tesco dog food

Tetulla

Hello all
Has anyone try feeding their dogs with the tesco brand food. either premium or value. please i need to know how good they are
Thanks

Shanao

Tesco brand, dunnes brand, aldi brand and lidl brand dog foods are pretty much the lowest of the low when it comes to quality dog foods. Sure they're cheap, but what you will have to pay in vets fees for all the health problems ahead will more than cover it. You're much better off buying dog food from a pet shop, and a high quality one with a named meat source as the first ingredient.

ashlingm

They're stocking a new dog food in tesco ... Can't remember the name of it (I'll check tomorrow) but having read the ingredients it looks really good and is vet approved. It's not too expensive (€8 for 2 kilos I think, but bigger bags are available) and they do little taster sachets for 30cent so you can try them out before you buy a big bag.

Be warned though, if you've been feeding a dog cheap dog food and then move them on to high quality premium dog food, they will often turn up their noses at it. It's similar to a child eating junk food full of colours, additives and sugars and then suddenly plonking a plate of veg in front of them. But they will come round once hunger sets in and they realise they arn't getting cheap dog food anymore

A brilliant site for checking out some dog food and ingredients is http://www.dogfoodanalysis.com/ they have most brands of dog food on there. One thing that shocked me was that many dogs foods contain a PROVEN carcinogen ingredient that's been banned for over 50 years in human foods but yet they think is fine for dogs to eat!

And I agree with the above poster... I'd much rather spend a few extra euro on good dog food. It really does cut down on vets bills (and heartache) in the long run!

andreac

They arent good at all. I wouldnt feed it to my dogs unless i was really desperate.
I would highly recommend going to your local pet shop and get a high quality food, it will prob work out cheaper in the long run as you usually have to feed less of it as it has better ingredients.

Mo60

Shanao wrote: »

Tesco brand, dunnes brand, aldi brand and lidl brand dog foods are pretty much the lowest of the low when it comes to quality dog foods. Sure they're cheap, but what you will have to pay in vets fees for all the health problems ahead will more than cover it. You're much better off buying dog food from a pet shop, and a high quality one with a named meat source as the first ingredient.

I have always used various supermarket pet foods and have never had to frequent the vet because of this. I have tried dearer options but have found no difference healthwise.

All my animals are healthy and previous pets have all lived to a good age.

Shanao

Mo60 wrote: »

I have always used various supermarket pet foods and have never had to frequent the vet because of this. I have tried dearer options but have found no difference healthwise.

All my animals are healthy and previous pets have all lived to a good age.

Perhaps in the past, but I would be extremely wary about doing so now. I had a collie who was fed supermarket foods and pedigree chum was a treat to her, she lived to fifteen but there's no way in hell i would feed the same to my own dogs now. My akita for example is allergic to Pork so cannot have any food that might use pork in it (which any of the low quality foods can use without listing it as an ingredient). I found that out the hard way by feeding him a food with pork in it and then had to watch as he pulled out clumps of his own hair and almost scratched himself raw. Now on a completely natural dry food with a bit of raw, he is perfectly healthy. A lot of other people I've talked to have akitas that break out if eating certain foods as well, my boy's brothers and sisters are the same when it comes to pork. Then in the red setter you have gluten intolerance and breeds like the westie which can break out if they are on a food with hard to digest proteins.
The recession has hit pet food manufacturers as much as it has the rest of us and most of them have started cutting costs by using diseased meat/roadkill/ingredients banned from human consumption. BHT and BHA, two preservatives often used in pet foods are promoting the growth of tumours and causing cancer in our pets, and many companies have fallen back on using this preservative because its cheaper. Big companies who make a lot of things dont rely too much on the pet food industry so dont particularly care all that much about what goes into them.
Now in saying that, even some of the dearer petfoods have done the same. Hills for example, the cat food recipe was recently changed to make it more 'palatable'. What they really did was cut down on the meat and put in wheat instead, which is a filler and definitely not an ingredient cats need or digest properly. And Royal Canin always used BHA as a preservative, yet miraculously since they have changed the design on their bags, there is no longer any preservative listed. Not to mention that they now list ingredients such as animal fat (which animal?) and animal protein (which animal again?)

