Your post is a little ironic when you talk about human concerns compared to dog concerns. I say this because we buy dog food thinking the same ingredients in there that work best for us, should work best for dogs, and that’s not the case. If it was up to the dogs to pick food, I think it would be very different…by nature they would go for byproducts instead of chicken breasts, etc.
Really? I feel like dogs would probably go for whatever looked/smelled/tasted like meat. So they would probably eat both a by-product and a chicken breast. The problem comes when we consider what each one is made of. Chicken is chicken breast. Usually with some hormones and such because that's how livestock is mainly raised in this day and age, but still chicken. By-product, by AAFCO's definition can be pretty much any meat. Chicken, beef, pork, roadkill etc. I do not like that by-product gives you no idea of what the meat actually is. If I am feeding my dog a food, I want to know what meat is in it and where it comes from. And a company using by-product in their food almost certainly doesn't know what is in it because by-product is normally bought pre-made from a supplier. My dog would probably eat both, but I can choose to give him the healthier option where I actually know what meat I am giving him.
I admit I am the same and base a lot my behavior on what I perceive is true based on marketing…but it’s one thing to understand that and still prefer one product over another, versus blindly following it without any science based data. In the gym we call it “bro science” … I haven’t yet found the term to use for these situations.
Thanks for assuming that I just blindly following the prettiest packaging.
I don't talk about dog food because I've been loaded up with "bro science". As unbelievable as it is, I'm competent enough to draw conclusions from scientific literature and my own experiences and make informed judgments about dog food ingredients. I don't dislike Purina's food because it doesn't have the prettiest prom dress. I dislike it because it uses things like whole grain wheat, whole grain corn, and the synthetic vitamin K, which has been linked to liver toxicity and is not even needed in their food. Yet they put it in anyways.
Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon State University
The company also refuses to answer back about the presence of ethoxyquin in their fish meal. Hopefully you've done enough research that I don't have to waste my time pulling up information on how toxic ethoxyquin is to dogs?
The one big thing that many people miss is companies like P&G, Mars, Purina, or whatever big name company you think of, has a legacy of their brand name to consider. They also typically have the R&D budget to properly do formulations and QA testing to assure their good name doesn’t get spoiled and they go from selling millions to zero because of trust. BTW – the Proplan company you don’t trust happened to also be the company that invested 14 years in a study involving scientists, PhDs, and UPenn Vet science professors to get data behind the life span differences between lean and overweight dogs. My guess is, that wasn’t cheap.
Purina releases results from first life span study - DVM
That's great for them. It's great that vets have concrete proof to give to people who can't resist shoving that next bag of bacon strips down their engorged dog's throat. But that doesn't exactly impress me. Most people with half a brain can probably connect the fact that being overweight usually leads to health problems and a lowered lifespan. By the way, my uncle's lab lived to sixteen by NOT eating the corn and chemical riddled slop that Purina sells.
Do you remember your parent’s dogs or perhaps your grandparent’s dog that would live to 15 years old without issues while eating “bad” food? Have you looked up data on how long dogs lived in the last few decades compared to the recent ones?
Like I said, I fall for the same hype…I feed grain free, have spent years on Orijin/Acana foods, but I also remember the time Proplan Sensitive Skin & Stomach basically saved my pup when she would have liquid runs for months on all the other foods I fed her.
I remember my parent's rottweilers eating Purina and dying slow agonizing deaths due to various cancers, organ failures, and toxic buildups in their livers and kidneys, finally shutting down at eight and nine years old. Meanwhile, my raw fed ranch dogs lived to healthy old ages and usually died of accidents or natural causes like getting hit by a car or just living to fourteen or fifteen years old and finally passing away in their sleep. If you really want to argue this, you should probably do a bit more research and stop relying on your "bro science".