Does anybody rotate formulas to avoid protein intolerance?

[channeledbymodem]

First post from new member. I don't know the first thing about gun dogs or guns (I live in New York City). I joined here specifically because Ezzy's posts helped me to overcome my dog food obsession. Between his explanations of nutrition and manufacturing practices and the anecdotal experience of other members my Jack Russell puppy is happily eating Pro Plan. Compared to Orijen, Wellness, Merrick, Blue Buffalo etc. it's a bargain. I'm not embarrassed to say I tried it because of its reputation for small, firm stools. My last two dogs were a disaster in that department.

I'm pretty sure most of you feed the same formula for months (years?) at a time once you find one that "works." Among my several perhaps erroneous preconceptions about feeding was the idea that you should rotate protein sources every so often or else the dog might eventually develop an intolerance to the formula, if not the meat source in it. Since changing brands has always brought me nothing but heartache in the past I'm content to feed some variant of Pro Plan Sport with chicken indefinitely but I'd switch to the salmon or lamb formula every few months if that would be advisable.

Whatever kibble I feed I do tend to add plain yogurt, cottage cheese, eggs, sardines, "healthy" scraps and different "flavors" of canned (in moderation) so maybe that automatically helps mitigate the potential for protein intolerance. Be that as it may, I like feeding the additions; I haven't completely given up on my tendency to tinker. Keeping in mind I only have one small dog to feed so the expense is minimal.

FWIW, I emailed Dr. Tim (Hunt) of Iditarod and dog food fame, about this and he replied:

"I think with some dogs that idea [of rotating formulas] may have merit. Some dogs have a higher incidence of allergies due to food, for instance. Wish I could be of more help but the science can be guesswork at times."

So maybe kibble rotation is just another foo-foo notion, eh?

[shags]

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

Don't borrow trouble.

It's not rocket surgery.

You can fool some of the people some of the time....

Choose your pick.

[ezzy333]

In all of the feed test I was ever involved with no matter what the specie other than human, the less the diet was tampered with the better the animal did. That included additives like you are doing also. I have never seen protein intolerance caused by continued use of any ingredient, so it stands to reason the less changing you do the less chance for a problem. I like what Shags told you , if it isn't broke don't fix it. I would suggest you find a different hobby like chasing the wife around the table instead of playing in the dog dish. lol

Thanks for the kind words,

Ezzy

[Neil]

For years I fed ProPlan, then with a number of my dogs retired I tried some cheaper feed with poor results. Now back to ProPlan. But there are other quality feeds that would do as well. In the end, the cost is close to the same, as I feed less. I have a 15 year old that I left on ProPlan to not cause him problems, so that is all he has ever eaten.

[Sharon]

First post from new member. I don't know the first thing about gun dogs or guns (I live in New York City). I joined here specifically because Ezzy's posts helped me to overcome my dog food obsession. Between his explanations of nutrition and manufacturing practices and the anecdotal experience of other members my Jack Russell puppy is happily eating Pro Plan. Compared to Orijen, Wellness, Merrick, Blue Buffalo etc. it's a bargain. I'm not embarrassed to say I tried it because of its reputation for small, firm stools. My last two dogs were a disaster in that department.

I'm pretty sure most of you feed the same formula for months (years?) at a time once you find one that "works." Among my several perhaps erroneous preconceptions about feeding was the idea that you should rotate protein sources every so often or else the dog might eventually develop an intolerance to the formula, if not the meat source in it. Since changing brands has always brought me nothing but heartache in the past I'm content to feed some variant of Pro Plan Sport with chicken indefinitely but I'd switch to the salmon or lamb formula every few months if that would be advisable.

Whatever kibble I feed I do tend to add plain yogurt, cottage cheese, eggs, sardines, "healthy" scraps and different "flavors" of canned (in moderation) so maybe that automatically helps mitigate the potential for protein intolerance. Be that as it may, I like feeding the additions; I haven't completely given up on my tendency to tinker. Keeping in mind I only have one small dog to feed so the expense is minimal.

FWIW, I emailed Dr. Tim (Hunt) of Iditarod and dog food fame, about this and he replied:

"I think with some dogs that idea [of rotating formulas] may have merit. Some dogs have a higher incidence of allergies due to food, for instance. Wish I could be of more help but the science can be guesswork at times."

So maybe kibble rotation is just another foo-foo notion, eh?

.............

Now isn't that nice. Makes up for all the crap you've taken lately Ezzy.

Pro Plan here too. ... 13 and 9 year old all their lives have had Pro Plan Never disappointed in how it treats my dogs.

[channeledbymodem]

For years I fed ProPlan, then with a number of my dogs retired I tried some cheaper feed with poor results. Now back to ProPlan. But there are other quality feeds that would do as well. In the end, the cost is close to the same, as I feed less. I have a 15 year old that I left on ProPlan to not cause him problems, so that is all he has ever eaten.