Personally, I believe the dogs of today are in no way as healthy or strong as they may have been only ten-fifteen years ago and this is reflected in the way we feed them. How many people would have heard of sensitive diets for dogs twenty years ago? Something has changed most certainly. The food? The dogs themselves? As of yet, no one can be sure, but I stand by what I say. In this day and age, these are considered low quality foods and while you can be lucky to get a dog capable of surviving on it, in the majority, they will not suit your dog and he will end up with health problems down the line. I've heard of dogs as young as seven months being diagnosed with pancreatitis, nine times out of ten, these dogs are on a low quality diet.

deandean

It's a good query OP.

I am paying €65 or whatever for a sack of Royal Canin for my dog. I see same-size bags for less than one-third the price.

In 'these recessionary times' with lots of dog owners moving e.g. from Superquinn to Lidl, I am looking at reducing cost of dog food too. It's hardly gonna kill him.

It is worth knowing about protein content, etc so you can make a somewhat informed decision when picking a pet food.

_Lady_

Hi,

I've been wondering about the same thing. It's a bit of a racket but you still don't want to sell out altogether. We've got our 5 month old labradoodle pup on the Red Mills Leader Large Breed nuts and he's grand on it. It's good enough value in terms of the more expensive foods - 49 euro for 15kg in petworld I think which is lasted a month already and we're about half way through maybe.

But most people I know have their dogs - mongrels, dalmations all sorts on the Lidl Optidog brand along with the odd scraps and dogs seem healthy and happy. And I know Freddie goes for their bowls if there's any left without hesitation and has been fed on it the odd time when on his hols!

He loves veggies as well and there doesn't seem to be any harm in that - the carrots are great for teething lol also he's a fan of ice cubes!!!

But what to do about the brand when money is tight?!!!

Shanao

@deandean- personally, i dont like royal canin. It was a good food once upon a time but there have been too many changes in it since it was bought out by another company and now it is actually not worth what you are paying for it. Red mills leader is a very good food with more meat in it than Royal canin and at least twenty euro cheaper. You can always look online as well, you can get a lot of foods cheaper, though it is a pain having to order it, it works out a bit cheaper at least and you get it delivered to the door.

The thing about the higher quality foods is you do feed a lot less of them. When i got my akita i looked at a lot of foods before deciding on the one I'm now using and had a look at Red Mills mother and puppy because it was cheap. its 21 euro for 15kgs, but, i would have to feed almost 2000g a day. So I would have to buy four bags for 84 euro to last me 30days and that's of a mostly cereal based, low quality food. I'm feeding him a food with 35% meat thats costing me 70euro that lasts 37.5 days because I'm only feeding him 400g of it a day. The lower the quality, the more you need to feed because the more of it that comes out the other end due to it being harder to digest.

Mo60

My pets, cats and dogs, range in age from 5 months to 17 years. All are healthy for their age so I will continue to feed them on supermarket food, as I have not seen any proof that they are likely to suffer illhealth by this diet.

I do not believe dogs to be any less healthy now than they were 10-15 years ago.

SingItOut

Mo60 wrote: »

I have always used various supermarket pet foods and have never had to frequent the vet because of this. I have tried dearer options but have found no difference healthwise.

All my animals are healthy and previous pets have all lived to a good age.

+1!

