What's your favorite dog food? - Page 6

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Nans gsd on 06 April 2015 - 21:04

Just say'in;  enviroment does play a large role in our dogs lives, from puppyhood all through adulthood;  however, how are we to know with the foods, vaccines, poisons, water, and the list goes on and on what is killing them.  JUst thought it was interesting with both dogs being fed Petcurean for a number of years the bitch with cancer since puppyhood, the older boy since probably 4/5 years old they both have serious health issues.  They are related, however not really close some common dogs in background though, however these lineages usually have a very healthy background with great longevity to boot.  Just a pisser.

 

Arra, raw and tripe will not work in this case.  Am thinking about trying Orijen again though the 2nd time around should definitely tell the story.  Thank you for your input, always interesting to see what works for peoples dogs.  Nan

 

 


by vk4gsd on 07 April 2015 - 00:04

ok i am not in the US, i was intrigued by this question about hormone use in US poultry becuase i know it DOES NOT HAPPEN legally in my country yet the public insist it does. things as stupid as teenage girls growing...never mind.

 

i am trying to find credible research from US on line sources it seems the situation is the same, can't vouch for credibility of this site but;

http://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/2812/chickens-do-not-receive-growth-hormones-so-why-all-the-confusion/

"As a result, many of us in the poultry field hear the same question with increasing frequency: "Why do you put hormones in the feed to make chickens grow so big and fast?" The fact that the question begins with "why" instead of "do" indicates the level of confusion and misunderstanding of the consuming public. The truth is no hormones have been allowed in poultry production for more than 50 years. Hormone use in poultry production was banned in the United States in the 1950s."

 

seems consistent with what i would expect, not saying it is true.

 

we legally use growth hormones in feed lot cattle as they do in the US. our farms are mainly free range grazing and it is easy to get beef free of hormones and grain etc, it is actually less exensive and most people prefer it on taste.

 

more on hormones in poultry from industry sites;

 

http://ncegg.org/the-hormone-myth/

 

The Hormone Myth



Chickens Are Not Fed Hormones!  Here Are 7 Reasons Why.

It seems to occur with increasing frequency. Sometimes it crops up in a conversation with someone seated next to you on an airplane, or perhaps at a social gathering. If you happen to mention you are involved in poultry nutrition, sooner or later the question is bound to arise: ‘Why do you add hormones to chicken feed?’ The form of the question…asking why? Instead of if?…emphasizes the degree of misinformation prevalent among the general public. As all nutritionists know, it is simply not true. Hormones are not added to poultry feeds.

At the recent International Poultry Exposition in Atlanta, over a thousand companies exhibited their products to the poultry industry. As not a single firm that was there markets hormones for poultry, it may be questioned where the general public gets the idea that these substances are an integral part of poultry production. During the past several years, some poultry producers have in their advertising campaigns emphasized that they do not use hormones. Whether this position puts the matter to rest in the mind of the public is not certain. Perhaps, such advertisements might be interpreted to imply that other producers use hormones, or that this was a common practice at some time in the past. It would take a public relations expert to interpret the mental impressions. Another possible reason for suspecting hormone use is that today’s broilers grow so incredibly fast that those not familiar with poultry production might well assume that “magic bullets” are needed. Whatever the case, the misconception that hormones are added to poultry feed is, of course, totally inaccurate and detracts from the image that the poultry industry likes to project to health-conscious consumers. In the interest of refuting this belief, it is the authors’ purpose to not simply deny the use of hormones, but rather to go one step further and provide solid reasons why hormones are not and, in fact, cannot be used in poultry production.

Seven Reasons

1.Hormone use is illegal. In the United States and many other countries, extremely strict controls are placed on the use of hormones and hormone-like substances in animal feeds. In no case is the supplementation of hormones approved for poultry. While it might be alleged that illegal use of hormones might occasionally be practiced, as will be made clear below there is no logical reason to use these compounds in poultry production.

2.Hormones are not effective. The administration of growth hormone does not lead to increased growth in chickens. In a similar vein, injecting growth hormone into humans will not lead to development of a winning basketball team. Growth is an extremely complex combination of metabolic functions, depending on a wide array of endocrinological signals.

3.Administration is extremely difficult. Like insulin, which is used in the treatment of diabetes, growth hormone is a protein. If either of these hormones were consumed orally, they would be quickly digested in the same way as protein from corn or soy. As is well known, diabetics must receive injections of insulin. Thus even if a positive effect were likely, growth hormone would need to be injected into chickens on a very frequent basis. The logistics of injecting hundreds of thousands of chickens with hormone illustrates the impossibility of this scenario.

 

Research indicates that the release of natural growth hormone in chickens is pulsatile, peaking every 90 minutes. This could imply that if growth hormone were to be administered effectively, the only feasible way to do this would be through frequent intravenous administration.

