Feeding continued - Page 1

Hi everybody, with your permission, I will start this topic anew, since the format went haywire on the old one. Patrishap, I truly value your opinion and I don't think that you are a sadist. More and more, I am convinced that not soaking the dog food is the right thing to do. And I am kind of glad since it is definitely better for their teeth. My German friends, who advised the soaking are kind of old-fashioned anyway. They are worried that it is not good for their stomach ligaments, and (to quote them) that the food is laying like stones in their stomachs. Maybe, it used to be that way with the older dog food brands. Anyway, my husband is happy you agree with him. He told me to tell you cheers. Good night, Chris

Great Chris, I'm very happy that my efforts actually 'made a small difference'! My notions may not be that scientific, but I think its just as important to heed one's own common sense, of which - even if you're only remotely as my mother was -you must have abundance! As well, where all these extruded products are concerned, I think that many set far too much store by all the glossy advertising. They forget that at one time they didn't exist at all! Of course when you have famous judges and well-known Breeders endorsing them to the hilt, it's easy to forget! This business of 'lying like stones in their stomach' I don't get at all. I would have thought that a bit of roughage, with these extruded products that is, is just what they need. That's partly why I add my own concoction as well! I hate to think their opinion of chicken wings/legs, chewed to bits and swallowed as it comes, or other bones! You know how you mentioned undigested carrot? Well a much later post mentioned shredding them. In all this time, I'd never even thought of it! I'm going to do just that in future and add to concoction fresh. As a youngster, in neighbourhood I lived, in lieu of vets needle, unwanted animals were often disposed off at local slaughterhouse - and, not knowing any better (initially at 7 to 10 years old then), had to take a few dogs there myself. If I even hinted at the gruesome details, Sunny and quite a few others, would want to lynch me! (Similarly if I described how my mother used to dispose of unwanted pups!). We even fixed broken limbs ourselves with splints and gypsum! Different world then! Thought I'd throw in that trivial tit-bit only for you and your husband's interest. You know something that also came back to me, some of animals we had, and from memory none had shred of paper or pedigree, and I've got photographs, they look better 'the thing' than pure animals I see now, especially where nobility of head is concerned! Try and figure that one out! Kind regards to you and your husband.

Hi guys, have to read up on the other posts to this topic. Adding some roughage is a good idea. Most commercial dog foods are too low in fibre. The idea is to have small stools. IMO more for the benefit of the lazy owner who wants less to clean up from the yard. Small stools have little to do with digestablity. The kibble expands slowly in the stomach. If on doubt feed in twice a day. There is a concern about stretching the stomach wall, which could be a cause for torsion. But if you feed a premium food, it will expand slowly at body temperature, and the outer soaked up layers will start to be digested before all of the kibble is completely soaked through yet. Most kibble is too low in fat IMO, and too low in roughage. Most senior diets just have cheap fillers, so in other words roughage, added, and people pay through the nose for the "special" diet. If a dog gets older and needs less calories, but the owner feels he still wants to give the dog the same amount as usual, then you can soak it to make the meal appear larger. Basically for the benefit of the owner, not so much for the dog. If you live in very warm or very cold climates and dehydration is a possible issue, soaking is a good idea, because your dog may not meet his requirements for drinking and get health problems. When you soak, soak in hand warm water or cold water only, to preserve nutrients. Exception is when we put pups on solid food for the first time, because you can only feed well soaked food and you need to feed it at body temperature, so you need warm water for soaking. So we put the kibble in the blender and grind it down to a powder. Then it soaks up the water within 5 minutes and still has a good temperature for feeding. Fruits and veggies make great snacks. Carrots are good, but yes ground up. Lots of work. Here is a tip: get a juicer and have a glass or two of carrot juice yourself, and give the rough stuff that is left over from the juicing to the dogs. A very tasty combination is carrot, apple and beets. Also very healthy for your dogs. And for good ol' Funky out there: apple and/or pear with celery (stalk, not the root). Yum...

Hallo DH, Very glad to see your input. Yet, despite my huge regard for your obvious knowledge, and this is solely my inexperienced view, your contributions of late do have just a charmful, surreal hint of magazine 'ideal world' scenario about them (here I particularly refer to your last Banana-Backed and Newcomer topics)!. Thus, in subtle or not so subtle ways, they do incline to be contrary, using that over-worked phrase, to self-evident fact - if not, for larger posts, self-contradictory. As a friend, I know I can say so without risk of offending you. Broadly speaking, although carefully couched, you also appear to advocate soakage of extruded product - but it is difficult to be sure one way or the other. In fact, many points made earlier in favour of not doing so are simply ignored! By the way, these products have two crucial points in their favour - convenience and nutritional balance - so, as such, I think they're great. Reading bag accompanying kibble I'm using, I read that its 'unrivalled combination of scientific expertise and endless work with top breeders' has seemingly resulted in incorporation of 'every known nutritional' need known to man. I do wonder though, how this is possible with a dry, manufactured product. And that about a third consists of protein, fat, salt, and fibre (all of 5%!).Presumably, the rest is filler of corn or rice starch or similar. You initiate above post with comment that small stools are desirable, and have little to do with digestion. May I ask as to relevance and authority for such statement? I only ask because I've ever been only concerned with firmness thereof, and worry if they show up loose. At same time you admit adding roughage is good idea - would this not tend to make for larger stools? Would soakage perhaps also not lead to looser ones? You continue with remarks to do with kibble expansion in stomach and that premium brand is somehow slower to expand - outer layers supposedly digest first before complete expansion - and therefore superior? This recalls a manufacturers' advertising brochure I saw somewhere! And then comment: 'there is concern about stretching stomach wall, which could be a cause for torsion' (bloat). Which authority exactly has these 'concerns'? Isn't this merely baffling 'the folks' with bit of scientific hogwash? The next remark suggests soakage (regardless of dog's needs?) in order to make meal seem larger for older animal - apparently mostly with aim of pleasing owner. This strikes me as a truly nonsensical statement. Soaking is particularly good in hot climates for otherwise dog may dehydrate, you say next! Another piece of unadulterated nonsense, DH! In hot climate there's always bucket of water standing by - when thirsty, dog drinks - weird, yes? Are you actually suggesting that adding bit of water to kibble would make any difference here whatsoever, or in cold climate? You even say it's 'particularly' good! Do you know what 100 degree heat does to soaked kibble that's not immediately eaten? You then advise to soak in cold or warm water only, and so neatly sidestep issue whether to soak at all! Research cited under previous heading suggested torsion was twice as likely with soakage: not worthy of mention? I checked on manufacturers recommendations on bag and note they similarly skip the issue: I thought it might have been worthy of mention! Instead, it simply suggests what water to add if you want to soak: pretty clever! Remainder is just silly rhetoric! I'm no longer so glad of your effort here, DH! It surely under-rates intelligence of reader! I hoped for some constructive input that I could test my own very basic notions against, and instead I see superficial double-talk: disinformation! Yet I've seen some very worthwhile previous posts, so all is forgiven! With regard. Lets hope format here doesn't get screwed up as before, eh? Can't stand thought of going through it again!