Jump to content

Menu

FDA lists dog food brands linked to DCM


Pawz4me
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

 

In contrast, I've never seen a single study that shows any advantage for feeding dogs in the general population carbohydrates. I've looked. So if you have a study. I'm open to reading it.

Bill

 

Great, there are a few links on my post, in addition to the many links I have provided that show the recommendations  and conclusions by those who spend their lives studying canine nutrition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

And I was refuting the ridiculous idea that feeding a dog grains is a "fad". Totally false.

And the idea that the pate canned cat food I recommended was mostly grains - which was also false.  I have no idea where he got that information, but it's not true. And if he's so sure of that, but wrong, it's hard to rely on his other claims. 

At least three of the brands that are considered not to be linked to DCM have high protein formulas. If anyone is interested look for "sport" or "performance" on the bag. 

Dogs have eaten animal based diets for eons. What's a joke is calling a diet that conforms to nature a "fad." LOL.

Kibble is a post WWII invention. 

Canned cat food typically has plant-based food stuffs in the mix. Despite the fact that cats are obligate carnivores. Cat kibble is even worse. I did not use the word "mostly," you are dissembling. Please stop.

Sport and performance are not guarantees of protein or fat, nor of the percentage of each that comes from inferior plant sources. Food labeling laws for dog food in this country are a scandal. 

Bill

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, JessieC said:

 

Great, there are a few links on my post, in addition to the many links I have provided that show the recommendations  and conclusions by those who spend their lives studying canine nutrition.

I'm not seeing links to studies that show the advantages of feeding carbs in any of your posts.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

I'm not seeing links to studies that show the advantages of feeding carbs in any of your posts.

Bill

 

You have to actually read the articles. I can't do the work for you. Functional foods refers to fruits, veg, grains, etc., which contain carbs. I am leaving the argument. Feel free to have the last word, which I know you want, but despite the long-winded mansplaining, you have not provided any evidence or convinced anyone that you know what dogs need better than animal nutritionists do.

From second link, just one example:

Examples of functional foods studied in human nutrition include fruits, vegetables, whole grains, prebiotics, and probiotics. The results of these studies have highlighted numerous benefits of functional foods, including better digestive function, improved satiety, and enhanced antioxidant activity.

Edited by JessieC
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

Dogs have eaten animal based diets for eons. What's a joke is calling a diet that conforms to nature a "fad." LOL.

Kibble is a post WWII invention. 

Canned cat food typically has plant-based food stuffs in the mix. Despite the fact that cats are obligate carnivores. Cat kibble is even worse. I did not use the word "mostly," you are dissembling. Please stop.

Sport and performance are not guarantees of protein or fat, nor of the percentage of each that comes from inferior plant sources. Food labeling laws for dog food in this country are a scandal. 

Bill

 

 

1. No one said what you are feeding is a fad. YOU said that feeding dogs grains was a fad. The word fad does not = thousands of years. It just doesn't. 

2. In order to not "dissemble" or "state falsehoods" (that's twice you are claiming I'm being dishonest), I've quoted you below. You were responding after my statement that the best option was canned, pate style food. 

3. Either quote the person who said sport and performance were guarantees, or stop being purposely contrary. I suggested those were key words to look for, to make it easier to sort through the many varieties. I did not say it was a guarantee of anything. 

5 hours ago, Spy Car said:

Look at canned cat food and you will see that most are jammed with carbohydrates and plant based protein sources despite the fact that cats are obligate carnivores.

 

thats, sir, is untrue, at least of the pate style canned foods such as I had recommended.   I linked to average, lower cost, grocery store food to show the ingredients, of several different flavor varieties. They are meat based, with about 4% carbohydrate, and the only plant source was the very last ingredient, by weight, on the label (before vitamins/minerals). Fancy Feast, probably the other most commonly fed food, is similar. 

