If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Food
Melinda Shore wrote: In article .com, wrote: ...and Melinda is another Hill's Hater who would rather kill the messenger because she is unable to kill the message. The fact is that initially I thought that Science Diet just didn't work for my dogs - it's not the only one that hasn't, including some "premium" foods like Solid Gold, so I assumed it was just one of those things. Then I discovered that other people had exactly the same problems with it that I did, and then I discovered that the people who browbeat anybody who criticizes Science Diet actually work for Hills, and then I discovered that Hills asserts that ingredients don't matter, and then I discovered that one of the people who claims his job is reviewing the research literature for Hills is completely innumerate. So that's the sequence of events that led to me having a problem with your employer. Melinda that's just not true either. You've got a problem with the truth, don't you? You've been railing against Hill's for years; long before this "new sequence of events" that you talk about. It's really too bad that you feel you must be deceitful in order to explain your argument. It's also amazing how you IGNORE all the positive comments about Science Diet that are all over the net and in other places. You are disingenuous at best. (and don't play the victim card, it's really unbecoming of you) Since you believe that Steve "posted incomplete information about corn", then why don't you correct the record? Oh that's right, you have no or "incomplete" knowledge about the subject. I've been asking you for a long time what year you allegedly fed Science Diet. You've never answered the question. (that's the point at which your acolytes respond; I fully expect that to happen any moment in this thread) I'll ask it again. EXACTLY WHICH YEAR DID YOU "FEED" SCIENCE DIET? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Food
Melinda Shore wrote: In article . com, wrote: As long as people out there are going to focus on ingredients over all else (even nutrition), Hill's will try to actually EDUCATE people about NUTRITION. Shouldn't they wait until they hire someone who knows about it? Just a suggestion. -- That's the best you've got? Again, you didn't answer the question. Also, you still haven't provided any helpful information in this thread. I think you use this forum as an outlet for your frustrations in life. You're obviously not interested in advancing the debate surrounding nutrition in companion animal diets. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Food
In article . com,
wrote: I think you use this forum as an outlet for your frustrations in life. One of my frustrations, certainly, and that's the misuse of science to promote wacko agendas. For example, arguing that ingredients don't matter to dog food quality. Oh, and another frustration is the degradation of the ethical environment in the US. And then there's frustration with the sensibility that we should ignore the evidence of actual performance in the field and instead hew unto something that's not working because it says on paper it *should* work. Generally when predicted results don't match the observable evidence, reasonable scientists go back and review their work to find out where they went wrong. That you guys keep saying "But but but but this paper says ... " is pretty clear indication that Hills doesn't work that way. (Although frankly, until you hire someone to do literature evaluation who's actually qualified to do literature evaluation there's really no way of knowing whether or not your understanding of any given set of results is correct in the first place.) -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Food
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Food
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Food
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Food
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Food
Papa Dog wrote:
In article , says... 18 or years ago I used Hills. My vet swore by it and I figured he knew best. Both my dogs scratched all the time and had flakey skin. Both were different breeds ( one a Cairn terrior and one a shepherd/coon dog mix). Switched from Hills and never went back. I hear the same story over and over from so many people. 18 or so years ago, almost all the show and breeders in the U.S. fed SD. Unlike you, it did not provide the symptoms you describe. In fact, it was considered the premium food out there. 18 years later, I don't know a single show or performance breeder that feeds it. None. Nada. And I know, or at least know of well enough to know what they feed, hundreds. What could have happened? They have marketing, they have monopolies at veterinarians all across the country, they're in as many stores as the other foods. What happened is that the formulation changed and the food no longer produced results. Coats went bad, stools got weird, and the dogs were unthrifty on the diet. So being smart, people stopped feeding it. I know Science Diet still has market share, but not the one that counts as far as I'm concerned. I feed a food that is also a big brand, so it's not that I'm anti-brand. But I feed what works, and that is way not science diet. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Food
"Melinda Shore" wrote in message ... In article . com, wrote: As long as people out there are going to focus on ingredients over all else (even nutrition), Hill's will try to actually EDUCATE people about NUTRITION. Shouldn't they wait until they hire someone who knows about it? Just a suggestion. -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community. I wouldn't claim to be an expert on dog foods, per se, but I do believe, when I have a question, in asking someone who I feel is qualified to answer the question. When it came to dog food, I touched base with the breeder who I bought my latest dog from, and my vet. My breeder uses IAMS exclusively, and recommended that I do the same. Since I paid a great deal of money for my pup, I took her at her word. When I questioned my vet on IAMS, he was very quick to point out that it was a high quality dog food. It isn't true in every case, but I feel that you most often get what you pay for. Aside from that, I feel that if breeders of expensive dogs and vets agree that IAMS is a quality dog food, I am ok using it. However, I am always open to new information. If anyone has ever had a negative experience with IAMS, I surely would want to hear about it. Of course, my dogs would really rather have the fried chicken or steak that I may be eating....naturally.... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What is REALLY in your pet's food? | catsdogs | Dog behavior | 3 | May 12th 04 05:57 AM |
What is REALLY in your pet's food? | catsdogs | Dog behavior | 0 | May 11th 04 10:22 PM |
What is REALLY in your pet's food? | catsdogs | Dog behavior | 0 | May 11th 04 10:22 PM |
THE PET FOOD INDUSTRY AND YOUR PETS HEALTH (vol 1) | WalterNY | Dog behavior | 0 | February 8th 04 05:15 PM |
THE PET FOOD INDUSTRY AND YOUR PETS HEALTH (vol 1) | WalterNY | Dog behavior | 0 | February 8th 04 05:15 PM |