Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f..

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

"Thomas Silverstein" <nospam.RemoveThis@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.10.01.00.10.16.633682@Thomas-Silverstein...
> Could someone point me to some helpful information.
>
> So much of what I come across seems to have underlying ideology and
> secondary motivation. I would love some unbiased third party type
> comparison reviews.
>
>
Protein is protein. Carbs are carbs. There are simple and complex carbs.
They all break down into APT for energy with the byproducts of water, CO2,
waste, and fat (waist). And, fat is fat. Fiber is indigestible and,
therefore, not really considered a nutrient. Then there is water. Vitamins
are classified as either fat or water soluble They, like minerals are
usually protein helpers of some sort. If you have enough, you have enough.
More is not better. The rest is dispensed of in the urine, breath, feces,
sweat, or stored in the fat for later use.

There's your first class in basic nutrition.

Quiz:

Q1: Where do we (and other mammals) get calories?

A. Only from protein, carbohydrates, and fat (please don't give your dog
beer, but alcohol metabolizes like a fat).

Q2: How many vitamins and minerals do I (and other mammals) need?

You need only enough vitamins and minerals to function, and not more.

Q3: Are there any other nutients?

Yes, water. However, arguably, you need some fiber to aid in defecation.

Everything else is superfluous.

Dog Chow or Sam's Choice works as well as the high-falouting stuff. Just
pick one and don't keep changing it all the time, you and your dog will be
much happier.
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

> Protein is protein. Carbs are carbs. There are simple and complex carbs.
> They all break down into APT for energy with the byproducts of water, CO2,
> waste, and fat (waist). And, fat is fat. Fiber is indigestible and,
> therefore, not really considered a nutrient. Then there is water. Vitamins
> are classified as either fat or water soluble They, like minerals are
> usually protein helpers of some sort. If you have enough, you have enough.
> More is not better. The rest is dispensed of in the urine, breath, feces,
> sweat, or stored in the fat for later use.
>
> There's your first class in basic nutrition.

And a bad one at that. Protein is not protein. It's well established
that different protein sources provide different rates of breakdown. And
fat is also not fat. There are saturated fats, unsaturated fats,
trans-fats, natural fats, chemical fats. All have different properties
and metabolize differently in the body. Ditto carbs.

Whoever this yahoo is, don't listen to him. No, Old Roy is NOT the same
as the super premium foods. Among the extremely common differences you
will see are coat structure, length, thickness, and gloss, skin
suppleness, pad quality, thickness (cracked versus thick and smooth),
general condition, energy, endurance, amount needed to be fed (i.e.,
better quality food feed less and get better result), stool quantity and
quality, and overall health.

If all food was the same, there would be no difference between a diet of
quarter pounders and a diet of equal protein gotten from lean meats,
fish, and chicken.
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

"Robin Nuttall" <robinjn DeleteThis @mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:qDWTg.219740$1i1.192079@attbi_s72...
>
>> Protein is protein. Carbs are carbs. There are simple and complex
>> carbs. They all break down into APT for energy with the byproducts of
>> water, CO2, waste, and fat (waist). And, fat is fat. Fiber is
>> indigestible and, therefore, not really considered a nutrient. Then
>> there is water. Vitamins are classified as either fat or water soluble
>> They, like minerals are usually protein helpers of some sort. If you
>> have enough, you have enough. More is not better. The rest is dispensed
>> of in the urine, breath, feces, sweat, or stored in the fat for later
>> use.
>>
>> There's your first class in basic nutrition.
>
> And a bad one at that. Protein is not protein. It's well established that
> different protein sources provide different rates of breakdown.

I don't know what the rate of breakdown has to do with anything? You have
not explained how this is important to you either. Most people can only
assimilate about 19 g of protein an hour. It's my guess that a dog could
assimilate less per hour. The rest is discharged through the urine. Hence,
the higher than average rate of kidney failure in weight lifters due to a
lifetime of overloading on proteins.

Protein is made up of amino acids. They form the building blocks for your
(and your dogs) development of protein (interpret proteins to mean proteins,
enzymes, hormones, etc.) in your own body.

And
> fat is also not fat. There are saturated fats, unsaturated fats,
> trans-fats, natural fats, chemical fats. All have different properties and
> metabolize differently in the body.

True. But, they are a source of calories. That was my point. Beyond that,
one should certainly limit fat calories to a fairly low amount of total
caloric intake (30% or less). I'm not sure, but most dogs probably going to
get hypertension from a high level of LDLs in their limited 15 or 20 year
lifespan (even off of the stray gazelle in the Serengeti).

>Ditto carbs.

Again, the purpose is for caloric intake. Diabetics need to watch their
carbs. Obese Americans may follow the latest fad. But, fad does not
lifestyle make. Carbs all break down (eventually) to glucose in the blood
and glycogen in the muscle cells. If its complex, it has to go through a
few more steps, but it all ends up where I stated in the my first post ...
as *energy* (the purpose of calorie intake, afterall), waste, or fat
(potential energy).
>
> Whoever this yahoo is, don't listen to him.