 

Edited by Ktgrok
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, JessieC said:

 

You have to actually read the articles. I can't do the work for you. Functional foods refers to fruits, veg, grains, etc., which contain carbs. I am leaving the argument. Feel free to have the last word, which I know you want, but despite the long-winded mansplaining, you have not provided any evidence or convinced anyone that you know what dogs need better than animal nutritionists do.

From second link, just one example:

Examples of functional foods studied in human nutrition include fruits, vegetables, whole grains, prebiotics, and probiotics. The results of these studies have highlighted numerous benefits of functional foods, including better digestive function, improved satiety, and enhanced antioxidant activity.

 

I read one from Psychiatry Today, it offered no science on the point.

Which is the second link?

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

1. No one said what you are feeding is a fad. YOU said that feeding dogs grains was a fad. The word fad does not = thousands of years. It just doesn't. 

2. In order to not "dissemble" or "state falsehoods" (that's twice you are claiming I'm being dishonest), I've quoted you below. You were responding after my statement that the best option was canned, pate style food. 

3. Either quote the person who said sport and performance were guarantees, or stop being purposely contrary. I suggested those were key words to look for, to make it easier to sort through the many varieties. I did not say it was a guarantee of anything. 

thats, sir, is untrue, at least of the pate style canned foods such as I had recommended.   I linked to average, lower cost, grocery store food to show the ingredients, of several different flavor varieties. They are meat based, with about 4% carbohydrate, and the only plant source was the very last ingredient, by weight, on the label (before vitamins/minerals). Fancy Feast, probably the other most commonly fed food, is similar. 

 

1. Raw feeding was called "a fad" in this thread, so once again you are being inaccurate.

2. Canned cat foods often contain plant based ingredients like wheat gluten and soy, etc. Why have even 4% carbs in a ration for obligate carnivores? Plus many people serve these as toppers over cereal based cat kibble that have much more carbohydrates. Pet food companies market cat kibble with high amounts of carbohydrates to obligate carnivores, why? 

3. Sport and Performance are marketing terms and guarantee nothing. One must look deeper than that. Saying that is not "contrary," it is the truth.

Bill

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Spy Car said:

Science Diet formulas are notorious low in fat and protein. Such formulations will zap a growing puppy of their energy levels.

I hope you get good news with regard to the heart. I'd be skeptical of "the cure."

What is the formula you've been give called?

Bill

I purchased the Adult 7+ formula. He's 10, so not the same formula he was on as a pup. I do put bone broth on his food to moisten it, plus he gets chicken and carrots as treats during the day, probably close to 1/8 cup of chicken, so I'll have to calculate the protein. He's currently 40 pounds and the vet wants him down to 34 pounds, so I'm not sure what his protein requirements should be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

1. Raw feeding was called "a fad" in this thread, so once again you are being inaccurate.

2. Canned cat foods often contain plant based ingredients like wheat gluten and soy, etc. Why have even 4% carbs in a ration for obligate carnivores? Plus many people serve these as toppers over cereal based cat kibble that have much more carbohydrates. Pet food companies market cat kibble with high amounts of carbohydrates to obligate carnivores, why? 

3. Sport and Performance are marketing terms and guarantee nothing. One must look deeper than that. Saying that is not "contrary," it is the truth.

Bill

 

 

I didn't see it called that, and I didn't call it that. If I missed it, my mistake. 

The canned foods I recommended do NOT have wheat gluten and soy. I linked the freaking ingredient list for several varieties even. As to why 4% carbs, I imagine for texture, to make it easier to serve. And the answer to your question about why put carbohydrates in kibble, it's for cost, mostly. People struggle to buy meat for themselves, let alone their pets. 

Again I never said it WAS a guarantee. I was offering help in narrowing down which formulations to look at. When there is a whole store full of bags, it's helpful to narrow down which ones you are pulling down to look at the nutrient breakdown. That's all. To pretend I was offering a guarantee is to be argumentative. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, dsmith said:

I purchased the Adult 7+ formula. He's 10, so not the same formula he was on as a pup. I do put bone broth on his food to moisten it, plus he gets chicken and carrots as treats during the day, probably close to 1/8 cup of chicken, so I'll have to calculate the protein. He's currently 40 pounds and the vet wants him down to 34 pounds, so I'm not sure what his protein requirements should be. 

