applaws 75% meat dry dog food???

krlyr

pawsies wrote: »

I personally think it's overpriced and overhyped. My dogs are on tesco value atm (yes I'm sure it's rubbish) but they love it and still behave and are healthy. They also get chicken wings on occasion.

Did feed raw but it became too expensive to maintain.

I was quite healthy as a child/teen despite my dad's terrible feeding habits - burgers, chicken nuggets, etc. and deepfried chips almost daily, lunchboxes consisted of crisps, chocolate bars, cake, etc., we often got taken for a McDonalds as we spent weekends away at sporting events. That's not a healthy longterm diet but because I looked well physically (wasn't overweight, had healthy hair, complexion, etc.), does that mean everyone should eat that way?
I know many dogs who will appear to thrive on cheap foods but I do wonder what effect the food has on a longterm basis. They're often high in sugars and fats to make them more appealing, which I imagine can't be good for the organs to process, and often have added salts too. Also the colourings and preservatives can have a detrimental effect, and I know that in small animals, certain brands of foods were linked to causing cancer, suspected to be linked to the cheap.poor source of chicken used.

Not to mention the false economy, when you're feeding a food that doesn't even contain any meat in itself (Tesco Value is just "meat & animal derivatives", i.e. the leftovers of the animals once the bulk of the meat has been removed for other purposes), how much nutritional value do you think a carnivore gets from it? You often have to feed substantially more than better foods, and I'd be thinking about the implications long-term in terms of vet bills from a poor diet.
Going by the feeding guidelines online, it'd cost you a few pennies more to feed something like CSJ's "That'll do". Not the best ingredients in the world but better than Tesco's - contains actual meat for starters!
http://www.csjk9.com/productcart/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=7&idcategory=4

Rev

paws4pets wrote: »

It really is a pity that people make uninformed posts as these can give companies and products a bad name whilst in themselves misleading other readers.
The misconception that melamine is generally used to boost the protein levels in pet food has been brought about by food recalls in 2006-8 when imports of certain vegetable ingredients from China were found to have been illegally laced with melamine (Google Chinese_protein_adulteration).

In addition a complaint by only one breeder about Applaws which - was determined to be unfounded - has continued to pervade postings by the uninitiated.

The protein levels in pet food are normally indicated as being the total of both vegetable and meat based proteins. Most high protein foods actually have a very high vegetable protein content rather than meat protein and, as such, actually tend to mislead the consumer who thinks that a high protein level is great - whereas there are certain amino acids that are not found in the vegetable proteins. Hence a high protein level in a dog food consisting principally of vegetable ingredients can actually lead to problems. There are 10 essential (cannot be synthesised from other sources) amino acids for the dog - that is 2 more than for a human and so a dog cannot exist solely on a diet that can sustain a human!

A raw meat diet alone can actually be harmful - you have no way of knowing what micro-nutrients are missing or provided in excess. Chicken & Turkey meats contain all 10 essential amino-acids whereas Beef, Lamb, Pork and Herring (for example) do not provide 4 of them.

Just for example - Rice provides over 15 vitamins and minerals and is a good source of Selenium, Zinc, Iron, B vitamins etc. As far as dog food goes you want to go for Brown Rice (No undigestible husks) rather than White Rice, Whole Grain Rice or Rice Flour - you need to go through the ingredients list with a fine tooth comb!

To get back to the subject of the posting - Applaws has 37% protein, Orijen 38% - both mainly from meat - both good balanced foods.
My 4 furries (2 x Old English & 2 x Portuguese Water Dogs) are on alternating meals of Burns and Applaws with a smattering of Natural Dog Food and Fish 4 Dogs and they are in fab condition and love their meals. With the first 3 the feeding guide is only 10g/Kg/day (Orijen is 13.5) so these cost less than you may think.

If you'd read the date you'd have found the post was two years old.

Yes, I know they were cleared etc, but at the time of posting the statements I made were true. And as a pet owner I'd have liked to have been informed about them, so I informed others.

Rev

pawsies wrote: »

I personally think it's overpriced and overhyped. My dogs are on tesco value atm (yes I'm sure it's rubbish) but they love it and still behave and are healthy. They also get chicken wings on occasion.

Did feed raw but it became too expensive to maintain.

I save £80 a month feeding raw over commercial foods.

But then I didn't feed my dogs any old shi£e because I actually care what they eat. Tesco couldn't pay me to feed my dogs their food.

Using DAF it cost me around £35 month to feed two 30kg dogs.

pawsies

My Bichon has kidney problems so can't have high protein. Meat and animal derivatives usually means everything not used for human consumption e.g. bones, organs, nails etc. If people feed a raw diet they are feeding pretty much the same thing (animal carcasses) so I don't see the difference.

I'm sorry but I've researched quite heavily into pet foods myself and fed oriijen and nature diet before (plus other expensive things before). My dogs often get different foods for variety and are happy this way.
Like you said all dogs are different and mine do absolutely fine on tesco value- why change? They rarely go to the vet so yes I would say they are in good health. I know bakers etc is linked to hyperactivity, my dogs are not hyper and never have been on any food they've been fed.