Nice to meet you, too. I *used* to counsel people on diets ... real diets,
not fad diets. However, none of this intended to do so. This is the dogs
forum, after all. And, I'm giving my personal opinion and it is based on
common sense and widely available information, I like dogs and value common
sense. It has been some years since I studied any of this stuff, anyways.
Heck, any diabetic could probably give you the rundown I'm giving you.

>No, Old Roy is NOT the same as the super premium foods. Among the extremely
>common differences you will see are coat structure, length, thickness, and
>gloss, skin suppleness, pad quality, thickness (cracked versus thick and
>smooth), general condition, energy, endurance, amount needed to be fed
>(i.e., better quality food feed less and get better result), stool quantity
>and quality, and overall health.

All of what you just wrote is unsubstantiated opinion. One is going to find
few, if any unbiased studies on the internet. One would be well advised to
consult the Journal of Veterinary Medicine or a similar periodical for
studies on animal nutrition.

>
> If all food was the same, there would be no difference between a diet of
> quarter pounders and a diet of equal protein gotten from lean meats, fish,
> and chicken.

Who said all food was the same? Certainly, there are high-fat meats and
low-fat meats. Some even classify medium fat meats. In people, we just
tend to eat humongous portions of the fattiest meats we can find. (Filet
mignon, anyone?) But, essentially, dog food companies do this type of
measuring for you. And, once again, when a body has enough of something,
the rest is superfluous.

Yours,
Dan

P.S. inciditally, I just checked my dog chow. It has 10% crude fat.
Compared to human consumption standards (30% or less), that's *very*
healthy.
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

Math mistake, sorry.

> Fat: 1 gram = 9 calories
> Protein: 1 gram = 4 calories
> Carbohydrates: 1 gram = 4 calories
> Alcohol: 1 gram = 7 calories
>
> So,
>
> 100 g of Dog chow =
>
> Protien 9 calories x 100 grams x 0.21 = 189 calories from Pro.
> Fat 4 calories x 100 grams x 0.1 = 40 calories from fat
Carb 4 calories x 100 grams x 0.69 = 276 calories from carbs
Total = 505 total calories per 100 grams

> 40/505= 7% of caloric intake is from fat.

and, my point remains the same.
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

Thomas Silverstein <nospam DeleteThis @nospam.com> wrote in
news:pan.2006.10.01.00.10.16.633682@Thomas-Silverstein:

> Could someone point me to some helpful information.
>
> So much of what I come across seems to have underlying ideology and
> secondary motivation. I would love some unbiased third party type
> comparison reviews.
>
>
>

the food "science diet" is the best food you can buy. My dog is much larger
and more muscular than any other dog his breed and same age. heh.
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

"Dan" <danUNDERSCOREgoesHEREslaughter.TakeThisOut@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:yfWTg.12208$7I1.5402@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Thomas Silverstein" <nospam.TakeThisOut@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.10.01.00.10.16.633682@Thomas-Silverstein...
>> Could someone point me to some helpful information.
>>
>> So much of what I come across seems to have underlying ideology and
>> secondary motivation. I would love some unbiased third party type
>> comparison reviews.
>>
>>
> Protein is protein. Carbs are carbs. There are simple and complex
> carbs. They all break down into APT for energy with the byproducts of
> water, CO2, waste, and fat (waist). And, fat is fat. Fiber is
> indigestible and, therefore, not really considered a nutrient. Then
> there is water. Vitamins are classified as either fat or water soluble
> They, like minerals are usually protein helpers of some sort. If you
> have enough, you have enough. More is not better. The rest is dispensed
> of in the urine, breath, feces, sweat, or stored in the fat for later
> use.
>
> There's your first class in basic nutrition.
>
> Quiz:
>
> Q1: Where do we (and other mammals) get calories?
>
> A. Only from protein, carbohydrates, and fat (please don't give your dog
> beer, but alcohol metabolizes like a fat).
>
> Q2: How many vitamins and minerals do I (and other mammals) need?
>
> You need only enough vitamins and minerals to function, and not more.
>
> Q3: Are there any other nutients?
>
> Yes, water. However, arguably, you need some fiber to aid in defecation.
>
> Everything else is superfluous.
>
> Dog Chow or Sam's Choice works as well as the high-falouting stuff. Just
> pick one and don't keep changing it all the time, you and your dog will
> be much happier.
>
I pretty much agree with you. I feed my dog inexpensive dry food and
sometimes mix in part of a can of meaty food with gravy, sometimes even
some cat food. I think a variety of foods is better, as long as it does not
include much of anything really unhealthy.

Somewhere I saw where Vitamin C was added to some dog food. I have read
that most animals, with the notable exceptions of humans, apes (and related
animals), and (curiously) Guinea pigs, produce their own ascorbic acid,
especially in times of stress, and it is a vital factor in healing. Humans
would need to ingest as much as ten or more grams of ascorbic acid daily to
obtain the same benefits, which are far more profound than simply avoiding
scurvey. Is it really necessary, or even healthy, to add Vitamin C to pet
food for animals that make their own?