My four year old Labrador is fed aldi dry nuts, always has been since he was a year old, and hes by far the healthiest dog in the area. Never had to go to the vets besides boosters. He used to be fed on Pedigree chum dry nuts but as it was too expensive we switched to the tesco brand food (do you mean the one with the collie on the front? thats the one we gave ours), he did great on it but the bag never lasted a week with him so we switched to earls (lasts longer) and his coat has remained shiny, soft, his teeth are all white & he is slim. It's not the dog food that puts weight on the dog its the owners who don't exercise them. . My jack russel was fed pedigree chum then switched to bakers because she was terribly scrawny and she gained no weight whatsoever on either food so again that's a myth that your dog will gain weight on those foods. She was then on "red mills adult small breed" but again same problem so she was switched to "hills vet essentials mini dog" and she is now perfect weight so she will remain on that. My dogs are also fed table scraps a few times a week and sometimes only get all meat dinners and guess what? neither are over weight.

Another poster mentioned a new tesco dog food brand, I think you mean Lathams? its seems to be a great quality food. It's always advertised on the discovery channel. I got some samples for my dogs & they loved it.

tk123

THIS is why a lot of people don't recommend supermarket foods :

kylith

SingItOut wrote: »

+1!

My four year old Labrador is fed aldi dry nuts, always has been since he was a year old, and hes by far the healthiest dog in the area. Never had to go to the vets besides boosters. He used to be fed on Pedigree chum dry nuts but as it was too expensive we switched to the tesco brand food (do you mean the one with the collie on the front? thats the one we gave ours), he did great on it but the bag never lasted a week with him so we switched to earls (lasts longer) and his coat has remained shiny, soft, his teeth are all white & he is slim. It's not the dog food that puts weight on the dog its the owners who don't exercise them. . My jack russel was fed pedigree chum then switched to bakers because she was terribly scrawny and she gained no weight whatsoever on either food so again that's a myth that your dog will gain weight on those foods. She was then on "red mills adult small breed" but again same problem so she was switched to "hills vet essentials mini dog" and she is now perfect weight so she will remain on that. My dogs are also fed table scraps a few times a week and sometimes only get all meat dinners and guess what? neither are over weight.

Another poster mentioned a new tesco dog food brand, I think you mean Lathams? its seems to be a great quality food. It's always advertised on the discovery channel. I got some samples for my dogs & they loved it.

It's not about the dog putting on weight, its that the food is muck. I could feed a child on McDonalds, and while they mightn't get fat the food wouldn't be doing them much good in the way of nutrition either.

My brother had his dog on Baker's, and he was the most hyper thing I'd ever seen. As soon as he switched to Nature's Diet there was an instant change in the dog; much less hyper and much more biddable.

I ran out of my usual stuff once, back when the girls were on JWB, and had to get some supermarket stuff; Rani was bouncing off the walls, that's when she wasn't pooing everywhere because the stuff went right through her.

Supermarket stuff often isn't any cheaper, either. I get a 15kg bag of Whites for about €35, less than €2 per kilo. Supermarkets will often sell 2kg bags for €6/7. It's food, that doesn't have the same nutritional value, that you have to feed more of, and that, frequently, costs more. Buying supermarket brands is, imo, false economy.

SingItOut

kylith wrote: »

It's not about the dog putting on weight, its that the food is muck. I could feed a child on McDonalds, and while they mightn't get fat the food wouldn't be doing them much good in the way of nutrition either.

My brother had his dog on Baker's, and he was the most hyper thing I'd ever seen. As soon as he switched to Nature's Diet there was an instant change in the dog; much less hyper and much more biddable.

I ran out of my usual stuff once, back when the girls were on JWB, and had to get some supermarket stuff; Rani was bouncing off the walls, that's when she wasn't pooing everywhere because the stuff went right through her.

Supermarket stuff often isn't any cheaper, either. I get a 15kg bag of Whites for about €35, less than €2 per kilo. Supermarkets will often sell 2kg bags for €6/7. It's food, that doesn't have the same nutritional value, that you have to feed more of, and that, frequently, costs more. Buying supermarket brands is, imo, false economy.