First, I'm sorry that I misread your earlier post. I misconstrued that Science Diet was used as a puppy with thinking he was still a puppy.

From my perspective, I'd have major concerns with the Senior Science Diet 7+ formula. As an article linked by another post indicated, senior dogs can require as much as tice the protein to keep them sound according to some. Yet senior formulas by Hill/Science Diet (and many other brands) reduce the vital calories from protein (and fat) in senior formulas, which is the opposite of their needs.

I wonder why Hill/Science Diet has the Calcium/Phosphorus ratio in this food at 1.7 to 1 instead of 1.2 to 1? Is there a need here? Seems odd.

The 7+ formula has only 19% protein (dangerously low) and 13.7% fat, which is inadequate. This is a very high-carbohydrate food and a poster boy product for what not to feed senior dogs. Hill spends millions to control the nutritional education at veterinary schools. 

The folks at Hill/Science Diet have created "weight loss" formulas that replace vital nutritious ingredients with fillers, fiber, and carbohydrates, figuring--I suppose--that dog owners can't help themselves from overfeeding dogs, so they will come up with low density formulas. It is madness IMO.

The best approach with senior--and especially overweight dogs--is the opposite of Hill's tactic. Best to feed nutrient-rich calorically dense high-protein/high-fat foods (ones that trigger satiety) and cutting the portions. That way dogs eat less volume of food (which is very positive), create less stool, and get more vital nutrients. Win, win, win.

It is very bad for dogs, seniors especially, to have to process huge amounts of waste through their GI tracts. The Science Diet approach is heinous.

It sounds counter-intuitive but dogs fed high-fat (with high-protein) in reduced quantities lose weight much more easily than dogs fed larger amounts of a lower calorie high-carb diet.

Below 26% protein (SC formula is at 19% ) dogs will tear muscle fibers and have great struggles with repair. It is a terrible formulation.

Good on you for supplementing with chicken. Ordinarily when supplementing one would need to consider throwing off the 1.2 : 1 calcium/phosphorus mineral balance by adding some calcium to balance the phosphorus rich meat. As I mentioned earlier. I'm surprised this formula is at 1.7 : 1. I'd like to know if there is medical reasoning for this choice on the part of the vet. If not, the chicken you are serving would redress what appear to be a strangely imbalanced formula.

Bill

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, @Spy Car, when a thread is about choosing a safer kibble food, coming in and pontificating about how kibble is bad is kind of like if everytime you'd talked about how to use your sous vide to make steak someone jumped in to derail the thread into one about how you should really be a vegetarian. Not cool. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dog did poorly on our raw food experiment this past month. She lost 4 lbs in a month and she was hovering near underweight to begin with. 

She was then hospitalized last week with hemorrhagic gastroenteritis. We dont know if the two are related but we are back to kibble and will add in some canned food once we're sure her stomach is settled.

We fed grain-free puppy food, Nature's Domain from Costco, but switched to their regular line after picking her up from the vet. I will keep researching until this bag is used up and switch to something better if I find it. I am interested in the Victor so I will look more into that.

Edited by AbcdeDooDah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, AbcdeDooDah said:

My dog did poorly on our raw food experiment this past month. She lost 4 lbs in a month and she was hovering near underweight to begin with. 

She was then hospitalized last week with hemorrhagic gastroenteritis. We dont know if the two are related but we are back to kibble and will add in some canned food once we're sure her stomach is settled.

We fed grain-free puppy food, Nature's Domain from Costco, but switched to their regular line after picking her up from the vet. I will keep researching until this bag is used up and switch to something better if I find it. I am interested in the Victor so I will look more into that.