Just as an aside, most "other quality feeds" are not available to me in NYC since they are distributed through feed stores, of which we have none Plus I need smaller bags with only one small dog. No point in buying six months of food at one time (and our apartment is really too small to store it anyway). A lot of the Diamond varieties, for instance, only come in 18lb and larger sizes.

I was in my favorite local store today, which is part of a small chain of six locations. I asked my pal the manager if the chain didn't stock Pro Plan. He said they still did but at his location no one bought it so they gave the shelf space to some other brand. They do a tremendous business in Orijen. I see $90 29lb bags staged for local delivery all the time.

But then garage space here costs more than most people's mortgage.

[SCT]

I like Pro Plan and am feeding it now. I also like Nutrisource and Diamond Naturals and doubt you can go wrong with those brands. Nice to hear the Pro Plan testimonial about the 15 year old Neil. I will change a bit when a litter is born, but really don't need to. I just mix it up a bit occasionally.

Steve

[Spy Car]

Something is "broken" if people believe a species shaped by evolution to eat a wide variety of prey as carnivorous predators is better served eating an unvaried diet of highly processed cereal.

Bill

[pato y codoniz]

Something is "broken" if people believe a species shaped by evolution to eat a wide variety of prey as carnivorous predators is better served eating an unvaried diet of highly processed cereal.

Bill

You mean that our canines might thrive more on a more evolutionary based feed and not one that is essentially corn porridge fortified with corn protein ( ($0.07/lb and $0.25/lb respectively)?

The worst part is that there are foods that are more bang for the buck at the same price point.

[Spy Car]

Something is "broken" if people believe a species shaped by evolution to eat a wide variety of prey as carnivorous predators is better served eating an unvaried diet of highly processed cereal.

Bill

You mean that our canines might thrive more on a more evolutionary based feed and not one that is essentially corn porridge fortified with corn protein ( ($0.07/lb and $0.25/lb respectively)?

The worst part is that there are foods that are more bang for the buck at the same price point.

You've successfully grasped my point

Bill

[greg jacobs]

Here we go again. After this many times maybe no one will bite.

[pato y codoniz]

Here we go again. After this many times maybe no one will bite.

Maybe the nth time is the charm and someone will tell us why corn gluten meal (aka corn protein concentrate) is preferable to or even equivalent to chicken meal, fish meal, pork meal, or other animal based protein concentrates?

I mean, with all the people around here feeding pro plan 30/20 and cgm being the #2 ingredient and primary protein concentrate, you'd think that somebody would have an answer to this. No?

[Brazosvalleyvizslas]

You can get just about any brand you want shipped to your door from Chewy.com or Petflow.com. Orders over $50 ship for free and I find no harder to store 40lbs vs 18lb.

[greg jacobs]

A raw diet might work for you but some carbs might help a hard working dog. However that wasn't what the op asked.

[Brazosvalleyvizslas]

A raw diet might work for you but some carbs might help a hard working dog. However that wasn't what the op asked.

If that was directed at me, I have never fed Raw.

[greg jacobs]

Nope, not you

[greg jacobs]

Pato was trying to start a ruckus.

[pato y codoniz]

Pato was trying to start a ruckus.

How is asking a very basic nutrional question about a food's primary protein concetrate considered starting a ruckus?

If pro plan 30/20 is to be considered the preferred, a fantastic, great or even good food; the food's primary protein concentrate, corn gluten meal, should compare favorably to animal protein concentrates like chicken meal, fish meal, or even the by product meals.

Otheewise, it is a subpar food because of a subpar 2nd ingredient and primary protein concentrate.

Btw, "working dog" is painting with quite a wide brush. The ultimate working dogs run for 1100 miles on fat and protein. I highly recommend reading the 1998 article The Nutritional Requirements of Exercising Dogs. Pointers, which were lumped into the sled dog type, perform better when their dietary energy was from over 50% fat and over 30% protein.

Ps. I don't feed raw.

[Neil]

Someone needs to come up with a definition for better.

Field Champion Odyssey's Tequaila Azul has been fed ProPlan Lamb and Rice and only that for 15 years, he has 41 horseback adult wins, All-Age and Shooting Dog, including wins against pointers. In addition, he hunted an average of 60 days a year, retiring at 13. The only time he needed veterinarian care was for a cut ear. He never missed a trial or hunt, was never sick. Beautiful coat and clear eyes, with a happy, loving disposition.

So if I had fed him better would he have won more, hunted harder, and would live longer? Do you guys have many 17 year old dogs?

His kennelmates have averaged 13 and 1/2 years, all hunted and many trialed, all died of old age.

So please tell me about your better results with your better feed.

[Spy Car]

Here we go again. After this many times maybe no one will bite.

Maybe the nth time is the charm and someone will tell us why corn gluten meal (aka corn protein concentrate) is preferable to or even equivalent to chicken meal, fish meal, pork meal, or other animal based protein concentrates?

I mean, with all the people around here feeding pro plan 30/20 and cgm being the #2 ingredient and primary protein concentrate, you'd think that somebody would have an answer to this. No?

