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
|
|||
|
|||
You won't get a straight answer from them. They will simply perform
spin control on their product and send out endless smoke screens to try to change the subject. They will also attempt to discredit any food other than Hill's and anyone that doesn't agree with them. They're here for one reason, to defend their product and try to convince the masses that corn meal, soy meal and by-products are somehow equal to real meat, whole grains, fruits and veggies. In the end, they won't answer the question If it's all about nutrient profiles, then why don't we all give up real meats, whole grains, fresh fruits and veggies and just slap a feed bucket over our heads and eat a mixture of fortified Corn Meal, Soybean Meal and By-products? The answer is that it's all about money and the fact that they can make a huge profit selling their formula at ~$1 per pound. If you look at the other foods you mentioned, they also cost around ~$1 per pound. If you consider your dog livestock and don't mind paying ~$1 per pound for Corn Meal, Soybean Meal and Chicken heads, feet, intestines and other random organs, then Science Diet isn't a bad food, albeit overpriced, but if you consider your Dog Family, I wouldn't touch Science Diet with a 10 foot pole. I'd also like to see the ingredient list of their foods before they were assimilated by Colgate-Palmolive, anyone have it? Let the spin begin! |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
PawsForThought wrote: David, I do believe you've hit the nail squarely on the head. Well put! I did get a chuckle out of Steve Crane's reply on why they add peanut hulls to their food. He said it was so the dog was satiated and didn't drive the owner nuts by begging for more food. What he fails to realize (or maybe he does, lol) is that if the dog were fed a good wholesome food instead of a food with filler bulk, the dog would be naturally satiated. More than likely, he got hit in the head WITH a nail! Lauren, you and David NEVER answer the questions put to you--so it's clear that as long as you and others attack Hill's, then Steve, me, and others will defend them. Clearly, you would rather demogogue than discuss, you would rather attack and bash than debate and reason. It's clear to everyone here, that neither you nor David, have ANY understanding of feline or canine nutrition. You think you can discern the quality of a food by looking at an INGREDIENT LABEL?? That's absolutely laughable! It's been stated here time and time again, what a fool's errand that is. Not to mention, that it just doesn't make any sense. Perhaps if you worked in the pet food industry, you might have more of an understanding of nutrition, but you don't. It's very amusing that you castigate Hill's at every turn, yet they are single-handedly responsible for the lion's share of small animal clinical nutritional advances in the last 50 years. You recommend companies that have never done A SINGLE THING to advance canine or feline nutrition, yet you swear by those same foods. When asked simple questions about nutrition, you respond w/ personal attacks, namecalling, and insults. Clearly, that's all you, David, and others have... and that's sad. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Are you going to answer the original poster's question or start sending
up smoke screens and diversion tactics once again? Surely Hill's could source some high quality, low ash chicken meal to use instead of by-products and surely you could use better quality grains and protein sources instead of Corn Meal and Soybean Meal and surely you could use a better quality fat source than vegetable oil? So why don't you? |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
OK Rocket, Two more things for you to try
1. Show us the peer reviewd published data that illustrates the use of cellulose and penaut hulls does NOT cause satiety in dogs. 2. Show us the legal definition of "human grade" and explain to use what law or regulations define that term. We'll add these to the growing list of your ideas and hypothesis that you can't support. 3. We're still waiting for you to grant us your infinite wisdom in regards to what nutrients are of primary concern in large breed adult puppies and why? 4. We're still waiting for you to show us the published data which illustrates corn is "bad" for dogs. How long will this list become - anyone want to start a pool? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Okay, let the flames rise...I don't get it and will probably be