Victor does, I believe, do testing on the actual food, not just the recipe, which some boutique brands do not. I do not know if they are implicated in the DCM cases yet. That post recipe testing is important. That said, they do not have the same nutrional experts some other brands have. If you want higher protein, Pro Plan has a Sport 30/20 that is high protein and fat. That said, if you increase fat do it slowly, as some dogs don't do as well on it if they have a sensitive digestive track. Those dogs may need lower fat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

Also, @Spy Car, when a thread is about choosing a safer kibble food, coming in and pontificating about how kibble is bad is kind of like if everytime you'd talked about how to use your sous vide to make steak someone jumped in to derail the thread into one about how you should really be a vegetarian. Not cool. 

 

Says the lady who is talking about cat food. LOL.

As long as we feed domestic animals on ingredients that are not a natural part of their diets we risk creating health problems.

The possible role of peas/legumes in causing DCM is but one example. DCM a very rare condition. Ignoring all the other widespread harms that come with feeding unnatural processed foods is very unwise.

Bill

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

The possible role of peas/legumes in causing DCM is but one example. DCM a very rare condition. Ignoring all the other widespread harms that come with feeding unnatural processed foods is very unwise.

Bill

 

 

And if you were asking about wine recommendations and I started telling you that ignoring the widespread harms associated with alcohol was unwise, that would be equally as obnoxious as someone asking for kibble recommendations and being told they need to feed raw. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Victor does, I believe, do testing on the actual food, not just the recipe, which some boutique brands do not. I do not know if they are implicated in the DCM cases yet. That post recipe testing is important. That said, they do not have the same nutrional experts some other brands have. If you want higher protein, Pro Plan has a Sport 30/20 that is high protein and fat. That said, if you increase fat do it slowly, as some dogs don't do as well on it if they have a sensitive digestive track. Those dogs may need lower fat. 

Consumers would be well advised to look at the protocols for testing dog food under AAFCO rules. It is a small number of dogs, with allowances for dropping dogs out, over a short duration. These trials are simply inadequate and no guarantee of long term safety. They prove only an "illusion" of safety.

Purina Pro Plan does offer 30/20 formulas which is the lowest amount of protein/fat I'd recommend if feeding kibble (and higher than industry standard); however, Purina (Nestle) boosts the protein content of this food by using significant amounts of incomplete plant protein in the form of corn gluten. It is a way to inflate protein numbers with an inexpensive waste product. 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spy Car said:

Consumers would be well advised to look at the protocols for testing dog food under AAFCO rules. It is a small number of dogs, with allowances for dropping dogs out, over a short duration. These trials are simply inadequate and no guarantee of long term safety. They prove only an "illusion" of safety.

Purina Pro Plan does offer 30/20 formulas which is the lowest amount of protein/fat I'd recommend if feeding kibble (and higher than industry standard); however, Purina (Nestle) boosts the protein content of this food by using significant amounts of incomplete plant protein in the form of corn gluten. It is a way to inflate protein numbers with an inexpensive waste product. 

Bill

You seem to lack a basic understanding of how amino acids work. The body doesn't give a rat's behind where a particular amino acid comes from. The proteins in the food are combined in such a way to be sure all the needed amino acids are there. That is part of the testing process. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

And if you were asking about wine recommendations and I started telling you that ignoring the widespread harms associated with alcohol was unwise, that would be equally as obnoxious as someone asking for kibble recommendations and being told they need to feed raw. 

We have different ideas about who is being obnoxious.

The thread is about dog diets and health risks. Your "analogy" is far fetched and you keep veering into personal attacks.

Cool it.

Bill

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spy Car said:

We have different ideas about who is being obnoxious.

The thread is about dog diets and health risks. Your "analogy" is far fetched and you keep veering into personal attacks.

Cool it.

Bill

 

The thread is about DCM. 

As for personal attacks, you've multiple times said I was lying (dissembling, telling falsehoods, etc) when I wasn't. 

Either way, anyone can PM me if they want, I have a book to write. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ktgrok said:

You seem to lack a basic understanding of how amino acids work. The body doesn't give a rat's behind where a particular amino acid comes from. The proteins in the food are combined in such a way to be sure all the needed amino acids are there. That is part of the testing process. 