P.S. It is worthy to note that "chicken" is the first ingredient listed in Pro Plan only because the odd regulations allow for the weight to include the water weight of pre-processed chicken. If the label showed the dry weight chicken would be far (far) down the list. This is a cereal product with scant amounts of meat.

Corn gluten meal is not the equivalent of meat protein, but you know that.

Bill

[pato y codoniz]

Someone needs to come up with a definition for better.

Field Champion Odyssey's Tequaila Azul has been fed ProPlan Lamb and Rice and only that for 15 years, he has 41 horseback adult wins, All-Age and Shooting Dog, including wins against pointers. In addition, he hunted an average of 60 days a year, retiring at 13. The only time he needed veterinarian care was for a cut ear. He never missed a trial or hunt, was never sick. Beautiful coat and clear eyes, with a happy, loving disposition.

So if I had fed him better would he have won more, hunted harder, and would live longer? Do you guys have many 17 year old dogs?

His kennelmates have averaged 13 and 1/2 years, all hunted and many trialed, all died of old age.

So please tell me about your better results with your better feed.

In a word, yes.

Usain Bolt ate 1,000 chicken nuggets in 10 days at the Beijing Olympics and has a notorious fast food habit.

BUT... exceptions don't disprove the rule and it doesn't mean that there isn't room for improvement.

Usain Bolt has now changed his diet and is eating right. Acording to your logic, he must be an idiot since he has had so much success in prior olympics.

Btw, since you're obviously a propopant of purina, why didn't you chose their "performance" food that has corn gluten meal as its primary protein concentrate? Don't you trust Purina to know which one of its foods yields the highest performance?

[shags]

I trust the 90-something years of production and the years and millions in research that Purina has put into their feeds over the anecdotal word of a few internet "experts".

How many millions of dogs, including probably many thousands of performance/working dogs, have lived long healthy lives on commercial feeds with so-called sub par ingredients?

How about some hard comparisons of performance, health, and longevity between the feeds you "experts" extol and Purina, Diamond, etc? Prove your point, then spout off all you want.

[channeledbymodem]

P.S. It is worthy to note that "chicken" is the first ingredient listed in Pro Plan only because the odd regulations allow for the weight to include the water weight of pre-processed chicken. If the label showed the dry weight chicken would be far (far) down the list. This is a cereal product with scant amounts of meat.

Purina lists ingredients on an as fed basis. Chicken is the "heaviest" ingredient after processing.

[channeledbymodem]

Pato was trying to start a ruckus.

How is asking a very basic nutrional question about a food's primary protein concetrate considered starting a ruckus?

I haven't been here very long, but I know a troll when I see one. Instead of repeating a subjective opinion that everyone here has heard many times before perhaps you'd like to address my original question? I was not asking anyone's permission to feed a particular food.

I have never seen any scientific study that proved that one food formula was any better than any other. Therefore advocacy for any particular diet, commercial or raw, is anecdotal. And based on anecdotal evidence, your dislike for Pro Plan puts you in a very small minority here. You may say that distinguishing between pet foods is as simple as reading a label but your supposedly common sense approach is not really scientific because ingredients are not nutrients. Ezzy has tried to explain this to you over and over again and at this point your thread crashing is not only rude but tiresome.

[Neil]

I don't keep up with sports, but I am pretty sure Bolt is a human and his nutritional needs are not germain.

Azul is exceptional in only one regard, he loves me. His kennelmates have fared as well. I fully recognize this is non-scientific, but I base most of buying decisions on pure anecdotal experiences. So do you really think he would have done better on one of your better foods? Please name one winning trial dog being fed one of these better foods? Perhaps your own win record would be important to the discussion.

We need to hurry, because history says one of you gets rude and the thread will be locked.

[pato y codoniz]

I haven't been here very long, but I know a troll when I see one. Instead of repeating a subjective opinion that everyone here has heard many times before perhaps you'd like to address my original question? I was not asking anyone's permission to feed a particular food.

I have never seen any scientific study that proved that one food formula was any better than any other. Therefore advocacy for any particular diet, commercial or raw, is anecdotal. And based on anecdotal evidence, your dislike for Pro Plan puts you in a very small minority here. You may say that distinguishing between pet foods is as simple as reading a label but your supposedly common sense approach is not really scientific because ingredients are not nutrients. Ezzy has tried to explain this to you over and over again and at this point your thread crashing is not only rude but tiresome.

If you think my opinion is subjective, you are the one not paying attention. My conclusions are based purely on scientific fact.

Corn gluten meal doesn't have the bioavailability of the different named animal meals. FACT

It is the primary protein concentrate in pro plan performance 30/20. FACT

Ezzy's act is tiresome because he doesn't admit or accept basic scientific fact, and, if he does, he tries to justify subpar ingredients with non-nutritional issues like cost effectiveness.

Either pro plan performance is the best performance food or it isn't. There is no need for obfuscation with non-factors.

Btw, the next time I pay attention to the masses and their opinions, it will be the first.