admonished for this; but... It's not difficult to seek out the facts. If you do a quick google search to either substantiate or disprove what Steve and Gaubster have enspouted (like phosphorus and calcium levels, ash levels, corn meal advantages etc.), it's easy to find that they speak from a scientifically sound and proven vantage point. Look, I don't care about Hill's or think they need anyone here to "help" them. I think they do pretty well on their own, however, the truth of the matter is that Science Diet does have science on their side. Perhaps some are not psychologically able to accept the facts. Even in my quest to find the most nutritional dog food, it's hard for me not to fall victim to the hype. It's hard for me to see corn meal as a first ingredient (or even in the list of ingredients, period) and not wince, but that is marketing working it's magic on me. Logically and intellectually, it just isn't accurate. Does that mean that some of these boutique foods aren't good - no, it doesn't. Some of them are fine, even good, but the thing that gets sorely missed in this forum is just because a food like "Blue" passes the muster, doesn't mean that Hill's is this evil empire wanting to make dogs sick and terminally ill. It's so silly. Like these boutique dog food advocates are the only people in the know that happen to understand this conspiracy, while the majority of vets and scientists nation-wide are just uninformed, uneducated and ignorant. eyeroll I'm so sure!! It defies common sense, IMO. I think it speak volumes that Iams and Hill's doesn't claim, "Human grade" on their products when legally, they most certain could do so. They seem less interested in preying on fear than simply making a quality product through scientificically proven nutrition. Question: Does anybody here actually have conclusive evidence that proves your theories about their nutrition to cause x, y or z; from a *credible*, non-bias source? |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
I suspect a troll here but let's see.
So my questin still wasn't aswered by the SD expert(s). Whether or not Innova or Canidae or any other higher end dog food really uses high or low grade meat, Why does SD use low grade ingredience? On what basis would you define Innova or Canidae as having "better" ingredients? Please define what that term means. Does it mean that the ingredient "sounds better" to you from an emotional point of view, or that the ingredient brings a higher level of digestibility, broader spectrum of amino acids, lower levels of calcium and phosphorus, much higher level of proven antioxidants? What measureable things would you use to define "better". I would be in SD's corner if they used brown rice or flaxseed instead of peanut hulls. Flax seed does not contain sufficient insoluble fiber to effect satiety in obese dogs. The only place Hill's uses cellulose and penaut hulls is in diets designed for obesity. Of course you know that, you're just hoping readers on this NG will be ignorant enough to believe you when you try to insinuate cellulose and peanut hulls are used in all Hill's foods. Flax seed would contribute additional fats which would be contraindicated in obese prone animals. Or chicken meal instead of soy meal. The first ingredient listed in Science Diet Canine adult is chicken, not soy meal so I'm guessing you'll start singing the praises of Science Diet now? . Please let us know just exactly why soy meal is "bad" for dogs? Please be sure to cite your references for this claim. My old vet who was really old, told me that Hill's used to be a great company when they were independent. But when they got bought up buy these corporations like their current owners Colgate-Palmolive their ingredience had really gone down hill. He could no longer prescribe their use. Good grief your vet must have graduated from vet school well over 35 years ago. Hasn't he gotten to the point of retiring yet? Colgate bought Hill's in 1976. What a silly thing to say without checking your facts. You just end up looking kind of ignorant. Unless of course you once again hoped that readers on this NG would be so ignorant they would buy this nonsensical story as well. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
THE PET FOOD INDUSTRY AND YOUR PETS HEALTH (vol 1) | WalterNY | Dog behavior | 0 | February 8th 04 04:15 PM |
THE PET FOOD INDUSTRY AND YOUR PETS HEALTH (vol 1) | WalterNY | Dog behavior | 0 | February 8th 04 04:15 PM |
THE PET FOOD INDUSTRY AND YOUR PETS HEALTH (vol 1) | WalterNY | Dog behavior | 0 | February 8th 04 04:15 PM |
THE PET FOOD INDUSTRY AND YOUR PETS HEALTH (vol 1) | WalterNY | Dog behavior | 0 | February 8th 04 04:15 PM |
THE PET FOOD INDUSTRY AND YOUR PETS HEALTH (vol 1) | WalterNY | Dog activities | 0 | February 8th 04 04:15 PM |