Neither of my dogs are or were hyper on any of those foods. Earls is hardly "muck" when my dog is perfectly healthy on it. If anything when they were given royal canin in the past they puked and had diarrhea for two days after! Not all supermarket food is going to have the same affect on any two dogs. The main problem with dogs these days in my opinion is they are not given enough variety in their diet, for example my aunts dog and roomates dogs are fed nothing but dry food (red mills & something else, can't remember) and they are constantly at the vets & if they are given any other type of meat (raw or cooked) or any other type of food not neccesarily dog food, they will have diarrhea or vomit. The reality is some people simply cannot afford to buy ridiculously expensive food

kylith

SingItOut wrote: »

Neither of my dogs are or were hyper on any of those foods. Earls is hardly "muck" when my dog is perfectly healthy on it. If anything when they were given royal canin in the past they puked and had diarrhea for two days after! Not all supermarket food is going to have the same affect on any two dogs. The main problem with dogs these days in my opinion is they are not given enough variety in their diet, for example my aunts dog and roomates dogs are fed nothing but dry food (red mills & something else, can't remember) and they are constantly at the vets & if they are given any other type of meat (raw or cooked) or any other type of food not neccesarily dog food, they will have diarrhea or vomit. The reality is some people simply cannot afford to buy ridiculously expensive food

I'm not familiar with Earls, so I can't comment on it.

Various foods suit various dogs; I had mine on Eukanuba a few years ago; it suited one but didn't suit the other.

To say that dogs who are fed dry food are constantly at the vets is as erronious as you claim my assertion that supermarket food is muck is. Both of mine have been on Whites for over a year, and various brand names before that. They are robustly healthy, not having had so much as a sniffle in the last 4 and a bit years, and don't have any problems with being fed the occasional chicken wing, or whatever.

In general supermarket food is rubbish. Sure, you're dogs can be healthy enough on it, like a person can be healthy enough eating just ready made meals, but in general the premium foods are better for them, containing more meat and less fillers.

SingItOut

kylith wrote: »

To say that dogs who are fed dry food are constantly at the vets is as erronious as you claim my assertion that supermarket food is muck is.

I did NOT say all dogs, I said dogs I am familiar with. And I also stated different brands work for some and not for others. Either way we will have to agree to dis-agree. My Labrador is perfectly healthy on supermarket food so I will keep him on that.

lainycool

I started feeding my shih tzus natural food about a year ago and its the best thing I ever did.....I used to feed them pedigree chum which was €8 for a 3 kilo bag at the time (not sure if its that price now) and that would last me a week, The brand i give now is barking heads and it costs €45 for a 12kg bag and that lasts 8 weeks so its actually cheaper on the natural food.....The guy from the pet store told me that they put so much binders in those foods to bulk them up and they don't keep your dogs full so naturally they will eat more whereas the natural food doesn't have all that cr*p so they don't need to eat as much!

200yrolecrank

deandean wrote: »

It's a good query OP.

I am paying €65 or whatever for a sack of Royal Canin for my dog. I see same-size bags for less than one-third the price.

In 'these recessionary times' with lots of dog owners moving e.g. from Superquinn to Lidl, I am looking at reducing cost of dog food too. It's hardly gonna kill him.

It is worth knowing about protein content, etc so you can make a somewhat informed decision when picking a pet food.

Check out leader in petworld,their value for money and of good quality.
Royal canin whilst a good food is vastly overpriced,it's a bit like the large pharmaceuticals giving sweetners to doctors to promote their products the sane thing happens with the vets.
Have you ever wondered why most vets only stock it and recommend it.
I would steer clear of the supermarket stuff as a regular source of the dogs good,it's fine if your stuck but not daily.

Mo60

kylith wrote: »

In general supermarket food is rubbish. Sure, you're dogs can be healthy enough on it, like a person can be healthy enough eating just ready made meals, but in general the premium foods are better for them, containing more meat and less fillers.

What proof do you have that premium foods are better for them?
I have nearly always fed my dogs on supermarket food, which you claim is rubbish. I have never had a dog that has died before the age of 15 years. Surely they must all have been healthy to survive to this age.