At the end of the day my dogs may be fed 'rubbish' food but they get the best attention and get vet treatment asap which I may not be able to do on expensive diets. Whilst we're at it, rescues tend to feed low quality food as they are on a budget too- shouldn't they be feeding orijen too? As for feeding less on premium diets this doesn't really happen as cheaper foods have fillers and therefore dogs get full quicker- they do not want more food as a result. Therefore you'd be feeding less on cheaper diets but they may not be getting all of the nutrients. However with high meat diets they are getting more nutrients but less fillers so will be hungry as they are not satisfied with mostly protein.

Rev

pawsies wrote: »

My Bichon has kidney problems so can't have high protein. Meat and animal derivatives usually means everything not used for human consumption e.g. bones, organs, nails etc. If people feed a raw diet they are feeding pretty much the same thing (animal carcasses) so I don't see the difference.

I'm sorry but I've researched quite heavily into pet foods myself and fed oriijen and nature diet before (plus other expensive things before). My dogs often get different foods for variety and are happy this way.
Like you said all dogs are different and mine do absolutely fine on tesco value- why change? They rarely go to the vet so yes I would say they are in good health. I know bakers etc is linked to hyperactivity, my dogs are not hyper and never have been on any food they've been fed.

At the end of the day my dogs may be fed 'rubbish' food but they get the best attention and get vet treatment asap which I may not be able to do on expensive diets. Whilst we're at it, rescues tend to feed low quality food as they are on a budget too- shouldn't they be feeding orijen too? As for feeding less on premium diets this doesn't really happen as cheaper foods have fillers and therefore dogs get full quicker- they do not want more food as a result. Therefore you'd be feeding less on cheaper diets but they may not be getting all of the nutrients. However with high meat diets they are getting more nutrients but less fillers so will be hungry as they are not satisfied with mostly protein.

If you'd researched as much as you suggest you'd know full well you feed less of higher quality foods.

Skinners duck is £20' that's not expensive. But it's a decent food.

Look at the feeding guide for origen and for tesco value, which has the lowest feeding rec for a 25kg dog?

Comparing a pet dog to a rescue dog is ridiculous, rescues do the best they can on a budget, pet owners should have considered the food budgets before getting a pet.

My dogs are raw fed, all they get is meat, meat and more meat, zero fillers, they aren't going hungry in any way shape of form.

My nan smoked for 70 years, she didn't suffer a day for it, so I shall recommend that shall I? Or shall I realise it's not good for health and even though every one is different and some may show no ill effects, it's best if people don't smoke?

I'm sorry but having studied animal nutrition for almost three years, I'd suggest you go back to square one because you've been seriously miss informed. Dogs don't need fillers, of they did, they'd be called ingredients and not fillers wouldn't they.

krlyr

I rawfeed and yes they get bones, fur, feet, etc. - but in proportion to a prey animal, alongside meat fillets or minces. If I fed them a diet consisting mainly of chicken feet and beaks, they would not be getting a balance of everything they needed. As it is, I have to watch how much bone one of them gets as too much causes a bit of constipation and anal gland problems, and I think that shows me exactly why things should be fed in correct ratios. Animal derivatives are cheap and there will be more of the cheaper parts and less of the meatier bits. Even Pedigree etc. at least put some meat in their food in addition to the derivatives.

Rescues may feed cheaper foods but many also keep dogs in small kennels and only walk them a few times a week - practices I again wouldn't recommend to your normal dog owner. Rescues are temporary places of care, doing the best they can do to help the maximum amount of dogs they can, I think they have a genuine reason to make compromises as temporary measures. Maybe you've suddenly found yourelf unable to afford a premium food but I feel that many people could at least stretch to a dog food that actually contained meat - the CSJ food I mentioned will cost about 3p a day more if you can find a local stockist to save on the delivery cost. Or even buying a slightly more expensive food and mixing it with the Tesco stuff to raise the quality of their diet. If I could literally only afford to feed my dogs that rubbish then I would be questioning if I was the best home for them - they may be healthy now but I hate to think what a poor diet will do them longterm. Given the fact that one of them has kidney problems I would also be concerned about the strain that poorly digested foods put on the organs. Yes, perhaps it rules out a raw diet and perhaps feeding more cereals than usual is beneficial but the poor quality protein that will inevitably be in this cheap food seems to go against what is recommended.

As for more expensive foods making dogs less satisfied, my dogs have been raw-fed for 3 years and you can't really get more "concentrated" than that - they have no fillers at all, unless you count the ground bone in some of their meals, but that's part of the balance of their diet anyway. No cereals, no potato, no veg, etc. and they are more than happy on thier diet. They love their food but they never scrounge for more, never raid the bin (which is within reach) or pester for food (other than the hopeful look if you have something particularly tasty but I think that's quite normal!). My mum changed her puppy to rawfeeding and we found that, as a growing pup, she did seem to have a bigger appetite (perhaps due to having been fed on a regularly petfood in larger quantities too) so for a couple of months her meals were bulked out with a bit of roughly blended vegetables. Filled her stomach up without adding all sorts of rubbish that's in cheaper foods, and it did the trick. As it was, the veg was slowly reduced and pup was fine on the regular amount of raw meat without it - their stomachs adapt like ours do, a dog fed on 600g of dry food a day probably will feel hungry switching to 200g of better quality food a day initially but I would far rather they have a few weeks of feeling hungry to know they're getting the best nutrition I can afford than a lifetime of cheap foods full of fillers and not getting their nutritional requirements.