[Neil]

So how much longer do you suppose your dogs will live beyond 15 years?

How many more than 41 wins will they have?

Don't see how you can improve upon injury and illness free, he never missed a day to either.

But those are real world facts, not test tube theory.

Neil

[channeledbymodem]

I haven't been here very long, but I know a troll when I see one. Instead of repeating a subjective opinion that everyone here has heard many times before perhaps you'd like to address my original question? I was not asking anyone's permission to feed a particular food.

I have never seen any scientific study that proved that one food formula was any better than any other. Therefore advocacy for any particular diet, commercial or raw, is anecdotal. And based on anecdotal evidence, your dislike for Pro Plan puts you in a very small minority here. You may say that distinguishing between pet foods is as simple as reading a label but your supposedly common sense approach is not really scientific because ingredients are not nutrients. Ezzy has tried to explain this to you over and over again and at this point your thread crashing is not only rude but tiresome.

If you think my opinion is subjective, you are the one not paying attention. My conclusions are based purely on scientific fact.

Calling something a "fact" in CAPS does not make it so and ignoring an OP's question while sidetracking a thread is very bad manners. I'm hard pressed to see what your agenda is aside from discrediting Ezzy. Did he borrow money from you and not pay it back?

As for facts, a quick click of the Google brings up the following. I note that in all of your many, many, many posts disparaging Pro Plan you *never* cite a source yet insist you have "science" to back you up. I'm sure you will find fault with my sources here but since you don't believe accredited professionals nor the "testimony" of very experienced peers here, I don't know where that leaves you. And actually I don't give a sh*t. I'm only sparring with you to get certain citations into the record since I discovered this site via a Google search for Pro Plan and someone some day might find this thread useful apart from your tedious assertions

Nutrition Know-How: Corn: Nutrient or Filler? Busting Common Nutrition Myths | Vetlearn - http://is.gd/WwG5if

"using a wet milling process for corn maintains its protein quality. In this process, the corn kernel is separated into starch, fiber, and protein. The protein component becomes corn gluten meal—a source of highly digestible protein for dogs and cats... Corn contributes a wide range of nutrients while offering balanced energy. In addition, corn has highly digestible (>90%) protein and a moderate amount of fat."

Comparison of amino acid digestibility coefficients for corn, corn gluten meal, and corn distillers dried grains with solubles among 3 different bioassays - http://is.gd/CmLmhJ

"For corn gluten meal, the PFR yielded significantly higher values than the PFC for the majority of the AA"

For additional citations please see subsequent posts. Forum rules only allow 2 URLs per post.

[channeledbymodem]

Is Grain Free Really The Answer? | Daily Vet | petMD - http://is.gd/gfp803

"The gluten in grain provides quality protein to the pet diet. Although it is not as bioavailable (intestinally absorbable) as the egg (the gold standard), it rivals many meat and legume products. It is an inexpensive way of fortifying the protein in pet diets. It significantly reduces the meat protein in my homemade diets and helps reduce the cost of feeding homemade diets."


Pet food prices, what you get by spending more - http://is.gd/ALKw9m

"There's no scientific evidence that any food is better than the next," says Joseph Wakshlag, D.V.M., Ph.D., an assistant professor of clinical nutrition at the Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine. Pets can thrive on inexpensive food or become ill from pricey food. If your animal is active and healthy, the food is doing its job. . . "

[channeledbymodem]

The Truth About Cat and Dog Food - The New York Times - http://is.gd/XBGAUq[/i]

"Marion Nestle, the Paulette Goddard professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, and Malden C. Nesheim, emeritus professor of nutrition at Cornell University: Within the premium brands, there is also a wide price range, yet when the ingredients lists are compared, they are strikingly similar since all have to meet certain nutritional standards. . . She ... compared 10 premium chicken dinners for dogs and found that all contained basically the same ingredients: All start with chicken or chicken broth, followed by grains and vegetables. The nonpremium brands use more grains and poultry, meat and fish byproducts. Although some owners insist on cooking for their pets, the authors said animals are more likely to get all the nutrients they need, and in the right amounts, from a commercial product...Besides, the pet food industry serves an important ecological function by using up food that would otherwise be thrown out,” Dr. Nestle said. “If everyone cooked human food for the 472 million cats and dogs in America, it would be like feeding an additional 42 million people.”

[Sharon]

Here we go again. After this many times maybe no one will bite.

Maybe the nth time is the charm and someone will tell us why corn gluten meal (aka corn protein concentrate) is preferable to or even equivalent to chicken meal, fish meal, pork meal, or other animal based protein concentrates?

I mean, with all the people around here feeding pro plan 30/20 and cgm being the #2 ingredient and primary protein concentrate, you'd think that somebody would have an answer to this. No?

................

Not sure what you are saying.
I feed pro Plan Focus; first ingredient is chicken.

[pato y codoniz]

I haven't been here very long, but I know a troll when I see one. Instead of repeating a subjective opinion that everyone here has heard many times before perhaps you'd like to address my original question? I was not asking anyone's permission to feed a particular food.