Secondly, I was advised to limit my dog's intake of rawhide chews, as they
are indigestible. I would assume that means it is simply roughage, which I
have thought to be generally beneficial. I would think rawhide would
contain some protein and fats, being composed of animal skin. My dog eats
these treats very efficiently, chewing off small pieces. What are your
thoughts?

Thanks,

Paul
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

"Dan" <danUNDERSCOREgoesHEREslaughter.TakeThisOut@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:_RXTg.12221$7I1.5903@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>
> All of what you just wrote is unsubstantiated opinion. One is going to
> find few, if any unbiased studies on the internet. One would be well
> advised to consult the Journal of Veterinary Medicine or a similar
> periodical for studies on animal nutrition.

I'd like to see some good studies on this too. We've got a house full of
energetic dogs with nice coats and good skin and pad quality that have been
raised on Old Roy, Field Trial and River Run - 50 lbs for $9.95-$12.95.

Our Shar Pei was 13 when I had her put down, physically very healthy still
(alas, untreatably senile), a breed supposedly prone to "food allergies" and
various "food sensitivities" that should have precluded a long healthy life
on such stuff. Our Saint just went for his yearly checkup, and the vet
pronounced him "gorgeous" and asked what we were feeding. Heh.

So there's my anecdotal evidence that inexpensive dog food is fine. I fail
to see how spending two or three times as much would improve the health of
our dogs.

flick 100785
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 03:04:44 -0400, "Paul E. Schoen" <pstech DeleteThis @smart.net>
wrote:

>Secondly, I was advised to limit my dog's intake of rawhide chews, as they
>are indigestible. I would assume that means it is simply roughage, which I
>have thought to be generally beneficial.

No. Rawhides are high in fat, and the parts that are not digested can
cause blockages.

--
Shelly
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

I have always wanted my colours to sing.
-- Paul Delvaux
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 03:28:18 GMT, Robin Nuttall <robinjn DeleteThis @mchsi.com>
wrote:

>http://www.totaldobe.com/images/viva/dobegirls010sm.jpg
>
>http://www.totaldobe.com/images/cala/rallyadvcalavivasm.jpg
>
>So, which one do you think turns 9 this month?

The one with the extra tall ears, of course! They really are gorgeous
girls. Wow!

--
Shelly
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

In visual perception a color is almost never seen as it really is--as it
physically is. This fact makes color the most relative medium in art.
-- Josef Albers
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

"Dan" <danUNDERSCOREgoesHEREslaughter RemoveThis @sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:bmYTg.12240$7I1.890@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
> My Dog Chow states:
>
> Crude Protein 21 % (min)
> Fat 10 % (min)
> (assuming the all remaining calories come from carbs)
> Thus, fat, in terms of caloric intake in this off-the-shelf dog food is
> 40/298= 13%
>
> Still, very much within healthy nuturtional ranges.

.......You need to know what DOGS need, not people. Dogs are not 4 legged
people. Their digestitive tracts are shorter. They don't have issues with
clogged arteries and heart and cholesterol problems.

Fats:
"Fats should be incorporated into a dog's diet in sufficient amounts to
make up between 25 and 30 percent of the calories in the food." Collins
Guide to Dog Nutrition, Donald R. Collins DVM

........Dogs use fat for energy
.........Unless the dog is pregnant or lactating, they have no physiological
need of carbs. (from Vet Merck Manual)

Proteins:
"There are 3 common causes of protein deficiency in a dog's diet:
1. Insufficient total protein in the diet
2. Imbalanced, poor-quality dietary protein
3. Bulky, low-energy diets which cause the marginal amounts of protein
present to be converted to energy
The nutritive value of a protein depends on its distribution of amino acids,
and on its digestibility. For the dog, both of these factors seem to be
more satisfactory in proteins from animals than in proteins from plants." -
Collins Guide to Dog Nutrition, Donald R. Collins, DVM

........and last but not least that number on the bag says nothing, zero,
zip, nada about bioavailability of the nutrients to the dog. Poor quality
protein does not get used.

buglady
take out the dog before replying
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

Shelly <shelly.TakeThisOut@cat-sidh.net> said in rec.pets.dogs.health:

> They really are gorgeous girls. Wow!

As nekkid dogs go, I agree.

I'm still trying to figure which dogs are in better shape - my
friend's Malinoisss, or Robin's Dobes. It's probably a tie.

--
--Matt. Rocky's a Dog.
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f.. 

I've also heard of dogs cutting their mouths on rawhide

"Shelly" <shelly.RemoveThis@cat-sidh.net> wrote in message
news:e802i21fm1ssu89i1nkro4q35n4hn02mdj@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 03:04:44 -0400, "Paul E. Schoen" <pstech.RemoveThis@smart.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Secondly, I was advised to limit my dog's intake of rawhide chews, as they
>>are indigestible. I would assume that means it is simply roughage, which I
>>have thought to be generally beneficial.
>
> No. Rawhides are high in fat, and the parts that are not digested can
> cause blockages.
>
> --
> Shelly
> http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
> http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)
>
> I have always wanted my colours to sing.
> -- Paul Delvaux
 >> Stay informed about: Good articles (online) regarding choosing a brand of dog f..