LOL. Corn gluten is lacking essential amino acids. Who is misinformed?

The short (and small) feeding trials are completely inadequate to establish the safety of unnatural food formulas. It is an illusion of testing. That's why issue like diet-related DCM only show up after products are in wide release.

Are you that unaware of the inadequate protocols? 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

The thread is about DCM. 

As for personal attacks, you've multiple times said I was lying (dissembling, telling falsehoods, etc) when I wasn't. 

Either way, anyone can PM me if they want, I have a book to write. 

You have made statements that are not factually accurate. I have countered with facts, not personal attacks.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spy Car said:

LOL. Corn gluten is lacking essential amino acids. Who is misinformed?

The short (and small) feeding trials are completely inadequate to establish the safety of unnatural food formulas. It is an illusion of testing. That's why issue like diet-related DCM only show up after products are in wide release.

Are you that unaware of the inadequate protocols? 

Bill

I very specifically said that ingredients were combined to make sure all amino acid are present a needed. And many if not all the brands implicated did not do feeding trials and some of the other testing that the now recommended brands do. The brands doing the more extensive testing have not been linked to DCM. Perhaps you are that unaware of the different types of testing and that different companies do more or less. And all do more than someone making a homemade raw diet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I very specifically said that ingredients were combined to make sure all amino acid are present a needed. And many if not all the brands implicated did not do feeding trials and some of the other testing that the now recommended brands do. The brands doing the more extensive testing have not been linked to DCM. Perhaps you are that unaware of the different types of testing and that different companies do more or less. And all do more than someone making a homemade raw diet. 

The feeding trial protocols are a bad joke. Are you really defending them???

The pet food companies have one interest. Finding the cheapest most profitable ingredients they can regardless of how unnatural they are in a dog's diet or how contaminated they are before being sent to rendering plants. The more consumers are educated, the less savory industry practices appear.

Taurine, for example is synthesized in China and added as a powder to dog food. So much for amino acid balancing.

You want to compare these Franken-foods with balanced meat, edible bone, and organs? LOL. I'd accept that challenge any day of the week.

Bill

 

Edited by Spy Car
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Spy Car said:

Its like comparing Happy Meal options while ignoring real food.

Too limited.

Bill

I'm allowed to limit my own post to discussing two options. I have no requirement to add other options especially when others already covered those other options. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Pawz4me said:

This site is referenced in @Selkie's link. It's the companion website to the DCM Taurine Facebook page, and IMO it's much easier to navigate (the FB page is a bit overwhelming to me, not to mention a bit clunky to navigate). It's a very good resource on this issue.

Yes, I also followed Selkie's link to that site, and it was very helpful. Definitely recommended! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

I'm allowed to limit my own post to discussing two options. I have no requirement to add other options especially when others already covered those other options. 

As I'm free not to be bound by such limitations.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

As I'm free not to be bound by such limitations.

Bill

True. But when I post something comparing two options, you don't actually NEED to jump in, every time, and say no, choose this third option.Or worse, try to say that there is no real difference in the first two options, or if there is, it doesn't matter, because everyone obviously can see they need to do option 3. 

Because not everyone is going to choose option 3, and given that, knowing the differences between options 1 and 2 is helpful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ktgrok said:

True. But when I post something comparing two options, you don't actually NEED to jump in, every time, and say no, choose this third option.Or worse, try to say that there is no real difference in the first two options, or if there is, it doesn't matter, because everyone obviously can see they need to do option 3. 

Because not everyone is going to choose option 3, and given that, knowing the differences between options 1 and 2 is helpful. 

I do not accept that the only choices a person can make for dog food are between two (or more) brands of kibble.

It is NOT for you to decide what I can and can not post. Capiche?

Bill

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spy Car said:

I do not accept that the only choices a person can make for dog food are between two (or more) brands of kibble.