4. High cost. As chicken growth hormone is not produced commercially, its cost would be extremely high. If 1 mg were to be administered to a broiler, the cost would be far in excess of the value of the chicken itself. Obviously, this makes no commercial sense.

5.Negative impact of chicken performance. The modern broiler has been genetically selected to grow so rapidly that it occasionally encounters physiological limits. All are familiar with the cases of young men who, as they enter puberty, experience a sharply increased rate of growth. The “growth spurt” is usually accompanied by joint inflammation and other problems. In the same way, the modern broiler lives literally on the edge of its metabolic maximum. In fact, feed restriction is occasionally recommended (either by physical restriction or reduced nutrient density) in order to reduce growth rate and limit the incidence of lameness, heart attack and ascites. In tropical regions, a sharply increased growth rate would almost certainly double, triple or possibly quadruple the rate of mortality from heat stress. Thus, it would be highly counterproductive to suddenly force a higher rate of growth on broiler chickens.

6.What about anabolic steroids? The occasional abuse of anabolic steroids by athletes is periodically documented in the press. There is certainly no question that their use leads to increased muscle mass. However, this effect in athletes is only possible when steroid use is combined with rigorous physical training, such as weightlifting.  What makes the steroid question even more unlikely is that the most valuable part of the chicken-the breast-is composed of muscles used to raise and lower the wings. Chickens have not flown for several thousand years. No exercise . . . no benefit from anabolic steroids.

7.Hormones are simply not needed. The extremely rapid growth of broilers is very easy to explain without resorting to hormones. Reviewing the records of genetics firms, it will be noted that for the past several decades birds have reached a specified market weight one day earlier per year. The challenge to poultry producers is to provide high quality feed (proteins, vitamins, minerals, etc.) and a healthy environment in the poultry house, including roof insulation, ventilation and adequate numbers of feeders and waterers to meet the broiler’s prodigious genetic potential. For those familiar with the technical aspects of poultry production, the rapid growth of modern broilers is a logical consequence of slow but consistent improvements in genetics, nutrition, management and disease control. Hormones are simply not needed.


by Nans gsd on 07 April 2015 - 01:04

Vk4:  Watch Dr. Oz.


Jenni78

by Jenni78 on 07 April 2015 - 01:04

What do hormones and poultry have to do with this discussion? Who said poultry was given hormones? 


by joanro on 07 April 2015 - 01:04

Chickens have not flown for several thousand years. No exercise . . . no benefit from anabolic steroids
^^^That! Is a crock of chicken guano! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

by vk4gsd on 07 April 2015 - 02:04

jen; 

 

"What do hormones and poultry have to do with this discussion? Who said poultry was given hormones? "

arra;

"chicken is even worse, they have to grow too fast and are pumped with antibiotic and hormone feed! I am sure that most people never think about those things....but this is an other topic for it selve I guess."


by Nans gsd on 08 April 2015 - 02:04

Thank you all for your responses;  the dog food industry is well should I say more than an education in itself.  Am still looking into NC and others.  Thx again  Nan

 

Just a little diddy;  I feel it is most important the feed well DO NOT WAIT until you have a problem like my friend Megan did;  her boy now has diabetes (an 11 year old sammie boy) that has been fed crap food most of his life;  like Iams.  Soooo my philosophy is feed well while they are still young enough to benefit and hopefully with any luck it will assist them in the later years to better health...  Nan  That is why I keep trying to find the ultimate answer to feeding our young dogs a nutritious and balanced diet;  I don't care if it is wet, raw, dry or whatever.  Just be good for our dogs and carry them through a health life.  Nan


Jenni78

by Jenni78 on 08 April 2015 - 03:04

Ah, vk, I didn't see that part. I didn't read that post thoroughly, I guess. I thought you were referring to earlier in the discussion, more along the lines of Koach's choice to feed Orijen as opposed to poultry. 


Dawulf

by Dawulf on 08 April 2015 - 23:04

Had to pick up some cat food today and tripe and duck feet... and a pig ear for Miss Spoiled, so I snapped a pic of the Orijen dog food prices for the doubters. ;)

 

I'm almost due to get another bag of dog food which will be her third I believe. Jen's right, the fact that they don't eat as much as they would a different brand makes it a lot easier on the wallet than one would think when you say you're feeding a GSD a food that costs that much a bag. Plus, they have the rewards program - buy 12 bags get the 13th free (or buy 6 get the 7th free for the breeder program), which lessens the blow in the long run.

 

If I had the space/means to do raw, I probably would, for Qira at least. Cat is too picky so she can stick to her Regional Red.


by Nans gsd on 09 April 2015 - 00:04

Those are pretty amazing prices, however, my raw feeding bill for 4 dogs was about $400/500 dollars per month.  So given that thought Orijen seems cheap. 

 

What would do with a kennel of 30 dogs???  It would break the bank for sure.  Nan






 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top