My oldest dog is now 17 years of age.

Cherry Blossom

Mo60 wrote: »

What proof do you have that premium foods are better for them?

This question would be much easier to answer if you could post the full ingredient list of what you are currently feeding - I have not been able to find this on-line for any of the supermarket own brands.

Mo60

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

This question would be much easier to answer if you could post the full ingredient list of what you are currently feeding - I have not been able to find this on-line for any of the supermarket own brands.

Over the years I have not always used the same brand.

I was asking what proof is there that the premium food is better healthwise, seeing that my dogs have thrived on various supermarket brands.

200yrolecrank

Mo60 wrote: »

adrenalinjunkie wrote: »

This question would be much easier to answer if you could post the full ingredient list of what you are currently feeding - I have not been able to find this on-line for any of the supermarket own brands.

Over the years I have not always used the same brand.

I was asking what proof is there that the premium food is better healthwise, seeing that my dogs have thrived on various supermarket brands.

I suspect you may be mixing in some of your own food with the dogs which will help them along.

lainycool

Have looked on net for ingredients in supermarket brands and they don't seem to be available......Strange!
This is the food I give mine anyhow

Deboned Chicken*, Dried Chicken*, Brown Rice, Oats, Barley, Trout, Pea Protein, Chicken Fat, Pea Starch, Lucerne, Seaweed, Hip & Joint Care Pack +

*Total 45% Chicken

Analytical Constituents (%):

Crude Protein 25%, Fat Content 14%, Crude Fibres 3.75%, Inorganic Matter 8.5%, Moisture 8%

Calcium 1.6%

Phosphorous 1.3%

Omega 6 (linoleic acid) 2.3%

Omega 3 (linolenic acid) 0.7%
Vitamins:

Vitamin A 16,650 iu/kg, Vitamin D3 1,480 iu/kg, Vitamin E 460 iu/kg

Trace Elements:

Iron (as ferrous sulphate monohydrate) 185mg, Zinc (as zinc sulphate monohydrate) 200mg, L-Carnitine 220mg, Manganese (as sulphate monohydrate) 32mg, Copper (as sulphate pentahydrate) 9mg, Iodine (as calcium iodate anhydrous) 2.8mg, Selenium (sodium selenite) 0.23mg

Shanao

Mo60 wrote: »

My pets, cats and dogs, range in age from 5 months to 17 years. All are healthy for their age so I will continue to feed them on supermarket food, as I have not seen any proof that they are likely to suffer illhealth by this diet.

I do not believe dogs to be any less healthy now than they were 10-15 years ago.

While dogs may be living longer, the rate of cancers, liver disease, diabetes, pancreatitis, heart disease and skeletal problems are most definitely on the increase and every one of these is linked with the wrong diet being fed. Osteosarcoma and Lymphoma have become increasingly commonplace in dogs in the past few years. Just look at humans, why do the doctors reccommend a diet as natural as possible when a patient has cancer? Because so many foods, both ours and our pets have known carcinogens in them.

lainycool

Found this interesting site

http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-reviews/pedigree-dog-food-dry/

mikemac1

If it's got ingredients I cannot pronounce or my Granny never heard of then I'm putting it back on the shelf

Both humans and dogs would do well from eating as naturally as possible and avoiding processed food

Butchers will give you leftovers for your dog if you build a relationship and get known as a local. Saves them throwing it out
Just an option

Cherry Blossom

Mo60 wrote: »

I was asking what proof is there that the premium food is better healthwise, seeing that my dogs have thrived on various supermarket brands.

I know what you were asking and there is plenty of proof, but because the 'harm' lies in the individual components of the food, it's necessary to know what these are. Not all foods some people would class as premium are any less harmful for example advocates of supermarket brands on this thread keep mentioning Royal Canin which is certainly not what I would consider a 'premium' food.

planetX

lainycool wrote: »

Found this interesting site

http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-reviews/pedigree-dog-food-dry/

I don't see what the problem is with meat byproducts - they make a big deal of it being parts that are unfit for human consumption. Well what would wild dogs eat, not just the breast meat and leave all the organs - they'd eat every last scrap. My cats will often open up mice and eat only the innards, it's the best part apparently...