It is NOT for you to decide what I can and can not post. Capiche?

Bill

 

 

Of course those are not the only two choices! There is home cooked, frozen cooked, frozen pre-made raw, dehydrated, home made raw, etc etc etc. No one, including me, said their were only two options. But I was trying to explain some of the differences in kibble in particular, for those that DO want kibble (majority of people).  Those that want another option are free to skip that post. 

You can post whatever you want, but I was trying to explain why people (not just me) keep telling you your approach is off-putting and driving away people more than converting them. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

Of course those are not the only two choices! There is home cooked, frozen cooked, frozen pre-made raw, dehydrated, home made raw, etc etc etc. No one, including me, said their were only two options. But I was trying to explain some of the differences in kibble in particular, for those that DO want kibble (majority of people).  Those that want another option are free to skip that post. 

You can post whatever you want, but I was trying to explain why people (not just me) keep telling you your approach is off-putting and driving away people more than converting them. 

What's more off-putting than trying to censor other people's expression?

Come on man!

Bill

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Spy Car said:

What's more off-putting than trying to censor other people's expression?

Come on man!

Bill

 

 

censor other peoples expression is how you are taking it, explaining social norms and polite discussion is how I meant it. No one is saying you should not feed your dog the way you want, or even promote it. But constantly dismissing other people's choices, and steamrolling over posts like mine, where I was discussing types of kibble to again proselytize for raw food, is off-putting. I can't keep you from doing it - therefore I cannot censor you. But I and several others have asked you not to, as it does more harm to your cause than good. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very few forums on the internet have no censorship, and I somehow doubt you're all that interested in 4chan, Bill.  (judging by political affiliation, though I could be wrong).  All they censor is spam and illegal material and off-topic things.

This forum has some direct, overt censorship, of course (no politics, no bashing Halloween in a what-costume-will-you-wear thread, no personal attacks (interpreted very inconsistently, imo)), but mostly it has a lot of soft censorship (covert), because it's mainly a forum of women, who like to get along.  

Every conservative person on these boards and I bet many liberals feel the reality of this constantly when posting here; we refrain from saying what we really think all.the.time in a thead that's not directly about that because we value other aspects of the community more than the need to state our beliefs about everything, especially over and over.

Now, personally, I would prefer a less censored forum, both overtly and covertly, but this is the one we've got and most of the time I make my peace with that.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

censor other peoples expression is how you are taking it, explaining social norms and polite discussion is how I meant it. No one is saying you should not feed your dog the way you want, or even promote it. But constantly dismissing other people's choices, and steamrolling over posts like mine, where I was discussing types of kibble to again proselytize for raw food, is off-putting. I can't keep you from doing it - therefore I cannot censor you. But I and several others have asked you not to, as it does more harm to your cause than good. 

 

Who elected you the Queen of Social Norms? Telling me what I can and can not post (something you do very frequently) is bloody rude.

I'm not "proselytize for raw food." Your false attributions are off-putting.

I don't "have a cause" other than to offer an alternative to unnatural kibble diets.

Knock it off please.

Bill

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, moonflower said:

Very few forums on the internet have no censorship, and I somehow doubt you're all that interested in 4chan, Bill.  (judging by political affiliation, though I could be wrong).  All they censor is spam and illegal material and off-topic things.

This forum has some direct, overt censorship, of course (no politics, no bashing Halloween in a what-costume-will-you-wear thread, no personal attacks (interpreted very inconsistently, imo)), but mostly it has a lot of soft censorship (covert), because it's mainly a forum of women, who like to get along.  

Every conservative person on these boards and I bet many liberals feel the reality of this constantly when posting here; we refrain from saying what we really think all.the.time in a thead that's not directly about that because we value other aspects of the community more than the need to state our beliefs about everything, especially over and over.

Now, personally, I would prefer a less censored forum, both overtly and covertly, but this is the one we've got and most of the time I make my peace with that.

SWB has some rules in place that I abide by. I have no idea what 4chan is.

