ingredance looks better A or B for dog food?

By: doggie_poopie

doggie_poopie — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 12:14:00 +0000

I really think this is a silly question hands down option B.
For more comparisons go to
All scientific evidence points towards the fact that dogs, while not true carnivores, are opportunistic, carnivorous scavengers. Cats on the other hand are true, obligate carnivores, requiring animal protein to survive. There is a difference between a carnivorous scavenger and an omnivore though – dogs lack the dental characteristics, longer digestive tract and specific enzymes of true omnivores like humans. That is the reason why they can not digest grains and vegetables unless they are “predigested” by processing, mincing/grinding, breakdown by enzymes, or fermentation through bacteria. Once converted, they are fully available to the dog.

This does, however, not mean that your dog will thrive on a diet mainly made up of poor quality grains or grain fragments, which is what most cheap foods are. Whole grains, including their entire complement of nutrients are much more valuable – and this does not only apply for a dog’s diet, but for humans as well!

Protein is the second most important substance the body is made up of, right next to water – accounting for about 50% of the dry body mass. Dietary protein contains the 10 essential amino acids required for building and maintaining muscle, hair, bone and organs and supporting other vital functions. Essential means that these substances must be supplied in the diet and can not be synthesized by the body.

The blend of protein sources is very important. Different ingredients contain different amounts of amino acids, both essential and non-essential. A product that relies on only a single source of meat (for example strictly lamb based diets) must be balanced by supplying other sources of protein, like whey, alfalfa, potatoes, or grains. The grain ingredients should not be the main protein source though, but only balance the overall profile of amino acids if necessary.

Lastly, I quote the Purina Rep “The animals fed Purina dog, cat, puppy and kitten Chow will exist on it.” Personally, I don’t want my animal to exist on anything! I want my pets to THRIVE!!!

By: Jocelyn7777

Jocelyn7777 — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 23:27:20 +0000

Neither sounds good to me… Too many of the things dogs can’t digest. Dogs are carnivores. They need meat, meat, more meat, a slight bit organ, slight bit of bone, and more meat.

Dogs lack the enzymes to break down cellular walls of plant matter to enable them to utilize the nutrients inside. Even if the cellular walls are broken down… dogs can’t efficiently utilize the nutrition because they are meant to get all their nutrition from prey… the meat, bones, and organs of prey.

for true dog nutrition information please see some of these sites:

Research wolves (dogs are only slightly (very slightly) removed from wolves)… D. L. Mech- wrote good books about Wolves, their diets, how they hunt, what they eat, etc.

Good luck.

By: Freedom

Freedom — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 10:25:30 +0000

As someone who has studied dog foods and kibble making processes, I can tell you that while the ingredients sound good to humans.. Its a pack of lies that ANY of that (original nutrional value that they are boasting about ) is left by the time it reaches the dogs bowl. Secondly, these ingredients are very expensive and I can guarantee you that they are ot the same ingredients that you would feed to your family. The ingredients are rotton, decaying, rejected for human use and sold to dog food companies because they are where America dumps it’s waste.
All you have to do to realize that is some math. 35 or 40 bucks for a 33 pound bag. The ingredients are paid for. (pennies because it is rotton, decaying and rejected for human use…) The manufacturer is paid, Workers, utilities, etc. the retailer is paid, the trucking companies are paid, the shiny bags it comes in are paid for, Advertising is paid for. Everyone takes their cut… Exactly how much goodness do you think is really in there?
Not to mention that the temperatures the food is cooked at takes ALL the nutrition out. It is added back in, in synthetic form. See the list at the bottom of recognizable foods in the ingredients.. The vitamins and minerals are added back in because f they were not, no nutrition would exist. These are the facts!
So they can put any dam thing they want in there and market it to sound good to PEOPLE so they can sell it. but the end result and fact is that it doesn’t matter.
That said, these ingredients are better then what you would get from Ol Roy.
Speaking of ‘All Natural’.. These are words used as selling tactics because these things are most certainly NOT all natural. No such thing as ‘Organic’ dogfood either. All you have to do to figure out these are lies and sales tactics is go buy your own family a couple of meals of All natural or organic meals and let me know what you food bill was. The laws regulating the use of these words is non exisitant practically and most certainly it is non existant for dog food!
Choose either. It simply does not matter.

By: missleyden

missleyden — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 23:05:04 +0000

Actually I wouldn’t feed my great danes either of those. Dogs aren’t vegetarians. They don’t raid corn and rice fields. They are relatives of wolves which eat all meat products. They raid chicken coops and go after sheep…don’t you watch cartoons…hehe.
Seriously, I feed my dogs a kibble that has meat for the first 4 ingredients. If I had the money I would feed them raw. Lots of people do that these days.

By: hanksimon

hanksimon — Mon, 15 Dec 2008 06:05:14 +0000

A. Chicken Meal, Brown Rice, White Rice, Chicken Fat
B. Chicken Meal, etc. (catfish is not a big deal. Salmon would be)

The major difference that I see is really marketing. By law, ingredients are listed by amounts. However, I bet that the marketed version (B) costs twice what (A) costs.

Dog food, especially dry dog food, has to fit a certain level of quality, otherwise people will stop buying it. In addition, dogfood has to maintain quality, because dogs have sensitive stomachs and if you change quality of ingredients, then the dog will get diarrhea for a week as it gets used to the change.

I feed my dog plain Purina dog food for 17 years (!) with no problems. I feed my current dog Purina Pro, because I think it may reduce potential for arthritis. But my point is to get the cheapest, brand name food that your dog will eat and will stay healthy.

Don’t feed too many treats, Never feed people food, and follow the directions on the package for amounts.

Also, don’t worry about dogs liking the taste… they will eat dirt or worse. They eat to live and gulp in a few moments. They don’t savor every bite, like a cat might.

If the dog has problem, like skin issues, allergies, or arthritis, then you might change to more expensive brands…. These brands are not more expensive, necessarily, because the the quality of the chicken is better. They are more expensive because they include more ingredients, like Omega-3 oils (fish oil from salmon, etc. is MUCH better than Omega-3 from Flax seed alone.)

So my advice is go inexpensive – not cheapest – and get more expensive, if needed. So I like A.

By: stevenesat

stevenesat — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 09:18:22 +0000

All of the ingredients that are not food, like the bacteria, the proteinated stuff, and the yeast, are very good for your dogs immune system, much like humans when exposed to a cold or the measles, we build our immune systems to become stronger, these aid in their digestive system too, by forcing out all the other ingredients left behind, after the vitamins were digested out, like the grains, the greens, the fruits, and the meats. A good brand of Dog Food, keeps all of these ingredients in the dog longer, like squeezing a sponge, it gets out more of the good stuff from the food, and a Cheaper brand, store brands, and discount brands, are more likely to make your dog go more often, due to the high fat and high grains, and less of the vitamin stuff. Hope this helps!