Shanao

planetX wrote: »

I don't see what the problem is with meat byproducts - they make a big deal of it being parts that are unfit for human consumption. Well what would wild dogs eat, not just the breast meat and leave all the organs - they'd eat every last scrap. My cats will often open up mice and eat only the innards, it's the best part apparently...

The problem is that they are only getting the byproducts which would have far less nutritional value than the actual meat. There was a big report a few years back as well about certain foods that were using roadkill, diseased animals and even euthanised cats and dogs as their meat source. How many dogs/cats would really survive on beaks/feet/hooves/eyes if they were getting them raw?

Mo60

200yrolecrank wrote: »

I suspect you may be mixing in some of your own food with the dogs which will help them along.

Only food mixed in is leftover cooked potato skins.

lainycool

http://www.naturalnews.com/012647.html

This tells you the dangers off meat byproducts.....I certainly wouldn't eat it so I wouldn't expect my dog to!

planetX

'Chicken by-products include head, feet, entrails, lungs, spleen, kidneys, brain, liver, stomach, bones, blood, intestines, and any other part of the carcass not fit for human consumption," writes Henry Pasternak in Healing Animals with Nature's Cures.'

aren't you being a bit anthropomorphic - the above is exactly what you'd expect a carnivore to eat.

Shanao

planetX wrote: »

'Chicken by-products include head, feet, entrails, lungs, spleen, kidneys, brain, liver, stomach, bones, blood, intestines, and any other part of the carcass not fit for human consumption," writes Henry Pasternak in Healing Animals with Nature's Cures.'

aren't you being a bit anthropomorphic - the above is exactly what you'd expect a carnivore to eat.

But again, you're not going to get all of that in one bag. You might get a bag of dog food with only feet and beak in it. Or brain, and that's it. You have no way of insuring that what your pet is getting is actually doing them any good. It wouldn't be so bad if it was guaranteed that your dog is getting all of the above, but it isn't.

lainycool

Tbh PlanetX it's not even the meat byproducts that bother me as much it's all the chemicals that they add to the food....I try to avoid them myself and I just do the same for my dogs! I know they digest it much easier too, When I used to feed them the other stuff i would 8 times out of 10 have to clean up mess in my kitchen......So its just easier for me in the long run.

nc6000

So what would be considered then to be the best reasonably priced dry dog food which is easily available?

lainycool

I just calculated the food I feed mine cost €2.81 per week per dog which I think is great value!

Mo60

Shanao wrote: »

While dogs may be living longer, the rate of cancers, liver disease, diabetes, pancreatitis, heart disease and skeletal problems are most definitely on the increase and every one of these is linked with the wrong diet being fed. Osteosarcoma and Lymphoma have become increasingly commonplace in dogs in the past few years. Just look at humans, why do the doctors reccommend a diet as natural as possible when a patient has cancer? Because so many foods, both ours and our pets have known carcinogens in them.

You say that the increase in these diseases in dogs is linked to the wrong diet. Again where is the proof?

As for humans with cancer, the diet recommended has nothing to do with known carcinogens.

portgirl123

i think, with posts like this there are a lot of food snobs around, me included. but at the end of the day, if the day came, in which it was a case of either changing to a supermarket brand or to rehome my dogs, i know what i would choose.

sparkle_23

I feed my dog Premiere High 5 from Maxi Zoo! It's €39.99 for 15kg and I find the bag lasts me for 6 weeks. My dog seems to love it! I used to buy supermarket brands but it was just too expensive. This food is cheaper and there are less sugars and stuff in it.

gregers85

Mo60 wrote: »

Only food mixed in is leftover cooked potato skins.