I have never seen any scientific study that proved that one food formula was any better than any other. Therefore advocacy for any particular diet, commercial or raw, is anecdotal. And based on anecdotal evidence, your dislike for Pro Plan puts you in a very small minority here. You may say that distinguishing between pet foods is as simple as reading a label but your supposedly common sense approach is not really scientific because ingredients are not nutrients. Ezzy has tried to explain this to you over and over again and at this point your thread crashing is not only rude but tiresome.

If you think my opinion is subjective, you are the one not paying attention. My conclusions are based purely on scientific fact.

Calling something a "fact" in CAPS does not make it so and ignoring an OP's question while sidetracking a thread is very bad manners. I'm hard pressed to see what your agenda is aside from discrediting Ezzy. Did he borrow money from you and not pay it back?

As for facts, a quick click of the Google brings up the following. I note that in all of your many, many, many posts disparaging Pro Plan you *never* cite a source yet insist you have "science" to back you up. I'm sure you will find fault with my sources here but since you don't believe accredited professionals nor the "testimony" of very experienced peers here, I don't know where that leaves you. And actually I don't give a sh*t. I'm only sparring with you to get certain citations into the record since I discovered this site via a Google search for Pro Plan and someone some day might find this thread useful apart from your tedious assertions

Nutrition Know-How: Corn: Nutrient or Filler? Busting Common Nutrition Myths | Vetlearn - http://is.gd/WwG5if

"using a wet milling process for corn maintains its protein quality. In this process, the corn kernel is separated into starch, fiber, and protein. The protein component becomes corn gluten meal—a source of highly digestible protein for dogs and cats... Corn contributes a wide range of nutrients while offering balanced energy. In addition, corn has highly digestible (>90%) protein and a moderate amount of fat."

Comparison of amino acid digestibility coefficients for corn, corn gluten meal, and corn distillers dried grains with solubles among 3 different bioassays - http://is.gd/CmLmhJ

"For corn gluten meal, the PFR yielded significantly higher values than the PFC for the majority of the AA"

For additional citations please see subsequent posts. Forum rules only allow 2 URLs per post.

You're lost.

The question isn't if corn gluten meal is digestible or bioavailable. The question is COMPARATIVE... is it more bioavailable than chicken meal, fish meal, pork meal, etc?

The answer is simple... it isn't.

There are several studies published in numerous veterinary journals to support that FACT.

Ps. They aren't written by Purina sales staff so you might not consider them valid.

[channeledbymodem]

Here we go again. After this many times maybe no one will bite.

Maybe the nth time is the charm and someone will tell us why corn gluten meal (aka corn protein concentrate) is preferable to or even equivalent to chicken meal, fish meal, pork meal, or other animal based protein concentrates?

I mean, with all the people around here feeding pro plan 30/20 and cgm being the #2 ingredient and primary protein concentrate, you'd think that somebody would have an answer to this. No?

................

Not sure what you are saying.
I feed pro Plan Focus; first ingredient is chicken.

Sigh. dogfoodadvisor has a very hard time with "fresh" chicken (as opposed to chicken meal) because after it is processed its weight will move it lower on the ingredient list. When the next ingredients listed are brewer's rice, corn gluten and poultry by products (and OMG animal fat) the assumption is that 1) Purina is deliberately misleading about "chicken being the first ingredient" and that 2) the food is a rip-off because of the gluten and by products. (BTW, the explanation for why Purina uses "poultry" and "animal" by-products and fat is very simple. Almost always they will be chicken if the first ingredient is chicken but since Purina sells millions of bags of food and the FDA is strict about changing the label if the formula changes, they leave themselves some wiggle room to substitute ingredients from other animals if chicken products are in short supply. This is very different from the suggestion that "animal" is used as a descriptor because the fat is rendered from roadkill and euthanized pets.)

Anyway, just to make things more confusing, AAFCO regulations allow ingredients to be listed either pre-processing or post-processing. DFA (and some of our friends here) *assume* that Purina's chicken is pre-processing rather than "as fed." The company is under no obligation to explain which method they use and obviously "chicken," plain and simple, sounds best to anyone reading the label.

Forgive me if this has been cited in one of the 10,000 threads on this subject (and go back to my original post please; it wasn't really about Pro Plan. It was about rotating foods. I only semi-intended to kick the hornet's nest.) but Vickie Lamb, who I assume many of you know from the retriever world, was so tired of the wet weight chicken canard she called Purina and Eukanuba to ask them.

. . . I checked with two companies, . . . Purina and Eukanuba, and both adjust in cooking for wet-weight loss so that the ingredient emerges as number one after cooking. THE FACT THAT THE WEBSITE {DFA} DOESN'T STATE THAT SOME COMPANIES WILL ADJUST FOR THIS IS IN THE END MISLEADING IN THE WAY THEY HAVE WORDED WHAT THEY WROTE. If people don't read really closely they will jump to the wrong conclusion about all companies.

