Interesting Dog Food Comparison
Here's an interesting comparison I found at rewievs.com
I am not calling it "study" or "analysis" on purpose, because as I understand it no testing was involved. It's rather an evaluation or comparison of customer reports, recalls and manufacturer information. Although I do not agree with the set-up of this evaluation in every corner, I still think this is valuable information for every pet owner looking for good quality foods.
I would not take it as the first and only source of information due to the lack of real testing. But it's a good starting point before taking a second look at another source, such as dogfoodadvisor.com etc. Careful, many of the recommended dry foods are plant-based (which I personally consider less valuable for a dog than a nutrition in which a majority of the protein is of animal sources, such as beef, chicken or fish and other animals, also eggs). Not only the comparison is interesting, but also the tips in the article on what ingredients to look for in order to tell a food of less nutritional value apart from the better ones.
Comments
I’ve never fed it, but still have it in my mind as an alternative for the food we now feed.
I was happy to find another high quality brand that is a little more affordable, though. I was really close to add Orjien when we decided to supplement Djamila’s raw diet with some good kibble to help her feel a little fuller and regain the pounds she had lost due to her hyperactivity.
Our choice then fell on Merrick Grain Free Real Texas Beef and Sweet Potato.
Merrick did NOT make the list. But the reason why it was excluded combined with all of my other research at least at the moment still convinces me that it’s a very good food. And there are sure others that also did not make the list.
In addition to my research I had contacted the manufacturer and asked a few questions about Merrick, mainly to see how I feel about the way they handle my questions and their answers.
They answered pretty quickly and told me that their kibble has a 70/30 ratio of meat-based and plant-based protein. They also answered questions about the calcium sources in the food and stated that they do not use by-products.
After reading the article I compared their labeling to the "red flags" in that article. Merrick list the meats by animal and not just as “meat” on their packaging. The only “red flag” I found was sodium selenite. And I also dug into that a little deeper.
Merrick eventually was not excluded for this, according to the article, but because of existing recalls.
While recalls are never fun, I’ve only found two incidents from 2010 and 2011 with Merrick, both regarding several batches of treats and contamination with salmonella. Salmonella is nothing to take lightly, not so much for the dog, it’s allegedly far more dangerous to the food handlers.
This site explains how salmonella can get into the kibble.
http://www.tesh.com/story/pets-category/dry-pet-food-can-be-tainted-with-salmonella/cc/11/id/2307
It is unfortunate and dangerous, but it can happen to any manufacturer.
So, all the cons I found so far are not reason enough for me to cross Merrick off my list for now.
There may be other good foods/ brands that got excluded for different reasons. Some exclusion reasons similar to the case of Merrick even show that the food essentially is a good food. While other foods/ brands are excluded for good reason.
Like I said, I would not base a decision on this article alone. That’s why I take the time here to lay out the details of how I do my research.
Another example, we try to avoid chicken or poultry recipes, because all of the dogs we’ve owned so far had one or the other issue with chicken. That’s why I would not consider most of the recommended dry food products on the list (many of them have chicken as the first ingredient).
Also many of them - like I already mentioned - are also plant-based foods.
However if a dog tolerates poultry well and the owner does not mind to feed plant based, there are indeed some choices among the recommendations even in the more affordable range that were also able to earn up to 4.5 out of 5 stars. Only speaking about kibble here, because that’s the only product I took a closer look at out of personal interest.
Also in that article some whole grains are advocated as “good ingredients”. While this may not be entirely untrue compared to other ingredients, I find it a little bit sketchy to not differentiate here and consider their potential as allergens, while on the other hand flatly excluding ingredients such as sodium selenite, which is discussed highly controversial, however seems to be a very common ingredient that is hard to avoid in processed dog foods in general.
http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/red-flag-ingredients/selenium-dog-food/
They also excluded foods that contain beet pulp, a highly discussed ingredient that is demonized by some experts mainly for its overuse as a cheap filler in dog foods, while it’s highly appreciated by others for it’s high fiber content and benefits for digestion.
With this information at hand, I don’t think it makes sense to exclude foods containing beet pulp in general unless the real content of them is known. That’s one of several examples where this comparison lacks accuracy IMO.
I did not mean to rip the article apart here. I am still convinced it has got some good information to offer.
There is hardly ever only ONE source that can tell the whole story. And we can often only base our decision on what we are able to find out, not knowing what we’re NOT being told. That's why at least comparing different sources of information is so important, not only with dog food.
We use the Orijen Large Puppy GF, mixed with Pure Vita GF Turkey and California Natural Grain-Free Kangaroo & Red Lentils.... Never tried the "Regional Red" though... gotta look into that.