I first learned about PMR raw feeding on this forum. I'm grateful that I did. I'm convinced with promotes optimal health and condition in dogs.

I also think when any species is fed foods that they were not shaped by evolution to thrive on that they will experience health issues. It isn't nice to mess with Mother Nature.

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

I'm not "proselytize for raw food." Your false attributions are off-putting.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

I'm convinced with promotes optimal health and condition in dogs.

I also think when any species is fed foods that they were not shaped by evolution to thrive on that they will experience health issues. It isn't nice to mess with Mother Nature.

Bill

proselytize

(British proselytise)

1Convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another.

1.1Advocate or promote (a belief or course of action)

When you refuse to let others discuss food you don't agree with without explaining to them over and over and over again that they are doing it wrong and should do things your way, that is proselytizing. Saying it once is giving an opinion. What you are doing goes beyond that. WE all understand how you feel on the subject, and should be able to discuss choices in kibble without you repeating over and over gain that we should feed raw instead.I'm not the only one calling you out on this. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

 

proselytize

(British proselytise)

1Convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another.

1.1Advocate or promote (a belief or course of action)

When you refuse to let others discuss food you don't agree with without explaining to them over and over and over again that they are doing it wrong and should do things your way, that is proselytizing. Saying it once is giving an opinion. What you are doing goes beyond that. WE all understand how you feel on the subject, and should be able to discuss choices in kibble without you repeating over and over gain that we should feed raw instead.I'm not the only one calling you out on this. 

More lies and falsehoods. What is your problem?

I've asked you to stop this harassment multiple times, yet you dare lecture me about saying things over and over?

Kibble isn't the only way to feed dogs. There is a healthier option. Stop trying to silence me. You do not have that right.

Bill

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Spy Car said:

More lies and falsehoods. What is your problem?

I've asked you to stop this harassment multiple times, yet you dare lecture me about saying things over and over?

Kibble isn't the only way to feed dogs. There is a healthier option. Stop trying to silence me. You do not have that right.

Bill

 

I've told zero lies and yet you continually accuse me of lying. That's the harassment. And explaining that your tactics are off putting is not silencing you. Obviously. As you keep doing it. Even in this post you are doing the very thing I said you are doing, when you accused me of lying. 

crying harassment when someone says something you don't like is doesn't make it harassment. Asking you to please allow others  to discuss something without you shoving your choice in their face over and over and over again is not silencing you. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I've told zero lies and yet you continually accuse me of lying. That's the harassment. And explaining that your tactics are off putting is not silencing you. Obviously. As you keep doing it. Even in this post you are doing the very thing I said you are doing, when you accused me of lying. 

crying harassment when someone says something you don't like is doesn't make it harassment. Asking you to please allow others  to discuss something without you shoving your choice in their face over and over and over again is not silencing you. 

For the love of god, please stop!

You are being very obnoxious. Talk about being "off-putting."

People are allowed to have opinions that differ from yours. And I do. 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kand said:

I think Katy has done a good job explaining what makes your posts so off putting, though she has let a lot of things slide that I would have called out. Like that you continually tell people to “stop it” “knock it off” or “cool it”, which is closer to forum policing than anything anyone else has posted in this thread. 

Also, what lies and falsehoods are you accusing Katy of? I looked over the post you responded to with that, and I can’t imagine what part you are calling a lie. 

More and more, I start wondering if you’re just messing with people, because this all makes no sense otherwise. 

Her name is Katie. 

Welcome to the forum. Enjoy your stay.

Bill

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am the OP of this thread. It was started for the purpose of informing members here of the DCM issue and particularly about what foods have been implicated in that issue. I did NOT start it to be a debate about what or how to feed. Anyone who wants to do that can of course start their own thread. If this thread doesn't mostly get back on topic, then I will ask the mods to lock it. Not delete, because IMO the info shared is useful. The bickering and name calling and proselytizing isn't, and I'm pretty sure nobody wants to be wasting their time reading through it.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...