Potato Skins can be toxic for dogs! Poisonous alkaloids (Solanum) are present in green sprouts and potato skins

Mo60

gregers85 wrote: »

Potato Skins can be toxic for dogs! Poisonous alkaloids (Solanum) are present in green sprouts and potato skins

I have been doing this for 25+ years with no ill effects.

Cameron Poe

Mo60 wrote: »

I have been doing this for 25+ years with no ill effects.

That you know of.

Mo60

Cameron Poe wrote: »

That you know of.

???

I think I know my dogs well enough to know whether something is making them unwell or doing them harm. After all, my eldest dog has been on this diet for 17 years.

andreac

Why would you feed your dog something that you know is bad for them and could be harmful to them??

Cameron Poe

Mo60 wrote: »

???

I think I know my dogs well enough to know whether something is making them unwell or doing them harm. After all, my eldest dog has been on this diet for 17 years.

Prove it.

My grandad smoked 40 a day, drank like a fish and lived to be 80. Would you advocate this way of life to your kids?
Your anecdote about your dog means nothing. you clearly aren't willing to take on board anything anyone has tried to say to you in this thread.

kylith

I think that the problem with saying that your dog is 'fine' on whatever foods is that you can't know that they're fine unless you change their diet and see if there's any change. We all know of people that have been 'fine' all their lives until they, for example, give up milk or bread and suddenly realise that they weren't 'fine', they just never realised that they were sensitive to lactose or gluten.

The same goes for supermarket brand foods. Yes, your dog is fine; they're not keeling over or vomiting all the time, but other foods would probably be better for them in the long run. I could live on tins of beans and be 'fine' i.e. not noticably ill (I know one girl who lived entirely on mashed potatoes, peas, and coke for the first 16 years of her life and was 'fine'), but you can't argue that a proper, well balanced, diet wouldn't be much better.

Mo60

andreac wrote: »

Why would you feed your dog something that you know is bad for them and could be harmful to them??

As I said I have been feeding this for 25+ years and this is the 1st time I have heard it is bad for them.

Perhaps you could prove in what way it is bad.

Mo60

kylith wrote: »

I think that the problem with saying that your dog is 'fine' on whatever foods is that you can't know that they're fine unless you change their diet and see if there's any change. We all know of people that have been 'fine' all their lives until they, for example, give up milk or bread and suddenly realise that they weren't 'fine', they just never realised that they were sensitive to lactose or gluten.

The same goes for supermarket brand foods. Yes, your dog is fine; they're not keeling over or vomiting all the time, but other foods would probably be better for them in the long run. I could live on tins of beans and be 'fine' i.e. not noticably ill (I know one girl who lived entirely on mashed potatoes, peas, and coke for the first 16 years of her life and was 'fine'), but you can't argue that a proper, well balanced, diet wouldn't be much better.

I have tried so called premium food in the past and noticed no difference. As I have said previously all my animals are all healthy for their age, and my vet has verified this on many occasions.

gregers85

Mo60 wrote: »

As I said I have been feeding this for 25+ years and this is the 1st time I have heard it is bad for them.

Perhaps you could prove in what way it is bad.

As I said in my Original post they contain harmful alkaloids called Solanum:

poisoning is primarily displayed by gastrointestinal and neurological disorders. Symptoms include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, stomach cramps, burning of the throat, cardiac dysrhythmia, headache and dizziness. In more severe cases, hallucinations, loss of sensation, paralysis, fever, jaundice, dilated pupils, hypothermia and death have been reported. In large quantities, poisoning can cause death

If you google it You will find plenty of proof as to why they are no good for your dog!!

Cameron Poe

Mo60 wrote: »

As I said I have been feeding this for 25+ years and this is the 1st time I have heard it is bad for them.

Perhaps you could prove in what way it is bad.

You'll find the proof you so greatly desire through the power of google.

andreac

http://askville.amazon.com/potatoes-dogs/AnswerViewer.do?requestId=5484380

http://www.free-pet-treats-recipes.com/pet-nutrition.html