While she was at it Vickie threw in another ringing endorsement for Pro Plan:

As far as my own dogs and my own choices, after my own considerable research (not just by the book) I've chosen Pro Plan for quite a number of reasons and I'm very happy with that decision and my dogs over the years on PP have shown the same by good health and condition from puppyhood into twilight years and ability and desire to perform in those years as well in various hunting/sporting breeds.

I guess if you live in a world where you make up your own facts Vickie could be delusional and Purina could be lying through their teeth. But I don't think so.

retrievertraining.net forum thread - Pro Plan smoe plan - Page 9 - http://is.gd/9KdG0W

[channeledbymodem]

pato y codoniz wrote:

There are several studies published in numerous veterinary journals to support that FACT.

Ps. They aren't written by Purina sales staff so you might not consider them valid.

My gosh, you're like a guy in a bar arguing about baseball before smartphones. After he's had a few. You need someone to show you how to use Google (or Bing, since you like to be contrarian).

I'm done here. Thank you to everyone who made a positive contribution to my first thread. Since no one chimed in and endorsed rotating protein sources I guess I have my answer.

Moderator: please feel free to lock this thread. It's begun its descent into h*ll.

[pato y codoniz]

pato y codoniz wrote:

There are several studies published in numerous veterinary journals to support that FACT.

Ps. They aren't written by Purina sales staff so you might not consider them valid.

My gosh, you're like a guy in a bar arguing about baseball before smartphones. After he's had a few. You need someone to show you how to use Google (or Bing, since you like to be contrarian).

I'm done here. Thank you to everyone who made a positive contribution to my first thread. Since no one chimed in and endorsed rotating protein sources I guess I have my answer.

Moderator: please feel free to lock this thread. It's begun its descent into h*ll.

You link to an article written by Purina sales staff and I'm the drunk?

Keep feeding your lap dog corn gluten meal and pretending it's the best stuff out there.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1250243/

Like I said, there are tons of articles... look for them...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12224854

[ezzy333]

Channeled,

Don't get too caught up in this whole debate as we like most forums have people who want to learn and a few that already know everything and have no intention of changing their agenda no matter how many times you try to explain what really takes place in the nutrition and manufacturing world of dog food. I like the material you posted as it seems pretty factual to me and comes with some authoritive people as authors. There is so much hype in this area that it is hard to find something based on scientific tests. I have pretty much refused to start looking up everything anymore for the non believers since I have found it makes no difference and they are not interested enough to look it up for themselves.

This has gone on for several years and the same old arguments continue to come up in spite of the massive evidence of millions of healthy animals and thousands of those are winning performance animals that are eating dog food we are being told a dog can't thrive on. A good example came up in this thread when we were told that an animal that naturally lives on what it could catch in the natural arena was proof they can't thrive on a good food that is available to them everyday. I think that means we all should throw whatever we happen to have available to the dog two or three times a week if we want to duplicate what a dog should eat. Maybe a dead possum today and an old shoe in a few days but just make sure you don't feed corn or any derivative there of to the dog no matter how it looks because it is eating all natural and is healthy. Of course I jest but it is pretty much what we are hearing.

I have been hoping this would get back to your question but maybe it has been answered. But if it doesn't we will cut it off through no fault of your own.

thanks for handling this whole thing responsibly and glad to have you here.

Ezzy

PS Send money so I can get Pato paid off.

[pato y codoniz]

Channeled,

Don't get too caught up in this whole debate as we like most forums have people who want to learn and a few that already know everything and have no intention of changing their agenda no matter how many times you try to explain what really takes place in the nutrition and manufacturing world of dog food. I like the material you posted as it seems pretty factual to me and comes with some authoritive people as authors. There is so much hype in this area that it is hard to find something based on scientific tests. I have pretty much refused to start looking up everything anymore for the non believers since I have found it makes no difference and they are not interested enough to look it up for themselves.

This has gone on for several years and the same old arguments continue to come up in spite of the massive evidence of millions of healthy animals and thousands of those are winning performance animals that are eating dog food we are being told a dog can't thrive on. A good example came up in this thread when we were told that an animal that naturally lives on what it could catch in the natural arena was proof they can't thrive on a good food that is available to them everyday. I think that means we all should throw whatever we happen to have available to the dog two or three times a week if we want to duplicate what a dog should eat. Maybe a dead possum today and an old shoe in a few days but just make sure you don't feed corn or any derivative there of to the dog no matter how it looks because it is eating all natural and is healthy. Of course I jest but it is pretty much what we are hearing.

I have been hoping this would get back to your question but maybe it has been answered. But if it doesn't we will cut it off through no fault of your own.

thanks for handling this whole thing responsibly and glad to have you here.

Ezzy

PS Send money so I can get Pato paid off.

I citing scientific studies and you, who was in the biz, is citing anecdotal evidence.... yet, I'm getting paid off?

Again, I put the question forth to you old grandmaster of dog food... other than being cheap, why is corn gluten meal preferable to other animal based protein concentrates?

