Author Topic: underweight?  (Read 2601 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Helen

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 20025
  • Gender: Female
    • helen noakes jewellery
Re: underweight?
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2008, 11:26:59 PM »
Do you think maybe the reason Burns does not put weight on dogs is that it is not designed to? It is made to a vet's recipe (John Burns) and vets are rather like human doctors in that they do not like (excess) weight on dogs/people.

From what I have read on other threads, if you fed the recommended amount on most dried food, a lot of dogs would be overweight, but this does not seem to be the case with Burns, rather it seems you need to feed more - just an observation :shades:

don't have excess weight on my dog - he's 12.7kg which I think is fine, but my vet thinks he could have 1/2 a kg more on him! When he was on Burns he was skinny (for him, around 11kgs) and had dry fur and flaky skin.  It just didn't agree with him.  I truly believe it depends entirely on the individual dog and it doesn't suit all of them.  Much happier on BARF and a bit of AG.

If you feed more Burns (like any food) than recommended you will either overfeed your dog which will cause diarrhea or they will expel more as their body will get rid of what it can't digest.  If it's not getting what it should from the food anyway, then imho increasing the volume is not going to sort the problem.

I don't go much on marketing hype, and I feel there's a lot of that with Burns. 


helen & jarvis x


Offline Mudmagnets

  • Site Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8336
  • Gender: Female
  • My boys
Re: underweight?
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2008, 11:55:13 PM »
I would definately agree with you, Burns does not suit all, Suzie my other pooch is on Winalot Dry and does well on that and so I would not think of changing her, There are so many options that I am sure there is one to suit whatever needs each indvidual dog has.
Remembering Smudge 23/11/2006 - 3/8/2013, and Branston 30/8/14 - 28/10/22 both now at the Bridge.

Offline *sammy*

  • Site Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1235
  • Gender: Female
Re: underweight?
« Reply #17 on: June 25, 2008, 07:04:02 AM »
i got up to the biggest pile of sh&t this morning >:D >:D >:D

that is with a tiny bit more food. the descison is made.

thanks again evryone for your advice.  :D


Offline MegandMolly

  • Donator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2623
  • Gender: Female
Re: underweight?
« Reply #18 on: June 25, 2008, 07:43:14 AM »


I'd take a look at what you can get easily locally too - at the moment I'm trying Robbies but only one store sells it, otherwise two have been on Arden Grange and one on Burns, can't find a supplier of both so end up running around just to get their feed  >:(

Berriewood deliverys, and there's a lot of the recommended foods on eBay at the mo too
Sam (that's me), Meg (B&W cocker), Ruby (Blue Roan cocker) and Gemma (Black lab)


Offline Sian P

  • Site Member
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 542
  • Gender: Female
Re: underweight?
« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2008, 09:04:55 AM »
I have just taken Murphy off Burns. He was doing really well on it but now, although I don't think he's unhealthily skinny i would personally prefer him to be a little squidgier. He is quite a muscular lad but was beginning to feel a little too bony.

When he was on Burns he was skinny (for him, around 11kgs) and had dry fur and flaky skin.  It just didn't agree with him.  I truly believe it depends entirely on the individual dog and it doesn't suit all of them.  Much happier on BARF and a bit of AG.


I found this too, his hair was very dull and he also had flaky skin. He's looking much shinier now so hoperfully I made the right decision. It's definitely an individual thing. Murphy was fine with the mini bites as a pup, it's just the adult food he didn't get on with.
Sian & Murphy x