[ezzy333]

I would answer you but you wouldn't accept it anyway so just believe it as no one is trying to make a poor feed.

[pato y codoniz]

I would answer you but you wouldn't accept it anyway so just believe it as no one is trying to make a poor feed.

I'll consider any scientific study you can provide as evidence that corn gluten meal is a superior protein source than the animal based protein concentrates.

Most corporations do not set out to make good or bad products. They set out to make a profit. They allow their market research and projections to make the product determinations.

For example, 20 years ago, the plastic cups at some fast food joints were of good enough quality that you could use them over and over again. The were strong and durable enough to become a fixture in every college apartment. Now those plastic cups are so flimsy that the sides collapse when you pick them up. The cup manufacturer didn't forget how to make those great cups. They chose to make a cheaper flimsier cup. An inferior product because of profit (either by market demand or by their own research).

[Neil]

You are comparing the quality of one time use cups to dog food? And think it proves your science? Quality cups are still available, they are just not included in the cost of your food. As are all price levels of dog food. And had I thought I could have improved on Azul' s health, happiness, performance, and longevity I would have bought more expensive food, gladly.

Neil

[pato y codoniz]

I don't keep up with sports, but I am pretty sure Bolt is a human and his nutritional needs are not germain.

Azul is exceptional in only one regard, he loves me. His kennelmates have fared as well. I fully recognize this is non-scientific, but I base most of buying decisions on pure anecdotal experiences. So do you really think he would have done better on one of your better foods? Please name one winning trial dog being fed one of these better foods? Perhaps your own win record would be important to the discussion.

We need to hurry, because history says one of you gets rude and the thread will be locked.

When your using sports performance as validation of your sports nutritions, Usain Bolt is germane because it shows the folly of your logic.

The guy won the 100m gold, the 200m gold, and the 4x100m gold eating 100 chicken nuggets a day.

Using your logic, his diet should be the standard for sports nutrition because of his athletic performance or, maybe the more likely scenario, his athletic gifts overshadowed his atrocious diet?

[pato y codoniz]

You are comparing the quality of one time use cups to dog food? And think it proves your science? Quality cups are still available, they are just not included in the cost of your food. As are all price levels of dog food. And had I thought I could have improved on Azul' s health, happiness, performance, and longevity I would have bought more expensive food, gladly.

Neil

Neil,

You literally prove my point using my cup example while claiming it is a bad example. They're allowing market research determined price points and profitability to make product ingredient, formulation, and ingredient quality decisions which runs contrary to Ezzys point which that the goal is to make a good food.

No, the goal is to make a profit given the parameters for their product.

[channeledbymodem]

Keep feeding your lap dog corn gluten meal and pretending it's the best stuff out there.

As long as we're getting personal as well as way off topic, here's FDR:

"These Republican leaders have not been content with attacks on me, or my wife, or on my sons. No, not content with that, they now include my little dog, Fala. . . . You know, Fala is Scotch, and being a Scottie, as soon as he learned that the Republican fiction writers in Congress and out had concocted a story that I had left him behind on the Aleutian Islands and had sent a destroyer back to find him - at a cost to the taxpayers of two or three, or eight or twenty million dollars- his Scotch soul was furious. He has not been the same dog since. I am accustomed to hearing malicious falsehoods about myself . . . . But I think I have a right to resent, to object to libelous statements about my dog."

[Neil]

You are comparing the quality of one time use cups to dog food? And think it proves your science? Quality cups are still available, they are just not included in the cost of your food. As are all price levels of dog food. And had I thought I could have improved on Azul' s health, happiness, performance, and longevity I would have bought more expensive food, gladly.

Neil

Neil,

You literally prove my point using my cup example while claiming it is a bad example. They're allowing market research determined price points and profitability to make product ingredient, formulation, and ingredient quality decisions which runs contrary to Ezzys point which that the goal is to make a good food.

No, the goal is to make a profit given the parameters for their product.

A one time use cup that is included in the price of the product is not an ingredient nor a formulation, it is a delivery system. Like comparing the incidental reusability of a dog food bag. Your point of profit is correct, but Purina has every reason to keep the quality of ProPlan high.

[Brazosvalleyvizslas]

I would answer you but you wouldn't accept it anyway so just believe it as no one is trying to make a poor feed.

I'll consider any scientific study you can provide as evidence that corn gluten meal is a superior protein source than the animal based protein concentrates.

Most corporations do not set out to make good or bad products. They set out to make a profit. They allow their market research and projections to make the product determinations.

For example, 20 years ago, the plastic cups at some fast food joints were of good enough quality that you could use them over and over again. The were strong and durable enough to become a fixture in every college apartment. Now those plastic cups are so flimsy that the sides collapse when you pick them up. The cup manufacturer didn't forget how to make those great cups. They chose to make a cheaper flimsier cup. An inferior product because of profit (either by market demand or by their own research).

Or maybe the companies are avoiding lawsuits because those plastic cups were never intended to be re-used. That's why they are called disposable. Not sure what that has to have anything with dog food though.

[pato y codoniz]

Keep feeding your lap dog corn gluten meal and pretending it's the best stuff out there.

As long as we're getting personal as well as way off topic, here's FDR:

"These Republican leaders have not been content with attacks on me, or my wife, or on my sons. No, not content with that, they now include my little dog, Fala. . . . You know, Fala is Scotch, and being a Scottie, as soon as he learned that the Republican fiction writers in Congress and out had concocted a story that I had left him behind on the Aleutian Islands and had sent a destroyer back to find him - at a cost to the taxpayers of two or three, or eight or twenty million dollars- his Scotch soul was furious. He has not been the same dog since. I am accustomed to hearing malicious falsehoods about myself . . . . But I think I have a right to resent, to object to libelous statements about my dog."

Lol, calling your jack Russell terrier a lapdog, mind you the breed standard is 14 to 18 lbs, is getting personal but you calling me a drunk on a barstool isn't somehow getting personal? Your lack of self-awareness is astonishing.

[pato y codoniz]

You are comparing the quality of one time use cups to dog food? And think it proves your science? Quality cups are still available, they are just not included in the cost of your food. As are all price levels of dog food. And had I thought I could have improved on Azul' s health, happiness, performance, and longevity I would have bought more expensive food, gladly.

Neil

Neil,

You literally prove my point using my cup example while claiming it is a bad example. They're allowing market research determined price points and profitability to make product ingredient, formulation, and ingredient quality decisions which runs contrary to Ezzys point which that the goal is to make a good food.

No, the goal is to make a profit given the parameters for their product.

A one time use cup that is included in the price of the product is not an ingredient nor a formulation, it is a delivery system. Like comparing the incidental reusability of a dog food bag. Your point of profit is correct, but Purina has every reason to keep the quality of ProPlan high.

The cup is the cup manufacturer's product. It is what they make and sell. They make a product to meet market demands and their market researched price point. Their market, fast food companies, have demanded a lower price point and they've responded by making a cheaper flimisier product. Their intention wasn't to make a good cup. It was to make a cup that was cheap enough.

[ezzy333]

I would answer you but you wouldn't accept it anyway so just believe it as no one is trying to make a poor feed.

I'll consider any scientific study you can provide as evidence that corn gluten meal is a superior protein source than the animal based protein concentrates.

Most corporations do not set out to make good or bad products. They set out to make a profit. They allow their market research and projections to make the product determinations.

For example, 20 years ago, the plastic cups at some fast food joints were of good enough quality that you could use them over and over again. The were strong and durable enough to become a fixture in every college apartment. Now those plastic cups are so flimsy that the sides collapse when you pick them up. The cup manufacturer didn't forget how to make those great cups. They chose to make a cheaper flimsier cup. An inferior product because of profit (either by market demand or by their own research).

Not an inferior product at all. Both cups fulfilled the need of the fast food joint. Seems they found out they were paying for a cup they didn't need so made a decision to change to a cheaper cup that still filled the need they had. I'll bet you don't buy a semi to haul your dog to the field or cast iron hunting boots though they would last longer.

Did you know dogs don't use protein. Protein is a word we made up to signify the amino acids the dogs need. They don't much care where they come from as long as they get enough of each one.

[pato y codoniz]

I would answer you but you wouldn't accept it anyway so just believe it as no one is trying to make a poor feed.

I'll consider any scientific study you can provide as evidence that corn gluten meal is a superior protein source than the animal based protein concentrates.

Most corporations do not set out to make good or bad products. They set out to make a profit. They allow their market research and projections to make the product determinations.

For example, 20 years ago, the plastic cups at some fast food joints were of good enough quality that you could use them over and over again. The were strong and durable enough to become a fixture in every college apartment. Now those plastic cups are so flimsy that the sides collapse when you pick them up. The cup manufacturer didn't forget how to make those great cups. They chose to make a cheaper flimsier cup. An inferior product because of profit (either by market demand or by their own research).

Not an inferior product at all. Both cups fulfilled the need of the fast food joint. Seems they found out they were paying for a cup they didn't need so made a decision to change to a cheaper cup that still filled the need they had. I'll bet you don't buy a semi to haul your dog to the field or cast iron hunting boots though they would last longer.

Did you know dogs don't use protein. Protein is a word we made up to signify the amino acids the dogs need. They don't much care where they come from as long as they get enough of each one.

Tell me more about these amino acids....

[Spy Car]

P.S. It is worthy to note that "chicken" is the first ingredient listed in Pro Plan only because the odd regulations allow for the weight to include the water weight of pre-processed chicken. If the label showed the dry weight chicken would be far (far) down the list. This is a cereal product with scant amounts of meat.

Purina lists ingredients on an as fed basis. Chicken is the "heaviest" ingredient after processing.

Proof please! And not just third hand (and unsubstantiated) claim from a "Vicky" on another forum.

Bill